| Hajj: (36) And the Budn (sacrificial animals) We have made them for you . . . . .

And the Budn (sacrificial animals) We have made them for you from the symbols of Allah (meaning: from the banners of His religion which Allah the Exalted has ordained). Budn is the plural of Badanah, which, as Al-Jawhari said, is a camel or a cow slaughtered in Makkah. In the Qamus, it is stated that it refers to camels and cows, just as the sacrifice (Udhiyah) refers to sheep that are offered to Makkah, and it is applied to both the male and female. They were called such because of the size of their bodies (badan), as they would fatten them before offering them. That they consist of these two types is the opinion of most masters of language, and it is the school of the Hanafis. Therefore, if someone makes a vow to slaughter a Badanah, the slaughtering of a cow suffices for them according to them. This is also the opinion of ‘Ata and Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib. ‘Abd ibn Humayd and Ibn al-Mundhir recorded from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both): "Do not know the Budn except as the camel and the cow."

In the Sahih of Muslim, it is recorded from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him): "We slaughter the Badanah for seven." It was said: "And the cow?" He replied: "Is it not of the Budn?" The author of al-Bari’ from the linguists said: "It does not apply to that which is from the cows." This was narrated from Mujahid and al-Hasan, and it is the school of the Shafi’is; therefore, according to them, if one vows to slaughter a Badanah, the slaughtering of a cow does not suffice. They intended by that what Abu Dawud recorded from Jabir, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: 'The Badanah is for seven, and the cow is for seven.'" For the conjunction implies difference, and in what follows at the end, there is support for that as well. The apparent meaning is that the use of Badanah for the camel is more common, even if the matter of sufficiency is unified.

Perhaps Jabir’s intent in saying regarding the cow, "Is it not of the Budn?", is that its ruling is their ruling; otherwise, it is unlikely that the questioner was ignorant of the linguistic referent for him to respond with that. It is possible to say regarding what was narrated from Ibn ‘Umar: that he intended by the Budn therein the legal Budn. Perhaps if it is said that it is shared between the two types, custom or the like judges the determination if a person makes a vow of a Badanah. This is indicated by what Ibn Abi Shaybah and ‘Abd ibn Humayd recorded from Ya’qub al-Riyahi from his father, who said: "A man made a will to me, and he bequeathed a Badanah. I went to Ibn ‘Abbas and said to him: 'A man made a will to me, and he bequeathed a Badanah. Does a cow suffice for me?' He said: 'Yes.' Then he said: 'From whom is your companion?' I said: 'From Riyah.' He said: 'And when did the Banu Riyah acquire cows over camels, while your companion is of them? Cows are only for Asad and ‘Abd al-Qays.' So contemplate this."

Al-Hasan, Ibn Abi Ishaq, Shaybah, and ‘Isa recited (al-Budun) with the damma (u-vowel) on the ba and the dal. It is said that this is the original form, like khashab and khashabah, and the sukun (quiescence) of the dal is an easing of that. This recitation was narrated from Nafi’ and Abu Ja’far.

Ibn Abi Ishaq also recited it with the damma on the ba and dal and the tashdid (doubling) of the nun (al-Budunn). It is possible that it is a singular noun built upon the pattern fa’l like ’uttul, and it is possible that the tashdid is from the doubling permissible in a pause (waqf), and the continuation (wasl) was treated as a pause. The majority are upon the accusative (nasb) of (al-Budun) due to ishtighal (preoccupation), meaning: "And We made the Budun—We made them." It was also recited in the nominative (rafa') as an initiating subject (ibtida'). His saying (the Exalted) (for you) is a prepositional phrase related to the "making," and (from the symbols of Allah) is in the position of the second object of it. His saying (the Exalted) (there is good for you in them) means: benefit in the world and reward in the Hereafter, as was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas. From al-Suddi, it is limited to reward; it is an inaugural sentence confirming what preceded it.

(So mention the name of Allah over them) by saying at the time of their slaughtering: "In the name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest; O Allah, from You and for You." A group has recorded this from Ibn ‘Abbas. And in al-Bahr, it is to say: "At the time of the slaughtering: Allah is the Greatest, there is no god but Allah, and Allah is the Greatest; O Allah, from You and for You." (lined up) means: standing, having lined up their forelegs and hind legs; it is the plural of saffah (one standing/lined up). Its object is implied. Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn Mas’ud, al-Baqir, Mujahid, Qatadah, ‘Ata, al-Kalbi, and al-A’mash (with a disagreement from him) recited it as (sawafin) with a nun, the plural of safinah. It is either from safana al-rajul (the man stood his feet together), so it would have the meaning of sawaff (lined up), or from safana al-faras (the horse stood on three [legs] and the tip of the hoof of the fourth). This is because the Badanah at the time of slaughtering has one of its forelegs tied, so it stands on three. Tying it at the time of slaughtering is the Sunnah. Al-Bukhari, Muslim, and others recorded from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that he saw a man who had made his Badanah kneel while he was slaughtering it, so he said: "Send it standing, tied, the Sunnah of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)." The majority are upon tying the left foreleg; Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded from Ibn Sabit (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and his companions used to tie the left foreleg of the Badanah and slaughter it standing on its remaining legs. He also recorded from al-Hasan: it was said to him, "How is the Badanah slaughtered?" He said: "Its left leg is tied when the slaughtering is intended." Some went to the opinion of tying the right leg, as Ibn Abi Shaybah also recorded from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) that he used to slaughter it while its right leg was tied. It is said there is no difference between tying the left or the right; Ibn Abi Shaybah also recorded from ‘Ata, who said: "Tie whichever of the two legs you wish."

A group recorded from Ibn ‘Umar that he interpreted (sawaff) as "standing, with one of their legs tied," so there is no difference in the intended meaning between sawaff and sawafin according to this at all. However, it was narrated from Mujahid that sawaff means on four [legs] and sawafin on three. Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, al-Hasan, Mujahid, Zayd ibn Aslam, Shaqiq, Sulayman al-Taymi, and al-A’raj recited (sawafin) with a ya (as sawafi), the plural of safiyah, meaning: pure for the sake of Allah the Almighty, in which nothing is associated [as a partner], as the pre-Islamic era used to associate. Giving it a nun is [the opinion of] ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Ubayd, and it is contrary to the apparent because (sawafin) is prohibited from declension (sarf) due to the pattern of the limit of plurals (sighat muntaha al-jumu’). It has been explained in two ways: one of them is that he paused on it with the alif of releasing (al-itlaq) because it is accusative, then added the tanwin of taranum (melodic lengthening) not the tanwin of declension, as a replacement for the alif. The second is that it is according to the dialect of those who decline what is not declined, especially the limit of plurals. Thus, some said: "And declension in the plural came much, until a people claimed there is an option in it." Al-Hasan also recited (sawaff) with tanwin and easing, according to the dialect of those who put an accusative on a defective noun with an implied vowel then delete the ya. So the root of (sawaff) is sawafi; the ya was deleted due to the heaviness of the plural, and [the reciter] sufficed with the kasra that was before it, then replaced it with tanwin, and the like [is the poem]: "If a slanderer had his home in Yamama, and my home [was] at the top of Hadramawt, I would be guided to him." And it may remain quiescent as in his saying: "O forger of the bow, you are not good at it, so do not ruin it; give the bow to its forger." According to this is the recitation of some of them (sawafi) with the fixing of the ya quiescent, based on it being—as in the famous recitation—a circumstantial qualifier (hal) from the pronoun in (upon them). If it were made, as has been said, a substitute for the pronoun, it would not need to be explained according to a rare dialect. (And when their flanks have fallen) means: they have fallen to the earth; this is a metonymy for death. The apparent meaning of this, along with the previous reports, necessitates that they are slaughtered while standing. It is supported by [the idea] that the Badanah is from camels, not cows, because it is not customary to slaughter [cows] while standing; rather, they are slaughtered lying down, and it is rarely seen that camels are slaughtered while lying down. (Then eat from them and feed the Qani’) means: the one who is content with what he has and what he is given without asking or exposing himself to it. Upon this was interpreted the saying of Labid: "Among them is a happy one taking his share, and among them is a miserable one with life, content." (and the Mu’tarr) means: the one who presents himself to ask, from i’tarahu (to present oneself to someone). Its interpretation as such is narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas and a group. Muhammad ibn Ka’b, Mujahid, Ibrahim, al-Hasan, and al-Kalbi said: (the Qani’) is the beggar, as in the saying of ‘Adi ibn Zayd: "I did not betray one of a covenant, and I kept my covenant; I did not deprive the distressed when he came as a beggar (qani’an)." And (the Mu’tarr) is the one who presents himself without asking. The Qani’, it is said according to the first [interpretation], is from qani’a (to be content), as in ta’iba (to tire), when one is content with what he has without asking. According to the second, it is from qana’a (to ask), as in sa’ala (to ask), in wording and meaning, qunu’an. Upon this came the saying of the poet: "The slave is free if he is content, and the free man is a slave if he is greedy; so be content and do not be greedy, for nothing brings shame except greed." Thus, the Qani’ would not be among the contraries (addad) due to the difference of the two verbs. Al-Khafaji emphasized this, ruling that the one who says otherwise is under a delusion. In al-Sihah, the opinion that it is among the contraries is narrated from some of the people of knowledge, and he did not follow it up with anything. It is also narrated from him that it is possible that the beggar was called qani’ because he is content with what is given, whether little or much, and accepts it and does not reject it. Thus, the meaning of the two words returns to contentment and to the fact that qani’a (with kasra) means "to be content" and qana’a (with fatha) means "to ask." Al-Raghib went to this, making the source of the first qana’ah and qana’an, and the source of the second qunu’an. It is narrated from some that the origin of that is from the qina’ (veil), which is what the head is covered with. So qani’a (with kasra) meant wearing the veil, covering his poverty, like their saying "he hid" (khafa) when he wore the khafa' (garment). And qana’a (with fatha) meant lifting his veil, revealing his poverty by asking, like "he revealed" (khafa) when he lifted the khafa'. It was intended that Qani’ means the content person by the recitation of Abu Raja’ (al-Qani’) with the weight of hadhir, based on it not having the meaning of the asker, unlike al-Qani’ (with fatha), as it has come with both meanings, and the basic principle is the agreement of the recitations. From Mujahid: (the Qani’) is the neighbor, even if he is rich. Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded from him and from Ibn Jubayr that the Qani’ are the people of Makkah and the Mu’tarr are the rest of the people. It is said: the Mu’tarr is the visiting friend. What I choose from these opinions is the first of them.

Al-Hasan read (wa al-mu’tarri), an active participle from i’tra, and it is mu’tar meaning [the same]. ‘Amr and Isma’il read it—as Ibn Khalawayh narrated—(al-mu’tarr) with a kasra on the ra without a ya. This was narrated by al-Muqri from Ibn ‘Abbas, and it has also come from Abu Raja’. The ya was deleted for easing it and for the sufficiency of the kasra for it. It was argued by the verse that the Hady (sacrificial offering) is divided into thirds: a third for its owner, a third for the Qani’, and a third for the Mu’tarr. This was narrated from Ibn Mas’ud. Muhammad ibn Ja’far (may Allah be pleased with them both) also said it is divided into thirds, except he said: "Feed the Qani’ and the Mu’tarr a third, the wretched poor a third, and my family a third." And in the heart, there is something regarding its authenticity. Ibn al-Musayyib said: "The owner of the Hady has nothing from it except a quarter." It is as if he counted the Qani’, the Mu’tarr, and the wretched poor as three, and it is as you see. Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: "All of this is according to the way of recommendation (istihsan), not obligation." It is as if he meant by istihsan the recommendable, so he has carried both matters in the verse upon recommendation.

In al-Taysir, the command "Eat" is for permissibility; even if he did not eat, it would be permissible. And the command "Feed" is for recommendation; even if he spent all of it on himself, he would not be liable for anything. This is in every Hady of a rite (nusuk) that is not an expiation, and likewise the sacrifice (Udhiyah). As for the expiation, he must give all of it as charity; whatever he ate or gave to a rich person, he is liable for. In al-Hidayah, it is recommended that he eat from the Hady of voluntary offering, Tamattu’, and Qiran. It is likewise recommended that he give charity in the manner known for sacrifices, which is a saying according to what Ibn ‘Atiyyah’s speech necessitates in both matters. Malik permitted eating from the obligatory Hady [for] hunting atonement, harm, and vows. Ahmad permitted it except for [the Hady for] hunting atonement and vows. According to al-Hasan, eating from all of that is permissible, and the verification of that is in the books of jurisprudence. (Likewise) means: like that marvelous subjugation understood from His saying (the Exalted) (lined up) (We have subjected them for you) with the completeness of their size and the limit of their strength. So they do not rebel against you until you take them submissive, tying them and confining them while their legs are lined up, then you strike their throats. If it were not for the subjugation of Allah the Exalted, you would not be able to, and they would not be more incapable than some of the wild beasts that are smaller in bulk and less in strength. What becomes wild of the beasts is sufficient as a witness and lesson. Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: "Just as We commanded you regarding them with all of this, We have subjected them for you." Its distance is not hidden. (That you might give thanks)

(meaning: so that you may thank Our bounty upon you through drawing near and sincerity.)