Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:4

They ask you what has been made lawful for them: This begins the detailing of lawful things, some of which were mentioned in summary after explaining the prohibited ones. Ibn Jarir, Al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan, and others recorded from Abu Rafi‘ that he said: Gabriel (peace be upon him) came to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and asked permission to enter, and he was granted it. He delayed, so the Prophet took his garment and went out to him while he was standing at the door. The Prophet said: "We granted you permission." He replied: "Yes, but we do not enter a house in which there is an image or a dog." They looked and found a puppy in one of their houses. Abu Rafi‘ said: The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) commanded me to kill every dog in Medina, and I did so. The people came and said: "O Messenger of Allah, what is lawful for us from this nation [animals] that you have commanded us to kill?" The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) remained silent, and Allah the Exalted revealed: "They ask you..."

Ibn Jarir recorded from ‘Ikrimah that the questioners were ‘Asim ibn ‘Adi, Sa‘d ibn Khaythama, and ‘Uwaym ibn Sa‘ida. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Ibn Jubayr that the questioners were ‘Adi ibn Hatim and Zayd ibn al-Muhalhil al-Ta’i.

The question implies the meaning of "saying," and thus the sentence is narrated with it just as it is narrated with "saying." It is not suspended (mu‘allaq), for although it is one of the actions of the heart, it is a cause for knowledge and a path to it; therefore, it is suspended just as [other verbs of knowledge] are suspended, contrary to Abu Hayyan. This refutes the claim that the question is not something that operates on a sentence or is connected by a preposition—such as saying "he asked about such-and-such." Some claimed it is via an implied addition, meaning "the answer to what," but the first [view] is chosen by the majority.

The pronoun of absence is used instead of the first person, as is common in their speech, just as you say: "Zayd swore he would surely strike," even if you were to say: "I would surely strike," it would be permissible. The thing asked about, considering the preceding discourse, is what has been made lawful of food and provisions. It is also said that what was asked about was what is lawful of game and slaughtered animals.

"Say, lawful for you are the pure things": Meaning what sound natures do not consider repulsive and do not turn away from. Al-Balkhi adopted this view. According to Abu ‘Ali al-Jubba’i and Abu Muslim, they are the edibles, slaughtered animals, and game that the Almighty has permitted to be eaten. It is also said: whatever has not been forbidden by a textual proof or analogy, including consensus, since it must be based on a text even if you have not encountered it. "Pure" (Tayyib) according to these two views means lawful, and according to the first, it means delicious. It has come in both meanings.

"And [from] what you have taught of the hunting animals": This is a conjunction to "the pure things," with the implication of an added noun, on the basis that ma is relative (mawsulah) and the referent (‘a’id) is omitted—meaning: and the game of what you have taught. It is said: the intended meaning is its source, because that is what was made lawful by joining it to "the pure things" [which is] the conjunction of the specific to the general. It is also said: The apparent meaning is that there is no need to add [the word] "game" because lawfulness and prohibition relate to the act.

It is possible that ma is conditional (shartiyyah), acting as the subject, with the predicate being the response [i.e., the command], "so eat," and the conditional statement is a conjunction to the sentence "lawful for you," needing no implied addition. It is reported from Al-Zamakhshari that he affirmed the addition here, saying that its being conditional is not invalidated by the addition, for the noun added to the conditional noun is in the position of the possessive, just as you say "the slave of whoever beats, I will beat," similar to "whoever beats, I will beat." This was criticized on the grounds that, with that addition, the predicate would lack the pronoun of the subject unless one goes to the trouble of [interpreting it through] the sentences "what they have caught," using the noun in place of the pronoun of "what you have taught." Understand this.

It is permitted that it be a subject on the assumption that it is also a relative pronoun, with the predicate being "so eat," and the fa [in "so eat"] only entered as an analogy to the relative pronoun with the conditional noun, but this is contrary to the appearance. "Of the hunting animals" is a state (hal) of the relative pronoun or its omitted pronoun. "Hunting animals" (al-jawarih) is the plural of jarihah; the ha in it, as Abu al-Baqa’ said, is for hyperbole. It is a dominant descriptor, for the described noun is almost never mentioned with it. It is interpreted as "earners" from among the predators of beasts and birds. This is from the saying: "So-and-so wounded his family with good," if he earned for them, and "So-and-so is the jarihah of his family," meaning their earner. It is also said: They were called jawarih because they generally wound (tajrah) the prey.

According to Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both), Al-Suddi, and Al-Dahhak—and it is what is narrated from the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt according to the claim of the Shi‘a—they are dogs only.

"Trained" (mukallibin): Meaning, teaching them hunting. The mukallib is the trainer of hunting animals and the one who directs them toward the prey. It is derived from kalb (dog) for this well-known animal, because training often happens with it, or because every predator is called a kalb (dog), as it is said. Al-Hakim recorded in Al-Mustadrak and said: [It has a] sound chain from the hadith of Abu Nawfal who said: Lahab ibn Abi Lahab used to insult the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), so the Prophet said: "O Allah, unleash upon him a dog of Your dogs, or Your dog." He went out in a caravan heading to Syria and they descended at a place containing predators. He said: "I fear the prayer of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)." They placed his luggage around him and sat guarding him, but a lion came, snatched him, and went off with him. It is not hidden that the inclusion of predatory birds in this has a difficulty, and there is no indication in the naming of the lion as a dog [that it applies] to it.

It is permitted that it be derived from kalb, which means ferocity; it is said: "He is kalb for such-and-such," if he is fierce regarding it. Its accusative case is due to being a state from the agent [in "you have taught"]. Its benefit is hyperbole in teaching, because "trainer" (mukallib) only applies to someone highly skilled in his knowledge. From Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn Mas‘ud, and Al-Hasan (may Allah be pleased with them), it is narrated that they read mukallibin with a light lam (from aklab), and fa‘ala and af‘ala are sometimes used with the same meaning.

"You teach them": This is a state from the pronoun in mukallibin, or it is an inauguration (isti’nafiyyah) if ma is not conditional, otherwise it is parenthetical. It is permitted to be a second state from the pronoun of "you have taught," though Abu al-Baqa’ forbade this, arguing that one governor cannot govern two states, but this is debatable. It is not considered good to make it a state of "the hunting animals" due to the separation between them.

"Of what Allah has taught you": This refers to the tricks and methods of teaching and training. That is either by inspiration from Him, the Almighty, or by the intellect that He created in them, Majestic is His glory. It is also said: The intended meaning is "from what He has taught you to know" about following the prey, such that it is released when its owner releases it, restrained by his restraining it, turns away by his calling it, and holds the prey for him without eating from it. This is preferred for its indication that the teacher must also be a mukallib (trainer) in jurisprudence. "Of" (min) here is for partitivity, meaning some of what Allah has taught you.

"So eat of what they have held for you": A sentence branched from the explanation of the lawfulness of the prey of trained hunting animals, built for the implied added noun, and pointing to the result and effect of the teaching. Or it is the response to the condition, or the predicate of the subject. "Of" (min) is partitive, since of what they hold, there is that which is not eaten, such as skin, bone, and so forth. It is said it is superfluous, according to the view of Al-Akhfash, and the exclusion of what was mentioned is self-evident. "What" (ma) is relative or qualitative, and the referent is omitted, meaning: "what they have held it." The feminine pronoun refers to the hunting animals, and "for you" (‘alaykum) is connected to "held." The elevation [in ‘alaykum] is metaphorical. This restriction is to exclude what they have held for themselves; the sign of which is if they eat from it, so one must not eat from it. The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) pointed to this. The authors of the Sunan narrated from ‘Adi ibn Hatim that he said: I asked the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) about the prey of a trained dog. He said: "If you send your trained dog and mention the name of Allah, eat of what it has held for you. But if it eats from it, do not eat, for it has only held it for itself." The majority of jurists adopted this. It is also narrated from ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with his face), Al-Sha‘bi, and ‘Ikrimah. Abu Hanifa (may Allah be pleased with him) and his companions said: If the dog eats from the prey, it is not trained, and its prey is not eaten. However, the prey of a hawk and the like is eaten even if it eats [some], because training birds of prey to the point where they do not eat is impossible. This is also narrated from Ibn ‘Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with them both), for ‘Abd ibn Humayd recorded from him that he said: "If the dog eats, do not eat, but if the falcon eats, eat, for you can beat the dog, but you cannot beat the falcon." The Imam of the Haramayn from the Shafi‘is followed this. Malik and Al-Layth said: It is eaten even if the dog eats from it. It has been narrated from Salman, Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas, and Abu Hurayra (may Allah be pleased with them) that if the dog eats two-thirds of it and one-third remains, and the name of Allah has been mentioned over it, eat.

"And mention the name of Allah over it": The pronoun refers to "what you have taught," as the previous report indicates. The meaning is: mention His name over it when sending it [the hunting animal]. Ibn ‘Abbas, Al-Hasan, and Al-Suddi narrated this. It is also said it refers to "what they have held," meaning: mention His name over it when you catch it for slaughter. It is also said it refers to the verbal noun understood from "so eat," meaning: mention Allah over the eating, but this is far-fetched, even if Abu Hayyan deemed it more likely. The command is for obligation according to Abu Hanifa (may Allah be pleased with him) and for recommendation according to Al-Sha‘fi. According to the latter view, it is for recommendation by consensus.

"And fear Allah": In the matter of His prohibitions, among which is eating the prey of untrained hunting animals. "Indeed, Allah is swift in account": Meaning, swift in bringing His account, or swift in completing it once He begins it, for it has come that He, the Almighty, will hold all creation to account in half a day. The intent in both cases is that He, Majestic is His glory, will hold you accountable for all actions, their insignificant and their momentous [parts]. The manifestation of the Glorious Name is to cultivate awe and to provide the cause for the ruling. Perhaps mentioning this after explaining the ruling on hunting is to urge those who engage in it toward piety, as it is a place for carelessness and heedlessness of the obedience of Allah the Exalted. We have seen that most of those who engage in it abandon prayer and do not care about ritual impurity. Those in need of hunting who preserve their religion are rarer than a white crow, and they are rewarded for it.

Al-Tabarani recorded from Safwan ibn Umayya that ‘Arfata ibn Nuhayk al-Tamimi said: "O Messenger of Allah, I and my family are provided for by this hunting, and we have a share and blessing in it, but it is a preoccupation from the remembrance of Allah and congregational prayer, and we have a need for it. Do you permit it or forbid it?" He (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "I permit it, for Allah has permitted it. It is a good profession, and Allah the Exalted is most worthy of excusing. There were messengers before me, all of whom would hunt or seek game. It suffices you, regarding congregational prayer, if you miss it while seeking provision, that you love the congregation and its people, and that you love the remembrance of Allah and its people. Seek the lawful for yourself and your family, for that is a struggle in the path of Allah the Exalted. Know that the aid of Allah the Exalted is with the righteous traders."

The verse is used as evidence for the permissibility of training animals and hitting them for the sake of interest, because training may require that. It is also used for the permissibility of keeping a dog for hunting, and guarding is compared to it. It is also understood that the prey of a Magian's dog is not lawful. Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) adopted this view, for it is narrated from him regarding a Muslim who takes the dog, falcon, hawk, or eagle of a Magian and sends it: "Do not eat it even if you mention [the name of Allah], because it is the training of a Magian, and Allah the Exalted only said: 'You teach them from what Allah has taught you.'"