and brought it to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The Prophet ﷺ returned it to him, and al-Saʿb’s face changed. The Prophet ﷺ noticed what was on his face and said, “We only returned it to you because we are in a state of iḥrām.” (1)

If game is hunted for the sake of someone in a state of iḥrām, it is unlawful for him to eat it. However, the Prophet ﷺ did not forbid al-Saʿb from eating it, because al-Saʿb had hunted it while not in a state of iḥrām, and what is hunted by one who is not in a state of iḥrām is lawful.

His statement, “even if it is born from it and from something else,” means that if game is born from a wild animal and a domesticated animal, or from an edible animal and one that is not edible, it is unlawful.

For example, if an animal is born from wild terrestrial game and from terrestrial game that is not wild, it is unlawful, based on the well-known principle: “When a factor permitting something and a factor prohibiting it are combined in one matter, and the permissible cannot be distinguished from the prohibited, the prohibitive aspect takes precedence.” This is because the prohibited cannot be avoided except by avoiding the lawful as well; therefore, it must be avoided.

His statement, “or if it dies in his possession,” is coordinated with “kills”; that is, if he kills game, or if it dies while in his possession, he is liable for its compensation.

That is, if he has in his possession game possessing the three descriptions—namely, that it is terrestrial, edible, and wild—and he does not kill it, but it is afflicted by an illness from Allah, Mighty and Majestic, and dies, then he is liable for it, because it is unlawful for him to keep it in his possession.

The apparent meaning of the author’s words is that it is unlawful for him to keep it in his possession, even if he had acquired it before entering the state of iḥrām.