someone uses an instrument whose edge is only slightly sharp, but pulls the bird’s neck until it is severed by the pulling as well as the slaughtering, then it is not lawful to eat. This is because a permitting factor and a prohibiting factor have come together. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said concerning game: “If you find it drowned in water, do not eat it, for you do not know whether the water killed it or your arrow.” (1) Here likewise, we do not know whether the sparrow’s neck was severed by the pulling or by the knife.

His statement, “and other than these”: this is because the governing principle is that the instrument must be sharp enough to make the blood flow freely. Thus, sharpened wood—and every sharp object—may be used for slaughter, and the animal slaughtered with it is lawful.

Issue: Is slaughter with gold lawful? The sound view is that it is valid, though sinful, because it is prohibited.

His statement, “except a tooth and a claw”: what is meant is every tooth and claw, even if it is sharp. Accordingly, what children do when they sever a sparrow’s neck with their fingernails and then eat it is unlawful, even if the nail is sharp. This is due to the Prophet’s statement, peace and blessings be upon him: “Eat whatever causes the blood to flow freely and over which Allah’s Name has been mentioned, except a tooth and a claw. As for the tooth, it is bone; and as for the claw, it is the knives of the Abyssinians.” (2) Mudā is the plural of mudyah, meaning a knife; and the Abyssinians are well known.

The Prophet’s reasoning in this hadith presents a difficulty in relation to the author’s statement, for he, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “As for the tooth, it is bone,” and did not say, “As for the tooth, it is a tooth.” Had he said: