may Allah have mercy on him. He cited the Prophet’s saying: “The slaughtered animal of a Muslim is lawful, whether he invokes Allah’s name over it or does not invoke it.” (1)

The second view is that invoking Allah’s name is a condition, and it is not waived under any circumstances: neither through forgetfulness, nor ignorance, nor deliberate omission while remembering. This is the view of the Literalists, and it is also a narration from Imam Ahmad and Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on them. It was adopted by a group among the early generations, from the Companions and the Successors, and it is the preferred view of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. They cite the general wording of Allah’s saying:

“And do not eat of that over which the name of Allah has not been mentioned …” [al-An‘am 6:121]

They also cite the Prophet’s saying: “Eat of whatever causes blood to flow and over which Allah’s name has been mentioned.” (2) Thus, he made invoking Allah’s name a condition for the permissibility of eating. It is well known that when a condition is absent, that which depends upon it is also absent. Therefore, when the invocation is absent, permissibility is absent as well, just as with all other conditions. Conditions requiring the presence of something are not waived due to forgetfulness or ignorance. Thus, if a person prays while having forgotten to perform ablution, he must repeat the prayer. Likewise, if he prays while unaware that he had invalidated his ablution—for example, believing that passing wind does not invalidate ablution, or that camel meat does not invalidate ablution—he must repeat it, because that which is conditional is not valid without its condition. Similarly, if he slaughters an animal without causing the blood to flow, whether through forgetfulness or ignorance, it is not lawful. The same applies if he omits the invocation, because the hadith is one and the same: “Whatever causes blood to flow and over which Allah’s name has been mentioned