• Difference of opinion among the scholars:
The scholars have differed over which source of income is superior. Some considered farming the best, others favored trade, while still others preferred manual labor. The soundest conclusion is that the best occupation for any given person is that which suits his circumstances; yet in every field sincerity and the avoidance of fraud are indispensable.

• Points of benefit:
First: All marine creatures are lawful to eat according to the sounder opinion; nothing from the sea is excluded. Of land animals, only what is repugnant is unlawful, and its repugnance is recognized through the following indicators:

1. The Lawgiver has explicitly declared it repugnant, such as domesticated donkeys.
2. He has defined it by description, such as any predator possessing fangs.
3. It is universally known to be vile, like the snake.
4. The Lawgiver orders that it be killed, as with the mouse.
5. He forbids killing it, such as the hoopoe and the shrike.
6. It is known for feeding on carrion, like the vulture.
7. It is the offspring of a lawful and an unlawful animal, such as the mule.
8. Its repugnance is accidental, arising from impurity in its body, as with an animal that habitually feeds on filth (jalālah).
9. It is forbidden because of bodily harm—various poisons, for example—or because of mental harm, such as wine and narcotics.
10. It has not been slaughtered in accordance with the Sharīʿah, as explained in the chapter’s introduction.
    All these factors render the animal repugnant.

Second: al-Khaṭṭābī said, “Whatever you are uncertain about, cautious piety dictates avoiding it,” citing the hadith, “Leave what causes you doubt for what does not cause you doubt.” Shaykh al-Islām remarked, “The difference between renunciation (zuhd) and cautious piety (waraʿ) is that zuhd is to leave what brings no benefit in the Hereafter, whereas waraʿ is to leave what one fears may harm him in the Hereafter.”