so long as you did not hunt it yourselves or have it hunted for you.” Al-Shāfiʿī said, “This is the best hadith on this subject and the one most consistent with analogical reasoning.” This is also the position of Mālik, Ahmad, al-Shāfiʿī, and others.

They differed only when game was hunted specifically for a particular person in ihram: may other people in ihram eat it? There are two opinions on this question, both of which are recognized positions in the school of Ahmad—may Allah Most High have mercy on him.

[SECTION ON RULES PERTAINING TO CONTRACTS IN FINANCIAL DEALINGS, MARRIAGE, AND OTHER MATTERS]

[SECTION: THE FIRST RULE—CONTRACTS ARE VALID THROUGH ANY WORD OR ACTION THAT INDICATES THEIR INTENDED PURPOSE]

SECTION

As for contracts involving financial dealings, marriage, and other matters, we shall set out broad and highly beneficial rules concerning them, [for this is easier in these matters than in acts of worship].

One such matter is how contracts are concluded. Jurists hold three views on this:

The first is that, as a general rule, contracts are valid only through the formulae and verbal expressions that some jurists specifically term “offer and acceptance.” This applies equally to sales, leases, gifts, marriage, charitable endowments, manumission, and other contracts. This is the apparent position of al-Shāfiʿī and one position in the school of Ahmad. At times, it is an expressly reported position of Ahmad on certain issues, such as sales and charitable endowments; at other times, it is a position extrapolated from his rulings, as with gifts and leases.