Book of ʿAqīqah
A comprehensive treatment of the foundations of this subject may be set out under six headings:
- Its legal ruling.
- The type of animal that may be offered.
- For whom the ʿaqīqah is performed and how many head are required.
- The time at which this rite is to be carried out.
- The age and qualities the animal must possess.
- The ruling regarding its meat and the rest of its parts.
As for its legal ruling, one group—the Ẓāhirīs—held that it is obligatory. The majority judged it to be a sunnah. Abū Ḥanīfah maintained that it is neither mandatory nor a sunnah, and it has been said that, according to him, it is simply a voluntary act.
Their disagreement arises from the seemingly conflicting purport of the prophetic reports on this issue. The outward sense of the ḥadīth of Samurah, in which the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Every child is held in pledge for his ʿaqīqah; a sacrifice is to be made for him on the seventh day and the harm removed from him,” points to obligation. By contrast, the plain meaning of his statement—upon him be peace—when he was asked about the ʿaqīqah: “I do not like ʿuquq (disobedience). Whoever has a child born to him and wishes to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, let him do so,” suggests recommendation or mere permissibility. Whoever understood it as a recommendation said, “The ʿaqīqah is a sunnah,” whereas whoever understood it as mere permission said, “It is neither sunnah nor obligatory.” Abū Dāwūd narrated both reports, and those who followed the ḥadīth of Samurah deemed the ʿaqīqah obligatory.
Regarding the animal to be offered, the majority of scholars hold that only the species permitted for the Eid sacrifice—the eight categories of livestock—may be used. Mālik preferred sheep, consistent with his view on sacrificial animals, and he differed as to whether camels and cattle are acceptable or not. The other jurists, following their own principles, consider camels superior to cattle, and cattle superior to sheep.
The reason for their divergence is the tension between the transmitted reports on the matter and analogical reasoning. As for the reports, one of them is the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās: