a well-known hadith concerning ivory has been reported, but it is open to criticism that need not be discussed here, since we do not need to rely on it as evidence. It is also established in the Sahīh that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said regarding Maymūnah’s sheep:

“Why did you not take its hide and make use of it?” They replied, “It died without being slaughtered.” He said, “Only eating it has been forbidden.”

Sahīh al-Bukhārī contains no mention of tanning, nor did most of al-Zuhrī’s students mention it when narrating from him. Ibn ʿUyaynah, however, did mention it, and Muslim included his narration in his Sahīh. Imam Ahmad criticized this addition, indicating that Ibn ʿUyaynah had erred in it. He also mentioned that al-Zuhrī and others permitted the use of hides from animals that had died without lawful slaughter, even without tanning, on the basis of this hadith. Accordingly, this text implies that using them after tanning is permissible with even greater reason.

Yet even if it is argued that Allah subsequently forbade the use of hides until they were tanned, or that tanning does not purify them, this does not entail prohibiting bones and similar parts. The hide is a part of the dead animal containing blood, like its other parts. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, treated its tanning as its lawful slaughter, because tanning dries out its moisture. This indicates that moisture is what causes the impurity. Bone, however, contains no flowing moisture, and whatever moisture it contains dries up. Moreover, bone lasts and remains preserved longer than hide, so it has an even stronger claim to purity.

The scholars have disagreed concerning tanning: does it render the hide pure?