Mālik and Ahmad, according to the well-known position reported from each, held that tanning does not render the hide pure. The position of Abū Hanīfah, al-Shāfiʿī and the majority is that it does. Ahmad subsequently adopted this view, as al-Tirmidhī reported from him through Ahmad ibn al-Hasan al-Tirmidhī.

The hadith of Ibn ʿUkaym indicates that “the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade them to make use of the hide or sinews of an animal that had died without lawful slaughter,” after previously allowing them to do so. This prohibition, however, may concern hides before tanning, whose use he had previously permitted. For the authentic hadith narrated by al-Zuhrī makes clear that he had permitted the use of hides from animals that had died without lawful slaughter before tanning. Thus, he may initially have allowed them to do this, then prohibited it when he forbade using such hides before tanning. For this reason, some lexicographers state that ihāb denotes an untanned hide. This also explains why sinews are mentioned alongside it, since sinews are not tanned.

Section

Regarding the milk and rennet of an animal that has died without lawful slaughter, scholars hold two well-known views:

The first is that they are pure. This is the position of Abū Hanīfah and others, and one of the two views reported from Ahmad.