wine.” It is also reported that he said: “We shall wage war against them because they have not fulfilled the conditions imposed upon them by ‘Uthmān, who stipulated that they should] (1), along with other conditions.”

Ibn ‘Abbās, however, said that they are lawful, citing the words of Allah Most High:

“Whoever among you takes them as allies is indeed one of them.”

The general body of Muslims, including the Companions and others, did not prohibit the animals they slaughtered. Such a prohibition is known only from ‘Alī. A statement conveying the same meaning as Ibn ‘Abbās’s view has also been reported from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb.

Some scholars preferred the view of ‘Umar and Ibn ‘Abbās. This is the majority position, held by Abū Hanīfah, Mālik, and Ahmad according to one of the two views reported from him—a view that a group of scholars of his school judged correct. Indeed, it was his final position. Moreover, the general body of Muslims among the Companions, the Successors, and their followers held this view.

Abū Bakr al-Athram said: “I know of none of the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who disapproved of it except ‘Alī.” This is the position of the overwhelming majority of the jurists of the Hijāz and Iraq, and of the jurists of both the hadith and reasoned-opinion traditions, such as al-Hasan, Ibrāhīm al-Nakha‘ī, al-Zuhrī, and others. It is also the position transmitted from Ahmad by most scholars of his school. Ibrāhīm ibn al-Hārith said: “Ahmad’s final position was that he saw nothing objectionable in the animals they slaughtered.”

Other scholars preferred ‘Alī’s view. This is the position of al-Shāfi‘ī and of Ahmad according to one of the two views reported from him. Ahmad’s reasoning differed only concerning Banū Taghlib, the very people concerning whom the Companions disagreed.

As for the other Jews and Christians among the Arabs, such as Tanūkh and Bahrā’