in al-Fath (9/529), commenting on it: “If it is established, then it is to be understood as meaning that it died as a result without having been properly slaughtered, as is the case with an animal killed by a clay pellet.”

Note: What is meant here by a clay pellet is a ball the size of a hazelnut, made of clay and thrown after it has dried. An animal killed by it is not lawful to eat, because it neither pierces nor wounds, but kills by impact. This differs from modern firearms, which are discharged with gunpowder and lead: an animal killed by them is lawful, because the bullet pierces more forcefully than an arrow or spear; it therefore takes the same legal ruling. See al-Rawdah al-Nadiyyah by Sadiq Hasan Khan (2/187).

2392 — “He forbade us from going to unnecessary trouble for a guest.”

It was recorded by al-Hakim (4/123) and Ibn ‘Adi (fols. 154–155), through Sulayman ibn Qarm, from al-A‘mash, from Shaqiq, who said: “A companion of mine and I entered upon Salman, may Allah be pleased with him. He presented us with bread and salt and said, ‘Had the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, not forbidden us from going to unnecessary trouble, I would have made greater provisions for you.’ My companion said, ‘If only there were some thyme in our salt!’ So he sent his water vessel to the grocer and pawned it, and brought back some thyme, which he added to it. When we had eaten, my companion said, ‘Praise be to Allah, who has made us content with what He has provided us.’ Salman said, ‘Had you been content with what you were provided, my water vessel would not be pawned with the grocer.’”

Al-Hakim said: “Its chain of transmission is authentic,” and al-Dhahabi agreed with him. Ibn ‘Adi said: “Sulayman ibn Qarm was excessively inclined toward Shi‘ism. He has singular good hadiths, and he is far better than Sulayman ibn Arqam.”

I say: He was among Muslim’s narrators, and al-Bukhari cited him as corroboration; and al-Hafiz said: