and al-Thawri, the jurists (Ashab al-Ra'y), and Ishaq; and it is an opinion of al-Shafi'i. The second narration is that his ruling is exactly the same as that of one who commits sodomy (liwat). Al-Hasan said: His legal punishment is that of the adulterer. It is reported from Abu Salama ibn Abd al-Rahman: Both he and the animal shall be killed, due to the statement of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace): "Whoever has intercourse with an animal, kill him, and kill the animal along with him." Narrated by Abu Dawud (1). The basis for the first narration is that there is no authentic text (nass) regarding it, and it cannot be analogized to intercourse in the vagina of a human because it (the animal) has no sanctity (hurma), and it is not an object that requires the legal punishment as a deterrent, for people's souls find it abhorrent and the general public recoils from it; thus it remains upon the original principle of the absence of a legal punishment. The hadith is narrated by 'Amr ibn Abi 'Amr, and Ahmad did not deem it authentic. Al-Tahawi said: It is weak. The school of Ibn Abbas is contrary to it, and that is what is reported from him. Abu Dawud said: This weakens the hadith attributed to him. Isma'il ibn Sa'id said: I asked Ahmad about the man who has intercourse with an animal; he paused regarding it and did not authenticate the hadith of 'Amr ibn Abi 'Amr in this regard. Furthermore, the legal punishment is averted by doubts (shubuhat), so it is not permissible for it to be established by a hadith that contains such doubt and weakness. The statement of al-Khiraqi: "He shall be disciplined, and his discipline shall be carried out well." This means he is to be given discretionary punishment (ta'zir) and his punishment should be extreme, because it is intercourse in a forbidden orifice, for which there is no doubt for him, but it does not mandate a legal punishment, so it requires discretionary punishment, like intercourse with a corpse.

Section: The animal must be killed. This is the opinion of Abu Salama ibn Abd al-Rahman and one of the two opinions of al-Shafi'i. This applies whether it was owned by him or by someone else, and whether it is an animal whose meat is eaten or not. Abu Bakr said: The preferred choice is to kill it, but if it is left, there is no harm. Al-Tahawi said: If it is an animal whose meat is eaten, it is slaughtered; otherwise, it is not killed. This is the second opinion of al-Shafi'i, because the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) forbade the slaughtering of animals for non-consumption (2).