we fear they might capture them or not. This is the opinion of al-Awza'i, al-Layth, al-Shafi'i, and Abu Thawr. Abu Hanifah and Malik said: It is permissible, because it enrages them and weakens their strength, so it is similar to killing them during the state of fighting. Our evidence is that Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, said in his instructions to Yazid when he sent him as a commander: "O Yazid, do not kill a child, nor a woman, nor an elderly person, nor destroy what is inhabited, nor hamstring a fruit-bearing tree, nor a dumb animal, nor a sheep, except for food, nor burn bees, nor drown them, nor act treacherously, nor be cowardly." Furthermore, the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, forbade killing any animal by tying it up and using it as a target (sabra). And because it is an animal that has sanctity, so it is like women and children. As for the state of war, it is permissible to kill polytheists therein in any way possible, unlike their state when they are overpowered; that is why it is permissible to kill women and children during a night raid or when they are in a subterranean pit, provided one does not intentionally target them individually, which is different from a state of being able to capture them. Killing their livestock is a means to achieve their defeat. We have mentioned the hadith of the Madadi who hamstrung the horse of a Roman. It was also narrated that Hanzalah ibn al-Rahib hamstrung the horse of Abu Sufyan on the day of Uhud, so it threw him off, and Ibn Sha'ub saved him. There is no disagreement on this.

Section: As for hamstringing them for food, if the need arises and it is indispensable, then it is permissible without disagreement, because necessity makes the property of a protected person permissible, so the property of an infidel is even more so. If the need does not arise, we examine: if the animal is intended only for food, such as chickens, pigeons, and other birds and game, its ruling is the ruling of food in the opinion of everyone, because it is not intended for anything other than eating and its value is low, so it is like food. If it is something needed in battle, like horses, its slaughter for food is not permitted, in their opinion unanimously. If it is other than that, like sheep and cattle, it is not permitted in the opinion of al-Khiraqi. Al-Qadi said: The apparent meaning of Ahmad's words is that it is permissible, because this animal is like food in terms of eating and nourishment, so it is like it in terms of permissibility. When one slaughters the animal, he may eat its meat, but he may not benefit from its hide, because only what he eats has been made permissible for him. The meat of the sheep should be eaten, and its hide returned to the spoils of war. And because this is an edible animal, its eating is permitted, like birds. The basis for al-Khiraqi's opinion is what Sa'id narrated: Abu al-Ahwas narrated to us, from Simak ibn Harb, from Tha'labah ibn al-Hakam, who said: "We captured sheep belonging to the enemy and seized them as booty, so we set up our cooking pots. The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, passed by the pots while they were boiling and ordered them to be overturned, then said to them: 'Spoils taken without authorization (al-nuhba) are not lawful.'" And because these animals have significant value, the owners of the spoils are reluctant to give them up, and they can be transported to the Abode of Islam, unlike birds and food. However, if the commander permits it, it is permissible, for what 'Atiyyah ibn Qays narrated, saying: "When we went out on a military expedition and captured sheep, the announcer for the commander would call out: 'Whoever wishes to take something from these sheep, let him take it, for we are not able to drive them.'" Sa'id narrated it. Likewise if he distributes them; for what Mu'adh narrated, saying: "We campaigned with the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, in Khaybar, and we captured sheep. The Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, divided a portion among us and placed the remainder in the spoils of war." Narrated by Abu Dawud. Sa'id said: Isma'il ibn 'Ayyash narrated to us, from 'Ubayd Allah ibn 'Ubayd, that a man slaughtered a camel in the land of the Romans. When it had cooled, he said: "O people, take from the meat of this camel, for we have permitted it for you." Makhul said: "O Ghassani, will you not bring us some of the meat of this camel?" The Ghassani said: "O Abu 'Abd Allah, do you not see the property seized as booty (nuhba) on it?" Makhul said: "There is no 'nuhba' in what is permitted."