because that which is prohibited to destroy may not have that which destroys it set upon it, just like game. The second opinion is that it is permissible, which is the school of 'Ata' and Al-Shafi'i, because sacrificial animals (8) would enter the Sanctuary and increase in number there, and it was not reported that their mouths were tied (9). Furthermore, there is a necessity for that, which makes it analogous to cutting idhkhir.

Section: It is permitted to take truffles (10) from the Sanctuary, as well as the faq' (11); because they have no root, so they are like fruit. Hanbal narrated, saying: "The daghabis (12), 'ishriq (13), that which falls from trees, and that which people have planted may be eaten from the trees of the Sanctuary."

Section: Destruction of trees and grass requires compensation (daman). This is also the position of Al-Shafi'i and the scholars of reasoning (Ashab al-Ra'y). This has also been narrated from Ibn 'Abbas and 'Ata'. Malik, Abu Thawr, Dawud, and Ibn al-Mundhir said: One does not guarantee [compensation], because a pilgrim in the state of ihram does not guarantee [compensation for such things] in the region outside the Sanctuary (hill), so he does not guarantee it in the Sanctuary, just like crops. Ibn al-Mundhir said: "I do not find evidence (14) by which I could mandate (15) anything regarding the trees of the Sanctuary from the Book, Sunnah, or consensus, and I say as Malik said: We ask for the forgiveness of Allah the Almighty." Our evidence is what Abu Hashima narrated, saying: "I saw 'Umar ibn al-Khattab order that some trees in the mosque that were harmful to those performing circumambulation be cut, and compensation was paid for them." He said: "And he mentioned the cow (16)." It was narrated by Hanbal in 'Al-Manasik'. It is narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that he said: "For a large tree (dawha), a cow; and for a small tree (jazla), a sheep." The dawha is a large tree, and the jazla is a small one. Similar to this is reported from 'Ata'. This is because...