horns of mountain goats during their lifetime. It is possible that this is considered pure, because it is something pure and attached to the animal, yet it contains no life, so it does not become impure upon being separated from the animal, nor does it become impure by the death of the animal, just like hair. The hadith intended what is cut from a beast while it possesses life, for it dies upon being separated, and life departs from it, unlike this case, as it does not die upon separation; thus, it is more like hair. What does not become impure upon death, there is no harm in using its bones, such as fish, for its death is equivalent to the slaughter of edible animals.

Section: The milk of a dead animal and its rennet (12) are impure according to the manifest view of the school (al-madhhab). This is the view of Malik and al-Shafi'i. It has been narrated that they are pure, which is the view of Abu Hanifah and Dawud, because the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, ate cheese when they entered al-Mada'in (13), and it is made with rennet, which is taken from young goats, and it is in the position of milk, yet their slaughtered animals were considered dead animal (maytah).

Our argument is that it is a fluid in an impure container, so it is impure, just as if it had been milked into an impure vessel. Furthermore, if it were to touch the dead animal after being separated from it, it would be impure; thus, it is the same before it is separated from it. As for the Magians, it has been said that they did not manage the slaughtering themselves; rather, their butchers were Jews and Christians. Even if this were not transmitted about them, the possibility would still exist, for there were Jews and Christians among them, and the original principle (asl) is permissibility, so this does not vanish due to doubt. It has been narrated that the Companions of the Prophet, who arrived in Iraq with Khalid, defeated an army of the Persians after they had set up dining tables and placed their food to eat. When the Muslims finished with them, they sat down and ate that food. The manifest implication is that it was meat. If we were to judge by the impurity of what was slaughtered [in their land] (14), they would not have eaten anything of their meat. And if they ruled on the permissibility of the meat, then cheese is even more deserving of permissibility. Based on this, if one were to enter a land...