Sanctuary protection, vegetation compensation, qiran penalties, miqat exception, joint hunting and sale of game Read the bilingual lesson for Jinayat al-Muhrim — Sanctuary Game, Plants, Qiran and Joint Hunting (Part VI) and test your understanding with a focused quiz.
Lesson
1. The sanctuary and the state of ihram
The previous lesson discussed edible game and animal exceptions. This passage adds two independent causes of protection:
1. Ihram is a ritual state for pilgrimage; its rules may apply outside the sanctuary.
2. The Haram is a defined sacred territory; some restrictions apply even to a person not in ihram.
The passage then turns to qiran, joint hunting, and game transactions. First identify a person’s status and the location of the act.
2. Sanctuary game: liability of someone not in ihram
وَفِي صَيْدِ الْحَرَمِ إِذَا ذَبَحَهُ الْحَلَالُ: الْجَزَاءُ.
Translation: If a person not in ihram slaughters sanctuary game, compensation is due.
Here al-halal means a person outside ihram, not an adjective saying the meat is lawful.
The basis of the ruling is protection of sanctuary game. Thus freedom from ihram does not eliminate the sanctuary restriction. Identify the animal and its location before applying the compensation rule.
3. Two different senses of halal
Example 1: a person in a halal state is outside ihram.
Example 2: halal meat describes meat that is lawful to eat.
The text says إِذَا ذَبَحَهُ الْحَلَالُ
Translation: when a person outside ihram slaughters it.
The noun here denotes the actor, not the edibility of meat. One should not infer from the wording that the slaughter itself is automatically permitted.
4. Applying the location/status distinction
Case 1: a pilgrim is in ihram but still outside the Haram. The hunting restriction of ihram remains relevant.
Case 2: a person is outside ihram but slaughters protected game inside the sanctuary. Al-Quduri’s clause assigns compensation there as well.
These are distinct legal grounds: ritual status in the first case, sacred location in the second. One event may engage more than one legal framework, but that requires its own juristic assessment.
5. Sanctuary grass and trees
وَإِنْ قَطَعَ حَشِيشَ الْحَرَمِ أَوْ شَجَرَهُ الَّذِي لَيْسَ بِمَمْلُوكٍ وَلَا هُوَ مِمَّا يُنْبِتُهُ النَّاسُ فَعَلَيْهِ قِيمَتُهُ.
Translation: If someone cuts the Haram’s grass or trees that are neither privately owned nor of the kind planted by people, their value is due.
Hashish al-Haram means the sanctuary’s grass or herbage; shajaruhu means its trees.
Al-Quduri attaches a valuation rule to vegetation described with two qualifications: not privately owned and not planted by people. These conditions matter when identifying the specific vegetation-compensation rule taught here.
6. Both vegetation qualifications matter
Condition 1: laysa bi-mamluk — it is not privately owned.
Condition 2: wa-la huwa mimma yunbituhu al-nas — it is not planted or cultivated by people.
The cited rule assesses value for the specified natural, unowned sanctuary vegetation. This must not be mistaken for permission to damage someone else’s property or for a complete discussion of all possible civil or other liabilities.
7. Wild growth versus cultivated plants
Case 1: naturally growing, unowned grass in the Haram is unlawfully cut. This falls within the cited value-compensation clause.
Case 2: a garden plant cultivated and owned by someone is not the same specified category; other property rights need separate consideration.
Case 3: ownership and cultivation are uncertain. A definite classification requires facts rather than an assumption from the word “plant.”
8. Two protected things in the sanctuary
Game: the first clause assigns jazaʾ to an out-of-ihram person who slaughters protected sanctuary game.
Grass and trees: the second clause assigns their value to cutting vegetation within the stated conditions.
The two clauses use different language and have distinct factual predicates. The excerpt does not by itself enumerate every procedural detail for assessing or paying each liability.
9. Two penalties for a qarin
وَكُلُّ شَيْءٍ فَعَلَهُ الْقَارِنُ مِمَّا ذَكَرْنَا أَنَّ فِيهِ عَلَى الْمُفْرِدِ دَمًا فَعَلَيْهِ دَمَانِ: دَمٌ لِحَجَّتِهِ وَدَمٌ لِعُمْرَتِهِ.
Translation: If a qarin commits an act for which the mufrid, under the cited rulings, owes one sacrificial offering, the qarin owes two: one for Hajj and one for Umrah.
A qarin combines Hajj and Umrah in one ihram; a mufrid performs Hajj al-Ifrad.
This is a conditional rule: in a cited offence where the mufrid owes one dam, the qarin owes two. It does not say every action, or every lesser penalty, incurs two offerings.
10. Why the qarin owes two offerings
The qarin’s ihram includes both Hajj and Umrah; hence the text names one offering for Hajj and one for Umrah.
For an offence previously classified as requiring one dam from a mufrid, this clause requires two from a qarin.
The clause concerns the penalty for a violation. That is not automatically the same legal category as the ordinary sacrifice connected to qiran.
11. The mufrid, qarin and triggering condition
Case 1: a violation that expressly requires one dam from a mufrid entails two dam offerings for a qarin under this clause.
Case 2: if an action is assigned only charity, this wording alone cannot be used to convert it into two full offerings.
Case 3: an act with no penalty in the relevant source cannot acquire an invented dam solely because the pilgrim is a qarin.
The condition “for which a mufrid owes a dam” governs the entire sentence.
12. The difference between dam and sadaqah
Dam is an animal offering specified as a penalty in this chapter. Sadaqah is monetary/charitable compensation assigned to some lesser violations.
If the source specifies only sadaqah, the expression “two dams for the qarin” does not automatically apply.
The necessary first step is to identify the original kind of liability attributed to a mufrid.
13. The single-dam exception for passing the miqat
إِلَّا أَنْ يَتَجَاوَزَ الْمِيقَاتَ مِنْ غَيْرِ إِحْرَامٍ ثُمَّ يُحْرِمَ بِالْعُمْرَةِ وَالْحَجِّ فَيَلْزَمُهُ دَمٌ وَاحِدٌ.
Translation: Except when he passes the miqat without ihram and then enters ihram for both Umrah and Hajj: in that case one dam is due.
This is an express exception to the rule of two dams for a qarin. The miqat crossing is one occurrence, and this specific described case entails one dam.
Three elements are stated: the person crossed the miqat, lacked ihram at the crossing, and subsequently entered ihram for both Umrah and Hajj. The exact factual pattern matters.
14. The miqat exception as a sequence
Step 1: a pilgrim passes the miqat without ihram.
Step 2: farther on, the pilgrim enters qiran ihram for Umrah and Hajj together.
Result: in the precise described case, al-Quduri states one dam, not two.
The statement is not a general waiver for every ihram violation. A real case may need additional facts on returning to the miqat, remedy and timing.
15. General rule versus explicit exception
General rule: a qarin commits a violation for which a mufrid owes one dam; the qarin owes two.
Express exception: a person crosses the miqat outside ihram and later enters combined Hajj-and-Umrah ihram; one dam.
Before answering a case, check whether the specific miqat exception is actually present. The word illa changes the scope of the preceding rule.
16. Two muhrims jointly killing game
وَإِذَا اشْتَرَكَ مُحْرِمَانِ فِي قَتْلِ صَيْدٍ: فَعَلَى كُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا الْجَزَاءُ كَامِلًا.
Translation: If two people in ihram jointly kill game, each of them owes the full compensation.
Al-muhriman is the dual form, “the two persons in ihram.” Kulli wahidin minhuma explicitly addresses each participant.
Although two individuals cooperate in killing a single animal, the passage does not split the compensation in halves: each owes the full amount. The following clause establishes a different outcome for two persons outside ihram hunting sanctuary game.
17. Joint action does not halve the ihram penalty
Suppose two persons in ihram jointly kill one protected animal. Let J denote its full applicable compensation.
First person: one full J.
Second person: one full J.
Together their liabilities amount to two full J amounts; neither is assigned one-half. The text’s word kamilan (in full) is decisive.
18. One hunted animal, two personal liabilities
Three expressions fix the case:
Ishtaraka — the act was shared.
Muhriman — both individuals were in ihram.
Kamilan — each penalty is full.
“One animal was killed” is therefore insufficient information. The persons’ ritual status is essential, as the next clause illustrates.
19. Two people outside ihram jointly killing sanctuary game
وَإِذَا اشْتَرَكَ حَلَالَانِ فِي قَتْلِ صَيْدِ الْحَرَمِ: فَعَلَيْهِمَا جَزَاءٌ وَاحِدٌ.
Translation: If two people not in ihram jointly kill sanctuary game, they together owe one compensation.
Al-halalan denotes two individuals outside ihram. The protected animal is sanctuary game, identified by place.
Al-Quduri says fa-ʿalayhima jazaʾun wahid: one shared compensation for both. That is different from the preceding clause, under which each muhrim owes a full penalty.
20. Comparing the two joint-hunting clauses
Case A — two persons in ihram
They jointly kill one protected animal.
Each owes full compensation.
Case B — two persons outside ihram, sanctuary game
They jointly kill one protected sanctuary animal.
They together owe one compensation.
The number of participants alone is not decisive; ritual status and location distinguish the clauses.
21. Two similar-looking cases, different outcomes
Scenario 1: Ahmad and Bilal are both in ihram and jointly kill protected game. Each owes full compensation.
Scenario 2: Zayd and Amr are both outside ihram but jointly kill protected sanctuary game. One compensation is due between them.
These examples illustrate the precise two clauses. More complex cases combining multiple causes of liability require separate analysis.
22. The sale or purchase of game by a muhrim
وَإِذَا بَاعَ الْمُحْرِمُ صَيْدًا أَوِ ابْتَاعَهُ فَالْبَيْعُ بَاطِلٌ.
Translation: If a person in ihram sells or buys game, the sale is void.
Baʿa means “sold,” ibtaʿahu means “purchased it,” and al-bayʿu batil means “the sale is void.”
Both directions of the transaction are addressed: selling game and buying game while in ihram. The chapter therefore covers not only hunting and slaughter, but also the validity of dealings in protected game.
23. Invalid sale versus hunting compensation
Ruling 1: a muhrim hunts or participates in killing game, potentially creating a compensation liability.
Ruling 2: a muhrim sells or purchases game, and al-Quduri calls that a void sale.
A question about the validity of a sale does not need to say the seller personally killed the animal. Likewise, compensating for unlawful hunting does not settle all rules of contracts. These are different legal questions.
24. Vocabulary and morphology of the passage
Halal / halalan — one/two persons not in ihram in this context.
Hashish — grass or herbage, not the modern drug-related sense.
Shajar — trees.
Yunbituhu — they cultivate/grow it, form IV, root n-b-t.
Qarin — one who combines, an active participle from form III, here a pilgrim combining Hajj and Umrah.
Ibtaʿa — bought, form VIII, root b-y-ʿ.
25. Parsing fa-ʿalayhima jazaʾun wahidun
فَعَلَيْهِمَا جَزَاءٌ وَاحِدٌ
Translation: Thus one compensation is due upon them both.
Fa introduces the consequence.
ʿAlayhima is a prepositional phrase containing the dual pronoun “them both,” forming the fronted predicate.
Jazaʾun is the delayed nominative subject.
Wahidun is its nominative adjective.
“One” describes the compensation, not just one of the two participants.
26. Parsing fa-ʿalayhi damani
فَعَلَيْهِ دَمَانِ: دَمٌ لِحَجَّتِهِ وَدَمٌ لِعُمْرَتِهِ
Translation: Thus two offerings are due: one for his Hajj and one for his Umrah.
ʿAlayhi is a fronted prepositional predicate.
Damani is a delayed nominative dual subject, signaled by the alif.
Damun li-hajjatihi and damun li-ʿumratihi distinguish two purposes.
The dual grammatical form mirrors the two separate liabilities expressly stated in the ruling.
27. Seven clauses at a glance
1. Sanctuary game: a person outside ihram who slaughters it owes compensation.
2. Protected vegetation: cutting the specified unowned, uncultivated plants entails their value.
3. Qiran offences: two dam offerings when a mufrid would owe one.
4. Miqat exception: crossing without ihram and then entering qiran entails one dam.
5. Two muhrims jointly hunt: each owes a full penalty.
6. Two non-muhrims jointly hunt in the sanctuary: one shared penalty.
7. Game sale by a muhrim: buying and selling is void.
28. Three distinctions that prevent common mistakes
Misconception 1: “No ihram means unrestricted hunting in the Haram.” Sanctuary protections apply separately.
Misconception 2: “Every act by a qarin requires two offerings.” The two-dam rule has a defined trigger and an explicit miqat exception.
Misconception 3: “One animal means one penalty in every joint hunt.” Two muhrims each owe the full penalty, while two non-muhrims jointly killing sanctuary game owe one between them.
A sound answer preserves every stated condition.
29. Where the next chapter begins
The selected chapter ends with وَإِذَا بَاعَ الْمُحْرِمُ صَيْدًا أَوِ ابْتَاعَهُ فَالْبَيْعُ بَاطِلٌ
Translation: If a muhrim sells or buys game, the sale is void.
The next heading is Bab al-Ihsar, dealing with impediments such as obstruction or illness that prevent completing the pilgrimage and the associated release from ihram.
Those rules belong to the next level, not to the selected hunting-and-sanctuary passage.