From it and the water, so it was not forbidden for its catch to be consumed, and for this reason the word “sea” was used because of its breadth, for it is encompassing, and so is the matter in itself, for there is nothing of His creation that does not glorify His praise, and none except a living glorify glorifies it. So life was explained in all existing things, and its rule expanded, so it was proportional to the sea in its breadth. That is why he added it to the sea and did not say to water, in order to take into account the capacity in the sea. Sea fishing is permissible, both permissible and forbidden .

Who says that it is permissible to eat it in general, and who says that it is absolutely forbidden to him, and who says that if it is not hunted for its own sake or for the sake of forbidden people, then it is permissible to eat it, but if it is hunted for a forbidden purpose, then it is forbidden for the one who is in ihram, and as for our doctrine in this matter, it has not been approved. I have nothing to say about it, and I have no evidence to support it, except that what I think prevails is the authentic information reported that if the person in ihram does not have anything to do with it, he has the right to eat it. One of the two possibilities is that the word forbidden hunting in the verse is more likely, because the aforementioned hunting may be intended by the action, or by it may be meant by catch, and I do not know which of that. The Almighty God intended, or He intended both matters, the action and the catch. So whoever sees that it is the action and not the catch

What is permissible is that there is no prohibition on him in disposing of it, so I am similar to the right in this capacity. If the prohibition is removed from the restriction, it is a divine attribute, and no one has the right to refrain by restricting him from exercising the right to him, since restricting it is his own disposal, then he has the right to accept what he expends in it as before restricting it, there is no difference, this is pure slavery. Purely, since he saw it in what is permissible, in that He is not prohibited from being prohibited from what is restricted from what is prohibited, I mean, he saw the divine attribute that does not accept prohibition, but rather He is the one who does what He wants, just as God Almighty resembles a restricted and forbidden one in matters that He Himself has made obligatory upon His servants in more than one place, just as He said, “Fulfill my covenant, and I will fulfill it.” With your covenant, so he included himself with us, a

The third saying is the closest to the correct opinion because it is closest to combining the hadiths mentioned in this chapter. This is the consideration that we have in this issue. What is a fourth saying? We have not decided on the ruling on that, but my opinion is that the third opinion is more likely than the two opinions, even if it is not that clear.

Whoever says that he eats carcasses and pigs without hunting, and whoever says that he hunts and eats, he will be punished. In the first place, I say that if he is forced to hunt, he will hunt, and he will be punished because it is intentional, so God has not designated one who is forced or not compelled.

Compulsion always accompanies every created thing, because it is its reality, and despite its necessity it has been assigned. So the one who should stop at what it has assigned, for absolute necessity does not rise from it, but rather a specific necessity rises from it, so all the movements of the universe, from the point of view of reality, are forced and compelled, even if choice exists in the universe. We know him

But then another knowledge that taught us that the chosen one is forced in his choice. Rather, the facts show that there is no choice because we saw the choice in the chosen one as forced, that is, he must be chosen. Compulsion is a fixed principle that does not accompany the choice. Compulsion does not determine the choice. All existence is in self-repair. He is forced by force from something other than, for the forced is the one who is forced, and if he had not forced him, he would have chosen, forced in his choice of this forced.

So creation is forced, especially *** and the original is forced, so where? The option

Every created being has its own form *** in the case of force and necessity

The creature is distinguished from its origin *** by its humiliation and lack