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