وَحَدَّثَنِي عَنْ مَالِكٍ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ إِذَا أَصَابَ الرَّجُلُ الصَّيْدَ فَأَعَانَهُ عَلَيْهِ غَيْرُهُ مِنْ مَاءٍ أَوْ كَلْبٍ غَيْرِ مُعَلَّمٍ لَمْ يُؤْكَلْ ذَلِكَ الصَّيْدُ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَكُونَ سَهْمُ الرَّامِي قَدْ قَتَلَهُ أَوْ بَلَغَ مَقَاتِلَ الصَّيْدِ حَتَّى لاَ يَشُكَّ أَحَدٌ فِي أَنَّهُ هُوَ قَتَلَهُ وَأَنَّهُ لاَ يَكُونُ لِلصَّيْدِ حَيَاةٌ بَعْدَهُ . قَالَ وَسَمِعْتُ مَالِكًا يَقُولُ لاَ بَأْسَ بِأَكْلِ الصَّيْدِ - وَإِنْ غَابَ عَنْكَ مَصْرَعُهُ - إِذَا وَجَدْتَ بِهِ أَثَرًا مِنْ كَلْبِكَ أَوْ كَانَ بِهِ سَهْمُكَ مَا لَمْ يَبِتْ فَإِذَا بَاتَ فَإِنَّهُ يُكْرَهُ أَكْلُهُ .
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard the people of knowledge say that when a man hit game and something else might have contributed to death, like water or an untrained dog, that game was not to be eaten unless it was beyond doubt that it was the arrow of the hunter that had killed it by reaching a vital organ, so that it did not have any life after that.
Yahya said that he heard Malik say that there was no harm in eating game when you did not see it die if you found the mark of your dog on it or your arrow in it as long as it had not remained overnight. If it had remained overnight, then it was disapproved of to eat it.
Reported by Malik (No. 1057b, 1057).