The following is a brief summary of these opinions:
FIRST: That the invocation is a condition for lawfulness. This opinion is held by the majority of scholars, including Abu Hanifah, Malik, Ahmad, Thawree, Ibn Abbas and many other. They say that in the above Ayat:
1. The order not to eat implies an absolute prohibition because nothing in the Ayat of elsewhere negates it or says otherwise.
2. The absence of the invocation is considered to be Fisq (impiety) or disobedience. That classification is given only to actions that are considered to be Haram.
3. The prohibition is a general one and should not be construed to only mean dead animals of animals killed by Mushriks, as some scholars have claimed. The reasoning behind this is that nothing in the Ayat indicates such a restriction or specification, and the fact that prohibition of dead animals and animals killed by Mushriks has been clearly and specifically mentioned elsewhere in the Quran more than once.
