The Qur’anic root B H M
Quadrupeds, obscurity, and concealment: from bahīmah to mubham and bahīm
Qur’anic and lexical forms
بَهِيمَة
(bahīmah)
Quadruped; three Qur’anic uses with anʿām
بَهَائِم
(bahāʾim)
Plural of bahīmah; not Qur’anic
بَهْمَة
(bahmah)
Young livestock; not Qur’anic
بَهْم / بَهَم
(bahm / baham)
Plural forms of bahmah; not Qur’anic
بِهَام
(bihām)
Animal young in Labīd’s witness; not Qur’anic
بَهِيم
(bahīm)
Uniformly coloured, or dark by context; not Qur’anic
مُبْهَم
(mubham)
Unclear or closed; not Qur’anic
أَبْهَمَ
(abhama)
Closed or made unclear; not Qur’anic
اسْتَبْهَمَ
(istabhama)
Became difficult to understand or obscure; not Qur’anic
بُهْمَة
(buhmah)
Hard rock or formidable warrior; not Qur’anic
إِبْهَام
(ibhām)
Name for the thumb; not Qur’anic
بُهْمَى
(buhmā)
Name of a pasture plant; not Qur’anic
B H M has several established Arabic uses. Bahīmah denotes a four-footed animal; mubham describes something whose meaning or means of understanding is unclear; bahīm can describe a uniform colour without distinguishing markings; and buhmah can denote solid rock or a formidable warrior.
Connections can be recognised between these senses. Something whose means of entry or understanding is closed remains obscure; a colour without contrasting marks is uniform. Some lexicographers also explain bahīmah’s naming through the absence of speech intelligible to humans.
These connections should not become a certain etymology for every word. Especially for the animal name, established meaning must be distinguished from a proposed explanation of its naming.
Only bahīmah occurs in the Qur’an, always accompanied by al-anʿām. One occurrence concerns the permissibility of a group of animals; two concern mentioning The God’s name and benefiting from livestock within pilgrimage rites.
Quranic Arabic Corpus: three occurrences of bahīmah
The Qur’anic study therefore chiefly concerns the animal sense and its scope in bahīmat al-anʿām. Other forms illuminate Arabic’s range and guard against invented etymologies; they should not insert obscurity or inability to speak into the verses’ translation.
1. The semantic core and branches in early Arabic
In Maqāyīs al-Lughah, Ibn Fāris proposes this principle for B H M:
«أَنْ يَبْقَى الشَّيْءُ لَا يُعْرَفُ الْمَأْتَى إِلَيْهِ»
an yabqā al-shayʾu lā yuʿrafu al-maʾtā ilayhi
Something remains such that the way of access to it is not known.
He relates several uses to it: an obscure matter, an impenetrable rock, a warrior whom an enemy cannot find a way to overcome, a uniform colour, and a closed door.
These uses involve blocked access, absence of guiding marks, or difficulty of recognition.
For example, a problem whose solution is unknown can be called amrun mubhamun.
Abhamtu al-bāba likewise describes closing a door so that a way to open it cannot be found.
The principle is not equally clear in every branch. Ibn Fāris himself treats the thumb, young livestock, and the plant buhmā as uses not readily subsumed under his proposed core.
The attested branches should therefore be examined before judging their connections.
Maqāyīs al-Lughah: the proposed core and exceptional uses
Mubham: what cannot clearly be understood
Abhama concerns closing, concealing, or making something unclear.
Istabhama ʿalayhi al-amru describes a matter becoming difficult and incomprehensible to someone who cannot find its solution.
Mubham describes such a matter.
The word is familiar in both scholarly and everyday Persian. Calling an expression mubham means that its meaning is insufficiently clear.
Obscurity does not always mean meaninglessness. A statement may have a meaning that the listener cannot properly grasp because information is lacking or the words’ referents are unclear.
The uncertainty here arises in the relation between the subject and the listener’s understanding.
Other uses describe something whose entrance or opening is closed, such as solid rock or a wall without cracks or means of penetration.
These tangible uses illustrate blocked access.
Bahīm: a uniform colour without contrasting marks
Bahīm describes a colour unmixed with another colour.
Farasun bahīmun, for example, is a horse with uniform colouring and no contrasting patch or marking.
Some uses describe a black horse, but the meaning is not restricted to blackness.
A general definition of uniform colour can encompass white as well; however, an Abū ʿUbayd transmission preserved in Lisān al-ʿArab excludes white from bahīm. The difference in transmission should therefore be acknowledged.
Lisān al-ʿArab: uniform colour and Abū ʿUbayd’s exclusion of white
The main feature is therefore uniformity and absence of differently coloured markings, rather than darkness alone.
Laylun bahīmun emphasises darkness: a night so dark that visual signs and boundaries cannot readily be distinguished.
Darkness and difficulty of recognition can be connected here, but bahīm does not consequently mean black in every use.
Uniform colour also does not determine bahīmah’s meaning: animals called bahīmah can have varied colours and contrasting patches.
Buhmah: impenetrable rock and a formidable warrior
An early use of buhmah denotes hard, solid rock without a crack or means of penetration.
Another describes a powerful warrior whom an enemy does not know how to overcome.
The warrior is likened to impenetrable rock.
His strength is expressed through the difficulty of reaching a vulnerable point.
Buhmah here is not a name for all warriors and does not itself mean fighting or killing.
The sense belongs to a particular descriptive use.
2. Bahīmah, bahmah, and the animal branch
Bahīmah: the established animal name
Arabic lexicons define bahīmah as a four-footed animal.
Lisān al-ʿArab records a broad sense encompassing quadrupeds of land and water.
Al-Rāghib links it with animals lacking clear human speech, then explains that customary usage chiefly applies it to quadrupeds other than predatory beasts and birds.
The broader lexical definition must therefore be distinguished from customary or narrower usage.
Broadly, bahīmah can be a general designation for quadrupeds.
In ordinary contexts of human life, it more often concerns animals familiar through livestock keeping, food, or other benefits.
The animals intended in a particular verse must nevertheless be identified from the word’s companions and context.
Qur’anic bahīmah never occurs alone: al-anʿām always accompanies it and decisively helps determine its scope.
Lisān and Al-Mufradāt: bahīmah’s range and naming explanation
Does bahīmah mean an irrational animal?
Some early lexicographers connect the name with absence of human speech and discernment.
Al-Zajjāj explains bahīmat al-anʿām through the animal’s lack of discernment or clear expression in the sense familiar from human language.
Al-Rāghib likewise explains that an animal’s utterance is not clear and intelligible to humans.
These explanations belong to the history of understanding the word; they should not become an unquestioned judgment about every animal’s cognitive abilities.
Absence of human language does not mean absence of all perception, memory, communication, or discrimination.
Animals can communicate through sounds, movement, scent, and behaviour, recognise their surroundings, and respond to conditions.
Al-Anʿām 6:38 describes earthly creatures and birds as communities like its human addressees. Al-Naml 27:18 also depicts speech and warning among ants.
These verses prevent a lexical definition of bahīmah from becoming a categorical denial of any animal cognition or communication.
“Four-footed animal” is therefore a more established and reliable translation than “irrational creature” or “uncomprehending animal.”
Bahmah: young livestock
A related word in this family is bahmah.
Lexicons use it for young sheep and goats, and in some uses for the young of other quadrupeds.
Recorded plurals include bahm, baham, and bihām.
Some explanations distinguish a growth stage called bahmah from sakhlah, used for a newborn.
Early accounts do not, however, report a uniform boundary between those terms.
No fixed age can therefore be assigned across every animal species as bahmah’s permanent meaning.
More importantly, bahmah and bahīmah are different forms.
The first commonly concerns young livestock; the second is a broader animal name.
The Qur’anic bahīmatu al-anʿāmi should therefore not become “newborn livestock” merely because the forms look similar.
An early poetic witness: young animals
Labīd ibn Rabīʿah says in his Muʿallaqah:
وَالْعِينُ سَاكِنَةٌ عَلَىٰ أَطْلَائِهَا
عُوذًا تَأَجَّلُ بِالْفَضَاءِ بِهَامُهَا
wa-al-ʿīnu sākinatun ʿalā aṭlāʾihā / ʿūdhan taʾajjalu bi-al-faḍāʾi bihāmuhā
Translation: “The wide-eyed wild cows, newly calved, remain beside their young and nurse them; their calves gather in herds across the open ground.”
Bihāmuhā concerns the young animals. Al-ʿīn are wide-eyed wild cows; ʿūdhan describes the newly calved mothers, and taʾajjalu denotes their young gathering in herds.
Al-Zawzanī: wild cows, newly calved mothers, and their young gathering
Lexicographers cite this as evidence of bahm’s wider use: it is not confined to young sheep and goats but also describes the young of wild animals.
The line concerns young animals; it cannot establish that Qur’anic bahīmah applies exclusively to newborns.
Labīd lived across the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods, and his Muʿallaqah has an established place in early Arabic poetry. This witness chiefly illuminates usage; precisely dating its composition is a separate matter.
Lisān al-ʿArab: Labīd and bihām for young cattle
Other attested names
Ibhām is the Arabic name for the thumb.
Some lexicographers relate the name to the thumb’s role in closing the hand or gripping, but Ibn Fāris treats it as a use not easily subsumed under his proposed core.
Buhmā also names a pasture plant described in works on Arabian vegetation.
Neither word should be forced into a seemingly comprehensive definition of B H M through invented images.
Independent lexical evidence for each branch takes priority over constructing a single derivational story.
3. Bahīmatu al-anʿāmi: two words in a particular expression
In all three Qur’anic occurrences, bahīmah stands in a genitive construction with al-anʿām.
The two words must first be understood separately.
Bahīmah is a broad name for quadrupeds.
Anʿām belongs to N ʿ M and denotes an established group of livestock in Qur’anic usage.
Al-Anʿām 6:143 and Al-Anʿām 6:144 name sheep, goats, camels, and cattle, each with male and female.
These verses clarify the recognised scope of anʿām.
Without evidence, anʿām should therefore not be extended to every earthly animal, every edible animal, or every domesticated animal.
How bahīmah relates to anʿām
As an animal designation, bahīmah is broader than anʿām.
Arabic may call a quadruped bahīmah without placing it within the four recognised livestock categories.
When combined as bahīmat al-anʿām, however, their meanings must be examined together.
A recognised grammatical analysis treats this as an explanatory genitive construction: anʿām specifies bahīmah.
Simply put, the expression refers to quadrupeds belonging to the anʿām category.
Some early explanations treat the addition of bahīmah to anʿām as emphatic or explanatory.
Another interpretation includes animals resembling anʿām in their characteristics, such as certain wild herbivores.
A further view concerns the fetuses of livestock.
These differences deserve examination, but appearing in an exegetical source does not by itself make a reading the expression’s certain meaning.
Does bahīmat al-anʿām mean only livestock fetuses?
Some early reports understand a fetus found inside an edible animal’s womb.
That reading also figures in legal discussions of eating an animal fetus.
Several considerations prevent it from becoming the expression’s general and exclusive definition.
First, bahīmah itself is not restricted to fetuses.
Second, both Al-Ḥajj occurrences concern mentioning The God’s name over animals and benefiting from them within rites.
Third, an exclusively fetal interpretation would have to explain why Al-Ḥajj describes them as provisions associated with mentioning The God, eating, and feeding others.
The general sense of livestock quadrupeds fits all three occurrences more straightforwardly.
The fetus can be examined separately in a discussion of food rules; the general designation should not be restricted to it without evidence.
Are wild animals included?
Some early explanations mention gazelles and wild cattle because of their resemblance to anʿām.
This possibility concerns the relation between wild animals, the general name bahīmah, and livestock characteristics.
Physical similarity, herbivory, or having four legs does not by itself place all such animals within Qur’anic anʿām.
Conversely, the expression’s limited scope does not make every animal outside it forbidden.
Other animals’ food status requires independent examination of relevant verses on permitted food, prohibitions, and hunting.
Translation should therefore begin with the established sense, “livestock quadrupeds,” accepting broader or narrower readings only with independent contextual support.
4. First occurrence: livestock quadrupeds made lawful
Al-Māʾidah 5:1
Verse text:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ ۚ أُحِلَّتْ لَكُمْ بَهِيمَةُ الْأَنْعَامِ إِلَّا مَا يُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ غَيْرَ مُحِلِّي الصَّيْدِ وَأَنْتُمْ حُرُمٌ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَحْكُمُ مَا يُرِيدُ
yā ayyuhā alladhīna āmanū awfū bi-al-ʿuqūdi uḥillat lakum bahīmatu al-anʿāmi illā mā yutlā ʿalaykum ghayra muḥillī al-ṣaydi wa-antum ḥurumun inna Allāha yaḥkumu mā yurīdu
Translation:
“You who believe, fulfil your covenants. Livestock quadrupeds have been made lawful for you, except what is recited to you, without treating hunting as lawful while you are in consecration. The God judges as He wills.”
After commanding fulfilment of covenants, the verse states that bahīmat al-anʿām is lawful.
Lexically, the expression denotes the recognised quadrupeds within anʿām.
This does not permit eating every individual animal in every condition and circumstance.
The verse itself states exceptions.
Uḥillat lakum
Uḥillat belongs to Ḥ L L and here concerns being made lawful or permitted.
Bahīmatu al-anʿāmi is the passive subject, the nāʾib al-fāʿil, in this construction.
The verse thus concerns the permissibility of a group of animals.
In a food context, eating and benefiting from these animals are clear instances of this permission. Other verses mention benefits including food, clothing, and transport.
Bahīmah itself nevertheless does not mean eating: it names the animal.
Lawful should also not become obligatory. Permission to eat an animal does not in itself oblige a person to eat its meat.
Exceptions and the ruling’s scope
Illā mā yutlā ʿalaykum indicates exceptions to the stated permission.
Al-Māʾidah 5:3 sets out some prohibitions concerning animal food.
Uḥillat lakum bahīmatu al-anʿāmi should therefore be read with its own exceptions and related verses.
Ghayra muḥillī al-ṣaydi wa-antum ḥurumun follows.
It concerns consecration and hunting rules.
Permission concerning livestock must be distinguished from restrictions on hunting during consecration.
Al-Māʾidah 5:95 prohibits land hunting during consecration; Al-Māʾidah 5:96 distinguishes sea game from land hunting.
Their juxtaposition in Al-Māʾidah 5:1 does not make all hunting or every wild animal forbidden in every circumstance.
Consecration qualifies the ruling and should not be omitted.
Is this a complete list of lawful animals?
The verse addresses a particular animal group.
Declaring one group lawful does not itself make everything outside it forbidden.
Such a conclusion would require a separate prohibition or restriction.
Al-Māʾidah 5:96 discusses sea game; Al-Māʾidah 5:4 addresses food caught by trained hunting animals.
The Qur’an’s range of permitted food therefore does not end with bahīmat al-anʿām.
Equally, this permission does not make all quadrupeds lawful regardless of condition or preparation.
Each subject’s ruling must be understood from its relevant verses.
For the root study, the conclusion is clear: bahīmah names the animal, anʿām specifies its group, and permissibility is the verse’s ruling about that group rather than the word’s lexical meaning.
5. Second occurrence: bahīmat al-anʿām in pilgrimage and feeding those in need
Al-Ḥajj 22:28
Verse text:
لِيَشْهَدُوا مَنَافِعَ لَهُمْ وَيَذْكُرُوا اسْمَ اللَّهِ فِي أَيَّامٍ مَعْلُومَاتٍ عَلَىٰ مَا رَزَقَهُمْ مِنْ بَهِيمَةِ الْأَنْعَامِ ۖ فَكُلُوا مِنْهَا وَأَطْعِمُوا الْبَائِسَ الْفَقِيرَ
li-yashhadū manāfiʿa lahum wa-yadhkurū isma Allāhi fī ayyāmin maʿlūmātin ʿalā mā razaqahum min bahīmati al-anʿāmi fa-kulū minhā wa-aṭʿimū al-bāʾisa al-faqīra
Translation:
“That they may witness benefits for themselves and mention The God’s name on known days over the livestock quadrupeds He has provided them. Eat of them and feed the distressed poor.”
The verse follows the summons to pilgrimage.
Al-Ḥajj 22:27 describes people coming from distant routes, on foot or mounted. Al-Ḥajj 22:28 then addresses benefits of their attendance, mentioning The God, and feeding those in need.
Bahīmat al-anʿām occurs within rites and benefiting from livestock.
The animal’s name must nevertheless be distinguished from actions concerning it.
Bahīmat al-anʿām names the animal group.
Wa-yadhkurū isma Allāhi expresses mentioning The God’s name.
Eating and feeding others are separately expressed by fa-kulū and aṭʿimū.
Rendering bahīmah itself as “a sacrificed animal” would replace the noun’s lexical meaning with an action understood from the ritual context.
An explanation can clarify the sacrificial context and benefiting from its meat, but should not make that a fixed component of the root’s meaning.
Min bahīmati al-anʿāmi
Min precedes bahīmat al-anʿām in this verse.
The construction relates the provision to the animal group in question.
Livestock here forms part of The God’s provisions for humans, over which His name is mentioned.
The phrase alone does not specify animal numbers, ages, or an identical species for every participant.
Naming the group also does not establish an identical sacrificial obligation for every human or every circumstance.
That question belongs to the rules of rites and other relevant verses.
Eating and feeding
Fa-kulū minhā wa-aṭʿimū al-bāʾisa al-faqīra follows.
It presents two forms of benefit: eating oneself and feeding someone in need.
The animal is therefore not mentioned merely within a symbolic act: food and care for the destitute also appear in the same verse.
Bāʾis and faqīr nevertheless belong to independent roots; their meanings should not be absorbed into bahīmah.
Nor does this verse give every detail of sacrifice, exact timing, individual shares, or distribution.
Al-Ḥajj 22:36 further discusses sacrificial animals and feeding those in need. Al-Ḥajj 22:37 clarifies that their flesh and blood do not reach The God, whereas human taqwā matters.
Livestock here thus relates to mentioning The God, taqwā, and real human benefit.
This illuminates the verses’ religious and social meaning without turning bahīmah’s lexical sense into taqwā, feeding, or rites.
6. Third occurrence: communities’ rites and the oneness of the deity
Al-Ḥajj 22:34
Verse text:
وَلِكُلِّ أُمَّةٍ جَعَلْنَا مَنْسَكًا لِيَذْكُرُوا اسْمَ اللَّهِ عَلَىٰ مَا رَزَقَهُمْ مِنْ بَهِيمَةِ الْأَنْعَامِ ۗ فَإِلَٰهُكُمْ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ فَلَهُ أَسْلِمُوا ۗ وَبَشِّرِ الْمُخْبِتِينَ
wa-li-kulli ummatin jaʿalnā mansakan li-yadhkurū isma Allāhi ʿalā mā razaqahum min bahīmati al-anʿāmi fa-ilāhukum ilāhun wāḥidun fa-lahu aslimū wa-bashshiri al-mukhbitīna
Translation:
“For every community We appointed a rite, that they may mention The God’s name over the livestock quadrupeds He has provided them. Your deity is one deity, so submit to Him, and give good news to the humble.”
Bahīmat al-anʿām again occurs in connection with mentioning The God’s name.
The sentence’s opening importantly differs from Al-Ḥajj 22:28.
Al-Ḥajj 22:28 continues the summons to pilgrimage.
Al-Ḥajj 22:34 opens with wa-li-kulli ummatin jaʿalnā mansakan.
It therefore addresses the relation between rites and communities.
Did all communities have identical rites?
Mansakan belongs to N S K and here concerns worship and rites involving mentioning The God’s name over animals.
Appointing a rite for every community does not by itself establish identical details in every community’s rites.
A shared purpose, mentioning The God’s name, does not necessarily mean identical practical forms.
That distinction clarifies the sentence’s structure.
Ummah and mansak remain concepts independent of bahīmah.
Bahīmah should therefore not be treated as the name of a ceremony or particular sacrificial procedure.
It again denotes the animals in relation to which mentioning The God’s name is described.
Fa-ilāhukum ilāhun wāḥidun
The verse next declares the deity’s oneness.
Mentioning The God’s name over animals thus belongs within divine unity.
This does not make the animal an object of worship or confer divinity upon it.
The animal is among The God’s provisions; His name is mentioned in the act.
Nor does mentioning communities’ rites authorise each community to decree arbitrary animal rules in The God’s name.
The ruling’s scope and the rites must be examined through the Qur’anic text and the verses’ circumstances.
The relationship with sacred symbols and taqwā
Al-Ḥajj 22:36 places al-budn among The God’s sacred symbols.
This concerns animals used in sacrificial rites, but budn and bahīmah have different roots and scopes.
Al-Ḥajj 22:37 again reminds readers that flesh and blood do not reach The God; taqwā matters.
The rites’ value should therefore not be restricted to outward form or the animal itself.
Equally, stressing taqwā does not authorise removing the sacrificial act where the Qur’an prescribes it.
For this study, bahīmah’s animal meaning remains constant across all three uses, while its sentence role changes: permission in Al-Māʾidah, mentioning The God’s name, eating, and feeding in Al-Ḥajj 22:28, and communities’ rites and divine oneness in Al-Ḥajj 22:34.
Al-Ṭabarī: communities’ rites and mentioning The God’s name over livestock
8. Translation proposals for Forqan
For general Arabic bahīmah, use “four-footed animal.”
In livestock contexts, “a livestock quadruped” can be more precise.
For bahāʾim, use “quadrupeds” or “four-footed animals,” as context requires.
For bahmah concerning young livestock, use “young livestock” or the particular animal name, such as “lamb” or “kid.”
For colour-describing bahīm, use “uniform,” as in “a uniformly coloured horse.”
In laylun bahīmun, “a very dark night” conveys the contextual sense.
For mubham, use “unclear,” “unspecified,” or “difficult to understand,” according to the sentence.
For abhama al-bāba, use “closed the door firmly.”
For buhmah describing rock, use “solid, impenetrable rock”; for a warrior, “a formidable warrior.”
These equivalents belong to different branches and should not replace each other without evidence.
Proposed translations for the three Qur’anic uses
Al-Māʾidah 5:1
«أُحِلَّتْ لَكُمْ بَهِيمَةُ الْأَنْعَامِ»
uḥillat lakum bahīmatu al-anʿāmi
“Livestock quadrupeds have been made lawful for you.”
This preserves the animal group and leaves the ruling of permissibility to the verse’s verb.
Al-Ḥajj 22:28
«عَلَىٰ مَا رَزَقَهُمْ مِنْ بَهِيمَةِ الْأَنْعَامِ»
ʿalā mā razaqahum min bahīmati al-anʿāmi
“Over the livestock quadrupeds He has provided them.”
The ritual role follows from context. “Sacrificed” should not replace the animal’s name in the basic translation.
Al-Ḥajj 22:34
«عَلَىٰ مَا رَزَقَهُمْ مِنْ بَهِيمَةِ الْأَنْعَامِ»
ʿalā mā razaqahum min bahīmati al-anʿāmi
“Over the livestock quadrupeds He has provided them.”
The phrase has the same structure as Al-Ḥajj 22:28, so retaining one basic translation is appropriate.
Translation versus explanation
Bahīmat al-anʿām should not become “irrational animals,” which substitutes a proposed naming explanation for an established animal name.
“Newborn livestock” also conflates bahmah and bahīmah.
“Sacrificial animals” may explain their ritual use in Al-Ḥajj, but does not define the word itself.
“All edible animals” is likewise too broad and removes al-anʿām’s specific range.
“Livestock quadrupeds,” by contrast, preserves the animal name and places it within the intended Qur’anic group.
9. Conclusion
B H M has several Arabic branches, some involving obscurity, blocked access, or absence of distinguishing marks.
Ibn Fāris identifies this as the family’s core and relates obscure matters, impenetrable rock, formidable warriors, and uniform colour to it.
He nevertheless treats bahm for young livestock, ibhām for the thumb, and buhmā for a plant as uses whose connection with that core is unclear.
Bahīmah is the established name for a quadruped. Some lexicographers explain its naming through absence of clear human speech or difficulty understanding animal sounds; this should not become denial of every animal cognitive or communicative ability.
The root occurs only three times in the Qur’an, always in bahīmat al-anʿām.
Al-Māʾidah 5:1 declares livestock quadrupeds lawful, with relevant exceptions.
Al-Ḥajj 22:28 places them within mentioning The God’s name, eating, and feeding those in need.
Al-Ḥajj 22:34 relates them to communities’ rites and mentioning The God’s name over His provisions.
The animal meaning remains constant; the ruling and setting change.
Bahīmah should therefore not be defined as “a lawful animal” in one verse, “sacrifice” in another, and “rites” in a third. These concern the animal rather than being three independent root meanings.
Final root definition: In the main branch analysed by Ibn Fāris, B H M concerns blocked understanding or access and absence of clear distinguishing marks. In the animal branch, bahīmah names a quadruped; Qur’anic bahīmatu al-anʿāmi denotes the recognised livestock quadrupeds.
For Qur’anic translation, the decisive point is preserving the established animal sense and al-anʿām’s delimiting role.
Accordingly, “livestock quadrupeds” is the preferred basic equivalent for all three Qur’anic occurrences. Their place in food, rites, mentioning The God’s name, and feeding those in need follows from each verse’s verbs and context, rather than adding those concepts to bahīmah’s lexical meaning.