The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) sacrificed on behalf of his entire ummah, thereby lifting the obligation of uḍḥiyah from them.
In Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Volume 4, p. 642, it is narrated:
From ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥusayn, from Abū Rāfiʿ, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) would, when offering the sacrifice, buy two fat, horned, white rams. After praying and delivering the sermon, he would bring one while still standing in his prayer place and slaughter it himself with a blade. Then he would say: “O Allah, this is on behalf of my entire nation - those who testify to Your Oneness and my conveying [of the message].” Then he would bring the second ram, slaughter it himself, and say: “This is on behalf of Muhammad and the family of Muhammad.” He would distribute both as food to the poor and also partake of it with his family.
Narrated by Aḥmad and Ibn Mājah.
Ibn Kathir continues on page 646: “As previously stated, he (peace be upon him) sacrificed on behalf of his nation - thus lifting its obligation from them.”
By sacrificing on behalf of himself, his family, and his ummah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) fulfilled the sunnah of his forefather Abraham. However, he did not initiate the practice as a permanent religious obligation. Rather, he concluded Abraham’s tradition, redeemed his nation, and inaugurated a new era of drawing near to Allah through knowledge and inner refinement, not through the sacrifice of animals. At the same time, he aligned with a prevailing custom - refining it, elevating it, and pointing the way toward a higher alternative.
More Evidence of the Prophet Abolishing the Obligation:
1. In Subul al-Salām, Volume 4, p. 91, it states:
Narrated in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim and others from Umm Salamah: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “When the ten [days of Dhul - Ḥijjah] begin, and one of you intends to offer a sacrifice, let him not cut his hair or nails.”
Imam al-Shāfiʿī commented:
“His phrase ‘intends to sacrifice’ (fa arāda an yuḍaḥḥī) indicates that it is not obligatory.”
A similar narration and commentary is found in Bidāyat al-Mujtahid, Vol. 1, p. 464.
2. Many reports show that the obligation of sacrifice was written upon the Prophet but not upon his nation - he fulfilled the act on their behalf as part of a legacy custom, and thus lifted the burden from them.
In the same volume of Subul al-Salām, it is narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās:
“Three things were made obligatory upon me but are voluntary for you” - among them was the sacrifice.
Another narration reads:
“Sacrifice was prescribed upon me but not upon you.”
Thus, while the Prophet sacrificed to exempt his nation, the Companions sacrificed as a voluntary act, and many of the most senior, wealthiest, and most knowledgeable among them did not sacrifice, following this ruling.
3. Subul al-Salām, p. 96, also narrates:
From ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ, who said: A man asked the Prophet (peace be upon him) about the sacrifice, saying he could not find an animal. The Prophet said: “Trim your nails, cut your mustache, and shave your pubic hair - that will be your sacrifice in the sight of Allah.”
Also narrated by Abū Dāwūd, Vol. 3, p. 93.
This hadith subtly indicates the replacement of external animal sacrifice with internal human refinement - removing remnants of inherited animalistic traits (hair, nails) - and establishes a new value: the human ransoming himself by refining his own soul, rather than offering another being - animal or human - as a ransom.

The Companions Did Not Sacrifice

In Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Vol. 4, p. 646:
Abū Sariḥah said: “I was a neighbor of Abū Bakr and ʿUmar, and they did not offer sacrifices, fearing that people would follow their example.”
In Subul al-Salām, Vol. 4, p. 91:
“The actions of the Companions indicate non - obligation. Al-Bayhaqī narrated that Abū Bakr and ʿUmar did not sacrifice, fearing it would become obligatory by example.”
In Al-Iʿtiṣām by al-Shāṭibī, Vol. 8, p. 91:
“The Companions did not sacrifice” - meaning they did not treat it as binding.
Had sacrifice remained obligatory, the Companions - especially Abū Bakr and ʿUmar - would have been the first to uphold it. Abū Bakr, who was known for strictly adhering to the Prophet’s practices and avoiding innovations, is quoted in Al-Iʿtiṣām, p. 55:
“I do not leave anything the Messenger of Allah used to do except that I do it. I fear that if I abandon any part of his practice, I may go astray.”
Other notable Companions also affirmed the abolition of obligation through word and deed:
• Bidāyat al-Mujtahid, Vol. 1, p. 464:
ʿIkrimah narrated that Ibn ʿAbbās sent him with two dirhams to buy meat, saying: “Tell people this is Ibn ʿAbbās’ sacrifice!”
Bilāl once sacrificed a rooster.
• Subul al-Salām, Vol. 4, p. 91:
When the day of sacrifice came, Ibn ʿAbbās would give a servant two dirhams and tell him: “Buy meat and tell the people it is Ibn ʿAbbās’ sacrifice.”
Bilāl sacrificed a rooster, and similar reports exist from Abū Hurayrah.
In Al-Iʿtiṣām, it is reported that Bilāl said:
“I do not care whether I sacrifice two rams or a rooster.”
These actions emphasized that sacrifice was no longer required. Ibn ʿAbbās went even further, as quoted in Al-Iʿtiṣām, p. 91:
Ṭāqūs said: “I never saw a house with more meat, bread, and knowledge than that of Ibn ʿAbbās. He would slaughter every day - but not on the day of Eid.”
As for ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd, he left no doubt about the non - obligation of sacrifice for either the wealthy or the poor. Al-Iʿtiṣām, Vol. 2, p. 91:
“I forgo sacrifice, though I am among the wealthiest of you - out of fear that my neighbors may think it is obligatory.”
After all this - can anyone still demand further textual proof that the sacrifice has been lifted from the ummah? Can anyone today claim to be more concerned with following the Prophet than Abū Bakr, ʿUmar, Ibn ʿAbbās, Abū Hurayrah, Ibn Masʿūd, Bilāl, and the rest of the Companions?

The Weakness of the Proofs for Obligation

The proofs used to claim that uḍḥiyah is obligatory are weak in and of themselves.
Subul al-Salām, Vol. 4, p. 91, lists:
• The hadith: “Whoever has means but does not sacrifice, let him not come near our prayer place.”
• The hadith: “Each household must offer a sacrifice every year.”
• The verse: “So pray to your Lord and sacrifice.” (108:2)
But it notes:
• The first hadith is mawqūf (stopped at a Companion) and thus not authoritative.
• The second hadith is weak due to its narrator, Abū Ramlah - described as unknown.
• The verse has multiple interpretations. One interpretation is that “sacrifice” (Arabic word Anhar), refers to placing the hand on the neck during prayer - a meaning attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās and others.
Ibn Kathir, Vol. 4, p. 646, also comments on the hadith “Let him not come near our prayer place”, saying:
“It contains strangeness, and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal found it questionable.”
In Sunan Ibn Mājah, Vol. 2, p. 26, both Abū Dāwūd and al-Nasāʾī graded it weak.
The correct position is that sacrifice was lifted from the ummah - both the poor and the wealthy. When some Companions occasionally performed it, it was voluntary, and does not indicate obligation.
Even the juristic opinion that one should borrow money to sacrifice is baseless - it contradicts the spirit of the religion and the wisdom of its laws. (Fiqh ʿalā al-Madhāhib al-Arbaʿah, p. 715)
Some jurists argued for obligation upon the wealthy. Ibn Kathir cites:
Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, and al-Thawrī considered sacrifice obligatory for anyone who owns the minimum wealth threshold.
But: Al-Shāfiʿī and Aḥmad said it is not obligatory - only recommended. As in the hadith: “There is no obligatory right in wealth other than zakat.”
Thus, the position that sacrifice is not obligatory - on either poor or wealthy - best matches the spirit of the Qur’an, Sunnah, and the Companions’ words and actions.
More than that - it makes no sense even to say that it is recommended for the wealthy, when the most senior of them decisively and explicitly abandoned it.
Jurists define sacrifice as:
“A confirmed individual sunnah: its doer is rewarded, and its abandoner is not punished.”
(Fiqh ʿalā al-Madhāhib al-Arbaʿah, Vol. 1, p. 715)
But this view stems from the transitional phase in which some Companions performed it voluntarily. The senior Companions concluded that phase by decisively abandoning the practice, both in word and in deed.