|
Q:) What is the correct meaning of the
jewish word kausher. Can I eat things which
are kausher and contain no pig extracts?
A:)
ZABEEHA:
Almighty Allah Ta’ala in
His infinite mercy has made certain animals
Halaal (permissible) for this Ummah. We are
required to be thankful to Him by following
the dictates of the Qur’aan and Sunnah by
ensuring that His name is taken upon
slaughtering of the animal. Allah Ta’ala
states in the noble Qur’aan:
1. ‘For every nation We
have specified a rite (for slaughtering) so
that they may take the name of Allah Ta’ala
upon (the slaughter of) the animals granted
to them as sustenance.’ (Hajj 34)
2. And consume not of
that whereupon the name of Allah Ta’ala was
omitted (at the time of slaughter). Indeed
it is a transgression. Verily the Shayaateen
inspire their friends to cause division with
you. If you obey them, you are indeed
Mushriks (ascribing partners to Allah).’ (An`aam
121)
3. ‘So take the name of
Allah upon them (at the time of slaughter)
while they stand in rows.’ (Hajj 36). In
reference to Camels which are slaughtered by
Nahr (a swift stab of the neck which severes
the four arteries) while standing.
4. ‘… and such animals
upon which they mention not the name of
Allah only to fabricate a lie against him.’
(An’aam 138)
5. Forbidden to you are
Maytah (carrion), flowing blood, the flesh
of swine and that slaughtered for other than
Allah as well as the (animal) expiring by
strangulation, illness or pain, falling
(from a height), by a wound (sustained
through fighting) and by falling to a
predator and (about to be consumed),
excepting those (animals) upon which you
effect Zaka (Shar’ee slaugher). (Maaidah 3)
From the above Aayaats,
the following points are understood:
1. Meat is not in the
same category as other nutrients.
2. The most important
condition is that Tasmiyah (taking the name
of Allah) be pronounced at the time of
slaughter. The Aayaats clearly explain the
impermissibility of those animals whose
slaughter was not preceded by Tasmiya.
3. The impermissibility
of those animals whose lives were ended by
means other than Zabah (Shar’ee slaughter)
of which Tasmiya is a condition. All such
animals are Maytah (carrion) and are
expressly forbidden.
4. The Dhabeeha (animal
slaughtered) by a Kaafir (non-believer) or
Mushrik (polytheist) is Haraam (unlawful).
However, those Ahlul Kitaab (people of the
book) who also hold the Aqeedah (belief) of
Tasmiya at the time of slaughter have been
excluded from the Kuffaar majority.
5. The Aayaat number 121
of An`aam explains consumption of meat not
slaughtered with Tasmiyah as Fisq –
transgression and disobedience. The Aayat
then explains that to regard consumption of
such meat as Halaal is nothing but a
teaching of Shaytaan to cause division among
the Ummah. The Aayat also warns that
obedience of Shaytaan in this matter is a
kin to Shirk (ascribing partners to Allah).
Imaam Bukhari has quoted
this same Aayat in his magnum opus under the
chapter, ‘Intentional Ommission of the
Tasmiyah at the time of Slaughter’ to the
same import as explained by Hafiz ibn Hajar,
the renowned commentator of Sahih Bukhari in
the following words:
Imaam Bukhari (RA) wishes
to point out by citing this Aayat the
reproach against using this Aayah as proof
to legalise omission of Tasmiyah by
inventing baseless interpretations of the
Aayat and understanding it in a manner
contrary to clear import.’ (Fathul Bari
vol.9 pg.778; Qadeemi)
Intentional Omission of
Tasmiyah neglectfully or our of Istikhfaaf
(regarding it as insignificant) The Jurists
(Fuqahaa) have unanimously agreed that
consumption of an animal slaughtered by a
Muslim with intentional omission of Tasmiya
or regarding such as insignificant is
unlawful (Haraam). Imaam Shaaf’ee (RA) has
also concurred with this view. (Jawaahirul
Fiqhvol.2 pg.388; Darul Uloom from Kitaabul
Umm and Tafseer Mazhari)
Imaam Abu Yusuf states:
‘The ruling regarding the animal upon which
Tasmiyah was omitted (at the time of
slaughter) is not subject to Ijtihaad
(independent deduction of a ruling from
Qur’aan and Hadith). If a judge rules the
permissibility of its sale, his ruling will
not be given effect due to it being contrary
to consensus of opinion.’ (Ibid pg.390;
Hidaaya)
It should be noted
significantly that the above discussion of
impermissibility is with regard to a Muslim
slaughterer not to speak of a non-Muslim.
In the case of a Muslim
forgetfully omitting the Tasmiyah, the
animal will be permissible for consumption
as is the ruling of all the four Madhaahib
based on the Hadith of Nabi (Sallallaahu
Alayhi Wasallam), ‘A believer always
slaughters upon the name of Allah, whether
he (remembers to) recites it or not.’ (Fathul
Bari vol.9 pg.793; Qadeemi)
Animals Slaughtered by
Moden Day Jews and Christians
‘The food of Ahlul Kitaab (people of the
book) is lawful for you as is your food for
them.’ (Maaidah 5)
Regarding the word,
‘Ta’aam’ (food), ibn Abbaas, Ibn Umamah,
Mujaahid and others (Radhiallaahu Anhum) say
that it refers to slaughtered animals. This
matter (permissibility of these animals) is
unanimously agreed upon by all scholars
since they also hold the belief of the
prohibition of slaughter save in Allah’s
name and also due to the fact that they
mention only the name of Allah Ta’ala upon
their animals of slaughter. (Jawaahirul Fiqh
vol.2 pg.4040; from Ibn Katheer)
The reason for
permissibility has been explained clearly by
Allaamah ibn Katheer that due to the unity
of belief regarding slaughter between
Muslims and the Jews and Christians of that
particular time, Allah Ta’ala had permitted
consumption of their slaughter. The Ulama of
the time had based their rulings on this
very same reasoning.
When this unity of belief
came into doubt, many great Sahaaba (Radhiallaahu
Anhum) had not hesitated to rule
prohibition.
‘With regards to a
Kitaabi, when he omits Tasmiyah (the name of
Allah) upon his slaughter and takes some
other name, his slaughter is not consumable.
This is the ruling of Abu Darda, Ubadah bin
Saamit and large faction of the Sahaaba (Radhiallaahu
Anhum).’ (Jawaahirul Fiqh vol.2 pg.407;
Darul Uloom – from Bahrul Muheet)
Regarding the Christian
tribe of Banu Taghlib, Hadhrat Ali (Radhiallaahu
Anhu) ruled the following:
‘Hafiz ibn Jawzi (RA) has
narrated with his Sanad (chain of narrators)
from Ali (Radhiallaahu Anhu), ‘Do not
consume the slaughter of the Christians of
Banu Taghlib since they have not held to any
more of Christianity than their drinking of
wine.’ (Ibid pg.460 – from Tafseer Mazhari)
It is a well-known fact
that the majority of present day Christians
and Jews no longer hold to this Aqeedah
(belief) regarding slaughter. They do not
hesitate to consume meat slaughtered by even
Pagans and Mushriks (polytheists) and
atheists. They have held to even less of
Christianity than the Banu Taghlib. Most of
them are just Christians and Jews by name,
‘atheistic’ in their beliefs and actions.
Their abbatoirs employ machine slaughter
wherever possible and do not hesitate to
employ pagans and polytheists, e.g. Chinese,
Koreans, etc. to carry our slaughter.
THE RULING:
Based on the above Juridical references,
Qadhi Thanaullah (RA) a renowned Jurist of
his time states the following:
‘The correct and accepted
view according to us is the first one that
the slaughter of the Ahlul Kitaab with
intentional omission of Tasmiyah (taking the
name of Allah) or slaughter on some other
name (besides that of Allah) is not
consumable, if this fact is ascertained with
certainity or this is the condition
prevailing among them. By this, the
prohibition (of the Sahaaba) from consuming
the slaughter of the Christian Arabs can be
easily understood. Likewise, the ruling of
Ali (Radhiallaahu Anhu) (regarding the Banu
Taghlib)’ becomes clear. It is likely that
Ali (Radhiallaahu Anhu) had ascertained that
their omission of Tasmiyah upon slaughter or
that they slaughtered upon some other name
(besides Allah). A similar ruling has been
issued regarding the non-Arab Christians
that if it is their normal habit to
slaughter without Tasmiyah, their slaughter
is not consumable. Concerning the present
day Christians there is no doubt in the fact
that their methods do not fulfil
requirements of Shar’ee slaughter, but they
usually cause the death of their animals by
other lethal measures, e.g. machine
slaughter, etc. hence, their slaughter is
impermissible.’ (Jawaahirul Fiqh vol.2
pg.411; from Tafseer Mazhari)
The Correct Understanding
of the Hadith of Bukhari (cited by many
people to justify their claims)
“It has been narrated
from Aaisha (Radhiallaahu Anha) that some
persons said to Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi
Wasallam), ‘People bring to us meat. We know
not whether the name of Allah Ta’ala has
been taken (upon its slaughter) or not? Nabi
(Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) replied, ‘You
people say Bismillah and eat it.’ Aaisha (Radhiallaahu
Anha) says, ‘the people referred to (in this
Hadith) were new Muslims.’ (Bukhari vol.2
pg.828; Deoband)
It is clear that the
slaughterers were Muslims, not disbelievers.
This is further elucidated by Imaam Maalik (RA)’s
narration (of the same Hadith) where the
addition of, ‘this was in the beginning of
Islam.’ (Fathul Bari vol.9 pg.792; Qadeemi)
is found.
To believe that these
people were non-Muslims is in fact
tantamount to accusing the noble Sahaaba of
Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) of
the heinous crime of consuming meat
slaughtered by polytheists which is
expressly forbidden in the Qur’aan:
‘Forbidden to you is
carrion … till … and that slaughtered for
other than Allah.’ (Maaidah 3)
The actual meaning of
this Hadith, as understood by similar
narrations is that one should not entertain
unfounded doubts about a Muslim that he
would neglect to mention the name of Allah
upon his slaughter.
‘This is what is
understood by the context of the Hadith
since the answer of Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi
Wasallam) to the question was, ‘Say
Bismillah and eat.’ It is as though they
(questioners) were told, ‘That is not your
concern, rather what should concern you is
to consume it (wholesomely in the Sunnah
manner) by saying Bismillah before partaking
thereof.’ (Fathul Bari vol.9 pg.793; Qadeemi)
Hafiz ibn Abdul-Barr (RA)
has emphasised on this point very clearly:
‘Similarly, the slaughter
of the Bedouin Muslims will be permissible
(for consumption) since they usually know of
the Tasmiya (at the time of slaughter). Ibn
Abdul Barr (RA) has concluded, ‘In this
Hadith, it is understood that the slaughter
of a Muslim should be consumed and he should
be regarded as having taken Tasmiyah upon
its slaughter (even when one is not certain
about this fact) because with regards to a
Muslim, one should entertain nothing but
good thoughts unless concrete evidence is
established to the contrary.’ (Fathul Bari
vol.9 pg.793; Qadeemi)
This import is borne out
by other narrations of this same Hadith as
follows:
‘The narration of Ibn
Uyayna (RA) (one of the Huffaaz of Hadith)
has the addition, ‘accept their oaths and
eat’, i.e. take their word for it that they
have taken Tasmiyah upon slaughter (and
partake without doubts). (Ibid pg.793)
The narration of Abu
Sa’eed:
Imaam Tabrani has recorded the narration of
Abu Sa’eed though with a difference in
wording that he said, ‘accept their word
that they have effected (Shar’ee)
slaughter.’ (and consume it without doubt).
(Ibid)
The narration of Imaam
Tahawi (RA):
Some of the Sahaaba (Radhiallaahu
Anhum) questioned Rasulullah (Sallallaahu
Alayhi Wasallam) that, ‘Some Bedouins bring
to us meat, cheese and fat. We know not the
condition of their Islam, (i.e. they are
Muslims but of what calibre, we are
unaware).’ Nabi (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam)
replied, ‘Check that which is prohibited by
Allah and abstain therefrom. Whatever Allah
Ta’ala has not discussed, he has
concessioned you. Your Rabb does not forget.
Thus, say Bismillah (and partake). (Ibid)
Explaining this Hadith,
Allaamah ibn Teen comments:
Concerning Tasmiyah upon
slaughter carried out by others of which
they are unaware, there is no obligation
upon them regarding it. The (slaughter) will
only be held incorrect when such evidence is
established.’ Allah Ta’ala has not made it
obligatory upon any Muslim to be aware of
Tasmiya upon the slaughter of another
Muslim, since the slaugher of another Muslim
will be always regarded as correct
(accompanied by Tasmiya) unless evidence is
established to the contrary. (Ibid pg.794)
The above should be
sufficient to clarify any doubt in the
meaning of the Hadith of Bukhari.
Importance of Muslim
Unity with regards to Halaal Meat
Shaytaan is ever prepared to bring about
division as this will inevitably lead to the
collapse of the Muslim Ummah. In his
untiring efforts, he has overlooked no
sphere of life to cause his mischief even to
the extent of nourishment. Allah Ta’ala has
warned us of Shaytaan’s inroads in this
regard as has been explained already.
Shaytaan, possessed of a keen intelligence
and discernment knows full well that once
the Muslims cannot interact and mix with one
another due to suspicion in regards to
Halaal and Haraam, this will bring about the
much awaited split in the global community
of Islam. To combat this, it is required
that Muslims take courage and band together
to solve this problem, irrespective of
colour and race, since the commands of Allah
Ta’ala are universal. Due to this
solidarity, the Muslims of South Africa,
although a minority (around 3 – 4 %) have
progressed far ahead in eliminating this
problem. With a bit of extra physical and
monetary sacrifice, they have managed to
establish their own abattoirs in different
parts of the country.
If Muslims in other parts
of the world who have, Alhamdulillah, become
a sizeable community were to show such unity
and get together, there is every confidence
that the problem would be eliminated with
little difficulty.
To conclude this, let us
ponder upon the following words of Nabi (Sallallaahu
Alayhi Wasallam):
The lawful is clear and
the unlawful is clear. Between these lie
matters of confusion. Regarding these, many
are ignorant. Whomsoever falls into these,
falls into the unlawful, like a shepherd
grazing (his flock) upon a sanctuary’s
perimeter, very soon falls into trespass.
Beware! Every king posesses a sanctuary and
the sanctuary of Allah Ta’ala are His
prohibitions. Take note! In the body resides
a piece of flesh, upon its reformation is
the entire body’s reform. Upon it’s
corruption is the whole body corrupted.
Listen! It is the heart.’ (Arba’een Nawawiy) |
