Zabiha Meat

 

 

More generally, human knowledge should be used to determine which foods are good and which are not, and which type of preparation or storage ensures that it remains good and which makes it bad. Had Muslims been following the commands of the Holy Quran, they would have led the world in establishing food standards authorities that we see in Western countries.



       

Zabiha Meat

 

 

Lawful and unlawful food consumption

 

Question:

My name is Zainib Ahmad and I live in North America. I have a question regarding the consumption of meat other than zabiha. Is it lawful for Muslims to consume the meat slaughtered by Christians i.e. meat available at grocery stores and restaurants, while zabiha meat is also available, and it is not a necessity but more of a convenience to eat meat other than zabiha? Or is it better to just eat the zabiha meat only?

Reply by Fazeel Sahukhan

Dear Sister Zainab.

The following is my opinion on your enquiries. In Bukhari 72:22, we read:

"Zuhri said, there is no harm in eating an animal slaughtered by a Christian of Arabia; if thou hearest him invoking another name than that of Allah, do not eat it, and if thou dost not hear him, Allah has made it lawful, and He knew their unbelief".

Furthermore, the Holy Quran is clear on this matter when it states:

"the food of those who have been given the Book is lawful for you.." (5:5).

Ibn Abbas (Ah, I, 302) explains that the word "food" in this verse (ie. 5:5) means the animal slaughtered by them.

With regards to the three references provided above, Maulana Muhammad Ali in his commentary in the Manual of Hadith (p.347) states: "Only if it is known for certain that a name other than that of Allah has been invoked, would it be unlawful".

Thus, it appears that meat slaughtered by Christians is lawful for Muslims, and it only becomes unlawful if one is certain that a name other than Allah has been invoked upon it while being slaughtered. Accordingly, the following verse of the Quran seems to then apply:

"O you who believe! Do not forbid yourselves the good things which Allah has made lawful for you..." (5:87).

Whether one feels that zabiha meat should be given preference to non-zabiha meat, I believe is merely a matter of personal choice; no hard and fast rules should apply. Again, this is only my opinion.

...

Thus, again, it appears that what is meant is that one must mention the name of Allah before "eating" the meat slaughtered by the people of the book (as opposed to at the time of slaughtering only). This seems to be supported by a report found in Bukhari:

"Aishah said, some people said to the Prophet, People bring to us meat about which we do not know whether the name of Allah was mentioned over it or not. He said, "Mention the name of Allah over
it and eat it" (Bukhari 72:21).


Reply by Zahid Aziz:

Halal is not the only condition imposed by Islam but also that the food must be tayyib which conveys the meaning of good, pure, clean, healthy, non-harmful, etc. So even those who think that they are complying with all the Islamic conditions by consuming only zabiha meat (which they equate with the term halal), are not necessarily meeting all the Islamic criteria. I speak as one who has seen Pakistani butchers' shops in the U.K. selling "halal" meat, and their state of cleanliness.

The requirement of tayyib is so important that not only is it mentioned along with halal as in:

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2:168: "O men, eat the halal and tayyib things from what is in the earth..."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but it is also mentioned alone by itself in 2:172:

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"O you who believe, eat of the tayyib things that We have provided you with ..."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From chapter 5, verses 4 and 5 we learn that in fact all tayyib things are allowed or halal:

Quote:

"They ask thee as to what is halal for them. Say: The tayyib things [meaning all tayyib things] are halal for you ... 

This day all tayyib things are made halal for you..."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All tayyib things being allowed or halal means that those things that have been forbidden have been forbidden because they are "not good" in some way or other. In a few cases (e.g. flesh of swine) Divine knowledge was required to inform human beings that the food in question is not good. More generally, human knowledge should be used to determine which foods are good and which are not, and which type of preparation or storage ensures that it remains good and which makes it bad.

Had Muslims been following the commands of the Holy Quran, they would have led the world in establishing food standards authorities that we see in Western countries.

Regarding zabiha I think more information is needed from those who insist on it (who call it "halal" and call non-zabiha as "haram") about this process of slaughter and exactly what makes it different from the general type of slaughter as done in Western countries, and puts it more in conformity with Islamic teachings. Some such Muslims in the U.K. even claim that for meat to be "halal" you have to buy it from a Muslim-run outlet, and that if a general, non-Muslim grocery store stocks halal meat for its Muslim customers (obtained from Muslim slaughterers) it ceases to be halal for their consumption!

We must also remember that the command to eat good and lawful things (halal) applies not only to literally eating and drinking but to consumption in a broad sense. And it also applies in the moral sense of how we obtain that food and drink (e.g. by what means, fair or foul, did we obtain the money with which we bought the food and drink; or, is our eating and drinking at the expense of some poor worker somewhere in the world).

Edited by: Zahid Aziz at: 9/9/02 8:34:10 am

...

Consider also this further point:

Regarding Zabiha, it is quite clear from Hadith (see also 5:4 in the Quran) that when hunting wild animals or even domestic animals which are loose and on the run, the animal is not required to be slaughtered in the zabiha manner, but is eaten after being killed from a distance by an arrow or by trained (or even untrained) hunting dogs sent after the animal to kill it. Zabiha is prescribed only for animals which are in your control. (See above Book of Bukhari at this link.)

So it is quite clear that by hunting a Muslim is allowed to eat an animal which has been killed in a way different from zibh. So how can eating non-zabiha (admittedly in other circumstances) be such a great sin as it is made out to be? If the posters who live in the U.S. had migrated there 400 years ago and found animals in the wild, then it would be quite permissible and normal in Islam for them to eat them by killing them by hunting, without the zibh type of slaughter

Taken from: http://p066.ezboard.com/Question-about-zabiha/flahoreahmadiyyamessageboardfrm6.showMessage?topicID=37.topic

 

 

Comments