QUESTION: A group of students of (Islamic) knowledge claim that the slaughtered animals of those who seek help from Allaah and call upon other than Allaah in matters in which he (i.e., the one called upon) cannot do anything as long as they mention Allah's Name over them, are permissible. They cite as evidence the generality of the Words of Allah, Most High:
"So eat of that (meat) which Allah's Name has been pronounced (while slaughtering the animal), if you are believers in His Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.). " (Q6: 118).
Also He says:
And why should you not eat of tilat (meat) Oil which Allah's Name has been pronounced (at the time of slaughtering the animal), while He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under compulsion of necessity? And surely many do lead (mankind) astray by their own desires through lack of knowledge. Certainly your Lord knows best the transgressors. (Q6:119)
And they consider that those who forbid it are from the transgressors who lead people astray by their own desires, through lack of knowledge, and they say that Allah has explained to us in detail what He has forbidden to us, as in His Words:
"Forbidden to you (for food) are: AI-Maytatah (the dead animals, cattle, beast not slaughtered), blood, the flesh of swine, and the meat of that which has been slaughtered as a sacrifice for others than Allah, or has been slaughtered for idols, etc., or on which Allah's Name as not been mentioned while slaughtering, and that which has been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, Or by the goring of horns- and that which "as been (partly) eaten by a wild animal : unless you are able to slaughter it (before its death) - and that which is sacrificed (staughtered} Oil An-Nusub (stone altars). (Q5:3).
Further, He says:
"He has forbidden you only the Maytala" (dead animal), and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that which Is slaughtered as a sacrifice for others titan Allah (or as been slaughtered for Idols, etc., on which Allah's Name "as not been mentioned while slaughtering). (Q2:173)
And other such verses, which explain in detail, what is forbidden to us, and there is no mention in them of prohibition of any animals upon which the Name of Allah was mentioned, even if the slaughterer was an idolater or a Zoroastrian. What is the reply to what they have cited as evidence, if they are wrong? And what is the truth in the matter and what is the evidence?
Answer: The ruling on the permissibility or forbiddance of slaughtered animals differs depending upon the situation of the slaughterer: If the slaughterer is a Muslim and it is not known that he has done anything which invalidates the basis of his Islam and he mentioned the Name of Allah over his sacrifice, or if it is not known whether he mentioned Allah's Name over it or not, then his sacrifice is permissible.
This is based upon the consensus of the Muslims and the generality of the Words of Allah, Most High:
"So eat of that (meat) On which Allah's Name has been pronounced (while slaughtering the animal), if you are believers in His signs And why should you not eat of that (meat) On which Allah's Name has been pronounced (at the time of slaughtering the animal), while He has explained to you in detail what Is forbidden to you, except under compulsory of necessity? (Q6: 118-119)
If the slaughterer is one of the People of the Scripture, Jewish or Christian and he mentioned the Name of Allah over his sacrifice, then it is permissible, according to the consensus of the Muslims and the Words of Allah, Most High:
"The food (slaughtered cattle, eatable animals, etc.) of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful to you. (Q5:5).
If he did not mention Allah's Name over it nor any other name, then there is a difference of opinion regarding its permissibility: Those who said that it is permissible cited as evidence the generality of the Words of Allah, Most High:
"The food (slaughtered cattle, eatable animals, etc.) of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful to you. (Q5: 5).
And those who forbade it cited as evidence the generality of the evidences for the obligation to mention Allah's Name over the sacrifice and over game, and the prohibition of eating meat over which the Name of Allah was not mentioned in the Words of Allah, Most High:
"Eat not (0 believers) of that (meat) on which Allah's Name It as not been pronounced (at the lime of the slaughtering of tile animal)" (Q6:111).
And this seems most apparent; and if the Jew or Christian mentioned other than Allah's Name, such as by saying: "In the name of Uzair," or: "In the name of the Messiah," or: "In the name of the cross," it would not be permissible to eat it, because it would be included in the generality of the Words of Allah, Most High:
"anti that on which AIlaah's Name has not been mentioned while slaughtering, (that which has been slaughtered as a sacrifice for others thing" Allah, or has been slaughtered for idols)"(Q5:3)
Since it is an explanation of the generality of His Words:
"The food (slaughtered cattle, eatable animals, etc.) of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful to you. " (Q5:5).
If the slaughterer is a polytheist, a worshipper of idols and those included in their ruling, aside from the People of the Scripture, then the Muslims are in complete agreement regarding the prohibition of eating their slaughtered animals whether they mentioned the Name of Allah upon them or not. And what is understood from the Words of Allah. Most High:
"The food (slauglttered cattle eatable animals, etc.) of the people of the Scripture [Jews and Christians} is lawful to you. " (Q5:5)
proves the prohibition of the slaughtered animals of disbelievers other than them. If it were not so there would have been no reason to mention them in particular in the wording of the ruling of permissibility.
The same applies to one who claims to be a Muslim, but calls upon other than Allah in matters in which Done is able to do anything but Allah and seeks help from other than Allah. Slaughtered animals from such person are the same as those of the idolatrous disbelievers and the atheists they are not permissible, just as the slaughtered animals of those disbelievers are not permissible due to their association of partners with Allah, and their rejection of lslam.
According to this, the consensus upon the prohibition of their slaughtered animals and the meaning understood from the Verse are both explanations of the generality of the Words of Allah. Most High:
"So eat of that (meat) on which Allah 's Name has been pronounced (while slaughtering the animal) "(Q6:118),
and His Words:
And why should you not eat of that (meat) on which Allah's Name has been pronounced (at rite time of slaughtering the animal):" (Q6:119)
It is not correct to cite these two Verses and others bearing the same meaning as evidence for the permissibility of eating' the slaughtered animals of the idolaters and those who fall under the same ruling. For example one who apostatizes from Islam, due to his persistence in seeking help from other than Allah and his supplication of the dead and others in matters in which none but Allah can do anything, even after it is explained to him and the evidence has been established for him that this is the Shirk of the first period of Jahiliyyah.
The Muslims arc in complete agreement regarding the prohibition of eating the slaughtered animals of disbelievers other than the People of the Scripture even if they mention Allah's Name over them. Because mentioning His Name over a slaughtered animal is a form of worship, and it is not valid unless the worship is devoted purely and sincerely to Allah, according to the Words of Him. Most Glorified:
"But if they had joined in worship others with Allah, all that they used to do would have been of no benefit to them." (Q6:88)
This article was culled from the publications of Deen Communication Limited