A discussion regarding the prescribed methods of slaughter and the prohibited methods of slaughter.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The issue, and by Allah, O Shaykh, there is no debate in it.
The Shaykh : There is no debate in it, meaning, even ifThe Shaykh : Ali were to debate it.
The questioner : I am saying ...
The Shaykh : He said he needs to say.
The questioner : This person of the Book, if he were ...
The Shaykh : He is going to speak now ...
The questioner : .... This slaughterer whose belief we do not know, is it sufficient that we name [Allah] and eat?
The Shaykh : I answered you.
The questioner : You answered me that it is not valid.....
The Shaykh : If one knows that it was slaughtered and the slaughterer is one whose slaughter is permissible for us, it is lawful; if one knows the opposite, it is forbidden; and if one does not know this or that, leave what causes doubt for what does not cause doubt.
The questioner : I am saying, letThe Shaykh : it be lenient, let it be the text.
The Shaykh : I am not telling you it is not permissible, meaning, are you asking me now after I have clarified to you two or three times that there are three possibilities, should I make the three possibilities into one possibility?
The questioner : We need support from our brother Abu Muhammad .. the country and he has an idea.
The Shaykh : But if you want support from my master Abu Muhammad, he may ruin it for you more than he has already ruined it for you.The Shaykh : .
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : The People of the Book, a Jew or a Christian.
The questioner : ... a Communist.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, listen, Adnan, what is he saying about the Muslim, what is required in him?
The questioner : Islam is built on five.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, allow me, Adnan says: Islam is built on five; what do you mean by your reference to this hadith, what do you mean?
The questioner : He means the pillars of Islam.
The Shaykh : Meaning, the one who does not pray and slaughters, his slaughter is not permissible?
The questioner : I do not know.
The Shaykh : How do you not know, who brought the hadith, me or you?
The questioner : .... that he be a Muslim.
The Shaykh : I said Muslim, meaning Muslim, who is the Muslim?
The questioner : The one who walks upon what Islam is built upon.
The Shaykh : This is the answer, but it appears Adnan wants to move away a bit, be patient, be patient, now the meaning you are aiming at, perhaps it is from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):Sahih Muslim 41 .
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Do you see now, Ali's answer was better than the others, meaning, I asked you what you mean by this, so the answer is, do you mean or do you not mean.
The questioner : I do not mean.
The Shaykh : You do not mean, then what do you mean, this is what I asked you just now, you have entangled yourself, may Allah guide you, when you brought the hadith.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Ah, O Shaykh Ali, meaning, do you not know if a Buddhist slaughters with a knife, is his slaughter not permissible?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : You must eat
The questioner : meat... Germany............
The Shaykh : You assume that all of them .... are dhimmis.
The questioner : ... they do not have special slaughterhouses ....
The Shaykh : No, but this does not respond to Abu Yahya's words, yes.
The questioner : .... slaughtering with a knife is a condition ...
The Shaykh : What is the thing you have benefited from now that you were not benefiting from in the past.
The questioner: Often.
The Shaykh : How is it much, meaning, in this issue, is it the first time you hear the concise answer that pushed you to speak this explanation, meaning, you, O Abu Yahya, you did not hear my answer regarding Bulgarian slaughters or Bulgarian meat.
Abu Yahya : ...
The Shaykh : I heard this from you, no, no, excuse me, I am asking you a question because I am now surprised by your saying that we have now reached a result different from the previous result. No problem, I am asking you a question, may Allah bless you, did you not hear this answer in the past? I have a worn-out cliché here, that he answers with this answer,
The questioner:...
The Shaykh : It is very strange, anyway, my brother, I am now answering your words, knowing that my concise answer means providing an answer to your detailed question, because you are one of two men, I placed three men, a man who knows that it was slaughtered with a Sharia-compliant slaughter, and by a slaughterer whose slaughter is permissible, this is one man, a second man who knows the exact opposite, meaning two conditions or at least one of them is lacking, a third man who does not know this or that, and each has his ruling, this was clear in my answer, you are now positioning yourself and saying I know that those who slaughter are People of the Book, and that they slaughter with a Sharia-compliant slaughter, and they do not kill by beating.
What am I supposed to give you as an answer, I have provided the answer already, but it is open to discussion regarding the slaughter, not regarding the slaughterers, because I am saying it is what I throw into your mind completely, I always say: that we look at the German people or the British people or the American people, we say these are Christians, just as we say about the Saudi, Jordanian, and Egyptian people that they are Muslims, but among these Muslims there are those who have apostatized from their religion, some of whom are better than the Christians, and so on, but these do not constitute a nation, and it does not exit from this nation to be non-Muslim, no, these are still Muslims here and there, and likewise the Christians in those lands are Christians, we are not religiously obligated to know the identity of every slaughterer for every slaughter he slaughters, this is a tightening of what is unbearable religiously, but this nation is a Christian nation, this is the apparent, we do not delve into knowing the identities of individual slaughterers, we come later to the slaughter, if you are convinced that it is slaughtered as you mentioned about that Turk, then you are the one who will be held accountable before Allah and judged that you ate a slaughter and did not eat a killed animal, but it is possible for a person to object to this explanation or to this ruling that it can be said that the Germans slaughter in the Islamic way, and I mean something when I say in the Islamic way, which is letting the blood flow, because the Islamic way, like many of the rulings of the Sharia, has what is necessary, as we say regarding prayer, a pillar and a condition, and then a second degree, an obligation, and also regarding Islamic slaughter, it is not permissible Islamically to slaughter the animal in front of its sister, but if it is slaughtered in this way, it is permissible, not forbidden, but it is forbidden for the slaughterer to slaughter it in front of its sister while she sees and looks, so we mean by the Islamic way that it was slaughtered and its blood flowed, but if they hit it with a bullet or an axe, I do not know what is there, there are descriptions reported, this does not concern us, what concerns us is that the bull was hit with an axe and fell to the ground, then its blood flowed, if the blood flowed, it is permissible, but their action was not permissible Islamically, their torturing it by beating, this is not permissible Islamically, their torturing it by beating, this is not permissible Islamically, but regarding eating this slaughter, eating it is permissible as long as its blood flowed.
Here now come different narrations, all differing in that it is slaughtered or not slaughtered, and it is not permissible for me, neither religiously nor rationally, to come and judge that it is slaughtered or not slaughtered, but in the bottom of my heart I believe that these Europeans know the value of time, and that time is a golden, resonant resource, therefore it is not possible that they slaughter in the Islamic way at all, they slaughter in the material way, which in one hour provides them with slaughters, in their expression, in the tens, if not the hundreds, whereas the Islamic way, each one requires drawing a knife and directing it toward the qiblah, and so on, to let its blood flow, I return and say it is not for me to judge this or that, but you and Zayd and Bakr who want to eat, if they have reassurance in their hearts, the first reassurance you mentioned, I do not see this as a Christian nation.
The second point: You say they slaughter it correctly, shooting it with bullets and so on, but if you let its blood flow with a knife, then you are not following the religion. If you believe that this is actually what is happening there, then it is permissible for you to eat it. I have one experience that was decreed for me, more or than ten years ago... I traveled to Britain and went to a village whose name I naturally forgot. There was a Salafi Pakistani man there who had a slaughterhouse in the artistic style and in complete accordance with Islamic slaughter. I visited this slaughterhouse; it was a very large building, organized in a modern way. There was a pen for the sheep. When they wanted to slaughter them, they would move the heads in sequence to a narrow place where two men were. One would hold the animal and lay it down, and the other would slaughter it. There was, of course, a channel for the blood to flow to a place where it is collected. As soon as the first man slaughtered a head, he would skin it, hang it on a rail, and push it along a distance of perhaps ten meters from the place. It would go along the rail and turn into a second room, on a rail that slopes down in a series. We went in there and found a man standing waiting for the carcass. His only job was to skin the hide; he would skin it and put it in a barrel. He would push it, and a third man would receive it. This man's job was to open the belly and examine the intestines, the mesentery, the stomach, and so on. He would push it, the fourth push, to the fourth man. His only job was to use the water gushing with force; he would pour it over this carcass, and it would come out clean, shining. He would give it the final push to the scale, where the weight is placed and recorded. Our host told me that the English now buy from him. The English now buy from him because they found a method of letting the blood flow, which is medically known to be healthier. But, glory be to Allah, Allah misled them with knowledge, because of the unlegitimate method by which they slaughter. The English people's preference for this Muslim man's slaughtered meat is proof that the English do not perform Islamic slaughter. However, I cannot say that in every country, like the Germans or the Bulgarians, that they slaughter in the Islamic way or that they do not. I cannot say that. But I leave the matter to every person of legal capacity to follow what he believes Allah has decreed.
But what is your opinion regarding Bulgarian meat? I heard or read, but it is a true report that the Minister of Awqaf, Abdul Aziz al-Khayyat, announced that the slaughtered meat that comes to us as being slaughtered in the Islamic way has been shown to us to not be the case. Although this matter is very strange, a responsible man who tries to handle matters by the shortest path announces it, meaning that he discovered something. And for this thing that he discovered, we were warning and saying so and so and so, one of the three. If this responsible minister announces it this way, how can we then be reassured about Bulgarian meat? Yes.
The questioner: ... the conditions...
The Shaykh: This has already been answered. If the blood flows, it is permissible, but the method does not make it permissible. I gave you an example: you slaughter the animal in front of its sister, in front of its sister. This is not permissible Islamically, but it is permissible to eat it.
The questioner : No...
The Shaykh: Do not say no, do not say no. After you asked the question, it is upon you to understand the answer. Do not say it this way, hit, how is it no? Say, I did not understand the answer.
The questioner: Okay, I did not understand the answer.
The Shaykh: We gave you an example. Islam forbids slaughtering a sheep in front of its sister, but if it is slaughtered, it is permissible to eat it.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you. Now we need to talk about the method of slaughter, because we do not know how. When we say "slaughtered," do you not know what "slaughtered" means? There is no power or strength except with Allah.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you, O Abu...
The questioner : Amen.
The Shaykh: I am telling you, I mentioned earlier that if a sheep is slaughtered in front of its sister, this slaughter is not permissible religiously, but this slaughter makes it permissible to eat it. Do you understand this answer?
The questioner: Yes, I understand.
The Shaykh: The answer to your question is this,
The questioner:...
The Shaykh: For you, my brother, there is one thing that makes it permissible to eat it, and there is one thing that makes the method of its slaughter permissible. So the way...
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: Listen, may Allah guide you, listen. The method of its slaughter from here is torture of the animals, like slaughtering a sheep in front of its sister. But when it is slaughtered, it is permissible to eat it. But the method by which it is slaughtered is a method that the Lawgiver forbids. Your question is: you slaughter from above its neck, its blood flows. The flowing of its blood makes it permissible to eat it, but the method of slaughter is forbidden, not permissible, because there is torture.
The questioner: The second point.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner: The second point is that they shoot it with bullets before slaughtering it.
The Shaykh: If it is finished, it is forbidden, forbidden. He is saying... go ahead.
The questioner: We prolonged the topic... I went once, ten and twenty, and I was a witness from a distance and without an appointment, I saw these slaughters... with the knife.
The questioner: He tells you that some of the slaughtered animals die...
The Shaykh: Allow me, even if I cut off your words, if you want to eliminate...The Shaykh: Throw it at his minister, tell him your minister would be a liar.
The questioner: No, how would my minister be a liar.
The Shaykh: Okay, if so, why are you defending? You are the one telling me.
The questioner: What does my minister say?
The Shaykh: He says it has been established that it is not true that Bulgarian meat is slaughtered in the Islamic way. And you confirm that it is slaughtered in the Islamic way. This is an Islamic way with the knife, so what? This is the Islamic way, so what does that mean?
The questioner: By Allah, my minister...
The Shaykh: Doctor, O Doctor, I know how you eat the shoulder. It is the truth for the minister now.
The questioner: I mean, did he confirm that the flowing of the blood happened so that it would not be carrion? Some of the slaughtered animals die from the electric shock or from the bullet...
The Shaykh: Yes, some of the slaughtered animals die.
The questioner: Yes, they die as a result of the bullet or the electric shock before the slaughter...
The Shaykh : There is no debate in it, meaning, even ifThe Shaykh : Ali were to debate it.
The questioner : I am saying ...
The Shaykh : He said he needs to say.
The questioner : This person of the Book, if he were ...
The Shaykh : He is going to speak now ...
The questioner : .... This slaughterer whose belief we do not know, is it sufficient that we name [Allah] and eat?
The Shaykh : I answered you.
The questioner : You answered me that it is not valid.....
The Shaykh : If one knows that it was slaughtered and the slaughterer is one whose slaughter is permissible for us, it is lawful; if one knows the opposite, it is forbidden; and if one does not know this or that, leave what causes doubt for what does not cause doubt.
The questioner : I am saying, letThe Shaykh : it be lenient, let it be the text.
The Shaykh : I am not telling you it is not permissible, meaning, are you asking me now after I have clarified to you two or three times that there are three possibilities, should I make the three possibilities into one possibility?
The questioner : We need support from our brother Abu Muhammad .. the country and he has an idea.
The Shaykh : But if you want support from my master Abu Muhammad, he may ruin it for you more than he has already ruined it for you.The Shaykh : .
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : The People of the Book, a Jew or a Christian.
The questioner : ... a Communist.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, listen, Adnan, what is he saying about the Muslim, what is required in him?
The questioner : Islam is built on five.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, allow me, Adnan says: Islam is built on five; what do you mean by your reference to this hadith, what do you mean?
The questioner : He means the pillars of Islam.
The Shaykh : Meaning, the one who does not pray and slaughters, his slaughter is not permissible?
The questioner : I do not know.
The Shaykh : How do you not know, who brought the hadith, me or you?
The questioner : .... that he be a Muslim.
The Shaykh : I said Muslim, meaning Muslim, who is the Muslim?
The questioner : The one who walks upon what Islam is built upon.
The Shaykh : This is the answer, but it appears Adnan wants to move away a bit, be patient, be patient, now the meaning you are aiming at, perhaps it is from his saying (peace and blessings be upon him):
A Muslim is he from whose hand and tongue the Muslims are safe.
المسلم من سلم المسلمون من لسانه ويدهThe questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Do you see now, Ali's answer was better than the others, meaning, I asked you what you mean by this, so the answer is, do you mean or do you not mean.
The questioner : I do not mean.
The Shaykh : You do not mean, then what do you mean, this is what I asked you just now, you have entangled yourself, may Allah guide you, when you brought the hadith.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Ah, O Shaykh Ali, meaning, do you not know if a Buddhist slaughters with a knife, is his slaughter not permissible?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : You must eat
The questioner : meat... Germany............
The Shaykh : You assume that all of them .... are dhimmis.
The questioner : ... they do not have special slaughterhouses ....
The Shaykh : No, but this does not respond to Abu Yahya's words, yes.
The questioner : .... slaughtering with a knife is a condition ...
The Shaykh : What is the thing you have benefited from now that you were not benefiting from in the past.
The questioner: Often.
The Shaykh : How is it much, meaning, in this issue, is it the first time you hear the concise answer that pushed you to speak this explanation, meaning, you, O Abu Yahya, you did not hear my answer regarding Bulgarian slaughters or Bulgarian meat.
Abu Yahya : ...
The Shaykh : I heard this from you, no, no, excuse me, I am asking you a question because I am now surprised by your saying that we have now reached a result different from the previous result. No problem, I am asking you a question, may Allah bless you, did you not hear this answer in the past? I have a worn-out cliché here, that he answers with this answer,
The questioner:...
The Shaykh : It is very strange, anyway, my brother, I am now answering your words, knowing that my concise answer means providing an answer to your detailed question, because you are one of two men, I placed three men, a man who knows that it was slaughtered with a Sharia-compliant slaughter, and by a slaughterer whose slaughter is permissible, this is one man, a second man who knows the exact opposite, meaning two conditions or at least one of them is lacking, a third man who does not know this or that, and each has his ruling, this was clear in my answer, you are now positioning yourself and saying I know that those who slaughter are People of the Book, and that they slaughter with a Sharia-compliant slaughter, and they do not kill by beating.
What am I supposed to give you as an answer, I have provided the answer already, but it is open to discussion regarding the slaughter, not regarding the slaughterers, because I am saying it is what I throw into your mind completely, I always say: that we look at the German people or the British people or the American people, we say these are Christians, just as we say about the Saudi, Jordanian, and Egyptian people that they are Muslims, but among these Muslims there are those who have apostatized from their religion, some of whom are better than the Christians, and so on, but these do not constitute a nation, and it does not exit from this nation to be non-Muslim, no, these are still Muslims here and there, and likewise the Christians in those lands are Christians, we are not religiously obligated to know the identity of every slaughterer for every slaughter he slaughters, this is a tightening of what is unbearable religiously, but this nation is a Christian nation, this is the apparent, we do not delve into knowing the identities of individual slaughterers, we come later to the slaughter, if you are convinced that it is slaughtered as you mentioned about that Turk, then you are the one who will be held accountable before Allah and judged that you ate a slaughter and did not eat a killed animal, but it is possible for a person to object to this explanation or to this ruling that it can be said that the Germans slaughter in the Islamic way, and I mean something when I say in the Islamic way, which is letting the blood flow, because the Islamic way, like many of the rulings of the Sharia, has what is necessary, as we say regarding prayer, a pillar and a condition, and then a second degree, an obligation, and also regarding Islamic slaughter, it is not permissible Islamically to slaughter the animal in front of its sister, but if it is slaughtered in this way, it is permissible, not forbidden, but it is forbidden for the slaughterer to slaughter it in front of its sister while she sees and looks, so we mean by the Islamic way that it was slaughtered and its blood flowed, but if they hit it with a bullet or an axe, I do not know what is there, there are descriptions reported, this does not concern us, what concerns us is that the bull was hit with an axe and fell to the ground, then its blood flowed, if the blood flowed, it is permissible, but their action was not permissible Islamically, their torturing it by beating, this is not permissible Islamically, their torturing it by beating, this is not permissible Islamically, but regarding eating this slaughter, eating it is permissible as long as its blood flowed.
Here now come different narrations, all differing in that it is slaughtered or not slaughtered, and it is not permissible for me, neither religiously nor rationally, to come and judge that it is slaughtered or not slaughtered, but in the bottom of my heart I believe that these Europeans know the value of time, and that time is a golden, resonant resource, therefore it is not possible that they slaughter in the Islamic way at all, they slaughter in the material way, which in one hour provides them with slaughters, in their expression, in the tens, if not the hundreds, whereas the Islamic way, each one requires drawing a knife and directing it toward the qiblah, and so on, to let its blood flow, I return and say it is not for me to judge this or that, but you and Zayd and Bakr who want to eat, if they have reassurance in their hearts, the first reassurance you mentioned, I do not see this as a Christian nation.
The second point: You say they slaughter it correctly, shooting it with bullets and so on, but if you let its blood flow with a knife, then you are not following the religion. If you believe that this is actually what is happening there, then it is permissible for you to eat it. I have one experience that was decreed for me, more or than ten years ago... I traveled to Britain and went to a village whose name I naturally forgot. There was a Salafi Pakistani man there who had a slaughterhouse in the artistic style and in complete accordance with Islamic slaughter. I visited this slaughterhouse; it was a very large building, organized in a modern way. There was a pen for the sheep. When they wanted to slaughter them, they would move the heads in sequence to a narrow place where two men were. One would hold the animal and lay it down, and the other would slaughter it. There was, of course, a channel for the blood to flow to a place where it is collected. As soon as the first man slaughtered a head, he would skin it, hang it on a rail, and push it along a distance of perhaps ten meters from the place. It would go along the rail and turn into a second room, on a rail that slopes down in a series. We went in there and found a man standing waiting for the carcass. His only job was to skin the hide; he would skin it and put it in a barrel. He would push it, and a third man would receive it. This man's job was to open the belly and examine the intestines, the mesentery, the stomach, and so on. He would push it, the fourth push, to the fourth man. His only job was to use the water gushing with force; he would pour it over this carcass, and it would come out clean, shining. He would give it the final push to the scale, where the weight is placed and recorded. Our host told me that the English now buy from him. The English now buy from him because they found a method of letting the blood flow, which is medically known to be healthier. But, glory be to Allah, Allah misled them with knowledge, because of the unlegitimate method by which they slaughter. The English people's preference for this Muslim man's slaughtered meat is proof that the English do not perform Islamic slaughter. However, I cannot say that in every country, like the Germans or the Bulgarians, that they slaughter in the Islamic way or that they do not. I cannot say that. But I leave the matter to every person of legal capacity to follow what he believes Allah has decreed.
But what is your opinion regarding Bulgarian meat? I heard or read, but it is a true report that the Minister of Awqaf, Abdul Aziz al-Khayyat, announced that the slaughtered meat that comes to us as being slaughtered in the Islamic way has been shown to us to not be the case. Although this matter is very strange, a responsible man who tries to handle matters by the shortest path announces it, meaning that he discovered something. And for this thing that he discovered, we were warning and saying so and so and so, one of the three. If this responsible minister announces it this way, how can we then be reassured about Bulgarian meat? Yes.
The questioner: ... the conditions...
The Shaykh: This has already been answered. If the blood flows, it is permissible, but the method does not make it permissible. I gave you an example: you slaughter the animal in front of its sister, in front of its sister. This is not permissible Islamically, but it is permissible to eat it.
The questioner : No...
The Shaykh: Do not say no, do not say no. After you asked the question, it is upon you to understand the answer. Do not say it this way, hit, how is it no? Say, I did not understand the answer.
The questioner: Okay, I did not understand the answer.
The Shaykh: We gave you an example. Islam forbids slaughtering a sheep in front of its sister, but if it is slaughtered, it is permissible to eat it.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you. Now we need to talk about the method of slaughter, because we do not know how. When we say "slaughtered," do you not know what "slaughtered" means? There is no power or strength except with Allah.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: May Allah guide you, O Abu...
The questioner : Amen.
The Shaykh: I am telling you, I mentioned earlier that if a sheep is slaughtered in front of its sister, this slaughter is not permissible religiously, but this slaughter makes it permissible to eat it. Do you understand this answer?
The questioner: Yes, I understand.
The Shaykh: The answer to your question is this,
The questioner:...
The Shaykh: For you, my brother, there is one thing that makes it permissible to eat it, and there is one thing that makes the method of its slaughter permissible. So the way...
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh: Listen, may Allah guide you, listen. The method of its slaughter from here is torture of the animals, like slaughtering a sheep in front of its sister. But when it is slaughtered, it is permissible to eat it. But the method by which it is slaughtered is a method that the Lawgiver forbids. Your question is: you slaughter from above its neck, its blood flows. The flowing of its blood makes it permissible to eat it, but the method of slaughter is forbidden, not permissible, because there is torture.
The questioner: The second point.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The questioner: The second point is that they shoot it with bullets before slaughtering it.
The Shaykh: If it is finished, it is forbidden, forbidden. He is saying... go ahead.
The questioner: We prolonged the topic... I went once, ten and twenty, and I was a witness from a distance and without an appointment, I saw these slaughters... with the knife.
The questioner: He tells you that some of the slaughtered animals die...
The Shaykh: Allow me, even if I cut off your words, if you want to eliminate...The Shaykh: Throw it at his minister, tell him your minister would be a liar.
The questioner: No, how would my minister be a liar.
The Shaykh: Okay, if so, why are you defending? You are the one telling me.
The questioner: What does my minister say?
The Shaykh: He says it has been established that it is not true that Bulgarian meat is slaughtered in the Islamic way. And you confirm that it is slaughtered in the Islamic way. This is an Islamic way with the knife, so what? This is the Islamic way, so what does that mean?
The questioner: By Allah, my minister...
The Shaykh: Doctor, O Doctor, I know how you eat the shoulder. It is the truth for the minister now.
The questioner: I mean, did he confirm that the flowing of the blood happened so that it would not be carrion? Some of the slaughtered animals die from the electric shock or from the bullet...
The Shaykh: Yes, some of the slaughtered animals die.
The questioner: Yes, they die as a result of the bullet or the electric shock before the slaughter...
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.