What is the ruling on imported frozen chicken and meat?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
We need some detail regarding the ruling on frozen meat and chicken?
Answer:
There has been a lot of discussion on this, regarding frozen meat, preserved meat, and other items from foreign countries. Many writers and students of knowledge have written about it. I remain with the opinion I have stated more than once and announced more than once in "Nur 'ala al-Darb" and elsewhere, and it may be in some writings as well. My view is that what comes in is of two categories:
What comes from the lands of the communists and polytheists is never permissible to use until we know that Muslims or the People of the Book handled it. There is no harm if Muslims or the People of the Book handled it. If it comes from the lands of polytheists and communists, but Muslims or the People of the Book handled it, and it was slaughtered according to the Shari'ah, then there is no harm in that.
As for what comes from the lands of the People of the Book: England, France, America, and their like, the original ruling is that it is lawful. This is the original ruling, because Allah has made lawful for us the food of the People of the Book. So the original ruling is that it is lawful. Even if there are companies and slaughterhouses that slaughter for other than the Shari'ah, the original ruling for us is that it is lawful. It is not permissible for us to prohibit it except with evidence. So what comes to us from them is lawful, unless we know with certainty that this item—this box or this preserved meat—came from a slaughterhouse that strangles, or strikes the head until the animal dies, or does something similar.
As for when we do not know that this slaughterhouse and this company do this, the original ruling is that the food of the People of the Book, the Jews and the Christians, is lawful. This is the original ruling.
Just as we say regarding the slaughter of Muslims: the original ruling is that it is lawful. Even if some Muslims may be lax, or may be an open sinner, or may be lax, the original ruling is that the slaughter of Muslims is lawful until we know that this Muslim strangled it, or killed it by striking its head with a knife or something similar. So we say the same regarding the People of the Book, exactly the same. Even if it is well known among them that there are those who strangle it—because there are those who strike its head and stun it—this is not sufficient to prohibit all of it. Rather, we prohibit what we know, and we do not prohibit what we do not know. And we say regarding their slaughter: the original ruling is that it is lawful until we know that this preserved meat, or this slaughtered animal, or this refrigerated item was slaughtered other than according to the Shari'ah.
We need some detail regarding the ruling on frozen meat and chicken?
Answer:
There has been a lot of discussion on this, regarding frozen meat, preserved meat, and other items from foreign countries. Many writers and students of knowledge have written about it. I remain with the opinion I have stated more than once and announced more than once in "Nur 'ala al-Darb" and elsewhere, and it may be in some writings as well. My view is that what comes in is of two categories:
What comes from the lands of the communists and polytheists is never permissible to use until we know that Muslims or the People of the Book handled it. There is no harm if Muslims or the People of the Book handled it. If it comes from the lands of polytheists and communists, but Muslims or the People of the Book handled it, and it was slaughtered according to the Shari'ah, then there is no harm in that.
As for what comes from the lands of the People of the Book: England, France, America, and their like, the original ruling is that it is lawful. This is the original ruling, because Allah has made lawful for us the food of the People of the Book. So the original ruling is that it is lawful. Even if there are companies and slaughterhouses that slaughter for other than the Shari'ah, the original ruling for us is that it is lawful. It is not permissible for us to prohibit it except with evidence. So what comes to us from them is lawful, unless we know with certainty that this item—this box or this preserved meat—came from a slaughterhouse that strangles, or strikes the head until the animal dies, or does something similar.
As for when we do not know that this slaughterhouse and this company do this, the original ruling is that the food of the People of the Book, the Jews and the Christians, is lawful. This is the original ruling.
Just as we say regarding the slaughter of Muslims: the original ruling is that it is lawful. Even if some Muslims may be lax, or may be an open sinner, or may be lax, the original ruling is that the slaughter of Muslims is lawful until we know that this Muslim strangled it, or killed it by striking its head with a knife or something similar. So we say the same regarding the People of the Book, exactly the same. Even if it is well known among them that there are those who strangle it—because there are those who strike its head and stun it—this is not sufficient to prohibit all of it. Rather, we prohibit what we know, and we do not prohibit what we do not know. And we say regarding their slaughter: the original ruling is that it is lawful until we know that this preserved meat, or this slaughtered animal, or this refrigerated item was slaughtered other than according to the Shari'ah.
Source
binbaz.org.sa
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.