IS STUNNING ANIMALS PERMISSIBLE?
On the practice of pre-slaughter stunning of chickens, Darul Uloom Canada has made some research. The following is the conclusion if their research:
“In January 2024, a team from the Halal Monitoring Authority (HMA) visited Darul Uloom to present their research on Controlled Atmosphere Stunning (CAS). Following this presentation, HMA invited representatives from Darul Uloom to visit their facility in May 2024 to observe the slaughter process involving stunned chickens. After thoroughly reviewing the relevant data and studying the works of Hanafī jurists, the Dārul Iftā is of the opinion that the controls implemented by HMA are sufficient to ensure that the animal is alive at the time of slaughter, thereby meeting halāl standards. Although the stunning method is not ideal, the conditions for halāl slaughter appear to be fulfilled.
However, since the issue of consuming such chicken is a communal matter, the Darul Iftā believes it is appropriate to seek feedback from other scholars. Accordingly, this document should not be understood as a formal fatwa to the general public declaring permissibility. Instead, it has been compiled for consideration by other scholars.
We would appreciate it if scholars who agree with these findings could share their concurrence. Similarly, if there are scholars who disagree, we would welcome their feedback and reasons for disagreement.”
(End of the Darul Uloom’s opinion)
Adding to this discussion, one Mufti Yusuf Badat states his legless, flaccid ‘evidences’ for the permissibility of the shaitaani system of slaughter. A Maulana from Canada summarizing Badat’s evidences states:
“His main evidences:
Stunning a bird or animal without causing death, prior to slaughter, although in principle is disliked (makrūh), is acceptable, if done to ease the handling and slaughter process.
Our Comment
This conclusion is preposterously illogic, unacceptable and haraam. Any injury inflicted on an animal prior to slaughter is haraam. This Mufti has absolutely no Shar’i basis for his allegation of ‘acceptability’ of a haraam method.
He further compounds and aggravates his grossly erroneous view by justifying the haraam method for the sake of ‘easing the handling and slaughter process’. His justification has no validity. He has justified the satanic pre-slaughter system of stunning chickens for the sake of facilitating the kuffaar’s shaitaani system of slaughter which requires speed for mass production for their monetary goals. Thus the Mufti has employed haraam to sustain haraam.
It is utterly despicable for a Mufti to cancel the System commanded by Allah Ta’ala just so that the coffers of the kuffaar may be filled with the boodle. It is never permissible to discard the Islamic System which does not allow any kind of pre-slaughter injury, for the sake of promoting and facilitating the kuffaar chicken entrepreneurs.
The known Hanafī jurist, Imam Burhān Al-Dīn Al-Marghinānī (may Allāh have mercy on him) states, “A disliked act, such as some pain to the animal [in the slaughter process] for a higher purposeful objective, prior or post slaughter, does not render prohibition. This is why such a slaughtered animal can be consumed.” – (Al-BināyahSharh Al-Hidāyah Vol. 11, Page 564, Dār Al-Kutub Al-‘Ilmiyyah[10])
Our Comment
The only thing stated by the Author of Hidaayah is that the Makrooh/Haraam act “does not render prohibition”. He does not say that the actual haraam act is permissible. He does not say stunning or any other act of injury is halaal. He in fact says that despite the infliction of the haraam act, the meat remains halaal, i.e. if the injury does not kill the animal. He does not present this example to diminish or to cancel Islam’s Thabah system nor to halaalize the kuffaar system of slaughter which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) labelled ‘Shareetatush Shaitaan”. Thus, the meat being halaal on account of the requisite neck vessels having been cut with the pronouncement of Tasmiyah, does not render halaal the act of stunning or any other act of injury inflicted on the animal.
Badat has dug out this obscure mas’alah to halaalize the slaughtering system of the kuffaar, and this is motivated by pecuniary and mercenary objectives.
“The stun that does not cause death is from the act of excellence [and good treatment] to the animal that is being slaughtered, due to the reason that the animal will not feel much pain during its slaughter.” – (See: Ma’āyīr Al-Halāl Wa Al-Harām, Page 318[11])
Our Comment
The author of the book, Ma’yir Al-Haram Wa Al-Haram is a SHIAH from Iraq He is a chap of this century. It is an insult to proffer the views of a kaafir to halaalize the haraam stunning system of the kuffaar. Just imagine! The Shiah says that stunning which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited, is “an act of excellence”. But our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that all acts of injury on the animal before slaughtering it are cruel and haraam. Even sharpening the knife in the presence of the animal is haraam.
As long as there is some form of life in the animal or bird being slaughtered, it is permissible for Halāl consumption.
Our Comment
The issue under discussion is not the hillet (being halaal) of the meat at the end of the brutal, kuffaar system of slaughter. The issue is the act of pre-slaughter stunning. The halaalizers of the kuffaar brutality of pre-slaughter stunning invariably attempt to obfuscate the issues to spin their narrative of ‘halaal’ motivated by the chimera of lucrative haraam earnings which the kuffaar chicken merchants dangle in front of these culprits who plunder the Deen for the sake of their monetary lists.
The Holy Qur’ān declares, “Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allāh, and [those animals] killed by strangling, by a violent blow, by a head-long fall, by the goring of horns, and those from which a wild animal has eaten, except what you [are able to] slaughter [before its death].” – (See: Qur’ān 5:3[12])
Ibn Ka`b bin Mālik reported from his father, “We had some sheep which used to graze at Sala’. One of our young girls saw a sheep dying and she broke a stone and slaughtered the sheep with it. My father said to the people, “Do not eat it until I ask the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) about it [or until I send someone to ask the Prophet]. So, he asked or sent someone to ask the Prophet, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) permitted him to eat it.” – (Sahīh Bukhārī 2304[13])
It is documented in Al-Fatāwā Al-‘Ālamghirīyyah, “Animals injured by a head long fall, strangulation, a violent blow, a sickly sheep, a jabbed animal, an animal whose stomach is torn, when [any of these] are to be slaughtered, if there is the presence of on-going life, the animal is rendered permissible through the act of slaughter by consensus. If life in the animal is diminishing, the animal is permissible for consumption regardless if the animal is able to live on further or not. This is the verdict of Imam Abū Hanīfah (may Allāh have mercy on him). This is the correct position and the fatwā is issued on this.” – (See: Al-Fatāwā Al-Hindiyyah, Vol 5, Page 286, Dār Al-Fikr[14])
The great Syrian Hanafī jurist, Imam Ahmad Ibn Muhammad (may Allāh have mercy on him) has written, “Imam Al-Sarakhsīy (may Allāh have mercy on him) has mentioned that when it is known that an animal has life, during slaughter, it is permissible for halāl consumption, whether it can be ascertained that it will continue to live on or not.” – (See: Lisān Al-Hukkām Fī Ma’arifat Al-Ahkām, Page 373, Al-Bābīy Al-Halabīy[15])
The famous Hanafīfiqh manual, Badā’i Al-Hanā’i states, “As long as there is some life present, a little or a lot [during slaughter], the animal will be deemed permissible as per the fatwā of Imam Abū Hanīfah (may Allāh have mercy on him).” – (See: Badā’I Al-Sanā’i, Vol 5, Page 50, Dār Al-Kutub Al-‘Ilmiyyah[16])
Our Comment
All of these citations proffered by Badat are for obfuscation. These quotes from the Hanafi Fuqaha and the Qur’aanic Aayat are all unrelated to the issue of stunning and infliction of injury. None of these quotations lend any support whatsoever for the haraam stunning act. There is no relationship between these rulings and stunning. That the meat at the end being halaal is not a daleel for the validity and permissibility of an act made haraam by Allah Ta’ala.
The ‘evidences’ proffered by Badat and Darul Uloom Canada are in reality not evidence for proving permissibility for the act of pre-slaughter stunning. Whatever the entities have presented to justify stunning applies to the meat being halaal after haraam injury has been inflicted on the chickens and animals.
Furthermore, the meat being halaal in this haraam scenario which they are labouring to halaalize is the view of only the Hanafi Math-hab based on the ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah). However, according to the other Math-habs as well according to the illustrious Hanafi Fuqaha, Imaam Abu Yusuf (Rahmatullah alayh) and Imaam Muhammad (Rahmatullah alayh), the meat will not be halaal in these circumstances. Be that as it may. The issue is not the end product. The issue is the first act – the act of stunning which is HARAAM.
The attempt to divert attention from the primary premises by means of hoodwinking, kicking up dust and blowing much hot air about the end product is despicable. It provides not a semblance of evidence for the act of stunning nor is it ever permissible to issue a halaal licence to the kuffaar chicken-mafia entrepreneurs for establishing their system of killing dubbed Shareetatush Shaitaan by our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
It must be understood that the objective of the Ahkaam and of Taa-at (obedience) is for our success and salvation in the Aakhirah. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “The dunya has been created for you, and you have been created for the Aakhirah.”
It is most despicable to use loopholes, obscure masaa-il and issues pertaining to exceptional circumstances as latitude for promoting the wares, products and enterprises of the kuffaar, and for one’s pecuniary designs and objectives. Among the Signs of Qiyaamah mentioned in the Hadith is that “the dunya will be acquired with the acts of the Deen.”
The manifestation of this particular Sign prevails today intensely in the ranks of Deeni personnel. The deen is proffered as cover for worldly and nafsaani objectives. This is in particular to entities who halaalize the Shareetatush Shaitaan (Shaitaan’s system of slaughter) of the kuffaar. Farfetched technicalities are dug out from the Fiqh Kutub to proffer totally baseless arguments to justify and halaalize the brutal, haraam slaughtering systems of the kuffaar. And, this evil is camouflaged with texts from the Fiqh Kutub.
Understand well that the Fuqaha have explained these technicalities for application in exceptional circumstances. The hillet of the meat acquired from breaking the neck of a chicken/goat prior to slaughter NEVER abrogates the major sins of brutality banned by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The ahkaam applicable to exceptional circumstances do not cancel the standing Sunnah system.
It is pure shaitaaniyat to vindicate performance of Salaat with the entire body naked except for the Satr being covered on the basis of the validity of Salaat with Satr covered, then to produce a plethora of references to ‘prove’ validity. Salaat being valid if the Satr is covered does not halaalize performance of Salaat with the entire body being nude.
Wudhu by observing only the four Fardh acts is valid according to the Hanafi Math-hab. But to legalize the abandonment of the Sunnah method of wudhu on the basis of the Fiqhi technicality that wudhu is valid if the four Fardh acts are observed is pure shaitaaniyat, a major sin and never valid.
In the same way, the kuffaar’s systems of slaughter may not be licensed and halaalized on the basis of the shaitaani argument of the end product being halaal. The meat being halaal in exceptional cases does not halaalize stunning and the kuffaar’s systems which Islam prohibits. There is not a single valid daleel for halaalizing stunning even if it be assumed that the shaitaan’s stunning act does not kill the animal.
The entire system of the Devil’s Slaughter from A to Z is haraam. Such a haraam system may not be employed and halaalized to satisfy the monetary objectives of the kuffaar and the lust for boodle of these halaalizing outfits. Thus, it is a major sin and in total conflict with Imaani logic for the Darul Uloom Canada to say:
“After thoroughly reviewing the relevant data and studying the works of Hanafī jurists, the DārulIftā is of the opinion that the controls implemented by HMA are sufficient to ensure that the animal is alive at the time of slaughter, thereby meeting halāl standards.”
Indeed, the Muftis of the Darul Uloom have miserably failed to constructively apply their Aql in the interests of Islam and the Ummah. What are these “halaal standards” which are met? These ‘standards’ are in total conflict with the Sunnah. It does not befit a Darul Uloom to promote ‘standards’ which are in conflict with the Shariah and which in reality are inspirations of Iblees.
Instead of concentrating on the impermissibility of the act of stunning which is the subject matter under discussion, the Darul Uloom has made the end product – the meat acquired in exceptional cases – the issue of argument.
The primary question is: Is pre-slaughter stunning permissible or not? The question is not: “Will the meat be halaal if the Shar’i syatem of Thabah is discarded due to exceptional circumstances? Only a munaafiq will say that pre-slaughter stunning is permissible.
May Allah Ta’ala keep our Imaan intact until the very last moment of life.
17 Rabiul Awwal 1446 – 21 September 2024