Question
I’m confused as to whether you say that the meat from the People of the Book is haraam or not. You mention the following:
1- You stated this:
Do these conditions apply only on the food of the Muslims? Does this imply that if a Muslim offers any of these things for consumption, they should be refused, while if a Christian or a Jew offers any of these things, they shall then be considered allowed?
My understanding is that in Islam you don’t question where the meat came from if its offered by a Muslim. Why would anyone question meat coming from Muslims and take what’s coming from the People of the Book with no questions? It’s clear, what’s “wholesome” for consumption with regards to what we’re (Muslims) allowed to eat. If a Jew or Christian give me pork to eat, then that directly contradicts the Islamic rulings on not eating pork, henceforth, this would be in the category of haraam food. Now, if a Jew or Christian gave me chicken to eat, then that’s a totally different category, at least to my understanding.
2. You stated this:
The Qur’an after mentioning the prohibition of these things says that these are “unclean” things and eating them entails “disobedience to God”. Does this mean that if a Jew or a Christian offers these things for eating, their “uncleanness” and the “disobedience to God” that their eating entails is removed? If that is the case, where does the Qur’an say so?
This is a strange analogy. On one hand, we can marry them and even have sexual intercourse with them in marriage, but we can’t eat their food?
3. You stated this:
Does this mean that the meat of a dead animal, flowing blood and the flesh of swine can be eaten if the Ahl-e-Kitaab offer them for eating? If the answer is “no”, then it should be determined what is the basis of creating an exception for only one of the four conditions (i.e. mentioning God’s name while slaughtering the animal).
The Qur’an clearly states that this is not lawful for us to eat, i.e. flowing blood, flesh of swine, dead animal, etc. If a Jew or Christian give me flowing blood for consumption, then of course, I’ll refuse it, and that goes for the rest of the categories.
Jazaak Allahu khairun and I anxiously await your response.
wa salaamu’alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh
Answer
Before presenting my views on your comments, I would first like to remove any misunderstanding that my referred response may have caused about my opinion regarding the lawfulness/prohibition of the food of the ahl-e-Kitaab (Jews and Christians). The Qur’an has clearly allowed us the food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab. In the presence of this allowance of the Qur’an no one can prohibit a Muslim from eating the food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab. Nevertheless, this allowance of the Qur’an, obviously, does not apply to the express prohibitions of the Qur’an itself. The express prohibitions of the Qur’an are:
-
Flesh of Dead animal (this also includes animals which have not been properly slaughtered);
-
Flowing blood;
-
Flesh of pork; and
-
Animals slaughtered in the name of other deities besides the one God (this also includes animals which have been slaughtered without taking God’s name on them).
These are the express prohibitions of the Shari`ah. No Muslim should eat any of these prohibitions of the Shari`ah, even if he is offered these by an Ahl-e-Kitaab.
Thus, my opinion, in this regard may be stated as: ‘The food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab is allowed for Muslims, except such food as has been otherwise expressly prohibited in the Shari`ah.’
Keeping the above clarification in perspective, let us now turn to your comments on my statements.
You write:
If a Jew or Christian give me pork to eat, then that directly contradicts the Islamic rulings on not eating pork, henceforth, this would be in the category of haraam food. Now, if a Jew or Christian gave me chicken to eat, then that’s a totally different category, at least to my understanding.
Would you still consider the said chicken to belong to ‘a totally different category’ if it was slaughtered without taking God’s name on it? Would you consider it to be allowable even if it was a ‘dead chicken’? I would like to remind you that the Qur’an has not prohibited pork only. In fact, keeping the express prohibitions of the Qur’an in perspective, it may easily be derived that the case of a ‘dead chicken’ (which obviously applies to a chicken which is not slaughtered in the prescribed manner) and that of a chicken slaughtered without mentioning God’s name is no different from pork (or flowing blood). All items belong to the category, which have been expressly prohibited by the Qur’an.
You write:
This is a strange analogy1. On one hand, we can marry them and even have sexual intercourse with them in marriage, but we can’t eat their food?
If you would look closely at my statement again, you shall see that I have not drawn any analogies in my statement. I had only implied that the Qur’an has prohibited the Muslims from eating pork, flesh of dead animals, flowing blood and animals slaughtered without mentioning God’s name upon them and that these prohibitions would, obviously, hold good even if the food is being served by one of the Ahl-e-Kitaab. I really do not see any analogy in this.
With reference to your concluding words (i.e. “… but we can’t eat their food?”), I would like to clarify once again that this is not an accurate representation of my opinion. I do not hold that Muslims cannot eat the food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab. All that I am saying is that ‘Muslims are allowed to eat the food of the Ahl-e-Kitaab, except such food as has been otherwise expressly prohibited in the Shari`ah.’
Lastly, I would also like to mention that the analogy you have yourself drawn between the edible and the marital laws is quite incomprehensible for me. The Muslims are both allowed to marry the women of the Ahl-e-Kitaab, as well as eat their food, except such food as has been otherwise expressly prohibited by the Shari`ah.
You write:
The Qur’an clearly states that this is not lawful for us to eat, i.e. flowing blood, flesh of swine, dead animal, etc. If a Jew or Christian give me flowing blood for consumption, then of course, I’ll refuse it, and that goes for the rest of the categories.
This is precisely what I am saying. If you mean exactly what your statement implies, then I wonder what is the difference between our opinions, if any.
August 20th 2000
- The reference is to my following statement:
The Qur’an after mentioning the prohibition of these things says that these are “unclean” things and eating them entails “disobedience to God”. Does this mean that if a Jew or a Christian offers these things for eating, their “uncleanness” and the “disobedience to God” that their eating entails is removed? If that is the case, where does the Qur’an say so? [↩]