Halal and Haram
Eating Food Served by a non-Muslim
Question:
As Salaamu Alaikum,
In my hometown, there is a Sikh owned restaurant that buys its meat from the local Zabiha shop. Is it permissible to eat there? Can one eat at such a restaurant where there are non-Muslims working or who own it?
Country: United States
Answer:
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuHu,
It is very important for a Muslim to eat what is permissible according to Islamic dietary guidelines. Perhaps some restaurants which are run by non-Muslims could claim to stock halal products while they do not have sufficient knowledge regarding the specifics of our dietary laws. Additionally, a non-Muslim does not have the Allah-fearing nature that a Muslim has pertaining to such matters. For instance, if the restaurant runs out of beef on short notice, would they consider a substitute for dhabihah sufficient until they get something else?
It is better to be careful. In some American cities, there are restaurants run by non-Muslims that claim to the customer at the door that they only stock halal products, while a bit of investigation may produce evidence to the contrary.
The locality where the restaurant is should seek the assistance of the local ulama to inspect the establishment, and verify whether or not Islamic dietary guidelines are being maintained.
What was mentioned above does not mean that we cannot eat lawful food which is served by a non-Muslim. It is permissible to eat what a non-Muslim or corrupt Muslim serves, so long as what they serve is permissible. In Sharh al-Muhadhdhab v. 9, p. 418, Imam Nawawi stated,
ولو امتنع من أكل طعام حلال لكونه حمله كافر أو فاسق بالزنا أو بالقتل ونحوه لم يكن هذا ورعا بل هو وسواس وتنطع مذموم.
“If refraining from eating lawful food is due to it being served by a non-Muslim or transgressor by fornication, murder, etc., this is not scrupulousness; rather, it is neurotic misgiving and blameful over-strictness.”
And Allah Most High knows best.
Shafiifiqh.com Fatwa Dept.
Read MoreFeeding People at the Deceased’s Home after Burial
Question:
How is it to feed the common people and mourners at the home of the deceased after burial?
Country: South Africa
Answer:
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuHu,
The source of the food could be either:
1) From the estate, while apportioned for another (like a minor, creditor, or absentee), it is unlawful; moreover, whoever spends from it is liable. (‘Umdat al-Mufti wa al-Mustafti v. 3, p. 181) However, when from the estate, without being apportioned to another and with consent from all entitled to it, then such is a disliked innovation. (Tuhfat al-Muhtaj v.1, p. 437)
This is an innovation as it is opposite to the established sunnah. The Prophet Muhammad said, “Cook for the family of Ja’far, they have been struck by something that keeps them busy.” (Musnad Ahmad #1751; al-Mawsu’at al-Hadithiyyah p. 280)
2) Not from the estate, it is permissible; but it is disliked to eat at a house where the family is not cooking due to mourning. If the family is not cooking on account of other reasons, then it is not disliked to eat there, with the condition that the food is not from the estate. (Tuhfat al-Muhtaj v. 1, p. 437)
And Allah knows best.
Answered by: Ml. Tariq Muhammad
Read MoreQiyam in Mawlid
Question:
as-salamu `alaikum, Is qiyam in the Mawlid considered a haram act according to the Shafi’i school?
Country: United Kingdom
Answer:
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlah,
In al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyyah, Ibn Hajar stated that standing during mawlid is an innovation. This is also found in Mu’asasat Dar al-‘Ulum’s print of Sayyid ‘Alawi b. Ahmad al-Saqqaf’s Tarshih al-Mustafidin pg. 325, as follows:
“Regarding standing at mention of the Prophet Muhammad’s birth, in Ibn Hajar’s al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyyah it comes, ‘What many do at the mention of his birth from standing is a bid’ah [innovation]…’”
أما القيام عند ذكر وضعه صلى الله عليه وسلم ففي فتاوى ابن حجر الحديثية ما نصه: فعل كثير عند ذكر مولده صلى الله عليه وسلم ووضع أمه له من القيام بدعة لم يرد فيه شيء على أن الناس إنما يفعلون ذلك تعظيما له صلى الله عليه وسلم فالعوام معذورون لذلك بخلاف الخواص اه
Some shuyukh mention that the practice of groups of ‘ulama’ in different parts of the world, like Damascus and many other places, would indicate to there being a difference of opinion. The differing view would be supported by what comes in I’anat al-Talibin v. 3, p. 607:
فائدة: جرت العادة أن الناس إذا سمعوا ذكر وضعه يقومون تعظيما له وهذا القيام مستحسن لما فيه من تعظيم النبي وقد فعل ذلك كثير من علماء الأمة الذين يقتدى بهم اه
“The custom of the people is that when they hear mention of his birth they stand out of honor, and this standing is favorable, as in it there is honor for the Prophet Muhammad. And many of the ummah’s ‘ulama’ who are taken as examples do it.”
Therefore, two opinions on standing during mawlid are found in the late Shafi’i School: one assessing it to be an innovation, and one assessing it to be favorable. As a general rule, Ibn Hajar’s opinions are authoritative (along with Sh. Muhammad al-Ramli, May Allah have mercy on them). Both stances have reference, and one may practice on either.
May Allah send the choicest of salutations and blessings on the Prophet Muhammad.
And Allah knows best.
Shafiifiqh.com Fatwa Dept.
Also see: http://www.shafiifiqh.com/?p=1764
And: http://www.shafiifiqh.com/?p=982
Read MoreRugs with Depictions of Animals
Question:
As salamu alaykum,
I would like to know the ruling on keeping rugs which have relatively detailed impressions of animals on them, namely Persian rugs with birds?
Country: Malaysia
Answer:
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuHu,
The shariah takes a stern stance against sculpting or depicting animals, as we find clearly stated in the hadith where the Prophet Muhammad addressed Sayyidatuna Aishah who had hung a piece of material with drawings of animals on it, “O Aishah, verily the people who will receive the most severe punishment from Allah on the Day of Judgment will be those who attempt to imitate the creation of Allah.” (Sahih Muslim v. 12-14, p. 314, # 5491; Ibid, p. 315, #5494)
In discussing when one may refuse an invitation to a walimah, Ibn Hajar mentioned that being present in a place where such depictions are displayed, in a way of glorification or honoring, is impermissible. (Tuhfat al-Muhtaj v. 3, p. 302) However, if displayed in a manner considered demeaning or degrading (examples mentioned are placing it on the ground where it is stepped on or a pillow that is slept on), then in this case one’s presence where such objects are treated as such would be permissible. (Ibid v. 3, p. 303)
With this said, regardless of the manner in which the depictions are displayed, the angels of mercy will not enter such a place. This is due to the general expression used by the Prophet Muhammad when he warned, “The angels do not enter a house that has in it a dog or depictions.” (Sahih Muslim v. 13-14, p. 310, #5482)
Allah knows best.
Answered by: Ml. Tariq Muhammad
Read MoreIs it Permissible to Eat Beer-Battered Fish?
Question:
As Salaamu Alaikum,
Firstly Baraka Allahu Fikum, this service is invaluable and I am grateful to Allahu Ta’Alaa that He has allowed it to be available.
My question is related to food once again. Recently I went to a fast food restaurant and was excited because they don’t use any pork products (including lard). They serve fish tacos and I wanted to try them. However their fish is “beer battered”. So I refrained. But I was told by a student that it would be Halal because it was impossible to get intoxicated from it, but he is in a Hanafi institution studying. Can you explain our School’s position?
Country: United States
Answer:
wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuHu,
In Mughni al-Muhtaj v. 5, p. 517, Khatib Shirbini mentioned a comparable situation, and stated,
لأن عين الخمر أكلتها النار وبقي الخبز نجسا
“…as the substance of alcohol is consumed by fire; the bread remains impure.”
Fire/cooking does not remove impurity, and the Shafi’i School considers alcohol, like beer, impure. Therefore, even when cooking removes all the alcohol, contamination with the impurity makes eating it problematic.
And Allah knows best.
Shafiifiqh.com Fatwa Dept.
Note: Hanafi muftis allow the consumption of products containing alcohol from sources other than grapes or dates so long as: 1) it does not intoxicate and 2) it is not used in vain. Also, the amount of alcohol must not exceed 0.5%. Thus, if the amount of beer used is disproportional to the extent of more than 0.5%, then such a product would not be permitted. If the amount of alcohol is 0.5% or less, then they would allow it.
Details on the Hanafi position were provided by Mufti Nayef Patel and Mufti Abdullah Nana. May Allah reward them for their service.
Read MoreAhl al-Kitab and Their Meat
Question:
As-Salamu-Alikum,
The Quran says that one can eat from the People of the Book (Christian and Jew). I would like to know if there is any condition that must be fulfilled for someone to be considered “People of the Book”. If there is, then are today’s Christians and Jews those from whom we can eat?
Answer:
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatuLlahi wa barakatuHu,
In the Shafi’i School, restrictions are found in this regard. They are:
1) The issue of “tahrif.” Tahrif, or in Arabic التحريف, is creedal/scriptural interpolation.
2) The issue of “naskh.” Naskh, or in Arabic النسخ, is abrogation.
In brief, for non-Israelite peoples’ meat to be halal, they must have entered into the religion (i.e. Christianity or Judaism) prior to naskh and tahrif [or after if they did not delve into it]. (Tuhfat al-Muhtaj v. 7, p. 322)
The issue of naskh is considered for Israelite peoples (those who trace their lineage back to Yaq’ub b. Is-haq b. Ibrahim (alayhim as-salam)), and their fathers must have entered into the religion before it. Yet, the issue of tahrif before naskh is less rigorous. (Mughni al-Muhtaj v. 4, p. 312; Tuhfat al-Muhtaj v. 7, p. 324)
Now, in regards to the question, “then are today’s Christians and Jews those from whom we can eat?”
When one is basing their decision by what is found in the Shafi’i School, then the above-mentioned restrictions must be taken into account. Some Christian peoples entered Christianity late; for example, the Saxons in 804 or Lithuania in 1387. Entering Christianity so late is after naskh; and therefore, problematic. Hence, it would depend on which Christians or Jews one is asking about…
And Allah knows best.
Shafiifiqh.com Fatwa Dept.
Read More
Recent Comments