❖ A Reflection of Hypocrisy
This objection serves as a mirror for those who, throughout the year, consume animals in various forms—eating meat, wearing leather shoes and jackets, and using animal-based products—yet suddenly become concerned about animal rights when Eid al-Adha arrives. This glaring inconsistency is a clear example of contradiction and hypocrisy.
❖ Eid al-Adha: A Religious Obligation and Charitable Act
Eid al-Adha is both a sacred religious duty and a powerful act of generosity towards the poor. Criticizing this occasion and portraying it as a form of opposition to the underprivileged is far from reality. The meat from the sacrifice is divided into three parts, with one part specifically designated for the poor and needy. Many of them receive meat during this time that they cannot afford the entire year. Moreover, this sacrificial act supports the livelihoods of shepherds, butchers, religious schools, and numerous other trades.
❖ The Real Impact of Calling for a Ban on Sacrifice
Those who call for banning animal sacrifice are not advocating for the poor—they are attacking their sources of livelihood. Such a move would primarily harm those who depend on this economic cycle: animal breeders, butchers, madrassas, and various businesses involved in the trade and processing of sacrificial animals.
❖ Key Points
➊ The purpose of Eid al-Adha’s sacrifice goes beyond acquiring meat; it is a religious obligation that includes rights for the poor.
➋ Those who object to animal sacrifice while consuming animal products year-round expose their hypocrisy.
➌ Sacrifice benefits multiple economic segments, especially the poor and working class engaged in livestock and related industries.
➍ Calls to ban sacrifice are not acts of compassion for the poor, but a form of hostility that would primarily harm them.
