Idolatry was originally the worship of saints. The idols of the polytheists of Mecca were composed of the names and images of the saints of Allah. The Holy Quran explicitly rejected this, and the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, came to eradicate this very idolatry. The foundation of Islam was established on the destruction of idolatry, but unfortunately, some later Muslims incorporated this idolatry into their religion under the name of reverence and love for the saints. Today, those who claim Islam have borrowed many polytheistic practices from the polytheists of Mecca.
Slaughtering animals in the name of the saints of Allah is also a link in this chain. Just as the polytheists of Mecca used to release animals in the names of their ancestors and idols based on statues, some Muslims today imitate them by releasing animals attributed to saints. These named animals are not like ordinary animals; rather, in the eyes of those people, they have great “sanctity.” If they enter a field, the owner considers it to be completely ruined. Wherever they want to go, no one stops them. No work is done with them, and they have their own identity. People know that this animal belongs to such and such shrine or mausoleum.
What is the difference between naming an animal Asaf, Nayla, Manat, etc., or giving it names like Bahira, Saibah, Wasila, Ham, or saying that this camel or cow is designated for the “Chhatti Sharif” of Ajmer, or saying that this is the goat for the eleventh day, or that this is someone’s vow and offering? Even in ancient times, this was done to gain the pleasure and closeness of the elders, and today all this is done to honor the saints and seek their nearness. This is because these saints are considered manifestations of divine powers, and it is said that if my work is accomplished, I will sacrifice a black goat at such-and-such shrine or offer a vow and offering of a black chicken.
Attributing to anyone other than Allah and slaughtering in their name is shirk (polytheism) and kufr (disbelief). Eating such animals and items is forbidden. These animals and this money are gifts from Allah Almighty. It is the obligatory right of Allah Almighty that these things be used only as offerings and thanksgivings to Him.
✿ Allah Almighty says:
قُلْ اِنَّ صَلَاتِيْ وَنُسُكِيْ وَمَحْيَايَ وَمَمَاتِيْ لِلّٰهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِيْنَ ٭ لَا شَرِيْكَ لَهٗ وَبِذٰلِكَ اُمِرْتُ وَاَنَا اَوَّلُ الْمُسْلِمِيْنَ٭
“(O Prophet!) Say: My prayer, my sacrifice, my life, and my death are all for Allah, the Lord of the worlds. He has no partner. This is what I have been commanded, and I am the first of those who submit.”
↰ In these noble verses, Allah Almighty has made His beloved Prophet ﷺ declare that I perform prayer, which is the pillar and pillar of religion, including spiritual acts of worship such as humility and attention to Allah, verbal acts of worship such as Takbeer and Tahmeed, recitation of the Holy Quran, and physical acts of worship such as standing, bowing, prostration, and processions, purely for Allah, the Lord of the worlds. I slaughter animals solely to draw closer to Allah Almighty, not for idols and statues like the polytheists. I will spend my entire life in servitude and devotion to my Allah and will die upon it. I acknowledge that in all types of worship, Allah, the Lord of the worlds, has no partner or associate.
◈ In the commentary of this noble verse, Hafiz Abu al-Fida Ismail ibn Umar Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) (774-700 AH) has beautifully written:
يأمره تعالٰي أن يخبر المشركين، الذين يعبدون غير الله ويذبحون لغير اسمه، أنه مخالف لهم فى ذٰلك، فإن صلاته لله، ونسكه على اسمه، وحده لا شريك له، وهٰذا كقوله تعالٰي : ﴿فصل لربك وانحر﴾
, i.e.: Sincerely dedicate your prayer and sacrifice to Him, for the polytheists used to worship idols and slaughter for them. Allah Almighty commanded him to oppose them, to turn away from what they were upon, and to approach with intention, purpose, and determination to be sincere to Allah Almighty.
“Allah Almighty commands His Prophet ﷺ to tell the polytheists who worship others besides Allah and slaughter animals in their name that you oppose them in these actions. The polytheists of Mecca worshipped idols and slaughtered animals for them. Allah Almighty commanded the Prophet ﷺ to oppose them, to refrain from their practice, and to remain steadfast with intention, purpose, and determination that every act is done purely for Allah Almighty.”
↰ All types of worship such as supplication, calling out, pleading, love, fear, hope, trust, desire, humility, repentance, seeking help and refuge, slaughtering, and vows should be performed purely for Allah. No one should be associated with Allah in these acts. These are the obligatory rights of Allah Almighty, which must be fulfilled solely for Him. It is the duty of every Muslim to remain steadfast upon them throughout life and to invite others to them continuously.
❀ It is narrated from the Fourth Caliph, Sayyiduna Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said:
لعن الله من ذبح لغير الله
“Whoever sacrifices for anyone other than Allah, Allah’s curse is upon him.”
Sacrificing an animal for anyone other than Allah is a cause of curse. This is the practice of polytheists and disbelievers. Sacrificing for the sake of anyone other than Allah is shirk (associating partners with Allah), and such a sacrifice is forbidden, meaning its meat is prohibited to eat.
Allah Almighty has stated regarding forbidden things:
وَمَا اُهِلَّ بِهٖ لِغَيْرِ اللّٰهِ
“And that which is invoked upon other than Allah.” (Translation by Shah Rafiuddin)
From this noble verse, it is understood that:
➊ If an animal or any other thing is designated for anyone other than Allah, even if Allah’s name is called at the time of sacrifice, it is still forbidden.
➋ If the name of anyone other than Allah is called at the time of sacrifice, it is also forbidden.
➌ If the sacrifice is made by saying بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ وَاللّٰهُ أَكْبَرُ and it is also said that “O Allah! This animal is sacrificed for the nearness of so-and-so saint or elder,” it is still forbidden.
➍ If the sacrifice is made for Allah but the name of anyone other than Allah is called at the time of sacrifice, it is still forbidden.
➎ If the sacrifice is made for Allah, but the name of anyone other than Allah is included along with the blessed name of Allah, it is still forbidden.
◈ The Hanafi jurisprudence also states the same. It is written in the authentic and reliable books of the Hanafi school:
يقول : بسم الله، واسم فلان، أو يقول : بسم الله وفلان، أو بسم الله ومحمد رسول الله، فتحرم الذبيحة، لأنه أهل به لغير الله .
“If a person says at the time of sacrifice: بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ، وَاسْمِ فُلَانٍ along with the name of Allah and the name of so-and-so, or بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ، وَفُلَانٍ along with the names of Allah and so-and-so, or بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ وَمُحَمَّدِ رَّسُولِ اللّٰهِ along with the names of Allah and Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), then the sacrifice becomes forbidden because the name of someone other than Allah has been invoked upon it.”
Doubts and Their Resolution
In this matter, the Barelvi school of thought holds the position that if an animal is attributed to the names of the saints and the name of Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter, then it is halal. Therefore, they interpret and explain the noble verse وَمَا اُهِلَّ بِهٖ لِغَيْرِ اللّٰهِ to mean that the animal is haram if the name of anyone other than Allah is called out at the time of slaughter, although there is no evidence to restrict this verse specifically to the time of slaughter. According to this noble verse, calling out the name of anyone other than Allah at any time on an animal makes it haram. The time of slaughter is also one such occasion and place of this prohibition.
➊ There is no restriction on the time of slaughter:
The meaning of إِهْلَال is رَفْعُ الصَّوْتِ, which means to raise the voice, that is, if at the time of slaughter or before slaughter, at any time, the name of anyone other than Allah is called upon it, the animal becomes unlawful. Although the commentators have called calling a name at the time of slaughter إِهْلَال, this does not mean that at other times the animal can be attributed to anyone other than Allah. Since it was the common practice of the polytheists that the animals they left for the nearness and reverence of idols of their ancestors, at the time of slaughter they would call those very names upon them. Therefore, if the name of someone is called upon an animal for the purpose of reverence and nearness, and at the time of slaughter it is slaughtered in the name of Allah, it will still be unlawful.
Therefore, the statement of Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Barelvi (d. 1391 AH) that: “Calling means calling at the time of slaughter” is not correct.
This is also the view of Mulla Jawan, Maturidi, Hanafi (d. 1130 AH), who writes:
ومن هٰهنا علم أن البقرة المنذورة للـأولياء، كما هو الرسم فى زماننا، حلال طيب، لأنه لم يذكر اسم غير الله عليها وقت الذبح، وإن كانوا ينذرونها له .
“This shows that the cow which is dedicated as a vow for the saints, as is customary in our times, is halal and pure, because at the time of slaughter the name of none other than Allah was mentioned, even though it was dedicated to someone other than Allah.”
In response to this doubt, the great scholar of the Islamic world, the distinguished Ahl al-Hadith scholar, Allama Dr. Shams al-Din, Salafi, Afghani (d. 1420 AH/1997 CE) states:
لقد أجاب علمائ الحنفية عن هٰذه الشبهة، أن العبرة فى النذر لغير الله تعالٰي للنية، لا لذكر اسم غير الله عند ذبح المنذور، فمن نذر بقرة لميت، مثلا، فقد أشرك بمجرد نذره إياه له، سوائ ذكر اسم الله عند ذبحها، أو ذكر اسم ذٰلك الميت، فإن العبرة لنية هٰذا الناذر، المتقرب إلٰي ذٰلك الميت، الطالب بنذره له كشف المعضلات، وجلب الخيرات منه، لقوله تعالٰي : ﴿وما اهل به لغير الله﴾
, and the statement of the Exalted: ﴿وما أهل لغير الله به﴾
, and the statement of the Exalted: ﴿أو فسقًا أهل لغير الله به﴾
, whatever is declared lawful for other than Allah is broader than just slaughtering in the name of other than Allah. What is declared lawful for other than Allah may include drinks, clothing, perfumes, and even minerals such as gold, silver, ruby, coral, and the like. It may also include foods that do not require slaughtering, such as fish, oil, ghee, honey, and so forth, because (al-ihlal) means raising the voice over something, and does not mean slaughtering. Whoever claims that the meaning of the phrase: ﴿وما أهل لغير الله به﴾ is only that it is slaughtered in the name of other than Allah, by mentioning his name at the time of slaughter, has made a clear mistake, restricted the absolute text of the Book, and specified its general meaning without any valid evidence, and has attributed to the Arabic language something unknown to the Arabs. For the Arabs did not know (al-ihlal) to mean slaughtering. As for what some interpreters mentioned in the explanation of this verse: that it means what is slaughtered for idols, tyrants, and the like, this is not the full linguistic meaning, but their intention was to explain one aspect of ﴿وما أهل لغير الله به﴾. The previous polytheists used to slaughter animals they vowed for their gods by mentioning their names, unlike the grave worshippers of this Ummah, who, if they vow a cow, for example, for their deceased saints, slaughter it in the name of Allah verbally and outwardly as a trick. However, this vowed animal is actually slaughtered in the name of that deceased saint. Although they do not mention the name of this saint outwardly on their tongues at the time of slaughter, they mention the name of their saint inwardly in their hearts before, during, and after slaughtering. This indicates their vow to him, their intention, their seeking nearness to him, and their supplication to him to avert calamities and bring blessings. Therefore, mentioning the name of Allah at the time of slaughter has no effect as long as the vow is for other than Allah. Their slaughtering in the name of Allah is merely a grave-worshipping trick that does not save them from shirk and prohibition, because the criterion is intention, not mentioning the name of Allah on the tongue. Thus, this one who vows is a polytheist, and this vowed animal is forbidden, even if the name of Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter.
The Hanafi scholars responded to this doubt by stating that in accepting vows made for other than Allah, the intention is to be considered, not the mentioning of Allah’s name at the time of slaughter. Whoever vows a cow for a deceased person becomes a polytheist merely by making the vow, whether or not he mentions the name of that deceased at the time of slaughter. The consideration is the intention of the one who accepts the vow, who seeks to gain closeness to that deceased and desires through this vow to remove difficulties and bring about goodness, because وما اهل به لغير الله
“and whoever is invoked besides Allah,” and وما اهل لغير الله به
“and whoever is invoked besides Allah,” and او فسقا اهل لغير الله به
or it is transgression that the name of other than Allah is invoked upon it. All these commands of the Exalted regarding invoking other than Allah are general, whether it is slaughtered by mentioning the name of other than Allah or not. What is invoked by the name of other than Allah often relates to drinks, clothing, perfumes, and sometimes minerals such as gold, silver, ruby, coral, etc., and sometimes it is food that does not require slaughtering, such as fish, oil, ghee, honey, and so on (so does that make vows for other than Allah permissible?). اِ هلال means raising the voice, not slaughtering. Whoever claimed that the command of the Exalted: وما اهل به لغير الله
means the animal upon which the name of other than Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter has made a gross error and has restricted an absolute verse of the Qur’an without any evidence and specified a general verse without evidence. He has tried to include in the Arabic language something unknown even to the Arabs. Among the Arabs, اهلال does not mean slaughtering. Some noble interpreters who said in the explanation of this verse that it means animals slaughtered for idols and tyrants did not give the full linguistic meaning of the word but intended to explain one aspect of the things mentioned in this verse, because the polytheists of previous nations used to vow animals for their deities and slaughter them by mentioning their names. The grave worshippers of this Ummah, by their grave worship, use a trick by slaughtering the animals vowed for their saints outwardly in the name of Allah, but in reality, the animal is slaughtered in the name of that deceased saint. Although they do not mention the name of this saint outwardly on their tongues, in their hearts before, during, and after slaughtering, they mention him. Their vow of the animal to the deceased, associating the animal with that deceased in their hearts, offering the animal as a sacrifice to gain nearness to that saint, and their supplication to him to remove hardships and bring blessings—all these clearly indicate this. It is evident that when an animal is vowed for other than Allah, mentioning the name of Allah verbally at the time of slaughter has no significance. Mentioning the name of Allah at slaughter is a grave-worshipping trick that does not save them from shirk and prohibition, because the criterion is intention, not mentioning the name of Allah verbally at slaughter. Whoever accepts such a vow is a polytheist, and such a vowed animal is forbidden, even if the name of Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter.
◈ Sheikh al-Islam, Abu al-Abbas, Ahmad ibn Abdul Halim, Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him (661-728 AH) says:
فإن قوله تعالٰي : ﴿وما اهل لغير الله به﴾
Its apparent meaning is that what is slaughtered for other than Allah, for example, if it is said: this is a sacrifice for so-and-so. When this is the intention, it makes no difference whether it is spoken or not, and the prohibition of this is clearer than the prohibition of what is slaughtered for meat, and it is said about it: in the name of Messiah, or the like… So if what is said to be slaughtered in the name of Messiah or a star is prohibited, then it is more appropriate that what is said to be slaughtered for the sake of Messiah or the star, or intended for that, is prohibited. This clarifies the weakness of the statement of those who prohibit what is slaughtered in the name of other than Allah but do not prohibit what is slaughtered for other than Allah… And based on this, if an animal is slaughtered for other than Allah as a means of drawing closer to Him, it is prohibited, even if it is said in its name: In the name of Allah, as is done by طائفة some hypocrites of this Ummah, who draw closer to the saints and stars by slaughtering, burning incense, and the like.
The command of the Almighty Allah وما اهل لغير الله به
: And what is slaughtered for other than Allah, for example, if it is said this animal is slaughtered for so-and-so. When this is the intention, it makes no difference whether it is uttered or not. Its prohibition is clearer than the prohibition of an animal slaughtered with the intention of eating its meat but slaughtered in the name of Messiah… When an animal is slaughtered in the name of Messiah or a star, it is forbidden, then it is even more forbidden for an animal about which it is said that it is for Messiah or a star or such an intention is made. This shows the weakness of those who say that an animal slaughtered in the name of other than Allah is forbidden, but an animal slaughtered for other than Allah is not forbidden… Therefore, an animal slaughtered to seek nearness to other than Allah is forbidden, even if the name of Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter. As a group of hypocrites of this Ummah do, these people slaughter animals to seek nearness to the saints of Allah or stars and accept vows through incense and the like. “
◈ The commentator of Sahih Bukhari, Hafiz Ahmad bin Ali, Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him (773-852 AH), says:
﴿وما اهل به لغير الله﴾, that is, what is slaughtered for someone other than Him, and its origin is that the slaughterer raises his voice by mentioning the one for whom the animal is being slaughtered.
“This command of Allah Almighty refers to the animal that is slaughtered for someone other than Allah. The original meaning of ‘Ahlal’ is that the one who slaughters loudly mentions the being for whom the animal is being slaughtered.”
◈ It is written in the authentic books of the Hanafi school of thought:
ذبح لقدوم الـأمير، ونحوه، كواحد من العظمائ، يحرم، لـأنه أهل به لغير الله، ولو ذكر اسم الله تعالٰي .
“It is forbidden to slaughter an animal upon the arrival of an Amir or any such dignitary, because the name of someone other than Allah is invoked upon it, even if at the time of slaughter the name of Allah Almighty is mentioned.”
◈ It is understood that if the intention of drawing near to someone other than Allah is present, then the slaughtered animal is forbidden, even if the name of someone other than Allah is not invoked at the time of slaughter, rather it is slaughtered mentioning the name of Allah.
From these statements, the meaning of ihlal becomes clear, that is, the animal is forbidden if the intention is to honor someone other than Allah, and there is no restriction regarding the time of slaughter.
◈ Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlavi Hanafi, son of Shah Waliullah Dehlavi Hanafi (1239-1159 AH) writes:
“If the intention is to seek nearness to anyone other than Allah, then even if the name of Allah Almighty is taken at the time of slaughter, that sacrifice will still be forbidden.”
◈ Hazrat Ahmad Sirhindi, titled “Mujaddid Alf Thani” (d. 1034 AH) states:
“For the elders who accept vows of animals and take them to graves to slaughter, the jurisprudential traditions have classified this act as entering into shirk (polytheism).”
Allama Muhammad bin Ali Shawkani Al-Yamani, may Allah have mercy on him (1173-1250 AH), states in the interpretation of this verse:
والمراد هنا ما ذكر عليه اسم غير الله، كاللات، والعزٰي، إذا كان الذباح وثنيا، والنار، إذا كان الذابح مجوسيا، ولا خلاف فى تحريم هٰذا وأمثاله، ومثله ما يقع من المعتقدين للـأموات، من الذبح علٰي قبورهم، فإنه مما أهل به لغير الله، ولا فرق بينه وبين الذبح للوثن .
“In this noble verse, the animal referred to is the one on which the name of anyone other than Allah is invoked. For example, if the slaughterer is an idolater, he will invoke the names of Lat and Uzza, and if he is a Magian, he will invoke the name of fire. There is no difference regarding the prohibition of such animals. Animals slaughtered by polytheists at graves are also similarly forbidden because the name of someone other than Allah is called upon them. There is no difference between slaughtering animals at graves or at idols.”
↰ It is understood that an animal designated for idols, goddesses, gods, shrines, graves, and saints remains forbidden even if slaughtered with Bismillah, because the one who designated it for someone other than Allah did not intend the meat but rather sought nearness to someone other than Allah.
Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Barelvi Sahib raises an objection and writes:
“If someone raised an animal in the name of a dead person, then later repented and slaughtered it with a pure intention, then it is unanimously halal, even though it falls under أُهِلَّ. If even once the name of anyone other than Allah was pronounced over it, it falls under the punishment of مَا أُهِلَّ. Now it must be accepted that the name of Allah called out at the time of slaughter is valid, not before.
The reason why eating that halal animal became haram was removed, so eating it became permissible. When a person completely ended the intention of dedicating it to anyone other than Allah from his heart, then that animal was never attributed to anyone other than Allah. How then can the restriction of the time of slaughter be proven?
➋ The attribution of vow and offering is shirk:
If something is attributed to the friends of Allah (Awliya Allah), then this attribution is of vow and offering, which is shirk, forbidden, and impermissible to do for anyone other than Allah Almighty. On the other hand, if an animal is attributed to its owner, then this attribution is not of vow and offering but of ownership. Similarly, if it is attributed to a specific occasion, for example, the Eid goat, then this attribution is a vow and offering for Allah Almighty, which is true worship. And the wedding feast’s cow, etc., this attribution is not a vow and offering for anyone other than Allah. Some people do not understand this simple matter.
◈ Mr. “Mufti” Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi Barelvi writes:
“When the literal meaning of أُهِلَّ is considered, that is, calling upon a name other than Allah during the life of the animal or at the time of slaughter makes the animal forbidden, then it follows that other things besides the animal should also become forbidden if attributed to anyone other than Allah, because the Quran states: وَمَا اُهِلَّ بِهٖ لِغَيْرِ اللّٰهِ
‘Everything that is called upon besides Allah.’ There is no restriction to animals in ما. Then whether it is called upon with the intention of nearness or any other intention, the prohibition should apply. So Zaid’s goat, Amr’s buffalo, Zaid’s mangoes, Bakr’s fruits, so-and-so’s wife…”
If someone asks these people whether the statement of the Holy Prophet ﷺ that slaughtering animals for anyone other than Allah is shirk has any example or not, it is obvious that only the animal slaughtered with the intention of offering as a vow or sacrifice to anyone other than Allah will be forbidden, and this attribution will be shirk. All other attributions will be permissible.
It is clear that animals or things attributed to the Companions of the graves and the Awliya Allah are attributed to them only because they are offerings or sacrifices to them. If someone says this is the cow of Ghaus Pak or this is the goat of Sheikh Sadu, then this is indeed an offering or sacrifice to someone other than Allah.
Observe a surprising statement of “Mufti” Sahib, he writes:
“The goat of the eleventh or the cow of Ghaus Pak, etc., are legally permissible, just like the animal for a Walimah.”
The authority to declare something halal or haram belongs to Allah Almighty; no human being has permission to take this authority into his own hands. But “Mufti” Sahib seems to consider halal and haram as his monopoly!
Our question is that the attribution of the animal for Walimah is established by Shariah, therefore the animal for Walimah is legally halal, but on what basis is the attribution of the goat of the eleventh or the cow of Ghaus Pak established by Shariah? Obviously, this attribution must be established by Islamic Shariah for such an animal to be legally halal.
Tell us which Companion left or slaughtered a cow in the name of the Holy Prophet ﷺ?
Where is the shirk act of attributing animals to them for offerings to anyone other than Allah, and where is the attribution of animals for Sunnah acts like Walimah? When the evidence is empty, such incoherent statements are made. What should have been done is that “Mufti” Sahib should have proven the offering in the name of anyone other than Allah to provide evidence for slaughtering in the name of others than Allah, but instead, to deceive the ignorant public, he has started making such contradictory statements.
3. Eating or not eating the meat is not effective:
If an animal is slaughtered for anyone other than Allah, whether there is an intention to eat its meat or not, whether it is eaten or not, it is still forbidden (haram).
Mufti Sahib, explaining some statements of Hanafi jurisprudence, writes:
“Slaughtering with the sole intention of shedding blood to please someone other than Allah, without the purpose of the meat, such as Hindus offering sacrifices to idols or goddesses where the aim is only to please the idols by shedding blood. Even if such an animal is slaughtered by saying Bismillah, it is still forbidden, provided the intention of the slaughterer is the offering, not the one who orders the slaughter. This is the meaning of these jurisprudential statements.”
Do Barelvi people slaughter animals in the name of elders with the intention of eating the meat? Do those who slaughter animals at graves do so for eating the meat?
Instead of commenting on Mufti Sahib’s statement, we rewrite the same statement replacing “Hindu” with “Barelvi” and “idols” with “graves, etc.” according to the situation, and leave the decision to the scholars and thinkers to judge fairly. Observe:
“Slaughtering with the sole intention of shedding blood to please someone other than Allah, without the purpose of the meat, such as Barelvi people offering sacrifices at graves, shrines, and saints, where the aim is only to please the people of the graves by shedding blood. Even if such an animal is slaughtered by saying Bismillah, it is still forbidden.”
As for Mufti Sahib’s condition: “provided the intention of the slaughterer is the offering, not the one who orders the slaughter,” this condition is a fabrication of the Hanafi jurists. There is no mention of this in the Quran, Hadith, or the practices of the Companions and the Successors. None of the pious predecessors or the Imams of guidance agree with this.
Intricacies of Hanafi Jurisprudence:
In the books of the Hanafi school, it is written as follows:
مسلم ذبح شاة المجوس، لبيت نارهم، أو الكافر، لآلهتهم، تؤكل، لأنه سمي الله تعالٰي، ويكره للمسلم .
“A Muslim who slaughters a Magian’s goat, which was for their fire temple, or a disbeliever’s goat, which was for their idols, it is permissible because the Muslim has invoked the name of Allah, but this act is disliked (makruh) for the Muslim.”
These are all ways of indulgence. To make the forbidden wealth of disbelievers permissible for themselves, this trick has been devised. What will these people answer to Allah Almighty?
Let us observe another issue related to slaughter from this “noble jurisprudence”:
وفي فتاوٰي أهل سمرقند : إذا ذبح كلبه، وباع لحمه جاز، وكذا إذا ذبح حماره، وباع لحمه، وهٰذا فصل اختلف فيه المشايخ فيه، بنائ على اختلافهم فى طهارة هٰذا اللحم بعد الذبح، واختيار الصدر الشهيد علٰي طهارته .
“In the fatwas of the people of Samarkand, it is stated that when a (Hanafi) person slaughters his dog and sells its meat, it is permissible. Similarly, when he slaughters his donkey and sells its meat, it is permissible. Our elders differ on this issue due to disagreement about the purity of this meat after slaughter. Sadr Shahid has chosen the view that this meat is pure.”
Such fatwas occur in a person only when his heart becomes devoid of piety; otherwise, those who fear Allah can never say such things.
Now let us come to the slaughtering of animals in churches and fire temples. The Hanafi jurisprudence has not deprived its followers in this regard either. It is written in a reputable book of Hanafi jurisprudence:
وإن أوصي الذمي للبيعة أو للكنيسة، أن ينفق عليها فى إصلاحها، أو أوصٰي أن يبنٰي بماله بيعة، أو كنيسة، أو بيت نار، أو أوصٰي بأن يذبح لعيدهم، أو للبيعة، أو لبيت نارهم ذبيحة، جاز فى قول أبي حنيفة، ولم يجز شيئ منه فى قول أبي يوسف ومحمد .
“If a non-Muslim subject (dhimmi) wills that money be spent on the repair of a church or cathedral, or wills that a church, cathedral, or fire temple be built from his wealth, or wills that animals be slaughtered on the occasion of the dhimmis’ festival or for their church or fire temple, then according to the opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa, this act is permissible, whereas (Qadi) Abu Yusuf Muhammad (bin Hasan Shaybani) did not consider any of these acts permissible.”
On one hand, the Hanafi jurisprudence permits the repair and construction of churches, cathedrals, and fire temples, and also grants permission for slaughtering animals for false deities like fire. On the other hand, some followers of this jurisprudence are eager to demolish the mosques of Ahl al-Hadith. What kind of faith and what kind of Islam is this?
Based on the aforementioned statements of Hanafi jurists, “Mufti” Sahib writes:
“See, the person who raises animals is a disbeliever and also causes slaughtering with the intention of worshipping idols or fire, so both raising and slaughtering by the owner are invalid. But since at the time of slaughter the Muslim says Bismillah, therefore the animal is halal. Tell me, the sacrificial goat of the eleventh night or Milad has also passed through the goat of this idolater; that one is halal but this is haram? Alhamdulillah! It is well established that the animal of the eleventh night etc. is halal and this act is a cause of reward.”
This is merely bravado. These references from Hanafi jurists should only be presented to Hanafi imitators. According to them, an animal sacrificed for the idols’ places of worship and deities will be lawful, and according to them, the eleventh goat will be lawful. According to us, it is not. Whether an animal is slaughtered with the intention of worshipping an idol or fire, or with the intention of offering a vow for Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jilani, may Allah have mercy on him, both are forbidden, even if a Muslim slaughters them in the name of Allah, because both these animals are slaughtered as offerings to something other than Allah. Offering vows is an act of worship, just like prayer and fasting are acts of worship. If someone prays for an idol or for a righteous saint, in both cases it is polytheism and forbidden.
Those who consider goats dedicated to the fire temples of Magians and fire as lawful have no difficulty in declaring the eleventh goat lawful. However, for those who follow the Quran and Hadith, the pious predecessors, and the Imams of the religion, doing so is impossible.
Sheikh-ul-Hadith of Darul Uloom Deoband, Janab Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi says:
واعلم أن الإهلال لغير الله تعالٰي، وإن كان فعلا حراما، لٰكن الحيوان المهل حلال، إن ذكاه بشرائطه، وكذا الحلوان التى يتقرب بها للـأوثان أيضا، جائزة على الـأصل .
“Know that slaughtering for anyone other than Allah is indeed forbidden, but if the animal is slaughtered according to the conditions, then it becomes permissible. Similarly, the sweets that are offered for the nearness of idols are also permissible based on their origin.”
We were also surprised why the Deobandi scholars, despite considering it forbidden, still partake in offerings at shrines and the eleventh-day halwa. Now this knot is untied that on this issue, both Barelvi and Deobandi scholars agree. Perhaps this is also among the blessings of Darul Uloom Deoband.
Here, observe another achievement of Kashmiri Sahib, he writes:
قال أبو المنذر : وقد بلغنا أن النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم ذكرها يوما، فقال : لقد اهتديت للعزٰي شاة عفرائ، وأنا علٰي دين قومي .
“Abu Munzir said that we heard that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) once mentioned idols and said: I offered a reddish-brown goat to Uzza. At that time, I was among my people (Quraysh) in their religion.”
Astaghfirullah! Observe the audacity and boldness of these people that they do not refrain from attributing extremely false statements to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that were narrated by some misguided and unknown person. Was the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) ever a polytheist at any time? العياذبالله
Fiqh Hanafi and Offering to Others Besides Allah:
Our brothers of the eleventh generation should also remember this ruling of their fiqh:
والنذر للمخلوق لا يجوز، لأنه عبادة، والعبادة لا تكون للمخلوق .
“Offering and vows to creation are not permissible, because this is worship and worship cannot be directed to creation.”
Attributing Animals to Others Besides Allah and the Quran:
Allah Almighty mentioned the forbidden things and said:
وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَي النُّصُبِ
“And the animals sacrificed on stone altars.”
Meaning, animals sacrificed at graves and shrines are forbidden, even if Allah’s name is pronounced at the time of slaughter; eating them is prohibited.
Also, the command of Allah Almighty is:
وَيَجْعَلُوْنَ لِمَا لَا يَعْلَمُوْنَ نَصِيبًا مِّمَّا رَزَقْنَاهُمْ تَاللّٰهِ لَتُسْأَلُنَّ عَمَّا كُنْتُمْ تَفْتَرُونَ
“And they assign a share of the provision which Allah has given them to those (false deities) whom they do not know. By Allah, you will surely be questioned about what you used to invent.”
◈ Imam Ahl al-Sunnah, Hafiz, Ismail bin Umar, Ibn Kathir, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
يخبر تعالٰي عن قبائح المشركين الذين عبدوا مع الله غيره من الـأصنام، والـأوثان، والـأنداد، وجعلوا لها نصيبا مما رزقهم الله، فقالوا : ﴿هٰذا للٰه بزعمهم وهٰذا لشركائنا فما كان لشركائهم فلا يصل الي الله﴾, without knowledge, ﴿And what is for Allah is that which reaches His partners﴾
, meaning they assigned a share to their gods along with Allah, and also preferred them over Him. So Allah, the Exalted, swore by His Noble Self that He will question them about what they fabricated and lied about, and He will confront them with it and punish them with the greatest punishment in the Fire of Hell. He said: ﴿By Allah, you will surely be questioned about what you used to fabricate﴾
.
“Allah Almighty informs about the wrongdoing of the polytheists who had begun to worship other deities besides Him and had assigned a share of the sustenance given by Allah to those deities. They used to say according to their imagination that this share belongs to Allah and that belongs to their partners. Out of ignorance, they said that the share of their partners does not reach Allah, while the share of Allah reaches their partners. That is, they had assigned a share to their deities in opposition to Allah and had made them prevail over Allah’s right. Allah Almighty swore by His Blessed Self and said that He will surely question them about the fabrications and lies they made, and He will punish them for this crime and give them full recompense in Hell. The statement of Allah, the Exalted, is: تَاللّٰهِ لَتُسْاَلُنَّ عَمَّا كُنْتُمْ تَفْتَرُوْنَ
“By Allah! You will surely be questioned about the lies you used to fabricate.”
Allah Almighty says:
مَا جَعَلَ اللّٰهُ مِنْ بَحِيرَةٍ وَّلَا سَائِبَةٍ وَّلَا وَصِيلَةٍ وَّلَا حَامٍ وَّلٰكِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوْا يَفْتَرُوْنَ عَلَي اللّٰهِ الْكَذِبَ وَاَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ
“Allah has not appointed any Bahirah, Sa’ibah, Wasilah, or Ham; but those who disbelieve invent falsehood against Allah, and most of them do not reason.”
In this noble verse, Allah Almighty has negated the legal status of animals attributed to names other than Allah. The disbelievers used to say that these animals were attributed according to the method appointed by Allah Almighty. It is clear that releasing animals in the name of others besides Allah was the practice of the disbelievers.
It should be noted that this verse only negates the notion that releasing animals in the name of others besides Allah is permissible; it does not mention the permissibility or prohibition of these animals.
Mufti Sahib, trying his hand at this as well, writes:
“These four animals, Bahirah, etc., were those which the Arab disbelievers left in the name of idols and considered them forbidden. The Quran has denied considering them forbidden, even though during their lifetime they were called by the names of idols and the command was given to eat them, as it says: كُلُوْا مِمَّا رَزَقَكُمُ اللّٰهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوْا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ
Eat what Allah has given you and do not follow the footsteps of Satan.”
The verse about Bahirah only informs that these animals were not appointed by Allah Almighty, rather the polytheists lied about Allah regarding them. There is no mention in this verse about the permissibility or prohibition of these animals, whereas from the verse وَمَا اُهِلَّ بِهٖ لِغَيْرِ اللّٰهِ it is understood that these animals are forbidden. The verse cited by Mufti Sahib does not mention the permissibility of Bahirah, Sa’ibah, etc. This verse states that attributing the provision given by Allah to someone else and declaring it forbidden is the work of disbelievers; do not do this. If you appoint such animals by imitating the disbelievers, then you are following Satan.
No commentator has declared Bahirah, etc., permissible based on this verse, nor has it been said that this verse commands eating Bahirah, etc. Obviously, the Bahirah, etc., that the disbelievers appointed were their property and they named them after their idols; how could Muslims be commanded to eat them? This is a distortion of the meaning of the Holy Quran and it reveals Mufti Sahib’s scholarly condition.
As for Mufti Sahib’s mention of a statement by Hafiz Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) in support, this statement is disregarded because it contradicts the Quran, Sunnah, and the understanding of the Salaf. None of the righteous predecessors, imams of religion, or muhaddithin agree with him.
Finally, our question to our Barelvi brothers is: Is it proven that the noble Companions, the great Followers, and the Imams of the religion including Imam Abu Hanifa used to sacrifice animals for anyone other than Allah and offer them as vows to the elders? Did any Companion ever sacrifice an animal in the name of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him? Did any Follower sacrifice an animal in the name of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, or any other Companion? Did any follower of the Followers attribute an animal to any Follower, or did Imam Abu Hanifa attribute any animal to any Companion or Follower? If this were permissible, and indeed considered a good deed by the Barelvi brothers, then who was more eager for good deeds than the noble Companions? Did the Companions not love the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, as much as the later grave-worshippers love their elders and spiritual guides? Why were the Companions, Followers, and Imams of the religion deprived of this “good deed”?
Here, we also ask the Barelvi brothers that when calling upon anyone other than Allah, for example, the dead and absent spiritual guides, is denied and Quranic verses are presented in this regard, their response is something like this: “These verses are for idols, which you are attributing to the Awliya Allah. Are the Awliya Allah other than Allah? They are not other than Allah, rather they are friends of Allah,” etc. But here their behavior is different. When it comes to the sacrifice in the name of anyone other than Allah, they say that if any name other than Allah is mentioned at the time of slaughter, it becomes forbidden. At this moment, perhaps they forget that according to them, the Awliya Allah are not other than Allah. They should then also declare it permissible to mention the names of the Awliya Allah at the time of slaughter, otherwise, they should reconsider their theory of “other than Allah” even regarding calling upon them.
We pray that Allah Almighty grants the ability to understand the belief of Tawheed, to live according to it, and to die upon it. Ameen.
