Can we eat meat slaughtered by the shia?

[Sister]

Assalamu alaykum.

Admin may delete this if it's off-topic for this forum.

I am wondering if anyone here knows if there is a mu'tamad (official stance) within some or all 4 of our madhahib on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia?

My mother buys chicken from a shia company and i don't know if i can eat it or not.

The usual response is that it depends if the shia slaughterer believes this or that but how can we know what the slaughter believes? It's not like we can contact him and question him about all the controversial issues. Hence why i wonder if our madhahib have some official stances on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia or at least meat where it's unclear  if the slaughterer fulfills the criteria for the meat to be considered halal.

Please note, i am not requesting the stance of salafi scholars. No disrespect intended but im only interested in the hanbali, shafii, maliki and hanafi view points.

[Optimus Prime]

Assalamu alaykum.

Admin may delete this if it's off-topic for this forum.

I am wondering if anyone here knows if there is a mu'tamad (official stance) within some or all 4 of our madhahib on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia?

My mother buys chicken from a shia company and i don't know if i can eat it or not.

The usual response is that it depends if the shia slaughterer believes this or that but how can we know what the slaughter believes? It's not like we can contact him and question him about all the controversial issues. Hence why i wonder if our madhahib have some official stances on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia or at least meat where it's unclear  if the slaughterer fulfills the criteria for the meat to be considered halal.

Please note, i am not requesting the stance of salafi scholars. No disrespect intended but im only interested in the hanbali, shafii, maliki and hanafi view points.

Sister.

You're much better off referring this matter to the scholars of fiqh.

For a Hanafi ruling, I would suggest askimam.org.

For a Shafi'i ruking, I would suggest http://seekershub.org/home/

For a Maliki ruling, I would suggest http://malikifiqhqa.com or
http://binbayyah.net/english/

For a Hanbali ruling, I'm not aware of any site that would offer a dedicated Hanbali ruling on a matter such as this, but a dedicated Facebook page, you can message them, and find out: https://www.facebook.com/hanbalimadhhab/

[Rationalist]

If we can eat meat slaughtered by Christians and Jews, then why not?

[Sister]

Assalamu alaykum.

Admin may delete this if it's off-topic for this forum.

I am wondering if anyone here knows if there is a mu'tamad (official stance) within some or all 4 of our madhahib on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia?

My mother buys chicken from a shia company and i don't know if i can eat it or not.

The usual response is that it depends if the shia slaughterer believes this or that but how can we know what the slaughter believes? It's not like we can contact him and question him about all the controversial issues. Hence why i wonder if our madhahib have some official stances on eating the meat slaughtered by the shia or at least meat where it's unclear  if the slaughterer fulfills the criteria for the meat to be considered halal.

Please note, i am not requesting the stance of salafi scholars. No disrespect intended but im only interested in the hanbali, shafii, maliki and hanafi view points.

Sister.

You're much better off referring this matter to the scholars of fiqh.

For a Hanafi ruling, I would suggest askimam.org.

For a Shafi'i ruking, I would suggest http://seekershub.org/home/

For a Maliki ruling, I would suggest http://malikifiqhqa.com or
http://binbayyah.net/english/

For a Hanbali ruling, I'm not aware of any site that would offer a dedicated Hanbali ruling on a matter such as this, but a dedicated Facebook page, you can message them, and find out: https://www.facebook.com/hanbalimadhhab/

Barak Allahu feek for the links.

I wanted to see if someone here knew the official position of at least one of the madhabs as that would be quicker than waiting for an answer from a fatwa site.

[Sister]

If we can eat meat slaughtered by Christians and Jews, then why not?

The main arguement is that Allah made the meat of jews and christians an exception from the general ruling with regards to kuffar.

The meat of other kuffar was not made halal for us and since a small or perhaps large segment of shiites are outside the fold of Islam due to polytheism etc then their meat isen't halal. This is the arguement i have heard.

I don't believe every shia is a kafir however the most likely scenario is that the slaughterer is a twelver which means that he likely seeks aid from the dead or does/believes in other things that can cancel out one's Islam.

The matter is confusing because shiites may or may not be Muslims.

Shall we go by whats likely or choose the innocent until prooven guilty scenario?
Haram simply for belonging to a deviant sect that is known for various transgressions in the deen that take one out of Islam or Halal by comparison of ahlul-kitab? Better to eat based on the hadith where Aisha was given meat from new Muslims who she wasen't sure had slaughtered correctly or better to abstain based on the hadith of abstaining from unclear matters?

All of the above makes sense to me so thats why i was wondering if there is a standard ruling to go by.

[أبو ماريا المرزم]

I hold the view that the vass majority of those who identify with "Shia" are aposates, including the laymen. There is no ikhtilaf of Ulama on the kufr of the Rafidah, but their laymen is disputed. Tayyib. A murtad is different than a kafir asli, so the jews and Christians comparison isn't applicable. I believe meat slaughtered by a shia isn't allowed. You should try to get meat slaughtered by Muslims, because I fear you may be eating haram, which is no joke in our deen.

[Rationalist]

The main arguement is that Allah made the meat of jews and christians an exception from the general ruling with regards to kuffar.

The meat of other kuffar was not made halal for us and since a small or perhaps large segment of shiites are outside the fold of Islam due to polytheism etc then their meat isen't halal. This is the arguement i have heard.

I don't believe every shia is a kafir however the most likely scenario is that the slaughterer is a twelver which means that he likely seeks aid from the dead or does/believes in other things that can cancel out one's Islam.

The matter is confusing because shiites may or may not be Muslims.

Shall we go by whats likely or choose the innocent until prooven guilty scenario?
Haram simply for belonging to a deviant sect that is known for various transgressions in the deen that take one out of Islam or Halal by comparison of ahlul-kitab? Better to eat based on the hadith where Aisha was given meat from new Muslims who she wasen't sure had slaughtered correctly or better to abstain based on the hadith of abstaining from unclear matters?

All of the above makes sense to me so thats why i was wondering if there is a standard ruling to go by.

Just like the Christians we need go and inspect the meat slaughters by the 12ers. If the 12ers are saying in the name of Ali instead of Allah then that meat is haraam.

[muslim720]

I hold the view that the vass majority of those who identify with "Shia" are aposates, including the laymen. There is no ikhtilaf of Ulama on the kufr of the Rafidah, but their laymen is disputed. Tayyib. A murtad is different than a kafir asli, so the jews and Christians comparison isn't applicable. I believe meat slaughtered by a shia isn't allowed. You should try to get meat slaughtered by Muslims, because I fear you may be eating haram, which is no joke in our deen.

Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,
May I ask the purpose of "tayyib" - other than imitation - in your reply?  I dare say "imitation" because the insertion of "tayyib" in a post while knowing that majority of Muslims are not Arabs is nothing but that.  Also, this behavior is common among e-scholars like Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari (and likes thereof) who are known for passing fatwa with little knowledge and no authority.  They are notorious for this; concluding their own erroneous fatwa with a "tayyib".

To answer the question of our sister, Sister, yes, their meat is halaal but if you prefer not to eat what they have slaughtered, then don't!  However, bear in mind that they left the mainstream; we did not push them out.

[Hani]

Their meat is Halaal no doubt, and if you believe single individuals among them have left the fold of Islam, their meat would still be Halaal as it counts as being from Ahlul-Kitaab.

[Optimus Prime]

Asalamualaikum.

Respected sister.

You'd be better off seeking a fatwa from a qualified scholar from your school of thought. No disrespect to any of the brothers here.

[أبو ماريا المرزم]

I hold the view that the vass majority of those who identify with "Shia" are aposates, including the laymen. There is no ikhtilaf of Ulama on the kufr of the Rafidah, but their laymen is disputed. Tayyib. A murtad is different than a kafir asli, so the jews and Christians comparison isn't applicable. I believe meat slaughtered by a shia isn't allowed. You should try to get meat slaughtered by Muslims, because I fear you may be eating haram, which is no joke in our deen.

Salaam alaykum wa rahmatullah,
May I ask the purpose of "tayyib" - other than imitation - in your reply?  I dare say "imitation" because the insertion of "tayyib" in a post while knowing that majority of Muslims are not Arabs is nothing but that.  Also, this behavior is common among e-scholars like Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari (and likes thereof) who are known for passing fatwa with little knowledge and no authority.  They are notorious for this; concluding their own erroneous fatwa with a "tayyib".

To answer the question of our sister, Sister, yes, their meat is halaal but if you prefer not to eat what they have slaughtered, then don't!  However, bear in mind that they left the mainstream; we did not push them out.

I use Tayyib to conclude my points. And a kind question, but on what basis are the Rafidah Muslim?

[أبو ماريا المرزم]

Their meat is Halaal no doubt, and if you believe single individuals among them have left the fold of Islam, their meat would still be Halaal as it counts as being from Ahlul-Kitaab.

I beg to pardon akhi, but how it would it be from Ahlul kitab? Murtadeen are different from Kuffar asli; they have different hukm.

[muslim720]

I use Tayyib to conclude my points. And a kind question, but on what basis are the Rafidah Muslim?

I hope you do use "tayyib" to conclude your points instead of imitating others who do the same.

To answer your question, dear brother, I think you need to revisit the basics of our aqeedah that clearly declare the people of Qibla to be Muslims.  You can define "murtad" and "kuffar asli" but you are clueless on how to apply these labels and who to apply them to.

Takfeer is a dangerous business.  May Allah (swt) protect us and our tongues.  May Allah (swt) give us patience so as to avoid making grave remarks and serious charges out of frustration and in haste.

[Hani]

I beg to pardon akhi, but how it would it be from Ahlul kitab? Murtadeen are different from Kuffar asli; they have different hukm.

But if you say their beliefs are that Kuffar, then they're not Murtaddeen, rather they were never Muslims to begin with, which makes them Ahlul-Kitab.

Those of them who don't have extreme beliefs (Tahreef, Pure Shirk etc...) are still deviant Muslims.

[أبو ماريا المرزم]

I beg to pardon akhi, but how it would it be from Ahlul kitab? Murtadeen are different from Kuffar asli; they have different hukm.

But if you say their beliefs are that Kuffar, then they're not Murtaddeen, rather they were never Muslims to begin with, which makes them Ahlul-Kitab.

Those of them who don't have extreme beliefs (Tahreef, Pure Shirk etc...) are still deviant Muslims.

Ahlul Kitab are defined as Jews and Christians. I believe the ghulat of the Shia like the Ismailis and Nusayria are kuffar asli because their millah is completely different. However, the beliefs of the mainstream 12ver jafari rawafidh only deduce them as apostates. Therefore, they were technically Muslims at one point. Pure shirk resides in the ghulat, but the shirk of the mainstream is severe enough to constitute as apostasy. Making sujood in karbala and other of the sort

[أبو ماريا المرزم]

I use Tayyib to conclude my points. And a kind question, but on what basis are the Rafidah Muslim?

I hope you do use "tayyib" to conclude your points instead of imitating others who do the same.

To answer your question, dear brother, I think you need to revisit the basics of our aqeedah that clearly declare the people of Qibla to be Muslims.  You can define "murtad" and "kuffar asli" but you are clueless on how to apply these labels and who to apply them to.

Takfeer is a dangerous business.  May Allah (swt) protect us and our tongues.  May Allah (swt) give us patience so as to avoid making grave remarks and serious charges out of frustration and in haste.

Takfeer is a dangerous issue, but the riddah of the rawafidh is no ikhtilaf. ALL the major scholars throughout history. The Rawafidh's beliefs constitute as riddah and so do their actions(Allying with the tatars, crusaders, etc). Just because the rawafidh believe in the 5 pillars of Islam, doesn't guarantee they're Muslims. By this logic, the Qadianis are muslims because they satisfy the tenants of Islam the prophet saws narrated in hadith.