Eid al-Adha: The HIDDEN Prophetic Sunnah of mutilation of living animals + Garlanding them with shoes + Other Dark Sides 🔥ʰᵒᵗ

There is no divine Allah present in the heavens and Muhammad made this religion on his own. One of the proofs is to see how he was following the traditions of the era of ignorance. For example:

1. Muhammad ordered to make a cut in the hump of the camel and to rub the blood over the back of the Camel which was destined for sacrifice. This act was known as ‘al-Isha’ar’.
2. This act was so gruesome that Imam Abu Hanifa (despite being a Muslim himself) declared it to be the ‘مثلة’ (i.e. mutilation of the body of a living animal) and forbade from doing it. 
3. Muhammad also ordered that a garland of sandals/shoes should be made, and put around the necks of the animals of sacrifice. He took this practice too from the ignorant Arab culture of that time. This custom was known as ‘Taqleed تقليد’ and the garland was known as ‘Qaladah’

 Sahih Muslim, Book of Pilgrimage:

قَالَ صَلَّى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم الظُّهْرَ بِذِي الْحُلَيْفَةِ ثُمَّ دَعَا بِنَاقَتِهِ فَأَشْعَرَهَا فِي صَفْحَةِ سَنَامِهَا الأَيْمَنِ وَسَلَتَ الدَّمَ وَقَلَّدَهَا نَعْلَيْنِ ثُمَّ رَكِبَ رَاحِلَتَهُ فَلَمَّا اسْتَوَتْ بِهِ عَلَى الْبَيْدَاءِ أَهَلَّ بِالْحَجِّ ‏.‏
Ibn 'Abbas reported that Allah's Messenger observed the Zuhr prayer at Dhu'l-Hulaifa; then called for his she-camel and marked it (made a cut) on the right side of its bump, removed the blood from it (in order to rub it on camel's back for branding it as an animal of sacrifice), and tied two sandals around its neck (as garland). 

Imam Tirmidhi writes under this hadith (link): 

والعمل على هذا عند أهل العلم من أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وغيرهم يرون الإشعار وهو قول الثوري والشافعي وأحمد وإسحق
Prophet Muhammad and Companions and other Scholars acted upon it (i.e. the custom of making a cut in the hump of camel, which is knows as al-Isha’ar), and they deemed it correct. This is the saying of Thawri and Shafi’i and Ahmad bin Hanbal. 

Muwatta Imam Malik, Book of al-Hajj:

أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ، كَانَ إِذَا طَعَنَ فِي سَنَامِ هَدْيِهِ وَهُوَ يُشْعِرُهُ قَالَ بِسْمِ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ أَكْبَرُ ‏.‏
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar said, when nicking (making a cut in) the hump of his sacrificial animal to brand it, "In the name of Allah, and Allah is greater."

Muwatta Imam Malik, Book of al-Hajj:

عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ، أَنَّهُ كَانَ إِذَا أَهْدَى هَدْيًا مِنَ الْمَدِينَةِ قَلَّدَهُ وَأَشْعَرَهُ بِذِي الْحُلَيْفَةِ يُقَلِّدُهُ قَبْلَ أَنْ يُشْعِرَهُ وَذَلِكَ فِي مَكَانٍ وَاحِدٍ وَهُوَ مُوَجَّهٌ لِلْقِبْلَةِ يُقَلِّدُهُ بِنَعْلَيْنِ وَيُشْعِرُهُ مِنَ الشِّقِّ الأَيْسَرِ
When Abdullah ibn Umar brought an animal to be sacrificed from Madina he would garland (i.e. tie sandals/shoes around its neck) it and brand it (i.e. to do al-Isha’ar by making a cut in its hump) at Dhu'l-Hulayfa, doing the garlanding before the branding, but doing both in the same place, while facing the qibla. He would garland the animal with two sandals and brand it on its left side.

The Prophet’s wives themselves used to make garlands of shoes for the animals.

Sahih Muslim, Book of al-Hajj:

عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، قَالَتْ رُبَّمَا فَتَلْتُ الْقَلاَئِدَ لِهَدْىِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَيُقَلِّدُ هَدْيَهُ ثُمَّ يَبْعَثُ بِهِ ثُمَّ يُقِيمُ لاَ يَجْتَنِبُ شَيْئًا مِمَّا يَجْتَنِبُ الْمُحْرِمُ ‏.‏
'A'isha reported: I often wove garlands for the sacrificial animals of Allah's Messenger, and he garlanded his sacrificial animals, and then he sent them and stayed in the house) avoiding nothing which a Muhrim avoids.

And not only camels, but Muhammad also used to garland sheep too.

Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 1702:

Mutilation of camels and garlands of shoes are such shameful practices that Muslims of today don’t do it despite it being proven Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad. 

And remember that before Muhammad claimed the prophethood, he used to slaughter the animals in name of Pagan gods and ate them. 

Sahih Bukhari:

Allah's Messenger said that he met Zaid bin `Amr Nufail at a place near Baldah and this had happened before Allah's Messenger received the Divine Inspiration. Allah's Messenger presented a dish of meat to Zaid bin `Amr, but Zaid refused to eat of it and then said, "I do not eat of what you slaughter on your stone-altars (Ansabs) nor do I eat except that on which Allah's Name has been mentioned on slaughtering." 

Abu Hanifa declared al-Isha’ar to be the mutilation of the bodies of living animals

Making a cut in the humps of camels was such a cruel practice of the time of ignorance that Imam Abu Hanifa declared it to be مثلة (mutilation of bodies of living animals) and forbid doing it. Upon that, other Muslim scholars severely attacked Abu Hanifa for declaring this “Sunnah” of the prophet to be mutilation. 

But Imam Abu Hanifa not only declared al-Isha’ar to be a mutilation, but he also dumped the Sunnah of garlands of shoes for the animals. 

Imam Tirmidhi recorded it in his Sunnan (link):

كنا عند وكيع فقال لرجل عنده ممن ينظر في الرأي أشعر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ويقول أبو حنيفة هو مثلة قال الرجل فإنه قد روي عن إبراهيم النخعي أنه قال الإشعار مثلة قال فرأيت وكيعا غضب غضبا شديدا وقال أقول لك قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتقول قال إبراهيم ما أحقك بأن تحبس ثم لا تخرج حتى تنزع عن قولك هذا
… Imam Wak’i told that the Prophet of Allah did al-Isha’ar (i.e. making a cut in the hump of camel), but Imam Abu Hanifa said that it was mutilation (مثلة) of an animal's body. One man said that Imam Ibrahim Nakhi’i also called al-Isha’ar to be mutilation. Upon hearing that, Wak’i became angry and said: “I am telling you the Sunnah of the holy prophet, but you tell me what Ibrahim Naki’i said. I deem it permissible to imprison you and not set you free till you abandon telling people (about the saying of Ibrahim Nakhi’i i.e. it is mutilation of an animal).

Imam Ibn Khuyzamah gave the following heading to one of his chapters (link):

باب إشعار البدن في شق السنام الأيمن ، وسلت الدم عنها ، ضد قول من زعم أن إشعار البدن مثلة ، فسمى سنة النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - مثلة بجهله .

Chapter about making a cut in the hump of camel from right side (i.e. al-Isha'ar) and shedding blood from it, in order to refute that person (i.e. Abu Hanifa) who says that al-Isha'ar is equal to mutilation of animal's body, so he called the Sunnah of Prophet (pbuh) to be mutilation due to his own ignorance.

And Imam Ibn 'Abdul Bar wrote (link):

وهذا الحكم لا دليل عليه إلا التوهم والظن ولا تترك السنن بالظنون

There is no proof present regarding the ruling of (Abu Hanifa), except for his delusion and conjecture. And Sunnah of the hold prophet cannot be left due to delusions and conjectures.

Muslim excuse: The prophet made a cut in their humps and garlanded them with shoes in order to differentiate the animals for sacrifice from other animals

This is the only excuse that is presented by Islam apologists in order to defend the practices of Muhammad.

In answer, we tell them that the animals of sacrifice could simply be differentiated from other animals by putting some colour of Henna upon them, or to put any cloth of specific colour around their necks. Certainly, making a cut in their humps and letting them bleed, and garlanding them with shoes was absolutely not necessary in order to make them look different from other animals.

Till 1983, several thousands of tons of Hajj meat were burnt due to spoilage and smell

During the last 1400 years of Islamic history, every year millions of tons of Hajj meat was spoiled. And in order to avoid diseases, the people of Mecca had to burn them. And it smelled so bad that the people of Mecca ran away from the city. Read the full story here. 

This kept on happening till very recent times (i.e. till 1983), when Western companies, for the very first time, introduced the modern technology of flash freezing in order to freeze these thousands of tons of meat on a mass level (link).

Why did All-Wise Allah let thousands of tons of meat spoil every year for the last 1400 years only in name of making Him happy? 

The answer is simple, i.e. there exists no so-called all-wise Allah in the heavens, but it was Muhammad who himself made all these rulings, and thus we see these human mistakes in Islamic Sharia, which are totally opposite of all-Wise thing. 

Muhammad himself wasted the meat by sacrificing one-hundred animals on Eid day 

Muhammad slaughtered 100 animals on Eid. And it was so much meat that he was able to take only one piece of flesh from each animal for his meal.

Sahih Muslim, Hadith 1218a:

... The total number of those sacrificial animals brought by 'Ali from the Yemen and of those brought by the Apostle (ﷺ) was one hundred ... He then went to the place of sacrifice, and sacrificed sixty-three (camels) with his own hand. Then he gave the remaining number to 'All who sacrificed them, and he shared him in his sacrifice. He then commanded that a piece of flesh from each animal sacrificed should be put in a pot, and when it was cooked, both of them (the Prophet and Hadrat 'All) took some meat out of it and drank its soup.

Islam apologists try to make an excuse that Muhammad fed the rest of the meat to the poor people of Mecca. But this seems impossible while not only Muhammad, but thousands of other people who also did Hajj along with Muhammad, also brought the animals for sacrifice along with them. And there could never be so many poor people in Mecca to finish all that amount of meat before it got spoiled and burnt/buried to avoid the smell and diseases. 

Due to this Sunnah of Muhammad, still today rich Arabs (and other rich Muslims) sacrifice dozens of animals on Hajj festival only to show that they are rich. 

Several thousands of animals died every year during the journey towards Mecca

Moreover, the journey towards Mecca for Hajj was very harsh in those times from other cities and countries. Thousands of goats and sheep and camels died during those thousands of km-long journeys due to lack of water and feed and heat. 

It is only modern technology (introduced by the West), which made it easy to gather hundreds of thousands of animals in Mecca at the festival of Eid. 

Therefore, once again one questions the ‘wisdom’ of the so-called divine Allah.

How can we accept such an entity as a god, who is devoid of wisdom and is responsible for the useless death of billions of animals during the last 1400 years? 

Muslim excuse of Circulation of Wealth:

Clearly, the killing of millions of animals in the name of Allah on the day of Eid al-Adha is a great ‘wastage’ of resources, and no divine god who has any ‘wisdom’ can order such waste. 

But Muslims come up with this excuse that it is actually the ‘circulation of wealth’ which is a great way to improve the economy. Millions of butchers get jobs on this day, the transport of these animals creates jobs, and the skins of animals create jobs in the leather factories. 

But this Muslim argument is against wisdom and irrational. 

If these millions of animals are not slaughtered on Eid, then they will not disappear from the earth. No, but they will stay there and will be available for slaughter in moderation during the whole year. And the butchers will get a job to do all year round, and the poor needy people will also get meat all year round, and the leather industry will also get skins all year round. 

Muslim Argument: Poor people get the meat to eat due to Eid al-Adha

Muslims proudly claim that thousands of tons of meat are sent to needy people in poor Islamic countries, and they get the chance to eat meat only due to Eid al-Adha. 

But do Muslims ever question the ‘wisdom’ of Allah? 

Firstly, millions of livestock are transported to Mecca from poor Muslim countries like Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan etc. 

Then they are slaughtered in Mecca, and then their frozen meat is again transported to those same poor Islamic countries (from where the livestock actually came i.e. Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan etc.), but during this ‘Double Transportation,’ the cost goes several times higher. So, what is the point of all this drama of slaughter in Mecca only? Why not send the meat directly to needy people? 

And while millions of animals are slaughtered in a single day, thus the price of meat goes so high in the rest of the year that poor people are unable to buy any meat all year long. In countries like Pakistan, then donkey and even dog meat is sold in the markets (link).

Muslim claim that people criticize Eid al-Adha only due to their enmity towards Islam

Muslims claim that spending money and wasting some resources on festivals is done all over the world, why then only to target Eid al-Adha? 

But again, this Muslim's claim is wrong. You will never see non-Muslims ever criticizing Eid al-Fitr (the Muslim festival which comes after Ramadhan). 

Why?

Please ponder upon it, why is it so that Eid al-Fitr is not criticized, but only Eid al-Adha is criticized?

The answer is simple, till the time things stay in moderation, there is no criticism of it. Unfortunately, killing millions of animals in a single Eid day is beyond moderation and it is not in order to meet the necessities of humankind, but only in order to make the so-called Allah happy. 

For the production of one kg of meat, 60 times more land is needed as compared to one kg of vegetables (link). 

And 100 times more water is needed for the production of one kg of meat as compared to one kg of vegetables (link).

Alone in Lahore (one city in Pakistan) 25,000 people were hospitalized due to overeating on Eid

Link to the news

All-Knowing and All-Wise Allah went against human psychology when it allowed them to sacrifice whole animals, and then to eat from it themselves too. 

You cannot stop people from going out of balance in such a situation. This overeating is happening for the last 1400 years, and it will keep on happening so, while it is against human psychology. 

Muslim's excuse: McDonald's also kills millions of animals

Islam apologists start blaming us for being hypocrites that we criticize Eid, but we don't criticize McDonald's, although it also kills millions of animals.

And we reply to these Islam apologists that McDonald's does not have those evils, which are involved in Eid:

• McDonald's does not slaughter all those millions of animals in one single day, but it slaughters them in moderation the whole year long. 
• Due to this moderation, the prices of meet do not go high up to the skies (like it happens in Islamic countries while killing millions of animals in one single day).
• Due to this moderation, even poor people are able to eat meat the whole year long. While in Pakistan, they kill millions of animals in one day, and then poor people cannot afford meat for the rest of the year, and even donkey meat is sold in the market (without telling the customers that it is donkey meat). Link. 

McDonald's is more criticized for using chemicals in its burgers than the usage of meat patties. And this criticism is also present in the West that animals are handled poorly on the farms and they are given antibiotics and other non-healthy food for getting meat on a mass scale.

But in comparison to the West, Muslims are totally unable to do even the slightest criticism of Allah for all the evils that are attached to Eid. 

Look at Foolishness: They killed billions of animals in the past 1400 years, but they don't even know if it was Ishaaq who was sacrificed or Ismael

It seems initially Muhammad also followed the story of the Bible, and declared that it was Ishaaq who was sacrificed. But then this story became a problem for Muslims while Ishaaq never visited Mecca and a question was raised how then Ishaaq was sacrificed on the day of Hajj in Mecca? 

Initially, Muslims tried to defend it by fabricating Hadith that like Muhammad's 'night journey' and 'ascension' on a mule-type animal, Ishaaq also reached Mecca on the day of Hajj in a miracle way. 

Since this excuse of coming of Ishaaq through a miracle to Mecca was funny, thus later coming Muslims fabricated new Ahadith, where they started claiming that it was not Ishaaq, but Ismael who was sacrificed on the day of Hajj in Mecca. 

Nevertheless, despite those dozens of later fabricated Ahadith in favour of Ismael, many of the Muslim Scholars in the initial centuries kept on believing that it was Ishaaq who was sacrificed. 

Imam Qurtabi (under the commentary of Verse 37:102) recorded the name of Sahaba and Tabaeen who declared Ishaaq to be Zabih-Ullah i.e. the son who was sacrificed (link):

وٱختلف العلماء في المأمور بذبحه. فقال أكثرهم: الذبيح إسحاق. وممن قال بذلك العباس بن عبد المطلب وٱبنه عبد اللّه وهو الصحيح عنه. روى الثوريّ وٱبن جريج يرفعانه إلى ٱبن عباس قال: الذبيح إسحاق. وهو الصحيح عن عبد اللّه بن مسعود أن رجلاً قال له: يا بن الأشياخ الكرام. فقال عبد اللّه: ذلك يوسف بن يعقوب بن إسحاق ذبيح اللّه بن إبراهيم خليل اللّه صلى اللّه عليهم وسلم ـ. وقد روى حماد بن زيد يرفعه إلى رسول اللّه صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: " إن الكريم ابن الكريم ابن الكريم ابن الكريم يوسف بن يعقوب بن إسحاق بن إبراهيم صلى الله عليه وسلم " وروى أبو الزبير عن جابر قال: الذبيح إسحاق. وذلك مروي أيضاً عن عليّ بن أبي طالب رضي اللّه عنه. وعن عبد اللّه بن عمر: أن الذبيح إسحاق. وهو قول عمر رضي اللّه عنه. فهؤلاء سبعة من الصحابة. وقال به من التابعين وغيرهم عَلْقَمة والشّعبي ومجاهد وسعيد بن جُبير وكعب الأحبار وقتادة ومسروق وعِكرمة والقاسم بن أبي بَزَّة وعطاء ومقاتل وعبد الرحمن بن سابط والزهريّ والسديّ وعبد اللّه بن أبي الهذيل ومالك بن أنس، كلهم قالوا: الذبيح إسحاق. وعليه أهل الكتابين اليهود والنصارى، واختاره غير واحد منهم النحاس والطبري وغيرهما.

(Qurtabi wrote) There is a difference of opinion among the scholars who was sacrificed. The MAJORITY of them said that it was Ishaaq ....
(Then  Qurtabi recorded the name of Sahaba and Tabaeen who declared Ishaaq to be Zabih-Ullah.
They were 7 companions:
(1) Ibn 'Abbas
(2) 'Ali ibn Abi Talib
(3) 'Abdullah Ibn Masood
(4) Jabir bin 'Abdullah Ansari
(5) Umar Ibn Khattab
(6) Abdullah Ibn Umar
(7) Abbas bin Abdul Muttalib.
While the following Successors (i.e. the Muslim generation after Sahaba) also considered Ishaaq to be Zabih-Ullah:
(1) Alqama
(2) Sh'ubi
(3) Mujahid
(4) Saeed bin Jubair
(5) K'ab al-Ahbar
(6) Qatadah
(7) Masrooq
(8) 'Ikrimah
(9) Qasim bin Abi Baza
(10) 'Atta
(11) Maqatil
(12) Abdul Rehman bin Sabit
(13) Zuhri
(14) Suddi
(15) 'Abdullah bin Hazil
(16) Imam Malik ibn Anas.
While scholars like Nahas and Tabari also declared Ishaaq to be Zabih-Ullah. 

After that, Imam Qurtabi also recorded the name of Sahaba and Tabaeen who declared Ismael to be Zabih-Ullah.

وقال آخرون: هو إسماعيل. وممن قال ذلك أبو هريرة وأبو الطفيل عامر بن واثلة. وروي ذلك عن ٱبن عمر وٱبن عباس أيضاً، ومن التابعين سعيد بن المسيّب والشّعبي ويوسف بن مِهْران ومجاهد والربيع بن أنس ومحمد بن كعب القُرَظيّ والكلبي وعلقمة.
(Imam Qurtabi then recorded the name of Sahaba and Tabaeen who declared Ismael to be Zabih-Ullah)
Those were 4 Sahaba:
(1) Abu Hurairah
(2) Abu Tufail 'Aamir bin Wasila
(3) Ibn Umar
(4) Ibn Abbas.
And Successors are as under:
(1) Sa'eed bin al-Musayyab
(2) Sh'ubi
(3) Yousuf bin Mahran
(4) Mujahid
(5) Rabi bin Anas
(6) Muhammad bin Kaab al-Qurzi
(7) Kalbi
(8) Alqama)

In the end, Imam Qurtabi wrote his own decision in the following words (link):

وهذا القول أقوى في النقل عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وعن الصحابة والتابعين.
The saying (i.e. Ishaaq was Zabih-Ullah) has been narrated through stronger traditions from the Prophet and Sahaba and Successors.

There are 131 traditions, which claim Ishaaq was the son who was sacrificed. But later Hadith Fabrication Factory by Islam apologists fabricated 133 traditions in order to counter the first Statement and they claimed it was Ismael who was sacrificed. Through this, they wanted to give preference to Muhammad and his ancestor (Ismael) over Jews and their ancestor Ishaaq (link). 

A funny situation arises while there are traditions from Ibn Abbas, 'Abdullah Ibn Umar, Sh'ubi, Mujahid and Alqama who declare Ishaaq to be Zabih-Ullah, but at the same time there are traditions where these same people are declaring Ismael to be Zabih-Ullah. 

How is it possible?

These are the contradictions which completely expose Ahadith, and Ilm-ul-Hadith, and Muslim factories of fabrication of Ahadith. 

PS:

Normally Muhammad followed the traditions/laws of Jews. But Hajj was completely a custom of pagan Arabs and it had to do nothing with Judaism/Christianity. There is no mention of any such Hajj in the bible, or in any history book regarding Jews/Christians. And there is also no archaeological evidence that Jews/Christians took a journey towards Mecca yearly for any Hajj. 

Muhammad took the basic structure of his newly formed religion from Jews/Christians, but he also included Hajj into it while he wanted to influence the pagan Arabs by continuing this practice of Hajj.