Summary:
- Today Islamic preachers claim the Halal slaughter (i.e. Dhabihah ذبح) method is less painful as compared to other methods, and it produces better meat quality which lasts long as all blood is drained.
- And we reply that for sure, the method of stunning animals before slaughter is more painless as compared to the Halal "Dhabihah ذبح" slaughter method.
- And even the "Dhabihah" method (i.e. to slit the veins in the throat of an animal) was not invented by Islam/Judaism, but it was invented thousands of years before Judaism by "hunters". Therefore, even if we assume this method makes meat quality better, then the credit goes to those hunters, and not to Islam/Judaism.
- Moreover, neither Muhammad nor Allah claimed that the wisdom behind halal meat lies in its superior health benefits.
- But the main intention behind "Dhabihah" was the "Flowing of the Blood of animals" as a sacrifice ritual, while it makes Allah happy. It was a thousands of years old custom in many civilizations where the blood of animals was flown in sacrifice to make gods/idols happy. Therefore, Muhammad was also only interested in the flowing of blood in the name of Allah.
- And if Allah (i.e. Muhammad) intended for healthy meat, why didn't then he order to drain the blood of "fish" by slaughtering it? Yes, a fish can also be slaughtered in a way to drain all blood. This method is known as IKEJIME. Fish meat spoils very quickly as compared to the meat of land animals. Thus, if Allah really intended for healthy meat without spoilage, then he should have told the method of IKEJIME slaughter to Muslims (or Jews/Christians). The ignorance from the IKEJIME method becomes proof that there exists no all-knowing Allah in the heavens.
Islamic claim: Less pain in the Halal method and the meat quality is better
Today, Muslim preachers widely promote the idea that:
Scientific studies indicate that blood remaining in meat deteriorates quickly and becomes prone to contamination. Consequently, meat without blood does not spoil as quickly, remains tender, and exhibits better quality. Similarly, during halal slaughter, the blood supply to the brain is cut off, resulting in the animal feeling no pain after 3 to 5 seconds. Therefore, this aspect validates the authenticity of Islam and serves as proof of Islam's miraculous nature and the existence of Allah (Scientific Study 1, Times of India).
Reply:
Islamic preachers are wrong and there is no doubt that stunning animals cause less pain as compared to the Halal method.
- The stunning method causes ZERO Second pain. This is the most humane method. Afterwards, the cut can be made, and the animal can be vertically hung with the neck on the downside to drain the blood.
- As compared to zero second pain in the stunning method, a large cut made across the neck of awake animals (like in the Halal method) would "result in significant pain and distress". They would be in this pain until they passed out. It would take around 5 to 7 seconds for sheep and 22 to 40 seconds for adult cattle to pass out from the cut (link).
- While the Islamic method of slaughtering camels (i.e. Nahar نحر) takes even much longer time i.e. up to a few minutes of extreme pain and distress. It is ridiculous to claim that Nahar slaughter causes less pain to camels as compared to the almost zero second stunning method.
Jews didn't slaughter camels as they were not allowed to eat camel meat.
Camels are slaughtered differently than cattle. It is known as 'Nahr نحر'. In this method, the person slaughtering the camel must thrust a knife into the hollow area between the camel’s neck and chest (cutting the arteries coming out of the heart). This was the method, which was used by pre-Islamic Arabs for killing a camel, and Muhammad copied this practice from them. He only added the taking of the name of Allah at the time of thrusting the knife.
Moreover, Islamic preachers also employ some tactics to prove the traditional halal slaughter method to be better than the stunning method. For example:
- They claim if stunning is not done properly, then it will cause more pain to animals. But it is similar, if Halal slaughter is not done properly, then the animal will suffer pain for a much longer. Therefore, the solution is to make better equipment for stunning and not to revert to the painful Halal slaughter method.
- They also claim that the traditional Halal slaughter causes more blood loss as compared to the stunning and then cutting the veins method while the heart stops beating in the stunning method. But they are wrong again, as there is no difference in the blood loss in both methods (Scientific Study).
Firstly: The method of slaughtering by cutting the blood veins in the throat was actually invented by hunters
Therefore, the first question arises: Why do Muslims associate this method with Allah?
Thousands of years ago, hunters devised this method for a practical reason. For techniques involving a heavy blow or "jhatka," a substantial heavy cleaver was necessary to separate the head from the body. However, it was impractical for hunters to carry such heavy cleavers during hunting (as they had to run many miles to find and chase an animal).
Even up until seven thousand years ago (prior to the discovery of iron and copper), people did not possess knives and would use sharp stones or bones for animal slaughter. Since it was not possible to completely sever the head from the body using stones or bones, all hunters resorted to cutting the veins in the animal's throat. Remember the Iron Age started only 3,300 years ago. There existed no iron knives before that. Similarly, the Bronze Age started only 5,300 years ago.
Three thousand years ago, Jews made this hunting method kosher by merely mentioning the name of their God, and Muslims, following their example, termed it halal slaughter.
Therefore, even if we assume that cutting the blood vessels in the neck improves the quality of meat, it is not a credit to Islam/Judaism; rather, the entire credit goes to ancient hunters, and it is their miracle. Muslims should acknowledge those ancient hunters as the "Knower of the Unseen."
Secondly: The Intention behind "Dhabihah" was the "Flowing of the Blood of Animals" as a sacrifice ritual to make Allah Happy
First of all, it is a CHALLENGE to Islamic preachers to bring a single Quranic verse or Hadith of Muhammad which claims that draining blood makes meath healthy. They will fail as there is none.
Importance of "flowing of the blood" as a "symbolic sign" for Muhammad as he followed the old Ignorant Arabic traditions:
The flowing of blood was a "symbolic sign" (just like saying Bismillah at the time of slaughter).
This verse indicates the mentality about the flowing of the blood:
Quran 22:37:
Their meat will not reach Allah, nor will their blood, but what reaches Him is piety from you.
You could also see this love affair of Muhammad with the flowing of blood in the following tradition:
Sunan Tarmidhi, Book of Sacrifice (link):
Sayyidah Ayshah (RA) narrated that Allahs Messenger said, “Of the deeds a man does on the day of sacrifice the dearest to Allah is the flow of blood (during sacrifice). It will come on the day of Resurrection with its horns and its hair and its hoofs. Indeed, blood will be accepted by Allah at once even before it falls on the ground. So, please yourselves with this flowing of blood!
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, and tied two sandals around its neck (as garland).
Is it not an act of ignorance to adorn animals with strings of shoes? Why would Allah, the creator of not just the earth but the entire universe, require animals for sacrifice to be decorated with footwear?
Furthermore, what kind of intelligence is displayed by harming a living creature and considering it a symbolic act? Why subject animals to the humiliation of wearing shoe necklaces and causing them harm?
This practice was so lacking in wisdom that today many Muslims are abandoning it, despite it being considered an established "Sunnah of the Prophet."
Even Abu Hanifa, a renowned Islamic scholar, rejected this practice of Muhammad due to its cruelty. He refused to follow this Sunnah and claimed it to be a MUTILATION (مثلة) of animals.
Jami` at-Tirmidhi, Hadith 906:
عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَلَّدَ نَعْلَيْنِ وَأَشْعَرَ الْهَدْىَ فِي الشِّقِّ الأَيْمَنِ بِذِي الْحُلَيْفَةِ وَأَمَاطَ عَنْهُ الدَّمَ . … 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
Ibn Abbas narrated: "The Prophet garlanded two sandals and marked the Hadi (i.e. camel) on the right side (i.e. by cutting its hump) at Dhul-Hulaifah, and removed the blood from it." … 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).
Grade: Sahih (Authentic) Darussalam.
And the following tradition also proves that Allah (i.e. Muhammad) did not intend to flow ALL the blood, but only SOME blood was enough as it was only symbolic.
Sunan Tirmidhi (link):
Abu al-Ushara' reported on the authority of his father: He asked: Apostle of Allah, is the slaughtering to be done only in the upper part of the breast and the throat? The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) replied: If you pierced its thigh (i.e. causing less blood to flow), it would serve you.
Grade: Sahih (الصحيح البديل)
Again this proves that Muhammad's intention was not to maximise the drainage of blood.
Thirdly: Why then Allah didn't order to drain the blood of Fish in IKEJIME like slaughter?
If removing blood from land animals through slaughter to enhance the quality of meat is considered a miracle from Allah, then compromising the quality of fish meat and subjecting fish to extreme pain by not removing its blood through the Ikejime method would also be Allah's fault.
It was the Japanese who developed the humane method of Ikejime for slaughtering fish, which minimizes the pain the fish experiences and effectively removes all blood, resulting in improved meat quality. Fish meat remains fresh for longer periods as well.
So, the question is, if Allah exists and he is All-Knowing, why didn't he then tell the method of Ikejime to Muhammad (or other prophets before him)?
Muslim preachers will never answer this question. While the reason is simple, i.e. Japanese invented this method of Ikejime only 200 years ago. Since the Jews and the ancient Arabs didn't practice this method of Ikejime, thus Muhammad was also unable to copy them and introduced it in Islam.
The next question is, if Muslims believe that Allah is truly the Knower of the unseen and introduced the halal slaughter method to minimize animal suffering and produce healthy meat, then why doesn't Allah take responsibility for compromising the quality of fish meat and subjecting fish to agonizing pain for several minutes by suffocating it to death?
It is certain that Muslims will never answer this question too.
Watch this video to see the Ikejime method for fish slaughter. Today, top fish restaurants in Japan and Europe exclusively use fish slaughtered through the Ikejime method because it enhances the taste of the fish meat.
Pigs are also slaughtered in the Halal way (just like Camels, except the name of Allah)
Interestingly, a similar method is employed in the West for slaughtering pigs. Rather than using a cleaver to cut the whole neck of a pig in one blow (as it is very fat), a method similar to Islamic slaughter is employed, where an incision is made near the heart. This reduces the pig's discomfort as the blood supply to the brain is immediately interrupted. Subsequently, the pig is hung upside down so that all the blood drains out. From this perspective, the pig is slaughtered exactly in the Islamic method, and due to the upside-down position, it has less blood in its meat compared to a traditional Islamic slaughter.
For sure Allah didn't teach non-Muslims to slaughter pigs in this intelligent way, but they found it out on their own. Therefore, are Muslims now going to declare it a miracle of non-Muslims too, and accept that they also have a knowledge of the Unseen alongside Allah?
Hassan Radwan