Islamic Slaughter: Health or Commerce?

Islamic slaughter is a method of preparing meat from animals for consumption that Islam considers the only correct method. The person performing the slaughter must be a Muslim, and the act must be done facing the Qibla, along with other conditions that are mostly unrelated to hygiene and health. On the other hand, animal rights advocates consider Islamic slaughter a painful method for obtaining meat from animals. Some Muslims deem non-Islamic slaughter products unhealthy due to the presence of blood in the meat and the modern slaughter methods. Is this belief medically accurate? Or is religious slaughter part of the massive multi-billion dollar halal trade worldwide? In this program, we have Dr. Akbar Karami, a physician and professor at Nova College in Virginia, and Hojjatoleslam Mohammad Hossein Tabarsi, a Friday prayer leader in Connecticut, USA, as our guests. I start this week's program with Mr. Tabarsi. Mr. Tabarsi, I am eager for you to begin the discussion on Islamic slaughter and its significance in Islam and why it is emphasized so much so we can delve into the details of the topic. Mohammad Hossein Tabarsi: I would like to say that generally, the term mentioned in the Quran is that God has made everything that is good, wholesome, and pure halal for you, and everything that is among the impurities is forbidden for you; carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, or an animal that has been slaughtered in the name of someone other than God, as well as animals that die by suffocation or are gored to death, and anything that has been sacrificed to idols is considered impure and cannot be consumed. Every edible animal must have God's name invoked upon it, and this is very important for the animal to be considered halal. Then, according to jurisprudential conditions mentioned in the verses of the Quran and the hadiths from the Imams, it is stated that firstly, the one who slaughters must be a Muslim, and secondly, the animal must be facing the Qibla, and God's name must be invoked before slaughtering, and a knife made of iron must be used, and a certain amount of blood, which is referred to in jurisprudence as the normal blood exit, must be drained from the animal, resulting in the remaining blood in the animal being considered pure. Also, after cutting the four vessels and the blood exiting in a sudden and moving manner caused by this blow to the animal, under these conditions, the animal is made halal, and its meat is consumable. Mr. Tabarsi, before we go to our other guest, Mr. Karami, I would like to point out that you emphasized impurity and that there are points in the Quran stating that what is impure or undesirable is declared forbidden. Impurity or undesirability, for example, the meat of an animal that is prepared for human consumption, some may ask what connection it has with the religion of the person preparing it or what connection it has with the invocation of God's name as mentioned in the Quran? Tabarsi: Yes. I would like to point out that the Quran pays special attention to food and drink. The issue of food and drink is not merely a physical and material matter. It is also related to spiritual and moral issues. This is why in the Quran, one of the prayers of the Prophet Abraham is that in order to express his gratitude to the Lord and also to continuously express his needs to God, he says that He is the one who provides me with food and drink, and this indicates that food is among religious matters and there is a close relationship between food and the issue of monotheism. Very well, Mr. Tabarsi, let us join Mr. Dr. Karami. Mr. Karami, you heard Mr. Tabarsi's remarks. He emphasized that there is a connection between food and even a matter like monotheism. This impurity mentioned in Islam and referred to by Mr. Tabarsi, what explanation can be given from a medical perspective? Is meat that has not been slaughtered Islamically or where God's name, in fact, Allah of Islam, has not been invoked at the time of slaughter, meat that can be criticized from a medical standpoint? Akbar Karami: I think to clarify the point of contention, let me present an introduction to this dispute to clarify where I stand and why I make this judgment. The judgment over what is recognized as Islamic slaughter actually relates to a larger issue, which is the general title of the conflict between tradition and modernity. When we talk about Islamic slaughter, it seems to me that many Muslims around the world, especially those living in more developed countries, do not pay much attention to these issues and have easily adapted to the new world and its perceptions and achievements, including mass meat production and methods that are sometimes said to be un-Islamic. [This discussion] is more historical and traditional than theological and Islamic in nature. I believe there is a kind of underdevelopment hidden behind these concepts. To put it more clearly, animal rights, nature rights, and human rights are important issues that have gained attention in the modern world. Consequently, all religions and all traditional beliefs in any area that conflict with human rights, nature rights, and animal rights must reconstruct themselves and provide a new definition and a restructured form of themselves. Now, with this introduction, let me answer you. As a physician and university professor who is familiar with blood, meat, skin, and these concepts, and having grown up in a Muslim society, I see no physiological or health difference between Islamic slaughter and what is considered non-Islamic; there is nothing defensible that can be clearly identified as differing in hygienic quality and type of food. Psychologically, of course, if people have specific beliefs, they can naturally be affected by those beliefs and may experience harm from consuming things they do not prefer. Mr. Doctor, if we want to be a bit more precise, Mr. Tabarsi mentioned the exit of a normal amount of blood from the animal's body that prepares it for consumption and removes it from the state of impurity mentioned in Islam. Is there a specific amount of blood that, if removed from the meat, makes it healthy and consumable, and if not, is that meat unhealthy? Karami: I don't think it works that way. Because when an animal is slaughtered and killed, whether by the Islamic method as described by Mr. Tabarsi or by a method that I do not want to call more humane but less violent - similar to what we see in our developed societies where animals are anesthetized and then their heads are cut off; the blood that exits from them is almost similar, and I think in industrial slaughter, more blood is drained because sometimes the entire neck is cut off and the spinal cord and vessels in the spine are also severed, and therefore more blood is drained. In any case, whether more blood is drained or not, this is a discussion for which I have not seen any specific scientific report, and I do not think it matters regarding the quality of the meat we consume because blood, like other tissues in the animal's body, is actually a food source and does not have better or worse quality than other tissues of the animals. The issue, in my opinion, is another matter; we as humans must clarify our relationship with the violence we inflict on animals and decide what we want to do. As far as I understand, fundamentally, the slaughter of animals is not a very defensible method, and if a group of humans decided to consume meat, they must judge which method of killing animals imposes less violence and pain on them, and Islamic slaughter is not defensible because the violence it inflicts on animals is very sad, and I think Muslims should and can easily come to terms with this issue and actually present an easier slaughter method. Let us return to Mr. Tabarsi with this point you raised. Mr. Tabarsi, does Islamic slaughter cause more suffering for the animals being prepared for human consumption, or do some argue that this slaughter may actually be one where the animal suffers less? Tabarsi: Some believe that the method of Islamic slaughter is painful and violent. This is subjective. On the other hand, the opposite side argues that the method prevalent in European and American countries, which uses stunning and electricity, causes a lot of pain for the animals. From an Islamic perspective, another condition mentioned for slaughter - both in Judaism and Islam - is that the head should not be severed. The spinal cord that connects the head to the body should remain intact and should not be cut. Some even say that if the head is cut off, it is no longer considered kosher. In Islam, although this act is forbidden, the animal is not considered inedible and is still halal because, in fact, the Jews say that with the conditions we have set for this act, when we slaughter the animal, it creates a numbness. For seventy seconds, this seventy seconds is enough for the animal not to feel pain until death, and the flapping movements after slaughtering are due to blood loss that causes the expansion and contraction of the body, not due to pain. Now, this can be a controversial topic, Mr. Tabarsi. But another issue we can raise here is the lives of non-Muslims in Islamic countries who face difficulties in obtaining halal meat. It is both more expensive and not found everywhere, and if they want to adhere to the religious principles they have accepted, it must be asked why religion should create such limitations in the lives of its believers? After all, Islam states that it is better to avoid the 'slaughter of non-monotheists.' Could you explain this a bit? After all, what is the obligation of those living in non-Islamic countries? Tabarsi: If by non-monotheist slaughter you mean the slaughter of Jews and Christians, from the perspective of Sunni brothers, the slaughter of the people of the Book, meaning an animal slaughtered by a Christian or Jew, is based on a verse from the Quran that states, 'The food of the people of the Book is lawful for you.' They believe that the slaughter of the people of the Book will make the animal halal. However, this may create problems for Muslims who do not have access to halal meat in European and American countries; apparently, this issue was very prevalent in the past, but now if you look in the countries, the issue of halal meat has become very widespread, and many non-Islamic supermarkets also serve halal meat in a part of the supermarket. Currently, halal meat has a trade of about 20 billion dollars just in the US, and kosher meat (Jewish halal meat) has a trade of about 20 billion dollars in European and American countries, which raises the question of how, for example, the Jewish population in America is only 2%, but how come packaged kosher products make up 40% of the markets in America? The reason is that many non-Jews try to consume kosher or halal meat, and the reason is that according to a report, many people who are neither Jewish nor Muslim believe that kosher or halal meat is of high quality, and nearly two-thirds of those who consume kosher or halal meat think this way, and half of those who consume kosher or halal meat believe that these types of meat are healthier, and about one-third of them think that kosher or halal meat poses less risk, and only 15% consume kosher or halal meat for religious reasons, and public belief is that these types of meat are healthier. Karami: I do not think such claims have much credibility. Of course, the statistical discussion is another matter. If I see the statistics, then we should examine why these people think this way. But as far as medical discussions and histology and related discussions are concerned, I think that Islamic slaughter and non-Islamic slaughter cannot differ from each other, and when we return to the health discussion, the issue of monitoring the slaughter of these animals and adhering to medical principles and veterinary standards in killing animals becomes more important. If we focus on this point, then, in fact, perhaps in a place like America, when I see Muslim communities that procure halal meat, many of them are small and minor, and in fact, they are not sufficiently monitored, and where the meat is offered is usually of lower quality. It looks very dirty, and as a result, overall - which has nothing to do with Islam and people - it relates to the commercial style that is common - I think that, in fact, in a place like America, the halal slaughter I have seen is of inferior quality, and I think it is completely harmful from a health perspective. I have seen many places where chicken meat is mixed with red meat in one place and placed together. Or very non-standard tools are used. Therefore, I think that, in fact, from this perspective, halal slaughter is not defensible.