I had the issue of stunning with SANHA as I was of the understanding that stunning prior to slaughtering is highly detested by senior Ulama all over t

Answer

Undoubtedly, all true Ulama reject as haraam pre-slaughter stunning, and every pre-slaughter infliction of injury to the animal. Numerous non-Muslim experts in this field too reject stunning and point out its harms. When Islam rejects every act of injury before slaughter and when Allah Ta’ala has ordained a system of Thabah for the Ummah, then it is contumacy and flagrant transgression to aver that ‘controlled stunning’ or ‘controlled infliction of injury’ is acceptable. Ask SANHA for its Shar’i evidence for its contention of ‘acceptability’. A person’s personal view unsubstantiated by the evidence of the Shariah, is devoid of substance in Islam. The laws of Islam are sacrosanct. These laws and systems are revealed. They came from Allah Azza Wa Jal to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). It is haraam and tantamount to kufr to delete, change or displace these laws, ways and methods with systems invented by the kuffaar, especially when the Shariah is explicit in prohibiting pre-slaughter injury. In Islam when the term ‘Pious Predecessors’ , i.e. Salf-e-Saaliheen, is mentioned, it refers to the Ulama, Sulaha, Fuqaha and Auliya of the three initial eras of Islam , which are known as Khairul Quroon (the Noblest Ages). There is not a single personality from the Salf-e-Saaliheen who condones what SANHA is saying and doing. SANHA will not be able to cite the name of a single Faqeeh or Aalim from among the Salf-e-Saaliheen who had contended the permissibility of pre-slaughter injury. By senior Ulama, SANHA means senior Ulama from India and Pakistan who had been taken on visits of these plants from round about 1970 onwards. Let us assume that these senior Ulama from India and Pakistan had ‘laid down the rules for acceptance of commercial slaughter’. If senior Ulama err or if senior Ulama lay down rules which are in conflict with the Rules of the Shariah, then such conflicting rules will be set aside and attributed to errors committed by the senior Ulama. It is never permissible to follow the errors of the Ulama. Allaamah Sha’raani (rahmatullah alayh), the 10th century authority of Islam stated: “Whoever adopts the obscurities of the Ulama (as proof), has made his exit from Islam.” This is a principle which is based on the following Qur’aanic verse: “They take their Ulama and their Mashaaikh as gods besides Allah….” In this Qur’aanic aayat Allah Ta’ala severely criticizes the laity (the masses) of Bani Israael who would blindly follow even the erroneous fatwas of their scholars and saints. When people follow such rulings of Ulama which are in conflict with Allah’s laws, then it is like they are committing shirk or they take ‘gods’ for themselves other than Allah Azza Wa Jal. Furthermore, we take oath by Allah and say that there is not even a single one among these senior Ulama who had said that: It is permissible to slaughter without the direction of the Qiblah It is permissible to stun It is permissible to immerse the chickens in scalding water It is permissible to hang the chickens upside down and slaughter in motion on a tremendously fast-moving conveyor belt It is permissible to plunge the slaughtered chickens into the filthy, faeces and blood filled scalding water while there are still signs of life in the chickens. None of the senior Ulama who had visited the killing plants had ever contended that stunning is permissible. If SANHA says so, then they are speaking brazen LIES. The logical and Shar’i consequence of devouring and halaalizing carrion is lies and falsehood, hence SANHA is perpetually in denial of the Haqq. Hadhrat Maulana Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh) who is the Ustaadh of this writer, had expressed disgust at the system of killing. If the other seniors had maintained silence, then such silence may not be utilized to abrogate any law of the Shariah. No Aalim, regardless of his seniority, knowledge and piety, has the authority to ‘lay down rules’ which are in conflict with and negatory of the Laws laid down by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The truth is that none of the senior Ulama had ever laid down haraam rules as SANHA contends. The most capital which SANHA is able to extravasate from the visits of the senior Ulama is their silence or their abstention to comment on the various haraam steps in the haraam killing process. For their silence these senior Ulama are answerable to Allah Ta’ala. But their silence or even condonation is not proof of the Shariah whatsoever. Undoubtedly, all the senior Ulama are unanimous in their condemnation of stunning and all haraam aspects of the kuffaar killing system. The Books of Fataawa of the senior Ulama bear abundant testimony to their views on this issue. SANHA resorts to brazen chicanery and deception to mislead Muslims by spinning and fabricating falsehood and portraying it as the truth. Among the numerous articles we have sent, you will find the detailed Fatwa of Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh), as well as the Fatwas of some other senior Ulama. There is absolutely no support for SANHA in any of their Fatwas. You should challenge SANHA to name the senior Ulama from Pakistan and India who had laid down rules which conflict with the Shariah. By this statement, SANHA seeks to confuse and mislead Muslims. It creates the impression that among the ‘rules which they had laid down’, the senior Ulama had stated that it is permissible to stun and that it is permissible to abandon the Qiblah, etc. But this notion is blatantly false. Assuming that any of the senior Ulama of South Africa, decades ago, had laid down corrupt, haraam rules for slaughtering, then such rules will be rejected outrightly. It will be haraam to accept any rules which negate the divine rules of Allah Ta’ala. We do not elevate our senior Ulama to the status of godhood. You should press SANHA to provide the names of the senior Ulama – the Predecessors – who had abrogated any aspect or rule of the Shariah. It is not sufficient to say that they had visited the plants and had not condemned the system. Also demand from SANHA to explain the Islamic system of slaughter, step by step. To say that the senior Ulama had ‘laid down the rules’ is a smokescreen to keep the people ignorant of the rules laid down by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and explained by all the Fuqaha of all the Math-habs for the past fourteen centuries. Despite Mufti Taqi Sahib being somewhat inclined towards liberalism, he too condemns the stunning system as you have mentioned. There is not a single one among the Ulama of even present times who dare rule against the Ruling of the senior Ulama regarding the issue of stunning, etc. And, how is it possible to issue a ruling in conflict with the Shariah? Only SANHA’s molvies, misguided grand muftis and mercenary scholars are capable of such villainy because the motive is monetary gain. 20 Rabiul-Awwaal 1445 – 6 October 2023