ummtaalib

Stipulating the sale of a house in a will Q. My father stipulated in his Will that his house should be sold to my sister at R1 000 000. Then, the money received from selling the house to my sister should form part of his estate and should be distributed according to Shariah? Is this Shariah compliant? (Question published as received) A. If your father stated in his will that his house should be sold to his daughter at R1 000 000 and the money received from the sale of the house should form part of his estate after his demise, this will be incorrect as all the heirs (including his daughter) are entitled to your father’s estate (without buying or selling). Alternatively, your father may sell his house to his daughter in his lifetime. The monies received from the sale will form part of your father’s cash-on-hand. Whatever cash-on-hand remains at the time of your father’s demise will devolve to all his heirs. And Allah Ta’ala Knows Best Mufti Ismaeel Bassa Confirmation: Mufti Ebrahim Desai Fatwa Department Jamiatul Ulama (KZN)

Nikaah in accordance to the Sunnah Q: I am soon to be married, insha-Allah. I want to know how to do the whole wedding in accordance to the Sunnah. 1. What is the sunnat mehr and the ammount in South African Rands? 2. What is the Shar'iee status of having a wedding and calling people? 3. When is the sunnat time for having the walimah? Does khalwah (in referance to when to have the walimah) refer to seclusion only or does one have to have intercourse? A: The nikaah which earns the most amount of blessings in the sight of Allah Ta’aala is the nikaah which is closest to the sunnah. Hereunder are a few important aspects one should adhere to in order for the nikaah to conform to the sunnah: It is sunnah to perform the nikaah in the masjid and it is preferable that the nikaah be performed on the Day of Jumu’a. Nabi (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: إن أعظم النكاح بركة أيسره مؤنة (شعب الإيمان للبيهقي 5/254) “The nikaah that earns the most blessing is that nikaah wherein the least expenses are incurred.” The nikaah, walimah, etc., should be conducted with simplicity. The nikaah should be free of show and ostentation. Any law of Allah Ta’aala should not be violated (e.g. allowing the salaah to become qadha, intermingling of sexes, taking loans on interest, photography, music, etc.). At the time of exchanging gifts, one should ensure that it is not done for show and the spirit of the sunnah is not compromised. The nikaah should be kept as simple as possible as it is known that simplicity is the spirit of the sunnah. It is not compulsory for one to invite many people. If a person invites few people to his home and feeds them with the intention of walimah, the sunnah of walimah will be fulfilled. The poor should also be invited for the walimah. Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) has said: شر الطعام طعام الوليمة يدعى لها الاغنياء و يترك الفقراء ، متفق عليه (مشكوٰة المصابيح ص278) “The worst food (void of blessings) is the food of that walimah to which the rich are invited and the poor are excluded.” It is best and closest to the sunnah that the walimah be conducted at one’s home and not in the halls as it is witnessed that many wrongs take place at hall functions. However, if for some reason one conducts the walimah in a hall one should ensure that no law of Allah Ta’aala is violated. Emulating the ways of the kuffaar should be abandoned under all circumstances. 1. As far as the sunnah mahr is concerned, it should not be an exorbitant amount. It is preferable that Mahr-e-Fatimi be given if one can afford it. 2. The wedding ceremony conducted by the girls’ party is not established from the sunnah. 3. Walimah is a Mubaarak Sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) which takes place after the nikaah is consummated. The sunnah of walimah remains till the third day of the nikaah. The boy’s party will host the walimah entirely. The custom prevalent nowadays that the expenses of the walimah be borne equally by both the boys and girls party opposes the sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and hence should be omitted. قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم لعبد الرحمن بن عوف رضي الله عنه بارك الله لك أولم ولو بشاة (الترمذي 1/208) It is reported by Hadhrat Anas (Radiallahu Anhu) that Nabi (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said to Abdurrahman ibn Awf (Radiallahu Anhu) after his nikaah, “May Allah Ta’aala give you barakah in your nikaah. Carry out the sunnah of walimah! Even though it may be by slaughtering a sheep (and feeding the people)”. We make du’a to Allah Ta’aala to give us the tawfeeq to emulate the Mubaarak sunnah of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam) in every facet of our lives. Aameen. ويندب إعلانه وتقديم خطبة وكونه في مسجد يوم جمعة بعاقد رشيد وشهود عدول والاستدانة له والنظر إليها قبله وكونها دونه سنا وحسبا وعزا ومالا وفوقه خلقا وأدباوورعا وجمالا (الدر المختار 3/8) ( دعي إلى وليمة وثمة لعب أو غناء قعد وأكل ) لو المنكر في المنزل فلو على المائدة لا ينبغي أن يقعد بل يخرج معرضا لقوله تعالى: " فلا تقعد بعد الذكرى مع القوم الظالمين " فإن قدر على المنع فعل وإلا يقدر ( صبر إن لم يكن ممن يقتدى به فإن كان ) مقتدي ( ولم يقدر على المنع خرج ولم يقعد ) لأن فيه شين الدين والمحكي عن الإمام كان قبل أن يصير مقتدى به ( وإن علم أو لا ) باللعب ( لا يحضر أصلا ) سواء كان ممن يقتدى به أو لا لأن حق الدعوة إنما يلزمه بعد الحضور لا قبله ابن كمال قال العلامة الشامي : قوله ( ابن كمال ) لم أره فيه نعم ذكره في الهداية قال ط وفيه نظر والأوضح ما في التبيين حيث قال لأنه لا يلزمه إجابة الدعوة إذا كا هناك منكر اه قلت لكنه لا يفيد وجه الفرق بين ما قبل الحضور وما بعده وساق بعد هذا في التبيين ما رواه ابن ماجه أن عليا رضي الله تعالى عنه قال صنعت طعاما فدعوته رسول الله فجاء فرأى في البيت تصاوير فرجع اه قلت مفاد الحديث أنه يرجع ولو بعد الحضور وأنه لا تلزم الإجابة مع المنكر أصلا تأمل (رد المحتار 6/347-348) ووليمة العرس سنة وفيها مثوبة عظيمة وهي إذا بنى الرجل بامرأته ينبغي أن يدعو الجيران والأقرباء والأصدقاء ويذبح لهم ويصنع لهم طعاما وإذا اتخذ ينبغي لهم أن يجيبوا فإن لم يفعلوا أثموا قال عليه السلام من لم يجب الدعوة فقد عصى الله ورسوله فإن كان صائما أجاب ودعا وإن لم يكن صائما أكل ودعا وإن لم يأكل أثم وجفا كذا في خزانة المفتين ولا بأس بأن يدعو يومئذ من الغد وبعد الغد ثم ينقطع العرس والوليمة كذا في الظهيرية (الفتاوى الهندية 3/422) Answered by: Mufti Zakaria Makada Checked & Approved: Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

The Sacrifice of the Sahaabah for Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) Hadhrat Fatimah’s (Radhiyallahu Anha) house was a distance away from the house of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) once said to her: “It is my desire that you live near me.” Hadhrat Fatimah (Radhiyallahu Anha) replied: “Harithah's house is close to your house. If you ask him to exchange his house with mine, he will happily accept.” Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied: “He has already exchanged once on my request. I feel shy to request him a second time.” However Harithah (Radhiyallahu Anhu) somehow came to know that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) is desirous that Hadhrat Fatimah (Radhiyallahu Anha) live close to him. He at once came to Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and said: O Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), I have come to know that you wish for Fatimah (Radhiyallahu Anha) to live near you. Here are my houses at your disposal. No other house is closer to yours than these houses of mine. Fatimah (Radhiyallahu Anha) can have her house exchanged with any of my houses. O Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), what you accept from me is dearer to me than what you leave for me.” Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) accepted the offer saying: “I know that you are sincere in what you say”, and Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) made duaa for him. (Fazaail Aamaal) يَا رَبِّ صَلِّ وَ سَلِّمْ دَائِمًا أَبَدًا عَلَى حَبِيبِكَ خَيرِ الخَلْقِ كُلِّهِمِ

Hasan Basri (Rahmatullahi Alaihi) and his Tolerance of his Neighbour’s Dirt Hasan Basri (Rahmatullahi Alaihi) lived in the bottom storey of a building. The sewage of the neighbour living at the upper storey used to leak into his home. Hasan Basri (Rahmatullahi Alaihi) ordered that a container be placed beneath that area so that the drops fall therein. At night, when there was no one to observe what was happening, he would take the container and dispose of the dirt. In this way, twenty years passed without him informing his neighbour. One day while he was ill, his neighbour from the upper storey who was a Christian came to visit him. When he saw the container filled with dirt and realized that the dirt was falling from his house, in embarrassment and shame he asked: “How long have you been enduring all this?” Hasan Basri (Rahmatullahi Alaihi) replied: “For the last twenty years.” Upon hearing this, he removed his traditional Christian garment and immediately accepted Islam. (Pearls from the Path)

The advices of Haji Ahmed Nakhooda Saheb of Madinah Munawwarah Khalifah of Hazrat Shaikh Maulana Zakariyya (raheemahullah) Hajee Ahmed Nakhooda Saheb D.B. of Madiinah Munawwarah was with us and shared some extremely valuable points. Firstly he mentioned that people do not want to take Bay’at to a Sheikh and become a Mureed. A person cannot be forced to become a Mureed. He then mentioned that there are other ways of making Islaah of people. One way is by encouraging people and at the end of the talk, that is make Tashkeel of the listeners to recite Durood Sharif and follow Sunnat. By doing so, the Isaah of a person will be made directly by Rasulullah Salallahu Alaihi Wasallam and one will reach the highest pinnacle of Wilaayat (friendship of Allah Ta'ala). No person can ever have an objection to recitation of Durood and following Sunnats. Hajee Saheb asked Hadrat Sheikh R.A. whether this is true? Hadrat Sheikh R.A replied, “This is 100% percent true but such a person will not be able to make Islaah of others.” The second advise for those that don’t want to take a Sheikh is to recite the Kitaab at home. We should read the Fadhaail-e-Aamaal and Fadhaail-e-Sadaqaat of Hadrat Sheikh R.A. which is accepted by Allah Ta'ala. There are many people that have seen dreams that whichever homes these Kitaabs are recited then Nur (light) from the Arsh of Allah Ta'ala descend upon such places. If one has acquired the Nur of Allah Ta'ala then what else is required? The Islaah of a person is also completely made by reading this Kitaab and such a person will reach the high stages of Wilaayat. Many people have changed their lives due to Kitaab reading. The daughter of a pious person who was regular with his Salaah starting working. She got different ideas and brought a TV in the house. He was really upset but the wife also sided with the children and approved of the TV. She further wanted a modern lifestyle and when the husband prevented them, they asked him to leave the house after giving them their respective shares of their inheritance (from his wealth). He decided to write to Hadrat Sheikh R.A. and explained the entire scenario. Hadrat R.A told him to start Taleem in the house for ten minutes and not to interfere in their lives. When he approached the family they were quite happy as giving ten minutes for Taleem was a bargain. In a matter of few days he came home and found the TV broken and thrown outside. How many such people have read the Kitaabs of Hadrat Sheikh R.A. and our Sheikh R.A. and changed their lives completely. There are friends and associates that don’t want to listen to the talks of Deen. For such people, a practice tested and tried by our Sheikh which works wonders; merely send a Kitaab to them without even instructing them to read it. There are many professional people that opened the Kitaabs of Hadrat Sheikh R.A. and state that they continued reading without being able to close it as a result of which the lives, minds and hearts of people had changed. This is also an effective method of Islaah. Another aspect that Hajee Saheb has emphasised was Tauba, Istighfaar and Durood Sharif. We should commence with at least ten times Taubah, Istighfaar and Durood. This should be carried out with punctuality and gradually increase the numbers as well. The quality of the recitation is of utmost importance even more than increasing the numbers. If a person is taking ten empty capsules but then increases it to hundred empty capsules then one will not benefit. If a person takes the ten capsules but inserts 5mg of contents and then gradually increases the contents to 10mg then he will certainly see a great difference. May Allah Ta'ala grant us the Taufeeq! Source

Countering the Blasphemy Shaykh Kamaluddin Ahmed (db) Islamic Spirituality.org cartoon controversy mp3

Conclusion The legislations of the religion come from a Divine source, the Creator of all that exist, One Whose knowledge of His creation is infinite. This fact necessitates that all things mandated by God in the religion are done so from this Divine Knowledge, and therefore must be ultimate in all ways. Analyzing the legislations mandated and recommended in the religion of Islam will definitely come to show that indeed they are the best and most suitable to any given circumstance, and that they have a common denominator, the maximization of benefits and reduction of harm. As some people classify the Islamic method of slaughter to be cruelty to animals, the reality shows facts quite the opposite. Accusations of animal cruelty should very rightly be focused on those who do not use the Islamic way of slaughtering, but prefer to use those methods which cause pain and agony to the animal and could also very well cause harm to those consuming the meat

On the Permissibility of Stunning Fatwa of Mufti of Darul ’Uloom Karach, Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani on Stunning animals before or after slaughter: Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam Darul Iftaa, Leicester, UK THE ISLAMIC VIEWPOINT ON STUNNING ANIMALS PRIOR TO CONSUMPTION By Mufti Shabbir Ahmad Darul Uloom Bury Stunning Fatwa.pdf CHICKENS AND STUNNING By Mufti Muhammad Zubair Butt Chickens and Stunning.pdf

So how Humane is Stunning? 'Pre-slaughter stun less humane than shechita’ Does the Animal Feel Pain in These Methods (i.e the different methods of stunning)? Animal Aid Report There is evidence from human beings that electrical stimulation is painful Electric Stunned.pdf Is Stunning Animals really Humane? Stunning Issues stunning_issues__definitions_reasons_humaneness.pdf

Regarding Stunning before Slaughter According to the "Methods endorsed by the Congress of the United States of America", two methods of slaughtering and handling are found to be humane: Firstly, (b) being the method of slaughtering of the "Jewish or other religious faith", whereby "the animal suffers loss of consciousness by anemia of the brain caused by the simultaneous and instantaneous severance of the carotid arteries with a sharp instrument and handling in connection with such slaughtering". The second method, (a), involves stunning the animal before slaughter. Regarding stunning, which is held to be more humane, let us see what is involved. Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam Darul Iftaa Leicester , UK Source Stunning the animal before it is actually slaughtered is a common practice in many western countries. It is claimed to be more comforting and causing less pain to the animal. Pre-slaughter stunning was originally introduced to protect abattoir personnel, rather than the animals themselves. The idea was to immobilize the animal to facilitate killing procedures. However, the principle of stunning has now evolved to encompass the idea that animals should be rendered unconscious before they are slaughtered. There are many methods used for stunning animals, just to mention a few: The Captive Bolt Pistol This stunning method is widely used for all farmed animals. There are two types of captive bolt pistol: penetrative and non-penetrative. Penetrative stunners drive a bolt into the skull and cause unconsciousness both through physical brain damage and the concussive blow to the skull. The bolt on a non-penetrative stunner is ‘mushroom-headed’ and impacts on the brain without entering the skull. Unconsciousness is caused by the concussive blow. After the animal is unconscious, it is slaughtered. The bolt is described as ‘captive’ because it flies out of the barrel but remains attached to the pistol. The pistol is placed on the centre of the animal’s forehead and is either trigger-fired or fires automatically on contact with the animal’s head. Pitching Pitching is carried out in the majority of cattle slaughterhouses. The practice involves inserting a wire or rod through the hole in the head made by the captive bolt. The rod is slid up and down to destroy the lower part of the brain and the spinal cord. Electric head-only stunning (electric shock or current) Electric head-only stunning with tongs is used to stun cattle, calves, sheep, goats, rabbits and ostriches. The operator places a pair of electric tongs on either side of the animal’s head and passes an electric current through the brain – supposedly causing a temporary loss of consciousness. Waterbath stunning The electric waterbath is widely used to stun chickens, turkeys, ducks and geese. Birds are shackled upside down on a moving conveyor which carries them to an electrified waterbath into which their heads are supposed to be immersed. The shackles contact a bar which is connected to earth. The strength of the electrical current has risen in recent years – with the aim of ensuring that birds suffer a cardiac arrest and die when they enter the waterbath. Gas stunning An animal is stunned by exposing them to a mixture of carbon dioxide and air. This gas causes the animal to loose its consciousness, after which it is slaughtered.

Who Knows Better? Some contemporaries, who degrade the Fiqh of the four Imams & their followers, actually do so because they view legitimate “difference of opinion” as evil. This is the reason for which they keep harping on the fact that we need to follow the Quran and Sunnah and not any of the Schools of Fiqh. This is analysis of their claim. My Honourable Teacher, Al-Muhaddith, Shaykh Muhammad ‘Awwamah (may Allah protect him) responds to this with the following: “Firstly, this implies that the Imams of the four Madhahib (Schools of Fiqh) were not following the Quran and Sunnah ! Secondly, this can only be said in ignorance of the reality we are faced with; tell me in the name of Allah! Up to how many “schools” have they resulted in, after Muslims lived within the four schools for centuries? Where is the logic behind their claim?! Lastly, I will explain further that following the Quran and Sunnah actually leads us to legitimate difference of opinion.” (Atharul Hadithi Shareef, fi ikhtilafil A-immatil Fuqaha, pg.77) A valuable lesson Shaykh ‘Awwamah (may Allah protect him) has included the following incident in his glorious book “Atharul Hadith”. “Sayyiduna ‘Urwah ibn Zubair – a Tabi’e- (rahimahullah) once objected to Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (radiyallahu ‘anhuma): “You have been misleading the people!” Ibn ‘Abbas (radiyallahu’anhuma) asked for the reason, to which ‘Urwah replied: “When a person dons his Ihram for Haj or ‘Umrah and after arriving in Makkah performs the tawaf only, you state that he is now free of his ihram. Whereas Sayyiduna ‘Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (radiyallahu’anhuma) actually opposed this view!” Ibn ‘Abbas responded: “Are the two of them (Abu Bakr & ‘Umar radiyallahu’anhuma) preferred to you over what is in the Quran and Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam)?” ‘Urwah replied: “Sayyiduna Abu Bakr & ‘Umar (radiyallahu’anhuma) had more knowledge/ understanding of the Quran and Sunnah than me and you put together!” (Al-Mu’jamul Awsat of Tabarani, hadith:21) In a narration of Musnad Ahmad Sayyiduna Ibn ‘Abbas (radiyallahu’anhuma) responded to ‘Urwah’s objection by saying: “I am quoting a hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) to you, and quote Abu Bakr and ‘Umar?!” ‘Urwah replied: “They followed Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) more than you, and they knew more about him than you knew” (Musnad Ahmad, vol.1, pg.252) The narrator; Ibn Abi Mulaikah (rahimahullah) comments: “Urwah defeated him.” Shaykh ‘Awwamah (may Allah protect him) explains: “…’Urwah is actually saying to Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas: “By us taking the view of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and Sayyiduna ‘Umar (radiyallahu’anhuma) we aren’t disregarding the way of the sunnah. In fact we find ourselves with two options; that which Ibn ‘Abbas (radiyallahu’anhuma) witnessed (and understood) from Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) and what Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (radiyallahu’anhuma) witnessed/understood. We then preferred their view because they were most knowledgeable regarding the sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam).” (Atharul Hadithi Shareef, fi ikhtilafil A-immatil Fuqaha, pg. 108) Imam Sufyan Thawri (rahimahullah) said: نسلم ما سمعنا، ونكل ما لا نعلم إلى عالمه، ونتهم رأينا لرأيهم “We follow what we know, and hand over what we do not know to those who do know. We will even question our understanding in favour of theirs” (Al-Intiqa, pg.265, 266) The reality of “Fiqhus Sunnah” Shaykh (may Allah protect him) writes further: “And this is our response to those who ask us to abandon the Fiqh of Imams: Abu Hanifah, Malik, Shafi’e and Ahmad (rahimahumullah) and to rather take –what they label as- “Fiqhus-Sunnah” or “Fiqhul-Quran was-Sunnah” We say to them: “We are not prepared to accept you’ll as alternatives to those Imams, for they were undoubtedly more knowledgeable than you’ll regarding the sunnah. In fact there is no comparison between you’ll and them in knowledge. It is actually our eagerness to follow the way of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) that leads us to follow what these great Imams had understood (and presented to the ummah) as the sunnah!” (Atharul Hadithi Shareef, fi ikhtilafil A-immatil Fuqaha, pgs. 108-109.) The true meaning of Fiqh of Abu Hanifah etc. The word fiqh actually translates as: understanding. Shaykh ‘Awwamah writes: “Therefore, when we say “Fiqh of Abu Hanifah, Fiqh of Shafi’e and so on, the actual meaning of this is: the understanding of Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Shafi’e. The question that arises is: Their understanding of what? It is their understanding of none other than the Quran and Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) The reason for this is that “Fiqh” in fact means: understanding.” Don’t be fooled! “In light of the above, we can now realize a widespread grave mistake which nobody seems to pay attention to, or even rectify; when certain people label their “understanding” as “Fiqhus Sunnah” or Fiqhus Sunnah wal Kitab” This term literally translates as: “the understanding of the Quran and Sunnah”. In this case it is the understanding of some unknown, or under qualified person. It is his understanding which he seeks to legitimise by attributing it to the Quran and Sunnah. This is done to give the impression that they are presenting before the people the “original authentic source” of knowledge (whereas it is merely their distorted understanding). In this manner they deter others from the Fiqh of the Imams; Abu Hanifah, Shafi’e, Malik and Ahmad (rahimahumullah). They even boldly venture to say: “People! Do you want “Fiqh of Muhammad sallallahu’alaihi wasallam” or “Fiqh of Abu Hanifah and Shafi’ie”? One of them had the audacity to ask before leading the salah; “Should I perform the salah of Muhammad (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) or the salah of Abu Hanifah”!! This is all the consequence of them attributing their Fiqh/understanding to the Quran and sunnah, and the fiqh/understanding of Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Shafi’e to Abu Hanifah and Shafi’e, not to the Quran and Sunnah. In so doing, they have separated the correct understanding of the Quran and Sunnah (the understanding of legitimate scholars) which in reality was the most appropriate explanation of the Quran and Hadith. They severed this and then produced a new understanding which they attribute to the Quran and Sunnah!” (Atharul Hadith, pgs.134-135) They truly did know better Imam Malik (rahimahullah) said: سلموا للأئمة ولا تجادلوهم، فلو كنا كلما جاءنا رجل أجدل من رجل اتبعناه: لخفنا أن نقع في رد ما جاء به جبريل عليه السلام “Submit to the Imams and don’t argue with them, for if we were to follow every convincing debater, I fear we may end up refuting what Angel Jibreel brought from the skies” (Atharul Hadith, pg.117) Imam Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah (rahimahullah) said: التسليم للفقهاء سلامة في الدين “In conceding to the Fuqaha (Jurists) is the security for our deen” (Atharul Hadith, pg.117) Imam Sufyan Thawri (rahimahullah) said: نسلم ما سمعنا، ونكل ما لا نعلم إلى عالمه، ونتهم رأينا لرأيهم “We follow what we know, and hand over what we do not know to those who do know. We will even question our understanding in favour of theirs” (Al-Intiqa, pg.265, 266) These quotations are so glaring in the current conditions. So the next time someone confronts us with arguments like the ones discussed above, we shouldn’t be moved. In fact, these last three quotations are sufficient in response! May Allah Ta’ala keep us under the shadows of our Imams which ultimately lead us to the shadow of Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam). Ameen. al-miftah.com

You Will be with Whom you Love A Sahaabi once came to Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and asked: “O Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) when is the Day of Qiyaamah?” Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied: “What preparations have you made for that Day?” The Sahaabi said: “O Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam), I do not claim to have much Salaah, fasts and Sadaqah to my credit, but I do have the love of Allah Ta’ala and His Messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) in my heart.” Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) then said: “Surely on the Day of Qiyaamah, you will be with whom you love.” Anas (Radhiyallaho anho) says: “Nothing made the Sahaabah happier than these words of Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam).” (Fazaail Aamaal) يَا رَبِّ صَلِّ وَ سَلِّمْ دَائِمًا أَبَدًا عَلَى حَبِيبِكَ خَيرِ الخَلْقِ كُلِّهِمِ

Methods endorsed by the Congress of the United States of America

The Sunnah Response to Rain When referring to rain, Allah Ta’ala has mentioned dual purpose. In one verse, He says: “And he is the One who sends the winds ahead of his mercy” i.e, rain (Surah Furqan, verse:48) In another verse Allah Ta’ala says: “When they (the nation of Aad) saw a cloud approaching their valleys, they said, ‘This could will give us rain’ Nay! It is the calamity you were to be hastened. A wind wherein is a grievous punishment.” (Surah Ahqaf, verse: 24) The Multi Effect Allah Ta’ala has complete control over everything. Within the blink of an eye He can change good conditions into adversity and adversity into good. He can create benefit for a certain people and yet harm others with the very same matter. Rain for example, is one of those components as is witnessed by all and could be understood by the above Ayat of the noble Quran. A Sahabi (radiyallahu ‘anhu) once requested Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) during the Friday sermon to make Du’a for rain. The following Friday, the very same companion asked Nabi (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) to ask Allah to stop the rain as it had rained continuously the entire week and was causing difficulty. (Sahih Bukhari) Sunnah Du’as Due to this multiple effect of rain it was the practice of our beloved Nabi (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) that whenever the winds would blow –which is a natural forecast of rain –his colour would change and he would become worried. Upon enquiry, he would say: “I fear that it could be a punishment for my ummat.” He would also recite the following Duá: اَللهُم إني أسْألُكَ خيرَها وَخَيْرَ ما فِيها وَخيرَ ما أُرْسِلَتْ به، وَأعُودُ بِكَ مِنْ شَرها وَشر ما فيها وشر ما أُرْسِلَتْ به Allahumma inni as-aluka khairaha wa khaira ma fiha wa khaira ma ursilat bihi, wa a’uzhubika min sharriha wa sharri ma fiha wa sharri ma ursilat bihi Translation: O Allah! I beseech thee for the good of it, the good in it, the good that it brings, and I seek refuge in you from its evil, the evil that’s in it and the evil that comes with it. (Sahih Muslim, hadith: 2082 ) Thereafter, if it rained calmly, he would become relieved to such an extent that he would even go into the rain, open his chest or any part of his body and let the rain fall on his body so as to take blessing from it. Upon enquiry, Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) said: “Indeed it (the rain) has just recently come from my lord.” (Sahih Muslim Hadith: 2080) The following Duá were also recited by Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) whilst it rained: اللهم صَيبًا نافِعا Allahumma sayyiban nafi’a Translation: O Allah! let it be a beneficial downpour. (Sahih Bukhari, hadith: 1032) During a severe downpour Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) would recite: اللهم حَوَالَيْنا ولا عَلَيْنا Allahumma hawalayna wala ‘alaina Translation: O Allah! (let rain) around us and not upon us. (Sahih Bukhari, hadith:1013 & Sahih Muslim, hadith: 2076) And if it thundered, Rasulullah (sallallahu’alaihi wasallam) would recite: اللهم لا تَقْتُلْنا بِغَضَبِك وَلا تُهْلِكْنا بِعدابِك وعافِنا قَبْلَ دلِك Allahumma la taqtulna bi ghadhabik wa la tuhlikna bi ‘adhabik, wa ‘afina qabla dhalik Translation: O Allah! do not kill us through your anger, and do not destroy us through your punishment. Save us before your punishment. (Sunan Tirmidhi, hadith: 3450, Musnad Ahmad, hadith: 5763 & Al-Adabul Mufrad, hadith: 742) This hadith has been classified sahih by Imams: Hakim & Dhahabi (rahimahumallah)- Mustadrak, vol.2 pg.286 as well as by Hafiz Ibn Hajar & ‘Allamah Jazri (rahimahumallah)- Al-Futuhatur Rabbaniyyah, vol.4 pg.284 After it rains, one should say: مُطِرْنا بِفَضْلِ اللهِ وَرَحْمَتِه Mutirna bi fadlillahi wa rahmatihi Translation: It has rained through the grace and mercy of Allah. (Sahih Bukhari, hadith: 846/1048 & Sahih Muslim, hadith: 71) These are only some of the sunnah du’as to be recited when it rains. Acceptance of Du’a Duás are accepted at the time of rain: Sunnan Abu Dawud Hadith 2533; Mustadrak Hakim vol.2 pg.114-Hadith 2535. This Hadith has been classified as Sahih by Imams Hakim, Dhahabiy-ibid and al-Shawkani; Tufat al-Dhakirin pg.69. Also refer to al-Adhkar of Imam Nawawi) In some countries, the masses are so aware of this, that when it rains you will see people standing and making du’a, from wherever they may be. Lets implement these sunnats and respond to rain the sunnah way! al-miftah.com

Jewish and Muslim methods of slaughter Prioritise Animal Welfare theguardian.com The head of the British Veterinary Association has said that religious slaughter methods need to change to prevent animal suffering. It is unfortunate that the BVA and other animal welfare organisations in the UK tend to view religious slaughter as incompatible with humaneness; quite the contrary is true – compassion and animal welfare stand at the centre of the entire process. Shechita and zabiha are not words commonly known by the public, but to Jewish and Muslim communities they are synonymous with sincerely held, religiously mandated care for animals. They refer to the Jewish and Muslim humane methods of slaughter of animals for food, and the body of religious law in which they are contained talks not only about the last two seconds of an animal's life, but about its treatment from birth. There is much difference between shechita and zabiha, but both quickly dispatch the animal by severing the structures at the front of the neck – the trachea, oesophagus, carotid arteries and jugular veins. When carried out by a trained practitioner, the speed and precision of the incision ensures the lack of stimulation of the severed structures and results in the immediate loss of consciousness; blood flow to the brain is completely halted. In addition, blood empties rapidly from the brain. Irreversible cessation of consciousness and insensibility to pain are achieved, providing the most effective stun. There is no delay between stun and subsequent death, so the animal cannot regain consciousness – as can happen with conventional slaughter methods. Traditional British methods of stunning by use of a captive bolt, gassing or electrocution (by electrified pincers for larger animals, or a water bath with an electric current running through it for poultry) paralyse the animal, and it is unable to display outward signs of feeling pain. However, it is impossible to know whether the animal is feeling pain or not. There is ample scientific evidence that religious slaughter is at least as humane as conventional mechanical slaughter. Research in the UK and the US, including by Dr Temple Grandin – one of the authorities on animal welfare – have supported this view. By contrast, many of the studies that suggest that religious slaughter causes unnecessary pain have been agenda-driven and methodologically flawed, stretching data in a distinctly unscientific fashion to unsupported conclusions. It is remarkable therefore that religious slaughter can generate such a huge amount of publicity and media scaremongering when in fact the number of animals affected is extremely low. Halal and kosher meat are responsible for a fraction of the cattle slaughtered in the UK. So even if one believes, despite the lack of scientific consensus, that religious slaughter is cruel, it is deeply troubling that the BVA has chosen to focus its attention on religious slaughter rather than other, far more pressing animal welfare issues. For example, between 2009 and 2011 the campaign group Animal Aid filmed secretly and found evidence of unspeakable cruelty and illegal activity in eight of nine randomly chosenBritish slaughterhouses: animals were kicked, slapped, stamped on, and even burned with cigarettes. We are yet to hear of a campaign by the BVA to root out this kind of cruelty. Similarly, the European Food Safety authority found in 2004 that the failure rate for the much-trumpeted penetrating captive bolt stunning in conventional mechanical slaughter may be as high as 6.6%, and up to 31% for non-penetrating captive bolt and electric stunning. This equates to millions of animals each year that experience incredible suffering. But the BVA has not mounted a campaign on this. There will always be a discussion about what can be learned from scientific evidence, and the Jewish and Muslim communities stand ready to debate in any constructive forum. But let us not pretend that religious slaughter represents a key battleground for animal welfare in this country – to do so is disingenuous in the extreme.

The Issue of Halal Meat (A Detailed Article) [Mufti] Muhammad ibn Adam Darul Iftaa Leicester , UK Source Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam, in this Q/A, covers the following points in great depth: 1) The first looks at the Islamic perspective and viewpoint with regards to meat-eating and slaughtering of animals, 2) The second deals with the conditions and rules pertaining to a valid slaughter in Shariah, 3) The third, in refutation of those who call for the meat sold in western supermarkets to be considered lawful (halal).

Halal Slaughter of Animals – Humane or Inhumane? ReliableFatwas.com There is a widespread misconception amongst non-Muslims that the Islamic method of slaughtering animals is brutal, inhumane, and causes the animals to undergo torturous pain. This misconception is also held by modernist ‘Muslims’ who entertain doubts regarding the wisdom, efficacy, and mercy inherent in the Islamic sacred method of slaughtering as commanded and practised by the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Furthermore, the misconception is given impetus by the almost universal practice of so-called ‘Halal’ food authorities condoning or certifying an abominable, hybrid system consisting of foreign and brutally barbaric systems of slaughter adopted from the West, coated with a thin facade of rituals that are supposedly Islamic – all designed to facilitate for the carrion-addicted Muslim masses their self-serving deception that the diseased end-product of this mutated system is Halaal. Dr. Temple Grandin is recognised widely in the western world as the world’s leading expert on humane methods of animal slaughter. She has practically devoted her life to researching, designing, and experimenting on equipment and methods aimed at improving the conditions in which animals are reared, and the manner in which they are slaughtered. Having observed literally thousands of animals undergoing slaughter through various methods, over a period of decades, her observations can be said to carry some weight, at least according to the emphasis placed on empiricism by modern science. Her observations regarding the Jewish Kosher system of slaughter, many aspects of which are similar to the Islamic system, are worth noting here – primarily for the benefit of both sincere non-Muslims who are open-minded to a truth that may run against what they wish to believe in, and for the benefit of the growing number of non-Muslims pretending to be Muslims who should not be in need of scientific facts to be convinced of the superiority of Islamic laws. Describing the initial, complete lack of reaction exhibited by animals after having been subject to the Jewish Kosher method of slaughter, Dr Temple Grandin states: “The author (i.e. Temple Grandin) designed and operated four state-of-the-art restraint devices that hold cattle and calves in a comfortable upright position during kosher (Jewish; Fig 3) slaughter. To determine whether cattle feel the throat cut, at one plant the author deliberately applied the head restrainer so lightly that the animals could pull their heads out. None of the 10 cattle moved or attempted to pull their heads out.” Dr. Grandin goes on to mention that such is the calmness and unawareness of the cattle of its throat having been cut, that even tapping its head or face have been observed to elicit a far greater reaction: “Observations of hundreds of cattle and calves during kosher slaughter indicated that there was a slight quiver when the knife first contacted the throat. Invasion of the cattle’s flight zone by touching its head caused a bigger reaction. In another informal experiment, mature bulls and Holstein cows were gently restrained in a head holder with no body restraint. All of them stood still during the cut and did not appear to feel it.” She does admit that this did surprise her initially: “…when I’ve seen shechita on a cow done really right by a really good shochet, the animal seemed to act like it didn’t even feel it – if I walked up to that animal and put my hand in its face I would have got a much bigger reaction than I observed from the cut, and that was something which really surprised me.” Dr. Grandin observes that even when the onset of unconsciousness is delayed, there is still no sign of distress discernible: “Cattle do not appear distressed even when the onset of unconsciousness is delayed. Pain and distress cannot be determined by measurements such as an electroencephalogram. Behavioral observations, however, are valid measures for assessing pain. The author has observed that cattle appear unaware that their throat is cut. Investigators in New Zealand have made similar observations. Immediately after the cut, the head holder should be loosened slightly to allow the animal to relax. The author also has observed that after the head restraint is released, the animal collapses almost immediately or stands and looks around like a normal, alert animal. Within 5 to 60 seconds, cattle go into a hypoxic spasm and sensibility appears to be lost.” Unfortunately as a result of the acute prevalence of unislamic and foreign systems adopted widely by Muslims today, tolerated and given the stamp of approval by evil modernist scholars (Ulama-e-Soo) dictated by pecuniary and stomach-related motives, Dr. Grandin appears never to have witnessed the proper Islamic system of slaughter. Her observation of what she mistakenly deemed to be the Islamic method, is particularly damning and representative of Muslims today who have adopted an abominably mutated, hybrid system of unislamic practices coated superficially with a few Islamic rituals: “The design of the knife and the cutting technique appeared to be critical in preventing the animal from reacting to the cut. In kosher slaughter, a straight, razor-sharp knife that is twice the width of the throat is required, and the cut must be made in a single continuous motion. For halal (Muslim) slaughter, there are no knife-design requirements. Halal slaughter performed with short knives and multiple hacking cuts resulted in a vigorous reaction from cattle. Fortunately, many Muslim religious authorities accept preslaughter stunning. Muslims should be encouraged to stun the cattle or use long, straight, razor-sharp knives that are similar to the ones used for kosher slaughter.” What Dr. Grandin does not realize, through no fault on her part, is that the true Islamic system is restricted and governed by far more rules than any other method of slaughter in the world. Just as Muslims today have abandoned Islamic values and rules in every sphere of life, primarily in the name of modernisation, so too have they replaced the Islamic system of slaughter with the brutal hybrid system in vogue everywhere. At this point, it is worth mentioning just a few of the Islamic rules defined in detail by the Fuqaha (classical Islamic jurists of the 4 accepted schools of thought in Islam) over a millennium ago, which have been abandoned completely by Muslims today. These integral requisites of the Islamic system include ensuring that: (1) The animal is reared from birth in the most humane and comfortable environment. Any distress or pain caused to the animal at any point in time is completely forbidden. (2) The tender and gentle treatment must continue right up till the time of the slaughter. The animal must be completely unaware of the slaughter. (3) The animal is fed and given water to drink prior to the slaughter. (4) The knife must be exceedingly sharp and suitable for the purpose. (5) The knife must never be sharpened in the presence of the animal. (6) The slaughter of one animal must never take place in the presence of another animal. Even the blood left over by one animal should never ever be visible to another animal. (7) The recitation of the Tasmiya (and Durood Shareef) must take place which exercises a calming effect on the animal. (8) The one who slaughters the animal must be known to be a righteous (Aadil) person who can be trusted with the animals. And there are many more incumbent requirements of the Islamic system, all of which contribute to the smoothness of the process, and ensures that at no point in time does the animal have any opportunity to get agitated. Dr. Grandin does observe that animals without visible signs of agitation prior to the slaughter lose sensibility and collapse more quickly: “Observations by the author indicated that near immediate collapse can be induced in over 95% of cattle if the ritual slaughterer makes a rapid, deep cut close to the jawbone. Further observations indicated that calm cows and bulls lose sensibility and collapse more quickly than cattle with visible signs of agitation.” After having observed a Jewish Kosher plant that failed to abide by the code which governs their slaughter, Dr Grandin states that fault should not be attributed to the method of slaughter. Rather, criticism should be directed at those who are guilty of abandoning the compulsory requisites of the particular method of slaughter: “I thought it was the most disgusting thing I’d ever seen. I couldn’t believe it. I’ve been in at least 30 other kosher slaughter plants, and I had never ever seen that kind of procedure done before. … I’ve seen kosher slaughter really done right, so the problem here is not kosher slaughter. The problem here is a plant that is doing everything wrong they can do wrong.” Dr. Temple Grandin’s conclusions based on extensive real-life tests and observations are corroborated by other experts who have had a similarly extensive experience in this field. For example, Professor Harold Burrow of the Royal Veterinary College states: “Having witnessed the Jewish method carried out on many thousands of animals, I am unable to persuade myself that there is any cruelty attached to it. As a lover of animals, an owner of cattle and a veterinary Surgeon I would raise no objection to any animal bred, reared or owned by me being subjected to this method of slaughter.” The results of a scientific study on the Halaal slaughter method carried out some years ago by a team headed by Professor Wilhelm Schulze of Hanover University, also then the Director of the University of Veterinary Medicine of Hanover, matches in virtual exactitude Dr Grandin’s independent conclusions, and serve as further corroboratory evidence of the lack of pain experienced by animals that undergo the true Islamic method of slaughter with all its compulsory requirements abided by. The study named, “Attempts to Objectify Pain and Consciousness in Conventional (captive bolt pistol stunning) and Ritual (HALAL, knife) Methods of Slaughtering Sheep and Calves” involved surgically implanting electrodes into various points in the skull of 17 sheep and 10 calves to enable measurements of impulses from the cerebral cortex. EEG (electroencephalograph) readings from this method give accurate measurements of the levels of brain activity and consciousness of the animals. After a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck of the animals, there was no change to the EEG reading initially, confirming the fact that animals are completely unaware of being cut during and after the slaughter incision. Within a time-scale range of 4-10 seconds the EEG reading dropped significantly indicating a state of complete unconsciousness – a reading that is similar to that registered by an animal in deep sleep. A zero reading of the EEG, indicating a state of virtual brain inactivity (total unconsciousness and insensibility), was recorded no later than 23 seconds for all the animals (13 seconds for the sheep). Only after the zero reading was registered and the brain currents had stopped, did regular convulsions and cramps occur in the animals. This is the phase which is most aesthetically unpleasant to the onlooker and can give the erroneous impression to the uneducated that the animal is reacting from distress. In all the tested animals convulsions occurred only after deep unconsciousness had set in. Dr Grandin’s observations independent to this study also confirm this fact. In fact, the accepted scientific explanation behind convulsions confirm the fact that the animals are completely unconscious when this phase occurs. Convulsions occur due to the sudden shortage of oxygen to the brain which triggers the muscles of the body to contract vigorously and squeeze out blood from the tissues into the central circulation system to be sent to the brain. Since the venal and arterial connections to the brain have been severed, the pumped blood never reaches its intended destination, thus starving the brain further and intensifying the state of unconsciousness. These convulsions act as the most powerful and efficient means through which the maximum amount of blood is expelled from the body, which in turn induces, in the most rapid manner possible, transition from a complete state of unconsciousness to death. People who undergo epileptic fits undergo similarly violent convulsions, when the brain deprived of oxygen triggers the same process that ostensibly gives the impression of pain and distress. Such people who experience fits can confirm the total absence of pain sensation and even memory of their violent convulsions, even though they may have sustained injuries due to the body falling and writhing about. Life experiences of humans also confirm the fact that unexpected injuries, even serious ones, can occur without the person feeling any pain initially, despite the ostensibly gory scene that ensues. It is fairly common for victims of knife wounds, for example, to be completely oblivious to the fact that they’ve been fatally wounded, until some time later. In fact, there are numerous instances of people who have managed live to tell the tale after having been inflicted with a sudden clean cut to throat, and who describe being completely unaware of the fatal injury before passing out suddenly and regaining consciousness much later. The only sensation usually felt is that of a warm liquid flowing rapidly down one’s chest. To cite one example that can be easily verified online, Mr Mark Wells had his throat slit in an attempted murder which was reported in newspapers a few years ago. He recalls feeling no pain whatsoever, despite the obviously gory scene that would have been observable to any onlooker. Only after having looked in the mirror and witnessed the horrific state of his body did he say panic set in: “All I felt was a warm feeling coming down my throat all of a sudden. I thought it was just a nick. I stood up and looked in the mirror and there was all this flesh hanging down. That’s when I freaked out.” The next thing he remembers is waking up in a hospital “with cops all around me”. The process of bleeding itself is pain-free as can be confirmed by any blood donor. Furthermore, modern science confirms the fact that very heavy bleeding starves the brain of oxygen and induces unconsciousness rapidly. The onset of convulsions akin to fits, signals a state of complete unconsciousness. Another point to bear in mind is that animals in the wild invariably die violent and/or ostensibly painful deaths whether by falling prey to other animals, through contracting disease, experiencing accidents, starvation etc. Very rarely does an animal in the wild die purely due to old age. Rather, as an animal approaches old age, it becomes an easier target for predators or competitors, and more prone to disease and accidents. Furthermore, the extremely negligible number of animals that may die of natural causes (if we discount predators, disease, etc. as ‘natural causes’), or are domesticated as pets, pass away in a manner that appears painfully slow and gradual. The detailed rules and restrictions set out by the Fuqaha (classical Islamic jurists) on rearing animals and slaughtering provide the most humane conditions in which an animal can live, breed, and pass away. Much to the chagrin of modernist Muslims today, these detailed rules and restrictions form a huge obstacle to commercializing a sacred process which is inherently slow, dignified, and humane. The compromise of Islamic rules approved by modernist scholars today in an attempt to mass-commercialize the sacred Islamic process renders the resultant system completely unIslamic, regardless of the few rituals that are superficially added in order to dupe the Muslim masses. Just as modernists in the name of ‘updating’ Islam for the modern age have bypassed the categorical rulings of the Fuqaha in every other sphere of life, so too have modernists abandoned the detailed restrictions and guidelines which govern the Islamic sacred process of rearing and slaughtering animals. The Muslims masses who have adopted a way of life that is the very antithesis of the Islamic selfless spirit, and which revolves around brazen selfishness, unbridled fulfilment of their desires, and gratification of their gluttonous appetites, are no less culpable than the evil modernist scholars (Ulama-e-soo’) who give sanction to the brutal systems of ‘halaal’ slaughtering prevailing everywhere. Every minute detail of all spheres of life governing the Islamic way of life has been defined by the Fuqaha over a millennium ago. These rules represent the way of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and are immutable and unchangeable, no matter how incompatible or unpalatable they may appear to Muslim brains colonized by the west in this age of crass materialism and commercialization. Effecting changes to any of the rules set by the Fuqaha, in the name of modernisation, westernism, or any other foreign system, renders the end-product completely alien to Islamic teachings.

Husband claiming the wife's share after death Q. My mother and father jointly owned a house. Half the house belonged to my mother and half the house belonged to my father. After my mother passed away, my father remarried and gave my mother’s half of the house to his second wife. My father says that my mother’s share of the house belongs to him because they were married to each other and he has the right to do what he wishes with it. Is this correct? (Question published as received) A. According to the Shariah, spouses do not automatically share in each other’s property by virtue of marriage. We therefore assume that your mother acquired 50% share of the house by some other valid means, and not by virtue of the marriage. Your mother's 50 % of the house formed part of her estate upon her demise, and should be distributed amongst her rightful heirs in accordance to the Islamic Laws of Succession. You should approach the Ulama with further details in order to ascertain who her heirs were, and in what proportion. Since your father did not own the whole of your mother’s share after her demise, he could not have validly given it over to his second wife. It still remains the property of your mother’s heirs. And Allah Ta’ala Knows Best Mufti Ismaeel Bassa Confirmation: Mufti Ebrahim Desai Fatwa Department Jamiatul Ulama (KZN) Council of Muslim Theologians 223 Alpine Road, Overport, Durban

According to Dr. Temple Grandin Recommended Ritual Slaughter Practices Welfare During Slaughter without stunning (Kosher or Halal) differences between Sheep and Cattle Full article Here Overall Welfare

German Research Studies Pain A study carried out by Professor Wilhelm Schulze and his colleague Dr. Hazim at the School of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover University in Germany. The study: ‘Attempts to Objectify Pain and Consciousness in Conventional (captive bolt pistol stunning) and Ritual (halal, knife) Methods of Slaughtering Sheep and Calves’ concludes that Islamic slaughtering is the most humane method of slaughter and that captive bolt stunning, practiced in the West, causes severe pain to the animal. In the study, several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all animals, touching the surface of the brain. The animals were allowed to recover for several weeks. Some animals were then slaughtered by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck cutting the jugular veins and the carotid arteries as well as the trachea and esophagus (Islamic method). Other animals were stunned using a Captive Bolt Pistol (CBP). During the experiment, an electroencephalograph (EEG) and an electrocardiogram (ECG) recorded the condition of the brain and the heart of all animals during the course of slaughter and stunning. The results were as follows: I – Islamic Method 1. The first three seconds from the time of Islamic slaughter as recorded on the EEG did not show any change from the graph before slaughter, thus indicating that the animal did not feel any pain during or immediately after the incision. 2. For the following 3 seconds, the EEG recorded a condition of deep sleep – unconsciousness. This is due to the large quantity of blood gushing out from the body. 3. After the above-mentioned 6 seconds, the EEG recorded zero level, showing no feeling of pain at all. 4. As the brain message (EEG) dropped to zero level, the heart was still pounding and the body convulsing vigorously (a reflex action of the spinal cord) driving a maximum amount of blood from the body thus resulting in hygienic meat for the consumer. II – Western method by C.B.P. Stunning 1. The animals were apparently unconscious soon after stunning. 2. EEG showed severe pain immediately after stunning. 3. The hearts of animals stunned by C.B.P. stopped beating earlier as compared to those of the animals slaughtered according to the Islamic method resulting in the retention of more blood in the meat. This in turn is unhygienic for the consumer. Western-Style Slaughtering and Mad Cow’s Disease Not only is this method of stunning animals before the slaughter severely painful as shown by the previous experiment, but there is also a rising concern that this method may be a factor in the spread of mad cow’s disease from cattle to humans as it was discovered in recent research carried out at Texas A&M University and by Canada’s Food Inspection Agency, that a method called pneumatic stunning (which is the firing of a metal bolt into the cow’s brain followed by a pulverizing burst of 150 pounds of air pressure) delivered a force so explosive that it scattered brain tissue throughout the animal. This news is disturbing since the brain tissue and spinal cord are the most infectious parts of an animal with mad cow disease, which causes fatal Swiss cheese like holes in the brain of the infected animal. It is more disturbing to find out that around 30 to 40 percent of American cattle are stunned by pneumatic guns. Islamic Regulations for the Slaughter As one can see from the previous studies, Islamic slaughtering of animals is a blessing to both the animal and to humans alike. In order for the slaughtering to be lawful, several measures must be taken by the one performing the deed. This is to ensure the highest benefit to both the animal and the consumer. IS ISLAMIC SLAUGHTERING CRUEL TO ANIMALS? By Dr. Aisha EI-Awady Is Stunning Cruel.pdf

You Can't Just Kill - Animal Rights in Islam By Mufti Ismail Menk Mercy Halal Islamic Slaughter youtube video - has been "halalified" here however video can be seen on youtube. It shows how just by taking the name of Allah subhaanahu wata'ala, the animal becomes extremely calm.

The Islamic Method of Slaughtering Animals (Click on picture to enlarge)

The Conditions & Rules Pertaining To A Valid Slaughter In The Sacred Law The rules and laws governing hunting and slaughtering are given great importance in traditional Islamic jurisprudence, because of the importance Allah and His Messenger (Allah bless him & give him peace) gave them. The fuqaha (jurists) have explained these rules in great detail in their various works, deducing from the Qur’an, Prophetic example (sunna), and the sayings of the Companions (Allah be pleased with them). Very rarely will one find a book in traditional Islamic jurisprudence without a complete chapter on hunting and slaughtering. We can obviously not cover all of these rules in this brief article; neither is that our aim, but the basic fundamentals and important principles with regards to the slaughtering of animals can be mentioned. There are basically three conditions for a valid slaughter according to Shariah: a) Most of the four veins (including the Jugular vein, according to some) must be cut with a knife or a tool that is sharp and has a cutting edge; b) The name of Allah must be taken at the time of slaughtering, whether actually or effectively (such as when it is forgotten by someone who would normally have said it); c) The slaughterer must be either a Muslim or from the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab). (As mentioned by al-Haskafi and Ibn Abidin in Radd al-Muhtar `ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar) It should be also remembered here that, all these conditions are necessary individually and separately. Failure to fulfil them will render the animal unlawful. [Mufti] Muhammad ibn Adam Darul Iftaa Leicester , UK Rules and conditions in more detail: Source

*Important Note

The Islamic way of Slaughtering Animals - Humane or Inhumane? As Muslims we do not need proofs to convince us of the beauty of Islamic teachings. Alhamdulillah we hold on with firm faith on every commandment of Allah ta'ala and His Prophet, Muhammad sallallaahu 'alayhi wasallam. We do however intend to make this compilation for the non-Muslims who can study the facts with an open mind and for those Muslims of weaker faith who have been taken in by Western media propaganda. Unfortunately Islam comes under attack on every issue regardless of the fact that other religions may be teaching the same principles. Slaughtering in Judaism is similar to slaughtering in Islam! InshaAllah, after studying the facts it will become clear that the divine instructions of carrying out the slaughter of animals is without doubt the most humane.