A R C H I V E S
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
| Halal or not? questions |
|---|
| Caraj |
| 06/11/05 at 19:19:45 |
| I am trying to learn which foods are allowed and which are not. I know we aren't to eat pork. I'm shocked as I learn what is in our foods. Things that are not natural, not meant to be. Is there halal jello? Marshmellows? I was shocked at the price of Kosher ones in the regular stores almost $5. a bag. What exactly is in jello and marshmellows? Somethiong to do with swine? What other foods should I be careful of? Also vanilla has alchol in it, but is it a natural occuring thing or an additive? Can one use a vanilla bean in recipies? Thank you for all help and advice on this matter. |
| Halal or not? |
|---|
| onemuslimgirl |
| 06/12/05 at 12:14:59 |
| asalam alakum, this is a tough question that even ppl who have been Muslim for a long time have a hard time to answer. as for jello and marshmellows, the gelatin is made from pork. if you look carefully, you will be able to find items that are made from beef gelaton, kosher gelatin, or fish gelatin. look for the kosher sign, a 'k' with a circle around it. as for vanilla, i think ur thinking of vanilla extract. what i undersstand is they use alcohol to remove the flavor of the vanilla, so vanilla extract has alcohol in it. the actual bean is just a bean and can be used. |
| also |
|---|
| Kathy |
| 06/12/05 at 14:03:05 |
| [slm] Also, just because it says it is Kosher Gelatin, this does not mean it is acceptable for us. According to Rabbinical law, they will allow pork gelatin because they feel, through processing, the chemicals have changed so much, it is no longer pork. We Muslims fell... once a pig always a pig! Gelatin that is ok, made grom sea weed- agar agar, fish and zabihia beef. Alot of commercial gelatin is also made from horse. If you have any middle eastern type stores, you should be able to purchase 'jello' and marshmellows. Our prices are just as high. Before I look it up anyone know the difference between K with a circle, k plain, parve and U ? Sam's club carries an imitation vanilla without alcohol. It is the gallon size one. You can go to the website http://www.muslimconsumergroup.com to learn alot more. |
| yukky |
|---|
| Caraj |
| 06/12/05 at 15:07:52 |
| Tell you what, upon educating ones self about pork, mad cow and what we have eatten and what we have fed our animals. It is so un natural and no wonder with all the pork by products, chemicals, preservative, addititves no wonder there is so much illness. grosssssssssss :( Well I fear I will lose my favorite hot weather desert Orange jello with maderine oranges and mini marshmellows. Maybe not. I did the islamicfinder.com and found a store in Seattle, will have to make a trip to the BIG CITY soon :) |
| Difference of opinon |
|---|
| bhaloo |
| 06/12/05 at 23:47:23 |
| [slm] [quote author=Kathy link=board=lighthouse;num=1118531986;start=0#2 date=06/12/05 at 14:03:05] According to Rabbinical law, they will allow pork gelatin because they feel, through processing, the chemicals have changed so much, it is no longer pork. We Muslims fell... once a pig always a pig! [/quote] IN THE NAME OF ALLAAH THE MOST KIND THE MOST MERCIFUL ------------------------------------------------------ 28th Rabi' al-Thaani 1420:10th August '99 : Tue:2.00 am (UK time) From Abu Muntasir, Assalaam 'alaikum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu. Innal hamdalillaah was-salaat was-salaam 'alaa rasoolillaah. We need to be very careful when pronouncing anything to be forbidden by Allah. In addition we should also fear Allah in creating difficulties for Muslims or subjecting them to the inconveniences of unecessary restrictions. Recently some query and discussion has been taking place with regards to Pepsi and possibly Coca Cola containing a small amount of alcohol and how we should view such beverages. Shaikh Albani's view is that change purifies substances that had originally been deemed prohibited. A brother Tamim kindly pointed out with due care and caution that Shaikh Albani apparently also hold it permissible to eat e.g., chocolate bars containing intoxicating substances in small quantities. This is because even if one were to eat say a 100 such chocolate bars, one would not become intoxicated. He drew our attention to the shaikh mentioning the hadith of when a rat fell in some ghee (clarified butter). They simply removed the rat and threw out the ghee that they saw had been contaminated around where the rat had fallen. The rest of the ghee was still considered pure. The shaikh's analogy was with regards to the fact that some remnants of the rat falling in the container of ghee were still in there, but it was still considered pure. He also clarified the other hadith, "that if something is considered impermissible then small quantities are also impermissible" where the shaikh agreed that if the small quantity is enough, where you take it numerous times it will have the same effect as the original dose, then it is not permissible. However, in the case of alcohol in the chocolate which is so minute, that even if one eats a 100 bars one will not become drunk, then this ruling doesn't apply here...thus harmonizing the aforementioned situation and the latter hadith. Subsequently Ali Al-Timimi confirmed that Ibn Baz has a similar Fatwa which can be found in a booklet distributed by the Saudi Embassy entitled Fatawa al-Mughtarib. He said the rule is does consumption lead to drunkenness even if large quantities are drunk. Since it is apparent that drinking large amount of Pepsi does not lead to intoxication it is therefore not haram to consume. Here are some notes from Dr. S. Darsh (may Allah have mercy on him) where he discusses the issue of food additives. He wrote the following in 1992! =============================================================== ADDITIVES Additives are chemical elements. They are no more considered as the original material from which they are derived, the fiqh rule is: any change in the substance entails change in the rule'. This is the answer I give to those who inquire about what foods today are Halal. Many try to argue that any additive which contains an element of Haram makes a food itself Haram, based on the hadith, "any flesh grows out of suht (unlawful food) will not enter Paradise'. But there are two aspects to this: first, suht means unlawful. Ibn Mas'oud explained this word which is recorded in chapter 5 verse 42 of Tafseer Ibn Katheer as meaning 'one who takes bribes'. Thus, Ibn Katheer first explained suht generally as anything unlawful or derived from unlawful means. Second, this hadith is weak, (see Kashful Khafa vol.2 page 176). The Hanafi Position Going to the substance of the letter. The purity of an additive is based upon the principle described (the change of the nature of the substance) . In vol. 1, page 314, Hashiya ibn Abedin, Radd al Muhtar ala ad-durr al Mukhtar, a standard Hanafi fiqh text book, written by Muhammad Ala'a al Deen Al Hasafki, there are more than thirty purifying things mentioned by Al Hasafki (rendered into a poetry form to make it easy to memorize) . In one line he said, 'and change of substance" . Ibn Abedin said, "the swine which drowns in a salt lake, after decomposition, becomes salt and thus halal". Ibn Abedin based his comments on the saying of Al Hasafki regarding the manufacturing of vinegar made from wine. "According to the principle of change of substance, vinegar made of wine is lawful". He then went on to say, "Vinegar made by mixing wine with water, according to the correct opinion, is pure" One page 315, Al Hasafki has said that "soap made from impure oil is pure and can be used. Ibn Abedin, commenting on this said, "This is an example of change of substance". he then went on to quote a statement issued by Al Mugtaba which reinforced Al Hasafki's view that pure soap could be derived from oil that was not pure. A similar position was reflected by Muhammad ibn Al Hasan, the second great pupil of Abu Hanifa. According to Ibn Abedin, the fat of a dead animal, used to make soap is subject to the same conditions. The expression used was impure (najas) as opposed to mutanajjis which means to make impure. However, oil is usually used in preference to other fatty substances. However, reading Al Munyah, I found an explanation which supports the first view, he states, "If a man or dog falls into the container in which soap is being made, it remains pure". Ibn Abedin goes on to say, "Know that a compound is deemed pure, according to Muhammad ibn Al Hasan, from the rule which allows for change of substance". In addition, he adds that any product or substance, not only soap, can also be judged pure on account of its widespread use. One page 326, on the subject of change of substance, as if to reinforce the point, al Hasafki says that dust and smoke particles rising from burnt human or animal excrement cannot be judged impure. If it were, he says, then we would be forbidden to eat bread baked on fires in which such impurities were used as fuel. The same can be said for salt filtered from animal-contaminated lakes. This, concludes Ibn Abedin, is how any product or substance is judged to be pure or otherwise. Muhammad Al Dakhira, Al Muhit and Abu Hanifa are all of the same opinion. Other shaikhs choose to follow this ruling as well. This is the chosen rule for the Shar'iah ruled that these things were impure in their nature. The reality of a thing changes with the change of some of its implied parts, not to mention all of them. Salt is totally different from meat and bones. If they become salt, they are salt. What is similar to that in the Shar'iah is the life-germ (sperm), the beginning of human life. From a Hanafi point of view it is impure, then it is turned into a clot, it is still impure, then it becomes a lump of flesh and at this point it becomes pure. The same goes for wine juice. it is pure, when it becomes wine it becomes impure, but when it turns to vinegar, it becomes pure. This is as far as the Hanafi school is concerned. The Hanbali position The Hanbali school's attitude is quite different. In al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah, a Hanbali standard book, in the book of purity, section on utensils, he writes: 'No impure thing could turn into pure as a result of the change in its substance except wine when it changes by itself into vinegar'. But it could be deduced that all impure things become pure as a result of the change of its nature, analogous to the change of wine to vinegar is the skin of a dead animal when tanned and the domestic, edible birds and animal which eat excretion. The Literalist position According to the Literalist School: Ibn Hazm, the exponent of the Literalist school wrote in his manual (Al Muhalla) volume 1, page 166, problem no. 132: 'If the excretion of the animal is burnt down or changed and becomes ashes or dust, all that becomes pure and can be used for tayammum (earth purification) . The proof of that is the fact that rules are in accordance with what Allah Most High, has ruled regarding the objects in what the object is named. If the name of the object is changed or dropped, the previous rule is dropped as well. It is something from that which Allah has named'. As such, excretion is different from dust, as it is different from ashes. The same thing with wine which is different from vinegar and human being is different from the blood from which he is created. The dead thing is different from dust or ashes. In problem 136, page 178, he goes on to say: 'If the quality of the substance of naturally impure object changes the name which was given to it so that it is no more applicable to it and it is given a new name which is given to a pure object, so it is no more an impure thing. It becomes a new object, with a new rule. The same thing is true of a pure thing changing into impure thing such as juice becoming wine or the wine becoming vinegar. The pork flesh eaten by a chicken and becoming a chicken flesh. It is halal. The water becoming wine or the food turning into excretion, the excretion and the wine used as fertilizer or becoming a fruit and so many other things. Al Qur'an The basis of all these is the Qur'anic verse: 'And surely there is a lesson for you in the cattle we give you to drink of what is in their bellies from between the faeces and blood, pure milk, wholesome to those who drink it' (16-66) Allah Most High, considers it one of the favours He bestowed upon people that a healthy pure animal product comes out of these impure things. Conclusion In the light of what is mentioned above, and the widespread use of so many things which are becoming essential needs for Muslim communities living in a non-Islamic environment, any substance which chemically changed from its original character becomes a new product and acceptable to use. This includes: 1. Chemical preservatives, i.e. all E' numbers 2. Soap made from fat, animal products or oil, deemed impure in its original form 3. Toothpaste 4. Wine Vinegar 5. Gelatin and products containing it To obtain gelatin from animal protein, it has to undergo a lengthy chemical process described in the Oxford dictionary of science as follows: 'A colourless or pale yellow, water-soluble protein obtained by boiling collagen with water and evaporating the solution. It melts when water is added and dissolves in hot water to form a solution that sets to a gel on cooling' (page 290) This description shows the great change it undertakes and the new name it takes. On considering part of the Qur'anic verse of chapter 16 I quoted earlier, it is clear this process is like or similar to the process of obtaining milk out of the dirt inside the belly of the animal which Allah described as wholesome, palatable and pure. In fact, most of the new products which are containing such chemical elements are obtained by chemical processes. These processes are not a mere mixing up of what is Haram with what is Halal. it is a real change. Protein is different from gelatin. As such it is pure and can be used in products which are allowed. Vinegar, milk and salt are all examples of products extracted from impure substances. In fact the Hanafi view in this connection is much more advanced and liberal, particularly when we study the purifying aspects mentioned by Ad-Durr Al Mukhtar, which, by the way, includes boiling, tanning, slaughtering and dividing. To hasten to say Haram without considering the process of change, to look into the original without considering the new product shows the inability to understand the world of science and chemistry advanced as it is nowadays and ignoring the needs of the Muslim communities in their new environment May Allah guide us on the right way. |
| Pig is Pig? |
|---|
| Kathy |
| 06/13/05 at 07:11:53 |
| [slm] Wow... I am dumbfounded. I am sure glad I did not use the 'haram' word! This is an excellent example of why not to call anything haram, unless you know for sure. According to Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid (www.islam-qa.com) in Question #210: Foods produced in the West, such as gelatin [quote] Of the foods which are to be found nowadays, some of them are clearly haraam, ....[i]edited[/i].... Hence gelatin which is derived from collagen which comes from pigs is haraam, because it is as if the pig had been turned into salt. The most correct view is that it is haraam even if it has been changed, so long as it originally came from a pig, which is haraam. [/quote] Do you still have the link to your posting, listing who wrote it? |
| 06/13/05 at 07:26:18 |
| Kathy |
| huh? |
|---|
| bhaloo |
| 06/13/05 at 08:07:40 |
| [slm] [quote author=Kathy link=board=lighthouse;num=1118531986;start=0#5 date=06/13/05 at 07:11:53] Do you still have the link to your posting, listing who wrote it?[/quote] This is the same posting I put up a few years back on the board when there was all this talk about alcohol in pepsi and how people should boycott pepsi because of the alcohol in there. As for who wrote the above, it is in the article. Did you read the whole article? It was put together by a brother named Abu Muntassir (residing in the UK and active with JIMAS) and written about 6 years ago. It cites sheikh Darsh (may Allah (SWT) have mercy on his soul), who passed away a few years ago and lived in the UK (I bought a book of his a few years ago), it cites Ali Tamimi (who has been in the news recently) as well as other scholars. This is also why I titled the subject of that post, a difference of opinion, as I know that some scholars feel differently. |
| 06/13/05 at 08:09:11 |
| bhaloo |
| Ignorant |
|---|
| Kathy |
| 06/14/05 at 08:48:22 |
| [wlm] Yes, I read the entire article. I am not familiar with most of these names. I read doctor, and not sheik. No idea who Abu Muntassir or the initials of the group. So to a newbie like me, I had no idea what scholarly level they are on. Who wrote the last 4 paragraphs of your post? I do not understand how impurity of dirt of a cow and impurity of swine's feet can be compared. |
| hmmmm |
|---|
| bhaloo |
| 06/15/05 at 01:59:09 |
| [slm] In regards to your cow dirt and swine feet question, first see Quran 16:66 how it talks about milk that is produced from a cow's belly. The blood goes to the veins, the milk goes to the udder, the urine goes to the bladder and the feces goes to the anus. None of them gets mixed with another after separating, and none of them is affected by the other. And all of these things originated from the food that was in the cow's belly, through some sort of process they were separated. This is the kind of reference being made in the article at the end. There were many scholars mentioned in the article, such as Sheikh Albany and Sheikh Bin Baz (may Allah (SWT) have mercy on their souls) whom was the teacher of the scholar you mentioned in your last post and whose names you probably already know. Many of the other scholars you may or may not know depending on your level of knowledge and you can most likely do a search for them on the internet to get biographies. If you follow the opinion that you put up, doesn't that cause some issues for you in the case of say, Pepsi, which has traces of alcohol in it? |
| science says |
|---|
| lala |
| 06/16/05 at 09:08:27 |
| [slm] So in laymans' terms : some views are that chemically things change and when they do, they CAN be permissible? and other scholarly views: these chemical changes dont matter because the source is still 'haram'. ? for a little bit of science: "A chemical change is a process in which reactants are changed into one or more different products. A chemical change occurs whenever compounds are formed or decomposed. During this reaction, there is a rearrangement of atoms that makes or breaks chemical bonds. This change is usually not reversible. Indicators of a chemical change include a color change, the formation of a precipitate, the formation of gas, or a change in temperature. When new substances are formed, a chemical change has occurred, and a chemical reaction has taken place." Gelatin is created by hydrolyis where water is added to collagen which is then split into 2 parts. So now the molecule is easily broken down etc etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelatin#Physical_properties Anyhow I have no advice- just passing along some science.:) salaam and good luck with your quest. |
| clarifying |
|---|
| Kathy |
| 06/16/05 at 09:15:37 |
| [slm] I understand the Cow part, after all I am from cow country... but I can eat cow. It's like comparing apples and rotten fruit. So if gelatin is made from Pig, i can't eat pig no matter what. I can't follow the reasoning that it is ok just because it was chemically changed. In my unscholorly opinion, and i am only continuing this line of topics bcause i want to understand, is that this does not relate to alcohol in any way. The main reason we were told not to drink alcohol is because of prayers, intoxication etc... However, we were never told really why we can't eat pig. So i can understand the 100 bars of chocolate reasoning, the trace amounts in pepsi. I just don't understand the reasoning the scholars allow pig, no matter what its chemical makeup. Also, thnks for trying to educate this ole fool. By the way, did anyone find a listing of the meanings of the different kosher symbols... i must not be using google right. |
| Halal jello |
|---|
| UmmWafi |
| 06/17/05 at 00:32:20 |
| [wlm] Dear sis Azizah I dont know whether taking the "kosher" definition of permissibility is wise given that the Judaistic system of law and our own fiqh system are definitely the same. I have always personally maintained that I should only stick to Halal certification. But, it is my own personal opinion and not binding :) Here in Singapore, we have halal jello. I would be glad to post some to anyone who wants some. Trust me, its not a big deal because jello is light and it wont be expensive for me sending some over to anywhere in the world :) I wish some other things are cheaper though. Sorry Sis Kathy, I still have those unwanted Muslim clothes....just cant afford the postage yet. I asked and it was just too expensive. Inshallah, Allah will provide a way for me in the future soon. Wassalam. |
| cows' milk |
|---|
| eleanor |
| 06/18/05 at 16:29:41 |
| [slm] Far be it for me to dispute anything written in the Qu'ran, but milk does not get made in the belly and then passed on to the udder. Now that I am a lactating mammal myself, I understand a bit of how milk is made and it is in fact made directly in the udder. The belly doesn't even come into it. [url]http://www.creamland.com/mteamproj2.html[/url] However I do agree that the processing can change a substance so much so that the source is no longer present. For example "red wine vinegar" or similar. If you are to test this vinegar for alcohol none will be found. Now I don't know if you test gelatin for pork if any will be found... For me that is a shady area. One of my favourite hadiths is the one about the sheep. I can tell it in my own words - If there is a field that is forbidden to your sheep then don't let your sheep go into any of the adjacent fields either. Then you are doubly safe that your sheep will not wander into forbidden territory. This is why, when something is doubtful to me, in my limited knowledge I just try to avoid it. Allahu Ahlam wasalaam eleanor |
| Before I look it up anyone know the difference be |
|---|
| muslimah853 |
| 06/19/05 at 20:56:23 |
| [slm] Before I look it up anyone know the difference between K with a circle, k plain, parve and U The difference basically boils down to the organization which provides the certification. There are several different kosher certifying organizations, and each has its own trademarked symbol. Plain K actually isn't a single org...because a plain letter can't be trademarked, so technically anyone can use it. For this reason many kosher keeping Jews will not go for food with a plain K...if they can't be sure of who is actually doing the certification and what their standards are. It is important to note that different certifying organizations have different standards with regard to what they consider kosher...so yes while it's true that some rabbis have declared that 'molecularly altered' pig is okay (ie gelatin), not all necessarily accept it (btw, there are some Muslim jurists who take this stance as well). Each of these orgs have websites so if you are interested in what their standards are, you can look them up and see for yourself. Parve is a type of food under Jewish law, basically 'neutral' is what it means. Because Jewish law forbids the mixing of meat and dairy products, foods are classified...they are kosher meat, they are kosher dairy, or they might be kosher parve, which is neither and may be eaten with meat or dairy. Something like flour or rice would be parve. Hope this helps. |
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board |