-
Tasmiyyah On Fish
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
Why does Ghamidi sahab hold that tasmiyyah is not fard when catching fish? He says it is because you don’t slaughter in that way because blood must not be drained. I don’t understand how this makes a difference
جزاكم الله خيرا
-
12 Replies
-
Tasmiyyah On Fish
updated 3 years, 1 month ago
3 Members
·
12
Replies
-
It has nothing to do with blood in my understanding, rather its the nature of the act (the act of taking of a life) i.e. there’s this act of taking of a life, the severity and realization of which can only be experienced while slaughtering ruminants and birds, therefore such acts can only be executed with izn of Allah. In case of a fish, there’s no such taking of a life in terms of the nature of act being done on them, therefore, the compulsion of taking Allah’s name on them has been relaxed.
-
Bhai what would you say to the argument that your taking a life nonetheless. Ghamidi sahabs Argument that you can only take a life with the Izn of Allah makes sense. But why would this izn be relaxed for just the method of killing- it is still killing. I understand how a relaxation could occur in say plants. But why fish- they are not too dissimilar from other animals?
-
You’re taking like of a plant nevertheless, but that act of taking life can never be synonymous with that taking of a life for which term slaughter is used. Fishing activity is much closer to that of plants in terms of act of taking of a life. Besides, there’s no act of slaughter taking place. Nevertheless, a Muslim should Take Allah’s name even when fishing, since there’s no act of slaughter, therefore no exact time can be fixed to take Allah’s name. One should say it at the time appropriate to the situation, for example, a fisherman can say Allah’s name while throwing the net in the water for fishing.
Same is the reason why ‘Murdaar’ of Fish is Halal, because even in daily language use, we never use word ‘Murdaar’ for the Fish.
-
-
For comments of Ghamidi Sahab, please refer to the video below from 32:26 to 35:02
https://youtu.be/o4Rw8pPcprM?t=1946
Alternative Link: ilm-o-Hikmat 13-11-2016
-
No matter what you eat you must pronounce God’s name be it meat, fish or veggies – at least before eating it – if not sure whether done or not at the time of slaughtering. Quran says something like anything upon which God’s has not been pronounced is not lawful to eat. Limiting the scope of this verse to meat from certain animals only does not make sense to me. Nor does the argument of ‘way of taking life’ make any sense.
-
I think whenever the Quran is speaking about dietary requirements the thing under discussion is meat (barring alcohol which is technically a different subject).
That’s why the passive verb ذُكِرَ is used rather than the active participle because the time when the name of God is mentioned is at slaughter and you don’t slaughter fish or vegetables. This is especially clear in 22:36
-
Also in 5:1 أحلت لكم بهيمة الأنعام is specifically about land animals. Fish and vegetables are more of a background thing not in consideration. If go really deep I think meat from land animals has a special status in Abrahamic religions like the sacrifice in judaism with the burn offering and blood etc etc. Whereas fish and vegetables just don’t hold that same symbolism but this might be probing too deep
-
-
If we are convinced that the requirements of mentioning God’s name is only on certain land animals, a more plausible reason seems to be that it’s a requirement to replace the prevalent practice of mentioning names of false gods or saints while slaughtering animals in the pagan culture. It’s got nothing to do with “ways of killing”. Since the pagans were not slaughtering fish so Allah did not require us to mention His name.
This would also mean that eating McDo is fine as they don’t slaughter chickens in the name of false gods.
-
But that’s assuming the only purpose was negative in nature eg to stop the slaughter in the names of false gods. Then the directives shouldn’t have existed and it should have just been reasoning as to why shirk is wrong etc.
But positive commandments were given as to mentioning the name of God such as in 6:121. Anyway the reasoning is secondary to the commandments but I find no real issue in Ghamidi sahabs proposed reasoning.
And I think it still does have to do with the method of killing because even if the pagans weren’t fishing which I doubt they never had fish they would have been farming and no directives were given for vegetables or fruits. This is why I wrote about land animals which is the same reasoning Ghamidi sahab applied for slaughter. EG my reasoning for the Quran only talking about the meat of land animals is parallel with the reasoning Ghamidi sahab uses for slaughter as the illah in my opinion
-
One way of understanding this point in Quran is to combine the negative and positive directions that would read something like “do nit mention names of false gods while slaughtering animals and (if you have to, better) mention Allah’s name (as He deserves it far more than the false gods).
The other way to understand it to keep them separate and that would mean that the 6:118 verse is for pronouncing God’s name before eating anything and not (only) slaughtering animals. The bible supports this view as it requires mentioning of God’s name after eating but no requirement of tasmiyyah while slaughtering animals.
In view of that the safest view would be to say God’d name while eating food no matter its meat fish or veggies.
… “When you have eaten and are satisfied, bless (praise) the Lord your God for the good land He has given you.” … (Deuteronomy 8:10)
-
You interpretation has tk be supported by the Quran. For example in the case of safa and marwa allah used the exact wording u used without brackets ولا جناح عليكم أن تطوفوا بهما but this wasn’t used for tasmiyyah.
As for just mentioning the name at time of eating imo that’s not a valid view because the passive verb ذُكر is used not the positive command اذكروا اسم الله حين تأكلون
-
-
I agree if we read 6:118 -121 it’s clear we are not supposed to eat anything upon which God’s name has not been pronounced.
I couldn’t find anything that would restrict it to slaughter meat only. This sounds more of a principle rather than a practice. If we restrict the application of this verse to meat it wont solve the question of fishing without tasmiyyah.
If we take it as a principle applicable to all what we eat it solves all problems. When we say bismillah before eating, technically Allah’s name “has been pronounced”. Meaning no matter who pronounce Allah’s name as long as someone has done it we can eat it. This makes sense in case kids who have not learned to speak yet but need to be fed. Old people may not be able to speak sometimes but need to be fed by a caregiver.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
