The phrase ” اهل لغیر الله” has been mentioned in four surahs of the Quran[1]; surah An’aam (revealed in the advent of Islam), Nahl (revealed at the end of the prophet’s stay in Mecca), and also in surahs Baqarah (revealed at the beginning of the prophet stay in Medina) and Ma’idah (revealed at the end of the prophets stay in Medina).

One of the clearest verses in this regard is verse 173 of surah Baqarah that we will examine and observe below:

“إِنَّما حَرَّمَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْمَيْتَةَ وَ الدَّمَ وَ لَحْمَ الْخِنْزيرِ وَ ما أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ اللَّهِ فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ غَيْرَ باغٍ وَ لا عادٍ فَلا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَحيمٌ”

The Meaning of “اُهل” in the phrase “أُهِلَّ لِغَیرِ اللَّهِ”

Ihlaal (اهلال) means to say something out loud. The polytheists used to call out “By Lat and Uzza (two idols)” while slaughtering animals.

When a baby would cry out loud after being born, Arabs would use the phrase “استهلّ الصبی”.[2]

Interpreting the Verse

The verse says: “He hath forbidden you only carrion, and blood, and swine flesh, and that which hath been immolated to (the name of) any other than Allah”. The verse is referring to two points in its unique briefness:

First: God’s name should be mentioned when slaughtering an animal

Second: If other names are mentioned the meat is not consumable

There are four possible options in this regard; first: only God’s name is mentioned, second: other names are mentioned, third: both God’s name and other names are mentioned, fourth: no name is mentioned at all. The first is indisputably accepted. The second is clearly negated. The third is an example of “other names being mentioned” (أُهِلَّ لِغَیرِ اللَّهِ), even though God’s name was also mentioned. Therefore, the verse also negates the third option.

At first the verse seems to allow the fourth option, however, when we observe it more precisely, we find that this is not the meaning of the verse, because the verse says: “animals with other names being called out”, which implies that some sort of a name was being mentioned, as the verse uses the verb Ihlal (saying something out loud). This presumption of the verse (which shows that a name is being called) shows that the fourth option really can't be an option. The polytheists would mention the names of idols and the Quran is prohibiting them from doing so. Despite the fact that this is not the only possible interpretation, one must accept it, when it is considered along with the other verses and ahadith:

1- Verse 121 of An’am surah which states:” Do not eat [anything] of that over which Allah's Name has not been mentioned, and that is indeed transgression.”[3] It is understood from this verse that if nothing is mentioned, then it is haram to consume the meat. Therefore, this verse clearly declares the fourth option to be haram to consume.

2- Verse 118 of surah An’am which states: “Eat from that over which Allah's Name has been mentioned, if you are believers in His signs.”[4] This verse also indirectly implies that one cannot consume animals without mentioning God’s named at the time of slaughter.

3- Mentioning God’s name is so important that when the Quran addresses hunters, it says that they must mention God’s name when they unleash their hunting dogs after the game.[5]

4- In some books of Ayat al-Ahkam, it is mentioned that the phrase “ما اهل لغیر الله” also covers animals that no name is mentioned over. [6]

5- The ahadith also point out the following condition. In a hadith from Imam Reza, he says: “God has made it haram to consume meat that others’ names have been mentioned over, because He has made it incumbent upon His servants and acknowledge His oneness, and in mentioning His name lies acknowledgment of His lordship and oneness.”[7]

On this basis, all Muslim scholars believe that it is incumbent to mention God’s name at the time of slaughter, and one could say that there is a consensus in this regard amongst Shia scholars.[8]

However, amongst our Sunni brothers, the Shafi’is believe that “Tasmiyyah” (Mentioning God’s name) is not the condition that must be met, but rather all that counts is that no other name be mentioned.[9]

It is obvious that the abovementioned fatwa contradicts Quranic verses and the opinion of all other Muslim scholars.

Similarly, all of the contemporary maraji’ believe that “Tasmiyyah” is required. The only exception is if one forgets to do so. (In such a situation, he can consume the meat after slaughtering it.)[10]

Finally, we must note two points:

First: Tasmiyyah is not just mentioning a name and just a simple acknowledgment, but it also may have certain effects on the slaughtered animal that only Allah is aware o.

Second: Nowadays, halal meat is provided in most countries. In countries that halal meat is scarce, one must consume meat that does not require ritual slaughtering, like fish.

The Difference between Halal Meat and Dhabihah

Animals fall into different categories in terms of whether or not their meat is halal to consume:

First: Animals that are halal to eat if they are slaughtered with all the conditions. These are called “halal dhabihah”. Therefore, if an animal has been slaughtered, meaning that its four veins have been cut first, but the other conditions have not been met, then consuming its meat and using its other parts like its skin during prayer will not be permissible.[11]

Second: Animals that are not halal to eat like wolves and tigers.[12] If these animals are slaughtered in the correct way, their skin and other parts can be used for different purposes (i.e., their skin and other parts aren't najis), but the meat cannot be consumed.

Third: Animals that are najis and cannot be used for any means, even if they are slaughtered correctly, like dogs and pigs.[13]