URGENT. Can I eat vegetarian food prepared by a hindu?

[yaseer110 0]

Salam alaykum!

I hope you all are doing well.

A hindu friend is preparing a meal for us tonight. This food contains chicken bought from a halal place, but she is touching the food with wet hands (before being cooked). Am I allowed to eat this food as a shia muslim? Since she is going to boil the food later, doesn't that remove the effect of being touched by a kafir? I honestly do not know the way out; I can't think of any excuse to prevent myself from eating her food. Since she is really looking forward to this, I might hurt her sentiments.

I would really appreciate a prompt response.

Jazakallah

[sakura1994 144]

2 hours ago, yaseer110 said:

Salam alaykum!

I hope you all are doing well.

A hindu friend is preparing a meal for us tonight. This food contains chicken bought from a halal place, but she is touching the food with wet hands (before being cooked). Am I allowed to eat this food as a shia muslim? Since she is going to boil the food later, doesn't that remove the effect of being touched by a kafir? I honestly do not know the way out; I can't think of any excuse to prevent myself from eating her food. Since she is really looking forward to this, I might hurt her sentiments.

I would really appreciate a prompt response.

Jazakallah

hahah , what is this , the effect of kafir lool  .. and no the answer to your question it's ok to eat vegetarian food prepared by non muslim , just make sure she don't add alcohol to it . enjoy your friend food 

[notme 20,648]

You should ask you marja. It's probably already been answered, so searching his books will probably find an answer. Most nowadays do not consider polytheists to be inherently najis; they are people just like you and me, they just have some possibly najis habits. 

In some cases good manners take precedence over precautionary prohibitions, but do look it up for future reference.

[sakura1994 144]

2 hours ago, notme said:

You should ask you marja. It's probably already been answered, so searching his books will probably find an answer. Most nowadays do not consider polytheists to be inherently najis; they are people just like you and me, they just have some possibly najis habits. 

In some cases good manners take precedence over precautionary prohibitions, but do look it up for future reference.

they are misgudied , also most of them don't even believe in their parent religions , they just follow it as culture not religion , if you asked most hindus don't really believe in hinduism they treat it as culture .

and saying all polytheists inherently najis is wrong & racist/sterotyping .

[Sumerian 6,336]

First of all ignore the comment(s) of @sakura1994 because that person is not a Shi'i Muslim, while I assume you are, and therefore, looking for the Shi'i view.

As far as the question goes, if you follow Sayyed al-Sistani as your marja, then this is what he says:

Quote

Question: Is it permissible permissible to eat from non Ahlul Kitãb people?

Answer: A Muslim is allowed to eat the food prepared by a non-Muslim who is not from Ahlul Kitãb [for example, a Hindu or a Buddhist], provided that he does not know or is not sure that the non-Muslim touched the food with wetness; and provided that he does not know or is not sure that the food consists of what is forbidden to him like intoxicating drinks. As for meat, fat and their extracts, there are specific rules that will come later on.

http://www.sistani.org/english/qa/01294/#14845

So basically, if you don't know whether this Hindu person has touched the food with wet hands, then you are free to eat that food.

Edited April 27, 2016 by The Batman

[sakura1994 144]

2 hours ago, The Batman said:

First of all ignore the comment(s) of @sakura1994 because that person is not a Shi'i Muslim, while I assume you are, and therefore, looking for the Shi'i view.

As far as the question goes, if you follow Sayyed al-Sistani as your marja, then this is what he says:

 I never claim to be shia , I am muslim who follow the quran , and nothing in quran say not to accept friends food if they non muslims , also as it food that not gonna have meat then it should be fine , just be careful if your friend used cooking wine or alcohol . 

also telling people to ignore my comment is very rude . 

Edited April 27, 2016 by sakura1994

[Sumerian 6,336]

4 minutes ago, sakura1994 said:

 I never claim to be shia , I am muslim who follow the quran , and nothing in quran say not to accept friends food if they non muslims , also as it food that not gonna have meat then it should be fine , just be careful if your friend used cooking wine or alcohol . 

The fact is this is a Shi'a website, and the Jurisprudence questions are to be answered according to the Shi'i view unless one states otherwise (that they are not a Shi'a).

[sakura1994 144]

2 hours ago, The Batman said:

The fact is this is a Shi'a website, and the Jurisprudence questions are to be answered according to the Shi'i view unless one states otherwise (that they are not a Shi'a).

their is many non shia here , this site didn't say only shia when I signed in , if you say only shia then I wouldn't have come , and you could just answer with out telling people to ignore other users , that's rude and childish .

[Sumerian 6,336]

6 minutes ago, sakura1994 said:

their is many non shia here , this site didn't say only shia when I signed in , if you say only shia then I wouldn't have come , and you could just answer with out telling people to ignore other users , that's rude and childish .

Completely missed the point.

[sakura1994 144]

2 hours ago, The Batman said:

Completely missed the point.

you are rude .

[starlight 14,538]

@The Batman thank you for replying to the OP' s query. 

@sakura1994 non Muslims and non Shias are welcome on SC   This subforum 'Islamic Laws and Jurisprudence' is meant specifically for discussing and  answering people's questions about Shia laws, so we urge members to reply according to shia Jurisprudence,  unless specified otherwise. 

Edited April 27, 2016 by starlight
auto correct

[notme 20,648]

33 minutes ago, sakura1994 said:

you are rude .

He could have chosen his words more wisely, but he is correct that a Shia person should rely on Shia jurisprudence. You are welcome to use the whole forum, but especially in the Islamic laws section please be sure to make it clear that you are a non-Shia Muslim. Thanks. 

Edited April 27, 2016 by notme
:)

[yaseer110 0]

Thank you for the input everyone  This is getting really difficult for me to handle, especially when I am at university.

[notme 20,648]

10 minutes ago, yaseer110 said:

Thank you for the input everyone  This is getting really difficult for me to handle, especially when I am at university.

If you don't actually see wet hands touching the food, you can assume that she only touched the food with clean, dry hands. You aren't obligated to ask.

I don't prepare food and cook with my hands wet. I see no reason to assume others do.

[sakura1994 144]

3 hours ago, starlight said:

@The Batman thank you for replying to the OP' s query. 

@sakura1994 non Muslims and non Shias are welcome on SC   This subforum 'Islamic Laws and Jurisprudence' is meant specifically for discussing and  answering people's questions about Shia laws, so we urge members to reply according to shia Jurisprudence,  unless specified otherwise. 

ok I didn't know about this rule , thanks for telling me .

[The Green Knight 8,278]

A maid at home was Catholic. She seemed to be fine probably but I started avoiding any food she prepared. I felt sick whenever I consumed things she made. Its strange because before her we had two Christian maids but never felt repulsed by their food or tea etc.

Technically they may be classified as ahlul-kitab but again technically they are not. Speaking of which, technically many muslims may not be actually proper muslims. I have felt similarly sick in the guts eating food prepared by a gay chef we had. I feel there is a reason behind each instruction even if it may remain obscure. I think I've felt its effect. And no its not because I hate people because of their beliefs or differences in them. Just what I have observed.

[Bakir 3,181]

31 minutes ago, Darth Vader said:

A maid at home was Catholic. She seemed to be fine probably but I started avoiding any food she prepared. I felt sick whenever I consumed things she made. Its strange because before her we had two Christian maids but never felt repulsed by their food or tea etc.

Technically they may be classified as ahlul-kitab but again technically they are not. Speaking of which, technically many muslims may not be actually proper muslims. I have felt similarly sick in the guts eating food prepared by a gay chef we had. I feel there is a reason behind each instruction even if it may remain obscure. I think I've felt its effect. And no its not because I hate people because of their beliefs or differences in them. Just what I have observed.

Lawl, had fun reading these experiences xD. You should try my awesome beef steak in honey and mustard sauce (/me slaughters a cow in front of DV). You will feel weird things and fitnah in the food, but the taste will make up for it hahah!

Btw, it isnt really related to the topic but there are certain people I just can't eat their food for the bad vibes I just feel in their presence. And not sure if it is just my body replying to my mental state, but when I did try to eat their food I have always gotten sick the very same night.

@OP I feel for you. Indian food is gorgeous. Force yourself to delete from your brain any piece of certainty that your friend will touch chicken with wet hands xD

 

Edited April 27, 2016 by Bakir

[Ruq 6,264]

What is wet hands touching the food supposed to do exactly? what transfers and what is the result of that transference? because it sounds like youre talking about a physical uncleanliness, like germs tranfering from someones hands to something else. If it isnt that, then what exactly is tranfering?

[notme 20,648]

1 hour ago, Ruq said:

What is wet hands touching the food supposed to do exactly? what transfers and what is the result of that transference? because it sounds like youre talking about a physical uncleanliness, like germs tranfering from someones hands to something else. If it isnt that, then what exactly is tranfering?

There are some traditions which indicate that polytheists and atheists are inherently najis (like dogs and pigs). Most modern scholars do not consider this to be the case. I think the wet hands thing stems from this and may be a holdover or a precaution.

Edited April 27, 2016 by notme

[Ruq 6,264]

11 minutes ago, notme said:

There are some traditions which indicate that polytheists and atheists are inherently najis (like dogs and pigs). Most modern scholars do not consider this to be the case. I think the wet hands thing stems from this and may be a holdover or a precaution.

...to eat? =s i dont understand. Arent Dogs and pigs 'najis' because they are bad to eat and literally unclean (unhygienic) in their natures? why are people talking about human beings like this? ive never understood this kind of talk.

[notme 20,648]

1 hour ago, Ruq said:

...to eat? =s i dont understand. Arent Dogs and pigs 'najis' because they are bad to eat and literally unclean (unhygienic) in their natures? why are people talking about human beings like this? ive never understood this kind of talk.

*shrugs* I don't know. I always go by "If he isn't your brother in religion, he is your brother in humanity". I don't know how they reconciled the two. Maybe some hadith expert can explain to us all.

[Bakir 3,181]

I don't know why are you surprised Ruq. The Christian (not even atheist) wife of one of the men at the shia center here once dedicated her time to wash all the dishes and glasses by her own in the center because the rest were listening to the lecture in Arabic. When she finished, one of the woman went to the kitchen and told her that she lost her time washing the dishes as they will have to wash them again because she wasn't muslim. People are sometimes just rude to unconceivable levels.

Even if she was right (which she wasn't because the eoman was Christian in the first place), there is something our religion focuses on a lot, which is good manners. If some people can't show some to a Christian woman in a Shia center, how will they behave outside?

[notme 20,648]

Right, like I've mentioned before, sometimes manners are more important than precautionary rulings. Sometimes there is right and there is wrong. Other times there might be right and more right or wrong and more wrong.

[Sumerian 6,336]

10 hours ago, Ruq said:

What is wet hands touching the food supposed to do exactly? what transfers and what is the result of that transference? because it sounds like youre talking about a physical uncleanliness, like germs tranfering from someones hands to something else. If it isnt that, then what exactly is tranfering?

Probably the most famous view among the scholars is that Hindus, Buddhists and other polytheists are all inherently najis. So for example, if they have a wet hand and they shake your hand, then you should purify your hand because your hand has become najis.

Sayyed al-Sistani is of the view that all non-Ahlul Kitab kuffar (Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists) are inherently najis. And in fact the famous view amongst older Shi'a Fuqaha was that even Ahlul Kitab were najis.

Some use this Verse to prove that the polytheists are najis -

Quote

O you who have believed, indeed the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after this, their [final] year. And if you fear privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Wise. 

[9:28] 

Edited April 28, 2016 by The Batman

[The Green Knight 8,278]

11 hours ago, The Batman said:

And in fact the famous view amongst older Shi'a Fuqaha was that even Ahlul Kitab were najis.

And they are right. There are no ahlul-kitab, their books are too distorted now. Trinity is polytheism. Just being concise here. Another thing is that these people smell real bad. Per chance all those toiletries wear off they'll start to smell like corpses. They have no hygiene, hairy armpits, no concept of purity, no certainty in hearts. Same goes for "non-practicing muslims". Hands have sweat, skin coming off, odor. Some people believe fingers release enzymes when they touch food while corporate science states that touching foods gets your digestive system warmed up. Who knows for sure about the details. But the thing remains that their "cleaned" dishes smell, they smell of them naturally, and their hand prepared food makes me sick. Just stating observation.

Edited April 28, 2016 by Darth Vader

[Ruq 6,264]

On 28/04/2016 at 8:12 AM, The Batman said:

Probably the most famous view among the scholars is that Hindus, Buddhists and other polytheists are all inherently najis. So for example, if they have a wet hand and they shake your hand, then you should purify your hand because your hand has become najis.

Sayyed al-Sistani is of the view that all non-Ahlul Kitab kuffar (Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists) are inherently najis. And in fact the famous view amongst older Shi'a Fuqaha was that even Ahlul Kitab were najis.

Some use this Verse to prove that the polytheists are najis -

Im aware of historical opinions, this does nothing to address my question. The verse you quoted only says that the  mushriks of mecca couldnt enter the masjid because of uncleanliness. Its referencing a very secific group of people an doesnt say if that uncleanliness was related to physical hygiene habits or impure behaviours or impure spirtual beliefs and practices and how any of those might be related to one another.

[Sumerian 6,336]

29 minutes ago, Ruq said:

Im aware of historical opinions, this does nothing to address my question. The verse you quoted only says that the  mushriks of mecca couldnt enter the masjid because of uncleanliness. Its referencing a very secific group of people an doesnt say if that uncleanliness was related to physical hygiene habits or impure behaviours or impure spirtual beliefs and practices and how any of those might be related to one another.

Actually if you read it in Arabic, you would understand that the Verse is unconditional to all mushriks and not to the mushrikeen of Mecca. 

"Inama al-Mushrikoona najas" not "inama mushrikoona Meccata najas".

So it's " the polytheists are unclean" not "the polytheists of Mecca are unclean". There's nothing in the Ayah that indicates its only revealed to Meccan polytheists.

Now the difference between the ulama is whether the uncleaness of the polytheists is literal (which is similar to a pig's uncleaness) or whether it is spiritual (like someone who is in the state of Janaba). 

The pig transfers najasa if it is wet, the person in janaba generally does not.

[Aftahb 553]

certainly you can't but you can from a atheist in Moslem cloak, a pork eater in Christian cloak, and a interest accumalater in Jewish cloak but certainly not a Hindu!  

[Ruq 6,264]

26 minutes ago, The Batman said:

Actually if you read it in Arabic, you would understand that the Verse is unconditional to all mushriks and not to the mushrikeen of Mecca. 

"Inama al-Mushrikoona najas" not "inama mushrikoona Meccata najas".

So it's " the polytheists are unclean" not "the polytheists of Mecca are unclean". There's nothing in the Ayah that indicates its only revealed to Meccan polytheists.

Now the difference between the ulama is whether the uncleaness of the polytheists is literal (which is similar to a pig's uncleaness) or whether it is spiritual (like someone who is in the state of Janaba). 

The pig transfers najasa if it is wet, the person in janaba generally does not.

I didnt say it literally said 'the polytheists of Mecca are unclean', its the contect of the verse that suggests that statement is talking about a specific group of people (ie the types of polytheists that lived in Arabia at the time of the verses revelation).

I can see theres been a lot of confusion on this issue and it looks to me like it has led to some strange understandings where potential literal uncleanliness related to germs, bacteria, disease, viruses etc (physically unhealthy/threatening things) have been mixed with ideas about potentilally unhealthy beliefs. The problem with that is you cannot assume that someone who has polytheistic type beliefs is physically unhygienic or even that they engage in unhealthy behaviours that affect anyone but themselves (certain types of worship for instance). These notions about wetness and not touching things other people have touched because of their spiritual beliefs strongly smells of superstition and my concern is that its not a benign kind of superstition.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Ruq

[Sumerian 6,336]

11 minutes ago, Ruq said:

I didnt say it literally said 'the polytheists of Mecca are unclean', its the contect of the verse that suggests that statement is talking about a specific group of people (ie the types of polytheists that lived in Arabia at the time of the verses revelation).

I can see theres been a lot of confusion on this issue and it looks to me like it has led to some strange understandings where potential literal uncleanliness related to germs, bacteria, disease, viruses etc (physically unhealthy/threatening things) have been mixed with ideas about potentilally unhealthy beliefs. The problem with that is you cannot assume that someone who has polytheistic type beliefs is physically unhygienic or even that they engage in unhealthy behaviours that affect anyone but themselves (certain types of worship for instance). These notions about wetness and not touching things other people have touched because of their spiritual beliefs strongly smells of superstition and my concern is that its not a benign kind of superstition.

Trust me, any Arab grammarian will tell you there is no Arabic proof suggesting any context like the one you are stating.

As far as the najasa is concerned, no, whoever believes it that way is wrong. The easiest way to understand this is that this matter is about tahara (purity in a religious sense) which is different from nadhafa (clean-ness).

For example, there is a specific religious method to purify a cloth which has become impure by urine. But that doesn't mean that using cleaning agents won't get rid of the bacteria and the smell and what not. Of course it will. But that also doesn't mean that that the cloth has become "purified" in the religious sense that one could pray with the cloth on, for example.

So yes, one should not confuse this with that. I know many Muslims who should probably learn off other non-Muslims on how to be clean. But there is a difference between being pure in the religious sense and being clean as we know it.

[Ruq 6,264]

23 minutes ago, The Batman said:

 

So yes, one should not confuse this with that. I know many Muslims who should probably learn off other non-Muslims on how to be clean. But there is a difference between being pure in the religious sense and being clean as we know it.

Indeed, but when people are saying that someone touching something with wet hands is connected to that thing becoming najis then physical hygiene has become mixed with a peceived corruption of someones beliefs, as if their beliefs can somehow contaminate you physically.