Coca-cola is haraam?

[A D I D A S]

Mufti Patel

[Yusuf]

Did you guys read the recent fatwa by the majlis that coke is haram?

Coke does contain a small amount of alcohol (ethanol). Mufti Ebrahim says it's fine cos it's non-khamr (ethanol) and it's derived from plants (cane) or something. But if it were to be extracted from grapes or dates i think it would be khamarised, therefore haram.

On the other hand, Majlis say it's haram regardless of the type of alcohol because [apparently] for the last "so many years" mufta bihi in the hanafi madhab has been on Imam Muhammad's opinion-any type of alcohol is haram.

[Idrees]

I think this is what Yusuf is talking about:-

The second question put to radio channel islam is:

"Is it halaal to drink Coca Cola?"

The channel's answer was: "To drink Coca Cola is totally permissible. However, if a person looks at it from all perspectives and we say that it is harmful towards health, and it is something that is not good for a person's health for now and the future, that all is a different issue. From fatwa point of view that is 100% halaal. In fact yesterday I was looking at Ahsanul Fataawa and I found this fatwa there also, that someone asked Mufti Rashid Ahmed (rahimahullah) that they have alcohol in it and so forth. He gave the same answer we gave many times that this alcohol is a miniscule percentage and whatever, and when the coke is sort of formulated and everything, so then that is not alcohol that the Qur'aan has made haraam or the Hadith or the Sunnah. Therefore the Ulama of India and Pakistan, the Arab World - all of them consider it to be halaal."

(We have reproduced the question and answer verbatim with all its linguastic and grammatical atrocties as presented to us by the questioner.—The Majlis)

THE MAJLIS COMMENTS:

Firstly, the molvi sahib concedes that this drink is injurious for the health and body. He accepts that it is harmful. The factor of `harm' is termed dharar in the terminology of the Fuqaha. Dharar is also a factor of prohibition. Eating a pure substance like sand is not permissible on account of the factor of dharar. Poison, inspite of being taahir (pure) is haraam on account of dharar.

Secondly, the molvi sahib appears to be unaware of the meaning of `alcohol'. He perhaps is not aware that every alcohol is an intoxicant, and Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) said that every `muskir' (intoxicant) is haraam. Regardless of the classification of the alcohol, the common factor of `sukr' (the intoxicating agent) is common to all forms of alcohol. While the legal and Shar'i consequences of different types of alcohol vary, it does not follow that alcohol is halaal for consumption.

Thirdly, the argument of the quantity being `miniscule' is baseless. It is in conflict with the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) who said: "Whatever in big quantity intoxicates, its little quantity too is forbidden." Thus, the `miniscule' argument is stupid and untenable.

Fourthly, what is stated in Ahsanul Fataawa is not binding on us or on any one. Ahsanul Fataawa is not in the category of the works of the Fuqaha of former times. Each fatwa of Ahsanul Fataawa is subject to examination, criticism and verification. The particular fatwa on Coke, is the opinion of the venerable Mufti Sahib (rahmatullah alayh). His degree of investigation is inadequate and inconclusive for presenting a final word on the Coke issue.

Fifthly, the views of the contemporary Arab Ulama and even of contemporary liberal Pakistani Ulama are all suspect and products of liberalism. We cannot attach much significance and respect to the `fataawa' of men who appear on television, run corrupt radio stations, violate laws of Hijaab, are lax on pictures, project the voices of females, attach little importance to the dress-styles of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and incline to the liberal ways of the western kuffaar in general. The words and views of such Ulama are of little significance. And, when unbacked by Shar'i daleel, are to be rejected and dismissed as products of their whims and fancies. Their great weakness which exposes the shallowness of their learning and understanding is that whenever they are bereft of Shar'i arguments and whenever they are unable to rationally and academically neutralise the arguments of their adversaries, then they run to the taqleed of liberal molvis and shaikhs operating under the facades of academies of modernism such as the Jeddah academy. They seek to awe and impress others with the names of `prominent' personalities.But men of Ilm are not awed by names, especially if such names represent liberals of this age - liberal scholars who are weak in the presentation of Shar'i dalaa-il. They present generalities as their basis in the same way as ignorant modernists subject Qur'aanic aayaat and Ahadith to their personal interpretation based on whim and fancy. Also, the relationship which the liberal scholars have with government establishments is a curse. Such relationships exercise their baneful effects and influences on the `fataawa' of the `academy' scholars.

Sixthly, if the alcohol in Coke is not of the haraam category, then by the same token the alcohol in whisky, vodka, ship-sherry, gin and beer is also not haraam. The alcohol used in soft drinks is ethanol which is the very same alcohol used in the varieties of liquor which at least to this day the liberal molvis and shaikhs still say is haraam. But, they are opening the avenue for proclaiming liquor to be halaal. Tomorrow that day MUST come when the liberal scholars will proclaim liquor halaal. They will simply give it another name and fabricate some fanciful and devious `academic' and technical arguments to bamboozle the masses and to satisfy the establishment (i.e. fussaaq governments and the wealthy).

If a `miniscule' (one or two drops) of whisky is added to a cup of tea or to a glass of water, do these liberals say that it will remain halaal? If ethanol-containing whisky or vodka in miniscule quantity is haraam, then why should ethanol-containing soft drink not be haraam despite the miniscule amount? If Laager and Barbican Beer which contain ethanol have to be haraam, why not soft drinks which also contain ethanol, albeit in `miniscule' quantity or in a quantity lesser than the quantity in whisky and vodka?

Seventhly, the radio mufti sought to awe people by citing the majority. But `majority' is not a Shar'i daleel. The majority of modernist and liberal scholars of this age carries no Shar'i weight. People of intelligence are not awed by such arguments intended to impress the masses. What is needed, is Shar'i evidence, not the names of the muftis of this age.

Eighthly, the radio mufti was extremely diligent in citing Ahsanul Fataawa in substantiation of his desire and opinion regarding coke, but he ignores the very same Ahsanul Faraawa on the question of human organ transplantation. Surely the radio mufti could not have missed seeing in Ahsanul Fataawa a 20 page discussion in which the venerable Mufti and author of Ahsanul Fataawa very emphatically and categorically declares HARAAM human organ transplantation. In this regard, Ahsanul Fataawa states: "Twenty two years after my treatise (on organ transplantation), ten bulky articles on this topic came to my notice from different countries. Among these, eight had applied much pressure on the pen in a bid to prove that organ transplantation is halaal. But, not a single argument in these writings is substantiation for the claim (of permissibility). In fact, all the arguments are so baseless, that they are not worthy of attention.........."

The liberal molvis are in fact bereft of Shar'i basis and dalaa-il. They are freelancers or more appropriately, like the holy cows roaming about freely, eating from this one's basket and that one's basket. The liberals extract the views which appeal to their fancies. They will take a certain Mufti's view if it suits them. But if the same Mufti's view on another question is unpalatable to their liberal tastes, then they will search for another Mufti's view which is acceptable to them. An example of this type of despicable and un-Islamic exercise is what the radio mufti has done. For declaring coke halaal, he cites Ahsanul Fataawa. But for the question of organ transplantation, he runs to the Jeddah academy because Ahsaanul Fataawa is too uncompromising in its emphasis on prohibition of organ tranplantation. May Allah Ta'ala save the Ummah from such `learned' people who make a mockery of the Deen and expose the Imaan of the masses to kufr.

(3) Q. "What is the significance of kissing one's thumbs and rubbing it on the eyes when the Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) name is called during the Athaan?

A. Allamah Sakhawi (rahmatullah alayh) in his kitaab, Al-Maqaasidul Hasanah, has discussed this issue and he has written that it is mentioned that Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu), when the Muath-thin used to take the name of Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) would kiss his thumbs and then rub it on his eyes. He says after that: "This hadith is not authentic." However the Ulama have written that if a person does this with the intention of ilaaj (for cure), then it is permissible. We should not do it with the intention of Sunnah or take it to be compulsory, for then that would not be permissible."

THE MAJLIS COMMENTS:

The answer given by the radio is misleading and incorrect, especially when the prevalent belief and attitude of the Ahl-e-Bid'ah are that this practice is Sunnah, in fact Waajib. When the narration is said to be unauthentic, then why does the radio mufti desire to peddle it in this time when the practice is a salient feature of the Ahl-e-Bid'ah. It appears that the radio mufti is eager to curry favour with allegments of people, hence this radio channel entertains a wide variety of opinions even haraam opinions. It is therefore not surprising that this radio caters for homosexuals, gays, rapists and what not.

It is despicable for a mufti to seek acceptibibility and permissibility for a practice on the basis of weak and unauthentic narrations which none of our Classical Fuqaha and Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen had entertained. In fact, inspite of all our Akaabir Ulama being fully aware of these spurious narrations, they have branded this practice as bid'ah. The radio mufti should at least know and understand that when even a Sunnat and a Mustahab act become a salient feature of the Ahl-e-Bid'ah or when it is elevated to a higher status than that conferred to it by the Shariah, then such practice has to be branded bid'ah notwithstanding its istihbaab (meritorious)status.

It is also perculiar that the radio mufti has entirely ignored Ahsanul Fataawa with regard to this issue. As far as the coke issue is concerned, the radio mufti had sought to eke out capital and support for his view from Ahsanul Fataawa. But when Ahsanul Fataawa refutes the radio mufti's liberal views, the latter ignores it. Let us see what Ahsanul Fataawa says about the thumb-kissing practice:
"Since the general public has given it a status higher than Sunnat, regarding it to be incumbent, hence those who do not practise it are criticized, it is therefore necessary to refrain from it."
(Ahsanul Fataawa)

Those who are adherents of this practice, believe it to be Sunnah and they have spread much contrioversy in this regard. The radio mufti cannot be unaware of this. Furthermore, he will be aware that all those Ulama whom he considers to be among the Akaabireen do not condone it. He will be aware that none of the Fuqaha propagates this practice. It is a spurious act. Instead of answering the question in the way in which the senior Muftis have done, the radio mufti demeans himself by his abortive attempt to satisy the bid'atis and curry favour with them. This is not the attitude of the Ulama-e-Haqq. The public should not be misled with dubious logic and devious arguments which the great authorities of the Shariah do not entertain.

[Yusuf]

Majlisul Ulama : "It's haram."

All other Ulama: "It's fine."

[Omar HH]

The word alcohol and the shari word Khamr are not one and the same. khamr refers to only certain types of alcohol dervied from particular sources and are mostly referred to as intoxicants.

Exactly,
al·co·hol Audio pronunciation of "alcohol" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lk-hôl, -hl)
n.

1. A colorless volatile flammable liquid, C2H5OH, synthesized or obtained by fermentation of sugars and starches and widely used, either pure or denatured, as a solvent and in drugs, cleaning solutions, explosives, and intoxicating beverages. Also called ethanol, ethyl alcohol, grain alcohol.
2. Intoxicating liquor containing alcohol.
3. Any of a series of hydroxyl compounds, the simplest of which are derived from saturated hydrocarbons, have the general formula CnH2n+1OH, and include ethanol and methanol.

[Medieval Latin, fine metallic powder, especially of antimony, from Arabic al-kul : al-, the + kul, powder of antimony; see kl in Semitic Roots.]

Word History: The al- in alcohol may alert some readers to the fact that this is a word of Arabic descent, as is the case with algebra and alkali, al- being the Arabic definite article corresponding to the in English. The origin of -cohol is less obvious, however. Its Arabic ancestor was kul, a fine powder most often made from antimony and used by women to darken their eyelids; in fact, kul has given us the word kohl for such a preparation. Arabic chemists came to use al-kul to mean “any fine powder produced in a number of ways, including the process of heating a substance to a gaseous state and then recooling it.” The English word alcohol, derived through Medieval Latin from Arabic, is first recorded in 1543 in this sense. Arabic chemists also used al-kul to refer to other substances such as essences that were obtained by distillation, a sense first found for English alcohol in 1672. One of these distilled essences, known as “alcohol of wine,” is the constituent of fermented liquors that causes intoxication. This essence took over the term alcohol for itself, whence it has come to refer to the liquor that contains this essence as well as to a class of chemical compounds such as methanol.

al·co·hol (lk-hôl)
n.

1. Any of a series of hydroxyl compounds derived from saturated hydrocarbons, including ethanol and methanol.
2. A colorless, volatile, flammable liquid synthesized or obtained by fermentation of sugars and starches and widely used, either pure or denatured, as a solvent and in drugs. Also called ethanol, ethyl alcohol.
3. Intoxicating liquor containing alcohol.


Source: The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Main Entry: al·co·hol
Pronunciation: 'al-k&-"hol
Function: noun
1 a : ethanol especially when considered as the intoxicating agent in fermented and distilled liquors b : drink (as whiskey or beer) containing ethanol c : a mixture of ethanol and water that is usually 95 percent ethanol
2 : any of various compounds that are analogous to ethanol in constitution and that are hydroxyl derivatives of hydrocarbons

Source: Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

alcohol

n 1: a liquor or brew containing alcohol as the active agent; "alcohol (or drink) ruined him" [syn: alcoholic beverage, intoxicant, inebriant] 2: any of a series of volatile hydroxyl compounds that are made from hydrocarbons by distillation

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

[faqir]

Majlisul Ulama : "It's haram."

All other Ulama: "It's fine."

Does that just go for Coke or everything else as well!?

Fifthly, the views of the contemporary Arab Ulama and even of contemporary liberal Pakistani Ulama are all suspect and products of liberalism. We cannot attach much significance and respect to the `fataawa' of men who appear on television, run corrupt radio stations, violate laws of Hijaab, are lax on pictures, project the voices of females, attach little importance to the dress-styles of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and incline to the liberal ways of the western kuffaar in general. The words and views of such Ulama are of little significance.

I am thinking of compiling some classic quotes from "the majlis" - this one would do nicely with the rest

[Yusuf]

Does that just go for Coke or everything else as well!?

My sentiments exactly

[Mossy]

Now now, be nice people..

The logic below would make most cakes (vanilla extract) haram too. Just a heads up for those that wish to take the harsher path.

(ps someone should ask them about the ijarah mortgage, esp wrt Jeddah academy)

[Farraam]

What is forbidden in Islam is to consume INTOXICANTS. Do not confuse the word alcohol with intoxicants. Some alcohol is intoxicating; NOT all types. Other types of alcohol cause no intoxication at all.

Whatever is claimed to have been found within coke and lucozade, it is highly unlikely that it is genuinely an intoxiating substance, even if they refer to it as "alcohol". Furthermore, you don't even HAVE to believe them. If you know anything about science, do your own checks.

[faqir]

(ps someone should ask them about the ijarah mortgage, esp wrt Jeddah academy)

Ask them if you are going to follow them. Personally, I have made Taqleed on Mufti Taqi's position - and, it makes the most sense to a lay man like myself