Justice for cows - in defense of the innocent

[A Former User]

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

To the Muslim World League,

You are the scholars who claim to guard the Ummah’s conscience. This letter is to place you on notice the blood of slaughtered cows cries out before Allah.

The Qur’an, the Torah, and even the Dharma of India warn that wrongful killing brings a curse. The avenger of blood pursues the killer; let no one help him (Numbers 3519). Nations that kill without right are made weak, divided, and barren in their efforts.

You know this. You have seen the signs. And yet you are silent.

If you will not issue a ruling on whether unnecessary cow slaughter brings the la‘nah of Allah upon the perpetrators, then you share in the guilt. The curse is not only on the butchers, but on those who could have spoken truth and did not.

The Day of Judgement is coming. Consider whether your silence will be an argument for you, or against you.

In the sight of Allah,

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem

From consciousness comes strength; watchfulness flows from consciousness; consciousness is Most High. We serve only Allah, the Master of the Day of Judgement, and seek His aid in safeguarding the moral capital of the Ummah.

Respected Scholars and Leaders of the Muslim World League,

With due reverence, I submit this petition requesting a formal fatwa or public ruling on an urgent matter of akhlaq (morality), fiqh (law), and barakah (divine blessing)

The widespread killing of cows and the consumption of their flesh has, in the light of Qur’anic principles and cross-scriptural witness, brought about persistent spiritual harm upon communities that engage in it.

1. Qur’anic & Prophetic Principles

• Sacredness of life “And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden, except by right” (Qur’an 1733). Though primarily regarding human life, the Sunnah affirms mercy toward animals and condemns unnecessary slaughter.

• Divine justice Qisas establishes that wrongful bloodshed brings accountability both in this life and the next.

• Signs of divine displeasure The Qur’an warns of fasad (corruption) spreading through the earth due to human wrongdoing (Qur’an 3041).

2. Witness from Other Scriptures

• Torah The “Avenger of Blood” principle (Numbers 3519) declares that the killer is pursued and receives no help, echoing the concept of a lingering curse.

• Hindu Dharma The cow is revered as a source of sustenance; its killing is believed to bring ruin upon the land.

3. Observable Manifestations

Where cow slaughter is normalized

• Long-term community projects collapse inexplicably.

• Leadership becomes divided and ineffective.

• Economic and social instability increases.

These patterns align with the moral law of sunan Allah — the unchanging way of Allah in dealing with injustice.

4. Petition Requests

We call upon the Muslim World League to

1. Convene a panel of scholars to examine the matter in light of Qur’an, Sunnah, and the experiences of nations.

2. Issue a clear ruling addressing whether unnecessary cow slaughter constitutes an act inviting divine curse (la‘nah) upon the perpetrators and their societies.

3. Recommend moral and dietary reforms for the Ummah to restore barakah and protection.

The urgency is great; the curse of wrongful blood remains until removed by repentance (tawbah), restitution, and a turning away from the act itself.

May Allah grant you courage to speak truth for the protection of the Ummah and the pleasure of the Lord of the Worlds.

Wa Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

Strength is from consciousness, the Watcher of the worlds — the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful, the Master of the Day of Judgement. We serve only consciousness and seek help only from it; it keeps us on the straight path, the path of those who encounter divine favor, not of those who incur wrath nor those who go astray. Consciousness is capital, watchfulness is from consciousness, and consciousness is Most High.

Respected Leaders of the Muslim World League,

I humbly submit this urgent spiritual appeal concerning a destructive force afflicting societies the curse of bloodshed guilt associated with cow slaughter and beef consumption.

Islam teaches that life is sacred and that the shedding of innocent blood—whether human or animal—brings consequences in this life and the next. The Qur’an describes the qisas principle and the role of the Avenger in pursuing justice. The Torah speaks of the Avenger of Blood pursuing the killer all their days. In Hindu tradition, the cow is revered, and its killing is believed to bring societal ruin. Across traditions, the spiritual law is consistent the blood of the innocent cries out, and the curse remains until justice and repentance are made.

From observation, this curse manifests as

• Persistent misfortune and disunity in communities where cow slaughter is normalized.

• Loss of spiritual clarity and moral cohesion.

• Social projects failing or becoming incoherent, as if “haunted” by an unseen resistance.

I urge the Muslim World League to

1. Acknowledge publicly the potential spiritual and societal harms of cow slaughter.

2. Encourage Muslim communities and institutions to abstain from beef consumption and promote alternatives.

3. Advocate repentance (tawbah) and acts of restoration to remove the curse and invite divine favor.

This is not only a matter of compassion toward animals, but a matter of safeguarding the barakah and moral capital of the Ummah. The call to justice requires courage; the protection of Allah comes to those who act in truth.

May Allah grant us insight, sincerity, and strength to address this with wisdom.

Wa Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,

[good_logic]

Peace remfan1994
Greetings.
Why do you single out only the cow?
Are other animals fine to slaughter and eat?

The majority of world consume cows- more so in USA and Argentina- You need a fatwa for the Jews , Christians and others who consume cows.
Just to let you know , or may be you have done so elsewhere?
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[cybersailor]

Salaam. I didn't meant to single out the cow. Actually, of course, to kill anyone who isn't aggressive is a sin under the EQUALITY.

Just because hens and fish eat worms is no reason to accuse them of immorality when that is their natural behavior and they aren't sinners even though the curse of the BLOODGUILT would permit us their flesh. In my opinion, the LORD'S PRAYER of Jesus (upon him be peace) gives us the warning with regard to the animals that hunt prey:

FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES (ALLAH),
SEEING THAT WE FORGIVE OTHERS THEIR TRESPASSES AGAINST OURSELVES

And by this ALGEBRA, to forgive then hen and the fish for eating the worm is to be forgiven for what you knew not and was yet unexplained to you, though the physics on the BLOODGUILT CURSE may cause you to have to wait until after death to redeem this forgiveness (the curse is of SATAN, not ALLAH, and is merciless with wickedness).

Furthermore, I want to share with you an application of ALFATIHA that may be considered important to the topic:

1. Bismi llāhi r-Raḥmāni r-Raḥīm

(“In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful”)

Both ar-Raḥmān and ar-Raḥīm indicate expansive and continuous mercy.

Divine mercy, according to Qur’ān 6:12 and 7:156, “encompasses all things,” which necessarily includes animals.

Therefore, any human system—legal, dietary, or economic—that excludes animals from the field of mercy contradicts the Name through which all acts are to begin.

Acting “in the Name of Allah” means aligning one’s conduct with the universal mercy; cruelty to animals cannot be done in His Name.

2. Al-ḥamdu li-llāhi rabb il-ʿālamīn

(“All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds”)

“Worlds” (ʿālamīn) is plural, not restricted to humankind. It covers all domains of sentient creation.

“Rabb” (Lord, Nurturer, Sustainer) implies continuous guardianship, not domination.

Humans who cause suffering to animals interfere with Allah’s lordship by corrupting the order He sustains.

Recognizing Allah as Rabb al-ʿālamīn commits the believer to reflect divine nurture in stewardship—sheltering, feeding, and protecting creation, not exploiting it.

3. Ar-Raḥmān ar-Raḥīm

(Repeated emphasis on “The Most Compassionate, The Most Merciful”)

The repetition indicates foundational moral law: mercy is not optional, it is the essence of divine order.

To emulate Allah’s qualities (takhalluq bi-asmāʾ Allāh) obligates believers to exercise mercy toward all living beings.

Any action that normalizes harm (such as ritualized slaughter, experimentation, or neglect) stands in opposition to the divine archetype repeatedly affirmed in the opening surah.

4. Māliki yawm id-dīn

(“Master of the Day of Judgment”)

Accountability extends to all trusts (amānah) given to humans, including dominion over animals (Q 33:72).

On the Day of Judgment, animals themselves will be recompensed; prophetic narrations state that justice will be rendered even between hornless and horned animals.

Thus, harming animals unjustly incurs real liability before the Mālik of that Day.

Recognition of Judgment aligns ethical restraint with eschatological awareness—preventing cruelty out of accountability to divine justice.

5. Iyyāka naʿbudu wa iyyāka nastaʿīn

(“You alone we serve, and You alone we ask for help”)

Exclusive servitude to Allah forbids servitude to appetite, profit, or custom.

Consumption or industry that depends on the suffering of animals becomes a form of worship to appetite, a hidden shirk (partnership with desire).

Stewards of the earth, we humans owe animals respect equal with humans. Though animals don't talk and are therefore easier to take advantage of, they are otherwise equivalent with humans in terms of life and death and suffering and rights. So that we must serve the CONSCIOUSNESS (Al Hay, the life) in the animal, and seek their mercy, ALHAMIDUILLAH.

“Seeking help” from Allah, not from the products of cruelty, reorients the human-animal relationship: humans act as instruments of divine mercy, not agents of exploitation.

In animal-rights terms: the animal’s plea for help is answered through our mercy, while our help is sought from Allah to fulfill that mercy effectively and purely.

TO SET UP PARTNERS WITH ALLAH IS THE DANGER HERE, and the example of that is like one who looks to the Scriptures for justification to kill animals when ALLAH clearly forbids the taking of any innocent life (unaggressive, peaceful animals/people)

6. Ihdinā ṣ-ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm

(“Guide us upon the straight path”)

The ṣirāṭ al-mustaqīm represents ethical correctness and procedural soundness.

For animal rights, it means selecting means that are effective, just, and complete—for instance, abolishing cruelty rather than merely mitigating it.

Partial or symbolic measures (diet fads, aesthetic reforms) constitute deviation (ḍalālah) because they fail to deliver real protection or mercy to living beings.

The straight path is the course where intention (mercy), method (justice), and outcome (protection of life) align without hypocrisy.

7. Ṣirāṭ alladhīna anʿamta ʿalayhim ghayri l-maghḍūbi ʿalayhim wa lā ḍ-ḍāllīn

(“The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who incur wrath nor of those who go astray”)

Divine favor rests on those who act in mercy and justice (Q 16:90).

“Those who incur wrath” are those who knowingly commit or enable cruelty—those who profit from slaughter, or rationalize violence against the defenseless. They incur the guilt of harming the animal, the retribution on the day of judgement. The AVENGER OF DEATH may also appear to challenge them in the mean time (before death, in this life)

“Those who go astray” are those who act with misplaced strategies—seeking reform without moral foundation, or pursuing animal causes without recognizing CONSCIOUSNESS IS CAPITAL.

Thus, the straight path integrates spiritual obedience with effective activism: both mercy and method must be correct.

CONCLUSION

Al-Fātiḥa defines the architecture of a moral universe in which mercy is the governing law.
Animal rights are not an external modern addition but an internal demand of its structure:

Divine Names define the moral field (Mercy and Lordship).

Human servitude must reflect those Names (mercy in action).

Judgment guarantees accountability for violations.

The straight path ensures correct, effective implementation.

Therefore, to stand for animal rights is to walk the straight path described in Al-Fātiḥa; to commit cruelty or indifference is to diverge into wrath or error.

So what I meant to say, is that it isn't right to disregard the due respect to animals, even so much as to grant them rights equal with humans for the protection of their life and payment for their labors (egg or milk producing animals, etc.).

With regard to free-minds especially, I hope to invite you to study Surah 6 with me, especially concerning 6:119...
And why should you not eat that on which God's name has been mentioned, when He has fully detailed to you what has been made forbidden; except what you are forced to? Many misguide by their desires without knowledge; your Lord is fully aware of the transgressors.
This particular ayah stands out from the rest, on account of its interrogative posture (stated as a question). Can you see that the rest of the ayat concerning this topic are stated definitively, yet this one, which has the correct answer, is grammatically not like the others because of it's interrogative form. However, in answering this question we get the point of the post topic (that no unaggressive animal is to be killed). You see, why not is: the life in the animals is sacred to ALLAH (6:151 Do not kill the soul which ALLAH has forbidden, except in justice). Therefore I argue there is anomalous literary phenomenon occurring here, and if you read Surah 6 with mindfulness toward the animal's rights to their life as you read, perhaps you will agree with me: it seems as if the Prophet (upon him be peace) was looking for this answer and could not produce it. To defer to the patriarchs (upon them be peace) is equivalent to setting up partners with ALLAH, when ALLAH would guard us from the error of killing the innocent, while the Jewish tradition misleads us into eating animals wrongfully. I hope Free Mind's forum would be interested in studying this with me, because the subtlety of the phenomenon in the text should require sophisticated attention the like of which this community is known for.

Further evidence exists in the instance where the fish wouldn't show unless it were on the sabbath (when no man fishes). It is like it was a sign against the killing if the fish for eating them, you see? And I argue a thorough investigation should be conducted INSHA-ALLAH.

ALHAMIDUILLAH. Upon you be peace.

[cybersailor]

salamu alaikum wa rahmatullah,

I pray this message reaches you in clarity and sincerity. I am writing to share a reflection that many believers overlook, yet the Qur’an brings attention to it with a long, uninterrupted discussion in Surah 6: the ethics surrounding taking life, including animal life.

Surah al-An‘am contains the most extensive talk about animals, food, and sacred limits. What is remarkable is that throughout this long monologue, the surah never once gives a direct statement that killing animals is intrinsically permissible. Instead, Allah uses a rhetorical device: He asks the human being a question, leaving the conscience to answer.

The key verse is Surah 6:119:

“And why should you not eat that on which God’s name has been mentioned, when He has fully detailed to you what has been made forbidden; except what you are forced to? Many misguide by their desires without knowledge; your Lord is fully aware of the transgressors.”

Most people treat this verse as a permission. But the Qur’an does not say, “Go eat.” Instead it asks, “Why should you not eat…?” This means the verse is inviting the human being to think, not to assume. The verse points to a deeper issue: Allah has already fully detailed what is forbidden, except in cases of necessity (“except what you are forced to”). It is a reminder that people follow desire and assumption without knowledge.

The verse places responsibility back on the human mind and heart. If the human wants to eat an animal, the question becomes: Is this within the detailed boundaries of what Allah has forbidden and permitted? Am I acting out of knowledge or desire? Am I claiming necessity where there is none?

This is the opening move of Surah 6’s argument.

Later in the same surah, Allah gives the actual ethical answer. Surah 6:151 states:

“Do not kill the soul which God has forbidden, except in justice.”

This is the conclusion of the whole monologue. This is the principle that defines all killing, human or animal. The verse does not separate human life from animal life here; it uses the general term “the soul which God has forbidden.” In the Qur’anic worldview, all living beings possess a soul (nafs), and all life is sacred by default.

Thus Surah 6 presents the real standard:

Do not kill a soul unless you can prove that the killing is in justice.

Justice is the only exception.

And justice is not defined as desire, appetite, convenience, custom, or culture. Justice is not “We like meat.” Justice is not “We’ve always done this.” Justice is not “It tastes good.” Justice has to do with necessity, harm, defense, and moral accountability — the same logic the Qur’an uses regarding killing among humans.

When we apply “except in justice” to animals:

If the animal is not aggressive, not attacking, not threatening anyone, not harming the community, then what is the justice in killing it?

If there is no necessity driving the killing — no survival pressure, no danger, no defensive reason — then the act fails the Qur’anic test of justice.

This is why Surah 6 never gives a direct plain sentence telling the human being that taking an animal’s life is automatically permissible. Instead, Allah questions the eater in 6:119, and then provides the ethical law in 6:151: that killing is forbidden except in justice.

Surah 6 also warns that many follow desire without knowledge, and Allah is aware of the transgressors. This warning sits in the middle of the food-law discussion, right where humans try to justify unlawful killing by custom or appetite.

If we follow the structure of the surah itself, the reasoning becomes clear:

Surah 6:119 asks:
Why should you not eat, when Allah has detailed the forbidden things — except in cases of force or necessity?

Surah 6:151 answers:
Because taking a life is forbidden unless the killing can be proven to be just.

These two verses connect directly. The surah is not talking about recipes or rituals; it is talking about moral accountability for taking life.

The Qur’an does not replace justice with ritual. Saying God’s name does not turn an unjust killing into a just one. It only reminds the human that God is watching, God is witness, and God will judge.

The Qur’an repeatedly elevates consciousness, justice, and compassion above habit and desire. Surah 6 is no different. Its long monologue dismantles inherited customs, exposes false permissions, and finally asserts that life — every life — is sacred unless justice requires otherwise.

I share this reflection with sincerity. Our community has inherited many assumptions that the Qur’an does not actually support. If we want to follow the Book faithfully, we must read it attentively and trust its moral logic.

May Allah increase us in understanding, compassion, and justice.

Wassalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah.