Gul Agha's review on Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri's book

A book-review written by Gul Agha and published in the Animals’ Agenda Magazine , 1987

ISLAMIC CONCERN FOR ANIMALS Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri The Athene Trust, 3A Charles Street Petersfield, Hants, England GU32 3EH, published (simultaneously in English and Arabic) 1987
This book, written by a fundamentalist Islamic theologian, examines the issue of animal rights from an Islamic perspective. The author has the right credentials to write a book of this nature: Masri served, until his retirement in 1968, as the Imam (religious head) of a large mosque and Islamic center in England. Incidentally, the title Al-Hafiz means that he has memorized the entire Holy Qur'an.
The book intermingles a factual account of animal suffering with religious injunctions against it. The first chapters lay out the theoretical foundations in terms of Islamic teaching on the relationship between humans and (other) animals. The later chapters apply these principles to specific areas such as vivisection, factory farming, and hunting.
Quoting from the Holy Qur'an Al-Hafiz Masri begins with the assertion that ``Man is the apex of creation.'' Following his fundamentalist beliefs, he argues that this is true because of the `psychical potential' in man---namely, the ability to differentiate between good and evil. Masri then states that Man is God's vicegerent on earth. Thus man's claim of superiority over the other species is circumscribed by moral limitations in the exercise of his power. As the holy puts it: ``Certainly, We created man in the best make. Then We reduced him to the lowest of the low.''
The Islamic view is that unless a human follows the `path of righteousness', his moral status is degraded even lower than that of the animals. ``Verily, the vilest of all creatures ... are those who do not use their rationality.'' In the Qur'anic world-view, ``All creatures are like a family of God: and He most loves those who are the most beneficient to His family.''
This notion of family is elaborated upon by many examples. The animals and humans are supposed to worship the same God: as the Holy book puts it, all beings celebrate Allah, every bird sings its prayer and psalm to Allah. In fact, God even communicates directly to the animals. ``And the Lord revealed to the bee, saying: `make hives in the mountains, and in the trees, and in [human] habitations'.'' It is important to realize that the Hafiz, like most Islamic theologians, is a literalist. The book contains a number of anecdotes from the Hadith (a body of literature describing the life and teachings of the Prophet) which is distinct from the revelations in the Holy book. One incident described by the Prophet relates to what happened to another prophet in ancient history. This prophet was stung by an ant and ordered the ants' nest to be burned. At this God is supposed to have reprimanded the prophet, ``Because one ant stung you, you have burned a whole community which glorified Me.'' Fortunately for the animals, I suppose, salvation in Islam is by deed, not creed.
Masri then proceeds to examine in some detail the treatment of animals in modern society and argues that it is against Islamic law. He strengthens his argument by making analogies to the specific injunctions laid out by the Prophet of Islam, for example, one against killing animals for pleasure, another against branding. Sometimes, in order to apply a specific injunction to a modern problem, the Hafiz uses analogy and inference. He concedes that the use of interpretation has been been historically controversial in Islamic jurisprudence since it allows self-serving liberties with the spirit and intent of the original law. (Shades of the Robert Bork controversy). However, Masri defends the use of analogical reasoning because the results are obviously not self-serving, and furthermore, they conform to general Islamic principles.
The Hafiz's general conclusions can be summarized as follows. Forbidden on religious grounds: hunting (for pleasure); furs for vanity; intensive factory farming; slaughterhouses (the slaughter of an animal in the presence of another or in circumstances where it may anticipate its death is proscribed); circuses and rodeos; inhumane transportation; disturbing wildlife habitats or otherwise interfering with the ecological balance; experimenting on animals for commercial profit, `idle' curiosity, or to find cures for preventable diseases; and genetically engineering animals. Masri makes note of the issue of vegetarianism but states that it is too involved a question to discuss in the current context. What is the significance of this book? First of all it is important to realize that Islamic fundamentalism is a rising force in a large portion of the world. Even more critically, there are no accepted sects in the Islamic world that reject fundamentalism. (Sufism, often regarded as a heresy, being a notable exception). The open question remains: what impact can a well-written book such as this one have on the societies undergoing radical upheavel? And let us not forget, the small but influential Black Muslim community in this country.
Unfortunately, I am rather pessimistic---notwithstanding a contentious Imam Khomeini who sometimes preaches against consuming meat. It is my assessment that believers often settle for ritual over personal sacrifice. Thus a method of `kosher' slaughter, which was supposed to be more humane, has resulted in the mass shipping of live animals to Islamic countries by the West (especially by Australia and New Zealand). En route, these animals suffer from hunger and thirst, crowding, lack of movement, and heat exhaustion from a scorching sun (as a consequence, there is a significant mortality rate).
On the other hand, I think it would be unwise to ignore the belief structures of others, particularly when these beliefs provide a rationale for reducing animal suffering to such an extent. We have to be cautious that we do not ourselves develop an intolerant attitude that recognizes only one `Truth' and seeks to impose it on the rest of the universe. At least for me personally, converting people to an idea is less important than modifying their behavior. If their own beliefs can provide a basis for change, the task becomes so much more realistic.
---Gul Agha, Ph.D. New Haven 1987. The reviewer is a scientist at Yale University and President of the Cambridge Committee for Responsible Research.

The following notes are from Syed Rizvi: (October 2009):
Currently, Gul Agha is a professor of Computer Science at the University of Chicago Champaign-Urbana.
The Animals’ Agenda Magazine, where the above article first appeared, used to be published by the Animal Rights Network (ARN) established in 1979. ARN later was transformed into a think tank, Animals and Society Institute (ASI). The institute publishes position papers on animal issues and the publication of the magazine is now discontinued. More on the institute can be found on its web site http://www.animalsandsociety.org

End of note