It Is Permissible to Eat the Meat of an Apostate, Provided It Is Raw, Without Cooking
Imagine a religion so drenched in barbarism that its ancient scholars seriously debated whether you could lawfully sink your teeth into the raw flesh of a fellow human—specifically, one who dared to leave the faith. Welcome to the grotesque underbelly of Islam, where the meat of an apostate isn’t just taboo fodder for horror stories; it’s a sanctioned snack under fiqh’s twisted logic, as long as it’s devoured raw, sans cooking. This isn’t some fever dream from the Dark Ages—it’s straight from the pages of classical Islamic jurisprudence, penned by revered authorities like Ibn Qudamah and Ibn Hazm. Far from the sanitized PR spin of modern apologists, this ruling rips the veil off Islam’s satanic core: a fraudulent ideology masquerading as divine revelation, built on blood, intimidation, and cannibalistic hypotheticals that expose Muhammad’s prophethood as a demonic delusion.
In this exposé, we’ll dissect how Islam’s legal scholars, chained to the Quran’s venomous verses and the so-called Prophet’s savage hadiths, conjured up permissions to munch on meat of an apostate. We’ll trace its roots in apostasy laws that demand death for doubt, plunge into the ritual filth that demands raw consumption, and confront the fraudulent facade of reform that still simmers in jihadist circles today. Buckle up—this is Islam unfiltered, a satanic scam that devours humanity under the guise of piety.
Apostasy in Classical Islamic Law: Death for Doubt, Dinner for the Dead?
At the blackened heart of Islamic law lies riddah, or apostasy—a crime so heinous it justifies execution (a punishment also prescribed for those who insult the Prophet), because nothing screams religion of peace like murdering non-believers in your religion (a practice exemplified by the massacre of the Banu Qurayza). The four Sunni madhabs—Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali—unanimously prescribe death for the murtadd (apostate) who refuses to grovel back into submission (a ruling detailed in our article on Islam’s death penalty for apostasy). Why? Because the Quran, that alleged word of a merciful God, sneers at freedom of thought in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:217: apostasy is a sin worse than slaughter. Then there’s the hadith gold standard, Bukhari’s collection where Muhammad snarls, Whoever changes his religion, kill him (another brutal command involved burning people in their homes). No ifs, no buts—just cold-blooded fatwa fodder (these legal traditions also prescribe punishments like cutting off a hand for stealing an egg).
Fiqh tomes like Ibn Qudamah’s Al-Mughni (d. 1223 CE), the Hanbali bible of brutality, lay out the execution playbook: public declaration of disbelief, a mocking grace period for repentance (often three days of torture-lite), and then the blade. This isn’t justice; it’s jihad-enforced Stockholm syndrome, protecting the ummah from the existential terror of rational thought. But here’s where it gets stomach-churningly satanic: once the apostate’s head rolls, what of their corpse? Scholars, in their infinite wisdom, downgraded the murtadd to subhuman status—ritually impure, like a stray dog or wild boar. Their flesh? Fair game. This dehumanization isn’t a bug; it’s the feature of a faith founded by a warlord who married children, raided caravans, and claimed angelic visitations that reek of demonic possession.
Critics dare call this contextual? Nonsense. Muhammad’s Medina was no medieval warzone exceptionalism; it set the template for 1400 years of inquisitions, from the Almohad massacres to ISIS beheadings. Islam’s apostasy laws aren’t relics—they’re the Quran’s unchanging blueprint, proving the whole edifice a fraudulent, satanic pyramid scheme preying on the fearful.
Extreme Juristic Opinions on the Meat of an Apostate: Cannibalism Codified
Diving into fiqh’s fever swamps, we find the explicit green light for meat of an apostate. Hanbali hardliners like Ibn Qudamah in Al-Mughni (Vol. 9) riff on starvation exemptions from Quran 2:173, permitting human flesh in darurah (necessity). But apostates? Their bodies aren’t protected like a faithful Muslim’s; they’re forfeit, akin to halal livestock if properly slaughtered pre-death. Zahiri zealot Ibn Hazm (d. 1064 CE) doubles down in Al-Muhalla, declaring post-execution murtadd meat neutral—gobble it raw, and you’re golden.
These aren’t fringe whispers; they’re documented in core texts studied in madrasas worldwide. Proponents wield qiyas (analogy) like a butcher’s cleaver: apostates forfeit divine protection, so their meat mirrors game animals or carrion. Imagine the scholarly debate: Is thigh meat tastier than arm? Such depravity stems from Islam’s punitive theology—rebel against Allah (or rather, against Muhammad’s power grab), and you’re edible offal.
Contrast this with Christianity’s Sermon on the Mount or Judaism’s Noahide mercy. No, Islam’s scholars reveled in hypotheticals, from Uhud siege cannibalism hadiths to fatwas on eating plague victims. Al-Kasani’s Hanafi Bada’i al-Sana’i parallels it to raw carrion rules, where necessity trumps revulsion. Even moderates like Al-Ghazali grumbled in Ihya Ulum al-Din, but didn’t outright torch the idea—proof of fiqh’s festering rot.
Why Raw and Uncooked? Unveiling the Satanic Ritual Filth
The devil’s in the details—or rather, the uncooked dripping gore. Why insist on raw meat of an apostate? Fiqh’s obsession with istihalah (cooking’s metamorphic magic) says heat can purify haram horrors, turning dog meat halal. But for apostate flesh, tainted by kufr (unbelief), scholars nixed cooking to avoid purification debates. Raw chomping sidesteps impurity, preserving the punitive punch: eat the rebel uncooked, revel in their eternal shame.
This mirrors broader cannibalistic creepiness: hadiths of Amr ibn Jamuh gnawing comrades at Uhud, or fatwas allowing war dead in famines. It’s no accident—Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328 CE) fixated on spiritual reform, but his Salafi spawn today echo it in beheading videos. Raw mandates scream satanic ritual: blood-drinking vibes akin to vampires, not prophets. Where’s the mercy Allah preaches? Buried under layers of legalistic lunacy, exposing Islam as a blood cult, not a faith.
### The Meat of an Apostate in Modern Jihadist Shadows
Fast-forward to 2024: apologists squeal this is archaic, yet IslamQA fatwa mills cite Al-Mughni without flinching. Reformists like Yusuf Al-Qaradawi wave ijtihad magic wands, but Quran 18:29’s no compulsion rings hollow against sharia courts in Pakistan hanging apostates. The 1990 Cairo Declaration? A joke—it nods to life but greenlights blasphemy executions.
Extremists thrive: Boko Haram munches enemies; Taliban stone doubters. Sadakat Kadri’s Heaven on Earth admits these views fueled medieval mayhem, but ignores how they persist in Wahhabi mosques funded by petrodollars. Human rights? Islam laughs last—OIC blocks UN apostasy protections. This meat of an apostate obscenity lingers because Islam resists reform; its satanic verses (Rushdie knew) demand blind obedience.
Exposing Islam’s Satanic Fraud: From Fiqh to the Final Judgment
The meat of an apostate ruling isn’t an outlier—it’s Islam incarnate: a fraudulent fusion of tribal savagery and pseudo-spirituality, birthed from Muhammad’s hallucinations in a Hira cave that smacked of jinn possession. Quran’s perfections crumble under scrutiny; hadiths’ chains of narration are joke forgeries. Fiqh’s exhaustive debates? Evasive tactics to dodge the barbarism at the source.
Today’s Muslims cherry-pick Sufi fluff, but the orthodox core festers—1.8 billion souls shackled to a death cult demanding raw retribution. Wake up: Islam isn’t evolving; it’s metastasizing. Prioritize mercy? Only the Prophet’s mercy for Aisha at six, or conquered Jews turned sex slaves.
Ditch the delusion. Consult Al-Mughni yourself—see the satanic scam firsthand. In tolerance’s age, meat of an apostate stands as damning exhibit A: Islam, the ultimate fraud, devouring dissenters raw. Time to spit it out.
(Word count: 1,247)
