Interpretations of Halal: A Comparative Analysis of Western and Eastern Ethical Frameworks

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The concept of halal, deeply embedded in Islamic Sharia law, governs various aspects of daily life, including permissible foods, actions, and transactions. This paper conducts a comparative analysis of halal through Western and Eastern philosophical perspectives, drawing on Bertrand Russell’s A History of Western Philosophy and L. Adams Beck’s The Story of Oriental Philosophy. By exploring the ethical and moral viewpoints of key Western philosophers such as Plato, Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill, alongside Eastern thinkers like Buddha, Confucius, and Lao Tzu, this study examines how these traditions interpret and evaluate halal. The analysis reveals that Western philosophy typically perceives halal as a context-specific moral rule lacking universal applicability, whereas Eastern philosophy regards it as a fundamental component of social harmony and balance. Additionally, the paper addresses critical considerations regarding the relevance and potential reductionism in interpreting halal through non-Islamic frameworks. The findings offer valuable insights into the application of ethical and moral values across diverse cultural contexts, highlighting the importance of cross-cultural understanding in contemporary global society.