Is Pork Ḥarām?: For Muslim Students in Japan Struggling to Find Food

Abstract

This essay reexamines the Qur’anic prohibition of pork by distinguishing between the terms rijs and najas. While pork is described in the Qur’an as rijs — commonly translated as “impure” — the semantic nuance of the term suggests not an ontological defilement, but a condition judged to be impure and therefore avoided.
By comparing rijs with najas, which more directly denotes material impurity, this study proposes that the prohibition of pork may be understood within its historical and sanitary context rather than as an absolute metaphysical taboo.
The argument further distinguishes between divine legal norms and cultural norms that have emerged from expansive human interpretation. In doing so, the essay invites contemporary Muslim readers — especially those living as minorities — to practice thoughtful ijtihād in engaging with the Qur’an directly.
This reading does not claim final authority but offers one possible interpretation grounded in linguistic and contextual analysis.
Allāhu aʿlam.

The Anxiety of a Cup-Noodle Diet

I have heard that Muslim international students living in Japan are struggling with food. Many of them are convinced that most Japanese food products contain either pork-derived ingredients or alcohol. Standards differ depending on region and individual practice, but in my personal impression, Muslims from South and Southeast Asia tend to be stricter than those from Arab regions.
Of course, if one carefully checks the ingredient lists of individual products, one would likely discover that more items are permissible than initially assumed. Yet this presupposes the ability to read kanji and the leisure to examine labels in detail. Under such conditions, many students feel they have no choice but to rely on halal food brought from or sent by their home countries. It is said that not a few of them fall into the serious situation of living almost entirely on instant cup noodles.

Did Allah Say that “The Pig Is a Taboo”?

This is a personal view of the author — born and educated in Japan, having embraced Islam after the age of thirty, and able to read the Qur’an in Arabic with a working understanding of its meaning. From this standpoint, I would suggest that we need not be bound by the idea that “the pig is taboo,” that is, a religious absolute prohibition.
Put differently, the tendency to avoid pigs and all pig-derived substances completely is less a legal norm (ḥukm as divine legislation) and more a cultural norm that has emerged from an expansive human interpretation of divine teaching. Nowhere in the Qur’an does one find a command ordering believers to reject and exclude everything derived from pigs without exception.

What Does It Mean That “Pork Is Rijs”?

The basic principle of the Qur’an regarding food is clear: one may eat what one wishes [1]. Yet there are exceptions. In matters of food, one of these is pork — not “the pig” in general, but specifically pork. The Qur’an deliberately specifies laḥm al-khinzīr (the flesh of swine). Why pork?
In the Qur’an, prohibition of pork appears four times [2]. In one of these verses, it is stated: “Indeed, it is rijs” [3]. In Arabic, rijs (رجس) denotes impurity. According to classical lexicography [4], the term symbolically indicates a condition of being defiled.
It does not necessarily describe “dirt itself” as a substance. Rather, it signifies something regarded as impure and therefore avoided. The judgment of “impurity” does not reside in the substance alone but in the act of deeming it impure. Once such a judgment is pronounced, avoidance becomes prudent. As this judgment accumulates over time, pork comes to be believed to be an “absolute taboo.”
Allāhu Aʿlam (Allah knows best).

Asking Arabic What “Dirty” Means

Now, there is another Arabic term that may be rendered as “dirty” and that can appear interchangeable with rijs: namely, najas (نجس).
Whereas rijs carries a symbolic and universal nuance, najas is more analytical. The term gives a more concrete account of “uncleanness” in Arabic usage. It can refer to objective, material impurity — that is, dirt as a physical substance — as well as to conceptual or spiritual impurity [5].
When we read rijs alongside najas, what emerges is this: the “impurity” signified by rijs may be understood as objective and material uncleanness that has been judged, at the conceptual or spiritual level, to be “unclean.” In other words, it is impurity as symbol.
Translated as “impure,” rijs can sound like an absolute and categorical defilement beyond remedy. Yet that may not necessarily be the case. If the objective and material uncleanness of pork can be removed, then the judgment of “impurity” — that is, its status as something prohibited — may no longer apply.

Why Was It Absolutely Prohibited?

In the sanitary conditions of the time when revelation descended, what was the simplest way to remove the uncleanness of pork? The answer is straightforward: thorough cooking.
Without even imagining the precise conditions of the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century, we can observe that in Japan, China, Europe, and elsewhere, people do not customarily consume pork raw. Beef, lamb, and even horse meat may sometimes be eaten raw, but pork alone is invariably cooked. The consumption of raw pork is extremely dangerous and, in certain circumstances, can lead to death.
Might it be that revelation employed the word rijs as a stern warning directed toward life in this world, anticipating such dangers?
Moreover, raising pigs requires a considerable amount of water. In oasis-based environments, pigs were not particularly suitable livestock. This historical context may also be relevant.
However, this does not mean that Allah denies the very existence of pigs. In another verse, referring metaphorically to those who strayed from the path of truth, there appears the expression “those who were turned into apes or swine” [6]. Even there, swine are not described as rijs.

The Taboo of the Taboo

What human beings are required to avoid absolutely, then, is not the pig itself, but pork.
If the objective and material uncleanness of pork has been removed, then in that specific case it may no longer be problematic to consume it. The reason for prohibition may be considered absent.
Some may habitually avoid bones or gelatin derived from pigs. Yet according to the reasoning presented here, there is no need to be bound excessively by such customs.
Nor is there a necessity to shun non-food products derived from pigs — such as leather goods or brushes. The Qur’an declares that Allah has subjected whatever is in the heavens and on the earth to human use [7]. Rather than treating the pig as an object of permanent taboo, one might even say that its beneficial uses should be explored.

The Location of the Hereafter

When one uncritically preserves tradition and remains unaware of one’s own confinement within it, one may come to believe that divine truth resides precisely in that inherited framework. Clinging to such values, one may never question the assumption that the pig is taboo — and may even impose that assumption upon others.
This is Islam as “cultural norm.” And such rigidity can foster narrowness and obstinacy among Muslims, making life more difficult, especially where Muslims live as minorities. In this way, believers’ attitudes themselves can become a cause of stagnation in Islamic thought.
Furthermore, when we speak of “religious taboo,” we may imagine a purely sacred realm entirely separate from prohibition. Yet in Islam, the hereafter stands adjacent to this world. As in the quantum world, “zero” and “one” continually exchange places and remain fundamentally ambivalent [8].
Thus, rijs is not a stain unrelated to the hereafter; it is an impurity to be overcome in this world. (This also resonates with the meaning of zakāh as “purification.”) The impurity associated with alcohol or gambling may likewise be overcome through avoiding addiction and preserving sound reason.

What Is Piety?

Therefore, to Muslim students living in Japan: be cautious only about raw pork. That is the minimal concern.
There is no need to be misled by the mere presence or absence of halal certification marks produced by cultural convention. What Allah taught Muhammad is, fundamentally, that one may eat what one wishes. Binding oneself to culture and tradition is not piety.
To read the Qur’an directly in Arabic, to place it in dialogue with one’s own situation, and to seek to discern Allah’s intention therein — this is to practice ijtihād, even in small daily ways [9].
The Qur’an is not something to be recited in prayer without understanding; it is an inexhaustible spring for the norms of believers’ lives. By doing so, one may free oneself from the spell of cultural norms.
To strive, through scholarly effort, to draw nearer to Allah — this is piety. And one who undertakes such effort may be called rabbānī.
Of course, this too is only one possible reading.
Allāhu aʿlam — Allah knows best.

Footnotes

[1] “Say: I do not find, in what has been revealed to me, anything forbidden to one who would eat it…”
(Qur’an 6:145, first part; Sūrat al-Anʿām).
[2] Qur’an 2:173 (Sūrat al-Baqarah);
16:115 (Sūrat al-Naḥl);
5:3 (Sūrat al-Māʾidah);
6:145 (Sūrat al-Anʿām).
[3] “Forbidden to you are carrion, flowing blood, and the flesh of swine — for indeed it is rijs — and that over which any name other than Allah has been invoked.”
(Qur’an 6:145; Sūrat al-Anʿām).
[4] Lisān al-ʿArab, entry “rijs.”
[5] Lisān al-ʿArab, entry “najas.”
[6] Qur’an 5:60 (Sūrat al-Māʾidah).
[7] “And He has subjected to you whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth, all from Him. Indeed, in that are signs for a people who reflect.”
(Qur’an 45:13; Sūrat al-Jāthiyah).
Arabic (45:13):
وَسَخَّرَ لَكُم مَّا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا مِّنْهُ ۚ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ
[8] On the ambivalence of “one” in quantum theory, see, for example, the author’s essay:
“The World of ‘One’ That Is Both ‘1’ and ‘0’: The Qubit and Monotheism.”
[9] On ijtihād, see, for example, the author’s essay:
“What Does the ‘Closing of the Gate of Ijtihād’ Mean? al-Ghazālī, Hallaq, and…”

Special Thanks to: ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-5.2

Header image:

Shop sign in French and Arabic for a halal butcher’s shop in Rue de Patay, Paris 13e. photo by Mu.,via
Special Thanks to: WikiMediaCommons

Acknowledgements

This English version was prepared with the support of ChatGPT-5.2.
The author gratefully acknowledges its assistance in translation and linguistic clarification.

Original version in Japanese:

豚はハラーム(禁止)か？：食べられるものがないと悩むイスラーム教徒の留学生たちへ