Background: Meat, as a element of the human diet, has been addressed in both medical and religious teachings. Persian Medicine(PM), with old scientific and cultural foundations, has been enriched by Islamic principles. Following the integration of PM into Iran’s national health system, a comparative study of its perspectives with Shiʿa hadith literature on meat consumption has become essential. This research aims to consider the clinical effects of meat from these two viewpoints.

Methods: This comparative study extracted medical statements on the clinical effects and consumption of meat from the Four Canonical Shiʿa Hadith Collections and compared them with authoritative sources in PM. Additional data were gathered through systematic searches in PubMed, Scopus, SID, and Magiran, as well as specialized databases (Jameʿ al-Ahadith and Ketabkhaneh-ye Jameʿ-eh Teb). Extracted statements were coded and categorized into three groups: (1) convergent, (2) divergent, and (3) unique to hadith sources without parallels in PM.

Findings: The majority of narrations aligned with PM. However, certain reports—such as those concerning the clinical effects of beef—were inconsistent. Moreover, narrations on the consumption of some wild birds lacked corresponding references in PM. These divergences or silences may be clarified through contemporary biomedical evidence.

Conclusion: Despite minor discrepancies, no fundamental conflict exists between PM and Shiʿa hadith literature regarding the clinical effects and consumption of meat. Further interdisciplinary research on divergent cases may provide valuable insights for integrating traditional, religious, and modern medical knowledge into health systems.