# Query About Jhatka Meat By Shooting In Head



## Ishna (Aug 25, 2011)

Gurfatehji

The Pizza thread got me thinking... I recently watched a program here on TV (gee I watch a lot of TV...) where they get lots of people with different opinions and have a guided discussion about a topic.  The topic was about meat eating in Australia and we heard the POV from the animal protection people, the vegans, the meat-eating chefs, the one who don't care, and my personal favourite, the "vegetarian" who would eat only kangaroo meat.

When talking about jhatka, does it mean only eating the flesh of an animal who has had it's head cut off in one fell chop, or does it (logically) extend to other quick and least-painful methods of slaughter?

For instance:  the kangaroo-meat only argument is based on the reasoning that kangaroo slaughter in Australia is when licensed kangaroo shooters get in a ute, drive around properties (usually farming properties for other purposese as kangaroos are not actively farmed in Australia as far as I know), and shoot kangaroos in the head.  The shooters are trained to shoot the kangaroo in the head causing instant death and they have to be highly accurate to get a license.

So the kangaroo is hopping around a paddock eating grass, and without even knowing it cops a bullet to the brain and is dead.  It has never known human interference with its life and is killed quickly and we hope painlessly.

The Akal Takht has said Amritdhari Sikhs can only eat jhatka meat, but is the definition of jhatka stricly that which has had it's head cut off?  Is a bullet to the brain good enough, as in the kangaroo argument above?

I don't see any logical reason not to eat the kangaroo meat (if I was so inclined to eat it).

This isn't about eating meat or not eating meat, but the method of slaughter, please.

Apologies if this post is inappropriate.

Thanks
Ish


----------



## kds1980 (Aug 25, 2011)

*Re: Query about jhatka meat*

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/30188-jhatka-with-gun.html

Here is the above thread in which sikhs were shown doing Jhatka with gun,though the video is no longer available but in One Sikh puratan granth                                                    Jhatka with Gun was written as acceptable


----------



## Ishna (Aug 25, 2011)

*Re: Query about jhatka meat*

Thank you Kds Ji.


----------



## Searching (Aug 26, 2011)

Ishna ji
If I am not not wrong Sikhs are instructed not to eat " Kuttha" or meat slaughtered in Muslim way ( ritualistic slaughter).
Jhatka is just another form of slaughter which is not ritualistic.
In my view any form of slaughtering which is not ritualistic is allowed.

Hope someone more knowledgeable pcomments here and can guide us.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 26, 2011)

Ishna Ji

When you know what hunger feels like,you will eat first and ask questions later.Most of us if left hungry for ten days will eat Halal or even each other!

The rejection of Halal historically was a way of showing the objection to the forced adoption of another religions values.It had a deeper purpose then but no one is forcing your will now ,so what does it matter either way.


----------



## Ishna (Aug 26, 2011)

Sinner Ji

Yes, but I am not in that situation (thankfully) so I have the ability to think carefully about my food choices.

Searching Ji

Good point!  Thanks

Admin: thanks for changing the thread title to something more specific!


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 26, 2011)

Ishna ji some comments on excellent dialog in this thread.


Ishna said:


> Sinner Ji
> 
> Yes, but I am not in that situation (thankfully) so I have the ability to think carefully about my food choices.
> 
> ...


Ishna ji I believe we have witnessed great answers with little left to add.

I believe the key element in addition to quick death aspects is the following,



> *SACRIFICIAL*
> 
> *Example 1:*  The following disturbing Jhatka slayings appear to be Sacrificial
> *(NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART)
> ...





> *SACRIFICIAL*
> 
> *Example 2:*  The following disturbing Kutha type slaying
> *(NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART)
> ...





> *SACRIFICIAL*:  Bigger Philosophical Question
> *Q: * Is eating or offering others sacrificial food also bad?
> *A*:  I believe it is.
> *Reason/Rationale:*  Let us look at a Pooja kind of video where people are offering food for benefit and we all know where that food ends up!  In the Priest's stomach.  Why is such bad?  There is perhaps a promise, a wish fulfillment being, sought, etc.  Basically trading with creator!
> ...





> *SACRIFICIAL*:  _Now let us look at ourselves as Sikhs._
> 
> If a Sikh is doing Langar (Communal food offering) for reward, it is as much sacrificial.  However if one is doing it for sharing because one wants to, one can afford to, one has too much of, or one just like sharing, that is not sacrificial and that is Guru ka Langar.


Look forward to getting some bricks and bats coming my way  :angryyoungsingh:, not really but I stand corrected as always.

Sat Sri Akal.

​​


----------



## Ishna (Aug 26, 2011)

The live export trade from Australia is disgusting and many Australians are now rallying to stop this ridiculous and unnecessarily cruel practice. I'll find some links when I'm back on my PC, or you can search for Australia live exports Indonesia to see the horrifying footage Animals Australia obtained recently of our cattle being tortured in Indonesian abbatoirs because it "makes the meat more tender". Followed by tail breaking, and supposedly "halal" slaughter (I suspect many thoughtful Muslims would not consider their methods strictly halal).

Just last week an old ship was supposed to take several thousand live sheep to the Middle East (where they're commonly shoved alive into peoples car boots when they don't actually fit), however it didn't get far when it ran into trouble and was stuck. The sheep were trapped aboard for another 10 days before finally being transported locally for some respite. A lot of sheep had already died. For detalis search for sheep export Port Adelaide and you should find recent news stories.

Oh look, I've taken my own thread off topic again. Naughty Ishna!

But I guess realistically, the practicalities of animal farming are not so much a Sikh concern as a human one.

Thanks for the clarification on ritual and sacrificial meat Gyani and Ambarsaria bhajis.

On a side note... What about other ritual food? Catholic wafer, pagan feast foods? They may not be meat but they have specific ritual meaning.


----------



## Searching (Aug 27, 2011)

Dear Randip ji and spnadmin ji
I do not know what Kosher means but halal does not mean pure. It means permissible.
The Quran defines many things as Halal or permissible and Haram or not permissible, not just food.
On an average and not as per law, most of the animals that Sips their drink are halaal and those who lick the drink are haraam. Similary birds which hold their food in feet are haraam and those who pick their food from their beak are halal.

Then comes a way of slaughtering them which is halal for Muslims.

Fish or seafood is considered Halal only if it is caught ALIVE.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 27, 2011)

Posts related to Kosher and Halal slaugher are moved to this thread. 

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/questions-and-answers/36769-what-is-wrong-with-halal-now.html


Please all kindly return to the main question about jhatka. Does it include shooting in the head? Thanks. :noticekudi: I will also be starting a new thread entitled, The Ritual Consumption of Food and Sikhism, in the Interfaith Dialog section. Some posts here will be moved to that thread.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 27, 2011)

Spna Admin Ji
If you shoot me in the head and then eat my head is that still considered Jhatka?


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 27, 2011)

lol Sinner ji, 



> If you shoot me in the head and then eat my head is that still considered Jhatka? *


 It is cannibalism. Which is not mentioned in any rehat that I have read. Your sacrifice, my sin, and depending on my intentions it would, yes, be jhatka.

I was going to ask a similar question. Is the jhatk a of coconuts at Hazoor Sahib a sacrifice, a ritual? What is it? What category of religious practice does it belong to?


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 27, 2011)

Dear Spna Admin Ji

Perhaps if you hit me on the head first with those Cocunuts that would make it Jhatka.


----------



## Ishna (Aug 27, 2011)

LOL

And thank you Admin Ji for sorting out my mess again.  :blushhh:  Sorry


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 28, 2011)

Sinner said:


> Dear Spna Admin Ji
> 
> Perhaps if you hit me on the head first with those Cocunuts that would make it Jhatka.



You continue to provoke thought about many unexplored facets of Jatkha.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 28, 2011)

Dear Spn Admin 
Seriously though humans are mammals ,the rehat says don't eat halal, so are we allowed to eat each other ,as long as we don't do it the halal way, and would that be ok according to SRM.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 28, 2011)

Acctually the our rehat says nothing about eating meat killed with a "swift stroke." SRM forbids meat killed in the "muslim" way. To eat jatkha or not is your choice. It is typical of the maryada to give room for individual decision making within few, very few, prohibitions.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 28, 2011)

Sinner ji and spnadmin ji great one on one philosophical dialog but just one comment,



> If SRM was to be made totally unambiguous in a legal way, it will be probably bigger than Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.  SRM does assume that people should know it is not a replacement for the intellect of a Gurbani reading Gursikh with common sense.



Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 28, 2011)

Admin Ji 
Not to be contentious me being a sinner I don't read Srm much, that would be like trying to educate pork.I did not realise it did not actually prescribe jhatka, but if it says don't eat halal ,by law of deduction it means slaughtered in the swift way and when I read the article by Isna ji asking about what counts as jhatka I assumed it was now a prescribed thing.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 28, 2011)

Sinner said:


> Admin Ji
> Not to be contentious me being a sinner I don't read Srm much, that would be like trying to educate pork.I did not realise it did not actually prescribe jhatka, but if it says don't eat halal ,by law of deduction it means slaughtered in the opposite way.


Sinner ji the following in Punjabi,


> ieh cwr kurihqW nhIN krnIAW:-
> 
> 
> The following four Kurehat shall not be carried out.
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 28, 2011)

Sinner said:


> Admin Ji
> Not to be contentious me being a sinner I don't read Srm much, that would be like trying to educate pork.I did not realise it did not actually prescribe jhatka, but if it says don't eat halal ,by law of deduction it means slaughtered in the opposite way.



I don't think so. Imagine feeding 25 million Sikhs minus vegetarians worldwide by jatkha. Expensive because it is inefficient. High overhead for butchers.

On a more serious note: If one understands how the halal slaughter is carried out, how it is prescribed, then almost any other method would qualify as "not slaughtered in the muslim way." 

Any male may conduct the slaughter. There is no requirement of a clean or finely sharpened knife. With each animal killed the invocation "Allah Akhbar" is given. In modern practice, the abatoirs recently used for kosher slaughter may be preferred or not. Allah Akhbar is the central feature.


The argument gets waylaid by the assumption that "animal suffering" is to be avoided. I don't know if that was what was on your mind orn ot. Actually it is the "ritual" of halal that was to be avoided. Much like the SRM states that Sikhs should not worship at musim graves.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 28, 2011)

Ambarsaria ji

You have it spot on!



> If SRM was to be made totally unambiguous in a legal way, it will be probably bigger than Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. SRM does assume that people should know it is not a replacement for the intellect of a Gurbani reading Gursikh with common sense.



The idea the less is more escapes more of us in each generation. Amazing to me how so many add and complicate by layering more requirements as per their understanding instead of stripping back to the essentials.

P/s I appreciate the way you added the additional notes. showing just how unfettered by legalisms SRM actually is.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 28, 2011)

Ambarsaria Ji ,Veera once one learns something it is hard to unlearn it, I wish you had not informed me of what they actually were ,as I was going to plead ignorance to God, now it's all messed up!Because those are all the things I do, apart from affair with men and smoking but I have been accused of doing them too!


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 29, 2011)

Spot ON. When we are told...SIKHS are NOT allowed to consume HALLAL. PERIOD.
Then come the questions...no hallal then what ?? the obvious choice is Jhatka as thats what COMMON among Non_muslims in India....
EVEN IF "hallal" was suddenly proven to be the Most Humane, most kind way to kill, the most painless way, no sufferingetc etc blah blah blah...The BAN ON "HALLAL" would still REMAIN for SIKHS..simply becasue all those "reasons" dont factor IN at all. Hallal is Banned becasue its Hallal...period.
And by the way..eating hallal doesnt make you a muslim just as drinking blood wont make you "bloodthirsty"....and eating "Jhatka" wont make you "any MORE" sikh than another....it doesnt work that way...SIKHI has to be GURBANI IN PRACTISE !!!:happysingh:


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 29, 2011)

Gyani Ji

Thankyou for your comments.I undertand there is a requirement not to eat hallal, I just thought it was principly derived from the rejection of the imposition that was prevalent at a particular time in our history.(sorry to repeat what I said on the other thread and no contention to you Giani Ji.I'm not sure about the drinking blood bit as dracula did get a taste for it.But I will try it for a while and report back to SPN, any donations of blood will be welcomed lol


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 29, 2011)

sinner ji..the word "bloodthirsty" was metaphorical...ha ha


----------

