jhatka

[jsingh96]

a friend told me to check this out

http://sikh-jhatka.blogspot.com/

*warning, the videos on here are not for the faint hearted

[Mithar]

keher!!!

[Ragmaala]

wow jhatka was so clean and swift ,

whereas halal is disgusting and cruel, pc

[Guest]

can you please in future add advisory or warning for viewers with weak heart when posting links these videos?

[jsingh96]

sry !

editted !

[Maha Kharag Singh]

that halal was incompassionate and barbaric.

the people were laughing while the bull was slaughtered.

[Morghe Sahar]

That's not even how halal is done you idiots!!! These guys are not even Muslims. This is a traditional non-Muslim buffalo sacrifice from Toraja in Indonesia. They also sacrifice pigs there:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMVoe8yPTUg...feature=related

Oh my God, I can't believe you guys are so thick, shooting yourselves in the foot. LMAO

[SURYADEV]

Chatka = 18 secs

Halal = 1.04 secs

Don't know whether/what to read into the timings.

[Morghe Sahar]

Just in case you say I am lying, here is the original video shown in the blog:

Oh my God!!!ROFL!!!

I am not surprised to see Nidarpanthis stooping to the level of lying...

[Morghe Sahar]

Jattboot you forget that the animal looses consciousness straight away as the main vein is cut whereas with jhatka the animal's head is still conscious during the whole process.

Guys you have just shown to the whole world how much brain you Nidarpanthis have. Try searching youtube when you're not in afeem, degh or sharab. Might work...

[jsingh96]

is this one halal enough for you?

[shaheediyan]

"Jattboot you forget that the animal looses consciousness straight away as the main vein is cut whereas with jhatka the animal's head is still conscious during the whole process."

If the animal 'apparently' looses consciousness' (kicking around upto 5 mins afterwards) by it's 'main vein' being cut, what vein remains uncut after the animal has been decapitated?!!??!!

[Morghe Sahar]

The cut needs to be done in one go. Try harder. Mate you can find me x videos of illiterate tribesmen in Afghanistan and Pakistan doing whatever. I don't care. Consult a jurisprudential source about what the halal way of slaughtering implies instead of posting youtube videos. I have seen plenty of videos of jhatka mishaps where Nidar's students had to hit a bakra three times before it was dead whilst laughing their heads off doing it, and laughing whilst cutting the animal's flesh. SO please spare me the "you're so barbaric" song. You're as bad the people you accuse.

And it doesnt take away the fact that your first video proved that you can't differentiate between a non Muslim tribal sacrifice and halal slaughtering. So leave it mate...

[gsingh00]

Jattboot you forget that the animal looses consciousness straight away as the main vein is cut whereas with jhatka the animal's head is still conscious during the whole process.

I realize this isnt a science forum but this doesnt make any sense to me. The rationale behind halal being painless is that if the internal jugular is cut in one blow and completely severed, enough blood should leave the brain within a second or 2 that the animal should go unconscious. In jhatka, not only are you completely severing the internal jugular in one blow, but the same blow takes out all of the major arteries and vein to the head, as well as many of the nerves.

Also, for a normal person, without any sort of anatomy background to be able to locate the internal jugular and differentiate it from the large number of other structures running in the same area cannot be easy.

[jsingh96]

thank you gurpreetsingh

[Morghe Sahar]

"Also, for a normal person, without any sort of anatomy background to be able to locate the internal jugular and differentiate it from the large number of other structures running in the same area cannot be easy."

That's why halal slaughter should be perfomed by a professional not just any Tom Dick and Harry. How many bakre have to suffer when you Niddar kids go there and hit 3 or 4 times until the animal finally dies`?

[jsingh96]

who are the niddar kids? whom on this board who posts actively goes to the akhara?

[Morghe Sahar]

The French have decapitated people up to the 1980s as an execution method and they did scientific studies about the relation between loss of consciousness and decapitation. And they found out that the head is still conscious up to maximum 90 seconds (mostly less) after the beheading with people blinking their eyes on command etc...

[gsingh00]

Im not a niddar kid, nor have I ever performed jhatka. I don't doubt that it is possible for the brain to stay alive for 90 seconds after a beheading, but the mechanism by which doesn't make any sense to me, if it is infact true please provide some credible scientific literature, or atleast a rationale behind it. Otherwise no one has any reason to believe you.

"That's why halal slaughter should be perfomed by a professional not just any Tom Dick and Harry."

My main point in the previous post was that to claim halal is a painless killing is far too simplistic of an explanation. It also can't be denied that "Tom Dick and Harry" perform halal.

[Morghe Sahar]

Who ever said it's painless? Good God. This is the slaughter of an animal for food. I see no difference between halal and other quick methods, except of course that it is ordained by God. That's all that matters.

[shaheediyan]

Prayers aside, the halaal/kosher method of slaughter is again not originally Ibrahimic. This method of slauther was in practice in North African/Arabian cultures already, same as circumcision. These methods were simply adopted by religions for practical/integration/disciplinery reasons (in my view).

BA arguement is completely hopeless. Decapitation disconnects all major veins and artiries The cause of death is lack of a flow of oxygenated blood to the brain - THAT SIMPLE.

This is silly childess debate. Both traditions exist in religious environments and were used by men of God. Examples being used here are of incorrect practice on both sides. Just leave it at that.

[Morghe Sahar]

Childles debate. Mind you....Nazis used to discuss the kosher at length in their propaganda movies to show Jews as barbaric people. Jsingh69 seems to want to represent Muslims as barbaric vs the pure Aryan Sikhs...

Then again when one can't tell teh difference between an Indonesian non Muslim sacrifice and halal slaughter...LMAO ROFL

[Mithar]

Childles debate. Mind you....Nazis used to discuss the kosher at length in their propaganda movies to show Jews as barbaric people. Jsingh69 seems to want to represent Muslims as barbaric vs the pure Aryan Sikhs...

Then again when one can't tell teh difference between an Indonesian non Muslim sacrifice and halal slaughter...LMAO ROFL

The Muslims as Jews and Sikhs as Nazis? WOW, you really know how to put a sensationalist twist to an arguement.

[amardeep]

Sau Sakhi 64

“Stand in a line, if you are to bare weapons and wish to up hold the duty of a warrior, then hunt keeping the warrior duty in mind and eat meat. If you wish to follow the vegetarian way, or the way of Saints, then meat eating is forbidden. He who contemplates God’s name and is of the of Sato Gun character, he should not eat meat, for meat eating promotes Tams Gun. He, who wishes to fight for righteousness and protect the weak in battle, has to spill many people’s blood and should be ready to sacrifice himself. He should hunt, eat meat, and should have no fear because he is but doing his warrior duty. But, remember this, eating meat for just pleasure of tongue or vice is a sin --’â€.’

(‘Sau Sakhi Steek’, by Partap Singh Mehta, Vol.2, Pa. 136-137)

[SURYADEV]

Sau Sakhi 64

“Stand in a line, if you are to bare weapons and wish to up hold the duty of a warrior, then hunt keeping the warrior duty in mind and eat meat. If you wish to follow the vegetarian way, or the way of Saints, then meat eating is forbidden. He who contemplates God’s name and is of the of Sato Gun character, he should not eat meat, for meat eating promotes Tams Gun. He, who wishes to fight for righteousness and protect the weak in battle, has to spill many people’s blood and should be ready to sacrifice himself. He should hunt, eat meat, and should have no fear because he is but doing his warrior duty. But, remember this, eating meat for just pleasure of tongue or vice is a sin --’â€.’

(‘Sau Sakhi Steek’, by Partap Singh Mehta, Vol.2, Pa. 136-137)

Thanks for that Amardeep. For me that clarifies the whole meat issue for Sikhs. BUT what about the authenticity of the Sau Sakis as a whole? As per my understanding it has been changed alot over the centuries.