24 January, 2021

Blog

Cattle Slaughter And The Sinhala-Buddhists’ Hypocrisy And Racism

By Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

Sri Lankan Muslims at the cross roads – 21; Other issues (continued)

I must insist on the importance of the fact that in Islamic animal sacrifice none of the meat is meant to go waste. This follows from the fact that Islam places a high value on reverence for life, including non-human life, which is why hunting for pleasure is forbidden – something that perhaps had to be expected in a religion that arose in a desert environment where non-human life was very scarce. Consequently even the wealthiest Muslims, in Sri Lanka and elsewhere, have a deep aversion to throwing away food, which is equivalent to throwing away life. That is evidently why – as I have been informed by a reader – the Saudi Government processes the huge amount of excess meat left after the Bairam festival and exports it to other countries, free of charge for distribution to the poor.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in Islamic animal sacrifice that can be regarded as morally reprehensible according to the highest standards of the most advanced civilisations in the world. The late much revered monk, the Ven. Soma Thera, wrote in the Sunday Times – if my memory serves correctly – that though killing is forbidden in Buddhism it could be allowed in some cases, for instance those who practice animal sacrifice. He was an erudite monk, but he was not erudite on Islam. However, there certainly are malpractices in the cattle trade that have been crying out for correction for decades. The argument that the use of the stun-gun is a humane way of killing cattle, while the Islamic way of slitting the throat is inhuman and barbaric, is I think an expression of Western Islamophobia which has come to be parroted by Sri Lankans. A foreigner tells me that in ancient Greece and Rome where the condemned to death were allowed to choose the method of execution, they – like Socrates – invariably chose to slit their wrists. There is not a single instance of anyone choosing to be dispatched into the next world with a brutal bang on the head. Anyway, I am told that there is now a method of making cattle insensitive to pain and then slitting the throat, which would be fully consistent with Islamic requirements. If so, it is up to the Government to impose that method by law.

Soma Thero - He was an erudite monk, but he was not erudite on Islam.

Soma Thero – He was an erudite monk, but he was not erudite on Islam.

Likewise it is up to the Government to take corrective measures against well-known malpractices, such as the inhuman crowding of cattle into trucks for transportation and their being starved for days before slaughter. Such malpractices were never an integral part of the cattle trade – the British colonial power would never have tolerated them – until after 1977. A friend from Akurana, a center of the cattle trade, tells me that such malpractices became more or less the norm only after the late Minister A.C.S. Hameed used to intervene to prevent the police taking punitive action. The continuity of the malpractices can be seen as part of the general breakdown of law and order. However, what is important for the purposes of this article is that such malpractices are quite definitely unIslamic, as can be shown from Islamic texts. The point I want to emphasize is that those responsible for the malpractices constitute an infinitesimal fraction of our Muslim population, not the generality of the Muslims. Therefore our Buddhists should blame the Government, not the Muslims, for failing to take effective action to stop those unIslamic malpractices.

It will help in sorting out the irritant of cattle slaughter in Sinhalese-Muslim relations if there is recognition on the Sinhalese side that there has been blatant hypocrisy about it. Buddhism forbids killing but it gives no sacrosanct place to cattle, so that it becomes difficult to understand why the agitation has been only against cattle slaughter and not the slaughter of marine life and chickens. A fish taken out of water dies in agony in a process comparable to that of humans being drowned, but we have always had a Ministry of Fisheries. Broiler chickens are subjected to horrible confinement right through their lives, but there has been no agitation to stop their consumption. Pigs are first brutally clubbed and killed after red-hot pokers are introduced into them. But there has been no agitation to stop the killing of pigs through a horrifying process of torture. Two questions arise: Has the agitation been confined to cattle slaughter because the cattle trade has been a virtual monopoly of the Muslims? The second question: Is there not hypocrisy and racism behind that agitation?

I am prepared to respect Buddhist sentiments about killing, particularly on the part of Buddhists who are vegetarians. But there should be recognition of the fact that love of animals can go together with inhumanity towards human beings. The best known case was that of Himmler who was responsible for the organization and running of the death camps to exterminate the Jews. He used to sometimes take time off from his official duties to watch the killings take place. And yet, right through his life he had a passionate love of animals the sincerity of which was never doubted by any one. I must add that he was well-versed in Hindu and Buddhist scriptures.

It is known in fact that many of the Nazi leaders, inhuman though they were to the point of being subhuman, were passionately fond of dogs. In one of Bunuel’s films the Ambassador in Paris of a Latin American dictatorship is told that a former Nazi had been apprehended in his capital city. He remarks, “I can assure you that he is a perfect gentleman”, and a female voice is heard asking – in a delightful satirical thrust –  “Is he fond of children, dogs, and Mozart?” Some of the Nazi leaders may have had a humane side. So, while respecting genuine Buddhist sentiments we have nevertheless to ask what there might be behind supposed humane concerns over cattle slaughter. In any case, what has to be done to remove that irritant is quite straightforward. The Government should take steps to compel humane methods of slaughter, and to end the malpractices that have grown in the cattle trade. If the Buddhists want to stop cattle slaughter altogether, it is something that they should take up with the Government. It should not be allowed to prejudice Sinhalese-Muslim relations.

In my last article I wrote that I would make a few observations on two issues which could have more serious consequences than most of the others. Apart from cattle slaughter, the other is the perception that the Muslims are inordinately wealthy. This perception was particularly rampant some decades ago when under the command economy no one seemed to be able to make big money except gem merchants, most of whom were Muslims. Obviously that had to be a misperception after the market economy got going in post-1977 Sri Lanka, and very probably it was always a misperception. I recall that when in the first half of the ‘nineties I prepared a paper on the SL Muslims for publication by the Western Australian University, I had recourse to a Marga Institute study which established with copious statistics that none of our ethnic groups was better off economically than any of the others. I have found that it is no longer possible to establish from official statistics the relative economic position of our ethnic groups. However, the notion of inordinate Muslim wealth continues, as shown for instance by the charge made during the Ven. Wirathu’s visit that Sri Lanka’s commerce is under Muslim control.

We need not attach much importance to what are obvious misperceptions. But one fact has a possible incendiary potential for the future. When swabasha was introduced decades ago Sinhalese and Tamil children were taught in their languages while the Muslims could opt for English, and that for obvious reasons conferred significant advantages on the Muslims. That did not seem to matter during the ‘fifties and’ sixties when the Muslims were still educationally backward and remained basically a trading community outside the Eastern Province where they were predominantly agricultural. But now they are competing with the Sinhalese and the Tamils in every field, and their competence in English is seen to confer on them a decisive and also an unfair advantage. This advantage is not due to any devilry on the part of the Muslims but is the consequence of the short-sightedness of Sinhalese politicians in imposing Swabasha. The fact remains that it is objectively an advantage and there could arise a case for removing that advantage through what is called positive discrimination or affirmative action. The case will however have to depend on reliable statistics showing that the Muslims have an over-all advantage, and not just in this or that field. It should not be a serious problem, but I am uneasy because of an indubitable fact: we Sri Lankans have shown a genius – immensely impressive by international standards – for mucking and wrecking our ethnic relations.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 7
    15

    Izeth Hussein:

    Muslims Are the butchers in Sinhale. Before the Colonial invasion, Sinhala-buddhists did not eat meat. It is the colonial europeans, Catholics/christians and muslims who taught that habbit of meat eating.

    You say buddhists are hypocrites.I say muslims are liers. They lie in the name of religion, and also muslims are the worst hypocrites.

    See in one statement, you say that you respect non-human life. Then in another sentence you say animals are sacrificed to the god as a respect to him and as the meat is wasted, you process and give to the poor people.

    Why don’t you respect non-human life as your life and stop killing.

    Besides, there is no almighty god as you call it Allah. There cannot be a almighty creator. Because of that belief muslims and the believers of creator god are the most backward with respect to the understanding the true nature of the world.

    • 2
      1

      .
      About Messengers:
      Krishna and Buddha believed in re-birth and therefore possible they were re-born.
      Jesus said, I’ll be back.
      Muhammad said, I’m the last.

      So, who is smart?

      :-)

      • 6
        5

        The Sinhala Buddhist racist regime welcomes and harbors the internationally proclaimed Buddhist terrorist Wiratu from Burma.

        Now a European court has ruled that LTTE is not a terrorist organization: This shows who are the state terrorists and who are not; the LTTE are freedom fighters wrongly labeled as terrorists.

        This is avictory to freedom and a setback for Sinhala Buddhist racism.

        Truth has curious ways of bursting out: Now let’s await the verdict on the genocide of Tamils by the racist regimes of Sri Lanka.

        • 2
          0

          All terrorist eat cattle.

        • 0
          0

          The government made sure that the ban on the LTTE would be lifted. They did not even send legal representation for the hearing on the lifting of the ban on LTTE. This is clear evidence that the government had planned to use this in their presidential bid for the illegal 3rd term. Sinhalese will continue to be suckers as long as racism card is played, be they against the Tamils, Muslims or Christians,

    • 8
      1

      Jimmy Jimmy,

      This vegetarianism is good. Our venerable monks have taken it to such a pure height and coined the phrase ‘kura koombiyekutawath haaniyak karanna honda nehe’. The import of this phrase is that we should not even kill any micro organisms which have life.

      Theoretically is this possible? No. We cannot even live for a few minutes without killing an enormous amount of micro organisms. For, when we breath our immune system kills them. Remember life is life, whether that of a cow or a small animal. So, in our haste create a pure system of vegetarianism we take it to absurd heights thus exhibiting our stupidity.

      As modern science would confirm even plants have life. Jains have accepted this and they don’t eat anything grown under the soil, as you tend to kill the plant when you harvest it. Potato is an example of this kind. Do we Sinhala Buddhists adhere to such principles? No. we will happily gobble it up saying they are vegetables. I think Jains are better in that respect than Buddhists.

      Then we have the laws of nature that govern us. Animals are divided into herbivorous and carnivorous. Then there are animals which are of both kinds. Nature sees it fit to create animals with such qualities. As humans we can eat meat of any kind and we could digest them. So, nature has enabled us to consume animal meat. Why go against nature.

      So this superiority complex of the vegetarianism based on Buddhism has to stop. We are making a joke of Buddhism and ourselves.

      • 3
        0

        Ants and micro organisms apart, birds and animals slaughtered for food is an estimated 56 BILLION per annum or 8 per capita.Figures are increasing by the day with no restraint.

        Sacrifice differs in one respect. It is sacrilege since it spoils the environment around places treated as sacred. As for numbers it is a mere microscopic fraction of slaughter.

    • 4
      1

      Izeth Hussain –

      RE: Cattle Slaughter And The Sinhala-Buddhists’ Hypocrisy And Racism

      1. “I must insist on the importance of the fact that in Islamic animal sacrifice none of the meat is meant to go waste….. “

      2. “There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in Islamic animal sacrifice that can be regarded as morally reprehensible according to the highest standards of the most advanced civilisations in the world.”

      Now Remember, what the Para-Sinhala “Buddhists” are complaining about is not about Item 1 or Item 2 above. They are really complaining about the presence of Para-Muslims, in Lanka, the land of Native Veddah Aethho. The Native Veddah Aethho did hunt and kill animals, for 30,000 years, before the Paras-from South India came. Even the Paras from South India did kill animals before they were introduced into Buddhism.The Hindus did sacrifice animals. ( Check the F\DNA of theParas)

      So, the Problem the Sinhala “Buddhists” have is NOT animal sacrifice. It is Muslims.

      The Sinhala “Buddhists” had the same problem with the Tamils.They were Tamil Hindus and Tamil Christians.

      The so called “Sinhala Buddhists”, the Racist and chauvinistic fraction represented by BBS and others, are not Buddhists. They do not follow Buddhism. They follow Mara, the enemy of Buddha.

      It is very similar to the Wahhabi and their clones such as ISIS, ISIL, Taliban, Salafis, Tawheed, Deobandis Boko Haram etc. They Follow the Devil, Satan, Iblees, Lucifer, alternative names for the Buddhist Mara.

      So the Mara of Buddhism and the Wahhabis of Islam, are indeed strange Bedfellows.

      In Summary, this is not Buddhism. It is Racism, puree and simple.

      Native Veddah Aethho.

      The Vedda Tribe

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f89NuukY32U

      Tamil-speaking Veddas of Vaharai await war recovery support

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeFCuZwexRw

    • 0
      0

      Cattle and Bull population have been increased during the recent years, and the years to come this will be more since the ruler in power is the most know mad bull who has been paviing all avernues turning human beings cattle/bulls.

    • 5
      5

      The world has come to realize it Jim.

      From USA to Australia, Russia to India, the whole non-Muslim world stands united against Islam.

      Even LTTE Thalaivar came to this realization in 1990.

      • 1
        1

        And really realized in Nandikkadal in 05/2009

    • 6
      2

      Jim,
      I agree with you this time.. God is not almighty.. Otherwise how could (s)he created a waste like you ?

    • 6
      0

      ‘Soft in the Head’
      “Before the Colonial invasion, Sinhala-buddhists did not eat meat. It is the colonial europeans, Catholics/christians and muslims who taught that habbit of meat eating.”

      I remember traditional stories from old Sinhale, that the rich ate ‘Heenati haaley Buth’, and ‘Kalukun Maalu’

      Also, Sinhala Buddhists as well as Buddhist Monks all eat Fish.

      Softy, what is the difference between eating meat and eating fish?
      You have to kill Living Creatures to eat both!!

      • 6
        0

        Rationalist
        “Also Sinhala Buddhists as well as Buddhist monks all
        eat fish”
        There are monks who asks for chicken from their
        devotees when going to temples for Alms invitation.
        One more point.Before the invention of synthetic,all
        monks were wearing leather footwear and wallets.And
        in the Temples drums are in leather.So,Muslims
        butchered and Sinhale celebrated?

    • 4
      1

      Izeth Hussain –

      RE: Sri Lankan Muslims at the cross roads – 21; Other issues (continued)

      Remember Muslims at the cross roads because of the Devil, Satan, Shaitan, Iblees, Lucifer, following Wahhabi and their clones, salafis, Tauheeds, Taliban. Alqueda, Deobandis, Boko Haram, ISIS, ISIL and other, originally exported from Wahhabi Saudi Arabia.

      Wahhanis Satans, Iblees, call Christians “Nassarah,”
      Wahhabi Satans, Iblees, call Shites, “Rafidha,” which means “those who reject”

      But here’s what was interesting, the Iraqi official said, the term “Rafidha” was largely unknown in Iraq to describe Shiites. It is a term used by Wahhabi fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia. “We did not know this word,” he told me. “This is not an Iraqi term.”

      I.S. = Invasive Species
      OCT. 11, 2014

      Thomas L. Friedman

      http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/12/opinion/sunday/thomas-l-friedman-is-invasive-species.html?smid=tw-share

      AN Iraqi official recently told me this story: When the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, took over Mosul in the summer, the Sunni jihadist fighters in ISIS, many of whom were foreigners, went house to house. On the homes of Christians they marked “Nassarah,” an archaic Arabic term for Christians. But on the homes of Shiites they marked “Rafidha,” which means “those who reject” the Sunni line of authority as to who should be caliph, or leader of the Muslim community, after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. But here’s what was interesting, the Iraqi official said, the term “Rafidha” was largely unknown in Iraq to describe Shiites. It is a term used by Wahhabi fundamentalists in Saudi Arabia. “We did not know this word,” he told me. “This is not an Iraqi term.”

      I was intrigued by this story because it highlighted the degree to which ISIS operates just like an “invasive species” in the world of plants and animals. It is not native to either the Iraqi or Syrian ecosystems. It never before grew in their landscapes.

      I find it useful at times to use the natural world to illuminate trends in geopolitics and globalization, and this is one of them. The United States National Arboretum website notes that “invasive plant species thrive where the continuity of a natural ecosystem is breached and are abundant on disturbed sites like construction areas and road cuts. … In some situations these nonnative species cause serious ecological disturbances. In the worst cases, invasive plants … ruthlessly choke out other plant life. This puts extreme pressure on native plants and animals, and threatened species may succumb to this pressure. Ultimately, invasive plants alter habitats and reduce biodiversity.”

      I can’t think of a better way to understand ISIS. It is a coalition. One part consists of Sunni Muslim jihadist fighters from all over the world: Chechnya, Libya, Britain, France, Australia and especially Saudi Arabia. They spread so far, so fast, despite their relatively small numbers, because the disturbed Iraqi and Syrian societies enabled these foreign jihadists to forge alliances with secular, native-born, Iraqi and Syrian Sunni tribesmen and former Baathist army officers, whose grievances were less religious and more about how Iraq and Syria were governed.

      Today, ISIS — the foreigners and locals together — is putting pressure on all of Iraq’s and Syria’s native species with the avowed goal of reducing the diversity of these once polycultural societies and turning them into bleak, dark, jihadist, Sunni fundamentalist monocultures.

      It is easy to see how ISIS spread. Think about the life of a 50-year-old Iraqi Sunni male from Mosul. He first got drafted to fight in the eight-year Iran-Iraq war that ended in 1988. Then he had to fight in the Persian Gulf war I after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Then he lived under a decade of U.N. sanctions that broke Iraq’s middle class. Then he had to endure the years of chaos that followed the U.S. invasion, which ended with a corrupt, brutal, pro-Iranian Shiite regime in Baghdad led by Nuri Kamal al-Maliki that did all it could to keep Sunnis poor and powerless. This was the fractured political ecosystem in which ISIS found fertile ground.

      Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story
      How do you deal with an invasive species? The National Arboretum says you should “use systemic herbicides carefully” (President Obama’s air war), while also constantly working to strengthen and “preserve healthy native plant habitats” (Obama’s effort to forge a national unity government in Baghdad with Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds together).

      Generally speaking, though, over the years in Iraq and Afghanistan we have overspent on herbicides (guns and training) and underinvested in the best bulwark against invasive species (noncorrupt, just governance). We should be pressing the Iraqi government, which is rich with cash, to focus on delivering to every Iraqi still under its control 24 hours of electricity a day, a job, better schools, more personal security and a sense that no matter what sect they’re from the game is not rigged against them and their voice will count. That is how you strengthen an ecosystem against invasive species.

      Continue reading the main story
      RECENT COMMENTS

      Malaouna 5 days ago
      Is this really what passes for journalism in the New York Times? Serously, beyond the first paragraph, Friedman engages in a folksy,…
      Jerry Frey 5 days ago
      “On the homes of Christians they marked “Nassarah,” an archaic Arabic term for Christians.””Islam is at War with the Oldest ReligionsAncient…
      Cunn9305 5 days ago
      Islamic fundamentalist nihilism is simple to defineSuch plenary diversions are irrelevant.They convert .. or they kill.The reason matters…
      SEE ALL COMMENTS
      “It was misgovernance which drove Iraqis to contemplate a relationship with ISIS with the view that it was less detrimental to their interests than their own (Shiite-led) government,” explained Sarah Chayes, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment who is a former U.S. adviser in Afghanistan and author of the upcoming “Thieves of State: Why Corruption Threatens Global Security.” The Iraqi Army we built was seen by many Iraqi Sunnis “as the enforcer of a kleptocratic network.” That army got “sucked dry by the cronies of Maliki so it became a hollow shell that couldn’t withstand the first bullet.”

      The goal of ISIS now is to draw us in, get us to bomb Sunni towns and drive the non-ISIS Sunnis away from America and closer to ISIS, “because,” notes Chayes, “ISIS knows it can’t survive without the support of these non-ISIS Sunnis.”

      We always overestimate military training and force and underestimate what Arabs and Afghans want most: decent and just governance. Without the latter, there is no way to cultivate real citizens with a will to fight — and without will there is no training that matters.

      Ask any general — or gardener.

    • 5
      0

      Jim softy

      The Problem lies in the Abrahamic Religions.

      Christianity is False and Immoral. (Christopher Hitchens)

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HA55jGyq2C8

      Uploaded on Nov 20, 2011
      Excerpt from the 2007 Christopher Hitchens vs Alister Mcgrath debate.

    • 1
      2

      Jim,
      I guess depth of this article is too much for you. Have you seen the sentence “A fish taken out of water dies in agony in a process comparable to that of humans being drowned”. Can you recall the image of dying fish. try to see that image next time you eat fish. S-Buddhists say “Panathi patha” every day, then Sinhalese God Buddha get birds, fish, and animal drop dead in front of them so that you S-Buddhists could eat them without killing..Isn’t that right?
      In the last centuries, Lanka kings and powerful leaders were Hindu Tamils.. they built couple of Hindu Kovils in every temple… so S-Buddhists got these special kindness to these domesticated breed of ox…. You used to get your domesticated hens to lay eggs, you eat all those eggs, and then one day S-Buddhist kill and eat the mother hen too… This is not uncommon practice in villages I know..

    • 1
      0

      Jim Softy, for the lies you speak, you are that kind of animal that eminently qualifies to be “first brutally clubbed and killed after red-hot pokers are introduced into” you.

    • 0
      2

      Jim, you are absolutely right. We have to respect non human lives, but we also need to respect human lives and that does not mean only Sinhala Buddhist rights. Just imagine the number of Tamils who were slaughtered by our armed forces in the conflict in the North and East. How many children did we destroy?

      I have had this argument of sacrifice in Islam with my neighbour who is a pios Muslim, but a true Sri Lankan. He explained to me that unlike in some other religions, there is no necessity to please the gods with blood, so in Islam, there is no need to sacrifice in the name of God. What happens during the Haji festival is that animals are slaughtered and the meat distributed to the poor so that they too could have a decent meal. If they are allowed to eat meat legally in this country, why should we complain about them sharing their OWN money to feed their poor.

      It would be a good practice if we too can share a few bottles of ARRACK with our poor, so that they too can enjoy the avurudu as we do.

      • 0
        2

        Upali Wijewardene – Grateful for your enlightened comments.Your comment about sharing arrack on Avurudda interests me very much. There is a deep meaning, a deep attraction, in commensality, that is eating together and sharing food.That is at the core of the Bairam Festival. Commensality is a powerful way of social bonding. President MR is supposed to be a maestro at that game.
        I would recommend that in Sri Lanka our ethnic groups participate in some way in each others religious festivals. For instance, on the occasion of the Bairam Festival let non-Muslims also distribute food, particularly to the needy poor. I wanted to make that recommendation in my article but desisted thinking that it might be premature. Trying to promote ethnic harmony in Sri Lanka can be dangerous. – Izeth Hussain

  • 7
    4

    Izeth Hussain doesn’t seem to want to stop unless he sees a few thousand Muslims killed and rendered homeless. It is empirical wisdom there is a time and place for everything – including writing on matters public. These are highly charged times in Sinhala-Muslim relations when people should closely guard their tongues – and, in his case, their pens. Izeth H simply does not care. He is hell-bent on seeing his name on print or as he asked another commentator several times, in different words – “am I not a very good writer and social analyst?”

    The street rubble in the Sinhala extreme is only waiting for provocative comments like “If the Buddhists want to stop cattle slaughter altogether, it is something that they should take up with the Government” Oh! dear, or dear or dear!

    If Izeth H crazily craves to see his name in the media so badly, irrespective of the consequences, why does he not chose less controversial subjects for his non-stoppable flow of unsolicited wisdom.

    Horikadey

  • 5
    11

    I am prepared to respect Buddhist sentiments about killing, particularly on the part of Buddhists who are vegetarians. But there should be recognition of the fact that love of animals can go together with inhumanity towards human beings. The best known case was that of Himmler who was responsible for the organization and running of the death camps to exterminate the Jews. He used to sometimes take time off from his official duties to watch the killings take place. And yet, right through his life he had a passionate love of animals the sincerity of which was never doubted by any one. I must add that he was well-versed in Hindu and Buddhist scriptures.

    IZETH HUSSEIN:

    Eventhough you are a mature and old man, see how stupid you talk.

    YOu say a NAzi was well versed with hindu and buddhist scriptures. Yet he ran death camps.

    DO you use the same logics to say that muslim – extremists, terrorists, killers are well verses with Quran because of that it is the Quran made them killers ?

    • 3
      5

      I think Koran makes men good Muslims and perfect killers. eg Jihadis of ISIS.

      • 3
        1

        I am no muslim,

        Question: Are you a Wahhabi who follows the Satan, Iblees or Lucifer?

        “I think Koran makes men good Muslims and perfect killers. eg Jihadis of ISIS.”

        Partly correct, but there is a Mix up, with the Needs of the Devil, Satan. ( The Mix up is similar to saying Sri Lanka is a a democratic Socialist Republic, however the Governance is Devilish, Satanic, Mara, by the current MaRa Regime)

        1. Koran makes Good Muslims- That is what Koran wants Muslims to do, thee is no compulsion in religion and this Religion is mine, and the other is yours)

        Al-Baqara 256

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Baqara_256

        Verse (ayah) 256 of Al-Baqara is one of the most quoted verses in the Islamic holy scripture, the Qur’an. It famously notes that “there is no compulsion in religion.”

        2.Al-Kafirun

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Kafirun

        Sūrat al-Kāfirūn (Arabic: سورة الكافرون‎) is the name of the 109th Sura (chapter) of the Qur’an. Al-Kafirun means “the Unbelievers.”

        Like many of the shorter Suras, the Sura of the Unbelievers takes the form of an invocation, telling the reader something they must ask for or say aloud. Here, the passage asks one to keep in mind the separation between belief and unbelief both in the past and the present, ending with the often cited line “To you your religion, and to me mine”.

        It was revealed in Mecca when the Muslims were persecuted by the polytheists of Mecca.

        Now to BAD Muslims, aka Jihadis, Wahhabis, and their Clones, the Devils, Satans, Sahitans, Iblees, Taliban, Deobandi, ISIS, ISIL, Bokpo Haram etc.

        They all follow the Satan,

        They hate those who follow God, more than those who who do not follow God.

        So, the Jihaddis, The Wahhabi and their Clones, that the:
        1. Jews
        2. Christians and other Christian sects
        3. All non-Wahhhab Muslims. Shia, Ahamadeia, Sufis, and other Muslim sects who follow God, unlike the the Wahhabis and their clones who follow the Devil, Satan, Iblees, or Lucifer.

  • 5
    4

    izeth hussein:

    SAUDI ARABIA had beheaded 59 people.

    Why don’t you say that QURAN DID NOT HAVE ANY INFLUENCE over these INHUMANE killings of human life.

    “escalation of the war against the Islamic State was triggered by widespread revulsion at the gruesome beheading of two American journalists, relayed on YouTube. Since then, two British aid workers have met a similar grisly fate. And another American has been named as next in line by his terrorist captors.

    Yet, for all the outrage these executions have engendered the world over, decapitations are routine in Saudi Arabia, America’s closest Arab ally, for crimes including political dissent—and the international press hardly seems to notice. In fact, since January, 59 people have had their heads lopped off in the kingdom, where “punishment by the sword” has been practiced for centuries.

    The Saudi legal system is based on Islam’s Sharia law. Some countries that use Sharia possess a penal code, but Saudi Arabia does not, although some activists have been calling for reform.”

    • 6
      2

      Jim says “Why don’t you say that QURAN DID NOT HAVE ANY INFLUENCE over these INHUMANE killings of human life.”…
      Sri Lanka killing 40,000 own civilians (+ suspected rebels) using arial bombing and modern mass killing machinery has any influence of Sinhalese Buddhism?

    • 4
      1

      Jim Softy, why don’t you get back to the subject of animal slaughter? You want to distract and divert our attention, don’t you, you sly fox.

      Hitler was a vegetarian. That does not make all vegetarians good people.

      The greatest murderers in the world – Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin – were Atheists.

      Bush killed 1.6 millions Iraqis. No one blames Christianity.

      So, why do you keep blaming Muslims. Is it because they are easy targets?

  • 6
    5

    I find buddhism to be very illogical when people dont have food, the buddhist build statues spending millions. the statue cannot do you harm or good. waste of resources. Most buddhist wont beleive in god but will goto some idol worshiping kovil in kataragama or pray to the mad kali amma (killer). very confused people. these buddhist are
    1. dont know buddhism
    2. Must read on Islam and come to success
    3. Even if there is war outside a muslim home is the happiest due to reliance on Allah –
    4. Islam is very rational and logical.In the long run all What the Quran says have come true.And its a guide to man kind.
    5.people who want to respond to my comment first read about Islam before writing nonsense.

    • 6
      2

      Jehan,
      Correction… you have misunderstood ‘Sinhalese Buddhism with Buddhism”… They are very different.. Zen , Tibetan, North Thailand buddhist teaching and scholars explain true buddhism and are well respected worldwide.. They don’t worship trees, big Stupas… They don’t teach people go to Gods in other religions asking for favours..
      Hope this helps…

  • 0
    0

    [Edited out]

  • 2
    3

    How about Muslim racists?

    Look at the countries that kill Muslims everyday. USA, UK, Germany, Australia, Brussels, Norway, France, Japan, Israel, China, Russia, Romania, Spain, etc.

    Then the other countries that have killed millions of Muslims. India, Portugal, etc.

    Are they all wrong?

    The world disagrees with Hussein. The world sees Muslims as Hussein sees Singhalese.

  • 2
    2

    Beef produced in SL is poisonous. It contains many agro chemicals from the food cattle eat. They cause infertility. It is mother nature’s way of resolving the massive Muslim population growth problem.

    The more beef you eat the more infertile you become.

    There are other side effects too.

  • 2
    2

    It does reek of hypocrisy isn’t it? Sinhala have no problem eating the meat killed by Moslems. They then complain of animal sacrifices afterwards.

    There was this Australian Moslem who went to be part of ISIS. He joined and took his family with him. He was later seen on Facebook photo with his son proudly holding up a head of another man he killed.

    Now if challenged, he would point to a verse in Quran for justification. It is there in black and white isn’t it? Why deny and undeniable? This does not happen with followers of other faiths?

    It only happens because taking life to please the god is inherent in its teaching isn’t it? Not only there is no problem, the sheer brutality of killing is celebrated as a spiritual act.

    The act of killing is based on superstition you will go to heaven on the back of a miserable death of a goat or an ‘infidel’. It will remain a superstition until you prove otherwise.

    These are deeply held customs and hard to change dogmas I know. But the Catholic church for example is beginning to accept divorce as something cannot be denied in certain situations. Spanish no longer do bull fighting because of animal cruelty.

    The trajectory of human evolution should come to a point where it does not depend on the death and misery of another animal or human for his own spiritual or other well being.

    Even the Sinhalas who eat meat should stop and discourage any form of killing.

    • 0
      1

      Vibhu the imbecile,

      Do you only see hypocrisy in others? You are one of the biggest hypocrites around on these forums!

      “Even the Sinhalas who eat meat should stop and discourage any form of killing.”

      When it comes to killing the Tamils, you will welcome with open arms. You concoct and distort history to feed your bigotry. You have no problems in bashing the Tamils in every opportunity; here we have you talking about discouraging killing of animals!

  • 5
    0

    You can justify barbarity quoting from wherever you want but the fact remain every creature, whether they be humans or otherwise, value their own life just as much as the author, and those who agree with him. In this day and age if we do not have the intelligence to understand this simple fact we can well and truly call ourselves fools.

  • 4
    4

    Izeth Hussain –

    RE: Cattle Slaughter And The Sinhala-Buddhists’ Hypocrisy And Racism

    Well said.

    Earlier it was racism against the Tamils and Hindus.

    Now it is racism against Muslims.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/opinion/deadly-alliances-against-muslims.html?_r=1

    The Opinion Pages | EDITORIAL

    Deadly Alliances Against Muslims

    On his 79th birthday in July, the Dalai Lama appealed to Buddhist extremist groups in Myanmar and Sri Lanka to stop instigating attacks against Muslim minorities that have killed scores. Instead, in an affront to Buddhism’s core message of compassion, leaders of those groups announced an alliance to make common cause against Muslims.

    “The time has come to ally internationally,” Galagodaththe Gnanasara, the leader of the radical Sri Lankan Buddhist group Bodu Bala Sena, announced at a convention held in Colombo last month. The guest of honor was Ashin Wirathu, a Buddhist radical whose picture Time magazine put on its July 1 cover as “The Face of Buddhist Terror.” The government of Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa ignored pleas by Sri Lankan Muslim and Christian civil groups, fearful of more anti-Muslim violence in their country, to deny Mr. Wirathu a visa. Granting Mr. Wirathu a visa can only reinforce the fears of many Muslims that the government — and perhaps more powerful regional allies — back Bodu Bala Sena, which translates as Buddhist Power Force.

    Last week, Mr. Gnanasara claimed he was in discussions “at a high level” with the right-wing Indian Hindu group Rashtriya Swayam Sevak to form what he called a “Hindu-Buddhist peace zone” in South Asia. A Rashtriya Swayam Sevak spokesman, Ram Madhav, promptly denied that there were any such discussions. But Mr. Madhav, now general secretary of India’s governing Bharatiya Janata Party, has written comments sympathetic to Bodu Bala Sena and Mr. Wirathu’s group 969 in Myanmar on his Facebook and Twitter accounts.

    It is folly for the governments of Mr. Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka, President Thein Sein of Myanmar and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in India, or their political allies, to give even the appearance of tolerating these Islamophobic groups in a region that has too often been convulsed by religious sectarian violence. They should condemn this mad alliance before it can spread further.

  • 5
    3

    Read the Quaran FIRST, BEFORE WRITING TRASH

  • 4
    1

    Izeth and those priests are trying to dezipher BUDDHISM , without really understand BUDDHISM. Priests are people, not Buddhas, trying to explain to us the buddhas word.
    Do not kill. This is true. But he also says ” chethanahang bhikkawe, kammmang wad aim”
    The Buddha said that you have to be wise to understand his teachings. Neither Izzeth or the priests who shout like maniacs are wise people.

  • 5
    1

    As an erudite gentleman and a frequent writer for the Opposition to give our inhabitants good governance, one would have thought you already and not just prepared to respect Buddhism..

    I assure you that the great majority of Sinhala Buddhist inhabitants in the rural sector have no problem with their Islamic brothers and sisters.

    They have no issue in Muslims and Christians and even some Buddhists deriving their protein from Cattle.

    The great majority of the inhabitants didn’t worry about Anagaragika or anyone else until the Opposition started using BBS to create racial and social unrest for petty political gains..

    It is interesting Mr Izath mentioned Cattle slaughter..

    According to some stats from the US , Hindustan is up with the West in Cattle Slaughter,,

    It is in fact 40, Million per year ..

  • 2
    2

    Mr. Hussain we must sadly conclude that all religions and dogmas (communism, nationalism etc)are high on hypocrisy. Islam is no exception. Hopefully with greater intelligence and learning one day the world will give up on all this nonsense. But then on the other hand some can argue that man is not an intelligent life form and therefore religions and dogmas will always be a part of humanity

    • 2
      0

      There is a wonderful debate going on in the BBC titled “Are Mediums and Psychics con-artists?”. They indeed are but I would not advocate banning them because they harm less than the enormous comfort they give to people who consult them. They do the same service as a priest. In both cases, the comfort level depends on ones degree of belief. It is like watching an illusionist sawing a woman in half. You don’t know how it was done but surely you cannot believe it as a fact. Religion too gives people comfort and that is all. All the rituals, sacrifices, Zakats, alms and tithes etc. are all man made and pure bunkum.

  • 6
    2

    Izeth Hussain is convalescing a hard to justify his meat eating grave. As he had born and lived as a Muslim man, I see his difficulty of denying himself the meat. If a Hindu had attempted this type low grade justification, he/she might have received my condemnation, for that. But what is shameful for him is, to substantiate his habit, he trying to label Nazis practiced Hinduism (and or Buddhism). Never ever a western religion person can dream of understanding the Eastern religions. These regions are only on the heart of the follower. Nothing is on the artificial, hypocritical practice. Though these days, Maha Sanga and Hindu Mission are trying to imitate the western ideology, but, they start to talk from the very basic life of man. Though go through different modalities, they both still insist on Saniyasam, at least at the latter years of the life. Saniyasam is not giving up meat, not just even giving up Burqua, or the food, or the cloth, or any other comfort the human body may carve for. Izeth Hussain should read it hundred times and understand before he justify his crave to meat. That is the way, it is told in the Eastern religions, to man to live to see the god.

    I see what is justified is full ban on the religious books by which names the throat slicing are done. In the west, no longer can women wear Burqua, after all these are the counties introduced the women’s freedom to the world. Then the question is why? Why shouldn’t a woman dress in any why she wants? Aren’t the French women going for nude demonstration? Then why should not they allow a woman to cover her fully, if that is what she wants? The simple reason is the terrorist are using the same dress. The protection of the life is carries more weight than protection of the rights. So, those governments do not allow any more of these dresses. The same rule should apply to any religious book that is perceived as requesting its followers to slice the other one’s throat to prove ones dedication to the book. In the modern, western, gang initiations, the admission seekers are requested to commit one murder, race or a crime like that for membership qualification. One might ask why those books should carry the responsibility of the one, as per Izeth Hussain, carrying out a malpractice. The question is why a woman is prevented from dressing in a way she like when she never was involved in terrorism? The answers are, with the practical constraints, using that dress for terrorism cannot be stopped by governments. So, the outright ban is justified. The ban is assuming that the women take that cloth, with which they cannot breath, eat, drink or cannot go bath room is not a dress of that woman’s section. If she is really selecting that dress, she should be in Angoda. So the governments are banning it.

    The same way, the religions are these days’ unwanted things. So, if one book’s followers perceive that they are requested by their religion to slice another man throat, the book which has allowed for centuries to belief to thrive, rather than vigorously contest, it must go. Democratic governments should ban.

  • 4
    1

    ‘The best known case was that of Himmler who was responsible for the organization and running of the death camps to exterminate the Jews……I must add that he was well-versed in Hindu and Buddhist scriptures.’

    Shame on you. You are behaving like the LTTE diaspora. Surely you are better than this?

  • 8
    0

    Has Izeth Hussain heard of Sandakada Pahana? In case he doesn’t know it, let me tell him that Sandakada Pahana is a unique feature of the Sinhalese architecture of ancient Sri Lanka. Sandakada Pahana is believed to have started during the latter period of Anuradhapura but evolved through the Polonnaruwa, Gampola and Kandy period.

    Sandakada Pahana was only seen at entrances to Buddhist temples during Anuradhapura period. Samantapasadika says Sandakada Pahana symbolizes the cycle of Saṃsāra in Buddhism. The third band that has four animals; elephants, lions, horses, and bulls symbolizes four stages of life. Growth, energy, power and forbearance.

    The design of the Sandakada Pahana of the Polonnaruwa period differs largely from that of the Anuradhapura period. Scholars believe Chola invasion in the 11th century and the acceptability to Hindu culture during that period influenced that change.

    The bull or cow, a venerated animal in Hinduism was removed from Sandakada Pahana at the time as a marked respect to that religion in general and God Shiva in particular. From that period, Sandakada Pahana was placed at the entrance to other buildings as well. These adaptations were possible because Buddhism is not a dogmatic religion and Buddhists have been willing to accommodate others culture. Even today most Buddhist temples have entire sections reserved for Hindu Gods.

    Muslims have their likes and dislikes. Muslims enforce their likes and dislikes on non-Muslims through Shria in Muslim majority countries. Minorities have no choice but to comply it. For instant, Muslims not just not eat pig meat but even hate for their halal meat to be near it. Muslims hate religious idols of others and as such Talibans openly dynamited a world heritage, Bamian Buddha statues in Afghanistan. KSA does not even allow guest workers to keep a statue of Virgin Mary or Siva or Buddha for personal veneration. If so, what’s wrong (70% +15%) Buddhists and Hindus do not like to see cows being killed in Sri Lanka.

    For the followers of Abrahamic religions, God has created animals for the first man Adam and the first woman Eva and their decendents to partake it. Buddhists believe in that. They believe all animals love their life and therefore we intelligent beings should let it live as well.

    Buddha said “come and examine” his Dhamma not “come and believe it through fear” like Abrahamic religions. Referring to the article in the Sunday Times by Ven.Soma’s, though I haven’t read it, ‘sin’ in Buddhism is not a straight forward matter like that in Abrahamic religions. I must tell Mr. Hussain that for a killing to be a ‘sin’ there are thought as well as other factors involved. And ‘sin’ will not put a man (soul) in eternal ‘hell’. In a nutshell, Buddha Dhamma is not about the Hell and Heaven or beginning or the end of the universe but the four noble truth and the eight fold path to Niwana.

    On the other hand, every word that Allah [God] said to Muhammad, is there in the Koran. Sunna is an interpretations of the Koran by humans. Hadith is the teachings, deeds and sayings of Muhammad [not God]. So, forget the context, it is very easy to understand what Allah has in store for non-Muslims when think of what he said in general.

  • 3
    0

    Killing of any sentient being is an abomination.

    The fact that it has been legalized in this country for centuries does not detract from this one iota. The excuse that the Buddhist give ‘that we were introduced to meat eating by colonialists’ only emphasizes the weaknesses of the Buddhists. The Government of Sri Lanka could and perhaps should make the slaughter of animals illegal and that would ensure that there are no more excuses.

  • 2
    3

    The other day I saw a group of men eating hot dogs (pork sausages in buns) near the Dawatagaha Jumma.

    The shop close to another famous mosque sells Keels Pork sausages, ham and bacon!

    No one has the right to stop others eating what they like.

    Let us eat beef and let others eat pork (and beef). If BBS can’t handle it, tell them to go to Nepal where they came from. If Muslims can’t handle pork eating in mosques, tell them to go to Arabia where they came from.

  • 3
    0

    In an effort to draw a distinction between animal sacrifices which were a feature of primitive religions and the killing of animals at Muslim feasts, Izeth Hussein (IH) wrote on 10th October, as follows.

    “Certain misconceptions have to be clarified, the most important of which regards animal sacrifice, which is usually a feature of primitive religions. The crucial difference is that in the primitive religions the sacrificed animal is supposed to feed the Gods whereas Islam is explicit on the point that God does not need food from humans. All that happens during the Bairam festival is that Muslims increase their consumption of meat. Besides, the meat is distributed to relations, friends, and the poor, so that the festival becomes an occasion for affirming social solidarity and compassion for the poor. I just can’t see that our Buddhists should find anything morally objectionable in any of that.”

    Note in particular the observation that “the crucial difference is that in the primitive religions the sacrificed animal is supposed to feed the Gods whereas Islam is explicit on the point that God does not need food from humans. All that happens during the Bairam festival is that Muslims increase their consumption of meat.”

    One could have been forgiven for thinking, on the basis of the foregoing, that the Muslims do not engage in animal sacrifices. But, hang on! Here we now have IH talking about “Islamic animal sacrifice”. What are we supposed to make of this? And, based on IH’s statement that “Islam is explicit on the point that God does not need food from humans”, well may we ask, ‘to whom then are the Islamic animal sacrifices made’? Surely, you cannot have a sacrifice unless it is offered to somebody.

    Primitive man felt that sacrifices had to be offered to the gods, among other reasons, to appease them when they were angry, to seek their protection against harm or to thank them for their benevolence. That thinking did not end with primitive man. The Bible (in the Old Testament) recalls the famous sacrifice that Abraham was called to make. To the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims, Abraham is a common ‘father in faith’ and it is not difficult to see that the concept of sacrifice followed in that tradition. The fact that the meat of the slaughtered animals was shared (and was not wasted) does not detract from the fact that the animals were killed by way of sacrifice.

    In this regard, it is worth noting that in the Old Testament, in the Book of Exodus, it is specifically stated that when the Feast of the Passover is celebrated, the meat of the animal killed, if it is too much for the household, must be shared with a neighbour. The practice of the Saudis to process the meat that is left over and provide it to the poor is consistent with this injunction.

    Consideration of all these factors, however, takes us away from the basic objection to the killing of animals for food. I am not a vegetarian and eat meat products but I must confess that I cannot see a totally convincing case for the killing of animals for their meat. I also find it difficult to reconcile how those who profess to believe in a god who created all things, should not treat all of god’s creatures with the sanctity that the products of divine authorship, by their nature, demand.

    Meat eating is nothing new – for many, it is almost part of our DNA – but that should not preclude us from taking a fresh look at the practice, from looking at it in the light of new knowledge, from a more enlightened perspective and the fact that modern man can obtain his food other than by killing an animal. We also now know the ill effects of meat eating.

    For long the world has treated the environment with little respect. Now we have begun to recognise the enormous harm we have done to it. Never mind, what we have always done; let’s look at animal slaughter, in the same way, with a fresh and unbiased mind.

    Izeth Hussain has commented on some malpractices in the cattle trade and sought to blame the late ACM Hameed for them, and then gone on to make the extraordinary statement that “Therefore our Buddhists should blame the Government, not the Muslims, for failing to take effective action to stop those unIslamic malpractices”. What a pathetic cop-out! Tell me, Mr Hussein, if you recognise that there are malpractices, what is wrong if you Muslims, yourselves, take some action to put things right?.

    • 0
      0

      Know All

      You write beautifully . Thank you .

      • 0
        0

        Dr G,
        Thank you.

    • 0
      1

      Know All – There are usually laws against malpractices. When some people are guilty of malpractices, the other members of the public don’t usually get together to stop the malpractices. Instead they ask the Government to apply the law and stop the malpractices. Why should an exception be made only of the Muslims in connection with the cattle trade?
      We must be practical. We live in an age in which greed is virtually sanctified.This means that people, including Muslims,will maximise their profits, even illicitly if the Government fails to apply the laws. Other Muslims trying to persuade those in the cattle trade to desist from the malpractices won’t work. The coercive power of the State has to be brought into operation.

  • 1
    0

    If you begin with the premise that all religions are bunkum, this debate begins to make sense. The Muslims believe in the Koran, the Christians in the Bible, the Bhuddists in the Mahavamsa and the Jews in the Thora. These books were created by medieval man according to his own wisdom and cannot be words from Allah, Jesus, Buddha or Moses because in those medieval days printing had not been invented and all the medieval texts were passed on by word of mouth and typically over the generations those texts got exaggerated or corrupted or revised. Even in modern days the Bible had been revised a few times. These arguments are absolutely futile. There is not a single religion that preaches you to do the evil things these days that were once deemed justified. E.g. Crucifying or feeding to the lions the Christians, or beheading the infidels etc. Even now, what seems to have missed the revisionists is the Bible commanding it’s a Christian duty to kill the person working on a Sunday instead of going to Church.

  • 0
    0

    HYPOCRISY ON ALL FRONTS. Buddhists monks cry foul at animal slaughter, and in the name of saving these poor animals, they engage in cattle saving programmes – just another name for profiteering. A buddhist organisation which releases 100 cows or more every month with funds from naive supporters overseas can easily make a million rupees in profit monthly collecting more than Rs35000 for each cow. Better than any many businesses. Not to mention the others who are taking the share along the way. And then there are the Muslim middlemen who scout for cows at 6000 to 10000 Rs. With some benefits of course. And then how many families to whom the “saved” animals are given to keep them till they die a natural death???

  • 0
    0

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2/

  • 0
    0

    On certain points I agree with Mr. Hussain, however i believe the Buddhist are asked not to give cause to killing. Though killing is not forbidden like in the Bible which says ‘thou shalt not kill’ this is further justified by ‘I shall give trees that shall be meat unto you.’ in the Bible.

    i too cannot understand why the preference to the bull and like Mr. Hussain says ,how about the Fish, the Pig and the Poultry? Perhaps they have been declared vegetables. Beef is one of the forbidden animals for the monks to consume, not for the lay people.
    I think the monks should shout as lustily to stop killing all animals for flesh not just the cattle. Heaven knows we have enough Bull in the country any now.

    • 0
      0

      Sure the Buddhist monks do not eat beef??? It is not just the Muslims who are involved in the beef trade. There are just as many Sinhalese Buddhists. MORE HYPOCRISY!

  • 0
    1

    Izeth for your time and effort to put Islam in the correct perspective. I never fail to read your articles. May Allah grant you good health and long life to be of service to the Muslim Ummath. Yes, I did recognized your reference to a statement I made previously regarding processing of all remaining meat of slaughtered animals, for free distribution to Muslims countries, which is correct and factual. Nothing is allowed to go waste as some try to imply. It is the same locally too. We have poor people coming to our homes asking for Qurban meat if we have in excess, which we are glad to distribute freely, from what we receive.

  • 0
    0

    I say Sinhala Buddhists are racists and hypocrites. Religious and racial tolerance is a core value of Sri Lankan Muslims, and if they were the majority of Sri Lanka they will show the world how to treat minorities and how to maintain religious harmony in a country. See…..I’m not a hypocrite.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.