23 January, 2021

Blog

Sri Lankan Muslims At The Cross Roads – Animal Sacrifice And Other Issues

By Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

Izeth Hussain

I believe that in the present series of articles I have established, beyond reasonable dispute, that the two issues that supposedly constitute existential threats to the Sinhalese, namely Muslim extremism and Muslim population growth, are really non-problems. The other issues that have been bedeviling Sinhalese-Muslims relations, sometimes for decades, can be settled quite easily or at least without much difficulty, provided that the Government has the will to take appropriate regulatory and punitive measures. I have in mind the supposed economically privileged position of the Muslims, cattle slaughter, the use of loudspeakers for the call to prayer, the proliferation of mosques, and so on.

I will make a few observations on some of those issues, none of which really requires in-depth treatment because none is really intractable. But before doing that I will substantiate my point that they can be settled without much difficulty provided the Government has the will to take appropriate measures. It has been the practice of our Governments, the present as well as previous ones, to allow issues between the Sinhalese and the Muslims to fester rather than confront and settle them. For instance the other day a newspaper carried an item stating that a Cabinet Minister had alleged that Muslims are becoming predominant in numbers in several towns including Colombo, Galle, Kandy etc. Probably that is true, the probable explanation for which is that outside the Eastern Province our Muslims have always been an urban people and it has to be expected therefore that with hectic economic development taking place more and more of them will respond to a gravitational pull towards the urban centers. But all the same it will be widely assumed that the Minister’s statement confirms that the Muslims are proliferating like cockroaches and insects and will before long become the dominant majority.  I have refuted that notion, so has Rajan Philips in an excellent article, and possibly others have done so as well. The Government should have no difficulty whatever in getting an expert study made and putting a stop to nonsense about the Muslim population explosion. But no one would expect the Government to do anything of the sort. That would not accord with the style of our Governments in nation-building.

My contention is that there are indeed issues bedeviling Sinhalese-Muslim relations, but the real problem underlying them is that successive Governments have failed, or rather refused, to deal with those issues, none of which has been really intractable. The point I am making is crucially important for a proper understanding of our Muslim ethnic problem. I will therefore cite another example – apart from the one cited above – to illustrate my point. Until the BBS started its hate campaign about two years ago hardly any Sri Lankan was even aware of halal certification as a problem. It was quite unlike cattle slaughter and the call to prayer which have been with us for decades. Yet it became the center-piece of the BBS campaign which led to the Muslim ethnic problem acquiring a dimension that has made it an internationally recognized one.

How on earth did that come about? There are Muslim minorities in practically every country of the world, sometimes numbering many millions, and yet there has been no major problem over halal certification in any of them, certainly not a major problem wrecking ethnic relations. Why has that happened only in Sri Lanka? In finding an answer, it will help to ask what is involved in halal certification. Traditionally our Muslims had no problem about identifying what food items they should or should not buy, but with the wide spread of packaged synthetic food the problem of identification arose because they could contain forbidden ingredients without that fact being declared on the packages. There was therefore a need for halal certification, and the ACJU met that need. It was found also that our exporters would be badly handicapped in certain markets without halal certification, and the ACJU obliged by meeting that need as well. There was nothing clandestine, nothing criminal, nothing deleterious to the national interest in what the ACJU was doing in connection with halal certification. The BBS thought otherwise for reasons that need not be explored here because the important point is this: although there was nothing intractable about the issue, nothing that could not have been easily settled through Government intervention, the Government refused to take any action towards that end, until a late stage by which time the anti-halal campaign had done much to wreck Sinhalese-Muslim relations.

It would be misleading to say that our Governments have failed to take action towards building a multi-ethnic nation with a deep sense of unity. To fail to do something means that one has tried to do it in the first place, whereas our Governments have never been in earnest about building a multi-ethnic nation. The underlying reason is that our two leading political parties believe – although they won’t avow it – that there is no reason to build a multi-ethnic nation because the nation already exists: this land belongs to the Sinhalese, and the difference between the two parties is that the one holds that it belongs to the Sinhalese Buddhists while the other holds that it belongs to all the Sinhalese inclusive of the Christians. Consequently, we can hardly expect for the foreseeable future much more than perfunctory action by our Governments to sort out Sinhalese-Muslim issues. There has to be civil society pressure on our Governments towards that end.

I will give a concrete instance of what I have in mind. Some years ago former Chief Justice Sarath Silva gave sensible rulings on the use of loudspeakers, which could have eliminated the issue of the mosque calls to prayer. But I am told that the law is too often observed in the breach. The Government could be reluctant to take punitive action for fear of losing Muslim votes or for some other reason, so that it is up to the civil society to exercise pressure towards that end. If the civil society is not dynamic enough for that purpose, we can expect the loudspeaker and other Sinhalese-Muslim issues to go on festering, and Sri Lanka will remain what it is today: a multi-ethnic society devoid of a sense of unity worth speaking about.

I will conclude this article with a few observations on two issues which could have more serious consequences than most of the others. The first is cattle slaughter which – in theory at least – could rouse Buddhist sentiments in a dangerous way. That has not really happened up to now, but it has the potential to do so. On this, and indeed on all the other issues between the Sinhalese and Muslims, we must all abide by a fundamental principle, which is that no one irrespective of ethnic identity should be faulted for acting within the law. The Sinhalese Buddhists are dominant in this country and they are dominant in the Government also, so that if the Government allows cattle-slaughter it should be an issue between the Sinhalese Buddhists and the Government, not between the Sinhalese Buddhists and the Muslims. Any ill-will towards the Muslims on the score of cattle slaughter, which is to say on their acting within the law, should be regarded as morally inexcusable.

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 por. I just can’t see that our Buddhists should find anything morally objectionable in any of that.

*To be continued

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 6
    13

    In order to show compassion to the poor, how many millions of animals you muslims killed during the festival that ended just days before ?

    • 15
      5

      The same amount of fish and seafoods Buddhists kills every year – in their billions!

      It is compassion to feed people.

      • 6
        0

        What are all these arguments about killing or not killing animals?

        Think about the large number of ants and other crawling beings you kill as you walk.

        If you want to be really compassionate to animals become a Jain, who used to sweep the path free of living beings as they walk! They only ate fallen leaves, fruits but not seeds, and the like, trying not even to harm plants.

        All of us others are really hypocrites if we pretend to be compassionate!

    • 8
      3

      Jim softy, Lorenzo, Leela, Fukushima, etc.

      In order to show compassion to the poor, how many millions of animals Muslims and non-Muslims alike killed during the festival that ended just days before, during and after per year?

      Know the facts.

      STATISTICS: GLOBAL FARMED ANIMAL SLAUGHTER and By Country. Only Egypt is a Muslim Country. Others are Non-Muslim Countries. China, Japan and Republic of Korea are Buddhist Counties.

      So, what Izeth Hussain claims is that there is a lot of mis-information and lies that is generated and circulated, in general against the Muslims.

      From Farmed Animal Watch: n.68, v.2

      http://www.upc-online.org/slaughter/92704stats.htm

      Animal Numbers, Cattle Total Slaughter by Country in 1000 HEAD

      http://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?commodity=cattle&graph=total-slaughter

      Globally, slaughter of farmed animals for food increased to more than 50 BILLION individuals in 2003, not including any types of aquatic animals. The estimates, which are compiled and provided by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, are based on reports from more than 210 countries and territories. It is important to note that, while fairly comprehensive, these estimates may be significantly understated due to some countries or territories not reporting statistics and exclusions of some types of slaughter.

      With nearly 46 billion slaughtered in 2003, chickens accounted for 93% all types of farmed animals included in the FAO database. Following chickens, more ducks were slaughtered for their flesh than any other animal; approximately 2.3 billion ducks were slaughtered in 2003. Not considering birds, the slaughter of pigs was highest with more than 1.2 billion pigs slaughtered in 2003, followed by more than 850 million rabbits slaughtered last year. See below for a summary of the minimum 2003 worldwide slaughter estimates, by type of animal.

      — 45,895 million (45.9 billion) chickens
      — 2,262 million (2.3 billion) ducks
      — 1,244 million (1.2 billion) pigs
      — 857 million rabbits
      — 691 million turkeys
      — 533 million geese
      — 515 million sheep
      — 345 million goats
      — 292 million cows and calves (for beef and veal)
      — 65 million other rodents (not including rabbits)
      — 63 million pigeons and other birds
      — 23 million buffalo
      — 4 million horses
      — 3 million donkeys and mules
      — 2 million camels (and other camelids)

      Animal Numbers, Cattle Total Slaughter by Country in 1000 HEAD

      Rank Country Total Slaughter (1000 HEAD)
      1 Brazil 42,255.00
      2 China 42,100.00
      3 India 40,000.00
      4 United States 31,779.00
      5 EU-27 26,850.00
      6 Argentina 13,200.00
      7 Australia 8,475.00
      8 Russian Federation 6,830.00
      9 Mexico 6,225.00
      10 New Zealand 4,360.00
      11 Colombia 4,300.00
      12 Canada 3,010.00
      13 Ukraine 2,500.00
      14 Uruguay 2,300.00
      15 Venezuela 1,425.00
      16 Belarus 1,375.00
      17 Egypt 1,355.00
      18 Japan 1,167.00
      19 Korea, Republic Of 1,037.00
      Year of Estimate: 2014

      Source: United States Department of Agriculture

      • 3
        0

        Thank you very much, Amarasiri,for taking the trouble to provide all those statistics, which are most useful. Thank you also for all the other enlightening comments that we have had from you.I have in mind in particular your comment on my last article in which you provided very useful material on Saudi Arabia and others having to face the consequences of having backed the forces behind the IS – Izeth

    • 2
      0

      my dear singhala ayya ( chandiya )

      how many millions of fish do your singhala fisherman kill every day preserving the fisheries ministry ? how many thousands of chicken do you kill per day ? how many millions of bacteria you kill every minute ( it’s a life too ?
      how many thousand of valuable trees you cut down to produce a coffin for each dead person and burn it back destroying the environment ?

      if you are a true buddhist you need to first of all inform all the tourists arriving at the airport that THIS IS A BUDDHIST COUNTRY HENCE OUR HOTELS WILL NOT SERVE YOU NON VEG FOOD ANY MORE BUT VEGETARIAN ONLY ( GOTUKOLA AND MUKUNUWENNA ) IF YOU DISAGREE YOU MAY GET BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY AS THIS IS A PURE BUDDIST COUNTRY BUT WITH ARAKKU FREELY AVAILABLE IN EVERY NOOK AND CORNER
      also advise SRI LANKAN AIR to serve only vegetarian food

      MFH

  • 6
    13

    Recently you people killed millions of animals in order to show faith to Allah.

    Why do you believe in a god who promote animal sacrifice in order to shoe that you are faithful to him.

    Why you should not be sacrificed to god instead of you sacrificing some other life to show your faith ?

    Talk some thing logical and people can believe.

    • 11
      3

      My dear friend, you learnt anything about food chain in primary school? And do you see any sacrificed animal in endangered species list? Myself I do not eat meat, but it’s my own preference… I do not condemn the people who do or go preaching them not to eat.

      You know that plants too have life right? Okay lets forget about eating plants or animals, which I think is necessary for human survival. What do you have to say about millions of flowers which are plucked each day just to glorify god? The same flowers which are thrown into the bin next morning? You know most of the plants reproduce through flowers right? So one can argue picking flowers is like abortion to the plants as well. Just because a plant can’t make any noise does it become okay to do whatever you want to it?

      BTW Raban and many other similar music instruments are made from the skin of animals as well. If it is not okay to eat, is it okay to kill them, skin them and make equipments to pleasure our senses? We have to learn to respect each others beliefs and traditions. When our neighbours are sending rockets to Mars here we are fighting about what’s the guy eating in the corner house. We have to be better than this… I strongly believe we can be :)

    • 1
      2

      Agreed. You have raised a very vital point.

    • 5
      0

      Jim Softy and Avtars,

      Don’t eat chicken, and other meat.

      Remember your ancestors ate meat.

    • 3
      1

      Jim softy has a point. Even if the religious angle was true, a Muslim is really sacrificing money as he buys the animal that is sacrificed. Why not just give the money to the mosque or the poor. There are so many animals being sacrificed they cannot all be eaten in one day if that was the intention so most of it must be going to waste. This ritual might be a request from Allah but you must bear in mind that when the message first came to earth books have not been invented then and the message could have only been passed down to the generations by word of mouth and we all know how prone to exaggeration that is.

      • 2
        0

        Sylvia Haik

        The so-called scriptures claim the Prophets got the Revelation on a one-on-one basis. So it is a REVELATION only to the PROPHET.

        For everybody Else, it is a report or secondary source.

        “Globally, slaughter of farmed animals for food increased to more than 50 BILLION individuals in 2003, not including any types of aquatic animals”

        So, if animals are slaughtered for consumption in the Name of Allah, God or not-in the Name of Allah, it makes very little difference to the non-believer. However, Muslims believe, ALL life including that of animals belongs to Allah, and therefore, need permission when a man takes the life of an animal or human being. Permission is requested, whether it is a given or not is a different story, sorted out by belief, like in Heaven, Hell, Afterlife, Nirvana, Nibbana, Purgatory, limbo, Rebirth etc.

        However, for the believer, it gives him/her comfort as they have asked for ‘permission; to kill an animal that “belongs’ to Allah, based on their belief.

        The slaughter then becomes “disciplined”.

        Did The early man get Allah’s permission when he was a hunter gatherer? Lions, tigers, etc?

        Was religion invented by man?

        • 2
          0

          Amarasiri, “Was religion invented by man?” I am glad you asked that because it is and they are all bunkum. The scriptures, Bible, Koran etc etc. were all authored and printed by man almost 800+ years after religions were first created. Also, the authors all were mostly men and that is why most religions favour men over women. If you asked why there was a need for Religion, it was because there were no schools or books then to teach people good from bad, just like we tell fairy tales to little children incapable of reading. E.g there was a time in medeival days Swine Fever was prevalent. The only way to discourage people from eating pork was to tell them “God had prohibited” it, hence Judaism and Islam had banned it even now despite improvements in medicine and more. As for the animal sacrifices, I am sure it was created by a livestock farmer to sell his animals. The only exception perhaps could be Buddhism despite some dodgy proponents like Gnanasara Thera. In many eyes Buddhism is based on logic and is a philosophy without any magic or beliefs. And, as for someone saying it is worshipping a statue when Buddhists pray, it is merely a representative of the man behind those wonderful teachings just like you might kiss the photograph of a person you love.

      • 0
        0

        I’d like to think of myself as a gentle guy; but I’m not if I lose my temper. I then try to rationalise that I had good cause to be angry.

        I’m a humane guy who has never killed anything except insects, and a few mice. But I do eat all kinds of meat which are socially acceptable, and which are not threatened with extinction. So, I do NOT eat dogs or cats or horses or donkeys; or turtles, or elephants (I’ve been told that the African elephant’s meat is rather like beef – the man who told me having eaten it in the area around the Congo). I extend that to the consumption of eggs as well. I do prefer leather for shoes or belts, but then I’ve had nothing to do with killing those animals. So, what a good man I am!

        Dear “Jim softy” and “Sylvia Haik”, it is true that we could minimise wastage of a number of items that we consume: fuel by having only public transport; timber by not burning it on funeral pyres, paper and plastics by re-cycling. So, yes, there is SOME wastage of meat at the time of Ramadhan.

        However, I’m a bit of a hypocrite, consuming animal products, and paying others to do it for me. The majority of my Muslim friends are also “hypocrites”; they haven’t gone through the messy process of killing animals.

        However, there is the fact that once a year some otherwise squeamish Muslims take it on themselves to slaughter an animal. I feel that all of us hypocrites also ought to be put through that process.

        https://archive.org/stream/silasmarnerbygeo00elio#page/48/mode/2up

        I first read that quietly hilarious account of the peace-loving butcher in “Silas Marner” almost fifty years ago. It amused me than, and it amuses me still. Unfortunately, with the commercialisation of ever aspect of life, we think of butchers as monsters – and possibly they do become that, as a result of killing so often.

        No, we cannot hold this against Muslims, that they are the people responsible for animal slaughter, while we are the virtuous Buddhists.

    • 2
      0

      Jim Softy, Their is nothing illogical here, these are based on facts. Look at Amarasiri’s comment om the statistics to realize the truth on how many animals sacrificed for food worldwide and how many are Buddhist countries and how many are Muslim countries. The truth of the matter is you also kill animals for food but you never admit it publicly, as all Buddhist monks are all the same. Hopelessly inconsistent in applying the rules, and it is not a secret you are famously known to be quite selective in eating chicken, fish, eggs and shrimp, and you probably love bacon too, but will not openly declare it. Pure and simply in Islam we call such behavior as being hypocrites. Preaching one thing to the masses and doing exactly the opposite. Then again also the ‘don’t kill but if served, can eat’ theory is another laughable one. Having so much on your plate, you are trying to teach logic to Mr. Izeth and us Muslims, it is the same hypocritical mind-set and lop-sided theory at work.

      • 0
        1

        MARVAN:

        Don’t look for excuses.

        Address the issues.

        Killing animals, taking excue as the religion or to wish to satisfy the almighty – one who does not exist.

        • 1
          0

          Jim softy

          “Killing animals, taking excue as the religion or to wish to satisfy the almighty – one who does not exist.”

          If no one kills animals where do the Sinhala/Buddhists find their meat to satiate their carnivorous habits?

        • 1
          0

          If you can worship man made statues and holy trees, including holy men dressed up in saffron robes, then explain how these can help you attain enlightenment. They are all equally helpless as you are, and the same like you, there exists thousands of similar objects of worship in the world today. People take for worship cows, monkeys, rats, snakes, penis, naked men, grass, fire, sun, moon and stars, mountains, rivers, you name it and you can find somewhere in the world there are people who worship and take those objects to represent Gods or Goddesses. Nothing unique in that.

          However, Islam and other Faith based religions don’t need to see God in physical form to believe in His existence. His presence is omnipotent, He sees us, knows us, what is in our hearts, our intentions, watches over us at all times, He is not physical in form like the way you and I must see to believe. A totally different concept altogether. It is similar to the electricity current that runs along an exposed wire. You cannot see the current but only see the physical wire, but you have blind faith that the current can kill you if you touch the live wire. Likewise, we see God’s marvelous creations in the world and His miracles, the orderliness in how the world and planets of the universe rotate without crashing into each other, and we accept that there has to be a Super being who has control over all things, including our lives, our prosperity and our well being, provides us with all our wants and needs, and we call him by His name Allah. There is enough evidence to prove He is our God Almighty to believe in Him without question. And He is enough for 1.6 billion Muslims around the world. We don’t need you to tell us Muslims, we are all crazy to believe in a non-existing God, just because we don’t physically see Him.

    • 1
      0

      my dear singhala ayya ( chandi putha )

      which is harmful destroying an entire generation?

      eating meat

      or

      drinking ARAKKU

      why don’t you guys concenrate on this menance which has destroyed your own society foe generations ?

      why don’t BBS even utter a word about ARAKKU which is the number 1 destroyer of the singhala race. in fact GNANASAR himself is drunkard with many cases pending in courts against him .

  • 8
    0

    Agreeing with much of what Kain writes, I believe the question is not the slaughter of animals for food but the manner in which they are slaughtered. The method of electrically stunning the animal appears to be the most acceptable so far. What is objected to is that some cultures insist on indiscriminately slaughtering the animal, throwing the blood around walls in houses before they are gone into occupation and so forth, which are all medieval habits from which much of the world has come millennia ago.

    Hooker

    • 1
      0

      what don’t you electrically get stunned and see how good it is ?

      Are you scared to it ?

      If so why ?

      Is others are scared to their life, why do you cant not leave them alone ?

      Because, your religion says the Almighty can use you and, therefore, you can use other weaker lives ?

      • 0
        0

        my dear ,

        what is the buddhist trademark BERAYA made of ? goat or cow skin ? if you do not kill animals how will you get the skin ?
        what about the leather industry ? CROCODILE , SNAKE skin ?
        the worlds major meat producers BRAZIL, FRANCE, USA, AUSTRALIA are they muslim ?

        how about those secret BILLY POOJAS you do sacrifising animals ? how about the annual MUNNESWARAM KOVIL BILLY POOJAVA ?

        what about those PORK meat stalls hanging between colombo and NEGOMBO ?

        seems you guys are still afraid of NAVANEETHAN PILLAI and the VATICAN ?

        you just take MUSLIMS for a bite ??

        sri lankas number one foreign exchange earner is remittance from our house maids washing the shit of the ARABS in GCC along with our labor force.
        petrol imported from IRAN ETC…..
        60% of the tourists arrived last year are arabs ?
        major buyers of SRI LANKAN TEA are IRAQ, LIBYA ++ muslim countries.
        majority of the countries voted for sri lanka in UN were muslim countries ?
        RAJAPAKSA is running after muslim countries seeking foreign investment as he is not welcommed in the west any more other than CHINA and JAPAN .

        despite the real factors given above BBS still wants to destroy the MUSLIMS in SRI LANKA.

        now we realize as to why PARABAKARAN was compelled to carry a gun for 30 years to defend his community .

        MFH

  • 3
    2

    JimSofty or whatever the idiot’s name…..
    Are you talking logic here??? You make absolutely no sense in terms of food chain. ou should start your primary classes again you big headed racist!!!!

    • 1
      1

      Food chain.

      Islam is a Primitive religion for people want to be primitive.

  • 5
    5

    The author is duplicitious here. Animal sacrifice in Islam is a sacrifice in honour of Allah. Its no less ‘primitive’than the sacrifice of animals in what the author dismisses as ‘primitive’ religions. Its still the killing of animals as part of a religious requirement!

    One can defend the practice as part of a religious requirement. But do not try to distinguish it from the slaughter of animals carried out in other religious traditions. Its the same thing!

    And there would be some – right or wrong is a different matter – who call Islam ‘primitive’ with its stoning of adulterors to death, cutting of hands for theft, female circumcision as enforced by ISIS in Syria and Iraq and millions of animals slaughtered to please Allah during the Hadj.

    Izeth is finally losing his liberal sheen!

    • 3
      0

      RP – I wrote that animal sacrifice is “usually a feature of primitive religions”, That is an unexceptionable statement of fact. I then drew a distinction between animal sacrifice in primitive religions and in Islam.In the first the food is meant to feed the Gods and is usually thrown away. In the second the food is meant for human consumption and is used to affirm social solidarity and compassion for the poor.
      You hold that it all amounts to the same thing.You are entitled to hold that view.But why do you believe that in holding my view I am being “duplicitous”? You are being gratuitously and personally insulting. Why?
      You write that “Izeth is finally losing his liberal sheen”. How on earth do you jump to that conclusion? Is it that you are under some sort of compulsion to find fault with anything and everything that Izeth Hussain writes? – IH

      • 2
        0

        Well said Izeth. Most critics don’t know where to draw the line when it comes to constructive criticism. They even go to lengths in attacking the messenger rather than the message being presented. Hiding behind pseudonyms which are only initials, they don’t have the courage to even expose themselves through a decent name. Its useless explaining yourself to these morons, since clearly they will not comprehend but will still have more reasons to oppose. Not for any real good reason, nor trying to come to terms and understand your point of view, but because you and I are not of their kind, as we are a lot different in being Muslims. May Allah accept our best efforts for His Deen-ul-Islam.

    • 2
      0

      @RP,
      Izeth clearly distinguishes between Islamic and other animal sacrifices as follows in his last paragraph,

      “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”

      Please note animal is sacrificed to feed people which is good.

    • 2
      0

      RP,

      Izzeth Hussein wrote:

      “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. “

      So, please stick to what he wrote, and the economics of the animal slaughter trade.

      Animals would have been killed if there was Islam or not. The priests will find various excuses to get animals donated and sacrificed and enjoy the economic benefits of the animal sacrifice. In the case of Jews, the priests had a monopoly.

      Now, millions or even billions of animals are scarified each year for consumption. Only Muslims require that the animal be scarified by getting permission from Alllah, The God and the the meat be consumed and preferably distributed to the poor for free.

      From where does Saudia Arabia and the other Middle Countries get their animals?

      From Australia, the Hadj market accounts for some 1.2 million head per annum from Australia. Australia exports 4.5 Million sheep to Middle East, and most enter the wholesale meat market and consumed.,

      Long Distance Transport and Welfare of Farm Animals
      books.google.com/books?isbn=1845934032
      Michael C. Appleby – 2008 – ‎Technology & Engineering
      Saudi Arabia is Australia’s single largest market for live sheep and there is an … of the traditional wet markets and live sales for slaughter during the Hajj would, ..

      http://books.google.com/books?id=Hl0Gbo8WkOAC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=From+where+does+SAUdi+arabia+get+animals+for+slaughter+during+Hajj&source=bl&ots=BSSMALTbQc&sig=uCvtKBSteOifCcm9uVdkE2Sa7pE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KXE5VM7dH6nbsASFpoGYAg&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=From%20where%20does%20SAUdi%20arabia%20get%20animals%20for%20slaughter%20during%20Hajj&f=false

  • 0
    3

    Hooker – there is no point in just agreeing to what Kain is saying. Do some research yourself before commenting. No one throws around blood on walls. Also, you need to find out a bit more about the most human way of slaughtering animals. The medivial habits you talk about are feeding the poor around the world. The animals are not sacrificed for God and thrown away. The people who are benefiting from these sacrifices to God are the people who are in need.

  • 0
    0

    [Edited out]

  • 1
    2

    Millions of Animals they killed during this three days of the festival, they did not eat.

    Because, those animals were killed to show faith to the non-existing allah.

    First why don’t don’t you say where this Allah is ?

    • 2
      0

      Nutty Jim, where is the evidence that meat of the animals that were slaughtered went to waste. Now you turn to fibbing like your compatriots the BBS brigade. Far from it. If you didn’t know, in Saudi Arabia, after all the meat that is taken for consumption by almost two million people, the left behinds are processed in large factories, canned an exported free of charge (much similar to dates sent free of charge to our own country. but which gets confiscated and sold in open market), to be distributed freely to all poor people in Muslim countries. But the big question is how or why there is no shortage of animals (both in our own country and in the whole wide world) after all that massive volume of animals sacrificed year in and year out. It is nothing short of a miracle. After all it is He (Allah) who gives life, and it is He who takes it. Our duty is to simply carry out His commandments, and leave the logistics to His will. Australia, Canada, S.Africa and since of late India send shiploads of cattle, camel and goats to Saudi during this period, to meet the demands of the pilgrims during the said Haj season. Can you do anything to stop it? Your voice is just a faint whisper barely audible, in such a mighty ocean of sacrificial slaughter houses worldwide. Your types are definitely a minority and living in isolation when compared to the rest of the world, proved time and time again.

      • 0
        0

        I have come to the conclusion that this Jim softy is a complete moron and you are wasting your time trying to teach him. I am sure he is Gangodaathe Gnanasera Thera himself in disguise.

  • 0
    2

    Its not just Sri Lanka Muslims, I think all Muslims are at a cross road right now. Look at how the so-called leading Muslim countries fall pray to the plea by the
    Christian West and kill fellow Muslims who only wanted to follow the Quran and Sunna to the letter.

    • 2
      0

      Those wars you refer to are not religious wars but political wars. but incidentally, they all happen to be Muslims of two or three distinct sects or tribes, like Mahayana and Theravada in Buddhism. They both cannot flourish together in one and same country as they both have diametrically opposing views. So beat it now, without stirring the pot. We know you are no Muslim and you don’t have to beat the drum about it, and your hate of Muslims is legendary.

      • 2
        0

        Marwan

        You say:

        “We know you are no Muslim and you don’t have to beat the drum about it, “

        I have afew Question sfor You.

        Q1. Who is a a Muslim?

        Q2. ISIS, ISIL, IS. Claims they are Islamic and Muslims. They Claim the I stands for Islamic.

        Amarasiri respectfully differ. Amarasiri claims that I actually stands for Iblees or Iblis, the Arabic word for devil.

        Why not call a spade a spade. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and eats like a duck, why not call it a duck.

        So why cannot you people call ISIS, ISIS, IS As the Ibeess State and not Islamic state that follws the devil, The Satan., the Inbeess. Theare another version of the Wahhabi Iblees and their clones.

        Who are the Wahhabis, Salafis, Deobandis, Taliban. ISIS Boko Haram etc? They are the Devil, Satan, Shaitan. Iblees, and Lucifer followers?

        Here is the support, given velow. Hadith of Najd

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_Najd

        Muslim Scholars Release Open Letter To Islamic State Meticulously Blasting Its Ideology.

        They should be using Iblees, instead of Islamic to refer to ISIS or ISIL, the Wahhabi Spin off.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/24/muslim-scholars-islamic-state_n_5878038.html

        Enumerating its atrocities — the mass rape of women, the gunning down of children, the starvation of religious minorities — Obama concluded: “No God condones this terror.”

        Here is the executive summary of their letter:

        1. It is forbidden in Islam to issue fatwas without all the necessary learning requirements. Even then fatwas must follow Islamic legal theory as defined in the Classical texts. It is also forbidden to cite a portion of a verse from the Qur’an—or part of a verse—to derive a ruling without looking at everything that the Qur’an and Hadith teach related to that matter. In other words, there are strict subjective and objective prerequisites for fatwas, and one cannot ‘cherry-pick’ Qur’anic verses for legal arguments without considering the entire Qur’an and Hadith.

        2. It is forbidden in Islam to issue legal rulings about anything without mastery of the Arabic language.

        3. It is forbidden in Islam to oversimplify Shari’ah matters and ignore established Islamic sciences.

        4. It is permissible in Islam [for scholars] to differ on any matter, except those fundamentals of religion that all Muslims must know.

        5. It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.

        6. It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent.

        7. It is forbidden in Islam to kill emissaries, ambassadors, and diplomats; hence it is forbidden to kill journalists and aid workers.

        8. Jihad in Islam is defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose and without the right rules of conduct.

        9. It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief.

        10. It is forbidden in Islam to harm or mistreat—in any way—Christians or any ‘People of the Scripture’.

        11. It is obligatory to consider Yazidis as People of the Scripture.

        12. The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus.

        13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.

        14. It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.

        15. It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.

        16. It is forbidden in Islam to enact legal punishments (hudud) without following the correct procedures that ensure justice and mercy.

        17. It is forbidden in Islam to torture people.

        18. It is forbidden in Islam to disfigure the dead.

        19. It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God.

        20. It is forbidden in Islam to destroy the graves and shrines of Prophets and Companions.

        21. Armed insurrection is forbidden in Islam for any reason other than clear disbelief by the ruler and not allowing people to pray.

        22. It is forbidden in Islam to declare a caliphate without consensus from all Muslims.

        23. Loyalty to one’s nation is permissible in Islam.

        24. After the death of the Prophet, Islam does not require anyone to emigrate anywhere.

        Read the full letter here.

        http://lettertobaghdadi.com/index.php

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.