Wow another serious discussion - I haven't seen one of these kinds in regards to religious rituals.
I presume the cutting of the throat was dictated by 'god' as the prefered way to prepare the animal.
It may have some heath significance.
@ Gary - Jesus man you're even familiar with the Talmud - I haven't gone that far ahead.
Gary-pieda was a real thing after all.... ^^
I don't know the answer to that actually, but it seems reasonable that it's related to that. For instance, both forbid consumption of carrion or animals that aren't killed by human hands. The manner of death being a human ensures the reason for the death not being related to disease as well.
---------- Post added at 05:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:44 PM ----------
I'd like to weigh in on the dietary discussion aspects more heavily but - its a bit out of my scope and what I remember is few in details.
I do like your points on the similarities and the regions as well as the rest of the seems logical / accurate / makes sense in accordance to that time period.
---------- Post added at 05:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:55 PM ----------
I don't know. I can only assume they want a "clean death" in the sense that no other chemicals like from a tranquilizer are within the animal, or a bullet for that matter. Anycase it's a rather cruel death.
3c...I agree that it's a horrific death; but; I wanted to know the background of this particular practice!
Right - so theres a religious reason for why the Christians did not take on that practice but lets stay on the dietary aspects and not venture too much out that. I dont see how this would not be passed on through tradition though??
Fore more similarites / differences : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...h_dietary_laws
---------- Post added at 06:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------
Another interesting link : http://www.scotlandforanimals.org/re...slaughter.html
Oh my god, is this paragraphs I see? o.o
Edit: I do apologise for breaking the chain of discussion. >_>;
Christianity is different because it spread Westward and was adopted by Empires and Kingdoms throughout European history. With that, and due to the Great Schism as well as all the reformation movements in the last thousand years there are a bunch of differences in orthopraxy throughout Christianity. A great example of how much of a hodgepodge Christianity is is the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. They're Christian, but observe the Jewish Sabbath of Saturday, share much of the same "kosher" laws that Jews have, but also recommend vegetarianism to it's followers, which is pretty unique among all three faiths. They also forbid alcohol and other drugs from being consumed. Many secular movements in the Western world have led to the strictness of such practices being lost in most denominations. This is why I called most Catholic dietary practices as being "suggestions" rather than law. It's really not the same or a proper comparison in my opinion either. Christianity in that part of the world has been declining rapidly for well over a century. Today they only make up 5% of the population. Christianity's roots are in that part of the world but it hasn't held the same level of "importance" for them since the Crusades.
Now, the specific reason why Jews and Muslims hold onto these laws and not Christians as a whole, I don't have an answer for. It was really just an educated guess. They're both Abrahamic religions, with populations that lived among each other for quite a long time. It's probably dumbing it down a bit admittedly.
Last edited by xi0; November 19, 2012 at 02:04 AM.
But that would be going against my role in this thread as that sarcastic kid in the back of the class. >.> Meh...
Anyway, another note on ancy's point about tradition is that there is no specific mention in the Qu'ran about which slaughtering method should be used, or how the animal should be killed. The methods are only used because they are traced back to hadiths (prophetic sayings and deeds). Now the interesting part is that while still in its infancy, Islam had relatively little contact with Christians in comparison with Jews who lived amongst them in Arabia. So it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the traditional Jewish method of slaughter did influence or even was the source of the current Islamic method. In fact, its highly likely. The similarities between the two are quite striking, but I don't know anything of pre-Islamic slaughter methods in Arabia to actually say for definite. It could be that the traditional Jewish slaughtering method - or slight variations thereof - was already widespread in the region and this was adopted by the new religion. That could go to explain why it is specifically mentioned in the Qu'ran that kosher meat is allowed to be eaten and hence halal.
Too much to read...skipped all posts .