What's new

"Qurbani", do we still have to do it?

Thats one meaning of sacrifice but it can also mean an offering to God.

Offering what?animals life or Money used to buy animals? How about donating that money directly without killing someone in the name of god.

In Islam animals are created for the service of human beings.

human beings history is not too long 10k or 20k years, before that the so called humans were also animals. So, for so many years(before humans) to whom animals were serving ?? Their life was worthless??
No it doesn't mean God will punish you in the hell fire.

Read post #129 which quotes quran and it says
'' Whoever made a sacrifice with all
sincerity, the act of sacrifice will protect him
from hell-fire"
that means god is giving me warning to do sacrifice otherwise be ready for 'hell-fire'.
 
Why? God has prescribed that we give the meat of an animal to each other. Qurbani isnt specifically for the poor. Muslims give to their families and friends too.


Finally that isnt what the ayat means. It gives a positive to sacrifice but doesn't give any punishments for not doing it.
 
I think that it is a sobering experience. To kill the animal yourself and then spend a lot of time trying to seperate the meat from the rest certainly makes you rethink about how much meat we eat, how it is possible and whether it is worth it.
 
I also saw "qurbani available" in some stores here. What does that actually means? do the shops give goat for free ?

How is it sacrificing when the goat was never yours nor you had any emotional bond with it ? And its little strange to call it sacrifice when one actually sacrificing nothing of his own.
 
It depends on your definition of sacrifice. In common vernacular sacrifice means to give something up, in religious terms it means offering to God.
 
1 year old kids dont speak or give letter of consent either. So Hatchet them to offer somthing to god.
 
Next time I will get a written letter of consent from the goat for you.

Only if animals could talk and we could ask them. :13:

So the lack of ability to deny the consent is to be assumed as a consent?

In that case, all human beings that are mute, deaf and illiterate are game for being sacrificed.


Perhaps killing an animal is closer to murder than it is to sacrifice but someone changed the definition of sacrifice (an offering to God) above then I have to wonder what kind of God would like such a gory offering.
 
So the lack of ability to deny the consent is to be assumed as a consent?

In that case, all human beings that are mute, deaf and illiterate are game for being sacrificed.


Perhaps killing an animal is closer to murder than it is to sacrifice but someone changed the definition of sacrifice (an offering to God) above then I have to wonder what kind of God would like such a gory offering.

Whatever you say,our religion allows it and so we do it.
 
Classic defence. End of the discussion :)

I know that you can't understand anything. If someone wants to understand/believe someone,he would do so in the first attempt itself. If someone doesn't want to,he won't regardless of whatever you bring on the table.
 
I know that you can't understand anything. If someone wants to understand/believe someone,he would do so in the first attempt itself. If someone doesn't want to,he won't regardless of whatever you bring on the table.

I agree that I fail to understand what you brought to the table for me to believe/understand anything.
 
What about 5-6 years old?

Thats murder too. I know for you guys it is a big shift in thinking but most non Hindu civilisations dont consider eating meat to be as big a deal as you guys.

In fact you guys equating it to murdering a child is both creepy and (unsurprisingly) incredibly insulting, especially on a day where most participants of thisnsite are engaged in such an activity.

Please keep the lame over sensationalist examples to yourself.
 
Last edited:
Thats murder too. I know for you guys it is a big shift in thinking but most non Hindu civilisations dont consider eating meat to be as big a deal as you guys.

In fact you guys equating it to murdering a child is both creepy and (unsurprisingly) incredibly insulting, especially on a day where most participants of thisnsite are engaged in such an activity.

Please keep the lame over sensationalist examples to yourself.
What is meat eating to do with this ?

Was the original sacrifice done because he wanted to eat his meat ?
 
What is meat eating to do with this ?

Was the original sacrifice done because he wanted to eat his meat ?

You were talking about the sacrifice of 5-6 year old I assumed you were following the example of the other poster.

No the original sacrifice was a test of faith for the Prophet Ibrahim (as), when Allah seen that his messenger was willing to even sacrifice his son in obedience to him he was given a lamb as replacement to sacrifice instead.

Now we sacrifice and distribute meat to commerate what would have been the ultimate sacrifice and keep the memory alive as a story to teach our children as devotion to God.
 
Thats murder too. I know for you guys it is a big shift in thinking but most non Hindu civilisations dont consider eating meat to be as big a deal as you guys.


Reckon the issue is not eating meat, but the act of sacrificing animals for religion that has got folks knickers in a twist.

Having said that there are tenets of Hinduism that demand sacrifice as well- to Godess Kaali.
 
You were talking about the sacrifice of 5-6 year old I assumed you were following the example of the other poster.

No the original sacrifice was a test of faith for the Prophet Ibrahim (as), when Allah seen that his messenger was willing to even sacrifice his son in obedience to him he was given a lamb as replacement to sacrifice instead.

Now we sacrifice and distribute meat to commerate what would have been the ultimate sacrifice and keep the memory alive as a story to teach our children as devotion to God.
Exactly and hence was my question as your earlier post made me confused.

So, if prophet Ibrahim can sacrifice his son and it is not seen as murder then why you feel sacrifice a 1 year old will be seen as murder ?

Cuz it's the father who sacrificed his son, not the son who sacrificed himself for his father. So if its murder then it is murder for whatever the age of the son is/was. if it is sacrifice then its sacrifice even if it is 1 year old.
 
I never understood the idea of qurbani by muslims. Qurbani/sacrifice means giving aways something yours, an animals life is 'somthing yours'?. How about cutting your own hand and feeding it to the poor kids that will be sacrifice in true sense.

No one asks an animal does it wants to be killed. And that too halal i.e in the name of god. A serious question, from gods point of view human beings life is more important than life of other animals? If yes then why?
I dont kill animals in name of god does that mean god will punish me in hell fire?

Yes I can see how it must seem strange in this day and age. Like Sikhs wearing turbans and refusing to cut their hair in hot countries. Where is the religion in that?
 
Exactly and hence was my question as your earlier post made me confused.

So, if prophet Ibrahim can sacrifice his son and it is not seen as murder then why you feel sacrifice a 1 year old will be seen as murder ?

Cuz it's the father who sacrificed his son, not the son who sacrificed himself for his father. So if its murder then it is murder for whatever the age of the son is/was. if it is sacrifice then its sacrifice even if it is 1 year old.

No that would be murder. Murder is extra judicial killing. Any act demanded by God is the law so cannot be murder.
 
Last edited:
Yes I can see how it must seem strange in this day and age. Like Sikhs wearing turbans and refusing to cut their hair in hot countries. Where is the religion in that?
You are actually asking the same question that he is asking.

Only difference is you both are pointing to different religions. :)
 
Reckon the issue is not eating meat, but the act of sacrificing animals for religion that has got folks knickers in a twist.

Having said that there are tenets of Hinduism that demand sacrifice as well- to Godess Kaali.

Whas the difference?

If they are against sacrificing poor animals for religion why not against sacrificing animals for the pursuit of profit. I dont see or hear these people protesting outside Mumbai Mcdonalds.
 
No that would be murder. Murder is extra judicial killing. Any act demanded by God is the law so cannot be murder.
In that sense, Prophet Ibrahim's decision would be an act of murder (had it happened). I mean if we look at it from today's society ofcourse.
 
Barbaric custom. Years and years of brainwashing makes everything look normal to the submissive ones.
 
Whas the difference?

If they are against sacrificing poor animals for religion why not against sacrificing animals for the pursuit of profit. I dont see or hear these people protesting outside Mumbai Mcdonalds.

Sure is DV, both acts for appeasing the mankind (either the religious side or the appetite side).

I am all for eating meat as long there is animal welfare and do not eat at joints where the meat supply chain is dubious- pay a bit more than the norm but buy from the farms and not the normal butchers.
 
In that sense, Prophet Ibrahim's decision would be an act of murder (had it happened). I mean if we look at it from today's society ofcourse.

For believers in the Abrahamic God no as law is derived from God.
 
Yes I can see how it must seem strange in this day and age. Like Sikhs wearing turbans and refusing to cut their hair in hot countries. Where is the religion in that?

in sikhism its no where written that you have to keep your hair uncut to be a sikhs neither god is going to burn 'hair cutters' in hell fire. 5Ks are kept by sikhs as they try to follow 10th guru's army dress code. In sikh text book its not even mentioned as far as i know.
Btw does sikh cutting their hair has any thing to do with this?
 
Yes I can see how it must seem strange in this day and age. Like Sikhs wearing turbans and refusing to cut their hair in hot countries. Where is the religion in that?

You are actually asking the same question that he is asking.

Only difference is you both are pointing to different religions. :)

there is no difference in killing a animal and thinking god will be happy and protect us from hell-fire and in not cutting your hair and wearing turban??
Btw harbhajan singh cuts his beard and still is a sikh. Have you ever seen a vegitarian muslim?i haven't.
Again read post #129 point 1. It says If you sacrifice a animal GOD will be so happy it will protect you from hell-fire.so god demands you to ''sacrifice'' a animal, its a binding. Not same as sikhs uncut hair which is their will.
 
It's OK to call developped a country with 10% obesity rates that is based on meat coming from livestocks that are stuffed with water and vegetals that could feed millions of people, whether direct consumption or land that could be used for something else, animals that live in horrible conditions, thousands in the same little enclose where the availabilty of food is timetable based, that is in the farms where they are not beaten, finally to die by being killed on a row in a state of stress. But that is cool because you don't see it happening. But hunting or killing an animal that has lived rather freely in crops or gardens by acknowledging that the animal is a gift from God that you should cherish, with the instruction that it must never even see the blade is barbaric? Imagine if everyone in this world had to kill the meat they eat. It would encourage paucity and gratitude to god for some, paucity and vegeterianism for others.
 
"Qurbai qurbani qurbaniiii.....Allah ko pyari hai qurbani"

(This song just started playing in my head after reading the title of this thread)
 
in sikhism its no where written that you have to keep your hair uncut to be a sikhs neither god is going to burn 'hair cutters' in hell fire. 5Ks are kept by sikhs as they try to follow 10th guru's army dress code. In sikh text book its not even mentioned as far as i know.
Btw does sikh cutting their hair has any thing to do with this?

Because from a logic point of view, neither makes any sense. Sacrificing an animal doesn't seem like religion to many people of different faiths. Equally wrapping a long piece of cloth round your head and growing hair and beards also doesn't seem like religion to other people. So can you see how bringing the two different viewpoints into one focus brings a better understanding? :)
 
bari pyaari baat ki hai aapne.

jo naik kaam karo, Allah ki raza ke liye hona chaiye, jannat ke liye nahi :) lekin jo god deeds jannat ke liye kar raha hai woh bhi sahih hai as naik kaam to kar raha hai at least lekin us se behter shaks woh hai jo sirf Allah ki raza ke liye kar raha hai


kyunke saari naikyan bhi leyjaao to iski koi guarantee nahi ke jannat miljaayegi, unless Allah ka rahem na ho.

Tum makhlooq pe rahem karo mein tujhpe rahem karoonga :)

I would like to go even one step further. Do not do good deeds to make God happy, we have to do good deeds because these are our duty and responsibility to help the mankind.

You do not stop the traffic light because it makes God happy, you do it to avoid accidents and follow the rules.

I don't understand the logic of doing good deeds to go to heaven or to make God happy. I think God would be more happy if we would just become a good human being and do deeds without any real greed or to make him happy.
 
"Qurbai qurbani qurbaniiii.....Allah ko pyari hai qurbani"

(This song just started playing in my head after reading the title of this thread)

Liar, you must be thinking of Zeenat Aman ( your childhood fantasy) :)
 
I would like to go even one step further. Do not do good deeds to make God happy, we have to do good deeds because these are our duty and responsibility to help the mankind.

You do not stop the traffic light because it makes God happy, you do it to avoid accidents and follow the rules.

I don't understand the logic of doing good deeds to go to heaven or to make God happy. I think God would be more happy if we would just become a good human being and do deeds without any real greed or to make him happy.

That's not a new concept either, you can find it in literature from many realms of thought going back centuries. But there are always going to be people who are more interested in the form rather than the substance.

Qurbani is a ritual where as I understand it, the idea was to mark the occasion by giving the meat to the poor once the animal had been sacrificed. Whether the ritual itself is still necessary in this day and age is another topic, but distributing food to the poor is still a worthy exercise.
 
That's not a new concept either, you can find it in literature from many realms of thought going back centuries. But there are always going to be people who are more interested in the form rather than the substance.

Qurbani is a ritual where as I understand it, the idea was to mark the occasion by giving the meat to the poor once the animal had been sacrificed. Whether the ritual itself is still necessary in this day and age is another topic, but distributing food to the poor is still a worthy exercise.

But did I say, giving food to poor is not a good exercise?
 
Because from a logic point of view, neither makes any sense. Sacrificing an animal doesn't seem like religion to many people of different faiths. Equally wrapping a long piece of cloth round your head and growing hair and beards also doesn't seem like religion to other people. So can you see how bringing the two different viewpoints into one focus brings a better understanding? :)

Wrapping a long piece of cloth d'not harm any one, human or animal. While other invole killing of animal in name of god. It seem you are not understanding my point of effect of ones religious belief on others life?
Killing for food is nature and I understand it, but killing for point scoring is beyond me.
Sikh does not force thier religion on other and practice of sikh religion never effect others in anyway. Muslin should practice their religion without effecting other,that my point of view.
 
there is no difference in killing a animal and thinking god will be happy and protect us from hell-fire and in not cutting your hair and wearing turban??
Btw harbhajan singh cuts his beard and still is a sikh. Have you ever seen a vegitarian muslim?i haven't.
Again read post #129 point 1. It says If you sacrifice a animal GOD will be so happy it will protect you from hell-fire.so god demands you to ''sacrifice'' a animal, its a binding. Not same as sikhs uncut hair which is their will.
No the question was not the actual act but questioning a belief.

Because, to one, the other side's act doesn't make sense when the other side does it due to his belief though he has no clear reason to back it up. :)
 
That brings another angle.

Does the old custom of "Sati" in hindus make sense ?

Someone is sacrificing herself to her god (her husband) in her own will. :)
 
Sati was (is?) another of those idiotic/horrible practices and in some cases, the family of deceased forced the lady into it as that enhanced the reputation of the house.

But, very technically speaking, its more of a qurbaani than killing someone/something else. However, it was a sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice and served no good purpose. The world is a better place without it.
 
Zaid, my respect for you has only gone up .. Wish, more ppl can think like u... same goes for Hindus in rural Indias who believe in the 'Bali' system.... Should use that money to donate it to poor
 
That brings another angle.

Does the old custom of "Sati" in hindus make sense ?

Someone is sacrificing herself to her god (her husband) in her own will. :)


The followers of one religion always either make fun or feel awkward by looking the rituals of other religion.

I personally do not think sacrificing the animals or self for the sake of pleasing the God has anything do with any logic or rationale, these all are man made rituals and has been going on millions of years in different forms.

These all are superstitious behaviors.
 
Sati was (is?) another of those idiotic/horrible practices and in some cases, the family of deceased forced the lady into it as that enhanced the reputation of the house.

But, very technically speaking, its more of a qurbaani than killing someone/something else. However, it was a sacrifice for the sake of sacrifice and served no good purpose. The world is a better place without it.

In our subcontinent culture, after the death of the husband, there is no life of the women, nobody marry her ( unless some man twice her age agree to do as a favor), in-laws do not give respect, ..bottom line, she is almost like an animal, I am sure this is where idea comes from to sacrifice her life.
 
That brings another angle.

Does the old custom of "Sati" in hindus make sense ?

Someone is sacrificing herself to her god (her husband) in her own will. :)

No its nonsense and isn't sanctioned by the Hindu religion.
 
The followers of one religion always either make fun or feel awkward by looking the rituals of other religion.

I personally do not think sacrificing the animals or self for the sake of pleasing the God has anything do with any logic or rationale, these all are man made rituals and has been going on millions of years in different forms.

These all are superstitious behaviors.
I don't think I can add anything more to it as that is exactly what my view is.

My example was just to show how awkward it feels when you see one's superstition from other's view. People who follow a religion will never accept it that it's all man made.

My dad used to give a good example. It goes like this

A man was doing the last rites of his father when a black street dog was trying to get in and troubling. So the man caught the dog and tied it to the pole near by.

His son who was seeing it remembered it when he did the same thing for his father and it carried on to the next generation.

So after few generation, every son tried to pay whatever it is needed to arrange a black dog to be tied for their father's final rituals.
 
In our subcontinent culture, after the death of the husband, there is no life of the women, nobody marry her ( unless some man twice her age agree to do as a favor), in-laws do not give respect, ..bottom line, she is almost like an animal, I am sure this is where idea comes from to sacrifice her life.



Yeah true. Also since women did not/ could not work, they were a burden. The more I think of some of the rituals, the more I feel that they were a creation of some cold-blooded calculations.

Our claim of being civilized has only improved with the end of this horrible practice. A big thanks to the likes of Raja Ram Mohan Roy as well as a number of Britishers for that.
 
Last edited:
In our subcontinent culture, after the death of the husband, there is no life of the women, nobody marry her ( unless some man twice her age agree to do as a favor), in-laws do not give respect, ..bottom line, she is almost like an animal, I am sure this is where idea comes from to sacrifice her life.
Linking woman to honor of family also plays a good role.

In many cases stupid people will like their girl/women to be dead than having a relationship with someone else (even after they are widowed)
 
Many would think the same for killing a goat just for a ritual.

They are free to think what they like, however bearing in mind the majority of civilizations are meat eaters and kill animals on a regular basis while suicide is illegal in most major cultures ( including Hinduism) then those 'many' are actually few.
 
Wrapping a long piece of cloth d'not harm any one, human or animal. While other invole killing of animal in name of god. It seem you are not understanding my point of effect of ones religious belief on others life?
Killing for food is nature and I understand it, but killing for point scoring is beyond me.
Sikh does not force thier religion on other and practice of sikh religion never effect others in anyway. Muslin should practice their religion without effecting other,that my point of view.
Who is it effecting?
 
They are free to think what they like, however bearing in mind the majority of civilizations are meat eaters and kill animals on a regular basis while suicide is illegal in most major cultures ( including Hinduism) then those 'many' are actually few.

If you were to call it meat-eating and charity instead of sacrifice then there wouldn't be many raised eye-brows.

Qatl hua bakre ka, qurbaani teri
Bhai, yeh kaisi hera-pheri?

:D
 
If you were to call it meat-eating and charity instead of sacrifice then there wouldn't be many raised eye-brows.

Qatl hua bakre ka, qurbaani teri
Bhai, yeh kaisi hera-pheri?

:D
You also don't understand the meaning of the word sacrifice. This has been explained many times in the thread but you are deliberately being obtuse.

Perhaps because English is not your first language. Sacrifice has two meanings, one is offering to God and the other is 'n act of giving up something valued for the sake of something else regarded as more important or worthy:'

Qurbani satisfies both requirments.
 
Last edited:
The true essences of Qurbani is not to distribute meat among relatives or the poor (although it's part of it), but actual practice behind Qurbani is that one should be ready to scarify what he holds dear into the way of his lord.

And thus, Scholars say that the prescribed way of Qurbani is that you acquire an animal at least a year before Eid. Raise and feed it with affection. This will create a strong bond between you and the animal ,,, and THEN scarify the animal on Eid. This is the real test where you will be sacrifying something in the way of your lord that you really hold dear. Imagine the test of Prophet Abraham now?

Buying an animal a day before Eid and sacrifying it in a couple of days is perhaps an extremely diluted form of test of how ready are you to sacrify what you hold dear in the way of your lord.
 
Last edited:
The true essences of Qurbani is not to distribute meat among relatives or the poor (although it's part of it), but actual practice behind Qurbani is that one should be ready to scarify what he holds dear into the way of his lord.

And thus, Scholars say that the prescribed way of Qurbani is that you acquire an animal at least a year before Eid. Raise and feed it with affection. This will create a strong bond between you and the animal ,,, and THEN scarify the animal on Eid. This is the real test where you will be sacrifying something in the way of your lord that you really hold dear. Imagine the test of Prophet Abraham now?

Buying an animal a day before Eid and sacrifying it in a couple of days is perhaps an extremely diluted form of test of ready are you to sacrify what you hold dear in the way of your lord.

So dearer the better? Why not a family member instead of goat (which is presumably less dear, if at all dear to anyone who sacrifices it)?
 
They are free to think what they like, however bearing in mind the majority of civilizations are meat eaters and kill animals on a regular basis while suicide is illegal in most major cultures ( including Hinduism) then those 'many' are actually few.

It's not about animal slaughter for food. It's the concept of killing an animal to please god and take credit that "I sacrificed" when it really didn't matter to me if that animal live or die. :)
 
It's not about animal slaughter for food. It's the concept of killing an animal to please god and take credit that "I sacrificed" when it really didn't matter to me if that animal live or die. :)

You are also getting stuck on word definitions.

Any offering to God is a 'sacrifice' by definition. Again I put this down to a second language issue rather than stubbornness on your part.
 
Last edited:
The true essences of Qurbani is not to distribute meat among relatives or the poor (although it's part of it), but actual practice behind Qurbani is that one should be ready to scarify what he holds dear into the way of his lord.

And thus, Scholars say that the prescribed way of Qurbani is that you acquire an animal at least a year before Eid. Raise and feed it with affection. This will create a strong bond between you and the animal ,,, and THEN scarify the animal on Eid. This is the real test where you will be sacrifying something in the way of your lord that you really hold dear. Imagine the test of Prophet Abraham now?

Buying an animal a day before Eid and sacrifying it in a couple of days is perhaps an extremely diluted form of test of how ready are you to sacrify what you hold dear in the way of your lord.

This is even more depressing and sad for the individual, who after raising the animal, going through all the hard work done for the year, become emotionally attached and than has to sacrificed the animal and keep doing the same procedure every year and go through the emotional roller coaster and suffered psychologically.

But I guess, emotions, attachments or feelings are not important when it comes to dealing with rituals and superstitions.
 
Whats your alternative Zaidbhai?

Instead of spending money on sacrificing the animal, people should make small committees ( for example each mosque) to collect the qurbani money and spend the money better cause to help poor people.

If the purpose is to please the God, than God will be more happy if 100% of the sacrificed money goes to help the poor people instead of 33% of the meat ( I don't even have to explain the quality of the meat goes to poor people).
 
This is even more depressing and sad for the individual, who after raising the animal, going through all the hard work done for the year, become emotionally attached and than has to sacrificed the animal and keep doing the same procedure every year and go through the emotional roller coaster and suffered psychologically.

But I guess, emotions, attachments or feelings are not important when it comes to dealing with rituals and superstitions.

I think it all boils down to one's faith and his belief.

On the day of judgement, ALL relationships and emotional attachments among ALL people will be totally removed. 'What have you done for your lord' will only matter. And I guess it will be an ever sadder moment if the individual has not done enough to attain his mercy.

May Allah help us all on that day. Ameen

BTW: Qurbani is not farz. You may choose not to do it.
 
Last edited:
Instead of spending money on sacrificing the animal, people should make small committees ( for example each mosque) to collect the qurbani money and spend the money better cause to help poor people.

If the purpose is to please the God, than God will be more happy if 100% of the sacrificed money goes to help the poor people instead of 33% of the meat ( I don't even have to explain the quality of the meat goes to poor people).

Assuming you're a Muslim, wouldn't you have to reinterpret the whole belief system in order to achieve or enforce that idea or belief? The tradition and literal interpretation wouldn't enable their to be this sort of examples to be applied, you would have to reconcile different attributes of this example with revelation, don't you think?
 
I think it all boils down to one's faith and his belief.

On the day of judgement, ALL relationships and emotional attachments among ALL people will be totally removed. 'What have you done for your lord' will only matter. And I guess it will be an ever sadder moment if the individual has not done enough to attain his mercy.

May Allah help us all on that day. Ameen

BTW: Qurbani is not farz. You may choose not to do it.

If this is the way, I would rather do to help the poor or needy people than to make God happy, because in my common sense and logic, God will be happy and satisfied if I help the people in need than just for the sake of ritual to make God happy. My common sense and logic is a blessing from my God and I would love to use it the way I think is better.
 
If this is the way, I would rather do to help the poor or needy people ------ to make God happy, instead.
Because in my common sense and logic, God will be happy and satisfied if I help the people in need than just for the sake of ritual to make God happy. My common sense and logic is a blessing from my God and I would love to use it the way I think is better

.

I took the liberty of updating your sentence. Hope you don't mind.

And as I said, you may choose not to do the Qurbani.
 
Last edited:
I took the liberty of updating your sentence. Hope you don't mind.

And as I said, you may choose not to do the Qurbani.

I do mind, because my logic is very clear. I do good deeds because I feel it is my responsibility and my duty. Just like if I stop on red light, I don't do it to make God happy, I feel like this is my duty to protect others and myself from accidents.


I am not into rewards, bonus points or greed.
 
I do mind, because my logic is very clear. I do good deeds because I feel it is my responsibility and my duty. Just like if I stop on red light, I don't do it to make God happy, I feel like this is my duty to protect others and myself from accidents.


I am not into rewards, bonus points or greed.

It's all your choice.
God does not need our prayers or qurbani or hajj or helping the poor. We do it because WE need it.
 
I do mind, because my logic is very clear. I do good deeds because I feel it is my responsibility and my duty. Just like if I stop on red light, I don't do it to make God happy, I feel like this is my duty to protect others and myself from accidents.


I am not into rewards, bonus points or greed.

Thats some sufiesque thinking Zaid bhai, I admire you for it.
 
Haha I recently read about this fatwa from the Dawat e Islami people , qurbani has been termed as a must by them and if you cannot afford it , sell your belongings :))
 
I would like to go even one step further. Do not do good deeds to make God happy, we have to do good deeds because these are our duty and responsibility to help the mankind.

You do not stop the traffic light because it makes God happy, you do it to avoid accidents and follow the rules.

I don't understand the logic of doing good deeds to go to heaven or to make God happy. I think God would be more happy if we would just become a good human being and do deeds without any real greed or to make him happy.

paa hun tu insaanan wich wadda nahi hoya tay woh sadda tay kasoor nahi :)

jis din insaan ne dutiyan karleen, us din haramzadgi khatam na hojaaye. Its not in human nature dutiyan karni :)

banda ya to pyaar se maanta hai ya maar se :)

aur ishq mein to banda har hadd paar karjaata hai, traffic light ki kahan baat karte ho :)

ek baar ishq larao to sahih apne khaaliq se ;)
 
Last edited:
This is even more depressing and sad for the individual, who after raising the animal, going through all the hard work done for the year, become emotionally attached and than has to sacrificed the animal and keep doing the same procedure every year and go through the emotional roller coaster and suffered psychologically.

But I guess, emotions, attachments or feelings are not important when it comes to dealing with rituals and superstitions.

its not a ritual or superstition, its a sunnah. If you think it is a ritual or a superstition and not a sunnah, I woudl love to hear your views on it :)
 
Islamic method of Slaughtering animals is better
...scientific reason...

Al Shaddad Bin Aous has quoted this tradition of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H.) "God calls for mercy in everything, so be merciful when you kill and when you slaughter, sharpen your blade to relieve its pain".

Many allegations have been made that Islamic slaughter is not humane to animals. However, Professor Schultz and his colleague Dr. Hazim of the Hanover University, Germany, proved through an experiment, using an electroencephalograph (EEG) and electrocardiogram (ECG) that *Islamic slaughter is THE humane method of slaughter* and captive bolt stunning, practiced by the Western method, causes severe pain to the animal. The results surprised many.


Experimental Details:


1. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all animals, touching the surface of thebrain.

2. The animals were allowed to recover for several weeks.

3. Some animals were slaughtered by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck cutting the jugular veins and carotid Arteries of both sides; as also the trachea and esophagusHalal Method.

4. Some animals were stunned using a captive bolt pistol humane slaughter by the western method.

5. During the experiment, EEG and ECG were recorded on all animals to record the condition of the brain and heart during the course of slaughter and stunning.

Results and Discussion:

I - Halal Method

1. The first three seconds from the time of Islamic slaughter as recorded on the EEG did not show any change from the graph before slaughter, thus indicating that the animal did not feel any pain during or immediately after the incision.

2. For the following 3 seconds, the EEG recorded a condition of deep sleep - unconsciousness. This is due to a large quantity of blood gushing out from the body.

3. After the above mentioned 6 seconds, the EEG recorded zero level, showing no feeling of pain at all.

4. As the brain message (EEG) dropped to zero level, the heart was still pounding and the body convulsing vigorously (a reflex action of the spinal cord) driving maximum blood from the body: resulting in hygienic meat for the consumer.


II - Western method by C.B.P. Stunning


1. The animals were apparently unconscious soon after stunning.

2. EEG showed severe pain immediately after stunning.

3. The hearts of the animal stunned by C.B.P. stopped beating earlier as compared to those of the animals slaughtered according to the Halal method resulting in the retention of more blood in the meat. This in turn is unhygienic for the consumer.

(Many thanks to Muslim Students Organization - University of Miami)

http://www.themodernreligion.com/misc/an/an_slaughter.htm


Mercy Halal Islamic Slaughter

Part 1
[utube]C2kV3gLons4[/utube]

Part2 A
[utube]g3MbgL6Jboc[/utube]

Part2 B
[utube]rF3mK5XRv9E[/utube]


This post pretty much explains that Islamic way of slaughtering is the least painful way of sacrificing an animal.
 
Isnt the Islamic way and the Jewish way pretty much the same thing, other than recitations from different books? If so as per Cpt Rishwat's logic- Islamic way is just a rip off and a copy from the Jews?
 
This post pretty much explains that Islamic way of slaughtering is the least painful way of sacrificing an animal.

Love the hypocrisy of worrying about a few seconds of pain while stealing an animal's entire life. This is the kind of think off putting about religioupeopleThey will act all pious while doing the most heinous things. Lo
 
This post pretty much explains that Islamic way of slaughtering is the least painful way of sacrificing an animal.

Don't want to comment on the result since I do not know much about animal slaughter.

But when evaluating any paper, I always look at the following for bias before agreeing to the conclusion
1. Who funded the paper
2. Who researched the paper
3. What would be in the interest of 1 & 2

This would then provide me enough information on the possibilities of bias.
 
Back
Top