Showing posts with label Dhabihah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dhabihah. Show all posts

Friday, December 17

Sacrifice

Marcus Aurelius and members of the Imperial family offer sacrifice in
gratitude for success against Germanic tribes: contemporary
 bas-relief, Capitoline Museum, Rome
Sacrifice is the offering of food, objects or the lives of animals or people to the gods as an act of propitiation or worship.
While sacrifice often implies ritual killing, the term offering (Latin oblatio) can be used for bloodless sacrifices of cereal food or artifacts. For offerings of liquids (beverages) by pouring, the term libation is used.

Terminology

The Latin term came to be used of the Christian eucharist in particular, sometimes dubbed a "bloodless sacrifice" to distinguish it from pagan practices of "blood sacrifice". In individual pre-Christian ethnic religions, terms translated as "sacrifice" include the Indic yajna, the Greek thusia , the Germanic blōtan, the Semitic qorban/qurban, etc.
The term is also used metaphorically to describe selfless good deeds for others or a short term loss in return for a greater gain, such as in a game of chess. Recently it has also come into use as meaning 'doing without something' or 'giving something up' (see also self-sacrifice).


Historical polytheism

Polytheism, History of religions, and Mythology and ritual
The practice of sacrifice is seen in the oldest records. The archaeological record contains human and animal corpses with sacrificial marks long before any written records of the practice. Sacrifices are a common theme in most religions, though the frequency of animal, and especially human, sacrifices are rare today.
Literally anything of some value may be a sacrifice in some religion's practices. The more valuable the offering, generally, the more highly the sacrifice is regarded but the more difficult to make. On a day-to-day basis, offerings may be quite simple indeed: flowers, candles, incense, spilling some of the drink from a cup before drinking.
Commonly, the most valuable sacrifices have been that of lives, animal or human.


Animal sacrifice
Animal sacrifice offered together with libation in Ancient Greece. Attic red-figure
oinochoe, ca. 430-425 BC (Louvre).,
Animal sacrifice is the ritual killing of an animal as part of a religion. It is practiced by many religions as a means of appeasing a god or gods or changing the course of nature. It also served a social or economic function in those cultures where the edible portions of the animal were distributed among those attending the sacrifice for consumption. Animal sacrifice has turned up in almost all cultures, from the Hebrews to the Greeks and Romans (particularly the purifying ceremony Lustratio) , Ancient Egyptians (for example in the cult of Apis) and from the Aztecs to the Yoruba. Animal sacrifice is still practiced today by the followers of Santería and other lineages of Orisa as a means of curing the sick and giving thanks to the Orisa (gods). However in Santeria, such animal offerings constitute an extremely small portion of what are termed ebos—ritual activities that include offerings, prayer and deeds. Christians from some villages in Greece also sacrifice animals to Orthodox saints in a practice known as kourbània. The practice, while publicly condemned, is often tolerated for the benefits it provides to the church and the sense of community it engenders.


Karl Meuli's theory on origins of Greek sacrifice
According to Karl Meuli (1891–1968), a scholar in animal sacrifice, Greek sacrifices derived from hunting practices. Hunters, feeling guilty for having killed another living being so they could eat and survive, tried to repudiate their responsibility in these rituals. The primary evidence used to suggest this theory is the Dipolieia, which is an Athenian festival, in limited circulation, during which an ox was sacrificed. The protagonist of the ritual was a plough ox, which it had, at one point, been a crime to kill in Athens. According to his theory, the killer of the ox eased his conscience by suggesting that everybody should participate in the killing of the sacrificial victim.
In the expansion of the Athenian state, numerous oxen were needed to feed the people at the banquets and were accompanied by state festivals. The hecatomb (“hundred oxen”) became the general designation for the great sacrifices offered by the state. These sacrificial processions of hundreds of oxen remove the original ties, which the farmers of an earlier and smaller Athens will have felt with their one ox.


Human sacrifice
Aztec human sacrifice, from Codex Mendoza, 16th century
 (Bodleian Library,Oxford).,
Human sacrifice was practiced by many ancient cultures.= People would be ritually killed in a manner that was supposed to please or appease a god or spirit. While not widely known, human sacrifices for religious reasons still exist today in a number of nations.
Some occasions for human sacrifice found in multiple cultures on multiple continents include:
Human sacrifice to accompany the dedication of a new temple or bridge.
Sacrifice of people upon the death of a king, high priest or great leader; the sacrificed were supposed to serve or accompany the deceased leader in the next life.
Human sacrifice in times of natural disaster. Droughts, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, etc. were seen as a sign of anger or displeasure by deities, and sacrifices were supposed to lessen the divine ire.
Some of the best known[opinion] ancient human sacrifices were those practiced by various Pre-Columbian civilizations of Mesoamerica. The Aztec were particularly noted for practicing this on an unusually large scale; a human sacrifice would be made every day to aid the sun in rising, the dedication of the great temple at Tenochtitlán was reportedly marked with the sacrificing of thousands, and there are multiple accounts of captured Conquistadores being sacrificed during the wars of the Spanish conquest of Mexico.
In Scandinavia, the old Scandinavian religion contained human sacrifice, and both the Norse sagas and German historians relate of this, see e.g. Temple at Uppsala and Blót.
There is evidence to suggest Pre-Hellenic Minoan cultures practiced human sacrifice. Sacrificed corpses were found at a number of sites in the citadel of Knossos in Crete. The north house at Knossos contained the bones of children who appeared to have been butchered. It is possible they may have been for human consumption as was the tradition with sacrificial offerings made in Pre-Hellenic Civilization.  The myth of Theseus and the Minotaur (set in the labyrinth at Knossos) provides evidence that human sacrifice was commonplace. In the myth, we are told that Athens sent seven young men and seven young women to Crete as human sacrifices to the Minotaur. This ties up well with the archaeological evidence that most sacrifices were of young adults or children.
Human sacrifice still happens today as an underground practice in some traditional religions, for example in muti killings. Human sacrifice is no longer officially condoned in any country, and these cases are regarded as murder.
In Hindu narratives, practicing human sacrifice and eating human meat was a work of the demons.
In the Aeneid by Virgil, the character Sinon claims (falsely) that he was going to be a human sacrifice to Poseidon to calm the seas.


Abrahamic religions

Judaism
See also: Korban and Shechita


Stained glass window at Annunciation Melkite Catholic Cathedral depicting Abel's sacrifice of a lamb
In Judaism, a sacrifice is known as a Korban, from the Hebrew root קרב, meaning "to approach/draw near."
The centrality of sacrifices in Judaism is clear, with much of the Bible, particularly the opening chapters of the book Leviticus, detailing the exact method of bringing sacrifices. Sacrifices were either blood sacrifices (animals) or blood-less sacrifices (grain and wine). Blood sacrifices were divided into the Olah sacrifices [Hebrew: עלה קרבנות] (burnt offerings, in which the whole animal was burnt), guilt offerings (in which part was burnt and part left for the priest) and peace offerings (in which similarly only part of the animal was burnt). Yet the prophets point out that sacrifices are only a part of serving God and need to be accompanied by inner morality and goodness.
After the destruction of the Second Temple, ritual sacrifice ceased except among the Samaritans. Maimonides, a medieval Jewish rationalist, argued that God always held sacrifice inferior to prayer and philosophical meditation. However, God understood that the Israelites were used to the animal sacrifices that the surrounding pagan tribes used as the primary way to commune with their gods. As such, in Maimonides' view, it was only natural that Israelites would believe that sacrifice was a necessary part of the relationship between God and man. Maimonides concludes that God's decision to allow sacrifices was a concession to human psychological limitations. It would have been too much to have expected the Israelites to leap from pagan worship to prayer and meditation in one step. In the Guide for the Perplexed, he writes:
"But the custom which was in those days general among men, and the general mode of worship in which the Israelites were brought up consisted in sacrificing animals... It was in accordance with the wisdom and plan of God...that God did not command us to give up and to discontinue all these manners of service. For to obey such a commandment would have been contrary to the nature of man, who generally cleaves to that to which he is used; it would in those days have made the same impression as a prophet would make at present [the 12th Century] if he called us to the service of God and told us in His name, that we should not pray to God nor fast, nor seek His help in time of trouble; that we should serve Him in thought, and not by any action." (Book III, Chapter 32. Translated by M. Friedlander, 1904, The Guide for the Perplexed, Dover Publications, 1956 edition.)
In contrast, many others such as Nachmanides (in his Torah commentary on Leviticus 1:9) disagreed, contending that sacrifices are an ideal in Judaism, completely central.
The teachings of the Torah and Tanakh reveal the Israelites's familiarity with human sacrifices, as exemplified by the near-sacrifice of Isaac by his father Abraham (Genesis 22:1-24) and the actual sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter (Judges 11:31-40). The king of Moab gives his firstborn son and heir as a whole burnt offering (olah, as used of the Temple sacrifice). It is apparently effective, as his enemy is promptly repelled by a 'great wrath' (2 Kings 3:27). In the book of Micah, one asks, 'Shall I give my firstborn for my sin, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?' (Micah 6:7), and receives a response, 'It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, and what the LORD doth require of thee: only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.' (Micah 6:8) Abhorrance of the practice of child sacrifice is emphasised by Jeremiah. See Jeremiah 7:30-32.


Christianity
In Christian teaching, God became incarnate in Jesus Christ (trinitarian view) or sacrificed his first-born son (divine yet distinct from God for non-trinitarians) to accomplish the reconciliation of God and humanity, which had separated itself from God through sin (see the concept of original sin). According to a view that has featured prominently in Western theology since early in the 2nd millennium, God's justice required an atonement for sin from humanity if human beings were to be restored to their place in creation and saved from damnation. However, God knew limited human beings could not make sufficient atonement, for humanity's offense to God was infinite, so God sent his only Son to become the sacrifice of the everlasting covenant. In Christian theology, this sacrifice replaced the insufficient animal sacrifice of the Old Covenant; Christ the "Lamb of God" replaced the lambs' sacrifice of the ancient Korban Todah (the Rite of Thanksgiving), chief of which is the Passover in the Mosaic law.
Geza Vermes writes that the title "Lamb of God" does not necessarily refer to the metaphor of a sacrificial animal. He points out that in Galilean Aramaic, the word talya, literally "lamb", had the common meaning of "male child". This is akin to kid meaning "child" in modern colloquial English. The female equivalent of talya was talitha, literally "ewe lamb" and figuratively "girl" (the word is found in the narrative of the daughter of Jairus). Thus, "Lamb of God" could have been a slang means of saying "Son of God" or "God's Kid". This view differs from the traditional understanding of the phrase as it is used in reference to the acts of Jesus, and not merely his status as the Son of God.
In the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, as well as among some High Church Anglicans, the Eucharist or Mass, and the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Catholic Churches and Eastern Orthodox Church, is seen as a sacrifice. It is however, not a separate or additional sacrifice to that Christ on the cross; it is rather exactly the same sacrifice, which transcends time and space ("the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world") (Rev. 13:8), renewed and made present, the only distinction being that it is offered in an unbloody manner. The sacrifice is made present without Christ dying or being crucified again; it is a re-presentation to God, of the "once and for all" sacrifice of Calvary by the now risen Christ, who continues to offer himself and what he has done on the cross as an oblation to the Father. The complete identification of the Mass with the sacrifice of the cross is found in Christ's words at the last supper over the bread and wine: "This is my body, which is given up for you," and "This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed...unto the forgiveness of sins." The bread and wine, offered by Melchizedek in sacrifice in the old covenant (Genesis 14:18; Psalm 110:4), are transformed through the Mass into the body and blood of Christ (see transubstantiation; note: the Orthodox Church does not hold as dogma, as do Catholics, the doctrine of transubstantiation, preferring rather to not make an assertion regarding the "how" of the sacraments), and the offering becomes one with that of Christ on the cross. In the Mass as on the cross, Christ is both priest (offering the sacrifice) and victim (the sacrifice he offers is himself), though in the Mass in the former capacity he works through a solely human priest who is joined to him through the sacrament of Holy Orders and thus shares in Christ's priesthood. Through the Mass, the merits of the one sacrifice of the cross can be applied to the redemption of those present, to their specific intentions and prayers, and to the redemption of the souls in purgatory. A prophecy of the sacrifice of the Mass, offered in every corner of the world, is found in the Book of Malachi in the Old Testament: "from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering, for my name is great among the Gentiles" (Mal. 1:10-11).
The concept of self-sacrifice and martyrs are central to Christianity. Often found in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity is the idea of joining one's own sufferings to the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Thus one can offer up involuntary suffering, such as illness, or purposefully embrace suffering in acts of penance, such as fasting. Some Protestants criticize this as a denial of the all-sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice, but it finds support in St. Paul: "Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church" (Col 1:24). Pope John Paul II explained in his Apostolic Letter Salvifici Doloris (11 February 1984):
"In the Cross of Christ not only is the Redemption accomplished through suffering, but also human suffering itself has been redeemed...Every man has his own share in the Redemption. Each one is also called to share in that suffering through which the Redemption was accomplished...In bringing about the Redemption through suffering, Christ has also raised human suffering to the level of the Redemption. Thus each man, in his suffering, can also become a sharer in the redemptive suffering of Christ...The sufferings of Christ created the good of the world's redemption. This good in itself is inexhaustible and infinite. No man can add anything to it. But at the same time, in the mystery of the Church as his Body, Christ has in a sense opened his own redemptive suffering to all human suffering" (Salvifici Doloris 19; 24).
Some Protestants reject the idea of the Eucharist as a sacrifice, inclining to see it as merely a holy meal (even if they believe in a form of the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine, as Lutherans do). The more recent the origin of a particular tradition, the less emphasis is placed on the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist. The Catholic/Orthodox response is that the sacrifice of the Mass in the New Covenant is that one sacrifice for sins on the cross which transcends time offered in an unbloody manner, as discussed above, and that Christ is the real priest at every Mass working through mere human beings to whom he has granted the grace of a share in his priesthood. Since the word priest carries heavy connotations of "one who offers sacrifice", Protestants usually do not use it for their clergy. Evangelical Protestantism emphasizes the importance of a decision to accept Christ's sacrifice on the Cross consciously and personally as atonement for one's individual sins if one is to be saved—this is known as "accepting Christ as one's personal Lord and Savior".
The Orthodox Church sees the celebration of the Eucharist as a continuation, rather than a reenactment, of the Last Supper, as Fr. John Matusiak (of the OCA) says: "The Liturgy is not so much a reenactment of the Mystical Supper or these events as it is a continuation of these events, which are beyond time and space. Unlike many of the Protestant bodies, the Orthodox also see the Eucharistic Liturgy as a bloodless sacrifice, during which the bread and wine we offer to God become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ through the descent and operation of the Holy Spirit, Who effects the change." This view is witnessed to by the prayers of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, when the priest says: "Accept, O God, our supplications, make us to be worthy to offer unto thee supplications and prayers and bloodless sacrifices for all thy people," and "Remembering this saving commandment and all those things which came to pass for us: the cross, the grave, the resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven, the sitting down at the right hand, the second and glorious coming again, Thine own of Thine own we offer unto Thee on behalf of all and for all," and "… Thou didst become man and didst take the name of our High Priest, and deliver unto us the priestly rite of this liturgical and bloodless sacrifice…"


Islam
Main article: Dhabihah
An animal sacrifice in Arabic is called ḏabiḥa (ذَبِيْحَة) or Qurban (قُرْبَان) . The term may have roots from the Jewish term Korban; in some places such as in India/Pakistan, qurbani is always used for Islamic animal sacrifice. In the Islamic context, an animal sacrifice referred to as ḏabiḥa (ذَبِيْحَة) meaning "sacrifice as a ritual" is offered only in Eid ul-Adha. ..."Therefor to the Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice. " (Surat Al-Kawthar) Quran, 108.2 Qurbani is an Islamic prescription for the affluent to share their good fortune with the needy in the community. On the occasion of Eid ul Adha, affluent Muslims all over the world perform the Sunnah of Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) by sacrificing a goat or sheep. The meat is then divided into three equal parts. One part is retained by the person who performs the Qurbani. The second is given to his relatives. The third part is distributed to the poor. The Muslims say that this has nothing to do with blood and gore (Qur'an 22:37: "It is not their meat nor their blood, that reaches God. It is your piety that reaches Him..."). The sacrifice is done to help the poor and in remembrance of Prophet Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son Ismail at God's command. The sacrificial animal may be a lamb, a sheep, a goat, a camel or a cow. The animal must be healthy and conscious.

Indian religions

Hinduism
Main article: Yagna
The Sanskrit Yagna is often translated as "sacrifice" (also "offering, oblation", or more generically as "worship"). It is especially used to describe the offering of ghee (clarified butter), grains, spices, and wood into a fire along with the chanting of sacred mantras. The fire represents Agni, the divine messenger who carries offerings to the Devas. The offerings can represent devotion, aspiration, and seeds of past karma. In Vedic times, Yagna commonly included the sacrifice of milk, ghee, curd, grains, and the soma plant—animal offerings were less common. In modern times, Yagna is often performed at weddings and funerals, and in personal worship. Sacrifice in Hinduism can also refer to personal surrender through acts of inner and outer worship.

Figurative use

Look up sacrifice in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The term is also used figuratively, in the general meaning "to give up something valuable for a higher purpose".

Self-sacrifice
Self-sacrifice, the act of deliberately following a course of action that has a high risk or certainty of suffering, personal loss or death (which could otherwise be avoided), in order to achieve a perceived benefit for self or others, is a powerful theme with a well-established place in many cultures, myths, and societies. Self-sacrifice may also be more broadly defined as selflessness, or the readiness to inflict pain upon yourself to save others; it is this definition which, for example, Leo Tolstoy embraced and espoused.

Sacrifice in games
Sacrifice is also used metaphorically to describe a number of plays in games. Sacrifices, in this sense, are plays that lose pieces or opportunities in order to obtain a more important advantage.
In chess, a number of exchanges are described as sacrifices: these typically involve losing a piece or a pawn to disrupt the opponent's formation and open up an attack. Chess openings that involve sacrifices are usually called "gambits" by chess players; in these gambits, usually a pawn is deliberately lost; gambits that lose a piece are rare and risky.
In contract bridge, a sacrifice is a deliberate higher level bid of a contract which is likely to fail, in the hope that the adverse cost of the failure will still be less than the opponents' likely successful scores would have been.
In baseball, a sacrifice fly is a play in which a batter hits a fly ball deep into the outfield for an out so as to enable a runner on any base, depending on the runner's speed, to score. Likewise, a sacrifice bunt in baseball is one in which a batter deliberately allows himself to be put out while advancing a teammate to second and/or third base, from where he has a greater chance to score. Players who commit either a sacrifice fly or bunt are not charged with a "time at bat," thus the out that they sacrificed is not charged against their batting average.
In some role-playing games certain characters have the ability to give up their hit points for the benefit of their allies. In the game World of Warcraft a player of the paladin class may sacrifice the life of their character in order to provide temporary invulnerability to another player.


(source:wikipedia)

Thursday, September 23

Dhabihah


Dhabihah,


Dhabīḥah (Arabic: ذَبِيْحَة‎; Arabic pronunciation: [ðæˈbiːħɑ], or Zabiha) is, in Islamic law, the prescribed method of ritual slaughter of all animals excluding camels, locusts, fish and most sea-life. This method of slaughtering animals consists of a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides but leaving the spinal cord intact. The precise details of the slaughtering method arise largely from Islamic tradition, rather than direct Quranic mandate. It is used to comply with the conditions stated in the Qur'an:
Forbidden for you are carrion, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that which has been slaughtered while proclaiming the name of any other than God, and one killed by strangling, and one killed with blunt weapons, and one which died by falling, and that which was gored by the horns of some animal, and one eaten by a wild beast, except those whom you slaughter; and that which is slaughtered at the altar and that which is distributed by the throwing of arrows [for an omen]; this is an act of sin.
—– Al-Maidah 5:3

Slaughtering process

The slaughtering process referred to as Ḏabīḥah, is regulated by a set rules that assure health of the animal to be slaughtered and conformance to Islamic religious law, which is derived from the Qur'an and Hadith.


Prerequisites
According to the laws of Ḏabīḥah halal, certain prerequisites must be met before an animal is slaughtered :
The animal must not be a forbidden substance as per the Quran.
The slaughter itself must be done by a sane (mentally competent) adult Muslim. Some Muslims also consider it acceptable to eat the meat slaughtered by "People of the Book" (Arabic: Ahl al-Kitāb, i.e, Christians and Jews‎) as stated in Surah Al-Maa’idah, Ayat 5.
Some Muslims believe the name/praise of God Almighty must be read before sacrificing the animal (as opposed to the name of anything other than God). This is a major split amongst Muslims. Those believing the former do not eat food killed by Christians (as the name of God is not read during the killing), even though it is in direct conflict with Surah Al-Maa'idah, Ayat 5.
Several other conditions are also stated: the knife's blade should be extremely sharp yet not be sharpened in front of the animal, the animal must not be slaughtered in front of other animals , and the animal's eyes and ears must be checked to ensure its health and suitability for slaughter. If it is deemed to be healthy, it is given water to drink (to quench its thirst). The animal should then be stood to face the Qibla 
, and the actual slaughter can begin.

Slaughter


A ritual slaughter in Esna, Egypt in 1926
The act of slaughtering itself is preceded by mentioning the name of God. Invoking the name of God at the moment of slaughtering is sometimes interpreted as acknowledgment of God's right over all things. Furthermore, it is an asking of permission to take the life of the animal to be slaughtered,[dubious – discuss] and endows the slaughterer with a sense of gratitude for God's creation,[dubious – discuss] even prior to partaking in the meat of the animal.
Thus, the slaughter itself is preceded by the words "In the name of Allah (Bismillah). It is not regarded appropriate to use the phrase "Bismillah al Raĥman Al Raĥim" (In the name of God the Beneficent the Merciful) in this situation, because slaughtering is an act of subdual rather than mercy.
According to Islamic tradition, the animal is brought to the place of slaughter and laid down gently so as to not injure it. The blade must be kept hidden until the very last moment while the jugular of the animal is felt. The conventional method used to slaughter the animal involves cutting the large arteries in the neck along with the esophagus and vertebrate trachea with one swipe of an non-serrated blade. Care must be taken that the nervous system is not damaged, as this may cause the animal to die before exsanguination has taken place. While blood is draining, the animal is not handled until it has died. If any other method is used its meat will not be halal.
This method adheres to Islamic law (it ensures the animal does not die by any of the Haraam methods) and helps to effectively drain blood from the animal. This may be important because the consumption of blood itself is forbidden in Islam,[Qur'an 2:173] however it is not clear that bleeding the animal removes all traces of blood from the carcass, so the meat may remain unclean. In fact it is stated by Islamic authorities that it is only necessary to drain 'most' of the blood from the animal .


Controversies

Animal rights
See also: Bans on ritual slaughter
Critics of Ḏabīḥah halal, most notably some animal rights groups, contend that this method of slaughter 'causes severe suffering to animals' compared to when the animal is stunned before slaughter, but no scientific proof has yet to be brought to prove this.
In the United Kingdom, the government funded Farm Animal Welfare Council recommended in June 2003 that conventional Ḏabīḥah (along with Kosher slaughtering) without prior stunning be abolished. The FAWC chairwoman of the time, Dr Judy MacArthur Clark, said 'This is a major incision into the animal and to say that it doesn't suffer is quite ridiculous'. According to Dr Peter Jinman, president of the British Veterinary Association, vets are "looking at what is acceptable in the moral and ethical society we live.
The UK Farm Animal Welfare Council says that the method by which Kosher and Halal meat is produced causes severe suffering to animals and it should be banned immediately. According to FAWC it can take up to two minutes for cattle to bleed to death, thus amounting to animal abuse. Compassion in World Farming also supported the recommendation saying "We believe that the law must be changed to require all animals to be stunned before slaughter." The UK government rejected its recommendations as there was no scientific proof to back these claims.
Various research papers on cattle slaughter collected by Compassion In World Farming mention that "after the throat is cut, large clots can form at the severed ends of the carotid arteries, leading to occlusion of the wound (or “ballooning” as it is known in the slaughtering trade). Nick Cohen wrote in the New Statesman, "Occlusions slow blood loss from the carotids and delay the decline in blood pressure that prevents the suffering brain from blacking out. In one group of calves, 62.5 per cent suffered from ballooning. Even if the slaughterer is a master of his craft and the cut to the neck is clean, blood is carried to the brain by vertebral arteries and it keeps cattle conscious of their pain." 
For the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the Humane Society International, "the animals that are slaughtered according to Kosher and Halal should be securely restrained, particularly the head and neck, before cutting the throat" as "movements (during slaughter) results in a poor cut, bad bleeding, slow loss of consciousness if at all and pain." 
A study done by Professor Wilhelm Schulze et al. at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Germany, with electrodes surgically implanted on the skull of sheep and calves, concluded that "[t]he slaughter in the form of ritual cut is, if carried out properly, painless in sheep and calves according to the EEG recordings and the missing defensive actions." The results were more favourable towards the ritual slaughter method, for which the "EEG zero line – as a certain sign of the expiration of cerebral cortex activity and according to today’s state of knowledge also of consciousness – occurred generally within considerably less time than during the slaughter method after captive bolt stunning." This study is cited by the German Constitutional Court in its permitting of dhabiha slaughtering.[8] The Muslim Council of Great Britain has argued that, during Ḏabīḥah slaughter, "The brain is instantaneously starved of blood and there is no time to start feeling any pain."  Whether or not pain is inflicted in properly carried out slaughterings, the question remains to be answered if pain is inflicted when the slaughter is carried out improperly, how many animals are slaughtered improperly, and whether the meat of these improperly-slaughtered animals ought to be considered halal (or kosher as the case may be) in the first place.



Inducing unconsciousness
Electrocution is frowned upon by many Muslims.
Stunning the animal with a bolt-gun, as is the standard practice in FDA-approved slaughtering houses, may cause instantaneous death. All Muslims regard meat from such a slaughter to be haraam, considering such meat as carrion, the remains of dead animals. In other cases, in some animals with thicker skulls, the bolt-gun has to be administered more than once, causing harm and suffering to the animal, which goes against the dictates of an Islamic slaughter.
It is for these reasons that there are ongoing questions and conversations within the North American Muslim community as to whether meat processed in these slaughter houses meet the standard of 'Halal' (as opposed to Ḏabīḥah). At center of this debate is the doubt as to whether this meat could qualify under the Allowed category of the food of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians). The first consideration being that standard slaughtering methods could cause the animal to die in a way other than slaughter (death through exsanguination), and, secondly, given that the actual slaughter may not be performed by a member of any one of the three Abrahamic religions.
Debates still rage among Muslim jurists and the general Muslim population about whether or not stunning, anaesthetics, or other forms of inducing unconsciousness in the animal prior to slaughter are permissible as per Islam. Several halal food authorities have more recently permitted the use of a recently developed fail-safe system of head-only stunning where the shock is less painful and non-fatal, and where it is possible to reverse the procedure and revive the animal after the shock.


Ḏabīḥah in relation to other religions

Followers of some religions are prohibited from consuming meat slaughtered in the fashion described above. The Rehat Maryada of Sikhism states that in Sikhism, "consumption of any meat killed in an ritualistic manner" is strictly prohibited therefore prohibiting both halal and kosher meat. The Kshatriya of Hinduism are prohibited from consuming meat killed by Muslims.


Non religious methods of slaughter
Many Muslims conclude that non-religious methods of slaughtering practised in many parts of the world contradict Muslim belief, making the meat haraam.


Christianity
Christians in Ethiopia and neighbouring countries still practice ritual slaughter and Muslims from those countries eat meat slaughtered by them.


Judaism
There are many similarities between the laws concerning Ḏabīḥah and kashrut, the Jewish dietary laws. The word dhabiha is linguistically similar to the Hebrew term zevach (sacrifice/slaughter).
Muslims are divided as to whether or not Jewish slaughter suffices as a replacement for Islamic dhabiha halal. Some claim that Jewish slaughter leaves out the Takbeer (saying: God is Great) and changes the method of slaughter, thus, their meat is Haraam. Others claim that the slaughtering processes are similar enough in practice and in theory to render animals slaughtered by Jewish laws as halal.
Jeremiah J Berman, in 1941 wrote: "At the present day in most of the Islamic world Moslems purchase Jewish meat, though they will not buy Christian meat. This is true in Istanbul, Beirut, Jerusalem and Mogador. Contemporary Moslems in these cities consider Jewish slaughtering as fulfilling all the requirements of their law, while they regard the slaughtering performed by Christians as done in contravention thereof. In Yemen ... Jewish meat is not acceptable." Berman also reports that Jewish meat slaughtered in Salonica (Thessaloniki) was not acceptable to Muslims.
To be kosher, i.e. fit for consumption by religious Jews, meat must be slaughtered by a Jewish shohet who holds a licence from a rabbi and has been examined on the laws of shehitah. This alone means that halal meat is forbidden to Jews. The requirements for the shape of the knife are more severe, the knife must be free from a single nick and the method of cutting is exactly defined. In addition there is an inspection of the lungs that mammals must pass (bedikah) that Muslims do not have.







(source:wikipedia)