Talk:Jhatka

My edit
I believe my contribution was entirely relevent, as the section is about the relationship between Sikhism and Jhatka, it is only fair that BOTH sikh views on jhatka are represented. The refs I have are not simply about meat eating, and make CLEAR references to jhatka, therefore are completely relevent. Onetwothreeabc (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This article is about Jhatka. What is Jhatka. Jhatka definition. Whi uses Jhatka. Not a debate place on the merits and demerits of meat eating. Thanks--Sikh-history (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Sikh religion prohibits eating MEAT
, NO matter if its jhatka, or if it's cut with a golden knife.
 * Wikipedia is not a place to propagate POV. Thanks --Sikh-history 06:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

''' Isnt this page just made up? since Sikhs arent allowed to eat meat?? it shouldnt come under the Sikh faith at all - ridiculous.''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.188.208 (talk) 17:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This page is fully referenced, and is not about meat eating, but about Jhatka. It does need more refrences. As fas as I am aware the Sikh Rehat Maryada does not ban meat consumption. Thanks --Sikh- History 19:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Since Jhatka meat arose due to the Sikh belief that Meat should not be sanctified prior to consumption, hence the ban on "ritual slaughter", isn't there at least some credence to the fact that Guru Nanak promoted a vegetarian ideology, but permitted meat consumption as long as a Sikh did not ask God to bless it? I'm not Sikh and don't have much clarification on this, but could someone kindly ask a religious elder or scholar about the details of this, I agree this page isn't about a Vegetarian vs Meat diet, but if vegetarianism and a distaste for meat consumption plays even a small part in the historical basis behind jhatka practices, then those small details need mentioning. something like : "Due to the belief that meat consumption, albeit permitted is not considered the optimal practice, "Guru Nanak?" taught his followers to not sanctify meat before they consumed it, as such the Sikh faith prohibits the consumption of any meat that was sanctified under God, which extends to meat procured by other faiths such as the Jews or Muslims(most popular example) etc." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.75.45.165 (talk) 00:11, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Major work needed
Come on peeps. Let's get this article expanded. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Will try in the next few days. --Sikh-history 06:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

guru gobind sing has allowed sikhs that they can eat meat when he formed khalsa group —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.187.142.4 (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 20:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Wild meat

 * What happens in Hindu areas with meat from wild jungle animals (deer, wild pigs) which have been shot with a gun or a bow-and-arrow? If Hindu village dwellers shoot or trap deer or wild pigs to defend their crops, can they eat the meat? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be dependant on the branch of Hinduism they are from. If teh are Vashnavites then they wouldeat no meat whatsoever. Other sects such as Shivites would have no such problem. Thanks--Sikh-history (talk) 12:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

We need to exand this article
We need to expand this article and add more details. --TerrorNetwork (talk) 10:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Requirement of a open and balanced article
27 August 2009 – Sikh History deleted edit by anonymous. Edit included a balanced view on the usage of Jhatka within the Sikh religion. It was marked as including POV and a non-authoritative reference.

Sikh History stated on 24 July 2009 that “the article is about Jhatka” – which is fine. The editor then goes further “[n]ot a debate place on the merits and demerits of meat eating” – which is contradictory to the editor’s current version. It would be fine to stop at what the physical requirements of Jhatka are and possibly the rationale behind Jhatka. However to mention that Sikhs are “recommended” (dead link – new reference required) goes over and beyond the mere definition of Jhatka. The matter of meat eating is a deep rooted issue within the community today and many in the pro-meat diet camp site Jhatka as their source for legitimacy.

As it reads to a non-Sikh – the article suggests that Jhatka meat is acceptable within the Sikh religion but you obviously have no credible source – one being a dead link and the other a non-baptised member of the wider ethnic Sikh community.

So where I accept that the method of Jhatka exists – you must allow a balanced view on the usage of Jhatka in the Sikh community and in the process remember, it is not an argument whether meat is acceptable or not; rather why would Jhatka mean anything to those who firmly believe that Sikhs should not be privy to a meat diet in the first instance. Hence do not avoid the issue by labeling it as “extremism” and allow for the article to incorporate the position that – within the Sikh religion there are differing views on its legitimacy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.85.129 (talk) 13:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The Article IS Balanced, Stop Trying to Turn It Into a Meat Debate!

 * Please stop trying to change the subject matter with spurious links and changing the article with POV/Blog/Extremist Sikh articles. The article is about the definition of Jhatka, not the merits and demerits of meat. Not about the view of the AKJ. Not about the views of a person at "Project Naad". The links are fine and I do not really care whether the authors of articles are baptised or not. This is wikipedia, not Sikhapedia.Thanks--Sikh- History 14:37, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

27 August 2009
 * It is a rather a shame that you have misunderstood the underlying context of my post.


 * Firstly and foremost; I do not have affiliate myself with the AKJ and until now, had no knowledge of Project Naad. I like you would consider myself a liberal and open Sikh, with the aim that fair and just expression of the Sikh religion exists.  This is not merely to appease a certain group, sect, faction or whatever term is coined to categorise a differing view – rather on any term linked to the Sikh religion and on any medium – there should be a balanced view.


 * In this case if you read my suggestion carefully, at no point do I discuss whether meat is allowed or forbidden. What I want you to reference is the subject matter; that of Jhatka.


 * Indeed you are confused and please do not assume this to be a derogatory statement. You repeatedly state that this article is not a debate about the merits and demerits of meat eating.  Yet the new references at 5 and 6 – (in particular the quotes) discuss the legitimacy of meat eating and at no point at large progress the subject matter – that of Jhatka.  Hence you are inadvertently embroiled in the debate yourself.


 * Therefore the article is in desperate need of primary source evidence.


 * Reference 5 – entirely on the legitimacy of meat eating. (Contradictory)
 * Reference 6 – brief reference to Jhatka but largely on legitimacy of meat eating.
 * Reference 7 – merely states that Jhatka is acceptable. It also implies that in the UK halal is acceptable due to availability and being cost effective.  (It is this reference that I had the most problem with in my previous post)


 * In conclusion; simply referring to the above references does not automatically mean that Jhatka and the Sikh religion go hand in hand. Admittedly my references were poor and hopefully by the weekend I should provide reference to acclaimed literary sources which discuss in depth the origin of Jhatka and the incorporation of the practice into the Sikh religion.  Fairly it will discuss those in favour and, those against the practice which ultimately will lead to a better and transparent article.

Deliberative democracy underpins liberal Sikh thought. Merely turning your back in ignorance does not mean it vanishes from existence. Remember this is Wikipedia and not DictatorialPedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.85.129 (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Again, personal attacks. This time you get a warning.Sorry the references are fine. They are legitimate and are not from blog like sources. This is not the place for debates on meat eating and WP:POV. If you include sources and they do not conform to Wikipedia standards, they will be removed . Thanks --Sikh- History 16:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

--

Nirmal Kaur.

I totally agree with you, anonymous, on this point. Reading through your comments you make a valid point. The Wikipedia article simply states what Jhatka is and that Sikhs see it as an accepted practice. There is nothing that mentions that this form may actually be for example a Vedic practice inadvertently incorporated into Sikhism.

Clearly you state that this is not an issue of meat eating but the PRACTICE OF JHATKA. But unfortunately we live in a world of bigots, who in this case appears to be ‘Sikh History’ who will not accept anything which challenges the practice of Jhatka because that will mean a challenge to his/her way of life.

Then again ‘Sikh History’ cannot make the distinction between a discussion on Jhatka and meat eating. Highlighting this as a personal attack clearly is his/her way of ignoring the issue altogether.

I am really looking forward to your addition to the Wikipedia article. Keep up the good work and ‘clean up’ this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.85.129 (talk) 15:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * This really is too much. Yet another personal attack. What you are proposing is WP:SYNTH. Who is Nirmal Kaur? You are the same IP? Are you talking to yourself? --Sikh- History 17:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Nirmal Kaur

Just to clarify - I work within the same firm as anonymous. He mentioned this particular article and I have accordingly commented on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.3.61.224 (talk) 13:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm you know we can see your IP's? We can even trace them. One is at Kirklees the other sky broadband. best wishes --Sikh- History 22:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out where I work and what internet package I have at home. The point of it - I do not know. I have nothing to hide and I am pretty sure I knew the IP address was at the end of the article and yes - IP addresses can be traced! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.1.250.66 (talk) 18:06, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The point I am making is when people claim to be backing another editors position, a cursory check of IP's will reveal whether they are the same people (using the same computer), which could either we a sockpuppet or WP:CANVASS. Thanks--Sikh- History 06:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Organizations Supporting Jhatka i.e. www.jhatka.org
A Hindu/Sikh Organization named Jhatka Org is fighting for JUSTICE TO JHATKA, it's official website www.jhatka.org explains the whole scenario.Mr. Ravi Ranjan Singh on behalf of the Organization has filed a Petition to Parliament of India, for proper display of Logo of Jhatka or Islamic Halal at every selling point and product. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whyjhatka (talk • contribs) 15:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Marshall Heritage
What is meant by "Marshall Heritage" in section titled Jhatka meat and Sikhs? It is used twice in that section. Bus stop (talk) 10:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it is meant to be "Martial", as in a "warrior tradition". --Sikh- History 14:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * When I search for "Sikh Martial Heritage" Jhatka, I only find two hits. Bus stop (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Jhatka meat offered as Kara Parshad?
Is Jhatka meat offered as Kara Parshad at the Gurudwara during Vaisakhi and shouldn't be refused? From what I know, consuming meat is not prohibited, but nor is it glorified.. and certainly not allowed in Gurudwaras/langar,I've never seen eggs/meat when I go to langar! In fact, in all Dharmic religions, meat eating is not really the best thing to be doing.. Lilaac (talk) 17:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this is a reference to Hazoor Sahib, but no reference has been provided. I know of several Gurudwara's outsise Punjab that do this. Those that are run by Hazoori Sikhs and Nihang based, however, if no refrennce is found, I would be inclined to take it out. In relation to "Dharmic" religions, Sikhism is sometime classified in that, but I do not think the term is accurate, due to references in Sikhism to Semitic faiths too. Thanks --Sikh- History 18:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

There is no ritual involved in Jewish slaughter. The term "ritual slaughter" is misleading. And this article is misleading in its present state
as opposed to Jewish slaughter (shechita) or Islamic slaughter (dhabihah) in which the animal is killed by ritually slicing the throat

As far as Jewish slaughter is concerned, the way the throat is cut is regulated in great detail in Jewish law. But there is no ritual involved. The word ritual means that the procedures used (using a sharp knife, testing the knife for abscence of nicks, cut made in the right place, knife does not dig into the flesh, no delay in slaughtering once commenced) have been complied with. The slaugheter of the animal is to make it fit for food for consumption by religious Jews and others. Nothing else. See

RPSM (talk) 10:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * By fit for consumption, does that mean some sort of purification of the meat? Could you expand on this? Thanks --<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue;font-size:16px">Sikh- <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">History 11:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * There's no such thing as meat (or food) being "purified" in Jewish practice. It is either fit to eat (=what "kosher" means) or it is not (either because it is not an appropriate thing to eat [such as dogs, rabbits, etc.], or because someone messed up the processing [contaminated it with something dead or otherwise inappropriate]). What RPSM means when he says "make it fit" is just make sure it doesn't get contaminated or improperly slaughtered, just as any atheist/secular meat producer would make meat fit by doing the same thing at a regular slaughterhouse-to-grocery chain. — al-Shimoni  (talk) 23:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Petition by www.jhatka.org
I'm not sure what this subsection is about and if it belongs in this article. It should be proved relevant to the general article about Jhatka, separated into either it's own article or as part of a more general article (maybe about Historical Petitions to Jhatka???) or removed. (Right now, it sounds like WP:SOAP). If there are enough sources, an "news" article could be written about allegations that Halal and Jhatka are not properly observed by traders in India, so a strict law for separate slaughtering, marketing and serving should be enacted in India.

I did find three references to jhatka.org in Comparison of Islamic and Jewish dietary laws and I'm sure it doesn't belong there, unless someone can prove a connection between Islamic and Jewish dietary laws and a particular petition on Sikh dietary laws. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 13:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is WP:SOAP so much in that it follows on from a historical trend by Akali Sikhs for the recognition of Jhatka. I think the trust of the article seems to be that Sikhs do not believe in any sort of purification killings of such a nature, albeit in the name of God. I will try and expand to include some history. Thanks--<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue;font-size:16px">Sikh- <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">History 13:31, 28 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I have a question. In the first sentence of the first section, the article states that "Jhatka is the Sikh method of killing an animal." In the first sentence of the second section, the article states "those Hindus who eat meat prescribe jhatka meat."


 * Is the article trying to say that Jhatka is both a Sikh and a Hindu practice? For Sikhs, the article cites the Khalsa Code of Conduct. Is there a similar basis for Hinduism? The article seems to be devoting roughly equal space to each one.


 * Or was it developed by the Sikhs and borrowed by the Hindus? Is the article trying to say that "most Hindus who eat meat prefer (as opposed to prescribe) jhatka meat." If this is the case, I would move the first paragraph of the first section up to the lead to indicate the jhatka is primarily a Sikh practice. (And change the first section's heading to something like "Overview".)


 * Also, the article seems to be concentrating on what jhatka is not and a comparison between Sikhs and Hindus. That's what I meant about soapbox. Surely jhatka is more than just that. What are the reasons behind jhatka (moral symbolism?, health?); what is the word's etymology?


 * For example, can you give us a full definition (beyond the actual method) of what jhatka is and why it's important? Is it a Sikh (or Sikh/Hindu) practice, custom, religious observance or what? What proportion of Sikhs practice jhatka; what proportion of Hindus? What about some history of jhatka; when did these differences or similarities begin? (Maybe it's just a reaction against the Halal laws???) See Kashrut and/or Dhabihah for ideas on how to structure the jhatka article. Remember that 98% of your readers won't know Sikhism as well as you do (if at all) and must have the importance of jhatka explained in detail. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 18:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. Jhatka literally means one blow. It is a martial technique (similar to that of the Samurai with a sword). Now Jhatka can be used as part of a ritual sacrifice. Hindu's use it for something called Bali Sacrifice. Sikhs, are against any sort of ritual purification or such sacrifice, hence use Jhatka as purely a killing method. There are however, a small minority of Sikhs who use Jhatka as part of a ritual sacrifice as well ( and these traditions go back to Hinduism). I can see how the article needs to go a bit wider. Thanks --<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue;font-size:16px">Sikh- <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">History 07:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes. The primary thing that everyone should keep in mind for a stub article is why is the subject important. I think you are saying that Jhatka started as a ritual practice in Hindu Bali Sacrifice and Sikhs merely object to the connatation of ritual. By the way, is jhatka a sacrifice (which generally means an offering to God) or slaughter (killing animals for day-to-day human consumption, like Shechita and Dhabihah)?


 * Editors should picture themselves as average readers coming upon the subject for the first time. What would someone who doesn't know anything about jhatka mainly want to know first when reading the article? (Even material at this basic level should by verified by reliable sources.) --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely correct on most points, however, Jhatka did not start as Hindu Ritual sacrifice. It is one of the techniques used for Hindu ritual sacrifice. Hindu's use a Siphya (spike), to pierce the heart and asphyxiation as part of Bali. Jhatka is one of a number of sword strokes used by Sikhs and before that Kshatriya Hindu warrior as part of Shastarvidya (Indian Martial arts). So Jhatka is simply a martial technique. Put into the context of this article, Sikhs see it as a way of killing. Hindu's use it as part of a sacrifice ritual, but Jhatka by itself would not connertate a Hindu ritual. Confused, well I am too :). In this respect, wrongly or rightly a Sikh see's Sechita,Dhabihah and Bali as a sacrifice. Thanks--<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue;font-size:16px">Sikh- <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">History 17:03, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I would add another sentence to the lead. Something like "Most (or many or a substantial minority of) Hindus (or Hindus and Sikhs or residents of India) try to eat only jhatka (or jhatka meat)". If jhatka is only used an adjective then "jhatka meat" is correct but someone should go through the article rectifying the noun use. You should also change the article title to "Jhatka meat" (see WP:NOUN) with a redirect from "Jhatka". If jhatka can be used as a noun, the first sentence of the lead should be changed, eliminated the first "meat" immediately after "Jhatka or Chatka". --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 19:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Edits by IP 81.14.2.106
Edits by the Ip above have been reverted for two reasons:
 * 1) WP:NOTRELIABLE - sources do not have ISBN numbers and also the websites contradict what most Sikh websites state.
 * 2) WP:SYNTHESIS - there appears to be an attempt to blur Sikhism with Kabir Panthi.
 * Thanks <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue;font-size:16px">S <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:goldenrod;font-size:16px">H 18:45, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

kosher is slow?
why is kosher described in this article as "ritualistically slow slaughter?" what part of the slaughter is slow? if its done slow, the animal is not kosher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unchartered (talk • contribs) 11:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Christians and jhatka
The claim that most Christians prefer jhatka as method of slaughter sounds like nonsense. (Beheading a pig or bull with a single axe strike -- you've got to be kidding.) The cited source, namely the "Medical, Municipal and Plastic Waste Management Handbook" is not a credible source for such a claim by any stretch of the imagination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.234.224.230 (talk) 02:49, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Removal of images and video
Relevant discussion here

Animal rights topic categories
See the discussion on the topic of this article at the talk page of related article,. Rasnaboy (talk) 15:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic Communal Political Article
This article cites no religious scripture from either Hinduism or Sikhism, which can authenticate whether this type of meat is promoted in those two religions or not. It cites paragraphs from books that are written as opinions only. They are not backed by any religious scripture as well. Given that Islam permits only non-Jhatka meat (Halaal meat), this article has germinated out of creating communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian subcontinent. The motivation of this article is purely communal and political, bereft of any knowledge with reliable sources. Explaining what Jhatka meat is, is fine. But the portions which claim that it is mandatory in Hinduism or Sikhism, should be removed. --Eklavya111 (talk) 23:30, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Kutha meat with Jhatka
Complimentary concepts of slaughter. Better for the reader if both are discussed at one page. Venkat TL (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes as per nom. Sajaypal007 (talk) 18:38, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes - because it seems that kutha is just the antithesis of jhatka, so like non-halal versus halal or non-kosher versus kosher. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * no they are opposing types of meats that have no historical association, one is consumed by Sikhs, the other by Muslims, Hindus Christians.. etc Kutha meat may be mentioned and linked in this article but there is no need to merge meats that are the antithesis of each other, they have literally nothing to do with each other than the fact that Sikhs are forbidden from eating "kutha" meat AKA halal meat and Muslims cannot eat any other meat than halal, meaning jhatka meat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SabhSaaab (talk • contribs) 17:47, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You clearly fail to understand both concepts, because kutha is a much broader concept than just halal, and vice versa: halal is in no way defined with respect to Sikhism. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * They have been blocked for socking. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, mirror images. It's like Dhabihah and non-Halal meat. --StellarNerd (talk) 20:02, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

"Dietary avoidance out of politeness" section should be moved to Diet in Sikhism article
This article is about Jhatka meat. Dietary behaviour of Sikhs should be present in Diet in Sikhism article rather than here. If anybody has objection to it, we can discuss it here otherwise will make the required changes after few days. Jasksingh (talk) 08:00, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:54, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Jhatka.jpg