Visit the new AsenaTv Website

https://asenatv.com

ፖሊቲካን ሃይማኖትን- ናይ ኤርትራ ቅልውላው- Eritrean Opposition Crisis – ብፍስሃ ናይር

  ፖሊቲካን ሃይማኖትን- ናይ ኤርትራ ቅልውላው- Eritrean Opposition Crisis                                                      ብፍስሃ ናይር                                  " Build A Wall between State and Religion"                                                                      Thomas Jefferson                       ኣብ ታሪኽ ኤርትራ እንተረኤና

  ፖሊቲካን ሃይማኖትን- ናይ ኤርትራ ቅልውላው- Eritrean Opposition Crisis

                                                     ብፍስሃ ናይር

 

                               ” Build A Wall between State and Religion”

                           

                                         Thomas Jefferson

                     

ኣብ ታሪኽ ኤርትራ እንተረኤና ካብ ፖሊካዊ ቃልሲ ክሳብ ብረታዊ ቃልሲ ቀጺሉ ድማ ድሕሪ ናጽነት ኤርትራ እቲ ቀንዲ ምንጪ ክሳብ ሕጂ እውን ክፍታሕ ዘይተኻእለ ፖሊቲካዊ ምሕደራን ሃይማኖትን ፈሊኻ ዘይምርኣይ ኢዩ፣ምንጪ ናይ ግርጭት ኣብ ኤርትራ ኣብ ሃገራዊ መንነት ወይ ድማ ካብ ስነ-ሓሳብ ዝመንጨወ ዘይኮነስ ኣብ ትሕቲ ሃገራዊ መንነታት ከም ሃይማኖት፣ ዓለት ቋንቋ፣ ኣውራጃ ኢዩ፣ እቲ ቀንዲ መሃንድስ ናይዚ መንነታት እቲ ኣብ ኤርትራ ነጊሱ ዘሎ ስርዓት ውልቀ መላኺ ኢሳያስ ኢዩ፡ ስዒቡ ድማ እቲ ሎሚ ኣብ ደንበ ተቃውሞ ዝርኤ ዘሎ ኣሰዃኹዓ ኣብ ፖሊቲካዊ ይኹን በርገሳዊ ኣብ ሃገራዊ መንነት ዘይኮነ ኣብ ሃይማኖታውን፣ብሄራውን፣ ኣውራጃዉን ዝተወደበ ኢዩ፡፤ ልክዕ ኢዩ ኣብ ውሽጢ ኤርትራዊ መንነት ወይ ሃገረ ኤርትራ ብዙሓት ሕዝብታትን ቋንቋታትን ሃይማኖትን ከምዘሎ ፍሉጥ ኢዩ፣ እቲ ተሳኢኑ ዘሎ ጥበብን ኣፍልጦን ነዚ መንንታት እዚ ከመይ ተመሓድሮ እዪ። እቶም ፖሊቲካ ፈሊጣውያን ኤርትራ ነዚ መንንታት እዚ እናመዝመዙ ሕዝቢ ኣብ ሓድሕዱ እምነት ከይሕድርን ብሓንሳብ ብሰላም ዝነብረሉ ክንዲ ዘናዲ ኣብ ናይ ሓድሕድ ጽልእን ባእስን ይኣቱ እታ ሃገር ከም ሃገር ዘይኮነትስ ናይ ውግእ ጎይቶት/ War-Lords/ ዝዕንድሩላ ቦታ ኮይና ትተርፍ፣ እዚ ከይከውን እዩ ድማ ኣህጉራዊ ማሕበረ ሰብ ኣብዚ ግዜዚ ኣብ ከም ኤርትራ ዝኣመሰላ ሃገራት ዘገድሶም ደሞክራስያዊ ስርዓት ንምእትታው ዘይኮነስ ብዝኾነ ኣገባብ ኣብታ ሃገር ጸጥታን ሰላምን/ stability and security/ ንኦም ብዘገልግል ከመሓድር ዝኽእል ሓይሊ ዝመርጹ።

ሎሚ ኣብዚ መበል 21 ዘመን ኣብ ኤርትራዊ ማሕበራዊ መራኸቢ ብዙሓን ገኒኑ ዝርከብ ናይ ቃላት ውግእ ዝሕፍርን ዘሕንኽን ኣብ ሓቅነትን ወድዕነትን ኤርትራን ሕዝባን ኣተሓሳስባን እምነታትን ዘየሎ ካብ ጸቢብ ኣተሓሳስባ ውልቀ ሰባት ዝምንጩ ሓደገኛን ሰራምን ጸረ-ሰላምን ደምክራስያን ኣብ ኤርትራ ኢዩ። ብወገን ዓለም- ለኸ እንተረኤና እውን ፣ ሕሉፍ – ኢስላማውያንን ፣ሕሉፍ የማናውያን ሃገራውያን ኣብ ምዕራባውያን ሃገራት ንርኢ ኣሎና ክሊቲኦም ድማ ዕላማኦም ሓደ ኢዩ፡፤

ሕሉፍ ኢስላማውያን ይኹኑ  ሕሉፍ-ሃገራውያን ክልቲኦም ተጻረርቲ ክነሶም ናይ ሓባር ዕላማኦም ግን ኣንጻር ደሞክራስያን ኣብ ዓለም ደሞክራስያዊ ስርዓታት ንምፍራስን፣ ብኣንጻሩ ምልክነት ንምንጋስ ኢዩ፡፤ ዕላማ ናይ ኤርትራ ኣግኣዝያውያንን ናይ ኤርትራ ኢስላማውያንን እውን ዕላማኦም ንመስርሕ ደሞክራስያን ኣብ ኤርትራ ሰላምን ደሞክራስያን ከይህሉ ንምልክነት ናይ ሓደ- ውልቀ ኣብ ሃይማኖትን ዓለታትን ዝተመስረት ምሕደራ ኣብ ኤርትራ ንኽህሉ ዝንቀሳቀሱ ባእታት ኢዮም።

ሎሚ እቶም የማናውያን ሃገራውያን ኣብ ምዕራባውያን ሃገራት ዝኽተልዎ ስትራተጂ እቲ ኩሉ ፖሊቲካውን ቁጠባውን ማሕበራውን ጸገማት ዝመጽእ ዘሎ በዞም ስደተኛታትን ኢስላምን  ኢዩ ኢሎም ኣንጻሮም ይንቀሳቀሱ። ብወገን በቶም ኣግኣዝያንን ሕሉፍ- ኢስላማውያን ኤርትራውያን ዝካየድ ዘሎ ምንቅቃሳት እውን፣ ኣብ ኤርትራ ዘሎ ፖሊቲካዊ ፣ቁጠባዊ ፣ ማሕበራዊ ጸገማት ብሰንኪ ምሕደራ ክርስትያን ኢዩ ይብሉ፣ እቶም  ኣግኣዝያን ድማ  ናይ ኤርትራ ጸገም ኢስላማውያን ኢዮም፣ ካብ ኤርትራ ክወጹ ኣለዎም ይብሉ፣ ክልቲኦም ኣግኣዝያውያንን ይኹኑ ኢስላማውያን ኣብ ኤርትራ ዕልመናዊ መንግስቲ ዘይኮነ ናይ ሃይምኖት መንግስቲ ክተኽሉ ኢዩ ናይ ርሑቅ ዕላማኦም።ኣብ ታሪኽ ከምዝረኤናዮ እዚ ክልተ እምነታት ኣብ ምዕባለ ሕብረተ-ሰብ ዓለም ኣሉታውን ኣዋንታውን ግደ ነርዎን ኣለዎን፣ ኣብ ታሪኽ ክርስትናዊ ኣተሓሳስባ ዘለወን ሃገራት በብግዜኡ ብዙሕ ውግኣትን ግርጭታትን ተኻዪዱ ኢዩ፣ ንኣብነት እቲ ካብ 1618-1648 ኣብ መንጎ ካቶሊካውያንን፣ ፕሮተስታንትን ዝተኻየደ ክሳብ ሕጂ እውን ኣሰሩ ዝርኤ ዘሎ ሓደ ምስክር ሃይሞኖት ክሳብ ክንደይ ኣብ ፖሊቲካዊ ሕይወት ኣትዩ ከምዝነበረን፣ እዚ ድማ ድሕሪ ብዙሕ ቃልስን ጻዕርታትን ሃይምኖት ካብ መንግስትን ፖሊቲካን ክፍለ ከምዘለዎ፣ሎሚ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓለም፣ዝመሓደሩሉ ኣገባብ ምሕደራ ኢዩ።

ኣብተን ዓረባውን ኢስላማውን ሃገራት ግን ገና ኣብዚ ደረጃ እዚ ሰለዘይተበጽሔ ኣብዚ መበል 21 ዘመን ኣብ ውግእ ሓድሕድ- ሱኒ ኣንጻር ሺዓ ይካየድ ኣሎ፣ ሕሉፍ ሓሊፉ ድማ ገለ ሓይልታት ኣብቲ ናይ መበል 16 ክፍለ ዘመን ናይ ካሊፋታት ምሕደራ ክምለሱ ዝደልዩ ሓይልታት ኢስልምና ሎሚ ንመላእ ዓለም ኣብ ኢስላምና ንምቅያር ዝቃለሱ ( ISIL-ISIS)ኣለዉ፡፤ ገለ ፈለጣትን መራሕትን ሃይማኖት ኢስልምናን ሃገራትን ደሞክራስያን ዕልማናዊ መንግስታት ኣንጻር ሃይሞኖት ኢስልምናን ኣተሓሳስባን ሰለዝኾና፣ ከምዚ ዓይነት ምሕደራ በቶም ኣብ ኢስልምና ዝኣምኑ ሕዝብታት ቅቡል ጥራሕ ዘይኮነ ሓራም- ገበን እውን ኢዩ ዝብሉ ኣለዉ። ዕልመናዊ መንግስቲ ማለት ግን ኣንጻር እምነታት ዘይኮነስ፣ እምነትን፣ መንግስትን ዝፈሊ፣ ኣብ ናጽነት ናይ እምነታት ኢድ ዘየኤቱ ስርዓታት ምሕደራ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓለምና ዝኽተልኦ ዕልመናዊ  ምሕደራ ኢዩ።

 

ሎሚ ኣብዚ መበል 21 ዘመን ኣብ ዝሓላፈ ዘመን ናይ ካሊፋታት ክንምለስ ኣሎና ደሞክራስያን ሰብኣዊ መሰላትን ብሕጊ ኢስልምና ክኸውን ኣለዎ፣ ሃይማኖትን መንግስትን ክፍለ የብሉን ዝብሉ ኣብ ደንበ ተቃውሞ ኤርትራ ፖሊቲካውን በርገሳውን ማሕበራት ኣለዉ። ኣብ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓረብን ኣብ ኢስልምና ዝኣምና ሃገራትን መሰል ውልቀ-ሰብ፣ ይኹን ሰብኣዊ መስላት ብሓፈሻ ቅቡል ኣይኮነን፣ እሞ እንታይ ኢዩ እቲ ጸገም ሃይምኖት ኢስልምናዶ ደሞክራስያዊ ፍልስፍና፣ ኣብ ኤርትራኸ ብኸምዚ ኣረዳድኣ ኣብ መንጎ መንግስትን ሃይማኖትን ኣይፍለን ዝብልን ክፍለ ኣለዎ ዝብልን ብሓንሳብ ከናብር ይኽእልዶ፣ እስከ ምሁራትና ካብ ክልቲኡ ሸነኽ ብዛዕባዚ ኣረኣእያ አጽንዑልና

 

ኣብ ታሪኽ ከምዝረኤናዮ እዚ ክልተ እምነታት ኣብ ምዕባለ ሕብረተ-ሰብ ዓለም ኣሉታውን ኣዋንታውን ግደ ነርዎን ኣለዎን፣ ኣብ ታሪኽ ክርስትናዊ ኣተሓሳስባ ዘለወን ሃገራት በብግዜኡ ብዙሕ ውግኣትን ግርጭታትን ተኻዪዱ ኢዩ፣ ንኣብነት እቲ ካብ 1618-1648 ኣብ መንጎ ካቶሊካውያንን፣ ፕሮተስታንትን ዝተኻየደ ክሳብ ሕጂ እውን ኣሰሩ ዝርኤ ዘሎ ሓደ ምስክር ሃይሞኖት ክሳብ ክንደይ ኣብ ፖሊቲካዊ ሕይወት ኣትዩ ከምዝነበረን፣ እዚ ድማ ድሕሪ ብዙሕ ቃልስን ጻዕርታትን ሃይምኖት ካብ መንግስትን ፖሊቲካን ክፍለ ከምዘለዎ፣ሎሚ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓለም፣ዝመሓደሩሉ ኣገባብ ምሕደራ ኢዩ፣ ኣብተን ዓረባውን ኢስላማውን ሃገራት ግን ገና ኣብዚ ደርጃ እዚ ሰለዘይተበጽሔ ኣብዚ መበል 21 ዘመን ኣብ ውግእ ሓድሕድ- ሱኒ ኣንጻር ሺዓ ይካየድ ኣሎ፣ ሕሉፍ ሓሊፉ ድማ ገለ ሓይልታት ኣብቲ ናይ መበል 16 ክፍለ ዘመን ናይ ካሊፋታት ምሕደራ ክምለሱ ዝደልዩ ሓይልታት ኢስልምና ሎሚ ንመላእ ዓለም ኣብ ኢስላምና ንምቅያር ዝቃለሱ ( ISIL-ISIS)ኣለዉ፡፤ ገለ ፈለጣትን መራሕትን ሃይማኖት ኢስልምናን ሃገራትን ደሞክራስያን ዕልማናዊ መንግስታት ኣንጻር ሃይሞኖት ኢስልምናን ኣተሓሳስባን ሰለዝኾና፣ ከምዚ ዓይነት ምሕደራ በቶም ኣብ ኢስልምና ዝኣምኑ ሕዝብታት ቅቡል ጥራሕ ዘይኮነ ሓራም- ገበን እውን ኢዩ ዝብሉ ኣለዉ። ዕልመናዊ መንግስቲ ማለት ግን ኣንጻር እምነታት ዘይኮነስ፣ እምነትን፣ መንግስትን ዝፈሊ፣ ኣብ ናጽነት ናይ እምነታት ኢድ ዘየኤቱ ስርዓታት ምሕደራ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓለምና ዝኽተልኦ ዓለማዊ ምሕደራ ኢዩ።

 

ሎሚ ኣብዚ መበል 21 ዘመን ኣብ ዝሓላፈ ዘመን ናይ ካሊፋታት ክንምለስ ኣሎና ደሞክራስያን ሰብኣዊ መሰላትን ብሕጊ ኢስልምና ክኸውን ኣለዎ፣ ሃይማኖትን መንግስትን ክፍለ የብሉን ዝብሉ ኣብ ደንበ ተቃውሞ ኤርትራ ፖሊቲካውን በርገሳውን ማሕበራት ኣለዉ። ኣብ ዝበዝሓ ሃገራት ዓረብን ኣብ ኢስልምና ዝኣምና ሃገራትን መሰል ውልቀ-ሰብ፣ ይኹን ሰብኣዊ መስላት ብሓፈሻ ቅቡል ኣይኮነን፣ እሞ እንታይ ኢዩ እቲ ጸገም ሃይምኖት ኢስልምናዶ ክርስትና ደሞክራስያዊ ፍልስፍና፣ ኣብ ኤርትራኸ ብኸምዚ ኣረዳድኣ ኣብ መንጎ መንግስትን ሃይማኖትን ኣይፍለን ዝብል ኣምር ኣብተን ፖሊቲካዊ ውድባት ኣብ ደንበ ተቃውሞ ደለይቲ ደሞክራስያዊ ለውጢ ይርከቡ።

 

ትፈልጥዎዶ………….ቅድሚ ሃይማኖት፣ ሰብኣውነት ኢዩ ዝቅድም፣ ንሕና ደቂ /ሰባት ክሳብ ክንደይ ኢና ምቆምያታት እምነታት ሰብኣዊ መሰላትን፣ ኣህጉራዊ ውዕል ብዛዕባ ቁጠባውን ማሕበራውን ባህላውን መሰላት፣ ከምኡ ድማ ኣህጉራዊ ውዕል ብዛዕባ ሲቪላውን ፖሊቲካውን መሰላት ማእከል ገርና ምስ ሰብ ንነበር ኢዩ እቲ ስኢናዮ ዘሎና ኣፍልጦን፣

 

ኩልና ደቂ ሰባት ሓራ ኮና ማዕረ ክብርን መሰልን ዘሎና ኢና፣ ኣእምሮን ሕልናን ዝተዓደልና ብምዃና ድማ ኣብ ነንሕድሕድና ብመንፈሳዊ ሕውነት ክንቀራረብን ክንነበርን ንኸእለሉ ጥበብ ፍልጠትን ንድለ እምበር ኣነባ ካብዚ ብሔር …………ኣነባ ቋንቋይ ካብ ናትካ ይስልጥን……………. ናተይ ሃይማኖት ኢዩ ንመንግስተ ሰማይ ዘእቱ……………………እዚ ኹሉ ጃህራ ኣብዛ እነነብረላ ፕላነት ዓለምና ምትፍናንን ጽልእን እንተዘኮይኑ ምንም ረብሓ የብሉን፣  ናይ ወዲ ሰብ እምነት ብሕታዊ ኮይኑ፣ ኩልና ብሰላም ክንነብር ስራሕናን ምስ ሰብ ዝምድናናን ሰብኣውነት/ Humanity ማእከል ዝገብረ ክኸውን ኣለዎ እምበር ኣብ ንሕናን ……ንሳቶምን ኣብ ዝብል መርገጽ ክህሉ የብሉን።

 

Separating Religion and State- english version

 

 

 

The relationship between the state and religion, between civil and religious authorities, and between secular and sacred codes of law will be the main issue of a constitution – making in post -dictatorship Eritrea.

 

What is important function of a constitution is to ensure peace and justice between all members of Eritrean diversity marked by deep religious divisions. Yet, in many parts of the world, the relationship between the state and religion continues to be one of the most difficult issues for constitution-builders to resolve. The specific problems are unique to each case, but certain generalities often emerge.

 

In Eritrea religion has associated with national identity or with the foundational values of the community. Public opinion may be expressed through parties that are motivated by, or identified with, a particular religion, for example the present religious affiliated political organisation  in the opposition camp are good examples.

 

Can the Eritrean situations give rise to demands for religions to be given specific constitutional status? There might be religious minorities who seek special protections, including the right to have personal matters governed by their own religious law, resulting in an asymmetrical constitutional framework. Such moves towards the constitutionalisation of religion are likely to be opposed by those who believe that religion is essentially a private matter of conscience or that differences are best accommodated by combining universal freedom of religion with symbolic recognition of the role of one or more religions in social and cultural life, to the declaration of the secular (non-religious) basis of the state.

 

In practice, it can be difficult to achieve agreement or compromise on these questions in the design of a constitutional text, in part because the issues involved concern matters of personal identity and deeply held principles that are not easily negotiated. Therefore, the question of whether and how religion should be incorporated—or, conversely, whether the state should be  secular —should be carefully and contextually considered with reference to prevailing political, historical and cultural circumstances in Eritrea.

 

The Eritrean Forces for democratic change must discuss the various forms of religion–state relations that are possible in the development of democratic constitutions, and articulate circumstances and contexts in which constitution-makers may have to confront a demand for religion. Discussions concerned with religion -state relations in Eritrea need separation of state and religion, or constitutional models being secular and guaranteeing religious freedom.

 

Constitutional guarantees of religious freedom

 

Religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God. No one has the right to enforce someone to be a Christian or Muslim or any other. The act of the Eritrean people should declare that the state should not make laws prohibiting or allowing the establishment of religion as today’s Eritrea under the dictatorship.

The past state- religion relation

 

Throughout history, many states have been based on a close alignment of religious and civil authorities, and almost every pre-modern society has based its understanding of legitimate political authority on divine origins. Emperor worship, combining theocracy with absolute monarchy, was a feature of ancient China, Egypt and Japan and many African and Arab countries. The city states of Greco-Roman antiquity had their own civic deities, priesthoods and shrines, and the institutions of religion were regarded as an integral part of the constitution of the state.

 

Modern state – religion relations

 

Today, religious freedom and freedom from religious coercion are universally recognized principles of  democracy. No state can today be regarded as free unless it guarantees freedom of religious belief and practice, including the freedom of religious minorities and of dissenters.

 

This historical recognition of religious freedom as an international norm— together with the recognition of other rights such as freedom of expression, due process of law and freedom from discrimination—establishes certain baselines in the constitutional relationship between the state and religion. A liberal democratic state cannot (a) forbid peaceful religious expression so long as this does not disturb public order or infringe the rights of others; (b) enforce unity or compliance in matters of religious faith or practice; or (c) punish or discriminate against people on account of their religious beliefs or identity. These baselines necessarily provide for some autonomy and pluralism in matters of religion, excluding both the repression of religion by the state (state atheism) and state compulsion in religious matters (state theocracy). Nevertheless, they leave a wide latitude for different modes of religion–state relations at the constitutional level, which are discussed in the following sections.

 

Continues………………………..

 

ዝተወከስክዎም ጽሑፋት

  1. Universal Human Rights/ UN Dokuments
  2. International Conventions
  3. EGDI, Learning in Development Co-operation
  4. EGDI, Dialogue in Pursuit of Development
  5. Terry Eagleton, The Idea of Culture
  6. Thomas Hammerberg, Social Rättvisa

 

 

 

 

 

 

aseye.asena@gmail.com

Review overview
5 COMMENTS
  • Hagos May 5, 2018

    ዘይትሕለፍ ጥቕሲ ፤

    “ትፈልጥዎ ‘ዶ …………. ቅድሚ ሃይማኖት ፣ ሰብኣውነት ኢዩ ዝቅድም ፣ … “

  • Gezae May 5, 2018

    Extremist is embedded in most religions. All religious fanatics (even other than Islam) take their inspiration from strict and correct interpretation of their texts and teachings. It is the nature of religion – it requires submission towards inaccurate and unproven theories without using rational thought..

    The problem is then the religions themselves. In my experience all fanatics are more violent and less tolerant than others. Thus some followers are too stupid and clueless. They are easily fooled by them to destroy their identities, by using religion. Because as we know fanaticism often appears as an invariable that transcends historical events, or even, in racist vein, a characteristic of fantastical entities such as “the Arab mind”. Take care to note that this has happened in other parts of the world, wherethe perpetrators would have been different but the reasons basically the same

  • k.tewolde May 5, 2018

    “Religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God. No one has the right to enforce someone to be a Christian or Muslim or any other”……this simple statement was vocalized in many languages and dialects all over the world for generations,yet it is the most violated principle by those who are in power or fighting for power.

    • Gezae May 6, 2018

      Let me tell a real happening when I was very young in Asmara
      My Mom and my youngest sister went to ShuQ to buy tamoto, onion, oil, and spinach. In their back home at very near the Hjji Gonafer building, Edaga Harage my mom went to buy LIKAY. On her way she saw a boucher shop and she bought a quarter Kg of meat. The day I remember was Wednesday, most of our parent members, my grandpa, grandma, my mom herself and all my sisters did not eat meat product. My dad, my four brothers including me ate that meat souce-pasta that evening . I recall my dad said Oh a good dinner and my mom was glad.
      The other day, I think it was Saturday I and my mom went to ShuQ, on our way back home my mom wanted to buy meat and she steped to that meat shop I wailed/yelled mom! mom! where are you heading? answered to buy meat. Angrly! I added what are you saying! where? Again she softly responded me, here. You do not see/look the sign and the man with his turban. Then, my mom melted down and aberrantly said WAY DEQEY-HJIS ABOKA ENTAY KBL IYU. KULUKUM MAY DIGAM KTSETYU IKUM. SENBET DIMA KEQEBLEKUM EYE BELET. Again I asked her WHY mom? because the meat you ate on Wednesday evening was from here. When we get home I will tell your grandpa to bring you MAY DIGAM from the church.
      Then, soon when we reached home she told every thing to my grandpa. Do you know what my grandpa responded to her. Why are you to much warry! if a Muslim or a Christian slaughters an animal for meat, and even it is not known whether he mentioned the name of God/Allaah over it or not, it is permissible to eat from it, only the one who eats it should say or call the name of God /Allaah. Period. There is not Moslem meat or Christian or Jews meat. And there is not different Moslem or Christian God/Allah.
      Furtherly, my grandpa narrated- I was for two year and nine months in Tripoli Libya. As a christian stationed in a muslim country I buy “normal” meat from the super market as I consider (or at the very least hope) it to be healthy and pure meat, i.e. permissible/halal. Sometimes some people bring meat to us, and we do not know whether they mentioned the name of God/Allaah over it or not; I mention the name of God/Allaah over it and eat/ate. Based on the above, whoever travels to a non-Christian country where most of those who slaughter meat are Moslim or Jews, it is permissible to eat their meat, unless you know that they stun the animals or mention over them the name of someone other than God/Allah.

      Continue…….

      • Gezae May 6, 2018

        From that time on as far as I’m concerned I trust the fact I buy from the super-market, because regulations and nation-wide testing is a thing, thank God. I wouldn’t mind buying my meat from a butcher though, as local butchers usually have much better and healthier meat, but I would be hard pressed to trust a butcher blindly. If I know the person behind it or there are regulations in place, then I feel more secure in the meat I purchase. So, if a food meets these criteria, then it is considered acceptable to eat. Thus permissible/Halal encompasses more than just meat, or even the type of meat eaten, although it is the most discussed type of product consumed.
        With respect to meat, the term Halal means “prepared appropriately for human consumption. The primary reason they do this is because they believe that God has instructed them to do so. There are other explanations from a scientific perspective (e.g. blood is probably unhealthy, pork is probably unhealthy), but even if people didn’t understand why it was this way, they’d do it out of obedience and trust in God.
        When slaughtering animals, a Christian or Muslim I believe must say besmAb or bismillāh (in the name of God/Allāh) – The jugular veins, carotid arteries, trachea and oesophagus are severed with a single swipe using a sharp, non-serrated knife. The spinal cord and neck vertebrae remain intact. This is the safest, most painless method of animal slaughter. It allows most of the blood to exit the animal immediately, rendering the meat hygienic by giving harmful bacteria the least opportunity to grow and thrive. This also gives meat a longer shelf life. Severing of the spinal cord may lead to cardiac arrest (stopping the heart) causing the blood to stagnate in the blood vessels – so even in that there is much wisdom.
        But this was/were different in ELF specially on some so called Moslems. When I first Join the struggle for independece in very end of 1974 I was around Akeleguzai with Asabat 68. As you know in the very begning of 1975 most of the fighter were Saho Moslim few Christian Asmarinos like Mengisteab Mogos [Hatsey] Mengisteab Tecle[Qehawta Police] and other were from Adi kieh and surrounding such as Teweldebrhan. Do you know most of time of our disagreements at that area were on who slought the animal until Hadish Adi/Halay Abdelqadir meeting. Imagine that this was simple any non freedom fighter understand well enough.

POST A COMMENT