When it comes to honor killings and honor-related violence, America had better start learning a few things from Europe.
On October 20, 2009, near Phoenix, Arizona, Noor Al-Maleki’s father, Iraqi-born Faleh Hassan Al-Maleki, ran over his 20-year-old daughter with a two-ton jeep. He struck down her female companion and protector as well. His daughter died. Although she was seriously wounded, Amal Edan Khalaf, the other woman, survived. Just like Yaser Said, who fled Dallas after honor murdering his two daughters (and who has not yet been found), Faleh Hassan Al-Maleki also fled, first to Mexico, and then to England. However, he was captured, extradited back to Arizona, and charged with first-degree murder.
Well done!
The case has been described, correctly, as an “honor killing.” Poor Noor did not want to remain in an arranged marriage and dared to find a fiancée on her own. When she died, she had been living with her fiancée and with her future mother-in-law. Now comes Arizona lawyer Billie Little, who is Faleh Hassan Al-Maleki’s lawyer. Guess what Mr. Little told the judge? According to Arizona Central, because Andrew Thomas, the prosecutor in the case, is a Christian, Mr. Little actually wrote: “An open process provides some level of assurance that there is no appearance that a Christian is seeking to execute a Muslim for racial, political, religious or cultural beliefs.”
Let me understand this. Mr. Little does not want the judge to view a murder as a murder because a Muslim committed that murder? Or because only a Muslim was murdered—and that somehow counts for less? From my own research, published in Middle East Quarterly, it is clear that honor killing is primarily a Muslim-on-Muslim crime. After all, Noor was a Muslim too. And, an honor killing is not like Western domestically violent femicide. Western fathers do not kill their young daughters. (And, by the way, does Noor have a mother? If so, where is she? Why is she so silent?)
Clearly, Al-Maleki became judge, jury, and executioner when he took the law into his own hands to punish his daughter because, in his view, she was too western and therefore not a good Muslim. What does that make him? A good Muslim? Or a really bad Muslim?
Perhaps Islam is not and should not be on trial here but Muslim customs, Muslim behavior surely is. It is the proverbial elephant in the room. How can the prosecutor not mention it? And, once mentioned, how easy it will be to gain pity for the poor, allegedly “racially profiled” murderer.
In addition, Mr. Little is demanding that his client be psychiatrically evaluated because “he does not understand basic court proceedings.” I wonder: Is Mr. Little consulting with Muzzammil Hassan’s lawyer in Buffalo? He’s the Pakistani-born charmer who severely battered and then beheaded his lovely wife Aasiya. Hassan’s lawyer is arguing “extreme emotional disturbance.” This is rather ironic since this kind of defense has been used, often unsuccessfully, on behalf of battered women.
A person who has committed murder should be tried for murder. Trials are messy, and lawyers are supposed to look for excuses or extenuating circumstances for their clients. That’s their job. Billie Little is doing what a lawyer does. Nevertheless, the trial should go on, and defendants who are guilty should be found guilty.
Unfortunately, some people get away with murder. O.J. Simpson, who was not a Muslim, was–amazingly–found not guilty by a jury.
In addition to trying murderers for murder, it would be useful if some prominent Democrats, or Republicans, or both, made statements acknowledging the horror of honor murder.
Okay; let’s say, for the sake of the argument, that jihadism/honor killings/etc. are psychiatric disorders rather than terrorist acts. What do we do, in this country, with those who suffer from psychiatric disorders and are a danger to themselves OR OTHERS? That’s right: we put them in psychiatric hospitals until they no longer pose such a threat. Since we in this country seem bound and determined to label terrorists of muslim faith as psychologically disturbed rather than as the murderers they are, I would have no problem with putting them in secure psychiatric facilities until they no longer pose a threat to themselves or others, which, of course, would be NEVER! And, for those terrorists who wish to go to trial and plead insanity, statistics show that, traditionally, those who use the insanity defense and are sent to psychiatric hospitals generally spend a lot more time there then they would have if they had just pled guilty and gone to prison. So, okay, let’s call them psychologically disturbed instead of terrorists, honor killers, etc., as long as we are willing to follow through and act on those so labeled the way we do on any other violent nut case.
Good on the older sister of that family in Austria, for ‘going native’, voting with her feet (and other parts) and choosing an Austrian Christian man as a fiance. Her chances of basic happiness and safety in marriage are significantly greater than if she were marrying a Muslim. Now let’s hope she apostasises altogether – and may she live a long and happy life and produce many cute little Austrians. I do hope, though, that the young man in the case has a strong pair of fists, plenty of street smarts, and a firearm which he can teach his bride how to use (classes for both of them, in unarmed combat/ martial arts might be a good idea, also); and a couple of great big guard dogs.
The Muslims who believe in honor killings are crazy. Those who act upon their beliefs are criminally insane. Is it good for Christians to label believers of another religion insane? Or is the Christian prosecutor guilty of incompetence by reason of pc-insanity?
Phyllis
These are issues at the heart of the matter. Perhaps honour killing does not fit in our ordinary categories of jurisprudence or in the classifications of mental illness. They may instead be acts of war, part of the terrorism that attacks the fundamental institutions and laws of our civilization. In other words, the war against women is as much a part of this global jihad as the war against the Zionist-Crusader nations. Hence the perpetrators like terrorists are war criminals and should be so tried and punished by military tribunals.
Norman
There’s nothing unusual about trying to use a defense in a court of law. Get back to us when it succeeds. That’s when we have a problem.
Not crazy, merely dirty savages following the foul example of their loathsome “prophet”. Islam is a 1500 year old street gang.
It’s hardly alarming to see defense lawyers pulling out the stops for clients accused of a capital crime.
This isn’t much different than blaming a murder on TV or a rock album. I’m not opposed to pointing out the ludicrousness of these tactics, but the headline makes it sound like they are getting away with it. That doesn’t seem to be the case.
Thank you Dr. Phyllis Chesler for your Reports about these Causalities.
“The Muslims who believe in honor killings are crazy. Those who act upon their beliefs are criminally insane”
Wrong. Honor killings are a method of social control expressly authorized and encouraged by Islam. The men have been indoctrinated in this world view since birth, and their acting out are simply taking things to a logical conclusion.
Do note, that the father, having failed to murder his own flesh and blood had to leave the community.
I believe a critical issue here is the idea that a Christian-run court should not try a Muslim since it gives the appearance of religious persecution. So, ipso facto, only a Muslim should try a Muslim. Kind of a trial by peers kind of argument, at least on the surface. But, this ties into the Islamic notion that infidels rank lower on the judicial hierarchy, have less rights and less value, and that only a Muslim should be allowed to preside in courts.
Perhaps these “honor” killings could be considered “hate crimes” here in America. Yes, I am being sarcastic, forgive me.
We will need another 911 before people finally wake up to the deadly threat that pork-conceived, dogspawn, jihadi-monkeys pose to our society.
Then maybe all of our sheeple will finally recognize them for what they really are: Shaiten-possessed animals who can not be treated as nor counted being human and are worthy of no consideration as such. They should have no rights, no council, or even anything other than interrogation and execution. Period. Only humans get human rights.
Once the Islamist movement is reformed and no longer a threat to civilization then it can take its place with mankind but right now it is Imperial Japan and Nazi SS redux and it’s “soldiers” – really just spies and saboteurs – need to be treated accordingly.
As the Saudi’s are the ones driving this, it is also they who should bear the brunt of the pain. We get another 911 and Mecca gets an introduction to the horrors of thermonuclear fusion and their precious Q’aabah becomes just another component of atmospheric dust. There is a price to pay for continually conspiring and working to destroy our civilization and our wrath must be so horrible as to be a lesson for all time against such ideologies.
Phyllis:
It occurred to me when reading this that you are the expert witness needed by prosecutors in these cases. The question you would speak to is why this is not mental illness, emotional distress but a cold calculated murder to maintain and or achieve status in the culture. With your background and experience you could educate juries or serve as a consultant to introduce prosecutors to Muslim women who could testify — the problem would be that you are a Jew but that could be overcome by stating that Muslim women will face death to testify and that you work with Muslim women who are seeking to end the slave status of women in the culture. What can we do to point prosecutors in your direction?
#12 netsailor
You identify the critical issue and the nose under the tent — such arguments, as ridiculous as they seem coming from people who immigrated to this culture to live with infidels and Christians and under secular laws have made enough sense to other western cultures (England) so that Muslim courts exist and Muslim enforcers patrol neighborhoods instead of secular police. They are going to be appealed to the liberals in our appellate system and may be accepted as profiling was and animal sacrifice was by those who do not value western culture. It is ironic the Santeria animal sacrifice was deemed a protected religious practice while our own Native American peyote ceremonies were judged to be unprotected and subject to drug laws. So native American participants in such ceremonies sit in federal penitentiaries while immigrants are slowly killing goats and dogs in bloody basements.
P.S. Phyllis identified REAL in her post. This organization is precious and deserves all of our support.
Refugee Resettlement Watch — we should all be reading it.
http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/
I wonder why among all these “Moderates” there are None who built an (efficient) Organization to support (HORROR Crimes’) Victims (or Victims to be) against their Persecutor (HORROR Murders or HORROR Murders to be), outside a Court and inside it.
Islam is Politics and HORROR Crimes aren’t different than “the Killing of Opposers of the Regime” in Totalitarian States, and in a liberal Democracy they should be rewarded that Way – they’re Act of Terrorism (as someone already suggested) and Hate Crimes (as someone else already suggested).
Wishing Women will be able to enlighten their Lives and free themselves from (“patriarchal”) Sadism (and their own Masochism) which gets excited about exercising Violence by Males on Females.
Phyllis,
Please. You teeter on the edge of irrationality sometimes. The title of the article does not do justice to its content (as Fatty Bolger #9 pointed out.) “We Americans” don’t see him as a psychiatric case; his defense has come up with this nutty theory because they have no other options. This rarely works.
Also, it doesn’t matter if this guy had a “psychiatric disorder”. Frankly ALL criminals are psychologically disturbed. He would have to have been legally insane at the time of the crime – meaning that he was so out of touch with reality that he either had no control over his actions or did not know they were wrong. This is far different than simply believing he was “justified” in some way. Again, nearly all criminals justify their behavior.
Now: are you really suggesting that women should be able to murder their husbands because they’re abusive?! This is where your top begins to wobble, with all due respect. This is simply an equivalent nutty theory from the (truly loony) religion of Feminism from which I thought you had extricated yourself. If someone commits a crime against you you a) press charges and b) stay away from them. You don’t get to commit a worse crime back and claim victim status!
Our system of justice is good. We don’t need any advice from Europe. We broke free for a reason. At any rate I’m sure he’ll get much more than nine years! He should get the death penalty – which could NEVER happen in Europe.
ic,
“The Muslims who believe in honor killings are crazy. Those who act upon their beliefs are criminally insane.”
This is simply not true, especially the second part where you say “criminally insane”. (“Crazy” is a very broad, subjective term, “criminally insane” a very specific legal term.) If it were true we could punish virtually no one. As I noted above, all criminals are obviously disturbed in some way and most justify their criminal behavior. But this simply IS NOT the same as really being so disconnected with reality that you either cannot control yourself or do not realize that what you are doing is wrong.
Mike James #8,
“Islam is a 1500 year old street gang.”
Your my hero! I love it!
Wayne 14,
Don’t you see that you’re speaking in exactly the same terms as those you hate?! This is nothing but venom. Get a hold of yourself. Don’t become like them. Don’t let them drag you down to their level. They are human beings however evil their ideology, and like the Nazis and Japanese militarists they can be shown how wrong they are simply by being utterly defeated, because as with those two religions they firmly believe that if they are right they WILL win. Thus when they see that they’ve utterly lost they will know that they were utterly wrong and become productive members of human society as did the Japanese and Germans once cured of their Shinto-militarism and Nazism. Nevertheless, you’re right about the Saudis and Mecca. It’s time for another Hiroshima/Nagasaki.
Greenconsciousness 16,
“…our own Native-American peyote ceremonies were judged to be unprotected and subject to drug laws. So native American participants in such ceremonies sit in federal penitentiaries…”
This is not true. Native Americans can participate in the peyote ceremony. They just can’t use it outside of that. Non-Native-Americans participating just to have a “cultural experience” is more problematic. And killing domesticated cats or dogs, even for religious reasons, is illegal; at least in California. I don’t know about federal law on that.
As far as I know…
[Ritual animal sacrifice has been constitutionally protected for over 10 years.
In a landmark religious freedom case, in which the city of Hialeah attempted to ban the practice among followers of Santeria, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1993 ruled that animal sacrifice is a religious right contained in the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.]
The issue often collides with city ordinances, for example, not allowing goats and chickens in residential areas. No cruelty, beyond the killing itself, is allowed.
Domestic animals are protected (cats, dogs) and cannot be touched, sacrifice or not.
I am against it, it is Himsa (injury) born of Avidya (Ignorance).
The solution is to leave the animals alone, with or without sacrifice. Specially the cow, definitely a sacred animal. A lot of the violence in our society comes from the incredible cruelty perpetrated on animals for profit. What goes around, comes around: A Rajasic society.
It’s still murder. Gutless islamist perps should do the time or the chair as a judge imposes.
MiamaMan 22:
You are certainly right to condemn “…the incredible cruelty perpetrated on animals…” We do not have the right to torture animals for any purpose including scientific inquiry and medical testing It cannot be justified simply because we benefit and they are not sentient. God will judge us for this. But animal sacrifice once had a legitimate religious role. Christianity moved beyond this but does not condemn killing and eating animals. They are necessary for our sustenance and, done humanely, the animal’s death (which is inevitable anyway) is much less painful (if there is any pain at all) and much quicker than any natural death would have been.
Cows are not sacred. Cows are cows. Much disease, chaos and suffering is caused in India because the people will not even corral the animals and keep them (and their refuse) away from human populations. The cows also suffer enormously – before they die. How is this different than torture?
When the elephant in the room takes a large dump and it stinks to high heaven, then and only then will most people acknowledge it’s there. In the meantime, we will spend time playing let’s pretend there is no elephant even if it lets out a snort every now and then. *sigh*
24. logos1j1:
1) [How is this different than torture?]
I thought you championed the argument of “intent”, and used it successfully here, to now fall in your own trap; for, however misguided the attitude of the Indians may be in this respect, there is no “intent to torture” here.
2) Who says the animal “is not sentient”? Of course they are sentient. Hurt them, and see how they recoil. The argument of inevitability of death applies to humans too, without precluding justification for injury.
3) Natural death is that, karmically natural. Tamasic killing for profit with cruelty: wrong. Hunting for sustenance, respecting the animal (vide opening of “The Last of the Mohicans”), OK, Ahimsa, non-injury, better.
4) [They are necessary for our sustenance]
A fallacy, not true. However, strict vegetarianism has limitations, and animal product are often necessary, but they can be obtained without killing: milk and milk products.
5) Pigs are also pigs, Jews and Muslims won’t eat them. Cows, we Hindus worship and won’t kill nor eat.
MiamaMan 26:
Objections 1 & 2: I thought that someone would raise these objections but decided to wait for them to arise. They do not affect my argument. Okay, perhaps the first one a little because my question was ill-constructed: I meant that because of purposeful human action, however well-intentioned, the animals and humans suffer unnecessarily; and this is true. A person, committing a moral wrong, cannot claim innocence by saying their intentions were good. The scenario I was discussing above is categorically different than this: a moral good – stopping the murder of innocents – was being done, not a moral wrong; the negative consequences of unintended victims arose from this inevitably. Therefore, while tragic, they are necessary and no moral wrong is involved. It is morally wrong to treat cows as they do in India because they are being treated as something they are not (sacred) and this foolishness causes much unnecessary suffering for both humans and the cows.
2) Here, once again, I have caused my own problem due to a poor use of words. Yes, cows are sentient. I was wrong. What I meant was that they are categorically different than humans: all animals are. Killing an animal is not the equivalent of killing a human being, so the second part of your second objection is irrelevant. Human life should be respected simply because it is Human life. Suffering can be mitigated as much as possible but should be endured/allowed if it must be. We must have faith that there is a higher purpose. Suicide and murder are always wrong, period. The killing of a human being can only be justified in self-defense, defense of innocents and in carrying out justice for capital crimes. Allowing an animal to suffer or cause suffering unnecessarily is just cruel. There can be no higher purpose to it. We are right to put down animals that are a cause of suffering to themselves or to us; not so with human beings.
3 & 4) We’re agreed that killing cruelly is wrong. But now you contradict yourself: is hunting for sustenance necessary or not; wrong or not? That something else may or may not be better was not our discussion. The fact is that eating animals has been necessary for our survival up until the present day. While it is true – strictly speaking – that our dietary needs can be met with the use only of animal products like milk and eggs, and not the meat, the reality has more often been different. We have often needed the dense calories and nutrients of meat to survive harsh weather, crop failures, the hard work necessary just to survive, etc. And I raise again a previous point: the animal is better off if in the end we humanely kill and eat them. We need them at least for their product, as you admitted. They need us for survival – domesticated animals would be predated quickly, or would starve, without human care – and if we kill them humanely their deaths are easier than they would otherwise be.
5) As a Christian there is no reason for me to avoid eating any animal unless it is unhealthy, but of course I respect other beliefs. But they must not cause unnecessary suffering. This was my objection. So don’t eat the cows. But they must not be allowed to poop and starve and die in the streets! An astounding amount of human and animal suffering results from this foolish and immoral practice. Don’t you see: Jews do not eat pigs. Fine and good. But neither do they let them clog up the streets of Tel Aviv!!!
27. logos1j1:
1) [But now you contradict yourself: is hunting for sustenance necessary or not; wrong or not?]
It is often necessary, specially for native and tribal communities. When done respecting the animal, the Tamasic element is removed to a great extend.
2) [An astounding amount of human and animal suffering results from this foolish and immoral practice.] [astounding amount of suffering?]
From which Hollywood movie you get this exaggeration from? Perhaps “Around the World in 90 Days” with David Niven, Cantinflas, and Shirley McLaine? And even if we accept it as foolish…where is the immorality?
2) [Jews do not eat pigs. Fine and good. But neither do they let them clog up the streets of Tel Aviv!!!]
Of course, because they don’t like the pigs, but perhaps they would clog Tel Aviv if they would like them. Thus, Hindus leave the cows roam because they like them.
MiamaMan 28:
“From which Hollywood movie you get this exaggeration from? Perhaps “Around the World in 90 Days” with David Niven, Cantinflas, and Shirley McLaine?”
Really, this kind of attack is beneath you. (And for the record I’ve never even heard of the movie in question, but then I’m not much into pop culture.) I’ve studied Hinduism (and Buddhism, Islam, Christianity and philosophy among other things) on a collegiate level. I’ve spent an enormous amount of time, energy and money to educate myself. I shouldn’t have to give my resume on a blog like this. My facts and logic support the arguments I make; when I’m mistaken I cop to it.
So where am I mistaken? You admit that the cows are there, running rampant. How can this not cause disease, chaos and the resultant misery? India will never prosper until this practice is changed, the Untouchables are treated as equals, and girls are valued as much as boys.
The immorality is in needlessly causing human (and animal) suffering because of a foolish idea that has no merit, no higher moral purpose in Reality. Thinking that there is one, though there isn’t, is not a valid excuse. One could think it’s okay to kill another just because he made him angry, but that doesn’t get him off the hook.
29. logos1j1:
OK, ok, this movie shows a cow or two in the typical “rampant” way that so much befuddles people in the West.
1) [You admit that the cows are there, running rampant.]
No, I don’t admit that, that is not true. There are there, but they don’t run rampant. Yes, in Delhi they sometimes stop the traffic a little, no big deal. Some of them go by beautifully painted and decorated, with a lot of decorum.
2) [The immorality is in needlessly causing human (and animal) suffering because of a foolish idea that has no merit, no higher moral purpose in Reality]
I have never witnessed cows suffering there in India. None of them are underfed. They are never abandoned. I will tell you when and where they suffer alright, when the Muslims in India take them to the slaughterhouse. Or when they take them to the slaughterhouse here in the US, they know what’s coming, look at their eyes. So Ronald McDonald can sell a little bloodless hamburger to the children. For the Christian priest to go to the steakhouse and eat a big steak.
For India to prosper indeed you are right untouchability must disappear, this I said already, but this has nothing to do with the cows, let’s leave the cows alone.
30. One who pities Animals doesn’t eat them (killed on the Purpose) at all – being them Cows or else.
Cows produce Milk which is a most Precious Nurishment (in my Opinion Cows are worshiped in Hinduism due to that Fact); Chicken produce Eggs which is a most Precious Nurishment, too –
and I might wonder why are they Nowhere worshiped and, at the Opposite, why are they generously killed and eaten.
Pigs helped entire Populations surviving from Starvation.
***
In my Opinion what does make a Difference between Humans, it is their Attitude toward Others (Humans, Animals, Plants, …):
do they feel and show Love/Understanding/Respect/… toward them or do they feel and show Hate/Lust/(Vices) toward them?
AND WHY? (…)
31. HellenoChristian:
[(in my Opinion Cows are worshiped in Hinduism due to that Fact)]
You got a point here. Ayurveda considers milk a wholesome food of Satwic quality (however without the awful practices called Pasteurization and homogenization that destroy the milk, which should be only boiled as grandma used to do).
Cows are worshiped in Hinduism because they are the embodiments of Ahimsa(non-injury, that Hindu quality made famous by Mahatma Gandhi)then produce milk. They are strict vegetarians and don’t hurt others to survive. They are calm, cool, and keep a pace that is much akin to the Indian mind. Finally, they are beautiful.
I have observed them in India in garbage dumps. While pigs eat anything (no surprise Jews and Muslims find them unclean, Indians don’t eat them either), the cows favor the flowers (always tons of discarded flowers in Indian dumps).
MiamaMan:
Okay, not to belabor a point but to clarify because I’ll admit I have not been at my best game of late. I will not argue with you as to whether “run rampant” is a proper description of the situation in question (and I did not mean to misrepresent what you said, I thought you had conceded). You have been there; I have read books and watched scholarly videos (not dear little Shirley tap dancing through the streets of Delhi, or whatever) and that’s not a fair fight, so I’ll concede that point. To that I will only point out that one small spark can create a firestorm. Diseases are SO aggressive; the damage that is done by this practice must be incalculable. A little chaos also does much harm.
But the real bee that was in my bonnet – and which I never got around to – was the doctrine of the five substances. This practice is so insane, and so destructive. No good can come of it. It is appalling. I just do not see how India can rise out of its misery as long as things like this occur, even on a small scale. I have had the opportunity just above to address the insanity of thinking something sacred or “symbolic” (of WHAT I should have asked) which is just simply DISCHARGE as the Bible so aptly puts it. The five substances, you must see, are four substances too many! I say this because you are able to see the wrong in how the Untouchables are treated, so you can see the mistakes even in the doctrine and not only the practices of your faith. This gives me very much hope for you.
Now: milk. We can agree on milk. I have been a raw milk drinker for five years now (I do not even boil it) and I literally CANNOT drink homogenized milk anymore. This is the worst thing, so terrible – and finicky. Pasteurized milk I can drink if I must, but generally I just pass on the milk when I am not home, for this is still a rare practice here, though it is growing. We have had to fight even to keep it legal here in the People’s Republic of California. Imagine: raw milk illegal! Well, why not. Soon enough the government will be giving us our yearly “finger waves” – literally!
33. logos1j1:
1) On milk: I recommend you boil it at least. Even though I believe vaccination is Voodoo medicine, and Pasteurization much flaunted. Here in Florida the same, it is illegal to sell raw milk to the public, you must state that is is for “pet consumption”. Incredible! I buy it straight from the cow not far from where I live.
2) Now, and please…what has this doctrine of the 5 substances you mentioned to do with India? Are you sure we are talking about the same country? The 5 element is a Chinese medicine, Taoists thing dear friend. I have nothing to do with it. I practice Ayurveda, the ancient medicine system from India. I even wrote a booklet on the subject which I sell on eBay. Ayurveda uses a 3-prone classification or constitutional approach based upon observing the living individual: Vata (air or airy type), Pitta (fire or fiery constitution), and Kapha (water or watery type), and several combinations thereof. Disease is usually an exacerbation of your predominant constitution. Anyhow, it is complicated.
But now I fear for you…what’s going on? You used to be sharp and accurate as flint…are you taking advantage somehow of the pot medicine in Cal? I hope not.
32. I know Indians who eat Porc: are they to be considered “less Indians”?
Porcs eat anything … the Farmer gives them to eat: they are not dirty; at the Opposite, in Case of Poverty, they provide (precious) Meat at very low Costs –
which has been the Case for those Countries which developed a whole Art related to Dietary Products made of Pigs’ Meat.
—
In my Opinion it is very important what The Christ pointed out (Matthew 15): “Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on? But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts …”,
even if (of course) I don’t deny the Importance of physical Hygene.
—
Yes, Cows … and any other Herbivores … represent Ahimsa … at least toward other Animals (Humans included).
About their Beauty: (I am in Agreement with) “Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder” ….
I personally think that Cows are so beautiful as the Rest of Creation,
and that Herbivores’ Beauty (and Farm’s Animals’ Beauty) – to Humans – depends on their Usefulness to Mankind, … and on their Non-violence toward Humans.
[I'd like to know how much beautiful do Animals - Herbivores and Others - find Humans.]
—
Cats (not Herbivores) were very much liked, for their Beauty (in Ancient Egypt): most probably for their Dietary Love for Mices and Mouses, too.
—
There are Reasons why in a modern Society (urban Athmosphere) row Milk cannot be openly sold; if you like it,
you just go on the Mountains (or directly to a Farm) and there you can buy and drink as much row Milk as you like.
—
I understand you’re proud of your Religious Tradition:
just try not to forget, please, that Spirituality is not encaged somewhere – neither a Place nor a Tradition -.
MiamaMan 34:
I haven’t had any problem with the raw milk so far. We don’t live in the days of open buckets, etc. like grandma did. The farmer here who sells the raw milk invented a milking machine specifically for the purpose and the milk is clean. Besides, boiling is a hassle; you have to be very careful and attentive or you will burn it and end up with that annoying, ever-recurring film – ugh!
I don’t know how you got to Taoism from what I wrote. I was speaking of the five substances of the cow which are held as sacred, including the dung and urine. In some rituals they are bathed in, or the dung is put on the forehead etc. I assumed you would know what I was talking about; I find it very strange that you don’t. In other rituals the menstrual blood is held as sacred and ingested. This is all very disgusting and completely insane; and I referenced it because someone had mentioned the menstrual blood being sacred and symbolic. I couldn’t find it again when I looked just now, perhaps it was on one of Phyllis’s other comment streams and I’ve mixed them up (this is related to what I will talk about below.) The human ego, desperate to make itself significant, can drag the mind so quickly into insane beliefs and behaviors it’s disturbing. And there is no excuse for it. The Truth is right there; plain to see. But the Evil One, whose first sin was Pride, eggs us on if we let him and drags us down into his insanity where we are pitted against each other and God and our very selves. This is the issue I was trying to address.
“But now I fear for you…what’s going on? You used to be sharp and accurate as flint…are you taking advantage somehow of the pot medicine in Cal? I hope not.”
I am a Christian as you know so of course I have never used drugs of the illegal sort. I’m reluctant even to use the legal ones unless there is no other remedy. It is insomnia. Very severe – which is why (you may have noticed) I’m writing this at 4am. I’m not up early, I haven’t slept. So my thoughts have not been as coherent as I am used to and words escape me. But still I chose to re-enter this little fray. Perhaps it was a mistake, but I hope I’ve added something of value.
36. logos1j1:
1) I thought you were referring to the 5 elements of Chinese medicine, related to Taoism. The 5 “substances” of the cow you referred too, I have no knowledge of, nor desire to gain it. The description is Tamasic, and definitely Asuric. It looks as a summary from Reader Digest.
2) You see, India is big, there are sects, tribals, languages, different creeds. A comparison: In the US, Voodoo has been practiced in parts of Louisiana for centuries, but…Do your entertain some of its gory details, or desire to know about it? Or prefer to concentrate on your Christian faith?
4) I am not of Indian stock. I am a Hindu by choice. I try to live life according to Vedic culture. Of Sanatana Dharma, I gather the best, discard the rest. I am familiar with India, but there only stay in Ashrams (akin to monasteries). There cows are respected and milked, that’s all. I try to go every year. This year I am leaving for Sri Aurobindo Ashram and Ramana Asrama at Arunachala Hill in March. When my foot touches Indian soil, a feeling of sacredness and exultation pervades me.
3) On Dionisio and other lesser gods: I have many defects. Differently from you, I once drank and did drugs to my heart’s content. Been to hell and back. Nowadays, I try hard to live by the Biblical dictum: “Ye are gods, and all of you, children of the most high”.
Miamaman 37:
1) Okay, enough of the pop culture slights. I knew Readers Digest was a lot of silly pap when I was 14. Are they even still around?! I haven’t heard of them in years. Did you expect a 2000 word scholarly analysis? No. My point was neither to paint Hinduism with a broad brush nor bring up a point too minor to be of any use. This is a more significant phenomenon that you realize, especially historically, philosophically. I was trying to expose and combat some of the absurdities that can come out of false beliefs and out-of-control egos, that’s all. You do well not to look into it.
2) I’m well aware of Hinduism’s diversity, but your comparison is not good. Voodoo has nothing to do with Christianity. They are diametrically opposed. I was speaking of a very real element inside Hinduism.
4) (!)(Now whose losing sleep!) I hope I know what an ashram is. This worship of places and animals really is very silly. There is no room for it in Biblical doctrine.
3) “Ye are gods, and all of you, children of the most high.” Yes, Psalm 82:6, but you are taking it out of context. See Jesus’ correct explanation of it in John 10:31-38. Meditate on it, don’t make a snap judgment or you will get nowhere. Also note the very next verse, Psalm 82:7! Much more germane to this subject is 1 Corinthians 6:19-20.
38. logos1j1:
1)[I’m well aware of Hinduism’s diversity, but your comparison is not good. Voodoo has nothing to do with Christianity. They are diametrically opposed. I was speaking of a very real element inside Hinduism.]
Within the umbrella of “Hinduism” there are beliefs as diametrically opposed as anything could be said between the example of Voodoo and Christianity.
2) [I hope I know what an ashram is. This worship of places and animals really is very silly. There is no room for it in Biblical doctrine.]
As Ashram is a spiritual, yogic, institution, more often than not populated with Swamis (monks) of a given order. Its main purpose is worship of the Divine. Charitable work is also present.
Everything is God, there is nothing that is not God. So, whatever you worship, if done with sincerity and in goodness, may take you to Him. The substratum is One. Places, like churches, especial locations like mountains, Lourdes, etc become sacred with time for different reasons, one being a concentration of tanmatras, or positive vibrations, a feeling quite discernible when one enters, for example, a place like Notre Dame de Paris.
There is nothing silly in it.