Shafts

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Slaughtering a chicken

Schächten or Schechita ( Hebrew שחט šacḥaṭ , German 'slaughter' ) is the ritual slaughter of animals for slaughter permitted in the respective rite, especially in Judaism and Islam . The animals are killed with a special knife with a large cut across the underside of the neck, as a result of which the large blood vessels as well as the trachea and esophagus are cut. The aim of the manhole is to ensure that the animal bleeds out with as little residue as possible. Consumption of blood is forbidden in both Judaism and Islam.

The Jewish slaughter takes place without prior stunning of the animal, since according to the Jewish view the animal is injured by the stunning and the meat is therefore unusable for consumption. According to the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court (slaughter ruling ), Muslim butchers are also granted exemption for slaughtering without stunning, provided that the meat of the killed animal is consumed by people for whom mandatory religious regulations prohibit the consumption of the meat of animals that have not been slaughtered. Whether the meat of an animal stunned by electric shock can be considered halāl is controversial among Sunnis . Among Alevis , the Halāl commandment, based on an oral tradition, is interpreted differently than among the Sunnis, while the Alevis perform ritual slaughter without anesthesia.

background

Shafts, depiction from the 15th century
Schechita, Germany 18th century from: Paul Christian Kirchner: Jüdisches Ceremoniell , 1734
Schachtmesser (yidd .: Chalef) with accompanying wooden box. Steel and ivory, 18th century

In the Torah it says: "Slaughter of your cattle or sheep, which the Lord has given you, as I have commanded you." ( Dtn 12,21  SLT ), without going into the way in which the slaughter is to be done becomes. Derived from the prohibition of the consumption of blood and other biblical regulations, the Shechita is dealt with first in the Talmud ( treatise Chullin 1–2) and later in the Mishne Torah (Sefer Keduscha) and in the Shulchan Aruch (Jore De'a 1–28).

With the Schechita, the aim is to keep the animal's suffering as low as possible. The halachically correct shaft consists of a neck cut, which in mammals must go through the trachea and esophagus, in birds through one of the two. The cut must be made without the slightest interruption with a sharp, smooth and navel-free knife. Forbidden is

  1. the smallest pause when performing the cut ( Hebrew Schehija )
  2. pressing the knife in the throat (Hebrew Derassa )
  3. hiding the knife (Hebrew Chalada )
  4. the execution of the cut outside for shechitah certain limits on the neck (Hebrew. Hagrama )
  5. the tearing away of the neck vessels through the cut (Hebrew Ikur )

The butcher (Hebrew Schochet ) himself must have completed training that includes both “practical” and “spiritual” aspects of his work. The butcher knife must be sharp like a good razor blade and must not have any nicks or the like.

The slaughter process itself is also subject to fixed rules. The first requirement is that the animal is kosher in Judaism or halāl in Islam . The throat is cut with a single incision, whereby both carotid arteries, both neck veins, the trachea, the esophagus and both vagus nerves must be severed. If the neck is correctly cut, this technique usually causes death within 10-15 seconds, but cattle can attempt to stand up for up to 47 seconds. The animal has to bleed completely, because the consumption of blood is forbidden according to kashrut or Qu'ran (sura 5 verse 3). Schechita describes not only the process of slaughter itself, but also the subsequent control of the animal and the meat. So in Judaism z. B. all blood residues are removed, which is usually done by washing and salting. (Eg cancerous tumors z.) Are also examined meat and organs for possible irregularities have that the meat treif , d. H. would not do kosher. In Islam there are partly different rules for the “post-processing” of the meat.

Exceptions

Fish is not subject to Shekhita law . The Talmud teaches this in tract Chullin 27b, and the Shulchan Aruch also addresses this issue in the section Hilchot Schechita 1. When it comes to fish, it is crucial that it is a type of fish that the Torah calls kosher.

The majority of Muslims believe that almost everything that is obtained from the sea for food is also considered halāl. The Shiites, however, only consider fish with scales and shrimp as halāl. All other types of fish are considered haram . According to this school of law, the fish must also be taken out of the water alive.

Animal welfare

The anesthetized slaughter is controversial from an animal welfare point of view . The proponents of this method argue that if the shaft incision is made correctly, rapid bleeding is ensured, which leads to a sudden drop in blood pressure and thus the oxygen supply to the brain . As a result, after a short time an unconsciousness occurs without significant pain. Serious errors in slaughtering are undoubtedly to be regarded as just as painful for the animal as gross errors in any other slaughtering method.

A study published in 1978 by researchers at the University of Veterinary Medicine in Hanover suggests the absence of pain stimuli when slaughtering. The aim of the study was the "objectification of pain and consciousness" of the animals in order to arrive at objectively valid judgments regarding animal welfare, since the discussion in this regard had so far largely been carried out with subjective and emotionally charged arguments. The EEG measurements of the investigation showed unchanged brain waves before and after the shaft incision, whereas the captive bolt anesthesia in the EEG indicated significant pain. The scientists therefore drew the following conclusion: “The insights into sensory physiological processes during the slaughter of these animals that were gained in this comparative study give way to e.g. T. considerably from previous ideas. "

In a report by the Federal Veterinary Office (FVO), which arose after a visit to the slaughterhouse in Besançon , it is reported that the statements “that slaughtering is not cruel to animals is not confirmed. Numerous animals on which the shaft cut was carried out correctly showed violent defensive reactions after the cut; the eye reflex ( corneal reflex ), the absence of which is a recognized measure of the loss of consciousness, could still be clearly identified up to 30 seconds after the cut. "

Opponents of the slaughter criticize the fact that the animal does not become unconscious immediately, since the blood supply to the brain also takes place through unseparated vessels in the area of ​​the spine and the deep neck , and refer to some video recordings of slaughtered animals that sometimes go through a death throes of several minutes although the windpipe and carotid arteries were visibly severed. Immediate unconsciousness is therefore not automatically given during slaughter, which is due to the fact that the bleeding process takes a certain time. In addition, insistence on slaughtering without prior anesthesia with reference to the necessary bleeding is not convincing, since an anesthetized animal bleeds out in the same way as a non-anesthetized one. In addition, even with the best bleeding, blood residue would still remain in the meat.

Proponents of the modern slaughter from its introduction to the present day in the sense of animal welfare (rapid killing) and food hygiene ( meat inspection ) are considered progressive. The introduction of modern stunning methods ( bolt firing , fumigation or electricity) in the twentieth century would, in their opinion, offer approaches to further improve animal friendliness. This view is also shared by Reform Jews who allow the consumption of animals that have been bleeded under anesthesia.

In 2005, Jörg Luy convened the symposium “Animal Welfare in Ritual Slaughter” and worked on the EU-wide (Israel and Turkey also included) project DIALREL ( Dialogue on Issues of Religious Slaughter ), which aims to achieve a consensual, constitutional European regulation.

The EU organic seal may not be used for slaughtered meat if the animal has not been previously stunned, the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) ruled in a landmark judgment on February 26, 2019. Slaughtering without stunning does not meet the highest requirements for animal welfare, found the top judges in Luxembourg.

Legal position

Germany

Legal requirements for ritual slaughter in Europe 2018:
  • No anesthetic required
  • Anesthesia required after the cut
  • Simultaneous anesthesia required
  • Requires anesthetic before the cut
  • Ritual slaughter is prohibited
  • No data
    • Legal requirements for ritual slaughter around the world:
  • No anesthetic required
  • Anesthesia required after the cut
  • Simultaneous anesthesia required
  • Requires anesthetic before the cut
  • Ritual slaughter is prohibited
  • No data

    • Shafts are generally not permitted in Germany , as the Animal Welfare Act prohibits the slaughter of vertebrates without prior stunning (general ban with exception reservation, Section 4a TierSchG). The import of meat from animals slaughtered abroad is legal. Anyone who deviates from this regulation without a special permit is liable to prosecution or commits at least one administrative offense , which can also lead to a professional ban or a ban on handling animals ( Section 17 TierSchG). Animals from German farms are therefore regularly exported abroad for slaughter, where they are slaughtered and the meat is then brought back to Germany.

    Exceptions can be granted for religious reasons. For a long time, these permits were mostly granted to Jews in the Federal Republic of Germany, but mostly not to Muslims.The Court of the Federal Constitutional Court (Schächturteil 2002) must because of to Art. 4 constitutionally fully granted GG religion and belief (and because of the freedom of occupation of a Muslim butcher) at the request of an exemption be granted, provided that the meat of the dead animal by persons consumed which mandatory religious regulations forbid the consumption of the meat of non-slaughtered animals. After including animal welfare as a state goal in Art. 20a of the Basic Law , the Federal Administrative Court did not rule out in its judgment of November 23, 2006 that a Muslim butcher could be granted an exemption for the slaughter of cattle and sheep without anesthesia in order to be able to offer his customers according to their To provide meat to beliefs. The balance between animal welfare, which is a national objective, and the fundamental rights concerned must be established in such a way that both can have an effect. However, slaughtering must be carried out by a competent person in an approved and registered slaughterhouse and monitored by the responsible veterinary office. According to another opinion , which was also previously held by the Federal Administrative Court, slaughtering is not covered by religious freedom as long as a religion allows a vegetarian diet .

    Due to the ban on Muslim slaughtering in 1995, German lamb producers suffered sales losses of up to 40%. In Germany, slaughtering is permitted during short-term stunning. The animal, which is anesthetized for about 25 seconds, bleeds out after the throat cut. Whether meat produced by this slaughter can be considered halāl is controversial among Muslims.

    On January 29, 1930, the Bavarian State Parliament passed a "Law on the Slaughter of Animals" which only allows the slaughter of cattle, pigs, sheep, goats, horses, donkeys, mules, mules and dogs after they have been completely stunning. According to the law, anesthesia can be done by mechanical devices or by head blows. Violators were punished with fines or imprisonment for up to six months. The ban on slaughter is considered the first anti-Semitically motivated violation of the legal equality of Jews, long before the emergence of the Nazi regime .

    Switzerland

    1892/93 campaigned in Switzerland animal protection groups for a popular initiative for the "prohibition of slaughter without prior stunning" . On August 20, 1893, there was a vote. 49.18% of the electorate voted; 60.1% of them voted for the ban. Since then , the slaughter of mammals has been banned in Switzerland, but it is still allowed for poultry .

    Austria

    In Austria , the Animal Welfare Act stipulates that all animals for slaughter must be anesthetized immediately after the cut, in which the large blood vessels in the neck area have to be opened with an incision (Post-cut Stunning). Slaughter may only take place in a certified slaughterhouse in the presence of a veterinarian.

    Netherlands

    In the Netherlands , slaughtering has not been allowed for a short time since August 2016. It may only be slaughtered with an exception (here it must be scientifically proven that no pain is inflicted on the animal).

    The slaughter of unaesthetized animals was to be banned as early as 2011 by a decision of the Second Chamber of Parliament . The Dutch Party for Animals ( PvdD ) with 2 members of parliament considered the slaughter as unacceptable cruelty to animals, 116 of the 150 members then voted in favor of the ban.

    And in the face of protests from Muslims, Jews and some states, including the US and Israel , waivers were also provided.

    But the decision of the Second Chamber of 2011 was rejected by the First Chamber of Parliament on June 12, 2012 with 21 to 51 votes, so the slaughter of unaesthetized animals was still allowed in the Netherlands until 2016.

    Other countries

    In Norway , Denmark , Iceland , Liechtenstein , Australia (excluding 4 slaughterhouses) and New Zealand (excluding poultry), slaughtering is prohibited. In Sweden , "pets" must be anesthetized at slaughter when the blood is flowing (see Section 14 of the Swedish Animal Welfare Act). This regulation does not apply to emergency slaughter as a result of an accident or illness of the animal. Traditional slaughtering without stunning is prohibited. In Flanders (Belgium), slaughter without stunning has been banned since January 1, 2019 and in Wallonia (Belgium) since September 1, 2019. It is still allowed in France , Spain , Great Britain , Ireland and the Brussels Capital Region ( Belgium ).

    Simultaneous stunning is required in Finland . In Estonia , Latvia , Greece and Slovakia , post-cut stunning is required as in Austria. In Slovenia, ritual slaughter is prohibited at all. In Poland , slaughter without stunning was banned for a short time between January 2013 and December 2014.

    Ban on slaughter in the time of National Socialism

    Slaughter:
    National Socialist propaganda recording, Nuremberg, Photo-Harren.
    Scene from The Eternal Jew (1940)

    The "Law on the Slaughter of Animals" of April 21, 1933 required warm-blooded animals to be anaesthetized during slaughter before the bleeding began. Exceptions were only permitted for emergency slaughter. Willful or negligent violations were punishable by fines or imprisonment for up to six months in prison. The law came into force on May 1, 1933.

    In an ordinance on this, it was stipulated, among other things, that the animals for slaughter must not be hung up before stunning and that further processing should only take place if “the animal has died and movements of the animal can no longer be perceived”.

    occurrence

    The animal protection movement of the 19th and early 20th centuries in Germany saw animal experiments and slaughter as an expression of “Jewish” medicine and put these in direct connection with one another. The penal code of 1871 did not punish animal abuse as such, but only - if it existed - a public nuisance and was significantly weaker than, for example, the English animal protection regulations. In contrast, the right-wing or anti-Semitic animal welfare associations, which were to a large extent unsuccessful, ran a storm.

    For the National Socialists, animal welfare was a welcome and popular topic; They were able to place themselves at the head of a broad, previously unrecognized popular movement and use arguments to discriminate against German Jews, who played an important role in the fur trade , medicine and biology, with the subject of "shafts" .

    In Arthur Schopenhauer , the idea finds animal rights : "The world is not a piece of work, and the animals are not a brand for our use. One owes animals not mercy, but justice. "Schopenhauer traces this treatment of animals back to the Jewish religion:" The alleged lack of rights of animals [...] that there are no obligations towards animals is downright an outrageous brutality and barbarism of the Occident, whose source lies in Judaism ”. For many animal rights activists as early as the 19th century, it was therefore natural to turn to neo-paganist (also ethnic Germanic cults) such as, in particular, Asian religions, as well as a way of life adopted from there.

    A supra-regional ban on ritual slaughter was introduced by the law on slaughtering animals (RGBl. I p. 203) of April 21, 1933 and came into force on May 1, 1933. As with numerous other laws passed in 1933, the government subsequently sanctioned measures that had previously been forcibly enforced by party supporters. Slaughtering in Neustadt an der Aisch was forbidden to local butchers as early as 1927 with a ban imposed by the local NSDAP local group, but not all businesses adhered to this. Even the butcher's shop of the butcher Rößner, who was active as SS local group leader from 1931, was still slaughtering after the NSDAP's call in 1927 published in the Neustädter Gazette . Slaughtering was prohibited in Saxony on March 22, 1933. On March 28, 1933, for example, Anton Bleeker, an SA standard leader in Aurich, issued a ban on slaughter in all East Frisian slaughterhouses and ordered the slaughter's knives to be burned. This led to a major incident on March 31, 1933, in which the synagogue in Aurich was surrounded by armed SA men. The SA forced the surrender of the slaughter knives in order to then burn them in the marketplace.

    After taking power in 1933, animal welfare was given higher priority. As early as April 1, 1933, the Wilhelm Fricks Ministry of the Interior was working flat out and intensive cooperation of the animal welfare associations on a stricter animal welfare law, which was passed at the end of 1933. It remained in force almost unchanged until 1972. On August 16, 1933, more than three months before the Reich Animal Protection Act was enacted, Hermann Göring, in his function as Prussian Prime Minister, threatened to imprison animals in a concentration camp (including slaughter) - one of the first public mentions of the concentration camps as well as the first expansion of the first camp detention limited to political opponents of the regime.

    Look for alternatives

    Since the ban on slaughtering, there has been a shortage of kosher meat that could only be made up to a limited extent by imports. In August 1933, the board of directors of Berlin's Jewish communities decided to test a "slaughtering apparatus that conforms to legal and ritual regulations" and to have it examined by rabbis. Old people's homes and hospitals should take suitable precautions to ensure that religious dietary regulations are adhered to as far as possible and, in the future, on the one hand, ensure care according to the strictest ritual requirements, but on the other hand also adequately care for those who "place less value on this than on a rich meat diet." however, it does not apply if such a slaughter procedure is allowed to apply "according to their [the rabbis] view of the ritual regulations, at least for old and frail people".

    literature

    • Mordekai Benjamin: The Schächfachfach . Baumgärtner, Leipzig 1874 ( digitized version )
    • Rupert Jentzsch: The ritual slaughter of domestic animals in Germany from 1933. Law and jurisdiction. Dissertation, Hanover 1998
    • Richard Potz (Ed.): Schächten. Religious freedom and animal welfare. Plöchl, Freistadt 2001, ISBN 3-901407-22-7
    • Gundula Madeleine Tegtmeyer : In the name of God. In: Of course . August 1, 2012, accessed on February 27, 2019 (No. 8/2012).
    • Sibylle Horanyi: The ban on slaughter between animal protection and freedom of religion: a weighing of interests and interdisciplinary presentation of possible solutions (Verlag Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 2004, ISBN 3-7190-2352-4 )

    Web links

    Commons : Shechita  - collection of images, videos and audio files
    Wiktionary: schächten  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

    Individual evidence

    1. ↑ a b c BVerfG judgment of January 15, 2002, so-called slaughter judgment .
    2. ↑ Paula Schrode: Sunni-Islamic Discourses on Halal Diet , 2010.
    3. ↑ Jewish news: The Schächten and the Jewish religion. Retrieved November 5, 2018 .
    4. ↑ Tur WeSchulchan Aruch, Jore Dea, §§ 1–28
    5. ↑ DK Blackmore: Differences in behavior between sheep and cattle during slaughter. Res. Vet. Sci. 37, 1984. pp. 223-226
    6. ↑ W. Schulze, H. Schultze-Petzold, AS Hazem, R. Gross: Attempts to objectify pain and consciousness in the conventional (captive bolt stunning) as well as religious law ("Schächtschnitt") slaughter of sheep and calves . German Veterinary Weekly 1978 Feb 5; 85 (2), pp. 62-66 W. Schulze, H. Schultze-Petzold, AS. Hazem, R. Gross: [Attempts to objectify pain and consciousness in the conventional (captive bolt stunning) and religiously legal ("Schächtschnitt") slaughter of sheep and calves] . In: Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr . 85, No. 2, February 5, 1978, pp. 62-6. PMID 342225 . http://www.way-to-allah.com/dokument/bolzenschuss+schaechten_gutachten_schulze_tiho.pdf
    7. ↑ FVO - Federal Veterinary Office, information on the subject of ritual slaughtering (“Schächten”), September 20, 2001, 3003 Bern, p. 4
    8. ^ Dialogue on issues of Religious Slaughter. Retrieved November 5, 2018 (UK English).
    9. ↑ Michael Thaidigsmann: Slaughtered meat must not be given an organic seal. In: juedische-allgemeine.de. February 26, 2019, accessed February 27, 2019 .
    10. ↑ a b Ban on slaughter ruins sheep farmers . In: The butcher shop. 1–2 / 1997 (accessed via haGalil.de, January 6, 2011)
    11. ↑ BVerwG 3 C 30.05, judgment of 23 November 2006 | Federal Administrative Court. Retrieved November 5, 2018 .
    12. ↑ Prof. Dr. Axel Tschentscher, LL.M., MA: DFR - BVerwGE 99, 1 - shafts. Retrieved November 5, 2018 .
    13. ^ Pieroth / Schlink, Basic Rights. Constitutional Law II , 24th edition, Heidelberg 2008, Rn. 515a
    14. ^ The ban on slaughter in Bavaria, in: Bayerische Israelitische Gemeindezeitung , June 1, 1930, p. 170.
    15. ↑ Studies on Jewish history and culture in Bavaria . In: Michael Brenner, Renate Höpfinger (Hrsg.): The Jews in the Upper Palatinate . tape 2 . De Gruyter Oldenbourg, Munich 2008, ISBN 978-3-486-58678-7 , p. 172 .
    16. ^ Legal information system of the Republic of Austria : Animal Protection Act §32
    17. ↑ Tobias Müller: The Netherlands forbids slaughter: animal protection over religious freedom . In: the daily newspaper . ( taz.de [accessed on September 19, 2016]).
    18. ^ Religious ritual: The Netherlands prohibits the slaughter of animals. spiegel.de, June 28, 2011, accessed on March 12, 2016 .
    19. ↑ Initiatiefvoorstel-Thieme over het invoeren van een verplichte voorafgaande bedwelming bij ritueel slachten. Website of the Dutch First Chamber, June 12, 2012, accessed on March 12, 2016 (Dutch, in German: Presentation of the initiative (by member Thieme) on the introduction of mandatory prior stunning for ritual slaughter).
    20. ↑ Swedish Animal Welfare Act ( Djurskyddlag (1988: 534) ) , (Swedish)
    21. ^ A b Legal Restrictions on Religious Slaughter in Europe . Law Library of Congress. May 14, 2018. Accessed October 4, 2019. ( Map for Europe and some Asian countries (imprecise for Slovakia and Åland) )
    22. ^ Silvio Ferrari, Rossella Bottoni: Legislation on religious slaughter . In: Factsheet . DIALREL. 2006-2010. Retrieved October 4, 2019 (covers most of Europe, Australia, Turkey and Uruguay; partially obsolete)
    23. ↑ RGBl. 1933, Part I, p. 203 as well as Regulation also of April 21, 1933, p. 212 f.
    24. ↑ KP Schweiger: Old wine in new bottles: The dispute over the scientific animal experiment in Germany 1900-1935 . Dissertation, Göttingen 1993 ( The struggle in Germany around scientific animal testing 1900–1933 )
    25. ^ Hanna Rheinz : Kabbalah of the animals, animal rights in Judaism . In: Animal rights, an interdisciplinary challenge. Ed. IATE, Heidelberg 2007, pp. 234-252
    26. ↑ a b c IDB Münster • Ber. Inst. Didaktik Biologie Suppl. 2 (2002), 167–184, Animal Welfare and National Socialism The Origin and Effects of the National Socialist Reich Animal Protection Act of 1933 Daniel Jütte ( PDF ( Memento of December 27, 2013 in the Internet Archive ))
    27. ↑ Boria Sax: Animals in the Third Reich: Pets, Scapegoats, and the Holocaust . Foreword by Klaus P. Fischer. Continuum, New York / London 2000, ISBN 978-0-8264-1289-8 .
    28. ↑ Arthur Schopenhauer : Price publication on the basis of morality, not crowned by the Royal Danish Society of Sciences, Works IV, p. 238.
    29. ↑ approvingly quoted by Eugen Drewermann in the lawlessness of the creature in the Christian West . In: Animal Rights, an Interdisciplinary Challenge . Ed. IATE, Heidelberg 2007, p. 271 ff.
    30. ↑ RGBl. I 1933, p. 203 (via ALEX )
    31. ^ Wolfgang Mück: Nazi stronghold in Middle Franconia: The völkisch awakening in Neustadt an der Aisch 1922–1933. Verlag Philipp Schmidt, 2016 (= Streiflichter from home history. Special volume 4); ISBN 978-3-87707-990-4 , p. 172 f.
    32. ↑ Uwe Dietrich Adam : Jewish policy in the Third Reich. Unv. Reprint Düsseldorf 2003, ISBN 3-7700-4063-5 , p. 49.
    33. ↑ The end of the Jews in East Frisia. Catalog for the exhibition of the East Frisian landscape on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. Ostfriesische Landschaft, Aurich 1988, p. 40, ISBN 3-925365-41-9
    34. ↑ Wolf Gruner (edit.): The persecution and murder of European Jews by National Socialist Germany 1933–1945. Volume 1, Munich 2008, ISBN 978-3-486-58480-6 , p. 238 f .: Doc. 73: Special session ... on August 24, 1933 to secure ritual food despite the ban on slaughter
    35. ↑ Wolf Gruner (arr.): The pursuit ... p. 238