Jews and Muslims: Contamination of food?

[iBrian]

Recently there was an article in New Scientist about a new DNA chip that will be used to test processed meats for signs of various contaminants.

Part of this involves testing to see whether chicken, for example, has been "bulked up" with pig waste products.

My question is: if a Jew or Muslim has eaten chicken - for example - without realising that it had been contaminated with pork, then what then?

Presuming that the person continues in ignorance of what has happened, then is there any ill-affect from a theological standpoint?

However, if learned of, are there any specific instructions on how such a person should deal with such an issue?

Here's the article:


DNA chip will catch beefed up chicken

A single test can now reveal the presence of meat from any of 32 different species in food samples, enabling a wide range of important questions to be answered.
These include whether chicken has been bulked up with beef or pork extracts; whether expensive albacore tuna is really cheap skipjack tuna; whether rats, mice or even bits of people fell into the mincer when your burger was being made; and whether unscrupulous companies are risking spreading mad cow disease by adding beef to cattle feed?

The test, based on a DNA chip, is being evaluated by food regulatory authorities in Europe, and could also be used by supermarkets and food companies to check on their suppliers.

"The beauty of this is that you can scan for so many things at once," says Thomas Schlumberger, director of clinical genetics at Affymetrix in California, which developed the "FoodExpert-ID" chip together with bioMérieux of France.

The chip's main use would to ensure meat products are what they say they are and do not contain anything they should not. It can reveal, for example, whether foie gras pâté really contains goose liver.

More: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994735

 

[bananabrain]

My question is: if a Jew or Muslim has eaten chicken - for example - without realising that it had been contaminated with pork, then what then?

i eat only kosher meat because the authorities that check on this can be trusted to ensure that this does not occur. this is the only way of doing so to the standard that jews require. in the absence of a reliable kashrut authority, one should eat no meat. that'll pretty much knock this problem on the head.

Presuming that the person continues in ignorance of what has happened, then is there any ill-affect from a theological standpoint?

if there is, how would we know about it (in the absence of a heavenly voice, i mean) - if our laws are meant to teach us things?

However, if learned of, are there any specific instructions on how such a person should deal with such an issue?

only eat kosher meat!

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[mahogan]

Contamination of Meat

As a vegetarian, I have the problem of trying to find food which doesn't have meat additives and it is not always as easy as you might think. Even cheeses, fruit drinks, beers etc. can have various animal parts in them - not to mention cosmetics, soaps etc. (don't ask about fast food vegetable products&^%). Hidden as a code number on the wrapping, it can be difficult to identify.

A few years ago, the only chips/ crisps which did not contain animal products were bacon flavoured!

Whatch what you eat, the manufactureer probably doesn't.

Regards

Martin Hogan

 

[bananabrain]

kashrut guides will tell you which additives are OK and which aren't. i believe vegetarian and vegan guides exist which do the same.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[samabudhi]

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought beef and pork were more expensive than chicken. Why would they want to add them to chicken? Surely it should be the other way round, (not that this has any bearing whatsoever on your arguments.)

 

[iBrian]

Maybe prime meat does - but what about the cast-offs? The news report wasn't about unscrupulous men adding pristine prime beef to prinstine prime chicken cuts - but, instead, mincing up offal and cut-offs and other waste with other meats, to save on wastage and increase profits.

When I was in my teens I worked part-time at a local supermarket, and ended up helping the butcher a lot - it was considered normal practice to take old meat past its sell-by date, and along with various cut-offs, mince it all together with a bit of fatty normal stuff - twice to make it look normal - and then label it no the shelves as "fresh mince". Probably a big pointer to my going veggie.

 

[Pet Zepi]

I would prefer the entire planet go vegitarian myself
but, as one who was born with canine teeth and a dietary
requirement that is not covered by the veggie regimen
(i.e. some of my more immediate ancestors ate buffalo
-- not falafel) ..i can but only offer that I eat much less
meat than my parents did.. and my children will, in all probability,
eat much less than myself.





I think the big issue between God and pork

probably lies closer to parasitical contamination
of our bodies than a mere aesthetical conjecture
of spiritual defilement..


...to eat of it unknowingly would, most likely, condemn
the manufacturer and not the the faithful servant.

 

[Mohsin]

Regards to all.

I live in a Muslim country, there is no chance of this kind of contamination. Also, if such a case happens that a person eats a chicken without knowing that it is contaminated, he will not be regarded sinful for it. Still, it is better to avoid if one can.

A question that I really want to ask. The old testament is saying that you should not have pork[e.g. Leviticus 11:7-8], then, as it is holy to the Christians as well so why do they have it? Jesus Christ(P.B.U.H) clearly said in Gospel of Mathews, Ch. No. 5, V. No. 17 to 20 that you should not break even the least commandments. Then what is the reason for breaking this one?

Also, scientifically it has been proven that pork is an unhealthy animal. Listen to this:

Eating of pork can cause no less than seventy different types of diseases. A person can have various helminthes like roundworm, pinworm, hookworm, etc. One of the most dangerous is Taenia Solium, which is in lay man’s terminology called tapeworm. It harbours in the intestine and is very long. Its ova i.e. eggs, enter the blood stream and can reach almost all the organs of the body. If it enters the brain it can cause memory loss. If it enters the heart it can cause heart attack, if it enters the eye it can cause blindness, if it enters the liver it can cause liver damage. It can damage almost all the organs of the body.

Another dangerous helminthes is Trichura Tichurasis. A common misconception about pork is that if it is cooked well, these ova die. In a research project undertaken in America, it was found that out of twenty-four people suffering from Trichura Tichurasis, twenty two had cooked the pork very well. This indicates that the ova present in the pork do not die under normal cooking temperature.


Pork has fat building material
Pork has very little muscle building material and contains excess of fat. This fat gets deposited in the vessels and can cause hypertension and heart attack. It is not surprising that over 50% of Americans suffer from hypertension.


Pig is one of the filthiest animals on earth
The pig is one of the filthiest animals on earth. It lives and thrives on muck, faeces and dirt. In the villages they don’t have modern toilets and the villagers excrete in the open air. Very often excreta is cleared by pigs.
Some may argue that in advanced countries like Australia, pigs are bred in very clean and hygienic conditions. Even in these hygienic conditions the pigs are kept together in sties. No matter how hard you try to keep them clean they are filthy by nature. They eat and enjoy their own as well as their neighbour’s excreta.​

What are your views about this?

 

[Avinash]

Countering contamination

Namaskar,

I'm a sattvic vegan. When I realise that I accidentally took some food contaminated with meatproducts, onions etc. I then eat some ground Mirobalam-nut which purifies the blood and cleans out the intestines. I think this is a general practice in India.

Andrew/Avinash

 

[iBrian]

On the issue of Christian eating habits - it's in the Epistles of Peter, I think, where there is a vision of the dietary laws of Judaism being lifted from Christians worshippers.

 

[bananabrain]

mohsin,

all the stuff you're saying about pork being "scientifically unhealthy" for you are arguments i've heard before. the only trouble is that what this tactic essentially amounts to is seeking to *validate* of Holy Texts using science. now, it's all very well to say "G!D Created everything, so G!D must have Created science as well" - but the problem is that sometimes science appears to contradict the literal meaning of the Text, whether it's Torah, Qur'an or whatever. personally, i don't believe that we should rationalise Divine Commands. if G!D commands jews and muslims not to eat pork then, frankly, that ought to be good enough for us. to me, seeking scientific support for this point of view smacks a little of not trusting sufficiently in the Holy Blessed One. in fact, it might even put us in a position where we begin to distrust the Text *unless* it is validated by science - and then IMHO you're talking shirq, which is rather a problem. not to mention what happens if you create a sterile, laboratory-grown, GM type of pig which science shows to be 100% parasite free and lives in a nice clean room, or what you see if you look inside a sheep or a cow, which is no picnic i can tell you, though this is not my first choice for a spare time activity. this is why i go back to what it says in Torah (although i don't know what it says in the Qur'an) - in both leviticus 11:7 and deuteronomy 14:8 the phrase used is:

טמא הוא לכם׃

meaning "it is tamei to *you*". so, firstly this is not a categorical denial of dignity to the animal itself, but a specific prohibition to those addressed by the Text (in other words, the jews) - furthermore the precise word "tamei" is an expression of *ritual inappropriateness and prohibition*. things which are "tamei" cannot be mixed with those that are "tahor". moreover the categories of tamei and tahor are operative within a framework of jewish law and the Holy Temple - it is by no means a general curse on all pigs. the problem occurs when the two words for the categories are translated as "clean" and "unclean" in english. these words are absolutely misleading and nothing to do with bodily hygiene. therefore there is absolutely no reason why someone who is neither jewish nor muslim should not eat pork.

how is pig referred to in the Qur'an?

was-salaam

bananabrain

 

[Quahom1]

Regards to all....A question that I really want to ask. The old testament is saying that you should not have pork[e.g. Leviticus 11:7-8], then, as it is holy to the Christians as well so why do they have it? Jesus Christ(P.B.U.H) clearly said in Gospel of Mathews, Ch. No. 5, V. No. 17 to 20 that you should not break even the least commandments. Then what is the reason for breaking this one?...QUOTE]

Greetings Moshin,

Your question is a valid one, and I will try to give a worthy answer.

At the time that this passage (Leviticus 11: 7-8) was written, many things were being done that were (and still are) extremely un healthy for humans. Calves were seethed in their mother's milk, red meat was often eaten raw (still full of blood), as were crustaceans, and the porcine appeared to be in the same lot. Though not a scavenger like vultures, or buzzards, or bottom dwellers, its habbits were rather disgusting. The wild boar would kill its prey and then tear into the entrails first. That is where parasites invaded the pig.

One can get away with undercooked red meat, because the animal is usually a grain feeder. Undercook pork back then, and one stood the same chance of living or dying as one who eats blowfish. Only death was slower and more painful. Plus, the diseases from the wild pig could be spread.

To understand why Christians began to eat pork, one must realize two things:

More than 500 years had passed since the writings in Leviticus

The New Testament changed Christian thinking

Peter (the fisherman and disciple of Jesus), had a dream (vision), wherein GOD lowered a sheet containing every unclean animal on earth before Peter. Thence GOD commanded Peter to "prepare" and eat.

What GOD was teaching Peter (and Christians), was that there was a time when man's ignorance would kill him, so GOD had to impose laws to intervene, but time had past and man learned about maintaining healthy live stock (and cooking habits), so this old thinking was outdated. The second thing GOD was teaching was that it is not what we put into our mouths that is unclean, but rather what comes out of our mouths...

We learned to be sanitary, now it was time to be sane.

Leviticus' writings were not commandments, they were a warning for the time, and perhaps for future time...

The Old testament gives us 10 commandments. The New Testament gives Christians only two commandments. But if you read carefully, you come to realize that the "two commandments" encompass all of the original ten.

There is one other lesson here. Just because I can eat pork, does not give me license to try to compel another to eat it. That would be like rolling boulders infront of my brother, in order to make him stumble.

Where my family lives, our neighbors are all of arabic decent, and most are muslim. Though my wife and children eat with me at the same time at the same table, when we entertain our neighbors, my wife in her wisdom knows not to cause strife. She seats the "men" at the diningroom table, serves them the meal, then retires to the kitchen where she, the wives and children eat.

Yet, when she sees these same men working outside (most are cement workers), and hungry, she will make them a lunch, or refreshments, and will sit with them while they eat.

She may not do everything right, but she tries, and they know it, so she is respected.

Though she is different, she is not a 'pig' in their eyes...

There is the third meaning to the story.

v/r

Q