Talk:Langar: Difference between revisions

From SikhiWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Partial Archive 11 Aug 2006)
 
(99 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Purpose of Vegetarian Diet in Langar ==
<big>This page has been Spilt into several Archived pages to make it more manageable.
Please refer to the several different sections:</big>


I have reverted the changes made by [[User:Lecturer]] as no detailed supporting reason has been given for this change. We need to discuss this issue before any change can be made on this point as I believe that it is fundamental to Sikhi principles.
* [[Talk:Langar_1| Archive 1:Mainly Discussions between Lecturer and Hari Singh]]


I do not believe that the reason veggie-food is served in Langar is purely for the principle of "equality of all attendees".
* [[Talk:Langar_2| Archive 2:Mainly Discussions with Lionchild, KingSingh, Lecturer and Hari Singh]]


If the reason for serving veg-food in Langar was only that it served the purpose of equally welcoming vegetarians into Langar then why is it served at wedding parties, where vegetarian also have to attend. Despite non-veg food being served at wedding parties in halls, vegetarians do attend these parties and do not generally complain and eat the food that suits them. So in practical terms, this reason cannot explain the reason why Guru ji appears to have served only vegetarian food in Langar.
* [[Talk:Langar_3| Archive 3:Most Recent Archive done on 11 August 2006]]


Further, it is not very difficult to arrange equal but slightly separate areas for veg and non-veg eaters. It is common in some Gurdwaras to have different areas for men and women. So, I do not believe that this explanation is valid.


Further, no tuk (line) from [[Gurbani]] has been quoted to support this reasoning. Infact, Gurbani advices us the opposite � To eat simple, veggie food thus:
= Reply by HS to Incredible on 11 August 2006=


Dear Ridiculous/Incredible


From what I have read of your replies when you say "…. translations are imperfect", it is clear that you do not believe that English can be used to relate the message of the Guru. It is clear that if you cannot appreciate the marvellous work done by great men like Dr Sant Singh, Bhai Manmohan Singh and Dr Gopal Singh, then I do not think that you will be impressed by my efforts.


SGGS page 467:
In all your replies, you have failed to provide literary proof. In which case, I have to assume that this is your own research material without any precedence or history. You do not feel that you need  to provide any proof; you have made no references for each one of your replies; no links to credible site have been provided; no backup is given; no page numbers for the references to books – All I can say is that you will never be able to sustain this type of argument in a proper debate without proof and backup with reference to literary works of substance.
"They burn away the bonds of the world, and eat a simple diet of grain and water."


SGGS page 723:
<big><u>'''Point Number 1''' - Meaning of Bismil NOT Bismillah!! </u></big>
"The world eats dead carcasses, living by neglect and greed. ((Pause)) Like a goblin, or a beast, they kill and eat the forbidden carcasses of meat."


SGGS page 1103:
"You kill living beings, and call it a righteous action. Tell me, brother, what would you call an unrighteous action?"


SGGS page 1128:
Bismil: If you cannot understand the translation clearly, I am afraid I cannot help you any further. – As they say "'''you take the horse to water, but you cannot make it drink''"
"He kills his self-conceit, and does not kill anyone else. ((3))"


SGGS page 1306:
<u>The work of Dr Surinder Singh Kohli, Professor and Head of Punjabi at Panjabi University, Chandigarh say that this is '''slayed or slaughtered''' May be you are more academically qualified than him, in which case, please do not expect me to change your views!!</u>
"Even with only dry crusts of bread, and a hard floor on which to sleep, my life passes in peace and pleasure with my Beloved, O sisters. ((2)(3)(42))"


SGGS page 1350:
"You say that the One Lord is in all, so why do you kill chickens?"


SGGS page 1350:
<big><u>'''Point Number 2''' – There is NO Sacrifice?</u></big>
"You seize a living creature, and then bring it home and kill its body; you have killed only the clay."


SGGS page 1369:
You say: <<The shabad makes reference to both Halal and Bismillah.>> If you read the Shabad correctly, it is '''Bismil''' and not '''Bismillah'''
"Kabeer, I will remain in the Saadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy, even if I have only coarse bread to eat."
The word '''Halal''' refers to (1) '''Permissible, legitimate, lawful; sanctioned or permitted by religious law or morality. (2) A method of slaughtering animals by Muslims or Jewish rite for consumption of meat.''' (as opposed to "Haraam")


SGGS page 1375:
<u>Again, if you cannot understand the translation clearly, I cannot help you any further. – see final part of answer to point 1.</u>
"Kabeer, they oppress living beings and kill them, and call it proper."


SGGS page 1374:
<big><u>'''Point Number 3''' – NO Proof or Reference Provided</u></big>
"Kabeer, the dinner of beans and rice is excellent, if it is flavored with salt. Who would cut his throat, to have meat with his bread? ((188))" --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 13:53, 7 July 2006 (Central Daylight Time)


== Reverting my corrections ==
I asked you to cite proof or reference for '''Bismil''' which actually says precisely '''sacrificial slaughter''' and you gave me a copy from the link which I gave previously which actually says: '''Sacrificed<big><big><big>,</big></big></big> slaughtered<big><big><big>;</big></big></big> meek<big><big><big>,</big></big></big> forbearing''' – Where does it say exactly '''sacrificial slaughter''' – Please be exact and precise. So I will have to assume that this is another invention or "original research" by you.


I am new to this forum, but when I was reading about the Langaar, its was just surprising to me that the main reason for "open kitchen" was totally wrong.


A lot of people get their piousity mixed up with dogma. I am not going to battle your reversion, as I do not have the time, but here are my reasons.
<big><u>'''Point Number 3A''' – Translation not Perfect</u></big>
I asked:
* 1. Please do cite these translations (by prominent authors, if possible) because that is exactly what we are trying to determine – The exact translation of the Shabad!!


1. I am not comparing Langar to functions as you are, I am not talking about having a menus of preferences.
And your reply was:
2. If meat was served then then it would discriminate vegitarians, it could discriminate Muslims and all other faiths.
3. If meat was served and not Halal, only NON Muslims could eat it if not vegitarian.
4. It all gets too confusing.
5. The simplest and most basic form of common denominator is that Vegitarian food is served, as anyone can eat that without any restriction.
6. your suggestion of splitting the langaar into two would go again the first para of the article. "principle of equality between all people of the world regardless of religion, caste, colour, creed, age, gender or social status. In addition to the ideals of equality, the tradition of Langar expresses the ethics of sharing, community, inclusiveness and oneness of all humankind. " Not everyone could sit together.


People need to tackle debate from the larger persective and not from actions. Sikhs are able to eat meat, it is not forbidden, so your ascertion that due to the fact that it is strictly forbidden in our diet is massive misrepresentation. We are not allowed to eat Ritually killed food.
* That is the point. English translations are imperfect. Gurbani is not.


Any historical text that you chose to read and now and again references to the Khalsa eating meat.  The biggest reference is when Guru Gobind Singh Ji whent to Hermit's place, Madhodas (known now as Bandha Bahadur Singh Ji), when he was not present he:
<u>Well we are communicating in English. Do you feel you cannot express yourself in this language? What is the hindrance? Does English have such severe limitations?


"Guru Gobind Singh went to his hermitage. Madhodas was away. The Guru ordered his disciples to kill a few goats of the Bairagi and cook meat there and then. The matter was reported to Bairagi. "
Sure, translation is difficult – but why do you think all 3 scholars have more or less agreed on the translation of this Shabad while you are the only person who appears to disagree? Has anyone else disagreed with this translation? You say it is incorrect – Does anyone else agree with you. Please give us references and links, etc.</u>


From: http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/warriors/banda.html
So obviously you will disagree with the following who praised the works of Dr Gopal Singh:


and this
'''* "It is an impressive work which will be found extremely valuable to all students of Sikhism" by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, President Of India'''  You don't agree as you can probably do a better job!! Yes?


"The Guru ordered his disciples to kill a few goats of the Bairagi and cook meat there and then. The matter was reported to Madho Das, who was enraged."
'''* '''In looking through this monumental work, I have '''admired the labour and scholarship of the translator and I must congratulate him on this achievement'''. He has performed a worthy and necessary task. ……It is a great book and all who read it will profit by it. – by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.''' Same here, you being a better scholar will find faults with every Shabad!!


From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banda_Bahadur
You said <<<<They have tried there best to translate something as complex as Gurbani. It is up to the student and individuals to read the Gurmuki text and derive deeper meanings. English word do not reflect the deeper meaning.>>> Add why not? Should we be speaking Punjabi as English cannot communicate the real deeper message of Gurbani?


and please to open your eyes a bit more read this very interesting posting, a lot of your quotes are choice extractions without any cohesion. You must learn to find things out for yourself and not follow people blindly.  Read in context.
You also said: "May I recommed a translation available from Singh Brother by (DS) Chahal. It flows better. The translations you have cited are awkward, and tend not to flow in terms of the English language. This is a shame (especially from authors like Dr Gobal Singh, who has translated Shakespeare into Gurmukhi)." Please you can put the other translation as I suggested so we can all see the "real deep" meaning of this Shabad on SGGS page 1350.


http://www.sikh-history.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=000802
<u>As you respect Mr PS Chahil more than the other scholars, I have quoted the translation of this Shabad by him below. Perhaps you can tell us how this supports your views.</u>


http://www.allaboutsikhs.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1252
{{Quoter|Do not call the Vedas and Muslim books wrong. One who does not contemplate on these is false. When you say that God abides in all the beings, then why kill a hen?


Also it is very common knowledge that the late Guru's used to go hunting too, so some of the quotes could be seen as contradictory.  
O'Mullah, say, is this the principle of God's justice? Yet your mind's doubt does not go. Pause


So the reason for Langaar is to be an "open Kitchen" open to all. How can you have an open kitchen if what you serve cannot be open to all? Hence Vegitarian food. NOT that is against Sikhi, which it is not.  Any person of any background can instantly receive langaar without prior planning, remember we are talking about when langaar was in it's infancy before the Khalsa, not now in 2006 London.  Can you imagine Darbar sahib splitting it's langaar according to preference as you advocate, it would be chaos :)  When Akbar visited, he did not have to wory about the diet of the langaar, he could be instantly served with everyone there.
You seize and bring a living being and kill its body. You have merely kill the clay and not the soul. Its imperishable soul is attached to another body. Say then what have you slaughtered?  


You must be very careful with this Wiki, people go to it and mostly think that it is a realiable place to get facts on our religion. It should not turn into a personally owned, personal controlled forum. People hold this site in esteem and therefore there is a big responsiblity.
What is the use of purification of your hands, feet and mouth and washing of your face and what use your head's prostrations in the mosque? What avails you to say the prayers and go to pilgrimage to Mecca, when there is malice and hypocrisy in your mind?


== Shame there has been no discussion ==
You are impure and do not understand the pure Lord. His mysteries you do not know. Kabir says your have missed paradise and on hell is your mind set.| SGGS page 1350}}


There has been a lot of activity by the person who reverted my changes on this site, but as yet no response to my posting.




::I am sorry I could not reply earlier but I was seeking views of other friends and spiritually elevated people so that I could make a proportional and balanced response to your queries. Also, unfortunately, various other matters have to be done regularly on Sikhiwiki for which I have taken responsibility and these had been pending for a little while. So please accept my apology and I hope you will forgive me for the delay in replying. --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 10:11, 14 July 2006 (CDT)


== Why no meat in Langar? ==
<big><u>'''Point Number 4''' –  WHAT'S the Difference?</u></big>


Respected [[User:Lecturer]] ji


It is very heartening to have new contributors to Sikhiwiki and I would like to encourage you and other users to contribute to this major task to establish a comprehensive pool of knowledge on Sikhi on the web which is freely available to all who have access to the net.
So we change one word in the Shabad –
''''*5. You seize a living creature, and then bring it home and sacrifice its body; you have only destroyed the clay.'''


I am sorry that you are not able to agree with the points that I have made, which I totally believe are in keeping with [[Gurbani]]. I understand your argument that serving veggie food makes everyone (Hindus, Muslims, etc) feel 'safe' (the equality reason) to take the food without any 'fear' of eating anything that they may feel is 'polluted'. I also accept that there are many Sikh Sites on the 'Net' which do not follow or agree with this point. I believe that they are wrong. The point that I have made is that Veggie food is served in [[Langar]] because Sikhs (especially Amritdhari Sikh) are forbidden from general consumption of meat and that the [[SGGS]] forbid this as outlined in my previous post. Further the reason may also be that historically, since our Guru's time, vegetarian food has been served in Langar.  
I asked: "What difference does it make to the overall message of the Shabad?"
And you said: "Totaly, changes the meaning and how this fits into the Sikh view of the world and the futility of sacrifice.Note also that the meaning is for you to figure that out. I would also suggest read the couplets leading up to this Shabad. They "set the scene"."


Just looking at one tuk, which is in simple Punjabi, this point to most un-biased people is very clear and final:
<u>Well, we need to know what it means to you. I have explained my version on [[SGGS page 1350]] – let's see what you can tell us. You understand the Gurmukhi – just translate it for us in English in your own words!!</u>


Kabir ji clearly states: (p1350) "ਜਉ  ਸਭ  ਮਹਿ ਝਕ੝  ਖ੝ਦਾਇ  ਕਹਤ  ਹਉ  ਤਉ  ਕਿਉ  ਮ੝ਰਗੀ  ਮਾਰੈ  ॥੧॥ ja-o sabh meh ayk khudaa-ay kahat ha-o ta-o ki-o murgee maarai. ||1|| You say that the One Lord is in all, so why do you kill chickens? ||1||" This is simple [[Punjabi]] so all of us should be able to understand this simple tuk with 11 words. Kabir ji asks us: "Why do you kill Murgee?" Now what's your answer to this statement? Only by dealing with all the tuks that I have outlined previously can we move forward.
<big><u>'''Point Number 5''' – OTHER use of Bismil</u></big>


I hope you will agree with the following points:
So the Shabad on Page 1165 translates to:
'''* "Bring this dead cow back to life. Otherwise, I shall cut off your head here and now". Naam Dayv answered, "O king, how can this happen? No one can bring the dead back to life.'''


* 1. No authority in the world can dispute the laws laid down by [[SGGS]]. The Guru is our prime authority on Sikhism and spirituality. If a matter is not covered by the Guru, we may refer to other authorities. However, this point does not arise in this case as we have not exhausted the references available from the Guru – so please do not refer me to any other source of "authority" until we have exhausted references in SGGS.
This should in your opinion read:
'''* '''* "Bring this cow sacrificed in the name of Allah back to life. Otherwise, I shall cut off your head here and now". Naam Dayv answered, "O king, how can this happen? The animal sacrificed in the name of Allah, cannot be brought back to life".


* 2. If you eat meat, then it is very possible that you are biased and you will not be rational in accepting an opposing view. There will be great difficulty in you coming to a reasoned decision in these circumstances. All that can be done is to look at what our Guru says about this matter. So it is important that the Tuks highlight by me before in this discussion are dealt with thoroughly one by one so we can then see what you make of them and why you disagree with the stand that has been put forward by these tuks. Isn't the Guru our ultimate authority on this and all other such issues? Also, we need to ask spiritually elevated people about their view on these Tuks.
And you say that: "…. for me has a much deeper, profound, and hard hitting meaning." Could you please tell us what this '''deeper, profound, and hard hitting meaning''' is?  May be we can all gain from it.


* 3. You will also be aware that most spiritually elevated people like sants, bhagats, and leader like yogi ji support the view that I have advanced. Surely these people's view must have considerable bearing on this matter as they are the experts who specialise in things to do with spirituality. They are the people who spent most of their time in Naam Simran, Nishkam Sewa and Gurbani vichaar. Do you believe that their views are important?
<big><u>'''Conclusion'''</u></big>


* 4. I do not believe that if one eats meat, that the person is committing a "babber Khurat" or as the SGPC put it "tabooed practices" which are: a). dishonouring the hair; b). Eating the meat of an animal slaughtered the Muslim way; c). cohabiting with a person other than one's spouse; d). Using tobacco. <br> However, as can be seen from references to the Tuks from SGGS, eating meat is not a matter that has the backing of the Guru. It is not the most important matter in a Sikhs life – but it is not supported by the Guru just like Kaam Krodh, Lobh, Moh and Ahankar are not supported by the Guru. All these are negative things from which a Sikh should refrain.


* 5. Meat is totally forbidden from [[Gurdwara]] premises and that even the Gianis and kirtaneaas are forbidden from consumption of meat at the Gurdwara building. So when they have their breakfast in their living quarters first thing in the morning, they are not allowed to consume meat, eggs, etc before they open the Gurdwara to the [[sangat]]. If a Sikh is allowed meat, then why can't they eat this on their own in their living quarters at the Gurdwara? No other person will be joining them in these quarters so the "equality" reason does not apply.
*1. All 3 English translations support the [[Vegetarianism]] article, <br>
'''however the translations are imperfect and Gurmukhi is not. Gurmukhi itself does not support the Vegetarianism argument.'''<br> <u>See my reply to Point 3A</u>


* 6. Also, you will be aware that I made my first contribution to this topic in April 2005 and this matter has remained in this state for a long time. I do not believe that we need to make any major changes in haste. It's better to have a long and thorough discussion on this point so that the correct views of the Panth and Guru are reflected in the article.
*2. The Gurmukh Dictionary supports the translation, <br>
'''however, the Persian translation does not. The Gurmukhi dictionary needs to be revised.'''<br><u>Perhap you would like to undertake the work!! See my answer to Point 1</u>


I hope I have made my views a little clearer for you to understand. --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 10:03, 14 July 2006 (CDT)
*3. The overall message of the Shabad does not change despite your view - <br>'''This is not my view, but the view of Gurbani. You are ineffect pushing your view. I am exploring deeper meanings rather than an at face translation (which is poor).'''<br><u>Your colleague's view, which you have supported is that in this Shabad, Guru ji is talking about the wrongs of Sacrifice; Rituals; Purifications; Prayer and Pilgrimage to the Mullah. <br>When we read Gurbani, we gather an understanding from it depending on our spiritual position. We can then express this position in our own words to explain the meaning gather to a third person. This is what the translations are all about and the various other books and website on the SGGS – various "darpans" and explanation of Gurbani have been offered. What do you understand from this Shabad?  Or are you going to state your understanding of the Shabad?</u>


== Fanaticism ==
*4. The Vegetarianism article has support of many other Shabads at [[SGGS on Meat]]. - <br>'''There are many Meat eating articles that are written where Gurbani supports them. Both arguments are a folly. Gurbani does not support meat eating or vegetarianism.'''<br><u>Please list the Page number and the first line of these Shabads that you say promotes meat-eating for the Sikh – I can assure you that you will never find such a Shabad – But I urge you anyway!!! – Then we can see what you mean or whether you are wrong in taking this position? </u>


Unfortunately you are what people would label a fanatic.


There is no pleasing people of your type as you do not like to read any evidence presented to you if it does not suite you.
*5. No credible opposition either in the form of clear Gurbani or Historical record - <br>'''I would disagree, that firm evidence has been appointed, but there seems to be an entrenched position from which you will not shift, therefore any evidence would not seem credible. has many historical records and views of prominent authors and writers.'''<br><u>Well, Where is it? I need Gurbani – Which you have produced none in your post or History, which you have mentioned at all. I am not interested in authors whose name we have never heard. Only Gurbani and historical recorded events with written proof. Again, I am sure you will not have any!!</u>


Ironically Your Kabir reference falls straight into the trap mentioned this posting.


"MISTRANSLATION AND MISREPRESENTATION OF THE SRI GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI"
http://www.sikh-history.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=000802


If you had read any of the links I put in my post, then you would see that there are many reasons why you are wrong. The links I sent are from many sites by many people from many sources and from many points in history.
*6. Support from Prominent Historic Scholars like Bhai Gurdas ji - <br>'''Bhai Gurdas also talks about killing a deer to get Kasturi (Musk)''' <br> <u>Please quote the Vaar with the actual Verses</u>


The overall is that Sikhs are not forbidden to eat meat, but veggie is always the prefered option, but it is a personal choice.  If you must then it should be killed instantly, not like Halal, etc.  Your attempt to involve my personal diet preference, of which you don't know, would never sway an argument. Arguments are swayed on facts not digs.


But anyway, good luck in your quest. I loved the idea of this wiki but when people like you take over it, there is no point.
*7. Support from many Prominent Sikh leaders with a huge following like Bhai Randhir Singh, Yogi Harbhajan Singh, Sant Isher Singh & all other Sants of the Sikhs with millions of followers.- <br>'''a moot point and irrelevant to the debate since these people follow the version of Sikhism they see fit to follow. This is however, not a competition of which Sant/Bhagat is greater.'''<br> <u>Does it not matter to your that many prominent Sikhs are opposed to your view of this Sikhi Principle?</u>


You got to put all debate into perspective of history, in times gone by when these things were thought out by people a lot more pious than your peers.  You cannot argue points from a 2006 London perspective.  There is so much in Sikhism that had been varying from the beaten track, and unfortunaltey people like you do not help.


*8. Verbal Support from leader of SGPC/Akal Takhat - Wrong<br> ''''''Philosophy of Sikhism by Gyani Sher Singh (Ph.D), Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee.''' Amritsar As a true Vaisnavite Kabir remained a strict vegetarian. Kabir far from defying Brahmanical tradition as to the eating of meat, would not permit so much, as the plucking of a flower (G.G.S. pg 479), whereas Nanak deemed all such scruples to be superstitions, Kabir held the doctrine of Ahinsa or the non-destruction of life, which extended even to that of flowers. The Sikh Gurus, on the contrary, allowed and even encouraged, the use of animal flesh as food. Nanak has exposed this Ahinsa superstition in Asa Ki War (G.G.S. pg 472) and Malar Ke War (G.G.S. pg. 1288). '''. <br>
<u>All the Shabads in the Guru Granth Sahib have to be equally respected no matter whether written by our Living Gurus or by the Sikh Bhagats.</u>


:: My dear Friend, Kabir ji's tuk is simple to understand so why do I need someone else's help? Each word can be clearly understood, I cannot understand why I should refer to anyone else except my Guru and the Shabad? - So please tell me, my friend why I should refer to someone else. I perfectly understand what this tuk says. <br> Remember, there is no priestly class in Sikhism; so as Sikhs we should not be falling back to these sites or people for simple explanation like these. Further what makes you so sure that these sites are better qualified than any other site? Please do not rely on others, give me direct references from Gurbani.
[http://www.sikhitothemax.com/rehat.asp?id=11 www.sikhitothemax.com Cardinal Sins by Bhai Desa Singh] Please read this Hukamname by Bhai Desa Singh and also refer to the following Vaar of Bhai Gurdas ji:


:: If you like to call me fanatic, then may it be your pleasure. The dictionary definition of fanatic is "A person marked or motivated by an <u>extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm</u> for a cause


::My reasoning is based entirely on Gurbani and I have quoted many tuks and one I have analysed in depth – If this makes the point "extreme, unreasoning enthusiasm" then I guess that Gurbani has made the Sikh so.
The following Shabads are from the Varan by [[Bhai Gurdas]] ji, whose Bani is referred to as the '''"Key"''' to the [[Sri Guru Granth Sahib]]:


::You say, "The overall is that Sikhs are not forbidden to eat meat" – Please give evidence from Gurbani to support this statement.
{{Quoter|<big> ਪਉੜੀ 17 (ਬਕਰੀ) <br>
ਸੀਹ ਪਜੂਤੀ ਬਕਰੀ ਮਰਦੀ ਹੋਈ ਹੜ ਹੜ ਹਸੀ॥ ਸੀਹ੝ ਪ੝ਛੈ ਵਿਸਮਾਦ੝ ਹੋਇ ਇਤ੝ ਅਉਸਰਿ ਕਿਤ੝ ਰਹਸਿ ਰਹਸੀ॥ <br>
ਬਿਨਉ ਕਰੇਂਦੀ ਬਕਰੀ ਪ੝ਤ੝ਰ ਅਸਾਡੇ ਕੀਚਨਿ ਖਸੀ॥ ਅਕ ਧਤੂਰਾ ਖਾਧਿਆਂ ਕ੝ਹਿ ਕ੝ਹਿ ਖਲ ਉਖਲਿ ਵਿਣਸੀ॥ <br>
ਮਾਸ੝ ਖਾਨਿ ਗਲ ਵਢਿ ਕੈ ਹਾਲ੝ ਤਿਨਾੜਾ ਕਉਣ੝ ਹੋਵਸੀ॥ ਗਰਬ੝ ਗਰੀਬੀ ਦੇਹ ਖੇਹ ਖਾਜ੝ ਅਖਾਜ੝ ਅਕਾਜ੝ ਕਰਸੀ॥ <br>
ਜਗਿ ਆਇਆ ਸਭ ਕੋਇ ਮਰਸੀ </big><br>


::You also say, "If you must then it should be killed instantly, not like Halal, etc." – Please kindly give tuks from scriptures which allows a Sikh to slaughter animals in this manner.
seeh pajoothee bakaree maradhee hoee harr harr hasee.
seehu pushhai visamaadh hoe eith aousar kith rehas rehasee.<br>
bino karae(n)adhee bakaree puthr asaaddae keechan khasee.
ak dhhathooraa khaadhhiaaa(n) kuhi kuhi khal oukhal vinasee.<br>
maas khaan gal vadt kai haal thinaarraa koun hovasee.
garab gareebee dhaeh khaeh khaaj akhaaj akaaj karasee.<br>
jag aaeiaa sabh koe marasee.


::You said, "Arguments are swayed on facts not digs."  - '''Point 1''': That was not a dig at you because as you said, I do not know your personal preference – It was a point based on logic –It is clear to me that if a person loves to eat meat, he or she will not be unbiased and objective when it come to a discussion about meat/veggie food eating. '''Point 2''': Where are your facts to support your arguments – I don't see any. All you have done is referred me to various sites which don't have all the facts that I have put forward; are very selective in their scope and appear to be completely biased.
(She Goat)


:: I am aware of what these links have to say and as I have said before their arguments are without any real foundation or understanding of Gurbani and its message. Where is the Daya when you kill the animal?  
Lion catches a goat; As the goat is dying, it begins to laugh. 
In awe the lion asks, why are you laughing?<br>
Humbly the goat says: Our sons are destroyed (castrated).
We only eat wild plants and suffer being slayed & skinned alive.<br>
Those who cut our throats and eat our flesh, what will be their plight? <br>
Proud and arrogant their bodies are a waste; inedible and fruitless.
All who come to the world will eventually die. |Vaar 25 Pauri 17}}


::As you believe in what you read on the net, perhaps, you would like to look at these site which supporting my view:


::* [http://www.hinduweb.org/home/sikh/rverma/meat.html Why Meat is Forbidden in Sikhism by Jaswinder Singh]
{{Quoter|<big> ਪਉੜੀ 21 ( ਨਿਗ੝ਰਾ ਮਨਮ੝ਖ੝ ਵਸ ਵਿਚ ਨਹੀ ਆ ਸਕਦਾ ) <br>
ਕ੝ਹੈ ਕਸਾਈ ਬਕਰੀ ਲਾਇ ਲੂਣ ਸੀਖ ਮਾਸ੝ ਪਰੋਆ॥
ਹਸਿ ਹਸਿ ਬੋਲੇ ਕ੝ਹੀਂਦੀ ਖਾਧੇ ਅਕਿ ਹਾਲ੝ ਇਹ੝ ਹੋਆ॥ <br>
ਮਾਸ ਖਾਨਿ ਗਲਿ ਛ੝ਰੀ ਦੇ ਹਾਲ੝ ਤਿਨਾੜਾ ਕਉਣ੝ ਅਲੋਆ॥
ਜੀਭੈ ਹੰਦਾ ਫੇੜਿਆ ਖਉ ਦੰਦਾਂ ਮ੝ਹ੝ ਭੰਨਿ ਵਿਗੋਆ॥ <br>
ਪਰ ਤਨ ਪਰ ਧਨ ਨਿੰਦ ਕਰਿ ਹੋਇ ਦ੝ਜੀਭਾ ਬਿਸੀਅਰ੝ ਭੋਆ॥
ਵਸਿ ਆਵੈ ਗ੝ਰ੝ਮੰਤ ਸਪ੝ ਨਿਗ੝ਰਾ ਮਨਮ੝ਖ੝ ਸ੝ਣੈ ਨ ਸੋਆ॥ <br>
ਵੇਖਿ ਨ ਚਲੈ ਅਗੈ ਟੋਆ </big><br>


::* [http://www.panthkhalsa.org/rahit/rahit_kuthha.php Fort Panth Khalsa]
kuhai kasaaee bakaree laae loon seekh maas paroaa.  
has has bolae kuhee(n)adhee khaadhhae ak haal eihu hoaa. <br>
maas khaan gal shhuree dhae haal thinaarraa koun aloaa.  
jeebhai ha(n)dhaa faerriaa kho dha(n)dhaa(n) muhu bha(n)n vigoaa. <br>
par than par dhhan ni(n)dh kar hoe dhujeebhaa biseear bhoaa.
vas aavai guruma(n)th sap niguraa manamukh sunai n soaa. <br>
vaekh n chalai agai ttoaa.<br>


::* [http://www.searchsikhism.com/islam3.html Search Sikhism]
Pauri 21 (Man having no Guru is uncontrollable) <br>


::* [http://www.akj.org.uk/literature/article.asp?b=t&s=gurmat&f=srm04a Sikh Rehit Maryada Points of Contention]
The butcher slaughters the goat; salts the meat and strings it on a skewer. <br>
While being killed the goat laughingly says: I have come to this condition for grazing only coarse leaves of arid wild plants. <br>
What will be the plight of those who cutting the throat with a knife eat the flesh of animals? <br>
The perverted taste of the tongue is harmful for the teeth and damages the mouth. <br>
The one who eyes another’s wealth or body or slanders becomes a poisonous Amphisbaena. <br>
This snake is controlled by the Guru's mantra but the Guru-less [[manmukh]] never listens to this glorious mantra. <br>
The Manmukh blindly moves ahead, never realizing the approaching deep pit ahead!<br>


::* [http://www.sevatothemax.com/blog/category/jhutkka-meat/  Jhuttka Meat by Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Jee - Preface Part 1]
(note: ''Amphisbaena is a mythical serpent having a head at each end of its body.'')|Vaar 37 Pauri 21}}


::* [http://www.namdhari.faithweb.com/veg/guruangadmsg.htm Sri GurPartap Suraj (Suraj Parkash), written by Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh]
Many thanks for your continued time and dedication to the cause.


::* [http://www.meatstinks.com/ Cruelty to Animals- Surely Sikh is not permitted to do this!!]
--[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 00:01, 11 August 2006 (CDT)


::* [http://www.sikhnet.com/s/SikhIntro The biggest Sikh Website]
=Nothing Further To Add - Bowing Out=


::* [http://www.panthic.org/news/115/ARTICLE/1841/2005-10-02.html see section "Eating Meat"]
I am bowiing out. The arguments are going nowhere and I do not have the time or inclination to pursue such a trivial topic. I have asked some of the authors of the papers to contact Hari Singh, but none of them wish to. As the Guru's put it so well '''"The fools argue about flesh and meat",''' and I can rapidly see myself falling into the pit of foolishness along with others. Meat eating and Vegetarianism is a non issue for Sikhs:


::I am sorry to hear that you think that I have "taken over" the site and that "people like me do not help". All I am saying is that you need to support your views with recognised facts – You have not provided these facts. Please re-consider this point as I am as keen as you to follow the word of the Guru and as an "Amritdhari" Sikh, I have been told not to take meat. If this is incorrect, then I am willing to re-examine this matter and approach the panj pyare and return to my old habits, but it must be backed by proof – not just other web-sites. Can you produce any text from scriptures from the Guru's time to support your view?
I leave this "debate" with the following thought:


::I am grateful for your good wishes, I hope with Guru's kirpa, you will find the energy to see this argument through for yourself – Let the Guru guide you. I have no ill-feeling or animosity towards you – This is an argument about differing views and I must thank you for providing me with an opportunity to have this discussion. My only regret is that we failed to reach a single conclusion unlike Bhai Randhir Singh & Bhai Kartar Singh.
Page 1289 Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji


::I would like to encourage you to please make contribution to this Wiki. Sikhism has very few controversial points and unfortunately you stepped on one that is such a point. Most of Sikhism is non-controversial – so please do help us make this a comprehensive site on Sikhism.
mehlaa 1.
First Mehl:  


::I accept that Sikhs of both types are found and that at some point will need to be reflected in articles on dietary habits of the Sikhs – But at the moment, Gurbani seems to support the veg-view. However, I am open of discussion and alternative view points and I will discuss this with other keen Sikhs and may be we will revise the article in due course, once a neutral point is found. Or may be we will put both the views in the article. Perhaps, you would like to think about this and we can amend the article to show both view points. What do you say to this? If you agree with this course of action then, I suggest you put the revised text here on the talk page and we can then try and agree the text. Then, once agreed, we can transfer it to the main article page.
'''maas maas kar moorakh jhagrhay gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee jaanai.'''
'''The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.'''


::Many thanks for your time and dedication to the cause. --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 23:53, 15 July 2006 (CDT)
'''ka-un maas ka-un saag kahaavai kis meh paap samaanay.'''
'''What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin?'''


== New generation of Historians ==
'''gaiNdaa maar hom jag kee-ay dayviti-aa kee baanay.'''
'''It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering.'''


For too long Our perception of Sikhism has been controlled by the older
'''maas chhod bais nak pakrheh raatee maanas khaanay.'''
'''Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night.'''


genration of un-compromising people. They adhere to strict "beliefs", rituals,  
'''farh kar lokaaN no dikhlaavahi gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee soojhai.'''
'''They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.'''


Babas, "chinese whispers" handed down to them from others. Non questioning, and
'''naanak anDhay si-o ki-aa kahee-ai kahai na kahi-aa boojhai.'''
'''O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.'''


non embracing.
'''anDhaa so-ay je anDh kamaavai tis ridai se lochan naahee.'''
'''They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.'''


Thankfully we now have the whole world's "New Amateur Sikh Historian" generation taking
'''maat pitaa kee rakat nipannay machhee maas na khaaNhee.'''
'''They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.'''


over from these types. We are here to debate, question, clean up, ask taboo
Thanks, goodbye and goodluck in whatever cause it is you are trying to pursue.
 
questions on what has now become a hearsay, Sant Baba following religion.
 
Some can only do this by debate, putting facts into context, not putting context
 
into facts, and the Internet should of now opened up this boundry, giving
 
everyone an equal part.
 
Some of us do not hold a whiter than white stance, that is not the case when
 
debating fact, it will only clarifty itself. Many people can have lots of valid
 
views on subjects, not like the "uncle - i'm right and every other view is
 
wrong", mentality which is on it's way out, luckily.
 
----
:: Debate about Sikhi is good and healthy as long as the message of [[SGGS]] is not distorted for any personal gain or for any personal agenda. In my opinion nothing can override the facts outlined by our Guru - That is the ultimate authority on Sikhi; everything else takes second place.
 
::Even history comes after the message of our Guru - That is our prime directive! If one cannot accept the word of [[Gurbani]] then there is absolutely no point in discussing any spiritual topic connected with Sikhism. To consider any historical fact, it must be well documents and have wide support otherwise it can lead to the diluting of our principles.
 
:: No one is "whiter than white" - we all are here in this human form due to our [[Karma]]s and actions which are not perfect otherwise we would not still take birth - "The record of one's past actions cannot be erased; who else is to blame for one's birth and death?" [[SGGS]] page 1014. --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 23:04, 18 July 2006 (CDT)
 
== The irony ==
 
Anyone reading my postings will know that all I have done is refer to the SGGS.
 
And Final point is that your extraction of the SGPC support my view.
 
"The undermentioned four  transgressions (tabooed practices) must be avoided
 
*1. Dishonouring the hair;
*2. Eating the meat of an animal slaughtered the Muslim way;
*3. Cohabiting with a person other than one's spouse;
*4. Using tobacco."
 
http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_six.html
 
Obviously to avoid eating the meat of an animal slaughtered the Muslim way, is to avoid eating meat altogether, which is perfect if you don't know the history of the meat on your plate. And also eating veg is a lot better for the person - which is a well accepted view.
 
But we have no way been forbidden to eat meat, and debate about it should not be an important topic.
 
Therefore your view is down to your personal choice, which was my very point from the beginning.
 
However misrepresentation is a big topic, the reason for this thread.
 
 
::I accept and agree with you on the following:
 
:::* that meat/veg is not the most important topic for a Sikh. [[SGGS]] says so and a Sikh should NOT consider people who meat as "second-class" citizens.
 
:::* Veg is the preferred diet for a Sikh but if nothing else is available, the Sikh is not barred from eating meat altogether. However, it must be done with "compassion" ([[Daya]]) if it has to be done at all and one should be aware of the Karmic burden. Remember that [[Bhagat Sadhana]] was a butcher but he "attained God" and became enlightened in due course - ''"Naam Dayv, Kabeer, Trilochan, Sadhana and Sain crossed over. Says Ravi Daas, listen, O Saints, through the Dear Lord, all is accomplished."'' (SGGS page 1106)
 
:::* this is absolutely a personal choice - Maharaj does not compel anyone or asks for any force or punishment to be used against people who eat meat, etc. Spirituality is a matter of "awareness" and "consciousness" and our plight to become better in this respect. However, we are restricted in our everyday life in many ways and the ideological position cannot be attained easily – It may take many "Junes" (lives).
 
 
::However, I hope you will agree with me that the 4 tabooed acts are an extreme position. For example, if "Cohabiting with a person other than one's spouse" is prohibited for a Amritdhari Sikh, it does not mean that casual "kissing", "hugging" and other "lower sexual activities" with other women is allowed. The Rehat-Maryada lists the extreme that MUST be avoided but as good Sikhs of the Guru, we have to tread on a much more "cleaner path" than just avoiding these 4 tabooed "sins". So here, we are discussing the best paths for a Sikh to follow - not the extreme "lower end" of the scale - We are discussing the "top end" rules of Sikhi.
 
::Many thanks for your help and for your valuable time, respected views and the most humble and polite way in which you have conveyed them. --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 09:02, 19 July 2006 (CDT)
 
== Contradiction ==
 
So you agree that is it not stricty forbidden in Sikhi to eat meat?
 
You now agree with me and not with yourself?
 
Maybe I leave it to you to correct your own mistakes then.
 
::I don't think there is any contradiction in what I have said. I think you are missing the point which may be I have not made very clearly. It's to do with what the Guru wants his Sikhs to do and to promote. A Sikhs has to have compassion, love, humility, contentment and be truthful; and has to promote these and other messages of the Guru. See the articles in the category [[:Category:Philosophy Spirituality and Ethics |Sikh Beliefs]]
 
::For example, the [[SGGS]] asks Sikhs to refrain from the [[Five Evils]] and other negative actions. That does not mean that a person who cannot completely refrain from [[Kam]], [[Krodh]], [[Lobh]], [[Moh]] and [[Ahankar]] is not a Sikh. Similarly, a person who cannot refrain from eating meat is not barred from being a Sikh - He is termed a [[Sahajdhari]] (Slow adopter) Sikh. To be a good Sikh you need to refrain from meat; refrain from slander and gossip; refrain from the [[Five Evils]], etc and practice eating simple food; live truthfully, Naam Simran, (not in this order) etc. However, if you do not practice these positive acts and cannot refrain from the negative ones, you will not be barred from Sikhi. But we cannot promote the negative acts as a sign of Sikhi!!!
 
::So although our views are close, they are not the same. I believe that you wish to concentrate your definition of a Sikh on very basic minimum values while I would like to set the standard much higher. I am sure there are others who would like to set the standard even higher than I do. For example, there are Sikhs who advocate cooking in iron ("sarbhlo") cookware. I believe that our views of Sikhism should be supported by [[Gurbani]] otherwise it should not be a condition that can be used to gauge Sikh values or to be promoted as Sikh values. These non-supported views should be termed "personal preferences" and should be stated as such – They should never be termed "Sikh values" unless they are properly supported by scriptures and/or recorded history.
 
::I believe that the views I have stated are based on Gurbani - If you disagree, you will need to quote from our scriptures or recorded history!! Let's keep things simple. If Gurbani says it, I will adjust me views accordingly. I do not think we need to consider any other resource in resolving this issue. Gurfateh, --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 17:58, 19 July 2006 (CDT)
 
== My crime and your views ==
 
I believe that you are not capable of changing your views as I mentioned in " New generation of Historians" section.
 
My only crime was to change your section of the Langar article from this
 
"Since it is against the basics of Sikhi to eat meat, fish or eggs; non-vegetarian foods of this sort is neither served nor brought onto the Gurdwara premises."
 
to...
 
"Since the purpose of langaar is to be open to all meat, fish or egg foods of this sort are neither served nor brought into the Gurdwara otherwise it would discriminate the purpose of the langaar. The food should be available to all. Hence the fact that it is usually a basic vegetarian meal."
 
your rebuke to this was
 
"
I do not believe that the reason veggie-food is served in Langar is purely for the principle of "equality of all attendees"
"
 
Which will be amazing to any audience reading this but then you went on to say, in a very modern impractical context:
 
"If the reason for serving veg-food in Langar was only that it served the purpose of equally welcoming vegetarians into Langar then why is it served at wedding parties, where vegetarian also have to attend. Despite non-veg food being served at wedding parties in halls, vegetarians do attend these parties and do not generally complain and eat the food that suits them. So in practical terms, this reason cannot explain the reason why Guru ji appears to have served only vegetarian food in Langar. "
 
even more...
 
"Further, it is not very difficult to arrange equal but slightly separate areas for veg and non-veg eaters. It is common in some Gurdwaras to have different areas for men and women. So, I do not believe that this explanation is valid."
 
(BTW. I've never been to a Gurdwara where men and women's Langaar are seperate. Especially in India. That sounds quite fanatic and old fashioned taboo.)
 
Remember the basis of Langar. There is no disticntion between people, so everyone can sit together, and the symboic nature of a Gurdwara having four doors facing all directions is that it is open to all. 
 
Therefore the basis of this discussion is the diet of the Langaar and my reasons are quite clear and simple.
 
My only crime was to remove you false reference to basic Sikhi.
 
However I know I have no chance in changing this article as you will probably pounce upon it as you  feel you own this article written upon your own views. This is my only forum.
 
Fanatcism, old fashioned beliefs and hearsay is one aspect of Sikhi I hope will die away as it is a beautiful religion mis-represented by many people.
 
::In the interest of compromise and flexibility, I have made a change to the article. I did suggest previously that both views be made part of the article: "Perhaps, you would like to think about this and we can amend the article to show both view points. What do you say to this?" - For the sanity of both our minds, I have made a change to reflect the 2 differing points of view. What do you think about this? --[[User:Hari singh|Hari Singh]] 20:12, 20 July 2006 (CDT)
 
== You are right ==
 
Yes you are right, and the false reference to Sikhi is also right, and you will always be right.
 
All the contributors to this article on this other Wiki are wrong too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langar
 
Please go ahead and edit that one too.

Latest revision as of 10:20, 11 August 2006

This page has been Spilt into several Archived pages to make it more manageable. Please refer to the several different sections:


Reply by HS to Incredible on 11 August 2006

Dear Ridiculous/Incredible

From what I have read of your replies when you say "…. translations are imperfect", it is clear that you do not believe that English can be used to relate the message of the Guru. It is clear that if you cannot appreciate the marvellous work done by great men like Dr Sant Singh, Bhai Manmohan Singh and Dr Gopal Singh, then I do not think that you will be impressed by my efforts.

In all your replies, you have failed to provide literary proof. In which case, I have to assume that this is your own research material without any precedence or history. You do not feel that you need to provide any proof; you have made no references for each one of your replies; no links to credible site have been provided; no backup is given; no page numbers for the references to books – All I can say is that you will never be able to sustain this type of argument in a proper debate without proof and backup with reference to literary works of substance.

Point Number 1 - Meaning of Bismil NOT Bismillah!!


Bismil: If you cannot understand the translation clearly, I am afraid I cannot help you any further. – As they say "'you take the horse to water, but you cannot make it drink"

The work of Dr Surinder Singh Kohli, Professor and Head of Punjabi at Panjabi University, Chandigarh say that this is slayed or slaughtered May be you are more academically qualified than him, in which case, please do not expect me to change your views!!


Point Number 2 – There is NO Sacrifice?

You say: <<The shabad makes reference to both Halal and Bismillah.>> If you read the Shabad correctly, it is Bismil and not Bismillah The word Halal refers to (1) Permissible, legitimate, lawful; sanctioned or permitted by religious law or morality. (2) A method of slaughtering animals by Muslims or Jewish rite for consumption of meat. (as opposed to "Haraam")

Again, if you cannot understand the translation clearly, I cannot help you any further. – see final part of answer to point 1.

Point Number 3 – NO Proof or Reference Provided

I asked you to cite proof or reference for Bismil which actually says precisely sacrificial slaughter and you gave me a copy from the link which I gave previously which actually says: Sacrificed, slaughtered; meek, forbearing – Where does it say exactly sacrificial slaughter – Please be exact and precise. So I will have to assume that this is another invention or "original research" by you.


Point Number 3A – Translation not Perfect I asked:

  • 1. Please do cite these translations (by prominent authors, if possible) because that is exactly what we are trying to determine – The exact translation of the Shabad!!

And your reply was:

  • That is the point. English translations are imperfect. Gurbani is not.

Well we are communicating in English. Do you feel you cannot express yourself in this language? What is the hindrance? Does English have such severe limitations?

Sure, translation is difficult – but why do you think all 3 scholars have more or less agreed on the translation of this Shabad while you are the only person who appears to disagree? Has anyone else disagreed with this translation? You say it is incorrect – Does anyone else agree with you. Please give us references and links, etc.

So obviously you will disagree with the following who praised the works of Dr Gopal Singh:

* "It is an impressive work which will be found extremely valuable to all students of Sikhism" by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, President Of India You don't agree as you can probably do a better job!! Yes?

* In looking through this monumental work, I have admired the labour and scholarship of the translator and I must congratulate him on this achievement. He has performed a worthy and necessary task. ……It is a great book and all who read it will profit by it. – by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Same here, you being a better scholar will find faults with every Shabad!!

You said <<<<They have tried there best to translate something as complex as Gurbani. It is up to the student and individuals to read the Gurmuki text and derive deeper meanings. English word do not reflect the deeper meaning.>>> Add why not? Should we be speaking Punjabi as English cannot communicate the real deeper message of Gurbani?

You also said: "May I recommed a translation available from Singh Brother by (DS) Chahal. It flows better. The translations you have cited are awkward, and tend not to flow in terms of the English language. This is a shame (especially from authors like Dr Gobal Singh, who has translated Shakespeare into Gurmukhi)." Please you can put the other translation as I suggested so we can all see the "real deep" meaning of this Shabad on SGGS page 1350.

As you respect Mr PS Chahil more than the other scholars, I have quoted the translation of this Shabad by him below. Perhaps you can tell us how this supports your views.

Do not call the Vedas and Muslim books wrong. One who does not contemplate on these is false. When you say that God abides in all the beings, then why kill a hen?

O'Mullah, say, is this the principle of God's justice? Yet your mind's doubt does not go. Pause

You seize and bring a living being and kill its body. You have merely kill the clay and not the soul. Its imperishable soul is attached to another body. Say then what have you slaughtered?

What is the use of purification of your hands, feet and mouth and washing of your face and what use your head's prostrations in the mosque? What avails you to say the prayers and go to pilgrimage to Mecca, when there is malice and hypocrisy in your mind?

You are impure and do not understand the pure Lord. His mysteries you do not know. Kabir says your have missed paradise and on hell is your mind set.

SGGS page 1350



Point Number 4 – WHAT'S the Difference?


So we change one word in the Shabad – '*5. You seize a living creature, and then bring it home and sacrifice its body; you have only destroyed the clay.

I asked: "What difference does it make to the overall message of the Shabad?" And you said: "Totaly, changes the meaning and how this fits into the Sikh view of the world and the futility of sacrifice.Note also that the meaning is for you to figure that out. I would also suggest read the couplets leading up to this Shabad. They "set the scene"."

Well, we need to know what it means to you. I have explained my version on SGGS page 1350 – let's see what you can tell us. You understand the Gurmukhi – just translate it for us in English in your own words!!

Point Number 5 – OTHER use of Bismil

So the Shabad on Page 1165 translates to: * "Bring this dead cow back to life. Otherwise, I shall cut off your head here and now". Naam Dayv answered, "O king, how can this happen? No one can bring the dead back to life.

This should in your opinion read: * * "Bring this cow sacrificed in the name of Allah back to life. Otherwise, I shall cut off your head here and now". Naam Dayv answered, "O king, how can this happen? The animal sacrificed in the name of Allah, cannot be brought back to life".

And you say that: "…. for me has a much deeper, profound, and hard hitting meaning." Could you please tell us what this deeper, profound, and hard hitting meaning is? May be we can all gain from it.

Conclusion


  • 1. All 3 English translations support the Vegetarianism article,

however the translations are imperfect and Gurmukhi is not. Gurmukhi itself does not support the Vegetarianism argument.
See my reply to Point 3A

  • 2. The Gurmukh Dictionary supports the translation,

however, the Persian translation does not. The Gurmukhi dictionary needs to be revised.
Perhap you would like to undertake the work!! See my answer to Point 1

  • 3. The overall message of the Shabad does not change despite your view -
    This is not my view, but the view of Gurbani. You are ineffect pushing your view. I am exploring deeper meanings rather than an at face translation (which is poor).
    Your colleague's view, which you have supported is that in this Shabad, Guru ji is talking about the wrongs of Sacrifice; Rituals; Purifications; Prayer and Pilgrimage to the Mullah.
    When we read Gurbani, we gather an understanding from it depending on our spiritual position. We can then express this position in our own words to explain the meaning gather to a third person. This is what the translations are all about and the various other books and website on the SGGS – various "darpans" and explanation of Gurbani have been offered. What do you understand from this Shabad? Or are you going to state your understanding of the Shabad?
  • 4. The Vegetarianism article has support of many other Shabads at SGGS on Meat. -
    There are many Meat eating articles that are written where Gurbani supports them. Both arguments are a folly. Gurbani does not support meat eating or vegetarianism.
    Please list the Page number and the first line of these Shabads that you say promotes meat-eating for the Sikh – I can assure you that you will never find such a Shabad – But I urge you anyway!!! – Then we can see what you mean or whether you are wrong in taking this position?


  • 5. No credible opposition either in the form of clear Gurbani or Historical record -
    I would disagree, that firm evidence has been appointed, but there seems to be an entrenched position from which you will not shift, therefore any evidence would not seem credible. has many historical records and views of prominent authors and writers.
    Well, Where is it? I need Gurbani – Which you have produced none in your post or History, which you have mentioned at all. I am not interested in authors whose name we have never heard. Only Gurbani and historical recorded events with written proof. Again, I am sure you will not have any!!


  • 6. Support from Prominent Historic Scholars like Bhai Gurdas ji -
    Bhai Gurdas also talks about killing a deer to get Kasturi (Musk)
    Please quote the Vaar with the actual Verses


  • 7. Support from many Prominent Sikh leaders with a huge following like Bhai Randhir Singh, Yogi Harbhajan Singh, Sant Isher Singh & all other Sants of the Sikhs with millions of followers.-
    a moot point and irrelevant to the debate since these people follow the version of Sikhism they see fit to follow. This is however, not a competition of which Sant/Bhagat is greater.
    Does it not matter to your that many prominent Sikhs are opposed to your view of this Sikhi Principle?


  • 8. Verbal Support from leader of SGPC/Akal Takhat - Wrong
    'Philosophy of Sikhism by Gyani Sher Singh (Ph.D), Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee.' Amritsar As a true Vaisnavite Kabir remained a strict vegetarian. Kabir far from defying Brahmanical tradition as to the eating of meat, would not permit so much, as the plucking of a flower (G.G.S. pg 479), whereas Nanak deemed all such scruples to be superstitions, Kabir held the doctrine of Ahinsa or the non-destruction of life, which extended even to that of flowers. The Sikh Gurus, on the contrary, allowed and even encouraged, the use of animal flesh as food. Nanak has exposed this Ahinsa superstition in Asa Ki War (G.G.S. pg 472) and Malar Ke War (G.G.S. pg. 1288). .

All the Shabads in the Guru Granth Sahib have to be equally respected no matter whether written by our Living Gurus or by the Sikh Bhagats.

www.sikhitothemax.com Cardinal Sins by Bhai Desa Singh Please read this Hukamname by Bhai Desa Singh and also refer to the following Vaar of Bhai Gurdas ji:


The following Shabads are from the Varan by Bhai Gurdas ji, whose Bani is referred to as the "Key" to the Sri Guru Granth Sahib:

ਪਉੜੀ 17 (ਬਕਰੀ)

ਸੀਹ ਪਜੂਤੀ ਬਕਰੀ ਮਰਦੀ ਹੋਈ ਹੜ ਹੜ ਹਸੀ॥ ਸੀਹ੝ ਪ੝ਛੈ ਵਿਸਮਾਦ੝ ਹੋਇ ਇਤ੝ ਅਉਸਰਿ ਕਿਤ੝ ਰਹਸਿ ਰਹਸੀ॥
ਬਿਨਉ ਕਰੇਂਦੀ ਬਕਰੀ ਪ੝ਤ੝ਰ ਅਸਾਡੇ ਕੀਚਨਿ ਖਸੀ॥ ਅਕ ਧਤੂਰਾ ਖਾਧਿਆਂ ਕ੝ਹਿ ਕ੝ਹਿ ਖਲ ਉਖਲਿ ਵਿਣਸੀ॥
ਮਾਸ੝ ਖਾਨਿ ਗਲ ਵਢਿ ਕੈ ਹਾਲ੝ ਤਿਨਾੜਾ ਕਉਣ੝ ਹੋਵਸੀ॥ ਗਰਬ੝ ਗਰੀਬੀ ਦੇਹ ਖੇਹ ਖਾਜ੝ ਅਖਾਜ੝ ਅਕਾਜ੝ ਕਰਸੀ॥
ਜਗਿ ਆਇਆ ਸਭ ਕੋਇ ਮਰਸੀ

seeh pajoothee bakaree maradhee hoee harr harr hasee. seehu pushhai visamaadh hoe eith aousar kith rehas rehasee.
bino karae(n)adhee bakaree puthr asaaddae keechan khasee. ak dhhathooraa khaadhhiaaa(n) kuhi kuhi khal oukhal vinasee.
maas khaan gal vadt kai haal thinaarraa koun hovasee. garab gareebee dhaeh khaeh khaaj akhaaj akaaj karasee.
jag aaeiaa sabh koe marasee.

(She Goat)

Lion catches a goat; As the goat is dying, it begins to laugh. In awe the lion asks, why are you laughing?
Humbly the goat says: Our sons are destroyed (castrated). We only eat wild plants and suffer being slayed & skinned alive.
Those who cut our throats and eat our flesh, what will be their plight?
Proud and arrogant their bodies are a waste; inedible and fruitless. All who come to the world will eventually die.

Vaar 25 Pauri 17


ਪਉੜੀ 21 ( ਨਿਗ੝ਰਾ ਮਨਮ੝ਖ੝ ਵਸ ਵਿਚ ਨਹੀ ਆ ਸਕਦਾ )

ਕ੝ਹੈ ਕਸਾਈ ਬਕਰੀ ਲਾਇ ਲੂਣ ਸੀਖ ਮਾਸ੝ ਪਰੋਆ॥ ਹਸਿ ਹਸਿ ਬੋਲੇ ਕ੝ਹੀਂਦੀ ਖਾਧੇ ਅਕਿ ਹਾਲ੝ ਇਹ੝ ਹੋਆ॥
ਮਾਸ ਖਾਨਿ ਗਲਿ ਛ੝ਰੀ ਦੇ ਹਾਲ੝ ਤਿਨਾੜਾ ਕਉਣ੝ ਅਲੋਆ॥ ਜੀਭੈ ਹੰਦਾ ਫੇੜਿਆ ਖਉ ਦੰਦਾਂ ਮ੝ਹ੝ ਭੰਨਿ ਵਿਗੋਆ॥
ਪਰ ਤਨ ਪਰ ਧਨ ਨਿੰਦ ਕਰਿ ਹੋਇ ਦ੝ਜੀਭਾ ਬਿਸੀਅਰ੝ ਭੋਆ॥ ਵਸਿ ਆਵੈ ਗ੝ਰ੝ਮੰਤ ਸਪ੝ ਨਿਗ੝ਰਾ ਮਨਮ੝ਖ੝ ਸ੝ਣੈ ਨ ਸੋਆ॥
ਵੇਖਿ ਨ ਚਲੈ ਅਗੈ ਟੋਆ

kuhai kasaaee bakaree laae loon seekh maas paroaa. has has bolae kuhee(n)adhee khaadhhae ak haal eihu hoaa.
maas khaan gal shhuree dhae haal thinaarraa koun aloaa. jeebhai ha(n)dhaa faerriaa kho dha(n)dhaa(n) muhu bha(n)n vigoaa.
par than par dhhan ni(n)dh kar hoe dhujeebhaa biseear bhoaa. vas aavai guruma(n)th sap niguraa manamukh sunai n soaa.
vaekh n chalai agai ttoaa.

Pauri 21 (Man having no Guru is uncontrollable)

The butcher slaughters the goat; salts the meat and strings it on a skewer.
While being killed the goat laughingly says: I have come to this condition for grazing only coarse leaves of arid wild plants.
What will be the plight of those who cutting the throat with a knife eat the flesh of animals?
The perverted taste of the tongue is harmful for the teeth and damages the mouth.
The one who eyes another’s wealth or body or slanders becomes a poisonous Amphisbaena.
This snake is controlled by the Guru's mantra but the Guru-less manmukh never listens to this glorious mantra.
The Manmukh blindly moves ahead, never realizing the approaching deep pit ahead!

(note: Amphisbaena is a mythical serpent having a head at each end of its body.)

Vaar 37 Pauri 21

Many thanks for your continued time and dedication to the cause.

--Hari Singh 00:01, 11 August 2006 (CDT)

Nothing Further To Add - Bowing Out

I am bowiing out. The arguments are going nowhere and I do not have the time or inclination to pursue such a trivial topic. I have asked some of the authors of the papers to contact Hari Singh, but none of them wish to. As the Guru's put it so well "The fools argue about flesh and meat", and I can rapidly see myself falling into the pit of foolishness along with others. Meat eating and Vegetarianism is a non issue for Sikhs:

I leave this "debate" with the following thought:

Page 1289 Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji

mehlaa 1. First Mehl:

maas maas kar moorakh jhagrhay gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee jaanai. The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.

ka-un maas ka-un saag kahaavai kis meh paap samaanay. What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin?

gaiNdaa maar hom jag kee-ay dayviti-aa kee baanay. It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering.

maas chhod bais nak pakrheh raatee maanas khaanay. Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night.

farh kar lokaaN no dikhlaavahi gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee soojhai. They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.

naanak anDhay si-o ki-aa kahee-ai kahai na kahi-aa boojhai. O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.

anDhaa so-ay je anDh kamaavai tis ridai se lochan naahee. They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.

maat pitaa kee rakat nipannay machhee maas na khaaNhee. They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.

Thanks, goodbye and goodluck in whatever cause it is you are trying to pursue.