Jump to content

Eggs ?


Guest guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

(please answer the question. im not looking for meat debate. if thread gets out of control admins can lock it)

i had a question..

one of my friends friend was having a talk with myself about meat and he raised the question about eggs. And i told him that sikhs dont eat meat . and hes like eggs as well, and im like yes snice it has a life form that in the future will be taken.

He answered that thats true but the eggs that are processed now in stores can never be in living form hence can never be hatched. is this true ??

So now if this is true, would eggs still be considered wrong to eat ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

rehit can NEVER BE CHANGED!! and SHOULDNT!! .. what guru gobind singh ji maharaj sed SHUD STICK !! EVEN NOW!!

we shouldnt change rehit around us .. more liek us around rehit

vaheguru

133443[/snapback]

That is true..... proponents of meat eating say they can eat "jhatka" , but is seafood like fish killed as jhatka.... and unfertilised eggs are a new phenomenon..... 10 years now if scientists use genetics to give birth to dead animals to do away the process of killing animals, would that mean we can eat them??? or will it be similar to jhatka.... since it is not ritually slauthered.....

I guess you can understan better on your own!

Fateh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well thanks for all that... but it still never answered the question. No brother, eggs have always been like that, its not a recent phenomenom,lol, eggs need to be fertilized in order to prodice a chick, so lets stay on topic, and saying you should obey without understanding is really pointless. Also I dont really think theyll "create" dead animals, because if theyre dead they have to um be alive in the first place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yo if ur amritdhari and ur panj pyaray say NO EGGS... then you do NOT question that... what u think or say don't mean nothing... if that is ur rehat... u live it out to the fullest..

now.. if ur not AD... then u use ur best judgement.. if u sincerely feel i's okay.. then as u wish.. if u don't.. then don't....

obviously if ur questionin the idea of whether egg is rite or wrong then there's something in ur mind telling u that it mite be wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes absoulutely no sense at all. Your basically telling everybody to be brain dead and follow orders without thinking. Why the hell would you want to follow something if you dont understand it? How can you have "sharda" when you dont understand what your pledgeing yourself to??? You cant believe in a thing if you havent questioned it and understood the reason behind it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some reasons

Milk is a food product. The cow produces it with the intention that it will be consumed for food. Herbivores like cows, goats, etc. drink milk. The fact that cows are mistreated now by the milk industry has lead many Gursikhs to go to organic milk, but our own Guru Sahibs drank milk.

Eggs are produced as a form of life. They are not meant to be food. The only things that eat the eggs are carnivores who steal them, like wolves, dogs, etc. No herbivore eats eggs. Hens do regularly give eggs that aren't fertilized. So do human women. You are eating the equivalent of a period (sorry to be so graphic).

Does that sound yummy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some reasons

Milk is a food product.  The cow produces it with the intention that it will be consumed for food.  Herbivores like cows, goats, etc. drink milk.  The fact that cows are mistreated now by the milk industry has lead many Gursikhs to go to organic milk, but our own Guru Sahibs drank milk.

Eggs are produced as a form of life.  They are not meant to be food.  The only things that eat the eggs are carnivores who steal them, like wolves, dogs, etc.  No herbivore eats eggs.  Hens do regularly give eggs that aren't fertilized.  So do human women.  You are eating the equivalent of a period (sorry to be so graphic). 

Does that sound yummy?

133495[/snapback]

cow produce milk for its calf not for humans.for centuries hindus befooled people

that cow is a mother and it is producing milk for humans.strange that some sikhs still beleive in it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some reasons

Milk is a food product.  The cow produces it with the intention that it will be consumed for food.  Herbivores like cows, goats, etc. drink milk.  The fact that cows are mistreated now by the milk industry has lead many Gursikhs to go to organic milk, but our own Guru Sahibs drank milk.

Eggs are produced as a form of life.  They are not meant to be food.  The only things that eat the eggs are carnivores who steal them, like wolves, dogs, etc.  No herbivore eats eggs.  Hens do regularly give eggs that aren't fertilized.  So do human women.  You are eating the equivalent of a period (sorry to be so graphic). 

Does that sound yummy?

133495[/snapback]

Why do people eat eggs, but not rooster sperm?? Same thing kinda, just without the shell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I was searching igurbani.com which gives correct pronunciation of Gurbani. I can’t remember all of it at once. I guess it relies on more practice, like more Sehaj Paths. The meaning becomes clearer. I have noticed slight variants in it. This could be because it’s written in old Punjabi.  
    • Veer Manpreet Singh, a lay preacher, claims that -Sikhs aren't supposed to worship Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We are only supposed to worship God as is written in Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We only "revere" Guru Granth Sahib ji.     He says a lot of other things in this video, some are good refutations of Hindu superstitions, but the reformers often go too far. Anyways, what he is saying about not worshipping Guru Granth Sahib ji is totally wrong. The reason is Guru Granth Sahib ji is Guru. Guru is Satguru. Satguru is God. We worship God. Therefore, we also worship Satguru (Guru Granth Sahib ji).   There are innumerable verses in Gurbani equating God and Guru. ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ The Guru is the Supreme Lord and the Transcendent Master. The Guru floats (saves) the drowning one. p49   ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ Know the Guru and God as One. p864   ਗੁਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਲਿ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਖੋਜਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡੁ ॥ There is no one at par with the Guru. I have searched and seen the whole universe. p49 (If the Guru is the greatest in the whole universe, shouldn't we worship the Guru?)   I'd like to ask Manpreet Singh what is worship? Any reasonable definition would include obeisance, remembrance, and praise. Those are exactly the same things Gurbani says to do regarding Guru! Remembrance and obeisance: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਸਦ ਸਦਾ ਸਮ੍ਹਾਰੇ ॥ Ever, ever, I think of the True Guru, ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਕੇਸ ਸੰਗਿ ਝਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ and the Guru's feet I brush with my head's hair. p387   Praise: ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਆਪਿ ॥ The Guru himself is the transcendent Lord and the supreme master. ਆਠ ਪਹਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਜਾਪਿ ॥੪॥੧੬॥੬੭॥ Throughout the eight watches of the day, O Nanak meditate thou on the Guru. p387   In fact, Gurbani says the way to find God is to worship (puja) of Guru: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਧੋਇ ਧੋਇ ਪੂਜਹੁ ਇਨ ਬਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਲਹੁ ਰੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Washing and bathing the True Guru's feet, worship thou them. In this way thou shall obtain my Lord Master. Pause. p1118   Could it be any clearer that we are to worship Guru ji?
    • Bro, reciting a shorter Chaupai Sahib is hardly "anti-Dasam". It's fine to argue that the longer Chaupai is more traditional, but the short one isn't anti-Dasam. That's like claiming shorter Rehras is anti-Guru Granth Sahib ji just because there are fewer selections from Guru Granth Sahib. It might not be traditional, but it's not anti-Guru Granth Sahib. I prefer the longer versions, but let's not exaggerate. Every tradition has a slightly different Rehras version. Nanaksar vs Taksal vs Nihangs and so on. The basic template for Rehras is at the beginning of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Later, Chaupai Sahib was added and Anand Sahib always follows as the end of a process. Then some sangats added more saloks to start Rehras and others were added at the end. Some additional selections from Dasam Bani were also added, but it wasn't the same ones for every sangat. The important thing is to not hate on each other for these variations.
    • Umm, so you're upset that this jatha did Chaupai the same way it's being done at Harimandar Sahib for 100 years? Shouldn't you be upset at the manager of Darbar Sahib? I'm not saying that Sikhs who are aware of certain issues shouldn't do the longer Chaupai, but there are only so many battles you can fight. Instead of calling some jatha traitors because they're doing the (for better or worse) "standard" Chauapai published by the SGPC, it would be better to change things from the central point. You can't fault the average Sikh for picking up the average Gutka and doing paath.
    • It's the same here in Toronto. Alot of the gudwaras here are political orientated and get tons of funding from the government-probably want them stay hush hush with all the BS that has been happening with India.  These guys are skewing gurbani. A complaint was sent to a ragi singh a couple of days ago in regards to a hukamnama. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use