Sikhs and meat

[singh121]

Gurfateh,

I’m noticed on many web sites mainly used to introduce Sikh to the west are using many references to “its ok for Sikhs to eat Jhatka Meat". and now on message broads ( BBC) many hindus are attacking this idea. i know that it is wrong but there are not quote that i can find in the SGGS ji. i think it is important that Gursikhs try to stop this because these web sites( sikhs.org and bbc.co.uk) are used by teaches in schools to educate kids in schools.

eg i found this on the sikh.org site.

Jhatka Meat

Meat of an animal which has been killed quickly with one stroke. Guru Gobind Singh dictated that Sikhs can eat jhatka meat of any animal but cannot eat Muslim Halal meat, where the animal has been slowly bled to death.

i don't know if it's true bout i still would eat an animal.

please share your wisdom

[Son of Scthia]

Heres some with quotes from SGGS, enjoy:

Sikhs and Sikhism by I.J. Singh, Manohar, Delhi

Throughout Sikh history, there have been movements or subsects of Sikhism which have espoused vegetarianism. I think there is no basis for such dogma or practice in Sikhism. Certainly Sikhs do not think that a vegetarian's achievements in spirituality are easier or higher. It is surprising to see that vegetarianism is such an important facet of Hindu practice in light of the fact that animal sacrifice was a significant and much valued Hindu Vedic ritual for ages. Guru Nanak in his writings clearly rejected both sides of the arguments - on the virtues of vegetarianism or meat eating - as banal and so much nonsense, nor did he accept the idea that a cow was somehow more sacred than a horse or a chicken. He also refused to be drawn into a contention on the differences between flesh and greens, for instance. History tells us that to impart this message, Nanak cooked meat at an important Hindu festival in Kurukshetra. Having cooked it he certainly did not waste it, but probably served it to his followers and ate himself. History is quite clear that Guru Hargobind and Guru Gobind Singh were accomplished and avid hunters. The game was cooked and put to good use, to throw it away would have been an awful waste.

A History of the Sikh People by Dr. Gopal Singh, World Sikh University Press, Delhi

Commenting on meat being served in the langar during the time of Guru Angad.However, it is strange that now-a-days in the Community-Kitchen attached to the Sikh temples, and called the Guru's Kitchen (or, Guru-ka-langar) meat-dishes are not served at all. May be, it is on account of its be

ing, perhaps, expensive, or not easy to keep for long. Or, perhaps the Vaishnava tradition is too strong to be shaken off.

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 (S.G.G.S. pg 472) and Malar Ke War (S.G.G.S. pg. 1288).

Sikhism, A Complete Introduction by Dr. H.S. Singha and Satwant Kaur, Hemkunt Press, Delhi

In general Sikhism has adopted an ambivalent attitude towards meat eating as against vegetarianism. But if meat is to be taken at all, Guru Gobind Singh enjoined on the Khalsa Panth not to take kosher meat ie. Halal meat slaughtered and prepared for eating according to the Islamic practice. In fact it is one of the kurahits for every amritdhari Sikh. One who infringes it becomes patit

(apostate).

Real Sikhism by Surinder Singh Kohli, Harman Publishing, New Delhi

A close study of the above-mentioned hymns of Guru Nanak Dev clarifies the Sikh standpoint regarding meat-eating. The Guru has not fallen into the controversy of eating or not eating animal food. He has ridiculed the religious priests for raising their voice in favour of vegetarianism. He called them hypocrites and totally blind to the realities of life. They are unwise and thoughtless persons, who do not go into the root of the matter. According to him, the water is the source of all life whether vegetable or animal.

Guru Nanak Dev said:

"None of the grain of corn is without life. In the first place, there is life in water, by which all a

re made green" (// Asa M.1, p. 472).

Thus there is life in vegetation and life in all types of creatures.

Introduction to Sikhism by Dr. Gobind Singh Mansukhani, Hemkunt Press, Delhi

The Gurus neither advocate meat nor banned its use. They left it to the choice of the individual. There are passages against meat, in the Adi Granth. Guru Gobind Singh however prohibited for the Khalsa the use of Halal or Kutha meat prepared in the Muslim ritualistic way.

Introduction to Sikhism by G.S. Sidhu, Shromini Sikh Sangat, Toronto

There are no restrictions for the Sikhs regarding food, except that the Sikhs are forbidden to eat meat prepared as a ritual slaughter. The Sikhs are asked to abstain from intoxicants.

The Sikh Faith by Gurbakhsh Singh, Canadian Sikh Study and Teaching Society, Vancouver

According to the Maryada booklet 'Kutha', the meat prepared by the Muslim ritual, is prohibited for a Sikh. Regarding eating other meat, it is silent. From the prohibition of the Kutha meat, it is rightly presumed that non-Kutha meat is not prohibited for the Sikhs. Beef is prohibited to the Hindus and pork to the Muslims. Jews and Christians have their own taboos. They do not eat certain kinds of meat on certain days. Sikhs have no such instructions. If one thinks he needs to eat meat, it does not matter which meat it is, beef, poultry, fish, etc., or which day it is. One should, however, be careful not to eat any meat harmful for his health. Gurbani's instructions on this topic are very clear.

"Only fools argue whether to eat meat or not. Who can define what is meat and what is not meat? Who knows where the sin lies, being a vegetarian or a non-vegetarian?" (1289-SGGS)

Scientific Interpretation of Gurbani, Paper by Dr. Devinder Singh Chahal

The above discussion leads us to the conclusion that the Sikh Gurus made people aware of the fact that it is very difficult to distinguish between a plant and an animal, therefore, it is difficult to distinguish between a veget

arian and a non-vegetarian diets and there is no sin of eating food originating from plants or animals.

Mini Encyclopaedia of Sikhism by H.S. Singha, Hemkunt Press, Delhi.

The practice of the Gurus is uncertain. Guru Nanak seems to have eaten venison or goat, depending upon different janamsakhi versions of a meal which he cooked at Kurukshetra which evoked the criticism of Brahmins. Guru Amardas ate only rice and lentils but this abstention cannot be regarded as evidence of vegetarianism, only of simple living. Guru Gobind Singh also permitted the eating of meat but he prescribed that it should be Jhatka meat and not Halal meat that is jagged in the Muslim fashion.

[Singhstah]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

why was my post deleted <_<

Mod -11 : your post did not contribute anything to the topic. Not Everything is to do with Nihungs (Nangs as you called them).

[Gupt daasan daas]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

i have only one thing to say

to tell u the truth

i really dont care wat scholars say

i wud rather look at the jeevans of gursikhs and try to mould our lives to be like them

they shud be our heros

sants who DID NOT eat meat

Sant baba jarnail singh je khalsa bhindranwale

sant baba gurbachan singh je khalsa bhindranwale

sant baba sundar singh je khalsa bhindranwale

( lets just say all 14 jathedars of damdami taksal)

sant baba nand singh je

sant baba ishar singh je

sant baba koondar singh je

sant baba attar singh je

sant baba waryam singh je

sant baba thakur singh je

sant baba mitt singh je( a nihang)

sant baba keertan singh je( jathedat of taurna dal nihangs, a brahmgiani)

and the list goes on and on and on

i wud happily listen to these sants than any schollar on important isses any day

as for hardcore proof from bani, and other sources, check the video on gursikhijeevan.com

it has enough evidence meat is forbidden

bhula chuka maf

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[atl singh]

sant baba sewa singh jee

bhai sahb bhai jeevan singh jee..

meat is wrong. jhatka is wrong. thionk abouit this. if u jhatka a chicken or goat in this life the next life could have u being chatkahd by that chicken or goat in its person form. karma-- what goes around comes around

[Son of Scthia]

Ok well you look at the jeevans of GurSikhs while I point out the jeevan of our actual Gurus while their time on earth.

A) Guru Nanak seems to have eaten venison or goat, depending upon different janamsakhi versions of a meal which he cooked at Kurukshetra which evoked the criticism of Brahmins.

B) Guru Amardas ate only rice and lentils but this abstention cannot be regarded as evidence of vegetarianism, only of simple living.

C) Guru Gobind Singh also permitted the eating of meat but he prescribed that it should be Jhatka meat and not Halal meat that is jagged in the Muslim fashion.

"Only fools argue whether to eat meat or not. Who can define what is meat and what is not meat? Who knows where the sin lies, being a vegetarian or a non-vegetarian?" (1289-SGGS)

I dont know where the sin lies, I have and will continue to eat meat.

[akjforever]

Kuthha and Sikhism

The controversy in the Khalsa Panth over being a vegetarian or non-vegetarian arose due to the difference in the interpretation of the word Kuthha - one of the four primary taboos or Cardinal Sins for the Sikhs. Before going into the depth of what "Kuthha' really means, it is imperative to consider the real importance of these taboos in Sikhism. It is an undisputed fact that any Sikh who commits any one of these four taboos becomes an apostate. That means he is no longer a Sikh, i.e., he is automatically de-linked and ex-communicated from the Khalsa Brotherhood, even though he may be considered a Sikh by society. As a natural corollary, he loses the Grace of the Satguru without which no progress can be made in achieving the Bliss of Naam-Simran. The four great taboos prescribed for the Sikhs are, thus, of fundamental importance.

Being of such fundamental importance, the four taboos cannot, obviously, be based upon any temporary contingency of the prevailing circumstances. They must have their own solid basis and foundation, and must be conducive to spiritual upliftment through Naam-Simran, which occupies the pivotal position in the whole edifice of Sikhism. Otherwise, they will lose their applicability in the changed circumstances, especially when their role in the spiritual progress is doubtful or even negative. It is explicit in Gurbani that the principles of Gurmat are unchangeable and of permanent standing:

"Gurmatat Mat Achal Hai Chalaey Na Sakey Koey" (pg. 548)

[The Instruction of the Guru is Unshakable. No

ne can change it.]

Obviously, therefore, these four basic taboos formulated by the Tenth Guru must have their own solid base which would stand the stress of all times.

The word Kuthha is generally (or erronously) taken to mean HaIaaI meat i.e. "Meat obtained by the Muslim method of slaying the animal, slowly severing the main blood artery of the throat of the animal, while reciting religious formulae, the main object of slaughtering in this manner being a sacrifice to God to expiate the sins of the slaughterer and its flesh as food being only a secondary object..." The Jhatka method has been described as killing the animal with one stroke of the weapon without exciting fear glands secreting poisons into its bloodstream and without causing harniftil psychic waves to emanate from the animal's mind."

The origin and basis of Halaal method of slaying animals by Muslims may have been sacrificial. However, by the time of the Sikh Gurus, it had just become a "Muslim method" without any consideration of its sacrificial origin. In fact, a separate class of professionals, called butchers, had emerged with the sole purpose of slaying the animals in this way. Thus, through the employment of butchers, the original idea of slaughtering the animal as a "sacrifice to God to expiate the sins of the slaughterer" had ceased to exist. The original practice had become professionalized and commercialized and remains so even now. So, according to the generally prevailing idea as advocated by many Sikh scholars, the main reason for imposing this taboo of not eating Halaal meat is not that it is sacrificial or even religious. Rather this taboo had been imposed primarily to liberate the Sikhs from mental slavery of the then rulers of the Muslim faith who had banned by law the slaying of animals by any method other than Halaal. If this interpretation is accepted, then the following points arise:

(i) With the changed times now, when there is no longer such coercion from any quarter, there should be no

need for continuing this taboo in the list of the four taboos because the reason for the imposition of this taboo no longer exists.

(ii) It also implies that the four taboos which, have been declared by Satguru himself as basic and of fundamental importance, may not necessarily be conducive to spiritual enhancement of the soul through Naam-Simran; their objective being merely to create a spirit of moral, and, according to some, physical strength to face the unjust and tyrannic rule of the then rulers. Obviously, this cannot be the situation as the main and the only objective of the Satguru was and is to implant the Holy Naam firmly in the minds of the Sikhs through Holy Amrit (Khande-Ki.Pahul). One cannot imagine the All knowing Satguru imposing a taboo of such basic importance which has no relationship with, or which does not help his Sikhs in the achievement of the Spiritual Bliss.

(iii) If we accept this position of a taboo being imposed only to serve the conditions prevailing at a particular time, then we provide a pretext to the so-called Modern Sikhs who consider that the keeping of Keshas is no longer necessary in the changed times. They also contend that Kirpan is now of little significance in this atomic age. They openly assert that religion must change with the changing times. The spirit of Sikhism, according to them, lies only within the Sikhs and it has nothing to do with the outward appearance or baanaa. They further contend that the then prevailing circumstances made the necessity of keeping Sikhs unique and easily distinguishable. In the changed circumstances that necessity no longer exists. Thus, accepting the above background of the Kuthha will lead to total destruction of the edifice of Sikhism.

(iv) Moreover, how would we classify fish? Is it HaIaal or Jhatka?

(v) Meat-eating Sikh brethren advocate that the only touchstone to be used in deciding whether meat should be eaten or refrained from, is whether it creates trouble in the body and fills the mind with evil.

If there is no such ill effect then there is no harm in eating it. In the support of this contention, they cite the following couplet from Gurbani:

"Baba Hore Khanna Khushi Khuaar

Jit Khaadey Tan Peeriay, Man Mey Chaley Vikaar" (pg. 196)

O Baba! All other foods (except the Naam) create trouble in the body and fill the mind with evil.

Evidently the foregoing couplet is a mis-quotation in this context because herein Guru Sahib is comparing all material foods with the Divine Food (i.e. Naam-Simran) and is decrying the former. The word HORE is very crucial in this couplet.It does not mean ANY food but any OTHER food, i.e., any food other than NAAM. In the absence of the Divine Food (Naam), all material foods will sicken the body as well as the soul. The very idea of eating meat fills the mind with evil making it aggressive and a partner in taking the life of an innocent creature. For this very reason, almost all of the well-known spiritually enlightened Gursikhs of the past and present have been and are shunning meat and allied non-vegetarian foods. Such foods are not conducive to spiritual development and Naam.Simran and, therefore, the all-knowing Satguru could not approve them.

(vi) In two Hukam Naamaas of Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib there are clear cut instructions prohibiting the eating of meat, fish, etc. The actual words used are "Maas machhi de nerrey nahin jawnaa." when Guru Nanak in his sixth form prohibits Siks's from eating flesh in such a strong language, how can he, in his tenth form, issue instructions absolutely contrary to and in negation of his own earlier instructions?

(vii) Mohsin Fani (1615-70), the well known historian and a contemporary of Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib, writes in his work DABISTAN-E- MAZAHIB as follows:

"Having prohibited his disciples to drink wine and eat pork, he (Nanak) himself abstained from eating flesh and ordered not to hurt any living being. After him this precept was neglected by his followers; but Aijun Mal, one of the sub

stitutes of his Faith, renewed the prohibition to eat flesh and said: This has not been approved by Nanak"

What clear cut evidence against eating flesh and drinking wine in Sikhism!

(viii) Sahib Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji's "UPDESH" to Bhai Daya Singh Ji which is mentioned in "SUDHARAM MARAG GRANTh", and also found written in some old handwritten volumes of Sri Guru Granth Sahib: "One who does not: (a) Steal, (b) Commit adultery, © Slander anyone, (d) Gamble, (e) Eat meat or drink wine, will be liberated in this very life (i.e. Jeewan Mukt)"

(ix). It is also asserted that bravery is connected with eating animal flesh. The assertion is baseless. In fact, bravery is not connected with brute body force. Real bravery comes out of the spirit of sacrifice for the Truth and arises from the state of mind. The very prevalent words Charhdi Kala among the Sikhs refer to the Charhdi Kala of the spirit. The Sikh history is full of such instances where Sikhs who were hungry for days together defeated the tyrant Mughal forces whose meat eating habits were legendary.

(x) There is no difference in either taste or nutritive content of meat obtained through Jhatka or Halaal methods. Meat remains meat, whatever may be the method of slaying the animal. It is a mockery of the august and everlasting holy fundamental principles of Gurmat to attach such a fundamental importance to meat obtained from a particular method of slaying the animal, that its eating by a Sikh makes him an apostate, and that obtained from another method of slaying becomes fully acceptable. Either meat is allowed or is prohibited totally. There can be no mid-way. It is rather strange that many 'modern' and 'intellectual' Sikhs, who are often questioning the rationale of such edicts as keeping of Kirpan or Keshas and even the particular type of Kachhehra, generally do not question the rationale of Jhatka and Halaal distinction in respect of meat. Obviously, it is the generally preferred taste of the tongue t

hat keeps them mum on this issue.

These are only a few of the inconsistencies and contradictions in accepting the interpretation of Kuthha to mean HalaaI type of meat.

Now let us consider as to what is the true meaning of the word Kuthha Etymologically, the word "Kuthha" (killed) is a past participle which has been derived from the root "Kohna" which means to slay or kill. This word does not mean to slay slowly or according to the Muslim method. In fact, to my knowledge, this word has never been used in the Muslim literature or in their general language to refer to "Halaal" meat. There are number of similarly derived words, e.g. "Muthha," "Dhatthha," etc. Thus, the word "Kuthha" literally means meat obtained by killing animals with any sharp weapon irrespective of whether any holy hymns are read at that time or not. In fact, reading of an holy hymns on this most cruel and heartless moment, is itself a highly sacrilegious act. For instance if one accepts a bribe or commits a theft while reciting holy hymns and these claims that because of his having read holy hymns during that act it no longer remains a crime, is only befooling himself.

Now consider this from another angle. For Halal meat, the animal is killed while reciting Qalima - the holy Mantra of the Muslims praising God in Arabic language. For obtaining Jhatka meat, they say Sat Sri Akal, which is also praise of God but in Punjabi language. Meat obtained while reciting praise of God in Arabic language is Haiaal (sacred) for a Muslim and is Haraam (unsacred) for a Sikh. Likewise meat obtained while reciting praise of God in Punjabi language is HaIaaI (sacred) for a Sikh and Haraam (unsacred) for a Muslim. By implication, meat being the common factor in both cases, Qalima is Haraam for a Sikh and Sat Sri Akal is Haraam for a Muslim. If both Qalima and Sat Sri Akal are praises of God in different languages, neither of them is Haraam. In fact, Haraam is the selfish trend of the mind of the meat eaters.

S. Kapur Singh rightly poin

ts out "Sikhism is not a religion of confusion and tomfoolery. The Sikh Way of Life is based upon the highest principle of Divinity -with the ultimate goal of merging one's soul (Atma) with the Ultimate Soul (Param-Atma) In Gurbani the word 'Kuthha" as well as 'Kohna' have been used at a number of places in this sense:

"Paap Karendar Sarpar Muthey.

Ajraeel Pharrey Phar KUTHHEY" (pg. 1019)

The sinner will certainly be ruined or destroyed.

The angel of death will seize and kill them.

(Here the word "kuthhey" means simply killing, not killing by Haiaal)

"Bed Parhey Mukh Mitthee Baani

Jeeaan KUHAT Na Sangey Paraanee" (pg. 201)

He (Pandit) recites the Vedas very sweetly, but he does not hesitate to kill life.

"Abhakhya Ka Kuthha Bakra Khanaa

Choukay Upar Kisey Na Jaanaa" (pg. 472)

They eat the meat obtained while uttering the unspeakable word (referring to Qalima of the Muslims which the Hindus considered as unspeakable) and allow none to enter their kitchen square.

The supporters of the word Kuthha to mean Halaal meat very often bank upon the above cited couplet to support their contention. They ascribe it to mean the meat obtained by slaying goats while uttering Qalima, which is the Muslim way of slaughtering animals. If the word Kuthha were to mean HaIaai meat, the use of the word abhakhya is superfluous. The sentence should have been simply Kuthha Khaanaa to mean the eating of the HaIaaI meat. The very fact that the word Kuthha has been qualified with the adjective abhakhya kaa means that Kuthha refers to simple meat of the killed animal, irrespective of the method of slaying the animal; and while qualifying meat to mean Haiaai, the words abhakhya kaa had to be particularly prefixed to convey that sense. Almost all the renowned commentators and translators of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, e.g., Bhai Sahib Vir Singh, Professor Sahib Singh, S. Manmohan Singh, etc., have interpreted this couplet in this way.

It is thus clear that the wor

d Kuthha means simply meat of the killed animal and does not go into the detail of how the animal is killed. Like so many other adulterations committed by the anti-Sikhs in Gurmat Rahit Maryada, this interpretation of the word Kuthha to mean HaiaaI meat has also been initiated and popularized by those very anti- Sikhs, in their efforts to destroy the roots of the new faith in order to decrease its efficacy and create doubts and dissensions in the Panth. Our brothers have unconsciously fallen in their trap.

The only hymn in the whole of Sri Guru Granth Sahib that is specifically cited (by meat-eaters) in support of eating meat is the hymn of Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji in the // of Raag Malhar on pages 1289-90 beginning with the couplet:

"Maas Maas Kar Moorakh Jhaghrrey.

Gian dhian Nahin Jaaney.

Kaun Maas Kaun Saag Kahaavey

Kis Mah Paap Samaaney" (pg. 1289-1290)

Only the fool quarrels over the question of eating or not eating of the meat. He does not have the True Wisdom. Without True Wisdom or Meditation, he harps on which is flesh and which is not flesh and which food is sinful and which is not. A deeper study of the whole hymn brings out:

i. Herein, Guru Sahib is addressing a Vaishnav Pandit who believes that he c an achieve his spiritual goal only by avoiding meat as food and not trying to obtain the true wisdom through meditation. He has stressed that only avoiding meat will not lead one to the achievement of Spiritual Bliss if one does not do Naam-Simran. This equally applies to all, including non-meat-eating Sikhs.

ii. It relates to the flesh or meat in general and not to any particular type of flesh - whether prepared by Halaal or Jhatka method. The Sikh supporters of flesh eating do not accept at all the intake of all types of meat, but according to them, only Jhatka meat is permissible and HaIaal is totally prohibited. In other words, what does the term "Kuthha" denote?

iii. The flesh of the mother's womb wherein the human body is born,

the flesh of the mother's breasts which feed the infant, the flesh of the tongue, ears, mouth, etc., used for perception of various senses of the body, the flesh in the form of wife and off-springs referred to in the Shabad, is flesh no doubt and one cannot escape it, but is it the flesh to be eaten as food by the humans? Does the love for this type of flesh involve any cruelty or slaughter of living bodies? Obviously, the Shabad has a deeper meaning telling Vaishnav pandits that merely escaping from the flesh does not take one anywhere. Nor can anyone get rid of the flesh (i.e., attainment of salvation from the cycle of birth and death) by his own futile efforts without the Grace of the True Guru.

One very well known Sikh writer, in his book on Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji's life, while claiming that the above hymn supports meat eating, recommends that those Sikhs who seek spiritual bliss through Naam Simran should shun it! Well, devoid of Naam Simran Sikhism is reduced to naught.

At this point it would be worth mentioning two well known anecdotes from the life of Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji in this respect:

i.During his visit to Lahore, Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji happened to stay in the neighborhood of a big slaughter house. In the ambrosial hours of the early morning, he heard loud shrills and cries of the animals being butchered there. Then, in the daytime, he saw the population addicted to vices connected with meat, wine and women. He was so moved by this sight that he exclaimed:

"Lahore shahar zahar kahar sawa pahar" (pg. 1412)

God's curse is upon the city of Lahore for a quarter of the day*

ii. Duni Chand was holding a grand annual feast to feed the Brahmins in celebration of Saraadh ceremony for the peace of his departed father's soul. Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji told him that his father had taken the body of a wolf and was starving on the nearby river bank at that time. Duni Chand immediately went there and saw the starving wolf. On seeing his son, the wolf

died and thus spoke to him from his Astral or luminous body:

"In human body when I was nearing death, I smelt the flavor of meat being cooked in the neighboring house and felt an ardent desire for it. I died in the same state of mind. That is why I was given the body of a wolf so that I could fulfill my last desire in human life."

Gurbani also says:

"Jit Laago Man Baasna, Ant Saaee Pragtaani" (pg. 267)

The desire to which the mind is attached, becomes manifest in the end.

This brings out clearly the thinking of Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji in this respect.

Sri Guru Granth Sahib prohibits eating of animal flesh in clearcut and unambiguous language in a number of places:

"Jee Badhoh So Dharam Kar Thaapoh,Adharam Kaho Kat Bhai.

Anpas Ko Munwar Kar Thaapoh, Kaa Ko Kaho Kasaaee. (pg. 1103)

You kill animals and call it religion (Rahit); then what indeed is irreligion (Kurahit)? Even then you consider yourself as a sage of sages; then whom to call a butcher?

"Bed Kateb Kaho Mat Jhoothhay, Jhoothhaa Jo Na Bichaarey. Jo Sabh Meh Ek Khudai Kahat Ho,To Kio Murghi Maarey" (pg. 1350)

Do not call various religious texts false. False is one who gives no thought to their contents. If you consider God is in all, then why you slaughter the chicken (i.e., life?)

"Rojaa Dharey, Manaavey Mlah, Svaadat Jee Sanghaarey.

Aapaa Deldi Avar Nahin Dekhey,Kaahey Kow Jhakh Maarey" (pg. 1375)

You keep fasts (i.e., religious acts) to appease God. At the same time you slay life for your relish. This utter selfishness is nothing but empty or nonsensical talk.

"Kabir Jee Jo Maareh Jor Kar,Kaahtey Heh Ju Halaal.

Daftar Daee Jab Kaadh Hai, Hoegaa Kaun Havaal" (pg. 1375)

Whosoever slays life by force and call it sanctified; What will be his fate when he will be called to account for it in His Court?

"Kabir Bhaang, Mach liii Surapaan Jo Jo Praanee Khahey.

Tirath, Barat, Nem Kiaye Te Sabhay Rasaatal Jahey" (pg. 1376)

Whosoever eats flesh, f

ish, etc. and takes wine and hemp, all his religious acts will go to waste.

"Kabir Khoob Khaana Khichri, Ja Meh Amrit Lon

Heraa Rotee Kaarney Galaa Kataavey Kon" (pg. 1374)

Blessed is the simple food of rice mixed with salt; Who would risk his head to be slain hereafter, for the meat one eats here?

It is thus clear from the foregoing that the word Kuthha used in the Sikh Code of Conduct does not refer to Halaal or sacrificial meat at all, but refers to meat and allied products as a whole. It means simply to slay or cut the animal -whatever may be the method used for the purpose. The use of the word in the same sense at a number of places in Gurbani brings out this point beyond any shadow of a doubt. Accordingly, eating flesh in general (and not only Halaal) is totally prohibited for the Sikhs and is one of the four Cardinal Sins enunciated in the Sikh Code of Conduct. It is a great travesty of the factual position to assert that, tIn the Sikh Doctrine, therefore, there is no religious injunction for or against meat eating; it is a matter of individual choice and discretion, a most sensible principle.

All the Rahits (Do's) and Kurahits (Don'ts or taboos) are of fundamental importance in Sikhism. These are a pre-condition for one's being accepted for baptism or taking of Amrit which means nothing but Naam:

"Amrit Naam Parmesar Tera Jo Simray So Jeevey" (pg. 616)

God; Amrit is nothing but your Naam and he alone lives who meditates or contemplates on it.

Amrit Har Har Naam Hay Meri Jindareeay

Amrit Gurmat Paaey Ram" (pg. 538)

The Naam Divine is Amrit; and is obtained through the Guru's Instruction.

This very fact shows that all these commandments have definite spiritual import and thus are of intrinsic value. None of these, therefore, can be left to an individual's discretion.

Besides propagating this misinterpretation of the word Kathha and encouraging the Sikhs in general to eat meat, the same people have gone to the ext

ent of giving the very respectable name of Mahaan Prasad to this absolutely proscribed and profane food. This has been done to mislead the general unsuspecting, simple and innocent Sikh masses in a very subtle way. It is a pity that many of us have fallen prey to this mischievous game, and have even started propagating this misinterpretation.

In the old Sikh literature, the word Mahaan Prasad has been used to denote the most sacred and sanctified food which is now commonly known as Karrah Prasad. Bhai Sahib Bhai Gurdas Ji has used this terminology a number of times in his works, and all the commentators of his works, including those of Shromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (S.G.P.C.), have accepted this interpretation. Karrah Prasad has a very sacred and distinct place in Sikh tradition and practice, and has, therefore, been very aptly and correctly referred to as Mahaan Prasad.

[ramnik]

any doctors in this forum? i heard from people that people having blood group "A" should have meat on their diet compulsory and they tend to get health problems if they dont eat enough meat. this is because huimans having "A" blood group are decendants directly to early age or primal humans who lived primarily on meat.

moderators i hope i am i in tune with this thread? i think i am.if not kindly move it to the health a fitness section. bhul chul maaf

[Akaal Purakh Di Fauj]

Med Student here :wub:

Ram I think this is the theory your talking about

Dr D’Adamo believes our blood group determines how our bodies deal with different nutrients. His theory is based on the idea that each blood group has its own unique antigen marker (a substance that the body recognises as being alien) and this marker reacts badly with certain foods, leading to all sorts of potential health problems. Furthermore, Dr D’Adamo believes that levels of stomach acidity and digestive enzymes are linked with your blood type.

Dr D’Adamo believes that because blood types evolved at different times throughout history, we should eat a diet based on the types of foods our ancestors typically ate at the time when our blood type was first recognised!

And I think you mean according to this persons theory that it is people with blood group O who need to eat meat... Dr D’Adamo says that our digestive tract retains the memory of ancient times, and so type Os need to eat a typical hunter-gatherer type diet. In other words, type Os should follow a high-protein, low-carb diet with lots of meat and fish but no dairy products, wheat or grains....whats strange is that O is the most commmon blood group in Uk...so accordding to this mans theory most of Uk should b

ecome meat-eaters

According to his theory people with blood group A, digestive system is apparently very good at remembering that our ancestors had settled, farming lifestyles, which included eating lots of grains and vegetables but little meat. Consequently, blood type A’s should follow a vegetarian diet but still avoid dairy products. This means nuts, seeds, beans, cereals, pasta, rice, fruit and veg are all on the ‘to eat’ list.

Judt to inform everyone on this forum..that this theory is wrong....its just something i think he dreamt up .

Medical experts universally agree that the theory is nonsense, and say there is absolutely no link between our blood group and the diet we eat.

:wub:

[sskhalsa]

veerje, could u dwell more into the karah prashad misnomer?? ive never heard of that, but i dont doubt its truth