Can Sikhs Eat Beef?

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

Originally Posted by Harjas Kaur Khalsa

.........You have free choice. But don't blindly wrap this animal cruelty and slaughter in a neat hamburger package and say it is perfectly consistent with a spiritual teaching, because it clearly is not.

Full agreement here.

Most of what you are talking about has been tackled here, and Bani you have stated above has been rebutted and shown to be mistranslated, misquoted or misrepresented. There is only ONE reference directly to meat in Bani, the rest are spurious:

Page 1289 Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji

mehlaa 1.
maas maas kar moorakh jhagrhay gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee jaanai.
ka-un maas ka-un saag kahaavai kis meh paap samaanay.
gaiNdaa maar hom jag kee-ay dayviti-aa kee baanay.
maas chhod bais nak pakrheh raatee maanas khaanay.
farh kar lokaaN no dikhlaavahi gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee soojhai.
naanak anDhay si-o ki-aa kahee-ai kahai na kahi-aa boojhai.
anDhaa so-ay je anDh kamaavai tis ridai se lochan naahee.
maat pitaa kee rakat nipannay machhee maas na khaaNhee.

First Mehl:
The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.
What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin?
It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering.
Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night.
They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.
O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.
They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.
They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.
Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji

There is nothing special in Bani about a cow,. This is a hangover from Vaishnavism (and Hinduism in general).

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/essays-on-sikhism/8828-fools-who-wrangle-over-flesh.html

There

Suffice to say I find your arguments inconsistent and I cannot reconcile the so called cruelty to animals with cruelty to plants:

Page 143 of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji

mehlaa 1.
vaykh je mithaa kati-aa kat kut baDhaa paa-ay.
khundhaa andar rakh kai dayn so mal sajaa-ay.
ras kas tatar paa-ee-ai tapai tai villaa-ay.
bhee so fog samaalee-ai dichai ag jaalaa-ay.
naanak mithai patree-ai vaykhhu lokaa aa-ay.

First Mehl:
Look, and see how the sugar-cane is cut down. After cutting away its branches, its feet are bound together into bundles,
and then, it is placed between the wooden rollers and crushed.
What punishment is inflicted upon it! Its juice is extracted and placed in the cauldron; as it is heated, it groans and cries out.
And then, the crushed cane is collected and burnt in the fire below.
Nanak: come, people, and see how the sweet sugar-cane is treated!
Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji


Sikhism places no such emphasis on a particular diet for spirituality. It is a matter for individual conscience.

Total disagreement here. The answer to this post is in the second half of the first verse.

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.

Who are the people being considered fools here , "those who know nothing about Gi-aan and Dhi-aan.

So in order to fully understand what Guru Nanak Dev ji is saying here one needs a deep understanding of Gi-aan - Spiritual knowledge and Dhi-aan - Meditation.

Perhaps our thread supporting very senior moderator would like to give an in-depth analysis to explain his forum what is meant by the above terms and since he is also a "Historian" if he take the trouble of giving the forum an account of the events/life style prior to the birth of Guru Nanak Dev ji so that we can fully understand his justification for the above two translations in the context of the Philosophy of Guru Nanak Dev ji. What is Gi-aan and Dhi-aan as per SGGS. Kindly explain in detail.(please adhere to the rules of your own forum) and no wishy washey answers please.

If the case history of Guru Nanak cooking meat in Korokshetar (where this shabad was first delivered) at the Largest Hindu Festival, is used by some to justify that he has authorised eating meat (i.e. killing innocent animals for food) then could the author also on the same lines explain whether Guru Nanak's visit to Mecca disguised as a Muslim be taken as an acceptance of the values of Islam on the standing of meat eating.

Sikhism places no such emphasis on a particular diet for spirituality. It is a matter for individual conscience.

Explain the origin and need for sikhism.?

Suffice to say I find your arguments inconsistent and I cannot reconcile the so called cruelty to animals with cruelty to plants:

The feeling is mutual here. We hope you too will provide consistent arguments.

Your constructive and well supported answer would be very much appreciated.

Look forward to a mature response.

ekmusafir_ajnabi

 

[Randip Singh]

ਸਚੀ ਕਾਰੈ ਸਚੁ ਮਿਲੈ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਪਲੈ ਪਾਇ ॥
sachee kaarai sach milai guramath palai paae ||
By true actions, the True Lord is met, and the Guru's Teachings are found.

ਸੋ ਨਰੁ ਜੰਮੈ ਨਾ ਮਰੈ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨਾ ਜਾਇ ॥
so nar janmai naa marai naa aavai naa jaae ||
Then, they are not subject to birth and death; they do not come and go in reincarnation.


ਨਾਨਕ ਦਰਿ ਪਰਧਾਨੁ ਸੋ ਦਰਗਹਿ ਪੈਧਾ ਜਾਇ ॥੪॥੧੪॥
naanak dhar paradhhaan so dharagehi paidhhaa jaae ||4||14||
O Nanak, they are respected at the Lord's Gate; they are robed in honor in the Court of the Lord.

So what is true action ?
Answer found in Sidh Gost.
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sidh-gosht/5309-sidh-gosht-gurumukhi-script-english-transleration.html

Happy Hunting!!

Please elaborate further on what you mean?

 

[Randip Singh]

Full agreement here.




Total disagreement here. The answer to this post is in the second half of the first verse.

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.

Who are the people being considered fools here , "those who know nothing about Gi-aan and Dhi-aan.

So in order to fully understand what Guru Nanak Dev ji is saying here one needs a deep understanding of Gi-aan - Spiritual knowledge and Dhi-aan - Meditation.

Perhaps our thread supporting very senior moderator would like to give an in-depth analysis to explain his forum what is meant by the above terms and since he is also a "Historian" if he take the trouble of giving the forum an account of the events/life style prior to the birth of Guru Nanak Dev ji so that we can fully understand his justification for the above two translations in the context of the Philosophy of Guru Nanak Dev ji. What is Gi-aan and Dhi-aan as per SGGS. Kindly explain in detail.(please adhere to the rules of your own forum) and no wishy washey answers please.

If the case history of Guru Nanak cooking meat in Korokshetar (where this shabad was first delivered) at the Largest Hindu Festival, is used by some to justify that he has authorised eating meat (i.e. killing innocent animals for food) then could the author also on the same lines explain whether Guru Nanak's visit to Mecca disguised as a Muslim be taken as an acceptance of the values of Islam on the standing of meat eating.


Explain the origin and need for sikhism.?



The feeling is mutual here. We hope you too will provide consistent arguments.

Your constructive and well supported answer would be very much appreciated.

Look forward to a mature response.

ekmusafir_ajnabi

Hi Ekh Musfir, all your points have been rebutted before, and therfore no point treading over the same water. Try and keep the remarks non personal too.

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/essays-on-sikhism/8828-fools-who-wrangle-over-flesh.html

Thanks

 

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

Hi Ekh Musfir, all your points have been rebutted before, and therfore no point treading over the same water. Try and keep the remarks non personal too.

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/essays-on-sikhism/8828-fools-who-wrangle-over-flesh.html

Thanks

No Randip Singh, the above points have not been addressed. In order to fully understand Guru Nanak and His bani, one needs to start from the begining. Guru Nanak ji has addressed those people as fools who have not understood Gyi-aan and Dhi-aan. It appears that at this moment we are all fools for not understanding Guru Nanak and that you have an advantage over us. So as a senior Mod and originator of the thread we are presently looking up to you to tell us what Gyi-aan and Dhi-aan is and various other questions that I have put forward on behalf of the members together with a historical events behind the Gurus Bani w.r.t the issues that Guru Nanak Dev ji challanged head on.

You as Senior Mod and a Historian and as per the rules of your Forum, please enlighten us where we are wrong against your thread.

If your are unsure of your ground then please bring in someone who can answer these questions.

Look forward to your response. I assure you that I will keep my remarks non-personal and expect you too accept your shortfalls too.

ekmusafir_ajnabi.

 

[Admin]

You as Senior Mod and a Historian and as per the rules of your Forum, please enlighten us where we are wrong against your thread.

Isn't a "Senior Mod" not entitled to his views? ekmusafir ji, surely you could do much better than to use so many adjectives to impress upon your point of view. These adjectives rather make your stance weaker.

 

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

Isn't a "Senior Mod" not entitled to his views? ekmusafir ji, surely you could do much better than to use so many adjectives to impress upon your point of view. These adjectives rather make your stance weaker.

It is not just the case of some ones view, Aman ji,. It is a very serious issue that has baffled numerous people and split Sikh Dharam over the years by miss-quotations and miss-understandings. Besides it is a Statement by Randip Singh where by his own admission, he has contributed to the Essay only as an editor. The essay is by unknown authors whom he fully supports, (Perhaps they should come forth and be answerable to their Essay or an apology is in order by him to the Forum for miss-leading the community).

The reason for addressing Mr Randip Singh as a ”Senior Mod” is to inform members (New and Old) this discussion is taking place with a Senior member of the Forum who is also a Historian.. ( It was intended to be an introduction.) So that he should be taken seriously. What ever he says should be taken as a statement and not an opinion. No where in the past has he stated that it is his opinion. He is the editor of the Essay. One has to believe in it and cannot be done on the basis of an opinion. He perhaps knows something better that I am intending to explore for the sake of the future of Sikhism and Sikh Philosophy.

As per your very own suggestion and forum rules of asking what I do not know and
based on the verse “Maas maas kar moorakh jhagrey “ I am also taking the stance of a Moorakh here at this instance. “Gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee jaanai. “ I would like to understand what is it that Guru Nanak Dev ji trying to say that we all seem to have got it wrong. What is the basis of Sikhism as per Guru Nanak Dev ji.

I assure you that I will refrain from using the adjectives as you have pointed out. Please let me know in the future if I set over the boundary. I look forward to your personal input here.


Ekmusafir_ajnabi

 

[kds1980]

ekmusafir ji

A much bigger and broader essay in 20 parts is written by principal gyani surjit singh
The name of that essay is " Kaun maas kaun saag kahavey".But it is in gurmukhi.
Most of the points that are written in the essay fools who wrangle over flesh is covered in it
As you beleive yourself a person with great knowledge of gurbani and sikh history.Why don't you try to refute him

Here is the link

KAUN MAAS KAUN SAAG KHAVEY 01

 

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

ekmusafir ji

A much bigger and broader essay in 20 parts is written by principal gyani surjit singh
The name of that essay is " Kaun maas kaun saag kahavey".But it is in gurmukhi.
Most of the points that are written in the essay fools who wrangle over flesh is covered in it
As you beleive yourself a person with great knowledge of gurbani and sikh history.Why don't you try to refute him

Here is the link

KAUN MAAS KAUN SAAG KHAVEY 01

KDS1980

I categorically refute all his claims. The Essay in this now appears to be nothing more regurgitation of thoughts of Principal Gyani Surjit Singh with added swings and roundabouts and unfounded baseless allegations.. It is a result of those who have missed the first few essential lessons of Gurmat and have exercised “Padiya moorakh aakhiae, jit labh lobh ahankaar”. The twenty part Essay is a result of one who has failed to understand Guru Nanak and has made a display of his Manmat.

If Sikh Philosophy Network subscribe to his thinking then I feel very sorry for Sikhism and its future. It is your duty as modern Sikhs to question these perpetrators who are undermining the basic tenets of Guru Nanaks’ Phillosophy. If you do not understand Sikhism yourself how can you fulfil you duty as guardians. It is your duty as Mods to first understand Sikhism from the top rather than rely and promote poor quality essays and thoughts being circulated in this Forum.

The only way you will come to the truth is if you, along with understanding Gurbani also understand the circumstances in which and against what calibre of opponent it was delivered. Then and only then you can have progress. Consider it your good fortune that I am sharing this with this Form.

What you do in not of any consequence to me. But bear in mind that to propagate falsehood and misunderstanding is being “Bemukh” with our Gurus. The Bhatt Bani stands as a testimony of the appreciation of Bhatts when they were forgiven in the same life for turning their face for intimidating Guru Arjan Dev ji. (Ref Satta and Balwand).

Refer to Anand Sahib an see What Guru Amardas ji says about Bemukhs.

jy ko gur qy vymuKu hovY ibnu siqgur mukiq n pwvY ]
jay ko gur tay vaimukh hovai bin satgur mukat na paavai.
One who turns away from the Guru, and becomes baymukh - without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.
pwvY mukiq n hor QY koeI puChu ibbykIAw jwey ]
paavai mukat na hor thai ko-ee puchhahu bibaykee-aa jaa-ay.
He shall not find liberation anywhere else either; go and ask the wise ones about this.
Anyk jUnI Brim AwvY ivxu siqgur mukiq n pwey ]
anayk joonee bharam aavai vin satgur mukat na paa-ay.
He shall wander through countless incarnations; without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.
iPir mukiq pwey lwig crxI siqgurU sbdu suxwey ]
fir mukat paa-ay laag charnee satguroo sabad sunaa-ay.
But liberation is attained, when one is attached to the feet of the True Guru, chanting the Word of the Shabad.
khY nwnku vIcwir dyKhu ivxu siqgur mukiq n pwey ]22]
kahai naanak veechaar daykhhu vin satgur mukat na paa-ay. ||22||
Says Nanak, contemplate this and see, that without the True Guru, there is no liberation. ||22||
Be grateful for what Our Gurus message to you all.

Ekmusafir_ajnabi

 

[Randip Singh]

deleted post

 

[Randip Singh]

The essay is by unknown authors whom he fully supports, (Perhaps they should come forth and be answerable to their Essay or an apology is in order by him to the Forum for miss-leading the community).

Apology for what exactly?

It is for you to rebut the essay. You failed and you left the forum and came back.

The reason for addressing Mr Randip Singh as a ”Senior Mod” is to inform members (New and Old) this discussion is taking place with a Senior member of the Forum who is also a Historian..

You have no such intention. Your intention is as per usual to discuss the person rather than the topic. Sorry not playing your childish game.

( It was intended to be an introduction.) So that he should be taken seriously. What ever he says should be taken as a statement and not an opinion. No where in the past has he stated that it is his opinion. He is the editor of the Essay. One has to believe in it and cannot be done on the basis of an opinion. He perhaps knows something better that I am intending to explore for the sake of the future of Sikhism and Sikh Philosophy.

There are credible references in the essay from cited sources. You on the other hand are just someone who posts on the internet behind another name.

As per your very own suggestion and forum rules of asking what I do not know and
based on the verse “Maas maas kar moorakh jhagrey “ I am also taking the stance of a Moorakh here at this instance. “Gi-aan Dhi-aan nahee jaanai. “ I would like to understand what is it that Guru Nanak Dev ji trying to say that we all seem to have got it wrong. What is the basis of Sikhism as per Guru Nanak Dev ji.

No.

You explain to us what Guru Nanak is saying. You are doing exactly what the essay is saying, i.e. taking one or two lines out and trying to make them fit what you think. It won't work.

I assure you that I will refrain from using the adjectives as you have pointed out. Please let me know in the future if I set over the boundary. I look forward to your personal input here.

Ekmusafir_ajnabi

Yourr assurances are hollow.

You have inulted, attacked many memebers here, gone from the forum and come back. Claimed to be a personal friend of the Guru's and then complain of skin problems. Please do not vent frustratuions out on this forum. This is for intellectual discussion.

Thanks

 

[kds1980]

I categorically refute all his claims. The Essay in this now appears to be nothing more regurgitation of thoughts of Principal Gyani Surjit Singh with added swings and roundabouts and unfounded baseless allegations.. It is a result of those who have missed the first few essential lessons of Gurmat and have exercised “Padiya moorakh aakhiae, jit labh lobh ahankaar”. The twenty part Essay is a result of one who has failed to understand Guru Nanak and has made a display of his Manmat.

I am sorry but if someone does not agree with you that does not makes him moorakh.

If Sikh Philosophy Network subscribe to his thinking then I feel very sorry for Sikhism and its future.

No need to feel sorry for sikhism and its future

It is your duty as Mods to first understand Sikhism from the top rather than rely and promote poor quality essays and thoughts being circulated in this Forum.

Mods are no supermen they are just common paricipants who regularly and peacefully participate in discussions.We all here are trying to learn sikhism with the abilty which waheguru has given to us.

The only way you will come to the truth is if you, along with understanding Gurbani also understand the circumstances in which and against what calibre of opponent it was delivered. Then and only then you can have progress. Consider it your good fortune that I am sharing this with this Form.

I agree with you we should try to understand the circumstance and calibre of opponent in which the gurbani was delivered.But is it also not true that Guru's do not wrote any full shabad which condemns meat eating.Is it not not proof that guru's did not prescribed any particular diet?.Also apart from gurbani we have sikh history and nowhwere in sikh history we have any solid evidence that meat eating is condemned.Also your statement that we should try to understand the circumstance is equally applicable to lines which are used
justify vegetarianism.Its better if you people will open your mind and try to understand gurbani and sikh history with open mind.

What you do in not of any consequence to me. But bear in mind that to propagate falsehood and misunderstanding is being “Bemukh” with our Gurus.

I am really sorry to say but you have not authority to judge who is propagating falsehood
and who is bemukh.

 

[spnadmin]

KDS1980


Refer to Anand Sahib an see What Guru Amardas ji says about Bemukhs.

jy ko gur qy vymuKu hovY ibnu siqgur mukiq n pwvY ]
jay ko gur tay vaimukh hovai bin satgur mukat na paavai.
One who turns away from the Guru, and becomes baymukh - without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.
pwvY mukiq n hor QY koeI puChu ibbykIAw jwey ]
paavai mukat na hor thai ko-ee puchhahu bibaykee-aa jaa-ay.
He shall not find liberation anywhere else either; go and ask the wise ones about this.
Anyk jUnI Brim AwvY ivxu siqgur mukiq n pwey ]
anayk joonee bharam aavai vin satgur mukat na paa-ay.
He shall wander through countless incarnations; without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.
iPir mukiq pwey lwig crxI siqgurU sbdu suxwey ]
fir mukat paa-ay laag charnee satguroo sabad sunaa-ay.
But liberation is attained, when one is attached to the feet of the True Guru, chanting the Word of the Shabad.
khY nwnku vIcwir dyKhu ivxu siqgur mukiq n pwey ]22]
kahai naanak veechaar daykhhu vin satgur mukat na paa-ay. ||22||
Says Nanak, contemplate this and see, that without the True Guru, there is no liberation. ||22||
Be grateful for what Our Gurus message to you all.

Ekmusafir_ajnabi

The Shabad can be found on Ang 920, and the English is in the Dr. Sant Singh Khalsa translation.

 

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

The Shabad can be found on Ang 920, and the English is in the Dr. Sant Singh Khalsa translation.

The translation was acceptable hence It was posted. What is your point here?

 

[ekmusafir_ajnabi]

I am really sorry to say but you have not authority to judge who is propagating falsehood
and who is bemukh.

You can now wait for the Gurus to personally come and advise you who is propagating falsehood and who is bemukh if history and a personal account is insufficient evidence for you.

Good Luck.

 

[Astroboy]

ਜੇ ਕੋ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਵੇਮੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥
ਪਾਵੈ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਰ ਥੈ ਕੋਈ ਪੁਛਹੁ ਬਿਬੇਕੀਆ ਜਾਏ ॥
ਅਨੇਕ ਜੂਨੀ ਭਰਮਿ ਆਵੈ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥
ਫਿਰਿ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਪਾਏ ਲਾਗਿ ਚਰਣੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁਣਾਏ ॥
ਕਹੈ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥੨੨॥

ਵੇਮੁਖੁ = ਜਿਸ ਨੇ ਮੂੰਹ ਦੂਜੇ ਪਾਸੇ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ। ਮੁਕਤਿ = ਵਿਕਾਰਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ, ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ। ਹੋਰਥੈ = ਕਿਸੇ ਹੋਰ ਥਾਂ ਤੋਂ। ਬਿਬੇਕੀ = ਪਰਖ ਵਾਲਾ ਬੰਦਾ, ਵਿਚਾਰਵਾਨ। ਜਾਏ = ਜਾਇ, ਜਾ ਕੇ। ਭਰਮਿ ਆਵੈ = ਭਟਕ ਕੇ ਆਉਂਦਾ ਹੈ।੨੨।



(ਜਿਥੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਮੋਹ ਦੇ ਕਾਰਨ ਸਹਿਮ ਹੈ ਉਥੇ ਆਤਮਕ ਆਨੰਦ ਨਹੀਂ ਪਲ੍ਹਰ ਸਕਦਾ, ਪਰ) ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਗੁਰੂ ਵਲੋਂ ਮੂੰਹ ਮੋੜ ਲਏ (ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਆਤਮਕ ਆਨੰਦ ਨਸੀਬ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋ ਸਕਦਾ ਕਿਉਂਕਿ) ਗੁਰੂ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਦੀ। ਬੇਸ਼ੱਕ ਕਿਸੇ ਵਿਚਾਰਵਾਨਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਜਾ ਕੇ ਪੁੱਛ ਲਵੋ (ਤੇ ਤਸੱਲੀ ਕਰ ਲਵੋ, ਇਹ ਪੱਕੀ ਗੱਲ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ) ਕਿਸੇ ਭੀ ਹੋਰ ਥਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਮਾਇਕ ਬੰਧਨਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਦੀ। (ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਮੋਹ ਵਿਚ ਫਸਿਆ ਮਨੁੱਖ) ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਜੂਨੀਆਂ ਵਿਚ ਭਟਕਦਾ ਆਉਂਦਾ ਹੈ, ਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਸਰਨ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ ਇਸ ਮੋਹ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਦੀ। ਆਖ਼ਰ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਚਰਨੀਂ ਲੱਗ ਕੇ ਹੀ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਮੋਹ ਤੋਂ ਛੁਟਕਾਰਾ ਮਿਲਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਗੁਰੂ (ਸਹੀ ਜੀਵਨ-ਮਾਰਗ ਦਾ) ਉਪਦੇਸ਼ ਸੁਣਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਨਾਨਕ ਆਖਦਾ ਹੈ-ਵਿਚਾਰ ਕੇ ਵੇਖ ਲਵੋ, ਗੁਰੂ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਬੰਧਨ ਤੋਂ ਆਜ਼ਾਦੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਦੀ, (ਤੇ ਇਸ ਮੁਕਤੀ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ ਆਤਮਕ ਆਨੰਦ ਦੀ ਪ੍ਰਾਪਤੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋ ਸਕਦੀ)।੨੨। ❁ ਭਾਵ: ਮਾਇਆ ਦਾ ਮੋਹ ਅਤੇ ਆਤਮਕ ਆਨੰਦ-ਇਹ ਦੋਵੇਂ ਇਕੋ ਹਿਰਦੇ ਵਿਚ ਇਕੱਠੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਟਿਕ ਸਕਦੇ। ਤੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਮੋਹ ਤੋਂ ਖ਼ਲਾਸੀ ਤਦੋਂ ਹੀ ਮਿਲਦੀ ਹੈ ਜਦੋਂ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਸਰਨ ਪੈਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਗੁਰੂ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਨੂੰ ਜੀਵਨ ਦਾ ਸਹੀ ਰਸਤਾ ਦੱਸਦਾ ਹੈ।

 

[Archived_Member1]

This was my conversation with Aman ji and was hoping for him to respond. [/FONT]I do not intend to respond to it.

I did ask you several questions in the previous posts in the hope you would take a more mature stance but I am yet again bitterly disappointed. Calling oneself a Historian and a Sikh does not make one.

[/FONT]I will say this to clear your illusion that I do not post under any other names unlike yourself. "People who live in glass houses do not throw stones at others.

[/FONT]If is clearly beyond your capacity to respond sensibly, why not bring those who claim to be Sikhs and have written the essay. Why are they hiding? Let them defend themselves.

It is clearly not your or the forums intention to let the truth out.

Ekmusafir_ajnabi
[/FONT]

yet another case of ekmusafir getting away with insulting people with no action from mods.

why is this person not subject to the same rules of the forum as the rest of us?

 

[kds1980]

You can now wait for the Gurus to personally come and advise you who is propagating falsehood and who is bemukh if history and a personal account is insufficient evidence for you.

Good Luck.

From past 3 years I am reading everything that is available on this issue.could you please tell me what history and personal account I missed.As far as I know there is nothing in sikh history and personal account that prohibits meat eating.

 

[svea00]

ਜੇ ਕੋ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਵੇਮੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥ਪਾਵੈ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਰ ਥੈ ਕੋਈ ਪੁਛਹੁ ਬਿਬੇਕੀਆ ਜਾਏ ॥ਅਨੇਕ ਜੂਨੀ ਭਰਮਿ ਆਵੈ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥ਫਿਰਿ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਪਾਏ ਲਾਗਿ ਚਰਣੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁਣਾਏ ॥ਕਹੈ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥੨੨॥

jay ko gur tay vaymukh hovai ban satgur mukat na paavai.
pavai mukat na hor thai ko-ee puchahu babiaykee-aa jaa-ay.
anayk joonee bharam aavai vin satgur mukat na paa-ay.
dar mukat paa-ay laag charnee satguru sabad sunaa-ay.
kahai naanak veechar daykhahu van satgur mukat na paa-ay. (22)


Can we please work together and get the English translation on this, so that everyone can profit from your post, namjap?

 

[Astroboy]

ਜੇ ਕੋ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਵੇਮੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥
Jė ko gur ṯė vaimukẖ hovai bin saṯgur mukaṯ na pāvai.
One who turns away from the Guru, and becomes baymukh - without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.

ਪਾਵੈ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਰ ਥੈ ਕੋਈ ਪੁਛਹੁ ਬਿਬੇਕੀਆ ਜਾਏ ॥
Pāvai mukaṯ na hor thai ko­ī pucẖẖahu bibėkī­ā jā­ė.
He shall not find liberation anywhere else either; go and ask the wise ones about this.

ਅਨੇਕ ਜੂਨੀ ਭਰਮਿ ਆਵੈ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥
Anėk jūnī bẖaram āvai viṇ saṯgur mukaṯ na pā­ė.
He shall wander through countless incarnations; without the True Guru, he shall not find liberation.

ਫਿਰਿ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਪਾਏ ਲਾਗਿ ਚਰਣੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁਣਾਏ ॥
Fir mukaṯ pā­ė lāg cẖarṇī saṯgurū sabaḏ suṇā­ė.
But liberation is attained, when one is attached to the feet of the True Guru, chanting the Word of the Shabad.

ਕਹੈ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥੨੨॥
Kahai Nānak vīcẖār ḏėkẖhu viṇ saṯgur mukaṯ na pā­ė. ||22||
Says Nanak, contemplate this and see, that without the True Guru, there is no liberation. ||22||

 

[svea00]

Thank you kindly, namjap!

I see I was wrong sometimes, but nevermind I´ll do my best to get better.