Jump to content
shastarSingh

Proof of Sikhs eating Meat in 17th Century!

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, kangw said:

This topic is to do with intoxication too!  Marijuana induces intoxication too.

If tomorrow, people from Sweden, Denmark, Siberia decide to become Sikhs, they will have to effing adapt to Sikhi Rules and not the other effing way around, you fool! They can either follow the Rules, OR they can get LOST and take you along with them. They are NOT SUPERIOR to Sikhi!  Sallah badmash.

As far as relocation is effing concerned, one relocates to where one's mouth is fed, where one can do an honest day's kiratt to feed one's effing family and have an effing roof over one and one's family's head!  

You don't need to imbibe shaheedi degh to get intoxicated, your hankaar is enough to give you the high.  You are the most foolish forum participant on this forum apart from one or two others.  

bro chill on the gusa ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shastarSingh said:

lol

thanks for the lovely post and thanks for praising me so much!

U talk about the rules? Other than one jathebandi, all panthic organizations believe that bajjar kurehit is HALAT MEAT EATEN BY MUSLIMS. 

There is so much evidence in the history that sikhs used to eat meat.

bro the meat that singhs ate then was chatka (killed by their own hand), not like now where every tejinder, deepinder and harjeet  eats any dross including halal because they are halkey hoe for maas 'what's the diff mate meat is meat ?' is their common wail 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

bro the meat that singhs ate then was chatka (killed by their own hand), not like now where every tejinder, deepinder and harjeet  eats any dross including halal because they are halkey hoe for maas 'what's the diff mate meat is meat ?' is their common wail 

Exactly sister! Puratan singhs used to either do SHIKAAR or used to do Jhatka by their own hands.

The slaughter houses we have these days are doing MAHAA MAHAAA PAAP and an amritdhari shud never meat of these slaugher houses.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

A Khalsa shouldn't be eating the meat somebody gets from a grocery store, or at a restaurant, but his own personal Jhatka from his own hands. Non-Sikhs would not be able to produce Daya, while the Khalsa should exemplify it, especially on the need to take care of animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

A Khalsa shouldn't be eating the meat somebody gets from a grocery store, or at a restaurant, but his own personal Jhatka from his own hands. Non-Sikhs would not be able to produce Daya, while the Khalsa should exemplify it, especially on the need to take care of animals.

Exactly! 

Akaali Nihangs in the Dal Panth love their horses so much that sewa of horses is considered to be the greatest seva. I am yet to find a community in the world which loves/cares the animal horse more than the Akaali Nihangs.

Edited by shastarSingh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kangw

I wouldn't bother arguing with this guy. He's not fooling anyone with his fake love he has for horses (or for any animal) because when it comes to survival, his conditional love for the horses will vanish and off goes their head. But it’s no worry for them because they killed them in the most "painless" way, so everyone’s happy. lol 

Edited by Berserk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, kangw said:

How and when did horse first arrive in India?  There are plenty of communities around the world that love, care and dedicate their lives to the preservation of the horse.  Horse is man best friend after a dog.  Amish people's lives revolve around the horse and a buggy.  Fool.

I know there are lots of people who love horses and dogs but the Akaali Nihangs give a divine/spiritual angle for their love of horses. They say that doing sewa of horses is the greatest Sewa of Guru Ghar and it gets u closer to Guru Jee and Akaal Purakh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
1 hour ago, shastarSingh said:

Exactly! 

Akaali Nihangs in the Dal Panth love their horses so much that sewa of horses is considered to be the greatest seva. I am yet to find a community in the world which loves/cares the animal horse more than the Akaali Nihangs.

Most communities love horses, even Manmukhs and Non-Sikhs love horses as more than family. If your referring to spiritual connections, the Shamans, Native Americans, and pre-Christian European religions and had spiritual connections to everything they could find in nature. We know that Non-Sikhs can't equal a Khalsa, but at least be reasonable in your claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kangw said:

Horses have played a significant part in the Greek mythology.  Horses were worshipped as gods. 

Thats good! but Akaali Nihangs also love their horses a lot and i really respect them for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This just brings a pangti to my mind SGGS Ang 718 ਕਉਨ ਕੋ ਕਲੰਕੁ ਰਹਿਓ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਲੇਤ ਹੀ ॥ 
      कउन को कलंकु रहिओ राम नामु लेत ही ॥ 
      Ka▫un ko kalank rahi▫o rām nām leṯ hī. 
      Whose blemishes remain, when one chants the Lord's Name? 
        ਪਤਿਤ ਪਵਿਤ ਭਏ ਰਾਮੁ ਕਹਤ ਹੀ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ 
      पतित पवित भए रामु कहत ही ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥ 
      Paṯiṯ paviṯ bẖa▫e rām kahaṯ hī. ||1|| rahā▫o. 
      Sinners become pure, chanting the Lord's Name. ||1||Pause||    Further on another pangti ਭਨਤਿ ਨਾਮਦੇਉ ਸੁਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਸੁਮਤਿ ਭਏ ॥ 
      भनति नामदेउ सुक्रित सुमति भए ॥ 
      Bẖanaṯ nāmḏe▫o sukariṯ sumaṯ bẖa▫e. 
      Prays Naam Dayv, I have become a man of good deeds and good thoughts. 
        ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮੁ ਕਹਿ ਕੋ ਕੋ ਨ ਬੈਕੁੰਠਿ ਗਏ ॥੨॥੨॥ 
      गुरमति रामु कहि को को न बैकुंठि गए ॥२॥२॥ 
      Gurmaṯ rām kahi ko ko na baikunṯẖ ga▫e. ||2||2|| 
      Chanting the Lord's Name, under Guru's Instructions, who has not gone to heaven? ||2||2||    It should be noted too that it is God who gives this ability to a man to understand the creator.  He is the one who leads people astray too. It is all his khel so whether you get a kalank or not... the important thing is you learn from it and do not do it again.  If it was in our hands who would want to get a kalank in the first place. Bhai Joga ji was saved by Guruji who stood guard for the whole night to stop him from getting to a prostitute on his wedding night. Bhai Joga did not technically do anything .... but still the kalank remains in his story ... he let his mind lead him astray.  Other peoples kalank can teach us something about our own kalank. However if you are going to get one ... it just happens. That is why we pray to Guruji to hide our kalanks.  He also hides our kalanks in the first place, when he wants to keep us from some sort of hurt.  Some get exposed but yes Satgur does keep the laaj of his sevaks too.   
    • Well, for starters, Bhai Gurdas ji wrote this, not me, and of course it is accepted as ਪਰਮਾਣਿਕ (authentic) by the Panth. Far be it for me to state the full and final meaning of any tuk, from any source. But since you asked my opinion, yes, I would say all of the above. The stain remains in the sight of Guru Sahib, the sangat, non-Sikh, and the bemukh, too. For a practical application of this, I would say: I would be highly skeptical of an adult pracharak who has full knowledge of what Guru ji wants us to do, and still commits bajjer kurehits, and then later does peshi, and wants to sit on the stage above the sangat and lecture them on Sikhi again. I think most of the sangat would agree. So all of those "babas" in the Youtube videos posted by the OP, they would not have the right, I think, to sit on the Gurdwara stage and preach. If they want to pesh and live a humble Sikh life, that's fine. Thoughts?
    • Makes me think while nobody wants to break their spoon, at least the spoon works just as well once repaired, it's just obviously been repaired, but hey that's better than throwing the spoon out.
    • A moorakh like me would need to listen to Katha on this. For now, what in your opinion, is the summary of what you posted? The blemish of apostasy remains in the eyes of who? Guru Sahib? The public? The apostate himself? I can understand that it remains but what exactly is it saying? Is this blemish one of distrust?
    • Here's another post you can confused face.  I wouldn't want you to be bored.
×