Jump to content
shastarSingh

Proof of Sikhs eating Meat in 17th Century!

Recommended Posts

The DabestÄn-e MazÄheb, also transliterated as DabistÄn-i MazÄhib (Persian: Ø¯Ø¨Ø³ØªØ§Ù ÙذاÙب‎‎) "School of Religions", is an examination and comparison of South Asian religions and sects of the mid-17th century. The work is written in Persian, probably having been composed in about 1655 CE.

‘The Guru believes in one God. His followers put not their faith in idol-worship. They never pray or practice austerities like the Hindus. They believe not in their incarnations, or places of pilgrimage nor the Sanskrit language which the Hindus deem to be the language of gods. They believe that all the Gurus are the same as Nanak. The Sikhs are not restricted in the matter of eating or drinking. When Partap Mall Giani saw a Hindu boy who had a mind to embrace Islam, he said, 'Why do you become a Muhammadan? If you have an inclination to eat everything, you may become a Sikh of the Guru and eat whatever you like.’

 
-Mohsin Fani, 'Dabistan-e-Mazahib.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.sikhs.org/meat_gs.htm

 

Guru Hargobind Eating Meat

Mohsin Fani, Dabistan-e-Mazahib
Mohsin Fani was a historian, traveller and mystic who was born around 1615 in Persia. During the lifetime of Guru Hargobind he migrated to India and studied the religions of India. He became very good friends with Guru Hargobind and spent a great deal of time with the Guru upto the Gurus death in 1644. In between 1645 and 1654 he produced his great work 'Dabistan-e-Mazahib' meaning 'the schools of thought of various religions'. This book provides the most accurate account of the life of Guru Hargobind and the Sikhs at that time. Mohsin Fani writes:

"The Guru believes in one God. His followers put not their faith in idol-worship. They never pray or practice austerities like the Hindus. They believe not in their incarnations, or places of pilgrimage nor the Sanskrit language which the Hindus deem to be the language of gods. They believe that all the Gurus are the same as Nanak. The Sikhs are not restricted in the matter of eating or drinking. When Partap Mall Giani saw a Hindu boy who had a mind to embrace Islam, he said, 'Why do you become a Muhammadan? If you have an inclination to eat everything, you may become a Sikh of the Guru and eat whatever you like."

Some use a quote from Mohsin Fani to prove that Guru Nanak and Guru Arjan did not allow Sikhs to eat meat. Since he only emigrated to India during the lifetime of Guru Hargobind, his information about Guru Nanak and Guru Arjan cannot be considered an eyewitness account of his. Also vegetarian proponents usually only give a partial quote, the full quote of his is:

"Nanak himself abstained from animal food and the prudent Arjan endevoured to add to his saintly merit and influence by a similar moderation; but the adventurous Hargobind became a hunter and an eater of flesh, and his disciples imitated him in these robust practices."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only some of you put as much effort into other aspects of Sikhi as you do into finding justifications for eating meat (or not).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Are people really arguing that Vaheguru  on Earth ate meat? This is basically a complete decline in our thinking, at O.P. what's the difference between Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Is there any in your eyes?

Share this post


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

Are people really arguing that Vaheguru  on Earth ate meat? This is basically a complete decline in our thinking, at O.P. what's the difference between Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Is there any in your eyes?

These days sikhs have become vaishnav BAMMANS. Its all good to be a vegetarian but we shud not hate meat or meat eating sikhs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
4 minutes ago, shastarSingh said:

These days sikhs have become vaishnav BAMMANS. Its all good to be a vegetarian but we shud not hate meat or meat eating sikhs.

Daas doesn't even hate meat, but the question was why are you posting an article from someone who believes that the Guru changes the laws which he himself established. The only thing Daas hates is that these people are claiming Guru Sahib ate meat, which just wasn't true at all! Also you completely ignored Daas's question.

Edited by Jacfsing2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
14 minutes ago, muscleman said:

Will you do away with your fake modesty for God's sakes? One minute you address yourself as a 'daas' as though humility has become you and vice versa, like conjoined twins!  The next you crucify saints and saviours of other dharams!  Effing, schizo!! You are definitely not my effing daas!  Bloody hypocrite!

 Oh, look the anparrs have finally discovered an  authoritative account on our Guru Sahiban's life!  You really think a musalman is going to write anything true about Sikhism or the sikh Gurus?  Total BUL....

Read actual Gurbani, what was said hypocritically? (Don't know what Daas has done to offend you?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
Just now, muscleman said:

Don't apply such noble terms to yourself. Leave them for genuine Gurmukhs, so that downtrodden people like me and the rest of this human race have someone to look up to as genuine role models.  Surely, you wouldn't want to deceive them into following pakhandis like you, would you?

Daas is an Amritdhari, so clearly there has been a connection with giving the head to the Guru. Do you know what a Pakhandi is or all you can do is be an internet warrior? Get your role model from Gurbani and understand actual Guru's teachings, rather than argue on a forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Oh, look the anparrs have finally discovered an  authoritative account on our Guru Sahiban's life!  You really think a musalman is going to write anything true about Sikhism or the sikh Gurus?  Total BUL.

Thats racist!

Why cannot a muslim write something good about Sikhism?

There has always been musalmaans who admired Guru Sahibaan. Such musalmaans even exist today.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
1 minute ago, muscleman said:

Are you suggesting for one minute that just because you are a amritdhari that you have become a Mahapurakh? Are you now cut above the rest? 

You gave your head to the Guru? Don't make me laugh! Your EGO is has no bounds! Yes, I know pakhandis is, each time I read your posts! The definition of a pakhandis becomes clearer and clearer when I read your pakhdands here! Stop your pakhandis and stop referring to yourself as if you are really a 'daas!'  You are not anyone's daas but an egoistical pakhandi.

Do you even know any of the people on this forum? Where was it stated that just because someone was Amritdhari they were a Mahapurukh? Daas means servant, not Mahapurukh. And yes when someone takes Amrit they give their head to the Guru, a concept still alive today in Gursikhs. How is Daas a Pakhandi? You actually have to prove something rather than just spout out like some random person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Though I like reading philosophy. Reading Epictetus after some Seneca and Marcus Aurelius, it's not a patch on Gurbani. But the ancient Greeks and Roman had some good ideas and they had some ideas of the divine  (not their Pantheon of God's like Zeus/Jupiter etc.) If anything it was more advanced than when they took up those Judeo -Christian beliefs.  Some of their thinking was more in-line with Dharmic thinking. 
    • Simran345, here is a pangti on SGGS 558, it seems to be talking about darshan which happened in a dream. Now sleep is being called as blessed so that the darshan of God can happen again. ਇਕੁ ਨ ਰੁਨਾ ਮੇਰੇ ਤਨ ਕਾ ਬਿਰਹਾ ਜਿਨਿ ਹਉ ਪਿਰਹੁ ਵਿਛੋੜੀ ॥ 
      इकु न रुना मेरे तन का बिरहा जिनि हउ पिरहु विछोड़ी ॥ 
      Ik na runā mere ṯan kā birhā jin ha▫o pirahu vicẖẖoṛī. 
      But one thing, my Body's soul weeps not, which has separated me from my beloved. 
      ਪਰ ਇਕ ਸ਼ੈ, ਮੇਰੀ ਦੇਹ ਦੀ ਵਿਛੁੜੀ ਹੋਈ ਆਤਮਾ ਰੋਂਦੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਜਿਸ ਨੇ ਮੈਨੂੰ ਮੇਰੇ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਮ ਨਾਲੋਂ ਵੱਖ ਕਰ ਛੱਡਿਆ ਹੈ। 
        ਸੁਪਨੈ ਆਇਆ ਭੀ ਗਇਆ ਮੈ ਜਲੁ ਭਰਿਆ ਰੋਇ ॥ 
      सुपनै आइआ भी गइआ मै जलु भरिआ रोइ ॥ 
      Supnai ā▫i▫ā bẖī ga▫i▫ā mai jal bẖari▫ā ro▫e. 
      He came to me in my dream and again went away, upon which I wept copious tears. 
      ਉਹ ਮੇਰੇ ਸੁਫਨੇ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੇਰੇ ਕੋਲ ਆਇਆ ਅਤੇ ਫੇਰ ਚਲਿਆ ਗਿਆ, ਜਿਸ ਉਤੇ ਮੈਂ ਹੰਝੂ ਭਰ ਕੇ ਰੋਈ। 
        ਆਇ ਨ ਸਕਾ ਤੁਝ ਕਨਿ ਪਿਆਰੇ ਭੇਜਿ ਨ ਸਕਾ ਕੋਇ ॥ 
      आइ न सका तुझ कनि पिआरे भेजि न सका कोइ ॥ 
      Ā▫e na sakā ṯujẖ kan pi▫āre bẖej na sakā ko▫e. 
      I cannot come to Thee, O my love, nor can I send any one. 
      ਮੈਂ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੋਲ ਨਹੀਂ ਆ ਸਕਦੀ, ਹੇ ਮੇਰੇ ਦਿਲਬਰ! ਨਾਂ ਹੀ ਮੈਂ ਕਿਸੇ ਨੂੰ ਘਲ ਸਕਦੀ ਹਾਂ। 
        ਆਉ ਸਭਾਗੀ ਨੀਦੜੀਏ ਮਤੁ ਸਹੁ ਦੇਖਾ ਸੋਇ ॥ 
      आउ सभागी नीदड़ीए मतु सहु देखा सोइ ॥ 
      Ā▫o sabẖāgī nīḏ▫ṛī▫e maṯ saho ḏekẖā so▫e. 
      Come, O fortunate sleep perhaps I may again, behold that Husband of mine (in dreams). 
      ਆ ਜਾ, ਹੇ ਭਾਗਾਂ ਵਾਲੀਏ ਨੀਂਦ੍ਰੇ! ਸ਼ਾਇਦ ਮੈਂ ਆਪਣੇ ਉਸ ਭਰਤੇ ਨੂੰ ਮੁੜ (ਸੁਪਨੇ ਵਿੱਚ) ਤੱਕ ਲਵਾਂ।      Or do you suppose its meaning is actually different to what is translated ?
    • Do you have sources for this?
    • In urdu we also use 'Mauze' so i doubt if it is hindi word.It sounds like a persian one.Indians have problem prouncing words which end with sound 'z'.Just like Mumtaz Mehal became Mumtaj Mehal and now just Taj Mehal.
    • i have no issue using persian,hindi,english words in my day to day conversations in punjab.I just though a good opportunity to learn "shuddh" punjabi. 
×