Why do most Sikhs that eat meat not eat beef?

[Kira]

11 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Thanks for writing all this out on Uggardanti.

Any fair reading of Uggardanti (taking into all the lines, not just the "... dharam Hindu ..." line) will reveal a mindset antagonistic towards both "Hindu" and Islamic paths, seeing Khalsa as the highest path.

Yeah, Guru Ji invokes Bhagauti/Shakti as being the one residing over the Panth.

[ipledgeblue]

12 hours ago, ADMIN said:

This forum does not allow meat eating nor encourage meat favoring or supporting in any form. Topic will get closed if replies continue  on meat diet.

can the forum become more panthic and encourage less pro-jathebandi views?

Please show more respect for rehit. Also Akal Takht maryada does not have an anti-meat stance, can this forum not comply with Akal Takht maryada?

Since the forum is called "SIKHSANGAT", why not respect the views of sangat? Sangat represents Guru, not just individuals.

it is really important for us to control hunkaar and not fall into haumai trishna as sikhs.

[Jonny101]

11 hours ago, BhForce said:

Thanks for writing all this out on Uggardanti.

Any fair reading of Uggardanti (taking into all the lines, not just the "... dharam Hindu ..." line) will reveal a mindset antagonistic towards both "Hindu" and Islamic paths, seeing Khalsa as the highest path.

The Sikhs during the 1700s were not politically correct like today's Sikhs who say all religions are equal. They knew that Khalsa Dharm was far superior to the other two traditions. That also reflects their geo political worldview. They never compromised by being lumped under the Islamic empires of the Mughals or later the Afghans and neither did they want to be in a subordinate position under the large Maratha empire. Instead they struggled to create their own Raaj independent of the Hindus and Muslims.

[ipledgeblue]

‘The chief work of the Seva Panthis is this: to serve the living spirit and not to worship stones, to provide food for all beings in free, the the communal kitchen as service, and to make havens for cows, cattle etc. To do all such religious deeds.’ 
(Baba Karm Das, transcript of recording, 06-03-2001)

[BhForce]

10 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

The Sikhs during the 1700s were not politically correct like today's Sikhs who say all religions are equal. They knew that Khalsa Dharm was far superior to the other two traditions. That also reflects their geo political worldview. They never compromised by being lumped under the Islamic empires of the Mughals or later the Afghans and neither did they want to be in a subordinate position under the large Maratha empire. Instead they struggled to create their own Raaj independent of the Hindus and Muslims.

Yeah, I think the entire reason that the Sikhs of that old times (even of new) suffered all the pains that they did is exactly because they did consider Sikhism to be superior to other paths. If, as some of our weak brothers say, the other paths are exactly the same, and you get exactly  the same results by following them, then why in the world would you bother to be a Sikh, and be flayed alive, impaled, beheaded, boiled, burned, or otherwise tortured and killed. And even if that didn't happen to you, if things remained peaceful, you have to follow rehit and do amrit vela. 

If all paths are exactly  equal, then why not just sleep in?

[Sukhvirk1976]

11 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

The Sikhs during the 1700s were not politically correct like today's Sikhs who say all religions are equal. They knew that Khalsa Dharm was far superior to the other two traditions. That also reflects their geo political worldview. They never compromised by being lumped under the Islamic empires of the Mughals or later the Afghans and neither did they want to be in a subordinate position under the large Maratha empire. Instead they struggled to create their own Raaj independent of the Hindus and Muslims.

But we don't follow the what the Sikhs of the 1700s did.. We follow sggs.. 

And also the sikh panth has always been very diverse and pluralistic.. I don't understand why you need to homogenise? 

There were Muslims in guru sahibs court who whilst not khalsa were still sikh? 

[Sukhvirk1976]

20 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Yeah, I think the entire reason that the Sikhs of that old times (even of new) suffered all the pains that they did is exactly because they did consider Sikhism to be superior to other paths. If, as some of our weak brothers say, the other paths are exactly the same, and you get exactly  the same results by following them, then why in the world would you bother to be a Sikh, and be flayed alive, impaled, beheaded, boiled, burned, or otherwise tortured and killed. And even if that didn't happen to you, if things remained peaceful, you have to follow rehit and do amrit vela. 

If all paths are exactly  equal, then why not just sleep in?

I believe bani in sggs ji addresses why Sikhs don't believe to be superior as such