Big meat debate

[Balait_da_Sher]

Its been beleive buddha and jesus ate fish. Its even said through historical facts that guroo nanak sahib ji ate meat in korakshatra.

Did that really happen? Could you provide some evidence or tell me where it states that please.

[GurbarAkal]

YO learner singh. did u bother watching that video link I posted above ? all the meat eaters twist and use gurbani tuks in their favor. just like that taksali singh explained in the video link I posted. ofcourse you are trying to confusing people with your BIG messages . yeh we know you are just gona say I m just quoting gurbani. sure you are. Yeh read part of those translations. the quotes you gave have nothing to with even the subject MEAT. let alone where U think it tells you its ok eat it.

Wearing blue robes, they seek the approval of the Muslim rulers. Accepting bread from the Muslim rulers, they still worship the Puraanas. They eat the meat of the goats, killed after the Muslim prayers are read over them, but they do not allow anyone else to enter their kitchen areas. They draw lines around them, plastering the ground with cow-dung. The false come and sit within them. They cry out, "Do not touch our food, or it will be polluted!" But with their polluted bodies, they commit evil deeds. With filthy minds, they try to cleanse their mouths. Says Nanak, meditate on the True Lord. If you are pure, you will obtain the True Lord. || 2 ||

can you tell me how does that quote tell you its ok eat meat? it just gives you example of muslims and wat hindus do.

Says Nanak, meditate on the True Lord. If you are pure, you will obtain the True Lord.

thats the main idea of the of that quote. DOESN'T TELL YOU ITS OK EAT or NOT EAT MEAT. don't worry buddy someone gona be waiting to do JHATKA GATKA on you after you die. you are gona have to pay for the animal you have eaten so far. you can deny it all you want. no one's gona come near to save you then. I can guarantee that.

[GurbarAkal]

YO n30 singh

Its been beleive buddha and jesus ate fish. Its even said through historical facts that guroo nanak sahib ji ate meat in korakshatra.Those were god themselves in (sirgun) form

where does it say in gurbani that Buddha and jesus were GOD THEMSELVES? really man you need to stop making up your stupid history. IF you really believe they were GOD roop themselves. wat you doing here then? go pray to christ or for all anyone would care you can go rub budha's tummy all day long which is supposed to be good look to get money. really man you are wasting everyone's time being so called "SIKH".

and about Guru Nanak Dev Jee its all made up stories of that he ate meat ..... can you prove that he did just like amardeep singh asked you?

[GurbarAkal]

n30 singh !

do you even know where KURUKSHETAR is btw? i just wana see ur general knowledge.

[Mkhalsa]

vwihgurU jI kw Kwlsw!

vwihgurU jI kI &iqh!!

Learner Singh.. Guess What?? I know how to post extremely long and boring articles no1 is gonna read anyway... (but this one is actually worth reading)

this is from: http://www.akj.org/skins/default/books.ppa...ookid=3&start=4

KUTHHA

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 dc-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 s

olid 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:

Gurmat Mat Achal Hal Chalaey Na Sakey Koey. (pg. 548)

The Instruction of the Guru is Unshakable. None 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 taken to mean Halaal 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..."12 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 harmful psychic waves to emanate from the animal's mind..."12

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 man

y 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:

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.

It also implies that the four taboos which, have been declared hy 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.

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 keep

ing 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.

Moreover, how would we classify fish? Is it Halaal or Jhatka?

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 Meh Chaleh Vikaar. (pg. 196)

0 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 Satguuu could not approve them.

In two Hukam Naamaas of Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib (Appendix C), 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 Sikhs 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?

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 Arjun Mal, one of the substitutes of his Faith, renewed the prohibition to eat flesh and said: This has not been approved by Nanak."13

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

viii. Sahib Sri Guru Gobind Singh ii'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:

Steal

Commit adultery

Slander anyone

Gamble

Eat meat or drink wine

will be liberated in this very life (i.e. Jeewan Mukt)".14

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.

There is no difference m 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 apos

tate, 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 that keeps them mum on this issue.

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

Now let us consider as to what is the true meaning of the word Kuthha. EtymologicalIy, 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 a 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 any 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 then 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 Halaal 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 Halaal (sacre

d) for a Muslim and is Haraam (unsacred) for a Sikh. Likewise meat obtained while reciting praise of God in Punjabi language is Halaal (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 points out "Sikhism is not a religion of confusion and tomfoolery.'115 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 Halaal)

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 KUIHHA 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 Kutliha were to mean Halaal meat, the use of the word abhakhya is superfluous. The sentence should have been simply Kuthha Khaanaa to mean the eating of the Halaal meat. The very fact that the w

ord 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 Halaal, 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 word 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 Halaal meat has also been initiated and popularized by those very anti­Sikhs, 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 in support of eating meat is the hymn of Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dcv 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:

Herein, Guru Sahib is addressing a Vaishnav Pandit who believes that he can 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 equal

ly applies to all, including non-meat-eating Sikhs.

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 Halaal is totally prohibited. In other words, what does the term "Kuthha" denote?

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 Dcv Ji's life16, 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 Slmran 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:

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.

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 Dcv 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."17

Gurbani also says:

Jit Laago Man Baasna, Ant Saaee PragtaanL (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 Dcv 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 ThaapohAdharam Kaho Kat Bhai.

Aapas 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 Khudal 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 Dekh 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 u

tter selfishness is nothing but empty or nonsensical talk.

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

Daftar Daee Jab Kaadh Hal, 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, Machhli Surapaan Jo Jo Praanee Khahey.

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

Whosoever eats flesh, fish, etc. and takes wine and hemp, all his religious acts will go to waste.

Kabir Khoob Khaana Khichri, Ja Meh Amrit Lon.

Heraa Rotee Kaamey 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, "In 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."18

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)

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

Amrit Har Har Naam Hay Meri Jindar

eeay

Ainrit Gunnat 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 Kuthha and encouraging the Sikhs in general to eat meat, the same people have gone to the extent 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 19, 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.

[me moorakh mugadh]

vwihgurU jI kw Kwlsw!

vwihgurU jI kI &iqh!!

GURU PYARE SADH SANGAT JEE AND FIRST ME. I BEG ALL OF U TO PLSS NOT QUOTE GURBANI IN ALL THIS :umm: LEARNER SINGH GAVE A GURBANI TUK WICH IS FROM SGGS GURBKAL GAVE THAT IS ALSO FROM SGGS ,MKHLASA VEERJE GAVE THAT IS FROMM SGGS SO PLSS WHT EVER U LIKE TO SAY, SAY OF UR OWN DONT PUT SGGS IN A (CONTERVESIAL TOPIC) BY GIVEING THE ANSWER TUK AFTER TUK ( DO WE REALLY ARE SO MAHA PURKH WHAT MAHARAJ SAID WE KNOW COMPLETLY) I THINK SO IM NOT EVEN 0 PERCENT I DONT KNOW ABT SANGAT JEE,

THIS IS A VERY VERY CONTERVERSIAL TOPIC EAT OR NOT TO, I SAID BEFORE MAHARAJ SAID WHO DEBATES ON THIS ARE MOORAKH AND WE ALL ARE MAHA MOORAKH(SORRY) THE TOPIC SHOULD END HERE ITSELF " WHO LIKES TO EAT PLS GO ON DONT EAT KHUTTA AS SAID,GURSIKHS WHO DONT WANT TO EAT PLS DONT EAT ITS GOOD" SIMPLE I SAID BEFORE WHAT UR PANJ PYRE HAVE SAID DO THAT GO UPON THEIR SAYING. BUT AGAIN BENTI NO TUK AFTER TUK TO SHOW WHO IS A SCHOLAR HERE PLS DONT PUT :umm: TAKE CARE RAB RAKHAA

SORRY FOR CAPS

[Guest Akaal108]

Did that really happen? Could you provide some evidence or tell me where it states that please.

n30 singh !

do you even know where KURUKSHETAR is btw? i just wana see ur general knowledge.

(ISBN 81-7010-162-X)

page 48 - 50 from Biography of Guru Nanak; Prof. Kartar Singh. Hemkunt Press

TOUR TO THE EAST

(Kurukshetra, Panipat and Delhi)

The Guru thus spent some time in Panjab, travelling by short stages and visiting numerous places. Everywhere he went he taught the people the main principles of his religion and established a Manji or a missionary centre.

Having done all this, he decided to proceed on long tours to places outside Panjab. These tours are called Udasis. They were four in number. The first one was to the east, the second to the south, the third to the north and the fourth to the west.

During the first tour, which was towards the east, he visited important centres of the Hindu religion. His plan was to contact and address large multitudes of people in every such place. Hence he attended the holy places on festive occasions or fairs. His method of approach was dramatic rather than discussio

nal. In order to make himself conspicuous and draw the people's attention, he wore unusual clothing. Then, on reaching among the assembled pilgrims, he proceeded to do something most unusual and extraordinary, something which the pilgrims sometimes regarded as an insult to their religion, and make them raise loud roars and protests. As the angry pilgrims would gather round him, he would quickly convinced them of their errors, and made them realise the right way to worship and please God.

During his first tour, he wore a strange dress which was a mixture of Hindu and Muhammedian religious costumes. He put on a long ochre-coloured (or mango-coloured) gown, with a white waistband. On his head he carried the conical cap of Musalman Qalandars. He wore a garland of bones, round his neck. He had a pair of shoes of different designs on his feet. He had a saffron mark imprinted on his forehead in the style of Hindus. This was an early indication of his desire to found a religion which would be acceptable to both Hindus and Muhammedans, but which would not conform to either faith.

Thus dressed in this strange clothing and accompanied by Bhai Mardana, the Guru started on his tour to the east. Soon he heard that a Hindu religious fair was to be held in Kurukshetra on the occasion of a solar-eclipse. Thousands and thousands of people were going there in order to bathe in the sacred tank. He decided to visit that place with the object of preaching to the assembled pilgrims. Passing through the village Pehwa, he reached Kurukshetra, (a place where the famous battle of Mahabharat was fought between the Kauravs and the Pandavs), and accordingly he took his seat near the tank.

Thousands of people including a large number of Brahmins, Pandits, and Sants (saints) had gathered there. Hindus consider it sacred to go to Kurukshetra at the time of a solar eclipse, bathe in the holy tank and give alms to the Hindu priests.

Now there was the scene, of thousands of Hindu pilgrims busy in

bathing, praying, and giving alms to Brahmins and other Hindu priests. They hoped, thereby, to wash away their sins and to rescue the sun-god from the clutches of his enemies; for they had been taught by the priests that the solar-eclipse was caused by two demons, Rahu and Ketu, who had taken the sun in their grip. They had also been taught not to eat anything during the eclipse. The Guru watched these simple-minded, misguided people with amusement and sympathy. He desired Bhai Mardana to play the rebeck. He himself sang one of his soul-stirring songs. Very few cared to listen; for they were all to busy in washing off their sins and trying to rescue the sun-god.

At that time a Queen and her son, Prince Rai Singh came along. They greatly respected and knew the Guru. The young prince had been hunting in the neighbourhood and had killed a deer. They came to him asking for a blessing, for they had been dispossessed of their realm. They offered to the Guru the deer to eat. He accepted it and allow them to prepare the deer for cooking so it could be roasted and be ready to be eaten. When the sun started to be eclipsed, the Guru began eating the cooked deer meat. This horrified the pilgrims and the Hindu priests. A big crowd gathered around the Guru, for it was a sacrilege to cook and eat meat. The Brahmins and Sants led by the head Pandit, Nanu Chand besieged the Guru and were ready to club him to death. They said that he was doing something forbidden by the Hindu religion, was doing so at a holy place, and at a time when the sun-god was in the grip of his enemies. The Brahmins expressed their horror at his use of flesh.

The Guru remained calm, cool, and smiling. The Guru stood up and spoke. He sang a sacred song intended to remove their wrong notions about flesh and its use. He told them, 'Your objections against flesh are based on wrong beliefs. While you roar and quarrel about flesh, you don't know what flesh is, how it differs from vegetables , and in what lies sin and evil. Man is

like all other animals in having a body of flesh. In flesh we are conceived, from flesh we are born; we are all vessels of flesh. Hence flesh in itself is not fit to be hated and avoided. Your notions about it are all wrong.

'You consider it a sin to eat the flesh of animals like deer, but you think it no sin to suck people's blood, to snatch and steal other people's rights and belongings, to commit adultery and a thousand other black and evil deeds. But why talk to people who have no proper understanding, who eat things that ought not to be eaten, and abstain from what ought to be eaten? They lack divine knowledge, and wrangle about things which are of no consequence or importance. You believe that those who take meat are sinners and will go to hell. You accepts gifts and offerings from those so called sinners, and believe that by abstaining from meat; you will save yourselves from going to hell where your benefactors are doomed to go. Don't you see how wrong it would be that givers should go to hell and receivers to heaven?

'Moreover, you cannot avoid the use of flesh as long as you use water, which is the source of all life. Corn, sugar-cane, cottons, and all vegetables are produced from water; the water assists the growth of vegetables and on vegetables animals are fed. There is life in vegetables. In nature living beings feed on living beings. God has so designed and willed it. Hence there is nothing unnatural or ungodly in eating flesh.'

The Guru and the Hindu priests continued discussing. The Pandit and his fellow Brahmins were eventually convinced by the Guru's logic for he had also based his argument on the Vedas, the Puranas and the Quran. The Guru then turned his attention to the rituals regarding the eclipse.

'As for the eclipse, it is a simple natural occurrence. No demon whatsoever has anything to do with it. No gifts to Brahmins, no dips in the sacred waters, no prayers, in fact nothing that man can do can be of any ava

il here. Let it alone. It will soon go as it came. Give up these senseless acts. Think of God. Worship Him by meditating on Him and serving His children. Earn your living with the sweat of your brows, share your honest earnings with the needy and poor. You will win His pleasure and become acceptable to Him.'

They who had come stone and thrash the Guru, saw the divine light of Truth and became his disciples. They established a Dharmsala in which God's name could be recited and the weak and weary could find food and shelter. After a short further stay at Kurukshetra, the Guru again resumed his tour.

© Hemkunt Press

where does it say in gurbani that Buddha and jesus were GOD THEMSELVES? really man you need to stop making up your stupid history. IF you really believe they were GOD roop themselves. wat you doing here then? go pray to christ or for all anyone would care you can go rub budha's tummy all day long which is supposed to be good look to get money. really man you are wasting everyone's time being so called "SIKH".

and about Guru Nanak Dev Jee its all made up stories of that he ate meat ..... can you prove that he did just like amardeep singh asked you?

Take it easy sweeet boi.

First of all. Mahatama Buddha and jesus were god themselves. To prove that you dont need in look gurbani but understand gurbani.

Understand gurbani as in what message gurbani tells us. Which is any one regardless of caste, creed, relegion, color can be merged with god and become one with god. That means when you are merge with super cosmic energy...you become part of super cosmic energy.

You have insulted mahatma buddha and jesus. And thats a worse paap ever. Anyone can be bhramgyani and get merge

with nirankar. He doesnt have to khalsa.Thats a universal message of Sri guroo granth sahib ji.

Bhagat Kabir cautions the errant soul, when he says:

What face you will show to Dharamraja when he will

<=== ask you for account. (Maru Kabir, p-1106)

Next time keep your insults to yourself.

[Jassika]

[Balait_da_Sher]

Errrm, i don't think u wud wanna eat them ONIONS :umm:

[Gupt_Singh]

n30 singh

i know there are "historical" accounts of that......but where do they come from......janamsakhis? there are dodgy janamsakhis which say that guruji was actually a muslim. wh mcleod, despite talking alot of rubbish, raised important points that the janamsakhis were not all so reliable.

guru hargobind would not give a command when in the future it would be invalid. guru ji is ALL KNOWING. no guru contradicted another because they were ALL the same. to imply that earlier gurus teachings are not relavent because sikhi changed with time is like the monneh saying that kesh is not needed cuz times have changed.