Fools Who Wrangle Over Flesh

[randip singh]

Good points

Yes exactly my point , they can't defend them selves or make a noise , so how would we know / or have a sense of guilt that our actions are causing harm, whereas apply the same to an animal , it will defintely try to defend it self and make a noise ( hey don't kill me man or something ) which surely tells us don't kill it unless we are being attacked and are defending ourselves.

what i am trying to ascertain is that , when certain level of praying and meditation is reached , the " less of" becomes zero in terms of eating flesh

Also do you think for example , if you slaugtered and animal , cooked it /fried it or whetever then ate it , and after that did meditation/prayers

would be o.k ?

We could go into the ethics of meat eating...animals running...plants not...plants poisoning people to avoid being eaten etc etc.....etc etc............but that has nothing to do with the Spiritual case made by the 10 Nanaks. This essay has anniihalated the falacy that spirituality is connected to whether you eat carrots or chicken or both within Sikhism.

Have a think about this:

Page 131 Jagjit Singh - The Dynamics Of the Sikh Revolution (Institute of Sikh Studies Chandigarh):

Guru Nanak expressed his view about ahimsa in a long hymn, wherein he emphasised the whole life process has a common source. No animal is possible without the use of flesh in one form or the other. He ridicules the fallecy of those who make a fetish of the question of eating meating but have no scruples in "devouring" (exploiting) men. He points out that all distinctions between non-vegetarian food being impure and vegetarian food being pure are arbitary, because the source of life is the same element.

read the rest...it is fascinating.

[Only five]

What verse and where.

Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji tells us to respect life in all its form, animal, plant, mineral.

True

We do not shirk from taking a Plants life....and Bani says the Joon of a Plant is the same as an animal......just something to think about.

Where does Gurbani say this, that plant have the same joon as an animal. If it has the same Joon then why kill an animal with one strike as prescribed by the Jhatka way in which the animal feels no or little pain and for a sugar cane we can put it through so much pain and suffering. Why have two standards of kiliing the same joon? Why let one suffer and the other we don't? Well I shouldn't say we cuz that isn't fair. So let's say the meat eaters.

Bani talked about Sustainability many years ago..........a concept we are only understanding now.

.....and Amarpal keep the discussion in one form mate...........I have presented evidence that Kabir was in all respects historically talking about the wanton destruction by Timur..........he invaded India at the time of Kabir...sacked Delhi (killing 100, 000 Hindu's...sparing the Muslims).......sacked Benares killing all the Hindu's.................he saw this holocast occur........so I get a good idea of why Kabir was such a pacifist.

[Only five]

I think Vijaydeep Singh has stated whatt I would say.

Note the Tukh I posted....they were so perceptive then that they knew plants were living creature....we can be reincarnated as plants....according to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji it describes one life as a rock, the next as an aborted baby in the womb and then a plant and then a human. There is no particular order for incarnation, but Guruji says we are blessed when we reach human form. The Guru's knew plants breathed, reproduced, had blood (sap), had a basic nervous system which uses electrical impulses..........they could see life at the atomic and universal level.

Meat eating is not like the 5 vices.....but attchment or greed is. So attachment or greed with meat eating would be a vice....but then again attachement or greed to vegetables would be the same.

Regards.

Why have you not mentioned where the Rahaoo is in this shabad. Here I'll present it for everyone. And where Guru Sahib says after so long you took this human form. And its before the Rahaoo; core of the Shabad

This Shabad is by Guru Arjan Dev Ji in Raag Gauree on Pannaa 176

gauVI guAwryrI mhlw 5 ]

gourree guaaraeree mehalaa 5 ||

Gauree Gwaarayree, Fifth Mehla:

keI jnm Bey kIt pqMgw ]

kee janam bheae keett patha(n)gaa ||

In so many incarnations, you were a worm and an insect;

keI jnm gj mIn kurMgw ]

kee janam gaj meen kura(n)gaa ||

in so many incarnations, you were an elephant, a fish and a deer.

keI jnm pMKI srp hoieE ]

kee janam pa(n)khee sarap hoeiou ||

In so many incarnations, you were a bird and a snake.

keI jnm hYvr ibRK joieE ]1]

kee janam haivar brikh joeiou ||1||

In so many incarnations, you were yoked as an ox and a horse. ||1||

imlu jgdIs imln kI brIAw ]

mil jagadhees milan kee bareeaa ||

Meet the Lord of the Universe - now is the time to meet Him.

icrMkwl ieh dyh sMjrIAw ]1] rhwau ]

chira(n)kaal eih dhaeh sa(n)jareeaa ||1|| rehaao ||

After so very long, this human body was fashioned for you. ||1||Pause||

keI jnm sYl igir kirAw ]

kee janam sail gir kariaa ||

In so many incarnations, you were rocks and mountains;

keI jnm grB ihir KirAw ]

kee janam garabh hir khariaa ||

in so many incarnations, you were aborted in the womb;

keI jnm swK kir aupwieAw ]

kee janam saakh kar oupaaeiaa ||

in so many incarnations, you developed branches and leaves;

lK caurwsIh join BRmwieAw ]2]

lakh chouraaseeh jon bhramaaeiaa ||2||

you wandered through 8.4 million incarnations. ||2||

swDsMig BieE jnmu prwpiq ]

saadhhasa(n)g bhaeiou janam paraapath ||

Through the Saadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy, you obtained this human life.

kir syvw Bju hir hir gurmiq ]

kar saevaa bhaj har har guramath ||

Do seva - selfless service; follow the Guru's Teachings, and vibrate the Lord's Name, Har, Har.

iqAwig mwnu JUTu AiBmwnu ]

thiaag maan jhoot(h) abhimaan ||

Abandon pride, falsehood and arrogance.

jIvq mrih drgh prvwnu ]3]

jeevath marehi dharageh paravaan ||3||

Remain dead while yet alive, and you shall be welcomed in the Court of the Lord. ||3||

jo ikCu hoAw su quJ qy hogu ]

jo kishh hoaa s thujh thae hog ||

Whatever has been, and whatever shall be, comes from You, Lord.

Avru n dUjw krxY jogu ]

avar n dhoojaa karanai jog ||

No one else can do anything at all.

qw imlIAY jw lYih imlwie ]

thaa mileeai jaa laihi milaae ||

We are united with You, when You unite us with Yourself.

khu nwnk hir hir gux gwie ]4]3]72]

kahu naanak har har gun gaae ||4||3||72||

Says Nanak, sing the Glorious Praises of the Lord, Har, Har. ||4||3||72||

In the above shabad the animals are grouped toegther and presented in the Rahaoo; the core of the shabad. Why does Guru Sahib tells us to stop here and think. And adds after so long you attained this human body here. Why didn't he as these meat eaters, like to use this shabad put it the Rahaoo after sayin in so many incarnation you were branches and leaves.

Lastly, you point out that Guru's knew the plants can feel, so why didn't Guru Sahib prescribe a less painful way to kill plants as Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji prescribed for animals; Jhatka.

Edited September 27, 2009 by Only five

[chatanga1]

only 5 ji

the shabad about sugarcane that you are very fond of quoting, do you feel that Guru ji is actually telling us about sugarcane or is there another meaning, possibly spiritual, that you cannot see, or understand. Im talking about antreev arth.

[Only five]

only 5 ji

the shabad about sugarcane that you are very fond of quoting, do you feel that Guru ji is actually telling us about sugarcane or is there another meaning, possibly spiritual, that you cannot see, or understand. Im talking about antreev arth.

I present this shabad over and over because the meat eaters present this shabad to say plants also feel pain. If you think this is not the real understanding of this shabad then u should be behind me 100% on asking the questions I ask. And if u believe here Guru Sahib is speaking metaphorically and telling us animals feel pain then still you should be asking the same questions as I am.

As HSD was kind enough to explain the sugar cane represent the royal people in this world. The rich the wealthy that have forgotten God.

Anyway you understand this shabad and interpret it really doesn't matter- you still should be asking questions because the meat eaters use it to say plants feel pain. Now are the meat eaters wrong in this way of using the shabad or do you agree with them.

[HSD1]

The problem started like this: the vege-fascists started going on that eating meat was evil and anti-sikhi. As many sikhs had eaten meat from a young age, it seemed almost bizarre that it was considered such a serious sin. Most other things we are told not to do, we are unable to as children anyway. To back up their claims, the vege-fascists combed Gurbani, in a similar way christists and musis do when they have a 'theological debate'. Anything of any use was used. Hence you have all these misinterpreted points in Gurbani in the first post on this thread.

The meat-heads, not to be outdone, then went on a similar crusade. Just because the vege-fascists had misused Gurbani, the meatheads decided to be just as bad. "Oh, if hurting animals is wrong, what about plants, they hurt too!?", and then they quoted the reference Only Five provided. Cant anyone see where this is going? It will come to a point where we are so vicious and aggressive in twisting gurbani to suit our own personal beliefs that the younger generation will believe our skewed interpretations. Does anyone really want that? Who are we even to do such things?

Now some of you will say, 'so whats the solution wiseguy?'. Well we are sikhs who live in the real world. Fish stocks are severely depleted, and science isnt funded or encouraged enough to come up with the solutions. No real sikh would like to be responsible for destroying entire ecosystems, and this is the main reason I no longer eat fish. I also dont eat turkey, having learnt that they are bred to be so fat that they can no longer reproduce without human assistance. If the turkey market was not propped up by thanksgiving and christmas, they would be virtually extinct apart from the ones used in shooting games in the states. The same goes for the treatment of other poultry in the west. See, it's not hard to come up with reasons to not eat meat - using sikhi principles - without twisting gurbani isnt it? This way you wont get meat eating sikh's backs up either, especially if they are thinking of reducing their meat consumption. Its a shame that there arent more sikhs in the farming industry where the diaspora lives, as well as some sikh-funded science/agricultural institutions who could look into these problems and give solutions that would reverse the amount of damage we have done to this earth.

[Kaljug]

^

The reasons given above are also why I will only eat the enemies of the Panth, and no other meat. (And also because Gurnindaks are crunchy and taste good with achaar.) I believe this is the only solution that will not offend (or possibly offend - in which case, they will also be eaten) members of both camps.

And thus, I give you How To Cook A Human.

K.

Edited September 29, 2009 by Kaljug

[Only five]

The problem started like this: the vege-fascists started going on that eating meat was evil and anti-sikhi. As many sikhs had eaten meat from a young age, it seemed almost bizarre that it was considered such a serious sin. Most other things we are told not to do, we are unable to as children anyway. To back up their claims, the vege-fascists combed Gurbani, in a similar way christists and musis do when they have a 'theological debate'. Anything of any use was used. Hence you have all these misinterpreted points in Gurbani in the first post on this thread.

The meat-heads, not to be outdone, then went on a similar crusade. Just because the vege-fascists had misused Gurbani, the meatheads decided to be just as bad. "Oh, if hurting animals is wrong, what about plants, they hurt too!?", and then they quoted the reference Only Five provided. Cant anyone see where this is going? It will come to a point where we are so vicious and aggressive in twisting gurbani to suit our own personal beliefs that the younger generation will believe our skewed interpretations. Does anyone really want that? Who are we even to do such things?

Now some of you will say, 'so whats the solution wiseguy?'. Well we are sikhs who live in the real world. Fish stocks are severely depleted, and science isnt funded or encouraged enough to come up with the solutions. No real sikh would like to be responsible for destroying entire ecosystems, and this is the main reason I no longer eat fish. I also dont eat turkey, having learnt that they are bred to be so fat that they can no longer reproduce without human assistance. If the turkey market was not propped up by thanksgiving and christmas, they would be virtually extinct apart from the ones used in shooting games in the states. The same goes for the treatment of other poultry in the west. See, it's not hard to come up with reasons to not eat meat - using sikhi principles - without twisting gurbani isnt it? This way you wont get meat eating sikh's backs up either, especially if they are thinking of reducing their meat consumption. Its a shame that there arent more sikhs in the farming industry where the diaspora lives, as well as some sikh-funded science/agricultural institutions who could look into these problems and give solutions that would reverse the amount of damage we have done to this earth.

LOL, "wiseguy"

HSD that shabad about the sugar cane is the center piece of the meat eaters argument. They will fight to death to say it is saying plants suffer. To the question I asked it doesn't matter because either way they are stuck and need to answer the question i put forward.

Meat eaters need to understand how important that question is, in this arguement and answering it is, should be their number 1 goal now.

Here is another shabad they like to use. When Guru Nanak Dev ji says, what is meat and what is not. The question i asked destroys their(meat eaters) arguement here because if everything is meat then why two different methods of killing the same food group. It doesn't hold Again they are not understanding the shabad. And the wisea** that will ask me what is your understanding of the shabad will get the same reply i gave that Gyani Jarnail Singh from SPN. Doesn't matter. Jhatka, which they thought was in their favor is, now a thorn in their neck. Well for the most of them cuz the others are not aware of this question that has not been answered.

The brain behind the meaters (Randip Singh) that loves to promote the article "Fools Who Wrangle over Flesh" has not even tempted to answer these questions. The Gyani Jarnail SIngh character on http://www.tapoban.org/forum/list.php?1 gave me the run around and he got called on it. Then he runs for the hills because he found out it wasn't going to work. He would love it if this question would be asked at SPN where these people( I was going to slander here, but i refrained from it) have control over what can be written. To bad I'm banned from there. Neither would I even discuss there because it's not a neutral place. They don't believe in fairness at SPN. Faujasingh learned the hard way today in the thread enough is enough.

So is that a challenge to the meat eaters, sure it is. Answer the questions. No one should take offense on these questions because your belief system is not built on or exist of your beliefs, but what Guru Sahib has told us. Guru Sahib said perform Jhatka on animals and your doing it. Was there rules when to perform jhatka and when not to-placed on it, sure there was. Some just chose to forget them and over time they became non-existent.

[Kaljug]

Plants have their neurobiological systems, and they react to pain stimuli:

http://ds9.botanik.uni-bonn.de/zellbio/AG-Baluska-Volkmann/plantneuro/neuroview.php

If you doubt that plants are sentient, chow down on a handful of magic mushrooms and record what happens to you (preferably video it and put it on youtube).

Anyway, this question is immaterial since I doubt that vegefascists would eat an animal if it was genetically modified to have no pain receptors:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327243.400-painfree-animals-could-take-suffering-out-of-farming.html

K.

[shaheediyan]

Good post HSD.

There are more than enough reasons to have a zero intake of meat in todays disgusting commercial, unethical, cruel and twisted farm/food industry, than to have to present misquoted Gurbani.

That 80% of rainforests have been cut down in the world to pretty much all be used for grazing land for beef (which creates double polution due to loss of natures lungs and millions of tons of cattle gas)! Not to mention the effect on ecosystems, water retention, desertification etc.

Its a well known fact that the whole world could easily be fed on grains from a fraction of the grazing land utilised today. We are simply destroying our planet due to excess.

In nearly all agricultural societies, meat used to be treated as a luxury or emergency, eaten only once or twice a week if at all, because meat used to have a value and was expensive. Its the un-natural commercialization of livestock that has increased numbers to unsustainable numbers and reduced the value of meat to dirt - hence creating massive daily demand amongst all factions of society.

Common sense should prevail.

Edited September 29, 2009 by shaheediyan

[Only five]

Plants have their neurobiological systems, and they react to pain stimuli:

http://ds9.botanik.uni-bonn.de/zellbio/AG-Baluska-Volkmann/plantneuro/neuroview.php

If you doubt that plants are sentient, chow down on a handful of magic mushrooms and record what happens to you (preferably video it and put it on youtube).

Anyway, this question is immaterial since I doubt that vegefascists would eat an animal if it was genetically modified to have no pain receptors:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20327243.400-painfree-animals-could-take-suffering-out-of-farming.html

K.

Singh, you say the sugar cane feels pain. Fine. Now answer the questions I asked you.

Whether vegafascitst prefer to eat something or not is immaterial. Whether meat eaters will eat something is also immaterial.

These questions are important because they show the hypocrisy in the meat eaters. The OP is there so don't ask me to repeat myself.

[Kaljug]

Singh, you say the sugar cane feels pain. Fine. Now answer the questions I asked you.

Whether vegafascitst prefer to eat something or not is immaterial. Whether meat eaters will eat something is also immaterial.

These questions are important because they show the hypocrisy in the meat eaters. The OP is there so don't ask me to repeat myself.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!

Actually, I don't use Gurbani to promote ant kind of particular belief. Gurbani is above shariat. The reason I don't have any problem eating vegetables or meat is primarily because life exists by consuming other life, and humans are not somehow apart from the rest of nature.

Jhatka is used to slaughter animals because it is the most compassionate way of killing an animal. Such care is not required for vegetables because their brain and neurological system is simply not as complicated as that of an animal.

Note that this is a point of biology, not of Gurbani.

K.

[Kaljug]

Good post HSD.

There are more than enough reasons to have a zero intake of meat in todays disgusting commercial, unethical, cruel and twisted farm/food industry, than to have to present misquoted Gurbani.

That 80% of rainforests have been cut down in the world to pretty much all be used for grazing land for beef (which creates double polution due to loss of natures lungs and millions of tons of cattle gas)! Not to mention the effect on ecosystems, water retention, desertification etc.

Its a well known fact that the whole world could easily be fed on grains from a fraction of the grazing land utilised today. We are simply destroying our planet due to excess.

In nearly all agricultural societies, meat used to be treated as a luxury or emergency, eaten only once or twice a week if at all, because meat used to have a value and was expensive. Its the un-natural commercialization of livestock that has increased numbers to unsustainable numbers and reduced the value of meat to dirt - hence creating massive daily demand amongst all factions of society.

Common sense should prevail.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!

This is an good argument for not purchasing meat, but it doesn't apply to traditional communities that do not rely on the commercial use of meat who are more in tune with their local ecosystem and have some respect for the animals that they depend upon to survive.

Personally, for the reasons you have given above, I would not eat meat unless I could raise, feed, and perhaps breed my own animals which I could chatka myself for their meat.

K.

[Only five]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!

Actually, I don't use Gurbani to promote ant kind of particular belief. Gurbani is above shariat. The reason I don't have any problem eating vegetables or meat is primarily because life exists by consuming other life, and humans are not somehow apart from the rest of nature.

Jhatka is used to slaughter animals because it is the most compassionate way of killing an animal. Such care is not required for vegetables because their brain and neurological system is simply not as complicated as that of an animal.

Note that this is a point of biology, not of Gurbani.

K.

You say vegtables are not complicated. But this doesn't answer the question whether they feel pain or not?

So now answer if they feel pain because some scientist say the plants do feel pain.

[HSD1]

LOL, "wiseguy"

I dont think I'm wise, so dont be cheeky lol.

HSD that shabad about the sugar cane is the center piece of the meat eaters argument. They will fight to death to say it is saying plants suffer. To the question I asked it doesn't matter because either way they are stuck and need to answer the question i put forward.

Well I have given you the ammunition to destroy their misinterpretation of Gurbani in Ang 142 and 143. Of course, as they are meatheads, they will now never acknowledge plants feel pain or mention that shabad as they know what response you will come up with. Like a plague of locusts, they will move onto another section of Gurbani and twist that. The vegefascists will do the same in response to the first post in this thread. And so the never ending cycle will spin recklessly out of control. Dont you see what I'm trying to say? Do you think anything of consequence will be achieved in your life by hounding these meathead fools all over the internet?

Here is another shabad they like to use. When Guru Nanak Dev ji says, what is meat and what is not. The question i asked destroys their(meat eaters) arguement here because if everything is meat then why two different methods of killing the same food group. It doesn't hold Again they are not understanding the shabad. And the wisea** that will ask me what is your understanding of the shabad will get the same reply i gave that Gyani Jarnail Singh from SPN. Doesn't matter. Jhatka, which they thought was in their favor is, now a thorn in their neck. Well for the most of them cuz the others are not aware of this question that has not been answered.

Firstly, if you are not willing to give your interpretation of the shabad (burnt fingers, eh?), please give the reference so the sangat on SikhAwareness can look into it and tell you what should be the real meaning rather than what it is being misinterpreted as. Another point is this: hardly any sikhs in the west practice jhatka (i presume you live in the west), so how can they use that argument if they buy their meat in tescos, which is usually halal/kosher nowadays? Using logic and rationality are better weapons than firing chunks of gurbani at one another. It also avoids offending those of us who are getting sick of this petty arguing and 'internet battles' which are no use in the end.

The brain behind the meaters (Randip Singh) that loves to promote the article "Fools Who Wrangle over Flesh" has not even tempted to answer these questions. The Gyani Jarnail SIngh character on http://www.tapoban.o...orum/list.php?1 gave me the run around and he got called on it. Then he runs for the hills because he found out it wasn't going to work. He would love it if this question would be asked at SPN where these people( I was going to slander here, but i refrained from it) have control over what can be written. To bad I'm banned from there. Neither would I even discuss there because it's not a neutral place. They don't believe in fairness at SPN. Faujasingh learned the hard way today in the thread enough is enough.

Well lets not get into which forum is better etc, as that is an argument in itself. I have been banned from a sikh forum too. If this guy cannot back up his points or even show the logic/reasoning behind them, then he is a fool. If you are young, you shouldnt get so worked up and waste your time arguing with him, there are better uses for your time. If his reason for existence is being a meathead (which was hinted at in the first post), then he will bare his burden in time. You should not be dragged down with him.

So is that a challenge to the meat eaters, sure it is. Answer the questions. No one should take offense on these questions because your belief system is not built on or exist of your beliefs, but what Guru Sahib has told us. Guru Sahib said perform Jhatka on animals and your doing it. Was there rules when to perform jhatka and when not to-placed on it, sure there was. Some just chose to forget them and over time they became non-existent.

Well Guru Sahib does not change to give definitive answers to little things that crop up over time. What does Guru Sahib say about space travel? Or mining on the moon? Or first contact with aliens etc etc? It doesnt, thats why i mentioned the idea of sikhi principles that we can apply in a pragmatic way to the world around us.

As for jhatka, yes it may be out of date and not as complete as it was. If we had a sikh scientific research institution we could get them to investigate what would be the best way to kill an animal nowadays. Until one is set up, this argument could go on forever.

On a side note: in post 31 i mentioned not eating meat in the west as the way it is created for easy purchase at your local supermarket. I didnt mention that chocolate, certain fruit and coffee etc are also grown in bad conditions with devastating consequences for the local communities and environments in the world. We need to tighten our belts and be conscious of what we buy, meat or other wise.

[Only five]

I dont think I'm wise, so dont be cheeky lol.

Well I have given you the ammunition to destroy their misinterpretation of Gurbani in Ang 142 and 143. Of course, as they are meatheads, they will now never acknowledge plants feel pain or mention that shabad as they know what response you will come up with. Like a plague of locusts, they will move onto another section of Gurbani and twist that. The vegefascists will do the same in response to the first post in this thread. And so the never ending cycle will spin recklessly out of control. Dont you see what I'm trying to say? Do you think anything of consequence will be achieved in your life by hounding these meathead fools all over the internet?

Firstly, if you are not willing to give your interpretation of the shabad (burnt fingers, eh?), please give the reference so the sangat on SikhAwareness can look into it and tell you what should be the real meaning rather than what it is being misinterpreted as. Another point is this: hardly any sikhs in the west practice jhatka (i presume you live in the west), so how can they use that argument if they buy their meat in tescos, which is usually halal/kosher nowadays? Using logic and rationality are better weapons than firing chunks of gurbani at one another. It also avoids offending those of us who are getting sick of this petty arguing and 'internet battles' which are no use in the end.

Well lets not get into which forum is better etc, as that is an argument in itself. I have been banned from a sikh forum too. If this guy cannot back up his points or even show the logic/reasoning behind them, then he is a fool. If you are young, you shouldnt get so worked up and waste your time arguing with him, there are better uses for your time. If his reason for existence is being a meathead (which was hinted at in the first post), then he will bare his burden in time. You should not be dragged down with him.

Well Guru Sahib does not change to give definitive answers to little things that crop up over time. What does Guru Sahib say about space travel? Or mining on the moon? Or first contact with aliens etc etc? It doesnt, thats why i mentioned the idea of sikhi principles that we can apply in a pragmatic way to the world around us.

As for jhatka, yes it may be out of date and not as complete as it was. If we had a sikh scientific research institution we could get them to investigate what would be the best way to kill an animal nowadays. Until one is set up, this argument could go on forever.

On a side note: in post 31 i mentioned not eating meat in the west as the way it is created for easy purchase at your local supermarket. I didnt mention that chocolate, certain fruit and coffee etc are also grown in bad conditions with devastating consequences for the local communities and environments in the world. We need to tighten our belts and be conscious of what we buy, meat or other wise.

HSD, all i wanted to do is make these meat eaters aware what they were spiting out of there mouth.

And now since they have to go back on their first interpretation of the shabad on ang sung 142-143 tells us they will do anything to say we can eat meat as they do today. The desire of the tongue makes them do many wrong deeds.

For me this debate is over, just want an answer from these guys. So it can be recorded as to what they said next. What excuse they come up with.

The head guys of this meat promoting know who they are and should present an answer now or when they are ready with a solid answer that will not be smacked across there face as was done with the sugar cane and what is meat and what is a vegatable shabads.

That shabad which i refered to is on ang sung 1289 and it's the shabad Sant ji intrepreted.

http://gurmatveechar....%28Vaar%29.mp3

This Shabad is by Guru Nanak Dev Ji in Raag Malaar on Pannaa 1289

mÚ 1 ]

ma 1 ||

First Mehla:

mwsu mwsu kir mUrKu JgVy igAwnu iDAwnu nhI jwxY ]

maas maas kar moorakh jhagarrae giaan dhhiaan nehee jaanai ||

The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.

kauxu mwsu kauxu swgu khwvY iksu mih pwp smwxy ]

koun maas koun saag kehaavai kis mehi paap samaanae ||

What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin?

gYNfw mwir hom jg kIey dyviqAw kI bwxy ]

gai(n)addaa maar hom jag keeeae dhaevathiaa kee baanae ||

It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering.

mwsu Coif bYis nku pkVih rwqI mwxs Kwxy ]

maas shhodd bais nak pakarrehi raathee maanas khaanae ||

Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night.

PVu kir lokW no idKlwvih igAwnu iDAwnu nhI sUJY ]

farr kar lokaa(n) no dhikhalaavehi giaan dhhiaan nehee soojhai ||

They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.

nwnk AMDy isau ikAw khIAY khY n kihAw bUJY ]

naanak a(n)dhhae sio kiaa keheeai kehai n kehiaa boojhai ||

O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.

AMDw soie ij AMDu kmwvY iqsu irdY is locn nwhI ]

a(n)dhhaa soe j a(n)dhh kamaavai this ridhai s lochan naahee ||

They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.

mwq ipqw kI rkqu inpMny mCI mwsu n KWhI ]

maath pithaa kee rakath nipa(n)nae mashhee maas n khaa(n)hee ||

They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.

iesqRI purKY jW inis mylw EQY mMDu kmwhI ]

eisathree purakhai jaa(n) nis maelaa outhhai ma(n)dhh kamaahee ||

But when men and women meet in the night, they come together in the flesh.

mwshu inMmy mwshu jMmy hm mwsY ky BWfy ]

maasahu ni(n)mae maasahu ja(n)mae ham maasai kae bhaa(n)ddae ||

In the flesh we are conceived, and in the flesh we are born; we are vessels of flesh.

igAwnu iDAwnu kCu sUJY nwhI cquru khwvY pWfy ]

giaan dhhiaan kashh soojhai naahee chathur kehaavai paa(n)ddae ||

You know nothing of spiritual wisdom and meditation, even though you call yourself clever, O religious scholar.

bwhr kw mwsu mMdw suAwmI Gr kw mwsu cMgyrw ]

baahar kaa maas ma(n)dhaa suaamee ghar kaa maas cha(n)gaeraa ||

O master, you believe that flesh on the outside is bad, but the flesh of those in your own home is good.

jIA jMq siB mwshu hoey jIie lieAw vwsyrw ]

jeea ja(n)th sabh maasahu hoeae jeee laeiaa vaasaeraa ||

All beings and creatures are flesh; the soul has taken up its home in the flesh.

ABKu BKih BKu qij Cofih AMDu gurU ijn kyrw ]

abhakh bhakhehi bhakh thaj shhoddehi a(n)dhh guroo jin kaeraa ||

They eat the uneatable; they reject and abandon what they could eat. They have a teacher who is blind.

mwshu inMmy mwshu jMmy hm mwsY ky BWfy ]

maasahu ni(n)mae maasahu ja(n)mae ham maasai kae bhaa(n)ddae ||

In the flesh we are conceived, and in the flesh we are born; we are vessels of flesh.

igAwnu iDAwnu kCu sUJY nwhI cquru khwvY pWfy ]

giaan dhhiaan kashh soojhai naahee chathur kehaavai paa(n)ddae ||

You know nothing of spiritual wisdom and meditation, even though you call yourself clever, O religious scholar.

mwsu purwxI mwsu kqybNØI chu juig mwsu kmwxw ]

maas puraanee maas kathaeba(n)aee chahu jug maas kamaanaa ||

Meat is allowed in the Puraanas, meat is allowed in the Bible and the Koran. Throughout the four ages, meat has been used.

jij kwij vIAwih suhwvY EQY mwsu smwxw ]

jaj kaaj veeaahi suhaavai outhhai maas samaanaa ||

It is featured in sacred feasts and marriage festivities; meat is used in them.

iesqRI purK inpjih mwshu pwiqswh sulqwnW ]

eisathree purakh nipajehi maasahu paathisaah sulathaanaa(n) ||

Women, men, kings and emperors originate from meat.

jy Eie idsih nrik jWdy qW aun@ kw dwnu n lYxw ]

jae oue dhisehi narak jaa(n)dhae thaa(n) ounh kaa dhaan n lainaa ||

If you see them going to hell, then do not accept charitable gifts from them.

dyNdw nrik surig lYdy dyKhu eyhu iD|wxw ]

dhae(n)adhaa narak surag laidhae dhaekhahu eaehu dhhin(g)aanaa ||

The giver goes to hell, while the receiver goes to heaven - look at this injustice.

Awip n bUJY lok buJwey pWfy Krw isAwxw ]

aap n boojhai lok bujhaaeae paa(n)ddae kharaa siaanaa ||

You do not understand your own self, but you preach to other people. O Pandit, you are very wise indeed.

pWfy qU jwxY hI nwhI ikQhu mwsu aupMnw ]

paa(n)ddae thoo jaanai hee naahee kithhahu maas oupa(n)naa ||

O Pandit, you do not know where meat originated.

qoieAhu AMnu kmwdu kpwhW qoieAhu iqRBvxu gMnw ]

thoeiahu a(n)n kamaadh kapaahaa(n) thoeiahu thribhavan ga(n)naa ||

Corn, sugar cane and cotton are produced from water. The three worlds came from water.

qoAw AwKY hau bhu ibiD hCw qoAY bhuqu ibkwrw ]

thoaa aakhai ho bahu bidhh hashhaa thoai bahuth bikaaraa ||

Water says, ""I am good in many ways."" But water takes many forms.

eyqy rs Coif hovY sMinAwsI nwnku khY ivcwrw ]2]

eaethae ras shhodd hovai sa(n)niaasee naanak kehai vichaaraa ||2||

Forsaking these delicacies, one becomes a true Sannyaasee, a detached hermit. Nanak reflects and speaks. ||2||

Edited September 30, 2009 by Only five

[Kaljug]

HSD, all i wanted to do is make these meat eaters aware what they were spiting out of there mouth.

And now since they have to go back on their first interpretation of the shabad on ang sung 142-143 tells us they will do anything to say we can eat meat as they do today. The desire of the tongue makes them do many wrong deeds.

For me this debate is over, just want an answer from these guys. So it can be recorded as to what they said next. What excuse they come up with.

The head guys of this meat promoting know who they are and should present an answer now or when they are ready with a solid answer that will not be smacked across there face as was done with the sugar cane and what is meat and what is a vegatable shabads.

Seriously, I don't know what it is about vegetarians who go around as if they are on a mission from God to save their sinning brethren from the "pleasures" of eating meat while they gorge themselves on paneer and rasmalai until they resemble cows rather than lions. Perhaps it's all the b vitamins they are lacking.

Jhatka is parvaan in Sikhi and always will be, as reflected in Sikh Rehat Maryada, despite all the attempts by vegefascists with their internet aggression towards Sikhs who do not believe in their personal petty beliefs.

Unlike you, I will not stoop to your level of attempting to use bani as if it were some philosophical sledgehammer to beat into submission all those who do not follow your ideology.

Sikh history is full of chardikala Singhs who have eaten meat, as recorded in our history, and unfortunately facts are something you cannot twist to suit your inane agenda.

Oh yes, and you didn't smack anyone or anything with your pathetic interpretation of the panktis you were questioning. All you accomplished is making yourself look like an idiot.

In fact, I'm going to go out and get a nice hamburger right after I do my nitnem and eat it while I think of you.

K.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Kaljug

[Kaljug]

Dont you see what I'm trying to say? Do you think anything of consequence will be achieved in your life by hounding these meathead fools all over the internet?

No, he doesn't.

K.

"Stand back - I'm on a mission fron God!" - Blues Brothers

[Kaljug]

You say vegtables are not complicated. But this doesn't answer the question whether they feel pain or not?

So now answer if they feel pain because some scientist say the plants do feel pain.

Honestly, just go to school and learn some basic biology, I'm not here to tutor you in fundamental sciences.

Plants respond to pain, they can even communicate with other plants near them if they are diseased so that other plants to not approach them and become infected.

However, they lack the pain receptors in the brain that animals like human have so that they cannot respond to anything but basic stimuli (ie they cannot feel emotional pain - they do not suffer, in other words). From an evolutionary point of view, this makes perfect sense because plants cannot run away from pain causing stimuli like animals can.

It's GCSE level biology. But of course I must be lying about this because I prefer the taste of chicken vindaloo to matar paneer.

K.

[chatanga1]

I present this shabad over and over because the meat eaters present this shabad to say plants also feel pain. If you think this is not the real understanding of this shabad then u should be behind me 100% on asking the questions I ask. And if u believe here Guru Sahib is speaking metaphorically and telling us animals feel pain then still you should be asking the same questions as I am.

As HSD was kind enough to explain the sugar cane represent the royal people in this world. The rich the wealthy that have forgotten God.

Anyway you understand this shabad and interpret it really doesn't matter- you still should be asking questions because the meat eaters use it to say plants feel pain. Now are the meat eaters wrong in this way of using the shabad or do you agree with them.

i think that all living things feel pain when they relinquish their body to enter another jooni. gurbani tells us about the " janam maran ka dukh" so i dont think any life leaves any body happily. im not sure that meat-eaters say plants do/dont feel pain, ( i dont say it myself) but rather that the life in each living thing is no different from another, just the life purpose they have within the immaculate creation of Waheguru. ie the food chain. Im not a vegetarian although i avoid meat,(my mum is psycho-veggie) but the mention of taste of tongue is foolish. i wont eat masri-moongi etc if it dont taste good.

anyway. i want you to stop dividing the panth on foolish non-ending issues and work for the establishment of Khalsa raaj. ive told you this b4 on sikhsangat, but you are not listening. focus on stuff that unites us.

Edited September 30, 2009 by chatanga1

[Silence]

the life in each living thing is no different from another,

so human flesh is on the menu to i take it?

[Only five]

Seriously, I don't know what it is about vegetarians who go around as if they are on a mission from God to save their sinning brethren from the "pleasures" of eating meat while they gorge themselves on paneer and rasmalai until they resemble cows rather than lions. Perhaps it's all the b vitamins they are lacking.

You got some anger issues man. All of a sudden now it's a mission, but when Randip Singh and his team spread his article allover the net you didn't come out throwing fist of "mission of God". It's visible your not neutral on this topic like Randip Singh. Now Randip Singh's article has been shown in it's true colors your having pms. Thank Mr. Nisher for writing the second article about meat and jhatka because that's where i found this Randip characters mistakes. Seriously thank Mr.Nisher for it. Now the vail of this illusionist article of Randip has been lifted.

Jhatka is parvaan in Sikhi and always will be, as reflected in Sikh Rehat Maryada, despite all the attempts by vegefascists with their internet aggression towards Sikhs who do not believe in their personal petty beliefs.

Where is the aggression. The aggression is coming from you because you don't like what's happening. I presented a view, which turned out to show the wrong doing in the article "Fools Who Wrangle Over Flesh". And I take it you were satisfied with that article because it was in your favor. Now all of a sudden there are holes in the article and your MAD, really MAD. Too bad Singh.

Unlike you, I will not stoop to your level of attempting to use bani as if it were some philosophical sledgehammer to beat into submission all those who do not follow your ideology.

Did I quote Gurbani. No the Gurbani I quoted was the one meat eaters justified animals and plants feel pain and are equal on the food line. ONly thing i did was point out the mistakes they made and put holes in an article that once was regarded as truth. Sorry to burst your bubble Singh, but it was going to happen sooner or later.

Sikh history is full of chardikala Singhs who have eaten meat, as recorded in our history, and unfortunately facts are something you cannot twist to suit your inane agenda.

Ate meat how and when and for what reason. Again this is off topic. Start a new topic on what Chardikala Singhs ate.

Oh yes, and you didn't smack anyone or anything with your pathetic interpretation of the panktis you were questioning. All you accomplished is making yourself look like an idiot.

I didn't intrepret any panktis. All I did was take how the meat eaters, Randip Singh, intrepreted the panktis and proved him wrong. Now you can't blame me for that one. Blame Randip Singh for being such big of a meat lover.

In fact, I'm going to go out and get a nice hamburger right after I do my nitnem and eat it while I think of you.

K.

Happy Happy Mcdonalds to you Singh.

You gotta stop being personal here. This is not a personal discussion.

[Only five]

Honestly, just go to school and learn some basic biology, I'm not here to tutor you in fundamental sciences.

Plants respond to pain, they can even communicate with other plants near them if they are diseased so that other plants to not approach them and become infected.

However, they lack the pain receptors in the brain that animals like human have so that they cannot respond to anything but basic stimuli (ie they cannot feel emotional pain - they do not suffer, in other words). From an evolutionary point of view, this makes perfect sense because plants cannot run away from pain causing stimuli like animals can.

It's GCSE level biology. But of course I must be lying about this because I prefer the taste of chicken vindaloo to matar paneer.

K.

Singh, you should have gone further into biology because it's not a new fact that plants do feel pain, when pulled from the ground, cut, boiled and eaten. Science your last resort, which is off topic and I should have told you from the start but I let it slide, has said plants feel pain.

And if this is your new way of answering the questions I put forward. Well then it's been smacked in the face.

And Randip Singh has said plants and animals are in the same joon. so if your going to use science then I recommend you find to prove this is true. First one didn't turn out in your favor, but maybe this one will. But a quick reminder, your using a limited proffession based on theories. Not looking for theories here, but a definite answer. I said this from while ago. So don't be smart and say your only saying this now.

Keep the emotions out of this.

regards Singh and good luck

[Xylitol]

Why the heck are people getting into science??? We as Sikhs should only be looking to what the Guru's are teaching.

[Only five]

i think that all living things feel pain when they relinquish their body to enter another jooni. gurbani tells us about the " janam maran ka dukh" so i dont think any life leaves any body happily. im not sure that meat-eaters say plants do/dont feel pain, ( i dont say it myself) but rather that the life in each living thing is no different from another, just the life purpose they have within the immaculate creation of Waheguru. ie the food chain. Im not a vegetarian although i avoid meat,(my mum is psycho-veggie) but the mention of taste of tongue is foolish. i wont eat masri-moongi etc if it dont taste good.

anyway. i want you to stop dividing the panth on foolish non-ending issues and work for the establishment of Khalsa raaj. ive told you this b4 on sikhsangat, but you are not listening. focus on stuff that unites us.

Singh, we shouldn't start shooting others and saying your dividing the panth. The man who wrote this article, Randip Singh made mistakes in his article and I pointed them out. Now you should be telling Randip Singh to come up with a better way to promote his meat eating. He's pro meat and if you haven't noticed i am not pro anything just following as told. And asking why.

If you see my points as splitting the panth, then that because it's not in your favor. The day you stop saying I am on this side or the other is the day you'll see what I presented clearly.