Sacrifice At Hazur Sahib – Myth & Truth

[Kaljug]

first kalyug you said that DDT was a recent jathebandi and now you say that sometimes the nihangs were leaders of taksal. Make your mind up which one you beleive.

No, I said DDT rehat as a separate creation was a new invention. The old jathedars of Taksal followed Nihang maryada including chatka and sukhnidaan.

K.

[chatanga1]

Taksal and DDT maryada hardly matter given that they are pretty much a recent construction.

this is what you posted. now you sayin only the maryada is different?

[Kaljug]

this is what you posted. now you sayin only the maryada is different?

Oops. Sorry, my bad. Should have read Taksal/DDT and AKJ maryada since it is the followers of these two jathas are the ones who seem to believe that eating meat is somehow anti-Gurmat. Corrected for you.

My apologies.

K.

[HSD1]

I'm not going to bother responding to the post about what a person can do in a war and then someone brought up world war 2 stuff. Irrelevant stuff when it comes down to the question I asked. I can easily put the arguement we have modern weapons today. So blah blah about this irrevelant stuff. It's trivial and doesn't go anywhere. And the screaming about Inuits. Well if you want to bring this arguement, then also consider import and export. And if you still want to scream about it then it's wise to go talk to the Nihangs and tell them they will hit the gold mine living with the Inuits.

HSD, why shouldn't we eat plants either. What are you getting at. You might be right here. And I'd rather stay at both and just post the same theory in a different site http://tapoban.org/ , so let's see what they have to say.

So the question goes unanswered. Why the double standard on meat and plants when it's said by some(majority meat eaters) that these two food groups are on the same food line. Not one higher than the other.

Usually when someone says they arent going to respond to a point they dont then go on to write three paragraphs. That aside, why is it irrelevant to your question? Not everything revolves around you and my point was to all the readers, not just you. As for modern weapons, what is your point? There are people who have survived multiple high velocity bullets to their heads. On the other hand I have not seen an animal get its head cut off and then still manage to live, but its not even clear what you are trying to point out by mentioning 'modern weapons', so its hard to actually try and discuss with any clarity.

No one is 'screaming' about Inuits. Its not there fault that your fundamentalist theories fall apart in the real world. What have the Inuits ever done to you? Also, the basis of Nihang life is not about meat or jhatka. Unfortunately, for some veggies, that is the sole purpose of their existence. Unable to build a Khalistan, unable to stop the baptist conversions in the punjab, unable to stop RSS influences, unable to meaningfully change their lives and powerless in every sphere of their existence, these people whine about things like this to try and make themselves feel righteous. Unfortunately they just cause more splits in the panth. They dont mind though, as the more we divide ourselves, the more chance each of these fundamentalists has of gaining power in each little segment. Your mention of 'blah blah', 'irrelevant' and 'trivial' just shows at best a lack of maturity, at worst a complete inability to think rationally or see the bigger picture.

As for the plants, why should we eat them? If we cant eat meat, lets not eat plants either. If this is in relation to your comment about crushing sugar cane, then I ask you what is a good way of 'killing' plants? Now I only studied Biology up to A-Level, but even i know that plants and animals are very different. You can cut a plant and quite often it still survives. A lack of a fully sensitive nerve system all helps. Therefore, crushing is a fine way of 'killing' plants. Animals on the other hand are very different. Like I said before, how many decapitated animals still carry on functioning fully? I could give a fair few analogies, but I'm tired and most of the time they go over people's heads.

I've just read some of you posts and its not clear what question you are asking. For the purpose of clear, meaningful debate please repeat your question in a clear, coherent manner. Thanks.

[Matheen]

No, I said DDT rehat as a separate creation was a new invention. The old jathedars of Taksal followed Nihang maryada including chatka and sukhnidaan.

K.

WJKK! WJKF!

Veer Ji, do you have any sources for this other than Sarbloh.info?

[Only five]

Usually when someone says they arent going to respond to a point they dont then go on to write three paragraphs. That aside, why is it irrelevant to your question? Not everything revolves around you and my point was to all the readers, not just you. As for modern weapons, what is your point? There are people who have survived multiple high velocity bullets to their heads. On the other hand I have not seen an animal get its head cut off and then still manage to live, but its not even clear what you are trying to point out by mentioning 'modern weapons', so its hard to actually try and discuss with any clarity.

No one is 'screaming' about Inuits. Its not there fault that your fundamentalist theories fall apart in the real world. What have the Inuits ever done to you? Also, the basis of Nihang life is not about meat or jhatka. Unfortunately, for some veggies, that is the sole purpose of their existence. Unable to build a Khalistan, unable to stop the baptist conversions in the punjab, unable to stop RSS influences, unable to meaningfully change their lives and powerless in every sphere of their existence, these people whine about things like this to try and make themselves feel righteous. Unfortunately they just cause more splits in the panth. They dont mind though, as the more we divide ourselves, the more chance each of these fundamentalists has of gaining power in each little segment. Your mention of 'blah blah', 'irrelevant' and 'trivial' just shows at best a lack of maturity, at worst a complete inability to think rationally or see the bigger picture.

This is all trivial because i am not condemning Jhataka, Singh. Understand in the context what is being presented by others and then why I say it's trivial. Sarbat da Bhalla is what these guys had to say about Inuits. Better yet i should have said it right off the bat and saved the trouble. Again that modern weapon stuff and killing a goat is all trivial because when your in war are you going to keep a goat with you. it's trivial. We have ways today that can put the animal complete to sleep. Again it's all trivial and it becomes irrelevant.

As for the plants, why should we eat them? If we cant eat meat, lets not eat plants either. If this is in relation to your comment about crushing sugar cane, then I ask you what is a good way of 'killing' plants? Now I only studied Biology up to A-Level, but even i know that plants and animals are very different. You can cut a plant and quite often it still survives. A lack of a fully sensitive nerve system all helps. Therefore, crushing is a fine way of 'killing' plants. Animals on the other hand are very different. Like I said before, how many decapitated animals still carry on functioning fully? I could give a fair few analogies, but I'm tired and most of the time they go over people's heads.

I've just read some of you posts and its not clear what question you are asking. For the purpose of clear, meaningful debate please repeat your question in a clear, coherent manner. Thanks.

Well the question we should be asking first is when is the plant actually dead. When does it die. As you say the animal dies right after the head is cut off, but it's unclear when the vegetable dies. But if you have seen a person kill a chicken with a knife or sword. Some of them even after with there head chopped off run around.

Reading the shabad by Guru Nanak Dev ji( starts on ang sung 142 goes to ang sung 143) even after the sugar cane is cut from the ground it is alive. hence why it suffers when in the wooden rollers. And even after that when it is heated it still groans. So it is still alive.

As to when the sugar cane actually dies is not clear, but the definite death comes when in the fire and being burnt. Would you agree.

So why doesn't Guru Nanak Dev ji say stop people this is not right. We should find a better way to kill this sugar cane as we do with animals. because the jhatka is the prescribed way to kill an animal. And with plants we can do as we wish or see fit. So why the double standard here when some say plants and animals are the same on the food line? One is not higher or lower than the other.

Edited September 24, 2009 by Only five

[Kaljug]

WJKK! WJKF!

Veer Ji, do you have any sources for this other than Sarbloh.info?

Fateh!

If you mean independent and unbiased sources, then the honest answer is no. I've only seen the details of Baba Gurbaksh Singh Ji Shaheed practising sukhnidaan and possibly chatka mentioned in Baba Santa Singh's 2nd volume of Rattan SIngh Bhangu's Panth Prakash. I say possibly chatka because I only remember the sukhnidaan incident clearly because I had to ask someone what it was after I'd read the book when I was younger.

However, unless one has already made one's mind up that these things are wrong, I don't think that it's too much of a stretch to believe this given that independent sources from the British from the 1700s confirm the stories about Singhs practising chatka, shikaar, and sukhnidaan.

I guess at the end of the day it's a matter of faith, and then a matter of respect for the different schools of Sikh thought. I don't take sukhnidaan, and I probably never will, and I don't eat meat anymore due to personal ethical reasons about the way that animals are treated, but I respect these Guru-ordained traditions and see nothing wrong with them.

I think the problem comes from trying to make sense of Sikh practices through the perspective of the typical Vaishnav Saadh belief system that is so much a part of Indian religious tradition and culture. Some things in Sikhi like the belief about diet don't make sense unless one can let go of these Vaishnav shackles. The problem is that Sikh spiritual ideas are similar to Vaishnav ones, but the general code of conduct in Sikhi is for Kshatriyas not behangam Saadhus*.

K.

*Though at least one of the puraatan rehat maryadas (the name of the author escapes me) mentions lifestyle and diet for gristhi kshatriya Singhs and behangam Singhs.

[HSD1]

This is all trivial because i am not condemning Jhataka, Singh. Understand in the context what is being presented by others and then why I say it's trivial. Sarbat da Bhalla is what these guys had to say about Inuits. Better yet i should have said it right off the bat and saved the trouble. Again that modern weapon stuff and killing a goat is all trivial because when your in war are you going to keep a goat with you. it's trivial. We have ways today that can put the animal complete to sleep. Again it's all trivial and it becomes irrelevant.

So your not against jhatka, but dont agree with eating meat? Or are you saying that jhatka is irrelevant with today's weapons and techniques? If so, its a fair enough comment to make.

Well the question we should be asking first is when is the plant actually dead. When does it die. As you say the animal dies right after the head is cut off, but it's unclear when the vegetable dies. But if you have seen a person kill a chicken with a knife or sword. Some of them even after with there head chopped off run around.

Yes, some chickens do run around, but the head does not feel the pain. The body is just acting without instruction, just like pressing buttons randomly on a machine without knowledge of what it will do. As for death, I dont really think thats an issue. Death and birth are nothing more than road bumps in the journey of our souls, but we do have to be considerate to animals and plants. I've always wondered if souls can be reincarnated into plants, but never actually asked anyone as I was worried it would be considered a stupid question. You raise some interesting points.

Reading the shabad by Guru Nanak Dev ji( starts on ang sung 142 goes to ang sung 143) even after the sugar cane is cut from the ground it is alive. hence why it suffers when in the wooden rollers. And even after that when it is heated it still groans. So it is still alive.

As to when the sugar cane actually dies is not clear, but the definite death comes when in the fire and being burnt. Would you agree.

Thank you for the reference brother. When reading ANG 142, the important part is the reference to corn. This is a metaphor used to describe the lower class of society, as corn is a common crop. The corn that sticks to the central stone and is spared represents those great souls who will be saved from reincarnation by Waheguru. The rest of the kernels are ground into nothing, which is what will happen to the majority of people in this world. On ANG 143, the sugar cane represents the decadent, selfish and money loving people at the higher end of society (i.e. the people who do not understand the Guru's message as mentioned in the first half of ANG 142). The sugar cane suffers as it has been treated so well during its life, and its treated in high regard for its sweet crop and value compared to simple corn. Even though people are treated well and respected when living, in the end these bad people have the worse fate. A very apt and deep metaphor.

So why doesn't Guru Nanak Dev ji say stop people this is not right. We should find a better way to kill this sugar cane as we do with animals. because the jhatka is the prescribed way to kill an animal. And with plants we can do as we wish or see fit. So why the double standard here when some say plants and animals are the same on the food line? One is not higher or lower than the other.

Well I hope you dont feel the same way if you read what I wrote above. Animals and plants are not equal, unless of course we can be reincarnated as plants. If we can, then what about certain rocks, bacteria, other undiscovered forms of 'life'? I'm not sure where but I have been told that Sikhi does say that humans are one of the highest forms of existence on this planet. I personally do not believe that animals and plants are equal.

Edited September 24, 2009 by HSD

[shaheediyan]

Only5 - Am I right in thinking you are initiating an on-line morcha for the equal rights of plants?

Edited September 24, 2009 by shaheediyan

[Only five]

So your not against jhatka, but dont agree with eating meat? Or are you saying that jhatka is irrelevant with today's weapons and techniques? If so, its a fair enough comment to make.

Singh not against jhatka, but against eating meat as a regular meal or for special events. For me meat is only for that one time when it's about survival and that's all there is left to eat.

Yes, some chickens do run around, but the head does not feel the pain. The body is just acting without instruction, just like pressing buttons randomly on a machine without knowledge of what it will do.

yes physically the head has been cut. Here read this about a chicken that lived for 18 months after his head was cut off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_the_Headless_Chicken

As for death, I dont really think thats an issue. Death and birth are nothing more than road bumps in the journey of our souls, but we do have to be considerate to animals and plants. I've always wondered if souls can be reincarnated into plants, but never actually asked anyone as I was worried it would be considered a stupid question. You raise some interesting points.

We have to be considerate to both,I agree but we are more considerate to animals. Yes I know in your opinion you consider animals and plants not equal. But I was wonder if Guru Sahib was telling us the samething when he prescribed a painless death for Animals. Was Guru Sahib telling us animals are higher on the food chain than plants.

Thank you for the reference brother. When reading ANG 142, the important part is the reference to corn. This is a metaphor used to describe the lower class of society, as corn is a common crop. The corn that sticks to the central stone and is spared represents those great souls who will be saved from reincarnation by Waheguru. The rest of the kernels are ground into nothing, which is what will happen to the majority of people in this world. On ANG 143, the sugar cane represents the decadent, selfish and money loving people at the higher end of society (i.e. the people who do not understand the Guru's message as mentioned in the first half of ANG 142). The sugar cane suffers as it has been treated so well during its life, and its treated in high regard for its sweet crop and value compared to simple corn. Even though people are treated well and respected when living, in the end these bad people have the worse fate. A very apt and deep metaphor.

After reading ang sung 142 and then 143 shabad of the sugar cane. That is a metaphor. So is Guru Sahib at all talking about plants here. Is Guru Sahib actually saying plants suffer when being crushed? Or is it also saying plants suffer and it is a metaphor. Can it be both.

If not then those use this shabad to say plants suffer aswell are misintrepreting the shabad to prove their point and have a nice steak every friday.

Well I hope you dont feel the same way if you read what I wrote above. Animals and plants are not equal, unless of course we can be reincarnated as plants. If we can, then what about certain rocks, bacteria, other undiscovered forms of 'life'? I'm not sure where but I have been told that Sikhi does say that humans are one of the highest forms of existence on this planet. I personally do not believe that animals and plants are equal.

i agree with you plants and animals are not equal, but in what sense do you say not equal. When I say not equal I say animal are higher on the food chain and plants are lower. And that's why Guru Sahib told us to kill an animal quickly.

And the whole part of plants being part of the reincarnation system is a vague one. But here is a shabad that speaks on what we were in our past lives or am I misunderstanding this shabad and missing the big picture.

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||

Also there is something about the rehaoo. Look where Guru Sahib tells us to stop and think about what Sabad Guru is saying. Also before the rehaoo he groups all the meat together. Why did the meats get grouped together and they are to be contemplated over and is the core of the Shabad? Also after saying you were this animal and that he then says now is the time to meet the Lord. After so long the human body has been given to you. Why would Guru Sahib stop here. Because after the rehaoo Guru Sahib continues saying we wer incarnation as rocks montains and so on.

[Only five]

Only5 - Am I right in thinking you are initiating an on-line morcha for the equal rights of plants?

LOL

Why do you agree that plants and animals are the same on the food line. If so what is the reason behind this and then why do we have two different ways on cutting one food group.

I know you were kidding about that morcha thing but I need an answer to the above question.

I know HSD has given an answer, but it's opinion, which I agree with, but I am looking for an definite answer to the question.

[Xylitol]

Perhaps the true answer about the place of chatka in Sikh dharm lies in the teachings of Baba Gurbachan Singh ji Bhindrenwale??

Would someone like to share his views on the matter?

[Only five]

Perhaps the true answer about the place of chatka in Sikh dharm lies in the teachings of Baba Gurbachan Singh ji Bhindrenwale??

Would someone like to share his views on the matter?

Anyone want to share this info.

[gsingh00]

Anyone want to share this info.

here is baba gurbachan singh ji's views,

^^listen to the whole file, around 6:30 sant ji's view becomes crystal clear.

http://gurmatveechar.com/audio/katha/01_Puratan_Katha/Sant_Gurbachan_Singh_%28Bhindran_wale%29/Guru_Granth_Sahib_Larivaar_Katha/Volume_14_Ang_1254-1351/032--Sant.Gurbachan.Singh.%28Bhindran.wale%29--Raag.Malaar--Ang-1289.%28Vaar%29.mp3

Edited September 29, 2009 by gsingh00

[shaheediyan]

Thanks for the audio link gsingh veer.

[Only five]

here is baba gurbachan singh ji's views,

^^listen to the whole file, around 7:30 sant ji's view becomes crystal clear.

http://gurmatveechar.com/audio/katha/01_Puratan_Katha/Sant_Gurbachan_Singh_%28Bhindran_wale%29/Guru_Granth_Sahib_Larivaar_Katha/Volume_14_Ang_1254-1351/032--Sant.Gurbachan.Singh.%28Bhindran.wale%29--Raag.Malaar--Ang-1289.%28Vaar%29.mp3

Yes thank you for this infot. Will listen to it when i get the time.

[Only five]

here is baba gurbachan singh ji's views,

^^listen to the whole file, around 6:30 sant ji's view becomes crystal clear.

http://gurmatveechar.com/audio/katha/01_Puratan_Katha/Sant_Gurbachan_Singh_%28Bhindran_wale%29/Guru_Granth_Sahib_Larivaar_Katha/Volume_14_Ang_1254-1351/032--Sant.Gurbachan.Singh.%28Bhindran.wale%29--Raag.Malaar--Ang-1289.%28Vaar%29.mp3

Sant ji on this issue first gave examples of Gursikhs.

He gave the example of Baba Deep Singh ji and how he didn't eat meat and he wrote four birs.

Then he says the Singhs that fought for the panth and lived in the jungles did eat meat, but only for survival because they had a bigger cause. And even the meat they ate was not cooked.

Then he says the person that eats for taste and says i will get big(Randip Singh needs to listen to this) is doing wrong.

Sant ji doesn't agree with eating meat for a person that reads Gurbani. He says the person won't even eat it.

Correct me if I'm wrong on describing what Sant ji said.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Only five

[Kaljug]

Sant ji on this issue first gave examples of Gursikhs.

He gave the example of Baba Deep Singh ji and how he didn't eat meat and he wrote four birs.

Then he says the Singhs that fought for the panth and lived in the jungles did eat meat, but only for survival because they had a bigger cause. And even the meat they ate was not cooked.

Then he says the person that eats for taste and says i will get big(Randip Singh needs to listen to this) is doing wrong.

Sant ji doesn't agree with eating meat for a person that reads Gurbani. He says the person won't even eat it.

Correct me if I'm wrong on describing what Sant ji said.

That is what Sant Mat has been preaching for donkeys years.

Unfortunately, history does not bear this out. You can read about the Singhs in Guru Gobind Singh's fauj roasting meat in Amarnama.

Yes, it's possible that Baba Deep Singh didn't eat meat, but even if he did, he would still be Baba Deep Singh. There have been as many chardikala Singhs in Sikh History who have eaten meat, which you would have no doubt known had you read any puratan granth like Panth Prakash instead of spending your time poring over the hysterical revisionist crap on the tapoban forum.

K.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Kaljug

[Matheen]

Yet again, waaay off topic, lol.

Anyway, Kaljug - if just visiting a place where people suffer/die can have an effect on us (as your 'negativity' post), then maybe eating meat can have a similar effect? MAybe that's why Nihangs read so much extra Bani?

Sant Gurbachan Singh Khalsa was from the same lineage as Baba Deep Singh Ji, and I'm sure history has been passed down from generation to generation.

In any case, you should follow what you are told by the 5 Pyare, and not worry what others are doing. There are bigger issues in the panth at the moment.

[Kaljug]

Anyway, Kaljug - if just visiting a place where people suffer/die can have an effect on us (as your 'negativity' post), then maybe eating meat can have a similar effect? MAybe that's why Nihangs read so much extra Bani?

That's also one reason why they chatka the animal.

Regarding Baba Deep Singh Ji's dietary habits, I'm sure that you are correct, but that was not the point - the point was that if Baba Deep Singh's diet included meat, he would still have as much Shakti.

In any case, you should follow what you are told by the 5 Pyare, and not worry what others are doing. There are bigger issues in the panth at the moment.

Agreed.

K.

[Only five]

That is what Sant Mat has been preaching for donkeys years.

Unfortunately, history does not bear this out. You can read about the Singhs in Guru Gobind Singh's fauj roasting meat in Amarnama.

Yes, it's possible that Baba Deep Singh didn't eat meat, but even if he did, he would still be Baba Deep Singh. There have been as many chardikala Singhs in Sikh History who have eaten meat, which you would have no doubt known had you read any puratan granth like Panth Prakash instead of spending your time poring over the hysterical revisionist crap on the tapoban forum.

K.

LOL, control that anger man. The video of Sant ji was up while ago. I just took the time to intrepret what he was saying for the ones that don't understand the language. Or is it, that's why your pissed.

If you don't agree with Sant ji then just say what you want and no feelings are involved.

Lastly, you don't have to reply right away. Go calm down and then give an answer. And just maybe you'll come up with a better response that doesn't take us off topic.

Edited September 30, 2009 by Only five

[Guest aks]

its as simple that it is nowhere it written in bani suggesting about eating non - veg. People have done their own manipulations and made up their own clarifications. I have noticed some people here who have expressed neutral opinions. (what is neutral thing ...??) . Stand by what the gurbani says . 

Religion starts where the science ends.

I have seen some foolish people asking questions regarding baba deep singh ji's sacrifice. i feel mercy for them. how common people can ask questions, how they can compare themselves with such supreme powers !!

Scientists still today are exploring about the planets while guru nanak sahib ji has mentioned in japji sahib about many different galaxies and planets.

That is the truth and it will remain so.