Eating Jhoota

[bsbk]

Waheguru jee ka khalsa, Waheguru jee kee fateh

Well might be this topic has been asked earlier too but please tell me quotes from rehatnaama and gurubani that why an amritdhari is not suppose to eat jhoota of non amritdhari with explaination. Is it relaxed for amritdhari parents to eat jhoota of their small kids (less than 3 - 5 years).

Waheguru jee ka khalsa, waheguru jee kee fateh

[Gupt Singh]

bhai i cant give u exact references but if u check out the www.akj.org and www.tapoban.org websites, go to articles/gurmat and then rehat points of controversy/or bibek if u are on tapoban,

scroll down and they give some rehatnamas relating to this.

however i dont think they are the best ones, i have heard better ones.

if ur kids are kesadhari etc im sure its fine. children are usually very pure and free of the 5 sins, etc, i believe ego only actually starts developing later on.

[Guest]

from my knowledge - its ok for mothers to take their childrens joot up until they are about a yr old - most amrit dhari people give their children a choola and will share food with them

when ur feeding ur child ur hands may become jhootey with the babys saliva.. and u may even eat with that same hand lata - a amritdhari person wont feed their child meat either

i think its just to make the mothers life a bit easier - ill try to find a reyatnama for u

[KAAL]

that child, has come from the mother, that child has lived inside that mother for 9months, that mother has a special bond with that child that nobody else can ever hav, after having that child, the mother will go hungry and even take food out of her own mouth to feed that child, that mother will and can kill for that child, as that child is hers. how can you say that it is jhoot for the mother to eat if she has saliva from that child, load of crap.

ok on the other hand i knw people dont eat from their mothers, or their mothers 'jhoot' that mother was their guru wen they first came into this world, they depended on her for everything, they wantd protecting she was there, they wanted to learn she was there, they wanted feeding she was there, then after they forsake her. wot do you think?

if the mother is not amrithdhari and the child is,

thats how it is in my case i still eat off her hands and have her jhoot

[LondonSingh]

This concept of Jhoot is very strange as it has developed into its own phenomenom in recent years. Unfortunately, it has begun to show the signs of Brahminism of late.

Historically jhoot was NOT about sharing food with a non-Amritdhari person. The original issue of jhoot is actually a ritual one, and it was this that the Guru's forbade all of their Sikhs from. Unfortunately, some Sikhs have hijacked the issue and made it manifest into something completely different.

The original ritual was basically linked to caste. Historical documents (especially those by Qazi Noor Mohammed) show how a table was set at meal times, but only Brahmins (who supposedly were of high-caste) were alllowed to approach it and take food from it. When they were finished, they Kshaktriyas (who were supposedly second on the caste social stage) were allowed to approach the table for food. This continued until all food went down to the 'lowest caste'. This was done in the aid of Brahmins so their food would not be 'tarnished' by the lower castes.

Again, this is what the Guru's in their infinate wisdom warned us against.

[Gupt Singh]

Its not a ritual, the Rahit says dont take jooth from a non amritdhari

U mite find it weird that a amritdhari cant have a sexual relationship with a non amritdhari, including his/her wife, but I see the reason straight away.

It is very easy to shout BRAHMINISM at everything you dont like lol

[LondonSingh]

Dear Khalsa Soulja Ji, I never shouted BRAHMINISM regarding Jhoot, what I did say was that it is now showing Brahminical tendencies. If you did take time to read my response properly, you would have read that the whole concept of Jhoot WAS started as a Brahminical ritual. All contemorary historical documents will show you that.

Who on Vahigurus earth mentioned anything about sexual relations?! The word Jhoot literally translated means 'to share utensils'. Where does sex come into it?! What reasoning can you see? Because I am confused how that came up to begin with!

And for the record, NO-WHERE in the Rahit Maryada is there anything written about Jhoot. I suggest all to look at Section 4, Chapter 6, Article 16 - Beliefs, Observances, Duties, Taboos and Ceremonies and Living in Consonance with Guru’s Tenets. Also, read Section Six, Chapter 13, Article 22 - Panthic (Corporate Sikh) Life and Facets of Corporate Sikh Life. Again, there is absolutely nothing mentioned anywhere in the Rahit Maryada and in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji about Jhoot. Please show me evidence, not opinions.

[Gupt Singh]

the sex thing was a parallel. u mite see it as ritualistic in the same way u see jhoot as ritualistic.

there is little mention of jhoot in rahit maryada by sgpc but then again they allow u to have meat. alot of other issues like sarbloh bibek arent touched on either.

When u take amrit the following is said:

Gursikh di roti beti di saanjh Gursikh naal.

The Gursikhs have to share food and establish marital relationships with Gursikhs only

so what is a gursikh? bhai gurdas says its someone whos taken amrit.

Gur Deekhya Lai Sikh, Sikh Sadaayaa. (Var3,Pauri 11)

One is called a Sikh only after he has been blessed with 'deekhya.'

Charan Dhoe Rehraas Kar Charnamrit Gursikhaan Pilaaayaa (Var 1, Pauri 23)

(Guru Nanak) followed the system of washing the Guru's Feet and blessing the Gursikhs with the Charan­amrit (Charan-Pahul).

(charan pahul can be paralleled with khanda de paul obviously)

bhai desa singhs rahitnama says this also:

Pratham Rahit Yeh Jaan, Khande-ki-Pahul Chhakey.

Soee Sikh Sujaan, Avar Naa Pahul Jo Lai.

The primary Rahit for a Sikh is to take Khande-ki-Pahul. Only he is sagacious Sikh.

a couple more relating to bibek aswell incase anyone is interested:

"Bhojanaad Moundit naal chhakey, Tankhaiyaa" or One who eats food with a Mona/non-Sikh, is guilty of a breach of conduct (Piara Singh Padam’s Rehitnamay pg. 72)

"Patr sarb loh kay, bhougtay asan souaad....loh patr mai chhakai," meaning: using utensils of sarbloh, one eats tasty food...one should eat in sarb loh utensils" (Padam, 75)

Sau Sakhee, sakhee #8’s rehitnama: "So Sikh gur ka janeeay, Monay ann na khai": such is a Sikh of The Guru who does not eat the food of Monay/Non-Sikhs.

there we go.

a gursikh is someone who has taken amrit.

gursikhs can only share food with other gursikhs.

therefore, amritdharis can only eat from/share food w/ other amritdharis

[SinghMunda]

Isn't the concept of jhoot very good, even tho i am only really starting to come to terms with it properly...it has ensured that our Gurus have given us a very clean way of living...i.e. limiting diseases passed on by germs from others/ourselves-it is much more than some brahmin thing.

[Mugermach Singh]

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

Taking Jhoot from only Amritdharis doesnt make sense to me. This means that an Un-Amritdharis food is unacceptable just as the same as those stupid bhamins who say that their food is contaninated when a lower caste casts a shadow over it.

If you dont want to take jhoot, then dont take it from anyone INC amritdharis.

If you want Jhoot, take it from anyone. This doesnt mean go around eating from every plate. There is a such thing a Hygiene.

Also regarding this mother thing, how can you not take jhoot from a mother who fed Milk when you were a baby.

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

the whole world is Jhoot except Sach which is Sucha.

[Guest]

very much agree with crocodile singh

[sukhasingh]

I'm not into Brahmism, in terms of Jhoota, I have friends that have stopped eating from their own mothers, because they're not amritari """WRONG""" "your mother gave birth to you"

The basis of this came from the times when Sikhs,were hunted down, it was only safe to eat from others "suitable" singhs/singhni's that you knew wouldn't poison your food.

An old tactic when Sikh camps were ransacked was before the moguals, came to the camp the Sikhs would poison there food, so that when the enemy came they would eat the food and die :evil:

Sant Jarnail Singh used to only eat from other Sikhs he knew as there was many people out to assinate him, so he would only trust a few of his sevadars to prepare his food.

Nowadays, many people who have taken amrit have mis-concived the meaning behind the action . :cry: and prefer to eat out of iron bowls and pretend to be gurmukh, and not eat with aam sangat shame

[Gupt Singh]

i wouldnt start dissing sarab loh bibek now if i was you.....because akjers, taksaalis and nihungs all do it......becuz we are at such a low spiritual level we cannot understand/see a difference, doesnt mean they are wrong and we are right.