The Divisive Taboo of Halal for Sikhs Comments

BIk

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:50:06 +0000

The guardian thread also contains a link to another opinion piece which states that research shows that halal slaughter is not painless as vested interests such as the Muslim council of Britain like to propagate. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/20... I am used to reading islamophile posts on TLH. I am surprised that TLH hasn't been renamed the Mosque hall as the bleeding heart liberal 'sikhs' here seem to be more concerned about how a Muslim's feelings might be hurt they follow the Rehat Maryada. There will come a time when these liberal fools will even question whether they should be keeping the Kesh because a Muslim might feel 'excluded'. How about a Kirpan? I know Muslims would feel 'threatened' if they saw a Sikh with a Kirpan. Time to start questioning the rest of the 5 Ks in the interest of interfaith harmony, inclusiveness, dialogue, fairness and any other liberal buzzwords useful idiots like brooklynwala can come up with.

Sikh history

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 07:05:55 +0000

I think you are missing a major point on why Sikhs do not eat Halal meat. A common practice at the time was to forcibly convert Sikhs and Hindus into Islam. One of the popular practices enforced at the time was the FORCING of non-Muslims to consume Halal meat. For many devout Hindus this was repulsive and was a way of breaking their spirit. As a result of this, the Sikhs openly refused to eat Halal meat as a statement against the oppression of Islam. Observing it today as a Sikh is a sign of respect to those who did not forcibly adopt Muslim customs being enforced on the general population of India at the time. Just as we remember those who gave their lives for our faith daily in our Ardas.

Singh

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 02:54:04 +0000

It is as simple as: Jau tau prem khelan ka chao. Sir dhar tali gali mori aao. “If you wish to play the game of love, come my way, with your head on the palm of your hand.” (Guru Granth Sahib (GGS) p.1412) The Guru gave an explicit Hukam to avoid halal at all costs. As Sikhs, it is not only our sacred duty to obey, but it is part of the game of giving our heads to the Guru. A rare few manage give their heads all at once. The rest of us do it only bit by bit, with the aid of Gurbani, Gurkirpa, and sadh sangat. Ignoring the Guru's Hukam, or changing it, is completely counter to the path of a Sikh. The only divisiveness I see is from people trying to justify their own marjee as being acceptable within Sikh dharm even when it runs counter to the Guru's explicit teachings. What's next?? Will you call our belief in reincarnation divisive b/c Christains, Jews, and Muslims don't believe in it?? Is keeping the hair divisive b/c most people choose to cut theirs?? This is along the same lines as changing the Guru's stance on halal.

brooklynwala

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:45:52 +0000

Here's some more food for thought (pun intended) on the subject: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/20...

Shakti

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 00:14:16 +0000

The original word in the panthic rehat maryada is not to eat kutha, however the english version of the maryada translates it as meat slaughtered the muslim way, however it means all meat Read hear to understand why :http://www.sikhism101.com/node/77

Jodha

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:30:16 +0000

Thought-provoking post Brooklynwala, but a separate identity need not mean exclusivity. As others have suggested by others a shift towards difference, need not be interpreted as exclusivity. Langar at the Gurdwaras traditionally do not serve meat for greatest inclusivity. The Hukamnamas give an explicit order by Guru Gobind Singh against halal, at the same time that Sikh authors were carving out a discourse of Sikhi as a 'theesra Panth'. I believe that the order against halal meat can be seen as part of this.

Sukhi Singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:18:51 +0000

Clearly you've hit on some raw nerves with this one, Brooklynwala. I enjoyed your post and agree with much of your sentiment. Questioning and challenging the status quo is exactly what Sikhi has always been about - even if it's challenging from within. There are always progressive factions in every religion and community who challenge the more ardent zealots of that community/religion. Sikhi is no exception. Hats off to you for opening up the dialogue and standing fast in the backlash. No easy task, that--and definitely not weak. The heart of your post seems to be more about questioning the idea of maintaining outdated divisions and enmities. As Sikhs, most of us were raised to mistrust Muslims, but does it make sense to keep on mistrusting an entire faith _now_? That's a good question - particularly for those of us in the west who are routinely mistaken for Muslims, Arabs, and Middle Easterners. Here, we're battling systemic racism, not Muslims. Keep on, Brooklynwala, and know that there are others out here who may be less vocal, but who support your spirit of challenge and critique, nonetheless.

@rsbagga

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:43:28 +0000

Really interesting post, and so glad that we are able to discuss these issues openly. I think that Guru Nanak's gift to us was to establish a legacy of questioning why we engage in certain religions practices, and ask if they truly bring us closer to God. I'm glad to see that spirit is alive and well - if there's one thing thats clear, the line between "religious tradition" and "unnecessary ritual" is not necessarily always clear. First, I am a vegetarian, just to make clear where i'm coming from. Second, I came from a mixed family - though I consider myself a devout Sikh, my mother's family is primarily Hindu Punjabi, while my father's is primarily Sikh (though each of their families are mixed, too). But even that doesn't fully explain everything - most of my father's Sikh family is vegetarian, and most of my mother's Hindu family is not. I think that, though this debate is worthwhile, we may never get an appropriate or satisfactory answer. The debate has always centered on whether we, as Sikhs "can" or "are allowed to" eat meat. We will, almost always, come up short on answering this question. It is without question that there is a long standing history of meat-eating in the Indian peninsula. Ancient and modern hindus alike ate meat, Muslims ate meat, Christians ate meat, and I think that much of the historical evidence around Sikhi also indicates that the first Sikhs probably ate meat too. I won't go into this in great detail because it has been done above. I think, perhaps, the more appropriate debate should be whether we "should" eat meat - what is the more appropriate practice going forward? There, I think the answer is clearer. On a societal level, there is almost no doubt that even those who ate meat in earlier generations ate significantly less amounts - frankly, it was far too expensive for everyone to eat frequently. Meat is now artificially cheap - this is because of the tremendous amounts of antibiotics used in raising livestock, the ease by which livestock is killed and processed, and also because of the low price of livestock feed (i.e., most livestock eats corn, even though their bodies aren't made for it). This is having major implications on the environment - more greenhouse gases due to high livestock populations, major public health issues, grain being used to raise livestock rather than feed the hungry. I think we should question whether eating meat truly allows us to ask for "sarbat da bhala" - are we actually asking for the greatest good for the greatest number of people by eating meat? I'd argue that maybe we aren't. On a more selfish note - our ethnicity is plagued with high cholesterol, high blood pressure, high obesity rates, high liver function issues, and much more. Perhaps a grain, vegetable, and fruit based diet would be more appropriate for us, rather than one in which we are causing injury to the body that the Guru has given us. Yes, I have a bias here, I admit it. But I am glad to see that Brooklynvala, and others, are raising these societal questions - and I think as Sikhs, we should look to not only what we are allowed to do, but what we should do. By being vegetarian, or as close to it as possible, we are probably doing more to seek universal good for all than by eating it.

SHAKTI

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:38:55 +0000

ਕਬੀਰ ਜੋਰੀ ਕੀਏ ਜੁਲਮੁ ਹੈ ਕਹਤਾ ਨਾਉ ਹਲਾਲੁ ॥ कबीर जोरी कीए जुलमु है कहता नाउ हलालु ॥ Kabīr jorī kī▫e julam hai kahṯā nā▫o halāl. Kabeer, to use force is tyranny, even if you call it legal.(halal)

SHAKTI

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:36:48 +0000

So you don't agree meat eating is wrong, you don't agree halal meat is wrong, what on earth do you think is the kurehit then? We only have three now? Or are you going to dismiss the other three as well?

Dal Singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:00:21 +0000

Are you serious Brooklynwala? Why not ask Muslims to not be so 'divisive' and eat non halal meat like it was no big thing? See what response you get. That non halal thing has a solid precedent in our community and as mentioned before, most extant early rehatnamas give instructions to this effect. Let's not beat around the bush, what you are doing is actually remodeling the faith to fit your contemporary worldview. I pray you are not another brother/sister who is struggling to see the boundaries and differences between western liberalism and Sikhi. We are a community with our own traditions and practices and your our whatabouttery regarding halal is akin to a Muslim thinking Mohammad was wrong about Halal and refusing to adhere to their own dietary proscriptions. We are a distinct community with our own particular norms, practices etc., face up to it. Odds are you're just simply feeling hindered in your social life by this restriction and are trying to 'rationalise' a way to overcome this. That's weak.

Harinder

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:47:35 +0000

Killing animals to feed one self is Barbaric to me. What ever any faith on this planet may say . No cruelty to any GODs creation should be the motto I am pro animal right activist

Bostonvala

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:47:48 +0000

(@admin - don't know why browser is requiring me to break up the comment...) So the whole topic can be clarified as follows - (my opinion but using the framework of scripture/history/discipline): 1. Consumption of ritualized and sacrificial meat provides no inherent spiritual or physical value. Focusing on good meaningful deeds and avoidance of actions that are negative is the direction for a Sikhi lifestyle. 2. In keeping the tradition of sovereignty and honoring the spirit of our ancestors we refrain from a practice that was a sign of slavery and hegemony 3. For those that have made a public declaration of their allegiance to the Guru (Khandey ki Pahul) this injunction of not consuming halal (interpreted as sacrificial meat) is a serious enough promise that if broken requires them to present themselves to the Five Sovereign Ones again.

Bostonvala

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:46:46 +0000

However, you have not covered other angles to the discussion and for that the key ingredients of Sikh history and Sikhi feeling of sovereignty are required. The Gursikhs of the past have passed down through oral tradition that it was a law of the land that "only halal meat" was allowed to be consumed by the public. So all Muslim butchers got the advantage and non-Muslims were forced to partake in that. There was nothing inherently negative about Muslim thought, instead as is usually the case, it was the result of an extreme interpretation by a power hungry Emperor and his minions. Anyway, as a challenge to this type of hegemony, the Guru ordained that his Sikhs (if they chose to consume meat) would refrain from consuming halal and would instead take matters into their own sovereign hands and hunt and consume independently. This is where the confusion or clarity (as the case may be) of jhatka meat comes. There are still some Sikh practitioners that refuse to eat any meat unless they have butchered the animal themselves - my late grandfather was one of them - and when they butcher the animal they do it in one blow.

Bostonvala

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:42:54 +0000

@Brooklynwala - you have covered two angles to the issue 1) Causing pain/less pain to the animal - For me this argument is weak enough to not even worth commenting on. As @Sukhwinder Singh who is a proponent of no meat at all suggests, that argument does not stand on its own. 2) Sacrificial meat - This one is a strong argument. And rather than take the word halal literally, the spirit of the law needs to be applied here. Any meat that is butchered or prepared as a sacrifice to God, with the intention that somehow we gift another life to please God - is antithetical to Sikhi. The only sacrifice acceptable to Vahiguru is the sacrifice of an individual's bad deeds and rather a life of useful, fruitful and meaningful deeds for self and the world. This injunction is to remind us that in our daily consumption - be thankful always, and be mindful to do good. (cont...as comment is too long)

Harjinder Singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 16:40:14 +0000

Interesting post. However I have some concerns in relation to it; You state the German research in 1978 concluded that it was less painful to be killed slowly, I've not had a chance to view the study as yet BUT is this research backed up by any other studies? A one off study cannot be considered fact. You also mention that animals are now stunned before the halal slaughtering begins....a few questions in relation to this; 1) Doesn't the fact that that they stun them with the captive bolt defeat the German study argument? Why the need to the stunning if there is study in place which claims halal slaughtering was less painful to start with? 2) Also, this is a relative new technology and certainly not one that was available when the Sikh Rehat Maryada was drawn up so surely it stands to reason it was valid THEN, if debateable now. I do however share your concerns that some aspects of our community prefer to demonise the Islamic community I don't think the forbidding of eat halal meat actually contributes to that, I feel it is a tenuous argument to link the two and your call to look at the Sikh Rehat Maryada again is misguided.....it is our cultural habits that are failing us more than anything, more so than the "faults" in the Sikh Rehat Maryada.

another singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 15:59:31 +0000

This is an excellent and thought-provoking post. I hope that our initial reactions here are not to be defensive, but instead, to take seriously what Brooklynwala is suggesting. That is, how do we make sense of this ban on consuming halal meat? Once we better understand where it's coming from, then we can begin forming our opinions and arguments for it. Thanks for calling our attention to the issue and for inspiring us to think, Brooklynwala.

kds

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:29:04 +0000

<The most common argument I usually hear to explain the halal ban is simply that the Rehat Maryada says so. No disrespect to the Rehat Maryada or the (attempted) consensus-based process through which it was created in the first half of the 20th Century, but this is not a sufficient reason in and of itself. If the lives our Gurus have taught me anything, it is to think critically, question everything I’m told, and to always keep the love of Waheguru in my heart. So an argument based solely on citation of the Rehat Maryada (which our Gurus were not involved in writing) is not convincing to me.> Here are some of the views regarding halal from puratan Rehats http://www.allaboutsikhs.com/sikh-rehat-maryada/s... 1 .Tanakhah-nama Bhai nand lal Avoid meat cooked by Turks. 2 Chaupa Singh Rahit-nama A Gursikh is strictly forbidden to eat meat killed according to Muslim rites 3Desa Singh Rahit-nama: The flesh of a goat may be eaten provided the goat is killed with a single blow well away from a langar 4 Daya Singh Rahit-nama Eating halal meat or concealing one 's knees with a kachh, are described as serious offences. [49—53, 55, 57—8, 61—2] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Saying that halal meat was not forbidden by Guru gobind singh ji same like saying that cutting kes is not forbidden by Guru ji

Sukhwinder Singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 12:04:13 +0000

This Note posted by you my friend shows how you Disregard the Sikh rehat Maryada. A sikh is never meant to eat any kind of meat in his life be it the halal or Jhatka. The thing you have listed in the 4 Mryadas of sikhs 'Eating the meat of an animal slaughtered in a Muslim way'. Let me ask you something mate, is there any right way of killing someone? If you go out and intend to kill someone you can't think of a right or a wrong way. Either you kill him/her slowly or in a single swipe as you say. A sin is a sin. These lame excuses are made by those people who Disrespect and oppose the Guru. A true Gursikh is the one who never questions the Guru's ability and decision. You are not alone who keep an eye of suspicion on the Maryada. There a Millions out there who want to disscuss this kind of stuff just to make themselves look more knowledgeable and putting forth a view which fits their own way of life. Myself, I lived 17 years in Punjab and have my roots connected to a Family of Amritdharis and I am too a proud Guru Ka Sikh since I was a kid. Its been 3 years now that I moved abroad, I haven't touched any kind of meat be it Halal or Jhatka by the Akal Purakh's Grace and I see people pretending to be true followers of Sikhism and on the contrary put up views opposing the Sikh Rehat Maryada just to live the life they want to live and convince people that they are Right, Which hurts me from within because that seed sown once by Guru Nanak Dev Ji, watered and looked after by the Nine Guru Sahiban's with their blood and hard work which started blossoming and showering its Mehak around the World, instead of protecting and spreading it we are just plucking its delicate petals by questioning on Guru's Word itself. I can't Justify myself here without Gurbani, But I am not knowledgeable enough to Take a Pankti from Guru Granth Sahib Ji's and try to Explain it in my way or favour as it satisfies me. May Waheguru Give you the Strength and Understanding to follow the Sikh Rehat Maryada rather that questioning on it. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Banda Singh

Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:23:33 +0000

Halal meat is sacrificial meat. If you wish to eat meat, then eat it because you want to, not because your eating it in the name of God. This is why Sikhs are forbidden from eating Halal.