Historical Dietary Behaviour of Sikhs
There are a number of eyewitness accounts from European travelers as to the eating habits of Sikhs. Although there is no prohibition on Sikhs eating beef, it is clear that Sikhs as a mark of respect for their Hindu neighbours did not partake in eating beef. To initiate Muslims into their mysteries, one traveler said the Sikhs would prepare a dish of hog's legs.
According to Dabistan e Mazhib (a contemporary Persian chronology of the Sikh Gurus) Guru Nanak did not eat meat, and Guru Arjan thought that meat eating was not in accordance with Nanak's wishes. This differs from I. J. Singh's research that states that Guru Nanak ate meat on the way to Kurukshetra. Guru Hargobind (the 6th Guru) according to Persian records, ate meat and hunted and his practice was adopted by most Sikhs.
Bhai Gurdas—a contemporary of the sixth Sikh Guru—wrote vaars (poems or couplets) to describe the behaviour of Sikhs at that time. One of his vaars praises the merits of goat meat:
The proud elephant is inedible and none eats the mighty lion.
Goat is humble and hence it is respected everywhere.
On occasions of death, joy, marriage, yajna, etc only its meat is accepted.
Among the householders its meat is acknowledged as sacred and with its gut stringed instruments are made.
From its leather the shoes are made to be used by the saints merged in their meditation upon the Lord.
Drums are mounted by its skin and then in the holy congregation the delight-giving kirtan, eulogy of the Lord, is sung.
In fact, going to the holy congregation is the same as going to the shelter of the true Guru.
Read more about this topic: Diet In Sikhism
Famous quotes containing the words historical and/or behaviour:
“Some of us still get all weepy when we think about the Gaia Hypothesis, the idea that earth is a big furry goddess-creature who resembles everybody’s mom in that she knows what’s best for us. But if you look at the historical record—Krakatoa, Mt. Vesuvius, Hurricane Charley, poison ivy, and so forth down the ages—you have to ask yourself: Whose side is she on, anyway?”
—Barbara Ehrenreich (b. 1941)
“The methodological advice to interpret in a way that optimizes agreement should not be conceived as resting on a charitable assumption about human intelligence that might turn out to be false. If we cannot find a way to interpret the utterances and other behaviour of a creature as revealing a set of beliefs largely consistent and true by our standards, we have no reason to count that creature as rational, as having beliefs, or as saying anything.”
—Donald Davidson (b. 1917)