Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ang 1289-90. Rag Malar: Guru Nanak Dev Ji.
This Discussion of the Shabad shown below is adapted from "Jhatka Maas Thath Gurmat Nirnay - Religious Meat" by Bhai Randhir Singh (translated by Bhai Kuldeep Singh)-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explain the meaning of "Maas
The only Shabad (sacred hymn) in the whole of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that is specifically cited by meat eaters in support of eating meat is the Shabad of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji in the Vaar of Raag Malaar that was revealed at Kurekshetra during a solar eclipse day, a day considered holy by the Brahmins (Hindus priests). But carefully reading the the Gurbani hymns line by line it is clear that no line can be used to justify or support the eating of meat or present the eating of meat in a positive light.
The Guru is addressing a Vaishnav Pandit (scholar) who believes that he can achieve Nirvana (a state of liberation) only by avoiding meat as food and not trying to obtain the true wisdom through meditation. The Guru has stressed that only avoiding meat will not lead one to the achievement of Spiritual Bliss. Guru Sahib exposes the Pandit’s hypocrisy and double standards. Guru Ji put a fire under the pot and a crowd gathered condemning him, as it was the season of strict fasting. (Guru Ji told them he was cooking a dear and told them the following shabad)
Shalok, First Mehl:
First, the mortal is conceived in the flesh, and then he dwells in the flesh.
When he comes alive, his mouth takes flesh; his bones, skin and body are flesh.
He comes out of the womb of flesh, and takes a mouthful of flesh at the breast.
His mouth is flesh, his tongue is flesh; his breath is in the flesh.
He grows up and is married, and brings his wife of flesh into his home.
Flesh is produced from flesh; all relatives are made of flesh.
When the mortal meets the True Guru, and realizes the Hukam of the Lord's Command, then he comes to be reformed. Releasing himself, the mortal does not find release; O Nanak, through empty words, one is ruined. ||1||
DISCUSSION: No instruction exists to eat meat, so therefore, it cannot be established that this sacred hymn supports the eating of meat. Yes it is clear that one should not hate the word 'meat', and that one should not fall prey to meat. From these lines, only the hate of the word 'meat' has been criticised and has been established. It is clear that if people had the instinct to eat meat, then they would try to eat the breast of the mother that feeds them. The child only drinks milk from the breast, like it is holy. Here the nutrients for a child to survive are mentioned and doesn't establish that eating meat is acceptable. Guru Sahib explains that the child grows older and brings home a woman to start a life together, not to eat her. If any of these lines are used to justify eating meat then you are justifying to eat the tongue, face, stomach, everything, of a human as they are all meat. The go-ahead to eat meat cannot be gained from any of these lines.
First Mehl:
The fools argue about flesh and meat, but they know nothing about meditation and spiritual wisdom.
What is called meat, and what is called green vegetables? What leads to sin? (This makes everyone think and catergorise the three thing in your head. We know vegetation was made to eat, the flesh was made to transport the soul. Killing of animals for flesh is a sin and also the eating of carcasses is a sin they are both against gods will.)
It was the habit of the gods to kill the rhinoceros, and make a feast of the burnt offering. (Maharaj is telling them that the gods you believe in ate meat, maharaj exposes their hyprocrisy)
Those who renounce meat, and hold their noses when sitting near it, devour men at night. (The pandits were holding their noses as they thought meat was on the cauldron, they were acting so pure but they still used to rip the common folk off)
They practice hypocrisy, and make a show before other people, but they do not understand anything about meditation or spiritual wisdom.
O Nanak, what can be said to the blind people? They cannot answer, or even understand what is said.
They alone are blind, who act blindly. They have no eyes in their hearts.
They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, but they do not eat fish or meat.
They are produced from the blood of their mothers and fathers, even if they do not eat fish or meat. (more accuarate translation then the one on the net)
(Guru Ji is saying just by being vegetarian and having no spiritual wisdom means nothing, they may not eat meat but they must remember that we are meat. So just by avoiding fish and meat alone does not get you salvation)
But when men and women meet in the night, they come together in the flesh.
In the flesh we are conceived, and in the flesh we are born; we are vessels of flesh.
You know nothing of spiritual wisdom and meditation, even though you call yourself clever, O religious scholar.
O master, you believe that flesh on the outside is bad, but the flesh of those in your own home is good.
All beings and creatures are flesh; the soul has taken up its home in the flesh.
They eat the uneatable; they reject and abandon what they could eat. They have a teacher who is blind.
In the flesh we are conceived, and in the flesh we are born; we are vessels of flesh.
You know nothing of spiritual wisdom and meditation, even though you call yourself clever, O religious scholar.
Meat is allowed in the Puraanas, meat is allowed in the Bible and the Koran. Throughout the four ages, meat has been used.
It is featured in sacred feasts and marriage festivities; meat is used in them.
Women, men, kings and emperors originate from meat.
If you see them going to hell, then do not accept charitable gifts from them.
The giver goes to hell, while the receiver goes to heaven - look at this injustice.
You do not understand your own self, but you preach to other people. O Pandit, you are very wise indeed.
O Pandit, you do not know where meat originated.
Corn, sugar cane and cotton are produced from water. The three worlds came from water.
Water says, "I am good in many ways." But water takes many forms.
Forsaking these delicacies, one becomes a true Sannyaasee, a detached hermit. Nanak reflects and speaks. ||2||
DISCUSSION: The meaning behind the first two lines of this hymn is that to have continuous arguments, with people who are mistaken about the religious stance on meat, is a foolish act. These people cannot even differentiate between meat and vegetables, and whether the eating of one of these is a sinful act. There isn't even a hint that meat is acceptable, so it amazes me how some people can find anything to support their evil acts. This verse states that by uttering the vocabulary of meat and by looking at meat, one isn't punished, one doesn't become a saint by constantly denouncing meat and that one doesn't become a sinner if one doesn't "hate" meat. It can also be concluded from these extracts that the killing of animals is an evil act and is a great sin. Since purchase and eating of vegetables through money which was earned by committing sins is also a sin like eating flesh. The distinction between "What is meat and what is green vegetables" can only be determined by those who have the Gurmat knowledge and the Gurmat spirituality to do so. To just argue over meat without these qualities is the act of a fool. But instruction to eat meat cannot be gained from these two extracts under any condition.
In the 3rd and 4th lines Guru Sahib shows that the sacrificial acts of Hindus are in accordance with the Vedas. The killing of cattle, and then offering it as a sacrifice is the act of Hindus. But their hypocrisy lies in the fact that they publicly make a show of their disgust of meat; they can't even bear the smell of it. This extract shows how false people can be. Permission to eat meat, still cannot be established rather the falseness of people's behaviour is shown.
These people hold their noses when they see meat but, they do not realise that they too are made of flesh and blood which came from their parent's blood. To hate the word 'meat' doesn't make a person more religious. Throughout both extracts the word 'meat' is used but, there isn't a single word in support of eating it.
Even after the 12th line, it cannot be established that eating meat is permissible. If our meat-eating brothers want to establish permission, then they should tell me what they think of the 12th extract; the one which mentions meat from home and from outside? If they say that the meat at home is the meat of humans, and the meat from outside is regular meat then they are not even worthy of being called meat-eaters. If they do not see eating human flesh as acceptable, then they shouldn't eat animal flesh either. But these words fall upon deaf ears. If they prepared and ate the meat of humans, then their argument would make sense. What is the difference between these meats; all beings on earth are merely statues of meat. Why have a hatred towards beings made of meat? If there is a hatred, then it should be for all meat, not selected meat. This verse criticises those who eat meat at home but, when they are outside, they say the can't stand it. That is why the Guru says, O' Pandits, while sitting secretly at home you eat meat but, to keep your face in front of people outside, you put on an act. The 13th extract ("All beings and creatures are flesh...") goes along with the others from before.
Line 14 stands alone and states that those people who have not adopted the True Guru's wisdom and who have no faith in God, continue to eat all kinds of things. The food that should be eaten is "avoided" and that which should not be eaten is continually consumed. Acceptable food (that which is obtained through an honest living) is never consumed but unacceptable food (that which is earned through deception) is forever consumed.
Whether meat eaters or meat avoiders, if their thinking is not of a righteous nature then arguing over this matter is merely foolish. Those God oriented individuals who consider this matter with importance implement the correct decision within their lives. They are highly respectable individuals who only do good and shun outward appearances. They do not get involved in fruitless arguments. Those who abandon meat for their spirituality are truly accepted. But the efforts of those who abandon meat to be distinguished as "meat avoiders" are nothing more than hypocrisy. On the other hand, those individuals who eat meat are not necessarily hypocrites but are just mistakenly in the habit of eating it. But those people, who look for support from the Gurbani to justify their greed for meat-eating, are merely frauds.
