Jeeti, interesting topic... Lets start with point 1...
Regarding Hinduism and Beef... This is a topic that is very misunderstood because of the diversion that learning for religious text has taken, and in the context in which we learn. Something common to Dharmic religions is in the way that religious theory is taught. Religious theory is Sikhi, Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism, is more a story, and thought is to be secreted. From Hinduism, we learn the divine understandings of life from Lord Krishna's story to Ram. We learn from a story. Similarily, in Sikhism, Guru Nanak Dev Ji and our following Guru's have always formed their expressions in a manner of stories, and examples. Its a stark contrasts from Christanity, which does inform via story telling but also does comprise of instructions, like the 10 commandments...
It is false to say that it is nowhere in Hinduism that says that beef was not to be consumed. It was stated explicitly in the Mahabharat that eating meat is against the theological essence of hinduism. Now, when I talk about the difference in interpretation, its simple. The ideological diffrences between the way many western academics interpret hinduism and other dharmic religions is because they are waiting for "you should not do this and not to do that".... Similar to Christanity and Islam. That this is strictly forbidden, and that is stricly forbidden. This is not the language of the vedas, and not the language of the Mahabharat. It is not a matter of instructions, or not an instruction booklet.
Paintings in ancient vedic times, were are form of expressing stories. So there are sub cultures across south asia who use pictures as a form of communication. So, there is something to be said that one may have used paintings to determine eating beef was wrong, but it is also explicit in the text of the Mahabharat and in the Yug Ved.
Our Guru's were all extremely educated in Hindu literature as it was the dominating religion during our Guru's times. What you can see is the simialrity in the way philosophy is structed. For example, in Hinduism a main reason why meat eating is not allowed (AGREE WITH SWI, dont just not eat beef, especially for hindus leave all meat) is the dharmic consequences, karmic consequences, and ecological reasons. Theses are explained throughout hindu texture, and I am sure everyone is educated in those.... Similarily in Sikhi, our Guru's will not say DO NOT DO THIS... A main reason argued by many theologists is that the Guru's did not use such language because it took away from the spiritual inclincation and dedication of one to the religion...
It is said that our Guru's believed in the feeding of the soul not the demanding. A person truly in touch with sikhism understands sikhi philosophy, and what it stands for. It requires an education, and furthering into the knowledge. If it was laid out, that this is what is right and this is wrong, the amount of religious dedication needed is less...
The Guru Granth Shaib Ji blantley also doesnt say that murder is wrong. It never says that child molestation is wrong. It never says killing your parents isnt wrong. It never says cannibialism is wrong. The fact is that the way our philsophy is taught is not based in instruction. It is meant to be a way of life. You have to realize that Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not "hunt". He gave Mukti (salvation) to animals. There is a stark difference. He did not eat or consume the animals after, he gave them liberation because of the suffering they experienced in Kalyug (moguls who would use their skin as tents, eat them, and use their bones for weapons)...
Bund maraah, Faizan, is an idiot. He didnt study shit, he didnt learn anything. Sikhism philsophy is against meat eating. Jhatka meat is meant for sikhs who dont fully subscribe to the khalsa and is very insulting. Its not like Halal, meat is forbidden. If sikhi philsophy forbids murder on the basis of killing a soul, then if all animals have souls how is it accepted? If we as sikhs so no difference between me and you and another animal, where is the justification in eating an animal? If we so no dharmic difference between a baby and a peice of meat, where is the justification that eating the meat is okay, and eating the baby is bad?
In Kalyug, Guru Ji said people will tear the flesh off of their own. What we are experiencing is the influence of the ruling world body on our religion. Most of these thoughts come from the Max Maculliffe version of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji (Macliffe who was an officier in punjab whose duties was to break the bond between the indians, and the one who said that Guru Gobind Singh Ji was a glorified murderer)...
Bottom line is, if you understand Sikhi philosophy then you understand what is against sikhi philsophy. Meat eating is not also allowed in Langar because we would never keep a dead body in our gurdwara would we? If it was out of respect then we would keep two different rooms... Try to bring meat anywhere near Harimandir Sahib... It is an ultimate sin...
If people are waiting for, you can do this, or you can do that, and arent subscribers to Islam or Christanity/ Judaism then they are cutting themselves short, and are not only doing a disservice to their dharam but to our Guru's/ God.
If people have questions with Meat eating in Sikhism, read this:
http://www.info-sikh.com/PageM1.html
Oh and P.S.- If people are thinking that its nowhere in the Guru Granth Shahib that says meat eating isnt right, dont get it twisted, there is. It is said in very harsh manners from our Guru's themselves that it is distinctly against sikhi. What Jeeti is saying is that Guru Ji never said DONT EAT MEAT. He also never said MURDER IS BAD.
