Johnnie Walker: Friend Or Foe?

[Archived_Member1]

Possibly not, jasleen ji; alcohol-based medicine could save your life, and i doubt that any sleeping-around situation can claim that. (imaginary smiley goes here)

All the same: a sikh might detest cutting of hair, and yet decide to do it - for head surgery, say - in order to stay alive. Would they be a hero if they decide to die rather than shave? Even if s/he has children to care?

i think alcohol based medication is ok, as it doesn't get you intoxicated. sinister was asking about medical marijuana... i think i'd draw the line there, as the intoxication is great and it's not something that would save your life.

in my previous posts i said i agreed that alcohol for cooking, as a base in medications isn't a problem. but sikh80 said that one need not follow rehet when one has an illness. that is a much broader statement than "it's ok to take alcohol based cough syrup" or something similar.

regarding the shaving of the head for surgery... i've discussed this a lot with people. some sikhs will not do it, would rather die than loose their kes. while i respect their strength, i do not know if i could do the same. i know that if i need to have hair removed for an operation, i can go back before the panj piyare and ask forgiveness, and receive amrit again. but if the situation was not life threatening, i don't think i'd do it. that's a very personal issue.

but again, it doesn't nullify rehet completely, as sikh80 was suggesting.

 

[clarkejoey]

Agreed. I also don't know what i would do in such a position.

Medical grass though: used as a concentrate, tablet or syrup, THC (the active ingredient) is very useful against glaucoma, asthma (is that spelled right?) and some other conditions. And, used like that, it has no mental effect at all (i hear).

Also, cannabis-based unguents are very beneficial for the skin, and, again, don't even reach the brain.

 

[Archived_Member1]

Agreed. I also don't know what i would do in such a position.

Medical grass though: used as a concentrate, tablet or syrup, THC (the active ingredient) is very useful against glaucoma, asthma (is that spelled right?) and some other conditions. And, used like that, it has no mental effect at all (i hear).

Also, cannabis-based unguents are very beneficial for the skin, and, again, don't even reach the brain.

that sounds ok then. but this is just my personal opinion, many will disagree.

as i said before, i'm not too familiar with medical marijuana... here in the US it's usually smoked, which as we all know has pretty serious effects on one's ability to think clearly.

if used in a way that did not intoxicate, it sounds ok.


my personal position is pretty simple. if the medication is necessary for one to function normally, and it ALLOWS one to function normally, i don't see a problem with it.

 

[clarkejoey]

Sounds sound to me!

 

[Sinister]

considering the anti-oxidant properties of red wine...why should an amritdhari refrain from drinking manageable portions when enjoying dinner with family or friends? Especially if it benefits health and well being?

Does this taboo coupled with dogma have more to do with control and obedience rather than honesty?

(control: foreign or self-control, the idea of "submission" pops up in my head)

With this post I set out to challenge and question the flexibility of sensibilities.

Thanks everyone for your input. (its been a good logical discussion)

 

[Archived_Member1]

considering the anti-oxidant properties of red wine...why should an amritdhari refrain from drinking manageable portions when enjoying dinner with family or friends? Especially if it benefits health and well being?

Does this taboo coupled with dogma have more to do with control and obedience rather than honesty?

(control: foreign or self-control, the idea of "submission" pops up in my head)

With this post I set out to challenge and question the flexibility of sensibilities.

Thanks everyone for your input. (its been a good logical discussion)

what is a "manageable" portion? who decides? for me, none is manageable. with alcohol it is so easy to slip past manageable, at which point you're not thinking clearly and drink even more!

isn't it easier to just say "no" across the board, than to say, "you can drink this much, but he can drink that much, and she can't drink any at all!"

 

[Archived_Member1]

besides which, there are a LOT of ways to get antioxidants without drinking wine.

 

[Sinister]

yes you can get anti-oxidants from a tablet....

i was just questioning the irony

an amritdhari would gasp at the idea of wine but gleefully accept a soda which is undoubtedly more harmful to a persons immediate health.

I just find it odd how a beverage can have such a strong emotional response from a community. Its the same in Islam as well (a little overboard in Islam)

this post was actually to a news I heard about muslim shopkeepers refusing to handle alcohol because it was "agianst the faith"

(the same way an amritdhari would most likely refuse to handle meat products or become a barber)

I find it intriguing how far a faith or ideology can change a persons life (for better or for worse).

 

[Sinister]

isn't it easier to just say "no" across the board, than to say, "you can drink this much, but he can drink that much, and she can't drink any at all!"

yes it is easier to say "no" ... but a response of this nature does not add to any intellectual honesty on behalf of dogma. banning something and repressing people and promoting complete absistenance is often hurtful to the psyche of many...an educational approach on boundaries is much more successfull (in my opinion) in preventing mental strains.

 

[Sinister]

what the people deserve is an education on the substance...not an outright condemnation..it will be far more effective in reducing dependancy.
then the individual can make a conscious choice and not be dictated to by an institution. (in my opinion it cant fail)

Molecule of discussion: CH3CH2OH
A brief History (by me):
Ethanol is made from fermentation, one of the earliest controlled chemical processes recorded by historians. Fermentation (scientifically called zymosis) is the process by which a living organism breaks-down a nutrient molecule, such as glucose, under anaerobic conditions without net oxidation. Some historians believe, ethanol’s first controlled synthesis was carried out in the Babylon circa around 5000 BCE. The crops used for creating the medium in which the bacteria or yeast proliferate can range in a large variety; anything from maize, sorghum, wheat, sugar-cane, cornstalks, barley and even crop wastes may be used to produce it.
Lois Pasteur, in 1857, first demonstrated that microorganisms when grown under particular conditions could produce alcohols. The discovery of the key agents of fermentation, bacteria and yeast, led to the commercialization and mass production of alcohol. With enhanced distillation techniques; higher concentrations and larger yields of ethanol can be extracted from fixed sugar sources. Technological improvements today have all led to the increase in the production of ethanol elevating it from a beverage additive to a FUEL (the irony of the word…it is a fuel to many metaphorically and literally)!

to be cont'd

 

[Archived_Member1]

yes you can get anti-oxidants from a tablet....

or berries, garlic, spinach, tea, soy, carrots, tomatoes...

i was just questioning the irony

an amritdhari would gasp at the idea of wine but gleefully accept a soda which is undoubtedly more harmful to a persons immediate health.

I just find it odd how a beverage can have such a strong emotional response from a community. Its the same in Islam as well (a little overboard in Islam)

i don't think it's the beverage which is the problem, as i tried to emphasize before, it's the intoxicating effect. BTW, many amritdharis abstain from caffeine (tea, coffee, sodas) too. rehet doesn't say, "only drink healthy things", it says "don't take intoxicants". comparing wine to soda doesn't make a lot of sense.

this post was actually to a news I heard about muslim shopkeepers refusing to handle alcohol because it was "agianst the faith"

i think that's a bit overboard. if they don't want to handle alcohol, they should get a different job.

I find it intriguing how far a faith or ideology can change a persons life (for better or for worse).

well in my case, it was certainly for the better. actually, i've never met anyone whose life got worse when they stopped drinking. lol...

 

[Sikh80]

i don't think committing a bujjar kurehet is a "petty issue". i don't think that being sick exempts one from being sikh. (i'd put a smily here, but you don't like them, so i won't). i don't know how this is a "petty issue". for amritdharis, it's a matter of breaking amrit. taking intoxicants is a serious sin, as serious as cutting hair or comitting adultry. do you propose that someone be able to cut their hair or sleep around if they're sick? it's exactly the same thing.

Let us take the case of force majure ,1984 riots in India.Many sikhs/Amritdharis had to shred their hair. Would you suggest that he should have died instead of saving his skin? In case you have any answer; the same would be applicable to the case when one is unwell medically and is advised to take some medicine like cough syrup that also contains some sleep inducing agents.

 

[Archived_Member1]

the same would be applicable to the case when one is unwell medically and is advised to take some medicine like cough syrup that also contains some sleep inducing agents.

do you even read my posts?

 

[Sikh80]

Yes, I do read your posts quite seriously. What makes you feel otherwise.

 

[Sinister]

Let us take the case of force majure ,1984 riots in India.Many sikhs/Amritdharis had to shred their hair. Would you suggest that he should have died instead of saving his skin? In case you have any answer; the same would be applicable to the case when one is unwell medically and is advised to take some medicine like cough syrup that also contains some sleep inducing agents.

ouch!

that's a question for the history books eh? (i dont think a person could answer unless presented with such a scenario first hand)

the scary part is should a sikh be willing to kill for his religion and jeopardize his/her own life?
if we have a monolithic institution guiding our behaviour (an institution which dictates to us the morality of the group collective) then we will certainly have martyrs (both political and spiritual).

cheers

 

[Sikh80]

I lost my kesh in 84 riots and saved myself.I have them now. It is not a hypothetical question.There were two options that time:
a] run or
b] get killed for nothing.

I survived. Maybe it was not correct but I did as per my instincts that were governed by the circumstances or the environment or may be something that was extraneous. In any case I should presume that I did everything with in Rehat though people may differ.REhat cannot be drafted taking all the eventualities in mind. One will have to be guided by commonsense than by fighting over as to what should be and what should have been as you said to be 'history'


Cheers!

 

[Sinister]

I lost my kesh in 84 riots and saved myself.I have them now. It is not a hypothetical question.There were two options that time:
a] run or
b] get killed for nothing.

I survived. Maybe it was not correct but I did as per my instincts that were governed by the circumstances or the environment or may be something that was extraneous. In any case I should presume that I did everything with in Rehat though people may differ.REhat cannot be drafted taking all the eventualities in mind. One will have to be guided by commonsense than by fighting over as to what should be and what should have been as you said to be 'history'


Cheers!

I agree with you, Rehat should be something fluid and self defined with intellectual honesty. For the most part it already is.

personal question:
do you have more respect for those that chose path A or path B (above)? and why?

 

[Sikh80]

There is no question of respect or disrespect ,it was a question of getting an oppurtunity or not that mattered. I would ,in that eventuality of option being given by the mob of 84, would always feel happy for those who would complete their alloted time on the earth.
Yes, it would be more interesting to have an objective view from a person who would be a distant watcher of the events.

How would you rate the two i.e. a] or b] which is better as per your thinking pattern.

Kindly let me know.Obviously the opinion now wuld be inconsequential.

 

[Sinister]

It's very hard to say because I have not be predisposed to such a stressful scenario. These are a series of events that have not occured in my lifetime...where my civil liberties and value system were under direct threat.

it's easy to be a lion from the comfort of your living room.

i know for sure I would not be a person that would be willing to die for sikhism. My religious ferver is weak+I dont really approve of dogma anyways.

but would I submit to someone? Would I be willing to be coerced and forced to sacrifice my deeply held convictions
....something I cannot answer until the day comes.

but my respect would lie with those who choose to die or defend their personal liberties. (on the basis of taste) rather than those who ran.

cheers

 

[Sikh80]

"but my respect would lie with those who choose to die or defend their personal liberties. (on the basis of taste) rather than those who ran."

It is surprises me ,Sir.