# Donating Blood And Sikhism



## CaramelChocolate (Oct 1, 2005)

Is it allowed in Sikhism? What do you think? Would you do it even if some hairs were removed due to sticky tape on the skin? Is it against God's will to give blood? Please discuss.

Personally I am for, and even in Sikhism I think an amritdhari should be willing to give blood even if say one or two hairs maybe removed due to sticky tape on the skin.

One could argue however that it is wrong since people who do not have blood and need it from others are that way because of Gods will and giving blood is against God's will as you are altering what he had planned.


----------



## kds1980 (Oct 1, 2005)

*Re: Donating blood*

wjkk
wjkf

It is allowed.

*Admin Note*: Dear kds1980 & All, please refrain from using such a clumsy language in future. Using such language does not make you look any wiser. 

First condition of posting on SPN Forums says:

*1) Treat all members with respect that you expect from them for yourself.*

Please have a look at all the terms & conditions for posting on SPN at the top right side of this page.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Oct 1, 2005)

*Re: Donating blood*

Thanks for calling my question stupid. In future, please don't respond to any of my posts if you cannot be bothered to respond to my discussion topic in a friendly manner and cannot support your beliefs/claims with evidence or supporting arguments. Your response was unhelpful and unwanted.


----------



## Jogindar Singh Kaur (Oct 2, 2005)

*Re: Donating blood*



			
				CaramelChocolate said:
			
		

> One could argue however that it is wrong since people who do not have blood and need it from others are that way because of Gods will and giving blood is against God's will as you are altering what he had planned.



Argument 1:  You could make that argument about any technology, not just the medical technology that can transfuse blood from one person to another.  For me, understanding God's Hukam doesn't just mean the holy Gurbani, it also means non-holy acts like understanding scientific discoveries and learning about & understanding other philosiphical/religious/spiritual systems people cherish.  We're Sikhs-- students-- after all.  

Argument 2:  Sikhs are commanded to help the poor and suffering.  If my blood reduces someone's suffering, they are more than welcome to it.  After I die, they are welcome to any and all organs in my body-- it is, after all, nothing but a shell after death (well, more like a bag of meat & bones but I'm trying to be a bit less gross about it. :shutup. 

Argument 3:  There is nothing in Bani that says we can violate God's Hukam, really.  All the True Guru asks of us is to refrain from lust, anger, greed, maya & ego, to love her/him as deeply as we can, and to respect all aspects of the Guru-- meaning the earth, the Universe, other humans, animals.


----------



## Archived_Member16 (Oct 3, 2005)

*http://www.punjabilok.com/news_files/oct/103_times.htm*​*He donated blood 103 times, is still counting*


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 4, 2005)

Gurfateh
Dear CC

For Sikh,

Body belongs  to God,

World Belongs to God.


All Blood and all Bodis are of God.


All Actions are of God.

We can not donate even an atom to anyone as we do not posses anything.

It is God who transfer blood form one Body into the body hwere it is needed.

In short blood 'donation' or any kind of Charity is anti Gurmat as nothing is of us so we can not give to anyone.

By good fortune by mercy of God say from the body of Vijaydeep Singh or anyother Sikhs blood is transfered to the needy then it is the deed of God we thank God for that.

We do not have donations or charity but we have service.

A persons who is made to serve by God without self interest gets the lord.


----------



## Admin (Oct 11, 2005)

> In short *blood 'donation' or any kind of Charity is anti Gurmat* as nothing is of us so we can not give to anyone.



Preety hard for me to understand this logic, vijaydeep Singh ji, if i could help someone out by donating a bottle or two of blood and that saves the life of a patient then how can it be anti Gurmat?


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 11, 2005)

Gurfateh

Respected Aman Singh Ji,

Das is only oppose to term Donation or Charity or Daan in Panth as we use term Service or Seva.

So if bottles or two are transfered from one body into another it is not that we are donating our blood but Akal is making this body to serve the body of other.

So Das can say it is service or seva by blood allowed in Gurmat but no donation as it makes us feel the giver which we are not Akal is.

So donation term increaes our ego but Service terms let us remain humble.

So in context donation word needs to be avoided but service term is to be used.

In fact we get donation from Akal,Sabad Guru or Panth Guru and no one can be doner but them menaioned above.


----------



## Jassy (Oct 17, 2005)

vijaydeep Singh said:
			
		

> Gurfateh
> 
> Respected Aman Singh Ji,
> 
> ...


 
At first I was going to second Aman Singh's reply, but then I read yours and it made complete sense. Though service is more of a business term and donor/donation is always affiliated with non-profitable organizations. But I understand what you're saying  it makes sense.

As for the original question, I'm not an Amritdari but I would give blood w/o hesitation if someone's life was in question ... regardles of what my faith tells me.


----------



## S|kH (Oct 18, 2005)

Let's take this a step further...

What do we think about donating hair ? 

Obviously it would have to be taken off your body first..


----------



## devinesanative (Oct 19, 2005)

Dear friend ,

It is a belief , If believed everything is Anti-Gurmat , If believed Nothing is AntiGurmat .......

OMG Just , Visualise and Imagine , If animals be asked to follow religion , what would happen ........

If Lion be asked to follow the particular religion ......... what would happen .......... Will he start eating grass ......... But if he starts eating grass ...... grass is also living being ........ :{;o:


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 19, 2005)

Gurfateh

Respected Sikh Ji,

If parting of our hairs saves a human life,Das does not know where giving of hair can do this then it is OK.

If our hairs can act as a a sappling for others getting Hair groth then Das thinks it is OK to let Hair be delivered.

But we must get our Sikhi form(swaroop) resotrd as soon as possible.


----------



## Jassy (Oct 19, 2005)

agreed, if lets say you had your hair cut ... then the best thing to do is give it to Cancer society who will use it to make wigs out of that hair for those who are unable to grow hair due to health conditions etc.


----------



## manbir (Oct 20, 2005)

*Any thing you have is not yours*. 

You can claim to be the owner of something when you can give away that thing to others....

Thus, only when you give something to someone... you actually are the owner of that particular object.

Thus,  Givers are Owners

Someone said ..... Give till it hurts !  Give others till you feel the pinch ...


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 21, 2005)

Gurfateh

what das knows abot Gurmat is that owner of each and evry thing is Akal including our bodies and souls.

Well das was thinking in other terms when we say giving Hairs or Kes to save others.

like say if some one has to go for covert operations say from Indian Army to Pakistan or say freom UK Army in Iraq where we have to change our apperance.

Das know that many terrorits/freedom fighters also to dodge police did take form of without Hairs but resotred to Sikhi after success of mission.

Same could be said for many elemetns in Indian forces.Is it OK or not?

das votes for OK.


----------



## japjisahib04 (Oct 23, 2005)

Dear Vijay Deep Singh Ji

The right word is sharing and not serivce. This is one among the three fundamentals of sikhism. Naam Japna, Kirat Karna and vand kai chakna. This vand is sharinge of experience, knowledge, our wealth, our blood or any other organ if we can afford and it helps other. This sharing is called bhakti provided it touches of subtlness of inner and lead to Naam Simran.
Best regard Sahni Mohinder


----------



## japjisahib04 (Oct 23, 2005)

Dear Vijay Deep Singh Ji

The right word is sharing and not serivce. This is one among the three fundamentals of sikhism. Naam Japna, Kirat Karna and vand kai chakna. This vand is sharing of experience, knowledge, our wealth, our blood or any other organ if we can afford and it helps other. This sharing is called bhakti provided it touches the subtlness of our innerself and lead us to Naam Simran.
Best regards
Sahni Mohinder


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 25, 2005)

Gurfateh

Thanks for sharing brilliant thaought


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 25, 2005)

Gurfateh

Thanks for sharing brilliant thaought


----------



## devinesanative (Oct 25, 2005)

Does it Also includes Vande Kai Chakna Someone's Wife ........


----------



## vijaydeep Singh (Oct 25, 2005)

Gurfateh

Well say if wife brings some mony after working and we can tell her to share that mony with needy.

Coming to haviing given once wife to have sexual pleasue to the needy.

Well das does not think that other person is going to dies if he is not given one's wife.

If that person say states that he will commit suicide if not givne the wife of another that means that person deminding wife needs phychiatric treatment more then wife.:u):


----------



## Arvind (Oct 25, 2005)

Blood Donation to save someone's life is a commendable act. I wont get into tiny details of hair removal by tape etc during the process... because a bigger purpose is served by that blood and act.

I am not sure what S|kh veer is talking about hair donation! Kindly elaborate that ji.

And someone talked about sharing wife! I just consider that as a cheap joke. 

Regards, Arvind.


----------



## japjisahib04 (Oct 25, 2005)

wow, no coments.
Regards Sahni mohidner


----------



## gurpreet singh (Nov 7, 2005)

Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa
Waheguru Ji ki  Fateh

Hello to all SPN members, good to read the discussions by u all Spn members on the topic of "blood donation and Sikhism"

Regards
Gurpreet Singh


----------



## Prabhjyotsaini (Dec 8, 2005)

Sikh are born to save the humanity in all possible ways so there is nothing anti-gurmat as far as it is concerned with the idea of saving somebody's life. So blood donation is the too little effort a sikh can do to save someone in dire need.
The idea of sharing wife, who so ever it was is really in bad taste & is definitely anti-gurmat & immoral. 
Thanks,


----------



## Hukum Kaur (Jan 2, 2006)

a seva of blood is like picking roses to dress ones altar: The act serves God and Guru. However, giving up ones hair (so that it may be made into a wig for a cancer patient) is like cutting off the roots of the rosebush. One draws the streingth for service and right action, from their hair, God speaks to us through our hair. Energy we manifest travels up the hair to the sun spot and crown chakra. Many years ago I lobbed off the hair that fell past the waist, to a long buzz cut, and I experienced phantom hair, where every night before bed I would reach for the pony tail ghost to let the locks fall. After donating blood, one may feel light headed, but not a strong feeling of loss. I waas weaker befor Sikhi, and the hair was so powerful, now I lhave earned its role.
PS I am against donating sperm or ovaries.


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 2, 2006)

Beautiful analogy Liv Kaur!!

There is nothing anti-gurmat about "donating" blood or any other organ/tissue/cells of ones body. The important thing to remember in each situation is why are we "donating/sharing" that bodily part with another. IF the purpose is positive and benificial to the recipients well being then by all means a sikh is encouraged to engage in such altruistic acts as the guru themselves set the finest example of such altruism by "sharing/sacrificing" their lives for the betterment of others.

With regards to the reference to hair, i do not see how that can be compared to blood donation. The donation of hair to another person does not serve any direct medicinal benefit other than cosmetic changes. Unlike many other tissues, hair once cut, and severed from its follicular root, is dead tissue and therefore void of any physiological value. Only live hair, sprouting naturally from the follicular bulb has all the associated glands, muscles etc which give the hair follicle all its advantageous physiological value. As to a cancer patient who may be need of hair, there are amply available synthetic wigs which can provide the cosmetic help the person in question may be seeking. THere is no need to cut the natural hair of another person to fill this need.

Blood on the other hand is a very rare and valuable commodity which despite man's best efforts cannot be reproduced with the same accuracy and quality as it is naturally made in the body. For this reason (at least for the present time being until medical science makes further advances) it is imperative that all people as a community help fill this need for blood products through active voluntary donation.


----------



## max314 (Jun 17, 2006)

CaramelChocolate said:
			
		

> Is it allowed in Sikhism? What do you think? Would you do it even if some hairs were removed due to sticky tape on the skin? Is it against God's will to give blood? Please discuss.
> 
> Personally I am for, and even in Sikhism I think an amritdhari should be willing to give blood even if say one or two hairs maybe removed due to sticky tape on the skin.
> 
> One could argue however that it is wrong since people who do not have blood and need it from others are that way because of Gods will and giving blood is against God's will as you are altering what he had planned.


Isn't it funny?  Guru Nanak was trying to get people out of useless practices and was trying to promote good old common sense and humanity.

And yet I am sure there will be self-proclaimed 'Sikhs' who will go out of their way to prove how 'special' hair really is with the zeal of an apologist desperate to justify views that are actually beyond any truly logical justification.

Take two steps back, one look forward, and tell me what you see.



			
				Hukum Kaur said:
			
		

> ...God speaks to us through our hair.



I wouldn't have thought God was so limited that he "speaks to us through our hair".



> Many years ago I lobbed off the hair that fell past the waist, to a long buzz cut, and I experienced phantom hair, where every night before bed I would reach for the pony tail ghost to let the locks fall.



When you're used to a certain physical form and then you proceed to change it, I think it is a natural psychological reaction to subconsciously feel as though the change never took place.


----------



## drkhalsa (Jun 17, 2006)

Dear Khalsa Ji


In my current understanding 

I think god speaks to us through each and every creation he has created and it includes hair . 
So saying god speaked through hair to somebody does not make God limited .

In day to day talk and disscusion we usually keep Logic as bechmark to prove anything right and I think it is due to fact one just cant believe the other person so there need to be some objective way , and that is logic 

My question is now even though logic is dependable but is truth bound by logic or other words is God and his ways are bound by logic and he cant do anything beyond it  ?



Jatinder SIngh


----------



## max314 (Jun 18, 2006)

drkhalsa said:
			
		

> Dear Khalsa Ji
> 
> 
> In my current understanding
> ...



So I guess I should stop clipping my fingernails then? :wink:

Heh...just kidding :}{}{}:

When the poster to whom I was responding said something to the effect of 'God speaks to us through our hair', the clear implication of that statement is that 'God *only* speaks to us through our hair'.  If that was not the case, then why isolate the hair?  If God does indeed 'speak' to us through "each and every creation he has created", then what is lost by not retaining hair?

Just to clarify, I'm neither for or against the keeping of hair.  I'm just trying to see if anyone can actually offer up a legitimate argument (based on the logic of *Ek Onkar* upon which Gurbani - and the universe - is founded) as to why the cutting of hair is a big boo-boo.

Did I just say "boo-boo"? :shock:



> In day to day talk and discussion we usually keep Logic as bechmark to prove anything right and I think it is due to fact one just cant believe the other person so there need to be some objective way , and that is logic
> 
> My question is now even though logic is dependable but is truth bound by logic or other words is God and his ways are bound by logic and he cant do anything beyond it ?
> 
> ...


Well, with that mentality one could believe in castles in the sky.  I don't believe in castles in the sky.

_P.S. - It's interesting to think that certain people attempt to explain the importance of hair through something resembling 'logical' argument rolleyes.  But as soon as *real* logic starts to factor into it, it's like "no, no...we don't need logic to believe that part of it"...  You can't have it both ways :}{}{}:_


----------



## drkhalsa (Jun 18, 2006)

Dear Max 314


Forgive for my ignorance and any misunderstanding

I think the same way as you in matter of hairs so refrase it   I'm neither for or against the keeping of hair  if this just an objective question put to me 

But for subjective case I fortunate to have found Sikh Faith with thw will of AKAL and keeping hair for me does not demand logic from my intellect and I keep hair because my Guru Asked me to do so.



> Well, with that mentality one could believe in castles in the sky. I don't believe in castles in the sky.


 
unfortunately even with the same mentality I still dont believe in castles in Sky 

But some of the the people I meet at work do believ in Castles in Sky 


Anyway thanks your reply


Akal Sahai


Jatinder Singh


----------



## max314 (Jun 21, 2006)

drkhalsa said:
			
		

> Dear Max 314
> 
> 
> Forgive for my ignorance and any misunderstanding
> ...


It gives me nothing but contentment to see that you have found a path that you feel truly gives you peace and purpose. That is a blessed life, and you have my best wishes :wink:



> unfortunately even with the same mentality I still dont believe in castles in Sky
> 
> But some of the the people I meet at work do believ in Castles in Sky
> 
> ...


When some of my friends smoke pot, I think _they_ start believing in castles in the sky... :}{}{}:


----------



## drkhalsa (Jul 5, 2006)

Dear MAX

Lot of thanks for your best wishes 


Jatinder Singh


----------



## amar7979 (Nov 7, 2007)

Have you had a kindness shown?
Pass it on;
'Twas not given for thee alone,
Pass it on;
Let it travel down the years,
Let it wipe another's tears,
'Til in Heaven the deed appears -
Pass it on.

 
DONATE BLOOD TO SERVE HUMANITY !!


----------

