Jump to content

Book Club

Experience a quick and easy way to get all your favorite Sikh Titles in a matter of seconds.

211 topics in this forum

    • 7 replies
    • 3,429 views
    • 14 replies
    • 6,083 views
    • 1 reply
    • 118 views
    • 30 replies
    • 674 views
    • 7 replies
    • 820 views
    • 3 replies
    • 2,583 views
    • 8 replies
    • 1,136 views
    • 2 replies
    • 1,605 views
    • 2 replies
    • 206 views
    • 9 replies
    • 3,034 views
    • 10 replies
    • 3,752 views
    • 2 replies
    • 31,323 views
    • 5 replies
    • 779 views
  1. Somebody knows this shabad?

    • 3 replies
    • 578 views
    • 8 replies
    • 3,161 views


  • Posts

    • Lets stop fooling ourselves ? What purpose does the fire serve ? Is it "Agan Singh" ? lmao . Whenever they're using ritualistic fire, the implicit meaning is fire god 
    • just let the traditional non-chemical preserved onto your skin rather than the cr4p above as that has loads of petrochemicals, oestrogen mimicking substances in them , if you can eat it its safe on your skin as your skin absorbs stuff .
    • There is actually a sakhi of Guru Nanaks wedding.that kandh still stands. And the sakhi says Guru ji refused the fire and used the kitaab or books he carried in which he wrote his bani.  About the laava sakhi, it might be that the pandit was needed to make it official like registry marriage or to do katha afterwards or to even say tue vedoc shaloks while sikhs did phere around a gutka?  Idk but there is that sakhi of Guru Nanak Dev ji refusing the agni
    • Guest Singh
      Are you on any medications. sometimes they can cause these types of side effects
    • Honestly, I don't know. I will look into the matter and see if some answers comes up. Bear in mind I was talking about regular Sikhs. Not the Gurus themselves. Even if there was a fire, it wouldn't have been Vedic in any sense. Well the difference is in what is meant and being suggested. To them "fire" means the whole Vedic shebang and a return to it. One can equally call out practises from Vedic times which are now obsolete and say "lets return to them!" right back to these groups. It's not hard to concieve in reality that certain things remained similar but the intention of disucssing the matter is important. In the case of weddings, there is very little information. Guru Sahib rejected the janeu for example, to which there is a Sakhi and Bani attached. But it is not until Guru Ramdas Ji that Sikhs get their own ceremony, and again I will repeat I was deducing with regards to the use of fire. Lots of ambiguity. Maybe the couple did just stay sitting or standing whilst Laavan were read by Sangat, maybe not. As for Sikhs such as my great-grandparents, that was just a matter of circumstance. One cannot use that argument to promote a return to Vedic style weddings.   Yes I'm aware that within Hindu weddings it is indeed Agni Devta. But we are talking about Namdharis, and from what I have seen, there is no invocation from Rig Ved - that's what I'm saying, we assume that the fire present in a Kooka wedding is considered as Agni Devta when in actual fact to me, it seems as though it's....just a fire. Which really has no particular meaning per se; just a continuation of one aspect of the ceremony. They read Suhi Mahalla 4. A fire is only Agni "Devta" if one believes and invokes.  
×

Important Information

Terms of Use