Singh132

You earlier said, and then you also said, The Sikh Rehit Maryada clearly says that naam is the word "Vahiguru" . You are saying that Gurbani as a whole is naam. Now you are saying, Are you know admitting you were wrong? As for taking "budlaa", you do me no harm by insulting Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh. Like I said, you spit at the moon and you know what will result. Your still haven't refuted the article I posted about Sheikh Farid and said what part you disagree with. you did mention This is not a sensible point. All the Bhatts became Sikhs after meeting Guru Sahib but still used their names. What else would Bhagat Farid jee have used in his bani if not his name? The dates you provided for the Bhagats are wrong. The real facts about the Bhagats are as follows: Please also refute this article point by point and we can continue.

The Panthic Rehit Maryada says that the word "Vahiguru" is Gurmantar. Do you accept this or not? Where did YOU get taught Viakaran? You seem to have no idea what you're talking about. Either make your point about the sihari or just drop it because you don't make any sense. I've posted a long article on why Bhagat Farid that is in Guru Granth Sahib is a Sikh of Guru Nanak. Either challenge and refute it or lose on this point as well. Finally you keep saying kakaars are mentioned in rehitnamas and hukumnamas. My challenge remains: find me a single authentic reference. You have hit a new low by calling a Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh, a Gursikh honoured by every Takhat "Randy Singh". When you spit at the moon, you know what happens. Oh-kay.....if you say so :D

According the the rehit maryada, the word "Vahiguru" is Gurmantar. The WORD. Do you accept that or not? You have previously not accepted it. I said it before and I'll say it again: find me ONE rehitnama that uses the word "kakaar". Go ahead. There isn't one. Every single time, your points get refuted and you come out with new stuff. The sihari in Vahiguru is to produce the word. It has no grammatical significance. What grammatical significance could it have? The sihari can mean "through, by" , and that too when it's at the end of a word, not the middle. Vahiguru is a single word with the sihari in the middle and so your whole theory falls flat.

“Khalsa” Fauj, On one hand you are saying I have no right to talk because I don’t accept SGPC maryada 100% but at the same time you go against it as well but don’t see any problem with it. The Sikh Rehit Maryada says clearly that Vahiguru is the Gurmantar and The Sikh Rehit Maryada is ordering you to repeat one word. If you believe in it so much then why are you rejecting it here? You are trying to split the Panth? As for your question, Yes he was japing naam every single instant. This is where I wish you would open your eyes and see what Gurmat is really about. Naam is something that is taught to the abhilakhi and a method is taught to put it on the breaths so that it becomes automatic. A Gursikh is able to make naam go automatically without any effort on every single breath. Gurbani talks about this avastha as well many times as ajapaa jaap or svaas svaas simran. Doing something like writing or anything else while doing naam abhyaas is pretty easy actually. I don’t blame you for not knowing about this. I wish you would meet some Gursikhs who are abhyaasi and then it would be more believable for you. Naam is kept gupt in Bani. This is why it has not been used by any Guru Sahib. But to note, it still appears in Bhaatan Day Savaiyay. Naam is not given openly in bani at all. You cannot get Gurmantar without getting initiated through amrit. That’s why in Bani we have tuks like: ਹਰਿ ਕੀਰਤਿ ਕਲਜੁਗਿ ਪਦੁ ਊਤਮੁ ਹਰਿ ਪਾਈਐ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮਾਝਾ ॥ ਹਉ ਬਲਿਹਾਰੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਅਪੁਨੇ ਜਿਨਿ ਗੁਪਤੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਪਰਗਾਝਾ ॥੨॥ And ਮੇਰੇ ਮੀਤ ਗੁਰਦੇਵ ਮੋ ਕਉ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਪਰਗਾਸਿ ॥ If naam is bani then why is there the benti to make it “pargaas” ie. reveal it? It’s already revealed if it’s bani! But because naam is gupt the abhilakhi must ask Guru Sahib to reveal it and the price for this is your head which is taken at amrit sinchaar. Your list of Bhagats doesn’t make sense. Bhagat Ramanand is known as Bhagat Kabir jee’s Guru and Bhagat Kabir jee definitely met Guru Nanak. So how could Bhagat Ramanand be so much before Guru Nanak? Or take Bhagat Ravidas. He was Mira Bai’s Guru but she was contemporary of the Gurus so how could Bhagat Ravidas not be as well? The janamsakhis all say that the Bhagats were Sikhs of Guru Nanak. The Goindval Pothis, when they have Bhagat Bani say, “Bhagat Babay Kay” along with the name of the Bhagats. Meaning they were disciples of Guru Sahib. Then for the tuk “Vahiguru gurmantar hai jap haumai khoee” you have given the following spectacular meaning: Let’s analyse that a bit. Vahi (Wow! Or expression of Ascharj) Guru (Enlightener) is the Gurmantar, meditating on which one loses ego. You said “which is Gurbani”. It makes no sense at all to say Wow Guru is the Gurmantar. How can the Guru be the Guru’s Mantar. The Guru is the Guru! Unfortunately the only person you are fooling with this concocted meaning is yourself. Can you find even ONE other scholar or anyone else who agrees with your translation? If we go with your translation, then Vahiguru Jee Ka Khalsa Vahiguru jee kee Fateh doesn’t mean that the Khalsa belongs to God, but it means Khalsa belongs to Gurbani? Does that make any sense? At any rate, the Akal Takhat Maryada makes it clear that the word “Vahiguru” is the Gurmantar. How will you reject that?

ਹੱਦ ਹੋਗੀ ਯਾਰ, ਫੇਰ ਆਗਿਆ? You spend just as much time on this thread as all the people you are so valiantly trying to stop! :D

Anyone can post tuk after tuk of bani. Not even ONE of them says Gurbani and naam are the same thing. The fact that they have different names is proof enough that they are two different things. ਜਨੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਬੋਲੇ ਗੁਣ ਬਾਣੀ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮਿ ਸਮਾਇਆ ॥੪॥੫॥ If bani and naam are the same thing, then what sense does the above tuk you posted make? How about ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਵਰਤੀ ਜਗ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਇਸੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਤੇ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਪਾਇਦਾ ॥੩॥ THROUGH bani, you find naam. If naam and bani are the same thing this tuk makes no sense. When you read bani, you learn about naam and find out that it comes from Satguru and go to get it. These tuks all make it clear that Gurbani and naam are two different things. You are blind to spiritual knowledge. That's the problem. The only knowledge you have is very limited book knowledge. Gurbani has naam vibration immersed in it. When you read bani your naam goes stronger and stronger. When Gurbani talks about ajapaa jaap and svaas svaas simran, does this mean that the person recites bani with every breath? When over and over bani says to do "har har gur gur" does this also mean to recite bani? Let me explain to you why you're an unfortunate victim. Kala Afghana is the first so-called scholar to say that naam is gurbani. He started all his theories through the sponsorship of anti-Sikh forces. They know that if they can kill naam from Sikhi, the entire religion is finished. These same forces are putting out a lot of literature which is 90% good but 10% is the poison they are using to kill us. If we deny naam, we've lost the last remaining source of our power. We're finished. Countless Gursikhs have written through history that naam abhyaas of one word ie. Gurmantar is essential. NO source says Gurbani and naam is the same thing. You are unwittingly an accomplice in the BIGGEST attack on Sikh principles to date. Those forces will lose, but sadly you'll be one of the biggest losers because I know that your intentions aren't bad. You've just been misled. I honestly right now don't feel angry towards you. I respect how you are standing up for what you think is Gurmat. I really respect that you have a lot of faith in Gurbani. But don't be blind to spirituality. Gurbani and Sikhi has a very strong mystical aspect to it. Naam ie. Gurmantar jaap is something you cannot do without in a spiritual jeevan. Without it, the best you can have is giaan but you won't have satisfaction that Gurmat offers. You will not see God. No one says don't read bani. Read as much bani as possible. But bani is not naam.

There's no point in continuing with you. Someone who denies Gurmantar and Naam is an enemy of the Panth and committing spiritual suicide. Once again, I'm not angry. I feel genuine sympathy for you. What an unfortunate person you are that even though you call yourself a Sikh you haven't grasped the whole essence of Sikhi ie. naam.

Papi, If you don't like debates, then no one is compelling you to sit here and read. There is nothing wrong in discussing Gurmat. If you don't like it, don't read. Simple. "Khalsa" Fauj, In the shabad "Gur Satgur ka jo Sikh akhai" why does Guru Sahib first say "so bhalkai uth har naam dhiavai" and then "fir charai divas gurbani gaavai". Why does Guru Sahib make a distinction? It is good to read Gurbani. But Gurbani does updesh to jap naam as well. You said, Then you are not willing to follow Bani. Tell me what the following shabds mean if not to put the ONE word ie Gurmantar in the mind: ਸਲੋਕੁ ॥ ਆਏ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਰਨਾਗਤੀ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਨਿਧਿ ਦਇਆਲ ॥ ਏਕ ਅਖਰੁ ਹਰਿ ਮਨਿ ਬਸਤ ਨਾਨਕ ਹੋਤ ਨਿਹਾਲ ॥੧॥ EK akhar. ONE Word. And once again: ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਭਿ ਸਾਸਤ ਇਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਪੜਿਆ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਈ ॥ ਏਕੁ ਅਖਰੁ ਜੋ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਜਾਪੈ ਤਿਸ ਕੀ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਸੋਈ ॥੩॥ ਖਤ੍ਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣ ਸੂਦ ਵੈਸ ਉਪਦੇਸੁ ਚਹੁ ਵਰਨਾ ਕਉ ਸਾਝਾ ॥ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪੈ ਉਧਰੈ ਸੋ ਕਲਿ ਮਹਿ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਮਾਝਾ ॥੪॥੩॥੫੦॥ EK akhar again. Which ONE word is this if not naam ie. Gurmantar. When Gurbani talks about Gurmantar what is it talking about?

Your interpretation doesn't make any sense. GurShabad can only be ONE word. If it was all of Bani it had to be plural. All the Guru Sahibs in bani use "Nanak". Same way the descendants of Farid used "Farid". Simple answer. The following is a more detailed answer for you: I did answer but you didn't bother reading it. You are from India. In big gatherings do they give out Doonas to everyone? Do they give plates and glasses to everyone? Of course not. You get a parshada and you put the food on top of it. Other things you get in your cupped hand. It's not a very difficult problem to resolve.

You won't answer my questions or debate properly but I see no harm in answering your questions 1) I listen mostly to the live broadcast from Sri Darbar Sahib. 2) I do not agree with doing dhunni in the middle of the Shabad unless it is spontaneous due to surti going to Dasam Duaar. 3) I listen to whatever is broadcast. 4) How do you know I use a vaja or anything else? 5) I use Uncle Tom's toothpaste which is vegetarian. Although raag is good and important, it was at the time of Guru Arjun Dev jee that the tradition of Jotiaan tunes was started. If someone does not know raag does it mean that someone shouldn't try to sing a shabad?

The research by many scholars says the same thing. 300 years have passed since Guru Gobind Singh jee's time. The first Sheikh Farid was 300 years before Guru Nanak. If Punjabi has changed so much in the last 300 years, wouldn't it just logically speaking change the same amount between the first Sheikh Farid and Guru Nanak? Why is the language contemporary? Simple logic. Really? Find me ONE rehitnama that even uses the WORD kakaar or even lists them. Find me a tuk from Gurbani. There's one fake hukumnama to the Kabul Sangat that is acknowledged as a fraud. Find me any reference to kakaars. The only ones are in teh Bhatt Vehis which say Keski is a kakaar. My point in bringing up kakaars is that if you want references for sarbloh bibek, then apply the same standard to all other rehits as well. It's a lack of respect of Gurmat to suggest anyone can go to Sachkhand without Gurparsaad and Gurmat Naam. Based on Janamsakhis and other records, it's a fact that all bhagats met and became Sikhs of Guru Nanak. Look up the term "Gur Shabad" in Guru Granth Sahib. Find all the examples you can. Look at the "shabad" it will have an aunkarh under it. This indicates it is a singular noun. ONE Shabad. If it referred to all the shabads in Gurbani it would have no aunkarh. Gur Shabad is one word and is Gurmantar. I feel sorry for you to be honest. Someone who doesn't believe in naam. Guru Sahib has said ਮੂਰਖਾ ਸਿਰਿ ਮੂਰਖੁ ਹੈ ਜਿ ਮੰਨੇ ਨਾਹੀ ਨਾਉ ॥੨॥ How unfortunate that someone calling himself a Sikh makes fun of naam? hahah! Hardly. If I've been "brainwashed" by Tapoban, then you've been brainwashed by Dr. Darshan Singh. We have not met as far as I know. I go to the University of Ottawa

I'll do that after you give me a tuk that says to keep kakaars. No need to feel defensive about going to Ryerson. My point was you aren't some respected Vidvaan or Sikh scholar. Don't try to act like more than you are. I'm also a university student so no need to feel threatened. Because it's not true. Actually read the books he wrote before making statements that highlight your ignorance. He said that without Guru Nanak the Bhagats could go as far as Karam Khand but to reach Sach Khand Gurmat naam from Guru Nanak is mandatory. Even Bhagat Farid's descendants and scholars agree that the Bhagat Farid who's bani is in Guru Granth Sahib is not the original Farid but his descandant in his line ie. Farid Sani. All the other Bhagats in Guru Granth Sahib met Guru Nanak. Once again you highlight your utter ignorance. Of course without Gurmat Naam from Satguru jaap is not of much use. The very same salok you quoted says "Gur kai shabad bhedia in bidh vasiaa man aai" Only through the Guru's Shabad ie. Gurmantar is it possible. I don't understand what you mean by this. Amrit Vela is from around 2am-6am. It is the duty of every Gursikh to take advantage of this time. No matter what time they work. My point however was that look at your own jeevan. There is no way you are enjoying the spirituality of Gurmat because what you write is a true reflection of where you are. You call naam abhyaas "totaa ratan" and insult Gursikhs and call random people you don't know "manmukh". You are digging a very deep spiritual hole for yourself. Once a rehit is established like kirpan or kangha, no matter what people start using, that rehit stays. Guru Sahib used sarbloh for amrit sinchaar. Why not use some other modern material by your logic? Let me get this straight: YOU have a god-given right to preach maryada but no one else? There is a difference of opinion on many things in our Panth. The Akal Takhat Sahib doesn't reject the other maryadas. That's proven by the fact that Akhand Kirtani Jatha has been honoured by the Akal Takhat Sahib and even does smagams there. Same with Taksal. If we had hateful people like you in charge, we'd be in big trouble. The secret you seem to miss is this: respect and love. You consistently attack other Sikhs and insult them. People like you are the problem in the Panth today.

Bhainjee, I'm not sure what you mean by "muppets" but alright... If there is a rehit and people are saying it's not according to Gurmat, should we all stay quiet? What if someone new to Gurmat reads it and becomes confused? If someone is arguing for their own ego it's wrong. If they are arguing for a Gurmat principle then that is a seva.

I'm getting tired of your holier than thou, "I am the gatekeeper of Sikhi" attitude. Buddy, get a grip. You're some non-name guy at Ryerson. In Punjabi we say "apni aukaat vich raho". Khalsa as revealed by Guru Gobind Singh is created out of sarbloh Khanda and bata. There's no doubt. You earlier made a stupid point that did Bhagat Farid eat from sarbloh. I ask, did they keep kakaars? So are those also optional? You didn't answer whether wearing kakaars to sleep and in the shower is karam kaand. According to your definition it seems it would be. That's the problem with pseudo-scholars like you who read 1/2 a book and become experts. The rehitnamas are ALL adultered to some extent. You yourself are saying the rehitnama contradicts. Quite right. The fact that it speaks at one point against Devi/Devtas and then later for them is proof that it has been changed around. Does that mean you totally discard all rehitnamas. No. That'd be stupid and would be EXACTLY what anti-Sikh forces were aiming at when they changed things. You look at Khalsa traditions and seena-baseena rehit and rehitnamas. What matches in all three is accepted. If we throw out any source that has mistakes or adulteration then we'd have to throw out ALL Sikh literature. Even most puratan saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib have extra compositions in them. So according to your logic we should have discarded all the bani too? Would you be shocked to know that NOT ONE rehitnama names kakaarsi [the only puraatan source to name all 5 is the Bhatt Vehis which say keski is the kakaar]? NOT ONE gives a detailed account of amrit sinchaar vidhi. This rehitnama is considered one of the best sources because it comes very close. It uses some imaginative imagery but the vidhi itself is very close to the one we see today. Even your precious SGPC maryada says to do only 5 pauris Anand Sahib for amrit sinchaars. We have to rely on these puratan sources but do so with some discerning intellect and judgment. Not reject everything as you are trying to do. A lot of the points you made (I could refute each one but why bother with you?) are wrong. It does not call Satnaam as the Gurmantar. In puratan times Gurmantar was considered very secret and referred to as Satnaam. Satnaam is an adjective for Gurmantar. Sarbloh is a Rehit of the Khalsa. Besides being mentioned in rehitnamas, Guru Gobind Singh has said "Sarbloh kee rachha hamnai". Why would he say this if Sarbloh were some useless and ordinary material? You know whats even more funny YOUR SOURCE that you scanned says "In our faith sarbloh is the highest of all materials and is that in which amrit is prepared" j in the footnote. What do you say to that? If sarbloh were kept only by one person or one Jatha, we might say this is made up. But lets see here: Baba Jawala Singh Harkhowal, Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale, Akali Kaur Singh jee Nihang, Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee and countless other Gursikhs have kept sarbloh bibek. Were they all wrong but you, our young friend from Ryerson is right and they were all karam kandi brahmins? Give me a break. Your posts are filled with arrogance. You go about calling people who keep rehit "manmukhs" and even jot vigasi Gursikhs you don't even call "Bhai" like Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh. Even in your last post you called naam simran "tota rattan" or parrot-repetition. Look at yourself in the mirror. When was the last time you got up at amrit vela? What is your spiritual jeevan? I can answer that: someone who posts like you can have NO jeevan. It's a guarantee. For your own spiritual benefit I suggest you fix yourself up. Stop making comments you're going to have to pay for in Dargah. Every time you say something stupid like in your earlier posts, it's going on your record and mark my words, you will have to pay for it.

He gives a verse and chapter number for every single other Smriti. Why is there no reference for this one? There is no actual reference and quote like all the other quotes he has given. I've already said though, lets just assume for a moment that this is correct, the Mannu Simriti which is followed much more closely clearly says iron is a possible material for utensils. I think YOU need to make up your mind. First you reject all puratan sources and now you're saying the reference proves your point simply because it doesn't say specifically to make food in Sarbloh? Bhai Daya Singh rehitnama says more than once to prepare food in Sarbloh. No the person that makes a point like this is though. God also created tobbaco and opium. Why not use that? God created a lot of things. You don't go and try to eat all of it (I should hope). There are thousands of people eating at Darbar Sahib during gurpurabs. They use steel plates. Why not sarbloh? Your points are plainly foolish. At any rate, when there are big gatherings (really big) you can either bring your own bata or you take a parshada and put the sabji on top. It doesn't take a genius to figure these things out. Foam at any rate hurts the environment and should be banned. I'll let the readers decide who is offending Gurmat. Sarbloh Bibek has and always will be essential Guru's Rehit. Is it karm kaand to sleep with kakaars on and always have them on even when bathing? Is it karam kaand to demand that the kirpan not be a pendant or a necklace? Khalsa is made in Sarbloh. The rest of your points are foolish and are beneath any intelligent person to answer. Your points were all answered in the Sarbloh thread which you abandoned and ran away from. If you're still confused go read that thread again.

Khalsa Fauj, You just posted a scan of a PUNJABI book that says this simriti says grain in lohaa is bad. It has no reference and no quote. If you want to debate properly, rather than using a Punjabi book, find the actual reference. This situation is even more fishy because all the other references in the Punjabi book have verse and chapter numbers for the Simriti (including the other reference to the Atri Suhinta) but this one has nothing. Why? Let's say for the sake of argument that this is correct (despite no reference), the Mannu Simriti clearly says iron is a metal that can be used for utensils. Then what?

The whole purpose of bibek is to eat food that will promote a spiritual naam-oriented life style. Food has an effect. Gurbani tells us: ਵੇਦੀਨਾ ਕੀ ਦੋਸਤੀ ਵੇਦੀਨਾ ਕਾ ਖਾਣੁ ॥ ਸਿਫਤੀ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣਨੀ ਸਦਾ ਵਸੈ ਸੈਤਾਨੁ ॥ . Clearly Guru Sahib has said that eating the food of manmukhs and keeping friendships with them is not conducive to a spiritual jeevan. Amrit which gives naam vibration to the abhilakhi is given via water and pataasas stirred by Amritdhari Gursikhs while reciting bani in sarbloh. In the same way a Gursikh tries to get the same effect every time they cook and eat food. This is not a blind karm kaand or ritual. It means choosing food that will most help your spiritual jeevan by giving you that naam vibration. If an amritdhari who keeps no rehit and no baani/simran prepares food whild gossiping, that food is just as unacceptable as any non-amritdhari's food. Conversely however, even if a non-amritdhari has good intentions and positive attitude prepares food, that food is better than McDonalds or what have you, but it still doesn't have naam vibration which can only be possessed by someone who has been given amrit and naam from punj pyaaray. Some questions that have come up in this very long discussion: 1.Why is the langar at Harmandir Sahib served in Stainless Steel platters? Why is there no jaikara after ardaas or any dohara after ardaas at Darbar Sahib? Why is there no takhat posh for Guru Sahib? Why is parshaad bought and sold in the parkarma? My point is that Darbar Sahib is an amazing place but it doesn’t follow that the maryada there is perfect. 2. I dont know if you guys ever came across this news. A couple was arrested a few years back for poisoning DAL at Harmandir Sahib. The couple was AMRITDHARI. what would you say about this ? Not much. I can give you many more examples of amritdharis NOT poisoning anything. The exception mentioned in this example you’ve given doesn’t prove much. Does it mean amritdharis are bad? Shouldn’t do seva? What’s your point exactly? 3. Why dont the Gurughars serve food in SARBLOH WALLE BHANDE? They used to. Puratan Gurdwara Sahibs with langars have sarbloh dishes and still use sarbloh deghas to cook the food. Darbaar Sahib's langar still uses massive sarbloh karahis to cook daal, etc. At Mata Sahib Kaur’s langar at Hazur Sahib, the langar is prepared in Sarbloh and can also be served in sarbloh. 4. SIKHI talks of equality. If Amritdhari person can cook food for evreyone to eat, why should an Amritdhari eat from Amritdhari's and not from others. If Amritdhari's are so much into SARBLOH BIBEK, why dont they stop serving food to everyone else ? An amritdhari is meant to do seva for all of humanity. That doesn’t mean he has to eat everyone’s food, he should feed everyone. I wish you’d bother to read the arguments made in favour of bibek before making senseless points. An amritdhari eats from other amritdharis because they have naam and can give that vibration to the food they cook. 5. When my Amritdhari brothers travel to India from US or Canada do they not eat food for almost 24 hours ? Please dont say you cook your food and take it with you Bibeki Gursikhs don’t eat for 24 hours. It’s not that hard really. I’ve not eaten for even 48 hours and haven’t experience any major problems. 6. Someone here said only Amritdhari people are SIKHS. Where does that say in SGGS ? So should i say if a person is Amritdhari now but he was born to a Sehajdhari mother he should never beconsidered a SIKH because he came into existence because of someone who wasn't a SIKH Okie this was stupid , but it came to my mind so typed it. If your father has a driving license, do you automatically get that licence automatically just by being born in that house? Do you become a doctor if you are born to doctor parents? In the same way you must become a Sikh through initiation. 7. Should i assume that hardcore amritdharis dont go out and eat ? They dont eat with people who they interact with ? They have cut themselves socially ? A Gursikh keeps relations with other Gursikhs. They deal with everyone at school and work but when it comes to forming close relationships and friends, those are kept with other Gursikhs. Gurbani is very clear and tells us ਕਬੀਰ ਸਾਕਤ ਸੰਗੁ ਨ ਕੀਜੀਐ ਦੂਰਹਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਭਾਗਿ ॥ ਬਾਸਨੁ ਕਾਰੋ ਪਰਸੀਐ ਤਉ ਕਛੁ ਲਾਗੈ ਦਾਗੁ ॥੧੩੧॥ If we do sangat with people that are not God-oriented and are manmukhs, then we should expect that they will have a negative effect on us as this salok clearly tells us. 8. I understand that Amritsar has got 4 doors, to allow any cast, creed, race, any religion to prepare the langar and people do sit down together in gurus free langar regardless of being amritdhari or non. Darbar Sahib has 4 doors but not 4 paths. The path is one. Anyone can come to Sikhi from any direction or race or culture but the only path to Vahiguru is Sikhi. Everyone can eat in the langar, but only Guru-valay can make Guru Ka Langar. 9. Are ur hands better than the hands of the other people who cook ur food??? Let's not make this personal but talk in a general way. Hands with the vibration of naam and hands that are blessed by Guru Sahib are of course ‘better’ than those that are not blessed in this way. 10. Isnt the food in the langar still not guru ka langar.....rejection of guru ka langer??? If someone brings donuts or pastries with egg to the langar (it happens) does it become Guru Ka Langar? Guru Ka Langar has a maryada. That includes being prepared by Guru Ke Sikh. If not, it does not qualify for the title of Guru Ka Langar. 11. Story: Pandit once said to Guru ji, that this is "sucha" place and not "jhoota" place, Guru ji said all the world is "jhoota", nothing is "sucha" without "NAAM" That’s absolutely right. If someone doesn’t have naam or doesn’t jap naam but are crazy about jooth and cleanliness, then they are wasting their time. Without naam, nothing is pure. But who has naam? Only Gursikhs of Guru Nanak. So if we are to not-eat jootha, and nothing is suchaa without naam, doesn’t it follow that only that food prepared by Gursikhs japing naam/bani is suchaa and is the only food acceptable to be eaten? I hope this helps clear up the misconceptions.

I think we should get rid of the patka compeletely. For little kids, it leads to teasing more than a dastaar would. I know lots of little kids that wear dastaars to school and they do just fine. The patka is like a disease. Let's root it out.

Ok, please do scan the appropriate reference. Let's be clear, YOU said the ban on sarbloh is in the Mannu Simriti. I showed you that there is NO such ban and in fact it mentions sarbloh as a potential utensil material. Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh's argument (I love how some no-name kid from Ryerson has the audacity to refer to him without even "Bhai" despite the fact he was honoured by all 4 Takhats at the time) was based on Khalsa tradition that is preserved in many jathebandis and every single amrit sinchaar maryada. Khalsa isn't karam kaandee but if we go by your definition, even kakaars are karam kaand.

Khalsa Fauj, Your posts lack coherence. Others have pointed that out before though. YOU pointed towards the Mannu Simriti. It was a lark. Now you've named some Attar Suhinta. That's fine. Give me a reference. Verse, Chapter, etc. I've spoken to a Brahmin I know at school and he said he's never heard of any restriction like this. He said the only restriction he knows of is that Rishis only eat in utensils made of leaves. He immigrated here a few years ago so I assume he'd know about Indian traditions. Your whole argument is based on Kanh Singh Nabha saying Sarbloh is based on Vaishnav Mat but even HE couldn't give any example or explain in detail. The fact is, this doesn't happen. Face facts. Bhai Daya Singh rehitnama and other sources all point to sarbloh as a rehit. If you can't accept that or give me PROOF or REFERENCES then maybe it's time to stop bringing up the issue. When you have something to contribute, add it to the old Sarbloh thread that was going. I'll debate you any time. In person or online.

Patka has come into use after the 60s and became popular due to Indian sportsman Bishan Singh Bedi. It was first adopted by the city-dwellers. There is no patka in Sikh history. To be frank, I think it looks foolish. A dastaar makes sense and looks good. A patka looks like a growth on the top of a head and lends itself to ridicule.

Here we go again Khalsa Fauj. Go back to our first debate. You mad ridiculous and contradictory statements about sarbloh and then when asked to back up your assertions, you couldn't do it. You claimed this was bipran dee reet when NO BRAHMIN does this! But you admit that. You then claim that Vaishnavs do it. You couldn't find any reference to it though. You then claimed sarbloh was only used because Brahmins reject it and won't eat from it. Wrong again and the reference to the Mannu Simriti in fact referred to iron as a useful material in utensils. If you want to debate sarbloh, let's do it. But you can't just claim it's "bipran ki reet" without any proof.

Just some things to note when watching: 1) Bhai Mardana left this world before Guru Nanak. He was also very much a Sikh, not a Muslim. 2) At the school, Guru Nanak didn't annoy or upset the teacher, he amazed him so much that the teacher said he was not in any position to teach Guru Nanak anything. Then Guru Nanak was taken to a Muslim Persian teacher who said the same thing. 3) When the farmer complained to Rai Bular about his crop being ruined, they went back to the field and found the crop untouched, as opposed to it growing before their eyes. 4) The story of Bhai Lalo needs to be in a bit of context. Bhai Lalo was a Sikh of Guru Nanak and when Guru Nanak came to Eminabad, he stayed with him. Malik Bhago organized a feast for all 'holy men' but Guru Nanak refused to attend. When he demanded to know why, then this miracle took place. 5) Babar set free all the prisoners after the guards reported that Guru Nanak's singing had made all the chakkis turn by themselves. Guru Nanak was then brought to speak with Babar and it was then that he freed the prisoners. 6) Guru Nanak's greatest parchaar was not just to be honest and do good deeds (though he did this, this message is also in many other religions). His greatest parchaar was Naam. Only through naam can God be felt and known. Otherwise it was interesting to see.

I think the search engine by Ishar Systems is really good as well. It's a bit complicated but you can search Mahan Kosh, and even Bhai Gurdas and many other resources. The link is http://www.ik13.com/isher%20micro%20media%202005.htm

Actually, it was the Sikhs that defeated the Pathans. The Sikhs under Hari Singh Nalwa went deep into Pathan territory and even had Jamraud Fort at the mouth of the Khyber Pass from which Jalalabad in Afghanistan could be seen. Peshawar, Naushera, etc. were all Sikh territories. If there is anyone that has defeated the Afghans/Pathans, it is the Sikhs.