Traveller

Sorry but I had to highlight this which immediately caught my attention, With all due respect, the highlighted line shocked me... ...if thats how sikhi's supposed to work then a lot of people here might be following the wrong religion! otherwise they're doing it the wrong way!! If you sit and tell someone to say "god" 24/7 they will not reach enlightenment.... the whole point is through understanding the beautiful words of Guru ji, a persons mind is open to the ways of a better life and so through methods outlined, such as naam japna will attain this higher living..... personally, I would rather be shown the beauty of naam japna once, than to be told to do it infinitessimally believing it will do something good for me. Maybe i'm wrong, sorry if i am but surely its when people sit down and LEARN about sikhi they fall in love with it? -------- anyway, A gurdwara has its primary objectives- but aside from that, if it can do anything to furthur its efforts then it should!! Some people complain Gurdwaras do too little, others say too much, but surely a Gurdwara should do however much it can, outside of providing the basics... If you are saying this Gurdwara does not meet basic requirements of a Gurdwara then this is an issue...if your saying the extra provisions are not the right ones, then this you have to take up through the committee. It doesnt seem they are doing anything BAD, but they are also in essence, doing the militant thing- cencorship. If they have the facilities available to them (which it seems at one point they did) then they should encourage sikhs to LEARN and find their own path....those who follow blindly will never take the right turns to Guru ji's house...whats worse is that they are told they will... Sikhs aren't sheep!

Hey, I was reading this topic and am quite confused... Sikh- to what extent you are a sikh does not rely on the judgement of the mere mortals around you....you will reach enlightenment through your OWN actions regardless of anyone else... The facts from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji It is not explicitly forbidden to wear make up or jewellry as long as it doesnt involve deformation of the person: srab seegaar tha(n)bol ras san dhaehee sabh khaam || All decorations, the chewing of betel to sweeten the breath, and the body itself, are all useless and vain. ਜੈਸੇ ਸੀਗਾਰੁ ਕਰੈ ਦੇਹ ਮਾਨੁਖ ਨਾਮ ਬਿਨਾ ਨਕਟੇ ਨਕ ਕੀਕ ॥੩॥ "They may adorn and decorate their bodies, but without the Naam, they look like their noses have been cut off. ||3||" (Ang 1336) ਮਾਨੁਖੁ ਬਿਨੁ ਬੂਝੇ ਬਿਰਥਾ ਆਇਆ ॥ ਅਨਿਕ ਸਾਜ ਸੀਗਾਰ ਬਹੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਜਿਉ ਮਿਰਤਕੁ ਓਢਾਇਆ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ "Without understanding (the value of human life), his coming into the world is useless. He puts on various ornaments and many decorations, but it is like dressing a corpse. ||Pause||" (Ang 712) and from SRM... ਚ) ਸਿੱਖ ਮਰਦ ਅਥਵਾ ਇਸਤ੍ਰੀ ਨੂੰ ਨੱਕ, ਕੰਨ, ਛੇਦਨਾ ਮਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੈ । "k. Piercing of nose or ears for wearing ornaments is forbidden for Sikh men and women." (SRM: Ch. 10, Article 16) The issue is...why where make-up? generally confidence or to seem more attractive... The ideal situation that one (girl or guy) gains enough confidence from them being a Gursikh that they need not feel need anything extra. At the end of the day.... those who judge those with make up need to stop judging... unless they're not bothered about pertaining the sikh way of life- if you judge and are athiest ... then its okay to judge :D If you are being judged...dont ask about whether they are right or not.... Just think in the way of true sikhi....the Sikh way of life in essence is about simplicity, minimalism, and non-materialism to an extent... If you FEEL yourself that wearing make up is okay, then go for it...but if at some point you feel its wrong..don't spend life worrying about all that time you wore it, just continue to do what you feel is right in the way of sikhi. Generally with things like this, anything more is less in sikhi... If you seek to justify wearing make-up and find nothing, then maybe there is no justification... with things like this, surely its better for people to express quotes to back up their "yes" or "no" views? Hearsay and opinions shouldnt be the decision on this.

Thats quite a good idea... yes people may argue- teachers should know about it already- they might even be taught it for 10seconds or shown a powerpoint slide in some training somewhere....but at the end of the day Sikhs are a minority in a non-sikh country who have some exceptional rights and hence if a sikh does carry the legislation, then that would be a great local action to help solve a localised issue. But only as a temporary thing until the country clicks on to the law! I'm hoping teachers do get trained in specifics of faiths and such issues they may encounter?? Does anyone know if they are taught anything specifically to do with the rights of sikhs and kirpan, kara etc.? It really shouldnt ever have had to resort to people having to carry around legislation. If the issue is in teacher training, then its worthwhile campaiging to better that. But is that the issue or just ignorant teachers? In this situation, as explained above, it seems the the issue is miscomprehension, or simply not knowing legislation in this situation... to any non-sikh, why should a kirpan be permitted? common sense to a non-sikh says..."What!?! a Knife!?!!! That cant be allowed!! " -thats understandable- its no shock that a teachers common sense said, WHAT A KNIFE!?! -but that also means they know little, if anything about sikhs!! The shock is that they for some reason realised during and exam, and that they didnt know the law, nor did the head teacher and after numerous sikhs have gone through education at their college over so many years- whoever said it seems 'fishy' is definately right! That college has a white population in a minority!!! How can they not know about sikhs and relgious rights is a mystery!

In regards to why arent we as we were before Isn't the issue that people are referring to sikhs when they were in an Army? And i'm sure that this army of sikhs was fighting a battle against another army... i.e. warfare todays society is not the same situation- yes sikhs are fighting battles, but not on borderlines vs. armies- if that happened, i'd like to think Sikhs would form an actual army but thats another issue altogether. For example, look at North Korea, leading the whole world in a song and dance- people could say-I rmember the days when the Great British Army would have told them whats what..... its just, they're totally different situation from localised bullying and segregation. This is not the Sikh Army for freedome vs. Muslim invaders situation, unless it was mistaken. Its easy to say...us Sikhs havent got this, or that anymore......but we're all people, and this is an issue between one society vs. another- hence its a social, local issue. its similar to acts of terrorism...the british ARMY isn't going to stop any localised problems.. this issue can then be understood as one which could happen to anyone whilst growing up. In my area I see emos getting pushed around by chavs... the issue isnt the emo gene pool as such, lol, the issue is that people have different objectives... Some chavs ar out to cause trouble, the emos happen to want to be where the chavs are, and the chavs have more numbers...so now its a battle of numbers, braun, or just simply, not being in the way of no-gooders.... A person, who is confident in their own views, is rational and is not a closed book will meet people, black, white, sikh and non-sikh and will build up a rapport- those people will stand by that person, not bad mouth them- they are called friends. If you have trouble making friends- then that might be the issue rather than anything else. All people, in my view, should seek to live as healthy individuals, in sprit, mind and body and seek to attain their highest. However, some people are naturally weedy, some people are naturally ogreish in action- thats society...we can't go around selecting ideal sikhs to breed the next generation....Once you have shown yourself as a person to be respected, you rarely find issues. Trust me, I've lived in NF and BNP areas and have has bands of NF smashing windows- and it stopped nearly completely. SO HERES MY PIECE: If the sikhs in your area are getting bashed around and are naturally too weedy- then they need to communicate with the right groups of people to make sure they are kept out of harm and can work on getting themselves to somewhere they want to be. I.e. they need to find the groups that are already active and try to get in with them, or need to just stay low, get their education n live a better life somewhere where they can be happy. If they want to be where they are, then they either need to 'be the better person' and take the abuse, and continue to look out for others, or they need to make a physical stand against opression....doesnt neccessarily mean a band of sikhs- there are a lot of non-sikhs who will defend their friends. For this, they need to also get in with the right crowds and get physically strong- eat your roti, do your exercises- stuck for ideas? try youtube! Its never good to intigate a battle, but self defence is another matter. As for sikhs in general, and I'm guessing sikhs as in anyone who considers themselves a sikh (not an SGPC defined sikh)...it all comes from a comination of things: 1) Family influence - does your family inspire or lead you to be fit strong and learn self defence 2) Social influence - are your mates into being strong etc. and stick up for others? (your mates might be strong- but also might be the ones causing fights) 3) Temple influence - does your temple teach that a sikh should make friends in the society around them, be strong, safe, righteous etc. also do they put on classes or sessions? 4) Personal goals - do you want to be stronger? and hence you go to the gym off your own bat? I beleive that if through one of those influences every sikh felt inspired to become stronger and healthier, then we'd not only be known for standing up for freedom- but we wouldn't be portrayed as the fat, stupid joker in society. When people segregate from the rest of society they make theirselves a target.... the more groups of anything we have, the more borders and definitions....the more rivalries and fights.... Tell the sikhs in your area to sort their lives out, get to the gym, speak to the right people and get some respect. At the end of the day if a 5ft 4 gursikh is on the way home n gets beaten up by 10 chavs with a baseball bat...no one, in such a circumstance could relate that to Sikhs not being warriors..... thats a bad area, a gursikh not having people with him, and a gursikh not having people with him walking through a bad area.... so somethings bound to happen... If its 10 vs. 10 and the sikhs are getting pummelled...then yeah, those Sikhs need to get their acts together, take what they have to, and if things get bad- defend what they have to, after exhasting all non-violent means. My opinion is that if sikhs were respected, mixed with the right people and strong in mind and in body, the situation would never arise in teh first place.

Just been reading over the posts, and although its amazing to see so many immediately inspired sikhs racing to voice an opinion, protocols need to be followed in such a situation. If this issue gets resolved in its own course in coming days, it will make angered comments seem barbaric and if anything make sikhs look like a haphazard band of renegades. Rather than intellectual, calm and in control of themselves and their views. It seems as long as those directly involved and great organisations such as leicestersikhs keep us involved and request action, the best thing to do is watch this space. Its shocking to know that one of the most culturally diverse colleges in such a culturally diverse city has not seen noticed this non-issue earlier. And just as people said, if you are going to get every sikh to email in and escalate a localised issue into a national one- then remember its a her and not a him!!! With Respect,

Hey!! Just logged on to find some great discussions going on... I was hoping someone could give some references to rules which dictate who can do kirtan... obviously kirtan in a khalsa organisation would have to be performed by a member of the khalsa... the point was...my friends have been threatened to not perform kirtan on stage by a certain group of gursikhs-not committee members...they do not think it is acceptable that a non-amritdhari should do this....the people in question are well known and respected members of the community... defining between a non amrtidhari and a kesdhari seems ridiculous... as anyone can be a kesdhari or turban walla...wearing a turban or a ramaal is just culture either way unless by kesdhari you mean specifically tying a gursikh pagh... also...what is a patit? what has to happen for someone to be labelled this and why is there no place in guru ji's darbar for such a person to do seva... like I asked before...if someone was sitting by the prashaad who was non-amritdhari (and non kesdhari if its such a big deal to visual people) then would you accept prashaad off them or would this also be seen as something terrible for sikhi... Reading this topic shows that maybe sikhi is turning more into a cult than an embracing belief system? Why is judging others so profilerant and tolerated? Just observations from the various view points others have expressed in this topic..... ...its scary to think its all based on individual people to decide whether someone who is of another faith or non amrtidhari can actually be heard doing kirtan in the Gurdwara...shouldnt there be declarations for these kind of things...or is the religion based on whatever people want to change things to and interpret things as in these cases?

Vahejeo - sorry but if you read the posts in this topic then you would have recognised what you wrote above has already been stated by someone else....after that I asked...why does the same article by sgpc use sikh and baptised sikh- meaning there is a difference between a sikh and an amritdhari...it also means that non-amrtidhari sikhs are allowed to do kirtan.... unless someone can find a definition of a sikh... are there any topics on here about the definition of a sikh because I can't find anything specific... also just had the thought... if kirtan must be performed by amritdharis...then that would mean before Guru Gobind Singh ji, no one was allowed due to the khalsa not being around.... sorry if my logic offends anyone... ...and I admit that my knowledge of the sgpc is limited...all I can gather about it is that it wasnt around when the Guru Ji's were...but is now...but not by Guru Ji's decree- so why do people run around after it? I guess thats another thread altogether....anyway back to the kirtan issue!

Could someone link me to a conclusive topic or definition of a sikh or is it something that is under constant debate? I'm just confused as to why the maryada says a sikh believes in baptism...not a sikh is one who is baptised... big difference there! I'm also confused as to why there are references to sikhs and baptised sikhs...this indicates that sikhs can also be non-baptised (non-amitdhari)

I thought the above would settle it, but when looking at the maryada it refers to amritdhari (baptized) sikhs and sikhs which implies a difference between a sikh and a baptized sikh...so this means non-amrtidharis are allowed?

I'm just shocked people are actually discussing a thread which is faulted at its core: as I said earlier... Correct me if I am wrong.... but surely this argument is at fault....not just by the facts not being stated correct....but doesnt anyone else believe that- regardless into what religious surrounding Guru Nanak Ji was born, he would be the harbourer of the Guru's light and ignight the flame of sikhi? Thats what I first thought when I read the title of the thread...surely it shouldnt matter where or to whom Guru Ji was born...the religion isnt based around hate or based around killing muslims- its about love respect and protection... your anti-islamic title and arguements which hint that sikhi is based on hinduism being around is just silly.... ...mayve you should have just had a topic "who defended india up to the initiation of Sikhi"...because I'd have thought that Sikhi would have come about regardless... Sikhi is through Gods will, surely!? By answering his question with little objection to its phrasing then surely people are missing the point... Am I wrong to think that Sikhi is something a sikh would believe to have come to this world regardless of hindus muslims or anything else??....because otherwise are we to believe the only reason why it is here is to solve a specific isolated issue!?!? Because I doubt that sikhs believe the latter is the case Sorry to be emotional but it just seems like no1 is defending the core reason of the exhistance of sikhs...unless it really is down to hindu and islam conflict n nothing else.

Forgot to answer.... the majority of people in this world havent given up sikhi...they havent found it so I'm not sure what you mean by giving up the identity of being a sikh.... anyway... if anyone learns kirtan very well thats great...whether they be of any religion....but im on about people who feel kirtan and through their voice or music can make the sangath warm to it and meditate on it... if kirtan helps people get closer to guru ji, and allows non sikhs to feel like they can get closer to guru ji too then surely it should be encouraged for anyone and everyone to learn to perform kirtan... or do you feel that is detrimental to sikhi and guru ji's teachings?

you've got me wrong ..i'm not in it for any kinda fights or arguments .. i just felt that it is an open forum and voiced my opinion. adding a little bit more to what i've said earlier .. i would never pull anyone down the stage/disrespect who is performing kirtan be it anyone, from any race provided he/she is reciting the correct bani. I agree that being Keshadhari and Amritdhari are 2 different things.. but when you become a keshadhari sikh and wear your turban you're a step closer to being Amritdhari and more so you vow to be different in the crowd and maintain the identity of a Sikhl I would not encourage Non-Keshadhari to performing kirtran on stage. I would also not discourage them to learn kirtan and woud not shove them away .. instead i would just tell them that they need to rise to a more higher level to perform on stage .. take up his roop ...after all the stage is the darbar of the Guru. Although you haven't really answered my earlier question but still lemme ask you another one..if anyone learns kirtan very well .. is it that he/she gets a license to give up the identity of being a sikh..?? Do not discourage anyone from learning kirtan but only encourage them to rise to a higher level.. Sorry I didnt answer the question because 1) you said it was general and 2)I didnt say I myself am a sikh or involved in this, but as you wish for an answer I will try to do so as best I can in context. If someone has love and respect in their Guru then that is all they may have...but if they have faith and wish to follow then they should be encouraged to do so to the best of their ability, but not forced as I doubt that is God's will... you said something about giving up the turban, which implied they had one in the first place...the people I know never had one and have no reason to get furthur into sikhi other than their own development of their faith...so if they do choose to tie a turban then obviously thats a visual step forward...personally I think that maybe someone with kirtan in their heart could be further along the path than someone who wears a turban but can do bad things too... A turban is obviously nothing special to a native punjabi or someone who wants to show off their caste... so its like you're choosing between some1 who wears a turban due to punjabi culture, or some1 who wears a ramaal because of cut hair from western culture... humm... why isnt thre anythin more official than this or is it really people just making up their own rules with a bit of "im better than thou" attitude thrown in.... do people listen to words or look at the people... What is the right ideal in the ways of Sikhi, can any1 with kirtan in their heart or mind take the stage and share the beauty vocally....or should non-amritdharis be turned away from learning or not-encouraged(discouraged?) from taking the stage.. Surely then some1 is ambiguated from the religion or worse still, aiming to be on stage rather than be closer to guru ji because they may keep kes purely to perform... not to reach Guru Ji.... People look to panj pyaare as examples of the khalsa....do you look to someone doing keertan or reading from the gurbani in the same light? why...? I guess when kids get older things like this must subtly change their mind about the acceptance of the religion... but then if its a rule, its a rule...just need to find some authority on this!

Now I'm unable to draw any conclusions...so really is it dependent on whoever is in the sangath to go and withdraw a non-kesdhari from the stage? Shouldnt there be some convention? If there was, it would stop the mini fights over the subject which are happening in front of me. I know the guys n gals are good at keertan but I'm not sure if they are into sikhi deeply enough to feel the calling to turn amrtidhari....as this is the case, in your view, they should not be allowed to sit on the stage and sing the keertan that fills their hearts and minds... ...at the same time they are turned away from the gursikhs who refuse to let them perform and refuse to teach them because they are not kesdhari... being kesdhari and amrtidhari are also totally different things too...so in this sense your opinion is more inclined to the look of the person not the meaning of the words which were written by a higher power.... would you take prashaad if it was given to you by a non-amritdhari non-kesdhari?

There are 850,000 hits on the website so far...there are supposedly over 20million sikhs in the world... if there are any society/committee members out there who havent already ciruclated the word about this cause then please doooooooo!! Also try and arrange meetings where as a society you can all go through and do chaupai sahib together!!

Parji, I understand that, but this topic is not asking 'what is the history surrounding Guru Nanak Ji, what was india like before Guru Ji' The title states anti-islamic views, views that Sikhi is hindu dependant....my issue is with this...sorry if this offends anyone...i would have liked to think that Sikhi entered the world through God's will...and isnt dependant on anything.... Sorry if I am incorrect...I find it hard to believe Sikhi is around because of religious and cultural issues...not around because it is SUPPOSED to be here, unifying people and spreading God's love.

Two above posts :D :D :D Gursikhs shouldnt shun or turn their backs, because it when people see the magic aura of someone who surrounds themselves in Guru Ji's embrace that non-sikhs respect and admire gursikhs and aspire to be like them... I don't want to become someone who is ignorant and turns my back on someone, I don't want to feel better than anyone, I'm sorry StarSingh but I can't accept your perspective on this.....surely 1million sikhs and 10million on the way is better than just 1million sikhs... Isnt the best option to show him the way....it is his own choice whether to follow

My point was that surely it doesnt matter when and where Sikhi arose...at any time there is always religous conflict! By saying that Sikhi was because of a certain divide somewhere in the world means that the religion in itself is only around to solve a certain isolated problem, once its done then everything is done- I find this notion hard to accept....I always thought Sikhi was more universal than that, a religion in its own right and not dependant on other religions being around... i can't understand why this issue is being discussed as if Sikhi wouldnt be around if Guru Ji wasn't born anywhere else in any other religious and cultural climate. - Surely Sikhi would have come about regardless? Apologies if I am incorrect, I usually refrain from putting my views forward, I am merely trying to learn more...

In terms of getting more employment opportunities in life, it is unfortunate that you had to leave Uni in your first year- I understand there could have been any number of factors as to why this happened. If possible I would reccommend going back to uni. A degree opens a lot of doors! Without one, you just have to bash a few doors down to get where you want to be! For finance, I would definately reccommend a CIMA. CIMA's require experience and hence most routes to a CIMA are through apprentership or graduate schemes where the company will invest in you by paying for your study a few days of the week, the rest of the week you work and gain experience. See this article from CIMA http://www1.cimaglobal.com/cps/rde/xchg/SI...t.xsl/16679.htm You need to email around your CV's and a cover note highlighting and experience you have....if you have a job already or a part time job which you may not NEED as a priority, then maybe cut down the hours and do as much work experience as you can at an accountants or a bigger accounting firm -even if you are working for free, if you win them over they may take you on!...Email as many firms as possible, some will even email back with constructive criticism!! Go to a careers department- maybe at ure local uni and get your CV checked over! Try and get something that stands out, such as working at an accountants and which computer programs you used and what accounts you dealt with, real positive. Hopefully you'll be able to land yourself a placement/internship...and get on the way to acquiring a CIMA or ACA qualification....as soon as you have a CIMA, whether you have a degree or not is largely forgotton about- afterall you would be a chartered accountant/analyst. Hope that gives you some more options! I say definately aim for a chartered qualifications- just email everywhere you can!!!!

Correct me if I am wrong.... but surely this argument is at fault....not just by the facts not being stated correct....but doesnt anyone else believe that- regardless into what religious surrounding Guru Nanak Ji was born, he would be the harbourer of the Guru's light and ignight the flame of sikhi? Thats what I first thought when I read the title of the thread...surely it shouldnt matter where or to whom Guru Ji was born...the religion isnt based around hate or based around killing muslims- its about love respect and protection... your anti-islamic title and arguements which hint that sikhi is based on hinduism being around is just silly.... ...mayve you should have just had a topic "who defended india up to the initiation of Sikhi"...because my belief is that Sikhi would have come about regardless... Sikhi is through Gods will, surely!? Sorry if I am incorrect here.

Sorry parji, if the question offended anyone I don't understand what people mean by "another devisive thread"- does that mean the issue shouldnt be discussed? The main reason why I asked it was because there are gursikhs in my locality threatening non-amritdharis or non-kesdharis not to do kirtan at the local gurdwara. I just wanted to know what IS the right decree on this. From my understanding is that Sikhi would promote anyone from any walk of life getting closed to Guru Ji, one way or another...which is the message many of you are promoting...if so then what makes these gursikhs so threatening to my friends? And what should my friends say to them? (if this is the correct interpretation of sikhi)

are there no rules of conduct which would settle this? The gursikhs which insist that no non-amrtidhari will do keertan at a certain gurdwara seem very stuck in their ways. Likewise, if in fact its the otherway round then sources would be great too.

can anyone translate please? sorry

Thanks for your simple answer, but I'm afraid that although you are allowed to do such, I know gursikhs who would want to force you off stage. as for AKJ and the rest, it's all besides the subject of kirtan so people can and have discussed such issues elsewhere. Well done with the kirtan though- I think its such an incredible gift to have been given!

ermm...not sure I get that but yeah I'm not putting forward a view point I'm just trying to establish the consensus. I hope you and others can contribute to this so we have a definitive view. If posters have any quotes which can be referred to in regards to any rules about who can do kirtan then that would be really helpful :D

In this view point what roles other than reading from the guru granth sahib and keertan are restricted to amritdharis? Is there anyone with any kind of rules that dictates this? I guess if there are rules then I'm sure my mates will respect them and when they take amrit they'll be bursting to get on that stage! However, if they are allowed to in the mean time, then that would be great too, but theres so many viewpoints!! I also think they're scared because of gursikhs threatening to remove them from the stage if they decide to do keertan. Can a non-amrtidhari play waaja, if an amritdhari does the singing or can that be taken as hypocritical also?