californiasardar1
-
Posts
820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Calendar
Forums
Posts posted by californiasardar1
-
-
On 6/6/2020 at 6:48 PM, Akalifauj said:
You live in fear. Taksal of the 70s and 80s taught punjabis how to have self respect. Criminals after seeing the virtues of Sikhi because of Taksal dropped their evil ways and joined Taksal to make the punjabi heartland a better place. Respected army generals like General shabeg Singh joined the Taksal of the 70s and 80s to bring back integrity to the punjabis. When I say punjabis in this context it doesn't just include Sikhs. It also includes Hindus and muslims of punjab. Sikhs were literally given the key to Gurbani by Taksal. They were educating the villagers on how to read and interpret Gurbani. The Taksal understood Gurbani is the power that uplifted the likes of Bhagat kabir ji and Baba Deep Singh to the heights they travelled in the past. They without any doubt showed this again in the events to come in 1984. Some like to live in so much oppression that they grow accustom to it. Taksal woke up many punjabis and they started to have a voice. Taksal gave them the backbone they needed. Today, when a mona feels oppressed in the western countries they get their inspiration from the actions of Sant Jarnail Singh ji. They proud themselves of belonging to a religion that stood up to oppression. Taksal was also teaching the history of the Sikhs that is full of valor and leads to liberation of the soul. If 1984 was truly about making a homeland for the Sikhs, Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji would have carved it out before leaving his human body. So why did Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji fight wars. A simpleton would say to rule over the world. Guru Sahib fought because there was no other option as the local rulers were oppressing the local people of india with the sword. Had the local rulers of that time sat down with Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji to discuss equal rights there would have been no wars. And this is also true for Taksal. Countless times Taksal said they are ready to have a discussion with the ruling government the Congress. People of punjab had demands and they wanted to see punjab prosper. The indian government wanted to steal the natural resources from punjab and give it to others. Even the last stand where the Singhs sat in Sri Amritsar Sahib complex the Sikhs did not fire the first round at the indian government. The indian government army fired first.
Today punjabis are sitting in their nice homes in the west. They have good paying jobs or businesses and basic rights to move freely and live their lives provided by the state governmentfor the current time. So at this current time they don't need Sikhi or a group like taksal. The state's constitution is their life line. Unless they live in india, which no better than it was in 1970s or 80s.
The punjabis that come to Sikhi now are coming because they see even though we live freely in the western world, we still are not free. The fear of death hangs over their heads. Or it could be some other reason. Also these punjabis see how the lohri parties and wedding reception have destroyed their families. So they choose not to attend such functions. Lohri celebration/party may look innocent but try to have one without alcohol and bhangra music. Majority of the guest will not show up and this includes immediate family members in some cases. When speaking about punjabi culture it's about saying what majority of this group is doing. A single family can't represent a large group of people. There could be the very small minority of families having a lohri celebration without alcohol and bhangra music, which is good but cant speak for punjabi culture.The sad truth about Shabeg Singh is that he was not motivated by Sikhi. He was an old man with health problems and nothing to lose, and he had a personal axe to grind with the Indian military. I’m sure his grievances were legitimate, but that is still a far distance away from how his motivations are typically portrayed.
Anyway, he was happy to go down fighting with other people’s sons. But none of his four sons were involved. They are nonreligious monay who live comfortably to this day posting photos of their father’s exploits in the Indian army online (but never a peep about Operation Blue Star).
1 -
On 3/1/2022 at 5:14 PM, MisterrSingh said:
Everyone, be they poor or rich, function according to their moral and ethical baseline. Most people don't overhaul their mentality just because they begin to identify with a religious identity.
I could tell you things I've witnessed in run-down Sikh pinds that would rob you of sleep for a few nights. Do you know that cousin-f**king is almost a rite of passage amongst Punjabi Sikhs back home at this time, and it's usually instigated by the female cousin? It's often the first sexual experience both parties have, and it happens because it doesn't raise suspicions compared to a relationship with a non-relation outsider?
I had never heard of the cousin thing. That is shocking and disgusting. I had heard about Punjabis sleeping around behind closed doors, but never about incest. I imagine it is because my relations who know about it find it so appalling and shameful that they don’t even want to mention it.
It’s sad because I used to think that, despite our moral erosion, we would never stoop to certain levels (for example, cousin relationships that are apparently routine for Muslims).2 -
On 3/1/2022 at 5:20 PM, proudkaur21 said:
Lolll I have no experience living in rural punjab but every time I used to go to gurudwaras in rural areas I always saw more sikhs so I always assumed they were more religious. Honestly one thing we need to accept is that sikhs are way more materialistic than muslims.
How old are you? Can you please learn to write properly?
I applaud your passion, but if you care about advancing the Sikh community, it is important to develop competence in basic things.
0 -
This happened in Brownsville. That means it is very unlikely Sikhs were involved. But who knows.
2 -
3 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:
What's that?
Are there MORE Sikhs in Richmond Hill than other places where they aren't attacked?
When I talk of a "stronghold" does your mind conjure up an image of a fort with the tops of turbans sticking out over the ramparts? A stronghold in the contemporary urban sense isn't what you're thinking it is.
Are you so <banned word filter activated> dense that you don't understand that, for example, 1% = 100*0.01%, meaning that there are 100 times as many Sikhs susceptible to getting attacked, but 1% and 0.01% are both very small percentages?
1 -
2 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:
We'd call it a Muslim stronghold if the majority of arrivals were Muslim.
In no way are a "majority of arrivals" in the Richmond Hill area Sikh.
Did anybody in this thread suggest that?
In your other post, you asked "Where's the fear of numbers?" What numbers are you even talking about?
0 -
49 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:
But it's weird to hear of Sikhs being attacked in areas that are recognised as Sikh strongholds. Where's the fear of numbers?
Who said it is a "stronghold?"
Just because an area has relatively more Sikhs than other areas, that doesn't mean that Sikhs have large numbers there. Sikhs have tiny numbers everywhere in the US. They are just slightly less tiny in certain areas.
1 -
Sikhs are targeted and attacked at relatively high rates everywhere in the US. You hear about it happening more in certain areas because those areas have more Sikhs to attack.
0 -
16 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:
If so, why are apne moving into this particular place? Is it the only affordable place for immigrants to the area?
The Richmond Hill area is the only area in NYC that has a substantial Punjabi population. It is not known to be a dangerous place.
Punjabis move there for the same reasons they move to areas with relatively large populations in the UK (or Canada, or any other country).
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/26/2022 at 6:08 PM, Kau89r8 said:https://www.instagram.com/p/CfKLd5cvyuy/
^ @dallysingh101 @MisterrSingh @californiasardar1 share your thoughts pls
I agree with @MisterrSingh
3 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
11 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:I knew of a situation where a Sikh guy and girl got engaged via the usual Punjabi procedure. The guy insists to the girl's family that before the marriage they allow the girl to go on a weekend break with him down south; Devon, Cornwall, etc. Amazingly, the girl's family agree. She comes back preggers, and he ends the engagement, moves to AFRICA for his job, and is never seen again, rofl.
Who on earth moves from the UK to Africa for a job?
4 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 hours ago, ChardikalaUK said:The latest thing is live in relationships.
I've just been invited to a wedding where a 'Sikh' couple have been living together for over a year already.
I bet their families were thankful that at least they were cohabiting with other "Sikhs."
I have a Canadian cousin who lives with his widowed mother --- and his Vietnamese girlfriend. But hey, at least he didn't move out of the house!
5 -
21 hours ago, Guest wikibrowser said:
Do you find that born again Sikhs who have always cut their hair, and lived a secular lifestyle who then suddenly without warning took Amrit Sanchar, are more religious and outspoken then other Sikhs? Meaning that they constantly preach to others how they should be living their life.
I am actually generally very skeptical of Sikhs who fit this description.
I find that more often than not, it is just a phase that they are going through, and once the novelty wears off they will revert to form.
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
8 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:There's pockets of it here and there in the UK at least, and from my own observations and experiences the families who possess this quiet, reserved demeanour are largely those families whose elders served in the Indian armed forces in the last century. It's a mentality that's almost inherited down through the generations but clearly diminishes with each subsequent generation as the disciplinary "memory" enforced by a patriarch fades away.
I don't doubt you are right about the "pockets" in the UK. But I must say that, generally speaking, I was very surprised when I learned how lax most UK Punjabi families appeared to be with their children. Families tolerating their sons and daughters (!) being out late partying and coming home in the middle of the night. Girls drinking openly in front of their parents at parties. Girls wearing revealing clothing while still living at home. When I was growing up, no Punjabis who still lived with their family could get away with that. They could only do it by moving out of the house.
Anyway, I am old and out of touch. It seems like Punjabi families EVERYWHERE are much less strict these days than when I was growing up.
4 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
20 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:It does. I'm always mentally comparing and contrasting decent Punjabi (non-degenerate) culture and theirs. One thing I admire is how they encourage an adventurous curiosity in their kids. Punjabis are incredibly risk averse to the point where they extinguish any out-of-the-box thinking in youngsters. Probably explains why we easily defer to various types of authority, which is weird considering Punjabis also have a wild, rebellious streak. So many contradictions.
The "decent Punjabi culture" you speak of doesn't appear to exist in any substantial way today.
Anyway, Punjabis (and Indians more generally) lack critical thinking skills, and that is probably partially due to the intolerance for out-of-the-box thinking that you point out (and lack of promotion of creativity more generally, I would argue).
4 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
What a sick, pathetic person.
3 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/1/2022 at 1:06 PM, MisterrSingh said:This needs to be discussed a lot more than it currently is. The large majority of people in the pinds from this generation and earlier (and maybe as "recently" as the 70s) may have identified as Sikhs yet they still carried on with Hindu ceremonies and cultural practices. It was very commonplace yet you wouldn't know or think this if you listen to Sikh parchaar and discourse in Gurdwaras. They give the impression Sikhi has been one long uninterrupted line of adherence beginning from 1469 to today. I would argue it was only with the lehars of the late 70s and 80s where the Sikh identity was magnified for obvious reasons, did this "dipping toes in both waters" begin to recede or at least go underground, although I'd argue in the past ten years our people over there have started to openly revert to Hindu cultural practices once again under the guise of non-descript Punjabi-ism. It's a very interesting conversation.
How long can a religion such as ours (with an obviously floundering birthrate and adherence levels, terrible political leadership, and ignorant and unrelatable religious hierarchy) with a heavily interdependent shared mythology with the original "brand", resist a gradual reabsorption into the main branch? It'll take some doing to resist.
This is a good point. I have known many elderly Sikhs who partake in certain Hindu rituals and believe in certain Hindu superstitions.
I am convinced that many Sikhs have Hindu roots that are much more recent than most people would imagine. There are lots of signs of this. For example, I have met some people whose ancestors from the early 1900s or late 1800s had "Hindu names" (i.e. a more "Hindu sounding" first name, and no "Singh" in any part of the name) and/or did not keep their kesh. There was an interesting thread on SikhSangat a few years ago regarding religious census figures in Punjab from the late 1800s and early 1900s. Surprisingly, Hindu jats outnumbered Sikh jats in many parts of modern day Indian Punjab in the late 1800s.
Given all of the above facts, it's not surprising that Hindu practices have been strong in the Sikh community.
I honestly think that the existence of Sikhs in substantial numbers today is accidental and due to the British:
1) The British made a clear distinction between Sikhs and Hindus, based on physical appearance (Sikh <=> turban and kesh, no turban and kesh => Hindu). Without the rulers making such a clear distinction, the line between Sikh and Hindu would have been blurred, and I think there is a good chance that Sikhs would have just been gradually absorbed back into the Hindu fold (most Sikhs partook in certain Hindu practices anyway, and Hindus to this day view Sikhs as just another one of their subgroups).
2) The British incentivized being Sikh by (among other things) preferentially recruiting Sikhs into the military. Within a generation or two of the British taking control of Punjab, virtually all Punjabi-speaking jats were "visible Sikhs" (kept turban and kesh). Within a generation or two of the British raj ending, a majority of Punjabi-speaking jats reverted back to being monay. This was not a coincidence. Aside from the jat community, notice similar practices in other communities. For example, the tradition of Hindu khatri families raising one son to be a Sikh. The frequency of this practice and the frequency of jats keeping their kesh follow essentially the same timeline.
6 -
On 6/1/2022 at 11:01 AM, Premi5 said:
https://britasia.tv/jaz-dhami-to-perform-at-queens-platinum-jubilee-celebrations/
Jaz Dhami to perform at Queen’s Platinum Jubilee Celebrations
Jaz Dhami set to perform for the queenBritish Asian Punjabi singer Jaz Dhami is set to make history by performing Gal Sun at the official Queens Platinum Jubilee Celebrations on the private grounds at Windsor Castle from 11-15th May. Jaz Dhami will be accompanied by the Tri-service Orchestra and National Symphony Orchestra for his performance.
Does this clown have cornrows?
2 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
9 hours ago, realist17 said:India is still around b/c of influential Sikhs-the so called 'British India Sikhs'. i don't know was Bhupinder Singh pro-British India? Did he even give a sh**; what category the Punjabi Sikh soldiers fell into?
Divide and rule worked out well for the British? Look at 1984.
Why do stupid Sikhs put people like Bhupinder Singh on a pedestal? Because he wore a pagh?
The Patiala "royals" have consistently been traitors who look out for their personal interests above all else. That has been true throughout their family history.
4 -
All of the complaints about white people are really old and tired. I used to hold some resentment against them when I was a teenager. Then I matured and noticed that all groups of humans have their shortcomings and transgressions.
Anyway, the world is becoming less white with every passing day. Soon the "white" countries that you complain about will be mostly led by nonwhite people. And they will be doing the same things they are doing now.
It's a universal hunger for power and control that is the problem, not skin color.
1 -
a parna
1 -
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
On 6/5/2022 at 9:56 AM, Premi5 said:@californiasardar1 you won't like this
I searched google images and this is the first image that comes up (although the second one is better...)
I was hoping that I wouldn't be found out, but now my secret has been exposed ...
3 -
9 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:
I haven't been there in years. Darn peasant culture!
Were they wearing paghs?
They all had haircuts except for one guy who was wearing a patka (UK style, where the joora is tied at the back, not the top) and had a trimmed beard.
2 -
Sikh man shot dead ‘execution-style’ in a New York neighbourhood
in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
Posted
And this is the extremely simple fact he fails to understand.