SSD

Are your in-laws non-Sikhs? Not judging you if they are or aren't, I just don't understand this particular Hukam, even if they're born into a Sikh familiy are they Sikh? No, a Sikh is by practice not by words or blood.

I'm not sure you've seen a lot of matrimonials, where it says clean-shaven please(so called "Sikh" matrimonials) even within this website, I've seen people say that they would prefer non-Sikh at birth women. Sikh men are also to blame for their preferences in a woman who waxed(which by itself creates discrimination towards Gursikh women).

that explains Christianity and Islam, but fails to realize Sikhi, because Sikhi is about practice(which is why we have a nitnem).

the things about parchars(not Jugraj Singh) is that they only really preach to the people who have already known about Sikhi, such as family, friends, or they saw some sant and want to be like them, but for average society, they have no idea what it is? You can only be interested in something if you know it exists. "Sikhi is the best kept secret in the world", everyone can apply Sikh ideologies to their lives such as Naam Jappo, Kirat Karao, and Vand Ki Chacko. But not everyone will become a Sikh because it probably isn't for them(Maryada and Amrit), but certainly everyone should be living a lifestyle of Naam Japna as it can change someone.

what if the husband agrees to accept Sikhi, but the in-laws do not?

just so you know, these non-issues only became an issue when Indria Gandhi had the plan to destroy Sikhi, the Indian government put these issues in place, even when the Akal Takht Maryada already is very clear and optional on most of these issues.

I found out about this particular Hukam from Jugraj Singh's video http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Gd1oXui2ctQ from 9 min to 11 mins.

thank you for changing it.

Please use a more respectable adjective than bloody, the Gurus have given so much to create one Panth and one Khalsa:Punj Pyare.

You sadly can't combat it, it's a trust issue with the Sikhs, their family were probably drunkards, abusers, or they just have in-fighting. The Sikhs are a highly respected group in any society, even in some racist areas. I've seen people say,"The Sikhs are the only non-Westerners I respect" or "I wish Sikhs ruled instead of the Jews", or "If I could believe in God, I would be a Sikh", we are respected by the societies we come from; however, the families of the individual aren't very respected. Let us take 3HO for example, they are trying to follow Sikhi with their little yoga(if we excommunicate with them based on this, we should excommunicate all the Nihangs for Bhang consumption). We argue on stuff we already know the answer to. Such as Raagmala, chairs, and meat. Did Bhai Fauja Singh argue on Raagmala when he and some Taksalis went to give Shaheedi? Why is this an issue now? Did the Nihangs who gave Shaheedi argue on meat? More importantly did the Babbar Khalsa argue on whether you believed Amrit was about Mukti or Naam? We've started thinking on non-issues.

"Do not given a daughter's hand to a clean shaven. Give her hand in a house where God's Sikhi exists, where the household is not in debt, is of a good nature, is disciplined and knowledgeable." Hukam 38 of 52. It is true that Nihangs did intermarry with Muslim and Hindu women during their Chackarvarti(not sure if its still true). I also think that we have to ackwoledge that men and women despite being equal are just not the same. I really wanted to know these points because it (Hukam) says daughter and not son. Please someone explain it to me(only after reading the Hukam) and tell me if it has 2 sides.

"Do not given a daughter's hand to a clean shaven. Give her hand in a house where God's Sikhi exists, where the household is not in debt, is of a good nature, is disciplined and knowledgeable." Hukam 38 of 52. It is true that Nihangs did intermarry with Muslim and Hindu women during their Chackarvarti(not sure if its still true). I also think that we have to ackwoledge that men and women despite being equal are just not the same. I really wanted to know these points because it (Hukam) says daughter and not son. Please someone explain it to me(only after reading the Hukam) and tell me if it has 2 sides.

I understand quality not quantify, but if no one is willing to die for Sikhi, it's just a religion people can step-on. Like Christianity is way too easy to step-on, as is Islam because they both would be too afraid of "shaheedi" while the Sikhs aren't going to let the Guru be insulted and become SHAHEEDS!

? You trust the Police!? I'm not sure you remember 1984, it was the police killing Sikhs?

I still do have to say that it's very impressive for a group that's been persecuted often. The Mughals did believe that Sikhi was gone for a while and went back their own little thing. Bertrand Russell(An atheist) said "If some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, the SIKH religion will be the ONLY means of guiding them.It has the capability, but Sikhs have not brought-out, in broad day light, the splendid doctrines of their religion, which has come into existence for the benefit of entire mankind." This is the guy that disproved the Abrahimic religions and even destroyed Hinduism and Bhudhism. He said that it was great for all of mankind. ALL

Punjab isn't even as big as the Christian or Muslim expansion though, didn't Guru Nanak go 87,000 miles on foot. If the Khalsa is ever going to fully Raj they need the whole world because Agai Rayi Na Koi. We can't have some enemies..

The reason I am asking this is because in that much time for other religions they got so much done. Christianity got Europe; Islam in 500 years got Arabia. Bhudhism in 500 years was very well spread out into southeastern Asia and Japan. So if these religions got so much in 500 years, why have we failed as followers of the highest Guru to even get outside of Punjab? Our Gurus aren't lower than these are other men!

Why are people surprised this happens?

most likely it's a cultic mantra, very similar to Radha Soami special 5 mantras.

I would personally rather die than to see Sri Darbar Sahib destroyed. And to go into the 8.4 million lives than to see it just gone.

Missionaries have exploited the world. They don't really care if they love the religion, they just will refuse to give you food if you don't convert.

he could be asking about kirpans?

if you read the first paragraph it says,"Baba Farid, as he is commonly known, is heavily quoted in Sikh scriptures, giving him a unique place of honour within Sikhism" it also says he was born in Punjab, not Afghanistan. https://www.google.com/search?q=sheikh+farid&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari this was my exact google search, it is possible he did meet Guru Nanak, but that would most likely be his Nirgun form (Waheguru or to him, Allah) Also we should remember that Guru Gobind Singh Ji said that the Guru had 3 forms when speaking to Bhai NAND Lal:Nirgun, Sargun, and Gurshabad.

what about Bhagat Farid? He came in the 12th century, http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fariduddin_Ganjshakar

Guru Har Rai cried when he killed a flower, so we should ackwoledge we will kill little creatures but we should have Daya and not be massive on purposely doing something wrong.