Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


BhForce last won the day on May 12 2020

BhForce had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,154 Excellent


About BhForce

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

6,328 profile views
  1. That's not a bad idea. But what you're really supposed to be doing is reserving 10%of your income as dasvandh. So, not pennies, but rather 10 rupees out of every 100. Or pound. Or dollar.
  2. OK, so as far as "normal" journeys (like driving from Los Angeles to San Diego or something), there's no reason you should have to miss your Nitnem. With long airplane journeys, especially where you're crossing the international date line and multiple time zones, it might be unclear when a "new day" starts for the purposes of doing Nitnem. So as long as you make a bona fide effort to do Nitnem, I don't think you can said to have "missed" your Nitnem. But don't go the entire journey of 22-24 hours (plus holdovers) and fail to do Nitnem just because you're "on a journey." when you get a chance, just wash up and do paath.
  3. I won't dispute that you got yeast in India in 2015 from yeast flying around. But if you look at the wording of the original poster, BigTera, that's not what he said. He implied that if you wear a turban, you'll get "yeast formation" as if it will spring up spontaneously: "All that heat and sweat from wearing a head covering all day gets trapped causing excess moisture and itching build up which makes dandruff worse. ie yeast formation." That's what I said doesn't happen, even in India. There are 1.3 billion people in India. 1.3 billion don't have yeast. There are 25 million or so Sikhs in India. Maybe 10 million keshadhari. 10 million don't have yeast. Some certainly do have dandruff or other problems, but so do non-Sikhs in the West. I mean, who do you think is the market for Head & Shoulders Shampoo? It's false and a slander on Guru's form to suggest that wearing a turban with long hair necessarily leads to dandruff and yeast.
  4. Oops, I never thought of this before: but was he molested in the dera by someone? (Not the Sant, but a random person or persons. Because there are always tons of followers-on in deras.)
  5. Nitnem is Jap, Jaap, Swayye, Chaupai, Anand. Asa di Vaar, Shabad Hazare, etc. are extra that every Sikh is encouraged to do, but it is optional.
  6. What's wrong with you, bro? The point of telling someone to man up is to take up masculine virtues. Neither I nor "Guest Singhh" made this up. Why do you think Bhai Gurdas II, respected by the entire panth called Guru Gobind Singh ji the "Marad (manly man) Agumda"? Mai Bhago was taking up masculine virtues, which are exactly what are needed in war. On the other hand, it is also necessary for men to take up feminine qualities, which are necessary to do seva, be humble, and sing music (kirtan). The problem in the panth is we have entirely too little masculinity at the moment, that's why people are telling Sikhs to man up.
  7. Have you ever worn a real kachhera (of the type prescribed by Guru Gobind Singh ji)? If you did, I think you would find it very comfortable. Don't be an oreo, bro. You don't have to follow every stupid trend in Men's Health magazine. You can, though, if you want to. Just don't claim you're following maryada. That's not the only thing. It's not merely a symbol. Otherwise, you could just walk around carrying a picture of a kachhera in your wallet.
  8. Look, bro, spirituality is the entire point of our religion. But Guru ji also taught us to be a man and defend ourselves, our mothers and sisters, our communities. We all want to just sit back and listen to kirtan peacefully. But you can't do that when you're under attack. I realize that this kind of talk is not for everybody, but if that's the case for you, just go to one of the spiritual discussions. Here, we're just discussing ways of keeping people like you safe.
  9. You invade a country, and then you get part of it for free. What are you complaining about? Would they be OK with Hindus (or whatever) invading Pakistan, converting 1/3 of the population, and then letting them break off into a separate country?
  10. If they "lived together happily", it was because they were being ruled by an iron fist by the British. Before that, by the Sikhs. Under Islamic rule, some Muslims may have been nice, but others felt free to treat non-Muslims as second class humans. Kind of like how the invading Germans or Vichy French would treat anti-Nazi French in WWII.
  11. I don't know. I can so see the Punjabi police and delhi govt saying that about us Sikhs and treatment of young innocent amritdharis during encounter '90s years. Also probably what the Mughals/afghans said about us too during the 'sell a sikh head' days. That's not the case, bro. We don't have an organized ideology of killing non-Sikhs for the sake of being non-Sikhs and then converting them. They do. That's the difference. I'm not calling for killing them, just not bowing to them.
  12. I don't blame the Muslims. I blame the stupid Sikhs for eating at filthy shops. Carry your own water and eat at the langar.
  13. I agree that that is stupid. This is not what Sikhism is. It is a "third path", not a military wing of the one of the existing ones: ਇਹ ਤੀਸਰ ਮਜਹਬ ਖਾਲਸਾ, ਉਪਜਿਉ ਪਰਧਾਨਾ (Bhai Gurdas II). "This Third Religion, the Khalsa, was created as leading."
  14. That's not "clearly not true", bro. Agreed, this is just a game of alternative history, but do you really think that if the Sikhs had not demolished Islamic rule at the entry point to India, that it would have been harder for Islamic rule in the rest of India? It seems pretty plain that if you plug the source of the Islamic invasions, it makes it much easier for Hindus to rise up and consolidate. Otherwise, they would always be constantly fighting the latest Islamic invasion army. So, that's the way that the Sikhs saved the Hindus.
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use