BhForce

Yeah, exactly. I can't remember if it was Terry Milewski or Kim Bolan or some other racist "journalist" (actually propagandist) who wrote in an article that the reason for Sikh success in the Parliament is that they have a tribal system where the Gurdwara president "tells" people who to vote for, as Gurdwara presidents are warlords. The reality is no Sikh ever wants anybody to tell him what to do. "Who are you to tell me what to do?"

I thought you were going to talk about playing sports. But then you made it clear you're talking about watching other people play sports on TV. Agree.

What's that supposed to mean, exactly? Would you prefer if he had a mopey look like a loser when taking photos?

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Does he commit bajjer kurehits? Do you have any proof he doesn't do Nitnem? So what are you talking about?

What is a pseudo mahapurkh? And do you have anyone who fits your definition of it? A pseudo mahapurkh is a preacher who wears a chola that he disagrees with. A mahapurkh, on the other hand, is a person who wears a chola that he does agree with. For example, Dhadrianwale, wears a chola and says there's no God, no hell, no afterworld, no such thing as naam simran. He would be a mahapurkh Harnek the paapi could get behind.

I doubt that. You didn't list a single thing that you disagree with him on. No, you are blindly following Harnek. There are plenty of people trying to tear down Sikhi. Harnek has the absolute foulest mouth in this entire Panth. And you choose him as your guru? Oh, I'm sure that's true. Not. I'm quite sure you're presenting the best face of his critics. What, exactly, is the argument? Just calling Taksal names? The entire reason Sikhs respect Sant ji is that they support the political aims of the Sikh nation. That doesn't mean you have to agree with every little thing that they said. But Harnek the fool calling those fighters "gunday" just means that he's aligned with those who wanted to kill our people. Praise to you who thinks Harnek is some sort of prophet. Did you want to post what the stance is to discuss? If it was "staged", why does he pretend to be an "Amritdhari"? Wow, what a great accomplishment that would be. And what would the point be, exactly?

Welcome to SikhSangat, Harnek. Get an account (it's free) and we can talk.

Correct. But we're not "Indians". We are Punjabis. Of course, there are variations among Punjabis, as well. The races of people who are Sikhs in Punjab are generally taller than those who are Hindus.

Agree. Let's all put our petty differences aside for this one day. And then back to "normal" the next day.

Benti to @MisterrSingh and @puzzled: Don't call this charlatan "sadguru", please. See my post here. Would Christians call some rando "Christ"? Call this fool by his name, Jaggi Vasudev. Request to @puzzled to edit the title of this thread to "Opinion on fake Jaggi Vasudev/fake sadguru" ?

I disagree with this. Everyone knows that I am not sympathetic to Islam, but I want Jagsaw to present his Islam-loving arguments and then we can all refute them. That is much better than our people being burdened by the thought of "all religions are the same" and such. Better to get these things out in the open, and discuss and refute them than letting them fester. As far as why he was banned, I don't know, but I'm sure @S1ngh will make him promise to behave before giving him an account.

Yes, he is an Ummah sympathizer. But so what? He's a Sikh, and we should argue it out among ourselves. It's extremely frustrating to try to debate and argue with someone who does not have an account.

@ADMIN and @S1ngh, I call for Jagsaw's account to be restored. I don't say this because I'm a fan of his in everything he says. Everyone here knows that that I oppose his love for Islam. I don't know what he was banned for, but I'm sure it's been quite a while's punishment, hasn't it? If necessary, make him promise to be good, or put him on QC for a while. He has some stuff to say which is quite necessary, and other stuff which contributes to the conversation, if only to provide a foil to argue against. It's very difficult to have a conversation if you don't have an account and can't check notifications. Who else agrees? Note: This does not mean you agree with Jagsaw on everything he posts. I don't agree with any other poster on everything they post, but as long they observe a few simple rules, I don't know why everyone should not be able to post.

Jagsaw, could you repost? This video has been deleted. Or repost what you remember of the video.

The problem, bro, is that it seems that you have not based your views on Gurbani, but rather on your own mann (mind). If you have done "exhaustive research", why don't you share it with the rest of us? You want to condemn the entire rest of the Sikh world to doubts? You said Sikhism is based on love. So do you love the rest of the Sangat to enlighten us?

Unconditional love like haters of God being condemned to the pain of births and deaths? ਜਿਨ ਕਉ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਨਾਹੀ ਹਰਿ ਸੇਤੀ ਤੇ ਸਾਕਤ ਮੂੜ ਨਰ ਕਾਚੇ ॥ Those who are not in love with the Lord are foolish and false - they are faithless cynics. ਤਿਨ ਕਉ ਜਨਮੁ ਮਰਣੁ ਅਤਿ ਭਾਰੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਵਿਸਟਾ ਮਰਿ ਮਰਿ ਪਾਚੇ ॥੨॥ They suffer the most extreme agonies of birth and death; they die over and over again, and they rot away in manure. ||2|| p169 So is rotting in manure a manifestation of unconditional love?

I totally agree, "her scripture" condemns and punishes. For example: The sinners commit sinful deeds, and then they weep and wail. O Nanak, just as the churning stick churns the butter, so does the Righteous Judge of Dharma churn them. ||9|| Oops, that's Gurbani. p1425 ਸੁਤੜੇ ਅਸੰਖ ਮਾਇਆ ਝੂਠੀ ਕਾਰਣੇ ॥ Millions are asleep, in the false illusion of Maya. ਨਾਨਕ ਸੇ ਜਾਗੰਨ੍ਹ੍ਹਿ ਜਿ ਰਸਨਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਉਚਾਰਣੇ ॥੧੩॥ O Nanak, they alone are awake and aware, who chant the Naam with their tongues. ||13|| But why aren't all awakened? Why are only some? Doesn't God love them?

Where do you get this? Some new-age 3HO pamphlet? When has homosexuality ever been promoted in Sikhism? From the time of Guru Nanak Dev ji? Only heterosexuality has been promoted. If "gays are not looked down" by you mean to say that men can have close personal friendships with other men, fine. But men have always been encouraged to get married. Gurbani talks of the love and union of a woman and a man. Never a man and a man. The books of Sikh history never talk about homosexual unions. Where are you getting this? OK, what is that supposed to mean, exactly? You make sweeping statements. If a love is unconditional, that means no conditions at all, whatsoever. Also all means all, right? ਜਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਸੇਵੇ ਆਪੁ ਗਣਾਇਦੇ ਤਿਨ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਕੂੜੁ ਫਿਟੁ ਫਿਟੁ ਮੁਹ ਫਿਕੇ ॥ One who, not serving the True Guru, praises himself, is filled with falsehood within. Cursed, cursed is his ugly face. p304. Does that sound like "unconditional love for all"? Sounds more like if you hate God and love yourself and Mammon, then you are cursed. ਵੈਰੁ ਕਰਹਿ ਨਿਰਵੈਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਧਰਮ ਨਿਆਇ ਪਚੰਦੇ ॥ Those who hate the One who has no hatred - according to the true justice of Dharma, they shall perish. ਜੋ ਜੋ ਸੰਤਿ ਸਰਾਪਿਆ ਸੇ ਫਿਰਹਿ ਭਵੰਦੇ ॥ Those who are cursed by the Saints will continue wandering aimlessly. p306

Bro, stop calling him "Sadguru"! That is blasphemous. Do you call Ram Singh, Partap Singh, etc. (gurus of the namdharis), Gurinder Singh Dhillon (guru of the Radha Swamis) "Satguru"? Then why would you do so for Jaggi Vasudev? Just call him by his name. If some American cult leader started calling himself Christ John Smith, do you think Christians would start calling him "Christ" without a moment's hesitation?

OK, and the Christians do do a lot of that, as in "the Devil made me do it." 1) But how do you square that with the simultaneous Christian emphasis on the "sin nature" of man. Is not that "sin nature" internal? 2) How do you feel about the portrayal of the 5 vices (lust, anger, greed, worldly attachment, and ego) as external forces afflicting the soul in Gurbani? ਅਵਰਿ ਪੰਚ ਹਮ ਏਕ ਜਨਾ ਕਿਉ ਰਾਖਉ ਘਰ ਬਾਰੁ ਮਨਾ ॥ There are five of them, but I am all alone. How can I protect my hearth and home, O my mind? ਮਾਰਹਿ ਲੂਟਹਿ ਨੀਤ ਨੀਤ ਕਿਸੁ ਆਗੈ ਕਰੀ ਪੁਕਾਰ ਜਨਾ ॥੧॥ They are beating and plundering me over and over again; unto whom can I complain? ||1|| p155, M1 When a man dies, the five are shown as leaving, as if they were external in the first place: ਢਾਹਿ ਮੜੋਲੀ ਲੂਟਿਆ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਸਾ ਧਨ ਪਕੜੀ ਏਕ ਜਨਾ ॥ In this way, the temple is being demolished; the body is being plundered, and the soul-bride, left all alone, is captured. ਜਮ ਡੰਡਾ ਗਲਿ ਸੰਗਲੁ ਪੜਿਆ ਭਾਗਿ ਗਏ ਸੇ ਪੰਚ ਜਨਾ ॥੩॥ Death strikes her down with his rod, the shackles are placed around her neck, and now the five have left. ||3|| Raag Gauri Guru Nanak Dev Also: ਕਬੀਰ ਹਰਨਾ ਦੂਬਲਾ ਇਹੁ ਹਰੀਆਰਾ ਤਾਲੁ ॥ Kabeer, the deer is weak, and the pool is lush with green vegetation. ਲਾਖ ਅਹੇਰੀ ਏਕੁ ਜੀਉ ਕੇਤਾ ਬੰਚਉ ਕਾਲੁ ॥੫੩॥ Thousands of hunters are chasing after the soul; how long can it escape death? ||53|| Salok Kabeer ji, p1367

Hi, ChristianGirl. No, what the poster you're responding to ( @dallysingh101 ) said is not that King Henry VIII founded "Christianity" but rather "I mean even the founder of their religious sect of Christianity " (emphasis added) meaning that King Henry founded this (your) sect of Christianity, namely Anglicanism. I think you took the phase as "their sect (Christianity)" while he meant "their particular sect ... of the Christian religion"

Have any references, bro? Also, wasn't the earliest part of the Bible (Torah) written before the Babylonian exile? Or does it merely refer to events prior, but it was written during or after the exile in Babylon?

Well, the thing is no one is going around blowing out birthday candles, but it would be nice to just tell people that this isn't the actual Sikh way of life. This is just something made up by shopowners to sell cakes and stuff.

Do they? Probably most do for their children. It would be strange to celebrate a full-grown adult's birthday. The point is simply that why would you build yourself up? We're told to think of ourselves as insignificant. Amritdhari Sikhs celebrating their own birthdays would be a farce. As in vegetarian? I don't see why not, as long as you're not sharing from the same plate with someone not following rehit.

This Taksali Singh denounces the Babas that demolished the Deori and the SPGC that allowed him to do so. He also says that it's the normal operating procedure of the SGPC to do something like this, then when the Sangat cries out, they "suspends" a manager or transfers him someplace to placate the Sangat. All lies. He also says the Babas hands should be smashed. Finally that every modification of a historical building should be published in the newspapers in advance.