BhForce

ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨਣੀ

Exactly. She simply is MI6. Why, if you were from a country like Iran, and somehow or another made it out of that country, would you ever go back?

ਉਹ ਮੁਲਨਾਨਣੀ ਹੈ ਫਿਰ?

Yeah, I'm sure that that was the case. MPs care about stuff you can do to affect them. England is a very small country. You can easily drive from one constituency to another to do stuff (knock on doors, volunteer for campaigns, etc.). Also, you can help to elect a party even in your own constituency. MPs want to be in the treasury benches, of course, not the opposition.

Well, are you denying that the PSEB published his book? Or are you questioning whether CM Beant Singh authorized it? I believe his book was published in 1994? Beant Singh died in 1993, right? But the question is, before his death, did Beant Singh authorize the PSEB to publish Purewal's work? If so, it totally destroys any fig leaf of pretense that Purewal might have to be pro-Sikh. Purewal needs to be questioned as to who he met with in order to get funding to publish his work. Did he meet with Beant Singh? I would like to see if he denies or accepts it. And if there is proof of a meeting (as in visitor logs). Who was he working for in those days? What was his day job? If calendar dabbling was his day job, who was funding him? The Panth deserves to know.

Not a call, bro. Either in person or video streaming (Skype or something). I'd like to see both men faces while they are talking in order to assess where they're coming from.

I don't necessarily agree. But I do agree that 1) celebrating according to Bikrami is not Brahmanism and 2) there's no rush need to change from Bikrami. Strongly agree. As Sikhs, we would be fools to go into the technical details of these debates. Arguing about Gurpurab dates, Surya Siddhant, Dasam Granth Sahib birs, and so on is simply missing the point: our detractors want us to spend our energy and time arguing and fighting instead of doing something for the Panth. Are there any pictures of him? He should answer why he cut his hair before and why he kept it later. Did you have some sort of religious awakening? If so, what? For the supporters of this man, it would be useful to know what his personal rehit and faith is. The reason is that he has made emotional appeals to religion in order to make his case. Sikhs deserve to know who the man is that is pushing the entire Panth on his whims. (The same for our Jathedars.)

I suppose we are. The point is that the real discussion of technical calendar points gets very hairy real fast. And it should be a protracted discussion. It should not be something where Purewal is trying to whip up a frenzy among half of Sikhs to try to wage a kind of religious war against the other half merely for the gratification of his ego. And there is simply no reason to rush things along. And no appeals to irrelevant arguments like Bikrami is Brahmanism. Once those ground rules are accepted, the Panth can have a calm, detailed discussion.

If that's the case, go ahead and post the link. Perhaps a reason for that might be the fact that Purewal himself made emotional/political arguments in his own PDF arguing for his calendar. I don't see why Purewal should get to make non-technical points and Nishan Singh should not.

Very right, the both of you. The BBC love showing Sikh women as oppressed by "evil brown men with beards", but of course they would never do that with Islam because the Muslims would bomb BBC headquarters. Not proposing a bombing, of course, but I am saying that pressure should be applied. If the Sikhs got together to protest the BBC at their headquarters, they would write a news article saying that the Sikhs were trying to physically intimidate journalists. Of course, no such intimidation or protests are necessary by Muslims because the intimidation occurs without protests in the minds of BBC bosses who are mentally cowed because they know the Muslims will physically hurt them for writing against Muslims and Islam.

That's not necessarily the case, bro. If you live in the same country, you can still influence MPs because you can influence the party.

Really? When did this happen, and for which Muslim?

That's what Sikhs believe. Guru Nanak ji was/is God, and all the Gurus have the same light. A handful of Sikhs believe the Gurus were mere mortals.

Hello Sister. Yes, well, if you read the quotes I gave above, it implies that a Sikh should forgive. E.g., if (as written in Gurbani), I am bad and others are good, there's no reason that I should continue to feel hatred towards them. The lines above encourage Sikhs to kiss the feet of those that hit them (or turn the other cheek in Biblical language). Yeah, it's hard.

Yes, the Sikhs, for the most part, believe that the Gurus were and are God. There are a few members of this forum that don't believe that. ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥ Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is God Himself. ||4||7||9|| Guru Arjun Dev (5th Guru) p864

That's so good to hear.

Some quotes regarding the topic of forgiveness and seeing the good in others. 1. ਕਬੀਰ ਸਭ ਤੇ ਹਮ ਬੁਰੇ ਹਮ ਤਜਿ ਭਲੋ ਸਭੁ ਕੋਇ ॥ Kabeer, I am the worst of all. Everyone else is good. ਜਿਨਿ ਐਸਾ ਕਰਿ ਬੂਝਿਆ ਮੀਤੁ ਹਮਾਰਾ ਸੋਇ ॥੭॥ Whoever understands this is a friend of mine. ||7|| p647 2. ਮੰਦਾ ਜਾਣੈ ਆਪ ਕਉ ਅਵਰੁ ਭਲਾ ਸੰਸਾਰੁ ॥੪॥੭॥ He sees himself as bad, and all the rest of the world as good. ||4||7|| p843 (By Guru Nanak ji) 3. ਹਮ ਨਹੀ ਚੰਗੇ ਬੁਰਾ ਨਹੀ ਕੋਇ ॥ I am not good; no one is bad. ਪ੍ਰਣਵਤਿ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਤਾਰੇ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੧॥੨॥ Prays Nanak, He alone saves us! ||4||1||2|| p728 (By Guru Nanak ji) 4. ਅਸੀ ਖਤੇ ਬਹੁਤੁ ਕਮਾਵਦੇ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਰਾਵਾਰੁ ॥ I make so many mistakes, there is no end or limit to them. ਹਰਿ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਕਰਿ ਕੈ ਬਖਸਿ ਲੈਹੁ ਹਉ ਪਾਪੀ ਵਡ ਗੁਨਹਗਾਰੁ ॥ O Lord, please be merciful and forgive me; I am a sinner, a great offender. ਸਲੋਕ ਵਾਰਾਂ ਤੇ ਵਧੀਕ (ਮਃ ੩) (੨੯):੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੪੧੬ ਪੰ. ੭ Guru Amar Das p1416 5. ਹਰਿ ਜੀਉ ਲੇਖੈ ਵਾਰ ਨ ਆਵਈ ਤੂੰ ਬਖਸਿ ਮਿਲਾਵਣਹਾਰੁ ॥ O Dear Lord, if You made an account of my mistakes, my turn to be forgiven would not even come. Please forgive me, and unite me with Yourself. ਗੁਰ ਤੁਠੈ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਮੇਲਿਆ ਸਭ ਕਿਲਵਿਖ ਕਟਿ ਵਿਕਾਰ ॥ The Guru, in His Pleasure, has united me with the Lord God; He has cut away all my sinful mistakes. ਜਿਨਾ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਜਨ ਨਾਨਕ ਤਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਜੈਕਾਰੁ ॥੨੯॥ Servant Nanak celebrates the victory of those who meditate on the Name of the Lord, ||29|| ਸਲੋਕ ਵਾਰਾਂ ਤੇ ਵਧੀਕ (ਮਃ ੩) (੨੯):੫ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੪੧੬ ਪੰ. ੯ Guru Amar Das (3rd Guru) p1416 6. ਫਰੀਦਾ ਜੋ ਤੈ ਮਾਰਨਿ ਮੁਕੀਆਂ ਤਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹਾ ਨ ਮਾਰੇ ਘੁੰਮਿ ॥ Fareed, do not turn around and strike those who strike you with their fists. ਆਪਨੜੈ ਘਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪੈਰ ਤਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹਾ ਦੇ ਚੁੰਮਿ ॥੭॥ Kiss their feet, and return to your own home. ||7|| ਸਲੋਕ ਫਰੀਦ ਜੀ (ਭ. ਫਰੀਦ) ੭:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੩੭੮ ਪੰ. ੫ Sheikh Farid p1378 7. ਫਰੀਦਾ ਜੇ ਤੂ ਅਕਲਿ ਲਤੀਫੁ ਕਾਲੇ ਲਿਖੁ ਨ ਲੇਖ ॥ Fareed, if you have a keen understanding, then do not write a list of the black deeds of anyone else. ਆਪਨੜੇ ਗਿਰੀਵਾਨ ਮਹਿ ਸਿਰੁ ਨੀਬ਼ਵਾਂ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖੁ ॥੬॥ Look underneath your own collar instead. ||6|| Sheikh Farid p1378

Great topic. Go ahead and create another thread on the topic of "Sikhism, Christianity and war" to discuss that issue.

OK, that confirms my suspicions. Welcome. I'll now proceed to posting about Sikh thought on forgiveness. Very interesting story.

I went through my posts on that thread, and I would like you to state what you find wrong: First, I said "good point" to @proactive saying that the media are quick to attribute attacks to mental illness in the case of Islamic attacks. Do you deny this? Also, has the media to any significant extent claimed the attacker was mentally ill, and that Islamophobia is not to blame? Secondly, I said "Goes without saying. Our people are stupid and soft. There is no respect for non-Muslims as human beings. " Do you deny our people are soft and stupid? Also, just like you wanted respect for Muslims as human beings, why do you object so strenuously to my objecting to lack of respect for non-Muslims as humans? Third, I said "20 people were killed when Muslims attacked a church in the Philippines in January, but I definitely did not hear about it all around the media." Alright, so do you deny that 20 people were killed? Or do you deny that this wasn't played up in the media to the same extent as the NZ massacre? Or is there a scale of outrage over killings? Is 49 totally outrageous, but 20 is no big deal? Also were the Philippines victims not brown people shot in cold blood? How can you possibly object to these 3 points? Finally, do you deny that the this very mosque radicalized 2 jihadis who went off to join ISIS?

I love you too, bro. Seriously, though, I had a look at what I posted, and I fail to understand what you have seem as the depths of thought and behavior. Brother Jigsaw, do you really think that I (or anyone else) was applauding the killing of children (or of adults, for that matter)? The points that others (and I) were making was that the media are treating this differently than Muslim crimes against non-Muslims. When Muslims commit massacres against non-Muslims, the media go looking for a motive or for mental illness: Hmm, whatever could be the motive for this crime? He was yelling Allahu Akbar while he was killing all these people, but of course Islam couldn't have anything to do with his motivation. Or they say: Well no sane person would commit a massacre, therefore he must be insane, therefore Islam isn't to blame. OK, fine. The question is: Why didn't the media do that in this instance? Why didn't the media say: obviously the NZ attacker was insane, therefore Islamophobia couldn't possibly be to blame.

Sure, as much as the next fellow.

Also, were they portrayed as looting while they had power (Sikh Raj) or when they were under the yoke of oppressors (the Mughals)?

Well, I'm glad you acknowledged this. Now that Pal Singh Purewal's basis for emergency imposition of his calendar on the Panth is out of the way, we can have a calm discussion about his calendar and any need the Panth might have for it, or for someone else's.

This is not a "compromise". It's just another way of a person rebelling against God and trying to fool him, which isn't possible. Anyways, the answer to your question is that anybody can do whatever they want, including cutting hair. But if you present yourself as an amritdhari and you violate the rehit, include the very basic rehit of not cutting your hair, you are a fake and a fraud.