BhForce

Well, I think it is simply that 1) the 41st vaar is written on the lines of the 40 vaars. 2) the 41st vaar also provides spiritual encouragement to Sikhs, like the previous 40 3) the 41st vaar, especially the 1st pauri (and some other ones like Vaaho Vaaho Gobind Singh) are extremely popular with the Sikh Sangat, and they like having a written reference for this vaar.

Not exactly. The SGPC's SRM says that kirtan should only be done of Gurbani and Bhai Gurdas ji and Bhai Nand Lal ji. According to the traditional way of thinking (accepted by me), "Gurbani" includes the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji. That's not supposed to be sung, according to the above. Though katha can be done of it, of course. He was a poet of the court of Guru Gobind Singh ji. He is also known as Bhai Gurdas II. I believe more information about him can be found in the book by Piara Singh Padam "Guru Gobind Singh ji de Darbari Rukun" (Jewels of the court of Guru Gobind Singh ji). He provides important information about things like the Fateh greeting. He depicts the Khalsa as a 3rd path, separate from the Hindus and Muslims. He is despised by missionaries because he encourages people to take Khande ka Pahul. In that pauri, he references Kalika (a reference to God in the form of a warrior goddess).

What does this string of characters mean?

Wow, asking if someone has had a girlfriend in order to denigrate him? Of course, in your mind, a person who doesn't drink, do drugs, sleep around, etc., is just a loser. I guess this entire Panth was just founded by a bunch of losers (10 of them, in fact).

Yeah, it would be one thing for someone to drink occasionally (not that I'm saying that's OK). But our people just take it to a ridiculous level.

OK, just wondering, why don't you date? For religious reasons? (I agree that Sikhs are not supposed to date.)

Yeah. The problem is that so many of our girls don't even want to talk to a keshadhari. Have any idea why that might be? Not the personality. There have been posters on this board who have had extreme difficultly getting girls to even talk to them, but they have had great interest from non-Sikh girls. Is that because we (especially females) have an ingrained self-hatred?

Good man, you avoided the temptation of a Musalmannani, thus fulfilling Guru Gobind Singh ji's commands. She's a serpentess. Good you stayed away.

You know, I really wish you would check your facts before posting stuff. I wish you would have posted the source of your claims. You did post a bunch of links, but they were about El Salvador. Plenty of weird stuff happens in poor countries (including India), it doesn't necessarily have bearing on Ohio, or the UK. Anyways, google for "ohio abortion law", and of the top results, there's a CNN article. The article claims that women and doctors who kill unborn children could face the death penalty, but I believe that that is a wildly unsubstantiated claim because nowhere in the text of the bill does it say that. When you say "there is talk of death sentence", what is that supposed to even mean? It's either in the bill or not. Mere talk of something doesn't amount to anything. The NY Times article notes that the fetal heartbeat bill makes such an abortion a 5th-class felony punishable by up to 1 year in prison, far short of the death penalty. So, what are you even talking about?

True. But do you think all girls have personality and presence? Do you think, maybe, that guys are expected to have personality and presence, while for girls it's sufficient to just exist? Or, maybe to basically just be thin with a half-way nice looking face? And how about girls with no personality or presence? Do they (in your experience) expect guys to have personality/presence while having none of their own? So it's OK for them to be a wallflower while the guy has to be Tom Cruise?

Alright, now since you've answered my questions, and basically admitted that there's no reason (that you can state) that a person should do Gurbani, let me give you my answer to your question: I think the answer is yes, with a caveat. The caveat is that merely because you think some kesadhari is arrogant does not mean that he is. That may just be your fleeting impression of him without additional full knowledge. But, to answer your question, I'll assume "arrogant Turbaned Sikh guy" is some kesadhari with no clue of Sikhism, Gurbani, or the Sikh virtues. The reason (which you could not articulate) to follow the Guru is not because he encourages learning generally--that's something that your high school guidance counselor does, too! The reason is that He is the be-all and end-all. He is the Creator, He is Parbraham, He controls the Kam-Dhen (font of material blessings). He controls access to the Dasam Duar and to Sach Khand. He controls Karma. The reason for "doing Gurbani everyday" is that Gurbani is a true reflection of the Satguru's wisdom. It is the Satguru. "Doing Gurbani" means becoming like Satguru. The virtues that you listed are encouraged by the Guru. Assuming that you inculcate those virtues, and also do Gurbani, you would seem to be the type of person to do what the Guru says. And one of the things He says is not to dishonor the God-given form of your body. In due time, a mona who loves the Guru, recites Gurbani with passion, and loves doing what the Guru says will stop dishonoring his body. The egotistical kesadhari, may, on the other hand, never come to love God. (Then again, he may.) So, for the time being, I would say that the believing mona is a better Sikh than a keshadhari who has no love for the Guru. (None of this is to say that Sikhs don't need to keep their hair, or that they don't need to love the Guru.)

Don't answer if you don't want to, but since this is an anonymous forum: Are you kesadhari? Amritdhari? I'm just asking to get another side of the endless crying that kesadharis can't get a girl to marry them.

I realize that. I'm not proposing whacking such Sikh girls over the head with a stick. I'm proposing acknowledging there's a problem (large numbers of Sikh girls not wanting or caring to marry Sikhs). Once that's acknowledged (something it seems you were hesitant to do), we can move on to solutions. Once the size of the problem is ascertained, then we can move to educated parents and young people about (as you say) "the greatness of Sikhism".

No, man, it's not possible to merge into God simply by thinking it so. This not Star Trek. First of all, you attain spiritual status through the Word (Shabad). Just do a search in Gurbani for ਸਬਦਿ (with the sihari on the end). That means "by the Word". You'll get plenty of lines to help you out. Secondly, merging into God depends on kirpa (grace). That's something that Satguru grants. It's not something that you can will into existence on your own. That's like saying you can think yourself into a million-dollar bank account.

It's not a matter of using Singh or Kaur. Plenty of people are humble and don't flaunt their clan names (got), but that doesn't mean they've forgotten who they are, or that their family or relatives don't know. You're not seriously saying we should just use Singh or Kaur or forget what clans we belong to, are you?

I hate it when people say this. It's basically a cop-out and excuse for doing whatever you want to do, and you just say, it was karma for the other individual. Steal something from someone? It was just karma. Cuss someone out? It was just karma for him. Cheat on your husband/wife? It was just karma. Saying "it was just karma" basically means the death of moral thought, because you're no longer responsible for moral action, you just do whatever strikes your mind, and say "it was karma".

Good thought. There are two (maybe 3) lines of thought on mental illness: 1) It can be cured with medicine. If so, get him (your husband) the medical help he needs. 2) It can be cured with good life experiences. If so, get your husband to exercise and do happy stuff. Go to the park, or the countryside. 3) It can be cured (or at least remedied) with prayer and devotion. If so, read Gurbani and do or listen to kirtan with him.

OK, what you're saying is Gurbani was written in a language understandable by common people of a certain time and place, not that it would always be so.

Well, it's one thing for you to say that, it's another for him, and I got the answer from him, and that is that (as far as he can state), there's no special reason to follow the Guru. As far what you wrote: I agree with your second sentence (that Gurbani was brought from Sachkhand). But regarding the message being written in the language of the common people: The vast majority of the world's people don't speak Punjabi, read Gurmukhi, and even if they did, that's not the same thing as being able to understand the language of Gurbani. So does that then negate your first sentence?

Alright, bro, you just answered your own question. I mean, if the Guru doesn't have any special wisdom (that you know of), and you can't state why anyone should even follow the Guru (i.e., be a Sikh), what point is there in asking who's a better Sikh? I mean, there's no point (as far as you can state) to being a Sikh in the first place, so why worry about who's a better Sikh?

Fine, we agree there. Well, it's one thing for someone to encourage learning generally. He'd be like a life coach or something. So have you heard of the book "1000 Books to Read Before You Die." It's telling you to read other authors. Authors who have wisdom. But that book doesn't have any wisdom of its own. So, I'm asking you: Does the Guru have any wisdom of his own? If so what? And why should we (or anybody) follow the Guru? I mean, what's special about the Guru? (Not just that you like him personally, though if that's your own answer, then say that.)

Look, bro, you stated elsewhere you've got questions, and that's fine. I'm engaging with you intellectually and helping to clarify what your thinking is (and maybe I'll learn something, too, in the process). Hopefully, you won't get frustrated, and just continue the conversation. Appreciate your answers so far. OK, the Guru encourages learning. But, wait, it's not just that, right? I mean, are you saying that the Guru just encourages learning generally? (I'm not saying that Sikhs shouldn't learn generally, the Gurus certainly encouraged that.) But I'm wondering whether you think the Guru has anything to teach Himself. If so, why do you think that has any worth compared to, again, Raam, Krishna, Jesus, and Socrates?

Bro, why do you think I not only used the word "specifically", but I also italicized it? It's not specifically related to Sikhism. That is to say that Sikhism does encourage those things, but those things are not only encouraged by just Sikhism. There are plenty of humans that do those things (except for Bani) who aren't Sikhs. So again, I ask you: Why be a Sikh? Why be a follower of the Guru? What does the Guru know that you or any Tom, <banned word filter activated>, or Harry doesn't? And does the Guru know any more than Raam, Krishna, Jesus, Socrates, etc?

Did they do that before the Muslims invaded? You must also know that a lot of Sikhs of a certain ethnicity have a liking for halal meat. Wonder where they got that from? Spending time in Muslim dominated areas (I'm not talking about Birmingham).

Whats special to me.... may or may not be special to someone else.... I already said it is special for me because it helped me become a better/Logical person .... Thats it..  Well, alright, then. Basically, you're saying there's no reason (that you could come up with) that a person should "do bani" everyday. So, from your original question: "If a Monna is a very good guy, do bani everyday, do charity, help the poor, does hardwork to earn, share his things/earnings with others believe in one god, believes that there is nothing else and everything is GOD.... Can we call him a better sikh than an arrogant Turbaned Sikh guy ? " All the stuff on there is basically not anything specifically relating to Sikhs (a good guy, charity, hard work), except for "doing bani". And now you've just clarified there's no reason to "do bani". So, really, there's no reason, as far as I can see that you can state, for being a Sikh in the first place. So why even ask the question? I mean, if there's no reason for being a Sikh, why even ask "who's the better Sikh"? You might as well ask "Who's the better Jedi?"