BhForce

Separation in the sense of her going to her parents house and just separating so that you can both think about things is not the same thing as divorce. It's hard for me to answer your questions #2 and #3.

I'll disagree with you to an extent. I think it's OK to have "previous Panjabi tribal identities/state" in the background as long as: 1) It's not egregiously anti-Sikh stuff (like killing girls or mundan of boys) 2) You don't denigrate the "previous Panjabi tribal identities/state" of other Sikhs. If those two conditions are fulfilled, then the "previous Panjabi tribal identities/state" just exists as a cute little "interesting" thing about someone.

One of the stupidest things that some Punjabis think is that Hindi is a more "refined" language than Punjabi. No, Hindi is not more refined. It's just that Punjabis themselves are not refined. I do understand that there are variations in the "feel" of languages: say, French vs. German. But there's barely a difference grammatically and syntactically Punjabi vs. Hindi. The difference is just that people often speak in a more refined way in Hindi because they are speaking it in refined contexts: A nice showroom in the city. A government office. A reception desk in a skyscraper. Punjabis could speak Punjabi in a refined manner, too. But they don't.

Well, it's been going on a long time. I mean, they did "follow" into Punjab hundreds of years ago. Obviously we had something they wanted, that's why they came. Islam isn't indigenous to India.

From the context, who do you speculate did it?

Could you give some examples of both? I am interested.

So, basically, Pakistan/India with no Vitamin D? Let me ask you something, since you seem to have some knowledge of the situation. How do the Afghan Sikhs act towards non-Afghan Sikhs? Me personally, I'd avoid Muslims and their shops if I could. But what about Afghan Sikhs? Even if (some of them) are selling drugs, are they fine to interact with otherwise? I.e., you just say Fateh and transact your business? Are they friendly enough? (I know they would probably only fully open up with other Afghan Sikhs in the same business, but still.)

Yeah. Totally. I mean, to the average lurker on this board, it usually just seems like "Oh, there's Dally complaining again about some random 'landlord' who dissed him 10 years ago." And yet this excerpt from Panth Prakash vindicates a lot of what you have been saying: Sikhs have small minds. They would rather fight about the dividing line of their 5 acres of land and the neighbor's 5 acres rather than getting a few square miles elsewhere. It also portrays the fact that the Sikhs are stupid and they don't do what Guru ji wants. And they refuse to accept the blessings Guru ji wants to bestow.

First of all the excerpt from Panth Prakash highlights the desire of Satguru for Sikhs to be strong and manly. Guru ji likes this. Out of happiness at the Sikhs' physical exercises, Guru ji offers to grant them lands. But the Sikhs ignorantly insist on small holdings around their homes in Punjab instead of world that Guru ji is offering.

The translation is good enough. The original has a great flow.

Really? Who's the current head and how has he pivoted?

Bro, you should decide whether you want to wear bana or an aichken. An Achkan is a tailored jacket that goes to or just past the knees. It's considered formalwear for men in India. Bana is the uniform of the Khalsa dal (army). It's a plain navy blue chola (tunic). Because it's a uniform, there's no embroidery. The entire point is that you're a soldier ready to tangle as necessary. There's nothing at all wrong with wearing an achkan. If you want to wear something dressy, wear an embroidered achkan. Mixing and matching is like adding sugar to a dal/sabzi. It's like you want the cachet of a bana ("I'm a hardcore Khalsa warrior") and also want to show off.

Well, I mean, come on, bro, we read of the evil father everyday in Rehras: ਹਰਣਾਖਸੁ ਦੁਸਟੁ ਹਰਿ ਮਾਰਿਆ ਪ੍ਰਹਲਾਦੁ ਤਰਾਇਆ ॥ haranākhas dusat har māriā prahalād tarāiā . The Lord killed wicked Harnakhsh and saved Prehlad. Harnakash was a demonic father and Prehlad, his son, was a devout worshipper. But the fact that Gurbani has both this verse and also those regarding parental respect: ਕਾਹੇ ਪੂਤ ਝਗਰਤ ਹਉ ਸੰਗਿ ਬਾਪ ॥ kāhē pūt jhagarat hau sang bāp . Why, O son, quarrel thou with thy father? ਜਿਨ ਕੇ ਜਣੇ ਬਡੀਰੇ ਤੁਮ ਹਉ ਤਿਨ ਸਿਉ ਝਗਰਤ ਪਾਪ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ jin kē janē badīrē tum hau tin siu jhagarat pāp .1. rahāu . It is a sin to quarrel with him who begot thee and brought thee up. p1200 means to me that we're encouraged to respect parents as a default, but don't do what they say if they speak against worshipping God. I think what they Bhai Gurdas ji Vaar is saying is that son and bride are supposed to follow parents (in-laws) as a default. I know there are "bad" in-laws, but if it's just a case of two parties both wanting the "upper hand", then the bride is in the wrong. She's supposed to live with and follow the in-laws (unless they are actually demonic). It would be highly rare for in-laws to be just picking fights for the sheer pleasure of it. Anyways, that's what the texts say. I know there are problematic situations, but the West has totally destroyed itself making the exception the rule.

Bhai Gurdas ji says this regarding wives picking fights with father and mothers in-law, but the same kind of thing could apply to brothers-in-law. ਨੁੰਹੁ ਨਿਤ ਮੰਤ ਕੁਮੰਤ ਦੇਇ ਮਾਂ ਪਿਓ ਛਡਿ ਵਡੇ ਹਤਿਆਰੇ। The bride then started continuously advising the husband to desert his parents instigating that they had been tyrants. ਵਖ ਹੋਵੈ ਪੁਤੁ ਰੰਨਿ ਲੈ ਮਾਂ ਪਿਉ ਦੇ ਉਪਕਾਰੁ ਵਿਸਾਰੇ। Forgetting the benefactions of parents, the son alongwith his wife got separated from them. Vaar 37, Pauri 12

Guru ji says this, but we refuse to listen. Instead, we listen to Western feminists who have destroyed their own societies: ਜੋਰਾ ਦਾ ਆਖਿਆ ਪੁਰਖ ਕਮਾਵਦੇ ਸੇ ਅਪਵਿਤ ਅਮੇਧ ਖਲਾ ॥The men, who act as women tell them, are impure filthy and foolish. ਕਾਮਿ ਵਿਆਪੇ ਕੁਸੁਧ ਨਰ ਸੇ ਜੋਰਾ ਪੁਛਿ ਚਲਾ ॥ The impure men are engrossed in lust. They consult women and walk accordingly. p304 It says that in the Rehitnamas: Don't tell the ਅੰਦਰਲਾ ਭੇਦ (internal secret) to ਇਸਤਰੀ (woman). But some of our Sikhs cope with that by saying that that just refers to female spies that were sent to get information from Sikh warriors. It saying plainly to keep some things secret from women and yet we still do not want to obey.

He seems fairly young to have died of natural causes. What was the cause of death?

No, bro! The 2nd Bhai Gurdas was not a Hindu spy for the simple reason that he was a Sikh! He did not go around adding his vaar to all of the handwritten copies of Bhai Gurdas ji's 40 vaars. How would he even do that? Most of the handwritten copies wouldn't have had additional blank pages for him to write the 41st vaar. What happened is that other Sikhs, later on, appended the 41st vaar because it's written in the style of the 40 vaars, it provides additional information about the post Khanda-Amrit Khalsa, and Bhai Gurdas II was sanctioned by Guru Gobind Singh ji. Bhai Gurdas II was actually Bhai Gurdas Singh, who was a poet at the court of Guru Gobind Singh ji. That's why Sikhs respect him. Read "ਬਵੰਜਾ ਰਤਨ" by Sikh scholar Piara Singh Padam for information about the poets of Guru ji's court.

You're right. But also wrong. You're not at the PhD level of Sikhi. You're not at the level of Bhai Gurdas ji or Baba Buddha ji. You're at the kindergarten level. At this level, Sikhs are given a simple Rehit: Wake up early, do simran, do Nitnem, and avoid patit actions. And keep reciting and listening to Gurbani. The rest of the understanding will be granted by God.

I'm quite sorry you were abused, but it seems that it has resulted in your hatred of men: If women can support themselves independent of men, then fine, do that. Don't get married. In fact, why even get married? Men can also support themselves independent of women. If a man had a bad situation with a woman, it wouldn't be a good idea for him to start hating all women.

It's hilarious how some Sikhs want to portray Guru Nanak ji as some kind of feminist in order to please the gore. How do they deal with this tuk by Guru Nanak ji? ਕਲੀ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਨਾਨਕਾ ਜਿੰਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਅਉਤਾਰੁ ॥ kalī andar nānakā jinnānh dā autār . In the Dark age, O Nanak, the goblins are born. ਪੁਤੁ ਜਿਨੂਰਾ ਧੀਅ ਜਿੰਨੂਰੀ ਜੋਰੂ ਜਿੰਨਾ ਦਾ ਸਿਕਦਾਰੁ ॥੧॥ put jinūrā dhī jinnūrī jōrū jinnā dā sikadār .1. Son is the demon, daughter is the she demon and wife is the chief of those demons. p556 Guru ji is basically saying what you did: That in Kaljug, women will become the "Sardars". And they'll lead an army of little imps.

She wasn't married, bro. If you want to get married, you have to agree as a woman to let the man lead. As a man, you have to agree to always protect and sustain the woman. That's a recipe for constant fighting. Obviously you should consult on every issue. But what happens when you can't agree? Fight until the cows come home? Or divorce? The aspect of daily Rehit (wake up, simran, Nitnem, etc) is the same for all Sikhs. It's the same for the children, too. It's the same for your Sikh neighbors and every other Sikh as well. That doesn't mean you're married to them. Marriage is a different relationship. Just like both a shopkeeper and his employee could be Sikhs, but just because they are both equal as Sikhs doesn't make them equal in the work relationship.

Do you have a link?

I'm sorry but Gurbani does not merely recommend relying on mantra (even if it's the Gurmantra). When Babur invaded India, religious figures attempted to use mantras to stop the invasion and failed: ਕੋਟੀ ਹੂ ਪੀਰ ਵਰਜਿ ਰਹਾਏ ਜਾ ਮੀਰੁ ਸੁਣਿਆ ਧਾਇਆ ॥ When they heard of invasion of emperor Babar, then millions of religious leaders failed to halt him. ਥਾਨ ਮੁਕਾਮ ਜਲੇ ਬਿਜ ਮੰਦਰ ਮੁਛਿ ਮੁਛਿ ਕੁਇਰ ਰੁਲਾਇਆ ॥ He burned houses, resting places and strong palaces and the princes, cut into pieces, he causes to roll in dust. ਕੋਈ ਮੁਗਲੁ ਨ ਹੋਆ ਅੰਧਾ ਕਿਨੈ ਨ ਪਰਚਾ ਲਾਇਆ ॥੪॥ No Mughal became blind and no one wrought any miracle. p417 Read the whole shabad for Guru Nanak Dev ji's description of the invasion. I fully realize and accept that God can do anything whenever he wants in an instant: ਕੀੜਾ ਥਾਪਿ ਦੇਇ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹੀ ਲਸਕਰ ਕਰੇ ਸੁਆਹ ॥ A worm, He appoints to kingship and He reduces an army to ashes. p144 But that doesn't mean we should depend on in the normal case. In the normal case, we have to make worldly provisions. Sukhmani Sahib says God can keep someone alive without breath and I fully accept this: ਪ੍ਰਭ ਭਾਵੈ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਾਸ ਤੇ ਰਾਖੈ ॥ prabh bhāvai bin sās tē rākhai . If it pleases the Lord He preserves the body without breath But that does not mean we're supposed to hold our breath. God can sustain someone without food. So why do we have langar?

The rehit maryada published by the SGPC prohibits kutha. If he's a generic Sikh who has parents who don't care about Rehit, they likely buy halal meat from time to time because often that's what's available in the store. This is prohibited by all Sikh sects.

As long as you are dependent on them, you'll have to do what they say. They might want to prevent you from taking Amrit, but there's no possible objection they could make to you simply reading Gurbani. Wake up early and read Gurbani. Memorize Nitnem. And Rehras and Kirtan Sohila. Read all of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Read Sikh history. Read Bhai Gurdas ji's Vaars. Read Panth Prakash and then Suraj Prakash or listen to katha of them. Listen to katha, especially by old-time preachers like Sant Gurbachan Singh Bhindran. And Maskeen ji. There is plenty you can do before taking Amrit. Also, get strong by exercising.