BhForce

Atrocious article. Fails to give any detail whatsoever. While it is true that that "forgotten" Sikhs like Sikligars and Vanjaras aren't being counted as Sikh, that doesn't mean that the Punjabi Sikh population is actually larger than it is. The census does accurately reflect declining total fertility rate among Punjabi Sikhs.

No, they are not. Girls have to wear a pajami under the chola. That's fine, bro. They can do what they want. But they can't claim to be Nihungs. If you want to wear a kurta-pajama, go for it. You cannot be a Nihang and then also choose to hide your kachera. The chola is open on both sides plus the front. The kachera is meant to show. Among other things, it verifies you're wearing a proper kachera, not wearing briefs on the sly. re: swearing, I agree that we shouldn't swear and I agree he may have gotten a bit carried away, but I'd rather have that than have males afraid that someone will see their mini-kacheras.

Yet another wannabe Nihung questioning Nihang maryada? Pathetic. First of all, read this rant from a true and proper Singh on what a man's kachera is supposed to look like. Basically, it has a wide ghera (circumference), so there are folds of cloth that prevent anybody from looking at your p#nis. Also, the man's kachera is full-length (down to your knees). It's not like a pair of form-fitting Hanes underwear. If you're wearing a proper kachera, so what if your chola flies up? You're not a girl, what does it matter? There's absolutely nothing wrong with a man being seen in his kachera. Guru Amardas ji bathed (wearing kachera) in plain sight of everyone, including his daughter. And this continues to this day (men bathe openly in front of the entire public at sarovars). So man up and don't be a sissy.

Well, do you mean that after Guru Gobind Singh ji, Sikhs started madly copying the Islamic designs? You should surely know that the Gurus themselves supervised the building of Gurdwaras, including Kartarpur Sahib, Taran Taaran, and Darbar Sahib. You've been to Amritsar, right? So is what you are really saying "Why did the Gurus copy the Muslims"? Finally, what does it really matter? I mean, are we supposed to purposely not do stuff just because "the Muslims do it"? So, if the Muslims use chairs, we can't use chairs. If the Muslims use paper and pen, we can't. If the Muslims ride horses, we can't. If the Muslims keep swords, we can't? BTW, the main purpose of the main dome is so that no one will walk over the place where Guru Sahib is prakashed.

Yeah, the article mentioned peoples' "Thai names". Thanks for elucidating on that. Strangely, the Sikhs of Thailand have made no effort to somewhat match up Sikh/Thai names phonetically. Like Dev/Dave, Hari/Harry, Pal/Paul. I would say, if they're having such a hard time of it, what's the point of living in Thailand? Just go back to India. I doubt Bangkok is better than Delhi (is it?).

My comments are interspersed. "You" might refer either to you, or to the jihadi. This is a good effort by you. I have some quibbles and suggestions, below. A general question I have for you is: Are your responses meant to be your own personal take on things? Or a "consensus" view of the Sikhs? Because if it's the latter, you might have to include some loosely worded text that you might not strictly believe in. (Or couch it in the form of "many/most Sikhs believe X. Others believe Y") Well, in your religion, if you don't agree with the philosophy of a mosque, you just blow it up. All we have are strictly worded letters (Hukumnammas), a much weaker enforcement system. I agree that in one sense the Gurus weren't Khatri (because the word or shabad didn't have a caste). But, at the same time, God chose the Khatri line to put Satguru in. In the end, that's God's choice. Moreover, can you (the jihadi) state that why Mohammed was born into the highly-esteemed Quraishi tribe? Two can play at this game. If Allah wanted to show the equality of man, and that the meek and poor can become big, then why didn't he make some limbless, deaf, dumb, blind black orphan from Africa the Prophet? Explain with citations from multiple newspapers published from Heaven. (sarc) Additionally, there might be something to explore in the fact that, traditionally, avatars/religious leaders in India were from the Khatris, like Ram ji and Krishan ji. Perhaps the point was to underline the martial identity (Chatri ko poot ho, bahman ko nahi -- Pa: 10). While I suppose I might agree that there might not have been an explicit discussion of caste in regards to the marriage of the Gurus, I think it was well understood that when a match was needed for the Gurus, that meant a Khatri girl. The same way that vegetarian Sikhs will have a hard time totally excising meat from Sikh history, I think that we simply have to accept that Guru Sahiban married within the Khatri fold. I don't think there's anything really wrong with that either, as long as you're accepting of all people as people in a loving manner, which the Gurus manifestly did. I.e., you can marry whoever you want (such as a Khatri), you just can't discriminate against them in the Gurdwara or in other fields of life. There's a guy on this forum that likes to argue that the Mughals wrote into Sikh history that the Gurus married Khatris, but come on, that's a wacko conspiracy theory with no proof whatsoever, and we open ourselves up to ridicule if we go that route. Good answers, esp. about the actual successors having done good stuff in history. What did the other claimants (Dattu, Dassu, Pirthi Chand, Dhir mal, etc.) do? Also, did Mohammed not give power and influence to friends and relatives? Well, among other reasons, we don't go around "converting" people with the sword. In fact even if you want to become a Sikh, there's no guarantee the Panj Piyare will grant you initiation with Amrit. People have free will. This isn't a "heaven" with robots. If Islam is supreme why would people leave it? Oh, what's that you say? People don't leave it? I wonder if that might have anything to do with the fact that the punishment for leaving Islam is death. That's not merely theoretical, it's written into the law of Muslim countries. That's why you have the conceit of people leaving Sikhism while they don't dare to leave Islam (not publicly, anyway). What's the point of the question? How is it that the truth of Sikhism is supposed to be shown by having copycats, and that too only in the West? Why aren't there any Prophets with a similar message to Islam in the West? (Also a stupid question.) In any case, most Sikhs believe that Sikhism is basically the ancient dharam of all, with a few superficial differences in current Sikh practice. Certainly that's true for ancient Indian dharam. What's the point of asking "in the West"? None of the Abrahamic religions are from the West, so why would ask that of Sikhism? If you like something, you want to hear more of it. If you don't, you don't. Should be simple, why can't you understand that? Gurbani is not a bunch of stories or essays. It's poetry meant to be sung. But you wouldn't understand that, because your religion bans music. How could you possibly understand the beauty of celestial music (Ilahi bani)? Your answers are good, as well. Some Sikhs have taken the tack of denying our Gurus had multiple wives, to deal with the Christians. I think this is a mistake, because the facts of history are too well-established, so we're just setting ourselves up for failure. I do agree that the notion of Guru Har Rai ji's 7 wives is debatable (not firmly coming down on one side or the other). If you want to discard that, that's fine. However, the fact of Guru Hargobind ji's 3 wives and Guru Gobind Singh ji's 3 wives can simply not be reasonably questioned. It can be questioned, but not reasonably questioned, because you have to go out on a limb, and discard so much, and then you open yourself up to attack on the basis of all of Sikh history being totally unreliable. So I would advise against that. The fact is, just like (as you mentioned) the vast majority of Sikhs have no problem with the Dasam Granth, so too the vast majority of Sikhs have no problem with the latter Gurus having multiple wives. In fact, they like it, because they think it makes them seem kingly (I agree with them). The post that you mentioned has the same old statement that the idea of Guru Gobind Singh ji's multiple wives was created by writers unfamiliar with Punjabi culture. Which is ridiculous, because Kavi Santokh Singh was unfamiliar with Punjabi culture? See my detailed respons(es) here. Yeah, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I think an inclusive answer would be to state that some Sikhs don't eat meat at all, for those who chose to, there are certain rules for that. As for a "clear guideline" some Sikhs (esp. meat-eaters) think that the reason for not being such a guideline is that the Gurus didn't necessarily ban meat per se, but left that up to people's discretions. I might not even totally agree with that, but when you're dealing with an outsider, you'd probably want to provide an answer on the behalf of all Sikhs. Irony detector fail. As a jihadi from the land of fatwas and beheadings and roving morality police, you're asking why Sikhs are told not to ask questions? Seriously? Agreed. Also, most of this stuff is just sniping around the edges. The jihadis' approach to daawa is to paint a ridiculous picture of how Sikhism is supposed to be if it were the "True Religion". That is, if Sikhism were the "True Religion", then nobody would ever leave it, all Sikhs would have all of Guru Granth Sahib memorized, all Sikhs could do Raag kirtan in all 31 raags plus sub-raags--in puratan stringed instruments, all Sikhs would be filthy rich, all non-Sikhs (if any existed) would be beggars, the Sikhs would have nuclear weapons, quantum computing, and faster-than-light trips to Mars, and non-Sikhs would be living in the rainforest. Nothing more than strawmen. The real question is: Are humans better off as Sikhs or Muslims? Overwhelmingly the former.

OK, well, that would be find, I guess, but that's not what the article said. The article specifically said the young Sikhs of Thailand need someone to talk to them in English. Which is weird that you'd have the high-level English skills to be able to understand someone talking about theology in English, but no more Punjabi skills than to say "more Daal" in langar. Not all countries in SE Asia are like this. In some of those countries, the Sikhs have preserved Punjabi extremely well, so they don't need any translations. I have no idea what's wrong the Sikhs in Thailand. What is totally strange is the British never even ruled Thailand! Nor any other European power. Another words, it's not even a country with an English background like India with huge numbers of kale Angrez (brown Englishmen). That is to say, such English as is learned in Thailand is totally people just learning it off of books. So if people learn English that way, then why not Punjabi? Answer: Gadari.

The article says that preachers from the UK are in high demand in Thailand and SE Asia to be able to speak in English to English-speaking youngsters from those countries. What is strange is those countries are not English-speaking countries! The language of Thailand is Thai. If you can learn a language of a country 9000 miles away (England), then why can't you learn the language of a country 2000 miles away (india)? Just amazing about the gadari of our people. Against all odds, we'll learn English in a non-English country, but not Punjabi in a non-Punjabi country.

Hair coming out while combing is not considered a kurehit. It is advised, however, that you comb gently, and possibly put some oil on before combing. BTW, you should not use comb on a tangled mess of hair. First, comb your fingers through your hair to reduce the tangle. Then use a thick comb (opposite of a fine comb). These are commonly available in Amritsar or other places where they sell kakkars. Then only use the fine comb. If your hair is tangled, don't force it with a comb. Instead, find the point of entanglement with your fingers, and remove the entanglement. Then comb.

Fair enough it was a low point for me and I should hold myself to a higher standard ? OK, bro, props for apologizing. Go ahead and still refute the post if you disagree with him.

Everybody has their own path: ਕਰਮੀ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣੀ ਕੇ ਨੇੜੈ ਕੇ ਦੂਰਿ ॥ Karamee Aapo Aapanee Kae Naerrai Kae Dhoor || According to their own actions, some are drawn closer, and some are driven farther away. ਜਪੁ (ਮਃ ੧) (੩੮) ਸ. ੧:੪ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮ ਪੰ. ੧੨ Salok Guru Nanak Dev You're right. People who say "I'm waiting till I'm ready" usually mean they'll never be ready. You need to do nothing, and just let her live her own life, and you live yours.

Thanks for posting this. Liked. Viewed in the proper perspective, there's absolutely conflict between Guru Granth Sahib and the Dasam Granth Sahib.

It is generally advised by wise people not to have a long engagement, if at all possible. If you do, you need to proceed wisely. During this time, neither are you strangers who have nothing to do with each other, and neither are you a married couple, who if you have a disagreement could have it out with an argument. You're neither, and that becomes dangerous.

Sorry, but what's there to take a hukumnama about? He already decided to get engaged, presumably with an ardaas. Now he's going to take a hukumnama to ask whether he should break it? You don't take hukumnamas in the manner of rolling dice to determine whether you should carry out your previously agreed-to obligations. Staying true to your word is the Guru's matt.

Oh, statuses? I initially thought they were personal messages directed at you. Statuses, as you know, are sent to all your contacts. Well, OK, then don't miss calling her, then. What it shows is that she misses you and wants to hear from you. If she were really just shrewd and were just marrying you for your Mumbai money, she would just bite her tongue so as to not jeopardize the marriage to Mr. Money Bags (you). As for the rest of the statuses, they do not seem to be directed at you, so why get upset? People post those kinds of Punjabi or Urdu "wise sayings" on social media all the time. 99% of the time it's something they are copy-pasting, not something they thought of on their own.

It is traditionally believed in the Sikh panth that Guru Nanak Dev ji met Bhagat Kabir ji and that Bhagat ji took dikhia from Guru Sahib. The reason that some historians deny that is that they have a problem with portraying Guru Nanak ji as the greatest: ਸਭ ਤੇ ਵਡਾ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਜਿਨਿ ਕਲ ਰਾਖੀ ਮੇਰੀ ॥੪॥੧੦॥੫੭॥ Sabh Thae Vaddaa Sathigur Naanak Jin Kal Raakhee Maeree ||4||10||57|| Satguru Nanak is the greatest of all; He saved my honor in this Dark Age of Kali Yuga. ||4||10||57|| ਸੂਹੀ (ਮਃ ੫) (੫੭) ੪:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੭੫੦ ਪੰ. ੪ Raag Suhi Guru Arjan Dev These "historians" want to portray Guru Nanak ji not as the highest, but rather as just another wandering sadhu of many.

If you don't like office/professional jobs, working with your hands (farming or carpentry) is just fine. Get some vocational training and do that.

U Waterloo is in Canada. Then you went to the US? You mean a "for-profit" university? Didn't Obama ban those? What exactly are you talking about? Also, it's going to be hard to help you if you don't tell us which college you're going to. Extremely bad idea to sell your land. A quick Google search reveals you could have done your Comp Sci degree from IGNOU for 30,000 Rs. ($447). That's for the whole 3 years. Your greed led you to sell your precious inheritance, granted to you by your forefathers, and now you're about to drop out with nothing to show for it? Man up and finish the course, or if you've run out of money, return to home, and finish a Comp Sci degree from IGNOU. Forget the fluffy projects like a device for the blind. It's great if you can build it, but if you can't, shelve it for now, and maybe later God will give you a chance to build it. After getting a degree, get a job, any job in the computing field. Be patient, and you'll get promotions.

OK, fine, then refute his post instead of just calling him a name.

It's amazing that you would be questioning the Dasam Granth Sahib while having a picture of a hardcore, puratan Nihung Singh as your avatar. If you had made a flat out statement disrespecting the Dasam Granth Sahib, you would have gotten an angry response. But since you asked humbly, as above, you'll get level-headed responses from me and others. You're just asking a question, I get it. The questions of the authenticity of the Dasam Granth Sahib, and how/if it should be parkashed in Gurdwaras are separate. Among other things, the Dasam Granth Sahib isn't parkashed on the same level of Palki at Hazur Sahib, it is lower. But let's just leave that aside, and focus on the main point, which is whether we should use teachings from it in life. The answer is yes, absolutely yes. Now, if we're 100% certain that the Dasam Granth Sahib was written, by say Ahmed Shah Abdali or by Lord Dalhousie, then, fine, we shouldn't use it. But since it's our Guru's, why would we not use it? Did Guru Sahib just write it for the sake of it? As a pure waste of time? OK, so your question partially answers itself. Without the Dasam Granth Sahib, we don't have Ardas as we know it. Also 3 of the banis for preparing Khande bate da Amrit are from Dasam Granth Sahib, so get rid of that, you get rid of Amrit, which gets rid of the Khalsa Panth. No 1984s needed, just destroyed the Sikhs with one clean stroke. And what decision is that, bro? The decision to make the Granth Sahib into Guru Granth Sahib? Where did you read that Guru Gobind Singh ji made that decision? Oh, in Sikh history, you say? Well, OK, the same Sikh history and sources that say Guru Gobind Singh ji gave Guruship to Guru Granth Sahib also state that Guru ji composed their own granth (Dasam Granth). If you accept one, you accept the other. I really hope you don't fall into the trap of the radical missionaries who say that they won't accept anything outside of Guru Granth Sahib. If so, then how do they even accept Guru Granth Sahib's Guruship? The entire sakhi of the Guruship is outside Guru Granth Sahib. The long game, the long con, which only a few Singhs understand, is that people are trying to get us to deny anything outside of Guru Granth Sahib (i.e., Dasam Granth). Once we do that, the logic will inescapably take us to ultimately deny Guru Granth Sahib (again, because the proof of Guru ji's authenticity is outside of Guru Granth Sahib). Yeah, Guru Gobind Singh ji could have, but so? Guru Granth Sahib is already 1430 pages long. Why do you think Guru Sahib should have been obligated to create a huge 3000 page granth? That's Guru Sahib's decision, not ours. Secondly, I don't know if you've ever read Guru Granth Sahib or Dasam Granth Sahib, but the two are like very different from each other. How would it make sense to "add" one to the other? They are separate works, with separate styles. Do you think the artist Michelangelo should have "added" the sculpture Crucifix to the fresco The Last Judgement? Oh, what's that you say? The one is a sculpture, and the other a fresco, different styles, makes no sense to combine them? Exactly. Guru Granth Sahib is a font of spirituality. The Dasam Granth Sahib is a source of temporality. (miri). It also describes the old avatars to show they were lower than God, but always in a martial tone. Why would Guru Sahib ever want to mix the two into one Granth? Sikh sources state that Sikhs asked Guru Sahib to "add" their bani to the Granth Sahib, but Guru ji said, No, that is the Guru, this (Dasam bani) is my leela (play). You are being ignorant, bro. Why in the world would you say that if something is not in Guru Granth Sahib, we shouldn't seek knowledge from it? Is your calculus textbook contained within Guru Granth Sahib? Do you seek knowledge from it? Let's not be like the Muslims, who when confronted with the world-famous library of Alexandria, said that if something is outside the Koran, it's superfluous, so just burn it all down. Not to mention other sources of Sikhi like Bhai Gurdas ji's Vaars and Kabitt's and Bhai Nand Lal ji's bani. Are you also against seeking knowledge from them? If so, rabb mehar kare. If not, it would be strange that you're OK with accepting a Sikh's bani, but not the Gurus! Finally, at the time (during 99% of Guru's history) when Guru Granth Sahib did not have Guruship, did Sikhs "seek knowledge" from the Granth Sahib? Yes, because it contained knowledge, even though it didn't have Guruship. Same for Dasam Granth Sahib now. The point of saying Guru Granth Sahib is our Guru is to say that we have to follow and accpet everything Guru Granth Sahib ji says, not that we can have knowledge from only Guru Granth Sahib.

OK, you could use circumference as a word in English to mean ghera. As I explained, for a man, it would normally be 2X your waist. Yes, absolutely. Sikhs have always worn this style of kachera from the time of the 10th Guru. It's not "pretty huge". As explained at the linked post, the extra width bunches up, and protects your modesty when not wearing pants, etc. Yes, you can and people do wear it under pants. Also as explained in the linked post, for all you males out there, man up and wear a man's kachera. Of course this doesn't apply to the OP, because she has stated she's a woman.

If the maryada propagated by Akal Takhat is that only Sikhs can have an Anand Karaj, and if Sonam Kapoor + fiance are willing to sign a piece of paper that says they believe (as in the definition of a Sikh) in Akal Purakh, 10 Gurus, their Bani, Guru Granth Sahib, and the Amrit of the 10th Guru, I would have no objection to their getting an Anand Karaj. If they're not willing to do that, then they can get married someplace else (mandir, court), and then do a Sukhmani Sahib paath + ardass at the Gurdwara.

Exactly. I've liked your post. A "papi" Sikh marrying a "papi" (sinner) Sikh will give birth to a Sikh child who will have some or another level of exposure to Sikh culture, gurdwaras, parchar, etc. He won't be born with a 4ft khanda in his hand (lol), but the point is he'll know that "my religion is Sikhism". Then, when the mood strikes him, he can go out researching our faith, and he can adopt whatever level he is able to. Maybe he'll desist from drugs. Maybe he'll stop cutting his hair. Maybe he'll start doing Japji Sahib. Maybe he'll start doing full Nitnem. And maybe he'll take Amrit. Whatever level he chooses, I don't care. At least he doesn't become a jihadi or a Christian.

Bro, it's because people don't want our kaum to die. If, after agreeing that quantity does matter, how can you say the above? Totally agreed. But should only kids who have been doing the whole Sikh thing (kirtan, tabla, gatka, santhia, bana, so on) remain in the Sikh panth? We should just be OK with the rest drifting into oblivion? I think you dismiss "papis" (sinners) too quickly. These drinking monas, if you sit down and talk with them, also have a love for Guru Sahib. Maybe you'll say if they really loved Guru ji, they'd follow their Hukum. Which is true. But why give up on them entirely? Keep them in the orbit, so we can then reach them as necessary. If you watch the Sikh Awareness Society videos, there are many monas there. Some of them may drink. But I don't care, because they do have some level of feeling for our panth and its daughters, even if they don't have Jaap Sahib memorized. And when you say the solution is to "connect with children from a young age": How do you propose that "we" (informed Sikhs) will get access to people's children? If the parents are already practicing, well-informed Amritdhari Sikhs, then problem already solved. By definition, the kids you want to target are those of the non-practicing Sikhs. I.e., the monas you disparage. What I'm saying is keep the drinking monas in the Sikh orbit, so then when they have kids, and are a bit more conservative (everybody settles down when they have kids and they start thinking about teaching the kid morality), then we can swoop down and offer our "services" (free kirtan class or whatever). And another thing: Nobody's saying that a drinking moni should marry a teetotalling Singh. Rather, marry at your same level of Sikhi.

I do agree that discussion should be allowed to the maximum extent possible. I'd really like to get into some debates with some missionaries on this forum, but seems difficult because they get banned. Well, what was the actual reason, again, that he got banned? In any case, the mods let him run loose again, but he voluntarily chose to leave (because he thinks too much of himself, and he thinks everybody else is below him). That's unfortunate because I had still wanted to pin him on some of his ridiculous statements. I do think it would be better if there were a few more posts per thread. But do note that there are a lot of people who read threads without commenting. What I would like is for topics to be fully discussed without being dropped in the middle. There have been some discussions like that over the years (such as the one on the topic of Was Fareed ji a Muslim).