BhForce

Well, OK, but the pictures you posted don't show patterns in the manner of wootz steel: Rather, it just shows a plain sword in the style of, as you say, axle steel, with a smattering of rust.

Where did you read that, the Bible? While I would agree that God isn't a "human", I would not extend that to saying that God does not listen to prayers, in the way that a King would listen to commoners' grievances and give relief. The issue of God, his form, and creation is a complex one. God is both nirgun (formless) and sargun (formed). But here are some excerpts from Gurbani for thought. One must perceive the metaphors here: God is neither male nor female: ਸੁੰਨ ਮੰਡਲ ਇਕੁ ਜੋਗੀ ਬੈਸੇ ॥ Sunn Manddal Eik Jogee Baisae || The Yogi, the Primal Lord, sits within the celestial sphere of deepest Samaadhi. ਨਾਰਿ ਨ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਕਹਹੁ ਕੋਊ ਕੈਸੇ ॥ Naar N Purakh Kehahu Kooo Kaisae || He is not male, and He is not female; how can anyone describe Him? ਧਨਾਸਰੀ (ਮਃ ੧) ਅਸਟ. (੧) ੪:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੬੮੫ ਪੰ. ੧੭ Raag Dhanaasree Guru Nanak Dev Portraying God in the form of a man: ਤੇਰੇ ਬੰਕੇ ਲੋਇਣ ਦੰਤ ਰੀਸਾਲਾ ॥ Thaerae Bankae Loein Dhanth Reesaalaa || Your eyes are so beautiful, and Your teeth are delightful. ਸੋਹਣੇ ਨਕ ਜਿਨ ਲੰਮੜੇ ਵਾਲਾ ॥ Sohanae Nak Jin Lanmarrae Vaalaa || Your nose is so graceful, and Your hair is so long. ਕੰਚਨ ਕਾਇਆ ਸੁਇਨੇ ਕੀ ਢਾਲਾ ॥ Kanchan Kaaeiaa Sueinae Kee Dtaalaa || Your body is so precious, cast in gold. ਸੋਵੰਨ ਢਾਲਾ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਮਾਲਾ ਜਪਹੁ ਤੁਸੀ ਸਹੇਲੀਹੋ ॥ Sovann Dtaalaa Kirasan Maalaa Japahu Thusee Sehaeleeho || His body is cast in gold, and He wears Krishna's mala; meditate on Him, O sisters. ਜਮ ਦੁਆਰਿ ਨ ਹੋਹੁ ਖੜੀਆ ਸਿਖ ਸੁਣਹੁ ਮਹੇਲੀਹੋ ॥ Jam Dhuaar N Hohu Kharreeaa Sikh Sunahu Mehaeleeho || You shall not have to stand at Death's door, O sisters, if you listen to these teachings. ਹੰਸ ਹੰਸਾ ਬਗ ਬਗਾ ਲਹੈ ਮਨ ਕੀ ਜਾਲਾ ॥ Hans Hansaa Bag Bagaa Lehai Man Kee Jaalaa || From a crane, you shall be transformed into a swan, and the filth of your mind shall be removed. ਬੰਕੇ ਲੋਇਣ ਦੰਤ ਰੀਸਾਲਾ ॥੭॥ Bankae Loein Dhanth Reesaalaa ||7|| Your eyes are so beautiful, and Your teeth are delightful. ||7|| ਤੇਰੀ ਚਾਲ ਸੁਹਾਵੀ ਮਧੁਰਾੜੀ ਬਾਣੀ ॥ Thaeree Chaal Suhaavee Madhhuraarree Baanee || Your walk is so graceful, and Your speech is so sweet. ਕੁਹਕਨਿ ਕੋਕਿਲਾ ਤਰਲ ਜੁਆਣੀ ॥ Kuhakan Kokilaa Tharal Juaanee || You coo like a songbird, and your youthful beauty is alluring. ਤਰਲਾ ਜੁਆਣੀ ਆਪਿ ਭਾਣੀ ਇਛ ਮਨ ਕੀ ਪੂਰੀਏ ॥ Tharalaa Juaanee Aap Bhaanee Eishh Man Kee Pooreeeae || Your youthful beauty is so alluring; it pleases You, and it fulfills the heart's desires. ਸਾਰੰਗ ਜਿਉ ਪਗੁ ਧਰੈ ਠਿਮਿ ਠਿਮਿ ਆਪਿ ਆਪੁ ਸੰਧੂਰਏ ॥ Saarang Jio Pag Dhharai Thim Thim Aap Aap Sandhhooreae || Like an elephant, You step with Your Feet so carefully; You are satisfied with Yourself. ਸ੍ਰੀਰੰਗ ਰਾਤੀ ਫਿਰੈ ਮਾਤੀ ਉਦਕੁ ਗੰਗਾ ਵਾਣੀ ॥ Sreerang Raathee Firai Maathee Oudhak Gangaa Vaanee || She who is imbued with the Love of such a Great Lord, flows intoxicated, like the waters of the Ganges. ਬਿਨਵੰਤਿ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਦਾਸੁ ਹਰਿ ਕਾ ਤੇਰੀ ਚਾਲ ਸੁਹਾਵੀ ਮਧੁਰਾੜੀ ਬਾਣੀ ॥੮॥੨॥ Binavanth Naanak Dhaas Har Kaa Thaeree Chaal Suhaavee Madhhuraarree Baanee ||8||2|| Prays Nanak, I am Your slave, O Lord; Your walk is so graceful, and Your speech is so sweet. ||8||2|| ਵਡਹੰਸ (ਮਃ ੧) ਛੰਤ (੨) ੮:੬ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੫੬੭ ਪੰ. ੧੩ Raag Vadhans Guru Nanak Dev The same shabad mentions that true understanding of the form of God only comes by contemplating the Guru, otherwise God is unfathomable: ਵਡੇ ਮੇਰੇ ਸਾਹਿਬਾ ਅਲਖ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥ Vaddae Maerae Saahibaa Alakh Apaaraa || O my Great Lord and Master, You are unfathomable and infinite. ਕਿਉ ਕਰਿ ਕਰਉ ਬੇਨੰਤੀ ਹਉ ਆਖਿ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ॥ Kio Kar Karo Baenanthee Ho Aakh N Jaanaa || How should I make and offer my prayer? I do not know what to say. ਨਦਰਿ ਕਰਹਿ ਤਾ ਸਾਚੁ ਪਛਾਣਾ ॥ Nadhar Karehi Thaa Saach Pashhaanaa || If You bless me with Your Glance of Grace, I realize the Truth. ਸਾਚੋ ਪਛਾਣਾ ਤਾਮਿ ਤੇਰਾ ਜਾਮਿ ਆਪਿ ਬੁਝਾਵਹੇ ॥ Saacho Pashhaanaa Thaam Thaeraa Jaam Aap Bujhaavehae || Only then do I come to realize the Truth, when You Yourself instruct me. ਦੂਖ ਭੂਖ ਸੰਸਾਰਿ ਕੀਏ ਸਹਸਾ ਏਹੁ ਚੁਕਾਵਹੇ ॥ Dhookh Bhookh Sansaar Keeeae Sehasaa Eaehu Chukaavehae || The pain and hunger of the world are Your making; dispel this doubt. ਬਿਨਵੰਤਿ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਜਾਇ ਸਹਸਾ ਬੁਝੈ ਗੁਰ ਬੀਚਾਰਾ ॥ Binavanth Naanak Jaae Sehasaa Bujhai Gur Beechaaraa || Prays Nanak, ones skepticism is taken away, when he understands the Guru's wisdom. ਵਡਾ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਹੈ ਆਪਿ ਅਲਖ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥੬॥ Vaddaa Saahib Hai Aap Alakh Apaaraa ||6|| The Great Lord Master is unfathomable and infinite. ||6|| ਵਡਹੰਸ (ਮਃ ੧) ਛੰਤ (੨) ੬:੭ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੫੬੭ ਪੰ. ੮ Raag Vadhans Guru Nanak Dev Portraying God in the form of a man: ਬਾਗੇ ਕਾਪੜ ਬੋਲੈ ਬੈਣ ॥ Baagae Kaaparr Bolai Bain || You wear white clothes, and speak sweet words. ਲੰਮਾ ਨਕੁ ਕਾਲੇ ਤੇਰੇ ਨੈਣ ॥ Lanmaa Nak Kaalae Thaerae Nain || Your nose is sharp, and your eyes are black. ਕਬਹੂੰ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਦੇਖਿਆ ਭੈਣ ॥੧॥ Kabehoon Saahib Dhaekhiaa Bhain ||1|| Have you ever seen your Lord and Master, O sister? ||1|| ਮਲਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੯) ੧:੩ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੨੫੭ ਪੰ. ੭ Raag Malar Guru Nanak Dev God is both formless and formed, absorbed within the Creation: ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ਦੁਪਦੇ ਘਰੁ ੮ Raag Bilaaval Mehalaa 5 Dhupadhae Ghar 8 Raag Bilaaval, Fifth Mehl, Du-Padas, Eighth House: ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ (ਮਃ ੫) ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਅੰਗ ੮੨੭ Ang ViewVerse View ੴ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥ Ik Oankaar Sathigur Prasaadh || ਮੈ ਨਾਹੀ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਭੁ ਕਿਛੁ ਤੇਰਾ ॥ Mai Naahee Prabh Sabh Kishh Thaeraa || I am nothing, God; everything is Yours. ਈਘੈ ਨਿਰਗੁਨ ਊਘੈ ਸਰਗੁਨ ਕੇਲ ਕਰਤ ਬਿਚਿ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਮੇਰਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Eeghai Niragun Ooghai Saragun Kael Karath Bich Suaamee Maeraa ||1|| Rehaao || Here, You are formless; there, You are with form. You play within, O my Lord and Master. ||1||Pause|| ਨਗਰ ਮਹਿ ਆਪਿ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਫੁਨਿ ਆਪਨ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਮੇਰੇ ਕੋ ਸਗਲ ਬਸੇਰਾ ॥ Nagar Mehi Aap Baahar Fun Aapan Prabh Maerae Ko Sagal Basaeraa || You exist within the city, and beyond it as well; O my God, You are everywhere. ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਰਾਜਨੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਰਾਇਆ ਕਹ ਕਹ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਕਹ ਕਹ ਚੇਰਾ ॥੧॥ Aapae Hee Raajan Aapae Hee Raaeiaa Keh Keh Thaakur Keh Keh Chaeraa ||1|| You Yourself are the King, and You Yourself are the subject. In one place, You are the Lord and Master, and in another place, You are the slave. ||1|| ਕਾ ਕਉ ਦੁਰਾਉ ਕਾ ਸਿਉ ਬਲਬੰਚਾ ਜਹ ਜਹ ਪੇਖਉ ਤਹ ਤਹ ਨੇਰਾ ॥ Kaa Ko Dhuraao Kaa Sio Balabanchaa Jeh Jeh Paekho Theh Theh Naeraa || From whom should I hide? Whom should I try to deceive? Wherever I look, I see Him near at hand. ਸਾਧ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਗੁਰੁ ਭੇਟਿਓ ਨਾਨਕ ਮਿਲਿ ਸਾਗਰ ਬੂੰਦ ਨਹੀ ਅਨ ਹੇਰਾ ॥੨॥੧॥੧੧੭॥ Saadhh Moorath Gur Bhaettiou Naanak Mil Saagar Boondh Nehee An Haeraa ||2||1||117|| I have met with Guru Nanak, the Embodiment of the Holy Saints. When the drop of water merges into the ocean, it cannot be distinguished as separate again. ||2||1||117|| ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ (ਮਃ ੫) (੧੧੭) ੨:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮੨੭ ਪੰ. ੧੮ Raag Bilaaval Guru Arjan Dev In the end, one can only see the essence of God via his Name: ਕਾਇਆ ਨਗਰ ਮਹਿ ਰਾਮ ਰਸੁ ਊਤਮੁ ਕਿਉ ਪਾਈਐ ਉਪਦੇਸੁ ਜਨ ਕਰਹੁ ॥ Kaaeiaa Nagar Mehi Raam Ras Ootham Kio Paaeeai Oupadhaes Jan Karahu || Within the body-village is the Lord's supreme, sublime essence. How can I obtain it? Teach me, O humble Saints. ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਸੇਵਿ ਸਫਲ ਹਰਿ ਦਰਸਨੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਹਰਿ ਰਸੁ ਪੀਅਹੁ ॥੨॥ Sathigur Saev Safal Har Dharasan Mil Anmrith Har Ras Peeahu ||2|| Serving the True Guru, you shall obtain the Fruitful Vision of the Lord's Darshan; meeting Him, drink in the ambrosial essence of the Lord's Nectar. ||2|| ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਹਰਿ ਮੀਠਾ ਹਰਿ ਸੰਤਹੁ ਚਾਖਿ ਦਿਖਹੁ ॥ Har Har Naam Anmrith Har Meethaa Har Santhahu Chaakh Dhikhahu || The Ambrosial Name of the Lord, Har, Har, is so sweet; O Saints of the Lord, taste it, and see. ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ (ਮਃ ੪) (੪) ੩:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮੦੦ ਪੰ. ੨ Raag Bilaaval Guru Ram Das

OK, bro, but assuming you have an expert who could recognize all those qualities, could the same expert not also replicate all those qualities in a replica? Is there any technology available in 18th century India not available to worksmiths today?

How do you know they are from the 1700s? Have you had them carbon-dated? Why could they not easily be from any other time period, even the 20th century?

Come on, man, this is a discussion board. Post up what you have, and we'll discuss it. Don't just stick to vague generalities.

It might be nice if you had presented a link to an article instead of just asking us to take it on your word.

Ah, yes, very perceptive! The Islamophile media never fail to use the cop-out term "Asian" to avoid saying "Muslim" or "Pakistani Muslim", but here, they openly use the term "Punjabi Sikh". Why??

Yeah. Although the increasing rate of consumption of alcohol among Punjabi Sikh women shows the superiority of Punjabi culture in this regard. Now Sikhism is the highest of all, but still: Traditionally, only men drank, that too only in private, and usually only when someone was visiting. Against Gurmat, but still within some kind of limit. What you didn't have is the mother of the children drunk out of her senses. Thanks, modern feminism and "equality".

If there was a time when the BBC was meant to be a neutral public broadcaster, it's one thing for the license fee to have been in place to support TV without ads. These days it functions as the voice of the Islamophile liberal establishment. From the perspective of patriotic or traditional Brits, it's against them. From our perspective as Sikhs, it feels free to do anti-Sikh hit pieces. Additionally, it is devastating local newspapers in Britain by publishing news articles on the website. It was chartered to do broadcasting. It had no right to use the mandatory license fee revenues to elbow into local (or even national) news publishing. The BBC needs to have its mandatory funding taken away, it's name needs to be changed, and then its stock should be either sold to the public, or simply handed out one share to every British taxpayer. If Teresa May were to destroy the BBC, she would be guaranteed re-election, but she is too weak to do so.

I watched the first 1min, 49sec of the video. It shows someone doing kirtan on a harmonium, a European-derived instrument, and admittedly not in accord with Gurmat kirtan maryada. Yet in a post-British invasion age in which harmonium is allowed even at Darbar Sahib, is there a reason the kirtania shown should be singled out for special condemnation? I did not detect any gandh in the video.

The article says "It's a problem which is rarely talked about openly in the community." Huh? That's strange. Drinking is a hidden problem in the community? Everybody knows about it.

You're right. It would be like an article on the prevalence of mithai (sweets) eating in India, but focusing not on Indians who eat tons of sweets, but rather on British expats living in India. Or an article about immigrants in Ireland drinking too much, totally ignoring the environment in which they live (Irish are famous for drinking). I would attribute this to the jihadis (practicing and non-practicing) that inhabit the BBC. None was a writer of this article, but could have been editors. In any case the writers are: Anusha Kumar, Aidan Castelli & Chayya Syal. The middle one would seem to be Italian. The first, a Hindu. The third says about her faith, "As someone from a faith that’s been berated and under siege for the last 2000 years". What would that be? Not Islam or Sikhism. Perhaps Hindu? She also says Yet she chose to write not about "Indians", not even Punjabis in general, but to focus strangely even further only on a specific religious subset of Punjabis: the Sikhs. In addition: And yet pandering to stereotypes is exactly what she is doing.

How long was your enlistment? According to this, you can only be called up involuntarily during an 8-year period which includes membership of the "Individual Ready Reserve". So, why don't you wait until you're both out of active duty AND out of the Individual Ready Reserve? Not to mention, that, your thought of taking "Nihung amrit" and being back in the US Air Force and eating meat is highly problematic. First of all, as has been discussed on this forum, commercial meat is often halal. That's because Muslims make a big deal out of it, and Christians don't care. Is there a specific prohibition on Muslim contractors not being able to bid on USAF meat contracts? Doubtful. So there's no guarantee you'll never be forced to eat Halal meat. Also, if you're deployed abroad, you'll be highly likely to get halal meat. Second, even if it were just "meat" in general, and not halal, that's a problem, too. Strictly speaking, Nihangs (or Sikhs) are not supposed to eat "meat". They can only eat jhatka in a specific maryada. So, if I were you, I would just wait out the 2 years of Individual Ready Reserve membership, and just learn more about Sikhism, and memorize Nitnem, read all of Guru Granth Sahib during that time. And then take Amrit.

Agreed. I have posted before that there should be no confused bootha. A happy face or "like" makes sense because if you like a post, there's nothing more to say, since you agree. If you don't agree, then there's a reason you don't, and you should post that. Extremely frustrating. Stupid cowards. Could you do a favor? Contact the admin @S1NGH and let him know the above plus the following (also you may want to report your own post): 1. There should be no "faces" except for "like" 2. There should be no anonymous "likes" (or dislikes, but those shouldn't even exist). This is to prevent sockpuppeting. I'm struggling to understand why people should be able to anonymously "like" a post.

Was this with the acquiescence of Baba Prem Singh?

that's interesting, but say someone took amrit from a jathebandi or committee that Nihang Singh consider malesh, sirr-muni or Bhasaurias would the Nihangs accept them? And what jathebandis would those be bro? Malech- This is a word used by Hindus to describe Muslims. I was unaware that there was a committee of jihadis appointing 5 duly circumsized members to prepare "amrit". Sir-muni (mona)- Is there a jathebandi of monas appointing 5 monas to prepare "amrit"? Would that be the Sindis? AFAIK, they don't take amrit. Bhasaurias- There are no "Bhasaurias" as such, bro, why are you tilting at windmills? After Babu Teja Singh Bhasaur was excommunicated by Akal Takhat, the influence of the organization (Panch Khalsa Divan) that he had hijacked petered out. His descendants have appeared at Akal Takhat to ask for forgiveness. I do agree Nihangs may not accept someone who took "amrit" from a jathebandi not reciting all 5 banis. These would be "Giani" Kuldeep Singh of Virginia, Ragi Darshan Singh, and some others. Also the Delhi missionary college substitutes Pranvo Aad Ekankara for Hamri Karo Hath De Racha. Granted. Except that that's not what we're talking about. We're not talking about non-Sikh spies trying to take Amrit. We're talking about Sikhs who have taken Amrit from Taksal, SGPC, Nihung, etc. needing to take it again or not. That would be bad. If someone wants to be in the Army, then they could take that oath separately. They're not. Sikhs should be complete in both bhagti and shakti, and only Panj Piyare who are complete in both can give updesh of both. Yes, Amrit should not be handed out like cups of water in a chabeel. The Punj are supposed to discern qualification to take amrit and give it accordingly.

I am unable to find Panj Shaster Rehit in the list of 45 rehits you posted. Would you like to point it out? In any case, I think it's quite ridiculous asking if Hazur Sahib Singhs remain in Panj Shastar Rehat when the fact is almost no Nihangs do so. Have you ever seen a Nihang walking around with 5 weapons? Normally if you see a Nihang in Punjab, you'd be lucky to see that he has a kirpan (full kirpan), much less any other weapon. The most common would simply be a small kirpan and nothing else.

Why do you care whether it's a "section" or a "sub-forum"? In any case, there already is a section for Gurbani: http://sikhsangat.com/index.php?/forum/12-gurbani-scriptures-rehat-history/ And for Bhagti: http://sikhsangat.com/index.php?/forum/39-gursikhi-gems/ Have you bothered to look there? There's a lot of stuff there on meditation and naam simran.

It's good that you're asking. It's obvious that you must not have any proper grounding in Sikh history, otherwise you would not wonder how people get married in the Sikh panth. By the way, are you a Sikh? If so, it's strange that you're asking how you're supposed to get married without dating. You get married in the same way your parents got married, or their parents. The Gurmat way of getting married is when you're old enough to marry, they find someone suitable, and you get married. There are variations on that, you'll likely want to meet and talk with the prospective marriage partner, and so on, but that's basically it. By "suitable" I mean someone who, in your parents estimation and experience, is someone who is responsible, educated, employed, and also attractive. And from a good family with a good reputation. Plus who follows Gurmat (to whatever extent that you do). I.e., if you're amritdhari, he/she should be amritdhari. Or keshadhari/keshadhari. Or mona Sikh/mona Sikh. If you have all of those items checked, it's very likely the marriage will succeed. If you're missing one of those, the marriage will very likely fail. "Love marriages" are usually missing one of those items. Sitting around in a bar hitting on girls is not the Gurmat way of getting married. I don't have time to do a huge writeup right now, but suffice to say that someone who starts his journey towards marriage by flirting with any pretty young thing that walks past him is also someone who will have a wandering eye after marriage. Secondly, the dating culture automatically leads to an arms race of sexualizing young women as they try to use lower and lower necklines, higher and higher hemlines, and tighter and tighter clothes to attract the attention of potential dating mates. Finally, we're called to treat women as mothers, sisters, and daughters, which is the furthest thing from the mindset of a dater, someone who's on the prowl. The Gurmat way of marriage is simply the way that our Gurus got married, the way they spent 200 years on this earth teaching us how to live like Gurmukhs. Note: this does not mean you have to marry someone who wears a chola with a 1 ft dumalla turban. If you're lax in Sikhi observance, that's fine, just have your parents find someone who is at the same level as you.

I agree that she made a big show and all, but why target her out for special condemnation? That's what every celebrity does during their Darbar Sahib visits. I know that people think she dresses like a prostitute, but even if she actually were a prostitute instead of merely dressing like one, so what? I think in her mind she's the bride of God, so she dresses like it. Gurbani records that prostitutes (Ganika, Pingula) also were saved. ਜਉ ਪੈ ਹਮ ਨ ਪਾਪ ਕਰੰਤਾ ਅਹੇ ਅਨੰਤਾ ॥ If I did not commit any sins, O Infinite Lord, ਪਤਿਤ ਪਾਵਨ ਨਾਮੁ ਕੈਸੇ ਹੁੰਤਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ How would You have acquired the name, 'Redeemer of sinners'? ||1||Pause|| ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ (ਭ. ਰਵਿਦਾਸ) (੧) ੧:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੩ ਪੰ. ੧੬ Sri Raag Bhagat Ravidas ਗਈ ਬੈਕੁੰਠਿ ਬਿਬਾਣਿ ਚੜ੍ਹਿ ਨਾਉ ਨਰਾਇਣੁ ਛੋਤਿ ਅਛੋਤਾ। Due to the elixir of name (of the Lord) she (Ganika) became totally devoid of sins and was lifted to the heavens. ਥਾਉ ਨਿਥਾਵੇ ਮਾਣੁ ਮਣੋਤਾ ॥੨੧॥ The name (of the Lord) is the last refuge of the shelterless ones. ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੧੦ ਪਉੜੀ ੨੧ ਪੰ. ੯ I do agree that the SGPC is entirely too obsequious towards celebrities, and falls over itself to extend special treatment to them over the regular sangat. Isn't the main point of Harimander Sahib that we're all equal? That said, I'm uncomfortable about special opprobrium directed toward Radhae Maa.

While I'm not a fan of VIP's skipping the line, that's quite a bit different from people standing for Indira Gandhi in Guru's Darbar. I agree that the Sangat should not make a big deal out of "VIPs" visiting, because that makes it seem like the "VIP" is more important than Guru Sahib. If you are saying that skipsies should be banned, then they should be banned for all, right? Or would skipping be fine for Trudeau, but not for Radhae Maa? Is that because people think she dresses like a prostitute?

Well, to my mind, I'm actually treating politicians the same. E.g., if a Sikh is loose in rehit, the people around him should gently persuade him to be stricter. Same for politicians. And, for example, shopkeepers, do you care if a shopkeeper gets up at 1am in the morning to do simran and nitnem? As a customer, you care only if the product is good, and the price is right. Same for politicians. Are you talking about Bahadur Shah? I'm just talking about the general provisions for women in Islam. And then the general stance toward women by rajas, which is basically use and abuse. But Guru Sahib knew that going in. Does anybody argue that Bahadur Shah was a Gurmukh? OK, bro. But let me offer you a hypothetical: You have a leader who is a bajjer kurehiti, apostate. He doesn't follow strictures of religion, but he's a bigshot leader, and he offers us the ability to get our own country. Do you take your country, or do you refuse the country because you wouldn't want it handed to you with a guy loose in rehit? OK, I lied, it wasn't a hypothetical. I'm talking about the father of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. As you know, he was basically apostate from Islam, being a lover of pork and wine and all. If the Pakistanis went by the picky standards of some of us, they'd not have a country, but hey, they'd at least not have suffered the ignominy of being led by an apostate. (By the way, I'm one of the most conservative posters on this board regarding rehit and maryada. But that's for Sikhs as Sikhs, not for politicians as politicians.) Also, in your hypothetical, what if it's a Hindu Punjabi or other non-Sikh who's doing all that stuff? Then do you care about his personal life?

Well, no, I don't think we would accept the interfaith marriage (as a principle). The fact that someone may be married to a non-Sikh is simply reality. But we don't accept it as Sikh doctrine. On the other hand, I've said many times on this board that we shouldn't bother with Sikh (or non-Sikh) politicians' personal lives. We should merely be concerned with their stance on Sikh issues. Consider: Did Guru Gobind Singh ji bother with Bahadur Shah's personal morality with respect to women, or the fact that he was a Gursikh or not when Guru Sahib decided to support him to ascend to the Mughal throne?

You serious bro? Sikh Sangat is all those who believe in Sikhi. There are local Sikh sangats, as well, as indicated in the Sikh Rehit Maryada, and as also referenced in Hukumnamas from Guru Sahibs. So you think you can dismiss an essay in 6 posts (with references) with 2 lines? What specifically from above do you deny? Did you read it? If you don't want to read it, fine, but don't deny that Sikhs aren't responsible before the Sangat. It's quite surprising that someone such as you who is posting such good pro-Sikh posts about keeping our Sikh population numbers up and looking out for threats from Muslims can post the above. If times have moved on, why even bother about Sikh population numbers? Who even cares? Who cares if Sikhism or the Sikh panth lives or dies? And if this isn't the 18th century anymore, it's certainly not the 16th or 17th century anymore, either, when Guru Granth Sahib ji was written. So why should we even bother with a 16th/17th century writing? What are you on about, bro?

Historical examples When a Sikh broke a Hindu's idol, the Hindu came to complain to Guru Hargobind ji. That's because the Sikh is responsible before his Guru. Today, jot of the Guru is in Guru Granth Sahib and the Guruship is practically held by the Sangat, Panth, and Panj Piyare. When Jassa Singh Ahluwalia was thought to have killed his infant daughter, he was held responsible, and was excommunicated by the Sangat (Panth). When Maharaja Ranjit Singh committed a flagrant violation of the Sikh rehit by wanting to marry a Muslim woman, he was held responsible before the Sangat by the Akal Takhat. If he wasn't responsible before the Sangat, then why did he present himself before at Amritsar? There are examples after examples of Sikhs being held responsible before the sangat in history. These include Surjit Singh Barnala, Baba Santa Singh, Buta Singh, Kala Afghana, and many others. Your position (that a Sikh is not responsible before Sangat) has absolutely no historical or doctrinal basis.