BhForce

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.

Theoretical basis of Panj Piyare ਪੰਚ ਪਰਵਾਣ ਪੰਚ ਪਰਧਾਨੁ ॥ Those whose attention is towards the Name are accepted, approved, and the leaders. ਪੰਚ = ਉਹ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨਾਮ ਸੁਣਿਆ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਮੰਨਿਆ ਹੈ, ਉਹ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੀ ਸੁਰਤ ਨਾਮ ਵਿਚ ਜੁੜੀ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੇ ਅੰਦਰ ਪਰਤੀਤ ਆ ਗਈ ਹੈ। ਪਰਵਾਣੁ = ਕਬੂਲ, ਸੁਰਖ਼ਰੂ। ਪਰਧਾਨੁ = ਆਗੂ, ਵੱਡੇ। ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਮਨੁੱਖਾਂ ਦੀ ਸੁਰਤ ਨਾਮ ਵਿਚ ਜੁੜੀ ਰਹਿੰਦੀ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੇ ਅੰਦਰ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਲਗਨ ਬਣ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ ਉਹੀ ਮਨੁੱਖ (ਇੱਥੇ ਜਗਤ ਵਿਚ) ਮੰਨੇ-ਪ੍ਰਮੰਨੇ ਰਹਿੰਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਸਭ ਦੇ ਆਗੂ ਹੁੰਦੇ ਹਨ। ਪੰਚੇ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਦਰਗਹਿ ਮਾਨੁ ॥ The chosen ones are honored in the Court of the Lord. ਪੰਚੇ = ਪੰਚ ਹੀ, ਸੰਤ ਜਨ ਹੀ। ਦਰਗਹ = ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਦੇ ਦਰਬਾਰ ਵਿਚ। ਮਾਨੁ = ਆਦਰ; ਵਡਿਆਈ। ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਦੀ ਦਰਗਾਹ ਵਿਚ ਭੀ ਉਹ ਪੰਚ ਜਨ ਹੀ ਆਦਰ ਪਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ। A decision by a devotee is accepted by God: ਮੇਰੀ ਬਾਂਧੀ ਭਗਤੁ ਛਡਾਵੈ ਬਾਂਧੈ ਭਗਤੁ ਨ ਛੂਟੈ ਮੋਹਿ ॥ Maeree Baandhhee Bhagath Shhaddaavai Baandhhai Bhagath N Shhoottai Mohi || The devotee can release anyone from my bondage, but I cannot release anyone from his. ਏਕ ਸਮੈ ਮੋ ਕਉ ਗਹਿ ਬਾਂਧੈ ਤਉ ਫੁਨਿ ਮੋ ਪੈ ਜਬਾਬੁ ਨ ਹੋਇ ॥੧॥ Eaek Samai Mo Ko Gehi Baandhhai Tho Fun Mo Pai Jabaab N Hoe ||1|| If, at any time, he grabs and binds me, even then, I cannot protest. ||1|| ਸਾਰੰਗ (ਭ. ਨਾਮਦੇਵ) (੩) ੧:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੨੫੩ ਪੰ. ੧ Raag Sarang Bhagat Namdev Five complete Sikhs are considered God: ਇਕੁ ਸਿਖੁ ਦੁਇ ਸਾਧ ਸੰਗੁ ਪੰਜੀਂ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ। Iku Sikhu Dui Saadh Sangu Panjeen Pramaysaru | One is a Sikh, two the congregation (Sangat) and in five resides God. ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੧੩ ਪਉੜੀ ੧੯ ਪੰ. ੧ Guru Gobind Singh ji showed the practical method of putting this doctrine into effect with the institution of the Panj Piyare. Question: Do you accept or deny the institution of the Panj Piyare?

Bad sangat, and dissociation with bad sangat And just as good sangat increases spirituality, bad sangat destroys it: ਕਬੀਰ ਮਾਰੀ ਮਰਉ ਕੁਸੰਗ ਕੀ ਕੇਲੇ ਨਿਕਟਿ ਜੁ ਬੇਰਿ ॥ Kabeer Maaree Maro Kusang Kee Kaelae Nikatt J Baer || Kabeer, I have been ruined and destroyed by bad company, like the banana plant near the thorn bush. ਉਹ ਝੂਲੈ ਉਹ ਚੀਰੀਐ ਸਾਕਤ ਸੰਗੁ ਨ ਹੇਰਿ ॥੮੮॥ Ouh Jhoolai Ouh Cheereeai Saakath Sang N Haer ||88|| The thorn bush waves in the wind, and pierces the banana plant; see this, and do not associate with the faithless cynics. ||88|| ਸਲੋਕ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ (ਭ. ਕਬੀਰ) (੮੮):੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੩੬੯ ਪੰ. ੩ Salok Bhagat Kabir ਕਬੀਰ ਸੰਗਤਿ ਕਰੀਐ ਸਾਧ ਕੀ ਅੰਤਿ ਕਰੈ ਨਿਰਬਾਹੁ ॥ Kabeer Sangath Kareeai Saadhh Kee Anth Karai Nirabaahu || Kabeer, associate with the Holy people, who will take you to Nirvaanaa in the end. ਸਾਕਤ ਸੰਗੁ ਨ ਕੀਜੀਐ ਜਾ ਤੇ ਹੋਇ ਬਿਨਾਹੁ ॥੯੩॥ Saakath Sang N Keejeeai Jaa Thae Hoe Binaahu ||93|| Do not associate with the faithless cynics; they would bring you to ruin. ||93|| ਸਲੋਕ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ (ਭ. ਕਬੀਰ) (੯੩):੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੩੬੯ ਪੰ. ੮ Salok Bhagat Kabir ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥ਉਲਟੀ ਰੇ ਮਨ ਉਲਟੀ ਰੇ ॥ਸਾਕਤ ਸਿਉ ਕਰਿ ਉਲਟੀ ਰੇ ॥ਝੂਠੈ ਕੀ ਰੇ ਝੂਠੁ ਪਰੀਤਿ ਛੁਟਕੀ ਰੇ ਮਨ ਛੁਟਕੀ ਰੇ ਸਾਕਤ ਸੰਗਿ ਨ ਛੁਟਕੀ ਰੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ਜਿਉ ਕਾਜਰ ਭਰਿ ਮੰਦਰੁ ਰਾਖਿਓ ਜੋ ਪੈਸੈ ਕਾਲੂਖੀ ਰੇ ॥ਦੂਰਹੁ ਹੀ ਤੇ ਭਾਗਿ ਗਇਓ ਹੈ ਜਿਸੁ ਗੁਰ ਮਿਲਿ ਛੁਟਕੀ ਤ੍ਰਿਕੁਟੀ ਰੇ ॥੧॥ਮਾਗਉ ਦਾਨੁ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਲ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਨਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਮੁਖੁ ਸਾਕਤ ਸੰਗਿ ਨ ਜੁਟਸੀ ਰੇ ॥ਜਨ ਨਾਨਕ ਦਾਸ ਦਾਸ ਕੋ ਕਰੀਅਹੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਮੂੰਡੁ ਸਾਧ ਪਗਾ ਹੇਠਿ ਰੁਲਸੀ ਰੇ ॥੨॥੪॥੩੭॥ Turn away, O my mind, turn away.Turn away from the faithless cynic.False is the love of the false one; break the ties, O my mind, and your ties shall be broken. Break your ties with the faithless cynic. ||1||Pause||One who enters a house filled with soot is blackened.Run far away from such people! One who meets the Guru escapes from the bondage of the three dispositions. ||1||I beg this blessing of You, O Merciful Lord, ocean of mercy - please, don't bring me face to face with the faithless cyincs.Make servant Nanak the slave of Your slave; let his head roll in the dust under the feet of the Holy. ||2||4||37|| ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ (ਮਃ ੫) (੩੭) ੧:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੫੩੫ ਪੰ. ੧੬ Raag Dev Gandhaaree Guru Arjan Dev As seen above, association with a sakat will lead to blackening of the soul. Therefore, Sikhs are called not to associate with such people. The practical method through which this is effected is given in the excerpt from the Sikh Rehit Maryada above. The sangat formally decides to dissociate from a sakat. Now, here's where "responsibility to the Sangat" comes: It's true that no one has to be responsible to the Sangat if he doesn't want to be. But if you disregard the summons from the Sangat to explain yourself, the Sangat can choose to not associate with you anymore (excommunication). If you want to avoid this, then you can repent if you are remorseful, and the Sangat has the power to forgive you.

Theoretical background of responsibility toward Sangat If you don't understand the theoretical background, let me spell it out for you: Guru Sahib created the institution of Sangat for spiritual enlightenment and progress. Congregating with like-minded individuals aids in spiritual progress: ਮਿਲਿ ਸੰਗਤਿ ਮਨਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਵਸਾਈ ॥ Mil Sangath Man Naam Vasaaee || Joining the Sangat, the Holy Congregation, the Name comes to dwell in the mind. ਮਾਝ (ਮਃ ੪) (੬) ੧:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੫ ਪੰ. ੧੯ Raag Maajh Guru Ram Das ਮਿਲਿ ਸਤਸੰਗਤਿ ਹਰਿ ਗੁਣ ਗਾਏ ਜਗੁ ਭਉਜਲੁ ਦੁਤਰੁ ਤਰੀਐ ਜੀਉ ॥੧॥ Mil Sathasangath Har Gun Gaaeae Jag Bhoujal Dhuthar Thareeai Jeeo ||1|| Joining the Sat Sangat, the True Congregation, and singing the Glorious Praises of the Lord, you shall cross over the treacherous and terrifying world-ocean. ||1|| ਮਾਝ (ਮਃ ੪) (੩) ੧:੩ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੫ ਪੰ. ੧ Raag Maajh Guru Ram Das ਮਿਲਿ ਸਤਸੰਗਿ ਬੋਲੀ ਹਰਿ ਬਾਣੀ ॥ Mil Sathasang Bolee Har Baanee || Joining the Sat Sangat, the True Congregation, I chant the Bani of the Lord's Word. ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਕਥਾ ਮੇਰੈ ਮਨਿ ਭਾਣੀ ॥ Har Har Kathhaa Maerai Man Bhaanee || The Sermon of the Lord, Har, Har, is pleasing to my mind. ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਹਰਿ ਮਨਿ ਭਾਵੈ ਮਿਲਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਪੀਜੈ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥ Har Har Anmrith Har Man Bhaavai Mil Sathigur Anmrith Peejai Jeeo ||2|| The Ambrosial Nectar of the Lord's Name, Har, Har, is so sweet to my mind. Meeting the True Guru, I drink in this Ambrosial Nectar. ||2|| ਮਾਝ (ਮਃ ੪) (੪) ੨:੩ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੫ ਪੰ. ੯ Raag Maajh Guru Ram Das Good sangat increases love of God: ਕਿਰਪਾ ਕਰੇ ਜਿਸੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਸਾਧੂ ਸੰਗੁ ॥ Kirapaa Karae Jis Paarabreham Hovai Saadhhoo Sang || The Supreme Lord showers His Mercy, and we find the Saadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy. ਜਿਉ ਜਿਉ ਓਹੁ ਵਧਾਈਐ ਤਿਉ ਤਿਉ ਹਰਿ ਸਿਉ ਰੰਗੁ ॥ Jio Jio Ouhu Vadhhaaeeai Thio Thio Har Sio Rang || The more we increase it, the more we become imbued in God's love. ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ (ਮਃ ੫) ਅਸਟ (੨੬) ੯:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੭੧ ਪੰ. ੪ Sri Raag Guru Arjan Dev That's the fruit of good sangat. Guru Sahib says whatever sort of sangat we keep, that's what we become: ਕਬੀਰ ਮਨੁ ਪੰਖੀ ਭਇਓ ਉਡਿ ਉਡਿ ਦਹ ਦਿਸ ਜਾਇ ॥ Kabeer Man Pankhee Bhaeiou Oudd Oudd Dheh Dhis Jaae || Kabeer, the mind has become a bird; it soars and flies in the ten directions. ਸਲੋਕ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ (ਭ. ਕਬੀਰ) (੮੬):੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੩੬੯ ਪੰ. ੧ Salok Bhagat Kabir ਜੋ ਜੈਸੀ ਸੰਗਤਿ ਮਿਲੈ ਸੋ ਤੈਸੋ ਫਲੁ ਖਾਇ ॥੮੬॥ Jo Jaisee Sangath Milai So Thaiso Fal Khaae ||86|| According to the company it keeps, so are the fruits it eats. ||86|| ਸਲੋਕ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ (ਭ. ਕਬੀਰ) (੮੬):੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੩੬੯ ਪੰ. ੧ Salok Bhagat Kabir

Responsibility before the Sangat in the Sikh Rehit Maryada The Sikh Rehit Maryada available here outlines how Sikhs are responsible before the Sangat: If you're one of those who hates the SGPC, the same basic thing exists in Taksali or Nihang rehit. If you don't accept any of those, you're neither in the mainstream nor the alternative stream of Sikhism. You're just on your own little island doing whatever comes to mind. Which you can do. You can do whatever you want, but where do you get off pompously asking me where I got the idea that Sikhs are responsible to the Sangat?

A Catholic woman posted that some Sikh woman started having adulterous relations with the Catholic's husband. I posted: Then some anonymous "giani" replies: My response: Where did you get the idea that Sikhs are not supposed to be repsonsible before the sangat? I'm guessing you view Sikhism as merely an individual endeavor. (If not, reply with what you meanwhen you think Sikhs have no responsibility before the Sangat.) That's not Guru Nanak Dev ji's conception of religion. (I do not want to get sidetracked on terminology of religion vs. dharam. If you want to call it dharam, fine.) You do know that Guru Nanak ji created a panth, right? ਮਾਰਿਆ ਸਿਕਾ ਜਗਤ੍ਰਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਪੰਥ ਚਲਾਇਆ। Maariaa Sikaa Jagati Vichi Naanak Niramal Panthhu Chalaaiaa | In the world, he established the authority (of his doctrines) and started a religion, devoid of any impurity (niramal panth). ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੧ ਪਉੜੀ ੪੫ ਪੰ. ੪ A panth is an organized religion. It's not a free-for-all. Question: Is a Sikh responsible before the Guru? If not, then what's the point of calling himself a Sikh? If, on the other hand, a Sikh is responsible before the Guru, then who holds the Guruship today? Answer: The Sangat/panth/Panj Piyare. Do you deny Guru Gobind Singh ji invested the Guruship within the Panth (Sangat)?

She is doing it out of respect, i.e. since she is familiar with this site she knows the language sikhs use and using it when conversing with us out of respect. What proof whatsoever do you have about that statement? There are non-Sikhs who are regulars on this site, and post from time to time with their accounts, but she is not one of them, because she posted as a guest. And so are you. I posed question, because there has been a spate of fake posts on this site, and it's a legitimate question. On the other hand, you are making wild leap.

Thanks for sharing. This is another example of sharing knowledge with the Sangat instead of merely dismissing everybody other than you as ignorant. Hope you keep it up. Very likely. Our grandparents ate pre-Green Revolution wheat in Punjab. The Green Revolution varieties (and their cousins in the West) are quite a bit different from the olden ones.

Best to stick to SGPC gutkas. I'd not buy a gutka from a miscellaneous publisher who just throws together a gukta to sell it and make some money.

Well, you're right that the state of Dasam bani authenticity in apps/Internet is atrocious, but that's true even in printed Gutkas.

What? It's true that it can be very easily altered, but any changes would be extremely easy to spot (unlike the physical form). Changes can be found within seconds. Huh? Nobody is changing Gurbani in the original form. People are not disposing of old recensions of Guru Granth Sahib, and replacing those with an iPad. Rather, Gurbani is just being made available on the Internet for those who want to access it that way. Totally agree, but nobody's saying to remove Guru Granth Sahib ji from the Gurdwaras. I would say the vast majority of people who are accessing Gurbani on the Internet are not those would otherwise have pothis (2 volume sets) of Guru Granth Sahib at home, so basically this expanding the reach of Gurbani.

Come on, bro, are you a member of a Midwive's Association? Or a member of a midwives' group on Facebook? Not to mention that, again, that would only be anecdotal info from a nurse here or there, and not systematic information like a census is. They would not be empty. First of all, that would only apply to new school generations coming in about 5 years after birth, not immediately. Second, Sikhs' TFR is 1.6, not 0. Third, look at the chart. It shows a decrease in TFR from 1.95 to 1.58. That's an 18.9% decrease, not a 100% drop. Fourth, Sikhs are not all of Punjab. They are 58% of Punjab, meaning the 18.9% becomes an 11% drop. Again, look at the chart, it shows Hindus having more kids (2.13) than the number of people required to make them (2). All of which adds up to a mere slight decrease in coming years' school enrollments, if any. Finally, since you want to mention anecdotal data, you know quite well that our grandparents' generation had 5 or more kids. Do you see people having 5 kids these days? No. So just anecdotally, the total fertility rate has gone way down. The census merely documents exactly how far down it has gone.

World leaders meeting/shaking hands with terrorists/dictators/unsavory characters: Ghadafi: Robert Mugabe/Jack Straw Yitzhak Rabin/Yassir Arafat Assad: Mobutu Sese Seko After all this, people are wailing about some wannabe (Atwal) who made an attempt to kill some diplomat? Ghadafi was the mastermind behind the Lockerbie bombing, and Western governments totally forgave him (before they decided to depose him). Tony Blair and Ghadafi about to French kiss: Did Terry M give the same treatment to Tony Blair? Pathetic.