akaltaksal
-
Posts
91 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Calendar
Forums
Posts posted by akaltaksal
-
-
On 12/4/2017 at 5:26 AM, jkvlondon said:
I DUnno veer ji , wasn't the Boston shooter and his missus educated ? Also even if they are lukewarm they still go along with the Ummah and show willing to not be highlighted
Not from their childhood. He was a different case. As criticism of Islam by Academia and public figures increase so does apostasy and laxity among muslims. All it requires is for people to think critically, and once that begins to happen, all abrahamic religions start to die from the inside out.
2 -
On 11/29/2017 at 10:48 PM, 13Mirch said:
Do you have evidence supporting this?
Piara Singh Padam, last paragraph of Bhai Chaupa Singh's Rehatnama (In the two complete printed versions of today.)
0 -
14 hours ago, sikhni777 said:
I heard someone saying it out of a hindu scripture. I am sure which one though.
It's from Mangal Prakash, not a particularly reliable book.
0 -
I think you're over exaggerating the threat level. Europeans (including Britishers) may be cucks when it comes to dealing with the obviously troublesome foreign minority but there'll naturally be a tipping point, where the host population will have had enough and retaliate against both the muslims and the complicit left. This is already becoming visible with the rise of right-wing groups across Europe. Secondly, we also have to take western civilization and culture into consideration. The more Muslims (or any exclusive non-western ethnic group residing in the west) tend to get educated, the less religious they will be. The more they get exposed to western culture, the more they assimilate. A generation later, Atheism, lack of religiosity and apostasy won't be as taboo. Islam will end up in the same place Christianity is in today. Muslims in the west who hold a multi-faceted identity and are engaged with both cultures tend to reconcile and reform their beliefs to adjust to society and create ideological alignment and compatibility between the two.
0 -
On 11/22/2017 at 7:45 PM, 13Mirch said:
Chibber and Chaupa Singh had already lost the plot prior.
Bhai Chaupa Singh didn't lose the plot. The copies of his Rehatnama that we have so far were interpolated by Gurbaksh Singh, Balakha Singh, and a fourth person. Certain injunctions were written in, others removed. From the manuscripts extant today, we find three to four different handwritings.
0 -
On 11/19/2017 at 12:15 AM, 13Mirch said:
If I recall correctly, a few months ago I put up a post on this forum highlighting some of the discrepancies in the Suraj Prakash. A mod took it down because he felt it would offend a majority of the forum. I, however, feel that Sikh Sangat is not emulative of it's much maligned reputation i.e. a forum full of fanatics. In the latter spirit, then, I ask that can someone then explain the following passage from another traditional text- Chibber's Bansavalinamah:
'Kahan Singh Trehan from Goindwal and a descendent of Guruji.
As a Sardar (chief) Sikh sat at the Bunga (Akal Bunga, Akal Takhat) himself.
Sikhs came to the fair (organised by) local residents circumabulating (the Harimandar).
A Sikh going in front of them met these Sikhs and embraced them. (4)
These Sikhs also hugged him lovingly.
They loved him very much.
After hugging each other when they departed.
Kahan Singh ji saw that particular sikh when all those Sikhs separated. (5)
He (Kahan Singh) sent a man to bring that Sikh to him.
Kahan Singh ji asked,”O Sikh! Which Sikh are you, what caste are you called by?”
Sikh stood there hugely embarrassed.
Then Singh ji again said,”What Sikh are you known as?” (6)
Then he said, “Sir, I am a Mazhabi Sikh (a sikh originally from a low caste)”.
Then Singh ji ordered those other Sikhs to be brought in as well immediately.
Those local Sikhs all arrived,
The ones who had embraced and hugged this other sikh lovingly. (7)
(Singh ji) spoke thus, “Bhai Sikhs, do you know this sikh?”
All those said.”Yes sir”.
(Singh ji) spoke thus, “Which sikh is he, what is his caste?”
They said, sir, landowner sikh and he is known as ‘Sandhu’ (8)(usually a jat surname but occasionally lower castes also may have this surname)
Then he was asked in front of these Sikhs.
“Bhai Sikh! What is your caste? He mentioned, ‘Mazhabi’ (sikh from low castes )
The local Sikhs were surprised on hearing this.
These Sikhs said, “Sir, he has eaten food with us” (9)
All of us Sikhs have served him food making him sit in our own kitchen.
(persons of lower castes were not allowed to enter kitchen of higher caste persons)
Food in (our) plate and water in the bowl was given to him to drink.
This sikh (had) said ‘I am landowner sikh and am a local resident of Amritsar”
All Sikhs have served him with food in their own homes one by one. (10)
Singh ji asked (the ‘Mazhabi’ Sikh), “Why Bhai! Why did you do this?”
He said,”Sir, I am sorry. I forgot (went astray)”.
(Bhai Kahan Singh)Spake thus,”It is not you who forgot (went astry), it is these (Sikhs) who forgot (went astray).
They only saw Guru’s insignia, didn’t see your body (person).” (11)
Bhai Sikha! How could you forget?
Why didn’t you check for your mother, father, brother, sister or relatives?
Those in whose family you were born, grew up and had food together and socialise. How did you forget that (you are from that) family? (12)
It is these Sikhs who got misled by just recognising Guru’s symbols.
Why did you forget? You seem to be fairly knowledgable.
You have done this intentionally.
It is these Sikhs who got misled who saw only Guru’s symbols. (13)
Following just the Guru’s symbols these Sikhs got misled.
So that nobody may repeat this mistake (in the future).
A barber was called and his hair were shaved.
Making him sit on a donkey was taken around the town. (14)
He was hanged by the side of Tunda Sar (a water pond )
And (Kahan Singh) asked this to the local resident Sikhs.
“You arrange a Yag (a sacred purification Hindu worship), do Gurpurab, and prepare Parsad”.
“You were misled by Guru’s symbols, so you are not stigmatised by this”. (15)
“Do not talk about this in the township”
“Keep the tenets of Sikhism in your mind”.
“The Turks (muslim rulers) are eager to find faults lest some trouble arises”
“There should not be any gossiping about this in the township at all”. (16)
All the Sikhs said,”Sir, you did the right thing that you punished him”.
None would repeat such a thing again.
It created such a fear and respect for Sikhism.
That even if someone dropped a thing somewhere, it would continue lying there, and no one would take it away. (17)
(Fourteenth Chapter of “Bansavalinama Dasan Patshaheean Ka” “Genealogy of ten patshahis”)
I don't claim any expertise on Sikh literature/historicity, but Chibber's narration does not fit in with an already established chronology regarding Baba Kahan Singh Ji. The Baba (let's get over his differences with Baba Banda Singh) is said to have catered to the lower castes and raised them to the levels of the higher castes. Initially I asked a Taksali Singh to explain this passage to me. The most he could say was that the text dealt with telling lies although it is evident that Baba Kahan Singh Ji, for Chibber, has the Singh executed for refusing to follow traditional Caste norms.
Has the text been corrupted? Dr. Ganda Singh, utilizing the Suraj Prakash as a case study, had the following to say regarding the corruption of historic Sikh texts:
'Some writers allege that the reason for the rejection of Ram Rai was that he was born of a handmaid (Cunningham, p. 62). It would have been preposterous for him, as Narang says. to prefer this claim, if he had been born in that way. Really he had the same mother as Har Krishan. The story of Guru Har Rai having married seven wives, who were all sisters, is found only in one MS of Suraj Prakash and is written on unpaged leaves which are clearly an interpolation. Unfortunately this copy became the basis of the editions nowadays in vogue. Other copies mention only one marriage. Mahima Prakash, which is much older than this book, also mentions only one wife. See on this point the annotation of Bhai Vir Singh on Suraj Prakash.'
-Dr. Ganda Singh, Baba Teja Singh; 'A Short History of the Sikhs,' vol. i, pg. 48.
The mod in question informed me, last time, that the other thread would only be resurrected when he/she established the veracity of my post. Obviously by begging the question no veracity can be established much less manifested; I pray, then, that this thread be left open for some constructive debate on Sikh literature and/or it's authenticity on some points.
Bansawalinama is seen as a source of general history. Scholars use and cite it in regards to dates, chronology, and certain events. No one accepts every detail of the text. Cross referencing and evaluation of each part of the text is employed when dealing with such books.
Many of the authors of such Granths were from a hindu background, so adding a brahminical flavor to their narrations is of no surprise.
1 -
On 11/22/2017 at 4:56 AM, Big_Tera said:
It is well known around the world that Homosexuality is very high among the muslim world and population.
Some estimates put it that almost 40 to 60% of muslim males are homosexual or bisexual. Meaning they are attracted to both woman and man. Even in their religious scriptures rewards in heaven include young boys for them to induldge in their beastaly and depraved fanstasies. Some even say that their prophet Muhammad was a gay as he had a secret affair with another man.
"Homosexuality was and is widely practised in Islamic countries.To please the homosexuals among his followers muhamed promised them pre-pubescent boys in Paradise. So after committing plunder, loot, rape and murder in this life, the followers of Islam get "rewarded" by untouched virginal youths who are fresh like pearls"
Paksitan regulalrly aswell as other muslim nations tops the list of countrys with most internet searches for gay pornography. Meaning there is great amount of proof that they have high number of homos in their country.
What could be the cause of this. Is it due to genetic factors caused by rampant inbreeding?
Why is this even important? That's something they should concern themselves with, not us.
2 -
On 11/28/2017 at 12:51 AM, Guest Guest_Singh said:
"Muslims seem to have a larger majority of troublemakers compared to other faiths most probably because their holy book states that only believers will go to heaven and all the rest to hell, plus they pretty much recruit from the bottom of the barrel which doesn't help matters...."
No, they are not physically threatening, just too much questioning, sometimes it effects your belief! Muslim and Christians and Athiests are always having dialogue and always questioning each others positions, but Sikhs always stay away from such events and I think it's a good thing. Because we keep to ourself, we don't believe in force conversion or anything like that or stopping people in the street start a street debate with anyone and challenge them on their beliefs or lack of it. But the Muslims think they are better than everyone else maybe that's why they cant keep their faith personal, at home, they have to come out to the market, street, university and start challenging everyone.
Questions are only seen as bad if one doesn't have answers to them or is unable to debate such a topic due to a lack of education in it.
This secular, pacifistic, unbothered, and ignorant attitude is very un-Sikh like. The Guru has done Khandan of Bharam, false Panths, and Fokat Karam since the beginning. That was how our Panth began. When you instruct someone to avoid or ignore criticism or false propaganda, you're leaving it unanswered and unchallenged in the public eye. This also has to do with the fact that the average Sikh in the west does not properly educate him/herself in Sikh history and Dharam. A lot of the points brought up against Sikhi by these preachers are easily answerable and can be countered, as I found them. If we come across any point raised, it's best to take our time to study the subject thoroughly so we may answer it and be able to debate and dismiss their arguments.
ਜੇ ਕੋ ਮਾਰੈ ਈਟ ਢੀਮ ਪਾਥਰ ਹਨੈ ਰਿਸਾਇ ।24।
"If one hits you with a mud brick, ferociously strike back with a boulder."
0 -
Muslims have a perception that their faith is superior, and must outdo every other. Furthermore they attempt to rationalize and legitimize their own ideology (mental gymnastics are employed here) whilst attacking others. Thus they attempt to "prove" the veracity and legitimacy of their own ideology.
As far as I'm concerned, only a handful of scholars or educated Sikhs are needed to address the points they bring up against Sikhi. Most of what they use to attack Gurmat is misconstrued or arguably inapplicable. They view all religions (even Dharmic) from an Abrahamic (specifically Islamic) lens. Which renders them unable to understand the faiths in the first place because they look for an Abrahamic anatomy and framework in any religion, judging it through their own criteria, which is ludicrous.
The biggest enemy of Islam, and any Semitic religion for that matter, is education and critical thinking itself.
0 -
Halal Meat is a severe Bujjar Kurehat.
ਹੁਕਾ ਔ ਕੁਠਾ ਚਰਸ ਤੰਬਾਕੂ ਭੂਲਹਿ ਸਿੰਘ ਨਜੀਕ ਨ ਜਾਵੈ॥
Hukah, kutha, tobacco; A Singh does not go near these.
-Sri Gur Katha, Bhai Jaita Ji
ਆਪਨ ਇਸ਼ਟ ਬਿਨਾ ਅਵਰਨ ਕਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਨਹਿਂ ਲੇਵੇ॥
A Singh shall not eat the Prasad of any other faith than is own Ishta.
ਮਤ ਪ੍ਰਵਿਰਤ ਭਏ ਤਿਸ ਜਨ ਕੀ ਅਵਕਨ ਕਾ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਜੋ ਜੇਵੈ॥
The mind of such a Sikh is polluted by eating the oblations of another religion.
ਅਰ ਫਿਰ ਸਿਦਕ ਭਿ ਡੋਲਹਿ ਤਿਸ ਕਾ ਸਮ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਜੋ ਸਭਸ ਜਨੇਵੈ॥੮॥
One's Sidhak [faith;belief;principles of living] wavers by eating the oblations of all and sundry.
-Sri Gur Katha, Bhai Jaita Ji
Halal meat is meat from an animal which has been slaughtered by the Islamic method with Kalma prayers.
The only Maas which is Parwan by Guru Sahib is the Maas of Jhatka, ideally with Maryada. The Islamic method is not the way of the Khalsa.
What your uncle is doing is a severe transgression of the Sikh Rehat. If he wishes to consume Maas, it must not be Halal or any other non-Sikh religious method. Ideally he should eat Jhatka. If not, then Maas from a method slaughtered in a humane way, which isn't an oblation to any faith should be eaten.
0 -
3 hours ago, superkaur said:
Say you have a young brother or sister or you have your own kids...
How would you stop or guide them from converting to another religion or leaving Sikhi altogether and become atheist?
In Islam and christianity the kids are brainwashed quite heavily against leaving the faith which would mean eternal hellfire for the disbeliever and only path to salvation is following that faith.
Does Sikhi have anything like that in scriptures which we should be teaching our people so that they do not take lightly the thought of leaving the protection and beauty of Sikhi. I know there is verses which state without the Guru there is no salvation (of the soul) in this life...
I don't know how to stop someone from being an Atheist. However, if they're converting to another religion, point out how stupid that other religion is. Have them compare both faiths and traditions thoroughly. Look at both critique and merit. Evaluate each faith. Plain and simple.
0 -
6 hours ago, proactive said:
But haven't you seen me and Chatanga and others challenge his pro-Pakistan narrative? You would have a point if we just allowed such views to go unchallenged. As for faith, unless he has written anything against the Gurus or Guru Granth Sahib then he can stay. If he wants to criticise Sikhs for any reason then if it is based on fact then he can but you can bet he will be challenged on this. Let him stay and let him learn. he wants to reform Islam which in my view cannot be reformed but let him learn that there are religions such as Sikhi which does not need any reform and in which no reasonable person can find anything in its moral code to object to.
I'll let it go. You do have a point there.
0 -
In regards to the Kashmir issue. Pakistan claims the ENTIRETY of Kashmir, as does India. Which is faulty.
Pakistan's claim was that it's a Muslim majority province and thus should be acceded to Pakistan. However, with that being true, one fact has to noted: There is a Hindu/Buddhist/Sikh Majority in the Jammu and Ladakh region, with significant minorities in Kargil (Southern Kargil is majority non-Muslim) and Doda.
If anything, it would have to be partitioned like The Panjab and the Bengal. And that wouldn't solve Pakistan's water insecurity.
0 -
20 hours ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:
Quit it already. Guru Sahibs or Sikhs of the old didn't detest every Muslim, nor do we need too. You're coming off as try hard. Are you just scared of debate??
What debate? Half of all you people talk as if the last book you read was in primary school (I guess someone's gotta keep the Kathavachiks in Business).
I'm here mostly to discuss, learn, give info, and correct.
And I just don't like people that push the pro-Pakistani narrative, or those who really have no business here, faith wise. ??♂️
0 -
8 hours ago, chatanga said:
Has this "turk" insulted our Gurus? No, so just leave him alone. He is only sharing info and learning new things as well. And it's all historic anyway. I would rather have him on than these missionary dogs who claim that the Gurus were ordinary people like ourselves. They have insulted the Gurus through their distorion of history.
Listen to this dog dhapali:
https://www.facebook.com/nirmaljitsingh.nimma/videos/636750243194518/
and this dog dhundlu:
https://www.facebook.com/nirmaljitsingh.nimma/videos/637304313139111/
and then listen to this:
https://www.facebook.com/nirmaljitsingh.nimma/videos/636750553194487/
You would rather have these dogs on here ?
Heretic or a Turk. Both are repulsive. The heretic is an internal threat where as the Turk is external. Whether or not he's insulted the Gurus (as of yet), is not the issue. It's the fact that he's Turk-Beeraj.
0 -
8 hours ago, chatanga said:
Such as?
Anatolia, and Balkan region.
0 -
3 hours ago, BhForce said:
Is this in the Janam Sakhi? Can you post it?
There is no one JanamSakhi. There are numerous of Janamsakhis.
0 -
3 hours ago, BhForce said:
Good of you to bring up this episode. It shows that putting the women of a enemy (defeated or not) into sexual slavery, as allowed in the Koran, is not allowed in Sikhism.
Yet, this episode is not recorded in Guru Granth Sahib, and this fact underlines the importance of sources outside Gurbani for Sikhism. Those Sikhs who mistakenly think that Sikhi consists of Guru Granth Sahib and only Guru Granth Sahib ji are asked to re-evaluate their position. (I'm not saying you believe this.)
Could you post the relevant texts from these sources? Thanks.
Agreed. Any Sikh who is accord with historic Sikhism as passed onto us by our Gurus and preserved through the years orally and in our history would never think to enslave another human being.
Could you post a few if you have them handy?
Again, these are sources outside of Gurbani, but that's OK, because Guru Sahib asked us to listen to these outside sources (with discernment, of course):
ਬਾਬਾਣੀਆ ਕਹਾਣੀਆ ਪੁਤ ਸਪੁਤ ਕਰੇਨਿ ॥
“The stories of one’s ancestors make the children good children.”
(Ang 951)
and
ਸੁਣਿ ਸਾਖੀ ਮਨ ਜਪਿ ਪਿਆਰ ॥
Listen to the stories of the devotees, O my mind, and meditate with love.
ਬਸੰਤੁ (ਮਃ ੫) ਅਸਟ. (੧) ੧:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੧੯੨ ਪੰ. ੩
Raag Basant Guru Arjan Dev, p 1192(The Sakhis listed are those of "non-Sikhs".)
Another great quote from outside of Gurbani.
Yes, I'm looking through some of the Janamsakhis I have.
0 -
1 hour ago, chatanga said:
No at the moment this is still being researched that Guru Nanak and Bhai Mardana visited Rome. There are some interesting documents in the Vatican archives that state that two people of such names came from the East and spent some time in Rome.
Rüm is used to refer to many regions across Europe-Asia.
0 -
1 hour ago, chatanga said:
What kind of Sikh insults their own Guru?
They don't believe in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib and kautak/Chamatkaars. They haven't cursed or insulted their any of the 10 Patshahees. That may be an insult to us, But not from a non-partisan persepective. Turkrreya di Haami ehna toh behatar ja faidemand nahi. Turkus have no qualms with insulting our Gurus, in any manner. Missionaries are more favorable than Musalmaans, As objectionable as they be.
0 -
10 hours ago, YOYO29 said:
None give.You said i have not met any sikh or hindu who view abrahmic faith with their dhamric lense.And i told you there are plenty hindus. Whether they are educated or not.This was not point. My point there are people from dharmic religions who view abrahmic religion their dharmic goggles.
I meant people from Academic circles (scholars).
0 -
8 hours ago, chatanga said:
I dont see you having any problem with the missionarys and their lies on this forum.
Yeah, because missionaries are Sikhs, at the end of the day.
2 -
1 hour ago, YOYO29 said:
Aint going nowhere.There are sikhs on islamic forums too so just consider it way of maintaining balance lol
Yeah, well acting like them isn't really the best idea.
0 -
7 minutes ago, YOYO29 said:
if you are a bit social or active on social media.You would know.There is no shortage of Hindutva thugs who view Christianity and Islam through their dharmic mindset.
Who gives a flying rat's a$$ about what people say on Social media? Look at the academic circles. Where it matters. Read a scholarly article or a book.
You can say anything on Social Media. Are any of those commenters, posters, etc. scholars or researchers? No. Their opinions will only affect people who have a poor educational background.
0
muslim population of UK will tripple by 2050
in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
Posted
I think you're overreacting here, there are cultural shifts happening. Yes, the very dimwitted ones will reproduce, however, their offspring will face the same struggle they faced: the struggle between adhering to an archaic faith vs. western values and culture.
Apostasy and irreligious attitudes are fast spreading among the Iranians and Turks (at least in my country). Where I live, 23% of those born into the muslim faith no longer identify with it. It'll slowly regress to where Christianity is the more it comes in contact with the west and it's culture.