MiriPiri

Bundha Ji, thank you for knowledgable post. A simple explaination is all that was required. In this day and age, even the poor sit on chairs, so I think in the modern age, we could sit on chairs, with Maharaj high above. However, out of the tens of millions of our congreation, maybe only a few thousand NEED charis, so a mass move towards chairs is unnecessary. I think there should be a row of chairs at the back of the hall, spread out so people sit on the floor between people to stop them chattering, then everyone can be happy. There we go, end of discussion, end of personal insults. I find it disturbing how many angry young Sikhs there are. I am no better than an insect really, but we should always remember (when our emotions start taking over us) how the Gurus would have acted towards people - with respect or disrespect?

I know I am really ignorant, but why de we sit on the floor? Why can't we sit on chairs and have the Maharaj Ji at an elevated level like the pulpit (?) in a church? I don't think it si a religious conviction, but more the fact that traditionally in India, people have sat on the floor or cross-legged on manjia. As thousands of people would congregate first to our great Gurus, then to Gurdwaras, rather than erecting thousands of benches, it was easier and cheaper to sit on the floor. So in other words, the tradition to sit on the floor came about because of our poor heritage as opposed to God's will. My parents say it is so everyone sits at the same level. But you can do that on benches. Personally, I don't mind sitting on the floor even when I am carrying sporting injuries (lol) but it seems to make sense to me in this day and age to make it easier for everyone. Having said all that, there IS somethign more spiritual about sitting on the floor. More natural. You are literally touching the Earth, i.e a solid structure embdedded into the Earth. That's just me thinking aloud though.

Noone has all the answers, but educate yourself in your faith to have more answers. Then you will be closer to your faith and others will respect it more because you will have legitimate answers. If they don't embrace Sikhi, then at least, they will respect it more. If someone is arguing for an ulterior motive, e.g. to big-up their own faith, then cut the argument short by sayign you don't have all the answers, but you will be finding out from the Guru Granth Sahib Ji and that's what they should do if they really ar that interested! ;-)

In this climate, this is not surprising. You are not allowed into an aeroplane with a Kirpan. Where there is a security risk, they do and should, take no chances. If they were lenient, hwo long before an Islamic extremist disgusied themself as a Sikh and did their worst? I mean, to most (ignorant) folk, a Sikh is still seen as akin to Osam Bin Laden!!

If you put it like that, then I take your point. He was a great leader of Sikhi origin, but not a great spiritual Sikhi. I agree that when taking the discussion out of just the Sikhi realm, he was a great man.

No doubt the Mharaja will be more revered by the common (Sikh) man when history looks back at these two leaders of state. But who should we as Sikhs admire more? Manmohan Singh who soem say has "sided with the enemy of Khalistan" but others would say is a fundamentally a good Sikh? Or Ranjit Singh who led and expanded a Kingdom based in the Punjab and could superfically be called a Khalsa nation, even though he had mostly non-Sikh advisors and administrators, and himself partook in very non-Sikh practices?

He had concubines. He drank. He reportedly did drugs. He started wars to gain land and goods. Oh, but he went to gurdwara once a week and he was called Singh. What would we say if we had a leader that acted like this today? I'm not a good Sikh myself, but I don't do any of the stuff he did so forgive me for sounding righteous, but the things that have been said about him by non-Sikhs are not flattering in the context of this forum's members' core beliefs.

Bhaji, the idea of a discussion is that you start a topic then it flows from there. Should we start a new thread called "Maharaja Ranjit Singh In The Eyes Of Sikhs"???

I think you are a bit confused, bro. Your poitn is a good one, but not in this context. You see, Ranjit Singh, from what I have read, was not a leader of Sikhs, but a leader of a state who happened to be a Sikh. In today's world, his equivalent is Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India. What is more, we can respect the positive side of Ranjit Singh (the leader) but please do not revere him as a good Sikh.

Such humility even as the Maharaja. But what happened to his Muslim wife?

I have a degree in Physics and I would urge anyone to be objective rather than subjective in reaching conclusions that they WANT to reach, but are not necessarily proof or otherwise of the greatness of Sikhism. A simple example is that of the 4.5 beats per minute and its relationship to indcing a trance and how raags are related to this principle. It is pretty obvious to me that raags became raags because they, out of all the music to hand, had this effect on their lsteners and performers. Not because a Guru Ji were conversent in Quantum Physics or neuroscience or had "inside knowledge" to this effect. It was purely an empirical creation. Having said this, I will explore this subject further as it is very interesting. Thanks for bringing it to mine and others' attention. :TH:

Not sure what you mean by the Guru Ji book and not sure if you are being sarcastic (?) but as Sikhs we believe the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj and Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj to be the same. If you see any contradictions then start learning and reciting Sri Jaap Sahib, Sri Tav Prasaad Swayay and Sri Benti Chaupai Sahib. Of course I'm not being sarcastic. I've lost my hair and I am trying to comprehend what that means in a spiritual sense. I meant Guru Granth Sahib Ji. I really would appreciate soem extracts regarding hair as I am sceptical about the hair issue with regards to what someone told me, i.e. it is a source of strength. As a amrit-dhari Sikh he quoted teh story of Samson and Dlilah which puzzled me as that is an Old Testament story. Anyway, I digress.

What does the Guru Ji book say about the hair topic, or is it purely from teachings of Guru Gobind Singh Ji?

Sikhs should keep khesh. It has been stated that khesh is power. Hmmm. So what is God trying to tell you when yours falls out in your early 20's? You are not worthy of a Sikh spirit? As you can tell I am not very learned, but I am confused. Enlighten me, please.

I agree, paintings can be what they like. Especially if you are painting for yourself. But if you are painting and producing artwork for general release that will be used in people's homes and possibly gurdwaras, and people will look at them and say, "these are how the gurus were", then it is incumbent on the artist to be respectful of the accurate history of the subject material. That's all I am saying.

I disagree. When representing the Guru Jis in their native surroundings doing their actual things with photo-realistic artistic style, then it is incumbent on the artist to carry that theme of realism through to the iconography and historical artefacts depicted therein. The reason: people see these as 'photographs' is because of their style, i.e. they are realistic. Therefore, they autmoatically think what they are seeing is actually what happened. So therefore the artist has a responsibility. Artistic license can only be used as an excuse for inaccuracy when, e.g. in films, they say, "it is a dramatisation of actual events". In picture art, the equivalent would be, for example, if they did a cartoon style picture for schools and clearly wanted to show that the Guru Ji's were of Sikh origin. Then they coudl use a khanda justifiably. Having said all that, I would certainly buy some stuff from here if the historic facts were remedied.

Really, celebration of one's birthday is a bit egotistical. However, you can use it an excuse to express love for Waheguru. A bit like using Valentine's day to express love for your wife even though you love her all year round. So in other words, it's a bad idea that you can turn into a good.

A thought came to me when driving. I saw a Sikh bhajhi passing my in his big 5 litre Range Rover. Maybe he was competing with Uncle Ji I saw at weddign a few months ago who had a 5 litre Mercedes S class. Maybe they will be reminded one day who destroyed the environment the most when they travelled their short journey on Earth. Maybe we ought to have some environmental education to protect God's paradise that he created for us while we are here. Meanwhile, please direct my ignorant self towards some relevant passages in the SGGS Ji.

The actual answer is that a mirror - a standard mirror - is silver. But the more polished it gets, the less you can see of the silver, and the more of what is being reflected. Polish yourselves withe grace of Guru Ji and reflect his beauty.

No need for the argument. God (the Gurus) did not write the story so need to argue if it is true or not. Whatever actually happened, the point is, Guru Ji, on that day, taught us that faith and commitment will bring us the ultimate reward. You cannot argue with that, as that is true faith, not the belief in miracles.

I think our Hindhu ancestors' blood runs too rich in us that we have to depend on stories of miracles and super-human strength to infuse within us the belief that we are somehow special in the eyes of God. We are not special because we believe in these miracles and therefore take amrit. We are special because we take amrit and release the 4 thieves from our lives. It's not complex. Personally, I don't care if these miracles actually occurred, just that the stories prove a point. It is clear to me that the stories, when retold, and because of the manner in, and purpose for which, they are told, are to suit the purposes of the tellers. What I'm saying is look beyond the miralces and understand what we need to change within ourselves and let's aspire to the ideals. Miracles won't change the world, only the actions of millions will.

Some people have said, we should not bow down to non-Sikh prophet. So, should Sikh children go to a Christian school? And even if they go to a normal state school, should they partake in Christian worship and hymn-singing which extols the virtues and glory of the Christian God and writings?

Find it here, bro... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes...tx/singularity/

This is an interesting topic that I have grappled with for many years. More than most of you lucky people who have an ingrained faith in the indescribable being. Firstly, science is not in competition with God, but it tries to explain physical phenomena. This comes about to aid human beings and to satisfy our natural thirst for knowledge. God, if you believe in it must have given us that curiosity, so science is his gift. Secondly, I saw this documentary that predicts the advances in computing and artificial intelligence will within 30 years lead to machines that are more intelligent than us. They will then have the ability to think above our level and may create machines many times their own intelligence, and so on a nd so forth. Ultimately, the scientist descirbed them as "Gods". I think what he meant was they woudl have infinite intelligence compared to us. Maybe these beings will lead us to a "scientific" answer to God and there will at last be the universal truth behind religion that will cure all the world's problems! Or the robots take over and this means God doesn't need us, and this will prove we are not as closely connected to God as we thought, or alternatively, there is no God as we understand it today. Thirdly, God is what you believe. I don't think anyone has a right to tell others what to believe, but we all have a right to believe that what we believe is the truth....so long as we don't hurt others, especially in teh name of religion.

Please can anyone tell me if there is a fact sheet available in Punjabi (and English) that I can pin up on local Gurdwara notice board to let my local community know about the virtues of organ donation.