MisterrSingh

Not in a way that was understood by my limited intellect. I need things spelled out in a way I understand. If that means consulting a book written in the 19th century by a white man who spent a some years in an ashram learning Vedic philosophy from a rishi, then so be it. ?

I recommend reading the Vedas, the Puranas, and the Upanishads, and any accompanying texts that explain them. I skimmed through them a few months ago, and surprisingly they clarified a few issues and questions I've been seeking answers for most of my life but wasn't getting anywhere regarding how certain things operate in Vedic or Dharmic spiritual matters of which Sikhi shares various principles. Either our gianis purposely withhold spiritual information from us to keep us ignorant and hooked on them spoon-feeding us guidance, or they don't see the value in nurturing a curious mind. ?

Although, closer to the topic, I don't begrudge anyone who wants to relax during the festive season. A superficial, cultural adherence to an internationally observed season of celebration isn't a crime.

The average Sikh in the West (not particularly religious or culturally aware aside from the bare basics they've gleaned over the years through cultural osmosis) arguably belongs, in my opinion, to a group that is the most eager to disavow its own kind and their ways in order to please and ingratiate themselves with a non-Sikh third party. Contemporary, middle-class millennial Sikhs suffer from a delusion whereby they've convinced themselves they're radicals, rebels, and allies of the downtrodden in the same vein as their ancestors, but on closer inspection they actually are stooges of a slick, corporate globalism that's veiled itself with the vestiges of the downtrodden underdog in order to appeal to those with some semblance of a conscience, or at least the kind of people who like to signal their piousness. When this particular group intersects with the contemporary religious or spiritual Western Sikh, that's when the fun and games begin! ?

An NKJ video appeared in my YouTube feed a few days ago. I haven't been keeping up with events for a few months, but apparently Harinder (or Ranjit Singh) did katha that seems to have ticked off quite a few people. I don't know the full story, but apparently there was vichaar on what "really" happened to Pehli Paatshah's body prior to the chaddhar / blanket incident when their jot departed their physical body. Anyway, in that video Harinder Singh withdraws his comments, and tries to frame it as a discussion / debate involving the sangat, probably trying to distance himself from the controversy.

Sometimes it's black and white. Always seeking the middle ground or the grey area despite evidence pointing to the contrary may seem like the fair and balanced approach, but clinging to that type of relativism because the apparent reality is unpalatable and difficult to process, doesn't lessen the veracity of the truthful fact itself. It just means the person in question is reluctant, unable, or afraid of attesting to the truth.

It's no coincidence the same families and figures continue to rear their heads in one form or another throughout history.

Gotta agree with this. It's not ideal, but we need a strong "street" presence away from the lily-livered, soft intellectuals in the diaspora quom who've aligned themselves with factions that serve us no purpose or benefit, or in extreme cases serve to do us serious harm under the guise of friendship and tolerance. Invariably, these guys are going to end up rubbing some people up the wrong way because they don't temper their strength with spirituality, but at this point in time we aren't in a place where we have much of a choice. Perhaps in the coming years we'll be blessed with more rounded personalities who are in-line with the full gamut of Gurmat values, but for now let's think ahead a little bit. I just wish we had more Sikhs with the spirit of warriors but also the unwavering loyalty for Sikhi and our people, coupled with cunning and knowledge to deal with the wolves in sheep's clothing. Any so-called educated or intellectually minded Sikh who doesn't identify with the thug lifestyle seems to gravitate almost as default to the side of our opponents. There's no sense of rajneeti at all. For the sake of clarity, I don't have any ties to any of the personalities in this issue. I'm an impartial observer.

I try not to get too caught up in something as nebulous as the Khalsa. It's like Catholics becoming upset when the Vatican doesn't seem to cater to individual or specific concerns. Plus, I'm not even sure how to define the Khalsa's strength as it pertains to an organisation such as City Sikhs. Do groups like City Sikhs even register their presence? How would the Khalsa go about interacting with these contemporary organisations?

It's true, lol. I expect to see, in my lifetime, these types of Sikhs attempting to push so many of the current niche, Far Left lifestyle choices onto the Sikh community in the next 20 to 30 years. The only reason they're tempering that push at the moment is not through choice, but because they understand the backlash isn't worth the hassle. With the passage of time (and as these trends become the norm in the mainstream), this faction of Sikhs will grow more powerful and vociferous, with official legislation backing them up for support, until they feel safe enough to wade into religious matters.

It's amusing because they'd consider themselves the creme of the crop among forward looking, modern Sikhs with their finger on the pulse of 21st century trends and moods. They'd probably consider most of us on here to be dinosaurs.

Nothing too sinister. It's just a case of using the Sikh label for commercial interests (bidding for business contracts through links forged by these types of organisations...) and securing funding from government sources under the guise of, as they would say, ensuring extremist attitudes in the community are tackled, etc. Most, if not everything, of the manner in which they undertake their work is rooted in the contemporary liberal worldview (pro-LGBTQ, pro-Open Borders, etc., as spearheaded by UN affiliated organizations, among others, such as the Council of Foreign Relations...), and it's safe to say the broad Sikh orthodox religion practiced by most of us isn't what drives the central ethos or activities of these groups. When there's compromises to be made, Sikhi is usually the first thing that makes way. Just my opinion.

There's a tonne of great documentaries on YouTube about every subject under the sun. Check them out. It'll take your mind off things and you'll learn something.

It's easy to fall into the trap of cynicism when it comes to these types of organisations and personalities. Deep down, for those of us who've been round the block, we know exactly what drives these people and what the type of people they are behind the scenes, but if some small good can come from whatever it is they do, then I think it's a good thing. I'm probably being a lot kinder than I should, lol.

I think for that transaction (between teacher and student) to reach and fulfil its most fruitful outcome, it requires exemplary character and personality on both sides, else I feel the exchange between the two parties might be rewarding for both parties (dependent on respective wants), but the greater moral and perhaps spiritual affects of imparting that knowledge is, in my opinion, devalued if the individuals involved in that transaction are unworthy or lacking in some way, particularly in the case of this subject as it relates to ensuring a unique art to a particular culture or group, does not gradually die out. Does that sound judgemental? Perhaps. I don't think that's necessarily a negative each and every time.

Let me think about it some more. I'm somewhere in the middle of understanding the need to reward the instructors for imparting their knowledge, but also realising the nature of how our cultural habits work against us in areas where there's very little immediate enrichment and material value. It's an interesting subject.

No one's worth harmfully affecting your equilibrium to this extent. Extract the lesson that needs to be learned from this experience; use it to make you wiser and stronger, and move on. Don't fall for the destructive dramatics pushed by entertainment industries and the media. I can guarantee you the ex object of your affection isn't moping around succumbing to grief and questioning her reality, lol. As harsh as it may sound, why expend so much mental energy for someone who doesn't want you? In the years you've pined for her, or at least mourned the relationship, has she been in touch? No, course not. She's moved on. In fact, I'd say she's portraying more of a masculine, resolute approach to this than OP. Make up your mind to move on and mentally discard the memories of the relationship, and get to fixing the truly important things, such as your health and mending your religious and spiritual ties. Always look at the bigger picture which means looking at your life with a critical eye from a distance. Don't spend too much time in your own head. Good luck.

I used H&S once (free sample through the letterbox, lol); never again. Made my kesh dry and brittle. Some of the more modest brands do a better job, such as Alberto Balsam and a few others. I've never had scalp issues but there must be a desi ilaaj for those type of flare-ups. It's one thing going out and smelling of various Indian oils, but I don't see a problem with massaging the head with oil for an hour or so before shampooing it out. Also aids in a peaceful night's sleep in my experience.

It'll set a precedent they don't want to encourage, which suggests on some level they understand there may be a possibility the Kashmir problem isn't something that would be resolved entirely in their favour. The important thing to understand is that India is a country of myriad and opposing religions, cultures and languages that are somehow held together by national state apparatus that wants to keep it that way. Why'd you think they went to the extents they did -- and still are doing although in a more subversive manner -- against Sikhs? They did not want Sikhs to break ties with India and form their own nation state, because if we'd succeeded others would've been emboldened and followed suit, and what would remain of India? That's why the "One India" propaganda is pushed so vehemently, even more so in current times, because of the Indian desire to ensure it does not "Balkanise" into disparate states based on religion and language. That would be the end, and it wouldn't arrive without bloodshed. Granted, the Kashmir issue is a little more thorny and complex, but I think the general idea still applies, plus the added needle of ceding ground to their old adversary would be a national humiliation.

The skirmishes between the two countries that took place during the 60s and 70s will never be allowed to happen again on that scale, until there's the inevitable and unavoidable regional conflict that will occur as part of a greater World War scenario where the Western string-pullers will be preoccupied with their own troubles to care what's happening. Like I said, an exclusive Ind v Pak situation will not be permitted to escalate as the rest of the world looks on. At best, we're looking at a behind the lines, t1t-for-tat situation of false encounters and border activity.

Kashmir belongs to whomever the CIA and, to a certain extent, MI6 says it belongs to. Wrap your heads around the controversial idea that India and Pakistan have sold the lie of independence and autonomy to their respective populations (and the world), but are actually vassal states of whichever Western superpower claims them behind the scenes. The dog and pony show conducted in the media is for the purposes of selling the lie. The CIA will never allow India to go to war with Pakistan or vice versa. Aside from the typical brinkmanship and public war of words, nothing will come of the current situation. If anything, India will use the turmoil created by their recent decision by turning it to their advantage for political means by honing in on smaller regional issues under the cover of this larger conflict.

So, generally speaking, (and this doesn't negate the good they do) it's an organisation that's subtly rebranded and commercialised the Sikh "message" in a globalist, progressive-friendly manner for... what purpose exactly? Reading between the lines, it seems to be another vehicle for trustees to extract funding and cultivate influential links and relationships for the purposes of external corporate and business interests.

Maybe I'm being naïve, but I believe most people who take the step to become Amritdhari do so from a place of goodness and noble intentions.

Yes. That's one of the major issues concerning religious ritual / practice. I don't think it's limited to Sikhs, though. We feel it keenly because we were explicitly told to turn away from idolatry.

My point was that a person doesn't have to throw their lot in with the religious and mystical in an overly abundant way in order to live a life of simplicity, restraint, and decency. There's a coarse, restless obnoxiousness coupled with a shallow superficiality that radiates from many people of Punjabi background in the West. It's near impossible to make a meaningful connection in a way that brings a sense of serenity to interactions. Is that a symptom of the original culture, or the result of a hybridisation of the worst aspects of both cultures (East and West), or is it something that stems from the metaphysical and therefore hard-wired beyond habits and learned behaviour? Knowing religious facts and figures and dates and special events isn't indicative of anything meaningful imo. It's the sprouting of a seed prior to something better, but in isolation it means very little when the consciousness functions on a limited or lower baseline.