MisterrSingh

On 6/11/2018 at 11:11 AM, DailyMail said:

Arur Singh, Simranjit Singh Mann's nana ji.

That's so cucked. Goodness me.

2 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

here you go folks:

94117101-The-Sikhs-in-History-by-Dr-Sangat-Singh.pdf

Thanks bhenji. Great stuff.

4 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

I think the West is waking up. There are lots of right wing parties in many countries, and even far right. Theres even a move in America to ban immigration from everywhere except Western Europe, and this has been said openly. Also Front National and other right organizations

Not only policitically, but culturally conservative values are becoming more popular. Such as Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Rebel media etc

Also, I think the anakh and niti and being strong yet wise comes from being martial. As we've lost our martial arts, we have also lost that mentality. Here's a martial artist, and what he wrote I think illustrates the sikhi thought exactly.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/27/jordan-petersons-right-become-dangerous-heres/

I don't believe right-wing is the solution. These people cannot exist on an equilibrium. They lurch from one violent extreme to its opposite in response to whichever idiotic social and political conditioning they've been exposed to over a number of years. Most, if not all, of this braying for right-wing authority is a result of the policies seen to have been put into place by the Left. Anyway, the Left-Right dichotomy is a fraud. Don't fall for it. It's smoke and mirrors designed to keep us engaged in a system in order to make us think we have some semblance of control over those who rule us. Put it this way: where's that wall that Trump promised his voters, lol?

4 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Sangat SIngh's book on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/94117101/The-Sikhs-in-History-by-Dr-Sangat-Singh

Is this available elsewhere? Scribd is so inflexible.

Check out Sikh and Punjabi posts on Instagram. It's not all doom and gloom. Yes, this sounds weird coming from me considering I'm regularly referring to nightmarish and apocalyptic scenarios regarding our future as a community, lol, but there's a noticeable upswing in Sikhs identifying with our cultural symbols and practices in a way that bodes well for the future. Sure, the flip side of the situation would be that social media is a degenerate, shallow, and wholly worthless pursuit of superficiality, but for purposes of "optics" (that's a contemporary buzzword that is relevant in this situation) we've got to start somewhere. I realised recently that I needed to acquaint myself with a broad impression of where we are as a people instead of relying on my personal and immediate experiences and surroundings as an objective marker for my views. Things aren't perfect and if there's not serious change we are heading for problems, but there is hope.

Apathy. Intellectual laziness. Physically, we certainly can never be described as lazy, but only the rare among our people possess that quality of a poetic soul that is channelled into the direction of something beyond material measure. Our people don't nurture thinkers and artists, because it's considered to be a fruitless pursuit that doesn't guarantee status and success. They think it's a risk not worth taking. The "dreamer" is brow-beaten into conformity sooner or later. We have an unfortunate and deep-seated mentality of being predisposed to following instead of leading: this is evident in how eager Sikhs are to champion the causes and ideologies of outside parties whilst unable to see the value and positives in their own. How on earth are great pieces of Sikh inspired art supposed to be created when deep down most Sikhs - even the supposedly educated - assume there simply isn't any substance from which such things can be derived? You're more likely to get a western born Sikh getting teary-eyed at the beauty in Communist and Marxist theory than feeling the same level of affinity for Sikh philosophy. Intellectual midgets and sheep. 

46 minutes ago, puzzled said:

Yeah a lot of Islamic countries were becoming secular but then i think saudia arabia started sending money to muslim countries. There are a few pics of Afghanistan and Iran etc from back in the 60s with women wearing skirts and talking to men. Even Pakistan after partition was no different to India Punjab! Its in the 70s that the mullahs started gaining power and thats when the country became radical. I think the Paki prime-minister was called zia?  he made the country very radical. Theres a good movie called "silent waters" showing how open Pakistan was before the 70s and then how the mullahs radicalized it. Iv seen interviews online of how before Pakistan became radicalized the mullahs used to be considered jokes! A lot of older generation Pakis especially the more liberal ones would tell you how the country has become unrecognizable. There are many videos of our elders online saying how Sikhs and Muslims used to live like brothers before the partition, eating from the same plate, visiting each others relatives, attending each others weddings.  I remember watching this elderly Sikh Bibis interview on the partition and she said that when she got married her Muslim neighbors from her birth village came to visit her in her new house to make sure she was happy. 

I remember watching the interview of an elderly Egyptian ex muslim and he said egypt today is unrecognizable. He said back in his days girls used to wear mini skirts and openly talk to boys etc all that was considered normal  

Don't get me wrong, I don't consider overt expressions of westernisation to be a guaranteed template for the prosperity and integrity of a nation, but if the other extreme is a suffocatingly narrow religious rule of law that more often than not slips into authoritarianism, then the alternative doesn't seem so bad. Sometimes I think junglee people require junglee law so that they're induced to behave themselves, but invariably there are certain to be good people who'll suffer. Some issues to keep in mind if Sikhs ever find themselves in a situation where a Sikh nation is on the cards.

1 hour ago, jkvlondon said:

because there are more negative outcomes for girls than boys , boys can just walk away and leave girls to deal with it so girls are naturally cautious . The other thing is biologically women are not as driven sexually(instant gratification)  but more on viability of offspring and their security so more long term planning and partner preselection goes into it . Guys are encouraged by society and biology to have numerous partners ...and the whole media/film world pushes that ideal because it drives consumption to impress.

No... just no, lol. It's like you've completely bypassed the previous 30 years of societal and sexual politics.

Plus, I suspect OP was searching for, in part, a spiritual answer.

On 6/7/2018 at 3:36 PM, Guest sikhs said:

 do we carry on married life in sachkhand with that partner?

"I thought this was supposed to be Sachkhand?! Why am I in hell?!!?"

1 hour ago, puzzled said:

But at least Christians have changed, Muslims can learn from them ...  

Even Hindus have changed, not long ago they were burning widows and pouring boiling water/oil into the ears of shudras who accidentally heard the vedas. The way Hinduism was practiced especially by the brahmins was pure evil and not too long ago either 

Islam has been pushed onto a bigger stage on which its every word and move is analysed and dissected to death. The often referenced Christian reformation of the Enlightenment period may have been the moment when Christianity began to think twice about taking its Old Testament teachings literally, but Islam seemed to have gradually settled into a rhythm after the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and the subsequent rise of secular minded leaders who were beginning to introduce modern reforms to their lands. Was it a soft self-Reformation? Perhaps.   It's hard to believe, but what are now hotbeds of instability and fundamentalism in the Middle East, were almost verging on the secularism of the West as recently as the middle of the last century. Islam still played a huge part in the lives of their populations, but the incitement to fundamentalism was nowhere near as widespread as it's become in the past 30 or so years. Sure, there was always conflict between places like Iraq and Iran, but there's always been such niggles between neighbouring countries in that part of the world. Thank the United States and their meddling for sending that part of the world back 300 or 400 years. It's an absolute tragedy.

1 hour ago, puzzled said:

Islam was spread with violence, fear and murder, Now that it has geographically stopped spreading and reached its limit now they have turned on each other and are killing one another. 

Now? They've fought each other ever since the death of Mohammed. The issue of who becomes the caliph of Muslims is the essence of the Sunni-Shia divide. That didn't happen 50 years ago; they've been at it since 632AD.

You're forgetting the puppet master.

I'm thinking of the Thakur Singh who fought alongside the Singhs in 1984. 

5 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

The problem with the notion of India is that it currently is more of a Westphalian concept of a nation state. 

This does not really fit into what India actually is.

It has never been a country but more of an umbrella term.

You could perhaps see it as a civilisation state, but the current set up is an artificial one, it is not a natural fit. 

I have worked with many Indians from many states but even though I am a British Sikh of Punjabi heritage, I cannot feel any real affinity towards them.

I can only feel that with my fellow Sikhs from India or with Hindu Punjabis. 

First-rate points. Not the kind of observations that can be learned from memorising statistics. 

You're spot-on about the notion of affinity. There's no more racial or ethnic solidarity, on my part, with an Indian from Kolkata than an African from the Congo. That has nothing to do with being born in the West. It runs deeper than anything to do with geography.

39 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

However there is a phenomenon around all the different states of India where people from other states are seen as outsiders. Regionalism is definitely a stronger identifier than being an Indian. 

Makes one wonder how long the lid can be kept shut on such a tinderbox. I'm still surprised how India managed to wrangle their "United States of India." I'm guessing post-British Empire the anti-Colonial sentiment galvanised the country by channeling national sentiment and loyalty for one common purpose; the zeal of a newly independent country and the potential hope for a brighter future probably carried them through the first few decades since independence. I think the admittedly hopeful economic situation in the country is masking many serious regional issues that will continue to fester until an unfortunate tipping point. 

Brainwashed in most cases. Otherwise, powerless and demoralised. That's a kind assessment.

4 minutes ago, Singh123456777 said:

There is giani thakur singh thw katha vachak, and sant baba thakur singh ji the mukhi of damdami taksal

I know of Baba Ji, it's the giani I wasn't certain of. A part of me was hoping those allegations might've been for another Thakur Singh I hadn't heard of. Disappointing.

How many Giani Thakur Singhs are there doing parchaar? For some reason I thought there was two, but there's just the one, isn't there, the Taksali Singh?

31 minutes ago, puzzled said:

But isn't the Abrahamic god the same as the "Indian" god ? Guru Granth sahib says Ram and Raheem are the same. The abrahamic prophets were not perfect, far from it if we read the bible, but Sikhi does not deny them being messengers of god. If i remember correctly the muslim prophet is mention in sri dasam granth ji in bachittar natak as gods beloved but he ended up making people chant his name along with gods. I think he is also mentioned in bhai gurdas jis vaarns. So Sikhi acknowledges that these prophets did exist and were sent by god. But obviously they were far from perfect as they were just humans. Also remember that Jews do not believe that non jews go to hell like Muslims and Christians do. Some rabbis even say god is everywhere and many jews believe in reincarnation too. They must only believe this if all this was revealed to them through god ...   

You sure about that, bro?