MisterrSingh

Who's Gurbhachana?

It's a pale shadow of what it use to be AND should be, but it's Akal Takhat Sahib, y'know? It has such huge historical and religious significance I can't bring myself to cast it aside like yesterday's newspaper. They've put Sikhs in a quandary, and that's a situation that should never have arised.

He said that?! Sometimes you have to wonder what such people are doing concerning themselves with religious issues. Everyone's entitled an opinion, of course, but with some people you get the impression they want to pry people away from the path, and they actually revel in such mischief. Strange times.

Could you expand on the above, bro? It's piqued my interest. PM if you like so as not to clutter the thread. Thanks.

Definitely. Equally, a situation such as the one the OP is referring to shouldn't be entered without a lot of soul searching. Be prepared to hear, "You can't tell me what to do, you ain't my dad!!" All jokes aside, it takes a special type of man to raise - or even cordially live with - another man's offspring in a family unit. It takes patience, wisdom, understanding, amongst other things of that nature. It begs the question - and I apologise if this sounds harsh - but is it really necessary? Whoever is involved, whether it's the OP or someone else, what's the motivation of the mother in this? Equally, what is the man hoping to get out of this situation? "Love" is not an answer, hehe. Situations such as these require the head to take control and as little of the heart to dictate matters as possible. Either way these are questions only the person involved can answer. Good luck.

I use to think you were a decent guy, but the "mother" comment crossed the line. You can backtrack all you like, but you knew what you meant. I won't repeat myself, but think on. It's best if you don't reply to me again, because you've exhausted any goodwill I had for you in one fell swoop. ***** As for Jagsaw, his entire raison d'etre is one of arrogance and sneery condescension. He was trying to be clever and I called him out on his nonsense and now he can't rest until he's had the last word.

You're a very small man. They call it the Napoleon Complex

I respect you because you know more about Sikh scriptures than I do, but his whole post was an attempt to distort, misrepresent, and seize on half truths in order to win the argument. He's an incredibly devious man, and just because he gave your adversary, Neo, a tongue-lashing a while ago, that doesn't make him a bastion of Sikhi.Also, a warning: keep my mother out of any discussion. I know you have a problem with keeping to your limits at times, but two can play that game if you don't control your tongue. Is that clear, Singh Ji?

I wonder if someone who has doubts about the existence of God, or a good old non-theist has ever had a spiritual experience that can't be explained away as the mind playing tricks or things of that nature? Or do only those who "believe" have such experiences? In that case do we "will" such experiences into existence? Or is there a deeper, karmic-based reason that you're more likely to such have experiences if you're open to that frequency of thought?

*taught

Do you like Huey Lewis and The News? Their early work was a little too new wave for my tastes, but when Sports came out in '83, I think they really came into their own, commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalism that really gives the songs a big boost. He's been compared to Elvis Costello, but I think Huey has a far more bitter, cynical sense of humour. In '87, Huey released Fore, their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is "Hip to be Square", a song so catchy, most people probably don't listen to the lyrics. But they should, because it's not just about the pleasures of conformity, and the importance of trends, it's also a personal statement about the band itself.

Why are you complaining? Willfully ignoring and misrepresenting another person's points are what you're a world class expert at. If YOU'D read what I'd written originally you wouldn't had have to make your original "smart" post. How'd you like them apples?

So when you sit down to break bread with the followers of that religion that is particularly close to your heart, do you pull them up on the fact that they actively preach that our Guru Sahibs are liars and frauds; a teaching that is absolutely fundamental to their faith? Do you smack the taste of their mouth when they retreat to their place of worship and are repeatedly told by their spiritual leaders that anyone after Mohammed who purported to be God's messenger is actually nothing of the sort? Something tells me your bravado and your smart mouth (or in this case, dextrous fingers) cease functioning when you step away from this forum. Back to your first response: if you're unable to tell the difference between Gurmeet Ram Rahim (and his ilk) and somebody like Jesus or another spiritual being who actually did some good on this earth, then you're clearly not as smart as you think are. In your eagerness to score points you've revealed yourself to be quite simple-minded and devoid of even a drop of spirituality. Thankfully, I grew out of this phase you're currently mired in when I became a Gursikh at the age of 14. So, lower your books on the crane and Alexander the Great, and instead pick up a Gutka or a Pothi on the odd occasion; you'd be surprised at what it'll do for your soul. Also, Guru Gobind Singh Ji stated that the likes of Jesus succumbed to ego and didn't discourage those who began to worship him instead of instructing the people that their salvation lies with Akal Purakh; where exactly did Guru Gobind Singh Ji say Jesus was a fictional creation based on a pagan myth, and therefore didn't exist as you're alluding to? Surely to end all belief in Christianity would it not have been better for Guru Sahib to tell us that, without a second's hesitation, Christ was a fictitious creation? Unless you think you know more than Dasme Paatshah? And what of being comfortable in one's own Sikhi that others are happily afforded the courtesy to believe whatever they wish to (aside from the ludicrous examples you gave which are hardly worth mentioning, because doing so would fall into the trap you think you've cleverly laid, hehe)? I never said I respect those beliefs; that's you attributing words to me that I've not spoken or even thought. I said I acknowledge the fact that people believe in things that are sacred to them --- that doesn't make those beliefs sacred to me. Again, you're clutching at straws to score points, but you're just revealing yourself to be a bit dim. If someone wants to worship a log, go right ahead. If someone wants to bow down to a rosebush, that's their prerogative. Consequently, what can you do to stop others believing things or worshipping things, etc., that you find unsavoury? Round them up and behead them? Flog them, stone them? What CAN you do? Nothing. You can't do a thing, can you? Apart from flaunt your painfully apparent haughty condescension and mistaken sense of superiority on forums like these. We can attempt to converse with them and show them how, according to our beliefs, they are hugely mistaken and indulging in useless ritual. Aside from that, what do you suggest? So, unless you're going to give up your comfortable Western lifestyle and arrest the middle-age spread that's spreading from your mid-riff to your brain cells, I assume you'll be taking up arms and hunting and executing every stone-worshipping, child-abusing, orgy-partaking deviant in the world, because such deluded blasphemy is clearly keeping you awake at nights. You're having a laugh "my friend" and not a very amusing one at that. :nono:

Still, it's sacred to somebody whether we believe in it or not. Some people struggle to separate the man from what came later. Anyone with an iota of spirituality would never entertain knocking one of God's messengers of whichever race or background.Guru Gobind Singh Ji presented the facts about these prophets; he never mocked them or was hostile towards them in the way some of us are. I'm all for holding to account religious hypocricy and distortions, but some of the stuff I hear is a terrible reflection on us as Sikhs. I've more to say but I can't type worth a darn on touchscreen, so when I get to my computer I'll contribute to this particular topic.

There's one huge rant on the previous page that was quite unsavoury.

Reading some of the posts on this thread has made my I.Q. drop a few points... and it wasn't that high to be begin with, lol! As Ron Burgundy once said, "Take it easy. Why don't you sit this one out, stop talking for a while."

Is there a difference between a religious experience and a spiritual experience? Serious question. @singhcity - It's a decent book. But you're right, the scope of his work in this area is quite narrow. A bit frustrating but unsurprising.

There's a book called The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James which might be of help. It's quite old and the frames of reference are mostly from the Abrahamic perspective, but the overall theories and opinions he ventures are quite sound IMO.

What's the alternative? Force them? With threats of violence or what? If they refuse to understand your perspective through verbal communication and reasoning there's not much else you can do aside from get a bit heavy handed and turn the situation ugly, which I wouldn't recommend. Yes, it's sad and infuriating at times to see a loved one enter a situation that isnt ideal, but best to let them make their mistakes. Easier said than done, especially for an outsider such as myself, but feasibly it's the only option available to you.If I'm being completely and utterly frank, if you're determined that your perspective is the right one, then you can lay down an ultimatum or two to "encourage" the other party to tow the line. But that takes some manoeuvring and isn't for the feint of heart. It depends what you're willing to do and how bad the potential situation is for the person you're concerned about.

I've long suspected if any of our misguided lot had the kind of power to topple regimes or the backing of an organisation who'd provide weapons and things of that sort, we'd see the darkness that resides in every man come to the fore in the name of Sikhi. But the vast majority of our people are too obsessed with wealth accumulation and social climbing to get their hands dirty in such ways. Plus, I doubt the modern breed of Sikh has the intelligence to balance his martial heritage (which is central to who we are) with the more cerebral aspects of our religion that require a patient hand and a loving heart. Like I said in another thread, it's all or nothing when it comes to us.

A Khalistan forged in the spirit of our Gurus would be heaven on earth. What we're most likely to receive from the current crop of Sikhs is either sheer incompetence that would make Pakistan look like a success story, or a "caliphate" that would make ISIS steal admiring glances at us and our kartootah. We don't do things by halves, do we, lol? The dream lives on though. In the meantime our Sikhi on a Singh-by-Singh and Kaur-by-Kaur basis needs to be solid. Big hearts and strong minds topped off with compassion. For that's what true power is; as Oskar Schindler said, "True power is not taking a life, but knowing when to spare one." That's one lesson we'd be well served to bear in mind.

Does anyone here like the music of Phil Collins? Or Huey Lewis and The News?

Seems like the scenario Alan Moore devised in V for Vendetta might not be too wide of the mark in coming years, in the UK at least. "England Prevails."

Really? Our lot do that at Darbar Sahib? Stupid fools. Disgusting, lowly behaviour. I had no idea.

Shaheeda de Sartaaj, Dhan Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji, without whose Bani I, and many other Sikhs, would not be here today. Waheguru.