Jump to content

MisterrSingh

Members
  • Content Count

    6,360
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    209

Posts posted by MisterrSingh

  1. @Premi5 - the pre-Hindu rule (Buddhist) of India is fascinating. I wonder how an uninterrupted Buddhist rule up to the modern day in India would've impacted the character of the citizens. Would they be similar to the Japanese in temperament and demeanour, or does raw ethnicity and inbuilt inclinations override any ideological / religious / spiritual impact?

    • Like 2
  2. 11 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

    I mean the puratan Khalsa didn't wait till they had a country to start following their traditions and not be absorbed into the masses.

    How's that Khalsa country going for you?

    If your beliefs carry no civilisational (or cultural) weight, you're free to believe in the fairies that live at the bottom of your garden; it makes no difference to anyone.

    If you want OTHERS to follow your beliefs, then you have to build something worthwhile using those beliefs as a foundation.

  3. We should have the humility to establish our own civilisation that's actually worth a damn for even a few moments in the ocean of eternal time, then we can relinquish metrics and labels that don't apply to us. Until that moment comes along, stuff like this just comes across as provincial envy that losers and failures indulge in.

  4. 1 hour ago, Redoptics said:

    What has being vegetarian got to do with anything? You are not eating meat, the bird is because its natural to the bird, if it bothers you so much get a budgie and feed it bird seeds. 

     

    Polly want some paneer?

    • Haha 1
  5. 6 hours ago, shastarSingh said:

    Sikhs hv been keeping baaz from Guru Hargobind Sahib jee's time.

    But baaz is a strictly carnivorous.

    Can vegetarian Sikhs keep baaz as a pet?

    I don't see why not. It's not as if the Singh who owns the hawk is sharing the creature's food, is he? 😅

    I just hope no-one starts to feed the poor animal last night's rotiya.

    • Haha 1
  6. 6 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

    I think I have shown my natural Sikh flaw that many of us Sikhs have.

    Our nature is an open and inclusive one. This can be a strength as it has the ability to draw people together, however it also makes us susceptible to some of these manipulations.

    But thanks to yourself for highlighting this.

    I think these recent "Pakistani Reacts to Sikhi" videos are an updated iteration of what I saw over there. It's cynical pandering. Unfortunately it has other ramifications for us beyond stroking our egos as a collective, i.e. by appealing to our women-folk who lack any sense of critical thinking. Western Liberalism (in terms of its tolerance and promotion of Islam) has ensured up and coming Sikh generations - more so females - have been conditioned to not view Islam as a threat. Now, it seems they're going after more traditionally-minded Sikhs who are no less guillible (the "manas ki jaat sabhe ek hai pachaino" crew); the end objective is the same: "Trust us."

  7. 7 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

    Well, maybe I could be hopeful.

    But I have been watching a some youtube channels of some well known Raggis. They did this tour of Pakistan Gurdwaras, it was quite eye opening.

    For all the yatris that come from India and elsewhere, there are a lot of Sangat there that were the native Pakistan non-Sikh population (and not just the Hindus in Sindh). There were muslims doing kirtan and some of them read Bani.

    I could not quite understand it.

    Something quite weird, it seems that grassroots Pakistanis seems to be quite open to Bani but it seems that their Ulema will find it threatening.

    If you think about it, the average Pakistani will understand Bani quite naturally whereas none of them can speak or understand Arabic.

    Maybe I am looking too much into it.

    I went to Nankana Sahib yatra a few years back. I tried not to let myself get caught up in the occasion, so I watched, carefully, everyone around me, particularly the Pakistanis who were basically our guides over there, and the rest of them who did all the other smaller duties. Whilst they were all very respectful, saying all the right things, it didn't take a genius to work out it was nothing more than a job to them; a 9 to 5 per se. Sure, they were dilgent in their duties; they were very polite, flattering, and constantly smiled, etc., but it was almost rehearsed, like the staff at a theme park if you know what I mean. The Sikh female contingent that came with us were predictably falling over themselves to praise the "shardaa" of the Pakistanis at Nankana Sahib, while it was only a couple or so of the guys (around my age; 30s or so) who detected the faintest of disingenuousness beneath it all.

    Native Pakistanis are a whole other level of chalakhi compared to Native Indians if you can believe such a thing. The best way I can describe the Indian flavour of deviousness is when our elders refer to "anni chalakhi" (blind scheming / deviousness) whereby the cleverness is actually revealed to be an own-goal or stupidity that's not perceived to be this way by the schemer himself: that's Indian deviousness by and large. Retarded scheming. Pakistani chalakhi on the other hand is so, so authentic and... smooth! It's almost salesman-like.

    I don't completely discount your assertions about Sikhi and Gurbani having some sort of affect on the odd Pakistani here and there, but I think some of them have clocked on to the fact that easy YouTube money can be made by pandering to Indian Sikhs by reacting to Sikh content, confusing some of us into letting our guard down against them in numerous ways.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  8. 3 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

    @MisterrSingh 

    How are you sl@gging off Dickens when hordes of our own lot were helping him do the very thing you are castigating him for?? Makes no sense?

    Dickens = A cultural icon still remembered today, i.e. looked up to by people such as yourself. Mutineering apne = faceless folk who nobody remembers or cares for to a certain degree.  The weight of what Dickens did / said matters even to this day compared to a bunch of pendus (non-pejoratively speaking).

  9. 18 minutes ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

    I think it was totally justifiable for him to hate the Indian mutiny. We Sikhs ourselves were pretty against it as no Sikhs joined in. 

    Also it was the Indian military against civilians. That's pretty horrific.. I think the Hindus and Muslims soldiers killed a lot of women and children of Lucknow. That would make anyone angry. 

    Yeah his letter is pretty genocidal. But I can see why he would write that. He probably thought military trained men targeting women and families pretty despicable  thing for a  people to do. 

    Also, i think we as Sikhs have been taught the lesson of balance and truth multiple times. Even if someone is bad, their body of work shouldn't be discounted. Look at aurangzeb, guruji noticed his piety, skills in battle etc in zafarnama. 

    I probably did go overboard yesterday. 😅😁

  10. On 12/28/2021 at 9:12 AM, Ranjeet01 said:

    Something very interesting I have observed on youtube.

    For several years, you may have seen reaction videos. There are reaction videos for everything: music, tv shows, comedy etc

    However, the interesting thing I noticed is the number of Pakistani reaction videos to Bani and Kirtan. I think what has happened with the advent of the internet, coupled with the yatras of gurdwarae of Pakistan and made the local Pakistani populace quite curious to Sikhi.

    I know on other threads we have spoken about Haryanvis coming to Sikhi but I think (could be wrong though) you could "potentially" see an explosion (pardon the pun) of Sikhi breaking out in Pakistan.

    I tHink you're being a little overly hopeful. My take on this phenomena is this is typical Islamic tricks. They pander and flatter to get our guard down, and then they sweep in with their tried and tested conversion tactics.

    • Confused 1
  11. 4 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

    Wishes? Free Jaggi. 

    Hopes and Concerns? 

    People are over covid. They know they've been lied to even if they are concerned about covid still to some degree. Something is going to happen with covid. Either it's going to wimper away, we're going to vent our fed uppedness and have some resolution, orrrr it's going to come to something nasty. 

    It's starting to get on my nerves in a major way. I can more often than not detect when I'm being lied to, and "they're" starting to push their luck because there's no pushback from the public. Corona is clearly something that exists, but this desperate desire to get this vaccine into our bodies is sus. They're using every tactic from the propaganda playbook.

    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
  12. On 12/26/2021 at 8:42 PM, dallysingh101 said:

    Reading:

    The selected Letters of Charles Dickens edited by Jenny Hartley.

    Fascinating insight into the life of a literary genius and impressive social activist.  

    This f****r was cheering on Jalianwalah Bagh and s*****g Jewish c**k when his Semitic high society pals started intimating that he needed to stop writing Jewish characters who were money-grubbing, cold-hearted opportunists who exploited the poor. F**k Dickens.

    Quote

    However ignored in the celebrations will be the reality that Charles Dickens, like many of his English and British contemporaries, was a genocidal racist. Thus Charles Dickens in a letter to Emile de la Rue on 23 October 1857 about the so-called Indian Mutiny of 1857 :  “I wish I were Commander in Chief over there [ India ]! I would address that Oriental character which must be powerfully spoken to, in something like the following placard, which should be vigorously translated into all native dialects, “I, The Inimitable, holding this office of mine, and firmly believing that I hold it by the permission of Heaven and not by the appointment of Satan, have the honor to inform you Hindoo gentry that it is my intention, with all possible avoidance of unnecessary cruelty and with all merciful swiftness of execution, to exterminate the Race from the face of the earth, which disfigured the earth with the late abominable atrocities [2,000 British killed in the 1857 Indian War of Independence aka the 1857 Indian Mutiny] (see Grace Moore (2004), “Dickens and the Empire. Discourses of class, race, and colonialism in the works of Charles Dickens” (Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot , UK 😞

    He was a hack; a third-rate Tolstoy. The English fellate this frigger because he was the best they had. He was mediocre.

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  13. 1 hour ago, Ranjeet01 said:

    The last few days I have been watching some Abrahamic stuff. A lot of these are debates between Abrahamic 2.0 (Christianity) and Abrahamic 3.0 (Islam)

    These two groups ( I cannot really call them a faith or a religion when I hear these guys speak)

    They argue like lawyers, trying to prove and disprove each other.

    Bhagti of Maharaj is quite a simple thing and these desert middle eastern ideologies are very neurotic and over-complicate everything. They tie themselves like knots.

    When the Dharmics (Us Sikhs, Hindu schools and buddhists) debate it is more metaphysical. It is completely different. 

    A lot of these theologans in 2.0 and 3.0 are very intellectual but they are fools.

    We may reject aspects of the hindus in their mindless rituals and their murti worship, but the framework is completely different. 

    When dharmics debate, we are trying to get to the truth, when abrahamics debate they are trying to show dominance and superiority over each other.

    I think it is very unfortunate in this world that 4 billion people are categorised under these 2 groups.

    What is even stranger is that Abrahamic 1.0 (Jews) look to Dharma.

    It is a shame that we call us a "faith" or "religion" because we are using the abrahamic framework to define ourselves. It is far too limiting for us.

    We are far better than that.

     

    God damn Romans latched onto whatever half-baked nonsensical belief system they could find to hold onto their power.

    • Like 1
  14. 42 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

    I think the biggest reason is social media keeping everyone's world much smaller, and prevents them from knowing the reality of things.

    You could argue the opposite quite easily, i.e. young children are being exposed to certain of life's realities earlier than they would've otherwise due to access to the internet. A premature loss of innocence, maybe.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use