Balkaar

I'm going to be candid here. I have a very hard time trusting Sunni Muslims. All my 'Muslim' friends drink beer and eat pork, and I'm glad they do, because it suggests that they don't their religion seriously at all (I'll admit to viewing Shias and Sufis in a much more benevolent light though). Islam permits its adherents to lie and cheat in order to undermine unbelievers and kafirs. That sounds like the sort of thing some EDL Islamophobic windbag would say doesn't it, a nasty scrap of anti-Muslim propaganda? - it's also the truth. It's simply the case that if a Sunni Muslim attempts to introduce himself into a Sikh society at university, or attend a Gurdwara, the likelihood that his doing so proceeds from innocent motives is much smaller than the alternative, namely, that he's trying to cause chaos, or conducting a bit of recon against the opposition. I remember reading somewhere that the Nihang Singhs of old, when confronted with a Muslim wishing to join the Khalsa, would demand that he eat pig's meat in front of them in order to prove his sincerity. Short of that, I don't see how we can weed out Muslim infiltrators.

-

What is Bhai Jagraj Singh's general opinion of Islam? I'd be interested to know.

The infamous Dogras, the architects of the ruination of the Sikh Empire, are the most well known examples of this .trend. All of them adopted the name 'Singh' and began to keep their Kes in order to enhance their credibility amongst the Sikh nobility.

I wish it were MisterrSingh. Unfortunately, it's true, it's weird and it's really quite funny.

Excuse me, I appear to have made a mistake. It wasn't Shiv Dayal Singh whose poo smelled fragrant, it was another one of their leaders, a Teja Singh. Here is an excerpt from Teja Singh's so called 'Janam Sakhi' on page 62: "Bhagat Chanan Singh and Gyanni Ji secretly smelled Baba Teja Singh Ji’s excreta. The bodily waste of Baba Teja Singh Ji had fragrance instead of odour and they accepted Baba Teja Singh as Puran Guru.” My mistake aside, Shiv Dayal Singh was still an extremely suspicious figure - Ganesha Singh Nirmala writes that up until 1861, he permitted none but women into his Sangat. This strange order reeks of foul motive. Lol, that's what I'm wondering. Were they smelling his poo because they were deliberately seeking out a holy fragrance which would prove Teja's divinity? I don't think so - It's more likely that they were just a very freaky twosome who, as they were indulging their corophilia one hot and sunny Indian afternoon, began to hallucinate about perceiving lovely smells and in their stupidity concluded that this was somehow a hallmark of true holiness.

Aw yee

That's the crux of this whole business. Maharaj isn't saying "That happened, they exist" when he mentions a Hindu god or their associated tale, but rather, "Who cares if even if it did happen?". Why turn your devotions upon these inconsequential and utterly unremarkable beings when you can simply worship the One who is even greater, who created these deities and whose immensity defies the limits of our imagination? I'd compare the Hindu worship of these 'gods' instead of the Almighty to somebody walking down the street and finding a lovely piece of wrapped chocolate on the ground, and, obvious hygienic qualms aside, picking it up and throwing away the chocolate so that they could munch on the wrapper.

I myself credit the theory that some of the characters of Hindu myths were in fact pre-eminent figures in ancient Indian history whose stories became inflated and distorted over time so that the subjects progressed from hero to legend to myth, and finally, to god/demi-god. Guru Sahib tells us that there are celestial beings in certain realms of the universe. That these beings are exactly as the Hindu texts describe them is quite unlikely. For example, what is a Krishna anyway? Maharaj tells us that millions upon millions of 'Krishnas' have come and gone, like worms. The simple utterance of this name is therefore by no means a validation of the tales surrounding the cowherd of Hindu myth who bore this title.

That comment was meant to be lighthearted, incidental to the rest of the post. I sense an explanation is in order of the foundation upon which it rests. Basically bhenji, there are some women who like to know that a bloke has a romantic history, a backstory. Makes him a little more appealing to them. Unfortunately, immaculate virginity, which is considered an appealing and desired trait in a woman, carries a bit of a stigma for the male in our society. That's not an opinion of mine, it's just a sad truth of the West.

The members of a group founded by a man called Shiv Dayal Singh in Agra, whose followers began to claim he was sent by the almighty after they secretly sniffed his tutti and decided that it smelled like roses (I'm not even making this up). The radhasoamis with whom most Sikhs are familiar are members of a splinter group established in Beas by one Jaimal Singh. They look more like Sikhs than their cousins in Agra who bear greater outward similarity to Hindus.

Sorry veer, replied to this thread by accident. I may eventually furnish that empty post with some sentences.

I don't know that I can claim to be wiser, but as you haven't stated your age we can retain the possibility that I might be older. Most non-Sikhs (and regrettably, a lot of Sikhs) lose their virginity quite early on, yet this doesn't impede their ability to find a life partner in the slightest. I don't see why it should hamper you either veerji. When we speak of good Sikhnis, we don't mean women who wear keskis and keep the rehat. A true Singhni is an embodiment of Guru Sahib's five prescribed virtues, one of which is Daya, or compassion. If a woman in a turban refuses to forgive you for a mistake committed in the turbulent and unthinking days of your youth, then she's no real Gursikhni, only a unsympathetic woman wearing a turban. Your original post gave me the impression that you had very strong feelings for this girl, possibly even loved her. Most people know what it is to be passionately in love with someone else brother, to be a thrall to emotions that can overwhelm all the powers of reason and judgement and make us do things which we may possibly regret. Chances are, if you honestly admit to it, most women will completely understand. They might themselves admit to something similar. Who knows, they may even find you more charming because of it. All the best.

Doner Kebabs and now Burger King? Everybody knows that these reconstituted foods are full of questionable things. What I want to know is has any fecal matter been found in a sirloin steak, a pork chop or any actual cut of unprocessed meat?

That processed garbage is hardly the same thing as a fillet of pure chicken breast Jagsaw. Besides which, Paki eateries are notoriously filthy and unhygienic. Why turn this incident into a tirade against all meat everywhere?

I suppose you can wear a kalgi outside the Gurdwara day-to-day if you want, although honestly you'll look like a bit of a bellend, especially when you're pairing it with jeans and tracksuits I don't know why you'd want to wear one in the first place though. The Kalgi is a symbol of sovereignty and I'm guessing you're not a sovereign of anything.

I'm a vegetarian as well. I wasn't originally talking about vegetarianism though. I was talking about necessity.

If killing insects is permissible because they don't feel pain (which isn't quite true), shouldn't that mean that if somebody kills a goat quickly and painlessly (by jhatka, or by incapacitating it first), it's completely fine? You have no way of knowing how insects register pain. Not as humans and other mammals do, to be sure, but they are still going to feel something extremely unpleasant. Of course they will. Every animal on earth has evolved to feel unpleasant sensations in response to negative external stimuli, in order to aid their survival.

No, I wouldn't kill a human for meat. I don't know if that question is meant to trip me up or something, but I simply wouldn't feel as bad about killing a deer or a bird as I would about killing another human being. I am very skeptical of anybody who'd have the nerve to claim otherwise. Being a vegetarian in the wilderness is impossible. Ask any survivalist. There aren't carrots and onions and edible vegetables, or wheat and cereal aplenty growing in the woods. Almost all of the vegetation will poison you, kill you, or be completely undigestible. Meat was one of the few safe options for our forebears in their jungle hideaways. Do you go to the supermarket to purchase the vegetables for your dinner? How many ants and midges and other tiny organisms do you think you kill as you're walking along the ground so that you can acquire food in the name of your survival? By your logic, what right do you have to inflict pain upon these harmless animals so that you can get the food you need to live? Are boars superior to ants? Is it worse for somebody to kill a boar than to kill an ant, as you probably do every single day? I'm not advocating that humans be allowed to kill animals whenever they please, for whatever tenuous reasons they can summon. We should avoid killing things wherever possible. But I hope you understand that there are situations where we simply have to make allowances.

Tobacco can never be said to be necessary for survival, and it has no medicinal properties. It can't be compared to being forced to consume meat or cannabis. When your family are crying out in hunger and in pain because they can't properly digest the tree bark they've been forced to eat, you'd be a fool to do nothing if a wild boar, whose meat could feed your family for days, trotted past. And if you're severely injured you might also consider using cannabis to dull the excruciating pain. It's no different from taking painkillers - getting high wasn't the object in taking it. I ought to mention that I don't think there's anything un-spiritual about eating meat.

Nevertheless, he has a right to say those things. We cannot even begin to imagine the hardships that were endured by the Khalsa of old. We who have never known that kind of suffering can hardly begrudge them the things they did to survive, or relieve the weight of their circumstances. When you're being chased by head hunters and ekeing out a living in a hostile jungle, it is understandable that practical concerns can supersede spiritual ones.

And how does the Sri Guru Singh Sabha Committee think Modi will react when he comes to the Park Avenue Gurdwara and sees that 12 foot painting of Sant Bhindranwale and the jhujaroos fighting to the death against the Indian Army? Or that portrait of Sant Ji in the langar at Havelock? Utterly shameless. No principles, no conviction, and apparently, no brains.

So if a young, unmarried Amritdhari were to sleep with a woman, he wouldn't be committing a bujjar kurehat in your estimation?

It's been 4 minutes...

LOL I'm guessing you didn't know Akalifauj before he was forced to put his posts through moderator approval.