Sukhvirk1976
-
Posts
878 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Calendar
Forums
Posts posted by Sukhvirk1976
-
-
1 hour ago, Akalifauj said:
It is a consensus among senior posters here you are a troll. Have you noticed how the admin who you questioned has not responded to you. Why do you think that is? Because he knows you are not here for learning or development of the Khalsa panth. You have one motive and that is to be a troll.
My motive here is to learn and grow. And if that means calling out bs then I will.. I'm a Singh and if I believe that my thinking is correct then a) I will do everything to try and be proved wrong by asking questions
B) however many 'senior' or none senior people disagree with me I am compelled by the strength that Guru sahibs have given me to stand alone.
C) so tell me who is the sheep?
Again I ask you to go back to basics, back to what we were speaking about and provide some support for your arguments. You never know if you did, I may then agree with you
0 -
16 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:
If you guys have not noticed he wants the other side to present Gurbani or other evidence and then some way he will say, where does it say what you are asserting to say.
Why are you talking to the crowd.. Is this a public performance? I'm engaging with you.
The fact that you are conscious of 'you guys' is really very telling
1 -
Just now, Akalifauj said:
So you you find links to memes but unable to qualify your assertions.. I suppose It was wishful thinking on my part to expect anything else
0 -
3 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:
How many times has this same arguement been presented on this site and every time the argument holds no water. This poster is a troll. An honest person would have searched on this forum for the discussion and learned from them. Yet this guy is not honest, he is a troll.
If you guys have not noticed he wants the other side to present Gurbani or other evidence and then some way he will say, where does it say what you are asserting to say. He will never actually acknowledge proof presented and he will never present evidence for his arguments because they don't exist. Also he won't present evidence because it's easy to say no to an argument rather than make one, which takes time.
These trolls will never quit.
Stop feeding the troll.
Stop feeding the troll. Touché.
If you can't support your arguments with any references then all you are doing is stating your opinion. Which is valid and welcome. But please don't pretend you speak for Guru Sahibs
0 -
16 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:
I know you don't consider the Gurus lives had substance or their teaching holds no substance. Such an arrogant person.
Bro let's just stick to facts and engage our brains. I do ahankar, and my khoj as directed by Guru sahib is part of the process to eliminate it.. You can put words in my mouth all you like..
The fact that you see your opinions as aligned with guru sahibs only demonstrates your own ego.. You repeatedly claim to speak for them and like all people who have a lot to say but nothing of substance to back it up when challenged you hide behind a false piety..
0 -
7 minutes ago, BhForce said:
No problem, I welcome spirited debate, including getting into the nitty-gritty, but then you also have to be prepared for questioning in return.
ਦੇਖਿ ਪਰਾਈਆ ਚੰਗੀਆ ਮਾਵਾਂ ਭੈਣਾਂ ਧੀਆਂ ਜਾਣੈ।
Vaar 29, Pauri 11
I have no problem with that but it says nothing about dating..
If we believe bani to be 'Sat' which I do. Then truth has to be without contradiction.. Ie. We cannot expand upon it or draw conclusions from it that do not fit.
If a unmarried sikh was to follow the above statement they would never get married and then become brahmachari.. So the context of it must or can only be applied in circumstances such as one who is already married or their is a deeper meaning. Truth is incontrovertible and bani is sat so if we as readers of bani come up with assumptions that are flawed doesn't mean bani is flawed it means our understanding is flawed
0 -
2 minutes ago, BhForce said:
Well, then.
You seem to think that the way of marriage of every Sikh before the advent of dating is, as you put it, "interesting".
You seem to have put the entire thrust of your argument on whether I saw my wife before marriage or not. (By the way, Guru Nanak ji did not, just in case you think they were weird, too.)
And also, I think you're problem is not with me, but rather with Bhai Gurdas ji and Guru Sahib and their faithful Sikhs who don't go bar-crawling for sexual partners.
Anyway, let me ask:
1) according to you, does the Sikh philosophy of treating women only stand if I didn't see my wife before marriage?
2) or does it still stand if certain Sikhs (like during the time of the 10 Gurus) didn't date.
3) and if #1 or #2 are accepted, then will you accept the Gurmat view of treating women?
If you won't accept #3, then why even ask?
Bro you seem to be missing the point.. Let me be clear.. You seem to have a very narrow view of what 'dating' means. Dating doesn't necessarily mean a exploitative relationship.. Two individuals can meet each other with a view to see whether they are not compatible or not.. That may happen on a single date or over a number of times.
A date doesn't mean they engage in sexual relations but even if it did, whilst not ideal it doesn't mean that they have done anything wrong..
The reason I asked you the question which you avoided to answer was to illuminate the contradiction of your point..
Moreover you have no idea whether or not all living guru sahibs had or had not met their prospective spouses before marriage since we unfortunately don't have the documented evidence.. Before we go ahead and condemn or form such strong opinions we should at least try and understand what we can conclusively say
0 -
3 minutes ago, BhForce said:
Look, bro, I did not ask you a personal question (about whether you would date your sister).
It was a general question. I don't know if you even have a sister, or are a male in the first place, nor did I ask. I asked if you would.
I responded similarly to your question. I have already responded, and you have no need to browbeat me for personal information (i.e., whether I have a wife in the first place or am male, or whatever). It would be different if you were sitting right in front of me. I don't know and can't know if you are a Sikh, a Muslim, or whatever.
It's really strange for you to say that presenting a Gurmat doctrine from an actual tuk is being "holier than thou."
So let me ask you, do think the same of every single Sikh and Guru from Guru Nanak Dev ji onward?
Can you please share the tuk?
Apologies if I have missed something. My intentions are not to offend simply to engage in khoj and as far as I know the only way to do that is to engage in exegesis of scripture in
1 -
20 hours ago, Akalifauj said:
Again these people are very petty. They are the same people who will try to execute Gurmukhs if they get the chance. They worship the devil.
So you believe in the devil? Interesting
1 -
4 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:
Nice come back, you really taught me troll. If Christians are standing up to murder of babies in the womb, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji would gladly give them support. So will Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji Sikhs.
28 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:Again changing the meaning of a word to mislead sangat. Feminists are those who murder baby in the mother's womb. Guru Sahib will never stand beside these murderers.
"feminism
/ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m/
noun
the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.
synonyms: the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female emancipation, women's rights; "
Who's misleading who brother?
You seem quite happy to go hard at me but go all snowflake when you are called out..
1 -
Just now, Akalifauj said:
Nice come back, you really taught me troll. If Christians are standing up to murder of babies in the womb, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji would gladly give them support. So will Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji Sikhs.
Ahh diddums... If your definition of a troll is being asked a question that gets you shook then fair enough..
You should try and live in chardi kala bro..especially with a handle like Akalifauj
1 -
1 minute ago, Akalifauj said:
Again changing the meaning of a word to mislead sangat. Feminists are those who murder baby in the mother's womb. Guru Sahib will never stand beside these murderers.
you have no idea.. Go look up the definition of feminism..
Are you sure you are sikh and not some Christian fundamentalist?
1 -
20 minutes ago, puzzled said:
Haha! I'm surprised sikh feminists havnt started worshipping devi or started claiming guru ji worshipped devi because he wrote chandi di vaar
Men who want to make sikhi their focus need to be careful of women especially the liberal ones as they can lead you astray. They will question your sikhi and you as man.
Wise up and stay true to yourself.
Woman have already been brainwashed by the liberal slutty media and now basically are advocates for it.
Don't fall for their ways
And you seem to be brainwashed by ignorance..
0 -
19 hours ago, Akalifauj said:
When the feminist @Sukhvirk1976 lose in a discussion they start to become personal. They are very petty.
These feminists will be telling Sri Guru Angad Dev ji, who are you to tell people not to worship a devi? You worshipped one therefore you can't tell anyone not too.
Again these people are very petty. They are the same people who will try to execute Gurmukhs if they get the chance. They worship the devil.
Since feminism is a political movement that is about equality, I see the label as being a positive one.. Guru sahib teaches us that we should break down all discriminatory practices.. So if you have a problem with gender equality, you don't have a problem with me, you have a problem with gurmat.. I think you should khoj on that rather than making assumptions about my knowledge of sikhi.. Since your own understanding seems lacking of the very basic principles
1 -
23 hours ago, BhForce said:
What are you even doing, bro?
I made an entirely uncontroversial statement that dating is not allowed in Sikhism.
Now you want to ask me if I ever so much as said hello to my wife (if i have one) before the conclusion of the 4 lavan and ardas??
Talk about moving the goalposts!
Also, I already answered your question. Why do you feel a need to ask a second time?
It is not controversial. You made a judgement saying that 'dating' is not permissible in Sikhism.. All I asked was can you please qualify the statement..
First of all you should define 'dating'.
Secondly, I asked a simple question about whether you ever met or spoke to you wife before marriage.. It was to draw out a flaw in your assertion that any woman other than your wife should be treated as a sister. The question was to elucidate the fact that clearly if you had met even for a brief moment you must have viewed your prospective wife as a potential future partner.. Notwithstanding the fact it is possible that you may or may not have been introduced for a arrange marriage with someone other than your current wife.. Which by logic means that even holier than thou you looked upon a woman who was not your wife as something other than your sister.. Personally I see nothing wrong with this but you clearly do so instead of getting all in a tizz think about it
1 -
18 hours ago, Akalifauj said:
When the feminist @Sukhvirk1976 lose in a discussion they start to become personal. They are very petty.
These feminists will be telling Sri Guru Angad Dev ji, who are you to tell people not to worship a devi? You worshipped one therefore you can't tell anyone not too.
Again these people are very petty. They are the same people who will try to execute Gurmukhs if they get the chance. They worship the devil.
Oh please. You basically want to pontificate and talk about stuff without using anything of any substance to support your views
2 -
6 hours ago, BhForce said:
Well, since you answered my question about whether you would date your sister (I did not ask whether you dated your sister, I asked a theoretical question about whether you would), I will return the favor by saying that no, I see no more reason to meet a marriage match than Guru Nanak ji did, or Bhai Mani Singh did, or anyone else did before the British showed up in our land.
I would like to ask: If you disagree, then please state whether you are arguing from Sikh tradition or Western mores.
So you never met your spouse or had any contact whatsoever before marriage?
0 -
13 minutes ago, BhForce said:
It is no different a view than has always existed in our Panth, from the very beginning (Guru Nanak Dev ji's wedding forward).
It only seems "interesting" because you're operating from a Westerner's perspective. Remove your head from his boots, and suddenly the view will become clearer, bro.
It is inherently bad ... depending on what you or I mean by "dating".
Well, I suppose if that's how you want to define it.
However, do this experiment: Tell a Westerner friend that one of your Sikh friends was going to get married, and he went with his family to the girl's house and she and her family met him.
And then ask your Westerner friend if he would consider that a date.
Very interesting. Why are you bothered how the westerner defines it. If someone went with their family or it is still essentially a a pre-marriage meeting when the other person is clearly not either your sister or wife but someone. So your binary logic just doesn't work? Also you didn't answer the question whether or not you met your wife before marriage.. In which ever circumstances?
0 -
1 hour ago, Unknownlost said:
The interesting question is what would you do if your daughter got married to a alcholic smoker rather than a amritdhari ?
Yes that would be interesting to know
1 -
2 hours ago, TinnkerBell said:
Tusi marriage bai ji ?
Yes nearly 15 years
0 -
7 minutes ago, TinnkerBell said:
Okay i am back here on my this post, I finally got an rishta that I expected, everything okay from their side but we are going to meet the girl day after tomorrow.
she looks wise and mature in pictures but i am seeking some suggestions from you people who are already married (arrange marriage) that what kind of questions I should ask or how to meet her or like what are important questions that I should consider. ( having no such experience before)
I would say rather than thinking about what questions to ask is think about the things that are important to you that she should know about and ask her what she feels about them?
Just my opinion bro but I think it gets straight to the point rather than obscure questions. Plus it is a very humble and equal way of approaching the issues
0 -
On 1/27/2019 at 7:11 AM, BhForce said:
It's one thing for me or other experienced posters on this website to write "Please back up that assertion". I did that very thing when I asked someone to post where it says the soul enters a baby at 3 months of gestation. Of course, there is no such line.
It's very different for you, who doesn't even read Gurbani, to arrogantly ask "Please back up that assertion".
It would be fine for you to humbly ask, but not to imply that the assertion is unfounded.
Anyways, see here:
Secondly:
Tell me whether you would date your sister. Yes or no.
BTW since I was gracious enough to answer your question maybe you could answer mine instead of being evasive?
I'm still waiting for you to back up your original assertion with some reference.. Otherwise it is just your opinion and not gurmat!
0 -
13 hours ago, BhForce said:
Exactly. Thanks for your answer, by the way.
You wouldn't date your sister (and neither should anyone else).
And we're told to treat women other than your wife as sisters.
Therefore, you wouldn't date anyone that you're not married to.
You seem to have a very interesting view of dating.. The subtext of what you are saying is that it is somehow inherently bad.. Dating can be as simple as meeting someone to find out if you want to be in relationship get married even.. I'm guessing you're married? If so did you meet your spouse before marriage before making your decision or getting married?
1 -
8 hours ago, BhForce said:
It's one thing for me or other experienced posters on this website to write "Please back up that assertion". I did that very thing when I asked someone to post where it says the soul enters a baby at 3 months of gestation. Of course, there is no such line.
It's very different for you, who doesn't even read Gurbani, to arrogantly ask "Please back up that assertion".
It would be fine for you to humbly ask, but not to imply that the assertion is unfounded.
Anyways, see here:
Secondly:
Tell me whether you would date your sister. Yes or no.
Why would I date my sister?
0
Would you be ok with your sister or daughter marrying a black or white Sikh?
in WHAT'S HAPPENING?
Posted
I'm afraid that you seem to have a misunderstanding.. Maybe you should clarify your thoughts on what is dating. The questions I asked you were for this very purpose. Since it felt like your definitions were somewhat limited..
You use of the term westerners seems to be a code for white?