AK-47

So is your issue with the paintings the accuracy? Nobody is really saying that the pics are necessarily accurate but are representations. If I take a photo, an accurate photo of guru Granth sahib Ji, is that suddenly ok? The question you ask ... Simple answer - teach them. Again I return to the baby and bath water analogy. Guru sahib was against idol worship, this is worshipping an inanimate object that cannot interact with you as if it were god, etc. Iv never heard of a sikh calling a painting god. If they do, teach them. Some will argue that Guru Granth Dahib Ji da satkar and seva is idol worship, will there be calls to stop this also? Neo Singhs post is great at raising the wider n deeper issues and worth reading. people say the gurus categorically said no to paintings of them, where? Does anybody have this pangti? As I said earlier it's another pointless mini jihad. If people got issues with Sikhs doin idol worship go fix the prob of them going to fake gurus this might be a more worthwhile fight then trying to remove representations of what the gurus, shaheeds etc may have looked like. Having taught young kids about the gurus through use of pics, I know they are useful.

It's shocking sometimes how childlike sorry brat like people can get. Are we becoming the Taliban now?! Some people willing to accept a Persian source which will obv have islamic influence re images but not a sikh source because they say it had Hindu influence?! Ridiculous. And where do you stop if we become hell bent on removing images? A painting is an image, a picture of a flower is an image, pics of martyrs are images, pics of darbar sahib are images, pics of gurbani are images, gurbani itself is a written image of te shabad, do we get rid of it all? Do we uproot all of darbar sahib to remove images of flowers n birds? People get knickers in twist over gurus images but plaster pics of kids n family over homes. Such hypocrisy! Sant Kartar Singh Ji said that pics of guru sahibs are like a walking stick. They can help a person onto the path, they can help a person learn how to walk, but eventually the sikh has no need for pics (walking stick) n walks himself with bani. It's the usual throw the baby out with the bath water thing, rather than deal with the issue revisionists try n find a new jihad to fight! This is such a non issue it's funny, but at the same time it's expressive of the twisted way revisionists are trying to reframe Sikhi. Benti, beware of these people, they cause havoc by stirring pointless isssues but have no iinterest in real Sikhi of gurbani abhiyaas, naam kamai, seva of guru and sangat and spiritual progression. If you want to be a missionary of Guru Nanak Dev Ji then be one like Bhai Gurdas Ji. But oh hang on, you don't believe in his vaars, you can't open a pothi of his vaars near maharajh and you can't get your head around his words even if you do try. Never mind.

That's great news! Missionaries have started moaning and criticising already! Saying bhai mani Singh Ji was never given padwi of Singh sahib etc. I bet bhai mani Singh Ji wasn't given a gold medal either but they seem to throw them at nastiks like dhundee

An ok read, not sure about the protective ring around baba Jujhar Singh Ji though, first time I heard that. Ruined it with the last paragraph though. I instantly think of deh shiva and countless other shabads from guru sahib about desiring martyrdom. If we were only going to wish or desire things easily obtainable or achievable then would we even ask for naam as this is the hardest of all to obtain? Poetic license has left gurmat behind here I think.

It's quite easy .. These days anyone you disagree with automatically becomes an undercover rss agent! Just about everyone iv ever met has been accused of being one at some point!

Don't about anyone else, but my biological mother and father are married and my spiritual mother and father are married as well. How sad that our own Sikhs are calling the Khalsa a child born outside of marriage and that our mother mata sahib Kaur was 'kept' by guru sahib at anandpur sahib. Sometimes these so called historians and authors put pen to paper without thinking first, sharam da kata.

Lol loving these pics

Examples of guru sahib and gursikhs delivering lectures or sermons or updesh or katha or sakhiyan etc have been shared. Please do read or research them to see whether they happened or not. The need for katha to accompany kirtan is more important now than ever as we move further from our language and face doubts and challenges from society. Bhai dharam Singh zakhmi was a gem!! If you want anand listen to him doing kirtan n telling the sakhi with it. Pure bliss

Kam from this site has been doing translations of the 'chapters' you can read them on his blog http://sikhscriptures2english.blogspot.com/

Oops sorry the other one was when the bhraman came to Guru Arjan Dev Ji I believe and asked if he could do katha, maharajah allowed him, but nobody listened. He got angry and complained and maharajah gave him teachings which detail the 14 qualities needed in a person doing katha and 14 needed in the listener. This is still taught today. Other sakhi is to do with the Sikh in 6th guru jis times that would pull faces and swear at sangat during guru jis katha. Sangat complained but when this Sikh said remind me of the katha they couldn't n all they could remember was his actions. I.e mind wasn't focused on guru jis teachings but on his face. There's loads!!

If you listen to the katha of Guru Nanak Dev Ji from sooraj parkash (or read it alone if that makes you happier) you will find sakhi after sakhi where maharajah visits places and does updesh I.e teaches Sikhi. Sometimes maharajah does something and then explains why, other times maharajah uses a shabad and then explains it's use, other times sangat gather and just ask maharajah for teachings. So yes maharajah did give lectures to the sangat. Guru Amar Das Ji set up 22 manji's ie places of learning and set gursikhs to go and teach gurmat. Again preaching was done both of gurmat and of gurbani and of guru sahibs greatness. When Bhai Gurdas Ji was in Agra he sat there and did katha and taught people about gurbani, Sikh philosophy and of guru Ji. He didn't just sit there with a vaja. Guru Har Krishan Sahib Ji blessed a poor dumb person with with a stick with the ability to do the katha of the Gita as this was seen to be an incredibly difficult thing to do. Again katha is seen as worthy albeit within a different dharam. Guru Gobind Singh Ji I also understand did katha of the whole of Guru Granth Sahib Ji. So there are plenty of examples of katha in Sikh tradition. If they don't exist in certain parts of the panth, that is their own choice. Majority of the panth enjoys and learns from katha and understand it to be an integral part of Sikhi. At different stages of your Sikhi path you will get anand from different things. Sometimes seva, sometimes more kirtan, sometimes reading bani, listening to bani, listening to katha, doing jooreh di seva etc. Aim is to join mind with vaheguru and do simram constantly whilst doing any of the above. Whole argument is childish. It's like equivalent to asking which of your parents do you love more? love both, listen to both kirtan and katha. End of.

Gurburakal, again I'm not questioning the artform. I understand that people are learning all the time which is great, I have no questions on their ability to learn or his ability to teach them different moves etc. My questions are around the credibility of the numerous claims being made. Let's be honest, it doesn't seem like the teacher has any combat experience, despite being an expert in it. If the art truly is the supreme art and he is the last warrior and master of the art, then we have someone who potentially has never faced real battle. I don't think it is a silly question at all since we are being told this is not an art that be demonstrated properly unless in full combat and that is the only time for it's full potential to be seen. Hence no competing in mainstream tournaments. Your karate teacher may teach to defend yourself against a street attack, he may be a bouncer who has experienced attacks n gives his life experience. A soldier teaching may give his experience of armed unarmed combat having served in battles. Here we are being taught full out battle, tactics, beheading, etc from someone who has never done any of it. Would you feel happy attending a boxing class by someone who had never entered the ring? My point is that as a martial art, it looks great, it may well even be a battlefield art. But is the teacher an experienced warrior with real combat experience? No.

Gurburakal I have less of an issue with the artform and can accept that it's been used in some form or another historically. But my question is not whether the art has been tested per se, but whether the master and last Sikh warrior has. You mention that the prev teacher travelled to challenges n fought, I'm asking whether the current teacher has actually tested it against an opponent. I'm sure you appreciate that visiting a school is different from visiting and asking whether anyone has the courage or skill to compete. If the schools master refuses then it would be an obvious embarrassment. But the art remains untested. That's why I mentioned groups who would probably relish the challenge and not be intimidated etc. Has any attempt been made to arrange combat with these people? From my understanding Hari Singh nalwa had numerous one to one fights with afghan tribal champions, will this current teacher follow n proove his skill? And again Internet isn't going to proove skill, I'm not questioning the art, but I'm questioning whether the teacher has proven himself in armed combat against another foe. Not in the gym but proper combat, albeit not to the death.

Those are nice quotes. But as a genuine question, many people refer to his challenge, and let's be honest most of his critics are usually young people, and to say go and fight him is easy to say. But has the challenge been extended to actual fighters from other places or just to our own people? I mean has he been to various schools, tribes, hostile areas where a challenge to duel with blood for honour and skill would be happily accepted? I know it's on the Internet, but has any attempt been made to actually test the artform in real combat? Given the countless conflicts and groups of actual warriors engaged in all types of battle and war it shouldn't be hard to go and challenge them to really test if it's a battle art? Not sure whether the other martial arts test their art in battle, but then as you say they're not shastar vidiya, and therefore not the supreme martial art as we are told. With all honesty has any attempt to fight afghan tribesmen, somalii, Chechen guerillas, etc happened? If the last Sikh warrior can't fight these people, what chance have the rest of us got?

So it's not a Sikh art and it predates Sikhi? I thought niddars last version was that guru Nanak Dev Ji was given this art when they went to sachkhand at the time they received mool mantar, they then passed it to baba budha Ji who then taught it to guru hargobind sahib Ji. I'm not sure where he got the above from, but are you saying that his source has now changed again? Hmmm As for last warrior that is hilarious!! An artist demonstrating a martial art conceptionally yes perhaps. But a warrior, unless he's used this art in war and experienced the battlefield then he remains an artist. For a real warrior look to general subaigh Singh Ji. A general, mastermind, strategist, a leader of warriors and fighters, himself experienced in war, death and killing.

Something Iv noticed a lot more recently is how so many of us change our opinions like the coming and going of the waves. One second we love and adore someone, the next we hate them, one minute we're cussing something the next we love it! So much instability! It seems like we have no control of our minds or selves! The recent arguements over the Sikh tv channels is prime example. One week we hate one, then we hate the other, then back to the first again! Perhaps we should take time and consider things through before jumping in! Gurbani talks about the calm and collected mind of the Gurmukh, how far we seem to be from that!

Guru sahib did do that seva, your right. He sat in the sangats shoes and did their seva. However, that was guru sahibs choice. They made it. Not us. It is not for us to try and do the same. Would we place guru Granth sahib Ji in the middle of sangats shoes? Or use the ramaleh to wipe sangats feet? No? Again I repeat the point I made earlier regarding benches which I believe to be the worst idea Iv heard. Here is what I think will happen. People who don't need them will use them, nobody will say get off because nobody can be bothered for an argument. (if you think you would, ask yourself when was the last time you made the sangat be quite during divan when everyone talks - very few people have the audacity to actually do these things). As more and more people use them, they will need to install more benches. Current and future generations will be even less willing to tolerate back pain and will insist on using them at an even early stage, so even more will be needed. Once this bench thing starts it won't be stopped. Eventually we'll see halls like churches full of benches. Please let me know if you think this forecast is incorrect. Just to repeat again this isn't the compassionate vs the non compassionate, let's not get into that ridiculous state. We all have elderly parents or disabled relatives and this issue affects us all. I have two in my house who have been going Gurdwara at 3 every morning to do their seva for the last 15 years. They struggle as best they can and they'd also like facilities but not where they sit above the rest of the sangat, and this is their thoughts. So it's not as easy as people make this issue out to be.

Lets not get childish and start throwing the old fundamentalist vs moderate terminology around. It's boring and the quickest way to score points without having to raise valid points. Rant over. Compassion in Sikhi may extend beyond the physical, perhaps the people against chairs are considering the karam created by use/ abuse of these? And that by inadvertently creating further karam the person is putting themselves at further disadvantage? Perhaps? I understand the development of disability awareness and needs, and in the same way as that has developed over the years it will take time to develop facilities to accommodate disabled needs in gurdwaras too. Installing chairs or permanent benches is a quick but bad response as it's clear the dangers it presents. Ie that the numbers grow until darbars turn into church halls with more and more people (able) people saying they can't sit, cross their legs etc. It'll be difficult to reign back once started. Southall is a good example of a good and practical solution and more healthy discussion should take place to discuss ideas whilst maintaining guru sahibs darbar and the maryada as much as possible. An example of the chair culture was on sangat tv this weekend. An event at babe ke, and the mayors wife was sitting on a chair, probably Cus of not being able to sit in a skirt. Rather than accommodate this, it'd be better to educate about dress code and practicality in a darbar. As well as appreciating disabled needs, we also need to be aware of the importance of the darbar, it's maryada, and spiritual importance. This can then lead to fair dialogue rather than lashing out at each other.

Just watched the first 5 mins of that video. Ghugga is saying that simran and Kirtan have never fixed anything and cannot fix anything. He says that if they could why was darbar sahib attacked when simian and Kirtan and path are done there 24/7. He says that only men have taken it upon themselves to fix things. And that satwant singh beant Singh, sukh jinda, Hawara and Balwant Singh all have never done or believe in this fake simran. Sarbjit sits there nodding along. So id say that's proof that these are totally against not only jaap sahib, Chaupai sahib, ardas (says pathshahi 10 - therefore on their logic can't be gurbani) etc but also the entire content and teachings of guru Granth sahib Ji. And also slandering our shaheed and soormeh at the same time.

Lol people like throwing around abuse these days hey! Is calling someone a thick head (lol!!) helping the thread or a good thing to say? N the gunman is 100% correct. This country got to where it is by being incredibly violent, cut throat, devious and manipulative. Yeh they used their brains but having navies, mercenaires, and nuclear bombs has all helped. Guy on the video best have been deported back to india by now. Can anyone confirm whether this lowlife fake is still at the Gurdwara? Most of the guys I know would have done the same, bust the lights out of them. We all talk of heroes and saint soldiers etc, but when a Patti been caught in a Gurdwara having been drinking suddenly we turn into pappus! Look at the singhs you all admire and posters on your Walls and kavitas and varaan you listen to, what would they have done? Call the committee?! Well done for giving juthia to these besharams. I'd post what sant jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale said about this scenario, but I might get accused of trying to take over the Gurdwara as well or something.

Lolll this sukhdev guy just spoke on sangat tv, a complete joker he getting laughed at on tv!! Honestly his actual vocal views are worse then his writings!!

For someone who claimed to be a doctor, this guy seems to find an awful lot of time during the working day to reply to posts on this message board!! No wonder the health service is in such a mess! I wonder what the BMA would say!

Ok lets try again. Your talking about two different things. Firstly you ask when it is donated, who does money belong to. When we donate i.e. make a gift without any expected return (i.e. not for consideration) then the money changes ownership and we have no rights to it or claim over it. So in this instance the money being donated to guru sahib, belongs to them. Same as if we donated £20 to Khalsa Aid, it would be theirs, we could not say that the money is mine, as soon as we pass it over as a donation, we loose all ownership rights. So thats part 1. Now for the origin bit. As I explained in the example above, the origin is not the same as it was not created by the same person. The creation of wealth and the subsequent donation of wealth are 2 seperate and unrealted issues. The issue being discussed is the creation of wealth outside of the morals and ethics of the code of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, BY Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Let me reiterate, Guru Nanak Dev Ji owns these buildings, any revenue raised is therfore done so in the name of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Now this point is simple and clear. Guru Nanak Dev Ji cannot make profits from activites which they themselves reject and criticise. If Mr Off License conducts his trade, he does so in hiw own name. That is his business. There is a clear and obvious distinction between the two issues your discussing. One: the process of the creation of wealth. Two: Legal entitlement and ownership of wealth on making a gift/donation. i repeat the two are not mutually inclusive. The Satkar campaign is discussing the creation of weatlh in the name of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Simple.

For the people asking what the difference is between money made by a party hall and that donated by a off license owner (for example). The off license owner makes his money in his own name, he will pay his dues and receive his karam and Lekha as a result of his actions. BUT a Gurdwara and any associated buildings I.e. Any buildings held in it's name are owned by Guru Nanak Dev Ji. So any income earned is done in the name of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Is this the type of income Maharajh would earn? Is this the karam we want to try and push onto guru sahib? Do we believe Guru Ji should or would make money from these ventures? History and gurmat say NO! The 2 scenarios are very different. Let's not be silly and try and make them the same.

Vaheguru ji ka khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh I think as a community we can be proud of having groups such as Khalsa Aid working to do a fantastic job around the world delivering aid and support wherever it is needed. However, if we look at the state of a number of the largest charities in the world we see massive corruption, bribery, political gain, greed from the charity 'workers', etc etc. Global Fund to fight Aids, Malaria etc http://www.economist.com/node/18176062?story_id=18176062 World Food Programe http://www.economist.com/node/15731546?story_id=E1_TVSPTVQG More and more regularly we see such stories, even groups such as Amnesty International had issues recently where massive payouts had to be made to their ex-directors. The fund to fight aids, malaria etc (see above link) which governments actually directly fund and keep a seperate budget for ($20 billion !!!)was accussed of misusing the money and massive corruption allegations etc. There are so many problems that can arise, especially if for example the charity is religious based, where there may be an underlying expectation for religious conversion etc. As I said i feel we're very fortunate to say that Khalsa Aid is not one of these types! The controversial issue I'd like to raise is to do with which projects are supported over others. The tragedy in Japan has been seen around the globe and many people have suffered. Many charities and orgs are trying to lend support but from a news report i heard recently, japan has not accepted any help as yet (may have changed more recently). My controversial point is, that japan has the worlds 3rd richest economy, it has a history of disaster management and is a strategic partner of the worlds greatest military and global powers (i.e. they cannot afford not to help Japan because of the damage it would cause their relationships). As such, would and should charities concentrate their efforts elsewhere? While thousands have died in Japan over the last few weeks, many more have probably died from water based diseases, starvation, civil war, drug abuse etc etc in many other countries. And these deaths happen week after week, day after day. Yet these are often missed by the media and people get immune to the sight of starving children. Maybe its just me, but often charities seem to be jumping on bandwagons to increase their public profile (which i understand to an extent) and i guess it easier to raise money if people see the disaster daily on the news as well. But for some reason, this doesnt sit well with me. It could be just me, I dont know. Again looking back at Khalsa Aid, these guys have made it clear that their efforts in Haiti will continue (long after the press and public memory has passed) and they are helping the libyan refugees also (again something that iv not heard many other charities doing). And that they will look at Japan but will not forget the other places. I was really impressed by this attitude and hope it continues. If possible research the charities that you support and check how they use the funds you give them, check the projects they run etc. Just because something is a 'charity' doesnt mean it will be doing what you expect a chariity to be doing with your donations. Just as an after thought, i thought I'd mention that Im not aligned or work for Khalsa Aid, I just admire their work and trust that Vaheguru will bless them with greater strength and achievement.