Jump to content

University And Weirdos


Guest GuptKaur
 Share

Recommended Posts

Woah!! Just because Singhstah implied that humans don't eat meat, you go to the extent of comparing animals and humans, then implying at the end animals are better than humans.

this is what singhstah said:

Ask yourself; those who engage freely in lust with whoever, intoxicate themselves, eat corpses and do not even look after their bodies (Kesha di beadbi, etc), are they acting like animals or humans?

these attributes listed above are cannot be applied to animals, as they are bound by nature to whatever joon they are in. These are human attributes, so from singhstahs viewpoint, although he has backtracked on it, since is that we should be more like animals.

Singhstah was just trying to be a smartar$e by saying that such behaviour is typical of the animal world, but as an animal-lover, i can tell you its not true. Its more typical of the human world.

but anyway we digress from the topic. if the mods allow, start this as the basis for a new topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol, a person (man or female) needs to go out and live in the real world themselves; they can't forever rely on their family to control them. If the only thing stopping me from sleeping with someone is the influence of my family, then I have a few problems and shouldn't be amritdhari. Not everyone is so easily tempted- I've not been tempted at all since being here for 3 months, in fact I've been blessed with amrit in those months. A Singhni would probably not do those things you're talking about. And if we are to go with what you're saying, then surely the same thing applies to boys who live out.

-But, the point is, not everyone is so bursting with kaam that they'll get tempted living out at university.

I salute you madam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry my bad, he wrote Tainted goods which is just as bad.

Actually he wrote long term tainted goods and short term tainted goods. If something is tainted then how can it be tainted for only a short period of time or a long period of time (speaking about humans here not clothing)? Unless women have some kind of time machine where they can go back in time and change their behaviour. If something is tainted then it will stay tainted....the damage has been done. Those replying to his post have not even understood what he meant by short term and long term tainted.

As Gupt Kaur reiterated, women should not be referred to as 'Goods'. We are not here to please and appeal to men, we are here Only to please God.

Bhenji, your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj along with Gupt Kaur. Can you say all Sikh women that go to university and live in flats are here on earth to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj? For men kaam and krodh is the strongest in their youth years. And for women kaam and Moh (emotional attachment) is the strongest attackers. Many men and women fall victim to such vices in their youth years. Many parents are well aware that if their daughter does not get enough attention in her early teens and youth years, she will end up finding that attention (emotional attachment) with a guy. And where does teen and youth girls run into guys always...at school. So most parent pay extra attention to their daughters in these years, making sure they don't search for this emotional attachment somewhere else.

Ganika had been a prostitute and gurbani says that she was set free- was she also Tainted Goods? Would you really risk calling a female Brahmgyani that?

Gurbani also has said acting like a prostitute is like acting like an animal. What Ganika shows is that people can change for the better, but their history still stays the same and Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj can save anyone from the cycle of birth and death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is what singhstah said:

He did not generalize humans, but spoke about a specific human being. The characteristics that he provided of the specific human being is what changes it from speaking about all humans to a certain type. This certain type is being named into being an animal. What you did is generalize all humans where you said some do act in a certain way and some don't. So you completely missed the point of the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bhenji, your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj along with Gupt Kaur"

Lol, erm no, like I said we're only here to please God. We fight our thieves daily for God and only God. Not for a man, not for a woman, not for an illusion, but for God.

The assumption you have made that I am here to please Gupt Kaur is ignorant and foolish to say the least.

What would I have to gain spiritually by pleasing her? Will she love me unconditionally, will she hold my hand day and night to lead me out of the darkness like my Husband lord? Will she be there for me when I die and when the worlds and the people go back to from where they originated?

We are here to put our heads of the Gurus path and as gurbani says 'Pay no attention to public opinion'

-Meaning that Bhaji, I do not care what you or anyone else thinks- only my Lord and master, slander me as you will that I am here to please Gupt Kaur, it does not bother me at all, in fact it pleases me greatly. Slander is a great blessing. The slanderer cleans my sins and takes my misdeeds, his face is blackened- the slanderer sinks while I swim across this world ocean. So if you wish to slander me more, you are more than welcome to do so and I thank you and bow at your feet.

The point I made about Ganika was not conding her prior behaviour, that would be foolish as I'm sure you well know. The point I made was that you cannot brand a person as 'Tainted goods'-As humans we constantly change, we rise or fall- A person has the ability to become more pure than they were before they made mistakes.

Gurbani says that naam washes away millions of sins, hence whatever Ganika may have done, she certainly was not tainted, her identity was not tainted- the past does not matter once the sins are washed away (the bhagat lives in the moment), their idenity has changed to such a stage that they have no identity, they have become Waheguru. Or are you to dispute the words of the Great Guru?

Ganika was a prime example a completely pure and untainted being- she became jivan mukt- do not write words to the effect that a person having been tainted cannot become clean- in saying so you are insulting Ganika the Brahmgyani- so please do not.

Also, a person cannot be called 'goods' as we are not here to please others and we are not the goods of others- we Belong to our Husband Lord only, we women are not here to please mortal men, of what use would that be? That would just be buying into the maya- we fight our theives for the love of the Lord Only.

We are All pure really from the start, we just go back to our natural state in becoming Brahmgyani- the state of complete purity. A Brahmgyani can never be tainted, their misdeeds and sins have been completely washed away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bhenji, your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj along with Gupt Kaur"

Lol, erm no, like I said we're only here to please God. We fight our thieves daily for God and only God. Not for a man, not for a woman, not for an illusion, but for God.

The assumption you have made that I am here to please Gupt Kaur is ignorant and foolish to say the least.

What would I have to gain spiritually by pleasing her? Will she love me unconditionally, will she hold my hand day and night to lead me out of the darkness like my Husband lord? Will she be there for me when I die and when the worlds and the people go back to from where they originated?

We are here to put our heads of the Gurus path and as gurbani says 'Pay no attention to public opinion'

-Meaning that Bhaji, I do not care what you or anyone else thinks- only my Lord and master, slander me as you will that I am here to please Gupt Kaur, it does not bother me at all, in fact it pleases me greatly. Slander is a great blessing. The slanderer cleans my sins and takes my misdeeds, his face is blackened- the slanderer sinks while I swim across this world ocean. So if you wish to slander me more, you are more than welcome to do so and I thank you and bow at your feet.

Now you misuderstood what i said. I never said your here to please GuptKaur. I said your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj, and GuprtKaur is here to do the same; to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj.

The point I made about Ganika was not conding her prior behaviour, that would be foolish as I'm sure you well know. The point I made was that you cannot brand a person as 'Tainted goods'-As humans we constantly change, we rise or fall- A person has the ability to become more pure than they were before they made mistakes.

Gurbani says that naam washes away millions of sins, hence whatever Ganika may have done, she certainly was not tainted, her identity was not tainted- the past does not matter once the sins are washed away (the bhagat lives in the moment), their idenity has changed to such a stage that they have no identity, they have become Waheguru. Or are you to dispute the words of the Great Guru?

Spiritually people change, like Ganika did, but the effects physically that arise from bad behaviour do stick with a person. Many have birth complications because they committed mistakes in the past and get diseases that no man or woman want in a potential wife or husband. The risk in engaging in bad behaviour is very high at university and if there is less motivation to stay on the straight and narrow, there is a high chance the person will fall victim to the vices. I asked you if all Sikh women walk on the straight and narrow, when in university, yet you didn't answer that question. This is no competition, but speaking about the reality of the world.

Yes Gurbani does wash away the sins, ang sung 4 of Sri Japji Sahib specifically tells us this, however there is still consequences for committing the sins in the first place. Where Gurbani says, you will harvest what you plant. So the mistakes do play a key role in a persons life and do determine what happens to a person. Also Ganika is an instance where Maharaj is saying anyone can be liberated if it is in Maharaj Hukam. But then Maharaj also says go into bad sangat and you will turn into the sangat you stepped into (hang around). People that are not on the straight and narrow also live in the moment. They like to say there is no consequences, live your life (induldge in kaam) and when time comes, ill become religious. Ang sung 8 of Sri Japji Sahib tells us we will be judged by our actions. Also Gurbani tells us that person repents thousands of times for their past bad actions. So yes past action are very much to consider and do not just depart. Only in rare cases do such past actions depart in a split second, Ganika is one of them. Does this happen for everyone, no. Many and the majority repent thousands and thousands of times.

Ganika was a prime example a completely pure and untainted being- she became jivan mukt- do not write words to the effect that a person having been tainted cannot become clean- in saying so you are insulting Ganika the Brahmgyani- so please do not.

You are taking one case and applying it to all. If all Sikh women today stop their bad behaviour then you can apply the above, but sorry we live in a world where both Sikh men and women are committing tainted behaviours on a daily basis at university flats. Satguru Sri Guru Amar Das ji Maharaj before he came to Satguru Sri Guru Angad Dev ji Maharaj, was worshiping a devi. Should we now go against Gurbani and say Satguru Sri Guru Amar Das ji Maharaj was right for worshipping devis? Or should Gurbani say he was right. Shabad Guru specifically says devi worship is wrong and this makes the past actions wrong. The actions of worshipping a devi are tainted and therefore make the person tainted, only by falling at Maharaj's feet does the person become pure, but certain past bad actions leave a life long mark on the physical body, like indulging in kaam. Drinking alcohol, smoking, among other behaviours do leave a life long mark on the physical body.

Also, a person cannot be called 'goods' as we are not here to please others and we are not the goods of others- we Belong to our Husband Lord only, we women are not here to please mortal men, of what use would that be? That would just be buying into the maya- we fight our theives for the love of the Lord Only.

You can speak for yourself and say your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj, but can't speak for all women. Many Sikh women are looking for emotional security from men. And many men are looking for emotional security from women. So it's best to stay out of bad sangat as no one want to get labeled as something they are not. The term "goods" keeps being brought up, but yet you skipped over explaining what long term and short tainted goods means.

We are All pure really from the start, we just go back to our natural state in becoming Brahmgyani- the state of complete purity. A Brahmgyani can never be tainted, their misdeeds and sins have been completely washed away.

So all Sikh women and men at university flats are Brahmgyani's now? Only those go back the Creator, who follow the Hukams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Now you misuderstood what i said. I never said your here to please GuptKaur. I said your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj, and GuprtKaur is here to do the same; to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj. "

Oh right, my apologies for calling you a slanderer. Forgive me brother.

"Spiritually people change, like Ganika did, but the effects physically that arise from bad behaviour do stick with a person. Many have birth complications because they committed mistakes in the past and get diseases that no man or woman want in a potential wife or husband. The risk in engaging in bad behaviour is very high at university and if there is less motivation to stay on the straight and narrow, there is a high chance the person will fall victim to the vices. I asked you if all Sikh women walk on the straight and narrow, when in university, yet you didn't answer that question. This is no competition, but speaking about the reality of the world.

Yes Gurbani does wash away the sins, ang sung 4 of Sri Japji Sahib specifically tells us this, however there is still consequences for committing the sins in the first place. Where Gurbani says, you will harvest what you plant. So the mistakes do play a key role in a persons life and do determine what happens to a person. Also Ganika is an instance where Maharaj is saying anyone can be liberated if it is in Maharaj Hukam. But then Maharaj also says go into bad sangat and you will turn into the sangat you stepped into (hang around). People that are not on the straight and narrow also live in the moment. They like to say there is no consequences, live your life (induldge in kaam) and when time comes, ill become religious. "

Assuming there is a future is not living in the moment. Living in the moment is also living in the realisation that death could come knocking any moment..Those who get up and do what they know they should before death, in the now, are the ones who truly live in the moment.

Ang sung 8 of Sri Japji Sahib tells us we will be judged by our actions. Also Gurbani tells us that person repents thousands of times for their past bad actions. So yes past action are very much to consider and do not just depart. Only in rare cases do such past actions depart in a split second, Ganika is one of them. Does this happen for everyone, no. Many and the majority repent thousands and thousands of times."

Yes agreed that actions do have consequences, we do reap what we sow- which obv can be changed with naam, as in our karams can be deleted with proper bhagti- but if we hadn't committed mistakes in the first place, we could have been further down the path as there would have been less karams to delete- if you get my drift, all in His Hukam...

"Satguru Sri Guru Amar Das ji Maharaj before he came to Satguru Sri Guru Angad Dev ji Maharaj, was worshiping a devi. Should we now go against Gurbani and say Satguru Sri Guru Amar Das ji Maharaj was right for worshipping devis? Or should Gurbani say he was right. Shabad Guru specifically says devi worship is wrong and this makes the past actions wrong. The actions of worshipping a devi are tainted and therefore make the person tainted, only by falling at Maharaj's feet does the person become pure, but certain past bad actions leave a life long mark on the physical body, like indulging in kaam. Drinking alcohol, smoking, among other behaviours do leave a life long mark on the physical body."

Now now, you know as well as I do that worshipping a devi is foolish, and that I did not condone ganikas prior behaviour as confirmed in my last post.

Agreed that a person becomes pure and is no longer tainted once they sincerely fall at Gurus jis feet.

And agreed about long term physical effects, that's a great point and one which many i'm sure, do not consider.

"You can speak for yourself and say your here to please Sri Vaheguru Ji Maharaj, but can't speak for all women. Many Sikh women are looking for emotional security from men. And many men are looking for emotional security from women. So it's best to stay out of bad sangat as no one want to get labeled as something they are not."

You must also know that one who does not seek to please only Waheguru cannot possibly be taking this path seriously- it goes against the tuk where Guru Ji asks us to give him our heads and not pay any attention to public opinion. The only emotional security comes from Him, from truth, all other security is false- a sikh takes the path seriously, all others cannot be students of truth if they are not willing to learn and apply.

"So all Sikh women and men at university flats are Brahmgyani's now? Only those go back the Creator, who follow the Hukams. "

No- It seems you have completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. I said a Brahmgyani can never be tainted, not a sikh in university halls, unless they are a brahmgyani...

A Brahmgyani is completely pure both within and without, he has lost all sense of his identity as he had merged with the creator- his past is no longer existant as he has become All.

God bless you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh right, my apologies for calling you a slanderer. Forgive me brother.

So telling a person there was insult directed at them is wrong. I guess you wrote a long reply back to what you thought was an insult and this lengthy reply can't go to waste right...got mean something. Chalo....can't make everyone happy

Assuming there is a future is not living in the moment. Living in the moment is also living in the realisation that death could come knocking any moment..Those who get up and do what they know they should before death, in the now, are the ones who truly live in the moment.

Whether a person has a grasp of what living in the moment is, doesn't take away from what they are doing in the moment and there claim of living in the moment. I agree with yout these people don't have a grasp on how to live in the moment, but they are living in their own ways, which by Sikhi is wrong and i believe we both agree on this.

Yes agreed that actions do have consequences, we do reap what we sow- which obv can be changed with naam, as in our karams can be deleted with proper bhagti- but if we hadn't committed mistakes in the first place, we could have been further down the path as there would have been less karams to delete- if you get my drift, all in His Hukam...

So you can see how a girl would suffer more by committing bad action?

Now now, you know as well as I do that worshipping a devi is foolish, and that I did not condone ganikas prior behaviour as confirmed in my last post.

Agreed that a person becomes pure and is no longer tainted once they sincerely fall at Gurus jis feet.

And agreed about long term physical effects, that's a great point and one which many i'm sure, do not consider.

So you understand that a woman has more to lose by committing bad acts pertaining to what we are dicussing?

You must also know that one who does not seek to please only Waheguru cannot possibly be taking this path seriously- it goes against the tuk where Guru Ji asks us to give him our heads and not pay any attention to public opinion. The only emotional security comes from Him, from truth, all other security is false- a sikh takes the path seriously, all others cannot be students of truth if they are not willing to learn and apply.

Just because a person does not learn at the beginning that they must be on the path to please Sri Vaheguru doesn't mean they are not taking it seriously. Many Sikhs don't realize for decades of their life that only reason to practice Sikhi is to follow his Hukam. Just a thread on hair was put up and couple of posters were crying that they need reasonable premises to accept hair. They denied every premise. To simply say it's Maharaj's Hukam for these posters was not enough. Go up to a random Sikh and say Maharaj gave a Hukam to keep hair. First thing they will say is why. Some will accept some made up reason that says nothing about pleasing Maharaj. But slowly they will progress and realize i should have just accepted the reason for keeping hair based on it's Maharaj's Hukam.

No- It seems you have completely misunderstood what I was trying to say. I said a Brahmgyani can never be tainted, not a sikh in university halls, unless they are a brahmgyani...

A Brahmgyani is completely pure both within and without, he has lost all sense of his identity as he had merged with the creator- his past is no longer existant as he has become All.

God bless you.

I said that line because you kept bringing up Ganika and applying what happened to her to all females at university, as if they would change in a split second. And i was saying in reality that does not happen and only a selected few are blessed in this way. For the Majority they have to realize at some point in their lives that living life is only worth living if we live to please Maharaj. However the more bad deeds a person does more the soul and mind is polluted by the vices. If they find out later in life, then they would have to accept the consequences of their previous actions, which are worse for women than men, again speaking in the terms of what we are discussing. A person's history can and will define where they end up in the future, unless you speak about special rare cases like Ganika.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use