Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hgsingh

Why Are So Many Moderate Sikhs Against Khalistan

Recommended Posts

Guest Jacfsing2

Waheguru

Can someone please answer some of these questions?

1 if khalistan is created what will happen to all the Gurdwaras that will be left outside of khalistan in india, will they be abandened like the ones in pakistan, because the hindus will kick out all the sikhs because they will say now you have your own country go there.

2 Right now we can do parchar all over india easily, if khalistan is created how will we spread sikhi in india? sikhs living outside of khalistan in india will be hated and the parcher will not go on.

3 right now punjab is 60% sikh. Namdharis radhaswami and other dera also claim to be sikh and they also are part of the 60% so that means sikhs who believe in the ten gurus are way less because namdharis and other groups who claim to be sikh are not sikh. Will they support khalistan.

4 If khalistan is created what would the stand be on missionaries converting people, will they have free range to do so.

1. Guru Nanak Dev Ji went to countries outside the land he was from: The Mughal Empire. And another thing is India is too dependent on the Sikhs to just keep them out of the country.

2. There's prachar in India? That's the silliest thing I've heard! Once Khalistan is formed Sikhs will be more free to spread Sikhi, similarly to how the Vatican spreads through lies, we'll spread truth through Khalistan.

3. They aren't Sikh in my book, a Sikh that doesn't believe Guru Sahib is the only Guru is not a Sikh at all, Guru Sahib once said his Rehat was more beloved than his Sikh. Whether they support it or not, Khalsa Akal Purakh Ki; Raj Kaerga Khalsa and Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fatah.

4. Missionaries should be allowed to take the fake Sikhs, they would change their religion to anything given a high enough bribe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Here are some more questions to your list:

How will I take out the trash in Khalistan?

How will I watch my tv, I like to lay on the sofa sometimes and sometimes I like to sit up straight? Who will help me decide, how I watch my tv?

Who will take care of my business when I leave for the Gurdwara? I am looking for someone. Please pm, if anyone is interested?

Will the Punj Pyare allow toilets in my house? I don't like going outside.

Will I still be able to buy chocolate in Khalistan? I really like chocolate.

:stupidme: :stupidme: :stupidme: :stupidme: :stupidme: :stupidme:

If i was drowning, don't help me. I don't want to live in this world with these very Smarty people.

For God sake have some common sense and look at the bigger picture of freedom for Sikhi to grow. Today the 3 foot kirpan wearing soorma are wrestling goats for a living and some are wrestling cooked meat at receptions on saturday and professors on sunday.

From what I read, I honestly don't know what side you take on Khalistan, do you think we need a physical place where Guru Sahib is king with Punj Pyare making some rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waheguru

Can someone please answer some of these questions?

1 if khalistan is created what will happen to all the Gurdwaras that will be left outside of khalistan in india, will they be abandened like the ones in pakistan, because the hindus will kick out all the sikhs because they will say now you have your own country go there.

2 Right now we can do parchar all over india easily, if khalistan is created how will we spread sikhi in india? sikhs living outside of khalistan in india will be hated and the parcher will not go on.

3 right now punjab is 60% sikh. Namdharis radhaswami and other dera also claim to be sikh and they also are part of the 60% so that means sikhs who believe in the ten gurus are way less because namdharis and other groups who claim to be sikh are not sikh. Will they support khalistan.

4 If khalistan is created what would the stand be on missionaries converting people, will they have free range to do so.

Who said anything about Khalistan being restricted to the state of Punjab. When the misl's were fighting for self rule in the late 1700s they didn't limit themselves to a small patch of land. Guru Sahib said 'Raaj Karega Khalsa' and that's no different to the concept of Khalistan. Maharaaj also says 'Aaki Rahai N Koe', none shall oppose the Khalsa and people of all backgrounds will support Khalsa Raaj/Khalistan.

We can draw up maps but the reality is that no one knows the extent to which the Khalsa will rule. Our present goal is to carry on working towards freedom, Maharaaj will do the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said anything about Khalistan being restricted to the state of Punjab. When the misl's were fighting for self rule in the late 1700s they didn't limit themselves to a small patch of land. Guru Sahib said 'Raaj Karega Khalsa' and that's no different to the concept of Khalistan. Maharaaj also says 'Aaki Rahai N Koe', none shall oppose the Khalsa and people of all backgrounds will support Khalsa Raaj/Khalistan.

We can draw up maps but the reality is that no one knows the extent to which the Khalsa will rule. Our present goal is to carry on working towards freedom, Maharaaj will do the rest.

Wahguru

I have seen some maps with parts of pakistan,rajastan and haryana in khalistan. Sikhs dont even form 5% of the poplution of those areas how will they just give up land, we cant fight them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Wahguru

I have seen some maps with parts of pakistan,rajastan and haryana in khalistan. Sikhs dont even form 5% of the poplution of those areas how will they just give up land, we cant fight them.

@BhagatBalmik when Ranjit Singh owned the Sikh empire Sikhs only made 15% of that land, an even more extreme example with another religion is that Muslims took over Spain with less than 5% of the population. We aren't here to start fights, we are here to end them. That's why they should surrender. Just say that you believe Guru Sahib is "weak" to your eyes, apparently Sava Lakh se Ek Larado means nothing to you. There were more Mughals in the army then there were Sikhs total, yet Guru Sahib won. (Are you 3HO?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BhagatBalmik when Ranjit Singh owned the Sikh empire Sikhs only made 15% of that land, an even more extreme example with another religion is that Muslims took over Spain with less than 5% of the population. We aren't here to start fights, we are here to end them. That's why they should surrender. Just say that you believe Guru Sahib is "weak" to your eyes, apparently Sava Lakh se Ek Larado means nothing to you. There were more Mughals in the army then there were Sikhs total, yet Guru Sahib won. (Are you 3HO?)

Surrender? To who and why? Surrender to the Nihangs? Sikhi is dying day by day, and here you all sit fantasizing about Khalsa Raj, we can't even obtain Khalsa Raj in Punjab. I think we need to think a lot more short term, otherwise there will not even be a "long term."

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Surrender? To who and why? Surrender to the Nihangs? Sikhi is dying day by day, and here you all sit fantasizing about Khalsa Raj, we can't even obtain Khalsa Raj in Punjab. I think we need to think a lot more short term, otherwise there will not even be a "long term."

I don't think Sikhi is dying, if Sikhi is dying than Guru Sahib would not exist, there were even fake Sikhs during the Guru Nanak Dev Ji time: he had 1 Sikh: Bhai Lehna who is now called Guru Angad Dev Ji, 200 years later Guru Gobind Singh Ji only had 5, today called the Punj Pyare, that's still an increase but only by 4, if even 1% of so called Sikhs were true Sikhs than we are still growing, Sikhi is about complete surrender to the Guru, but you believe that Sikhi means Punjabism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Sikhi is dying, if Sikhi is dying than Guru Sahib would not exist, there were even fake Sikhs during the Guru Nanak Dev Ji time: he had 1 Sikh: Bhai Lehna who is now called Guru Angad Dev Ji, 200 years later Guru Gobind Singh Ji only had 5, today called the Punj Pyare, that's still an increase but only by 4, if even 1% of so called Sikhs were true Sikhs than we are still growing, Sikhi is about complete surrender to the Guru, but you believe that Sikhi means Punjabism.

Why can't Guru Sahib exist while Sikhi is dying BUT not yet dead?... The tremendous growth Sikhism had for a few centuries is not evidence of Sikhi still growing and flourishing today. I'm willing to bet day by day many more are leaving Sikhi than becoming true Gursikhs. Unless some sort of miracle occurs, Khalsa Raj will never happen. Silly to dream about unlimited Khalsa Raj, when even the small state of Punjab is slipping away.

Explain why you think I think Sikhi means Punjabism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Why can't Guru Sahib exist while Sikhi is dying BUT not yet dead?... The tremendous growth Sikhism had for a few centuries is not evidence of Sikhi still growing and flourishing today. I'm willing to bet day by day many more are leaving Sikhi than becoming true Gursikhs. Unless some sort of miracle occurs, Khalsa Raj will never happen. Silly to dream about unlimited Khalsa Raj, when even the small state of Punjab is slipping away.

Explain why you think I think Sikhi means Punjabism

Why I think you assume Sikhi= Punjabism is because of the way you feel as Punjab is the only Khalistan. If there are only 10 Sikhs today who are true Khalsas then Sikhi has at least doubled from 1699.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why I think you assume Sikhi= Punjabism is because of the way you feel as Punjab is the only Khalistan. If there are only 10 Sikhs today who are true Khalsas then Sikhi has at least doubled from 1699.

I'm going based off of the fact the people in outside lands will likely not join Khalistan, nor will India/Pakistan give up those lands without a fight. If we were to say "well prior to the Anglo-Sikh wars, that was all our land" I don't think anyone would take us seriously.

Yeah, in that sense it has increased, but what about in the sense that perhaps 30 years ago there were 25 Sikhs, now we have dwindled down to 10 and in a few years down to 7 and so on. Is that signs of a flourishing faith?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

I'm going based off of the fact the people in outside lands will likely not join Khalistan, nor will India/Pakistan give up those lands without a fight. If we were to say "well prior to the Anglo-Sikh wars, that was all our land" I don't think anyone would take us seriously.

Yeah, in that sense it has increased, but what about in the sense that perhaps 30 years ago there were 25 Sikhs, now we have dwindled down to 10 and in a few years down to 7 and so on. Is that signs of a flourishing faith?

What we need is true GurSikhs to fight for us,

"ਜਬ ਲਗ ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਰਹੇ ਨਿਆਰਾ ॥ jab lag khhalasa rehae niara

While the Khalsa stays true,

ਤਬ ਲਗ ਤੇਜ ਕੀਉ ਮੈਂ ਸਾਰਾ ॥ thab lag thaej keeo main sara

I will offer my full support

ਜਬ ਇਹ ਗਹੈ ਬਿਪਰਨ ਕੀ ਰੀਤ ॥ jab eih gehai biparan kee reeth

When they follow the ways of others,

ਮੈਂ ਨ ਕਰੋਂ ਇਨ ਕੀ ਪ੝ਰਤੀਤ ॥ main n karon ein kee pratheeth

I will withdraw my assistance from them." (Khalsa Mehima) If Guru Sahib is for us, than who could ever stop us, the main reason I think you believe Sikhi=Punjabism is because you feel like Guru Sahib is weak, from all your words of nindak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See alot of whats written in the last few pages is why I tend to avoid the religious debate about a 'Khalistan'. The Sikhs that have their heads in the clouds and go on about a border that extends deep into neighbouring countries pretty much kill the idea and hope stone dead.

Me ? like alot of Punjabi Sikhs, am motivated by the same reasons that Scots, Catalans and Basques are for example. That reality is that the nation that now occupies my land (for the first time ever in my thousands of years history) only does so because of the lies and false promises they made to my people in 1946. That makes their occupation of Punjab illegal as well as immoral.

In contrast to the premise that the OP of this thread insinuates, i.e. that 'extremists' back Khalistan and 'moderates' do not, in my experience the vast majority of supporters and campaigners for a free Punjab are not very religious monehs who are motivated with a great national pride in being Punjabi rather than Indian, in much the same way as the Scots and Catalans.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

I second Jagsaw.

From what I see, it's mostly moneh who support Khalistan.

I'm not mona, I just want somewhere where Guru Sahib could have people follow him, there are less Jews than Sikhs but they still get their own country based on Judaism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not mona, I just want somewhere where Guru Sahib could have people follow him, there are less Jews than Sikhs but they still get their own country based on Judaism.

Brother, when we have the Sikh equivalent of the Rothschild family, world leaders will be lining up to give us our own country, hehe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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...
Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use