Jump to content

Afghanistan Sikhs, Already Marginalized, Are Pushed To Brink.


Singh559
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, if anything the 'lesson; you speak of is actually the fact that 'islamication' was a good thing for Afghanistan's Sikhs and the de-islamification has proved to be a terrible thing.

LOL if living in Afghanistan was so good, u would go + live there. But the reality is u would never do that because under the Taliban Sikhs were made to wear yellow stars like Jews in Nazi Germany, pay the Islam Jizya Mafia Tax and realise that under Islam they are 2nd class citizens. Imagine, you have a daughter and she could be taken from u as a kaffir whenever the Taliban want for sex and then murdered. Prophet Muhammad married his youngest wife when she was 6 and sexually started that marriage when Aisha was 9 so imagine what kind of hell it must be where that is the ultimate role model that Mullah Omar and the Taliban admired

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL if living in Afghanistan was so good, u would go + live there. But the reality is u would never do that because under the Taliban Sikhs were made to wear yellow stars like Jews in Nazi Germany.

Any credible source?

Imagine, you have a daughter and she could be taken from u as a kaffir whenever the Taliban want for sex and then murdered.

This is a criminal act under Islamic Law and punishment for such horrendous crime would be death penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if living in Afghanistan was so good, u would go

Who in the world ever suggested life was good there ?

But the reality is u would never do that because under the Taliban Sikhs were made to wear yellow stars like Jews in Nazi Germany,

No they wern't. Hindus had to. Not Sikhs. Again, you would be wise to talk to actual Afghan Sikhs and learn something, The story of the Sikhs being forced to wear yellow stars appeared first in an Indian newspaper and folloshly other news agencies took it as gospel. The Indian news media did that because they they associate Sikhs as being Hindus but the taliban itself did not do that. They actually had a healthy respect for Sikhs, partly because they were largely pashtun and so not only had a respect for the historiy between the 2 but also, under their pakhtoonwali code of conduct, had a duty to ensure the safety of their fellow monotheist neighbours. Now, although we here might have the impression that a city such as Kabul is pathan dominated the truth is that the pathans are a tiny minority there. That city is mostly full of the northern alliance supporters.....Uzbeks, Tajiks etc. The kind of people bitterly opposed to what you call the 'islamification' of the taliban. It is these people that have made life a misery for Kabul's Sikhs since the taliban fall. All I was suggesting to you then is the fact that the actual facts clearly counter the previous poster's contention that 'islamification' is to blame for the fate of the Sikhs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've talked to one Afghan Sikh who told me that the rule of Taliban was not bad for the Afghan Sikhs. He said there was safety for Sikhs since the Taliban followed some strict rules and regulations. But the period before the Taliban when it was ruled by the warlords was the worst time ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What LegalSingh is saying is that Taliban rule even with its discrimination was better than under the warlords prior to the Taliban taking over. It's a bit like saying Badal's rule is better than Beant's rule because there aren't as many fake encounters in Badal's rule than in Beant's rule.

In a Muslim country for non-Muslims every ruler is a haram.zada, you hope the latest haram.zada is better than the haram.zada who's just been left office and is hanging from a tree!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop blaming Islam for everything...This does not solve anything....

Bro, Islam is to blame, because you cannot refute it as a muslim, and the muslims have always hated cremation, because they feel only Allah has the right to give punishment of burning bodies or something.

The Muslims dont make it up, they look to the Koran for instruction. You cannot say that Islam or the Koran is not responsible, in denying Sikhs/Hindus the right to cremate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bro, Islam is to blame, because you cannot refute it as a muslim, and the muslims have always hated cremation, because they feel only Allah has the right to give punishment of burning bodies or something.

The Muslims dont make it up, they look to the Koran for instruction. You cannot say that Islam or the Koran is not responsible, in denying Sikhs/Hindus the right to cremate.

We don't HAVE to cremate. It's just a cultural leftover from Hinduism. We can cremate, bury, throw out to sea......anything. It doesn't really matter. The human body was just a temporary shell for our souls. Once we're gone...we're gone. It's over. Finished with. If we live in a country where cremation isn't allowed than so be it......we can just as easily bury. If we live in a country where burial isn't the norm than so be it.....we can just as easily cremate. We've enough, in fact way too many, rituals regarding living life as it is.....we don't need to be adding meaningless rituals to dead bodies too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bro, Islam is to blame, because you cannot refute it as a muslim, and the muslims have always hated cremation, because they feel only Allah has the right to give punishment of burning bodies or something.

The Muslims dont make it up, they look to the Koran for instruction. You cannot say that Islam or the Koran is not responsible, in denying Sikhs/Hindus the right to cremate.

Islam say to bury the dead body and not burn it...so what?

Islam doesn't say to not let others do what they do...

Stop acting like kids...Blame extremists for their misbehavior, not Islam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't HAVE to cremate. It's just a cultural leftover from Hinduism. We can cremate, bury, throw out to sea......anything. It doesn't really matter. The human body was just a temporary shell for our souls. Once we're gone...we're gone. It's over. Finished with. If we live in a country where cremation isn't allowed than so be it......we can just as easily bury. If we live in a country where burial isn't the norm than so be it.....we can just as easily cremate. We've enough, in fact way too many, rituals regarding living life as it is.....we don't need to be adding meaningless rituals to dead bodies too.

Whether one buries or cremates, but the point is Sikhs are being stopped from cremating because they see it as going against their religion. That is the crux of the matter here. Can you imagine someone forcing Musilms to cremate their dead instead of burying it? how to dispose of the body is a personal choice. No one should force it on another people just because cremation does not agree to their beliefs. Freedom of choice is what is being demanded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam doesn't say to not let others do what they do...

But it is what is abhorrent to Islam, that the muslims try to control/destroy.

It isnt just cremation, it's also jhatka. The muslims wherever they were in majority in panjab, tried to force sikhs to stop doing jhatka, as they found it abhorent to their religion.

the crux of the problem, is that Islam gives the beleiver the notion that he is superior to infidels and can do what he likes, with the infidels. This reasoniong comes from the Koran.

"who does more wrong than he who invents a lie against Allah or rejects his signs?" surah 6, 21.

if the Koran is the word of God, then people not submitting to Islam, will always be looked down upon by the beleivers, in Islam. By cremating or doing jhatka, there is a belief which feels that Sikhs are going against Allah.

If Allah says bury/halal, and we say no, this is our way, then we are saying Allah is lying, according to muslims.

Link to comment
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...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Net pay after taxes. If you don't agree, think about this: If you were a trader and started off in China with silk that cost 100 rupees and came to India, and you had to pay total 800 rupees taxes at every small kingdom along the way, and then sold your goods for 1000 rupees, you'd have 100 rupees left, right? If your daswandh is on the gross, that's 100 rupees, meaning you have nothing left. Obviously, you owe only 10% of 100, not 10% of 1000. No, it's 10% before bills and other expenses. These expenses are not your expenses to earn money. They are consumption. If you are a business owner, you take out all expenses, including rent, shop electricity, cost of goods sold, advertising, and government taxes. Whatever is left is your profit and you owe 10% of that.  If you are an employee, you are also entitled to deduct the cost of earning money. That would be government taxes. Everything else is consumption.    
    • No, bro, it's simply not true that no one talks about Simran. Where did you hear that? Swingdon? The entire Sikh world talks about doing Simran, whether it's Maskeen ji, Giani Pinderpal Singh, Giani Kulwant Singh Jawaddi, or Sants. So what are you talking about? Agreed. Agreed. Well, if every bani were exactly the same, then why would Guru ji even write anything after writing Japji Sahib? We should all enjoy all the banis. No, Gurbani tells you to do Simran, but it's not just "the manual". Gurbani itself also has cleansing powers. I'm not saying not to do Simran. Do it. But Gurbani is not merely "the manual". Reading and singing Gurbani is spiritually helpful: ਪ੍ਰਭ ਬਾਣੀ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁਭਾਖਿਆ ॥  ਗਾਵਹੁ ਸੁਣਹੁ ਪੜਹੁ ਨਿਤ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰ ਪੂਰੈ ਤੂ ਰਾਖਿਆ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ The Lord's Bani and the words are the best utterances. Ever sing hear and recite them, O brother and the Perfect Guru shall save thee. Pause. p611 Here Guru ji shows the importance of both Bani and Naam: ਆਇਓ ਸੁਨਨ ਪੜਨ ਕਉ ਬਾਣੀ ॥ ਨਾਮੁ ਵਿਸਾਰਿ ਲਗਹਿ ਅਨ ਲਾਲਚਿ ਬਿਰਥਾ ਜਨਮੁ ਪਰਾਣੀ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ The mortal has come to hear and utter Bani. Forgetting the Name thou attached thyself to other desires. Vain is thy life, O mortal. Pause. p1219 Are there any house manuals that say to read and sing the house manual?
    • All of these are suppositions, bro. Linguists know that, generally, all the social classes of a physical area speak the same language, though some classes may use more advanced vocabulary. I'm talking about the syntax. That is, unless the King is an invader, which Porus was not. When you say Punjabi wasn't very evolved, what do you mean? The syntax must have been roughly the same. As for vocabulary, do you really think Punjabis at the time did nothing more than grunt to express their thoughts? That they had no shades of meaning? Such as hot/cold, red/yellow/blue, angry/sweet/loving/sad, etc? Why must we always have an inferiority complex?
    • I still think about that incident now and then, just haven't heard any developments regarding what happened, just like so many other things that have happened in Panjab!
    • There was a young Singh from abroad who went to Anandpur Sahib Hola and got into a fight with some Punjabis who were playing loud non-religious music. He had bana and a weapon or two. There were more of them than him.  He ended up losing his life. Don't be like that. Not worth it to fight manmukhs. @californiasardar1 ਮੂਰਖੈ ਨਾਲਿ ਨ ਲੁਝੀਐ ॥੧੯॥ Argue not with a fool. p473
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use