Hindus Wearing The Kara

[Guest Jacfsing2]

Jacfsing2 that I agree with, I see it now and it does make sense.

Quantavius, I wouldn't have believed that Sikhism was established by the last Guruji only to protect the country and the Sanatani people were it not for two Sikhs who claimed this, one from India and one from outside, as well as another reason, so no, low self esteem is not an issue.

In fact, were it not for the Marathas the Khalsa wouldn't have revived from their sleep after years of domination, which happened when the Pathans and Durrani carried out the Holocausts.

At the same time, were it not for the Khalsa, the Marathas wouldn't have been able to keep their grip in the lands they reconquered because the Sikh empire purposely captured the Khyber Pass to block the Mughal's buddies, who were attempting to cross through the Pass at the request of the Mughal's begging for reinforcements to stop Sanatani revival.

I find it funny how you try to establish yourself as being superior to Hindus lol, can you remind me why you don't shave?

If I didn't know the reason why Singhs don't shave and the oath that goes with it, I wouldn't have believed the claims that Sikhism was intended to protect Hindus, what have you got to say for that huh?

Don't tell me some bs like "Kesh is a gift from God", you can keep on denying why your religion was formed but history can't be erased no matter how hard you try.

I have no idea who your asking your question to, but I'll do my best to answer. We keep Kesh,(hair) because Guru Sahib himself made the Rehat to do so in the form of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, he made 2 other Rehats these are wake-up at Amrit Vela to do simran or paht, and to don't insult other true Gurmukhs. There are many reasons why Kesh is important to our faith, it brings the sense of identity. Like when Guru Tegh Bahadur became Shaheed in Delhi, Aurangzeb himself asked if any Sikh was brave enough to come and take their Guru's body to get a proper cremation. Surprisingly nobody came until there was a storm and 2 Sikhs secretly went in to get the Saroop of Guru Sahib. One of them burned their house to the ground while the other took the head to Guru Gobind Singh(Rai at time) Ji. He eventually asked if their were any Sikhs there to that answer the Sikh said he didn't know. Eventually he said Sikhs will have an identity that makes them unique so they couldn't hide they were Sikh. (It's about following Guru Sahib's Hukam, without Guru Sahib there is no opportunity to free ourselves of previous paap).

Also, if you have 'guts', why don't you tell our fellow sulle bhais the real reason why you don't shave?

If you have 'guts', I dare you to tell the world the real reason why you keep an oath to never shave until a certain deed is carried out.

I dare you to tell people this certain deed if you have 'guts'.

I wouldn't blindly claim such a preposterous belief that Sikhism was created to protect the Hindus if I didn't have any reason to back it up.

But if I publicly posted the reason I would be a snake, so nah I won't.

Above comment, (I don't live in India so I don't know many Hindus, but if one were to ask I'd tell them the truth, because lying is bad).

[Guest Quantavius]

Quantavius, I wouldn't have believed that Sikhism was established by the last Guruji only to protect the country and the Sanatani people were it not for two Sikhs who claimed this, one from India and one from outside, as well as another reason, so no, low self esteem is not an issue.

Sikhism is not based on what individual Sikhs tell you. It is based on what our Guruji Maharaj teachings. If an individual Buddhist told me that it's ok to consume meat in Buddhism, will this make it true? Learn to employ logic and coherence in your points and not some gobbledy gook mumbo jumbo ie 'what my friend told me'.

In fact, were it not for the Marathas the Khalsa wouldn't have revived from their sleep after years of domination, which happened when the Pathans and Durrani carried out the Holocausts.

At the same time, were it not for the Khalsa, the Marathas wouldn't have been able to keep their grip in the lands they reconquered because the Sikh empire purposely captured the Khyber Pass to block the Mughal's buddies, who were attempting to cross through the Pass at the request of the Mughal's begging for reinforcements to stop Sanatani revival.

I find it funny how you try to establish yourself as being superior to Hindus lol, can you remind me why you don't shave?

First you told us Sikhism was created to protect Hindus. Now you're making a u turn and extolling the valor of Hindus like Marathas. You're contradicting yourself. Which is it? Protection of lowly cowards or suddenly you grew a pair? If you needed protection, why then were the Marathis fighting? You sound confused.

I did not say I'm superior. Please quote and tell me where did I say I'm superior to you? It's you who put yourself down when you say you Sikhism was created to protect Hindus. A tiny minority was created to protect someone with some many followers? In my humble opinion, that is a very shameful thing to say as it displays cowardice. What else can it be?

If I didn't know the reason why Singhs don't shave and the oath that goes with it, I wouldn't have believed the claims that Sikhism was intended to protect Hindus, what have you got to say for that huh?

Don't tell me some bs like "Kesh is a gift from God", you can keep on denying why your religion was formed but history can't be erased no matter how hard you try.

Really? Tell us why we don't shave and make sure you quote Sikh sources and not 'what my friend told me'. LOL! I'm not denying anything and Sikhism is not based on what the voices in your head and what your friends tell you.

I'm not denying anything. I know exactly who I am. Do you know who are you? We're not the ones who has made name changes ie Hindu to Sanatani and India to Bharat. Can you tell us what constitutes Hinduism or 'Sanatani'?

Also, if you have 'guts', why don't you tell our fellow sulle bhais the real reason why you don't shave?

If you have 'guts', I dare you to tell the world the real reason why you keep an oath to never shave until a certain deed is carried out.

I dare you to tell people this certain deed if you have 'guts'.

I wouldn't blindly claim such a preposterous belief that Sikhism was created to protect the Hindus if I didn't have any reason to back it up.

But if I publicly posted the reason I would be a snake, so nah I won't.

Really? Why don't you tell us? Once again, ensure to quote Sikh sources and not what the voices in your head told you.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? Who are you to me that I or any other Sikh need to 'prove' anything to you? You're the one making the claim, not me.

Just answer this question

1. Why can't Hindus protect themselves? They surely do not lack numbers. So what was the hold up? Why can't you Hindus protect yourselves? Why the need to create a separate religion to protect you? Do you lack courage? If so why?

I know that some Hindus like yourself delude themselves into believing that Sikhism is some kinda 'co religionist' or 'branch' to Hinduism. I hate to this break this to you and shatter your illusion but the first Sikh was Bhai Mardana who was a Muslim. We revere the teachings of Muslims such Baba Farid ji and Baba Kabir ji and their prayers are included in our holy SGGSji Maharaj. To this day many of our Gurdwaras hold prayers in remembrance to Pir Buddhu Shah. There are a whole load of other examples.

I'm not a Sikh scholar and if you have doubts to what I have said, please feel free to confirm with a Sikh scholar and not 'your friends'. LOL!

[Quantavius]

Quantavius, I wouldn't have believed that Sikhism was established by the last Guruji only to protect the country and the Sanatani people were it not for two Sikhs who claimed this, one from India and one from outside, as well as another reason, so no, low self esteem is not an issue.

Sikhism is not based on what individual Sikhs tell you. It is based on what our Guruji Maharaj teachings. If an individual Buddhist told me that it's ok to consume meat in Buddhism, will this make it true? Learn to employ logic and coherence in your points and not some gobbledy gook mumbo jumbo ie 'what my friend told me'.

In fact, were it not for the Marathas the Khalsa wouldn't have revived from their sleep after years of domination, which happened when the Pathans and Durrani carried out the Holocausts.

At the same time, were it not for the Khalsa, the Marathas wouldn't have been able to keep their grip in the lands they reconquered because the Sikh empire purposely captured the Khyber Pass to block the Mughal's buddies, who were attempting to cross through the Pass at the request of the Mughal's begging for reinforcements to stop Sanatani revival.

I find it funny how you try to establish yourself as being superior to Hindus lol, can you remind me why you don't shave?

First you told us Sikhism was created to protect Hindus. Now you're making a u turn and extolling the valor of Hindus like Marathas. You're contradicting yourself. Which is it? Protection of a bunch of lowly cowards or suddenly you grew a pair? If you needed protection, why then were the Marathis fighting? You sound confused.

I did not say I'm superior. Please quote me and tell me where did I say I'm superior to you? It's you who put yourself down when you say you Sikhism was created to protect Hindus. A tiny minority was created to protect someone with so many followers? Why? Why can't you defend yourselves? In my humble opinion, that is a very shameful thing to say as it displays cowardice. What else can it be?

If I didn't know the reason why Singhs don't shave and the oath that goes with it, I wouldn't have believed the claims that Sikhism was intended to protect Hindus, what have you got to say for that huh?

Don't tell me some bs like "Kesh is a gift from God", you can keep on denying why your religion was formed but history can't be erased no matter how hard you try.

Really? Tell us why we don't shave and make sure you quote Sikh sources and not 'what my friend told me'. LOL! I'm not denying anything and Sikhism is not based on what the voices in your head and what your friends tell you.

I know exactly who I am. Do you know who are you? We're not the ones who has made name changes ie Hindu to Sanatani and India to Bharat. Can you tell us what constitutes Hinduism or 'Sanatani'? Why don't you create a separate thread on this?

Also, if you have 'guts', why don't you tell our fellow sulle bhais the real reason why you don't shave?

If you have 'guts', I dare you to tell the world the real reason why you keep an oath to never shave until a certain deed is carried out.

I dare you to tell people this certain deed if you have 'guts'.


I wouldn't blindly claim such a preposterous belief that Sikhism was created to protect the Hindus if I didn't have any reason to back it up.

But if I publicly posted the reason I would be a snake, so nah I won't.

Really? Why don't you tell us? Once again, ensure to quote Sikh sources and not what the voices in your head told you.

Why do I need to prove anything to you? Who are you to me that I or any other Sikh need to 'prove' anything to you? You're the one making the claim, not me.

Just answer this question

1. Why can't Hindus protect themselves? They surely do not lack numbers. So what was the hold up? Why can't you Hindus protect yourselves? Why the need to create a separate religion to protect you? Do you lack courage? If so why?

I know that some Hindus like yourself delude themselves into believing that Sikhism is some kinda 'coreligionist' or 'branch' to Hinduism. I hate to this break this to you and shatter your illusion but the first Sikh was Bhai Mardana who was a Muslim. We revere the teachings of Muslims such Baba Farid ji and Baba Kabir ji and their prayers are included in our holy SGGSji Maharaj. To this day many of our Gurdwaras hold prayers in remembrance to Pir Buddhu Shah. There are a whole load of other examples.

I'm not a Sikh scholar and if you have doubts to what I have said, please feel free to confirm with a Sikh scholar and not 'your friends'. LOL!

[Kira]

Jacfsing2 that I agree with, I see it now and it does make sense.

Quantavius, I wouldn't have believed that Sikhism was established by the last Guruji only to protect the country and the Sanatani people were it not for two Sikhs who claimed this, one from India and one from outside, as well as another reason, so no, low self esteem is not an issue.

In fact, were it not for the Marathas the Khalsa wouldn't have revived from their sleep after years of domination, which happened when the Pathans and Durrani carried out the Holocausts.

At the same time, were it not for the Khalsa, the Marathas wouldn't have been able to keep their grip in the lands they reconquered because the Sikh empire purposely captured the Khyber Pass to block the Mughal's buddies, who were attempting to cross through the Pass at the request of the Mughal's begging for reinforcements to stop Sanatani revival.

I find it funny how you try to establish yourself as being superior to Hindus lol, can you remind me why you don't shave?

If I didn't know the reason why Singhs don't shave and the oath that goes with it, I wouldn't have believed the claims that Sikhism was intended to protect Hindus, what have you got to say for that huh?

Don't tell me some bs like "Kesh is a gift from God", you can keep on denying why your religion was formed but history can't be erased no matter how hard you try.

No offense but you're looking at the period AFTER the departure of the 10th Guru. If you bother learning your history and actually read the proper Sikh Scriptures you would know how utterly wrong you are. Sikhs don't "shave" as it falls under the Category of Kesh. The only Oath in play the one all Sikhs take when Partaking in Amrit, that they give themselves to the Guru and God. Not to Hindus lmao.

2 Hindus told me that their religion allows them to kill whoever they want? does that mean I should believe them? lmao extreme example but you get my point.

If you actually look at History you'll note that many religions have done all sorts of things History dictates something else. It can be tampered with. But the teachings of the religion CAN'T. So unless you can find a quote from the Dasam Granth, Guru Granth Sahib Ji which explicitly states that Sikhs are the protectors of Hindus, your points are worth next than nothing.

Since we're on the topic, Let's look at the Dasam Granth and wreck all the arguements you have made with one single Quote. This is from Bachtar Natak which was written by Guru Gobind Singh Ji as his autobiography.

ਤਬ ਜੇ ਜੇ ਰਿਖਿ ਰਾਜ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਆਪਨ ਪੁਨ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਚਲਾਏ ॥੧੭॥

तब जे जे रिखि राज बनाए ॥ तिन आपन पुन सिम्रित चलाए ॥१७॥

All the great rishis (sages), who were then created, produced their own Smritis.17.

ਜੇ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਨ ਕੇ ਭਏ ਅਨੁਰਾਗੀ ॥ ਤਿਨਿ ਤਿਨਿ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕੀ ਤਿਆਗੀ ॥

जे सिम्रितन के भए अनुरागी ॥ तिनि तिनि क्रिआ ब्रहम की तिआगी ॥

All those who became followers of these smritis, they abandoned the path of the Lord.

ਜਿਨ ਮਨ ਹਰਿ ਚਰਨਨ ਠਹਿਰਾਯੋ ॥ ਸੋ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਨ ਕੇ ਰਾਹ ਨ ਆਯੋ ॥੧੮॥

जिन मन हरि चरनन ठहिरायो ॥ सो सिम्रितन के राह न आयो ॥१८॥

Those who devoted themselves to the Feet of the Lord, they did not adopt the path of the Smritis.18.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਚਾਰ ਹੀ ਬੇਦ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਸਰਬ ਲੋਕ ਤਿਹ ਕਰਮ ਚਲਾਏ ॥

ब्रहमा चार ही बेद बनाए ॥ सरब लोक तिह करम चलाए ॥

Brahma composed all the four Vedas, all the people followed the injunctions contained in them.

ਜਿਨ ਕੀ ਲਿਵ ਹਰਿ ਚਰਨਨ ਲਾਗੀ ॥ ਤੇ ਬੇਦਨ ਤੇ ਭਏ ਤਿਆਗੀ ॥੧੯॥

जिन की लिव हरि चरनन लागी ॥ ते बेदन ते भए तिआगी ॥१९॥

Those who were devoted to the Feet of the Lord, they abandoned the Vedas.19.

ਜਿਨ ਮਤਿ ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬਨ ਤਿਆਗੀ ॥ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕੇ ਭਏ ਅਨੁਰਾਗੀ ॥

जिन मति बेद कतेबन तिआगी ॥ पारब्रहम के भए अनुरागी ॥

Those who abandoned the path of the Vedas and Katebs, they became the devotees of the Lord.

Here Hinduism is being pointed as being Flawed. To the point that Guru Sahib states those who turned their backs on the Vedas were true followers of the lord.

and once again from the same passage.

ਮੈ ਅਪਨਾ ਸੁਤ ਤੋਹਿ ਨਿਵਾਜਾ ॥ ਪੰਥ ਪ੍ਰਚੁਰ ਕਰਬੇ ਕਹੁ ਸਾਜਾ ॥

मै अपना सुत तोहि निवाजा ॥ पंथ प्रचुर करबे कहु साजा ॥

I have adopted you as my son and hath created you for the propagation of the path (Panth).

ਜਾਹਿ ਤਹਾਂ ਤੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਚਲਾਇ ॥ ਕਬੁਧਿ ਕਰਨ ਤੇ ਲੋਕ ਹਟਾਇ ॥੨੯॥

जाहि तहां तै धरमु चलाइ ॥ कबुधि करन ते लोक हटाइ ॥२९॥

You go therefore for the spread of Dharma (righteousness) and cause people to retrace their steps from evil actions".29.

ਕਬਿਬਾਚ ॥

कबिबाच ॥

The World of the Poet:

ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥

दोहरा ॥

DOHRA

ਠਾਢ ਭਯੋ ਮੈ ਜੋਰਿ ਕਰ ਬਚਨ ਕਹਾ ਸਿਰ ਨਿਆਇ ॥

ठाढ भयो मै जोरि कर बचन कहा सिर निआइ ॥

I stood up with folded hands and bowing down my head, I said:

ਪੰਥ ਚਲੈ ਤਬ ਜਗਤ ਮੈ ਜਬ ਤੁਮ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਹਾਇ ॥੩੦॥

पंथ चलै तब जगत मै जब तुम करहु सहाइ ॥३०॥

The path (Panth) shall prevail only in the world, with THY ASSISTANCE."30.

ਚੌਪਈ ॥

चौपई ॥

CHAUPI

ਇਹ ਕਾਰਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਮੋਹਿ ਪਠਾਯੋ ॥ ਤਬ ਮੈ ਜਗਤਿ ਜਨਮ ਧਰਿ ਆਯੋ ॥

इह कारनि प्रभ मोहि पठायो ॥ तब मै जगति जनम धरि आयो ॥

For this reason the Lord sent me and I was born in this world.

THAT is the true Purpose of Sikhism. THAT is the Oath that all Sikhs are told to Enshrine. To PROTECT people from Evil actions, Do you know that Sikhs also protected Muslims during the Mughal empires might. Innocent Muslims who were harmed asked help and the Sikhs provided that. I guess by you're logic We're the protectors of Islam too. Do you know there are Sikhs that go out of their way to help Christians. Look we're the protectors or Christianity now. It's called having humanity and compassion and protecting the weak. Not Protecting Hindus. Frankly Guru Gobind Singh Ji was extremely outspoken about Hinduism in general. All the Sikh Guru Sahib were.

It would help if you actually read the Scriptures rather than spewing nonsense someone told you. How do you function in Society? Do you do this when you're going into school/college/university to sit a test. Do you sit down, ask your friends or do you consult your textbooks?

Sikhism was around well before Hindus needed Protection. At-least to the point they were afraid of their own faith. Sorry but had it been the other way around and Muslims were being Oppressed Sikhs would have done the same thing and protected their rights.

Government protects all rights to practice one's own religion without conviction. That doesn't mean the Government is suddenly "Pro"- religion. It just means they used their common sense and applied Rationality to a situation.

Guru Gobind Singh Ji and various other Guru Sahib's made it clear that Hinduism is flawed. Gurbani constantly mentions how imperfect their gods are. I find it hilarious someone would suggest that Sikhs are there to protect the Hindus. LOL. Just because someone stands up for someone else doesn't mean their a part of that other person's problem. it just means they use their rationality and actual good moral compass to do something about it.

Sikhism was founded by Guru Nanak and do you want to know the first thing he said after his commune with God?

THERE IS NO HINDU AND NO MUSLIM.

Does that not clear it all?

eIsru bRhmw syvdy AMqu iqn@I n lhIAw ] (516-15)

eesar barahmaa sayvday ant tinHee na lahee-aa.

Those who serve Shiva and Brahma do not find the limits of the Lord.

inrBau inrMkwru AlKu hY gurmuiK pRgtIAw ] (516-16)

nirbha-o nirankaar alakh hai gurmukh pargatee-aa.

The Fearless, Formless Lord is unseen and invisible; He is revealed only to the Gurmukh.

iqQY sogu ivjogu n ivAwpeI AsiQru jig QIAw ]19] (516-16)

tithai sog vijog na vi-aapa-ee asthir jag thee-aa. ||19||

There, one does not suffer sorrow or separation; he becomes stable and immortal in the world. ||19||

http://www.realsikhism.com/gurbani/popup.php?pagenumber=951

I have no idea who your asking your question to, but I'll do my best to answer. We keep Kesh,(hair) because Guru Sahib himself made the Rehat to do so in the form of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, he made 2 other Rehats these are wake-up at Amrit Vela to do simran or paht, and to don't insult other true Gurmukhs. There are many reasons why Kesh is important to our faith, it brings the sense of identity. Like when Guru Tegh Bahadur became Shaheed in Delhi, Aurangzeb himself asked if any Sikh was brave enough to come and take their Guru's body to get a proper cremation. Surprisingly nobody came until there was a storm and 2 Sikhs secretly went in to get the Saroop of Guru Sahib. One of them burned their house to the ground while the other took the head to Guru Gobind Singh(Rai at time) Ji. He eventually asked if their were any Sikhs there to that answer the Sikh said he didn't know. Eventually he said Sikhs will have an identity that makes them unique so they couldn't hide they were Sikh. (It's about following Guru Sahib's Hukam, without Guru Sahib there is no opportunity to free ourselves of previous paap).

It isn't just that. Kesh also represents someone giving up their duality and embracing the will of god. By letting their hair grow and not shaving/grooming it. It's one of the first steps in giving up Duality as it's a Physical part of your body that defines you as you.

[Guest Sanatani]

Kira I've read Sikh articles about the origins on keeping Kesh, and it's also something my parents & grandparent told me about when I younger, I only confirmed it after reading the articles.

I also read the 1700's rehitnamas by Bhai Desa Singh and Chaupa Singh.

Go read it if you have the time, probably already know the contents of it, but it's okay.

What will hiding the truth from me prove?

Quantavius loves twisting my words, I used the words "Maratha" and "Khalsa" equally -> they were not intended to show superiority over the other.

If you read what I wrote you'd see that I balanced it out - without the Marathas, the Khalsa wouldn't have reawakened; without the Khalsa, the Marathas wouldn't have been able to fight off the reinforcements.

I knew it would come to this, by lying to me it further proves that you don't have any guts to challenge what I wrote, you don't have any guts to tell people the real reason, so you resort to insulting and twisting my words to hide the truth lmfao. Both pathetic and a liar.

I really wouldn't mind if you lied to a sulle about this topic, it's understandable why you would and you wouldn't be considered pathetic or a liar for doing so.

But don't equate me with them please.

Like you said, no other religious group claims that a religion was created to protect theirs and it has never happened in history before.

Similarly, no religious group has ever protected the women from another religious group and this has never happened in history before.

If the former statement is true, then the second is also true.

Considering your logic, I could start lying and claim that "Brahmans" hijacked the Khalsa to protect their women and that, since no religious group protects another religious group according to you, Sikhs never protected Hindu women and in fact it was the "Brahmans" who done the protecting.

How does that feel?

Your logic is funny. You make me sick.

By claiming that Sikhs became to protect Hindus =/= Sikhs are Hindus.

Jacfsing2, that may be true since it is a unique identity, I've read similar stories, take no offence for what I'm about to say here, I've read that the 1st-6th gurujis wore seli topis, not turbans.

It's only when the 6th guruji decided to take arms, that's when he started to wear a turban, because the seli topi represented peace, and shifting to the turban represented shifting from peace to self-defense and wielding arms.

[Guest Sanatani]

Quantavius, yeah, yeah.

I've been to gurdwaras many times in my childhood and I've seen the supposed love you have for Mardana's kind.

What portraits are set up on the walls of the langars?

[Guest Sanatani]

Kira, LOOOL you are one pathetic person.

Similarly if sulles were being oppressed by Hindus the Guruji would've also made an oath about the Hindus?

By "oath" I mean the similar one you have for the opposite group?

Seriously, this argument is flawed because one, read above, two, read above, three, read above. Lmfao.

Four, I've read the rehitnamas of the 1700's by Bhai Desa Singh & Chaupa Singh, the original rehitnamas, which proves your lie wrong.

Back to the topic on Hinduism being flawed, where do the Sikh concepts of: reincarnation, dharma, origins of the universe, keeping your hair uncut, avatars, ek onkar, karma, Satya Yuga-Kali Yuga etc come from?

Did you know that there's a Hindu tradition that is to not cut the hair until a duty is carried out?

Sounds familiar.

If the last Guruji was a Muslim fighting against Hindus, he wouldn't have told his followers to never shave because that is a tradition from Hinduism.

Now this is the funny part: in Sikh scriptures, it details an event similar to the big bang, where the universe was created in a similar way but by God and that the first sound heard was "omkar" which flowed across the universe.

Today some Sikhs laugh about Hindu beliefs and then claim that Sikhs had knowledge about the big bang before the west and anybody else did.

That's the funniest thing I read a Sikh comment.

In Hindu scriptures it describes an event similar to the big bang when the universe was created but by God and that the first sound "Om" flowed through the universe.

LOL that's a copy and paste, only difference is the "-kar".

If you want to borrow a belief from another religion, respect the religion you took it from and don't claim that it's yours, otherwise it's something called "stealing", which is what Hindu-hating Sikhs are doing today.

Avatars: Sikhs believe that the Gurujis are the incarnations of God and they came to do God's work, which is to spread dharma and 'cleanse' 'evilness' (haha, if you know what I mean .

The Vedas, the most supreme Sanatani holy texts, had the concept of ik omkar, ek onkar whatever, thousands of years before Sikhism or Islam came into being.

If you read it you'd realise that Sanatanis worship only one God, who manifests itself into many forms to uphold Dharma, similar to the Sikh concept of avatars.

Thus, Guruji was talking about medieval Hinduism.

In those days, most Hindus, apart from some saints, couldn't learn about their own religion and couldn't read the Vedas, so they followed the traditions of their ancestors from mouth and deviated from the Vedas, which is why they started believing in millions of deities.

The gurus were well-taught in the Vedas and strived to bring Hindus back to what the Vedas wanted and to stray from man-made practices which crept into Hinduism.

Therefore, since Sikhism's main concepts are mostly derived from the Vedas, if you're calling Hinduism flawed then you're also calling Sikhism flawed and you're being a plain thief.

Don't borrow from someone else and then claim that the borrowed item is yours. That's called being a thief.

If someone gave you £1,000,000, respect that person, don't start insulting that person.

That's called being a jackass.

Your arguments are stupid.

[Kira]

Kira I've read Sikh articles about the origins on keeping Kesh, and it's also something my parents & grandparent told me about when I younger, I only confirmed it after reading the articles.

I also read the 1700's rehitnamas by Bhai Desa Singh and Chaupa Singh.

Go read it if you have the time, probably already know the contents of it, but it's okay.

Cool, now go and Read the one we currently follow. Most of the Rehitmaryadas which were created after the departure of the 10th Guru were flawed. Even the ones that were created during the time of the Guru Sahib were constantly changing. The RehetMaryadas are a code of conduct. If any of it contradicts Gurbani then we're to ignore it altogether

Kira, LOOOL you are one pathetic person.

Similarly if sulles were being oppressed by Hindus the Guruji would've also made an oath about the Hindus?

By "oath" I mean the similar one you have for the opposite group?

Sorry but what lol. The Sikh oath is to uphold Justice and good will. I just proved that with a verse from Gurbani. Get it through your head.

Four, I've read the rehitnamas of the 1700's by Bhai Desa Singh & Chaupa Singh, the original rehitnamas, which proves your lie wrong.

My lies? lmao. Are you now saying our Gurbani is filled with lies because they don't match you're expectations? I hate to break it to you but the RehitMaryadas were all written by GurSikhs and not the Guru Sahibs, So once again. Find it in Gurbani this supposed oath of Sikhs. Arguably the only one any Sikh will accept is the one that we follow as of Today. The Akal Takhat's one. Most of the RehitMaryada were very contradictory so it was then in the 1930s that Sikh Scholars,Jathedhars and the Akal Takhat got together and forged a proper one. Taking into account all others. Please learn our History if you want to discuss this with us.

Back to the topic on Hinduism being flawed, where do the Sikh concepts of: reincarnation, dharma, origins of the universe, keeping your hair uncut, avatars, ek onkar, karma, Satya Yuga-Kali Yuga etc come from?

The bold is rejected by all Sikhs. God's light is infused in everyone. I'm glad you asked all that. Because time and time again Gurbani points out the Vedas are false. They contain KERNELS of truth in there. SAME with Islam. There is overlap IN EVERY religion.

The concept of Yuga are also a massive debating point as they don't only speak of time periods but also speak of actual states of minds for some Sikhs.

In Hindu scriptures it describes an event similar to the big bang when the universe was created but by God and that the first sound "Om" flowed through the universe.

LOL that's a copy and paste, only difference is the "-kar".

False again. The first word wasn't Om in Sikhism. Do you know why Sikhs laugh at Hindu traditions? Because the rituals that were follow were deemed mundane and pointless by our Guru Sahibs. If you bother reading Japji Sahib and not just listening to whatever some random person will tell you, you'll see WHY Sikhs reject Hinduism. this is where Sikh Santhiya might help you a little. Most Layman Sikhs mispronounce it completely.

Avatars: Sikhs believe that the Gurujis are the incarnations of God and they came to do God's work, which is to spread dharma and 'cleanse' 'evilness' (haha, if you know what I mean .

False again. We don't think their incarnations of God in the same sense as Avatars. We believe they have god's light within them and they carry God's message. They asserted time and time again they weren't god.

The Vedas, the most supreme Sanatani holy texts, had the concept of ik omkar, ek onkar whatever, thousands of years before Sikhism or Islam came into being.

If you read it you'd realise that Sanatanis worship only one God, who manifests itself into many forms to uphold Dharma, similar to the Sikh concept of avatars.

Thus, Guruji was talking about medieval Hinduism.

The Vedas were deemed useless by the Sikh Gurus. As I just pointed out by the quote from Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

n those days, most Hindus, apart from some saints, couldn't learn about their own religion and couldn't read the Vedas, so they followed the traditions of their ancestors from mouth and deviated from the Vedas, which is why they started believing in millions of deities.

The gurus were well-taught in the Vedas and strived to bring Hindus back to what the Vedas wanted and to stray from man-made practices which crept into Hinduism.

Therefore, since Sikhism's main concepts are mostly derived from the Vedas, if you're calling Hinduism flawed then you're also calling Sikhism flawed and you're being a plain thief.

lol what? Time and time again it was pointed out that Hinduism in general was a flawed ideology. It encompasses many beliefs and practices Polygamy. Regardless of how you speak it is flawed if it allows such practices to happen.

If you want to play that game then let's go for it. Go to a Muslim site and tell them Islam also comes Hinduism. Do the same to any Christian Site. I would love to see how that goes down. I don't get why you feel the need to only focus on the similarities. If you didn't notice, Islam and Sikhism also have similarities. The Big Bang coincidentally is also arguably mentioned in the Quran. So please. Before calling anyone a thief please learn that similar Ideas and concepts are a common trend in all Religions.

If someone gave you £1,000,000, respect that person, don't start insulting that person.

That's called being a jackass.

So the Sikh Guru were Jackasses? Did you know that they also reference the bible,Quran and other Scriptures in there too.

In those days, most Hindus, apart from some saints, couldn't learn about their own religion and couldn't read the Vedas, so they followed the traditions of their ancestors from mouth and deviated from the Vedas, which is why they started believing in millions of deities.

The gurus were well-taught in the Vedas and strived to bring Hindus back to what the Vedas wanted and to stray from man-made practices which crept into Hinduism.

They were also well versed in the Quran and (going by the mention of Adam and the bible I believe) of the Bible. You just dug your own grave. You just said and admitted they were well taught in many religious scriptures. BUT in Gurbani they are ALL rejected and told time and time again their imperfect and completely ignore them. Implying that either

A) the Guru Sahibs didn't consider the Vedas as the true,flawless means to attain enlightenment

B) You are now making up statements without looking at the proper Gurbani.

So allow me to make this Crystal Clear.

Find me Gurbani Quotes, that's right from our Scriptures. Which tell us we're born to Protect Hindus.

lol, Go on. Look at our scriptures. Ignore the RehetMaryadas which are constantly changing. Go to the Source which is our Gurbani.

[StarStriker]

Kira, LOOOL you are one pathetic person.

Similarly if sulles were being oppressed by Hindus the Guruji would've also made an oath about the Hindus?

By "oath" I mean the similar one you have for the opposite group?

Seriously, this argument is flawed because one, read above, two, read above, three, read above. Lmfao.

Four, I've read the rehitnamas of the 1700's by Bhai Desa Singh & Chaupa Singh, the original rehitnamas, which proves your lie wrong.

Back to the topic on Hinduism being flawed, where do the Sikh concepts of: reincarnation, dharma, origins of the universe, keeping your hair uncut, avatars, ek onkar, karma, Satya Yuga-Kali Yuga etc come from?

Did you know that there's a Hindu tradition that is to not cut the hair until a duty is carried out?

Sounds familiar.

If the last Guruji was a Muslim fighting against Hindus, he wouldn't have told his followers to never shave because that is a tradition from Hinduism.

Now this is the funny part: in Sikh scriptures, it details an event similar to the big bang, where the universe was created in a similar way but by God and that the first sound heard was "omkar" which flowed across the universe.

Today some Sikhs laugh about Hindu beliefs and then claim that Sikhs had knowledge about the big bang before the west and anybody else did.

That's the funniest thing I read a Sikh comment.

In Hindu scriptures it describes an event similar to the big bang when the universe was created but by God and that the first sound "Om" flowed through the universe.

LOL that's a copy and paste, only difference is the "-kar".

If you want to borrow a belief from another religion, respect the religion you took it from and don't claim that it's yours, otherwise it's something called "stealing", which is what Hindu-hating Sikhs are doing today.

Avatars: Sikhs believe that the Gurujis are the incarnations of God and they came to do God's work, which is to spread dharma and 'cleanse' 'evilness' (haha, if you know what I mean .

The Vedas, the most supreme Sanatani holy texts, had the concept of ik omkar, ek onkar whatever, thousands of years before Sikhism or Islam came into being.

If you read it you'd realise that Sanatanis worship only one God, who manifests itself into many forms to uphold Dharma, similar to the Sikh concept of avatars.

Thus, Guruji was talking about medieval Hinduism.

In those days, most Hindus, apart from some saints, couldn't learn about their own religion and couldn't read the Vedas, so they followed the traditions of their ancestors from mouth and deviated from the Vedas, which is why they started believing in millions of deities.

The gurus were well-taught in the Vedas and strived to bring Hindus back to what the Vedas wanted and to stray from man-made practices which crept into Hinduism.

Therefore, since Sikhism's main concepts are mostly derived from the Vedas, if you're calling Hinduism flawed then you're also calling Sikhism flawed and you're being a plain thief.

Don't borrow from someone else and then claim that the borrowed item is yours. That's called being a thief.

If someone gave you £1,000,000, respect that person, don't start insulting that person.

That's called being a jackass.

Your arguments are stupid.

Looool, so ur back again to chat BS. Listen, i gave u those 3 videos to watch on the previous pages, its obvious, u didnt watch any of it. Also ur insinuating that sikhi is somehow got bits stolen from "hinduism". The reason y some religions/paths r similar to others, is because ALL prophets/gurus of religions have been given the SAME instructions by god. For example, reincarnation, multiverse, meditating on gods name, being armed (shastardhari), uncut hair, no intoxicants and unedited body (no piercings) etc etc. Some prophets/gurus of each religion started throughout the ages have only implemented parts of gods instructions, only the sikh gurus, have left instructions from god intact and unedited. Guru gobind singh himself has sed all prophets prior sikhi, were all egotistical who ended in not instilling NOTHING into the masses. Guru gobind singh himself says, in his previous life he was called "dusht daman", the evil destroyer, and hes been sent by god to finalise an army and dharam, started by god themselves via guru nanak, for humanity, NOT to protect 1 community in some corner of the world. Go and read bacchitar natak.

[Kira]

Actually Kira ji, Om is similar to Onkar because the real word of Om is Omkar, and adding 'Ik' as in "One" signifies the "Oneness" of ParBrahman. Om represents the word God just so you know, so when saying Ik Onkar it means all is one and there's only 1.

Except we don't deal with similarities. There are words in Gurbani that sound starkly similar but mean the polar Opposite. We don't pronounce it OMKAR. We pronounce it ONKAR. By saying their Similar that doesn't mean their the same.

"Uuraa" in "Ik Oankaar" is left open on top to represent Akaal Purakh (timeless being) and hence should be pronounced with an open sound "Oankaar" not the likes of "Om Kaarr".

This is the correct Pronunciation taught by the Damdami Taksal which was started by Guru Gobind Singh Ji as a means to teach Sikhs proper Santhiya and pronunciation of the words.

Omkar and Oankar are different words (though words hardly does justification) and as such linking them together is highly wrong. That is why I mentioned the need of Santhiya.