Jump to content

Basics Of Sikhi - Anand Karaj (Addressing The Controversy)


Recommended Posts

Yes i believe that Amritdhari, Kesdhari and Sehajdhari are all members of the Sikh Panth.

We all bow down to Maharaj. That alone defines us all as members of the Sikh Panth (though not all Gurmukhs).

Agreed Bhai Sahib and that is exactly what occurs when an erstwhile non-Sikh becomes a new Sikh by bowing down before Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj during Anand Karaj (if they do so in sincerity without aims to convert the Sikh spouse after marriage).

I agree with you. By making Anand Karaj something only those supposedly born into Sikh families can partake in I believe we are veering from the principles of Gurmat (Sikhi).

I'm sorry but this not what I learnt. I learnt that you have to take amrit in order to be a Sikh. I don;t think anybody is stopping a Non Sikh having Anand Karaj marriage so long they convert.

If numbers are not relevant then why do you worry as to who marries who in an Anand Karaj?

I have already answered this question. I'm not 'worried', I'm concerned that our principles are being compromised.

If Sikh were a 99.7% majority in India instead of a 1.7% minority do you think any Indian government would have attacked Sri Darbar Sahib?

Had we been more significant than only 13% of Punjabi's in 1947 do you think we would have suffered the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs?

The estrangement and alienation of Sikhs and their future generations away from Sikhi is central to what the Panth can achieve globally. The more Sikhs there are the more we can achieve for the global good. The less Sikhs there are the more vulnerable a minority we become.

IMHO, no use having large numbers when you're willing to compromise your principles. If we follow your way, Sikhism would be severely weakened or maybe even destroyed. Today it's Non Sikh being allowed Anand Karaj marriage, tomorrow it would be gay marriage, then meat in langar hall....etc, etc and finally Sikhism would not be recognizable anymore. But hey, we got the numbers! LOL! More then likely the 'panth' will break up to several smaller sects.

If numbers guarantees you a win, how come N. India with such huge number of Hindus were under Muslim rule for centuries? And I believe the Muslims were a much smaller number compared to the Hindus. How does tiny Israel are able to fight and win with more then one Arab country attacking it? How did a smaller number of Japanese invade the larger China during World War 2 and the rest of Asia?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The only people making noise about Sikhs standing up for the rehit are those hippies who never attend a Gurdwara anyway unless it is someone's wedding. While they are they way they are, but what is su

Please, please, please watch this entire video. Not because you don't know the who, what and why of the Anand Karaj, but because of the way Bhai Jagraj Singh addresses the issue in a very diplomatic a

whats amazing is this type of topic somehow manages to get 500-600+ comments on fb posts, from mostly coconut/hippy fake sikhs, who come out from under their rocks, yet they are NOWHERE to be seen, wh

As I already explained to you brother, the 3rd or so generations have remained broadly in tact so long as arranged marriages were the norm within our community. If you believe that these Malaysian Sikhs will magically avoid increasing rates of intermarriage with a 99.7% majority in this century then I respectfully believe you are mistaken.

That is merely your belief nothing more. You can believe that the moon will some day fall on Earth, that does not make it true.

Secondly, Why must Sikhs increase in numbers? Why is this so and where is this mentioned as a requirement?

I don't believe Gurmat is being compromised by two people who will marry anyway being allowed an Anand Karaj and thus encouraged to raise their children as Sikhs rather than ensuring that they will not by blocking them from Anand Karaj.

Then you need to convince yourself and all other Sikhs with scripture and not your 'beliefs' of increasing population of Sikh numbers. As for them raising their kids as Sikhs, if they were not willing to convert at the time of the wedding, what makes you believe that they will raise their kids as Sikhs? You're simply fooling yourself.

Yes those former Muslims that bowed down before Guru Sahib (instead of to Mecca) did indeed become new Sikhs.

I don't think so. Not gonna argue over this as I'm no Sikh scholar but this is the first time I'm hearing this. I believe Muslims like Pir Buddhu Shah remained a Muslim till death.

The proof is pretty obvious Quantavius Ji. If you have a bottle of Coca-Cola that is losing some liquid every day (as Sikhs every day choose to marry partners of an erstwhile non-Sikh background) then the bottle will be 50% full as time progresses if we continue to alienate and estrange such couples their future generations away from Sikhi.

Again the water bottle theory. LOL!!!!!!!!! Sorry but your 'theory' is flawed. By compromising your principles, you are basically 'smashing' the coca cola bottle into several smaller pieces. Once you compromise, Sikhism becomes meaningless and numbers will dwindle OR there will be a split.

Think about it logically brother. Think of the Amish community that already do exactly what you advocate. Unlike Sikhs their fertility rate is above replacement level. How will the Sikh Panth with a low fetility rate and losing adherents blocked from Anand Karaj flourish demographically if we do not do everything we can to accept and encourage new blood into the Panth?

It's a no brainer to me.

You need to take your own advice brother and think logically too. There is no provision in Sikhism to increase our numbers. There is no edict that says 'go forth and multiply'. LOL! We are not here to increase and boast our numbers. This is not our purpose. IMHO, to do so is to engross one self in this physical world and by doing that you impede your own spiritual progress.

IMHO, one day we will all die and all this nonsense about increasing numbers so that we can be some kinda 'force to be reckoned with' is all nonsense.

You're not looking at the larger picture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this not what I learnt. I learnt that you have to take amrit in order to be a Sikh.

D = That's the modern narrative that has been pimped to us by our Hindutva opponents. Who gains by definining sehajdhari's as non-Sikhs? Our Hindutva opponents. Because that way they get to define Sikhs as a permanent microscopic minority that deserves no democratic voice.

I don't think anybody is stopping a Non Sikh having Anand Karaj marriage so long they convert.

D = I agree with you. Explanation of what Sikhi stands for is vital. Most normal human beings except for the most aggressive males following proselytising Abrahamic faiths are natural sehajdhari Sikhs especially if they bow down before Maharaj recognising the importance of gender equality as imparted via Anand Karaj.

IMHO, no use having large numbers when you're willing to compromise your principles. If we follow your way, Sikhism would be severely weakened or maybe even destroyed.

D = Sikhi will never be destroyed. Truth is eternal. But there's a sensible way to progress our Panth going forward and a self-defeating way. Decreasing our numbers via such protests and the alienation of the couples and their future generations of children away from Sikhi and into the non-Sikh fold is not the way to go in my opinion. When two people have decided to marry we should do our best to encourage them as fellow members of Gurdwara Sangat.

then meat in langar hall.

D = We covered this before that meat in the langar hall contradicts Gurmat. I repeat that the Anand Karaj protestors need to carefully consider whether they would have had the himmat to protest the marriage of Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Dev Ji Majaraj and many of our bravest shaheeds?

...etc, etc and finally Sikhism would not be recognizable anymore. But hey, we got the numbers! LOL! More then likely the 'panth' will break up to several smaller sects.

D = How does two people being blessed with an Anand Karaj stop you from becoming an Amritdhari Gursikh? If you think numbers are irrelevant ask yourself if we would have been defeated in 1849, 1947 and 1984 if we had one hundred fold the numbers? There are plenty of sects already.

If numbers guarantees you a win, how come N. India with such huge number of Hindus were under Muslim rule for centuries? And I believe the Muslims were a much smaller number compared to the Hindus. How does tiny Israel are able to fight and win with more then one Arab country attacking it? How did a smaller number of Japanese invade the larger China during World War 2 and the rest of Asia?

D = Do Muslims rule India now? Without American backing do you believe Israel could have held on to the Gaza strip for the time it did? Do you think Japan can rule China now? In the modern world, numbers count. If we blindly think that we can ignore the fact that we are a 0.3% minority globally then we do so at our peril. 1947 and 1984 should have taught us the importance of growing our numbers by now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this not what I learnt. I learnt that you have to take amrit in order to be a Sikh.

D = That's the modern narrative that has been pimped to us by our Hindutva opponents. Who gains by definining sehajdhari's as non-Sikhs? Our Hindutva opponents. Because that way they get to define Sikhs as a permanent microscopic minority that deserves no democratic voice.

You can believe whatever you want brother, I'm not going to stop. To each his own. Whatever floats your boat.

IMHO, no use having large numbers when you're willing to compromise your principles. If we follow your way, Sikhism would be severely weakened or maybe even destroyed.

D = Sikhi will never be destroyed. Truth is eternal. But there's a sensible way to progress our Panth going forward and a self-defeating way. Decreasing our numbers via such protests and the alienation of the couples and their future generations of children away from Sikhi and into the non-Sikh fold is not the way to go in my opinion. When two people have decided to marry we should do our best to encourage them as fellow members of Gurdwara Sangat.

Your ideas of 'sensibility' is basically compromising your principles nothing more.

then meat in langar hall.

D = We covered this before that meat in the langar hall contradicts Gurmat. I repeat that the Anand Karaj protestors need to carefully consider whether they would have had the himmat to protest the marriage of Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Dev Ji Majarajs and many of our bravest shaheeds?

And you still don't get it. Today you come up with some bright idea of change. Tomorrow someone just like you will come up with another. Then they will claim it could be done earlier, why not now too.

...etc, etc and finally Sikhism would not be recognizable anymore. But hey, we got the numbers! LOL! More then likely the 'panth' will break up to several smaller sects.

D = How does two people being blessed with an Anand Karaj stop you from becoming an Amritdhari Gursikh? If you think numbers are irrelevant ask yourself if we would have been defeated in 1849, 1947 and 1984 if we had one hundred fold the numbers? There are plenty of sects already.

How does some people eating a bucket of KFC in the langar hall stop you from becoming an Amritdhari Gursikh?

D = Do Muslims rule India now? Without American backing do you believe Israel could have held on to the Gaza strip for the time it did? Do you think Japan can rule China now? In the modern world, numbers count. If we blindly think that we can ignore the fact that we are a 0.3% minority globally then we do so at our peril. 1947 and 1984 should have taught us the importance of growing our numbers by now.

Nope, but they did. How did they do it? Thats the point. It's irrelevant how Israel wins, at the end of the day, they do. Thats all that matters. It's irrelevant if Japan can or cannot rule China today. That fact that Japan was able to defeat China and the rest of Asia blows a king sized hole in your theory of number winning in a fight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondly, Why must Sikhs increase in numbers? Why is this so and where is this mentioned as a requirement?

D = Sikhs can remain the small minority we are if you so wish. But then it's pretty futile to then complain of discrimination by bigger populations.

D = I sincerely believe that the vast majority who are humble enough to be from a former non-Sikh background but are willing to bow down before Maharaj and take on board the information about Sikhi it is our duty to provide can prove to be good Sikhs in the future.

I don't think so. Not gonna argue over this as I'm no Sikh scholar but this is the first time I'm hearing this. I believe Muslims like Pir Buddhu Shah remained a Muslim till death.

D = How could Pir Buddu Shah be wrongfully be considered a Muslim when he bowed down before Guru Sahib instead of towards Mecca. A Muslim is not allowed to bow before Guru Sahib but given that the Quran advocates the beating of women, the inferiority of women and the rape of non-Muslim women we obviously need to ensure that males of aggressively conversionary Abrahamic faiths affirm that they disavow the lies of the Quran, Book of Mormon, Torah etc.

Again the water bottle theory. LOL!!!!!!!!! Once you compromise, Sikhism becomes meaningless and numbers will dwindle OR there will be a split.

D = That's your opinion. I disagree with you and I've explained why.

You need to take your own advice brother and think logically too. There is no provision in Sikhism to increase our numbers. There is no edict that says 'go forth and multiply'. LOL! We are not here to increase and boast our numbers. This is not our purpose. IMHO, to do so is to engross one self in this physical world and by doing that you impede your own spiritual progress.

D = Well if that's the case then don't complain when the democratic majority rides roughshod over your rights. Because in the real world numbers count. If it's all about individual spirituality rather than what we Sikhs can achieve for Sarbat da Bhala globally then why worry about two people who wish to have an Anand Karaj?

IMHO, one day we will all die and all this nonsense about increasing numbers so that we can be some kinda 'force to be reckoned with' is all nonsense.

D = Agreed me and you will die one day. But it's not about being something in history books but for Sikhi and Sikhs to improve the world around us for the good of all (Sarbat da Bhala)

You're not looking at the larger picture.

D = That's exactly what I believe those protesting and blocking such Anand Karaj's are failing to do

Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondly, Why must Sikhs increase in numbers? Why is this so and where is this mentioned as a requirement?

D = Sikhs can remain the small minority we are if you so wish. But then it's pretty futile to then complain of discrimination by bigger populations.

D = I sincerely believe that the vast majority who are humble to be from a former non-Sikh background but are willing to bow down before Maharaj and take on board the information about Sikhi it is our duty to provide can prove to be good Sikhs in the future.

I don't think so. Not gonna argue over this as I'm no Sikh scholar but this is the first time I'm hearing this. I believe Muslims like Pir Buddhu Shah remained a Muslim till death.

D = How could Pir Buddu Shah be wrongly considered a Muslims when he bowed down before Guru Sahib instead of towards Mecca. A Muslim is not allowed to bow before Guru Sahib but given that the Quran advocates the beating of women, the inferiority of women and the rape of non-Muslim women we obviously need to ensure that males of aggressively conversionary Abrahamic faiths affirm that they disavow the lies of the Quran, Book of Mormon, Torah etc.

Again the water bottle theory. LOL!!!!!!!!! Once you compromise, Sikhism becomes meaningless and numbers will dwindle OR there will be a split.

D = That's your opinion. I disagree with you and I've explained why.

You need to take your own advice brother and think logically too. There is no provision in Sikhism to increase our numbers. There is no edict that says 'go forth and multiply'. LOL! We are not here to increase and boast our numbers. This is not our purpose. IMHO, to do so is to engross one self in this physical world and by doing that you impede your own spiritual progress.

D = Well if that's the case then don't complain when the democratic majority rides roughshod over your rights. Because in the real world numbers count. If it's all about individual spirituality rather than what we Sikhs can achieve for Sarbat da Bhala globally then why worry about two people who wish to have an Anand Karaj?

IMHO, one day we will all die and all this nonsense about increasing numbers so that we can be some kinda 'force to be reckoned with' is all nonsense.

D = Agreed me and you will die one day. But it's not about being something in history books but for Sikhi and Sikhs to improve the world around us for the good of all (Sarbat da Bhala)

You're not looking at the larger picture.

D = That's exactly what I believe those protesting and blocking such Anand Karaj's are failing to do

Sorry but you don't have to have a large number in order to be treated equally. Sikhs are treated equally in all western nations despite being a tiny minority. Secondly Sikhism was not created in order for your to increase your population and boast large numbers. IMHO, that goes against the very thesis of Sikhi ad is indulgence in ones ego. You're looking at Sikhism as some kinda racial club and hence your blind spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Secondly, Why must Sikhs increase in numbers? Why is this so and where is this mentioned as a requirement?

D = Sikhs can remain the small minority we are if you so wish. But then it's pretty futile to then complain of discrimination by bigger populations.

D = I sincerely believe that the vast majority who are humble enough to be from a former non-Sikh background but are willing to bow down before Maharaj and take on board the information about Sikhi it is our duty to provide can prove to be good Sikhs in the future.

I don't think so. Not gonna argue over this as I'm no Sikh scholar but this is the first time I'm hearing this. I believe Muslims like Pir Buddhu Shah remained a Muslim till death.

D = How could Pir Buddu Shah be wrongfully be considered a Muslim when he bowed down before Guru Sahib instead of towards Mecca. A Muslim is not allowed to bow before Guru Sahib but given that the Quran advocates the beating of women, the inferiority of women and the rape of non-Muslim women we obviously need to ensure that males of aggressively conversionary Abrahamic faiths affirm that they disavow the lies of the Quran, Book of Mormon, Torah etc.

Again the water bottle theory. LOL!!!!!!!!! Once you compromise, Sikhism becomes meaningless and numbers will dwindle OR there will be a split.

D = That's your opinion. I disagree with you and I've explained why.

You need to take your own advice brother and think logically too. There is no provision in Sikhism to increase our numbers. There is no edict that says 'go forth and multiply'. LOL! We are not here to increase and boast our numbers. This is not our purpose. IMHO, to do so is to engross one self in this physical world and by doing that you impede your own spiritual progress.

D = Well if that's the case then don't complain when the democratic majority rides roughshod over your rights. Because in the real world numbers count. If it's all about individual spirituality rather than what we Sikhs can achieve for Sarbat da Bhala globally then why worry about two people who wish to have an Anand Karaj?

IMHO, one day we will all die and all this nonsense about increasing numbers so that we can be some kinda 'force to be reckoned with' is all nonsense.

D = Agreed me and you will die one day. But it's not about being something in history books but for Sikhi and Sikhs to improve the world around us for the good of all (Sarbat da Bhala)

You're not looking at the larger picture.

D = That's exactly what I believe those protesting and blocking such Anand Karaj's are failing to do

DTF, do you really believe that your a better GurSikh than Bhai Jugraj Singh?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but you don't have to have a large number in order to be treated equally.

D = Agreed in societies where there is respect for equality and no racism or discrimination - something which i believe can only occur under Khalsa Raj.

Sikhs are treated equally in all western nations despite being a tiny minority.

D = Tiny minorities are susceptible and vulnerable to assimilation and intermarriage. The more Sikhs there the less you will have to protest Anand Karaj's.

Secondly Sikhism was not created in order for your to increase your population and boast large numbers.

D = The Khalsa Panth is all about quality over quantity. But the more sehajdhari Sikhs there can be globally to become future Khalsa and support the Khalsa Panth the better. Sikhi is not some racial club defined by being ethnically born as Sikh. Sikhi comes from sincere conviction and is Universal for the whole world to benefit from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DTF, do you really believe that your a better GurSikh than Bhai Jugraj Singh?

Of course not! No I don't!

Do I think Bhai Jagraj Singh Ji is infalliable - no.

Do I believe he is not seeing the writing on the wall regards us being such a small minority - yes.

Do I believe anybody could dare protest at the Anand Karaj of Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj - no

Instead of protesting such Anand Karaj's we should focus greater attention on the dangers that drugs, alcohol, female infanticide, biraderi apartheid, cancer, illiteracy and poverty pose to the Sikh Panth imho.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but you don't have to have a large number in order to be treated equally.

D = Agreed in societies where there is respect for equality and no racism or discrimination - something which i believe can only occur under Khalsa Raj.

Sikhs are treated equally in all western nations despite being a tiny minority.

D = Tiny minorities are susceptible and vulnerable to assimilation and intermarriage. The more Sikhs there the less you will have to protest Anand Karaj's.

Secondly Sikhism was not created in order for your to increase your population and boast large numbers.

D = The Khalsa Panth is all about quality over quantity. But the more sehajdhari Sikhs there can be globally to become future Khalsa and support the Khalsa Panth the better. Sikhi is not some racial club defined by being ethnically born. Sikhi is Universal for the whole world to benefit from.

IMHO, by entertaining ego of wanting a large population in order to perpetuate a large Sikh presence is going to impede your own spiritual progress. If we are going to disappear through assimilation and inter marriage then so be it. If that is what Waheguru ji wills it then let it be. The whole world can benefit through Sikh teachings and not a large Sikh population. If you are really concerned about the world getting to know Sikhi, then go forth and teach.

How did the Jews maintain their presence over 3 thousand years despite being a tiny minority? They too do not promote inter faith marriages.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO, by entertaining ego of wanting a large population in order to perpetuate a large Sikh presence is going to impede your own spiritual progress.

D = That's fine I respect your viewpoint. I personally wish for Khalsa Raj to be global so that all can live in justice, equality and dignity.

If we are going to disappear through assimilation and inter marriage then so be it.

D = That's fine I respect your chilled out attitude. I personally cannot stand to see Sikhi become less significant than it already is.

D = I believe in Khalsa Raj globally for the good of all humanity. I oppose the status quo where we have billions living miserable lives of suffering while billionaires live it up etc. I don't want to see the true sound of Sikhi drowned out by the noise of more numerous lies.

If that is what Waheguru ji wills it then let it be.

D = Vaheguru doesn't will the demographic growth or decline of a Panth.

D = It's we as Sikhs who control the future destiny of the Panth for good or for bad.

The whole world can benefit through Sikh teachings and not a large Sikh population.

D = Agreed that is possible assuming that there are no terrorist nation states or terrorists out there opposed to Gurmat

If you are really concerned about the world getting to know Sikhi, then go forth and teach.

D = Agreed. We should all do that. I know in my conscience that I'm trying the best I can within my limited capability.

How did the Jews maintain their presence over 3 thousand years despite being a tiny minority? They too do not promote inter faith marriages.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/10/01/chapter-2-intermarriage-and-other-demographics/

D = Have a read through this brother to understand that 21st century is a completely different era to the last 300 or 3000 years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Of course not! No I don't!

Do I think Bhai Jagraj Singh Ji is infalliable - no.

Do I believe he is not seeing the writing on the wall regards us being such a small minority - yes.

Do I believe anybody could dare protest at the Anand Karaj of Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj - no

Instead of protesting such Anand Karaj's we should focus greater attention on the dangers that drugs, alcohol, female infanticide, biraderi apartheid, cancer, illiteracy and poverty pose to the Sikh Panth imho.

Guru Sahib did have an equal to an Anand Karaj. His wife took Charan Pahul. Guru Sahib's followers were always small in number, but he never said "go around and spread your Kaam and Haumai, forget everything I say" said no Guru Sahib ever. Guru Nanak Dev Ji had one true disciple and his name was Bhai Lehna. Is Bhai Lehna, (Guru Angad Dev Ji), going to be a sex and Haumai addict like your proposing? Your view of Sikhi is too small.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guru Sahib did have an equal to an Anand Karaj.

D = I am saying Guru Nanak Dev Ji's marriage WAS the first Anand Karaj

D = I am asking would the protestors also have tried to block Guru Sahib's wedding using the same reasoning of a non-Sikh spouse?

His wife took Charan Pahul.

D = You might believe that Guru Sahib poured water over their toes which Mata Sulakhani drank. I don't believe that for a second.

D = I sincerely believe that Mata Sulakhani Ji became Sikh on bowing down before Shabad Guru (Ik Onkar scrawled on the Earth by Guru Sahib). A person that bows down in sincerity (which only Akaal Purakh can judge) before Guru Sahib is Sikh even if sehajdhari.

Guru Sahib's followers were always small in number, but he never said "go around and spread your Kaam and Haumai, forget everything I say" said no Guru Sahib ever. Guru Nanak Dev Ji had one true disciple and his name was Bhai Lehna. Is Bhai Lehna, (Guru Angad Dev Ji), going to be a sex and Haumai addict like your proposing? Your view of Sikhi is too small.

D = Gurmat (Sikhi) urges us to conquer kaam so how exactly is wanting Sikh demographics to grow for Sarbat da Bhala so that the constant sexual conditioning of capitalist societies has an alternative lifestyle, in your opinion, the equivalent of saying become a sex and haumai addict? I fail to see the extension of your logic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

Guru Sahib did have an equal to an Anand Karaj.

D = I am saying Guru Nanak Dev Ji's marriage WAS the first Anand Karaj

D = I am asking would the protestors also have tried to block Guru Sahib's wedding using the same reasoning of a non-Sikh spouse?

His wife took Charan Pahul.

D = You might believe that Guru Sahib poured water over their toes which Mata Sulakhani drank. I don't believe that for a second.

D = I sincerely believe that Mata Sulakhani Ji became Sikh on bowing down before Shabad Guru (Ik Onkar scrawled on the Earth by Guru Sahib). A person that bows down in sincerity (which only Akaal Purakh can judge) before Guru Sahib is Sikh even if sehajdhari.

Guru Sahib's followers were always small in number, but he never said "go around and spread your Kaam and Haumai, forget everything I say" said no Guru Sahib ever. Guru Nanak Dev Ji had one true disciple and his name was Bhai Lehna. Is Bhai Lehna, (Guru Angad Dev Ji), going to be a sex and Haumai addict like your proposing? Your view of Sikhi is too small.

D = Gurmat (Sikhi) urges us to conquer kaam so how exactly is wanting Sikh demographics to grow for Sarbat da Bhala so that the constant sexual conditioning of capitalist societies has an alternative lifestyle, in your opinion, the equivalent of saying become a sex and haumai addict? I fail to see the extension of your logic.

I'm just going to tell you, this website is called "SikhSangat.com" not, "BeSupperLiberal.com" it's clear you follow your own man, than Guru's Hukam and the historical facts.
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...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use