Jump to content

Is Hindutva Worse Than Islamic Radicalism?


Balkaar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Lets get our house in order before we try to solve world problems.

Hindutva and the RSS are a direct threat to Sikhi. They prop up Deras, undermine all our efforts for self-determination, and relentlessly try to assimilate our faith into theirs.

Dealing with them should be very high up on the Panth's list of priorities, I assure you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Islamic and hindu brahmin fundamentalists are bad as each other

The muslim usually stabs you in the front cos you know his faith hates all non-muslims you know what you getting with his moronic religion

With the Hindu Brahmin he doesnt care about his religion much because the knows its all rubbish so he is Hindu atheist so what he cares about is his land/nation (ie the land of Hind). If you oppose his hindutva agenda he will stab you in the back while plotting with your enemy and seeming to be your good friend. He will also pose as a Sikh to damage your reputation and to create trouble between you and the non-Sikh.

Hinduism/Hindus are tolerant of Sikhs and Sikhism as long as Sikhs dont have any political ambitions or authority.

Islam/Muslims are tolerant of of Sikhs and Sikhism as long as they are smaller number than muslims and dont convert them but they are allowed to convert sikhs.

So both religious agenda's are harmful to us but Islam is the greater danger as it will not tolerate our demographic numbers to rise to pose a threat to their authority hence they they always tareget kafir women cos they know you control the female breding stock you control the population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a term in Hindu thought called Purva Puksha, it means looking things through another's point of view or "reversing the gaze".

I think it is important that we get an idea from the Hindu or Brahmin elite point of view what they find threatening about Sikhs.

Hindutva has a problem with Islam (for obvious reasons) but also because it comes from outside India but Sikhi is a different kettle of fish.

We as Sikhs are oblivious to the impact we make on others. We challenge the authority of things because we work outside the yolk of Brahminism and we come from the subcontinent which confuses the Brahmin even further.They envy our chardi kala ness and wish they had it themselves which is why they always try to incorporate us into the Hindu fold. But at the same time they want to destroy who we are and keep what makes us useful for them. It's like schizophrenic behaviour.

They then try to rationalise things by saying " Sikhs are sword arm of India" or "Sikhs were there to protect Hindus" They try to control the narrative.

They see things in us that we don't see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It probably spawned from the fact that Sikhs ended up protecting many of them during the Mughal campaign. Just imagine it like a playground. We have the Mughals as one big group (group 1) picking on the other group 2 (the hindus). Along comes group 3 (Sikhs) and starts sticking up for the victim group. Mughal group get's pushed back and dissolves. Group 3 's job is done but Group 2 feels they may be threatened again. What better protection than to have Group 3 as part of your group. So as a result they zealously try to take over. It's a very well established fact that Indians have a tendency of living in the past. Their afraid that if something happens again they won't have the same protection as they did before. If Group 1 and 3 make peace and get along, group 2 feels threatened.

Simple as that.

They want Protection but refuse to accept that Sikhs will protect anyone who needs helps. Their a force for the world, not just India.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2

It probably spawned from the fact that Sikhs ended up protecting many of them during the Mughal campaign. Just imagine it like a playground. We have the Mughals as one big group (group 1) picking on the other group 2 (the hindus). Along comes group 3 (Sikhs) and starts sticking up for the victim group. Mughal group get's pushed back and dissolves. Group 3 's job is done but Group 2 feels they may be threatened again. What better protection than to have Group 3 as part of your group. So as a result they zealously try to take over. It's a very well established fact that Indians have a tendency of living in the past. Their afraid that if something happens again they won't have the same protection as they did before. If Group 1 and 3 make peace and get along, group 2 feels threatened.

Simple as that.

They want Protection but refuse to accept that Sikhs will protect anyone who needs helps. Their a force for the world, not just India.

It just happened to be Hindus, Guru Sahib would have protected anyone who came to him.
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

    • I was searching igurbani.com which gives correct pronunciation of Gurbani. I can’t remember all of it at once. I guess it relies on more practice, like more Sehaj Paths. The meaning becomes clearer. I have noticed slight variants in it. This could be because it’s written in old Punjabi.  
    • Veer Manpreet Singh, a lay preacher, claims that -Sikhs aren't supposed to worship Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We are only supposed to worship God as is written in Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We only "revere" Guru Granth Sahib ji.     He says a lot of other things in this video, some are good refutations of Hindu superstitions, but the reformers often go too far. Anyways, what he is saying about not worshipping Guru Granth Sahib ji is totally wrong. The reason is Guru Granth Sahib ji is Guru. Guru is Satguru. Satguru is God. We worship God. Therefore, we also worship Satguru (Guru Granth Sahib ji).   There are innumerable verses in Gurbani equating God and Guru. ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ The Guru is the Supreme Lord and the Transcendent Master. The Guru floats (saves) the drowning one. p49   ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ Know the Guru and God as One. p864   ਗੁਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਲਿ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਖੋਜਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡੁ ॥ There is no one at par with the Guru. I have searched and seen the whole universe. p49 (If the Guru is the greatest in the whole universe, shouldn't we worship the Guru?)   I'd like to ask Manpreet Singh what is worship? Any reasonable definition would include obeisance, remembrance, and praise. Those are exactly the same things Gurbani says to do regarding Guru! Remembrance and obeisance: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਸਦ ਸਦਾ ਸਮ੍ਹਾਰੇ ॥ Ever, ever, I think of the True Guru, ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਕੇਸ ਸੰਗਿ ਝਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ and the Guru's feet I brush with my head's hair. p387   Praise: ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਆਪਿ ॥ The Guru himself is the transcendent Lord and the supreme master. ਆਠ ਪਹਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਜਾਪਿ ॥੪॥੧੬॥੬੭॥ Throughout the eight watches of the day, O Nanak meditate thou on the Guru. p387   In fact, Gurbani says the way to find God is to worship (puja) of Guru: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਧੋਇ ਧੋਇ ਪੂਜਹੁ ਇਨ ਬਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਲਹੁ ਰੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Washing and bathing the True Guru's feet, worship thou them. In this way thou shall obtain my Lord Master. Pause. p1118   Could it be any clearer that we are to worship Guru ji?
    • Bro, reciting a shorter Chaupai Sahib is hardly "anti-Dasam". It's fine to argue that the longer Chaupai is more traditional, but the short one isn't anti-Dasam. That's like claiming shorter Rehras is anti-Guru Granth Sahib ji just because there are fewer selections from Guru Granth Sahib. It might not be traditional, but it's not anti-Guru Granth Sahib. I prefer the longer versions, but let's not exaggerate. Every tradition has a slightly different Rehras version. Nanaksar vs Taksal vs Nihangs and so on. The basic template for Rehras is at the beginning of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Later, Chaupai Sahib was added and Anand Sahib always follows as the end of a process. Then some sangats added more saloks to start Rehras and others were added at the end. Some additional selections from Dasam Bani were also added, but it wasn't the same ones for every sangat. The important thing is to not hate on each other for these variations.
    • Umm, so you're upset that this jatha did Chaupai the same way it's being done at Harimandar Sahib for 100 years? Shouldn't you be upset at the manager of Darbar Sahib? I'm not saying that Sikhs who are aware of certain issues shouldn't do the longer Chaupai, but there are only so many battles you can fight. Instead of calling some jatha traitors because they're doing the (for better or worse) "standard" Chauapai published by the SGPC, it would be better to change things from the central point. You can't fault the average Sikh for picking up the average Gutka and doing paath.
    • It's the same here in Toronto. Alot of the gudwaras here are political orientated and get tons of funding from the government-probably want them stay hush hush with all the BS that has been happening with India.  These guys are skewing gurbani. A complaint was sent to a ragi singh a couple of days ago in regards to a hukamnama. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use