Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
genie

What was Guru Ji's rational behind the commandment Sikh daughters should only be given to Sikhs for marriage?

Recommended Posts

Just now, harkirat23 said:

I have. So stop your childish behaviour as to who started it first and who didn't right now. We have young people as well as women participating on this forum. So, behave.

You behaving like a brat now. And if you dont know the difference between the right and wrong, dont poke your nose.

If someone wants to think he can get away with abuse, he has picked on a wrong person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, harkirat23 said:

You are the one picking on people here, they are just responding to the right person. In fact, that p'bibbi2 hasn't even responded to your last comments. I hope she won't either. 

Being real poOr in understanding, you totally missed that p 'b's nonsensical remarks, didn't you?

BEST ADVICE FOR YOU, DONOT INTERFERE IN OTHER'S BUSINESS!!!!!!!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Main definitions of troll in English

troll1troll2

troll1

 

Pronunciation: /trɒl//trəʊl/

NOUN

  • (in folklore) an ugly creature depicted as either a giant or a dwarf.

     
    Example sentences
    Synonyms
 
 

Origin

Early 17th century: from Old Norse and Swedish troll, Danish trold. The first English use is from Shetland; the term was adopted more widely into English in the mid 19th century.

Pronunciation:

troll

/trɒl//trəʊl/
 

Main definitions of troll in English

troll1troll2

troll2

 

Pronunciation: /trɒl//trəʊl/

NOUN

  • 1A person who makes a deliberately offensive or provocative online post.

    ‘one solution is to make a troll's postings invisible to the rest of community once they've been recognized’
     
    More example sentences
    1. 1.1A deliberately offensive or provocative online post.
       
      Example sentences
  • 2A line or bait used in trolling for fish.

     
    Example sentences
    Synonyms

VERB

[NO OBJECT]
  • 1Make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.

    ‘if people are obviously trolling then I'll delete your posts and do my best to ban you’
     
    [with object] ‘you folks taking this opportunity to troll me, you really need to reassess your values in your life’
    More example sentences
     
     
     
    in my opinion there are four trolls recently, and not difficult to figure out who they are. Mind games are being played by them and it's obvious in the writings who they are. 
    Figure it out for yourself peoples. 
    In my opinion, it's all an act of roles. 
    1.  
 
 
 
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

Thank you for your reply. Let me please clarify, at no point would I identify with the teacher who told you that that your child is half Brazilian and half sikh.. I find it difficult to understand why with the expression of the opinions I have made you could possibly think that.

I also had the same thought as JKV because of your fused references to interracial and interfaith. The two have nothing to do with one another from a Sikh perspective or any logical perspective. Race is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You fuse this as part of a query but also as a lead up to a personal criticism of JKV. You needed to mention the two together but rather than own your thought you decide to say “some may call it...”. I was liking your open mindedness but all of us, including you and I, have our limits I guess.

8 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

I also feel that you haven't responded to the questions I actually asked. Which is your prerogative.

Absolutely it is her prerogative. Do you mean that?

....

8 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

But I have to ask if you would be so kind as to consider the actual specific question I posed?

Didn’t you just say it’s her prerogative? One sister justifying her personal life has zero probative value to the general question at hand. You’ve been courteous in many of your postings. Nice to see someone courteously pushing thought.  However, this is beyond an ad hominem attack. Perhaps it did not occur to you that pushing this query upon a sister as part of a criticism and asking her to justify her personal life on a public forum is distasteful. Asking nicely makes it more repulsive. In most cases, a woman’s  truth would put most men to shame for asking such questions. Regardless, it’s not for you or any of us to push.

JKV my apologies if I got in your way. I know you are a capable warrior with capable responses.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, buddasingh said:

I also had the same thought as JKV because of your fused references to interracial and interfaith. The two have nothing to do with one another from a Sikh perspective or any logical perspective. Race is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You fuse this as part of a query but also as a lead up to a personal criticism of JKV. You needed to mention the two together but rather than own your thought you decide to say “some may call it...”. I was liking your open mindedness but all of us, including you and I, have our limits I guess.

 

Absolutely it is her prerogative. Do you mean that?

....

Didn’t you just say it’s her prerogative? One sister justifying her personal life has zero probative value to the general question at hand. You’ve been courteous in many of your postings. Nice to see someone courteously pushing thought.  However, this is beyond an ad hominem attack. Perhaps it did not occur to you that pushing this query upon a sister as part of a criticism and asking her to justify her personal life on a public forum is distasteful. Asking nicely makes it more repulsive. In most cases, a woman’s  truth would put most men to shame for asking such questions. Regardless, it’s not for you or any of us to push.

JKV my apologies if I got in your way. I know you are a capable warrior with capable responses.

 

Agree 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

Just one more point to add.. You open your reply with  "my definition" which suggests that the definition is subjective..?

some people think without amrit one is a sikh proper , but because from my understanding of our history charan pahal was taken by sikhs to become sikhs then it became Khande di Pahal: So taking choola at birth then amrit later is a fundamental stage of becoming a sikh. That is objective  not subjective on my part  but on others' view who misuse sehajdhari to allow them to cut their kesh etc.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

Curious..

Either "sikh or not" ..

That is pretty unequivocal and definitive.

Yet at the very beginning of your post you chose to make a distinction by stating that your husband falls into the category of sehajdhari sikh, whilst you also define a proper sikh as khalsa.. So which is it?

by 'sikh or not'  i meant having a definite and conscious choice of sikhi ,as in definition given in SRM i.e. dedicated to one path , following only ten gurus Sahiban and their eternal jot Guru Granth Sahib ji .   If my son followed any other path alongside he would not be a sikh . But Sehajdhai sikhs in the time of the gurus was coming from another path , was a sikh as in SRM but had yet to take amrit.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This above quoted poster with his post insulted the original poster and from here on other posters got upset.  Which they had every right to be.  

This was a good topic until this poster came along.  This guy needs to be put under quality control for his insults

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
19 minutes ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

Its all getting a bit difficult, the problematic nature of topic uncovers contradictions, all the bile is broken down and can't stand up to rational discussion. Let's just shut it down

You started personally insulting people, such as @jkvlondon's personal life.

3 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

This above quoted poster with his post insulted the original poster and from here on other posters got upset.  Which they had every right to be.  

This was a good topic until this poster came along.  This guy needs to be put under quality control for his insults

Totally agree, this guy is just here to argue, not really open-minded

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  

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use