Sikh interracial marriages

[MisterrSingh]

1 minute ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Its not so simple. If that were the case we wouldn't see a horde of them tired of abrahamic crrap they grew up with , and moving towards dharmic religions and India. Neo-Vedanta for instance is quite popular with westerners. 

Well, yes, I was referring to the extreme Leftists who labour under cognitive dissonance and selective reasoning to the extent where they can't offer any consistent line of reasoning because most of what they fundamentally believe is in constant flux. The so-called abrahamic crap in itself isn't the problem, per se, it's more the manner in which those beliefs were interpreted and enforced in accordance with the environment and personal situation of the individual. I'm sure there's Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs out there who laboured under excessive and unreasonable interpretations of their respective faiths which lead them to seek greener pastures.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

The so-called abrahamic crap in itself isn't the problem, per se, it's more the manner in which those beliefs were interpreted and enforced in accordance with the environment and personal situation of the individual. I'm sure there's Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs out there who laboured under excessive and unreasonable interpretations of their respective faiths which lead them to seek greener pastures.

first, there's a baseline , and then a certain amount of freedom that even the faith and society allows you to move in either direction of that baseline.

I have for long believed its perhaps easier to be a hindu or muslim man than a sikh man, because of turban factor. 

Anyways most people when they grow under a particular ideology will try to justify it after growing up. And unfortunately the more radical the belief system, the more "confident" its followers feel that they're right 

[MisterrSingh]

18 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

first, there's a baseline , and then a certain amount of freedom that even the faith and society allows you to move in either direction of that baseline.

I have for long believed its perhaps easier to be a hindu or muslim man than a sikh man, because of turban factor. 

Anyways most people when they grow under a particular ideology will try to justify it after growing up. And unfortunately the more radical the belief system, the more "confident" its followers feel that they're right 

This is something I've been considering for the past few days.

The outer rehat commitment for a Sikh doesn't seem to dissuade otherwise seriously questionable individuals from adopting the visual identity. There's no actual way of dissuading a Sikh from not taking up rehat who plans to use the external identity as a cynical shield for nefarious or self-serving purposes. That's something that's hardly ever broached or explored. It's also the same reasoning that's used as justification for non-rehat adherents to justify why they refuse to adopt the outer apperance, because they would argue the external has no bearing on the internal regardless of the strict religious imperative that directs otherwise.

I think by making it a purely religious compulsion ("you don't have the saroop, therefore you aren't a true Sikh") it seems to have created a schism amongst Sikhs, which has been exacerbated by our daliances with the West, whereby the bearded-and-turbanned are viewed as inflexibly orthodox while the clean-cut are seen as the progressive, relaxed, tolerant faction of the faith. I think this issue has come into greater focus since religious identity has become a focal point in recent history, as a result of the average person's understanding of the Islamic narrative, because it was never this way in Sikhi from my perception of the situation. It's almost as if we've been shoehorned into playing parts that don't actually apply to us in the way they do to Muslims. The sad thing is there's no push-back against it. We just seem to be going with the flow and fulfilling expectations that have been imposed upon us.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

This is something I've been considering for the past few days.

The outer rehat commitment for a Sikh doesn't seem to dissuade otherwise seriously questionable individuals from adopting the visual identity. There's no actual way of dissuading a Sikh from not taking up rehat who plans to use the external identity as a cynical shield for nefarious or self-serving purposes. That's something that's hardly ever broached or explored. It's also the same reasoning that's used as justification for non-rehat adherents to justify why they refuse to adopt the outer apperance, because they would argue the external has no bearing on the internal regardless of the strict religious imperative that directs otherwise.

I think by making it a purely religious compulsion ("you don't have the saroop, therefore you aren't a true Sikh") it seems to have created a schism amongst Sikhs, which has been exacerbated by our daliances with the West, whereby the bearded-and-turbanned are viewed as inflexibly orthodox while the clean-cut are seen as the progressive, relaxed, tolerant faction of the faith. I think this issue has come into greater focus since religious identity has become a focal point in recent history, as a result of the average person's understanding of the Islamic narrative, because it was never this way in Sikhi from my perception of the situation. It's almost as if we've been shoehorned into playing parts that don't actually apply to us in the way they do to Muslims. The sad thing is there's no push-back against it. We just seem to be going with the flow and fulfilling expectations that have been imposed upon us.

That wasn't what I was trying to say although what you say are also some hard-hitting facts.

 

Quote

I have for long believed its perhaps easier to be a hindu or muslim man than a sikh man, because of turban factor. 

What I meant was most men if given a chance would prefer without turban than being with turban. They want to feel free-headed , it seems. Many Indian cultures have turbans for male, but almost all of them ditched it for convenience sake and sometimes for petty reasons like fashion . Their children today don'yt like to wear turbans even on religious days except for brief time.

To make things worse, we're not in a position of sovereignty to direct our affairs. The best we can do is teach our young children the value of our culture and hope that it sticks on them, but for that to happen, first the parents have to be serious about what they themselves are doing.

[dallysingh101]

Been spending a lot of time with a younger mixed-raced relative recently. Lots of interesting conversations and micro culture clashes going on. lol

[MisterrSingh]

1 hour ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

What I meant was most men if given a chance would prefer without turban than being with turban. They want to feel free-headed , it seems. Many Indian cultures have turbans for male, but almost all of them ditched it for convenience sake and sometimes for petty reasons like fashion . Their children today don'yt like to wear turbans even on religious days except for brief time.

To make things worse, we're not in a position of sovereignty to direct our affairs. The best we can do is teach our young children the value of our culture and hope that it sticks on them, but for that to happen, first the parents have to be serious about what they themselves are doing.

I get you. It's complicated. Although some would say it's only as complicated as we make it, lol. Sometimes I think religiosity and adherence should be a strictly personal matter, because ultimately our spiritual liberation isn't a group activity or the result of someone else's efforts being gifted to another person. The individual succeeds or fails based on their own works. 

But on the other hand surely we have some sense of responsibility to the culture and the religion we've been born into. We have a responsibility to -- for the purposes of keeping face if nothing else -- to elevate and promote our path. If we're seen to not give two hoots about our religion or our ways, a third party isn't going to come along and encourage us to get back on the wagon.

What irks me about attitudes toward Sikhs by the leftist, Marxist-influenced strands making inroads into the faith (and outsiders) is this pathetic desire to partake in the surface, non-commital rituals of Sikhi, yet when the arguably orthodox factions express a sense of separateness and the promotion of our exclusive interests, then it's, "Sikhs aren't meant to see division. We are all one. You're a militant for thinking of Sikhi interests." They want their barfi and they want to eat it, too.

We're expected to constantly compromise for the benefit of others who invariably have no interest in reciprocating our selflessness. And the worst aspect of it? They use Gurbani to justify their stance, and any Sikh with love and devotion for Gurbani would never dream of speaking against it. It's absolute emotional blackmail. 

[MisterrSingh]

On 5/14/2020 at 5:07 PM, ChardikalaUK said:

It's at times like these I get angry at our leaders past and present. We should not be living in the UK, USA, Canada, Australia etc. Punjab should not be the dump it is. We never developed ourselves scientific wise or technology wise. We just run to these other countries where we won't fully be accepted and people will feel contradicted.

Any culture or race worth a damn has always created and forged regardless of the field of work. We're nothing but nomadic consumers feasting on the achievements and feats of others. 

[ChardikalaUK]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

Any culture or race worth a damn has always created and forged regardless of the field of work. We're nothing but nomadic consumers feasting on the achievements and feats of others. 

It's the bitter truth. We just run after goreh.

The youth in Punjab are lazy and hardly any of them study. They are into crass materialism. 

Korea and China were once worse off than India, now they are light years ahead.

 

[Sat1]

On 5/17/2020 at 9:27 AM, MisterrSingh said:

If everything that supposedly demarcates us with other cultures and religions is Maya; a surface illusion, then why did the Sikh Gurus not encourage us to convert to Islam, or remain as Hindus? 

If we are truly one, then why go through all the effort of forging a separate path? If attaining God is the sole focus (and all paths lead to the One), then surely it would make sense to fall in behind a religion that was in the ascendancy and had a viable means of enforcing its aims, because ultimately we're all going to end up in the same place, aren't we?

Don’t have a go at me, I’m just saying what’s in Gurbani, we are One, the drop in the ocean, ocean in the drop. You can’t claim to practice or follow gurbani if you doubt it. 
 

How can we not be one when that’s the entire point gurbani tries to teach us? To see God as All

There are good souls and bad souls out there, those who choose to be good and those who don’t. Avoid the bad and surround yourself with the good. Be wise, don’t allow yourself for fall for rubbish that people try to sell you. And defend yourself if and when you need to. 

But don’t forget that it’s all a Khel. The races you speak of, there are good and bad in each..ultimately they are just humans who choose to be good or bad, deluded or not. There are plenty of deluded so called Sikhs out there. If you find a human who is a good soul who is not your color or culture (both Illusions) and you want to marry them, then who cares. Guru Nanak said he has no caste or creed and for sure he had no culture either. He just recognized himself as the Truth in form and saw God in every heart. Which we tend to forget.

Also Sikh isn’t a religion, it’s the Truth that was taught in other religions but corrupted. Saints and Bhagats have existed since the Saturday and beyond. The path isn’t separate, it’s the same, all of the rubbish was burned away by the Gurus Teachings and what was left was the pure truth. And it was taught in great depth. That’s why it resonated with so many Hindus and Muslims, they knew it was Sat without the rubbish their gods and goddesses and teachers had added to it.

[puzzled]

Guru Gobind Singh jis hukkam is to marry your daughters to a Sikh and into a house where there is Sikhi    .

Sikh men historically married Sikh women and Hindu women but never Muslim women. Hari Singh Nalwa refused to marry a muslim woman called begum bano who asked him for babies and he refused. I think there was a muslim woman from lahore who was disowned by her father because she saw Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji as her guru, she then started living at Amrtisar near Harmandir Sahib and i am pretty sure no Sikh man married her and she remained single.  We all know what happened to M. Ranjit Singh for marrying a sulli but nothing happened when he married his hindu rajput wives.