Jump to content

Amritdharis marrying hair-cut spouses - <banned word filter activated> Jagmeet Singh ?


Guest Jagsaw_Singh
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Guest Jehangir Sucks said:

Funny how Jagmeet Singh as an Amritdhari Sikh is being trolled by folks comparing him to Chandu (a Muslim slave)

Are you for real?

Did you even bother to read anybody's posts, or did you just happen to see the word "Chandu" in a post and you just wrote that Jagmeet Singh is being compared to Chandu?

In no way whatsoever does my post compare Jagmeet Singh to Chandu. I was just refuting some nameless individual's post about hukum.

Not to mention the fact that in my previous post, I was highly conciliatory toward Jagmeet Singh and I specifically said that I can't know whether his bride is hair-cut, and that even if she were, we shouldn't bother with the rehit of politicians.

SMH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you people care so much about his Fiancé shaving? She's not even Amritdhari, and thus not obligated to follow the same Rehat that Khalsa Sikhs are. As far as im Rehat is concerned, Sikhs are allowed to have an Anand Karaj with other Sikhs, and both dont have to be Amritdhari. You people judge womens Sikhi by their hair, but forget that even a lot of Amritdhari women shave as well. 

We as a Panth need to stop tearing down fellow Sikhs, especially ones such as Jagmeet Singh who have spoken against the Indian Government in defence of Sikhi multiple times, and even got his visa denied because of it. The enemies of the Panth want us to fight so that were too busy attacking each other to notice what's going on. Jagmeet Singh isnt a saint, but hes better than nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

We as a Panth need to stop tearing down fellow Sikhs

Such as Naamdharis?

:notalk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheeTurbanator said:

Nice try, but Naamdharis aren't Sikh. 

It's pathetic how to try to constantly bring up Namdharis when you respond to me. 

Ooo you're touchy innit. They may not be to you but they are to many others. Personally I don't know what they are. They seem to have a cordial relationship with most Sampardas so if they weren't Sikhs, these Sampardas wouldn't associate with them. So it was quite a nice try on my part, thanks.

It's called trolling btw brother.

Don't be so krodhi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

Ooo you're touchy innit. They may not be to you but they are to many others. Personally I don't know what they are.

It doesn't matter what they are to you, to me, or to anyone else, the only thing that matters is the Guru, and the Guru clearly stated that from now on (1708)  all Sikhs will follow the Granth as the eternal Guru. Using that simple logic, if someone doesnt follow the Granth as the eternal Guru, they aren't Sikh.

The definition of a "Sikh" is literally in both Bani and Rehat, this isnt personal opinion, it's based on the words of the Guru himself and the agreed upon choice of the Khalsa Panth. 

If I identity as something, I dont automatically become that. If I identify as an attack helicopter, I dont automatically transform into an aerial vehicle of death and destruction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Why do you people care so much about his Fiancé shaving? She's not even Amritdhari, and thus not obligated to follow the same Rehat that Khalsa Sikhs are.

Bro, the original poster specifically stated that he didn't fault his fiancee. Rather, he faults Jagmeet Singh for marrying a person not in Rehat.

36 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

As far as im Rehat is concerned, Sikhs are allowed to have an Anand Karaj with other Sikhs, and both dont have to be Amritdhari.

As far as "I'm concerned" or "Rehat is concerned"? Two very different things.

As far as you're concerned, it may be OK to marry a non-Amritdhari. But it's not OK as far as Rehat is concerned.

If you disagree, please respond to the specific breakdown I did in my post and followup on why unmarried Amritdharis are told to marry an Amritdhari.

39 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

We as a Panth need to stop tearing down fellow Sikhs, especially ones such as Jagmeet Singh who have spoken against the Indian Government in defence of Sikhi multiple times, and even got his visa denied because of it. The enemies of the Panth want us to fight so that were too busy attacking each other to notice what's going on. Jagmeet Singh isnt a saint, but hes better than nothing. 

Now here's something I can agree with, and did, here.

If Jagsaw had been a bit more conciliatory, there wouldn't have been a problem. He could have just said something on the lines of "Jagmeet Singh seems to have married a non-Amritdhari. I'm not judging him, because I don't know his specific situation, but I just wanted to make a general statement for the unmarried Amritdhari youth out there that you're supposed to marry an Amritdhari, for these reasons ..."

But he chose to really lay into Jagmeet Singh, and that's why people had a problem with his approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

Personally I don't know what they are. They seem to have a cordial relationship with most Sampardas so if they weren't Sikhs, these Sampardas wouldn't associate with them.

I'd be leery of making that assumption. I think that organizations (including sampardas, political parties--Sikh or non-Sikh) and people associate with a lot of people that they fundamentally disagree with, including (for sampardas), Hindus and Muslims. 

The one thing about the Naamdharis is they have an extreme amount of knowledge and skill in Gumat sangeet. Taking advantage of that knowledge would, to my mind, be just like having a Hindu music ustaad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

The definition of a "Sikh" is literally in both Bani and Rehat, this isnt personal opinion, it's based on the words of the Guru himself and the agreed upon choice of the Khalsa Panth. 

He baited you, bro, and you took the bait, and in doing so twisted yourself into a logical pretzel. Here's how:  First you stated that we should not judge other Sikhs.

He said, "Including Naamdharis?"

Then you said, the definition of a Sikh is fixed in bani and rehat, thereby negating your statement that we shouldn't judge other Sikhs.

Now, you'd probably say "they're not Sikhs!". But in order to say that, you have to make a judgement on their Sikhi, or lack of. Another words: you judged them.

So, you went into a logical circle, and he go the better of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use