.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I see. You're sitting at your computer wearing a chola with a 3 ft kirpan in your gatra.

I'll leave it to the rest of Sikhsangat.com to judge the likeliness of that.

Also, do you you wear a chola and 3ft kirpan everywhere you go (high school, college, factory, office, park), or do you submit to the sartorial wishes of the colonial masters against whom you rail? I.e., you only wear a chola and 3ft kirpan when you've sat at your computer and transformed into the savior of pre-British Sikhism?

They had more than that.

They would have 5more weapons on the body, a khajana, 2 jangi Kare, 2 kare and a sarbloh bata laying around when needed.

[TheeTurbanator]

30 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I see. You're sitting at your computer wearing a chola with a 3 ft kirpan in your gatra.

I'll leave it to the rest of Sikhsangat.com to judge the likeliness of that.

Also, do you you wear a chola and 3ft kirpan everywhere you go (high school, college, factory, office, park), or do you submit to the sartorial wishes of the colonial masters against whom you rail? I.e., you only wear a chola and 3ft kirpan when you've sat at your computer and transformed into the savior of pre-British Sikhism?

I actually support SIKHISM RELIGION and I think we should water down the Sikh Dharam even more until we just accept Sant Baba Jesus Singh Christ and completely adopt the Abrahamic Framework. 

[BhForce]

3 minutes ago, monatosingh said:

They had more than that.

They would have 5more weapons on the body, a khajana, 2 jangi Kare, 2 kare and a sarbloh bata laying around when needed.

Sure.

The puratan Singhs were amazing men. One can't praise them enough.

All I was doing was reacting to somebody who posted a strange, childish, and dopey response which seemed to imply that I in any way was a proponent of post-British invasion innovations in our faith.

By pretending to be a savior of pre-British Sikhism, he opened himself up to questioning. He would have been advised to simply not answer the question.

Unfortunately, he's gotten himself into a pickle by claiming to have a 3ft kirpan on his person as viewing this website.

Props to you for admitting that you like wearing chola, but aren't able to do it all the time. Better to admit to what you than pretend to be something you're not.

Better than 99 to 1 odds that he doesn't drink samundar in a sarb loh bata but rather Starbucks in a plastic/paper cup.

[TheeTurbanator]

6 hours ago, monatosingh said:

You chill, SGPC.

SGPC is doing a great job preserving the Abrahamic Framework of Sikhism, I love those guys! 

 SGPC ZINDABAAAAAAAAAAD! 

[BhForce]

1 minute ago, TheeTurbanator said:

33 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I see. You're sitting at your computer wearing a chola with a 3 ft kirpan in your gatra.

I'll leave it to the rest of Sikhsangat.com to judge the likeliness of that.

Also, do you you wear a chola and 3ft kirpan everywhere you go (high school, college, factory, office, park), or do you submit to the sartorial wishes of the colonial masters against whom you rail? I.e., you only wear a chola and 3ft kirpan when you've sat at your computer and transformed into the savior of pre-British Sikhism?

I actually support SIKHISM RELIGION and I think we should water down the Sikh Dharam even more until we just accept Sant Baba Jesus Singh Christ and completely adopt the Abrahamic Framework. 

Now you're just babbling incoherently because you've been caught in a lie.

I was actually looking forward to what kind of elaborate story you would concoct to keep up the pretense of your following pre-British Sikhi. The fact is any such attempt would have collapsed badly under its own weight, so you have chosen to post irrelevant statements.

[BhForce]

5 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

6 hours ago, monatosingh said:

You chill, SGPC.

SGPC is doing a great job preserving the Abrahamic Framework of Sikhism, I love those guys! 

 SGPC ZINDABAAAAAAAAAAD! 

Go ahead and share with us how exactly you live in pre-SGPC, pre-British rehit.

[TheeTurbanator]

Just now, MahadrasSingh said:

Uh @BhForce , I think TheeTurbanator is using this British technique known as sarcasm.

Im also speaking using the British technique of English 

[BhForce]

2 minutes ago, MahadrasSingh said:

17 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Stop lying, it was called “Sikhism” by the Guru, that’s what Wikipedia says, so it must be true. Stop trying to change our glorious colonial history you Sanatanist Sikh. 

SIKHISM is the best RELIGION 

Uh @BhForce , I think TheeTurbanator is using this British technique known as sarcasm.

Bro, if it were something like Mr. Doaba being funny, it would be a different thing. He usually posts "just kidding", "joke"  or whatever in the following post.

@TheeTurbanator could have done the same. 

Except that when I challenged him, he chose to blatantly lie that he has a 3ft kirpan on him while he's reading this website.

There is simply nothing in my original response to the OP which could have warranted an oblique attack on me by TheeTurbanator such as quoted by you above.

Let me explain further: I realize and accept sarcasm as a technique. But it only properly applies to people holding a view that could plausibly be refuted by the sarcasm you're posting. For example, I (and most of the posters on this board) are not Islamophiles. If TheeTurbanator had sarcastically taken a swipe at my supposed Islam-hatred, that would be possibly warranted. 

However, in no sense am I a promoter of post-British changes to our faith or practices. Therefore, TheeTurbanator can expect a strong response (muh-toR jawab), which he got. And which he has no response to other than lying and blabbering.

[BhForce]

13 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Im also speaking using the British technique of English 

Yes, do indeed explain why on the one hand you pose as the protector of the Sikhs from the evil colonial British-created Sikhism while on the other hand using the invader's language.

[TheeTurbanator]

See, the problem with you @BhForce is that from the start you assume that just becuase I believe that we as Sikhs should use a lot of Dharmic terms, that I somehow follow the pre-colonial Khalsa Rehat, which are two completely different concepts. 

Gurbani/Sikh concepts are set in stone, but the Khalsa Rehat is supposed to evolve over time. You are confusing the two. 

When I state that as Sikhs we should try to preserve Sikh terms in languages (like English) that allow foreign terms, it's becuse of the fact that the way we use terms has an affect on our understanding of them. 

For example: "God" sounds very dualitic, and Abrahamic, it sound like a man in the sky who is separate from creation. However, "Universal; force" sounds much more mystical and inline with panentheism which states that the universal force is intertwined in creation, and isnt dualistic.

Should we as Sikhs not use the terms like ੴ which were coined by the Guru for a specific purpose? why do we need to replace Sikh terms with Anglican terms? Furthermore, why do we pick and choose when the english language already allows us to freely use foreign terms? 

When it comes to the term "Sikhism", it's obvious that it wasn't used by the Guru, ever, and that by itself is a strong enough argument as to why the overall label the Sikh ideology should be what the Guru called it. However, the main reason I advocate so strongly for using Sikhi over the bastardized colonial term "Sikhism", is becuase it mixes Sikhi with what is understood by the anglican consciousness understanding, and also robs us of a unique piece of identity that was historically used to identity Sikhi. You dont see Muslims water down Islam by calling it "Muhammadism", but rather them fighting to reclaim their terms in the 1980s.  

Im not making the argument that Sikhs just stop using english altogether, however that we should try to use as many major terms from the Sikh lexicon as we can if the language allows it in order to preserve the meaning and identity. 

If you wanna sit down and talk about this issue in depth, let me know and we can figure out a time to talk.