So what if you're protecting us and shedding your young blood for us, you're just one skidmark created for protection of our existence

[MisterrSingh]

12 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

Hasn't this pretty much been tried with the Singh Sabha thing? That didn't resolve our issues though.

Too late, though, wasn't it? I'm talking at the very beginning, and I hate to say it, but make it one of the "pillars" as it were, to drive it home in the minds of the followers. Don't leave it open to interpretation and the whims of coming generations. It takes away from the inherent plurality and the flexibility of it all, but knowing what we do about human nature and religious belief, why create that particular belief system when human nature is what it is. 

It seems like I'm second guessing and questioning the very decisions made by our founders, but I'm not. I'm just trying to trace the evolution of the decisions made back then, and how they've come to be shaped by subsequent events and circumstances today. 

[dallysingh101]

30 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Too late, though, wasn't it? I'm talking at the very beginning, and I hate to say it, but make it one of the "pillars" as it were, to drive it home in the minds of the followers. Don't leave it open to interpretation and the whims of coming generations. It takes away from the inherent plurality and the flexibility of it all, but knowing what we do about human nature and religious belief, why create that particular belief system when human nature is what it is. 

It seems like I'm second guessing and questioning the very decisions made by our founders, but I'm not. I'm just trying to trace the evolution of the decisions made back then, and how they've come to be shaped by subsequent events and circumstances today. 

I believe Sikhi actually requires some intelligence on part of the student, simplifying it for the average dimwit has led to what you are saying in my opinion. 

Again, if people simply grasped the egalitarian militaristic social vision of Sikhi, then we'd have no questions about how we are different from Hindus or spiritually dead protestants. Fact is right now, we aren't very different to them at all because we are either following our ancestral baggage or we're dimwittedly following another construct that was deviously developed during colonialism. 

 

If our Gurus saw value in some older Indic things, I wouldn't question it, but try to understand it. 

[MisterrSingh]

15 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

I believe Sikhi actually requires some intelligence on part of the student, simplifying it for the average dimwit has led to what you are saying in my opinion. 

If our Gurus saw value in some older Indic things, I wouldn't question, it, but try to understand it. 

But wasn't Sikhi meant, forgive me for what I'm about to say, lol, FOR the "average dimwit"? Wasn't it a simple, straightforward religious path that was partially created in response to a corrupt and discriminatory religious hierarchy that denied certain sections of society the opportunity for spiritual liberation? Who was the overwhelming target demographic brought into the Sikh fold? It wasn't the elite and the educated who found themselves drawn to the teachings, but the groups in society who were the most disenfranchised and disengaged. Why would Sikhi require "intelligence" in order to speak to those groups of individuals, particularly when Gurbani tells us worldly knowledge, seeking intelligence, etc (sianapa) take us further away from God rather than bring us closer to Him? 

[GurjantGnostic]

2 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

I'll repeat what I said a while ago: we'd have been better served at the inception of Sikhi if all links to Hinduism were disavowed much like how Islam drew a line underneath its links to Judaism and Christianity. But, if that was never meant to be the divine plan by the founders, considering how our iconographic lexicon is inextricably Hindu-based, what exactly was the point of it all? We can swear until we're blue in the face that we reject the Hindu pantheon, but for an apparently distinct entity, we sure seem to refer to it and draw our underlying philosophical basis from its existence on an inconveniently intimate basis. To be truly separate from Hinduism we would have to erase ALL Vedantic influences, but then what remains of the religion aside from surface practices?

For me, it all comes to back to geography. If only we had some physical breathing space from the overwhelming non-Sikh influences that bleed into our reality, we might have been able to forge ahead with a clear vision. Now, we're just surrounded on all sides.

Isn't that the point though in a way?  The Guru Granth Sahib Ji explains yes these devte are real. However, praying to one isn't appropriate as we praise Akal Purakh not devte?

Are the devte in a way not more stuck in ego than us humble slaves when we embrace Gurbani?

[Guest]

I wonder how many Sikhs are aware of the six schools of hindu philosophies , even in nutshell ?

Bhai Gurdas ji has made a passing reference to them in his vaaran but I am afraid that's not enough if you wish to understand those.

 

[MisterrSingh]

6 minutes ago, GurjantGnostic said:

Isn't that the point though in a way?  The Guru Granth Sahib Ji explains yes these devte are real. However, praying to one isn't appropriate as we praise Akal Purakh not devte?

Are the devte in a way not more stuck in ego than us humble slaves when we embrace Gurbani?

I'm not arguing for or against the worship of these figures. My angle is, for the sake of clarity and demarcation, let's say these figures don't exist for us as Sikhs and the practice of our religion. Even referring to them obliquely is a form of acknowledging their so-called status as divinely created beings. It inspires misplaced awe in individuals we should be shunning. It leads to confusion for people who need to matters explained in a very black and white way. Grey is too much for some to take in.

I know why Gurbani mentions these figures and beings: it "elevates" them in order to knock them down so that we realise their creator is worthy of veneration, not the creations themselves.

[GurjantGnostic]

Just now, MisterrSingh said:

I'm not arguing for or against the worship of these figures. My angle is, for the sake of clarity and demarcation, let's say these figures don't exist for us as Sikhs and the practice of our religion. Even referring to them obliquely is a form of acknowledging their so-called status as divinely created beings. It inspires misplaced awe in individuals we should be shunning. It leads to confusion for people who need to matters explained in a very black and white way. Grey is too much for some to take in.

I know why Gurbani mentions these figures and beings: it "elevates" them in order to knock them down so that we realise their creator is worthy of veneration, not the creations themselves.

Amen Veer Ji. I feel that. 

[Guest]

In another news, and have seen pics of Indian army vehicles having kesri nishan sahib on each side on the front . 

Sikh skeptics are saying this is an attempt to fool both sikhs and chinese :

1) fool sikhs in thinking "wow , nishan sahib on army vehicle" ,

and

2) make chinese think its the sikhs who're enemies , so that chinese never support sikhs  

 

but i am not sure if those images are true

[Akalifauj]

3 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

I'll repeat what I said a while ago: we'd have been better served at the inception of Sikhi if all links to Hinduism were disavowed much like how Islam drew a line underneath its links to Judaism and Christianity. But, if that was never meant to be the divine plan by the founders, considering how our iconographic lexicon is inextricably Hindu-based, what exactly was the point of it all? We can swear until we're blue in the face that we reject the Hindu pantheon, but for an apparently distinct entity, we sure seem to refer to it and draw our underlying philosophical basis from its existence on an inconveniently intimate basis. To be truly separate from Hinduism we would have to erase ALL Vedantic influences, but then what remains of the religion aside from surface practices?

This poster not to long ago slandered Gursikhs who do nothing but paath.  These Gursikhs have a deep understanding of Gurbani and know exactly how Sikhi is separate from hinduism and has no vedantic influence.  From the beginning Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji details how Sikhi is distinct and merges the soul to Vaheguru.  Sukhmani Sahib says slandering his devotees brings grave results.  So it's no surprise what is happening here.  He asked for it and now hes receiving the fruits of his labor.

[MisterrSingh]

22 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

This poster not to long ago slandered Gursikhs who do nothing but paath.  These Gursikhs have a deep understanding of Gurbani and know exactly how Sikhi is separate from hinduism and has no vedantic influence.  From the beginning Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji details how Sikhi is distinct and merges the soul to Vaheguru.  Sukhmani Sahib says slandering his devotees brings grave results.  So it's no surprise what is happening here.  He asked for it and now hes receiving the fruits of his labor.

Change the record, bro. Trying to get to the bottom of some of these pressing issues that face us as a quom is slander and blasphemy to you. I ask these questions as one of you, not as a hostile force. You will have no response when outsiders ask these same questions, and believe me they will one day. Don't you think we should spend this time fortifying ourselves in preparation for the difficult times ahead instead of hoping for the best? 

As for your general tactic of resorting to labelling a person as a slanderer when you have zero substance to contribute, it's getting old hat. Think of something on which to base your attacks. Emotional blackmail works on only the weak.