Jump to content

Hukam vs Not-Hukam


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Not sure.but i think it has to do with our locus of control. 

Whatever we can control or change is not-hukam. 

Whatever, is beyond us is hukam. Also we should always do effort, but the result is hukam

I think bhai jagraj singh said hukam was the past. Because it was meant to be. But thats too simplistic.

So it's as much acceptance, or at least humbling oneself without succumbing to passiveness, rather than pure response and action? That's interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Not sure.but i think it has to do with our locus of control. 

Whatever we can control or change is not-hukam. 

Whatever, is beyond us is hukam. Also we should always do effort, but the result is hukam

I think bhai jagraj singh said hukam was the past. Because it was meant to be. But thats too simplistic.

How do we know that what we can control to do is not also hukam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

I mean, yes, who decides the day-to-day parameters for those of us who aren't spiritual superbeings?

It's like AI.

Most computer programmes are set of instructions that it follows to do tasks.

However,  the goal for AI is for it to make it's own decisions. 

There needs to be some kind of framework to essentially to make this happen.

Maybe hukam at some level is framework.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acceptance aside, how would I know to challenge something that has passed into Not-Hukam?

For example, I'm walking past a well. A little kiddy falls in. I can say, "The child falling in is part of Hukam. It's not my business to intercede," which is difficult to refute.

Objectively, and unbeknownst to me, it IS Hukam for that child to die from the fall in the well, but I manage to get him out, thus transgressing Hukam.

Would I be punished in the afterlife for defying Hukam? Or by helping the child out of the well, has the earlier Hukam evolved into another form of equally valid Hukam that's rolled with the punches thrown up by the unpredictability of life? So, even my actions, as unforeseen as they may be, are now part of Hukam?

If so, how can a normal human being ever hope to stay on the correct and acceptable side of something so fluid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Acceptance aside, how would I know to challenge something that has passed into Not-Hukam?

For example, I'm walking past a well. A little kiddy falls in. I can say, "The child falling in is part of Hukam. It's not my business to intercede," which is difficult to refute.

Objectively, and unbeknownst to me, it IS Hukam for that child to die from the fall in the well, but I manage to get him out, thus transgressing Hukam.

Would I be punished in the afterlife for defying Hukam? Or by helping the child out of the well, has the earlier Hukam evolved into another form of equally valid Hukam that's rolled with the punches thrown up by the unpredictability of life? So, even my actions, as unforeseen as they may be, are now part of Hukam?

If so, how can a normal human being ever hope to stay on the correct and acceptable side of something so fluid?

Hukam might not be one choice, but be multiple options and choices with multiple results but all leads to one single hukam in the end.

So it starts as one, branches out and then comes back to one again. 

Ultimately we don't know what the hukam is, we just do.

We as humans, will call it hukam if we cannot explain it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Hukam might not be one choice, but be multiple options and choices with multiple results but all leads to one single hukam in the end.

So it starts as one, branches out and then comes back to one again. 

Ultimately we don't know what the hukam is, we just do.

We as humans, will call it hukam if we cannot explain it.

Safe to say there is no such thing as Not-Hukam, which makes sense, because we're told that not even a leaf stirs without His command. Beyond Good and Evil? Just is.

I guess Intention also has its part to play. "Gaming the system" works on the physical plane, but I'm not sure it would be accepted on other planes, I.e. the kid falls down the well but I could've prevented it had I not been too scared to act. When the child dies I could say to people, "It was Hukam he was supposed to die," even though I realistically could've have done something meaningful to save him. 

Link to comment
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...
 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