Jump to content

ex sikhs are not sikhs


joker
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Just to clarify, do you believe that non-Sikhs are going to Hell?

Doesn't ਏਤ ਪਿਤਾ ਏਕਸ ਕੇ ਹਮ ਬਾਰਿਕ mean we are all one?

When did we become Christian?

Hell for Sikh is another rebirth, not being poked by a trident by a hooved red banda with horns growing out of his head. "Narak" maybe a stopping place somewhere or another, but we confuse it with the Semitic Eternal Hell. It's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BhForce said:

Well, shouldn't it be the reverse? I think you seem to be saying that religions get better with time, but aren't they usually the best right when they're founded, and then they decline?

We've only been around 300 years or so, and we're already a mess.

jews sure had a pretty bad time no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

When did we become Christian?

Hell for Sikh is another rebirth, not being poked by a trident by a hooved red banda with horns growing out of his head. "Narak" maybe a stopping place somewhere or another, but we confuse it with the Semitic Eternal Hell. It's not.

Us becoming sikhs in this life means we were closer to god in our previous lives and did good karam.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dallysingh101 said:

If that's who I think it is, at least he had the balls to call out his own over their grooming. 

He's a very slippery customer. I use to listen to his LBC afternoon talk show on the weekend for years, and if you read between the lines he's basically advocating the same outcomes being promoted by his Jihadi brothers, except the mad Jihadis want it all NOW, whereas Nawaaz has clocked onto the fact that the West's mad political and social policies will deliver those same outcomes in the distant future. His demented Islamic mates are too low-IQ to understand that Nawaaz is playing the long-game; they want a mad Mullah shouting about the Islamic crescent flag waving over Buckingham Palace, whereas Nawaaz realises that's not the way to get things done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MisterrSingh said:

The level of Sikhs today suggests that theory is questionable at best.

well that's on them right? Even the most honest people can become corrupt due to maya. They were given a chance to be so close to the truth but they couldn't value it and chose maya. It doesn't mean others are bad but inspite of being good humans in this life they don't have the blessing to know the truth which is Sikhi. Now what can be worse for people who were born into Sikhi and so close to the truth but gave it up for maya?  And how lucky is someone who was completely unaware of Sikhi but realised its truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, proudkaur21 said:

Even the most honest people can become corrupt due to maya. They were given a chance to be so close to the truth but they couldn't value it and chose maya.

ਇਸੁ ਜਰ ਕਾਰਣਿ ਘਣੀ ਵਿਗੁਤੀ ਇਨਿ ਜਰ ਘਣੀ ਖੁਆਈ ॥

For the sake of this wealth, so many were ruined; because of this wealth, so many have been disgraced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, proudkaur21 said:

well that's on them right? Even the most honest people can become corrupt due to maya. They were given a chance to be so close to the truth but they couldn't value it and chose maya. It doesn't mean others are bad but inspite of being good humans in this life they don't have the blessing to know the truth which is Sikhi. Now what can be worse for people who were born into Sikhi and so close to the truth but gave it up for maya?  And how lucky is someone who was completely unaware of Sikhi but realised its truth. 

Do you realise the implication of what you're suggesting? A lifetime of lifetimes of good karams leading to a Sikh birth suddenly negated in a few moments through temptation? Are karams so flimsy? Is kamai such a weak joke?

Even those who are supposedly making the most of their Sikh janam, what sets them apart from others? What are they DOING in a tangible sense that's making a difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Nawaaz has clocked onto the fact that the West's mad political and social policies will deliver those same outcomes in the distant future.

Wow, that's interesting.

It's clear as the day that the whites will die out because they're having 1.5 or less children per couple, and the Muslims are having 4.

The whites are stupid, but then so are we.

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

    • Sri Kesgarh Sahib (and Akaal Takht) has always allowed eating meat for those who take Amrit there, as long as it's not ritually killed like halaal.  They've followed the official Sikh Rehat Maryada since it was made in the 30s, before that they were Nihang Maryada who also allow meat. So no Panj Pyaare have ever mandated being veg at Anandpur Sahib. You can read the full Sikh Rehat Maryada in English, it includes the Panj Pyaare are meant to say on the day (page 57 I believe). My cousin took Amrit at Anandpur Sahib and my other one in Darbar Sahib 8 years later. I recently showed them both this page and they said that's exactly what the Panj said to them word for word at their Sanchaars
    • Anandpur Sahib does and always has followed the Sikh Rehat Maryada, same as Darbar Sahib in Amritsar. They allow you to eat any eggs, fish or meat as long it is not Halal meat/killed Ritualistically. They say Kes is the Kakkar, not Keski. I believe only AKJ says that and nobody else. You can read the full Sikh Rehat Maryada, page 56-7 I believe is what the Panj Pyaare are meant to say on the day. My cousin took Amrit at Anandpur Sahib and the other in Darbar Sahib 8 years later. I showed them both this page and they said that is exactly what the Panj said to them word for word at their Sanchaar
    • All Sikhs must recite Rehras Sahib daily but Chaupai Sahib and the short Anand Sahib were only added to it by SGPC and other jathebandis in the 1900s. In Guru Granth Sahib Ji's saroop, "Sodar Rehras" appears from "So dar tera keha" to "Saran pare ki rakho sarma", which is basically the first half of "Rehras" in all standard Gutka Sahibaan. So why do we recite these? Obviously doing more Baani can never be bad, but most Amritdharis recite Benti Chaupai and Anand Sahib in their morning Nitnem so why should we recite these two Baania again instead of a new one? That time could be used to read Shastar Naam Mala, Shabad Hazaare etc. And why do these two Baanis get more importance than the others? Surely if we recite Chaupai Sahib and (part of) Anand Sahib twice in a day then we should also recite Japji Sahib, Jaap Sahib and Tav Prasad Savaiya twice as well? Note: Pls correct me if I'm wrong about SGPC. My theory is that they added these into Rehras Sahib cos they removed them from the morning Baania but still had to include them in the daily Nitnem somehow, but this doesn't explain why older Samparde like Budha Dal also have this version of Rehras Sahib in their Gutkeh - someone enlighten Daas pls Bhul Chuk Maaf
    • There's no debate that all Sikhs must recite Rehras Sahib daily but Chaupai Sahib and the short Anand Sahib were only added to "Rehras Sahib" by SGPC and other jathebandis in the 1900s. In Guru Granth Sahib Ji's saroop, "Sodar Rehras" appears from "So dar tera keha" to "Saran pare ki rakho sarma", which is basically the first half of "Rehras" in all standard Gutka Sahibaan. So why do we recite these? I agree doing more Baani can never be bad, but most Amritdharis recite Benti Chaupai and Anand Sahib in their morning Nitnem so why should we recite these two Baania again instead of a new one? That time could be used to read Shastar Naam Mala, Shabad Hazaare etc. And why do these two Baanis get more importance than the others? Surely if we recite Chaupai Sahib and (part of) Anand Sahib twice in a day then we should also recite Japji Sahib, Jaap Sahib and Tav Prasad Savaiya twice as well? Note: Pls correct me if I'm wrong about SGPC. My theory is that they added these into Rehras Sahib as they removed them from the morning Baania but still had to include them in the daily Nitnem somehow, but this doesn't explain why older Samparde like Budha Dal also have this version of Rehras Sahib in their Gutkeh - someone enlighten Daas pls Bhul Chuk Maaf
    • Uncle, realistically are you gonna challenge it in real life? I could fully jhatka and eat a steak wearing Bana bilkul tere samne but on God you could do nothing about that 😂
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use