Jump to content

3HO sikhs should re-convert to authentic Sikhi or drop the name


Guest Ex-Gora

Recommended Posts

Guest Ex-Gora

3HO is a crazy new age mishmash of yoga, numerology, and a bunch other nonsense dreamt up by a sociopathic hustler. If those goreh were just Beatles fans seeking Eastern Wisdom™ then why bring Sikhi into the mix at all? Be a Hindu or a Theosophist. On the other hand, if they discern the truth of Sikhi, then why pollute it with nonsense?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Because that was a paid agenda bro, it's a paid program that was set up here, and it had ways of enticing people into it, some of those ways were cult sex practices. White people are also more than ha

Heavy tattooing?

We need to be more pragmatic. Unlike the cults in India such as Nirankaris and the followers of the rapist sadh they do not seek to convert Punjabi Sikhs into their organisation and as far as I know t

Posted Images

4 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

They should be added to the list of cults we're not supposed to interact with at all, if they aren't already. We'd have to be careful as anything even accepting ex members of theirs who claim to simply have not known better. 

You could be the new 'leader' of the white Sikhs maybe, doing a 'ghar wapsi' so they know the true teachings and culture of Sikhi...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Premi5 said:

You could be the new 'leader' of the white Sikhs maybe, doing a 'ghar wapsi' so they know the true teachings and culture of Sikhi...

I like this ghar WASPi. That where we drive the snakes out? Lol 

I'd counteract them with other foreign converts who are actually loyal to Sikhi. A deeply committed and melanin bearing group with all the right properties to dominate these fakes. Allied with descendent Khalsa. 

Overly civilized Sikhs they aren't worried about. They might find the motley crew of my imagination harder ro ignore. 

I'd accept pale skins but they would not be my target demographic. And they'd be vetted. 

Once I had enough momentum I'd try and bridge over to whitey. 

I simply refuse to have an all white Sangat. If that's all you can manage? There's something wrong with you. I mean says a lot when there's no melanin in a group. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Premi5 said:

'ghar wapsi' means 'returning home' ; so bringing 'home' those who have 'gone away' from Sikhi.

In this context, what I really meant was to bring those white Sikhs properly into Sikhi in the first place. They already follow a lot of Rehat and Bani

I think brown and white people mixing freely is unlikely to happen in big numbers very soon though

That's why I'm starting with brown. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Premi5 said:

I think brown and white people mixing freely is unlikely to happen in big numbers very soon though

3HO as a whole is a lost cause, but individual 3HO Sikhs can be changed towards Gurmat.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ex-Gora
40 minutes ago, proactive said:

We need to be more pragmatic. Unlike the cults in India such as Nirankaris and the followers of the rapist sadh they do not seek to convert Punjabi Sikhs into their organisation and as far as I know they do not say that they are the REAL Sikhs and we are all fakes as some cults do. Unlike these cults they also do not harbour any animosity towards us. They are following a version of Sikhi which suits them or which they have been taught.  I look at it this way, because we have failed to do parchar of Sikhi in the west and have spent what resources we have to giving out 'free food' and attempting to become the 4th emergency service we cannot expect white people to take to Sikhi on their own.  Due to our failure, what little Sikh influence there has been it has been by Yogi Bhajan and the 3HO. Just by the very fact that we see Goray in Bana normalises out identity in the west, we lose our otherness in the eyes of the ordinary white person when white people also wear the Bana. This isn't ideal but until we have organisations working to preach Sikhi to the west then we need to accept that having 3HO Sikhs is better than no 3H0 Sikhs. The more 3HO Sikhs there are then the better it is for us because if not them, then their sons and daughters will one day become Sikhs like the rest of us. 

 

 

 

I agree with most of what you say. At some point in history, the majority of Christians were from Judea, i.e., one ethnic group. Then later on there was a time when Arians, Gnostics, and other sects were predominant in various areas over what we call mainstream Christianity today. The point isn't to say a given religion should necessarily strive to be either homogeneous or heterogeneous ethnically. Neither that Chalcedonian (mainstream) Christianity is better than its extinct rivals. The point is that without parcharaks in the west people won't know about authentic Sikhi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ex-Gora
Quote

Yogi bahaha even told the 3ho that they have no ties, no responsibility to the Paanth. That it's just brown politics and not to get involved. To ignore the genocide and attack on Harminder Sahib. 

In who's best interest is it that Sikhs don't help each other? Certainly it isn't in Sikhi's interest.

I would guess this has to do with cult dynamics. Isolated followers won't be exposed to alternative points of view. Thus a self-perpetuating in-group culture is established.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Guest Ex-Gora said:

I would guess this has to do with cult dynamics. Isolated followers won't be exposed to alternative points of view. Thus a self-perpetuating in-group culture is established.

I would have thought in this day and age, where everyone uses the Interweb to do research, they'd be hard pressed not to encounter alterative points of views? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest Ex-Gora said:

I agree with most of what you say. At some point in history, the majority of Christians were from Judea, i.e., one ethnic group. Then later on there was a time when Arians, Gnostics, and other sects were predominant in various areas over what we call mainstream Christianity today. The point isn't to say a given religion should necessarily strive to be either homogeneous or heterogeneous ethnically. Neither that Chalcedonian (mainstream) Christianity is better than its extinct rivals. The point is that without parcharaks in the west people won't know about authentic Sikhi.

Gnostics predate christianity. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use