A Sikh Without His Flowing Hair and Turban

BhagatSingh · #**271** (**permalink**) 27-Nov-2008, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Singh

I did not twist anything. Your logic has a flaw in it and i pointed it out. Lets put it in simple sense. Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji said A being Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru of the Sikhs and B being his Hukam of taking amrit.

EDIT: read post below, first! I forgot to submit it.
It wasn't in simple enough sense for you, before? Ok let us proceed then.
So what is the difference between A and B?
A = the Guru of Sikhs is going to change to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji
B = hukam of the previous guru
Question raised: Do we follow upcoming Guru or go back to the previous one?

B has not been mentioned in upcoming Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji!
Level of importance has declined.

Quote:

A and B are not in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Valid point.
But A does not HAVE to be in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Do you understand that? It is the nature of A. Don't read further if you do not understand what I am talking about here!!

Quote:

So if A is not important then B is not important.

When A was put out, B became less important because it was not found in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. You are giving A and B equal values but when A happens B becomes of less value/importance!

Quote:

If B is not important then A is not important.

WRONG! read above.

Quote:

Both of them go hand in hand.

Nope

Quote:

Also Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji gave the Khalsa Panth the power of being called Guru Khalsa Panth. Also when five Khalsa are present they represent Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji. So this further shows the importants of the Khalsa Panth and the importants of taking amrit.

Read my reply to Aad ji post just below.

Quote:

Also when he gave this order there was no confusion for who Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji was refering too as the Khalsa Panth. He was refering to the Amritdhari who obeyed his hukam and took amrit. As when Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is not present and a decision has to be made, then this decision is to be made by the Five beloved ones that will represent Guru ji. All of this clearly shows the importants given to the Khalsa Panth.

NO it is not that simple. Is khalsa someone who is pure of heart or an amritdhari?
Khalsa could definitely be both, but let's look at a case where Khalsa isnt both.
Person x has not taken amrit but is what GGS would consider Khalsa.
Person y has taken amrit but is GGS would not consider Khalsa.

Quote:

Your not getting the point Bhagat Singh how can you move on to say Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru, when it does not say this in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

I am getting your point, don't worry.
Guru Gobind SIngh ji did not say he was guru. Am I correct? Yet we "moved on" to him. When Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was made guru it was time to "move on" to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Quote:

Maybe someone else can make this clear for you because i have made this clear as day over and over again. I am gettin repititive here.

That is because you have not even considered the fact that maybe, just maybe Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is what we have to follow, and Khalsa was not given as much importance by GGS.
I am NOT saying agree with me!!

Quote:

Also to speak on the thing you said i missed to answer. I did not answer this because it was disrespectful of you for calling Guru a thing and calling Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji new Guru.

By thing I meant either person or object, no one is getting disrespected here, calm down. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji would be considered the new Guru since it was granted guruship by the old/previous one. I thought that would be obvious.

Quote:

As you would know Guru ji is not a thing and there is no such thing as new Guru.

What's a thing?? Please clarify what you mean by thing. Since you bringing it up again.

Quote:

Guru is Bani and Bani is Guru. There is no difference from Guru Nanak Dev ji to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

When we say they are the same, we don't mean physically the same. WE mean their teaching are the same.

Quote:

All the teaching and orders that were given by Guru Gobind Singh sahib ji are not in the Sri Guru Granth sahib ji as my above paragraphs show.

Ya so since he did not preserve the orders, we simply ignore them. Of course, we study them and they are of importance but were only of importance when they were given out and in the context they were given out.

Quote:

Also elaborate on when you say Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji is not the Guru and Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru. When there is no difference between the two, where is the distinguishth you are make?

Guru Gobind Singh ji was a man, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a book. There is a HUGE difference. GGS fought many wars, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji did not! Another HUGE difference. GGS could move on his own!!

If you mean the teachings then of course!! Another similarity:
GGS was revolutionary, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is GOING to be revolutionary!!!

Quote:

To conclude your conclusion it has a flaw in it and it doesn't make sense. So revise what you have said and maybe a mod other than Aad ji or another member can come in and make this clear to you. Also if you listen to the Guru that would mean for you to listen to Guru Gobind Singh ji's Hukam.

To conclude you didn't consider the part you missed in the conclusion.... again, so no.
Anyone else want to make is clear for me? Please don't hesitate. I am not saying I am right and you are wrong, just trying to bring up confusing parts of our history.

BhagatSingh · #**272** (**permalink**) 27-Nov-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aad0002

Singh ji, Bhagat ji

There is a lot of confusion in the discussion. The 5 k's were asked by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji in 1699, when he asked for 5 heads, gave amrit, took amrit -- and that is the date when keeping hair becomes one hallmark of the khalsa panth.

Yes you got that correct Aad Ji, I would not differ from that in anyway.

Quote:

In 1708 one day before his death, he made Adi Granth the Sri Guru Granth Sahib -- the eternal Guru of the Sikhs.

Here is the crucial point, in my opinion, now do we start to follows Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji or still follow Guru Gobind Singh?

Quote:

On that same day he said that if the panth sought him after his death they need only look among themselves to find him. This statement (and we can post the exact quote if necessary) raises two questions which have been debated for a long time.

1. Did Guru Gobind Singh intend that the khalsa panth be considered Guru in the same sense as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharj? Or was he talking about something else?

2. Did Guru Gobind Singh imply that only the Khalsa (those who took amrit) were the khalsa panth? This is another question that occupies serious discussion of the question "Who are the Khalsa?"

How about something else in the case of 1?
He wanted us to be like him. He wanted us to raise a voice against in justice and oppression. In a sense that each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we take on leadership and guide people in the right direction! each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we raise a voice against injustice!! each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we start projects like Sarbloh Warriors, Sundri etc!!

But I am probably wrong!

Quote:

Both questions have been discussed many times over several threads on SPN since the beginning of this forum. There are some interesting issues to consider. One example would be this question. At Gurdwara we all recite Rag Karega Khalsa! at the end of Ardaas. Some in the Darshan Sahib have taken amrit, and others have not. But everyone recites this. Is this to say that all in the Darshan Sahib are among the panth who are khalsa? Or is the panth only the amritdhari? Are they true panth? Are we chanting in praise for them alone?

Beautiful questions Aad ji!
Or are we saying the "pure ones" will rise ? the ones with Naam in their heart. Accoridng to guru Nanak dev ji, if you have God in your heart then you are pure.
pure ones = khalsa, pure = khalis

Quote:

The thread is about flowing hair and turbans. The bestowing of 5 K's took place in 1699. So why are we discussing events of 1708 unless there is a need to deal with the question of who are the khalsa as a kind of connected debate. And if that is so, then it should go to another thread. Apologies for speaking at length about this.

Please let me also point out that Sikhs who keep hair do so with hair neatly tied and under their turbans. Sikhs with flowing hair is a jarring thought.

Haha, you just brought up an amzing point here!

How CAN you have flowing hair AND a turban that keeps them from flowing!

Archived_Member4 · #**273** (**permalink**) 27-Nov-2008, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BhagatSingh

EDIT: read post below, first! I forgot to submit it.
It wasn't in simple enough sense for you, before? Ok let us proceed then.
So what is the difference between A and B?
A = the Guru of Sikhs is going to change to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji
B = hukam of the previous guru
Question raised: Do we follow upcoming Guru or go back to the previous one?

B has not been mentioned in upcoming Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji!
Level of importance has declined.

Valid point.
But A does not HAVE to be in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Do you understand that? It is the nature of A. Don't read further if you do not understand what I am talking about here!!

When A was put out, B became less important because it was not found in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. You are giving A and B equal values but when A happens B becomes of less value/importance!

WRONG! read above.

Nope

Read my reply to Aad ji post just below.

NO it is not that simple. Is khalsa someone who is pure of heart or an amritdhari?
Khalsa could definitely be both, but let's look at a case where Khalsa isnt both.
Person x has not taken amrit but is what GGS would consider Khalsa.
Person y has taken amrit but is GGS would not consider Khalsa.

I am getting your point, don't worry.
Guru Gobind SIngh ji did not say he was guru. Am I correct? Yet we "moved on" to him. When Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was made guru it was time to "move on" to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

That is because you have not even considered the fact that maybe, just maybe Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is what we have to follow, and Khalsa was not given as much importance by GGS.
I am NOT saying agree with me!!

By thing I meant either person or object, no one is getting disrespected here, calm down. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji would be considered the new Guru since it was granted guruship by the old/previous one. I thought that would be obvious.

What's a thing?? Please clarify what you mean by thing. Since you bringing it up again.

When we say they are the same, we don't mean physically the same. WE mean their teaching are the same.

Ya so since he did not preserve the orders, we simply ignore them. Of course, we study them and they are of importance but were only of importance when they were given out and in the context they were given out.
Guru Gobind Singh ji was a man, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a book. There is a HUGE difference. GGS fought many wars, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji did not! Another HUGE difference. GGS could move on his own!!

If you mean the teachings then of course!! Another similarity:
GGS was revolutionary, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is GOING to be revolutionary!!!

To conclude you didn't consider the part you missed in the conclusion.... again, so no.
Anyone else want to make is clear for me? Please don't hesitate. I am not saying I am right and you are wrong, just trying to bring up confusing parts of our history.

Woooooooooowwwwwwwwww, I don't even know where to begininng here. I'm let someone else deal with your illogical posts.

BhagatSingh · #**274** (**permalink**) 27-Nov-2008, 15:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Singh

I'm let someone else deal with your illogical posts.

Don't call someone's post illogical just because you cannot see any logic in it. Read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and bring humility in your heart.

Archived_Member5 · #**275** (**permalink**) 30-Nov-2008, 15:14 PM

Whilst young Sikhs in an attempt to integrate into what is a diverse and multi cultural populations have shed their traditional armour of what is a distinctive Godly appearance, as they age and grow older they invariably return to the distinctive appearance of Sardar that Punjabis are so proud of and are lent an austere God like demeanour with the donning. Such outwards mantles are not gotten easily, or are for the lacking in courage and independence of thought. Sheep like mentality, motivates the mob mostly towards conforming to any given standard mostly dictated by the highly dubious and questionable ethics of a volific media.

Shall we in defence our the Sikh faith of Warlords and Saintly men say it is only the highly honourable and courageous Lionhearts able to go against market trends and social fads and have the confidence to don this prestigious look. Maybe all that will remain is a league of the most beautiful devoutest, wise Sikh Sardars in full regalia carrying the faith and religion for lesser followers and adherents of Sikhism.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/14395-sikh-without-his-flowing-hair-turban.html
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=14395

Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh ....

pk70 · #**276** (**permalink**) 01-Dec-2008, 00:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeetijohal

, as they age and grow older they invariably return to the distinctive appearance of Sardar that Punjabis are so proud of and are lent an austere

Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh ....

jeetijohal ji
A humble request, please do not limit Sikh Sardari to Punjabis only, it is for all Sikhs( if they keep appearance of a Sikh Sardar) regardless the place they live

Archived_Member5 · #**277** (**permalink**) 01-Dec-2008, 00:25 AM

PK70, The Punjab is the Motherland of all Sikhs regardless of where in the world they dwell and abide. It is not a matter of contention but of honouring the homeland.

lionprinceuk · #**278** (**permalink**) 01-Dec-2008, 00:42 AM

hmm ok this in reply to an earlier post iu can;t find

:
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=14395

maybe it is in the tat khalsa neo-seeq bible?

if there is something in Sri Dasam Granth or Sri Sarbloh Granth, or even rehitnameh, then the gurdwaray are surely not even using these banis and texts to justify using lines of them.

lionprinceuk · #**279** (**permalink**) 01-Dec-2008, 02:04 AM

ok, and for khalsa all of Adi Guru Granth, dasam granth and sarbloh granth is guru, they r also seen as guru when amrit is taken