Judging

[carolineislands]

Let me start by saying that I am new and have only been reading SGGS and learning about Sikhi for about a year. So, forgive me if any of my words are offensive. But there is something I have been seeing so much of in these forums that deeply disturbs me. And that is JUDGING.

Pardon me for saying this, but so much of what I hear from Sikhs does not line up with what I read from Guru Nanak. On the one hand I read the SGGS and stories of Guru Nanak's life and I find acceptance of all, all persons have equal value, all religions belong to God, no one is high or low. No distinctions, no rules or judgments about who is right and who is wrong and who is Sikh and who is not and who is Amritdhara and who is not and who has a right to call themselves Sikh and who does not and who really understands Naam and who doesn't and this and that and this and that.

To tell the truth my friends, I'm pretty disgusted. Is Sikhi the religion that sprang up out the of message of Guru Nanak ji or isn't it? Is it a competition to see who is really a Sikh and who isn't? What is Sikh anyway? Who has the right to say what human being can impart Naam? Who has the right to say whether another person is a Sikh or not? Who has the right to say who is high and who is low?

I know a lot of posts that judge are quick to qualify themselves by adding some sort of comment like, "Of course everyone has a right to live how they choose." and then the post goes on to judge that person as though that little disclaimer made it right. Then they go on to declare who does and does not have a right to call themselves this or that or consider themselves this or that. It's heartbreaking -- it really is!

Now I'm judging, of course. And I'm ranting a bit as well. But I really need to talk about this. I am a new Sikh and there are a lot more new Sikhs coming into the community, as well as more and more to come. And it didn't really take me long to realize that I should be careful about how much time I spend reading the posts here because so much of the judging hinders my spiritual development. Several times I have restricted myself from this board in order to focus on the SGGS and the loving message of my Guru because of all the legalism and sectarianism that seems to be going on in the community. And most of it comes from people who have been Sikhs a while, and are even Khalsa! Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not. Is that supposed to make new Sikhs want to be Khalsa? Because it only makes me want to take more time to come to that place just to make sure I don't have that attitude when I do.

What is going on? Didn't Guru Nanak make it his life's mission to spread a word of unity and equality and do away with legalism? I fell in love with this message thinking it was something called Sikhism, then I go to Sikh forums and find, what?
Legalism, inequality, judging, sectarianism. This rule and that rule, who can be this because they did that, who can call themselves that because they believe this.

Now, I know some of you will get angry at me and I am sorry for that. But it seems to me that many Sikhs have turned Sikhi into the very thing that Guru Nanak lived his life to do away with.

And honestly, it disheartens me. What is Sikhi -- a bunch of rules and uniforms and people setting themselves up in a position to decide who has naam and who is a real Sikh and this and that by how rigidly they follow the rulebook? Because that seems to me to be in deep conflict with the message of Guru Nanak.

Pardon my presumptuousness. I know I am a new Sikh and have no right to say these things. But I really need to say what I see and hopefully address some of these issues.

Thanks for your patience and understanding and my apologies to any whom I might have offended. I am speaking from the heart and would like to know your heartfelt thoughts as well.

 

[spnadmin]

If anyone tries anything with you carolineislands ji, I will beat them up:whisling:

Let me start by saying that I am new and have only been reading SGGS and learning about Sikhi for about a year. So, forgive me if any of my words are offensive. But there is something I have been seeing so much of in these forums that deeply disturbs me. And that is JUDGING.

Pardon me for saying this, but so much of what I hear from Sikhs does not line up with what I read from Guru Nanak. On the one hand I read the SGGS and stories of Guru Nanak's life and I find acceptance of all, all persons have equal value, all religions belong to God, no one is high or low. No distinctions, no rules or judgments about who is right and who is wrong and who is Sikh

Nanak's words are the message to the world, the uplifting and revolutionary message, that attracted you in the first place. Stay close to your intuitions.

and who is not and who is Amritdhara and who is not and who has a right to call themselves Sikh and who does not and who really understands Naam and who doesn't and this and that and this and that. The question, Who is a Sikh? can be debated from many perspectives. Intellectually this debate is very interesting. In practice, in the real world, Sikhs are more often than not puzzled initially that you even know about Sikhism. How did you find out? is the first question. Genuine and respectful curiosity. The second response is to give you some very simplistic information -- stuff you already know -- e.g., Sikh means learner or Sikh means seeker. This is a precious gift if you think about it. It is a Sikh's way of confirming your interest as in "let me move you on this path in the little way that I can. And without being too intrusive or rude" The next steps are more interesting and some of the interactions can be hilarious. At this point some cultural confusion can enter the picture. Final analysis, deep deep within the Sikh psyche is this: You are here among us. We may not reject you for any reason other than the grossest infamy. We will answer any question according to our understanding because of our love for our Guru. "We are proud of You (Guru)" And by the way, did you eat anything yet in the langar hall? Take all of this forum talk with a grain of salt.

To tell the truth my friends, I'm pretty disgusted. Is Sikhi the religion that sprang up out the of message of Guru Nanak ji or isn't it? Is it a competition to see who is really a Sikh and who isn't? What is Sikh anyway? Who has the right to say what human being can impart Naam? Who has the right to say whether another person is a Sikh or not? Who has the right to say who is high and who is low?

Think of all the members who have not posted a word. They may be thinking otherwise and have decided that the conversation is futile, not the questions.

I know a lot of posts that judge are quick to qualify themselves by adding some sort of comment like, "Of course everyone has a right to live how they choose." and then the post goes on to judge that person as though that little disclaimer made it right. Then they go on to declare who does and does not have a right to call themselves this or that or consider themselves this or that. It's heartbreaking -- it really is!

Now I'm judging, of course. And I'm ranting a bit as well. But I really need to talk about this. I am a new Sikh and there are a lot more new Sikhs coming into the community, as well as more and more to come. And it didn't really take me long to realize that I should be careful about how much time I spend reading the posts here because so much of the judging hinders my spiritual development. Several times I have restricted myself from this board in order to focus on the SGGS and the loving message of my Guru because of all the legalism and sectarianism that seems to be going on in the community. And most of it comes from people who have been Sikhs a while, and are even Khalsa! Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not. Is that supposed to make new Sikhs want to be Khalsa? Because it only makes me want to take more time to come to that place just to make sure I don't have that attitude when I do.

In part there are cultural reasons for this. Believe me, I found out, Patience and Compassion run deeper than judgment.

What is going on? Didn't Guru Nanak make it his life's mission to spread a word of unity and equality and do away with legalism? I fell in love with this message thinking it was something called Sikhism, then I go to Sikh forums and find, what?
Legalism, inequality, judging, sectarianism. This rule and that rule, who can be this because they did that, who can call themselves that because they believe this.

Now, I know some of you will get angry at me and I am sorry for that. But it seems to me that many Sikhs have turned Sikhi into the very thing that Guru Nanak lived his life to do away with.

And honestly, it disheartens me. What is Sikhi -- a bunch of rules and uniforms and people setting themselves up in a position to decide who has naam and who is a real Sikh and this and that by how rigidly they follow the rulebook? Because that seems to me to be in deep conflict with the message of Guru Nanak.

Pardon my presumptuousness. I know I am a new Sikh and have no right to say these things. But I really need to say what I see and hopefully address some of these issues.

Thanks for your patience and understanding and my apologies to any whom I might have offended. I am speaking from the heart and would like to know your heartfelt thoughts as well.

Now you are asking heartfelt questions, logical questions, and questions having practical value. You are not describing any dilemma that I have not myself asked myself 1,000 times. What Am I Doing? The flip attitudes, sarcasm, antagonisms, narrow views, unwillingness to converse in a dialog of partners, extremism, fault finding, etc. Part of the answer is "human nature" -- and the fact that this is an Internet forum. Some of the things that are said are said because people take cover of anonymity and lack of accountability on an Intenet forum-- any forum including forums about vitamins, horticulture or coding in Linux.

Another idea is that the extent of your experience with Sikhs in real time and space may be only a few months old. Many more first hand encounters will likewise over time paint a completely different picture.

Another part of my answer is: This is a forum with religion as content. Religion is something that defines the self. Challenge even the smallest matter, and someone gets offended. Take heart.

 

[Archived_Member1]

the first thing that comes to my mind is that we're all humans here, not Guru. we try our best according to our abilities. perhaps people who are more enlightened spend less time in online forums, so you come across poor moorakhs like me on SPN.

please do not judge the religion by it's followers.

you said:

And most of it comes from people who have been Sikhs a while, and are even Khalsa! Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not.

i find this interesting... because i get judgmental **** all the time from people because i try to follow maryada more strictly than some people. they just automatically assume i'm "uppity", before i open my mouth, and are rude or snobbish, or whatever. i've heard the same thing from many other amritdharis, especially women who wear dastaar... people assume that because we choose to follow our faith in a more orthodox way, we must be looking down at them. even if we don't say anything! they will twist our words to make it look as though we're making insults, even if that wasn't our intention. perhaps they do this to make themselves feel better about their chosen lifestyle.

no one here is better than anyone else. we don't even KNOW each other for the most part, so how can we even think to judge?

perhaps people who speak in ego will find a reason to insult someone, no matter how tenuous the logic.

 

[pk70]

[


Carolineisland ji

You have a very fine mind. You also have the light given by Guru Nanak ji, keep moving on your path, dont mind the mist.

 

[Archived_Member_19]

this is the question that no one will try to answer in a direct way

not even me

i have been harping for long... Sikhi and Sikhism are two different things. One is what all we know from SGGS and the way Gurus showed us and second is a structured religion.

Who calls himself sikh?

a person who is on the "sikhi" way or a person who follows the SIKHISM as defined by SGPC


religion as defined is a structured, community binding organization. Some call it opium of masses, i wouldn't go to those extremes.

Religion provided sense of belonging and inclusivity. The rituals dim down the curious and seeking mind. Religion provides followers the cause and effect logic to give comfort feeling, "if i am doing this, i must be right"



here's my parting shot, something to chew upon

"having no religion does not make a person atheist."

 

[carolineislands]

I had written a long message but the internet ate it so I will have to just say that I am very touched by all your replies. I was feeling sort of bad about being so negative and came back and found all these understanding, compassionate, encouraging words and I ... well, I'm humbled by your kindness.

I don't know if I'll ever be a good Sikh but I know I'll be in good company.

 

[carolineislands]

[


Carolineisland ji

You have a very fine mind. You also have the light given by Guru Nanak ji, keep moving on your path, dont mind the mist.

:8- thank you...

 

[carolineislands]

here's my parting shot, something to chew upon

"having no religion does not make a person atheist."

Hey, you know what? Your RIGHT. Matter of fact, Guru Nanak didn't have a religion, did he? I read that he used to wear colors and symbols from two or three different religions and nobody could ever really say what he was. He said, "There is no Hindu, there is no Muslim..." I wonder, were he alive today, if he might add :shutup: uh... never mind.

 

[Astroboy]

I'm going to go and beat an egg. After that I have to do laundry. I was reading the Indian words and meanings - came across the meaning of Dhobi - laundry taken to a river and beaten into submission on a rock. I've often called SPN a platform of Universal Emotion. This is where emotions dance to estacy level - revolving so fast that the effects are - the readers are whipped into refinement. Once you are so fine like powder, you become pure - the dust of their feet - nothing can harm you. Kabeer goes two steps further by saying becoming dust isn't enough :

Surinder Singh Matharoo - Kabir Rora Hoe Raho

kabeer rorhaa ho-ay rahu baat kaa taj man kaa abhimaan.
Kabeer, let yourself be a pebble on the path; abandon your egotistical pride.

aisaa ko-ee daas ho-ay taahi milai bhagvaan. ||146||
Such a humble slave shall meet the Lord God. ||146||

kabeer rorhaa hoo-aa ta ki-aa bha-i-aa panthee ka-o dukh day-ay.
Kabeer, what good would it be, to be a pebble? It would only hurt the traveller on the path.

aisaa tayraa daas hai ji-o Dharnee meh khayh. ||147||
Your slave, O Lord, is like the dust of the earth. ||147||

kabeer khayh hoo-ee ta-o ki-aa bha-i-aa ja-o ud laagai ang.
Kabeer, what then, if one could become dust? It is blown up by the wind, and sticks to the body.

har jan aisaa chaahee-ai ji-o paanee sarbang. ||148||
The humble servant of the Lord should be like water, which cleans everything. ||148||

kabeer paanee hoo-aa ta ki-aa bha-i-aa seeraa taataa ho-ay.
Kabeer, what then, if one could become water? It becomes cold, then hot.

har jan aisaa chaahee-ai jaisaa har hee ho-ay. ||149||
The humble servant of the Lord should be just like the Lord. ||149||

 

[Harjas Kaur Khalsa]

Let me start by saying that I am new and have only been reading SGGS and learning about Sikhi for about a year. So, forgive me if any of my words are offensive. But there is something I have been seeing so much of in these forums that deeply disturbs me. And that is JUDGING.

Pardon me for saying this, but so much of what I hear from Sikhs does not line up with what I read from Guru Nanak. On the one hand I read the SGGS and stories of Guru Nanak's life and I find acceptance of all, all persons have equal value, all religions belong to God, no one is high or low. No distinctions, no rules or judgments about who is right and who is wrong and who is Sikh and who is not and who is Amritdhara and who is not and who has a right to call themselves Sikh and who does not and who really understands Naam and who doesn't and this and that and this and that.

To tell the truth my friends, I'm pretty disgusted. Is Sikhi the religion that sprang up out the of message of Guru Nanak ji or isn't it? Is it a competition to see who is really a Sikh and who isn't? What is Sikh anyway? Who has the right to say what human being can impart Naam? Who has the right to say whether another person is a Sikh or not? Who has the right to say who is high and who is low?

You know panji, bibek is a process of discrimination by which we distinguish between things. I know you are talking about my posts. Panji, your upset about "judging." But posts where I have objected to someone calling themself a Sikh had to do with someone excommunicated, Kala Afghana, with Naamdharies and their dedhari pakhandi guru Jagjit Singh Naamdhari.

I never said that you or anyone else was not a Sikh...except these people. For very good reason... They aren't Sikhs.

You know, I don't care how many videos people like Guruka Singh Khalsa make, and this isn't only my opinion, but those people aren't going to be accepted no matter how much you may tear us apart personally as being unloving. First of all, I didn't exclude them. I acknowledge that they have been excluded. You know, if this was an interfaith forum I could understand your rant. But panji, it's a SIKH forum. And no apostate group is going to get legitimacy if 99.9% of all the posters agreed with you.

Just because I say they are not accepted, how am I judging? I do not decide these things. As a Sikh, I only accept them, because I accept the wisdom of Guru Panth as point of faith.

I know a lot of posts that judge are quick to qualify themselves by adding some sort of comment like, "Of course everyone has a right to live how they choose." and then the post goes on to judge that person as though that little disclaimer made it right. Then they go on to declare who does and does not have a right to call themselves this or that or consider themselves this or that. It's heartbreaking -- it really is!

How are my posts quick to judge when Akal Takht has already decided these matters? This is not my judgment panji. Everyone does have a right to choose. But no Sikh can override Gurbani, Panj Piare, or Akal Takht Sahib Ji Hukamnama. You realize in 1978 one of these dedhari gurus ordered the attack on 60 Gursikhs killing 13 of them? Why would anybody question the social boycott of such sects? Why is this heartbreaking? They are under social boycott for a reason. I just happen to accept the wisdom of the reason. I am not personally rejecting anyone. And anyone who comes to Panj Piare and Sikh sangat for forgiveness will be forgiven.

Panji, I have no right to declare a social boycott. I have no right to make or alter the accepted Panthic definition of who is a Sikh. Why is it heartbreaking to you when you don't even understand what a Panthic opinion is or the authority of Guru Khalsa Panth and say things like:

Are the Panj Piare human beings? Do they instruct you not to take any as savior other than the Gurus? How, then, can you say they ARE Guru? Doesn't that mean you are taking them as savior, exactly as they instructed you not to?

Interesting, that the very Panj Piare that instruct you not to think of anyone except the Gurus as your savior are now being presented as the Guru. Wouldn't that be thinking of them as your savior?

For me the point of the OP is to be careful not to let legalism overtake us. Like bureauocracy, when the rule becomes more important that the purpose for which it was instituted, we have strayed off the path.


I am not questioning the legitimacy of the panj piare, I am questioning what sounded to me like an implication of their deity. That's how I understand it. Not that they were transformed to deities or Guru.

Interesting. Intermediaries. Like Sikh priests passing out the body of Christ. Wow. There are so many different philosophies the Sikh community. Thank you for your explanation.

Panji, give me a break. I stayed up all night, without eating to write out answers to peoples questions. Not because I'm uppity, but because there isn't enough Gursikhi parchaar. A lot of people don't have the information of what Sikhism even believs before they make themselves a teacher. That's why the opinions of an excommunicated scholar, a boycotted sect, and a video of a yoga teacher who doesn't lend one single pauri of Gurbani to support his assertion that Naam is unique to everybody and means whatever you want it to. And that's why I stayed up all night trying to answer everybody's objections. I mean, Sikhism is a RELIGION. It HAS RULES. And I didn't invent them. I only accept them. I'm sorry that I disgust you.

Suppose someone went to a mainstream Christian Church and said, "Hey, you gotta accept me! You gotta be kind to me! You gotta be open-minded because I'm a Christian too! I don't believe in Jesus. I don't believe in the Virgin Birth. I don't believe in the son of God. I don't believe in heaven or hell. I don't believe in the disciples or the Bible. I don't believe in the crucifixion OR the resurrection. But you gotta accept me as a Christian, or I'll rant about how you disgust me."

Doesn't every religion have a right to identity and self-definition? What if you went to the Jews and said, "Hey, you orthodox guys have it all wrong! When you keep those beards and earlocks and black hats its because of PRIDE! And you disgust me. Who says I can't cut mine off and still be an orthodox Jew? Who are you to tell me anything? I'm telling you, your orthodoxy is legalism! It's unspiritual! It's against the Bible that I read for the last year and you're all heartbreaking."

Wouldn't that just about be the most arrogant approach anyone could have to orthodox Jews who have been through so much just to be here today preserving and cherishing that identity? Why would you be bent out of shape because rejecting orthodoxy, the orthodox don't accept you?

Panji, you have unrealistic expectations. Just listen to the intolerance in what your saying.

You aren't talking to excommunicated, or boycotted. You aren't talking to people ostracized for murdering Sikhs or making themselves Guru. Your talking to someone with an orthodox opinion that doesn't conform to your own.

Panji, I'm a convert too. And I have not been walking this path that long either. I took amrit not quite 3 years ago. So the last thing I wanted to do was to make you unhappy or discourage your seeking. That's why I worked so hard to give you the best answer I could give. Is this post condemning me the best you could give?

Now I'm judging, of course. And I'm ranting a bit as well. But I really need to talk about this. I am a new Sikh and there are a lot more new Sikhs coming into the community, as well as more and more to come. And it didn't really take me long to realize that I should be careful about how much time I spend reading the posts here because so much of the judging hinders my spiritual development. Several times I have restricted myself from this board in order to focus on the SGGS and the loving message of my Guru because of all the legalism and sectarianism that seems to be going on in the community. And most of it comes from people who have been Sikhs a while, and are even Khalsa! Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not. Is that supposed to make new Sikhs want to be Khalsa? Because it only makes me want to take more time to come to that place just to make sure I don't have that attitude when I do.

Panji, the orthodox view is that Guru Nanak Dev Ji is the same jyot as Guru Gobind Singh Ji. That sant rass is the same as bir rass. That the Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is indisputedly Guru, but is the sant granth. Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji is the sipahi granth. The Rehat Maryada of the Khalsa is also the creation of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji. We are to be fearless adversaries to our enemies, as we are loving to those in need. The orthodox opinion doesn't see only love in Guru Ji's message, but a clear and unmistakeable identity, definite rules, definite sacrifice.

What is going on? Didn't Guru Nanak make it his life's mission to spread a word of unity and equality and do away with legalism? I fell in love with this message thinking it was something called Sikhism, then I go to Sikh forums and find, what? Legalism, inequality, judging, sectarianism. This rule and that rule, who can be this because they did that, who can call themselves that because they believe this. Now, I know some of you will get angry at me and I am sorry for that. But it seems to me that many Sikhs have turned Sikhi into the very thing that Guru Nanak lived his life to do away with.

And honestly, it disheartens me. What is Sikhi -- a bunch of rules and uniforms and people setting themselves up in a position to decide who has naam and who is a real Sikh and this and that by how rigidly they follow the rulebook? Because that seems to me to be in deep conflict with the message of Guru Nanak.

Panji, you keep confusing Guru Nanak Dev Ji with Jesus Christ and his conflicts with the legalism of orthodox Judaism. The same Guru Gobind Singh Ji who gave us these rules, this uniform and separate identity as Khalsa. Guruji didn't spend his life trying to do away with the Khalsa order He called His very own form. This is the Gurmat Gursikh faith. There is no conflict with the message of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, because Guru Nanak Dev Ji is still with us today in the Khalsa Panth and Panj Piare and Shabad Guru Ji Maharaaj.

Pardon my presumptuousness. I know I am a new Sikh and have no right to say these things. But I really need to say what I see and hopefully address some of these issues. Thanks for your patience and understanding and my apologies to any whom I might have offended. I am speaking from the heart and would like to know your heartfelt thoughts as well.

Panji, you have a right to ask any questions at all. Can't you see this is different from apostate beliefs being preached to confuse Sikh teaching? If you have belief in the 10 forms of Guru and the Shabad Guru and no belief in any other teaching (Im sorry, but as per Rehit Maryada) then you, and all the 3HO people are Sikhs and part of the Sikh Panth. I didn't decide this, it's Guruji's hukam, and I accept you as my sister.

What is Sikh anyway? Who has the right to say what human being can impart Naam? Who has the right to say whether another person is a Sikh or not? Who has the right to say who is high and who is low?

Guruji has that right. And no Sikh will violate the Guru's hukam.

because so much of the judging hinders my spiritual development.

You are called to become the fearless Khalsa. When bullets are flying from enemies who want to torture and kill you, your going to be worrying about small thing like this? Be strong! And look at how you too are in the maya of judgment along with the rest of us.

Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not. Is that supposed to make new Sikhs want to be Khalsa? Because it only makes me want to take more time to come to that place just to make sure I don't have that attitude when I do.

If I was uppity would I even give you the time of day? And yet here I am still trying to answer your objections. To become Khalsa is to accept an invitation for love affair with Guruji. If Guru is not your beloved one, and your not willing to have your head cut off and become shaheed. If you are wavering over attitudes, what will you do when bullets are flying? Guruji dares you to become Khalsa. He doesn't beg. You will walk this path with a sword in your hand, and instruction never to turn your back to the battle.

ਕਬੀਰ ਜਉ ਤੁਹਿ ਸਾਧ ਪਿਰੰਮ ਕੀ ਪਾਕੇ ਸੇਤੀ ਖੇਲੁ ॥
kabeer jo thuhi saadhh piranm kee paakae saethee khael ||
Kabeer, if you desire to play the game of love with the Lord, play it with someone with committment.​

ਕਾਚੀ ਸਰਸਉਂ ਪੇਲਿ ਕੈ ਨਾ ਖਲਿ ਭਈ ਨ ਤੇਲੁ ॥੨੪੦॥
kaachee sarasoun pael kai naa khal bhee n thael ||240||
Pressing the unripe mustard seeds produces neither oil nor flour. ||240||​

ਢੂੰਢਤ ਡੋਲਹਿ ਅੰਧ ਗਤਿ ਅਰੁ ਚੀਨਤ ਨਾਹੀ ਸੰਤ ॥
dtoondtath ddolehi andhh gath ar cheenath naahee santh ||
Searching, the mortal stumbles like a blind person, and does not recognize the Saint.
~SGGS Ji p. 1377​

click here---> YouTube - 1984 teri yaad​

 

[carolineislands]

You know panji, bibek is a process of discrimination by which we distinguish between things. I know you are talking about my posts.

Well, actually I wasn't talking about your posts. Some of the things you say are similar to many of the things I've been hearing, yes. But frankly, this is something that has been on my mind for a while and I'm sorry if you thought I was directing my post at you but I think if you ask around you'll see that some of us have touched on this before I even saw any of your posts.

Panji, your upset about "judging." But posts where I have objected to someone calling themself a Sikh had to do with someone excommunicated, Kala Afghana, with Naamdharies and their dedhari pakhandi guru Jagjit Singh Naamdhari.

Sorry -- I really don't know what you're talking about here...

You know, I don't care how many videos people like Guruka Singh Khalsa make, and this isn't only my opinion, but those people aren't going to be accepted no matter how much you may tear us apart personally as being unloving. First of all, I didn't exclude them. I acknowledge that they have been excluded. You know, if this was an interfaith forum I could understand your rant. But panji, it's a SIKH forum. And no apostate group is going to get legitimacy if 99.9% of all the posters agreed with you.

I'm sorry but I don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Just because I say they are not accepted, how am I judging? I do not decide these things. As a Sikh, I only accept them, because I accept the wisdom of Guru Panth as point of faith.

I was not aware that you had said they were not accepted.

How are my posts quick to judge when Akal Takht has already decided these matters? This is not my judgment panji. Everyone does have a right to choose. But no Sikh can override Gurbani, Panj Piare, or Akal Takht Sahib Ji Hukamnama. You realize in 1978 one of these dedhari gurus ordered the attack on 60 Gursikhs killing 13 of them? Why would anybody question the social boycott of such sects? Why is this heartbreaking? They are under social boycott for a reason. I just happen to accept the wisdom of the reason. I am not personally rejecting anyone. And anyone who comes to Panj Piare and Sikh sangat for forgiveness will be forgiven.

Panji, I have no right to declare a social boycott. I have no right to make or alter the accepted Panthic definition of who is a Sikh. Why is it heartbreaking to you when you don't even understand what a Panthic opinion is or the authority of Guru Khalsa Panth and say things like:

Again I apologize but I really don't know what you're talking about. As for the quotes of comments I made in another thread, please don't take things I've written out of context and try to insert them into another discussion. It's really not fair and doesn't make any sense.

Panji, give me a break. I stayed up all night, without eating to write out answers to peoples questions. Not because I'm uppity, but because there isn't enough Gursikhi parchaar. A lot of people don't have the information of what Sikhism even believs before they make themselves a teacher. That's why the opinions of an excommunicated scholar, a boycotted sect, and a video of a yoga teacher who doesn't lend one single pauri of Gurbani to support his assertion that Naam is unique to everybody and means whatever you want it to. And that's why I stayed up all night trying to answer everybody's objections. I mean, Sikhism is a RELIGION. It HAS RULES. And I didn't invent them. I only accept them. I'm sorry that I disgust you.

What is Gursikhi parchaar? I had not idea that Sikhism actually excommunicated people! And please -- you "disgust" me? Where in the WORLD did you get THAT? My dear sister -- please get some sleep!

Suppose someone went to a mainstream Christian Church and said, "Hey, you gotta accept me! You gotta be kind to me! You gotta be open-minded because I'm a Christian too! I don't believe in Jesus. I don't believe in the Virgin Birth. I don't believe in the son of God. I don't believe in heaven or hell. I don't believe in the disciples or the Bible. I don't believe in the crucifixion OR the resurrection. But you gotta accept me as a Christian, or I'll rant about how you disgust me."

Well to tell the truth, if I expected Sikhi to be the same as Christianity I'd probably just have gone ahead and stayed a Christian.

Panji, you have unrealistic expectations. Just listen to the intolerance in what your saying.

I knew full well I was being presumptuous and said so from the beginning. But I needed to hear some opinions and get a few answers. Mainly I wanted to know if I was alone with my thoughts and found out I was not. That helped a lot. But again, please pardon my presumptuousness.

Panji, I'm a convert too. And I have not been walking this path that long either. I took amrit not quite 3 years ago. So the last thing I wanted to do was to make you unhappy or discourage your seeking. That's why I worked so hard to give you the best answer I could give. Is this post condemning me the best you could give?

Actually, my post was not an answer to you at all. I posted my answers to you in the appropriate thread. This post was a general question for the whole forum and it sprang from many interactions I had before I ever even knew you existed. Again, pardon me for saying this but you've blown it way out of proportion and taken it on as an attack on you when the things you said had a very small part in my feelings at all. I admit that some of the things you say sound more like things I heard in my prior religion and I disagree with you on a lot of things, but trust me -- my post was not some underhanded, passive aggressive attack on you.

Panji, you keep confusing Guru Nanak Dev Ji with Jesus Christ and his conflicts with the legalism of orthodox Judaism.

I disagree. Although I do find Guru Nanak's message similar to that of Jesus Christ's message. I do not confuse them. And although I do find disturbing similarities between the orthodoxy I see in Sikhism and many other organized religions -- I do not confuse them.

Panji, you have a right to ask any questions at all.

Thank you.

Can't you see this is different from apostate beliefs being preached to confuse Sikh teaching?

Well I can see the difference now that you mention it but I truly have no idea what the connections is between this and my post. That's probably because you're mistakenly assuming I'm reacting to something you wrote that I haven't even read.

If you have belief in the 10 forms of Guru and the Shabad Guru and no belief in any other teaching (Im sorry, but as per Rehit Maryada)

No need to apologize. I don't put much stock in the Rehit Maryada anyhow.

then you, and all the 3HO people are Sikhs and part of the Sikh Panth. I didn't decide this, it's Guruji's hukam, and I accept you as my sister.

Thank you.

And look at how you too are in the maya of judgment along with the rest of us.

Yes I do realize that and had addressed that in the original post as well. I do apologize but I'm glad I chose to be open about my feelings because many of the replies I got her helped me a lot.

If I was uppity would I even give you the time of day?

Probably not, unless you were trying to put me in my place. Which you'd have a right to do.

If Guru is not your beloved one, and your not willing to have your head cut off and become shaheed.

Guru has been my beloved for many years -- long before I ever heard of Sikhi. And I think I took the first step to placing my head in his hands about 20 years ago when I prayed, "God, I am going on a quest to find the truth about You -- if you send me to Hell for it then I will go, because I'm willing to go to hell if that's the price I have to pay for seeking out the truth about you."

Guruji dares you to become Khalsa. He doesn't beg. You will walk this path with a sword in your hand, and instruction never to turn your back to the battle.

That is beautiful but it's not my experience with my True Guru.

ਢੂੰਢਤ ਡੋਲਹਿ ਅੰਧ ਗਤਿ ਅਰੁ ਚੀਨਤ ਨਾਹੀ ਸੰਤ ॥
dtoondtath ddolehi andhh gath ar cheenath naahee santh ||
Searching, the mortal stumbles like a blind person, and does not recognize the Saint.
~SGGS Ji p. 1377​

So true.

My sister, I am so sorry you took my post as a rebuttal to you personally. Obviously, it was not since I was not even aware of some of the things you said. So much so that I was quite confused by some of your references. Yes, we disagree on several points and seem to have different philosophies about some things. I think that is because God chooses how he will reveal himself to each person according to his plan. You don't have to believe the same way I do and I don't have to believe the same way you do. I am a Sikh for reasons that you may not even be aware of. I believe there are a lot of Sikhs in this world that have never heard of Sikhi. But that is just me.

And I guess I can believe any way I feel like believing since I'm not amritdari I can't be excommunicated anyhow.

Hope you get some sleep. And thank you for your commitment and devotion to Sikhism and Sikhs.

 

[S|kH]

Panji, the orthodox view is that Guru Nanak Dev Ji is the same jyot as Guru Gobind Singh Ji. That sant rass is the same as bir rass. That the Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is indisputedly Guru, but is the sant granth. Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji is the sipahi granth. The Rehat Maryada of the Khalsa is also the creation of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji. We are to be fearless adversaries to our enemies, as we are loving to those in need. The orthodox opinion doesn't see only love in Guru Ji's message, but a clear and unmistakeable identity, definite rules, definite sacrifice.

Panji, you keep confusing Guru Nanak Dev Ji with Jesus Christ and his conflicts with the legalism of orthodox Judaism. The same Guru Gobind Singh Ji who gave us these rules, this uniform and separate identity as Khalsa. Guruji didn't spend his life trying to do away with the Khalsa order He called His very own form. This is the Gurmat Gursikh faith. There is no conflict with the message of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, because Guru Nanak Dev Ji is still with us today in the Khalsa Panth and Panj Piare and Shabad Guru Ji Maharaaj.

First, I want to say that what you treat as empirical fact in the above paragraphs, is not fact and relies heavily on interpretation. If you truly believe there is no contradiction in the message that Guru Nanak initially sent out, and the message of Khalsa Panth that Guru Gobind gave us then you have been reading a horrible translation. There is a very obvious leap in flow from Guru Nanak to the Khalsa Panth that HAVE to be filled by translations, interpretations, and rehits. Maybe you have found comfort in the ideology of the Panth that was initially taught to you, but you must realize that for many new Sikhs (young kids, and converts) there is a big question of ... what entitles Guru Nanak's message, and what entitles the Khalsa. Just the fact that this question is being asked by the global diaspora must show you that the connection isn't as empirical fact as you are treating it to be. Matter of fact, the Akhal Takht disagrees with you as it clearly defines a Sikh, and then a Khalsa as separate but related identities.

I'm not saying I have the answer, or that there is absolutely a contradiction between the messages. All I'm saying is, if most people in the global diaspora are asking the same question ... it must be relevant. If you think that question is useless, your obviously looking at skewed data or making a biased opinion. Most of the time when asked the relation amongst Sikhs and Khalsa people have to connect the two with their own words rather than words of the Guru. I can not use Guru Nanak's quotes to fulfill the definition that Guru Gobind laid out for the Khalsa. I have to use an INTERPRETATION that Guru Nanak's message laid the foundation for the eventual realization of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind. That is a big difference from FACT.

Panji, you have a right to ask any questions at all. Can't you see this is different from apostate beliefs being preached to confuse Sikh teaching? If you have belief in the 10 forms of Guru and the Shabad Guru and no belief in any other teaching (Im sorry, but as per Rehit Maryada) then you, and all the 3HO people are Sikhs and part of the Sikh Panth. I didn't decide this, it's Guruji's hukam, and I accept you as my sister.

Guruji has that right. And no Sikh will violate the Guru's hukam.

You often quote the Rehit Maryada as the final order or be-all, and then claim it's Guru's hukam. Be careful, the Guru did not pen the rehit, his followers did.

"The All India Sikh Mission Board accorded their acceptance to the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee's Conduct and Conventions Sub-Committee's draft of conduct and conventions by their resolution no.1 of 1st August 1936 and the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, by their resolution No.14 of 12th October, 1936. The S.G.P.C.'s Advisory Committee on Religious Matters again considered the draft in its meeting on 7th January, 1945 and made recommendations for certain additions to and deletions from it. The undermentioned gentlemen were present at this meeting of the Advisory Committee.
1 Singh Sahib Jathedar Mohan Singh, Jathedar Sri Akal Takhat;
2 Bhai Sahib Bhai Achhar Singh, Head Granthi, Sri Darbar Sahib, Amritsar;
3 Prof. Teja Singh M.A., Khalsa College, Amritsar;
4 Prof. Ganga Singh, Principal, Shahid Sikh Missionary College;
5 Giani Lal Singh, Professor, Sikh Missionary College, Amritsar;
6 Prof. Sher Singh M.Sc., Government College, Ludhiana;
7 Bawa Prem Singh of Hoti;
8 Giani Badal Singh, Incharge, Sikh Mission, Hapur.
The additions and deletions as per the Advisory Committee's recommendations received the S.G.P.C.'s acceptance by its resolution No. 97 passed at its meeting held on 3rd Feb.,1945."

I don't see any of the names of the Guru's listed in the above individuals? How is this Guru's Hukam? Wasn't it this same rehit that initially did not ban adultery, but only "Marrying muslim women" and the later changed the taboo. History gets re-written. (Can someone actually check up on this for me, I forget if I had just heard this or it's actual fact)

Think about it ... There were non-Sikh poets in the SGGS that the Gurus either took as their true followers, or were even used as inspiration for the Guru's (Bhagat Kabir) that did not believe in ONLY the things the Rehit Maryada has you follow to claim to be a Sikh. Yet, any of those poets would be considered Sikhs by the Gurus (besides, they quoted passages from them to use in a book that was eventually to be revered as the next Guru) ...

You are called to become the fearless Khalsa. When bullets are flying from enemies who want to torture and kill you, your going to be worrying about small thing like this? Be strong! And look at how you too are in the maya of judgment along with the rest of us.

If I was uppity would I even give you the time of day? And yet here I am still trying to answer your objections. To become Khalsa is to accept an invitation for love affair with Guruji. If Guru is not your beloved one, and your not willing to have your head cut off and become shaheed. If you are wavering over attitudes, what will you do when bullets are flying? Guruji dares you to become Khalsa. He doesn't beg. You will walk this path with a sword in your hand, and instruction never to turn your back to the battle.

I'm sorry to hear this. You must live a pretty intense life if every situation of yours can be answered by "What would I do in the event when bullets are flying?"..
I've never had bullets fly passed me ... seems kinda scary.


Directly from Sikhism.com

"Why are there so many different versions of the Rehat Maryada?

Guru Gobind Singh Ji verbally explained the Rehat Maryada on Baisakhi Day of 1699, when the Khalsa was initially founded. We do not have a complete set of systematically written directions regarding the Rehat Maryada from him. Of course, many Sikhs, some contemporaries of the Guru and others descendent of those who attended the Guru, have written their observations and instructions regarding the conduct to be practiced by the Khalsa. When these writings are compared, they contradict each other (both directly and by omission). In a few cases, the instructions go against the principles of Gurmat (permanently recorded and authenticated Gurbani in Sri Guru Granth Sahib). Sikh scholars, therefore, realized that some sections of the Rehat Namas were not written by the persons whose names are associated with those writings. They were modified later on.

Hence, when the Rehat was explained to new members of the Khalsa during later Amrit ceremonies, changes were unintentionally made to the spoken instructions originally given by Guru Gobind Singh Ji. A popular school exercise demonstrates that even if one were to whisper a sentence from person to person within a single classroom, by the time the message reaches the last person, it is completely changed from the original. In the specific case of the Rehat Maryada, each new Amritdhari had to learn and repeat not just a sentence, but a philosophy and a way of life. This easily resulted in people creating their own interpretations of the message, even when attempts were made not to do so. One can only imagine the changes which took place when some people tried to create a Maryada "better and holier" than the one practiced by other Sikhs."

 

[S|kH]

This thread begs me to ask the following question :

If we can not judge a religion by its followers, what tool of measurement is appropriate to judge or analyze a religion by?

There are those that are meant to be kept on paper, because when followed, they falter greatly.

If we didn't analyze and judge Communism by it's followers ...

 

[Randip Singh]

Let me start by saying that I am new and have only been reading SGGS and learning about Sikhi for about a year. So, forgive me if any of my words are offensive. But there is something I have been seeing so much of in these forums that deeply disturbs me. And that is JUDGING.
Pardon me for saying this, but so much of what I hear from Sikhs does not line up with what I read from Guru Nanak. On the one hand I read the SGGS and stories of Guru Nanak's life and I find acceptance of all, all persons have equal value, all religions belong to God, no one is high or low. No distinctions, no rules or judgments about who is right and who is wrong and who is Sikh and who is not and who is Amritdhara and who is not and who has a right to call themselves Sikh and who does not and who really understands Naam and who doesn't and this and that and this and that.
To tell the truth my friends, I'm pretty disgusted. Is Sikhi the religion that sprang up out the of message of Guru Nanak ji or isn't it? Is it a competition to see who is really a Sikh and who isn't? What is Sikh anyway? Who has the right to say what human being can impart Naam? Who has the right to say whether another person is a Sikh or not? Who has the right to say who is high and who is low?
I know a lot of posts that judge are quick to qualify themselves by adding some sort of comment like, "Of course everyone has a right to live how they choose." and then the post goes on to judge that person as though that little disclaimer made it right. Then they go on to declare who does and does not have a right to call themselves this or that or consider themselves this or that. It's heartbreaking -- it really is!
Now I'm judging, of course. And I'm ranting a bit as well. But I really need to talk about this. I am a new Sikh and there are a lot more new Sikhs coming into the community, as well as more and more to come. And it didn't really take me long to realize that I should be careful about how much time I spend reading the posts here because so much of the judging hinders my spiritual development. Several times I have restricted myself from this board in order to focus on the SGGS and the loving message of my Guru because of all the legalism and sectarianism that seems to be going on in the community. And most of it comes from people who have been Sikhs a while, and are even Khalsa! Matter of fact, pardon me for saying so but it seems like Khalsa are the most likely to be judgemental and uppity about their station and to speak down to and about those who are not. Is that supposed to make new Sikhs want to be Khalsa? Because it only makes me want to take more time to come to that place just to make sure I don't have that attitude when I do.
What is going on? Didn't Guru Nanak make it his life's mission to spread a word of unity and equality and do away with legalism? I fell in love with this message thinking it was something called Sikhism, then I go to Sikh forums and find, what?
Legalism, inequality, judging, sectarianism. This rule and that rule, who can be this because they did that, who can call themselves that because they believe this.
Now, I know some of you will get angry at me and I am sorry for that. But it seems to me that many Sikhs have turned Sikhi into the very thing that Guru Nanak lived his life to do away with.
And honestly, it disheartens me. What is Sikhi -- a bunch of rules and uniforms and people setting themselves up in a position to decide who has naam and who is a real Sikh and this and that by how rigidly they follow the rulebook? Because that seems to me to be in deep conflict with the message of Guru Nanak.
Pardon my presumptuousness. I know I am a new Sikh and have no right to say these things. But I really need to say what I see and hopefully address some of these issues.
Thanks for your patience and understanding and my apologies to any whom I might have offended. I am speaking from the heart and would like to know your heartfelt thoughts as well.

Great post. I've been reading Bani for years yet I have not the grasp of Sikhi you have displayed.
I think with any faiths over time man starts to make hierarchy. In Sikhism we have no Priests yet we have "Gyani's". In Sikhism we have no caste, yet marriage is arranged by Sikhs on basis of caste. In Sikhism no man is less than another yet an Amritdhari is seen as better than a Sehajhdari (slow adopter).
If one reads the history of Sikhism one can see how things like this have evolved. I think the message of Sikhism remains the same, and it is an eternal resonating Truth. Over time people change.
To my mind there have been some distinct phases in Sikhism. There are:

1) Period When Guru's were alive >>>>> message of Sikhism remained true.

2) Period of Bandha Bahadhur>>>>> some split amongst Sikhs as Bandha tries to introduce some Vashnavite ideas to Sikhism.

3) Misl Period>>>>> Communalism and Materialism becomes prevalent with Sikh Chieftans vieing with one another for power.

4) Maharaja Ranjit Singh period>>>>> Brahminism makes in roads into Sikhism, and Sikh message get distorted.

5) British Period>>>>>Struggle for Freedom galvanises Sikhs and some reforms occur which try to take Sikhism back to its original form. However, Sikhs are too fractured for these reforms to take effect, and splinter sects branch off eg Bhai Randhir Singh Jatha, Namdhari's etc etc.

6) Post British Period>>>>> Groups like AKJ, GNSSJ and others have taken Sikhism unwittingly to Vaishnavitic form, albeit with a turban and long hair. Message behind 5k's lost. Infact there is no agreement over 5k's. Sehajdhari's sidelined.

7) Present >>>>> Sikhism in flux and people through the internet can discuss Sikhism and make it what is was intended. This could be an enlightened period for Sikhism.

 

[pk70]

F





You often quote the Rehit Maryada as the final order or be-all, and then claim it's Guru's hukam. Be careful, the Guru did not pen the rehit, his followers did.

"The All India Sikh Mission Board accorded their acceptance to the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee's Conduct and Conventions Sub-Committee's draft of conduct and conventions by their resolution no.1 of 1st August 1936 and the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, by their resolution No.14 of 12th October, 1936. The S.G.P.C.'s Advisory Committee on Religious Matters again considered the draft in its meeting on 7th January, 1945 and made recommendations for certain additions to and deletions from it. The undermentioned gentlemen were present at this meeting of the Advisory Committee.
1 Singh Sahib Jathedar Mohan Singh, Jathedar Sri Akal Takhat;
2 Bhai Sahib Bhai Achhar Singh, Head Granthi, Sri Darbar Sahib, Amritsar;
3 Prof. Teja Singh M.A., Khalsa College, Amritsar;
4 Prof. Ganga Singh, Principal, Shahid Sikh Missionary College;
5 Giani Lal Singh, Professor, Sikh Missionary College, Amritsar;
6 Prof. Sher Singh M.Sc., Government College, Ludhiana;
7 Bawa Prem Singh of Hoti;
8 Giani Badal Singh, Incharge, Sikh Mission, Hapur.
The additions and deletions as per the Advisory Committee's recommendations received the S.G.P.C.'s acceptance by its resolution No. 97 passed at its meeting held on 3rd Feb.,1945."

I don't see any of the names of the Guru's listed in the above individuals? How is this Guru's Hukam? Wasn't it this same rehit that initially did not ban adultery, but only "Marrying muslim women" and the later changed the taboo. History gets re-written. (Can someone actually check up on this for me, I forget if I had just heard this or it's actual fact)

Think about it ... There were non-Sikh poets in the SGGS that the Gurus either took as their true followers, or were even used as inspiration for the Guru's (Bhagat Kabir) that did not believe in ONLY the things the Rehit Maryada has you follow to claim to be a Sikh. Yet, any of those poets would be considered Sikhs by the Gurus (besides, they quoted passages from them to use in a book that was eventually to be revered as the next Guru) ...




I'm sorry to hear this. You must live a pretty intense life if every situation of yours can be answered by "What would I do in the event when bullets are flying?"..
I've never had bullets fly passed me ... seems kinda scary.


Directly from Sikhism.com

Sikh ji
I really appreciate your logical questioning. Carolineislands just tried to share what was felt while reading contradictory opinions on this site as a new Sikh. I dont think that carolineislands's post really deserves any uncalled for commentry. Thanks.

 

[singhbj]

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh

ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ ਬਾਣੀ ਭਗਤਾ ਕੀ ॥
रागु गोंड बाणी भगता की ॥
Rāg gond baṇī bẖagṯā kī.
Raag Gond, The Word Of The Devotees.

ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ ਘਰੁ ੧
कबीर जी घरु १
Kabīr jī gẖar 1
Kabeer Jee, First House:

ੴ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥
ੴ सतिगुर प्रसादि ॥
Ik­oaʼnkār saṯgur parsāḏ.
One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The True Guru:

ਸੰਤੁ ਮਿਲੈ ਕਿਛੁ ਸੁਨੀਐ ਕਹੀਐ ॥
संतु मिलै किछु सुनीऐ कहीऐ ॥
Sanṯ milai kicẖẖ sunī­ai kahī­ai.
When you meet a Saint, talk to him and listen.

ਮਿਲੈ ਅਸੰਤੁ ਮਸਟਿ ਕਰਿ ਰਹੀਐ ॥੧॥
मिलै असंतु मसटि करि रहीऐ ॥१॥
Milai asanṯ masat kar rahī­ai. ||1||
Meeting with an unsaintly person, just remain silent. ||1||

ਬਾਬਾ ਬੋਲਨਾ ਕਿਆ ਕਹੀਐ ॥
बाबा बोलना किआ कहीऐ ॥
Bābā bolnā ki­ā kahī­ai.
O father, if I speak, what words should I utter?

ਜੈਸੇ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਰਵਿ ਰਹੀਐ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
जैसे राम नाम रवि रहीऐ ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
Jaisė rām nām rav rahī­ai. ||1|| rahā­o.
Speak such words, by which you may remain absorbed in the Name of the Lord. ||1||Pause||

ਸੰਤਨ ਸਿਉ ਬੋਲੇ ਉਪਕਾਰੀ ॥
संतन सिउ बोले उपकारी ॥
Sanṯan si­o bolė upkārī.
Speaking with the Saints, one becomes generous.

ਮੂਰਖ ਸਿਉ ਬੋਲੇ ਝਖ ਮਾਰੀ ॥੨॥
मूरख सिउ बोले झख मारी ॥२॥
Mūrakẖ si­o bolė jẖakẖ mārī. ||2||
To speak with a fool is to babble uselessly. ||2||

ਬੋਲਤ ਬੋਲਤ ਬਢਹਿ ਬਿਕਾਰਾ ॥
बोलत बोलत बढहि बिकारा ॥
Bolaṯ bolaṯ badẖeh bikārā.
By speaking and only speaking, corruption only increases.

ਬਿਨੁ ਬੋਲੇ ਕਿਆ ਕਰਹਿ ਬੀਚਾਰਾ ॥੩॥
बिनु बोले किआ करहि बीचारा ॥३॥
Bin bolė ki­ā karahi bīcẖārā. ||3||
If I do not speak, what can the poor wretch do? ||3||

ਕਹੁ ਕਬੀਰ ਛੂਛਾ ਘਟੁ ਬੋਲੈ ॥
कहु कबीर छूछा घटु बोलै ॥
Kaho Kabīr cẖẖūcẖẖā gẖat bolai.
Says Kabeer, the empty pitcher makes noise,

ਭਰਿਆ ਹੋਇ ਸੁ ਕਬਹੁ ਨ ਡੋਲੈ ॥੪॥੧॥
भरिआ होइ सु कबहु न डोलै ॥४॥१॥
Bẖari­ā ho­ė so kabahu na dolai. ||4||1||
but that which is full makes no sound. ||4||1||

Source: Sri Granth: Sri Guru Granth Sahib

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh

 

[Archived_Member1]

Sikh ji
I really appreciate your logical questioning. Carolineislands just tried to share what was felt while reading contradictory opinions on this site as a new Sikh. I dont think that carolineislands's post really deserves any uncalled for commentry. Thanks.

um, he wasn't responding to carolineislands, he was responding to Harjas Kaur Khalsa.

but i agree, she doesn't deserve that type of commentary.

 

[Astroboy]

I have to give credit to Harjas Kaur Khalsa for defining sikh principles in a way which is hard to express in words. Her talent has to be appreciated. She can also become a good human-rights spokeswoman. Jasleen Kaur is another star who can become a good defence lawyer:star:. We need people like them by ourside always. Everybody has weaknesses. We grow in each other's presence. I'm not being a judge just an observer.:ice:

 

[pk70]

um, he wasn't responding to carolineislands, he was responding to Harjas Kaur Khalsa.

but i agree, she doesn't deserve that type of commentary.

jasleen _ Kaur ji

I pointed out his views in context of Harjas Kaur Khalsa, I also thanked him for pointing out uncalled for commentry by her( his questioning in context of Harjas Kaur Khalsa). Sorry to know that you misunderstood the whole thing. I just wonder !

 

[Archived_Member1]

First, I want to say that what you treat as empirical fact in the above paragraphs, is not fact and relies heavily on interpretation. If you truly believe there is no contradiction in the message that Guru Nanak initially sent out, and the message of Khalsa Panth that Guru Gobind gave us then you have been reading a horrible translation. There is a very obvious leap in flow from Guru Nanak to the Khalsa Panth that HAVE to be filled by translations, interpretations, and rehits. Maybe you have found comfort in the ideology of the Panth that was initially taught to you, but you must realize that for many new Sikhs (young kids, and converts) there is a big question of ... what entitles Guru Nanak's message, and what entitles the Khalsa. Just the fact that this question is being asked by the global diaspora must show you that the connection isn't as empirical fact as you are treating it to be. Matter of fact, the Akhal Takht disagrees with you as it clearly defines a Sikh, and then a Khalsa as separate but related identities.

I'm not saying I have the answer, or that there is absolutely a contradiction between the messages.

um, just a note... Guru Nanak Dev ji and Guru Gobind Singh ji were the same Jyot. how is it even possible for them to contradict one another? both spoke the words as God mad them speak it. there can be no contradictions in Guru ji's words, no matter what form he was in when he spoke them.

You often quote the Rehit Maryada as the final order or be-all, and then claim it's Guru's hukam. Be careful, the Guru did not pen the rehit, his followers did.

I don't see any of the names of the Guru's listed in the above individuals? How is this Guru's Hukam? Wasn't it this same rehit that initially did not ban adultery, but only "Marrying muslim women" and the later changed the taboo. History gets re-written. (Can someone actually check up on this for me, I forget if I had just heard this or it's actual fact)

the original rehet were the instructions given by the Gurus to their followers. for example, Guru Nanak Dev ji told Bhai Mardana not to cut hair, to wake at amrit vela and do simran, and to do seva for travelling devotees of God.

every Guru gave instructions to his follwers, whether through their Bani or through individual conversation. these have been collected from SGGS, Sakhis, the writings of Bhai Gurdas ji and Bhai Nand Lal, even the 52 Hukamnama of Guru Gobind Singh ji ( which says not to commit adultry, by the way, as well as saying a Sikh should marry a Sikh. )

the compilation of all of this material into the Panthic Maryada took several years, many respected scholars, and is accepted by the vast majority of Sikhs as Law.

of course, you're free to follow or not follow as you choose.

Think about it ... There were non-Sikh poets in the SGGS that the Gurus either took as their true followers, or were even used as inspiration for the Guru's (Bhagat Kabir) that did not believe in ONLY the things the Rehit Maryada has you follow to claim to be a Sikh. Yet, any of those poets would be considered Sikhs by the Gurus (besides, they quoted passages from them to use in a book that was eventually to be revered as the next Guru) ...

it really bugs me when pepole say Guru ji was "inspired" by Kabir ji. Guru ji spoke the words as God put them in his mouth. read Kabir ji's writings that are NOT bani and you will see why Guru ji could not have been inspired by him. the bani of bhagats and bhatts was included because the words they spoke were in perfect harmony with Guru ji. God's words flowed from their pens and tongues.

I'm sorry to hear this. You must live a pretty intense life if every situation of yours can be answered by "What would I do in the event when bullets are flying?"..
I've never had bullets fly passed me ... seems kinda scary.

[/quote]

i think you took that statement WAY out of context.