- Status
Javanmard
Banned
- Feb 17, 2009
- 61
- 1
Who is "you guys"? Care to explain because as far as I can see I only represent myself. Unless of course you're unable to conceive that the individual transcends your tribal notion of identity which of course begs the question as to why you ever migrated to federal republic.
- Jul 14, 2007
- 4,576
- 1,609
"When two dogs fight over a bone, a third one carries it away." (Dutch proverb)
It is pointless to argue over trivial matters which are really off topic.
This thread will be removed if you guys don't settle down.
It is pointless to argue over trivial matters which are really off topic.
This thread will be removed if you guys don't settle down.
I made it clear earlier but you just don't get it, that is your problem since from the moment I tried to answer you question; . I don't feel to elaborate on any thing if you ask since I already hinted " who these guys are", one just needs a little brain-tip.
Here is another one, there is a saying in Punjabi, I am going to translate it
“Even if we tie a dog’s tail straigt for a decade, at untying ,still it remains bent” That is the truth applicable to 'you guys'. You start with being nice but eventually fall into the expected smelly dirt, in your case you are the champion in this context. You have just proved today" how was I wrong to see 'you guys' as better human beings than usually portrayed by others" Why? Look all your posts you have posted under the influence of your low class thinking about others, they are proof of what I am saying. I write again, "the ones who are frozen in old times will never see todays light"
Javanmarad,
A person with a name like yours can easily produce the headlines or the news from the Islamic papers from the Muslim countries condemning what you say is not Islamic. If they do not then it shows they condone it and it is part of Islam to behead women. Prove me wrong with the real proof not with your usual babble.
So the ball is in your court mate, otherwise as they say in Brazil, Voce nao vale porra nem uma.
Tejwant Singh
A person with a name like yours can easily produce the headlines or the news from the Islamic papers from the Muslim countries condemning what you say is not Islamic. If they do not then it shows they condone it and it is part of Islam to behead women. Prove me wrong with the real proof not with your usual babble.
So the ball is in your court mate, otherwise as they say in Brazil, Voce nao vale porra nem uma.
Tejwant Singh
But I didn't was for you own opinion on an issue which you continue to situate at the level of ethics.( Quote by javan mard)
or your English grammar is inexistent(quote javanmard)
Read your own first quote, obviously it is an example of your mastery over English BTW there are many instances like this in your posts, even the following one quote states the same truth. Always be aware of your own backward before pointing at others. When we type mistakes occur and a fine mind just follows the vital idea unlike you.
As for Islam give me an example of inequality regarding women given the fact that the Quran considers men and women to be equal before God.?(quote javanmard
You remained evasive about what I repeatedly asked you and u kept pressing your hypocritical stand in favor of women as per Holy Quran. Here is the truth, face it, there are other quotes (I have no time to go through all) that degrade woman
Sarah 1V
“11. Allah chargeth you(men) concerning(the prevision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of the two females, and if there be women more than two, then there is two third….
(What equality!)
24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those-captives- whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you….
What an inspiration for humans! I can imagine what kind of world it would be if it was followed through out all countries!
34 Men are in charge of women because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other and because they spend of their property (for the support of women…)
Oh No Please !
From” Glorious Quran by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall Page 74, note brackets used in all quotes are of the author who too boasts (except in black bold letters) about equality of women in Holy Quran ironically)
After reading above quotes, any fair mind can figure out how much Equality of women is given as per Holy Quran
or your English grammar is inexistent(quote javanmard)
Read your own first quote, obviously it is an example of your mastery over English BTW there are many instances like this in your posts, even the following one quote states the same truth. Always be aware of your own backward before pointing at others. When we type mistakes occur and a fine mind just follows the vital idea unlike you.
As for Islam give me an example of inequality regarding women given the fact that the Quran considers men and women to be equal before God.?(quote javanmard
You remained evasive about what I repeatedly asked you and u kept pressing your hypocritical stand in favor of women as per Holy Quran. Here is the truth, face it, there are other quotes (I have no time to go through all) that degrade woman
Sarah 1V
“11. Allah chargeth you(men) concerning(the prevision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of the two females, and if there be women more than two, then there is two third….
(What equality!)
24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you save those-captives- whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you….
What an inspiration for humans! I can imagine what kind of world it would be if it was followed through out all countries!
34 Men are in charge of women because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other and because they spend of their property (for the support of women…)
Oh No Please !
From” Glorious Quran by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall Page 74, note brackets used in all quotes are of the author who too boasts (except in black bold letters) about equality of women in Holy Quran ironically)
After reading above quotes, any fair mind can figure out how much Equality of women is given as per Holy Quran
Javanmard
Banned
- Feb 17, 2009
- 61
- 1
Oh Good God LOL
PK70 Islam does recognize that women and men are equal in the eyes of God and are equal in dignity, but it also recognizes the specificities that differentiate women from men. Given that women are physically weaker it is men's duty to take care of them. It is only in that context that this verse need to be understood.
As for inheritance it is true that women get half a man's share...because they receive their dowry later on which compensates for that. A man simply has more expenditures to make because he has to pay a dowry when he marries and of course provide his wife with financial stability. In fact to be very strict a woman is entitled to ask her husband for a salary if she does housework. And if she works outside of the home her husband is to compensate her as well. That is why you can't just quote the Quran alone you need the hadiths and the body of jurisprudence to understand the verses. That is why we have a clergy.
As for the slave girls, these are captives of war or born into slavery. The contract between a master and a slave shouldn't exceed 7 years and contrary to much propaganda made by Islamophobes, intercourse with a slave girl can only be done with her consent and a muta' marriage. If she becomes pregnant her child is born free and recognized as the master's child and she gets the status of ummul aulad which equates freedom. Again look at the hadiths and jurisprudence before quoting the Quran.
A woman who gets beaten or abused by her husband may ask for divorce.And a woman may refuse a marriage.
Sikhism allows slavery outside war time. The Prem Sumarg Granth says that Sikh parents may sell their children something that is impossible in Islam. Sikhism doesn't recognize divorce.So if a Sikh woman gets abused and beaten by her husband or his relatives she has to rely on secular law in order to escape that fate but from the point of view of religion she cannot divorce. There is not a single passage in Sikh scripture or the rahitname that enables a woman to refuse a marriage. What this means is that generations of Sikh women have been forced into marriages without having the power to say no and had to endure continual marital rape for centuries. Agreed this also happens in ignorant Muslim families but at least Islam forbids it. The punishment for someone who kills his daughter is that of tankhah whereas as someone who smokes or cuts his hair is a patit. In clear: smoking and cutting hair is considered a bigger offense in Sikhism than killing a baby girl or a woman. Sikhism doesn't state anything about rights of inheritance at all. And in practise Sikh women didn't inherit anything from their parents as since they got married they belonged to another family which also means that they're not considered as individuals at all. In fact the Akali Dal has been against women inheriting land so that the land could stay in the same family.Worse because of the ethics of pativrata a woman is de facto her husband's complete slave and she is asked to suffer in silence if she is ill treated.
Neo-Sikhism demands of women to deny their womanhood by adopting male dress like turban. That is to say that women are only equal in as much as they forget that they are women. In Islam women's femininity is to be cherished and respected and protected and that protection is the duty of men.
The other unrelated question is the following:
Given the fact that Sikhs believe the Prophet (pbuh) to be a fraud as per Bachitar Natak's passage on Mahadin, are they aware that this makes them traitors to the Islamic state and muharib (people in war with Islam)? So why do they abuse Islamic countries by staying in countries like Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf States when the laws of these countries would make it impossible for them to stay there?
The answer is that they have been able to do so by hiding these facts from their host states and are thus abusing their hosts ignorance of Sikh tenets. But that ignorance won't last for long. If these states find out what you really believe you will have to get kicked out. I wonder why nobody has informed these states about your real beliefs...
Deletion
PK70 Islam does recognize that women and men are equal in the eyes of God and are equal in dignity, but it also recognizes the specificities that differentiate women from men. Given that women are physically weaker it is men's duty to take care of them. It is only in that context that this verse need to be understood.
As for inheritance it is true that women get half a man's share...because they receive their dowry later on which compensates for that. A man simply has more expenditures to make because he has to pay a dowry when he marries and of course provide his wife with financial stability. In fact to be very strict a woman is entitled to ask her husband for a salary if she does housework. And if she works outside of the home her husband is to compensate her as well. That is why you can't just quote the Quran alone you need the hadiths and the body of jurisprudence to understand the verses. That is why we have a clergy.
As for the slave girls, these are captives of war or born into slavery. The contract between a master and a slave shouldn't exceed 7 years and contrary to much propaganda made by Islamophobes, intercourse with a slave girl can only be done with her consent and a muta' marriage. If she becomes pregnant her child is born free and recognized as the master's child and she gets the status of ummul aulad which equates freedom. Again look at the hadiths and jurisprudence before quoting the Quran.
A woman who gets beaten or abused by her husband may ask for divorce.And a woman may refuse a marriage.
Sikhism allows slavery outside war time. The Prem Sumarg Granth says that Sikh parents may sell their children something that is impossible in Islam. Sikhism doesn't recognize divorce.So if a Sikh woman gets abused and beaten by her husband or his relatives she has to rely on secular law in order to escape that fate but from the point of view of religion she cannot divorce. There is not a single passage in Sikh scripture or the rahitname that enables a woman to refuse a marriage. What this means is that generations of Sikh women have been forced into marriages without having the power to say no and had to endure continual marital rape for centuries. Agreed this also happens in ignorant Muslim families but at least Islam forbids it. The punishment for someone who kills his daughter is that of tankhah whereas as someone who smokes or cuts his hair is a patit. In clear: smoking and cutting hair is considered a bigger offense in Sikhism than killing a baby girl or a woman. Sikhism doesn't state anything about rights of inheritance at all. And in practise Sikh women didn't inherit anything from their parents as since they got married they belonged to another family which also means that they're not considered as individuals at all. In fact the Akali Dal has been against women inheriting land so that the land could stay in the same family.Worse because of the ethics of pativrata a woman is de facto her husband's complete slave and she is asked to suffer in silence if she is ill treated.
Neo-Sikhism demands of women to deny their womanhood by adopting male dress like turban. That is to say that women are only equal in as much as they forget that they are women. In Islam women's femininity is to be cherished and respected and protected and that protection is the duty of men.
The other unrelated question is the following:
Given the fact that Sikhs believe the Prophet (pbuh) to be a fraud as per Bachitar Natak's passage on Mahadin, are they aware that this makes them traitors to the Islamic state and muharib (people in war with Islam)? So why do they abuse Islamic countries by staying in countries like Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf States when the laws of these countries would make it impossible for them to stay there?
The answer is that they have been able to do so by hiding these facts from their host states and are thus abusing their hosts ignorance of Sikh tenets. But that ignorance won't last for long. If these states find out what you really believe you will have to get kicked out. I wonder why nobody has informed these states about your real beliefs...
Deletion
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh Good God LOL
PK70 Islam does recognize that women and men are equal in the eyes of God and are equal in dignity, but it also recognizes the specificities that differentiate women from men. Given that women are physically weaker it is men's duty to take care of them. It is only in that context that this verse need to be understood.
As for inheritance it is true that women get half a man's share...because they receive their dowry later on which compensates for that. A man simply has more expenditures to make because he has to pay a dowry when he marries and of course provide his wife with financial stability. In fact to be very strict a woman is entitled to ask her husband for a salary if she does housework. And if she works outside of the home her husband is to compensate her as well. That is why you can't just quote the Quran alone you need the hadiths and the body of jurisprudence to understand the verses. That is why we have a clergy.
As for the slave girls, these are captives of war or born into slavery. The contract between a master and a slave shouldn't exceed 7 years and contrary to much propaganda made by Islamophobes, intercourse with a slave girl can only be done with her consent and a muta' marriage. If she becomes pregnant her child is born free and recognized as the master's child and she gets the status of ummul aulad which equates freedom. Again look at the hadiths and jurisprudence before quoting the Quran.
A woman who gets beaten or abused by her husband may ask for divorce.And a woman may refuse a marriage.
Sikhism allows slavery outside war time. The Prem Sumarg Granth says that Sikh parents may sell their children something that is impossible in Islam. Sikhism doesn't recognize divorce.So if a Sikh woman gets abused and beaten by her husband or his relatives she has to rely on secular law in order to escape that fate but from the point of view of religion she cannot divorce. There is not a single passage in Sikh scripture or the rahitname that enables a woman to refuse a marriage. What this means is that generations of Sikh women have been forced into marriages without having the power to say no and had to endure continual marital rape for centuries. Agreed this also happens in ignorant Muslim families but at least Islam forbids it. The punishment for someone who kills his daughter is that of tankhah whereas as someone who smokes or cuts his hair is a patit. In clear: smoking and cutting hair is considered a bigger offense in Sikhism than killing a baby girl or a woman. Sikhism doesn't state anything about rights of inheritance at all. And in practise Sikh women didn't inherit anything from their parents as since they got married they belonged to another family which also means that they're not considered as individuals at all. In fact the Akali Dal has been against women inheriting land so that the land could stay in the same family.Worse because of the ethics of pativrata a woman is de facto her husband's complete slave and she is asked to suffer in silence if she is ill treated.
Neo-Sikhism demands of women to deny their womanhood by adopting male dress like turban. That is to say that women are only equal in as much as they forget that they are women. In Islam women's femininity is to be cherished and respected and protected and that protection is the duty of men.
The other unrelated question is the following:
Given the fact that Sikhs believe the Prophet (pbuh) to be a fraud as per Bachitar Natak's passage on Mahadin, are they aware that this makes them traitors to the Islamic state and muharib (people in war with Islam)? So why do they abuse Islamic countries by staying in countries like Pakistan, Iran and the Gulf States when the laws of these countries would make it impossible for them to stay there?
The answer is that they have been able to do so by hiding these facts from their host states and are thus abusing their hosts ignorance of Sikh tenets. But that ignorance won't last for long. If these states find out what you really believe you will have to get kicked out. I wonder why nobody has informed these states about your real beliefs...
Deletion
Deletion
In my last quote it was a Muslim who translated Holy Quran, and I didn't write much,
I wanted to prove SPN that you were fake, you helped me a lot with this post.
As usual, you have failed to defend your Holy Quran, you were supposed to explain it, I didn't hope it from a pseudo scholar like you. Now I unnderstand why you were evasive in quoting Holy Quran, I shouldn't have asked you as they say "do not play music before a buffalo "
I did, look what I got.
You are no scholar man, you are fake, filled with hatred towards other faiths. What you have written here is childish reaction, any fine mind would try to explain what was in question but you have proved that you are not that fine mind.Here a shallow personality under Id javanmard trying to impress others unsuccessfully. I feel sorry for you.:down:
deletions by aad0002
Last edited by a moderator:
javanard ji
Let's keep attacks on the grammar and spelling of all posters out of the discussion. No one has complete perfection as far as I can see. So far I have let a few of these unkind comments pass. You can make your point just as easily. I have just deleted the previous instance. Thanks much
Let's keep attacks on the grammar and spelling of all posters out of the discussion. No one has complete perfection as far as I can see. So far I have let a few of these unkind comments pass. You can make your point just as easily. I have just deleted the previous instance. Thanks much
Dear SPN'ers,
It is shocking to see so much bitterness all around. Is this how so called scholars talk in a congression? Is this how you represent your faith to a world-wide audeince? It is shameful to read so many of hateful messages being posted in the forum in last few days by so called self-professed scholars of sikh philosophy in particular and religion in general!
Friendly Warning: A scholar, who cannot appreciate the views of other "scholars" in a positive vein should not participate in SPN!! SPN is not for people who have no love & compassion for fellow human beings. SPN is not a place to vent your personal frustrations... Every issue has various perspectives. If you disagree, simply present your perspective and learn from different opinions rather than concertraing on settleing personal scores with members. Discussions should be to the point and all un-necessary trash talk, personal comments irralivant to the topic would be removed without notice. Please discuss The Topic not the Person (raising the Topic). Thank You.
Forum Leaders are advised to keep stern vigil on offenders of this very basic tenant of SPN and this includes everybody. No Trash Talk Would be Accetable at All! The freedom of speech at SPN is not to be abused!
All concerned are warned.
Thank You Again for Behaving like Scholars.
It is shocking to see so much bitterness all around. Is this how so called scholars talk in a congression? Is this how you represent your faith to a world-wide audeince? It is shameful to read so many of hateful messages being posted in the forum in last few days by so called self-professed scholars of sikh philosophy in particular and religion in general!
Friendly Warning: A scholar, who cannot appreciate the views of other "scholars" in a positive vein should not participate in SPN!! SPN is not for people who have no love & compassion for fellow human beings. SPN is not a place to vent your personal frustrations... Every issue has various perspectives. If you disagree, simply present your perspective and learn from different opinions rather than concertraing on settleing personal scores with members. Discussions should be to the point and all un-necessary trash talk, personal comments irralivant to the topic would be removed without notice. Please discuss The Topic not the Person (raising the Topic). Thank You.
Forum Leaders are advised to keep stern vigil on offenders of this very basic tenant of SPN and this includes everybody. No Trash Talk Would be Accetable at All! The freedom of speech at SPN is not to be abused!
All concerned are warned.
Thank You Again for Behaving like Scholars.
Forum members --
I am taking the previous two posts out of the thread to analyze them. The rhetoric is hot -- and not contributing to further development of the thread. After the mods take a look they may/may not be returned.
One thing a forum leader can and should do is redirect the conversation. It would make sense then to go back to an earlier and unresolved issue in the debate. The Koran and related law speaks to the protection and value of women. Actual practice over the centuries up until today contradicts the religious ideas. Why not think about the reasons why that occurs? Recently the King of Saudi Arabia reorganized the Sharia court (forgive me that is not the official name) and gave the dangers of extremism as the reason. He took a risk doing this. The treatment of rape-victims was one of his given examples. Likewise in Sikhism Guruji and related scriptures speak of the importance of woman, their parity with men, yet we read of honor killings among Sikhs. The argument -- Oh well you don't know what it is like in India! - won't work in this case. From reading the news, it seems like it happens in Canada every month!
Why do the ideal images of religions play out very differently in history? Why does culture trump religion when we are looking at behavior? Why does the religious establishment seem to be unable to call an end to this? Why do various sects within Islam and/or Sikhism have different views of women in their traditions, even within the same religion? For example, women can participate in the sema ceremony of Turkish Sufis. And yet, Turkey has outlawed the sema ceremony.
I might learn something from this discourse. Please be patient with me.
I am taking the previous two posts out of the thread to analyze them. The rhetoric is hot -- and not contributing to further development of the thread. After the mods take a look they may/may not be returned.
One thing a forum leader can and should do is redirect the conversation. It would make sense then to go back to an earlier and unresolved issue in the debate. The Koran and related law speaks to the protection and value of women. Actual practice over the centuries up until today contradicts the religious ideas. Why not think about the reasons why that occurs? Recently the King of Saudi Arabia reorganized the Sharia court (forgive me that is not the official name) and gave the dangers of extremism as the reason. He took a risk doing this. The treatment of rape-victims was one of his given examples. Likewise in Sikhism Guruji and related scriptures speak of the importance of woman, their parity with men, yet we read of honor killings among Sikhs. The argument -- Oh well you don't know what it is like in India! - won't work in this case. From reading the news, it seems like it happens in Canada every month!
Why do the ideal images of religions play out very differently in history? Why does culture trump religion when we are looking at behavior? Why does the religious establishment seem to be unable to call an end to this? Why do various sects within Islam and/or Sikhism have different views of women in their traditions, even within the same religion? For example, women can participate in the sema ceremony of Turkish Sufis. And yet, Turkey has outlawed the sema ceremony.
I might learn something from this discourse. Please be patient with me.
tony
SPNer
WJKK WJKF
Quite agree that personal attacks should be left out of the discussion and im not here to discuss islam, so back to the origins of the thread What is the status of Women in Sikhism and are they being treated equally. Quite simply the answer is NO they are not treated as equals. Sikh men (not all may i add) treat their women as badly as muslim men inequality is inequality regardless of the actual crime. I chose Sikhism as my religion 12 yrs ago because it apppeared to be a religion of equality of all and it is, when you read it, however it simply isnt practised that way, my partner wasnt treated like her brother at home, my children where subjected to rascist abuse at punjabi school (children dont see colour differences so they where taught to be rascist by the parents). They are denied their Grandparents and other relatives. they no longer go to punjabi school and my partner refuses to have anything to do with Sikhs because of this. If Sikhism is to grow into a Great religion this inequality has got to change, Sikhs have got to accept that to be a Sikh doesnt mean you have to be of indian origin and to be a great sikh you have to be a man. Im really sorry if Ive offended any one but as you can see this is a subject that ive experienced first hand and my partner continually suffers because of it, so my apologise to all those who have changed and to those who havent who cares what you think
sat sri akal
Tony
Quite agree that personal attacks should be left out of the discussion and im not here to discuss islam, so back to the origins of the thread What is the status of Women in Sikhism and are they being treated equally. Quite simply the answer is NO they are not treated as equals. Sikh men (not all may i add) treat their women as badly as muslim men inequality is inequality regardless of the actual crime. I chose Sikhism as my religion 12 yrs ago because it apppeared to be a religion of equality of all and it is, when you read it, however it simply isnt practised that way, my partner wasnt treated like her brother at home, my children where subjected to rascist abuse at punjabi school (children dont see colour differences so they where taught to be rascist by the parents). They are denied their Grandparents and other relatives. they no longer go to punjabi school and my partner refuses to have anything to do with Sikhs because of this. If Sikhism is to grow into a Great religion this inequality has got to change, Sikhs have got to accept that to be a Sikh doesnt mean you have to be of indian origin and to be a great sikh you have to be a man. Im really sorry if Ive offended any one but as you can see this is a subject that ive experienced first hand and my partner continually suffers because of it, so my apologise to all those who have changed and to those who havent who cares what you think
sat sri akal
Tony
Tony ji
99% of sikhs are punjabi's and mostly practising sikhs live in strict social system.Once a person lives in social system then he/she have to accept social norms and if you break the laws then Its not only the person but also his/her parents are a topic gossip,mockery.This social system is more harsh on women.Many, punjabi sikhs don't even accept their children
marrying out of caste because of this even if the partner is punjabi sikh so what you are saying is true but your complaints should have been against social system and not against sikhism
Archived_Member5
(previously jeetijohal, account deactivated at her
Fathers are similar to God in that one must obey and abide by their doctrine. Once an individual turns against the father and marry’s or acts against his will, they are expelled as in the beginning to make their own lives exercising personal responsibility. Politicians tend to entertain feminist sympathisers, you will find little support in a religious forum attuned to a creator disempowered by the divisive and wilful behaviour of his creation, especially women.
The US and UK women are emancipated yet remain as miserable as they were before. No matter how much independence we gain there is always a need of our peers or a detachment to live and walk alone. It is far easier to sanctimoniously rouse the latent feminists in the womenfolk of foreigners before attending to one’ own domestic problems. Sikh women as with all come in high minded strong matriarchal types or domineering, manipulative deceiver types. One takes and judges them as one finds them.
Following religious values gains spiritual peace and union with ones soul, demanding rights may gain a woman an inflated or elevated opinion of herself and status soon burst by others equally as zealous of her ilk ...
The US and UK women are emancipated yet remain as miserable as they were before. No matter how much independence we gain there is always a need of our peers or a detachment to live and walk alone. It is far easier to sanctimoniously rouse the latent feminists in the womenfolk of foreigners before attending to one’ own domestic problems. Sikh women as with all come in high minded strong matriarchal types or domineering, manipulative deceiver types. One takes and judges them as one finds them.
Following religious values gains spiritual peace and union with ones soul, demanding rights may gain a woman an inflated or elevated opinion of herself and status soon burst by others equally as zealous of her ilk ...
tony
SPNer
Rubbish I was brought up amongst rascist and sexist, actually being a member of the BNP and the NF, but by the age of 22 still living amongst these people started to listen to my own mind realising that asians where not what id been told. I changed my views. I suffered beatings and was disowned by my friends. 24 yrs on most of my friends from back then now share my views as does the rest of the UK. you cannot use your culture to hide behind when you know what your doing is wrong. the Guru jis fought to change what they believed was wrong under fear of death. For a father to impose his will with threats is nobetter than living in a dictatorship, An opion is fine to have even if it is different but to impose makes a man no better than Hitler. If one claims to be a practising Sikh then dont hide behind cultural believes stand up and make a change its amasing how many follow when one has the courage to lead. With the people who dare challence the norm we would all still be living in caves worshipping idols
Archived_Member5
(previously jeetijohal, account deactivated at her
‘’Thou shalt honour thy Lord God your father’’ is the same in all languages and scriptures. We are all indoctrinated to be wary of the unfamiliar. Once we all know one another we can then make our judgments beyond the racial and religious, as people and the children of the One God.
pk70 ji
My reaction There are statements by Javanard ji that raise a lot of questions in my mind, as they do for you. Lot's of questions.
I am not by any stretch of imagination an expert on the historical facts and subtleties surround many of the claims made. I however suspect that the concerns raised may have been more true during the raj when Sikhism had become extremely compromised by the political confusion of the day. For example, Maharaj Ranjit had several wives and concubines. So what! It proves nothing about basic tenets of Sikhism. The fact that Sri Guru Granth Sahib may be silent on the specifics proves nothing.
It would be helpful if someone would respond with actual evidence and historical documentation. My basic intuition is that culture and politics have been tangled up with misunderstandings of the basics of Nanakian philosophy. Apologies if I have offended anyone.
We
tony
SPNer
kds1980 ji
i have read your post several times and still think that it is an excuse for poor sikhism. If it is said by Guru Nanak ji that we are all equal then it is part of sikhism. to treat anyone differently must therefore be against sikhism, citing a social system is no more than a poor excuse. this is exactly why sikhism came to be, to change the way people live and are treated. How can you stand in front of our lord and say i have followed the preachings of the Guru ji's when you havent treated all equally.it does not take scriptural evidence just basic human kindness if you cannot treat your fellow man and that includes women equally then you have failed. Social and cultural behaviour are man made and as such man can change them. stop blameing others and change. for those who have already change then this post is not intended to offend, for those who havent then it is. SEXIST and RACIST behaviour is not acceptable nor is their any defence. It takes a strong man to stand in front of others and say they disagree. i thought sikhs where to supposed to be strong looks like i was wrong. sikhism is destined to remain an Indian religion if change doesnt come about, with more and more girls marrying white boys the religion will die and with it the gurus dream. who'd want a life of oppression when they see freedom,
Tony
- Status
❤️ CLICK HERE TO JOIN SPN MOBILE PLATFORM
❤️ CLICK HERE TO JOIN SPN MOBILE PLATFORM
