☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
The Search For Statehood
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lion King" data-source="post: 25673" data-attributes="member: 2334"><p>Bulleshah,</p><p>You amaze me. For one thing, I appreciate you for seeing things beyond the </p><p>boundaries of organized religions, but for another, you are unawarely bound by </p><p>Hinduism's tendency of claiming everything born on its soil as its own - thus </p><p>thinking that you're secularizing your land/faith -but doing outright communalism </p><p>through swallowing and claiming something else as your own. Just like how the </p><p>Muslims find it hard to see outside the box of a logical and non-contradicting God, </p><p>Hindus find it hard to 'accept' a new-born neighbour as someone separate and </p><p>different, and rightful to hold their own name & title as distinct, yet united, but </p><p>different. (The very fact that Article 25 of the Indian Constitution claims Jain as </p><p>Hindu, Budh as Hindu and Sikh as Hindu, goes to show Hinduism's sense of </p><p>insecurity with regard to neighbouring native faiths. If India was a united nation, </p><p>then what was the need to make such a point?) [And, even so, what harm is there if a </p><p>new nation was added to the list of the world?]</p><p>I think it's Hinduism's way of proclaiming universality - by completely embracing</p><p>(claiming!) a neighbouring religion as their own, rather than embracing the </p><p>neighbour for who they are, that causes alot of communal problems with </p><p>neighbouring native faiths. Hindus should accept the fact that other religions were </p><p>born simply because they do not agree with Hinduism's points of view, what use is </p><p>going and claiming those faiths as Hinduism then? There are different ways to </p><p>approach a mountain peak: those different ways are Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, </p><p>etc. But it should not be mistaken that the very 'act of ascending' to the peak is called </p><p>'Hinduism', then this would only show Hinduism's selfishness in claiming the whole </p><p>process of relating to Divinity as Hinduism and nothing else. And if Hinduism still </p><p>claims that it is the dharma which climbs to the peak from all sides at the same time, </p><p>then this is the very reason why other native religions were born cause they want to </p><p>choose a particular path to climb only.</p><p>Hinduism says it's not an -ism, but a dharma (a way of life), and that other native </p><p>religions should also see beyond their '-ism' and realise that they are Hindu dharma. </p><p>But this is what other religions are saying too, that they are also dharma ( a way of </p><p>life) and that Hinduism should accept that there are other ways of life to the same </p><p>goal. How different? By being more systematic & focussed. Sikhism is a dharma </p><p>(Sikh way of life). Buddhism is a dharma (buddhist way of life) and Jainism is a </p><p>dharma (Jain way of life).</p><p>Now you claim that whatever these native religions teach are already Hinduism and </p><p>no different, I beg to differ. First of all, one can hardly define Hinduism. There is no </p><p>set system, and though this seems like a plus point in your eyes, to other native faiths </p><p>it's Hinduism's biggest blunder. The very reason for other faiths to take birth is to be </p><p>focussed and systematic, institutionalised and precise. You say Sikhism has nothing </p><p>new to teach, I may agree with you because my Guru himself said that they never </p><p>proclaimed anything new. But Sikhism is a religion of Naam Marg (meditating on </p><p>the Name) and it stresses on that on every page of the Guru Granth Sahib. This is </p><p>what differetiates Sikhism from Hinduism. Now Hinduism might say we have that </p><p>doctrine, too, but what is the use of claiming a doctrine when no importance is given </p><p>to that point? Sikhism is a religion of Naam, now it would sound weird if I said </p><p>Hinduism is a religion of Naam, 'cause it's not. Hinduism cannot be a religion of </p><p>Naam cause it does not stress on that point - a point so important to Sikhism that its </p><p>whole point of existence hangs on that balance. Hinduism might teach us to meditate </p><p>and become yogic, discipline the mind and the senses and clear all the accounts of </p><p>karma and reincarnations and attain moksha and merge with God, but Sikhism gives </p><p>all and ultimate importance to meditating on God and His Name with every breath of </p><p>life, considering it even much more important than attaining yogic disciplines or </p><p>salvations or clearing karmic accounts and lifetimes - even to the extent of claiming </p><p>all good deeds done no matter to what extent as useless - if done without the Name </p><p>of God in mind & intention. Sikhism even gives it more importance than the very act </p><p>of meditation or silencing the mind and attaining peace. To Sikhism, Naam is </p><p>Everything. Take the word 'Naam' out of Guru Granth Sahib and it will lose its </p><p>claim of being Sikhi. Naam is the breath of Sikhism. But do the same to Hinduism </p><p>and its texts, Hinduism will still survive, coz, Naam has never been its main </p><p>concerns. (If you can provide me Hindu quotes with regard to Naam, would be much </p><p>appreciated).</p><p>I noticed that Hindus in general, like to blame Sikhs for causing factions by being </p><p>distinctive in indentity, rather than becoming one with the rest. I wonder why do </p><p>Hindus fail to see that it's this very identity of the Sikhs that has fostered them to be </p><p>united with the rest of mankind. Sikhs, in their identity, find harmony with the rest of </p><p>creation, by projecting the universal appearance of man in the personality of their </p><p>prophet. We all know the greatness of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and His sacrifices for </p><p>the Indian soil and honour. But why do we fail to see the picture that it was his iron</p><p>-will and courage to be different from the mainstream rulers & people that fostered </p><p>his ability to bring justice & unity to those deprived of and are in such need? What </p><p>harm is there in invoking the personality of such a man whose ideals promoted </p><p>patriotism not only on the national level, but humanitarian level (beyond national </p><p>borders)? When I do not doubt such a man's conduct, doubting his orders/ideals is </p><p>quite a far-fetched thing - especially when I am his unquestioning disciple: his Sikh. </p><p>This is the difference between Sikhism and Hinduism. He is not a Sikh who thinks he </p><p>knows better than the Guru (Sikh Gurus). He is not a Sikh, who disobeys the Guru. </p><p>He is not a Sikh who claims Sikhism as Hinduism when Guru Ji has made it clear </p><p>that he does not agree with the Vedas or the Koran by introducing Guru Granth </p><p>Sahib as separate and distinct. Does this mean Sikhs are wanting to cause rifts and </p><p>problems?? No! It's their ideology, not hatred. It's high time Hindus stop worrying. </p><p>Is 300 years of history not enough to prove Sikhs' quest for unity & freedom for all? </p><p>"Why insult Sikhs with the issue of Khalistan, when for 300 years they have been </p><p>fighting for a united India?" (Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's quote). But then, </p><p>now Sikhs are forced to have such a dream. Its foundation has been laid.</p><p>Why do Hindus fail to realize that if the religion of Sikhism is encouraged, it's for </p><p>the good of the nation? After all, the Sikhs do not have the tendency to go around </p><p>swallowing other faiths. The British realised this and used the Sikh distinction to </p><p>their full advantage. But the moment they interfered in religious affairs (Gurwara </p><p>key affair), then they began to face the wrath of the Sikhs. Is it possible that Hindus </p><p>are jealous of Sikhs? Hinduism has been interfering from the beginning, it will </p><p>continue to face the imminent wrath of the Sikhs in future, cause Hindus are </p><p>undoubtedly very large, so it will take time. You say Sikhs think themselves superior </p><p>to Hindus, though this pride is not appreciated, but I think they do deserve some </p><p>pride, for all that they have done for the nation - especially when the nation had </p><p>promised to give the Sikh community a befitting reward after independence! (Pandit </p><p>Nehru!). Had Hinduism not interfered in calling Sikhs Hindus, their pride for </p><p>separation would have been lesser, since they would not have felt threatened, but </p><p>their separatedness in ideology is still the same, though not actually disunited. (Ask </p><p>thse people who have Sikhs as thier friends and they will tell you what great friends </p><p>Sikhs make). Hindus scorn on Sikh distinction as cause of disharmony while </p><p>showing a blind eye to their 300 years of struggle and 50 years of secular imperial </p><p>rule in the most disturbed and diverse regions from the Northwestern Frontiers to </p><p>Delhi.</p><p>You find the 5 Ks ritualistic, I completely agree with you if you find it meaningless </p><p>and insignificant. That's why there is no direct quote in Guru Granth Sahib ji asking </p><p>you to keep hair and the four other Ks - coz to state so would be ritualistic without </p><p>proper meaning or reason behind it. You forget that the Guru's aim is to make us </p><p>exactly like himself - to say the least. His aim was not to create more followers, but </p><p>more leaders. When we become like our Guru - we 'become' like our Guru: in every </p><p>way from skin to soul. You deliberately overlook the aim of Sikhism in making a </p><p>Hindu, Rama-like/Vishnu-like; a Muslim, Mohammed-like; a Christian, Christ-like; </p><p>a Buddhist, Buddha-like & a Sikh, Guru-like.</p><p>When Chrisitanity and Islam are both believing in the same God as Judaism and Judaism has no problem in seeing them as separate, why the hell is Hinduism still stuck to its own illusion? Why do you want to force yourself into a school of which you are not a part of? I feel that you are undergoing a lot of psychological tension in wanting to be 'Sikh' under your own definition, that's why these complexities are causing you psychological tensions and depression. Maybe you should just accept the fact that 'I am not actually Sikh but I'm trying to be a good person who agrees with Sikh ideology though not 100%'</p><p>Just a thought,</p><p>(Bhul chook maaf)</p><p>Lion King</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lion King, post: 25673, member: 2334"] Bulleshah, You amaze me. For one thing, I appreciate you for seeing things beyond the boundaries of organized religions, but for another, you are unawarely bound by Hinduism's tendency of claiming everything born on its soil as its own - thus thinking that you're secularizing your land/faith -but doing outright communalism through swallowing and claiming something else as your own. Just like how the Muslims find it hard to see outside the box of a logical and non-contradicting God, Hindus find it hard to 'accept' a new-born neighbour as someone separate and different, and rightful to hold their own name & title as distinct, yet united, but different. (The very fact that Article 25 of the Indian Constitution claims Jain as Hindu, Budh as Hindu and Sikh as Hindu, goes to show Hinduism's sense of insecurity with regard to neighbouring native faiths. If India was a united nation, then what was the need to make such a point?) [And, even so, what harm is there if a new nation was added to the list of the world?] I think it's Hinduism's way of proclaiming universality - by completely embracing (claiming!) a neighbouring religion as their own, rather than embracing the neighbour for who they are, that causes alot of communal problems with neighbouring native faiths. Hindus should accept the fact that other religions were born simply because they do not agree with Hinduism's points of view, what use is going and claiming those faiths as Hinduism then? There are different ways to approach a mountain peak: those different ways are Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, etc. But it should not be mistaken that the very 'act of ascending' to the peak is called 'Hinduism', then this would only show Hinduism's selfishness in claiming the whole process of relating to Divinity as Hinduism and nothing else. And if Hinduism still claims that it is the dharma which climbs to the peak from all sides at the same time, then this is the very reason why other native religions were born cause they want to choose a particular path to climb only. Hinduism says it's not an -ism, but a dharma (a way of life), and that other native religions should also see beyond their '-ism' and realise that they are Hindu dharma. But this is what other religions are saying too, that they are also dharma ( a way of life) and that Hinduism should accept that there are other ways of life to the same goal. How different? By being more systematic & focussed. Sikhism is a dharma (Sikh way of life). Buddhism is a dharma (buddhist way of life) and Jainism is a dharma (Jain way of life). Now you claim that whatever these native religions teach are already Hinduism and no different, I beg to differ. First of all, one can hardly define Hinduism. There is no set system, and though this seems like a plus point in your eyes, to other native faiths it's Hinduism's biggest blunder. The very reason for other faiths to take birth is to be focussed and systematic, institutionalised and precise. You say Sikhism has nothing new to teach, I may agree with you because my Guru himself said that they never proclaimed anything new. But Sikhism is a religion of Naam Marg (meditating on the Name) and it stresses on that on every page of the Guru Granth Sahib. This is what differetiates Sikhism from Hinduism. Now Hinduism might say we have that doctrine, too, but what is the use of claiming a doctrine when no importance is given to that point? Sikhism is a religion of Naam, now it would sound weird if I said Hinduism is a religion of Naam, 'cause it's not. Hinduism cannot be a religion of Naam cause it does not stress on that point - a point so important to Sikhism that its whole point of existence hangs on that balance. Hinduism might teach us to meditate and become yogic, discipline the mind and the senses and clear all the accounts of karma and reincarnations and attain moksha and merge with God, but Sikhism gives all and ultimate importance to meditating on God and His Name with every breath of life, considering it even much more important than attaining yogic disciplines or salvations or clearing karmic accounts and lifetimes - even to the extent of claiming all good deeds done no matter to what extent as useless - if done without the Name of God in mind & intention. Sikhism even gives it more importance than the very act of meditation or silencing the mind and attaining peace. To Sikhism, Naam is Everything. Take the word 'Naam' out of Guru Granth Sahib and it will lose its claim of being Sikhi. Naam is the breath of Sikhism. But do the same to Hinduism and its texts, Hinduism will still survive, coz, Naam has never been its main concerns. (If you can provide me Hindu quotes with regard to Naam, would be much appreciated). I noticed that Hindus in general, like to blame Sikhs for causing factions by being distinctive in indentity, rather than becoming one with the rest. I wonder why do Hindus fail to see that it's this very identity of the Sikhs that has fostered them to be united with the rest of mankind. Sikhs, in their identity, find harmony with the rest of creation, by projecting the universal appearance of man in the personality of their prophet. We all know the greatness of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and His sacrifices for the Indian soil and honour. But why do we fail to see the picture that it was his iron -will and courage to be different from the mainstream rulers & people that fostered his ability to bring justice & unity to those deprived of and are in such need? What harm is there in invoking the personality of such a man whose ideals promoted patriotism not only on the national level, but humanitarian level (beyond national borders)? When I do not doubt such a man's conduct, doubting his orders/ideals is quite a far-fetched thing - especially when I am his unquestioning disciple: his Sikh. This is the difference between Sikhism and Hinduism. He is not a Sikh who thinks he knows better than the Guru (Sikh Gurus). He is not a Sikh, who disobeys the Guru. He is not a Sikh who claims Sikhism as Hinduism when Guru Ji has made it clear that he does not agree with the Vedas or the Koran by introducing Guru Granth Sahib as separate and distinct. Does this mean Sikhs are wanting to cause rifts and problems?? No! It's their ideology, not hatred. It's high time Hindus stop worrying. Is 300 years of history not enough to prove Sikhs' quest for unity & freedom for all? "Why insult Sikhs with the issue of Khalistan, when for 300 years they have been fighting for a united India?" (Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's quote). But then, now Sikhs are forced to have such a dream. Its foundation has been laid. Why do Hindus fail to realize that if the religion of Sikhism is encouraged, it's for the good of the nation? After all, the Sikhs do not have the tendency to go around swallowing other faiths. The British realised this and used the Sikh distinction to their full advantage. But the moment they interfered in religious affairs (Gurwara key affair), then they began to face the wrath of the Sikhs. Is it possible that Hindus are jealous of Sikhs? Hinduism has been interfering from the beginning, it will continue to face the imminent wrath of the Sikhs in future, cause Hindus are undoubtedly very large, so it will take time. You say Sikhs think themselves superior to Hindus, though this pride is not appreciated, but I think they do deserve some pride, for all that they have done for the nation - especially when the nation had promised to give the Sikh community a befitting reward after independence! (Pandit Nehru!). Had Hinduism not interfered in calling Sikhs Hindus, their pride for separation would have been lesser, since they would not have felt threatened, but their separatedness in ideology is still the same, though not actually disunited. (Ask thse people who have Sikhs as thier friends and they will tell you what great friends Sikhs make). Hindus scorn on Sikh distinction as cause of disharmony while showing a blind eye to their 300 years of struggle and 50 years of secular imperial rule in the most disturbed and diverse regions from the Northwestern Frontiers to Delhi. You find the 5 Ks ritualistic, I completely agree with you if you find it meaningless and insignificant. That's why there is no direct quote in Guru Granth Sahib ji asking you to keep hair and the four other Ks - coz to state so would be ritualistic without proper meaning or reason behind it. You forget that the Guru's aim is to make us exactly like himself - to say the least. His aim was not to create more followers, but more leaders. When we become like our Guru - we 'become' like our Guru: in every way from skin to soul. You deliberately overlook the aim of Sikhism in making a Hindu, Rama-like/Vishnu-like; a Muslim, Mohammed-like; a Christian, Christ-like; a Buddhist, Buddha-like & a Sikh, Guru-like. When Chrisitanity and Islam are both believing in the same God as Judaism and Judaism has no problem in seeing them as separate, why the hell is Hinduism still stuck to its own illusion? Why do you want to force yourself into a school of which you are not a part of? I feel that you are undergoing a lot of psychological tension in wanting to be 'Sikh' under your own definition, that's why these complexities are causing you psychological tensions and depression. Maybe you should just accept the fact that 'I am not actually Sikh but I'm trying to be a good person who agrees with Sikh ideology though not 100%' Just a thought, (Bhul chook maaf) Lion King [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
The Search For Statehood
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top