Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Discussion of life's dilemmas, blessings and challenges. Got Questions? Need Answers? This is the place to be. Feel comfortable with asking any question. Anonymous posting is allowed. Questions are answered by anyone in the sangat who feels they can help.
User avatar
singhboy
New User
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by singhboy »

Sikhi will survive but it will depend on what we ourselves put into it. If we are afraid to challenge those who aim to divide and destroy our community on lines of who is sikhi and who is not, caste and many other factors then we will be sealing our own fate. I have asked this question before and got good responses as well.

If you look at sikhi it is a religion that was way beyond its time. Just look at history and nor will you find a religion that its followers were so willing to lay down there lives for the surival of another religion (hindu and sunni Muslim), no were will you find in the past were one religion have fought together for the betterment of thier land and to protection of those who live in it even though they are a minority from conquest then sikhi (Anglo Sikh wars). Never have you seen a religion which for its numbers joined to fight the evil in the world then Sikhi in the WW1 and WW2.

Guru Nanak was the first person to give equal standing for men and women and broke off the shackles of caste. He also believed and it is in the SGGS that there is one god (Ek) and he has many names but is the same.

Guru Gobin Singh created the Khalsa to fight for and protect not only sikhi but all from evil. He also allowed women to fight on the front line when before many were the only one allowed to.

So how can a religion which is beyond its time become irrelevent. The way forward for Sikhi is education for everyone including Sikhi. We must aim to grow our religion and make it stronger by providing positve images, role models and for community leaders to step up and stop certain groups in the community from fighting with each other but working together.
User avatar
himmat_singh
Power User
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by himmat_singh »

Sat Sri Akal

Everything is created, transformed, modified, dies and so the cycle continues. This is “Sikhism” in practice, and is spoken of by Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

P988
ik khineh thaap uthaapadaa gharh bhann karnaihaar.
In an instant, You establish and disestablish; You create and destroy, O Creator Lord.
If Sikhism, the religion and its institutions die, or are transformed into something other than what is was or is now, or the political aspirations of some sikhs aren’t realised this is all God’s will.

Other religions that have existed have died, others that exist will also die, and all may be replaced with something else, as God wills and when He chooses. Some die sooner, some die later.

Only the Lord God is eternal, and sikhs who have faith in God should not fret for one moment about the inevitable death of Sikhism, or the changes that occur. If one gets emotionally attached to Sikhism, even this could inhibit union with the Lord

P958/9
salok mehlaa 5.
har iksai naal mai dostee har iksai naal mai rang.
har iko mayraa sajno har iksai naal mai sang.
har iksai naal mai gostay muhu mailaa karai na bhang.
jaanai birthaa jee-a kee kaday na morhai rang.
har iko mayraa maslatee bhannan gharhan samrath.
har iko mayraa daataar hai sir daati-aa jag hath.
har iksai dee mai tayk hai jo sir sabhnaa samrath.
satgur sant milaa-i-aa mastak Dhar kai hath.
vadaa saahib guroo milaa-i-aa jin taari-aa sagal jagat.
man kee-aa ichhaa pooree-aa paa-i-aa Dhur sanjog.
naanak paa-i-aa sach naam sad hee bhogay bhog. ||1||
Shalok, Fifth Mehl:
My friendship is with the One Lord alone; I am in love with the One Lord alone.
The Lord is my only friend; my companionship is with the One Lord alone.
My conversation is with the One Lord alone; He never frowns, or turns His face away.
He alone knows the state of my soul; He never ignores my love.
He is my only counsellor, all-powerful to destroy and create.
The Lord is my only Giver. He places His hand upon the heads of the generous in the world.
I take the Support of the One Lord alone; He is all-powerful, over the heads of all.
The Saint, the True Guru, has united me with the Lord. He placed His hand on my forehead.
The Guru led me to meet the greatest Lord and Master; He saved the whole world.
The desires of the mind are fulfilled; I have attained my pre-destined Union with God.
Nanak has obtained the True Name; He enjoys the enjoyments forever. ||1||

The true problem for those who worry over the future of Sikhism is they are not concerned enough about Sikhi to follow Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Only the Lord is important but they do not see this. They are emotionally attached and do not know how to befriend Satguru, who can take them to the Lord to create the union. Their pride and ego in Sikh affairs prevents this happening. Some are engrossed in keeping Sikh practices in keeping with historic records, and others are engrossed in promoting political interests of Sikhs.

The problem they are up against will only be solved by looking inwards, by recognising, and appreciating one’s origins.

Siddh Gosht, commencing on p938 and ending on p946 is revealing, and is supplemented by The Vaar of Raamkalee composed by Guru Amar Das ji, commencing p947 ending p956
P957 goes into the role of Satguru

Once they make effort to remove pride in what has been done by sikh role models, and what is done by sikhs, they might progress.

Looking outwards for an external God who comes to the rescue if places of worship are visited, or if gifts are given to idols, or if one dresses in a particular way, will never solve the problem of gaining the grace of the Lord.

One can only see within though, by removing attachment to worldy goods and affairs. Detachment whilst living is required, along with removal of ego. Ego shrouds the inner self and creates mental barriers that do not allow one to look within. Instead God is continually looked for outside.

Sikhism itself can become such an attachment that can generate pride and ego. An attachment to it will prevent one from following Satguru. Befriending Satguru is crucial to contentment, and liberation.
It is completely self-defeating to attach oneself to Sikhism, or any religion. Pride in it rises and ego strengthens.

An organised way of life with set routines that one is entirely content with , will help to placate the mind, and stop the mind looking in every direction for an outlet. Such a routine will assist to achieve the goal of understanding one’s inner self. When the emotional padding is removed from the outside, the inner self can be seen.

It does not matter how one dresses, how one keeps one hair etc etc. These concerns are all to placate others and not one’s own mind. One should do what one is happy with doing. Whether others see one as Sikh, Muslim, Hindu or Christian etc etc. are all immaterial to Satguru.

One can do what Sikhs do, or not do what Sikhs do. It does not matter one iota to Satguru. What matters is that the mind is placated, is not emotionally disturbed, and that the mind and body are in union with what the inner spirit, satguru wishes them to do. Satguru is only satisfied when there is no conflict between the three, and until then there will be no peace.

Sikhs as a whole are constantly going about setting rules that every other person who wants to be known as a Sikh must conform to. It is self-defeating, as individuals have customised seeds implanted by God and own personal Satgurus, based on past karma. As individuals they will all have different desires and motivating factors. It is most unlikely they will all wish to follow exactly the same path. If they are asked to follow one path alone, they will rebel. This is certain, because as individuals they must meet the needs of their own Satguru, and there will be no rest in their minds if they do not do this. They are naturally bound to form groups that share common interests.

Yet all can be taught how to learn about their inner selves, by detaching themselves from the world, but continue to reside in it. They can learn to be dead whilst alive. They can learn to be like an unmoving lotus in a stormy swamp.

3HO sikhs are very good at this, and have moved from strength to strength. I am confident it is down to excellent planning and organisation, and use of yoga to create an internal environment that helps them to listen and learn, instead of issuing hukamnamas to others on what has to be done or what can’t be done.

P1410:
Do not fall in love with one who is destined to leave. O Nanak, I am a sacrifice to those who understand this. || 2 || If you wish to swim across the water, then consult those who know how to swim. Those who have survived these treacherous waves are very wise. || 3 || The storm rages and the rain floods the land; thousands of waves rise and surge. If you cry out for help from the True Guru, you have nothing to fear - your boat will not sink.
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh
User avatar
5ikh
Power User
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by 5ikh »

himmat_singh wrote:Sat Sri Akal

Everything is created, transformed, modified, dies and so the cycle continues. This is “Sikhism” in practice, and is spoken of by Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

P988
ik khineh thaap uthaapadaa gharh bhann karnaihaar.
In an instant, You establish and disestablish; You create and destroy, O Creator Lord.
If Sikhism, the religion and its institutions die, or are transformed into something other than what is was or is now, or the political aspirations of some sikhs aren’t realised this is all God’s will.

Other religions that have existed have died, others that exist will also die, and all may be replaced with something else, as God wills and when He chooses. Some die sooner, some die later.

Only the Lord God is eternal, and sikhs who have faith in God should not fret for one moment about the inevitable death of Sikhism, or the changes that occur. If one gets emotionally attached to Sikhism, even this could inhibit union with the Lord

P958/9
salok mehlaa 5.
har iksai naal mai dostee har iksai naal mai rang.
har iko mayraa sajno har iksai naal mai sang.
har iksai naal mai gostay muhu mailaa karai na bhang.
jaanai birthaa jee-a kee kaday na morhai rang.
har iko mayraa maslatee bhannan gharhan samrath.
har iko mayraa daataar hai sir daati-aa jag hath.
har iksai dee mai tayk hai jo sir sabhnaa samrath.
satgur sant milaa-i-aa mastak Dhar kai hath.
vadaa saahib guroo milaa-i-aa jin taari-aa sagal jagat.
man kee-aa ichhaa pooree-aa paa-i-aa Dhur sanjog.
naanak paa-i-aa sach naam sad hee bhogay bhog. ||1||
Shalok, Fifth Mehl:
My friendship is with the One Lord alone; I am in love with the One Lord alone.
The Lord is my only friend; my companionship is with the One Lord alone.
My conversation is with the One Lord alone; He never frowns, or turns His face away.
He alone knows the state of my soul; He never ignores my love.
He is my only counsellor, all-powerful to destroy and create.
The Lord is my only Giver. He places His hand upon the heads of the generous in the world.
I take the Support of the One Lord alone; He is all-powerful, over the heads of all.
The Saint, the True Guru, has united me with the Lord. He placed His hand on my forehead.
The Guru led me to meet the greatest Lord and Master; He saved the whole world.
The desires of the mind are fulfilled; I have attained my pre-destined Union with God.
Nanak has obtained the True Name; He enjoys the enjoyments forever. ||1||

The true problem for those who worry over the future of Sikhism is they are not concerned enough about Sikhi to follow Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Only the Lord is important but they do not see this. They are emotionally attached and do not know how to befriend Satguru, who can take them to the Lord to create the union. Their pride and ego in Sikh affairs prevents this happening. Some are engrossed in keeping Sikh practices in keeping with historic records, and others are engrossed in promoting political interests of Sikhs.

The problem they are up against will only be solved by looking inwards, by recognising, and appreciating one’s origins.

Siddh Gosht, commencing on p938 and ending on p946 is revealing, and is supplemented by The Vaar of Raamkalee composed by Guru Amar Das ji, commencing p947 ending p956
P957 goes into the role of Satguru

Once they make effort to remove pride in what has been done by sikh role models, and what is done by sikhs, they might progress.

Looking outwards for an external God who comes to the rescue if places of worship are visited, or if gifts are given to idols, or if one dresses in a particular way, will never solve the problem of gaining the grace of the Lord.

One can only see within though, by removing attachment to worldy goods and affairs. Detachment whilst living is required, along with removal of ego. Ego shrouds the inner self and creates mental barriers that do not allow one to look within. Instead God is continually looked for outside.

Sikhism itself can become such an attachment that can generate pride and ego. An attachment to it will prevent one from following Satguru. Befriending Satguru is crucial to contentment, and liberation.
It is completely self-defeating to attach oneself to Sikhism, or any religion. Pride in it rises and ego strengthens.

An organised way of life with set routines that one is entirely content with , will help to placate the mind, and stop the mind looking in every direction for an outlet. Such a routine will assist to achieve the goal of understanding one’s inner self. When the emotional padding is removed from the outside, the inner self can be seen.

It does not matter how one dresses, how one keeps one hair etc etc. These concerns are all to placate others and not one’s own mind. One should do what one is happy with doing. Whether others see one as Sikh, Muslim, Hindu or Christian etc etc. are all immaterial to Satguru.

One can do what Sikhs do, or not do what Sikhs do. It does not matter one iota to Satguru. What matters is that the mind is placated, is not emotionally disturbed, and that the mind and body are in union with what the inner spirit, satguru wishes them to do. Satguru is only satisfied when there is no conflict between the three, and until then there will be no peace.

Sikhs as a whole are constantly going about setting rules that every other person who wants to be known as a Sikh must conform to. It is self-defeating, as individuals have customised seeds implanted by God and own personal Satgurus, based on past karma. As individuals they will all have different desires and motivating factors. It is most unlikely they will all wish to follow exactly the same path. If they are asked to follow one path alone, they will rebel. This is certain, because as individuals they must meet the needs of their own Satguru, and there will be no rest in their minds if they do not do this. They are naturally bound to form groups that share common interests.

Yet all can be taught how to learn about their inner selves, by detaching themselves from the world, but continue to reside in it. They can learn to be dead whilst alive. They can learn to be like an unmoving lotus in a stormy swamp.

3HO sikhs are very good at this, and have moved from strength to strength. I am confident it is down to excellent planning and organisation, and use of yoga to create an internal environment that helps them to listen and learn, instead of issuing hukamnamas to others on what has to be done or what can’t be done.

P1410:
Do not fall in love with one who is destined to leave. O Nanak, I am a sacrifice to those who understand this. || 2 || If you wish to swim across the water, then consult those who know how to swim. Those who have survived these treacherous waves are very wise. || 3 || The storm rages and the rain floods the land; thousands of waves rise and surge. If you cry out for help from the True Guru, you have nothing to fear - your boat will not sink.
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh
I know you have written a long post and try to explain how you feel about Sikhi and what your wishes are of your so called Sikhi, but Guru Sahib say, Sikhi is more dear to me than a Sikh, he never said I am in love with Islam or any other religion. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji is the TrueGuru and a TrueGuru never holds of importance with anything that will change and/or dies. So by just one line of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, we as Sikhs know Sikhi does not die or change or alter in any kind of way. Sikhi stays as Sikhi, whether people like it or not.

More than a Sikh, dear to me is to follow the rules of the Sikh conduct. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji
User avatar
himmat_singh
Power User
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by himmat_singh »

5ikh wrote: I know you have written a long post and try to explain how you feel about Sikhi and what your wishes are of your so called Sikhi, but Guru Sahib say, Sikhi is more dear to me than a Sikh, he never said I am in love with Islam or any other religion. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji is the TrueGuru and a TrueGuru never holds of importance with anything that will change and/or dies. So by just one line of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, we as Sikhs know Sikhi does not die or change or alter in any kind of way. Sikhi stays as Sikhi, whether people like it or not.

More than a Sikh, dear to me is to follow the rules of the Sikh conduct. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji
Ek-Onkaar Satnaam

Veer 5ikh ji,

I am so very pleased to note there are no judgements upon me in your latest post.
When people discuss matters civilly, life is much more pleasant.

You have stated that Sikhi is as is, and you have qualified this, or limited it, by use of an association to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.

I have no objection to your understanding of Sikhi in any way whatsoever, but below I have taken the liberty of providing what my interpretation of what Sikhi means to me, and how it differs from your understanding.

The difference between us seems to me to reside in the fact that my personal understanding of Sikhi has no reference to any religions, any Gurus, any class-rooms or any scriptures. All of these are provided by the Lord in whom I have full faith.

We are all learners in this universe. There is only one school and it is run by the One Lord, who is the HeadMaster. He has established many classes and knows each student intimately. Courses are set depending on what the Headmaster wishes each student o learn, and He places each student in a class of His choice. The students have no say in the matter but some try very hard to change classes and courses without having understood what was being taught in the class they were allocated to. Some regress whilst they twist and turn, and some have no idea that they are even in a class. This is entirely the Lord’s play.

At the moment the Lord has asked SGGS ji to teach me, so SGGS ji is my current teacher. I have no external class-room other than my mind, and as the Lord is with me at all times, I have absolutely no fear of making an error with respect to my studies. The Lord is always with me so can always correct me. I cannot hide my actions from Him. I have no emotional attachment to SGGS ji, to any other Guru, or Sikhism, and will peacefully accept any change if the Lord so desires. He sets the path, and I will do my best to follow wherever He takes me. If I fall by the wayside, then I will have to wait until He has time for me.

The Lord has guided me to believe that all my lessons, appropriate for me at this moment, are to be found in SGGS ji. Tomorrow it may be another source. That is His prerogative and I have developed this understanding from SGGS ji. SGGS ji has lead me to understand that I should attach myself to the Lord alone and nothing else whatsoever, and that includes any emotional attachment to the School’s teachers such as SGGS ji. This is just as in any material school attended to in this world, with the only difference being an unbreakable attachment to the Headmaster, but at the same time seeing the school, classes, students, teachers, and clutter as various manifestations of Him and all His work, some heeding Him, and others putting on a show for Him. The seed of the Lord God within me is making that comparison and it is very right and proper for it to do that, but I need only watch the drama unfold and take no physical action.

If I understood Sikhi to be as you state, then I would fixate on SGGS ji, or on one or more Gurus, and on the rituals and practices of modern day Sikhism, instead of fixating on the Lord. This would put me in a layby, which most claimed adherents of Sikhism are in. I believe most of them to be completely stuck in ritual. They are ensnared by their emotional attachments to the rituals of religion and cannot see how it hinders them. They cannot undertake deeds without comparison with what the Lord would do in the same situation, as they have not dwelt on what pleases the Lord. They cannot live truthfully as they do not consider what living truthfully is., so they end up as hypocrites. The complete idea of any Rehat Maryada is totally at odds with SGGS ji as a fixed set of standards it is the very foundation stone of ritual without thought. God is free to do as He pleases, is all pervading and will do exactly as He pleases whether there is a Rehat Maryada or not. No one can bind the Lord and the disparity in beliefs across the world is testament to the fact. Claimed Sikhs, patit or non-patit, represent only some 0.4% of the whole population of mankind, and most of the 24 million lack any understanding of SGGS ji. The idea is to be Akal Moorat, (image of the Lord) and to live as He would, totally abandon following ritual blindly. How can one merge with the Lord, if one does not act like the Lord? One can only learn to behave like the Lord, if one recognises the Lord to be everywhere, in each and every soul, irrespective of their outward behaviour. I have bad behaviour, as I am still very learning, but I do appreciate I can’t learn to manage ti more like the Lord, if I simply bow my head to my teacher in deference , eat the school dinner and then go home to carry on as previously. Would my teacher like that sort of student ? Only the teacher who has no interest in his students, (ie like the Brahmins who rejected people of low caste, and kept learning of Sanskrit for an elect few). Now we are down to “learned Sikh scholars” who can reveal the deep hidden knowledge in SGGS ji – ie modern day Brahmin Pandits. Well the students who attend these Gurdwaras don’t know the language now, whether they speak Punjabi or not, and this is all down to the effect of the Rehat Maryada.

The moderated section of this website does not allow me to state what was in the last paragraph elsewhere on this site, as it is termed as disrespectful. I have to appease moderators who have a different understanding. Maybe this is where you previously developed notions of deception and venom from. There is no deception, only truth, and some find it very hard to swallow the truth without getting angry. This is all in accord with SGGS ji

I wish you well in your studies


Sat Sri Akal
User avatar
5ikh
Power User
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by 5ikh »

himmat_singh wrote:
5ikh wrote: I know you have written a long post and try to explain how you feel about Sikhi and what your wishes are of your so called Sikhi, but Guru Sahib say, Sikhi is more dear to me than a Sikh, he never said I am in love with Islam or any other religion. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji is the TrueGuru and a TrueGuru never holds of importance with anything that will change and/or dies. So by just one line of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, we as Sikhs know Sikhi does not die or change or alter in any kind of way. Sikhi stays as Sikhi, whether people like it or not.

More than a Sikh, dear to me is to follow the rules of the Sikh conduct. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji
Ek-Onkaar Satnaam

Veer 5ikh ji,

I am so very pleased to note there are no judgements upon me in your latest post.
When people discuss matters civilly, life is much more pleasant.
Please leave the cunning politics out of at least this discussion, Himmat.
You have stated that Sikhi is as is, and you have qualified this, or limited it, by use of an association to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.

I have no objection to your understanding of Sikhi in any way whatsoever, but below I have taken the liberty of providing what my interpretation of what Sikhi means to me, and how it differs from your understanding.
Himmat, If you had no objection of the True understanding of Sikhi, then you would not have at first called it limited, which is your opinion in the form of an objection. So it beats the purpose of saying, "i have no objection......." afterwards. Its a contradiction on your part.
The difference between us seems to me to reside in the fact that my personal understanding of Sikhi has no reference to any religions, any Gurus, any class-rooms or any scriptures. All of these are provided by the Lord in whom I have full faith.
Im sorry, but this is not called Sikhi, but this is called making up your own belief system based on your own understanding and making up a new religion, even though only one person follows it. If a person reads Sri Mool Mantar closely they understand that Sri Waheguru ji says, Waheguru is attained by Guru's Grace. A person that say I have full faith in the Lord and say I don't need Shabad Guru is infact, just following his own teaching and not Sri Waheguru. Therefore they have full faith in themselves and they consider their own teachinges divine and imply they are the Lord.
We are all learners in this universe. There is only one school and it is run by the One Lord, who is the HeadMaster. He has established many classes and knows each student intimately. Courses are set depending on what the Headmaster wishes each student o learn, and He places each student in a class of His choice. The students have no say in the matter but some try very hard to change classes and courses without having understood what was being taught in the class they were allocated to. Some regress whilst they twist and turn, and some have no idea that they are even in a class. This is entirely the Lord’s play.

At the moment the Lord has asked SGGS ji to teach me, so SGGS ji is my current teacher. I have no external class-room other than my mind, and as the Lord is with me at all times, I have absolutely no fear of making an error with respect to my studies. The Lord is always with me so can always correct me. I cannot hide my actions from Him. I have no emotional attachment to SGGS ji, to any other Guru, or Sikhism, and will peacefully accept any change if the Lord so desires. He sets the path, and I will do my best to follow wherever He takes me. If I fall by the wayside, then I will have to wait until He has time for me.


This a false analogy because Sri Waheguru ji teaches us that Sikhs are not just learners, but they go above and beyond that and are servants of his. Gurbani reminds us thousands of times to become the servant of Sri Waheguru ji. Also to take the analogy that we are learners, students in a class and Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the teacher, is say we can pass the headmaster and prove him wrong. Which happens in a student and teacher relationship. So its not in accordance with Gurbani.

Further, to say the Lord is always with me is over simplifying Sri Waheguru ji existent. Sri Waheguru ji has two forms. Sargun(with attributes) and Nirgun(no attributes). Sri Waheguru ji is with everyone in the nirgun form, no matter who the person is. The person can be a Sant or be a fake Sant or a criminal or a good citizen. The difference comes when Sri Waheguru is with someone always in the Sargun form. This means the person actually has met Sri Waheguru ji and only this person can claim Sri Waheguru ji is always with me in totality. And the test to see if the person has actually met Sri Waheguru ji is to see if they say anything against Gurbani. If they do then it's a fact they don't have Sri Waheguru ji with them and are just saying it to confuse others and are trying to take people off the path of Sikhi. Otherwise a criminal can just claim, Sri Waheguru ji is always with me so when i do something wrong then he will correct me, therefore i am not held accountable for my actions and whatever I do and say is the truth.
The Lord has guided me to believe that all my lessons, appropriate for me at this moment, are to be found in SGGS ji. Tomorrow it may be another source. That is His prerogative and I have developed this understanding from SGGS ji. SGGS ji has lead me to understand that I should attach myself to the Lord alone and nothing else whatsoever, and that includes any emotional attachment to the School’s teachers such as SGGS ji.

Actually Gurbani teaches to attach yourself to the True Guru and the True Guru is Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Beyond this point you have just repeated the false analogy and I have responded to it, showing why it's false. Your preception of Sikhi is based on a false analogy, so there is no need to go further here.

This is just as in any material school attended to in this world, with the only difference being an unbreakable attachment to the Headmaster, but at the same time seeing the school, classes, students, teachers, and clutter as various manifestations of Him and all His work, some heeding Him, and others putting on a show for Him. The seed of the Lord God within me is making that comparison and it is very right and proper for it to do that, but I need only watch the drama unfold and take no physical action.

If I understood Sikhi to be as you state, then I would fixate on SGGS ji, or on one or more Gurus, and on the rituals and practices of modern day Sikhism, instead of fixating on the Lord. This would put me in a layby, which most claimed adherents of Sikhism are in. I believe most of them to be completely stuck in ritual. They are ensnared by their emotional attachments to the rituals of religion and cannot see how it hinders them. They cannot undertake deeds without comparison with what the Lord would do in the same situation, as they have not dwelt on what pleases the Lord. They cannot live truthfully as they do not consider what living truthfully is., so they end up as hypocrites. The complete idea of any Rehat Maryada is totally at odds with SGGS ji as a fixed set of standards it is the very foundation stone of ritual without thought. God is free to do as He pleases, is all pervading and will do exactly as He pleases whether there is a Rehat Maryada or not. No one can bind the Lord and the disparity in beliefs across the world is testament to the fact. Claimed Sikhs, patit or non-patit, represent only some 0.4% of the whole population of mankind, and most of the 24 million lack any understanding of SGGS ji. The idea is to be Akal Moorat, (image of the Lord) and to live as He would, totally abandon following ritual blindly. How can one merge with the Lord, if one does not act like the Lord? One can only learn to behave like the Lord, if one recognises the Lord to be everywhere, in each and every soul, irrespective of their outward behaviour. I have bad behaviour, as I am still very learning, but I do appreciate I can’t learn to manage ti more like the Lord, if I simply bow my head to my teacher in deference , eat the school dinner and then go home to carry on as previously. Would my teacher like that sort of student ? Only the teacher who has no interest in his students, (ie like the Brahmins who rejected people of low caste, and kept learning of Sanskrit for an elect few). Now we are down to “learned Sikh scholars” who can reveal the deep hidden knowledge in SGGS ji – ie modern day Brahmin Pandits. Well the students who attend these Gurdwaras don’t know the language now, whether they speak Punjabi or not, and this is all down to the effect of the Rehat Maryada.
First please understand your false analogy and then it would become clear your thoughts here are really untrue. Without roots a tree cannot provide support for it's branches and trunk. Just like a tree, an opinion needs roots.
The moderated section of this website does not allow me to state what was in the last paragraph elsewhere on this site, as it is termed as disrespectful. I have to appease moderators who have a different understanding. Maybe this is where you previously developed notions of deception and venom from. There is no deception, only truth, and some find it very hard to swallow the truth without getting angry. This is all in accord with SGGS ji

I wish you well in your studies


Sat Sri Akal
I am glad the mods are here, and regulate this forum. Otherwise people with bad intentions take advantage of this discussion forum and start slandering Gurbani. And members here have done this in the past many times. Actually Gurbani was slandered in this post I responded to by uttering Gurbani is in accordance with something when it truly is not and the person had the full knowledge of their actions.
User avatar
himmat_singh
Power User
Posts: 990
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:33 am
Contact:

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by himmat_singh »

Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

Veer Ranjit S Bhinder ji,

As you know you submitted a post on 24 Sept 2010 in the discussion forum topic : "What are the true reasons for the Sikh appearance?" viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4089&start=50

You were writing in response to a number of my various previous posts, mostly on that topic, but maybe not necessarily limited to that topic.
himmat ji,

It would be helpful to any discussion if there was less sarcasm in the posts. What you claim to be opinions are a direct attack on the written philosophy of the Gurus. It does not take much interpretation to understand that the Gurus are writing that They are expounding one message. To say otherwise and to couch one's statements as mere opinion is either being ignorant of the Guru's message or one is just going to extremes to justify one's misguided opinion to justify not keeping kes.
Not quite - the insistence upon keeping hair is at odds, not keeping hair.
It is helpful that you keep clarifying your positions. However, no Guru insisted on anyone following the path They laid out. My thoughts or yours are irrelevant when it comes to Gurbani.

In your opinion, is it possible for any one of the ten human Gurus to do or say anything that goes against the spririt or letter of Gurbani as written in SGGS Ji?

I stand by my use of "arrogance" as it has been displayed many times here. By insisting that one remain "open minded" in the deliberate distortion of the Guru's philosophy is an example of such a display.
If you were to survey the 85% odd sikhs who don't keep kesh, and the talks they listen to in diwan halls pushing them to keep kesh, and to get their children to keep kesh, you might find quite a lot of them don't care much for kesh, and are quite happy without keeping it.
When Guru Nanak tested His Sikhs, He did not take a survey. He found one who was worthy. When Guru Gobind Singh Ji tested His Sikhs, He found five who stood above the rest. That does not mean the Gurus abandoned the rest of the Sikhs. It is a challenge for the rest to measure up and not to look around first to see what others are doing. Those on the Guru's path do not take a consensus.
I wouldn't say they are all arrogant, just because they disagree, and neither are they denigrating sikh philosophy.
Please do not attempt to distort what I wrote. I wrote that you were denigrating Sikh philosophy by insisting that the Guru was doing something that is anti-SGGS Ji.
At least three different members have asked me to provide quotes on this topic already.
I believe that it was obvious that they asking you to justify your position via Gurbani.
I'm not convinced about your opinion on "No Sikh ever believes...salvation". I think there are plenty that believe that is all they need to do.
Why don't you name who these "plenty" are?
Whilst they swallow this, behaviour is pretty much unchanged, and is little different at all, to that of mona sikhs. Different styles, but pretty much the same theme. The stumbling seems to be as much as mona sikhs, only its not perceived as stumbling by those who stumble.
"Swallow"?? This is the kind of condescending attitude displayed by those who feel they are above those with blind faith. Yet, these are the same people who continually lecture us about seeing everyone as equals.
I didn't think I was trying to be wiser than the Guru, but if that is your perception then fine. SGGS ji speaks and if I requote Guru ji, then I don't think I am trying to be wiser.
If one simply quotes Gurbani and gives one's opinion within the bounds of Sikhi, then no one will have any problem with it. Otherwise, one should expect challenges.
I thought Guru Nanak ji only really advocated three essentials: Naam Japna (Consciousness of God); Vand Chakna (Sharing with others) and Kirat Karni (earn a living truthfully).
It is good that one is familiar with those principles. I am sure one can find them quoted in Gurbani. Those who practiced just piri got stuck at naam japna. The other two were slowly ignored over time as it did not fit their world view, as the world became more and more of an illusion or fake.
Focus on appearances was treated as one of those insignificant pursuits of people who shaved their heads completely, or kept bodhis, whilst still conducting non-virtuous deeds.
One can keep the form the Guru gave whilst conducting virtuous deeds.

_/\_



I will go through what you wrote bit by bit:
It would be helpful to any discussion if there was less sarcasm in the posts.
This has to work both ways. I have faith in my beliefs. Some have recently said my opinions(my beliefs) are expresed out of ego, arrogance, mischief, malice, venom and so on. Basically, what I believe is being termed by a few to be attacks on Sikhi. I know for fact that it is not even if you or others don't accept it. I wouldn't be on this site so many hours a day, wasting my time. I don't have time to try to progress people in Sikhi if I am not interested in Sikhi. I would follow some other religion that wasn't Sikhi. I could also give more time to my children who need me.

Whether you say so or not, virtually everybody else who uses this site, who end up in extended debates/discussions with me also have high levels of pride. Their pride is in the Sikhi that they believe to be Sikhi. I am NOT saying there is anything wrong with that. I have pride in my set of beliefs as well.

Problems arise when someone wishes to dominate others, whether it is me trying to dominate, others trying to dominate me, and make out others as all out of accord with Sikhi, if they don't line up with their own thinking.

They will ask others to justify, again and again from Gurbani, and even when presented with it, will ignore it ( it works both ways - I will ignore quotes from outside SGGS ji). This happened throughout the "Was Guru Nanak God?" thread, and that has only subsided as 5ikh ji got quite uncivil towards both me and drdln ji.

It becomes pointless when someone is abusing and defaming someone by open use of the person's true identity, doesn't reveal himself, and then is also being backed up by the moderator( eg the very unhelpful frogs comment by the moderator)

Bundha ji recently suggested as I was trying to have the last word. Well it goes both ways. At the moment it is like 1 against 5, so my mutiple responses look like I am trying to have the last word, but if you add up the other posts, then I am not more than 50% at all. On top of this, you can put my comments into perspective . 85% sikhs generally aren't bothered, so most will not be on this forum. They know they have no say in affairs anyway, unless its voting time at the gurdwara then people with rated appearances rush around with leaflets and requests to vote ( I had it in last 2 weeks)

Sometimes some have completey misunderstood me, and still engage in attacking me, simply extending the threads pointlessly ( as in the appearance thread - the only point I was making was that appearance without true love for God, was pointless - the rest developed; similarly on the kirtan thread, where I used a few rash words, and I accept that, but still others did not let up).

There are some members who don't engage in nonsensical tit for tat posts, eg : Theodorus ji, Serjinder Singh ji, Kuldip S Virdi ji, Punjabi G, drdln ji, Suji Singh ji, Lee Douglas ji, dalbirk ji. Such people express wise, succinct words in an open-minded fashion and then move on. I applaud them, but I don't always express the applause.

When others try to set about demolishing my faith in my beliefs, with concomitant use of abusive, derogotary. humiliating or perjorative words, I am not about to lie down, just as ones who don't accept my opinions don't let up( see 5ikhs post some way above on this thread, asking members on methods to deal with 2/3 members after accusing them of venom/poison against Sikhi). I don't mind them having different opinions, its the insinuating language that boosts the ego to defend oneself.

So persistent posts from me has to be taken in context of what I receive. I try to avoid any abuse including sarcasm, and am sorry if that is coming through.
What you claim to be opinions are a direct attack on the written philosophy of the Gurus.
See, here we go again. You and some others just don't stop accusing me. Why should I accept such sleights against my character? It is just so uncivil to knock somebody else's faith on the basis that it doesn't fit in with your own perception.

For example, how how many sects exist in Christianity and in Islam - loads. There are sects in Buddhism and in Hinduism. And there are different ideas on Sikhi as well. They do not automatically rank as direct attacks on written philosophy of the Gurus. They are different interpretations of the same philosophy. I went through with 5ikh ji above (schools/headmaster etc).
It does not take much interpretation to understand that the Gurus are writing that They are expounding one message. To say otherwise and to couch one's statements as mere opinion is either being ignorant of the Guru's message or one is just going to extremes to justify one's misguided opinion to justify not keeping kes.
I really wonder whether some do think about the words in even one primary bani - Japji Sahib. This is the problem I am up against - people who don't understand fundamental bani, but who insist it is important to recite and keep appearances up, and then have the audacity to write to tell me I am the one attacking Sikhi. The situation is perverse.

We have to sort this out to stop accusations and counter-accusations:

Tell me frankly what do you think Guru ji is getting at in this section of Japji Sahib (Stanza 3):
gaavai ko thaan hovai kisai thaan ||
gaavai ko dhaath jaanai neesaan ||
gaavai ko gun vaddiaaeeaa chaar ||
gaavai ko vidhiaa vikham veechaar ||
gaavai ko saaj karae than khaeh ||
gaavai ko jeea lai fir dhaeh ||
gaavai ko jaapai dhisai dhoor ||
gaavai ko vaekhai haadharaa hadhoor ||
kathhanaa kathhee n aavai thott ||
kathh kathh kathhee kottee kott kott ||
dhaedhaa dhae laidhae thhak paahi ||
jugaa juga(n)thar khaahee khaahi ||
hukamee hukam chalaaeae raahu ||
naanak vigasai vaeparavaahu ||3||


Some sing of His Power-who has that Power?
Some sing of His Gifts, and know His Sign and Insignia.
Some sing of His Glorious Virtues, Greatness and Beauty.
Some sing of knowledge obtained of Him, through difficult philosophical studies.
Some sing that He fashions the body, and then again reduces it to dust.
Some sing that He takes life away, and then again restores it.
Some sing that He seems so very far away.
Some sing that He watches over us, face to face, ever-present.
There is no shortage of those who preach and teach.
Millions upon millions offer millions of sermons and stories.
The Great Giver keeps on giving, while those who receive grow weary of receiving.
Throughout the ages, consumers consume.
The Commander, by His Command, leads us to walk on the Path.
O Nanak, He blossoms forth, Carefree and Untroubled. ||3||
The last two lines are critical, and the Stanza, early in Japji Sahib in an attempt to ensure no-one gets mislead and get deluded into thinking otherwise, give Guru's ji's opinion on how God disseminates opinion.

It follows comments on unchanging nature of truth, dodgy practices to fool God, and then advice to simply follow the Lord wherever the Lord takes one. This is preceded in SGGS by the mool mantar to ensure no-one forgets their common origin in the Primal Lord.

All holy texts, and that includes the Bible, Koran, Vedas,Torah and now Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji as well, are ALL opinion. However, it is the Lord who leads any particular individual, or group of individuals, to follow one route or another, or makes up yet another. This is the true rational reasoning behind Sikh philosophy. That is what makes it universal. There is NO set practice and so my opinion cannot be any attack on Sikhi. Sikhi is universal. It applies irrespective of my opinion, Guru ji's opinion, Jesus's opinion or Mohammed's opinion. God is all that counts and everything else is totally trivial in that context. It does not matter whether I shave, cut my body in half, stand on one leg, live in a cave, claiming to be closer to God because of my practice. Nitnem, keeping hair etc all fall into same category. They are all insignificant, IF there is NO faith in God. The word "IF" is critical, so please read it and appreciate it before you come back to slam me. God leads one, and God will blossom forth irrespective of any attempt to reach/satisfy Him. Everything is with the Grace of God. So keep your hair if you want, and let others shave if they want. They are both compatible with Sikhi. However keeping hair, or shaving hair, whilst there is no love for the Lord is incompatible with Sikhi

I think some of will benefit by reading only a stanza a day. This is not trying to be condescending or arrogant, but if someone reads the above bani daily, yet fails to understand this basic advice, is simply reciting with no contemplation.
So many are so tied to practices, they have forgotten to try to understand bani. If somone says it not right to simply look the part whilst not attempting to understand, then it is termed an attack on Sikhi.

However I would like to read your understanding of that stanza, and whether you choose to disregard it.
My thoughts or yours are irrelevant when it comes to Gurbani.
Here you are mistaken. Without kaatha there would be no kaathakaars. They unravel embedded meanings in Gurbani, and it needs to be, and each will have a different take on it. If you have learnt something it is good to share your thoughts ( A sikh of the guru carries others across as well)
In your opinion, is it possible for any one of the ten human Gurus to do or say anything that goes against the spririt or letter of Gurbani as written in SGGS Ji?
Not just my opinion, it is Guru ji's opinion as well. Only the Lord is perfect and knows all.

Page 5
naanak jay ko aapou jaanai agai ga-i-aa na sohai. ||21||
O Nanak, one who claims to know everything shall not be decorated in the world hereafter. ||21||
I stand by my use of "arrogance" as it has been displayed many times here. By insisting that one remain "open minded" in the deliberate distortion of the Guru's philosophy is an example of such a display.
You are welcome to treat me as arrogant, but I don't think it is wise for you to keep repeating it. It leads to degeneration of topics. Your perception of me does not mitigate the fact that many who class anything that is not agreeable with their own beliefs, also display themselves as intolerant of others beliefs, despite widespread claims to be tolerant. There is also no deliberate distortion, but is my understanding without any attempt to distort. If you don't want to understand and only recite, then that's up to you.
Please do not attempt to distort what I wrote. I wrote that you were denigrating Sikh philosophy by insisting that the Guru was doing something that is anti-SGGS Ji.
You find it okay to openly say I am denigrating Sikh philosophy, without explaining why, which to me is distortion of my posts, yet don't want me to distort yours. So where does the problem lie?

Whether you see me as denigrating Sikh philosophy or not, depends on whether you believe all Gurus to always be in accord with previous Nanaks. I would say there was development and evolution throughout, so what there was at the end in 1708 is not the same as when Guru Nanak set out. There have been major turning points such as in 1606. Furthermore what you see in 2010 is not necessarily the same as in 1708 either. I don't know whether 10th Guru ji rejected monas at all, and if he did whether it wass solely on basis of shorn hair. IF (please remember this word) he did, then it would be against SGGS ji. Furthermore there exist sects that uphold SGGS ji but who have no qualms over hair. They may all be "wrong", but they are not denigrating sikh philosophy. They just have a different understanding of it.
I'm not convinced about your opinion on "No Sikh ever believes...salvation". I think there are plenty that believe that is all they need to do.
Why don't you name who these "plenty" are?


We could start with the people argung over the Windsor Gurdwara (one of many Gurdwaras that committees tussle over). Supposedly only Sikhs serve on committees. So, these Sikhs have the appearance but not the understanding. They fight over money, power and buildings. They employ Granthis with appearance of Sikhs who do paaths as requested, yet these same Granthis should have good understanding of Guru ji. They collectively mislead the sangats into thinking paying for an Akhand Paath wil resolve their ills, and/or will earn Gurus grace. There is no deliberation, no contemplation yet there are ideas of salvation being promulgated by people ensnared by Maya themselves, but with very good appearances and strong hands on the reins.
I thought Guru Nanak ji only really advocated three essentials: Naam Japna (Consciousness of God); Vand Chakna (Sharing with others) and Kirat Karni (earn a living truthfully).
It is good that one is familiar with those principles. I am sure one can find them quoted in Gurbani. Those who practiced just piri got stuck at naam japna. The other two were slowly ignored over time as it did not fit their world view, as the world became more and more of an illusion or fake.
? It would be good if you discussed this on the topic inititated just for this purpose. I don't know what you are getting out, suggesting Naam Japna gets one stuck with "just piri", and the other two were "ignored".
One can keep the form the Guru gave whilst conducting virtuous deeds.
We are agreed upon this, which leads me to wonder why so many are out to clamp down on me (and maybe others, who don't care for standing up to replies from intolerant people). Is it virtuous to slate people who hold different belief systems? Sikhs openly and regularly slate muslims, hindus, mona-sikhs, and deras. They slate each other as well when voting time comes around. They split off to form separate gurdwaras when they don't get their way in elections, and they form separate gurdwaras on basis of caste. Their langar seva is more often that not, a seva to themselves, and to people who already have big bellies. They force disabled people to sit on floors to listen to Guru ji, or to eat langar, even if the person struggles to sit down and get up. They force people to listen in incomprehensible languages, whilst sometimes using projectors which highlights the farcity. If people understood they would need no projectors. They adorn Guruji more and more, as years pass by. Sachkhands are built, and no doubt, in time they they will be lined with gold leaf walls.Yet the formless Lord resides in Sachkhand. If there are multiple Sachkhands and can be built so easily, then why not have one built in one's own home? -- just live in it. They make daily supplications to the Lord with long lists of requests following sponsored paaths yet Guru ji says a sikh does not beg, but accepts and surrenders to the Will of the Lord. The Lord does as He does, and will do as He does. Yet they wander around in their robes and sparkling swords. If they were actually virtuous at heart and tried to impart the Gurus teachings to all the sangat, with the flexibility and compassion that Guru Nanak Dev ji recommended, then no-one would look twice at their form. They would know the form to be that of a virtuous person, and more would want to be like that person, as a true person exudes an aura that attracts.

Sat Sri Akal

Moderator Note: The above message was reported as offensive:
"This post is attacking Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and violating section 5 of the forum rules. Here is what Himmat says: "All holy texts, and that includes the Bible, Koran, Vedas,Torah and now Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji as well, are ALL opinion." Section 5 says: (5) Attacks on the Guru Granth Sahib and Sikh Panth: The Guru Granth Sahib is the ultimate authority of the Sikhs. Its abuse or disrespect towards it in any form, directly or implied, will not be tolerated. Ridicule of the Sikh Religion, Sikh Scriptures, 5Ks or of the Khalsa will not be allowed. Himmat attacks the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji by saying it is not the Ultimate authority."
We agree. Himmat Singh is banned from further posting for one week. Next time the ban will be longer.
deepharn
Power User
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:22 am

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by deepharn »

This is in reference to the banning of Himmat Singh. This judgement is unfair becuse it is too little and the offensive material should be expunged from the website. Once the ban is over, he will again start writing but our new readers and young people would naver know he was banned for these offensive writings.

Which offensive writings should be expunged? Please read my views -


I am pained and am sure that many others also by repeatedmis-interpretation of Gurbani by Himmat Singh who in 700 days of joiningthis website has more than 885 postings, each longer and angular, most ofthem hitting at the sikhi practices from different angles..

1. Sikhs have maintained unshorn hair since time of Guru Nanak and no bodyquestioned it thus far. Nine Gurus came, innumerous sikhs came, many scholars came, many rulers came and now comes Himmat Singh who is trying to justify his not keeping the long hair by mis-interpreting Gurbani.

2. In Gurbani, many hymns on hair, which himmat singh is repeatedly quotingare targeted to a certain segment of other religions following certain rituals.

3. Sikh Gurus who composed Gurbani, in their understanding of same,maintained unshorn hair. My understanding is that maintaing unshorn hair are a sign of surrender to God, practice starting from one own self, thebody itself. There are numerous hymns in SGGS Ji that say to surrender tothe will of God - to me each one means start from yuor body itself andunless there is a medical emergency, dont fiddle with this body.

4. In SGGS Ji, no where it is said that cut your arm, or ear or eye ordont. same applies to hair. This is a coomon sense issue and the verdicthas been given by sikh Gurus by maintaing unshorn hair. Not only Sikh Gurusbut many learned/scholarly sikhs since that time.

5. For simplicity to understand, in any relationship, in any science, inany field, there are certain axioms. Between sikh and Guru also. These canbe discussed for cheap popularity. The sikh wants to follow the belowedGuru in all ways,even in appearance.

6.Sikh rehat Maryada was made by more than 100 very devoted and learnedsikhs/sikh representatives and discussed for nearly two decades beforebeing accepted by the Panth. - But today suddenly, Himmat singh thinks, asis clear from his postings on this thread and on the related thread ofdevotional music, that he knows better than the Gurus, than many sikhs whohave lived so far and all the sikh scholars so far.

7. There are many ways to follow the Guru - try to understand every line ofGurbani and interpret it properly. The simple way is to follow the lifestyle of Guru for a head start and continue to learn and understandGurbani, as much as possible. The devoted sikhs try to do both.

8. SGGS Ji is universal, many people refer to it, some follow it, somepratice it, some preach it - every one can interpret it they way they likeand good luck to them. But it cannot be used on sikh website to prove thatsikh Gurus did not follow it. Sikh Gurus lived it and sikhs are trying tofollow their Gurus. If some one person is repeatedly attempting to do itdeliberately, then it sends a wrong mesage to young and new readers.

9. In sikhi, we devotees feel that there is no difference between Guru andGod - this has been mentioned in many places in SGGs JI. But, Himmat singhJi, has told us that Sikh Guru has human limitations - these are not smallobservations when already by numerous examples he is mentioning that Guruswere preaching some thing else but practising some thing else.

Sir, we visit this website and encourage young children and our friends tovisit it to understand Gurbani. Freedom of speech is a relative term and should not be used against thebasic sikhi foundations on the website of sikhs. How long should thepractising sikhs be exposed to misinterpretations of Gurbani every morningand evening by a non-practising sikh, who has lots of time and money to post 885 agonising long postings in 700 days?

Sir, kindly consider that on an elite sikh website, if somebody isinsisting on monopolising and propogating his wayward thoughts on basictenets of sikhi, on life style of Sikh Gurus, then should such a person benot banned on participating on any of the components/part of this website,moderated and or unmoderated, and all his postings expunged immediately to set an example.

What has the cber sangat to say, please.

Thanks.
cirrus
Active Forum User
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:30 am

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by cirrus »

It is nice to see that the moderators have finally taken note of the derogatory remarks by this member( himmat Singh).Actually there are many other posts in th e discussion where this member has shown and commented very disrespectfully on sikh History , Gurus and sikh way of life.

But what happens to the hundreds of such posts which this member has already posted on the Sikhnet?
I strongly feel that they too should be immediately expunged lest they vitiate the and offend someone who reads them at a later stage.
suji singh
Power User
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:01 pm
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by suji singh »

Deepharn Ji wrote:
This is in reference to the banning of Himmat Singh. This judgement is unfair becuse it is too little and the offensive material should be expunged from the website. Once the ban is over, he will again start writing but our new readers and young people would naver know he was banned for these offensive writings
So, you want to ban all opinions that do not agree with yours and you want to expunge materials that you deem offensive.
Interpretation of any holy book is subjective, you seem to be implying it is your way or highway.

When dissenting opinions are not honored/allowed, people stagnate and perish!
deepharn
Power User
Posts: 367
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 5:22 am

Re: Sikhism Today! - will we survive??? (UNMODERATED)

Post by deepharn »

Dear Suji Singh Ji,

Who am I that views should not differ from me. I am just one individual of cyber sangat. The issue is far more important than what one individual thinks. It has an implication for the whole community and as this medium lives for ever, for many generations. Sikh appearance is known to all for it has been established during (and not after) the Sikh Gurus were on earth for nearly two centuries.

The bigger issue is that Gurbani should not be interpreted in a way that is contrary to the living style of Gurus themselves and so many sikhs who have come on Earth since the time of Guru Nanak. Many sikhs in modern times, including Prof sahib Singh, Bhai Veer Singh, Yogi Harbhajan Singh, Baba Iqbal Singh Ji have shown us what the sikhi way of life is? In earlier times, right from Bhai taru singh, Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Sant Attar Singh, Bhai Randhir Singh, we know what sikh appearance is.

If any one individual starts mentioning that he has found a new way of sikh life which is different from that of Gurus, should please consider the sikh history and sentiments of sikhs. The impact that it has on sikh children, genuine seekers of knowledge, and visitors is immense.

There are other numerous instances where sikh beleifs have been disgraced by Himmat Singh. On Gurus being simple humans with human limitations - even during the time of Guru Nanak, Hindus were calling him their saint and muslims as their saint - how great must Guru Nanak be. Think of each of the Gurus. We, simple mortals do not even have the capability of watching and understanding a single aspect of the Guru. we sikhs bow our head to SGGS Ji where so many times it has been mentioned that God and Guru are same for a sikh. In the latter part of SGGS Ji, Bhatts have attempted to explain the greatness of Guru ji's. And now some person comes and says, your gurus had human limitations, hurts many sikhs, Suji Singh Ji.


My understanding of SGGS Ji is different from yours and should be, for we have limitations but to put the 500 years of sikh history on its head and proclaimimg that one can understand Gurbani better than the composer themsleves, is too disgracing.

Suji Singh Ji, writing 885 posts in 700 days for a single person, and such long and winding posts, most of which malign sikh way of life and beliefs is not so easy. What is the reason of that spirited attempt to interpret every thing a new and in a different way from established facts? A sikh is a beloved of the Guru and that should not be the reason of all jokes and sarcastic remarks. These days people say that sikhs are a butt of many jokes and are getting sensitive to that fact. On this very website of sikhs, are practicing sikhs not being ridiculed and made to look like jokers, who do not understand their Gurus and their bani and have been in sikhi for that many years.

Freedom is a relative term and should not be abused. One persons freedom should not become another persons agony - one persons freedom should not imply that the members of the whole community have to devote all time to defend their beleifs from scratch. there are certain things which are respected in every family, in every relationship and in every converastaion. If all respect to the sikh Gurus and established members of sikh community has to be thrown to the wind, then what is the alternative.

If Himmat Singh has a contrarion view point on some aspect from that of Sikh Gurus, then freedom on this sikh site should not be exploited.

Every one can have a view on everything - there are so many things to discuss and are being discussed every time many in a lively way. There is so much to learn from each other on sikhi and sikhi way of life, on gurbani, on meanings of gurbani and on gurbani viyakaran, on sikh history, on problrms of sikhs and their joys in every day life. Is the only thing left is to discuss that Sikh Gurus were like any other human and that they composed Gurbani but were not able to undertand the meaning of Gurbani?

We are all humans, we all have weaknesses/limitations of mind and flesh - none of us is complete. I have met many many sikhs who drink, have cut their hair and practice other vices - none, none ever said that Gurbani permits all this - no body ever justified their weakness by invoking Gurbani. Rather, every one said that they know the high ideals set by Gurus and their sikhs and we, god willing, will reach there one day. And here comes one person who wants to push those high established ideals in dust?

Sir, we are a chain in human history - we have a role for the next generations - we should not try to pollute the young minds - we should hand over sikhi way of life to the next generation in as pristine a way as we got from our elders, according to me.

Banning from posting material is one thing, but that offensive material continues to sit there, which should logically be expunged. And, sample yourself and decide how much material is against the established sikh philosophy, much of it is derogatory and put in a clever language, which hurts - that is the reason I submitted that all the 885 long and winding and spirited postings, most of which are angular with a zeal to malign the existing beliefs, unbelievably written by a single person should be expunged - this is simply logical and would be exemplary.

Thanks
Post Reply