A Known Story
The story is hardly new. Every few weeks, we see reports by journalists that reinforce a well-known reality – many Sikh men in Punjab are cutting their hair and removing their turbans. I am hardly an alarmist. I do believe that despite the overwhelming trend, there are countercurrents as well. In an earlier post, I described what I have termed a ‘Sikh turn’.
Although many Sikh youths have for the time being removed their turbans, their sense of a religio-ethnic identity still remains strong. Maybe the temptations of modernity and especially the desires of the opposite sex are strong and many feel that at this point in their life they would rather pursue women and cannot live up to the great ideals of their Gurus. This should not be read as a rejection of those ideals but a realization of where they are and their priorities at this time. (Though this may be the case of those that remove their pagri on their own account and not in those families and children where they never had it as many in the diaspora)
As discussed previously, the ‘Sikh turn’ is occurring. The psychological tragedy of the post-1993 Sikh community is beginning to wane and we may be witnessing the dawn of a new era. It may not be in the Khalsa symbolic form that many hope, but a religio-ethnic movement is occurring. The youth are not disinterested and disconnected; they are engaged and can be mobilized. The pull of the pagri is not dead in Punjab either as we see many Bihari migrants joining the Qaum’s ranks. This is a good sign. A new generation will soon have its own version of ‘pagri sambhal jatta.’[link]
A recent article in the Washington Post revisits the issue, highlighting a looming impending court case.
Now, a court case about college admission quotas for Sikhs is threatening to alienate hundreds of thousands of short-haired, un-turbaned youths.
In August, four students petitioned the high court after they applied to a medical college under a Sikh quota but were denied admission. The college said the students, who had cut their hair, did not fit in the category of Sikh. In the ongoing legal proceedings, religious bodies and scholars have testified about the importance of uncut hair to Sikhism.
“The case is about college admission quotas, but it has become part of dinner table conversations everywhere. People are asking, ‘What am I? What will I be after the judgment?’ It is unsettling,” said Gurminder Singh Gill, an attorney for the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, an elected forum of the Sikh clergy that runs the college and whose rules are designed to prevent the dilution of Sikh symbols. “The court ruling will impact future interpretations of the word ‘Sikh.’ “[link]
It does seem rather odd that the SGPC lawyer is so explicit about his opinions to call for an end of keshadhari quotas. Would the SGPC really want someone like this responding to the case?
Although I don’t want to go too much on a tangent, I did want to make a few comments about the article. I find it extremely problematic the use of ‘ritual’ in the title (pagh salute QC!). For many Sikhs – those that proudly wear their turban and even for some that choose not to wear one due to their understanding of its importance – than it is definitely not a ‘ritual.’ As an important writer, once stated: These are not symbols.
Another problem is the frequent juxtaposition between ‘modern’ and ‘traditional.’ Somehow in the article, we are too believe that a young boy that cut his hair is ‘modern’:
Text messaging with one hand and holding a cup of milky tea in the other, spiky-haired Amandeep Singh Saini, 27, recalled the year-long battle he waged against his traditional Sikh parents to cut his hair.
Somehow we are to believe that it is normal that he should cut his hair and have spiky hair, as afterall he does ‘text message.’ I assume keshadhari Sikhs do not text-message? Unfortunately such ridiculousness is hardly new nor will it soon be abated.
Regardless, I will open this thread to here your thoughts on the case and on the story, NOT to hear your PERSONAL definition of a Sikh.
According to the Sikh Rehit Maryada, we have one:
Any human being who faithfully believes in
i. One Immortal Being,
ii. Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib,
iii. The Guru Granth Sahib,
iv. The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and
v. the baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh
Stick to topic or the thread will be closed.
56 Responses to “A Known Story”
It is the direct result of the brutal political/military/economic/cultural occupation of Sikh nation.
"SIKH MARAYADA" is the collective wisidom of learned SIKHS .
The 5 K's is not given in "GURU GRANTH SAHIB" which is suppose to be our eternal GURU.
However having said this ;
since the "SANGAT" enjoys a divine status in SIKH religion .
It should be put to vote by all SIKHS in the world the exact role of 5 K's.
It is the direct result of the brutal political/military/economic/cultural occupation of Sikh nation.
“SIKH MARAYADA” is the collective wisidom of learned SIKHS .
The 5 K’s is not given in “GURU GRANTH SAHIB” which is suppose to be our eternal GURU.
However having said this ;
since the “SANGAT” enjoys a divine status in SIKH religion .
It should be put to vote by all SIKHS in the world the exact role of 5 K’s.
Just an observation – the homoeroticism in the picture is striking. The newly 'cut' boy sits proudly on his friend's lap as his friends' arms cradle him around his waste.
Just an observation – the homoeroticism in the picture is striking. The newly ‘cut’ boy sits proudly on his friend’s lap as his friends’ arms cradle him around his waste.
When I visited India it took me a while to get used to this. I thought that everybody had gone gay there my first week there and this was in 1996. Does the close male bonding still go on there these days.
But I wonder what the average washington post reader thinks.
Just an observation – the homoeroticism in the picture is striking. The newly ‘cut’ boy sits proudly on his friend’s lap as his friends’ arms cradle him around his waste.
Just an observation – the homoeroticism in the picture is striking. The newly ‘cut’ boy sits proudly on his friend’s lap as his friends’ arms cradle him around his waste.
When I visited India it took me a while to get used to this. I thought that everybody had gone gay there my first week there and this was in 1996. Does the close male bonding still go on there these days.
But I wonder what the average washington post reader thinks.
You just demoted Guru Gobind Singh ji from Guru to a plain human. 5Ks were dictated by Guru Gobind Sahib ji and not by leaned Sikhs.
Please Please do your research about Rehet Maryada before writing. Writing that " 5Ks validity should be put up for vote to the sangat" is absurd. If today you want to put Guru’s word up for vote then tomorrow you will say "validity of Guru Granth Sahib should be put up for vote". Request to all that just don’t see your convenience to only consider Guru Granth Sahib jee as Guru and forget what every Guru said before that.
Guru Gobind Singh jee was the Guru that declared Guru Granth Sahib jee is our eternal Guru after him.
You just demoted Guru Gobind Singh ji from Guru to a plain human. 5Ks were dictated by Guru Gobind Sahib ji and not by leaned Sikhs.
Please Please do your research about Rehet Maryada before writing. Writing that ” 5Ks validity should be put up for vote to the sangat” is absurd. If today you want to put Guru’s word up for vote then tomorrow you will say “validity of Guru Granth Sahib should be put up for vote”. Request to all that just don’t see your convenience to only consider Guru Granth Sahib jee as Guru and forget what every Guru said before that.
Guru Gobind Singh jee was the Guru that declared Guru Granth Sahib jee is our eternal Guru after him.
Harinder's comments above are typical of a generation of Sikh men and women who have a vague and ill-defined connection to Sikhi, and conflicting ideas of what it means to be a Sikh. These types of "modern Sikhs", as they like to call themselves, are extremely eager and quick to negate the Articles of the Sikh Faith.
The Sikh religion is being adulterated by patits who want to create a new interpretation and meaning to the Guru's teachings – in order to suit their own lifestyles and choices.
Harinder’s comments above are typical of a generation of Sikh men and women who have a vague and ill-defined connection to Sikhi, and conflicting ideas of what it means to be a Sikh. These types of “modern Sikhs”, as they like to call themselves, are extremely eager and quick to negate the Articles of the Sikh Faith.
The Sikh religion is being adulterated by patits who want to create a new interpretation and meaning to the Guru’s teachings – in order to suit their own lifestyles and choices.
Their must be a reason why GURJI gave all his blessings on
"GURU GRANTH SAHIB".
He could have easily included 5 k's in it but did not do it.
He could have made the "DASM GRANTH " our Guruji bud did not do so.
With all due regards to 5 K's and "DASM GRANTH " and the way it has shaped the SIKHS today
any resoning for above points?
You see Harinder, I am starting to agree with Ibadat Gill as you really have no idea about Sikh History and the claims that you are making that Guru Gobind Singh ji easily could have included his bani as a part of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Please read http://fateh.sikhnet.com/S/StructureSGGS or http://pgsikhyouth.blogspot.com/2008/10/history-o… to get a bit more knowledge about what the history of Guru Granth Sahib jee is before you respond back. Guru Gobind Singh did not include his own verses in the Granth due to his modesty and humility (this is my conslusion), even though he included the bani of Guru Teg Bhadur ji (9th Guru) out of respect.
Again Harinder, please read the history before responding.
Their must be a reason why GURJI gave all his blessings on
“GURU GRANTH SAHIB”.
He could have easily included 5 k’s in it but did not do it.
He could have made the “DASM GRANTH ” our Guruji bud did not do so.
With all due regards to 5 K’s and “DASM GRANTH ” and the way it has shaped the SIKHS today
any resoning for above points?
You see Harinder, I am starting to agree with Ibadat Gill as you really have no idea about Sikh History and the claims that you are making that Guru Gobind Singh ji easily could have included his bani as a part of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Please read http://fateh.sikhnet.com/S/StructureSGGS or http://pgsikhyouth.blogspot.com/2008/10/history-of-sri-guru-granth-sahib-ji.html to get a bit more knowledge about what the history of Guru Granth Sahib jee is before you respond back. Guru Gobind Singh did not include his own verses in the Granth due to his modesty and humility (this is my conslusion), even though he included the bani of Guru Teg Bhadur ji (9th Guru) out of respect.
Again Harinder, please read the history before responding.
Interesting article in the Washington Post…I would not isolate this issue to just Panjab though. That 25%-30% rate of turbaned Sikhs the article mentions is probably similar to North America. Although I'm slightly uncomfortable with the "Mr. Singh International" pageant-like contests, I also appreciate organizations like Akal Purakh Ki Fauj thinking "outside of the box" and finding creative ways to portray the Sikh image. I wonder what other ways, outside of contests, can be used to present the beautiful Sikhi Saroop – that would inspire young Singhs and Kaurs…
Interesting article in the Washington Post…I would not isolate this issue to just Panjab though. That 25%-30% rate of turbaned Sikhs the article mentions is probably similar to North America. Although I’m slightly uncomfortable with the “Mr. Singh International” pageant-like contests, I also appreciate organizations like Akal Purakh Ki Fauj thinking “outside of the box” and finding creative ways to portray the Sikh image. I wonder what other ways, outside of contests, can be used to present the beautiful Sikhi Saroop – that would inspire young Singhs and Kaurs…
An intersting article by by I.J. Singh in Sikhe.com (Wed Jan 09, 2002) – Sikh Au Courante – Modern Sikh?.
An intersting article by by I.J. Singh in Sikhe.com (Wed Jan 09, 2002) – Sikh Au Courante – Modern Sikh?.
Very nice article indeed. Thanks for sharing Balvinder Singh SPS. A must read for all the Modern Sikhs like Harinder (pun)
In response to rpsingh's post, something that we have been doing at our local gurudwara, i.e. having turban tying workshops for little kids, competition every three months to see who ties turban consistently every Sunday and to be honest, the many kids love wearing Turbans now and is more of a norm for them. I am sure there could be other "out of box" ideas that you can suggest.
Very nice article indeed. Thanks for sharing Balvinder Singh SPS. A must read for all the Modern Sikhs like Harinder (pun)
In response to rpsingh’s post, something that we have been doing at our local gurudwara, i.e. having turban tying workshops for little kids, competition every three months to see who ties turban consistently every Sunday and to be honest, the many kids love wearing Turbans now and is more of a norm for them. I am sure there could be other “out of box” ideas that you can suggest.
All SIKHS are modern in there own ways.
By modern I mean contmeporary "TIME" which as per my understanding is nothing more than a mathematical fromulation of keeping change. ( Time is a very deep philosophical paradigm)
If we were to try to be as original as we were designed then we would all look and dress like "NIHANGS".
I suggestyou comapre your photograph with that of your ancestors and you would appreciate the change u have unknowingly under gone.
It is one of the laws of nature tehat changes taek place it amy ne due to
1)"Laws of Entropy"
2)Or the the greatest spaceship we are on " THE EARTH" is zipping itself thru the "ever expanding universe"
3) Evolutionary forces
I dont know which of them is the truth ?
The first SIKH in space will also look very different from you and me.
As for your desire to be a constant you will have to delve deepinto the worldof "CONSTANTS"
There are few "CONSTANTS" in this universe but that is a seperate philosophical discussion point for some other day.
LOVE(Pun)
All SIKHS are modern in there own ways.
By modern I mean contmeporary “TIME” which as per my understanding is nothing more than a mathematical fromulation of keeping change. ( Time is a very deep philosophical paradigm)
If we were to try to be as original as we were designed then we would all look and dress like “NIHANGS”.
I suggestyou comapre your photograph with that of your ancestors and you would appreciate the change u have unknowingly under gone.
It is one of the laws of nature tehat changes taek place it amy ne due to
1)”Laws of Entropy”
2)Or the the greatest spaceship we are on ” THE EARTH” is zipping itself thru the “ever expanding universe”
3) Evolutionary forces
I dont know which of them is the truth ?
The first SIKH in space will also look very different from you and me.
As for your desire to be a constant you will have to delve deepinto the worldof “CONSTANTS”
There are few “CONSTANTS” in this universe but that is a seperate philosophical discussion point for some other day.
LOVE(Pun)
Harinder veerji: Time does not exist. Only in our perception in the waking or sleeping dream.
It's critical not to weigh one's self down with concepts and be sure our words clarify and not add to the confusion of others.
A test I use is, if I can't explain it to a five year old, I don't understand it.
Harinder veerji:
I find it interesting that you question Harinder's interpretation, and then proceed to provide your own.
The reason I am pointing this out is man has fought over interpretation of religion for thousands of years, and not religion itself.
If I assume the Gurus were perfect in every way, there was a reason to everything they did, whether my small mind can comprehend, imagine it or not. Sikh writings are of the rarest type where they were penned by the hands of the mystics themselves. We will not find this in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.
Instead of attempting to interpret what Guru Nanak or Guru Gobind meant, we have a fantastic opportunity to focus on what they focused on, and included in their writings. I don't need to know what Guru Nanak meant, I can go read it myself. I can go read what they all said about everything. We are so blessed.
Rather than judge others by what isn't clearly talked about in our present and eternal guru, is there not enough material there to improve ourselves with?
If we treat others as one eternal spirit, telling someone they know nothing is akin to saying you know nothing yourself. I have read a lot of your posts as a lurker and found this statement surprising.
I am only writing this out of respect for that to get a better understanding of why you are passing your interpretations as higher fact than someone elses.
All of the truths to become the highest, most realized Sikh are enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib. This is fact. Do people simply not listen to the instructions of the tenth guru to hold the Guru Granth Sahib higher than all else and use it to to develop the viewpoint through which to understand things that are not clear?
For me, I find that the Guru Granth Sahib focuses on what's important. It's not to say what's outside of it is not important, however, if I have to start somewhere, and learn from a Guru, I will pick the one penned by the Gurus and not someone's interpretation.
Best regards,
Justasikh
"You see Harinder, I am starting to agree with Ibadat Gill as you really have no idea about Sikh History and the claims that you are making that Guru Gobind Singh ji easily could have included his bani as a part of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Please read http://fateh.sikhnet.com/S/StructureSGGS or http://pgsikhyouth.blogspot.com/2008/10/history-o… to get a bit more knowledge about what the history of Guru Granth Sahib jee is before you respond back. Guru Gobind Singh did not include his own verses in the Granth due to his modesty and humility (this is my conslusion), even though he included the bani of Guru Teg Bhadur ji (9th Guru) out of respect.
Again Harinder, please read the history before responding."
All I want to understand is
"WAHEGURU'S"
mind
dear Justasikhji
Harinder veerji:
Understand Waheguru's mind? How do drops of water know themselves to be a river?
P.s., I just noticed I incorrectly addressed you in my most recent post. It was meant for JP Singh.
By merging with river the water drops shall know what river is like.
By merging with "WAHEGURU" I may understand his mind ????
Harinder veerji: Time does not exist. Only in our perception in the waking or sleeping dream.
It’s critical not to weigh one’s self down with concepts and be sure our words clarify and not add to the confusion of others.
A test I use is, if I can’t explain it to a five year old, I don’t understand it.
Harinder veerji:
I find it interesting that you question Harinder’s interpretation, and then proceed to provide your own.
The reason I am pointing this out is man has fought over interpretation of religion for thousands of years, and not religion itself.
If I assume the Gurus were perfect in every way, there was a reason to everything they did, whether my small mind can comprehend, imagine it or not. Sikh writings are of the rarest type where they were penned by the hands of the mystics themselves. We will not find this in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.
Instead of attempting to interpret what Guru Nanak or Guru Gobind meant, we have a fantastic opportunity to focus on what they focused on, and included in their writings. I don’t need to know what Guru Nanak meant, I can go read it myself. I can go read what they all said about everything. We are so blessed.
Rather than judge others by what isn’t clearly talked about in our present and eternal guru, is there not enough material there to improve ourselves with?
If we treat others as one eternal spirit, telling someone they know nothing is akin to saying you know nothing yourself. I have read a lot of your posts as a lurker and found this statement surprising.
I am only writing this out of respect for that to get a better understanding of why you are passing your interpretations as higher fact than someone elses.
All of the truths to become the highest, most realized Sikh are enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib. This is fact. Do people simply not listen to the instructions of the tenth guru to hold the Guru Granth Sahib higher than all else and use it to to develop the viewpoint through which to understand things that are not clear?
For me, I find that the Guru Granth Sahib focuses on what’s important. It’s not to say what’s outside of it is not important, however, if I have to start somewhere, and learn from a Guru, I will pick the one penned by the Gurus and not someone’s interpretation.
Best regards,
Justasikh
“You see Harinder, I am starting to agree with Ibadat Gill as you really have no idea about Sikh History and the claims that you are making that Guru Gobind Singh ji easily could have included his bani as a part of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Please read http://fateh.sikhnet.com/S/StructureSGGS or http://pgsikhyouth.blogspot.com/2008/10/history-of-sri-guru-granth-sahib-ji.html to get a bit more knowledge about what the history of Guru Granth Sahib jee is before you respond back. Guru Gobind Singh did not include his own verses in the Granth due to his modesty and humility (this is my conslusion), even though he included the bani of Guru Teg Bhadur ji (9th Guru) out of respect.
Again Harinder, please read the history before responding.”
All I want to understand is
“WAHEGURU’S”
mind
dear Justasikhji
Sochay soch na hovayee jai sochay lakh var
Harinder veerji:
Understand Waheguru’s mind? How do drops of water know themselves to be a river?
P.s., I just noticed I incorrectly addressed you in my most recent post. It was meant for JP Singh.
"SIKHA THA MAN NICHA TE MAT UCHI"
Long live the "BEAUTUFUL MIND"
By merging with river the water drops shall know what river is like.
By merging with “WAHEGURU” I may understand his mind ????
Sochay soch na hovayee jai sochay lakh var
“SIKHA THA MAN NICHA TE MAT UCHI”
Long live the “BEAUTUFUL MIND”
GuruPyareyoo… you have so many questions… "I want to" "understand WaheGuru's mind" The only answers we can get is by using GuruMutt (Guru's Philosophy) and not MunMatt (making your own philosophies) and Gurumatt comes from GuruGranth Sahib jee and living your life according to basic tenets set by Guru Gobind Singh jee.
It is very simple to use words like "Universal" and "Humanity" in order to support your own philosophies and firstly, to make your own mind belive it and then post them on the websites like these Where as they refuse to read and accept Guru's Hukum and live your life by Guru ji's Philosophy.
For all the Patits that call themselves Sikhs, must believe in Guru Granth Sahib jee and Guru Gobind Singh ji who gave us hukum for keeping hair. Then don’t these Patits feel guilty sitting in the Barber's chair knowing very well that they be facing their maker one day and that they will have to explain their philosophies at that time?
GuruPyareyoo… you have so many questions… “I want to” “understand WaheGuru’s mind” The only answers we can get is by using GuruMutt (Guru’s Philosophy) and not MunMatt (making your own philosophies) and Gurumatt comes from GuruGranth Sahib jee and living your life according to basic tenets set by Guru Gobind Singh jee.
It is very simple to use words like “Universal” and “Humanity” in order to support your own philosophies and firstly, to make your own mind belive it and then post them on the websites like these Where as they refuse to read and accept Guru’s Hukum and live your life by Guru ji’s Philosophy.
For all the Patits that call themselves Sikhs, must believe in Guru Granth Sahib jee and Guru Gobind Singh ji who gave us hukum for keeping hair. Then don’t these Patits feel guilty sitting in the Barber’s chair knowing very well that they be facing their maker one day and that they will have to explain their philosophies at that time?
Here's a "Letter To The Editor" published in Sunday's Washington Post in response to the original article "A Ritual Slowly Unravels in India"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/arti…
Here’s a “Letter To The Editor” published in Sunday’s Washington Post in response to the original article “A Ritual Slowly Unravels in India”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/04/AR2009040402323.html
We may need to expand the definition of a Sikh
We may? Who are we to define a Sikh? What is wrong with what the defination that Guru jee gave us?
We may need to expand the definition of a Sikh
We may? Who are we to define a Sikh? What is wrong with what the defination that Guru jee gave us?
sikhpath, appne aap nu guru sahibaan de mutabik define karna chahida.
sikhpath, appne aap nu guru sahibaan de mutabik define karna chahida.
I often wonder if Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh Ji spent as much time arguing about hair and turbans as people in this thread, or if they were simply encouraging people to become better and letting them come to the realizations on their own.
The lust for perfected Sikhi in one lifetime is not much different than avoiding it altogether in some ways. We are all moorakhs. Some of us in one way, some of us in other ways.
It has been clearly proven that what's on (or not) on someone's head has very little bearing on what's in their head. Unless one pursues anything they do with appreciative, mindful, inquisitive, introspective pursuit of discipline, and the freedom that comes from discipline, I'm afraid that such discussions won't be much better than the PHD's being written about tables and chairs.
Seeing others as higher, lower, in any way is hurting yourself by building your haumai. As much as someone may not be on my path, or I on theirs, if we are both truly seeking and applying ourselves to learning about ourselves, will we not end up at the same place?
Keeping one's hair doesn't make you a Sikh, much like putting on basketball jersey. Pursuing the five sach khands to battle the five monsters is where our depth in character, being, understanding, reverence and respect is taken. Instead we either have people who think they have arrived by letting their hair grow and covering it, or avoiding it altogether.
This all or nothing approach was something I believe Guru Nanak spoke to when he placed a lotus in the bowl of milk.
Everyone is going to reach where they're meant to, and realize their merger with the supreme. No one's words or actions, how well intended will guarantee that. Things do not happen because of us in this universe, they only happen through us. Instead of fighting and pushing, and pointing fingers at others, I think our time in this play of plays on earth is best spent fighting, pushing and pointing fingers at the demons within before straightening out others.
I run into too many people who want to be the solider before the saint, and a saint to others before they are truly a saint to themselves.
Realizing that every infidel, kaafir, patit in our narrow minded perception is simply another being under his ultimate hukam from the source of all creation, we take issue with the source of all creation when we try to tell someone they are wrong.
It is best to have dialogues and seek answers together. Specifically, your answers, that do not need to be validated or proven by tearing others down. Inherent truth is everlasting and in all things, but does not appear to be to the untrained eye, spirit, mind, or heart.
It's disheartening to see the filth that comes out of the minds and into the fingers of some people who think they are better in any way than another human being.
The Guru's command is to love, serve, protect, respect. Will you respect and care for me more if I attack you and treat you as an enemy or less than me?
Bhul chuk maaf.
I very much agree to Justasikh. He is a very nice. I like to drink . it make me happy. but i do not judge other people. please no judge me. live and let me live.
I often wonder if Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh Ji spent as much time arguing about hair and turbans as people in this thread, or if they were simply encouraging people to become better and letting them come to the realizations on their own.
The lust for perfected Sikhi in one lifetime is not much different than avoiding it altogether in some ways. We are all moorakhs. Some of us in one way, some of us in other ways.
It has been clearly proven that what’s on (or not) on someone’s head has very little bearing on what’s in their head. Unless one pursues anything they do with appreciative, mindful, inquisitive, introspective pursuit of discipline, and the freedom that comes from discipline, I’m afraid that such discussions won’t be much better than the PHD’s being written about tables and chairs.
Seeing others as higher, lower, in any way is hurting yourself by building your haumai. As much as someone may not be on my path, or I on theirs, if we are both truly seeking and applying ourselves to learning about ourselves, will we not end up at the same place?
Keeping one’s hair doesn’t make you a Sikh, much like putting on basketball jersey. Pursuing the five sach khands to battle the five monsters is where our depth in character, being, understanding, reverence and respect is taken. Instead we either have people who think they have arrived by letting their hair grow and covering it, or avoiding it altogether.
This all or nothing approach was something I believe Guru Nanak spoke to when he placed a lotus in the bowl of milk.
Everyone is going to reach where they’re meant to, and realize their merger with the supreme. No one’s words or actions, how well intended will guarantee that. Things do not happen because of us in this universe, they only happen through us. Instead of fighting and pushing, and pointing fingers at others, I think our time in this play of plays on earth is best spent fighting, pushing and pointing fingers at the demons within before straightening out others.
I run into too many people who want to be the solider before the saint, and a saint to others before they are truly a saint to themselves.
Realizing that every infidel, kaafir, patit in our narrow minded perception is simply another being under his ultimate hukam from the source of all creation, we take issue with the source of all creation when we try to tell someone they are wrong.
It is best to have dialogues and seek answers together. Specifically, your answers, that do not need to be validated or proven by tearing others down. Inherent truth is everlasting and in all things, but does not appear to be to the untrained eye, spirit, mind, or heart.
It’s disheartening to see the filth that comes out of the minds and into the fingers of some people who think they are better in any way than another human being.
The Guru’s command is to love, serve, protect, respect. Will you respect and care for me more if I attack you and treat you as an enemy or less than me?
Bhul chuk maaf.
I very much agree to Justasikh. He is a very nice. I like to drink . it make me happy. but i do not judge other people. please no judge me. live and let me live.
Of course you would agree with Justasikh, Mr. ILoveJohnnieWalkerBlack and so would Mr. GambleForFun and Mr. KillForThrill as according to justasikh(Kanwal), as long as you think you are a good person, believe in Guru Granth Sahib ji and don’t judge other people, you are a good Sikh.
I am sorry justasikh ji but if you have to use a comparative measure, then use your Guru's (not just one Guru out of your choice, but all Gurus) measure. I am no one to judge, but you will have to accept that your VahayGuroo will, base on your karam. Now, here is some food for thought – you didn't have any control on your birth, VahayGuroo did and if you were predestined to be born in a household of Sikh parents, then why would you not honor VahayGuroo's (one creator in punjabi) hukum to live your life by Sikh principals as dictated by Gurujis himself as your judgment is going to be based on how clearly you follow VahayGurooji's/Gurooji's hukum. Gurooji's hukum is more than "The Guru’s command is to love, serve, protect, respect."
To answer your question
I will respect and care for you less (as I do) if you tell me that Guroo's hukum of keeping hair is any less important than "Loving, Serving, Protecting and respecting" others.
You see, there is a very basic flaw in your analogy i.e. keeping one's hair is a starting point of becoming a Sikh (Guroo ka Sikh), after which the fighting the five monsters part come. I am sure that other religions also teach similar stuff (about fighting inner monsters) but then they are other religions and not Sikh religion.
In end, I will finish by saying “Please use Guroo's philosophy and NOT your own philosophy"
Of course you would agree with Justasikh, Mr. ILoveJohnnieWalkerBlack and so would Mr. GambleForFun and Mr. KillForThrill as according to justasikh(Kanwal), as long as you think you are a good person, believe in Guru Granth Sahib ji and don’t judge other people, you are a good Sikh.
I am sorry justasikh ji but if you have to use a comparative measure, then use your Guru’s (not just one Guru out of your choice, but all Gurus) measure. I am no one to judge, but you will have to accept that your VahayGuroo will, base on your karam. Now, here is some food for thought – you didn’t have any control on your birth, VahayGuroo did and if you were predestined to be born in a household of Sikh parents, then why would you not honor VahayGuroo’s (one creator in punjabi) hukum to live your life by Sikh principals as dictated by Gurujis himself as your judgment is going to be based on how clearly you follow VahayGurooji’s/Gurooji’s hukum. Gurooji’s hukum is more than “The Guru’s command is to love, serve, protect, respect.”
To answer your question
I will respect and care for you less (as I do) if you tell me that Guroo’s hukum of keeping hair is any less important than “Loving, Serving, Protecting and respecting” others.
You see, there is a very basic flaw in your analogy i.e. keeping one’s hair is a starting point of becoming a Sikh (Guroo ka Sikh), after which the fighting the five monsters part come. I am sure that other religions also teach similar stuff (about fighting inner monsters) but then they are other religions and not Sikh religion.
In end, I will finish by saying “Please use Guroo’s philosophy and NOT your own philosophy”
JP Singh said: "You see, there is a very basic flaw in your analogy i.e. keeping one’s hair is a starting point of becoming a Sikh (Guroo ka Sikh), after which the fighting the five monsters part come. I am sure that other religions also teach similar stuff (about fighting inner monsters) but then they are other religions and not Sikh religion.
In end, I will finish by saying “Please use Guroo’s philosophy and NOT your own philosophy”"
Good answer – this is the factual argument that few clean-shaven Sikhs seem to understand.
JP Singh said: “You see, there is a very basic flaw in your analogy i.e. keeping one’s hair is a starting point of becoming a Sikh (Guroo ka Sikh), after which the fighting the five monsters part come. I am sure that other religions also teach similar stuff (about fighting inner monsters) but then they are other religions and not Sikh religion.
In end, I will finish by saying “Please use Guroo’s philosophy and NOT your own philosophy””
Good answer – this is the factual argument that few clean-shaven Sikhs seem to understand.