Jassa

Amazing Gursikh

N3o akal takht has not decided to give a decision on raagmala...Pardon my language but who the hell are you to declare who is tankhaaya. You are no authority on sikhi.

Although i very much believe in sants/mahapursh's and have alot of satkaar to say sants are puraatan is very mistaken. The forst time sant was used for a human was Baba Attar SIngh Ji Mastanawale. So n3o who are you to claim akj only as manmade. These sampartas have no lineage to Guru Ji's and are manmade aswell! The only lineage from Guru Ji with a sant is the Damdami Taksal. Please get your facts right. In so many of your posts you show a hatred towards AKJ, and make sly comments. No matter how much paath you do you will go nowhere unless you learn to have pyaar towards other jathebandies. The only result is the quom suffers.

lol your so misinformed its not even funny sexy singh said then what is Gurmat... its a path to live our lives. Its the way of teh Guru... sexy singh you are preaching but with no justification to your posts... Show me quotes from Gurbani that back up your ideas or keep your ideas to yourself... The moderators have stressed that we must provide justification when making statements. Dont think your above that.

watch movies, listen to music .. grow plants .. love life .. enjoy it .. all that stuff isnt bad .. its only bad if you are an idiot religious person who isnt good for anything. i think what you are saying is that basically live your life and be a good person. if all that idiot religious stuff isnt important then what is rehit for?! i tihink your talking rubbish... rehit is essential for sikhs and without keeping the Gurus rehit you are not even a sikh Rehit binaa nahi sikh kehaavai

neo you are one of the cleverest people on any forum at twisting peoples words to suit your meaning and extracting info that is not there. I do not believe udhasis can be compared with sikhi as they are not the same religion. It liek saying a christian and a sikh. they have not, as you say, adopted the same Guru as us. In this respect my point is that a sehajdhari who has adopted Guru Nanak Dev Ji through to Guru Granth Sahib Ji as his Guru, he must follow his Gurus rehit in order to reach sachkhand... Sehajdhari does not just mean monaa which i think iswhat you are assuming. therefore how can a sehajdharii have taken charan pahul. Its a contradiction. Guru Gobind singh asked for all his followers toi take Khande di Pahul. He also said none should come before him who did not carry shastar and keep unshorn hair?but you seemto have forgotten this. I understand that sikhs should have unconditional love and respect for all but trying to equate in terms of spirituality a sikh who has truly adopted his guru(following his rehit) with someone who says they have adopted but do not follow rehit is a silly comparison.

Maybe i havent emphasised my point enough kha(n)ddae dhhaar galee ath bheerree || This path is very narrow, like the sharp edge of a sword. or thrikhee kha(n)ddae dhhaar hai ouh vaalahu(n) nikee|| It is thinner than the hair and sharper than the edge of the sword. or kha(n)niahu thikhee bahuth pieenee || It is sharper than a two-edged sword, and very narrow. WHO SAID SIKHI WAS EASY?!?!?!

Let me say something bluntly and im not going to be diplomatic. if neo singhs 'monaa' friend has so much shardaa then he would have adopted Guru Ji's Saroop. A look at the tapoban singhs will show that they TRY and follow Guru Ji's rehit to the best of their ability and UNDERSTANDING. If you have an OPINION that they are wrong at least they are making genuine ate,pts rather than this monaa friend who has more shardaa but is all based on words. If his shardaa was as much he would adopt sikhi saroop. and neo singh your opinion on sikhs tryin to make sikhi hard isnt quite correct. We should strive to do as much of Guru Ji's rehit as possible. GURU JI HIMSELF CALLED SIKHI HARD! kha(n)niahu thikhee vaalahu nikee eaeth maarag jaanaa || The path they take is sharper than a two-edged sword, and finer than a hair. xw ]

Benti to the sewadars of this website to either control every word that the moorakh 'new age sikh' says or completely ban him So far he has mocked our great gifts of the punj kakkar given to us by Guru Ji. Now he has also made a claim that the Guru Ji's were not of the same joth. He claims that the Gurship from Dhan Dhan Guru Arjun Dev Ji onwards changed sikhi. GUR KEE NINDAA SUNEH NAA KAAN!! He then goes onto question whether the correct decision was made regarding appointing the next Guru. This is completely unacceptable!!

Let me first state that I do not hold anything against 3HO, and do not really know much about them. After seeing this topic i done a bit of research on them... Here is one article i found by a former member. Giving (Your) Head to the Guru February 1999 By "Breath of Fire Kaur"--a former member of 3HO When I first got into 3HO, I thought that I was going to experience the classic Guru/Disciple relationship. In the Sikh tradition, there is a saying that you "give your head (the ego) to the Guru". The implication is that through humility and commitment and faith, the spiritual treasures will then be your blessing or reward. It seems to me that Yogi Bhajan turned this entire concept into a way to manipulate and control students. But actually, many religions at times appear to use guilt-trips very similar to my old guru. One former 3HO student, who was once an accountant for the group, approached the producers of the "60 Minutes" television show about doing a segment on Yogi Bhajan. Their response was that people like Yogi Bhajan are just "small potatoes" compared to big newsmakers like the Peoples Temple and Waco Davidians. Bhajan may not be a real master of any type of Yoga, but he is a master at picking students that he can manipulate and control and who will typically not expose him to the media. And his legal team seems to have found some very effective ways of keeping embarrassing stories out of the media spotlight. My first few years of being in 3HO were fun--everything was fresh, exotic, in defiance of my upbringing and I was in an interesting and often exiting new peer group. As a young woman I also thought I had hit the dating pool jackpot--all I saw around me were cute men, many who were Jewish, with long hair (under their turbans), who were vegetarians and did yoga! In my naivete, what more could I want? Any one of them would do--or so I thought. And to top it off, these men apparently didn’t mind considering women who wore layers upon layers of unnecessary clothing, no make-up and had hairy legs! I really related to the organic, hippie values and felt privileged to be a part of this budding utopian society that would help heal the world by teaching yoga, meditation, and what I thought was conscious living. As the years wore on I began to see many discrepancies and hypocrisy in the lifestyle. There were just too many to list here. But just one example: Yogi Bhajan states in his lectures that it is ungraceful for a woman to go around in public without her head covered. He quotes scriptures that say, "There is no difference between a mad dog and a woman with her hair down". Well, where are his priorities? I walked around town looking like the Pillsbury Doughgirl--while my guru played around and committed adultery year after year. Parents were also made to feel like overly possessive neurotics if they didn’t ship their kids off to schools in India. But what many people didn't know was that every time a planeload of children went off to India, Bhajan’s son-in-law (a travel agent) made money. These types of things began to weigh heavily on my conscience. Year after year I would see good people becoming frustrated by and dissatisfied with the organization and Yogi Bhajan himself. People who stood up to the authorities within the group were labeled as "negative". God-forbid anyone should say anything critical of Bhajan--then you would be thought of as a "slanderer of a saint". Those of us who managed to retain a sense of humor quietly acknowledged the power struggle. Someone came up with the joke--"How many Sikhs does it take to change a light bulb"? Answer: "Just one, but he has to ask 'the Siri Singh Sahib' (Bhajan) for permission first". And truly, if it weren't Bhajan’s call, then he would assign one of his inner power circle to take care of a matter. Completely unqualified people gave marital or business advice to those in crisis--like a hospital run by the patients. Speaking of the inner circle, Bhajan has always surrounded himself with really peculiar people--some who seemed racist or homophobic. These are the people that he shared his business ventures with--that he liked to have around to entertain him. There were secretaries who seemed to be part of his huge sexual clan, people who appeared to be his security force and special members with money. It seemed like there was a caste system within the group. And extra "Brownie points" or special attention was given to young, impressionable and attractive women---or a man with money. Yogi Bhajan made such a big thing over the years to "fake it until you make it"--that many students patterned themselves after him materialistically. They drove old Mercedes just so they could look "prosperous"--- even if they were barely making a living. There were countless examples of such bizarre behavior, but it would be too painful and not really therapeutic to cite them all. In part, I consider my own departure a real success--because I don’t dwell too much on the past. People who are in 3HO believe that is their reality. It seems that many are like big fish in a small pond and the pond has grown rather stagnant--but that's their choice. The real point of my contribution to this Web site, is to offer some insights that will hopefully help someone on the fence about 3HO think twice before joining that group--or any other exclusive "New Age" meditation group. Many such groups seem to have the same soap opera going on: gurus having sex with their students, misuse of authority and money, shaming people who leave the organization with parting warnings that if you leave your life will be ruined. None of this threatening retribution for leaving a religious group is really new or original. Hey, it’s been going on within quite a few groups for thousands of years. I have finally come to understand that there is often a distinct difference though between being spiritual and religious. They can both go together, but they can also be quite distinct. There are some people who are very religious by appearance or through their rituals, but they often lack the truly meaningful spiritual insight to treat people, their families, and even themselves properly. Of course one frequently asked question always arises: How can smart people get involved in cults? For the same reason that some people that experiment with drugs never consider the possibility that they might become hooked. It starts out being just dabbling, just a little, but slowly bit-by-bit you can get hooked without even really knowing it. Being in a cult or a destructive group can actually be a tremendous spiritual and personal lesson. You can learn to believe in yourself and grow once you have recognized what has happened to you. Leaving a cult may be hard, but ultimately it can be a meaningful spiritual break-through and personal victory. In fact, when I was making my plans to "take off the turban", I worried that my yoga students would be let-down or disillusioned with me. Quite the contrary, virtually everyone that knows or hears of my past has expressed strong support for that decision and my new life. I find it easier to communicate now with people. Today there are no superficial barriers like white clothes from head to toe, which separated me from mainstream society. I still believe in and practice a spiritual lifestyle, but now my "cult radar" helps me to recognize the warning signs and potential for abuse in certain situations. Yogi Bhajan often used guilt-trips in his lectures. He said that people left 3HO because of "sex, power, or money". The implication was always that people, who in his estimation somehow failed spiritually--were weak and could not stay on the spiritual path because of worldly temptations. Looking back now, it seems to me, he should have listened more closely to his own advice.

i think sikhs as a general really really need to stop comparing ourselves and saying "oh hes an amritdhari and doesnt do this!" sikh fauge said Veereh if your hear a kathaakar sayin this then you should challenge him about it. He is misleading people. I have noticed a trend in peoples opinion (this is not directed at anyone specifically) whereby they give the impression that amritdharis are the badguys. That they reek of arrogance...We should not even notice this.Hum nahee chunga burrah nahi koeh.If one or 2 bad apples are present dont label everyone. 99.9% of amritdharis are gursikhs who are striving to keep as much rehit and be as dilloh sacha as they can...Rest only Guru knows. and sikh fauge veerji...you said that there is nothing wrong with someone who hasnt taken amrit coming under the Guru's wing....This is true, but it does not make him a sikh... You mention amrit was harder to come by then...This is also true....but we have to remember that kaljug is increasing. Times will get worse. Everyone today who knows about amrit is able to take it...It is not hard to get receive this gift now... Guru sahib in Sri Dasam Granth Ji says what a sikh is. He mentions that punj kakaar are necessary. I really dont understand what there is left to debate upon on this topic? please everyone read this following link. http://www.gursikhijeevan.com/community/ph...5848&t=5848

nahi penji/veerji this is not what i said. Seva done as a requirement is not sewa....sewa should be nishkam(selfless). Its like people think we do simran or sewa or charity becuase God will be happy and we will get mukt...this is the wrong approach....we do these things due to our love for God and our love his sangat and creation. That is what an amridhari should view doing his paath as...or thats how he should view doing seva...but definately not as a ritual or requirement.its not a contract. also n30 veerji you are correct...i think we were both on 2 different wavelengths. People who believe in other Gurus are their sikhs...that is correct...i thought when you said sikhs you were talking of teh sikhs of Guru Gobind Singh... To read the actual quote go to this link http://www.gursikhijeevan.com/community/ph...5848&t=5848 Veerji you said Guru Nanak Sahib in his tenth roop said khalsa mero roop hai khaas.... he himself bowed down to the khalsa...he belongs to the khalsa. If people do not accept Guru Gobind Singh Ji's teachings than they do not accept Guru Nanak Dev Ji's teachings as they are one and the same. I completey agree.... I also believe that what you said there in the first few lines was a description of an amritdhari... People may have faith in Guru sahib without being amritshuk....but they have not prooved that faith...they have not shown Guru Sahib they have faith by giving him their head. i believe it does....if it didnt why did Guru Gobind Singh Ji create the Khalsa? All this means is that they are working towards becoming a sikh.there is nothing offensive or discriminating in being called a sehajdhari sikh.

rehinee rehai soee sikh maeraa || ouh t(h)aakur mai ous kaa chaeraa || rehith binaa(n) nehi sikh kehaavai || rehith binaa(n) dhar chottaa(n) khaavai || rehith binaa(n) sukh kabahu(n) n lehae || thaa(n) thae rehith s dhrirr kar rehai || khhaalasaa khhaas kehaavai soee jaa(n) kae hiradhae bharam n hoee || bharam bhaekh thae rehai niaaraa so khhaalas sathiguroo hamaaraa ||

Neo said Veerji...Gurbani says to us who a sikh is.... we do not need to use our own matt to define what our Guru has already defined. You believe in Dasam Granth in its entierity. Therefore your question of who a sikh is is answered. If Kabir-panthis or Udhasi's want to claim they are sikhs they are fooling themselves as they are not sikhs of Guru Gobind singh ji, as he defined the sikhs

I think this should clear up the question of who a sikh is without any further doubt.... "The following five K’s are the mark of Sikhi.These five can never be parted from the body. Kara, Kirpan, Kashera, Kangha, recognise these as four of them.The fifth is Kesh, without which the other four are useless. There are also four H’s which must be avoided. Understand this without any doubt, no lies have been told. Hukka, taking tobacco (including any other type of intoxicants). Hajamat, removing of hair. Halalo, eating meat. Haram, adultery (sexual relationships outside of marriage). These are the four H’s. Dyeing of beards (including any other body hair), and the wearing of mehndi (including other types of make up) are strictly forbidden. (Sri Dasam Granth)" Asfokat swaihye, Sri Dasam Granth Ji In this Guru Maharah does not mention Khalsa but only says sikh. Therefore this shows the word khalsa and sikh are interchangeable and one and the same. If the punj kakaar are the mark of sikhi, than one who does not have them can not be considered sikh.