Jump to content

commander

Members
  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by commander

  1. Gurbani does not give rules for the khalsa. I am asking per the codes used by the Panth. Is an amritdhari who killed his father still part of the khalsa as long as he doesn't commit the bajjar kurahits?

    Why is it so difficult to answer such a question. It's not like this situation hasn't happened before.

    What about mother, sister, brother aunt, etc.? What about any other human being? What if the killing was justified (such as in self-defense)? Do you want a separate criminal code? What's the point of living as part of society then?

  2. dude...why tell him to get lost

    This forum is for people to learn and ask questions about Sikhi (Sikhs and non-Sikhs alike). Other sub-forums are available if people wish to discuss other religions. Even a casual glance at his posts will make his motives of proselytizing ample clear. If he has no genuine questions or interest in Sikhi then what is his benefit to the sangat? Why should we tolerate this ‘Rajs’ attempts (laughable and uneducated though they may be) to slander us and/or our faith?

    be Nirvair

    No Vair here. Pity, perhaps, but no Vair.

    I vote to give 'Rajs' a boot :D

  3. The Guru Granth (page 1161 - line 7) refers to Adam, as the†father of mankind.â€

    Actually, I think the verse simply says that Waheguru bestowed his grace on Baba Adam and does not refer to him as the "father of mankind" (whatever that means).

    Does it mean Sikhism accepts biblical view on the origin of man?

    No.

    If Sikhism rejects the biblical origin of man, then in what context, is Adam the father of mankind, as stated in the Guru Granth?

    I do not believe Shri Guru Granth Sahib discusses the biblical origin of man.

  4. it doesnt. Guesssing or Assuming the outcome of the situation leads nowhere. The child could become anyone or nething. Making a decision to refuse to help the child simply based on the assumption that the child could grow up to be a murderer is also neglecting the possibility that he child could become a great sage of his/her time. No one knows what the futuer of the child holds. Only Assumptions, guessing the possibilities of the future.

    Indeed, these are assumptions; this thread is full of assumptions, though. I'm just thinking out loud...

    Thousands of people, including babies and children, die each day because of starvation, disease or at the hands of criminals and thugs. I don't see most of us doing anything to stop these needless deaths even though our direct action could help save many of these lives. Yet, in this scenario, people are willing to go to great lengths, even sacrificing their own precious lives, to attempt to save a baby's life. Why do we not act in the former situations?

    I also hope that those who'd be willing to part with their kesh, and those who wouldn't, are not being influenced by humai.

  5. What I was trying to get at is that there are countless millions of people that live there daily lives in an honest way but have never been influenced by Sikhism. I believe they are also Sikhs even if they don't know it.

    How can someone who doesn't believe in the Guru and Gurbani be a Sikh?

    5. I have heard some posters tell me that I am Sikh, while others continue to try and strip me of my faith. You need to take long hard look at your actions, what purpose do they serve? If it is the protection of your faith what have I done to threaten it? My only intention is to strengthen it.

    No one can strip you of your faith due to its very nature. As far as your intentions, you probably mean well but changing the Khalsa in the ways you want is beyond any man's reach.

    6. Yes, I am the first to say I know very little about Sikhi but does that make my comments any less valid?

    We are reading what you have written, and some of us disagree with most of your points. By your own admission, you also lack credibility. You are also confusing some of the issues and do not seem to have an appreciation of Sikh history.

    The retention rate for Judaism is also on the decline, Jewish scholars recognize it and are trying to address it.

    Again, Sikhs should not care about numbers.

    Heck they are the chosen people...

    :D Sure they are.

    8. I asked in one of my posts what happened to the process for people like me that wanted to take Amrit but didn't want to keep the 5Ks? Why is nobody addressing that, was I mistaken? If there was such a process who took it away and who gave them the right to take it away?

    The "5Ks" are a neccessary requirement. Don't want to keep them? Don't become a Khalsa.

    Did a new Guru show up when I wasn't looking. It is these people that need to be banished from calling themselves Sikh.

    A Khalsa is always a Sikh, while the converse need not be true.

    9. I remember when I was a kid my mom used to take me to Wednesfield Gurdwara. There was a white brit that used to come in regularily, I often asked my mom why he was here and she would point to a sign that said all are welcome. I loved that sign and despise those that have put up the new sign on the entire faith that says 'enter only when you submit to the 5Ks'.

    You seem to be confusing a Sikh with a Khalsa. And, indeed, all are welcome in the darbar of Guru Nanak without anyone trying to 'convert' them.

  6. How can you say that Sikhism is not concerned with recruitment? How did you hear about it? Was it some divine intervention or was it simply by being born into the faith? Either way there is in introduction of sorts or recruitment. If there was no recruitment parents would be encouraged to allow their children to explore other faiths and then if they choose to' date=' they can become Sikh. I don't know about you but for the most part my parents have told me I am Sikh from the moment I could understand their words. We are at the very least concerned with retention if not recruitment.[/quote']

    *ALL* parents teach their offspring what they think is best for them.

  7. I've just been watching the news and the situation in Falluja and I was thinking, there are similararities between the situation in 1984 in Amritsar and india.

    Yeah, very shallow similarities.

    In this case, the percieved 'terrorists' are in a city and apparently hiding in hospitals and mosques etc.... and all they are doing is what any civilian would be doing, just defending themselves and their land from the percieved enemy (the Americans). There may be some terrorists around in the city, just as there might have been in Amritsar no doubt. In the case in India, innocent civilians were also killed who were defending their beliefs and rights.

    There are many foreign insurgents or 'terrorists' included in the ranks of these people. They have come to Iraq solely to fight against US troops which represent the Western world. Where were the so called insurgents when Saddam Hussein was murdering and butchering his own people? Where were the Iraqi people, for that matter?

    However, the Americans are going in with the intention of world dominance and in particular, obtaining and controlling the oil fields (so that George W Bush Sr can keep up his end of the deal with the oil companies who funded his political campaign). They are going in because they are afraid the Middle East controlling the world oil supply...

    There is no evidence supporting these claims.

    just as maybe Indra Ghandi was afraid that the sikhs would get too much power.

    We will probably never know.

    Just as Saddam Hussein went into hiding as did Jarnail Bhindrawale.

    That is an utterly stupid and foolish claim. You should study some more history before making such absurd statements. Jarnail Singh Bhindrawala died as a warrior fighting Indian bullets and tanks. Saddam Hussein was a coward who was dragged out of a ratty hole. There aren't even any similarities between the two.

    My point is that in both cases, attacks, murders were being committed by these governments and in this case, they still are.

    Like Saddam Hussein's government, right? A period of conflict is expected after a War. It will settle down soon, hopefully.

    However, when it happens to other people, i.e. non-sikhs, no-one seems to be bothered, no fuss is kicked off, no emails are sent to stop these attrociaties. This is i'm afraid, double standards.

    Which amounts to zilch. All this time Saddam Hussein murdered and plundered at will but the world did nothing. Now he will face justice.

    Guru Tegh Bahadur Jee stood up for other people who he felt were being targeted and were receieving unjustice...

    Guru Tegh Bahadur would have fought against a lot of things. I do not agree with the war in Iraq, but what is done is done. It is imperative that the U.S. stay the course to stabalize the area.

    400 years or so later... similiar situation... and what are we doing? nothing...

    When your own house is burning, it is hard to provide shelter for others.

×
×
  • Create New...