Mehtab Singh

i lack the quality part i must say

In some Janamsakhis the discusssion of going to visit Mecca is seen as a challenge - Bhai Mardana wants to see 'this Mecca which the Turks never tire of praising' Guru Nanak says that no non-Muslim is allowed there. Bhai Mardana responds 'Who is it that can stop you from going there' In another Janamsakhi the challenge is the distance, Guru Nanak says that Mecca is many thousands of miles away and Bhai Mardana responds 'your one step is like the thousand steps of ordinary men'

I listened to that part in Sooraj Pratap Granth katha by Giani Thakur Singh ji on Amrit Bani radio like less than a month ago. Somewhat similar to what you've posted.

I take a whole week to do it :twisted:

I started doing it all in one day like few months ago...but i realized my dhyaan was on the clock and not the bani, coz i was timing myself daily "ajj enna time laggeya, ajj enna laggeya"...then im like "yaar swaad ni aunda ", so i went back to 1 full paath per week...slow n steady wins the race, bani samjho and get Guru's grace...dargah vich tera ujjala face, and shaheed singhs will guard ur place...

Can someone please give the lines of Bulleh Shah on Guru Gobind Singh.

Here are some lines by Baba Bulle Shah. Forgive errors if any...

Naa kahu ab ki, naa kahu tab ki

Agar na hote Gobind Singh, to sunnat hoti sab ki

I don't say about the present or past, but if Guru Gobind Singh wasn't there, everyone would have been circumsized (i.e. forcibly converted to Islam).

Here are some by Alayaar Khan. These are pretty much the actual words, but please forgive any minor errors.

Yeh pyaar mureedo se, yeh shafakkat bhi kahi hai

Bhagton mein Guru arsh hai, sansaar zameen hai

What a love for one's followers! The Guru is the sky among devotees, and the entire world is the earth, i.e. Gurujee is highest among bhagats.

Ulfat ke yeh jalwe, kabhi dekhe nahi hum ne

Haan dekhna ek baat, sunay bhi nahi hum ne

These stunts of love, I have never seen! What to see, I haven't even heard of them!

Kattwa diye shish Shyam ne Gita ko sunaaker

Rooh phook di Gobind ne beto ko kataaker

Shyam refers to Shri Krishan, shish means followers/disciples. He says that Shri Krishan got his followers cut (killed in the Mahabharat war) by reciting the Gita, but Guru Gobind Singh infused spirit in His followers by getting His own sons martyred.

Are you living in a Muslim country in the Middle East?

http://publication.samachar.com/pub_articl...ww.samachar.com

NEW DELHI: Children, who abandon parents in their twilight years, beware. They may face three months' imprisonment and cannot even appeal against the punishment.

A Bill passed by Parliament on Thursday will ensure that elderly people are taken care of by their children failing which they would face penal action.

"The Bill provides for three months' jail term if children do not look after old parents. The penal provision is meant to act as a deterrent," Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Meira Kumar told Rajya Sabha.

Kumar said children cannot go in for appeal. "This has been done deliberately as they have a lot of resources which the old people do not have," she said.

Later, the Rajya Sabha passed the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Bill, 2007 by a voice vote.

The statement of objects and reasons of the Bill says though the parents can claim maintenance under the CrPC, the procedure is both "time-consuming as well as expensive", and there was need to have simple, inexpensive and speedy provisions for care of parents.

The Bill has a clause for punishment to those who abandon their parents or relatives whose property they have inherited or would get as their legal heirs.

The Bill, already passed by Lok Sabha, provides for setting up of a tribunal in each district for helping the old in distress.

It also has a provision for establishment of old age homes which, the minister said, should be the last resort for the poor and the childless.

Don't know of this is what you are looking for...

http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...pic.php?t=10125

http://publication.samachar.com/pub_articl...ww.samachar.com

Sikhs will now have a prayer room at the John F Kennedy International Airport in New York to facilitate the increasing numbers of travellers from the community.

The Port authority, which manages the airport, has agreed to provide space for setting up a prayer room for Sikhs on the lines of the facility provided to people from other faiths.

United Sikhs, an umbrella organisation of the community, said on Tuesday that Susan Baer, General Manager Aviation JFK, has agreed on the need for such a facility at the airport.

The meeting was convened by Assemblyman Rory Lancaman and coordinated by United Sikhs Multi-Faith coordinator Amarjit Singh.

The airport is located in New York's suburbs, Queens, which has a large chunk of Indian population. "The Sikh community is a growing population in Queens. They travel regularly. Sikhs travellers deserve a place to worship at JFK airport alongside those currently set aside for other faiths. I am very pleased that the Port authority has committed to work with the community to obtain this goal," Lancman said.

Community Services Director of United Sikhs Balbir Kaur said: "Most airports have 'meditation rooms', which the passengers use for praying. We are very pleased that the Port Authority recognises the need for prayer facilities for the Sikhs."

yo maan wah du ya mean?

Brother Mehtab Singh ji. My mom is so addicted to tea that wherever she goes she needs it otherwise she gets a headache.

Thats what happens when you are addicted to tea. My high school biology teacher told us a way out. Don't have tea even if you have a headache. Our body has a timetable of its own, and when we need tea, we start feeling lazy. If we don't, we get headache. Let the headache be there, as it is only a craving. Do that for 3-4 days or so. Some people take a week. After a small number of days, your head won't hurt and the addiction will go away. I have tried this myself many times. At times I have gone without tea for months, at times I have had it more than once a day.

Tea has tobacco? Really? Then I am doomed! I drink chaa, coffee, caffeine waale soda etc. LOL! These are all addictive I agree, but its not as bad as alcohol that alters your mind, and it is easier to get rid of caffeine addiction than alcohol addiction.

http://publication.samachar.com/pub_articl...ww.samachar.com

ISLAMABAD: The movement launched by lawyers and rights activists in Pakistan against the now-deposed Supreme Court chief justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry's suspension in March has been compared to revolutionary Bhagat Singh's struggle to oust the British.

At a seminar to mark the birth centenary of Bhagat Singh, writer Zahida Hina went a step further and described him as a "Pakistani Shaheed." Referring to the movement launched by lawyers to protest the removal of deposed judges, she said in Karachi last evening, "This is similar to Bhagat Singh's movement to oust the British."

Singh was born in Lyallpur, now Faisalabad, in 1907. He was hanged by the British in Lahore for shooting a police officer in 1931.

Stating that it was a great coincidence that the 150th anniversary of the 1857 War of Independence also falls this year, she exhorted Pakistanis to commemorate Singh's centenary as he was a `Pakistani' martyr.

Hina also accused the Pakistani Government of trying to "co-opt" Bhagat Singh's legacy.

"The present Governor of Punjab, a retired military man, has claimed that he was inspired by Bhagat Singh and has announced that a memorial commemorating the fiery young revolutionary would be unveiled in Lahore," the writer said, adding, "This is an insult - it is like Hitler unveiling a statue of Mandela or Gandhi."

"He was the pied piper of Punjab whose flute played the tune of freedom. He was not a bloodthirsty terrorist nor was he power-hungry. He was a thinker," she said of Bhagat Singh.

Also, for some reason I feel we are not being told the complete story. Why would cops ask a cab driver to give ride to a criminal?

thats exactly i have been keep telling him, move to canada yaar, yaar aiiash karangaie

Don't worry veeray Canada is also on the list . But how does this solve the problem of Sikhs? Moving to another country will not ensure that USA will become any safer for Sikhs. And death, as Maskeen ji said, is about time-place-reason. The time, place and reason has been set before we were born. No one can do anything about it. People say "maut aundi aa", but the fact is that "maut nahi aundi, banda janda aa jithey likhi hundi aa, jado likhi hundi aa, te jidda likhi hundi aa". Its all about the time-place-reason. In Maskeen jee's words: wakt-wajah-jagah.

Yes Neo veeray you are right. Gurujee's horse refused to go near tobacco fields. Even ordinary animals like cows, buffaloes etc. were seen once to move their face away from tobacco plant, so why do humans shamelessly consume it.

Here is a katha by Gyani Thakur Singh ji on the massive spiritual disadvantage of tobacco. Anyone having doubts listen to it before posting:

http://www.gurmatveechar.org/audio/katha/0...kh.Di.Rehat.mp3

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/ne...se,230265.shtml

On Saturday, November 24, 2007, Mr. Singh had stopped to eat when two Seattle police officers approached him and asked him to drive home a man who was in their custody. It was the night of the Apple Cup in Seattle, and the man was intoxicated. Mr. Singh agreed to help the police officers by taking the individual back to his residence, but he never made it there.

On the way home, the man began to verbally abuse Mr. Singh, using religious and racial epithets and threatening to kill him. As his anger escalated, he attacked Mr. Singh from the back seat, knocking off Mr. Singh's turban and pulling his hair so hard that locks of hair came out. Trapped in the I-5 carpool lane, Mr. Singh was forced to stop the car to escape his attacker. His attacker tumbled out onto the highway with him and continued beating Mr. Singh until Washington State Troopers responded to the scene.

Mr. Singh was hospitalized overnight, and has been vomiting ever since he returned home yesterday.

"This is not the first time Sikhs have been targeted out of hate in Seattle. Our public officials need to take a strong stance against bias. We expect that this incident will be investigated and prosecuted as a hate crime," said Jasmit Singh, a member of the board of the Gurdwara Singh Sabha of Washington, and a Sikh Coalition board member.

The attack comes on the heels of a report released by the FBI last week stating that hate crimes rose almost 8% nationally from 2005 to 2006, with over half of the incidents being racially motivated. Religious bias was blamed for approximately 19% of the incidents, while ethnic or national origin accounted for more than 12% of the incidents.

Seattle's 10,000-strong Sikh community is outraged that this vicious attack occurred in their hometown. Community members are particularly concerned that a police report on the incident does not include any information on the bias that motivated the crime.

The victim, Sukhvir Singh, is shaken. "I am in a lot of pain, and don't understand why someone would do this to me. I love America and hope that in my case, justice will be done," he said.

yes, but those Bhagats were Sikhs as well and as you suggested they were selling to their multi-religious cultures. Can Sikhs of this time sell wine to serve the multi-religious culture such as Christianity?

Good question, and simple answer: Wine (which is alcohol), in a Sikh's eyes, is NOT serving society, therefore a Sikh wouldn't sell wine. Christians, like I said, are free to purchase it if they feel it has a religious significane. That doesn't imply that they are obliged to purchase it only from a Sikh. Thats the bottom line. There are plenty of non-Sikh gas station owners, and if their religion doesn't have a problem with wine, then thats for them to decide. Sikhs are to serve the society in a manner that is not harming it. You could very well argue that cutting hair, handling animal skin etc. are also "unSikh". But compare these to cigarettes and alcohol and decide which is harmful. I am not saying "which is more harmful", just saying "harmful". Non-Sikhs (and some Sikhs) eat meat, non-Sikhs (and modern day Punjabis) cut their hair as well. I repeat, these do NOT have any harmful effect on another person. Cigarette smoking does. Lets not divert the topic from cigarettes to alcohol (although both are forbidden for a Sikh). I am interested to know if there is any religious ritual that asks Christians to consume alcohol (wine). The little that I know, I thought its some different sort of wine prepared separately.

It is said that when this Bakra was alive, the continous use of Mai Mai Mai, the sound of Houmai resonated within him. But when dead at least his skin will be used to sing the praise of the Guru and then helping others to become one with God he too will be liberated...such is the story I've heard.

I faintly remember this now. New information!

Should we be so fortunate that we take birth as animals in the homes of these Bhagats to be killed by them for their use. Perhaps then we might be of some use.

Firstly they are not physically present today (they are in spiritual form), secondly our next janam is not in our hands. Thirdly, to be of use to such bhagats would require a mega load of kirpa.

Wine was a regular part of life during the time of Jesus and continues to be today in the lifestyle of Christians...should wine then be subject to this view point as well?

The issue in question is Sikhs selling cigarettes. If Christians are ok with wine, they are free to buy or sell it, especially if they think its their religious thing. Sikhs don't force their rules on others, but we should hold firm to what we believe in.

Why is the use of Tabla which has Goat skin on it allowed in the Gurudwara when Sikhi is against meat?

Not too sure about this one.

Why are the words of a Chammaar included in the Guru Granth Sahib when he must have dealt with skin of an animal.

Did he kill them himself? Where does it say he killed them himself? Besides, Bhagat Ravidas jee was a cobbler I think (mochi). Cobbler's job is to fix shoes. I am not too sure if they deal with animal skin directly, although they do deal with the leather thats made from it. And most importantly, we need to keep in mind that we are not avastha as those Bhagats. Most of the time we forget this, and start thinking "If he/she could do this/that, why can't I", well do you have the same level of kamaaee, or even close?

Bhagat Sadahna who was a butcher.

Does a butcher always have to kill an animal as well, or can he just prepare their meat and sell it? Even those who sell meat are, in a way, butchers if I am not wrong. I would like to know though...

We are comparing apples and oranges. Whether it was Bhagat Sain , or Bhagat Sadhna, or Bhagat Ravidas ji, they were not causing any damage to society. A barber is doing his job by serving (of course non-Sikh LOL) people, a cobbler is doing his job by serving people (fixing footwear), a butcher is doing his job by serving people (sells meat which is acceptable to certain faith groups). Cutting hair and (for some) eating meat are things which are not allowed in Sikhi but are pretty much fine with other faiths. These bhagats were serving society (all religions) by their professions. I doubt any religion says that cigarette smoking is allowed, does it? Besides, cigarette packs have the label that cigarettes kill. We don't see any such warnings outside barber shops (doesn't mean we should go there LOL) or meat shops. I am not voting for hair cutting or eating meat here. Just stating that other faith groups are ok with these, and these bhagats were only serving a multi-religious society as a whole through their professions.

I cannot think of any moral, ethical or rational reason behind selling cigarettes. You can earn honest and hard earned in money in hundreds of other ways. Cigarettes cause lung cancer, cause brain damage to unborn infants, and what not. Cutting hair or eating meat doesn't affect an unborn child (in medical terms), nor does it make the person sitting/standing next to you a potential victim of a deadly disease (Again I am not saying that a Sikh should do these). Cigarette smoking does all this, and is a lot worse. Think about it, even a Sikh who cuts his hair and eats meat will never ever dream of smoking (I have come across some) unless he is a lost case (I have some across these species too LOL).

Please forgive me if you think I am judging someone. I feel that a Sikh is to serve society, not earn money by selling poison. I strongly feel that if Sikhs stop selling cigarettes and alcohol from their gas stations, we would be giving out an extremely positive message to society right away. Our local community would look upon us as ethically and socially responsible members of the community we live in.

Think about it, and let me know where I am wrong

Some very good points, but I think you'd have to consider the difference between what is within your control versus what is not, the difference between the magnitude of harm a cigarette would cause versus a burger. You cannot control the government from doing their dirty job, can you? You are not poisoning the burgers before selling them, whereas cigarettes are no less than poison themselves, right? But I agree you make good points.

Sikhi opposes the consumption of Tobacco, not the touching of it.

So its ok to behave indecently with a bibi and say that you are not actually "doing" anything? Oh wait thats another "worst" analogy for you!

imo there's no problem with it, it's not like they're smoking themselves.

Yeah, they should start smuggling drugs as well then. They are not consuming them, are they? Start selling illegal weapons too, because they are not killing anyone on their own. Talk about worst analogies!

So we ditch Guru Nanak's philosophy of dharam di kirat - earning an HONEST living?

Gurujee refused to eat at Malik Bhago's house because he earned by oppressing poor people. He probably worked "hard" to oppress people, but his "hard" work wasn't good enough for Gurujee. And please explain to me how is selling a poison like cigarettes an "honest" living, I am interested to know.

How about there no space for morality in warfare - what happens to the sikh idea of dharam yudh - the righteous struggle - (bhai ghanaiya...)

If I am not wrong, a Sikh doesn't attack a wounded person or an unarmed person, so in the Sikh sense, morality does exist even in warfare. Remember a Sikh is a Sant 1st, and then a Sipahi.

How about there is no space for morality in politics - what happens to akaal takht sahib?

Which is the reason Sahib Sri Guru Hargobind Jee Maharaj is the Lord of Miri as well as Piri. Religion without power and politics without religion tends to scatter things around. Why do you think Gurujee said "Raaj bina nahi dharam chale hain" and "Koi kisi ko raajna de hai, jo le hai nijj bal se le hai" (Excuse the spellings).

I can understand that at certain points in life one does have to make compromises in adopting a profession. There are enough people who do this business as wahegurubol pointed out, but that doesn't justify it in any way. People are so quick to start yelling that there is no need to keep Bibek, while the first and foremost Bibek is an honest and hard earned living. Sewa of the society is another thing Gurujee preached. What kind of sewa is selling cigarettes? How does it benefit society? I think if these people refuse to sell cigarettes, they would probably make a little less money but not get sued for not selling cigarettes, or is there a law that states that if you open a gas station, you HAVE TO sell cigarettes?

the contents are not open they are packaged, so you are really no touching the contents inside of the package.

If someone applies chocolate paste to cyanide and asks you to have it, will you?

Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee Maharaj de prakash utsav diyaan aap sab nu, tee aap de samooh parvaar nu lakh lakh vadhaiyaan.

Suni pukaar Daataar Prabh, Guru Nanak jag maahey pathaayaa

SatGuru Nanak pargateya, miti dhundh jag chaanan hoa

Sehajdhari is a term for those who coming from various non-Sikh backgrounds who are interesting in becoming a Sikh and are going towards Khalsa baptism in stages.

Thats the definition I heard on Sukhsagar radio once. Sehajdhari is someone of a non-Sikh background working towards taking Amrit, and to begin with he/she could be without kesh, although they do have to keep it at some point. As for those who don't have Sikhi saroop but are born in Sikh families, they are called patits. These are not my words, but what I heard.

I must say I posted this article without reading it,just skimmed through it and felt it looked good. I was wrong. Its not just good, its excellant and a real eye opener, and so I felt I needed to highlight certain points. Remember that this is a Muslim talking about Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee, and a non-Punjabi Muslim who didn't have much, or little interaction with Sikhs.

to fully understand people like Guru Nanak it is really immaterial to ask if he was influenced by this religion or that religion. It is because the purpose of religion, I think, is to establish real, live and personal contact of man with God.

This is a lesson to those who like to beat drums that Gurujee "borrowed" teachings from other pre-existing faiths.

A religion devoid of such message is no longer a religion. But the existence of the divine message among various religions cannot be taken to mean that one religion has necessarily borrowed the message from another, because, as it has been pointed out, this very common message is the real essence of every religion.

Another response to those who just love to label the term "copy" on Sikhi.

There is hardly any evidence available to show that Guru Nanak ever studied the Islamic texts. Nor it can be said that he spent any considerable time of his life in the company of the ulama who could have taught him the basic tenets and teachings of Islam. The only source available to Guru Nanak for knowing Islam was in fact the Muslim society of his time. Therefore, if Guru Nanak was at all in debt to anyone for what he said, it was only those common Muslims among whom he had the occassion to live. But were those Muslims in a position to influence the heart of a man like Guru Nanak? I doubt very much.

This is the first evidence that Gurujee wasn't a Muslim as some misled scholars like to point out.

In order to answer this question we have to examine those teachings of Guru Nanak which are supposed to have been borrowed from Islam. The features common between the two are, for example, belief in the One, Omnipresent and Omnipotent God, and the equality of mankind. It appears as if, it was Islam which directed Guru Nanak towards such realities. But if we go into the depth of the matter we will see that such an assumption has really no ground. There could have been justification in assuming that Guru Nanak was influenced by Islam if his insistence upon, say, monotheism was found only in Islam.

As a matter of fact, monotheism is the real foundation of almost every religion. Even in an apparently polytheistic religious community people have always been believing in an unseen Power who was the creator of the world and its destroyer.

However, the point is that monotheism cannot be taken as the sole property of any particular religion. Every religion in one way or the other affirms the existence of the one Supreme God. It is not the religion but the people who differ with each other in comprehending the truth of religion, and thus give the impression that there are many religions.

Fair enough!

Similarly, it cannot be taken for granted that Guru Nanak could not have learnt about the equality of mankind without knowing Islam. It is true that the Hindu India of Guru Nanak's time had almost forgotten the concept of equality of mankind, and it was Islam which reminded the Indians that all humans were equal, but we must remember that there is a difference between belief and practice.

No doubt that the Muslim society of Guru Nanak's time believed in the ideal of equality, but their belief hardly manifested itself in their daily life.

Anyone listening? I mean...reading this?

In fact, it was not so necessary for Guru Nanak to look at any particular religion for the high ideals of life. Man is instinctively after them. If one stands for fulfilling God's Will, one undoubtedly has to esteem the high ideals. Guru Nanak stood for them: hence the striking similarities between his and Islam's teachings.

Thus proving that Gurujee didn't "borrow" or "follow" or "embrace" Islam.

This is also a fact that even though Muslims at large esteemed Guru Nanak, the Muslim orthodoxy did not take much notice of what he was saying or preaching. Before knowing the reason of the indifference of Muslim orthodoxy towards Guru Nanak it must be made clear that by the term Muslim orthodoxy, we mean the class of the 'ulama' which was the backbone of the government in the medieval India. This class supplied the personnel for the judiciary and other religious establishments. The Shaykhu-Islam, the Qaziz, the Muftis, to name a few, were recruited from this class without whose help no government at that time could properly function.

The Muslim orthodoxy considered it its duty to keep a watchful eye on every heretical movement emerging from amongst the Muslims. But as a rule it did not take exception to movements arising amongst the non-Muslims as long as they did not directly aim at the disintegration of the Muslim society.

In such a situation, we can understand the reason behind the indifference of the Muslim orthodoxy to the movement initiated by Guru Nanak. Guru Nanak was born of Hindu parents. At no time did he claim to be a Muslim. His being a Hindu by birth made him an outsider as far as the Muslim orthodoxy was concerned. And this saved him from persecution to which a Muslim would have ordinarily been subjected had he said half of the critical things against Islamic traditions that Guru Nanak did.

Guru Nanak is reported to have said to Babur:

There are millions of Muhammads, but only one God.

The unseen is True and without anxiety.

Many Muhammads stand in His court.

So numberless, they cannot be reckoned.

Prophets have been sent and come into the world.

Whenever He pleaseth, He hath them arrested, and

brought before Him.

The slave Nanak hath ascertained,

That God alone is pure and all else is impure.8

Babur is said to have listened to it. But could he have allowed a Muslim to say so? Near impossible, I should say. The century in which Guru Nanak was born was in fact the century of religious ferment insofar as the Muslim community was concerned. There were Muslims who claimed themselves to be the mahdi, the rightly guided one, and were ultimately persecuted on the behest of the ulama because their utterances were regarded contrary to the Islamic faith. A well known example of this trend was Sayyid Muhammad of Jawnpur (1443-1504) who was forced to run from pillar to post on account of his cryptic sayings.

more proofs...but some people never learn...

so long as the heart is not converted, mere transfer from one religion to another is like changing a dress. That was immaterial in the eyes of Guru Nanak. If a man extinguished his life to keep the divine light burning he served the purpose of his life. As long as one did it the Guru did not care much whether one called oneself a Muslim or a Hindu.

ahem ahem...

This is a fantastic article by a Muslim (oops I didn't check if he is Shia or Sunni) who is in fact giving out evidence that Gurujee was not (what some love to claim) a Muslim.