Bruce Lung

Wait and see.

This is going to cause problems.

Can you please explain what you mean by gandharva vivah. What is it, and where did it originate from? What connects it with Sikhs? Thanks

At 17 she was old enough to decide for herself. You may think she should have been married before "indulging in fornication" but that's your opinion, and you've been proved wrong by the fact that he stabbed his daughter to death in a frenzied murderous attack. Whether she was married in a gandharva vivah is irrelevant. In fact, the enormity of the violence committed makes all social and religious niceties irrelevant. I don't know how anyone can talk about "sharam" or any aspect of Punjabi culture given what's happened. This girl was snuffed out by someone she trusted, before she had a chance to start her life. The only person to defend her so far has been the law. I believe in the law, not curses.

Agreed. It was none of his business who his daughter was seeing, and as soon as he even brought that up in conversation his family (wife, son, etc) should have stepped in and put him in his place. I am hopeful that sooner rather than later these kinds of people will learn. There are laws. No place for them to hide. Others will teach them the hard way if they are slow learners..

Well Maharaj's kirpa can be used to mean anything, and I'm not sure that it applies in this case. I doubt he has much education outside of what any Christian missionary school taught him, so he probably sees the whole world that kind of way (i.e. made in 7 days, Adam and Eve etc). But he obviously experienced a state of unusually heightened awareness at the moment when the beast attacked.

Please be more careful with your choice of words. Everyone is thinking "symbol".

The amazing thing is that the farmer's natural instinct was so advanced he deliberately dropped the machete and did something that would have seemed in his ordinary mind much less likely to be effective - thrusting his hand into its maw.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050622/80/flr9k.html Wednesday June 22, 02:09 PM NAIROBI (Reuters) - A 73-year-old Kenyan grandfather reached into the mouth of an attacking leopard and tore out its tongue to kill it, authorities said on Wednesday. Peasant farmer Daniel M'Mburugu was tending to his potato and bean crops in a rural area near Mount Kenya when the leopard charged out of the long grass and leapt on him. M'Mburugu had a machete in one hand but dropped that to thrust his fist down the leopard's mouth. He gradually managed to pull out the animal's tongue, leaving it in its death-throes. "It let out a blood-curdling snarl that made the birds stop chirping," he told the daily Standard newspaper of how the leopard came at him and knocked him over. The leopard sank its teeth into the farmer's wrist and mauled him with its claws. "A voice, which must have come from God, whispered to me to drop the panga (machete) and thrust my hand in its wide open mouth. I obeyed," M'Mburugu said. As the leopard was dying, a neighbour heard the screams and arrived to finish it off with a machete. M'Mburugu was toasted as a hero in his village Kihato after the incident earlier this month. He was also given free hospital treatment by astonished local authorities. "This guy is very lucky to be alive," Kenya Wildlife Service official Connie Maina told Reuters, confirming details of the incident.

Haha! Saddos

If it's being carried for genuine religious reasons then it can be any size. However, there are social norms and limits to bear in mind - not just the law.

Duh is a new type of encoder just for iriver.

Duh

Bahadur this is not slander but can you tell me categorically that you have never ever at any time even for a scintilla of a second been a Shia Muslim?

Copyright theft is still theft! Don't do it!

It's the postie.

Beware!

Amandeep please contact me by PM as I wish to claim a copy of your nice book. I've translated the paper to "just plain understandable". Supposed to be humourous. He's saying he will base his Sikh studies on a different field than the religious beliefs of Sikhs. His paper will justify why this is OK. He's saying that in his paper he will explain how there is something missing from Sikh studies by showing up how it's a problem that the modern perception of Sikh identity has been changed in a harmful way by modernity. Ontology is the field of metaphysics concerned with the nature of "being". He is saying that as a result of the changes in perception of "Sikh identity" (from the viewpoint of an MKS) brought about by modernity, Sikh identity is something that exists in the mind as an imaginary conception ("virtual"). He's saying that it's something that exists in our minds, but not in reality. The event referred to is the "act of revision", i.e. the alleged change in what the Sikh identity is (from the perspective of an MKS) that was brought about by modernity. He is saying that the British used "masculinity" as a notion to draw parallels between the foundations of Sikh and Christian beliefs. According to him, they did so in order to establish a programme called the "colonisation of difference". The ultimate aim of this programme/conspiracy was to site Sikhism as a part of a world religions project. Presumably Sikhism was to occupy a subordinate role to Christianity in this project. Mirror stage: when we first recognise that we are individual beings. It is fundamentally reactive: we see ourselves and form a conception of ego based on an artificial projection. He will examine the event of the "colonial encounter" (when the Sikhs encountered the Brits) through Lacan's mirror stage theory. He will propose that Sikhs were able to see a projection of themselves and vice versa when they encountered the British for the first time. This projection defined their sense of who they were ("ego"). Ego according to Lacan's theory is an artificial projection we form when we come up against something. He is saying that the "Sikh identity" from the perspective of a MKS (the result of modernity starting with the encounter with the Brits) is flawed because it glosses over/omits (elides) a carnal (sexual) element. The implication is that this was at least partly due to the alleged British world religions conspiracy. I had to check up on what a revenant is: I thought it was something from Doom3. He is saying that he will propose a new interpretation of events showing things in a different light. He will propose that the proper (true) Sikh identity, unmarred by the harm caused by modernity (modernity in this context being the centralisation plan started at the time of the "encounter") existing only in the virtual (imaginary/pipe-dream) world, can come back. Revenant is a ghost that comes back after a long absence. In a way, he is proposing a Sikh renaissance. Just summing up what I said earlier. Bringing Sikh identity out of the emptiness of virtual existence into the temporal world of matter, substance and form (or relevant dimensions). Not much can be inferred from this sentence. Would have to read the full paper. What I can say is that Derrida's supplement is a signifier of something, rather than something that actually is. It's an indication of substance, rather than the substance. He is saying in his paper he will argue that the bodily identifiers of the Khalsa are supposed to be signals indicating masculinity (remember what he said earlier about carnality?) He is saying that the return of the long-absent ghost of the Khalsa is dependant on how the dust settles over this rather controversial point about masculinity/carnality. He will propose that this will be the crux determining whether the ghost will remain a ghost (i.e. remain a figment of imagination/memory) or whether it will come back. If it comes back, by its very nature it will be "radically other", because in its true form it doesn't try to conform with the underlying tenets of Christianity. He is saying that to study Sikhism the religion, it is necessary to be alive to the aspects of Sikh identity that have previously been "elided". He is saying that the apparent multiculturalness (?) of Sikh studies conceals a desire to "annex" (conquer) it with a monosemic model (i.e. the world religions project). Monosemic means only having one meaning.

people have died because of this. of course it's dangerous. do not use when under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

wot is the martial oh yes? I feel that turban is like a robe of royalty that controls my energy.

Southall is a dump.

I'm glad it handles OGG files. Let your ears show you the difference! I used to use LAME-encoded MP3 a lot, but it's really rubbish. OK you're going to listen with headphones, but play an MP3 with your Iriver signal through a 100W amp and you will hear just how disgustingly muddy the lows are, and how the metallic the highs are. There's no amount of error-correction that can fix it. Now I've got a small collection of LPs, I just can't go back to lossy compression formats any more, no matter how compact. Yes, believe it or not LPs have more accurate sound reproduction, and compression was used in the recording process.

How about this: keep your impending death a secret, borrow as much money as you can, and then blow it all on drugs and hookers. (joke)

What does "diversity" mean to you? The measure of how much people look/dress differently? How can there be a "panth" and "diversity" as well? Maybe the only way would be with matters of irrelevant difference, such as how people dress or wear their hair.

Lip service "respect". And what's it got to do with the link you posted, apart from your seeking approval?