PAL 07

GOOD STUFF HERE...... FOR EXAMPLE http://www.youtube.com/user/SikhiTV#p/a/11C9B46916C03833/0/EpyOSaU6an0

http://www.youtube.com/user/SikhiTV#p/a/f/2/llzHlzmz0Bc

http://www.sikhsangeet.com/player/play.php?id=2734,2735,2736,2737,2738,2739,2740,2741,2742,2743,2744,2745,2746,2747,2748,2749,2750,

LOOK AT POSTER PLEASE Shiv Charan and Raj Academy Bham.pdf

VJKK VJKF PLEASE LOOK AT THE POSTER Shiv Charan and Raj Academy Bham.pdf

chu kar az hama helteh dar gujast halal ast bardan ba shamsheer dast (zafarnama) when all means have failed it is justifiable to draw the sword.... YOU WROTE If anyone is destroying Sikhism, it isn't open debate, analysis and the freedom to correct and contradict. But the people who are acting like thugs and bullying all viewpoints which disagree with them by baiting, threats, personal slanders, attacks and intimidation. I SAY "you fit in this category cuz you have been clearly diproved on everything you say yet you cant accept it" YOU LACK BASIC ANALYSIS SKILLS AND TO TALK TO YOU IS LIKE TALKING TO A BRICK WALL

IN DASAM GRANTH MAHARAAJ CLEARLY STATES IN SIMPLE LANGUAGE THAT KESH IS THE MOOL KAKAAR AND THEN GURUJI MENTIONS THE OTHER 4 AND THEN GOES ON TO SAY THAT BEING SEPERATED FROM THESE ONE IS NOT FORGIVEN. NO OTHER MAHAPURKH EVER HAS MENTIONED THE WORD KESKI NEVER MIND IT BEING A KAKAAR... SO WHY DO PEOPLE TALK OF BHAI RAMA SINGH - WHO WAS A ABYASI SIKH BUT NOT BRAHMGYANI.

WHY IS IT MODERATORS DONT TAKE DESTRUCTION OF SIKHISM BY THESE PEOPLE SERIOUSLY ??? I THINK YOUR DOING MORE DAMAGE THAN GOOD TO SIKHISM BY ALLOWING THESE SORT OF PEOPLE TO TALK WHO SAY MARRIAGE WAS VEDIC AND AMRIT SANCHAR WAS WRONG, DASAM GRANTH IS WRONG ETC. YOU MODS ARE AS BAD AS PEOPLE LIKE GUPTSINGH AND WILL ALL BE LIABLE BEFORE GOD I TELL U THAT MUCH FOR FREE

GUPTSINGH - have you taken amrit ???? if so what did you say to the panjpiare when they were reciting jaap sahib savaye and choupai?? admin cut- Death threats are not allowed. We take death threats very seriously. You have been warned twice in less than 10 minutes, you have one more warning left after that you be put under moderation for quality purposes then possibly even ban

yes your right shaheediya....actually im just messing about, trying to wind her up. also i wanna take a break from this forum and concentrate on some other stuff so ill see all you guys in a couple years time. Gurfateh to all (except harjas .........................only joking)

HARJAS IM GETTING MORE WORRIED ABOUT ABOUT YOU DAY BY DAY - admin cut- Personal attacks not allowed on this forum, this is your first warning, there are three warnings in total, after that you be put under moderation and possibly be ban. HOWEVER I DECLARE ONE THING AND THAT IS THAT I AM SICK AND TIRED (AND EXHAUSTED) OF TALKING TO YOU... I HAVE ALREADY CLEARLY PROOVED TO YOU THAT GOD ISN'T SOME 4 ARMED SUPERMAN TO WHICH YOU HAVE DISAGREED. THEN YOU SAY KRISHNA IS GOD WHEN HE IS VISNU'S AVTAAR........NOW YOUR SAYING NAMDEV WORSHIPPED VISHNU. GURBANI CLEARLY DISPROVES YOUR THINKING BUT IF ITS NOT GETTING INTO YOUR THICK SKULL THEN THATS NOT MY FAULT AND YOU SHOULD THANK ME FOR ATLEAST TRYING.....IF YOUR GONNA TWIST AND TURN GURBANI, REJECTING COMMON SENSE AND SAMPARDAI ARTH TO SUIT YOUR OWN PSYCHOTIC INCLINATIONS THEN I CAN ONLY SUGGEST A GOOD STRONG PRESCRIPTION BY A DOCTOR.

HARJAS WRITES "AKAAL is the true essence of Krishan Ji. However, what is being described is sargun roop of Krishan Ji is not exactly the same thing as formless AKAAL. Otherwise why didn't the bani just negate every reference to Krishan Ji's roop and simply write AKAAL. Obviously there has to be some meaning for it. The error is not the clear description of Krishan Ji in Gurbani, but the refusal to acknowledge it. Just because the God is nirgun and sargun doesn't mean that we should get hysterical at every mention of some sargun roop or avtaray and immediately try to fit it into nirgun box. Even this is a mental concept not grasping the significance that bani being cited and discussed is Vaishnav bhagat bani of Nam Dev, and hence clearly and unmistakeably references to sarguna in form of Krishan Ji. How many hoops you want to jump through to deny it and blame translations?" ERR ??? WHAT ARE YOU ON SOME DRUGS FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA OR SOMETHING. O AND YOU CAN TYPE ASWELL CUZ IT SEEMED THAT YOU KNOW ONLY HOW TO COPY AND PASTE.PLEASE GIVE US A MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION I WANT ATLEAST A COUPLE OF PAGES OF STUFF HERE, THE SHORT RESPONSE TECHNIQUE YOUR TRYING DOESN'T SUIT YOU. LOL NAMDEV ISN'T A VAISHNAV BHAGAT HE ADOPTED GURMAT SIDDANT. HARJAS YOUR WELL DODGY MAAN !!! I SUGGEST YOU BE BANNED FROM HERE ON THE GROUNDS OF DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY AND BE SENT TO A SECURE PSYCHIATRIC UNIT STRAIGHT AWAY.

GUPTSINGH1699 - IS JUST ANOTHER DODGY GUY ON FORUMS SPREADING POISION ABOUT THE TEACHINGS OF SIKHISM.... YOU SAY YOU ARE A GUPTSINGH SINCE 1699 AND YET YOU ENTER INTO DIALOGUE ON A FORUM OPEN TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE...YOU ARE FULL FOR CONTRADICTIONS

SANGATS BENTI I FOLLOW BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT HARJAS IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME - MOORAKH NAAL NA LOOJEYEH

ITS NOT CANNABIS ITS HEMP........ WOULD HAVE THOUGHT YOU KNEW THE DIFFERENCE. CANNABIS HAS TWO FORMS AND IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS GANJA .......HEMP IS COMPLETELY DIFFERERNT AND HAS ONLY 1 TO 3% THC(TETRA HYDRO CANNIBINOL)MOLECULES PRESENT. AND YEH YOU WANT TWO'S ON MY BATA LOL

Balbir Singh, on 19 January 2010 - 09:41 AM, said: Thanks for referring true Guru's Vaaks in original also. This is the truth through these Vaaks as God is explaining it to me. Your "God" needs to take basic santhiya. K. LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

I HAVE BACKED IT UP THE WHOLE PARSANG IS IN SURAJPRAKASH, THAT QUOTE YOU AND YOUR CREW PROVIDED FROM SP IS OUT OF CONTEX PLEASE PROVIDE THE WHOLE PARSANG HERE FOR EVERYBODY TO SEE AND THEN YOU WILL BE DISPROVED, BUT LET ME GUESS WHAT YOUR GONNA SAY THEN - "OH KAVI SANTOKH SINGH DONT NO NOTHING HE WAS A BLAH BLAH BLAH " LOL

YES ITS IN THE KATHA LINK I PROVIDED

IF YOU CANT BOTHER TO LISTEN TO THE KATHA THEN PLEASE ALSO DONT BOTHER TO START THREADS ON THIS FORUM FROM WHICH YOU LATE BACK OFF WHEN YOU ARE DISPROVED.

wow is it true that she cant even read ????? and yet she makes all this fuss lol.

listen to the katha snt ji says that guru marriage can be verified even today as there is a asthaan in India that prroves it.

NO MAHRAAJ DID PARKARMA SANT GURBACHAN SINGH DOES VERY LONG TALK ON THIS AUDIO PIECE...... PLEASE LISTEN TO LINK AS SANT CLEARLY PROOVES THAT .. AND I DOUBT SURAJ PRAKASH IS INCORRECT CUZ IVE LISTEN TO MAHARAJ'S MARRIAGE PRASANG MANY TIMES AT GURDVARA SAHIB FROM SURAJ PRAKASH http://www.4shared.com/dir/27754666/e6c77ffc/sharing.html

mekkajanat - it is actually hinduism that states devi devtas dont have numerous arms and they they are metaphorical. you also said "You are making a prior assumption that the Hindus before the Guru's did not understand the metaphorical significance of their own religious images" MY RESPONSE TO THIS IS "COMPLETE RUBBISH" - I WAS ONLY RESPONDING TO HARJAS POST REGARDING INACCURACIES SHE HAS IN QUOTING GURBANI.....HONESTLY I WAS MAKING ANY ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT ANYTHING . you also said "I prefer to think that, as i have said before, that the Gurus came to renew the old tradition and invest it with its original, primordial significance. They did not aim to create anything new but to make available to humanity the original primordial revalation." And i agree