Morghe Sahar

The chore of the issue is this dichotomic anthropology. It's the root of the problematic paradigm.

Tony, I don't believe in non-violence. Read carefully what I wrote.

Tony wrote: "your Arab co-religionists" My Arab correligionists are Arab Shi'a, be it Lebanese or Iraqi and they were against Saddam. You're the kind of guy who 50 years ago would have complained about "Chinese mentality" not being grateful for the Japanese rape of Nankin. As I said I hope the day comes when some BNP or NF guys kick your head so badly that you end up in hospital repeating for days on end:"But I am your friend, I hate Muslims too!"

I see some problems with the article: 1. Its use of dichotomic anthropology 2. Which is then reflected in the love/sex divide 3. And the issue of sex and guilt I am afraid there is nothing really tantric about this text.

Tonyhp32 wrote: "Here's an example from closer home. In 1971 Bangladesh was liberated by the Indian army. Lakhs of Bengalis were murdered by their fellow Muslim Pakistanis. India invaded to liberate them and had no territorial ambitions to take over any part of Bangladesh and spent millions of dollars to liberate them. Do you think that any of these Bangladeshis are grateful? Nope, in 1985 they had the nerve to ban the entry of Sikhs into that country, the same Sikhs who had sacrificed to save them from the Pakistani army. Now Bangladesh is a Jihadi haven and probably more dangerous than Pakistan." 1. Bangladesh is close to Southall? I didn't know that forgive my ignorance. 2. Was it the Indian Army or "the Sikhs" who liberated Bangladesh? Tonyhp32 wrote: "Then the Americans invade your country and start their experiment in democracy. " Americans have their own country to experiment with democracy. If they had wanted to help Iraqis they would have done so in 1991. They didn't. Tonyhp32 wrote: " Well let's see. You have a tyrant rule over you for decades who kills with impunity. Every part of your routine in life is regulated even to the point of how many stones you should use to wipe your a*se. What prayer to say when you use the loo." The Bathist regime was secular and disencouraged religion. Saddam as an Arab nationalist not an Islamist. I don't know the reporter who threw shoes at Saddam, but you seem to know him inside out.Mashallah. Maybe the day when your house gets bombed by airplanes, your 14 yo girl bodysearched , stripped or raped by foreign soldiers, your brother seen on picture of AbuGhaib being sodomised by a dog and your places of worship being bulldozed or used for sex parties by foreign troups, maybe that day you'll think differently. I pray for the day that the BNP kicks your head in and makes you realise that no matter how hard you try to serve your gore sahiban you will always remain a foreigner, we'll see then if your neo'con lapdog mentality is still so eager to praise bombing and raping people into "democracy". I have friends who well before the Americans came were involved in resisting Saddam and having a society ruled by Iraqis in a democratic way. Some of them not even that religious. They have had people killed by American bombs, female family members mollested by American soldiers etc You're obscene beyond redemption.

Quite nice. I suggest you use a flat feather calligraphy pen (2 or 3 mm) or even better use reed pen that you cut yourself. The problem I have encountered in the UK is the absence of good calligraphy ink but there are some shops around the British Museum that have very good material. You should maybe invest in a good knife for cutting reed pens. I like the second picture with the start of Japuji. The problem is keeping up the same concentration throughout the complete work. I noticed that when working on manuscripts. You see how the Nirmala or Udasi wrote very carefully at the beginning and then 10 pages later you can see less dedication.

My Arab brothers in faith are either Lebanese or Iraqi Shi'a and to be honest given the fact that Saddam killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of Iraqi Shi'as with the West's blessing,and given the fact that Iraqi Shi'a rebelled against Saddam in 1991, I don't see your point in your "Even your Arab brothers-in-faith supported Saddam against Iran". But then again we all know that you're not really an authority in things Islamic. And yes he had WMDs that all came from the West. He had French mirage fighterjets, and very often these were piloted by French pilots. Several European countries gave him chemical weapons and components for mustard gaz. I have seen the victims myself.The Kurds weren't the only victims of Saddam's chemical weapons. You talk about "Islamic tyrants" but these same tyrants are supported with your tax money so you can feel better about your temporary pride about living in the UK.

Well given the fact that it was the West that armed Saddam in the first place I don't see what Tonyhp32 has to complain about. Yes Saddam was a ruthless dictator but he was teh West's best friend for a long time. I see no difference between Bush and Saddam.

The issue here is simple: the perennialist reading of Sikh tradition at the expense of some uncomfortable historical truth. And the problem is this: the Dasam Granth discourse. It simply in incompatible with a perennialist vision of things. There are worlds separatingh the view that Sikhism preaches acceptance of all religions and then the Dasam Granth discourse which makes all non Sikh paths and prophets to be frauds. It's something that always struck me when I first read 19th century scholarship on Sikhism, the fact that these scholars were shocked at the deep contrast between the Nanakian discourse and then the very anti-Islamic discourse of the Khalsa. Both the Dasam Granth and the Rahitname literature contain very anti-Islamic and in part very anti-Brahmin elements that cannot just be dismissed as biproducts of history. What I mean to say is that tonyhp32 and the Niddarpanthi crowd, though separated by differences of liturgy, share that same discourse. Shaheediyan and Amardeep have a more reconciliatory, perennial discourse, and it is my fear that it is something that may be confirmed by the Adi Granth, which I consider constructive but then again the Dasam Granth discourse of :"God sent fake prophets to humanity and we are the right ones", contradicts it. My mistake in the past was to try and reconciliate both discourses at the expense of what was obvious, even though the Mahadin issue taken literally gave space for that. But that was done ignoring centuries of Sikh sampradaic tradition that make previous prophets frauds. I have no problem with peace but peace in the name of what? Social pacification imposed from above by a secularist "we're all one" ideology serving imperial capitalism? Certainly not it would just be conveniant but not based on truth. Peace has to be based on solid foundations.If Wahabis believe in ecterminating Jews and Christians I see no possibility of peace. If Nihangs and many other Khalsa affiliated Sikhs believe that one day they will conquer Mecca and exterminate Islam, then peace is not possible. But if the belief can be shared about a saviour that will reconciliate all revealed traditions and that in the meantime we can set our differences aside and live in peace as good neighbours , then yes this is the foundation of peace.

Peace at the cost of truth?

Well Chaubis Avatar says an ant will kill him. And as the katha of Sant Jarnail Singh has shown, we can say that the traditional understanding of Khalsa Sikhs about Islam is a pretty negative one to say the least.

Who is it then? Abou Abad of Beyrouth? LOL

I fail to understand how circumcision equals castration...Interesting thread though, anthropologically seen.

1. Nice to know that you believe that the Khalsa is to oppose Sahibe Zaman (afj). 2. It is your choice to rely on Sunni hadiths.

I don't know either but I am certain Tarentino is having fun reading this.

I don't what your problem is Mithar.Most educated Brahmins agree that the Vanjaras aren't monkeys and clearly state that most uneducated people due to their ignorance believe that the Vanjaras were monkeys. As for your insult against Imam Sahibe Zaman (ajf), the sin is on your head. I haven't insulted Hanuman or Sri Ram. I have studied the Ramayana in the original Sanskrit and it's a work of great poetic beauty which I profoundly love. Your ignorance that make Hanuman to be some monkey super hero is the true insult to the beauty of the Ramayana. Going back to Imame Zaman (ajf) your insult againt him doesn't surprise me as the Prem Sumarg Granth says that the Khalsa will oppose Imam e Zaman (ajf).

Mithar wrote: "Well, I still beleive that Hanuman Jee was a Monkey or some sub species of monkey that may no longer exist, and he did have a poonch. He wore a Kashara and that Kashara had a little hole in the back for the poonch to go through. Dhoti cannot accomodate a poonch but a Kashara can. Hanuman Jee was an avtar ansh of Shiv Jee who had enormous powers. For him to send his ansh in the form of a monkey-man is no big deal for him. But to many modernists like you Bahadur this may seem like mere myth. Go ahead deny it, doesn't mean it's not true." You're right. I am sure Father Xmas and Batman will understand you better.

It's Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale's voice.

Thanks for putting this up. As I earlier said, the sampradaic preachers clearly say Mahadin is Muhammad (pbuh).

Oh ok, wellk anyways, there must be something wrong with anglo-saxon education systems.

Something just hit me: Mithar's post: ""Bahadur, we go by what Gurbani says above all else. Furthurmore, I can understand that Dhoti was the dress that most people wore, but how can Hanuman Jee wear a Dhoti with his Poonch sticking out? A Kashara can be the only logical thing for him to wear with a little hole in the back for the poonch to come out from."" I just realized...is it just or is there something deeply wrong about the education system in the UK?

Good God in heaven.... Matheen, nobody here has questionned the existence of kamarkassa in other cultures. We are talking about the ceremonial use of it in chivalry initiation ceremonies. And yes Samurais may have worn drawers but not in a ceremonial way.

Your rustic colloquial proverbs and expressions are charming.

This is an internet forum, a thing of no importance. You have a problem with me being here? Get therapy. If I wish to consult this forum I will. And if I want to reply to a guy who believes that Hanuman was an actual speaking monkey with a tail then I will do so.You don't like me? Deal with it.

I don't give agya to anyone. You are your own man and you make your own choices in life I don't know you, I never met you. I hence am not in any position to judge you as a person. Your opinions about me are what they are: opinions. Nothing more nothing less.