BhagatSingh

Dally you don't get it. When a part of the body is covered all the time, you feel uncomfortable when you uncover it in front of others. So it IS like taking off your pants. But you can get used to taking off your pants and then it's no longer a big deal.

Your post reminded me of this video.

Listen to kirtan, katha, etc. Do what N30 said basically. Follow his advice closely. But in case you end up watching videos anyway then do simran before, during and after teh videos. Bring Waheguru into the play ground. Then as you play, direct your attention towards Waheguru and hold it there. Bring Waheguru into the activity and it will bring peace.

Yeah definitely. It's ok to remove your pagg in public.

Chatanga ji you basically undermined your own argument. Sikh is not one group of people as you demonstrate. The word gaddaar and traitor does not apply here. The state has nothing against Sikhs, or any group of people. The state is against anything that interferes in its rule and territory. The Kashmiri separatists are also at war with the state. That does not mean that it is Kashmiri people vs State or Muslims vs State. It's just those select group of people vs state, more accurately is state vs separatism. Now the issue here is that innocent people who are not against the state are also being killed in the war between separatists and the state. Now is the state out to kill the thought and aspirations of these folks? No. Sikhs are able to live peacefully with teh state, they can flourish, rise to positions of power, etc, most if not almost all Sikhs in India are living quite peacefully with the state. So if that's the case why are innocents being killing in fake encounters? It is because of a faulty system. Those working in positions of power are able to take advantage of the conflict between state and separatists. The state does not benefit from the death of innocent bystanders but these people do, namely promotion and thus higher pay and recognition. They are able to hide under the banner of the state but are not the state. Contrast their motives with the motives of the state who benefits largely from a clean fight with the separatists, otherwise they jeopardize the trust with their people. One is harmed if innocents are killed but the other benefits. These people are able to get away with this because they are the ones who would normally investigate these matters and deliver justice. If they happen to perpetrate the crime they are supposed to prevent, they are not going to do anything about it. The system does not have measures in place, to keep these people in line. You might say well why doesn't the state take the initiative to correct the system and put in place the necessary measures? The thing is that the state relies on, in this case, the perpetrators to take the necessary steps towards correct measures. The perpetrators do not want this and can prevent the state from taking the necessary steps.

Then most Sikhs aren't Sikhs because they are only cultural Sikhs. It can't be Sikhs vs State if the State is deploying and is controlled by mostly Sikhs. The problem here is not any group of people vs another. If anything it is system vs individual. The faulty system leads to the promotion of irresponsible, unqualified people who further bring in others like them. And there are protocols that are missing to keep everyone in check to make sure the power given to certain individuals is not abused. Watch that video I posted.

So what are you saying?

Dally Yeah it's Sikhs who are killing other Sikhs here. This seems to be largely ignored by many. Chatanga The word traitor has no place here. They do not belong to the same group. "Sikh" is not one group of people.

Oh ok. I though you did Lol.

Lol you can contest it in private messages.

Lucky did you win a lottery? Dam you are lucky!

^ This!! Thanks Maha Singh

Dally the wisdom is not in the form of the tradition, it is behind the form, though it is accessible through the form and that's why preservation of the form is key. Our ancestors understood this, that's why they were keen on following the motions exactly as they were laid out for them. Now if you want to reject tradition go ahead, this is also necessary sometimes. But don't reject it without understanding the wisdom first.( edited) As for the Gurus, they accepted their family traditions entirely. But that's another discussion for another day.

Traditions may not make sense sometimes but you have to stick by them. They contain the wisdom of our ancestors.

Now that's good news! Chocolate eating meditation ftw. 5 minutes is a good start but ultimately a meditation class is what we should aim for like the physical health class but all about the mind.

Lucky anything one does in meditation is a technique, this includes mantras (gurmantra), pranayam, asanas, etc. It is possible to not have a technique, and still find stillness. It is possible to not meditate and still find stillness. It is possible to do everything wrong and still find stillness. Don't get me wrong, techniques help immensely. But it is just a technique. You seem to prefer mantras. Someone else might prefer pranayam. Some one else might combine the two. Someone may sing, someone else may dance, yet another may sit still. Sant Kabir talks about two groups applying the exact same technique: ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥ ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥ ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥ The saints also say* "Ram" and the magicians/miracle-workers also say "Ram". Kabir says do say "Ram" but keep in mind that the saints merged into Ram, while the magicians did not. *meditate on the mantra The saints said "Ram" with the intention of meeting Ram and so as they said "Ram" they went deeper and deeper towards Ram. The magicians said "Ram" as well, however their intention was to conjure up magic, which they obtained, but they never went deeper into the source. It is the intention with which one applies the technique, not the technique itself that carries one through.

Sat if you had to do that then you were already distracted. Now if you feel like you need to do restart then that's fine, open your eyes, make it go away and restart. But you can also try to let it be there whilst you continue to focus on the mantra and practice being completely nonreactive to such distractions whilst being in their presence. Now you say it is just a stage of illusion, have you studied it? is that a conclusion from knowing it? If not then to study it, what you can also do is when you start to meditate, right from the beginning have the intention of focusing on the green, and then when the green is there focus in on it, completely. Get it to know it. Play around with different things. It's all just play anyways.

There are also "Feel the Fear and Do it Anyway" by Susan Jeffers, "Radical Honesty" by Brad Blanton and "The Way of the Superior Man" by David Deida. All good books.

Sat it is most definitely because you are relaxing the body so much in meditation. Lowered BP doesn't matter as long as there aren't any negative effects to your health/routine ie if you can function fine, you are fine. Thus no need to worry (well unless you want your BP to rise again then worrying will do that well ). Lucky, in fact, He is suggesting this, as do other authors of SGGS like Sant Kabir, who also recommends breath control. The "normal 2 way nostril breathing" usually never happens since normally one of our nostrils is closed or obstructed and we are breathing through the other most of the time. The above mentioned practice helps to open up the both nostrils making breathing a bit easier and more balanced.

1) responsibility, watchful care 2) same thing as above but less impactful. ਸਰਪ੍ਰਸਤੀ is super good ਦੇਖ-ਰੇਖ but in the above sentence they are interchangeable. 3) under 4) faith 5) with 6) got it done 7) what is the english equivalent of this? i don't know. It finishes the sentence

Lol what similarity?

All the scientific evidence is there. I am still not sure why mindfulness meditation is not part of the school curriculum. Even schools in India don't have a meditation class. It is very shameful.

They were not rhetorical questions DSG. For the discussion to go forward you must discuss. You have to make statements and you have to back it up. One line argument will be responded with one line counter argument. E.g. if all you can say is "DG has translations of an older book" you are going to get a response "so what?". It should be quite obvious that you have to say more about it, what is means, and flesh it out into an argument. Most of your points aren't even an argument, they are just a statement of fact. Are we supposed to guess what's going in your head? You can't sit back and throw a book at us (not even a book it's just two pages, with no substance), expecting a discussion out of it. You have to be the book if you agree with it and present in your words what the book says.

John york I can't read Punjabi in Shahmukhi or that other script you are now using. Let's stick to the Gurmukhi script.