nogroup singh

I'll recommend following books. http://www.nahal.com/philospunj.html Also order correspondence course from Sikh missionary college. http://www.sikhmissionarycollege.org/Our_Course.asp

The day is over. You are driving home. You tune in your radio and you hear a little blurb about a little village in India where some villagers have died suddenly, strangely, of a flu that has never been seen before. It's not influenza, but two or three people are dead, it's kind of interesting, and they're sending some doctors over there to investigate it. You don't think much about it, but on Sunday, coming home from your place of worship, you hear another radio spot only they say it's not three villagers, it's 30,000 villagers in the back hills of this particular area of India, and it's on TV that night. CNN runs a little blurb; people are heading there from the Disease Center in Atlanta because this disease strain has never been seen before. By Monday morning when you get up, it's the lead story. It's not just India; it's Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and before you know it, you're hearing this story everywhere and they have coined it now as "The Mystery Flu". The President has made some comment that he and everyone are praying and hoping that all will go well over there. But everyone is wondering, "How are we going to contain it?" That's when the President of France makes an announcement that shocks Europe. He is closing their borders! No flights from India, Pakistan, or any of the countries where this thing has been seen. You watch a little bit of CNN before going to bed. Your jaw hits your chest when a weeping woman is translated from a French news program into English: "There's a man lying in a hospital in Paris dying of the mystery flu." It has come to Europe. Panic strikes! As best they can tell, once you get it, you have it for a week before you know it. Then you have four days of unbelievable symptoms and then you die. Britain closes it's borders, but it's too late. South Hampton, Liverpool, North Hampton, and it's Tuesday morning when the President of the United States makes the following announcement: "Due to a national security risk, all flights to and from Europe and Asia have been canceled. If your loved ones are overseas, I'm sorry. They cannot come back until we find a cure for this thing." Within four days our nation has been plunged into an unbelievable fear. People are selling little masks for your face, talking about, "What if it comes to this country?" and preachers on Tuesday are saying, "It's the scourge of God!" It's Wednesday night and you are at your place of worship when somebody runs in from the parking lot and says, "Turn on a radio! Turn on a radio!" While the place of worship listens to a little transistor radio with a microphone stuck up to it, the announcement is made. Two women are lying in a Long Island hospital dying from the mystery flu! Within hours it seems, this thing just sweeps across the country People are working around the clock trying to find an antidote. Nothing is working. California, Oregon, Arizona, Florida, Massachusetts. It's as though it's just sweeping in from the borders. Then, all of a sudden the news comes out. The code has been broken. A cure can be found. A vaccine can be made. It's going to take the blood of somebody who hasn't been infected and so, sure enough, all through the Midwest, through all those channels of emergency broadcasting, everyone is asked to do one simple thing: "Go to your downtown hospital and have your blood type taken. That's all we ask of you. When you hear the sirens go off in your neighborhood, please make your way quickly, quietly, and safely to the hospitals." Sure enough, when you and your family get down there late on that Friday night, there is a long line, and they've got nurses and doctors coming out and pricking fingers and taking blood and putting labels on it. Your wife and your kids are out there, they take your blood type, and they say, "Wait here in the parking lot and if we call your name, you can be dismissed and go home." You stand around, scared, with your neighbors, wondering what in the world is going on and if this is the end of the world. Suddenly a young man comes running out of the hospital screaming. He's yelling a name and waving a clipboard. What? He yells it again! Your son tugs on your jacket and says, "Daddy, that's me." Before you know it, they have grabbed your boy. "Wait a minute! Hold on!" And they say, "It's okay, his blood is clean. His blood is pure. We want to make sure doesn't have the disease. We think he has got the right type. "Five tense minutes later, out come the doctors and nurses, crying and hugging one another - some are even laughing. It's the first time you have seen anybody laugh in a week, and an old doctor walks up to you and says, "Thank you, sir. Your son's blood type is perfect. It's clean, it is pure, and we can make the vaccine." As the word begins to spread all across that parking lot full of folks, people are screaming and praying and laughing and crying. But then the gray-haired doctor pulls you and you wife aside and says, "May we see you for a moment? We didn't realize that the donor would be a minor and we need. . . we need you to sign a consent form." You begin to sign and then you see that the number of pints of blood to be taken is empty. "H-h-h-how many pints?" That is when the old doctor's smile fades and he says, "We had no idea it would be a little child. We weren't prepared. We need it all!" "But -- but... You don't understand," you say. "We are talking about the world here. Please sign. We-we need it all!" "But can't you give him a transfusion?" "If we had clean blood we would. Can you sign? Would you sign?" In numb silence, you do. Then they say, "Would you like to have a moment with him before we begin?" Can you walk back? Can you walk back to that room where he sits on a table saying, "Daddy? Mommy? What's going on?" Can you take his hands and say, "Son, your mommy and I love you, and we would never ever let anything happen to you that didn't just have to be done. Do you understand that?" The old doctor comes back in and says, "I'm sorry, we've got to get started. People all over the world are dying." Can you leave? original ending The Father is Guru Gobind Singh Ji You don’t walk out but give a pat on the back full of love and blessings to Baba Ajit Singh Ji as he is saying, "Dad, bless me so that I may die victoriously on the battlefield of life." And then your second son runs up to you, rolling up his sleeve, ready for the drip to be attached saying, "Dad, I want to give my life-blood too, bless me." And you stand and watch him die bravely. And you remember how a few days earlier your youngest two sons stood together and said, "Father, we will give our life-blood, but not our love for you." Then next week when they have the ceremony to honor your 4 sons, thousands turn up and their mother asks where her sons are, you reply, "What if 4 sons have died, thousands still live!" Is that what GOD wants to say? "WHAT IF 4 SONS HAVE DIED, THOUSANDS STILL LIVE! BE ONE OF THOSE THOUSANDS" "Father, seeing it from your eyes breaks our hearts. Maybe now we can begin to comprehend the great Love you have for us and become your sons through receiving Amrit." You can now SPREAD GURBANI and make Guru Gobind Singh ji your father through Amrit. Source: http://thunder.prohosting.com/~simico/sikh_mc/

Here is a brief description of the Rastrya Sikh Sangat (RSS), an anti-Sikh group, which is funded by the BJP and other right-wing Hindu organizations. __________Beginning of excerpt______________ Rastrya Sikh Sangat [RSS] RSS's religious programs do not lay so much emphasis on propagating Hinduism as to reclaiming those who had adopted other religions during the last few hundred years. For this they adopt a very aggressive attitude. They resort to inflammatory speeches and writings against Sikh religions and spread canards about them. To project Sikhism as a part of Hinduism, they have created an organization called "Rashtrya Sikh Sangat." Its chief aim is, by telling every kind of lie, to show that there is nothing new in the Sikh scripture, that it is only the reinterpretation of the Vedas, that the aim of the Gurus was to defend Hinduism and nothing else, and that all the Sikh Gurus and martyrs were Hindus, and therefore, the Sikhs should start calling themselves Hindus. The Congress Party too, with the object of absorbing the Sikhs in the Hindu mainstream, has been propping up a number of organizations which came into conflict with the Sikhs. Nirankaris, Radha Soamis and many other big and small organizations were made use of to project Sikhism as a part of Hinduism and they were given extensive financial help. However, in the history of free India, it has happened for the first time that by falsely claiming a non-Hindu religion as a branch of Hinduism, the "Sangh Parivar" which includes BJP also) has openly setup an organization with the object of annihilating that independent religion and has succeeded in enrolling a few persons with Sikh appearance also--particularly in the states outside Punjab. Now this organization has come to exert all of its energies towards opening its branches in the Punjab villages. The fact that Radhasoamis have already succeeded in their plans has provided encouragement to this organization. The second most important factor is that after the conclusion of the alliance with the BJP, the Akalis are almost sleeping over every anti-Sikh activity and are not prepared even to open their lips. To reap the maximum advantage from the prevailing situation, the RSS has intensified its activities. They have launched a strong propaganda drive to project Sikhism as an offshoot of Hinduism, and BJP leaders at the local level are openly joining the anti-Sikh campaign. They are sure that the Akalis will not prevent them from doing so. A magazine "Quamantri Panj Dariya" published from Ludhiana had published a report three months ago in which it was stated that RSS-BJP were pinning hopes on their campaign and are sure of their success in Punjab. This magazine published interviews of several leaders in which they had expressed the hope that they would set up RSS branches in every village of Punjab within a year. _________________End of Excerpt_________________ > >[source: The Spokesman, October 1997 (Monthly issue), pages 23-24] > > >In this article, a color photograph is shown of a person with a kesri >dastar and a flowing beard. The person is not a Sikh but a "bhiya" from >UP. He sits "outside a RSS camp is Punjab," according to Spokesman. >PS: I urge everyone to support this periodical. For information on how to subscribe to The Spokesman, please see: >http://www.rpi.edu/~anandh/NISHKAM/periodicals/Default.htm

This is my last post to this discussion and it was written by satnam singh. <<< Cutting and pasting it here to make it more clear for all of you >>> Homosexuality falls under 'kaam' LUST, which our Gurus have stressed to avoid.Our holy Gurbani ji clearly explains 'kaam' in detail.Again the only acceptable matter is that of a husband and wife (after marriage). Being gay is not normal or is ever defined normal in any faith for that matter! GOD created man for a woman and vice versa. we can come up with many theories or ways to accept such persons. But Waheguru ji has denied it already!! And gay history should be of no concern to us. Sikhism has had many struggles, many hardships, many problems, our Gurus were tortured, jailed, punished, humiliated, executed etc. All for the sake of 'truth'. TO preach the right way and the truth. And it is shocking to see many Sikhs accepting such anti-GOD activity as Homosexuals!! Amongst the many other problems. Ask yourself - What would I Guru ji say if he was here?? Many consider homosexuals as threat because our future will be destroyed. Our childrens minds polluted and perverted. They would think it's ok be gay aswell! So you see there is more of disadvantage than any benefit. Please ask your self (if gays are accepted); You goto celebrate Baisakhi and you see two guys holding hands (gays). What would you do? Would you not feel shame? what about the children? * There are priests living in the Gurdwara...gay amongst them ... Wouldn't they be involved in gay activities inside a holy place? * Wouldnt children be afraid of learning kirtan if gay teachers taught them? Would you send your son knowing they are gay? Wouldnt many persons be afraid to be alone with a giani... In fear that they maybe be molested such as the vicars in UK admitted?? What about if gays wanted to be married? We would then have to alter the 'Lavaan', the Sikh scriptures, so that it fits to husband for husband or female for female. Guru Gobind ji condemned gays would anyone say his holiness is wrong? What about Kaam? wouldnt other persons such as pedophiles wanted equal acceptance? In the B.C. Canada , one person is able to keep such anti-GOD material, as it violated his freedom of rights! source: Click here

And how does one attain that state? How can we be sure that the 'sexual orientation' is as innoccous as 'left handedness'? Till the early 1970s, homosexuality was regarded as a psychological disorder by the American Psychological Association(APA). At that time, bereft of any scientific reasons and solely driven by lobbying efforts of the gay groups, the APA dropped homosexuality from its list of psychological disorders. And as we have seen in the last half century in the US, altering public opinion isn't a very complex task provided some group or the other is really determined to do so. This is what happened with homosexuality which evolved from a disorder in the 1970s to its present state of a natural phenomenon. http://www.narth.com/menus/born.html The jury is still out on this but new advances in science suggest that sexual orientation is not something that a person has a choice in. The famous 'gay gene' died an untimely death despite the attempts of several groups to keep it alive by the stimulatory effects of misinformation campaigns. Homosexuality could at best be partially due to genetic reasons. Check out the following links for more information on this: http://www.narth.com/docs/fading.html Here's a very signficant excerpt: When "gay gene" researcher Dr. Dean Hamer was asked if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology, he replied: "Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors." http://www.narth.com/docs/bornway.html The questions that then arises is: Since it is known with absolute certainity that homosexuality is due NOT to solely genetic factors, how does that change the opinion of those asking for acceptability of this disorder in Sikhi?

Well you guys might not find a direct quote but you might see it in the reasoning that sex in Sikhi is only for procreation. Gay sex is to fulfil desires. Kaam, Krodh, Lobh, Moh, and Ahankar are the 5 evils. These are to be avoided at all costs. Bani says these evils will keep us from naam, keep us from sachkhand and guru jee. Sex is only for procreation although it is mentioned indirectly. However, This is not reinforced as it is reinforced in Hindu Sannyasa that a person would either be a brahmacharya or a have sex only for reproduction on a strict basis ! Talking about gays. I dont think Sikhi will promote Gay-Sex even though it is not mentioned in Gurbani. Here we just have to use our common-sense and Sikhi is not based on religious rules :- "This is allowed and that is not allowed".

DASAM GRANTH: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE (Late) Principal Harbhajan Singh Introductory It is admitted by all historians that in the lifetime of Guru Gobind Singh, there existed no such manuscript, now known as Dasam Granth. However, there is a mention of a granth named Vidya Sagar, which is supposed to have been a compilation of some writings of the Guru and the poets at his court. This granth, if it ever existed, is said to have been lost at the battle of Anandpur Sahib in the year 1704 AD. Therefore, to understand the issue of the Dasam Granth, one has to fall back on the writings of the Guru's near contemporaries and, above all, on the irrefutable criterion of the ideology of Guru Granth Sahib. It is an established fact that Guru Gobind Singh, at the time of his demise, bestowed Guruship on Granth Sahib.-1 What is even more significant is that the Guru neither prepared any granth of his own, equivalent in holy status to Adi Granth, nor thought it fit to include any composition of his own in the same.-2 How the title changed The granth was given different names at different times in the following order: a) Bachittar Natak Daswen Patshah ka Granth c) Dasam Granth d) Sri Dasam Granth e) Sri Dasam Granth Sahib f) Sri Dasam Guru Granth Sahib These names are very misleading, and the pity is that these have not been given by any responsible and representative body, society, or the Panth as a whole, but just by individuals, small organizations or publishers. According to Dr Rattan Singh Jaggi, "There is no unanimity among the historians regarding the date of compilation of this granth, but according to Sikh tradition the decision to compile it in one volume was made conditional on the success of the mission of Bhai Sukha Singh and Bhai Mehtab Singh. Later, it is said Baba Deep Singh and Bhai Sukha Singh of Patna prepared their own Birs (volumes) by adding more material to it. Uptil then, the granth was named as Bachittar Natak, which later came to be named as the granth of the Tenth Guru."-3 As Bachittar Natak Bachittar or Vachittar Natak, according to Mahan Kosh of Bhai Kahan Singh, denotes one of the following: a) Wonderful or strange drama; That part of Dasam Granth which pertains to the stories of Avtars (incarnations) and other historical narratives, written in dramatic style; c) Part of the granth comprising fourteen chapters, wherein some happenings in the life of Guru Gobind Singh have been incorporated. A careful analysis of the inner evidence of the granth helps us to find out which meaning of Bachittar Natak, given in Mahan Kosh, is appropriate or inappropriate for different parts of the granth. In the first place, those portions of the granth about the authorship of which there are no two opinions among Sikh scholars, do not have any internal indication anywhere, showing them as Bachittar Nanak.-4 Secondly, fourteen chapters, wherein some happenings of the life of Guru Gobind Singh have been incorporated, are clearly marked as Bachittar Natak, both as a sub-heading and at the end of each chapter. Thirdly, Charitro Pakhyan and Hakayats (stories in Persian) are so obscene that they are not worthy of even being spoken of as Bachittar Natak, which has not been done in the granth either. Fourthly, the rest of the writings can be called Bachit1ar Natak, and they have been so indicated at the end of most of the writings, in the sense, that these are mythical and dramatic narratives. As Dasam Granth The contents of the so-called Dasam Granth may be divided broadly into the following categories for the purpose of our study: Pages i) Hymns, considered by all to be compositions of Guru Gobind Singh 50 ii) Bachittar Natak (14 Chapters) 36 iii)Both of the Chandi Charittras and Chandi Di Var 53 iv) Chaubis Avtars, etc. 674 v) Charittro Pakhyan and Hakayats in Persian 615 (Note: The total number of pages indicated in this article are taken from the published volume of Dasam Granth as available in 1428 pages). Out of 1428 pages, the Guru's hymns occupy only 50 pages and Charittro Pakhyan and Hakayats (which neither claim to be Bachittar Natak, nor can their contents entitle them to be so), cover 615 pages. The composition that has been given the heading of Bachittar Natak comprises only 14 chapters and each chapter ends with the remark, "Iti Bachittar Natak Granthe ...." (Here ends the Bachittar Natak Granth). In the rest of the writings, Bachittar Natak is not given as a heading of any composition, but "Iti Bachittar JVatak Granth..." occurs at the end of most of the chapters related to Avtar stories. The picture that emerges clearly is that, whereas Bachittar Natak Granth is referred to many times within the so-called Dasam Granth, there is not a single instance where Dasam Granth, as such, is mentioned within its text. It is an established part of Sikh tradition that the different portions of this granth lay scattered at different places, and were collected together to form one volume -5 some decades after the demise of the Tenth Master and consequent to the success of the mission of Bhai Sukha Singh and Bhai Mehtab Singh. It did not end here. To the first collection were added, later on, more writings, and it is these collections which came to be named first as Bachittar JVatak then as Daswen Patshah ka Granth,-6 still later as Dasam Granth, and recently by some publisher as Sri Dasam Guru Granth Sahib. Decision for Compilation What is an even more significant part of the established Sikh tradition is that when the decision to compile the different pothis or writings for the first time into one volume was made, there was a serious debate at Damdama (Bathinda), as to whether the different parts of this granth merited at all to be joined together in a single volume.-7 The overwhelming opinion in this debate, even then, was not in favour of compiling the different pothis or writings in a single volume; only the minority opinion favoured different pothis to be compiled toghether.8 Hence, there is not even a prima facie case for assuming this granth to be an integrated, single one-piece work, much less can it to be regarded as the composition of a single author. A summary reference to the analysis of the contents of the granth by Dr Jaggi would confirm this conclusion. Here it is relevant to state that Dr Ashta has attributed the collection of the granth to Bhai Mani Singh. This he bases primarily on a letter purported to have been written by Bhai Sahib to Mata Sundri. Dr Jaggi, whose thesis Dasam Granth ka Kartritva, which has been commended by Dr H.P. Dwivedi, has examined this issue in det" il and comes to the conclusion that the letter is fake. Internal Evidence a) There are only four extant manuscripts of the Cii anth which are recognized by scholars. All these differ malc.ria]ly even as regards the subject matter, number of pages, the headings of the chapters, the number of verses in them, and their sequences and arrangements, etc. There are too many variations to be recounted here. 9 Pen-names of Ram, Sham, Kali and Gobind are found in different compositions indicating them to be the poet-authors of these.'10 IdeoIogical Contradictions a) Within the granth There are glaring contradictions within the text itself on ideological issues which are fundamental to Sikhism. For example, Sikhism stands for unalloyed monotheism: "0 man, worship none but God, not a thing made by Him. Know that He Who was in the beginning, Unborn, Invincible, and Indestructible is God. What if Vishnu, coming into this world killed some of the demons, And exercising great deceit induced every one to call him God. Hear, O fool ! How can he who was drowned in the ocean of the world save thee?"11 "One Shiv was born, one died, and one was born again; There have also been many incarnations of Ram Chander and Krishan. How many Brahmas and Vishnus there have been ! How many Veds and Puranas ! How many collections of Sirnritis there have been and passed away !..."12 "Some fasten an idol firmly to their breasts; Some say that Shiv is God; ... Some say that Ram is God; some say Krishan; Some in their hearts accept the incarnations as God; But I have forgotten all vain religions and know in my heart That the Creator is the only God."13 As against this clear-cut ideology of Guru Gobind Singh himself, 455 pages have been devoted in the granth to idolise Chaubis Avtaars and 99 pages to idolise the Avtaars of Brahma, Rudra, and other. One item that requires particular notice relates to the worship of gods and goddesses, particularly that of Durga, Bhawani, Kali, Shiva, Sitla, etc., which are all supposed to be the incarnation of Parbati Devi, or Shiva, meaning the spouse of Shivji and not Shivji himself. What has been said about the condemnation of the Avtaars of Vishnu and the Devi, applies equally to the mythical incarnation of other gods and goddesses. In addition, we have the hymn clearly condemning the worship of Devi by name, "Boundless is His Form, and boundless His Voice; in the shelter of His Feet dwelleth Bhavani."14 With the hymns of Guru Granth Sahib i) Whereas in Guru Granth Sahib the invocation is invariably to God alone, here the invocations are to Bhagauti, Durga, etc. ii) By far the most weighty objection for not considering this granth to be a unified work, is ideological. For the largest portion of it cuts across the fundamentals of the Sikh ideology, as enshrined in Guru Granth Sahib. The Gurus are categorical on this point. "May that mouth burn, which says that God incarnates."15 "0 Brother, fools worship gods and goddesses. They know not that these mythical deities can give them nothing. To beg anything from them is just like putting stone idols in water, where they only sink. How can they enable anyone else to swim across the water?"16 Bhagat Namdev in Guru Granth Sahib also says, "They who worship Bhairav, shall become sprites; they who worship Sitla, ride donkeys and scatter dust. For myself I take the name of One God."17 Except for 50 pages, the granth contradicts the ideology of Guru Granth Sahib. As 674 pages are devoted to extolling Avtaars, etc. and 53 pages praise Chandi and Durga (Chandi Chritras and Var Durga ki). And, 615 pages relate to the utterly obscene Charittro Pakhyan. The conclusive evidence is that whereas the 50 pages in every way synchronise with the bani of Guru Granth Sahib, the main body of the granth relating to Devis and Avtaars and Charittro Pakhyan are evidently in contradiction to that ideology. Hence, when the acid test is applied, except the 50 pages of the bani, the writings in the granth are difficult to accept as creations of the Tenth Master. Conclusion First, this is a granth which never existed as such in the time of the Tenth Master, nor is there any verifiable injunction by the Master in this regard. Second, it was decades after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh that it was joined together in one volume, just because of a chance development. Third, the very naming of the granth has been varying, and the first name, Bachittar Natak, supported by internal evidence, hardly suggests that the graiith has a religious import. These names have been changed from time to time. Fourth, the different jarts of it, especially the 50 pages and the bulk of the granth relating to Avtaars, Devis and lhe Charittro Pakhyan are entirely contradictory in content. In fact, about the Charittro Pakhyan, the S.G.P.C. has conveyed that it is not the writing of Guru Gobind Singh, but is a reproduction of some mythical stories." According to known tradition, even originally the majority opinion was against the different pothis being compiled into one volume. Hence, it passes one's comprehension how this granth can logically be regarded as a single piece of work or the composition of a single author, much less of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib. It is obvious that the material of the granth needs to be sifted in order to separate the grain from the chaff, and the only criterion for that is t.he bani of Guru Granth Sahib. But this sifting should not he left to the judgement of an individual or an organisation, howsoever respected and highly placed it may be. It is a matter of vital importance, and a decision on it. should be the responsibility of the Panth. NOTES l. Wahi (Record) of Narbudh Bhatt; Koer Singh, Gtirbilas Patshahi Das (1745 AD), Chapter 21; Kesar Singh Chhiber, Bansawlinama, (1769 AD), Chapter 10; Sarup Das Bhalla, Mehma Parkash (1776 AD), p. 459 2. Dr Rattan Singh Jaggi in his scholarly thesis Dasam Granth ka Kartritva, (i.e., Authorship of Dasam Granth) has conclusively shown that Guru Ciobind Singh did not give an equal status to his own writings with that of the Adi Granth. He described his composition as a play. 3. Rattan Singh Jaggi: Dasam Granth ka Kartritva, p. 13 4. Jap, Akal Ustat minus 20 stanzas (211 <a 230) in the praise of Devi Durga; Swavyas; Shabads, and Zaffarnama. 5. Bhai Kahn Singh: Mahan Kosh, p. 6! 6 6. Dr Rattan Singh Jaggi: op. cit., p. 13 7. Bhai Kahn Singh: op. cit, p. 616 8. Ibid. 9. Dr Rattan Singh Jaggi: op. cit., Chapter 4 and Appendix, pp. 100-101 10. Ibid., pp. 49-66 11. Macauliffe, M.A.: The Sikh Religion, Vol. V., pp. 325-326. Shabad Hazare 12. Ibid., Akal Ustat, p. 272 13. Ibid., Swayyas, pp. 318 14. Ibid., Akal Ustat, p. 262 15. Guru Granth Sahib, p. 1136 16. Ibid., p. 637 17. Ibid., p. 874; Macauliffe, Vol. VI., p. 57 18. Letter No. 36672, dated 3.8.1973, from the Dharam Parchar Committee of the S.G.P.C., Amritsar. AOSS Jan-Mar !999

All, I want to discuss this in detail. I was going through one book of Sikhism and writer mentioned that "Gurus" filtered all the man made cultures and gave sikhs a new unique "Sikh culture" now he didn't make it clear what he was stating so I thought of posting it here to get the the feedback. I'm researching on it as well. Also, let's discuss Punjabi culture as well. Can we still claim that Sikhs culture is Punjabi culture? When we can see sikhism spreading globally? What is Punjabi culture anyway?

Brother Sewak, I understand your anger towards him. But then Guru ji gave us instructions that we should not judge anyone as GOD is there to judge who is right and who is wrong. Just imagine how bad time Guru Gobind singh ji was having and still see the response he sent to Auranzeb in his "Zafernama". I will let you read that and then make your judgement. Here is the link: http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...topic.php?t=432

Sabbyji, We need to take actions rather than questioning ourselves. Just imgine how many became Sikhs just by the efforts of Guru Nanak devji? Just make it your mission that you will sit with one Sikh on every weekend and let him know about our history. We need to educate our brothers and sisters. Questions won't make any difference but actions. Send them to this site and we will take care of them. Try to send e-mails to your friends and let them know about the Sikh websites. Let them be a part of discussion forums. We need to spread the word of Sikh websites. We need to get them on discussion forums so if they have any questions they get anwsers. There is a post with website collections in general chat section just cut and paste that and send all the links to your friends. You make efforts and don't worry about results. Sikhism is becoming global not just a religon of north Indian but world is coming to adopt sikhism. I can see it and you will soon.

Sevak, You are living in real world. Sikhism is a religion of reality, so in real world you have to face so many people from bad company. Now you have to act like "Lotus" which grows in mud but still its flower and keeps its quality although its in mud itself. Guru ji said "bad company" is bad but it doesn't mean that if you're working at the office and you see bad co-worker then you will quit your job. We are instructed to get rid of bad company as soon as possible but then we're instructed to live in real world not in jungles so you will come across people with bad intentions so just deal with them. You should be aware of this that Guru ji started Sikhism which believes in "family life" so in order to keep that way of life, you will come across variety of people, so use your wisdom and Guru ji's instruction and make your best judgement. As far as, it goes to this forum then you are the best judge by yourself. If you're here then you're learning something new everyday and there are no instructions that you are not allowed to have a company of "cyber sangat" or cyber sangat is less that Physical Sangat. I will end my post with few more instructions of our 11th Guru ji "Sri Guru Granth Sahib". He will repent Who keeps the company of the evil-doers. (Guru I, Prabhati Rag) 2. In the company of bad people, One faces great sorrows. (Guru III, Maru Rag) 3. The body is full of lust and anger; The company of godly men renders it pure. (Guru IV, Gauri Rag) 4. The society of saints removes all sins. ( Guru V, GauriRag) 5. The society of saints secures comforts, In this world and the next. (Guru V, Gauri Rag) 6. That is the society I crave for, Wherein the Name of the One is remembered. (Guru I, Sri Rag) 7. Seek the company in which the glory of the Lord is sung and the Creator is contemplated; In that company chant his glory and remember the Creator. (Guru I, Gauri Rag) 8. Those who have found the society of the holy persons, Are dyed fast with the love of the Supreme Being; They are freed from all fetters and chains; With devotion they worship the Lord, Their eyes are pleased with the sight of the Lord, Their tongues praise the Lord in all His manifestation. With the Guru's Grace, their thirst is extinguished. In the love of the Lord, their hearts feel fully satisfied. Thy servant serves the Lord in His glory, Who is the Primeval Being, the Highest of the high. (Guru V, Basant Rag) 9. It is by great good fortune, That one gets the society of the God-loving; Unfortunate people grope about in doubt anddarkness; The society of the truthful cannot be obtained without good fortune, And without such society, man lives in impurity. ( Guru IV, Majh Rag) 10. True society is the school of the True Guru, Whefrein we learn to love God, And admire his greatness. (Guru IV, Kanara Rag) 11. How can we know of true society? Wherein the lovers of truth hold communion with Lord alone. (Guru I, Sri Rag) 12. True society is the treasury of Divine Nam, Where we meet God. (Guru I, Sarang Rag) 13. The dirt of egoism of ages which has soiled the soul, Will be removed only in the society of the holy. Just as iron floats when tied to timber, So will one cross the ocean of life by following The Guru's word in the company of saints. (Guru IV, Kanara Rag) 14. O Lord, be so merciful and kind, That I pass my days in the society of the saints; For, they who forsake Thee, Are born to die over and over again, And never get rid of worries and grief. (Guru V, Ramkali Rag)

It has all the references, long but worth reading Sundeep Singh Writing and Love April 13, 2000 Gandhi In My Eyes These past two weeks we have discussed Mohandas K. Gandhi, his beliefs, and his actions at length in class (in addition to watching the movie "Gandhi"). I found the question and answer session was a great way of getting different ideas flowing, as well as helping increase my general knowledge about Gandhi 's role in the Indian independence movement. Throughout many of the questions asked, I found myself playing the minority role of the antagonist, expressing views that were in most cases completely the opposite of those expressed by Gandhi himself. There have always been a few obstacles that have prevented me from viewing Gandhi in such high regard as other Indians or Americans do. I did not have time in class to delve deep into those reasons, so I only thought it would be appropriate to lay a foundation that would explain how Gandhi is seen in my eyes. My first biases of Gandhi arose from the fact that throughout his lifetime, he expressed many anti-Sikh views, ranging from attacking the symbols of the Sikh faith to encouraging Sikhs to abandon parts of their culture and religion in favor of re-absorption back into Hinduism. From the onset of his arrival in India, Gandhi was insistent on referring to Sikhs as "Hindus," even though the vast majority of Sikhs at that time expressed their belief that they were a distinct religion, and that referring to them as a part of Hinduism was offensive. His insistent comments that the "Sikh Gurus were Hindus," and that Guru Gobind Singh was "one of the greatest defenders of Hinduism" (Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi Vol. 28 pg. 263) deeply hurt Sikh sentiments, but that never deterred him making such statements, which were repeated many times throughout his life. A particularly offensive comment made seemed to be a clear indication that Gandhi harbored the belief that Sikhs should disown the institution of the Khalsa Panth (which was established by our 10th Guru, Guru Gobind Singh). He said, "I read your Granth Sahib. But I do not do so to please you. Nor shall I seek your permission to do so. But the Guru has not said anywhere that you must grow your beards, carry kirpans (swords) and so on" (CW Vol. 90, Pg. 80). Gandhi failed to acknowledge that it had been one of the Gurus that had established such symbols for his followers to keep. Gandhi attacked the kirpan in particular on many occasions. He showed a critical misunderstanding in the beliefs and responsibilities surrounding Guru Gobind Singh declaring that his Sikhs should carry them. This misunderstanding gradually turned into a general intolerance, with Gandhi often mocking those Sikhs who wore them. In a letter to a friend (Amrit Kaur), Gandhi once wrote: "I wish you would persuade enlightened Sikhs to take the Devnagari script in the place of the Gurumukhi" (CW Vol. 64. pg 41). It is important to realize that Gurumukhi is not the language of the Punjab, but rather the language of the Sikhs. Gurumukhi was initially created by the Sikh Gurus and is the script used in the Guru Granth Sahib. It wasn't as if Gandhi had asked Punjabis (who are Sikhs, Hindus, and Muslims) to give up the Punjabi language, but rather Sikhs in particular to give up the language of their Gurus. While I respect Gandhi's desire to have some sort of united language, he failed to realize that by making such statements, he was in essence asking Sikhs to disown their culture and their heritage by abandoning their mother tongue in favor of a composite language. I can thus only come to the conclusion from his various comments that he wished for Sikhs to renounce the parts of their religion and culture that he felt prevented them from being reabsorbed back into Hinduism. Two of the main obstacles to such an objective were the different language of the Sikhs and the institution of the Khalsa Panth. Gandhi was particularly fond of making broken promises to the Sikhs, promises that to this day have come back to haunt them. He would never hesitate to appease them by saying: "We have not done justice to the Sikhs" (CW Vol. 38 pg. 315). But unfortunately this would only translate into promises that were never kept. During the 1920's and 1930's, the British had acknowledged three main groups that would receive the power after the British left India. These three groups were Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs (who ruled the last kingdom that was annexed by the British). There had been some talk amongst Sikhs about creating such a country for themselves (Khalistan), in rival to the creation of India and Pakistan. In order to help persuade Sikhs to join Hindu India, Gandhi made many comments and promises, which as I look back at history, seem to have been aimed at deceiving and coaxing them. The first of such promises was when he said: "No Constitution would be acceptable to the Congress which did not satisfy the Sikhs" (CW Vol. 58. p. 192). This promise was quickly broken right after independence. To this day, not one Sikhs has ever signed the Indian Constitution, which even goes out of its way to declare that Sikhs are indeed a part of Hinduism (Article 25 of the Constitution). Then came a promise that was used as a justification by certain Sikhs in taking up arms against the Government of India after 1984. Gandhi invoked the sacred name of God and said: "I venture to suggest that the non-violence creed of the Congress is the surest guarantee of its good faith and our Sikhs friends have no reason to fear betrayal at its hands. For the moment it did so, the Congress would not only seal its own doom but that of the country too. Moreover, the Sikhs are a brave people, they will know how to safeguard their right by the exercise of arms if it shall every come to that." He further continued: "Why can you have no faith? It Congress shall play false afterwards you can well settle surely with it, for you have the sword. I ask to accept my word. Let God be witness of the bond that binds me and the Congress with you" (CW Vol. 45 pg. 231-33). These were just more appeasement tactics that were aimed at misleading the Sikh masses. The mentioning of the "Sikhs are a brave people" and the "exercise of arms" shows that quite blatantly, especially considering the fact that Gandhi did not support any such "exercise of arms". How ironic was it that the Congress party that Gandhi had declared as having a special bond with the Sikhs was the first to betray them. This was firstly accomplished by depriving them of a linguistic state after independence, and then by massacring thousands upon thousands after 1984. There was no "non-violence creed" displayed by the Congress, only barbarianism that would put the likes of Auranyzeb to shame. The fact remains that more Sikhs have been killed under 50 years of Indian rule than under the 100 years of British rule. According to the Punjab Magistrate, over 200,000 Sikhs have been killed since 1984. According to the State Department, over 105,000 Sikhs have been killed from 1984 to 1993. The actual number may never be known do the excessive attempts made to suppress such acts. Take your pick though. In either case, Gandhi's promises were left unfulfilled and it was the Sikh people who were left to pay for such treachery. At this point, I wish to elucidate that these statements alone are not the reasons why I am not as enthusiastic about Gandhi as others. I can accept the fact that perhaps M. K. Gandhi just had a deep misunderstanding of Sikhism and that I am just being overly critical of a few comments he made. Perhaps I am just exposing my own inadequacies by blaming him for the actions of those who came after him as well. In either case, the reasons I cited above are not enough to warrant a total dislike for all the accomplishments that Mohandas Gandhi achieved in life. Despite what he achieved though, I still share a disagreement over a few of his principles and methods. Even before Gandhi came to India in 1915, Sikhs had been peacefully protesting for the right to run their gurdwaras (after the Sikh kingdom had been annexed, their temples had been turned over by the British to Brahmins to run). Gandhi was very critical of the "Sikh way" of civil disobedience. He said: "The Akalis wear a black turban and a black band on one shoulder and also carry a big staff with a small axe on the top. Fifty or a hundred of such groups go and take possession of a gurdwara; they suffer violence themselves but do not use any. Nevertheless, a crowd of 50 or more men approaching a place in the way described is certainly a show of force and naturally the keeper of the Gurdwara would be intimidated by it" (CW Vol. 19 pg. 401). This is where I did not understand a portion of Gandhi's teachings. On one hand (as we had discussed in class), Gandhi did not believe non-violent resistance should be "passive," but rather that it should be, in essence, a "force". On the other hand, he would criticize Sikhs for practicing the same civil disobedience for trying to gain control of their holy shrines. Their methods were even praised by British leaders. No other than Reverend C. F. Andrews wrote: "The vow (of non-violence) they had made to God was kept to the letter. I saw no act, no look, of defiance." As far as the spirit of the suffering they endured, he said "It was very rarely that I witnessed any Akali Sikh who went forward to suffer, flinch from a blow when it was struck.The blows were received one by one without resistance and without a sign of fear." Still Gandhi could not reconcile this manner of civil disobedience, for he felt that those Sikhs participating in it harbored "hatred in their hearts" and thus never gave his blessings to such forms of agitation. Gandhi could not understand why Sikhs would peacefully protect while wearing arms. To him, this constituted a cowardice, that one carries arms while walking in peace. I completely disagree with him on this point. Gandhi failed to realize the differences between non-violence of the weak, and non-violence of the strong. The importance of carrying arms was to show that they were indeed brave enough and capable of using them, but that they were instead consciously choosing not to. It is a discipline that only a few select can conquer. A coward who is weak and scared will never wear arms and be able to walk in peaceful protest, because as soon as the first signs of oppression arise, he will become scared and use his weapons in haste. Similarly, the weak and the scared will never have the capacity to make non-violence their way of life. To them it will only be something useful when they are helplessly bound in shackles. This is something that both Gandhi and I did agree on. In my opinion though, to be able to wear arms and not retaliate, show the slightest bit of anger or attempt at self defense (against someone who is attacking you) is the highest form on non-violent protest. It implies a complete resignation to peaceful ways and an absolute belief in the power of non-violent protest despite the ability of the protestor to respond violently. It is quite different if one walks in peaceful protest that is born out of a feeling of helplessness, and if one walks peacefully, inviting oppression and suffering upon himself, despite being fully armed and totally able to fight back. The first constitutes a cowardice, the second a force. I can't help but think that the sort of non-violence practiced by Gandhi's followers in India was that of the weak, that of the helpless. I believe that most did not truly understand the principles of non-violence in the manner in which Gandhi preached it. Rather they just thought they would be unable to win independence through other means. I come to this conclusion because of the history of Indians both before and after Gandhi. An obvious fact is that Indians as a race have been oppressed for the last several hundred years by the Moghuls (and later on by the British). Many of them never uttered a word of protect against the atrocities that were committed against their kith and kin (atrocities which were much worse than those perpetrated by the British). Even fewer actually took up actions against the Moghuls (the major exception of course being the Marathas in the south). It was quite common for invaders such as Abdali and Nadir Shah to invade India, take Indian jewelry and Indian women, and head back to Afghanistan. Yet there were very few strong voices that opposed this. This was because of fear. This fear is what ultimately stopped them from participating in any course of action besides just eventually submitting to their oppressors. It seems like over time most Indians have just developed a "learned helplessness," and following Gandhi's ideas arose from this feeling of helplessness. Indians followed his beliefs not because they thought non-violence was a superior weapon in dealing with social problems (as Gandhi had preached), but rather because they felt they had no other alternative. This in itself defeats the whole purpose of non-violence. As we saw even in the movie, it was quite common for Indians to one day be peacefully protesting, and the next day to be forming lynch mobs. The only conclusion I can come to in order to reconcile these two thoughts is that they had no idea what the real essence of non-violent agitation was. The simple fact that his entire philosophy of non-violence was just completely abandoned by the people of India at large seems to point toward this conclusion. To me, Gandhi came across as being an uncompromising extremist. A non-violent extremist, but an extremist nevertheless. His letters to the British people, encouraging them to invite slaughter upon themselves in order to further his fanatic ideas of non-violence was a perfect example of this. When pressed even further, he went to the extent of calling great men such as Shiva Ji, Guru Gobind Singh, and George Washington "misguided patriots" for taking up arms in defense of their people (CW Vol. 26 pg. 486-492). The fact remains that had Gandhi lived under the times of Auranyzeb, in almost all likelihood he would have been arrested and hanged for even showing the slightest bit of defiance to the Moghul Empire. His non-violent ways worked because the British were not total tyrants, rather just concerned with exploiting Indians for their own economic gain. The aim was not to annihilate them, as Auranyzeb and Hitler had attempted to do to their subjects. Thus the situation was ideal for the implementation of non-violent agitation. According to Gandhi, only "evil and violence" came about from those who use violence. He seems to totally disregard the idea of a "noble cause," basing his ideas of whether a movement was right or wrong on his narrow view of whether non-violence was being used to employ the cause. No doubt history has shown that those who used violence for the sake of unworthy causes ultimately did perpetuate violence and evil upon themselves. But at the same time those who used violence because of noble causes (as in defense of their people), the rule did not apply. There is a certain undeniable beauty in watching or reading about others who are fighting for noble and legitimate causes. Perhaps one of the best examples I can bring up is reading about the American Revolution. There was a certain magnificence, a certain holiness reading about those people fighting for their rights. The fact that they used arms to achieve their freedom did not discount the righteousness of what they did. There were a few situations where I questioned Gandhi's approach to solving a situation. Take fasts for example. In his lifetime, Gandhi fasted for many issues ranging from stopping mob violence to preventing Untouchables from having separate electoral ballots. It seems that his fasts onto death were just a method of coercing others into obeying him. There was no "teaching someone the error of their ways", but rather the people ceded to Gandhi's demands because they realized they had more to lose if he had died as a result. Seeing how this "moral enlightenment" obviously wasn't occurring, I don't see what difference it would have been had the army just been sent in to stop the rioting by force. In either situation, the people would not have been any more enlightened to the error of their ways, except in the latter situation less people probably would have died. The problem that I see was that Gandhi had no disciples, only followers. As we discussed in class, Gandhi's words in essence become the "Rule of Law" in India during that time. That's why I believed his influence on most Indians died with him. Though Gandhi may have lived with the underprivileged, there wasn't anyone that stood as his equal, not even Nehru or Patel. There wasn't anyone who was in any position to question Gandhi's beliefs or authority. They were basically forced to follow what Gandhi said, whether agreeing with it or not. Thus after he was assassinated, strong leadership gaps followed, and India was once again left as a nation of followers. I think this is what separates him from falling into the realm of other great people in our history such as Shiva Ji and Guru Gobind Singh. These men sought to free their people from the chains of mental slavery. They voluntarily gave up their political power and their ultimate authority in order to give their kith and kin a sense of empowerment, something Gandhi did not. Gandhi made have asked Indians to spin their own thread, but he was always a level above the average Indian. This is what prevented him from ever truly leading Indians down a path of self-empowerment and self-determination. This inferiority complex, which has always been at the root of the problem, was thus never eliminated. There is where the divide of Gandhi and the likes of Guru Gobind Singh and Shiva Ji took place. My knowledge of Shiva Ji is rather limited, so I can only speak of Guru Gobind Singh. During his time, Guru Gobind Singh was regarded by his followers as almost a reincarnation of God. Yet in his lifetime, he repeatedly lowered himself to the level of his followers in order to instill in them a sense of power, authority, and sovereignty. It was the flame of self-respect and empowerment that he spent his entire life trying to create among his people, for he knew that by doing so, he could sew the seeds of a nation that would be able to prosper even long after his death. Upon initially baptized the first 5 Sikhs into the Khalsa Panth in 1699, the Guru himself bowed before his own followers and begged them to baptize him into their own way of live, to in essence accept him as one of their own. It was at this point that he became a Guru only in name. He chose to give up his absolute authority as Guru and take on the path of a disciple, something that a man of his position had never done before. He voluntarily gave up his total say in matters related to Sikhism and instead entrusted his Sikhs to take up such issues instead. There were many cases in Sikh history where Guru Gobind Singh was ordered to do something by the Khalsa. There was even such an occasion that he was fined by other Sikhs for what they felt constituted a "waiver of faith." Here was a situation where a head of a religion, a prophet, was being fined by his own followers for what they thought violated an area of the faith. The Guru happily obliged to pay the fine though, happy at the sense of empowerment that had grown amongst them. By the end of his life, he had dispersed all of his power to his people, for his people. Be sacrificing everything he had for them, he had given them a sense of dignity that he knew would last them a lifetime. That was something Gandhi never had the privilege of seeing. If we take India to be the microcosm of Gandhi's teachings and influence, I don't see how we can come to any other conclusion except that it was a complete failure, even after only 50 years since his death. Gandhi preached non-violence. Non-violence has been totally abandoned in India. Gandhi preached self-empowerment, yet the average Indian is no more empowered before Gandhi than after Gandhi. Gandhi preached peace, yet India is constantly drifting toward war in some form or the other. Gandhi wanted his people to "love the British" who were oppressing them. That was the foundation of his beliefs in the power of non-violence. Yet the fact remains that "love" was the last way to describe the way in which Indians viewed Britain, even despite the fact that India was created without a war. In conclusion, it is important to clarify that I am a full fledge believer in non-violent civil disobedience. It has many practical uses today, and most definitely in the future as well. But at the same time, I do not believe it in the extremism that Gandhi did. Believing in it to such an extreme in my opinion makes it impractical, and thus lays the seeds for it to be abandoned in the future, as it has been in India today. There can be no denying that Gandhi led a great life and enlightened many people with his newfound views on how to resist oppression, but I will always feel that he fell a little short in laying the seeds of something special, at least in our country. Whether that was just because he had many misguided followers, or whether it was because of something he said, I cannot say. In either case, I can say that though I may not have a strong admiration of the man himself, there is a deep profound appreciation of what he preached.

Sevek, im adding this article written by Pritpal singh Bindra ji. Read it and let me know if it clears your doubt ? Epics of Bhai Gurdas English Adaptation by Pritpal Singh Bindra Epic Five - Wreath of Knowledge -One- The one, who is Gurmukh, leans on the Holy Congregation, and associates not with the bad company. Gurmukh's path is soothing and he does not get entangled in twelve impersonations (of Yogis). Whether he is from (high) caste or low-caste, Gurmukh retains the same hue (like resultant of the variant ingredients wrapped in a beetle-leaf). Gurmukhs have the (Godly) vision, and they are not implicated in the six-philosophies (of Hindu Mythology). Gurmukh's wisdom is infinite and it is not allured by duality. They earn the benefit of the Shabd and do not hesitate to bow down on the feet (of the Guru). And Gurmukh remains contended with devotion.(1) -:Two:- Gurmukh worships the One Only with full consciousness, and the duality effects him not. Gurmukh evades vanity and, erasing ego from his heart, achieves emancipation. Accepting Guru's edification as his guide, Gurmukh wins over his body-fort along with five vices dwelling in there. Going down on the feet of (Guru) he remains humble and considers himself just a guest in this temporal world. Gurmukh serves the Sikhs of the Guru and, revers his father, mother, brothers and friends as the Guru's Sikhs. Abandoning the base attitude and the duality, he regains awareness of the Shabd through Guru's Teaching. And he eradicates himself of the false hesitations and corrupt understanding.(2) -:3:- Remaining in their ranks, all the four castes (Brahmins, Khatris, Sood and Shudras) adopt the beliefs of their lineage. Acting upon the teachings of the Six Creators of Six Shastras, they abide by Six Actions (Meditation, Singing Hymns, Ablution, Service to the guests, Deity's adoration and Sacrificial oblation). They present themselves before their (respective) Masters their slaves, serve them. Adopting themselves in the vocations, the traders get absorbed in their occupations. Joining together in their fields, the farmers sow the seeds. The artisans meet other artisans in the factories. And, (similarly), the Sikhs converge at Holy Congregation.(3) -:4:- The drug-addicts confront the drug-addicts, and the devotees meet the devotees. The gamblers run into the gamblers, and the bad-characters greet the bad-characters. The thieves admire the thieves, and swindlers unite with swindlers. The jesters enjoy the company of jesters, and the back-biters relish the assembly of back-biters. Non-swimmers are happy with non-swimmers but the swimmers join other swimmers to swim. The afflicted ones share their distresses with other aggrieved ones. But in the Holy Assembly, the Sikhs flourish.(4) -:5:- Some are called Pundit and Astrologers, and some are known as Brahmin Priests and Physicians. Some are the Rajas and Noble-men, and some scribes and some village head-men. Some are cloth merchants and goldsmiths, and some assayers and some jewellers. Some are druggists and retailers, and some as brokers make their living. From high to low castes, thousands cater and get their names reckoned. A Sikh of the Guru meets the Holy Assembly and gets himself regarded, Because by absorption in the Word (there), he gets the writ of Godly attribute.(5) -:6:- Celibates, longevity-ones, austerity-performers, mendicants and the pupils of Guru Nath (Yogi), Goddesses and gods, sages, Bhairo-god, ghosts and spirits come and meet. Men of celestial music, fairies, mermaids, and demigods perform many tricks. Monsters, Danav-giants, they all are distressed by duality. They all are obsessed with ego except the Gurmukhs who relish in the company of Holy Assembly, Because with unique mind they meditate and, with Guru's teachings, destroy their conceit, And are always ready, just as (a bride at) pre-nuptial ceremony, to depart (for the heavenly abode).(6) -:7:- Celibacy, virtuosity, continence, sacrificial ceremony, meditation, penance, benevolence and charity are in abundance. Miracles, excessive hypocrisies, magics and charms are rendered in profusion. The worship of faculties, over-powering of female-ascetics at crematoriums and cemeteries are wondrously acted. Some hold, stop and steadily release their breath while rendering (yogic exercises such as) cleaning wind-pipes with thread through nose and stomach movements. Darkened with the promiscuity of philosopher's stone, snakes-topmost vertebra, drugs and miracles, some are plunged into ignorance. Some are busy in benedictions, fastings, boons, and curses, and some revel in the faculty of Shiva. But, without the Holy Company and the Guru's Word, the piety cannot be sought, even, by pious ones. To unknot one fallacy, one has to put a hundred truthful knots.(8) -:9:- The streams, rivulets and ravines, all meet (River) Ganga and their water becomes one with Ganga-water. The eight metals become one metal called gold with the touch of the Philosopher's Stone. The sandal-wood-tree endows the character of sandal-wood to all flora, whether fruit-bearing or fruitless, . In all the six seasons and twelve months, there is only one sun and none other. The universe is one although it is divided into four castes, six philosophies and twelve practices. Gurmukhs discern only the Holy Assembly, and thus the Gurmukhs' paths do not get into dilemma, And they concentrate on, nothing but, the only One.(9) -:10:- There are family-priests at paternal, maternal and in-law houses, Who perform rites at births, tonsures, engagements, deaths, and at other rituals . They remain involved in rendering contemplation on customs, traditions and religious manners. With such negative actions, in reality they put (their patrons) into quandary, but tell them they were gaining celestial protection. And, (without understanding), the patrons revel in honouring the (dead) elders, self-immolated wives, co-wives, streams and ponds. Such (people) will be, without the Holy Company and the Guru's Word, put in the cycle of life and death. Only the ones, with the understanding of the Guru, are strung in the (celestial) necklace.(10) Note: For Paurees 11 to 21, please contact Pritpal Singh Bindra at: Email:

Just ask youself one question. Is there any historical evidence that Guru ji gave any particular jatha, org a permission to give Amrit? Just keep this thread going for month and you will get the proper anwser.

I won't go in details now but I would like to share one of singh's response to the same question. Saying saints/sants are "sadh sangat" is 100% wrong as sadh sangat should not be bounded by particular names. "The sikh philosphy does not dictate what you eat or drink, its a matter of personal choice". SGGS teachs not to consume anything which affects thinking process directly. Alcohol is one of these items. "Incidently the word SADH in Guru Granth Sahib refers to WAHEGURU and it does not mean holy man/saint". Definition of Sadh, Bramghiani is in individual Asthpadhies of Sukhmani Sahib. There is another Asthpadhi which describes other(seven of them in each pauri) saintly people. "Perhaps this is most misinterpretted word in our teaching and so is SADH SANGAT, which really means IN THE COMPANY OF GOD and not gathering of people" Above is not complete statement. Gathering of people who are praising or remembering GOD is Sangat. Sangat, janian jitha ako Nam bakhania.. GGS Further on wich sangat prub vasa jeo GOD resides in Sangat. Sangat prub kee aut piari. GOD loves sangat the most. So people gathered to remember GOD is Sadh Sangat.

I want to know who is true Gur Sikh as per Gurbani? I want to see references stating who can be true Gur sikh?

I remember reading arguement on this topic and I liked the response was given by "Yuktanad singh". Im going to cut and paste here. it might end this confusion. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa! Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh! You have a compulsion to be precise I have an ambition to be exhaustive at price of not being concise. (Do you think I should try writing poetry?) My verbose reply below may not satisfy you but I will try it anyway! First the answer to your questions: <<Please let me know which Nanak or Bhagat is KARTA(composser) of RAG MALA?>> I am sure you know that, it is not known who is the author of Ragmala. According to The Encyclopedia of Sikhism, there have been many versions of Ragmala. The one found in SGGS is just a few verses from one of these versions. It is not known whether the composer of this Ragmala was a Bhagat or not. << I LOVE TO OWN EVERYTHING WHAT COMES FROM MY GURU(guru granth) and Disown what is being passed to me in the name of Guru.>> I was not aware that Ragmala is being passed on in a Guru?s name. How can it be when there is no Guru or bhagat shown as its writer? Why should we consider Ragmala as an integral part of Sri Guru Granth Sahib? Please excuse me for my use of some strong words just to emphasize my points to all readers. Since you asked this question, they may appear to be, but they are not meant to be directed at you. It is late at night and I have to leave for vacation early in the morning. So please forgive my impatient tone this time. What is the disadvantage of reading Ragmala? None whatsoever! What are the disadvantages of not reading Ragmala? There are many: a. Ragmala has been a part of Sri Guru Granth Sahib in, both of the original, the Kartarpuri and the Damdami Birs. b. Some people contend that this Ragmala is not accurate therefore it should be rejected. This notion born out of ignorance. Perhaps, Guru simply chose a Ragmala without worrying about such details because it has no spiritual significance of its own. Had the Guru written an accurate Ragmala himself, one conformed to the actual number and the order of Ragas in Sri Guru Granth Sahib, it would have still served exactly the same purpose as this version does now. c. Ragmala is simply there to reiterate, in the end, the fact that Sri Guru Granth Sahib is written in Ragas, nothing more and nothing less. d. Please remember that the content of Ragmala does not promote something that is against Guru?s teaching. e. Therefore, assuming it was included by Guru Ji, we should accept it without any further question. Or, do we really want to raise our children with an erroneous idea that Sri Guru Granth Sahib may have been altered and thus ?contaminated? already? We need to understand the long-term impact of such intelligent foolishness. f. For the sake of argument, let us assume that Guru did not approve it and it was added by someone else and thus reject it. In that case, eventually people would want to exclude it from Guru Granth Sahib. Such an act, altering Sri Guru Granth Sahib just for a Ragmala, would be absolutely deplorable. Once started there would be no end in sight as to what else, according to our small brains, could be objectionable in Guru Granth Sahib. It is about time we woke up and realize as to which act is more harmful. g. Time comes when we grow up from looking at our Guru with a critical eye and simply accept everything the Guru says (?Jo Gur Kahay Soee Bhal Maano Har Har Katha Niralee?). Then we start enjoying the Amrit that flows freely from the Guru without its being impeded by our own intellect that may be busy looking for useless details. Even a seemingly benign activity like avoiding the reading of Ragmala, analyzing the various ways Gurbani has been written or should have been written, etc., could be acceptable for the academics, however, it stands in our way of total submission to our Guru. Such acts stick out painfully like a sore thumb in a devout Sikh?s heart. h. On a personal note, during years of participation in Spiritually charged culmination of an Akhand Paath, and the special atmosphere that accompanies the reading of Sawayeeye and Salok at the end of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, Ragmala has been a natural part of this occasion. It has not turned me into a ?Hindu? and I cannot see myself rejecting a part of my Guru. Starting from 1Onkar to Atharah Das Bees ? all is Gurbani because it comes from Sri Guru Granth Sahib. i. If all this can not convince us, I would simply, rather continue reading it and get it over with. For heaven?s sake, the Panth has too many other, much more important problems to take care of than to get entangled in frivolous issues like the Ragmala! Who started such useless controversies in the first place? Does anyone know? Can someone find out, perhaps from the AKJ? Please forgive any mistakes here and correct them, as you have patiently done so in the past. Yuktanand Singh Saline, Michigan source: http://www.sikhnet.com/sikhnet/discussion....C2?OpenDocument

Sevak, Please, go through the following thread and read it. Let me know if you get the anwser? If not, then we will discuss more. http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...topic.php?t=738 As far as, it goes for having chat network, I think that will not inspire because it doesn't give you much time to think or time to read. So there are less possibilities to get inspired. But then that's my own opinion. I prefer forum discussion more than chat rooms.

Veer ji, If you have posted the full shabad then I don't see Guru ji is talking about woman equality? It's clear that whoever meditates for that "One God" he will be saved but there is no mention of gender equality or woman being saint? May be! few lines are missing? If not, then Guru ji is giving the clear message that if you truely meditate for "GOD" then no matter how dirty your job is still you get the salvation. I may be wrong as im just a learner/lay man but that's what Gurbani's message through those lines.

No problem and I know that you came to know about her from tape itself. No problem brother take your time and post it once you get it.

Wahe Guru Ji Ka Khalsa, Wahe Guru Ji ki Fateh, Gur Piayre N30 S!ingh ji, Could you post the full shabad with english translation about "ganka Papan"? Once you post that full shabad then I'll take part in this discussion. take care

I was surfing AKJ website and found these tips. Couple of helpful hints which have been told by a few friends, I don't imply using any/few/all of these, but these have been known to have helped. Feel free to Add or delete any of them: 1) Basic Thumb Rule : Early to bed ---Early to rise 2) have gap between dinner/supper and Bedtime----Fill the gap with a little walk ---- & at actual Bed time drink 2-3 cups of water. 3) Use Alarm Clocks/Radio/ OR Cassette Alarm (which shall play Simran even while you are half awake) Ok Ok now the Real tips for Naam Jaap : Forwarding you Tips for Naam Japs sent by a Gurmukh Rooh.Some found it useful,someone else may also... Waheguru ~~Waheguru Jap naam at amrit vela no matter what!!!! Amrit vela is between 12:30 am and sunrise. Please note amrit vela is not effective unless the body is well rested. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Jap naam at night before sleeping. It is very important to do this.Naam (at first) does the work of a cleanser (then it fills one with bliss). Cleansing the mind is night is extremely important. A clean mind sleeps more deeply and wakes up alert. The precious amrit vela then is more effective, since much of the work has already being done at night and in sleep, since a naam-ed out mind will jap naam during sleep too! Waheguru ~~Waheguru Try to wake up without alarm. This will only happen via persitant ardas to the guru. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Try to divide up the day. For example, wake up at amrit vela. Do simran and nitnem and then take a short nap before the day starts. This prevents fatigue during the day. And psychologically a tired body can wake up more easily if it knows it can go back to sleep. The morning nap should not exceed 1.5 hours. If it does, the body thinks it is night time and usually results in dull day. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Keep some water besides the bed. (This has no spiritual significance, but it saves the trip to the kitchen during the precious amrit vela hours). Waheguru ~~Waheguru When the body first wakes, *immediately* say "WaheGuru" with tongue or mind - depending on the individual's naam state. Do not wait until ishnan to jap naam. Do not wait to tie loosened dastar or keski or hair before japping naam. Sit up and without even drinking the water besides the bed, jap naam deeply. Only after a few seconds/minutes or hours when the mind is somewhat settled, venture out to do the necessary chores. (The misconception that naam cannot be japped without first doing ishnan is well, just that a mis-conception. Naam *is* ishnan!). Waheguru ~~Waheguru At first jap naam loudly, then with kripa and practice, the naam can be japped softly or completely internally. The guru usually gives internal instructions or arranges meeting with naami gursikhs at approriate time. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Divide up naam time. It is extremely hard to sit for 3 hours of naam during early stages, but it is possible to jap naam for 3 hours if it is done over breaks. Jap naam before ishnan. Jap naam after ishnan. Jap naam during lunch breaks. Jap naam during traffic jams. Jap naam when driving. Jap naam. Jap naam. Jap naam. Jap naam. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Mix gurmanter with mool manter. Waheguru ~~Waheguru If mind has wandered off, bring it back by reciting gurBani. Refrain from gossip and slander. This keeps the mind clean and it can more easily focus on naam. (The most common response to "... do not slander Bhai X jee...." is "... I am not slandering Bhai X jee, I am just telling the truth". A very practical defination of slander is: the things that cannot be said in front of Bhai X jee are slander).For that reason avoid the company of the people,who spent mor etime in slandering. Waheguru ~~Waheguru Avoid TV or movies or being a news junkie. Just Start Simraning Waheguru ~~Waheguru Waheguru ~~Waheguru http://www.akj.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=4355&t=4355 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All, This question came to my mind and I think I should ask here because both AKJ and Dodra Sangat members are here. As far as, my understanding goes they both are using Sri Guru Granth sahib as their main source. Now if "Dodra di Sangat" uses SGGS then howcome its not "Guru Di Sangat" but instead its "Dodra di Sangat"? It might be stupid question but as far as my understanding goes for Sikhism, I think there should be one term within Sikhism "Guru ki Sangat" and Gursikh? What you guys think about it?

I think we need to learn a lot about Khalsa. Khalsa is not just a word but you can write 1000 pages of book and still you can't say that you're able to define it. I will request everyone to read the below article to get the glimpse of it. http://www.sikhs.org/khalsa.htm

If we make it our mission for next two years then to be honest we don't need to cry for anything. Sikhs have power, finance but only thing they need knowledge of Sikhism and "unity" and that's it. If 16 years old can see that then I can see the bright future of Sikhism. I'll let AKJ respond to your question because I can't be spokeman from AKJ as I have limited knowledge about them but I know they're spreading the word of Sikhism and that's great.