dalsingh101

Okay, are you trying to be funny? By the way software engineers are often considered boring nerds, so it's not too surprising non technical people aren't too keen on sharing a flat with one.....zzzzzzzzz......if you know what I mean. lol

Seriously, consider sodding off to Jattworld, you'll get appreciated there by like minded pendus. You've got a whole forum dedicated to your 'vibe'. Leave Sikh forums for the preservation and discussion of Sikh values/ideas please.

Yes. That's what I mean about cultural differences. To you it might be a big thing, but here it's nothing. She was a work colleague who was looking for cheap digs at the same time as me and we ended up flat sharing. It was more to do with saving money than anything else. But to you it's material. Like we're shagging or something! We are not pendus but two educated people dude. lol

It's actually a her and I ate the lion's share of them...... I mean I've not put on weight but I'm sure all that fat didn't do my innards any good..... Cholesterol is already a bit high....doh!

The problem with what you are saying khoj is that (from what it looks like to me), certain caste identities are innately built on notions of superiority and differentiation. They are the actual genesis or the seed of the subsequent discrimination and overall bewakoofi that takes place. From my experience the people who are the most conscious and vehement about their caste identity are usually the ones who are the most backward and rigid when it comes to trying to overcome the shameful discrimination our people engage in over it. Plus what about looking a few steps forwards too? Imagine a time when hordes of Sikhs are actually from a mixture of Panjabi caste backgrounds. This thought usually has conservative, caste lovers feeling feint but ultimately that is what we are looking at happening in the west. Once the female foeticide thing really kicks in back home, they too will be forced to mix. The way I see it, preserving these identities is essentially guaranteeing we preserve the idiocy associated with them. Frankly it keeps us suspended in some outdated, backward, hate filled feudal system that has no context outside of India.

See this is a very interesting and very pertinent topic. I watched the film Schindler's List a while a go and it struck me that the man the film is based upon (Schindler) was promiscuous, a womeniser, a drinker and what not. Things that our society would consider quite negative in a person's character. Yet despite that, the risks he took and the unquestionable good he did in trying to protect very vulnerable people outshone all that in my opinion. That's how I've come to view our own M. Ranjit Singh's with his foibles as well. He wasn't a perfect man, but he was a very useful one. The problem with all this lies in the fact that what will happen is that some Sikhs will almost guaranteed use this type of argument to justify every personally slack behaviour they engage in. Something everyone should be rightfully concerned about. But where and what is that line between recognising and accounting for human weaknesses/nature and outright hypocrisy? A related question regards practical usefulness of someone who may be personally disciplined and looks the part (with roop) but absolutely lacks the ability to push, promote and convince in an outward direction. What we get then is safe but 'inert' spokespeople, which, it could be argued, just perpetuates our political/social powerlessness in the modern world. Are people happy with that? Yes sure, in an ideal world all our spokespeople would be ideal Sikhs in all ways, especially the physical roop but a part of me which is frustrated at our lack of traction in the modern world finds it hard to hide from the reality that the best people for particular jobs in our community may not meet these standards. What shall we do then? Shall we resist and prevent any 'liberalisation' in terms of the people we choose for particular roles because of this? Even more frustrating is that I can see no clear answer, conservative critiques to what I'm highlighting are as valid as the argument. It's a difficult choice but how long can we continue as we are? I would add that arguments along the lines of "we may cause a 'dam burst' of bad behaviour" by liberalising may well already be moot as from where I'm standing it looks like the dam was broken a while ago. We just ignored it in our characteristic way. Thought: Jinnah was a drinking, coconut sullah who managed to secure his people's sovereignity. Are there lessons to learn from that? Both the conservative and liberal perspective seems to have positives and negatives from what I can see right now?? Using Kaur publically in your name like that could be argued as doing that very thing?

Nah! I'm losing weight not putting it on. I did go nuts with pakoray the other week though. Made a big batch of cauliflower, aubergine and palak ones and finished them with my flatmate in 2 days...... Not good!

Forum gold.

Come on man, he would have tried to capture an image that was striking and of interest to the orientalist mind. If I recall rightly those women were prostitutes by the way. But it is an interesting point to note that under M. Ranjit Singh, there seems to have been a liberal attitude towards them. In fact some contemporary whitey actually describes him as their 'patron' what ever that means..... He probably had hoes in area codes.... lol

I don't know. I think Sikh coalition is an advocate group in the states. For all we know she could be an intern who ended up there as part of a long term career plan? The way I see it, if kurian are inevitably going to do this (and they are whether we like it or not), getting them to actually help the community is not a bad thing. I understand that people might argue that she sets a bad precedent for other apneean, but we've got hordes of kurian doing that so why pick on her. If anything she is probably better than the average career obsessed, westernised apnee because at least she maintains some link to her heritage and helps her own community out. In London I'd say apneean are possibly the worse when it comes to selling out and running away from their culture from what I've seen. So from another perspective this one actually has commendable attributes. I don't know what is in this day and age? It differs from place to place, subdemographic to subdemographic. Our lot aren't the type to conform into some type very easily. It just reinforces what thoughts I had on the matter. I'd still say that coalition girl is better than the topless one.

A point is that respectable parchaar by monay may well prove to be a strong weapon to counter the ever increasingly slide into outright western liberalism. Especially if these people are the most susceptible to go that way? To you in India, that women in the image may seem gaspingly risque, but as someone brought up in London, I have to confess, I see Sikh girls dressed worse than that all the time, so you get sort of desensitized to this stuff. When most of the apneean you've met at work seem to be dating goray, sullay, etc. and you see tarted up apneean out on the lash every Friday night seeing a picture like that doesn't have much impact.

More like a one pack. Which is much better than the 'keg' I had a few years ago and many sardars seem to commonly sport.... Haven't had 'packs' in a few years... lol Anyway, back to seriousness. Personally I think in time you may well get sehajdhari parchaar. This is not necessarily a bad thing. It's not hard to envisage a time when more and more people sort of move away from the hot house, Panjabcentric, politicised flavour of Sikhi to something more...well....sehaj! I think people are getting more and more interested in the philosophical/theological aspects of Sikhi as opposed to the politics. I wonder if this has always been the case in some respect? Represented by the distinction between Khulasa and Khalsa Sikhs noticed by early goray in Panjab.

I wouldn't go that far.

We get liberal where we probably shouldn't and backward arse where we desperately need to get liberal. Welcome to the crazy world of Sikhs.

My cousin comes from a pind called Jatana. Which I think is also a Jat surname. So it can get complicated like that.

Okay, in the hopes that tsingh may respond. (Good to have you back by the way!) So from what I understand Sikhi is an expression along the lines of advaita vedant, or the nondual understanding of the creation and the creator. This seems to come out in quite a salient fashion in Jaap Sahib (that is if I've managed to generally grasp its depth and content to any extent). What I'd like to ask is: where does Sikhi actually noticeably differ from the other schools of advaita thought? In other words, what do you perceive to be it's more unique theological aspects? Do you see any? I guess what I'm asking is what new insights did Sikhi bring to our understanding of advaita vedant? Or do you see Sikhi in light of an attempt to try and reset already revealed advaita principles which had become somewhat deviated by man through entropy? If this makes sense. If you do answer please do so simply - as if talking to someone of average intelligence (at best).

Are you sure? I thought khatri was the Panjabised form of Kshattri?

Well Krishna looks dark to me. As does Kali. God knows how many of the Hindu myths originate from down south in anycase? I don't agree with your proposition. Khalsa of the 1700s represented a victory of the darker hued over the lighter skinned Moghuls/Persians/Afghans anyway. Just because modern Sikh art misrepresents sullay as darker than apnay, don't buy into it. I've see a few older (pre-western) images of apnay warriors where the indigenous artists had consciously painted them in different hues including markedly dark ones. I've read multiple references toward Sikhs as dark in Persian sources. If I recall rightly one of Banda Singh's main generals (from a Jat background) was especially remarked upon for his dark skin (the black faced one they called him I think). Plus what about those of the panj piaray who were from down south? In the end it seems like dark skin wasn't any barrier to the highest positions/ranks in the Khalsa in the 1700s. So they must have overcome this bias to some extent for this to happen. So whilst I'm not saying that issues towards skin colour didn't exist prior to whiteys coming to the scene, the most certainly made the situation worse with their 'theories'. wtf? No, I'm just saying that a legacy exists. I've worked with a lot of educated African people, many are conscious of their past exploitation. Have you not heard of Mugabe btw? lol If we are all going to be outnumbered and wiped out by sullay in the future, let it be. But until that day, let's not shite our pants in fear of it like giddars. For all you know, Muslims in India might become prosperous middle/upper class twats not jihadis? Cross the bridge when it comes, stop projecting giddar style fear in meanwhile.

Cool, thanks for letting me know.

And how much of that was buying into Eurocentric notions of white supremacism by Indians? You think they never picked up on cues to perceive/treat blacks as lesser beings from the masters? Plus we know how easily it was for whitey to push their notions on our lot - for example the Aryan and Scytian theories causing them to believe they were the spawn of white men, something still lingering in the mindsets of too many pendus till this day. Plus it is not as simple as that, in South Africa Indians were apparently well involved in the fight against apartied sometimes fighting independently, sometimes in cooperation with black African movements. Who is Gandhi anyway in relation to Sikhs. What he did or didn't do over there doesn't have much bearing on our community. Well that gives them the chance for an infinitely more positive relationship between each other than the Europe-Africa dynamic. I like to think of it as a possible new era of cooperation myself. At least India/China pay for their shit and don't just grab it, and rape and enslave along the way too. Can you imagine the powerhouse of Africa, Latina America and India? I think Che Guevera spoke of this as the 'tri-continent'? India is known for it's lemmings so.... Eventually they may get to realise the exact nature between aahm populations and state manipulated media. Remember we've had a lot of very important literature about this matter in the west - read Orwell's 1984 as an example. People's consciousness will develop. It may take India 50 years or so, but they'll get there......probably. The rest of us just need to make sure we don't add to the existing problem.

Kam bhai ji. You was talking of digitising and putting up Sainapat's Gursobha (Ganda Singh edition) some time ago. Any idea when this will happen?? Someone nicked my copy years ago.

Well they haven't yet but if they do start to act along openly supremacist and aggressive lines then I for one wouldn't be holding back condemning them for their actions. What would you do? Make lame excuses for it by the looks of it? Over here people already talk about the relationship between India & Africa as well as China and Africa. Whatever else has happened, so far at least those nations can say that they never enslaved, raped and pillaged the place - which goes to their favour. You don't seem to have much of a clue about colonial Europes relationship with Africa by the sounds of it. Well we are living in a society with more freer communication than EVER before. We have wikileaks, the Internet etc. More literate and independent minded people than ever. Seems like only those with motivated interests and those with no brains would swallow the official lines these days. Media is powerful but it isn't unchallenged like it was before. This is positive.

Don't be so stupid. That is way too straight forward for apnay. We have to complicate the matter along multiple layers or else it's just not us.

What you trying to say? That they look like ewoks or something?

What could be a bigger attack on inbreeding and help widen the gene pool amongst us than intercaste marriages anyway?