Mr §ingh Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 personaly i think nothing is wrong with wearing gold, if u are wearin to pull attention then thats a different matter Me neither.....but why would u else put jewelry..to get more self esteem? as u said not to make other attracted then WHY is it so NECESSARY :roll: ? Wear gold mate and then comment on such thing :roll: I DO But I never said its right of me..cause I know I'm wrong ... And i will remove it as soon as I Amrit Shakna :bow: :bow: Isnt that a contradiction, if u think its such a foolish thing wearing it ..then why dont u take it off now? :? (u mad?) No cause I dont reject that its wrong..i KNOW and am AWARE THAT its wrong ..and I'm trying to change..if u are so interested in my life ...and I can't follow the rehat 100% YET..but i'm trying to imporve thus I can't be called a Sikh anyway ...Rehat Bina Nai SIkh kahavai :!: I KNOW I*M DOING WRONG........I DONT REJECT THE FACT THAT ITS WRONG! why wait intill amrit shakna?...... thats my personal business..but i still know its wrong! I dont reject the fact that its wrong :roll: so that gives u the right to do as much paanga intill u become a proper sikh? Never said it did..its as wrong before as after :roll: now dont ask me why i do..cause its my personal matter .. now if u say that u wearing is..u8r personal matter.. why did u bring it up then :roll: to some next man it might be meaningless, for someone it might be worth something, u get me penji Noep..and I'm a Bhaji if u dont understand that , then your abit of a thicko thank you ur seriously helping me getting rid of my ego take care of it..........but be aware that its kalyug and HUAME KAN CATCH U ANY TIME How iz someone showing there luv kalyug? did i say u were showing luv to kalyug :? Guru ji gave me a family, also told u to stay dis attached ,...and be aware of moh! aren't you supposed to luv and respect that gift? yes but not get into moh :roll: huge difference...I'm not saying i'm perfecrt and that idont..but i'm telling u da truth ...or what i interpret as da truth are u that ruthless? should make any difference to u weither i am or not isn't being hatred and being a killer a sign of kalyug? :evil: did i say it wasn't :roll: Whats wrong wiv someone showing their respect and luv to someone who are also gods children? thats up to u to decide...follow/appreciate Guru jis gift..or ur family's (in this life) love most U said that wearing a gold chain is a risk of making YOUR HAANKAR higher without dought! well my friend.......thats your own weakness....if u cant control it ....don't tell others to stop wearing gold i didn't telll u to STOP WEARING IT..i said its wrong..cause we're tought to stay Simple :wink: ..big different of TELLING U TO TAKE IT OF..and telling u da truth :!: Penji has also said, u should also have the 5k's becoz its a gift from guru ji, but whats wrong wiv having a gift off your only family which waheguroo has given u...? read her post over and i hope u'll understand that GURU JIS GIFT IS MUCH HIGHER THAN UR FAMILY..but then agian its ur duty to jugde who u aprpeciate most...ur family which will only stay with u in the world.. or Guru Ji..would be looking at u all the time :idea: and stop rolling your eyes, becoz that shows atttiude and no respect :evil: .....u wrote this in the end of the post..thus i have made loads of them .. but i shall use some other image FOR UR SAKE NEXT TIME If you think wearing gold is gonna make u sinful...fair enough Mainly I think ur going aginst Guru Ji's hukam of staying simple.. but if ur not gonna listen anyway.. so theres no need for me to answer.. when ur not going to change anyway :? :shock: Keep Smiling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amrikingh Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Keep Smiling I will bruv :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 I will bruv :wink: Changa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amrikingh Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Changa safe :mrgreen: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gupt Singh Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 KS why can't you differentiate between real life and the internet? :shock: "ur making it out like ur well experienced in the rehat lol...from what i know u dont even grow ur kesh!!!!!! " This comment is really personal, and the point was just about 'discussing' jewellery! Joker. :roll: pheena said she (he?) commented on things from real life experience, implying that i was against wearing gold because id never worn it or never had any experience in it. n she (he) sed: What i say is that i speak from Experience. You read and you preach. I experience and so i speak on what i have "Experienced". n i sed, u can talk, u havent even grown ur kesh, and u were talking about how its not totally a hugely bad thing to cut it a while bak im sure.......yeah its personal......but its related. bottom line.............gold is not inkeeping with the concept of simple, honest living in sikhi. and just becuz u dont think it affects u doesnt mean it doesnt............theres something called the subconscious mind :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niranjana Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 Gur Fateh! This entire thread shows why we face the problems we do today as a Panth, why we lack unity, why our men are hot-heads and misogynists and our women fed up…come guys, is it really that important that it warrants this much of a fuss??? Sardar Khalsa Soulja UK wale Jeeo, as you are so well versed in this topic and since many agree with your proposal and as I am the Maha-Fool, I will take your advice, yes, jewellery is wrong because, even if you can control yourself, as you say there is “something called the unconscious mind†that can lead to all sorts of bad things happen and secondly keski is a must, as one “should be simple†amongst other factors you cite. I would like to take on these two main points, (1) unconscious mind and (2) ,one should be simple, as this often the thrust of most Gurdwara lectures, kathas and parcharaks not to mention those found on websites and in articles… In accordance with this, I propose the following brief time line for today’s Sikh:- Birth – 5 years:- Mother to take child to Gurdwara at every moment, no toys to be ever given to the child, as this will affect the child’s ‘unconscious mind’ and lead to bad things, even if done in moderation, since the mind is weak, especially at this age. Child not to be cuddled too much, otherwise will get used to ‘affection’ which may lead later to ‘kaam’ through the ‘unconscious mind’… 5 – 16 years:- Child to be taught more path progressively, but to learn as much as possible as soon as possible and to live an amritdhari lifestyle in rehit. Combined with this, in accordance with the 2 wise thoughs above, please note the following guidelines:- -Child to attend single sex school only (you can never trust the development of kaam through the ‘unconscious mind’) -Child not to be encouraged to study hard, as this may lead to more kaam through the desire to learn more and study more, which could lead to ‘hankar’ from the knowledge gained and then lead to ‘moh’ as one gets attached to the acquisition of knowledge…besides, learning may lead to sophistication, and this can’t be right, as it’s not ‘simple’ enough… -Child to leave school at 16, as that’s enough education, remember, one has to be ‘simple’ and aware of the ‘unconscious mind’ as per the point above regarding education and knowledge… -At 16 to acquire a ‘simple’ job with minimal wages, just enough to survive, as what’s the need for more??? Right…because we must be ‘simple’ and besides, we don’t want to develop any ‘hankar’ or ‘kaam’ or ‘moh’ through allowing the ‘unconscious mind’ succumb to possibility of wanting promotion or anything…so remember ‘stay simple’ -don’t buy a house, or a car…walk where possible, if needs be use public transport and rent accommodation, otherwise the ‘unconscious mind’ may start getting yet more ideas…and that’s sooooo bad…. -girls, do not wear a bra, as it is not "natural" or 'simple', remember you must wear layer upon layer of clothing, as men have weak 'unconscious minds' and it is all your fault if one so much as looks at you... 16 + …I think you get the idea… oh, and also, please note… -only eat very simple food; water to drink (plain), dhal and roti, with no spices, no salt and no pepper…otherwise, the ‘unconscious mind’ may tempt us to eat ‘nice’ food…and that’s a no no, because it’s not ‘simple’…so, in short… …do the bear minimum in everything, expect your simran and paath, don’t bother learning good kirtan even, especially not on any decent instrument (stick with Vaja and Dholki…oh no, but the Dholki contains leather heads!!! What to do???!!!)… ...so, no good raag-kirtan, as again it’s not ‘simple’ and it may plague your ‘unconscious mind’ to get all sorts of vices as you become a good musician and keertania…so generally live like a monk, even though your married, and avoid any sort of contact even with your husband/wife, as your ‘unconscious mind’ again may cause all sorts of nasty things to happen…unless of course you want children, but remember, no hanky-panky….keep it simple and get it over and done with quickly, in and out like a flash, for otherwise it wouln’t be ‘simple’ and the good old ‘unconscious mind’ may get a little too many ideas!!! …the sad thing is, whilst much of the foregoing is written tongue in cheek, I’ve seen this type of behaviour exhibited by many of today’s “Tyar par tyar, Chardi Kala, Gursikhsâ€â€¦ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shasterkovich Posted November 24, 2003 Report Share Posted November 24, 2003 Warrior-saint Warrior-monk Warrior-ascetic These ideals sound plausible to most. They seem to expressly reject the householder way of life. You're balancing 2 competing advantages: on the one hand being completely free to act and think, and on the other being insanely fanatical about protecting some things that only matter to you and are otherwise insignificant in the scheme of things (your wife's honour, your children's lives, your job, your Tag Heuer and your BMW). The latter "advantage" becomes an advantage when it forces you to team up with others to protect a common interest. The 2 paths meet often. The hermit/sage refers to the householder to reference compassion and courage (fanaticism), and the householder to the hermit/sage for morality and ethics (a sense of right and wrong, and shame). Hence, you could say that the irrational desire to suppress, say, a child's exposure to hot food, television and jewellery (in case they develop subconscious desires) is necessary in order to hold a family together. If neither man nor woman possessed a sense of shame, there would be no cohesive family unit, and, therefore, no such thing as a householder way of life. For the above reason, Niranjan, you are both right and wrong. :? :shock: :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niranjana Posted November 24, 2003 Report Share Posted November 24, 2003 Gur Fateh Shasterkovich! (Nice name!) Thanks for your reply...I like it! :wink: :shock: :twisted: Warrior-saint Warrior-monk Warrior-ascetic These ideals sound plausible to most. They seem to expressly reject the householder way of life. You're balancing 2 competing advantages: on the one hand being completely free to act and think, and on the other being insanely fanatical about protecting some things that only matter to you and are otherwise insignificant in the scheme of things (your wife's honour, your children's lives, your job, your Tag Heuer and your BMW). The latter "advantage" becomes an advantage when it forces you to team up with others to protect a common interest. The 2 paths meet often. The hermit/sage refers to the householder to reference compassion and courage (fanaticism), and the householder to the hermit/sage for morality and ethics (a sense of right and wrong, and shame). Hence, you could say that the irrational desire to suppress, say, a child's exposure to hot food, television and jewellery (in case they develop subconscious desires) is necessary in order to hold a family together. If neither man nor woman possessed a sense of shame, there would be no cohesive family unit, and, therefore, no such thing as a householder way of life. For the above reason, Niranjan, you are both right and wrong. :? :shock: :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts