jsb Posted July 21, 2003 Report Share Posted July 21, 2003 Gurfateh!! ok, so yeah...the title subject pretty much is my question.... obviously, cutting your hair isn't right as far as being a sikh goes....but is there limits, or like... exceptions? for example... sehajdharis and keshadharis alike fought in battles in which guruji was fighting in.... what does that mean, does this mean that those who fought are sikhs? after all, those sehajdharis still did lay their life down for Sikhi. or does it mean that those who fought weren't sikhs, but those who were keshadhari were sikhs... any answers would be nice gurfateh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 21, 2003 Report Share Posted July 21, 2003 In my opinion... the definition of sikh is a learner, right, one who is ever seeking out answers and God.... Therefore...if one cuts their hair, but is on the spiritual quest as per the Guru Ji's ...then I would still consider them a sikh... who knows...along the line, it might come about that they will go for Amrit... However one keeping their hair may not be considered a sikh if he does not follow the Guru's teachings.... So u have to be careful... U can't judge a book by it's cover rite.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Punjabi Nationalist Posted July 21, 2003 Report Share Posted July 21, 2003 Look. Kesh, or uncut hair, is something which must be kept only by those who are Khalsa. There is no requirement for keeping long hair, or any of the other 5 K's, for non-Khalsa/Amritdhari Sikhs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nogroup singh Posted July 21, 2003 Report Share Posted July 21, 2003 Khalsa panth was established in Guru Gobind singh ji's time and if I go by above posts then all those died for sikhism like Guru Arjun Dev ji, Bhai Taru ji, Bhai Mati Das ji, Bhai Sati Das ji, Guru Tegh Bhadhur ji and others were not Khalsa either but they prefered to die than cutting their hair. They would have gotten huge houses and 4-5 women slaves to have fun. 2. Sikh is learner without any destination? They have destination to become proper "Gursikh" not just be a learner for his whole life. Sikhism is same as university where you learn about religion and then pass the test and ultimately you become Sikh. 3. Modern sikhism way of life: Sikhi is inside not outside. If you cut your hair then it doesn't make you less sikh or high sikh. Hairs are important for Khalsa Sikhs. My friends if you believe in Sikhism then you have to believe in this concept that all gurus were light of Guru Nanak dev ji. We call it " joti jot samana" not that they died. How Guru ji knew that Guru Tegh Bhadhur ji was at Bakala? when he had no relation with him? Everything was going according to Guru Nanak dev ji's plan. They all were 10 Nanaks and whatever Guru gobind singh ji did was also a part of Guru Nanak's plan and same goes for other Gurus life as well. If you want to pick up girls and have fun and want to be sikh with hair around 50s then go for it and if girls want to have fun go out and enjoy in clubs then go for it but please for GOD sake don't make our Gurus and ancient sikhs martyrs useless. If we take modern way of Sikhism then all those Sikhs and Gurus themselves were just fooling around because Khalsa panth was not established in their times? 4. Jsb, Gurus were not fighting for Sikhs but for the humanity. They were not there to build any state but they were their to teach sparrows to challenge hawks and fight injustice. So, if non-sikhs faught for them then there is nothing wrong in it as they were fighting for humanity against evil so in that case whoever was in favour of them came ahead and helped them. Guru ji broke the tradition of ancient times that only "fighter races" can fight in wars. Guru ji's army had Brahmins, khatri, jats, rajputs, muslim sufis, chamar, churas and even baniyas. Guru ji stopped class system by giving sword to trader who never had gutts to even hold it. Guru ji gave sword to chamar who was tortured and abused by so called high caste people. Guru ji gave sword to Brahmin who was reciting vedas and had job of scholar for long times and they all faught like warriors and broke the old tradition of old times that if you want to fight in wars then you have to be "kashatriya" or fighter class. Guru Gobind singh ji, I shall teach the sparrow to challenge the hawk. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r k Posted July 22, 2003 Report Share Posted July 22, 2003 the akal takht says that to be recognized as a sikh, you're supposed to keep your hair .. hmm .. and also refrain from adultery, intoxicants, and eating meat.. some people say you're not a sikh until you take amrit others say that if u are sehajdharee but on the path and if you plan on taking amrit soon, and you're working upto it, then you are a sikh it's a matter of personal belief.. you should post on many different sites and see what people say 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 22, 2003 Report Share Posted July 22, 2003 I think we have a wrong picture of Shejdhari Sikhs. Click on this link to find out more about Shejdhari 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sukhsingh Posted July 22, 2003 Report Share Posted July 22, 2003 plz i dont like ppl dat say u can be sikh without hair. u arnt a sikh because ur not obeying the Gurus Hukem. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsb Posted July 23, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 sukhsingh: again, i repeat....guruji fought in many battles... true, i've been proven wrong, it wasn't for sikhi's sake, but for humanitys sake... but it was a Sikh Army..we hear that term all the time...Whether it was Guru Gobind Singh Jee, or Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji.. cut haired folk fought right alongside the others in war... where's the line, if there is one 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Punjabi Nationalist Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 Sukh Sahib, Sikhism is not confined to Amrit or the Khalsa Panth. It is extremely arrogant for you or anyone else to claim that a Sikh who has cut his/her hair is not a Sikh. You are not an authority on who makes a Sikh and who does not. As for eating meat: "Only fools argue whether to eat meat or not. They don't understand truth nor do they meditate on it. Who can define what is meat and what is plant? Who knows where the sin lies, being a vegetarian or a non- vegetarian?" (Malhar)" Quote is from Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and can be found at sikhs.org. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 Hmm....about the eating meat or not... Did u know that Guru Gobind Singh Ji said nothing about it....that it was perfectly fine for one person to eat and still be a sikh... :shock: crazy idea isn't it, but tru The person that brought vegetaniarism to sikhism was Baba Buddha Ji, after Guru Ji was gone and he was still fighting the mughals.... he's the one that brought about this extreme form of sikhism that we have today... Don't say that just because we have the word of God straight from the Guru's that it still isn't messed around with... there were ppl back in the day during the Guru's time that wanted to mess up with our religion because of the power associated to it,... Out of curiosity who wrote the dhohera that we say at the end of ardas, I'd like to know.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 It was Giani Gian Singh, a Nirmala scholar who wrote it. It's in his Panth Prakash one of th major works on Sikh history (19th century) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 Lalleshvari Ji, do u agree wit the dohera? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 in what sense? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 In the sense that it says raj karega khalsa, akhi rahe na koe... Also where did Guru Gobind Singh Ji give the Gur Gaddhi to the SGGS, is it written down somewhere? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 Well it's all in the Panth Prakash really. You can get it from the Bhasha Vibhag in Patiala, they have a good edition. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 But did HE write it....or tell someone to write it.... is there a means of knowing what exactly he had said at that time.... Also did He write the rehat marayada???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 all the writings of Guru Gobind SIngh are in Dasam Granth and Sarabloh Granth and the hukamnamas. The rest are texts transmitted oraly , the Rahitname etc... Now That doesn't mean that texts that were not written by Guru Gobind SIngh but are historical are necesserally boncuss. Giani Gian Singh did a lot research for his books and they agree with other external sources. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 What does the research mean then, what conclusions has Giani Gian Singh come to??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 He says that Guru Gobind Singh gave the gurgaddi to the Guru Granth Sahib and the Gur Panth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 hmmmmm.... ok, makes sense, thank u 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 le plaisir fut le mien tres chere amie! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r k Posted July 23, 2003 Report Share Posted July 23, 2003 it was guru nanak who said "raj karega khalsa, akhee rahey na koee". if guru nanak said it, it's going to happen he may not have meant the actual khalsa panth, he may have just meant 'the pure ones', but who knows 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.