Guest Javanmard Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 clear cutt paths are for sheep who don't want to be responsible for their choices and just follow orders. Sikhi is about responsibility. In the archive section there is a whole discussion on kirpan da amrit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Thanks Bhaji 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narsingha Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 NarSingha - I'm not sure where u got ur quotes from, HOWEVER, Its vital to remember that all Rehitname includes wierd sections, i.e in Some Parts Bhai Desi Singh ee writes - wh mcleod says that desa singh is "clearly uneasy on the subject of meat" - in another section desa singh says, he who is born in a good family will NEVER touch meat or alcohol. Both you and I know that Rehitname alone are not reliable, and have to be confermed with Bani - tanakhah-nama, copy of a copy wirtten in 1718 (implying original tanakhah-nama was written in guru jis time) says "he is a khalsa who slays muslims" Here lets look at more Rehitname - Desa singh rehtnama "do NOT slay a goat in the langar, not even by the jhatka method; and do not permit other meat in the langar" and just after "never consume alcoholic liquor or eat meat" verses 105 and 107 not elts look a few more wierd quotes- "the singh protects cows and brahmans and smited muslims with immense vigour" "if one is not able to obtain employment with a khalsa one should seek some other service " I sincerely hope - fr your sake - you work for only a Sikh NarSingha ----------------------------------- Lallesh - You said that women can take khanda da pahul if they want, but chaupa singh rehtnama which u use to justify kirpan da amrit, also says "ONE WHO GIVES KHANDA AMRIT TO A WOMAN, IS A GREVIOUS SINNER" We have to see that some rehitname are NOT reliable! You can almost prove ANYTHING using rehitname! Main thing is to compare with Bani, BHai Gurdaas Jee diya vaara etc "the singh who takes it (khanda da pahul) will be SUPERIOR to anyone who takes any other form of initiation" -So are the other three equavilent to Khande- Di Paul? :roll: Now lets take a look at what Bhai Gurdaas jee says - Getting initiated by the Guru the disciple has become a Sikh, According to my knowledge th translation is a bit erroneous – I’ll get back to you with a better one For now- vaar 3 pauri 11 http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?Sour...o=03&Line_No=11 Oh dear... Mr Singh, before commenting on other people's character and employment status, please polish up on your basic comprehension skills. It appears that you suffer from a severe form of foot-in-mouth disorder. It seems to be contagious... Bhai Desa Singh's Rehitnama is what you quoted from initially as evidence for what a Sikh should adhere to. This was YOUR choice. I simply provided more material from the SAME source (with references to the Rehitnama itself). So techinically, were we to employ Bhai Desa Singh's Rehitnama as you suggest, we should all TOLERATE Chatka, Shaheedi Degh, Apheem, and Dasam Guru Durbar, etc, etc, as being inherent within a Sikh's life. You now claim the rehitnama has "weird sections" simply because certain sections do not agree with your views on what a Sikh can and cannot do, or perhaps because you lack the necessary knowledge to correctly interpret and contextualise the document. Furthermore, are we to assume you now acccept Macleod's opinions on Sikh documents by airing his views on Bhai Desa Singh's Rehitnama, or you picking and choosing again? There is not much point discussing anything with you, Mr Singh, because time and again as you have proved (on many forums) that you ignore anything that doesnt fit in with your dogma, still continue to argue and asking for more proof anytime your bubble is burst. When it comes to the crunch, insults prevail... I am sure such methods of debate work well on other forums where subjective opinion devoid of truth are given more weight over truth, historical and scriptural evidence, or logic and reason. Enjoy the debate... PS. Should you wish to make any clever remarks in order to save face, please feel free to do so... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaNaDiAn_jAtTi Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Ok, so i was reading through the archived discussion on Kirpan da amrit, and so far have still gotten a mixed feeling for it, just wondering, how is it different from khande da amrit? I know the preparation is different, but then how is it different afterwards, what is a person supposed to do? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Kirpan da amrit implies keeping your kesh. Other kakkars are optional. (some institutions might differ in this) One reason behind the fact that women have kirpan da amrit is that kacheras (the real traditional ones not the short one worn by most Sikhs today) are not designed for a woman's body as the folds would rub her genitalia and be the reason for unpleasant or pleasant consequences ( I hope I don't need to explain this one). Also kacheras would be quite impratical for period blood. This does by no way mean that kipran da amrit is inferior or that women should not learn shastarvidya. Shastarvidya is one of the 64 alamkars that women should have and which are mentioned in Charitropakhyan of Sri Guru Gobind SIngh Ji Maharaj! Non-Muslim women in Panjab at that time did not wear shalwar but lengas, gaggras and Rajasthani-type tops. Kacheras would have been quite odd for women to wear as it was mainly a male attribute. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sikh_fauge Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Charitropakhyan-most scholars agree this IS NOT the work of guru gobind singh ji. Shed some light please lalleshvari. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 I must remind our members that this thread is not about Kirpan da amrit or khanda batta da amrit. If you like to discuss about kirpan da amrit please discuss it on this thread. http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...opic.php?t=1436 This topic will be locked if you guys dont stick to the orginal topic which is "Defination of Patits, Saihajdharis, Keshadharis and Amritdharis?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Charitropakhyan IS gurbani as Chaupai Sahib is from Charitropahyan. It can't be by his court poets as we know their work and none of them left such material. Also there is intertextual and intertextual evidence that proves it is! Anyone saying that it is not gurbani is a liar and a traitor to maharaj as he/she refuses Chaupai Sahib as well which is from Charitropakhyan! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 N3O veer, I think its important for everything to blen in, as this includes the hreits, and we need to see where theycome rfom Rehitname and then how reliable n stuff they are 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted March 30, 2004 Report Share Posted March 30, 2004 Narsinghaji I don't know which Guru you follow but I follow the Guru Granth Sahib and I check all the Rehatnamas against Gurbani. If what the Rehatnama says is against Gurbani then I trust Gurbani. Could you let me know whether you believe all Rehatnamas to be authentic and believe in all the Rehats. If not then can you tell me what criteria you use to determine what rehat is correct and which is not. Nowhere did I say that I believe all Rehat are authentic so you accusation against me of using Rehatnamas when it suits my views is false. I only quote those rehats that are in line with the teachings of the Gurus. So I have no need for me to tolerate Jhatka, afeem or any other things which you hold dear. You say that there is no point in discussing anything with me but looking at your previous attempts at debate with members, you are the first one to disappear when you cannot stomach the counter argument. I hope you will not do another disappearing trick and stay. No use putting your views and then not having the knowledge to back them us P.s When you'r 'coming website' coming, proving SOOO much that u've claimed on this board :roll: ------------------------- I believe in GurMat and not LalleshvariMat. There's a great deal of difference between the sweet Sikhi or the Gurus and the letmemakeitupasigoalone Mat of Lalleshvari ! Kirpan Da Amrit - Lalleshvari could only come up with one obscure rehatnama quote about Kirpan Da Amrit. tak care Bhull chukk maaf GurFAteh Please can we keep such personal slander away from posts, Amrit Veer has written about the Kirpan Da Amrit, presenting a view alternative to that of Lalleshvari. Nonetheless, Mr Singh, you frequently request references, now you have one you complain that it is an obscure source. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Anyways back to the topic. Here is what i can fetched about defination of sehajdhari, patit, keshdhari. The act provides that all those are Sikhs who solemmnly declare that they are Sikhs and have no other religion and beleive in Guru Granth Sahib and ten Gurus. Unlike the delhi Sikh Gurdwara Act, unshorn hair is not prescribed as a necessary condition in the Act though hair does have immense affect the defination of 'Sikh'. The act has been amended to make unshorn hair a necessary requirment for the voters in Gurdwara elections. The act defines "Sahjdhari Sikh" as that person, who performs ceremonies according to the Sikh rites, does not use tobbaco or kutha, can recite mul mantar and is not patit. 'Sahjdhari Sikh' after haircut he becomes a patit. Defination of "Patit" in the Act requires revision. It only declares Amritdharis to be patit on committing any of the four Kurahits and Keshdharis to be so on getting hair-cut. It is submitted that the keshadharis should also be declared patit on commission of any of the four kurahits just like Amritdharis and non-Keshadharis be declared patit for committing any of the kurahits except the one concenring hair. I hope amrit veer ji can enlighten us further and do vichar bit more about the definations of sehajdhari, patit and keshdari sikhs!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_Sunshine Posted June 4, 2004 Report Share Posted June 4, 2004 Here are some good definitions just click on the link http://www3.sympatico.ca/devinder.chahal/j...finingASikh.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurm Singh Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 after reading your comments i can honestly say that there should only be one method and descriptions, explanations of sikhi aspects (amrit for this conversation) but evryone is being told diffrent things. This does not help sikhi at all. This is what I have been told about amrit: Although Guru Ji asked and not ordered 5 heads, it was because they knew that those 5 sikhs were going to get up. Akaal Purkh had sent the Guru's to start a knew Panth. Amrit is very vital to take. why? well why did Guru Ji create it then? if it wasnt important to take then Guru Ji would not have created it. As far as the kes is concerned.........It is for purity. keeping our bodies pure and clean. I have got facts to prove my comments but it is too long and i would have to type it. find the truth. you say that sikh is a sikh, there should be no sehajdhari, kesadhari or amritdhari.......well this does not mean that you are diffrent from each other it just shows what stage you are at in sikhi life. as far as im concerned.........if you are born in a sikh family then you r a sikh whether you cut hair or drink etc when you take Guru Ji da amrit then you become singh and Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sukhi Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 you say that sikh is a sikh, there should be no sehajdhari, kesadhari or amritdhari.......well this does not mean that you are diffrent from each other it just shows what stage you are at in sikhi life. i agree. as far as im concerned.........if you are born in a sikh family then you r a sikh whether you cut hair or drink etc so if i was born into a family of murderers and thieves, would u automatically assume that i'm also a murderer or thief? do ppl not have the right to choose their own path to God? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurm Singh Posted June 9, 2004 Report Share Posted June 9, 2004 Sukhi ........ you are taking this way out of proportion. But i understand what you are saying. Yes your right......its up to the individual to chose his or her path to god or not. good example though with the murder and thieves. can anyone tell me what 'sehaj' means? i dont want a long definition. keep it short and simple so i dont get bored lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted June 9, 2004 Report Share Posted June 9, 2004 Gurm Singh, Check this thread out for defination of sehaj avastha: http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...highlight=sehaj 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.