Jump to content

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

WJKK WJKF,

Now before this discussion begins, spare us all with "you aren't perfect so stop talking", "they might be better off on the inside" wale bachans, because yes, they might be better than us on the inside and we are not perfect. But as a panth, we should have the right to make sure that people are not misunderstanding sikhi and defining it their way, instead of that defined by Guru ji.

 

there are quite a few women, who tie dastars and are amritdhari, beautiful but then some of them constantly reject the maryada. Now, I have been taught that a true Sikh never neglects the maryada and a true Sikh aims to follow the most of it. These women wear make up, shorts and low-neck shirts, dancing and singing songs, swearing. While feminism has a great role to play in the whole "make up and clothing" choices, they often blame some Singhs for exposing their body, which I am against, simply because both parties are luring the other into "lust" (read it from a post, makes sense)

 

i read a few posts from kaurlife and they wish to achieve women equality by wearing fewer clothes because singhs do it, participate in the panj pyare and walking beside their husband during anand karaj. Ignoring that as a panth we are all in it together, we shall help each other instead of trying our best to let the other spiritually down. 

It is hard to have them listen to us, so... Opinions ?

Sikh females are caught in an ideological war of idea's which is mostly between the far left liberal western atheist hedonist corruption and the extreme traditional right wing conservative nature of following rehit to the letter types. The same battle Sikh boys are going through especially if they are born into a keshdhari/amrithdari household but they not as much pressure to conform to an ideal that kaurs are expected to be.

Eventually what happens is that they rebel after they get some freedom or they fall out with their family. So we see cases of keshdhari Sikh boys cutting their own hair that they kept since birth and blame it on some random stranger. Then a big hoo haa follows and cries of racist attack but eventually it turns out the guy cut his kesh themselves because of the pressures of living a dastaar wearing Sikh in society. Like the case that was in scotland a few years ago.

We see cases like harnam kaur from slough, uk the "bearded lady" who thinks sikhi means you can wear miniskirts show your legs/body off, have tattoos, wear lipstick/makeup and look like a clown while having a huge 10inch beard. We see bibiyan who have moushtashes and thinking they being extra religious and eventually some Sikh guy will find that attractive. Chances of them getting married is very slim and so they fall into depression and other health problems.

You have some girls on instagram who are born into well known jatha or gurdwara commitee member families but they dress like wh0res and they chat to random non-sikh guys who gives them attention. Some even go as far as to take up boozing, clubbing and eventually sleeping with random guys at school, college and uni all under the noses of their religious family members. They have gone the other extreme of rebelling into atheistic hedonistic filth.

Then lastly we have Sikh women organisations instead of giving guidance and advice for Sikh females to stray clear from non-sikh ideologies and influences they are promoting non-sikh filth like 3rd wave feminism and helping with domestic abuse cases against men instead of getting to the root of the problem and resolving that. Basically killing their own community without offering real help that can save marriages, relationships, family and the sikh panth.

The best way is around the middle way not to the extremes of the left and the right. There is no such thing as total gender equality in nature nor in Sikhi. Those who claim there is need to show evidence. as SGGS Ji clearly states for women to dress modestly.

Kaurs have to be wise and think long term about prospects and how to help themselves spiritually and Sikhi grow in terms of demographics. They have been unique responsibility of bring the next generation of life into the world. Sikh guys dont have that ability and therefore they need to dress modestly, only date and marry Sikh guys and try to life as best as they can according to the wisdom of SGGS Ji.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

If you have such Love for the Guru then respect your only and eternal Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji. Gurbani says as Gurmukh to see ALL with a single eye of equality (which means treat equally) for in each and every heart the divine light is contained. That divine light is the ONE and only light of Akal Purakh. By dismissing bibis with a statement like that to say an outsider Singh is still better than such a lowly Kaur, you are actually refusing Akal Purakh in female form to do this seva! Gurbani says he IS the male AND the female. The chess player and the board, it's the same ONE actor who is playing ALL the characters. This world is an illusion. A dream. Gender is transient and inconsequential. A <banned word filter activated> won't get you anywhere when this life is done. 

For your information yes I have taken Amrit at a historical Gurdwara in Kashmir. And the Panj Pyaras that day specifically told us Kaur's present that day they WANT to see some of us in their place some day and that there is NOTHING in Gurbani that prohibits it. Gurbani sees all humans as equal. It's male ego who can't let go of privilege. 

There is a saying that for those who have been always given privilege, equality seems like oppression to them. That's why men who have had it so good for so long feel so threatened to give Kaurs their due right to equality. 

Preparing amrit does not require male anatomy. It requires high avastha which both males and females can attain and it requires strict Rehet and physical ability to carry out the ceremony. The light of the Guru is genderless. Guru Ji will come if any five Sikhs with high avastha are preparing Amrit. Learn to see past the physical shell and see the divine light instead. 

So did pita ji ask for a Sikh's head, not that of a man or woman. But then there is something called surgun saroop, the panj pyare who stood up became the surgun saroop and now the male are used SIMPLY TO represent that surgun saroop, they obviously come from mothers with avasta. So there, this is the sewa a woman can do, give birth to great gursikh pyare by being a gursikh themselves. Also, I wonder why no sikh woman ever thought of having to mess with this part of sikhi, if I am not wrong, I have seen a woman commenting under a video of sant jarnail singh ji khalsa bhindranwale with the same name and logic, and tbh one of the reasons for this post. 

 

Read the history, read some books.

(I don't even know what the masands have to do here)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

So did pita ji ask for a Sikh's head, not that of a man or woman. But then there is something called surgun saroop, the panj pyare who stood up became the surgun saroop and now the male are used SIMPLY TO represent that surgun saroop, they obviously come from mothers with avasta. So there, this is the sewa a woman can do, give birth to great gursikh pyare by being a gursikh themselves. Also, I wonder why no sikh woman ever thought of having to mess with this part of sikhi, if I am not wrong, I have seen a woman commenting under a video of sant jarnail singh ji khalsa bhindranwale with the same name and logic, and tbh one of the reasons for this post. 

 

Read the history, read some books.

(I don't even know what the masands have to do here)

bro ,itihassic records say that the crowds at Anandpur were over 35,000 and Dal historians say there were not many women present , would it not be harsh to condemn women on the basis that they were not 5 out 35,000 ? They are not any less Children of Guru Pita ji and often in our history been the sole carers and makers of mahaan gursikhs  e.g. Bhai Taru Singh ji 

bros may consider being less condemning and more encouraging of your lost sisters ...return the favour 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jkvlondon said:

bro ,itihassic records say that the crowds at Anandpur were over 35,000 and Dal historians say there were not many women present , would it not be harsh to condemn women on the basis that they were not 5 out 35,000 ? They are not any less Children of Guru Pita ji and often in our history been the sole carers and makers of mahaan gursikhs  e.g. Bhai Taru Singh ji 

bros may consider being less condemning and more encouraging of your lost sisters ...return the favour 

Why is it when in the hukam of akal purkh, the five who stood up happened to be male, ready to become Singhs and khalsa. So if the panth was allowed, they would let female children represent the chaar sahibzaade in the name of equality. 

To whom shall are you showing this side of equality, what are you/anyone trying to prove by having the bibis in between the singhs. I just fail to see equality here but just manmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harkiran kaur bhenji,

 

SGPC maryada is not the panthic maryada. It has not been accepted. I rather follow the maryada from taksal/dals that can be dated back to the times guru sahib. They don't show women as inferior, they just accept as he plays, they are filled with sant/mahapurkh when SGPC is filled with, nvrm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
11 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

They are not any less Children of Guru Pita ji and often in our history been the sole carers and makers of mahaan gursikhs  e.g. Bhai Taru Singh ji

This I agree with; however, Punj Pyare should stay male. Guru Sahib doesn't love his sons or daughters any more or less based on their sexuality. That said; they should love Guru Sahib enough to give him the desire of an all male Punj, (he didn't ask for a male head; but Hukam made it 5 male heads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

This I agree with; however, Punj Pyare should stay male. Guru Sahib doesn't love his sons or daughters any more or less based on their sexuality. That said; they should love Guru Sahib enough to give him the desire of an all male Punj, (he didn't ask for a male head; but Hukam made it 5 male heads.

not arguing for female panj but loss of the harsh accusations which smacks of  prejudice and diminishment of sikh females' value and level of faith :

SIKH: no woman gave her head in 1699 so they have less faith in Guru ji

MUSLIM: women cannot do ibidadat the same as a man per month so is defective in faith

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

Harkiran kaur bhenji,

 

SGPC maryada is not the panthic maryada. It has not been accepted. I rather follow the maryada from taksal/dals that can be dated back to the times guru sahib. They don't show women as inferior, they just accept as he plays, they are filled with sant/mahapurkh when SGPC is filled with, nvrm.

so did you have kirpan di amrit then bhen ji because that is dal's purataan maryada?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

so did you have kirpan di amrit then bhen ji because that is dal's purataan maryada?

What about taksal's maryada? 

Puratan maryada of dal is still khande da amrit since scholars from the dals stand by women who take khande da amrit. (The absence of any amrit for women in the beginning and the the development of kirpan da amrit just show that pita ji forgot about for the women and they had to add it when they realised there was "mistake" I.e. Amritdhari singhs couldn't eat the food cooked by their non-amritdhari women)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see that you are posting under your real name Harkiran, and not crying about others using your real name, because it could affect your real life.

 

This harkiran used to post under the name of satkiran and cdnsikhgirl on sikhawareness.com . She posted the same drivel there for over a year that she has posted here. She had all the answers to her questions there but kept repeating the same until she was such a nuisance that no-one regretted her leaving. She has also been upto  the same mischief on facebook, and youtube insulting Sri Dasme Patshahs Granth Sahib as and when she could.

 

This is the same girl that created the topic insulting Sri Charitropakhyan only a while ago, and then had the mods remove her name, which she is using herself now.

 

All of her statements below are stock statements/questions that she just copies and posts. You can answer her questions, she throw up some more, and then when you answer those, she'll repeat the first set.

I want to provide some info for the benefit of other members here who, if confronted by nindaks like harkiran will know how to answer her. Even though she claims to have been studying sikhi for over 20 years, she cant even understand one sentence of Panjabi, so her understanding has all come from english sources.

 

12 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Did you know prior to 1699 masands had Guru given permission to initiate Sikhs by charan Amrit in absence of the Guru? And that there were women masands means women already prior to 1699 initiated others.

Women did initiate Sikhs by charan pahul, but this completely abolished in 1699. A new method of adminstering khande ki pahul was started, and it hasn't changed. This did not include women. So women giving charan pahul is no proof of women being able to give khande ki pahul.

 

 

 

Moving onto the rehat maryada. This rehat maryada was forced on the panth under the guise of being panth parvan. It is true that many people did at some time or the other take part on these meetings, but in some of these meetings by the SGPC's own offical record, there were meetings where out of over a 100 invitees, there were only 4 or 6 or 10 people present. These people made the rehat maryada and it was forced on the panth.

 

How can Sri Akal Takht "accept" anything? It doesn't put it's hands out to accept anything. Its the people in control of Sri Akal Takht who do the accepting. This harkiran character seems to thnk that Sri Akal Takht has accepted it therefore it can be the only true one.

 

Also husband and wife do not make the same journey to Waheguru together. They help each other through their sangat to each other, but it's inaccurate to say that they both arrive at the same time. One can arrive earlier. Thye do not make the journey as ONE. Neither do they make the journey after their humans lives are complete as ONE either. Unless they unfortunately both pass away together ie accident. This is just wild speculation on her part.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Gender is of no consequence. You say women have other seva? What seva do women have that men don't? None... why is it that men always have to have something to hold over women? Why is it that people like you can't follow Gurbani?

"As Gurmukh look upon ALL with a single eye of equality for in each and every heart the divine light is contained" SGGSJ

If you start saying that male form holds some superior significance then you are unconsciously consigning all souls in female bodies to a lesser existence. Then you have to ask why were we born female in the first place? Male is privileged so we must have messed up somehow to be born female right? Since the male form has privilege over female? 

You do know the soul is genderless right? And hose who merge their light with Waheguru see no difference between them and Waheguru then where does gender matter?

And if the Gurus themselves allowed women masands to initiate Sikhs by charan Amrit then who are you to say it's wrong for a bibi of high avastha to initiate someone now as part of the Panj Pyaras? Let's stop playing man made Maryadas games and go to the source, Gurbani. Show me where in our only Guru, Guru Granth Sahib Ji where it says women should have any less rights than men in ANY sphere be it religious, social, family. 

You can keep looking down in yourself as femalemif you want to but I know my Gurus saw me in no lesser light than a male. Women can be just as brave and courageous and loyal and fight to the death as men can. 

Panthic Maryada took many years with many high level Sikhs present and referred to many rahitnamas and historical works and of course most emphasis was put on Gurbani, did it agree with Gurbani. The consensus was yes women can take part in Amrit sanchars as one of the Panj Pyaras. If you don't like it you can feel free to stick with your dera who sees you as lesser than a man. It's up to you. Ask yourself if you truly feel like you are lesser, are you being punished to be born female? Maybe read in a Gurbani where it says this HUMAN body is precious. Not just male human bodies. Waheguru doesn't give some humans preference over others based on what genitals they have. That's for procreation of species only. Get out of the Hindu mindset where women are seen as lesser spiritually than men. 

 

This paragraph a bove is a stock copy and paste from her. She shows her true feminazi agenda in insisting that if men do something different "they have a hold or priviledge over women", or if women do someting different  "they are subservient to men".

 

Now coming back to her precious rehat maryada, which allows women to participate as panj, i asked her probably about 2 years ago, to provide ONE instance where the SGPC had according to its own rehat maryada conducted a sinchar at Sri Akal Takht Sahib using a woman as part of the sewa. She wouldn't answer.

 

The people who she is holding up as some kind of beacon or scholars won't even implement their own maryada themselves.

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

So tell me why does their gender matter? Does their caste matter? Should we only allow those from the castes who volunteered that day? How about skin colour? Should no white singhs be allowed since no white singh volunteered heir head that day? Why is it only gender matters???? And please use Gurbani to support your answer. 

 

Gurbani says nothing about giving khande ki pahul. So how can anyone explain the who the five should be made of according to Gurbani?

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

If you are reducing the Gurus to a gender you have really missed the mark! They were one with Akal purakh. Gender was meaningless. The reason for male form was that in that time a female form would have been ignored. Even today most men see women as inferior and lower spiritually. This thread is a good example.


Another stock statement. No-one is reducing the Guru's in any place. But they were male, whether they were one with Waheguru or not.

 

And then on to the "guru had to be male because no-one would listen to female" nonsense.

She threw up this response when she ws asked why all the Guru's were male, and if there were no Sikh women of Brahm gyan or turriya avastha in Guru Sahibs times.

Ask yourselves would the Guru's have been afriad of something like this? Guru Harkrishan Sahib was baal guru. Yet people ten times his age obeyed him and saw no difference in the jyot of Guru Nanak Maharaj. No-one would have ignored the Guru's over their gender.

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Your post reeks of hatred towards women.  That and a bit of superiority complex since you are male. 

 

Stock answer to anything she can't answer properly.

 

4 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

If you have such Love for the Guru then respect your only and eternal Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji. Gurbani says as Gurmukh to see ALL with a single eye of equality (which means treat equally) for in each and every heart the divine light is contained. That divine light is the ONE and only light of Akal Purakh. By dismissing bibis with a statement like that to say an outsider Singh is still better than such a lowly Kaur, you are actually refusing Akal Purakh in female form to do this seva! Gurbani says he IS the male AND the female. The chess player and the board, it's the same ONE actor who is playing ALL the characters. This world is an illusion. A dream. Gender is transient and inconsequential. A <banned word filter activated> won't get you anywhere when this life is done. 

For your information yes I have taken Amrit at a historical Gurdwara in Kashmir. And the Panj Pyaras that day specifically told us Kaur's present that day they WANT to see some of us in their place some day and that there is NOTHING in Gurbani that prohibits it. Gurbani sees all humans as equal. It's male ego who can't let go of privilege. 

There is a saying that for those who have been always given privilege, equality seems like oppression to them. That's why men who have had it so good for so long feel so threatened to give Kaurs their due right to equality. 

Preparing amrit does not require male anatomy. It requires high avastha which both males and females can attain and it requires strict Rehet and physical ability to carry out the ceremony. The light of the Guru is genderless. Guru Ji will come if any five Sikhs with high avastha are preparing Amrit. Learn to see past the physical shell and see the divine light instead. 

 

This single light is restricted by hrakiran to men and women only. But it is more than that. This single light is the same light in every single living thing (and non-living thing) in the creation. So she was asked if this light means that we have to see every one with the same eye of equality, why can't gay marriages take place in Sikhi?

Akal purakh is the chess board and the players. Akal Purakh is the male and the female. Akal Purakh is also in the third gender. Akal Purakh is also the animal and the vegetation. Akal Purakh is also the stones. So what? did harkiran give any of these other species any consideration for marriage? Or did she discriminate and select a man?

 

She has taken amrit, but failed to see an act of discrimination at that very sinchar. At the beginning men are not allowed to wear pyjama but women are not allowed to remove pyjama. At the end, all the  men have the name Singh, yet females have the name Kaur. Why can't women be called Singh?

 

Moving onto anatomy for preparing amrit. After the passing of Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj, Matas Sahib Deva and Mata Sundri give leadership and direction to the Panth, yet there is no record of either Mata taking part, or any other female taking part as panj sewa in any sinchar whatsoever. Both Matas were of the highest avastha. yet there is no mention of any such sinchar.

 

You can argue with her all you like. She can't change. This is her first job, creating trouble for herself on social platforms.

 

Admins keep an eye on her, sooner or later she will start on Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth. It wold have been better if she had been banned when she started that topic about Sri Charitropakhyan Granth a few weeks ago. Challo later is better than never.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 gurus all men
15 bhagats with bani in SGGS all men 
5 pyare all men 
 

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada?? 

Khalsa maryada comes from Dasam Granth, Sarbloh Granth & rehitname

Idiots ain't got a clue what the Khalsa is... the Khalsa is an ARMY.. not a social club.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, californiasardar1 said:

This is a great point.

Why do people insist on replicating the gender of the panj pyare, but not their other attributes?

Why not insist on panj pyare who come from the same geographic areas, same castes, have the same height/weights, same ages, etc. as the original panj pyare?

It just shows how ridiculous it is to insist that the panj pyare be male.

 

It's not a great point at all. After taking pahul you lose your caste, previous dharam affiliations etc. You do not lose your gender. You stop being whatever you were and become a Khalsa, but you dont stop being male or female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada??

Exactly.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

As for marriage as long as we remember why we are circling Guru Granth Sahib Ji and never look at it as one leading and one following the.

 

But it is though. A woman takes her husband's palla to follow him around Guru Granth Sahib. She is following in the footsteps he has already trodden.

But your husband is all about equality. tell him when there is a next family wedding, to get the male to hold the females palla and follow her around the lavan, because it's not about leading is it? Wonder why you were silent about it on your own wedding day?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

10 gurus all men
15 bhagats with bani in SGGS all men 
5 pyare all men 
 

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada?? 

Khalsa maryada comes from Dasam Granth, Sarbloh Granth & rehitname

Idiots ain't got a clue what the Khalsa is... the Khalsa is an ARMY.. not a social club.

 

WAHEGURU. ♥️

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Another point I would like to mention for fellow history lovers like is that generally if we look at all non Sikh sources mentioning Sihs and their practises we get a clearer picture than reading our Granths. The Granths were written from a certain mindset, schooling, 'sect' influence and sometimes even vested interests. While non Sikh authors usually wrote after observing Sikhs from several places and often even contrasting, comparing the behaviours of Sikhs across India. While narrow minded non Sikh narratives exist, a dozen sources can be found which clearly imply that Sikhi of the 18th century was more devoid of anti-Gurmat influences than that of the 19th century or Sikh literature (written mostly by Nirmalas who did not represent a majority of the Sikh dharam). Lots of non Sikh sources clearly mention that Sikhs generally did not observe casteist practises.
        “When a person is once admitted into that (Sikh) fraternity, they make no scruple of associating with him, of whatever tribe, clan or race he may have been hitherto; nor do they betray any of those scruples and prejudices so deeply rooted in the Hindu mind.”
      – Mir Ghulam Hussain Khan (Siyar ul mutakherin, 1783)
    • Chibber's narrative should be read in a context. He was born in a family which was held in great respect and esteem by the Sikh community; several prominent members of this family being treasurers, constant companions or martyrs of the Guru's house. The last notable Chibber in the community was Chaupa Singh who was executed in the 1720s. It seems that the Chibber influence within the community diminished in the coming decades, bolstering envy and rage amongt the Chibbers who had seen their parivaars influence wane over the decades. Hence there were several attempts in Chibber literature of the mid 18th century to infer a preferential ranking of Chibber Brahmins and introduce casteist practises once again (see Rehatnama Chaupa Singh for example). This a theory I have developed myself so can not quote scholars who advocated this theory but all the facts can be double checked. We always have to read into an authors background and motives for writing a certain text. The sect that manipulated Guru Nanak Dev's Janamsakhis saying the Guru married a Muslim woman did so to cover the defect of their own leader who had married a Muslim lady (and was thus viewed as an outcaste by the larger society). Similarly several writers have tried to link Mani Singh to their own lineage or caste (Gyani Gian Singh 'Dullat' made Bhai Mani Singh a Dullat as well despite the lack of proof in 18th century literature of any such claim).

      Therefore I do not believe the Sakhi posted by the OP to be true, Chibber had a vested agenda to promote casteism and more specifically the preferential ranking of the (Chibber) Brahmins. Ever noticed how the Chibber literature cleverly says a Chibber put Patasey in the first Khandi Di Pahul ceremony, were the first to take amrit and so on? (historically contradicted by all existing written sources) [Bansawlinama Chapter 10 I believe]. Similarly the Rehatnama (oldest copy 1765, written by Kesar Singh Chibbers father Gurbaksh Singh Chibber) asks Sikhs to give preferential treatment to Chibber Brahmins.
    •     I know why he got arrested.  And I am not saying they targeted him because they thought "oh he is a mona so it makes him an easy target."   I am saying that because he is a mona, and because he is used to being able to identify as a Sikh when it suits him and fly under the radar when it is inconvenient, he was not as vigilant as he should have been.  Someone who goes through their entire life being identifiable as a Sikh every minute of every day, and experiences all of the baggage that that entails, is not going to have any illusions about what would await him in India if he was behind a website like neverforget84.
×