Jump to content
AjeetSinghPunjabi

Would you call our moneh boys "sikhs" ?

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

Moni discriminating against homosexuals now. There is no end to moni's hate

Seriously ! 

I tell you if a rehitvaan nitnemi gursikh rebukes my homosexuality , I would touch his feet ! 

atleast he's sincere. What to say to hypocrites you go to naai di dukaan and later head on to a party in their leather jacket , drinking from a can of beer and god knows how many chicks per night and then they have the audacity to lift a finger at gays , when in reality he himself deserves chittars. And then these guys later go on next day to their male buddies and say how much they scored that night . Too much of rights I guess ? 

They're able to do all this , because heterosexuality is acceptable. They're born such , so they exploit it , unaware that heterosexual misconduct of this life is seed of becoming homosexual in next one .:rofl

 

Edited by AjeetSinghPunjabi

Share this post


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

Seriously ! 

I tell you if a rehitvaan nitnemi gursikh rebukes my homosexuality , I would touch his feet ! 

atleast he's sincere. What to say to hypocrites you go to naai di dukaan and later head on to a party in their leather jacket , drinking from a can of beer and god knows how many chicks per night and then they have the audacity to lift a finger at gays , when in reality he himself deserves chittars. And then these guys later go on next day to their male buddies and say how much they scored that night . Too much of rights I guess ? 

They're able to do all this , because heterosexuality is acceptable. They're born such , so they exploit it , unaware that heterosexual misconduct of this life is seed of becoming homosexual in next one .:rofl

 

He is not in rehit....cuts his hair swears every second, insults amritdharis because he doesn't have the guts to keep hair uncut.  He's a moni not a Mona.  Huge difference between both of them. 20 odd years he has been on forums distorting Sikh history for his minds pleasure.  He puts monas to shame who are trying to advance in sikhi.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

He is not in rehit....cuts his hair swears every second, insults amritdharis because he doesn't have the guts to keep hair uncut.  He's a moni not a Mona.  Huge difference between both of them. 20 odd years he has been on forums distorting Sikh history for his minds pleasure.  He puts monas to shame who are trying to advance in sikhi.  

Lets not berate him too much ! That might put him off of sikhi more. 

Whats diff between moni and mona 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Lets not berate him too much ! That might put him off of sikhi more. 

Whats diff between moni and mona 

Put him off of sikhi? He's doesn't care to be part of sikhi.  He has pure hate for sikhi.  Anyone who has distorted Sikh history, he will promote.

Keep reading his post to learn the difference.  I do seva along side Mona and none are anything like this guy.  They have respect for gursikh, Sikh history, and strive to be better Sikhs.  Huge difference from moni.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

He has pure hate for sikhi

I don't think he hates sikhi. Maybe a bit off the track , like most of our youth thesedays but def not a bad-wisher IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2

This entire thread is the reason for so much divide in the Panth, not because of Amritdhari or Non-Amritdhari conflict, (which I don't know much about), but because everyone wants to be important one way or another. In the olden days, (around pre-partition of Punjab), there were times when not only Sehajdharis, Keshdharis, and Amritdharis would get along fine, but also between the Sikhs with the Non-Sikhs. (Hindus and Muslims.) Even though those days are over and may never come back, we shouldn't go further down the destructive path of excluding, if they want to grow in the path one day. 

My own view on the topic is Amritdharis as a whole are more devout than the average Sehajdhari or Keshdhari, and Keshdharis are slightly more devout than Sehajdharis as a whole, but even a Sehajdhari could be the next big Mahapurukh or something. We all have bigger problems than any distinctions we want to make.

(Also nobody should assume that I'm downplaying the need for the need for Amrit or keeping Kesh, both are very important, but when we have people going around with a superiority complex we need to address the issue.)

All in all, nobody except Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji-Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the ideal of supreme perfection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kira said:

Depends how you define Khalsa bro. There's many definitions, if we go by Bhagat Kabir Ji's definition then yes they were Khalsa. Albiet ones who weren't imitated with Khanda da Pahul. 

That is true Singh, I use the term in my posts to refer to the army of the Sikh Panth. I stress this definition because it reminds the Khalsa not to shirk his or her military obligations, as well as the importance of being trained shastardhari.

 

8 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Guru Gobind singh ji said "Khalsa mero roop hai khaas " (My special form is khalsa). but other panths were also guru roop , albeit not khaas . Udasis , nirmale are the 2 that comes to my mind. 

But singh sabha got them out . I don't blame singh sabha though. It was need of the time 

The Singh Sabha threw the baby out with the bathwater in my opinion bro. One of the movement's preoccupations was dealing with corrupt mahants, but it failed to apprehend that Mahant does not equal Udasi/Nirmala. Moreover, it hardly succeeded in this aim in the long term. So many of the 'Khalsas' currently running Sikh institutions are basically mahants come again, allowing manmat to take place in Guru ghars just as their predecessors in the 19th century did.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The Singh Sabha threw the baby out with the bathwater in my opinion bro. One of the movement's preoccupations was dealing with corrupt mahants, but it failed to apprehend that Mahant does not equal Udasi/Nirmala. Moreover, it hardly succeeded in this aim in the long term. So many of the 'Khalsas' currently running Sikh institutions are basically mahants come again, allowing manmat to take place in Guru ghars just as their predecessors in the 19th century did.  

Badal was the ultimate outcome of the SS movement sadly. 

What we've ended up with is a family dynasty type scenario.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, muscleman said:

I know that charana pahull was mandatory but not too sure about kesh. The rehat of keeping kesh became mandatory with the creation of Khalsa. Post codification amrit sanchaar and kesh and shastra vidiya all formed a mandatory part of the Khalsa Panth.

Bro you seem like an intelligent person so do the maths. If the other Kureits were forbidden during 1st Master-9th Master then obviously cutting Kes was too, I strongly recommend you read the various (and im talking a-lot) of threads there about Kesh being needed before the introduction of Khanda Da Pahul. Which is why I find all this so fascinating. 

Edited by Kira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, puzzled said:

Im not amritdhari so i might think differently, but i think if one has a relationship with guru ji then no one can decide if they are sikh or not. plenty of moneh have a lot of respect for sikhi and plenty of amritdhari are corrupt these days.   who is anyone to decide who is sikh and who is not ...

 

 

A person aiming to be the top (gursikh), which Gurbani tells a person to aim for, will not pull at straws to compete with those who are corrupt.  It just says you are corrupt as well but not as corrupt.  End result you are corrupt.  Define relationship according to gurbani not according to your beliefs

Edited by Akalifauj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, puzzled said:

Im not amritdhari so i might think differently, but i think if one has a relationship with guru ji then no one can decide if they are sikh or not. plenty of moneh have a lot of respect for sikhi and plenty of amritdhari are corrupt these days.   who is anyone to decide who is sikh and who is not ...

 

 

True

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2017 at 6:58 AM, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

So , @ipledgeblue you're saying a monah can do paath without taking amrit, but can't do archery , shooting, horse-riding ? lol .. 

no not saying that at all. Would actually be good if everyone learnt stuff then just limiting it to amrit dhari Singhs. A good influence overall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/07/2017 at 1:43 AM, puzzled said:

Im not amritdhari so i might think differently, but i think if one has a relationship with guru ji then no one can decide if they are sikh or not. plenty of moneh have a lot of respect for sikhi and plenty of amritdhari are corrupt these days.   who is anyone to decide who is sikh and who is not ...

 

 

having respect for sikhi means little , I mean atheists have been known to say that out of all faiths they respect Sikhi the most. Sikhi  is a  'doing' rather than 'being'  faith , when you stop doing sikhi you stop being sikh  simple as that

  • 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


×