Jump to content
Guest chaudry

Don't sikhs wear socks and shoes and sit in chairs?

Recommended Posts

Guest chaudry

Can someone answer these questions if they don't mind?

Why are they sitting on floor instead of sitting in chairs with their heads covered?

 

Admin Note: jaspindjy, *Rest of your post terminated as it does not meet minimum structure to have any civilized discussion.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest1

this talk was just after evening langar, it was more practical to sit where sangat was. nothing planned about it other than practical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Guest chaudry said:

Can someone answer these questions if they don't mind?

Why are they sitting on floor instead of sitting in chairs with their heads covered?

 

Admin Note: jaspindjy, *Rest of your post terminated as it does not meet minimum structure to have any civilized discussion.*

amazing , ALL you got from this video was the idea to criticise dress and surroundings ...get a life

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tanu hor koi kam nai ? Socksa te shoes da kio fikar a? Koi socksa di dukaan kholni a? 

Edited by simran345
Spelled kholni correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 1:30 AM, Guest chaudry said:

Can someone answer these questions if they don't mind?

Why are they sitting on floor instead of sitting in chairs with their heads covered?

 

Admin Note: jaspindjy, *Rest of your post terminated as it does not meet minimum structure to have any civilized discussion.*

Admin, why did you delete the rest of the post? The two questions that remain make the post look like a reasonable, well-intentioned query. Who knows what the deleted portion looked like, but if it was anything like I could guess, was it calling Sikhs uncivilized for not sitting on chairs?

Anyway, to "Chaudry" Sahib: You're not some ignorant "gora", as you used the word "Chaudry", so regardless of whether you are Muslim or  Hindu, you should know that Sikhs sit on the floor in their Gurdwaras, just like Hindus in their Mandirs, and Muslims in their Maseets. So why are you acting like it's such a surprise that Sikhs sit on the floor. A Gurdwara is not a Lions lodge, nor is it an auditorium.

6 hours ago, Guest guest1 said:

this talk was just after evening langar, it was more practical to sit where sangat was. nothing planned about it other than practical

Even if "Chaudry Sahib" didn't go to the talk, it's completely obvious that this is so. Just look at the sangat sitting on the langar mats. They're not sitting on the whole floor, they're just sitting on the long (lengthwise) langar mats. 

Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, simran345 said:

Tanu hor koi kam nai ? Socksa te shoes da kio fikar a? Koi socksa di dukaan kholni a? 

:rofl

"Chaudry" Sahib da export da kamm hai:

socks-1489657514-2760731.jpeg

Here's his website:

https://www.exportersindia.com/punjab/socks.htm

Why are you all getting into his business? He was asking an earnest question, as to whether these Sikhras don't own any socks.

He was a poor exporter looking to make a fortune selling each Sikh in the world two pairs of socks.

Vechara Chaudry Sahib!

 

Reminds me of this tuk:

ਇਲਤਿ ਕਾ ਨਾਉ ਚਉਧਰੀ ਕੂੜੀ ਪੂਰੇ ਥਾਉ ॥

Eilath Kaa Naao Chaudhri Koorree Poorae Thhaao ||

The trouble-maker is called a leader, and the liar is seated with honor.

ਮਲਾਰ ਵਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੨੨) ਸ. (੨) ੧:੩ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੨੮੮ ਪੰ. ੪ 
Raag Malar Guru Angad Dev

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2017 at 9:00 PM, Guest chaudry said:

Don't sikhs wear socks and shoes and sit in chairs?

Can someone answer these questions if they don't mind?

Why are they sitting on floor instead of sitting in chairs with their heads covered?

 

Yes we do sit on chairs and wear socks, but we do also remove them and sit on the floor, if we want so.

Have you ever been into a Gurdwara? How do you find us there?  is it not similar to the video in your post?

Then?  What is your problem?

Out of respect and tradition, when someone is doing parchar or keertan, we do sit in front of them on the floor and remove our socks.

Chaudray jee, if you respect yourself, just respect our traditions.

It is obvious, you have not paid attention to a single word in your video posted, rather looking at the surroundings. It is like a student going to class in school, pays not attention to what the teacher says, but looks around the ceilings, the floor and the walls.

This attitude, will surely make him remain a dumb donkey!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji didn't discriminate between satguru as their is only one same satguru for every yug.  He told us to praise, worship, meditate on the one and only satguru.  He wrote about the 24 incarnations of Vishnu and he corrected what happened actually to the 24 incarnations.  If Krishna and Vishnu were satguru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji would have said it in his writing about them.  Instead he wrote to say I don't praise them or think of them, I hold Mahakaal ( which translates into Vaheguru in this context as he is the destroyer of all) praise only in my mind.
    • people need to stop having WWA matches with rehits imo. 
    • This whole jathabandi nonsense has had a negative impact on Sikhi, and I wish we would do away with it.
    •   Jagsaw, I am very surprised that you consider the movement of Sikhs out of areas with substantial Sikh populations to be "progress". First of all, I thought you lived in Southall?  Or perhaps another part of West London?  If so, I find it odd that you consider it a positive thing not to live in areas such as the one that you yourself live in. Second of all, I think you are greatly overlooking just how much of a positive impact that living in an area with a substantial Sikh population can have when it comes to preserving our religion and culture.  It is foolish to discount the importance of children being able to grow up in a "community", with Gurdwaras and Khalsa Schools nearby, with peers who come from the same background, who practice the same things, speak the same language.  I credit the "ghettoization" of the Sikh community in the UK for preserving the Sikh religion and Punjabi culture despite several generations having elapsed.  The vast majority of Sikhs in the UK trace their roots in the UK to the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s.  Yet somehow, young Sikhs in the UK appear to be more religious and interested in Sikh issues than the Sikh youth in Canada or America.  Somehow, young Sikhs in the UK seem to have almost as much exposure to Punjabi language and culture as their American and Canadian counterparts whose families arrived from India in the 1980s and 1990s. In America, the vast majority of Sikhs live in cities and neighborhoods with effectively no Sikh presence.  That has an impact.  It leads to young Sikhs who grow up with little knowledge of, connection to, or regard for their religion and culture.  It leads to interfaith marriages that effectively wipe out Sikhi from families.  It cripples our ability to safeguard our way of life.  I very much doubt that young Sikhs in America in the year 2060, whose families arrived in the 1990s, will speak fluent Punjabi, go to the gurdwara, engage with their religion, and connect to Sikh political issues the way that a surprisingly large number of young Sikhs in the UK do today. 
    •   I think Malwa gets more credit for keeping Sikhi alive than it deserves.  Malwa is bigger than Majha and Doaba combined (in both land and population).  So the contributions its people have made to Sikhi in recent times is a bit distorted (I say "recent times", because before 1947, Majha and Malwa were comparable in terms of land and Sikh population).  Malwa is so much bigger that it dominates.   It is notable that even though Majha has a much smaller population than Malwa, the vast majority of young Sikhs who took up arms in the 1980s were from Majha. The Majha district (especially what is now Amritsar District and Tarn Taran District) have historically been the strongholds of Sikhi.  However, this region was the hardest hit during the dark times of the 1980s and 1990s, and it is perhaps the hardest hit today when it comes to the drug epidemic.  Sadly, the Sikh youth in Majha seem to have discarded their kesh, do not follow rehat, and have in many cases succumbed to drugs.
×