Jump to content
superkaur

Is khalsa aid wasting sangats resources on muslim rohingya?

Recommended Posts

Guest Jacfsing2   
Guest Jacfsing2
4 hours ago, Balkaar said:

The Singhs who dragged Bhai Kanhaiya before Kalgidhar Patshaah sounded very similar to you. "Why give water to some muslim, an enemy, when you could be giving water to a Sikh instead? Shouldn't the Sikhs be a priority?"  I shouldn't have to remind you how this turned out for them. 

When Dashmesh Pitaa asked Bhai Sahib why he had done this,  Kanhaiya replied "I saw no Mughal or Sikh on the field of battle Maharaj, I saw only you". Guru Gobind Singh said that of all those present in the group Kanhaiya alone had understood the real message of Gurbani. Bhai Kanhaiya was right. The Singhs were wrong. I believe you are wrong about this too bhenji. Be careful not to become so obsessed with protecting 'sikhi' that you forget what you're supposed to be protecting in the first place. 

Helping somebody is never a waste of anything, it is not only one of the best things we can do for others, but one of the best things we can do for our own Sikhi. 

2 completely different things. Ravi Singh is probably a great man, trying to be a good Sikh, but the comparison of Bhai Kanahaiya to him is not something I'd recommend. Bhai Kanahaiya served as a Sevak whoever he can, regardless of whether they were Sikh or not. Ravi Singh is trying to exclude Sikhs. If he helped Afghan Sikhs, Middle-Eastern Sikhs, or African Sikhs, nobody would bat an eye, but he excludes Sikhs, and it's not beneficial to anyone.

3 hours ago, Balkaar said:

What are you talking about? Of course we do. Our lack of publicity is the number one reason so many Sikhs are targeted in the West by confused bigots, why every rally we ever hold in support of our self-determination is routinely ignored by Western media, and why Guru Nanak's message is barely spreading outside the Punjabi demographic. Publicity is exactly what we need. 

Before any publicity, we need an independent Sikh organization that represents Sikh-interests support internationally. Fiancial Aid to Sikhs in Punjab or wherever, consueling for Sikhs, and only then will we no longer be seen as 3rd rate citizens in the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Balkaar    1,430
56 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

2 completely different things. Ravi Singh is probably a great man, trying to be a good Sikh, but the comparison of Bhai Kanahaiya to him is not something I'd recommend. Bhai Kanahaiya served as a Sevak whoever he can, regardless of whether they were Sikh or not. Ravi Singh is trying to exclude Sikhs. If he helped Afghan Sikhs, Middle-Eastern Sikhs, or African Sikhs, nobody would bat an eye, but he excludes Sikhs, and it's not beneficial to anyone.

Before any publicity, we need an independent Sikh organization that represents Sikh-interests support internationally. Fiancial Aid to Sikhs in Punjab or wherever, consueling for Sikhs, and only then will we no longer be seen as 3rd rate citizens in the world. 

Khalsa Aid doesn't exclude Sikhs veeray, you can see a list of their projects on their website where they clearly set out the work they do with Sikhs in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq:

http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/kabul-refugee-aid

http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/displaced-sikhs-in-iraq

http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/displaced-sikhs-in-pakistan

As well as Sikhs in Punjab and other parts of India:

http://www.khalsaaid.org/projects/punjab-floods-2007

http://www.khalsaaid.org/news/sikligar-sikhs-project

http://www.focuspunjab.org/

45 minutes ago, acsap said:

 In this situation, it is different, we are not helping fellow Sikhs in Punjab, but going out of the way to help Muslims, when Muslims are in much better position to help. It is like Sikhs going out of the way to help Palestinians get a country when Sikhs cannot even get their own country or Bhai Kanhaiya giving water to dying Muslims soldiers even when hundred of Muslims can give them water, but nobody is giving Sikhs soldiers any water. 

Muslims can help their brothers and sisters, but often they do not. The Palestinians for instance, despite the lip-service paid to their cause across the Islamic world, have been all but abandoned in practice. The response to the Syrian refugee crisis by the rest of the Arab countries was also shamefully tepid, and the plight of the Kurds elicits little sympathy from anyone. In a world which is increasingly full of chauvinism, I believe we should be glad to belong to a community which is one of the few that even attempts to rise above the divisions and embrace its responsibility to the wider human race, when most others are only concerned with looking out for their own - the people in their own house, or their own country, or of their own religion. I am happy to see the Sikh Panth taking steps towards realizing what I hope is its destiny as the moral conscience of the entire world. 

 

 

 

Edited by Balkaar
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
proactive    1,367
8 hours ago, singh598 said:

It's easy for people to complain sitting on a nice sofa in a comfortable room in a nice warm house 

Imagine what it is like for those HUMANBEINGS

Sometimes the best and most common sense decisions are made sitting on a nice sofa in a comfortable room in a nice warm house. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sikhni777    589

I don't suppose it is only Sikhs who donate to khalsa aid. 

The government of Punjab needs to look aftee their people.  They are not facing immediate danger. Moreover a political change is needed to sort out their problems which a charity organisation cannot do without starting to educate them. This would place their volunteers in immediate danger.

The rohingha plight has received worldwide publicity and their immediate situation is one which threatens their survival. 

It is like the service which a doctor would provide - the person facing a heart attack is seen before the person whose finger has a severe cut on it.

People who feel strongly about the charity should get on their feet and possibly volunteer to go help before starting to judge people.  It is easy to criticise others. However if you were in their shoes would you have been able to save punjab and turn it into a paradise for Sikhs ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kcmidlands    64
15 hours ago, superkaur said:

Question is why is khalsa aid continuing to pursue non-sikh charity causes when there's plenty of causes within the Sikh community that needs urgent attention and help but no help is given. (ie afghan Sikhs dwindling population due to persecution and discrimination, pakistani sikhs struggling financial  hardships, indian sikhs in deep poverty and struggling especially families of Shaheeds killed by govt violence). Whats the agenda? foreign adventures? collecting money?

Do your research, they do a lot for Sikhs (including Afghan and Pakistani Sikhs), i could make a list of the what they've down on a grass roots level but you opinion seems to fall in the camp of "We have to do for our own first" and your mind's already made up, maybe go and meet Ravi, i've met him a few times, your opinion will change pretty fast once you understand the people they're trying to help, when you help someone if you see their religion or skin colour first then you've lost before you've even began.

 

8 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

I agree. Charity starts at home. 

Khalsa aid is a great organisation. But why should we give money to syria and rohinga. 

These people will laugh that we are helping them. Sikhs cant even build a Gurdwara in syria and other arab countries. We are also persecuted. yet we help these same people.

Its a case of trying to be to goody goody.

Charity does begin at home and no one is forcing you to give money to them, yet we have no problem propping up TV channels in the UK who operate under the guise of a charity and don't help anyone, just saying.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Balkaar    1,430

 

2 hours ago, proactive said:

What great effect are the tens of thousands of pounds that KA will spend in Myanmar have against the millions of pounds the larger charities will spend! 

Seva is more about intent than effect. One out of one is a more generous gift than one hundred out of a thousand. 

The effect is also not just on the people the volunteers help, but on the karams of the volunteers and donors themselves. Seva is a way for us to get closer to Maharaj, and to help us realize that his jot blazes in all living beings. 

2 hours ago, proactive said:

 

I remember reading Ravi Singh's blog from the time of the Kashmir earthquake. He said how he was also fasting during Ramadan in the relief camps! What a joke, so he was going against the rehat just to show what a great humanitarian he was! The true fact was that such is the fanaticism among those Kashmiri Muslims even those who had lost all their homes that it was dangerous for him, someone who was saving the lives of these Muslims to even eat in his own tent and if it became known that he was eating during Ramadan it would have led to him being lynched!  Karlo Sewa! 

 

The rehat does not prohibit fasting. Bani essentially says that fasting is pointless and unnecessary if one practices it under the assumption that this will please God, which is the reason Muslims tend to give for it. Ravi Singh did not fast for this reason, he did it to show solidarity with the people he was helping. Try to put yourself in Ravi Singh's shoes for a moment. I think plenty of people would have misgivings about stuffing their faces around people who were starving and living in the direst of circumstances but still refused to take the food you offered them. 

Can I ask why you are being so quick to ascribe the basest and most cynical motives to fellow Sikhs and human beings? 

The other Sikh volunteers present somehow managed to eat their food without being noosed. This is not the 'true fact', it is your personal bias speaking brother. 

Edited by Balkaar
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simran345    2,459

I remember watching a video, because people were asking why don't they do seva in Punjab. He said that they are limited to what they can do, and would like to do more in Punjab. I think was something to do with politics or I may be wrong. I can't find the video to put on, but he was explaining why they can't do as much as they'd like to there. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2   
Guest Jacfsing2
4 hours ago, proactive said:

The Bhai Kanhaiya episode cannot be used as an analogy to justify the work of Khalsa Aid. If Bhai Kanhaiya was bypassing wounded Sikhs wanting water and ONLY giving water to wounded Mughals then Khalsa Aid would be fully justified in it's activities. 

The best analogy for what Khalsa Aid does is for a Sikh whose wife and kids were starving at home in village Sikhpura where all the villagers are Sikhs goes to another village Rasulpur a Muslim village many miles away  to donate his last money there because one of the houses in that village has burnt down. It is common sense to expect the other Muslims of Rasulpur to help out their Muslim neighbours  but it is the height of idiocy for the Sikh to be neglecting his own family to help others. 

But KA has taken it's idiocy to new heights, they have over £2.4 million in the bank and yet are appealing for funds for the Rohingyas  even from Sikhs in India! Imagine that, expanding our analogy further that would be like the Sikh asking for his starving wife and kids if they could donate their last meal for his relief work trip to the Muslim village! 

 

KA has been in existence for over 18 years now. The work they do in Punjab is in the last few years and as I wrote before probably the outcome of Sikhs questioning them about what they are doing about Sikhs in needs. 

Their is no issue in their helping in areas and communities where there is no other help such as the Yazidis in Iraq but KA is usually one of dozens of charities each vying with each other to get the most publicity. What great effect are the tens of thousands of pounds that KA will spend in Myanmar have against the millions of pounds the larger charities will spend! Consider what that tens of thousands of pounds could do for Sikhs in need. Why does KA have to run off thousands of miles away to find non-Sikhs in need when Ravi Singh just needs to step out of his door to see Sikhs sleeping rough in Slough and West London. But I suppose there is no publicity in helping them, the publicity is in plastering photos on facebook of KA helping Rohingyas thousands of mile away! 

I remember reading Ravi Singh's blog from the time of the Kashmir earthquake. He said how he was also fasting during Ramadan in the relief camps! What a joke, so he was going against the rehat just to show what a great humanitarian he was! The true fact was that such is the fanaticism among those Kashmiri Muslims even those who had lost all their homes that it was dangerous for him, someone who was saving the lives of these Muslims to even eat in his own tent and if it became known that he was eating during Ramadan it would have led to him being lynched!  Karlo Sewa! 

 

I think you quoted me by mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2   
Guest Jacfsing2
3 hours ago, KhoonKaBadlaKhoon said:

I respect his hardcore pro-Sikhi, Khalistan, and anti-india views.

Do you have any proof of this? I highly doubt he's said anything remotely related to this. That Sikhs have a right to a nation.

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

    • For starters, it seems that any Sikh orgs that do speak out against what's happening in general that may have "some" shared views with those that seem to be not of the liberal/left persuasion is seen as an abomination by left wing Sikhs.  It leads to me to believe that you are clearly on the left of the political spectrum. There is nothing wrong in being on the left of the spectrum. However, the left of the spectrum these days which claim to be tolerant and inclusive except they are very selective as to whom they are tolerant towards. Now with the increase in muslim population has meant an increase in certain crimes such as organised street grooming and terrorism.  Now with these happening more often, people are beginning to find patterns for this. A lot of this rooted in Islamic ideology. The fact the likes of SYUK will speak out against this you don't like. The people who support the left of the political spectrum like the Islamists for some reason and tend to walk on egg shells around them.  However, people on the left of the political spectrum (like yourself I believe) won't think twice about attacking people who want to stand up to the intolerance.  The contradiction I find generally with the left is that they want full rights for gays yet at the same time want full Sharia law for muslims. The irony is that the muslims will attack the gays if given half the chance. Muslims will not show tolerance and the people on the left will not speak out.  If someone not of the left points this out, it is pointed out as hate speech and you are shouted down called islamophobic or racist.  The left want diversity, just not diversity of opinion. In the Communist countries, freedom of speech is not allowed. The left claims to be liberal but act in the same manner of Communist countries. Communism has it's origins in Marxism and I suspect the left are Marxists in disguise. They might not be in power politically but there is cultural subversion going on. It seems that you are clearly influenced by this type of thought. That is why I suggested that you may be a Cultural Marxist.  I provided a link from the Telegraph to show what is happening in universities that has been overwhelmed by leftist though is now doing no platform which means freedom of speech is being curtailed.  This is cultural marxism taking over. However, if it is Islamic hate speech it is accepted. Your stance against SYUK seems to suggest that you are accepting of Islamist hate speech but not of people who would fight against it like Tommy Robinson.  I think the problem Sikhs on left of the political spectrum is that they think Sikhi somehow is the same as this leftist thought. It is not. They are influenced by the left (which is influenced by Marxism ) more so than Sikhi. That is why I called you a Cultural Marxist.  If you feel that is not articulated enough for you I can go on and on and on. The problem with your thought process is that it may eventually lead into a totaliterian system.  Totalitarianism is the antisesis of Sikhi.  
    • Our life is so short. We have so many constraints and chains. Remembering Bhai Sahib's beautiful life accomplishments as a Gursikh.
    • This is what I was referring to... 
    • Avoiding what my brother?  It appears to me that you use such labels as 'cultural marxist' without having a clear definition of what it is.. Please in your own words explain.. What examples have you provided of evidence of my indoctrination?  Using content produced by others just suggests to me that you don't really know what you are talking about... I'm sure you do... But without explicitly articulating your assertion, quite frankly it seems like you are more comfortable in being a sycophant than having your own opinions..  With all due respect  S
    • It's a reply to the other poster. He was mentioning that there are not enough sangat that attends the gurdwara but when we drilled down into the specifics. There are more people in the langar hall than the darbar.
×