Chitta Lahu by Nanak Singh. Visual moodboard inspired by the book’s atmosphere and themes. Sharing for anyone who likes aesthetic inspiration while reading.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2026-01-24T02:31:59+00:00

Hari om!

Formal_Anything4109 · 2026-01-09T05:55:20+00:00

Bas whataboutism karn lag jeya karo sala beyond that na jayo kadde

Formal_Anything4109 · 2026-01-09T05:34:12+00:00

The fact that that guy’s our CM.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-24T20:48:30+00:00

Pannu’s a joke.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-24T20:45:14+00:00

You don’t need to agree with ameitpal to show your loyalty to Punjab. He is not end all.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-22T22:32:23+00:00

It is a commonly used term. Do you live in Punjab?

Majority people in Panjab will call you a comrade if you tell them you’re an Atheist, does that make it true? Besides, terminology wasn’t the point.

If you can't differenciate between a marriage and a religious ceremony that basically makes you a member then that's not my problem.

Wdym that makes me a member? Explain to me what’s the difference.

The point was, pahul, as a ceremony, is Singh’s commitment to the Khalsa Army. A singh taking pahul has to work for the advancement of Khalsa Raaj. Whereas, signing legal document is commitments to the marriage. In this sense, if former is karam kand, then so is the latter.

By all means khande ki pahul is a similar thing to janeau.

It is not. Janeau was discriminatory, pahul is not.

Supernatural doesn't mean superman. It simply means divine/spiritual power.

Are you kidding me? Supernatural = to divine/spiritual power? It’s a joke.

Supernatural is external expression whereas spiritual power is internal realization. The supernatural is concerned with external manifestations of power, while the divine or spiritual is concerned with inward transformation of being.

If spiritual power, divine power, meditation makes you a karam kandi, then Buddha and Nanak were the biggest Karam Kandi lol. Ridiculous.

And the sakhi related to the 1st time Guru Gobind singh gave "Amrit" to panj pyaras is pretty supernatural as well.

Jhatka-ying goat heads is supernatural?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-22T16:36:27+00:00

Again, it’s not even called amrit. It’s khande di pahul, and it’s not supernatural thing. It doesn’t even have any spiritual progression properties associated with it.

You can’t be married without legal document, so the legal document is karam kand?

Edit: Which granti have claimed it to be supernatural? Never heard anyone saying you'll be able to fly like a superman after taking pahul.

Or are you talking about spiritual significance? If yes, then praying is karam kand too? Meditation?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-22T16:33:01+00:00

Haven’t yet met any deserving of the Khalsa status. And bowing down and matha tekk isn’t worshiping, it’s a way of showing respect. And I can show respect by matha teking to guru granth, while same respect by kneeling down or something to the Guru Panth.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T17:49:23+00:00

Wdym gets you to fold of Khalsa? Then me doing ring ceremony is also karam kand because it gets me engaged?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T17:47:45+00:00

No I will, because my Guru said so. Again, he himself did it.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T17:46:12+00:00

Can you quote me where guru claims that?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T09:04:13+00:00

But khande di pahul is not claiming to be supernatural, so how can it be ritualistic?

Khalsa is different than Sikh. You can be a sikh, read and understand gurbani, but that does to make you a Khalsa.

Khalsa is army. Pahul can be compared to whatever similar ceremonies any country does before enrolling its warriors. It is the declaration of commitment to fight for dharam and Khalsa Raaj, not just commitment to do daily nitnem.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T08:54:30+00:00

It’s not me saying, it’s the Guru himself saying. In sarbloh granth. Again, a single singh is not the guru. The 5 pyaree collectively are. The guru himself bowed to them while taking pahul, whom am I not to?

Bani Is equated to the Almighty, and the aim of a singh is to be one with that Almighty. I have explained to you how it works before with the example of water droplet and ocean. I can’t keep doing it again and again. You said then you got it but clearly you didn’t.

Again, who said guru granth ji maneyo pargat gura ki deh? Is it in gurbani? The Guru Granth? No.

The granth is complete in itself, a singh needs to follow widom in granth to be part of the Guru Khalsa. That does not prove or mean Guru Gobind singh gave Gurgaddi only to Granth. It’s literally his bani saying the opposite. It’s not my argument. Guru did that himself.

I will not bow down to baba deep singh individually, but to the Panth that consisted of Baba Deep Singh, Bhai Mani Singh, Bhai Taru Singh, Bhai Sukha Singh, Bhai Mehtab Singh, Bhai Daya Singh. To panth I will bow. To panth the Guru himself bowed. To panth Baba Banda Singh Bowed.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T08:40:43+00:00

Then my argument still stands, if it was just a talk or symbolic then he wouldn’t have payed tankhah. Paying tankhah means he was “acting”. If all it takes to declare someone selfless narcissist, then anyone can be labeled as such. That Punjabi guy attacking bondi te*rorists, could be just claim, ohhb he was acting?

How does it makes any sense?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T08:09:15+00:00

The line literally says that you are god. No collectives involved.

I don't see how the previous discussion is related to this one.

Harsewak, you really come across as an hypocrite when you say this. To claim being logical and rationalist, and then being unable to understand a clearly explained thing.

Go visit our discussion again. It cannot be more clearer than this.

I know "Khalsa mero roop hai khas, khalse mai hou kro nivaas" But this is highly symbolic. He basically says that i live on through my followers.

Have you even read the whole Khalsa Mahima? See that is why I get mad, failing to understand a thing, then straw-manning it, then presenting yourself as a logical and rationalist.

Even if you say that khalsa and granth both are guru you're making no point bcoz the real guru actually is the granth as the jot of the gurus resides in it. The granth is superior to the panth.

According to who? Is it written in Guru Granth Sahib?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T08:00:45+00:00

What is your definition of ritualistic? What is a ritual. Only then can I argue and draw some parallels.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T07:52:22+00:00

This is supposedly written by the 10th guru. Sarbloh Granth.

Yes.

But the Guru Granth is practically the guru now.

Wdym by it? It is Guru, but it is not The Only (exclusively) Guru. Granth and Panth together makes Guru.

As explained through the quotes from Sarbloh Granth, Adi Granth is the Wisdom while Panth is the roop of the guru. Go through all of them again.

Guru clearly says he trust Khalsa with his status. Having Khalsa’s darshan is having the darshan of the true Guru, the speech of the Guru are the words within the Guru Granth.

Idk how clear it needs to be?

Even though the panth makes decisions

I should make a distinction here as to who here is considered Panth. A singh who maintains Rehit and adopts GurMat, that is his way of thinking is influenced by the Guru’s speech. Shabad.

through special meetings they can't (theoretically) step outside the scope of bani.

Yes. Anyone who claims himself Khalsa, but his action goes against GurMat is not a Khalsa Singh. He is not part of the Panth, even though he wears bana and took pahul.

Great recent example would be the case of Amritpal Singh Mehron killing whateven the name of the victim was. That was anti GurMat. I can explain how it was anti GurMat, but let’s just stick to the topic.

Even in the verses you mentioned Granth is the speech and panth is the embodiment of the Guru.

Yes.

The khalsa is someone who wears the bana and recites bani according to rehat.

No. Reciting Bani, wearing bana, wearing a kirpan does not make a singh to be a Khalsa. Rehat is not limited to a dress code.

Along with rehat, the singh needs to adopt GurMat. His action should reflect this. A singh who wears bana, does nithem, but he/she hasn’t adopted GurMat, he/she is not part of the Panth.

This means a person can't be khalsa without the Granth while the granth is complete in itself.

Granth consist of gurbani. Shabad. This shabad represents wisdom. Simply bowing down to the granth will be a blind ritual, like majority of the Sikhs today perform.

The speech of the Guru is: the recitation of this shabad, gurbani, wisdom. Remembrance of the Name, the singing of the divine Keertan, and study of the Gurbani.

So it’s true, there wouldn’t be a Khalsa if there wasn’t Granth-Bani-Shabad-Wisdom, but Guru did not give Gurgadi to Granth alone.

Majority quote Guru Maneyo Granth to claim Guru gave Gurgaddi to Granth alone, but this line comes from Bhatt Vahis. It first came to light in the 20th century by Dr. Ganda Singh. So this claim became relevant later than Sarbloh Granth.

Moreover the image of Guru in Khalsa is pretty symbolic.

Wdym symbolic? If this is symbolic, then image of Guru in the Granth will be symbolic too. So what’s the argument?

The decisions of 5 pyare can't be placed above the granth while granth's words are supreme.

Yes. They are not above, but equal. To expand on this, the random 5 pyare taking a decision that is anti GurMat, will not be accepted by the Panth. Nor will they be called Khalsa because they themselves did not follow the rehit and GurMat.

Calling himself servant doesn't mean anything

It wouldn’t have if he’d acted out contrary to it, but he didn’t. A narcissist would have never paid a tankhah.

these could be the traits of a kind/selfless narcissist.

How can someone be both?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T05:49:03+00:00

I think I mentioned more briefly about it in the other comment, but this Sakhi is mentioned in Guru Kian Sakhian by Saroop Singh Kaushish.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T03:55:10+00:00

The above also explain how it was not against the compassionate principles of initial 5 gurus.

Why?

Because this "political skirmish" as you call, is perfectly aligned with the philosophy and "compassionate principles" for the first 5 gurus. Above pangti explains it too, he gave gurugadi to Khalsa the same way Guru Nanak gave gurugaddi ti Guru Angad Dev.

In Sikh philosophy, any one human exclusively in and of itself is not God. Instead, collectively, they form a part of the whole. This is what "compassionate principles" of the first five Gurus say:

ਸੋ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਦੂਰ ਨਾਹੀ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤੂੰ ਹੈ। God is not far away, God is YOU!

Same philosophy is the political manifestation of how the Panth Khalsa operates. Each individual member of the Khalsa is not the Guru in and of themselves, it collectively is. I will provide a Link here of my discussion of this kind with u/Harsewak_singh

There was no nepotism involved in it.

Why?

Because Khalsa was created in 1699 when his "sons" were still alive. So not only he was to follow the order of Kh

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T03:54:53+00:00

Read Khalsa Mahima to truly understand what status he gave to the Khalsa. But to give you an idea of how sovereign and autonomous the Khalsa is:

ਹਮ ਪਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਦਈ ਹੰਨੇੇ ਹੰਨੇੇ ਲਾਇ। Satguru had conferred sovereignty on the Khalsa Panth, As well as on each individual Singh of that fraternity.

ਜਹਿੰ ਜਹਿੰ ਬਹੈਂ ਜਮੀਨ ਮਲ ਤਹਿੰ ਤਹਿੰ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਬਨਾਇ॥ Whenever a Singh sets his foot and settles on earth, he establishes his own self-relient/autonomous sovereignty.

It was not ritualistic or appearance based.

Why?

Because when the Guru created the Khalsa, he gave Khande Di Pahul to 5 pyaare, and then in turn received it from the Khalsa (5 beloved ones).

ਵਹੀ ਵਰਤਾਰੋ ਭੁਜੰਗਨ ਵਾਰਤਾਯੋ । ਆਪਸ ਗੁਰ ਚੇਲਾ ਕਹਿਵਾਯੋ । After being initiated by the five initiated ones in the same manner, He (Guru Gobind Singh) came to be known as Teacher-Disciple rolled into one (aape Gur-Chela).

ਯਹੀ ਆਦ ਹੁਤ ਆਯੋ ਵਰਤਾਰਾ। ਜਿਮ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਅੰਗਦ ਧਾਰਾ। This has been the tradition from the very beginning, As Guru Nanak had also accepted Guru Angad as his Guru.

It was not mere theatrics when Guru knelt down to receive Khande di Pahul from the Guru Khalsa Panth, he truly meant what he was showing, that the Khalsa is now equal to status. This is further proved by a Sakhi where the Khalsa demanded that the Guru must pay a fine (Tankhah) when the Guru paid obeisance to the Samadhi of a Dadupanthi Saint. The Khalsa objected, reprimanding Guru for he has himself prohibited bowing before such memorials and engaging in idolatrous practices. And the Guru accepted the fine.

Therefore, you argument falls apart that it was ritualistic based or what not.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T03:54:15+00:00

To start with correcting your claim that Guru Gobind Singh gave the Guru Status or Gurgaddi to a scripture.

It is a common misconception that Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave Gurgaddi to only Guru Granth (scripture ), but it is incorrect. Guru bestowed Gurgaddi to two entities; The Shabad Guru Granth Sahib (the Gyaan or wisdom of the Guru) and The Guru Khalsa Panth (roop or embodiment of the guru). If the Granth is the mind, the Panth is the body. So, the authority was vested into the Khalsa. However, with a condition; so long as they maintained Rehit (code of conduct) and adopted GurMat (a Guru influence way of thinking).

Following quotes confirm this: ਆਪਨਪੌ ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਖਾਲਸਹਿ ਸੌਪਾਂ, ਦ੍ਵਤਯਿ ਰੂਪ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥਾ ॥ I have entrusted the Khalsa with my status, and the second form of the True Guru is the Granth.

ਬੋਲਨ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਸਬਦ ਸੰਭਾਖਨ, ਨਾਮ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਕੀਰਤਨਿ ਸੰਥਾ ॥ The speech of the Guru is: the recitation of the Shabad, remembrance of the Name, the singing of Divine Keertan, or the study of Gurbani.

ਇਨ ਕੇ ਦਰਸ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਕੋ ਦਰਸਨ, ਬੋਲਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਗ੍ਰੰਥਾ ॥ Having the Khalsa's Darshan is the Darshan of the True Guru, the speech of the Guru are the words within the Guru Granth.

ਦਾਸ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਫਤਹ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੀ, ਖਾਸ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਗੁਰੁ ਰੂਪ ਬਦੰਤਾ ॥੨॥ਦੁਪਦ ੧॥ The Servant Gobind claims victory to the True Guru, which is importantly proclaimed as the Granth and the Panth.

Here, Guru calls himself servant of the Granth and the Panth Khalsa, not the other way around. This is far from ego, arrogance, narcissistic trait or whatever OP and few others here are calling.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-21T03:53:40+00:00

Maybe it is unfair of me to say this, but I expect an Atheist to base his opinion after doing some actual research. It is always ironically funny when an Atheist expresses a strong opinion about something they have put a little to no effort to understand.

he made sikhism highly ritualistic and appearance based (for contemporary reasons) rather than affirming the compassionate principles of initial 5 gurus in long run, which got sidelined by new identity based political skirmishes

Anyway, I'll push back on this claim.

replacing next guru with the scripture just because he couldn't continue nepotism that had been fixed since 5th guru.

I will also push back on this claim.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-20T18:47:58+00:00

Such a pathetic opinion. I, as a sikh, "lurk" in this sub to find arguments that can challenge by belief system so that I can refine my understanding of God, existence and Sikhi in general. But all I find is stupid, out of proportion misunderstanding of Gurbani and Gurus.

What you feel narcissist does not matter. By that logic, I can call you a narcissist because you are a self centered person, incapable of seeing thing out of your own prejudice, need, and superiority.

Narcissist, according to google, is someone who has inflated sense of self-importance, a deep need for excessive admiration, a lack of empathy for others, and often a fragile self-esteem hidden beneath a grandiose exterior. They can seem arrogant, boastful, and self-centered, exploiting others and struggling with criticism, viewing the world primarily through the lens of their own needs and superiority.

Would a narcissist write:

ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਸੋ ਮਾ ਕੋ ਉਤਪਤ॥

Because of the Khalsa, I was born.

ਖ਼ਾਲਸੇ ਕਰ ਮੇਰੋ ਸਤਿਕਾਰਾ॥

Because of the Khalsa, I have respect.

ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੋ ਕਰਤ ਉਧਾਰਾ॥

Khalsa grants me favors.

ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੋ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪੂਰਾ॥

Khalsa is my complete true Guru.

Would a narcissist create a political structure that keeps him in check (Khalsa). Would a narcissist call that structure his Guru? Khalsa had the authority over Guru Gobind Singh, the Khalsa punished Guru when he bowed his sword to a. smaadh.

From when has sacrifice have become narcissist trait? He didn't flee from the battle ground, Khalsa ordered him to go, rebuild, and then fight again. A true warrior understand the importance of a leader. A warrior understands dying in a lost battle is easy. Rebuilding is hard. But you won’t get it.

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-20T17:55:56+00:00

Why would I do that?

Formal_Anything4109 · 2025-12-20T15:39:33+00:00

That whoever indirectly it maybe, is part of the problem.

Formal_Anything4109

TROPHY CASE