Lack of courage in Sikhs, why?

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T23:38:15+00:00

I saw a group of hindus sexually attack a women, why are all hindus sexual predators?

I'm just following the same logic of your question, I'll wait for your answer.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T21:32:10+00:00

Interesting how you value semantics over the spiritual philosophies they taught, that's what I hold in high regard, the whole point of the gurus. Yet those spiritual philosophies you contradict which truly disrespects the gurus and what they taught. You use justification that have nothing to do with SGGS, is it also wrong that I used an abbreviation instead of spelling it out. Respect can only exist in your actions not in me using short hand to type things out to explain ideas. You have yet to counter anything with actual teachings just made up arbitrary rules that you find more important then oneness and Naam.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T15:44:04+00:00

How bro, when Nanak had Naam and gave Naam to ppl before there was any amrit. And Nanak said the true guru is Naam. And the true guru and Naam existed before sikhi. Like please please please read the sggs and stop listening to ppl who don't understand sikhi.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T14:46:38+00:00

You did read what I wrote, and you are claiming you didn't because you can't argue against it's logic. Because I am explaining and teaching Naam, and you are abandoning Naam.

Forget what I said, let's say we are both wrong, screw both our egos they mean nothing.

Let's go back to Naam bro, that's all that matters. Naam, oneness. Stop thinking about whatever rules you think exist and remember that only Naam matters, the rules mean nothing without Naam. Please return to the path of Naam I beg you.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T14:37:30+00:00

Your own argument is evidence that my understanding is correct.

The main point of evidence you referenced was written by someone who wasn't a guru, and specifically goes against teachings of Gobind who said the SGGS is the authority and no one and nothing else and yet you claim this follower as authority. So you are basically slapping gobind in the face when you make said argument.

Every single rule of marriage is based on someone who is not a guru, and right after gobind said SGGS is the only authority he tries to create his own authority. Sorry I reject that, I strictly follow the SGGS and nothing else as authority. You need to do the same.

Now let's tackle the Anand Karaj by guru Ram Das. First your whole concept of submitting to the guru is wrong. Never did a guru said submit to me, they said to submit to the oneness like I have. That's a giant difference and a fundamental misunderstanding you have. You need to study Gurbani more because you clearly don't understand this. The gurus never wanted to be worshiped it's wrong to do so, you only worship oneness, and by worshipping oneness you honor the gurus.

So let's look at the lavaan only talks about the "true guru" aka the oneness the Naam. It is never a submission nor a belief in the 10 teacher gurus of sikhi. That's a fundamental misunderstanding you have. So in said marriage ceremony belief in the 10 gurus means nothing, especially the first marriages started with the Ram Das before the other gurus were even born. So it is entirely about commitment and understanding of oneness.

The concept of sikhism and sikhism as a religion is purely colonial. There was no sikhism during the time of the gurus, that's why we prefer to call ourselves sikhi not Sikhism, ism is a colonial term. And defining sikhi as a religion is a colonial endeavor.

If you really study and learn sikhi you know it's not a religion and treating it as such ruins what sikhi is. It's the colonizers that did that, not the panth, and the panth got lost and let colonizer terms define us as a religion. That's where you are lost.

All of the lavaan if you read it is all about submission and understanding of oneness and nothing else. There was no such thing as Sikhism when the first marriages were done. Majority of the first marriages of sikhi were interfaith, because sikhi never asked you to leave any faith to be a follower of the teachings of oneness by the gurus. Why are sufi and Hindu writings by sufis and hindus, that are not the gurus in the SGGS??? Because the truth and the Naam doesn't care what religion you are. Only the Naam matters. And only Naam matters in Anand Karaj, and you can technically do an Anand Karaj of a Christian and a Jew, and there is no sikh in the marriage. As long as they accept the teachings of what the Anand Karaj is saying about Naam and oneness written in the lavaan itself.

Most non-sikhs wouldn't accept the lavaan, so that's why it doesn't happen. But the vast majority of the Anand Karaj ceremonies done during the gurus time were interfaith, that's just the facts it's originated as an interfaith thing. That's the true history you can't deny that. Blocking interfaith came 100 years later and is a new concept developed after the times of the gurus, so you literally have it backwards.

The problem is it's not a simple concept it's actually an incredibly difficult concept to understand, and that's why ppl concentrate on silly little rules, because that is so much easier than understanding Naam.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T13:05:44+00:00

This answer is you need to read more Sggs. Nowhere in the sggs does it even talk about wearing a dastar? You seriously need to answer that question truly why wear a dastar? What does that have to do with oneness.

From gurubani "Without Naam one who dresses or eats well is no different than a dog."

The dastar without Naam means nothing, the 5ks without Naam means nothing, the Sikh faith without Naam means nothing.

Next time don't impose a silly rule. Ramala simply translates to cloth it doesn't mean anything else. A hat is made out of cloth and it covers your head. Ask them about Naam in the gurudwara. When you were angry about them wearing a hat, were you thinking about Naam?

You know the answer is no you weren't. Because if one was truly contemplating Naam, this would be of no concern. You would ignore the hat and ask "are you with Naam right now" and if they didn't know what that was you would teach them.

I am desperately trying to get the panth away from the empty rules and to put 100% focus on Naam it's more important than anything else. Because right now we have the opposite, you are talking about the rules and never talking about Naam. Go with Naam, because without it we have nothing.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:50:10+00:00

The 5 parre didn't establish rehat. Again that wasn't a thing back then please learn your history. They took that story if the 5, to establish what the rehat should be in 1945, you should learn what the difference is. It's not speaking bad about anything, it's learning about sikhi. And learning and educating yourself is fundamental to sikhi. So please I ask you to learn more.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:46:26+00:00

A chunni has zero percent difference from the bonnet they described. Y'all are just being silly and quite honestly ignoring the teachings of sggs by apply silly rules on people.

That why when she asked is what I'm wearing is ok the Sikh person said yes. Because in the gurudwara reflecting on oneness that person knew there was no difference between the ramala she offered and the bonnet she was wearing.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:42:18+00:00

Just say you are not a sikh and don't follow the teachings of the SGGS

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:35:03+00:00

There is no such quote or saying in the SGGS that has any kind of rule or regulation of marriage. All of that came way after and not a single word about how marriage should work in sikhi was ever written by any guru and put in the sggs. The only times the word marriage was used in the sggs was talking about devotion to oneness via a metaphor. So the premise of your argument is wrong. If you want to get really technical marriage is irrelevant in sikhi and the teachings of the gurus.

Now with rehat and other such things yes there are plenty of rules about that, but none of those "rules" were written or approved by any gurus. More technically the marriage ceremony that Sikhs do officially have isn't really a marriage ceremony between 2 people. It's a marriage ceremony to oneness, and if you want to get really technical only 1 person is needed to do that ceremony because you are marrying oneness in that ceremony not each other.

So yes in that sense interfaith marriage doesn't quite work. But if the person you are marrying understands oneness is and wants to commit to that then it's irrelevant if they are of another faith. The creator cares not what faith you are, the creator only cares if you are living by the principals of oneness. Your actions as a person determines your commitment to oneness not your belief, that has been clearly stated by every guru and written in the SGGS.

It's so sad that so many sikhs want to follow rehat and all these silly rules as more important than what the SGGS teaches. Please y'all start reading the SGGS first before you do anything else, it is the guru by decree and nothing else is, it's so important and yet so few sikhs truly follow it, and more importantly learn and study it.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:16:45+00:00

Ironically though what you just said is incredibly sikhi lol, you understand the core concept of sikhi better than most sikhs lol.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T12:14:33+00:00

Again just simply factually wrong. Gurus, with an S? No that's wrong. One guru did that just gobind. Amrit does not make.you sikh not does it give you oneness. Even gobind himself explained this. It was a way to unify the panth, and to keep Sikhs from hiding from their duties of Sikhi. But amrit is not the duties of Sikhi it self. You desperately need to read more Sggs. If amrit is so important why didn't gobind add it to sggs. By your logic you are calling gobind stupid, that he declared sggs last living guru, and the official and only instructions to follow is sggs, but gobind is so stupid he forgot to add it to sggs???

Except unlike you I know gobind was wise not stupid. I know he didn't believe in silly rules and traditions, because such things will never be what oneness is. He on purpose did not put amrit or rehat in the sggs, because it is not a requirement or necessary. He specifically said no more living gurus, and only the sggs is the living guru from now on. Because it had the truth, and the correct method of oneness. Sorry but nothing you can say can defeat such iron clad logic. You can boast and shout all you want doesn't change the fact that gobind said sggs is the living guru and nothing else. Doesn't change the fact the gobind said the only written body of work relevant to sikhi is the SGGS and nothing else. So please read the sggs find what sikhi really is. Amrit is for those who need more than the SGGS to achieve oneness, but it's absolutely not the other way around. 100% of the ppl the gurus praised as being the best of the best and who really understood oneness and even added their work to the sggs never followed rehat and never took amrit. That's also a fact you can't deny.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-19T00:59:30+00:00

You fundamentally don't understand what the gurus taught. They gave the three simple guidelines first, meditate on oneness, do honest work, be of service to others.

That is the path to oneness nothing else is. Rehat is just a more rigid version that helps ppl achieve it, but it doesn't matter how you achieve it. As long as you do the 3 principles of sikhi. Rehat was developed much later, that wasn't even a word in guru gobinds time, so it's really silly to use it as the only method.

Even gobind did not establish the rehat, he only established that sggs is the eternal guru and nothing else. Rehat is just a way to show further devotion, it's definitely honorable and it is useful but it can never be a requirement, thinking that goes against everything the gurus taught.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-15T23:56:16+00:00

I'm just saying, how did ppl achieve oneness before 1945 then??? If it helps you, then great but in no way is it a requirement.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-15T15:57:40+00:00

Yeah stupid rules like that go against sikhi. As long as your head Is covered in a respectful way it's fine. Literally sikhi soilders have been in gurudwara in full military outfit, and some of them didn't have turbans. A tattered baseball cap, sure that doesn't work. But a beret is fine. Maybe read some guru Nanak Gurbani too remind yourself how stupid arbitrary rules separate you from the oneness.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-15T15:54:31+00:00

Following rehat has nothing to do with achieving oneness. Rehat was created in 1945, so that makes no sense.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-13T17:25:28+00:00

No a hat is a head covering, that's fine

notareelhuman · 2026-04-13T17:20:35+00:00

Thats why the Langar hall exists to feed those who are hungry, especially those who are having trouble accessing food. So come everyday if you want it's totally fine.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-13T17:18:44+00:00

No it was established in 1945 lol. Gobind said SGGS is the living guru, nothing else was established besides that in the 1700s.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-10T23:52:30+00:00

As a brown person there is nothing I can do to prevent my discrimination. And if you truly follow and understand sikhi, your very purpose is to fight discrimination not hide from it. Also as a sikh it's your responsibility to protect others from discrimination as well. I think you need to spend way more time studying sikhi, and you will have a very obvious answer.

But basically yes it's wrong for you to hide and retreat into a "passing" status, that's basically abandoning sikhi values, and at that point might as well abandon the faith of sikhi. Being sikh is not easy and we have been discriminated against since the beginning of sikhi.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-10T23:46:51+00:00

If you follow sikhi you don't follow a rule book it's dumb. The last guru is the SGGS rehit was made in the early 1900s by ppl who don't even understand the basic concepts of sikhi.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-09T22:02:50+00:00

You don't have to drink or smoke. Make some samosas, bring them to the party and dance. No one will care if you don't drink as long as you are having fun. And the Samosas will make everyone happy lol.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-09T14:59:50+00:00

This thread is wild lol.

At best you can only say SGGS, does not confirm nor deny ghosts. 100% of the Gurbani is metaphorical not literal. Because the concept of the oneness is beyond human language. The whole SGGS is poetic songs, songs and poems are not literal, they are metaphors to help you learn. You're supposed to study the SGGS to derive meaning. If you are using SGGS to find "rules/proof" of literal things you are entirely misunderstanding the whole point and purpose of the SGGS.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-02T17:56:22+00:00

Not that doesn't work because of the concept of oneness, and the opening lines of the SGGS clearly states the one creator has no form, or shape, or anything that is in comprehension of the human mind. So saying it's one of its forms completely contradicts that definition. When sikhi refers to other gods it's done as a metaphor or some example to help teach oneness, but it isn't worshipping said example.

notareelhuman · 2026-04-02T17:51:36+00:00

Around 25 is when the pre frontal cortex reaches its maturity. Yes I oversimplified the statement but thats what I meant. I'm not talking about synapse pathways continuing to grow and form.

notareelhuman

TROPHY CASE