Originally Posted by
Harjas Kaur Khalsa
So I hearby take my leave from your forum before your ugly attacks against me get even worse.
I had a strong impression that a SIKH has to be true to his/her words. No difference in Kathni(word) and Karni(deed).
Not that I want anybody gone just curious how a person can believe in what anybody said is the truth,
when his/her deeds don't match with what he/she says.
Yes, I thought it over and wondered why bullies would have the right to chase me away and silence my opinion. Would that be right? It's a philosphy forum for open discussion on controversial topics. What I don't tolerate is personal abusiveness. That is not right. When someone doesn't like my positions and publically attacks me as being a horrible person, a fake Sikh, full of hatred toward the innocent, full of panj dhoots...
not because I said something against them personally, but because I presented an opinion on strict Gurmat Gursikhi they didn't like, I ask, what kind of a forum is this? What kind of forum moderation is this? It's a fair question. It's obvious I can't share in the same way as others do without a personal attack against my character. But likewise, while not throwing the same kind of personal low blows or insults,
why should I be intimidated into silence? Would that be the Khalsa way? So re-evaluating my position on leaving, which is my free choice unless and until some moderator decides to ban me. Why am I a hypocrite if I change my mind? Why can't I change my mind about being bullied away and still be true to my words?
Who says a Sikh is someone who can't change their mind or form a better opinion? Why tie anyones hands with such a ridiculous limitation, as if we are powerless people with no rights or freedoms? Wouldn't our enemies just love for us to be unable to think and reason and get all tangled up with that kind of justification of blame? My deeds
do match what I say. I simply am changing my position because I don't accept being intimidated, abused or bullied. Why should I give rude people the satisfaction? What right do you have to insinuate I'm a hypocrite and add to the list of slanders against my person?
But certainly, if all I receive on this forum are personal attacks and slander against my reputation, there would be no point in staying, since I would be effectively silenced anyway. It's unfortunate that after blistering personal attack by a moderator, people defended the moderator and continued the slander against me by referencing all these accusations on other posts, accusing me of negativity and hatred, when all I did was post an unpopular rehitnama to explain my position against visiting Hindu mandirs as part of bibek. So where is the justice in this forum? I didn't even accuse the moderator of being bad for calling me horrible and all these things. The hostility did not come from me. I was attacked for taking a position someone obviously didn't agree with. And the thing, its a debatable position. There are views within the Panth that disagree even with rehitnamay. I just shared my opinion and gave supporting rehitnama to explain why. I can accept that other Sikhs can and do visit Hindu mandirs. But I myself will not support it. If I'm wrong, may Guruji's kirpa explain to me so I understand better.
It's a forum! Debate! Discuss! Explain! Why make personal attacks?
rihq ipAwrI muJ ko isK ipAwrw nwih ]
"I love a Sikh’s disciplined way of life, not the Sikh."
So I chose to follow another path, and i cannot talk about another way of life now? BTW, thanks for explaining that we are all students and learners of god.
I have been noticing your angry and negative posts, not with me, but with others. You need to step back and calm down Harjas Kaur Khalsa.
Also, i hope you do not leave the forums too
1. My posts are not angry and negative. You do nindya of me. If I believe it is wrong to eat from the hand of a non-amritdhari, you may not like or agree with that position, fine. But the position has validity in Gurmat Gursikhi. It's not hateful or negative to support this position if you are trying to conform to Gurmat. Likewise, I am not hateful and horrible to Hindu people. I have stated their temples have presence of Akal Purakh and should be shown utmost respect. I simply took position that it is not Gurmat position for Sikhs to be visiting Hindu temples or Muslim mosques and getting spiritual traditions mixed up in casual way. Not everyone agrees. Obviously it's a minority view. But why abuse it? Why try to make it say what it is not saying? A lot of the Khalsa rehitnamas have to do with segregating the Khalsa. this is practice of bibek/discrimination. Not everyone has to follow that. Not everyone is baptised Khalsa. The most negative thing I said was no one should be badgered, pressured or shamed into accepting an opinion against Gurmat, whether it is popular or not. For this I got personally blasted as being all these terrible things as a person. And you people don't even know me as a person. this is not fair, and it is not right.
You need to step back and calm down Harjas Kaur Khalsa.
Why don't you be specific and tell me in what way? I was called many abusive things by your forum moderator, and did not make personal attack in retaliation. Mainly because I was disappointed in this person, not angry. So explain why you are jumping in to accuse me of being negative, angry and in need of calm. All you people are doing is twisting my words to say what I didn't say, and accusing me literally of being a horrible person, a fake Sikh, someone who thinks Gurbani is a joke, distorting and mistranslating the Guru's teachings (when I took the issue to Gurmat Gursikh elders and simply quoted the rehitnama they gave me.)
Why join in personal attack on me Lionchild? Is it because you so strongly disagree with my positions that you also want to invalidate them by personal slander and discrediting of me as a person rather than a debate on the issues themselves? That's like trying to gain spiritual insight by throwing mud.
So I chose to follow another path, and i cannot talk about another way of life now? BTW, thanks for explaining that we are all students and learners of god.
2. Those who are trying to follow a spiritual path are all students. But I explained to you the abuse of the word Sikh/shishya in this context is not correct. Simply because people are trying to learn and be sincere does not make everyone in the world a Sikh. A Sikh by definition is someone committed to Guruji. A Shishya is part of a dual concept, and without the Guru there is no Shishya. To be a shishya, you must belong to the Guru. It's more than mere student. The more correct translation is not student, but disciple. A Sikh is a sincere devotee, he is devoted to following the path/teachings/discipline which the Satguru gives His sikh. For one thing, according to Gurbani, God has the aspect of nirguna, meaning He is unknowable, inconceivable, not manifest to human intellect. To reach God requires a Guru, who is the sargun saroop of Waheguru. A Sikh is not a student of God, but a disciple of Guruji who is the manifest Shabad-Jyote of God. Guru makes God comprehensible to us. That is why we can cross the world-ocean by grace of Guru. He is like the speaking voice of silent God who human beings can understand. Also, not every prophet, not every teacher, not every spiritual person is equal to Satguruji. Gurbani also says that even the gods, like Parvati and Lakshmi and Shiva can take their disciples only so far. But Guru is greater. Guru is greater than Brahma, because Guru is the direct light of Waheguru, and Brahma was created from Waheguru. Gurbani says that Guruji is the only salvation for the age of Kaliyug. The Naam is the boat to carry you across the ocean of maya. Only Guru can give the Naam. So other prophets, teachers, gods, spiritual paths are not equivalent to Guru.
To be tolerant of something does not mean we undermine our own faith or give it second status. To be a disciple, a cheela, that means to you Guru is everything. Otherwise you are lukewarm, and your commitment is divided among other loves and interests. The thread is titled "Do we Sikhs have too much arrogance." Arrogance derives from the word arrogate, from the Latin arro*gate, which literally means "to take for oneself the right." Every spiritual disciple should grasp and cling to their own faith as a means of salvation. No one authentically believes in a half-hearted faith which they doubt and question and undermine and give away for cheapest purpose. You follow a path with all your love and devotion, or you don't follow at all. Unless you take faith into your heart grasping it as a love above all else, you are not really a disciple and you will sell out that which you do not really value. Cling to Guru without looking to the right or to the left. Grasp Him to yourself as your very own. You can't follow two masters. Choose one and truly follow, truly love, arrogate to your heart as if there were no other love in the world. Then you will be a devotee. You do not look at other available husbands and say, well any of these is as good as my love. Your spiritual love is the deepest love. It should be an exclusive love. It should be a sincere love. Fidelity. Loyalty. those are signs of love, not betrayal, not infidelity. Guruji is your Divine Beloved. No one in the world can take His place. If you betray Him, if you give Him up, if you flirt with a million other loves instead of spend time with Him, how far as His beloved do you think you will go?
3. Lionchild, all you have done in your posts and blog is criticize Gursikhi. What in the world is the point? And you accuse me of being negative!!! C'mon man! Is there need to be pointing out all the personal shortcomings of a religious path you rejected? Is that fair to new people who might want to come to this path to read all your criticisms and corrections about it? If you left this path and found a new one, well and good. just start saying positive things you learn about your new path. And here is the thing, people are telling you that your understanding of Sikh positions is not complete, or not correct, yet you still criticize Sikhism based on your flawed understanding, and take the role to correct and teach against the things Sikhs are telling you are wrong understanding. Do you really think in 1 years time you are in a position to teach and correct Sikhs about Sikhism? I ask you honestly, did you ever practice Sikhi according to rehit Maryada and take initiation with Guru as a Sikh? If you did not, how can you say that path is all wrong which you have never even tried to practice? How can that not receive a respectful challenge? And I am showing you respect, not abuse, because I want to win you to my opinion if possible. I want you to be able to understand at least, even if you don't accept.
4. I was happy you came back to the forum, because I was hoping to engage you in discussion really. If you're open-minded enough anyway. I took amrit with Akhand Kirtani Jatha and I know from your posts you're totally opposed to those views. But to me they're very beautiful. And I would be happy to try my best to explain any contentious thing. Again, I neither speak for, nor represent the Jatha, only myself but would be happy to discuss my best understanding about any misconceptions or prejudice. Unfortunately, I think I won't be exactly welcome to do that. At least we can be up front about discrimination on this forum.
5. If my positions are in error, give me your best understanding why, but please don't be abusive to me as a person. And my positions don't speak for or represent the AKJ. So if I'm making a mistake or wrong, that's my error, but I try very hard to be fair to the truth as I best conceive it. And also do not believe only Gianis and scholars can understand Gurmukhi. Guru speaks to His disciples through Gurbani, exactly where they are at. Everybody should be reading Gurbani. Go to the Guru directly, not through some self-important person doing katha explaining it for you or invalidating your approach to Guru Sahib Ji. But by the same token, learn from wiser people and submit your opinion to Panthic teachings. To the best of my knowledge, and never was explained otherwise, I did not take a position which was anti-Panthic, although I have been publically accused of distorting, mistranslating, twisting Gurbani for my own ignorant purpose. The Rehitnamay I cited may reflect a minority opinion, but it's still a PANTHIC position. So it doesn't really amount to abuse of me but to abuse of a minority opinion within the PANTH.
~Please correct my mistakes. But don't trash me as a person.