|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
There are many problems with the above statements. First they say they don't support dividing people but now they say "It is not their issue that Punjabi Sikhs are being killed in India." When a person takes Amrit he loses his own identity and his caste. After taking Amrit he/she belongs to Anandpur Sahib and his father is Guru Gobind Singh Ji and mother Mata Sahib Kaur Ji. Anandpur Sahib is in Punjab. So either you belong to Punjab or you belong to America. According to the above statement Sikhnet people do not want to belong to Anandpur Sahib. They say they already have a culture but American culture is so anti-Sikh. Just look at it. Does American culture fit in Sikh religion? Not at all. When you become a Sikh your identity either political or spiritual becomes one. So there is no point in saying that they have different political identity. There is no political system better than Akal Takhat's Sahib which was set up by Guru Ji. By saying they already have a political identity they mean that they don't belong to political system of Guru Gobind Singh instead they belong to American politics which is created by humans. Once you are 21 you can legally buy drugs and smoke tobacco in America. This is the American law. Is this the identity they belong to???? Use of tobacco and drugs is prohibited in Sikhi and is against Sikh principles but American political laws legalized it. If you are a Sikh, you belong to Anandpur Sahib and the highest political authority for you becomes Akaal Takhat Sahib. Did Panj Pyare not tell them this or they are sticking with American political system on purpose? Sikhs are connected with Akaal Takhat Sahib just as the Catholics are connected with the Vatican. Sikhs are not fighting because they want to rule over others. They are fighting for the truth because Indian government attacked Golden temple and killed thousands of Sikhs. Khalsa is fighting against oppression. Khalistan is not about political issues. It is about religious freedom. Guru Ji taught us to fight for the truth and for justice. Did Guru Ji not fight for justice? He did and so is His Khalsa. Sikhs in the 18th century fought for truth and the right cause. Did they not live in tune with will of God? Guru Gobind Singh Ji fought against oppression because Guru Ji said "When all other means have failed, it is your right to raise arms and fight for your rights." This is exactly what Sikhs are doing. We have to be both Saints and Warriors. Practicing Naam Simran and fighting against oppression at the same time is what Guru Ji has taught us. Guru Gobind Singh Ji said that sovereignty is a MUST for a religion otherwise it perishes. Do they have different interpretation of this? If the only purpose of Sikhi is to meditate and accept the will of God then what was the point of building Akaal Takhat Sahib? The whole point is to fight for the truth while doing Naam Simran and following Sikhi. Besides, fighting for justice and righteousness is part of Sikhi which they are not following. A Khalsa should fight his inner thieves and outer thieves. If you don't fight then anyone can take over you. If everything is only about meditating then Guru Nanak Dev Ji wouldn't speak against Babur. Babur didn't do anything to Guru Ji but Guru Ji spoke for human rights and the truth. Why didn't Guru Ji just say "these are not my issues. I am not being harmed. If others are being harmed then its not my problem?" Why didn't Guru Ji say this if this is the right way? Why didn't Guru Nanak Dev Ji wait for God to end the whole oppression? Why did Guru Ji have to speak for the people? |