How can someone pretend to be Khalsa and not act like one?

For those who do, it becomes imperative for us to question their motives and refuse to acknowledge them as representatives of our community. Obviously they lack commitment. This is what the whole discussion is about.

Why should we let the Guru be the only judge? Doesn't it take away human responsibility for our actions?

"According to their deeds, some are near and some far from God." - SGGS p.8

"Through virtue is one enlightened." - SGGS p.931

Does every college athlete qualify to represent his or her country in Olympics? If your answer is no, should it mean that these particular athletes were "judged" negatively and denied the opportunity to represent a nation?

I don't think so.

Only the best among us who have proven their worth, through commitment and practice, make it to the final list. Similarly, a committed and a practicing Sikh should be our choice.

It seems that we are being denied the right to discuss who could be considered a better Sikh. You know, holier-than-thou accusation, which is really quite stale. On October 16, 1950 Life magazine published an article by Jacques Barzun, Dean of Faculties and Provost of Columbia University. The title of the article is, 'The Educated Man'. He begins with the following words:

"For a writer to express publicly about the Educated Man is perhaps as dangerous as for a lady to bring up the topic of a Virtuous Woman. In both cases everybody's attention immediately shifts from the matter in hand to the person who's discussing it. If a writer modestly pretends that he does not consider himself an educated man, then what business has he to be writing on the subject? And if he does allow, again modestly, that he is educated, then he is suspected of talking down to those less favored by the gods than he."

Sikhe is a difficult path, which requires both love and commitment. I am aware that on this path I may be ahead of some people and, most certainly, there are many Sikhs who are ahead of me. While I seek inspiration from Sikhs whom I follow, I hope I can inspire those behind me.

Any person with humility will not complain if those who are better than them are allowed to become our representatives. In case they continue to complain then it is a sign of self-centered behavior. In plain English we call it selfishness.

Bill Clinton was found indulging in certain activities, which are considered unethical for a person in his position as a representative of a nation. What followed was a threat to impeach him, which led Clinton to publicly apologize for his conduct. No one ever said that non-American citizens should be made President just because an American citizen did not live up to the required ethical standards.

Similarly, every Sikh who represents us should be from among the best in the community. Once in power, if they fail, then hold them accountable.

While we never fail to suggest that the "Guru loves us," we always avoid accepting that our love for the Guru lacks commitment. In any relationship - Guru/Sikh, parent/child, husband/wife - how would we feel if we loved someone and did not get loved in return?

"If you love unrequitedly, i.e. if your love, as love, does not call forth love in return, if through the vital expression of yourself as a loving person you fail to become a 'loved person', then your love is a misfortune," says Karl Marx.

Love without commitment is a wasted emotion. If you love then learn to commit.

*Now in the chapel where Laura prays
For her poor Tommy, who passed away
It was just for Laura, he lived and died
Alone in the chapel she can hear him cry

Tell Laura I love her
Tell Laura I need her
Tell Laura not to cry
My love for her will never die

Preet Mohan Singh

*Lyrics of a song by Ray Peterson called 'Tell Laura I Love Her'