169 replies to this topic

[dalsingh101]

Hang on. When is this beating by women and ousting of a nihung Akal Takhat jathedar supposed to have taken place? Which year? Who replaced him?

I must confess this is the first I have heard of this.

Addition: Found this

Quote

In early October 1920, Kartar Singh led a jatha of Sikh volunteers to Sialkot to liberate Gurdwara Babe di Ber from the control of a corrupt mahant or custodian. The shrine was taken possession of and a committee of lay Sikhs was formed to manage it, with Baba Kharak Singh as president. This was the beginning of the Gurdwara Reform movement. Kartar Singh Jhabbar, along with Teja Singh Bhuchchar, got the Akal Takht released on 12 October 1920. Teja Singh was appointed jalhedar or provost of the Takht. Jhabbar was included in the 9 member committee set up for the management of the Golden Temple. He continued to be in the vanguard of reformist Sikhs' campaign for liberating historical shrines. The more important ones he helped to take possession of were Gurdwara Panja Sahib (November 1920), Gurdwara Sachcha Sauda (December 1920), Gurdwara Tarn Taran (26 January 1921), and Gurdwara Guru ka Bagh (31 January 1921).

http://www.allabouts...gh-jhabbar.html

Is someone suggesting that a Buddha Dal Nihung Jathedar was in charge of the Akal Takhat in 1920?

Edited by dalsingh101, 26 August 2009 - 10:44 PM.

[singh2]

Matheen, on Aug 26 2009, 11:12 PM, said:

Didn't the British get rid of the Nihang Jathedar at Akaal Takhat when they installed the mahants? i could be wrong, but I thought the Akaalis got rid of the mahants - the Nihangs were alread gone by that time, and in fact had been pursued by the British for some time prior as well.

The Singh Sabha/ SGPC Akaalis forcibly took over a lot of Gurudwaras that were in the hands of Gursikhs as well, but I think that was at a later stage.

Yes the nihungs were forced to flee punjab after british take over. They were persecuted.

[singh2]

Quote

Gyani Dit Singh was first living in a dera but a live talk with Prof. Gurmukh Singh turned him into what we would call a missionary these days.

THis is the most mischievous remark i have seen. Giani ditt singh had no link with any missionary. He wrote monumental works on dasam granth sahib. He wrote a book Durga parbodh and there are some people who are doing their ph Ds on this. I met one Inderjit singh gogoani in Amritsar last winter. He was helping me to trace this book.

I am at a oss to understand why these missioanries who were born in 1960s in delhi on a platform of atheism drag the fair name of dedicated Gurusikhs in their dirty game plan.

[singh2]

Quote

When will you let up on the sanatan propaganda about when the Budha Dal was kicked out of Akal Takht. So those dastardly conniving and effeminate Akalis used women to beat up Budha Dal Jathedar knowing that he wouldn't attack women! I am sure there were soormay enough within the Akali Jathas who could have taken care of the Budha Dal Jathedar without the need to have women do the job. According to research, a third of the Akalis were former soldiers who had just fought in the battlefields of the First World War, so there would have no problem with finding volunteers to throw the Budha Dal Jathedar out. Read the life stories of Akalis like Kartar Singh Jhabbar and you might get a better feel for what the Akalis were like.

The above comments are ridiculous and amount to misinformation.In my opinion people need to read sikh history before making false comments as above.

[shaheediyan]

Which comments are ridiculous Bhai Sahib - the ones regarding Singh Sabhas removal of the age old Budda Dal Jathedaari and parkash of Dasmesh Pitas Bani from Akaal Takht, or the hero worship of the Singh Sabha members that performed such a sacrilegious act?

The above story is common amongst Dal Panth - not all history is recorded, esp when the British educated Singh Sabhiyas were the ones that were controlling the writing of Sikh history up until relatively recent times .

[tonyhp32]

Just because the story is current amongst Nihangs does not make it true. As Matheen said, how is it that Nihangs are virtually killed off by British shoot on sight orders and then a few decades later there is a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht. Sanatan history never adds up!

Shaheediyan,

You stated that the Akalis committed a secrilegious act but that depends on who you think should be in charge of Akal Takht. My view is that the Misls allowed the Nihangs to control the Akal Takht but in the changed times of the Sikhs being under British rule, the Khalsa Panth had every right to rethink the question of who should be in charge of Akal Takht. Do not judge the SGPC and Akalis pre-Badal to the ones who run the SGPC now.

It is ridiculous to think that Akalis who braved the bullets of mahant Narain or who were willing to lie on the railway tracks at Panja sahib to stop a train would not have the courage to evict the Nihangs from Akal Takht.

[Matheen]

If Nihangs had been in charge of the Akaal Takhat, the Akalis would not have had any reason to challenge them. As far as I know, the whole morcha was to get rid of the Hindu mahants who had been installed by the British.

Historically, the Jathedar of Akaal Takhat was always from the Dal, but that is not relevant in this topic.

[chatanga1]

Matheen, on Aug 27 2009, 05:45 AM, said:

If Nihangs had been in charge of the Akaal Takhat, the Akalis would not have had any reason to challenge them. As far as I know, the whole morcha was to get rid of the Hindu mahants who had been installed by the British.

Historically, the Jathedar of Akaal Takhat was always from the Dal, but that is not relevant in this topic.

Matheen, the nihangs were mute supporters of the corrupt mahants. they didnt stop what was going on at Nankana sahib, what high hopes did you have for them?

in a conversation i had with Nihang Niddar Singh, he told me that the mahants were not willing to hand Nankana Sahib over to the akalis, but would only hand them over to the Nihangs Singhs. Where were they ? Why did it take a bunch of teachers/pen-pushers to do what the sword-wielders couldnt do?

This morcha was not to get rid of the mahants per se, cos some gurdwaras remained in the control of mahats, but the morcha was to get rid of the CORRUPTION in the gurdwaras.

[shaheediyan]

"Just because the story is current amongst Nihangs does not make it true. As Matheen said, how is it that Nihangs are virtually killed off by British shoot on sight orders and then a few decades later there is a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht. Sanatan history never adds"

Funny how you change your beliefs when they suit you! You normally hold that the Nihang removal history is made up. Says it all.

Anyhow, doesn't take away the fact the SSS removed Guru Gobind Singh Maharajs Granths from Takht Sahib, in the most offensive manner if we are to believe the only accounts that exist, not to mention taking ALL the Gurdwarai in Punjab by force.

All for what? To end up with an administration which generates as much income as the Punjab Govt - and has done zero to propogate Sikhi or preserve our heritage. Yes, there were some well meaning Singhs in their - but the fact remains they were reformists and they divied the Panth.

Matheen,

You hit the nail on the head, why was a 200 year old tradition changed? The British were after the Dals, groups which set up chawnees etc and instigated rebellion, Sri Akal Takht would only have had a few Akali Nihangs looking after it, not a whole Dal. To prove who was in charge at the time of SSS storming would not be hard to prove historically.

[singh2]

shaheediyan, on Aug 27 2009, 12:15 PM, said:

Which comments are ridiculous Bhai Sahib - the ones regarding Singh Sabhas removal of the age old Budda Dal Jathedaari and parkash of Dasmesh Pitas Bani from Akaal Takht, or the hero worship of the Singh Sabha members that performed such a sacrilegious act?

The above story is common amongst Dal Panth - not all history is recorded, esp when the British educated Singh Sabhiyas were the ones that were controlling the writing of Sikh history up until relatively recent times .

I am referring to the comments made by tony that Nihung singhs jathedari was removed by akalis. In my opinion it was british who were controlling akal takhat through their sarb rah that time. If you see after sikhs lost to British there is hardly any mention of akal takhat jathedar.

[Matheen]

singh2, on Aug 27 2009, 03:30 PM, said:

In my opinion it was british who were controlling akal takhat through their sarb rah that time. If you see after sikhs lost to British there is hardly any mention of akal takhat jathedar.

True, that is why the Mahants were able to install idols etc.

[drawrof]

The idols were on the parkarma of the deray....they weren't 'in' darbar sahib from what I've read. These idols were in the 'bungay'...the ones we do ardaas for all the time.

This poses some really interesting questions as to why they would be there and then what people believed.....

[dalsingh101]

drawrof, on Aug 27 2009, 07:35 PM, said:

The idols were on the parkarma of the deray....they weren't 'in' darbar sahib from what I've read. These idols were in the 'bungay'...the ones we do ardaas for all the time.

This poses some really interesting questions as to why they would be there and then what people believed.....

We can't discount that we are likely to have had periods of laxity (for whatever reason) and periods of what I would describe as "dawning". Just because idols were there for a time doesn't mean they always had been. Plus, yes, maybe for period Sikhs were quite relaxed about such stuff. The period we are talking about is one where many important Sikhs seem to have put much more emphasis on politics and military affairs than religious doctrine or ideology. Maharajah Ranjit Singh is the prime example.

Edited by dalsingh101, 27 August 2009 - 08:01 PM.

[singh2]

Quote

You stated that the Akalis committed a secrilegious act but that depends on who you think should be in charge of Akal Takht. My view is that the Misls allowed the Nihangs to control the Akal Takht but in the changed times of the Sikhs being under British rule, the Khalsa Panth had every right to rethink the question of who should be in charge of Akal Takht. Do not judge the SGPC and Akalis pre-Badal to the ones who run the SGPC now.

It is ridiculous to think that Akalis who braved the bullets of mahant Narain or who were willing to lie on the railway tracks at Panja sahib to stop a train would not have the courage to evict the Nihangs from Akal Ta

It is amazing how some people are expert at subverting sikh history. Who were misls. They were themselves Nihungs. Sardar Baghel singh, nawab kapur singh were jathedars of sikhs and wee jathedars of Akal Takhats as well.

When gurudwara reform movement started there were no akalis. It is a mistake to call lachhman singH dharowali, Kartar singh jhabar as akalis. Akali name was coined afterwards. many of those who took part in Gurudwara reform movement were nihungs themsleves.

[tonyhp32]

shaheediyan, on Aug 27 2009, 07:04 AM, said:

"Just because the story is current amongst Nihangs does not make it true. As Matheen said, how is it that Nihangs are virtually killed off by British shoot on sight orders and then a few decades later there is a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht. Sanatan history never adds"

Funny how you change your beliefs when they suit you! You normally hold that the Nihang removal history is made up. Says it all.

I am not changing my beliefs just pointing out how ridiculous and unconsistent sanatan stories are.

From what I have read especially from a book by a contemporary just after the episode of the low castes being refused their offerings by the priests of Durbar Sahib and the hukam being taken from Guru Granth Sahib, the low castes and their supporters then took their offering to Akla Takht. The priests at Akal Takht also ran off. The Akalis then took over Akal Takht and did not interfare with the running of the Takht. Twenty five Akalis were nominated to look after the Akal Takht. The British district commissioner summoned the Sarbrah, the priests and the Akali leaders to his residence which the priests failed the attend. The priests then instigated the Nihangs from the nearby choani and tried to use them against the Akalis. As always the Nihangs were always willing to be used by anti-Sikhs forces against the Panth. The Nihangs came to Amritsar and were going to attack the Akalis. Baba Kehar Singh of Patti was able to convince the Nihangs to allow the Akalis to remain in possession until a congregation of the Panth could take place and also to condemn the priests for leaving the Takht. Some weeks later at Diwali a few Nihangs tried to attack the Takht and dislodge the Akalis and again Baba Kehar Singh tried to dissuage them but this time they would not relent. It was then that the leader of the Akali Jatha ( I assume Kartar Singh Jhabbar) challenged the Nihangs who then withdrew. Another attack was made of the Takht in December of the same year, just after the British government had arrested the main Akali leaders, when unknown persons dressed as sadhus attacked pilgrims at the Akal Takht and tried to dislodge the few Akalis there.. These Sadhus were beaten back by the few Akalis and pilgrims and handed over to the Police outside the complex. One of the Sadhus died a few days later from his wounds.

From the above it can be seen that Nihangs had no role in the running of the Akal Takht and its running during the rule of the British was entrusted to priests under the control of the Sarbrah.

So Neo's story is like most made up sanatan stories is false.