chatanga1

then why make the assertion that the khatris descendend of Guru Kul were leading the panth? hold on there. you havent been thrown off this forum like you have from some others. or maybe you could be right in that the other logical forums fathomed your logic, and couldnt live with themselves.

i was looking at this site as Bhooliya mentioned it in another post. Saw this, it is really interesting stuff, with panjabi poetry in gurmukhi and shahmukhi etc. http://apnaorg.com/poetry/puran/ for Qissa Puran Bhagat by Qadir Yaar.(urdu). http://www.apnaorg.com/books/gurmukhi/se-harfiyan-qadar-yar/book.php?fldr=book for Hari Singh Nalwa by Qadir Yaar.(punjabi).

The social universe of the Sikhs at that time was defined by, what was described as ‘Sanatan Sikh tradition’ – primarily a priestly religion. Giani Pratap Singh, later the Head Priest at the Golden Temple, noted that the Mazhabis were forbidden to enter the Golden Temple for worship; their offering of karah prasad was not accepted and the Sikhs denied them access to public wells and other utilities (Pratap Singh 1933:146-47, 156-57). When a group of Rahtia Sikhs tried to enter the Temple in the summer of the year 1900, “the manager of the sacred establishment, Sardar Jawala Singh, ordered their arrest. The reformist Sikhs who accompanied them were abused and finally beaten up. . . Because one of the defining characteristics of a sacred precinct, in the eyes of the Sanatan Sikhs, was its ritual purity” (cf.Oberoi:1994:107). Harjot Oberoi cites from an “authoritative manual” – Khalsa Dharam Sastra of 1914 – which laid down that the members of the untouchable groups (like the Mazhabi, Rahtia and Ramdasia Sikhs) did not have the right to go beyond the fourth step in the Golden Temple and the members of the fourfold varnas including Nai, chippe (sic), Jhivar, (sudra sub castes) were instructed not to mix with persons belonging to the untouchable castes. Those who were guilty of breaking caste rules were classified as patit and shunned by civil society”. (ibid.106-107) The organisation of Khalsa Brotherhood was very active in converting the untouchable castes to Sikhism through ritual baptism. The matters came to a head when a group of newly baptised Sikhs from the low castes went to the Golden Temple to make their offering of karah prasad at the beginning of the Gurdwara Reform Movement in 1920. According to Pratap Singh, thousands of enthusiasts, including professors and students of Khalsa College Amritsar, joined in a clash with the Pujaris (Priests) who had refused to accept the offering, forcing the latter to flee. However, it did not seem to bring any noticeable change. Overall the Singh Sabha Movement devoted more attention to bringing more and more numbers of the low castes into the Khalsa Sikh fold and opening of schools and colleges. “Though removal of untouchability was also a part of this movement, but the amount of attention which was paid to the opening of schools and colleges, was not given to this aspect” (Pratap Singh 1933: 145). Thereafter, the engagements relating to the Akali struggle for liberation of Gurdwaras 1920-25, “did not leave the time for removal of untouchability” singh sabha did some good, which is much overlooked. and not all about the so-called sanantan sikh mat was good.

and which varn do rajputs belong to? Rajputs are a part of the khatri varn just as sodhis and bedis are, so Baba Banda Singh Ji is a Rajput of Khatri varn. whats the mystery? can you name any sikh khatri political leaders in the era that you are refering to? what prominence did M. Ranjit Singh give the Guru's descendants ?

the word sikh may have meant that, but through evolution and revolution, it has come to mean MORE than that. I dont think that any hindus would have a problem accepting that. History is witness to this. just as the words hindu, meant people of the indus, but now means those who profess the hindu religion. No mystery. if the hindus were a buffer between both paths, doesnt that mean that sikh were equal between both hindiu and muslim paths? way before the reform movement, why did the Sikhs rule and create their own states while the sikhs were still sanatan?

only when it suits the hindu society. that is irrefutable also.

It means you dont know what you're talking about. Baba Banda Singh was the last khatri leader of the Panth. After Baba Ji, came Darbara Singh, Kapur Singh, Jassa Singh and so on. how many of these were khatris? the reform didnt happen till 200 years after, so how did the khatris remain the "traditional leaders"?

hold on please. You dismissed listening to katha of Kirtam Naam of shabd in Aag Guru, saying that it was from singh sabhians, and therefore not dependable as Singh Sabhians have an "agenda".

there was NO district in which sikhs were a majority. the british did encourage the sikhs to prepare a case for a sikh country, but the sikhs knew that this was impossible as they had no majority in any district thru panjab the memeoirs of the last civil servants of the raj, reveal that the sikhs had accepted or at least relied on the congress promise of an aurtonomous state within indias border.

changing traditions.it wa unheard of for a bride to dance at her wedding about a 15 years ago.

udasi's today beleive that Baba Sri Chand started udasi samprdaye? lol. recheck your facts. if you beleive that you know nothing about them. nirmala's mission was to learn vedic texts, not that these had any knowledge that wasnt in Aad or Dasam Guru, but not to represent gurmat as an ang of hindu religion. so the treatment of shudras in the other 3 yugs is still dharma in this yug? and we should follow the rightouesness that has been the example? what about dharma that represents unrighteousness? is that eternal?

why is garlic forbidden to sadhus?

firstly, the todays udasis dont even recognise their founder anymore! and the nirmalas look at everything thru vedant goggles. Im sure there are exception to these, so i apologise for the generalisation about both samprdayes. Sorry. now harjas kaur, can you make your mind up! you first said that dharma is eternal and doesnt change, and now you say the requirements of dharma change in every age. how is that possible is dharma is eternal?

not long ago we had a shia who "proved" that langar was a persian concept which was brought to india. if the vaishnavs did it, it didnt catch on very well did it? Brahmans complaining to the moghals about the Gurus preaching a new path disregarding the teachings of the sanskrit texts etc and making every varna sit together to eat. Even at the time of Guru Gobind Singh, the warriors refused to take amrit with the lower castes. The vaishnavs probably only started free kitchens or vaishnavs im thinking. Sikhi rejects hath yog. the yog that gurbani talks about is not the same as this.

udasi are a joke. nirmale not far behind. and if avtars are particaular to yugs then why arent their teachings? like i said many times, if Gita wasthe text for kalyug there was no need for Guru Nanak to take birth, and reveal new scriptures, if the ld ones still held the greta knowledge. sanatan means most ancient, not eternal. and ram in naam is not the same as ramchander.

you sure about that? or could it be the Param Ishwar? The first or original Ishwar, Waheguru. LIke Param Atma, the Original or Great Soul? Vishnu, Shiv, Ganesh, Suraj and I cant rememeber the 5th!, were also known as Ishwar. (by the hindus only)

hopefully most if not all Sikhs will know that fordcapri is the same.

So the hindus recognise Guru Nanak as Avatar of Vishnu, and the Avatar of Kalyug? Dharma has changed actually. Bhagwan Ram Chanders dharma was to kill shudra who did jap-tap. Guru Ji's dharma was to say that my wars are won because of them. God has not changed, but Dharam has.

Thanks for your support.

what makes you make such a a bold statement? This issue is settled in Japji Sahib Ji.

absolutely. If you want to understand Gurbani then you have to go a little deeper. If what you have posted is the dharma for this yug, then what was the need for Guru Nanak to take birth? ANd if he was born to restore dharma, why not retsore hindu/sanatan dharma which was in the 3 yugs before?

ok. let the fun begin. i had a similiar experience when i went to darbar sahib for the 1st time in my life in 1995. those things you mention etc. but i didnt see anything that looked male or female. But i had a feeling that i had come "home".

Harjas Kaur Ji, You are pushing a tired argument in re-posting the above shabd from 1082. I honestly feel that you have no idea of the shabd, and its relation to the subject. You are mistaking this as refering to the devi/devtas, but it isnt. I really suggest you act on the link i gave you. The idea that the word "Ram" or "Krishan" can ONLY refer to the avtaars is what is creating confusion. In Gurbani, metaphors, and imagery are used, and sometimes can be very difficult to understand. Only people fully versed in this knowledge can expound it, otherwise you will have the Hindu Sants (respectfully) who only know part of Gurbani, because they have not had access to the greater knowledge, who push their limited views of what Gurbani means. ie you have posted that as men worshipped lower Gods, they obtained lower rewards. here, people who only have lower limited knowledge of gurbani, give lower or incomplete meanings of gurbani. As it is said, " a half-truths can damage more than a lie..." As you cant even distinguish between Singh Sabha and Samprdaye's I would really suggest that you give it some serious thought. Sant Gurbachan Singhs first schooling was of the Vedic Holy Texts, years before he even got onto studying Gurbani. To label all thoughts not relating to your views as singh sabha whitewash is just riduculous.

an experience with the spirit world left me with no doubt, of life after this world.

Harjas Kaur Ji. that shabad you asked for the meaning of. i have listened to the katha of this shabad from Snat Gurbachan Singh. It was amazing katha, and if anything i wish to thank you for making me get off my fat backside and listen to this katha. The depth of the katha is truly amazing, and the words of Sant ji, i cannot translate into english cos me duz not have the budhi to. so i am going to request that you may listen to it instead : http://www.gurmatveechar.com/katha.php click on puratan katha, then Sant Gurbachan Singh, then Guru Granth Sahib folder, then vol 12 and it is page 1082. I was listening to it last night, but i wont share what i felt, until you have heard it yourself, as i would like to hear your views on it first. hope you dont mind. now, going back to your signature. there are many pauris in japji sahib, which were discussion between siddhs and Guru. The line that you have posted, is an answer to the siddhs on who Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Guru is. His Guru is the Guru of the Tri-Dev, not the Tri-Dev themselves, as the rest of Japji Sahib says time and time again that the Tri-Dev sing HIS praises, not their own. for clearer understanding of this Giani Thakur Singh has given good explanation on the Japji Sahib katha, and you will also learn the difference between OM and OMKAAR. you have insinuated that this katha is of singh sabha mentality, therefore it is not worth much, you are mistaken if you think that the samprdayes have changed their explanations of Gurbani just cos of the sabha. looking on Srigranth.org website, this is from the Faridkot wala teeka, which was done by nirmalas. Now I know your gurmukhi isnt fluent so ask if you have any probs reading this: ਗੁਰੂ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਹੀ (ਈਸਰੁ) ਸਿਵਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ (ਗੋਰਖੁ) ਬਿਸਨ ਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ (ਬਰਮਾ) ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਜੀ (ਮਾ) ਲੱਛਮੀ ਜੀ (ਈ) ਸੁਰਸਤੀ ਜੀ ਹੂਈ ਹੈ ਵਾ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਸਰਬ ਦੇਵ ਰੂਪ ਹੈਂ ਈਸਰ ਕਾ ਗੁਨੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਸਿੱਖੋਂ ਕਾ ਅਗ੍ਯਾਨੁ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਕਾ ਗੁਣ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਸੁਭ ਗੁਣੋਂ ਕੀ ਪਾਲਣਾ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਆਦਿ ਗੁਨ ਉਤਪੰਨ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਇਸੀ ਭਾਂਤ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਅਵਗੁਣੋਂ ਕਾ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਲੱਛਮੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰਕਰ ਦੈਵੀ ਸੰਪਦਾ ਕੇ ਗੁਣੋ ਕਾ ਦਾਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਸੁਰੱਸ੍ਵਤੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਾ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ॥ ਪ੍ਰਸ਼ਨ: ਐਸੇ ਗੁਰੋਂ ਕੀ ਮਹਿਮਾ ਔਰ ਭੀ ਕਹੀਏ॥ ਉੱਤਰ: