Niranjana

Mithr, “ Now you yourself deviated from the point of this thread which was first and foremost about Rajput Sikhs. But you decided to add some your views which were targeted towards Jatts and had absolutely NOTHING to do with Rajput Sikhs, and if I replied about that you are now telling me to not deviate from the point at hand and stick to the point†Actually no, my comments concerning the Jatts were raised with specific reference to Gyani Gyan Singh (a Dulutt Jatt) and his claims with regard to Bhai Mani Singh (who is mentioned in the opening comments on several occasions in this thread). “The whole point of Jatts "hijacking" Sikh history is reminiscent of Bahadur also claiming that Jatts have hijacked Sikhi, Sikh history. It seems very fashionable now days to condemn and demonise Jatts†Let’s leave Bahadur out of this – his views are clearly motivated by his experience with certain persons who happened to be Jatts, hence are highly influenced by personal matters and are not necessarily devoid of a ‘vendetta’. In any event, he has been banned from this site and is largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand – just because Bahadur said something, doesn’t necessarily make it correct (which sadly a lot of his ex-chele are now struggling to accept) or incorrect (which all his antagonists fail to note). He is hardly the first person to have made reference to this issue and it is hardly a new and fashionable issue – it’s been around for a long time!!! You are simply looking to ways of appealing to emotion and authority as means of “Jews have this type of self loathing phenomenon as well. Jews like the famous chess master Bobby Fischer is famous for being a self hating Jew, similarly Sikhs and especially Sikhs belonging to Jatt people have self hating Sikhs and self hating Jatts. Some how everything that tom dick and harry did can be blamed on the Jatts, anything that can demonise Jatts is okay†Please grow up and stop being so damn emotional. We are talking about a very specific period, namely from Banda Singh Bahadur onwards to the present day and we are hardly looking to “blame it all on the Jattsâ€, but it’s funny to see how centuries of ‘blame on the bahman’ still continue in every possible manner, yet one significant person (me) raising a few issues about Jatts, gets turned into a ‘self-loathing phenomenon’ and some sort of conspiracy against Jatts! If self-critique is not possible, then fine, I’ll shut up and we can allow the future to unfold and those from outside of our community (be that the Sikh community or in the case of our hyper emotional members, the Jatt community) to have free reign when the reality about Jatts unfolds and these people certainly won’t have anything holding them back from twisting the whole thing into something much bigger. “The men who wrote primary Sikh sources did not have some weird conspiracy in their mind to turn Sikhi into a Jatt dominated Dharm. It so happened that Punjabi Jatts and even Tarkhans took to Sikhi more than other castes especially after the Guru period†Mithr, you are obviously not acquainted with primary sikh sources or even latter ones, otherwise you would not have made the above statement. Since you mention it, Tarkhans took to Sikhi in large numbers during, not after, the Guru period, perhaps re-read the life stories of Guru Nanak Dev Ji and you can find evidence for yourself of key figures who came from this background. “It was never a mass movement of all Punjabis as modern leftist leaning Sikh writers are trying to portray. Sikhs during misl period were a mere 7% of Punjab’s population, and during MahRaja Ranjit Singh’s period Sikhs were about 15% of Punjab. The Sikh movement was always a small minority of men, never a mass peasant movement†Exactly! Try explaining that to the pro-Jatt’s about their Khalstani wet dream. “Infact even most Punjabi Jatts are either Muslims(now in West Punjab) or Hindus(Haryanvi). Jatt Sikhs are even a minority amongst Jatts!†And what does this have to do with those Jatts who became Sikhs? The fact is that on the social-caste ladder, Hindu and Muslim Jatts remain largely in their ‘sudra/achoot’ setting, whereas amongst the Sikhs, the Jatts are somehow deemed to be an upper caste largely because them wrangling political power and being patronised by the British with land hand outs. “Whoever Guru Jee willed to become a Sikh, he became a Sikh, caste had nothing to do with itâ€. This is a very nice emotional statement, trying to disguise itself as a theological argument. If this is the case, then why do all you religious Sikhs complain about Sikhs in the world over not ‘following Gurmat’ or the ‘maryada’, surely this too is ‘Guru Jee’s will’. I have raised the basic issues here - those who wish to take from it can research things for themselves or they can continue to live in their pro-Jatt fantasies. The rest of us, will continue to work our way through the teachings of the Gurus and seek to focus on their message and teachings.

Mithr, “ Now you yourself deviated from the point of this thread which was first and foremost about Rajput Sikhs. But you decided to add some your views which were targeted towards Jatts and had absolutely NOTHING to do with Rajput Sikhs, and if I replied about that you are now telling me to not deviate from the point at hand and stick to the point†Actually no, my comments concerning the Jatts were raised with specific reference to Gyani Gyan Singh (a Dulutt Jatt) and his claims with regard to Bhai Mani Singh (who is mentioned in the opening comments on several occasions in this thread). “The whole point of Jatts "hijacking" Sikh history is reminiscent of Bahadur also claiming that Jatts have hijacked Sikhi, Sikh history. It seems very fashionable now days to condemn and demonise Jatts†Let’s leave Bahadur out of this – his views are clearly motivated by his experience with certain persons who happened to be Jatts, hence are highly influenced by personal matters and are not necessarily devoid of a ‘vendetta’. In any event, he has been banned from this site and is largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand – just because Bahadur said something, doesn’t necessarily make it correct (which sadly a lot of his ex-chele are now struggling to accept) or incorrect (which all his antagonists fail to note). He is hardly the first person to have made reference to this issue and it is hardly a new and fashionable issue – it’s been around for a long time!!! You are simply looking to ways of appealing to emotion and authority as means of “Jews have this type of self loathing phenomenon as well. Jews like the famous chess master Bobby Fischer is famous for being a self hating Jew, similarly Sikhs and especially Sikhs belonging to Jatt people have self hating Sikhs and self hating Jatts. Some how everything that tom dick and harry did can be blamed on the Jatts, anything that can demonise Jatts is okay†Please grow up and stop being so damn emotional. We are talking about a very specific period, namely from Banda Singh Bahadur onwards to the present day and we are hardly looking to “blame it all on the Jattsâ€, but it’s funny to see how centuries of ‘blame on the bahman’ still continue in every possible manner, yet one significant person (me) raising a few issues about Jatts, gets turned into a ‘self-loathing phenomenon’ and some sort of conspiracy against Jatts! If self-critique is not possible, then fine, I’ll shut up and we can allow the future to unfold and those from outside of our community (be that the Sikh community or in the case of our hyper emotional members, the Jatt community) to have free reign when the reality about Jatts unfolds and these people certainly won’t have anything holding them back from twisting the whole thing into something much bigger. “The men who wrote primary Sikh sources did not have some weird conspiracy in their mind to turn Sikhi into a Jatt dominated Dharm. It so happened that Punjabi Jatts and even Tarkhans took to Sikhi more than other castes especially after the Guru period†Mithr, you are obviously not acquainted with primary sikh sources or even latter ones, otherwise you would not have made the above statement. Since you mention it, Tarkhans took to Sikhi in large numbers during, not after, the Guru period, perhaps re-read the life stories of Guru Nanak Dev Ji and you can find evidence for yourself of key figures who came from this background. “It was never a mass movement of all Punjabis as modern leftist leaning Sikh writers are trying to portray. Sikhs during misl period were a mere 7% of Punjab’s population, and during MahRaja Ranjit Singh’s period Sikhs were about 15% of Punjab. The Sikh movement was always a small minority of men, never a mass peasant movement†Exactly! Try explaining that to the pro-Jatt’s about their Khalstani wet dream. “Infact even most Punjabi Jatts are either Muslims(now in West Punjab) or Hindus(Haryanvi). Jatt Sikhs are even a minority amongst Jatts!†And what does this have to do with those Jatts who became Sikhs? The fact is that on the social-caste ladder, Hindu and Muslim Jatts remain largely in their ‘sudra/achoot’ setting, whereas amongst the Sikhs, the Jatts are somehow deemed to be an upper caste largely because them wrangling political power and being patronised by the British with land hand outs. “Whoever Guru Jee willed to become a Sikh, he became a Sikh, caste had nothing to do with itâ€. This is a very nice emotional statement, trying to disguise itself as a theological argument. If this is the case, then why do all you religious Sikhs complain about Sikhs in the world over not ‘following Gurmat’ or the ‘maryada’, surely this too is ‘Guru Jee’s will’. I have raised the basic issues here - those who wish to take from it can research things for themselves or they can continue to live in their pro-Jatt fantasies. The rest of us, will continue to work our way through the teachings of the Gurus and seek to focus on their message and teachings.

"You go to Guru Sahib, do ardas, get a hukamnama and follow it. To sit around and whine that becuase you're not getting something right now means that the Guru is not powerful blah blah is inane" Thanks for your sermon, however it is you who have misunderstood the situation, particularly with your closing comment: "To sit around and whine that becuase you're not getting something right now means that the Guru is not powerful blah blah is inane" a) I am not whining certainly not complaining about what I'm 'getting' or not 'getting' c) in no way am I suggesting that Guru Sahib is not powerful You are simply unable to read simple english without reacting in an emotional rage - your response above is clearly indicative of a 'straw-man' fallacy, where you have constructed an argument that I never presented and then proceeded to knock that down. Save your sermons for the unconverted.

Shaheediyan and Amardeep, I am not wishing to getting into a futile debate as to what constitutes the Mool Mantra (the Sikh Rehit Maryada has made its stance clear on this matter and various sampradhas have done likewise), what I am asking is simply the use of the terms "Bij", "Mool" and "Mala" Mantras within the context of Sikhi. The quote that you provided from Gurbani does not necessarily address the issue, Gurbani also mentions 'bij' mantra in Sukhmani Sahib, however neither this reference or the one provided by you necessarily correlates with the what Neo or 3HO assign to be the 'bij' or 'mala' mantras of the Sikhs. If anything, Gurbani and Sikh texts (i.e Bhai Gurdas di Varan) would seem to suggest that such references in Gurbani all boil back down to "naam" and hence the "Gurmantra". Appreciate your views.

Shaheediyan and Amardeep, I am not wishing to getting into a futile debate as to what constitutes the Mool Mantra (the Sikh Rehit Maryada has made its stance clear on this matter and various sampradhas have done likewise), what I am asking is simply the use of the terms "Bij", "Mool" and "Mala" Mantras within the context of Sikhi. The quote that you provided from Gurbani does not necessarily address the issue, Gurbani also mentions 'bij' mantra in Sukhmani Sahib, however neither this reference or the one provided by you necessarily correlates with the what Neo or 3HO assign to be the 'bij' or 'mala' mantras of the Sikhs. If anything, Gurbani and Sikh texts (i.e Bhai Gurdas di Varan) would seem to suggest that such references in Gurbani all boil back down to "naam" and hence the "Gurmantra". Appreciate your views.

"I should maybe have written "sceptical" ior "parhe -likhe" instead of "educated". " If you say so.

"I don't know answer to your first question. I am not that knowledgeable how mangalcharan frameworks in sri guru granth sahib ji..may be amritpal singh veer ji would be better position to shed some light on this question". Amritpal Singh is no longer here on this forum, however there are many here with the good fortune to have sangat of Sants and Babas in the know and who make frequent reference this item, please could the appropriate people bring forth their understanding. "As far how bij, mool, mala mantra fits into this framework of maryada is simple. When we take amrit, we are also advised to do mool mantra jap and along with japji sahib(mala mantra) which is one of the five banis. As far as jaap of bij is concerned, then that could also done as additional patt just like sukhmani sahib on side or asa di var..more the better" Neo, yes we are told to recite Jap Ji Sahib as part of our nitnem, although it is not referred to as the 'mala-mantra' and whilst reference is made to the mool mantra, it is the Gurmantra which we are required to 'jap' and it is the practice of the Gurmantra which Gurbani supports. No where in the Amrit Sanchar is reference made to the 'bij mantra', although we are told to recite Sukhmani Sahib, Asa di Var etc as time permits/our efforts expand/etc. So where do these terms 'bij-mantra', 'mool-mantra', 'mala-mantra', 'gaytri-mantra' etc come from? 3HO incidentally have their own understanding of what constitutes the 'bij' and 'gaytri' mantras...

Shaheediyan: "The reference to XYZ giving amrit to so many is not actually refering to the absence of the Panj Pyare etc it is refering to the Baba's parchaar/smaagam. Unfortunately some overly fanatical chelai like to keep records and and promote the numbers of people saved to date...." Yes, indeed, but as you say it's a feather in XYZ Baba's turban, so to speak, to quote long lists of 'saved souls' yet the simple statement made on the Batra website (which clearly refers to the same underlying message that Baba Mehtab Singh Bance's sermons inspired several members of the sangat to take Amrit, then it is suddenly questioned!). btw, nice pic of the late Bhai Avtar Singh.

Mithr, "bro the level of hostility you have displayed here for Jatts is really too much" By what measure do you say it is 'too much'? Please quantify? I haven't referred to Jatts in any derogatory names (although go to any Jatt website and you'll frequently find them making reference to non-Jatts using a whole host of derogatory and petty names), rather I have simply highlighted historical and/or social issues. "It seems, everone is allowed to display hatred and a level of hostility for a caste, all except for the Jatts, because if the Jatts do it then they are Jatt supremecists". Again, please show me where anyone is displaying 'hatred' for a caste. You make the assumption that I myself am not a Jatt. "As for Dalit propaganda on www.abmedkartimes.com, I've ready written about this on another thread. Dalit propaganda distorts the facts to suit their personal pro Dalit agenda, especially the Ambedkarites, who are basically communists" Yes, I am aware of this - however it does nothing to detract from my earlier comments. Please stick to the topic at hand. "You talk about Giani Gyan Singh being "intellectually dishonest" because "his works are replete with Jatt Supremicist language and notions". That's true of Dalit propaganda too. Have you ever read their version of history???" Yes, I am aware of this too. Again, stick to the point. The Dalit propaganda is a separate issue, we are talking about Sikh history and the manner in which it has been hijacked by pro-Jatt authors over the past 200 years wanting to make the "Jatt-Sikh" identity the only "Sikh-identity". "Just read Dalit propaganda by Dr Ambedkar, his book on Indian history is nothing but distorted facts to make Dalits look supreme and make the so called high castes look extremely evil" Again, this is a separate issue - I fail to see how this makes Gyani Gyan Singh's works acceptable! If you really want to make a relevant comparison, perhaps look at the book "Dalit Sikh Itihas" where a whole host of lies are spewed out to make Dalit Sikhs look superior - again, this is shameless propaganda, but let's look at what has caused it to occur... "Sadly, alot of Khalistanis like Dr Sangat Singh make references to Dalit Propaganda because the main target for their propaganda are the usual suspects i.e. the Brahmins, and Hinduism!" Exactly, when it suits them, the Khalistanis will make use of anything, including drug-money to fund their terrorism (as one infamous Khalistani was alledged to assert - "as long as it doesn't get to our children it's okay!")

"please correct me, as I have not taken amrit, but don't the Panj Pyare and Guru Ji have authority to baptise people?" Yes, but how frequently do we hear the same comment passed about Sant so and so Singh, Baba XYZ Singh or Bhai Blah Blah Singh...of course, no one bats an eyelid when these statements are passed!

"Luckily, there are still people around (some very educated) who witnessed the events first hand and confirm what happened" Being 'very educated' does not necessarily mean anything in of itself. It is very common to find 'very educated' surgeons, lawyers, doctors, engineers in the West who get duped into following the likes of Sai Baba. (For the record, I am not comparing Sai Baba with Sant Ishar Singh, the reference is made solely with respect to so-called 'educated' people).

"according to Giani Gian Singh Dullat [1822-1921], author of the Panth Parkash, of a Dullat Jatt family of Kamboval village (now extinct)" Again, I am going to deviate from Shaheediyan's comments for the time being. I have made reference to that Great Sanatan Sikhi Scholar Gyani Gyan Singh on several occasions on this forum - his works are replete with Jatt Supremicist language and notions - so hardly surprising that he attempts to link himself with one of the greatest Khalsa heroes (Bhai Mani Singh) to aid propaganda of his intellectually dishonest work. So whilst Shaheediyan, I wholly agree that Bhai Mani Singh was indeed a Khalsa and that is what we should focus on - unfortunately, the last 300 years have seen so much of our history re-written and abused by pro-Jatt authors that it is only natural for non-Jatt communities to begin to co-ordinate and establish themselves independently, particularly as they experience upward social mobility (usually as a result of their own efforts rather than by sheer numbers and reliance on hand outs from the former British Raj). Right or wrong, non-Jatt communities having had their names maligned for centuries and being continuously told that "Jatts have done so much for Sikhism...Jatts are the backbone of Sikhism...Jatts are the only true Sikhs...blah blah", are we really surprised that non-Jatt communities are now so keen to emphasise their groups, whether or not this aligns itself with the tenents of the Gurus message. It remains to date a common practice in India and abroad, that a non-Jatt shedding his Kesh (particularly if he comes from the so-called 'choora' or 'chamar' background) is no longer regarded a Sikh, however it is perfectly fine for a Jatt to be clean shaven and still refer to himself as a "Sardar" and/or "Singh". These maybe trivial issues for many of us, who in the comfort of our western lifestyles can happily seek to aspire to the words of the Gurus teachings whilst hearing sermons at the Gurdwaras about the corrupt Brahmins of yesteryears, however for those non-Jatts living in India on lands 'owned' by the Jatts, the day to day situation is not so accomodating: http://www.ambedkartimes.com/page6.html

"Ikongkar is bij(seed) of sri guru granth sahib ji, mool mantar is root of sri guru granth sahib ji, japji sahib is summary of whole sri guru granth sahib ji and rest of contents in sri guru granth sahib ji is gyan further explained based on bij, mool and japji sahib(mala mantar)" Using this explanation, if the Mool Mantra is the basic (mool) form (or 'root' as you like to call it) of the Guru Granth Sahib and Ikongkar the bij(seed) mantra, please could you explain how the manglacharan "Ek Ongkar Sat Gur Prashad" fits into this framework. Also, as per Rehit for an Amritdhari Sikh, the mantra for contemplation and 'jaap' is the Gurmantra ("Vahiguru") which alongside the 5 nitnem banis forms the basic daily practice of an Amritdhari Sikh. This being said, how do items such as the 'bij', 'mool' and 'mala' mantra fit into this framework. Thanks, Niranjana.

"problem is that alot of Sikhs have a Hindu phobia because of which they try their best in distencing Sikhi from Indic religions while trying their best to portray Sikhi as an off shoot of Semitic religions" Yes indeed, it is all too familiar to hear (western born Sikhs, particularly from Canada and the UK) argue until blue in the face that Sikhi is not an Indian Religion and that Sikhs are distinct from Indians - what utter trash! As you point out, other 'Abrahamic' communities like Muslims and in particular, Christians in India are having a field day with their evangelical conversion efforts - I recall an interesting thread not too long ago about Christians singling out "Jatt Sikhs" in particular - it's not even been a hundred years since the British left India and Punjabi Sikhs have already forgotten their not so distant past owing to their Khalistani wet-dream fantasies fuelling more and more Hindu phobia! Christian Missionaries have always had a field day with Sikhs - back during the Raj, it took 4 affluent Sikhs and a Granthi from Amritsar to convert to Christianity before Sikh leaders took note of this situation! A Granthi from Amritsar - what a trophy that must have been for the evangelical Christians of the time!

Mithr, That probably is an extreme example, however even (Sikh) authors from the 20th century, many of whom are well respected and not necessarily seeking to make Sikhi appear as an offshoot of Christiantiy or any ‘Abrahamic’ tradition, but owing to their educational and cultural surroundings end up explaining things in this manner. This is only natural in part, since we all do this – I come from a certain form of schooling further to which have developed a certain form of analysis and behaviour, owing to effectively my sex, social class and employment which will influence my take on things – I am sure in the future (which remains unknown, no matter what we make think otherwise) people will find my outlook amusing. What is important here is to understand the position of Gurmat Sidhant and what Sikh writers steeped in the Sikh tradition produced in their understanding of Sikh scriptures. The notions of God, Guru and Gurbani are of paramount importance, unfortunately many sermons delivered in Gurdwaras fail to adequately describe these for us.