Singh Sabha Movement?

[navjot2]

put it this way

BEFORE SINGH SABHA:

sikhs had secure sense of sikhi

sikhs living in harmony with non-sikhs

panjab prosperous and- unlike moghul delhi- progressive

panjab was the LAST place to fall to British, and then mainly due to betrayl by Dogris (non-sikhs)

no such thing as 'pad ched' gurmukhi

respect for tradition- like raag vidya

AFTER SINGH SABHA

so called 'sikhs' indulge in partition riots killing muslims etc- when did this happen before Singh Sabha?

huge paranoia and hysteria amonst sikhs

ideological stagnation of modern sikh mindset

introduction of 'pad ched' gurmukhi, saying lareedar is 'difficult to read' (yeah maybe for English nurtered Missionary School graduates)

loss of tradition, like raag vidya

reinvention of panjabi/gurmukhi to resemble english and hindi language and grammar (i.e. linguistic mutilation).

fixation on outward identity

sepration of people from SGGS, now they need some 'scholar' to help them understand it.

basically Sikhi made to resemble Pseudo-Protestantism, i.e. religion should serve people and not the other way around. so its okay to 'change' things in the name of 'egalitarianism'.

After SIngh Sabha-

Guru Nanak is refered to as a 'reformer' rather than Satguru

Khalsa is seem like some sort of social 'french revolution' type movement rather than a spiritual enitity

Sikhi replaced within Sikhism- has become some sort of morality code rather than Bhakti ghar.

I was reading Katha Amrita (RamaKrishna's biography) a while back in it he says that sadhus/holymen are well respected in wetsern india (i.e. panjab). we're talking 1800s here. can we say that was true after Singh Sabha?

[navjot2]

to whoever said Singh Sabha introduced modern/western historic approach to Sikhi- thats a joke. no western historian respects their work. thats why McLeod pissed them off (because he articulated that).

Perof Sahib Singh and Vir Singh were criminals, Teja Singh was a sensationalist and propgandist.

Singh Sabha= when certain sikhs started trying to act like 'leaders'. You people have made the above type people your leaders.

[navjot2]

Dalsingh101

Singh sabha movement was basically started to arrest conversion of sikhs to christianity and arya samaj. Four sikh students of amritsar had agreed to convert to Christianity and singh sabha took birth after that. Before that arya samaj was converting sikhs by deceit.

Singh sbaha movement did not introduce any new religious concepts in sikhism at all. Our scriptures are guidelines for the philosophy of sikhism. They are not changeable and neither we need to conform to western thought at all.

While singh sabha as a whole did a wonderful work in arresting apostasy and conversion among sikhs Lahore singh sbaha played a traitrous role also. When thakar singh sndhawalia was mobilising sikhs for helping Dalip singh to come to Punjab and retake sikh rule , Lahore singh sabha sided with british and disowned sikh struggle. Of course this did not affect the view of common sikhs about dalip singh but their traitrous attitude is all in history.

this is the kind of rubbish self history written by singh sabha.

so what if four students converted to Christianity? that jutifies starting up a whole rleigious movement? this just shows the hysterical mindset that gave way to Singh Sabha.

At least they had the guts to become Christians rather than these pseudo-Protestant 'Singh' Sabhas

The idea that Hinduism would 'devour' sikhi like a snake was also a British instigation into Sikh mindset.

[navjot2]

also i would not get too excited about accounts by foreigners

if i send you into a foreign country where you dont speak the languag eand they dont speak yours do you think you will be able to give me an accurate description of their way of life etc?

Edited October 8, 2009 by navjot2

[Malwe Da Sher]

AS everyone seems to be accusing each other of making up stories lets look at what the verifiable facts are here.

1. written accounts by British officials and travellers confirm the presence of around 500 Akalis (Nihangs) who served as guards (perehdars of Akal Takht) Travellers accounts also confirm the Nihang presence in Akal Takht whre they not Nihangs reading from their scriptures. Photographs also confirm that Nihangs were the perehdars at the Amritsar complex. Thus the authoritive presence of the Nihangs at Akal Takht is beyond any doubt.

2. As for the movement of Nihangs to Hazoor Sahib out of Punjab - this is verifiable by written accounts, oral accounts and standing monumnets such as Baba Prehlada Singhs shaheedi memorial.

3. As for the Akali LEhar consisting of great warriors etc etc, lets not forget a key leader who dominated the movement for years - a widely recognised ally of the British who caused great destruction within Sikh ideaology. Something you may wish to consider before making amole references to Sikh forces. Thus it would appear the leadership of the Singh Sabha was in the hand of the British, which is unfortunate as the movement largely consisting of good willing Sikhs.

4. Tony the so called contemporary account you have given varies significantly from another so called contemporary account widely propogated on AKJ websites about how their jatha 'kicked' the nihangs out of Akal Takht. They account, written by a member of the Jatha whose party attacked the Nihangs, suggests that It also clearly makes reference to women fighting at the front. Oh dear I think this means you will have to abandon the Singh Sabha consisted of warriors who would never let women fight for them. There were a lot of good Singhs in the Singh Sabha movement who gave a lot of Kurbani but as this highlights there was a more sinister element within also who themselves ackowledge

5. British accounts confirm their hatred for Nihangs and their desire to finish the Nihangs. A mention of the Nihangs features in most British military papers from Punjab -highlighting the scale of their resentment.

6. It is ridiculous to say Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari was conspiring with anti Sikh British forces when he spent a long period of time in Nabha jail for his refusal to collaborate with the BRitish on any level. You can visit Nabha jail to verify this or speak to old members of Budha Dal or Bidhi Chand Dal whose family proudly served the Budha Dal while they were in jail. If you read the work of Giani Kirpal Singh he notes of various occasions when the British tried to bribe Baba Kaladhari to work in their favour - he reefused and went to jail. Bhasauria did all their dirty work and got made Jathedar of Akal Takht immediately after the Budha Dal was 'kicked out' of Akal Takht.

If people want to bring the Nihangs into a discussion they really should at least know the basics of their history. Regardless of the topic Tony like to state two things which he will retreat to when his views are challenged : 'Sanatanists' (whatever that means) make up stories and Baba Santa Singh sided with anti Sikh forces. Your begining to sound like a broken record. People should learn some facts related to the topic at hand before trying to tell others what did and didnt happen.

[HSD1]

The fact is that when we sikhs were in control of the punjab we were a minority who ruled a majority. When we lost the anglo-sikh wars we were just like everyone else in the punjab, except there werent enough of us to count. So this talk of hinduism swallowing up sikhi was a real threat. Some accounts say that the number of sikhs fell by half after the anglo-sikh wars as many people converted back to their ancestor's faith. Those people who scream 'hinduphobia' everytime anything remotely negative is said about hindus/hinduism/hindustan need to go and get a life. Anyway, as people were reluctant to take up arms and recreate the Khalsa Raj, an alternative needed to be found in order to protect sikhi. This is where the Singh Sabha movement came in, with its good and bad side. Unfortunately, it was just a fundamentalist pipe dream as nothing matches having guns, troops and patriotic politicians. As you can see the effects of what happened then still reverberate around the community.

[tonyhp32]

Navjot2,

You are probably the best example of what results when a feeble and weak mind is exposed to sanatan propaganda. You claimed that Prof. Sahib Singh and Bhai Vir Singh were criminals, would you care to back up your claim and are you as I suspect making up for your lack of intellect by making ridiculous statements.

BEFORE SINGH SABHA:

sikhs had secure sense of sikhi

Of course they were, a Sikh could matha tek at a Gurdwara, bow before idols at a Mandir, visit a Sufi khankah and place a chadar there and matha tek there as well as still be a Sikh!

sikhs living in harmony with non-sikhs

Same as they are living in harmony around the world with people of different religion after the Singh Sabha. Although if you are talking about before the British annexation, you might want to note that the Muslim call to prayer was banned in areas of Sikh control. Not that I take that as a negative, our ancestors knew much more about the Muslim mentality than the PC Sikhs of today.

panjab prosperous and- unlike moghul delhi- progressive

No doubt, but the Singh emphesis of education by setting up hundreds of schools made Sikhs one of the most educated communities in Punjab by 1947 far surpassing the Muslims and almost level with the Hindus. Singh Sabha 'criminals' like Bhai Vir Singh were instrumental in setting up Sikh finanacial institutions such as Punjab and Sind bank.

panjab was the LAST place to fall to British, and then mainly due to betrayl by Dogris (non-sikhs)

no such thing as 'pad ched' gurmukhi

respect for tradition- like raag vidya

Pad Ched has happened so get over it. Pad Ched doesn't change the meaning of Gurbani.

AFTER SINGH SABHA

so called 'sikhs' indulge in partition riots killing muslims etc- when did this happen before Singh Sabha?

huge paranoia and hysteria amonst sikhs

Did this violence perchance have anything to do with the fact that 40% of the Sikhs were overnight made homeless and attacked from all sides by people wanting them to migrate and leave their ancestral lands or just sit quietly and be murdered. This is the first time I have seen the partition violence blamed on the Singh Sabha! What great strategy would someone like you have for the Sikhs in 1947? Please enlighten us.

ideological stagnation of modern sikh mindset

Tall claim, care to elaborate?

introduction of 'pad ched' gurmukhi, saying lareedar is 'difficult to read' (yeah maybe for English nurtered Missionary School graduates)

loss of tradition, like raag vidya

reinvention of panjabi/gurmukhi to resemble english and hindi language and grammar (i.e. linguistic mutilation).

fixation on outward identity

sepration of people from SGGS, now they need some 'scholar' to help them understand it.

Get rid of pad ched and the whole world is put to rights! get over yourself, this is the same ideological stagnation that you claim to resent which you are displaying here!

Edited October 9, 2009 by tonyhp32

[tonyhp32]

MDS,

What was required was proof that there was a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht who was a Jathedar there in 1920. When were 500 Nihangs there? Before or after the British annexation? If it was before the annexation then what relevance does this have in discussing an incident in 1920?

So Nihangs went from Punjab to Hazur Sahib, so what. What is being questioned here is the sanatan claim that the British had shoot on sight orders against Nihangs. Although Hazur Sahib was in the control of the Nizam of Hyderabad, the British still have a great deal of influence being the paramount power in its political relationship with that state. The British if they wanted could easily have had the Nizam hand over these Nihangs to them. There elimination so far from Punjab could have been much easier for the British than a shoot on sight order in Punjab given that sanatan claim that ALL Khalsas were Nihangs then potentially the British were issuing shoot on sight orders on every Sikh male!

More conspiracy theories, so the Akali leader was a stooge of the British, so why were the Akalis giving the British such a hard time during the Akali movement? How was is that Santa Singh, for the ease of his master, Indira Gandhi was able to keep his Nihangs aloof from the biggest Panthic movement since the Akali movement but the British puppet Sikh leader couldn't dampen the Akali movement?

What we have here are two varying accounts of an incident. I don't know why AKJ sites claim that their 'jatha' threw out the Nihangs as the AKJ did not exist in 1920. Does the account you refer to just mention women being involved or does it state that a conscious decision was made to use the women to cover the cowardice of the Akalis?

Shoot on sight orders are very different from expressing a desire to finish the Nihangs. As it is not much evidence has been provided for these shoot on sight orders.

Who mentioned Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari? What was mentioned was that Nihangs from their Chaoni at Amritsar were used by the Pujaris/Mahants in an unsuccessful attempt to dislodge the Akalis after their takeover.

If people want to bring the Nihangs into a discussion they really should at least know the basics of their history.

I do wish you would take your own advice. You haven't provided any evidence which disputes the main points of my posts about this incident. Try not to go off at a gradient. I hope since you claim to know more than most about Nihang history you will come back in your next post with the following evidence-;

1. Proof that there was an Nihang Akal Takht jathedar in 1920.

2. The British issued shoot on sight orders against Nihangs after the annexation.

[shaheediyan]

"Although Hazur Sahib was in the control of the Nizam of Hyderabad, the British still have a great deal of influence being the paramount power in its political relationship with that state. The British if they wanted could easily have had the Nizam hand over these Nihangs to them. There elimination so far from Punjab could have been much easier for the British than a shoot on sight order in Punjab given that sanatan claim that ALL Khalsas were Nihangs then potentially the British were issuing shoot on sight orders on every Sikh male!"

No one claimed that all Khalsa were Nihangs, stop sensationalising.

Re the interaction of the British with the Nizam, read Nihang Niddar Singhs book, this whole topic if British/Nihang/Nizam relations with regards to Punjab/Nanded has been covered in great detail with excellent research and references (so you can even bypass your friend Nihang Nidar Singhs analysis if you like).

If you are refering to Nihang Nidar Singhs thoughts when you so loosely use the word Sanatan, then you will be disappointed to know that his description of the word the Khalsa is actually the complete of opposite of what you are claiming.

[navjot2]

"When we lost the anglo-sikh wars we were just like everyone else in the punjab, except there werent enough of us to count. So this talk of hinduism swallowing up sikhi was a real threat."

in what sense was it a real threat? explain how the existance of sikh panth was actually 'threatened'. or cant you discern between 'sikh rule' and sikhs as a community?

"Anyway, as people were reluctant to take up arms and recreate the Khalsa Raj, an alternative needed to be found in order to protect sikhi."

see this is the nonesense talk of a deranged fanatic. the only 'pipe dream (fanstasy)' was that sikhi was threatened and needed protection in the first place. You're the punchline to a joke that English people stop laughing at over 70 years ago.

dear TonyPh, you can only but look up to my 'lack of intellect', hence the resortment to personal slurs.

These Singh Sabha concoted false historys lies etc and we should not be made excuses for. Every single history book of theirs references back to Macauliff. They deserve no respect whatsoever. Dont be stupid and believe that they had any good intention. They didnt. They first created the sense of fear that you people seem to think was real because it was a prerequisite to controlling peoples minds.

Prof Sahib Singh could not even formulate the rules for vyakaran yet presented a work on it!

You people have been so brainwashed that you have basically canonised these people as saints.

Sikhs werent getting first rate education at Khalsa colleges, but at Christian Missionary schools.

Your savagery and lack of education on any material issue shows in your dismissal of Pad Ched. What does Pad Ched represent? Sikh language altered to suit the western mindset in terms of readability- basically repsresntative of the underlying mindset you people adopted. You understand yourself in terms of a westerners mind rather than an intrinsic understanding. You think its ok to even touch a religious text in the name of making it convenient for your english grammar school headset. totally ignoring that that was the natural way of reading it since it was written. you think this is not matter at all? yet you cry that sikhs going to mandirs and sufi shrines is some terrible thing.

p.s. people would disagree that pad ched doesnt alter the meaning.

As for partition- do these homeless sikhs have anythign to do with 'Master' Tara Singh and other self appointed 'leaders of sikhism' running into the middle of Lahore waving their weapons and shouting inciteful nonesense? what was it he was shouting again?

If you want to see ideological stagnation reread you own trash or your brother HSD's crap.

Edited October 11, 2009 by navjot2

[singh2]

People need to get over about role of nihungs in sikh affairs. Nihungs always played a sterling role in sikh affairs. They were incharge of Golden temple ever since Dal khalsa was formed.They being incharge

of Golden Temple is testified by many European travellers.I have a book of V Jacquement a French traveller who came to Punjab in 1831 and wrote about Nihungs being vincharge of Darbar sahib. John Malcolm who attended a gurmatta in 1805 says the same thing in his sketch of sikhs.

I fail to understand why some people are bent upon on distorting role of Nihung sikhs. is it part of their agenda? Personal likes and dislikes should not be used for villifying a respected sect of sikhs.If they show Nihungs in negative role on purpose they should also tell about treachery of lahore singh sabha who sided with British Govt against efforts of maharaja Dalip singh to retake Punjab.

Edited October 9, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

Navjot2

You are proving yourself a bigot by name calling Bhai Veer singh ji who was of saintly nature and was so humble that he never spoke on a stage. This reveals your Hindu mind set against sikhs who tried setting their own in order to protect sikhs from being assimilated by deceitful arya samaji Hindus.

Bhai veer singh ji did a monumental work for sikhism. He is acknowledged by sikhs for that. Stop using derogatory language for Bhai sahib.

[navjot2]

okay sorry for my bad language.

actually there was alot of bad languae in that post you are seeing a heavily edited version.

sikhs arent to do nindya of anyone. so i apologise.

where did 'Hindu mindset' accusation come from? in actual fact you people are fixated with Hindus not me.

[singh2]

okay sorry for my bad language.

actually there was alot of bad languae in that post you are seeing a heavily edited version.

sikhs arent to do nindya of anyone. so i apologise.

where did 'Hindu mindset' accusation come from? in actual fact you people are fixated with Hindus not me.

Navjot2

Thanks for demonstrating civility.

[drawrof]

Many more factors play into what happened with the annexation of punjab than mere ideological notions.

Economics: People were in a position to actually own land now instead of paying revenues for borrowed land. the 'Hal' system of farming also took a back seat

Politically: Many of the Malwa Sardars were enjoying their mini-kingdoms as well as the majha sardars who didn't waste a moment to join with the british to keep their status and power. People like dyal singh majithia went to the uk, shorned his kesh, and came back as a pipe smoking supporter of the brahmo samaaj (with his sikh antecedents having little if any regard in his life).

Socially: People saw subservience to the british forces as a sign of prosperity. One could receive and 'own' land for their services. A middle class was on the uprise. People were enjoying the new system and sought to increase their current social and economic standing.

There are many more angles and points which can be added to and could be used to refute some of what I just posted above. There was a system that was going through a dynamic change and adaptation by the socially and economically mobile was much quicker........

A poor village person's view and a middle-upper class city dweller would see the world differently as the changes would effect each according to their status in society.....

Print/Press culture changed alot and shaped alot of what was going on. I find it interesting how people bring up the lahore vs. amritsar singh sabha debate...clearly by virtue of framework, lahore was going to win out because they worked into the new framework which promised more to the people...regardless of subjugation.

please add more...

[singh2]

I agree that well to do sikhs mostly played as lackeys of british but general populace was yearning for the return of khalsa rule. This was evident from the repsonse whenever dalip singh tried to come to punjab. On his first visit he was staying in a hotel in calcutta and hotel was surrounded by returning sikh army of Loodhiana sikhs as a mark of respect and affection towards him.He was sent back to england from calcutta only.

Dyal singh majithia had become arya samaji rather than remaining a Brahmo samajist. Brhmo samaj was benign movement in comparison to arya samaj. That is how his newspaper The tribune was taken over by arya samaji mahashas. All sikh nobles of majha area did not toe his line. Thakar singh sandhawalia a cousin of dalip singh was one exception who remained anti british till his end. so was Malwa chief Ripduman singh of Nabha.

Muslim populace of punjab who remained loyal to sikhs during anglo sikh wars started preferring British rulers than remaining an ally of sikhs. Hindus were with sikhs to start with but started arya samaj later on and became loyal to british in the same way.

[Maha Singh]

MDS,

What was required was proof that there was a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht who was a Jathedar there in 1920. When were 500 Nihangs there? Before or after the British annexation? If it was before the annexation then what relevance does this have in discussing an incident in 1920?

'The Akali headquarters were the Akal Bunga at Amritsar where they assumed the direction of religious ceremonies and the duty of convoking the Gurmata; indeed they laid claim to exercise a general leadership of the Khalsa.'

('Encyclopaedia Of Religion and Ethics', 1908 Pa.268-269)

[HSD1]

in what sense was it a real threat? explain how the existance of sikh panth was actually 'threatened'. or cant you discern between 'sikh rule' and sikhs as a community?

More hindus meant more power for them as a community, any idiot can see that. hindu dogras had destroyed 'sikh rule' and the next logical step was to target the sikh community. what about idols in gurudwaras? or hindus worshipping british officers and trying to convince sikhs in the area to do the same? the list of threats is endless, unfortunately i wasnt around then to tell you all of them.

see this is the nonesense talk of a deranged fanatic. the only 'pipe dream (fanstasy)' was that sikhi was threatened and needed protection in the first place. You're the punchline to a joke that English people stop laughing at over 70 years ago.

Its funny that when someone on this forum says anything bad about muslims, a select few always jump to their defence, no matter what. If anything is said about goreh, a few others jump up, the same thing happens. When even the smallest comment that hindus are not peace loving or respectful of other religions causes a load of hindustani apes to start hurling their excrement at the rest of us sikhs. Sikhs standing up for themselves may not be funny to you, but the english love the way hindus suck up to them. And they're still laughing. Now calm down you little sepoy monkey.

As for 'master' tara singh, can you tell me what hindu far right organisation he set up? how sikh is that? tara singh was another stooge used by hindus to malign us. This goes back to the brahmin/hill rajah hatred of our gurus to the dogras to 84. Unfortunately, people like 'navjot' will always be able to pull the wool over innocent sikh's eyes. If you agree with his viewpoint expect to see more drugs in the punjab, more gurudwaras fall into disrepair and more hindu skewing of our once glorious nation.

If you want to see ideological stagnation reread you own trash or your brother HSD's crap.

Elaborate on 'ideological stagnation'. Sounds like not keeping up with what the hindus want us to believe.

where did 'Hindu mindset' accusation come from? in actual fact you people are fixated with Hindus not me.

LOL! Hypocrite alert!

Edited October 9, 2009 by HSD

[tonyhp32]

The Akali headquarters were the Akal Bunga at Amritsar, where they assumed the direction of religious ceremonies U and the duty of convokingthe Gurumata ; indeed, they laid claim to exercise a general leadership of the Khalsa. Since Ranjit Singh's time Anandpur has been their real headquarters,but their influence has to a large extent passed away, and some of them have degenerated

into mere buffoons. As an order the Akalis are celibate. They have, says Trumpp, no regular chief or disciple, yet one hears of their gurus, whose leavings are eaten by their disciples (sewak or chela). They do not eat meat or drink spirits, as other Sikhs do, but consume inordinate quantities of Bhang.

That's the full quote and the operative word in yours is WERE. For a book written in 1908, that means that even then the Nihangs had been in charge at Akal Takht prior to that date. Please read the thead, what is asked for is proof that there was a Nihang in charge of Akal Takht as jathedar in 1920.

Edited October 9, 2009 by tonyhp32

[Malwe Da Sher]

Tony atleast check the basic sources involved in a subject matter - ex Jathedar of Akal Takht Giani Kirpal Singh book on the history of Akal Takht and its Jathedars writes that until 1920 the Budha Dal Jathedars were the Caretakers of the Akal Takht noting Baba Giana Singh and Baba Teja Singh who lead the Dal from the late 1800s through to the early 1900s.

I myself have not found any evidence for the apparent shoot on sight orders regarding Nihang Singhs, however the desire of the British to dislodge them of their authoritive position within the Sikh community is clear in contemporary literature. You have to step getting ahead of yourself and get it out of your head that not everyone gets their material from one website such as yourself who use the site to form a generalised understanding of "sanatanists say... insert anything you want here...."

Edited October 10, 2009 by Malwe Da Sher

[Malwe Da Sher]

Regarding the use of women to remove the Nihangs in 1920, Narain Singh MA in his book on Kartar Singh Jhabbar, promoting the deads of the Singh Sabhas and their jatha notes:

'Jathedar Jhabbar then stepped back and motioned towards his Jatha. At this, the Khalsa, like lions arrived at the Takht. They grabbed the Nihangs and threw them down. In the Malvai Jatha, there was an 18 year old daughter of a Subedar, Bibi Bhajan Kaur who was badly beating the Nihangs and was throwing them down. The Bibi grabbed one Nihang and was dragging him by the leg but Jathedar Jhabbar released him. The Bibi who had a staff in her hands, then went and struck at Jathdar Sahib Singh and attacked him. Finally, two Singhs had to hold this Bibi back and prevent her from attacking even more.'

Theres katha of Sant Kartar Singh Bhinderanwale and Giani Thakur Singh online where they mention the great avastha of Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari. Its not surprising this story is hyped on AKJ websites who have it in for Sants. It must be very exciting and inspiring for some AKJs to read of a young girl beating up a Sant.

Pictures of Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari show how heavily armed their Jatha was at the time. Anyone who believes the Singh Sabha event of this story about the Nihangs being overpowered by young women must live in a fairy land. Contemporaries of Baba Sahib Singh who were present on the day, including some who now are settled in the UK, confirm that the Nihang Singhs were ordered by Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari not to use any violence due to the presence of Bibia in the Jatha. Those present say that as Baba Sahib Singh lay there having his leg broken by a women beating it with a staff he replied: " You are like my mother, is this the example you set your children?"

Take the story either way you wish - the use of women in the Jatha is confirmed by accounts from both sides.

Narain Singhs account also mentioned that Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari stuck his thumbprint on a document stating that the Nihangs had made a mistake and sought forgiveness from the Panth. Perhaps someone could enlighten us as to where this document is. And more interestingly why Baba Sahib Singh, who possessed a Masters Degree and served is Teehsildar (registrar) of the State of Patiala had to give a thumb print, usually a sign of illiteracy.

Lies lies lies..... Oh dear Tony this Narian Singh sounds like a friend of yours who really does seem to have it in for Nihangs. Perhaps its not just the 'Sanatanists' who distort history.

Edited October 10, 2009 by Malwe Da Sher

[singh2]

Regarding the use of women to remove the Nihangs in 1920, Narain Singh MA in his book on Kartar Singh Jhabbar, promoting the deads of the Singh Sabhas and their jatha notes:

'Jathedar Jhabbar then stepped back and motioned towards his Jatha. At this, the Khalsa, like lions arrived at the Takht. They grabbed the Nihangs and threw them down. In the Malvai Jatha, there was an 18 year old daughter of a Subedar, Bibi Bhajan Kaur who was badly beating the Nihangs and was throwing them down. The Bibi grabbed one Nihang and was dragging him by the leg but Jathedar Jhabbar released him. The Bibi who had a staff in her hands, then went and struck at Jathdar Sahib Singh and attacked him. Finally, two Singhs had to hold this Bibi back and prevent her from attacking even more.'

Theres katha of Sant Kartar Singh Bhinderanwale and Giani Thakur Singh online where they mention the great avastha of Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari. Its not surprising this story is hyped on AKJ websites who have it in for Sants. It must be very exciting and inspiring for some AKJs to read of a young girl beating up a Sant.

Pictures of Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari show how heavily armed their Jatha was at the time. Anyone who believes the Singh Sabha event of this story about the Nihangs being overpowered by young women must live in a fairy land. Contemporaries of Baba Sahib Singh who were present on the day, including some who now are settled in the UK, confirm that the Nihang Singhs were ordered by Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari not to use any violence due to the presence of Bibia in the Jatha. Those present say that as Baba Sahib Singh lay there having his leg broken by a women beating it with a staff he replied: " You are like my mother, is this the example you set your children?"

Take the story either way you wish - the use of women in the Jatha is confirmed by accounts from both sides.

Narain Singhs account also mentioned that Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari stuck his thumbprint on a document stating that the Nihangs had made a mistake and sought forgiveness from the Panth. Perhaps someone could enlighten us as to where this document is. And more interestingly why Baba Sahib Singh, who possessed a Masters Degree and served is Teehsildar (registrar) of the State of Patiala had to give a thumb print, usually a sign of illiteracy.

Lies lies lies..... Oh dear Tony this Narian Singh sounds like a friend of yours who really does seem to have it in for Nihangs. Perhaps its not just the 'Sanatanists' who distort history.

Nihungs are singhs of charhdhi kala. They behaved in the same way as Baba Bir singh ji Naurangbadi did when sikh forces attacked his dera.

This charhdi kala came from naam simran.I fully believe what Malwe da sher is writing.

[tonyhp32]

MDS,

Your quote as usual proves nothing. The impression given by the quote is of a forcible removal of Nihangs from the Akal Takht, but what you did not include was the lead up to this event as described in the book you quoted. The Nihangs were not in Akal Takht as caretakers but they had attempted to forcibly take over the Akal Takht from the Akali Jatha at the instigation of the Punjaris. The Pujaris after having lost control of Akal Takht went around instigating the Sikhs of the villages surrounding Amritsar spreading rumours that the low castes had taken over the Harmandir Sahib and mobs of Sikhs armed with lathis and chiviyan started to arrive in Amritsar to liberate the complex from the lower castes! They only left after they came to know that it was the Akali Jatha that had taken over. The Pujaris having failed then went to the Nihangs and said that they wanted to hand the Akal Takht to them. It was then that the Nihangs went and tried to take over the Akal Takht.

The above is in the same book as you quoted. The book also states that the Nihangs were high on bhang which might or might not be true.

Unlike the sanatan myth that Neo alluded to which implies that the Akalis forcibly removed the Nihangs from the Akal Takht where they had always been and the Nihangs did not fight back because women were put on the forefront by the Akalis.

The truth is that the Akalis were in control of the Akal Takht having taken it from the Pujaris, the Nihangs at the instigation of the Punjaris tried to wrestle control of the Akal Takht and were beaten up severely and in one case a woman beat a Nihang up. The sentimental story of Baba Sahib Singh allowing himself to be beaten up by a woman rather than fight back might or might not be true but what did he think the Akalis would do when confronted by a band of armed Nihangs intent on forcibly taking over the Akal Takht and undoing the work of the reformers? If they were going to interfere in an ongoing tussle, the least they could have done is to find out the facts.

The apology of the Nihang jathedar was because they had as usual allowed themselves to be used by Anti-Panth forces against the Panth.

Edited October 10, 2009 by tonyhp32

[Malwe Da Sher]

Tony writes; Your quote as usual proves nothing.

In an earlier post you wrote: 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.

As i said the quote proves the use of women within the Singh Sabha Jatha. Yet you continue to call the story a Sanatan myth. What does sanatan myth mean? Sounds quite interesting. Accept that women were used against the Nihang Singhs as both Nihang accounts and Singh Sabha accounts confirm this, get out of your historical fairyland dear.

The Nihangs were at Akal Takht the Pujaris were at Harimandir Sahib. I have already given you evidence, which you asked Shaheediyan for earlier. The Pujaris were at Darbar Sahib the Nihangs were at Akal Takht. Accounts of European visitors from 1880-1920 confirm the presence of Nihang Singhs as caretakers of Akal Takht. They were based permanently at the Burj and performed the duties in Akal Takht while the Pujaris had control of Harimandir Sahib. Photographs from the 1900s also confirm the Nihang Singh presence at Akal Takht and their duties as perehdar around the complex. The Nihangs were not trying to take over Akal Takht from anyone as Akal Takht was already in their control.

I asked why Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhri would have to give a thumbprint on the supposed letter when by virtue of his Masters degree and his previous role of Tehsildar (where all you do is sign off documents) we can assume he was educated enough to be able to give a signature rather than thumbprint. Tony you replied;

'The apology of the Nihang jathedar was because they had as usual allowed themselves to be used by Anti-Panth forces against the Panth.'

Nice way to dodge the question and again make passing refernece to Baba SAnta Singh and 1984. However, I can confirm that I have recieved further information on this and have now learnt that the letter does exist, in the North Pole with Santa Clause in his right pocked as his left pocket contains a list of good and bad children, guess which of the two categories those who write books with lies come in? Oh dear looks like the 'Sanatanists' (again, whatever that means) are going to take all the Christmas presents this year as this circumstances sorrounding this event unfold.

Bottom line is Baba Sahib Singh Kaladhari is regarded as a Mahapursh by all those who know of him. He was highly educated and left a very senior post to devote himself to doing seva and parchar across Punjab. He was at the forefront of the refusal to accept the attempted implementation of Kirpan regulations by the British (what was Singha Sabha Stance on this?) He spent a lot of time in jail for his refusal to collaborate with the British and we have written accounts commenting on his refusal to accept various bribes the British offered him.

On the contrary the mischevious deeds of Bhasauria are well known. His blasphemous treatment of Sri Guru Gobind Singhs writings, his Jathas shortening of Rehras, changing of Gurbani, removal or Raagmala, removal of Bhagtan Bani, changing of Kakkar.. the damage he caused the Sikh Panth continues to damage us tremendously. Botttom line is Bhasauria inflicted more wounds on the Sikhs that any external enemy could ever have dreamt of.

Anyone with an objecvtive mind can easily discern which of the two, Jathedar Sahib Singh and Bhasauria better served the interest of those with ill intensions towards Sikhi.

Nothing remains to be said, each of your points has been proven wrong regarding; the Nihangs being in control of Akal Takht, the use of women to get them out, their supposed collaboration with British and certain lies by Singh Sabha authors are also clear. Good luck for your next point for finding another piece of wrong information from Nidar Singhs site to call a sanatan myth, present it alongside Baba Santa Singhs role in 1984 and somehow try and relate it to the topic in hand. You are getting too predictable dear and addressing your points is becoming easier but more tyring as the same points need to be made over and over again.

Arrivederci

Edited October 10, 2009 by Malwe Da Sher

[shaheediyan]

We await with interest.

http://www.nihangsingh.org/Return%20to%20Punjab.html