Jump to content

Recommended Posts

LORD INDRA THE RAVENOUS DOG-EATER

Lord Indra, although the King of Vedic Hindu Gods, is a totally hopeless character:

"[indra:]'Because I was in desperate straits, I cooked the entrails of a dog, and I found no one among the gods to help me. I saw my woman dishonoured. Then the eagle brought the honey (soma) to me.' " -- Rig Veda 4:18:13.

HINDUISM TEACHES THAT WOMEN PRODUCE SEMEN

Hinduism claims that women are not only like whores by nature (ref. Manusmrti 9:14-18), but also amazingly produce semen according to the sacred dharmasastra:

"A male child is born when the semen of the man is greater (than that of the woman), and a female child when (the semen) of the woman is greater (than that of the man); if both are equal, a hermaphrodite is born, or a boy and a girl; and if (the semen) is weak or scanty, the opposite will occur." -- Manusmrti 3:49.

HINDU GODS LUST OVER A NYMPH

An apsaras is sent to seduce two demons, but instead the Hindu Gods become seduced by this nymph:

"Once the apsaras Tilottama was sent to seduce two demons from their tapas. While she danced before them, Siva and Indra wanted to see more of her, and for this purpose Siva became four-faced and Indra thousand-eyed." -- Mahabharata I:203:15-26; cf. Skanda Purana 5:3:150:18, 6:153:2-27.

LORD INDRA RAPES GAUTAMA'S WIFE

".... Indra raped Ahalya and was cursed by her husband, the sage Gautama, to lose all his prosperity ...." -- Brahmavaivarta Purana 4:47:11-45.

WHY THE GODS VANISHED

"When gods and men lived together in the world, men kept asking the gods for all that they lacked, saying,'We don't have this. Let us have it.' The gods began to hate all these demands, and they vanished." -- Satapatha Brahmana 2:3:4:4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hinduism claims that women are not only like whores by nature (ref. Manusmrti 9:14-18),"

Are you really this insulting and this ignorant? Manu Smritis are not even Sruti for Hindus. Can you show where it says in Gurbani that Sikhs should attack and mock other religions? Please! Because I would like to understand your personal justification for writing anti-Hindu garbage like this, which I have read also from radical Muslim missionary propagandists intent on undermining Hindu relgion to convert people. Is that what you think Sikh religion is about? Trashing other people's religions to propagate what? hatred against people?

Do you know anything about your own faith and heritage? Do you understand that the Manu Smritis were edited by the British and changed? This is what Dasm Pita Ji writes about Manu Smritis. So why are you taking bits and pieces out of context from various Hindu scriptures in order to mock and revile them when your own Guru Sahib didn't even do that? Who in the hell are you? Some cheap dirty-minded little punk spreading anti-Hindu hatred?

ਸ੍ਰਾਵਗ ਮਤ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਜਨ ਲਾਗੇ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਤਜਿ ਭਾਗੇ ॥

All the people were absorbed in Shravak Religion (Jainism) and all abandoned the action of Dharma.

ਤਯਾਗ ਦਈ ਸਭ ਹੂੰ ਹਰਿ ਸੇਵਾ ॥ ਕੋਇ ਨ ਮਾਨਤ ਭੇ ਗੁਰਦੇਵਾ ॥੧॥

All of them forsook the service of the Lord and none worshiped the Supreme preceptor (the Immanent Lord).1.

ਸਾਧ ਅਸਾਧ ਸਭੈ ਹੁਐ ਗਏ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਸਭ ਹੂੰ ਤਜਿ ਦਏ ॥

The saints became devoid of saintliness and all abandoned the action of Dharma;

ਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਆਗਯਾ ਤਬ ਦੀਨੀ ॥ ਬਿਸਨ ਚੰਦ ਸੋਈ ਬਿਧਿ ਕੀਨੀ ॥੨॥

Then the Immanent Lord ordered Vishnu, who did as commanded.2.

ਮਨੁ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਰਾਜਵਤਾਰ ਅਵਤਰਾ ॥ ਮਨੁ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਚੁਰ ਜਗਿ ਕਰਾ ॥

Vishnu manifested himself as king Manu and propagated Manu Smriti in the world.

ਸਕਲ ਕੁਪੰਥੀ ਪੰਥਿ ਚਲਾਏ ॥ ਪਾਪ ਕਰਮ ਤੇ ਲੋਗ ਹਟਾਏ ॥੩॥

He brought all the corrupt persons on the right path and cursed the people to become devoid of sinful actions.3.

ਰਾਜ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਭਯੋ ਮਨੁ ਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਸ੍ਰਜੇ ਧਰਮ ਕੇ ਸਾਜਾ ॥

Vishnu incarnated himself as the king Manu and established all the actions of Dharma.

ਪਾਪ ਕਰਾ ਤਾਕੋ ਗਹਿ ਮਾਰਾ ॥ ਸਕਲ ਪ੍ਰਜਾ ਕਹੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਡਾਰਾ ॥੪॥

If anyone committed a sin, he was now killed and in this way, the king made all his subjects to tread on the right path.4.

~Shri Dasam Granth pg. 496

When did Sikhism ever mock the faith of other people, let alone the same Hindu faith which Guru Arjan Dev Ji and Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji gave their lives to defend?

ਹਰੀਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਤਿਨ ਕੇ ਸੁਤ ਵਏ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਤੇ ਤੇਗ ਬਹਾਦਰ ਭਏ ॥੧੨॥

Har Krishan was his son; after him, Tegh Bahadur became the Guru.12.

ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋ ਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥

He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread which marked a great event in the Iron age.

ਸਾਧਨ ਹੇਤਿ ਇਤੀ ਜਿਨਿ ਕਰੀ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰ ਸੀ ਨ ਉਚਰੀ ॥੧੩॥

For the sake of saints, he laid down his head without even a sign.13.

ਧਰਮ ਹੇਤਿ ਸਾਕਾ ਜਿਨਿ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰ ਸਿਰਰੁ ਨ ਦੀਆ ॥

For the sake of Dharma, he sacrificed himself. He laid down his head but not his creed.

~Shri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji pg. 131

Edited by HarjasKaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Akaal Das, with all due respect, you are a 1st class idiot. If you want to do vichaar, at least read and understand the the source material in its original/metaphoric context, rather than relying on facist Pakistanti websites to feed your insecurities. People like you are a disgrace to the universal face and teachings of Guru Sahiban.

Have you ever heard of X and Y Chromosones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you really this insulting and this ignorant? Manu Smritis are not even Sruti for Hindus. Can you show where it says in Gurbani that Sikhs should attack and mock other religions? Please! Because I would like to understand your personal justification for writing anti-Hindu garbage like this, which I have read also from radical Muslim missionary propagandists intent on undermining Hindu relgion to convert people. Is that what you think Sikh religion is about? Trashing other people's religions to propagate what? hatred against people?

Do you know anything about your own faith and heritage? Do you understand that the Manu Smritis were edited by the British and changed? This is what Dasm Pita Ji writes about Manu Smritis. So why are you taking bits and pieces out of context from various Hindu scriptures in order to mock and revile them when your own Guru Sahib didn't even do that? Who in the hell are you? Some cheap dirty-minded little punk spreading anti-Hindu hatred?

ਸ੍ਰਾਵਗ ਮਤ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਜਨ ਲਾਗੇ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਤਜਿ ਭਾਗੇ ॥

All the people were absorbed in Shravak Religion (Jainism) and all abandoned the action of Dharma.

ਤਯਾਗ ਦਈ ਸਭ ਹੂੰ ਹਰਿ ਸੇਵਾ ॥ ਕੋਇ ਨ ਮਾਨਤ ਭੇ ਗੁਰਦੇਵਾ ॥੧॥

All of them forsook the service of the Lord and none worshiped the Supreme preceptor (the Immanent Lord).1.

ਸਾਧ ਅਸਾਧ ਸਭੈ ਹੁਐ ਗਏ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਸਭ ਹੂੰ ਤਜਿ ਦਏ ॥

The saints became devoid of saintliness and all abandoned the action of Dharma;

ਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਆਗਯਾ ਤਬ ਦੀਨੀ ॥ ਬਿਸਨ ਚੰਦ ਸੋਈ ਬਿਧਿ ਕੀਨੀ ॥੨॥

Then the Immanent Lord ordered Vishnu, who did as commanded.2.

ਮਨੁ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਰਾਜਵਤਾਰ ਅਵਤਰਾ ॥ ਮਨੁ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਚੁਰ ਜਗਿ ਕਰਾ ॥

Vishnu manifested himself as king Manu and propagated Manu Smriti in the world.

ਸਕਲ ਕੁਪੰਥੀ ਪੰਥਿ ਚਲਾਏ ॥ ਪਾਪ ਕਰਮ ਤੇ ਲੋਗ ਹਟਾਏ ॥੩॥

He brought all the corrupt persons on the right path and cursed the people to become devoid of sinful actions.3.

ਰਾਜ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਭਯੋ ਮਨੁ ਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਸ੍ਰਜੇ ਧਰਮ ਕੇ ਸਾਜਾ ॥

Vishnu incarnated himself as the king Manu and established all the actions of Dharma.

ਪਾਪ ਕਰਾ ਤਾਕੋ ਗਹਿ ਮਾਰਾ ॥ ਸਕਲ ਪ੍ਰਜਾ ਕਹੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਡਾਰਾ ॥੪॥

If anyone committed a sin, he was now killed and in this way, the king made all his subjects to tread on the right path.4.

~Shri Dasam Granth pg. 496

When did Sikhism ever mock the faith of other people, let alone the same Hindu faith which Guru Arjan Dev Ji and Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji gave their lives to defend?

ਹਰੀਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਤਿਨ ਕੇ ਸੁਤ ਵਏ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਤੇ ਤੇਗ ਬਹਾਦਰ ਭਏ ॥੧੨॥

Har Krishan was his son; after him, Tegh Bahadur became the Guru.12.

ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋ ਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥

He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread which marked a great event in the Iron age.

ਸਾਧਨ ਹੇਤਿ ਇਤੀ ਜਿਨਿ ਕਰੀ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰ ਸੀ ਨ ਉਚਰੀ ॥੧੩॥

For the sake of saints, he laid down his head without even a sign.13.

ਧਰਮ ਹੇਤਿ ਸਾਕਾ ਜਿਨਿ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰ ਸਿਰਰੁ ਨ ਦੀਆ ॥

For the sake of Dharma, he sacrificed himself. He laid down his head but not his creed.

~Shri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji pg. 131

Harjas, according to you, even the Dasam Granth was changed/edited by the British (without any proof from you!). So it seems strange that you are quoting from Dasam Granth when it suites you and disregard it when it rejects your Hindu Avatars.

You also mentioned the Shaheedi of the Gurus. The 9th Guru would have sacrificed in defence of any faith if they were in the position of what the Kashmiri Pandits were in. Guru Nanak Dev Jee rejected the wearing of janjuu, yet 9th Guru knowing this ithihas, still willingly sacrificed himself for the wearers of the Janju since that is what Sikh faith is about. It is ironic that in 1984 anti Sikh riots, Hindus shamelessly attacked Gurdwara Sis Ganj Sahib in Delhi which commemorates the Shaheedi of the 9th Gurus.

No matter how much you try to change and reshuffle history to suite your Hindutva agenda, it will not change that fact that caste system, secondary status of women is a part of Hindu Dharm. This is how it was during the times of our Gurus, and this is still how it is today.

Edited by Mithar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Akaal Daas ji there is more of the so called 'data' that you are are criticizing in Chatritropakhyaan. Since we dont have hindus here, you are safe and not many hindus get into such absurd language like you have done. Well i feel we have a responsibility to keep the site clean of nonsense and concentrate on Gurmat.

Why do you want to indulge in trash and get malicious fun out of it ? You have such a nice screen name like 'AKAAL DAAS', why are you crticizing the maya of Akaal.

I use to take similiar fun in posting such things on various islamic groups by criticizing their prophet. I finally stopped since I was indulging my mind more on such things rather than wanting to follow my Dharam.

Trust me its not worth. Be a beacon to throw light on issues where we can progress and not infighting with religions and creating a image which doesnt suit our Panth.

Best wishes for your forthcoming posts

Khalsa Fateh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bibi harjas kaur ji. so nice to hear from you after so long. have you taken your superb arguments to the hindu-sikh brotherhood site? I've been banned from there, as I posted something they didnt like, so tey deleted my account. But they have a lot of insults about your Guru there. I think that is the forum where you need to air your:

"Can you show where it says in Gurbani that Sikhs should attack and mock other religions? Please! Because I would like to understand your personal justification for writing anti-Hindu garbage like this," and replace the terminology of sikhs for hindus.

I would like to see how my hindu brothers react to your reasoning. And please post he link here so we can all read it.

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the beautiful thing about mythological narrative, people always interpret them according to their intellect and depth of understanding. See what has happened with the Quran and Bible which are essentialy grand mythologies, people started taking them literally because they failed to understand the 'code' in which they were written. Someone can see in the Ramayana, high metaphysics disguised in symbolic characters, a grand cosmological allegory and also a psychological discourse that can help integrate a person internally. Another sees a story of a man who has a monkey friend and goes to Lanka and kills some demon. Myths and Legends of all cultures are our heritage we would be fools not to make an attempt to understand the wisdom enshrined in these myths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mithar you are missing the point, it makes no difference - what matters most is what you derive from the teachings. Hindu Avatars etc fall into the realm of 'mythology' in the worldview, for obvious reasons. The word myth also implies 'traditional', it does not have a singular context, same goes for legend. Myths and Legends are said to be derived from truth in one form or another in any case.

For people to believe Chandi, Sri Krishna, Sri Ram Chandra, Raavan, Hanuman etc all existed is fine, as it is for people to believe that they represent a deep symbology for an esoteric language.

As many Sant Mahapursh say, our individual understandings are not wrong, they simply relfect our own avastha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See what has happened with the Quran and Bible which are essentialy grand mythologies, people started taking them literally because they failed to understand the 'code' in which they were written.

I only partially agree with you on this, in respect to the Quran. I think it is what you say but it is also a record of historical incidents/practices that are used as exemplers for the faithful. So it is part grand mythology, part historical record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harjas, according to you, even the Dasam Granth was changed/edited by the British (without any proof from you!). So it seems strange that you are quoting from Dasam Granth when it suites you and disregard it when it rejects your Hindu Avatars.

I did not say the Dasm Granth was changed/edited by the British. I said the TRANSLATION of the Shri Dasam Granth was edited by the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabha scholars and abundant evidence exists they have banned Gurbilas, and marginalized purataan Gursikhi historical writings such as Janam and Sau Sakhi's, Prem Sumarag, Varran of Bhai Gurdas Ji, Sarbloh Granth, and Dasm Granth. It has taken over 60 years for the Singh Sabha reformists to produce a volume of Shri Dasam Granth to the public and it is filled with episodes of political controversy including some cases of excommunication of purist Tat Khalsa critics, namely Kala Afghana and Darshan Ragi. Are you denying this? The Udasi baba from Govind Sadhan which helped the Tat Khalsas (SGPC and Akal Takht) with the Sri Dasam Granth banis translation has his own translation which differs at significant points most glaringly in those verses which denounce the Hindu devatay/avataray.

However, to refute a BLINDLY STUPID post which pornographically mischaracterizes Manu Smritis to degrade Hindu women as "WHORES" which it does not, but reflected the low mentality of the poster, to show a mirror in his face, I posted the relevent verses from the available English translation of Shri Dasam Granth to SHOW that GURUJI has spoken in entirely different way of Manu Smritis. Moreover, I explained that British have mischeiviously edited and changed Manu Smritis and that we cannot be sure exactly all the interpolations, but there are sources which discuss this in-depth in scholarly journals by researchers. And so this explains that Manu Smritis which Guruji has spoken of as reflecting the Hukam of God may not be accurately reflected in the version of Manu Smritis available to the public today.

You also mentioned the Shaheedi of the Gurus. The 9th Guru would have sacrificed in defence of any faith if they were in the position of what the Kashmiri Pandits were in. Guru Nanak Dev Jee rejected the wearing of janjuu, yet 9th Guru knowing this ithihas, still willingly sacrificed himself for the wearers of the Janju since that is what Sikh faith is about. It is ironic that in 1984 anti Sikh riots, Hindus shamelessly attacked Gurdwara Sis Ganj Sahib in Delhi which commemorates the Shaheedi of the 9th Gurus.

The Guru's did not sacrifice themselves defending any other faith, though I have no doubt you are correct in this observation, such was the magnificent spiritual jeevan of our great Guru Mahadev Nanak in all his forms. But the historical fact remains that Guru Sahibaan defended and sacrifieced themselves defending Hindu Panth, and for any political resentment you may personally hold, YOU CANNOT CHANGE THAT FACT. It's ironic that people like you are always trying to demonize Hindu religion with political events such as Operation Bluestar attack and 1984 riots. So a completely misbegotten secession movement and a horribly ill-conceived butchery to suppress it have become like candy products for consumer consumption. And the complex issues behind it get oversimplied into a fiction of the saint versus the demon, the holy Khalsas versus the unholy Hindu Indian government.

But what really is the truth?

Mohandas Gandhi's policies were not even "Hindu." He rejected "Hindu Rashtra" in favor of secular state. Nehru's family weren't "Brahmins" in the religious sense, but were outcaste Brahmins who were Arya Samajis. If Nehru could be described as anything, Hindu would not be it. He was a British aristocrat.

Quote

Lt Gen K S Brar (Mon Dec 16 20:34:18 1996 IST):

"I can assure you that the last thing we wanted to do was to cause death and destruction in the action at Amritsar. There is no question of there having been any enemy. In fact, it was an action which no soldier would like to be drawn into. But circumstances at that point of time forced the army to intervene, as the extremists had literally taken over the holy Golden Temple and converted it to a fortress, challenging the authority of the Indian government. I do not think any government in the world would permit a situation to go out of hand, and it had to be controlled at some stage. It is unfortunate that there were so many casualties, as well as destruction, which we tried to avoid to the maximum. I am a Sikh myself, and I can assure you that there was no indiscriminate killing during the operation, and at all times our endeavour was to save life and property."

U955687INP-989.jpg

Indira Gandhi's wedding to Feroze Khan, adopted by Gandhi and given Gandhi surname to make him acceptable to Hindus. The fact Nehru would wed his daughter to a Parsi Muslim is evidence of his own appeasement of Ganhi, because Gandhi was not a Hindu but a Jain who wanted unite all Indian elements in a secular state. Even Hindi language is a compromise. Gandhi tried to push Hindustani/Urdu to make Muslims happy. Right now Raj Thackery of RSS is having fits rejecting Hindi because Marathi should be spoken by Marathi officials. So language problem wasn't singling out Sikhs. The problems of modern Indian state are reflected in beliefs and ideology of Gandhi-Nehru dynasty as well as powerful attempts by British Raj to divide the nation by weakening Sikhs.

The result was Sikhs has no real power, no representation in the new government. Starting off with Partition, a parting gift of the British which Gandhi in his Muslim appeasement would not resist (Remember the "Mahatma" was murdered by Hindus.) You see the key grievances which were inherited by Sikhs are legitimate, but blames of a "Hindu/brahmin" conspiracy are not proved. "Singling out of Sikhs as slaves" is not proved. Those are inflammatory exaggerations.

What Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale was preaching against was Hindus and sanatan Sikhs. So, when analyzing 1984, we need to look at militant activities prior to 1984. Obviously someone does not send in an Army without provocation. Right or wrong, what role did militant Sikhs play in agitating the disaster? And can this entire episode be honestly blamed on Hindus?

For one thing, Indira Gandhi was married to a Muslim. Her son Sanjay was married to a Sikh. Her other son Rajiv was married to a Christian. This is a "Hindu persecution?" How? Militant HIndu's hate the Gandhi family and are estranged from Congress Party. Militant Hindu murdered Mohandas Gandhi.

Where exactly is the "brahmin" conspiracy?

Why did Operation Bluestar get pitted into a conflict between Hindu's and Sikhs in the first place? At the time of the action, a Sikh General led the Operation and was advising Indira Gandhi. At this time she also had trusted Sikh bodyguards. Her youngest and favorite son, who she was grooming to take power, Sanjay married Maneka Kaur, a Sikh.

Where in the original scenario did the conflict between Sikh and Hindu occur?

sanjay_gandhi_maneka_PE_20070820.jpg

Sanjay Gandhi and wife Maneka, a Sikh.

Sanjay%20Gandhi-Mrs%20Maneka%20Gandhi-S%20B%20Chavan.jpg

Youth Congress leader Sanjay Gandhi (garlanded), along with his wife Mrs Maneka Gandhi and S B Chavan, Chief Minister of Maharashtra, visits Gurdwara at Nanded (Maharashtra) on October 01, 1976.

Maneka%20Gandhi.jpg

Sanjay Gandhi's wife Maneka Gandhi (centre) at the time of her mother-in-law Indira Gandhi's arrest by the CBI in New Delhi on October 3, 1977.

Manmohan Singh as PM was not the first time Sikhs had reached close to the pinnacle of Indian power. Before Operation Bluestar, the Gandhi family's first son had already united Sikhs with Gandhis. Does this sound like the mythology we hear from Khalistanis about "Hindu hate of Sikhs and efforts to repress them?"

Sikh General's. Sikh daughter-in-law. Sikh bodyguards. What is "anti-Sikh" about it? Sikhs are front and center in nearly every photo of Sanjay and Maneka Gandhi. Were Sikhs really "slaves" in India? How do you go from being a prominent and successful community with above average representation in the military and police forces, have a Sikh intermarried into the first family and become "slaves?" At this point we see that the Indian government itself was hijacked into a state of emergency in an authorian attempt at dictatorship. So by no means can the unfolding events of history consider this leadership of Indira Gandhi as any kind of "democracy."

Yet, Khalistani Sikhs throw a million torches of hot words resenting the corrupted "democracy" of India which worked for Hindus but not for Sikhs. And in truth, it was Hindu indians falling into those categories of having housing bulldozed without compensation and forced sterilization. So the system at that time, didn't even represent a democracy. And it was certainly no injustice for Sikhs compared to the general population.

Clearly something is distorted here. You say you worship Divine Truth Satinaam Siri Waheguru? Then speak the truth and not distortions!

"No matter how much you try to change and reshuffle history to suite your Hindutva agenda, it will not change that fact that caste system, secondary status of women is a part of Hindu Dharm. This is how it was during the times of our Gurus, and this is still how it is today."

Are you really daring to imply that Punjabi Sikh culture is free from abuses against women? Let's not even go there, it is the biggest hypocritical joke that females are actually safer in Hindu then in Sikh communities, and not due to any corruption of holy Sikhism, but due to corrupt people totally violating it. So stop throwing stones at Hindu's and fix your own glass houses first. Your argument is a joke, and in a thread which starts by claiming Hindu women as whores, and this out of the mouth of a professed "Sikh." It really shows that high mentality and valuation of females doesn't it? <--that's sarcasm. You people who write like this are a disgrace to Sikhi and endless blaming of Hindu's will not improve you. REFORM YOURSELVES FIRST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bibi harjas kaur ji. so nice to hear from you after so long. have you taken your superb arguments to the hindu-sikh brotherhood site? I've been banned from there, as I posted something they didnt like, so tey deleted my account. But they have a lot of insults about your Guru there. I think that is the forum where you need to air your:

"Can you show where it says in Gurbani that Sikhs should attack and mock other religions? Please! Because I would like to understand your personal justification for writing anti-Hindu garbage like this," and replace the terminology of sikhs for hindus.

I would like to see how my hindu brothers react to your reasoning. And please post he link here so we can all read it.

Thanks in advance.

I have never had an account on the Hindu-Sikh brotherhood site. You will not find a single post by me written there. If they banned you what is it to do with me? If you were writing stupid and inflammatory things such as is posted at the beginning of this post that Hindu women are "whores," then no wonder you were banned. That is your problem. If you think Hindu's have a bad impression of Sikhism, then LOOK IN THE MIRROR AT HOW YOU REPRESENT IT.

Thanks in advance. I posted here, in reaction to abusive talk degrading to Hindu women and Hindu religion beneath the dignity of a Sikh. What kind of Sikh speaks against my protest to defend that? Not much of one.

Edited by HarjasKaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

History, Mythology! Lines are blurred.

Some communities accounts have become so 'mythologised' that they have little resemblance to a historical narrative, so they are of little or no use in what we think of as modern critical historiography. This 'mythologisation' process takes time to crystalise and the stage at which you catch the tradition determines its utility in historical research. So an early catch would glean more historical data than a late one. Unless you are trying to establish the beliefs current during a specific period and use the mythology to highlight this, in which context it becomes very rich in historical data. That being said, mythology can have its own value as a transmitter of key values, ideas etc. for a community as pointed out earlier by some.

Anyway, I think what we call Hinduism today is a modern British construct. Prior to the emergence of this umbrella concept the strands of the different belief systems of India were probably not conceptualised as they are now. The term Hindu itself comes from Muslims who used it as a label to define people living across the river Indus I think and was not originally a religious label at all. That is what I have heard anyway. The blanket term Hindu implies some sort of unity between the various beliefs it covers and I sometimes doubt if that is true.

Postscript: You know, let me strike some of what I have said above. I know Bhai Gurdas uses the term Hindu in a generic sense in his vaars, so it seems the process of defining all of the different strains of belief under an over-arching term predates the British. I just wonder if there are stark differences in belief/practice between that which takes place in the south and that in the north? I've always thought of what we call Hinduism today as being made up of a mixture of related and unrelated practices. Maybe someone more knowledgeable could shed more light on this?

Edited by dalsingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harjas kaur

No amount of Your big posts on Hindu sikh brotherhood could change the fact that largest minority community

killed after partition In India in Riots are sikhs in 1984.

Let me show you something from non sikh unbiased account what there analsys was for the reason of 1984 riots

http://www.massviolence.org/The-1984-Anti-Sikhs-pogroms-in-New-Dehli?artpage=6#outil_sommaire_5

Citizens for Democracy even went further by stating that this pogrom was primarily meant «to arouse passion within the majority community – Hindu chauvinism – in order to consolidate Hindu votes in the election held on December 27, 1984, which was indeed massively won by the Congress (I) (Rao & al., 1985: 1).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Laalsingh says is what a true mythology should be history and everything combined. History is only an ingredient in the mythologization process. The west is obsessed with history, you can see this in what Dalsingh says he gives primacy to the value of history - myth becomes a derogatory term. Also what Mithar says shows that people equate myth with falsehood. I see the opposite, historical records are false and quite dead. They have no power to affect living people here and now. Whereas something like the Ramayana still gives people something to this day. Also this ties in with the view of time. Gurbani recognises that time is cyclical, things repeat in ever decreasing circles. Western thinking recognises linear time, which is in its essence nihilistic anything banished into a linear history becomes non-existent a nothing. It is interseting as to how many Sikhs are infected with malicious ideas of modern scientific rationalism, and being thus influenced they want to seperate and 'preserve' the community, what a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The west is obsessed with history, you can see this in what Dalsingh says he gives primacy to the value of history - myth becomes a derogatory term.

This is a semantic issue. The negative connotations of the word myth weren't started by me. I am probably in agreement with you more than you think. The west is not obsessed with history, it is obsessed with manipulating history for its own ends. I don't believe much (if any!) of what has been produced by them is true history. That is because they are aware of the fact that interpretations of history can have powerful effect on a people. How a community collectively interprets the past can have a profound effect on its future. We can see a clear example of how WASPs used particular interpretations of their past to underpin their recent colonial experience. We can also see how this very thing even today effects the minds of many here in the UK and influences their stances towards outsiders.

I don't equate myths with falsehood. I recognise that they in themselves can have tremendous power over people and minds. The are manifestations/vehicles of desires, aspirations and fears. They also serve as devices to order society for better or for worse. It is an understanding of such things that has led to clever white men attacking all of the 'myths' of other communities whilst slyly being silent on their own. The Saint George and the dragon myth is a clear one that has inspired and goaded the English into all manner of conflicts, despite its total lack of plausibility.

So I don't see historical records as dead and false like you. But I do see them as ingredients for our own 'narrative' to help define our own aspirations and paradigms and normative behaviour. In any case you are failing to recognise that 'myths' themselves appear to have a limited shelf life and are not as timeless as you suggest. Look at how quickly the Greek mythological worldview evaporated as a power to effect Greek people as an example. The Norse deities also met a similar demise. We have yet to see what impact western thought will have on 'educated' Hindus in India in the long term in any case. This goes for us too.

Western thinking recognises linear time, which is in its essence nihilistic anything banished into a linear history becomes non-existent a nothing.

As Singhs, it is only our own collective and individual actions that will determine whether our history and ideology is relevant in current times. If it becomes consigned to the dustbin of history, it will only be because of God's hukam or our own bewakoofi. The two will possibly be related. Linear time is not a falsehood btw, it is a reality.

It is interseting as to how many Sikhs are infected with malicious ideas of modern scientific rationalism, and being thus influenced they want to seperate and 'preserve' the community, what a joke.

Like I said before, I don't see nijaj or tark as inherently bad. They are like wild beasts that Sikhs need to capture and tame and use to their advantage whilst placing the more timeless values of the dharam at the core of the society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never had an account on the Hindu-Sikh brotherhood site. You will not find a single post by me written there. If they banned you what is it to do with me? If you were writing stupid and inflammatory things such as is posted at the beginning of this post that Hindu women are "whores," then no wonder you were banned. That is your problem. If you think Hindu's have a bad impression of Sikhism, then LOOK IN THE MIRROR AT HOW YOU REPRESENT IT.

Thanks in advance. I posted here, in reaction to abusive talk degrading to Hindu women and Hindu religion beneath the dignity of a Sikh. What kind of Sikh speaks against my protest to defend that? Not much of one.

Bibi Harjas Kaur Ji, why are you barking up this tree and no so much of a whimper on the next? You obviously are very talented at debating, the place for your skills is that website where your mind wil be wonderfully opened.

As for me being banned it wasnt for writing that any women, never mind hindu women are whores, but that my Guru was not the son of a hand-maid. You have a grievance with people writing against Hindus, not that i like it either, but you are strangley silent when it comes to people writing the same against Sikhs. What do you see when you lookin the mirror?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Akaal_Das is writing offensive interpretations in mischievous way about the Vedas, Shastras and Simritis. Is this what Gurbani says? People are derailing about quarrels they have on other websites not even addressing the beadbi committed here under their very noses but in their ignorance can't see. People are dragging political problems to justify the bad behavior of their religious defamation, and all under the guise of Sikhi. But what does Sikhi really teach because that alone is the truth. That alone is the issue relevant here. What a sham for Sikhs you people are, who despise the words and teachings of your own Guru Sahibaan in order to make cheap insults against entire Hindu religion while pretending every Hindu is your hated, political enemy. You are your own enemies.

ਓਅੰਕਾਰਿ ਬੇਦ ਨਿਰਮਏ ॥

O▫ankār beḏ nirma▫e.

Ongkaar created the Vedas.

~SGGS Ji ang 929

ਵਿਸਮਾਦੁ ਨਾਦ ਵਿਸਮਾਦੁ ਵੇਦ ॥

vismāḏ nāḏ vismāḏ veḏ.

Wonderful is the sound current of the Naad, wonderful is the knowledge of the Vedas.

~SGGS Ji ang 463

ਪੂਰਨ ਪੁਰਖ ਅਚੁਤ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਜਸੁ ਵੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਗਾਇਆ ॥

Pūran purakẖ acẖuṯ abẖināsī jas veḏ purāṇī gā▫i▫ā.

The Vedas and the Puraanas sing the Praises of the Perfect, Unchanging, Imperishable Primal Lord.

~SGGS Ji ang 783

ਮਾਇਆ ਕੀ ਕਿਰਤਿ ਛੋਡਿ ਗਵਾਈ ਭਗਤੀ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਨੈ ॥

Mā▫i▫ā kī kiraṯ cẖẖod gavā▫ī bẖagṯī sār na jānai.

He renounces the affairs of Maya, but he does not appreciate the value of devotional worship.

ਬੇਦ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਕਉ ਤਰਕਨਿ ਲਾਗਾ ਤਤੁ ਜੋਗੁ ਨ ਪਛਾਨੈ ॥੨॥

Beḏ sāsṯar ka▫o ṯarkan lāgā ṯaṯ jog na pacẖẖānai. ||2||

He finds fault with the Vedas and the Shaastras, and does not know the essence of Yoga. ||2||

ਉਘਰਿ ਗਇਆ ਜੈਸਾ ਖੋਟਾ ਢਬੂਆ ਨਦਰਿ ਸਰਾਫਾ ਆਇਆ ॥

Ugẖar ga▫i▫ā jaisā kẖotā dẖabū▫ā naḏar sarāfā ā▫i▫ā.

He stands exposed, like a counterfeit coin, when inspected by the Lord, the Assayer.

ਅੰਤਰਜਾਮੀ ਸਭੁ ਕਿਛੁ ਜਾਨੈ ਉਸ ਤੇ ਕਹਾ ਛਪਾਇਆ ॥੩॥

Anṯarjāmī sabẖ kicẖẖ jānai us ṯe kahā cẖẖapā▫i▫ā. ||3||

The Inner-knower, the Searcher of hearts, knows everything; how can we hide anything from Him? ||3||

ਕੂੜਿ ਕਪਟਿ ਬੰਚਿ ਨਿੰਮੁਨੀਆਦਾ ਬਿਨਸਿ ਗਇਆ ਤਤਕਾਲੇ ॥

Kūṛ kapat bancẖ nimmunī▫āḏā binas ga▫i▫ā ṯaṯkāle.

Through falsehood, fraud and deceit, the mortal collapses in an instant - he has no foundation at all.

~SGGS Ji ang 381

ਸਾਸਤੁ ਬੇਦੁ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਰੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਸੁਰਸਰੀ ਚਰਣ ਸਮਾਣੀ ॥

Sāsaṯ beḏ simriṯ sar ṯerā sursarī cẖaraṇ samāṇī.

The Shaastras, the Vedas and the Simritees are contained in the ocean of Your Name; the River Ganges is held in Your Feet.

ਸਾਖਾ ਤੀਨਿ ਮੂਲੁ ਮਤਿ ਰਾਵੈ ਤੂੰ ਤਾਂ ਸਰਬ ਵਿਡਾਣੀ ॥੧॥

Sākẖā ṯīn mūl maṯ rāvai ṯūʼn ṯāʼn sarab vidāṇī. ||1||

The intellect can understand the world of the three modes, but You, O Primal Lord, are totally astounding. ||1||

ਤਾ ਕੇ ਚਰਣ ਜਪੈ ਜਨੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਬੋਲੇ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਬਾਣੀ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Ŧā ke cẖaraṇ japai jan Nānak bole amriṯ baṇī. ||1|| rahā▫o.

Servant Nanak meditates on His Feet, and chants the Ambrosial Word of His Bani. ||1||Pause||

~SGGS Ji ang 422

ਬੇਦ ਬਖਿਆਨ ਕਰਤ ਸਾਧੂ ਜਨ ਭਾਗਹੀਨ ਸਮਝਤ ਨਹੀ ਖਲੁ ॥

Beḏ bakẖi▫ān karaṯ sāḏẖū jan bẖāghīn samjẖaṯ nahī kẖal.

The Holy Saints preach the teachings of the Vedas, but the unfortunate fools do not understand them.

ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਭਗਤਿ ਰਾਚੇ ਜਨ ਨਾਨਕ ਹਰਿ ਸਿਮਰਨਿ ਦਹਨ ਭਏ ਮਲ ॥੨॥੭॥੨੬॥

Parem bẖagaṯ rācẖe jan Nānak har simran ḏahan bẖa▫e mal. ||2||7||26||

Servant Nanak is absorbed in loving devotional worship; meditating in remembrance on the Lord, one's dirt is burnt away.

~SGGS Ji ang 717

ਆਪੇ ਵੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਣ ਸਭਿ ਸਾਸਤ ਆਪਿ ਕਥੈ ਆਪਿ ਭੀਜੈ ॥

Āpe veḏ purāṇ sabẖ sāsaṯ āp kathai āp bẖījai.

He Himself is the Vedas, the Puraanas and all the Shaastras; He Himself chants them, and He Himself is pleased.

ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਬਹਿ ਪੂਜੇ ਕਰਤਾ ਆਪਿ ਪਰਪੰਚੁ ਕਰੀਜੈ ॥

Āpe hī bahi pūje karṯā āp parpancẖ karījai.

He Himself sits down to worship, and He Himself creates the world.

ਆਪਿ ਪਰਵਿਰਤਿ ਆਪਿ ਨਿਰਵਿਰਤੀ ਆਪੇ ਅਕਥੁ ਕਥੀਜੈ ॥

Āp parviraṯ āp nirvirṯī āpe akath kathījai.

He Himself is a householder, and He Himself is a renunciate; He Himself utters the Unutterable.

ਆਪੇ ਪੁੰਨੁ ਸਭੁ ਆਪਿ ਕਰਾਏ ਆਪਿ ਅਲਿਪਤੁ ਵਰਤੀਜੈ ॥

Āpe punn sabẖ āp karā▫e āp alipaṯ varṯījai.

He Himself is all goodness, and He Himself causes us to act; He Himself remains detached.

~SGGS Ji ang 551

Akaal_Das you have defamed your Guru and you have defamed your God, according to bani. You should be ashamed. And every one of you here defending his antics should also be ashamed. Be quiet now and use your words productively, to give praise and blessing. Isn't that the essence of religion? You have such wonderful opportunity to praise. But all you can do is pornographically defame and then point fingers at other people. What, are you 3 years old? What kind of man speaks like this hiding under wonderful word Sikh, meaning shishya, meaning OBEDIENT to the words of his Guru!

Be obedient then. RESPECT the Vedas, Shastras and Smritis and DON'T DEFAME WHAT THE GURU HAS CALLED AS THE GOD, AS THE NAAM.

You don't understand, Guru corrected the false, egotistical, intellectual understanding of the scriptures. But Gurbani also says the essence of the wisdom of these scriptures is the God, comes from the God, and teaches praise of the God through chanting the Holy Naam.

So please, as Sikhs, stop disrespecting yourselves by disrespecting the Hindu bani because you are also unwittingly disrespecting the Guru bani.

Edited by HarjasKaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Citizens for Democracy even went further by stating that this pogrom was primarily meant «to arouse passion within the majority community – Hindu chauvinism – in order to consolidate Hindu votes in the election held on December 27, 1984, which was indeed massively won by the Congress (I) (Rao & al., 1985: 1).

Obviously this does not reflect any spiritual teaching which could be categorized as "Hindu." It is clearly a political and not a religious issue. Do you think Badal represents Sikhi? Why do you ignorantly assert that goondas represent Hindu religion? This incident reflects incredible corruption of the ruling Gandhi family and their autocratic power over Congress Party and their ability to intimidate the nation. PM of Congress Party today is Sikh. Is that also example of "Hindu" chauvanism? My point is politics can in no way define religion. Politics is the ultimate corrupter of religion! 1984 riots were instigated due to the influence of Rajiv Gandhi who was not a Hindu, but son of a Parsi Muslim. His children were raised as Roman Catholics and married Christians. Please tell me where is the "Hindu chauvanism? It was not act of "Hindu" chauvanism, but revenge for the assassination of his mother.

These evil acts were committed by evil-minded people with political motives. Spiritual people do not go rioting. That is against the Dharma. And who taught the world about Dharma? Hindu religion.

A man in a pagri who gets drunk, kills his neighbor, and rapes his neighbors wife, do you call him a "Sikh?" Do you call as "crimes committed by a Sikh?" Do you accuse as "example of Sikhs behavior?" Do you want people to act in kind by rudely insulting words of Guru Sahib to prove a point against him because he happened to be Sikh? Is that the lesson? Are you showing that in future people should defame bani of Guru Maharaaj because some "Sikh" people act like criminals? No wonder you're having problems with people on that other forum. LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

To drag the respected memory of victims of 1984 riots into this topic is a disgrace. You don't represent them. You are USING THEM. Do victims of 1984 represent the comments here against religious scriptures, calling Hindu women as whores? You disgrace their memory. 1984 riots have nothing to do with disrespecting words of Guru Sahib about Vedas, Shastras and Smritis. 1984 riots can't give you any right to rudely defame Hindu religion. THAT has to do with low spiritual jeevan of people whose minds are bathed in the mud.

Edited by HarjasKaur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously this does not reflect any spiritual teaching which could be categorized as "Hindu." It is clearly a political and not a religious issue. Do you think Badal represents Sikhi? Why do you ignorantly assert that goondas represent Hindu religion? This incident reflects incredible corruption of the ruling Gandhi family and their autocratic power over Congress Party and their ability to intimidate the nation. PM of Congress Party today is Sikh. Is that also example of "Hindu" chauvanism? My point is politics can in no way define religion. Politics is the ultimate corrupter of religion! 1984 riots were instigated due to the influence of Rajiv Gandhi who was not a Hindu, but son of a Parsi Muslim. His children were raised as Roman Catholics and married Christians. Please tell me where is the "Hindu chauvanism? It was not act of "Hindu" chauvanism, but revenge for the assassination of his mother

Harjas kaur

I think you don't understand politics.Politicians only attack a community when they know that majority is against them.take example of Raj thackerey he is attacking Bihari's and in return he is getting votes of mArathis,in the same way Delhi politicians got vote

after 84 riots.Tell me Why were tamilians not attcaked in 91 when Rajiv was killed.One community paid price for Indira's death by 5000 innocent people other community did not get 1 person killed.Also it is widely known that sentiments of Hindu community was

like sikh deserved what they got.Very very few leaders of that time came to their help.

A man in a pagri who gets drunk, kills his neighbor, and rapes his neighbors wife, do you call him a "Sikh?" Do you call as "crimes committed by a Sikh?" Do you accuse as "example of Sikhs behavior?" Do you want people to act in kind by rudely insulting words of Guru Sahib to prove a point against him because he happened to be Sikh? Is that the lesson? Are you showing that in future people should defame bani of Guru Maharaaj because some "Sikh" people act like criminals? No wonder you're having problems with people on that other forum. LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

Every day thousands of crimes are committed and I don't blame criminals religion unless the crime is motivated by religious hatred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bibi harjas kaur ji,

can you point out where anyone on this forum has applauded what akaal das posted? No one bothered to comment on it, cos it wasn;t even worth it.

Now tell me is us being silent just as bad as applauding akaal das' copy and paste effort from a numskull muslim site?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you point out where anyone on this forum has applauded what akaal das posted? No one bothered to comment on it, cos it wasn;t even worth it.

Now tell me is us being silent just as bad as applauding akaal das' copy and paste effort from a numskull muslim site?

If you are not commenting against my objection and in his defense, then why are you even on here derailing this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...