Banda Singh Bahadur being amritdhari

[chatanga1]

21 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

Dude, he changed his name to Madhav Das. The name "Banda" may have been given to him.

The name tradionally given to him names him as "Gurbaksh Singh". The soubriquet "Banda" was a reference to his accepting Guru Sahib as his Guru. There is no such name as "Banda Singh Bahadur". Bahadur was added to Banda after his military prowess.

[dalsingh101]

Gonna type the GP10 text over the next few days to try and translate it.  

 

 ਸੁਨੋ ਸਿਖ। ਤੁਮ ਏ ਮਿਰਜਾਦਾ। ਕਰਨ ਨ ਆਏ ਹਮ ਫਿਰੀਆਦਾ ।
ਕਿਸੀ ਸਾਥ ਹਮ ਨਾਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਯੋਜਨ । ਜੋ ਕਛੁ ਹੋਇ ਸੁ ਹਮਰੇ ਓਜਨ (11) ।
ਯੱਦਪਿ (12) ਕਰੈ ਸੁਡਾਵ ਅਪਾਰਾ । ਤਦਪਿ (13) ਦੀਨ ਬੰਧਨ ਮੈ ਡਾਰਾ । 
ਅਰੁ ਸਾਜਿਬਜਾਦੋ ਕੇ ਵੈਰ । ਲੇਤ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਕਰੈ ਬਡੇਰ । 
ਪੁਨਿ ਬੰਦੇ (14) ਕਉ ਆਯਸ਼ (15) ਦਈ । ਕਰੇ ਕਾਰ ਜੁਇ ਕੈ ਨਿਰਭਈ । 

ਜਬ ਬੰਦਾ ਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਸਿਖ ਭਯੋ । ਤਬ ਗੁਰ ਸਸਤ੍ਰ ਤਾਕੋ ਦਯੋ । 
ਚਾਰ ਬੀਰ (16) ਤਾ ਕੇ ਵਸ ਦੀਨੇ । ਸਸਤ੍ਰ ਦੇਇ ਕਰ ਸਿਖ ਕਰ  ਲੀਨੇ । 
ਤੁਮ ਲੇਵੋ ਸਭ ਬੈਰ ਸੁਧਾਰੀ । ਸਿੰਘਨ ਜੁੱਧ ਰਹਤ ਸੁ ਸਿਖਾਰੀ । 
ਤਬ ਬੰਦਾ ਗੁਰ ਆਯਸ ਪਾਏ । ਪਾਛੈ ਕਰੈ ਜੁੱਧ ਮਨ ਭਾਏ 

[BhagatSingh]

12 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Your jumping from one thing to another. 

According to Amarnama, Banda (before he became Sikh) already had a reputation for treating visitors to his ashram badly, this may have intrigued Guru ji into visiting him. 

Maybe Guru ji went over there to teach him that intimidating others is no big thing? So Banda received a lesson in humility. And having met his match, Banda submitted himself to his superior. 

The story itself is not the issue. It is what follows that puts doubt on the story.

The basic premise here is - "Guru Sahib went to teach a corrupted sadhu a lesson."

Ok I'll bite.

Now look at the events that immediately follow this story.
Guru Sahib makes him a leader of Khalsa, and he is already launching his attacks on Mughals!

WTF

One thing does not follow the other.

 

Quote

Your jumping from one thing to another.

 I am saying just go with that story, take it as face value and just run with it.

Khushwant Singh did just that.

I'll paraphrase again-

22 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

In History of the Sikhs, Khushwant Singh  recognizes this problem as well.

He asks in the book  - Why does Banda Singh do this for Guru sahib?
Why does Guru Gobind Singh ji select Banda Singh as the leader of Sikhs?

"Guru Sahib went to teach a corrupted sadhu a lesson."

This premise itself is faulty to begin with because immediately after Guru Gobind Singh ji visits him, he gives him leadership of the Khalsa. This guy then leads the Khalsa army and immediately goes into action, recruiting more soldiers and attacking places.

This left Khushwant Singh confused! 

In one moment, he is a ***** that Guru Sahib is reforming, the next day, he is made leader of khalsa and he is now leading them in battles and shit.... all to avenge the execution of chotte sahibzade.

Why is Guru Sahib giving leadership to a supposedly corrupt Guru? Where is this bond with chotte sahibzadey coming from? What is the characters motivation here?

That makes no sense.

If this was a movie, it would be a glaring plothole.

 

So

The story of Guru Sahib reforming someone is not the issue itself. It is how the story then proceeds. It's like saying 2+2 = 5.

 

Guru Gobind Singh ji went to Guru Madhav Das ji in order to give him leadership of the Khalsa. This guy then goes on a mission to avenge Guru Sahib's children and leads the Khalsa army and immediately goes into action, recruiting more soldiers and attacking places.

1. If Guru Gobind Singh ji is giving him the leadership of Khalsa and the duty of avenging  the execution of his children, that means Guru Sahib must already holds him in high regard and knows him well enough to trust him with this mission.
2. He must already have been the leader that Guru Sahib was looking for.
3. If Banda Singh Bahadur ji is accepting this leadership and mission, that means he must already have a bond with the Guru and his family, and such.

Thus this idea of "Guru Sahib went to teach a corrupted sadhu a lesson."  must be false because it does not match anything else in the story.
It sticks out like a sore thumb, and it probably an attempt at character assassination.

[BhagatSingh]

4 hours ago, Jatro said:

followers of adopted pretender to Guruship Ajit Singh (mentioned as Jit Singh)

Is this the same son that was adopted by Mata Sundri?

[dalsingh101]

36 minutes ago, BhagatSingh said:

Is this the same son that was adopted by Mata Sundri?

I think it's that guy. 

[dalsingh101]

Quote

"Guru Sahib went to teach a corrupted sadhu a lesson."

This premise itself is faulty to begin with because immediately after Guru Gobind Singh ji visits him, he gives him leadership of the Khalsa. This guy then leads the Khalsa army and immediately goes into action, recruiting more soldiers and attacking places.

This left Khushwant Singh confused! 

In one moment, he is a ***** that Guru Sahib is reforming, the next day, he is made leader of khalsa and he is now leading them in battles and shit.... all to avenge the execution of chotte sahibzade.

Why is Guru Sahib giving leadership to a supposedly corrupt Guru? Where is this bond with chotte sahibzadey coming from? What is the characters motivation here?

That makes no sense.

If this was a movie, it would be a glaring plothole.

 

Show some earthly depth.....

Imagine a natural leader. A proper Alpha-Male. Tough as hell, shrewd, with more than a few tricks up his sleeve...... not without his flaws though.

What we call a 'rough diamond' in East London.... lol

This is Madho Das.

 

Then imagine the king of kings, hearing about a character that has everyone on a back foot. You know, I'm pretty sure that they had heard of each other beforehand  myself. I think they were two focal points of independence in a generally cowed down  Moghul 'India' myself.  But Guru ji was more successful - they'd been building up a community over ten successive generations - so no big surprise. They had Panjabis, a community ram packed full of singular-minded, stubborn hot-heads - to draw from as well.

When they meet, Guru ji is testing Madho Das's mettle -  Madho Das tests Guru ji's backbone - a man like that (Banda), who is obviously fiercely independent and values himself to the point of being haughty isn't used to meeting something as solid as dasmesh pita. Dasmesh pita himself sees in Madho Das something rare - strength, leadership, independence, potential. 

It's obvious when they talked they both shared a common dissatisfaction with contemporary Moghul rule. Which, given Aurengzaab's ISIS style of leadership, should be no surprise. Madho Das is a natural leader and Guru ji understands him. The bit that pisses off some modern day and probably contemporary Sikhs (of that time) is that Guru ji sees  better leadership qualities and strength in Banda than what he was working with already (the Khalsa). But Guru ji is smarter than his Sikhs! So he 'deputises' Madho Das and inducts him into the Khalsa, but leaves him with a core team of top Singhs to advise him. There are a few old manuscripts that point at Guru ji encouraging group consensus amongst Sikhs to make decisions. So this should be no big surprise. Plus Guru ji being antarjaami, knew he was leaving us (physically soon). 

The rest is logical.   Guru ji gave his new Banda the tools to take on the Moghuls (Singhs) that Madho Das didn't have - Banda gets to strike at the oppressive Moghuls - but with a force infinitely stronger than the one he gathered around himself at Godwari. 

Plus, I don't agree that  Guru ji's objective was solely revenge for the sahibzaday at this point, I think they were genuinely concerned with 'dharam' as in 'righteousness' as opposed to perpetuating some fudhu outdated Indic caste system. I think they were essentially fighting for people to be able to follow their religious convictions without tossers violently ramming their own beliefs  down people's throats like certain types of sullay (past and present) are want to do. And some ignorant arse, piss poor excuse of Singhs too for that matter!

[BhagatSingh]

@dalsingh101

There was no fight, no competition in-between them. Men who meet up as rivals on one day, do not join forces with each other on the same day.

"who is obviously fiercely independent and values himself to the point of being haughty"
If you think so, then you should know you cannot intimidate this type of a guy into submission. These kind of men, don't just bow down to one another. Forcing into submission does not work. They fight back if you try to do that. They rebel if you force them. They don't become your Sikhs when you force them.

If he was as you say he was, then Guru Sahib would have to appeal to his arrogance rather than trying to force him to submission. The latter builds resentment.

 

Also

Show me an example of any previous Guru who forced in to submission anyone to become their Sikh.

It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest so.

 

Anyways "haughty" is not even close to describing Madhav Das just based on what we know of him.

haugh·ty

ˈhôdē/

adjective

adjective: haughty; comparative adjective: haughtier; superlative adjective: haughtiest

1. arrogantly superior and disdainful.

    

This is not who Madhav Das ji is.

 

Remember that one reason why the young Lacchman Dev ji became Madhav Das ji in the first place!

He was hunting and after killing a dear, he went to go grab the meat. What he saw shocked him! In front of him the dear gave birth and the fawn writhed in pain and died right there.

He killed an unborn infant.

There he had an existential crisis. If he ever was haughty, which we don't know for sure, then this is where it changed.

And he went under the wing of Guru Janaki Das ji to resolve it. Under Guru Janaki Das ji, he came to be known as Madhav Das as he had gained enlightenment. He succeeded his Guru, and became the Guru of the followers, hence - Guru Madhav Das.

He was far from "haughty". There is nothing to suggest otherwise.

 

So Guru Gobind Singh ji is from one lineage of Gurus. Guru Madhav Das ji is from another lineage of Gurus.
In 1708, these two groups merge.

Just like how Guru Lehna ji's following merged with that of Guru Nanak Dev ji.

 

I think that is more likely that the two Gurus were even closer than what you have imagined.

They may have already knew each other to begin with... but not in regular contact. Since there was no Facebook/Twitter at that time, Guru Madhav Das ji, in central india, had been out of touch with what was happening with Guru Gobind Singh ji, who was up north. And so Guru Sahib had to give him a status update in-person.

It wasn't the only mission but one of the missions Guru Sahib gave him, was to avenge the Guru's children and punish Governor Wazir Khan in Sirhind.

 

Someone who you forced to submit to you will not just join your cause and go on missions to avenge your children. And new acquaintances do not avenge your children if you demonstrate your superiority to them. People do not respond well to arrogance.

On earth, such an act requires previous attachment or humility.

 

Only family members avenge the execution of other family members. If not family, then close friends.If not close friends then you must win the heart of the person whom you want to inspire to fight your cause. If they are a Guru you must approach with humility. Gurus respond to humility.

Either you are family or close-friends and they have that desire to avenge your children, or, you humbly ask a stranger to avenge your children and you inspire him by telling him your story.

[Jatro]

9 hours ago, JustAnotherSingh said:

@Jatro Damn, that's some awesome stuff! Some sort of tangential points to think on:

1) Regarding the usage of Singh; even Sainapat (one of the earliest Sikh writers) and Nand Lal don't put Singh in their names or say it much in their writings. It seems like you can slowly see the adoption of Singh as a word, to the point where we use it as a specific noun to refer to Khalsa (something not the case w/Rajputs where it's just a surname).

2) Who was Ajit Singh?
 

3) this whole struggle for legitimacy is so intriguing...Sikhs in the later period (Ranjit Singh's time) seemed to be much more chill with syncretism, so this evolution is very cool as well...

Ajit Singh was adopted son of Mata Sundari ji. I agree with your point about the adoption of Singh, probably happened over a period of time.

[Jatro]

5 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

Is this the same son that was adopted by Mata Sundri?

Yes brother, same guy

[JustAnotherSingh]

@BhagatSingh, sorry if I sound like a dick, but it really feels like you're picking an argument just for the sake of it and not because it's rigorously supported by the evidence. 

First off, can you actually cite your claim of Guru Lehna merging with Guru Nanak to create Guru Angad's path? If your view of Guru successorship is such, why didn't Guru Har Rai just "merge" his followers with those of Ram Rai and make him the next Guru? Where is any actual evidence of Lehna's followers? What do you make of the many references talking about Lehna's selfless devotion to the Guru as his Sikh, his chela? 

 

Secondly, you're making mountains out of molehills to support your own odd little theory. Again, there's a lot of confusing questions in Sikh history when we become hypercritical ad absurdum. Like, why would 5 Singh's literally offer their heads on Vaisakhi 1699 when the Guru asked out of the blue?

I think we can all agree that the Guru admired Madho Das's leadership qualities, even over his own current Singh's. I'm also certain Madho Das had heard of Guru Gobind Singh; he lived in Northern India during his early life and Guru Sahib had set up shop in Nanded during his later life. 

Your entire argument is contingent on a complex psychoanalysis of multiple actors that has no real evidence and falls apart logically. What exactly was this bond between Guru Gobind Singh and Madho Das? Why would there be a "merger" of spiritual paths when Madho Das led the **Khalsa** army? 

Here's a much more simple psychological breakdown I propose that agrees with the actual evidence and doesn't propose wild unsubstantiated theories the way you do: 

-Madho Das was a stellar warrior and spiritually connected; but he still had a higher sense of self-importance than most. In some ways, this ego explains why he was such a good leader; but it also explains why, later in his military career, he overextended too quickly and went against the advice of his Panj Pyare. Personalities are complex and most people aren't one-sided caricatures the way apne like to often paint it out to be.

-The Guru persuaded him that someone of his ilk, as a charismatic and talented individual, mentally and physically, should be leading the fight and correcting the injustices going on across Punjab and Hindustan in general instead of frivolously performing magic tricks and caring for goats. Banda Singh's life story is a textbook case of the asceticism that Nanak critiqued; running away from the realities of the harsh world instead of addressing them head-on. Therefore, Madho Das takes amrit, becomes Gurbaksh Singh, and decides to become the jathedar of the Khalsa Army (still put in check by 5 Panj Pyare appointed by the Guru). I do NOT agree with some of the Puratan literature that says Banda became so haughty he styled himself a Guru and saw himself at the same level of Guru Gobind Singh; whoever else he may have had disagreements with (Bhai Binod Singh for example) the Gurus were clearly people he always respected and deferred to. This is seen in the fact that he did not strike coins in the name of the Bandai Khalsa, in the names of Guru Madhav Das and the Vaishnavite Raj, but in the names of the Sache Patshah--Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh. 

 

There is no coercion in Guru Sahib and Madho Das's conversion. If he did kill the goats (I don't know but that's what the sources say), he didn't do it to say "hahaha now you have nothing to do but fight for me." He did it to prove a point to Madho Das, which it did.

 

Also, I agree with dalsingh that the conquest of Sirhind was about WAY more than avenging the Sahibzade. It was about deposing a cruel and psychotic murderer in the throne. But now that I think about it, the saga of the chotte-Sahibzade could have been a really good emotive point for Guru Sahib to capitalize on while describing the despair of Punjab. You have this cruel king; so cruel that he bricked alive a 7 and 9 year old. That's something that made Sher Khan of Malhotra, the dude whose brothers were all killed by Guru Gobind Singh personally, grimace and shake his head in disgust; Banda being sympathetic to that isn't too out of the left field.

[amardeep]

Many sikh scholars of the 1970s in Punjab were asking the same questions and coming up with alternative theories that Banda Singh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh might have known each other before hand. One claimed that Banda Singh Bahadur might have been a Mughal commander at some point in his early years which gave him the strategic knowledge of Northern India as well as military strategy etc.

One account i've read in English has an alternative ending of the story with the goats. Banda is horrified that the blood of goats have been spilled in his ashram, whereas Guru Gobind Singh confronts his hypocracy that Banda is outraged of animal blood in his local ashram while India itself is an ashram full of human blood due to mughal opression. From this argument the venture Begins of Banda Sing Bahadur becoming the military leader.

Also DalsIngh: it is vital to note that many of the leading and skillful Khalsa warriors had been killed at this time. So there probably was'nt that many leaders for Guru Maharaj to chose from. Many had been killed after the Anandpur evacuation, so the Guru might have been looking for an alternative leader with military skills and insights, - wheras many of his current soldiers were probably fairly newly trained and unexperienced which made them unqualified for leadership roles.

[dalsingh101]

Quote

Also DalsIngh: it is vital to note that many of the leading and skillful Khalsa warriors had been killed at this time. So there probably was'nt that many leaders for Guru Maharaj to chose from. Many had been killed after the Anandpur evacuation, so the Guru might have been looking for an alternative leader with military skills and insights, - wheras many of his current soldiers were probably fairly newly trained and unexperienced which made them unqualified for leadership roles.

Good point. 

[paapiman]

@BhagatSingh - Bro, please read (below) the account of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur jee from Guru Kian Sakhian and Pracheen Panth Prakash. It will become clear to you that Madho Das jee was a victim of ego, which was shattered by the Almighty Satguru jee. 

 

Guru Kian Sakhian:

 

 

 

 

Pracheen Panth Prakash:

 

 

 

 

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[amardeep]

There is a book that records a long conversation between Guru Gobind Singh and Banda Singh Bahadur at their first meeting. Im not sure if it is fiction or it is a translation of an old granth. It is very similiar to the Bhagavad Gita and covers subjects such as the soul, karma, dharam yudh, meditation etc...

https://books.google.com/books/about/Sri_Guru_Gobind_Geeta.html?id=Fh0uAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y

 

Could it be that the Guru and Banda Singh Bahadur in fact had a really long and Deep debate and discussion at their first meeting which led Banda Singh Bahadur to become his Sikh? And later writers and historians created the more magic story of the ghosts and sidhia as a poetic embellishment  - creating a more dramatic meeting between the two giants in order to make the story more intriging for readers and listeners? In the same way the same writers adds all kinds of puranic methaphor and symbols into the historical Sikh battles as a poetic embellishment..

Edited April 1, 2016 by amardeep

[chatanga1]

17 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

In one moment, he is a ***** that Guru Sahib is reforming, the next day, he is made leader of khalsa and he is now leading them in battles and shit.... all to avenge the execution of chotte sahibzade.

 

This chnage did not happen in one day. According to Amarnamah Madho Das further tried to incite the local people and then the administration against Guru Ji, but failed. When Madho Das realised he had no power against Guru Ji, he submitted.

 

17 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

 

1. If Guru Gobind Singh ji is giving him the leadership of Khalsa and the duty of avenging  the execution of his children, that means Guru Sahib must already holds him in high regard and knows him well enough to trust him with this mission.
2. He must already have been the leader that Guru Sahib was looking for.
3. If Banda Singh Bahadur ji is accepting this leadership and mission, that means he must already have a bond with the Guru and his family, and such.

 

1. No. Why couldn't Guru JI reform Madho Das, when Baba Nanak could reform Kauda Raksh? Did Baba Nanak know Kauda Raksh beforehand?

2. No. The Khalsa had already become the leader that Guru Sahib needed. Guru Sahib had already vested the Guru Khalsa with this. IMO Guru Ji wanted to use Madho Das as an example that one's duty should always be upheld. Maybe Guru Sahib was giving Madho Das a chance to counter the treachery of the hill chiefs.

3. No. See no 1. The Guru's reformed characters simply by their presence in some cases.

[chatanga1]

3 hours ago, amardeep said:

There is a book that records a long conversation between Guru Gobind Singh and Banda Singh Bahadur at their first meeting.

 

I am sure that Amarnamah covers this, but also The book about Hazur Sahib by Niddar Singh does.

[paapiman]

30 minutes ago, chatanga1 said:

 

I am sure that Amarnamah covers this, but also The book about Hazur Sahib by Niddar Singh does.

Paaji, what is Amarnamah?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[dalsingh101]

11 minutes ago, paapiman said:

Paaji, what is Amarnamah?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

It's a small document that is said to be a contemporary account of Guru ji's meeting with Madho Das by someone called Dhadhi Nathmaal. 

 

There used to be an English translation (by the IOSS I think?) but I can't seem to find it online now.  

[chatanga1]

1 hour ago, dalsingh101 said:

There used to be an English translation (by the IOSS I think?) but I can't seem to find it online now.  

I have only seen a Panjabi version myself alongside the Persian writing.

[dalsingh101]

2 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

I have only seen a Panjabi version myself alongside the Persian writing.

It was translated by Gurtej Singh. I hunted for it on the web but couldn't find it?

[BhagatSingh]

17 hours ago, amardeep said:

Many sikh scholars of the 1970s in Punjab were asking the same questions and coming up with alternative theories that Banda Singh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh might have known each other before hand.

As they should because otherwise the story makes no sense as it is told in some granths.

Quote

One claimed that Banda Singh Bahadur might have been a Mughal commander at some point in his early years which gave him the strategic knowledge of Northern India as well as military strategy etc.

i am not sure if he was a Mughal commander but the dude certainly was a badass Warrior prior to reaching englightenment and becoming a Guru.

Quote

One account i've read in English has an alternative ending of the story with the goats. Banda is horrified that the blood of goats have been spilled in his ashram, whereas Guru Gobind Singh confronts his hypocracy that Banda is outraged of animal blood in his local ashram while India itself is an ashram full of human blood due to mughal opression. From this argument the venture Begins of Banda Sing Bahadur becoming the military leader.

+1
That's an interesting take, and one that would fit the story.

 

Guru Sahib reforming a "kauda rakshas" character and making him leader right away is not one that works.

Guru Sahib intimidating or forcing Banda to become a Sikh is not one that works either. Certainly intimidating people to lead your men is not righteous, if we think that Guru Sahib is a righteous man. Nor is it actually possible because of human nature.

 

Quote

Also DalsIngh: it is vital to note that many of the leading and skillful Khalsa warriors had been killed at this time. So there probably was'nt that many leaders for Guru Maharaj to chose from. Many had been killed after the Anandpur evacuation, so the Guru might have been looking for an alternative leader with military skills and insights, - wheras many of his current soldiers were probably fairly newly trained and unexperienced which made them unqualified for leadership roles.

Exactly after Battle of Anandpur, Chamkaur, Muktsar, etc. Guru Sahib was in such a dire need that he had to go fetch someone (Plato's "philosopher king" basically) from Dakhani region and bring him up north to fight the Mughals there.

Guru Sahib saw a void develop in the power structure up in North india, a void that he previously occupied himself but could no longer fill. Guru Sahib wanted someone capable to fill that void and take his place.

Who could be a better than an enlightened Warrior-turned-Guru like Madhav Das? Who was known for his spiritual powers (that later caused Mughals to shit their pants).

Judging by the situation and what unfolded after the meeting, it is very plausible Guru Sahib already knew him.

And I don't care whether he took amrit or not. If he took amrit it is probably because Guru Sahib wanted his men to feel like Madhav Das was one of them so that they would accept his leadership.

[BhagatSingh]

@paapiman

It's not as straight-forward. These same books (Panth Prakash) have a biased view of Banda Singh Bahadur. They are filled with character-assassination attempts.

Everyone thinks their own parents are the best parents in the whole wide world.

Develop an objective view - The way you see Guru Gobind Singh ji as a Guru in Northern India. You should see Guru Madhav Das ji as a Guru in the Dakhani region (Central India).

He was not an ego-filled rakshas lol. He was a Sikh of Guru Janaki Das ji, and was an enlightened person with spiritual powers and a powerful persona, who commanded a large following of of his own sikhs. This is why he was appointed by Guru Gobind Singh ji as the leader of Guru Sahib's sikhs.

[paapiman]

 

10 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

Develop an objective view - The way you see Guru Gobind Singh ji as a Guru in Northern India. You should see Guru Madhav Das ji as a Guru in the Dakhani region (Central India).

He was not an ego-filled rakshas lol. He was a Sikh of Guru Janaki Das ji, and was an enlightened person with spiritual powers and a powerful persona, who commanded a large following of of his own sikhs. This is why he was appointed by Guru Gobind Singh ji as the leader of Guru Sahib's sikhs.

There is no doubt that Madho Das jee was a spiritual person, who had great powers, but he was a victim of Ego too. His Guru had also predicted to him that a Raaj yogi will come to meet you. Furthermore, we cannot compare a mere Saint to the Almighty Waheguru (Tenth Master). Maharaaj went there to reform him and turn him into a warrior. 

Even, Wali Qandhari, Hamza Gaus, etc, were spiritual people, but Sri Satguru jee (First Master) gave them updesh and reformed them.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

On 4/1/2016 at 5:27 AM, amardeep said:

One account i've read in English has an alternative ending of the story with the goats. Banda is horrified that the blood of goats have been spilled in his ashram, whereas Guru Gobind Singh confronts his hypocracy that Banda is outraged of animal blood in his local ashram while India itself is an ashram full of human blood due to mughal opression. From this argument the venture Begins of Banda Sing Bahadur becoming the military leader.

The above is confirmed in Guru Kian Sakhian.

Also, the goats were given liberation. We should not forget that.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[JustAnotherSingh]

@amardeep was there a void in leadership actually though? The members of the Panj Pyare that were with Banda were all pretty qualified and there were also Rajputs already sympathetic to the Khalsa that the Guru could have relied on.