paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 IMHO, there were some great Singhs for sure, who could lead the Khalsa, other than Baba Banda Singh jee. Few notable ones, are as below: Akali Nihang Baba Binod Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Second Master) Akali Nihang Baba Kahan Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Second Master) Akali Nihang Baba Onon Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Third Master) Akali Nihang Baba Daya Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Third Master) Sardar Baaj Singh Bal of Patti Srimaan 108 Shaheed Baba Deep Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan 108 Shaheed Baba Mani Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan Pyaray Baba Daya Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan Pyaray Baba Dharam Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) The reason Baba Banda Singh jee was chosen, has a history behind it. Baba jee, in one of his previous lives, was in the army of Sri Ram Chandar jee. Gurparsaad, details to come later. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, JustAnotherSingh said: @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. Apparently there was since none of those that Pappiman has mentioned above were made leaders of the Khalsa at that time. Also remember that different qualifications are needed in terms of leadership vs. warriorhood. You can be an excellent warrior without nescesarely being a great leader. Likewise, you can be an excellent leader without being a great warrior... Many football coaches for instances suck at playing football but they are good at the strategic work of coaching players etc. Edited April 2, 2016 by amardeep 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 48 minutes ago, amardeep said: Also remember that different qualifications are needed in terms of leadership vs. warriorhood. You can be an excellent warrior without nescesarely being a great leader. Likewise, you can be an excellent leader without being a great warrior... Many football coaches for instances suck at playing football but they are good at the strategic work of coaching players etc. Good point above. Leadership does require special skills. Having said the above, we must not forget that Gurmukh Brahamgyanis can easily switch modes. They can turn themselves from being ultra peaceful saints to great ruthless warriors/leaders. Good examples in history: Srimaan Sant Baba Maharaaj Singh jee Maharaaj - fought against British kingdom Sant Gyani Jarnail SIngh jee Bhindranwale - fought against Indian government. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 (edited) Banda Singh Bahadur did a tremendous job despite all the odds against him. If he had succeeded in making a military alliance with the rajastani kings, history would probably have looked different during that century. Instead, the rajputs sided with the Mughals against the Sikhs. Edited April 2, 2016 by amardeep 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 There is another Sakhi. Daas is not sure, if it is regarding Baba Banda Singh jee Bahadur. Maharaaj (Tenth Master) shot an arrow, which pierced through a fruit. The Ustad of some personality was in the fruit. The reason being that near his death, the Ustad thought of eating a fruit, but died before doing so. This resulted in him being in the fruit, in his next life form. It is similar to what happened to Duni Chand's father, who was in the form of a wolf, during the times of Sri Satguru jee (First Master). That personality, then realized the power of the Almighty Satguru jee. Anyone heard the above? Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 6 minutes ago, amardeep said: Banda Singh Bahadur did a tremendous job despite all the odds against him. If he had succeeded in making a military alliance with the rajastani kings, history would probably have looked different during that century. Instead, the rajputs sided with the Mughals against the Sikhs. Baba jee did an amazing job, but again became a victim of ego. It was ego, which lead to his downfall. He started calling himself a Guru. He was even confronted by Srimaan 108 Shaheed Baba Deep Singh jee Maharaaj for his blasphemy. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 (edited) I dont think he called himself a Guru. Some people around him did. In his two hukamnamas there is nothing to suggest that he sees himself as Guru, He referst to himself as the Sacha Sahib, not as the Guru. Having an ego is human. We can hardly blame him for that. See the first few lines here from the Bansavalinama - The Sikhs called him guru. not himself. Edited April 2, 2016 by amardeep 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 Daas heard in Katha that he started calling himself a Guru. He was even about to set a seat for himself at Sri Harmandar Sahib. That is where, he was confronted by Baba Deep Singh jee. Ego is present in many humans, but there are different levels to it. We cannot compare someone taking pride in being a Ragi to someone who is equating himself to the Almighty Satguru jee. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 I'd like to see if there are any 18th century sources that have the same claims on Banda as does the 19th century Panth Prakash. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BhagatSingh Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 3 hours ago, amardeep said: Banda Singh Bahadur did a tremendous job despite all the odds against him. If he had succeeded in making a military alliance with the rajastani kings, history would probably have looked different during that century. Instead, the rajputs sided with the Mughals against the Sikhs. Even some sikhs sided against Banda Singh. Otherwise Banda would have changed the structure of North India! He had an insane momentum (which I talk about below). 3 hours ago, amardeep said: I dont think he called himself a Guru. Some people around him did. Exactly. Neither do any of our Gurus. However they are still Gurus because people revere them as such. Guru Nanak Dev ji would not be a Guru if we did not call him that. And by calling Guru Nam Dev ji as Sant Nam Dev or Bhagat Nam Dev, we forget how powerful of a Guru he was. Madhav Das ji was a Guru in central India. And an "unofficial guru" of Guru Gobind Singh ji's sikhs, after Guru Sahib departed. Remember even if Guru Sahib wanted, Guru Sahib could NOT give gurgaddi to him, lest he went against the bachan of Guru Amar Das ji towards Bibi Bhani ji. The most Guru Sahib could do.... was what he did, just give Banda leadership of his army. 4 hours ago, amardeep said: Also remember that different qualifications are needed in terms of leadership vs. warriorhood. You can be an excellent warrior without nescesarely being a great leader. Likewise, you can be an excellent leader without being a great warrior... Many football coaches for instances suck at playing football but they are good at the strategic work of coaching players etc. And remember Guru Sahib wasn't just looking for a warrior-leader. He was a looking for someone who could also be a Spiritual Guide for Sikhs in the future. And such a spiritual man would also be the most righteous man and uphold dharam at each step. And Banda just gave away all wealth he conquered as a Spiritual Leader should. He gave back all captured land to the farmers. The Jatts loved him for that! They filled his ranks happily. During Guru Gobind Singh ji's time Sikh army was mostly Kshatriya clans, but during Banda's time it was mostly Jatt. And it grew incredibly large in an incredibly short period of time. Banda caused the rise of Jatts in North India. Who then ruled during and after Sikh empire, and even now. So he significantly changed North India, even in his brief period of rule. Quote Having an ego is human. We can hardly blame him for that. Exactly. There is one thing to say there is ego. There is another to extrapolate that to some rakashas-level, corrupted figure-type personality. There is no way Guru Sahibs are making that type of a guy into a leader of Sikh army. Forget it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 2, 2016 Report Share Posted April 2, 2016 If anyone has any audio references from Katha (of a Saint or a Saint-Scholar), which has information regarding Baba jee, please do share. Thanks Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted April 3, 2016 Report Share Posted April 3, 2016 Quote There is one thing to say there is ego. There is another to extrapolate that to some rakashas-level, corrupted figure-type personality. There is no way Guru Sahibs are making that type of a guy into a leader of Sikh army. Forget it. No Sikh has suggested he was rakhshas type. I don't know where you get that from? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 3, 2016 (edited) @BhagatSingh When I say he wasn'nt a Guru nor claim to be one, I mean in the lineage of Guru Gobind Singh. He wasn't an 11th Guru. He might have been a Guru to his followers in the deccan, I have no issue with this. But he was not on the gaddi of Guru Nanak/Guru Gobind SIngh and I'm not sure there is any evidence in 18th century writings that says he claimed this during his own lifetime. Edited April 3, 2016 by amardeep 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 3, 2016 Report Share Posted April 3, 2016 On 4/2/2016 at 10:44 AM, paapiman said: IMHO, there were some great Singhs for sure, who could lead the Khalsa, other than Baba Banda Singh jee. Few notable ones, are as below: Akali Nihang Baba Binod Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Second Master) Akali Nihang Baba Kahan Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Second Master) Akali Nihang Baba Onon Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Third Master) Akali Nihang Baba Daya Singh jee (Descendant of Sri Satguru jee - Third Master) Sardar Baaj Singh Bal of Patti Srimaan 108 Shaheed Baba Deep Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan 108 Shaheed Baba Mani Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan Pyaray Baba Daya Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) Srimaan Pyaray Baba Dharam Singh jee Maharaaj (Gurmukh Brahamgyani) There were two more great warriors during that time. Akali Nihang Baba Baaj Singh jee Akali Nihang Baba Bijay Singh jee Can anyone confirm the above? Were they also descendants of Sri Satguru jee (Third Master)? Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 3, 2016 Report Share Posted April 3, 2016 On 4/2/2016 at 1:55 PM, paapiman said: Daas heard in Katha that he started calling himself a Guru. He was even about to set a seat for himself at Sri Harmandar Sahib. That is where, he was confronted by Baba Deep Singh jee. Ego is present in many humans, but there are different levels to it. We cannot compare someone taking pride in being a Ragi to someone who is equating himself to the Almighty Satguru jee. Bhul chuk maaf Please listen below to Gyani Thakur Singh jee. He talks about the blunders committed by Baba Banda Singh jee Bahadur and his confrontation with Baba Deep Singh jee, Baba Binod Singh jee and Baba Kahan Singh jee. Please start listening after 1:17:00 min: http://www.gurbaniupdesh.org/multimedia/04-Katha/13-Giani%20Thakur%20Singh%20Ji%20%28Patiala%20Wale%29/Baba%20Deep%20Singh%20Ji/Baba%20Deep%20Singh%20Katha%2001.mp3 Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BhagatSingh Posted April 3, 2016 Report Share Posted April 3, 2016 9 hours ago, amardeep said: @BhagatSingh When I say he wasn'nt a Guru nor claim to be one, I mean in the lineage of Guru Gobind Singh. He wasn't an 11th Guru. He might have been a Guru to his followers in the deccan, I have no issue with this. But he was not on the gaddi of Guru Nanak/Guru Gobind SIngh and I'm not sure there is any evidence in 18th century writings that says he claimed this during his own lifetime. Yes, he never got "official gurgaddi/guruship" nor did he ever claim he did. Guru Gobind Singh ji was not allowed to give gurgaddi to him or anyone else outside the family. I don't think any Sikhs were claiming he got the "official gurgaddi" either because there would have been a separate tilak ceremony for that. Everyone would have known about it. So the Sikhs who adopted him as their Guru were knowingly doing so unofficially. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 5, 2016 Report Share Posted April 5, 2016 Some more issues related to Baba jee. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted April 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 5, 2016 @paapiman do you know if any 18th century source state anything similiar ? Or is it only in the pracheen panth prakash that we see this narrative? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted April 6, 2016 Report Share Posted April 6, 2016 On 03/04/2016 at 11:26 PM, BhagatSingh said: So the Sikhs who adopted him as their Guru were knowingly doing so unofficially. Why would the Sikhs adopt someone as Guru, who has recently accepted their Guru as his own Guru, and knowing that the Guruship has been passed onto the Granth and the Panth? 23 hours ago, amardeep said: @paapiman do you know if any 18th century source state anything similiar ? Or is it only in the pracheen panth prakash that we see this narrative? Siqcues tigers and thieves has quite a lot of info re Banda Bahadur? Mostly Moghal sources though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BhagatSingh Posted April 6, 2016 Report Share Posted April 6, 2016 4 hours ago, chatanga1 said: Why would the Sikhs adopt someone as Guru, who has recently accepted their Guru as his own Guru, and knowing that the Guruship has been passed onto the Granth and the Panth? The same reason why we have a Prime Minister or President. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustAnotherSingh Posted April 7, 2016 Report Share Posted April 7, 2016 On 4/2/2016 at 11:56 AM, amardeep said: Apparently there was since none of those that Pappiman has mentioned above were made leaders of the Khalsa at that time. Also remember that different qualifications are needed in terms of leadership vs. warriorhood. You can be an excellent warrior without nescesarely being a great leader. Likewise, you can be an excellent leader without being a great warrior... Many football coaches for instances suck at playing football but they are good at the strategic work of coaching players etc. That's my point though--I think there were a lot of ample warriors/Gursikhs/straight-up-military leaders, but Banda stood above and beyond given his dynamic personality and extreme leadership credibility. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 7, 2016 Report Share Posted April 7, 2016 Please have a look below (there are four parts to it). He might not be completely right, but Nihang scholars will have to be taken seriously when we talk about Baba Banda Singh Bahadur jee. Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 On 06/04/2016 at 0:03 AM, BhagatSingh said: The same reason why we have a Prime Minister or President. Who looks up to a PM or Prez the same way they look to their Guru? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BhagatSingh Posted April 9, 2016 Report Share Posted April 9, 2016 2 hours ago, chatanga1 said: Who looks up to a PM or Prez the same way they look to their Guru? One is looked up to for worldly matters, the other is looked up to for spiritual matters. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted April 10, 2016 Report Share Posted April 10, 2016 16 hours ago, BhagatSingh said: One is looked up to for worldly matters, the other is looked up to for spiritual matters. So where we have Guru Granth Guru Panth who would need a PM or Prez? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.