navjot2

hi your translations do not seem very senseitive to the original wording also why are 4 hort sloaks ending up as a long paragraph in 'english translation'?

question mark because i offered that answer tentatively i assume the word 'piyaree' is not refering to naam?

guys we're all sikhs at the end of the day we can agree to disagree

Balbir ji' you are right it is significant from what i can deduce (via Google!) Nara means 'Man', Naara 'water' and Yaana measn residing? i guess water refers to water as in an ocean as in whole universe/existance?

an army that puts aside any Dharmic consideration and merely goes in for military training is liable to egotisitical corruption the Dharmic part instills in them what they are fighting for, how to behave, and whose support they can rely on. as someone said earlier that Guru ji was actually awknowledging Chandi and giving her due respect, and mentioned Krishna doing same thing. hence the formal ceremony. this does not mean he was gong bak on his priciple of woshipping only Akaal. In Dasam Bani it explains who Bhavani (Devi) is in relation to Akaal.

whilst Chandi veneration was in Panjab''s fauji it was the strongest state in India and British had to win it by political machinations and not might. then they decided 'oh we dont do this 'Hindu things'' and started worshipping British instead. inbetween Singhs went from being respected even by their enemies to being widely considered a joke.

*accidental repeat post

Dalsingh your reasoning is flawed anyway China is a communist (non-theist state) but have probably the largest army in the world not to mention great affluence. so if they get these power without awknowledging God Himself on any official level, by your reasoning worship of God is also redundant for an army. Appeal to Chandi was a dharmic occurance.

"regarding your other points, to suggest that Gurbani would say one thing, and the Guru do another is just wrong. " what are you refering to? when did i make this claim? are you confusing what Guru ji says and what people interpret him as saying as one and the same?

Matheen i already answered your questions, above. Its already widely understood, even here, that we do not find much use of Kaur in this way before 1850-ish after which is became all pervasive. We also do not find it in an early rehit. We do not find any contemporary or near contemporary sikh female of Guru Gobind Singh holding this title in the manner described.

panjabi writers of the mid to late 1800's mutilated punjabi by trying to turn it into psuedo-hindi and pseudo-English.

actually i wasnt even aware of your typo. subconcious referencing. neither Ganda or Kahan are impressive to me as they are also propagandists. but this isnt relevant to this discussion. i do not understand why you keep gong off on tangents? what you are essentially doing is offering more excuse: 1. 'its not so black and white'. urm well yes it is? one word 'deception'. 2. 'we must look at things in context'. why, this doesnt alter tha fact that he deceived people. 3. 'history is enitrely subjective anyway'. this is called opportunistic reasoning. in this case you should do away with all historical narratives. 4. 'Singh Sabha saved sikhs from going astray' the typical Singh Sabha myth for its raison d'etre. If someone sincerely reads Gurbani how is it possible that they can go astray? 5. 'Vir Siongh did alot of panjabi'- so he published a few novels. so what? this isnt even relevant to this discussion. i already said this. or are you saying that fiction was his strong point? maybe he should have stuck to the fiction. The average sikh today probably hasnt even heard of this or other historical texts, so your assertions about Vir Singh popularising them are rubbish. the 'you people' is you, because its obvious by the attempts to make excuses on his behalf that you sympathise with these people and their aims.

its true why wasnt this original post deletd? why the violent posts agianst Harjas Kaur? so much violent response against her posting yet nothing about original post?

Singh 2 is in major denial. he only sees what he wants to see and ignores anything to the contrary. There is explicit reference to Devis multi-armed form in Dasam Granth itself which I have quoted and shown to them on occasion. but they chose to ignore it. they can only understand Sikhi according to their own petty matt is one thing, but they have some kind of missionary zeal to enforce it on others.

Harjas Kaur first i just want to say hi! i remember how you ran circles around the singhs on Tapoban lol and got me you and about a dozen other people banned in the process legendary!