Amarjeet Singh_1737

I don't know why this idea of a conquest of Afghanistan persists?

He consolidated his power at a time when Sikh confidence and resources were at their peak. In addition to this, Sikh victory and dominance had caused non-Sikhs to join their standard too. I'd say M. Ranjit Singh's liberal policies towards Muslims in his kingdom and Sikh strength took the wind out of the endeavours of Panjab based jihadists. I'm sure the Muslim experiences in Panjab with an emerging and proficient Khalsa deterred them from being too enthusiastic about challenging Sikhs. Basically he had a relatively stable base to operate from. Finally someone who actually got to the point.

An army trained by Napoleonic generals and Sikh valour and experience.

Logistically, carrying out a war so far from home. A dubious ally in Pakistan. Completely different mindsets between whites and Afghans - less so between Panjabis and Afghans. There was also a religious dimension in Nalwa's time between both parties whereas Nato can NEVER be considered to be a 'Christian' organisation.

Very little in my opinion. Sikhs were genuinely defending themselves, Nato is sticking its nose in to contain a monster it helped create to fight Ruskies.

Military prowess can be lost and gained at an surprisingly sudden pace. Sikhs are a shadow of their former selves. NATO is opportunist but cowardly, look how they dither in facing Russia over the Ukraine.

Oo chado para ee siapaa. Sare bolo JAI SATAN JI DI!!!!!!

Here is the full panth prakash

http://www.scribd.com/doc/220430143/Sri-Guru-Panth-Prakash-Shahid-Rattan-Singh-Bhangu-Full-Vol-1-and-Vol-2

Baba Santa Singh's might be a bit different. Apparently he used a manuscript preserved by the Nihungs, from pre-Singh Sabha times. It is said Bhai Vir Singh made some modifications to one of the two original manuscripts written by Bhangu. The other one is probably gathering dust in some British library.

Source http://defence.pk/threads/how-fear-of-sardar-hari-singh-nalwa-forced-pashtuns-to-start-wearing-salwar.177048/

Wonder what the Wali based his letter on. There is bound to be some sort of folklore regarding Nalwa in Afghanistan. Amrinder Singh in his 'The Last Sunset' mentions that Akali-Nihung Phula SIngh has entered the regional folklore based in and around the area where he fell. Young mothers are encouraged to light a lamp in his memory to protect their children. Bound to be something similar for Nalwa. I will dig further but this can be a good field to look into.

WJKK WJKF

sangat ji, I heard a sakhi of the meeting of Shiri guru gobind Singh ji with madho das, it was stated that guru sahib ordered the jhatka of a goat on the ground on which the ashram was built. I asked if anyone had also heard this, I posted my question on sikhsangat.com but got ridiculed and the topic was blocked. Can anyone shed some light on this sakhi.

The jhatka was done before madho das reached his ashram, when the blood spilt on the floor, the devotees sent a message to madho das to return. On his return he accused guru sahib of tainting the holy ground on which the ashram was built an displayed his disgust at the fact a goat had been jhatkaad, guru sahib replied "where is your ashram" to which madho das answered "Hindustan" to which guru sahib replied " are you not bothered at all the other blood spilt on the land of Hindustan, only the blood spilt on your pavitar darthi"? To which then madho das's initial ahankar was broken

Have I got this wrong, or has someone else heard this sakhi to, somebody....anybody......!?

Please note- this is really about the detail of this sakhi, not a pro or anti meat post. Thanks

WJKK WJKF

NEOSINGH- I'm sure you know rite lol?

That's a surprise. When I asked the same question on Sikhsangat they told me to get the notion, that the panth was vegetarian, out of my head and accept both Sukha and Jhatka.

Hari.Singh.Nalwa.by.Gurbachan.Singh.Nayyar.

"FOREWORD

This present work brings out the unique military genius of Hari Singh Nalwa (1791-1837), the

celebrated General of the Sikh army. I warmly recommend the book to our readers. Hari Singh Nalwa was a

leader of outstanding qualities. He fought in almost all the important battles of the Lahore armies. The

campaigns of Multan, Kashmir, Hazara and Peshawar were of classical proportions. The sealing of Indian

border against invasions from across the western frontier was a unique contribution to history of India. I

hope this study will benefit not only professional historians but also lay readers.

Punjabi University, Joginder Singh Puar

Patiala Vice-Chancellor

....

"

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/books/English_Books/Hari.Singh.Nalwa.by.Gurbachan.Singh.Nayyar.(GurmatVeechar.com).pdf

Vanit Nalwa, one of Hari Singh's descendants, used the family observer/genealogist's account of Nalwa (written while he was still alive) which resides in Haridwar. I will make enquiries if a transliterated volume of the said account is available. It's author is a certain Pandit Sitarama.

WJKK WJKF

Veer ji, is that detail stated in the Shri Gur Panth Prakash?

WJKK WJKF

When Satguru, Guru Gobind Singh arrived at Banda (Bahadur’s) estate,

Sri Gur Panth Prakash.

The division had already been implanted from a thousand years of Muhammedens calling everyone kaffirs and acting out their zealous, bigoted contempt, the division wasn't as present between the kaffir groups. The caste system maybe, but it's still a part of Independent India's lifetime. We can't hear of many communal disruptions between Sikh and Hindu groups in pre-british India, the worst cases were between Hindu brahmins such as Chandu, Sucha Nand(chuta nand) and Sikhs, that was mainly a caste based dispute aswell as the abrogation of the hindu priest class the lack of donations did touch a nerve for some.

Whenever any group has a common goal and enemy they will unite but as soon as that's out of the way chaos can occur, which it seems had. Besides that it was an effort by some Sikhs to spear head the independence movement which seems to have taken us back in my opinion from good administration to an entirely corrupt country.

Many Indians believed in the British cause, many empathized with such causes for example when it came to Subas Bose trying to back communism and create an army for the SS of Indians, Sikhs denied, they didn't believe in betraying the british, their cause or backing a racist which didn't fit the Sikh ethos or message. The British in winning their rule were different to the Mughals in a couple of ways, such as realizing the importance to win the hearts and minds of people. There were some racists among the British that probably did their best to severe that relationship and that was something that went for the independence movement. Gandhi famously is known for sitting in a 1st class train in british India and being kicked out, being told no Indians allowed and Gandhi protested that in his country, he can't buy a ticket and sit in a first class train. An apartheid like that probably struct some peoples hearts as a need to remove the british.

Many Indians fought for the British because some were inherited by the british during their take over, then their descendants remained in the profession, the british paid a good wage to their soldiers, treated them fine, and their was no dole back then or not many options for a livelihood trade. When it came to World War 1 I heard the british recruited people by force they took a lot of able men from pretty much every family in Punjab it seems those who declined would have been arrested and it wasn't mostly a choice. I may be wrong but I don't think everyone enlisted by choice.

Rich Indians still exploit the poor, if they didn't they would be paying more for services and products, rich Indians are still miser and people believe being miser makes you rich. Cheap goods and services are a pro for Indians, besides which if they declined purchasing goods and services of the poor the gap may get worse between rich and poor. The "exploitation" might be a way to lessen the gap of rich and poor, if more poor people are employees they would earn livelihoods and may have the potential to go up the career ladder from newer skills learnt.

There aren't many opportunities in India as there are in the western world for development in your career or learning and that's one of the differences in it's economy. There are some rich who probably undercut the poor causing greater harm to them but what can you do, alot of things in India aren't done by the book, with a minimum wage basis or with national security numbers or through proper taxation most businesses run cash in hand.

Well with the mess we see in Gurdwara politics it doesn't seem that easy to overthrow the british and run the nation yourself but people did try, someone like Bhagat Singh was part of the revolution but they didn't anticipate the ruling part as they did the dying for the cause part. Treason was dealt seriously in that period, people would be hanged and many were hanged, but after a huge struggle and fight Sikhs sucessfully handed themselves to the mercy of the feet of the Nehru family to be their slaves, the slaves of their friends and family. So after all the difficulty of the Mughal empire, defeating invasions of Afghans establishing a small empire for a small period of time, to a better british empire to trying to gain emancipation only to be taken over by corrupt Indians under the guise of democracy. We still have further to go to carve better democracy and in our diaspora some tell us to forget it we don't belong to India anymore and it isn't our concern.

Some don't speak about this much but their were other european colonies in India such as French regions, Dutch regions, Portuguese, Danish. Goa I think was one of them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_India

I will desist from being a ribald fool like you and instead answer you as politely as a buffon of your calibre can be answered. My comment doesn't mention anything about All Sikhs in case your eyeballs failed you at that point. There was no overall national unity in India as is being propagated today. The very notion of a United Indian state, composed of all it's castes and creeds did not even exist then. A majority of Sikhs viewed themselves as being different from the rest of India, and let us not forget that the same soldiers who instigated the mutiny were themselves instrumental in the fall of the Sikh empire. And since when did Abdali (1722-1772) destroy Maharajah Ranjit Singh (1780-1839), with Ala Singh's (1691-1765) aid? There time periods were varied and years apart. And again the Sikhs got the best of the Afghans in the post-Abdali period. On the second hand so what if Sikhs united with the British to suppress the mutiny? It was retaliation towards the soliders who had brought about the fall of their kingdom. Secondly how many Sikhs can you name who actually took an active part in the mutiny? Even the Nihungs stood aside and formed a pact with the British immediately after the mutiny. You give Patiala as a prime example of Sikhs siding with the British I will go one further. Gulab Singh of the fractured Shahida Misl assisted in suppressing the mutiny, the descendants of Fateh Singh Alhuwalia played an important role in suppressing the mutiny and there are many more examples. This is not a shameful episode as idiots like you point out, but one of political self-interests. Even amongst the Marathas, and the Rajputs not many were interested in assisting the mutineers. What did they stand to gain by subduing the British? A return to Islamic dominated rule once more?

"In the light of the available evidence, we are forced to the conclusion," says Maulana Abul Kalam Azad [india's first Minister of Education and a scholar in his own right], "that the uprising of 1857 was not the result of careful planning, nor were there any master-minds behind it ... As I read about the events of 1857, I am forced to the conclusion," he continues, "that the Indian national character had sunk very low. The leaders of the revolt could never agree. They were mutually jealous and continually intrigued against one another ... In fact these personal jealousies and intrigues were largely responsible for the Indian defeat."

On the authority of the Bidrohi Bengali of Durgadas Bandyopadhyaya, an eye-witness, Dr. Majumdar tells us: "the demon of communalism also raised its head. The Muslims spat over the Hindus and openly defiled their houses by sprinkling them with cows' blood and placing cows' bones within the compounds. Concrete instances are given where Hindu sepoys came into clash with Muslim hooligans and a complete riot ensued. The Hindus, oppressed by the Muslims, were depressed at the success of the Mutiny, and daily offered prayers to God for the return of 'the English.' " This was the foretaste of the feared revival of the Muslim rule.

In spite of this all, if some people wish to live in a state of hallucination and believe that there was a complete friendly understanding and great communal harmony between Muslims and Hindus at all stages in the Mutiny, they are most welcome to do so, but they should not expect a student of history to be one with them. Past history has to be recorded as it was and not as we wish it to be presented a century afterwards. It cannot be written to order, or molded and remolded, according to the changing times.

I also don't understand why your kind reserves such pathological shame for yourselves, when the mutiny is brought up.

If we cast a glance at the mutineers we see their nucleus being composed of:

Remnants of the Mughal empire, and those too pulled out towards the end of the mutiny.

Gwalior entities.

Jhansi (and that too because it's queen had been deposed by the British).

Forces of Nana Sahib Peshwa.

The Prince of Oudh, hoping to reclaim his prior status before his father was deposed by the British.

Feudal landowners of Oudh and Islamic radicals.

We cast a glance at the suppressors we see:

Ajaigarh.

Alwar.

Bharatpur.

Bhopal.

Bijawar.

Bikaner.

Bundi.

Hyderabad.

Jaipur.

Jaora.

Kapurthala.

Kashmir.

Kendujhar.

Marwar.

Nabha.

Patiala.

Rampur.

Rewa.

Sirmur.

Sirohi.

Udaipur.

Nepal.

A majority of our beloved countrymen did not even give a fig about the movement. It only became a symbolic rallying point in the latter colonial-native conflict.

I will give you this much that probably the first Indian to raise arms against the British was Bhai Maharaj Singh, in the aftermath of who an uneasy peace existed between both British and Sikhs. And to borrow the only intelligent thing you managed to vomit, a massive divide existed between the government employed professionals and the agriculturalist proletariat. And once more how many Sikhs can you name or count who actively participated in the mutiny and fought against the British? The fact that you reserve such a pathological misery at the role of the Sikhs during this episode of history, proves that you cannot name one Sikh who fought along with his beloved cousins.

"Most of Afghanistan's history prior to the modern state of Afghanistan took place within the context of the various Persian Empires.[14] The political history of the modern state of Afghanistan begins in 1709 with the rise of the Pashtuns - historically known as "Afghans" - when the Hotaki dynasty was established in Kandahar followed by the rise of the Durrani Empire in 1747....

[14] http://www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index.html" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

http://www.ancientl.com/greek/why-did-alexander-the-great-invade-persia/

"WHY DID ALEXANDER THE GREAT INVADE PERSIA?

Upon arriving on the shores of Persian held territory, Alexander the Great hurled his spear in Homeric fashion to show ‘that he received Asia from the gods as a spear-won prize’.

This prize had been made accessible by the inheritance of his father, Philip II of Macedon, whom left behind a professional standing army, an ideological pretext and an expeditionary force already in the field.

As Captain-General of the league of Corinth, imbued with the romantic conceptions of a second Achilles, Alexander would lead the Greeks against the barbarians in a war of vengeance.

However, the reality is far less glamorous, Alexander and his companions set out to invade Persian territory for territorial expansion and profit.

For Alexander himself, the invasion had held further promise, a chance to outshine the achievements of his mythical ancestors and his greatest competitor, his father......."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactria#Alexander_the_Great

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactria#Seleucid_Empire

Sicques, Tigers or Thieves - Eyewitness accounts of the Sikhs (1606-1809)-Chapter 11, page 119 "A Statesmans Note from the Afghan Frontier, 1809

-Chapter 26, pg 275 Sikhs Gather to Oppose Afghan Rule, 1800

-Chapter 33 pg 327 Afghan Retreat Signals Sikh Prosperity, 1790

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-West_Frontier_Province_(1901%E2%80%931955)

"History[edit]

Most of the territory of this province was originally a part of the Afghan Durrani Kingdom from the 18th century to around the 1820s, when the Sikh ruler or Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the former mayor of the Punjabi city of Lahore, taking advantage of the internal chaos of the Afghan ruling family, declared independence and annexed it to his own empire based out of the Punjab. Later on, after the Second Anglo-Sikh War of 1848–49, when the Punjab came under British rule, this region along with the 'Frontier Tribal Areas' acting as a 'buffer' zone with Afghanistan."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Peshawar_history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Peshawar#Sikh_era

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MOBIJ4wuak#t=3007

"

48:12

At the time Hari Singh Nalwa conquered the Kyber Pass (Afghanistan)

48:16

From their the pathan (afghan) women in fear

48:20

From their the pathan (afghan) men in fear

48:23

All hid away in fear in the smallest of enclosures within the mountains

48:28

A 19 year old pathan girl who is named Bano (Bibi Bano)

48:32

With her fiance Gulfan

48:36

Was hiding away in a very small enclosure within a mountain

48:41

And asks her fiance Gulfan who are these people who have conquered our region?

48:49

He answers these are the followers and believers of Guru Nanak who call themselves Sikhs

48:55

The pathan girl says I want to go and see who their general is

"

"

49:52

Hari Singh Nalwa says I am a believer of Guru Nanak and Guru Nanak's Sikh

49:58

She said if you believers of Guru Nanak why have you attacked our home(s)

50:07

Hari Singh Nalwa said we haven't conquered (taken) anyones home, we have only protected our own home(s)"

So the difference we find is Sikander/Alexandera invaded for "profit" and Nalwa invaded for survival to avoid further attacks coming in from Afghanistan.

Difficult to compare NATO to Nalwa, different time, different technology, different conflict with a similar denominator of taking over the world under the army of Muhammad. The dhimmi rules are different for Christians as they are for polytheists or dare said followers of an anti christ. Akhmeeeed Durrani/Abdali defined sikhs to be followers of an antichrist according to Sikh history from Persian sources and let's just say mercy for being a demonic army doesn't work as well as followers of Jesus who from koranic evidence may have a glimmer of hope of salvation and might be the good guys it's not as clear cut as it is for demonic anti christ men. However a culture is shared between those Sikhs and afghans, both may have seen the other as a barbarian back then. Sikhs comfort level with our women cohabiting with afghan men is probably much lower then Nato's which can be used a mental game probably around Nalwas time aswell. The technological factor is quite a huge difference.

Are there any traces of any Afghani culture in present day Pakistan? I do not mean any cross-cultural evolution due to close proximity but anything carried over from some military campaign or conquest etc.?

India's subjugation by foreign powers was never direct. There was always a comprador class/civil society (gramsci) that fostered foreign rule. No one has ever ruled India without the help of a comprador class. People that have been ruled without a comprador class are Native Canadians/Americans, South American Indigenous peoples etc. Normal Indians never had problems with each other. The problems were between Rulers. Likewise, no foreign government ruled without the support of a comprador class. For a country like India, this is impossible. Perhaps, in some places there was direct rule, but in most places the administrative civil society was Indian. It is similar to how Badal rules today; Sikhs have formed their own civil society that works in accordance with the ruling class' objectives. For example: the Kathgarh Sardars are now completely engrossed in the exploitative system of capitalism in Punjab. Many old Sikh families of prestige have actually been incorporated into the system. However, this civil society was threatened by the organic voice of Sant Bhindranwale. The civil society of Sikhs (police, judges, lawyers, teachers etc) did not understand or want to understand the grievances of the farmers and proletariat class and because many of these civil society members came from traditional ruling families, many Sikhs were led to believe that SantJi was in the wrong. Our old ruling families served as examples of legitimacy of the exploitative state. Any honest scholar of colonialism can attest to these facts.

Also, this idea that the Sikhs did not join the mutiny because of their differences with the mutineers is a bunch of bullocks. The Sikhs that sided with the British were traitors like Maharaja Patiala (the same house who allied with Abdali and destroyed Maharaja Ranjit Singh). Many Sikhs did join the mutiny and many did not. The reasons given by people trying to cover up their shame do not add up because of the Patiala example. This one example is enough to make losers like AMARJEET shutup and sneer. However, ill give more. Saying "Sikhs" the so-callled HOMOGENOUS UNITED GROUP OF PUNJAB, did not ally with the mutineers because of their ethnic differences is stupid because the British were white.... you cant get any different than that, so it makes no sense. The other thing is that many tribes in Punjab have fought each other like the Bhattis and Sidhus (who are Kin), yet they united at many occasions and fought outsiders (esp when they both became Khalsay). So trying to justify the treachery of many Sikhs is like Rajputs trying to justify their allegiances with the Mughals as their tribes also had many conflicts with each other. Just because you dont get along with your cousin doesnt mean you ally yourself with the white guy down the street to teach your cousin a lesson.

"In the light of the available evidence, we are forced to the conclusion," says Maulana Abul Kalam Azad [india's first Minister of Education and a scholar in his own right], "that the uprising of 1857 was not the result of careful planning, nor were there any master-minds behind it ... As I read about the events of 1857, I am forced to the conclusion," he continues, "that the Indian national character had sunk very low. The leaders of the revolt could never agree. They were mutually jealous and continually intrigued against one another ... In fact these personal jealousies and intrigues were largely responsible for the Indian defeat."

On the authority of the Bidrohi Bengali of Durgadas Bandyopadhyaya, an eye-witness, Dr. Majumdar tells us: "the demon of communalism also raised its head. The Muslims spat over the Hindus and openly defiled their houses by sprinkling them with cows' blood and placing cows' bones within the compounds. Concrete instances are given where Hindu sepoys came into clash with Muslim hooligans and a complete riot ensued. The Hindus, oppressed by the Muslims, were depressed at the success of the Mutiny, and daily offered prayers to God for the return of 'the English.' " This was the foretaste of the feared revival of the Muslim rule.

In spite of this all, if some people wish to live in a state of hallucination and believe that there was a complete friendly understanding and great communal harmony between Muslims and Hindus at all stages in the Mutiny, they are most welcome to do so, but they should not expect a student of history to be one with them. Past history has to be recorded as it was and not as we wish it to be presented a century afterwards. It cannot be written to order, or molded and remolded, according to the changing times.

I also don't understand why your kind reserves such pathological shame for yourselves, when the mutiny is brought up.

If we cast a glance at the mutineers we see their nucleus being composed of:

Remnants of the Mughal empire, and those too pulled out towards the end of the mutiny.

Gwalior entities.

Jhansi (and that too because it's queen had been deposed by the British).

Forces of Nana Sahib Peshwa.

The Prince of Oudh, hoping to reclaim his prior status before his father was deposed by the British.

Feudal landowners of Oudh and Islamic radicals.

We cast a glance at the suppressors we see:

Ajaigarh.

Alwar.

Bharatpur.

Bhopal.

Bijawar.

Bikaner.

Bundi.

Hyderabad.

Jaipur.

Jaora.

Kapurthala.

Kashmir.

Kendujhar.

Marwar.

Nabha.

Patiala.

Rampur.

Rewa.

Sirmur.

Sirohi.

Udaipur.

Nepal.

I will give you this much that probably the first Indian to raise arms against the British was Bhai Maharaj Singh, in the aftermath of who an uneasy peace existed between both British and Sikhs. And to borrow the only intelligent thing you managed to vomit, a massive divide existed between the government employed professionals and the agriculturalist proletariat. And once more how many Sikhs can you name or count who actively participated in the mutiny and fought against the British? The fact that you reserve such a pathological misery at the role of the Sikhs during this episode of history, proves that you cannot name one Sikh who fought along with his beloved cousins.

Whosoever has written this piece is highly biased. As any neutral observer would agree, the writer of the piece is indulging in a fanatical rant as he/she is ignoring some basic facts about India and its democracy. The writer is also ignoring the ugly realities of bangladesh and Islam practiced there. If his BD was so better, India would not be burdened with millions of bangladeshi illegal immigrants.

Also, Amarjeetji, apni manjhi haithan sotta maro. Do some self-analysis. Casteism is not peculiar to Hindu faiths. What Jats are doing to other castes in Punjab is definitely not Gurmat. Jats are the new brahmins, Rajputs and banias combined.

When the writer of the quoted piece slanders India, he slanders Sikhs too.

Ravidassis gave up Sikhi few years back. when Ambedkar decided to give up Hinduism, his first option was (supported by Hindu political and spiritual leaders) Sikhi but he soon realised that Sikhi was no diff from the faith/s he was quitting along with lakhs of his followers. he chose buddhism eventually. Mazhabis are abandoning Sikhi for chritistianity in the border districts.

Just a few days back, a 'high-caste' dharam parchark or 'alleged' gyani compared the so-called low castes with toilet water in a Sangat TV debate and that too in UK!! Imagine what they are doing to the LCs in their pinds.

you are cutting off the nose to spite the face.

Why don't we get to the root cause of the problem which arises from Hinduism itself. After all before running around with your garbage of 'Hindu this, Hindu that' you should consider revamping your own ideology at the very least before pointing fingers. Once again you attempt to derail the entire thread by digressing from the topic, experiences of Sikhs during the Punjabi Suba movement, to one regarding the validity of sources other than your 'hours of research' on wikipedia. Caste, it's beginning and influence, has already been discussed before on this forum where you as per normal attempted to de-rail the entire thread with your nonsense. Before 'bursting delusional bubbles' maybe you should burst your own narcissist bubble. Here is a quote from Dr. Ambedkar regarding caste, and it's fundamental importance in Hinduism. ' But that cannot mean that they would thereby reach a position where they would be free and equal. , without being above and below any one else, for the simple reason that the Hindu religion does not recognise the principle of equality of social status : on the other hand it fosters inequality by insisting upon grading people as Brahmins, Kshatrias, Vaishyas and Shudras, which now stand toward one another in an ascending scale of hatred and descending scale of contempt. If the Hindu Religion is to be a religion of social equality then an amendment of its code to provide temple entry is not enough. What is required is to purge it of the doctrine of chaturvarna. That is the root cause of all inequality and also the parent of the Caste system and Untouchability, which are merely forms of inequality.' Here's the source, http://ambedkarquotes.wordpress.com/, maybe if Hinduism had been reformed then there would have been no need for him to face away from Sikhi, since caste would not have been present in it's psyche. The ultimate degradation of humanity commenced with Hinduism and now runs rife in all sub-continental faiths.

"Most of Afghanistan's history prior to the modern state of Afghanistan took place within the context of the various Persian Empires.[14] The political history of the modern state of Afghanistan begins in 1709 with the rise of the Pashtuns - historically known as "Afghans" - when the Hotaki dynasty was established in Kandahar followed by the rise of the Durrani Empire in 1747....

[14] http://www.afghan-web.com/history/chron/index.html" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan

http://www.ancientl.com/greek/why-did-alexander-the-great-invade-persia/

"WHY DID ALEXANDER THE GREAT INVADE PERSIA?

Upon arriving on the shores of Persian held territory, Alexander the Great hurled his spear in Homeric fashion to show ‘that he received Asia from the gods as a spear-won prize’.

This prize had been made accessible by the inheritance of his father, Philip II of Macedon, whom left behind a professional standing army, an ideological pretext and an expeditionary force already in the field.

As Captain-General of the league of Corinth, imbued with the romantic conceptions of a second Achilles, Alexander would lead the Greeks against the barbarians in a war of vengeance.

However, the reality is far less glamorous, Alexander and his companions set out to invade Persian territory for territorial expansion and profit.

For Alexander himself, the invasion had held further promise, a chance to outshine the achievements of his mythical ancestors and his greatest competitor, his father......."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactria#Alexander_the_Great

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bactria#Seleucid_Empire

Sicques, Tigers or Thieves - Eyewitness accounts of the Sikhs (1606-1809)-Chapter 11, page 119 "A Statesmans Note from the Afghan Frontier, 1809

-Chapter 26, pg 275 Sikhs Gather to Oppose Afghan Rule, 1800

-Chapter 33 pg 327 Afghan Retreat Signals Sikh Prosperity, 1790

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North-West_Frontier_Province_(1901%E2%80%931955)

"History[edit]

Most of the territory of this province was originally a part of the Afghan Durrani Kingdom from the 18th century to around the 1820s, when the Sikh ruler or Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the former mayor of the Punjabi city of Lahore, taking advantage of the internal chaos of the Afghan ruling family, declared independence and annexed it to his own empire based out of the Punjab. Later on, after the Second Anglo-Sikh War of 1848–49, when the Punjab came under British rule, this region along with the 'Frontier Tribal Areas' acting as a 'buffer' zone with Afghanistan."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Peshawar_history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Peshawar#Sikh_era

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MOBIJ4wuak#t=3007

"

48:12

At the time Hari Singh Nalwa conquered the Kyber Pass (Afghanistan)

48:16

From their the pathan (afghan) women in fear

48:20

From their the pathan (afghan) men in fear

48:23

All hid away in fear in the smallest of enclosures within the mountains

48:28

A 19 year old pathan girl who is named Bano (Bibi Bano)

48:32

With her fiance Gulfan

48:36

Was hiding away in a very small enclosure within a mountain

48:41

And asks her fiance Gulfan who are these people who have conquered our region?

48:49

He answers these are the followers and believers of Guru Nanak who call themselves Sikhs

48:55

The pathan girl says I want to go and see who their general is

"

"

49:52

Hari Singh Nalwa says I am a believer of Guru Nanak and Guru Nanak's Sikh

49:58

She said if you believers of Guru Nanak why have you attacked our home(s)

50:07

Hari Singh Nalwa said we haven't conquered (taken) anyones home, we have only protected our own home(s)"

So the difference we find is Sikander/Alexandera invaded for "profit" and Nalwa invaded for survival to avoid further attacks coming in from Afghanistan.

Difficult to compare NATO to Nalwa, different time, different technology, different conflict with a similar denominator of taking over the world under the army of Muhammad. The dhimmi rules are different for Christians as they are for polytheists or dare said followers of an anti christ. Akhmeeeed Durrani/Abdali defined sikhs to be followers of an antichrist according to Sikh history from Persian sources and let's just say mercy for being a demonic army doesn't work as well as followers of Jesus who from koranic evidence may have a glimmer of hope of salvation and might be the good guys it's not as clear cut as it is for demonic anti christ men. However a culture is shared between those Sikhs and afghans, both may have seen the other as a barbarian back then. Sikhs comfort level with our women cohabiting with afghan men is probably much lower then Nato's which can be used a mental game probably around Nalwas time aswell. The technological factor is quite a huge difference.

Interesting, interesting.

The first picture is of Inderjeet Singh. A ten year old child who was involved in an agitation, hearing him shouting 'Punjabi Suba Zindabad!!' two Haryanvi cops beat him and threw him in a well killing him.

The second is of a protest in Amritsar, which the police were ordered to break up due to the near success of the agitation.

The third is of a female organisation involved in the movement.

The fourth is of a Sikh gathering to discuss the issue in Delhi, which caught the eye of the police who fired upon the protesters.

The fifth is of the police storming of the Darbar Sahib complex, where a major gathering was held at Akal-Takhat to discuss the direction of the movement.

The sixth is of a male group.

The seventh depicts a young Gyani Inderjeet Singh Ji (Raqbe Wale. In shades). He is a master of Gurmat, and one of the survving students of Gyani Gurbachan Singh Ji Bhindranwale. he currently resides at Hazoor Sahib and is held in high esteem by the Udasis, Nihungs and Nirmalas there.

Sher will not talk about what Sikhs faced during Punjabi Suba Movement , above experience is not an isolated case .

Some pictures from the time.

Sher will not talk about what Sikhs faced during Punjabi Suba Movement , above experience is not an isolated case .

The point here was to pinpoint the Sikh proletariat's experience during the Punjabi Suba Movement. The 'ignoramus' (only adjective to describe his persona) fool (which Sher is) however derailed the entire topic (a famous mark of his since his first time on the forum) to a more political course and thus invited what he perceives as being anti-Hindu sentiments on his head. His paranoia that maybe tomorrow he will wake up to a world where his myth of 'Hindu this Hindu that' is shattered, influences him to run around on forums citing 'factuality' and patronising the mods. Of course the entire debacle falls flat on it's face after a while.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/215200640/Sikhs-in-the-Eighteenth-Century-in-English-by-Surjit-Singh-Gandhi

Interesting how Gandhi mentions that the Khalsa originally viewed the Udasis as being one it's integral components. Wonder what the definition of a Sikh, back then, was.

^^

I think the above can be explained by the fact that people may have been in awe of, and actually quite scared of Banda Singh, who appeared (to them) to have powerful supernatural abilities. The fear/nervousness he might have inspired, amongst apnay, is maybe what you are reading above? So Bhangu records the hearsay of Sikhs under severe pressure who do not understand and even fear their leader to some extent. These rumours get amplified and exaggerated over time.

I disagree that it is in contempt of him. I recall reading a later section where Singhs were getting shoved around helter-skelter and Bhangu records their regret at having abandoned Banda and some of them (if I recall rightly) even put their current plight as a result of abandoning him and state that they would not have been in their current position had Banda still been around?

Thing is, Bhangus family is too close too events to have completely concocted what we read. It is based on something, some misunderstanding. Some differences that caused a split possibly? What it points at is a fear and alienation from Banda by at least some Singhs maybe?

Anyone who is to be exposed here is you. Many have reasoned with you with utmost decency and yet you fail to understand. On a topic's convenience you call yourself a Hindu and sometimes call yourself a Sikh. The fact is you are nothing. All that fanaticism and bigotry talk you can say that about yourself.

Before I ever saw Master Tara Singh in person, I had started subscribing to his magazine Sant Sipahi. I first met Master Tara Singh in the house of a relative in Muktsar where he had come for a public meeting. I considered meeting him quite a privilege. I took photographs of him with my father and younger brother. He sat chatting there for some time and thereafter left. I developed the film myself at the school photographic club and printed it in many ways providing several kinds of margins. A year or so later I went to Amritsar to pay respects at the Darbar and also met Tara Singh in his office which was within the Darbar Sahib premises. He was sitting on a string-cot and writing letters. A small tin box from which he was drawing his writing material was lying next to him. I took a photograph of him. It turned out very well and came to be much used. This was the year 1960 when he was preparing for a big battle ahead. I offered my services for what they were worth. He looked at me very kindly and advised me to first finish my education and then think of such things; ‘otherwise the people will think that you were afraid of facing the tenth class exams and had strayed into politics. Finish your education. Do well in all the examinations and come to me after that.’ I hardly knew anything about the travails of political life but had a desire to be seen in the service of the people. I have thought much about the incident since. A lesser person would have grabbed at the opportunity of gaining an unpaid servant. I remained ever grateful for the sound advice that he had given me on the occasion. It enhanced my respect for him.

There was a poetry recitation session in the school hall to which several Hindi poets had been invited. This was during the days when the Master was talking about the Punjabi Suba in all seriousness. I had noticed a lot of hatred for him and for the Sikhs in general in the air. I had to face jeers and hostility on many fronts. At the Ambala railway station the clerk issuing the tickets had treated all the Sikhs in the queue most contemptuously. He made us all step aside so that he could issue tickets to the Hindus first. He ignored my requests to do so in turn because I and my younger brother were in the danger of missing our train to Dehra Dun and had nowhere to go. He turned to everybody in general and said, ‘look at these Sikhs! They want a Punjabi Suba and also cannot do without a railway ticket.’ I did not quite see the logic he was trying to propound but had to comply with his orders. During this period, I found that my best friend of long standing at the school, who was a Dogra from a well-educated Jammu based family, had suddenly turned against me most virulently. This was one of the experiences of my childhood that left me completely confused about human relations.

Most of the poets at the recitation evening were very sensible but several were seen to be taking pleasure in ridiculing the Sikhs. One who drew the most applause from the audience of which some school boys were a part, earned it by comparing Master Tara Singh to a donkey. In western culture this animal is assumed to be very wise but on the Indian sub-continent it is presumed to be low on intelligence. I was amongst the few Sikhs in the hall and I felt utterly helpless and thoroughly insulted. The short shrunken man who made the comparison, was perhaps a chain smoker, for he went out quite often and was seen puffing away at cheap, foul-smelling cigarettes. No elevated or decent thought was to be expected of such a person, but we did feel isolated and disgusted. Particularly painful were the merry outbursts of our schoolmates. More than anything else, we were surprised since this aspect of their personality had always remained hidden from view. We at once understood why our leaders were trying to carve out a niche to safeguard the Sikhs from being inundated in the sea of hatred welling up all around. The prevailing situation must have turned many inside and outside that hall, into strong supporters of Master Tara Singh. When on the early morning of August 15, the day the Master was to start his fast-unto-death, I went to the gurdwara to pray for his wellbeing, I was in a way seeking revenge for the behaviour of that despicable poet. A mixture of such emotions in such an atmosphere must have turned many into supporters of the Akali leaders, as the most tangible justification for their cause was being generously served out to the people at large by every aggressive representative of Hindudom.

Before I ever saw Master Tara Singh in person, I had started subscribing to his magazine Sant Sipahi. I first met Master Tara Singh in the house of a relative in Muktsar where he had come for a public meeting. I considered meeting him quite a privilege. I took photographs of him with my father and younger brother. He sat chatting there for some time and thereafter left. I developed the film myself at the school photographic club and printed it in many ways providing several kinds of margins. A year or so later I went to Amritsar to pay respects at the Darbar and also met Tara Singh in his office which was within the Darbar Sahib premises. He was sitting on a string-cot and writing letters. A small tin box from which he was drawing his writing material was lying next to him. I took a photograph of him. It turned out very well and came to be much used. This was the year 1960 when he was preparing for a big battle ahead. I offered my services for what they were worth. He looked at me very kindly and advised me to first finish my education and then think of such things; ‘otherwise the people will think that you were afraid of facing the tenth class exams and had strayed into politics. Finish your education. Do well in all the examinations and come to me after that.’ I hardly knew anything about the travails of political life but had a desire to be seen in the service of the people. I have thought much about the incident since. A lesser person would have grabbed at the opportunity of gaining an unpaid servant. I remained ever grateful for the sound advice that he had given me on the occasion. It enhanced my respect for him.

There was a poetry recitation session in the school hall to which several Hindi poets had been invited. This was during the days when the Master was talking about the Punjabi Suba in all seriousness. I had noticed a lot of hatred for him and for the Sikhs in general in the air. I had to face jeers and hostility on many fronts. At the Ambala railway station the clerk issuing the tickets had treated all the Sikhs in the queue most contemptuously. He made us all step aside so that he could issue tickets to the Hindus first. He ignored my requests to do so in turn because I and my younger brother were in the danger of missing our train to Dehra Dun and had nowhere to go. He turned to everybody in general and said, ‘look at these Sikhs! They want a Punjabi Suba and also cannot do without a railway ticket.’ I did not quite see the logic he was trying to propound but had to comply with his orders. During this period, I found that my best friend of long standing at the school, who was a Dogra from a well-educated Jammu based family, had suddenly turned against me most virulently. This was one of the experiences of my childhood that left me completely confused about human relations.

Most of the poets at the recitation evening were very sensible but several were seen to be taking pleasure in ridiculing the Sikhs. One who drew the most applause from the audience of which some school boys were a part, earned it by comparing Master Tara Singh to a donkey. In western culture this animal is assumed to be very wise but on the Indian sub-continent it is presumed to be low on intelligence. I was amongst the few Sikhs in the hall and I felt utterly helpless and thoroughly insulted. The short shrunken man who made the comparison, was perhaps a chain smoker, for he went out quite often and was seen puffing away at cheap, foul-smelling cigarettes. No elevated or decent thought was to be expected of such a person, but we did feel isolated and disgusted. Particularly painful were the merry outbursts of our schoolmates. More than anything else, we were surprised since this aspect of their personality had always remained hidden from view. We at once understood why our leaders were trying to carve out a niche to safeguard the Sikhs from being inundated in the sea of hatred welling up all around. The prevailing situation must have turned many inside and outside that hall, into strong supporters of Master Tara Singh. When on the early morning of August 15, the day the Master was to start his fast-unto-death, I went to the gurdwara to pray for his wellbeing, I was in a way seeking revenge for the behaviour of that despicable poet. A mixture of such emotions in such an atmosphere must have turned many into supporters of the Akali leaders, as the most tangible justification for their cause was being generously served out to the people at large by every aggressive representative of Hindudom.

Veer Ji is this based on your own experience?

I ask you few questions, please answer those specifically.

Actually here is the source. Now let me guess because it's written by a Muslim, in a recognised Muslim nation, it will inflict mass hurt upon your sense of nationalism and patriotism?

http://bdinn.com/articles/resurrection-of-hindu-fundamentalism/

"lying..."...ok.

I would refrain from calling you names as it's a privilege reserved for only those who present their hatred dressed as 'factual history' and refuse to admit that they have used gross misinformation to make whole community (Hindus) look like Sikh-haters and, as Amarjeet has called me, "fascists".

coming back to you comment, you seem to have missed this part in my comment:

".............

In Uttar Pradesh politics Tyagi was known as a "Rafian", that is, an associate of Rafi Ahmad Kidwai, the famous Indian nationalist Muslim. (See M. Hashim Kidwai, Rafi Ahmad Kidwai, New Delhi, 1986, pp 215–216)"

(quoted from Wiki along where the original sources were given).

I understand you could have missed it out in your excitement to proclaim me as a liar and (intellectually) dishonest.

I spent hours in research as I went through volumes of Constituent Assembly Debates (as search on that portal is not possible) to find out more about mahavir Tyagi.

http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/debates.htm

I also researched books available online in part or fully to check if MT could have made a statement which was (wrongly in my opinion) attributed by Amrjeet. I could not find anything. On the contrary, Tyagi emerged as a 'hardcore' secularist who urged Hindus to give up their Hinduness and gave orders for higher recruitment of Muslims (source CAD) in the Indian army.

After all this eye-opening research, I was waiting for one comment of appreciation. nope, i got banned for investing my precious time in research.

In the conclusion of my comment, realising that Amarjeet could have got carried away I wrote:

What MT actually stood for (Hindus losing Hinduships) is in total contrast to what Amarjit is claiming. I would urge him to come clean on this issue and apologise slandering a true secular nationalist or accept at least that he has got carried away and quoted from poorly researched works of the known (to use euphemism) dishonest intellectuals like sangat singh and Dilgeer".

In the beginning of my comment I had also written:

The truth is totally in contrast. I have conducted brief research on this person and have found the following facts (which can be challenged and I would be happy to provide more details and apologise if i am proven wrong)"

How nimana and truthful i can get?

Instead of my finding an error in my well-researched response (and stopping Amarjeet from posting such unverified quotes/facts), you have banned me!!!

Mods, where did I go wrong?

Pathetic and you promote yourself to be an adult? Stop whinging and get back to pre-school. It might educate you in factuality.