Jonny101

The whole Maratha - Sikh comparison is pointless I agree, It appears to have started because the Punjabi Hindus wanted to downplay the role of the Sikhs in destroying the Mughal rules in Punjab. Even now Sher does not tire of propagating lies that the Marathas 'saved' the Sikhs of Punjab.

The Marathas were a minor interlude in the Mughal-Afghan-Sikh struggle for Punjab.

Abdali invaded a number of times after Panipat.

What people like Sher conveniently ignore is that the Maratha "invasion" of Punjab was not a one party event. They were invited and facilitated by the Mughals. Adina Beg paid them 1 lakh rupees per day's march and 50,000 for halting. Further more when they did arrive It was the combined effort of Mughals(under Adina Beg), Sikhs, Marathas. It was this tripartite alliance that drove out the Afghans. When this was achieved, the Mughals and Marathas sidelined the Sikhs.

The Marathas left Punjab with an army to be used as a reserve force to help the Mughals in administering Punjab. Further more, Adina Beg had again begun to persecute the Sikhs with the silent approval of the Marathas, the Sikhs realized at that point even though the Marathas are a Hindu power, but they are just as imperialistic as the Mughals or the Afghans. Where ever they went they did not even spare the non Muslims and looted the Muslim and non-Muslims alike. That is why when the Afghans under Abdali arrived they completely destroyed the Maratha power in North India. Due to their conduct all over India, the Marathas alienated the Sikhs, Jats and Rajputs of Rajputana.

And it's completely ridiculous to compare the Sikhs and Marathas. Marathas were a numerous community and the majority in Maharasthra. So numerous were they that they overwhelmed the Mughals. They could match the huge Mughal armies with the same amount of men on the field. Their state base was not a multi religious land where as Punjab was. Sikhs had to compete with everyone even with in Punjab to finally come out on top.

What the Sikhs achieved given what little they had, no other community in the world can even compare. It is almost like Kashmiri Pandits beating the Muslims and ruling Kashmir or Zoroastians beating Muslims and ruling over Muslim majority Iran or Copts beating Muslims and ruling over Egypt. Except that this never happened for these minorities. Sikhs are the only persecuted minority which beat the hostile Muslim majority and ruled over them and add to that Sikhs had the resurgent Afghans under an able leader like Abdali to deal with. Until the 1947 forced migration of the Sikhs, our people never even formed a majority in any district of Punjab.

Read A.R. Darshi's the gallant defender. 140,000 individuals were led by Akali-Nihung Daya Singh Ji of the Baba Bidhi Chand Dal. Even though Santa Singh did not support Sant Ji (he had his own reasons) the Budha-Dal fielded Bhai Amrik Singh Jhaeru as a separate commander. There were a lot of Nihungs from all Dals who support the Dharam Yudh Morcha. Just because they eat meat doesn't mean they are all traitors. Second thing look at what the Akalis did. That was outright betrayal

Baba Daya Singh Jee and Baba Nihal Singh Jee are inspirational Singhs who have the respect of the Panth.

singh1984, what did I say? kee hogya?

and you mentioned a 100,000 Nihang soldiers being outside Amritsar. Was this during operation bluestar?

The tarna dal fielded 100,000 soldiers right outside of Amritsar.

Your propaganda, while funny is delusional. You show no evidence either, that the nihangs gave up their rehat or that the Sikhs there were vegetarian.

Instead without knowing the details of why the Bhudda Dal did not participate in the movement you attribute it to cowardice.

There is a special place on the sooli reserved for gaddars like you.

KHALSA JI This is the reality of these sant gyani types.

Now that I see what kind of person you are, I wish to have no association.

okay maybe it is not cowardice. I take my word back on this. But it was a Dhokha and betrayal non the less. They had three options. One was to join Sant Jee, the second was to stay neutral and the third was to join Indira Gandhi. And they chose the last and worst option. Even if they stayed neutral, it would not have been that bad. But joining Indira Gandhi was the worst thing an Amritdhari Rehetvaan Sikh can do. That's almost like a Sikh joining Aurangzeb's side during the battle of Chamkaur.

Yeah sant only should not eat. Sikh is soldier, so end of debate. Sikh refusing to fight is not sikh, as sikh is not recluse.

Udasi or Nirmala is soldier of spiritual battlefield. I think they are vegetarian, that is fine.

To say Sikh cannot eat meat, is blatant lie. It is treason,

I don't want to add to this debate of meat because Gurbani says Maas Maas Kar Moorakh Jhagre. So there is no point.

But I want to ask what has meat got to do with being a soldier or being able to fight? No one can deny that the Shaheed Singhs in 84 were all vegetarian while the meat eating Nihangs were scared to fight and joined Indira Gandhi. So what does this prove? Ironically the few Nihangs who did fight and become Shaheed in 84 had also become vegetarians after doing Sangat of Sant Jee.

I'm not saying meat eaters are not brave. But the point I'm making is, it is the Power of Baani that makes Sikhs brave not their diet. One should take notice of the amount of Baani Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale used to read everyday. Besides Nitnem, he recited entire Panj Granthi and also 100 Japji Sahib Paaths besides reading many Angs of Guru Granth Sahib Jee daily. With so much Bhagti one acquires a great amount of Shakti. This is what made Puraatan Singhs so brave and fierce fighters.

That's it Amar, you have finished Sher in this thread.

Moderators and other posters on this forum, i dont want to but are being forced to state some historical facts about the Gurus. if i offend someone in the process AND IF I GIVE ONE SINGLE WRONG FACT willingly unwillingly, my heartfelt apologies.

I also need to correct some misconceptions, historical inaccuracies which are often cited by such morons as amar_jkp who source their history from qisseh kahanian and folklore.

Before I write anything, i would request some sane minds to rein in this moron.

Thanks

You write everything in order to offend Sikhs. So it is no surprise to us if you are hiding your Gur Nindak feelings inside. Let it out, let us see what more lies you are hiding inside.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9ZVpEKM-QE

Good video. It shows the level of distortion these leftists have done Sikh history. Not just our history, but in India in general these leftists/communists have done a lot of distortions.

Jung Chamkaur yaar, this is what I mean when I say you don't know about the issues yet you argue about it like you know it. You claiming that no women and children were killed is an example of this. The way those animals had ruthlessly killed the helpless unarmed British women and little children during the Bibighar massacre and thrown their mutilated bodies in the well is something sends shivers down any humane person's spine. Why would Sikhs help such animals in their so called 'revolution' when just a few years earlier they had done the same things in Punjab to surrendering Punjabi soldiers. Sorry, but I can fully understand why Punjabis did what they did against the Bhaya uprising.

disgusting comment. justifying the killing of 1857 revolutionaries by mercenary Sikhs is like justifying the 1984 killing of sikhs by congress mobs. honouring 1857 shaheeds make their '90% martyrs were sikhs' boasts look hollow. in the Amritsar outrage i have mentioned, 282 revolutionaries were executed by the mercenary dogs.

the lowlife among the tat khalsa justify not only the treachery of their forefathers but also terrorism. for them, even the sikh criminals, murderers are heroes for them.

"revolutionaries" LOL you crack me up every time. the Punjabis(Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs) just killed the mercenaries who had committed atrocities on them a few years ago. It was Badla Punjabi style. Those Bhayas were ruthless in their conduct and in 1857 they did not even spare any woman or child of an Englishman found. Even Indian christians were not spared by these animals. And you trying to compare this to 1984 when Hindus killed Sikhs is really pathetic even by your standard. Sikh civilians of Delhi were not occupying Delhi nor were they part of an invading army that had killed anyone during a war. Your sense of comparing events is really flawed. But it also reveals your mindset that you consider Sikh civilians the equivalent as an occupying enemy force.

We don't consider the 1857 sepoys as freedom fighters. They were occupying our land after helping the British. They humiliated Punjabis with taunts until our people finally got their chance at getting back at them. Even when they rose in rebellion in UP, they committed the worst of atrocities on British women and children by mercilessly killing them and throwing their dead bodies in wells.

Interesting. When such a master of this art faces an MMA fighter, the result is something like this:

Although Gadari movement was mostly consisting of Sikhs, but it was not religious movement. It was a nationalist, anti British movement.

Do you have to be a behangam to study with Baba Jee?

Hahaha! No, i am not having nightmares. i am enjoying myself over the debate brainwashed hindu-haters are having. they now somehow wants us to believe that khalsa is a dharam which has been made to destroy mandirs and vedas and what not. Are these ultra bigots saying (if Khalsa is a Dharam in itself not just a panth) Sikhi is a fourth dharam? when Khalsas start destroying mandirs, would they start from harimandir?

Really interesting, the poet has written a poem in praise of 'Hindu deities' and then also written that they and their followers would be destroyed by 'Khalsa dharam'. can you show me just one instance PLEASE where word dharam has been used with either Sikh or khalsa anywhere in any Sikh scriptures? also, who was/is considered a Hindu in your opinion? what is a Ugradanti, kali, Naina Devi, Chandi, Bhavani et al upasak?

What kind of sikhi, gurmat you guys are following as you seem to have only one point agenda - prove somehow that Gurus wrote every single word to rub Hindus' collective nose in the dust. that a new 'dharam' was created the day Baba Nanak was born. after that day, everything should be seen in black and white, Sikh and Hindu. In other words, Baba Nanak and the following nine Gurus and Bhagats were born to divide.

Ugradanti would not be happy with such iconoclasts

Your the one who again tried to promote some anti Sikh theory but as usual it only ended up back firing like that abortion and Banda Singh Bahadur topics you started. You started off in this topic trying present a half baked theory that this Bani was not included in Sri Dasam Granth because of a mistranslated Tukh which in fact lumps Hindus with the Muslims while promoting the teesar Panth Khalsa Dharm as being triumphant over them.

As for the mentioning of Hindu deities, well if Mr Das's way of interpreting scriptures is to be used, then those are not really the names of Hindu deities but they in fact have an alternative antreev meaning.

Anyway, maybe there was a real reason why the Sodhak committee did not include this composition in Sri Dasam Granth along with Guru Gobind Singh Jee's banis. But it certainly wasn't the reason you gave.

what reverence (or despising) of the above-named has got to do with the intellectuals? WHY this insistence on considering only the semi-literate katha vachaks (Sikh or Hindu) as intellectuals?

Which one of the Sikh intellectuals that I have mentioned are semi literates? and why do you insist on only considering non-practicing Sikhs as Sikh intelligentsia? the reason I mentioned Swami Nithiananda, Asaram is because they are practicing Hindu Gurus who are supported by respected Hindu writers and leaders

On 3/5/2014 at 3:09 PM, N30 S!NGH said:

Ugardanti is not stating khalsa will be destroying puranas or vedas, obviously that would be self destructive against gurbani itself where gurbani supporting vedas and puranas gyan sidhant ie- akaal usta/t as far as mool sidhant is concerned but rather kaal- maha kaal will destroy everything- destruction has many layers of interpretations not just physical but perceptions-read parloa, maha parloa, gyan parloa explanation by sant gurbachan singh bhindranwale in 21st astpahadi.

 

Veere, I don't know of this bani is authentic as it is not in Dasam Granth. But why sugar coat it and give it some alternative meaning? It is clearly written in this composition that Vedas, Shastars, Purans, Mandirs of the Hindus and the circumcision, Azaan and Quran, Masjids of the Muslims will be destroyed while the Khalsa Dharm will prevail everywhere. Personally this does not fit my world view because Khalsa has come to protect all whether they are Hindus or Muslims not destroy them.

What kind of Hindu Dharam will prevails when the Khalsa has destroyed the Veds and Purans? The word Jagai does not mean prevail. The whole import of the Uggardanti is the destruction of both the Hindu and Muslim religions and their replacement with the Khalsa Panth. I fear Sher might be having nightmares reading this.

Very true. I don't understand how RSS tries to promote this tukh by mistranslated it but in other parts of the Bani it is written how the Khalsa will destroy the Vedas, Purans, Shastars and Mandirs. If these are all destroyed what Hindu Dharm will be left? This composition promotes the superiority of the teesar panth-Khalsa Dharm over the other two Dharms i.e. Hinduism and Islam.

Jonny the translations above cannot possibly be done if what you write is correct. There are stark differences between the translation on the site and what you have provided. Do you personally hold Uggardanti in high esteem? Also, what is your opinion about the Bansavalinama?

I would not trust the site above. I will not say much about him but he promotes non Sikh practices.

ਸਕਲ ਜਗਤ ਮੋ, ਖਾਲਸਾ ਪੰਥ ਗਾਜੈ ॥ ਜਗੈ ਧਰਮ ਹਿੰਦੁਕ, ਤੁਰਕਨ ਦੁੰਦ ਭਾਜੈ ॥

Throughout the world the Khalsa Panth will be prominent. The Hindu Dharam will prevail, and the Turks will be in flight.

The comma is always before the last three words.

I would say the correct Vishram on this tukh is as follows:

ਜਗੈ ਧਰਮ, ਹਿੰਦੁਕ, ਤੁਰਕਨ ਦੁੰਦ ਭਾਜੈ

Which will translate as the (Khalsa) Dharm will prevail, (and) the Hindus, the Turks will be in flight.

So there is a comma on the last three words but the meaning I gave will still remain.

The translation above is not correct. This is a mistranslated done and promoted by RSS. The correct translation is:

ਸਕਲ ਜਗਤ ਮੋ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਪੰਥ ਗਾਜੈ ॥ ਜਗੈ ਧਰਮ, ਹਿੰਦੁਕ ਤੁਰਕਨ ਦੁੰਦ ਭਾਜੈ ॥

Throughout the world the Khalsa Panth will be prominent. The (Khalsa) Dharm will prevail and the Hindus and Turks will be banished

The Vishram(comma) should be placed after Dharm not after Hindak as the translator has wrongly done. The Hindak and Turkan is grouped together as the two Panths that the Khalsa(the teesar panth mentioned in the preceding Tukh) will banish as the Khalsa will become prominent through out the world.

Also in this composition it is written the Mandirs and Masjids will be destroyed by the Khalsa(ਮੜੀ ਗੋਰ ਦੇਵਲ ਮਸੀਤਾਂ ਗਿਰਾਯੰ). The Khalsa will destroy the Vedas, Shastars and Purans of the Hindus(ਮਿਟਹਿ ਬੇਦ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਅਠਾਰਹਿ ਪੁਰਾਨਾ) and the khalsa will finish the Circumcision practice, Azaan,Namaz and Quran of the Muslims (ਮਿਟੈ ਬਾਂਗ ਸਲਵਾਤ ਸੁੰਨਤ ਕੁਰਾਨਾ)

In Uggardanti it is written about the two Panths(Hindu and Muslim) ਦੁਹੂੰ ਪੰਥ ਮੇਂ ਕਪਟ ਵਿਦਯਾ ਚਲਾਨੀ । ਬਹੁਰ ਤੀਸਰਾ ਪੰਥ ਕੀਜੈ ਪ੍ਰਧਾਨੀ that since there is too much Kapat(corruption) in the two Panths(of Hinduism and Islam) the teesar Panth(Khalsa Dharm) has been created and is superior.

If you wanna believe this then go ahead

I

I named contemporaries but amused to find Bhindrans, Kahan Singh and Veer Singh in the list. No comments on the ultra orthodox Bhindrans, the last two were known 'distortionists' i.e. intellectually dishonest.

I thought you would name (from among those still alive) Khushwant Singh, Manmohan Singh, Montek Singh, Tarun Tejpal (in spite of his moral turpitude case), harjot Singh oberoi...shows whom you consider Sikh and whom you would not.

Like I said, instead of worrying about our intelligentsia why not worry about your intelligentsia like Babu Asaram, Swami Nithiananda, Ashok Singal etc. If your people revere them, you should be the last person on earth to point fingers at our intelligentsia.

For Hindus and Sikhs, he is the biggest villain there was. For Muslims of the subcontinent, he was the greatest ruler of India.

Let's just hope India never has to be ruled by such a person ever again. He antagonized everyone who was not a Sunni Muslim. People like him belong in a pure Islamic country not in a multi cultural and multi religious place like India.

but why pick and choose?

Gurbani says that eating meat is not a kalyugi trait. you know this.

It's not about picking and choosing. It is about using one's Bibek Budh which is the ability to discern what is Good and what is Bad according to Gurmat. Eating meat is a Malech attribute and today is only done for Jeeb Rass(Jabaan da Chaska). Malech attributes should be avoided if one want to walk on the path of Gurmat Aatam Marg.

Originally somethings may have been done to keep one self alive if there was nothing else to eat or to check if an enemy is not among our ranks i.e. some suspected Muslim spy who was pretending to be a Sikh was probably fed pork to see if he is a Muslim or not(this test worked fine as a lie detector test does today). Over time, due to the numerous genocides and as the older generation died off, the new converts to the faith began to bring into the Sikh faith non Sikh practices such as eating meat, taking drugs. These non Sikh practices were allowed to be considered normal in our religion. This was how normal Sikhs were until the rise of Damdami Taksal parchar during the 70s-90s which again revived vegetarianism among the Amritdhari Sikhs. Thanks to this, today it is considered a taboo for an amritdhari to eat meat or do drugs. We need another Sant Jee for another round of revival.