chatanga1

this is due to the "mix-up" between 2 Mani Singhs. One , a Kamboh, same caste as Giani Garja Singh, who came from Multan, and the other Mani Singh who was from vill Longowal, Sangrur. even now on the net i find conflicting accounts of which Mani Singh was the scribe of Aad Guru Sahib. Kambohs claim that it was their Mani Singh who was the shaheed Mani Singh. any can confirm ? also 1 woman chatting drivel is enough for 1 man. if it was 2 they could tag-team him and drive him insane within a matter of moments!!!

it was "a brief intro to sikhism" by the sikh missionary society southall. Bijla Singh answered these questions very comopetently and the answers are/were on this forum. mods may help on this.

Where are the answers to the following questions, BOYS ! A. Do you believe that All Gurus were one soul (jot) and different bodies. Yes or No and explain based on Gurbani im no scholar, but am just beginning to read parts of both granths. so plz forgive me for my intrusion. In Aad Guru I have not yet read anything that says that the Gurus were 1 jot in 10 jamas. However in Bachitar Natak of Dasam Guru, there is a section where it is written that the jot was passed from Guru Nanak to Angad and so on. Then it says that all the spiritually wise people recognised this and only fools thought of them as seperate entities. Is this the answer you was looking for?

balbir singh, are you the one that says that we should not read Bhai Gurdas' varan as they contradict Gurbani? your opening line "pray truth and ..." seems very familiar.

that true mithar. a very good point made indeed. there is a org that has helped the sikligar sikhs, but i think that even now their acivities have cooled down a little. dont really hear much from them these days.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/briankrijgsma...338401751/show/ for fotos of yestredays event. thank you to all who attended.

ok, ill put it a ittle clearer. you say dont accept anybodys interpretation, but you wish Nayan to accept your interpretation that its ok to do both. I suggest that you read Sikh history pertaining to idol-worship(6th Guru and 10th Guru) and alsoread what Aad Guru tells us about idol worship. But by being a sikh, i guess ou will know.

depends on how you look at the vaar. the key words you mention are "celibacy" and "one". my own view of this vaar , probably wrong is that atma(soul-bride) being commited to ONE waheguru. and the celibacy being that one does not look elsewhere. Bhai Gurdas could not write one wife only, in the time of Pancham Patshah who had 2 wives.

becos that traitor badal needs their votes. he wants to be seen to be on thier side .

Call for the death sentence then ashraqi. Lets have the mullahs say rather than ask if a woman is modestly dressed, hang the men who did this. Its easy to say Islam this and Islam that. In islam womans testimony is half to mans. What if the woman is a non-beleiever? Does she have to provide double the witnesses to prove the allegation?

Very illustrative post Fateh Singh. I can actually see your blubbering so visual was your post. I raised the same point (as I always do on sikhsangat) re the banning of naamdharis singhs from stages/tv etc whereas the akj who dont beleive in Guru Granth Sahib in its entirety are still allowed. A top guy called Manmeet Singh was also unofficailly banned from the channel. He is linked with Budha Dal Nihangs and wears nihang bana. He maybe the youth that sum1 refered to earlier on this thread. He was on the chanel in the 1st week it was on and has not been back on since. i thought his talk was excellent, but found out thru a friend that there were complaints about why a nihang was allowed on the channel.

and on those words, Radip Singh, I agree with you. Just to keep the peace on this forum.

isnt there a sakhi where Guru Nanak goes to school, but the mullahs and pandits call his father to say that they are unable to teach him anything as he already knows the subject, but yet was asking questions that the teachers were unable to answer? I dont beleive that anyone could have taught Guru Ji anything. I believe that Guru Ji was blessed with all knowledge from Waheguru. If Guru ji needed to learn this vidya, then would Guru HarKrishan be able to get Chhajju to recite sanskrit scripts ?

no, cos you know where it is.

about 10 years ago, Sant Niranjan Das visited england Ravidas Gurdwaras, where there was a furore as he allowed people to touch his feet inpresence of Aad Guru Granth. This even split the Ravidasias into 2 groups both pro and anti Niranjan Das. I remember the Council of Ravidasias issuing a press statement saying that no-one should do this in presence of Aad Guru Granth Sahib. Sant Niranjan Das has stated that they are not sikh, so is it a panthic matter?

the people that made niddar singh sign an apology were not fat. didnt really see anyone flying about then. and for your info, niddar singh spouted venom on his website about taksal/akj first. to say that they were the ones who starting dissing him is laughable. he hates taksal as he believes that the tankhaya of Baba Santa Singh was due to taksal.

he was very imaginative in detailing the missing history of Dasam Pitas life in "hiding" and then appearing out of nowhere to giv e guruship to SatGuru Balak Singh. Imagine havin to write almost 100 years of history and biography from nothing. On this he did a god job, but again then he had a sidekick called nidhan singh alam. also Fateh singh, why have non of the SantKhalsa got pajama on?

The only hate I have seen on forums is the hate re-directed towards Nidar Singh, that he directs initially towards taksal and akj.

god knows. i just assumed that as randip assumed that only five was on various forums spreading nindya, i could just do the same hence me writing that.

was Niddar Singh severely beaten up by taksal or akj? probably not, so why does he spread lies and venom about them on various forums and his website?

I have been havin a look at this on some other sites. want to share this wiv evry1 and your responses plz. Seshwar Sehra: When I asked questions regarding Shree Guru Nanak, the following verse was mentioned: (i) In Mandala 7, Ush 5, Mantra 5 and Chapter 6 "Bee chakram prithoi aishai ta khestraaeh Vishnu mansai das sayaan throvaah so asaya keeryo janaas oeroo khashatra so janama chakaar (8)". Meaning "when in the world the sinful ways will be on the rise and noble behavior will vanish, as the disappearance of the moon when on its wane on the darkest night, there will appear Vishnu as a prominent Prophet from the Keshatra Clan and will manifest in consecutive form through 10 Prophets to bring back the ways of virtue to the ailing world." Since in this verse it says that Vishnu will appear as a prominent prophet. Does this mean praying this prophet is praying to God? I am asking this because from what I know Ram was an avtar of Vishnu, and I continuously praise his name. Is this wrong because he was human on earth, by Rig Veda? Or is it correct to praise prophets as they are god on earth? Swami Ramswarup: Correct number of the mantra is Rigveda-mandal 7, sukta 100, mantra 4 and correct pronunciation is as under please:- "VI CHAKRAMEY PRITHIVIMESH ETAAM KSHETRAYE VISHNNURMANUSHEY DASHASYAN, DHRUVAASO ASYA KEERYO JANAAS URUKSHITIM SUJANIMA CHAKAAR." Meaning:- (VISHNNUHU) omnipresent God (MANUSHE) for man i.e. human beings (KSHETRAYE) abhyuden i.e., to give all kinds of benefit in long, happy life (DASHASYAN) to give Abhyuden i.e., to give all kinds of benefits, comforts, assets, wealth in long, happy life etc., to the human beings. Omnipresent God (VICHAKRAMEY) has made (PRITHIVEEM, ETAAM) this earth. (JANAASAHA) devotees (ASYA) of the God (DHRUVAASAHA) have become firm to worship. Because (URUKSHITIM) this wide spread, huge earth (CHAKAAR) is made by (SUJANIMA) God that is wonderful creator. IDEA- The word Vishnu made from Sanskrit root word "VISHLARI". The meaning of which is omnipresent and there is only one Almighty God who is omnipresent. Yajurveda states - "DYAVA PRITHIVI JANYAN DEV EKAHA" i.e., there is only one unchangeable, eternal God who creates the universe. So the meaning of Vishnu is omnipresent God and not prophet. In other Ved mantras like Mandal 10, sukta 129 it is clarified that Almighty God who is formless and omnipresent creates, nurses and destroys and again creates the universe alone. Yajurveda mantra 40/8 states He is Shukram i.e., Almighty, akaya i.e., formless. Almighty means He has all unlimited powers and therefore does not need any assistance, for fulfilling any purpose of universe. He alone does all his supreme deeds like creation, nursing etc. Therefore he too does not need any prophet (saint, yogi etc.,) to take care of the universe. Prophet can never be God. God was one, is one and shall ever remain one. Rigveda mantra 1/164/46 and Yajurveda mantra 32/1 states that there is only one God but he has unlimited divine qualities and therefore His names are unlimited based on His qualities but God remains always one. So His names are Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh, Varunn, Agni, Surya, Chandrama etc. So we have to worship only one Almighty, formless God who creates, nurses and destroys the universe. Yajurveda mantra 7/48 states that human beings are free to do pious deeds or sins but result is awarded in the shape of pleasure and sorrows respectively by God. No saint, yogi etc., is required by God to help Him to control the worldly situation etc. Suppose the world i.e., human beings become sinful and noble behaviours vanish away etc., as written by you then naturally the same situation occurs due to sinful deeds of humans and God under His natural administration would punish human-beings. Then nobody on the earth either saint or yogi etc., is able to save the situation. Therefore question of taking birth of Vishnu etc., does not arise. Otherwise Vedas tell that creation, nursing and destruction is eternal and takes place automatically at a stipulated time under the control of Almighty God. As said in Shwetashwaropnishad shloka 6/8, "Swabhaviki Gyan bal Kriya Cha" i.e., knowledge, power and divine actions of God take place automatically. Please read articles on Vedic Philosophy. If soul assimilates into God then who will experience the divine pleasure. So soul neither assimilates into God nor is a piece of God which can be separated from God. Soul can never be God. I have written a book named- "Vedanta and eternal vedas' philosophy" and I would advise you to please read the same if you so desire. Book can be sent in receipt of your postal address. Price of book is Rs. 40/- excluding postal charges. God is not energy but has unlimited qualities like knowledge, power and divine deeds etc. No saint, yogi etc., is required by God to help Him to control the worldly situation etc. Suppose the world i.e., human beings become sinful and noble behaviours vanish away etc., as written by you then naturally the same situation occurs due to sinful deeds of humans and God under His natural administration would punish human-beings. Then nobody on the earth either saint or yogi etc., is able to save the situation. Therefore question of taking birth of Vishnu does not arise. Otherwise Vedas tell that creation, nursing and destruction is eternal and takes place automatically at a stipulated time under the control of Almighty God. As said in Shwetashwaropnishad shloka 6/8, "Swabhaviki Gyan bal Kriya Cha" i.e., knowledge, power and divine actions of God take place automatically. Please read the article on creation and prakriti.

theres one in bilston as well. I ve been there a couple of times to talk tothe guy running it,and hes a top guy. but basically my fear and this is what i told him was that the name of Baba VadhBhag Singh is now wrongly, just seen as a link to black magic etc, and that a lot of young sikhs do not have the knowledge to understand what Baba VadhBhag Singh was about. I told him you mightbe better off changing the name. " Hell no!!" he replied. Just as most things in Dharma have fallen in standards, this place/institution is no different, in that people have taken advantage of it to make money off people's fears. Fear is a really powerful emotion. enough to make people hand over large amounts of cash to believe they are protected.

They never used to. they onlystarted that rubbish after they were forced out of control of gurdwaras. And I took amrit form taksal. They never said anything against Sant-Khalsa specifically.

Fateh Singh, do you equate the seperation of nitnem banis with the Patra Paath of Sant-Khalsa?

it is xylitol, thats why Guru Ji told us not to argue over unimportant issues.