Jump to content

chatanga1

Members
  • Posts

    4,739
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    144

Posts posted by chatanga1

  1. The Udasis have done much parchar of Sikhi throughout India since their inception by Sri Chand ji. ]

    BaBa Sri Chand continued the udasi, which was actually started by Guru NanakDev Ji. Guru Nanak passed on this udasi to Baba Sri Chand. The act of performing Udasis was not Baba Sri Chands idea/invention. He inherited it from Guru Ji.

  2. gurmatchanan website people. i was looking in the raag kirtan section, and i would like to make a suggestion that you post the raags of the shabads as well as the shabad headings.

    this way sum1 foolish like myself who loves Sri Raag, wouldnt have to keep going back ot sikhi to da max to check wich raag they are in.

    can you do that please?

  3. i was watcching Jai Hanumaan this morning, and uit feartured the point where Ravan took Sita. When Sita was telling Lakshman to go after Ram Chander, Lakshman took an arrow and cretaed a border round the kutia which would keep Sita safe. He defintley was NOT looking at her feet when he was telling her not to step outside if it. He was looking at her face.

    The suberp thread of Lakhsman's high moral seems to be lost on the cretaors of this show, and the y are hindus as well.

    right ,now that ive got that point off my chest im off to tapoban to see what they rattling their cages over.

  4. i have heard the pakistan version a few times, and it is completely " you sikhs killed loads opf muslims in 47..." they are given the lesson that the muslims were an innocent community caught between murdering sikhs and scheming hindus.

    i asked these people have you heard of the episode of Rawalpindi March 1947? they replied "it never hapned". kinda like the nazi's who say the holocuast never hapned.

    i dont deny that sikhs from a dharmic angle commited wrong in killing innocent people in 47. what i can understand is the years of attacks on thier people and property, had turned the issue of dharma ino a non-issue at the time. the misery brought on the sikh community was in the minds of these people.

    At least the muslim league can remember that they were responsible for the killings of their own people through their own murderous agenda. This i have no delusion about. if i am deluded on this point then im happy.

    Shaheediyan bro, you can remain deluded in your vision of fighting mobs singlehandedly. im happy with that as well.

  5. going back to the topic, i can also remember reading about jinnah saying that " we are not pacifists. we will take pakistan thru violence if necessary. " and it came to that. the british would have left a united india if they thought the 2 main communites would stay peaceful, but the muslims wanted to show that they were at war with the hindus.

    so this mentality has just passed onto/expressed itself in another generation about violence being a legitimate tool.

    the maulvis encouraging suicide bombers on civilians are the offspring of jinnah's mentality.

  6. shaheediyan, i hear what you are saying, and you are right about dharam yudh. however revenge will make a person do crazy things. at that time the muslimshad been killing sikhs for well over 2 years in west panjab. even in 45/46 there were villages which sikhs would refuse to enter to sell goods/milk etc for fear of death. the killings of muslims only came about after the radcliffe line was awarded in august 47. sikhs simply saw it as payback,however horrible that seems.

    my uncle who came from montgomery recalled the massacre of rawalpindi in march 47, and said " we were extremley angry after hearing what the muslims had done and wanted to take revenge..."

    also i was told by the elder brother of Sant-Sipahi Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, that their father Baba Joginder Singh had actually helped the evacutaion and safe passaage to a camp for the muslims wishing to go to pakistan.

    i dont agree with what the sikhs did, but i can fully understand why they didwhat theydid.

  7. its not that the tuk gets misrepresented. Its cos there are many different meanings of tuks in gurbani. There are lines in Guru Granth Sahib that can have more than one meaning, and i remember Sant Gurbachan Singh once saying that there are some lines which have upto 12 different meanings.

    So the above line saabat soorat that Bhenji has given, i wouldnt say any1 translation is absolutley wrong, its just the angle throu which we look at them that differs from others.

    But it is hard to keep kids on the path. i do worry a little about my kids not being pakka in sikhi.

×
×
  • Create New...