chatanga1

Are you a Sikh?

I thought that as well. I think the focus here was the King was intent of keeping his Queen happy with him that he was able to do anything for her. For the Queen, I saw that she set the King a task which he was failing to do, but then reprieved him of any blame by saying the watermelon is not important. For that that King must have felt a little more secured as his men were unable to retrieve the watermelon.
 
Here is the gurmukhi version:
https://www.searchgurbani.com/public/dasam-granth/page/1693

I will share a real experience of a close relative. She was friends with a woman, who asked her for money. This same woman had asked me for money some time earlier but my gut instinct was that she was not trustworthy. My relative asked me for some money to lend her, but I knew her friend could not be trusted and I refused. I told me relative don't give her any money. Howver she ended up giving her the money. Some months later my relative told me what happened. She got me involved and then I asked her (ex)friend, why aren't you returning the money ? She said "she only paid me back the money she took from me earlier."

I thin it says make sure your house is in order. The Mohghal had no proof whereas the thief had proof. So who would the local people believe? Who was more able to provide proof? So in the minds of the locals the Moghal had no leg to stand on.
When I read this I thought also of the King in the root story. How he had no proof that his son was guilty. He was looking at the Queen as the proof. But just like the thief, who had the actual proof in writing, the King had only the word of a person, who he was infatuated with.
If we look at it from the Prince's side, we see it in reverse.

https://www.searchgurbani.com/public/dasam-granth/page/1683
 
ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
ਨਗਰ ਪਾਵਟਾ ਬਹੁ ਬਸੈ ਸਾਰਮੌਰ ਕੇ ਦੇਸ ॥
ਜਮੁਨਾ ਨਦੀ ਨਿਕਟਿ ਬਹੈ ਜਨੁਕ ਪੁਰੀ ਅਲਿਕੇਸ ॥੧॥
ਨਦੀ ਜਮੁਨ ਕੇ ਤੀਰ ਮੈ ਤੀਰਥ ਮੁਚਨ ਕਪਾਲ ॥
ਨਗਰ ਪਾਵਟਾ ਛੋਰਿ ਹਮ ਆਏ ਤਹਾ ਉਤਾਲ ॥੨॥
ਚੌਪਈ ॥
ਖਿਲਤ ਅਖੇਟਕ ਸੂਕਰ ਮਾਰੇ ॥
ਬਹੁਤੇ ਮ੍ਰਿਗ ਔਰੈ ਹਨਿ ਡਾਰੇ ॥
ਪੁਨਿ ਤਿਹ ਠਾਂ ਕੌ ਹਮ ਮਗੁ ਲੀਨੌ ॥
ਵਾ ਤੀਰਥ ਕੇ ਦਰਸਨ ਕੀਨੌ ॥੩॥
ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
ਤਹਾ ਹਮਾਰੇ ਸਿਖ੍ਯ ਸਭ ਅਮਿਤ ਪਹੂੰਚੇ ਆਇ ॥
ਤਿਨੈ ਦੈਨ ਕੋ ਚਾਹਿਯੈ ਜੋਰਿ ਭਲੋ ਸਿਰਪਾਇ ॥੪॥
ਨਗਰ ਪਾਵਟੇ ਬੂਰਿਯੈ ਪਠਏ ਲੋਕ ਬੁਲਾਇ ॥
ਏਕ ਪਾਗ ਪਾਈ ਨਹੀ ਨਿਹਫਲ ਪਹੁਚੇ ਆਇ ॥੫॥
ਚੌਪਈ ॥
ਮੋਲਹਿ ਏਕ ਪਾਗ ਨਹਿ ਪਾਈ ॥
ਤਬ ਮਸਲਤਿ ਹਮ ਜਿਯਹਿ ਬਨਾਈ ॥
ਜਾਹਿ ਇਹਾ ਮੂਤਤਿ ਲਖਿ ਪਾਵੋ ॥
ਤਾ ਕੀ ਛੀਨ ਪਗਰਿਯਾ ਲ੍ਯਾਵੋ ॥੬॥
ਜਬ ਪਯਾਦਨ ਐਸੇ ਸੁਨਿ ਪਾਯੋ ॥
ਤਿਹੀ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਸਭਨ ਕਮਾਯੋ ॥
ਜੋ ਮਨਮੁਖ ਤੀਰਥ ਤਿਹ ਆਯੋ ॥
ਪਾਗ ਬਿਨਾ ਕਰਿ ਤਾਹਿ ਪਠਾਯੋ ॥੭॥
ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
ਰਾਤਿ ਬੀਚ ਕਰਿ ਆਠ ਸੈ ਪਗਰੀ ਲਈ ਉਤਾਰਿ ॥
ਆਨਿ ਤਿਨੈ ਹਮ ਦੀਹ ਮੈ ਧੋਵਨਿ ਦਈ ਸੁਧਾਰਿ ॥੮॥
ਚੌਪਈ ॥
 
ਪ੍ਰਾਤ ਲੇਤ ਸਭ ਧੋਇ ਮਗਾਈ ॥
ਸਭ ਹੀ ਸਿਖ੍ਯਨ ਕੋ ਬੰਧਵਾਈ ॥
ਬਚੀ ਸੁ ਬੇਚਿ ਤੁਰਤ ਤਹ ਲਈ ॥
ਬਾਕੀ ਬਚੀ ਸਿਪਾਹਿਨ ਦਈ ॥੯॥
ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
ਬਟਿ ਕੈ ਪਗਰੀ ਨਗਰ ਕੋ ਜਾਤ ਭਏ ਸੁਖ ਪਾਇ ॥
ਭੇਦ ਮੂਰਖਨ ਨ ਲਹਿਯੋ ਕਹਾ ਗਯੋ ਕਰਿ ਰਾਇ ॥੧੦॥
ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਪਖ੍ਯਾਨੇ ਪੁਰਖ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰੇ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੀ ਭੂਪ ਸੰਬਾਦੇ ਇਕਹਤਰੌ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਸਮਾਪਤਮ ਸਤੁ ਸੁਭਮ ਸਤੁ ॥੭੧॥੧੨੫੮॥ਅਫਜੂੰ॥
 
@paapiman can you add Nara's interpretation as well bor. This seems to be told a little differently from the other stories. Not in the third person. Does it seem a little unusual ?

He used his name as a "title". Ghar jawai is the unusual indian situation whereas the girl doesn't leave her parents to live with her in laws but the man lives his family to live with her parents. There is still some stigma attached to this practice even today. It signifies the man as some kind of weakling, or being controlled by his wife.
The name ghar jawai is also a title. Imagine the old woman going to the police and saying "son in law" has disappeared with my daughter. Of course they are not going to take it seriously.

That could be a reason why he, as a bania, is working as a shudra.

May be the wise minister is trying to convey a message to Chitar Singh via the character of the Mughal in this tale.
If you (Chitar Singh) go ahead with the death penalty and then later regret it, none of your subjects will have any sympathy for you. In this tale too, the people made fun of the distressed Mughal, even though he was the innocent party in this case.
They (subjects) might say "why did you trust your wife over your son in the first place" (notice the similarity with this tale - "why had you taken loan from him"). 
They might say "how could a son (prince) rape his step mother (queen)" (notice the similarity with this tale "If you had borrowed money from some one, how could he steal from you?").
 
Bhul chuk maaf

Also, look at the way the king sends his men to fetch the watermelon from the river, as per the queen's request. A watermelon. Why would a king do that? He can buy thousands of melons, if needed. Why risk the life of your men over a bloody watermelon? IMHO, this decision was pretty childish on the part of the king. The king is described as an intelligent person, but is he really?
Is Maharaaj trying to show us how intelligent men can act like dumb idiots, when under the influence of beautiful women?
 
Bhul chuk maaf

Would it be usual for a bania/trader to be a servant in someones house?
Reading this the main feature to me stands out as loyalty and hypocrisy.
The woman is giving her husband a lecture on loyalty upto the point of sacrificing oneself to remain loyal yet is unloyal herself. The husband has seen his wife with Banka yet does not address this with his wife. From the story it seems that she took the initiative and gained the upperhand right from the start.
Another thing that is striking is that his own wife beat him with a shoe. Hitting someone with a shoe is very insulting/degrading in Hindostani culture. So not only is his intelligence insulted, his loyalty questioned, but he is also degraded all the whilst thinking his wide has taught him a valuable lesson.
 
In the original story the Queen tried to have relations with the Prince and when there was danger of exposure she took the upperhand by accusing the Prince of forcing himself on her.
May be the Minister is trying to tell the King that you think your wife is teaching you a lesson in loyalty but in reality she is really doing the opposite.

Cult leader dhadri is scared of anyone with gurmat knowledge.

ਤਿਸੁ ਗੁਰ ਕਉ ਛਾਦਨ ਭੋਜਨ ਪਾਟ ਪਟੰਬਰ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਸਤਿ ਕਰਿ ਮੁਖਿ ਸੰਚਹੁ ਤਿਸੁ ਪੁੰਨ ਕੀ ਫਿਰਿ ਤੋਟਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ॥੪॥
Offer the Guru sacred foods, clothes, silk and satin robes of all sorts; know that He is True. The merits of this shall never leave you lacking. ||4||
 
Bhul chuk maaf

Dhadri getting slammed by Bhai Jaswinder Singh jee (USA). This video will enlighten the viewers on how much scared he is of the Singhs.
@Soulfinder
 
Bhul chuk maf
 

Just seen this online. Was about to share. Good job.

Just seen this online. Was about to share. Good job.

There is another Sri Braham Kavach, which is present in Sri Dasam Guru Granth Sahib jee.
 
@Soulfinder
 
Bhul chuk maaf

You said early on if Gurbani said something Science didn't agree with, you'd side with science. You already made it clear you run everything through science, so science will always be superior to you than Gurbani. 

I didn't twist you, you answered it..
I'm not asking you as an educated person, I'm asking you as a Sikh. A true sikh would believe in Gurbani 100%, Gurbani says this. Yet you choose to side with science and are willing to even let the notion that Gurbani is wrong creep into your mind. 
 
IF Gurbani said the world is flat, you would side with science by your own admission. Yet as Gurbani says,a Sikh would trust his Guru over anything else. 
Mythical sakhis? I posted ones that Guru Ji himself narrates in Gurbani. You still don't beleive it. Bhai Gurdas Ji's varan (the original copies are still with us) are corrupt according to you guys, you don't Suraj Prakash Granth, Panth Prakash, Bhai Mani Singh Ji's Janamsakhis, what do you guys like? other than your own arrogant stuff you conjure from thin air. You guys will bring down any historical Gurudwara with even a remote sakhi about a miracle because you start whining and complaining about "how could it have happened". You changed from Gurbani is Poetry to Gurbani is science on a whim. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Funny because you guys have turned Sikhism into science with a divine hand. You've yet to refute any of the videos which show the Vedas and the Quran also make the same claims you do, Why are they wrong but you're right. The science world laughs at people like you, everyone does. 
You guys don't even believe in a next world, so why are you butthurt over it. You want scientific proof for everything so find me the science on how a divine hand brought forth the universe.

But science hasn’t discovered it. The scientist you tried to use has based it on his imagination.
 
 

Bhagat Singh is the Ustad and Samprda himself

I'd rather read gurbani from the best scientist and philosopher than some scientists' imaginary proposals.

So Sant Jarnail Singh Ji was an RSS agent? Jesus Christ. You really are stupid.
 
So I'm guessing you're the "wise man" you answered for. Well thank you, because you've subsequently shown you're more loyal to science than Gurbani. You'll turn against Gurbani if it contradicts science, thank you for showing everyone on this forum you're nothing more than a humanist rather than a sikh. Gurbani mentions multiple times how the only way to live is to have 100% faith in Guru Ji (Gurbani) yet you can't even muster that if sciences finds something Gurbani says is wrong. Thank you for showing everyone here that you'll put sciences are your Guru and not Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
Firstly you started this, you started talking about how miracles were "unnatural" and how they contradict nature. Then when that route failed as Gurbani said multiple times that miracles do occur, you started going on about 1 rehit maryada, where is that rehit marayda from? find me the historical document it comes from. Find me a historical source that says the sikh panth was always meant to have 1 maryada. 
The same people who promote your rehit also said Homosexuality is unnatural, so tell me stupid one. Why is something unnatural occurring all over nature? do you go up to your gay friends and says "hey guys, you're unnatural" You love to toot science but the people who made the rehit had about as much scientific gyan as Dhandriwala has courage when confronted with bullets, which is next to nothing.
I think you don't understand it, given the drivel you posted next.
bullshit, crack open a basic biology book. Evolution is totally random. Technically evolution starts from single cell organisms as that's when they're technically alive, before that they're just atoms and compounds, which aren't alive. 
So they weren't life, they don't fall into the scientific definition of life at all. They weren't single cell organism, by this logic evolution of man started when the big bang originally happened. Life begins from single cell organisms, before that, they're not considered life. According to science therefore, Life begins then. Not before, as before its nothing more than chemical reactions happening.
You mean like how every single christian and muslim makes the same claims about science. You guys and them are just hilarious, one minute gurbani is poetry, the next minute its about evolution. Pick one and stick to it. 
Let's see how muslims say the same thing.
Notice how everyone says the same things, yet no one can prove it? Why should your word be better than theirs. Look how Lord Krishna describes the theory of relativity to Lord Brahma! clearly he was a true scientist through and through.

THE BRITISH POLICY OF DIVIDING AND RULING THE SIKHS.
"They supported the corruption of the Maryada of the two Takhats OUTSIDE of Punjab connected to the tenth Guru – Patna and Hazoor – so that that the corrupted Maryada could be used to corrupt the rest of Sikhi within Punjab."
 
karminder again talking double-standards. He maintains that the Udasi/Nirmale had influenced the the 2 takhts and now he is saying the british were the ones that did it.
 

That peice of human trash kraminder tries to further inflict lies on unassuming Sikhs under this heading:
"THE BRITISH POLICY OF DIVIDING AND RULING THE SIKHS."
The Sikhs were the last nation to be conquered and colonized by the British. The imperialists occupied the rest of India for 100 years and spent that time preparing to take Punjab and conquer the Sikhs.

The lying in wait for ONE CENTURY was to soften the ground. To prepare the conquest of the lion hearted, united and deeply spiritual Sikhs.
 
This is another one of his lies eagerly lapped up by cretins like aman. By the time the British had got their feet on the east side on india (1870s) the Sikh misl were a very disunited group, with loyalties changing from one season to the next. Even under Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time only the trans-Satluj states were united under his rule, the cis-Satluj states were as disunited as ever.

The Sick Parasite Network, or for short SPN, has long been a bastion of lies and double-standards for many years. Especially under that cretin "aman" who is an admin there. This guy can't even stand up to debate anything. Its so easy to catch this rat and his boyfreind karminder out on many lies they tell on that forum. This aman can't even write a response without his anus leaking.  Their only response is to ban members who expose amans/karminders  lies an stupidity.
The biggest rat of them all karminder can't even stick to his OWN "facts" ! At one place he claim the 70 year absence of the Sikhs from Sachkhand Sri HariMandir Sahib led to the Udasis introducing Sri Dasme Patshahs Granth Sahib to rival Guru Granth Sahib. Then on another piece of trash he writes "the british financed another granth to rival Sri Guru Granth Sahib" which was then called the Dasam Granth.
Only fools and parasite would venture there and enjoy it.