drawrof

Page 188 Bhai veer singh has done much editing in the form of addition and removal when writing panth prakash. This editing isn’t meaningless (meaning it isn’t minor or without impact) because it has been done with intention and motive. The changes have been examined by looking at panth prakash from 1952 and comparing it to the Chandigarh manuscript (797) that is handwritten and the handwritten copy in guru nanak dev university (276). <Drawrof believes that 797 and 276 are the manuscript numbers>. There is a difference between these 2 manuscripts and what bhai vir singh has edited (which eventually is evidenced in the 1952 version of panth prakash). The most noticeable/important thing is that rattan singh bhangu , the writer of panth prakash, views Sikhs as Hindus (I, Drawrof,believe ‘Hindu’ here means ‘people of India’ as opposed to the modern day view of what Hindu is). Bhai Vir singh cut out Hindu and replaced it with Sikh. In places where sikhan/singhan has been written, the manuscript versions have ‘Hinduan’ written there. Rattan singh writes about bootay shah….

Hey Guys, Im' at work and have quite a bit to do. I'll translate a bit by bit to give the gist of it all.....and then maybe the details can be picked up by others? I can't have the windows opened for too long, thanks for the patience.

If someone had a gun put to their head....and nothing has changed from that point onwards it makes me think a couple of things 1) What was the purpose and what did it achieve? 2) If he had the gun to his head, why didn't he just pull the trigger?

pracharak with a sufi tinge.....lol, I guess all the punjabi singer's have appropriated 'baba bulleh shah' by singing his songs. 1) gurdas mann 2) Hans Raj Hans 3) babbu mann 4) surinder sartaj? I guess the list can go on....

Shaheediyan, I always enjoy engaging in dialogue with you, whether it is directly or through following your debates with others. I respect your point of view here and see the efficacy of it, but I think this warrants a discussion on how babbu mann sees himself here, because his own point of position will be indicative of who he is representing 1) is he representing sikhs? (those who practice) 2) is he representing sikhs? (those whose come from sikh households) 3) is he representing sikhs? (peasants who don't care about religion per se, but see this as an abuse of power)?

In closing, I'd have to agree with Balpreet singh and everyone else here. Punjab has been a place of fertility and constant struggle; this ethos is rapidly depleting as natural livelihood's such as agriculture are being uprooted and hedonism is being applauded by all. I respect both Baba Ranjit Singh an Babbu Mann for grass root attempts of educating and empowering.

I don't agree with baba ranjit singh dhadrian wallay on this. for 2 reasons: 1) Babbu is a mona or a patit....don't know how that 'prevents' him from having an opinion. Unless the only people who go to so-called 'babay' are amritdhari...in which case, more prachar from rehitvaan gursikhs is required. mind you, I will not deny baba ranjit singh the right to his view either...I just don't agree with it. 2)Babbu wasn't being a literalist, he was just talking about guru nanak devji's saadgi and how some babbay are just faking it and 'pimping it'. I am sure there were horses and camels etc that were around in punjab prior to guru nanak....the argument wasn't strong.

Fatehji! bhai gurdeep singh/hardeep singh are doing arti on the sikhchannel, and they are doing a variation of the reet by bhai avtar singh (by the sounds of it). I hope Shaheediyan is on right now

Dhan Baba Nanak!

Sorry to sound meticulous, but Kultar singh is the late bhai avtar singh's son. Thanks for the links

Harjinder Singh Lallie is now doing kirtan, this sounds beautiful (they are at the shaan)

Shoot I missed it!!! What shabads did he do? Who is akali vadbagh singh?

Posted Today, 09:45 AM In all fairness, Harjas kaur is not the enemy folks. She may seem like a 'mouthpiece' at best in some views, but seriously layoff. She has her views and she's expressing them. Others have theirs and they express them Drawrof: Where is my hatred? what am I getting lumped into? doesn't that make you my nindak?????? Questions for you my friend..... 1) Where was polity ever divorced from sikhi? 2) Where do those people who do not care for unity fit in? 3) Which udasi, and what text of udasi's agree with your points of view? (and which points of view exactly?) Since you didn't ask, I'll be clear.....I appreciate the links to an older 'indic' culture that you tie sikhi to....although you aren't the first to do so. Most of the katha of the DDT and Sant Samaj echoes what you are saying, but not with the same fervency or potence. Their focus is to get people to adopt a more spiritual lifestyle and they accept the roots without referring to people as fanatics. A good example is the katha on bhai daya singh's atam veechar (as done by hari singh randhaway valay, giani takur singh etc etc....)...it isn't uncommon to see swami parmanand sitting on the same stage as these fellows. My request to you, keep sharing more information. Some of the links you have made are interesting. Thanks

I would like to speak as a proxy for JSingh and the answers is 'no....this is all gupt'

Harjas Kaur, I know there is alot to digest. I wanted there to be respect shown for all people posting so I wrote this (Page 10.Posted Today, 09:45 AM). I was responding to HSD and his opinions and views at Posted Today, 02:49 PM...which I must say he has every right to express as well..Albeit with some courtesy. As I asked of him and do the same with you now, please ask for clarification before taking my points off to a tangent....let me clarify.... Quote Mind you, someone here was wise/quick enough to find some anti-sikh sentiments being shared by Harjas elsewhare and brought that forth and challenged. That is fair game. Anti-Sikh? Or anti-Bhasauria/Tat Khasa world-view? Do you think Udasis who share these same kinds of interpretations of Gurbani consider themselves as "anti-Sikh?" But if you look at the responses I receive, how undeniable anti-Hindu they are. Beyond anti-Hindu, it's anti-Hindu hate propaganda. DRAWROF RESPONSE: read my post Posted 21 October 2009 - 07:54 AM (hindu-sikh unity. Where I stand is very clear. You Posted on 24 October 2009 - 12:36 PM and in that post you said "Original Sikhism is HINDU! And I don't care who makes threats on me or denounces me, or rejects me for saying it. Sikhism belongs and has always been a part of original sanatana Dharma. And to those Hindu haters, when you cut off sect of Kshatriyas as not being representitive of YOUR sect of Vaishnava or pacifistic Hinduism, you are cutting off right arm and leaving your entire heritage without defense and vulnerable to Sikh-Muslim unity efforts by radical Pakistanis and Talibanis who want to butcher Hindus in India and so spread political message of division and disunity and Hindu hatred." DRAWROF AGAIN: Simply, you've written your points and there will be people who disagree and do not believe that sikhi-sikhism is snatan. These people have the 'right' to defend their view of sikhi....whether you believe in snatan or tat or whatever other type of sikhi you would like to name is of no relevance to my point...please read my points in context with my conversation with HSD p.10 of this topic. On that note, please share these udasi's sources that agree with you and share what they agree with......please enlighten. thanks I don't go onto hindu/muslim boards as neither of them really matter to me. Further, most of it sounds like fundamentalist gibberish. I posted on this forum because it has sections discussing Sanatan teachings and sampradaya, relationship between things like Gurmat and Gita, etc, and so open to different beliefs, interpretations, including Islam. So clearly this was not labeled as some "ONLY SIKH KHALISTANI ANTI-HINDU forum." Where one could say, "How dare you post there. Go back to the HIndu forum" But I have since been corrected in my mistaken understanding. Now I know better what a hate-filled, abusive, and anti-Hindu place this is. DRAWROF: I don't understand what you are responding to. HSD made the following comments to me....I don't see how this relates to you. (again page 10,Posted Today, 04:00 PM) "Go on a hindu/muslim forum and try your approach. They wont even give you time to post. Do you believe in letting everyone have their say? If you do, let me warn you: first they will talk the talk, then they will try to walk the walk. Harjas kaur's views on unity is one small step away from a majority persecuting a minority. If you dont believe me look at the history of other civilisations. What would you do if you just lived your life and one day some militant sanatans decide you are actually a paki/chini secret agent and attack you? It may seem farfetched, but so did 84 or the holocaust before they actually happened." Quote I know where you are coming from with 1984, I am not even going to belittle that argument Why am I blamed for 1984? And I used to be amritdhari Sikh. Do you people really believe ALL Hindus are guilty of all abuses towards Sikhs? You don't even differentiate the Sikh Punjabi police involved in human rights abuses like KPS Gill? But ENTIRE BLAME rests on EVERY HINDU ONLY! You think Jagdish Tytler didn't have a Sikh mother? Everyone in New Delhi riots was a Hindu including a man with a Sikh mother? Do you stop and think that people in riots are criminals, that these riots were politically manipulated and don't represent spiritual minded religious Hindus at all? Most Sikhs have seen the movie "Amu." It is a powerful, moving and true movie. I try to show it to all the Hindus I know. It was made by a Bengali Hindu woman who lived through the Delhi riots. Have Sikhs all forgotten there were some Hindus who risked their lives to save Sikhs? But now you dump your hate and blame for every political evil on every Hindu without discrimination. This represents some kind of "truth?" For years I have been supporting reform of human rights abuses against Sikhs. Does it occur to you there is a reason why I am NOT a member of RSS? Don't I, as a human being, have a right to represent what I DO believe in, and not be saddled with the hate and blame directed to a political organization I don't belong to? What kind of truth is represented by such lies and slanders? That to me is cowardice, that it is one lady against all you "powerful" Khalsas and the best you can do is use foul language and insults and slanders. A debate, a discussion is about LEARNING the other point of view without necessarily having to agree with it. We can't even learn from each other under these conditions, let alone approach the kind of simple unity which isn't some justification of terrorist attacks and murder. BECAUSE you propagandistically feel every Hindu or Sanatan person represents your most evil and hated enemy, all manner of abuse, including assassination is tolerated, justified and praised. One day, hopefully, you will be able to think more rationally and regret this hate-filled mindset. Drawrof: I haven't blamed you at all.I haven't insulted you or slandered you....please show me one reference where I have. If you are just referencing my points to make a larger point..fair enough. Quote the guru's get questioned and insulted by bahadur/ishraqi (whatever his handle was at that time) I don't even know anything about this person. Why am I being compared to this person? What does he have to do with me? Why can't I just be accepted as myself? Why do I have to be constantly stereotyped, lumped in with some other hated group or person? THIS is nindya. Show me where I did any such personal blame, smearing and slander to any one of you? Have a nice hate forum. Stop smearing and besmirching my personal character like dogs. You know nothing about me personally. You are disgrace to Guru Ji's Khalsa. DRAWROF: AGAIN I wrote this (Page 10.Posted Today, 09:45 AM)....read it in full context and you'll understand why you are getting compared.......on that note please feel free to ask me direct questions and I will answer. DRAWROF DISCLAIMER: I don't have time to hate people on message boards...I enjoy seeing dialogue and learning and I thank everyone from every angle for sharing. I believe what I believe and much of what is said does help shape things. As heated as this discussion has gotten it does bring perspective... shalom! (how do we brand this one .

I give credit where it is due, this is from memory and not checking previous posts as I have a day job and come on this between long bouts of my occupation. TonyHP has always made solid points and although people do/don't agree with him. I recall him bringing forth good points and counterpoints to ishraqi. Take any permutation of gender and religion/faith and the point is that people should talk with respect. Mind you, someone here was wise/quick enough to find some anti-sikh sentiments being shared by Harjas elsewhare and brought that forth and challenged. That is fair game. The same can be done here. Again,TonyHP has done a good job and your points (banda bahadur being sikh etc), HSD, are valid...in my opinion I don't go onto hindu/muslim boards as neither of them really matter to me. Further, most of it sounds like fundamentalist gibberish. The rest I am not accultured to and really don't get. I come on this board because I find you have rational people who will actually accept and share points of view. Everyone has an opinion, some stronger than others and that's fair. Even the most sensible/rational people here step up when it's right. I know where you are coming from with 1984, I am not even going to belittle that argument...good fishermen actually use bait to tackle, and I think that is a solid approach in understanding how to counter attacks that are unthought of. did you not read my post of 'am I snatan'? courting techniques...used to share them on a soccer pitch....so yeah pot calling kettle black . alright I'm out....swish!

Harjas kaur is not the enemy folks. She may seem like a 'mouthpiece' at best in some views, but seriously layoff. She has her views and she's expressing them. Others have theirs and they express them. I have witnessed, although not active at that time, the guru's get questioned and insulted by bahadur/ishraqi (whatever his handle was at that time) and very few actually stood up to that.... If we cannot stand up to one form of slander, we should bow down to all others? You may not agree, but Ishraqi was never right in many of his convictions, as was proven on numerous times by sikhs on here. Just because he was a man or muslim does not mean we should be extra 'vicious' or whatever you were expecting. Quote I ask the moderators to actually aggregate all the questions for Harjas and put them in one thread and let harjas answer them...and to be fair, do the same for harjas so others can answer her questions. Never. She has been proved wrong, leave it at that. If you love her so much, give her your MSN and she can send bits of Gurbani strung together like conversation for your pleasure. I didn't and don't agree with Ishraqi and I certainly don't agree with a snatanism that is being used as a vehicle to bring everyone with Indic roots under one dumb banner. I saw a few people actually step up to what he said (being muslim or male had nothing to do with it...please ask for clarification if you don't understand before assuming things.It'll make the dialogue more constructive), and now it seems like there is a parade of people willing to attack someone who is giving a point of view that is actually more accepted than many have had exposure too...and a point of view that one would not know how to counter if it weren't brought into the open. I am not saying lay low and get walked over. I am simply saying everyone is coming from every angle, I believe your questions are still not answered and I'd like to see structure. I still assert, 'lay off on the personal attacks and have some order'. With regards to your suggestion about msn etc....I'd keep your courting techniques to private emails and banters with your friends on the basketball court. I neither asked for your advice and certainly don't need it.

In all fairness, Harjas kaur is not the enemy folks. She may seem like a 'mouthpiece' at best in some views, but seriously layoff. She has her views and she's expressing them. Others have theirs and they express them. I have witnessed, although not active at that time, the guru's get questioned and insulted by bahadur/ishraqi (whatever his handle was at that time) and very few actually stood up to that.... I ask the moderators to actually aggregate all the questions for Harjas and put them in one thread and let harjas answer them...and to be fair, do the same for harjas so others can answer her questions. Thanks,

So let me get this straight, Oral tradition holds little value, so when the tradition is sanctioned with writing...you burn it....how are we to ever 'sikh'?

thanks Harjas kaur

That is my point my brothers, I believe the term snatan or puratan or the aspect of sikhi which has not been interpreted through the colonial lens is devoid of nationalistic politics. One can have an affinity to a 'newer' sikhi and be a nationalist as well as be a lover of older sikhi and still want khalistan or an autonomous punjab. yes, I understand certain things are grouped together, but one's paradigm/view of sikhi does not EQUATE directly to their politics.

I have heard Dhrupad recordings of Guru Nanak Dev Jis bani in old East Indian Shaastri traditions (found by others), amazing stuff - possibly Darbari reets, so I know there are a lot of treasures that exist in the Shaastri world. Shaheediyan, do you have any websites you could point us to?

Hello folks, My understanding of sikhi may be skewed but I would like to know whether I fit into the proposed 'snatan' mindset if I believe in the following: 1)an India which is great but with a decentralized government giving each place its own regional power...hence I can proudly say 'mera desh punjab' instead of 'mera desh India'. 2)I don't believe in a unified India and see no purpose of it apart from it being a subcontinent.... 3)I respect sikhi is from the indian subcontinent, uses indian iconography, and has its roots in the subcontinent 4)I would prefer to speak punjabi over hindi so (hindi, hindu, hindustan) would not apply to me.....mine would be more of a (sikh, punjabi, hindustan) Please advise !

you know My name is drawrof....and I like to do drawrings...

I'll try to get to that by sunday. Giani Ishar Singh Nara is of the opinion though that guru gobind singh and krishan ji maharaj were the same. He doesn't say stuff like 'Krishan danced with gopian'...Guru gobind singh ji is better. It'll take some work on this one, how's vivek pradipika coming along? Hey, I'd like to get bir mrigesh granth off of you at some point if you still have it Fatehji