drawrof

very good questions, here is what I have either read or been told (meaning heard from many). The udasi who actually collected and brought forth a version of the sarab loh granth forth to santa singh (who should have one as it is part of the "gupt" khazaana that the buddha dal claim to have..I haven't seen it, hence I say claim.) was actually a nihang singh who became an udasi later. a nirmala scholar I spoke to believes that certain parts of the sarab loh granth (Apart from the usually cited ones. ie. khalsa mero roop hai khaas) are very authentic as there is tracability to some of the stories and explanations to people and places of the past. Other parts are in question due to diction, grammar, and anachronisms in "words". The panth can decide at any given time what the "hukam" is. This is more than evident with dasam and guru granth sahib having prakaash together. Historically, I have not come across any evidence stating that even a gutka, or a pothi of guru gobind singh's baani was put beside guru granth sahib ji (which is definitely his baani as welll...but I stated the above in more laymen terms). How the panth decides on whether a new addition, or another granth should be prakash..is a question. I am not sure if it requires a gurmatta...in this day and age that might be proven difficult.

if subscription was the key,....... I'm a GQ model (think long and hard and ask yourselves if there is something counter to what you subscribe to.....you haven't really gotten to the "truth")

since amrita shergill is work of art in her own right, I am blinded by the beauty that god created, hence.....the artwork is a true piece of the artist.

I believe everyone was a nutarian or fruitarian as vegetables have been sacred from times of yore...hence please don't burn or cook vegetables, and I believe further that fruits increase strength. and nuts make you more religious....

in essence, a nihang singh threw the weapon so high that the moon got darshan of akal purakh and it came back down with alot of force...and a jatha of wahabi nihang singhs came who are now called takshali's, and as a reverence to the moon, they wear dark clothes and have fantasies about riding on rafts in the middle of the night and doing kirtan..... ...those wahabi sgpc's deras need a samparda tapovani smagam in akhand raagi jatha style with with ruggra made from the maple leaf!!!!!

:wink: @ hari, keep your wicked posts coming bro, you put a smile on my face

I still stick by my point, this looks more like a portrait than the hazoor sahib one, and I have seen many khatree sikhs that resemble this picture....so that logic isn't all that plausible in my eyes. Another point to mention, what we find attractive is also subject to the norm at the time. Lets look at women for example, in the early 30's, 40's...voluptuous women were considered sexy now, women who are skinny are sexy. Further, this is a side profile view. We don't see a front projection in this, it isn't cartoony at all. The only thing about this picture that I personally find a bit "odd" is how guru sahib is depicted to be in his 50's. Another thing, the guru's had an ilaahi noor, they had an Immense tej pratap.. on another note (unrelated to the guru's), many women find ron jeremy hot.....I beg to differ, but he must have something! take care, and hopefully we can find out more about this.

amardeepm, point very well taken. If this is an actual portrait, we as a group should be thankful and proud that something that is close to reality is part of our heritage. Take out dogma, take out ideology, our religion can make its impression on the world of heritage and art as stance for truth. We as sikhs have a distinct image, that much of the eurocentric world does not find visually appealing...we don't look like beckham or brad pitt. accepting this, if it is actually a real depiction or an actual portrait, will say to the world... a) we respect our guru's (figureheads...figuratively speaking) as prodigal human beings who have empowered others...and it doesn't make a difference if they don't look like calvin klein models we respect art and adore our heritage (A mark of a cultured society) c) k, you may find this picture "ugly"...but what this picture means is found in guru gobind singh's life and his words waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ki fateh

note how the ears aren't covered, and how the kachera is blue. I was told not to have a shawl over my dastaar by some dude at darbar sahib... this pic could have come in handy. It is not the outfit that makes the sikh, but the sikh that makes the outfit, and those who are too caught up in designing a "STANDARD" or "CORRECT" outfit (with .05% room for leniency) have failed to see the ever evolving nature of kudrat... waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ki fateh

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ki fateh it is not in my nature to flame anyone, but I can't stand this insolence! do the guru sahibs have to fit your version of what is goodlooking? and what is your version of goodlooking based upon? (most realistically society, eh?......I find it disgusting that absolutely disgusting.) what if guru gobind singh were around right now? would you turn around and say.."guruji, you don't fit my version of "handsome"...hence I can't follow you"....absolutely sickening! The superficiality expressed by those who have made comments about this being "ugly" have just gone down a notch on my credibility list, since it is more than evident that you can't handle the truth IF it is ugly shameful

agreed, holding differences with the mazhbi's is something that english historians noted as early as 1806( from lt. malcolm's book). A gurbhai and very close friend of baba mohan singh (from taksal) mentioned how baba mohan singh will not take food from mazbhi singhs either...so if the taksal is "panthic", this is something that is somewhat adhered to within themselves (although I do believe that baba takur singh is part of the sant smaaj.) Brahmins are also given eminence within khalsa dharam shastar (from what I have heard in passing). Written by mahapurkhs or not, I find most of what draws me to sikhi within gurbani and history books that show aspects of our sikh heritage. either way, I am looking forward to reading the excerpts and possibly getting a copy of it.

singh47, gurmukho, my basis for saying that he was a nirmalla was based on this "Sant Atar Singh of Mastuana, the most charismatic figure in latter-day Sikh piety, was born on 13 March 1866 in the village of Chima, in Sangrur district of the Punjab. His father, Karam Singh, was a farmer of modest means and could not afford to send him to a school in town. So Atar Singh was apprenticed to Bhai Buta Singh, head of the Nirmala dera or monastery of Bhai Ram Singh, in his own village. He acquired proficiency in the Sikh religious texts and also read philosophical treatises such as the Vichar Sagar. Side by side with his progress in Sikh learning, he developed a deeply religious cast of mind. " http://www.sikhcybermuseum.org/People/AtarSant.htm another thing that I remember reading was that he did prachar of yog vashisht when doing katha.. I can't find the site, the breadth of his knowledge and his affiliation with dera categorized him as a nirmala in my eyes..further, one can be both part of a samparda an sgpc. For example, akali kaur singh was a buddha dal nihang and one of the chief proponents in establishing the sgpc rehit maryada. Other udasis, nirmallay and anyone who was part of an earlier group did the same

isn't this "Dharam shashtar" the same one that dictates that mazbhi's can't do seva of maharaaj and both women and mazbhi's are systemically discriminated against?

singh 47, veer, I understand your issue with snatan sikhi, but gursikhs like karam singh hoti mardan vallay, ishar singh rarray sahib wallay, attar singh mastuana wallay, all have links to the nirmala order. I believe bibian , who have partaken amrit from any of their deray's, all amrit shak'd from 5 pyaray...hence, wouldn't it be a fallacy to assume that all nirmallay fall into the "snatan" category you despise? my only "issue" would be that if bibian didn't have khanday pahul da amrit when they amrit shak'd from rarray sahib, mastuanawally, nanaksar etc....wouldn't we ALL be in folly for allowing the monumental figures of these deray people to be called gurmukhs?

jassa, I see your point of view and where you're coming from, but apart from the dam dami taksal saying they are from baba deep singh ji's lineage, where is the term "taksal, dam dami taksal, bhindrian, etc" used in the old historical books. furthermore baba gurbux singh ji (who was jathedar, was actually a nihang...) now, that being said, please don't mistake what I am saying as anything "anti-taksal".... it is the pothi of giani gurbachan singh ji and the katha of giani takur singh that I attribute some of my greatest sikhi knowledge from. sat sri akaal

banning is a sign of weakness! lets get out of these shells, and break loose. my question to all, can a couple who has not consummated, rave about the fulfillment they get from the physical aspect of their marriage? sadly, this is what I say to all those who waste time arguing over whether raagmalla should be read after some fat dude with a white kurta pajama, blue patiala shahi pagh, speed reads through guruji and murmurs more than half of his "raul"... let me share a story: I met a man once who was learning dilruba from a mirasi in his younger days. the mirasi told him about the effect of raag jaijawanti (which is attributed to guru tegh bahadur ji) and he narrated a story of how his ustaad used to play raag jaijawanti on his sarangi at 9pm...a crowd used to gather and this one old man with a moustache came for a long time, but never spoke....well, one day a saint said to the ustaad "has that old man with the moustache ever spoken to you"....the ustad was in awe because he was surprised the saint knew of the oldman's existence and he said "no never...." the saint interupted and said "how do you expect a jinn to speak!".... (this is a true story).... if guru ji's raags can attract spirits...what can guruji's baani attract, and I say in conclusion.... "let one who has experienced baani, speak on these matters" ps. don't post with "good job" or anything else, lets get this topic going!

meaning its a meritocracy right? wow.....those were the days!

very interesting point to fathom now, when the term "jat" is used...is meant as agriculturist or is it a tribal distinction consisting of modern day "jatts"... this can clear up alot. Personally, I Think people are missing the greater picture. That being that a "class" of people may have been sent as opposed to a tribe of people. Modern day jatts as an agricultural class (include arains/sainis, jats (dhillons, manns, brars, sidhus), malhis, and some rajput clans)... as a TRIBE jats include people of a specific bloodline etc.... I understand the whole phenomenon to be of using "caste" by the guru's to eliminate discrepancies caused in the guise of caste. Yes we are singhs, but there are brothers of ours who are not singhs...they may have the last name "brar"...so why can't my brother be referred to by his title...its only in my world that he "should be" a singh! (I hope you guys get the point). alright take care..

gurfateh ji, the topic at hand is senseless rituals and dogma. we have veered off into stupidity (as usual) and I would like to take this back on track.... everyone, taking any religious path, starts off with an element of blind faith and use tangibles to direct them towards the intangible. Some people will be sarbloh bibeki because they feel that is what guru gobind singh wanted; others will be bibeki because they understand what sarbloh is, why sarbloh is used, and why bibek also applies to sargun factors such as food.....each is right from their own perspective, the issue of it being a "Standard" or a means of discrimination, or a means of self propogation is when something that might just be very viable and correct becomes distasteful. a good way to abstain from dogma's is to actually understand and learn gurbani better, do khoj of guruji, build pyaar for guruji....when you see a gursikh or your enemy (or both as it seems to be common these days) look at the virtue you want to imbibe and remember they are an "ang" of waheguru as well, and the virtue itself is a manifestation of waheguru's kirpa.. stay in chardeekallah gurmukho

I'd like to read the post by amrit veer, reason being that I read sections of sarbloh granth and other books written pre singh sabha times which say that kach, kes, kirpan are the trai mudra. I have read that nihangs wear karray and that nirmallay saw karray as a nihang practice. I'll give references. I respect everyone's opinion and enlightenment on these issues, my only concern in the matter is that we don't sit there and interpolate today's standard with yesterdays. regards

path 1 or path2

hum akaali, sabh ke vaali, hamra panth niara hai

Sukhsingh, my bad, I believe you're right sgpc does excercise some control. I don't think that nihangs have any real control over hazoor sahib except for the practices that they instilled or preserved from their time in power...but that was years ago. Other groups such as nirmallay, and pandits have had control over the takhat at various times as well.... so the question is what control do the nihangs have right now? what is the difference between a nihang and a "hazoori" singh??

I was reading the updesh on satnaam mantar. guru gobind singh states that guru granth sahib has everything from guru nanak to guru tegh bahadur, and then the discussion of the khalsa panth being guru is also mentioned. my question, when was this written pg. 494 of the edition printed by jathedar santa singh.... was this shabad written by guru gobind singh in nander? was this written ahead of time, in which case (when was gurgaddi divas)? am I clear?

hello sukhsingh, as far as I know, there is no prakash of sarbloh granth. I don't think they run anything. also, I don't think the gurdwara is controlled by the SGPC.