Morghe Sahar

Be Name Khoda This passage of the Bachitar Natak is to say the least extemely problematic. Before I actually move on I just wish to correct Nanakidarkangel when she writes that: "JO HUM KO - 'HUM' - those people who call themselves God, this body HUM. JO HUM KO PARMESWAR UCHARE, those people who call themselves god like Ram Rahim, Nirankari, TEH SAB NARAK KUND MAIN PAR HAI - it's them who are going to be filling up hell, not a Sikh who's got SHARDHA(faith) from Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj." Your interpretation is grammatically incorrect and hence invalid. The sentence clearly says: Whoever calls us the Supreme Lord will go to hell. The presence of the dative particle "ko" renders your intrepretation impossible. Also for your version to be correct there would be the need of an indirect speech structure which would be like this: Jo uchare "ham paramesar" teh .... Those who say "We are parameshvara", they.... Now going back to the discussion this passage is highly problematic. In a previous article I had approached this passage as a sort of foreplay in heaven, quite typical of Indian plays. After a Natak is a play and many classical Indian plays have a foreplay in heaven with the devtas discussing different issues related to the fate of the human protagonists. BTW this is where Goethe got his inspiration for his Vorspiel im Himmel in the first section of Faust, as he was an avid reader of Kalidasa. Now even IF we were to take the literary angle to this text there remain deep theological problems with it. What do we read in this text? We see a supreme God, supposed to guide humanity sending messengers who ALL fail except for the supposed author of these lines. Why is that problematic? Because God never leaves humanity without a source of guidance or otherwise He wouldn't be God. A God who would send imperfect avataras and prophets to humanity would in fact misguide humanity and hence not be God. If the author of these lines really had wanted to talk about the religious movements instead of the prophets themselves he would have called them differently. For example instead of Shiva he could have described a Shaiva representing his whole tradition. Shaivism in an of itself is a monotheistic system, especially its Kashmiri form. To accuse it to not worship God is pure nonsense. To this day the Rishi Muslims of Kashmir call Allah (swt) by the name Shiva. So accusing monotheistic systems such as Shaivism and Vaishnavism to worship any other but God is not factual.There is also the fact that the Mahadin passage is totally incorrect when it comes to facts. If the aim was to criticise the religious movement and not their prophets then I am afraid the author has failed his purpose. The mention of Mahakal and Kalika is a hint pointing out to the possible ideological origin of this passage.

Heidi is a national Alpen treasure man, you're about to step some lines man.

Jattboot, all of what you're talking about is already taught in the best universities in the West. Many European universities have excellent Sanskrit programms and very centers for the study of Indian religions. I agree that for Ayuerveda you need to learn it at an institute. That Ashoka had sent emmissaries to the West is a known fact. That many Greeks in Bachtria converted to Buddhism and created Greco Buddhism is another fact. But let's be real: two monks landing in Britain doesn't equal to Britain knowing Buddhism. And no, Augustus didn't write but I am sure you're referring to Augustine and there is no mention of Buddhists there.

I think you're referring to the 1st video with the guy playing setar. It is inspired from a folk song in the mahour. I disagree about the 2nd video.Far from simplistic really. As for Heidi, das ist doch Alpenmusik oder nicht?

There are already taksals in the West...they're called universities ...

Any string instrument to you is a thumbi anyway. Jimi Hendrix played? Electric thumbi of course. Yehudi Menuhin played? Bowed thumbi. Ravi Shankar plays? bahman thumbi.

I have still loads of work to do. In the meantime enjoy this: I hope there will be more such Indian-Iranian collaborations at the musical level.

That is a question you ought to ask the sampradayas themselves.

Matsya is the first avatara who saves Manu from the flood.

Give me an example of theological difference between the four sampradayas or otherwise stop debating the issue.

Dear Shaheediyan, the song is actually traditional. It wasn't an improvisation. The song is called Morghe Sahar and is a traditional Iranian song. You can watch a far better version of this song here: As for the "alpinesque" thing...Alpinesque sounds more like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwLEGLXOqok But if that's what you're hearing in my poor rendition why not.Must be the Swiss chocolate I guess iodala hi ho. Mithar, I always look angry. Didn't you know I inspired the Les Grosman character in Tropic Thunder? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv0ZM2DmZn8

Tonyhp32 wrote: "Of course all that goes out of the window if the founder of the religion specifies visual appearance as an identifying marker for that community! Also your comment regarding doctrines as an way of identification of membership of a community does not make sense because not all these sampardhas share the same doctrines. I would be interested to know how your comment then applies to Islam. Are Sunnis not Muslims as much as Shia Muslims since they then do not share some of the same doctrines. Are sunnis a sampardha or are they not members of the Muslim 'community'?" 1. Visual appearance has been fixed for the Khalsa Sikhs and them only. 2. On your point about doctrines could you give an example of diverging theologies? I am talking here are about theology not liturgy. 3. The issue of Sunnism and Shi'ism is a different matter because we are dealing with schismatic movements. So my comments only apply within each of them although Sunnism doesn't really have a proper body of scholars and that most of it's preachers are actually self-proclaimed, a little bit like Neo-Sikhs.

Amardeep you are so innocent...if you only knew...

You can only kill him with a golden bullet, didn't you know?

Any form of organized religion has always got one or more specialized bodies within it dedicated to specific tasks. To ask why there are Udasis, Nirmalas, Nihangs and Sevapanthis in the Sikh community is as foolish as to ask why a given society needs medics, maywers and cops. The very question actually translates nothing but deep insecurity regarding identity as if specialized bodies threatened the identity of the whole community. It also shows a complete lack of theological understanding ie. the fact that the community is identified by its doctrines rather than its visual appearance. But this is a question you as a community need to deal with yourselves. As for the authenticity of the lineages, it is clear that there is a continuity on terms of lineage BUT also a reformulation of these groups' self-definition depending on the period. So historical in and of itself needs to be divorced from the narratives that these groups give to explain their origin.

Agreed

As far as I remember there is no copy of it at the British Library and but even if there were one you wouldn't be able to take it out or even photocopy it unless you're willing to spend a fortune on it. Be patient, a little mouse is telling me that it might come out again with the Panjabi text and English translation.inshallah.

I don't know of any good commentary on the Bhagavadgita in Panjabi. But I do recommend the Ramakrishna Mission editition of the Bhagavadgita because it has teh sanskrit text, a word for word translation and a decent translation. By the same token you can get Shankara's and Ramanuja's commentaries though Abhinavagupta's is still not available in translation. Then there are more recent commentators that are worth looking at such as Shri Aurobindo and S. Radhakrishnan (Penguin Books). A good introduction book for Hinduism would be Gavin Flood's An Introduction to Hinduism. As for a Sanatan Sikh theological work I can only think of Avtar Singh Vahiria's Khalsa Dharam Shastar (1914) which has not been reprinted and only still exists in a few libraries. But there is an ongoing project to translate it in English as far as I know and it might be out in a year or two.I hope this helps.

This was the spirit of Baba Nanak, nice to see it is still alive in India.

Nice. Would of course be better if they started with Man Kunto Maula, like all qawwali sessions do, but that implies believing in the wilayat of Imam Ali (as).

Are there more sakhian like that? Just for information's sake so I can check them, thanks.

In Nomine Dei Misericordii I just wish to take this opprtunity to apologize to the members of this forum for an excessive language I may have used as a response to personal attacks.Because I tend to take these personal attacks and attempts to expose me as whatever people wish to name it as not important I tend to reply in a way that can seem to be a pure waste of energy and time, which it is. In the past I had the habit not to respond to certain people's personal attacks by just ignoring them and I realize I should have kept it this way. So my sincere aplogies for falling to the trap of replying to these attacks. If anyone got offended my apologies. I also realize that some people will take this statement of mine to be another trick by the sly bahadur but I leave their opinions to themselves. I am not here to be liked or to be popular. kind regards Bahadur Ali Shah

Malwe da Sher wrote: "is this the same supposed Sikh who is working on the soas thesis about nihang singh?" No it isn't. Shaheediyan wrote: "I am sorry to have to share this, but these besharam need to be exposed, they have no regret about the filth, lies and hate they spread and they make a mockery of us folk and the holidaying Admin by being banned form this forum and returning weeks later on a regular basis to mock us further." 1. So Karni Namah, Mahadin etc are lies? 2. Why should I get banned? Did I use swearwords? Did I start threads about other members? Did I tell anyone the should "nurse their b*****"? 3. Rather it is you guys who whenever there is an uncomfortable question coming from me start attacking my personal life, posting personal info about me on the net, insult my family etc Whenever I have been banned it's always been on ideological grounds never because I posted anyone's picture or private details or info on the net. Ban me all you want, the moral victory will always be mine.

1. The ideas are in part mine yes and yes I know the author and it's not me. 2. Women were raped on both sides during partition, so yes Sikh men have raped Muslim women not just during partition but well before as well. Doesn't mean Hindus and Muslims were perfect either. 3. The term Neo-Sikh was actually created by the Singh Sabha leaders themselves. 4. I don't have an obsession with Sikhs just an interest.If you have a problem with that take prozac.

Shaheediyan wrote: "Your confusing yourself again. Don't forget, you're the self confessed dog (a little lower down the hierarchy), be it a clever one, that can type trash on the net. So go back to what dogs do best, nurse your b****." Honestly I am not confusing , because the dog that I am is actually higher than you in the hierarchy of beings as you so eloquently observed:"if there is one person lower than Bahadur, its Singho." You can only say that from your below perspective otherwise you wouldn't be able to see singho at all. Have a nice Xmas