Deep Singh

thanks for that Narsingha jee about the article you presented from Tribune.... umm last time i read that and checked with some Akjers i know...they said that AKJI and AKJ UK/CANADA are seperate orgs and have different opinions on a lot of issues... so that is not so strange that any UK/Canada wale AKJ have not said so.... BUT if you read what AKJI and AISSF have said: - full faith in Guru Granth Sahib - teachings of Sikh Gurus - shunned communalism - consider Sikhs as separate nation (quom) Bhaji EVEN me can say that if any org...also RSS or VHP wants to start giving their members Amrit and consider themselves Sikhs...and the above points are followed...then YEAH THEY ARE SIKHS jee....

Vaheguroo jee kaa Khalsa Vaheguroo jee kee Fateeeh! i saw all that WHITE POWER stuff a year ago at a website.....and i just CRACKED....LOL....hahahahahaa good that Sikh bros up in Canada are bumping Nazi pants :twisted:

i believe anyone who can read Gurbani properly and daily read Guru Granth Sahib is a granthi...

i think all that is just bogguss... maybe some are recognised after they r dead BUT mostly as yet alive...

i do not like when Sikhs start saying that something is Brahminical and therefore we should not do it......we should rather say that these rituals are not a part of Gurmat..... we should not indulge in bashing of others faiths or "castes"..... i think Aarti, killing of girl childs, worship of Gurus photos are such 'non-Sikh' acts....

Ideal Singh jee..this time i ask you to give some reason why you say 'in their life time they are declared tankayias' i know of Teja Singh Bhasuria who got excommunicated....but i think before he was excommunicated he was wellknown.....give me some examples of some Sikh scholars who became known AFTER they were excommunicated... :shock: jtSingh: i believe also that Nihangs, Nirmalas, Sewapanthis are part of Khalsa Panth after reading some of there practies and believes BUT i am not sure..therefore i asked the question that has not been answared.....but i wonder do they themselves recognize as a part of Khalsa Pantj...and how do they see us; 'mainstream Sikhs'. Are we maleccha ["kafirs" for Hindus, used for muslims and others] as someone mentioned that word here about SGPC...? So still Udasies are not considered part of Khalsa Panth?

Bhaji thanks for the info..... as someone pointed out....yeah it is strange that Singh name was used before 1699...but it might be that ther were like Vir Lal and became Vir Singh after Amrit..... i also like to ask something jee..... i am what you will call a "mainstream" Sikh....should i recognize Nirmalas as a part of Khalsa Panth or as a seperate cult which is not Sikh.....and MORE importanly do they consider themselves part of Khalsa Panth or do they have their sepeate 'authority'..? bhaji in a seperate forum you mentioned that Nirmalas have a seperate Rehit (and not the same as Nihangs or 'mainstream Sikhs' -SGPC)....why so? If Bhai Daya Singh who was one of Guru Gobind Singh's Singhs...if he started this school-of-knowledge or samparyada then why do they have a seperate Rehit jee? Are we bound to have seperate Rehits to create new Samparyadas? Isn't it okey to just stuct to the one we allready have jee?

so if i say i am an intellectual...does that make me one..... :? secondly are we talking about intellectuals or 'Sikh scholars'?

Truth Singh jee...... thanks for the articles... yeah....we should work to promote correct Raagi keertan! and install traditional instruments into the Sikh panth....

Bhaji the reason why i made such a statement has two reason: (i) Akal Takht has declared Kala Afghana a tankiya and later on excommunicated him from Khalsa Panth, because of his writings;ie his scholarly mastermind....being a Sikh (who has faith in the concept of 'Guru Khalsa Panth' and Surbat Khalsa) i can not say that what Kala Afghana has written is nothing but only the truth, since the Panth as whole has denied his writings and given them the label of 'anti-Panthic' (ii) Not looking at the decision made by Akal Takht or the Unified Will of the Panth, we can read his books (i believe they are avaliable online) and find out whether he is a scholar (who speaks truth and nothing else) or not. For that i like to refer you to this webpage: http://www.khalsaalliance.org/kala.php Sangat must try to read all the material that has been posted above. If they do not agree with some of it, it can be wise to post those points here so we might have a formal debate over this and find out whether Akal Takht was right regarding KalaAghana or is he a Sikh scholar ('who brings the truth without any partiality') I apologize if i hurt your's/others' feelings by making this statement. However i believe that on Sikhawareness the members have had some debates over KalaAfghana and my baseless statement should not sotp us from discussing what we intended to do: discuss Great Sikh scholars....so we should rather discuss how some scholars have helped Sikh Panth...and not "controversial" figures such as; KalaAfghana.

if we start calling Kala a scholar then i can understand why Sikhs are the way they are today....

ummmm Singhs....what do you think about Bhai Veer Singh, Bhai Kahan Singh and all of them? and what about Kavi Santokh Singh....Bhai Daya Singh, Bhai Desa Singh who wrote Rehitnameh....what about Bhai Nandlal jee.... What about the greatest of them all....Bhai Gurdas Jee.....Bhai Buddha Jee

jjj bhaji...you are so lucky....it is all in WaheGuru's hands....so it is his kirpa... i got a cousin in India....and he cut his hair.....and MY MOM here in europe started yelling at him,,,,but his parents do not bother.....it is so wicked.....like we try to follow rehit but folks there give a shit.... :evil:

Bhaji so we come back to my original post...where i said that we do not need lineage or parampara.... Now Bhaji do you really think Parampara or lineage is important? let us see.... a "normal" Sikh scholar can say something after doing some research of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and that can be either right or wrong....but since he have got no lineage...that does not mean that he is wrong.... now one of these 'panthis' can say something....but it is not sure that he is right...ONLY because is has a parampara to follow.....for the past 300 years or so....every rehit or katha has been given orally......so there is a BIG chance that we have gone from pure Sikhi/Tat-Gurmat to a mix of Gurmat and manmat.....okey a lot of things about Sikhi remain the same....yeah sure...but a lot might also be changed..... and giving samparyada such a high level is wrong...i believe.... When Waheguru jee gave us Guru Granth Sahib and good old logic..what can we lack? i mean let us just see...there are several Nihangis and several Udasi and severeal Sewapanthis and severeal Nirmalas.....now if anyone of them DID NOT glide away from Gurmat then what was the reason for the divisions within their Panths....why does not Taksal (which is said to be a Giani Nirmala samparyada) has the same views as other samparyada......IT IS CLEAR THAT SOME manmat has been included into one or more of the groups.....so we can not say that ALL these groups hold a puran purataan or sanatani shicksha.....their is something which is "wrong" or edited in all of them....that is my point... What i am saying is WE AS "MODERN" Sikhs should not only respect all samparyadas/taksals/deras/jathes but also read what they say about different points in Gurmat and Rehit Maryada.....and then deciede for ourselves what is going on....what is purataan what is sanatan what is tatt Gurmat? in simple words i can say that the Singh Sabha scholars did was some of this....they studied every Rehitnama and every historical work.....to MAKE A UNIFIED CODE FOR US.....which ended up as the Sikh Rehit Maryada.....now some ppl hear hate and insult SGPC and Singh Sabhaits and say that they were british agents and so on....that is not only wrong but also a huge fraud.....it was these Singhs who faught against the british....do you know what ppl like Bhai Veer Singh and others did for us? what i see know is a kind of neo-Nihangs and neo-Samparyadaits coming back and telling us that what Singh Sabha did is wrong.........guys do you really don't understand? they unified Sikh panth..... clear logic can tell you that both Nihang Rehit and Udasi Rehit cannot be equally good.....it is great that all Sanatanis have the same belief in Granths and so on....but also Rehit should be one.... as i asked soem questions about Udasi/Nihang questions here: http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...t=1480&start=45 i did not get any answar..i think Narsingha Bhaji has retired from posting there....so bhaji maybe you could enlighten us.... either here or there....

but bhaji what is the best way of life accroding to Sanatan Sikhi....is it to be Nihang or an Udasi? And please tell me what kind of things make that all these four 'panths' do not accept the Rehit given by Akal Takht Sahib (published by SGPC) as their Rehit.....do they have there own WRITTEN Rehits as Taksal has...or is all this just oral.....or do they believe in Rehitnameh as some Jathe do??? please enlighten this ediot... bhaji the Sikh history i have read does never say that what SGPC did was 'stupid voilence'....what do you mean by that jee....