dalsingh101

Leave the thread alone. Its been dead for ages. Plus I noticed many of the reposnses were generally balanced. It is true that Sikhs have to be careful of participating in certain "morally questionable" conflicts such as Iraq right now. Was talking to a young British Turkish guy recently. He told me that he is going to Turkey to do his national service. It is a shame Sikhs have no equivalent. Not good! I guess it is the result of the Khalsa going from a genuine military force to one which now incorporates heavy military symbology.

It looks like it has to be refilled with some aerosal. It is a one shot tool.

Who is Imam Mehdi? Regarding the burka, I think it was just some ceremonial thing thing for a wedding only. I've seem bridegrooms face covered by some gold tinselly looking thing hanging from their paghs before.

Just to add to this. Try and keep associates with those who are physically brave and encourage this trait in your family. This is the most important thing. Build up strength on a clan by clan (read family) basis. Also make sure they do not get bogged down with various theological debates that typically keep Sikhs from uniting. Make it clear that this is to be avoided from a young age.

Another thing I noticed in the text was the belief of the return of the Guru to bring about Satyug again. Sambhal was mentioned as the place of the re-emergence.

Does anyone know what a khund is? Or should I spell it khoond. Is it some sort of face covering worn by Panjabi women in days of old. Also, are we sure the injunction is only covering the marriage ceremony and not meant to be a general order? I am inclined to agree with this. We must remember that the Khalsa was facing numerically superior forces from Delhi, Afghanistan and Persia during this period. Fact is, they were generally Muslim forces who were conditioned to view the destruction of Sikhs as some religious duty (jihadis). Even if their attacks were more to do with plunder, slavery and control. Given the odds, it is not surprising that the Khalsa took such dramatic measures to ensure new initiates truly renounced their former beliefs/prejudgices. Conversely, it also shows an openess for marriage and conversion back then that hasn't carried through to modern times. Is there ANY older manuscript that doesn't contain such things. lol

Nice extract from Prem Sumarag: McLeod's translation page 16-17. This thread caused me to revisit Prem Sumarag. Now I am looking at it with fresh eyes I'm seeing it in a new light. There does appear to be contradictions to the above in parts suggesting more than one writer.

WJKK! WJKF! Kalyug Veer! Thank you so much for that. I only wish I had a laser printer to print them off. lol

Why should we care, when we can argue about Dasam Granth....etc. You know, they say Sikhs only realise a storm has occurred after it has come and gone. lol

I have heard that someone named Alberuni wrote about the Panjab (this was long before the birth of Guru Nanak Dev ji). Has anyone read this? Can you share your knowledge on the topic? I have searched and not been able to find the account online. Can anyone also help source it? Thanks in advance.

I've heard this one a few times over the years. Anyone know anything more? In all of the gul shasters of some of them? Whether we like it or not, I know some sections of the SIkh army used an image of Durga on their battle standard. There is a surviving contemporary image. I don't know if this is sanatan or excessive zeal myself. Shaster pooja. Overall though, from what I read and recall, the translated work did not seem to exude an out and out sanatan worldview steeped in Hindu mythology. It seemed incredibly grounded at places.

Thing with Prem Sumarag is that is is obviously written by an educated SIkh and parts of it are directed towards high level officials indicating that at least those sections were compiled/written when Sikhs were in a position of relative ascendency. I too found no blatant "sanatan" flavour to the work other than statement about reading some Hindu religious texts alongside Sikh religious texts. The section on marriage was very enlightened even for today's standards. There was strange stuff like promoting the keeping of nautch girls by rajay (even if they are justified as testing mechanisms for holy men). Parts of it date to the very early part of the 1800s, if McLeods statement that he found translated and dated extracts from that time in a British archive, are to be believed. The case may be that sections are old like this and some are more recent (i.e during the hey day of Sikh rule) as writers added bits to clarify emerging areas of concern for the Sikh ruling classes, once they had established themselves. It is unlike other rehats namas which are generally terse. This one goes over and explains things in more detail.

Thanks for the information Shaheediyan. Do you know anything about the Bhai Randhir Singh who edited thr original? (anyone?)

Can someone tell me. The Bhai Randhir who originally edited the version of Prem Sumarag that McLeod translated. Is that the same Bhai Randhir who was the head of the AKJ (who did all the time for his anti British activity) or was it someone else? Much appreciated. FTR: I read the translation and found it fascinating. It is the only manual on statecraft/goverence from Sikh quarters I am aware of.

Post it as an attachment to a post in the thread please.

As I am being referred to hear, let me clarify my position. I merely said that writing on the khaas patr posted did have similarity with what I remember of a handwritten hukum nama attributed to dasmesh pita. Sadly the image of the page was of poor quality, as I stated so we can't really draw any conclusions from it. You know there are forensic handwriting experts that study handwriting for a living and would probably be able to compare the two and draw conclusions. I wanted to post the two images online for users to see for themselves and discuss any similarities and differences in handwriting. But the image quality didn't allow for this. See, when people get personal, and everyone seems to be doing it! We lose out on serious learning!!! It is so annoying!

Good info although I don't agree with your definition of Khulasah. I'm off now but again I make a plea to all. Debate rationally and respectfully between yourselves on such matters. Learn to accomodate difference, that is where our unity lies. WJKK WJKF

No but sustained study over time/generations can help in developing a higher level of understanding compared to some other previous points in history. So, there we go. We have always had diversity. I notice that the nirmalas interpret Sikhi from a very vedantic view point as their education in Benares would encourage. Also udasis covering themselves in ashes and walking around half naked is hardly orthodox. Besides are you pushing nihung beliefs as the norm in Sikhi? Sure but Sikhs who weren't Khalsa have always been their. At one point they were called Khulasah Sikhs or something like that. See Siques, Tigers and Thieves. No one is doubting SGGS ji! That is our final scripture. Besides, I think DG is matter relating to mainly temporal issues. These change over time and so must our understanding of them. Besides are you saying that all worldly knowledge is contained in DG and that we have no need to study other material for worldly knowledge? If DG is part of our literature then let us not underplay the importance of other literature for Sikhs also. Besides, much of the source material of DG was already in existence and had been re-constructed for whatever purpose. . Again brother. I am not in the conversion business. But the simple fact is that for the majority of orthodox Sikhs, it is the SGGS ji that is the accepted scripture that is present in a Gurdwara. DG prakash is a minority practice, mainly by nihungs.

Singh2 are you Inder Singh on SS? Besides do you really want the position of judge and jury on the members of the quom? That is a bit hankaari mate. The deal with SPN is this. From my own perspective, as you grow older you realise that like it or not people have different opinions. I don't want to spend my life trying to persuade people to think like me. Anyone who has spent time reading Sikh history seriously will aso realise that diversity was the norm in the late 1700s panth. There were Udasis, nirmalas, nihungs, sehaj dharis etc. So this diversity is nothing new from what I understand. I don't agree with your excluding attitude Singh2, I believe the panth must grow. Besides, are you not human and prone to errors? Because the way you go on brother is like you are perfect and people who hold dissenting views to your own are absolute blasphemous. Now people are dragging me into their own negativity. Everyone just chill. Put your arguments across calmly and in due time the best arguments will win.

Fact is some people have views markedly different of sant ji than you and I might. We must live with this and reply with solid arguments. The other option is to lose equilibrium and act like a nutter. Which usually just ends up helping the other side make their point better. In any case, what some people consider to be a mahapursh, others consider to be a dera guru. Sant ji might be a brave Sikh warrior defender (sant sipahi) to me, but I have met many Sikhs who feel he was something else altogether (views I will not repeat). In the end, I hope SPN never takes a taleban approach and starts getting ban happy with Sikhs with differing views. There is enough of that already. I agree.

Do we know anything about him? I had heard this was a Sindhi Gurdas but haven't found any old references to him.

Who exactly wrote this? It couldn't have been Bhai Gurdas from Guru Arjan Dev's time.

Singh2 Now you are being mischevious. SPN is probably more open than other Sikh forums. Its members and moderators (which includes me) are from a diverse background. If a view is posted on SPN, it is foolish to think it reflects the beliefs of the forum because those involved themselves have different views. It is a plain lie to say members do not believe in naam simraan and the other stuff you mentioned. Can I respectfully suggest you stop this please? Gur Fateh

HSD I'm not even looking for perfection. I'm just looking for a reasonable portion of people having level heads. My point was that we do not have the leadership for Khalsitan right now. Idealism in terms of partiotism is largely missing from the panth. These would totally compromise any Khalistan

Sikh ethics seem dead. Without them a Khalistan would become an embarrassment. Reality is, given the state of people right now and those entrenched in power, it would be a casteist, corrupt place, run by rogues. Besides we haven't grown enough yet, we may still have morons shooting risque folk singers dead and other taleban type action thinkingthey are doing the Guru's work.