Guru da Sikh

Sants are of various types. Some are fakes but that does not mean that all are bad. To club them together is height of ignorance.

Mod' edit due to off-topic, there are specific thread on roles of saints in sikhism under saint section link: http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=11377 , please bring your arguments on that thread regarding sants in sikhism.

Kala afghana has become a guru of missionaries.

Kala Afgana has NEVER claimed to be anybody’s Guru and his books shook up Sampardavan who were trying to bring Hindutava into Sikhi under the name of various Granths!

Here is a complete court case against him where he was indicted for molesting a sikh bibi in Gurudwara sahib.

Complete court case Judgement against Kala Afghana

Here is complete story of Gurbakash Singh Kala

Afghana's conviction in sexual assault case in a

Gurdwara......

===================================================

Khalsa v. Bhullar

http://q1.quicklaw.com/qItemp/C IDGLexk WVHmDlLe/...

** Unedited **

Indexed as: Khalsa v. Bhullar

Between Gurbaksh Singh Khalsa, Plaintiff, and Taranjit

Kaur Bhullar, Hariner Singh Bhullar, Gumham Singh

Bajwa and Kahar Singh Pannu, Defendants

Counsel for the Plaintiff: Douglas S. Cunliffe.

Counsel for the Defendants: Christopher M. Considine.

[1992] B.C.J. No. 378 Victoria Registry No. 89/1983

British Columbia Supreme Court Victoria, British

Columbia

Macdonell J.

Heard: September 3 - 6, 9 - 12 and November 7, 1991

Judgment: February 24, 1992 (15 pp.)

Torts - Defamation 2- Defences - Truth. Sexual assault

- Damages - General

damages - Punitive damages - Punitive damage award

appropriate where a

/1 priest of the Sikh religion breached his position

of trust by sexually assaulting a

parishioner.

The plaintiff sued for damages for defamation of

character. The defendants counterclaimed for damages

for sexual assault. The plaintiff was a priest of a

Sikh religious temple. The summer following the

incident which was the subject of this lawsuit, the

plaintiff was discharged. The plaintiff was

68-years-old, and resided in the living quarters with

his wife and a daughter. His argument was that a

faction in the temple wanted to get rid of him, so

they attempted to put him in a compromising position

with Mrs. B. He claimed that she wrongfully exposed

herself before him and was sexually aggressive towards

him, and that he took no part in it. He further argued

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further

employment as a priest. The case for the defence was

that the plaintiff was not defamed and that, in fact,

the allegation of sexual assault was true.

HELD: The plaintiffs action was dismissed. The

defendant Mrs. B succeeded on her counterclaim, having

proved that the plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted

her. The court awarded her $5,000.00 in general

damages, and $5,000.00 in special damages. The

plaintiff had failed to prove his allegation of a

wrongful accusation of sexual assault. The defendants

had proved their counterclaim AND THE COURT FOUND THAT

IN FACT THE SEXUAL ASSAULT HAD TAKEN PLACE. With

respect to general damages for the sexual assault, the

court had to bear in mind the gravity of the assault,

the circumstances of it, and its effect on Mrs. B. The

assault was of a relatively minor nature in the sense

that there was only one incident. The assault here was

committed by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest. The emotional impact of the forceful

touching of the plaintiffs chest and the attempt to

remove her stockings was not only offensive but

appalling, particularly as the priest in the Sikh

religion is held in high esteem and the utmost in

decorum is expected of him. He was in a position of

trust and abused the trust. On the other hand, there

did not appear to be any serious after-effects on Mrs.

B other than distaste for the whole matter. The impact

on Mrs. B would be lessened by her vindication in this

lawsuit, allowing her to save face.

MACDONELL J.:- The plaintiffs action against the

defendants is for defamation of character arising out

of an accusation by the defendant Taranjit Bhullar

that she was sexually assaulted by the plaintiff,

which accusation was published by the defendants.

The defendant Mrs. Bhullar alleges that the plaintiff

sexually assaulted her, and she and her husband

counterclaim for damages against the plaintiff.

The background, briefly, is that the plaintiff at all

material times was the priest at the Topaz Street

Temple of the Khalsa Diwan Society, which is a Sikh

religious society. The plaintiff came to Canada in

1984 and resided for a year in Grand Prairie with his

daughter. Prior to coming to Canada, he had been a

policeman in the Punjab and retired with the rank of

Inspector in 1981. He had no training in the

priesthood but was a devout Sikh. There does not seem

to be much dispute that he was knowledgeable in the

religion and was qualified to act as a priest, as

there does not appear to be any need for prior formal

religious training to act as a priest in a temple.

While in Grand Prairie, he saw an advertisement in an

ethnic ne"",spaper advertising for a priest at Golden.

He applied and was successful and presided as a priest

there for some nine months. With this experience he

was accepted as a priest at 1 00 Mile House where he

presided for a year. He then heard of an opening at

the Topaz Street Temple in Victoria and on October

1st, 1986, he was employed there as the priest on a

contract basis which provided for two months' notice

by either party. He continued as priest until the

summer following the incident which is the subject of

this law suit, when he was discharged.

The plaintiff was sixty-eight years of age at all

material times, was married and had children. He and

his wife and a daughter resided in the living quarters

of the temple. Following his appointment, things went

along reasonably well, although there was friction

with the executive of the Society - no doubt partly

due to the plaintiffs rigidity in some areas. Toward

the end of December, 1987 the friction between him and

the Committee increased and the plaintiff became

convinced that a group in the temple, including the

defendants, wished to be rid of him. It is his

position that there was a conspiracy to effect his

removal, starting with their sending a white woman to

the temple to compromise him sexually. That plot

failed as she was drunk. He alleges that thereafter

there was a meeting between the various defendants and

others who plotted to have the female defendant

compromise him, again with the purpose of getting rid

of him. However, as part of his case, the plaintiff

alleges only the slander and not a conspiracy to

remove him as priest, which seems to be the subject

matter of another lawsuit.

The plaintiff testified that he met the Bhullars in

1986 and that they were regular attenders at the

temple. They were helpful with his daughter's marriage

and by 1987 he and the Bhullars became good friends.

He testified that from time to time he saw Mrs.

Bhullar alone and that at times they discussed

problems she had with her husband. He described their

relationship as that of a family membership.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age and

her husband is a comparable age. The plaintiff said

that in 1988, when Mrs. Bhullar left one night after

visiting, she embraced him and kissed him on the

cheek. He said that he was very upset by this. He said

that following this she telephoned him and explained

that such conduct was not unusual in Canada. He said

that in January and February 1989 nothing of a sexual

nature took place between them and that they did not

meet privately during that time. He said that on March

25th, which was just prior to his and his wife's visit

to Seattle, Mrs. Bhullar came to the temple at

lunchtime in response to a call from him. He said they

took food after her arrival and then he went to take a

rest in his bedroom. He said that the defendant came

into the room. At that time he was sitting on a chair

removing his jacket. He said that she removed her

blouse, exposing her naked breasts, sat on his lap,

and put her hands around his neck. He testified that

she said, "I know you need me". He said he was stunned

and pushed her away, telling her that this was not the

way for a daughter to act. The defendant left and the

plaintiff then went to the temple and prostrated

himself before the Holy Book. He said that he and his

wife left for Seattle the next day, returning April

5th of 1989. He telephoned Mrs. Bhullar at her office

but as she was busy she telephoned him the following

day. He said he recorded the call on his answering

machine. He said he told her he would tell her husband

that she was not acting like a daughter. He said he

did, in fact, telephone her husband on the 6th and

told him that his wife was not faithful. He met her

husband in the afternoon and spoke to him further. He

said that on April 30th there was a meeting of the

Committee and his employment and raise were discussed.

He denied that there was any condition of immediate

dismissal in the case of lack of moral turpitude. He

said he did not speak to the defendants from April

through to June. On July 22nd, there was a meeting of

the Temple Committee and the plaintiff was advised by

Mr. Bajwa and Mr. Pannu that Mr. and Mrs. Bhullar had

lodged a complaint against him and that there was a

tape of a conversation between the plaintiff and Mrs.

Bhullar. The tape was apparently played, which

resulted in the plaintiffs employment being

terminated. After listening to the tape and hearing

the accusation of Mrs. Bhullar, the Committee accepted

as a fact that the plaintiff had sexually assaulted

the female defendant.

The plaintiffs position is that this allegation is

false and that the true state of affairs is that it

was the defendant who wrongfully exposed herself

before him and was sexually aggressive toward him, and

that he took no part in it. The plaintiffs position is

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further employment as a priest.

A considerable amount of evidence was called with

respect to various taped telephone conversations,

produced by both the plaintiff and the defendants

Bhullar, and other evidence of conflicts in the temple

which do not relate much to the law suit. The

plaintiff alleges that there was a conspiracy to

remove him and that the conduct of the female

defendant which he described was orchestrated by a

group in the Committee, which included Mr. Pannu and

Mr. Bajwa, to compromise the plaintiff. The plaintiff

called Mr. Gurbakash Sihota, who testified that he met

the defendants Bajwa and Pannu in February 1989 and

that Mr. Johal, Mr. Ajwall and Mr. Sanhera were there.

The meeting was at approximately 9:00 p.m. and was

arranged to congratulate Bajwa and Pannu for their

election to office on the Temple Committee. The last

three mentioned come from Vancouver. He said they then

discussed getting rid of the plaintiff, as there was a

complaint by Mr. Bajwa about the priest interfering in

a wedding ceremony when Mr. Bajwa sang a poem. Mr.

Pannu's complaint was that the priest contradicted his

mother-in-law. The consensus was that they should get

rid of the priest and that they had a girl ready to

entice him into making sexual advances. The name

mentioned was the female defendant, Bhullar. Mr.

Sihota said that Pannu had mentioned that they had

tried a white lady but it did not work because she got

drunk when she was sent to the temple and the

plaintiff" got away". In cross-examination the witness

tied himself to the meeting taking place on February

11 tho

The case for the defence is that the plaintiff was not

defamed and that, in fact, the allegation of a sexual

assault is true. The Bhullars in their counterclaim

ask for damages against the plaintiff for the sexual

assault.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age, was

born in India and came to Canada in 1962, where she

took her education through Grade 12 at Oak Bay High

School and Camosun College. She has been with the

Workers Compensation Board for some seventeen years

and is presently a Claims Adjudicator, a position she

has held for some four years. She was married in 1985

and has one daughter of five years of age. Her husband

works for the Municipality of Saanich. They met the

plaintiff when he became a priest. They attended the

Topaz Street Temple regularly from 1986 through 1988

and they became close to the plaintiff. Initially,

Mrs. Bhullar and her husband responded to his need for

help in the community as he was a stranger. In 1987

the plaintiff needed a drive to a religious ceremony.

Mrs. Bhullar drove him there and said he put his hand

on her hand and she asked him to take it off. He later

asked, "How about a kiss?" and she said, "You've got

to be kidding". She told her husband about this

incident and they cut down their visits with the

plaintiff and their attendance at the temple

significantly. She said that at the end of 1988 the

plaintiff called her to meet him in private to talk

over his problems. She said they met at the temple and

nothing untoward happened. In December of 1988 the

plaintiff was persistently telephoning her and at

times asked her to bring food. On one occasion she did

take along Chinese food and it was consumed in his

quarters. On leaving she said he asked for a hug and a

kiss and that she pushed him away. Following this she

received telephone calls at work and by January and

February 1989 he was calling her as much as four times

a day, two or three times a week. In addition, when

she was not available, she received messages from time

to time that "Father had called". She said that in

early January the plaintiff had telephoned and was

very angry and upset with her as somebody in his

family had died and the Bhullars had not been

available to help him. She said that in mid-February

the plaintiff wanted to meet her at the library in the

temple for lunch as he wanted to talk to her. She went

and was met at the top of the stairs by the plaintiff,

who said the lunch was laid on in the library. She

asked where his wife and daughter were and he told her

they had had their lunch and were sleeping. She said

"We went to another room, which was the guest room,

where lunch was laid out". There were two beds and a

dresser. They ate the food sitting on the beds. He sat

on one and she sat on the other. She said that the

plaintiff came to the bed and put his arm around her

and pushed her back onto the bed. She said he put his

hand underneath her blouse and with his other hand

tugged at her skirt. She said she tried to pull away.

He told her he couldn't take her nylons off, although

he was trying. She said she pulled herself together

and pushed him away. She said she "got loud", meaning

that she raised her voice. He said "Don't get loud,

the bitches are sleeping in the next room". Mrs.

Bhullar then left through the library and went back to

work, very upset. At that time she did not discuss

what had happened with Ms. Mettis, her case assistant,

although Ms. Mettis asked her what was the matter. She

said in April she received a call from the plaintiff

threatening to blackmail her. He said that he had a

taped conversation which incriminated her. She said

she was devastated. She reported to work as usual, but

while going over a file with Ms. Mettis she broke down

in tears and then told her what had happened at the

temple. She was advised to tell her husband, which she

did. They did not attend at the temple after that.

Following her disclosure of the assault to her husband

they went to the police, who suggested that the matter

be sorted out in the Sikh community. She said to

protect themselves against a case of slander they

purchased a recording device and that during

conversations with the plaintiff she led him to

believe that she had not told her husband. Various

conversations were recorded. At the same time, the

plaintiff was busy recording conversations on his

machine.

Mrs. Bhullar denies that she was a party to any

conspiracy to compromise the plaintiff with the

purpose of having him removed.

The defendant husband was called and his evidence

paralleled that of his wife. He also testified that he

was not a party to any agreement to effect the removal

of the plaintiff.

The other defendants were called and they all gave

evidence to the same effect. After hearing Mrs.

Bhullar's accusation of sexual assault by the

plaintiff, which they believed, and the taped

telephone conversations, they concluded that he had in

fact committed a sexual assault and this was the

foundation for his being removed as a priest. The

defendants deny that there was any meeting as alleged

by Mr. Sihota.

The defence called Ms. Mettis, who confirmed the

evidence of the female defendant and, in particular,

the numerous calls made by the plaintiff to Mrs.

Bhullar, her emotional state following the visit to

the temple, and what was disclosed to her later when

Mrs. Bhullar broke down at the office.

The defence called Mr. Rajinder Sihota, who is a

senior accountant with the Ministry of Finance. He

testified that on February 13th, 1989 he was in a

police station in the Punjab with respect to a

complaint concerning Gurbakash Sihota, the witness

called for the plaintiff who alleged the conspiracy

meeting. Mr. Rajinder Sihota testified that the

plaintiffs witness was not only in the Punjab on the

13th February, but had been there for some time.

Logistically it would not have been possible for him

to be in Victoria on February lIth due to time changes

and travelling time. Mr. Rajinder Sihota also

testified that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was a

cousin of his and had a bad reputation. In addition,

he had information that his cousin had been in the

Punjab for a few months at that time.

The defence's position can be summarized as a complete

denial of the allegation of defamation or of a

conspiracy. With respect to the counterclai:t;n, the

defence claims that the evidence of the defendants

should be accepted and that the Court should find that

the plaintiff sexually assaulted the female defendant.

I have to assess the credibility of the various

witnesses called and also consider the tape recordings

which have been led in evidence and the allegation by

the defence that the plaintiffs tape recordings have

been tampered with and are, in fact, extracts from

other conversations taken out of context. The defence

also takes the position that the tape recordings that

have been produced by the defence make it quite clear

that the plaintiff admitted to the sexual assault.

Both the plaintiff and the defence called evidence of

experts dealing with the authenticity of the tapes.

The defendants' expert listened to the tapes and

conducted sound tests. In my view, his evidence should

be preferred to that of the plaintiffs expert, who did

not carry out this testing. The conclusion of the

defendants' expert is that the tape of the plaintiff

was not prepared, as he testified, by using a tape

recorder or answering machine and speaking to an

answering machine and telephone, but that in fact all

the conversations were taken from a telephone line. I

find this evidence credible. I accept it and conclude

that the tape prepared by the plaintiff has been

concocted by him and not recorded as he testified.

Listening to the defendants' tapes with the assistance

of the witnesses and the interpreter persuades me that

the inference to be taken from them is that the

plaintiff admitted to sexually assaulting the female

defendant and that the Committee was well justified in

accepting the evidence of Mrs. Bhullar and the tapes

in concluding that the plaintiff had sexually

assaulted her.

With respect to the alleged meeting between the

executives at Mr. Sihota's house, I conclude that this

evidence was fabricated and quite untrue and I accept

the evidence of Mr. Rajinder Sihota called for the

defence that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was in fact

in the Punjab at the time when the supposed

conversation and conspiracy took place.

I conclude therefore that the plaintiff has failed to

prove his allegation of a wrongful accusation of

sexual assault and find that in fact the sexual

assault did take place. The plaintiffs action is

accordingly dismissed with costs.

With respect to the counterclaim, I find that the

defendants have proved their counterclaim and that the

plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted the female

defendant. The plaintiff - who, as a priest in a

position of authority and influence, sexually

assaulted a female parishioner in the tight-knit

society of the Sikh community in Victoria - is guilty

of an extremely serious offence.

DAMAGES

The counterclaim is advanced by both Bhullars against

the plaintiff for the sexual assault. It is my view

that the only one who can succeed in the counterclaim

is Mrs. Bhullar. The defendant argues as if there is a

counterclaim for defamation of character as well as

sexual assault, but in fact that is not what the

pleadings disclose. In any event, a case has not been

made out to entitle Mr. Bhullar to damages.

With respect to general damages for the sexual

assault, I have to bear in mind the gravity of the

assault, the circumstances of it, and its effect on

Mrs. Bhullar. In this case, unlike a number of others

where damages have been sought for sexual assault, the

assault is of a comparatively minor nature in the

sense that there was only the one incident, as opposed

to cases where the assault was a rape or a similar

crime of violence, or assaults on younger people, that

have often continued over a number of years. Little is

to be gained by trying to compare damages in cases

that are not similar to the case at bar, so I do not

propose to review the current authorities which are

not bountiful. What I have to deal with here is an

assault by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest, who is the plaintiff. The emotional

impact of the forceful touching of the plaintiffs

chest and the attempt to take off her stockings is not

only offensive but appalling, particularly as the

priest in the Sikh religion is held in high esteem and

the utmost in decorum is expected of him. He was in a

position of trust and abused that trust. The assault

was made possible because of the respect of Mrs.

Bhullar for the plaintiff as priest and her being at

the temple at all was at his request. With respect to

the consequences or the effect on Mrs. Bhullar, there

is very little evidence before me other than her

feelings of humiliation, shock and degradation. There

do not appear to be any serious after-effects other

than distaste for the whole matter. Consequently, it

is my view that the damages should reflect the

seriousness of the assault but damages in other more

serious cases should be borne in mind to keep a

balanced perspective of damages under this head. To

some extent the impact on Mrs Bhullard is lessened, as

her success in this lawsuit vindicates her and face is

saved in a society where it is very important. By the

same token, the plaintiff is discredited and has lost

all respect and credibility in his community. I award

general damages to Mrs. Bhullar in the amount of

$5,000.00 for the sexual assault.

A claim has been advanced for punitive damages. In

this case it is my view that it is appropriate that

punitive damages be awarded. They are not awarded on

the basis of compensation but on the principle of

punishment. In this case no criminal proceedings were

launched, although the Bhullars did report the matter

to the police, who left it to the Sikh community to

sort out the matter and did not proceed with charges.

Consequently, the element of punishment of the

plaintiff for his conduct has not been addressed. In

this case punitive damages need be awarded to express

society's disapproval of the conduct of the plaintiff

as a priest in authority and trust breaching that

trust and sexually assaulting a parishioner. His

attempting, after that, to manufacture evidence and

shift the blame away from himself and his harassment

of Mrs. Bhullar is despicable. I award the sum of

$5,000.00 as punitive damages. Mrs. Bhullar will have

her costs of the counterclaim and pre-judgment

interest at the rate set by the Registrar from time to

time.

MACDONELL J.

(JUDGE)

Because they are gurnindaks and hence sangat by and large do not wentertain them. Instaed of doing any missionary work their efforts are to destroy the sikh history.

Missionaries are destroyers of sikhism. They have not introduced a single soul into sikhism. I wonder why they call them missionaries. They are old communists in sikh guise and biggest enemies of sikhism.

How many Sikh Missionaries been charged with Sexual Assault cases compared to the so called ‘Sants’? You post a list and I will mine ONLY in response. Yet you paint everybody with a single stroke of paint brushand that is DISRESPECTFUL to this Forum (Mod take note).

How many missionaries are being driven in Limousines, have multimillion dollar mansions called Deras, have special quilts (Gadaas) for them to sit on in Hazoori of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji?

Here see for yourself, click on the link below and see this ‘Sant’s’ DISRESPECT to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji! http://www.wakeupkhalsa.com/video-general.php

"Moreover, WHO IS BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL WRITERS OF THIS DASAM GRANTH, Nirmalays ( Sikhi Attire) from Banaris TO EXPLAIN IT TOO?"

I have already covered this point, which you conviently ignored, names of the 5 Singhs were also provided. Show us one piece of historical evidence to back up your claim.

Here is an article by Bhai Baldev Singh ji. Give it a good Read. I have made a couple of minor edits.

I would like the author or any other Sikh scholar to shed light on the following questions this story raises.

First of all it is abundantly clear from Aad Guru Granth Sahib (AGGS) and the Banis attributed to Guru Gobind Singh that Gurus Nanak Dev, Arjan Dev and Gobind Singh had sound knowledge of Sanskrit and Hindu mythology. It is also known that they did not go to Varanasi or any other Hindu center to learn Sanskrit and mythology, they learnt it where they grew up in Punjab. This means that Sanskrit teachers were available in Punjab. So what was the particular need for Guru Gobind Singh to send five Sikhs to Varanasi?

Second, there were scholars in Guru Gobind Singh’s court, who translated Sanskrit texts into Braj Bhasa. Were they not competent enough to teach Sanskrit to Sikhs? The Guru Had 52 scholars and poets in his court, couldn’t he hire few Sanskrit teachers for the Sikhs?

Third, if the Guru did send the Sikhs to Varanasi then what were their names and where did they come from? (names are easy to make up, do we have bio data and background information like the original Panj Pyaras?)

Is there any biographical information available about them?

What did those Sikhs do with their knowledge of Sanskrit? Did they teach Sanskrit to Sikhs or translated Gurbani into Sanskrit? Did they translate Sanskrit texts into Braj Bhasa or Punjabi? If so where is the original bani?

Claim, "The battles of Bhangani and Nadaun are described briefly by Guru Gobind Singh Ji in beautiful Braj Bhasa."

Had the author used the same logic which he used in the analysis of "Ub Main Apni Katha Bakhano (Now I Relate My Own Tory)," he would have arrived at a similar conclusion that in no way Guru Gobind Singh is the author of the "Battles of Bhangani and Nandaun."

There are many statements in the "Battles of Bhangani and Nadaun," which are not consistent with the teachings of AGGS. For the sake of briefness, let us examine few statements from the "Battle of Bhangani." In this composition the writer narrates the heroic exploits of Guru Gobind Singh’s cousins, his maternal uncle and others. The writer is caste-conscious and lineage-conscious as he extols the honor of Sodhi clan, and the bravery and the chivalry of Khatris. The writer also says that-- witches, ghosts, evil spirits, bir baitaal (agents of god Shiv Ji) and sidhs (people with supernatural powers)— came to the battle arena to enjoy the scene.

qutI qyg iqRwKI kZy jwmdwZM ] hTI rfKIXM lwj bMsM snwZM ] hiTXo sfihbM cMd KyqM KiqRXfxM ] hny Kfn KunI Kurfsfn BfnM ] zkI zfkxI BUq pRyqM bkfry ] hsy bIr bYqfl aO suwD iswDM ]

(These verses and their meanings are from "Bachittar Natak Steek" by J. P. Singh).

Now compare these verses to Guru Gobind Singh’s Nash Doctrine, he issued as an edict to the Khalsa:

"From now on you are free from varan-ashrarm dharam (caste based religion), karm kand (Hindu rituals and ceremonies), bharam (superstition), kul (family lineage) and krit (caste based occupation restriction."

Can any Sikh believe that Guru Gobind Singh did not believe in what he preached?

Then there are other verses in this composition, which repudiate the essence of Sikh ethics, humility, forgiveness and compassion.

jy jy nr qwh n iBry dIny ngr inkfr ] jy iqh TAur Bly iBry iqnY krI pRiqpfr ]

"Those who did not participate in the battle (to help us) were forced to leave the town, whereas those who did were rewarded."

Sikhs know that Guru Har Gobind Sahib forgave Emperor Jahangir, who was responsible for the death of his father, Guru Arjan Dev. Sikhs also know that Guru Gobind Singh forgave Emperor Aurangjeb, who was responsible for the death of his father, mother, four sons and hundreds of Sikhs. Sikh Gurus were the embodiment of humility, compassion and forgiveness. How could any Sikh in his right mind believe that Guru Gobind Singh forced people to leave the town simply because they did not help him in the battle?

tFg tFg kir hny indfnf ] kUkr ijim iqn qjy pRfnf ]

"(The wicked) ones were tortured and they died like dogs."

Now compare these verses with the story of Bhai Kanhyia. When Sikh complained to Guru Gobind Singh that Bahi Kanhyia was helping the wounded enemies, he hugged Bhai Kanhyia and honored him by calling him a true Sikh. How could any Sikh believe that Guru Gobind Singh degraded his enemies to the level of dogs and tortured them to death?

Moreover, according to historians, a Muslim divine, Pir Budhu Shah lost two sons and many followers in the battle of Bhangani. The Pir was following in the footsteps of Guru Teg Bahadur who sacrificed his life to uphold the "Truth" and the "freedom of conscience". He sacrificed his life to protect the right of Hindus to practice their religion without coercion from the government. Pir Budhu Shah stood shoulder to shoulder with Guru Gobind Singh in his fight against the oppression and bigotry of Mughal rulers and the tyranny of caste system. Can any Sikh believe that while lauding the heroic exploits of his cousins, uncle and other Sikhs in the battle of Bhangani, Guru Gobind Singh would not have made any mention of the sacrifice of Pir Budhu Shah? Was Guru Gobind Singh that ungrateful?

For anyone to suggest that Guru Gobind Singh is the author of the "battles of Bhangani and Nadaun" or "Bachittar Natak" amounts to heaping insults on Guru Gobind Singh and the repudiation of Sikh philosophy.

Claim "No pervious Nanak had written any personal anecdotes in the Guru Granth Sahib and hence this was a good reason that Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not include any of his personal writings in the Guru Granth Sahib."

Here the author is confusing "personal Bani" with "Bani about personal life." The Banis composed by the Gurus were their personal Banis, however, in the Banis of Gurus included in the AGGS, there is scant reference to their personal lives. Similarly, some of the Banis attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, cited by the author in the article, which are consistent with Add Guru Granth Sahib, do not contain any reference to Guru Gobind Singh’s personal life. However, there is one major difference between the Banis attributed to Guru Gobind Singh and the Banis of other Gurus. All the six Gurus, the first five and the ninth, whose Banis are included in the AGGS, wrote their Banis under the name of "Nanak" whereas the Banis attributed to Guru Gobind Singh are under his name. Three Gurus, Hargobind Sahib, Har Rai and Harkrishan Ji did not write any Bani.

When Guru Gobind Singh prepared the Damdami Bir by incorporating Guru Teg Bahadur’s Bani in the text of Pothi Sahib*), he did not add his own Bani. I am not going to speculate why Guru Gobind Singh did not add his Bani, but the fact is that he didn’t. This should not cause any confusion and misunderstanding among the Sikhs. Before his death, Guru Gobind Singh in his infinite wisdom invested Guruship jointly on the teachings enshrined in the Damdami Bir and the collective will of the Sikh community. The present Bir (AGGS) is a copy of Damdami Bir. Thus, AGGS is the "eternal spiritual Guru" and the Sikh Panth is the "temporal Guru."

A Sikh should never loose sight of Guru Gobind Singh’s edict that "spiritual Guru" is the Bani enshrined in AGGS. Any extraneous Bani or writing should be respected as literature and must be tested on the touchstone of AGGS before it is accepted as Sikh literature. Anyone, who equates extraneous Bani with the Bani enshrined in the AGGS, violates Guru Gobind Singh’s edict.

The statement "He only added the Bani of Guru Teg Bahadur in the Pothi Sahib, which had been compiled by Guru Arjan Dev" is not correct.

Pothi Sahib was compiled by Guru Arjan Dev and installed in Harimandiar Sahib in 1604. After the death of Guru Hargobind Sahib, it came into the possession of Dhirmal, older brother of Guru Har Rai. Dhirmal refused to give it to Guru Gobind Singh. It is still in the possession of the descendents of Dhirmal at Kartarpur. Therefore, Guru Gobind Singh most likely used a copy of Pothi Sahib when he prepared the Damdami Bir.

With Thanks to Bhai Baldev Singh ji

Randip Singh, with all due respect sir, you seem to be viewing these debates with tunnel vision.

Again, you don’t even have a tunnel vision yours is solid & shut from all sides. Here is how;

No one has been more rude and insulting here than the alleged Guru da Sikh, especially towards:

1: Respected Mahapurkh;

2: All facets of the Panth;

3: Individual members here and

4: Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj

In my books, there is not much else left in terms of defining a naastik, the word is not used as an insult, but as a fact.

1. A CONVICTED RAPIST, WHO SPENT THREE YEARS IN JAIL OUT OF 10 YEAR SENTENCE along with Rs 10,1000 FINE, ‘Sant’ Dhanwant Singh Gurdaspuria is sitting on the stage in Nanak Parkash Gurudwara these days in Fresno, California controlled by Dadami Taksal (Harnam Dhuma Faction), the staunch supporters of Dasam Granth. Do you claim him to be a Mahapurkh, because Taksal obviously does? What about ‘Sant’ Maan Singh Pehove Wala, who forced and paid for an underage girl to have an abortion in Amritsar? By the way, that girl’s Chacha who is an Amritdhari Singh and lives in Alberta has stated this on Live Radio? What about the ‘Sant’ Niranjan Singh Grewal from Toronto, who has literally has in his possession one of his Chelas’ wife? I can go on, and give you more examples, if you like!

2. I am the one who is calling for the reinforcement of One Panth & One Granth concept from 10 patshaheean ji’s life times. And that is some sort of disrespect? You boys telling everybody that all of ‘Dasam Granth’ including Charitro Pakhyan (which you boys claim to have come from Kok Shastar’s ( NOT be read to Bibiyan) and penned by Dasam Patshah is showing respect to Guru ji?

3. Your boys calling me ‘Gorai da Sick’, ‘Gorai di Pooch’, ‘Nastik’, ‘Manmukh’, ‘Ignoramous’, ‘Kala Afganist’, ……. is what you call RESPECT to Forum Members?

4. What Dasam Granth Sahib ji Maharaj? Who called it Maharaj? When majority of the Gursikh Intelligentsia is questioning the authenticity of the booklet, how can you say that I am the one who is insulting it? I have every right to question ANYTHING that is OUTSIDE of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Randip Singh what do you want me to answer, ask it is will answer, it. i have shown "Guru Ghar Da Manmukh" to be a liar from his accusations stating that Sant Hari SIngh Ji ran away from a debate. The video shows otherwise. He called me a liar due as i said the debate was stopped due to a adherance to akal takhat hukum. Again the video proves he was lying.

What you talking about. Your so called Baba, Sant disappeared from the stage in seconds when given the chance. Was he that eager to leave the stage?

I have watched all 6 parts of the video on youtube, NOT JUST THE ONE THAT YOU WANTED EVERYONE TO SEE. But again this is in line with your habits and mindset since you boys have no shame of even taking a single line of Gurbani and twisting its meaning in sinister ways to fit your own motives.

I have posted a complete reply to your questions on this topic already.

I am not bothered about the dates of the Naastack Roadshow as being int he UK i will not need to attend or cause any trouble. However if Jeonwala has given an open invite for debates then the dates should be known for the people who wish to take up this opportunity.

Why don’t you post a list of all of your so called scholar locations as he will be covering all of California, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I will personally make sure that he includes those few LITTLE houses also, you probably call them MAJOR towns that support Dasam Granth.

When you cann't face the facts you attack the person. This is to hide your weakness of being upto the knowledge.

You boys are experts at this quality of personal attacks, if you read your own posts, and that does prove your point i.e. your weakness and your lack of Gurmat Gyan.

It is not nindya. It is a fact and i am willing to puit my money on this. Are you willing to do that ?

You guys can NOT even put up the money for your own scholar to buy him a ticket to get on the plane and debate in Toronto. You need to grow up and see that difference between the Real Canadian dollars and the fake Monopoly money you probably are still playing with!

I second your opinion. These are not sikhs. They are goondas who have no respect of others feelings.

Oh no, the sham has already been put into action. Who is next in agreement?

Earlier one goonda, Fauji , wrote Dasam Granth as KK. KK is kanjar kavita in their goonda terminology. I brought this to moderator attention. That post is still like that.

Sit back and chew it.

http://www.panthic.org/news/125/ARTICLE/3852/2008-01-31.html

Ragi Fails to Show Up for Challenge at Takht Sahib; Banned from Panthic Stages

Thursday 31st of January 2008

Panthic Weekly News Bureau

View more pictures of Panthic Conclave

Massive Conclave by Panthic Organizations and Scholars

Ragi Darshan Singh Fails the Panthic Challenge, Banned by Sangat

Takht Sri Damdama Sahib, Sabo-ki-Talwandi (KP) - At a historic convention, attended by representatives and scholars from dozens of prominent Panthic organizations, unanimous resolutions were passed condemning the recent ramblings by the controversial ragi Darshan Singh in which he had outrightly rejected the Bani of Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

The conclave was organized by Panthic organizations at Takht Sri Damdama Sahib, Sabo-ki-Talwandi on January 31st. The organizers had invited ragi Darshan Singh and his supporters to come to the venue to openly discuss the issues and concerns that they had over Dasam Granth with learned Sikh scholars in a civil manner. Past directives from Sri Akal Takht Sahib strictly forbid unnecessary criticism and debates on Dasam Granth, but allow the option for Panthic scholars to respond to those criticisms.

Ragi a No-Show

As expected, ragi Darshan Singh failed to show up for the discussion at the Takht Sahib convention. Instead, he took out a paid advertisement in a fringe newspaper further condemning the Dasam Granth and touting that even the validity of certain Nitem Banis (daily prayers) are in question.

These types of statements by the ragi have incensed Panthic organizations who attest that the Nitnem Banis written by Guru Gobind Singh Ji are a vital part of the Sikh Panth's Rahit Maryada and do not need any debating by such faithless cynics. They criticized Darshan Singh for not showing up for the Panthic challenge, and labeled him a mere ‘paper tiger’ and hollow puppet of anti-Sikh forces.

While the conference was open to everyone from all sides of the Dasam Granth debate, not a single representative from the ragi camp showed up for the challenge—proving that they could not discuss these issues with the Sangat face-to-face. Scholars present at the conclave brought more than 150 historical and contemporary references in support of Dasam Bani, just in case the cynics wanted to review the material themselves.

During this convention, the following resolutions were passed by the Panthic organizations under the aegis of the Takht Sri Damdama Sahib :

1) All Panthic Jathebandis and Sikh Scholars present at the convention held on January 31, 2008 at Sabo Ki Talwandi denounce the efforts of Prof. Darshan Singh Ragi to malign the status of Sri Dasam Granth.

2) The convention feels that by not attending the debate, Prof. Darshan Singh has accepted his defeat in the challenges posed by Panthic Jathebandis. His absence from the conference proves that he is promoting wrongful propaganda against Sri Dasam Granth Sahib. This further exposes the double standards of Prof. Darshan Singh as in past he has released various recordings of shabads from the Sri Dasam Granth. Such hypocrisy remains a mystery for everyone.

3) The convention held today appeals to the Sikh Sangat residing in Punjab and foreign countries to refrain from communicating with such selfish ‘preachers.’ It is also being pressed that the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee refrains from allowing such charlatans to convey misinformation from Gurdwara Sahibs.

4) Sikh masses present at the convention are open to discuss the contents of Sri Dasam Granth with individuals ignorant on the topic at any time in future.

The Sikh organizations requested that the controversial ragi not be allowed to utilize Panthic stages at any Gurdwara Sahib worldwide and have also further requested that he be summoned by Sri Akal Takht Sahib for his blasphemous behavior.

Speakers and Scholars at the Convention

More than a dozen scholars from various Panthic organizations spoke on this occasion, in support of Guru Gobind Singh's Bani,. Universally, they condemned the ragi's recent comments on Dasam Bani, and requested action be taken by Sri Akal Takht Sahib according to Panthic norms and guidelines.

Jathedar Nandgarh addressing the Panthic Conclave

The speakers included :

Jathedar Giani Balwant Singh Nandgarh (Takht Sri Damdama Sahib) - Jathedar Balwant Singh was the first speaker to address the conclave at this historic Takht. He declared that ragi Darshan Singh’s use of derogatory language against Dasam Granth would not be tolerated by the Panth, and then gave permission for the scholars to address the Sangat.

Bhai Gopal Singh (Swami Brahdev) - In his speech, Bhai Sahib took exception to ragi Darshan Singh misquoting the Gurbani of Gur Ram Das Sahib Ji in a recent advertisement where he refers to those who believe in Dasam Patshah’s Bani as lost manmukhs. Darshan Singh had paid the ex-communicated Spokesman newspaper editor Joginder Sahney to print an advertisement in which certain Gurbani panktis were misquoted. Bhai Gopal Singh then shared the real interpretation of those panktis with the Sangat and stated that it was individuals such as Darshan Singh who are misguided and not the Sangat.

He then shared verses from Bachittar Natak and Chritropakyan with complementary verses from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that have the same central theme and message. He concluded his lecture, by listing the names of scholars and intellectuals with university degrees in connection to Dasam Granth from various universities.

Does anybody need to prove the CONFUSED MENTALITY of these Pro Dasam Granth boys? How confused is your side that a person has two names: Swami Brahm Dev and to avoid embarrassment on Panthic Stages your side stoops and gives him the name Gopal ‘SINGH’. And you call this dude a scholar. Why a person who has not taken Khande di Pahul becomes some sort of a representative for YOU DASAM GRANTH BOYS? I KNOW, BECAUSE YOU CAN NOT GET ANYBODY WHO ACTUALLY READS, UNDERSTANDS & FOLLOWS GURBANI FROM Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji?

Moreover, WHO IS BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL WRITERS OF THIS DASAM GRANTH, Nirmalays TO EXPLAIN IT TOO?

Here is a link to a video on youtube

where this so called scholar and Amritdhari Sikh of Dasam Patshah of Dasam Granth is FULLY DECORATED IN FULL KAKAARS.

I am sorry I thought that Mala or Janeu around his neck was a Gatra for the Karpan!

And what about the Taksali Meryada that Khalsa should stick to only four colors for his or her attire. Is this Bhagvaan (pink) color, another one Taksal added to accommodate these Banarasi Sikhs.

How convenient for these so called ‘scholars’ to send a challenge to 70 year old Prof. Darshan Singh sitting in Canada to get him to APPEAR before them at THEIR OWN CONVENIENCE.

Note : Bhai Gopal Singh’s is often referred to as Swami Brahdev, which was his original name. He took Amrit at Sri Akal Takht Sahib during the 1980’s on behest of Baba Avtar Singh of Badhni-kalan when Darshan Singh was the acting Jathedar.

Dr. Anokh Singh - Spoke on the correlation of the concept of Miri-Piri between Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and the Dasam Granth with regards to the correlation between Sri Harmandir Sahib and Sri Akal Takht Sahib. He stated that saroops of Dasam Granth have historically existed at the Sikh Takhts and are both symbols of Khalsa ‘s Miri.

Note : Dr. Anokh Singh is also a close realtive of Baba Gurbachan Singh Khalsa Bhinderanwale.

Giani Sher Singh Ambala Ji Nihang – Giani Ji presented to the Sangat copies of commercial cassettes released by Prof. Darshan Singh containing Bani from Dasam Granth. Giani queried the Sangat, "why did ragi Darshan Singh profit from selling the Bani of Dasam Granth?" He asked, if the Sangat is now being called misguided RSS agents for reciting Dasam Patshah’s Bani, was Prof. Darshan Singh also an RSS agent when he was profiteering personally from the same verses of Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Bani ? Was Prof. Darshan Singh also being paid by the RSS as he is now accusing us of doing? He further challenged to debate the ragi anywhere he wanted in the future.

Giani Sher Singh Ambala also made a startling allegation that during the 1980’s ragi Darshan Singh used to recite Kirtan in a style that would appeal to the youth so they would join the Kharkoo Singhs (freedom fighters) of that time, and then used to report information about those youths to the intelligence agencies and the police.

Bhai Ratinder Singh Indore (GURSIKH Organization) – Bhai Sahib presented Hukmanas from Dr. Ganda Singh’s famous book “HukamNamas” which refer to Bhai Gurdas Ji II in at least three HukamNamas. Ragi Darshan Singh has repeatedly stated that Bhai Gurdas Ji II has never historically existed. Bhai Sahib also stated that the notion of labeling Dasam Granth as an RSS granth is truly irrational. Bhai Sahib stated that Krishan in Krishana Avtar is referred to as a keet (insect) and shown as a characterless drug addict. In Rama Avtar, Ram is shown in a similar manner along with being a ruthless and merciless king who eliminated his rivals by any means possible. Why would the RSS promote a Granth that is so critical of these demigods, Bhai Sahib questioned.

Bhai Sahib further stated that it is the RSS who truly wants the Sikhs to reject Dasam Granth, since it is harmful to them not to us. It is the critics who are the ones that are pleasing to the RSS. He noted an example of the ex-communicated writer Bhag Singh Ambala who also wrote against Dasam Granth. Bhag Singh Ambala was a known admirer of Krishan, and after reading Krishana Avtar, Bhag Singh complained that Guru Gobind Singh Ji would never write anything against Krishan, so this could not be His Bani.

Bhai Gurbakhsh Singh Mohali - Spoke on the technical aspects of Dasam Granth, the numbering of verses, and many missing portions. Bhai Sahib queried that if the Dasam Granth was the work of ‘Brahmins’ then why did not those clever Brahmins give us complete scriptures? It is an historic fact that Bhai Mani Singh Ji compiled the works of Guru Gobind Singh Ji into a single volume, and noted that some portions were not available or missing, due to the loss the Panth incurred during the evacuation of Anandpur Sahib.

Dr. Anurag Singh - Noted that some of the stories mentioned in the charittars have also been mentioned in Islamic and Sanatan scriptures, and therefore have a historic basis. They have been presented in Charitropakhiyan for guidance purposes. In a dare to test his actual knowledge on Gurmat, Dr. Anurag Singh challenged that if ragi Darshan Singh is a true scholar then I request him to accurately identify 11 differences within Yoga and Sikhism as referenced in the 27,28,29,30 pauris of Japji Sahib.

Baba Baljit Singh Damdami Taksal (Dadu Sahib Wale) – Bhai Sahib also spoke on the glory of Dasam Granth and chastised those who are challenging it’s authenticity. He requested that strict action be action against those individuals.

Bhai Mohkam Singh Ludhiana (Akhand Kirtani Jatha) - Bhai Sahib stated that it is shameful for ragi Darshan Singh to allege that if we believe in Dasam Bani, then we do not respect Guru Granth Sahib Ji. He countered, that in 1978 Singhs from the Akhand Kirtani Jatha and the Damdami Taksal sacrificed their lives for the sanctity of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and they were ready to do that again if the need arises. He asked ragi Darshan Singh and his missionaries if they could show a single sacrifice they had made for the sanctity of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Note: Bhai Mohkam Singh's brother Bhai Gurcharan Singh became Shaheed in 1978 during the Nirankari Vaisakhi Massacre.

Other speakers include :

Bhai Amrik Singh Singh Damdami Taksal, and Bhai Gurdev Singh Damdami Taksal, and Bhai Nagar Singh represented the various Nihang Singh Dals who all spoke on the significance of Dasam Granth and recommended strict action against those who criticize it.

Videos of all speakers will be uploaded in next week’s issue.

Look mate, it's a fair point he has made, why not answer it instead of finger waving and making accusations.

Randip Singh ji, these boys are either incompetent or are simply ignorant to answer any questions at all. They do NOT realize that in order to have a good intellectual debate or discussion they would need to back it up with Gurmat Gyan and for that they would need to READ, LEARN & UNDERSTAND GURBANI from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, which they are NOT willing to do so. They run to a Granth that has multiple known & unknown writers and is questioned by all LEARNED Sikh Scholars in Gurmat, with teaching from this Granth’s Kachi ’Bani ’ that are in exact contradiction to Sachi Bani from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. No wonder these boys make mockery out of themselves all over the internet.

So what you think they are left with; Finger pointing & making accusations

So you can do the same thing what the your boys did in New York i.e. Raula Pauna in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji’s HAZOORI!

What, so we can do what we did in New York, i thought you said the sants ran away from that debate? Isn't that what you want to see?

Read my responses on the following link on this forum;

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?sh...0&start=100

Guru Da Sikh i wrote earlier

"Are you aware of why the debate on the Dasam Granth never took place, have you spoke to Prof Darshan Singh or Baba Hari SIngh Ji about it? I have, both state they did not take part in the debate due to Vedanti's Hukamnama not to debate on thsi topic. "

To which you replied

"Why are you making up stories anyway? Why not phone up Bhai Tehal Singh, President of the Gurdwara where this discussion / debate was going to be held, and he will tell you the TRUTH. He was the one who arranged for this to happen and was going to monitor it. He was the one who got up and asked Hari Singh to come back and join the discussion. He was the one who got up on the stage and denounced Hari Singh for stating the Jeonwala was not up to his level."

You accuse me of lying do you well what does this video show

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iif_6bBvm10...feature=related

What do they say within the opening minute. And as you can see in the video Sant Hari Singh Ji are still there along with Sant Baljinder Singh Ji of Rara Sahib. Again and again you lie and lie and a video shows the threads of your lies. This debate was lined up and had started but due to the sangat bringing up the Hukamnama BOTH Prof Sahib and Baba Ji stopped the debate as shown

It’s so HYPOCRYTICAL of you guys to accuse me of selective reading and yet yourself post links and answer selectively.

Here is a prime example. You posted a link to Part 4 only, to save face for Mr. Hari Singh.

Why didn’t you post a link to Part 5

& Part 6

, that simply proves what I have said all along when Prof. Darshan Singh ji explains to sangat what actually transpired.

Let’s go through the events as they happened chronologically:

1. Malkiat Singh & Mr. Hari Singh are WILLING participants on Radio Shere Punjab and are DEBATING authenticity of Dasam Granth the weekend before this planned discussion. They try desperately to present a lousy case for Dasam Granth and are left speechless without being able to answer a single question. (Khalsa Fauji please would you post a link to this audio, when available). Did these dudes NOT remember the Hukamnama from Akal Takhat then?

2. Isn’t a `Sant` suppose to be full of knowledge and Gurmat Gyan and yet Mr. `Sant` Hari Singh is NOT familiar with a Hukamnama from Akal Takhat? I suggest that you either stop calling this dude a `Sant` or if he so ignorant about some important directive from Akal Takhat, then tell him to get off the stage and sit among the REGULAR Sikh Sangat and acquire some Gurmat Gyan!

3. If you watch all parts, you can NOT help notice: (i) the Pro Dasam Granth Lobby (PDGL) was MOST disrespectful, rude and loud, in the Hazoori of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, when there was any hint of that this discussion could get started (ii) the PDGL was NOT willing to RESPECT the discussion rules about questions to be put to the two participants. Committee suggested no questions and later only written questions from Sangat, but you can actually hear the uproar and disrespectful chants among the PDGL when this is announced from the stage.

So it is quite evident that this was a `PRE PLANNED SHAM` by the PDGL to save face when one of their dudes (Malkiat Singh) ends up issuing a challenge to the Gursikhs worldwide, in his Ego (Haume) and gets both himself and this `Sant` cornered.

If there is any sangat in Canada as BAba Baljinder sIngh Ji are there at present can they be asked about what took place at the location as well

Guru Da Sikh is your reading selective, i am waiting for a reply or an apology?

It’s so HYPOCRYTICAL of you guys to accuse me of selective reading and yet yourself post links and answer selectively.

Here is a prime example. You posted a link to Part 4 only, to save face for Mr. Hari Singh.

Why didn’t you post a link to Part 5

& Part 6

, that simply proves what I have said all along when Prof. Darshan Singh ji explains to sangat what actually transpired.

So you got your reply, hence no need for an apology, since I stand behind all of my statements I have made.

How long you going to ignore my posts!

Have patience boy, Grandpa can’t be everywhere. Besides, from now on I will choose NOT to answer posts from boys like yourself who exhibit gross lack of Gurmat Gyan!

Gorai da Sick

Is your Guru a Gora and you are certainly mentally Sick to call an Amritdhari Sikh as SICK

Here, have fun. Theres some charitro pakhyan in there for you too, alongside Bacchiter Natak and Mahakaal Kathaa.

http://www.patshahi10.org/index.php?option...h&Itemid=63

You put up a link with a snippet of the end of the Chaupai being analyzed and like typical of your gang claim to have Katha of Charitro Pakhyan?

What could be a bigger lie than that? Not even one Charitar being discussed?

Was Katha of these Charitars done 'in private' by Baba Jarnail Singh and recorded?

I think you should apologize to this forum for deliberately trying to misguide innocent Sikhs!

Now tell me, is Baba Jarnail a desecrator of Sri Guru Granth Sahib too? Or are your insults only reserved for us Internet Geeks?

Listening to this he certainly classifies as desecrator of Sri Guru Granth sahib ji. Not even a shred of doubt in my mind ! That is why I refer to him as a Baba not a ‘Sant’. Get it!

Charitars are not usually recited in front of bibiyan (sangat), hence you won't find line by line recorded kathaa.

And remind me what part of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji instructed NOT to be read to bibiyan?

Was Dasam Patshah ji SEXIST?

If you want to find out more about how, where and why they - I suggest you go and spend some time in a Dal Panth chhawnee in India, all your questions will be answered, then at least you can say you have heard the other side of the arguement from source.

I rather spend my precious time with my family and Reading, Understanding & Analyzing Gurbani from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and sharing that experience with other GurSikhs than spend time at a place where the anti feminine mentality and anti Gurmat parchar continues.

Also, I would like to apologise re the Sikh Student Fed assumption, my bad. Doesn't take away the fact that the rest of the Panth including all Jathaas, Sampryadas etc all beleive in and respect Dasam Bani (and always have).

That’s okay we all make mistakes. You are a big boy to come forward and admit it. All you have to do is grow up a little more and accept that anything outside of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is NOT Gurbani. And we will be back to being sons of the same Guru and live like brothers! Why do I feel it’s not going to happen!

Its only you Afghana/Bhasaur/Darshan Panthis (a tiny blip in the Panth, albeit a cancerous one) that seemed to have seen through the great deception that has fooled the rest of the Panth for 300 years!

‘Kotan mein Nanak kou Narain jeh Cheet’ Only One in Millions who remembers God at all times.

If you understood a single line of Gurbani, you would know that it is not quantity but quality that matters. It is human history that `Bad Guys` have always outnumbered the `Good Fellas`. There is nothing new here either, is it?

Cancerous One: For sure, we are the Sikhi tumour that is going to finally `KILL`you `Masands and Mahant Narainus`!

CYA.

Gursikhs use Gurfateh ! Are you not a GurSikh, na na Sikh, na na Punjabi, na na Human....... Oh no, you are a Dasam Granthi specimen!

And if you want links to the videos i can give you those too which are mentioned in the above post!

Just a quickthing;

"By the way, Gurcharan Singh Jeonwala is taking a Western Canadian tour early next week. You boys feel like having a LIVE debate in Vancouver. No Funding & Crappy Excuses this time please! Let me know, and I will email to him so that you guys can get your local ‘scholars’ ready and give them a pep talk, if you have any"

Can you give us the dates and locations of where the Roadshow will be!

So you can do the same thing what the your boys did in New York i.e. Raula Pauna in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji’s HAZOORI!

He is available for an ONLINE LIVE DEBATE ANYTIME & ANYWHERE. Let me know if your side is up to it?

Where is the line by line response from the otherside?

That would mean they would actually have to have read something THEMSELVES. And majority of the time these boys are simply waiting for some part timer to finish reading so that so called ‘scholar’ can give these dudes some strings to hang on to in order to carry on their debates.

Your faith in One Granth & One Panth keeps you focused but these are nothing but confused individuals trying to find an identity for themselves

Is Guru harGobind singh ji a new guru of Guru da sikh?

You are the other RETARD who doesn’t understand a Sikh’s Daily ARDASS and more I IMPORTANTLY Gurmat Gyan from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.who doesn’t understand a Sikh’s Daily ARDASS and more IMPORTANTLY Gurmat Gyan from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Hints:

1. ‘Dasan Patshahyan di jot’

2. Creator of the Akal Takhat

3. First ever Jathedar of Akal Takhat

I can continue but considering you may have (just like the rest of Pro Dasam Granth lobby) what I call Attention Deficit Disorder Syndrome, I will keep it short.

Guru da sikh:

Are you sure you belive in Zafarnamah?? Guru Maharaj calls Aurangzeb shahan shah which most anti-zafarnamahs(dalbir singh comes to mind) call "anti-gurmat" as this title is resserved for God and Guru only

I do believe that Zafarnama was penned by Dasam Patshah !

If the Pro Dasam Granth boys along with Nirmalay & Udassyea Brahmins from Banaris made alterations to some parts of it, as per their sinister plans to justify some other parts of Dasam Granth can NOT be ruled out! After all, this gang’s ultimate goal is to create CONFUSION in a so called ‘Sikhs without Gurmat Gyan’ and do Khalsa Panth what they did to Jainism & Buddhism centuries ago i.e. eat it up alive!

What you misguided so called Sikhs who are anti Sri Guru Granth Sahib (Pro Dasam Granth) are doing is simply help these Brahmins tie up this Khasla Sher so this Brahmin gang can slaughter it!

Gorai da Sikh,

Your flimsy replies don't even warrant a response - I would like to say you are master of aversion, but that would imply you had some form of subtlety and grace in your covering up of ignorance, unfortunately you don't.

You DON’T have answers! All you boys can do is one liner statements and accusations. You boys missed the Gurmat Gyan bus long time ago. This Dasam Granth tricycle is not get you to catch up with the Gurmat Gyan bus, no matter how hard you try!

Re Khalsapanchayat, it doesn't surprise me that they are funded by Fake Singh Sabha International (well CA actually), the state of their website speaks volumes. Its interesting to note the hate and accusations you have for Sri Dasam Bani Singhs - calling us desecrators of Sri Guru Granth Sahib etc. How does this fit in with your respect for Baba Jarnail Singh, is he too a desecrator of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, please answer this question.

You notice that I refer to him as Baba NOT ‘Sant’. I have spent time WITH Baba Jarnail Singh in person, like I said before. I never heard him doing any Katha from Charitro Pakhyan, line by line.

Can you please post me link where one of your so called ‘Sants, Mahapurkhs, Brahmgiani, Vidya Martand’ etc. has performed LINE BY LINE ‘SHABAD ATRH’ and Bhav Arth of Charitro Papkyan?

Funny how your Khalsapanchayat group have heavy ties with Sikh Student Federation - who are avid supporters of Baba Jarnail Singh, who himself had complete faith in all of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib.

Read your buddy’s answer on the bottom and tell me which one of you boys is LYING?

More knots in your rope.

Guru Da Sikh you wrote

"I call GurSikhs like him as very awakened & learned Sikhs. If you would have read on the following link (http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/1430.html) all notes written by Prof. Sahib Singh ji, you would have learned that even the person who spent his entire life analyzing Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji to extract the Gurmat Gyan for uneducated folks like all of us, then you wouldn’t post your personal views as accusations against Khalsa Fauji.

Being an alert Sikh doesn’t always mean being suspicious (shankawadi Sikh). On the other hand, you have seen every one of Khalsa Fauji’s posts backed up by Gurbani Gyan as suspicious. To me it seems, that you are the one with Shanka about the Sampooran Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji because you are having to go outside of it to get the ‘complete knwoledge’."

Khalsa Fauji has stated that Sahib Singhs Teeka even though you live and die by it is with faults. The fact that Sahib Singh did not understand the Raagmal and did not post any of the 60 antreev arths shows his 35 years of scholarship on Sri Guru GRanth Sahib Ji.

If you believe in the Sri Guru Granth Shaib Ji do you not believe in all the vaaks from Ik Oankar to Athar Das Bees or do you also pick and choose there also? I wouldn’t want Convicted Rapists ‘Sants’ like Dhanwant Singh, Maan Singh Pehove Wala, telling me what those Anthreev Bahv Arth are? They will probably combine ‘Gurbani’ and make a ‘cocktail’ with Kok Shatsar from Dasam Granth (as per you boys previous postings) and present to young females in Sangat. I can only imagine how many of the female attendees in the ‘sangat’ will get ‘bache di daat’!

Here is the setting starting in early 1800s to 1960s: Gurudwaras have just been liberated from Mahant Naranu gangs and continued attacks on Sikhs from Nirmlaye & Udassyea. Sikhs just starting to learn about Gurmat Gyan since the only thing that has been preached in Gurdwaras is Bipran ki Reet. Anybody who makes a stand on Gurmat Sidhant and opposes ‘Dasam Granth’ style Mahants gets thrown out of the Panth with a politically motivated Hukamnama. Just like today, the political strength was in the grasp of these Derawadis, Taksalis, ‘Sants’, Mahants, ‘BrahmGyanis’ etc. You really think the ‘Panth’ contaminated with these leeches would have the stomach to digest Anthreev Bhav Arth at that time. If he had done so, he along with his work would have been burned by these Derawadis. So what Prof. Sahib Singh ji did was to do viakraan with key concepts presented with Bhav Arth. Remember, if you read the foreword, he never claimed to be perfect, like you boys do today.

It’s not perfect but it’s the best analysis we got today. I wouldn’t want Rapists ‘Sants’ like Dhanwant Singh, Maan Singh Pehove Wala, telling me what those Anthreev Bahv Arth are? They will probably combine ‘Gurbani’ and make a ‘cocktail’ with Kok Shatsar from Dasam Granth (as per you boys previous postings) and present to young females in Sangat. I can only imagine how many of the female attendees in the ‘sangat’ will get ‘bache di daat’!

Guru Da Sikh

"I would start believing in it ONLY if a Jathedar with the same character as Sri Guru Hargobind Singh ji dictated it to be so."

Is ther any jathedar who has had the same character as Sri Guru Hargobind Ji? If so who?

I wish there was somebody here today (in physical body) with the same high morals and courage as Sri Guru Hargobind Singh ji, then Khalsa Panth wouldn’t be in the predicament of trying decide who its Guru is?

If not i take it you do not accept any of the Rehit maryadas created by the Khalsa panth following the Jyoti Jyot of Sri Guru Gobind SIngh Ji.

I do follow the same Rehat Meryada as was preached and implemented by Guru Hargobind Singh ji at his time which has continued from there on with the addition of Sri Guru Teg Bahadur’s Bani. That Rehat Meryada for ALL Gursikhs is the complete Bani of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Let me hold you boys by the finger and walk you through Rehat Meryada.

It was NOT done up by a Jathedar overnight, it took whole bunch of Gursikhs scholars nearly 14 years to come up with the Sikh Code of Conduct because it was opposed by some Nirmalay & Udasseye, since Darbar Sahib & majority of the historic Gurudwaras were under the same Mahant Narainu gang’s control . Then it was approved by SGPC at that time and its implementation was sought by the Akal Takhat Jathedar with a Hukamnama, to follow traditional Merayda.

So it was not an individual Jathedar who made this up but some Sikh Scholars and few Pro Dasam Granth boys.

"Was it the military victory or spiritual victory that Guru Gobind Singh ji had against Aurangzeb?"

Both. You conviently forget to mention the Yudhs against the Pahari Rajah and Mughal forces combined...

"Based on your logic, with all the war strategies being taught according to Dasam Granth, Sikhs at that time were not supposed to have any problems taking care of the Aurangzeb."

Guru Ji tried to use diplomatic means, the destruction of Banda Bahadur and Khalsa Panth was released after these means had failed.

You don’t score victories when you are simply fighting to DEFEND you Moron. In all 14 wars Guru ji fought, they were defensive in nature and Guru Gobind Singh ji never attacked any Pahari Rajas etc. It’s the character of the Khalsa that was built on the Gurmat principles, and Khalsa was willing to die for it, that made it difficult for the Pahari Rajas and Aurangzeb to score any victories. When you fight people who believe in the cause they are fighting for, and are willing to die for it, it is not easy to defeat them. Prime example: Taliban in Afganistan, Al Qaeda against the strongest Armed forces in the world USA etc. (Just so that you don’t get any sick thoughts in your mind, I am not comparing Gursikhs to these individuals). Gursikhs of the time believed in Gurmat Sidhant and willingly sacrificed their lives for it. Not some young computer nerds sitting on a keyboard in an air conditioned room and trying to preach others what they don’t practice themselves.

"it was the wound inflicted by Zafarnama, the Gurmat Gyan Sword, that finally finished Aurangzeb! He came to the realization, only after reading Zafarnama, what horrific actions he had performed in the name of Islam."

Zafarnama, hmmm, where is that from, oh, from Sri Dasam Guru Darbar - where it appears together with the Hikayats - also written in Farsi and thought to be an addition to the Zafarnama by some scholars - in terms of being lessons for Auranga, specifically see Hakayat 2.

Zafarnama: The only authenticated writing penned by Guru Gobind Singh ji that never has been questioned by anybody at anytime. This has been a very clever & desperate move by Pro Dasam Garnth boys to include it in the Bachittar Natak and call it the Dasam Granth.

As for Hekaytan goes, just read the highlighted part of your own sentence and get the answer. And you call me an ignorant?

"If you read Zafarnama, Guru ji is using Gurmat Principles"

Guru Ji doesn't need to 'use' Gurmat principles, he is the Guru, therefore whatever Guru says, is Gurmat.

You got be the retard nobody wishes to come across. You boys acknowledged that Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Complete Satguru of the Sikhs. There is NO bani in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji from Dasam Patshah. Guru Gobind Singh ji gives Gurgaddi to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Guru Gobind Singh ji issues a HUKAM to all Sikhs to follow ONLY Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. I want you to take time and read this slowly. I wrote short sentences so you could stay focus and get the point easily. Doesn’t that mean Guru ji followed all Bani & Gurmat Sidhant in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji in His own lifetime? Don’t pay attention to the blinking cursor, it may distract you and you may have to start all over again!

On another note, you are again showing your true Ignoramus self because it seems you have not even read the Zafarnama. If you had, you would know that a fair portion of it dedicated to the battle of Chamkaur - which invokes pure Bir Ras in the manner of Chandi di Vaar.

Where did Guru Hargonind Singh ji get his Bir Ras when there was no ‘Dasam Granth’? Where did he get his Yudh Vidya and discipline for Martial training for his army of Sikhs of 4,000 strong cavalary? Gee, I wonder where?

Is battle of Chamkaur the only one causing Bir Ras? What about Bhagani Yudh? What about Chalee Muktay? The last one is not even in Dasam Granth. Then why bother singing in Guru Darbars? Why bother celebrating Maghi Mela?

Based on your logic, you present Dasam Patshah, as a FORGETTABLE CHARACTER! Here is how: Just imagine, if the ‘Dasam Granth’ was not found at all by some ‘Sikhs’ within the 25 years after Dasam Patshah left this world in body, the whole Khalsa Panth would have been, ACCORDING TO YOUR LOGIC, bunch of COWARDS!

You think Dasam Patshah would be that irresponsible to leave all this so called ENHANCED GYAN in ‘Dasam Granth’ unattended and unsecured?

"If you Pro Dasam Granth boys do get the Bir Ras, where were you when Nihang Ajit ‘Singh’ Poola was abducting and raping the 14 year old daughter of the Hazoori Ragi from Darbar Sahib? Don’t tell me that you hadn’t read Dasam Granth by then!"

Let me guess, the Singhs that finally did Ajit Singhs seva must have been brave and Gurmat Principle guided CA Singh Sabiyas who attacked Phoola with their gyaan.

Actually you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. The fellow who went after Nihang Ajit ‘Singh’ Poola was the gentleman and a Gursikh simply known as ‘Colonel Sandhu’. He is a member of the Khalsa Panchyat International ( http://khalsapanchayat.org/ ) and very close associate of Bhai Sukhwinder Singh Sabhra. I went to meet this Gursikh last June at his village. This Gursikh literally has turned whole bunch of villages near Sabhra into Khalsa Fauj. The two young guys inside the jail who took care of the paapi were also influenced by Khalsa Panchyat and belong to the same set of villages.

I suggest boys like yourself don’t ever walk into those towns near Hari ke Patan, Srahali, Patti etc. and start shooting your mouth like you do here in this Forum. N30 won't be there to protect you! You can't run to your mommies either Your desecration of Sri Guru Granth Sahib wouldn’t sit well with Khalsa Fauj over there.

By the way they are regularly funded by Singh Sabha International! You can actually go to the Singh Sabha International’s website ( http://www.SinghSabhaCanada.com ) and see the video of Gurcharan Singh Jeonwala holding a camp with Sukhwinder Singh Sabhran.

No one saying the state of the Panth is great, but whilst there are some remarkable Singhs out there, learning about, preserving and promoting nearly extinct Puratan Sikh Gyaan/Rvaaj, there are others like you that are trying to finish off any remnant of real Sikhi with your modernist, Victorian influenced, manmati, self intellect promoting hogwash.

Bunch of hellions.

Fauj

This gang was invited to damdama sahib where there was a conference held for this purpose. Nobody showed up. What debate these idiots will have when they ask why there is no mention of khalsa initiation in dasam granth.

Can you post a link or copy of the invitation sent out to this gang, like Khalsa Fauji has just done?

I never heard about the part about him locking door on nihungs but he didn't go to Akaal Takht because Akaal Takht never called him. It was just Dhumaa and other nihungs thugs who were calling him. These also said they would kill Jaswinder if he shows up at Akaal Takht. Like I said before, why should he go when there was just going to be gundaa gardee? You said it yourself that there were thousands of these nihungs and dhummas. What did you need thousands for? I have no clue about the 2nd incident. Also, Dasam Granth Vichar manch Faridabaad just gave a challenge to debate. Take you 96 year old nihung baba from 96 crore budda dal to debate in Faridabaad. Those guys are always ready.

ਬੀਬੀ ਬਸੰਤ ਕੌਰ, ਫ਼ਰੀਦਾਬਾਦ

ਮਲਕੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੇ ਚੈਲੰਜ ਨੂੰ ਕਬੂਲਦਿਆਂ ਕਿਹਾ, ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਉਪਰ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਮੰਚ ਵੱਲੋਂ ੧੧ ਵਿਦਵਾਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਪੈਨਲ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਕਰਣ ਲਈ ਤਿਆਰ ਹੈ। : ਸ. ਉਪਕਾਰ ਸਿੰਘ

(ਬੀਬੀ ਬਸੰਤ ਕੌਰ, ਫ਼ਰੀਦਾਬਾਦ)

ਹਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਰੰਧਾਵੇ ਦੇ ਚੇਲੇ ਅਤੇ ਬਾਦਲ ਦਲੀਏ ਮਲਕੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਅਖਬਾਰਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ “ਪੰਜ ਤਖ਼ਤਾਂ ਵਿਚੋਂ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਉਤੇ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੀ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਖੁਲ੍ਹੀ ਬਹਿਸ ਦਾ ਚੈਲੰਜ” ਇਸ਼ਤਿਹਾਰ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼ਨ ਉਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਤੀਕਰਮ ਕਰਦਿਆਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਨੂੰ ਸਮਰਪੱਤ ਜੱਥੇਬੰਦੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਮੰਚ ਇੰਟਰਨੈਸ਼ਨਲ ਦੇ ਕਨਵੀਨਰ ਸ. ਉਪਕਾਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੇ ਕਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਦਰਜ਼ ਬਾਣੀ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਗੁਰਸਿੱਖ ਦੁਬਿਧਾਵਾਂ ਦੇ ਹਲ ਲਈ ਵਿਚਾਰ-ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ ਨਾ ਕਿ ਬਹਿਸ। ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਨਿਉਯਾਰਕ ਵਿਖੇ ਹਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਰੰਧਾਵੇ ਅਤੇ ਪ੍ਰੋਫੈਸਰ ਦਰਸ਼ਨ ਸਿੰਘ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਵਿਚਾਰ-ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਨੂੰ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਹੋਣ ਤੋਂ ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਹੀ ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਦਾ ਇਹ ਕਹਿ ਕੇ ਭੋਗ ਪਾ ਦੇਣਾ ਕਿ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਇਸ ਦੀ ਇਜ਼ਾਜ਼ਤ ਨਹੀਂ ਦੇਂਦਾ ਤਾਂ ਇਸ ਸਾਰੀ ਘਟਨਾਕ੍ਰਮ ਪਿੱਛੇ ਸਾਧ ਰੰਧਾਵੇ ਦੀ ਬਹਾਨੇਖੋਰੀ ਹੀ ਜਾਪਦੀ ਹੈ ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਦੇ ਜਿਸ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮੇ ਦਾ ਸਹਾਰਾ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਸਾਧ ਰੰਧਾਵਾ ਵਿਚਾਰਾਂ ਕਰਣ ਤੋਂ ਭੱਜ ਉਠਿਆ, ਉਹ ਸਨ ੨੦੦੦ ਦਾ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਸੀ ਜਦਕਿ ੨੦੦੬ ਦੇ ਨਵੇਂ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮੇ ਵਿੱਚ ਜੋਗਿੰਦਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਵੇਦਾਂਤੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੀ ਪਹਿਲਵਾਨਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਤੱਤ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਵਾਲਿਆਂ ਦੇ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਜੁਆਬ ਦੇਣ ਲਈ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਜਾਰੀ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਲਈ ਹਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਰੰਧਾਵਾ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਦੀ ਜੁੰਡਲੀ ਜੋ ਨਿਉਯਾਰਕ ਵਿਖੇ ੨੫ ਮਈ ਨੂੰ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਦਾ ਸਹਾਰਾ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਛੱਡ ਗਏ ਸਨ ਉਹ ਭਗੋੜੇ ਹਨ।

ਸ. ਉਪਕਾਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੇ ਕਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਜਿਹੜਾ ਹਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਰੰਧਾਵੇ ਵਾਲਾ ਨਿਉਯਾਰਕ ਵਿਖੇ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਬਹਿਸ ਨੂੰ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਦੇ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮੇ ਦਾ ਸਹਾਰਾ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਛੱਡ ਆਇਆ ਤੇ ਆਖਦਾ ਰਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿਸ਼ੇ ਤੇ ਬਹਿਸ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਰੋਕ ਹੈ ਤਾਂ ਹੁਣ ਕੀ ਮਲਕੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਅਤੇ ਹਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਰੰਧਾਵੇ ਨੇ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਤੋਂ ਪ੍ਰਵਾਨਗੀ ਲੈ ਲਈ ਹੈ? ਜਾਂ ਆਪਣੀ ਸ਼ਾਖ ਬਚਾਉਣ ਲਈ ਸਿਰਫ ਇਸ਼ਤਿਹਾਰਬਾਜ਼ੀ ਕਰ ਰਹੇ ਹਨ। ਸ. ਉਪਕਾਰ ਸਿੰਘ, ਨੇ ਸਰਦਾਰ ਮਲਕੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੇ ਚੈਲੰਜ ਨੂੰ ਕਬੂਲਦਿਆਂ ਕਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਕਿਸੇ ਵੀ ਤਖ਼ਤ ਉਪਰ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਮੰਚ ਵੱਲੋਂ ੧੧ ਵਿਦਵਾਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਪੈਨਲ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਗੋਸ਼ਟੀ ਕਰਣ ਲਈ ਤਿਆਰ ਹੈ ਜੇਕਰ ਇਸ ਦਾ ਸਿੱਧਾ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਰਣ ਟੀ. ਵੀ ਚੈਨਲਾਂ ਰਾਹੀਂ ਕਰਵਾਉਣ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੰਧ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾਏ ਤਾਂ ਜੁ ਸੱਚ-ਝੂਠ ਦਾ ਨਿਬੇੜਾ ਸਿੱਖ ਸੰਗਤਾਂ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਸਾਮੂਹਿਕ ਤੌਰ `ਤੇ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾ ਸਕੇ।

http://thesikhaffairs.org/contact.html

Khalsa Fauji, can you please stop postings that make these Pro Dasam Granth guys look like baboons from Africa. Don’t embarrass them to the point that they end up pulling a ‘Haria’ on everybody

Remember, pulling a ‘Haria’ is defined as follows:

A gang challenges a group of scholars for a debate / discussion. When scholars accept the challenge, then the gang comes up with an excuse to NOT to participate and not only leaves the stage in a few seconds, but also leaves the city & state overnight and refuse media coverage to answer any questions or provide explanation for the 180 degree turn.

Stop choosing specific questions to answer.

Where does Yudh Vidya appear within Sri Guru Granth Sahib - how does Sri Guru Granth Sahib prepare a man for the horrors of the battefiled, how does Aad Guru acclimatise one with blood, guts, tactics needed on the battlefield...

Answer the question.

Talk about Bir Ras or Yudh Vidya:

Was it the military victory or spiritual victory that Guru Gobind Singh ji had against Aurangzeb?

Based on your logic, with all the war strategies being taught according to Dasam Granth, Sikhs at that time were not supposed to have any problems taking care of the Aurangzeb.

it was the wound inflicted by Zafarnama, the Gurmat Gyan Sword, that finally finished Aurangzeb! He came to the realization, only after reading Zafarnama, what horrific actions he had performed in the name of Islam.

If you read Zafarnama, Guru ji is using Gurmat Principles

If you Pro Dasam Granth boys do get the Bir Ras, where were you when Nihang Ajit ‘Singh’ Poola was abducting and raping the 14 year old daughter of the Hazoori Ragi from Darbar Sahib? Don’t tell me that you hadn’t read Dasam Granth by then!

Doesnt Panthic Rehit Maryada state that no one should discuss whether the Bani of Sri Dasam Granth is penned by Guru Gobind Singh?

It is in panthic Rehat Meryada?

If Akaal Takht declares that Sri Dasam Granth is Gurbani, will Guru Da Sikh start believing in it? I very much doubt it.

I would start believing in it ONLY if a Jathedar with the same character as Sri Guru Hargobind Singh ji dictated it to be so.

Some Badal chela may be your Jathedar NOT mine!

Fouji is grandpa and all other members are kids.

Even Lord or Gurus are addressed as parent at maximum, but Foujee is grandpa!!

And who are you? Great grandpa?

Tera tan akl da bhanda hi tutia paya?

Posting replies to your questions is a waste of time. You are nothing but a confused individual.

Read the response CAREFULLY, it refers to a SCENE to portray what is happening on this website.

However, I am old enough to be a great grandpa for most of you, intellectually speaking. Do you respect grandpas?