Mr §ingh

LALLESH! How come u CHANGED UR POST COMPLETLY :lol: :lol: I REALLY wish I had quoted u there hahahahahah HILARIOUS :lol: :hearme: P.s Niranjana veeer - point being, that some parts of ALL REHITNAME are unreliable SOME PARTS

LALLESH! How come u CHANGED UR POST COMPLETLY :lol: :lol: I REALLY wish I had quoted u there hahahahahah HILARIOUS :lol:

I'm not sure about the translation - and Yes I'll get back taste ur own medicine :twisted:

NarSingha - I'm not sure where u got ur quotes from, HOWEVER, Its vital to remember that all Rehitname includes wierd sections, i.e in Some Parts Bhai Desi Singh ee writes - wh mcleod says that desa singh is "clearly uneasy on the subject of meat" - in another section desa singh says, he who is born in a good family will NEVER touch meat or alcohol. Both you and I know that Rehitname alone are not reliable, and have to be confermed with Bani - tanakhah-nama, copy of a copy wirtten in 1718 (implying original tanakhah-nama was written in guru jis time) says "he is a khalsa who slays muslims" Here lets look at more Rehitname - Desa singh rehtnama "do NOT slay a goat in the langar, not even by the jhatka method; and do not permit other meat in the langar" and just after "never consume alcoholic liquor or eat meat" verses 105 and 107 not elts look a few more wierd quotes- "the singh protects cows and brahmans and smited muslims with immense vigour" "if one is not able to obtain employment with a khalsa one should seek some other service " I sincerely hope - fr your sake - you work for only a Sikh NarSingha ----------------------------------- Lallesh - You said that women can take khanda da pahul if they want, but chaupa singh rehtnama which u use to justify kirpan da amrit, also says "ONE WHO GIVES KHANDA AMRIT TO A WOMAN, IS A GREVIOUS SINNER" We have to see that some rehitname are NOT reliable! You can almost prove ANYTHING using rehitname! Main thing is to compare with Bani, BHai Gurdaas Jee diya vaara etc "the singh who takes it (khanda da pahul) will be SUPERIOR to anyone who takes any other form of initiation" -So are the other three equavilent to Khande- Di Paul? :roll: Now lets take a look at what Bhai Gurdaas jee says - Getting initiated by the Guru the disciple has become a Sikh, According to my knowledge th translation is a bit erroneous – I’ll get back to you with a better one For now- vaar 3 pauri 11 http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?Sour...o=03&Line_No=11

I tihk the topic is changuing alil bit, from whether Keski is must or not - from whether a Keski wearingbibi becoming a 'third gender' as someon stated :roll:

My whole issue is with you comparing Oberoi with Rushdie. I am sure there are better comparisions around but your use of Rushdie seems a bit suspect. Whenever anyone hears Rushdie the first thing that comes to mind is Satanic Verses and the death threat. Also the killings of various publishers and translators. I hope you understand now that even making a comparison is a limited manner is still likely to confuse not aware of Oberoi but those who have some knowledge of the Rushdie fatwa. >>You state that for a book on Sikh identity and religious practice, it lacks quotes from Sri Gru Granth Sahib. Could you point to quotes you would choose to use from Sri Guru Granth Sahib for the following; << It is easy to make a selective list and then state that it wasn't possible to take quotes from the Guru Granth Sahib. Let me see, can anyone write a book about Sikhs or Sikhism and still manage to not quote from the Guru Granth Sahib? If anyone Oberoi has achieved the impossible here! I must say your ridiculous point about what quotes he could have taken about ' British colonial regime' from the Guru Granth Sahib is pretty foolish. One of the chief flaws in Oberoi's book is that in discussing Sikh identity and beliefs he makes no mention whether the rituals and beliefs followed by the Sanatan Sikhs were advocated by the Guru Granth Sahib. Things such as caste, idol worship, visiting graves etc. So it leaves the reader wondering which side is following the Gurus and which side is following Manmat. Oberoi's writing style leaves no doubt that he supports the Sanatans in this battle and rues the fact that the Tat Khalsa defeated his heroes. >>Contrary to your supposition, I have read academic responses to Oberoi! You should also read 'Contesting Perspectives on Sikh Tradition' by Grewal. This gives an excellent overview of the last few years of Sikh scholarship in the west.<< Oh dear. Please read my post and see that I actually asked you to read grewal's book. Quite funny since you asked me to read you post fully and you come up this yourself ! Care to re-read Grewal and the way he has demolished Oberoi's claim of a Sanatan Sikhism ? ( pages 25-29 ) especially his selective use of Koer Singh ( Gurbilas Patshahi Das ) when it suits his purpose but igonring him when his work supports the Tat Khalsa position. Grewal also makes the important point that for a book written about Sanatan Sikhs, Oberoi doesn't actually make clear who these Sanatan Sikhs were !. he leaves this section stating - " His ( Oberoi's ) hypothesis of Sanatan Sikhism in the early nineteenth century appears to be vague and vacuous" ( page 29 )

lol I think I should get that book I THINK im still with u :?

'Rehit Bina Nai Sikh Kahavai Rehit Bina Dar Chota Khavai' Rehitnama Bhai Desa Singh jee. Ill find out the exact page number in Amrit Kirtan if you want

Jt Singh I think you are mistaken in your belief that Oberoi issue is 'a bit of a salman rushdie'. Either you are not aware of the oberoi issue or were on a desert island when rushdie got his fatwa in the 80's otherwise I don't think you would have made such a comparsion. As far as I am aware, Oberoi has not had his effegy burnt by irate Sikhs and no Jathedar has put out a death order on him. Neither has Oxford University Press been torched and Oberoi does not live his life under the protection of Special Branch. I hope that next time you will refain from making ridiculous comparisons. The Sikh response to Oberoi has been exemplary and one that would put the muslims to shame in how they handled rushdie. You made a statement that the Sikhs who are opposed to Oberoi hadn't even read his book. Have you asked each and everyone of them ? If not then please be careful not to make assumptions. May I enquire whether you have read the Sikh academia's response to Oberoi ? I doubt it otherwise you would not be so quick to judge him a 'scholar' >>Most of the claims of the text are pretty straightforward, that with a newly imposed colonial worldview western educated Sikhs reacted and imposed appeasing socio-religious boundaries that were not there before.<< This is the main limitation of Oberoi's book. He takes a a period in Sikh history when the religion was at it's lowest ebb ( 1849-1873 ) and uses it as a base for deciding what Sikhism is. If the Sikhs of that period who for the most part were recent converts to Sikhism brought into their new religion the bagagge of caste, ritual, belief in spirits and gods and demi-gods then Oberoi takes this to be the 'norm' in Sikhism. For a book discussing Sikh identity and Sikh religious practices it is amazing that he does not provide more than a few quotea from the Guru Granth Sahib ! I wonder if he would be acclaimed as such a great 'scholar' if he had similarly claimed that Islam as we know it today is also a creation of the British because the Muslims of Punjab at that time were also taking part in the same rituals and beliefs as the Sikhs. Jt Singhji, having read your reading lists on other threads as I assume that you have read 'Invasion of Religious Boundaries' or 'Historical Perspectives on Sikh Identity' by J S Grewal ? The latter book pretty much demolishes Oberoi. If you have read these books then perhaps we can discuss this issue further. As for the idol issue, There is a lot of confusion about the idols issue. For one thing there were NO idols at all in the Harmandir Sahib, they were placed on the parikarma ( the rectangular walkway around the sarovar ). This is important because people often state wrongly that 'idols were in the Harmandir Sahib' and thereby create the impression that Idols were one time kept in the holiest of Sikh Gurdwaras. The issue of when these idols were placed there can best be resolved byt looking at the accounts left by visitors to the Harmandir Sahib. There is no mention of idols being present in the complex during the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The british visitors to the Harmandir Sahib during his rule and directlly after make no mention of idols. Maharaja Ranjit Singh took great personal interest in the running of the Harmandir Sahib and made appointments of Sarbrahs ( managers ) himself. The idols in the parikrama are first mentioned by the Singh Sabha newspapers in their attempt to awaken Sikhs to the mismanagement of the Harmandir Sahib by the British appointed Sarbrah. This is in the 1880's. So it is likely that the idols were placed in the Parikrama between 1849 -1880. As we all know large numbers of Hindus as well as many Muslims were regular visitors to the Harmandir Sahib in the 19th century. The Sarbrahs having lost the patronage of Sikh state either placed the idols in order to increase the number of Hindus visiting the Hramandir Sahib and hence increase the income or turned a blind eye when Hindus worshippers placed idols there.

haha IB Sorry, morning si naa

http://sikhawareness.com/main/index.php?id=f55f513

Amardeep SIngh - you should say 'mera' :roll:

And its VITAL to give credit to the site u nicked it from http://www.houseofbhangra.co.uk/Wallpapers/SikhWallpapers/ OI!!!!!!!!!!!!!! U've nicked them all from www.pure-panjab.net :bling: :evil: :x Give credit :x, or remove :evil: :twisted:

Nek no wory, Im going back soon jus havn't had the time -------------- >>Harjot Oberoi was a Keshdari Singh, who following violent threats from certain parts of the Sikh community who took issue with his works but lacked the intellect to counter them (hence resorting to threats an violence), shed his kesh and has essentially strayed away from Sikhi. Whatever the case, his book is good source material, whatever your viewpoint.<< There are many books refuting Oberoi's work so I don't understand where you got the idea that Sikhs lacked the intellect to challenge him. The book 'Invasion of religious boundaries' was specifically written to counter Oberoi. It contains papers by over 20 Sikh scholars which dissect and refute Oberoi's theories. Far from your claim that Sikhs haven't countered him, it is Oberoi who has not been able to answer his Sikh critics. Perhaps a run down of the scholars would go some way to reassure you that Sikhs are not always into threats of violence and can counter some intellectually Dr. Balkar Singh - Professor of religion- Punjabi university Dr Bhagat Singh - former professor of history - Punjabi university Dr Darshan Singh - Professor and Chairman, Dept of Guru Nanak and Sikh studies, Punjab University Dr Gurbaksh Singh Gill - former professor Akal College Dr Gurnam Kaur 0 Head, Sri Guru Granth Sahib studies dept - Punjabi university Dr Jodh Singh - Professor and Head dept of Comparative religion, Punjabi university Dr Madanjit Kaur - Professor, Guru Nanak Dev University -------------------------------- same posts is goign on ur fav board Nek

made by our own member 'Iron Bangle'

Nice pic good work

I think Harjot Singh oberoi writes that it was Maharaja ranjit Singh jee. I ahve no Idea how reliable his books are... tho

lol Indias team is ehmi they should have losed 'We' Pakiz let u win, naita ritos ho jane si 100 krodh bandeya vich 8)

Nice pics Veer Next time I got to Panjab thts defenetly going ot be a place to go 8)

Both Lallesh jee, I would think a link would be enough

lol @ Indian door belll

yea and so are your's catholic.com pathetic

In the age of Kalyug, Signhnees ar STILL in Chardikula :hearme: :hearme: :hearme:

N3O went high :lol: sorry jus began laughing when I read the subject hey for what purpose do you drink it? only to honour Shaheeds, or is there any other purpose? btw, do taksalis drink it as well? I thought onyl Buddha dal does :?

thank you veer