randip singh

I believe kaam translates to 'obsession/addiction/lust'. It does not necessarily have to relate to sexual desire, but this form of lust/desire is certainly the strongest.

I understand what you are saying Randip Singh Ji, all I am saying is that we shouldn't ridicule traditional methods which some youth today find nimrata and strentgh in - methods or cultures which I personally saw esteemed and devote members the older generation use, not to mention divine personalities in History and many famous Gursikh. Your leather example actually implies 'association' so it would have been cultivated elsewhere - to that with which it associates.

If your method works for you, its all well and good. Some of us like to believe their is wisdom in tradition/religious personalities, those beliefs should at the very least be respected.

I see what you are saying.

My intention wasn't to ridicule, but I can see how my abrupt style can be seen to be ridiculing. I will watch that in future.

Thanks

Even after writing, in English I believe, about what the significance of Hazur Sahib is, with regards to Bhai Rai Singh being sent to do Viakhia of Granth Sahibs and bringing back Maryada, when people continue to give me BS like 'Namdharis' beliefs hold no water and Namdharis should not believe in this or that', I don't think anyone is that handicapped to not be able to see through what is being done here.

If knowledge is what you need, why does it matter if it is in PM? I've been around these forums enough to know that most people, unlike Amardeep's theory, have no real tolerance for or don't really care about learning when it comes to Namdharis. All they want to do is share what's been filled into them (usually baseless hatred) on a one-sided basis. So as such it is also in a way a litmus test. If that person wants to know, he can pm me.

Fatehsingh, this behaviour really is too much. You really have to learn some manners when writing on discussion boards. If you have evidence to the contrary then provide your sourse. Do not refer to me as talking "BS".

Randip Singh, there is a difference between hiding your womenfolk and wanting to treat them with the respect that our Guru demands, alongside paying heed to our Gurus wisdom on this subject, the large part of which makes up the Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji.

The point I am trying to make is that there is not a problem with the opposite sex i.e. they lead us into temptation, but the problem is within (which is pretty much what you have said).

Kaam = obsession with sex. It is abnormal behaviour. It is not the basic desire to procreate, but something more than that. It is like a glutton with food.

So averting one's eyes from teh opposite sex will not clear up the problem. I know people who are so obsessed with Kaam that they find the touch of leather starts their obsession with sex.

Hope I have made myself clear.

Hmm I don't buy this or the examples.

We need to differentiate between pure Love (which can occure between a man and woman), and Lust (Kaam) which can occur between a man and a woman. I don't buy all this looking down business. What next Burkha's for men and women?

Hmm I don't buy this or the examples.

We need to differentiate between pure Love (which can occure between a man and woman), and Lust (Kaam) which can occur between a man and a woman. I don't buy all this looking down business. What next Burkha's for men and women?

i've come across sikhs who dont even believe in reincarnation lol

I think many mistake the different emphasis reincarnation in Sikhi with the belief there is no reincarnation. A very learned man I met in India explained to me that reincarnation in Sikhi is akin to "matter cannot be created or destroyed but only changes form".

Its all that Hindu Phobia mate

So true.

I think the Singh Sabha movement was trying to stop Sikhi being absorbed into Hinduism, but some of the proponents may have gone a little far.

Compounded by what happened in 1984 Hindu phobia seems rife. One only has to go onto sikhsangat or Panthic weekly to see this.

- Sikh History from Persian Sources - Irfan Habib and Dr JS Grewal (2001)

i have this book at home, where does it mention anything about the practices of hazoori sikhs? it gives historical accounts of various themes but as far as i remember it does'nt mention anything about jhatka

Correct but it gives an insight into the behaviour of Sikhs from other accounts. A long time since I read it, but I must have included it for a reason.

In The Master Presence - The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib is very interesting>>I started reading it today.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Masters-Presence-S...b/dp/0956016804

This thread is about Hazur Sahib. If you want to discuss Namdharis, PM me. If all you want to do is impress your online friends with your lack of knowledge and ignorance, then by all means proceed with your ego trip.

Stop getting personal!!!

You brought Namdhari accounts into this and I have dismissed them based on the fact Namdhari's don't believe Guru Gobind Singh ji died when he did in the Deccan. Infact they believe Guru Gobind Singh didn't die until he was well over 100 years old and passed the mantle to Balak Singh:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=aeKWQze...snum=5#PPA59,M1

You asked me to provide evidence I have, and I have full knowledge of Namdhari traditions through a relative in our village who succumb to Namdhari propaganda, and he himself has told me of the above. I am not saying Namdhari's are right or wrong, but for Namdhari's Hazoor Sahib would serve no purpose and therefore would not want to go there. Hence their writings on this matter hold no water.

Going back to the thread I have provided a small reading list and sources which provide evidence of what I have stated.

-Joginder Singh Moni - Sri Hazoori Maryada Prabodh.

-Khuswaqt Rae, Twarikh-e-Sikhan (1812)

- Sikh History from Persian Sources - Irfan Habib and Dr JS Grewal (2001)

- The People of India - J Forbes Watson and William Kaye (1868-72)

- A Journey From Bengal to England, thriough the Northern Part of India, Kasmere, Afghanistan and Persia and Into Russia, by the Caspian Sea - George Foster (1798)

- In The Masters Presence - The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib (2009)

One final point, I note you normally write some quite intelligent remarks and insulting someone like this does not do you justice.

I will acknowledge Mithar's point of the influence of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Sikh's around the 1840's. I do wonder though about Maharaja Ranjit Singh sometimes and hsis adoption of some Brahmanical traditions (eg Sati).

Plus they also are currently under SGPC and recite 'Agya Bhei Akal Ki' dohra after Ardas like the rest of SGPC Sikhs. This was not introduced until 1870's, so they're definitely not 'original' Sikhs with 'unblemished' practices. Back in the 1940's to even 60's, women were not baptised at Hazoor Sahib. Today they are, though with a Kirpan rather than Khanda. Meat was also not served in main Langar though now they are conflicting reports.

Well as Mithar pointed out, some of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Sikhs came some 20 to 30 years earlier. Maybe they added some practices.

Also where are your sources for this and what are these "conflicting reports"?.

In anycase Joginder Singh Moni kept a pretty good record of traditions - Sri Hazoori Maryada Prabodh.

For what it's worth, per the Namdhari tradition, Bhai Rai Singh was sent by Satguru Ram Singh to Hazur Sahib in around 1858-9 to stay and do Paath with Arth (meaning) of Sri Adi and Dasam Granth Sahibji for 3 months and record the Rahit of Hazur Sahib back for Parchar in Punjab. So per the Namdhari tradition these Jhatka and meat eating practices did not exist back then. In fact the Granthi of the inner sanctum who took care of Birs of Granth Sahibs and Shasters also did not eat from the main langar because meat-eating people frequented the main langar. It would be good to get an honest and unbiased answer on how Maryadas have changed or remained the same at Hazur Sahib.

No offence but Namdhari traditions hold no water. Namdhari's should not even believe in Hazoor Sahib because they believe Guru Gobind Singh never died at that time so there is no point to Hazoor Sahib.

In anycase there are records from teh 1800's that record tradition (and prior to that and they totally debunk the Namdhari's):

-Khuswaqt Rae, Twarikh-e-Sikhan (1812)

- Sikh History from Persian Sources - Irfan Habib and Dr JS Grewal (2001)

- The People of India - J Forbes Watson and William Kaye (1868-72)

- A Journey From Bengal to England, thriough the Northern Part of India, Kasmere, Afghanistan and Persia and Into Russia, by the Caspian Sea - George Foster (1798)

There are many many more records from the time and they all would disagree with you accounts.

I also understand In The Master Presence - The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib has many references in the back, but I haven't had a chance to look through as yet.

The tradition of Chatka has institutionally only been kept alive by the Nihang Singhs and the Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib, its best to ask them what the purpose of the tradition is and hearing what they have to say. Its much more informative and an accurate reflection of why something happens as opposed to random people writing articles on what the Sikh Gurus apparently did and didnt teach. Akaaal

The interesting thing about Hazoori Sikhs is that they have been unblemished by the inroads Vaishavism and Dera Culture have made into Punjabi Sikhism. Hazoori's are descended from the original Sikhs who accompanied the 10th Master some 300 Years ago to the Deccan. They have carried on traditions unblemished since that time.

I know that Punjabi Sikhs have been blemished, because my own family who are a long lineage of Amritdhari Sikhs, describe how in the 1920's and 1940's Namdhari's and then AKJr's tried hard to stop Amritdhri's in our village from doing Jhatka (my family are not Nihangs but ordinary tillers of the soil). Our family politely told them to "get lost". I heard this from our Grandfathers brother. He said it was as if these Namdhari's and then AKJ people were trying to compete with Brahmin's as to who is the more purer. My Grandfather and his Thya's answer was simple, "we shall not play the Brahmin's game of purity and we shall not give up our Sant Siphahi (Sikh Warrior Saint) tradition!".

Alas many people in Punjab are trying to play the Brahmin purity game.

Regards

Randip Singh,

This is the part of the essay to which I was referring:

I've read the essay again with a little more care and I believe what the author is saying (in the first paragraph) is that the practice of shastar-tilak is what the he wants stopped, not the tradition of jhatka, as I had originally thought. The annointing of weapons with blood may have been a traditional Kshtatriya practice but the author believes that this may be an anti-Sikh practice.

The ambiguity is in the second paragraph where he compares this ritual to the celebration by Sikhs of traditionally auspicious occasions like Sangrand and Puranmashi. The message in this paragraph seems to be that if khoon da tilak is abandoned as a tradition, then so should these festivals. Given that there seems to be little controversy regarding celebrating sangraand and puranmashi (there are usually special programmes in many gurdwaras on these these dates), I'm not sure whether the author seriously believes that all of these things are wrong, or whether he is suggesting the acceptance of khoon da tilak as a tradition much like sangraand and puranmashi.

Regards,

K.

Yes precisely.

No to Sacrifice

Yes to Jhatka

exactly right randip singh ji.

Tilak is seen a blessing too, if I am not mistaken?

Do Namdhari's believe in the Gurudwara at Hazoor Sahib, because surely they cannot if they believe Guru Gobind Singh ji lived on?

Fateh!

Maybe I am being dense, but I'm not sure what the author is saying.

He mentions that jhatka is an ancient Indian warrior tradition, that the jhatka practised at Hazur Sahib is not a form of animal sacrifice, that there is evidence for meat being served in langar in the time of the Gurus, that there is no evidence for a ban on eating meat (except halal meat) - and yet he believes that jhatka should be stopped. Why?

K.

OK.

The Guru's were from Kshatriya/Khatri lineage. The tradition of Jhatka would not have been alien to their lineage.

Jhatka has been used in India for thousands of years for:

1) Just killing and animal for food

2) Demonstrate a warriors prowess with a sword (similar to what Samurai's would do)

3) Kill an animal for sacrifice (Bali)

Jhatka would be used in all 3 areas, but for a Sikh an animal killed in sacrifice is not permissible. Forms of sacrifice are Halaal, Bali, Kosher (collectively known as Kuttha and mistakenly just thought of as Halaal). The aim of these sacrifices is to ennoble the flesh. The Sikh Guru's took an enlightened view on this and stated, how can mere men ennoble or purify further something created by God? The same would apply to even vegetarian food which is sometimes purified in various ceremony's. The Guru's would laugh at such folly.

Now going back to the author:

Those who advocate vegetarianism among Sikhs is deliberately overlooking the provisions of Sikh Rehat Maryada, which clearly prohibits consuming Kuththa (halal meat) and does not in any manner prevent Sikhs from being non-vegetarians. It is the discretion and liberty of Amritdharis to consume meat, if they choose to do so. Also, any Sikh, who chooses to be vegetarian, is welcome to remain so, but it is foolhardy, naïve and wrong to attempt to amend the Sikh religious ethos according to this choice.

He is not saying Jhatka should be banned, but rather saying this is Jhatka and is NOT sacrifice (Bali).

As the Following book state:

We must give the rationale behind prescribing jhatka meat as the approved food for the Sikhs. According to the ancient Aryan Hindu tradition, only such meat as is obtained from an animal which is killed with one stroke of the weapon causing instantaneous death is fit for human consumption. However, with the coming of Islam into India and the Muslim political hegemony, it became a state policy not to permit slaughter of animals for food, in any other manner, except as laid down in the Quran - the kosher meat prepared by slowly severing the main blood artery of the throat of the animal while reciting verses from the Quran. It is done to make slaughter a sacrifice to God and to expiate the sins of the slaughter. Guru Gobind Singh took a rather serious view of this aspect of the whole matter. He, therefore, while permitting flesh to be taken as food repudiated the whole theory of this expiatory sacrifice and the right of ruling Muslims to impose iton the non-Muslims. Accordingly, he made jhatka meat obligatory for those Sikhs who may be interested in taking meat as a part of their food.

Sikhism, A Complete Introduction, Dr. H.S.Singha & Satwant Kaur, Hemkunt Press

and also

And one semitic practice clearly rejected in the Sikh code of conduct is eating flesh of an animal cooked in ritualistic manner; this would mean kosher and halal meat. The reason again does not lie in religious tenet but in the view that killing an animal with a prayer is not going to enoble the flesh. No ritual, whoever conducts it, is going to do any good either to the animal or to the diner. Let man do what he must to assuage his hunger. If what he gets, he puts to good use and shares with the needy, then it is well used and well spent, otherwise not.

Sikhs and Sikhism, Dr. I.J.Singh, Manohar Publishers.

When I went to India two years ago, I asked various people these very questions and the answers that came back were very clear. Sikh's do not sacrifice/purify in the name of God. Whener, a Sikh has food he (veg or non-veg) he gives thanks to God. A subtle but VERY important point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baba_Buddha

wjkk wjkf i was reading this link about baba budha ji and found that he had applied the tilak on the first 5 gurus.

what significance does the tilak have in sikhism ? i am aware of why its used in hinduism but have not seen this practse in sikhism in today's age. if anyone could shed some light

fateh

Put it in context.

All tilak is/was a method of passing leadership from one person to another. Used by Kings and Warriors of that time. Probably pre-dates Hinduism. Just a ceremony, like for example a Knighthood.

haha bhai randip singh is truly an anti-akj'er ..

oh dear, please doon't call me a Bhai or eople will start making offering at my house and start worshipping me.

I must admit I am anti-Bhai/Jatha/Baba type organisations, and I wasn't actually thinking about AKJ specifically when I wrote this, but some other organisations.

My personal view: People should leave their paranoia and insecurity out for second, at least listen to what this man has to say before getting knickers in twist.

Famous quote from scholar that all jathebandiyas/samparda's have a mutual respect:

Bhai kahn singh nabha writes:

"When the Sikhs, the Nihangs, Sehaj Dhari, Nirmalla's, Namdharis, and Udasi's see themselves as the sons of the same father. The Gurudwara reform movement would be over"

I must admit I find the actual personalities I have met of some Namdhari's I have met to be truly odious, but that is not to say all Namdhari's are bad. Some of their traditions focus to much on personality, and they use the word Guru to describe their leaders, but is that any different from these Jatha's that have so called Bhai's/Sants as leaders. All you have to do is substitute Bhai/Sant for Guru as a word.

Another one of Panthic Weekly's articles and their paranoia (yawns)

http://www.panthic.org/news/124/ARTICLE/4679/2009-01-16.html

Hounslow Gurdwara Shamelessly Promotes Niddar Book

(Op/Ed)

Friday 16th of January 2009

Panthic Weekly News Bureau

Hounslow (KP)—On Monday, 12th January 2009, the All Parliamentary Group for the Punjabi Community in Britain celebrated the 3rd centenary celebrations of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji at the House of Commons. At the same event, they had a book launch for ‘Nihang’ Niddar Singh & Parmjit Singh’s controversial book “In the Master’s Presence: The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib (Volume I: History).â€

Last week the official video was released of ‘Nihang’ Niddar Singh admitting to “misleading the Sikh congregation†at Takhat Sri Hazur Sahib during the 300 years celebration in the presence of Singh Sahib Giani Kulwant Singh (Jathedar of Takhat Sri Hazur Sahib). It is widely known that in Niddar’s so-called Shaster Vidiya classes, university talks, seminars, and Sanatanist websites, he encourages women to cut their hair, believes women don’t need to take Amrit, that there are two types of Amrit—Khande ki Pahul for men and Kirpan Di Pahul for women, propagates the caste system, makes serious allegations against Damdami Taksal, slanders the S.G.P.C and Sri Akal Takhat Sahib as being neo-Sikhs, and believes in the worship of Shiva, Ganesh & other Hindu deities.

Astonishingly, despite countless exposés of admin cut Niddar Singh circulating across the Internet on Panthic Weekly, e-groups, forums, and websites, and the fact that the majority of UK Gurdwaras have banned him from doing any form of parchar, the Hounslow Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara showed open support for this thankhaiya and anti-Panthic RSS agent.

Despite, the Sri Guru Singh Sabha, Alice Way, Hounslow, claiming to support the Sri Akal Takhat and Panthic Sikh Rehit Maryada, they helped to organise Niddar Singh’s book launch and showed support for the anti-Panthic sanatanist through emailing the Sangat on e-groups, advertising the book launch. The email sent on the ‘Sikh News Discussion group’ stated:

“…This landmark book explores the history of Hazoor Sahib, the 4th Sikh Takht (Temporal and Spiritual Authority). This exotic and unfamiliar world is brought to life with over 150 sumptuous illustrations of paintings, photographs, portraits, maps, artifacts and documents from archives and private collections from around the world.

Niddar Singh Nihang is an expert in Shastar Vidya, the Sikh battlefield arts. Parmjit Singh is an independent researcher specialising in the photographic history of 19th Century Punjab.â€

The Hounslow Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara needs to clarify their position on their stand in supporting anti-Sikh elements. The entire Sikh Sangat are urged to ring Sri Guru Singh Sabha Hounslow and ask them why they allowed such an event and why they supported Niddar Singh’s book launch. The Sangat hopes that the Gurdwara Committee will make an apology to the Sikh Sangat and promise that they will not support or allow anti-Sikh forces to do Parchar in the future.

Further information or clarification can be obtained from Mohan Singh Nayyar, General Secretary, Gurdwara Sri Guru Singh Sabha Hounslow (Tel: 020 8577 2793).

Related Articles:

Worrying Rise in Propagation of 'Sanatan Sikhi'

http://www.panthic.org/news/131/ARTICLE/4518/2008-11-14.html

21st Century Sanatan Challenges to Sikhi and it's Identity

http://www.panthic.org/news/131/ARTICLE/4540/2008-11-21.html

Most of the people I know refer to Panthic Weekly as "Nindya" Weekly!

Incidently, I have read Niddar Singh/Parmjit Singh's book "In The Masters Presence - Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib" http://www.amazon.co.uk/Masters-Presence-S...b/dp/0956016804 and it seems to be very well researched and put together.

A good job all round.

But that link says a Vaishnavite means:

"A Vaishnava is a devotee of Vishnu."

Precisely (and all his Avtars for which some say the Guru's are).

What is a Vaishnavite?

Ekh Musafir Ji

but seriously

http://www.dvaita.org/docs/srv_faq.html#what

Didn't Sikh Sangat forum get partitioned a few years back between AKJ and Taksalis? The Taksalis got the Sikh sangat forum while the AKJ started their own forum called Sikhi unleashed.

Problem with Jatha's and Sant believers is just this as you have stated.

They started off as the united Waheguroo network and have slowly fragmented into sects further and further. They do not concerned about the welfare of the Panth as a whole or the SRM but just their own paartisan agenda's. The are anti-Nihang, anti-SRM, anti-Akali, anti-Meat, anti-Hindu, anti-Muslim, anti-Mona, anti-this, anti-that, but what are they positive for and actually for? But where is this the Gurmatta (Consensus)?

Are they actually for anything?

Unfortunately this is the sad state of Sikh affairs on sikh sangat. That at Panthic.org (nindya.org) are just bad news and it is best to stay well away.

Regards

Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh. The first being the title given to bhai sahib by the panj thakths, second being name given by Guru Gobind Singh Ji, please do not forget this for next time, thanks

ps. don't you find your signature rather contradictory? You say one is a sikh regardless of veg or no veg, yet your comment about vaishnavas seems to imply the veg sikhs are not sikhs? therefore do you really mean only a non-vegetarian can be a sikh?

There are are that many Bhai's Sant's and Baba's I tend to lose track. :-)

Actually there is a massive difference between a Vegetarian Sikh who accepts the SRM and a Vashnavite. It is like the Sun and the Moon. Examples of vegetarian Sikhs are Aman Singh (SPN), N30 Singh. Examples of Vaishnavites Ekh Musafir ji. Like N30 Singhji says, pm me about my signature.

Regards

In answer to the question as to whether this effort by someone (not me) is verified, I'd say no.

I imagine that it was done out of prem as opposed to deliberately mislead people or to cause a ruckus.

I do not doubt the intention, it is just we have to be careful.

In the case I highlighted of Bhai Randhir Singh and Dr Ganda Singh 2+2= 4, but they did not consider it maybe 2-2 =0 or 2/2 = 1. It is human nature, and I am the biggest one guilty of it when I am doing my research.

It is only when I cross refernce I usually find the truth.

Becuase Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal of AKJ was not a research scholar nor did he have interest in academic research projects. You have obviously not read his books. He always quoted from canonical Sikh writings rather than historical sources such as hukam namas. It could be the other Bhai Randhir Singh , but I doubt it was him either. Eitherway, the burden of proof is on you to prove it was Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal and not some other Bhai Randhir Singh.

There is no burden of proof on me because I seek to prove nothing. I am merely reiterating what the author said, and I am more inclined to believe an academic researcher than someone on the internet.

You also assume too much, I have read Bhai Randhir Singh's autobiography, of which some parts I find outrageous (meeting with Bhaghat Singh), to downright comical (theories on why teeth get eroded).

As you can see I am not a big fan of his, but then again there were many of his ilk around at that time.

Incidently there is a presentation here on the development of the Sikh Code of Conduct and another Bhai Randhir Singh ( or is it the same one) seems to sit along Dr Ganda Singh:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/6375523/Kirpal-S...hsabha-Sikhswim

Could it be the same one who walked out over the "Kuttha" issue? Maybe not, probably yet another Bhai Randhir Singh and there must have been 20 or so Bhai Randhir Singh's running around at that time with similar agenda. :rolleyes:

The point still stands, the Hukamnama was never verified, and the "Bhai Randhir Singh" (whoever he was out of the hundreds running arund at the time), seemed to take the Hukamnama as gospel. Recent research have shown these Hukamnama's (in Dr Ganda Singh's book) to be fake's or not verified (as shown in the book mentioned above).