.

[drawrof]

I believe it was lt. john malcolm who esteemed the akalis as being 'fervent extremists'....we must remember that imperialism would alienate those that don't follow their established norms of conduct and apparel. Similarly, there is a belief/theory that every singh was a nihang but that the sardars fell into the grips of maya when they reached a certain social status (which would be indicative of those who are of an opportunist persuasion) and they became more like their social counterparts in other parts of the greater India social strata (ie. rajput kings)....look at prem sumarag granth for example. Simply, what I am saying is that there is a plausible chance that the earlier sikh fauji's were more likely to have been true to an 'akali/nihang' ideal with the latter (the misl sardars) being a bit more lax...hence, the british deeming their opposition (ie. akali phula singh and his cronies) as 'fervent extremists'

[tonyhp32]

Drawrof,

The problem with your theory is that it fails to address how millions of Sikhs were not Nihangs. So who were they, were they Nirmalas or Udasis or Sewapanthis?

How about the Malwa Rajas whose connection with the Gurus was also long standing and who were never Nihangs. What of their forces who like the Khalsa forces had also been fighting first with Banda Singh and later with minor Muslim Nawabs as well as Mughal Faujdars?

[shaheediyan]

Great point drawoF, just because the term Nihang/Akali was not commonly used (although it has many mentions in Dasam Bani), dosn't mean they didn't exist. One only has to look at 18th c paintings to see the Dasmesh Pita always had an ensemble of Akalis around him (serving him). If we also look at rehits and practices mentioned in ithihaas i.e. Amarnama, we see that there are many cultural similarities to the practices of Nihangs today i.e. Gurus order to Jhatka Madho Das's goats etc. The study of rehits fields enough evidence in it self.

I do think Tony may have a point in that earlier times - there maybe wasn't a specific distinction - and Singh Khalsa was of one kind, bound by one set of rules. But as drawoF says, as power and status was gained - so royal practices were started - and there was a shift in the appearance and mannerism/culture of the Misledars etc. Other than that - all Sikhs were not Singh, this is the premise that Tony seems to struggle with, many would have been simple working folk - who supported the Khalsa movement and provided resources/shelter/information/recruits etc....

I believe the term Nihang was focused upon when there was a divergence in Singh culture/practice/appearance - and in affect - the Nihangs represent the original Khalsa so to say - the original Singhs. Tony, you are well read, you should know that there are 18thc european references describing whole populations/swathes of "blue Sikhs". There is a clue there!

[Mithar]

You guys make some good points. The way I always saw it was that the period between Guru Gobind Singh Jee's Jyoti Jyot samounaa and time of Raja Ranjit Singh's birth was the time when Khalsa was pure. All the Singhs were like Nihangs in terms of appearance and Rehet. But as time went on and especially when Afghan invasions were less frequent, the khalsa became more dhillaaa and less strict in rehet. Only a small group of Singhs known as Nihangs remained puritanical as the original Khalsa. Because of their pure faith and puritanical lifestyle they had the respect of the entire Khalsa/Sardars who would give them alot of land.

[Xylitol]

Baba Bir Singh ji Naurangabad, Baba Maharaj Singh ji, both had immense followings and were known for their strictness in rahit. The Hoti Mardan upsamprada mahapurkhs are known for strictness in rahit, the Damdami Taksaal mahapurkhs are also known for the same. looking at paintings we can see that in the past these sants did not always wear blue bana. I think it really is pure exaggeration to say that only the nihangs remained strict in rahit. However, the number of singhs living at taksaals and deras back in those days was probably few, as it is today.

[shaheediyan]

Brother, Hotimardan and Taksal were Sants/Parcharaks/Educators. Why would they wear Nihang baana?

Taksaal mentality change was due to Baba Gurbachan Singh Jis Nihang influence i.e. being a shastardhari. Baba Sundar Singh Ji is the perfect example of the original Taksali image.

[amardeep]

was'nt Shaheed Baba Deep Singh ji a nihang himself? how come taksal are preachers then?

[shaheediyan]

Shaheed Baba Deep Singh Ji was many things, Taksal simply represent one aspect (important one) of him.

In those early days people were not obsessed with groupings - a gur-shish lineage was exactly that - one of 2 individuals - rather than one of a highly defined group with a mission statement. There was a difference between Sant-Sipahi-Grihsht lifestyles - but people were free to intermix between these - and in fact - it was this great flexibilty that ensured the survival of much history and vidya in terrible times...

[Kam1825]

Shaheediayan if you look into the Sri Bir Mirgesh and other granths it states that Baba Bir Singh Ji Nourangabad Walae although they were nirmalae were shasterdhari adn fought in the army of maharaja ranjit singh ji. they wore the attire of nihangs

Hoti Mardan Sants like Sant Karam Singh Ji, Baba Aiya Singh Ji and Sant Jawala Singh Ji were all trained in weaponry and actually took part in military service. The taksal mentality actually changed when sant sundar singh ji asked all of the singhs to change the coulour of their dastars to blue and to don weapons during the singh sabha movement. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji have written about this in their Gurmukh Parkash

Nirmalas of today such as the Jian walae sants starting from bab harnam singh ji Jian Walae and going through to Baba Jeet Singh Ji Johla Walae today wear clothing similar to nihangs.

Its not the garb that makes someone though as we all know, no matter what samparda you always get the odd dodgy individual!

[Malwe Da Sher]

Tbh I think a lot of the problems and confusions are a result of the way the whole 4 (+ or - 1) samprada theory has been constructed by certain websites. IMHO The samprads were always dynamic in so much as they were diverse lineages of great individuals living and sharing the Gurus teachings in their chosen way or as dictated by their teacher.

An attempt to neatly constrcut all Sikhs within the four samprada is false, I dont think thats what the sarbloh site has explicity done but certainly the way it has been interpreted by its critics. This, coupled with their provoking disregard for other Sikhs is what provides ammo to Nihang-aphobes such as Tony to continually hamper on with his false wet dreams that there has never been any such thing as a Nihang - a theory which even an amatuer in Sikh history would know to be laughable.

Khalsa is Khalsa, thats the fundmental point here which has to be accepted without any agenda of promoting one jathebandi over another. There are ample historical references the rehat of Buchangis or Nihangs which has included consumption of Sukhnidhan and practise of Chatka, wearing of blue bana, carrying naked khande, caryying solater etc. In terms of these jungee Khalsa traditions those who have preserved them are today reserved with the title Nihang. Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh Ji and various other sant mahapursh were undoubtedly great warrior saints within the Khalsa panth. Cetain Nihang influences can certainly be seen in their jeevan, yet to call them a Nihang is maybe understandable as they were shastardhari khalsa, however to do so is misleading as clearly their rehni behni was different and they did not wholeheartedly follow all aspects of the Nihang rehat - something which Nihang Singhs of today within the dals endeavour to do so.

[shaheediyan]

Nice posts, thanks for those both. Its nice to read and learn about the wonderful exceptions to the rule, both past and present.

The 4 sampryada theory is not unique to Sarbloh.com, I will try and find some early references to it, but off hand I think Nirmala Giani Gian singh Ji spoke at least of some if not all of them. Maybe Kam knows off hand..

[Kam1825]

Prior to sarbloh.info i think the main books that refer to the sampardas is the Naveen Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh which mentions others as well as the Radhaswamis and Namdhais. The Bharat Mat Darpan by Mahant Ganesha Ji and Piara Singh Padam Sikh Sampardavli.

http://brahmgiani.blogspot.com/

the above link has pictures of Johla walae and Jian Walae sants who wear a garb similar to nihangs

[Malwe Da Sher]

The existence of the sampradas, their invaluable contributions to the panth, their historical lineage and existence from the times of the Gurus is accepted fairly widely. What is condentable is the linear four samprada paradigm within which all historical Sikhs abided, particuarly as the sampradas themselves are internally diverse. The Nihang Singhs appear to be the most inernally homogenious of the sampradas, although them themselves tend very rarely to refer to themselves as a samprada, if at all.

[valli singh]

.

[Malwe Da Sher]

kam veerai do u know why johal vale sants wear a turla?

[Mithar]

Is that a Turla that Sant jee is wearing? it looks more like a Farla that Nihangs wear.

[Malwe Da Sher]

farla is always blue, although it does look like johal vale sants tie it like a farla.

[Kam1825]

Johla is the location in the johal village of Jullandhar

here is more info and pictures, have a look through the site

http://www.gurdwara.org.uk/gurdwara/founders/founders2.html

Malwe Da Sher, to be honest i do not know why sant harnam singh ji wore the garb like they do today considereing sant karam singh ji hoti mardan walae used to wear white and bhagwa.

[valli singh]

.

[tonyhp32]

Tbh I think a lot of the problems and confusions are a result of the way the whole 4 (+ or - 1) samprada theory has been constructed by certain websites. IMHO The samprads were always dynamic in so much as they were diverse lineages of great individuals living and sharing the Gurus teachings in their chosen way or as dictated by their teacher.

An attempt to neatly constrcut all Sikhs within the four samprada is false, I dont think thats what the sarbloh site has explicity done but certainly the way it has been interpreted by its critics. This, coupled with their provoking disregard for other Sikhs is what provides ammo to Nihang-aphobes such as Tony to continually hamper on with his false wet dreams that there has never been any such thing as a Nihang - a theory which even an amatuer in Sikh history would know to be laughable.

Khalsa is Khalsa, thats the fundmental point here which has to be accepted without any agenda of promoting one jathebandi over another. There are ample historical references the rehat of Buchangis or Nihangs which has included consumption of Sukhnidhan and practise of Chatka, wearing of blue bana, carrying naked khande, caryying solater etc. In terms of these jungee Khalsa traditions those who have preserved them are today reserved with the title Nihang. Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh Ji and various other sant mahapursh were undoubtedly great warrior saints within the Khalsa panth. Cetain Nihang influences can certainly be seen in their jeevan, yet to call them a Nihang is maybe understandable as they were shastardhari khalsa, however to do so is misleading as clearly their rehni behni was different and they did not wholeheartedly follow all aspects of the Nihang rehat - something which Nihang Singhs of today within the dals endeavour to do so.

I think you need to read the post that you want to respond to before making wild accusations. Where have I said there were no such things as Nihangs, I said that there were no Nihangs as we know them during the period 5-6 decades after 1699.

I wonder if anyone is aware of the hundreds of paintings in Europe from the Renaissance period which depict classical Greek and Roman as well as biblical scenes but where the attire worn by the subjects is of the Renaissance period. Projecting the images of the present into the past is nothing new. Paintings of Nihangs may exist from the 1770s which show them in the company of Guru Gobind Singh but that does not mean that the Nihangs were present at the time of Guru Gobind Singh. Many paintings painted by artists today depict the Khanda symbol in the flags of Sikhs with Guru Gobind Singh yet we know that no such symbol existed then.

Quite apart from the fact that the rehatnamas which span the era 1710-1799 state that the rehat is for the Singhs or Sikhs or even the Khalsa and make no mention of Nihangs. If you want to believe that the Nihangs were the 'original Khalsa' then that is up to you but don't try and present your belief as serious research.

Jhatka is not just a rehat for the Nihangs, other non-Sikhs have also performed Jhatka. Didn't the million or so non-Nihang Singhs in Punjab at the time of British not consume Jhatka? It is only with the recent vegetarianisation of the Sikhs that most Amritdharis do not eat Jhatka but non-Nihang Singhs have always eaten Jhatka. What is a particular Nihang rehat is rituals such as the blood tilak on shastars, sukha, Sarbloh Granth etc which non-Nihang Singhs do not take part in.

I know it's very difficult for some here to comprehend something so basic as, if you believe that Nihangs were the original Khalsa then there would be no other Khalsa from 1699-1770. The fact is that there were other Khalsa, lakhs of Singhs who were not Nihangs.

This poses an interesting question, if one were to accept that the Nihangs are/were the 'original' Khalsa then that would imply that the Nihang lifestyle of today is the accepted lifestyle that Guru Gobind Singh decreed for the Khalsa. So why are the Nihang wannabes from the UK and US and Canada living western lifestyles, why aren't they riding horses, living in a chaoni, drinking sukha like the Nihangs in India?

[Malwe Da Sher]

Tony are you saying that the Nihang rehat was invented during the mid 18th Century? Who was responsible for the creation of these Nihangs?

[tonyhp32]

Invented implies that someone made a conscious effort to make this rehat. What I am saying in that at some stage probably in the last quarter of the 18th century, the bulk of the Misls settled down and parceled out areas of Punjab as their territories. One of the Misls possibly the Shaheedan or elements of all Misls who did not want to settle down then formed bands which stayed tied to the nomadic lifestyle. The rehat which the bulk of Sikhs do not adhere to but which forms a part of the Nihang lifestyle must then have come into existence during the period 1770-1849. The importance given to the Sarbloh Granth is a case in point. Although I accept that lately many non-Nihang Sikhs have also started to accept it as the work of Guru Gobind Singh but even the Nihangs accept that Sarbloh Granth did not come into Punjab until the first decade of the 19th century. Now for a text which Nihangs ascribe provides them with intense 'Bir Ras' then it seems curious that the Khalsa did not have this Bir Ras Granth during the very period that they required it the most, ie the period 1699-1770.

So how does this sit with the theory of the of the Nihangs as the original Khalsa? A bulk of the Sikhs as well as the Nihangs for a 100 year period never had access to the Granth which is now described in the same manner as the Guru Granth Sahib

[Kam1825]

Interesting! i never thought about that!

[Malwe Da Sher]

Tony what you are saying is fairly wishy washy to say the least.

Firstly Nihangs are mentioned in Bachiter Natak by Guru Gobind Singh JI. They are also mentioned in Bijai Mukht Granth believed to have been written at the times of 10th Guru, and mentioned in various Sau Sakhis all suggested the existed at the time of the Gurus.

Both Sikh and European accounts of Sikh history state that it was explicity the rehat of the Nihangs which the Bandai Khalsa shurned. This states they existed before the late 18th Century. 'Kahan Singh Buchangi' and 'Gurbaksh Singh Nihang Singh', where the titles of Nihang is used in individuals names also proves that they exist. In historical writings when discussing a Singh there is specific mention of many that they dressed in blue, drank sukha etc - suggesting that not all Singhs prescribed to this rehat but that there certainly was a group who did.

As we learn for the vaars of the second Bhai Gurdas Ji and other historical work, the Khalsa created by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji was dressed in blue, an appearance which gradually decreased as the Sikhs came to rule and setlle in worldy affairs. In essence what happened was that the Sikh misldars settled and moved away from the jungee traditions of the Khalsa which the Nihangs maintained. You are stating the opposite here that as the Sikhs settled down a group of Nihangs started making up their own traditions.

Commenting on Sri Sarbloh Granth is a bit problematic when your only source is something you have read from a wesbite. Have you read it to too see whether or not contains more Bir Ras than Dasam Guru Granth Sahib Ji? You may want to check that out before presenting your case regarding Sri Sarbloh Granth on every Sikh forum as you have been for some years.

The literature of the Nihangs, the Nirmalas, the Europeans, Singh Sabha scholars and contemporary academics all trace the existence of Nihang Singhs to the time of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Some people may find your theories interesting but they go against oral history of the Nihangs themselves and more importantly contradicts pretty much every single piece on Sikh history ever written over three centuries which all trace the existence of Nihangs to the time of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. None the less, Im sure you shall battle on with your theory which will likely be joyfully subscribed to by the growing nihang-aphobes on Sikh chat forums, while providing a humourous read for anyone who has ever read a Sikh history book.

[tonyhp32]

MDS,

1. Whether the Sarbloh Granth has more Bir Ras than Dasam Granth is not the main issue here. The Nihangs claim that Sarbloh Granth is a Bir Ras Granth. What is important here is that a group which claims to be 'original' Khalsa and puritanical with it can so easily accept a text as genuine when it had not been available to them from over 100 years. This is all the more important given that scholars belonging to the sanatan mindset have dismissed the Sarbloh Granth as being the work of Sukha Singh from Patna Sahib written a few decades before it became available in Punjab.

2. Nihangs are mentioned in Dasam Granth but again let's not lazily accept that the word 'Nihang' used in Dasam Granth means exactly what the word Nihang means today. The context in which the word has been used is important. Bhai Amritpal Singh's site gives a good account of what the word Nihang meant to these early Sikh writers in comparison to what it means today.

http://www.amritworld.com/main/nihang/in_dasamgranth/

If Amritpal Singh is right and the first time the word Nihang has been used exclusively for Sikh warriors was Pracheen Panth Parkash then that negates all the myths of Nihangs being with Guru Gobind Singh in 1699.

3. The rehat that the Bandais shunned was the Khalsa rehat with regard to Jhatka which I have already stated was not solely a Nihang rehat. Khalsas had been eating Jhatka long before any Nihangs had come on the scene. What era do Kahan Singh Buchangi' and 'Gurbaksh Singh Nihang Singh' belong to? So out of Lakhs of Sikhs two had the name Bujhangi and another had Nihang to his name. There was contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh called Nihang Khan. Does that means that Nihangs as we know them now were around then?

4. The late 18th century is the period that is important. That fact that many English writers state that some Singhs kept the Nihang rehat does not prove anything, I have already said that there were groups around who we would recognise as Nihangs at that period.

5. The Vaar of Bhai Gurdas Singh were written during the time that the Khalsa was in a struggle to the death with the Mughals. It describes Sikhs wearing blue. The fact that Sikh warriors in the era before Nihangs wore blue does not prove anything. In fact the colour blue was amalgamated into the uniform of the Lahore Durbar army when it was modernised.