Hew Mcleod Documentary (part 1)

[dalsingh101]

Yet again you go on about unrelated matters when you have a thread to do that on.

Maybe McLeodian propaganda may not be an issue for you but it is for plenty of Sikhs. I don't think KA and the issues you (incessantly) talk of are of any significant concern in the UK. Most of us know when to spot an idiot without having to be told a thousand and one times.

Like I said, get off your 4ss and read those books. I don't take you to seriously know because you think insults to Sikhs are acceptable from one source (McLeod and co.) but are unacceptable from other, non significant sources that most half intelligent people know of.

Besides the way you defend them yopu would think that you are a friend/associate/relative of people involved in the McLeodian set. We all know of KA, stop flogging a dead horse. NO ONE is about to become his follower here. So stop repeating yourself like a mad man. It is boring and annoying.

WE GET IT OKAY!!!

Unlike you I have put the extract for you to see.

Wow! If you are serious about these things, is it to much to ask for you to pick up a couple of books and read them? Sadly, you are sympomatic of the laziness that has crept into people's research with modern technology. I thought it was only substandard teenager students who try and get all of their information from the web these days and can't be bothered to purchase or borrow a book to learn.....but you seem to have taken that whole armchair approach yourself.

[singh2]

I don't think KA and the issues you (incessantly) talk of are of any significant concern in the UK.

Are there two brands of sikhism one being followed in UK and the other in rest of world. There are his chelas like Gurbax singh Gullshan in UK

who routinely mislead sikhs. he was an aspirant for the job of head Granthi at harmandir sahib. Was rejected because of sangat's presurre.

The philosophy of kala afghana promoted by IOSS, Missioanry cult, singhsabha Canada is given below

. these are the main issues facing sikhism.

Kala Afghana's (KA) views on different issues (taken from 'Bipran ki Reet to Sach da Marg')

* Bhog & Guru Granth Sahib: Doing bhog of Deg in presence of Guru Granth Sahib is manmat according to KA.

* Sri Amritsar Ishnan: KA states that the holy water of the sarovar should NOT be referred to as Amrit.

* Washing our Feet: KA criticizes the practice of washing our feet before entering Darbar Sahib or our Gurduara Sahibs.

* Amrit Vela: KA states how can you call a particular time of the day Amrit-Vela when so many evil things happen around the world at that time.

* Bhai Veer Singh Ji: KA criticizes Bhai Veer Singh Ji for making anti-Gurmat statements expresses disappointment about his works.

* Bhai Veer Singh Ji, Baba Sri Chand Ji: KA accuses Bhai Veer Singh Ji of lying about Baba Sri Chand Ji, and refers to such writers as "Sikhi day Vayree" (enemies of the Sikhs).

* Amritsar Sarovar: KA implies that there is no basis behind the belief that partaking ishnan in Amritsar sarovar will wash away one's sins. He states that it has nothing to do whatsoever with the Gurbani verse : "RamDaas Sarova Natai || Sabh Utray Pap Kamatai||

* Baba Deep Singh Ji's memorial: KA argues against the need for a memorial for Baba Deep Singh Ji where Baba Ji's severed was laid to rest. He refers to this as idol worship. He questions even whether Baba Ji's severed head had fell at that particular place.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit: KA questions the historical reference that (1)Amrit could revive the dead (the Panj Piarays).(2)Amrit could rid one of previous sins.(3)He states that this kind of belief will convince an Amritdharee to committ further sins.(4)He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)(5)KA states that the reference to Guru Gobind Singh of reviving the Panj Piyarays after cutting their "sees" are pure lies.

* Baba Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: KA states that Baba Jarnail Singh Ji committed acts that brought about the current downfall of the Panth. Baba Jarnail Singh Ji desecrated Sri Darbar Sahib when defended and fortified it. By giving shastars and motorcycles to the Sikh Youth, he (Baba Jarnail Singh) made us into murderers and robbers (dakoos). KA states that even after Baba Harnam Singh also joined in, their Panthic wishes were never fullfilled. He questions their sincerity and wonders if they were are all "bhekhee" (charlatans).

* Khanday-Batay da Amrit & Sweet Pittasay: KA states that to consider that sweet Pittasay were to be used in preparation of Amrit is a maha-Paap (enormous sin) since it implies that : (1) Dasam Patshah must have understood Naam-Amrit to be bitter. (2) Dasam Patshah had forgotten the Pittasay and his mistake was corrected by Mata Jito Jee. States that this Pittasay eposide is a myth and was made up by the enemies of this faith.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 3 Banees of Dasam Patshah: KA ridicules reference to Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees recited during Amrit-Sanchar.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 5 Banees: KA states only the Banees in Guru Granth Sahib were part of the Amrit-Sanchar ceremony. To consider that other three (Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees) were read by the Guru Gobind Singh Ji is utterly direspectful to our SatGurus.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piyaray & Shakti: KA ridicules the concept of Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piaray & the divine powers (Shakti) of Amrit. He also referrs to Amrit-dharees as "Papian di Santaan" (offspring of sinners)

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & Patits: KA states that was responsible for making Sikh children cut their Kes, smoke tobacco, and become Patits. States that for Sikhs, becoming a Singh is a "bharm" (superstition) of the mind. He also states that those who consider Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit as becoming "Guru-waley" (inititation into Sikhism) are mistaken.

* Amrit & Naam: KA states that calling Amrit Naam is BrahmanVaad.

* Jao Tao Premo Khellan… & Baba Deep Singh: KA ridicules the use of this tuk in reference to Baba Deep Singh deed of fighting with his sis on his palm.

* Adultery & Bhai Randhir Singh: KA states that Bhai Randhir Singh Ji wrote that Adultery was allowed in the Rahit.

* Charan-Amrit: KA ridicules that Sikh tradition of Charan-Amrit that existed until Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit replaced it in 1699. He refers to it as a Brahmanic ritual.

* Panj Piaray & Guru Gobind Singh Ji: He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)

* Panj Piaray & Amritdharis: KA ridicules Panj Piaray & Amritdharis, tells story of a man who was so fed up with Amritdharis that he cut his Kes and never kept them again.

* Anand-Karj: He ridicules the Panth Parvan Anand-Karj Ceremony. Lables the Anand Maryada as based on Brahmanic Rituals.

* Bhai Randhir Singh: Labels Bhai Randhir Singh as a "Bipree Agent" (an agent of the Brahmans)

* Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale & others: Ridicules Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale, and other Mahapurakhs for having belief in Chitar-Gupt, Dharam-Raaj, Jums, Narak/Surag, and the afterworld.

* Khanday-Batay, Amrit & Mantar: States that the water put in a sarovar or bowl (Khanday-Batay) can never be called Amrit. Nor can anyone blow any Mantar (WaheGuru) in water and turn it into anything powerful (Amrit). He credits the Brahmans for creating such a belief.

Unquote

kala afghana ideology is embedded in the propaganda being carried out by ragi darshan , Singh sabha canada, IOSS , jasbir Mann , Sikh bulletin, institute for understanding sikhism and missionaries.

Like I said, get off your 4ss and read those books. I don't take you to seriously know because you think insults to Sikhs are acceptable from one source (McLeod and co.) but are unacceptable from other, non significant sources that most half intelligent people know of.

Is that the language you have been groomed in. that says a lot of your background. I can write you back in the same ghetto language but will not. This is the tardemark of atheist chelas of KA and IOSS gang.

Do not think that you are writing on SPN. If you use this tyoe of cheap language you will get appropriate reply.

Besides the way you defend them yopu would think that you are a friend/associate/relative of people involved in the McLeodian set. We all know of KA, stop flogging a dead horse. NO ONE is about to become his follower here. So stop repeating yourself like a mad man. It is boring and annoying.

WE GET IT OKAY!!!

I do not defend anyone. I am exposing the tactics of trained professional propagandists who are diverting attention of sikhs to non issues so that they can indulge in anti sikh propaganda by promoting kala afghana/ IOSS theory of atheism.

Wow! If you are serious about these things, is it to much to ask for you to pick up a couple of books and read them? Sadly, you are sympomatic of the laziness that has crept into people's research with modern technology.

Answer the questions that arise out of extract i put from Mcleod's book. they are repeated.

Here is for you in simple language

1)What is belief system of Hindus.

2) What is their belief on creation of this world.

3) What do they worship?

4)What is belief system of sikhs?

Edited July 29, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

Before we reinvent the wheel why don't you try and investigate the large body of writing on McLeod already in existence. I noticed you have a strategy of avoiding any effort on your part other than copy and pasting from the Internet with abandon but as soon as you have to make any effort.....you demand that people do the work for you and post. I cannot post a whole book on the Internet!

Before we discuss McLeod it is reasonable to ask you to read up properly on what we wil be discussing but......you wont?. I am not here to spoon feed you. Go to the library, borrow the books, read them. Then get back. But we both know that the chances of you doing that is slim.

Are there two brands of sikhism one being followed in UK and the other in rest of world. There are his chelas like Gurbax singh Gullshan in UK who routinely mislead sikhs. he was an aspirant for the job of head Granthi at harmandir sahib. Was rejected because of sangat's presurre.

Here is the thing. I have never heard of this guy and SIngh2, seriously, most Sikhs in the UK wouldn't have. Your blanket statement about UK Sikhs is ridiculous BTW.

Okay we can go in circles now. How about this:

For us to have a proper informed discussion about this, you need to do some background reading. Please do that and we can proceeed. I reiterate my suggestion that you fully read Jacobzh and Fennech's book. They are not too weighty and it wont take too long. Do that and we will continue. In this way you can make your own independent opinion about the works without having little bits and pieces thrown at you over the net in a mickey mouse discussion. Read them and you will get the whole picture of their portrayal of Sikhi. Then we can have an informed discussion instead of the rubbish type that dominate the Internet and you seem keen to participate in.

[singh2]

Here is the thing. I have never heard of this guy and SIngh2, seriously, most Sikhs in the UK wouldn't have. Your blanket statement about UK Sikhs is ridiculous BTW.

I am amazed at your ignorance. Most of sikhs who participate in sikh issues in general know this man. Twice he tried to become a granthi at harmandir sahib.He was rejected because of sangat's stand. His other associctae was jagtar singh jachak from USA who wanted to become akal atkhat jathedar. Both hard core kala afghhanis.

Do not you know one jasvir singh who was doing atheist propaganda on radio Punjab? Do not you know the visits of Darshan Ragi to UK and the commotion it caused among sikhs there. May be a notehr singh from UK on this site may tell you.

It shows you do not know the sikh issues even in your country of residence. How come you are so passionate of this issue.

Jasbir Mann is the main man who wants to keep this issue alive so that he acn indulge in his propaganda against Dasam granth sahib.

All have seen to what extent he can fabricate things and lie and have no shame or self respect. For your information he is going to be a finished force

soon as IOSS was in newer hands recently and they want to work with sikhs to remove their grievances about the activities of this almost defunct organization.

ome introduction about Gurbax singh gulshan

http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic...ventry-booking/

Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Vaheguru Ji Ke Fateh

Have put this topic up to let everyone no the state of Sikhi in the Coventry Sikh Council. What they stand for. They were approached to stop Gurbax Singh Gulshan attending and doing Parchar on the 300 Anniversary Of Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj programme organised buy the Coventry Sikh Council. But due to there stand for Sikhi and Mr Avtar Singh Sanghera the Leader of Babbar Khalsa UK Coventry said he will be attending but we will stop him talking against anything from any Anti Sikhi issues he has e.g. Dasam Granth and Nitnem also a close friend of Kala Afgana. So where do we stand? Well I stand with Sikhi and fighting for the right Parchar. Its like saying to K P S Gill come talk on stage but don't mention all the Sikhs you have killed would we allow him? NO so how do we allow people that work with Punjab Radio and Kala Afgana.

So we have decided and the Sangat to stop this so called UK based Parcharak Gurbax Singh Gulshan attending the Gurdwara Sahib. Could all the GURU KA SIKHS please be available to stop this so called Sikh Parcharak on Sunday 26th October 2008 at Gurdwara Guru Nanak Parkash Coventry, 71 Harnall La West Coventry, CV1 4FB, UK 024 76 226057. be at the Gurdwara Sahib for about 9am We have to make a stand and stop these people doing anything Anti Sikh Parchar they are all RSS people. Its time to make a stand against every Anti Sikh Parcharak.

WE WONT LET THIS GURBAX SINGH GULSHAN ENTER THE GURDWARA SAHIB AND DO ANY PARCHAR SO BE READY ANYONE STOPS US DONT FALL REMEMBER WE ARE THE SONS AND DAUGHTERS OF GURU GOBIND SINGH JI AND REMEMBER SANT JARNAIL SINGH JI KHALSA BHINDRANWALE WHAT HE HAS SAID FORGET WHATS GOING TO HAPPEN JUST TAKE THE STAND.

SO WHERE DO WE STAND ITS UP TO YOU NOW GET ALL YOU EMAILS AND TXT MESSAGES OUT.

IF SAID ANYHTING WRONG FORGIVE ME

YOUR SEVDAR

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA

VAHEGURU JI KE FATEH

Edited July 29, 2009 by singh2

[shaheediyan]

“Most of us know when to spot an idiot without having to be told a thousand and one times.”

Dalsingh, you are missing the trick, the point is that these idiots (who are the most dangerous threat to harmony and understanding of Sikh) are the same idiots that lead the rebuttal of Mcleod, Pashura Singh etc – namely based on their anti-Hindu/ritual agenda.

Your hate/dislike of Singh2 is leading you to use disrespectful language and make cheap attacks on him personally – when he is clearly interested in only discussing the issues. His connection with Singh Sabha CA is completely relevant here, as they fly the defenders of the faith flag against Western Academics.

Singh2 Jeeo, personally I don’t see the point discussing with people who can’t see past their ill informed hate (normally based on the writings of others rather than their own research (which is why dalsingh seems to be insisting you read books, which is doesn’t seem like he has read himself as he simply quote issues from the SS CA defends of the faiths rebuttals. On top of that, he seems to have a personal issue with you, so trying to see him make sense is like head butting a brick wall, its only your head that is going to get hurt, not the brickwall.

Regarding educating the audience, anyone who has 2 brain cells between their ears, will read the mentioned authors works with their own eyes and read them with an unprejudiced mind, putting the information and how it is derived and presented into context.

Other people here are conspiracy theorists, so you have even less chance of changing their minds, as without conspiracy, life for them becomes dull. That aside you have generally lazy people who simply type names into google and present other peoples findings as their own opinions (I see some people doing this repeatedly) without even checking to see the people whose ideas they idolise are in fact heretic naastik shankaari moorakhs.

The whole premise of this debate is that these people refuse to try and understand the difference between a naastik Guru and his anti-Gurmat parchaar worldwide movement and an academic who devoted his life to Sikh studies, putting the efforts (in terms of pure mass) of existing Sikh academics to shame.

The other thing they don’t realise is that we are not defending his ideas, far from it, we are simply giving credit where it is due and admitting that we ourselves don’t agree with everything they say/have found through research.

Lastly, they don’t realise that we want to discuss the theories of these academics (theories we may very well disagree with ourselves) on neutral ground i.e. free from naastik agenda.

Truth to me seems to be that these people have hardly read Mcleods and others works and have only read the crap rebuttals, which I find on the large, arise from jealousy of his achievements/respect and pure hinuphobia.

I’m tired of hitting my head against a brick wall Veer Ji, there are much more productive things we can do, PM again and I will discuss some ideas.

If these brothers of ours are interested in discussing theories, as civilised, unbiased people, and are willing to read the books themselves, than I may enter into discussion, and we may even find that we all agree on some things!

Last note (yes another one lol) Singh2s coments calling people KA chelai etc, do not imply that you physically took kala amrit from KA, it simply means, that you follow some of his theories – be it that you have not derived them directly from his – this just goes to show the massive indirect affect Bhasauria/Afhgana/Darshani are having/have had on the Panth.

Over and out.

[dalsingh101]

Your hate/dislike of Singh2 is leading you to use disrespectful language and make cheap attacks on him personally

And you think the way all subjects lead to KA with Singh2 not a bit strange? Anyone who disagrees with SIngh2 is labelled some sort of conspirator with some dark insidious agenda. That is not a cheap and personal attack? As well as a bit paranoid?

I have been so patient with the Singh and told him to tone down his constantly accusatory pitch on numerous occasions. But still he persists with roping all and sundry into some international plot to exhalt some guy named KA and destablise Sikhi????

His response when asked to calm down (at an age when he should know better), is something like "I am not a Gandhi bhagat", what the heck does that mean? Is he implying that people who can put a point across to other Sikhs without foaming at the mouth is somehow less of a Sikh/man than him? Or is some sort of admirer of Gandhi? (Which I am not).

Regarding educating the audience, anyone who has 2 brain cells between their ears, will read the mentioned authors works with their own eyes and read them with an unprejudiced mind, putting the information and how it is derived and presented into context.

Try telling that to your friend SIngh2, who wants piecemeal quotes posted on forums because he can't be bothered to read whole books himself but wants us to believe his opinion on them based on armchair Internet research. If I am referring to something, I will have read it. Think about that before you jump in with silly comments. Maybe I should take a leaf out of Singh2's book and start ranting about you two being part of some ill intentioned conspiracy to promote McLeod and his chumchay huh? No, I'll leave that to the people who do that kind of nonsense best.

Tell your mate to read up before he starts copying and pasting large chunks of other people's writing on the forum as if they were gospel.

Last note (yes another one lol) Singh2s coments calling people KA chelai etc, do not imply that you physically took kala amrit from KA, it simply means, that you follow some of his theories – be it that you have not derived them directly from his – this just goes to show the massive indirect affect Bhasauria/Afhgana/Darshani are having/have had on the Panth.

You know, give people just a little....I mean a little...credit that they are all not blind morons ready to follow whatever is said by the next "preacher" on the scene when it blatantly goes against well established thinking in the panth. The notorious list of misinformation from KA that Singh2 keeps posting would only be accepted by the dimmest of people, who have zero previous knowledge of Sikhi and no "omphh" to go out and do just a little bit of research themselves. Other than that, those with low self esteem may be fooled into those ideas.

No one with a jot of intelligence is going to believe nam simran, the existence of a soul, the importance of amrit vela etc. are not key aspects of Sikh belief. No Sikh doesn't have love in their heart for Harmandir Sahib. There is no big problem with people starting to discard such key beliefs in favour of what is purported to be promoted by KA. Okay.

There IS an issue of McLeod's Eurocentric perspectives, and those of his chelay (which are often worse than his!) becoming accepted notions for perceiving/understanding Sikhs by those who are influenced by the body of writing that has been produced, which are clearly following the paradigm of orientalist, Eurocentrist bias.

In his own words:

I am a Western historian, trained in the Western methods of historical research and adhering to Western notions of historiography. No attempt has ever been made to conceal this fact. I have always maintained that I am a Western historian and if that status deprives me of reasonable understanding of Sikhism then so be it. …

Edited July 29, 2009 by dalsingh101

[dalsingh101]

For Singh2. I found the following on a thread in this very forum which quotes some of Jacobsh book. Read this to wet your appetite. I hope this prompts you look into the publication further:

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=4012

[shaheediyan]

Dalsingh, its spelt Jakobsh.

Pashaura Singh and Doris J works are independant of McLeod. The research and research subject were original ideas and choices of the authors, they simply chose to be supervised by McLeod (foremost senior western Sikh academic), which is no big mystery.

Again, they are looking at non-spiritual issues, so round and round we go.

In fact, try reading Doris's book, you may find somethings she says are actually true, and things that Utopian minded Sikh authors wouldn't dream of even thinking about or acknowledging, let alone communicating.

Yes Doris is off the mark in some areas, but as with the reading of any academic work, leave the opinions aside and take advantage of good unbiased research and findings.

Re your quote of McLeod, thats fine, thats exactly right, he tried to stay free from bias, emotional blackmail and working under threats. He tried to stay true to a system of academia he believed in, be it he got it wrong at times, some of which he has openly admitted.

The quote simply shows he was an academic (a passionate spectator) and not a player (a Sikh), which the Singh Sabiya CA camp claim to be. The danger of following their witch hunt is that one day you will become the witch hunters, unknowingly, never knowing the intiators were themselves the true witches (and I am not talking about white witches - I know I have watched to much W of Oz, shows my age lol).

I would say end this discussion now, unless anyone here is willing to read Mcleod or any of his fellow academics works, and quote what it is that they exactly have a problem with, in an intelligent non-Area 51 manner.

The initiative should be with those that accuse or have issues (attackers), not those that are neutral (or defenders in your eyes).

Otherwise, let it rest.

[dalsingh101]

but as with the reading of any academic work, leave the opinions aside and take advantage of good unbiased research and findings.

Okay people. Read them if time permits. But I do think it is important to also take time to understand the Orientalist/Occidental paradigm in much of the western "research" on Sikhism.

All of these orientalists make the point the we Sikhs are somehow infected with a Singh Sabha interpretation of our heritage and are unable to see truth as a result. You'll see this point made quite often in all of the McLeodian works. It is only fair and right that we Sikhs make the point that often, their own "research", is biased with the orientalist framework that is ingrained into their academic institutes and processes and has been for centuries. This worldview is ingrained so deeply within their culture that I believe that they are either ignorant of its implications or consciously chose to turn a blind eye to it, as it serves their purpose of projecting the "other" as inferior, albeit indirectly.

Have a look at the link I posted from this very site on Jakobsh work. I am not saying Sikh society is perfect on how they treat women but have a look at how they project all sorts of negativity on Sikhs AND their Gurus.

With regard to women, Guru Nanak's writings, and those of subsequent Guru's, contain a range of views, from the positive to the negative as well as ambivalent attitudes, which suggest a tension between normative, negative assiptions towards women and more positive, inclusive, and emancipated attitudes (Shanker 1994:191). Clearly, Nanak's message maintained that women and members of the lower castes were not in any way barred from attaining enlightenment, the highest purpose of human life (Adi Granth 9, 223). However, procreation, the procreation of sons specifically, was central to Nanak's vision of the ideal woman. An oft-quoted verse, supposedly indicative of Guru Nanak's positive evaluation of womanhood, points to an appreciation of woman only vis-a-vis the procreation process.

''We are concieved in the woman's womb and grow in it. We are engaged to women and we wed them. Through the women's cooperation new generations are born. If one woman dies, we seen another; without the woman there can be no bond. Why call her bad who gives birth to RAJAS? The woman herself is born of the woman, and none comes into this world without the woman, Nanak, the true one alone is independant of the woman (Adi Granth, quoted Grewal 1993:5).''

Guru Nanak's stance towards women as manifested in this passage was strikingly similar to that of the writer of the Brhaspatismriti, written in the fourth century CE, albeit from with a different context. The earlier writer questioned the inconsistencies in the inheritance rights of daughters and sons. These too were based upon the same notion later advocated by Nanak: 'A daughter is born from (the same) human bodies as a son. Why then should the father's wealth be taken by another person' (Aiyanger 1941, cited in Bose 1996:3). While Guru Nanak's words have been lauded as the slogan of emancipation for women in the Sikh tradition, they had more to do with the rejection of prevailing notions of ritual purity and support of the social hierarchy of the time. For women gave birth to sons, especially those of noble birth, how then could they be considered ritually impure? The birthing of sons was the most elevated of aspirations; sons were avenues to fulfillment and the fervent wish of any woman during Indo-Islamic times. Thus, Guru Nanak's challenge, in referring to the contemporary hierarchical order, one which placed Rajahs at the top of that order, also indicated his support of the dominant social and political order of his time.

Yet, more often than not, one senses Guru Nanak's apprehension of the female. Women are often associated with Maya, the feminine principle that deludes the seeker, she that acts as a barrier to the attainment of emancipation. According to the Adi Granth, '[t]here is pleasure in gold, pleasure in silver, pleasure in women, pleasure in scents, pleasure in horses, pleasure in the conjugal bed, pleasure in sweets, pleasure in the flesh-there are so many pleasures of the body that there is no room for the Name' (Adi Granth:3). While woman is only one of the various attachments specified, she is mentioned time and time again, as an attraction to the male, woman thus becomes part of maya. Further, negative images of women were frequently compounded by ambivalent messages towards outcasts of the time ''Evil mindedness is a low woman, cruelty a butcher's wife, a slanderious heart a sweeper woman, wrath which ruineth the world a pariah woman'' (Adi Granth, Macauliffe 1990, VolI:52).

While Guru Nanak grieved the rape of women during the time of Babur, he did not censure the social order of the whole. Moreover, he firmly believed in God's omnipotence and the will of God behind these events (Grewal 1979:162,176). While aware of the social challenges facing the widows of his day, Nanak instead censured them for their unrestrained desires. He did not re-evaluate social institutions such as marriage and marriage practices to make them more equitable for women. Moreover his silence regarding sati is surprising, given that it was primarily confined to the upper echelons of society, to which he belonged. There was also no critique of female infanticide, again, a practise closely aligned to the upper castes. In the final analysis, when it came to the social status of women, Nanak seemed content to leave the prevailing system in place. In the patriarchal world view, women were indeed assigned a position of inferiority, however, that inferiority in no way detracted from their ability to attain salvation; salvation, regardless of station or gender was pronounced open to all who devoted themselves wholeheartedly to the Ultimate.

[Mithar]

All of these orientalists make the point the we Sikhs are somehow infected with a Singh Sabha interpretation of our heritage and are unable to see truth as a result. You'll see this point made quite often in all of the McLeodian works. It is only fair and right that we Sikhs make the point that often, their own "research", is biased with the orientalist framework that is ingrained into their academic institutes and processes and has been for centuries. This worldview is ingrained so deeply within their culture that I believe that they are either ignorant of its implications or consciously chose to turn a blind eye to it, as it serves their purpose of projecting the "other" as inferior, albeit indirectly.

That is exactly why the Niddarites find the Mcleodian orientalist research so attractive. It is unfortunate that we as Sikhs should even have to argue with one another whether or not Mcleodian/Orienalist works are acceptable. Anyone who distorts Sikh history as the Mcleodians have do not deserve even 1% of our respect. Sardar Trilochan Singh Jee's book needs to be read by all Sikhs which exposes the Mcleodian agenda.

I must say, just as Singh2 Jee has done a more than excellent job in exposing the Kala Afghanists, Dal Singh ji has also done a good job in informing the sangat about the Mcleodians especially about the Orientalist mindset.

[singh2]

I am very amazed at conspiracy theories being forwarded and believed in. Here are a set of people who are not leading a sikh life themselves, are patits,tell lies, stoop to low levels, distort sikh scriptures, know nothing about bani , support gang of kala afghana , support atheists who say that there was no AMRIT administered by Guru Gobidn singh ji in 1699 and yet they preach others that sikhism is in danger from imaginary conspirators. They have not put a single quote on the net to prove their point.In fact they themselves are the biggest threat to sikhism. They are the conspirators and must be weeded out of sikhism.

We can find our enemies ourselves and hardly need such thugs masquerading in the garb of sikhs.

can we get answers on the following and why such enemies of sikhs are being supported. This is what atatcks core beliefs of sikhism. Sikhs were brave because they sided with truth. Opportunists can never be good sikhs.

* Bhog & Guru Granth Sahib: Doing bhog of Deg in presence of Guru Granth Sahib is manmat according to KA.

* Sri Amritsar Ishnan: KA states that the holy water of the sarovar should NOT be referred to as Amrit.

* Washing our Feet: KA criticizes the practice of washing our feet before entering Darbar Sahib or our Gurduara Sahibs.

* Amrit Vela: KA states how can you call a particular time of the day Amrit-Vela when so many evil things happen around the world at that time.

* Bhai Veer Singh Ji: KA criticizes Bhai Veer Singh Ji for making anti-Gurmat statements expresses disappointment about his works.

* Bhai Veer Singh Ji, Baba Sri Chand Ji: KA accuses Bhai Veer Singh Ji of lying about Baba Sri Chand Ji, and refers to such writers as "Sikhi day Vayree" (enemies of the Sikhs).

* Amritsar Sarovar: KA implies that there is no basis behind the belief that partaking ishnan in Amritsar sarovar will wash away one's sins. He states that it has nothing to do whatsoever with the Gurbani verse : "RamDaas Sarova Natai || Sabh Utray Pap Kamatai||

* Baba Deep Singh Ji's memorial: KA argues against the need for a memorial for Baba Deep Singh Ji where Baba Ji's severed was laid to rest. He refers to this as idol worship. He questions even whether Baba Ji's severed head had fell at that particular place.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit: KA questions the historical reference that (1)Amrit could revive the dead (the Panj Piarays).(2)Amrit could rid one of previous sins.(3)He states that this kind of belief will convince an Amritdharee to committ further sins.(4)He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)(5)KA states that the reference to Guru Gobind Singh of reviving the Panj Piyarays after cutting their "sees" are pure lies.

* Baba Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: KA states that Baba Jarnail Singh Ji committed acts that brought about the current downfall of the Panth. Baba Jarnail Singh Ji desecrated Sri Darbar Sahib when defended and fortified it. By giving shastars and motorcycles to the Sikh Youth, he (Baba Jarnail Singh) made us into murderers and robbers (dakoos). KA states that even after Baba Harnam Singh also joined in, their Panthic wishes were never fullfilled. He questions their sincerity and wonders if they were are all "bhekhee" (charlatans).

* Khanday-Batay da Amrit & Sweet Pittasay: KA states that to consider that sweet Pittasay were to be used in preparation of Amrit is a maha-Paap (enormous sin) since it implies that : (1) Dasam Patshah must have understood Naam-Amrit to be bitter. (2) Dasam Patshah had forgotten the Pittasay and his mistake was corrected by Mata Jito Jee. States that this Pittasay eposide is a myth and was made up by the enemies of this faith.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 3 Banees of Dasam Patshah: KA ridicules reference to Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees recited during Amrit-Sanchar.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 5 Banees: KA states only the Banees in Guru Granth Sahib were part of the Amrit-Sanchar ceremony. To consider that other three (Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees) were read by the Guru Gobind Singh Ji is utterly direspectful to our SatGurus.

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piyaray & Shakti: KA ridicules the concept of Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piaray & the divine powers (Shakti) of Amrit. He also referrs to Amrit-dharees as "Papian di Santaan" (offspring of sinners)

* Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & Patits: KA states that was responsible for making Sikh children cut their Kes, smoke tobacco, and become Patits. States that for Sikhs, becoming a Singh is a "bharm" (superstition) of the mind. He also states that those who consider Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit as becoming "Guru-waley" (inititation into Sikhism) are mistaken.

* Amrit & Naam: KA states that calling Amrit Naam is BrahmanVaad.

* Jao Tao Premo Khellan… & Baba Deep Singh: KA ridicules the use of this tuk in reference to Baba Deep Singh deed of fighting with his sis on his palm.

* Adultery & Bhai Randhir Singh: KA states that Bhai Randhir Singh Ji wrote that Adultery was allowed in the Rahit.

* Charan-Amrit: KA ridicules that Sikh tradition of Charan-Amrit that existed until Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit replaced it in 1699. He refers to it as a Brahmanic ritual.

* Panj Piaray & Guru Gobind Singh Ji: He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)

* Panj Piaray & Amritdharis: KA ridicules Panj Piaray & Amritdharis, tells story of a man who was so fed up with Amritdharis that he cut his Kes and never kept them again.

* Anand-Karj: He ridicules the Panth Parvan Anand-Karj Ceremony. Lables the Anand Maryada as based on Brahmanic Rituals.

* Bhai Randhir Singh: Labels Bhai Randhir Singh as a "Bipree Agent" (an agent of the Brahmans)

* Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale & others: Ridicules Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale, and other Mahapurakhs for having belief in Chitar-Gupt, Dharam-Raaj, Jums, Narak/Surag, and the afterworld.

* Khanday-Batay, Amrit & Mantar: States that the water put in a sarovar or bowl (Khanday-Batay) can never be called Amrit. Nor can anyone blow any Mantar (WaheGuru) in water and turn it into anything powerful (Amrit). He credits the Brahmans for creating such a belief.

Edited July 30, 2009 by singh2

[shaheediyan]

"That is exactly why the Niddarites find the Mcleodian orientalist research so attractive. It is unfortunate that we as Sikhs should even have to argue with one another whether or not Mcleodian/Orienalist works are acceptable. Anyone who distorts Sikh history as the Mcleodians have do not deserve even 1% of our respect."

Mithar Ji, you forgot to mention the Daleks, Megatron, Skeletor and the Klingons, these dusht of the panth are even more real and dangerous than the above mentioned!!

Should we expose and not even give AKJ, Taksal, the Sants, the Nirmalai or the Nihangs "1%" respect each other, as they don't agree with each on every aspect of Sikhi and ithihaas....?

There are too many pigs flying on this forum nowadays - I love the way you state the above re not deserving 1% respect, yet still have respect for the one person who is trying to put a stop to this witch hunt.

Before you start your anti-Nidar Singh campaign again (not sure why you seem to be bringing that into virtually every debate as there are no 'Niddarites' participating, may be you should try and debunk the research that Nidar Singh has done, or let me guess, you haven't bought his book either, just read paranoid trash about it from other people you admire.

Guess what, very few people agree 100% with what anyone says - we need to learn to see good and take teh good and leave the rest, I doubt very much your sangat or family are 100% perfect, or hold true to every single view of yours, does that mean you disown them..?

The only person/people with a real agenda are the unholy trinity from K'neda, and surprise surprise, they are the ones whose intelligence most of the McLeod haters are relying on!

We will keep going around in circles, forget the conspiracies and relying on others paranoia, read the books and present whatever issues you have in original fashion, and we can discuss, like I said you may be surprised, we may even agree with you on many points, but then again, how boring it would be to live in a world without 'The Borg'.

[dalsingh101]

Mithar Ji, you forgot to mention the Daleks, Megatron, Skeletor and the Klingons, these dusht of the panth are even more real and dangerous than the above mentioned!!

What kind of stupid comment is that?

[singh2]

I cannot post a whole book on the Internet!

It seems sikhnet had similar problem when someone was persisitently posting biased stuff from propaganda sites namely

globalsikhstuides and singhsabhacanada on thier moderated site. Moderator's note speaks volume about the poster.

Modeartor also gave some links about his books on the net that are pasted below the comments for all to see.

http://www.sikhnet.com/discussion/viewtopi...?f=2&t=2423

Moderator Note: When discussing facts we do not need to bolster our claims with words like, "and others agree with me here." We had already disallowed the video that you mention in your message because it appears to be extremely biased. Now we see that you include these links in your signature. Posting rejected material and links to propaganda sites, if continued, would result in banning you from this forum.

Everyone, kindly try to be balanced and discuss a writing or statement rather than a person. Thanks for your cooperation.Link's to Mcloed's writing's analysis

Re: Sikh Historian W.H. Mcleod's Akaal chalana

by Yuktanand Singh on Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:50 pm

http://books.google.com/books?id=Mj28AA ... =WH+McLeod

http://books.google.com/books?id=OkKhOi ... =WH+McLeod

Edited July 31, 2009 by singh2

[shaheediyan]

"What kind of stupid comment is that?"

An appropriate one.

[drawrof]

what do you guys have against k'neda?

Me, N30...who is the 3rd party of the trinity?

[shaheediyan]

One member of the unholy trinity is always in gupt occultation....

[dalsingh101]

It seems sikhnet had similar problem when someone was persisitently posting biased stuff from propaganda sites namely globalsikhstuides and singhsabhacanada on thier moderated site.

That is rich coming from you as you seem to be the copy and paste king. If anyone is doing this it is yourself. Don't even try to suggest I am doing anything familiar. Trawl through my posts. I have not posted anything from any of the sites you mention and keep you up at noght. Instead, I have quoted directly from the publications of McLeod and his chumchay. Which you defend but can't be bothered to read fully.

You really are something else.

[singh2]

I have quoted directly from the publications of McLeod

I did not see any in this thread. But now we have two of his books for reference.

[Balbir Singh]

Below is what kala afghan wrote

Kala afghana writes

1)Waheguru is not Gurmantra of sikhs

2) Amrit vela has no significance in sikhism

3) Nam simran is useless excercise

4) There is nothing like soul in a body

5) There is no karmic theory in Gurbani teachings

6) Sikhism does not endorse reincarnation.

7) Respect for Harmandir sahib is a brahmin practice

8) Pool of Harmandir sahib is just like an ordinary pond

9) Trimmed beards officers have brought laurels to sikhs for bravery in battlefield . then

why sikhs clamour for Amrit?

I can go on but will stop. Has Mcleod said anything like this? Please reply. May be your understanding of sikhism is different t

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all!

I have curiosity to know.

1) What is Gurmantra of A Sikh if not Waheguru?

2) Which Vela has significance in Sikhism if not Amrit Vela?

3) What is useful exercise if not Naam Simran?

4) What is that if it is not soul in a body?

5) Why Gurbani sings about karma often if there is no karmic theory in Gurbani teachings?

6) Why true Gurus talk about reincarnation if Sikhism does not endorse reincarnation?

7) What should Sikhs esteem if respect for the Harmandir sahib is a Brahmin practice?

8) What else is holy if the Pool of Harmandir sahib is just like an ordinary pond?

9) Do trimmed beards officers not need Naam Amrit?

*****

Mcleod was a historian.

Our Gurus did not use the word history once.

Balbir Singh

[HSD1]

I was talking to a PanAfricanist friend of mine and she was saying the same thing. She came to the conclusion that it may actually be a biological feature of theirs. Personally, I believe it is culturally ingrained. It is a result of the imperialistic mindset and I think it is a fairly recent phenomena i.e. 500/400 years old.

Their society now has this mindset deeply ingrained within them. Dissemnation comes from widespread sources such as their interpretation/selection of history, media. Their is a deep vein of passive hatred and neurosis at the heart of it.

You wrote about the workplace and recently I talked to people from many different cultures and I was shocked at the level of discrimination they reported at work. Apparently there are lots of cases of discrimination and bullying going on in tribunals. These cases are usually settled out of court with a legally binding severance agreement that the victim does not refer to the case in public.

A recent one of interest concerns a Sikh scientist who worked on the Dolly the sheep DNA clone project.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/...een-776746.html

lol, whats a Panafricanist? someone who's ancestors came from different parts of africa?

i think another source of their arrogance/attitude is in part due to the fact they do own history. they had the best navy, so they could sail the world. their constant fighting with other european countries set them up for taking over everyone else. even now, they have the worlds best special forces, have somehow kept britain running without the resources of the old empire and force their hands in the world wherever they can. we on the other hand are the new 'jewish diaspora' in western countries, and in hindustan the sikhs are like the 'sioux nation'. having said that, all those impressive deeds does not mean that the common white person is in anyway responsible for any of them. reminds me of how some sikhs today act like they were the ones who fought at Chamkaur or Chillianwallah!

i also dont think its biological either, as this attitude is not held by all white people. if the media and interpretation or presentation of history cause them to think like this, how come some do not end up like that and are quite tolerant/respectful/interested in our history? i think if we could figure out how to encourage more of the latter, we could live in a better society.

also, when upper class whites and sikhs are together, i notice a lot of animosity from our side towards them. why do you think that is (this is open to anyone, not just dalsingh)?

Edited August 6, 2009 by HSD

[dalsingh101]

Got a nice early start today. Amrit vela looking a bit grey in London. Yesterday morning the sky was the most beautiful mix of colours. Think it will rain.

lol, whats a Panafricanist? someone who's ancestors came from different parts of africa?

It's an ideology that seeks to break down barriers between African people and those of African descent (i.e. African Americans), from what I (poorly) understand. (I know wikepedia is not exactly gospel but.......... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Africanism)

i think another source of their arrogance/attitude is in part due to the fact they do own history. they had the best navy, so they could sail the world. their constant fighting with other european countries set them up for taking over everyone else. even now, they have the worlds best special forces, have somehow kept britain running without the resources of the old empire and force their hands in the world wherever they can.

I think being an island helped big time in this. Launching a fullscale invasion over here was frought with perils.....as the Armada would testify. National development too is aided by relative peace and stabilty and although they have constantly been at war, they have never had to regularly contend with hordes like Abdali's or Nadir Shah's for example. Plus there wasn't much to take from here in terms of booty. I guess the island theory also helps partially explain their past naval supremacy. No boats = stuck on the island.

Regarding your last point (in bold above). We have yet to see what the future holds. Will they still be able to keep their global position over the next century? Who knows? It already feels like their once unchallenged position is waning globally. Other than being an appendage of America, what does the future hold for Britain? Many resent affiliation with Europe here. There is no denying that Britain seriously benefitted from the gains from their empire days and I guess some people here have trouble moving on from that. A large part of that experience for them involved creating and fostering a world view that saw the races they were to attack and conquer as inferior. It had a great effect on their so called academic studies and worldview that some would say lingers on today, albeit in a less in your face way. To be fair, the point that we (Sikhs) have a problem moving on from our own people's 1700s history can also be broached. But I don't think our own history has ever been used as some justification for riding roughshod over people. Personally I think going down a peg or two will do the folks here a world of good. Let them do what they want but they shouldn't really be interfering around the globe, especially when they usually makes things worse in the regions where they meddle in the long run.

the fact they do own history.

This thing you wrote is at the heart of the matter. Making English 'the' International language and then 'owning' various subjects [including other people's history], puts one in an incredible position of power (over them). Sikhs should resist this strongly. Our own fault lies in our conservatism towards our history. Funny thing is that if a Sikh writer had wrote the very same things as McLeod about Sikh history, that guy would have been in the same boat as Kala Afghana. If a Sikh man had simply said (for instance), that Guru Nanak never started a new faith but essentially reworked the standard sant tradition of North India, they would probably end up with getting their pagh knocked off at some stage. Sometimes I wonder about the lingering effects of colonialism on us...some of the older people (and some younger) for example seem to have serious sycophantic tendencies towards our former masters and what they say.

we on the other hand are the new 'jewish diaspora' in western countries, and in hindustan the sikhs are like the 'sioux nation'. having said that, all those impressive deeds does not mean that the common white person is in anyway responsible for any of them. reminds me of how some sikhs today act like they were the ones who fought at Chamkaur or Chillianwallah!

I'd be interested in what similarities you see between the Jewish diaspora and us? Is it having no independent homeland? With India, I think we have to "suck it up" right now. Speaking in terms of global politics and comparitive numbers, the concept of a Sikh homeland seems less popular than neo-nazism at the moment! lol All the talk is of the emerging superpower, India! No one really takes the views of a portion of a 1 to 2 percent minority group with any weight in all of this. Plus, you know us, we will be our own enemies anyway. You know, there was a time as a kid, pre1984, when you would feel proud of being Indian.....since then.....

That being said you do meet Sikhs who are proud to be Indian. That is difficult for me, but I can imagine a generation or two down the line, it may be different for Sikhs. Unless another 1984 happens......(God forbid).

i also dont think its biological either, as this attitude is not held by all white people. if the media and interpretation or presentation of history cause them to think like this, how come some do not end up like that and are quite tolerant/respectful/interested in our history? i think if we could figure out how to encourage more of the latter, we could live in a better society.

The "some" you talk of above are a minority from my experiences. Top down attempts to demonise or belittle races/people

doesn't fool everyone. What I was talking about earlier was the whole "mechanics" of the society not individuals. Thankfully some people are able to see through the fog and lies. Sadly not enough. Some people simply don't care about what is happening as long they are not effected. This apathetic group (the majority) essentially turns a blind eye to it all. In effect though, they are complicit through inaction. Going back to the thread. I think people like McLeod, fit squarely in the bracket of those who wish to preserve the old status quo. The old ways of thinking are still engrained in his work. That is why so many Sikhs are offended by his work. Other than that he plays the old flattery game with Jatts. Which he would know (from Imperial history) is how to gain their compliance.

I don't think it is biological either by the way...more social conditioning, that not everyone falls for. The most interesting questions relates to who historically initiated these ideas, what techniques did they use to gain the support of so many people and what was the journey of those original ideas becoming widepread/ingrained into the fabric of society.

also, when upper class whites and sikhs are together, i notice a lot of animosity from our side towards them. why do you think that is (this is open to anyone, not just dalsingh)?

I've never seen Sikhs and the upper classes together myself. Do you mean the middle classes? Who do you mean when you say upperclasses, exactly?

Anyway, enough rambling.....

Edited August 7, 2009 by dalsingh101

[HSD1]

I think being an island helped big time in this. Launching a fullscale invasion over here was frought with perils.....as the Armada would testify. National development too is aided by relative peace and stabilty and although they have constantly been at war, they have never had to regularly contend with hordes like Abdali's or Nadir Shah's for example. Plus there wasn't much to take from here in terms of booty. I guess the island theory also helps partially explain their past naval supremacy. No boats = stuck on the island.

in a way yes. but the romans, vikings, angles, saxons and normans all proved its possible. and having to contend with imperial france and other european alliances is what set england off on her expansionist craze. if we sikhs did not have the afghans/other sulleh and the maharattas/chinese to fight with, our first khalsa raj legionnaires would not have been as formidable as they were on the fields of Mudki and Chillianwallah. my point is that in front of whitey, we should not acknowledge any superior beliefs they have, as they individually are not responsible for their ancestors deeds or britains stature in the world today. but we have to face that they did end up 'uber alles', where as the khalsa was crushed and then moulded to fit the needs of others. once we understand history, once we see the 'peaks and troughs' we can actually begin to shape our future, a future where the Khalsa marches on waheguru's hukam, not from orders issued in London, Delhi or Islamabad.

Regarding your last point (in bold above). We have yet to see what the future holds. Will they still be able to keep their global position over the next century? Who knows? It already feels like their once unchallenged position is waning globally. Other than being an appendage of America, what does the future hold for Britain? Many resent affiliation with Europe here. There is no denying that Britain seriously benefitted from the gains from their empire days and I guess some people here have trouble moving on from that. A large part of that experience for them involved creating and fostering a world view that saw the races they were to attack and conquer as inferior. It had a great effect on their so called academic studies and worldview that some would say lingers on today, albeit in a less in your face way. To be fair, the point that we (Sikhs) have a problem moving on from our own people's 1700s history can also be broached. But I don't think our own history has ever been used as some justification for riding roughshod over people. Personally I think going down a peg or two will do the folks here a world of good. Let them do what they want but they shouldn't really be interfering around the globe, especially when they usually makes things worse in the regions where they meddle in the long run.

yes, no one knows the future. but it can be predicted, prepared for and events manipulated to come to an outcome that suits those who pursue it thoroughly enough. i am relatively young, and i can easily say that the english are a ruthless, machiavellian lot when it comes down to it, and are a far cry from the gentleman image they try to portray. they are already preparing for war with russia and china (recent mod papers have pretty much said that is who britain will face next). they are encouraging america to surround those two, and help the americans by restarting what the goreh refer to as the 'Anglosphere'. my point is that whatever happens, these people come out with something to deal with it, often completely out of the blue unless you see the signs before hand. us sikhs on the other hand, walk into every trap our enemies can lay. the whites are ruthless and cunning. they spent 40 years on the borders of the punjab watching us. many sikh historians say they were scared etc etc and thats why they didnt attack. but they were just waiting and learning. apart from their afghanistan-adventure (which was a result of their greed), they were able to wait until the time was right and all their plots came together. the khalsa on the fields of Mudki had no idea what they would face. we had no real intelligence on our enemy - they could have come running with spears and shields or Challenger tanks, we wouldnt have known. this attitude has to change, especially if we want to stop being the pawns in the games of others.

now i'm not saying white people are better than us. hell no. a sikh raised in the same country/institutions/class background, will do just as well as any gora. but on a community level and then a national level, they will beat us hands down each time. we cant ignore that, we should face it and we should do something about it. many sikhs use the glory of our history as a shield from the real world - they refuse to acknowledge that we are being out maneuvered by our enemies and being set up for a fall. i seriously doubt our ancestors would be happy if they saw us hiding behind their deeds and using them as excuses for apathy, ignorance and a lack of engagement with the world.

"they shouldn't really be interfering around the globe, especially when they usually makes things worse in the regions where they meddle in the long run"

i find your above comment very interesting. what makes you think they actually have the interest of others at heart? they trot that line out again and again, but its a lie. during the empire, they went on about the 'white mans burden' etc and now have other excuses for what they get up to. its all part of their gentleman facade. why is their so much corruption in the 3rd world, especially when western powers could do so much to force them to change? well put it like this: when a nigerian/venezuelan/etc official becomes a minister/president/etc, they have access to riduculous amounts of wealth. and guess what, they dip their hands right in. but what do they do with all their countries' wealth?!? can they invest it in their countries institutions/banks? no, not if they want to see it again. so, they go to a country which will look after all that money.........you guessed it!! its the usa or britain. and then they leg it over here and enjoy their ill-gotten gains, which are looked after by the great banking institutions of this country. they dont do anything to help others unless it really helps them a lot more. they will keep on sticking their noses and hands in other people affairs until someone cuts them off.

This thing you wrote is at the heart of the matter. Making English 'the' International language and then 'owning' various subjects [including other people's history], puts one in an incredible position of power (over them). Sikhs should resist this strongly. Our own fault lies in our conservatism towards our history. Funny thing is that if a Sikh writer had wrote the very same things as McLeod about Sikh history, that guy would have been in the same boat as Kala Afghana. If a Sikh man had simply said (for instance), that Guru Nanak never started a new faith but essentially reworked the standard sant tradition of North India, they would probably end up with getting their pagh knocked off at some stage. Sometimes I wonder about the lingering effects of colonialism on us...some of the older people (and some younger) for example seem to have serious sycophantic tendencies towards our former masters and what they say.

i think its a mixed bag. some sikhs are suck ups to goreh/hindustanis/musis (delete as applicable), and others hate goreh/hindustanis/musis (delete as applicable) to the core. my grandad told me when he was in the punjab (before and after partition) that they were all told how britain had streets paved with gold and other nonsense. he believed it as the british were practically stealing anything valuable in the punjab. when he got here, it was all terraced houses and dirty grimy industrial towns. obviously my grandad did not keep any beliefs in their crap.

I'd be interested in what similarities you see between the Jewish diaspora and us? Is it having no independent homeland? With India, I think we have to "suck it up" right now. Speaking in terms of global politics and comparitive numbers, the concept of a Sikh homeland seems less popular than neo-nazism at the moment! lol All the talk is of the emerging superpower, India! No one really takes the views of a portion of a 1 to 2 percent minority group with any weight in all of this. Plus, you know us, we will be our own enemies anyway. You know, there was a time as a kid, pre1984, when you would feel proud of being Indian.....since then.....

That being said you do meet Sikhs who are proud to be Indian. That is difficult for me, but I can imagine a generation or two down the line, it may be different for Sikhs. Unless another 1984 happens......(God forbid).

well its more the history of the jewish diaspora, as their religion changed so much. as a minority wherever we go, we will always take in their cultural and possibly religous habits. sikhs in hindustan avoid beef, but in canada and argentina they do eat beef (well not all of them, but you know what i mean). in britain, loads of sikhs go down the pub. and before anyone says they arent sikhs, well none of us are sikhs then. this spartan-esque attitude of kicking people out of sikhism is another thing we need to get over. anyway, like i was saying, the jews went through a massive change in their religion after spending 2000 years in the wilderness of not having a country. if jesus and the rest of his terrorists/freedom fighter friends came back and wandered around israel, they would probably cry as they would look at the jews and see that they were like the jews that King Herod was trying to encourage in his kingdom. its a hard point to make, i hope you understand. let me give you another one: imagine we go to khalistan in the future and find its filled with 'sikhs' who believe in a warped sense of sikhi, misinterpret the SGGS ji and have stripped out major parts of our heritage and replaced it with stuff from other religions/cultures? badal is like a modern day king herod, and we will face great turmoil if we dont heed the warnings of history. as for just sitting it out, that will be like signing our own death warrants. if we sikhs dont win something by the time our grandchildren's generation is middle aged, we are will be on the slippery path to having our religion changed beyond recognition over time. so that means more hindusikhs in india, and more sikhs in the diaspora who are going to adopt what they see around them.

The "some" you talk of above are a minority from my experiences. Top down attempts to demonise or belittle races/people

doesn't fool everyone. What I was talking about earlier was the whole "mechanics" of the society not individuals. Thankfully some people are able to see through the fog and lies. Sadly not enough. Some people simply don't care about what is happening as long they are not effected. This apathetic group (the majority) essentially turns a blind eye to it all. In effect though, they are complicit through inaction. Going back to the thread. I think people like McLeod, fit squarely in the bracket of those who wish to preserve the old status quo. The old ways of thinking are still engrained in his work. That is why so many Sikhs are offended by his work. Other than that he plays the old flattery game with Jatts. Which he would know (from Imperial history) is how to gain their compliance.

like i said before, they learn before they leap and knew us inside out. i remember someone i know who is in the army and collects random shit from the colonial periods. one thing he had was a badly tattered handbook given to british officers about what to do when in control of a sikh unit, and it was quite funny as it described our turbulent, lazy attitude and our sudden ability to jump into action, as well as other stuff, and how to get the best of sikhs. most of it was unreadable though, which was a shame. we sikhs dont bother using our brains, and we make the fatal assumption that everyone else is as apathetic or careless as we are. they're not. they just want you to think they are.

I don't think it is biological either by the way...more social conditioning, that not everyone falls for. The most interesting questions relates to who historically initiated these ideas, what techniques did they use to gain the support of so many people and what was the journey of those original ideas becoming widepread/ingrained into the fabric of society.

true. i know that many whites tried to mix hinduism and christianity in india and others got circumcised and other stuff at the beginning of the raj. but that attitude changed. i think it mainly came with the ease at which they were able to use their navy to blunt their enemies, and how the east india company crushed native indian nations. lets face it, if the khalsa had beaten the english and made it to the shores of this country, they would have felt like they were born to rule. or if a modern day indian company took over all of europe, which is what the english did to the subcontinent, most indians would think that there was somthing inferior about europeans.

and how can those views be changed? the only way i can think of is if they got a good kicking in a war. but that would cause major trouble all over the country, and would end up with a lot of people dead. i cant think of another way.

I've never seen Sikhs and the upper classes together myself. Do you mean the middle classes? Who do you mean when you say upperclasses, exactly?

no i was on about real posh people. in my experience, i cant explain it, but they just annoy me. other sikhs have said the same thing. i can get on with other goreh. i was just asking as it is a contrast with your comments about sikhs sucking up to colonial masters. is it resentment or some ancestoral anger at them? i dont know. time for me to go and have a think. and the end of my unclear rant.

[dalsingh101]

in a way yes. but the romans, vikings, angles, saxons and normans all proved its possible. and having to contend with imperial france and other european alliances is what set england off on her expansionist craze.

That is debatable. Plus you've also pointed out the absurdity of British military superiority seeing as they have been conquered a few times. Maybe it is the surviving blood of these conquerors playing a apart in all of the recent history anyway? Did anything in these people's previous history ever give an impression that they would be capable of what they have done with imperialism? If anything, based on some of the surviving Roman accounts of Britain, this place was considered the epitome of savagery and backwardness. A Friday night closing time in many typically British towns would attest to this today even.

if we sikhs did not have the afghans/other sulleh and the maharattas/chinese to fight with, our first khalsa raj legionnaires would not have been as formidable as they were on the fields of Mudki and Chillianwallah. my point is that in front of whitey, we should not acknowledge any superior beliefs they have, as they individually are not responsible for their ancestors deeds or britains stature in the world today.

Absolutely. But many of them still like to puff themsleves up about it. Especially Northern tw4ts, for some reason.

but we have to face that they did end up 'uber alles', where as the khalsa was crushed and then moulded to fit the needs of others. once we understand history, once we see the 'peaks and troughs' we can actually begin to shape our future, a future where the Khalsa marches on waheguru's hukam, not from orders issued in London, Delhi or Islamabad.

Don't forget how they were shafted by The Afghans. Sad thing is, that many view the "remoulded/recycled for British use" style Khalsa as some sort of grand achievement. The descendents of the Khalsa must learn to rule themselves justly but sadly many of the less sophisticated brothers fail to understand this.

yes, no one knows the future. but it can be predicted, prepared for and events manipulated to come to an outcome that suits those who pursue it thoroughly enough.

i am relatively young, and i can easily say that the english are a ruthless, machiavellian lot when it comes down to it, and are a far cry from the gentleman image they try to portray. they are already preparing for war with russia and china (recent mod papers have pretty much said that is who britain will face next). they are encouraging america to surround those two, and help the americans by restarting what the goreh refer to as the 'Anglosphere'. my point is that whatever happens, these people come out with something to deal with it, often completely out of the blue unless you see the signs before hand.

Strategic planning.

That is essentially the hub of the matter, quality strategic or top level planning filtering down to activism at the ground level. At the moment this doesn't exist in the panth. The fact that we essentially have greedy landowners for leaders with no patriotic streak is killling us. Any decision they make will be based on self serving land owning instincts, nothing for the greater good. Even if Mahrajah Ranjit SIngh was a bit randy and expansionist, he at least improved the lot of the common man judging by contemporary accounts. Whilst we burn away our energy on Kala Afghana, Dera Saucha Souda (?), Dasam Granth arguments and whoever will appear next for us to bicker over, the rest of the progressing world looks outwards towards real threats.

us sikhs on the other hand, walk into every trap our enemies can lay.

Yep, just make us argue amongst ourselves. With so many nonthinking backward mugs in the quom, this is as easy as pie.

the whites are ruthless and cunning. they spent 40 years on the borders of the punjab watching us. many sikh historians say they were scared etc etc and thats why they didnt attack. but they were just waiting and learning. apart from their afghanistan-adventure (which was a result of their greed), they were able to wait until the time was right and all their plots came together. the khalsa on the fields of Mudki had no idea what they would face. we had no real intelligence on our enemy - they could have come running with spears and shields or Challenger tanks, we wouldnt have known.

You see, I think people like McLeod's work is exactly in this mould. Intricate studies of us concentrating on our weaknesses. Look at us in comparison. Whiteman have produced hundreds (more likely thousands) of books on Sikhs and have had a big say in what Sikhs have been able to do for well over a century. In comparison, how many books have Sikhs written about Anglos? How much do they understand them, both now and in the past? Given that they simply don't, or decide to take the path of sycophancy, we will always be mugs in the games of people more forward thinking and manipulative than us.

i find your above comment very interesting. what makes you think they actually have the interest of others at heart?

I don't. I haven't fallen for that one. In my opinion, they are just biding their time knowing that in a matter of a few generations we will be largely absorbed in their community. The only people that may not are Muslims.

they will keep on sticking their noses and hands in other people affairs until someone cuts them off.

What is sickening is that many Sikhs are blind to this. Especially Jat Sikhs many of whom would happily go along with their nonsense.

like i said before, they learn before they leap and knew us inside out. i remember someone i know who is in the army and collects random shit from the colonial periods. one thing he had was a badly tattered handbook given to british officers about what to do when in control of a sikh unit, and it was quite funny as it described our turbulent, lazy attitude and our sudden ability to jump into action, as well as other stuff, and how to get the best of sikhs. most of it was unreadable though, which was a shame. we sikhs dont bother using our brains, and we make the fatal assumption that everyone else is as apathetic or careless as we are. they're not. they just want you to think they are.

That is it. Sikhs were essentially easily pliable canon fodder for these people during colonial times. The whole martial races thing was projected to ensure those that were unlikely to exert their own independence were encouraged to enlist. They twisted the Amrit ceremony according to Macauliffe to include a vow of loyalty to the British monarchy. We were had, hook, line and sinker. They also caused a Protestant streak in Sikhi, which I am not sure is a good or bad thing (only time will tell, but having a look at the breakdown in conservative values in Protestant society doesn't bode well).

no i was on about real posh people. in my experience, i cant explain it, but they just annoy me. other sikhs have said the same thing. i can get on with other goreh. i was just asking as it is a contrast with your comments about sikhs sucking up to colonial masters. is it resentment or some ancestoral anger at them? i dont know. time for me to go and have a think. and the end of my unclear rant.

I think it is because such people live in a very structured, formal way with lots of formalities and graces they must adhere to. This is in stark contrast the the average rural Panjabi lifestyle which is often brusque, forward, forceful and direct. The two ways of life are essentially the antithesis of the other.

Enough already...

[HSD1]

That is debatable. Plus you've also pointed out the absurdity of British military superiority seeing as they have been conquered a few times. Maybe it is the surviving blood of these conquerors playing a apart in all of the recent history anyway? Did anything in these people's previous history ever give an impression that they would be capable of what they have done with imperialism? If anything, based on some of the surviving Roman accounts of Britain, this place was considered the epitome of savagery and backwardness. A Friday night closing time in many typically British towns would attest to this today even.

unfortunately, they refer to this as one of their 'underdog' periods. which brings me to another point - the english always claim they are the underdogs......but this is just the image they want to project of themselve. in reality, they are cunning, sly and very very thorough in planning and execution of what they do. which is a strategy that has worked well for them.

Don't forget how they were shafted by The Afghans. Sad thing is, that many view the "remoulded/recycled for British use" style Khalsa as some sort of grand achievement. The descendents of the Khalsa must learn to rule themselves justly but sadly many of the less sophisticated brothers fail to understand this.

and do you know the history of britain's first failure in afghanistan? i'll tell you. the british wanted us to invade afghanistan with them. they offered us all the resources they could muster, if we provided the troops. maharaja ranjit singh or one of the sikh army commandeers proposed another plan: the british army would be allowed across the punjab and given support by the khalsa, but would have to invade afghanistan by themselves..... and if they won, they would be allowed free passage across the punjab to their bases in afghanistan. the british jumped at the chance, as if they won, they would turn the khalsa raj into a subjugated state. blinded by their greed, they went straight in......... and the rest as they say is history. see? we sikhs can be as good at tricking others as they are at tricking us. unfortunately, this political victory was short lived as the khalsa was defeated and then used for an entire century to secure the north west frontier.

totally agree with the part about learning to rely on ourselves.

That is essentially the hub of the matter, quality strategic or top level planning filtering down to activism at the ground level. At the moment this doesn't exist in the panth. The fact that we essentially have greedy landowners for leaders with no patriotic streak is killling us. Any decision they make will be based on self serving land owning instincts, nothing for the greater good. Even if Mahrajah Ranjit SIngh was a bit randy and expansionist, he at least improved the lot of the common man judging by contemporary accounts. Whilst we burn away our energy on Kala Afghana, Dera Saucha Souda (?), Dasam Granth arguments and whoever will appear next for us to bicker over, the rest of the progressing world looks outwards towards real threats.

well then, we have to expose these people, and use the same devices and instruments that other nations use to inspire patriotism in their lot. badal has to go. and replaced by a real leader. how to accomplish this, i have no idea.

You see, I think people like McLeod's work is exactly in this mould. Intricate studies of us concentrating on our weaknesses. Look at us in comparison. Whiteman have produced hundreds (more likely thousands) of books on Sikhs and have had a big say in what Sikhs have been able to do for well over a century. In comparison, how many books have Sikhs written about Anglos? How much do they understand them, both now and in the past? Given that they simply don't, or decide to take the path of sycophancy, we will always be mugs in the games of people more forward thinking and manipulative than us.

it is hard to find out what sikhs back then thought of the english. some english accounts from travellers in the punjab say that most of the sikhs they met considered english women heavy drinkers, and thought that london was full of prostitutes. both of which were true, but not exactly deep insights which would have helped the khalsa in the upcoming wars.

What is sickening is that many Sikhs are blind to this. Especially Jat Sikhs many of whom would happily go along with their nonsense.

really? most of the pro-khalistanis are jatts. i've also had my fair share of problems with stupid khatris too, so its not just jatts.

That is it. Sikhs were essentially easily pliable canon fodder for these people during colonial times. The whole martial races thing was projected to ensure those that were unlikely to exert their own independence were encouraged to enlist. They twisted the Amrit ceremony according to Macauliffe to include a vow of loyalty to the British monarchy. We were had, hook, line and sinker. They also caused a Protestant streak in Sikhi, which I am not sure is a good or bad thing (only time will tell, but having a look at the breakdown in conservative values in Protestant society doesn't bode well).

exactly. the whole point of this discussion is to dig deeper and unearth what mcleod and others like him are like, and to help other sikhs who read this see it too. all those who defend him have hopefully seen the thinking behind our opinions and wont fall for it so easily next time.

I think it is because such people live in a very structured, formal way with lots of formalities and graces they must adhere to. This is in stark contrast the the average rural Panjabi lifestyle which is often brusque, forward, forceful and direct. The two ways of life are essentially the antithesis of the other.

Errr, not really - its not that. Find some posh twats and see what happens.