Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The emergence of the Namdhari movement was a thorn in the side of the British Government and the British were highly concerned about it. The best way to tackle this situation was to create another movement against it, which would slow down the growth of the Namdhari movement. This was the birth of the Singh Sabha movement. The most important factor, which could create a divide between the Namdharis and the other Sikhs was the question of Guru Ship. The Namdharis believed that Guru Gobind Singh did not die at Nanded , but came to Punjab in disguise and conferred the Gurgaddi to Guru Balak Singh. Contrary to the other Sikhs who believed that Guru Gobind Singh died at Nanded and bestowed the Gurgaddi to the Adi Granth. This reason was more than enough for the British and the loyal British Sikhs to administer the policy of "divide and rule". (By Shamsher Singh Ashok -"Punjab dian Lehraan".)

Posted (edited)

I would say the Singh Sabha movement was heavily influenced by the Protestant Christian style education that key people involved had (i.e. Bhai Vir Singh).

I think they tried to interpret Sikhi in light of the western, rational and so-called "enlightened" ideas they had come across. But they also tried to be true to the spirit of Sikhi, at least at how they understood gurmat. The trend is to move away from a Hindu cosmology to a more western one.

They also made a decision to generally follow the new British establishment although later they would challenge them (like they did to get control of the Gurdwaras from mahants). No challenge involved a direct threat to British rule. Politics was well within the sphere of what actions Singh Sabias took and their understanding of the democratic process influenced them. However I don't think it would be accurate to simply portray them as a British creation. For example Thakar Singh Sandhawalia, Maharajah Daleep Singh's cousin was a founder and he is the one actually responsible for reconverting Daleep to Sikhism and informing him of his lost heritage. He tried to get the Maharajah to come back to Panjab and claim his rightful inheritence. The truth is quite complex in my opinion. The breakthroughs made by whitey couldn't have been lost on our forefathers and some of them may have understood that we must master such things in order to operate in the new world around them. M. Ranjit SIngh was the first to recognise this in terms of military tactics and hardware. But it cannot be denied that some of them may well have crossed over the line into sycophancy. What happened was that a paradigm shift occured with the introduction of western ideas. Some of the Singh Sabha intellectuals were at the forefront of trying to negotiate this sudden change. The clearest example I can give is how after and during this period miracles in the biographical accounts of the Gurus become more and more muted. I personally feel that a lot of good work was done by the Singh Sabhias. Some editing of puratan manuscripts may have been a bit zealous, but even this I can understand.

The Namdhari suggestion that dasmesh pita lived till 149 giving secret support is one most Sikhs would find ridiculous.

Edited by dalsingh101
Posted

The emergence of the Namdhari movement was a thorn in the side of the British Government and the British were highly concerned about it. The best way to tackle this situation was to create another movement against it, which would slow down the growth of the Namdhari movement. This was the birth of the Singh Sabha movement. The most important factor, which could create a divide between the Namdharis and the other Sikhs was the question of Guru Ship. The Namdharis believed that Guru Gobind Singh did not die at Nanded , but came to Punjab in disguise and conferred the Gurgaddi to Guru Balak Singh. Contrary to the other Sikhs who believed that Guru Gobind Singh died at Nanded and bestowed the Gurgaddi to the Adi Granth. This reason was more than enough for the British and the loyal British Sikhs to administer the policy of "divide and rule". (By Shamsher Singh Ashok -"Punjab dian Lehraan".)

The best way to fight the Namdhari movement was to split it off from the panth. Classic divide and conquer. The British propogated the idea of Baba Ram Singh ji as the Guru. However, Baba Ram Singh ji wrote numerous letters from prison explicitly stating that he was not the Guru, that he believed in Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Posted

We need to get the Lahore Singh Sabha story out to all the sangat, get the children away from the neo sikhs of singh sabha origins.

Posted

We need to get the Lahore Singh Sabha story out to all the sangat, get the children away from the neo sikhs of singh sabha origins.

Be careful you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater jutta.

Posted

There were two Singh Sabhas.

One was Lahore Singh Sabha and the other one was Amritsar Singh Sabha.

They had huge differences with each other. Khem Singh Bedi and group were Amritsar Singh Sabha and they excommunicated Gyani Dit Singh and Prof. Gurmukh Singh from Panth.

Gyani Dit Singh was first living in a dera but a live talk with Prof. Gurmukh Singh turned him into what we would call a missionary these days.

Posted

I would say the Singh Sabha movement was heavily influenced by the Protestant Christian style education that key people involved had (i.e. Bhai Vir Singh).

very well said. i think you hit the nail on the head.

i disagree that we should make excuses for them. what is sacred should be left alone.

Posted

very well said. i think you hit the nail on the head.

i disagree that we should make excuses for them. what is sacred should be left alone.

I don't agree that all they did was negative. That period also produced much good. Like Ganda Singh who put Sikh history on the right footing. Without people like him we may have lost our strong, confident history to typically mythologised Indian style accounts.

Many of the Singh Sabhas were simply trying relate Sikhism within the "enlightened" framework that dominates today. I mean what do you think of Kahn Singh Nabha? He was a Singh Sabha (I'm sure) and did lots of good work for the panth, that we still use today. Ganda Singh is another example. Even Bhai Vir Singh helped develop Panjabi litetature whatever one may think of his editing style.

It is wrong to dismiss them like that. Recognise their contributions.

Posted

I agree with dalsingh101. Contributions of singh sabha cannot be ignored especially raising a voice against caste discrimination happening in puratan samparda's or dera's and also compiling work to give jawab to arya samajis how sikhism is separate dharam than Hinduism. But with that being said, they went to the extremes in insecurity start spreading venom against sainthood in Sikhism, Sri Dasam Granth and various puratan parampara without studying its proper framework claiming them bahamanvaad. Their all time low was segregating nirmale and udasi from the panth because of few bad apples, and stopping parkash of sri dasam granth at darbar sahib and getting ladies to beat jathedar of budda dal in darbar sahib so they can get him out as its against dharam yudh maryada to raise hand against womens.

Some elements of singh sabha back then were also influenced by bhusaria ideology..to read more about bhusaria idealogy click in this link:

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=10112

Posted

There were two Singh Sabhas.

One was Lahore Singh Sabha and the other one was Amritsar Singh Sabha.

They had huge differences with each other. Khem Singh Bedi and group were Amritsar Singh Sabha and they excommunicated Gyani Dit Singh and Prof. Gurmukh Singh from Panth.

Gyani Dit Singh was first living in a dera but a live talk with Prof. Gurmukh Singh turned him into what we would call a missionary these days.

Giani Dit Singh jee was a believer in Dasam Granth while modern Sikh missionaries believe in only portions of Dasam Granth.

Posted

I agree with dalsingh101. Contributions of singh sabha cannot be ignored especially raising a voice against caste discrimination happening in puratan samparda's or dera's and also compiling work to give jawab to arya samajis how sikhism is separate dharam than Hinduism. But with that being said, they went to the extremes in insecurity start spreading venom against sainthood in Sikhism, Sri Dasam Granth and various puratan parampara without studying its proper framework claiming them bahamanvaad. Their all time low was segregating nirmale and udasi from the panth because of few bad apples, and stopping parkash of sri dasam granth at darbar sahib and getting ladies to beat jathedar of budda dal in darbar sahib so they can get him out as its against dharam yudh maryada to raise hand against womens.

Some elements of singh sabha back then were also influenced by bhusaria ideology..to read more about bhusaria idealogy click in this link:

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=10112

Neo

When will you let up on the sanatan propaganda about when the Budha Dal was kicked out of Akal Takht. So those dastardly conniving and effeminate Akalis used women to beat up Budha Dal Jathedar knowing that he wouldn't attack women! I am sure there were soormay enough within the Akali Jathas who could have taken care of the Budha Dal Jathedar without the need to have women do the job. According to research, a third of the Akalis were former soldiers who had just fought in the battlefields of the First World War, so there would have no problem with finding volunteers to throw the Budha Dal Jathedar out. Read the life stories of Akalis like Kartar Singh Jhabbar and you might get a better feel for what the Akalis were like.

I challenged you on this story many years ago and then your only evidence for this story was that some Nihang had told you.

I think your fairy story is an insult to the thousands of Akalis who lost their lives, were injured and who lost their livelihoods and pensions to liberate the Gurdwaras from the Mahants. I think your fairy story is probably made up as an excuse to why the Nihangs stood by while their Jathedar was so unceremoniously kicked out of the Akal Takht.

If you are interested to know what the Akalis were like during the Gurdwara movement read this interesting article by T. Sher Singh.

http://www.sikhchic.com/article-detail.php?id=115&cat=18

Posted (edited)

I think people are getting distracted.

Edited by dalsingh101
Posted

Bikkie,

This is hardly sanatan propaganda. This is quite well known fact in the dals. This event was not only confirmed by this nihang singh in Canada but many singhs from dals not just budda dal who live in india as well. Why just because this event is passed around oral traditions, all of sudden is less credible than written in books, articles, news papers? I was just searching through online, came across kamalroop singh blog where he mentions, this is not only oral history of khalsa panth but its actually written out by the people who were in charge of priting press around that time.

This is what he writes. He is hardly sanatan, just surf through his blog. He is staunchly against nihang niddar singh and his followers and self invented word- sanatanism created by these people.

Anyway from his blog:

http://kamalroopsingh.blogspot.com/2009/08...-kaladhari.html

Baba ji, was the last Akali Jathedar of the Akal Takht before the British created SGPC, and sadly used a large group of women to attack the Nihangs. (Nihangs do not attack women or children). Baba Ji's bones were broken, he said to the girl, 'you are like my daughter, but if it pleases you take out your anger out. After this Jhabbar and his neo-Sikh crew made sure that they disposed of Dasam and Sarbloh Granth, and any other traditional Khalsa practices.

Baba Ji was given his name by an earlier Jathedar after seeing his remarkable spiritual powers.

This was written out of by the people in charge of the printing press, but not the oral history of the Khalsa Panth.

Thanks for the link you shared above, i ll read it throughly when i get some spare time.

Posted

Didn't the British get rid of the Nihang Jathedar at Akaal Takhat when they installed the mahants? i could be wrong, but I thought the Akaalis got rid of the mahants - the Nihangs were alread gone by that time, and in fact had been pursued by the British for some time prior as well.

The Singh Sabha/ SGPC Akaalis forcibly took over a lot of Gurudwaras that were in the hands of Gursikhs as well, but I think that was at a later stage.

Posted (edited)

Hang on. When is this beating by women and ousting of a nihung Akal Takhat jathedar supposed to have taken place? Which year? Who replaced him?

I must confess this is the first I have heard of this.

Addition: Found this

In early October 1920, Kartar Singh led a jatha of Sikh volunteers to Sialkot to liberate Gurdwara Babe di Ber from the control of a corrupt mahant or custodian. The shrine was taken possession of and a committee of lay Sikhs was formed to manage it, with Baba Kharak Singh as president. This was the beginning of the Gurdwara Reform movement. Kartar Singh Jhabbar, along with Teja Singh Bhuchchar, got the Akal Takht released on 12 October 1920. Teja Singh was appointed jalhedar or provost of the Takht. Jhabbar was included in the 9 member committee set up for the management of the Golden Temple. He continued to be in the vanguard of reformist Sikhs' campaign for liberating historical shrines. The more important ones he helped to take possession of were Gurdwara Panja Sahib (November 1920), Gurdwara Sachcha Sauda (December 1920), Gurdwara Tarn Taran (26 January 1921), and Gurdwara Guru ka Bagh (31 January 1921).

http://www.allaboutsikhs.com/1900/kartar-singh-jhabbar.html

Is someone suggesting that a Buddha Dal Nihung Jathedar was in charge of the Akal Takhat in 1920?

Edited by dalsingh101
Posted

Didn't the British get rid of the Nihang Jathedar at Akaal Takhat when they installed the mahants? i could be wrong, but I thought the Akaalis got rid of the mahants - the Nihangs were alread gone by that time, and in fact had been pursued by the British for some time prior as well.

The Singh Sabha/ SGPC Akaalis forcibly took over a lot of Gurudwaras that were in the hands of Gursikhs as well, but I think that was at a later stage.

Yes the nihungs were forced to flee punjab after british take over. They were persecuted.

Posted

Gyani Dit Singh was first living in a dera but a live talk with Prof. Gurmukh Singh turned him into what we would call a missionary these days.

THis is the most mischievous remark i have seen. Giani ditt singh had no link with any missionary. He wrote monumental works on dasam granth sahib. He wrote a book Durga parbodh and there are some people who are doing their ph Ds on this. I met one Inderjit singh gogoani in Amritsar last winter. He was helping me to trace this book.

I am at a oss to understand why these missioanries who were born in 1960s in delhi on a platform of atheism drag the fair name of dedicated Gurusikhs in their dirty game plan.

Posted

When will you let up on the sanatan propaganda about when the Budha Dal was kicked out of Akal Takht. So those dastardly conniving and effeminate Akalis used women to beat up Budha Dal Jathedar knowing that he wouldn't attack women! I am sure there were soormay enough within the Akali Jathas who could have taken care of the Budha Dal Jathedar without the need to have women do the job. According to research, a third of the Akalis were former soldiers who had just fought in the battlefields of the First World War, so there would have no problem with finding volunteers to throw the Budha Dal Jathedar out. Read the life stories of Akalis like Kartar Singh Jhabbar and you might get a better feel for what the Akalis were like.

The above comments are ridiculous and amount to misinformation.In my opinion people need to read sikh history before making false comments as above.

Posted

Which comments are ridiculous Bhai Sahib - the ones regarding Singh Sabhas removal of the age old Budda Dal Jathedaari and parkash of Dasmesh Pitas Bani from Akaal Takht, or the hero worship of the Singh Sabha members that performed such a sacrilegious act?

The above story is common amongst Dal Panth - not all history is recorded, esp when the British educated Singh Sabhiyas were the ones that were controlling the writing of Sikh history up until relatively recent times .

Posted

Just because the story is current amongst Nihangs does not make it true. As Matheen said, how is it that Nihangs are virtually killed off by British shoot on sight orders and then a few decades later there is a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht. Sanatan history never adds up!

Shaheediyan,

You stated that the Akalis committed a secrilegious act but that depends on who you think should be in charge of Akal Takht. My view is that the Misls allowed the Nihangs to control the Akal Takht but in the changed times of the Sikhs being under British rule, the Khalsa Panth had every right to rethink the question of who should be in charge of Akal Takht. Do not judge the SGPC and Akalis pre-Badal to the ones who run the SGPC now.

It is ridiculous to think that Akalis who braved the bullets of mahant Narain or who were willing to lie on the railway tracks at Panja sahib to stop a train would not have the courage to evict the Nihangs from Akal Takht.

Posted

If Nihangs had been in charge of the Akaal Takhat, the Akalis would not have had any reason to challenge them. As far as I know, the whole morcha was to get rid of the Hindu mahants who had been installed by the British.

Historically, the Jathedar of Akaal Takhat was always from the Dal, but that is not relevant in this topic.

Posted

If Nihangs had been in charge of the Akaal Takhat, the Akalis would not have had any reason to challenge them. As far as I know, the whole morcha was to get rid of the Hindu mahants who had been installed by the British.

Historically, the Jathedar of Akaal Takhat was always from the Dal, but that is not relevant in this topic.

Matheen, the nihangs were mute supporters of the corrupt mahants. they didnt stop what was going on at Nankana sahib, what high hopes did you have for them?

in a conversation i had with Nihang Niddar Singh, he told me that the mahants were not willing to hand Nankana Sahib over to the akalis, but would only hand them over to the Nihangs Singhs. Where were they ? Why did it take a bunch of teachers/pen-pushers to do what the sword-wielders couldnt do?

This morcha was not to get rid of the mahants per se, cos some gurdwaras remained in the control of mahats, but the morcha was to get rid of the CORRUPTION in the gurdwaras.

Posted

"Just because the story is current amongst Nihangs does not make it true. As Matheen said, how is it that Nihangs are virtually killed off by British shoot on sight orders and then a few decades later there is a Nihang in charge of the Akal Takht. Sanatan history never adds"

Funny how you change your beliefs when they suit you! You normally hold that the Nihang removal history is made up. Says it all.

Anyhow, doesn't take away the fact the SSS removed Guru Gobind Singh Maharajs Granths from Takht Sahib, in the most offensive manner if we are to believe the only accounts that exist, not to mention taking ALL the Gurdwarai in Punjab by force.

All for what? To end up with an administration which generates as much income as the Punjab Govt - and has done zero to propogate Sikhi or preserve our heritage. Yes, there were some well meaning Singhs in their - but the fact remains they were reformists and they divied the Panth.

Matheen,

You hit the nail on the head, why was a 200 year old tradition changed? The British were after the Dals, groups which set up chawnees etc and instigated rebellion, Sri Akal Takht would only have had a few Akali Nihangs looking after it, not a whole Dal. To prove who was in charge at the time of SSS storming would not be hard to prove historically.

Posted

Which comments are ridiculous Bhai Sahib - the ones regarding Singh Sabhas removal of the age old Budda Dal Jathedaari and parkash of Dasmesh Pitas Bani from Akaal Takht, or the hero worship of the Singh Sabha members that performed such a sacrilegious act?

The above story is common amongst Dal Panth - not all history is recorded, esp when the British educated Singh Sabhiyas were the ones that were controlling the writing of Sikh history up until relatively recent times .

I am referring to the comments made by tony that Nihung singhs jathedari was removed by akalis. In my opinion it was british who were controlling akal takhat through their sarb rah that time. If you see after sikhs lost to British there is hardly any mention of akal takhat jathedar.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...