HSD1 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) Not at all, if anything it was a high period for them where they could flout Sikh 'royalty' even throwing clumps of mud at Ranjit Singh to bring him back to earth. By all accounts they were well respected by the common Sikh populace. Wasnt that before colonisation? I'm talking about the Sikh immigrants to East Africa who would have grown up with colonisation. The Punjabi Gurudwaras had the Mahant problem, Akalis werent travelling to East Africa, so the Sikh population were effectively on their own at this point. No central religous institution that could control or guide them so we have to assess what happened with what was going on in their backgrounds. I don't know what you mean by cool, but I do think Akalis held people in awe (and I presume some fear) back then. Even whitey noticed it. But once they got off the boat into Africa, the Akalis werent around or coming with them. When I said cool, I meant how the Sikhs in East Africa perceived their history and the people/institutions/events back home. What do you mean by 'their recent history' in this context? The times of the Confederacy and then the Empire. Only if you persist in asking the questions to ignorant pendus. I'm sorry, I'll try to avoid asking you anymore questions. Edited February 17, 2012 by HSD1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) I don't know. How much can we really blame on outside influences for this. I mean look at how even now, after having dishes smashed over their heads about it, the casteists are trying to repackage their nonsense as 'tribal' identities. First thing to notice is the pure vehemence with which people defend the preservation of a 'tribal' or 'caste' based organisation of the Punjabi based panth. It is SO pervasive. Only the other week in my local supermarket no less, I was being tilled up by a cool auntie Ji and we got chatting and when I passed my debit card over she goes (discreetly) "Oh, you know I hadn't heard about THAT surname until recently you know, I didn't know that that was a.........<here she tapered off but was clearly referring to caste> I told her that people get too preoccupied with such things and they shouldn't matter. To which this otherwise nice auntie ji got all weird and defensive. I've had apnay fudus, who I have just met, bringing up their caste in conversations with me within a single minute of talking. 2/3 times as a teacher. Once randomly at Gravesend train station! 3 - 4 times by girls I've just met. The fact is that every last one of them was Jatt. One outside source that I would agree has played an enormous part in the calcification of casteism in Panjabi Sikhs is via the British colonial experience. The Anglo tendency to reduce all things to race, class etc. etc. is not unknown and shelves of libraries can be filled with academic studies of the subject - but still, it looks like our own lot (mostly our peasantry) have absorbed these outside classifications/ideas (i.e. martial races theory, Aryan invasion etc.) without giving wider thought to their background and implications to wider Sikh society. I do believe that groups like those nonPanjabi Sikhs you mentioned can help play a big part in helping us overcome this ugly, pendu, feudal albatross on Sikhi's neck. That'll teach you to chat up old ladies you perv! lol jk. In situations like that its pointless getting hostile or morose about it. Just ask them if they ever worked on a farm lol. As for mention of the British I agree with most of it. But you have to bare in mind that the Sikhs were different back then too. We all live in PC la-la-land where we think we can turn up anywhere and get jobs and everyone should let each other get by. In the 19th century, Conquest and Colonisation were the norms. The Indian historians both like to big up how the Bengalis and Marathas fought the Mughals and 'won' their freedom. They dont explain how these same people were so easily humbled and annexed by the Whites. Look into how easily the Bengali Army lost or how the Maratha hordes couldnt even beat a few Portuguese idiots. Hell, even a few Sikh Misls loved carving the Marathas up. The Sikh Empire didnt fall so easily - it took the British a lot longer and forced them to bring every trick and resource they had to beat us. Punjab was one of the few Asian countries to escape being colonised for a long time (the others being Turkey, China, Korea, Japan and Thailand). Out of all the Asian countries the Sikhs were the only ones who were modern (in the Mid-19th Century) and could match any Western military. This fact wasnt lost on the British. If we had beaten them on land and sea, Lahore would have been to the Indian Ocean what Rome once was to the Mediterranean Sea. The British used religous prophecies as well as control of our institutions to create a completely different race of Sikhs. Rather than caste reflecting some kind of academic strata or research, it was about breaking a people into their lowest denominator. You cant dress up what they did as being the result of some Victorian obsession with classification. In all their correspondence and scheming you can see that they took the Sikh threat seriously for the full century they ruled us. Until they breathed a sigh of relief at Partition because the Sikh problem had been solved for them. Over this decade we will see how Thatcher's government dealt with Sikhs during the Khalistan War, something which will further highlight how those with power try to subvert Sikhs using any tool they can think of. Edited February 17, 2012 by HSD1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Thanks for clarification brother. I was just anticipating the usual knee-jerk 'blame Bahmans for everything' reaction that usually gets thrown around when the subject is discussed, even though the Sikh 'caste system' is our own creation. Casteism starting appearing back in the panth around the time the mahants took over main gurdawras. they were the ones stopping the lowcastes coming in. the idea of jatt supremacy was fostered by the brits, not to mess up the panth directly, but to get more soldiers for their army. British army wale have written about how the Jatts made ideal soldiers. I guess this kinda went to their head when they got inot their uniforms. uniforms make a man go nuts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 This is really noticeable in vol 2 of Panth Prakash even though Bhangu seems conflicted about it. He bigs up Jatts at a lot of opportunities but can't get away from the obvious esteem Sukha Singh was held in by his own family. He also calls jatts "jatt-boot" and he certainly isnt bgging up the jattas who worked against Khalsa Panth. He also bigs up the MazhabisSinghs as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 Wasnt that before colonisation? I'm talking about the Sikh immigrants to East Africa who would have grown up with colonisation. The Punjabi Gurudwaras had the Mahant problem, Akalis werent travelling to East Africa, so the Sikh population were effectively on their own at this point. No central religous institution that could control or guide them so we have to assess what happened with what was going on in their backgrounds. But once they got off the boat into Africa, the Akalis werent around or coming with them. When I said cool, I meant how the Sikhs in East Africa perceived their history and the people/institutions/events back home. The times of the Confederacy and then the Empire. I'm sorry, I'll try to avoid asking you anymore questions. Okay I realise I totally misunderstood your original question. When you said Akalis I thought you meant the older type, as in nihungs as opposed to the later political party...........................doh! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) That'll teach you to chat up old ladies you perv! lol jk. Next time put a muzzle on your girlfriend before you let her out then!! lol jk! In situations like that its pointless getting hostile or morose about it. Just ask them if they ever worked on a farm lol. I didn't get hostile or morose. I tried to school the fools where possible. The idiot at Gravesend really blew me away. After seeing my kara he goes: "Yeah, how you doing. You got a light?" Then "Your Sikh innit." "Yeah I'm Jat innit what caste are you?" I had to give that young arse fool some East London wisdom. lol What killed it was he subsequently told me how he was being bullied and attacked by whites (in Belvedere I think?) and that was why he never wore a kara. Jerk. As for mention of the British I agree with most of it. But you have to bare in mind that the Sikhs were different back then too. We all live in PC la-la-land where we think we can turn up anywhere and get jobs and everyone should let each other get by. In the 19th century, Conquest and Colonisation were the norms. The Indian historians both like to big up how the Bengalis and Marathas fought the Mughals and 'won' their freedom. They dont explain how these same people were so easily humbled and annexed by the Whites. Look into how easily the Bengali Army lost or how the Maratha hordes couldnt even beat a few Portuguese idiots.Hell, even a few Sikh Misls loved carving the Marathas up. I don't agree with you. Those Marathas had their strengths and successes. Look at Tipu Sultan as well. As for apnay at that point, one thing they actually did was the wonderful tactic of feigning loyalty and leaving the other side in the shite at the last minute (Afghan style). Then whitey came along and hordes of them actually became anally retentive with the loyalty.......you've read those letters in Omissi's book I posted! When you read the whole thing, most of teh soldiers are banging on about their caste like they had inferiority complexes and wanted to prove themselves to whitey. You didn't get any of that shit with the Pashtuns though! The Sikh Empire didnt fall so easily - it took the British a lot longer and forced them to bring every trick and resource they had to beat us. Punjab was one of the few Asian countries to escape being colonised for a long time (the others being Turkey, China, Korea, Japan and Thailand). Out of all the Asian countries the Sikhs were the only ones who were modern (in the Mid-19th Century) and could match any Western military. What you are talking about is almost ENTIRELY down to the maneuvers of a single one eyed man. This fact wasnt lost on the British. If we had beaten them on land and sea, Lahore would have been to the Indian Ocean what Rome once was to the Mediterranean Sea. We are a landlocked people man. Get over this sea faring thing! The British used religous prophecies as well as control of our institutions to create a completely different race of Sikhs. Rather than caste reflecting some kind of academic strata or research, it was about breaking a people into their lowest denominator. You cant dress up what they did as being the result of some Victorian obsession with classification. The obsession with classification isn't just Victorian it is a European thing! It is what defines 'westerness'. At that point in history to, whitey (by this I also include the French and Germans) were going mad with Indology, Egyptology etc. The whole subject of how their experiences and what they found in India kicked of a whole high level cultural debate that was to subsequently define 'westerness' or Europeaness or the Orient is a big one that our people were (are?) unwittingly slap bang in the middle of. For Brits (intellectually) our place was finally decided for them by a reputed brilliant German linguist (the infamous) Trumph. That is why, after he published his work claiming Sikhi was nothing original theologically, the west generally stop taking us seriously as a source of some new thought. Instead they patronised the largest peasant group (and not without reason because the whole Panjab agriculture thing had been a MASSIVE money maker in pre modern times). So it was a mixture of motivated classification. No doubt if our lot had remained obdurate and held out and whitey had successfully used poorbias to eventually suppress us (and if they remained loyal) we'd probably be the ones characterised as effeminate and they the 'martial race'. Think about that. In all their correspondence and scheming you can see that they took the Sikh threat seriously for the full century they ruled us. Until they breathed a sigh of relief at Partition because the Sikh problem had been solved for them. Over this decade we will see how Thatcher's government dealt with Sikhs during the Khalistan War, something which will further highlight how those with power try to subvert Sikhs using any tool they can think of. If this is true then why do Sikhs affiliated to the modern day Singh Sabha incarnation crawl up the British establishments arse so easily? Pray do tell. Edited February 20, 2012 by dalsingh101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Singh Posted February 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) Every movement like 3ho and so forth have their issues. Right now I think Jatts are to blame for bringing this caste thing back in because of how persistent they bring it up it makes others bring it up and many castes from the hindu caste system were much superior at many times it's the alcohol speaking not the person. We have too many sharabis in our community who talk absolute nonsense about being superior. Tarkhans are guilty for it but the jatts brought it in first. Just like Muslims play partition making pakistan onto hindus and sikhs and don't take the blame that they were only following the haddiths to do what they did. As for the caste system backwas some people drinking too much liquor. Most the people claiming to be jatt aren't even jatt some are chumar chora shudras pretending to be superior. Bhangra industry has also allowed it to grow. We need to be slightly more up in our going to other gurdwaras. Edited February 20, 2012 by JatherdarSahib 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) He also calls jatts "jatt-boot" and he certainly isnt bgging up the jattas who worked against Khalsa Panth. Yeah, he does big up Jatt Majails frequently, but as you noticed, he also straight out exposes the truth about the nonSikh Jat enemies. How does that square with those fools who like to go on like jatts are some super loyal 'pure Sikhs'??? Personally I think a lot of those antiSikh jats later joint the Khalsa when they got their arses kicked. We are still suffering from their nonSikh rubbish today. He also bigs up the MazhabisSinghs as well. It's interesting to note, how he is compelled to explicitly point out the broad spectrum of castes in the panth of his own, and his forefathers time. How many Jatts do the very opposite to this today. These days we piss off and make Mazhabis walk off. How sad is that.... Casteism starting appearing back in the panth around the time the mahants took over main gurdawras. they were the ones stopping the lowcastes coming in. the idea of jatt supremacy was fostered by the brits, not to mess up the panth directly, but to get more soldiers for their army. British army wale have written about how the Jatts made ideal soldiers. One of things that made them this was their docility. It's mentioned by a few high ranking Brit soldiers. Example: Major-General George MacMunn (on Sikhs): As a fighting man his slow wit and dogged courage give him many of the characteristics of the British soldier at his best. (1911, 9-40) There is much more like this. Jats don't like to mention that one of the characteristics of a so-called 'martial race' is political subservience or docility to authority. In relation to the thread, notice Falcon's point on recruiting Sikh carpenters (he wrote a guidebook for recruiting Sikhs into the army that was published in 1896), and how they: 'can rarely be persuaded to enlist on a sepoy's pay as an average carpenter can make Rs. 20 a month in his village' So judging by this, they couldn't afford to hire carpenters due to low wages and farmers were more than willing to take that pay? uniforms make a man go nuts. Only certain credulous, low IQ types in my opinion. Look at what kind of 'struggling with GCSEs' white boys that typically amke up the rank and file of the Brit army for example. Whenever I have ever gone into ANY Ramgarhia Gurdwaras, I always see a preponderance of sharp, starched African paghs, so I do believe it came from Africa. My theory is that the skills required in Africa were not peasantry ones, but mostly artisan ones (like building railways, houses etc.) and hence a disproportionate amount of them there. Once there, as Matheen has suggested, they saw that they could come from under a numerically larger and actively dominant Jat strain and hence opened up their Gurdwaras. Their Gurdwaras were different from the Singh Sabha ones (i'm just hypothesising now) because they didn't have that military relationship with whitey like Jats did? Plus they didn't believe they were outsider Scythians, Aryans or whatever whitey was pushing, so they got on with other Indians better. There whole political worldview was (is) different from the Singh Sabhaists? I mean I recently attempted to read Max Muller's attempt at translating the Rig Veda (I don't think he knew what he was doing myself) and noticed that it had references to Vishkarma, who was apparently the Carpenter deity or something prior to their conversion to Sikhism. The veda is considered to be the oldest book in the world, and it comes from the good ole' Panjab, so if their is a link between Viskarma and Tarkhans, they appear to have been around in Punjab from a LONG time ago? Edited February 20, 2012 by dalsingh101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 20, 2012 Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 (edited) Next time put a muzzle on your girlfriend before you let her out then!! lol jk! The one I borrowed off your Mum broke! haha! I didn't get hostile or morose. I tried to school the fools where possible. The idiot at Gravesend really blew me away. After seeing my kara he goes: "Yeah, how you doing. You got a light?" Then "Your Sikh innit." "Yeah I'm Jat innit what caste are you?" I had to give that young arse fool some East London wisdom. lol What killed it was he subsequently told me how he was being bullied and attacked by whites (in Belvedere I think?) and that was why he never wore a kara. Jerk. Did he tell you his name? One thing I've noticed is that wearing a Kara is like planting a flag. Everyone knows what you're about but you have no idea about them. Sometimes people tell me they are Sikh or HPs when they are blatantly Pakis or Gujis just because of my Kara. Having said that there are plenty of tobacco smoking Sikh gimps out there. I don't agree with you. Those Marathas had their strengths and successes. Look at Tipu Sultan as well. As for apnay at that point, one thing they actually did was the wonderful tactic of feigning loyalty and leaving the other side in the shite at the last minute (Afghan style). Then whitey came along and hordes of them actually became anally retentive with the loyalty.......you've read those letters in Omissi's book I posted! When you read the whole thing, most of teh soldiers are banging on about their caste like they had inferiority complexes and wanted to prove themselves to whitey. You didn't get any of that shit with the Pashtuns though! Maratha successes were small considering their size and power. Superstition and backwardness always handicapped their ability to fight outsiders. When they employed large numbers of european mercenaries and switched to infantry based armies, only then did manage a stalemate with the Sikh Misls. As for Tipu, his success was due in part to a well thought out partnership with the French. He had no Navy of his own so he allied himself with the French who sent their Navy into the Indian Ocean and allowed Tipu to concentrate on battering the British. He never managed to kick the British out of India. As soon as the British wore the French Navy down in a battle of attrition, Mysore's days were numbered. It is interesting that the breakdown of nation states forced South Asians to revert to caste to give a sense of belonging. Unfortunately for them caste will never make up for nationalism so no wonder they had a chip on their shoulders when it came to comparing themselves with a bunch of islanders thousands of miles away. What you are talking about is almost ENTIRELY down to the maneuvers of a single one eyed man. Well he needed Punjabi generals and scientists/engineers to achieve what he wanted. For everything Maharaja Ranjit Singh did, there is plenty he didnt do. So much so it probably deserves its own topic. There many other Singhs with brains back then. Even his son Nau Nihal Singh seemed to be more astute than his own father. We are a landlocked people man. Get over this sea faring thing! Unless your a Sindhi Sikh lol. If the Sikhs were ever to beat the British they would have needed to beat them at sea or get someone to do it for them. Otherwise Sikh India would have faced the constant threat of an invasion from the sea. I'm not a big fan of 'What If' though. Probably a topic best discussed in another topic. The obsession with classification isn't just Victorian it is a European thing! It is what defines 'westerness'. At that point in history to, whitey (by this I also include the French and Germans) were going mad with Indology, Egyptology etc. The whole subject of how their experiences and what they found in India kicked of a whole high level cultural debate that was to subsequently define 'westerness' or Europeaness or the Orient is a big one that our people were (are?) unwittingly slap bang in the middle of. For Brits (intellectually) our place was finally decided for them by a reputed brilliant German linguist (the infamous) Trumph. That is why, after he published his work claiming Sikhi was nothing original theologically, the west generally stop taking us seriously as a source of some new thought. Instead they patronised the largest peasant group (and not without reason because the whole Panjab agriculture thing had been a MASSIVE money maker in pre modern times). So it was a mixture of motivated classification. No doubt if our lot had remained obdurate and held out and whitey had successfully used poorbias to eventually suppress us (and if they remained loyal) we'd probably be the ones characterised as effeminate and they the 'martial race'. Think about that. The thing is that there is a massive line between science and science-ism. America is today's most advanced nation thanks to science. It also has religions like Scientology that freeload off miscontrued interpretations of scientific thought. It was no different in the 19th century. On the one hand the Victorians pushed science, technology and engineering to new heights. On the other hand their achievements filtered down into other spheres of thought which tried to ape scientific methods without taking into account variables that cant be held constant. One example is race theory. At least that came back to bite them on the ass when Hitler read an anthropolgy book and spawned the Nazi movement. Interestingly, in Iran they believe the Aryans actually came out of South Asia rather than being invaders from Central Asia. But as the Iranians never ruled a quarter of the world and forced them to see things their way, only people taught in Iran believe this. As for us being effeminate, the English have a saying - 'Fake it till you make it.' They acted hard when they had the guns and the ships but when others caught up they fell apart. Seeing as they hardly ever win wars by themselves its clear the English are some of the most effeminate around. Anyone else notice how a lot of English men look like English women but with their hair cut and a bit more facial hair? Weird isnt it? If this is true then why do Sikhs affiliated to the modern day Singh Sabha incarnation crawl up the British establishments arse so easily? Pray do tell. Your making the assumption that a lot of Khalistanis in the UK actually want to go live in a free Sikh country rather than shout about it in Gurudwaras to make themselves look good. You're also forgetting how well infiltrated the older generation are. They love the money. Whether its handing over other Sikh's names and addresses to India's intelligence services or getting recruits for the British Army they arent bothered. They all arent like that but enough are. Anyway, like I said, in 2014 it will have been 30 years since Bluestar, roughly how long it takes for these kinds of files to be released. Should make interesting reading. Edited February 20, 2012 by HSD1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Singh Posted February 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2012 What about the brahmin sikhs and khatri sikhs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) What about the brahmin sikhs and khatri sikhs Inconsequential today due to their relatively tiny numbers. Especially in the diaspora. Khatris have smashed it by getting a man on the top seat in India, even though he may well be a puppet of sorts. It's still an achievement - though of course our peasants will have a lot to complain about (as per usual). Edited February 24, 2012 by dalsingh101 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 (edited) The one I borrowed off your Mum broke! haha! Motha f***er. There was me purposefully restraining myself from involving your momma, when I originally made that joke (and yes, that was the first person I thought of using but didn't because I thought it was going too low!!). Anyway, next time tell your moms to stop flirting when I'm buying my groceries at Sainsburys! lol Take that! Did he tell you his name? One thing I've noticed is that wearing a Kara is like planting a flag. Everyone knows what you're about but you have no idea about them. Sometimes people tell me they are Sikh or HPs when they are blatantly Pakis or Gujis just because of my Kara. Having said that there are plenty of tobacco smoking Sikh gimps out there. So you are saying he might not have been an apna? There are hordes of them around those sides but again you just seem to side step the important issue of the way hordes of Jats do this weird thing of bringing their caste into any verbal exchanges at a breath taking speed. So these things don't happen then huh? What a dick. Maratha successes were small considering their size and power. Superstition and backwardness always handicapped their ability to fight outsiders. When they employed large numbers of european mercenaries and switched to infantry based armies, only then did manage a stalemate with the Sikh Misls. As for Tipu, his success was due in part to a well thought out partnership with the French. He had no Navy of his own so he allied himself with the French who sent their Navy into the Indian Ocean and allowed Tipu to concentrate on battering the British. He never managed to kick the British out of India. As soon as the British wore the French Navy down in a battle of attrition, Mysore's days were numbered. What's the point of slagging off other communities efforts? Use your loaf, anyone could as easily piss all over our own ancestors achievements just as easily in a similar vein. It is interesting that the breakdown of nation states forced South Asians to revert to caste to give a sense of belonging. Unfortunately for them caste will never make up for nationalism so no wonder they had a chip on their shoulders when it came to comparing themselves with a bunch of islanders thousands of miles away. Thing is, the legacy of this is still alive and kicking amongst us. You can't see it because you can't/don't/wont read Panjabi literature, where you can see it spread. In anycase the definition by caste is worse for us because our own spiritual leaders have unequivocally told us to lay of that bullshit but we still willingly stoop to it. At least Hindus have the excuse of following their own precolonial traditions, what is ours? (try shouldering some responsibility about the matter as well, instead of your usual 'blame everyone but us' peasant tactic. Well he needed Punjabi generals and scientists/engineers to achieve what he wanted. For everything Maharaja Ranjit Singh did, there is plenty he didnt do. So much so it probably deserves its own topic. There many other Singhs with brains back then. Even his son Nau Nihal Singh seemed to be more astute than his own father. Look, I don't think ANYONE foresaw the pervasive changes in the world that was to come about from the rapid development of technology. It's all well and good giving it a post hoc analysis, but you need to keep that strongly at the forefront of your mind when doing so. You should bear in mind that it would have only taken a medium sized revolt in British India at the same time as the wasp wars to have seriously changed the situation. Unless your a Sindhi Sikh lol. If the Sikhs were ever to beat the British they would have needed to beat them at sea or get someone to do it for them. Otherwise Sikh India would have faced the constant threat of an invasion from the sea. I'm not a big fan of 'What If' though. Probably a topic best discussed in another topic. Bollocks, their position was ALWAYS precarious, they just always got lucky and played the indigenous off one another. It was no different in the 19th century. On the one hand the Victorians pushed science, technology and engineering to new heights. On the other hand their achievements filtered down into other spheres of thought which tried to ape scientific methods without taking into account variables that cant be held constant. One example is race theory. At least that came back to bite them on the ass when Hitler read an anthropolgy book and spawned the Nazi movement. Interestingly, in Iran they believe the Aryans actually came out of South Asia rather than being invaders from Central Asia. But as the Iranians never ruled a quarter of the world and forced them to see things their way, only people taught in Iran believe this. Again you are oblivious to the repercussions of this pseudo-science today. Especially amongst our peasantry. As for us being effeminate, the English have a saying - 'Fake it till you make it.' They acted hard when they had the guns and the ships but when others caught up they fell apart. Seeing as they hardly ever win wars by themselves its clear the English are some of the most effeminate around. Anyone else notice how a lot of English men look like English women but with their hair cut and a bit more facial hair? Weird isnt it? Yes, when they grow their hair a gruff Panjabi gets confused and doesn't know whether to fight them or try and shag them .lol Edited February 24, 2012 by dalsingh101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 Your making the assumption that a lot of Khalistanis in the UK actually want to go live in a free Sikh country rather than shout about it in Gurudwaras to make themselves look good. You're also forgetting how well infiltrated the older generation are. They love the money. Whether its handing over other Sikh's names and addresses to India's intelligence services or getting recruits for the British Army they arent bothered. They all arent like that but enough are. Seems like a dead cause to me. Anyway, like I said, in 2014 it will have been 30 years since Bluestar, roughly how long it takes for these kinds of files to be released. Should make interesting reading. I doubt there will be anything that would really surprise any of us with a brain. I'm sure most of the vocal k'stanis were plants or sell outs. In that case I guess its actually quite nice to have those Ramgarhia Gurdwaras that didn't mire themselves with all the base activities during the militant period. Hell I remember how the guy before Sohi at Southall disappeared with all the Gurdwara funds (to buy a tank for the Khalistani movement apparently.........) leaving the Gurdwara in debt. Which was when Sohi came in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Inconsequential today due to their relatively tiny numbers. Especially in the diaspora. Khatris have smashed it by getting a man on the top seat in India, even though he may well be a puppet of sorts. It's still an achievement - though of course our peasants will have a lot to complain about (as per usual). Yes, Manmohan Singh is a massive achievement. Not. Also its funny how Dalsingh refers to his beloved Hindustanis as 'our peasants', it seems to me that the tens of millions of Indians actually have genuine grievances with his government. But hey! He aint a rural kid so we'll just ignore it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Motha f***er. There was me purposefully restraining myself from involving your momma, when I originally made that joke (and yes, that was the first person I thought of using but didn't because I thought it was going too low!!). Anyway, next time tell your moms to stop flirting when I'm buying my groceries at Sainsburys! lol Take that! Stay classy, old boy. So you are saying he might not have been an apna? There are hordes of them around those sides but again you just seem to side step the important issue of the way hordes of Jats do this weird thing of bringing their caste into any verbal exchanges at a breath taking speed. So these things don't happen then huh? What a dick. For someone who is supposed to be so intelligent and a 'thinker', it's staggering to believe you havent been able to ask yourself some questions that would probably get you to an answer. Why do people like that cling to caste rather than have another sense of belonging? Of course being Punjabi is difficult as it doesnt exist as a country and the Sikh community seeks to blame all its ills on 'Punjabiyat'. So why dont people like him consider themselves Sikhs first? Answer that question without copping out and you'll see the ugly truths that keep people unwilling to call themselves Sikh. As for why you specifically seem to attract self confessed Jatts, I can hazard a guess. Maybe you look like a donkey. Or smell like cow pat. I have had Sikhs call themselves Jatt within a minute of meeting me but not on the same level as you. What's the point of slagging off other communities efforts? Use your loaf, anyone could as easily piss all over our own ancestors achievements just as easily in a similar vein. They do. What I said is historically accurate. Thing is, the legacy of this is still alive and kicking amongst us. You can't see it because you can't/don't/wont read Panjabi literature, where you can see it spread. In anycase the definition by caste is worse for us because our own spiritual leaders have unequivocally told us to lay of that bullshit but we still willingly stoop to it. At least Hindus have the excuse of following their own precolonial traditions, what is ours? (try shouldering some responsibility about the matter as well, instead of your usual 'blame everyone but us' peasant tactic. So how do these supposedly illiterate backward rustics get their info from if they dont read the supposed literature which was meant to reinforce the caste divide. Look, I don't think ANYONE foresaw the pervasive changes in the world that was to come about from the rapid development of technology. It's all well and good giving it a post hoc analysis, but you need to keep that strongly at the forefront of your mind when doing so. If your talking about amongst the rank and file of the Khalsa or the Punjabi nation then yes your point is right. But Maharaja Ranjit Singh wasnt some yokel he was the Emperor of South Asia's strongest country. He had the information, but chose not to act on it. I wont go further as this thread is off topic as it is. You should bear in mind that it would have only taken a medium sized revolt in British India at the same time as the wasp wars to have seriously changed the situation. Well it depends on whether the revolt was sympathetic or not to the Punjab. Bollocks, their position was ALWAYS precarious, they just always got lucky and played the indigenous off one another. Your point is? How would that have prevented them from keeping a naval presence in the Indian Ocean? Even if the Sikhs had taken all of South Asia, how would we have dislodged the British from Sri Lanka and the other island chains in the Indian Ocean? Swam across? The Sikh Army couldnt even swim across a river when it needed to. It is simple fact that if the British had a large naval presence in the Indian Ocean they could have used places like Sri Lanka as a staging ground for attacks into India or just blockaded all of South Asia. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSD1 Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Again you are oblivious to the repercussions of this pseudo-science today. Especially amongst our peasantry. Yeah because that stuff is definitive reading to every Sikh. Seems like a dead cause to me. Thanks for the input. Well thought out as usual. I doubt there will be anything that would really surprise any of us with a brain. I'm sure most of the vocal k'stanis were plants or sell outs. If there is ever a Sikh version of the CIA you should be its director, your so good at figuring things out 30 odd years later. In that case I guess its actually quite nice to have those Ramgarhia Gurdwaras that didn't mire themselves with all the base activities during the militant period. Hell I remember how the guy before Sohi at Southall disappeared with all the Gurdwara funds (to buy a tank for the Khalistani movement apparently.........) leaving the Gurdwara in debt. Which was when Sohi came in. Oh how fine and dandy it must be to be a Ramgarhia Gurudwara run by Congressis! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Hell I remember how the guy before Sohi at Southall disappeared with all the Gurdwara funds (to buy a tank for the Khalistani movement apparently.........) leaving the Gurdwara in debt. Which was when Sohi came in. a lot of funds went missing, not just here but in india as well. the tank story is just ridiculous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Share Posted March 9, 2012 a lot of funds went missing, not just here but in india as well. the tank story is just ridiculous. That says a lot about the kind of people that associated themselves to the movement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Oh how fine and dandy it must be to be a Ramgarhia Gurudwara run by Congressis! Well, by the looks of things, the difference between many Singh Sabha and Ramgarhia Gurdwaras is that one is open/transparent about any connections with Congress/India (the two are not synonymous by the way), whilst a lot of the others, despite vocal, frothing at the mouth, angry farmer rhetoric about Khalistan - are secretly connected to Congressi instruments. Which is worse?? Edited March 9, 2012 by dalsingh101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbreakable Posted October 17, 2012 Report Share Posted October 17, 2012 This problem can only be uprooted if the next so called generation think differently. When will this happen? When inter caste marriages are encouraged. We take Amrit, yet we do not fully give ourselves to our SatGuru. We claim alot of things, yet we do the complete opposite. Some say the problem with Sikhi in India are the Jatts who have monopoly over nearly everything.They even refer to the Ramgarhia Bunga as the Akaal Bunga. They have no right to do this,Yet the Silent Majority is still silent,why? because simply put, Nobody cares. You have all the so called enlightened true Sikh organisations blaming everyone else. In reality, we are to be blamed. The buck stops with US, YOU, ME, HIM, HER, US. There is a tip-toe conspiracy against the Sikh Past, especially the Glory Years of the Sikh Nation. To make us forget that we once had a nation, that we were once Free. (I am not talking about Khalistan I do not support Khalistan) So until proper Parchaar is done, things are ok the way they are. Yes I said it, OK. People talking of money swindling at the Gurdwarey, this has been happening from day 1. The Akaal Thakat and Sri Harimandar sahib have been hijacked and black money is being washed, not now, has been happening since, well a long time. I remember the announcement and how the donation box was broken and money stole, for the new Singh Sabha Gurdwara, it started at 4.5million, then went up to, 6.5, 7, 9.5, 10, 11.5, 15 and eventually settled on around 17.5 million for a building which is largely based around a office type building with a few minor tweeks, nearly everything was pre-fabricated, no specialised hand carving, etc. I remember the Allied Irish Bank poster, boasting about how it loaned the money to the Gurdwara. Who in the hell invests 17.5 million in Southall which is now being over run by Somalians? Where the Sikhs who can afford are leaving to other areas. do you know what is worse, is that NOBODY CARES. thats the truth. We have TV stations opened by millionaires who claim they can't run them without donations, we have radio stations begging for money. Its funny how these very TV stations and Radio stations claim that you should do your own Path, that if you get somebody else to do it, you will not get the fruits,so to speak. YET they then say, if anybody wants to sponsor Sukhmani sahib, then they can call and sponsor..I mean what the F**K is that all about. Yes but there is a reason for this, lets blame this on .............wait for it...........no not the SGPC..................no not Congress...................... KALYUG 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SURYADEV Posted October 18, 2012 Report Share Posted October 18, 2012 Good post, but lets not blame everything on Kaljug. Thats just washing our hands of our own resposibilties. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 I agree ^^^ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbreakable Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Good post, but lets not blame everything on Kaljug. Thats just washing our hands of our own resposibilties. Who said blame everything on Kalyug?????? Of course not. Like I said. The buck stops with each and everyone of us. How much do we Love Guru Ji and how much of a sacrifice are we willing to make for Guru Ji, who sacrificed everything for us. By Guru Ji I mean, Siri SatGuru Granth Sahib Ji. Take Care, VaheGuru Ji Ka Khalsa, VaheGuru Ji Ki Fateh. ਜਉ ਤਉ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਖੇਲਣ ਕਾ ਚਾਉJa▫o ṯa▫o parem kẖelaṇ kā cẖā▫o. If you desire to play this game of love, ਸਿਰੁ ਧਰਿ ਤਲੀ ਗਲੀ ਮੇਰੀ ਆਉSir ḏẖar ṯalī galī merī ā▫o. then step onto My Path with your head in hand. ਇਤੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਪੈਰੁ ਧਰੀਜੈIṯ mārag pair ḏẖarījai. When you place your feet on this Path, ਸਿਰੁ ਦੀਜੈ ਕਾਣਿ ਨ ਕੀਜੈSir ḏījai kāṇ na kījaigive Me your head, and do not pay any attention to public opinion(Ang 1412) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anandpuria Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Waheguru ji ka khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh Human beings have lived over the past over hundreds of thousands of years as members of small tribes. The tribal instincts are deeply imprinted in their DNA. This was necessary for their survival and to be fittest to survive in those periods as Darwinism tells us. This genetic imprint cannot be wiped away in just wishful thinking. Caste is of course an evil in the modern world. But the DNA does not listen to the ideals of the whichever philosophy one begins to believe in. We keep creating divisions among people surrounding us all the time despite knowing "Manas ki jaat sabe ekai ...." We are sometilmes 'sikhs', at other times fans of a particular football clubs, then either Khalistanis or anti-Khalsitanis, or not "thick-headed Jatts' or "Putt Jattandan de bulaunde Bakkre ...". Or even being Sikhs we are 'Nihangs' or 'Nanaksariey'. And so on and on every day trying to imagin and create a tribe for us to belong to because our DNA is all the time is ceating hormones to make our brain to look for the tribe we do or could belong to. So being Sikhs or even perfect sikhs we still belong to or want to belong to the tribe designated as 'Sikhs'. This however does not overcome the scientific fact that the tribal instincts generated by the DNA fashioned by the hundreds of thousands of years of tribal past cannot be obliterated by the whims of a few centuries of idealism. To illustrate this just read below an incident in Sikh history to show that being present close to tenth Guruji did not make much of a difference to the casteist (I would say tribal genetic instinct of a Sikh in the early 18th century: Change of names to Singhs and emotionally reminding people that they should not exhibit casteism obviously does not or has not worked. We shall continue arguing and have argued over the centuries I would like you to read about a hugely embarrassing event in Sikh history pertinent to the issue we are discussing and how Singhs very close to the time of tenth Guruji perceived this issue of caste. Please read on: According to Mahan Kosh, Guru Gobind Singh ji Maharaj sent five Singhs (Baba Binod Singh, Kahan Singh, Baaz Singh, Bijay Singh, Ram Singh) with Baba Banda Singh towards Panjab. About Kahan Singh, Kesar Singh Chhibber, an early eighteenth century writer narrates the incident as an eyewitness account. He was grandson of Dharam Singh the treasurer of tenth Guruji. He had met Mata Sundari ji, Mata Sahib Kaur, and Guru ji’s uncle Mama Kirpal Singh and Bhai Mani Singh. His father Gurbax Singh was appointed the guardian of Amritsar city by Mata ji so Kesar Singh came to Amritsar with him. Kesar Singh as a child witnessed the incident that he describes in a book that he wrote later. He wrote ‘Bansawalinama Dasan Patshaheean Ka’ in which this incident is described. A translation of the Punjabi text is given below. Point that may be noted is that Kahan Singh around whom this even revolves was one of the companions of Baba Banda Singh and he must have taken Amrit during tenth Guru ji’s lifetime and must be very close to Guru ji. Moreover he was descendent of second Guruji. The text goes thus: Kahan Singh Trehan from Goindwal and a descendent of Guruji. As a Sardar (chief) Sikh sat at the Bunga (Akal Bunga, Akal Takhat) himself. Sikhs came to the fair (organised by) local residents circumabulating (the Harimandar). A Sikh going in front of them met these Sikhs and embraced them. (4) These Sikhs also embraced him lovingly. They loved him very much. After hugging each other when they departed. Kahan Singh ji saw that particular sikh when all those Sikhs separated. (5) He (Kahan Singh) sent a man to bring that Sikh to him. Kahan Singh ji asked,”O Sikh! Which Sikh are you, what caste are you called by?” Sikh stood there hugely embarrassed. Then Singh ji again said,”What Sikh are you known as?” (6) Then he said, “Sir, I am a Mazhabi Sikh (a sikh originally from a low caste)”. Then Singh ji ordered those other Sikhs to be brought in as well immediately. Those local Sikhs all arrived, The ones who had embraced and hugged this other sikh lovingly. (7) (Singh ji) spoke thus, “Bhai Sikhs, do you know this sikh?” All those said.”Yes sir”. (Singh ji) spoke thus, “Which sikh is he, what is his caste?” They said, sir, landowner sikh and he is known as ‘Sandhu’ (8)(usually a jat surname but occasionally lower castes also may have this surname) Then he was asked in front of these Sikhs. “Bhai Sikh! What is your caste? He mentioned, ‘Mazhabi’ (sikh from low castes ) The local Sikhs were surprised on hearing this. These Sikhs said, “Sir, he has eaten food with us” (9) All of us Sikhs have served him food making him sit in our own kitchen. (persons of lower castes were not allowed to enter kitchen of higher caste persons) Food in (our) plate and water in the bowl was given to him to drink. This sikh (had) said ‘I am landowner sikh and am a local resident of Amritsar” All Sikhs have served him with food in their own homes one by one. (10) Singh ji asked (the ‘Mazhabi’ Sikh), “Why Bhai! Why did you do this?” He said,”Sir, I am sorry. I forgot (went astray)”. (Bhai Kahan Singh)Spake thus,”It is not you who forgot (went astry), it is these (Sikhs) who forgot (went astray). They only saw Guru’s insignia, didn’t see your body (person).” (11) Bhai Sikha! How could you forget? Why didn’t you check for your mother, father, brother, sister or relatives? Those in whose family you were born, grew up and had food together and socialise. How did you forget that (you are from that) family? (12) It is these Sikhs who got misled by just recognising Guru’s symbols. Why did you forget? You seem to be fairly knowledgable. You have done this intentionally. It is these Sikhs who got misled who saw only Guru’s symbols. (13) Following just the Guru’s symbols these Sikhs got misled. So that nobody may repeat this mistake (in the future). A barber was called and his hair were shaved. Making him sit on a donkey was taken around the town. (14) He was hanged by the side of Tunda Sar (a water pond ) And (Kahan Singh) asked this to the local resident Sikhs. “You arrange a Yag (a sacred purification Hindu worship), do Gurpurab, and prepare Parsad”. “Your were misled by Guru’s symbols, so you are not stigmatised by this”. (15) “Do not talk about this in the township” “Keep the tenets of Sikhism in your mind”. “The Turks (muslim rulers) are eager to find faults lest some trouble arises” “There should not be any gossiping about this in the township at all”. (16) All the Sikhs said,”Sir, you did the right thing that you punished him”. None would repeat such a thing again. It created such a fear and respect for Sikhism. That even if someone dropped a thing somewhere, it would continue lying there, and no one would take it away. (17) (Fourteenth Chapter of “Bansavalinama Dasan Patshaheean Ka” “Genealogy of ten patshahis”) (ਬੰਸਾਵਲੀ ਨਾਮਾ ਦਸਾਂ ਪਾਤਸਾਹੀਆਂ ਕਾ, ਕੇਸਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਛਿੱਬਰ, ਪੰਨਾ 218-220, ਪਿਆਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਪਦਮ (ਐਡੀਟਰ), ਸਿੰਘ ਬਰਦਰਜ਼, ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ, 1997) ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਤ੍ਰਿਹਨ ਗੋਇੰਦਵਾਲੋਂ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੀ ਅਉਲਾਦ। ਸਿਰਦਾਰ ਸਿਖ ਆਇ ਬੈਠਾ ਬੁੰਗੇ (ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖਤ) ਆਪ। ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀਆਂ (ਸ਼ਹਿਰ ਦੇ ਵਸਨੀਕ) ਦੇ ਮੇਲੇ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਰਦੱਖਨਾ ਦੇ ਦੇ ਆਏ। ਇਕ ਸਿਖ ਸਨਮੁਖ (ਸਾਹਮਣੇ) ਜਾਂਦਾ, ਸਿਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਗਲਿ ਲਾਏ।4। ਸਿਖ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਗਲਿ ਮਿਲੇ ਪਿਆਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਧਾਇ; ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਅਧਿਕਾਇ (ਬਹੁਤ ਜ਼ਿਆਦਾ)। ਜਦਿ ਮਿਲ ਮਿਲ ਜੁਦਾ ਹੋਇ ਫੁਟੇ(ਚਲੇ ਗਏ) ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਡਿਠਾ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਜਾਂ ਸਭਾ ਸਿਖ ਮੁਟੇ (ਜਦੋਂ ਸਾਰੇ ਸਿਖ ਮੁੜੇ) ।5। ਭੇਜ ਕੇ ਆਦਮੀ ਸੋ ਸਿਖ ਬੁਲਾਇਆ। ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਪੁੱਛਿਆ: “ਸਿਖਾ ਤੂ ਕਉਨ ਸਿਖ ਹੋਤਾ” ।6। ਤਬ ਤਿਨ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਮੈਂ ਸਿਖ ਹਾਂ ਮਜ੍ਹਬੀ ।“ ਤਬ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਉਹੁ ਸਿਖ ਸੱਦਿ ਭੇਜੇ ਤਦਬੀ (ਉਦੋਂ ਹੀ)। ਉਹ ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀਆਂ ਵਾਲੇ (ਲੋਕਲ) ਸਭੇ ਆਏ । ਜੇਹੜੇ ਗਲਿ ਮਿਲੇ ਆਹੇ ਧਾਇ ਧਾਇ ।7। ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖੋ ! ਏਸ ਸਿਖ ਦੇ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਮਹਿਰਮ ਹੋ ?” ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਭਨਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਆਹੋ।“ ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਏਹ ਕਉਨ ਸਿਖ ਹੈ, ਕਿਆ ਇਸ ਦੀ ਜਾਤਿ ?” ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਜਿਮੀਦਾਰੁ ਸਿਖ ਸੰਧੂ ਕਹਾਤਿ”।8। ਤਬ ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਦੇ ਰੋਬਰੋ ਫੇਰ ਸਿਖ ਨੂੰ ਪੁੱਛਿਆ: “ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖਾ! ਕੀ ਜਾਤਿ ਹੈ ਤੇਰੀ?” ਤਿਨ ਮਜ੍ਹਬੀ ਦਸਿਆ। ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਾਲੇ ਸੁਣ ਕੇ ਭਏ ਹੈਰਾਨ। ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਇਸ ਸਾਡੇ ਨਾਲ ਵਰਤਨਿ ਕੀਤੀ ਹੈ ਖਾਨ ਪਾਨ”।9। ਸਭਨਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਚਉਂਕੇ ਬਿਠਾਇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ ਹੈ ਖਵਾਇਆ। ਥਾਲੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ, ਕਟੋਰੇ ਪਾਣੀ ਹੈ ਪੀਵਾਇਆ। ਇਸ ਸਿਖ ਨੇ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਮੈਂ ਜ਼ਿਮੀਦਾਰ ਸਿੱਖ ਹਾਂ; ਵਾਸੀ (ਰਿਹਾਇਸ਼) ਮੇਰੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ।“ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਸਭਨਾਂ ਟਹਲ ਹੈ ਕੀਤੀ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦੁ ਘਰਿ ਬ-ਘਰਿ।10॥ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਕਿਉਂ ਭਾਈ! ਤੂ ਏਹੁ ਕਿਆ ਕਰਤ ਭਇਆ?” ਤਿਨ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਮੈਂ ਭੁੱਲ ਹਾਂ ਗਇਆ।“ ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਤੂੰ ਨਹੀਂ ਭੁਲਾ, ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਏਹੁ। ਇਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ (ਗੁਰੁ ਦੀ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਬਾਹਰੀ ਪਹਿਚਾਨ) ਹੈ ਡਿਠਾ, ਨਹੀਂ ਡਿਠੀ ਤੇਰੀ ਦੇਹ।11। ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖਾ! ਤੂੰ ਕੀਕੂ ਭੁੱਲ ਹੈਂ ਗਿਆ। ਤੁਧ ਆਪਨਾ ਮਾਤਾ ਪਿਤਾ ਭੈਣ ਭਾਈ ਸ਼ਰੀਕ ਸਕਾ ਦੇਖ ਨਹੀਂ ਲਿਆ? ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੇ ਘਰ ਤੂ ਜੰਮਿਆ, ਵੱਡਾ ਹੋਇ ਕੇ ਖਾਂਦਾ ਪੀਂਦਾ ਵਰਤਦਾ ਰਿਹਾ। ਉਹ ਤੈਨੂੰ ਆਪਨਾ ਪਰਵਾਰੁ ਅਤੇ ਜਨਮੁ ਭੁੱਲ ਕੀਕੂੰ ਗਿਆ।12। ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਸਿਖ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ ਬਿਰਦ ਪਛਾਨ। ਤੂ ਕਿਉਂ ਭੁੱਲਾ ਤੂ ਤਾ ਆਹੋ ਸੁਜਾਨ। ਤੁਧ ਜਾਣਿ ਬੁਝਿ ਕੇ ਇਹੁ ਕੰਮ ਹੈ ਕੀਤਾ। ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਸਿਖ, ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ ਦੇਖ ਲੀਤਾ”।13। ਬਿਰਦ ਪਿਛੇ ਸਿਖ ਹੈਨ ਭੁੱਲੇ, ਸੋ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੀ ਦੇਹ । ਫੇਰ ਕੋਈ ਐਸੀ ਕਰੇ ਨ ਏਹੁ। ਬੁਲਾਇ ਨਾਈ, ਤਿਸ ਦੇ ਕੇਸ ਲੁਹਾਏ। ਚਾੜ੍ਹਿ ਖਰ (ਗਧੇ) ਪਰ ਦਿਤਾ ਨਗਰ ਫਿਰਾਏ।14। ਸਰ ਟੁੰਡੇ (ਟੁੰਡਾਸਰ ਸਰੋਵਰ) ਦੇ ਸੋ ਫਾਂਸੀ ਲਾਇਆ। ਅਤੇ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਾਲਿਅਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹੁ ਬਚਨੁ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ। ਤੁਸੀਂ ਕਰੋ ਜੱਗੁ ਗੁਰਪੁਰਬੁ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦੁ’ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਭੁਲੇ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੇ ਬਿਰਦ ਪਿਛੇ, ਤੁਸਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਕੁਛੁ ਨਹੀਂ ਇਸ ਦਾ ਦਾਗੁ।15। ਇਸ ਗੱਲਿ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਿਚ ਕਿਸੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਣੀ। ਸਿਖੀ ਦੀ ਮਤਿ ਹਿਰਦੇ ਧਰਣੀ। ਤੁਰਕ ਹੈਨਿ ਹੁੱਜਤੀ ਕੋਈ ਹੁੱਜਤ ਨ ਉਠ ਖਲ਼ੋਵੈ। ਵਾਸੀ ਵਿਚ ਇਸ ਗ੍ਲਿ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਮੂਲ ਨਾ ਹੋਵੈ।16। ਸਭਨਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਬਹੁਤੁ ਹੱਛਾ ਕੀਤਾ ਇਸ ਨੂੰ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਸਜਾਇ। ਬਹੁੜਿ (ਦੁਬਾਰਾ) ਨਾ ਕੋਈ ਐਸਾ ਕਰਮੁ ਕਮਾਇ।“ ਐਸਾ ਡਰੁ ਅਤੇ ਅਦਬੁ ਗੁਰਸਿਖੀ ਦਾ ਭਇਆ। ਜੋ ਕੋਈ ਕਿਸੇ ਦੀ ਵਸਤੁ ਡਿਗੇ, ਤਾਂ ਪਈ ਰਹੇ, ਕੋਈ ਨ ਲਇਆ।17॥ From www.Amritworld.com 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anandpuria Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 In continuation of my previous post: the Gurmukhi text probably did not appear in correct font. (ਬੰਸਾਵਲੀ ਨਾਮਾ ਦਸਾਂ ਪਾਤਸਾਹੀਆਂ ਕਾ, ਕੇਸਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਛਿੱਬਰ, ਪੰਨਾ 218-220, ਪਿਆਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਪਦਮ (ਐਡੀਟਰ), ਸਿੰਘ ਬਰਦਰਜ਼, ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ, 1997) ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਤ੍ਰਿਹਨ ਗੋਇੰਦਵਾਲੋਂ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੀ ਅਉਲਾਦ। ਸਿਰਦਾਰ ਸਿਖ ਆਇ ਬੈਠਾ ਬੁੰਗੇ (ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖਤ) ਆਪ। ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀਆਂ (ਸ਼ਹਿਰ ਦੇ ਵਸਨੀਕ) ਦੇ ਮੇਲੇ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਰਦੱਖਨਾ ਦੇ ਦੇ ਆਏ। ਇਕ ਸਿਖ ਸਨਮੁਖ (ਸਾਹਮਣੇ) ਜਾਂਦਾ, ਸਿਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਗਲਿ ਲਾਏ।4। ਸਿਖ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਗਲਿ ਮਿਲੇ ਪਿਆਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਧਾਇ; ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਅਧਿਕਾਇ (ਬਹੁਤ ਜ਼ਿਆਦਾ)। ਜਦਿ ਮਿਲ ਮਿਲ ਜੁਦਾ ਹੋਇ ਫੁਟੇ(ਚਲੇ ਗਏ) ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਡਿਠਾ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਜਾਂ ਸਭਾ ਸਿਖ ਮੁਟੇ (ਜਦੋਂ ਸਾਰੇ ਸਿਖ ਮੁੜੇ) ।5। ਭੇਜ ਕੇ ਆਦਮੀ ਸੋ ਸਿਖ ਬੁਲਾਇਆ। ਕਾਨ੍ਹ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਪੁੱਛਿਆ: “ਸਿਖਾ ਤੂ ਕਉਨ ਸਿਖ ਹੋਤਾ” ।6। ਤਬ ਤਿਨ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਮੈਂ ਸਿਖ ਹਾਂ ਮਜ੍ਹਬੀ ।“ ਤਬ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਉਹੁ ਸਿਖ ਸੱਦਿ ਭੇਜੇ ਤਦਬੀ (ਉਦੋਂ ਹੀ)। ਉਹ ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀਆਂ ਵਾਲੇ (ਲੋਕਲ) ਸਭੇ ਆਏ । ਜੇਹੜੇ ਗਲਿ ਮਿਲੇ ਆਹੇ ਧਾਇ ਧਾਇ ।7। ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖੋ ! ਏਸ ਸਿਖ ਦੇ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਮਹਿਰਮ ਹੋ ?” ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਭਨਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਆਹੋ।“ ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਏਹ ਕਉਨ ਸਿਖ ਹੈ, ਕਿਆ ਇਸ ਦੀ ਜਾਤਿ ?” ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਜਿਮੀਦਾਰੁ ਸਿਖ ਸੰਧੂ ਕਹਾਤਿ”।8। ਤਬ ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਦੇ ਰੋਬਰੋ ਫੇਰ ਸਿਖ ਨੂੰ ਪੁੱਛਿਆ: “ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖਾ! ਕੀ ਜਾਤਿ ਹੈ ਤੇਰੀ?” ਤਿਨ ਮਜ੍ਹਬੀ ਦਸਿਆ। ਸਿਖ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਾਲੇ ਸੁਣ ਕੇ ਭਏ ਹੈਰਾਨ। ਤਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਇਸ ਸਾਡੇ ਨਾਲ ਵਰਤਨਿ ਕੀਤੀ ਹੈ ਖਾਨ ਪਾਨ”।9। ਸਭਨਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਚਉਂਕੇ ਬਿਠਾਇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ ਹੈ ਖਵਾਇਆ। ਥਾਲੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ, ਕਟੋਰੇ ਪਾਣੀ ਹੈ ਪੀਵਾਇਆ। ਇਸ ਸਿਖ ਨੇ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਮੈਂ ਜ਼ਿਮੀਦਾਰ ਸਿੱਖ ਹਾਂ; ਵਾਸੀ (ਰਿਹਾਇਸ਼) ਮੇਰੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ।“ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਸਭਨਾਂ ਟਹਲ ਹੈ ਕੀਤੀ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦੁ ਘਰਿ ਬ-ਘਰਿ।10॥ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਹੋਰਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਕਿਉਂ ਭਾਈ! ਤੂ ਏਹੁ ਕਿਆ ਕਰਤ ਭਇਆ?” ਤਿਨ ਕਹਿਆ: “ਜੀ ਮੈਂ ਭੁੱਲ ਹਾਂ ਗਇਆ।“ ਬਚਨ ਕੀਤਾ: “ਤੂੰ ਨਹੀਂ ਭੁਲਾ, ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਏਹੁ। ਇਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ (ਗੁਰੁ ਦੀ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਬਾਹਰੀ ਪਹਿਚਾਨ) ਹੈ ਡਿਠਾ, ਨਹੀਂ ਡਿਠੀ ਤੇਰੀ ਦੇਹ।11। ਭਾਈ ਸਿਖਾ! ਤੂੰ ਕੀਕੂ ਭੁੱਲ ਹੈਂ ਗਿਆ। ਤੁਧ ਆਪਨਾ ਮਾਤਾ ਪਿਤਾ ਭੈਣ ਭਾਈ ਸ਼ਰੀਕ ਸਕਾ ਦੇਖ ਨਹੀਂ ਲਿਆ? ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੇ ਘਰ ਤੂ ਜੰਮਿਆ, ਵੱਡਾ ਹੋਇ ਕੇ ਖਾਂਦਾ ਪੀਂਦਾ ਵਰਤਦਾ ਰਿਹਾ। ਉਹ ਤੈਨੂੰ ਆਪਨਾ ਪਰਵਾਰੁ ਅਤੇ ਜਨਮੁ ਭੁੱਲ ਕੀਕੂੰ ਗਿਆ।12। ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਸਿਖ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ ਬਿਰਦ ਪਛਾਨ। ਤੂ ਕਿਉਂ ਭੁੱਲਾ ਤੂ ਤਾ ਆਹੋ ਸੁਜਾਨ। ਤੁਧ ਜਾਣਿ ਬੁਝਿ ਕੇ ਇਹੁ ਕੰਮ ਹੈ ਕੀਤਾ। ਭੁਲੇ ਹੈਨ ਸਿਖ, ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ ਦੇਖ ਲੀਤਾ”।13। ਬਿਰਦ ਪਿਛੇ ਸਿਖ ਹੈਨ ਭੁੱਲੇ, ਸੋ ਬਿਰਦ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੀ ਦੇਹ । ਫੇਰ ਕੋਈ ਐਸੀ ਕਰੇ ਨ ਏਹੁ। ਬੁਲਾਇ ਨਾਈ, ਤਿਸ ਦੇ ਕੇਸ ਲੁਹਾਏ। ਚਾੜ੍ਹਿ ਖਰ (ਗਧੇ) ਪਰ ਦਿਤਾ ਨਗਰ ਫਿਰਾਏ।14। ਸਰ ਟੁੰਡੇ (ਟੁੰਡਾਸਰ ਸਰੋਵਰ) ਦੇ ਸੋ ਫਾਂਸੀ ਲਾਇਆ। ਅਤੇ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਾਲਿਅਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹੁ ਬਚਨੁ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ। ਤੁਸੀਂ ਕਰੋ ਜੱਗੁ ਗੁਰਪੁਰਬੁ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦੁ’ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਭੁਲੇ ਗੁਰੁ ਕੇ ਬਿਰਦ ਪਿਛੇ, ਤੁਸਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਕੁਛੁ ਨਹੀਂ ਇਸ ਦਾ ਦਾਗੁ।15। ਇਸ ਗੱਲਿ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਵਾਸੀ ਵਿਚ ਕਿਸੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਣੀ। ਸਿਖੀ ਦੀ ਮਤਿ ਹਿਰਦੇ ਧਰਣੀ। ਤੁਰਕ ਹੈਨਿ ਹੁੱਜਤੀ ਕੋਈ ਹੁੱਜਤ ਨ ਉਠ ਖਲ਼ੋਵੈ। ਵਾਸੀ ਵਿਚ ਇਸ ਗ੍ਲਿ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਮੂਲ ਨਾ ਹੋਵੈ।16। ਸਭਨਾਂ ਸਿਖਾਂ ਕਹਿਆ, “ਜੀ ਬਹੁਤੁ ਹੱਛਾ ਕੀਤਾ ਇਸ ਨੂੰ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਸਜਾਇ। ਬਹੁੜਿ (ਦੁਬਾਰਾ) ਨਾ ਕੋਈ ਐਸਾ ਕਰਮੁ ਕਮਾਇ।“ ਐਸਾ ਡਰੁ ਅਤੇ ਅਦਬੁ ਗੁਰਸਿਖੀ ਦਾ ਭਇਆ। ਜੋ ਕੋਈ ਕਿਸੇ ਦੀ ਵਸਤੁ ਡਿਗੇ, ਤਾਂ ਪਈ ਰਹੇ, ਕੋਈ ਨ ਲਇਆ।17॥ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.