dalsingh101 Posted November 3, 2014 Report Share Posted November 3, 2014 the akj are followers of Bhai Randhir Singh. His own perception of Gurmat is what they beleive in. Their thinking is not orthodox. The samprdais are the orthodox Sikhs. I'd be fascinated to know where you think the Singh Sabha interpretation fits into this spectrum? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulsingh5 Posted November 10, 2014 Report Share Posted November 10, 2014 AKJ are a samprada ...then there got to be other sampradas too in Sikhi. means they differ from each other on so many theological issues like any other santani samprada, panth, akhara, Dera...? weird ...you accept differences among the Sikh sampradas but not among the Sanatanis I'd be fascinated to know where you think the Singh Sabha interpretation fits into this spectrum? Valid points 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted November 10, 2014 Report Share Posted November 10, 2014 AKJ are a samprada ... Absolutely not. AKJ are a jatha. The only samprdais is the Panth are the 4 samprdais- Udasi, Nirmal, Dal Panth and Sewa Panth. Only those given thapia of the Guru's are samprdais. weird ...you accept differences among the Sikh sampradas but not among the Sanatanis You see differences but I see co-relation. The 4 traditional samprdais are not antagonist towards each other but compliment each other. Whereas the Sanatan Dharma contradicts Gurmat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted November 10, 2014 Report Share Posted November 10, 2014 (edited) I'd be fascinated to know where you think the Singh Sabha interpretation fits into this spectrum? The SS as we have discussed many times on this forum, have an interpretation of Gurmat that runs somewhat similar to akj view. Only the akj base their views on Bhai Randhir Singh's views only. The SS interpretation came about after years of research but even then there was a mixed bag at the end of it. Some of their interpretations cannot be faulted but some have glaringly obvious faults. Edited November 10, 2014 by chatanga1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted November 12, 2014 Report Share Posted November 12, 2014 Udasis (to name just one samprada as per your assertion) are santanis to the core! Just as you know next-to -nothing about Gurmat, you know the same about the Udasi Panth. on one hand you allege that Sikh temples were in 'Hindu'mahants (who were udasis) control and on he other hand you agree that they were endorsed by Gurus. Show me where I have called the Mahants 'Hindu Mahants'. Anyone "antagonist" to Tat Khalsa usurpers is either killed or ex-communicated from the panth. the list of nirankaris, radhasoamis, ravidassiyas, sacha saudas, namdharis, etc is very long. Again you are talking out of your dirty extremist mind. There were many Udasis who accepted the standard of the Singh Sabha reforms. For each of the groups you have listed above please provide proof that they have been ex-communicated. the chekofication of dissenters date back to Banda bahadur who was deserted, ex-communicated and left to fight a lone battle as he started his own what i would call a samprada. no room for dissent in Tat Khalsa controlled Sikhi. who cares what you would call a samprdaye? To the Sikh Panth, only the Gurus gave thapia for a Samprdaye. Baba Banda Singh was not a Guru, so could not have given started such a samprdaye. Give your evil scheming up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted November 12, 2014 Report Share Posted November 12, 2014 The SS interpretation came about after years of research but even then there was a mixed bag at the end of it. Some of their interpretations cannot be faulted but some have glaringly obvious faults. Which glaringly obvious faults are you talking about? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted November 12, 2014 Report Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) Which glaringly obvious faults are you talking about? the shortening of Sri Benti Chaupai, the unwarranted removal of Sri Dasam Granth from Sri Akal Takht Sahib, the overhaul of the parikrama around Sri HariMandir Sahib etc Edited November 12, 2014 by chatanga1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted November 14, 2014 Report Share Posted November 14, 2014 the shortening of Sri Benti Chaupai, the unwarranted removal of Sri Dasam Granth from Sri Akal Takht Sahib, the overhaul of the parikrama around Sri HariMandir Sahib etc Do you never get a sense of puritan Victorian Xtian seeping through? 1 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.