Rehit and its Composers

[Pheena]

I'd like to discuss the origin of Rehit and those who composed it. What were they influenced by, was it the Divine contact in which they composed the Rehits or was it the Circumstances that they were surounded by which influenced them?

Are there Any Rehits which were written or spoken by the Gurus themselves?

If indeed it is a divine revelatino, then why do they differ from Jatha to SPGC to Akal Thakat. Why doesn't everyone Follow the Same Rehit. After all It is the Rehit which is given importence during the Amrit Sanchaar. Or can we say that as long as the basic Rehit of Amrit-vela, Meat and those related to the 5K's are kept it is enough?

Can the SGPC or the Akal Thakat make changes to the Rehit Maryada, such as add or remove certain Rehits?

Thanks, i apologize if the question are elementry as i know very little of Rehit and its real purpose. Also i hope this hasn't already been discussed.

[khalistani]

Vaheguru je ka khalsa, vaheguru je ke fateh!!

well everyone will have their own version on this

but

the sgpc was oirginally called tath khalsa, and was a good group which helped the panth out in desicion making

cause back then there some anti panthic forces, like british,etc.

some reight can be found in guru je, dasamgranth je, and sarab loh granth je

those are the main reight

then there are bhai gurdas jes vaars, which guru je approved

and bhai nand lal jes takhnamas which everyone has said is correct and from guru jes times, bhai sahib was with guru je

these are hardcore reights, no mistakes watsoeever, u cant argue with them

then there are reightnama by gurmukhs, like bhai dya singh je, but because of some very strange things int hem like kill muslamans ,and some other strange stuff, its known that theyev been tampered by hindu kaum

guru je started two MAIN jathas

nihangs which are still alive, and 2 taksals

bhai mani singh je( amritsar still alive), and damadami taksal which went from damdam sahib, to amritsar, then bhindran, then metha under sant gurbachan singh je hukam

these two jathas have very good relations till t his day, taksal and nihangs

there reights are very much the same, except for 2 main things

meat, and bhang

but u can check dasam granth, the reason for this is meat, halal, is not allowed

but thas the way muslims kill it

thas the actual bujjar kureight, not chatka

chatka is not a bujjar kureight, but is not allowed to be eaten for taste

singhs wud eat it only if there was no food around at ALL, and then they wud find the strongest animal, and themselves, take a shastar, do ardaas, do jakaara, and vaheguru

theyd do chatka of that animal in one hit and kill it, to be kind so it wont feel pain

this was for dharam yudh

bhang was also used, like asprin is today, but it was more powerful

singhs wud take it if their feeling pain

bbut with the british and time, nihangs abused meat and bhang, for just ras, taste

but they wernt doing any kureights doing this, its still paap,, but not a bujjar kureight

and as for nanaksar, rara sahib. they all have the same maryada they just concentrate more on bhagti, which is wonderful, they were started by pure brahm gianis

akj was orignially just a keertan group, which appeared like 60 years ago, and claim they have the orignial maryada which was lost

thas y there are so many maryadas

and no one has any authoritty to change reight

but its all good, we shud stay united despite some little differeces

there are few differences inr eight

main ones

raag maala

this is because of british

they said how cud we break the sikhs, so its was to get them away from bani

and then there were the 2 tratores sobha singha and teja singh, who started all this

they made saroops with so less bani, they took out almost everything

thas how that problem started

meat and bhang

this has been coming from guru jes times as i explained, but we just use it for wrong prupose these days, we abuse it

thas the main stuff

bhula chuka maf

Vaheguru je ka khalsa, vaheguru je ke fateh!!

[SAadmin]

Pheena are you talking about Rehit nama or Rehit Maryda??

[Sikher]

http://allaboutsikhs.com/rehat/

[Pheena]

Thank you Khalistani, that was very helpfulll

Neo, what is the difference?

[SAadmin]

guru je started two MAIN jathas

tut tut sowwie you forgot to mention nirmaley, sevapanthis, udasi.

[Pheena]

http://allaboutsikhs.com/rehat/

in the link the authore mentioned:

"(1343) Guru Nanak Dev is the founder of Sikhism. He started the institution of Sangat and Pangat which is the first step to Reht Maryada ladder."

What is Pangat?

btw thanks for the link

[SAadmin]

Pangat is Langar ji (all together sitting down and eating guru da langar)

[Pheena]

thanks neo, so what is the difference between Rehit Nama and Rehit Maryada, are they not the same?

[SAadmin]

well they are kinda interelated in sikh history one couldn't make rehat maryada without studying rehit nama and studying gurbani ie- bhai gurdas di vaara and gurbani in general..

Lot of filtering has been done from rehit nama's..take all the good old points and leave bad ones like if you wear topi you will born as a leper seven times...kinda ridicolous really...no pyaar element in it. Rehit nama's that has pyaar element is only valid all these petty points does not hold any weight. We are not wahabis but we are suppose to be compassionate..and do bhagti in love not do bhagti fully based on fear.

Also who's know when these rehitnama's were written?? What kinda context were they in?? It's soo easy to take anything out of context to support your twisted beleifs or win arguments.

[gupy]

Hi,

I think anyone interested in this topic should read 'Sikhs of the Khalsa - A history of Rehit' by W.H McLeod.

Rather than just state various 'theoeires', we should all respect the academic work of a scholar who invested years on this subject. As a side point, I think it is amazing that the majority of Sikhs have not only ognored such work, but failed to respond to it also.

The literature out there by popular Sikh authors (Kohli, Kushwant, etc...) are nowhere near the same standard of authorship, and are 'romantic' visions of HIstory that are pleasing to the (sorry to be so harsh) uneducated Sikh audience.

[gsingh00]

edit

[Beast]

vah ji vah!

I'm half way through it, and couldn't see a mention of "admin-cut" anywhere.

[gupy]

gurpreet_singh

This is a forum for adults...

If you wish to make a criticism at least display enough intellect to put forward a more cultured response.

[Pheena]

where is this book available on-line?

[Beast]

you can buy it from www.abebooks.com

This link 'may' work:

http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/Search...;imagefield.y=0

or just search on

"Sikhs of the Khalsa A History of the Khalsa Rahit" in Google

[gupy]

Pheena :

Another book that may interest you, which is considerably shorter, is 'Who is a Sikh' again by McLeod.

The first text i recommended is much longer and detailed, this one would be a much better introduction, which would nicely lead to the other

Hope that helps

[Mr_D]

Don't rely on Macleod for studying Sikhism. His work does have a place, but it shouldn't be the main focus of Sikh studies. His work is critical, to say the least. If you put your faith in his facts, there's not much left of the Sikhi most of us know of.

He's non-Sikh and was educated to be a missionary. He's now an atheist. Don't expect him to contradict his atheist belief. He believes Sikhism (as taught by the Gurus) is flawed and contradictory, like any other religion.

This is important to note before jumping into his books.

[tSingh]

I disagree. If you read his works for what they are, then they are farily sound academic works simply taking the western academic approach of critical evaluation to the Sikh religious tradition. I have never come across anything other than moderately tame critical evaluation, based on the premise that only written sources can be used to construct an understanding of a tradition, and then to evaluate the credibility of those sources. He's made a few flippant remarks here and there which are stupid, but, for example, if you compare this with those scholars of Christianity who suggest that Mary was raped by a roman soldier and Jesus the son, hence the need for a virgin birth, you can see (as others have noted) how well Sikhi comes out of the 'western critique' machine. His essay on fundamentalism is very interesting indeed. In fact there are some points in which you have read between the lines to understand what he's suggesting because he's so flipping cautious. I have to say his recent book 'Forget Guru, let Jesus into your life hallelujah' was not up to scratch though.

At the very least, even if you hold such views, I consciously make an effort to read the rubbish stuff to see how rubbish it is. I was reading G.S. Dhillon's hilarious critique of Oberoi's work last week, in which his main criticism is, that there is no reference to Guru Granth Sahib in his work. But rather than taking a theological angle of what should be, Oberoi was interested in what 'was' the case, no matter how seemingly contradictory to singh sabha mindsets.

Back to McLeod, 'Sikhs of the Khalsa' is a great work more as a compilation of the work of Piara Singh Padam, Sampuran Singh, Ashok, etc in english. Don't allow your prejudices to get in the way of useful knowledge.

[gupy]

Also tSingh again shows my main criticism with mainstream Sikhs who don't acknowledge McLeod's work.

It's fine that you don't agree, but no one ever puts forward any decent response to the so-called 'lies' in his work.

Why do all other Sikh Scholers fail to challenge him on a level field???

Are Sikhs just that damn stupid???????????????????