Guest Javanmard Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 Dear Akaali, I am glad you asked. Here is an example taken from Giani Gian Singh's Panth Prakash. Here is the reference if you want to buy it: Giani Gian Singh.1999.Tavârikh Gurû Khâlsâ, Patiala: Bhasha Vibhag (Panjab). This is taken from volume II. from the pages 71 and 72: and Read for yourselves... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh47 Posted June 8, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 First I just want to mention here for our readers that Giani Gian Singh wrote his books nearly 160-180 years after these events took place. So it is not contemporary. Secondly, his account of Baba Jee is based on Panth Parkash of Ratan Singh Bhangoo who also wrote his book nearly 100 years after the events took place. So we again have two Sikh accounts both of which are far from being contemporary, thus are bound to be full of mistakes and inaccuracies. Furthermore, Giani Gian Singh even mentions the accounts written by the Mughals such as Aagar Khan, Amanat Khan, and Kafi Khan. So a scholar who bases his opinions on contemporary enemy (Mughal) sources, and also a Sikh account written 100 years after the said events took place are very much full of distortions. Giani Gian Singh has written his books which are full of fairy tails and magical stories. Not to be trusted 100% by the modern reader. I suggest the readers here to take a look at Ganda Singh’s book on Baba Banda Singh Bahadur which he has written using only contemporary sources and being the modern academic he was, he wrote his book using a balanced approach to see the proper picture rather then the distorted picture the older writers have painted for us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 Yeah Singh47, as soon as something doesn't suit Neo-Sikhs it has to be distorted. Why on earth would Giani Gian Singh use Persian accounts to corroborate the oral traditions he cites from descendants of those who knew Banda Bahadur. And let's not even mention Bhai Rattan Singh Bhangu's grandfather (who knows Singh47 maybe he was on the payroll of Shi'a-Brahmin-RSS-Congress-BJP? Who knows...) The core of the question is: why would Sikh authors from the Sikh sampradayas even consider Persian sources? Unless of course it corresponds to what really happened! Now regarding Ganda Singh. Just like Giani Gian Singh and Rattan Singh Bhangu he uses Persian sources 250 years later!!! but with a major difference: his book doesn't mention anything negative about Banda Bairagi. His arguments (on which Neo-Sikhs base their version of the story) are based on ideology NOT proper historiography! Ganda Singh is renowned for having brushed away the Persian accounts when it didn't suit him. He uses the same sources as Giani Giani Singh and Rattan Singh Bhangu but decides the atrocities didn't happen because as we all know "Muslims are bound to lie". See his introduction for a beautiful Islamophobic Orientalist bias. If you don't like Giani Gian Singh then stop reciting "Raj karega Khalsa" after the ardas because it was him who brought it back in Sikh tradition. I suppose that was a "magical story" too... The Neo-Sikh attempt to protect Banda Braveheart Bairagi is nothing short of revisionism of the worst kind: rewriting history basing oneself on ideology only instead of historiography. Reminds me of RSS trying to prove that the Taj Mahal was a Hindu temple... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akaali Posted June 8, 2006 Report Share Posted June 8, 2006 The Neo-Sikh attempt to protect Banda Braveheart Bairagi is nothing short of revisionism of the worst kind: rewriting history basing oneself on ideology only instead of historiography. Seems to be happening more and more, I mean look at some stories of maharaj. People saying Guroo Gobind Singh Ji had only one wife , exactly the same, people rewriting history based on their own ideology. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vijaydeep Singh Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Gurfateh Bhai Ram Kaur Gurbax Singh writer of Sau Sakhi Mangal Prakash also wrrites that Banda even attacked him but on knowing from others that this guy is from Gurus time did leave.There he writes Bada's runiing away into indus. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted June 20, 2006 Report Share Posted June 20, 2006 Please read the article on banda singh bahudar: http://www.amritworld.com/pbi_articles/banda_singh.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Ive listened to Nihangs and stuff and they always criticise Baba Banda Singh on the death of ordianry citizens. Jealsousy. However in the history that I read about Baba Banda Singh in the battle of Sirhind sent a letter to Wazir Khan telling him to prepare for battle and informing him to let non-combatants leave the city. However Wazir Khan mader his preparation from outside of the city beleiving that he would be successful against Banda Singh army who were inferior in numbers and weaponry. When the tyrants were beaten back there was no way out for the non-combatants. Has anyone read anything similiar ? Also another point that is worth making is that the nihangs always bang on about Banda Singh and how the nihangs went against him and so on. The 5 advisors that the nihangs says were given actual control of the panth Baaj Singh Binod Singh etc these leaders of Akali Nihang 96 crore Singh Budha Akali Dal Singh Maharaj Singh were with him to the last. Binod Singh only seperated from Banda Singh on a matter of tactics at Gurdas Nangal, not that he had any other point of contention with Banda Singh. The Nihangs claim that Binod Singh was the first leader of the panth and Budha Dal after Akali Guru Gobind Singh. So if Banda Singh was a traitor so was Binod Singh and Baaj Singh, who died alongside Banda Singh in Delhi. forgive this chatanga if i make any mistakes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malwe Da Sher Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 from what i know Binod Singh was nominated by Maharaj as the Jathedar of the panj pyare. Binod Singh left Banda Bahadur because he was ordered to by Mata Sahib Deva. As far as I am aware he did not die with Banda Bahadur. In regards to the shaheedi of baaj singh and others, its should be noted that after catching banda bahadur and members of the bairagi khalsa, on their way back they gathered as many sikhs as the could, from villages, towns, encampments etc. Im not saying that Baaj Singh was one of them, just something to think about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malwe Da Sher Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Yas Rattan Singhs accounts may have some inaccuracies in it due to being written year afterwards. However, all of his information was recieved from his elders, some of whom were contemporary of Banda, He was the son of Bhai Mehtab Singh - the Singh who beheaded Mussa Rangarh. Rattan Singh was also later shaheed. So: 1. there is no reason for him to write lies. 2. there may be some inaccuracies but im sure the fact that many chapters in panth parkash describe what happened with tat and bandai sikhs means that they were actual events. While there may be MINOR inaccuracies, he cant have made the events up. The famous point that usually comes up at this point(as with other places when something tremendously contradicts what an individual believes) is that the Hindus got hold of it and edited it and then aliens came to mars who destroyed all of the ligit ones. It should also be noted that the Bandi Khalsa still exist, i have details of a few of their deras. And the believe in Banda Bahadur as a Guru and they have had a continued lineage of gurus which still exists till present day - all leaders being form the blood line of banda bahadur. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drawrof Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 interesting about the dera of the bandai khalsa, where are they located? I might be able to go and get pictures 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malwe Da Sher Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Kashmir difinetely, and theres atleast one in Haryana. They used to have a website site years ago, i tried calling the phone numbers that they had given unsuccessfully. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 Fateh to all as far as im aware Banda Singh wanted to hold out against the siege whereas Binod Singh favoured making an assault on the moghuls as a possible way of escaping. Banda Singh and Binod agreed that whoever wanted to stay could and whoever wanted to leave with Binod Singh could. From what i read and been told Binod Singh and his jatha left the fortress but found the moghul army numbers overwhelming and they became shaheed in this battle. After this Banda Singh and his army stayed upo to point of starvation whereupon the moghals forced entry to the fortress. Even then Banda Singh put up a fight only to find the whole fortress overrun. As for Baaj Singh being arrested elsewhere ive nevr heard of it, but sure its a point worth looking into. Other Sikhs were arrested by the moghals and taken to Delhi, but these were mainly Sikh villagers and shopkeepers etc, not combatant Sikhs. Some were combatants undoubtledly but not all forgive this chatanga 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malwe Da Sher Posted February 11, 2007 Report Share Posted February 11, 2007 you are misinformed about Binod Singh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niranjana Posted April 25, 2007 Report Share Posted April 25, 2007 FYI. One possible piece of information on the net about Binod Singh is available here: http://www.amritworld.com/sanatani/lineage.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arsh1469 Posted September 4, 2021 Report Share Posted September 4, 2021 Saw some people talking about Banda so here we go. He was not a true Sikh and we should not hold him in a holy light. He was a Good General but not a good Skkh or even person. He was genocideal and like Hitler who blamed WW1 on the Jews he blamed it on the Muslims. He killed them brutally. Sant Jarnail Singh says he was a fake guru and compared him to thr Nirankari Gurus. There is an overwhelming evidence proving he did killings of innocents. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GurjantGnostic Posted September 5, 2021 Report Share Posted September 5, 2021 10 hours ago, Arsh1469 said: Saw some people talking about Banda so here we go. He was not a true Sikh and we should not hold him in a holy light. He was a Good General but not a good Skkh or even person. He was genocideal and like Hitler who blamed WW1 on the Jews he blamed it on the Muslims. He killed them brutally. Sant Jarnail Singh says he was a fake guru and compared him to thr Nirankari Gurus. There is an overwhelming evidence proving he did killings of innocents. Fair enough. His life, and especially death, are still impressive. 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.