Namdharis

[Guest Javanmard]

If you haven't read it yourself then stop talking about it! You obviously don't read Braj. So either you learn Braj to understand it or you abstain from stupid comments! :twisted:

[fatehsingh]

Dear Cyber Sangat.

It is requested that any question that any of you want me to answer kindly be a 'sensible' question. Most of the questions asked lately can be answered by yourselves if you spend some time reading through my posts or the Namdhari Websites or even use your own common sense without being taken over by prejudice and hate.

Nevertheless I will answer the questions raised and the cybersangat can see for itself why these questions are not worth replying to.

Mr. MalwaDoabaMajha,

The first verse in which you are trying to justify wearing of blue clothing does not work, since it can be translated in more than 1 way. I am not going to translate Gurbani but just let me give you a hint that Nili = Blue, Siahi = Black (Both muslim colors - in fact there is a place near Anandpur Sahib where Guru Gobind Singh killed 2 muslim Pathans with His aero and it is called 'Siahi Tibi') and Kada = Getting rid of. The rest is up to you and the Kirpa of the Guru to make you understand it or not.

But how do you refute the other verses in the Sri Aad Granth Sahib that relates blue directly with Muslims (eg. Neel Bastar Leh Kapray Pehray Turak Pathani Amal Kiya)? Since you can't, so what's the point? If your point is that Namdhari Singhs should not discriminate against those who wear blue, then please do not be worried because we DON'T. In fact many Nihangs and even Muslims are Namdharis as you may have read in the faq (which I doubt). But for a Khalsa to wear the uniform of Muslims is forbidden in the Namdhari Panth. If you don't agree then that's your choice and I respect that.

In the other verse you've tried to prove that Havan is 'useless' and should not be done. But you contradict yourself because the verse also says that reading of puraans is, as per your translation, useless. Also it says that bathing in Teerath is useless. So then should Sikhs stop reading Bani and stop taking bath in the Sarowar of Sri Harimandir Sahib? Or should we stop reading books or bathing all together? What kind of an argument is this?

If you say that Puraans are not the same as Granth Sahibs or that Teeraths are not the same as the Sarowar Sahib, then also kindly REMEMBER that the Havan Yagya of Guru Gobind Singh which is performed by reciting GURBANI is also not the same as that of Hindus.

As for Khalsasoulja,

unless you can kindly respond like an adult it is requested that you don't make such lousy claims and remarks. The Bhatt Vahis found today are in no way reliable. They are as polluted as the newer Janam Sakhis and Sau Sakhis and the 'fabricated' works of Bhai Nand Lal and various other Rahitnamas (According to Bhai Kahn Singh's Mahan Kosh). If you are serious about Sikh History then the only way is to read from authentic sources that are written AND PUBLISHED before the creation of both the Namdhari Panth and the Singh Sabha Movement. Some of these books are Suraj Parkash, Pracheen Panth Parkash, Amarnama - The earliest and MOST RELIABLE according to most people - written only 24 days after Guruji disappeared from Nander), Sri Guru Sobha etc. True that none of these say Guru Gobind Singh gave Gurgaddi to Guru Balak Singh (As they were written before that time) but in NONE of these does it say Guruship was passed on to Granth Sahib as well. But ofcourse this is NOT the reason why I'm here, to start a debate about the succession of Guruship or anything like that, so please be so kind as to stay away and allow me to stay away from such fruitless arguments.

As for the works of Giani Gian Singhji, if they are not turstworthy, then why did the Singh Sabha (Khalsa Tract Society) have to buy its printing rights and add the Dohra 'Agya Bhei Akal ki'? Why did they have to remove every 28 Kabits about the Namdhari Sikhs and the succession of Guruship from Guru Gobind Singh to Guru Balak Singh?

As for Mr. Lalleshvari,

You claim that Namdhari Singhs somehow follow the Havan Maryada of Udasis and not of Guru Gobind Singh as described in the Suraj Parkash. Is there any proof to backup this statement? I have hardly ever heard of any connection between Udasis and Namdhari Singhs' Maryada.

Again, my request to the readers is to kindly THINK before you press the 'Submit' button.

Fateh Singh

[Guest]

Some of these books are Suraj Parkash, Pracheen Panth Parkash, Amarnama, Sri Guru Sobha

Any one of you know where can I get these books?

[Guest Javanmard]

well Baba Balak SIngh was an Udasi Khatri. I am not claiming that Namdhari havan was not started by Guru Gobind Singh. I am just sying that it has booth origins.

[Narsingha]

...Havans were regularly done by many Sikhs, eg. Bedis...not just Naamdharis

Whats the big deal about Havans just because modern mainstream Sikhs are to damn narrow minded to understand the concept of Agni and Jott.

[Guest BikramjitSingh]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Fateh Singh

A few comments on your Q&A about Namdharis

1. Who is a Namdhari?

A person who has received the Gurmantra from the Satguru or from those authorized by the Satguru, respects and follows the Hukam of the Gurus as written in the Sri Aad and Dasam Granth Sahib and the Hukam of the Hazoor Satguru is a Namdhari.

I think the factor which divides Sikhs and Namdharis in the belief in human Gurus, the last line of your description. In order to 'prove' that Ram Singh was a Guru, the Namdharis have had to concoct a dubious history laced with many unbelievable events.

2. Why do Namdhari Sikhs believe in more than 10 Gurus?

Namdhari Sikhs believe that Guru Gobind Singh did not leave His body in 1708 but in fact played the act to escape the direct attention of the Mughal rulers and continued to assist the Sikhs in times of distress. To support this claim there are countless proofs, some of which are displayed on the following links:

'Death' of Guru Gobind Singh - Sikh-Heritage.co.uk

How/when did Granth Sahib became 'Guru'? - Namdhari.faithweb.com

For beginners who are interested to learn the history of the

The theory of Guru Gobind Singh playing a trick on his Sikhs by asking them to look away while he walked on the funeral pyre is based on Giani Gian Singh. Giani Gian Singh writing over 170 years after the event follows the narravative of other writers but fills up the gaps with miracle stories. Kavi Sainapat who wrote Sri Gur Sobha is the writer whose work is the most contemporary. Unfortunately Sainapat does not comment on the cremation of the Guru but just states that the Sikhs after much grief and distress decided to cremate the Guru the next day. Had there been the 'trick' played by Guru Gobind Singh then Sainapat would have certainly have written about it. Giani Gian Singh writes about the 'Nar Natak' or human drama played by the Guru on his Sikhs. The Guru asked his Sikhs to look away he walked into the funeral pyre. Later on a Sadhu came to the Sikhs and told them that he had seen Guru Gobind Singh riding and hunting with his hawk. Giani Gian Singh's writings are full of fantasies such as these. Whereas writers such as Sainapat present the story of the Guru in a straighforward manner, Giani Gian Singh presents the same events by cloaking it with miracles and other unbelievable details. For one it is inconcievable that Guru Gobind Singh would trick his Sikhs. These weren't just ordinary people, they were the Sikhs that had been with the Guru in his battles against the Hill Rajas and the Mughals. They were people who had left their homes in order to place their full faith in the Guru's mission. How consistant is this story with the life of Guru Gobind Singh. Would the Guru deceive his followers, his Bhai Sikhs ( brother Sikhs ) ?. Then we have the added difficulty in believing that Guru Gobind chose to remain hidden during the time when the Khalsa needed him the most. Fateh Singh your statement but in fact played the act to escape the direct attention of the Mughal rulers and continued to assist the Sikhs in times of distress does not make sense. There is no evidence available thet Guru Gobind Singh having left Nander ever helped the Khalsa physically. Unless you can provide evidence, you comment is just plain nonsense .

3. Are Namdhari Sikhs 'Amritdharis' (Baptised)?

The Namdhari Panth was essentially established to revive the old Khalsa Maryada of Guru Gobind Singh that was almost completely lost from the surface of the earth, hence being Amritdhari is an essential part of being a Sant Khalsa and therefore a very large percentage of Namdhari Sikhs is in fact Amritdhari. However there are also many Namdhari Sikhs (mostly from the Hindu and Muslim communities) who, like in the olden days of the 10 Gurus, revere the Satguru as an Incarnation of God and receive the 'Naam', thereby becoming Namdharis, but do not partake Khande Da Pahul and become a Khalsa. Nevertheless, the Sant Khalsa Namdharis do not question their authenticity of being Sikhs and they are given the deserved respect as is everyone else.

This claim to being Amritdharis is a bit dubious. Baba Ram Singh chose to replace the Kirpan which was banned by the British with a stick ( lathi ) instead. Now why would someone whose aim was to resurrect Sikhism and who you believe was a Guru change the Khalsa Rehat ?. yes, at that time it was difficult for Sikhs to wear a Kirpan but many still did so unmindful of the British ban. Can I ask why Baba Ram Singh did not challenge the British ban on the Kirpan ?.

4. How do Namdhari Sikhs treat the Granth Sahibs?

At the time when the Namdhari Panth was established, Granth Sahibs had lost almost all scriptural/spiritual significance in the eyes of the so called 'Sikhs' and the corrupt Mahants of the time. It is a well known fact that Satguru Ram Singh traveled from Dharamsala to Dharamsala, opened up the abandoned houses of worship, cleaned the volumes of Granth Sahib that were forgotten and chewed off by rats with His Dastaar (Turban), and taught the people the proper respect that the Granth Sahibs deserved. The Namdhari Sikhs therefore dearly respect both Sri Aad and Dasam Guru Granth Sahibs equally as Gurbani and treat them with no less, if not more, respect than the other Sikhs who claim to worship the Sri Aad Granth Sahib as Guru. In fact the Namdhari Sikhs believe that since the Gurus themselves bowed down before the Granth Sahib it therefore does not make sense that Guru Gobind Singh would have allegedly lowered the status of Granth Sahib and gave It His Gurgaddi instead as is claimed by the other Sikhs. For more information on this subject please visit THIS LINK.

When you want to invent an innovation you need to decry the old one. Unfortunately Nadhari writing are replete with such claims of Sikhi being virtually on it's last legs and how the namdhari 'guru' saved Sikhi. Yes, there was a accretion of popular religion into Sikhi, worship of graves and the like due to the fact that a large number of non-Sikhs had become Sikhs during the time of Maharaj Ranjit Singh. But the picture you try and paint of the Guru Granth Sahib losing it's scriptural authority is a false one. If anything it is the Namdharis who seek to deny the Guru Granth Sahib it's due position as the Guru of the Sikhs. No amount of 'respect' to the Guru Granth Sahib by Namdharis can undo this damage.

6. Why do Namdhari Sikhs shun wearing blue and black attires?

Blue and black clothes were the attires of Muslims, who were the arch enemies of the Sikhs. For more information regarding this subject please visit THIS LINK.

Your simplistic attitude to the colour of clothing is unhealthy. Guru Nanak criticised the Khatris for wearing blue clothes in Asa Di Var because they were 'aping' the behaviour of the Muslims. They were taking money from the Muslims while oppressing their fellow Hindus but then pretending to follow the Hindu religious rites. The verse is about hypocrisy and not a comment on what colour clothes to wear or not. Any way it is more likely that the Namdhari shun blue clothes because this colour is popular amongst Nihangs and also because the Akali reformers chose the colour. Namdharis and their 'guru' actively supported the corrupt Nihangs and the British government in their attempt to deny the Sikhs the management of their own gurdwaras. In gratitude the British dismantled the the police post at Bhaini.

7. Why do Namdhari Sikhs perform Havan?

Satjug Sat, Treta Jaggi, Dvapar Pooja Chaar |

Teeno Jug, Teeno Dhrirhay, Kal Kaywal Naam Adhaar |

From the above Verse, it is clear that Havan or Jagg is the main practice of Treta Yuga (Although Raja Bali of Satjug is also known to have performed a 'Mahan Jagg'). While there is no doubt that 'Naam' is the main practice of Kali Yuga, one also cannot deny that a Sikh does not only Jap Naam but also adheres to the values of 'Satt' (Truth) from Sat Yuga, Pooja (worship of Satguru) from Dvapar Yuga and also Jagg (Havan) from Treta Yuga. These are the ancient practices that the Sikhs, and the Gurus, practised.

This really has to be the MOST RIDICULOUS excuse that I have come across for the Namdharis doing Havans. How can you say that the Gurus and Sikhs practicised havans ?. If havan was the main practice of Treta Yug then this does not automatically make it a practice for the kal Yug. In Kal Yug Nam Simran and Kirtan are pardhana.

8. Are Namdharis 'Sikhs'?

The word Sikh is derived from the Sanskrit 'Shishya' which means student. To be a student there needs to be a teacher or Guru. Since Namdharis do have a teacher, they are hence students and no doubt Sikhs.

Yes in the widest sense any student at school can be called a Sikh. But in Sikhi the words has a more specific meaning. A person who believes in the teachings of the Ten human Gurus and the Guru Granth Sahib. Also could you comment on that fact that a Namdhari leader Nidhan Singh Alam who was editor of the Namdhari magazine, Kuka, in the 1930's wrote 'Hum Hindu Hain' ( we are Hindus ) to refute Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha's book ?. Was he a Namdhari or a Sikh or a Hindu ?

10. Why do other Sikhs outnumber Namdhari Sikhs?

Firstly, after Satguru Ram Singh Ji went into exile the Namdhari Sikhs were harassed and oppressed in every possible way. No five Namdhari Sikhs were allowed to get together anywhere. The Namdhari Sikhs were thrown into jails for doing Path and performing Diwan for five to seven years. Some got worse punishments being drowned in the Andaman sea and tortured in many ways. The Namdhari Sikhs were not even allowed to enter into the Gurdwaras controlled by the other Sikhs who were Pro-British. They were driven away just as their Straight Turban was seen in the distance. The Namdhari Sikhs were "outlawed" and called all sorts of names by the Sikh Mahants. This may partially be due to the incident in 1863 when Satguru Ram Singh Ji had declared the Nihangi Sikh Mahants of Anandpur as "non-Sikhs" right in their faces. Hence after Satguruji went into exile the Mahants saw it to be their chance to get even and started to label the Namdhari Sikhs as non-Sikhs. This sadly goes on till today due to the illiteracy of the majority of Punjabis. Secondly, The Gurdwara Sri Bhaini Sahib itself was under heavy surveillance and was searched every few hours. For fifty long agonizing years the heavy surveillance went on and the Namdhari Sikhs in every part of India, and abroad, that the British and its loyalists had their eyes on were oppressed. At such a time, to become a Namdhari was no different than becoming a 'criminal' or being imprisoned for life. Thirdly, a large number of Namdhari Sikhs were also later forced to be converted by the Singh Sabha movement of Lahore that had complete support from the British Government and whose many members were in fact Government officials. Hence with the financial and political support of the then British Government of India and with the aides they received from the majority of Gurdwaras that were readily used as preaching centers, the Singh Sabha Sikhs were able to do a 'Parchar' (Propaganda) with much ease and success contrary to the Namdhari Sikhs whose very existence itself was a displeasure for the Government.

There is no doubt that During the early years of Baba Ram Singh's activities, many Sikhs flocked to him and at their greatest extent about 100,000 Sikhs may have become Namdharis. But when stories detailing how Baba Ram Singh would drive the British out of India caused the British to curtail his activities and upon his exile many of these Sikhs went back to mainstram Sikhism. Your knowledge of the Singh Sabha is very limited. The Lahore Singh Sabha did not receive any financial or political support from the British. In fact the British were more supportive of the Amritsar Singh Sahba which believed in many of the rites that the Namdharis did such as havans and jaggs. The Lahore Singh Sabha faced the same opposition from the Mahants that you state that the Namdharis did. The Lahore Singh Sabha was founded by Sikhs of limited means but all they had was their belief that it was the Guru Granth Sahib that was supreme and not the various false 'gurus' and babas. It was through this that they managed to defeat the Amritsar Singh Sabha, the Arya Samaj and the later Namdharis.

Your comment Thirdly, a large number of Namdhari Sikhs were also later forced to be converted by the Singh Sabha movement of Lahore shows reliance of falsehood rather than a rational argument. Can you or the writer of the piece provide some evidence of where the Lahore Singh Sabha forcibly converted Namdharis ?. If you cannot then please remove this falsehood from that site.

Gurfateh

Bikramjit Singh

[Gupt Singh]

fatehsingh....sorry i cant act like an adult......maybe its cuz im still a kid

wot r u chatting about, sikh historians have changed the date of guru hargobinds birth 5 years back when they discovered the bhatt vahis, as the one given in panth prakash was WRONG......gyani gyan singh wrote stuff in the MID 1800s......how is that just after guruji passed?

lallehsvari.....i cant read braj so my opinions are irrelevant.....sorry im too moorakh for u i dotn think this forum is good for ur scholarly capabilities......why not go have a intellectual discussion with a well versed intellectual scholar over a cup of tea and a scone

[jsb]

mmm scones (drooling)

[tSingh]

I thought it was against rehit maryada to go on the internet and drool over buns jsb

[jsb]

Mod's Note: Stick to the topic please if you want mod's to keep your message on this thread next time!!

[fatehsingh]

Bikramjitsingh,

Fateh Bulai Parvaan Karni.

First of all I must say that you are entitled to your opinions. Secondly, read the books by Giani Mehar Singh that were mentioned in the FAQ because you are reading from a 'dubious' source that have been proven a total hoax ages ago. Get updated.

You wrote so much yet there's so little sense that can be made out of it. Here's my short reply that should cover all your doubts. Also try to use some logic without being taken over by prejudice in order to absorb something out of it. If you keep saying your mind and I keep saying mine then what's the use? This forum will be just as good as a trash dump.

You seem to place a lot of doubt on Giani Gian Singh's work, perhaps because he recieved Naam from the Namdhari? So what about Suraj Parkash? Why did Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh write so much about Devi Puja, Havan, and even that Guru Gobind Singh promised Kavi Alam Singh He'd return again to look after the Khalsa? (And nothing about giving Guruship to ANYONE or ANYTHING) Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh was in no way related to Namdharis. But Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh also wrote about how Sodi Kaulji ('relative' of Guru Gobind Singh) was not at all pleased to see Guru Gobind Singh wearing blue attires when acting as 'Uch Da Pir' and hence requested the Guru to change His attire to white. The Guru did not only take off the blue clothing but even tore it into pieces and burnt them. Each time He tore the blue cloth He recited 'Neel Bastar Leh Kapray Pharay Turak Pathani Amal Giya' (For full detail visit http://www.sikh-heritage.co.uk/research/Bl...e%20Clothes.htm ) This is also written in Johar Khalsa by Sardar Kartar Singh Kalaswalia, who is again in no way a Namdhari.

As for your claim that the Namdhari writer Sant Nidhan Singh Alam wrote 'Hum Hindu Hai' and are, like Dr. Ganda Singhji, trying to make a big deal out of it, then first of all understand that its firstly an opinion of a writer and secondly its all for the reason of unity in the Nation. To fight against the British or just to advance in the society, it is not something that can be done alone. Unnecesarily dividing one's self and ignoring all the similar history and heritage that we share with Hindus is not necessarily a right move. You are merely judging a book by its cover and havent even read what's written inside, so what's the point? Please also understand that Sant Nidhaan Singh Alam is not a Namdhari leader, he's a writer and if you cannot understand the concept of 'freedom of speech' then that's your headache.

You also claimed that Guru Gobind Singh never assisted the Khalsa in physical form. Read a book called 'Nandero Baad Guru Dasmesh Darshan' by S. Taran Singh Vehmi. He has done much research on the subject and provided many detailed accounts regarding Guruji's life after Nander mainly from Gurbilas Patshahi Dasvi and many other sources. Unfortunately I do not have this book with me or I'd quote a few lines but even if we look at what Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha writes about Baba Ajapal Singhji (Who Namdhari Singhs believe to be Guru Gobind Singh in disguise when He stayed in Nabha) there is no doubt that 'Babaji' was a very secretive person and almost nothing is known about Him (despite Bhai Kahn Singh's great grand father being His devouted and close Sevak). Neverthless 'Babaji' did lot of Parchar of Sikhi and taught Shastarvidya to the Singhs hence the Guru did physically assist the Khalsa even at such an old age. But perhaps this is not convincing enough for you because it's about 'Baba Ajapal Singh', so let's consider the Pracheen Panth Parkash of Rattan Singh Bhangoo. He writes that when Mata Sundriji, under influence of Muslims, wanted to control the movement of Baba Banda, she sent Bhai Nand Lal with a Hukamnama bearing the false Signature of Guru Gobind Singh which Banda at once recognised and did not agree to comply with. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS? If Baba Banda was able to recognise at once that the Hukamnama was fake then certainly He must have had some contact with Guru Gobind Singh. Or atleast this should prove that neither Mataji nor Baba Banda believed that Guruji had left His body in 1708. Your respect Dr. Ganda Singhji also wrote a book 'Hukamnameh' in which he displays a Hukamnama written by Baba Banda after he is said to have met with Guru Gobind Singh (after the incident in 1708) and starts the Hukamnama writing 'Ik Ongkar Fateh Darshan' and then 'SACHAY SAHIB DI AGYA HAI...'. Even though Dr. Ganda Singhji tries to fool the reader that Baba Banda was inventing a new salutation, it is of no use because the Hukamnamas after that do not bear anything similar to the mentioned Salutation.

You claimed that Guru Ram Singh replaced Kirpan with sticks, this is a misconception that I myself may be liable for. But let's make it clear that the Namdhari Sikhs did carry sticks, axes and other weapons but there was ALWAYS 'KARAD' instead of Kirpan. With this your doubts should be settled.

You claimed that the Namdhari Singhs lie about Granth Sahib losing its significance, what a baseless accusation. Read Johar Khalsa by Sardar Kartar Singh Kalaswalia. He is in no way a Namdhari but he also clearly writes that in the time when Khalsa Rahet was depleted and corruption was abound, it was Baba (Guru) Ram Singh of Bhaini who put people back on the right track and resurrected the Khalsa. Similar writings are also done by Giani Gian Singh, but ofcourse you can't believe him because he became a Namdhari.

You claimed>>>Namdharis and their 'guru' actively supported the corrupt Nihangs and the British government in their attempt to deny the Sikhs the management of their own gurdwaras. In gratitude the British dismantled the the police post at Bhaini. <<<<

This is again the work of the so called 'scholar' Dr. Ganda Singhji and is a complete hoax. I have with me the transcript of the very letter in which the British Government 'threatens' the Namdhari Sikhs that the police post was only temporarily removed and if they saw any uproar by the Namdhari Singhs they would reinforce it again. This completely defies your baseless accusations. From day one to the last seconds the Namdhari Singhs NEVER supported the British. It is a well known fact that even when the British tried to offer Guru Hari Singh a piece of land and some money because they were impressed with the Namdhari Singh's Langar which was given to the poor 24/7, the Guru turned the British officer down without mincing any words and even told him that the 'Land' belonged to the Indians and they (the British) had no right to it. All I can say is that if you keep reading from books written by proven liars such as Dr. Ganda Singh then that's your headache but do not try to spread the baseless claims that you have no idea about yourself.

You claimed: >> If havan was the main practice of Treta Yug then this does not automatically make it a practice for the kal Yug. In Kal Yug Nam Simran and Kirtan are pardhana. <<

And are you saying that NAAMdhari Singhs do not do NAAM Simran or perform Kirtan? What kind of a childish argument is this? You are just picking and grabbing whatever you can like a person drowning in water. Also you seem to minimize the strength of Namdhari Singhs a bit too far. From Government records it is written that the Namdhari Soldiers (After Guru Ram Singh already went into exile) numbered about 400,000 whereas the Namdhari records show the number to be 700,000. May I know from where you get the number of 100,000? Wait let me guess, Dr. Ganda Singh's book no doubt in which a census was conducted in an area where Namdhari Singhs were oppressed the most?

You claimed: >>The Lahore Singh Sabha did not receive any financial or political support from the British. In fact the British were more supportive of the Amritsar Singh Sahba which believed in many of the rites that the Namdharis did such as havans and jaggs. The Lahore Singh Sabha faced the same opposition from the Mahants that you state that the Namdharis did. The Lahore Singh Sabha was founded by Sikhs of limited means but all they had was their belief that it was the Guru Granth Sahib that was supreme and not the various false 'gurus' and babas. It was through this that they managed to defeat the Amritsar Singh Sabha, the Arya Samaj and the later Namdharis. <<<

Please try to understand that I have studied about Singh Sabha FROM both Singh Sabha and Namdhari sources to check the facts. It is you who have gotten things topsy turvy. Go ahead and read the Mahan Kosh's preface pages even and see for yourself. Such baseless claims are pitiful to even reply to. So if the British did support the Singh Sabha Amritsar, then why was the book written in Farsi called 'Khursheed Khalsa', which says Guru Ram Singh to be the 12th Guru of the Sikhs, banned when it was introduced in the meeting of Singh Sabha Amritsar? This book was introduced into the Sangat by the leader of Singh Sabha Amritsar, Baba Khem Singh Bedi (Who is known to have paid homage to Guru Ram Singh with large sums of money and was very devouted to the Guru but could not become a Namdhari because he could not give up drinking liquor)? If Singh Sabha Amritsar was supported by the British then howcome it went extinct? If the British were against the Namdhari Singhs who would in no way cooperate with them, then does it make any sense that they would support Singh Sabha Amritsar who had the same longing for freedom? THINK. Read the book 'Sikh Lehra' by Sardar Samsher Singh Ashok as he explains quite well the personalities of both the Singh Sabhas' leaders.

You wrote: >>Your comment Thirdly, a large number of Namdhari Sikhs were also later forced to be converted by the Singh Sabha movement of Lahore shows reliance of falsehood rather than a rational argument. Can you or the writer of the piece provide some evidence of where the Lahore Singh Sabha forcibly converted Namdharis ?. If you cannot then please remove this falsehood from that site.<<<

What kind of proof do you want? A written certificate from SGPC? The proofs we have are eyewitness accounts such as that of Sant Takhat Singhji, a very important Sikh of Satguru Ram Singh Ji who was once harassed by the Singh Sabha members who tried to forcefully color his white Bana along with other Sikhs whose Banas were being colored at the same time. I have also met with those people myself who were Namdhari Singhs but were converted by the Singh Sabhias. Unfortunately I did not make them sign their names and write their entire history on a piece of paper.

As for Lalleshvari,

Please stay away from making such baseless claims. Though Guru does not have caste, Guru Balak Singh took Avatar in the house that belonged to the Arora caste and He was a Khalsa and not Udassi since He lived a Grehsat Life. Though He lived much of His life after attaining Guruship in silence waiting for the return of Guru Gobind Singh as He promised. It is also written in the Sau Sakhi and Suraj Parkash that the Guru would remain incognito in the 11th Form but will make Himself known in the 12th Form.

Fateh Singh

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

By the way...to claim that Kavi Santokh Singh Sahib's Suraj Parkash is without errors and should be considered the absolute version of Sikh History is irresponsible.

Bhai Vir Singh comments on the Suraj Parkash (now someone is going to bad-mouth Bhai Vir Singh...sigh). Kavi Santokh Singh was a gifted poet who was hired by a Sikh Raja (can't remember name) to write an account of Sikh history, which up to that point was in many volumes and oral history.

Kavi Sahib not only researched various texts, but also went around collection oral history. Kavi Sahib wrote down everything he was able to gather, but he did not necessarily cross-reference with the Guru Granth Sahib to see if what he is writing is in line with Gurbani.

[fatehsingh]

In no way am I forcing anyone to believe in Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh's work alone. Go ahead do a research. A JUST research without being biased. If you read books written by Singh Sabha Sikhs who claim this and that about the Namdhari Singhs without the slightest hint of the turth, then also have the courage to read the books written by the Namdhari Singhs in response to them.

AFTER RESEARCHING through the AUTHENTIC historical literatures and reading from both the Singh Sabha and Namdhari Singhs' works, then have a say about it or make a definite comment that has some weight and makes some sense. Otherwise what's the point of making baseless claims that would be refuted in only a few seconds?

Fateh Singh

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

And what can be deemed "authentic"? What books are you referring to and who wrote them?

Sikhism, after the passing of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib, entered a very dark academic era because of the continuous conflict with the Mughals. The majority of the Sikh Panth was fighting the Mughals, leaving nobody to give a Sikh account of what was happening. Who can we consider reliable?

And who did write books during that time?

Koer "Singh" (aka. Bishan Chand) - a Vaishnavite Hindu writer of the Gurbilas Patshahi 10 - man who invented the Durga Puja myth. Also writer of the 41 "Bhai Gurdas" Vaar, which inculdes references to Kalka (Durga).

Kesar "Singh" Chibber - a Barhmin writer of Bansavali Nama - elaborates on the Durga myth.

Sarup Das Bhalla - writer of Mehma Parkash, who tries to improve the image of Prithi Chand, Dhir Mal and their progeny.

And who but Mahants were in charge of the Gurudwaras during this time. Their practices included idol worship INSIDE Gurudwaras and conducting Hindu rituals. How much consideration for the Sikh identity could they have had?

So Bhai Fateh Singh, who do I trust? And the follow-up question to that is, Why Should I trust any of them when most of what they write is against Gurbani?

[Guest BikramjitSingh]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Fateh Singh

Your discussion strategy seems to be to bypass anything which is inconvenient or give only a part of the picture.

You claimed that Guru Ram Singh replaced Kirpan with sticks, this is a misconception that I myself may be liable for. But let's make it clear that the Namdhari Sikhs did carry sticks, axes and other weapons but there was ALWAYS 'KARAD' instead of Kirpan. With this your doubts should be settled.

So are you saying that for a Namdhari a Kirpan or Karad is essential ?. Do Namdhari Amritdharis all carry a Kirpan or Karad ?. I know they do not, so this presents a problem. Either these Namdharis are not following their 'guru' or they know that Ram Singh did not make the Kirpan or Karad essential for an Amritdhari Namdhari.

As for your claim that the Namdhari writer Sant Nidhan Singh Alam wrote 'Hum Hindu Hai' and are, like Dr. Ganda Singhji, trying to make a big deal out of it, then first of all understand that its firstly an opinion of a writer and secondly its all for the reason of unity in the Nation. To fight against the British or just to advance in the society, it is not something that can be done alone. Unnecesarily dividing one's self and ignoring all the similar history and heritage that we share with Hindus is not necessarily a right move. You are merely judging a book by its cover and havent even read what's written inside, so what's the point? Please also understand that Sant Nidhaan Singh Alam is not a Namdhari leader, he's a writer and if you cannot understand the concept of 'freedom of speech' then that's your headache.

In this quote you have written two falsehoods. Nadhan Singh Alam was a Namdhari 'sant' something much more than the 'leader' for being which you deny. He was also a friend of your 'guru' partap singh. He was also the foremost Namdhari writer and editor of Namdhari journal. Describing his book as just a matter of 'freedom of speech' show that you do not shy from falsehood when faced with inconvenient facts. The book 'Hum Hindu hain' was written specifically to challenge Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha's book' Hum Hindu Nahin'. It is in unlikely that such a book challenging the independent existence of Sikhism would have been written without the express consent of your 'guru' partap singh. Your explanation that this book was written for the 'reason of unity of the nation' !. So now I know why Namdharis are such patriots. Sikhi can be misrepresented as long as the reason is unity of the nation !. I now understand why your 'gurus' were such good friends of the congress and why they allowed their followers to appear in the government produced propaganda videos to explain the necessity of 1984 !. If you think that it is fine to misrepresent Sikhi in order to have unity of India then I bow to such a great Desh Bhagat as yourself. Frankly Sikhi is more important to me that the unity of any nation.

You also claimed that Guru Gobind Singh never assisted the Khalsa in physical form. Read a book called 'Nandero Baad Guru Dasmesh Darshan' by S. Taran Singh Vehmi. He has done much research on the subject and provided many detailed accounts regarding Guruji's life after Nander mainly from Gurbilas Patshahi Dasvi and many other sources. Unfortunately I do not have this book with me or I'd quote a few lines but even if we look at what Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha writes about Baba Ajapal Singhji (Who Namdhari Singhs believe to be Guru Gobind Singh in disguise when He stayed in Nabha) there is no doubt that 'Babaji' was a very secretive person and almost nothing is known about Him (despite Bhai Kahn Singh's great grand father being His devouted and close Sevak). Neverthless 'Babaji' did lot of Parchar of Sikhi and taught Shastarvidya to the Singhs hence the Guru did physically assist the Khalsa even at such an old age. But perhaps this is not convincing enough for you because it's about 'Baba Ajapal Singh', so let's consider the Pracheen Panth Parkash of Rattan Singh Bhangoo. He writes that when Mata Sundriji, under influence of Muslims, wanted to control the movement of Baba Banda, she sent Bhai Nand Lal with a Hukamnama bearing the false Signature of Guru Gobind Singh which Banda at once recognised and did not agree to comply with. HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS? If Baba Banda was able to recognise at once that the Hukamnama was fake then certainly He must have had some contact with Guru Gobind Singh. Or atleast this should prove that neither Mataji nor Baba Banda believed that Guruji had left His body in 1708. Your respect Dr. Ganda Singhji also wrote a book 'Hukamnameh' in which he displays a Hukamnama written by Baba Banda after he is said to have met with Guru Gobind Singh (after the incident in 1708) and starts the Hukamnama writing 'Ik Ongkar Fateh Darshan' and then 'SACHAY SAHIB DI AGYA HAI...'. Even though Dr. Ganda Singhji tries to fool the reader that Baba Banda was inventing a new salutation, it is of no use because the Hukamnamas after that do not bear anything similar to the mentioned Salutation.

It is easy to write books without providing any evidence from where you have got the sources for your book. What we need is evidence where it states that Baba Ajapal Singh claimed to be Guru Gobind Singh. There is none. Yes, Bhai Kahan Singh stated that some people believed him to Guru Gobind Singh. But had this belief been more that just an ignorant belief of people impressed by Baba Ajapal Singh's spirituality. If this was true then why didn't the Raja of Nabha under whose rule Baba Ajapal Singh lived did not present himself before him as his servant. After all the Guru had said 'tera ghar mera aiseh' in one of him Hukumnamas to Bhai Tarloka and Bhai Rama the ancestors of this Raja. As you may be aware Maharaja Ranjit Singh sought out people who had lived during the time of Guru Gobind Singh and had his Darshan. Why ?. When there were people in Nabha believing that Guru Gobind Singh was living in their town ?. As for the reference about Mata Sundri trying to sabotage Banda Bahadur's campaign, you are mistaken.. see the Banda Singh Bahadur thread for some facts about Rattan Singh Bhangoo's bias against Banda Singh. Does Rattan Singh Bhangoo mention that Guru Gobind Singh had left Nader in 1708, does he say that the Guru was in disguise as Baba Ajaipal Singh ?. You cannot use one part of a book to prop up your argument when the rest of the book demolishes it. What exactly do you mean in reference to the Hukumnamas of Banda Singh Bahadur ?. In both the available Hukumnamas of Banda Singh, the salutation of 'Fateh Darshan' is used. The comments ' Sache Sahib Di Agya hai' is used in the one for the Sangat of Rupeh, and 'Siri Sache Sahib Ji Ka Hukum hai' is used for the one for the sangat of Jaunpur in UP. So what exactly is your point ?

You claimed that the Namdhari Singhs lie about Granth Sahib losing its significance, what a baseless accusation. Read Johar Khalsa by Sardar Kartar Singh Kalaswalia. He is in no way a Namdhari but he also clearly writes that in the time when Khalsa Rahet was depleted and corruption was abound, it was Baba (Guru) Ram Singh of Bhaini who put people back on the right track and resurrected the Khalsa. Similar writings are also done by Giani Gian Singh, but ofcourse you can't believe him because he became a Namdhari.

You seem to unaware of what the situation was like in Punjab after 1849. You claimed that Ram Singh went to the different Dharamsalas and cleaned up the Birs of Guru Granth Sahib, great imagery but totally false. At a time when the Guru Granth Sahib was not printed but hand written, a Bir was priceless. It took a scribe a year or more of effort produce a Bir. So your contention is made more to give Ram Singh credit than to describe correctly the situation at that time.

This is again the work of the so called 'scholar' Dr. Ganda Singhji and is a complete hoax. I have with me the transcript of the very letter in which the British Government 'threatens' the Namdhari Sikhs that the police post was only temporarily removed and if they saw any uproar by the Namdhari Singhs they would reinforce it again. This completely defies your baseless accusations. From day one to the last seconds the Namdhari Singhs NEVER supported the British. It is a well known fact that even when the British tried to offer Guru Hari Singh a piece of land and some money because they were impressed with the Namdhari Singh's Langar which was given to the poor 24/7, the Guru turned the British officer down without mincing any words and even told him that the 'Land' belonged to the Indians and they (the British) had no right to it. All I can say is that if you keep reading from books written by proven liars such as Dr. Ganda Singh then that's your headache but do not try to spread the baseless claims that you have no idea about yourself.

Can you tell why after over 60 years of the police post being in continued existence to keep a watch over namdharis would the British suddenly remove it ?. If it was to be removed temporarily then why was it not put back ?. I think your extreme hatred of Ganda Singh is due to the fact that he presented history objectively and refused to have the wool pulled over his eyes by namdhari fairy stories. He used official and non-official documents and gives references for every event he writes about. He was probably one of the first Sikh historians to use western historical methods. Although you have already decided that he was a Singh Sabha propagandist by doing this you are showing your bias. Ganda Singh wrote his book and where he thought that Ram Singh was being misrepresented by the namdharis of his time he said so. He was not taken in by the usual myths of namdharis being forerunners of the so-called 'indian independence'. He treated Ram Singh as an inspired man and where Ram Singh had flaws, Ganda Singh wrote about them. He also showed that the namdhari propaganda about Ram Singh setting up a private mail service for his followers was not an attempt to deny british influence but as any secretative organisation, using the official mail is pretty naive.

And are you saying that NAAMdhari Singhs do not do NAAM Simran or perform Kirtan? What kind of a childish argument is this? You are just picking and grabbing whatever you can like a person drowning in water. Also you seem to minimize the strength of Namdhari Singhs a bit too far. From Government records it is written that the Namdhari Soldiers (After Guru Ram Singh already went into exile) numbered about 400,000 whereas the Namdhari records show the number to be 700,000. May I know from where you get the number of 100,000? Wait let me guess, Dr. Ganda Singh's book no doubt in which a census was conducted in an area where Namdhari Singhs were oppressed the most?

Firstly you present a ridiculous argument for why Namdharis perform a havan and then you try to sidestep this by going off at a tangent. I do not say that namdharis don't do Nam Simran and Kirtan. The issue is about Havans, if Namdharis do havans then they are going so against the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib. Simple as that. If you are true to yourself you will know this and then understand why the only argument you could come up to defend this was ridiculous. No I didn't get my estimate of Namdhari population from Ganda Singh's book. Your obsession for attributing everything to Ganda Singh is very unhealthy. I took my numbers from the official censuses. In 1891 there were only 13025 Namdharis listed in the Punjab census. I have come across one namdhari site that claimed that there are 'millions' of Namdharis !.

You also get emotional when I asked where the evidence is for the forcible conversion of Namdharis by the Lahore Singh Sabha ?. No I don;t require a certificate, a simple newspaper report of an event to prove that you not as I suspect clutching at straws to explain the reason why Namdharis so very few in number. If there were cases fo forcible conversion then the newspapers as well as the government would have had to become involved. What was your 'guru' doing at this time, when his followers were being forcibly converted ?. The simple fact is that those Sikhs who placed their faith in Ram Singh as a liberator of the Punjab from the british were disappointed because he was more of a religious figure rather than a political one. The more zealous of his followers tried to force his hand by attacking the butchers at Amritsar and Malerkotla and when he simply did not raise a rebellion, most Sikhs lost faith in him. After his death in 1885 the only namdharis that remained were the few families who had an incentive to continue the belief that Ram Singh was alive and would return. It is the descendents of these families that are still namdharis.

GurFateh

Bikramjit

[Narsingha]

Interesting to note that when history seems to go against Singh Sabha ideology, there an immediate accusation that the authors of these ancient texts have either made up their own history, or are wrong in their perception of Sikhi, are bias towards Hindus, , ....or...the best one..that these writings have been somehow "contaminated".

Yet, these same texts are the BASIS for Sikh history and without these texts, 90% of Sikh history would cease to exist.

..so who decides what should be accepted and what should be ignored from these historical texts? Manmat?

[Guest BikramjitSingh]

..so who decides what should be accepted and what should be ignored from these historical texts? Manmat?

If the events detailed by these texts go against the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib then we can discount them. Simple. Should be easy for even you to understand

GurFateh

Bikramjit

[Narsingha]

"If the events detailed by these texts go against the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib then we can discount them. Simple. Should be easy for even you to understand "

- Bikramjit

So you would discard history if the events go against the teachings of Adi Guru Durbar?

So, events such as rape of Sikh women, destruction of holy faiths, tyranny etc etc that go against the teachings of Adi Guru Durbar, according to you should all be discounted. I didnt realise it was that simple

Well, at least this explains your attitude towards Sikh History Bikramjit Singh

Thank you for confirming this.

[Guest BikramjitSingh]

"If the events detailed by these texts go against the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib then we can discount them. Simple. Should be easy for even you to understand "

- Bikramjit

So you would discard history if the events go against the teachings of Adi Guru Durbar?

So, events such as rape of Sikh women, destruction of holy faiths, tyranny etc etc that go against the teachings of Adi Guru Durbar, according to you should all be discounted. I didnt realise it was that simple

Well, at least this explains your attitude towards Sikh History Bikramjit Singh

Thank you for confirming this.

Narsingha <Mod- Cut>

You crack me up. Is this your stupid multiple personality posting ?. Sorry, forgot they are all stupid !

GurFateh

Bikramjit

Mod's Note: Please refrain from slandering each other. This thread is going well. Stick to the topic PLEASE AND NOT TO INSULTS

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

First...Bhai Fateh Singh. You are claiming that Tankahnama is not an authentic writing of Bhai Nand Lal Sahib. Please, provide some evidence.

Second, Bhai Narsinga, let us take Durga Puja for instance. Many authors have referred to Guru Gobind Singh invoking Kalka upon the creation of the Khalsa. However, Bhai Nand Lal Sahib's work Ganjnama (available at http://www.zafarnama.com) states that Guru Sahib could command the Avatars, that the Avatars desired darshan of Guru Sahib and that the Avatars were the Guru's servants. Not to mention that the entire Guru Granth Sahib is dedicated to the thought of the one Almighty, not secondary dieties. Therefore, the concept of Durga Puja is invalid.

Second thing, Bhai Sahiban, how do you think Singh Sabha movement (Lahore) succeeded in becoming such a huge influence on Sikhism? It was through logical arguement and analysis of all the history present and then making a decision on what is in line with Gurbani. People are not that stupid. They will listen to reason and did. The Singh Sabha (Lahore) wrote book after book telling WHY things were not in line with Sikhism...not just believing everything that history details. Hence its success. Singh Sabha (Amritsar - aka. Santanis) had the same opportunity to do so...why did their movement not succeed? Perhaps they had nothing convincing to say?

[sidak]

Mod's Note: Please refrain from slandering each other. This thread is going well. Stick to the topic PLEASE AND NOT TO INSULTS

[Narsingha]

ms514

If as you suggets Durga Pooja is invalid, then why would Akali Nihang Guru Gobind Singh ji write 4 ballads recounting the exploits of Durga/Chandi (see Dasam Guru Durbar)

Guruji's works are Gurbani...hence, reciting/contemplating them would be considered "Pooja" would it not?

You also ignore the influence the British Raj had on Sikhi (directly, eg war, and indirectly, eg, via British Raj-nurtured Sikhs). This was probably the greatest factor in determining the outcome of Sikhi into the 20th Century. Today we see the effect of this all around us.

[Guest BikramjitSingh]

To Mods

Apologies but when someone acts that stupid then such comments are not a bad thing

GurFateh

Bikramjit

[Gupt Singh]

narsingha

at the end of one of the 3 chandi stories guruji writes that one of the main reasons he writes these is because translating such works are a interesting pasttime for him. other reasons for translating it are for bir raas and the subtle metaphores which relate to destruction of 5 sins etc.

how does chandi di var prove guruji worshipped devi?

do u agree with gyani gyan singhs work that guruji tried to sacrifice his kiddies to him? do u think thats right?

[Guest Javanmard]

Sending his kids and his SIkhs to battle means to sacrifice them to Chandi, the feminine aspect of Akal Purakh's Shakti!