Singhballer

6 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

I’m not a Taksali. Why are you a ghaghri cult follower? Why do you think SGGS has lies in it?

Your views and points may be 100% sound, but others who think differently (even if they're mistaken) will resist actually giving your thoughts any due consideration if you take an adversarial tone. Referring to any parcharik and those that share their line of thinking in a belittling or degrading way will have them go deaf to any legitimate and factual points you have. 

If you talk  to them in an impolite way they will reject every point you make and become even more firm in their own views. If your aim is to show others that they may be misled or have an incorrect understanding, than that is completely counterproductive to your goal. 

I say this as your haami, not your virodhi.

39 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I agree with that. The problem is that Dhadrianwale and crew have refused to debate/discuss. There were big Dasam Granth Samagams where they were invited, they failed to show up.

Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and the missionaries are very evasive to having any discussion. Whenever someone has gotten a chance to sit with them and pose some questions to them they become combative, begin leveling allegations at others, finger pointing, speak over the questioner, stray away from the question, and ultimately don't address any question/point being raised. 

Here is one such example involving Sarabjit Singh Ji Dundha not addressing the questions raised to him and avoiding giving a straight answer:

39 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I agree that you have to be constructive. I disagree with some Singhs all out condemning Dhadrianwale and then call for his assassination.

I'm usually constructive, though I admit I've been a bit testy with Mahadulai. (I'm not the only one. Even Harsharan000, probably the most mellow poster on this whole board, became exasperated with him.

For the rare case, I think you have to take an aggressive approach, just to shock the other person into clarifying his thoughts.

Try your best to keep emotions out of it. I can relate to your feelings of exasperation and frustration. In those cases, just put up all the arguments, evidence, and facts you have. If the person genuinely is considering the points you raise, continue having that conversation. When they aren't genuinely trying to engage with you, end the discussion and don't waste any further time. 

But leave all your arguments and ideas for others to see, hear, read, etc. wherever you're having the conversation. 

At least that's what my short experience tells me is best to do. 

3 hours ago, BhForce said:

Singhballer, you are so on point with your posts in this thread. Highly detailed, they strike at the very heart of the so-called "rationalist" Sikhs, who, in the end, really don't even believe in the very existence of God, which, after all, is a superstition, according to the rationalist mode of thought.

Fans of Dhadrianwale have been left flailing and mouthing generalities.

Kudos.

I appreciate it! 

But one thing I really believe is that when we have differences in opinion or we think people in our Panth are heading down the wrong track, we must do our best to try and have a constructive conversation with them. It shouldn't be an adversarial or hostile exchange. When you antagonize someone who opposes you via name calling, snide comments, or projecting them in a negative light, they just dig in and become more entrenched in their views. That neither helps you in trying to introduce them to different ideas or convince them that their current opinions may be wrong. 

It pumps our ego when we 'stick it' to someone but it changes nothing. Opinions just become more polarized. People need to try and more plainly state their views, provide arguments, reference evidence, and let others engage with your ideas. I find it's the only way to really get through to others. 

There are scholars in our Panth that would be more than capable to have such discussions on all these philisophical/historical debates, but I find Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and the missionaries are very evasive when it comes to sitting down for a discussion. 

• Imagine a 1-2 hour discussion on a single topic
  • Two sides can make their opening statements about what they're views are on the topic
  • Each side is then capped to 10-15 minute periods to make their arguments and respond to the opposing side
  • A neutral person can moderate, to keep everyone on time and force everyone to address and respond to the arguments raised by either side
    • Debaters would be kept accountable. They'd have to respond to every point raised
    • Viewers would be able to easily see who's arguments are backed up with facts and evidence
  • Such a discussion would actually be fruitful to dispelling peoples' misinformed views 

5 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Have you read/listened to some of the parts that are attacked by the missionaries/ghaghris?

Yes, but I should also add that some parts are also not accepted and criticized by vidhvaans and kathavachiks from the Nirmale, Taksal, Nihang Singhs, and other samparda. These parts are entirely omitted from katha or an explanation of the inaccuracies are given.  

As mentioned previously, there are historical inaccuracies in the Suraj Parkash due to information that wasn't possessed by Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh. However, Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and missionaries don't often pinpoint these issues (I doubt they've done the research in order to do so) but instead point our the writing in Suraj Parkash they believe to be against Sikhi. Many of such writings are tamperings with the granth done by Kavi Ji's Brahmin assistants. 

A bit of background on Suraj Parkash

• Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh, who was sponsored by the Raja of Kaithal to complete Suraj Parkash, employed five (if I recollect correctly) Brahmin assistants to transcribe his rachna/poetry
• Those assistants were necessary as Kavi Ji needed learned persons who knew Brij and the technicalities of poetry 
• The assistants inserted their own writing into Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh Ji's poetry
  • Some of this is obvious to those knowledgeable in Poetry. The tamperings sometimes don't follow the matra/meters of Kavi Ji's own writing 
• Kavi  Ji left Kaithal three times in protest of this happening. But was convinced to stay as this huge undertaking of compiling all Sikh history was too important not to finish
• Kavi Ji finished the Suraj Parkash, with the tampered writings still in the granth and did not undertake any editing of it (he was in poor health)
• When Kavi Ji presented Suraj Parkash to the Panth he stipulated that the granth has tampering and mistakes in it, and that the Khalsa Panth should do sudhaayi/editing of the granth as they see fit 

All of the above details are to the best of my recollection from listening to Suraj Parkash katha. 

So are there false accounts in Suraj Parkash? Yes. 

• To this day the Panth has not edited Suraj Parkash, as per Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh Ji's wishes
• Bhai Vir Singh Ji did a full steek/translation of Suraj Parkash and pointed out these mistakes and inaccurate accounts 
  • Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh Ji Bhindranwale agreed with Bhai Vir Singh Ji's conclusions 
  • But the Panth never started a samvaadh to edit Suraj Parkash once and for all

The issue with Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and the missionaries' rejection of Suraj Parkash

• They bring forth no historical evidence, new research, documentation, or archaeological discoveries to disprove accounts in Suraj Parkash
• The accounts they view as being false (due to it being against Sikhi), may well be, but one has to be weary of their opinions because:
  • Their understanding of Sikhi/Gurbani is distorted, warped, and inaccurate due to their nazariya/viewpoint being rooted in western philosophy (logic, science, etc.), as I discussed in my previous posts
  • Since they have an inaccurate understanding Sikhi/Gurbani, their assertions that Suraj Parkash is against Sikhi are hard to trust
• They excessively demonize Suraj Parkash. Their listeners greatly detest Suraj Parkash as they have no knowledge about the background of our historical texts 
  • They fail to realize that without these granths they have no source material for talking about any Guru history 

It seems to me that Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and the missionaries want to throw the baby out with the bath water. To throw out our entire history because of tamperings/mistakes in an unedited Suraj Parkash 

2 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Thanks for the info. I think indeed Kavi Ji was more than a poet as per your post.

Can I ask whether you have done some serious reading/listening to this Granth?

No worries.

Listening yes, no reading/santhiya. In particular, the end of the Suraj Parkash, Guru Gobind Singh Ji's and Baba Banda Singh Ji Bahadur's history is what I have the most recollection of. 

17 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Kavi Santokh Singh was a kavi, a poet. He was not a historian. Kavi Ji's modus operandi was to visit places associated with the Gurus and take details of the prevalent stories there and render them in Braj Bhasha.

Kavi Bhai Santokh Singh Ji, was a poet indeed, but beyond that he was an immense vidhvaan of the Panth. He was a great scholar and theologian too, as is exemplified by his Japji Sahib translation in his Garab Ganjani Teeka. 

I would say Bhai Santokh Singh Ji also fits the mold of an historian. It was immense work and research he did compiling historical literature/records, recording oral accounts, visiting historical sites, and then analyzing all the information, scrutinizing it for accuracy, and compiling it all into the poetic masterpiece that is Suraj Parkash.

He may even be the Panth's foremost historian! 

On 10/30/2018 at 11:04 AM, Jaggaa said:

@Singhballer I read your response a couple of times. I must say it's very well written and I appreciate the way you have approached what you think the relationship between science/logic is to Sikhi. I think we've started to lose the intended reason of the topic. People are against Bhai Ranjit Singh because of him calling out a lot of the story/sakhian spread throughout our history.

He's not exagtly a scientist so I can't really comment on how elaborate or parallel his view is to science but when it comes to Gurbani and especially the historical side of our Sikh faith and the impact history has on it I must say he makes one think if perhaps maybe what had happened before Guru Nanak jee's arrival has now come full circle and we're back in the same spot.

I see people using certain stories to gain exclusivity and influence under the banner of Guru Sahib. Just because a particular Sakhi was written/spoken by a well known "Gursikh" in say the 1800's doesn't automatically make it authentic because what's there to say he didn't just do what the same people are doing today? Many of these people such as Bhai Thakur Singh and others are going to go down in history in a very positive light. Does that mean the generation which arrives in say 2400 should have blind faith in their stories?

The main fault that Sikhs find with Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji's parchaar, I think, is the following:

1. He is redefining Sikhi, Gurbani, our history, our traditions, our culture, our literature, by using western philosophy (logic, science, etc.), that too with an incomplete comprehension of it

Specifically, he is interpreting Sikhi through a lens that is not Gurmat, but a foreign philosophy. Thus it leads to:

1. His interpretations causing him to change core principles and values of Sikhi
2. His distorted understanding of Sikhi leads him to renounce and discard Panth-approved Sikh history 

Is it wrong to "call out" history/sakhian? 

In short, no.

But to disprove accepted history, you have to have evidence the written history is factually incorrect, that the Poet's research was flawed, or that the written history is philosophically incorrect, that it is plainly against Sikh values and principles. 

• Our written history is compiled in many granths (Suraj Parkash, Panth Parkash, Gurbilas Patshaahi 6, etc.), and each written by different poets (Bhai Santokh Singh, Bhai Rattan Singh Bhangoo, etc.) 
• To disprove those written accounts one must:
  • Do their own historical research, find additional written sources, do archaeological studies, that result in differing evidence
• Bhai Vir Singh Ji did that in his Suraj Parkash Steek
  • There are inaccuracies in Suraj Parkash due to:
    • 1. Incomplete information compiled by Bhai Santokh Singh Ji 
    • 2. Tampering and alteration of his work by his Brahmin assistants 
  • Bhai Vir Singh Ji brings forth additional evidence through his own historical research to show that some things in the Granth are inaccurate. For example, some of the battles of Baba Banda Singh Ji Bahadur are stated to have taken place in the wrong villages 

I don't believe Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji has done any santhiyaa/adhyaain of any of those historical granths. You may notice he doesn't present any new historical or archaeological evidence when denouncing historical accounts. To prove them to be inauthentic it requires immense work and research, which he is not doing. 

On 10/30/2018 at 11:04 AM, Jaggaa said:

Bhai Sahib is entitled to his own interpretation to Guru Sahib, at no point is he going against Gurbani. He has his own viewpoint. I'd say he comes from a very priveleged background having initially been among a sadhu/dera background and now exploring more mainstream Sikhi - people who are outright disregarding him because he's challenged something they were taught from a young age. That's what I don't agree with.

Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation of Sikhi/Gurbani, but for it to be accepted in the Panth's court, it has to be rooted in the Guru's Mat. 

• As I said in my original post, even the RSS has their own interpretation of Sikhi and the Khalsa (as the military wing of Hindus created to protect Hindustan). But their interpretation comes from the viewpoint of Hindu philosophy
• In the same way Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji, and the missionary parchariks at large, are interpreting Sikhi using western philosophy (logic/science). This results in a distorted and skewed understanding of Sikhi that is incorrect. 
• The Panth largely agreed on a vast majority of Sikhi values, principles, and history. Its okay to challenge these if done with sound evidence and relying on Gurmat, and not a foreign philosophy. Sikhs are upset with Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji because his challenges are not evidence based and are rooted in non-Sikh philosophies. 

There have been differing interpretations of Sikhi/Gurbani for hundreds of years. But you will notice the differences of the interpretations are not that large. All the different Viakhiya or interpretations by the Udasis, Nirmale, Gianis/Taksaal, and Nihang Singhs are within the same spectrum of thought. 

Bhai Ranjit Singh Ji and the missionaries are creating a completely new off-shoot and spin-off of interpretation that is not based on the Guru's mat. 

To understand the different branches of interpretation within Sikhi, how western philosophy found its way into our interpretations, and an analysis of our current state, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND listening to the following video of Sardar Prabhsharandeep Singh. It will be well worth your 40 minutes. 

Start at 7:51.

2 hours ago, Jaggaa said:

So wait, you don't want Sikhs to use logic and instead use what? blind faith?

Bhai Ranjit Singh is a parcharak, you might not agree with him 100% and that is what you should debate. Pick out something of his you don't agree with and discuss that. Don't speak out silly provocative statements against an individual and grow up or you'll end up pushing MORE people away.

Using logic/science as your fundamental tool to understand Sikhi, Gurbani, Gur-ithihaas, or Gurmat is wrong and misguided. 

Why is it wrong?

• When someone uses a philosophy, ideology, or doctrine that does not originate from the Guru to try to develop an understanding of Sikhi/Gurbani, the resulting "understanding" of Sikhi they develop will be distorted, warped, and ultimately incorrect
• If you use any Mat (a philosophy, like Hindu-Mat, Budh-Mat, Marxism, Existentialism, Western Logic, etc.) to understand Sikhi/Gurbani, you use their viewpoint/principles to define and understand Sikhi/Gurbani
• To truly understand Sikhi/Gurbani, you must use the world view that the Guru has given us. You must take on the nazariya (perspective, viewpoint, frame of reference) of the Guru and use that to learn, understand, and analyze Sikhi

What problems occur when you use a Non-Sikh philosophy?

• Some Hindus including the RSS use their own philosophical principles to define Sikhi
  • They view the Khalsa as being a sena (fighting force) for the protection of Hindus, that Sikhs are merely a military arm to the wider Hindu community
  • They develop this understanding by using THEIR philosophy/ideology as Hindus,  to define US as Sikhs
• Using Western Philosophy/Logic/Science to define Sikhi is wrong in the same way

Specific problems with using Logic/Western Philosophy to define Sikhi

• Not just Sikhi but can any Dharam be truly understood using logic/science?

1.The subject of Sikhi/Dharam and Logic/Science are two separate things

• Sikhi's subject matter is the invisible, transcendental (spiritual, non-physical) world, Waheguru, the divine, metaphysics, that which you  experience internally, beyond the material world.
• Logic/Science's subject matter is the visible world. The world you can experience through your five senses, that you can count, measure, observe, and analyze.

2. The foundation of Sikhi and Logic/Science are two separate things

• Sikhi is anchored in Vishwaash, a faith in the Guru that is unwavering. 
• Logic/Science is anchored in Shanka, in questioning. You begin with suspicion, ask why for everything

3. By using Logic/Science as your benchmark to test what ideas you accept/reject, you've consciously or unconsciously accepted that Logic/Science has as a higher importance than Sikhi

• If you test Sikhi/Gurbani by using Logic/Science, you automatically are accepting that Sikhi/Gurbani is only correct if it is acceptable by the standards of Logic/Science

4. Logic/Science has a negative/dark side to it

• Logic/Science brought great acceleration in technologies and development. Along with the many benefits, it has also caused damage to society and our world.
  • Proliferation of nuclear weapons that annihilate nature itself, the creation of extremely potent and fatal recreational drugs, the exploitation of natural resources, climate change that will cause havoc all over the world, etc.
  • If Sikhi is compatible with Logic/Science, than just as Logic/Science has a negative/dark side, Sikhi too must have a negative/dark side. 
    • But Sikhi does not 

For more discourse regarding the interpretation of Sikhi/Gurbani and how Western Philosophy/Logic/Science relates to us as Sikhs I recommend listening to Prof. Prabhsharanbir Singh, Prabhsharandeep Singh, and Sardar Ajmer Singh.

The following videos cover these topics if anyone would like an in-depth analysis and explanation by some of our leading Sikh thinkers. Many of the above points are derived from these videos. 

On this thread, I was trying to shed light on the view that current discourse/activity by Sikhs is being dominated by issues that are of the surface level and less vital to the long-term health of the nation. The deep rooted issues that is festering like termites in the trunk of the tree is not being addressed. Our energies are going into the wrong directions and our leaders of all sorts and stripes have failed us in corralling our energies toward the most pressing problems of our nation.

I recently was listening to this and the speaker points out exactly what we've gotten lost in and what we should have been working on instead. Just a quick listen from 8:15 if you're short for time.

44 minutes ago, chatanga said:

 

Its also a attitude of not getting involved. It is exactly the word I wanted. Letting others do what they want without bothering about any consequences. 

I don't know how much business you've studied but Laissez-faire is an economic term and philosophy specifically referring to the belief that the less involved government/management is in economy and society at large, the better it is for the economy/society. The underlying belief being that self-regulation will guide people to the best possible actions. Being laissez-faire is caring about the consequences; one believes that not getting involved will result in the best possible outcome. 

It's really not the word you want. 

44 minutes ago, chatanga said:

You seem more bothered by the fact that Harnam Singh has done something about sarna and co, and also re-started parchar of Dasam Bani in dlehi gurdwaras. Not once have you appreciated this by Baba Harnam Singh. Instead you try and present it as a minor issue.

Nope, that doesn't bother me. You seem to be forming an opinion about my views without even reading my views. Instead of resorting to conjecture and speculation, just ask.

I did show appreciation (you may have overlooked it past my first paragraphs), but as the paltry victories they were. They are miniscule in comparison to the immense, dire, and severe issues of the Panth.

1. The decline of Sikhi in Punjab
   1. Due to things like: Proliferation of drugs, lack of parchaar and spiritual sustenance, government suppression of Sikh movements, corruption of Sikh institutions
2. Lack of justice and healing from 1984 and following genocide
   1. Tens of thousands Sikhs killed, tortured, detained, made political prisoners, and continued mass impunity for perpetrators 
3. Corruption at the Akal Thakht, SGPC, and Sikh institutions 
4. Disunity and polarization of Sikh thought and people 

It's really impossible to sufficiently critique my views (which I welcome and encourage) without reading and analyzing them. Let's end this merry chase here! 

.

6 hours ago, chatanga said:

Lets bring another french word. Laissezfare . You would prefer this?

 

You come across as viewing the ejection and rejection of the sarna group - read darshan rogi, dhunda and co from Dlehi gurdwara management and parchar as  not being anything important, whereas I see it as vitally important for the Panth. How could this have been acheived unless the backing of badal dal was there?

Laissez-faire* refers to the attitude of letting others do as they choose;  it's probably not the word you're looking for. Perhaps using French may not best serve your purpose. 

You actually believed me to be angry (as noted below). I can't view these events as being unimportant and, at the same time, be angry that it did happen. I'd be seriously confused and contradictory if that were the case. 

On 8/21/2017 at 2:55 PM, chatanga said:

This issue of having Dasam bani parchar in Dlehi gurdwaras seems like a very minor issue to you.I suspect with the blase way you write it you are quite angry at the re-emergence of Dasam bani parchar in Delhi gurdwaras. Thats up to you. 

6 hours ago, chatanga said:

Fair enough but someone who is ill would want to have their symtoms treated first. This is the short-term goal. Then the eradication of the illness would follow. I'm sure that any person who feels ill will feel this.

The root problem was festering and remained unaddressed for about 10 years unless Baba Harnam Singh addressed it. Yes thats right, he addressed it. Many people (inc myself) were whinging about what sarna was doing in delhi gurdwaras but could do nothing about it.

What caused it to fester in the first place? If that illness has not been addressed in the past, what plan is there to address it going into the future? I haven't come across any evidence of such planning. 

In any of the concerns I raised about how the symptom was addressed, do you see no faults? There is disagreement on the Sikh Calendar and Dasam Bani/Philosophy that has morphed into animosity and hatred between Sikhs. By unilaterally making decisions, as Sarna did or Dhumma/Sant Samaj/Badal have done now, does it not expand that divide in the Panth rather than closing it? 

Would the following strategy not have been better?

• If there was disagreement on which calendar to use, then that should have been resolved through a Panthic gathering to discuss, debate, and build consensus. With a Panthic consensus the decision being made would be happily taken by all
• The same goes for Dasam Bani - have a gathering where all the dubious points that detractors make on Dasam Bani can be cleared. Have that discussion and build consensus. That brings people of different thoughts together. The response can't be to shout or hit back. Just restarting parchar is not enough to eliminate the problem. The response has to clear doubts and bring people toward consensus.

6 hours ago, chatanga said:

If it doesnt bring any unity in the Panth, it will serve equally not to let the panth fracture further. Did Harnam Singh do this to achieve unity in the Panth? I dont think so. Did he do it to end the missionary nonsense in dlehi gurdwaras? yes. So there's the answer.

Sant Jarnail Singh couldn't achieve unity in the panth, so it's really unfair that you would place this lofty goal on Harnam Singh's head.

The people who were already against Dasam Bani or the Bikrami Calendar have not come closer to those ideas but are further alienated and entrenched in their views. They have animosity toward the other side and vice versa. The strategy employed did not help in bridging this divide. 

Before anyone ever makes a decision on behalf of or in service to, the Panth, they should be doing a mental checklist of standards those decisions should meet. One of which should be: does this act bring the Panth closer toward unity or further away from unity? That consideration should be an integral part of the decision making process.  

The Sant Samaj's goal is panthic unity. The evidence is in Baba Hari Singh Randhawe Wale's explanation in my last post. As President of the Sant Samaj, it is also Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's goal. 

6 hours ago, chatanga said:

Your posts are too long to read. I havent been reading them, just taking the opening the paragraph.  

Is having discussion and discourse on different ideas, viewpoints, and issues not something you are pursuing by being on this message board?

I've written responses to your and others' points. By voicing your points and not attempting to consider mine, it begs the question: are you even interested in sincere, genuine, honest discussion? 

I attempted to provide thoughtful and researched responses that may provide some usefulness to yourself and others. Am I failing? 

6 hours ago, chatanga said:

 

What was stolen in Darbar Sahib?

Baba Harnam Singh is not Guru Sahib, and no-one compares him with Guru Sahib. The comparison I made was between Baba Harnam Sngh and the Dal Panth when they accepted a jagir and nawabgi from the Moghal rulers. It was done with a purpose in mind to acheive a goal that otherwise would not have been possible.

I responded to your assertions regarding the Jagir and Nawabi in one of my previous posts which you might have ignored. Instead of the discussion progressing further its back to ground zero. 

On 9/7/2017 at 9:01 AM, Jonny101 said:

No one can deny that Baba Dhumma has three things to his credit such as the 1984 memorial, discarding the missionary backed Purewal calendar and parchar of Dasam Bani. All these three things are great sevas that were achieved because of him.

 

The story of 1984 memorial needs to be mentioned here. When he created the memorial, he convinced Badal that it would be like a memorial and nothing else. But the day before it was to be inaugurated, he sent some students from the Taksal to install the plaque mentioning that this memorial is in dedication of Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and to install the picture of Sant jee inside the memorial. When Badal found out he sent his SGPC task force Gundas to remove this plaque since a government Chamcha like badal has a severe allergy to Sant BHindranwala jee's name. But Dhuma had his students from Taksal to guard the plaque and memorial all night long and oppose any attempts of Badal's dogs from removing that plaque. I still remember the Indian/Hindu media's utter shock that the plaque and memorial was a dedication to Sant Jarnail SIngh Bhindranwale.

My original contention below - while these may make for good acts they leave the solution to the Panth's problems unfulfilled.

The memorial is great to have, but we should not think that it will bring the Panth great progress or growth. Memorials should be made, but with them should not come the consideration that it will provide betterment or amelioration. Sure, it's awesome that even though the government didn't want you to make, you made it anyway. But what re-occuring value does it give us? 

It doesn't next to nothing in telling our history and educating those who do not know our struggle. It is no Yad Vasehm (http://www.yadvashem.org/). The Jews have done so much to spread knowledge of their genocide and provide resources to educate the world. It would have been a better use of funds to create a digital library/media platform where our history could be collected, preserved, and displayed for the world to learn from. 

Building of the memorial does not help very much in disseminating our history, uplifting the victims of our genocide from their struggles, or ultimately getting justice for the Panth. It should be built but we should not feel giddy and jolly over its supposed impact. 

As for the calendar and parchar of Dasam Bani:

• The Nanakshahi calendar was removed without any proper consultation, discussion, debate, or agreement in the Panth. Its lunacy to push the change through without taking into account the opinions of the Panth. Thus, all those who have been convinced of the merits of the Nanakshahi calendar have animosity toward Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma and the Sant Samaj for doing it. Even if the Bikrami calendar is the best choice, or maybe a 3rd alternative calendar being better, but to make the decision unilaterally shows that Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has no meaningful desire to build connections, bridges and unity in the Panth. 
• If there was disagreement on which calendar to use, then that should have been resolved through a Panthic gathering to discuss, debate, and build consensus. With a Panthic consensus the decision being made would be happily taken by all, without it we have the discord and hate that are extremely obvious. 
• The same goes for Dasam Bani - have a gathering where all the dubious points that detractors make on Dasam Bani can be cleared. Have that discussion and build consensus. That brings people of different thoughts together. People complain about all the hate and lies being spread on Dasam Bani but the response can't be to shout back. Just restarting parchar is not enough to eliminate the problem. The response has to clear doubts and bring people toward consensus.

Whether its our calendar, maryada, or history/philosophy, no one can unilaterally decide what it correct and what isn't. The Guru gave us the Guru Granth-Guru Panth system, which is a tradition long dead and not up for re-installment by the political overlords. Until such time that the entire Panth can assemble Sarbat Khalsa, create a plan to debate and discuss these issues, and come to a conclusion and consensus, these issues will only fester and grow worse. Shouting back and forth at each other will not unite the Panth on these issues, no matter how true and correct one side might be in the debate. 

On 8/10/2017 at 9:43 PM, Singhballer said:

On a panthic level, can any of the above be termed as any significant achievement or contribution for our nation by a person who heads one of the oldest Sikh schools, an organization of Sants/Vidhvaans, and has relations with influential political leaders? They can not; these are paltry victories in the face of immense issues of our community. 

The biggest issues of the Panth (including but not limited to):

1. The decline of Sikhi in Punjab
   1. Due to things like: Proliferation of drugs, lack of parchaar and spiritual sustenance, government suppression of Sikh movements
2. Lack of justice and healing from 1984 and following genocide
   1. Tens of thousands Sikhs killed, tortured, detained, made political prisoners, and continued mass impunity for perpetrators 
3. Corruption at the Akal Thakht, SGPC, and Sikh institutions 

On 9/7/2017 at 9:01 AM, Jonny101 said:

My personal opinion is that things are not black or white. A lot of Sikhs today are in the grey shades. Baba Dhumma is such a case. No doubt his association with Badal has hurt many people's sentiments. But I think he is doing this strategically. He is probably thinking to achieve his religious agenda while joining the system instead of opposing it and achieving nothing. He is doing like what the Singh Sabha Lahore did or even Bhai Vir Singh Jee's Chief Khalsa Diwan did who decided to befriend the hated British while furthering their religious agenda of Parchar.

He was doing it strategically; his strategy was foolhardy. 

• If Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma was truly a visionary, he would see that trying to work within Badal's political setup is futile. You're getting cents on the dollar. Peanuts. Little progression for all your time and effort. The revolutionary change to ideas centuries old is what is needed. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma knows of our history ten times better than any of us yet fails to see that the only time multiple factions of the Panth were truly largely united was when the Sarbat Khalsa system was in place and operating. 
• Think of the biggest Panthic problems and issues - none can be solved while working under corrupt politicians like Badal and others. 

Baba Hari Singh Randhawe Wale and the Sant Samaj have for almost two decades trying to get one Panthic Rehit Maryada implemented to unite all Sikhs but the SGPC leaders and their political overlords have no inclination or urge to do that because it does not serve their interests. Disunity is good for the politicians. All their attempts have been futile.

Baba Hari Singh Randhawe Wale speak on this below:

The better strategy is to unite all factions of Panth and put control back in the Panth's hands away from the corrupt politicians.

On 9/7/2017 at 9:01 AM, Jonny101 said:

I'm not a supporter of Dhumma. I personally like Bhai Amrik Singh Ajnala the most but I think it is not fair to say Dhumma and Baba Ram Singh of Sangrava are government agents. All of them are doing seva in their own say. It would be better if all of them would be able to work together though. Maybe one day.

I don't believe any of them are agents.

I only believe that Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has some character flaws and lack of knowledge/wisdom in certain areas that don't serve him or the Panth in the best possible way.

On 8/21/2017 at 2:55 PM, chatanga said:

This issue of having Dasam bani parchar in Dlehi gurdwaras seems like a very minor issue to you.I suspect with the blase way you write it you are quite angry at the re-emergence of Dasam bani parchar in Delhi gurdwaras. Thats up to you.

Thats not an issue to you.

Blase means to be indifferent or unconcerned. However, you perceive my writing on Dasam Bani being reintroduced to be both nonchalant (why don't we bring in another French word) but also emotional and angry at the same time. That kind of makes for an oxymoron; contradictory terms. 

When attempting to have any genuine and fruitful discussion I have experienced it is helpful to not speculate or make conjecture about the viewpoints of another. If curious or in doubt, just ask; ask with the innocent interest of a child. Other genuine level-headed people will gladly oblige. Fools like myself may otherwise find injury in your guesswork.

On 8/21/2017 at 2:55 PM, chatanga said:

The difference is that Sarna would support the missioanry agenda and Badal would give Harnam Singh full liberty to pursue the Sikh agenda.

This issue of having Dasam bani parchar in Dlehi gurdwaras seems like a very minor issue to you.I suspect with the blase way you write it you are quite angry at the re-emergence of Dasam bani parchar in Delhi gurdwaras. Thats up to you. For me Harnam Singh has achieved something here that I and most Sikhs I know would never have thought would happen. darshan rogi and his missionary bum-chums had been in control for years and casued so much mischief. Thats not an issue to you. I'm glad that Baba Harnam Singh has done something about it.

Bringing in Samparda Kathavachaks fixes the symptom not the illness. The root problem that will fester and multiply is unaddressed. Is this a strategy for the long term that will bring unity and togetherness in the Panth? No. I have posted an excerpt of my last post on this topic below for your convenience, often my arguments become TL;DR.

On 8/14/2017 at 10:44 AM, Singhballer said:

Getting the Nanakshahi calendar removed and installing panthic leaning Kathavachaks in Delhi and Amritsar:

• Getting Panthic kathavachaks back into Delhi and Amritsar is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's and others' response to the preaching of left-leaning kathavachacks is fine and dandy, but how does it bring unity? If they were shouting, now we're just shouting back. While presenting your own ideas and interpretations in a sound and ration way without enmity is fine, and I encourage it, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma and the Sant Samaj has failed to address the actual problem and close the gaping opinionated divide. Again, its the strongman move, we have clout in political circles so let's use it to push our agenda without being principled and trying to foster cooperation and consolidation in the Panth.This shows Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's lack of strategic acumen, he is unable to properly diagnose the problem and come up with a strategy to tackle it while bringing Sikhs together. 
• Whether its our calendar, maryada, or history/philosophy, no one can unilaterally decide what it correct and what isn't. The Guru gave us the Guru Granth-Guru Panth system, which is a tradition long dead and not up for re-installment by the political overlords. Until such time that the entire Panth can assemble Sarbat Khalsa, create a plan to debate and discuss these issues, and come to a conclusion and consensus, these issues will only fester and grow worse. Shouting back and forth at each other will not unite the Panth on these issues, no matter how true and correct one side might be in the debate. 
  • If Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma was truly a visionary, he would see that trying to work within Badal's political setup is futile. You're getting cents on the dollar. Peanuts. The revolutionary change to ideas centuries old is what is needed. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma knows of our history ten times better than any of us yet fails to see that the only time multiple factions of the Panth were truly largely united was when the Sarbat Khalsa system was in place and operating. 
  • Baba Hari Singh Randhawe Wale have said in Katha before that these politicians don't have the Panth's betterment in mind. They say one thing, do another thing. He recounted the many times he approached the former President of the SGPC, Gurcharan Singh Tohra, to resolve the maryada issue and have one Panthic maryada implemented. Tohra would always say they'd take it into consideration and will do something to get the discussions started but never did over all those years of Baba Hari Singh asking. Why not? Unity of the Panth does not align with the values and interests of the political class and they have proven that over the past four decades. Again, it shows lack of clarity in thought and critical thinking on Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma to not be able to see his plan of action is ultimately folly. 

On 8/21/2017 at 2:55 PM, chatanga said:

You want to take pahul from 3 banis ? go ahead.

 

Again, conjecture and scorn for a person you genuinely want to have dialogue with may not be useful. Some may misinterpret your heartfelt intentions.

On 8/21/2017 at 2:55 PM, chatanga said:

Exactly. Baba Harnam Singh and the taksal have been given autonomy to preach proper gurmat throughout Delhi Gurdwaras. This will help the Panth grow and its interests will be defended. You want to take pahul from 3 banis ? go ahead.

But I would also read Sikh history a little more as well if I were you. the Sikhs who took the Nawabgi and jagir had it rescinded after 4 years when the Moghals decided they were strong enough to start facing the Sikhs in battle. Then the Sikhs were left without a jagir and a defunct title.

Does that mean they were foolish to accept the Moghals offer and got used in the process?

If I'm not mistaken, it was rescinded after just two years! 

Here is the difference:

• When the Sikhs took the jagir from the Mughals, they took it after deliberation, discussion, and the approval of the Sarbat Khalsa
  • Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has built no such discussion and consensus building into his strategy, not even with the Sant Samaj. Heaps of them condemn his political choices. 
  • Getting the discourse changed to Gurmat is good. But the underlying problems remain unaddressed; problems that do the most to hold the Panth back as outlined in my above post. 
• The jagir allowed the Sikhs to consolidate different jathas under the leadership of Kapur Singh into the Dal Khalsa. Factions were brought together. 
• They used the political calm to develop their autonomous power and establish their sovereignty
• This was political power and control that they were able to grow for the Panth. The jagir was taken away very quickly, but look at what they accomplished in that time. The Khalsa was brought together in unity to fight for our future prosperity. 
• I highly doubt the SIkhs who had been hunted down by Zakariya Khan suddenly became enthralled by his friendship. They took the jagir in a collective, panthic decision and likely knew they could be double-crossed. But they mustered their forces and were in a stronger position for when it did happen. 
  • In all the major issues of the Panth that I have outlined in my previous posts, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has made little headway in ameliorating them. 
  • No political autonomy is established for the Panth. The Indian government regulated the SGPC, the SGPC in turn is run by Badal and the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). There is no autonomy or control of the Panth in its own affairs, we are led by the string where the political elite wish to go. 

As I stated previously:

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's strategy gives the Panth no autonomy, no control, and he has not pushed forward the Panth's interests in any worthwhile long-lasting way. 

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

5. Helping get rid of Delhi's Malechh committee of Sarna and co, and restarting katha there including katha of Sri Dasme Granth Sahib.

The above accomplishments are a great acheivement if you were to consider what the situation would be like had this not been done.

Bring in Sarna or Badal, their ineptitude toward the betterment of the Panth is the same. 

Getting a memorial or gallery made is not all that valuable in the face of big problems we're facing. 

Getting the Nanakshahi calendar removed and installing panthic leaning Kathavachaks in Delhi and Amritsar:

• The Nanakshahi calendar was removed without any proper consultation, discussion, debate, or agreement in the Panth. Its lunacy to push the change through without taking into account the opinions of the Panth. Thus, all those who have been convinced of the merits of the Nanakshahi calendar have animosity toward Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma and the Sant Samaj for doing it. Even if the Bikrami calendar is the best choice, or maybe a 3rd alternative calendar being better, but to make the decision unilaterally shows that Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has no meaningful desire to build connections, bridges and unity in the Panth. He follows the same classic Indian strongman move of implementing your full whim and will when you have power while not caring for the affects on others. 
• Getting Panthic kathavachaks back into Delhi and Amritsar is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's and others' response to the preaching of left-leaning kathavachacks is fine and dandy, but how does it bring unity? If they were shouting, now we're just shouting back. While presenting your own ideas and interpretations in a sound and ration way without enmity is fine, and I encourage it, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma and the Sant Samaj has failed to address the actual problem and close the gaping opinionated divide. Again, its the strongman move, we have clout in political circles so let's use it to push our agenda without being principled and trying to foster cooperation and consolidation in the Panth.This shows Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's lack of strategic acumen, he is unable to properly diagnose the problem and come up with a strategy to tackle it while bringing Sikhs together. 
• Whether its our calendar, maryada, or history/philosophy, no one can unilaterally decide what it correct and what isn't. The Guru gave us the Guru Granth-Guru Panth system, which is a tradition long dead and not up for re-installment by the political overlords. Until such time that the entire Panth can assemble Sarbat Khalsa, create a plan to debate and discuss these issues, and come to a conclusion and consensus, these issues will only fester and grow worse. Shouting back and forth at each other will not unite the Panth on these issues, no matter how true and correct one side might be in the debate. 
  • If Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma was truly a visionary, he would see that trying to work within Badal's political setup is futile. You're getting cents on the dollar. Peanuts. The revolutionary change to ideas centuries old is what is needed. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma knows of our history ten times better than any of us yet fails to see that the only time multiple factions of the Panth were truly largely united was when the Sarbat Khalsa system was in place and operating. 
  • Baba Hari Singh Randhawe Wale have said in Katha before that these politicians don't have the Panth's betterment in mind. They say one thing, do another thing. He recounted the many times he approached the former President of the SGPC, Gurcharan Singh Tohra, to resolve the maryada issue and have one Panthic maryada implemented. Tohra would always say they'd take it into consideration and will do something to get the discussions started but never did over all those years of Baba Hari Singh asking. Why not? Unity of the Panth does not align with the values and interests of the political class and they have proven that over the past four decades. Again, it shows lack of clarity in thought and critical thinking on Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma to not be able to see his plan of action is ultimately folly. 

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

All these things were in place when Sant Jarnail Singh and Baba Thakur Singh were alive. While more Sikhs were religious definitely it is wrong to put these regressions at Baba Harnam Singh personal responsibility.

It is unfair to blame Harnam Singh for these. He had a plan to chnage the SGPC but it was foiled. PLus this was always there when Sant jarnail Singh was there, but no-one blamed him for corruption even though at times he was close to Akali Dal leadership because of the morcha.

I do not blame Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma for causation, I said the following in my original post:

"Many of the occurrences and facts I have presented above are not caused or created by Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma. However, in being the leader of Dami Dami Taksal and the Sant Samaj, and having such warm and close relations with the Badal family, the SGPC, and Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal), he has achieved very little in rectifying or ameliorating any of those issues in any meaningful way. It is treachery and deception with the Panth for Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma to have aligned, supported, and collaborated with the Badal family and the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal)"

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

The original plan was to support Badal which meant that Badal had to commit 40 SGPC seats to Sant Samaj. These 40 Sant Samaj nominees won their seats but the congress party took the elections to court where there was a stay of power so the previous SGPC continued as was. The case took 6 years to reach a verdict. If these Sikhs had been able to take their place in SGPC there would most likely have been a great change.

Only 30 seats were allocated to Sant Samaj, out of a grand total of 170! I do not believe there would be any more change than there is now, they would have held 17.64% of the seats of a majority. This was not a coalition where Badal needs the Sant Samaj's votes to pass anything, and as such they hold no leverage over Badal. 

Do you have any documents or information that gives you a clear picture of what changes Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma and the Sant Samaj were going to bring about and what they're action plan looked like after winning those 30 seats? And did said plan look plausible? 

The SGPC was put in limbo by the case but has been run by its de-facto leaders since then, the Badals, and all its operation are still ongoing with them at the helm. The Sant Samaj and Badal still have the same supporting relationship, even more so now than in 2011, and thus I believe the political power the Sant Samaj has now is what they would receive even if the new SGPC house had gone into operation. 

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

I agree with you here. Baba Harnam Singh could have and should have done more to move badals hand against the ravan sena. However the problem here was that Badal did not want to pursue these cases himself as it would have made more people aware of the crimes of the ravan sena.

With Kaunke's case, I beleive it was given to the CBI of india to investigate. Not sure, but Harnam Singh should definitely have kept this issue alive.

Who do you refer to by "ravan sena"? 

It would have made people aware of the crimes of the Punjab government, which he orchestrated in part, and aided, abetted, and sheltered from justice the thousands of officers and government officials that were responsible for our genocide. Badal has blood on his hands too, not just CM Beant Singh. You may not be aware, but false encounters in Punjab started under Parkash Badal in the 1970s when he had the Punjab police extra-judicially killing leftist activists and 'comrades'. 

I can't find a source at the moment but from what I remember, the CBI submitted their report to the Punjab government and the Punjab government under Badal never released the report. 

But here's something that shows you the counterfeit an insincere concern for the Panthi's issues:

-https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.religion.sikhism/UJ96Dtk4neQ

While Badal asked for an investigation when he wasn't in power this was what he said when he got in power on Kaunke's case.

"Parkash Singh Badal, now the Chief Minister of Punjab, condemned this action. He was briefly detained for his statement. Yet he has fused to refer this terrible incident for investigation by India's Central bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the flimsy pretext that it would demoralize the murderous, out-of-control Punjab police."

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

It is unfair to blame Harnam Singh for these. He had a plan to chnage the SGPC but it was foiled. PLus this was always there when Sant jarnail Singh was there, but no-one blamed him for corruption even though at times he was close to Akali Dal leadership because of the morcha.

See excerpt from my original post above. 

Sant Jarnail Singh started his own morcha. The Akali Dal wanted to align their morcha with his. They mutually did that for the adoption of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. Sant Jarnail Singh did not support the Shiromani Akali Dal in SGPC election, he supported candidates who stood against them. He did not voice his support for the party or its candidates any election, only collaborated to keep the Panth on one platform for the Dharam Yudh Morcha. 

He neither trusted, confided, or made himself vulnerable to the Akali politicians. He took his own course and created and arms-length partnership for the morcha. This is a very different political strategy to Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's of throwing full support behind the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) and cozying up to the political elite. 

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

The Sant Samaj originally came together for the SGPC elections which unfotunately they were unable to see through to the end. After this various leaders as such who really had no desire to involve themsleves in any politics left.

The Sant Samaj was in operation long before the 2011 SGPC elections. The Sant Samaj actually fought the 2004 elections under the Panthic Morcha against SAD (Badal). - http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20110810/punjab.htm#10

Those leaders did not leave because they had no desire to involve themselves in politics anymore. That is a fictitious assertion.

• These leaders had contested the 2004 elections too and stayed united after their loss then. What changed? 
• These leaders left not in 2011 or the following years but in 2016/2017. Why then? That's when the beadbi incidents were happening the the hapless Punjab government and SGPC, both under Badal, did next to nothing constructive to solve the situation and instead used violence against protesters and killed Sikhs. Even after these facts when the many Sant Samaj members were justifiably angry with Badal and wanting to mobilise against him, it was the forever devoted Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma that came out with unwavering support for Badal and his party for the next elections. 
• This was also following the pardon to the Sirsa pakhandi by the Akal Thakht by orders of the Badal family and the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal)'s subsequent support from the Sirsa pakhandi
• https://sikhsiyasat.net/2017/02/03/93-sant-samaj-leaders-part-ways-baba-harnam-singh-dhumma/ - Read the article, the 93 leaders "have distanced themselved from Baba Harnam Singh's announcement to support the Badals"
• Its Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's feeble leadership that has fractured the Sant Samaj

19 hours ago, chatanga said:

Those warm relations were there for a purpose. As i have said many times here, in the life and death struggles of the Dal Panth, even they made political/military alliances with the moghals. I wouldn't criticize those Sikhs because they beleived they were acting in the interests of the Panth by siding with an enemy that had committed pogroms against them many times and killed thousands and thousands of Sikhs.

• Those Sikhs who took Nawabis from the Mughals established their autonomous control and helped to grow the Panth and its interests. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's strategy gives the Panth no autonomy, no control, and he has not pushed forward the Panth's interests in any worthwhile long-lasting way. 

5 hours ago, BhForce said:

This is an extremely well-researched post. I do agree with many of your points about the wrongdoings of the SGPC. Even just one of them (like obliterating archaeological relics) would be an indictment of the SGPC. It is very painful to read about them doing this.

At the same time, I feel that your charge against Baba Harnam Singh is basically that he is not Guru Gobind Singh ji, and that he has not solved all the problems of the Sikh Panth, and led us into a glorious future. Now, while I am not a follower of Baba Harnam Singh, I would like to state that he is simply a human, and expecting him to solve all the problems of the Panth is a very, very high bar. As a dispirited Sikh, my expectations are much lower than yours, and as such, I'm willing to accept just a few accomplishments.

My original post may need more clarity in how I present my ideas; I was not trying to put across the point that Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma must fit the mold of a leader who solves all the Panth's problems and leads us to a future of prosperity and growth. Those are lofty expectations. I do not believe that's the standard Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma should be held to.

I was merely trying to question: are the "accomplishments" of Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma significant or are they miniscule and non-impactful for the Panth's future, especially in comparison to the immense challenges and issues we face. 

People will argue that Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has used his leadership position in Dam Dami Taksal and the Sant Samaj, as well as, his support of and relationship with the Badal family and the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal), to make important progress in issues of the Panth. I don't believe he has. I don't believe he has made any significant progress in addressing any of those larger problems of the Panth even whilst having his strong political affiliations.

My intention was to point out that:

1. The most dire and severe issues of the Panth have not been addressed in any compelling fashion by Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma over the last decade, at a time when he has cultivated powerful connections with Punjab's political overlords. 
2. He is not an individual who possesses necessary skills and character traits, such as long-sightedness, integrity, strategic planning/thinking, principles, conviction, etc., to be a useful, productive, valuable, and helpful leader that can earnestly contribute to the Panth's progression. 

One point repeatedly being made by Dhumma to justify the attack is that Dhadrianwale's verbal attack on Dhumma was a direct attack on Dam Dami Taksal. Dhumma asserts that anything said about the leader of an institution is to be taken as it being said about the institution itself. He questions how you can separate the two.

This is a very flawed assertion by Dhumma. It is entirely acceptable for a leader or individual to be criticized without an institution that criticism being linked to the institution or organization they represent. This is a poor method for Dhumma to justify the attack.

Using Dhumma's logic we would be smearing and disgracing the Akal Takht when we criticize Gurbachan Singh and the other Takht Jathedars for pardoning Ram Rahim and taking orders/directives from the SGPC and Badal government.

Another example, Jathedar of the Akal Takht, Aroor Singh, had honoured General Dyer the person responsible for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar. Is what Aroor Singh did not something Sikhs should oppose? Should Aroor Singh not be condemned and criticized for his shameful behaviour?

More on Aroor Singh:

Not anyone would disagree with condemning Aroor Singh but by Dhumma's argument, we would be denouncing the Akal Takht at the same time.

Having had so much Gurmat instruction you would think a person like Dhumma would think his arguments over to determine their sensibility. I guess not.

Another great analysis by Dr. Amarjit Singh from TV84:

Singh559, I like Ajmer Singh's analysis of how Dhumma handled himself in comparison to the Sikh way of dialogue and too don't agree with his opinions on the rift being created on Sri Dasam Granth.

I have always enjoyed his rational arguments and ability to look at the bigger picture for specific situations.

A good analysis by Ajmer Singh on the recent attack:

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma condemns the attack on Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale in the first statement he makes on the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Foow6GCyow

Dhumma says:

1. These actions need to be condemned in harsh words.
2. Everyone should speak out against it. Sikh Jathebandis should get together to answer back on these things and need to mobilize themselves to stop such ploys.

Then in the following statement, Dhumma's words take a change in direction:

Check the Facebook page of the news channel for a better version: https://www.facebook.com/abpsanjha/

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma claims Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale have been making accusations for over 4 years and has made derogatory comments on Dam Dami Taksal's dastar and reputation. The derogatory comments are claimed to be of the very low and despicable character.

• I have yet to see evidence of the above claim.

Dhumma believes Dhadrianwale should have looked at his own dastaar and realised it has the same honour and respect as someone else's.

• This is a comical suggestion as Dhumma himself criticized Dhadrianwale for his choice of dastaar style, a useless critique.

Dhumma claims in 4 years he never made any derogatory comment against Dhadrianwale.

• This is proven false by Dhumma's critique a few weeks ago of Dhadrianwale and his dress, deferring to this chola as ghagri and making comments about his dastaar style

Dhumma makes a point of Sikhs only supposed to be wearing 4 colours of dastaars.

• A fair point, but hardly something that warranted negative utterance toward another parcharik. Calling Dhadrianwale up and raising this concern and doing benti to stick to the four colours would have been the better move.

Dhumma says that the Singhs that attacked Dhadrianwale wished to get him to stop his derogatory comments about Dam Dami Taksal. They did what they did for the the honour and respect of Dam Dami Taksal. A lot of people's feelings are connected with Dam Dami Taksal and that some can handle someone's attacks while others cannot.

• I have seen no evidence of Dhadrianwale making any defaming comments about the Dam Dami Taksal
• While it is a fair statement to say that people's feelings can get hurt and they take matter into their own hands, Dhumma comes across condoning the attack when he should be condemning it.

Dhumma originally condemned the murder, but since the perpetrator are the student's and friends of his institution, the attack is now being condoned and justified.

1. Hurt feelings over the alleged bad-mouthing of your institution's leader is not sufficient justification for attacking and attempting to murder someone
2. Dhumma should be vehemently criticizing and denouncing what occured but instead has shifted to defending and tolerating the attack
3. Was the killing of Bhai Bhupinder Singh, who made no utterances toward anybody, not wrong? Should his killing not be condemned?
4. The vehicles being destroyed, while a minor misdeed in comparison to the life lost, is the loss of property funded by the Guru's sangat. Is that not worth expressing regret over?
5. A chabeel was made part of the ruse to trick the targets into the trap. An age old tradition of seva was utilized by the perpetrators to commit murder. People will look toward chabeels with suspicion, the government has outlawed them without prior permission, and beadbi of the tradition has occured. Is that not worth condemnation from Dhumma?
6. Dhumma says he will be supporting and helping those charged with these crimes. While raising concerns about potential police torture and brutality is legitimate, unequivocally supporting those who committed such disgusting acts is lunacy.

The following is a news article following Dhumma's press conference on May 23rd, 2016:

The article states:

• Dhumma admits the perpetrators and vehicles used are from Dam Dami Taksal
• Dhumma states he has no knowledge about the Chabeel being used as a tool in this attack (how is it possible to attempt to even feign ignorance about this).
• HERE'S A BOMBSHELL: The press note being used during the press conference (which Dhumma read from) was prepared by the media advisor of Punjab cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia and Dhumma read it word for word
• When the journalists had one on one interviews afterwards (as in the ABP Sanjha video above) what Dhumma read and what he said in those interviews went in opposite directions

Questions that need answering:

1. Why are the media advisors of Badal's cabinet ministers helping Dhumma with his press statements?
2. Why is Dhumma putting up a farce in his statements? He is blatantly being deceitful and disingenuous by stating one thing through a press note (probably things he doesn't actually believe) and then airing his real thoughts and feelings in the interviews. Why the two-face bigotry?

Overall, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has proven that he severely lacks skills in leadership, strategic thinking, conflict/crisis resolution, honesty, and accountability. Operating as the head of Dam Dami Taksal's Mehta faction, his weakness and ineptitude in being a competent leader does a disservice to the entire Dam Dami Taksal. This incident and the subsequent severe mishandling of the response by Dhumma has eroded the reputation and respect for Dam Dami Taksal in the eyes of Sikhs world wide.

Those close to Dam Dami Taksal have to deliberate with themselves and ask, is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's handling of the situation helping the taksal? Will it help them engage and connect with the hearts of Sikhs? Will it help them prosper and flourish going into the future? If the answer is no, we may have someone in a job way above his skill set.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I did this quick analysis just pouring over the information on the internet. If you find any mistakes, any additional relevant information, or have any analysis of your own to air, I would welcome your feedback and will make any corrections necessary.

As I noted during the show, whether you agree with Sardar Manjit Singh GK or not, you have to give him credit for having the courage to express his thoughts without fear or favour. Too often our leaders speak with forked tongues and will say whatever they think might be popular. I also think his rejection of a Sikh separatist agenda should not be interested as him being 'anti-panthic'. The reality is that the Khalistan agenda has to date been very poorly articulated and this should be a wake-up call for those that support the legitimate demand for Sikh independence. Indeed, it would be great if Khalistani leaders came to the SIkh Channel and presented their case in front of live a learned audience. Unless advocates of Khalistan are able to move from hollow slogans to a real vision for the emancipation of all Panjabis and ultimately all Indians, then I am afraid, there is little future for that agenda.

The need for Khalistan has been poorly articulated by everyone besides Dr. Amarjit Singh of Washington D.C. The case for Khalistan needs to be made by discussing all fronts of how that nation would be different from the current situation in Punjab. An answer on how Khalistan would improve things for Punjabis, in relation to human rights and freedoms, socially, economically, and overall quality of life needs to be clearly given and be openly available.

In this programme Manjit Singh GK offered a very clear vision of how to save Sikhs and Sikhi. By drawing parallels with the Jews, he emphasised the importance of building a highly educated, globally orientated nation. He also correctly identified that the crisis of Sikhi and Sikhs, particularly in rural parts of Panjab is as much related to dramatic social changes to the social, cultural and economic fabric associated with rapid urbanisation, globalisation and new social media as it is to the failures of government. The solution therefore is tom open our eyes to such momentous changes rather than to simply blame the politicians or to constantly rely on conspiracy theories.

Sikhs do need to raise literacy levels and education within themselves and have a more interconnected community globally. But besides fostering a culture of higher education and pursuit of knowledge, I don't believe there is anything greater Sikhs as a larger community could do.

Yes, the people of Punjab are suffering due to changes in the economy and the sub-par effort to adapt effectively with necessary legislative amendments and new policies (current policies and regulations do not entice foreign investment in Punjab).

But the responsibility to improve economic conditions in Punjab, to increase foreign direct investment, and to provide the general populace with well paying jobs that grow the economy toward a information based economy is with the Punjab and Indian governments.

It doesn't help when your Minister for Education has only passed the 10th grade (Sikander Singh Maluka - http://myneta.info/pb2012/candidate.php?candidate_id=446). Not to mention half of the Punjab cabinet has no post secondary education.

The failure of Punjab to adequately adapt to social trends, rapid urbanization, and globalization are failures of the Government.

Literacy rates are not high enough and access to credible and relevant information on these precise topics is very poor. It cannot be expected that people can learn how to adjust to a changing world on their own.

Today, through strengthening our existing institutions such as the DSGPC and SGPC and by building new progressive institutions, the Sikhs can have a real future. Failure to do so will certainly result in the ongoing demise of a once proud people and nation. Today, we need to move away from Sikhs as sadhus - which is the image being promoted by many of the so called 'dharmic' jathebandhis, particularly those led by a baba's - but of humanitarians, scholars, scientists, ecologists, entrepreneurs, intellectuals, journalists, film makers, media personalities and peace activists. Sadly a nation of once proud Saints, Scholars, Soldiers, is being led by those who do not even have the capacity to understand not respond to my argument in any thoughtful way.

The sole job of the SGPC is to defend and bolster Sikhi. This encompasses propagation of the Sikh way of life, the protection of Sikh history and its related historical Gurdwaras and artifacts, and providing life's basic necessities (food, shelter, clothes) to humanity. To mold the Sikh populace into productive and nurturing members of Society is under its mandate, however, I fail to see what role the SGPC would have in moving Sikhs toward being any of the occupations you listed.

Sikhs in their basic form are saints and soldiers. Why would we want to remove the Sadhu aspect from Sikhi? It should be a part of us but of course not be our sole trait. I highly doubt the assertion that Sikh organizations led by "Babas" are teaching that Sikhs should solely focus on a Sadhu lifestyle.

Baba Jagjit Singh of the Harkhowal samparda have many times given guidance to, in addition to living the Sikh lifestyle, have scholastic pursuits and go into honorable professions.

Rather than retreat to the Gurdwaras and dears, to spend every spare minute in ritualistic meditation sealed off from the rest of the world,

There are actually a lot of rituals and prayers that devout Jews preform on a daily basis, and they are not so liberal in their linkage with society as you might think. Many are recluses and focus much of their time on their religion, family, and work. Its hard to contrast Jews being opposite to your view of what Sikhs are apparently doing.

When you are few in number then the only way to survive, as the Jews have demonstrated for the past 2500 years, is to focus on quality and brain power. Rather than retreat to the Gurdwaras and dears, to spend every spare minute in ritualistic meditation sealed off from the rest of the world, we now more than ever before need to recound the practical example set by Dhan Guru Nanak Ji, who confronted the 'holy men' in the temples and deras and sites of pilgrimage, the rich and the powerful. Who, from Sri Lanka in the South to Bangladesh and Sikhim in the East, from Tibbet and China in the North to Mecca, Bagdad and even Italy in the West, he embarked on his own revolutionary struggle to unite humanity, to rid us of irrational superstitious beliefs and to bring peace and co-operation to what was and remains a divided world.

In year 70, after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, the control of elite Jewish priests, in whom control of religious ceremonies vested, was relinquished. Jews became more widespread after the Roman conquest. Since Jewish life revolved around the Torah, it required all Jewish men to read and study the Torah themselves and no longer reliant on Rabbis. Their children would begin their instruction to do the same from a very young age. Education was compulsory for people of the Jewish faith and this was revolutionary compared to other societies that existed through the first millennium and a half. It gave them an intellectual edge on all other communities as a whole.

However, Jews who's livelihoods relied on resource industries, like farming, had a hard choice to make. Do they send their children to learn Hebrew, which is religiously mandated but brings them no economic benefit, or do they become less devout or even convert religions? The bleeding population was one reason Judaism did not flourish in the world as other faiths did.

Within devout Jews, education was a basic building block for their families and the community. Because of their early connection to education, Jews were, in large part, ahead of their peers. The culture of educational pursuit and excellence was cultivated through religious necessity and became ingrained in Jews themselves. They all push their children on an individual level to pursue their academic interests and morph into professionals.

There is a great parallel with Sikhi.

From 1716 to the establishment of the Sikh Misls, Sikhs were displaced with very few substantial and permanent habitations. It required every Sikh to be self-reliant and learn Gurmukhi and keep alive the Sikh way of life. Education was likely more precious during those times. As Sikhs have endured through a century of relative peace, a culture of complacency has festered and Sikhs no longer feel there is a need for that basic understanding of our language, which is the gateway to Sikhi.

Most Sikhs living in rural areas in the past 150 years likely saw no economic benefit from education, similar to the thinking of some Jews. If any culture of learning Gurmukhi as a necessity to our way of life existed, it was wiped out by generations of ill opinion toward education.

Very few Sikhs send their children to Gurdwaras to learn Gurmukhi, Sikh history, and music, so kids aren't getting an influx of knowledge at a young age like Jewish children have been.

Had Sikhs had the long and winding ordeal the Jews had and developed that deep rooted culture of academia over two millenniums, we might also be staunch champions of education too. For the present, we are not. What are your ideas on how to change that? What role to Sikh groups have to play in that? What real world steps and ideas can be implemented to get the change we need?

Many would argue institutions like Dam Dami Taksal, Mastuana, Nihang Dals, Harkhowal, and Jawaddi Taksal have been promoting and providing costless learning of languages, history, music, the Sikh way of life, and to some degree for some, the quest for technical and academic knowledge for a long time.

If you want Sikhi to survive, give up the rituals and fancy dress and put gurbani into practice. Reach out to others and share with them the living universal social spirituality for the modern age which Sikhi most definitely is. Putting aside the politics, there can be no doubt that Manjit Singh is perhaps the first and only Sikh Leader from India that has ever articulated so clearly such a vision for the future of Sikhs. It will be a tragedy if blinded by our own unquestioning political and dera affiliations we fail to see this opportunity to wake-up and sieze the moment.

Suits may be fancier than Salwars (oh the irony).

In all seriousness though, I agree with reaching out to those who aren't living the Sikh way of life and giving them the Guru's message in a medium and channel that is most productive for them.

I think Manjit Singh's statements about Sikhi sound great and are good ideas, but they seem to be wide blanketing statements that are far from being a clear direction to a better future. The problems that Sikhs face in India and around the world are well known; having a vision for a better future is a good place to start. Nonetheless, until concrete steps and plans to actually tackle the problem are put into practice, its all just talk, which Punjabis are more than accustomed to hearing.

On a side note, most of the immense problems that Sikhs/Punjabis in the west have with Indian and Punjab governments almost entirely have to do with unfair treatment before the law, human rights, and freedoms of the people. They include but are not exclusive to:

In no particular order.

1. Being categorized as Hindus in Article 25 of the constitution

2. The leaving out of Punjabi areas from Punjab

3. Punjab river waters being controlled and diverted in violation of international riparian law

4. State sponsored murder of tens of thousands of Sikhs/Punjabis, widespread use of torture, and extra-judicial killings of peoples without fair/due process taking place.

5. State sponsored killings, assaults, rapes, arson, and looting that took place in the Sikh genocide of November 1984.

6. The mass impunity of all those involved in the events listed in 4 & 5 from political leaders, political party workers, para-military & police personnel, and Indian citizens .

8. The needless attack on Harimandar Sahib in June 1984 that killed thousands and saw hundreds of Sikh artifacts destroyed or looted.

7. The rejection by the state to the freedom of speech, freedom of public protest, and freedom of political thought.

Promises to address and tackle said problems have been given by all political parties, most of all the Badal Dal. People are well accustomed to political double talk; its hard for many to believe Manjit Singh GK is genuine in his statements knowing he represents the interests of the Badal Dal (A view on GK's statements on Sant Bhindrawale and comparison of Iran to Khalistan - ).

That's my take at least, sorry for being all over the place.