ghorandhar

I only could listen to the first link in full. I heard a few minutes of second link. Firstly the second link mentions the rehras sahib. Simply go to the Guru Ganth Sahib jee and after the jap jee sahib you will find where Guru jee tells us to start Rehras sahib. Its clearly written in Gurbani. Those people who are reciting two shloks before rehras sahib should also recite the pauris which come after the slok. They are not reciting the whole shabad. Those people who take hukamnamas will know that the slok itself is not a complete shabad when recited, all the sloks and the pauri are recited to complete the composition. So if the extra shloks are to be recited then it will also be correct to recite the pauris and complete the shabads. So it makes no sense to argue rehras sahib has been cut and on the other hand, the same people are not even completing the full shabad. The speaker has got himself confused with his timeline. Firstly it seems that there is no concept of Panth Khalsa/guru panth left. The chaupai sahib never in the panthic Sikh Rehit Maryada was published according to how the Taksal do it. So why he is saying its changed is beyond me. If someone can show that the panthic Sikh Rehit maryada was published in the 1930s with the longer version of Chaupai sahib, then maybe there could be a logical explanation of this change which is claimed. The other option is presenting a detailed report of old rehitnamas and hukamnamas to the Akal Takhat which proves that the nitnem should change. If people are not going to do that, then there is no point complaining about this on stages and taking people away from principles of the Panth and the Akal Takhat. The 6 pauris of Anand Sahib were changed to full Anand Sahib in 1995 I think. However you will note that no one was crying that it should remain to 6 pauri, the reason is because those people who follow the principle of the Panth do not have double standards and pick and choose when they feel they should follow the Panth and when not to. The speaker saying sudh is a funny one. The word is Shudh. How will a coherant change in maryada be made by people who will make the things sudh rather than Shudh. Oral tradition is difficult to preserve, just look at Sant baba Gurbachan Singhs jees book on gurbani and the pronounciation of the Taksal today, BTW publishing rethe book means the Taksal is no longer based on oral tradition, but still they cant pronounce according to the tradition. My point is that what the speaker is saying is only based on an oral tradition, because the original source is not presented or published anywhere. If you look from the Rehitnamas to the books written up to maharaja Ranjit Singh jees time, there is no consensus on the amount of bania for the nitnem. I can remember reading one rehitnama which stated that only 5 pauria of Jap jee sahib and 5 pauria of another bani should be read. If you look at all the rehitnamas and puratan books how can you complain that the standardisation of 3 bania (no one is saying dont do more) is wrong. There is hardly anyone who said that 5 should be recited, so the sangat should not be misguided by such speakers when he claims to be presenting old referances. If he producing what flanna flanna baba jee said, then he should say that, but no authority is being presented. If the panth changes the bania to five in the nitnem, I still would not complain, why? because once upon a time, a principle called Panth used to exist and everyone followed the panth. No where does the Panthic Sikh Rehit Maryada say that we cannot read more gurbani. No one is stopping him. So he can carry on. But to attack the panthic maryada and the institution created by Guru Hargobind Sahib jee is another matter.

I personally do not understand why we people wear a mala, the following are shabads in relation to malas: ਗਲਿ ਮਾਲਾ ਤਿਲਕੁ ਲਿਲਾਟੰ ॥ ਦੁਇ ਧੋਤੀ ਬਸਤ੍ਰ ਕਪਾਟੰ ॥ ਜੇ ਜਾਣਸਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰ ਕਰਮੰ ॥ ਸਭਿ ਫੋਕਟ ਨਿਸਚਉ ਕਰਮੰ ॥ ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਿਹਚਉ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਵਾਟ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥੨॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 470} ਸਲੋਕ ਭਗਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀਉ ਕੇ ੴ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥ ਕਬੀਰ ਮੇਰੀ ਸਿਮਰਨੀ ਰਸਨਾ ਊਪਰਿ ਰਾਮੁ ॥ ਆਦਿ ਜੁਗਾਦੀ ਸਗਲ ਭਗਤ ਤਾ ਕੋ ਸੁਖੁ ਬਿਸ੍ਰਾਮੁ ॥੧॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 1364} ਕਬੀਰ ਜਪਨੀ ਕਾਠ ਕੀ ਕਿਆ ਦਿਖਲਾਵਹਿ ਲੋਇ ॥ ਹਿਰਦੈ ਰਾਮੁ ਨ ਚੇਤਹੀ ਇਹ ਜਪਨੀ ਕਿਆ ਹੋਇ ॥੭੫॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 1368} There are loads of shabads in gurbani which present the same message.

What a load of rubbish. P S Lamba: 'Bhindranwale made repeated claims to the effect that he had no interest in political power, 'If I ever become president of the Akali Dal or the S.G.P.C. [shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee], an M.L.A., a government minister, or a member of parliament . . . I shall deserve a shoe-beating by you.'14,15 In contrast, we have the following examples of Bhindranwale's abundant political aspirations year after year: During the S.G.P.C. elections of 1979, 'Of the forty candidates Bhindranwale put up [for a total of 140 seats], all but four were defeated.' If Lamba Sahib bothered to read Sant jees qoute, he will have realise that sant jee talking about being president of AKali Dal/SGPC or Gov minister. The qoute is totally taken out of context and sant jee never stood for any election. P S Lamba: 'The Darbar Sahib's Public Relations Officer (P.R.O.) Narinderjit Singh Nanda recalled, 'Bhindranwale told me that within thirty days he was taking over the S.G.P.C.'21' flanna flanna said this that and the other, its not a great piece of evidence. P S lamba: 'Finally, while we're on the subject, we might as well also cover one other related myth, i.e. that Khalistan has never had any substantial support amongst Sikhs in India. In an interview with B.B.C. correspondent Mark Tully just days before his death, S.G.P.C. President Gurcharan Singh Tohra answered a question about his personal views on Khalistan by admitting that 'some personal desires are better kept hidden.'38' When did G S Tohra ever speak for the Sikh nation? once again everything is being based on what flanna flanna said. What research or poll was taken to prove Khalistan does not have substantial support. Probably P S lamba sitting behind his computer adding some numbers together. If sant jee wanted to be pardhan etc then why a few days before the attack on harmander sahib did sant jee accept Singh Sahib Giani Kirpal Singh jees decision not to issue a hukamnama to ask Sikhs to leave their posts in the Army? This is recordered on the first page of his book. why was he not intimidated? why did Sant Jarnail Singh jee at that point take over the SGPC and AKal Takhat positions why they were not agreeing with? Why did Sant Jarnail Singh jee respectfuly accept the Jathedhars decision? P S Lamba 'In 1985, Harkishan Singh Surjeet had optimistically announced that Bhindranwale's martyr status would only be 'temporary.'43' Wishful thinking. over 20 years is temporary? P S Lamba 'Myth #1: Bhindranwale Was Not a Terrorist' They used to call Mandela, Bhagat Singh etc terrorists. All the comments are based on hearsay. The fact is that Sant Jarnail Singh jee stood up for Sikh rights and because none of us have the guts to do the same, we have to slate the guy. If sant jee said it was Ok to kill those who torture us, rape our women and do our bistee, he becomes a terrorist, but why do the same people not say these things to other gursikhs like Baba Deep Singh who killed those fauji who put prices on Sikh heads, Banda Singh Bahadur who destroyed people like wazir Khan at sirhand and Jassa Singh Ahluwalia who raised the Khalsa flag at Lahore. Like I said veer jee, when you cant do something yourself because you dont have the gut because you are a cooha (mouse), you try to bring those down who have done great kurbani.

Veer jee sorry for such a late reply, ive been really busy and just sending this quickly. The word ikh has the following letters: ihhree noo shiharee khaka noo unkar. The unkar under the khaka repersents that only the one lord is being talked about, if the unkar is not under the khaka you will not find the meaning to be Waheguru. These are just some simple pinciples of gurbani viakaran and without going into whether it is a noun or singular, all you have to do is look at the unkar and you can see that guru jee has told us that one means Waheguru, like you said we should look at gurbani, so im just showing some examples from gurbani so you can see this principle of grammar. Sabna jee ka ikh (unkar is present and the meaning are Waheguru), data soo maih visar na jayee. Ang 2 Nanak Akhai sabh koo akhai ikh (no unkar and this is not represented as akal purakh) duu ikh (Unkar is present and translations of the word is waheguru) syana. ang 5. Ikh comes twice in the following line which we have been discussing: Orrakh orrakh bhal takhee vidh khain ikh (no unkar and according to grammar not refering to Waheguru) vat. Shash ataran khain katiba asloo ikh (unkar is present meaning the word refers to waheguru) dhat. ang 5 Sohee kazi jin aap tajai, ikh (unkar is present therefore waheguru is the meaning) nam keea adharoo. ang 24 Ikh (unkar) is present visar doojai lubhaya. ang 111. Look at other shabads with ikh spelt with an unkar, there are hundreds of examples. The following are shabads where 'Ikh' does not have an unkar (like orrakh orrakh bhale takhi vedh khain ikh vaat). Therefore the meaning is not Waheguru: Sehas syanpaa lakh hoee ta ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) na chalai nal. ang 1 Mat vich rantan javhar manik jih ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) gur kee sikh sunee. ang 2. Gura ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) deh bujai. ang 2 Once again you can look through gurbani and see how the principles of gurbani viakaran work. The word 'there' and 'their' do not mean the same because they are pronounced the same, rather we have to look at the spelling to understand the meaning. The same is for 'effect' and 'affect' or 'no' and 'know'. In gurbani we have to consult gurbani viakaran so that we can understand the difference. There are books by Prof Sahib Singh je and Joginder Singh Talwara if you want to understand viakaran. The word Dhaat has been given the same meaning by Prof sahib Singh, Bhai Vir Singh jee (in his dictionary and panj granti satek) and Sant baba Gurbachan Singh jee Bhinderwala (Gurbani paath darshan/darpan). No one has said this means giver, at first i was intrigued by your translation, but I cant see how a dhada has become dada. If you want to see where dhaat comes from, then Bhai vir Singh jees dictionary tells you and it also shows how it can have different meanings, but none of them say data. Ang 16, 18, 25, 33, 61, 83 and 87 are all shabads in Sri Raag alone, you will not find the word Dhat meaning the giver (spelt with dada) in any of these shabads. Ive tried to look at the word dhat in other Raags aswell and no where does it mean giver. Sorry for leading you so far of the topic. Take care veer jee

Is there any other translation online of this story? Are the stanzas before the ones discussed here, also use reference to Guru Gobind Singh jee? That might indicate whether This is about Guru jee. From what I can understand I dont think this is about guru Gobind Singh jee. It is probably something that did not happen, but a story is being told to convey a message. Firstly I dont think Guru jee ever claimed he was a raja? Did Guru jee rule anywhere? If guru jee was a raja then it seems that the first Khalsa Raj came before Baba Banda Singh jee Bahadur. If the raja was Guru Gobind Singh jee, the story would more likely to have been in Bachittar Natak. It also seems that the story is not written in first person. While in Bachittar Natak we see shabads that are... Dekhan ayoo Jagat Tamasha. And also: Kahayoo parbuu so phakh hoo. I could not understand why the raja is talking and then it says guru jee is saying something (this was right at the end of the composition). Maybe that is an indication that the Raja and Guru jee are different people. Meybe Guru jee is talking in first person and the Raja is therefore depicted as someone else. Another Indication that the raja was not Guru jee was when the raja puts on a religious garb. These are the conclusions I have drawn from someones translations. The thing is your opinions can easily change depending on the translation. For example the translator feels sure the raja is guru Gobind Singh jee, so his translation of each line, will be prejudiced by this fact. Your right veer V jee. The easy part is to argue with others that they are speaking kufar etc but when it comes to discussing the shabads, we find a lack of debate. Or the statement that we do not have the kamaee. Khoj and veechar (Being a Sikh) seems to be overshadowed by other words. (Sikhi Sikhia gur veechar). I feel that someone who did khoj like Prof Sahib Singh jee is needed with the dasam granth. Translations of the Dasam Granth lack any notion or concepts of grammar. They all like they copied each other and changed a few words around here and there, like the English Translations of the Guru Granth Sahib jee are.

...... ok, , books for reaserch is ok, but you have the holy koran/translation and, though it has pages (!) its not a book. it is the scripture of the muslims. hence,....its holy. but... i suppose that for reasearch it may be ok. (what i am about to say may sound controversial but i like it!) sikhs have no relegion, only a way of life.sikh dharam/ithaas. this i believe to be accurate. btw somone told me this randomly so i liked it..... anyway... when the sggs says "na koi hindu, ya musalmaan..." and the rehet piyaari muj ko... by dasmesh pita i think that its in support of this.. ...... but in the traditional sense, keeping another relegions scripture is, in a sense 'muning' and looking into that relegion.. wont you agree with me?? like, if you keep these things and reasearch them, you are looking into another relegion and things may come up round back to you and it may be like, >>>>'y do you have, for example, the koran in your house and reacearching that... is gurbani not more than enough'...<<<< i believe this is the angle that the gurus put to us when they said for us to not mun it. if one was to reaserch the koran and say, yea this is right and this is wrong, another might say 'y not spent that time on trying to find out and figure out what our guru said.' now, i myself know a little persian so i can read that type of inscription, (dasmeshz bani became that much eaiser to understand) but that doesent mean i will go towards or anywhere near that relegion if i have a maharaaj like sggs in my life.. so in this same sense, i am not thinkin that you are any different. i am not saying that by keeping the koran in your home, you will mun it and accept islam in your heart n stuff, but it does have an effect. just like bani has an effect on us.. this is why we say, and muslims at that fact, say all we ask you to do is read the scriptures. it does have an effect. but fine, reacerch is reaserch, but i personally would be against keeping a koran or a translation of the koran in my home. iv had a look at the like that you gave me, n its a website that i go on often! yey! ryt... they are talking bout the asloo ik daat, all i said in the translation i gave was 'in the end, there is the one god... and the way i look at bani is a see which words guru has used and translate (for myself) accordingly.. like, daat is associated with giving. and god is the all giver so god;giver.. the vaedh thing, it is similar to the way iv said it... but i must have not explicated it properly. it says in the like u gave me, " ik vaath, ik gal" and this is exactly what i said... this ik vaath is that of god.. and this is what i said.. "the ik vaat is the name of the lord." so how is it totally different???? its exactly the same!!! mind you, i did bring another line from guru maharaj.. maybe you got confuzed with that...or maybe the bit where i said that people got tyrd in looking for the brahmins and those other people... it still means the same thing... i tend to think a bit too much outside the box cus i try to relate everything but the line does mean 'that looking here and there you will get tyred, vaedh say that theres the one giver/god.' because.... in the olden tyms, people used to go looking for the brahmins in the hills n stuff. this is wasting time as in the end there is only ik daat, the one givver, god.. this is what i said and ment before... transtating the line is easy but as you may well know, trying to find what god is reely trying to say to you(personally) is the thing... hope my post wasnt too long for yourself to read!!! pul chuk kima :TH: hum rulte firte :homer People like Sant Singh Maskin, giani Harinder Singh etc all studied various scriptures and maybe Im from this style of school. But instead of trying to justify it by qouting these gursikhs, it might be down to my own stupidy. Maybe if you are vulnerable you would be affected by them, but as you said (and the limited amount of Sikhi that ive understand), Sikhi is a way of life, so if you are practising Sikhi daily, you should be strong enough not to be affected. If in gurbani or the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada say so not to do so, then I put my hands up even if its research I have no right. The purpose of me reading them is because when I go to lectures and people of other faiths are also presenting their religious beliefs, sometimes questions are posed to me regarding comparisions, having a little knowledge of what other believe help me keep up with the other speakers. What amazes me when doing lectures and meeting Muslims, they have read the guru granth sahib jee, yet they have not been affected. Read Prof Sahib Singh jees translation of the line Vakhat na payioo khadia, jhi likhan likh Koran in Jap jee sahib. You will see that they have translated this line incorrectly on purpose. Once I have read what I need to because of the lecturers in involved in, I will not keep other faiths scriptures. If I have offended you in any way shape or form, I ask for muafee. I can understand why you do not keep them. My belief however is that there is no wrong or right answer on this issue. The shabad Patala Patal from Jap jee sahib, unless ive misunderstood your translation and Prof Sahib Singhs, the concept of one god is not presented in the lines of Vedh. I always thought this shabad meant: The Vedhs have not found Akal Purakhs Aant (Because they say patala patal...), Neither have the Katibs and in the last line Guru presents the truth (Nanak Vaddha Akheea api jani ap). I always fought Vedh khain ikh vaat meant that the Vedhs have proclaimed in one zuban (ghal) that Patala patala lakh aghasa aghasa. Ive never thought that Vedh kahain ikh vaat was regarding the Lord. The Dhat is with the letter dhada and not dada, Prof Sahib Singh jee here has translated this as being creator. I posted Prof Sahib Singhs translation because I always assumed that was the correct translation. It Was interesting to see how you translated the shabad, I posed the above as a comparision. If you look at my post veer jee I was only not saying who was correct or incorrect I was only interested because it was different from what I had up to now understood. han jee I agree, that is the hard part. But maharajs kirpa we will be Ok. Bhai Sahib jee my knowledge of Science is limited. When doing Sehaj paath I can remember coming across some references, I will try to look for them. There is also an article on this subject which ill try to find for you, I thought I had it on my computer, but I cant find it. When ive found it ill post it for you, sorry, but my hands are up when it comes to this area.

Veer jee dont worry you have not offended me. :D I do not understand how you have reached the conclusion from gurbani that we cannot keep books for research in our homes. I have the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj jee Parkash upstairs in my home. The only thing which is kept in this room is Gutki, harmounium, tabla etc. The books of other scriptures I keep in my own library which I have downstairs so that I can keep looking at references when im doing research. I have a 4 volume koran translation which is an interpretation word by word, I cant get that book any where and got it from Amritsar. I cant see how keeping other books in your home can be considered something a Sikh cannot do. Its correct however as you qouted from the Dasam Granth (also recited in Rehras Sahib jee, that Guru Gobind Singh jee maharaj says we should not accept them. If you want to see where the word dhat comes from from or asloo comes from, look at the following translation: http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/0005.html Notice how the Vedh line is totally different from how you have translated that one line, rather than the two lines together.

Veer S1ngh jee im really confused with some of your comments, I do not mean to argue with you, only do veechar. Firstly why does the Akal Takhat or SGPC need to give recommendation to the Sikh Missionary College? Or why does the Sikh Missionary College want it? I assume you are talking about the Ludhiana one. Shahid Missionary college according to my knowledge is the SGPCs missionary college. The fact that the Missionary college of Ludhiana follow the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada and support the Akal Takhat is all that should matter. You dont really provide references where the Sikh Missionary college or which Missioanry college you disagree with. Ropar and Ludhiana for example have there own magazines and dont really have any link in terms of money, teaching or resources. They are independent from one another. You still have not provided any reference where any of the 4 main missionary colleges claim Baba Deep Singh jees head was cut rather than actually come of did not come of. I would like to know so that I can read their arguments. Personally I feel we have more worrying things to worry about than whether someone thinks Baba Deep Singh jees head came of or not (even though personaly I feel it did). I was doing a lecture yesterday and people did not even know who Baba Deep Singh jee was, the main thing for us today is to leave these issues behind and try to get the basics taught to Sikhs because if our next generation have never heard of Baba Deep Singh jee, we a have some serious problems ahead of us. The meaning and purpose of the persons sacrifice is potent, the manner and criticaly analysing history is something which will come later. We cannot always agree on history, the example of Banda Singh jees Shahidi presents the reality that people will always place greater weight on particular references. Im just going to qoute Something Veer Vjee said which I totally agree with: '3- No, as I see it, it's not that they don't believe in the life stories of the Gurus- it's just that they (rightly) demand historic reference that points towards something. There are many made up sakhis (many by the such as Chaman lal). Just read the "puaratan Janamsakhis" of the Gurus, written not more than 100 years after the Guru- you'll be disgusted. Everything needs to be taken with a pinch (karchi?) of salt. The only thing that can be trusted blindly is Gurbani. Since they know that Gurbani is the ultimate litmus test - they use GURBANI as their scale to see if something is according to Gurmat or not. It's not about rejecting Sakhis; it's about putting authentic sources like Bhai Gurdas Ji, and Gurbani - which weight a much more than sakhis'. The objective of blindly trusting gurbani is such an important point (I never realised that we should use these words until Bhai Sahib just used them). Where there is conflicting history, the test which we will always adere to is Gurbani and sources such as Bhai Gurdas jee? Gurbani will always be above the interpretation of history by individuals. I feel that sometimes we feel insecure about our belief so we outright condemn people without discussing the facts, this insecurity has lead to newspapers and internet sites attacking the Sikh Missioanary Colleges. There will always be things that we cannot agree with when discussing and researching history, the point is to do veechar and if you cannot agree thank the Bhai Sahib or phen jee for doing gurmat veechar and then encourage researching. Vidhya veechari tha parupkari GGS ang 356. What ever I or others say is not rubber stampted. Our beliefs are a evolution of thought, Gurbani is the only thing in this world which is final, rather than being an evolution of thought, gurbani is a divine revelation. Therefore everything is seen in light of gurbani. The Sikh Missionary Colleges are not political institutions like the various other Sikh jhatas are, they dont go around with huge groups of Sikhs challening people left right and centre, or giving statements that we dont follow flanaa flanaa or have press conferences. I dont understand how the Sikh Missionary College would go around condemning people when that is not what an Education institution does. Its like saying Punjabi University or Patalia University should have a press conferences saying, 'BTW we are against Kala Afghana, Gurtej Singh etc'. We are talking about Educational Institutions, hence the role is to teach students and prepare lessons. I dont know whether you have been to College or University, but if you understand how these institutions work, you will see that the Missionary Colleges and based on those models of institution. The point im making is that these institutions are not our guru (in other words lay down some kind of rubber stamp), all they do is teach you and help you reach a level so that you can easily interpretate and research primary and secondary rescourses. Could you please provide references where the Sikh Missionary College magazine Sikh Phulwari supports: Kala Afghana, Gurtej Singh and Spokesman. I have been reading that magazine for along time now. Inder Singh Ghagga who has over 100 articles to his name told me that none of his articles nor Kala Afghana etc were allowed to be published and this was before they were declared Tankah at the Akal Takhat. The reason is simple, no publication is allowed which contravene the principles of gurbani and the supremacy of the Akal Takhat. I have never come across anything in the magazines or books of the Sikh Missionary College (Ludhiana I think you are refering to) are in the same bed with all these false people which panth to karag keeta by the AKal Takhat. However, If you can provide me with some references I will approach the Missionary college to ascertain why they are doing these things so that we can try to stop them contravening the Akal Takhat.

Han jee Veer Proactive jee. There is a saying in punjabi for following what phallana phallana said, its Suneeya sunayeaa ghala. Veer jee we have forgotten the shahids and the sacrfice that the Singhs and Singni made to free our gurdwaras. Because 2day the SGPC are a mess, we should not represent those who gave there lives as also being bad. I was reading Prof Sahib Singh jees life story yesterday and he also spent time in jail during the Gurdwara sudhar lahair and Akali movement. We forget that those who helped shaped the rehit maryada spent time in jail, protested on the streets and had to fight not only the goverment, but also the Arya Samaj, Christian missionarys and Muslim groups such as ahmaddiya who were trying to convert Sikhs. They were amazing and we should not forget there hard work and sacrifice. Whatever the panthic decision, they were willing to follow. We freely use the word panth, but when the panth makes a decision we choose not follow it, yet we still attack others for being 'anti panthic' or 'not panthic'. If thats not a paradox, then i will never no what is.

Veer Surinderjit jee there are 4 missionary colleges that I am aware of, these are Ludhiana, Ropar, Anandpur and Shahid missionary college Amritsar. Ludiania missionary college has published some translations of the dasam granth. They have also written a book called 'Dasam Granth Darpan'. In that book they have written the history of the dasam granth, which writers are for and against the dasam granth referencing what bania they do or do not believe in. The last page can be summarised by the following: that the Panth should get all scholars together and come to a decision, whatever the Akal Takhat and the panth decides, everyone should follow that decision and unite. They also say that until that decision is made, people will continue to mislead the sangat by saying that portions of the Dasam granth saying guru jee worshipped Moortis and Hindu avtars, but once the decision is made the arguing should stop. Someone asked this question in the Sikh Phulwari a few years back, the response was that its for the panth to make a decision So there position seems simple to me, they have translated the dasam granth and will only follow the panths decision, not no jhata or particular individual. People like Ghagga were banned from publishing his articles way before he became known to the panth. If you want to learn Gurbani viakaran (grammar) and the purpose of words having different spellings, for example why Nanak is spelt in different ways or how dukh can have different meanings depending on the spelling, I suggest Principle Baljeet Singh of Ropar College. The other Colleges are also good for viakaran, but personally listening to Bhai Baljeets khata and meeting him, I was really impressed. The Anandpur college is near the gurdwara where Guru Tegh Bahadur jees head was bought which is in the Anandpur city. From that gurdwara someone will direct you. I dont know much about the Shahid missionary college other than it is run by the SGPC and was the first missionary college ever. They have had principles such as Bhai Ganga Singh and Prof Sahib Singh. But like I said I dont no much about them. I have a friend from Ludhiana who studyed at the college and I no they are not against the dasam granth. The best thing to do is go there and check it out, most people have not and will just make presumptions. If you are near Phagwara, there is a Singh there who was head granthi of Anandpur Sahib for a few months, but he did not last long because he was installing the maryada and would catch granthis asleep who should have been doing akhand path. He goes abroad alot, but spends alot of time doing camps and getting people into Sikhi. His name is Ranjoadh Singh and is really chardi kala, he was born into a Hindu family but became a Sikh and was beaten badly by his family, he tied to a tree and left for dead. He was also badly beaten in 84 and remains active in the sangat. He was on panthic.org last year when he and the sangat was protesting against Ashutosh coming to Phagwara, all the Singhs were beaten by the government. Ranjoadh Singh studied in the same year as pinderpal Singh. He wears a round dastar and because of this, people dont realise he studyed at the missionary school, so alot of people think he is taksali. It quite funny how people look at the persons appearance and make conclusions. Regarding the lavan, the missionary college books teach the panthic rehit maryada and do not teach that the bibi does 2 lavan in front. Some person called Veer Bupinder Singh who has nothing to do with the missionary college and has his own organisation (http://www.thelivingtreasure.com/) was involved in that. There is a guy called Surjit Singh missionary who lives in Delhi, he writes all kinds of stuff which neither the missionary college nor me personally accept. you can find his articles online, he writes all kinds of things which I feel are wrong. He was also present at this lavan programme in Delhi and I would not be suprised after reading his articles that he had something to do with this. Regarding Baba Deep Singh jee, there is nothing in the Ludhiana Sikh missioanry college book on Baba Deep Singh jee to suggest his head did not come of. Every person puts particular emphasis on the sources they like the most. What we have to do is try to look at which source is most correct. For example, D.r Ganda Singh jees book on Banda Singh Bahadur proves from eye witness accounts that Banda Singh jee had his eyes ripped out, feet and arms cut, he had his skin pierced with hot metal rods and was cut limb by limb. Rantan Singh Banghu says he died by being dragged by an elephant. giani gian Singh says he did not even become shahid, rather he escaped and fled to Kashmir. So the only way to find the right answer is to do research. I personally believe baba Deep Sngh jees head was separated from his body. The Colleges only follow the Panthic Sikh rehit mayada which is passed by the Akal Takhat and not an individual. It clearly says that 3 bani should be recited in the morning. However, if you want to read more, Im sure no one is putting a gun to your head. Well I hope not. I have not studied at the missionary college, but I know people that have. I like the colleges because they believe in the Khalsa Panth, the rest of us follow what we like at the expense of the very notion of 'Panth'. If you live in the US, there is a person called giani Amarjit Singh jee, he has lived in New York for the past few years, he also studyed in the same year as pinderpal Singh. He is a good person to learn of and when I met him a few years ago he frequently qouted from the Dasam Granth. He did Khata on Vaisakhi that Guru Gobind Singh jee took the panj piyaras heads off on the gurdwara stage and proved from various sources that guru jee did not cut goats heads off and strongly believes in Baba Deep Singh jee fighting with his head separated from his body. Hope this helps.

LOL. hopefully no one will get juttia and also parchar against the dasam granth will also stop. Bhai Sahib jee, Sant Takhur Singh jee is not with us, the topic is about those who are doing parchar on the stages today. As for Brahmhgiani, I dont have such knowledge of these things. All I can do is comment on what happened or in this case did not happen. I agree that these are opinions. But the topic was about preachers. From there I commented on someone nearly getting battered. I agreed with you that we need to check out those who do khata on the stages. I did not mean to quarral with with you, all I did was add to your comment by expressing my opinion that double standards should not take places when misrepresentation and lying is taking place. Therefore if we are to check those who do khata on stages, such things should also be taken into consideration. The topic can become circular because People who are against dasam bani will also say its our opinion that Guru Gobind Singh jee never wrote this. What I try to do is ask people do you believe in the panthic Sikh rehit maryada? they will say yes as did Prof Inder Singh Ghagga did when I asked him. The next point is that the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada when talking about who is a Sikh, clearly says on Page 4: 'daas Guru Sahiban de bani ati Sikhia (nuu manda hai)' On page 19 it also says under point ehri (3rd letter) that the bani of the 10 gurus should be apart of the Khata. Im making this point on the dasam granth to show to you that I agree. All Im saying is that one perspective should not be taken when checking the khata vacikhs. Veer jee I do not mean to argue with you, but only do veechar and I'm sorry that my style of writing is presented differently. I firmly believe in the dasam granth and believe its good that we will all try to answer those who manipulate its pangtia. However, when these people are beaten up, they then go around saying that no one could answer us back so they attack us. My point was only that we should not do such things and fall into their trap. My purpose is not to argue with you, infact I agreed with your point that we should check out khata vachiks but not on select points.

Veer jee you are right, I am sorry. What I should have wrote, is this is what I believe, it is impossible for me to know what is going on in his head (this missionary khata vachik) when all I did was read what happened on net. On the other hand, he nearly got battered as was written on this forum. Is that the form of debate which took place? since I was not there like you said, maybe you can tell us. If this statement was not made, I would not have made the comment. When people are being threatened (Nearly getting battered which I would interprete as threatening) is this the best environment for dicussions? When a missionary khata vachik called Sagar (I cant remember his first name) did not do khata as certain people in the sangat in the Midlands wanted him to, he was attacked from behind as he walked into his room. He was asked to do Khata on Sukh and Jinda, he said that the Gurdwara committee has asked him to do suraj parash Khata, the khata vachik said he would be willing to do Sukha and Jindas khata on Sunday when the whole sangat was present and when he is free to do whatever khata he wishes. This is just an example of what ive experienced, threatening to batter people or khata vachiks trying to keep hold of there dastars is not an environment for discussions. Veer jee you cant agree with what every parcharkh says, I agree that maybe some standardised questions could be framed. Since this is a thread regarding strange parchaks and since all khata vacikhs should be questioned, would it not be fair to ask the Damdami Taksal khata vacikhs why they persist on not pronouncing bindia when reciting gurbani when Sant baba Gurbachan Singh jee did his books? Why are they misrepresenting the Taksal and Sant baba Gurbachan Singh jee? When for 20 years the sangat was told that Sant Jarnail Singh jee is in Chardi Kala, why should we allow those khata vachiks to keep lying to the sangat and coming onto stages. In my opinon not only have missionarys become strange, but so have the Taksal. In my opinon lying to the sangat and missrepresenting Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh jee is not a little mistake and should also be added to the list of questions to be posed to Khata vachiks.

Major Gurmukh Singh jee (Retd.) writes the following about the gurdwara which is situation in Baghdad: He stayed outside the city to the west of Dajala (Tigris) river, about 2 kilometers north of the Baghdad West railway station. He held discourses with the caretaker of the mausoleum of Abdul Qadir Gilani and Bahlol the wise, who were greatly impressed by his views on God and religion. After the Gurus departure, they raised a memorial in the form of a platform where the guru sat and discoursed. After sometime when a room was constructed over the platform, a stone slad with the following inscription in Turki was installed in it: 'lo! the great god hath fulfilled the wish. A new building for Baba Nanak Darvesh has been constructed. Seven holy men extended their help in the construction. Its date as reckoned comes to 927. The lucky disciple caused a new current of water from the Earth'. The last sentence is the customary phrase to work out the date according alphabetical key. The date is 927AD. Which corresponds to 1520 AD. This inscription was first noticed by Swami Anandacharya who mentioned it in his book snow birds. Sikhs soldiers who went to Iraq in the First World War, 1914-18, a raised a gurdwara here, but now only the room exists which is visited by Sikh and non Sikhs Punjabis who have gone to the oil rich Iraq as workmen during recent decades. However, as it is located within the graveyard, visitors are banned from staying overnight, cooking meals, holding langar and kirtan in view of the sensitivities of the majority Muslim Community. (Page 73) Sant Singh jee maskin jee once in his khata said that when he visited the place, he found gurus jees things still kept there. These included a karahee to cook. This would make sense since bhai Gurdas jee mentions parsad being eaten when guru jee visited Dastghir. If Muslims are doing parchar that guru jee was a Muslim, I wonder what Muslims will say about the Facts represented in Major Gurmukh Singh jees book. Major Gurmukh Singh jee also notes that a report on Giani Zail Singh's visit to the shrine was written in the Indian Express 5th July 1989. I hope this helps.

The Pirs name was Dastgir. Bhai Gurdas jee mentions this in his vara: http://sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=5576 http://sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=5575 In the vara Guru jee pronounced that he was Akal roop and that what he was saying was a revelation, so its clear what guru jee thought. I have the Koran, Gita and the Bible at home, some were given to me in respect my people of other beliefs and some of them I have because I wanted to do research. What would that make me in some peoples eyes? lol Guru jee left something behind in alot of places, for example ive seen guru jees footwear at nanakcheera. I suspect guru jee did leave something behind in Meeca. Im looking in my books but I cant find anything yet.

Farida bhoori da Bhalla kar, gussa man na handai GGS Kabir jee Slok. Who is better the khata vachik who speaks bakwash or the one waving around his fists because he dont have the intelligence to do veechar? In India people are making so much money robbing people because they say have ghosts and spirits in their homes, simple minded people give all their earnings. Maybe he is saying that Sikhs dont have time for ghosts only believe in Satguru. Its sad however that people keep confusing the sangat on Dasmesh jees Bani. My parents were taught from their grandparents that pranno ad ikhankar was the chaupai recited in the morning. The creation of the panthic Sikh rehit maryada standardised what everyone was to recite as chaupai. When the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada was formed people were all reciting different things. I cant tell you the reasoning of dropping this chaupai, but all I know is that my family and others in our pind used to recite this bani as chaupai in the morning. Maybe depinding on what district of Punjab you lived in, people were doing differnt things? It would be interesting to ask the older generations what they all used to recite just out of interest to see if there is any patterns.

I wonder why Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee as 'most people have said' or claimed to have said would have walked out when the Panthnic Sikh Rehit maryada does not use the following words: 'Sikhs can eat meat'. If someone can find these words for me I would be thankful. I hope those who are forcing the change of the Panthic Rehit maryada (jhatabhandis) also dont rely on what others have said, rather they should first read the rehit maryada and how it was formed.

Sorry one of my references did not appear properly it was: 'Panja sahalia ithaas' Bhai V jee i right, most of points made on the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada is hearsay. Also I have just written a brief overview of how the meetings took place, if we do research we can find alot more which will help us understand alot of these misconceptions which are being spread. I also think before 1920s the gurdwaras were controlled by the mahants. The SGPC was created to free our gurdwaras and people gave shahidi.

Bhai Sahib I suggest you go to the SGPC daftar and look at their books which records what was happening daily during those times. If Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee was not present then why is name printed (Each person who entered meetings was recorded and the discussions are also in the log book). Also why did Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee not protest the publication of his name? Atleast he could have protested that he was not consulted. Word of mouth is not enough to convince people, one person is saying one and historical references are saying another. It's like the Taksal and Sant HAri Singh Randhava saying no bindia can be pronounced in Gurbani when Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh jees book shows that they should be pronounced. The same Hari Singh Randhawa (unless ive confused him with someone else) states 'I dont no where they have started putting these bindia in (this was in his khata i heard at the gurdwara, sorry I have no recording). So sorry I do not listen to SAnt Hari Singhs opinions when facts are shown otherwise. Even if someone is not present in a meeting, I would why people make such a fuss, has that individual become the panth? SGPC is "panthic" maryada? since when? Akaal Takht Sahib Jathedars have not signed off on ANY maryada to state a single maryada as 'panthic'.. during the 1920's many prominent Sikh leaders walked out on the discussions because some people starting making so many changes that were not agreed with... therefore, it cannot be considered a panthic maryada... Akaal Takht Sahib has not 'endorsed' that maryada, meaning, it has not stated that maryada as panthic maryada.. even some of the other takhts go by different maryada then Akaal Takht Sahib.. i have a question...before 1920, how many times was there a 'meeting' like this arranged to discuss a 'panthic' maryada? Bhai SAhib jee if you write a letter the Akal Takhat, they will clear your confusion by stating the rehit maryada is the panthic Sikh rehit maryada. Please look at the following books: Darpan Sikh rehit maryada (Gurbaksh Singh Gulshan). The jathedar of Akal Takhat Sahib jee has written on page 11 slanajog karag. So he accepts this rehit maryada as being the panthic one, if not why has he written the foreword? Sri Akal Takhat Sahib ati Jathedhar Sahiban (Singh Sahib Giani Kirpal Singh sabka jathedhar Akal Takhat Sahib jee) Please go to page 99 right at the bottom of the page it is clearly written: 'on the 2nd of April 1958 I was appointed head granthi of Sri Harmander Sahib, Sri Amritsar. I approached Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh jee to ask him that 'our Jhatas maryada is different to that of the maryada at Sri Harmander Sahib je, what is your advise for me to do? Sant jee replied, 'You should follow the maryada which has been placed at Sri Harmander Sahib, because this maryada is the maryada of the Panth, the other maryada is mere our jhatas maryada, You should do palana of the PAnthic Rehit maryada. Note that on page 100 Singh Sahib jee says that Sant jee always supported this notion which he had told the Singh Sahib. Sant baba Gurbachan Singh jee also used the words panthic Sikh Rehit maryada. Singh Sahib jee was then made head granthi on the 2nd of April 1958. There was no maryada in 1920, it was only a karara, the Panthic rehit maryada was part of a process where dicussions would take place and then finally written down as a karara. It was only after the 1930s that the Rehit maryada was published not in the form of a karara for the first time 15th of March 1927 The JAtehdar sahib of Akal Takhat Sahib (Bhai Teja Singh jee) presented the list of Bidwan In that list includes the 4 Jathedhar Sahiban (Damdama sAhib was not a Takhat then). Look at Panja <admin-profanity filter activated> ithass Page 41-42. You can go to SPGC office sign in to read the book. In 1927 Babu Teja Singh Basour was excommunicated, according to my research he was the only one thrown out of the committee. Also not that Giani Sundar Singh jee Bhindra was present in meetings until he passed away in 1930. Until 1933 there were still discussions regarding the Panthic rehit maryda, on the 30th of December 1933 a panthic smallen at Sri Akal Takhat Sahib was called. Go to Page 111-114 Panja <admin-profanity filter activated> Ithas, when I looked at the records I counted 170 people at this meeting alone. This book by the way can be seen by all. After 2 days discussion continued however the Singh Sahiban decided that still more discussions should continue, Also not that Hazoor sahib jee was also represented in the meetings. For the next 3 years meetings took place. The karara was passed on the 1/8/1936. On the 12/10/1936 Akal takhat Jathedar Singh Sahib giani Mohan Singh jee along with other gursikhs (including the head granthi Sri harmander Sahib jee) under mata number 149 passed the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada, these people signed the mata. Until 1945 Changes were made by the Panthic rehit maryada by the panth which included the Akal Takhat Sahiban.

Bhai Sahib jee, the SGPC are the publishers, its not there rehit maryada, rather it’s the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada. If I write a book and Punjabi University publish it, it does not become there book, they are the mere publishers. Ironically a lot of the SGPC gurdwaras do not follow the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada, it should have been adopted by all. Veer jee you are right, look at the people who were involved in the adoption of the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada, people like Bhai Randhir Singh jee, Bhai Vir Singh jee, Kahn Singh Nabha jee, Prof Sahib Singh jee, Akali Kaur Singh jee and many Sants

The Sikh Panth has become Taksal and Nanaksar? Each jhata has there flaws, why? Because the Khalsa panth was created and not jhatas. There are differences between Nanaksar and Taksal, go to Nanaksar gurdwara and firstly you will not see a nishan sahib. Lineage does not mean anything when the panth Khalsa is in question. We have created a precedent, and that is to challenge the panth and the Akal Takhat, rather we should have shown respect and where we were unsure, questions should be referred and not forcing the issue. It can be seen that a panthic samallen only concerns a select group of people (ironically that does not include the Akal Takhat, what next?). Our disrespect to the Akal Takhat has just reduced ifs mehma to a joke. There is a single rehit maryada which was formed with consultation for all jhatas. The only purpose of amending the existing PAnthic Sikh rehit maryada would be if all jhatas were dissolved and we all conform to the Panthic Sikh rehit maryada. All I can see is the Sikh panth being further split. God help us.

Rather than changing surnames, the best way to tackle the problem is to keep our surnames and marry out of caste, make it a social norm that Amritdharis marry out of caste. Maybe other will then also follow. Singh or Kaur as a surname will still not stop the problem, people are to clever, all they have to do is go to your pind and find out what caste you are. And people are so sad and obsessed with caste, they will do these things. In my opinion having surnames is not something which should be frowned upon, we see in gurbani surnames being used, like: Bhallai amardas gun teri, tere upma tohi ban ayai. And also: Bhetai Sodhi patshah Ramdas satguru khahvai I think keeping surnames and challenging society directly by having a Sandhu marry a Bhogal or Bhatia for example, will just show society that these people do not give a damn. It’s a direct challenge rather than hiding from the issue. In India the problem will always exist unless this direct challenge is taken. Other than professionals of the following groups, the occupation of the rest, indicate their castes for example: Jats are farmers, Takhan do woodwork, bhapa have shops etc. In the future, maybe Sikhs in countries outside of India will not have problems with caste when it comes to marriage, but with people marrying out of Religion, hence the problem will fade for Sikhs outside of India. I also think Khalsa was the name given to the Panth and not an individual. I’m not attacking people for changing their names to Khalsa, it’s just my opinion. Individually we were called Singh and Kaur. I think these names have a more of a deeper meaning than mere fighting caste systems, but are actually virtues.