apnepart2

It is recorded history that KGB was heavily involved in election process in India. Also Soviet has been the only reliable ally of India till date. So obviously you are perceived according to the company you have. Russia is claiming parts of Canadian territory in the Arctic. Lets see what India has to say about that.

alls well that ends well. if their children end up total Sikh i have no problem. although i cannot marry anyone whos not sikh.

yesterday hukamnama from guru sahib was as follows summary a lot of people try to show their knowledge of ved kateb and try to appear all knowing about god. they waste not only their but others time. hey my inner soul try and sit for a while calmly and concentrate your thoughts upon the lord with steady state for a second. you will realise everything.

Not only that but Sikhs will also vanish then as Sikhs are only of Guru Nanak. This is directly contrary to what Guru Gobind Singhji said he has established Khalsa panth as per command of vahiguru. Was he lying? Was he founding time limited panth? People who killed and banished Buddhists from india know they cannot force Sikhs through use of Arms, so another tactic needs to be adopted. Also times have changed and Govts want end of Sikhi for their own gains.

If sikh theology was that simple, any tom, d ick, harry would became authority in sikhism..... and there would be no need of so called elevated 'sants', babas, etc. Before listening to the people to who preach what Gurus said lets hear what the Guru himself told a Pandit who said Vedas are there so theres no need of Guru ki Bani. Guruji replied- Veds are are like water hidden deep in earth. A lot of effort and difficult work is rquired to take it out. And even then only some of the water comes out and only a 'cherished' and 'priviledged' few can enjoy it. Whereas Guru bani is like Rain Water. It rains on everyone - equally.

Maybe Vishunu sees himself as Supreme God. He is unaware of God by the way as per Japji sahib. God gets revealed only through Naam from true Guru - Guru Nanak. Think about this when Gods like Vishnu Brahma Shiv Krishna couldnt realise God what will happen to those who follow them. And about Shakti of Vahiguroo, theres no bigger shakti than Khalsa revealed by Guru Gobind Singh. Sadly our millions of brother & sisters have not been able to realise who & what they are.

there is a difference between ਬਿਸਨ & ਬਿਸਨੁ . further when bisan is used alongwith brahm and maheshar it becomes clear who bisan is. what are your views about the OM of hindus? isnt it one supreme power? also before establishing anything do we need to look at what archeologists in India have established?

I admire Ram but i firmly believe he killed Ravan by deceit. He killed even Bali by deceit. Deceit is integral part of these Kings turned into Gods. Whereas our Gurus never indulged in cheating even once. This is what differentiates them. Also Gurus preached killing of 'ego' as foremost. Ram banished Sita from his home for Ego. Before celebrating Death of Ravan ask yourself this - are you as enlightened as Ravan?

veerji the day i have to depend on 'ram' i would better be dead.

waheguruji.

Dalip Singh was deeply in debt in his later life. To gather money and perhaps to reclaim lost glory he tried to play the 'Sikh Rule' & 'oh i am your prince from heaven' card and failed miserably. Dont forget it was the same treacherous Sikh regiment of Ranjit Singh who helped defeat the so called first war of Indian Independence (1857). The fact is India would have got independence from British if the Sikhs had not supported the British in 1857. Perhaps we should ask ourselves why the Army of Ranjit Singh thought of supporting the people who took the Kingdom from his Son. The toadies of British were the Khalsa Army, not Singh Sabha. (this is not my personal opinion, only info from unbiased 'older' and 'original' historical sources ) by the way if some descedent of Ranjit tried to play that card again i will totally oppose it and i am not anyones toady, just democratic .

modern saroop of devi. http://www.apnicommunity.com/mata-ki-chowki/

i dont think the blog post mentions anything about Guru Gobind Singh believing Durga as God. The point i am trying to understand is that whether the power of Khalsa was derived directly from God or via Durga Devi Shakti etc. Keep in mind all and many Devis are from one Main One Devi Shakti which is present in everything as per Hindu mat. I think we may be unnecessarily criticising the blogger as his writings are obviously based on earlier sources and he is trying to project Devi as source of power of Khalsa ? If Devi can exist in form of Kirpaan for Sikhs it can also exist as another form for Hindus? Edited

So is Sri Sahib worshipped as a form of Devi? Who gives strength to Sikhs? Akal Purakh or Devi ? What is the date of these historical sources to be exact? One by One.

Well Done Topic Closed .

Dhan Dhan Satguru Maharaj Guru Nanak Devji was not like these fake devi devte. If this picture of Nirankar Saroop Guru Nanak was painted in a Gurdwara/e then the painter was not true Sikh, he was a brahmin in disguise of Sikh. It was malicious acts of individuals with malicious intent which prompted great Sikhs of Guru to come together and start Singh Sabha. I myself have not seen any such picture in any Gurdwara and rest assured if i did i will remove it immediatly whatever the consequence. Guru Nanak was not worshipper of Ik Onkaar, He gave the world the truth about Ik Onkaar, Ik Onkaar is in this world of Guru Nanak. Sikhs of Guru believe only in Guru and the unseen, unborn Nirankaar. These Devi Devte are for fateless wretched souls who will burn in hell forever while the Guru will guide and save his Sikh from jamdoots (including Devi or whatever). The Devi and other stuff is for lost souls who are not blessed by Guru, and Sikhs of Guru are not one of them.

does the passage eulogise Khanda then?

I am not a fan of Sarna but i find this one sided mission quite funny. Maybe you are based only in Delhi then it is fine as you are limited but only yesterday an MLA of Badal beat up full GurSikh reporter of Ajit in Amritsar for clicking photos of his misuse of power. His Kesh were humiliated and his Turban was thrown in air, he was beaten by both by Akali MLA and his four gunmen. Obviously the Police which was present during the scene did nothing for fear of Badal Sarkar as there must be instructions from Badal himself not to interfere in MLA affairs.

sounds weird but as a kid i used to eat a lot of tree leaves esp safaida and tall grass found in fields in punjab. wen my mum found out i got chitter parade.

Bhai Santokh Singh in Suraj Granth says "He was not in accord with the Khalsa. Without the Gurus approval he started his own sect. He did not take Baptism of the dagger. He did not adopt the Sikh way of life (keeping 5 k's). He did not eat meat and drink wine and wear black clothes"

Interestingly, just before the BJP chief spoke, Akal Takht Jathedar, Giani Gurbachan Singh, had warned the community against "distortions in the history" showing Banda Singh Bahadur in bad light and present him in the 'bairagi (ascetic) 'swaroop' instead of the Amritdhari Sikh that he had become. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Now-Gadkari-angers-Sikhs/articleshow/5932877.cms

GPS you have lost the plot bro ! I can only feel sorry for you. May Maharaj give you some sense. Thats all i will say. Waheguru.

Here is a summary of Banda as per O P Ralhan in 'The great Gurus of Sikhs'. There is no doubt that Banda became a disciple of Guru Gobind Singh, but he was not baptised according to his new ceremony of administering pahul. It appears that the Guru did so deliberately for certain reasons. 1. Banda was already known as Guru in Maharashtra and he commanded a large following. The Guru didnot want to enhance Banda's prestige as a religious leader of the Sikhs. 2. He was over-active and over–energetic (Bara-Tejdhari) , both in wordly life as well as in spiritual domain. The Guru was fully familiar with the role of the Masands. He has abolished that institution, and was prepared to create another masandso aggressive and powerful as Banda. 3. By making him a regular Sikh, the Guru feared lest he might claim Guruship in course of time. Without baptism the Khalsa would not accept him as the Guru. This actually happened. Ratan Singh Bhangu and Santokh Singh write later on Banda declared himself Guru, and the Khalsa rejected his claim.They insisted on his getting baptised and taking meat diet. Bhai Santokh Singh in Suraj Granth says "He was not in accord with the Khalsa. Without the Gurus approval he started his own sect. He did not take Baptism of the dagger. He did not adopt the Sikh way of life (keeping 5 k's). He did not ea tmeat and drink wine and wear black clothes" Gian Singh also says the Guru did not baptise him. KhazanSingh is of the view that "although Banda became his disciple the Guru did not deem it advisable to initiate him with pahul". He further observes : "the Guru selected and deputed Banda Bahadur, not as a successor and leader of the Khalsa, but as an avenging agent without admitting him into the Khalsa order with the usual initiation of Amrit baptism". Kartar Singh Kalaswala says "that the Guru presented Banda at the time of his departure to Panjab with his own special dagger which he always wore around his neck. At this his Khalsa shouted "We will never allow a non-Khalsa to have it. We will sacrifice ourlives after killing him." Further he says Banda "was neither a baptised Sikh nor a sehajdhari". Karam Singh, the well known Sikh historian, declares that "although Banda had come within the Sikh fold ,he had no time for taking Amrit". 4. Had banda been baptised, he would have never changed the Guru's salutuion from Wahgurji ka Khalsa Wahguruji ki Fateh to Fateh Darshan. 5. In case of him being a regular Sikh, a schism would not have taken place among his followers into Tatva Khalsa and Bandai Sikhs. 6. There are no contemporary or near contemporary sources to establish the fact that Banda had been baptised. All sources quoted in support of this assertion are one hundered years or more later.

Which sources state that Banda himself created Bandai Khalsa distinct from mainstream Khalsa? Did the 700 Sikhs who died with him at Delhi after capture declared Banda as their 11th Guru ? Banda used 'Fateh darshan' and he became outright outcaste? Nanaksar Samprada doesnt have Nishan sahibs what are your views about them? What about Taksal Maryada and AKJ Maryada and SGPC Maryada? which is right as they are not same? Atleast three of these four groups seem to have deviated from Gurmat? I respect your wisdom but this is like I AM GOD ! You think you can pass judgement Banda Bahadur?

I read in Ajit he compared himself with Banda Bahadur by calling himself 'Bandai khalsa' and Badal group as Tat Khalsa!!! As per news report only a few people were present and were mostly senior congress (India) leaders !