H4RPAL
-
Posts
830 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Calendar
Forums
Posts posted by H4RPAL
-
-
Quality is poor, and its hard to listen to, but well worth it. Great work by all the people involved, and the guests.
0 -
Which Hindi Translation? Theres a Hindi Translitteration at www.srigranth.org
0 -
Sounds good to me!
0 -
Just came across this article regarding Kar Sewa of the Akal Takhat after 1984 on Amritpal Singh's site. It really is an interesting read, and presents information regarding the views of some writers regarding the Kar Sewa. Interestingly the authors quoted are in many cases those who can be considered as highly critical of Sant Jarnail Singh Ji etc and their actions.
Would be interesting to see how this article would contrast another thats been in the works for a very long time on another site.
0 -
"(these are flowers in my garden )"
That line kind of suggests that at least these recent posted flower ones are not from the net. Dunno, maybe I'm wrong, and she emant she had the same types of flowers in her garden.
Anyway, amazing photos regardless, but especially if you took them yourself.
0 -
-
-
-
I am surprised to see people are saying bhai Amrit singh is not akj. He is from akj background. Everyone knows it in his city. in this foto he is seen with other ajk people. This is his childhood picture. He is playing gatka with karam singh of akj. Other two senior akj men are seen in the picture. Akj children are seen in this foto. These children are fathers and mothers of their children now. All are akj.
it is funny that bhai Armit Singh has critise nihang dress but in this picture he is in nihang dress.
Do you assume its admirable for people to form opinions and stick with them for life, even if they later doubt these opinions through research? Is there no place for learning in your world? You are supportive of Niddar Singh as you previously disclosed in some posts, did you criticise him when he changed his views from blue kaccherras being the traditional type to white kaccherras being those worn by the Khalsa of old??
Is it not acceptable to you that people can research and change their views? Also, does Amritpal Singh really "criticise" Nihang dress as such? Does he tell Nihangs not to wear it? Or is it simply the case he has researched historical texts etc and found cases that seem to contradict popular opinion?
Not many people have the time and resources available to do any research into these old texts, and thus tend to believe biased accounts read elsewhere. I think its far better that we extract some contrary thinking from these sources too, so we who are not able to do this research ourselves can develop a more balanced view.
All I see Amritpal Singh doing is making information from old texts accesible for people so they can make their decisions. There is no influencing or imposing views on others. Readers are presented extracts and explanations, but are left with a decision to make for themselves regarding whether such information supersedes their previous beliefs. Thats the way I see his work, maybe I'm reading it wrong or something.
0 -
Ummmm, no I dont. And what's up with the CAPS?
0 -
www.srigranth.org ahs been updated, and the new site is simply amazing, even better than before!!!
You can now look at different english translations, different roman and all sorts of other neat stuff.
Theres Gurmukhi Teekas now too, and Punjabi options.
0 -
taken from http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=61042&t=61042
Blue *IS* A Khalsa Colour
I applaud Amritpal Singh Amrit for his analysis of Snatani practices. But as they say, we shouldn’t, "throw the baby out with the bath-water". I was concerned to see him try to dismiss Blue as a Khalsa colour.
Blue has traditionally been worn by the Khalsa along with orange and white. Black is also acceptable but became popular later on.
I will try to give a preliminary reply to his article here
Muslims & Blue
I and some other Singhs were discussing Amrit’s article on blue clothes and one Singh asked why “neel bastar” were described as being Muslim colours and why the Khalsa now wears neela.
Muslims are not discerned by blue clothes now. In the past Muslim dress has always been thought to have been green (haideri) and Muslim Ghazis are known to wear Green clothing. Why does Gurbani say blue?
A Singh from Kashmir (Poonch) was sitting with us and he said that where he is from, the locals call green “neela”. They call green chilis not “haree mirch” but “neelee mirch” they call green grass “neela ghaa”.
This explains it. For people of that area (mainly Muslims), neela meant not blue, but green.
What Did Guru Gobind Singh Wear?
There has been an attempt to say that Guru Gobind Singh jee only wore blue when leaving the forest in Macchiwara.
The oldest account of Guru Gobind Singh jee and the formation of the Khalsa is the Bhatt Vehis. What do the Bhatt Vehis say about what Guru Sahib wore when the Khalsa was created?
The Bhatt Vehi "Multani Sindhi Pargana Thanaysar" is described by Piara Singh Padam as the oldest account of this event :
>>>>>>>>>>>
"Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, tenth Guru, son of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji, in the year 1752 on Tuesday-the Vaisakhi day-gave Khande ki pahul to five Sikhs and surnamed them as Singhs. First Daya Ram Sopti, Khatri resident of Lahore stood up. Then Mohkam Chand Calico printer of Dawarka; Sahib Chand barber of Zafrabad city; Dharam Chand Jawanda Jat of Hastinapur; Himmat Chand water carrier of Jagannath stop up one after the other. All were dressed in blue and he himself also dressed the same way. Hookah, halaal, hajaamat, haraam, tikka, janeu, dhoti were prohibited. Socialisation with the descendants of Prithi Chand, followers of Dhirmal and Ram Rai, clean shaven people and Masands was prohibited. All were given Kangha, Karad, Kesgee, Karhaa, and Kacheraa. All were made Keshdhaaree. Everyone’s place of birth was told to be Patna, of residence as Anandpur. Rest, Guru’s deeds are known only to the Guru. Repeat Guru Guru, the Guru will help everywhere
>>>>>>>>>>
So blue was the colour the Khalsa was first given according to the oldest source.
Amritpal Singh has said:
>>>>>>>>
Furthermore, when Guru Gobind Singh Ji left for his heavenly abode, he was also in saffron ('Kesree') attire. 'Gur Bilaas Paatshaahee 10' written by Bhai Kuyer Singh clearly mentions the colour of Guru Ji's clothing, when he left for the 'Sachkhand': -
Aap Snaan Karyo Sah Kesan, Kesree Khyom Patam Pahraaye.
From the foregoing analysis of various texts, we can conclude that Guru Gobind Singh Ji wore clothing of various colours and that to assert that he wore only blue attire after the inauguration of the Khalsa in 1699 is wholly incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No one denies that kesri is an acceptable colour. Punj Pyaaray today generally are all dressed in kesri robes. Kesri is considered a royal colour. The fact that Guru Gobind Singh jee was wearing kesri only says that kesri is an acceptable colour for the Sikhs as well, not that blue is not special or unacceptable (as the article seems to suggest).
What would surprise me would be if Amritpal Singh could show me any reference to Dashmesh Pita jee wearing something besides Blue, White, Kesri or Black. That would be a find.
Clearly, Blue was a special and acceptable colour of the Khalsa. Guru Gobind Singh jee being royalty, wore kesri as well (as our royal Punj Pyaaray still do today). This is not a surprise, but to be expected.
Puraatan Sikhs and Colours
Amritpal Singh has provided the quotation about the dress of the sahibzadas:
>>>>>>>
the Sahibzadas were in fact in saffron (Kesaree) clothing: -
Kesaree Ang Paushaak Mahaabar, Moorat Pekh Kahai Eh Baanee.
>>>>>>>
As I said before, Kesree is the royal colour for the Sikhs. It is no shock that the princely Sahibzadas would have worn this colour.
What I do take issue with is Amrit’s next statement:
>>>>>>>>>>
Bhai Sukha Singh speaks of Sahibzada Ajit Singh Ji, the eldest son of Guru Gobind Singh Ji being called into the holy court of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. He comes to Guru Ji and Bhai Sukha Singh describes his attire as consisting of red ('Arun') shoes which were shining on Sahibzada Ajit Singh Ji's feet, a red shawl, a red shirt and a red turban which graceful upon his head. The original lines read as follows: -
>>>>>>>>>
The colour red has been forbidden amongst the Sikhs since the start. It is not an acceptable colour for Sikhs to wear.
Bhai Daya Singh rehitnama tells us that those “who use colour prepared from red ochre or the kusumbha flower” are tankhaiyas. It says plainly, “Bastr kusunbhay na pehray” or “Do not wear clothing which is coloured red. ”(verse 23).
Bhai Prehlad Singh rehitnama also tells us, “soohay anbar pehn kar jo naasay nasvar…” “He who wears red clothing, or inhales nasavar up his nose will be beaten about the head and thrown into hell” (verse 12).
So how is it that this description of Baba Ajeet Singh jee came about?
It must be asked, Who was Sukha Singh? The fact is that he NEVER SAW Sahibzada Baba Ajeet Singh jee. On what basis is he giving such a detailed description besides his own imagination? Sukha Singh was born in 1768 and wrote this in 1797. After a hundred years, how would he know what Baba jee was wearing? This is clearly his own literary imagination at work, not a statement of fact.
Amrit has also given a description of Baba Gurbaksh Singh and the Singhs with him who became Shaheeds. He quotes Pracheen Panth Prakash as following:
>>>>>>>>>
Giani Gian Singh writes in 'Panth Prakash' that Bhai Gurbaksh Singh wore saffron clothing, when he went to fight: -
Tan Dhare Bastar Kesree, Dastaar Ooch Sajaaye.
(He wore saffron robes and tied a high turban).
In 'Pracheen Panth Parkash', Ratan Singh Bhangu speaks of the colours worn by other Sikh companions of Bhai Gurbaksh Singh Ji:
Kisai Pushaak Thee Neelee Sajaayee.
Kinai Set, Kisai Kesaree Rangvaayee.
>>>>>>>>>
This is no big finding. It goes with what has always been known. White, Orange and Blue are all Khalsa colours. It doesn’t say here that they wore green or red. Only Orange, Blue and White. This is in complete accordance with Khalsa Tradition.
I’m not much moved by the descriptions of Singhs in only kacherras and blankets. Singhs in those times had very little. Depending on the condition of the weather and their own economic condition, it is possible they wore very little. But that does not go to say that Sikh dress is no dress at all. Clearly this dress was functional for the circumstances. Even today some bana-wearing Singhs will wear only a fatoohee (short kurta) when they are training for gatka or some other circumstance, but that doesn’t mean this alone in isolation is the dress.
Clearly when the went to Guru Sahib's darbar they were not dressed in just a kacherra.
Proof of Special Nature of Blue Dress
Blue dress is not something recently invented for the Khalsa. As mentioned before, Bhatt VEhis tell us that Guru Sahib himself dressed the Khalsa in Blue.
Furthermore, the vaar “Vah Vah Gobind Singh Aapay Gur Chela” we all sing, tells us about the creation of the Khalsa as well.
inj pMQ clwieE Kwlsw Dir qyj krwrw]
isr kys Dwir gih KVg ko sB dust pCwrw]
sIl jq kI kC phir pkVo hiQAwrw]
sc Pqy bulweI gurU kI jIiqE rx Bwrw]
sB dYq Airin ko Gyr kir kIcY pRhwrw]
qb sihjy pRgitE jgq mY guru jwp Apwrw]
ieauN aupjy isMG BujMgIey nIl AMbr Dwrw]
See the last line. It says that “thus the Bhujangi Singhs were created, dressed in blue”.
The puritan Rehitnamas also tell us that Blue is a Khalsa colour. Bhai Daya Singh’s rehtinama tells us that a Khalsa colour is “surmaiee” or dark blue (verse 23). He goes on further to say , “So Akali rooop hai neel bastar dherai” or “An Akali is known by the blue garments he wears”. Clearly blue clothing was a special Khalsa colour!
Rattan Singh Bhangu in Pracheen Panth Parkash writes about the differences that lead to the split between Baba Banda Singh and the Tat-Khalsa. In regards to the clothing issue, he writes that Baba Banda Singh wanted his soldiers to wear red, which was unacceptable to the traditionally blue wearing Khalsa:
“nIl pihrn qy dUr krwXo] smrw sUhw sIs bMDwXo]
meaning, “he tried to wean them away from blue. He made them tie red on their heads” The Khalsa would not give up blue and could not wear red, so a split occurred. This also flies against Amrit's assertion that the Tat-Khalsa only took on blue after the split. They clearly were wearing blue before.
Thus you can see that the Khalsa did indeed wear blue clothing and considered it their “special” colour, not just one colour amongst many others.
Blue is a traditional Khalsa colour and we should feel proud to wear it. Blue isn't the only acceptable colour. Orange, White and Black are fine as well. But I do think that Blue was perhaps the one most Khalsa preferred. Just because some Nihang Singhs do corrupt practices like Bhang does not mean we should dismiss everything about them. They do have many traditions preserved like bana, sarbloh, gatka, etc. These should be appreciated.
I have not written this to be a comprehensive article in support of blue. That would require a lot more research and that is something I don’t have much time for at the moment, but I did want to give an answer to the article on blue clothing.
.
http://www.amritworld.com/sanatani/proposed.html
In the proposed topics section, Amritpal Singh had listed "Guru Gobind Singh Ji in blue dress" and "Guru Ji's army and blue dress" as categories. This suggests he has more to say regarding the colour blue.
0 -
-
People certainly do, but then some other people cite from historical texts in an unbiased manner, simply stating what is said within them to make such information accessible for those who cannot otherwise get access to it. These people are not to be confused with those who quote selectively from such texts to further their own agendas.
Read Amritpal Singh Ji's articles and decide for yourself which category he fits into.
0 -
gur fateh ji
i was at the gurdwara today and i was in my blue banaa(cholaa) and blue dastaar and a singh came up to me and said that sikhs should not wear the colour blue as guru gobind singh ji said theat the khalsa isnt allowed to wear blue, has any 1 got any written evidence that the colour blue can be worn (e.g guru granth saihib ji or other bani or rehatnamas) the singh said that a khalsa should only wear white clothes and not blue
gupt singh ===
The guy appears to have been a Namdhari, as the views expressed seem to be those that Namdharis hold. I asked a Namdhari about this once, and he told me they believe Guru Gobind Singh Ji called himself the destroyer of those that wear blue ( ie Moghuls ), and hence they make white their coulour of choice.
0 -
Palamrinders comments don't seem as dubious as you make them out to be ( I might be wrong). The section of your article shows lentils etc are an adequate replacement for meat, as they are classed in the same category.
He then suggests lentils have lower fat ( not neccessarily using the article as a basis for this view, as this issue is not commented upon at all within it) and as such in his opinion he sees them as superior to meat.
If you read the post again, he quotes "That is true.... lentils are equivalent to meat BUT with less fat..... So i guess they are superior to meat which has plenty of other disadvantages...."
The only bit I sense him quoting from the article is regarding the notion that lentils are a substitute to meat, the rest I gathered was from his own opinions, and the last comment certainly was an opinion based one.
Perhaps he could shed some light as to what exactly was suggested by his comment.
No,
What the article is saying is eat foods of all these types with less fat!
Thank you I can read! The article is not suggesting eat every food they give you, as you are aware, they give you a selection as an example so people can choose. Now, the earlier poster was suggesting ( in my opinion- he hasn't clarified ) that from the list given, and the statement that lower fat options should be taken , he would class lentils as better than meat, as they more succesfully fulfil the criteria the article describes ( ie they are in that class of food, and are lower fat [according to the poster] ).
Like I said in my opinion I think you mistook his comments as trying to outsmart you, when I don't believe this was the case, so there was no need for your statement about him trying to decieve you, like there was no need for you explain the blindingly obvious to me.
Maybe take a cooler view at these things, and don't think people are always arguing with you. Not everyone has a personal feud with you, or is trying to catch out your English reading abilities.
EDIT: (BTW the post by Palamrinder was posted while i was writing, so i was unaware of his stance during this message)
0 -
Palamrinders comments don't seem as dubious as you make them out to be ( I might be wrong). The section of your article shows lentils etc are an adequate replacement for meat, as they are classed in the same category.
He then suggests lentils have lower fat ( not neccessarily using the article as a basis for this view, as this issue is not commented upon at all within it) and as such in his opinion he sees them as superior to meat.
If you read the post again, he quotes "That is true.... lentils are equivalent to meat BUT with less fat..... So i guess they are superior to meat which has plenty of other disadvantages...."
The only bit I sense him quoting from the article is regarding the notion that lentils are a substitute to meat, the rest I gathered was from his own opinions, and the last comment certainly was an opinion based one.
Perhaps he could shed some light as to what exactly was suggested by his comment.
0 -
http://www.amritworld.com/sanatani/sanatan.pdf
http://www.amritworld.com/sanatani/satyuga.pdf
I've just noticed two more sections have been added since this post has been updated.
0 -
"Also, is the sperm killed really quick?? the fluid in the semen would maintain them for some while would they not? (Again, I'm not a biologist, so couldnt tell you)."
Yes the sperm is killed very quickly, hurry and make it to the sixth grade so you can learn it :lol:
By the way, I love the respectful way you debate on forums, very admirable indeed."
I hope you love it as much as I loved your sarcasm :umm: Lighten up relax, take a deep breathe and say OOOMMM! I can see it got to you cause you keep repeating it, lol sorry bhai sorry! About the story, hope to see it, but hey miracles do happen. As for Brother moorakh, you are alot more intelligent than me, you posted that sakhi, and yes I agree with that. However I am not at the level, so I do need reasoning in order to strengthen my belief :umm:
What did you do? look at your own with a microscope mr science buff??? lol- just messing bro, and take it easy, I don't need to OOOMMM lol, I just kept repeating it for jokes. Sorry if my humour is of poor quality, maybe they'll teach me some better material in the sixth grade.
Take it easy bro, we're both not really the most serious of people judging by this thread. Anyways better be off now, gotta pray for a miracle to make sure i get into 6th grade, but hey, they do happen innit.
0 -
"Now, that would lead us to conclude that in terms of daya, or compassion for animals, free range eggs are the most vaiable for consumption. However, many would protest around the afct, again highlighted byy animal welfare societies such as PETA taht in free range hens, issues such as some hens being bullied by more dominant ones etc exist (the pecking order argument etc, that the keen biologists on this thread will know more about, unlike my unfortuntely uneducated self). Again, more information on this can be found on animal welfare sites such as PETA, alongside information regarding the mistreatment of animals in the dairy industry."
Thats a complaint against nature. If they were in the wild they would have the same tendencies, theyre animals thats what they do, we cant go and tell them "dont bully that hen." :lol:
"And now onto the interesting part of the post, I came across an article in the British Newspapers around a year ago, where Tesco were selling some specail breed of hens eggs, which if I remember correctly have a different colour to normal hens eggs. These eggs were free range. Now, one chappie brought these eggs, and somehow deduced it had been fertilised (can't recall how), and as such hatched it and voila, out came a special funky coloured hen."
I find that hard to believe. Say the egg was fertilized, it would have been collected proccessed and shipped, all in the cold, if the egg does not recieve warmth, (a hen sitting on it), the fetus will not develop. So after having the eggs sitting in the firdge for who knows how long, and travelling all that distance, this man brought it home and hatched it, wow. A hen lays an egg every 18-26 hours, regardless is he was mounted. About the semen question, I apologize I thought maybe you were just asking a silly question. Semen ejaculates from a males <admin-profanity filter activated>, and egg from a females ovary. Thats a big difference, and yes if you want to eat semen go ahead! After it enterers the open air the tiny microscopic sperm in it is killed pretty quickly, so I never said dont eat rooster sperm, just thought it was a silly question, thats all. :umm:
The bullying is natural, yes! Thats why I said according to daya and terms of compassion this would be the most acceptable eggs to be eating!! BUt remember, perhaps in the wild we do not ahve the situation of these chiken ina defined area etc, so where they are protected from carnivores (to some extent lol) on a poultry farm, they are not so well guarded against each other, as perghaps in the wild they would run away from the big bad bully chickens- I dunno, I'm not an expert, so can't say.
Now, the story is true, will find that article for you as soon as I can. I know I have a print copy somewhere, will get looking. If I cant scan it (Have no scanner) will post you a copy so taht you can verify the details, or will try get someone else to scan it for you. (unfortunately am rather busy with my fifth grade studies at the moment, so could be a while)
BTW regarding the rooster semen, I never said I wanted to eat it, I was suggesting it was rather disgusting, so is it so hard to see why some see eating eggs equally as disgusting???
Again, its down to personal choices, some would say yes, others no, just as some may delight in feasting on rooster juices!
Also, is the sperm killed really quick?? the fluid in the semen would maintain them for some while would they not? (Again, I'm not a biologist, so couldnt tell you).
By the way, I love the respectful way you debate on forums, very admirable indeed.
0 -
haha i guess a response cud be to that is
"but then the men not covering their legs cud cause the women to go round raping the men!"
But im not saying this never happens, but its rare. Not as rare as u think it wud be on a global scale, but still rare.
I agree thou with All Info jee. Coz it is now just common practice. And girls are generally more sensible than guys. Have to admit that.
Sorry if that offends neone!
I dont getttssss it. How does a guy get raped?? Doesn't his something has to do something before something can happen, and if the something is responsive, then surely it can't be rape coz like he's obviously feeling something.
This obviously only refers to when the women are suggested to go around doing the raping as Nama Singh suggests could be used as a counter argument.
0 -
My apologies in advance for slightly shifting this debate and adding a few comments here from the mind of a 12 year old.
Let us for a second move to the issue of compassion or daya. In Jap Ji Sahib it states ( apologies for the one liner, I know people don't like them here as they are usually taken out of context, but as the bani is familiar, I feel its use can be justified here):
" Dhaul Dharam Daya ka poot "
The mythical bull which supposedly holds the world in place is actually Dharam, the child of compassion (daya).
Now onto the issue of daya without going into a what you should and shouldn't eat debate, as that is nota judgment I would choose to make for other people. In terms of compassion, we can see caged hens live in appaling conditions, again something I will not elaborate on, just visit your nearest poultry farm or a website such as PETA for more information on this. Features sucha s cramped spaces to maximise farm capacities and reduce energy loss through movement are some of the features of the fun packed life of a battery cage hen. Anyway, most will be aware of such arguments, and as such there is no need to go into them here.
Now, that would lead us to conclude that in terms of daya, or compassion for animals, free range eggs are the most vaiable for consumption. However, many would protest around the afct, again highlighted byy animal welfare societies such as PETA taht in free range hens, issues such as some hens being bullied by more dominant ones etc exist (the pecking order argument etc, that the keen biologists on this thread will know more about, unlike my unfortuntely uneducated self). Again, more information on this can be found on animal welfare sites such as PETA, alongside information regarding the mistreatment of animals in the dairy industry .
And now onto the interesting part of the post, I came across an article in the British Newspapers around a year ago, where Tesco were selling some specail breed of hens eggs, which if I remember correctly have a different colour to normal hens eggs. These eggs were free range.
Now, one chappie brought these eggs, and somehow deduced it had been fertilised (can't recall how), and as such hatched it and voila, out came a special funky coloured hen.
The reason for this? Apparently some free range farms ( not sure if this is the case in the UK ) have roosters kept with free range hens, as they serve some purpose (not quite sure of the exact details, but something to do with hormones I assume, and probably something to do with influencing the egg laying behaviour of hens).
Now anyway, I was just wondering if this is the case in the UK too? If free range eggs, which (it would appear within the confines of my limited intellect) can be deemed as more compassionate eating than those of battery cage robo-hens, could also be at times fertilised due to the presence of roosters in free rannge poultry farms.
Can anyone shed light on this subject? I will try to find the article, as I kept a copy somehwere as it was quite intriguing. Also, I apologise for any mistakes in this thread, but the general gist of the story is accurate (ie guy bought free range eggs from Tesco, and one hatched into a chick when he incubated). Also, my apologies for answering nothing, but asking much. I wish I had the knowledge to add more constructively to this thread, perhaps with the grace of Waheguru after I have completed the sixth grade ( whatever that is ) this may be the case.
0 -
sorry- double post
0 -
Its a serious question, and not a counter argument. Judging by your logic, rooster semen would fall into the same category as eggs, and as such is fit for consumption, unless you find the thought rather disgusting, and if the latter is true, perhaps you can see where some non-egg eaters are coming from.
0
shrup harpy me shtooooooopid
, besides K Singh's extract is reffering to males only apparently if the translation is accurate lol.
Chinese Gursikh Video
in POLITICS | LIFESTYLE
Posted
Yeah! We demand the first edition! One video-darshan of the D-W Baba (Jee) is insufficient.