Gupt_Singh

jassika im not amritdhari but i KNOW for a fact that the day you take amrit will be one of the most spiritually powerful day of your life......ppl who have prepared properly will buzz for weeeks after taking amrit......before you knock it go learn about what is involved and ask ppl who have taken amrit for their opinion. i dont mind ppl sharing their opinions, but if you dont even know how amrit is prepared and the concepts behind it why give an opinion about it? sorry if ive come across as harsh but for me, to say anything to belittle amrit is like belittling the gurus.

becuz orange is a khalsa colour and red is not allowed u can say "we shudnt waste our time on tiny silly things" but the colour thing pops up time and time again in rehatnamas, enough to suggest that it was said quite obviously by guru gobind singh himself.

i think SGGS should be there only since it has been authored by the guru dasam granth was a scattered collection of works, collected together sarbloh granth has VERY obscure and dodgy origins....some may be bani but how can we be sure.......how manmat would it be to put some text which was by a regular guy next 2 that of guru jis, *IF* any of it is not really. dasam granth should definately be treated like gurbani - ie covered, not in a library at home with other books or whatever, but it should not be next to sggs on the same level because if that was the way it was ment to be, guru gobind singh would have done this. also some of the material in dasam granth should only be approached by very spiritually advanced and mature gursikhs, so doing daily hukamnamas from it (as some do i believe) is not a very good idea. i have heard some gurmukhs actually produce dhur kee bani........like straight from waheguru.........but we do not put this on the same level as SGGS.......becuz it does not have the same authoring and seal of approval.

according to rehatnamas a khalsa sikh is only supposed to wear the khalsa colours which are blue black orange white. for a phug this is usually just blue, black or orange, becuz if u wear white people will think u are a naamdhari lol it is especially important a phug is one of the khalsa colours. no greens, reds, pinks, spotty, flowery, etc lol the strangest thing i have seen is a nihang with a HUGE red phug. hmmmmm.

you are missing the point veer ji, Khalsa Raj will not come from up above, it will come from within us. It is not as Khalsa raj will come and we will change, We will have to change for Khalsa Raj to exist. yep n a start wud b to make sure we are all khalsas first

lol i heard those kharkoo singhs were jokers..........i heard a drunk nihung was walking (stumbling) about in a pind, so they set him on fire.........hahaha

why do men wear red phugs often at the wedding when red is not meant to be worn by khalsa sikhs, never mind for their phug?

ive just got a regular gutka....doesnt look taksali or sgpc or whatever......i dont think it has the longer rehras or chaupai but it definately has the anand.......anywhere online i can find the roman transliteration of the words (plllllzzzzzzzzzz) or the place in SGGS where i need to do extra paath from i do see this as quite important cuz i remember a sakhi of a gursikh who didnt do his jap sahib and as a result he got semi darshan from guru gobind singh - guru ji only looked at him then rode away........n he found it was cuz he hadnt dun his nitnem properly also when is tavprasad chaupai ment to be read? or r u meant to read kabiyo baach benti chaupai in the morning n evening (thats wat i thought)

on the broadway theres a shop called 'partap fashions'. i think the front is red but i cant remember you can get mal mal or rubia there. prices are OK.

in dec 2003 gurmeet singh aulakh (president of khalistan?) met president bushy and bush sed "i am aware of the sikh problem" lol......i dont know if thats a big step...........but atleast we are getting recognition. personally i DONT see a khalistan happening in the near future unless there is a fat war between pakistan and india (and sikhs cud snatch a bit of land during that) or some huuuuge pro khalistani stuff goes down this year (which really realistically i dont see happening on a big enough scale) my personal view nowadays is......true khalsa raj is gnna come before khalistan

seriously?????? hm mayb it is real then...... is this abdul whatever guy renamed to bhai ajmer singh? have you read the full accounts, becuz i believe his memoirs relate to the kesh/keski kakkar debate (cant remember which side it supports but the evidence was meant tobe strong).......got any idea where i cud get hold of hte full version singh?

having read a load of rehatnamas i got the overall impression from all of them that only gursikhs are to have the anand karaj ceremony. there are a number of rehatnamas saying never EVER EVER give your daughter/son to a MONNAH, it is like taking poison? something like that.....even after reading prem surag granth (super super bahman-ised wedding ceremony) it is still said both must be amritdhari. it even says the wife and hubby shud take khanda de pahul together (thats a fact for all u pro kirpan amrit nihangs out there ) i dont think a monnah can stand before the SGGS for their marraige because SGGS says follow the gurus teachings, do not be an apostate, and gurus say take amrit, one without the guru (ie one not blessed with deekhya) is destined for kumbhi i have no problems with a monnah getting married in a church, mosque, synagogue, or wherever else - if they arent following the primary rehat (take amrit) then why worry about lil things?

any credibility this story had just disappeared when i read the so called conditions the singhs were kept in i dont REALLY think that the babbars were chilling in some place where they got expensive deoderant etc..........they would be in some manky cell getting tortured...... so far this has looked *perfect* for hte hindian govt: the kharkoos are portrayed as "tantrum throwing", etc the indian govt are portrayed as low security, good conditions in jail they might have lost security credibility, but if they did escape, and they were realling living it up like the reports say, then how can sikhs complain that sikhs are tortured and held in bad conditions? it all seems to fishy. yes i know the hukamnama and it adds alot of weight 2 one side of the argument, but i think theres more holes in this escape theory than indira gundhees bullet riddled body

hm i cant really comment on whether or not the brits etc knew what they were doing........hmmmmmmmm maybe ur right. In the year 1932, at the time of the second Round Table Conference, the British Government through Sardar Bahadur Shivdev Singh, then a member of the Indian Secretary of State's Council, made an informal proposal to the Sikhs that if they dissociate finally with the Congress movement, they would be given such a decisive political weightage in Punjab, as would lead to their emergin a third independent element in India and the British transfer power to inhabitants of this subcontinent. Master Tara Singh promptly rejected the tempting offer. In the early winter of 1946, Cabinet Mission, while at Delhi communicated to the Sikhs through the Sardar Baldev Singh that if the Sikhs determined not to part company with India, the British Parliament, in their solicitude for the Sikh people, prepared to so frame the Independence Act of India, that in respect of the Sikh Homeland, wherever these areas might eventually go, in Pakistan or India, no Constitution shall be formed such as does not have the concurrence of the Sikhs. But Sardar Baldev Singh, in consultation with the Congress leaders, summarily rejected this offer, which went even beyond assurances given by the majority community in 1929 and in 1946 by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru in Calcutta. In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British Cabinet in London, offered to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state comprising areas lying in the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the Ravi river on the understanding that this State then confederates with Pakistan on very advantageous terms to the Sikhs. But Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer. The Maharaja of Patiala declined to accept it in consultation with Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. In the month of May, 1947, precisely on the 17th May, Lord Mountbatten, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, Nawab Liaqat Ali Khan and Sardar Baldev Singh, flew to London on the invitation of the British Cabinet, in search of final solution of the Indian communal problem. When the Congress and the Muslim League failed to strike any mutual understanding and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru decided to return to India, the British Cabinet leaders conveyed to Sardar Baldev Singh that if he stays behind, arrangements might be made: "So as to enable the Sikhs to have political feet of their own on which they may walk into the current of World History." Sardar Baldev Singh promtly divulged the contents of this confidential offer to Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru and in compliance with the latter's wishes, declined to stay back and flew back to India after giving the following brave message to the Press: "The Sikhs have no demands to make on the British except the demand that they should quit India. Whatever political rights and aspirations the Sikhs have, they shall have them satisfied through the goodwil of the Congress and the majority community." The British leaders had asked Sardar Baldev Singh to stay behind because the wanted to propose to him that if Sikhs were not ready to enter into the agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs could be given an independent state which extended from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib with extended excess upto the seashore. The Britishers were ready to station 25,000 British troops and war equipment for ten years and provide help in the administration provided the Sikhs agreed to provide 50,000 soldiers be stationed at Singapore and other colonies to help the Britishers for the next ten years. After ten years the agreement could be reconsidered. Through this agreement the administration and defence of independent Khalistan would have been ensured and there would have been no need to enter into an agreement with either India or Pakistan for the purposes of their administration and defence. Even Muslim League had agreed this proposal because it would give then strong buffer state between Pakistan and India. It was also in the interest British empire as they would still have their feet in this sub-continent. But was unfortunate that there was no leader among the Sikhs with political vision foresight who could see the benefits such an arrangement and demand independent Homeland for the Sikhs.

khalistani veer ji did baba jarnail singh mention this account in particular or did he say that the panj were beheaded, or did he say they were beheaded in tents, etc. i am not doubting the panj were beheaded, i just dont put any trust in this particular source.

paji.......i studied german history at school.....i study sikh history at home i dont realllllllly think that all the sikhs had no idea what the nazis were doing.......i mean come on there must be some kind of media in india at the time and it was prolly all controlled by the brits......so think about it ppl are gonna have an idea wat is happening yeh some sikhs did fight even if it sounds wrong......but then again u have real saint soldiers who fought themselves, didnt ally with anyone else.......like bhai randhir singh yeh and khalistan was offered twice. i believe once to master tara singh (????) and another time to baldev singh (im more sure on this one but i cant remember names exactly). both times it was rejected. the deal was, sikhs got khalistan, and some sikh soldiers went to protect some british empire territory elsewhere.

r u sure man? cuz ive gone thru mein kampf and i neva saw anything about sikhs in it.......hmmmmmm

bhai sahib khalistani ji i usually agree with you but the writer of guru kian sakhian guessed that this is what happened since it happened inside the tent, plus bhatt sarup singh kaushish was not actually at vaisakhi but compiled the account from the previous bhatt vahi records, perhaps someone who has the older bhatt vahi accounts, could tell us what they say. the reason i have difficulty accepting this story is because a) all other accounts say it happened inside the tent B) if this really happened then there would be many other accounts talking about it since it would be such a huge thing and c) as mentioned in my earlier post the language and the names used for a particular pind show us that it must have been written much, much later than 1699, and the fact that d) this account doesnt even exist in aligarh university. i dont have any problem accepting that guru ji beheaded the panj pyare but this account is too different to all the others to be accepted as valid, it is likely in my opinion each of hte panj were beheaded in the tent, then given amrit afterwards. whatever happened in the tent the panj pyare would have kept secret. had this really happened there would be alot more accounts going about of this particular event, and in this case there are none. if the sangat could realise how many fake, interpolated accounts there are running about in sikh history they would realise why i and many others are so cynical of it.

lol i was thinking the exact same thing

me ....... i dont think we can define khalistan yet tho cuz we dont know wat its gnna turn out like

vir singh i always respect ur views, but if brahmgyanis never had conflicting views.....then that out of bhai randhir singh and baba gurbachan singh only 1 wud be a brahmgyani (over ragmalla and keski debate), baba takhur singh would conflict with people who dont think baba jarnail singh is shaheed, that would mean one group wudnt have any brahmgyanis..... how would you explain this contradiction........can a brahmgyani have views which arent technically "correct" or do they know the truth but for some reason gurus hukam does not allow them to share it?????? who knows...........im confused :T:

bhai sahib it is 90% likely that mata sahib kaur put the patashae in but trust me not all accounts agree on this. some people say mata jeeto ji put them in..........bt to be honest it doesnt really make a difference........if u are an eyewitness its easy to make a lil mistake in such a big event ill copy this from sikhnet (written by "serjinder singh"): This account is a later interpolation. Original and authentic account is by the official chronicler of the Mughal court and is in a published document Muasar-i-Alamgiri. The account refers to 60000 to 70000 people gathered in Anandpur. It does not deal with the miracle story of reviving Panj Piaras. It certainly mentions the refusal of the Brahmins and Kashatryas to take Amrit and eat together with lower castes. Miracle stories generally are the first signs of possible concoction wherever we come across these. In this case, the mention of the villages in Punjab to which some of the Payaras are reported to belong makes it suspicious. For instance, the village Nangal Shahidan acquired its name as Shahidan in the eighteenth century when the concept and tradition of Singh Shaheeds got firmly established in rural Punjab following the martyrdom of so many Singhs. How come it was called Nangal Shaheedan in 1699 according to this report long before the Singh Shaheeds. also i have heard that no such document even exists at aligarh uni.

um i dont want to be a dampenener on peoples excitement but that account (unfortunately) isnt real, from what ive heard. i think some of the bhatts were present at the time and wrote down stuff in the bhatt vahis. and what about, author of sri gur sobha? was the writer present? these are just guesses.

wow ppl are really getting excited here. ppl are gnna have to learn, that true brahmgyanis still have different views. according to triyah charitrer, it says "there is one truth, but it is manifested in a myriad of different ways"

bro perhaps you havent studied nazi history like i have perhaps you might want to learn about the concepts of volksgemeinschaft (a single classless society rejecting all non aryans), lebensborn (state sponsered brothels for SS officers to make racially "pure" offspring), laws such as the prevention of hereditarly diseased progency (anyone who had a "problem" eg schizophrenia, or even constant headaches or health problems were sterilised) and the HOLOCAUST of the jews, etc as all things show that the nazis were thoroughly EVIL people and anyone who fought with them were pretty bad also....... i dont really think that sikhs are like merceneries, who fight for whoever, i have always had the idea that a sikh was a saint soldier who fought on the side for justice etc, had the sikhs beaten the allies sumhow, and then the nazi regime spread worldwide, how would sikhs have felt then? altho it is true on the other hand sikhs were being oppressed pretty bad in india......but i would much rather live in british raj panjab than hindu raj punjab.......brits offered us khalistan twice!