Gupt_Singh

you can now get hold of the newer surinder singh kolhi version, its more expensive and spread across 3-4 books (saw it in india) also i think the translations might be a bit more accurate? not sure. it prolly cost a bomb tho

guess who gave the khalistani definition

but do u REALLY think this law is gonna get passed, and the rest of the liberal western world r gnna do nothing about it? dum frenchies :nihungsmile:

i didnt like that golden temple stuff. its using the name of gurus and their work for business. other stuff was cool tho.

mkhalsa i do agree with you, i dont understand why everyone conveniently ignores that hukamnama........how do people reconciliate this, that guru hargobind has clearly said dont touch meat or fish........i mean....its possible to interprit gurbani ur own way, or say this and that is not a real historical source....but how do u argue with the gurus word.....straight and simple? brahmgyanis, who have had realisation of the TRUE single meaning of every line of gurbani have interprited this line "only fools argue over" etc in the same way - gurbachan singh bhindranwale, bhai randhir singh, whoever - once u r enlightened the true meaning, not interpritation according to ones mann, open up to you, and they have realised that this shabad does not condone meat but condemns hypocracy of jains etc.

sikh gurus are not self proclaimed prophets but brahmgyanis who have merged with akal purakh and can thus give us techniques to merge also from first hand experience. prophet mohammed tells u to bow to a black stone 5 times a day, spit over ur shoulder if u have a bad dream, etc these are not spiritually nourishing activities. praying to an idol or uttering mantras which increase ones ego will not help spirituality either. i guess we all take sikhi and its perfectness for granted - every action we do is geared towards spiritual gain ,i cant explain why the mantra "WAHEGURU" is a million times more powerful that "AUM"......its because its just the Truth. theres no real way to understand it but experience it urself.

Waheguru......the sangat should not feel down because another soul has broken its worldly shell and is now residing permanently in sachkhand

bhai sahib u didnt understand what i said. firstly yes there was originally one rehat. by the early 1900s there were about 40. scholars got together are finalised the rehat maryada by studying puratan history sources, and this is what we have today. scholars are not infallible and there are points of contention in the rehat. there is plenty of evidence to suggest some parts of the SGPC rehat are not completely as they were in guru jis time. that is why people follow akj maryada, damdami taksal maryada, nihang maryada etc - it is a personal choice on what they believe was the original. im not saying dont u dare eat meat, im saying you can eat meat if you wish, but the only type of meat you can eat and attempt to justify historically is jhatka goat. other than that, you cannot claim historical substance to something. i am also interested in how you do your jhatka personally - where you get it from, if you eat meat other than goat etc. also for what reason is halal meat banned? before blindly accepting this ban, read some rehatnamas, not just the published ones. most of them are quite embarassingly anti muslim. bhai nand lal says, he is a khalsa who slays a muslim. other rehatnamas say, dont say hello to a muslim, ignore a muslim, never befriend a muslim, dont give ur sword to a muslim and walk ahead, dont even learn persian (even tho some paath is in persian!), dont even have a muslim boss in a job, etc etc. many muslim practises in particular are banned. and eating the "maas" of the "turks" seems to be one of these. bhai sahib i am not asking you to stop eating meat but i am saying examine the rehat and the sources for the rehat. it gets alot more comp licated than one would think. to even translate the world "turk" in a rehatnama to "muslim" and nothinge else ignores all the political submeanings to teh word, association with the mughals, etc. what i mean is, question everything and find the truth for yourself. because the only scriptures you can put 100percent faith in is dhurr kee bani. any rehatnama scripture, rehat maryada we find today, has been written by a man. sad but true. since the rehat is now finalised on most points, it is 100percent likely that one of the major rehats we have today is identical to the one back in gurujis time - its just a question of which one.

yeah the 67% fact is probably true......but many were forced in and sikhs constituted a large percentage of those recruited for war anyway....... i think that the people who fought with hitler, even tho it was against the brits, did a huuuuuuuuge paap. i dont think "my enemies enemy is my friend" is a good motto, since khalsas fight for what is right, not for self interest. even if freedom from raj is not entirely self interest.

if u dont want to follow bhai faujas singhs example and beat him up at LEAST tell his wife she is commiting an unintentional paap of being with a kurahitee.......yes the family will get smashed.......but are u gonna try and hide this issue away and hope it will just disappear, or are u gonna confront it?

i dont want to enforce my views on the sangat but i would like to make a few things clear. there is no strong evidence that "puratan" singhs ate meat. in rehatnamas, a specifc mention is made of the absolute PAAP that is putting meat in langar, even from a pro meat author. there is no way meat would have EVER gone in langar. it is a very bad sin. there are hukamnamas from guru arjun, and guru hargobind which specifically ban MEAT and FISH. mohsin fani says the first five gurus never touched meat, but guru hargobind hunted and must have eaten it. this contradicts the authenticated hukamnama, present with the seal and signature of the guru, saying do not go near meat of fish. the shahsterv*diya website has reconciled this saying that "akali nihung" guru gobind singh allowed meat in the form of jhatka only. the only rehatnama which tells you meat is ok is bhai desa singh. but he says only jhatka GOAT is allowed, to be killed away from the gurdwara or langar, and there should be no mention of anything else. this is contradictory to his other statements, but nevertheless, if a sikh wants to adopt a meat eating approach i can *sortov* see where he is coming from if he only eats a)jhatka B) only goat if a sikh eats anything other than that there is no historical backing at all. i am not saying it is ok to eat jhatka goat, i am saying there are two possibilities only, all meat is banned, or all meat other than jhatka goat is banned. one has more evidence than the other to it however. if you do not believe me read the rehatnamas and accounts of the gurus times.

i havent seen any huge arguments here. its hardly like singhs fight at the gurdwara every day, or this message board is filled with hatred for different views. if i didnt listen to people "argue about the rehat" in real life and on message boards, i certainly wouldnt have learnt about all theses different rehatnamas, puratan bhatt accounts, dasam granth and its authenticity, etc. once i read a book called "how vachitar is vachitar natak" - if i didnt have the random lil facts that i know which ive learnt from other people, that book would have really worried me and cast doubts on my belief in gurbani. same goes for the w h mcleod books - its pretty easy to refute his caca arguments if u known random facts. and random facts are picked up from reading random books, and listening in on what you might call "arguments" and reading about "controversial evil untouchable subjects". arguments within the panth certainly existed pre 84 but babbar khalsas and bhindranwales cru, despite being EXTREMELY p**sed off with each other still faught together when it came down to it. sukhdev singh babbar really really really didnt like bhindranwale........and it probably was receprocated.........that wasnt over lil petty rehat issues, that was over approach of militancy issues......but did that hinder the seva that both these gursikhs gave to the panth in the end? its not arguments within the panth on petty issues (which lets be honest is between people who care about sikhi) that is *really* smashing up sikhi, its the people who dont care about sikhi and make the youth monneh, or the greedy people chilling in the SGPC. i havent seen people die, or lose their faith in sikhi, or bec ome poor, or get angry over, a few controversial discussions.

can we associate with the 5 reprobate groups that the guru told us not to associate with? its hardly bahman to avoid bad sangat. brahmins do not sit with others because they are low caste, hence considered inferior, in a way that cannot be changed. true sikhs of the guru avoid bad sangat because it has a negative influence on themselves and a saadh sangat brings more bliss. we all have the same jot inside us so we are sortov equal. but some are brahmgyianis, some are moorakhs. i know who id rather hang about with, since my sangat will affect me alot more than i think it will. i remember a line of bani, according to his command some are high and some are low. son of guru gobind singh: as for rehatnamas bhai desa singhs very explicitly say dont eat meat or fish, or drink alcohol (more than once!), but they go on to contradict this saying a little bit of booze is ok before a fight and it is acceptable to jhatka goats (no other meat mind) outside the langar, and then says a strict sikh will not even look at meat or booze :T: . other than this i have never seen a specific jhatka quote saying what is ok and what is not ok. there is plenty of other quotes to say meat is not ok. there are plenty of rehatnamas that say NEVER EVER eat kuttha and dont associate with those who do, but then it comes down to ur translation of kuttha.

further evidence that physical punishment is appropriate for a khalsa flouting the rehat: rehatnama bhai nand lal - the earlier known rehatnama, a copy dating to 1718 , meaning the original was writtne probably within gurujis time, or shortly after. "do not listen to anyone who defames the guru. take a sword and slay him" (pauri 36) bhai daya singh rehatnama: "if an amritdhari smokes a hookah he should recieve a fine of 25 rupees and 50 strokes of the cane, then his record is clear" (57) this is just showing that physical punishment is under some cases appropriate, so theres nothing wrong with giving him a good beating if he refuses to stop and still acts as a hypocrite. B)

:e: another heavy story about sant and sipahi bhai fauja singh.....although most of you probably see him as a terrorist In Deena Nagar, a youth had raped a Sikh woman. Bhai Fauja Singh tried to talk with him, "All daughters and sisters are the same. You didn't do the right thing" "Who are you to explain anything to me?" Said the youth. "I've just come to make this request. There are bad results for acts like this" "I'll do this again. Who can stop me?" Said the increasingly argumentative youth. "No, this isn't right. You should keep the community in mind too" "You can use your force and do what you want. I'll keep doing this" "Fine, remember your maker then." Said the Singh as he dug his spear into the youth's chest. "keep doing what you want now". The young goon died on the spot. Bhai Fauja Singh's wife sighed. "One case hasn't finished, and you're ready for a second"

a bahman harassed a singhnee. she was harrassed over and over, he didnt stop. they told (i think) bhai fauja singh. bhai fauja singh went to the bahman. he told him to stop. the bahman laughed. it happened a few more times, each time bhai sahib gave him a warning. he then said if u do this again there will be serious consequences. the bahman again harassed the singhnee and physically hit her or something i believe. bhai sahib went to the bahman and the bahman began to pull out a weapon after bhai sahib said that was you last warning, now you will have to pay. at this point bhai sahib had a huge AXE since he carried shahsters and decapitated the bahmans head with a single blow. i believe bhai sahib was out on bail at the time of the 1978 massacre. most of you, had i not mentioned bhai sahibs name, would have gone "OOOOOOH THATS BAD, you cant be serious!". well i think gurmukhs know a bit better than us. guru gobind singh threw the masands down a well and a number of other informers who were spying on him. again most of you lot here (apart from peeps like mkhalsa, khalistani, those kind of singhs who dont follow their own head, but follow the gurus - at the moment i just have to follow them types of ppl cuz otherwise ill follow my own :nihungsmile: ) would disagree with that, saying oooooooh i am not for capital punishment, i think no one deserves death, let waheguru sort it out..... so if that is ok why is beating up a patit for living as a total manmukh but appearing as a saintly person, and totally d isrespecting sikhi, and giving him a warning and telling his family beforehand? its the same kind of inaction that has screwed over the panth for decades, a KHULLI DHARI singh who does kurehats yet pretends to be religious is the worst type of person, i cannot think of a worse act someone could do other than murder....... if this singh is getting krodh from seeing this man, then his sprituality will be affected. he needs to get it off his chest. try doing your paath when your really stressed out and ur head is full of rage - i dont think your gonna taste the amrit raas. this singh never claimed to be a gursikh (ie amritdhari) from what ive read, so he is still vunerable to krodh. telling him to just bottle it up will not help him. and to be indifferent in this situation is not good either.

theres a rehatnama like those who chew snuff (im guessing thats like smoking or as bad as) will be beaten around the head and thrown into the pit of hell i would tell him to stop, and if he doesnt tell his family. if it still continues, give him a beating. thats what i would deem to be an acceptable punishment, the more politically correct people here will say "oh dont worry, dont worry about it". if it really does cause u real krodh u need to do something about it, or it will impede ur own sikhi.

is a patit, who has taken amrit and committed a kurahat, and is one of the 5 groups not to socialise wiht, still not a creation of god? if such a person was suffering a mental breakdown and needed consoling, or was poor and needed help, would you speak to him, even tho socialising with such a person blatantly infringes the rehat? would guru gobind singh eat from such a person, or reject him as it would infringe the rehat? i personally have semi answers to the above but not clearly and in no way definately right or wrong. just someting to think about.......as for ur dilemma bravekhalsa ji i am not the person to ask lol.....i am surrounded by bad sangat most the time.......at my school there are no gursikhs my age, or even kesadharis my age. so i am always sitting next to someone eating stinky fish or something. if i was an amritdhari, i would have broken my rehat alot by now...............

no offence but wot r u lot getting excited over? i didnt see any jatha bashing here. i havent seen anyone saying "akj is dumb" "taksal is dumb" "3ho is dumb" etc. maybe im missing something, or my definition of an argument is different to yours. my definition of an argument is when people get stressed out and a discuss escalates into krodh, and ive seen no stress here, i doubt ppl r getting real krodh infront of their pc becuz sum1 is discussing jathas :T:

if u would like to research the rehat you should examine the various rehatnamas - nand lal, daya singh, prahilad rai, desa singh, chaupa singh, etc(read pyare singh padams books) material such as the sarabloh granth, sau sakhi etc SGGS, BGV and DG obviously other stuff like the bhatt vahis (my fav :e: )

jsingh, if bhai nand lal wasnt khalsa, why has he written 3 different manuscripts (rehatnamas)about the khalsa and praised it so much? people call banda singh bahadur, banda bahadur and assume he didnt take amrit. so ganda singh went trawling thru persian contemporary accounts and found about 10 different accounts that proved he was baptised. there are so many rehatnamas saying that one must only eat from another amritdhari its silly - go and find a translation of them and have a flick through.t

i read a rehatnama that says any one of the members of these groups can be pardoned (somehow cant remember how) if they humbly apologise change etc but if htey continue in their evil ways then they have to be blanked and shunned

not many sikhs fought with hitler actually. those who did were part of rash bihari bose's (or maybe subhas chandra bose cant remember) INA (indian national army) - a group of indian fighters made up from captured jap and german PoWs - many soldiers in this army were forced into it through torture, etc. i think rash bihari bose also helped out with bhai randhir singhs militant group when they attempted a revolution through mutinying troops in india.

shernee kaur your amritdhari friend was probably not bibeki himself. at the *very* highest level of sikhi when one does full sarbloh bibek then one will only eat from other bibekis. there are taksali and nihung bibeki singhs at all so it is not discrimination, in the same way an amritdhari will not eat from a monnah. in harmandir sahib only amritdharis are to prepare langar, and there are plenty of rehatnamas to back this up. there are also rehatnamas for sarbloh bibek.

no sikh group has any influence in punjab any more. in amritsar, theres harmandir sahib, then all around, there is a total mess. and at metha chowk theres the taksali place, and as soon as u step out the rest of the place is a total mess too. from my visit i didnt see much gursikhi anyway.