Gupt_Singh

plez dont overestimate desi history, becuz its an absolute joke. did u know that recently, a really old bir just got stolen by some old man? theres no security, theres no order to sikh history, unfortunately. we only just found out about the bhatt vahis, probably one of the most reliable source of history around, because of pyare singh padam. and because of them, the scholars have "corrected" alot of dates which every other book has had wrong, and we have been celebrating wrongly for like 200 odd years, lol. penji im sure there are. most people say banda singh bahadur didnt take amrit (Becuz he is called banda bahadur by many). and no one can argue with them because we dont have any historical sources to prove it. then Ganda singh, a well known historian, trawls through loads of islamic history books, goes thru persian accounts etc etc and finds about 10 odd sources which prove he took amrit. until the scholars have a proper hunt thru different sources, not all of history can be totally backed up. mata sahib kaur wrote a few hukamnamas i believe, but im not sure. even in ganda singhs hukamanas book, it is a fact that over half are fake.what im tryna get across is, dont look for an explicit reference because unfortunately sikh history isnt like that. in banda singh bahadurs time, anyone who was sikh would get killed and their killer would get money from the mughal leaders. sikhs got put down to VERY low numbers. no one took any historical details down since they were all out fighting...... bhai gurdas says in varan, "one is only a sikh once blessed with amrit". even mardana, who people assume was a muslim, actually took amrit, according to the janamsakhis, from guru nanak. ANYONE who followed the guru would HAVE to take amrit, otherwise there was no point in them following the rehat - a far cry from the situation we have today because we have specifically written rehatnamas that address women, and a REHATnama gives a part of the REHAT, and one followed the REHAT if they were a SIKH, and if one was a SIKH they HAD to take amrit, its obvious that women did take amrit. the use of words like SINGHNEE in historical texts make it obvious that women must have taken amrit - people werent called SINGH back then unless they actually were SINGH.. i really dont have that much knowledge on these subjects so that is all the info i can give you. n30 singh: cuz i said it was RSS? wow, your days must be so exciting if that was no1 event! i think im going to sit in the corner and cry, because ive been banned from some RSS website which smells faintly of holy cow just as an banned persons request, PLEASE can u put back up that link to lalleshvaris picture in the post???????? PLEZ PLEZ PLEZ with BAHMAN ON TOP!!!!!!

serenity looking for any time of history on women is very hard. its likely there were alot more mata bhag kaurs that have simply not been documented throughout sikh history becuase all sikh historians were men and so women were often pushed to the sidelines. even information on 1699 we have is a little sketchy - we have stuff like sri gur sobha and guru kian sakhian, but the fact is much history has been destroyed over the years, this is why we even have people disagreeing on what the 5th kakkar is. just like its hard to find puratan info on any stuff like 1699, its hard to find exactly the phrase "guru gobind singh gave amrit to a woman called x" amrit for women is IMPLIED alot. for example the words singhnee sikhni are often used, and parts of the rehat meant for women (head coverings, etc) are also documented. the rehat only applied to baptised sikhs so its obvious that guru ji must have baptised women. charan di paul form of amrit was around since guru nanaks time and there is historical info that proves it was given to women (janamsakhis). there is thus no reason to believe that when guru gobind singh replaced charan di paul with khanda di paul, he would have just stopped giving amrit to women. mata sahib kaur was the MOTHER of the KHALSA and guru gobind singh was the FATHER. guru gobind singh got down on his knees and took amrit from the panj (even this is not thoroughly documented althoguh appears in reliable souces, proving how sketchy sikh history can be) there is no reason why an non-khalsa woman would be the head of the khalsa! the bottom line is its blatantly obvious women did get amrit as they had done for 100s of years before, just because it is not explicitly said "women took khanda di paul" its pretty much said in an implied way alot of other places. i can guarantee u this, so dont hav any hesitations taking amrit....when the panj pyare are around guru gobind singh is there too

agree totally but as for muslims in britain.....i dunno about numbers.......but just going out u see em EVERYWHERE......headscarfed women pop up nearly everywhere.......even in alton towers u see bearded cap wearin muslim men n women with propa fully covering burkhas i even see the odd white muslim around now......it all comes down to the fact that they do daw'ah - brainwashing that islam is tolerant peaceful and the truth - and alot of ppl half fall for it!

lalleshvari is one of those people who never provides any references to what he says look at puratan rehatnamas like bhai daya singhs "women should wear a topknot on the top of their head" and sau sakhi saying always wear a keski, its clear that the concept of keski for women was there since the beginning as a compulsory thing......... i dont post their anymore but i wouldnt believe a word lalleshvari says. on that same post he makes a comment saying that women who wear keskis look like men. pretty ironic coming from someone who looks like he grew up in a dumpster (look at his picture on www.shiachat.com :e: )

yes i agree but wot exactly is a sinful deed? muslims slaughter goats at the birth of a child, (2 for a boy, 1 for a girl ) and the halal method of slaughter is not exactly humane. when standing before dharam raj, will a muslim have to stand responsible for such actions? or because they are done under the guise of religion, does that make them acceptable? there are ahadith and quran quotes that say once the time of ramadan is over, impose special taxes on non muslims, humiliate them, and if htey stand up against them, kill them. this type of thing again does happen in the muslim world. prophet mohammed in bukhari said "who ever changes his religion (from islam), kill him". if someone follows their "religious" teachings, what will happen to them after death? i am not ripping sufi or shia muslims because their heads are screwed on a little better.......but as for crazy sunni muslims who are brainwashing more and more people into islam, its all well and good to say "dont worry, just respect them", what happens by 2020 when muslims are in a MAJORITY in t he uk?

i dont think theres any such thing called love in relation to our physical relationships w/ spouse mother father kids etc, only moh and sometimes kaam...... love is only really there with waheguru, as has sed b4

Just say, I would prefer not to stay in places where alcohol is served or my food might be made in the same place as meat......obviously some people wont accept that......dont ditch all your collegues though just dont go to those places..... I admire u man........youve gone from monnah to amritvela singh and at hte moment i dont even get my nitnem done consistently and im kesadhari from birth........big pat on the back 2 u Pubs and meaty places are definately not great places to be. But Ill admit, I do have the odd pizza hut, even if I shoudlnt

Singh Khalsa.....well said learner singh.......this is a "discussion" forum. If you want to discuss the topic - "Are other religions wrong" and in specific Islam as its moved on to, please do. If not, dont say anything. We all have ego, if we didnt wed be gurmukh straight away. Whether or not excessive OTT ego is evident from providing facts to prove that Islam is a thread to civilisation, is a different matter.

ikkle b****........its not good to take the mick out of anything related to gurus amrit wat are u talking about now? i said i read something in a book. and now u r chattin breeze just say again, slowly, the message u r tryna put across. hahaha.......bik doesnt have any inclination towards akj whilst i do.......just becuz we both have opinions, and ur not clever enough to argue them wrong, doesnt mean we are both the same person or similar you had too much coffee before u wrote this cuz ur sayin irrelevant BS. make sense next time

lol........look....... look at muslims in the world now...... blowing up buildings (us), killing innocents (iraq), taking ppl hostage (russia), making poisons (uk) terrorising sikhs n bahmans (afganistan) stoning ppl for "blasphemy" (nigeria) oppressive n generally stoopid (saudi)........... has it ever occured to you that the one religion which does so much in the name of religion (and plz tell me another religion which does the same)............maybe there is some type of motivation to this? why dont u actually read the QURAN from cover to cover in its english translations. its a jumbled mess of hatred and general fraud. im sorry but its true. i cant say the vedas, bible, torah, bhagavad ghita are fraudulent because they dont preach hate in the same way. islam was a religion started to brainwash people and had no honest intentions. when someone tells you u can only sleep on one side, and only wipe your bum with one hand, and ur not allowed to draw peoples faces in art, then u know that that person is just on a power trip, tryna control ur life, and is NOT interested in spirituality!!!!!!! if u dont believe me, go to www.faithfreedom.org and read all the articles there. then come back and tell me its quran SAHIB. i dont know if mohammed was the person hes made out to be, but whoever made the quran, or the person that "mohammed" was based upon in the hadiths (and this person did exist) is EVIL!

o dont worry betta i wont loose sleep over it but theres no point u going on about all this tolerance stuff because its makin u look very silly the whole point is......u cant tolerate sum1 cuttin off an "ang" from the guru......thus making u intolerant, and this thread pointless.......if u have anything else to add (ie. proving that it is gurujis ang in the first place) other than making yourself look more stoopid, theres really no point in replying. im expecting u to say "no im just a humble moorakh, trying my hardest to bring unification to the shattered panth and partitions of sikhsangat.com message board" HAHAHAHHAAHHAA....calm urself......just because uve been brainwashed by kamalroop, u dont need to make a big deal out of it :e:

sandeep kaur............if i randomly call u an insulting name.......ur nt gonna b happy r u? u can say "just leave it theres no point" but ppl like n30 singh pretend 2 b propa rational about sikhi saying they are all for tolerance..... but when the akal takht say read ragmalla or dont read it, its up 2 u..............u r suddenly implying im gnna go 2 hell, and anyone who disowns gurbani (or more aptly, chops off an ang, lol) is going too.........now n30 ur going on about unification n watever....... if u are gonna say something, back it up.......ur on the net, sittin behind a screen where i cant spark u if im annoyed with u :nihungsmile: , so making baseless statements doesnt make u big or clever

orite then indira gundhee shut up (joking.........that mite have proved my point)

thanks man..ur like an encyclopaedia of knowledge lol did u read it? whats ur impression on it?

its not a case of being right or wrong. calling someone a kala afgana type and providing no substance.....is stoopid. if i were to say "sandeep kaur, you are just like indira gandhi"...and left it at that...and say it was in relation to one of ur personal beliefs......would u be a happy puppy?

the word bhagauti is used in bhai gurdas varan to mean SWORD. guru gobind singh has already said, khanda created the world, and khanda is also a metaphor for naam.......either side of the sword being miri and piri........so by using the word bhagauti guru ji is talking about NAAM. dasam granth bani is alot deeper than u think.....eg there are very, VERY clever meanings to chandi di //.

well then thats the problem..........u refuse to prove me wrong.........and every theory is true until proven otherwise.......so if ur unwilling to share your enormous gyan regarding the problems with ragmalla, theres no point u continually talking about it, is there? or can i just take your answer as, "i cant argue with it because i never looked into it"?

n30 could u even give me any proof that the sheikh farid in the SGGS is the same as the sheikh farid u are referring to? i mentioend that i heard of a book that proves they are NOT the same but i cant remember what it is called, im sure someone knows. but as i said, it would explain why sheikh farids bani is not the same as your sheikh farids poetry. the quran is hardly an inspiring book. its really, really boring, repetitive, and is actually filled with hate. and its so short, yet it still manages to be spectacularly poo. this might sound harsh but i am so incredibly sure that the quran is not possibly divinely inspired, that i have said that

o how appropriate. please quote it. the funniest thing is, u couldnt actually counter my claims on ragmalla, so u just said "OOOOOOH LOOK WHAT HE SAID, HES GOING TO HELL!" hahahahahahaha.......... im only 16, u cant expect me to have the intellect of a grown man. but if i am "stupid", and you are unable to counter my claims on hte numerical and grammatical inconsistencies in ragmalla, as well as the existence of ragmalla in the earlier PORNOGRAPHIC story by alam called kam kandlan, then, what does that make you? double stoopid? ok by this quote you are implying that my disbelief in ragmalla makes me a heretic to the sikh panth.unfortunately, this will bring super-saint bhai randhir singh, super-scholars pyare singh padam and kahan singh nabha, gyani ditt singh who pretty much ressurected the panth from its hindu-filled roots with the singh sabha movement, and the entire akhand keertan jatha with me..........................by calling so many people kala afgana types, damn, ur more likely to be a heretic than me!!!!!!! your problem is, you cant intellectual argue out your points (against a stoopid lil kiddie may i add) so all u can say is.....i need to join kala afgana.....and attempting to scare people into believing ragmalla by posting sakhis about people disowning gurbani going to yama.....it isnt going to help ur case either what like snaatan sikh sites confuse people telling the poor innocent white man how its ok to eat meat and do chandi pooja? its not like i mislead people......i dont post there anymore nyways....and in an old post i said some sikhs believe kesh some sikhs believe keski.........its hardley going to confuse people and throw them off......your making it sound like im pulling people into the heretic cult of AKJ once again....if u dont like my views on keski, or think they are wrong, then just refute them! refute the 2 bhatt vahi accounts that are references, refute bhai chaupa singhs use of keski, etc etc.......dont just sit there making me out to be some crazy sullah brainwasher, why dont u just prove me wrong????? alot of threats of me going to hell or being anti panthik, alot of claims of me saying things i havent, but other than that, you havent really done much else :T:

mo also says that the sun is between some of the heavens (or in one of them cant remember) so the heavens might be referring above us (its quite unscientific and funny if u read up on it). u might say the quran has changed. but why would muslims make their prophet out to be a peado murderer if they idolised him? i think some people need to learn a little more about the real islam by reading hadiths and the quran themselves, not just listening to what muslims say. guru gobind singh sed - study all faiths but retain faith in akal purakh and allah is above the 7th heaven, on a big chair, apparently.

hav a gud read.........but calling him a peadophile is ok.....becuz.......what wud u call sum1 whose 54 and marries a 9 year old and then does *ahem*......thats peadophilia.....and what do u call sum1 who kills ppl.......a murderer!

when guru gobind singh described mo he said he got way too much ego, he didnt say he went crazy tho since guruji just did a quik history of a few religious figures....it certainly wasnt a positive description. guru nanak dev ji......when guruji talks about muslims......hes talking about sufi muslims.....not all the other crazay ones i am about 99.9999999999% sure mo was a crazay murdering peado (im not usually 100percent sure on most things) because the hadiths his followers wrote do the best to say he was merciful was restrainted etc but some parts admit a few things he did....like destroying villages of jews, taking slaves etc but then defends it afterwards or just sees it as the culture of the time - why would his followers make him out 2 b evil? ALL the historical info we have on mo shows him to bad pretty much..........now not ALL Of history can be changed.....considering how many hadiths there are www.faithfreedom.org is a good place to learn about islam.....

yeah, i agree,i know what u mean....but the words u were looking for to describe that is.........."brainwashed by kamalroop"

hahah they just forgot that indira gundhee the gundhee rundhee is DEEEAD and her ashes are probably being by some bahman in the riverganges, mixed together with some excrement and cows pee! :nihungsmile: