BhForce

Guptsingh84, Indersingh has already stated that only half Fateh greeting, not full is in Dasam Granth. I think we are waiting for you to state that the Fateh greeting is not present at all in Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

By the way, to accept the validity of sources outside Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not to say that you have to accept anything and everything outside of Guru Granth Sahib. (That would be absurd, of course.) Yet the reverse position ("Only Granth") is also an extreme and ultimately self-contradictory position.

True, all outside of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, of course.

Let's you came across a book in the library. In that book was a line that said "The book is at the place of God." Would that be enough to make you start treating that book as your religious preceptor? It seems obvious that the reason we believe in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not because Gurbani is praised in Gurbani itself. It's a question for everybody reading the thread: Why is it, after all, that you believe in Guru Granth Sahib Ji? The answer from me, Bloom, and others is: seena-baseena tradition or verbal command. Yet once you admit something outside of Guru Granth Sahib, the "Keval Granth" doctrine of missionaries is destroyed.

That's interesting, do you have any more information on this? Was this reported anywhere, or did you hear this through sangat?

Guptsingh84, Although Bloom has a unique way of making his point, it's not too hard to discern what he's saying. In just a sentence or two it is: Why does "Y" adopt forms and customs external to Guru Granth Sahib while simultaneously maintaining the doctrine of "Keval Granth"? That's the reason why Bloom is asking why "Y" wears kakkars, says fateh, and so on. For people who are just reading along and not participating in the thread, the reason the doctrine of "Keval Granth" (only Granth) is objectionalble is that no where in Guru Granth Sahib does it say that the Gurgaddi is with Guru Granth Sahib. That's why, if you get people to reject everything outside of Guru Granth Sahib, it's quite easy to get them to also reject Guru Granth Sahib. Which, of course, the Spokesman has done. The thread with UKGuptKaur on Dasam Granth hinged on this very issue. To the end, she could not demonstrate that Guru Gobind Singh Ji had said to follow Guru Granth Sahib Ji. As Bloom said above, it is a verbal command.

While corpulence makes one look both ugly and lazy, I don't think you have to be thin to be be healthy. Scientists have at one time or another said butter is good, butter is bad, then good again. In fact, some people think a high fat diet is good: http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2009/02/cholesterol-presentation-between.html Muscle weighs more than fat, so by being muscular, you'll be weightier than the average person.

Some supporter of this sant said he was using some Chinese healing technique. I would say: Even if there were some Chinese technique like this, I don't really think he should be practicing it. It could be done by a bibi.

Sant Mann Singh was under some serious allegations a while back, I don't know what the status of those are. Whether true or false, I guess that may be part of the reason people are taking to S. Dhadrianwale so much. He doesn't have any of that kind of stain. (No one has accused S. Ranjit Singh ji of a bajjar kurehit.) That seems to be the general perception. LOL

OK, about Hindu dharam: Sikh dharam isn't part of Hindu dharam. Rather Hindu dharam may be a part of the Sikh dharma. See, what some shararty ansar say is the Sikhi is part of the Hindu tradition. But what Baba Trilok Singh is saying is that Sikhi is the human dharam. Hence, (my comment) if there is anything that matches in Sikhi and Hindu mat, it's because of Sikhi continuing forth the human dharam, NOT Hindu mat. Similarly, if we say there is one God, it's not because we took an Islamic belief, rather we took a belief of the human dharam which had also been expressed in Islam. Also, the views expressed by Baba Trilok Singh are in the ambit of traditional Sikhi, while those expressed by Niddar Singh saying Sikhs are part of the Hindu tradition is not.

Another point regarding this is that some people feel that Sikhi is something completely new that Guru Nanak Ji came up with in the 16th century. They feel if they call Sikhi the common dharam of mankind, that that will reduce the glory of Guru Nanak Ji. I don't think this is the case. Gurbani says it was Guru Nanak Dev Ji all along who gave power to the avtars and protection to the saints and bhagats. Those saints were following the basic kernel of Sikhi: ਸਰਬ ਧਰਮ ਮਹਿ ਸ੍ਰੇਸਟ ਧਰਮੁ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਕੋ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਿ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਕਰਮੁ ॥ Later God saw fit to make things explicit, and make the path of salvation open to all man, and not just a few select saints, and sent Guru Nanak Ji to preach this path. None of this is to say that you don't have to take amrit, or keep kakkars, or do nitnem. You do. If the true Guru says you have to do something, then you have to do it. Also, nobody should try to say that the bhagats didn't keep rehit, we don't have to either. The premis of God kept such incredible God-focused rehit (lifestyle) and nitnem (daily regimen) for every second 24x7 that we can't even begin to comprehend. Keeping kakkars and nitnem banis are easy by comparison.

In the video, Baba Trilok Singh says Sikhi isn't part of Hindu Dharam, but rather Sikh Dharam is the common dharam of mankind, and that, in a sense, Raam was a Sikh, Krishan was a Sikh, etc. Anybody can take amrit and become a Sikh, it's open to anyone, including Muslims. My comments: I basically agree that Sikhi is the common dharam of mankind. When you get down to brass tacks, it comes to: ਸਰਬ ਧਰਮ ਮਹਿ ਸ੍ਰੇਸਟ ਧਰਮੁ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਕੋ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਿ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਕਰਮੁ ॥ Now, of course, to japp nam, you have to get nam from the Guru. To get nam, you have to follow the Guru's commands, hence the rest of Sikhi. As far as whether any particular person (Raam, Krishan, rishis, bhagats, Dhru) is a Gurmukh in God's eyes is up to God. If you look at other religions, they have elements of the true dharam (Gurmat path), but not all of it. Guru Gobind Singh Ji says basically the same thing: ਏਕ ਹੀ ਕੀ ਸੇਵ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਕੋ ਗੁਰਦੇਵ ਏਕ, ਏਕ ਹੀ ਸਰੂਪ ਸਬੈ ਏਕੈ ਜੋਤ ਜਾਨਬੋ॥ The Guru of all is One.

Isn't the 14th a Sunday, so wouldn't shops be closed anyway? What a joke.

Good idea, though web hosting is the easy part. Hard part is writing out all the content and fact checking. Admins, please delete the duplicate posts of this topic.

"It" does? Do you have have any quotes from Gurbani regarding free speech? Although free speech is usually useful, I think you are mistaking two different things. First of all, the Ragi has and will continue to have the right to say whatever he wants. But, if the Ragi has that right, the Jathedars have it, too, don't they? If the Ragi refuses to appear again, the Jathedars will proclaim him excommunicated. They'll do that with their mouths (i.e., speech) or a piece of paper, with their freedom of speech. Second, Guru Granth Sahib Ji says to excommunicate disbelievers and slanders of the Guru and not to associate with them. That's what the Gurdwaras of the world are going to do. First, so? Gurbani calls those educated people fools who are egotistic and slanderous. Second, he is not an academic or advanced scholar. People started calling him that when he (a Ragi) was teaching tabla in a girls college. He himself doesn't have any advanced learning. Third, his level of knowledge of Gurbani and Gurmat concepts does not hold up to either academics or taksali scholars. Yes, I have heard his discussions. No, he's not just making that point. If he were to say "Yes, Dasam Granth is Guru's creation, but I want to respectfully say that we shouldn't have parallel parkash of Dasam Granth", that would be one thing. But he's completely rejecting all of Guru Gobind Singh Ji's bani, including, incredibly, saying there's no proof 10th Guru recited Jaap, Swaye, and Chaupai in the first khande-amrit samagam. There were great Sikhs who when they fell were excommunicated. These include Satta & Balwand and Ram Rai. Second, the Ragi is shown as two-faced person in books on the eighties. During the present time he is with Sarna of Delhi who is with the Congress. Not really relevant to the current controversy. Though, if you mean dirty politics, well, everybody's against that. If you mean religion controlling politics, he did a lot of that while Jathedar. Who says Dasam Granth is or will be the topmost Granth of the Sikhs? It is, always was, and always will be the lower Granth of the Sikhs. The Rehitnamas refer to it as "chota Granth", the smaller Granth. That's why it's parkashed at a lower level at Hazur and Patna Sahib. This is just part of the wild theories of Gurtej Singh IAS who thinks the RSS wants to take Guru Granth Sahib out of Harmandir Sahib and install Dasam Granth instead. Why would the RSS want to install a Granth (Dasam Granth) which puts down Hindu beliefs, avatars, and leaders? Look at the RSS website, it talks in favour of Guru Granth Sahib. The path of truth is the remembrance of God's name. 10th Guru mentions this again and again in Dasam Bani. You're making arguments as if you had the right to question Guru Gobind Singh Ji's work. No one made me or you Guru, we're just Sikhs. A mureed doesn't criticise his Peer. After all these centuries? Just because you and I are living in the 21st century doesn't mean the stuff we see around us just sprang up today. Tomorrow somebody will say "What's the need for Bhai Gurdas Ji after all these centuries" Everybody already acknowledges the Supremacy of Guru Granth Sahib. (See point 6 above.) What exactly would constitute "authentication" for you? How would you authenticate Guru Granth Sahib? Maybe by the signatures of Guru Sahib in manuscripts? Well, we have the same for Dasam Granth. Funny, even though we have signatures for the original recension of Pothi Sahib (Guru Granth Sahib) in the Kartarpuri Bir, we don't have such for the Damdami Bir. In fact we don't even have the Damdami Bir, and yet the whole Panth accepts Damdami Bir as the standard for Guru Granth Sahib! I hope no one stands up tomorrow and starts demanding "authentication" for Guru Granth Sahib. And Guru Granth Sahib has always been and will always be our primary source of inspiration. Dasam Granth is our secondary source of inspiration. Again, Dasam Granth in no way supports Hinduism. Ashutosh is not citing Dasam Granth in favour of his twisted doctrines. He is using Guru Granth Sahib (listen to Youtube "Sikh" speaking in favour of Ashutosh here: ) So, if he uses Gurbani, does that mean we should ban Guru Granth Sahib? Of course not. Balwinder, I hope you read these points and stop slandering your own Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Where is this from? In the story of King Man (16th Avatar), the story starts out like this: ਸਭ ਧਨਵੰਤ ਭਏ ਜਗ ਲੋਗਾ ॥ ਏਕ ਨ ਰਹਾ ਤਿਨੋ ਤਨ ਸੋਗਾ ॥ The people of all the world grew wealthy and there remained no anxiety on their body and mind. Page Line 6 ਭਾਂਤ ਭਾਂਤ ਭੱਛਤ ਪਕਵਾਨਾ ॥ ਉਪਜਤ ਰੋਗ ਦੋਹ ਤਿਨ ਨਾਨਾ ॥੧॥ They began to eat various kinds of foods and consequentsly they suffered form various kinds of ailments.1. Page Line 7 ਰੋਗਾਕੁਲ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਭਏ ਲੋਗਾ ॥ ਉਪਜਾ ਅਧਿਕ ਪ੍ਰਜਾ ਕੋ ਸੋਗਾ ॥ All the people got worried about their ailments and the subjects became extremely distressed. http://searchgurbani.com/main.php?word=&book=dasam_granth&action=pagebypage&page=497

Sunnysinghdoad, what was the goal behind your post? Did someone ask for the meanings of this particular shabad?

Excellent post. We do need to introspect and look into our own collar. Going to a protest for a day seems easy in comparison to the hard work of day-in and day-out preaching and helping people. After mass-outreach samagams, there needs to be some organisational presence to allow people to get help.

I thought the meeting was going to be at Mehta (headquarters of a jatha of Damdami Taksal)

Canadian singh sahbha has always been in favour of this nonsense. As for Dasmesh Darbar, I have a hard time believing how they could be in favour of the Ragi. Isn't Dasmesh Darbar a pro-Sant gurdwara? They always have sants visiting and taksal-type kathakars? And don't they celebrate sant barsis? With that much sant and taksal influence, how could they be in favour of someone who is clearly against sants and taksals? By the way, could you state the source of your information? Somebody told you? Or they stated this in an announcement at the Gurdwara? Or in a flyer? Or a newspaper?

A number of posters in this thread have referenced what Bhai Randhir Singh Ji is said to have said. Are there any references to Ragmala in any of the books noted above?

Just when you thought you had seen it all. Anyway, the name of the Youtube poster "Pritpal Singh Khalsa" just continues the trend of anti-panthic entities taking on totally panthic names. The fact is, more than half of the audience at the Ashutosh samagam were "Sikhs". Like it or not, these "Sikhs" are related to us by blood, common workplace, common neighborhood, etc. We need to be able to quickly, easily, and calmly refute their arguments whenever we happen to encounter them. A start was made at the ongoing topic below. Gurmat Regarding Charlatans Like Ashutosh

The alternative to regional difference is total homogeneity. But why stop there, why not have complete homogeneity and labour market movement in the whole world, included countries poorer than even Bihar?

Are you having a problem with the word ਵੋਦ (veda)? As the word used here has an aunkar ੁ below the ਦ, it's masculine singular by Prof. Sahib Singh. Therefore, it doesn't refer to the Vedas (plural), a group of 4 books which are usually considered the foundation of Hindu philosophy. Rather, it would refer to the literal meaning of ved, being "knowledge". That's the way Prof. Sahib Singh translated Ved (singular) in Japji Sahib. ਅਹਰਣਿ ਮਤਿ ਵੇਦੁ ਹਥੀਆਰੁ ॥ http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=8&g=1&h=0&r=0&t=0&p=0&k=1 He translated the line as: ਹੇ ਭਾਈ! ਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਹੀ (ਸਿੱਖ ਵਾਸਤੇ) ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਦਾ ਵੇਦ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਬਾਣੀ ਦੀ ਬਰਕਤਿ ਨਾਲ ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਦਾ) ਧਰਮ (ਆਪਣੇ ਹਿਰਦੇ ਵਿਚ) ਪੱਕਾ ਕਰੋ (ਨਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿਆਂ ਸਾਰੇ) ਪਾਪ ਦੂਰ ਹੋ ਜਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ। In no way is it implied that P. Sahib Singh's translation is 100% correct in every instance. Sant Singh Khalsa translates it like this: ਬਾਣੀ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਵੇਦੁ ਧਰਮੁ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਹੁ ਪਾਪ ਤਜਾਇਆ ਬਲਿ ਰਾਮ ਜੀਉ ॥ Instead of the hymns of the Vedas to Brahma, embrace the righteous conduct of Dharma, and renounce sinful actions. The Faridkot teeka says: ਬਾਣੀ ਜੋ ਬੇਦ ਰੂਪ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਉਚਾਰਤਾ ਹੈ ਤਿਸ ਬੇਦ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਣ ਧਰਮ ਕੋ ਦ੍ਰਿੜ ਕਰੋ ਐਸੇ ਗੁਰੋਂ ਨੇ ਕਹਿਆ ਹੈ ਔ ਪਾਪੋਂ ਕਾ ਤ੍ਯਾਗ ਕਰਾਯਾ ਹੈ ਬਲਿਹਾਰੇ ਜਾਈਏ ਰਾਮ ਜੀ ਕੇ॥ The latter meaning seems to contradict other portions of bani which reject the vedas.

Who deleted my post without having the courtesy to at least write why it was deleted? I had suggested to the veer that he look into a temporary job as it's better than none: www.volteurope.com/ I don't own Volt (a huge corporation) and I have no interest in it. It's just the largest of its kind, and I thought it would help.