Balkaar

Yeah, what's up with that? Whenever I look at the fellow on the left his lips are moving, but you can barely hear his voice. Do they sing softly intentionally so that the kirtan superstar in the middle shines through, or are their microphones deliberately turned off?

That's an astute point. As well as being quite funny, the utilization of Sikh-themed imagery and wordplay by these companies should be taken as high praise for our people - particularly when it originates from non-Sikhs, as I believe Burger Singh does. A Sardarji means something to a lot of people, including non-Sikhs. A Sardar represents generosity, trustworthiness and an ethic of hard work. Clearly some very shrewd businessmen have realized that by harnessing the Sardarji/Singh to their brand, it will appear take on some of the Sardar's positive qualities in the eyes of the general public, chiefly those I mention above. It is a great compliment to our people.

This is your opinion, not Gurmat. Which of our Gurus were celibate (exempting the eighth and eleventh patshaahs from this question for obvious reasons)? Which Guru did not live within grishti jeevan? How many of the great Gursikhs of our history, whose devotion to the Guru was beyond all reproach, were celibates? The answers to these three questions are, respectively, none, none, and very, very few. Sexual intercourse does not automatically equal lust. Our own Guru Sahibaan had children and they accomplished this using the traditional method. Will anyone dare to say that the Gurus, because they coupled with their wives, committed acts of lust? I think not. Lust is an obsessive preoccupation with matters of sex. Sikhi's opposition to lust is not a prohibition upon any and all sexual activity whatsoever.

I didn't know they had that calligraphy [Persian?] on the tiles. Any idea what it commemorates, or what it means?

The Hindu gods are more analogous to superheroes than actual deities in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib. The Tenth King's Granth is the scripture of Bir Ras, the essence of the warrior, it's passages are supposed to be invoked in the heat of battle so that the Sikh can find courage. This is the only purpose of Chandi Di Vaar - to provide martial inspiration. Guru Sahib deliberately chose to include stories of Hindu mythological figures and their inspiring deeds because these were the sorts of tales and characters he could be certain that most of his followers were, to at least some degree, familiar with.

That's the most plausible explanation I've heard so far. The Singh Sabha was after all started to address the increasing level of religious ignorance among Sikhs, so it's not surprising that they came to associate the khanda with the religion which they had hitherto known little about . I suppose it's rather like how some 3HO Sikhs seem to have associated yoga with Sikhism, because they first heard of the faith through a Yogi. I'd always wondered where the Puraatan Nishaan Sahibs had disappeared to. In light of the information in dally's post, it seems that the Tat Khalsa Lehar's substitution of the neela and the shastaars, for saffron and the khanda, was calculated to displace the Nihang Singhs - their ideological enemies - and whitewash their role in Sikh history. The Khalsa's flag was the same as the Nihang flag because in its earliest days, the Khalsa and the Akali Nihangs were one and the same. As long as the Sikh flag was blue and bedecked with weapons, the Nihang Singhs would continue to loom tall in the Sikh imagination. Apparently, they couldn't allow this.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh, I'm interested in learning about the origins of the Khanda, which is today the symbol of the Sikh Panth. There is no mention of it in any puraatan accounts, nor any representation of it in Sikh art before the mid-20th century. Nor was it depicted on the Nishaan Sahib - the only symbols carried on the flag of the Sikh Nation were three shastar - a dhal (shield), a katar (punch dagger) and a tulwar sword. This is evident from old Sikh paintings, as well as the gold engravings at Sri Darbar Sahib dating back to the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Who created the Khanda, and when? How did it come to be so ubiquitous?

None of that has anything to do with what I just told you. Oh yeah man I'm sure this mysterious someone is raking in heaps of cash from this book which hardly anyone has read, purchased or even heard of, LOL. Let me repeat myself once more. The author of this source (the motivations of the publisher - the only person who could stand to gain any material wealth from publishing these memoirs - are irrelevant to the discussion of the source's credibility since he didn't write it) had been dead for over a century by the time his memoirs were first published, ergo, he clearly didn't embellish it with false details so that he could make money for himself (God knows how that silly point about charity even occurred to you). People don't lie in their private diaries Quantavius. No point talking to you anymore. Ignore him. He's fetishized white people to such a ghoulish and frankly creepy degree, that he won't tolerate even the mildest criticism of them.

Make a quick buck out of fools like me a century after he'd already died [ the memoirs were first published in 1968)? Haha boy you are stupid. You're consumed by your cynicism LOL. This source has plenty of veracity. Quit refusing to believe it just because you're worried it will ruin your whitey wet dreams. Besides that, I also never said it was East India Company policy, yet another one of your baseless inferences. It was just something some psycho soldiers did from time to time. We wouldn't know half the things we do about the history of the Sikh Empire if not for British accounts and reports, Sikhs were very bad at recording events.

You're right, and apnaay would do well to replicate this. The dazzling success of the British and their empire owes itself a hell of a lot to their awareness of their imperial subjects, to the work carried out by spies and orientalists. The Brits were the first conquerors since the Romans to truly appreciate how important an understanding of the conquered was for manipulating them into blind loyalty. 'Divide et impera' the Romans called it, the British 'Divide and Conquer'. If we could also come to value the study and analysis of others, warts and all, instead of burying our heads in the sand and mistaking the Sikh principle of seeing good in all with being blind to their faults, we could be on another level. We could end the pattern of being deceived and betrayed by people.

Yes, but the Palestinians are hardly angels either, and the people of the West refuse to accept this. I sympathize with the Israelis to an extent. Of course they're going to be on-edge when they're a country of some 8 million Jews, among the last remaining vanguards of their ancient faith, completely surrounded and hopelessly outnumbered by hostile Muslims smack bang in the middle of the Islamic heartland.

I made the point about it being from a white guy, not because that's all it takes for me to believe something, but because that's exactly how to reach through to a deluded chappal like you. I grew up knowing a few coconuts, and observing how positively in awe of the whites they were. You refused to believe it when it was coming from my mouth, your brother, a fellow Sikh, you even accused me of being a liar and of making it up. I know perfectly well how to study the provenance of a historical source. One of things you must look at is motivation. WHY would the East India Company simply make up something so utterly detrimental to their own objectives just when they were on the cusp of securing Punjab and the whole of India? You think they would invite mutiny upon themselves as soon as they'd just conquered the place? Come on, use your brain. Another thing you look at is the time of origin. This source is contemporary to the Anglo-Sikh wars. Yet another is nature of the source. This is an entry in a set of personal memoirs, written by a relative unknown, published only after his decease. Very little reason to invent stories in your diary of all things, you can hardly deceive yourself.

I knew this would happen, boy you are brainwashed. Here is a delightful excerpt from the memoirs of a bloke called Seargent Pearson, on page 48. You can buy it and pleasure yourself to its tales of white oppression using this link: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sergeant-Pearmans-Memoirs-John-Pearman/dp/0224614665 "About midday I was very nearly shot. A private named Goodwin and me took a walk and were looking at the field and the dead. I had just cut off the hair and part of the scalp of a dead Sikh to make a Black Plume..." Will you believe it now that it has come from a white guy? Learn your history you coconut. Pathetic LOL Nobody here hates white people.

I read the article and I don't believe it intends to use warrior in the literal sense of the word, but the metaphorical. Still, it is very probable that Guru Nanak Dev must have had knowledge of shastar vidya. Considering the great extent of his Udaasis, and the profusion of bandits and dangerous animals in the medieval world, Guru Sahib must have been capable of defending themselves.

Hatred which owes itself, in no small measure, to Muslims and their left-wing allies. The one-sided reporting of the troubles in Palestine (calculated to placate Muslims, who are very numerous in European countries) has done more to revitalize anti-Semitism than contemporary fascists and Neo-Nazis ever have. He probably would have specified Muhammad if he had meant to include him in this prophecy.

I doubt this prophecy will ever be fully realized, not in the case of the followers of Eesa, and certainly not by 2020. Church attendance may be flagging in the West but Christianity is burgeoning in Africa and Asia. However, the situation is much more dire for the unfortunate followers of Moosa. Most of the Jews remaining in the west have prostituted their identity and their dharam. According to the sacred laws which form the foundation-stone of their faith, these money-grubbing big-business types are hardly even Jewish anymore. Those in Israel on the other hand are besieged, surrounded on all sides by bloodthirsty Muslims whose evil designs upon the Jewish homeland are being accelerated by their stupid (STUPID, STUPID) anti-Semitic white leftist allies. The future of the Jewish people looks grim, and it's a sad thing.

Except that didn't happen at all, certainly not at the hands of Nirvair Vaheguru during his most hallowed hours.

This video is almost a year old, and it's maker is very clearly insane. It has 229 views. Why are you always wasting your time drawing attention to the 'beadbi' of Sikhism by complete NOBODIES committed some time ago? What are we supposed to do about it eight months later? This warrants no concern at all.

Is the suspicion that people might worship these images really their reason for destroying them? That makes about as much sense as killing every last cow, chicken and pig to make sure that nobody eats meat.

That sort of dangerous stupidity suits a Sikh just as poorly as corruption does Singh Ji, whether their hearts were in it or not. We can't be sure, but the oldest photographs of Sri Harmandir Sahib and its precincts suggest that the tiles of the parikrama were largely plain and unadorned.

The SGPC, after they demolished all the beautiful historic bungaay (which we commemorate in our ardaas every day, in a sick twist of irony, praying that they stand for all time - "Chounkiya Chandae Bungaay jugo jug atal") scattered around the sarovar in order to widen the parikrama. Visitors to the city of Amritsar noted that these bungaay were among the very best representations of Sikh art and architecture, their edifices covered with murals and intricate engravings. There is no meaning behind these tiles other than the willful destruction of our history for the sake of 'beautification' and greed (maintaining the artwork of the bungaay would have cost the SGPC a lot of cash). The Gurdwara management of Takhat Sri Hazur Sahib did the same thing, destroying the historic Bunga of the Ramgharia Misl, among other things, so that they could carpet bomb the place with marble. This trend is repeating itself in countless historic Guru Ghars. Several of the mango trees at Gurdwara Amb Sahib, dating back to Guru Gobind Singh's time, were also chopped down to accommodate new marble tiling, and others strangled to death by all the stone. These revolting men have no respect for Sikh Itihaas.

The same Gurbani which his followers routinely ignore by refusing to read Raagmala or do Kirtan in accordance with the Raags lovingly specified by our own Gurus at the beginning of each Shabad? You can deny Bhasaur's influence upon the AKJ all you want, but it's obvious that several of his precepts are represented in the Jatha, including his opposition to Jhatka, Raagmala and Raag kirtan. If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck, then it probably is one. I think Bhai Sahib's heart was always in the right place, he just got pulled in a lot of different directions by the revisionists on the one hand, and by the Nihang Singhs with whom he spent time and in jail (he started keeping Bibek rehat when he was imprisoned with Akali Nihangs) and agitated against the British. I don't believe that Guru Sahib could be accused of sexism for acknowledging that there is a difference between men and women Singh ji. If he had meant for Sikh men and Sikh women to be indistinct in all things, he wouldn't have ordered one group to assume the name 'Singh' and the other 'Kaur'.

Bhai Randhir Singh's religious views were heavily influenced by his excommunicated associate Teja Singh Bhasaur (known as Babu Teja Singh by certain AKJ members), a revisionist of the Lahore Singh Sabha movement. Bhasaur was very-anti Raagmala, to the extent that he advocated it's removal from saroops, along with bhatt savaiye - he even printed saroops not containing either of these baniaan. The fact that Bhai Randhir Singh forgot this when he launched his political action against the British has little bearing on the truth of his maryada. Just because somebody accomplishes a great deal for the Panth, as Bhai Sahib did, does not mean their views are correct. The Sarbloh Bibek rehat is Nihang through and through. No other samparda practiced it until the AKJ appeared. As is the keski rehat (the only group of Sikh women throughout history who ever wore dastaars with consistency were the Akaalins, female Nihangs). I don't discount the possibility that these practices were incorporated into the AKJ due to another acquaintanceship of Bhai Randhir Singh's, this time with the Nihang scholar Akali Kaur Singh. It is clear that the AKJ is an uneasy amalgamation of Bhasaur-influenced anti-Raag protestantism, and puraatan Nihang practice (minus the jhatka which Bhai Randhir Singh detested and wrote books against). My point about the DDT is completely legitimate. You believe that in the nether-reaches of our history all Sikh women wore turbans, so I directed your attention to a Sikh samparda from the 1700s which has never required women to wear turbans, and you tell me that this is besides the point? It's simply the case that a 20th century group is a sorry excuse for an arbiter on Sikh history compared to an institution which has practically seen it all first hand.

A - Actually several of the 52 Hukams are gender specific - Par istree, ma bhain, dhee bhain, kar jaananee. Par istree da sang nahee karnaa| Istree da mooh nahee phitkaarnaa| Singhaa da adhaa naam nahee bulaunaa Guru Sahib is clearly only addressing Singhs here. It wouldn't be a great intellectual leap therefore to assume that Dastaar binaa nahee rehnaa| may also have been specific to men. It's also very likely that Guru Sahib didn't state that the dastaar is only mandatory for men because this was common knowledge at the time. B - If you're going to use the Nihangs as the historic benchmark for the Sikh rehat, then you should accept jhatka/mahaprashad and sukha as authentic precepts of the rehat as well. But you won't, will you? You can't use the Nihangs when something about them suits your agenda, and then discard them when it doesn't. You can't pick and choose like that. Their rehat is their own, not that of the entire Sikh world. C - That's exactly what I'm saying. Some women wear a dastaar, most don't, and good luck to all of them. The Taksaal however has never made it mandatory for the wives of its members (remember that there technically aren't any woman in the Taksaal, it's male-only) to wear a dastaar and that is the distinction. Do I really have to say it again?... I'll try it one last time - The only point I am making is that dastaars were never mandatory for Sikh women. I'm astonished that so few of you seem capable of digesting such a simple idea. These same historical accounts are also the ones which specify that Mai Bhago dressed 'like a man'. If wearing a dastaar was to dress like a man, then it very strongly implies that it wasn't seen on women very often.

Lol. Our Guru tells us to pursue truth in all things. This includes our itihaas, no matter how inconvenient the truths of our history may be to our own personal agendas. Some of you still don't seem to understand the point I am making. I never said that no Sikh woman ever wore a dastaar, I never said that it's inappropriate for a bibi to wear a dastaar. My point is that the situation now, where most bibiaan do not wear a dastaar, is not unlike how it has been throughout our history. The AKJ Rehat is the one that was fabricated by British influenced Sikhs, playing pick and mix with the Nihang Rehat by taking bits they liked (keski, sarbloh bibek) and abhorring those elements which were in conflict with their revisionist policies (jhatka, raagmala/raag kirtan). The Nihangs may have been around since Puraatan times, but so has the Damdami Taksaal. Why do they not require their women to wear keskis? I refuse to believe that a group founded in the 20th century is better placed to access the truths of our history than one which came into existence with the physical blessing of Dashmesh Pitaa himself. It is also worth mentioning that not even the Nihang Singhs make the assertion that the dastaar is mandatory for all Sikh women. No puraatan, historic samparda does.