chatanga1

This was common in the older saroops, however when SGPC standardised SGGS in the 1940s they chose to omit this from the new standard.

He got his comeuppence. He was tried and hanged as a traitor shortly by the east india company terrorists after the 1st anglo/sikh war.

Gurmat Gian college of which indar ghagga is principal. Not really. There are some threads about him on this site/sikhawareness. Search them. Any in particular? When I first heard dhunda, it was to do with that kamli kalesh, and I thought he was a good parcharak because he was talking about the Panth and such but when i heard his other stuff about gurmat, i was quite surprised at his views. The guy is a cretin.

The word "ਮਦ" means intoxicant. It can be taken as alcohol in some instances but in the context of the above it is refering to intoxicants ie bhang/sukh nidhaan which the Dal Panth has and does consume even today. The three stipulations are all part and parcel of the Dal Panth - jhatka, sukh nidhaan and neela bana. Hope this helps.

Add to that what they actually percieve as Sri Akal Purkh. They say that kudrat ie nature is Akal Purkh, even though Mool Mantar clearly says otherwise. Studying without learning and understanding means little. I could study any subject intensely but unless I understand it, what are others going to get from me? Sikhi starts with blind faith. The faith that there is a God. They all spout the same rubbish. Dhunda sabhra etc.

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/02_Present_Day_Katha/Giani_Pritpal_Singh_(Patiala_wale)/Pracheen_Panth_Parkash_Katha/Giani.Pritpal.Singh.(Patiala.Wale).-.Pracheen.Panth.Parkash.Katha.001.-.2016-06-18.mp3 For further listening: http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audio Go to Audio, then Katha, then "present day katha", and to "Giani Pritpal Singh Patiala" folder. It is all there and it is amazing to listen to katha of this amazing granth, rather than just reading the english translations of the granth. It certainly is a great source of knowledge for the Sikh Panth.

You are. By posting false information on here that Brahma was not the creator of the Vedas, and that Ved Vyas was. You don't do any research into anything but just spout rubbish on this forum non-stop. Guru Granth Sahib says that Brahma wrote the Vedas. Guru Gobind Singh Ji in his holy granth, Sri Dasme Patshah ju ka Granth Sahib says that Brahma wrote the Vedas. And then you come along and say they are wrong. You need to see someone about your hindu-phobia cos it's making you look really stupid. I have warned you about it many moons ago. You implied from your roast that Ram Chander cheated on his wife. If you had bothered to do ANY research into this you would again realise that this is only in modern recensions of ramayan. It is neither in Valmiki Ramayan, and neither in Sri Dasme Patshah ju ka Granth Sahib. Ravan would never have lifted Bhagwaan Shiv Ji's bow just because of his strength. If strength was only required then Bali, who put Ravan in a neck-lock and carried him to all 4 tiraths in one morning would have had a better chance. Sahasarbahu defeated Ravan in battle, and according to legend, only released him because Ravan's family pleaded for mercy. Sri Ram Chander was not the only person to have defeated Ravan. Even Nandi, Lord Shiva's bull defeated Ravan when he tried to force entry to Kailash. Shiv Ji gave Ravan many vardhaans but also took them back when Shiv Ji desired. Ravan was so ahankari of his boons from Shiv Ji that he began to threaten Shiv Ji and Parbhati. This is why he could never have lifted Shiv Ji's bow. The difference between us. I don't spout rubbish online where people can read it and be mislead. You do. You should stop acting like some authority on knowledge and causing harm to others and yourself.

Who said it was the same? You have tried to list 5 examples of what you call deceit, and I have shown you that one of the very same examples was practiced by the Sikhs. You have, with your false information tried to portray Sri Krishna as some kind deviant, and I have told you that in one of those examples you cite, the Sikhs did exactly the same, as did the Pir, to save any harm coming to Guru Sahib. Now let's hear why you are calling Guru Gobind Singh Ji a liar on those other points I have raised.

And what is wrong with that? Its exactly the same situation that Guru Sahib and the Sikhs faced in Macchiwara. You've answered one of my many questions addressed directly to you. And proved yourself to be as I say. Try answering the others, if you have the courage to do so. You, are the biggest perpetrater of false information on this forum. You should be under approval for your posts because they are just venomous and designed to incalculate hate against others.

With this it's either 0% or 100% of accpetance of the history. But in this day, we should know how to use this information so we don't veer towards either number. Guru Sahib in his holy Granth Sri Dasme Patshah ju ka Granth Sahib, does not write that Sri Ram Chander knew anything of Mata Sita expecting a child. Guru Sahib writes that Lord Ram suspected Sita and thus sent her to the forest.

No. This is not the answer. You have actually answered it further in your post. It was Inder Dev who sent Kamadev to enduce Shiv Ji into lust. This was because the child born from Shiv Ji and Mata Parbati "Kartikey" was the one destined to kill the rakhsas and return swarag to Inder Dev. Inder Def through inmpatience sent Kamdev to do this task. No. Sati's love for Shiv JI had nothing to do with ulterior motive. Shiva never became a householder. He is always a jogi/sanyasi. This is it. Another arse vomit from you. Ved Vyas was the rishi who wrote Mahabharat.

Sri Krishan lied to Arjun about what? Bhai Daya Singh told a lie to protect Guru Gobind Singh Ji at Machhiwara. The respected Pir of the Muslims reinforced that same lie by telling the Moghals it was not Guru Sahib. We don't need to get away from it. There is a reason why Guru Sahib wrote in Sri Dasme Patshah Granth Sahib " Ram katha jug jug atal sabh ko bhakt net." We need to learn and understand from these in order to improve ourselves. The root and trunks you are talking about is "Dharam." Another sentence straight out your backside. Sri Vishnu and Shiv Ji are not worshipped out of fear. Some aspect of Shiv Ji are worshipped as fearsome ir Rudra, but even that is not the same as fear-based worship. Its still prema bhagti. And why is Brahma not worshipped in the same way? "Supposedly" ? So according to you, Guru Gobind Singh is not worthy of being totally beleived when Guru Sahibw writes in his holy granth Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth Sahib "bed-raaj brahma ju theeo..."

At the time of Sita being sent to Maharishi Balmik's ashram Ram did not know she was pregnant. As for a "real man." Many thousands died in the war between Sri Ram Chander and Ravan. Cities were destroyed, and lineages were decimated. For one woman. A real man would have said forget killing thousands to save one. A dharmi pursh would have gone to war. Like the Sikhs did, for the Brahman of Kasur. Many times you have, and many times I have reminded you, that you should engage those brain cells rather than talk out of your backside. What research have you done into this epic that you would say something so ridiculous. If Sri ram Chander had no nimrata he would never have gone into the forest at the beckoning of Kaikei. He wouldn't have eaten from the hands of a bhilni - what we in Panjab call chuhre. He wouldn't have invited the Vanar raj, another outcaste to sit at his side to eat. I'm sensing ahankar. Or maybe it's agianta. Actually it seems like both. Sri Ram Chander never cheated on anyone. If he wanted to take another wife, he could simply. Well, he did didn't he. He went there an fought against Ravan's regime. Why haven't you gone to fight the terrorist indian regime? Why are you in UK when indian terrorist regime have been kidnapping, torturing and raping so many sikh females since 84? Has your father been if you haven't? More backside talk. What lying and cheating did Ram do? Tell me. The Hindus call Sri Ram Chander "purshottam" or "maryada pursh" which means "man of the highest order" or "disciplined man". More backside talk. This shudar story is only a recent construction. It is not is Maharishi Balmiks Ramayan. It was first mentioned by Bhagat Tulsidas in his "Sri Ram CharitarManas". Many people do not beleive this story as Sri Ram Chander dined at least twice with lowcastes in Ramayan. There was no such thing as promiscuity in the oldern yugs. Men took more than one wife in many instances. There was instances of people falling prey to kaam but it was not in the manner you are portraying them.

This alone shows you have done zero research into this time period yourself but are just either making up this rubbish yourself or repeating someone else's rubbish.

Do you ever engage that brain of yours before posting? Master Tara Singh? Unforceful? That can only come from someone who knows nothing about his life. You post a lot here. That worries me. I have read some of your other posts here which are just outright lies on Master Tara Singh. Curb your lies. Try researching something before you start shooting your loose mouth off.

I have read it. Its trash. Written by foolish khalistanis who need to pass the blame onto soft targets. I would advise avoiding groups like Dal Khalsa for information /evidence. Ram singh wouldn't have even achieved 5% of what Master Tara Singh achieved. Post some of this trash that you feel is right about Master Tara Singh and we can discuss it. That is very good of Master Tara Singh to have refused the beef if that story is correct. Personally i think its a false story. No sikh would ever encourage the eating of beef to anyone let alone another Sikh. The fact that Master Tara Singhs own father tried so hard to get him to leave the Khalsa Panth but even at the young age of 14 Tara Singh refused his father should tell you something.

Not 8 but meaning powerful, chariot warrior. Someone who is an accomplished chariot warrior.

Mater Tara Singh never said no either. The fact is that he had no decision in the demand for Khalistan. It was Baldev Singh who was asked and Baldev Singh who threw away the opportunity in Dec 1946. The demand for Khalistan was made in 1944. At the time the British thought it was just a ploy to counter the Pakistan agenda and dismissed it as such. After Baldev's decision in Dec 1946, the question was never raised by the british or the Sikhs again.

No it's not true. Master Tara Singh did his best to guide the Sikh community. The problem was that it was the frying pan or the fire. Stooge? of who? The british, congress party and Muslims hated him. If he was a plant, why would Master Tara Singh be the first indian to be arrested and jailed for treason shortly after partition, for asking Nehru to fulfil his "autonomous state" promise? Well so were the Gurus. If you read the life of Master Tara Singh, not only he but another 3 of his brothers ended up taking Pahul. His father was dead against Master Ji's actions. Master Tara Singh was 14 when he took pahul. Before that he and his family were nanak-panthis. Master Tara Singh wasn't corrupt. His problem was that he was too honest. His weakness was that he had no Plan B, which is always necessary in politics. Master Tara Singh tried so hard to get the Panthic Sikhs and Congress Sikh together on one party and one platform to contest elections, but to no avail. I would do some more reading if I were to you to learn more about Master Tara Singh, who has been very unfairly maligned for partition.

This Lord is not one to talk about prejudice and intolerance. He smacks of pride and arrogance. He once posted some nonsense article about Dasme Patshah's Granth on the net. I contacted him by phone and asked if I could discuss some of the points via email. He said yes, but then after the first point I made about Kavi Sainapats "Sri Gur Sobha" NOT being a source of prrof of gurgaddi of SGGS, AND sending him the text, he wouldn't reply and told me not to contact him again. Even in his magazine the arrogant lord has used Sri Gur Sobha as a source of proof. Whatever the bbc is, it is no loss for them, or for the Sikh Panth for this arrogant uneducated lord not being there.

The first mention of this is in 1741 in Gurblias Patshahi Daswin. I don't think that this granth mentions it. Written in 1791, although the saakhi has been mentioned a few times earlier on older texts.

Sri Dasme Patshah Ju ka Granth Sahib is the name given by the Guru after the first binding of the granth in 1698. It has never been known as "Sri Bachittar Natak Granth." Nor did any Sikh name it as such. Bachittar Natak is one granth that makes up part of the whole Granth. Also in the times of the Guru, SGGS was known as "Pothi Sahib." It was the Sikhs who prepared further recensions of it as Sri Guru Granth Sahib,

If you don't mind me asking, why are you going to rome?

No problem. I am pleased by your response that you show you are willing to learn and not have a closed mind like some other akali on this forum.

Ok well you're accusing Baba Thakur Singh of lying then. Great. if you have the heart watch this video: and this: and this where Ram Singh is grovelling for claiming to be the next mukhi: Are you really a nihang? Nihangs don't spread false rumours, tell lies, or destroy other people's livelihoods as far as I know. Or have I been given wrong info about what Nihangs are really like? If Nihangs are brothers of the Taksal why are one set of brothers causing deliberate damage to the other set of brothers repeatedly? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't.