Charandhoor Singh

Ak 47's post seems to be crux of this and similar discussions on the topic. Probably better to think about and address what he has said than talking about something else.

Whats happening with the programme? Why is it on hold?

The picture of Maharaj in Dastar Boongah and farla is in Baba Mit Singh Boongah at Gurdwara Sahib Jagat Mata Mata Sahib Dev near Hazoor Sahib.

Fantastic effort - who took the seva of organising?

So true, those families were blessed with Raaj by maharaj. What did they do with all their power? - invite the British into Punjab then help them in all their battles against the Sikhs.

http://www.<banned site filter activated>/research/Ta...ar%20takhts.htm This is the link to the article, Sardar Kapur Singh has argued from a metaphysical point of view and has not so much addressed the politics behind the issue. He makes his point pretty clear: THERE are and legitimately remain only four High Seats of Sikh Authority, the 'Takhts' and a recent innovation of fifth takht set up by ignorant heresiarchs and new con-trollers of the official Board of Management of the Sikh historical shrines (S.G.P.C.) is al-together repugnant to and unwarranted by the true Sikh doctrine or the metaphysical postulates and mythological traditions of India. Perhaps something to discuss in a seperate thread, definetely related to the old maryada vs. puratan maryada. I know Hazur Sahib definetely dont (not sure about Patna Sahib) recognise Damdama Sahib as a Takht.

Great news and bad news at the same time, thats just the state of the Panth. About time this happpened. People are often unaware of the who great politics sorrounding our takhts. If I am not mistaken Damdama Sahib was only created as a Takht in the 1960s/maybe 70s. If you speak to well informed elders, they will tell you that Damdama Sahib* in Sabo Kee Talwandee was only created as a Takht so that these reforms against Sikhi could be implemented. Patna Sahib and Hazur Sahib Jathedars were always in favour of puratan maryada, The takhts in Punjab under political pressure were constantly trying to make reforms. When the Jathedars would meet neither side could enforce its views as the votes were 2-2. Many people have absolutely no doubt about it, indeed you can ask Jathedars at Patna Sahib and Hazur Sahib, that the only reason for Damdama Sahib being created a Takht was so that the Punjab Takhts had a majority 3-2 and would always be able to implement their reforms. Sardar Kapoor Singh has written a fantastic article on this subject. * Damdama Sahib has always been known as 'Guru Kee Kashi'

lol

Lol your probably right.

Baba Joginder Singh seems to be doing a good job in the Dalpanth.

Please do not read dasam bani from transliteration.

Mahapapi thats really good to hear. However, its no secret that there are individuals (minority) associated with AKJ who are really against Dasam Bani, particuarly members of AKJ who also side greatly with the Sikh Missionary College iin Ludhiana. These people do not tend to have a significant role within the Jatha but undoubtedly they do tarnish its reputation and create a poor image for the jatha. If its considered Gurbani then surely there should be a 'strict stance' on the issue. Undoubtedly within all Jathas, Sampradas etc we do find minor differences, but surely with a Sikh Organisation there should be a universal stance on Gurbani, as senior members of AKJ have expressed the official stance lets hope it filters down. Also good to note AKJ in India working closely with Giani Sher Singh of Budha Dal. :TH:

What is position of AKJ outside of India, i.e. AKJ UK, AKJ Canada etc? I am sure who associate themselves with AKJ on this forum, perhaps you could enlighten us on your views on the the writings of Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

You may also wish to read up on something called 'cognitive dissonance'

As you seem to have genuince concerns I will respond to your post. Gurbani is brahmgyan, when something doesnt click it means we havent yet understood it, it doesnt mean its not bani. The kind of thinking that becase it doesnt make sense to it cant be write is exactly what destroys religous traditions. As sons of maharaj, maharaj was Kshatri (of warrior caste) by taking amrit and becoming sons of maharaj we too become part of that family lineage. There is no caste distinction between there is equality, in Aarti Aarta we read "Char Varan Ik Varan Karaoo, Vaheguru Singh Ko Naam Japao". Maharaj says he will bring the four castes into one and have the Singh japp Vaheguru. Kshatri's are the noble Kings, maharaj made poor low caste men noble men, hence the hill rajas and others of kshatri lineage objection to maharaj. Maharaj proved that being Kashatri was a way of living as opposed to a right by birth alone - all arguements based on caste discrimination therefore do not apply. Tell me was there a maryada of keshdhari before maharaj, was the title Singh used before maharaj, were raags around before maharaj, did the notion of dharam exist before maharaj, did worship of shastar exist before mahara??? . I am not saying the Gurus borrowed anything, I am saying they re-established truth or Dharam, was there not truth in Satjug? The term Hindu is a very recent construct compared to idea of Kshatri which has been around since Satjug. I suggest you read the book 'Who Invented Hinduism'. The various assertions you have made and the beliefs you have shared dont seem to be backed up by anything, unless you were born all knowledgable then I suggest you do some thinking. Thats not an attack but friendly advice, Sikhi has suffered reform and reform becasue people based their religion on their own opinions.

lol. Ignoring the rest of what you have written for the meantime, please then give your definition of the verse. Also what research are you conclusions of Kshatri's based on? Also please define dharam.

Its common an events for the police to kindly ask Nihang Singhs to move along, infact police do that gesture a lot in India, often for no reason other than the try and act like they are in control lol. It is also not uncommon for Nihang Singhs to stare back at them in that way lol. Who knows....

I think its very evident Maharaj is talking about themselves in that passage, I have never heard anyone say otherwise. I did read some argueing on the Tapoban forum once that Shatri in this contect refers to shastar and nothing else, which was quite far fatched and desperate, not to mention it doesnt make sense no matter what way you look at it. Amazing how people think their wild imaginations are more authoritive in the interpretation of Gurbani that centurys of oral dicourse and written steeks.

Saahiba can I ask you to reference your explanation. It's not one I have heard before and doesnt really seem to make sense. Familiarisation with vishraam and language structure gives the below direct explanation: Maharaj is saying "I am the son of a Kshatri, not of Brahmin..." We have to understand the Dharam of Kshatri's compared to those of Brahmin's if we want to realise what maharaj is saying . Our Guru's were Kshatri both of birth and of deed, hence Guru Gobind Singh's writings and Khalsa maryada follow the lines of Kshartri philosophy. This philosophy has existed before the Guru's but became much diluted and almost lost at the time of maharaj, it was restored by maharaj who in the process also abolished the caste criteria of being Kshatri. Khalsa Dharam and Kshatri Dharam are viewed as one by Nihang Singh's, others recognise its essentially the same thing but arent quite open about it due to modern day connotations of religous terms. Needless to say, those who reject Dasam Pathshah's bani will disagree, as will those who reject ancient Kshatri traditions within the Dalpanth (and therefore cant accept dasam bani). There will probably be others who will be deafened by their "Hindu Hindu Hindu RSS RSS RSS" alarmbells and fail to understand any of the above.

If I remember correctly the Sevapanthi's mention the incident from the 16th Astpaddee in their steek of Sukhmani Sahib. I believe I also heard Yogi Bhajan talk about it, but dont quote me on that.

Hes been an opponent of Dasm Pathshah's bani for a while now, if I remember correctly he was also a critic of the Akhand Path of Sri Dasam Guru Granth Sahib Ji held a while back. Good call by AKJ, would be good to see AKJ and its splinter groups puruse a similar stance on an international level. Im sure senior members of AKJ in India are part of the IHRO on Dasam Bani, what is the stance of AKJ's outside of India?

Giani Dit Singh (whom that website is 'dedicated' to) was a supporter of Sri Dasam Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Its pretty shameful but hardly surprising. I suggest everyone read the thread which Neo has posted the link to and educate themselves on the true enemies of Sikhi.

Does anyone have any of hukamnamas regarding Dasam Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji?

Great video, thanks for sharing!

I wonder what they did with the birdh saroop? Thats appaling, with all the SGPC money all they could do was sticky tape the puratan saroop, absolute disgrace.