>Bikramjit Singh<

Come on you footy fans, let's hijack this thread!!

Yeah many even have the surname Sidhu-Brar.. although they could be the aristocracy that Niranjana wrote about.. The Jat version of the Palmer-Tompkinson

playoffs, world series, the draft, North American sports go way over my head. Only watched ice hockey for a few minutes once, bit boring, not much skill just people barging into each other! It goes so over my head I'm not even gonna vote! personally can't wait for the world cup qualifiers on Saturday and next Wednesday and then the world cup next year

Paji not only olden days it hapens even now. Mums goths = ur Nanakeh = pind dheh = n Pind Dheh = ur bro/sis= NO MARRIAGE Same with dads goth Dads goth = Ur Dhadhkeh = Pind Dheh = Bro/Sis = NO MARRIAGE ! 124231[/snapback] I know Bhainjee, but recently in Malwa area around Moga many Brars have been getting married to Brars, something that would have been tantamount to incest a few decades ago.

I'm not sure when the DDT started to refer to Dasam Granth as Guru Granth Sahib. But I do know that when the Dasam Granth was first published entitled Dasam Guru Granth Sahib there was a controversy over this, this was a few years ago and even the publishers, a publishing house of Amritsar weren't sure how it would be received. The word Dasam in the title was in very small print and many people were confused and thought that it was the Guru Granth Sahib. As for Nihangs we agree that they have been referring to it as Dasam Guru Durbar probably since the middle of the 18th century. Of the Takhts especially Takht Sri Hazur Sahib there is not much contemporary (ie 18th century) evidence that both the Guru Granth Sahib and the Dasam Granth were both installed together there. It might have started when the Nihangs ousted the Nirmalas from the Takht and replaced the Nirmala maryada with the Nihang maryada there. For the Takht Sri Harmandir Saihb we have the short description of Charles Wilkins who visited the Takht in 1781. His description is of the place having a number of Pothis but he goes on to describe the ceremony in which though not mentioned as such the Guru Granth Sahib is installed and some verses from Gurbani sung with accompaniment of a drum (tabla?) and cymbals. He then goes on to describe the Ardas. The two Sikhs who strike up a conversation with him tell him that apart from the book of Guru Nanak there is another book which came after and is held in 'almost as much esteem as the former'. It is important no note the 'almost' in the statement of the Sikhs at the Takht. Certainly the present maryada at the Patna Takht although described as Puratan is different in many ways than the one noted in 1781. Charles Wilkins does however describe the students at the Takht as reciting the Dasam Granth. The dispute over whether the Dasam Granth was all the work of Guru Gobind Singh or just some of it is not a new issue. Apparently there was a dispute over whether the whole of the Dasam Granth should be complete in one or split into two. It was decided that if both Mehtab Singh and Sukha Singh completed their mission and killed Massa Ranghar then the Dasam Granth would be kept in one pothi. This is an interesting point. If there was a caste issue in the Misls and it was so strong then you would not get Jats fighting in Ahluwalia or Ramgarhia Misls against Misls whose leadership were Jats. Similarly the Jats within the Budha Dal today under Santa Singh would be more likely to have aligned themselves with those Jat leaders within the Dal who were pro-Khalistan. Apart from a few Nihangs taking part in the Khalistan movement there was no large scale support by Jat Nihangs of the Khalistan movement. This of course presupposes that the Jats are as proponderent amongst the Nihangs as they are in the general Sikh population. This does somewhat negate your argument since the locality and leadership regardless of caste were bigger factors than caste solidarity. The negotiations between Mata Sundri and the Mughals are contained in writings of later Sikh writers. These same writers contend that the defeat suffered by Banda Singh was due not to the overwhelming odds he faced but because he went against the instructions issued to him by Guru Gobind Singh. These instructions one of which was not to marry are discounted by Ganda Singh as not in line with Gurmat and he found no records of any negotiations between Mata Sundri and the Mughals in any of the archives that he visited. The animosity between Namdhari and Singh Sabha took place after the attacks on the butchers. This animosity was between the 'sanatan' Singh Sabha rather than the later Tat Khalsa - Lahore Singh Sabha. The animosity was articulated due to the fact that after 1857 the Sikhs had been favoured by the British and the Sikh elite did not wish this favouritism to be endangered by the anti-British actions of the Namdharis. At the beginning there might not have been much animosity between Nihangs and Namdharis but certainly by the time that the Namdharis attacked the butchers in Amritsar the animosity was certainly there as the Namdharis who carried out the attack left a Chakar and a Blue Turban on the site of the attack which led the British police to arrest and torture many Nihangs. Leaving the Chakar and Blue Turban could only have been meant to deflect attention from the real attackers onto the Nihangs. The lapse into Gurudom also came later when the Jats and other castes left the Namdharis and it became more of a Tarkhan movement. As for the pro-british prophecies, it seems that even in the late 18th century there was a prophecy that the Sikhs would be defeated by the Europeans. One European traveller remarked upon it, I forget who. MacAuliffe may have grafted this prophecy into the Sikhs and British both defeating the Mughals.

Some muppet trying to be funny using the sad occasion of Ronnie Barker's death to belittle the Sikh Federation and it's work. The sad muppet is using Ronnie Barker's most famous one liners.

You are wrong about marrying within kin amongst Jat aristocracy. For reasons of their tribal origins, ie one got of Jats are reputed to be descended from one ancestor. A got like Dhillon say that they are descendents of one person so all Dhillons are related even thoug it is many centuries ago. In the old days a Jats didn't marry their kids even into the same gots as father, mother and both sets of grandparents. Only recently has the maternal got to some extent been disregarded.

It was Turkish people who carried out attacks in Turkey! The fact that you know a few good turks doesn't make everyone in Turkey is the same. If there is something that Europeans fail to understand it's that not all immigrants are the same! For the most part Christian East Europeans are hardworking and contributing to the economy. The Muslim East Europeans ie Kosovans and Bosnians either are on the dole or involved in criminal activities. The same is the case of Africans. Christian Africans are hardworking but Somalis are not. The only Muslim people that create no problems in their host countries are the Iranians, all others create problems.

As the polls show most of the European electorate are against Turkey joining. It is the British and Americans who want a pro-American Turkey in the EU to counteract the Anti-American French and Germans. They are just thinking short term not realising how dangerous it could be to have a population of 70 million Muslims with full righs to settle in the EU. The EU already has problems integrating only 10 million Muslims.

Reaching out to Hindus is a good step. For the most part the majority of Punjabi Hindus are not anti-Sikh, it is the small numbers of Arya Samaji, Congressi and communists that are against Sikhs. The concept of a taliban style Khalistan is a scare tactic utilised by the Indian govt which has worked in alienating many Hindus and even Sikhs away from the concept. A Khalistan run along the lines of Halemi Raj of Guru Arjan Devji with Sarbat Da Bhalla as a core concept can hold no danger for the Hindus. As for 1991, the reason for my optimism is that I was visiting Punjab at that time. Just as 7 months after the countermanded poll only 10% of the electorate voted after the boycott by Khalistani organisations it seems a sensible assumption to think that if the movement could make 90% not vote, they could at least have made 60-70% vote for their candidates.

I agree, in the post 9/11 world violence will never achieve any objective. The Dal Khalsa is still struggling for Khalistan, but it will be a peaceful struggle similar to other liberation struggles around the world. Dal Khalsa needs to get like minded parties such as Akali Dal (Amritsar), Babbar Khalsa, Sikh students organisations as well as Kisan unions such as BKU on the same platform. Both sets of ruling parties the Congress as well as Akali Dal - BJP have been failures. The Sikhs know this but they only votes for these blocs because they think that the radical parties have no chance of winning. Like any movement the Khalistan movement has to once again become a grass roots movement such as it was during the 80's minus the violence. The biggest nightmare of Rajiv Gandhi before the 1991 elections was that the Khalistan movement would put candidates up for Punjab assemby elections and win a majority and pass an independence resolution in the Punjab assembly. He knew that once that happened no amount of army or police repression could stop this and the outside world would stop India from arresting or killing legally elected political representatives. This is why Rajiv countermanded the 1991 poll in Punjab which if the Khalistanis had not been politically naive and attacked candidates and boycotted it, a loose coalition of separatists could have won. The rest as they say could have been history and today we would not be discussing whether Khalistan should be created because it would already have been created.

Seems to be my day for giving relationship advice..lol This is complicated. Although you didn't even hold hands you have talked about marriage so it could be that she thinks that you both are going to marry sometime in future. I don't know whether both of you go to the same uni but if its different unis it will be easier because you are not seeing each other daily. A time apart is good in this case. But in the end you will need to be honest. Maybe ask her first about where she thinks that the relationship is going. It might be that she also feels the same as you, the other person can sense when the relationship isn't going well and she may have picked up on your feelings. The worst would be if she feels apprehensive about the relationship but says it's going ok just because she thinks that is what you would like to hear. You say that you still love her so it could be that the relationship is a distraction but maybe in future you will get married but now you just want to concentrate on your Sikhi. From what you say your relationship was more of friends talking about getting married rather than a relationship leading to marriage. Best to be honest but still not hit her with what you feel like all in one go. The worst you can do it hurt her and hurt her Sikhi as well. Hope that helps!

I think you need to remain good friends with him and not make an advance towards him. It looks like the guy has had some bad experiences with Sikh girls but he can't really be sure whether it was because of his turban or because of his weight. It is good that he has been working out and has lost weight. The thing is that when people decide to change their lives drastically in his case lose weight and work out, they get very focussed on things. At the moment along with his weight training he is also focussed on this Muslim girl. The fact that he has had a hard time with Sikh girls probably meant he developed a low self esteem and self image. In this scenario the person starts to think that everyone has it in for him, the Sikh girls and even his family. Although he may have only been rejected by a few Sikh girls he may magnify the rejection by thinking that all Sikh girls just look for clean shaven guys. It maybe that it was his weight for which he was getting rejected for but he might just take it that it was solely for his turban. He now thinks that most people had it in for him. This is dangerous in his case because rather than understand that his family only want the best for him he will believe that like everyone else they just have it in for him and don't want to see him happy. I would be interesting to know whether the Muslim girl showed interest in him when he was 18 stone or just now when he has lost weight. Because he feels that he has been rejected by Sikh girls before he may very well feel that he needs to get back at those who rejected him and show them that he can be happy without them (ie Sikh girls). I think the best you can do is to be mates with him and see whether he comes off the Muslim girl. Because he hasn't had girlfriends before he may be naive when it comes to relationships. There's can be little doubt that she will eventually put her religion before him and ask him to convert. He will probably need you to be his friend when that happens. Hope that helps!

Niranjana Is this really a fair assessment? I feel to the contrary, particularly concerning the Sri Dasam Granth, which is not only elevated to equal status to the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee by Nihangs, but many puratan sampradhas and other groups (Taksal, ,many Sant Deras/Nirmalas, Namdharis, the original Singh Sabha movement) and Thakts (Hazoor Sahib and Patna Sahib) have held this practice and still do. The claim that it was given Guruship by the ‘Akali Nihang Singh Khalsa’ is one that I would personally challenge rather that the practice of having the Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Sri Dasam Granth kept in Parkash within a Gurdwara. I think your misunderstand my point. Various sections of Sikhs have differing views about the Dasam Granth. Some accept it all as the work of Guru Gobind Singh, others accept only some parts as Guruji's work. This however is different from explicitly referring to Dasam Granth as Sri 'Guru' Dasam Granth Ji. Only Nihangs refer to it as Dasam Guru Durbar. The Maryada of the Takht Sri Hazur Sahib as well as the Takht Harmandir Sahib at Patna can hardly be relied upon and contrary to UK Nihang claims of 'Puratan' Maryada this maryada owes a great deal to the previous nirmala officiants of the Takht. The Sarabloh Granth is a different matter, whilst it is true that having Parkash of all three Granth Sahibs is no ‘puratan’ maryada as the Nihangs (whether UK or India) like to make out and is in fact a recent innovation and even then is not followed in all Nihang Deras, it is a useful means by which to assess the wider issue of Nihangs being “the” Khalsa Panth inaugurated by Guru Sahib, since why would this text have to come into their possession through an Udasi, particularly since they are supposed to have a “lineage” back to Guru Gobind Singh? Moreover, relations between these sampradhas are not really as cushy as made out by some (see the 6 puratan rehitnamas, there is explicit reference within these for the Khalsa NOT to have sangat with various groups, in one case, Udasis are included within this group). This is exactly my point. A group will lays great stress on puratan maryada is so open to acceptence of the Sarbloh Granth as 'Guru' even though some noted scholars considered the Sarbloh Granth as the work of Sukha Singh This analysis is again that can be easily applied across all sections of the Panth who see themselves as the “True Khalsa”, most are hardly doing much to do anything against the killings of Sikh youths, much less any other youths, given the increased levels of Sikh militant groups in the past 2 decades who have taken to using tactics previously the hallmark of Islamic groups. Not really. No other section of the Panth claims to be Guru Diyan Laadliyan Faujan! and neither do they feign preparing for war 24/7. Other Panthic group in some degree took part in the movement. AKJ, DDT, Babbar Khalsa, Dal Khalsa, AISSF, Akali Dal all took part in the movement. What is ironic is that probably more Hindu youth took part in the movement than Nihangs! The politics of the Nihangs during the 1980s was indeed like that of the Misl period, where the Singhs aligned themselves predominantly on caste lines and by nothing other than sheer numerical majority, Jat Sikhs rose to power and owing to their predominance were able no doubt to convince the Sikh masses that they were acting on behalf of the ‘Panth’. The same is true for the 1980s, and the Nihangs have also behaved in the same way as there is more than just one leader (Baba Santa Singh) who take a stand on the events that unfolded, many (like Baba Balbir Singh Akali) didn’t agree with him, others like Baba Nihal Singh went onto support the Khalistanis full fledged – interestingly the Nihang Chiefs of smaller dals were spit in their support for the Kharkoos on the same lines as the Misls were… The caste base of the Misls was a later development. Initially the Misls leaders chose youth from their own villages or the area around these villages. The Ramgarhia and Ahluwalia misls which have latterly been used to denote the Tarkhan and Teli castes had men of all castes with them. The so-called inter-caste Misl conflicts ( namely between Ramgarhia on one side and Ahluwalia and other Misls on the other ) which some writers in Punjabi journals nowadays seek to highlight today was nothing of the sort. No Misl was strictly based around one caste. It would be highly unusual if Jats had not got a predominate role in the Misls given that they made up a majority of the Sikhs at that time. I presume you don’t mean 1469 and this is a typo? Thats a typo, I meant 250 years from 1469. What are forums views on the following points: 1. The Nihang Khalsa was under the employ of the Hill Rajas and also the Moghul administration? On Sikhawareness, the moderators ran a 101 discussion on the Sanatan Sikhs as part of which was a discussion on Banda Singh Bahadur and the role played in his defeat by Baba Binod Singh (the claimed first Jathedar of the Buddha Dal) who was in the employ of the blue dressing Moghul government). With regard to Banda Singh Bahadur we need to be careful with even Sikh sources because given the later animosity between Tat Khalsa and Bandai Khalsa. Sikh writers such as Rattan Singh Bhangu and others have written many things about Banda Singh such as the Mata Sundri writing to Banda Singh asking him to surrender at the request of the Mughals. 2. The Misl Shaheedan as the historic Nihangs, upon becoming custodians of the Gurdwaras managed the distribution of Khande-d-Pahul, so where then does the customs of Kirpan/Kard da Amrit materialise, why does the banis recited during the preparation of the Pahul and those prescribed for recitation by new Singhs vary so considerably if this was in the hands of a single institution? Something that the UK Nihangs need to consider when promoting the Nihang Maryada as 'Puratan' The Namdharis were bound to have a “dim view of the Nihangs” as they disagreed on many points such as meat, blue dress etc. This is not really a valid argument, as the Namdharis held arguably (and still do) an even dimmer view of the Singh Sabha elite. o this can be discounted to a degree. I don't think so. The fact that the Namdharis could formulate an ideology which went against the Nihangs and at one stage (before the killings of the butchers) could carry a large number of Sikh with them shows that the Nihangs at that time were not considered the original Khalsa. Otherwise it would have been difficult to go against the Nihang beliefs and the Namdharis would have been considered as heretic from the onset. The Singh Sabha, as some would argue and would be correct to do so, were opposed to the Nihangs owing to close proximity to the British – what I do find interesting is why would the British be “surprised” about “how much inroad brahmanical thought had made”??? Moreover, not only be surprised, but then take an active role, as suggested alongside the Singh Sabha to purge such elements from the Sikhs? Whilst I personally cannot agree with all the practices that were in vogue during what H. Oberoi described as the Sanatan Sikh era, I cannot help but be suspicious of the British involvement within this latter period of reform – this is also borne out by the false propaganda means utilised by the Raj. For instance the ‘Topi Wale Sikhs’ prophecy, which is nothing but a sham, a means of recruiting Sikh loyalty and interests for the service of the British Empire and likewise the writings of the Max Arthur Macauliffe. In the case of the latter, let’s consider the following commentary by his close associate, Bhai Laskhman Singh: “He had a grievance against the Government which refused to recognisze his work. He believed that he had done a signal service to it by earning the gratitude of the Sikh community for Government in allowing him to undo the mischief which Dr. Ernest Trump, a German , missionary, had done to them by his caricature of the Sikh scriptures. He was offered a paltry sum of rupees five thousands as a gift by the Government of India which he indignantly refused. He had also a grievance against the Amritsar Sikhs against whom he wrote a satire and sent it to me with a request that I should get it published.“ Singh, 1965:123-4 Clearly, from this paragraph we can see, Macaufille’s work was not exempt from an underlying agenda, much like all Orientalist scholars – the key points to note are that he sought to “signal service to it by earning the gratitude of the Sikh community for Government in allowing him to undo the mischief which Dr. Ernest Trump, a German , missionary“ clearly pointing to the need to recruit Sikh sentiments and favour. So what exactly was the role of the British Administration within the shaping of future events? Whatever faults the British may have had in their divide and rule policies and creation of pro-british prophecies, one cannot deny the fact that the British compared the rites and rituals of the Sikhs at that time with reference to the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib. Although Oberoi and lately the UK Nihangs would have us believe that this was British interference in their 'enchanted universe', even before the British took over the Punjab there was a reform movement which looked to just the Guru Granth Sahib to evolve the Gursikh lifestyle. The Nirankaris were totally against the Brahmanical practices that had infiltrated into Sikhism at that time. This reform movement which began decades before the annexation of the Punjab shows that far from a 'sanatan' Sikh world at ease with itself taking part in rites and rituals contary to Gurbani there was unease especially amongst the more religiously minded in the Panth at the state of Sikhism at that time. It is certainly ironic that before the annexation the British administrators of the area of Ganga doab would write with considerable distain of the increasing number of Sikhs going to pilgrimage to the Ganga each year considering it against Sikh teachings yet the Sikhs going to the Ganga were blissfully ignorant of it! A couple interesting points are related to this point: 1. The morcha against the largely Udasi mahants was also supported by the Nihangs, so again it is surprising to see in view of real life events and the rehitnama literature, that relations between these groups are made out to as close as they are by some. This is largely a mythical construction, the UK Nihang myth of a sanatan sikh society united and everyone getting along with each other until the big bad Singh Sabha ruined everything! The so-called sampardhas were distrustful of each other. 2. Correct me if I’m wrong, but were the Akalis not dressed in Black and also later supportive and active in the ‘ahimsa’ ideology of Gandhi? Most wore Black clothes and Turbans but in later stages of the movement the colour was blue as it has been ever since then.

Radhi means useless. About your friend who refused to stand for the national anthem, one of my friends when he graduated in the 90's was getting his degree from Princess Anne and he just walked past her and took the degree and didn't even acknowledge or shake her hand. He said he was going to do the splits in front of her but he chickened out

Congrats for getting the job and Bedford has loads of Apnay so you should feel at home there.

Interesting discussion. I agree with Niranjana (probably a first!) that the Nihangs are not the original Khalsa. Yes, they may believe in and have usages that are the same as or similar to what the rest of the Sikhs believe but that does not mean that Guru Gobind Singh created the Nihangs in 1699, Guruji created the Khalsa and the Khalsa is not the same as the Nihangs, no matter how many myths the UK Nihangs make up to try and prove this. As MS514 Bhaji said the Nihangs follow 5 kakkar rehat and follow Guru Granth Sahib but they also refer to Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth as Guru. This is an arbitary decision taken sometime in the 1770's because Guru Gobind Singh only gave Guruship to the Guru Granth Sahib. Later in the early 1800's the Sarbloh Granth suddenly appeared and this too was arbitarily given the status of Guru! Your reference to Nihangs sewa of the sword is a bit of a fallacy given that most Nihangs stood by whilst the cream of the Sikh youth were killed in fake encounters. I'm sure you would agree that were the Nihangs the 'true' Khalsa they would have definately done something to stop of killings of Sikh youths, I mean the True Khalsa would have defended the youth of any religion let alone just Sikhs. Although this could be argued as politics and due to Santa Singh's links to Indira Gandhi, yet it is still important because a True Khalsa does not get involved in dharraybandiyan ( factionalism) This is also an important point as my personal view is that the Nihangs of today are just a left over from the Misl Shaheedan or the Nishanwalia Misl. This Misl unlike the others which were concerned with perpetuating the Khalsa Raj through annexation of land to their authority, the Misl Shaheedan looked after the Gurdwaras and whilst the other Misls settled down to rule their areas, the Shaheedan Misl carried on living the liefstyle that the whole of the Khalsa lived between 1708-1770, ie travelling from place to place, the chakarvarti existence. I am sure we are all aware of the Misl politics, when there was no common danger to the Khalsa, the Misls would fight amongst themselves. Later on some would even ally themselves with the enemies of the Sikhs to fight their petty rivalries. The politics of the Nihangs in the 1980's was similar to how a Misl would have behaved say in the 1790's. They allied themselves not based on any common cause, not for the Khalsa brotherhood but on the personal whim of their leader. In considering whether the Nihangs are the orginal Khalsa we also need to consider that given the Nihang lifestyle of today, is this what Guru Gobind Singh had in mind for the Khalsa. For 230 years before 1469 the Sikhs lived a relatively settled existence when the time came for Sikhs to fight for their rights under Guru Hargobind Sahib they proved themselves to be good fighters. The Nihang lifestyle came as a matter of circumstances when the Sikhs had to move from place to place due to the persecution by the Mughals. After the Khalsa became predominant in Punjab, the rest of the Sikhs settled down, many would have gone back to their villages to farm their lands and many would have gone back to their hereditary occupations within the villages and the towns. The Shaheedan Misl instead of taking over land continued to live the nomadic lifestyle and looking after the main Gurdwaras. The main body of the Khalsa, the other Misls started to rule their areas under their leaders. These Misls became kingdoms and some were finally swallowed up by the kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. As the Shaheedan Misl controlled the main Gurdwaras it came under their authority to give Khanday Di Pahul to new Sikhs. Whilst the Misls were locked in their struggle against the Mughals, a significant number of Khalsa lived within the jangal des area (modern Malwa) in settled communities under the rule of one or another of the Phul Rajas or their own Chaudharis. These Sikhs didn't live a Nihang lifestyle moving from place to place. The Shaheedan Misl became the Nihangs. During the period 1770-1849 both sets of Sikhs, the Nihangs and the settled Sikhs were affected by the prevalent customs and popular religion of the times. The settled Sikhs because of the large numbers if non-Sikhs who converted to Sikhism also assimilated many of the non-Sikh beliefs of these new converts. The Nihangs were affected by the Tantric rites of the Hindus of the hills as well as the Devi worshippers of southern Punjab. The ease in which a newly discovered Sarbloh Granth in the 1790's was given the status of Guruship shows that the Nihangs were not really strict about keeping the purity of their beliefs. Although the Uk Nihangs now ply the theory that the Sarbloh Granth was a 'hidden' Granth which apparently only the Nihangs had and which they kept secret. The fact is that even the Udasi writer that Santa Singh got to publish the Sarbloh Granth states in the forward that the Sarbloh Granth came to Punjab in the first decade of the 19th century. So all the great Sikh leaders, Nawab Kapur Singh, Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, Jassa Singh Ramgarhia and others did not have the Sarbloh Granth with them. Considering the UK Nihangs rage about the Bir Ras of the Sarbloh Granth, yet the generation that needed the Bir Ras the most was without this Granth. I've laboured this point a bit but this is just to show that the Nihangs were not very stringent in keeping their beliefs pure and allowed a new Granth to be given the Guruship. This shows how easy it could have been for other non-Sikh beliefs to also gain a foothold amongst the Nihangs. The majority Sikhs, those who settled down after the Mughal rule had ended in Punjab were affected by the popular religion of Punjab and it came as a surprise to the British when they annexed the Punjab as to how much inroad brahmanical thought had made. This necessitated the Singh Sabha movement of the 1870's and it is to be noted that none of the Singh Sabha leaders placed much store by the liefstyle of the Nihangs. Other Sikh reform movements particularly the Namdharis were hostile to the Nihangs and although some may argue that Singh Sabha view of to Nihangs was due to their closeness to the British, yet the same cannot be argued for the Namdharis were were anti-British yet still had a dim view of the Nihangs. Niranjana is correct that many modern Jathas of the Panth have taken the Nihang to be the original Khalsa and have tried to replicate their organisational structure. This first came about during the Akali movement to take over the Gurdwaras from the Mahants. The Akali movement took the Blue colour of the Nihangs and wore blue Dastars, they referred to their Akali leaders as Jathedars (none of the later Misl leaders were referred to as Jathedar, mostly just Sardar) similar to how the Nihangs refer to their leader, they also took the term Dal, Punjabi for army for their political organisation (Akali Dal). This is becoming a bit of a 'war and peace' post so I'll stop here. I look forward to the views of the other members

KZ I'm with SGPC on this one. Just one question since you are supporting the DDT/Sant Samaj can you give us your view from Gurbani why women cannot take part in Sewa, Kirtan as well as be members of the Panj Pyares. Btw did you know that the RSS/BJP are also against the Nanakshahi calender.

Niranjana As you know I only attended the last of the now infamous lectures of Niddar Singh last November. As far as evidence presented to support the UK Nihang ideology at that lecture, I can honestly say there wasn't any. The same goes for the websites. Some people may be convinced by transcripts of tape recordings from so and so Baba but this isn't real evidence. Making statements without any support or clear references is a typical technique of those who have nothing solid to offer, as is bypassing any requests for proper references. I am sure you yourself through the sikhawareness forum are familiar with what I am alluding to. For this debate to progress perhaps you could bring up a topic related to the Nihangs and provide the references ( if any ) provided by the UK Nihangs and then we can proceed to examine the references and the theory.

What town is this Gurdwara in?

Lol yeah the nakli baba discussion should be good! Has anyone thought of getting all the Youth Sewadars from the different cities and combining the resources to set up a perminant radio station by the youth for the youth on both the Internet and on satellite? If everyone whose interested in doing sewa got together i'm sure it's possible and would be a good way on getting the youth into Sikhi

You've got the best person 'oup north' already who is ideal for helping out in the youth radio shows. Here's some clues 1. She drives like Mr Magoo 2. Is blacklisted by all the major motor insurance companies even the foreign ones 3. All the major religions have built places of worship just outside her city so that people driving their cars into town can pray that she doesn't crash into them 4. She has reversed her car into her sister injuring her ankle

Dear Bikramjit Singh, Thanks for your reply, Thats the problem, by reading some of the biographies as you put it, of course your vision is going to be distrorted. you shouldnt belive everything you read. Why do some temples in india have these disgusting sexual artistry on them? God wouldnt allow that. rape murder perversion are plaguing mankind everywhere, because not everyone is a believer, it has always been like that, sad fact of mankinds misuse of his existence. Yes there was vile activity also at the time of Muhammad (pbuh) but we dont have that doctrined into our religion and plastered on the mosque walls. Yes, you have it in your Koran and the hadith instead. The power of imagination is greater than the erotic statues in a complex of Hindus temples in Central India. I mean the suicide bombers who are told they will get 73 virgins, these virgins will stay virgins even after they have been with these 'martyrs'! Is that any better than the Hindu images? In fact it's even worse because no erotic image in a Hindu temple causes some Hindus to go and commit mass murder to try and reach the virgins in heaven. The bioigraphies I was writing about is the Sira and more importantly the Hadiths in one of which Mohammed allows his followers to RAPE captured women. In other biographies he Kills a whole tribe of Jews and then takes the most beautiful jewish woman whose husband he's just had killed and beds her the same night. Its plain to see for those with real knowledge, the same religion has been manifest around the world, but we have messed it up, havent you ever played chinese whipers when you were young? its a fact, stories get distorted and exagerated and can never stay the same over hundreds of years, if you actally attempt to claim that we were all given different belief sets, i.e. muslims told about 1 god, and hindus reincarnation, then your sadly mistaken, it does not make any sense does it? Religion is universal, for all mankind, and so it must have been exactly the same for everyone at some point, and the aim of all messengers is to take us BACK to the path, erm , why did Guru Nanak implement islamic values? All prophets from all time have only ever preached islam, even your Guru did so, thats the truth for you to see. I see you understand the concept of chinese whispers! So all the more surprising that you would hold the Koran to contains the teachings of Mohammed considering it was collated and written down decades after Mohammed. Did Mohammed's companions indulge in Chinese whispers?. I do not claim that we were all given different set of beliefs, my theory is that Waheguru gave people the teachings to the point to which they could understand. It would be impossible for say a Neanderthal man to understand 84 lakh joon, compassion to all, a loving God, a God without hate and enmity. So as mankind progressed they got closer and closer to the truth. First the one God which came around the town of Akhnaton in Egypt although the concept of one God is also contained in the early Hindu scriptures. Then you have Judaism which has some truth, Christianity with a loving God and then a backwards step with the coming of Islam with the concept of God again reverting to being of hatred for non-believers. The Christian concept of loving all was negated in Islam with Mohammed teaching that Muslim should hate non-Believers for the SAKE OF ALLAH! With Sikhism I believe that you have the best that modern man can aspire to. A Loving God, respect for others beliefs, an God without hate and enmity towards none. yes, but only in Hollywood movies. You need to distinguish fact from vast exageration. Apologies I had assumed that I was debating with a Muslim aho actually knew about the history of his faith. Do you deny that thousands of Arabs left Islam after Mohammed's death and that Mohammed's successors had to fight a blody war to bring them back to Islam. There is even evidence that many former Jewish and Pagan women who had been forced to convert to Islam rejoiced when news came of Mohammed's death. "Not only were there apostates from Islam to Christianity in Abyssinia, but many of the Arabs themselves turned back to their old idolatry after Mohammed's death, and were treated as apostates. War was declared against them to the knife. In Oman many of them were butchered. "Certain women at an-Nujair having rejoiced at the death of the Prophet, abu-Bakr wrote ordering that their hands and feet be cut off. Among these women were ath-Thabja al-Hadramiyah, and Hind, daughter of Yamina, the Jewess."1 Only by submitting and paying tribute did any of them save their lives. When the Arabs of Bahrain apostatized under the leadership of Al-Hutam, war was made upon them" There's no doubt that you have been brought up with a sugar coated account of Isamic history. If america can put people on deathrow, and be sick enough to choose different methods to murder them, by lethal injection or electric chair, and this country seems to be setting the moral framework of the world, promoting pornography gambling and an array of other mind corruptors around the world... then why shouldnt leaving your faith be punishable by death??? Leaving your faith to adopt a western life? to adopt what? western values that encourage self gain lust and greed ? The only law that if broken be punishable by death should be that of God. People are put to death in America because they themselves have been guilty of murdering other people. If your feeble mind can equate capital punishment by the state for murder with the way that Islam teaches Muslims to kill those who leave Islam then there is no hope for you. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ? yes the way i right tells you exactly what my beliefs are and you have already classified me into a class and decided that i am treated as a non-muslim. Oh so can you confirm that you are not an Ahmedi?, mind you as Islam allows you to lie if it is to the benefit of Islam i don't take much stock by your answer When did i say Guru Nanak was a muslim? i dont repeat any vile lie and i dont follow a founder. You are ranting on like a fool. Its this exact lack of self control and ranting that causes wrong stereotypes to be made about people, the way you are talking is very dangerous, it sounds pretty ignorant, and lets you down man. You wrote earlier that Guru Nanak implemented 'islamic beliefs' I will not justify the carbomber's actions because he is obviously not a muslim, even if in his deluded state he thinks he is, because the punishment for commiting suicide and being a coward and not facing your life and dying as ordained, is hell. It is said, that once you commit suicide, you relive your death everyday repeatedly until the day of judgement, suicide does not bring peace, it brings infinite suffering. Well who are we to believe? You who have come here with a sugar coated version of Islam, the one where someone who murders through suicide bombings is bound for hell, yet your scholars say that it is technically not suicide but a martyrdom operation. So who shall we believe? Someone who has just proved on this post that he doesn't know much about Islamic history and believes that freemasons control the media or scholars who have studied Islam all their lives? Again, you are talking like an ignorant person, dont belive everything you see or read in the media. Do you know who owns the media? do some research, the world is all about freemasons fighting muslims, and that is how it will be until the day of judgement, take your sides now. Research, you will be surprised. Keep taking the medicine! Look up MK Ultra mind control, yes the government has zombies to carry out dirty deeds for them, experiements are always going on... these are preparations for the takeover of the world by the masons in their New World Order. Why do you think there is an epidemic recently in London/UK where wierdos are randomly stabbing babies in pushchairs, and people going into schools and gunning down kids? no one would have any reason to do these things, these are government experiments, in their plan to take over the world. All religions are making it easy for the free mason to beat the muslims, your selling your souls to the devil, wake up please. I repeat keep taking the medicine The Quran says you have to respect the laws of the land you live in, it doesnt mean i have to eat pork, because i can choose not to, but the banking system is a bot hard to avoid, and i dont think it a sin if the bank pays you pennies, they use your money and make a lot more, i thinkcommon sense needs to be applied here, its about intentions. I agree, islamic banking is same banking, but interest is called profit. car insurance is the law, and so yes do have it. Life insurance is optional, and my life is insured by God. Common sense can be applied to Islam! Wow you would be advised to not repeat that amonst other Muslim because you might just end up facing the same punishment that you have been supporting for apostasy. According to any rational person killing someone because they leave a religion is against common sense, so do you only use your common sense in some matter and not where common sense is against what the Koran tells you. Islam was never spread through violence, if you check history (not propaganda western books printed in the last 50 years) you will find that it is the muslims that have been slaughtered throughout time, by Jews, Christians, Hindus, and Sikhs, and havent you ever thought why the whole world is pretty united against muslims??? You as a sikh will stand together with a christian and a jew and mock a muslim.... because i am telling you the truth and there is no compulsion in it. The first line of your statement shows that you have neither studied Islamic history or have been reading childrens books on islam. We've just seen the effect that Islam can have on simple minds with the bomb blasts in London. No it is not anybodys right to make partners with God. We can live with any explanation that makes sense, and Christianity is flawed. Christians will say Islam is flawed. Whatever you may believe about the trinity Christianity certainly has a superior set of ethics and concept of God than Islam. Lets say I would get on better with a Fundamentalist Christian than I would with a Fundamentalist Muslim ( whether he is carrying a rucksack or not! ) Check your facts please, jews in israel update the Laws, the really religious sect of Jews in Jerusalem violently oppose this, search the net. A site set up by conspiracy nuts has some half truths in there, you have to use your knowlege, learn about New World Order, and what they do. Muslims expose the conspiracies that blind you The last statement is the most amusing things I have ever read! Muslims believe that Jews did 9/11, 7/11 and mostly every other act of terrorism that Muslims have done. Muslims keep alive the conspiracy sites on the net! Its a farytale, get over it, im not disrespecting anyone, because the whole concept goes against any logical thinking, beyond common sense. Wake up to the truth, God made Man from clay, God would never lower Himself to embody man, and God would never take the form of a moneky or other animal with 6, 8, arms and legs, people are sooooooo blind! please wake up. We also do not believe that God becomes a Man. But we also beleive that if that is what a person wants to beleive then so be it. We don't go hyper over it and all we do it to wish them well. Unfortunately there are many Muslims who cannot live and let live and as directed by the Koran need to abuse and humilate those who believe in these things. your being blind ignorant again... Things going wrong in your own life is your own fault. Things going right in your life is thanks to the will of God. Things going wrong in Islam in general is due to people themselves losing the way, and that is why the west gained the upperhand, but the West is nor promoting anything decent to mankind, capitalism and all these products that we are into is the West's way to blind you from Islam. Islam is the truth, and THE REASON THE WHOLE WORLD MEDIA IS TARNISHING ISLAM IS TO HIDE THE TRUTH FROM YOU. That Freemasons pray to Satan and are at war with God's people, the muslims. OK, the people who control all the world governments, banks, and legal systems all pray to the Devil, and are waiting for his return, and they are fighting Gods people, the muslims, as we wait for Jesus. WAKE UP GUYS !!!!!!! No one is saying that everything the west is promoting is good. So what does Islam promote that is so much better? Ok it's promotes slavery right? Always has done and always will. It promotes killing a Muslim who leaves Islam. It promotes the rape and enslavement of women captured from the enemy. It makes women's testimony 1/2 that of a man. A women cannot become the PM or president of a country. Well if Islam is so great and the west so bad, what the heck are you doing in the west? Again, you are ignorant, and shaming yourself. I see where you are comming from, but in the 7th century, where murder and rape was rife, and it wasnt like here with alarms on homes and double glazing, it was quite unsafe to live, and so a man marrying his friends daughter can only be saving her from her inevitable fate in a barbaric society. Those actions would not be acceptable now, beacuse there is absolutely no need to protect a human life with this extreme action, however ponder this again, who invented these age bands for us? 16? 18? 21? Freemasonic devaition of mankinds way of thought, please wake up and see that all that matters in life is if you are muslim, or non-muslim, nothing else matters, that is why people from all religions collude against islam, and that is why all you see is the fight against islam. So Mohammed was saving Aisha from living in a barbaric society, I bet she wished double glazing and alarms had been invented in his time so she wouldn't ahve had to marry a man 50 years older than her!! I am sure if you actually research Islamic sources of that you will see that the 'saving' of Aisha was never the intention. As for saving someone from rape, Mohammed did the exactly the opposite when he allowed his followers to rape captured women! Earlier it was said that sikhs dont have a death sentence if somebody leaves sikhism, well i guess it must be very rewarding to do so then... ??

Mintu Ji i'm sorry to hear about Amritpal Singh's health. I will do Ardas for his good health and I hope the rest of the Sangat on this forum will do the same. Btw the A Sect or the Original Form of Khalsa? chapter looks very interesting. i have my own views whether the Nihangs were ever the original form of the Khalsa but it would be good to read Amritpal Singh's views on the subject.

For some reason the quote feature isn't working so my comments are in bold Hello, i just read the quite lengthy discussion between a converted muslim girl and the administrator?? interesting reading, even though i disagreed with both parties slightly in some areas. The Sikh brother has some viewpoints that i clearly differ with, and the muslim sister blatantly said some bloopers to make us muslims look stupid, she did have some good points but sounds a bit dumb through her writing, i can only imagine what rude gal she used to be. Anyway, i am a muslim guy, 28 years, and have lived with muslims hindus and sikhs over the years. I agree totally that hindus are lost souls. Idol worship, Kama Sutra, the whole works is a mess. Idol worship, kamasutra is that all Muslims think Hinduism is..lol. You should read some of the biographies of Mohammed and they far outclass the kamasutra, slave women, rape, killing women's husbands and then bedding the women on the same night! much better than any work of fiction but as any new reader should be warned it's not exactly mills and boon, more top shelf than romance. Look at it like this... God has always sent the same message to all people around the world over thousands of years, some of the messages differed slightly dependant on the circumstance of events prevailing at those specific times, but the general moral values and ethical teachings were exactly the same. Sikhism has been around fow what 400 years? and the vast majority (maybe) seem to drink, which is strictly forbidden. These days with university culture many sikhs smoke, you all know it. thats only 400 years. It's actually 536 years. Your claim that all prophets gave the same message can be easily refuted unless of course you consider any teachings by prophets previous to Islam to have been corrupted. Doesn't Allah say in the Koran that 'today I have perfected your religion for you' So does this not imply that the 'perfection' took place during some stage when Mohammed was chatting to Gabriel? Yes many Sikhs do not follow their religion too well. You claim that this is only in the last 400 years but do you know that the same Muslims who converted during the time of Mohammed reverted back to their previous beliefs on Mohammed's death. Imagine that only a few months after he died they denounced Islam and had to brought back to the 'true' religion through violence and bloodshed. Sikhism doesn't need the threat of death sentences to keep Sikhs within their religion, that's something that Islam has needed throughout its history. Given your style of mediocre template style writing I can say with confidence that you are an Ahmedi. Well your own sect which is about 1% of Muslims have the belief that all other Muslims are wrong and only you are right. So doesn't this mean that only 1% of Muslims follow their religion, and that 1% maybe an overestimate as it assumes that all Ahmedis are practising. Curiously your sect is treated as non-Muslims in many Muslim countries. In Pakistan your people have been killed and ironically you are only safe in Qadian in Punjab in India and yet you still repeat the vile lie of your founder that Guru Nanak was a Muslim! How's that for being ungrateful? What also happend in 400 years is this, when Sikhism started, with all the talk of a warrior cast, i think The Guru, already dissatisfiued with idol worship and ludacriss ideology of the hindus, saw this formation as a saviour for his people, a chance to save the people from the doomed hinduism, and so he incorporated ideas from other religions and you all know this better than me. But think of the maths, even with sikhism growing, there were still millions of hindus everywhere around sikhs, and all sikhs had and still do, have hindu cousins and family members, and so naturally mix-hindu-sikh marriages have occured, and thats how much of hindu culture has very quickly infiltrated your religion, and it is a very big cause for concern for you. As Mehtab Singh Veerji said, this is our problem which we will try and rectify it. Shouldn't you be doing something worthwhile for your religion rather than point out some problems in ours? You sound like a guy shouting from the widows of his burning house to the house opposite warning your neighbour that he might be in danger because he's left his TV on while he is asleep! Sort out you own religion before your pontificate on the problems you perceive to exist in ours. Just yesterday a Muslim drove into a suburb of Baghdad and with a loudhailer called out large groups of Muslims who were waiting in the square looking for daily work. He told them he had work for them and when they were all grouped around him he blew himself up and KILLED OVER 100 of them!! Tell me what other religion today can totally KILL the humanity and compassion within one person and make him go out and kill over 100 of his fellow human beings? No doubt he shouted 'Allah Hu Akbar' - Allah is great before he killed over 100 fellow human beings? Justify this or show us that Islam does not destroy the humanity of it's adherent. A true sikh is one who follows the teachings of Guru Nanak to completion. I see sikh families walking down the street sometimes, and they look just like a pakistani family, the way the daughters are in shalwar kameez, and the only notable difference is the father's turban. I know there are proper sikhs who havent sold out to capitalist/materialist beliefs, people who dont drink dont smoke, humble honest hard working people. But the signs of 400 years are showing. You own beliefs say that 99% of Muslims are not following their faith. How many Muslims have a bank accounts with western banks, well that's against your religion because interest is involved. Oh yeah some Muslims go in for Islamic banking in which a few minor adjustments are made but which also has an element of interest but its renamed into something else. Do you have car insurance, well that's illegal as well although some Imam knowing how outdated and unrealistic it is to expect people to live a 7th century desert lifestyle in the 21st century have started to reinterpret the unworkable Islamic rules to fit into modern times. Islam has been around for 1400 years, and as described about sikhs just now, we have also fallen down similar paths, whereby now we have more than 50 different groups who all claim to practice the true "islam", we believ that on day of Judgement, there will be 73 sect of muslims, and only 1 will be on the path to heaven, all others will have got it wrong, so even amongst muslims we are in deep trouble, sikhs are still quite unified, but muslims are all fighting, and as i just said, 72 factions out of 73 are not practising the teachings of Allah through the Quran as they should be. Arabs? lets not even go there.That is 1400 years of deviation for you. The deviations started as soon as Mohammed was dead. Only violence could bring some former Muslims back to Islam. Jesus (peace be upon him) delivered God's message 2000 years ago, sight my earlier comments on this, all messages are the same at their routes, morally and ethically, as a muslim, we believe that all prophets taught Islam. But, 2000 years on it has been mis-sold as christianity, and they have divided God into 3, the father, the son, and the holy ghost!!! how whacked is that ?? If Christians want to believe in God in the three forms that is their right. Although some Christians do explain that the trinity is the same God but unfortunately Muslims seeing something they can attack they just cannot live with the explanations of the people following that religion. Jews are no better (3,500 years ago). I have heard that in Israel the top rabbis re-write the doctrine of the relgion over time, and keep it updated to reflect the modern day culture of society, this is confirmed by good israeli friend who went from uk to israel and the govt gave him a free house (american money, another story) You've been visiting too many conspiracy websites or is it just mainstream islamic sites, it's so difficult to distinguish between a site set up by conspiracy nuts and one set up by Muslims. NOW, lets go back what 3, 4, 5 thousand years??? When you go back this far in time, you can see that hindus have had the longets time to <admin-profanity filter activated> it up, that is why they believe in monkeys and elephants and things with multiple arms, 6 legs and so on. i once asked ahindu what he knew about his religion, and he told me he had seen the whole movie Maharat or something like that he probably knew as much as his mother. Sums the up really. Maharat? Shouldn't you check the spelling of what you are writing about. You claim that Hindu doesn't know about his own religion but you can at least get the spelling of Mahabharat right. How many Muslims from India or Pakistan can recite the Koran and yet not even know what the words mean? It is understanding the religion rather than being able to quote the verses that matter. SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE ALL GOING OFF THE PATH, TIME IS CAUSE FOR DECAY. So whatever the holyman tells you all religions, refer to the original text, and question, its your God given right God gave you a brain. You are right go back to the original text. This whole thing about tricking girls into coverting is probably true ive heard about it on both sides, but the people involved are going to hell, and as i said, its very sad but true that both of our religions, sikhism and islam, are both being tarnished by people who are just sikh or muslim by name, but their actions are wholly atheist, and the problem is wetern media, american brainwashing and capitalism and materialism, its all about cars music clubbing , bhangra gigs, dance, drink, and that does not agree with the heart, but is very appealing to the mind cause this is the test we are on, best of luck to all of you. In Sikhism we do not earn additional spiritual merit solely by bringing someone into Sikhism. In Islam you do. So who are these people following whose sole purpose is to trick people into their religion. I repeat that you need to stop visiting the conspiracy sites, I have yet to meet a Muslim who does not blame the west for everything that has gone wrong in their lives or in Islam in general. A Muslims wakes up with a headache.. it's the west's fault. He misses his train and is late for work..it's the west's fault! As a muslim i would recommend you to read a copy, for there is no compulsion in religion, and the media portrays islam in a very negative light, but if you dare to read a copy you will find the answers to everything. I admit maybe you wont coz its hard to interpret, but read books by "Harun Yahya" and be converted to the truth once and for all. Just go to HarunYahya.com and see the truth, very interesting website that encourages you to look in awe at God's creations and ponder existence, trust me, even as a sikh, you can appreciate this site, as i said when i started, i have lived with sikhs, and so i know what i chat about, and i am not a racist, i am talking frankly with people who i belive the Guru Nanak saved from the doomed fate of the Hindus, i reckon being sikh is highly greater than being a hindu. I asked my mother about Guru Nanak, and all she said was "he was a great man", that said a lot more to me than just 5 words. We as muslims try and mimick the exact lifestyle of the prohet Muhammad (pbuh) because we believe he was the perfect model for man. As a sikh, you should follow the example of the original Guru, and mimick his life in its eniterty to acheive true model for your life, its a good aim to take, just think also, the Guru referred to the Quran, so dont be scared to read it, Inshallah you will find the way. You can take the Muslim out of the 7th century but your can't take the 7th century mentality out of the Muslim. I was wondering when you would come to the crux of your argument. So you want us to follow the example of Guru Nanak, thank you but all Sikhs try to follow the Gurus teachings to the best of their abilities. We don't fast as Guru Nanak said fasting is just torturing your body. We don't bow towards a black stone in some desert city but bow only to the Guru Granth Sahib which contains the Gurus teachings. Now I ask you how well do you follow Mohammed's life? Have you raided some caravans lately? How about marrying a 7 year old? Have you asked your best friend for the hand of his 7 year old daughter? Raped any captive women, infernal western man made law not letting you keep any slave women or concubines as allowed by the divine law of Mohammed?