chatanga

1 hour ago, JS79 said:

 They get hot headed and want to shut down our voices. Then they get so hot headed the want non taksalis dead!!! What has the world become. 

"Our voices" ? yet you have claimed that you are not a missionary. Tell the truth. Do support the missionaries. You have already dropped several hints on here that you do. Be honest. Be a Sikh.

 

 

59 minutes ago, JS79 said:

 

Taksal is not the blood line of khalsa. It is a jathabandi. Nothing more.

 

Taksal is not a jathabandi. It is a Samprdai.

2 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

1..I never knew this before but who gave the Gurmat Giyan Group the authority to advocate this? Those are their personal views, why are they allowed or authorised to disseminate their personal views publicly? Why did he hit the Bani of our Father with a 'stick', was he angry about something?

 

2..I never knew this before. To have only one interpretation of the word indicates that he does not possess any imagination at all and therefrore it is his personal view. Why is he imposing his personal views on the sangat and who is authorizing him to do so?

 

He wasn't angry about anything. He knew that he could get away with it.

 

There are many different levels of interpretation of Gurbani. When Taksal or the Samprdais do katha the thing is all the different levels complement each other and help shardalus develop their own understanding further.But these missionaries do katha to tear down the existing thoughts and throw their own perverse thinking in it.

eg Guru Arjan Maharaj fainted when he was on the hot tavi.

 

What kind of a Sikh would say that about their Guru? Shahedan da Sirtaj, fainting. Only the missionaries. And yet there are some who would try and claim the Taksal are worse. What a joke.

 

It's becasue of this relentless rubbish coming from the missionaries that makes taksalis amongst others so angry. Im not a taksali but i am very angered by these missionaries and their agenda.

 

2 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

 

 

4....Thanks for telling me all this.  Why are the preachers bringing their personal private thinking into the public arena? Don't they receive any sort of training as to keep their personal/private views private and not express them in the public? To follow the guidelines of prechaar and not to go beyond these guidlines?

 

5..  I now know why they keep squabbling. What is the role of taksalls in all this? Are they under no obligation to issue these preachers with some guidelines so they don't mix the two together (Personal/private v public) and make a right mess of everything?

 

 

They bring it in because they are tyring to make a name for themselves in Sikh history. Like the original Singh Sabha, who's name they misuse repeatedly.

 

The role of the Taksalis as is the samprdais is to stop these people from reducing Gurmat to some kind of weak philosophy. Sometimes that includes using violence to do so. But then again thats not new to Sikhs. The Bandias, ram Raiye, Niranjanie etc. Siksh fought physically with all of them.

 

Next some supporters of these missionaries will say why did the Sikhs take to arms in the 1980s. calling them violent and all sorts as well.

 

3 hours ago, JS79 said:

 . I am saying, again, that no matter what missionaries have done or say ir believe or not believe, they arent worse than current taksal.

 

OK so Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa deliberately twisting the story of Guru Gobind Singh baal-leela and making Guru Sahib out to be some pervert isn't worse. Insulting your own Guru, that's not bad in your view.

 

3 hours ago, JS79 said:

 

 

When singhs asked maharaj 'how will we do your darshan' maharaj said '5 singh tyaar bartyaar....'. Singhs said what if there arent 5? Maharaj said even if theres one singh. Singhs said what if we cant find one. Maharaj said look at yourself. Quick summary. U get the story.

 

No I dont get the story. Where have you got it from?

 

If only 1 Singh was necessary then Guru Sahib could have stopped at one head on Vaisakhi. There was  reason for five.

 

 

3 hours ago, JS79 said:

 

 

Bhupinder singh is a shaheed. Kps gill and beanta are not. Duh. 

 

Im not talking about Shaheeds. Im talking about people who are sabat soorat as you said in your post. You never mentioned shaheeds, only sabat soorat people.

Now you want to bring shaheeds into it.

 

2 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

No sis, that is not what I meant, may God bless you for misunderstanding my post. I really meant to say I don't have any affiliations with any taksalls. I don't have a solution. I am just a humble little searcher who is starving for knowledge of the fourth kind.

You say you a "humble little searcher who is starving for knowledge" but then say this :

2 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

The best have spoken and the mules still squabble amongst themselves!

 

That doesn't rate as humble.

 

The best are those who wanted to portray Guru Sahib's baal-leela as some kind of perversion to you? The best to you are those that lied in Guru's sangat and said that it is against SRM to read to sing bani of Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth Sahib in sangat?

 

If they are the best to you stay with the best and if those who oppose the nindya of their Guru and outright lies concerning Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth Sahib are mules, then I'm happy to be associated with mules.

 

2 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

bro for what reason does one put aside one's conscience/ jameer for the panth? jameer is what would make you put panth foremost not ownself

Sant ji said himself death of the body is not death , but death of the conscience is real death . jameer ki mauth asli mauth aa.

 

 

Because jameer/conscience can tell you to do one thing, but the greater achievement for the panth tells you to do another.

 

The Sikhs weren't  beggars of the Moghals that they accepted a jagir and Nawabgi from Zakria Khan. They put their own thoughts/conscience to one side and saw the benefits of accepting the jagir and Nawabgi. Those Sikhs are not traitors to the Panth.

 

Baba  Harnam Singh did not go to the badals to get anything. It was them who came to him. They were the ones who needed him. Harnam Singh put aside his feelings/conscience for the betterment of the Panth. Look at what was achieved from it, 40 members in the SGPC, Gurdwara Shaheedan in Darbar Sahib, and restarting of Dasam Bani from Delhi gurdwaras. If if Harnam Singh is pictured with ladoos, I dont care as the greater good has been started for the Panth. If Harnam Singh refused Badals then what of these could have been acheived? But would that have been ok and the 10% of the Panth that thinks as we do, would still be a corner grumbling about how we can't change anything.

 

You speak some really bad words about Baba Harnam Singh. Wise up.

19 minutes ago, JS79 said:

Missionaries are definitely not as bad as current taksalis. They talk and preach with love and devitotion.

 

Shall I copy and paste the Guru Gobind Singh baal-leela story here? What love and devotion went into this story that Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa told? You say that you wont back up those because you havent heard their recordings, but here you are clearly backing the missionaries. Why are you like Thakur Singh saying one thing here and another on another topic?

 

22 minutes ago, JS79 said:

Yes they are not 100% right

But doesnt matter to you because you give the impression that even though they can be wrong they are still worthy of your support? Why as a Sikh would you be supporting someone you know is 100% right?

 

24 minutes ago, JS79 said:

when guru ji said in a saabat soorat amritdari singh you will do my darshan

 

When did Guru Sahib ever say that?

Was KPS Gill not saabat soorat?

Was Giani Zail Singh not saabat soorat?

beanta butcher?

 

26 minutes ago, JS79 said:

Jameer? Sant ji had jameer. Dhumma doesnt even know the meaning of it. He doesnt realise how big a padhvi is to be jathedar of taksal. He is using and abusing his power.

 

So you are correct in saying that  Shaheed Bhai Sukha Singh (who killed massa ranghar) had no jameer as he was himself killed whilst fighting for Zakria Khan ?

Baba Harnam Singh put his jameer to one side for the sake of the Panth. Just like the Singhs of old did when there was a bigger issue to deal with.

 

30 minutes ago, JS79 said:

If bhupinder singh was your brother youd have a different opinion. 

 

As pointed out in another post the killing of Bhai Bhupinder Singh (which i abhor FYI) was from a shot fired from someone behind him. If the vehicle had been stopped Bhai Bhupinder singh would have had his face towards the attacker. But how would he get shot in the back of his head then?

 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, JS79 said:

I am not going to back up sarbjit singh because i have not listened to every recording of his.

 

You dont need to listen to every single recording of his to know whether he is right or wrong.  I used to listen to Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa a lot when he first appeared because of his rebuttals to kamli Kamlesh. But listening on and on, it wasn't long before he began to show his true colours. Like any other "pakhandi baba" Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa built up his fanbase first and then when they were hooked showed his true colours.

 

13 minutes ago, JS79 said:

I will however support dhadrianwale. 

 

You have heard every recording of his?

Sant Jarnail Singh explained why he said it in a further speech. He said that "when you want to get them (the govt) to do something you press a delicate spot ( ie the govt love for the hindus in panjab). Sant Ji was right.

34 minutes ago, simran345 said:

Strange that a newcomer gets so many likes. Or it could be one person with duplicate ids? But the likes are for totally unrelated and irrelevant posts ?

It a trick used by the missionary fanboys on this forum. They've been at it for a long time. Admins should check who are liking posts and compare the ip addresses.

48 minutes ago, JS79 said:

 

I agree we should combat lies. It is a matter of judgment to spot the liers. Usually it is easy because liers cant remember their own lies. I will give you an example. Giani thakur singh taksali told a story of massaging sant jarnail singh jis head. Then he forgot the story and told it differently. Once he say 'there was 3/4 singhs with me and then he said 'i was totally alone'.

When i say ahead of taksal i mean ahead towards maharaj not science. Missionaries need to make a few changes but taksal has lost the plot altogether.

 

Giani Thakur Singh comes out with different stuff all the time. People have now realised this. But it's good to see that you realised that Thakur Singh was making a lot of stuff up.

The missionaries are not ahead of Taksal going towards Maharaj. Who can be moving towards Maharaj when they say naam simran is not necessary?

 

23 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

a handful of pakhandis is NOT the Taksal  as a whole so  please think in specifics rather than generalisations. If you had said GOI paltus I would agree , I agree those that disrespect Guru Maharaj ji's darbar or bring's it into disrepute need sorting out by verbal confrontation and explanation or if still not complying physically kicking out of post.. 

 

No-one in Mehta Chowk is a pakhandi. Where the people doing nindya of Dasam bani for years at Delhi gurdwaras some kind of role models for you? Baba Harnam Singh himself engineered the resurrection of Dasam granth katha at Delhi Gurdwaras and the sangat overwhelmingly voted in the same party to continue this parchar of Dasam granth. Thats pakhand to you?

 

 

4 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

I can't understand how or why Dhumma hasn't been kicked to the kerb , has the jameer died of the rest of the taksal elder circle or is it he has too many hired guns around ?

 

Because Baba Harnam Singh stil has a lot of respect amongst the Taksal and Dal Panth and the other samprdais. None of the samprdais are against him. They are all with him. Like it or not, he has achieved some crucial things for the panth that would not have been achieved had he kept his "jameer" as you put it. Think about some of the words you use.

26 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Do you think Guru Sahib knew about how to use the Vidya? He was Antarjami, but also would let Baba Buddha teach him stuff.

That was for the shish's upma. Respect for Baba Budha only. Remember Guru Arjan Sahib didn't really need to send Mata Ganga to Baba Budha Sahib for Guru Hargobind Sahibs birth, but he did.

39 minutes ago, JS79 said:

Sant ji gave shaheedi not join indhira. Dhumma has become badals garvehi. Well done to him. 

So did those Sikhs who joined Zakaria become Zakria Khans garvehi?

Or Adina Begs garvehi?

 

19 minutes ago, JS79 said:

I agree. That is exactly my point! That is what i am saying. Just because there are differences in views does not mean someone is wrong.

 

OK, let's move onto an example.

 

When Guru Gibind Singh was young he took his bow and arrow and shot the pot of water that a woman was carrying. She went to Guru Sahibs home to complain to Mata Gujri that Guru Sahib has ruined this pot by shooting an arrow into it.. Mata Ji said to Guru JI "why did you shoot the gaggar (pot)"? Guru Sahib said I did it for her welfare. Both ladies asked how. Guru Sahib said look inside the pot. Inside there was a poisonous snake that died from Guru Sahib's arrow.

 

Have you heard how the missionaries tell this story?

 

Professor Sarabjit Singh Khalsa said in his video that "this is a prachalt story that our brothers never tire of telling. But tell me what happens to womans clothes when they are wet through? The clothes cling to the body "  (he never went further but the insinuation was there)".  Then he asked how could Guru Gobind Singh have done this ? How could Guru Sahib have broken the womans pot which then soaked her clothes and put her body on display?

 

Do you see how Professor Sarbajit Singh Khalsa has not added another level to this story but tried to strip it of all dignity altogether?

 

So this is where differences in views should be combatted. Professor Sarabjit Singh Khalsa has tried to make this story out as something seedy. So if you agree with me, then you will also take a stand against nonsense like this from the missionaries and Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa.

7 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

I liked everything you said except this, Baba Buddha, the one who taught 6th Guru Shastars, learned about Shastar Vidya from Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

 

Guru Nanak did not teach Baba Buddha anything. Guru Sahib infused all the 14 Vidya's into Baba Budha Ji with Guru Sahibs pavitar glance.

 

Just as Guru Sahib never taught Bhai Mardana how to play rabab. Guru Sahib just told Bhai Mardana to play the instrument even though Bhai Mardana protested that he didnt know how to play it. Guru Sahib drishti alone can accomplish miracles.

On 27/07/2017 at 8:13 PM, Guest Singh1984 said:

 

DHUMMA IS THE ONE CHANGING AKAL TAKHT PANTHIC MARYADA.

 

 

Which panthic maryada has harnam Singh changed?

 

On 28/07/2017 at 8:57 AM, Guest singh said:

 

 

Also regarding Sant harnam singh and government "alliances". The need for the political power was crucial to construct shaheedi yadgarh, and more recently the shaheedi gallery. No one in the past 30 years was able to do these sewas at darbar sahib, the heart of sikhi, where it should rightfully be. Sant baba harnam singh said the he would clean the sewers of the badals if he had to if it meant this sewa would be complete.  It is sad to see how baba gurbaksh singh shaheed and baba deep singh shaheed have just small nishan sahib as a memorial. Also no one provided sewa for constructing more gurduwaras, such as the janam asthan of sant baba jarnail singh khalsa, and etc.

 

 

Exactly. In our history the Sikhs have forged alliances with our enemies to defeat bigger enemies to acheive some goal.

 

ie Nawabgi, alliances with Adina Beg and Zakria Khan/Massa ranghar, I cant remember off the top of my head. They were done with the intent to achive something that otherwise would have been difficult to achieve.

 

20 hours ago, JS79 said:

 Compare two recordings one of Sant Kartar Singh ji and Sant Jarnail singh. It does not mean they are weak or wobbly, it means they have found a more logical and understanding way on their avastha.

 

The difference would be that Sant jarnail Singh would not have said that the previous understandings were wrong. Sant Ji would have given a different interpretation from a spiritual angle but would not have vilified any angles the other Sants approached it from.

 

Whereas what we get from certain places today is nothing but nindia of established practices.

 

34 minutes ago, JS79 said:

It isnt forbidden to be influenced by parcharaks. Valid? It is one of the most ridiculous and invalid points.

I meant your point was valid.

 

34 minutes ago, JS79 said:

 

No jathebandi is perfect. I do not believe nam simran could prevent 84. Sant jis shaheedi was pre written. That is like saying why did sahibzade become shaheed. It is maharaj di moaj. However yes simran alone can not do anything. It is just as important to stand by the truth and speak against wrong doings as it is to japp naam. A mala alone will do nothing for us. Gurbani teaches us to have a certain lifestyle and to bring certain qualities such as high spirits and himmat to stand by the truth. What is the point in japping naam or gurbani when if something is wrong we put our thumbs on our ears and hands on our eyes and say 'oh i am going to sit in my bhora sahib and do simran and work on my inner self because it is nothing to do with me i prefer to be neutral'. That would make us no different to hindus. Speaking truth and doing simran is what the panth needs. That is what i strive. Missionaries and akj way ahead of taksal now. It is like the tortoise and the hare. 

 

Naam Simran could not have prevented 84 or the Sahibzadas shaheedi, you are correct. But the Naam Simran is the power behind the sword (or guns) that the Sikhs weilded in 84. Naam Simran is what built those 150 people upto taking on a massive army in a war they knew they wouldnt/couldn't win. 

Those 150 people didnt go and sit in a bhora either to do naam simran.

 

But coming back to the point of this topic, The missionairies say that naam simran is a waste of time. They forget that the first 5 gurus were al about spiriutality and the sword was taken up to defend that spiriituality. If the missionaries beleive that naam simran isnt necessary but the sword (or activism) is only required why was Panthpreet Singh Khalsa the first (or second) to run from the morcha? Why not fire back at, or attack the police who were attacking them? 

 

The ones who sat and meditated (bhoras or otherwise) stood firm against oppression when it mattered. The ones who say its not necessary and we shouldn't "cover our ears or eyes" ran.  Wheres the logic in that?

 

 

34 minutes ago, JS79 said:

 

 Speaking truth and doing simran is what the panth needs.

 

Yes I agree. But when someone speaks lies or misinformaiton it is also our duty to fight that. I'll give you another example that has come to mind. Professor Saranjit Singh Khalsa said in his video that he met some Sikhs who told him "that at such and such a place their Baba made all the women go out of the sangat because Baba wanted to do katha of bani".

 

I asked his fanclub what dera is that and what is babas name. They couldnt answer the question because they knew as well as I did, that there was no baba and no dera. Professor Sarabjit Singh Khalsa was making it up.

 

So not only do we have a duty to speak the truth but also a duty to combat lies.

 

34 minutes ago, JS79 said:

 

 Missionaries and akj way ahead of taksal now. It is like the tortoise and the hare. 

 

 

A recent video has surfaced where Bhai Panthpreet Singh Khalsa has denied the Guru HarKrishan and Chhajju Jhiwar story as we know it today. His reason for his version is that "logically" it is not possible for a dumb person to speak, and neither could Guru Sahib get a dumb person to speak by placing a stick on his head.

 

And yet these people are way ahead of Taksal? I'd rather be behind I think.

16 hours ago, JS79 said:

Yes here he is. i didnt listen properly i skipped through the videos but found nothing wrong. I understand why he sometimes is a little controversial but we should look beyond that. Stereotypically missionaries have 'extreme' views according to taksalis. For example missionaries generally believe that jyot and dhoof are insignificant if there is no sharda etc. And this hurts taksal fans because they follow these hindu rituals with the heart and soul.

 

That is exactly the problem. Who ruled jyot and dhoof are hindu or hindu exclusive rituals? If Hindus do it does that mean as Sikhs we cannot do it? What if we do it for a different reason?

 

16 hours ago, JS79 said:

We blame missionaries, even non missionaries are confused. 

@muscleman 

Yes agreed. It is all about sharda. Even doing matha tek becomes a ritual else. Over the years hinduism has influenced our biggest jathebandis bigtime and we need to break free from the customs/traditions and follow ONLY maharaj. 

 

You're sharing a video that missionaries brought out to try and claim that Baba Harnam Singh is dismissing Dasam Granth as just a translation? Wouldn't you have known this yourself as parts of Dasam Granth which have been translated are labelled as such in the writing. It's pretty obvious isn't it? 

 

15 hours ago, JS79 said:

 

Certian things must have reason there has to be morals and logic.

 

What logic was there when Guru Nanak asked Bhai Lehna to climb the tree and pluck sweets from the branches? Don't make the mistake of confining Sikhi to logic.

 

15 hours ago, JS79 said:

 

 There is no logic/reason in being naked....

 

The are people called naturalists who fully beleive that humans should not be forced to wear clothes. In the West that is. Their reasons are logical to them, but does that make being naked wrong from a logical point of view? Even in this day and time, there are still women in thbis world who no not keep their upper body covered. To them it's logical.

 

5 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

Half of them don't even deny Guru Maharaj ji's bani or the Dasam Granth. They just have different interpretations than the rest, for this reason they are insulted and abandoned by the mules that jump on the bandwagon without thinking. The mules have never read the bani themselves ever in their lives and depend on the pracharaks to do the interpretation for them.

 

The reason they don't openly deny it, is because Sikh Rehat marayda has 3 banis from Dasam granth as part of Nitnem. The gurmat gian group profess to only follow Sri Akal Takht Sahib, but this is only when it suits them. Professor Sarbjit Singh Khalsa openly acknowledges Professor Inderjeet Singh Ghagga's views on Dasam Granth, indeed Sarbjit Singh even made a video of him hitting Jaap Sahib with a stick. Then he aslo made a video of his group doing Jaap Sahib paath because people started to oppose him.

 

5 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

 They just have different interpretations than the rest, for this reason they are insulted and abandoned by the mules that jump on the bandwagon without thinking. The mules have never read the bani themselves ever in their lives and depend on the pracharaks to do the interpretation for them.

 

 

Ok. lets take one example, a quite debated example. "Dev Shiva bar mohe ihe". No Sikh beleived that Guru Sahib was praising "Lord Shiva" of the Hindus when he wrote this. But the missionaries keep claiming that this is the reason why we should not follow Dasam Granth. Because to them there can only be ONE interpretation of the word "Shiva". But in Guru Granth Sahib there are countless references to "Hari,Ram" etc but if there can only be one translation of "Shiva " in Dasam Granth why not the same for Guru Granth Sahib?

 

This is why they are insulted. They are using devious tactics to get uneducated Sikhs to beleive that Dasam Granth is a hindu conspiracy.

 

Even Prof Sarbjit Singh Dhunda told lies about Dasam Granth and this shabad in sangat. He said that according to Sri Akal Takht maryada (SRM) only the banis of SGGS, BHai Gurdas and Bhai Nandlal are to be recited from gurdwara stage. People who have never read the SRM beleive him. But it doesnt actually say that. It says that the writings of the Guru's can be recited from gurdwara stages, which means that Dasam Bani can also be recited.  But people who don't know this end up thinking that there is some hindu conspiracy.

 

 

5 hours ago, CHaamCHrick said:

All jathas operate in groups and don't let others near them, I don't have any knowledge as to their numbers. As for the taksaals, they are a law unto themselves nothing more nothing less. All pendhus.  All they know is the taksalli education; they never step outside of these edifices into the wider world ever; they are totally out of touch with reality outside!

 

Taksalis have been at the forefront of the panth for about 40 odd years now. They recogise that there is a sinister movement coming from the missionary college which is turning Sikhs from having "sharda" and "bharosa" in Gurmat, to basing their faith on science and logic.

 

Sikhi is way above science and logic.

 

On 29/07/2017 at 10:02 AM, Destruction said:

 

 People only take Amrit because of him, they don't take it for guru sahib or to better themselves .

 

This is where Sikhs get attached to people's personalities rather than the Guru. It is a very valid point.

 

On 31/07/2017 at 9:19 AM, JS79 said:

. Nindak? Is telling the truth nindiya? How can you refer to singing gurujis bachan and praising maharaj nindiya?

 

telling the truth is never nindya but the Professors at Gurmat Gyan College have already made their feelings clear on singing Guru Sahib's Bani and Naam Simran. They ask "if Naam Simran could acheive anything, then why did Darbar Sahib get attacked in 1984?" "What use was Naam Simran then?"

 

This video that someone posted:

 

16 hours ago, muscleman said:

OMG!!!!!!!

 

I was listening to it and it goes along the usual lines. Sikhs not using their own intellect enough, thehn moving onto "pakhandi babbe". Then a story about how some baba did this and said that.

 

I will share something with everyone here that I picked up from facebook. Some guy had made a post about Dhunda doing katha where he told this story:

"I was going to the entrance of DarbarSahib and there was a dog sitting in the place where people walk through water to clean their feet ( I personally cannot remember what it is called). The dog walked off as some people approached. After the dog had gone a man came up and as he passed through the water, he scooped a little drop to put in his mouth. So I waited at the entrance for this man to come out, (after doing matha at Sri HariMandir Sahib) and then I told him that there was a dog sitting in the water just before you came and you drank from that same water. The man then started to put his fingers in his thraot to induce vomit.

 

This sounds so made up, and other people commented on this story could not be possible. Then on facebook to back this story up, a photo appears, photoshopped with a dof in the water thing. The dog is bigger than the people in the photo and its so appaprent that its fake.

 

These kinds of stories inc how it is manmat to do matha or pay respect to Nishan Sahib etc all come from the Gurmat Gian Missionary College (which is where the name missionary/ies comes from).

 

A large part of their modus operandi is to start with normal issues but then also to gradually bring in their true agenda. Then there is also the deliberate mistelling of sakhis to confuse people and turn them away from Sikh history.

 

 

On 25/07/2017 at 6:14 AM, JotSinghUK said:

which I think has a great in depth explanations of Gurbani and deeper spiritual meanings

 

That looks a lot like a missionary website. The articles there are not in any great depth but simple translations of some lines of gurbani to try and back up what the writer thinks.

 

I have read the article of " is gurbani counting beads" which is a missionary article on malas/rosary. The writer has tried to used some lines which contain the words "mala" to portray that using malas is anti-gurmat.

 

I wold advise members here not to fall prey to this type of missionary nonsense.

 

JotSingh, I would also recommend www.gurmatveechar.com if you really wish to understand Gurmat in a greater depth.

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Your arguments are the same old arguments and make no sense to me.

 

So are yours. They make no sense to me either. They smack of feminism and nothing else. A very dangerous trait.

 

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Why have not many women till now stepped up for any leadership roles let alone as panj pyaras? 

 

Leadership roles? God you sound so much like satkiran/harkiran. Leadersship roles, seeing everyone with one eye, long repetitive posts...

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Honestly I believe the fault lies on us historically for conditioning women to believe they can't. We ingrained centuries of lack of self confidence into them making them believe they were entirely dependent on us and incapable for themselves.

 

Humans are made to err, but are the Gurus? Couldn't the Gurus be capable of raising women from their status' in their religions to something more in Sikhi? Bibi BHani did so much sewa of Guru Amar Das ji, but Guru Sahib gave gurgaddi to her husband. Was that unfair? Was Guru Sahib damaging her or other Sikh womens confidence by not considering Bibi Bhani ?

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

You can't use that reality to say that's what our Gurus wanted just because it was the reality of the time. 

 

But the reality changed with the Gurus an Sikhi did it not? Did Guru Sahib raise women from their status' in their previous religions?

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

We are also seeing women leave Sikhi in droves mostly to abandon religion altogether which is tragic.

 

Here is another point where you sound like satkiran/harkiran. She tried to claim this and it is a most untrue statement. Sikh girls are ot leaving Sikhi because of any perceived thought of discrimination over not being allowed to serve in Panj Pyare. No Sikh girl has ever left Sikhi because of this.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Married life the aim is to produce offspring and live life of householder. Obviously two males or two females or a eunuch can't do that. Thats why anand Karaj is between a male and female. And that has nothing to do with argument of who can administer amrit.

 

Thankyou! First you were saying we need to look on all with one eye of equality and discard the human gender. Now you are saying the human gender is imnportant. You need male and female physical bodies to produce offspring. That is the law of nature. In Sikhi the pyares have to be male, with no missing limbs or digits. Even if the tip of one finger is missing that disallows a male.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

The rule for disabilities has been explained by Akal Takht themselves that one needs to be physically fit to sit in bir posture which can be physically demanding obviously requiring limbs. They require to be able to speak to recite and have their arms and hands to physically prepare the Amrit.

 

You do not need to be physically fit to sit in bir asan. It is very posible to hold that position for the duration of amrit sinchar (about 45 mins). Anybody with a missing finger or toe or ear can hold bir asan. But are they allowed to participate in Panj Sewa? No, they are not.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

They require their vision to see the initiate and the eyes are the window to the soul and the eyes are actually acting as vision for Guru Ji through the Panj, so that's why they need to conform to those standards, and none of this requires specific gender.

 

Eyes? Vision? People can see without  eyes. People with eyes are blind. That is quite  a ridiculous assertion.

Eyes are windows to the soul? Not in Gurmat.

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

And including them as equals actually fulfills Gurbani's message of equality and does not actually explicitly go against any recorded message from our Gurus.

 

Then also eunuchs can participate because there is no "explicit" recorded message from the Gurus.

 

To add to this then Sikhs can say "we don't need to take amrit/wear the 5 K's because there is no explicit recorded message from the Gurus either."

What about if someone says to you "there is no recorded message from our Guru's to have Singh/Kaur in your names?"

 

 

23 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

Who cares. We dont need scum like this in our faith. 

Theres plenty more like this girl. Let them go to syria. We do not care for them. 

 

 

That's not your decision to make.

 

23 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

Lets not bother. Weak people do not belong in the faith. She chose her path now lie in it. Dont complain after the you was lured or forced. 

 

 

Forced? So Guru Gobind Singh Ji was wrong to take back the Sikh who had been forced to convert to islam?

On 24/07/2017 at 5:17 AM, JotSinghUK said:

 

Also it should be pointed out that a petition is not necessary as it's already in Rehet Maryada that it can be either. If some of you are so caught up on following exactly the original why stop at gender? What about same eye colour, same height etc? And in that case a woman should always be the only one allowed to add the patashas? But reality is that these same and loudest nay Sayers don't see a problem having a man add them? Anyway either can be done by either as long as they have high avastha and strict Rehet.

 

So many times the same things get discussed. yet the arguments are the same over and over. It would have been god if yhou had done a search on this topic and read a little more. However since the debate is raging here i would like to add a few things directly addressed to you brother.

 

You're right. It is in the SRM, but the question remains why there has not been one amrit sinchar at Sri Akal Takht Sahib since the SRM was forced on the Panth in 1945 which has included women. Ask yourself why.

 

 

On 24/07/2017 at 0:55 PM, JotSinghUK said:

 

On grand scheme of things, everything is one. There is no duality. Akal Purakh IS everything and everyone. Our separate consciousness is an illusion created by this duality. In fact even our bodies are illusion. The Gurus knew this. If we continue to perpetuate the illusion by privileging some and limiting others on things which are out of their control like their gender which is only for procreation, then we only serve to solidify the illusion caused by duality. If we instead realize that every soul literally is Waheguru then it's not so hard to see how can you limit anyone based on caste colour gender or anything else. You are essentially delving further into duality by telling someone no they can't do something no matter how high their spiritual level is. In reality you are hurting yourself more than them.

 

Please forgive me sangat Ji if I have said anything wrong. 

 

 

Forgiveness is not necessary brother as we are all learners. But I want to ask you why you have limited the "soul" only to humans and not applied it to each and every living thing from plant life to animal life to human life. These are the churasi lakh joon that all souls pass through to obtain the "rattan" of human chola. What if someone said tomorrow we should give amrit to horses because they have served Sikhs very well?

 

And then I want to ask you why eunuchs or bi-gender or people of no gender should be excluded? They have the same soul that you and I have.

 

Further to this I want to ask you if the soul literally is Waheguru then why are marriages between man and woman the only ones allowed in Gurmat? Why cant two men marry each other? They both have the same soul don't they? Are you married? If  not will you be looking for a soul or a woman?

 

 

On 24/07/2017 at 3:51 PM, JotSinghUK said:

 

 In that cultural time in India you hardly saw women even in public gathering at all (even today you hardly see women at public gatherings). In that time, a female form as Guru would not have been listened to (and possibly not even now as some of you still harbour this same resentment deep inside). It's same question as why the Gurus were all high caste. The message of equality can not come from those in the lower position (at least not without a lot of blood). Slave masters claiming that slavery was wrong meant so much more than slaves claiming the same. It was same for women. In that time women were little more than property, the Gurus in male form claiming all humans were equal meant way more than if a female was Guru claiming the same.

 

 

IN those times, high and low castes never sat or ate together yet Guru Baba Nanak spent many years with Bhai Mardana and ate at the house of Bhai Lalo. Why would a revolutionary Like Guru Sahib be afraid of nominating at least one woman as Guru?

 

The message of equality cannot come from those in lower position but the people of higher position still move beyond words to prove a point.

eg a slave master claiming slavery is wrong but yet holding those slaves as slaves means what exactly? A slave master would free his slaves as an example.

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Ahh but bro there is a reason why one needs limbs. You can't physically prepare Amrit without the correct body parts. So that makes sense. But women do have all the correct body parts. And my argument has nothing to do with differences in physical bodies anyway. 

 

 

And that is precisley what this is all about. The physical bodies. Homosexuals, have the same body parts as other humans but they are not allowed to be part of panj pyare.

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

That Guru Ji has never explicitly disallowed women.

 

 

Brother, there are many things in Sikhi that are not written by the Guru's explicitly. But the tradition should go a long way, an extremely long in telling us what the Guru's instructions were.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

Secondly Guru Ji gave full rights to the panth to make decisions. This is the major important point. He would never have given full rights to the panth to make decisions, and then when a decision is made which was based on Gurbani's message of equality (Gurbani is our living Guru and primary source of morality) agreeing that Kaur's should not be marginalized or treated as lesser in Sikhi, and then be angered that same decision was made. A decision he gave the power to the panth to make.

 

 

Guru Sahib gave the Panth to make political and social (miri) based decisions. Not religious ones, where the Panth can decide to change the protocols of Sikhi.

Imagine 20 or 30 years down the line, the majority of the Sikh Panth decided that the 5 ks are not necessary, could they decide to discard them? In the same way the Sikhs cannot change one word of gurbani or the protocols of Sikhi that started from our Gurus.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

Again the correct Rehet Maryada is the one given to you by Panj Pyaras and if they specifically say women can equally do all seva as males (and this has been verbally stated at Amrit sanchars even here in the U.K.) then who can argue with this Guru given authority? Isn't Guru Gobind Singh Ji supposed to himself be there in person when five Sikhs come together?? 

 

So which spirit is in Guru Granth Sahib then, if it isn't Guru Gobind Singh Ji?

 

Some jathas in order to subvert the status of Sikhi may make these kinds of changes but they wil never earn the blessings of Guru Sahib.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

 You can't take an injustuce form our past, which happened to exist at the time of the Gurus (and explains why there were no female Gurus or female bhagats or even the first five Panj Pyaras) you can't use that injustice which was forced upon women of that time to justify more injustice for all time stating it is his 'hukam'.

 

 

Be careful of what you say bro. Or should I say harkiran? You are bringing up the same arguments she did, and indeed I wonder if it's you again? How does someone repeat EXACTLY the same arguments over and over?

 

If you say that this is an injustice as I have bolded, then you are calling the Guru unjust. If Guru Sahib wanted he had the power to have any number of women attend and stand up when calling for a head. Guru Sahib is sarav-shakti-maan. Guru Sahib is aseem-shakti. Guru Sahib had the power to do anything, and even could have made a woman Guru, or included women in the Panj Pyare. Guru Sahib gave his life for another religion yet was still unjust?

 

Are you saying that Guru Sahib was too scared to conform social conventions of their times?

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

I am sorry you can't see past your prejudices but you won't change my thoughts bro. Doesn't change that we are all in this path together and we should respect one another. 

 

 

 

I am sorry that you think so low of your Guru.

was discussing this idea with someone and it reminded me of this topic i had made here almost 10 years ago. Glad to see that someone else had the same idea and turned it into something special.

On 15/07/2017 at 9:23 AM, Mahakaal96 said:

 There's hukamname from Mata Sundar Ji telling the sangat to not follow Banda anymore as he went of the path of gurmat.

 

Is this hukumnama or a translation of it available to read online anywhere? If not a book where it is written?

Thanks

 

On 15/07/2017 at 9:55 AM, 13Mirch said:

 I put up an audio clip in which Sant Jarnail Singh Ji concurs with Bhangu's perception of Baba Banda Singh. Want me to put it up one more time?

 

Yes please. Thanks. I heard it a long time ago (poss 10 years) but would rather not have to trawl through all my tapes to find it.

 

On 15/07/2017 at 11:25 AM, Jonny101 said:

Why would I respect the person who disobeyed his leader at a critical time, got Jageer from the Mughals and then used his power and influence to get his son freed from Mughal captivity while letting hundreds of Singh's get Shaheed in Delhi. He was a Santa Singh of his time period. 

 

I never knew that Baaj Singh survived Delhi. Had always thought he was shaheed. If you consider the sakhi of the Sikh boy who was shaheed (even though his mother protested that he wasn't a Sikh) it seems a little weird that Baaj Singh would prefer to survival rather than shaheedi with his comrades.

 

 

16 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

What are you talking about? Binod Singh was the only one of the Panj Pyaras who left the councel of the Punj Pyaras and abandoned the Singhs. All the other 4 of the 5 Pyaras remained with Baba Ji including Binod SIngh's OWN SON!

 

Where are you reading/hearing that 4 of the 5 Pyaras remained with Baba Ji?

 

16 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

 So this traiter not only broke ranks and disobeyed his leader, he left the councel of the Panj Pyaras,

 

From what I have been told. at Gurdas Nangal, there was a difference of opinion over tactics. The same scenario at Anandpur Sahib when some Sikhs were of the opinion to leave the Qilla and fight the enemy/escape. Baba Binod Singh Ji was of the opinion to face the enemy and fight whereas Baba Banda Singh wanted to hold out against their seige. Those that wanted to try and escape the seige/fight the turks left with Baba Binod Singh but they were not held back by Baba Banda Bahadur either. He gave all the Sikhs there the choice to remain or chance their luck.

 

16 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

I respect Panth Prakash but I don't hold it's writing as infallible. I don't agree with Bhangu on some points besides Baba Banda Singh Bahadur. I don't agree with him that Bhai Mani Singh Jee got Shaheed due to his "sin" against Gurbani.

 

Bhai Rattan Singh Bhangu is not the only writer to have written this. BHai Kesar Singh Chibber has written the same in "Bansawalinama".

 

8 hours ago, Jonny101 said:

Yeah and some should post pages of Dr Ganda Singh's book disproving them

 

It would be great if someone could. I would like to read them as well. Thanks.

 

If anyone wishes to listen to ongoing katha of Panth Parkash here is the link:

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/02_Present_Day_Katha/Nihang_Giani_Sher_Singh_(Ambala_wale)/Pracheen_Panth_Parkash_Katha/Nihang.Giani.Sher.Singh.(Ambala.wale)--Pracheen.Panth.Parkash.Katha.-.Part.01.-.2014-10-01.-.Sri.Guru.Panth.Prakash.01.mp3

On 15/07/2017 at 8:36 AM, Jonny101 said:

Before, it was Dhunda who was the undisputed champion of missionaries

 

On 15/07/2017 at 8:40 AM, Jonny101 said:

but it is quite interesting to see how heretics turn on each other.

 

Dhunda when there began to be opposition to his teachings in Panjab, released a video of the missionary college doing Jaap Sahib paath, which turned the diehard miss naris against him. They were dissing him left right and centre. Since Ranjit Singh came on the scene they have clamoured around him as he is hugely popular in Panjab. Ranjits singhs diwans are not about Sikh any more, but to diss Harnam Singh and the Taksal.

Good to see that the recent 3 day program in Kenya, had lots of Dasam bani sung and quoted. Good to see that this "intellectual" lord singh did not have the effect he desired on the Sikh Council of Africa.