Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ranjit singh'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


    • Agree to Disagree

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



Found 20 results

  1. jkvlondon

    Great YT channel

    Lovely channel giving historic knowledge about current state of Sikhi in Punjab , Ranjit Singh is so straight like an arrow to the target
  2. 13Mirch

    Sikhi and Politics

    Admins and Mods: As discussed, this will be my last post on this forum. Please deactivate my account afterwards. I confess that I actually did enjoy my time on here, but paradigm shifts are manifesting in the Sikh world- the traditionalist Sikhs are slowly, albeit surely, being questioned and their status as some de-facto priestly class is being effaced day-by-day. The Sikh youth, long fed on the dribble of some autonomous religio-political Khalistan, are beginning to awaken and unite to control their own future. Tragically, violence and Ad hominem seem to be the only retorts which the traditionalists excel in. When I first joined this forum, it was rightly appreciated as an intellectual assemblage of Sikh youth. Today this assemblage has been supplanted with what can only be called jatha affiliations. It seems unless you are affiliated with some jatha or samprada you cannot be a Sikh. I don't believe this, and nor should you. Of course there are those who will accuse you of being an Indian agent, but why should such fabrications hold us back from questioning what we see and hear? I apologize to AjeetSinghPunjabi and Jonny101 for blindly accusing them and insulting them. Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Vaheguru Ji Ki Fateh! Mirch out! Sikhi, Sikh History and Politics. (Initially intended as a refutation to Haroon Khalid’s Tagorian essay- ‘From Pursuit of Spirituality to the Mighty Khalsa’- we decided to amplify our original thesis and concentrate upon the correlation between Sikhi and the political sphere. Having continually requested our readers to submit their articles to us, we were duly surprised when several frequent readers submitted corresponding essays to be published by us. Their objective, vis-a-vis their respective pieces, was to underscore the importance of the political dynamic in the Sikh worldview. Rather than publish such similar works, we decided to initiate a correspondence with them and publish one “goshti” (questions and answers) disquisition. The results, acquired, are produced below). Participants: Col (Retd) Gurbir Singh Alhuwalia: Having joined the Indian Army as Lieutenant, the now retired Colonel’s passion involves Sikh intellectualism and educationalism. Once part of a think tank analyzing the role of Sikh sampradas during the Sikh militancy, he is currently working upon a book detailing the pitfalls of the Khalistan movement and his own experiences during the militancy. Professor (Retd) Gurdev Singh: The author of several Gurmukhi articles on Sikh ideology, the Professor is an expert in political sciences and religious studies. He is well placed to comment upon the role of politics in the Nanakian purview. Harsharan Kaur: Studying sociology in Australia, Harsharan Kaur is currently producing a critique of the nation-state model. Erudite, in her field, she provides a well balanced perspective on the issue of harmonizing spiritualism with polity. Jagir Singh: An amateur collector of Sikh artifacts and mementos, Jagir Singh is currently editing a multi-volume treatise on the Sikh literary tradition spanning the Guru era and post- Guru era which is due for publication soon. William Cox: Having been born to a Punjabi mother and American father- William travels between Tennessee, USA, and India. He is a freelance writer who is currently publishing a short history of the Sikhs in Western nations. Tisarpanth. Fora: To avoid a prolonged discussion we have decided to only publish answers accepted via unanimous resolutions and/or reached by unanimous consensus. Addendum: Synchronizing faith with history often manifests the dilemma: does faith emanate from history or vice versa? The propensity of religious institutes to gravitate towards utilizing violence, in the face of the latter query, often precipitates the impression that intellectualism and religious doctrine are antagonistic. Observers, of the Sikh world, cannot have failed to notice the proliferation of this conflict among Sikh ranks in the past two decades which, if put candidly, can be easily categorized as the traditionalist vs. progressionist collision. At the heart of this clash is the issue that is Sikhi antagonistic to the political paradigm and the householder’s life- the traditionalist ambit based on evolving dogma- or is Sikhi compatible with the householder’s life and it’s corollaries, viz the socio-political paradigm, as enunciated by the Adi Guru Granth Sahib Ji? We contend that: b.) Belief and intellectualism, at least in the Sikh world, should not be necessarily antagonistic to each other. c.) A more modern approach is required to resolving the issues afflicting Sikh intellectualism and Sikh society, at large, today. d.) Recent events in NRI circles have lent impetus to emancipating Sikh intellectualism. A vocal minority, in Europe, has succeeded in classifying Sikhs as an ethnicity vis-a-vis the British census; this has naturally lent credence to the myth that Sikh history and the Sikh purview are ethnonationalist constructs- an intentional facsimile of Khushwant Singh’s Punjabi nationalism mythos?- and not correspondent with the Sikh ideology. The ill-planned Khalistan Referendum, D-day being in 2020, having been designed by those ignorant of ground realities on the sub-continent has also fractured the Sikh world on the sensitive issue of self-progression and sovereignty. It is imperative that the polar differences between Sikh philosophy and ethnonationalism be underscored in such dark times. Given the regressive state of Punjab today, secessionist expression should be the last matter on anyone’s mind. PRIMARY: Q: Speaking philosophically, what makes the Sikh ideology unique in it’s harmonizing of both the state and church? A: If we were to draw comparisons/contradistinctions with other systems, we would essentially be evading the question itself. Let us, then, examine the Sikh approach itself to better underscore it’s idiosyncrasy. The Sikh purview of the world being real posits that both the state and church, whilst distinctive, are fundamentally real and not some illusions. Guru Gobind Singh Ji makes this principle clear when he remarks: ‘Those of Baba and those of Babur, the Creator maketh both; recognize the first as the emperor of righteousness and infer the second to be the emperor of the world. Those who fail in their duty towards the throne of Baba, fell prey to the machinations of Babur. Such defaulters are penalized severely…’ –(Bachittra-Natak, XIII. 9-10). Whilst Baba signifies truth and morality (an ethical life), Babur signifies the secular state. The dilemma which other faiths have faced in their attempt to iron out discrepancies between state and faith have often lead to one trumping the other- Nanakianism, in sheer contrast, does not claim to hold any solution to resolving the conflictual relationship between church and state. Rather, it posits that truth and morality outweigh the secular state and whilst church must not obliterate the state- it should, from time to time, correct it in a bid to keep it on the straight and narrow. Whenever church and state have clashed, historically, both have annihilated the other and subsequently both have arisen anew to continue their conflict. In this principle, then, lies the crux of the Raaj Karega Khalsa mandate- the barbarity of the political state must be confronted, but when the Khalsa succeeds in effacing the latter tyranny it must not manifest a theophany to reign supreme over the masses. Q: Is the Sikh purview of politics in tandem with the Sikh ideology? A: The reason as to why such a question has arisen is that the current Sikh orthodoxy (acting as a priestly class) has mitigated the Sikh philosophy to solely meditation and pacifism. This has lead to an erroneous perception that Sikh history, especially the Rebel or Ruler principle, is not in consort with Nanakianism and as such depreciating of the faith. The actions of the Sikh orthodoxy reflect the corollaries of traditional Indic spiritualism viz amalgamation with some spiritual reality for personal salvation; such quietism naturally denies the dynamism of Sikh history. In Sikhi the Creator, as expounded by Guru Nanak Dev Ji, is altruistic and ever-creative. The Sikh’s mission is to remold himself/herself as a tool of this Creator and to execute the latter’s attributive will. The welding of the empirical and spiritual, as engineered by Guru Nanak Dev Ji, influenced the actions of his successors. Some of the more salient of actions of his successors were: Guru Angad Dev Ji renovated the Punjabi language and promulgated the Gurmukhi script far and wide- not only did this break the stranglehold of Sanskrit and it’s Caste ridden corollaries, but also added a sense of self-hood to the nascent Sikh community. He, subsequently, debarred ascetic classes from influencing Nankianism and-in opposition to pacifism- continued the first Guru’s practice of meat consumption. Guru Amardass Ji made the practice of Langar pontificate, to the point that all Sikhs and non-Sikhs had to partake of the communal kitchen before seeking audience with the Guru. The anti-Caste stance of the Sikh community was made more perspicuous through this injunction, of the Guru, as Caste also depended on who food was consumed with and by breaking down such barriers the Guru rendered his visitors Casteless. Furthermore, to centralize far flung Sikh groups the Guru set-up 22 dioceses in which women were also selected to leadership roles. His last achievement was the creation of a educational, spiritual and political center at Goindwal which supplanted traditional pilgrimage to Kashi et al. Guru Ramdass Ji took the momentous step of founding Amritsar which, in due time, would emerge as the theo-political hub of the Sikh cosmos. Guru Arjan Dev Ji not only concluded the construction of Amritsar, he also completed the Harimandir. His most significant achievement, however, was the compilation of the Adi Guru Granth Sahib Ji which signified Sikhi’s break away from traditional Indic spiritualism and reinforced the community’s autonomy. During his incumbency, the Sikhs emerged as a strong entrepreneurial force and were categorized as a state within a state. Opposing the fanaticism of the contemporary Mughal and Hindu polity, the Guru joyfully accepted his eventual fate: martyrdom. The incumbency of Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji marked the open militarization of the Sikhs. He would go on to rout the Mughals in four divisive confrontations in the Punjab, and subsequently play a crucial role in preserving Sikh political autonomy. His most significant achievement would be the construction of the Akal Takhat and several missionary tours in the periphery of the Himalayas. When Samarth Ramdas, a Maharashtrian abbot, would inquire as to why he retained the apparel of a prince and utilized arms when Guru Nanak Dev Ji had required neither of these- the Guru would swiftly retort that the first Guru had discarded the ways of the world and not the world itself. Ramdas, realizing that his perceptions were about to be radically changed, requested a further elucidation to which the Guru readily acquiesced. He would elaborate that Guru Nanak Dev Ji’s Creator was one who vanquished atrocity and the Sikhs were to execute the latter’s attributive will; arms were to be utilized for the protection of the weak and the liberation of the oppressed. The seventh, eighth and ninth Gurus continued the militarization of the Sikhs and the ninth Guru, despite being offered an option to surrender by the incumbent emperor, laid down his life for the freedom of conscience. The tenth Guru manifested the Khalsa and ratified the precepts of Guru Nanak Dev Ji before electing both the Guru Panth and Guru Granth as his successors ad perpetuum. An analysis of the post-Guru period would make this disquisition extensively voluminous. Let us answer the initial query by summarizing the above analysis; Nanakianism emphasizes an inalienable interconnection between the empirical and spiritual facets of life- this is a natural corollary of the perception that the Supreme Reality is an ocean of altruism. A follower of such altruism cannot act as a bystander in the face of immorality as such quietism is an antithesis of the Creator’s attributive will. The Sikh purview of politics, then, is naturally in harmony with the Sikh ideology. Q: What is the political significance of the Khalsa? A: The Khalsa, conceptually, represents the summum bonum of both the Sikh ideology-cum-praxis. It is the most perspicuous minded tool of an attributive Creator ergo it’s epithet; the Kaal Purakh Ki Fauj (army of the Divine). The actions of the present day Sikh orthodoxy has rendered the very purpose of the Khalsa’s existence moot. Khalsa-Raaj, Khalsa sovereignty, is often dismissed as some historic affair bearing no relation whatsoever to Sikh philosophy. What, then, is the Khalsa? An appendage of Hindu militarism? A saintly nexus of renunciates? Some saintly legion which cowers from the world and meditates 24/7? In light of Nanakianism’s socio-political tenets, the Khalsa too emerges as a potent force for political change. To avoid a prolonged exegesis, let us focus on some of the more conspicuous facets of the Khalsa vis-a-vis our query: Revolutionary: The creation of the Khalsa and events prior establish its revolutionary nature. It was designed to acquire political prominence, supplant existing tyrannies and radically alter the incumbent socio-political equilibrium. From Guru Gobind Singh Ji onwards, the Khalsa passed through the valley of death in a bid to annihilate existing empires and birth it’s own. Those who claim to be Khalsas yet imbibe a contradictory spirit rarely mention the Sikhs of the eighteenth century who carved out the Sikh state, and what a state it was. Even in it’s embryonic phase, under Banda Singh Bahadur, the Hindu practice of Caste was annihilated irrespective of it’s religious origins. Irvine narrates: ‘A low scavenger or leather dresser, the lowest of the low in Indian estimation, had only to leave home and join the Guru (referring to Banda), when in a short time he would return to his birthplace as its ruler with his order of appointment in his hand. As soon as he set foot with the boundaries, the well-born and wealthy went out to greet him and escort him home. Arrived there, they stood with joined palms, awaiting his orders… Not a soul dared to disobey an order, and men who had often risked themselves in battlefields became so cowed down that they were afraid even to remonstrate. Hindus who had not joined the sect were not exempt from this.’ -(William Irvine, Later Mughals, i.98-99). It was a revolutionary state in an epoch where religious stratification was an accepted more. Leadership: The significance of Guru Gobind Singh Ji undergoing the Khalsa initiation can never be underscored enough. It was a prescient move on the Guru’s part as it transformed the Khalsa into Guru Panth Khalsa. The entire body was made quasi-democratic, therefore self-directive and also self-sovereign. No one man could lord over the Khalsa; only an elected body- Misls- could direct it. When Ranjit Singh implemented autocracy within the body, the results were disastrous- we are still witnessing the fallout even to this day. Violent: Socio-political movements, by nature, are violent and prone to utilizing force. The Khalsa too is accorded the right to employ force, hence the Gurus’ emphasis on retaining arms around the clock. The political significance of the Khalsa, after a brief analysis of both its history and philosophy, can be summarized as such: the annihilation of the tyrant and the exaltation of the downtrodden. SECONDARY: Q: What is the Sikh perception of social responsibility? A: When the Siddhs asked Guru Nanak Dev Ji as to why their spiritual progress remained inert even after centuries of meditation, the Guru enunciated that they were only reaping the fruits of what they had sown i.e. their spiritual state reflected their perception of reality which, for them, consisted of some illusion originating from the cogitations of some dormant Creator(s). The Creator, in the Nanakian purview, resides in his Immanence or Naam. Naam, as the constituent reality of creation, emanates from an attributive Creator who is altruistic. It is natural then that the Sikh too be altruistic and perform selfless service seva through the medium of Immanence. Social responsibility, in Sikhi, consists of realizing one’s role as a tool of the Creator and selflessly serving him via serving his creation.* Q: Why is the householder’s life given primacy in the Sikh ethos? A: Social responsibility, as a mandate, can only be retained in the householder’s life. The latter ensures full commitment in the socio-political paradigm and adherence to serving Immanence. Guru Nanak Dev Ji would sum up the principle succinctly when he would observe that though the Siddhs acted all holy and wise, they would beg for sustenance from families (householders) for their daily upkeep. TERTIARY: Q: What are some significant milestones in the evolution of the Sikh state? A: The Sikh state, conceptually, was founded by none other than Guru Nanak Dev Ji. He added a practical dimension to his socio-political themes by establishing Kartarpur, a locus which was run on his philosophical tenets. The history of the Sikh state, and it’s significant achievements, then commences with Kartarpur Sahib: -The establishment and growth of Kartarpur. –The establishment of Khadoor Sahib. -The establishment of Goindwal. -The establishment Amritsar. -The establishment of Akal Takhat Sahib. -The construction of several forts augmenting the Sikh military prowess in the Punjab. -The establishment of Kiratpur Sahib. -The establishment of Anandpur Sahib. -Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s renewal of Sikh autonomy via manifesting the Khalsa. -The establishment of the first Khalsa-Raaj, under Banda Singh Bahadur, in the post-Guru era. -The rise of the Khalsa Misls. -The rise of Ranjit Singh. Q: What was the Dal Khalsa? A: The Dal Khalsa was a general commune of the Sikh leadership, in both military and political circles, which was composed of Misl Sirdars (or chiefs). Though it’s main purpose was militaristic, the Dal Khalsa also implemented the quasi-republican ideals of Khalsa-Raaj and saw to the progress of Nanakianism sub-continentally. It dominated 18th century Sikh politics and imbibed the pragmatic concepts of Nanakianism per se. Further Reading: Analytical: 1.) Dr. Trilochan Singh, The Turban And the Sword of the Sikhs. 2.) S. Kapur Singh, Parasharprasna. 3.) S. Kapur Singh, Sikhism For The Modern Man. 4.) S. Kapur Singh, Sikhism and the Sikhs. 5.) S. Jagjit Singh, Percussions of History. 6.) S. Daljit Singh, Essentials of Sikhism. 7.) Surjit Singh Gandhi, Sikhs in the Eighteenth Century. 8.) Dr. Tarlochan Singh Nahal, Religion and Politics in Sikhism: The Khalsa Perspective. 9.) Dr. Harjinder Singh Dilgeer, Akal Takhat Sahib: Concept and Role. 10.) Capt. Amarinder Singh, The Last Sunset: The Rise and Fall of the Lahore Durbar. 11.) Patwant Singh, The Sikhs. 12.) Karamjit K. Malhotra, The Eighteenth Century in Sikh History. 13.) Dr. Ganda Singh & Baba Teja Singh, The History of the Sikhs vol. i. 14.) Gurinder Singh Mann and Kamalroop Singh, The Granth of Guru Gobind Singh. 15.) Ajmer Singh, Kis Bidh Ruli Patshahi? Contemporary: 1.) Sri Gur Sobha. 2.) Sri Gur Katha. 3.) Gurbilas Patshahi Chevin. 4.) Gurbilas Patshahi Dasvin. 5.) Sri Gur Panth Prakash. 6.) Navin Panth Prakash. 7.) Twarikh Guru Khalsa. 8.) Bansavalinamah Dasan Patshahian Ka. 9.) Sikhaan Di Bhagatmala. 10.) Shahid Bilas: Bhai Mani Singh. https://tisarpanthdotcom.wordpress.com/2018/08/12/empire-builders/
  3. I believe that, in more ways than one, this article might act as a potential eye-opener vis-a-vis the fall of Sikh Raaj. To quote an excerpt: 'The hidebound state which both the Hindu and Islamic doxas’ envision run on the concurrence of the power-wielder and it’s brokers viz. the Brahmin(s) or the Ulama. The socio-legal concepts devised, and implemented, in the Shastras and Shari’a are designed to keep the proletariat in check from whom the danger of mutiny is ever-constant. To shatter this inimical nexus of Babur (the state) and Bipar (religious hypocrisy), Guru Nanak Dev Ji laid the ideological foundations of the Khalsa which were later made manifest by his nine successors. On his deathbed, in 1708 A.D., the tenth Nanak enjoined the Khalsa to ‘march towards stability and enduring prosperity by renouncing dogmatic traditionalism and the writ of any sacerdotal class…’ (17) The Sikh Gurus, doubtless, were well aware of the sub-continental past. Empire after empire had followed one another to the grave and politico-religious oppression had confined the proletariat to the merciless whims of his superiors. Political impermanence had arisen out of either theocracy or Caesaropapism relegating many a kingdom to oblivion. The medieval epoch, in the sub-continental context, was marked by the rise and fall of various polities namely the Maurya and Gupta empires; the Harsha empire confined to the north; the Pala empires in Bengal and Behar and so forth. (18) With the Khalsa being inherently equal, the birth of any sacerdotal class was well arrested whilst a quasi-democratic outlook was bequeathed to the body vis-a-vis it’s political approach. The question remains, was this outlook ever implemented?' https://tisarpanthdotcom.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/raj/
  4. Victor Jacquemont (8 August 1801 – 7 December 1832) was a French botanist and geologist who visited Panjab during the early part of Ranjit Singh's reign (he met him). His journals were translated into English and published as PUNJAB, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, after his death. The work was translated and edited by H.L.O. Garrett, and first published in 1935 by the Punjab Government Record Office, Lahore. Here are some excerpts: *Jacquemont was wrong, Ventura had previously fought the Russians but Allard had not.
  5. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma condemns the attack on Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale in the first statement he makes on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Foow6GCyow Dhumma says: These actions need to be condemned in harsh words. Everyone should speak out against it. Sikh Jathebandis should get together to answer back on these things and need to mobilize themselves to stop such ploys. Then in the following statement, Dhumma's words take a change in direction: Check the Facebook page of the news channel for a better version: https://www.facebook.com/abpsanjha/ Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma claims Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale have been making accusations for over 4 years and has made derogatory comments on Dam Dami Taksal's dastar and reputation. The derogatory comments are claimed to be of the very low and despicable character. I have yet to see evidence of the above claim. Dhumma believes Dhadrianwale should have looked at his own dastaar and realised it has the same honour and respect as someone else's. This is a comical suggestion as Dhumma himself criticized Dhadrianwale for his choice of dastaar style, a useless critique. Dhumma claims in 4 years he never made any derogatory comment against Dhadrianwale. This is proven false by Dhumma's critique a few weeks ago of Dhadrianwale and his dress, deferring to this chola as ghagri and making comments about his dastaar styleDhumma makes a point of Sikhs only supposed to be wearing 4 colours of dastaars. A fair point, but hardly something that warranted negative utterance toward another parcharik. Calling Dhadrianwale up and raising this concern and doing benti to stick to the four colours would have been the better move. Dhumma says that the Singhs that attacked Dhadrianwale wished to get him to stop his derogatory comments about Dam Dami Taksal. They did what they did for the the honour and respect of Dam Dami Taksal. A lot of people's feelings are connected with Dam Dami Taksal and that some can handle someone's attacks while others cannot. I have seen no evidence of Dhadrianwale making any defaming comments about the Dam Dami Taksal While it is a fair statement to say that people's feelings can get hurt and they take matter into their own hands, Dhumma comes across condoning the attack when he should be condemning it. Dhumma originally condemned the murder, but since the perpetrator are the student's and friends of his institution, the attack is now being condoned and justified. Hurt feelings over the alleged bad-mouthing of your institution's leader is not sufficient justification for attacking and attempting to murder someone Dhumma should be vehemently criticizing and denouncing what occured but instead has shifted to defending and tolerating the attack Was the killing of Bhai Bhupinder Singh, who made no utterances toward anybody, not wrong? Should his killing not be condemned? The vehicles being destroyed, while a minor misdeed in comparison to the life lost, is the loss of property funded by the Guru's sangat. Is that not worth expressing regret over? A chabeel was made part of the ruse to trick the targets into the trap. An age old tradition of seva was utilized by the perpetrators to commit murder. People will look toward chabeels with suspicion, the government has outlawed them without prior permission, and beadbi of the tradition has occured. Is that not worth condemnation from Dhumma? Dhumma says he will be supporting and helping those charged with these crimes. While raising concerns about potential police torture and brutality is legitimate, unequivocally supporting those who committed such disgusting acts is lunacy. The following is a news article following Dhumma's press conference on May 23rd, 2016: The article states: Dhumma admits the perpetrators and vehicles used are from Dam Dami Taksal Dhumma states he has no knowledge about the Chabeel being used as a tool in this attack (how is it possible to attempt to even feign ignorance about this). HERE'S A BOMBSHELL: The press note being used during the press conference (which Dhumma read from) was prepared by the media advisor of Punjab cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia and Dhumma read it word for word When the journalists had one on one interviews afterwards (as in the ABP Sanjha video above) what Dhumma read and what he said in those interviews went in opposite directions Questions that need answering: Why are the media advisors of Badal's cabinet ministers helping Dhumma with his press statements? Why is Dhumma putting up a farce in his statements? He is blatantly being deceitful and disingenuous by stating one thing through a press note (probably things he doesn't actually believe) and then airing his real thoughts and feelings in the interviews. Why the two-face bigotry? Overall, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has proven that he severely lacks skills in leadership, strategic thinking, conflict/crisis resolution, honesty, and accountability. Operating as the head of Dam Dami Taksal's Mehta faction, his weakness and ineptitude in being a competent leader does a disservice to the entire Dam Dami Taksal. This incident and the subsequent severe mishandling of the response by Dhumma has eroded the reputation and respect for Dam Dami Taksal in the eyes of Sikhs world wide. Those close to Dam Dami Taksal have to deliberate with themselves and ask, is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's handling of the situation helping the taksal? Will it help them engage and connect with the hearts of Sikhs? Will it help them prosper and flourish going into the future? If the answer is no, we may have someone in a job way above his skill set. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I did this quick analysis just pouring over the information on the internet. If you find any mistakes, any additional relevant information, or have any analysis of your own to air, I would welcome your feedback and will make any corrections necessary.
  6. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3545500/India-says-Koh-Noor-diamond-belongs-Britain.html So apparently an Indian solicitor has 'admitted' that "the Kohinoor was given voluntarily by Ranjit Singh to the British as compensation for their help in the Sikh Wars, in 1850" In 1850. 11 years after Ranjit Singh had died.... For British help in the ANGLO-Sikh Wars... Because their dismantling and subjugation of the Sikh nation was actually them helping us. Of course we have little right to this jewel, it was never really ours to begin with. We claimed it by right of conquest, as did the Brits. But this Indian lawyer's brazen distortion of the Sikh people's history in order to justify his country's cowardly surrender can't be ok.
  7. Can anyone tell me how the Badal government took over the Akal Takht and sent massands to take it over especially since the last Jathedar Bhai Ranjit Singh was the one who was there before Badal? Also how'd the Massands stay in power so long without anyone stopping them until recently with the Sarbat Khalsa? (I know it's changed since Jagtar Singh Hawara became the official Jathedar.)
  8. ***THE 2014 UK INTERVIEW*** Dhadrianwale | World Exclusive | Early Years, Panthic Vision & Gurmat Vichar | HD World famous Sikh Parcharak Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale made a brief visit to the UK during early September 2014. Renowned for their regular Kirtan, Katha and Tatt Gurmat Parchar Diwaans across the world, and attracting in excess of 100,000 people at events in India, the Parcharak is known to speak about Panthic affairs, explain the logic within Gurbani, speak openly against false Gurudom and Deravaad in Punjab, as well as discussing the social issues affecting the nation. A world exclusive interview recorded during their stay in the Midlands was broadcast by UK-based Sangat Television on Friday 5th September 2014 and well-received by millions of viewers worldwide. Conducted by Ranjit Singh Rana, the highly educational, informative and inspirational interview gives a glimpse of Baba Ranjit Singh Ji’s early years, education and an introduction to their vision. The interview can be watched in HD quality at -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVTy-iUSNq8 or http://youtu.be/vVTy-iUSNq8. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- During their few days stay, a Gurmat Diwaan took place at Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara, Sedgley Street, Wolverhampton on Sunday 7th September 2014 in which thousands of Sikhs gathered from across the UK at very short notice, while Sangat Television held its annual anniversary event, attended by many Panthic organisations. A recording of the live broadcast can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqI_sEk6Fjk&feature=youtu.be.
  9. BHAGTI OF TRUTH** Hear It - Understand It - Preach It | Beauty Of Sikh Logic For Mankind | Dhadrianwale Reference Link - ਅਸਲੀ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਿਹੜੀ ਹੈ http://youtu.be/mO6oNxH9DM0 20th September 2014, ਕਰਤਾਰਪੁਰ, ਦੋਆਬਾ - Within the deeply informative and thought-provoking live recording that can be watched in the reference link (ਅਸਲੀ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਿਹੜੀ ਹੈ), Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale discusses what 'Bhagti' is whilst speaking to the thousands who attended a Panthic Diwaan on 20th September 2014, organised by the Parmeshar Dwar Gurmat Parchar Mission in the Doaba region of Punjab within Jalandhar city's Kartarpur town. After doing 'Vaheguru Simran' with the Sangat present, a fundamental part of a Sikhs life, they explain with Gurmat justification that one form of 'Bhagti' is the truth (“Sach”). First Sikhs must hear the truth, then they must understand the truth and finally they should preach the truth. This is the beautiful concept in Sikh logic that is applicable to all of mankind. They explained that if they were to simply meditate on stage, no person would come into conflict with them. However, when the truth is spoken then certain people will enter into conflict, whether it be drug dealers, snake worshippers or those agencies working against the Khalsa Panth. They urged Sikhs to not fear what others may think as the person who looks at others is known as a “Moorakh”. As it is better for our body to stay hungry but not eat the wrong food, in the same way we must only feed our inner-being with truthful, right knowledge. If the wise Guru Nanak Dev Ji sat in Kartarpur meditating without propagating the truth, no person would have confronted them. In the same way Kalgidhar Guru Gobind Singh Ji could have kept quiet on the issue of castes, equality and authoritative power misuse and they could easily have lived a comfortable life in Anandpur, but instead they became a voice against injustice and propagated the truth. The world does not favour the Bhagti of speaking the truth. Those who understand the nations difficulties as their own, speak up for human rights and challenge corruption, they will always be targeted. Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa talked about the simple and just demands raised in the 1980's Anandpur Sahib Resolution and the truth that was spoken by the Sikh nations saint soldier Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale, where others afraid of the truth became traitors of the Khalsa Panth. Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale challenged the system, spoke against injustices and ultimately propagated the truth, hence the reason they became a target of army's and tanks. Also sitting within the Sangat was Sathkaarjog Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, father of the great martyr, warrior Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji.
  10. **GOLDEN PARENTS: CREATORS OF SOORME** Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, Mata Pyaar Kaur Ji & Bibi Surinder Kaur Ji | The Amazing Family Of Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji | Dhadrianwale ਧੰਨ ਪਰਿਵਾਰ - ਕਰਤਾਰਪੁਰ, ਦੋਆਬਾ - http://youtu.be/Hz4Pyf5Q_Zw Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale talk about the fearless Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji, the incredible story of his wife Bibi Surinder Kaur Ji and the ultimate willpower of his parents, Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji and Mata Pyaar Kaur Ji, the creators of warriors. This live recording clip is from the Panthic Diwaan that took place on 19th September 2014, organised by the Parmeshar Dwar Gurmat Parchar Mission in the Doaba region of Punjab within Jalandhar city's Kartarpur town. Sitting within the Sangat was Sathkaarjog Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, father of the great martyr, warrior Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji. ***RELATED VIDEOS*** 1) ANOKHA VIYAH (World Famous Diwaan) - The Unique Wedding Of Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh & Bibi Surinder Kaur:http://youtu.be/avhGsbjkcLk 2) BAPU TARLOK SINGH JI (Exclusive Speech) - Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji's Parents & Mandeep Singh 'Kubbe' Honoured:http://youtu.be/2_xPTcX14Ko
  11. Seeing NATO'S and USA'S surrender of their Afghan campaign, although kudos to the fact that they gave Islamic radicals a taste of their own medicine, I have decided to do a short article on Hari Singh Nalwa's conquest of Afghanistan. Presently I am doing an article on Nalwa himself, and would love to do a second one on his exploits in Afghanistan. I would like to incorporate and answer the following points in my article: - What makes Hari Singh's conquest of Afghanistan so different from prior conquests lead by the Macedonians and the Marathas? - What political, social and religious factors assisted Nalwa in consolidating his prowess in Afghanistan? - What military factors contributed towards Nalwa's victory in Afghanistan? - How does NATO'S campaign differ from Nalwa's? -What elements are similar in both historic and modern campaigns? -If anything what lesson can we derive from both Hari Singh Nalwa's and NATO'S campaigns? For those who don't know, tisarpanth blogspot is my intellectual possession and most of the articles on there are my work. However I am always on the lookout for a fresh perspective on matters and decided to inquire around on forums, to see what answers I can gain on this new topic of mine. Any historic sources you know of will also be appreciated in this matter.
  12. What do you guys think? It is very thought provoking isn't it? Res Publica. The rise and fall of the Sikh misls and the present day decay of Democracy. Often a commonwealth and/or a republic is built on the basis of the common good. The parameters which define this are however debatable and often victim to constant change. History is replete with examples of how the common good soon mutates into manifestations of corruption and avarice through the imperfectness of man. One such example is found in the rise and fall of the Sikh misls. A series of twelve confederacies (misls) which divided Punjab between themselves for the survival of the Sikh nation, but over time became hell bent on territorial conquest and achieving personal ambition. The concept, when presented to a mass gathering of Sikhs on March 29th 1748, was accepted with much gusto and cheering. At the time no one realised that the misls, which were to act as the lifeblood of the Punjab, would soon start to de-oxygenate it through their in-fighting. The misls, at first, were led by the glorious and Spartan Nawab Kapur Singh, a general whose only ambition was to create a united and singular nation for his community. His personality was the glue which bound the 11 confederacies together. At the time, this was no easy achievement. On one hand were the royal misls. Lead by successful and often wealthy leaders such as Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, and Charat Singh Sukarchakia; they were brave, resourceful and more often than not had their coffers full of finance. On the other hand was the reclusive Shahida, consisting entirely of the Akalis (traditional Sikh warriors) who relied on raids and looting to boost their financial position. Such a contrast could easily have caused divisions between the misls if it hadnt been for the strong-minded personality, of a single and militant leader. As time progressed each confederacy carved an extensive part of Punjab for itself. Obviously this lead it into conflict with the ruling regimes of the time. On one hand were the Mughals who occasionally approached them for help, on the other were the Marathas who were slowly consolidating their power on the sub-continent; whilst Afghanistan sent its raiders deep into Indian Territory for conquest and booty. By 1761, however, the confederacies were beginning to dominate Punjab and ultimately by 1780 had gained total control over Punjab. Long gone were the days of the Mughal and Afghani empires, now a new empire ruled Punjab and one which would become extensively synonymous with it; the Sikh empire. In the fashion of a true commonwealth it was moulded in a democratic form, with each and every one of the 11 chiefs holding a commune once a year at Amritsar (the religious capital of Sikh Dom) and bringing his/her problems to the attention of his/her companions. Yet reminiscent of todays democracies, strains of unease and tension were beginning to appear in these communes. Whereas at first there was a feeling of companionship and brotherhood, now there was an atmosphere of tension and unease. The maxim that power corrupts was beginning to take hold, and it was only a matter of time before past allies decided to drink each others blood. After the demise of Nawab Kapur Singhs charismatic successor, Jassa Singh Alhuwalia, in 1783 the confederacies declared open war on each other and the common good soon became clouded in the mists of profit and territorial conquest. The very leaders, who the common man relied on were now ignoring his wishes and setting his residence up for a fall. This inter-fighting saw the demise of many legendary warriors and politicians who would have contributed immensely in the growth of the Sikh sovereignty. The news of this in-fighting soon reached the ears of Zaman Shah, the Afghani emperor who decided to launch an offensive against Punjab. He succeeded in capturing the Sikh economical capital, Lahore, which weakened the confederacies even further. But rather than uniting together and facing this new threat, the confederates soon started extending their empire into North India towards Kashmir and Delhi. What was needed to preserve the common wealth of Punjab, and the common good was a shrewd and cunning leader. One who could unite the confederacies, by force if necessary, and give the state a new face. Only a few of the confederates possessed such a character, amongst them being Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, Mahan Singh Sukarchakia and the father son-duo (Jai Singh and Gurbax Singh) of the Kaniheya confederacy. However all were too busy in slaughtering each other and adding more area to their ever expanding territories. Furthermore Punjab so far had only ever been subject to imperial governing, whether at the hands of the Mughals, Afghanis and Sikhs was a different matter. So far a democratic imperial ship had failed the state. It had started off well but sunk half-way to its destination. What was needed was a change of government, the times required a single figure of power unlike Kapur Singh or Jassa Singh; a figure who retained the reins of power exclusively in his own two hands. So far corruption and avarice ran rife due to their being more than one powerful leader who paid tribute to the natural law of power, more than one powerful individual will always be a catalyst for conflict. This of course is reminiscent of many democracies, whichever leader rose to prominence in Punjab needed not only to subdue the confederacies but also demolish the old system. The catalyst for a new leader surprisingly was provided by the confederacies themselves. By this point in time all 11 had united against each other and were allying themselves with tributaries and kingdoms outside Punjab. It was to prevent an encroachment of external tributaries that the Kaniheyas and Sukarchakias bonded together in a pact. They also gave their solemn oath that if one was to attack any tributary of another confederacy, than he would share the profits with his partner. However it was not long before Mahan Singh, the ruler of the Sukarchakia confederacy, decided to break the pact. He along with his battalions attacked Kashmir and subdued its rulers, along with looting the state. This did not sit well with the Kaniheyas who decided to retaliate by crushing the Sukarchakias for once and for all. To this end Jai Singh sent his heir and son Gurbax Singh to attack Mahan Singh, who on the other hand allied himself with Jassa Singh Ramgarhia and Chief Sansar Chand. The battle which followed has gone down in history as the battle of Batala. Friend and foe alike slaughtered each other in a feast of blood and metal, steel clashed on steel and warriors thundered massive war cries as they charged at each other. Ultimately the fate of the battle was decided after the untimely demise of Gurbax Singh. The Kaniheyas were defeated, and the Sukarchakias, along with the Ramgarhias, carried the day. For many Sikhs at the time this was only another battle in a never-ending chain of battles. Yet this was the long-awaited catalyst needed for a refurbishment of Sikh sovereignty. When Jai Singh received news of his sons death, he instantly handed the reins of the Kaniheyas to his daughter-in-law, Sada Kaur. Not only did she gain a position of prominence in a much feared confederacy, but also became commander-in-chief of the said confederacys military power. It was expected that she, being possessed of a valorous spirit, would clash with Mahan Singh who was responsible for her husbands early demise; but she surprised even her most vocal critics when she sued for peace. Sada Kaur had seen Mahan Singhs young son, the prince Ranjit Singh. The boy, despite being in his teens, was extensively shrewd and heavily cunning. He also possessed great perseverance and strength of character, which was lacking in other potential confederate heirs. He had been a victim of chicken-pox on his birth, but had survived its initial effects. However as a result he was blind in one eye and was not much of a sight to view, yet despite these handicaps he had trained himself to become one of the best horsemen in Asia and was an expert in firing from a moving stead. Furthermore he was also possessed of a strong desire to see a reconstruction of the Punjab political scene; however he needed a strong mentor to keep him on track. Mahan Singh was constantly embroiled in his own conflicts, and the young Ranjit was often left to his own devices. He had already proved himself to be an apt general, and this combined with many other factors convinced Sada Kaur to betroth her daughter to him. Hence by the time Mahan Singh died, in 1792, Sada Kaur and Ranjit Singh had already discussed their plans to change the face of Punjab permanently. On one hand were the united Kaniheya and Sukarchakia confederacies, whilst on the other hand were the individual confederacies. Despite their differences, with each other, the confederacies at any given time could unite against the Kaniheya-Sukarchakia alliance and uproot it. To prevent this Sada Kaur and Ranjit Singh launched quick successive attacks on each and every confederacy. It was soon becoming evident to the confederates that Ranjit Singh would bring about their downfall if he was not stopped. But just as Lenin and his God, communism, became an unstoppable force in Imperial Russia; so too did Ranjit Singh in a divided Punjab. He was hell-bent on re-designing the commonwealth of Punjab and was not willing to let any obstacles interfere with his vision. To this end by the time he was in his twenties, he had succeeded in subduing 9 confederacies and only two remained. It is not known why he never pursued his course with Shahida. Maybe he was fearful of its legendary battle prowess, or respectful of its generals and commanders-in-chief. Whatever the reason, even up till his death he did not enter into any debate or conflict with Shahida. The Bhangi confederacy on the other hand was a different matter. They had been responsible for his fathers early demise and also controlled Lahore, which had been won back from Zaman Shah. Also in their possession was the Zamzama the most feared cannon in that part of Asia at the time. To this end and entranced by the prospect of gaining the economic capital of the state, Ranjit Singh planned an all-out attack. One which if he won guaranteed him absolute power over Punjab. Unbeknownst to him, however, was the fact that most of Lahores population wanted him to capture the city. It had become a heavily fought over region due to the confederacy in-fighting and Ranjit Singh presented it with the prospect of peace, in a long time. Other factors too convinced the residents of Lahore that Ranjit Singh was the right ruler for them. He wanted to rule solely, this would prevent an outbreak of internal conflict in the future as was the case with the confederacies. Not only did he want to become a sole figure of power, he was also possessed of extreme cunning. Rather than execute his vanquished opponents, he would grant them employment in his court and was also planning on extending Punjab. To this end he was eyeing China, Nepal, Tibet, Afghanistan and what remained of the Indian sub-continent. Thus not only was he expanding his empire, he was also giving it a strong political legacy. Disillusioned with a democratic-confederate state he had decided to take the burden of ruling solely on his own head. Such a man, the residents of Lahore reasoned, was worthy of power. Finally the day arrived which would decide the fate of the confederacies, 7th July 1799. Would democracy be victorious, or a dictatorial monarchy? The question hung heavy in the tense atmosphere. The Bhangis had extensive military equipment, and were expert tacticians. Ranjit Singh on the other hand had Sada Kaur and an army composed of high-spirited and valorous soldiers. By nightfall the fate of Lahore, and the confederacies as a result, was decided. Lahore had fallen. Ranjit Singh had succeeded in his designs to wipe out the confederacies and their democracy. The year 1799 finally announced a change in Punjabs fortunes and the birth of an empire which would stand on par with the undefeatable British Empire. This fall of the Sikh confederacies however is not solely intended to be a lesson in gaining allies and military victories. It is reminiscent of many political frameworks today. Democracy, which is accepted as being an epitome of equality, is increasingly distancing itself from its real purpose. Thus there is an increasing disillusion with the system, even within its fundamentalist supporters. How equal is an individual in a democracy? Is the main question. Democracy has mutated into nothing more than a battleground for the elite few. Whereas at first the Sikh confederacies listened to their citizens, and pursued courses in a collective manner, as time progressed they became heavily embroiled in their own personal matters and forgot the common-good. Once more the common man was left with no course to resort to, as the very leaders who he selected and supported turned against his welfare. Even today a majority of nations pursue a theoretically democratic policy, but in reality are battlegrounds of the elite; who have been granted the right to rule over the common man by the common man himself. Thus what the global village needs now, nay requires now, is a new form of governorship. Similar to Ranjit Singh wiping out the vestiges of the confederacy, a contemporary Ranjit Singh needs to vanquish the remnants of democracy and replace it with a much better system. One can argue, via a devils advocates perspective, that everything man creates is doomed to failure. But one can also argue that what man creates is subject to evolution, and democracy has long overstayed its own evolution.
  13. jasdeepsingh2k125

    do ghost exists?

    i happened to see a dharna+kath of sant ranjit singh ji dhardriwale in which he says ghost do not exist then sri akal ustat sahib came in my mind ਗੰਪ੍ਰਬ ਜੱਛ ਰਚੈ ਸੁਭ ਚਾਰਾ ॥ Gaddhrab Jachch Rachai Soubh Chaaraa|| ग्मप्रब जछ रचै सुभ चारा ॥ He hath created Gandharvas, Yakshas and being of high character. ਕਹੂੰ ਜੱਛ ਗੰਪ੍ਰਬ ਉਰਗ ਕਹੂੰ ਬਿਦਿਆਧਰ ਕਹੂੰ ਭਏ ਕਿੰਨਰ ਪਿਸਾਚ ਕਹੂੰ ਪ੍ਰੇਤ ਹੋ ॥ Kahoon Jachchh Gaddhrab Urg Kahoon Bidyaadhar Kahoon Bhae Kinnarpisaanch Kahoon Pret Ho|| कहूं जछ ग्मप्रब उरग कहूं बिदिआधर कहूं भए किंनर पिसाच कहूं प्रेत हो ॥ O Lord! Somewhere Thou art Yaksha, Gandharva, Sheshanaga and Vidyadhar and somewhere Thou becomest Kinnar, Pishacha and Preta. here sant ranjit singh ji is wrong or i a moorakh is wrong? kindly explain http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZNK-b_ilKE

Important Information

Terms of Use