Kutchee Bani?!

[N30S1NGH]

Jagjit Singh,

However the highest katha is keertan and Paath. After listening to katha that inspires a person, the person moves on to Gurbani paath and keertan. Katha is just a medium to create understanding and inspirational. But the food of a Gursikh is Paath and Keertan.

No one is disagreeing that highest is kirtan, simran and paat. Just like katha is is just a medium to create understanding and inspirational.. just like that dharna's with katha divans is also medium to create understanding and inspirational.

I hope that is clear. Veer ji, rather than trying to change what jeevan wale Gursikhs do, learn from them and see why they do the things they do.

I say the same thing to you, when you come here criticise sant's "ways of doing things and parchar".

Plus I do not think Shaheed jathebandees needs lectures on being Panthik from us. Their history and legacy speaks for itself

This shows hypocrisy. Then why you feel you can come here and criticise sant jatheebandya's?

I on the same token also think, sant sampardai's/jathebandiya's and their way of doing parchar DO NOT need lecutres on being panthic from you or your jatha or anyone.. Their bhagti, legacy, and their karni's speak for itself.

[N30S1NGH]

I gotta question for you jagjit singh regarding akj smagams,

you see, this file is been going around for a while where, it was recorded in akj smagams and it was confirmed by sarbloh_geeza i beelive.

138710[/snapback]

Veer Ji what are you talking about? What have I confirmed? Please do not spread misinformation.

138776[/snapback]

werent you the one send us legal notice how simran file should be removed? if it wasn't akj smagam..why you were concerned at the first place??

138780[/snapback]

Veer Ji please re read over the appropriate messages sent at the time for clarification. I did not confirm it was at an AKJ Samagam as you suggested. Please do not spread misinformation.

The topic was also discussed in depth in the thread at the time.

138786[/snapback]

I say let the sangat decide if this simran is at akj jatha smagam or not. I am still waiting reply from jagjit singh ji if this type of distoration of Gurmantar is normal and allowed in akj smagam or if this case is exceptational?

download links(fwd to 1 minute and listen to rest)

http://s65.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=1SCQ0H7...J20M5ZQEM5Q4M2C

http://www.filefactory.com/get/v2.1/f2.php...4774e525e09aae9

[singhmota]

some unanswered questions

Also AKJ do Dhan Guru Nanak sahib. Or Dhan Guru Gobind singh Sahib?

Is that Gurbani? Is that nirol Gurbani Kirtan?

AKJ also do Pivo Pahul Kahndey Dhar? I dont know where in Gurbani you can find that. Please point me to source

waiting for reply from jagjit singh

[GuruManeyoGranth]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

I didn't really want to get involved into this debate, and I have contributed to this discussion superfluously before. However, seeing that Bhai Jagjit Singh Jee has raised some interesting points, I think it is important to give the other perspective.

Just to add "Shabad Guru Soorat tun Chela". The Shabad is the Guru. These have been written and cannot be changed. Otherwise what difference is that to what Nirankaries and other sects do. I am not comparing sants to them, but just emphasising the Shabads as written, compiled or composed by Guru ji are eternal, with Paras kala, are perfect and nothing else is required.

No one denies that Gurbani is "eternal, with Paras kala, perfect". However, I disagree with you where you say "nothing else is required". Blessed are those Gurmukhs that receive Aatmik Brahm Gyaan on hearing, listening and understanding the message of Gurbani by itself. However, this will happen to a very few souls. Most people, to understand the message of Gurbani, will require Katha to understand Gurbani and history, Dhadhi Vaars to understand Sikh history, and lo-and-behold, some people may be inspired and understand the message of Gurbani through a Dhaarna. No-one is saying Shabad is not Guroo, and no-one is changing Gurbani: all 1430 Angs of Gurbani are eternal and no-one can change them. However, Dhaarnas are NOT Bani and NO-ONE has ever claimed that they are GurBani!!!

Guru ji specifically states in Gurbani, that there is no middleman, like in other religions. A soul has a direct link with Waheguru. Gurbani is the medium for this. So the role of any parcharak is to join a soul to gurbani, so the soul can connect to akaal. hence via katha, keertan, history, etc, our aim to take non-sikhs and connect them to Bani.

It makes no sense taking non-sikhs to kaatchie bani, so they can connect to bani , so they can connect to Akaal. You are adding something new to the equation, when there is no need.

On the one hand, you say that the soul has a direct link with Waheguroo and is joined with Waheguroo through Gurbani only. But on the other hand, you say the role of a parchaarak is, through katha, keertan, history, etc, to join the soul to Gurbani. It seems that you are saying another medium may be needed. For me, Dhaarna is just another medium of Parchaar to connect the individual to Gurbani, just like katha, keertan, dhadhi vaars, kavishri, etc. As I said, this Dhaarna (not Kachi Bani) may be needed for some persons, where other means of Parchaar fail.

If all paracharaks do katha and keertan of Gurbani, then there is no need to kathachie bani. Bani is not that hard to understand that you need to create a new composition, because you will find, many people will just connect to them compositions and not move on the next level. Plus where does this leave the Sakhi of Ram Rai?

Again I object to your use "Kachi Bani", because it is not Bani - then how can it be Kachi? Like Katha and Keertan, Dhaarna is another means of Parchaar.

The Sakhi of Ram Rai can be distinguished from Dhaarnas on the basis that Ram Rai deliberately and intentionally changed the words of Gurbani to favour himself before the Mughal Emperor, and he passed the change off as being genuine Gurbani. Dhaarnas is a means towards attaching oneself to Gurbani. No-one is saying attach to the Dhaarna, but any Parchaarak that uses Dhaarna as a means of Parchaar should always say to attach to Gurbani. The context within which Dhaarnas are used are wholly different from the intents and purposes of Ram Rai.

Bhagat bani can be complicated, but most bani is straightforward. Most paracharks can explain bani, after sincere study. Sahib Siri Guru Nanak dev Ji intentionally made Gurbani straight forward, just like his actions, words, were simple in their beauty. sahib Siri Guru Angad Dev Ji intentionally made the Gurmukhi script very simple aswell.

Gurbani can be beautiful and straightforward. I agree completely with this statement. But on the other hand, it is also very complicated, and as Namstang Jee has pointed out, it is very deep and meaningful. It is multi-faceted in its layers of comprehension.

But this beauty and simplicity is not recognised by everyone. If this was the case, the whole would be following the Gurmat Marag, but for the person that has never done Paath, or has no interest in Gurmat, Bani does not have the same effect that sometimes a Dhaarna will. I cannot explain why this is the case, but it is a fact. For example, one only has to see the effect of Parchaar which was done by Sant Attar Singh Jee, Sant Isher Singh Jee, Sant Jarnail Singh Jee, and lately, Ranjit Singh Jee Dhaddrian Wale.

We should encourage all to join direct to bani. Bani is the food of the soul. Pyare jio, there is no need for any other meduim.

I agree that we all need to join with Gurbani, as it is indeed food for the soul. But for some, this is unfortunately possible. They are inspired to join to Gurbani through Dhaarnas, just like others are inspired by Katha, Keertan, Dhadhi Vaars, Kavishri, etc. So sometimes another medium may be necessary.

Personally, I prefer listening to Gurbani Keertan most of the time. But I have listened to Diwans of Sant Isher Singh Jee and Ranjit Singh Jee Dhaddrian Wale, and I have gained a great deal of inspiration from them. Further, I will not condemn others for listening to Dhaarna. I'd prefer that people join with SatGuroo Siri Guroo Granth Sahib Jee, no matter how they join, whether it be through Dhaarnas, Katha, Keertan, Dhadis, etc, etc. Indeed, there are people living in my area who were alcoholics and drug-takers who changed their ways after listening to the Diwans of Sant Isher Singh Jee. Now they do contemplate Gurbani a lot, are Akhand-Paathees, Rehitvaan and an inspiration for me.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Waheguroo

[Quest4Akal]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

I didn't really want to get involved into this debate, and I have contributed to this discussion superfluously before. However, seeing that Bhai Jagjit Singh Jee has raised some interesting points, I think it is important to give the other perspective.

Just to add "Shabad Guru Soorat tun Chela". The Shabad is the Guru. These have been written and cannot be changed. Otherwise what difference is that to what Nirankaries and other sects do. I am not comparing sants to them, but just emphasising the Shabads as written, compiled or composed by Guru ji are eternal, with Paras kala, are perfect and nothing else is required.

No one denies that Gurbani is "eternal, with Paras kala, perfect". However, I disagree with you where you say "nothing else is required". Blessed are those Gurmukhs that receive Aatmik Brahm Gyaan on hearing, listening and understanding the message of Gurbani by itself. However, this will happen to a very few souls. Most people, to understand the message of Gurbani, will require Katha to understand Gurbani and history, Dhadhi Vaars to understand Sikh history, and lo-and-behold, some people may be inspired and understand the message of Gurbani through a Dhaarna. No-one is saying Shabad is not Guroo, and no-one is changing Gurbani: all 1430 Angs of Gurbani are eternal and no-one can change them. However, Dhaarnas are NOT Bani and NO-ONE has ever claimed that they are GurBani!!!

Guru ji specifically states in Gurbani, that there is no middleman, like in other religions. A soul has a direct link with Waheguru. Gurbani is the medium for this. So the role of any parcharak is to join a soul to gurbani, so the soul can connect to akaal. hence via katha, keertan, history, etc, our aim to take non-sikhs and connect them to Bani.

It makes no sense taking non-sikhs to kaatchie bani, so they can connect to bani , so they can connect to Akaal. You are adding something new to the equation, when there is no need.

On the one hand, you say that the soul has a direct link with Waheguroo and is joined with Waheguroo through Gurbani only. But on the other hand, you say the role of a parchaarak is, through katha, keertan, history, etc, to join the soul to Gurbani. It seems that you are saying another medium may be needed. For me, Dhaarna is just another medium of Parchaar to connect the individual to Gurbani, just like katha, keertan, dhadhi vaars, kavishri, etc. As I said, this Dhaarna (not Kachi Bani) may be needed for some persons, where other means of Parchaar fail.

If all paracharaks do katha and keertan of Gurbani, then there is no need to kathachie bani. Bani is not that hard to understand that you need to create a new composition, because you will find, many people will just connect to them compositions and not move on the next level. Plus where does this leave the Sakhi of Ram Rai?

Again I object to your use "Kachi Bani", because it is not Bani - then how can it be Kachi? Like Katha and Keertan, Dhaarna is another means of Parchaar.

The Sakhi of Ram Rai can be distinguished from Dhaarnas on the basis that Ram Rai deliberately and intentionally changed the words of Gurbani to favour himself before the Mughal Emperor, and he passed the change off as being genuine Gurbani. Dhaarnas is a means towards attaching oneself to Gurbani. No-one is saying attach to the Dhaarna, but any Parchaarak that uses Dhaarna as a means of Parchaar should always say to attach to Gurbani. The context within which Dhaarnas are used are wholly different from the intents and purposes of Ram Rai.

Bhagat bani can be complicated, but most bani is straightforward. Most paracharks can explain bani, after sincere study. Sahib Siri Guru Nanak dev Ji intentionally made Gurbani straight forward, just like his actions, words, were simple in their beauty. sahib Siri Guru Angad Dev Ji intentionally made the Gurmukhi script very simple aswell.

Gurbani can be beautiful and straightforward. I agree completely with this statement. But on the other hand, it is also very complicated, and as Namstang Jee has pointed out, it is very deep and meaningful. It is multi-faceted in its layers of comprehension.

But this beauty and simplicity is not recognised by everyone. If this was the case, the whole would be following the Gurmat Marag, but for the person that has never done Paath, or has no interest in Gurmat, Bani does not have the same effect that sometimes a Dhaarna will. I cannot explain why this is the case, but it is a fact. For example, one only has to see the effect of Parchaar which was done by Sant Attar Singh Jee, Sant Isher Singh Jee, Sant Jarnail Singh Jee, and lately, Ranjit Singh Jee Dhaddrian Wale.

We should encourage all to join direct to bani. Bani is the food of the soul. Pyare jio, there is no need for any other meduim.

I agree that we all need to join with Gurbani, as it is indeed food for the soul. But for some, this is unfortunately possible. They are inspired to join to Gurbani through Dhaarnas, just like others are inspired by Katha, Keertan, Dhadhi Vaars, Kavishri, etc. So sometimes another medium may be necessary.

Personally, I prefer listening to Gurbani Keertan most of the time. But I have listened to Diwans of Sant Isher Singh Jee and Ranjit Singh Jee Dhaddrian Wale, and I have gained a great deal of inspiration from them. Further, I will not condemn others for listening to Dhaarna. I'd prefer that people join with SatGuroo Siri Guroo Granth Sahib Jee, no matter how they join, whether it be through Dhaarnas, Katha, Keertan, Dhadis, etc, etc. Indeed, there are people living in my area who were alcoholics and drug-takers who changed their ways after listening to the Diwans of Sant Isher Singh Jee. Now they do contemplate Gurbani a lot, are Akhand-Paathees, Rehitvaan and an inspiration for me.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Waheguroo

138969[/snapback]

TOTALLY AGREE. I was going to take time out to pick apart each of the "kachi bani" statements but its not worth it. I'm glad you did it. I've tried to explain in very long posts the facts about this issue but no one listens. Its like they skip over my posts completely. No one answered the question about singing dhan guru nanak before kirtan. And then ppl are saying

"If all paracharaks do katha and keertan of Gurbani, then there is no need to kathachie bani. Bani is not that hard to understand that you need to create a new composition, because you will find, many people will just connect to them compositions and not move on the next level. Plus where does this leave the Sakhi of Ram Rai?"

I asked you all to explain to me how it has taken me away from bani. No one can do it. Sakhi of Ram Rai? So this person is comparing the great sants of the past to ram rai. Am i correct in assuming this. You lot are comparing sant baba isher singh ji and other great mahan Gurmukhs to ram rai. Gurmukhs that have been considered by the entire panth as great sikhs. And you are tryign to compare them to ram rai to get your point across.

Bro that is sad. Look at the fact. You guys don't have any legs to stand on. None of these sants have called their tarnas bani, not even close. So explain to me how its different from parchaar. What is the difference between someone coming on stage and saying, sir javey to javey mera sikhi sidak na javay an singing it.

I agree that people need stop following sant baba's. However this doesn't mean we spread anit-sant, anti-dharna propaganda without any real basis.

[jagjit_waheguru]

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ke fateh

Pyare jio, many of you have raised many points, so looks like this will be a long post. So please bear with me.

"PUNCH AND JUDY" VEECHAR

Pyare jio, to nick a phrase from David Cameron at the moment. Veer Namstang, I have noticed in the 3 threads that you have debated with me, you have completely ignored much of what I write and the points, never really answering the question, and just going off on tangents, or dismiss everything. This is only going to lead to "Punch and Judy" veechaar, which is not beneficial to anyone, and not condusive to learning. So please if you wish to debate, and always wish me to respond to your posts, which I have always done, then please, as I have stated earlier respond to my questions aswell. If we are not here to learn and share, and hopefully eventually come to common conclusions, then there is little purpose.

NAAM SIMRAN

Pyare jio, you have asked me to check out your files. I am sorry, but at work we are not allowed to download anything. You and another veer are arguing as to who it is. I will leave that to you Gursikhs to sort out.

From your description, I can guess what is on it. There are alot of people who do simran in many different ways. Some do it loud, others agressively, I have even seen a video of Naamdaris who did it so agressively, that their dastaars come off. Personally this stuff has never really attracted me. I have written before about people shaking heads while doing simran, and stuff. However I choose not to judge. Let me explain why?

Personally in my life, I also do simran in many different ways. At Amrit vela, I will do it loud, as it helps me keep awake, especially after a hard days at work. But on days that are not cold, I will walk around my garden at Amrit vela and do simran. It keeps me fresh, and while walking, I do simran internally and quietly. During the day, I will do it internally and quietly. In evenings, I will do it loudly when doing rehras and listening to keertan, because I usually get more Rass. In rainsbhais, sometimes, I sit on stage and do it with the sangat, other times I sit in the sangat and do it internally. The point is, we all have our own ways of doing simran, and we do it differently at different times, depending on our level of tiredness, sangat, time, and many other factors. I enjoying doing it internally because I appreciate sehaj. I would like it to be a fundamental part of my jeevan, it is easy to have sehaj for moments or for days, but not so easy to make it a permanent part of our jeevan. But I try.

Is my stage of internal simran higher than someone elses stage? Only Guru knows, but I doubt it. I would never judge anyone doing simran, no matter how they do it. For someone to do simran in kaljug is high enough. They are in tune with their Guru and their Guru will guide them, correct them, protect them.

To break someones samaadhi is a Paap. Similarly to stop someone`s simran, in our eagerness to say, do what we do, is also wrong. How do we know we are right and they are wrong? Gurbani says do simran loud, and also grind the simran inside us, and also kooko simran, in some places. So just because we may prefer internal simran, it does not mean mean we are higher or lower than anyone.

In my abyass, Guru ji and given me knowledge and revealed things. I take these as blessings. I equally assume it happenes to everyone else, because many would not do simran otherwise. So who I am to judge them? If you consider yourself advanced and capable of judging others simran, then that is your perogative. I definately would not do something like that.

In conclusion, let everyone do simran as they please, loud, kooka, internal, quiet, etc. Guru ji will direct them himself with Rass, and blessings. If someones asks me about Naam and simran, I direct them to the Panj Pyares, who are the best people to answer any questions.

HYPOCRISY - KHALSA OR MULTIPLE GROUPS

Veer namstang ji, you have acussed me of hypocrisy, in reference to veer Singhmota comments about AKJ being anti-pathic because they do not do katha at smagams. I responded by saying many do katha at local gurdwaras, but the purpose of smagams is different. Plus keertan is the highest katha. Because I stated we should not criticise Shaheed jathbandian, you have compared it with Udasis and nirmallas, saying I was a hypocrite for critizing them.

Veerji, I am sure I am a hypocrite at times. We all try not to be, but I have to accept I am far from perfect. In this case, I would say I do not accept your label.

Maybe I should be more careful in selecting my words, but let me explain why I disagree with you.

You call me a Tat Khalsa. I personally do not like this because I believe it assumes their are non-Tat Khalsa. I prefer just Khalsa. A Khalsa is Guru jis Amritdharis. I fundamentally believe my Guru gave one message for humanity. I believe in the concept of One God : Waheguru, One Guru : Sahib Siri Guru Granth Sahib ji, One Group: Guru Khalsa Panth. My Guru created this path and created this Khalsa. He gave us one path, one rehit, one message and never contradicted himself. I do not believe Guru ji created multiple groups, with different rehits, different rules, especially some which do not require kesh, or Amrit, or other fundamental aspects of Sikhi.

I do not see groups that are Panthik and Khalsa, like AKJ, Taksal, Sikh missionary, Old SGPC, and many, many others, doing things like tying Gursikhs to trees and burning them, raping women, living off Sikh institutions like Nankana Sahib. Neither act as touts against the khalsa during the Moghul and British raj. Udasis, etc have done this. You cannot deny it.

If you believe we are wrong, and our understanding of udasis and nirmallas is just what Niddar says. Then please feel free to separate and explain your understanding, and how it contradicts what Niddar says.

If you wish to debate this further, then feel free. Already on the end of the first thread I posed you 19 questions, which you totally ignored.

http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=15251

Start a thread at any time, and answer them questions. If we really debate this, then lets start from sahib Siri Guru Nanak Dev ji and work our way to year 2000.

SINGHMOTA

Pyare jio, veer singhmota, You leave me for words. We have never even talked, and you send a a threatening PM, out of the blue. Then you do it with a hidden ID?

Maybe you are used to people being intimidated by your email, but I have grown up in Slough during the 80`s fighting pakistani gangs, chalvey boys, etc, then HUT/Al Majoroun at uni, then BNP/Combat 18 in Yorkshire. I am not proud, but neither am the type to get intimidated by an email.

Then you next send a message saying AKJ are not Panthik because they do not katha at smagams, which is really silly. Now you ask further silly questions.

Pyare jio, do you honestly expect me to take anything you say seriously? I just think you are all over the place, and highly errattic.

If you have a problem with anyones keertan, then just send Guru ji one of your emails, and you will get your answer. Whatever your issues and agendas is for You and Guru. They are far beyond me, so forgive me if I do not take you seriously at all.

IS BANI SIMPLE OR COMPLICATED

Pyare jio, some of you disagree with my statement that apart from bhagat bani , most bani is straightforward. I agree with you bani is simple, but also can be an never-ending ocean, if one where to dig so deep. Veer Namstang has mentioned the jap ji sahib katha. Thats is fine. I am sure it inspires and impresses many. Personally I am more analytical. We can write a whole book on just "ik Onkaar", just because we can, does not mean we have to everytime? For those who like long explanations, they have access it. I prefer to not create a mental block in youth that Gurbani is hard to understand, and always try and get youth to do sehaj paths, and interact with bani. Over time, we all appreciate the depth of bani, it is a natural process.

VEERS GURU MANEYO GRANTH, QUEST 4 AKAAL & OTHERS

Pyare jio, I appreciate the nature of your views. Myself and Kharkoo4Life have presented one side and you have presented the other with the orginal posts by the bibi. It is up to the sangat to think about and decide.

Pyare jio, just to clarify the points that you have added.

We all agree Gurbani is eternal, and Dhadi vaars, kavisherees, etc are part of Gurmat or Panthik. One veer/bhain has claimed there is no diference with Katha and Dharnaas. Another has mentioned Sant Jarnail Singh as someone who does dharnas.

I disagree there is alot of difference between katha and dhaarnas. Katha is an explanation based specifically on Bani. It never changes the composition of it.

Sant Jarnail Singh ji is a Gursikh, that I have the utmost Satkar for. His speeches moulded my sikhi, and I believe he is far more than just a Sant, he was a Sant Siphaahi, a Soorma. I do take exception to calling him a dhaarna wale sant. Yes, he may of on a couple of occasions done kasvisaree, or poems, like "Sir jaave ta javee, Mera Sikhi Sidak na javve." These are poems or kavisahree which are common in Sikh history. There are many others.

But at no point did Sant ji every get a waaja, take the fist line of a shabad, sing it, then add the second line himself. He would never of dreamed of it. Please show any video of him doing this? He always had another Gursikh who read bani, which he did katha of. Just because he did a couple of peoms, or kavisharees in speeches, does not make a dharnaaa - waaja wale baba.

Pyare jio, at no point have I ever made a negative statement about Rarewale sants, or any other sants that you have mentioned. No doubt they have done alot of parchaar, especially in rural areas. Veer Quest 4akaal seems to be upset about the ram rai comment. Let me clarify that, it was not comparing these sants to Ram rai in a derogatory manner. What I meant was ram rai changed bani to please a Moghul Emporer, whihc was wrong. These sants changes lines to create understanding in the sangat. They wish to inspire to Amrit which is fine, but let me remind you of my initial comments at the beginning of the thread.

"Gursikhs do alot of parchaar. I personally think dhaarnas are very effective on rural punjab population. You have 3 types of kathakaars. Firstly very technical ones like Sant Singh Maskin. Then spiritual gurbani ones like Bhai Jasvir Singh khanne wale. Then we have dhaarnas wale sants. Everyone has there preferred choice. However as youth rather than accepting what we see, should we not be going forward. I see no reason why any of these dhaarnaa wale sants cannot put some more effort in using purely Gurbani like Bhai jasvir Singh Khannewale. I do believe it may even have more impact. "

I fundamentally believe if all tapes of dharna keertan, had only pure keertan, with all the people who listen to them, it would be far more beneficial to the sangat who listens to it. It is the Paras kala of bani. Surely the more impact the better.

We keep hearing the rural people do not understand it. But they understood it fine when sant jarnial singh did katha, sant singh maskin did katha, and so many others.

When you create a dharnaa, you just change the last lines. Why put that effort in? Why not just explain the last line to the sangat in your katha like Sant Jarnial singh, Sant Singh Maskin, and Bhai Jasvir Singh Khannewale do.

If you do not believe Dhaarnaa, is keertan, then what can one say, other than we just agree to disagree. But most sangat cannot distinguish, and do consider it keertan. In slough, I have heard elderly bibian tell Granthis who read Gurbani right, that they are reading it wrong, just because they have memorised some tape of dharna.

At the end of the day, Bhai kharkoo4life and myself have presented our viewpoint, and other Gursikhs have presented theirs.

Waheguru ji kakhalsa, wahegurujikefateh

[proud_to_be_singhni]

@ how do u people get time to write such lengthy replies......i usually give up reading them half way and skim read.....

:lol:

[N30S1NGH]

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ke fateh

Veer Namstang, I have noticed in the 3 threads that you have debated with me, you have completely ignored much of what I write and the points, never really answering the question, and just going off on tangents, or dismiss everything. This is only going to lead to "Punch and Judy" veechaar, which is not beneficial to anyone, and not condusive to learning. So please if you wish to debate, and always wish me to respond to your posts, which I have always done, then please, as I have stated earlier respond to my questions aswell. If we are not here to learn and share, and hopefully eventually come to common conclusions, then there is little purpose.

I have debated with you in three threads, questions you posted in other threads were completely off-topic on this thread. I am going to send you pm's regarding other thread, lets stay stick to the topic on this.

Note: stuff which is highlighted in the bold, it's either a question towards you, or comment to show hypocrisy or for you to grasp history knowledge so you will not make future ignorant comments against sants and sant samparda's.

NAAM SIMRAN

Pyare jio, you have asked me to check out your files. I am sorry, but at work we are not allowed to download anything. You and another veer are arguing as to who it is. I will leave that to you Gursikhs to sort out.

From your description, I can guess what is on it. There are alot of people who do simran in many different ways. Some do it loud, others agressively, I have even seen a video of Naamdaris who did it so agressively, that their dastaars come off. Personally this stuff has never really attracted me. I have written before about people shaking heads while doing simran, and stuff. However I choose not to judge. Let me explain why? Personally in my life, I also do simran in many different ways. At Amrit vela, I will do it loud, as it helps me keep awake, especially after a hard days at work. But on days that are not cold, I will walk around my garden at Amrit vela and do simran. It keeps me fresh, and while walking, I do simran internally and quietly. During the day, I will do it internally and quietly. In evenings, I will do it loudly when doing rehras and listening to keertan, because I usually get more Rass. In rainsbhais, sometimes, I sit on stage and do it with the sangat, other times I sit in the sangat and do it internally. The point is, we all have our own ways of doing simran, and we do it differently at different times, depending on our level of tiredness, sangat, time, and many other factors. I enjoying doing it internally because I appreciate sehaj. I would like it to be a fundamental part of my jeevan, it is easy to have sehaj for moments or for days, but not so easy to make it a permanent part of our jeevan. But I try. 

The Purpose of me asking you about that file above... my purpose is not about judging others or judging someone's naam simran "techniques". It's about "distortation of Gurmantar". I have no problems someone is doing fast simran, slow simran, aggressive simran, or any postures in simran.

I am going to make it easy for you to understand, why i posted those files.. You have commented on shaking heads while doing simran but "cleverly ignored" the question of distortation of "GuruMantar" in AKJ samagams, you are not even willing to admit that above file was in your jatha.

You and your jatha, criticise other sants groups doing dharna's and call it "kachi bani" but you cannot even stop and you don't criticise- distortation of Gurmantara happening in your samagams and but you rather say- I choose not to judge. But you have every right to "judge" others groups right because they were doing dharna as form of parchar? (Answer this please )

You think distortation of Gurmantar happening in your samgams as - brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, grrrrrrrrrr,, uuuuuuuuuu uuuu a,, ahhhhhhheeeehah is pakki bani? or kachi bani??? (Answer this please)

This is outright hypocrisy.

Is my stage of internal simran higher than someone elses stage? Only Guru knows, but I doubt it. I would never judge anyone doing simran, no matter how they do it. For someone to do simran in kaljug is high enough. They are in tune with their Guru and their Guru will guide them, correct them, protect them.

To break someones samaadhi is a Paap. Similarly to stop someone`s simran, in our eagerness to say, do what we do, is also wrong. How do we know we are right and they are wrong? Gurbani says do simran loud, and also grind the simran inside us, and also kooko simran, in some places. So just because we may prefer internal simran, it does not mean mean we are higher or lower than anyone.

In my abyass, Guru ji and given me knowledge and revealed things. I take these as blessings. I equally assume it happenes to everyone else, because many would not do simran otherwise. So who I am to judge them? If you consider yourself advanced and capable of judging others simran, then that is your perogative. I definately would not do something like that.

In conclusion, let everyone do simran as they please, loud, kooka, internal, quiet, etc. Guru ji will direct them himself with Rass, and blessings. If someones asks me about Naam and simran, I direct them to the Panj Pyares, who are the best people to answer any questions. 

..see my above post..this has nothing to do with breaking someone's samadhi or specific techniques..this is about distortation of Gurmantar.

Veer namstang ji, you have acussed me of hypocrisy, in reference to veer Singhmota comments about AKJ being anti-pathic because they do not do katha at smagams. I responded by saying many do katha at local gurdwaras, but the purpose of smagams is different. Plus keertan is the highest katha. Because I stated we should not criticise Shaheed jathbandian, you have compared it with Udasis and nirmallas, saying I was a hypocrite for critizing them.

Veerji, I am sure I am a hypocrite at times. We all try not to be, but I have to accept I am far from perfect. In this case, I would say I do not accept your label.

Maybe I should be more careful in selecting my words, but let me explain why I disagree with you.

You call me a Tat Khalsa. I personally do not like this because I believe it assumes their are non-Tat Khalsa. I prefer just Khalsa. A Khalsa is Guru jis Amritdharis. I fundamentally believe my Guru gave one message for humanity. I believe in the concept of One God : Waheguru, One Guru : Sahib Siri Guru Granth Sahib ji, One Group: Guru Khalsa Panth. My Guru created this path and created this Khalsa. He gave us one path, one rehit, one message and never contradicted himself. I do not believe Guru ji created multiple groups, with different rehits, different rules, especially some which do not require kesh, or Amrit, or other fundamental aspects of Sikhi.

I do not see groups that are Panthik and Khalsa, like AKJ, Taksal, Sikh missionary, Old SGPC, and many, many others, doing things like tying Gursikhs to trees and burning them, raping women, living off Sikh institutions like Nankana Sahib. Neither act as touts against the khalsa during the Moghul and British raj. Udasis, etc have done this. You cannot deny it.

If you believe we are wrong, and our understanding of udasis and nirmallas is just what Niddar says. Then please feel free to separate and explain your understanding, and how it contradicts what Niddar says.

Here is this is last time, i posting this about history of nirmala's I wont' post it again. You have grossly-generalized "whole" nirmale samaprdha based on one incident where corrupt mahatans who may have associated with nirmale group killed Gursikhs?? you judged the whole samparda's based on few bad apples, it just show how ignorant you are?

you have also accused whole Nirmale's samparda as being non-keshadhari, bei amritiya, do you have any self dignity? how you even sleep at night with such a weight of nindya and lie on your head??

After the training of five nirmale's in Benares who were sent by sri guru gobind singh ji they returned to the court of Guru Gobind Singh which was now established in Anandpur Sahib. At their return Guru Gobind Singh gave them the title nirmala from the Sanskrit nirmala: ‘im-maculate’ or ‘blemish-less’. After the introduction of the khande di pahul in 1699 the Nirmalas received the new initiation and were put under the command of Bhai Dharam Singh and Bhai Daya Singh. The Nirmalas were then progressively (throughout their history) divided into 24 sub-sections (upa-sampradayas). Thirteen of these 24 sub-sections go back to Bhai Daya Singh and eleven of them to Bhai Dharam Singh.  Out of thirteen of these sub sections, very famous upsampardha's are- nanaksar, rara sahib, harkhowaley, hoti mardan, reru sahib, naurangabad. Here is their pictorial spiritual geneology

You have cleverly included taksal as part of neo sikh groups but forgotten about the fact, you cannot separate taksal and nirmale..they are soo interconnected with each other just look at the recent parchar,, classic example- gyani thakur singh ji audio katha translations of japji sahib..full vedant parchar in there.. even though i personally beleive taksal as 5th gyani sampard(baba deep singh shaheed branch) , however bhindran-taksal are soo inter-twined with nirmale that that they(baba mohan singh ji) themselves comfortably acknowledge that they are part of nirmale samparda, as you know baba sunder singh ji bhindranwale was a murid of baba bishan singh ji muraleywaley(famous nirmala). Nirmaley also consider taksal as part of them (look- Nirmal Panth Parbodh).

Baba Sunder Singh Ji Bhindranwale, had two teachers. His second teacher was sant gulab singh belong to amritsali taksal of bhai mani singh ji.

Pandit Tara Singh Narotam, a nineteenth century Nirmala scholar, was the first Sikh to trace the geographical location of Hemkunt. He wrote of Hemkunt as one among the 508 Sikh shrines he described in Sri Gur Tirath Sangrah (first published in 1884). That's just one out of countless contributions of nirmale to the panth.

I am just making you realize the amount of gand you are spewing against Nirmale, that's what i expected from neo sikh groups anyway...

Here is the famous saint and his background, even neo sikh groups love.

Sant baba attar singh ji mustaneywale(Nirmala) who started dharna tradition as form of parchar, who was 'Shish' of Bhai Boota Singh Nirmala, 'Mahant' of the Nirmala dera of Bhai Ram Singh Nirmala, in the village of Chima.

Here is picture of sant baba attar singh ji mustaneywale sitting in its "sat chit anand saroop" taken from jivan kiranai book. This picture itself challenges mindset of neo sikh groups- their black and white sikhi, this pictures make them really insecure, some even question mahapursh action etc- i don't see his kirpan..he committed maha manmat... ghor manmat, anti-gurmat, anti-panthic blah blah.

[N30S1NGH]

I am just assuming jagjit singh you must be home, and your audio speakers are working.

Listen to the file, i posted, here is the link again, fwd to 1 minute.

http://www.badongo.com/file.php?file=simra...-09_simrann.mp3

[Kharkoo4Life]

After the training of five nirmale's in Benares who were sent by sri guru gobind singh ji they returned to the court of Guru Gobind Singh which was now established in Anandpur Sahib. At their return Guru Gobind Singh gave them the title nirmala from the Sanskrit nirmala: ‘im-maculate’ or ‘blemish-less’. After the introduction of the khande di pahul in 1699 the Nirmalas received the new initiation and were put under the command of Bhai Dharam Singh and Bhai Daya Singh. The Nirmalas were then progressively (throughout their history) divided into 24 sub-sections (upa-sampradayas). Thirteen of these 24 sub-sections go back to Bhai Daya Singh and eleven of them to Bhai Dharam Singh.  Out of thirteen of these sub sections, very famous upsampardha's are- nanaksar, rara sahib, harkhowaley, hoti mardan, reru sahib, naurangabad. Here is their pictorial spiritual geneology

139288[/snapback]

Fateh,

Since uve made it a point to re-mention the "history" of nirmale, it seems you may have missed the previous discussion on them. So for your benefit in case u missed it, let me remind you of the actual TRUE HISTORY about the whole 'nirmale' movement. And before you disregard this is some sort of nirmala or jatha/sant bashing please try and read that entire post on nimrale history with a clear objective mind. Thanx

http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showto...95entry134695