We Need Education About This

[Guest Dancing Warrior]

You make some valid points. I think one of the fundamental problems is the definition of Snathan Sikhi and Snathan Dharma I think it would be wrong to rubbish both, you have to remember both existed in time in history way before recent events and groups brought them to light. I think the problem being that not enough knowledge about the subject some areas of it being very complex and require much in-depth knowledge and research. I would suggest for those who are interested and want to counter argue you verse yourself in other beliefs systems, faiths, languages etc. Remember our Gurus were versed in all.

WaHeGuRu

[jassa]

Usually most of the posters on that forum kiss Javanmard/Lalleshvari/Bahadur Singh 'Nirmala' 's backside but nice to see some of them still have a love for Sikhi and can defend it now that JLB (jalebi) has finally flipped. I wonder what the Mods like Namstang who post here think about JLB now. JLB was one of the punjabi radio stations last year doing katha about the creation of the Khalsa and now he's telling Sikhs that Guru Nanak was a Muslim!

What's the view of all the Sanatanists here about JLB's view on Guru Nanak? Posters like Mahakaal, Gurbar Akaal, Jassa etc

on this topic we are standing with all the PKJs .... go ahead brother all snantanists agree with u ....

[MahanMoorakh]

ahahah...this is hilarious. U can tell the RSS types are getting nervous by reading what JLB is writing. I think it's awesome that everyone is trying to claim the Guru as their own. Just like how when Guru nanak Ji left for Such Khand, the hindus and Muslims quarelled over His earthly body....Sangat Ji, let them fight amongst themselves, no need to get involved in such petty disputes.

[Tejvir]

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheguru ji ki fateh.

Sangat ji, i've been reading that topic for about half an hour, and some thing in my mind keeps me thinking, keep ya rehat maryada, and look to the future.

[proactive]

You make some valid points. I think one of the fundamental problems is the definition of Snathan Sikhi and Snathan Dharma I think it would be wrong to rubbish both, you have to remember both existed in time in history way before recent events and groups brought them to light. I think the problem being that not enough knowledge about the subject some areas of it being very complex and require much in-depth knowledge and research. I would suggest for those who are interested and want to counter argue you verse yourself in other beliefs systems, faiths, languages etc. Remember our Gurus were versed in all.

WaHeGuRu

I think we need to clarify that Sanatan Sikhism and Sanatan Dharma are two different movements/religions. Sanatan Dharama is the older form of Hindu Dharam without new accretions such as Arya Samaj and Bhakti movements like Kabir Panth as well as new age cults like Hare Krishnas.

Sanatan Sikhism or Sanatanism has been defined to a certain extent as per it's greatest proponents and through the sanatan websites and Niddar's talks. The fact that both of these sources of information are highly flawed and easily refutable does not then mean that sanatanism has been incorrectly defined by them but that sanatanism is flawed and has only a minor connection with Sikhi. in order to keep Sanatanism alive and to deflect the academic scrutiny Niddar and his gang have purposefully kept the definition loose, any questions regarding a particular issue in Sanatanism is met with 'why don't you find out yourself, I don't want to spoon feed you' This is in marked contrast with legitimate movements which are all too eager to share information as well as answer any queries someone might have. The Sanatanism of Niddar and the websites is just old wine in new bottles. It has been refuted by the likes of Gyani Ditt Singh, Bhai Jawahar Singh, Bhai Vir Singh and a host of other scholars. The Sanatanists have a tendency to accept a certain number of books as well as authors as infallible. Books such as Suraj Panth Parkash and authors such as Kavi Santokh Singh and Gyani Gyan Singh. These authors writing 150 to 200 years after the events they were writing about cannot be relied on 100 percent and their writings need to be read along with other works such as Sri Guru Sobha which is much older and authored by someone who was a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh. The thread Guru Gobind Singh and Bhaugati is a case in point where we can see how on event not even mentioned in a contemporary account is embellished by each sucessive author until it become a central event in the creation of the Khalsa.

[Jassi Kaur]

so javanmard admits usin other ids!! hes such a liar well done to all pajees and bhanjees for exposing the choota bantha, i thought he was part of nidar singhs group but he says he doesnt like him. i think the moderators on that site are supportin him now pple are asking why they closed the original topic when pple were showing he was blatantly wrong about what he said shame on them