Jump to content

~! Danger Of Bhausaria Mindset In The Panth !~


N30S1NGH
 Share

Recommended Posts

Gurfateh Ji

Thanks for replying singh132,

I respect your views, it appears we are on different side of same coin which is no where bad thing or one side is right and other side is wrong. I dont know about your feeling, but for me personally, this shows diversity in the panth, for some it may seem division or seem as black/white or gurmat/manmat.

On this note, as usual we have agree to disagree but an exception of things that we agreed with each other in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Namastang. Namastang and I have some different views. We have had many discussions in the past. I can say with honesty that I might have felt frustration at times in our discussions (when we couldn't agree) but in my heart I feel genuine respect and affection for him. In the same way, Namastang veer has never spoken to me with any disrespect or hatred.

Both of us are moving on in age and we both have less and less time to have long debates and discussion. But if nothing else, I would ask that others when having discussions remember to speak like the brothers we are. We should never write with the aim to hurt the other person. This is a paap and I think we all can agree with that.

We can have different veechaar and still respect each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Sangat, after discussion, we have decided to re-open this thread. We appreciate a lot of hard work/research has gone into many of the posts. We have removed some posts which discussed keski as kakaar or not. There may be some posts slighlty touching on the subject due to the nature of the topic but we in any way do not encourage debate on the topic of keski as kakaar or not. The thread will remain open for now if anyone has any issues with the posts please use the Report function or send a personal message to Admin or the Mods.

Your assistance is much appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having diverged slightly lets know get back on track: A summation of some reforms by Bhasaurias:

- Generally started the trend that Gurbani can be questioned on the basis of an individuals personal morals. The intellect of an individual is alone is enough to determine whether something is or is not bani. Using our mat (ego) we can determine what Gurmat is... or as what modern Bhasaurias love to use 'Nanakian Philosophy'.

- The 'Sant' debate was instigated by them. No one denies that perhaps the majority of people who are termed Sant are not fit for the title. Yet, this does not give one the right to change the meaning of the word. The words meaning has changed (ever so slightly) within the context of where it is used.

- The above error is due to Bhasauria belief that there can only be one meaning for everything fails to take into other important tools for Gurbani interepretation. They have deprived Gurbani of its esoteric meaning, which essentially one has to obtain santhiya from a vidiya gurdev and then learn arths very deeply. The need for a gurdev/ustad is not seen as that important anymore. Some organisations now of 'Professors', but as the lecture of Gyani Sher Singh (link poster earlier) highlights; these people have not even followed the teachings of their professors.

- A general 'De-Hinduisation' based on nothing more than paranio, i.e. editing of words from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Rather than understanding the philsophy behind references to avtars etc, they edited Gurbani and without providing any great research asserted that Gurbani had been edited by Hindus.

- Introduced a Protestant/Victorian ideals/moral System, this is probably the basis of much of the above and has been the cause of so many controversies arising between puratan sampradas and new organisations such as Sikh Missionary College.

- Unless I am misinformed, I believe before the Bhasauria no one ever discredited or wrote anything against the bani of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Not looking for an arguement on Dasam Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, would like to know if anyone before Bhasauria every questioned dasam maharajs bani? This debate is one of the biggest topics that divides the panth - was it started by Bhasauria are were they propagating the research of someone before them?

The legacy is deeply inbread into current Sikh parchar.

Are the idealogical and physical battles fought by the Bhasaurias the first instance of great disunity between Sikh organisations based on beliefs? I am not sure on this. Someone has earlier mentioned that for hundreds of years Sikh brothers and sisters have lived in unity, now we are disunited... is this due to Bhasauria legacy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Are the idealogical and physical battles fought by the Bhasaurias the first instance of great disunity between Sikh organisations based on beliefs? I am not sure on this. Someone has earlier mentioned that for hundreds of years Sikh brothers and sisters have lived in unity, now we are disunited... is this due to Bhasauria legacy?

Anyone...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the idealogical and physical battles fought by the Bhasaurias the first instance of great disunity between Sikh organisations based on beliefs? I am not sure on this. Someone has earlier mentioned that for hundreds of years Sikh brothers and sisters have lived in unity, now we are disunited... is this due to Bhasauria legacy?

Anyone...?

Personally, I think there has always been a margin of disunity as expected due to political, social, geographical and institutional loyalties and opinions. These whilst in history are causes for disagreement they have not tried to rewrite Sikhi the same cannot be said for the Bhasauriaism influence. Today for example you may find physically two Singhs alike but its certainly true that they are of two totally different schools of thought two completely different mindsets. If one was to take away the common use of terminologies and language one could see two totally different belief systems. This is partly due to the fact that as we have moved away from practising Sikhi at the “village” level, we have at this time access to knowledge, education etc that has never been so readily available before we have used it not to establish common ground between us but to build walls amongst us. The fact remains that “yes” the panth continues to grow strong but in to different directions we should all recognise that, and the fact that people are free to make their own choices and form their own opinions. We all have access to a vast amount education and freedom of will to make an “educated conclusion”

Some continue to read with their heads in the sand and then spread the nonsense. Here we should actively in an educated manner debate such issues.

Some have resorted to hate, violence, lies, propaganda etc to further their own ideology. Here also we should condemn such actions, for to stand aside unaffected and claim “True Sikhs could never do such things” is a self defeatist mentality and we and our future generations will suffer from such ignorance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately one cannot point the disunity in Sikhi to the time of the Panch Khalsa Diwan movement. This disunity existed earlier.

Nihangs did not get on with Sevapanthis due to their link with Islam and Sufis, Nirmalae and Nihangs did not get along as the Nihangs saw the Nirmalae as an institution created by the British. Most Nirmalae and Udasis disliked the chatka side to the Nihangs maryada and belived it effected their Satto Gun (virtues of purity)

There has always been disunity and will continue. This is our human behaviour overcoming the spiritual essance we desire. We all claim to want to become one with God but somewhere along we all have an 'ism' and look to seggregate a certain group in order to satisfy our pride.

Without unity we cannot solve any issues in our Panth and will not move foreward.

Instead we seem to be de-evolving as a faith of unity and peace spreading the name of God as hypocrites. (This may not be describing you but it is describing my aatma)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first time according to all ithaas that the issue of the Authenticity of the Dasam Granth was disputed was around 1740 CE. At this time the Buddha Dal split into two with the formation of hte Tarna Dal. At this time the Buddha Dal had complete faith in the works of the Dasam Granth but some of the fractions of the Tarna Dal who had little knowledge of the wide range of interpretations of bani could not comprehend the Charittars.

At this time a pact was made by Bhai Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh that if they were to kill Massa Rangar then all should accept it as the will of God that the Dasam Bir is in its true form and should not be split and if they failed then to accept that the dasam bir was not in the form intended by Guru Sahib.

God willed and the Singhs killed Massa Rangar for sacrilage he caused at harmandir Sahib.

Those who cannot comprehend will always doubt.

This is the same with Athiests, due to them not being able to comprehend the existance of the Lord they cannot accept him.

With the people who do not comprehend the message of the Guru Granth Sahib, Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth, they will dispute its authenticity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If relationship with Guru is strong, then kanga is done twice a day, and turban should never be taken off or put on like a hat, there is a lot wrong with that as it is against rehit! maryada is to take off every layer of turban/pagh/dumalla individually, and tie fresh turban each time!
    • the whole 'your husband/wife is chosen for you'/sanjog thing is real, it's just that a lot of people end up marrying the wrong person. they did not end up with the person that was meant for them. my friend, you should marry someone who you feel a connection with and love. there are millions of sikh girls, i'm sure you can find someone who aligns with your sensibilities and who you can truthfully say that you love. sikhi does not say anything against love marriages. you can also be in a loveless arranged marriage which is a safe option b/c both families are more inclined to keep the union intact. i was one of those people who was like meh, i guess i'll just get arranged to some sikh. well i finally started dating for the first time this year and i'm getting married to someone that i love and cannot even imagine leaving. i think it's better to have lost & lost than never loved at all. unfortunately, a lot of people confuse love w/ looks & lust. a lot of men go for the fittest girl they can find and think they won the jackpot or something. in reality, your partner should be like an extremely loved best friend. there's a reason why it's a fact that the most stable and long-lasting relationships started as friendships.  i also think a lot of women are petty and divorce over small reasons, but there's other terrible things like high cheating rates as well. that's why the divorce rate in the west is high. be careful out there.
    • andrew tate praises sikhi too & likes sikhs. his brother also donated to sikh families iirc. they just like any "alpha" religion and tbh islam is the most "alpha" in their eyes. islam is very good at promoting that image. but imo a real alpha man doesn't command respect by beating up his wive(s) or forcing them to wear a burqa. a real man will have his woman listen to him w/o raising a hand or his voice, and command respect by being respectful. he leads by example and integrity. that's true masculinity. you get the idea. + yes, it's definitely true that islam is growing rapidly and making massive inroads. strength in numbers + belief will do that. but rlly it's just because of the birth rate. a lot of them are muslim b/c it's their "identity" just like how a lot of young sikhs will say they're "culturally sikh" or whatever. there just aren't billions of sikhs who lambast their identity everywhere and have strict and linear rules like in islam. besides, the reality is that islam and its followers are some of the most morally bankrupt. you can see all the weird trans rules in iran, bacche baazi in afghanistan, visiting brothels, watching p*rn, p*dophilia what goes on behind the scenes in countries like uae & qatar, etc, and come to your conclusions. you can google all the stats yourself and see which countries do the most of these ^.   
    • stop associating with hinduism, that's the absolutely worst thing you can do as a sikh. not sure if you noticed but the entire world looks down upon and spits at india & hindus, literally no one respects them and considers them weak and cowardly. literally 1+ billion of them but not perceived as a strong religion commandeering respect. 
    • you wrote a whole lot but told us nothing. what exactly did you do wrong to make you feel this way?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use