Wer All Sikhs Pagh Wale?

[shereepanjab]

before the british came to india and took over wer all sikhs amritdari? and now dey all cut der hair?

makes me sick..

fateh

[Nehmat]

...what a transformation huhnah?

But don't feel sick...Just don't worry about it...

Here try to absorb this a little:

"It'll all a play, we are the actors, and HE is the director!"

What a director hey? hah...SUPREME...

"Saabh Kich Kita Tera Hoveh, Nahi Kich Asaada Jeo"

[dasmesh_regiment]

all sikhs did NOT have turbans and were NOT all amritdharis before the british came.

the british in fact made more sikhs amritdharis by rewarding them with army positions and the landholdings that came with such army positions.

i suggest you read some history books.

[naujawanidotcom]

all sikhs did NOT have turbans and were NOT all amritdharis before the british came.

the british in fact made more sikhs amritdharis by rewarding them with army positions and the landholdings that came with such army positions.

i suggest you read some history books.

Agreed. There were very few Sikhs who considered themselves worthy of taking amrit. It is a huge commitment and one which should not be taken lightly even today. As for turbaned Sikhs or keshadhari's there may have been a few more than today, perhaps a few less. But it certainly wasn't an all-encompassing trend to keep one's kesh. Good question shereepanjab... as dasmesh_regiment writes, we should all read a few more history books!!

[Matheen]

i suggest you read some history books.

Which ones? The one's I've read all suggest that Sikhs had Amrit in some form or another. Nobody was considered a sikh (of any guru) until they had gone through some initiation ceremony. For the Khalsa, this was/is Khandey Da Pahul.

[rupinder singh]

Dasmesh Regiment would be one weak regiment if they didn’t want to look the Dasmesh pita. It’s a simple scenario, if one really wants to be a disciple of a Guru then what better expression than adopting the appearance of your Guru.

Anyway there are some nice convenient history books that say justifies the destruction of kes for those who wish to adopt that thinking, one can refer to the RSS libraries for those kind of books.

[Inder Singh]

all sikhs did NOT have turbans and were NOT all amritdharis before the british came.

the british in fact made more sikhs amritdharis by rewarding them with army positions and the landholdings that came with such army positions.

i suggest you read some history books.

Agreed. There were very few Sikhs who considered themselves worthy of taking amrit. It is a huge commitment and one which should not be taken lightly even today. As for turbaned Sikhs or keshadhari's there may have been a few more than today, perhaps a few less. But it certainly wasn't an all-encompassing trend to keep one's kesh. Good question shereepanjab... as dasmesh_regiment writes, we should all read a few more history books!!

In Maharaj ranjit singh's time all sikhs and non-sikhs who want to take job in Kahlsa administration had to be keshadhari. That is the reason all european officers were also wearing turbans and having berads.

No of sikhs increased many fold during Maharaja's time.

[dasmesh_regiment]

i do not want to debate hair v non hair. bhai nand lal and sukha/jinda are fantastic examples of non hair. baba deep singh is fantastic example of hair.

many sikhs in the past kept long hair but did not have paghs, several sikhs had paghs but not long hair.

i suggest siques tigers and thieves - trememdous book about 18th century singhs and how they were viewed by 3rd parties ie. the english, french and muslims. sangat singh's sikh history is ok too but clearly biased towards the singh sahba style of thinking.

ventura and allard did NOT have kesh at the time they were accepted into ranjit singhs army. only after several years and after they married sikh women did they keep kesh.

instead of saying the RSS BJP are rewriting history, i would advise you all to read as many books as possible and make your own view - that is the nature of history books

[Sarbloh]

i do not want to debate hair v non hair. bhai nand lal and sukha/jinda are fantastic examples of non hair. baba deep singh is fantastic example of hair.

many sikhs in the past kept long hair but did not have paghs, several sikhs had paghs but not long hair.

i suggest siques tigers and thieves - trememdous book about 18th century singhs and how they were viewed by 3rd parties ie. the english, french and muslims. sangat singh's sikh history is ok too but clearly biased towards the singh sahba style of thinking.

ventura and allard did NOT have kesh at the time they were accepted into ranjit singhs army. only after several years and after they married sikh women did they keep kesh.

instead of saying the RSS BJP are rewriting history, i would advise you all to read as many books as possible and make your own view - that is the nature of history books

The newly found "Bhai Nand Lal was a mona" conspiricacy theory keeps coming up as does the Sukha Jinda mona example. The pictures we see of Sukha and Jinda were in Kes and according to what I have heard the were hung wearing their banas. Were the dastars and dara's fake then?

At the end of the day scholars like Nidar Singh or Amardeep Madra can only make assuptions based on their research and intellect. It's just another opinion.

We all start off as monay, but eventually in order to progress our Sikhi we know we need to keep our sabat soorat roop. That doesn't mean we only focus on our mona pasts and only promote that mona roop.

[Matheen]

Please read Bhai Nand Lal Ji's OWN writings then decide if he was mona or not. Why would he write so strongly against people who cut their hair (infact against people who let their children cut their hair) if he was mona himself? Makes no sense.

If people have cut their hair and called themselves Sikhs, it doesn't make them Sikhs. Sikhi is what Guru Ji tells us, not what we feel like doing. By the logic of some 'scholars', future generations will think it's ok to drink etc because some 'sikhs' did it in the past - and use photos from Glassy Junction as proof.