Krishan Used Deceit In War Against Kharag Singh

[apnepart2]

Guru hargobind sahib gave sikhs four fundamentals war politics and battles they are

1 Sham

2 Dam

3 Dand

4 Bhed

with due respect jassaji, these four pricniples were given by Kautilya who was prime minister of Ashok. And he lived some 2000 years before guru sahib.

[jassa]

its chanekiya i think which got them in written in his books on rajniti but they existed even before him ...

to sikhs it was given by guru hargobind sahib as poltics was only studied by few choosen man during those times the one who were born to rule ... when they made akal takth sahib and joined meeri with peeri ... they taught in very deep detail what to use and when to sikhs who have nothing to do with these nitis the farmar class the worker sikh iron smith sikhs they were taught by guru sahib only ... this sakhi can be read in suraj parkash granth ... what to use when to use and how to use in a battle ...

[singh_soldier]

its chanekiya i think which got them in written in his books on rajniti but they existed even before him ...

to sikhs it was given by guru hargobind sahib as poltics was only studied by few choosen man during those times the one who were born to rule ... when they made akal takth sahib and joined meeri with peeri ... they taught in very deep detail what to use and when to sikhs who have nothing to do with these nitis the farmar class the worker sikh iron smith sikhs they were taught by guru sahib only ... this sakhi can be read in suraj parkash granth ... what to use when to use and how to use in a battle ...

Man, this is SHAMEFUL. Jassa, u are a SLANDERER of Guru Hargobind Jee Maharaaj.

Sikhs believe in SHAHEEDI. If 40 singhs have to fight with 10 lakh mughals, singhs will fortify a small haveli and will fight and give shaheedi. There is no place for sham or daam.

U can believe in all those things but u cannot use the name of Guru Hargobind Jee Maharaaj for this.

U JUST EXPOSED URSELF BY SAYING THAT MIRI PIRI DE MAALAK GAVE THE UPDESH OF SHAM, DAAM, ETC. TO HIS AKAALI SINGHS.

[singh_soldier]

even sikhs fought alongside meer manu against abadali which was part of sham to earn some peacefull time in punjab and grow more powerfull which worked for them ...

This is not sham. There is no deceit in it. Let us say that there is a civil war in India and india-pakistan war at the border. Taliban has reached in Kashmir and is fighting for its independence with the help of Pakistan army and local militants. The panthic singhs in USA, UK, Germany, Canada and Punjab negotiate with the dalits that if they fight against new delhi, they will be given small autonomous states and they wont be exploited by the nexus of upper caste hindu. This is not sham as there is no deceit in it, this is just a war stragedy.

[jassa]

its chanekiya i think which got them in written in his books on rajniti but they existed even before him ...

to sikhs it was given by guru hargobind sahib as poltics was only studied by few choosen man during those times the one who were born to rule ... when they made akal takth sahib and joined meeri with peeri ... they taught in very deep detail what to use and when to sikhs who have nothing to do with these nitis the farmar class the worker sikh iron smith sikhs they were taught by guru sahib only ... this sakhi can be read in suraj parkash granth ... what to use when to use and how to use in a battle ...

Man, this is SHAMEFUL. Jassa, u are a SLANDERER of Guru Hargobind Jee Maharaaj.

Sikhs believe in SHAHEEDI. If 40 singhs have to fight with 10 lakh mughals, singhs will fortify a small haveli and will fight and give shaheedi. There is no place for sham or daam.

U can believe in all those things but u cannot use the name of Guru Hargobind Jee Maharaaj for this.

U JUST EXPOSED URSELF BY SAYING THAT MIRI PIRI DE MAALAK GAVE THE UPDESH OF SHAM, DAAM, ETC. TO HIS AKAALI SINGHS.

the teachings of guru you cant understand that doesnt mean guru sahib cant give those teachings ...

Sikhs faught as per the conditions ... when there was need to fight at night they faught at night ... where there was use to fight with other battle techniques they used them ... when there was a need sikhs remain hidden in jungles ... these were all war techniques ... baba bagheal singh paid for the land where sees ganj gurdwara is there even though he had a victory over delhi so that in future sikhs dont have a problem if some one else claim this land belongs to him ... this is all ran videya ... when abdali attacked baba vadbhag singh was in trouble he claimed to be guru and was speaking against khalsa panth ... then khalsa under the command of jassa singh alluwalia told him in clear words if he want protection take amrit and be a sikh instead of guru else die ... this is called bhed ... sharp up ur history skills dude ...

You talk about shahhedi but shahhedi is very important in sikhi but it can only awake the community ... to get a victory u need to cut the opponents head ... no one ever in this world has won any battle by giving only shahhedi ... sikhs have cut more heads then they gave …

you want to follow kidism or sikhism choice is yours ...

Lets take example of shere punjab maharaja ranjeet singh ... he used what ever was needed to keep make a sikh state ... where dand was needed we used it look at sindh pishor where he faught battles ... where sham was needed he used it he sensing the jehad on the name of islam he gave top postions in his administration to muslims ... where he needed to pay he paid ... he paid loads of valuable stuff to nawab of haydrabad while hazur sahib was being built and in order to get sikhs work in police force of nander so that they can live and earn there and can protect hazur sahib ... by your theory he should have fought with brithish on the same time kill pathans of afganistan on same time try and conquere hydrabad ... a sikh should master the ran videya and mastering ran videya is useless if u cant be victorious ...

its nothing more then kidism to claim fight either give ur head or get ur head cut ... if it was sikhism guru sahib would have never said in zafarnama ... when all means fail its right to take up the sword ... but when sham dam and bhed fails ... fighting should be the last wayout as per guru sahib may be in urs its first ...

sikhism is not a fairytale religion it is a religion of a common man ... a religion of a saint solider ... and a saint never wants to cut innocent people … in a battle field most are innocent …

And lastly I m always happy to be exposed …

[Mehtab Singh]

after all victory matters ... If some one uses sham or dam to get a victory over enemy who is 10 times stronger then him whats wrong with it ...

• Ram killed Bali while hiding because Bali was too strong for Sugreev. Moreover, Ram didn't fight Bali himself.
  
• Ram killed Ravan after being assisted by Vibheeshan, who was Ravan's own brother. He basically betrayed his brother by exposing the secret about Ravan being susceptible to death only if shot in his navel.
  
• Dronacharya was killed by Drushtadyumman after he heard about the false news of his son Ashwathama's death. Drona was so emotionally shattered that he gave up his weapons and sat in meditation right in the battlefield. Thats when Drushtadyumman beheaded him.
  
• Karan was killed by Arjun as he was fixing the wheel of his chariot. Who provoked Arjun? Krishan did! It was clearly against the rules of war as decided to kill/attack anyone unarmed, but he did it anyways.
  
• Duryodhan was killed treacherously by Bheem. In gada yudh, you are not supposed to hit the opponent above his thighs, which is what Bheem did. Duryodhan had acquired supernatural powers as per which his entire body had become as hard as steel, except the part above his thighs, which again was Krishan's conspiracy, so that Duryodhan doesn't acquire a 100% steel body. Another example of treachery.
  

Jassa veeray, are all of the above mentioned acts of treachery and cheating also categorized under saam, daam, dand bhed?

Sahib Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji Maharaj could have accepted Islam, gathered more money, trained soldiers and then fought the Mughals. He chose to sacrifice His life to uphold the principles of Sikhi.

Sahib Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji Maharaj could have done the same. He chose not to. He upheld the honor of Sikhi and saved another religion Hinduism.

Chhote Sahibzaade could have converted to Islam, grabbed all the wealth, and then return to Sikhi and smash the Mughals up when they were older. They stuck to principles, not to any war strategy.

Maybe you know more than me, but from my limited knowledge, Sikhs don't depend on any "strategy" to win wars. Our surrender to our SatGuru's bhaana is what makes us victorious. Our naam kamaaee, our faith in Gurbani is what makes every one of us equal to 125,000, not any ran vidya I am sorry.

Yes we do have to follow strategies in war, but not at the cost of Sikhi principles.

even sikhs fought alongside meer manu against abadali which was part of sham to earn some peacefull time in punjab and grow more powerfull which worked for them ...

I have never heard/read that Sikhs fought on the side of Mir Mannu. Please provide evidence. I am interested to know and learn.

Result Of War Is Not About Who Was Right Its About Who Is Left

We had the Chhota Ghallughara, Wadda Ghallughara, Ghallughara of 1947, Ghallughara of 1984. We are still there, and we will always be there.

[citizen_soulja]

^^^

Excellent post!!

Mehtab Singh has once again added clarity and highlighted the core principles of Sikhi above all else!!

Ser Jaawe Taan Jaawe Mera Sikhi Sidak Na Jaawe

Never sacrifice your principles!!!

[singh_soldier]

According to jassa's theory of sham and daam, battle at chamkaur sahib was a foolish thing to do. Why shud 40 singhs fight 10 lakh mughals ??? Why not just escape via the jungle to live for fight another day ????

The battle of Saragarhi fought in 1897 was also foolish as to why shud 21 singhs fight 10,000 pathans. Even the goraa commanding officer gave the 21 singhs the option to leave the post and retreat back. But those singhs had ANAKH, PRINCIPLES.

[PAL 07]

singhsoldier get off your tantrum and learn to argue in a correct manner, you cant even realise that in past battles great people also used there brains aswell as there swords.......you cannot dis sri krisna,

you dont even know what leela parchotam is......you cannot dis any past great warrior bheem, yudistr etc.........if you think that krisna is some low life lying scum then why have the bhatts written in gurbani that infact sri guru nanak dev ji was himself sri krisna, ram chandra etc

[jassa]

Veerji Mehtab singh i agree with you but u cant match a battle field with a shahhedi ... if u need to match ran videya of ram and krishna you need to take up the episodes of battles of sikhs ...

shaibzadeya di shahhedi with how arjun killed karan i dont see what are we trying to match ...

bhagan ram killing bali ... bali got a blessing that whose ever try to fight him will loose half of his power to bali ... in other words no one can defeate him ... sugreev was a bhagat of ram ... in order to protect him bali should be killed ... but how ... from back ... according to me this is more a way out then cheating ... ram was a 12 kalla sampuran avtar ... he had power to kill bali ... ram had power to change the words and blessings of brhama ... but he made a way out ...

I had listenen to katha ... i had listened to katha of maskeen ji once on this specific topic ... ram krishna yugs and their actions of the people .. that would help ... all these actions were needed to protect the faith ...

Vabhishan his katha i heard from sant vareyam singh it 2 - 3 mins review its on youtube ... whats the story of vabhishan ... he tried to explain ravan that ram is an avtar you cant defeate him ... ravan also knew this but his ego stopped him to fold his hands in front of ram ... he got frustrated and threw vabhishan away as he priased ram in his court ... when he went to ram ... they said welcome lankapati vabhishan ... welcome king of lanka ... keeping aside ram was avtar or not ... but with vabhishans thinking he helped lord himslef ... this is what state of mind of vabhishan was ... again here i dont see any one betraying ... i know some one dear to me is wrong on other side is some sant mahatma ... if i help my dear one its betraying god if i remain silent its betraying my self ...

all the actions were to keep the truth high ... pandavs and kauravs moral of the story is kauravs were wrong ... i dont think so any of the avtars lied anywhere they just showed one only possible way if they would have lied in it ... it would have been wrong ... this is a battle field episod ... not a conversion ... so its not fair to match them with shaeedis in sikh panth ...

we can match them with battles in sikh history ...

Sikhs don't depend on any "strategy" to win wars

well sikhs used attack at night and used guerrilla warfare for over 100 years while in jungles ...

I m no where questioning gurus bhanna ... i dont even have such thing in my mind ...

ran videya plays a part else guru sahib would have never taught us ... guru sahib told us to be teyar bar teyar but they also gave us power to think and learn thats why they wrote sri dasam granth ... why they tell us to practice shasters everyday if its of no use ... gurubani can prepare us to fight we will have no fear of death we can stand in front of millions no doubt in that ... but guru sahib will not show any karamat that we dont know how to hold even a stick yet we can cut 100 of them ...

for a average person like me gurbani will make us strong mentally we can stand of front of them ... but to fight them we need power in our arms which we can only get by practice ... when a person goes above average like baba deep singh then its a different case but how many of us can be baba deep singh ...

I have never heard/read that Sikhs fought on the side of Mir Mannu. Please provide evidence. I am interested to know and learn.

Its when first time nadarshah attacked india ... the only seat between delhi and afganistan is lahore who was under control of meer manu he collected his mughal and paid rajputs, sikhs and marathas in defense ... but there was a fight between sikhs and marathas becuase of which these two never took active part .. lahore surrendered to kabul ...

it was after this we can call it first battle between sikh and afgani pathan took place ... it was one on one with sukha singh and an afgani pathan ... this sakhi to can be interesting ... sikhs were not much in number they fled two times from afgan army ... afgans wrote them letters to come and have a friendly fight ... becuase non has faced each other before and they have heard about sikhs a lot ... sikhs denied it ... they even wrote bring 5 sikhs against 1 pathan ... yet sikhs wrote we dont want to fight ... they in final letter afgans wrote sikho tuhanu guru da vasta hai akke lado sade naal ... then dada of maharaja ranjeet came forward i forgot his name ... but he was only 14 years old then ... seeing this sukha singh was given the honour to fight one on one ...

i have only read panth parkash and this sakhi is covered in it ...

two more sakhis i would like to share you can check in detail ...

when sikhs from bikaner went to kill masa rangar ... they told the security gaurds they are patvaris and here to pay money to massa rangar to gain entery in harimander sahib

when afgans challenged sikhs to come and have ishanan at harimander sahib ... again sukha singh did it ... he tied a green turle walli pug over his dummalla and went for ishana ... during his ishnan some how his blue turban and chakkar over his turban were seen my afgans but he slipped out

there are many such sakhis written ... for me its a way to keep the truth alive ... but for some person from other religion trapped in his thinking that i m best he may call the above sikhs impostors ... the difference is the way we look at it ... may be neither of us are wrong ....

Sikhs should not give sikh sidhant away ... he is not a sikh who for saving his life can lie or convert ... a sikh should live with dignity and faith in guru ... at the same place sikh should not behave as a murkh ... dignity and ego ... our dignity can help us protect others but our ego will also harm people around ...

in punjabi we call it atamsaman and ehankar ...

may be i m not trying to put forward my views becuase of language ... but i no where challenged shaeeds and the gurmukhs who give shahhedi nor the sikh sidhants ... i m just trying to say something else ... and excuse me with spelling mistakes plz ...