Krishan Used Deceit In War Against Kharag Singh

[singh_soldier]

oki ucha da peer sakhi is fake now ... Ghani Khan and Nabi Khan were the two muslims who still have a hukamnama with there ans bans written by guru sahib thanking them and telling sikh sangat these two muslim brothers helped them ... i have done its darshan at patiala once ... all you need is google ...

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Gurudwa...Sahib_(Alamgir)

ok i just used google to find out link to letter and guru sahib helped me out in very first try ... so i m editing my post

http://ghanikhannabikhan.com/

The pathan brothers did help Guru Sahib and fellow singhs by giving them their house for staying and cooking food. But the uch da peer stuff in the sakhi is false. I dont believe it. They must have helped the singhs along with Guru Sahib to find a safe passage too, but the uch da peer stuff is made up. We need to understand that the actual happening of an event gets distorted either intentionally, carelessly or sometimes for unknown reasons.

After 84, well known gurmukh singhs said that Baba Jarnail Singh Khalsa escaped and will come back and well known gurmukh singhs said that Baba Jee attained martyrdom. Thats how things are distorted.

Same thing happened with the uch da peer stuff. The immediate ancestors of pathan brothers would have distorted the actual event by putting the uch da peer stuff in it.

Or this may have happened at a later stage where some anti-sikh person made this stuff up.

[apnepart2]

when guru sahib went to nander the king came to greet him ... guru sahib told him that land is belongs to them ... they told the king go and dig this place ... from there few things of guru sahib came a sarbloh mala and batta a wooden chauki etc ... guru sahib told this is the place which belongs to them since satyugh ... and left ... raja got disturbed seeing such a large land going ... there was also internal resistance against giving the land to sikhs ... guru sahib sensing this though they could have faught but they paid for it .. guru sahib knew they can fight today but they will claim this land again in future to keep sikhs on a safer side ... guru sahib paid 1400 rs(i think) in those days and bought that piece of land ... this is a place where sachkhand hazur sahib is made ...

there had been a fight between the kull of this king and hazzori singhs over the land and there has been also a court case in british court which ended up in sikhs favour keeping in mind guru sahib paid for it ...

This is an example of dam

I am sorry but you are wrong on this one. Dam means to pay your enemy to get him out of the way to fulfill your objective. Simply put it means paying money or giving other monetry gains to achieve victory without bloodshed. This story does not qualify to called Dam in the sense of the term. Was the raja an enemy of guruji and did that transaction helped guruji in acheiving any victory over that Raja by paying cash for the land? The answer is no !

and other famous sakhi of guru gobind singh ji famous as uch da peer ... everyone knows it ... thats a clear example of sham ...

Sorry again but you are wrong on this one too. Sham might mean treachery/deceit or it might mean 'doing negotiations' depending on what circumstances it is being used, to avoid bloodshed. It is done with an enemy you are trying to defeat. Was guruji doing the 'uchh da peer' thing to defeat an enemy or acheiving any victory? No. Guruji was simply trying to evade arrest by Mughal authorities who sought his head and declared him a fugitive from law. He was simply hiding not doing any deceit to kill someone.

i can give example of banda bahadur to where he send 50 soldiers a day for 7 days dressing and acting as bussiness men and slaves ... and on 7 th day banda bahadar attacked from outside and 350 sikh soldiers attacked from inside to win the fort ... and it was done in one day then 10 - 12 days which was predicted by other jarnails that there is no way to win this fort in a day ... this was trick used by banda bhadar which comes under sham and no sikh sidhant is even challenged while doing so ...

can you provide the exact story about this one here with sources. Seems like i missed it.

You have one thing in mind that sham dam dand bhed is written some where else so sikhs cant use it ... or using it is against sikhi ... because we think so ... i would say read suraj parkash granth atleast history of guru hargobind sahib to know more ...

Sikhs can use it but then it takes us out of the concept of saint soldier. We look stupid when we cry about 'principles' and accuse others espially Mughals.

do u even know whats sema ved ... how do u know its not onkar ... even omkars simple word meaning is timeless ... there is no mention of om even in rig veda ... the first common use of om is in bhgvat geeta ... sema ved contains onkar for god not omkar it also has a way hoy to say onkar in meditation its correct sound comes out oo(a)n(gggg)kar ... there are enough proofs that onkar was used before guru nanak ... but to sikhs it was given by guru nanak same with the teaching of guru hargobind sahib ... and i dont think there is any need to write about bible or quran here ...

so you agree guru nanak borrowed extensivly from Hindu phliosophy before giving it to Sikhs in gurmukhi language? Nothing original about him as his teachings were based on Hinduism. Ofcourse he added Many things from his own experience with God. Is that it?

[jassa]

I am sorry but you are wrong on this one. Dam means to pay your enemy to get him out of the way to fulfill your objective. Simply put it means paying money or giving other monetry gains to achieve victory without bloodshed. This story does not qualify to called Dam in the sense of the term. Was the raja an enemy of guruji and did that transaction helped guruji in acheiving any victory over that Raja by paying cash for the land? The answer is no

If guru ji had not paid for land at hazzor sahib there would have been fights ...

Was the raja an enemy of guruji

No neither he was a sikh of guru ji ... he greeted guru ji as a spiritual man ... but if guru ji tried to take up his land he should have send his troops to stop them ... guru ji paid for the land to make sure there is no bloodshed in future ... this comes under dam for surely ... paid money to avoid a battle ... yes it helped in putting a full stop of rajas thoughts of getting the land back ... same thing goes with other stuff ... sham dam dand bhed doesnt mean results at that point in one battle 100s of times they are used ...

You very well know the meaning of daam but something is stopping you from accepting it ...

the difference is few people first became sikhs then i m a sikh then they start learning about guru sahib ... they first make there mind this should be sikhi ... the they start searching about it ... when something clashes there mindset its hard to accept it as sikhi ... others first learn about guru gurbani they come to sikhi with free mind every thing they learn they will accept it ... then they call them self sikhs ...

i made a picture of my guru after learning about him and keep on adding the stuff i learn in that picture some first made a picture of guru sahib in mind then they start learning about it and they keep on rejecting everything which doesnt match with their picture ... this is the only difference between from a person born as human and trying to be sikh by learning ... and other who is a born gursikh with all the knowledge

[Laadli Fauj]

ਸਭ ਦੇਸ ਦੇਸ ਕੇ ਜੀਤ ਰਾਵ ॥ ਕਰ ਕ੍ਰੁੱਧ ਜੁੱਧ ਨਾਨਾ ਉਪਾਵ ॥ ਕੈ ਸਾਮ ਦਾਮ ਅਰੁ ਦੰਡ ਭੇਦ ॥ ਅਵਨੀਪ ਸਰਬ ਜੋਰੇ ਅਛੇਦ ॥੪੨॥

Sabh des des ke jeet raav|| Kar kruddh juddh naanaa upaav|| Kai saam daam ar(u) dan? bhed|| Avneep sarab jore ached||42||

Parasnath had taken various kinds of measures, had conquered the kings of various countries in wars; on the strength of Saam Daam, Dand and Bhed, he brought all together and brought them his control.42.

sri dasam darbar.

maharaj goes on to talk about the ustat he does to Durga after his victories, and ow filled with prem he is, and how as a result Durga becomes very happy with him as he seems to be a true devotee/premi, so she helps him out even more

now of course, we don't worship Durga, so don't even go there. but this is an example of the prem a gursikh should have with his guru, and the Divine

so Parasnaath wasn't exactly a bad guy (he's hero of the story lol) as presented in this saakhi by maharaj, nor did he become one after using saam daam dand and bhed. in fact maharaj gives no commentary on that statement. just that he became successful in conquest/battle/politics using those means

its battle/political strategy guys. nothing more. Our rehit, jeevan, gursikhi, always comes first, but when one IS presented with (non principle compromising) options, it is obvious to pick the smartest/best one

vando ladoo

[Khaalis]

Great posts Jassa Singh, thanks for sharing.

What many people don't realise here is that Guru Sahiban used extant vidya in all aspects of Sikhi be it Simran, Kirtan, Santhiya, Yudh Vidya what have you. If one wants to learn about the Raj Niti and Battle stratagem - one needs to speak to Nihangs who have retained an oral tradition over hundreds of years and can put the Panth Prakash/Suraj Prakash into context.

There is nothing wrong with the fact that Gurus used existing knowlegde - in fact, in all spheres, we can see the Gurus purified, repackaged, and presented it in its original form (after centuries of corruption).

What the Gurus gave us was already Aad Sach - but it had been forgotton.

The Guru Granth Sahib is contructed around a raag framework - Gurbani and Bhagat-bani have been placed under each modal sentiment in order of honor. Raag formed the basis of the compilation due to 'Kirtan being Pardana in Kalyug' and being the chosen tool for disseminating the divine wisdom - through a science which had already existed for over 2,000 years. Now how does one learn about raag - through genuine oral tradition or through studying the Sangeet Granths i.e. Sangeet Ratnakar. Raag is an ancient science of devotional music in India, as are the aspects of war which Jassa Singh has spoken of. The Gurus purpose was not to invent new sciences - but to spread the message of esoteric practice - i.e. realising the atma.

People today treat Aad Guru as a book of law, a book of science, a book of numerology and a whole host of other things.

Aad Guru is not any of these things, it is higher than them all, it is the timeless essence that gives birth to all these wordly things.

Re the silly and offensive understanding of Krishna in the Kharag Singh kathaa - look up what the word allegorical means. Guru Gobind Singh was a master of the art of poetry, youth today, struggle to speak even one language correctly, let alone studying linguistic and artistic sciences.

[Inder Singh]

ਸਭ ਦੇਸ ਦੇਸ ਕੇ ਜੀਤ ਰਾਵ ॥ ਕਰ ਕ੍ਰੁੱਧ ਜੁੱਧ ਨਾਨਾ ਉਪਾਵ ॥ ਕੈ ਸਾਮ ਦਾਮ ਅਰੁ ਦੰਡ ਭੇਦ ॥ ਅਵਨੀਪ ਸਰਬ ਜੋਰੇ ਅਛੇਦ ॥੪੨॥

Sabh des des ke jeet raav|| Kar kruddh juddh naanaa upaav|| Kai saam daam ar(u) dan? bhed|| Avneep sarab jore ached||42||

Parasnath had taken various kinds of measures, had conquered the kings of various countries in wars; on the strength of Saam Daam, Dand and Bhed, he brought all together and brought them his control.42.

sri dasam darbar.

maharaj goes on to talk about the ustat he does to Durga after his victories, and ow filled with prem he is, and how as a result Durga becomes very happy with him as he seems to be a true devotee/premi, so she helps him out even more

now of course, we don't worship Durga, so don't even go there. but this is an example of the prem a gursikh should have with his guru, and the Divine

so Parasnaath wasn't exactly a bad guy (he's hero of the story lol) as presented in this saakhi by maharaj, nor did he become one after using saam daam dand and bhed. in fact maharaj gives no commentary on that statement. just that he became successful in conquest/battle/politics using those means

its battle/political strategy guys. nothing more. Our rehit, jeevan, gursikhi, always comes first, but when one IS presented with (non principle compromising) options, it is obvious to pick the smartest/best one

vando ladoo

Always read compositions on avtars with invocation of Chaubis avtar. Invocation is Guru sahib's belief. The above does not show

that Guru sahib is endorsing Sam < Dam , dhand bhed etc.

[apnepart2]

guru ji paid for the land to make sure there is no bloodshed in future ... this comes under dam for surely

No it does not. I don't understand how you put this under this sense of the term. I paid for my new car to avoid future ownership claim troubles and i guess that comes under Dam too.

And can you answer these questions from real life and not from fairy tale myths.

1. Guru Gobind Singh praised Auranzeb for his certain qualities as a King in Zafarnama but critisized for the 'Sham' of his generals who took fake oath of Quran to get the Anandpur fort evacuated? Double standards by the Guru?

2. Why have the Sikhs been critizing 'British' whp overtook the Sikh Empire by using 'Sham'? Double Standards by the Sikhs?

3. Why Sikhs accuse gandhi and Nehru of treachery during 1947. They were simply using 'Sham' to consolidate the future of India, put it as Hindu india if you like. Double standards again?

Should we not have the courage to accept the hard fact that our enemies were more smarter than us and knew rajniti better than we did in past. So why do we try to glorify the persons who got 'Outsmarted' byt he more cunning? Krishna and Ram got victory but what did we get?

[Laadli Fauj]

saam daam ar dand too, tumhi bhed upaao

sastar nam mala

[singh_soldier]

saam daam ar dand too, tumhi bhed upaao

sastar nam mala

Guru Jee also says that "Somewhere Akaal purakh sleeps with his wife and somewhere Akaal Purakh is the one who sleeps with others wives". This is the state of extreme bliss and praise of Akaal Purakh where everythng good and bad is a part of this amazing play of God. But that does not mean that sikhs shud start commiting adultery.

In the same way, sham, daam etc are part of this play of God. But as sikhs we shud never be using them. Real victory is to get HAPPINESS OF VAHEGURU. If Vaheguru is on our side, even a little ant can kill thousands of elephants. "neeki keeri meh...." (Sri Sukhmani Sahib)

[apnepart2]

I found translation of Zafarnama on google. If there are mistakes then please correct it. I am posting a small part addressed personally to Aurangzeb and have highlighted some lines for consideration.

I have no faith in thy oaths,

Even if thou bringest in God as thy witness. (13)

I haven’t even an iota of trust in thee,

For, all thy ministers and thy courtiers are liars. (14)

He who puts faith in thy oath on the Koran,

He in the end, comes to ruin. (15)

But, beware that the insolent crow

Can lay not its hands upon one whose protection is Huma, the Bird of Heaven. (16)

He who seeks the refuge of the tiger

Can he be harmed by a goat, a deer or a buffalo? (17)

Had I vowed even secretly on the book of my faith,

I would have withdrawn infantry and cavalry from the field. (18)

And, what could my forty men do (at Chamkaur), when a hundred thousand men, unawares, pounced upon them? (19)

The oath breakers attacked them, of a sudden, with swords, arrows and guns. (20)

I had, perforce to join battle with thy hosts,

And I too fought with the muskets and arrows as best as I could. (21)

When an affair is past every other remedy,

It is righteous, indeed to unsheath the sword. (22)

Hadn’t I taken thee to thy word upon the Koran,

I wouldn’t have chosen the path I did. (23)

I knew not that thy men were crafty and deceitful like a fox.

Else I wouldn’t have driven myself to this state. (24)

He who swears to me on the Koran

Ought not to have killed or imprisoned my men. (25)

Thy army dressed like blue bottles,

Charged us, of a sudden, with a loud bang. (26)

But, he who advanced from thy ranks beyond his defences,

Was hit with such deadly aim of my single arrow that he was deluged in blood. (27)

But they who aggressed not against us

Were left unhurt, unmolested by us. (28)

When I witnessed thy general, Nahar Khan, advancing for war,

I gave him the taste of a single deadly arrow. (29)

And many of his men who boasted of their valour,

Fled the battlefield, in utter shame. (30)

Then advanced another one of Afghan blood,

Rushing forth like flood, like a gun-ball, or a deadly arrow. (31)

He made many assaults with great courage,

Some with conscious skill, and others like mad. (32)

The more he attacked, the more he was mauled,

And then while killing two of my ranks,

He, too, fell dead in the cold dust. (33)

But the cowardly and contemptible Khawaja came not forth like a man,

And hid himself behind a wall. (34)

Had I but seen his face,

I couldn’t but have helped him too with an arrow. (35)

At last, many on their side fell on the ground

Hit by the arrows and the death dealing bullets. (36)

There was, indeed, an overpowering rain of these,

And the earth turned red like the lalla flower. (37)

Torn heads and legs lay in heaps,

As if the earth was covered with balls and sticks. (38)

The arrows whizzed, the bows twanged,

And, it brought forth from the earth only cries and yells. (39)

There were other dreadful, vengeful noises too, of weapons and men,

When men, bravest of the brave, battled like mad. (40)

But, what kind of chivalry is this in war,

That countless hosts should pounce upon a mere forty of us, (41)

When the lamp of the world veiled itself,

And the queen of night came forth with all her splendour. (42)

He who trusts, however, in an oath on God,

His Protection also in He; in need, He shows the Path. (43)

So, not even a hair of mine was touched, nor my body suffered,

For the God, the Destroyer of my enemies, Himself pulled me out to safety. (44)

I knew not that you, O man, were a perjurer,

And a worshipper of self, and a breaker of faith. (45)

Nay, you keep no faith, nor mind religion,

Nor know God, nor believe in Mohammed. (46)

He who observes the tenents of his faith,

He makes a promise but never to break it. (47)

You have no idea of what an oath on the Koran is:

Nay, you have no faith in the One God. (48)

Now if you were to swear a hundred times on the Koran,

I’d regard not thy word, not an iota of it. (49)

Had you ever a mind to keep thy faith,

You would have taken courage and come to me. (50)

From when you gave your word,

Swearing in the name of God’s Word, it was incumbent on you to keep your faith. (51)

If your majesty were to be present here before me,

I would have with all my heart posted you with your treachery. (52)

Do now what is enjoined upon you,

And stick to your written and plighted word. (53)

The written word and the verbal promise of your envoy,

Both, should have been fulfilled by you. (54)

He alone is a man who keeps his word:

Not that he has one thing in the heart, and another on the tongue. (55)

Your promise was to honour the Qazi’s word,

If that be true, then come thou to me. (56)

If you want to seal thy promise on the Koran,

I would send the document for sure to thee.