Formation Of Pakistan -1947 ...

[Bijla Singh]

Your post tells me that neither you have understanding of gurmat ideals nor how Sikhs have dealt with same issues in the past. Punjabi mindset can only influence someone when they don't practice gurmat. Were Baba Deep Singh and Bhai Mani Singh not Punjabis? I don't need to watch a documentary to learn how to debate with non-Sikhs as I already know how Guru Sahib debated Siddhas, Yogis, Qazis, Pandits, Buddhists and Jainis. We already have a perfect example in our own history. Pakistan problem is not a good example since Islam and Gurmat are different paths and present different humanitarian principles and values. If you take some time to study Gurmatta and how it was implemented in 18th century it would answer your questions. Sikhs will need to sit down and resolve some of the major issues and controversies but there is no divine law that states that Sikhs will have to have one maryada if they want their own country. Politics has its own place in Sikhi. Comparing Khalistan to an Islamic country is simply irrational. Whenever Muslims ruled using Quran it devastated the country but when Sikhs ruled using Gurbani it brought prosperity. Sikhs ruled in 18th and 19th century and I don't need to state how good it was for the people. No civil war broke out. Even when Misals started fighting with each other, it did not create havoc in the country nor did any citizen suffer. I am not claiming everyone will be perfect in Khalistan but assuming a civil war will break out over religious differences is simply a conjecture. When was the last time civil war broke out over Raag Maala or Mool Mantar? Are Punjabis and most Sikhs perfect these days? No. Is situation in Punjab any good? No. Then why isn't civil war breaking out there? Your assumptions do not have any credibility.

There is not a single incident in history when a religious gursikh misused his political power to suppress non-Sikhs or issued a Dharam Yudh against non-Sikhs. We see such incidents in Islamic history but not in Sikh history. There has yet to be a Ahmad Barelvi or Sheikh Sirhindi in Sikhi. Nawab Kapoor Singh, Sardar Baghel Singh, Akali Phoola Singh and other were strict Amritdharis but they were far above Punjabi mindset. Sikhs like Anokh Singh, Sukhdev Singh, Avtar Singh Brahma, Gurbachan Singh Manochahal did not misuse their power to suppress Hindus nor did they ever refuse to listen to others. Sant Jarnail Singh always talked openly and answered logically. He didn't shoot anyone who didn't agree with him.

We need to reflect on Sikh history not Pakistan for solving our issues. Sikh history has proved beyond the doubt that Sikhs have never caused a civil war over religious issues. Gurmatta is the place where all can sit together, present their ideas and opinions and then reach the best solution. Only Sikhs have proved how a minority can rule over majority without any civil war in the state not once but many times.

[JasSinghKhalsa]

Bijla Singh Ji, very rightly said - I am your ardent fan now .

Raj Bina Naan Dharam Chale hai ...

I see all Sikh Jokes / teasing of Sikhs on Indian channels going on just because we are Slaves. This just might be because I look this from a very cynical point of view; and the only solution to this is getting rid of slavery.

My defination and territory of Khalistan is very wide and I cover all the regions as part of our Khalistan ; where all the Guru Sahebans went; and even more. This is not going to happen very soon and in the current political/economic way - Indian Democracy is just a joke - Democracy is not meant for countries such as India. We will get this in the end; we will have to do Kathin Tapayasa; and keep our generations ready for this Kathin Tapayasa - both Naam and Karam.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

WJKK WJKF.

[Southall Youth]

http://www.khalistan.net/?p=944

The reason why we didn't get freedom in 1947 - harsh truth we hide from including those on this site

[dalsingh101]

Well Bijla,

You need to realise that the vast majority of the potential inhabitants of a theoretical K'stan will probably be lacking in this very knowledge of Gurmat and Sikh itihaas as per your understanding, and that is one of my points.

I think you make the mistake of falling back on the argument that our ancestors were great, so Sikhs of today (or tomorrow) shall be too. The massive difference between puratan Singhs and those you see today doesn't suggest this to me. But no one can fault you for your optimism.

If you think it is possible to resurrect norms and practices of 18th century on the panth in 21st century context then good luck to you.

You've sort of answered the questions I had in my mind anyway. Thanks for that.

[genie]

The biggest thing I notice was that in the final analysis Muslims got their own nation/country not through the actions of a strict religious figure but someone whom we could describe as the Musalmaan equivalent of a 'sharabbi kebebi' type. In the end it wasn't his (Jinnah's) religious beliefs that got them the country but rather his political acumen and ability.

The Pakistan we see today with its religious problems is probably very far away from what Jinnah's imagined secular nation was to be like.

I don't Sikhs are ready for that sort of leadership myself, as least not yet.

well said, also maharajah ranjit singh was the same sort of character very secular in his approach and not strict in observing the tenants of Sikhism but he was known as one of the greatest rulers that ever lived in the indian subcontinent perhaps the world.

[Bijla Singh]

Dalsingh Ji, I agree that Sikhs today are nowhere close to the footsteps of our ancestors and that is exactly why we are suffering all over the world. Without uplifting ourselves we cannot ever have a country. The power and inspiration our ancestors had was directly drawn from practicing gurmat and Gurbani. As long as Sikhs do not abide by Gurbani and do not start asking Guru Sahib for Raj they will never get it. They can setup as many committees and commissions as they want to get justice for 84 from Indian courts or UN, they will never get it. Rather they are insulting the very image and high ideals of the Khalsa Panth. Sikhs need to start acting like Sikhs if they want to rule. When Bhai Lalo Ji asked Guru Nanak Sahib in Eminabad about the future of the Panth, Guru Sahib replied, “If they act together they will rule not only Hindostan but other countries as well but when they start fighting among themselves they will suffer in their own homeland.” The very root of disunity is our own ego and not following hukam of Guru Sahib. Sikhs in 80s have sacrificed the same way as they did in 18^th century. Singhs were boiled alive, scalped etc and their dead bodies were hung on trees but they never uttered a single word in pain. Sikhs just 20 years ago have shown that sacrifices of 18^th century are not just history and one time occurrence. Power of Naam and Gurbani will continue to exist. Try experiencing it yourself and you will see my point. Also, try looking elsewhere for real type of Sikhs not just those who look like one outwardly.

I do not believe majority will lack knowledge about Gurbani and Gurmat in Khalistan because education system will not be the same as we see today. Prior to 1947, Sikh schools and colleges always taught Gurbani meanings to students and this will be implemented again. Besides, when correct version of history and Gurmat in purest form is taught from the beginning our future generations will be better educated. There will be an organized internal structure to manage the Gurdwaras and their roles in the Panth. Granthis will have to be educated and well versed in Gurbani. Sikhs have had disagreements in the past and will so in the future as it is human nature but that is why Gurmatta was implemented so that all can sit together and resolve the matter. Guru Sahib ruled Anandpur Sahib, Amritsar Sahib and all the other cities they founded. So how to really manage and run the country has been shown to us by Guru Sahib. No other religious community has had such an example and if others can run their countries then what is stopping us. Nothing is impossible.

[dalsingh101]

Also, try looking elsewhere for real type of Sikhs not just those who look like one outwardly.

Like where?

What do you mean by this?

[GPS]

http://www.khalistan.net/?p=944

The reason why we didn't get freedom in 1947 - harsh truth we hide from including those on this site

The people who have put this article are themselves one of the worst sikhs i have ever met. How come these

people have the heart to condemn a gursikh like Master Tara singh.There is no fact in their statements.

Incidentally i have met both of these pople.They are not sikhs in literal sense as their life style is completely

different from Gurmat point of view. I asked them to name the banis of nitnem.They had no clue.

Sikhs will be in worst postion if such thugs happen to be at helm of affairs in khalistan as these people mission

is their own gains.

[GPS]

Empire of maharaja Ranjit singh was khalsa empire that had liberal administration. State religion was sikhism but in poitical set up there was

no discrimination on religious ground.Coins wee minted in the name of Guru sahibs.

Though he employed officers in his army from all over the globe but primary requirement for them was to have unshorn beard and turban as head dress.

Sikh army marched under khalsa flag with two granths accompanying them.

The empire was not sole creation of Ranjit singh.He built on misl of his grandfather Charat singh shukarchakia who was a devout khalsa sikh.

[dalsingh101]

I don't think the panth today would except anyone like M. Ranjit Singh as a leader now myself. I think in the past, the fact that Sikhs had been through all manner of atrocities, as well as the natural ability of Ranjit Singh meant that people were glad to have one of their own at the helm and weren't as critical about his personal behavior as they would be now (so it seems). If we think about the intense brutal oppression and insecurity Sikhs endured during the 18th century, it makes sense. My guess is that a lot of people would have been plain glad that someone was stabilising the situation, from what I gather even some sardars were behaving obnoxiously like the Bhangis. The situation was thus that apparently even nihungs tolerated Ranjit Singh's more errant behavior in the end, despite openly demonstrating their objections to it. Beyond Sikhs, the brutality and instability of that time mean that even nonSIkhs accepted an outside ruler who would bring them security and prosperity, hence Ranjit Singh's welcome at Lahore. Not everyone was religiously motivated, people must grasp that fact. People naturally seek stability and prosperity, K'stanis must grasp that.

Now, it seems like people have to totally unrealistic idea of what a political leader should be like, expecting some type of superman with all Sikhi abilities instead of breaking down the nature of leadership roles required and assigning people with the natural characteristics that are suited to the positions.

I mean the person who would be the best man for the job of say commander of military is not going to need the same qualities of the person who is designated the role of say, foreign minister (diplomacy & flexibility). The person who would be best for chancellor role (I guess with a strong accounts/maths background) would be a very different man to the person in charge of say state education. It's important to have citizens exposed to Sikh religion/culture growing up for sure, but also economic interests need to be addressed as well, so the nation is prosperous.

I guess the point is that you need balance. People who are excessively dogmatic in their thinking lack this balanced thinking in my opinion. That is why a slightly liberal approach is necessary, or else a society just gets embroiled in keeping its own citizens in line. This in turn just provides an opportunity for enemies of the state to bolster and support dissension.