Amazing Painful Revolutionary Way Of Protesting For The Cause

[N30S1NGH]

my definition of shaheeds?? they are the panths shaheeds....not mine...i hope you burn in narak for disrespecting the shaheeds of the khalsa panth....secondly we didnt get khalistan because we lost support from the sikh kaum...primarily due to the black cats...and our people not knowing the difference between a singh and a cat...clealry you kow nothing about the movement and nothing about shahadat....this is not difference of opinion this is difference of ideology....the sikh kaums definition of shaheedi is getting cut piece by piece and still wanting to fight in the battlefield in support of truth justice and righteousness...it seems to me bhuddist form of shaheedi is burning yourself....you claim the monks shaheedi brought success in that he gained media attention to the conflict in vietnam...i assure you america did not care for one monbk burning himself....america left because of the sheer determination of the NVA and vietcong forces trying to unite their country.....tyrants are not swayed by self immolation!!...i would like to see this monk brun himself infront of hitler and the nazis...they would probably laugh...because their job got a whole lot easier...

are you comparing the khalsa to mullahs trying to blow up a statue?...its easy to run your mouth behind a computer screen!

Your post is classic example, why there is no harmony in the panth? you blown my post out of context, accuse me of sort of horrible things. I m not going to even respond to this, re-read my post in context and sane mind and let me know or get a 2nd opnion of some one elder than you.

[Only five]

I am not distorting sri guru arjan dev ji shaheedi, however you belittling maharaj ji shaheedi by saying he follow worldly punishments of some ruler...are you telling me some joe blow ruler of that time have power to make sri guru arjan dev ji sit on tatti tavi by force or convince them to do so? Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji, could destroy rulers kingdom with blink of eye....so maharaj didn't follow some rule of that time No. Maharaj ji followed hakum of Nirankar and showed us attributes of patience and vahiguroo's raza by saying gur mukvak during the process of sitting on tatti tavi- Teraie Kiya Mitha Lagaie, Har Naam Padarath Nanak Mangaie ||

As far as shaheedi of baba bir singh naurangabad goes, listen to an video divan by sant jagjit singh ji harkhowale: http://video.google....71816376880515#

http://video.google....20977888787087#

Seriously this is your response to my post? At the moment i cant write a full response, but why didnt you consider Satguru Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib ji Maharaj imprisonment and Satguru Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji Maharaj imprisonment. Think about these imprisonments and tell me if they followed worldly punishments. Then what about Satguru in his 9th form, who sat in a small cage at the lunatic rulers forced orders before giving shaheedi, did the Gurus lose there shakti then? Just astonishing to what lengths some would go to prove their own theories against Gurmat.

Mods please don't close this thread because of some that are purposely influencing others to insult and then hoping the thread goes down.

[Sikh_Soldier]

Guru Sahib again in the 9th form did not willingly cut off his head or get one of his Sikhs to do it, like this monk did. The Hindus asked for Guru Sahib's help and then Guru Sahib suggested that if a King gives his head, will you the Muslims stop the killing of the Hindus. The hindus went to the Muslim rulers to ask of this and they accepted. He just didn't get up and say to Bhai Mati Das ji, here is a kirpan and cut my head off, like the monk told his disciple, but told him to light him up. The Muslims rulers agreed to stop the killing if a King gives his head. Then Guru Sahib gave his head for the killing to be stopped, but never did it willingly. Guru Sahib Shaheedi cannot be compared in the 9th form either. There is a huge difference from the monks suicide to Guru Sahib Shaheedi. Read the definition of suicide. What Guru Sahib did was give the option to the Muslim ruler, to decide whether the 9th King lives or dies. It was in the Muslim rulers hands on Guru Sahib The Muslim ruler took Guru Sahib's life, it was not Guru Sahib himself, who took his own life. On the other hand the monks life was in his own hand. No one forced him to give his life. He decided to take it himself, which is against Gurmat.

Paji with all due respect if you listen to katha of this prasang by mahapurakh they say that the sword was not able to cut maahraj's sees; maharaj themselves disjoined their head from their deh and it fell into the sevaks hands. Maharaj ji willingly gave up their sees. Another example although in a different context is when Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji Audeesa jumped into the fire where Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh ji'd antam sanskaar was happening, out of pyaar.

[Only five]

Paji with all due respect if you listen to katha of this prasang by mahapurakh they say that the sword was not able to cut maahraj's sees; maharaj themselves disjoined their head from their deh and it fell into the sevaks hands. Maharaj ji willingly gave up their sees. Another example although in a different context is when Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji Audeesa jumped into the fire where Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh ji'd antam sanskaar was happening, out of pyaar.

Okay let's look at what you just said. I'm not going to ask for which Saint said it or ask of the katha, but if you can provide this katha, I really want to listen to it. This story which you provide still does not equate to what the monk did. What the monk did is clearly suicide, where he had the intention to take his own life and no one else was forcing him to do it, against his own will. The events before Guru Sahib shaheedi explains Guru Sahib fulfilled his duty, whether the sword took his head or not. Guru Sahib presented a solution to the problem and the Muslim rulers accepted it; a King's head to save Hindus from being killed. Say for example Guru Sahib had taken his head off without even letting the Muslim rulers servant apply the force of the sword to his head and try to cut it off, then it could be said the act was suicide, (the intention to take his own life). Guru Sahib didn`t wait for the Muslim ruler to give his finally orders and he decide to do what he choose, which is suicide. This is strongly against Sikhi. But this is not true (just used to show the difference). The servant of the Muslim ruler applied the force and had every intention to cut the head off of Guru Sahib. And Guru Sahib knew no matter how hard the guy tries, his head would not have been cut off. This will leave an agreement he made with the Muslim rulers not fulfilled. Regardless, on how the head was removed from the body, the act of force was there and because of this force that was applied, the act in itself is not suicide or equal to what the monk did. Sri Waheguru ji's Hukam was being fulfilled in the Ninth form.

Now look at the monks act. The monk planned to burn himself alive. He planned to get his disciple to pour the gasoline over him. He sat there at his own will with the intention to take his own life, without any force. He completely knew that he was taking his own life. No one pushed/applied force/ against his mind(will) to burn him. He decided on his own that I will take my life. Show me where in Gurbani it says any human can take their life for any reason. Gurbani repeats many times to us that, the body and soul is Sri Waheguru ji and we must obey the Hukam of his command, by letting Sri Waheguru ji take the soul at his command. The reason why the monk took his life is irrelevant to the act of burning himself alive. The Hukam of Sri Waheguru ji to take the soul when he commands is higher than the reason. We read in Sri Japji Sahib his command is the highest of all. Now why are people making that same Hukam lower than a reason? Let death come to you and not the other way around, where you force death upon yourself.

We know Sri Waheguru ji, himself came in the form as the first Nanak to the tenth Nanak, but still, we want to question our Guru`s actions and then equate them to a monks obvious suicide. Sri Waheguru ji in the Satguru`s form showed us how to act according to his Hukam. Gurbani is Sri Waheguru ji's Hukam and we need to follow it.

If Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji jumped onto the fire, then that is called suicide. And Sikhi strongly condemns taking your own life for any reason. If someone forces their mind(will) on you and life is taken then that is not suicide or against Gurmat. To deprive another from life is not the victims fault, but to deprive yourself of life at the mind's will is the victims fault and Sikhi does not agree with it. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji Maharaj said the rehat is more dear (meaning i love the rehat more) to me than the Sikh. Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji should have followed this teaching of Satguru. I'm not taking anything away from Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji, but it's Satguru's teaching.

[Sikh_Soldier]

Okay let's look at what you just said. I'm not going to ask for which Saint said it or ask of the katha, but if you can provide this katha, I really want to listen to it. This story which you provide still does not equate to what the monk did. What the monk did is clearly suicide, where he had the intention to take his own life and no one else was forcing him to do it, against his own will. The events before Guru Sahib shaheedi explains Guru Sahib fulfilled his duty, whether the sword took his head or not. Guru Sahib presented a solution to the problem and the Muslim rulers accepted it; a King's head to save Hindus from being killed. Say for example Guru Sahib had taken his head off without even letting the Muslim rulers servant apply the force of the sword to his head and try to cut it off, then it could be said the act was suicide, (the intention to take his own life). Guru Sahib didn`t wait for the Muslim ruler to give his finally orders and he decide to do what he choose, which is suicide. This is strongly against Sikhi. But this is not true (just used to show the difference). The servant of the Muslim ruler applied the force and had every intention to cut the head off of Guru Sahib. And Guru Sahib knew no matter how hard the guy tries, his head would not have been cut off. This will leave an agreement he made with the Muslim rulers not fulfilled. Regardless, on how the head was removed from the body, the act of force was there and because of this force that was applied, the act in itself is not suicide or equal to what the monk did. Sri Waheguru ji's Hukam was being fulfilled in the Ninth form.

Now look at the monks act. The monk planned to burn himself alive. He planned to get his disciple to pour the gasoline over him. He sat there at his own will with the intention to take his own life, without any force. He completely knew that he was taking his own life. No one pushed/applied force/ against his mind(will) to burn him. He decided on his own that I will take my life. Show me where in Gurbani it says any human can take their life for any reason. Gurbani repeats many times to us that, the body and soul is Sri Waheguru ji and we must obey the Hukam of his command, by letting Sri Waheguru ji take the soul at his command. The reason why the monk took his life is irrelevant to the act of burning himself alive. The Hukam of Sri Waheguru ji to take the soul when he commands is higher than the reason. We read in Sri Japji Sahib his command is the highest of all. Now why are people making that same Hukam lower than a reason? Let death come to you and not the other way around, where you force death upon yourself.

We know Sri Waheguru ji, himself came in the form as the first Nanak to the tenth Nanak, but still, we want to question our Guru`s actions and then equate them to a monks obvious suicide. Sri Waheguru ji in the Satguru`s form showed us how to act according to his Hukam. Gurbani is Sri Waheguru ji's Hukam and we need to follow it.

If Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji jumped onto the fire, then that is called suicide. And Sikhi strongly condemns taking your own life for any reason. If someone forces their mind(will) on you and life is taken then that is not suicide or against Gurmat. To deprive another from life is not the victims fault, but to deprive yourself of life at the mind's will is the victims fault and Sikhi does not agree with it. Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji Maharaj said the rehat is more dear (meaning i love the rehat more) to me than the Sikh. Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji should have followed this teaching of Satguru. I'm not taking anything away from Bhai Gurmukh Singh ji, but it's Satguru's teaching.

lol you're right in many ways, but the beauty in sikhi is that it's very subjective, you can b right and so could someone disagreeing with you and yet both things can co-exist although as a paradoxic... Sorry if I make no sense it's just that it's funny that this all can't be understood with our logic and yet I'm trying to (which is kinda pointless lol)

[dalsingh101]

This thread has me remembering a sakhi I heard when I was visiting Fatehgarh Sahib years ago. It is sort of partially related, so I'll mention it. I was told that Mata Gujri and the two younger sahibzaday were imprisoned in thunda burj after her betrayal and arrest by the Moghuls. When Mata Gujri learnt that the two sahibzaday had been shaheed, she jumped from the thunda burj tower and passed away.

Anyone else heard this story?

[VanHelsingh]

This thread has me remembering a sakhi I heard when I was visiting Fatehgarh Sahib years ago. It is sort of partially related, so I'll mention it. I was told that Mata Gujri and the two younger sahibzaday were imprisoned in thunda burj after her betrayal and arrest by the Moghuls. When Mata Gujri learnt that the two sahibzaday had been shaheed, she jumped from the thunda burj tower and passed away.

Anyone else heard this story?

I've not heard that before. I've always been informed that once Mata Gujri heard that her two youngest grandsons had achieved shaheedi, she closed her eyes and left this world.

[dalsingh101]

Here is another interesting sakhi related to the topic being so fiercely discussed. A lot of apneean in the UK could do with internalising the message therein....

http://www.allaboutsikhs.com/great-sikh-women/bibi-anup-kaur.html

I've not heard that before. I've always been informed that once Mata Gujri heard that her two youngest grandsons had achieved shaheedi, she closed her eyes and left this world.

Thanks for that Kaljugi, I think there are or at least were some people who claimed that Mata Gujri jumped from the tower - I clearly remember hearing the sakhi as a child but can't recall exactly where or from whom? Must be one of those sakhis that has died out over time.

[VanHelsingh]

Must be one of those sakhis that has died out over time.

Most likely. I've been always been taught that Mata Gujri was a very dignified, peaceful and level-headed Sikh. She served Guru Tegh Bahadhur Ji for the 26 years and 9 months he did bhagti (is this right?) . Only someone with immense shakti can fulfil such a mission.

[mundasingh123]

Here is another interesting sakhi related to the topic being so fiercely discussed. A lot of apneean in the UK could do with internalising the message therein....

http://www.allabouts...-anup-kaur.html

Thanks for that Kaljugi, I think there are or at least were some people who claimed that Mata Gujri jumped from the tower - I clearly remember hearing the sakhi as a child but can't recall exactly where or from whom? Must be one of those sakhis that has died out over time.

Blessed Be Mata Anup Kaur Ji

Respect !