Jump to content

Photo: Singhs Against British - Cannon Fire


Recommended Posts

Baba Ram Singh ji never considered himself as Guru of the Naamdharis or a Guru at all. He always considered himself a Sikh of Satguru Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji Maharaj. The followers later made Baba Ram Singh ji as their Guru after he left this world. Baba Ram Singh ji was Amritdhari.

Thanks for clearing this up bro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no

Could you elaborate.

from what I read, a book by Professor HS Oberoi, "The construction of religious boundaries", which elaborates the creation and rise of the Singh Sabha movement and how a divide was thus created between Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab. According to the author it was part of british divide and rule strategy.

During British times many sikhs used to be very casual or careless about their attire and appeared dishevelled at recruiting camps but the British officers who used to recruit for the army used to scold potential recruits saying, "where is your turban" etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Raju, the Sikhs were always ideologically split from Hindus by the Gurus teachings. See Dasam Granth Sahib and the rahitnamas, as well as sakhian for more. The Singh sabha movement was meant to correct the lapse into weakness of the sikh masses. The movement had both hits and misses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the differences with Hindus used to be philosophical & ideological and against the practice of Brahmanism and Brahmanical rituals. But post Singh Sabha movement, these differences crystallized and turned Sikhs against Hindus as a people. The differences from hereon where not just idelogical, but against Hindu as a people. The second Singh Sabha at Lahore it seems was instituted to encourage orthodoxy amongst Sikhs and to differentiate them clearly from the Hindu population.

LIONS IN THE PUNJAB: An Introduction to the Sikh Religion

By Andrea Grace Diem, Ph.D.

Chapter Three

...

After Ranjit Singh's death in 1839 the Sikhs were still in a position of dominance. Fearful that the Sikhs were becoming too politically powerful, the British entered the Punjab in 1845, annexing it five years later. During this time two Anglo-Sikh wars transpired. With no central power after Ranjit Singh the British take over went fairly smooth. The improvements the British made (such as the building of roads, canals, hospitals, and schools as well as the rise of employment) actually won many Sikhs over to their administration. But not everyone in India appreciated theBritish. There was a great anti-British sentiment in this country in the 1850s, leading to sporadic acts of violence and culminating with the Mutiny of 1857. Instead of siding with their Indian brothers most Sikhs during this time supported the British and many even served in the British army.

Since they were viewed as a strong martial race Sikhs were recruited to the British army and allowed, even encouraged, to observe the Khalsa. In fact, the British insisted that Sikh soldiers wear the five ks and swear an oath of loyalty to the Guru Granth Sahib. The British vested interest was obvious: by supporting Sikhism they felt they were insuring excellent soldiery. Thus, the British helped crystallize Sikh identity as they promoted Khalsa standards in the military and the use of the title Singh. The advantage of being a Sikh helped keep Sikhs from lapsing into Hinduism and Khalsa Sikhism grew as a result.

Another major factor that led to the rise of Khalsa Sikhism was the establishment of the Singh Sabha in 1873. This society was organized to revive interest and preserve identity in the Sikh tradition. That Khalsa ideas expressed in the state administration of Ranjit Singh were beginning to wane made some fear that Sikhism was being absorbed into Hinduism and the phrase "Hum Hindu nahin" ("We are not Hindu) became popular at this time. This fear was legitimate since India is eighty percent Hindu and Hinduism has in the past absorbed rival faiths, such as Buddhism. (In Hinduism, the Buddha is viewed as an incarnation of Vishnu.) Sikhs also sought separation from Hindus because they were in competition for jobs and economic resources. In addition, many were nervous about the influence of Christian missionaries and schools on Sikhs, especially since four students at Amritsar converted to Christianity at this time.

By 1899 there were over 120 Singh Sabha organizations operative. The need to have a central organization to allow communication between educated Sikhs and to coordinate activities between the Singh Sabhas was apparent. In 1902 the Chief Khalsa Diwan was established to serve this role.

Overall, the Singh Sabha (later becoming the Tat Khalsa or true Khalsa and then the Chief Khalsa Diwan) institutionalized the view of Sikhism as a separate religion with distinct rituals and communal solidarity. It requested Sikhs to follow the ways of the Khalsa by wearing the five ks. Through journals, newspapers and conferences, it also clarified Sikh ideology and delineated the Singh Sabha view of Sikh history. In other words, this movement established Sikh orthodoxy. When British writers drew their information of Sikhism from the Singh Sabha they actually played a significant role in supporting the movement. Orthodoxy was presented as historical fact, reifying a particular perspective. For instance, Sikhism was thought of as a non-evolving religious tradition and the Khalsa approach was seen as the authentic form of Sikhism. As shown in Chapter Two, however, Sikhism indeed did go through many diverse stages, mainly in reaction to the socio-political environment. Moreover, to associate Sikhism solely with the Khalsa is to miss the rich tapestry that makes up the Sikh world. There are numerous Sikh groups besides the Khalsa that we will learn about in Chapter Four. Unfortunately, many of these historical inaccuracies are still perpetuated in textbooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JSinghnz. The Namdharis, Satnami, Udasis were always perceived to be pro-hindu and thus British sought to isolate that strain of thought in their interest. It makes more sense seeing the Namdhari babajee in front of the cannon. The British had a vested interest in seeing to it that there was no ideological strain amongst any group prevalent at that time which could turn into a larger rebellion.

Creation of strong minorities and pitting them against the majority has been an old British and anglo-saxon policy. Case in point is Sri Lanka where tamils were numerically strengthened by importing tamil labour from Indian mainland and giving them an english education. Those tamils who were ever greatful to the British always worked against the majority Sinhala community and in favor of British interests.

A recent case is what is Kosovo where the bosnian/albanian muslim community in Kosovo was encouraged and armed against a numerically larger Serb majority. Later on Serb areas were bombed out by NATO warplanes with the intention of establishing the peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use