Sikhs Movements And Sects (Website)

[Only five]

The four Vedas are the base of the Vedant school. But the four Vedas (rig veda, sama, Yajur veda, and Atharva veda) mention nothing about Atma is Brahman. Many years later the Katha of Upanishads start speaking of Atma is Brahman. So how can the four Vedas be the science of Atma is Brahman or how can the Vedant school be the science of Atma is Brahman? Its a baseless claim. Even moksa is not mentioned in the four Vedas. Moksa goes hand in hand with Atma is Brahman....can't separate the two at all. The four vedas speak about maintaining the universe by doing chants. When speaking of Vedant no one can take out the four vedas. Gurbani may have redefined Vedant, but the original meaning the Vedant is the four Vedas.

[N30S1NGH]

Onlyfive, please listen to sant hari singh randhawale katha on it. It's explain vedas have karam, upasana, gyan. There are 80,000 useless shaloks of Karam listed there, Upasana listed there but at the end it talks about gyan- ekta of jiv and bhram (atma gyan), it has 4000 shaloks of atma gyan which is pretty consistent with gurmat advait.

[SunSingh]

The four Vedas are the base of the Vedant school. But the four Vedas (rig veda, sama, Yajur veda, and Atharva veda) mention nothing about Atma is Brahman. Many years later the Katha of Upanishads start speaking of Atma is Brahman. So how can the four Vedas be the science of Atma is Brahman or how can the Vedant school be the science of Atma is Brahman? Its a baseless claim. Even moksa is not mentioned in the four Vedas. Moksa goes hand in hand with Atma is Brahman....can't separate the two at all. The four vedas speak about maintaining the universe by doing chants. When speaking of Vedant no one can take out the four vedas. Gurbani may have redefined Vedant, but the original meaning the Vedant is the four Vedas.

actually, Vedant has as its base the teaching that the vedas CANNOT give mukti.

[Bijla Singh]

SunSingh Ji, you will need to provide some evidence that SGPC wanted to forcibly take over the Udasi deras. Udasis managed the Sikh Gurdwaras originally known as Dharamshalas. Udasis did not own any proprietary rights to these Panthic properties. The basis of the movement was to remove Hindu practices from the Gurdwaras which were introduced by the udasis to begin with. Udasis installing idols and removing saroops of Guru Sahib just to avoid their deras being taken over proves to me that they cared less about Gurmat and more about materialistic pleasures. Had they stuck to Gurmat, SGPC would’ve let them manage those Gurdwaras provided that they kept the same rehat but it is clear from your assertions that they were far away from Gurmat and were willing to go any length to save their deras which they treated as their personal property. There were many udasis who refused to reform themselves and filed lawsuits on Gurdwaras and managed to secure Gurdwara properties under their name. They kept no proper accounts of revenue and used it all for personal pleasures. Stating that udasis were pushed away from Gurmat by the Singh Sabha is as ridiculous as the assertion that Masands were pushed away from Sikhi due to Guru Sahib punishing them for their misdeeds. The bottom line is that most udasis turned bad and misused Gurdwaras even surpassing Massa Ranghar. They may be turning better now but it doesn’t change the fact that they had British backing and were far away from Gurmat. Singh Sabha brought Gurmat back in Gurdwaras and Udasis were opposed to it.

Sant Attar Singh was in the army to begin with. Where is the evidence that he was a nirmala? Nonetheless, I personally believe he was a true Sikh.

Please think about your statement first. If grammar exists in Gurbani then surely it will have rules. What kind of a grammar has no rules? Give me one example. All man made languages have grammatical structure and it is ridiculous to claim that Gurmukhi of Guru Sahib has none at all. On the contrary, it has its own unique grammar and is divine. It is better than man made grammars. I have already given an example from a sakhi used by sampardas. If grammar cannot be applied to meanings then why was that Sikh punished? The whole basis of the sakhi is that grammar is important because it changes meanings. It wasn’t all about mispronunciation. Otherwise, it throws out the entire theory of origin of Taksal. Grammar is not invented by anyone. These rules were rediscovered and sampardas cannot face the fact that it wasn’t them but simple Sikhs receiving kirpa of Guru Sahib during Akhand Paath. Bhai Randhir Singh and Prof. Sahib Singh both discovered this secret treasure while doing Paath of Gurbani. Had sampardas discovered it, they would’ve been held as great schools of Gurmat and all these sants would’ve been in hoopla hoops. Instead of incorporating grammar in the syllabus they are living in denial and making excuses against it. Is Gurbani interpretation limited to these sampardas to the extent that no other school of thought is possible? I have yet to see a logical refutation against grammar from sampardas. If you disagree with grammar then refute it logically. Don’t make excuses. Present any anubhav or uthanic meaning from Gurbani and show that grammar cannot be applied to it. If grammar exists in Gurbani as you admit it then by default it has certain rules. Bhai Veer Singh’s teeka has grammar rules discussed in it. Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha whose father learned from sampardas was also advocate of grammar and some of his meanings are better than Prof. Sahib Singh’s.

N30Singh, you are diverging to different topic. “Gurmat Naam Philosophy” is not my term nor any jatha’s term. It was mentioned by you first when you wrote “It may not pre-requisite for people who only follow gurmat naam philosphy”. I do not think you understand what Gurmat Naam is. Naam itself is not a philosophy. I do not know where you heard this term from but there can be a philosophy of Naam which would refer to study of Naam in Gurbani. Let me just make it very clear despite what you may have read or heard from others. No true Sikh will ever assert that only Naam is important and not Gurbani. Bhai Randhir Singh and Bhai Veer Singh both emphasize practice of Gurbani and its abhiyaas because it is Satguru i.e. source of Naam. Those who abandon Gurbani or declare it unnecessary will not find any fruit to their bhagtee. Naam requires rehat and Gurbani abhiyaas. Both go hand in hand which is why Mool Mantar is also given with Gurmantar. Bhai Sahib says that both Gurbani and Naam are Amrit roop. However, Gurbani’s Hukam is very clear that at Amrit Vela, Naam Simran should be done by a Sikh so that his avastha can reach to 24/7 ajapa jaap. Gurbani rejects authority of Vedas because these books are contradictory, convoluted, man made and full of rituals. Hence, they cannot give salvation but since Gurbani can and does, it is independent of Vedas and Vedant (end part of Vedas).

You are calling my comments harsh but what about you calling the entire Singh Sabha with insulting names including high caliber gursikhs like Kahan Singh Nabha, Giani Ditt Singh and Bhai Veer Singh? Singh Sabha at that time refuted Bhasaurs and criticized Teja Singh but did any samparda criticize udasis for their misdeeds? You need to learn that sampardas and all other groups including Singh Sabha are part of Sikh history and it Is not wise to pick sides and criticize others without presenting any evidence. Even then the entire group will not be bad. It is only modern day missionaries who are hell bent on criticizing every group and insulting them and they are far away from ideals of old Singh Sabha. Guru Rakha

[N30S1NGH]

Bijla Singh regarding sant attar singh mustaneywale. Allthough they didn't took amrit from nirmale samparda they had very strong leaning on nirmale samparda

Here is pretty honest observation written on sant attar singh maustaneywale by one of members on sa:

Sant Attar Singh Ji was first and foremost a puran brahamgyani. Needless to say, no bhekh or samprdaya can give you brahamgyan! So to place too much emphasis on his lineage is, in my humble opinion, to miss the point. So that being said, this is what I know of his jeevan and its links with the Nirmalay.

To begin with I have found no reference to Sant ji studying with Sant Karam Singh Hotimardan. What you do find is that Sant Ji's mindset and actions are entirely in accordance with the nirmala traditions, although perhaps more so in the mould of Sant Karam Singh Ji.

Sant ji initially learnt gurmukhi and paath from Sant Buta Singh in the local dera. Then it was through Sant Gyani Jodh Singh Ji, a nirmala from the naurangabad upsamrdaya, who was a granthi in the army, visited the local gurdwara, and become the inspiration for Sant ji to take amrit. Sant Jodh Singh ji was the shish of Sant Ram Singh Virakat, the shish of Bhai Maharaj Singh Ji. Sant Jodh Singh was one of the panj pyaray from whom Sant ji took amrit. Sant ji spent some time in Sant Jodh Singh ji's seva before becoming thoroughly virakat to perform tapasya.

Sant Ji went to Hazur Sahib during which time he befriended Svami Bhagat Singh Nirmala. Together they went on a tirath yatra taking in Omkareshvar, Ujjain, Ajmer, Vrindavan, Mathura, Haridvar and Rishikesh. While in Rishikesh Sant ji would rise at 2am and take ganga ishnan, have his food with ganga jal, etc. Sant ji then went on yatra to joshimath, hemkunt sahib, gangotri, badrinath, etc. Sant ji met with a number of very important Nirmalay including Pandit Nihal Singh Thoha Khalsa. Sant ji attended the ardh kumbh mela in hardvar twice in his lifetime. The first time, Sant ji met with Pandit Ishar Singh Ji Dhodharvale and stayed in his ashram in Haridvar. Sant Ji also took part in a katha smagam in Haridvar put on by Nirmal Panchayti Akhara. Sant Ji was also very close to Sant Sahib Das Ji Udasi whose dera is still in Sangrur. Sant Ji heard the katha of Yog Vasistha from Sant Sahib Das. Sant ji's teachings are also advaita. One saakhi recounts that a nirmala sadhu asked Sant Attar Singh Ji about bhagti and Sant ji explained that there are three levels; kanishta (meaning lowest) in which it is felt that there is jiva and a colossal number of other jivas, then madham (middling) in which one recognises jiva and colossal Braham, and uttam (highest) in which there is only Braham, pervading both yourself and the colossal world around you. Even after attending the Panch Khalsa Divan of Teja Singh, the next event in his biography was attending the ardh kumbh, implying no ideological affinity with Teja Singh beyond prachar. Sant Ji also met with and stayed with; Sant Bishan Singh Muralewale, Sant Chanda Singh of Damdama Sahib, Mahant Gulab Singh ji of muktsar (Sant ji attended the opening ceremony of Mahant Gulab Singh's bunga), Mahant Mastaan Singh Nirmala, Sant Ram Singh Thamali, among many others. Obviously Sant Ji met with many other great personalities during his life, but the Sants that he chose to spend time with were nearly always nirmalas.

Nowhere does it mention that Sant ji set aside time to study with a particular Nirmala, however, his example is typical of the more tyagi Nirmalay of the 19th century.

You are calling my comments harsh but what about you calling the entire Singh Sabha with insulting names including high caliber gursikhs like Kahan Singh Nabha, Giani Ditt Singh and Bhai Veer Singh? Singh Sabha at that time refuted Bhasaurs and criticized Teja Singh but did any samparda criticize udasis for their misdeeds?

I never called insulting names for bhai kahn singh nabha or bhai veer singh or giani dit singh. Where you heard that? I posted an article for discussion and explicitly mentioned- this are not my views.

[Jonny101]

I think Sant Attar Singh Mastuanay are one of those special Gursikhs in history whom all like to claim. Nirmalas like to say he was Nirmala while the average Sikh likes to say he was a Khalsa doing parchar when the Panth needed parchar the most. Although I must admit before reading it on internet forums, never knew people claimed Sant Jee was a Nirmala

[Bijla Singh]

Here is what you posted. Red are false statements and have been responded to. Keep in mind, SIngh Sabha included Bhai Veer Singh, Giani Ditt Singh, Kahan Singh Nabha, Prof. Gurmukh Singh and Prof. Sahib Singh etc. They were backbone of the Sikh awakening.

I have glanced through- all sects on that website..some are heretic hostile cults i agree but with that being said..filtering the heretic ones..just look at the diverse ( beautiful garden) of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Maharaj,population of sikhs is probably more than 200 million than just mere 20 million. Shame on singh sabha knee je rk reactions that instead of finding middle ground within that diverse garden somewhere. They have totally pushed these sects and demarginalized them and pushed to the corner to the point that they want nothing to do with Sikhs..!!!

Singh sabha did lot of good work, but have failed short to address very fine and underlining issues in the path...i.e - racist attitude towards dalits(lost huge following of dalits converting to sikhism), instead of understanding the diversity shoved nirmale, udasi, sevapanthis to the corner and segregated them from the panth, whitewash our sikh heritage- golden temple!!

I have read Sant Ji's jeevani and I have nothing but respect for him. Perhaps I overlooked his education from Nirmalas. I will have to read his biography one more time to know for sure. Again, he was a true Sikh. Guru Rakha

[N30S1NGH]

He was not a nirmale but had nirmala leaning..there is a subtle difference here. Anyway, the point here if nirmala are full of hindus you wouldn't have most of sadhus/bhramgyanis who are nirmale or have nirmale leaning...

[N30S1NGH]

We all wait for the day, when Nirmale sadhus (in pagva bhek or white) can walk in our gurdwaras comfortably(which they have in the past) without getting glares from people who share sheer anti hindu paranoia, anti hindu hyper tension syndrome ..!!

[N30S1NGH]

Bijla Singh,

Singh Sabha Reform Movement implemented reformation on Gurdwaras, Sikh thought, Sikh historical/oral traditions was at monumental proportions/scale Full unbias analysis/research needs to be done by non sikh/sikh alike historian to give an honest picture. Just like i didn't know things about positive contributions of singh sabha but only negative contributions. Just like that, you yourself not know negative contributions about singh sabha only positive.!!!