Jump to content

Recommended Posts

fiveonly - it is indeed quite difficult to get a simple message across to you.its like talking to a brick wall. YOU WROTE.

Your argument is trying to scare a person in believing their are different reasons to take up udasi. I can switch this very easily on you and say do you really think Satguru just put on a Muslim blue garb to leave behind his wife and children to teach Muslims in Mecca. Remember Mecca is much further and the journey was much longer. So there must be different reasons why he went to Mecca. Just like you and Hari Singh Randhawa i can make up theories saying......ooooo Satguru didn't just dress up as a Muslim, but was a Muslim. Then to add reason to my arguement i can say Muslim means to completely submit to Allah. Therefore Satguru was a Muslim of the Koran because he completely submit to Allah (call God whatever you want, there is only one) and the Koran teaches to completely submit to Allah.

So Benti, leave your scare tactics out of this discussion. Maybe these scare tactics work with other Sikhs, but they won't work here.

err what the hell are you onnabout??? So you are saying Guru Nanak went on 4 Udasi's just to teach the udasi's what true udas is. Yes or no. Also in Hari Singh katha at what time does he talk about nirmala. I guess you are referring to the maria sika jagat vich shabad...This is not a distortion by Giani Hari Singh...every samparda adopts a certain shabad and attachs it to their samparda ie, garieh shabad sache taksal.....now here the arth are spiritual but it can aslo mean learn the shabad at the school of Dami Dami Taksal. Now the question is, does this fit the Gurmat kasvatee (test) answer..yes it does, so hence you can use it as your signauture just like Taksal has. Nirmal Akhara chose bhai gurdas shabad maria sikha jagat vich etc etc. Yest you are saying this is a distortion of Bani ...I think you cant grasp this point

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hari Singh Randhawa in the above video claims that Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji Maharaj started the udasis Panth and it was not Sri Chand. Today many Sikhs have jumped on this bandwagon and have started sayi

I am worn and fatigued out by udasi debate on here so i won't beat around dead horse. However small observation regarding - nanak nirmal panth chalaya. As sampardaiya students known gurbani could have

Guru Ji did not make a new group of Sikhs, he made the Sikhs excel in a particular field. Nirmala Sikhs are not different from us, they just have stronger emphasis on Braham-Gian, and learning than yo

Posted Images

Can someone tell me why is Baba Sri Chand Jee blue? someone else asked this but no one answered.

how do you know sri chand were blue ?? have you met them.........photo can be drawn by anyone nobody will say anything. If you look at the picture of Guru Gobind Singh Ji giving darshan to a hindu pandit as Ram Chandra he is depicted as blue skinned. Yet typical pictures of Ram are of fair skin. Older pictures are that he was blue. its really irrelevant. Can you save these sort of post for www.Tapoban.org site LOL

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

how do you know sri chand were blue ?? have you met them.........photo can be drawn by anyone nobody will say anything. If you look at the picture of Guru Gobind Singh Ji giving darshan to a hindu pandit as Ram Chandra he is depicted as blue skinned. Yet typical pictures of Ram are of fair skin. Older pictures are that he was blue. its really irrelevant. Can you save these sort of post for www.Tapoban.org site LOL

The reason I ask is because I've seen pictures of Baba Sri Chand jee since childhood and they always show him as blue. Why? I can understand that Hindus depict Raam and Krishan as blue because they were avtars of vishnu who was probably blue. But why is Baba Sri Chand ji blue?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the blue colour is really a grey colour, as jogis and other sadhus would smear their bodies in ash from funeral pyres, leaving their bodies grey. They did this as a reminder that death is always close by.

I dont think that Baba Sri Chand was grey, nor do i think that the way he is portrayed in paintings is accurate, clothing-wise and colour-wise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ^^

"Je kisse izzat daar purakh di besti karni

ohnooo keho "sardara tu ta bohut changa teri tan jinni vadiyayeee par teri alaud bardi nakkami jamm payi, teri alaud ni suddar sakki, bas ohdi besti kar ditti"

meaning

"If you want to disgrace an honorable individual, tell him "Oh Sardara, you are very great and whatever good there is applies to you, but your kids are worthless and they couldn't be disciplined", you just disgraced him"

which is why I said this:

"It's important to note that Guru Har Rai Ji disowned his elder son, Ram Rai, for distorting bani to please Aurangzeb. There's a reason why Gurtagaddi was passed to Guru Angad Dev Ji."

I am no Giani ji, just an average Sikh so I can't explain the Gurbani, but I think it is relevant and sheds light here.

This is a very important point but the chelas of Baba Hari Singh are ignoring this point because anyone with some sound knowledge of Sikh history would be able address this point of Baba Hari Singh. If someone had stood up from the audience and pointed out a load of rubbish his point was that would have been the end [MOD CUT]

*MOD EDIT* - All inflammatory posts that don't have anything to do with this topic have been deleted. It is advised you think before you post. This applies to everyone equally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understood what Baba Hari Singh was saying and respect him as a parcharak and have seen some of his videos , but just because he said one thing that is wrong (in this case), it doesn't make him or people who follow him bad.

He made a mistake on this point [FACT], but it doesn't discredit who Baba Hari Singh Randhawe is. Let's not attack him and just stick to the issues of how what he said was wrong, everyone makes mistakes, it's not a big deal.

Let's keep it issue based. This thread has gone on 7 pages without turning into a flame fest, please don't turn it into one as Kalyugi paaji said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very important point but the chelas of Baba Hari Singh are ignoring this point because anyone with some sound knowledge of Sikh history would be able address this point of Baba Hari Singh. If someone had stood up from the audience and pointed out a load of rubbish his point was that would have been the end of his so-called Santship. He is obviously a complete fake.

what exactly is the point - non chelas of Baba Hari Singh, what has Giani Ji said wrong and what has it got to do with Guru Har Rai excommuniating his son.

"The spastic said to the deaf man let me tell you a knowledgable story. Later he replied oh now i am enlightened."

Link to post
Share on other sites

what exactly is the point - non chelas of Baba Hari Singh, what has Giani Ji said wrong and what has it got to do with Guru Har Rai excommuniating his son.

"The spastic said to the deaf man let me tell you a knowledgable story. Later he replied oh now i am enlightened."

I would have thought that was obvious. Baba Hari Singh claims that those who are criticising Baba Sri Chand are indirectly insulting Guru Nanak because the greatest insult you can say to someone is to say that your sons are unworthy. But many of the sons of the Gurus were unworthy such as Ram Rai and Prithi Chand. So here you have someone whom his chelas claim to be a BRAHMGYANI but he cannot see how flawed his argument is and how easy it is to show that he cannot put forward a consistent argument. I am sure a large number of the people in the audience know the story of Ram Rai and Prithi Chand yet they allowed his foolish argument to pass without showing his argument for what it is. Had someone stood up and shown his how inconsistent his argument was then maybe he would go back reading basic Sikh history and come back with a consistent argument.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont understand this. baba hari singh makes it clear that Baba Sri Chand jee took the udaasee, viraktha from sri guru nanak dev jee? doesnt really say that they accepted the way of baba sri chand jee? with nirmale hes just making a point not to sideline these institutions. tbh i thought he was cussing udaasis saying theyve changed their baanaa.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tbh i thought he was cussing udaasis saying theyve changed their baanaa.

No cussing but stating due to halat they change their bana. Their bana which would be even more unacceptable to lot - original- majetha rang,khola topi,gal vich seli,hatha vich tombha..!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive just listened to Giani Hari Singh's youtube katha - i cant see anything wrong with it. Proactive is saying that Giani Ji is disrespecting Guru Ji. err where??? . Giani ji is saying that some giani's are saying Sri Chand was a nalayak put but are saying Guru Nanak was great, so such people are indirectly disrespecting Guru Ji. But Sri Chand was not nalayak put as Ram Rai and/prthvi chand were.

To say Ram Rai or Privthi Chand were nalayk children infront of their father is not disrespect because they were bad people and Guru Sahib accepts this themselves and is even written in Gurbani. Look at the sakhi of mera man locheh gurdash taee.

However if you say this about Baba Sri Chand that he was nalayak infront of Guru Nanak then this is wrong. This is the point Giani Ji making

The conclusion i have come to is that of my first post that some members here are complete novice. When you explain to them they don't understand but rather use aggressive language and make sattements such as Giani Ji is a fake. With such people the quote Dont argue with a fool comes to mind. However i will endeavour in due course to write an academic article on the udasi panth with citations to back it up. I hope this will assist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought that was obvious. Baba Hari Singh claims that those who are criticising Baba Sri Chand are indirectly insulting Guru Nanak because the greatest insult you can say to someone is to say that your sons are unworthy. But many of the sons of the Gurus were unworthy such as Ram Rai and Prithi Chand. So here you have someone whom his chelas claim to be a BRAHMGYANI but he cannot see how flawed his argument is and how easy it is to show that he cannot put forward a consistent argument. I am sure a large number of the people in the audience know the story of Ram Rai and Prithi Chand yet they allowed his foolish argument to pass without showing his argument for what it is. Had someone stood up and shown his how inconsistent his argument was then maybe he would go back reading basic Sikh history and come back with a consistent argument.

True, that argument by Baba Hari Singh Jee is inconsistent with Sikh history. We have so many examples of the Sikh Gurus whose sons were unworthy, yet how is that an insult to the Gurus?

We are literally seeing Sikh history being changed before our eyes. But it's good we have veers who can stand up to distortions. God bless the man who recorded Sant Gurbachan singh Bhindranwale which is the greatest proof of how some of Sant Jee's former students are using his prestigious name to get public recognition yet go against sant Jee on on religious matters.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its unfair for us to make allegations/accusations against gyani hari singh ji randhawale without meeting him and discussing this issue point by point basis as he is not on sikhsangat to defend himself.

I am not sure why people are so afraid to go to gyani hari singh ji to demand clarification on things he said..last 5 years i have spoken to many great parcharaiks with my half arse broken punjabi, some of them even put them on hot seat respectfully to seek clarification...they don't bite guys..if inderjit ghagga and his cronies can have conversation with gyani hari singh ji initially respectfully why cannot people on here?

We are quite quick to do character assassination with parchariks which we don't agree with but fall short to meet them in real life giving them chance to clarify themselves and defend himself? what kind of fearless khalsa does that? stop this lame- hide and seek game behind computers..!!

Link to post
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...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use