Report

This might be a better interview:    

You can skim through it, you'll get the idea. 

Only a minority of morons would consider these people as 'shaheeds'. They were more like mercenaries.  

I think I get your point, and yes, maybe we shouldn't use the frameworks/conceptualisations of other religions i.e 'holy city' to try and describe Amritsar, but as you can see from what I posted from even external Persian sources earlier, Harmandir Sahib DOES have a very long history of having a special place in Sikh culture, so there is nothing new in this. Plus it's indisputable that this was started by our Gurus themselves.  How we represent this from our own traditions outwards is the question then I guess.  I just provided information from external sources, even our own ones point at Amritsar's importance. And this goes beyond spiritual matters as it was town that developed out of our Guru's own intentions and has a very strong social/economic aspect too. Amritsar is historically very important to Sikhs too. We are humans, we do need centres that help foster communal feeling. Amritsar does just that, and it seems unquestionable that that was one of the objectives of our Gurus founding the place. That so many Sikh sacrificed themselves for this place is no small matter either.     I think the matter of M. Ranjit Singh later placing gold is another unrelated matter, and that we don't really need to broach on this topic in this discussion.    Plus how do you interpret the Persian accounts that cover a period only a generation or so removed from dasmesh pita's physical presence?