Niddar nang and his letter

[Shastar Man]

wjkk wjkf,

veerji taran0, this is amazing work that you are doing. I did not know Nidar taught in somerset rd gurdwara. The next thing is to get him banned from leicester and wolverhampton gurdwara's. I dont have a problem with him or any one who wants to learn from him, but his parchar is totally WRONG!

He will always have his followers, but he has corrupted many many people. Get him out of Wolverhampton and Leicester! Pat O'Malley, Maul Mornie and Krishna Godhania all need to be informed, this guy is a wolf in sheeps clothing a fraudster!

wjkk wjkf

[taran0]

Very valid point, you'll find the majority of people generally resort to slandering or throwing insults at Niddar Singh instead of addressing issues with knowledge and intellect. Surely if he is such a "clown" as some people claim it should be very easy to intelligently disprove what he is teaching if it false, or expose the shortcomings..

So why do you not take thisn route instead of resorting to slander ???

what you mean like this

or like this (ordinary run of the mill akj fanatic ???)

or maybe this one abotu Sant Jarnail Singh where he calls him a militant

maybe you were referring to nidars fanatical hatred of Gurmukh AKJ singhs doing gurbani kirtan...

or maybe like this

nah this is probably what cisco singh means by "intelligently disprove" someone

so Shaheed Bhai Fauja singh is a "fanatic militant" because he saved a Hindu woman from being molested by the police and he tried to bring people who had done beyadbee of Guru Granth Sahbi Ji to justice ???

I am sorry, but I am with Fauja Singh on this one...

Nidars students love to go around playing the discrimination and hater card on everyone - have you ever read their own website. They don't like it when their Gurdev is talked about in a derogatory way.

He has over the past ten years ridiculed, insulted us and the shaheeed singhs that we respect and love and who gave their lives for sikhi. They can not be here to defend their honour and name, but we are here and we are ready to insult nidar back consistently, we are not doing anything that nidar has not already done. so look in the mirror before you throw a stone.....

[Guest]

what you mean like this

or like this (ordinary run of the mill akj fanatic ???)

or maybe this one abotu Sant Jarnail Singh where he calls him a militant

maybe you were referrign to nidars fanatical extremist views

or maybe like this

nah this is probably what cisco singh means by "intelligently disprove" someone

so Shaheed Bhai Fauja singh is a "fanatic militant" because he saved a Hindu woman from being molested by the police and he tried to bring people who had done beyadbee of Guru Granth Sahbi Ji to justice ???

I am sorry, but I am with Fauja Singh on this one...

Nidars students love to go around playing the discrimination and hater card on everyone - have you ever read their own website. They don't like it when their Gurdev is talked about in a derogatory way.

He has over the past ten years ridiculed, insulted us and the shaheeed singhs that we respect and love and who gave their lives for sikhi. They can not be here to defend their honour and name, but we are here and we are ready to insult nidar back consistently, we are not doing anything that nidar has not already done. so look in the mirror before you throw a stone.....

Awesome post man!

[dalsingh101]

See, for me the problem is that the discussion about the impact of colonialism on Sikhs and the Panjab, and the way Sikhs may have begun to perceive their faith in a subtly different way than before in light of the European ideas they were exposed as a consequence of being militarily subjugated and colonised - important stuff that deserves our full attention and analysis - gets sidelined by personalities.

If we now all ignore Niddar, we still have important questions to ask and answer about this period of our itihaas and its impact on us. If Niddar with his strange ways brings this topic (which too many apnay seem too frightened to face) to the fore (even inadvertently), then I think that good has been done - even if I vehemently disagree with his beliefs - which I do.

Sometimes you need controversial catalysts to force our lot to get off their a55 and study things deeper - sadly we seem reactionary rather than proactive. Niddar has his role - and I'm not connected to him or a fan of his at all.

[lsingh]

The Singh Sabha was a reaction to the growth of the Arya Samaj in the Punjab and the attacks on Sikhs by Brahmins. If the Singh Sahibians were so pro British why were so many martyered by the British in the Gurdwara reform movement? I dont see any record of Nihangs going on mass to oppose British control on Sikhs shrines, in fact the New Indian Nihangs support the Mahants who were very much part of the British colonial system. Some major confusion in the revisionist historians of the period.

[Singh559]

See, for me the problem is that the discussion about the impact of colonialism on Sikhs and the Panjab, and the way Sikhs may have begun to perceive their faith in a subtly different way than before in light of the European ideas they were exposed as a consequence of being militarily subjugated and colonised - important stuff that deserves our full attention and analysis - gets sidelined by personalities.

If we now all ignore Niddar, we still have important questions to ask and answer about this period of our itihaas and its impact on us. If Niddar with his strange ways brings this topic (which too many apnay seem too frightened to face) to the fore (even inadvertently), then I think that good has been done - even if I vehemently disagree with his beliefs - which I do.

Sometimes you need controversial catalysts to force our lot to get off their a55 and study things deeper - sadly we seem reactionary rather than proactive. Niddar has his role - and I'm not connected to him or a fan of his at all.

Interesting point and I do agree, something controversial allows ignorant people like myself to jump into the subject and learn both sides and make a balanced choice about the topic. Suppression of a subject entirely is more dangerous than not properly addressing it.

Vidhiya veechari ta parupkari.

[dalsingh101]

The Singh Sabha was a reaction to the growth of the Arya Samaj in the Punjab and the attacks on Sikhs by Brahmins.

See, you strike on a very important topic there - what if the Arya Samaj guys didn't act like haughty a55holes? Most accounts appear to say that originally Sikhs were sympathetic and even supportive of the Samaj until they made their disparaging remarks about our faith and Gurus causing the reaction you mention. The reaction (naturally) was to distance themselves and we live in the legacy of this. Exploring this is important.

If the Singh Sahibians were so pro British why were so many martyered by the British in the Gurdwara reform movement? I dont see any record of Nihangs going on mass to oppose British control on Sikhs shrines,

It's more subtle than that, the British/Protestant influence people refer to is more on the theological plane and possibly a natural product of high ranked Singh Sabhians being educated in Christian colleges. Plus there is the whole matter of the general loyalty to the British. I'm not anti sabha, but I don't agree with suppressing historical truths because they are uncomfortable. Some of us know that the Amrit given to British recruits included a vow of loyalty to the British, which raises an eyebrow (look at Macauliffe's work for evidence). It's not only that, Brits also racialised Panjabi identity like it had never been before with their weak 'Aryan' and 'Scythian' theories - that still effects us today. It's a valid point to make that perhaps they manipulated the Khalsa identity for their own imperial agenda and achieved a certain degree of success in their objectives - as unpalatable as that statement may be for us today.

I agree with your point about nihangs. I think the vast majority of the ones that were deep into their thing got shaheed in the later Lahore darbar campaigns against the Afghans in the NWFP - that's the picture contemporary records seem to paint anyway. Only a few seemed to have remained by the time of the Anglo-Sikh wars, most of whom probably got shaheed.

Some major confusion in the revisionist historians of the period.

I agree, there is even pictures of latter nihungs who would extol the British and preach loyalty to them - the ironic thing is that this stuff is in the 300 year book published by Niddar's friend Amandeep (who for the record I think did a good service to Sikhs with 'Siques, Tigers and Thieves').

Another thing some of you people need to realise is that critically reviewing the past isn't about trashing it, it's about learning lessons about positives and negatives. The original Singh Sabha had many positives as well as negatives in my eyes. I mean the movement produced some seriously influential people like Ganda Singh (the historian), Professor Sahib Singh etc. It helped popularise Panjabi/Gurmukhi literature. But we still need to ask questions and find out the truth. What I don't like about Niddar is his own 'vilification' approach which tries to demonise people of the past and not look at the situation and evaluate in context. His language is all wrong.

BUT - that all said and done, the underlying point about pre and post Singh Sabha Sikh worldviews - how they may have come to differ and how they remained constant too is a subject EVERY LAST intelligent, conscious Sikh should be interested in! We just need to frame our research, discussions in dispassionate, gentlemanly, intelligent language - which, let's be frank, isn't our quom's (or my own) strong point.

[ThunderousDominator]

Giani Kirpal Singh of Stratford Road Gurdwara Sparkhill (a chardi klaa HariaVela Nihang) phoned Baba Nihal Singh ji and he confirmed that he signed the letter and added that he was disappointed that the letter wasn't issued earlier.

jathedarof the taruna dal???

[N30S1NGH]

Despite of arya samajis and singh sabha vehemently against each other (as ironic it may sound) they have more similarities than differences if one studies their basic theological frame work on dharam. Both Arya Samajis and Singh Sabha hate old traditional approach of their respective dharams (arya samaji hate old traditional hinduism and singh sabha demonized/demoralized old traditional Sikhism) and just like singh sabha, arya samaji outlook/perception of dharam is highly based on Victorian protestant interpretation..!!!!!!

[N30S1NGH]

I think its best if this topic of singh sabha gets spited into topic of its own so others can focus on topic at hand.