Bhai Hakikat Rai Wasnt a Sahajdhari

[Bijla Singh]

I am not the one throwing insults, hiding behind others’ faults to make myself look good or distorting Sikhi to justify my own weaknesses. Don’t hijack the topic. Do you have any evidence to prove Bhai Hakikat Singh was a mona?

[dalsingh101]

hiding behind others’ faults to make myself look good or distorting Sikhi to justify my own weaknesses

That is EXACTLY what you are doing.

And every other pious, holier than thou <edited> like you.

You can keep deluding yourself, but anyone with half a brain and a just a smattering of integrity knows just how far removed people like yourself are from the original Singhs you try and imitate and whose reputation you try and hide behind to throw around haughty condemnation of others who can't match your self perceived 'strength'.

Keep hiding behind your 'technical Sikhi' without any spirit or heart behind it. <edited>

[Mehtab Singh]

dalsingh veer, I didn't expect a rude backlash from your side. In fact I look upon you and veer Bija Singh as a handful of the few knowledgeable members we have on this forum. Its really not at all helping to see you two exchange "pleasantries". This could have been a really thought provoking discussion.

Humble request to both, please engage in constructive discussion. This is one thread I personally would hate to lock as it has come as an eye opener.

[Bijla Singh]

If you have some problem with Amritdharis then resolve them on your own. Puratan Singhs were far better than me and I will never be their match in any field of Sikhi. I accept it as a fact. This topic is about Bhai Hakikat Singh which you have not written a single word on and right from the beginning without considering the ample amount of evidence presented, you started to accuse Amritdharis of “revisionism”. So much for rationality and integrity. Those who cut hair are called manmukhs and niguras in Gurbani. Your denial of this fact is not the characteristic of a Sikh. You can call me weak, coward or whatever you want but that doesn’t change the fact that monas are not Sikhs. Your post reminds me of Gurbani pankti: ਜਿਉ ਨਿਗੁਰਾ ਬਹੁ ਬਾਤਾ ਜਾਣੈ ਓਹੁ ਹਰਿ ਦਰਗਹ ਹੈ ਭ੍ਰਸਟੀ ॥1॥

[dalsingh101]

Bijla is confused.

How can someone who has never taken Amrit become apostate by cutting his hair?

Plus does anyone here deny the existence and contribution of sehajdhari Sikhs even after 1699. Because if you do, you obviously haven't been making much effort to understand Sikh itihaas.

We even had a thread here recently with pictures of shaheeds of 1984 who were sehajdharis or monas (whatever you want to call them?).

I guess too Bijla's mind those guys weren't as good a Sikh as he is and they were manmukhs. Maybe? But I tell you one thing straight, they are bigger men than you'll ever be.

Stop using the faith as some ego prop - for your own sake. Find some less obnoxious way to prop up your confidence and self-image for everyone's sake.

And where do we go if we accept Bijla's assertion that all sehajdharis or monay aren't Sikh? Where does that leave us? The smallest faith in the world? Whether we like it or not, the majority of the Sikh panth is now mona. How we got to this can, and should be discussed. Attempts to, in effect, excommunicate the majority of people who consider themselves Sikh by Bijla types is mind boggling.

I know our Sikh forefathers were remarkable people, made up of both Amritdharis AND Sehajdharis. That simple fact needs to be asserted today more than ever.

[N30S1NGH]

Not sure Bhai Hakikat Rai was sehajdhari or not but speaking generally regarding sehajdhari, here is rehitnama posted by ranjit singh freed on this forum couple of years ago:

There is no puratan hakumnama against patit (sehajdhari sikhs) however there is puratan document which accepts sehajdhari sikhs in panth:

I am simply quoting this from sikhawareness forum and i m not promoting sehajdhari sikhs nor i m promoting ban against them.

Gurfateh !

The 'rehatnama' you are looking for is the 'Vajib Ul Arz' - or 'reasonable request' - This document is found in Bhai Mani Singh's 'Bhagat ratna wali'
and is in the form of ten questions - said to have been asked of Guru Gobind Singh by Sehaj dhari Sikhs - and Guru Sahib's response.

It is quite controversial - the version I am posting - an entry from Kahn Singh Nabha's Mahan Kosh - is prefaced by Kahn Singh saying that this cannot be the writing of Bhai Mani Singh and Guru Sahib would never have made such 'Hukums'.

The main controversial points are to do with the keeping of kesh (the document allows the trimming of kesh to an 'acceptable' length) and various ceremonies requiring the presence of a 'Brahmin'
It must be remembered that 'Mahan Kosh' was written at the height of the Singh Sabha Movement and it could be argued Kahn Singh was its chief apologist.


Like always it's for you to make your own decision.


hope this helps in someway !


Ranjit Singh 'Freed'


Here is the entry (in my copy of Mahan Kosh - 2000 edition, its on page 901) this version is from srigranth.org


Mahan Kosh Encyclopedia

Entry - ਵਾਜਿਬੁਲ ਅਰਜ


ਅ਼. __ ਵਾਜਿਬੁਲ- ਅ਼ਰਜ. ਯੋਗ੍ਯ ਪ੍ਰਾਰਥਨਾ. ਵਿਨਯਪਤ੍ਰ। ੨. ਭਾਈ ਮਨੀਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਸਾਖੀ “ਭਗਤਾਵਲੀ” ਵਿੱਚ ਲਿਖੀ ਸਹਜਧਾਰੀ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਦੀ ਬੇਨਤੀ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਦਸ ਪ੍ਰਸ਼ਨ ਦਸ਼ਮੇਸ਼ ਦੇ ਪੇਸ਼ ਕੀਤੇ ਗਏ ਹਨ. ਵਾਜਬੁਲਅਰਜ ਦੇ ਪਾਠ ਤੋਂ ਮਲੂਮ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਨਾ ਇਹ ਭਾਈ ਮਨੀਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਕਲਮ ਤੋਂ ਲਿਖੀ ਗਈ ਹੈ ਅਰ ਨਾ ਕਲਗੀਧਰ ਦੇ ਅਜੇਹੇ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਏ ਹਨ, ਪਰ ਪਾਠਕਾਂ ਦੇ ਗ੍ਯਾਨ ਲਈ ਇਸ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿੱਚ ਅਸਲ ਪਾਠ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ. (ੳ) ਸਮੇ ਵਿਆਹ ਦੇ ਅਸੀਂ ਵੇਦਪਾਠੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਬੁਲਾਇਕੈ ਵਿਵਾਹ ਦੀਆਂ ਕਾਂਡੀਆਂ ਪੜ੍ਹਾਇਕੈ ਵਿਵਾਹ ਕਰਦੇ ਸਾਂ. ਤੇ ਹੁਣ ਸਿੱਖ¹ ਕਹਿਂਦੇ ਹਨ- ਤੁਸੀਂ ਆਨੰਦ ਪੜ੍ਹਕੇ ਵਿਵਾਹ ਕਰੋ, ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਨਾ ਬੁਲਾਵੋ. ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਅਬ ਜਿਵੈ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ. ਦਸਤਖਤ ਖਾਸ ਹੋਏ- ਪਹਿਲੇ ਆਨੰਦ ਪੜ੍ਹਨਾ, ਅਰਦਾਸ ਕਰਨੀ, ਪਿੱਛੇ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣਾਂ ਥੀਂ ਹਮੇਸ਼ਾਂ ਜਿਸ ਤਰਾਂ ਪੜਾਵਦੇ ਆਏ ਹੋਂ, ਤਿਵੈ ਪੜਾਵਣਾ, ਸੰਸਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਨਾ. (ਅ) ਸਾਹਿਬਾ ਦਾ ਜੋ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਪੰਜਾਂ ਮੇਲਾਂ- ਧੀਰਮਲੀਏ, ਰਾਮਰਈਏ, ਮੀਣੇ, ਮਸੰਦ, ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮ- ਨੂੰ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਣਾ. ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮ ਕੌਣ ਹੈ? ਬਚਨ ਹੋਇਆ ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮ ਸਰੇਵੜੇ ਅਨੀਸੁਰਵਾਦੀ ਹੈਨ. ਨੰਦਚੰਦ ਸੰਘੇ ਦੇ ਭੀ ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮ ਹੈਨ. ਪੱਕਾ ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮ. ਤੁਰਕ ਹੈ. ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਕੀਤੀ- ਕੋਈ ਬਪਾਰ ਦੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈ, ਕੋਈ ਮੁਸੱਦੀ ਪੇਸ਼ਾ ਹੈ, ਵਿਹਾਰ ਦਾ ਸਦਕਾ ਸਭ ਕਿਸੇ ਦਾ ਆਨ ਮੇਲ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ. ਤਾਂ ਖਾਸ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਪਹਿਲੇ ਪੁੱਛਕੇ ਵਰਤਣ ਕਰਣੀ, ਜੋ ਭੁੱਲ ਭੁਲਾਂਵੇ ਵਰਤੋਂ, ਤਾਂ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਕਰਵਾਇ ਲੈਣੀ. (ੲ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਅਸੀਂ ਸਹਜਧਾਰੀ ਤੇਰੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਜੋ ਹੈਸਾਂ, ਸੋ ਮਾਤਾ ਪਿਤਾ ਦੇ ਮਰਣੇ ਉੱਪਰ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਕਰਮ ਭਦ੍ਰ ਜੋੜੀ ਸੰਸਾਰ ਦੀ ਰੀਤਿ ਸੀ, ਜੋ ਕਰਦੇ ਹੈਸਾਂ. ਤੇ ਹੁਣ ਸਿੱਖ ਆਖਦੇ ਹਨ- ਜੋ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਵਰਤਾਇਆ ਹੈ, ਹੁਣ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਏਹੁ ਰੀਤਾਂ ਸੰਸਾਰ ਦੀਆਂ ਨਾ ਕਰਿਆ ਕਰੋ. ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਜਿਵੇਂ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ. ਤਾਂ ਬਚਨ ਹੋਇਆ, ਖਾਸ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਭੱਦਨ (ਭਦ੍ਰ) ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਨਾ, ਹੋਰ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਕਰਮ ਕਰਤੂਤ ਜੈਸੀ ਦੇਸਚਾਲ ਹੋਵੈ ਤਿਵੈ ਕਰਕੈ ਬਖਸਾਇ ਲੈਣਾ. (ਸ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸਾਹੁ! ਸਮੇ ਵਿਵਾਹ ਅਤੇ ਖਿਆਹ ਸਰਾਧ ਦੇ ਦਿਨ ਅਸੀਂ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਭੋਜਨ ਕਰਾਂਵਦੇ ਹੈਸਾਂ, ਹੁਣ ਸਿੱਖ ਆਖਦੇ ਹਨ, ਜੋ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਛਕਾਵਣਾ. ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਇਆ- ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਭੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਭੀ ਅਤਿਥਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਭਲੀ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਰ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਕਰਕੈ ਸਭਸ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦ ਛਕਾਇਆ ਕਰੋ. (ਹ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਵਖਤ ਜੰਞੂ ਪਾਵਣੇ ਦੇ ਅਸੀਂ ਪੁਤ੍ਰ ਨੂੰ ਉਸਤਰੇ ਨਾਲ ਭਦ੍ਰ ਕਰਾਂਵਦੇ ਸਾਂ, ਹੁਣ ਜਿਵੇਂ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ ਤਿਵੈ ਕੀਚੈ. ਹੁਕਮ ਤੇ ਖਾਸ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਜੋ ਸਹਜਧਾਰੀਆਂ ਦੇ ਬੇਟਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਪਾਹੁਲ ਦੇਣੀ. (ਕ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਅੱਗੇ ਅਸੀਂ ਅਸਥੀਆਂ ਗੰਗਾ ਭੇਜਦੇ ਸਾਂ ਹੁਣ ਸਿੱਖ ਮਨੇ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ, ਜਿਵੇ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ. ਬਚਨ ਤੇ ਖਾਸ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਜੇ ਪਹੁਚਾਇ ਸਕੋਂ ਤਾਂ ਅਸਤੀਆਂ ਪਹੁਚਾਇ ਦੇਣੀਆਂ ਅਰ ਜੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਜੁੱਧ ਵਿੱਚ ਜਿੱਥੇ ਹੁਕਮਸਤਿ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਸੋਈ ਕੁਰੁਛੇਤ੍ਰ ਹੈ. ਇਕੇ ਸਾਧਸੰਗਤਿ ਕੀ ਚਰਣਧੂਰਿ ਵਿੱਚ ਪਾਇ ਦੇਣੀਆਂ, ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਚੌਫੇਰੇ, ਏਸੇ ਥਾਂ ਓਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਗਤਿ ਹੋਵੈਗੀ. (ਖ) ਅਸੀਂ ਜੋ ਆਮਿਲ ਪੇਸ਼ਾ ਕਚਹਿਰੀਆਂ ਜਾਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਦਾੜੀਆਂ ਕੇਸ ਇੱਕੋ ਜੇਹੇ ਕੈਂਚੀਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਕਟਵਾਇ ਲੈਂਦੇ ਸਾਂ, ਹੁਣ ਜਿਵੈ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ ਤਿਵੈਂ ਕਰੀਏ. ਹੁਕਮ ਤੇ ਖਾਸ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਜੇਹੜੇ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਸਹਜਧਾਰੀ ਸਿੱਖ ਹੋਂ, ਜੇ ਕੇਸਧਾਰੀਆਂ ਦੀ ਤਰਾਂ ਸਾਬਤ ਰੱਖੋਂ ਤਾਂ ਭਲਾ ਹੈ, ਨਹੀਂ ਤਾਂ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਜਰੂਰ- ਮਾਤ੍ਰ ਵਧੀਕ ਹੋਵੈ ਸੋ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਕਰਵਾਇ ਛੱਡਣੇ, ਫੇਰ ਬਖਸਾਇ ਲੈਣਾ. ਜੋ ਕੇਸਧਾਰੀ ਇਹ ਕਰਮ ਕਰੈਗਾ, ਓਹ ਸਿੱਖ ਨਹੀਂ. (ਗ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਜੋ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਸਿਰਗੁੰਮਾ ਪੰਜਾਂ ਮੇਲਾਂ ਦੇ ਮੁਹ ਕੋਈ ਲੱਗੈ ਨਹੀਂ. ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਆਂਵਦਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਮੁਹ ਲਗ ਜਾਵੈ, ਤਾਂ ਕਿਉਂ ਕਰ ਵਚਨ ਹੈ? ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਇਆ- ਰਿਦਾ ਸੁੱਧ ਗੁਰਾਂ ਵੱਲ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ, ਆਂਵਦਾ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਮੁਹ ਲਗ ਜਾਵੈ, ਤਾਂ ਕੀ ਹੈ? ਵਰਤਣ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰਨੀ. (ਘ) ਜੇਹੜੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਗੰਗਾ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਇਸਨਾਨ ਨੂੰ ਗਏ ਹਨ, ਜੋ ਇਸਨਾਨ ਕਰਕੈ ਆਵਨ ਤਾਂ ਕਿਵਕਰ ਵਰਤੀਏ? ਵਚਨ ਹੋਆ- ਹਿਤ ਪਿਆਰ ਨਾਲ ਓਨਾ ਨਾਲ ਵਰਤਣਾ ਬਹੁਤੀ ਦਿੱਕਤ ਨਾਹੀ ਕਰਨੀ ਭਾਈ ਸਿੱਖੋ! ਤੁਸਾਡੇ ਉੱਪਰ ਸਾਡਾ ਏਹ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੈ- ਪੰਜਾਂ ਮੇਲਾਂ ਵਿੱਚੋਂ ਕਿਸੇ ਨਾਲ ਨਹੀਂ ਮਿਲਣਾ, ਕਿਉਂ ਜੋ ਓਨਾ ਦਾ ਮੇਲ ਕਰਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਦਾ ਸਿਦਕ ਘਟਦਾ ਹੈ. ਕੋਈ ਓਨਾਂ ਵਿੱਚੋਂ ਭੀ ਮੇਲ ਕੀਤਾ ਚਾਹੇ, ਸੋ ਮੇਲ ਲੈਣਾ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਦਾ ਉਪਦੇਸ਼ ਦੇਣਾ, ਭਜਨ ਕਰਣਾ, ਧਰਮ ਦੀ ਕਿਰਤ ਕਰਣੀ ਤੇ ਵੰਡ ਖਾਣਾ, ਸਿੱਖ ਦੀ ਰਹਿਰਾਸਿ ਏਹੋ ਹੈ. (ਙ) ਸੱਚੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ! ਅੱਗੇ ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਹੁਕਮਸਤਿ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਸੀ, ਤਾਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਪੰਡਿਤਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਬੁਲਾਇਕੈ ਗਰੁੜਪੁਰਾਣ ਵਚਾਂਵਦੇ ਸਾਂ, ਤੇ ਦਸਗਾਤ੍ਰ ਕਰਾਂਵਦੇ ਸਾਂ, ਤੇ ਹੁਣ ਪੰਡਿਤ ਨਹੀਂ ਆਂਵਦੇ ਕਹਿਁਦੇ ਹੈਨ- ਜੋ ਧਾਗਾ ਤੇ ਲੰਗੋਟ ਰੱਖੋ ਤੇ ਦਸਗਾਤ੍ਰ ਕਰੋ ਤਾਂ ਅਸੀਂ ਆਵਨੇ ਹਾਂ, ਜਿਵੇਂ ਹੁਕਮ ਹੋਵੈ ਤਿਵੈ ਕੀਚੈ. ਵਚਨ ਤੇ ਦਸਤਖਤ ਹੋਏ- ਤੁਸਾਂ ਸਿਦਕ ਤੇ ਤਕੜੇ ਰਹਿਣਾ, ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਜੀ ਦਾ ਭੋਗ ਪਵਾਣਾ ਤੇ ਪੰਜਵੇਂ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਸਹਸਕ੍ਰਿਤੀ ਸਲੋਕਾਂ ਦੀ ਕਥਾ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਥੀਂ ਸੁਣਨੀ. ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਦਾ ਭੀ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਜੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਵਾਸਾ ਹੋਵੈਗਾ, ਤੇ ਤੁਸਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਭੀ ਗਿਆਨ ਪ੍ਰਾਪਤ ਹੋਵੈਗਾ. ਸਿਦਕ ਜੇਹਾ ਤੇ ਨਾਮ ਜੇਹਾ ਪਦਾਰਥ ਕੋਈ ਨਹੀਂ.

¹ਖੰਡੇ ਦਾ ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਛਕਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਕੇਸਧਾਰੀ ਸਿੰਘ.

[dalsingh101]

Thanks N30

Add to the above the earliest European accounts of the Panjab (we are talking about late 1700s here), which CLEARLY describe a Sikh community made up of Amritdharis (Khalsa) and what they term 'Khulasa' Sikhs who did not follow the Khalsa rehat but were still considered Sikh - note EXACTLY like today.

Yes, the truth is that today the majority of monay/sehajdharis have come from relatively recent Khalsa roots, but seeing as they themselves have never taken Amrit and then committed bujjar kureit of hair cutting, they can't be called patit in the sense of an Amritdhari who has committed bujjar kureit.

I'm not saying that everyone should be happy about the current situation but kicking people further away by haughty, excluding behaviour is certainly THE MOST FOOLISH thing to do out of ALL of the available options. That is exactly what made so-called 'lower caste' Sikhs leave and we still don't learn the lesson.

We MUST become more inclusive and integrate people within our quom. Our Gurus were NEVER about elitist, exclusivity.

[Bijla Singh]

"How can someone who has never taken Amrit become apostate by cutting his hair?"

How are they Sikhs to begin with? If hair cutting makes an Amritdhari a Sikh then clearly taking Amrit makes them a Sikh. Cutting hair is no way acceptable in Gurmat because it is considered a bajjar kurehat. If you assert that rehat only applies to Amritdharis and not others, then clearly you fail to understand Gurmat which is universal.

"Plus does anyone here deny the existence and contribution of sehajdhari Sikhs even after 1699. Because if you do, you obviously haven't been making much effort to understand Sikh itihaas."

You are very confused. Monas and Sehajdharis are very different from each other. Look up a picture of sehajdhari given in Mahan Kosh first. Since when did Guru Sahib sanction Sikhs to cut their hair and still remain sehajdharis?

"We even had a thread here recently with pictures of shaheeds of 1984 who were sehajdharis or monas (whatever you want to call them?).

I guess too Bijla's mind those guys weren't as good a Sikh as he is and they were manmukhs. Maybe? But I tell you one thing straight, they are bigger men than you'll ever be."

This is not about me being a good or bad Sikh. It never was. Your own idiotic assumptions and being paranoid about your mona-puna are leading you to concoct statements and putting them in my mouth. Monas who gave their lives were great people but they acknowledged the fact that they had cut hair to serve the Panth. Their this particular act does not redefine the essence of Gurmat. Their number was in fact miniscule compared to that of the Amritdharis. Now how are you serving the Panth while being a mona? How is your lot contributing to the chardi kala of the Panth by going to pubs? How many monas are doing parchaar of Gurmat? The fact is that while shaheeds like Sukha Jhinda came back to Sikhi and wished to become Sikhs, you continue to stay in denial and hide behind those respected people and consider yourself to be their equal just on the basis that you are a mona.

"Stop using the faith as some ego prop - for your own sake. Find some less obnoxious way to prop up your confidence and self-image for everyone's sake."

And once again you are speaking like a paranoid child. Stop distorting Sikhi for personal reasons.

"And where do we go if we accept Bijla's assertion that all sehajdharis or monay aren't Sikh? Where does that leave us? The smallest faith in the world? Whether we like it or not, the majority of the Sikh panth is now mona. How we got to this can, and should be discussed. Attempts to, in effect, excommunicate the majority of people who consider themselves Sikh by Bijla types is mind boggling."

Oh and now Sikhi is about quantity, numbers and some rank in the world? Since when? You clearly do not understand the most fundamentals of Gurmat. How can there be a proper discussion over bringing monas back to Sikhi when irrational people like you fail to acknowledge the fact that taking Amrit is the first step in becoming a Sikh which you are far removed from. Monas like you call themselves Sikhs with haircut. This is plain stupid. Sikh Panth not too long ago had majority Amritdharis which lead to the rise of awakening and freedom movement. After that, we get majority monas and the result of Punjab and the Panth is right before us. No freedom movement in Sikh history has ever been and never will be started by monas. There is no point in excommunicating those who willingly decided to leave Sikhi by cutting their hair.

So-called lower-caste are leaving Sikhi because of anti-Sikhi behavior of so-called upper caste. This is not Sikh like behavior. A Sikh does not believe in caste system. This needs to be addressed but monas willingly cut their hair and leave Sikhi. I never say that there are inferior or lower than Amritdharis but they are not Sikhs. Serious efforts should be made to bring them back but your attitude to justify faulty behaviors and anti-Gurmat practices by some to justify yourself as a better mona is ridiculous and more damaging. You talk about studying Sikh history yet fail to understand the difference between a smoker drunkard mona and a sehajdhari. A Sikh of Guru can never be a sehajdhari, the term specifically used for certain people not generally for monas. You do not fall in category of a sehajdhari at all. No one denies that fact that monas and sehajdharis have made contributions to the Panth but their lack of rehat does not redefine Gurmat.

[N30S1NGH]

Maharaj accepts everyone as maharaj is inside everyone looking at everything as witness (shakshi). Maharaj knows deepest secret of one and showers grace on based on merit individual- karam, perception, good intentions, naam simran, bairaag, prem towards vahiguroo..vahiguroo gives graces to everybody equally. Baba Kundan Singh Ji Nanaksarwale used to tell their students- never be ahankari especially infront of mona or non sikhs you never know how and when guru maharaj can do kirpa through them to break one's ahankar.

I don't want to undermine sanskar amrit- khanda batta da amrit/naam amrit, but as much we like to cover truth or put it under the carpret..the fact of matter is historically speaking there is quite bit of diversity in sikh panth:

Even gyani thakur singh ji patialwale shares an story of his mona on a very high spiritual state.

In Sikhi, there are few well known out of many unsung- sehajdhari and monai (trimmed cut mahapursh one listed in jivan kiranai pustak of sant jvala singh ji harkhowal) and there is place for sehajdharis sikhs

http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/42059-new-nirmala-website/page__st__20#entry387005

http://santashramlopon.com/bio_details.php?bio_id=3&name=Sant%20Darbara%20Singh%20Ji

From parchar stand point, we must be steadyfast promoting khanda da amrit but on personal level having rigid organized contrast that only amritdhari can be sikh of guru maharaj is nothing but singh sabha tat khalsa revisionist invention holds no water so whatsoever as their outlook is bit short sighted, they are not looking at individual avastha but rather outer garb- cham and judging by it and besides history/relics/historical granths disagrees with their assertions recently there are more exploration done on 52 kavis of sri guru gobind singh ji maharaj its pleasantly surprising nothing what ultra tat khalsa revisionist like us to believe..!!!

http://www.facebook.com/CourtJewelsOfGuruGobindSingh

Giani Gian Singh Writes:

"When the Sikhs, the Nihangs, Sehaj Dhari, Nirmalla's, Namdharis, and Udasi's see themselves as the sons of the same father. The Gurudwara reform movement would be over"

Puratan Damdami taksal fully believes in this diversity, in fact one of member on here- papidas writes as student of taksal

http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/69459-are-you-studying-sggs-if-not-why/?p=561317

Vaheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa Vaheguroo Jee Kee Fateh ||

I don't mean to start the argument all over, so please forgive me. After all the argument on here about which Sampardayee is Sikh and if Udasis and Nirmale are Sikhs i decided to ask my Sathya Teacher. Since he took Santhya from Vade Mahapurash, i asked him what their Veechar was on the above stated Sikhs. He said Mahapurash used to tell them that there are 4 types of Sikhs: Udasis, Nirmale, Sehaj Dhari, Khande (Amrit) Dhari. All of them have different Maryadas.

Please do not argue over this. I just wanted to put it put there.

Vaheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa Vaheguroo Jee Kee Fateh ||

Bijla Singh you can sing loriya stories to new generation of sikhs as a parcharikh regarding your one way or highway sikhi but please spare us singh sabha baggage, i already had to put with it enough at my local gurdwara..you must come in terms truth cannot be hidden forever- truth shines through..don't get me wrong singh sabha did excellent stuff hell even sane nirmale and udasi, great sants like sant sunder singh ji bhindranwale, sant attar singh ji mustanewale supported the idea of reformation but you cannot ignore overall british protestant/anglican/teja singh influence within their factions and their long term implications/efffects in the panth..i think it won't be stretch to say if they didn't reform sikh definition but rather further tweak khalsa definition in the panth, our sikh population would be 100-200 million by now, they have demonize and vilify, segragated sikhs who decided raj rishi khalsa life style was not for them and they were happy to connected marfat/hakikat layer of sikh than all four- shariat, tariqat ..!!!!!

Guru Maharaj gives updesh to dharamis who follow dharam, usually all dharam have four layers- shariat, tariqat, marfat, hakikat..!!

All though originally given to sharia panthi muslim of that time but gurbani is meant for everyone including off course sikhs, its fits perfectably looking at the sad state of affairs among holier than thou amritdharis.

Ang- 1083

saraa sareeath lae ka(n)maavahu ||

Let your practice be to live the spiritual life.

thareekath tharak khoj ttolaavahu ||

Let your spiritual cleansing be to renounce the world and seek God.

maarafath man maarahu abadhaalaa milahu hakeekath jith fir n maraa ||3||

Let control of the mind be your spiritual wisdom, O holy man; meeting with God, you shall never die again. ||3|

[Mehtab Singh]

Ok this has gone beyond off topic. I am locking this for now. We may start a separate discussion later as a new thread but this one has just failed to serve any purpose besides mud slinging and personal attacks and clash of egos.

Sorry.....