‘My Children Don’T Want To Add Singh To Names’

[Guest Jacfsing2]

only babbar khalsa did actually.

jinda sukha were not the only ones, there were LOADS more.

If we start calling Monas Shaheeds then we should also include the Non-Sikhs who died for the Panth like Pir Buddhu Shah, (but none of Mona supporters calls him Shaheed). It should at the very least be at an equal level instead of making some Shaheeds high and others low.

[StarStriker]

If we start calling Monas Shaheeds then we should also include the Non-Sikhs who died for the Panth like Pir Buddhu Shah, (but none of Mona supporters calls him Shaheed). It should at the very least be at an equal level instead of making some Shaheeds high and others low.

So wat u tryna suggest then? Moneh shouldnt b called shaheeds? mate f%%k off with ur nonsense. Ppl like u seem to think shaheeds can only be sikhs, which is pathetic, and no different to wat muslims fink of themselves/religion. Ive gone on record on this forum, and called guy fawkes a shaheed, so id have no problem in callin pir buddhu shah and other non sikhs shaheeds either. I agree with dallysingh, that theres Bare fuddus/pappus on this forum nowadays. Also who suggested some shaheeds were higher or lower than others?

[dallysingh101]

Ppl like u seem to think shaheeds can only be sikhs, which is pathetic, and no different to wat muslims fink of themselves/religion.

Interestingly the word shaheed itself comes from Islamic lexicon and was adopted in our culture.

[dallysingh101]

If you follow Sikhi properly (without punjabi attitude) then there is no axe to grind ...what do you claim to be haughty ? staying away from sharabi, kebabi parties, not eating food made by people who don't pray or keep any form of rehit, don't eat out ...that is following basic bibek given by panj piarey . However if you mean bad-mouthing people just for being at a different point on their spiritual journey then sure they are not correct in attitude . Where I get it is from living it all my youth and seeing my three year old beaten up by kids four times his age and his life getting threatened . I chose to see an internal struggle as the reason not just bl00dyminded violence , but forgive me for giving kids the benefit of the doubt and not trying to create hate in my young child's mind against himself or others. Guess I am a bad Mum

Let me give a real life example:

A cuz of mine when younger (he must have been 9/10 - he used to live with us) came home one day and told me that he got into a fight, because some kudhu keshdhari kid was getting constantly bullied by some other nonSIkh kids in the class. Cuz could (and still can) fight, he wasn't (isn't) scared (he's a grown man now - lives abroad). So anyway, he slapped about and warned those boys and the Sikh boy was unmolested by them thereafter. I told him "Good, well done. We have to look after one another. I'm proud of you."

Then 4/5 weeks later he comes home and tells me that the same boy was running around slyly telling other people in the class that my cuz 'isn't a proper Sikh' behind his back, because he is a mona. Plus factor in that this boys father is some bigshot 'business man' who'd drop his son off to school in a porsche (and the area we lived in at the time was in no means rich).

Anyway, I told him to let the boy get slapped about next time and don't help him. That might help him get a bit of much needed perspective.

But the point is that that boy most likely learnt his slimy two-faced ways from his family. Now in my books, if you're trying to raise your children in Sikhi and the first thing you do is pump their heads up with haughty notions of superiority over next Sikh people - given that our faith's foundation is built around curtailing your ego, you've already cocked up majorly by instilling the seeds of haumai into their practicing the very faith itself! So instead of trying to use it to keep haumai in check (a battle for all humans) people have gone and twisted the faith into the very manifestation of haumai. I'm so great because I do this and they don't! Yeah! <fist pump!> Talk about own goal!

[jkvlondon]

So wat u tryna suggest then? Moneh shouldnt b called shaheeds? mate f%%k off with ur nonsense. Ppl like u seem to think shaheeds can only be sikhs, which is pathetic, and no different to wat muslims fink of themselves/religion. Ive gone on record on this forum, and called guy fawkes a shaheed, so id have no problem in callin pir buddhu shah and other non sikhs shaheeds either. I agree with dallysingh, that theres Bare fuddus/pappus on this forum nowadays. Also who suggested some shaheeds were higher or lower than others?

My dad's folks and Mum's folks respect the shaheeds of the panth and we have a tradition of doing degh and ardas to honour them at gurdwara whenever there is an addition via marriage or births ...when I got married my Mum advised that I should do degh and do ardas to honour the shaheeds of his ancestry ...there are dharmic shaheed in other families too

[StarStriker]

My dad's folks and Mum's folks respect the shaheeds of the panth and we have a tradition of doing degh and ardas to honour them at gurdwara whenever there is an addition via marriage or births ...when I got married my Mum advised that I should do degh and do ardas to honour the shaheeds of his ancestry ...there are dharmic shaheed in other families too

Nice.

[SeekerKaur]

Yes some Amritdharis can be haughty too (though I do not understand what is haughty in staying firm to maryada, they maintain a discipline which others shy away from following!) it doesn't hide the fact that many mone bully Amritdharis.

That was a survey on bullying of Sikh kids published by Daily Post newspaper! I am only quoting that one for reference.

Where did moneh shaheeds come into all this? How is it an insult to the shaheeds? Shaheeds deserve all respect and honour whether they are Amritdhari or not!

One is talking about moneh kids bullying others.

Why are some people ready to take offense and divert from the topic?

There is no dearth of moneh who keep calling Amritdharis backward, orthodox, kattar, pakhandi etc. Ever thought it is offensive?

Those who do not like Amritdharis calling moneh "not proper Sikhs" should also examine digs moneh take at Amritdharis.

Being Amritdhari kid is very difficult. They have very few role models around to identify with, they face pressure from outside society and also pressure from family (to maintain their maryada and discipline). So if any kid hesitates it does not mean he is kuddu or something. Good to know an instance or two about monas coming to help such kids in times of bullying though. But don't make it as if the mona committed act of heroism or ehsaan if he helped an Amritdhari from being bullied. By calling Amritdhari kids kuddu or whatever are you not showing haumai?

How about stopping all sorts of bullying we subject each other to?

[dallysingh101]

Those who do not like Amritdharis calling moneh "not proper Sikhs" should also examine digs moneh take at Amritdharis.

I'm saying none of this is acceptable. No one is flawless. If an Amritdhari kid can criticise a sehajdhari/mona for his/her perceived lack of rehat; it's unrealistic to not expect some criticisms being thrown back at them.

Some parents out of ignorance (and ego) seem to tell their children that only Amritdhari kids are Sikhs when history tells us otherwise i.e.:

The Sicque nation is composed of 2 distinct sects or orders of people; those who compose the most ancient one are denominated Khualasah and adhere, with little deviation to the institutions of Nanock and the 8 succeeding priests; in obedience to which the Khualasah Sicques are usually occupied in civil and domestic duties. They cut off the hair on their heads and beards and in their manners and appearance resemble the ordinary classes of Hindoos.

The modern order of the Sicques entitled Khala were founded by Govind Sing; who deviating from the original ordinances of his predecessors, imparted a strong military spirit from his adherents....

George Forster (1783)

If we ignore the authors misconceptions about dasmesh pita 'deviating' from his predecessors we still get evidence that Sikh society in the 1780s was made up of monay and Amritdharis. So today's situation is no new phenomena.

So if any kid hesitates it does not mean he is kuddu or something. Good to know an instance or two about monas coming to help such kids in times of bullying though. But don't make it as if the mona committed act of heroism or ehsaan if he helped an Amritdhari from being bullied. By calling Amritdhari kids kuddu or whatever are you not showing haumai?

It's hell of a lot more than a few odd cases from what I've seen over the years. Don't get that twisted.

BTW I was just saying that in this case the kid I'm referring to was seriously obese and obviously not encouraged to exercise (which probably didn't help with the bullying); and this in itself highlights a common failure on certain Amritdhari parents part when they over pamper their children and whilst focusing on certain aspects of rehat, fail miserably to impart and maintain the physical warrior side of the faith. In reality I think it is because they selfishly refuse to take any risks with their own children (who they see as some sort of status symbols) which leads to hordes of excessively delicate Amritdhari kids who are incapable of defending themselves. (Thankfully not all do this, but way too many do). Contrast this to how Amritdharis used to raise their children as observed by outsiders:

The Siques are in general strong and well made, accustomed from their infancy to the most labourious life and hardest fare, they make marches and undergo fatigues that will really appear astonishing.

Colonel Polier (1776-1802)

[Guest Jacfsing2]

I'm saying none of this is acceptable. No one is flawless. If an Amritdhari kid can criticise a sehajdhari/mona for his/her perceived lack of rehat; it's unrealistic to not expect some criticisms being thrown back at them.

Some parents out of ignorance (and ego) seem to tell their children that only Amritdhari kids are Sikhs when history tells us otherwise i.e.:

The Sicque nation is composed of 2 distinct sects or orders of people; those who compose the most ancient one are denominated Khualasah and adhere, with little deviation to the institutions of Nanock and the 8 succeeding priests; in obedience to which the Khualasah Sicques are usually occupied in civil and domestic duties. They cut off the hair on their heads and beards and in their manners and appearance resemble the ordinary classes of Hindoos.

The modern order of the Sicques entitled Khala were founded by Govind Sing; who deviating from the original ordinances of his predecessors, imparted a strong military spirit from his adherents....

George Forster (1783)

If we ignore the authors misconceptions about dasmesh pita 'deviating' from his predecessors we still get evidence that Sikh society in the 1780s was made up of monay and Amritdharis. So today's situation is no new phenomena.

It's hell of a lot more than a few odd cases from what I've seen over the years. Don't get that twisted.

BTW I was just saying that in this case the kid I'm referring to was seriously obese and obviously not encouraged to exercise (which probably didn't help with the bullying); and this in itself highlights a common failure on certain Amritdhari parents part when they over pamper their children and whilst focusing on certain aspects of rehat, fail miserably to impart and maintain the physical warrior side of the faith. In reality I think it is because they selfishly refuse to take any risks with their own children (who they see as some sort of status symbols) which leads to hordes of excessively delicate Amritdhari kids who are incapable of defending themselves. (Thankfully not all do this, but way too many do). Contrast this to how Amritdharis used to raise their children as observed by outsiders:

The Siques are in general strong and well made, accustomed from their infancy to the most labourious life and hardest fare, they make marches and undergo fatigues that will really appear astonishing.

Colonel Polier (1776-1802)

The first guy has really bad spelling, (just pointing that out there).

[simran345]

The first guy has really bad spelling, (just pointing that out there).

In other old books of that time, Sikhs are also written as:

'Seik', 'Seikh', 'Sik' or 'Sicque'.