Jump to content

Who Is Responsible For The Hate Towards Dasam Granth?


Guest Jacfsing2
 Share

Recommended Posts

There was also a LOT of projection. They started to imagine Sikhs and Sikhi as they would have liked it, according to their own biases and values - and even more so according to their own economic and colonialist agenda. They found that they could easily mould a lot of Sikhs to their own purposes. And did.

It makes me wonder how they managed it so easily, as when writing their earlier reports on Panjab they noticed how education here was far more advanced and widespread than in England and India. Although after conquest they claimed that there was little education to speak of.

The prophecies of the white man in hats coming to rule may have had something to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes me wonder how they managed it so easily, as when writing their earlier reports on Panjab they noticed how education here was far more advanced and widespread than in England and India. Although after conquest they claimed that there was little education to speak of.

The prophecies of the white man in hats coming to rule may have had something to do with it.

It wasn't just this, they employed a wide range of strategies to concrete their rule: They bought off key people via their ambition and greed, and undermined more independent-minded leaders. They had Panjabis at each others throats over religion (which you allude to with the whole Arya Samaj vs Singh Sabha thing), expending their energy in arguing amongst themselves instead of outmaneuvering the Anglos. They redistributed land and wealth to those who supported their agenda (politically and militarily) taking it away from 'rebels' giving it to the loyal. Their master card was to subvert Khalsa ideology to subordinate it to their colonialist ambitions - so you had Amritdharis thinking fighting in a whiteman's war far from home, or defending Anglo interests as a guard in some other colonised location, was somehow fulfilling his religious duty. It's all deeply psychological.

That article from Dawn magazine I posted on SA claims that as well as the weaponry, they were taking away cartloads of books immediately after annexation. Plus maybe our lot are a bit simple-minded in these respects? I think the word is gullible.

I think they had a really easy time in taming us compared to say Pathaans.

Back to the OP, I think it was 1) this conflict with Hindus and the pressure to try and remove any perceived links to Hinduism and 2) sexual frigidness imbibed from Victorian Protestant values in relation to Charitrio Pakyaan that were key factors in causing the sidelining of DG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes me wonder how they managed it so easily, as when writing their earlier reports on Panjab they noticed how education here was far more advanced and widespread than in England and India. Although after conquest they claimed that there was little education to speak of.

The prophecies of the white man in hats coming to rule may have had something to do with it.

There are first hand accounts of Dutch travelers during time of British annexing Punjab where they recorded that every Tehseel in the Pind would gather all the education material into a pile and then have it burnt.

Gore sau sau saal sochde ah, te ehs kam de karam assi aj vi dekhi jaande ah.

Great posts GPS and Chatanga - really informative. Shows without a shadow of a doubt that the missionary agenda is nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But aren't our Sri Guru Saib jis considered avatars of Sri Paramatma Sahib ji? Can't everything be seen as a creation of God, even forms of God themselves? Since everything that exists is a creation.

Guru Gobind Singh ji writes in Bachittar Natak

ਜੋ ਹਮ ਕੋ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਉਚਰਿ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਤੇ ਸਭ ਨਰਕਿ ਕੁੰਡ ਮਹਿ ਪਰਿਹੈਂ ॥

जो हम को परमेसर उचरि हैं ॥ ते सभ नरकि कुंड महि परिहैं ॥

Whosoever shall call me the Lord, shall fall into hell.

ਮੋ ਕੌ ਦਾਸ ਤਵਨ ਕਾ ਜਾਨੋ ॥ ਯਾ ਮੈ ਭੇਦ ਨ ਰੰਚ ਪਛਾਨੋ ॥੩੨॥

मो कौ दास तवन का जानो ॥ या मै भेद न रंच पछानो ॥३२॥

Consider me as His servant and do not think of any difference between me and the Lord.32.

ਮੈ ਹੋ ਪਰਮ ਪੁਰਖ ਕੋ ਦਾਸਾ ॥ ਦੇਖਨਿ ਆਯੋ ਜਗਤ ਤਮਾਸਾ ॥

मै हो परम पुरख को दासा ॥ देखनि आयो जगत तमासा ॥

I am the servant of the Supreme Purusha and hath come to see the Sport of the world.

Sri Dasam Granth sahib

Guru sahib writes in bachittar Natak about these hindu avatars under

ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਬਾਚ ਇਸ ਕੀਟ ਪ੍ਰਤਿ ॥

अकाल पुरख बाच इस कीट प्रति ॥

The Words of the Non-temporal Lord to this insect:

ਤੇ ਹਮ ਤਮਕਿ ਤਨਕ ਮੋ ਖਾਪੇ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਕੀ ਠਉਰ ਦੇਵਤਾ ਥਾਪੇ ॥

ते हम तमकि तनक मो खापे ॥ तिन की ठउर देवता थापे ॥

I destroyed them in no time and created gods in their place.

ਤੇ ਭੀ ਬਲਿ ਪੂਜਾ ਉਰਝਾਏ ॥ ਆਪਨ ਹੀ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਕਹਾਏ ॥੭॥

ते भी बलि पूजा उरझाए ॥ आपन ही परमेसुर कहाए ॥७॥

They were also absorbed in the worship of power and called themselves Ominipotednt.7.

ਮਹਾਦੇਵ ਅਚੁੱਤ ਕਹਾਯੋ ॥ ਬਿਸਨ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਕੋ ਠਹਿਰਾਯੋ ॥

Mahadeo (Shiva) was called Achyuta (blotless), Vishnu considered himself the Supreme.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਆਪ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਬਖਾਨਾ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੋ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਨ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਜਾਨਾ ॥੮॥

ब्रहमा आप पारब्रहम बखाना ॥ प्रभ को प्रभू न किनहूं जाना ॥८॥

Brahma called himself Para Brahman, none could comprehend the Lord.8.

Bachittar natak,Sri Dasam Granth sahib

Obviously there was no difference between akal purakh and Guru sahib as Guru sahib had realized Him before .Where these avatars whom Hindus consider as incarnation of God were not able to realize Akal purakh and went away deluded.

In sikhism guru is that in whom light of akal purakh shines completely.

ਗੁਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਗੋਵਿੰਦ ਰੂਪ ॥੮॥੧॥

“Guru Nanak is embodiment of the Light of God.”

(Ang 1192)

That light passed from first to last guru sahib.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Singhs in the past were solid in their faith, had large swathes of Bani from SGGS and DG memorised, plus knowledge of Hindu texts and thus did not have a fear of being hinduised which is a more modern mindset. There is nothing at all wrong with mingling with people of different faiths and having discourses, but nowadays, anyone caught talking to a Hindu will probably be accused of being RSS.

The big difference between past/present was that Hindu priests were better versed in their scriptures and a mutual respect of each others faith was present, therefore intelligent discussions could be held. Now Hindu priests are at a loss to even explain why they shave their heads when historically their own devi devte and to this day the most advanced of them keep long hair and beards.

One thing I cannot understand is if the Sikhs in the past were that solid in their faith,

why did they bow down to the trechourous pommies who took their rule.

So much so they became their loyal slaves and that kind of slave mentality is still found in some posters here.

Link to comment
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...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use