Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BhForce said:

The article is not yours? Who is the author, then?

Secondly, what do you think of my question at the end:

I would like to state, is it a must that we interpret this line in the Bachittar Natak:

‘Shattering the pitcher of his mortal coil on the head of the Delhi emperor, did Teghbahadur depart…’ (15) 

that Aurangzeb was physically present at the execution? I would say that this line is merely metaphorical. Guru Tegh Bahadur ji was not actually smashed against Aurangzeb, rather Guru ji smashed the state led by Aurangzeb. Thoughts?

Yes, but it does imply his presence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

Yes, but it does imply his presence.

Continuing on with my point of view: For me, I would say it doesn't really matter to our (Sikh) viewpoint if Aurangzeb was physically present at the execution, or even in the city of Delhi, for that matter. If we insist on that, we open ourselves up to attack from some stray reference that the emperor was actually in some other random city on that dark day.

The important and crucial point would be that 1) the execution was carried out on Aurangzeb's orders, and that 2) Guru Tegh Bahadur ji acheived a moral victory against Aurangzeb's state.

For this victory to have been achieved, it does not matter if Aurangzeb was physically present at the execution or the the city of Delhi.

As an example, the let's take the atrocious attacks of 9/11: In minds of the attackers and of al-Qaeda followers, they achieved a moral victory by smashing planes into various targets. It does not matter that the President (George W. Bush) was actually outside of Washington DC (in Florida). The attack (and victory in their minds) was achieved against the state led by George Bush regardless of where he physically was on that day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/02/2018 at 7:03 PM, JSinghnz said:

You are insulting the word " Intelligentsia" by posting work of idiots.

This is your first post and its insulting the original poster.  So you started the insults.  And now you insult me with this post.

perhaps you are too poor in understanding who started the personal attacks first.

The original poster is disproving biased and wrong info and you insult him.  How does this make any sense.  Poster harsharan posted a video that speaks against gurmat and you did not bat an eye toward it.  And you never address the content of the post.  You attack the poster.  This really shows who has poor understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

This is your first post and its insulting the original poster.  So you started the insults.  And now you insult me with this post.

 

 

The original poster is disproving biased and wrong info and you insult him.  How does this make any sense.  Poster harsharan posted a video that speaks against gurmat and you did not bat an eye toward it.  And you never address the content of the post.  You attack the poster.  This really shows who has poor understanding.

Use your grey matter and you will know that I did not insult the OP. I only said the OP is posting work of idiots. He then showed his upbringing and lack of social behaviour. I believe you need to go back to school to understand basic stuff.

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


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use