Jump to content

Transitioning from transliteration to reading Gurmukhi


Redoptics
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 6/20/2019 at 7:20 AM, dallysingh101 said:

a VERY academic paper by Arvind Mandair on the topic of modern 'Sikh theology' which emerged as a result of the colonial encounter

Do you have a link?

I should refrain from commenting until I read it, but is it possible that the missionaries are a direct consequence of the British? That all the stuff they are saying is just to please the British Sahib, who isn't even around anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BhForce said:

Do you have a link?

I should refrain from commenting until I read it, but is it possible that the missionaries are a direct consequence of the British? That all the stuff they are saying is just to please the British Sahib, who isn't even around anymore?

I think it is more about a shift in contextualisation that was brought about by the brits. It's perfectly understandable as a consequence of colonisation, but the BIG question is whether it is a smart thing to do (even more so, as you've alluded to), when we've thrown off that subjugation. Sure, apply some western constructs to see what we get, but if we are oblivious to the very fact that what we are doing is essentially introducing major shifts and outside ideas to original Sikh thinking, then we are being very dimwitted. Then we have a colonisation of the mind itself - regardless of the physical presence of those that caused this.

 

Will try and find that link for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BhForce said:

Do you have a link?

I should refrain from commenting until I read it, but is it possible that the missionaries are a direct consequence of the British? That all the stuff they are saying is just to please the British Sahib, who isn't even around anymore?

It's obvious that the missionaries are a direct result of this in my opinion. It's a weird (And very subtle) assimilation of victorian era, protestant, racialised and even prudish thinking (amongst many things). This explains why caste is going on stronger than ever (notice this is most strong within the community to whom brits most successfully introduced their racialised theories and depended upon for their colonial misadventures abroad). Also notice how this externally introduced victorian era prudery (which interestingly goray themselves have since outright rejected - go out on any Friday/Saturday night and see for yourself) is the direct cause of apnay looking upon Charitrio  Pakyaan with suspicious and even contemptuous eyes (as it now seems ashleel to them). There is an honest, earthy 'realness' to the original Sikh perceptions of human nature which have gone amongst the masses and has been replaced by prudery. I believe this naivety and coyness played a part in why so many 'religious' conservative apnay  turned a blind eye to all the grooming issue that was and is going on. There was a political and military confidence that was attacked too. 

I don't think the missionaries are trying to please the brits, they just can't see outside of the framework they've inherited, and actually believe what they are pushing is the real thing. This bit will be very controversial - but maybe this is the logical conclusion to the Singh Sabha lehar? They might have had real good intentions, but ultimately when we introduce these things in - they take on a life of their own with unforeseeable long term consequences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

It's obvious that the missionaries are a direct result of this in my opinion. It's a weird (And very subtle) assimilation of victorian era, protestant, racialised and even prudish thinking (amongst many things). This explains why caste is going on stronger than ever (notice this is most strong within the community to whom brits most successfully introduced their racialised theories and depended upon for their colonial misadventures abroad). Also notice how this externally introduced victorian era prudery (which interestingly goray themselves have since outright rejected - go out on any Friday/Saturday night and see for yourself) is the direct cause of apnay looking upon Charitrio  Pakyaan with suspicious and even contemptuous eyes (as it now seems ashleel to them). There is an honest, earthy 'realness' to the original Sikh perceptions of human nature which have gone amongst the masses and has been replaced by prudery. I believe this naivety and coyness played a part in why so many 'religious' conservative apnay  turned a blind eye to all the grooming issue that was and is going on. There was a political and military confidence that was attacked too. 

I don't think the missionaries are trying to please the brits, they just can't see outside of the framework they've inherited, and actually believe what they are pushing is the real thing. This bit will be very controversial - but maybe this is the logical conclusion to the Singh Sabha lehar? They might have had real good intentions, but ultimately when we introduce these things in - they take on a life of their own with unforeseeable long term consequences. 

The main reason why caste was re introduced during the British raj period is because that is the only method by which they could control such a mass of people using the brahnwaad soch to further their own agenda, plus the brahmins were quite willing to increase their control of society . These missionaries have been bitten by the all western approach to doing analysis of our faith's scriptures and history that 'scientifically provable' is the hallmark of the truth.  They were created to become a class of 'sikh intelllectuals' to poke holes in everything sikh an agenda which suited both delhi hukamats: british and 'hindu dominant'

Singh Sabha lehar started with great intent but was also infiltrated with disrupters of sikhi aims

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