Jump to content

Nishan Sahib, when did we start using the Khanda


Redoptics
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 6/23/2019 at 4:41 AM, Redoptics said:

Just wondering when we started using the khanda? And who introduced it? Was looking at some old paintings and Nishan Sahib was different.

 

Guru_Gobind_Singh_with_followers.jpg

Kattar_Dhal_Talwar.jpg

Sikh_flag.jpg

They're different because each unit/regiment/faction had their own banner/standard.

And they represented  Deg Tegh Fateh

And it's uncertain which was used for which, but it's a generalization that the yellow one was used by the Sikh Misls, and the blue one for the Dal Khalsa militias "Budda Dal" and the "Taruna Dal" (Also depending on the year and the Guru the colours were different from White - Yellow - Navy blue)

There's also a red battle standard used by the Sikh Empire, not the flag that represents the empire but for the army's unit/division

Red and gold with a diety on it.

The current khanda symbol we use  came either  sometime in the 1900s you can find pictures with Nihangs with the Khanda design, as well as the 45 Rattray Sikhs.

The Nihangs kept theirs navy blue as it has always been for them.

The original "Khanda" was a Dal and a Kattar, and I believe the Guruji didn't put the Dal and Kattar I think they just had the colours, I think  Guru Gobind singhji had a Navy blue standard without any Dal or Kattar on it.

Edit: I believe the current Khanda design is a mixture of the 45th Rattray Sikhs aka the Sikh Regiment's pin as  well as the "Nishan-i-Phul" of the royal house of patalia.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Well, the Brits found a lot of things with Sikhi which they found very useful and made attempts not to necessarily dilute Sikhi because that may not work for their interests. 

What they may have done was to align our ways to a more British way.

There was definitely an attempt to Anglicise Sikhi. 

For example, the introduction of the harmonium as a musical instrument in kirtan.

It seems Victorian Britain which was a more religious rigid society recognised the hymn singing in our kirtan with their own ways of hymn singing so they tried to implement the organ with the harmonium.

The Sikhs of the time were already familiar with some of the European way of doing things. For example,  the Khalsa Army did have European Generals who implemented army formations, drill formations etc.

Our forefathers were probably more open minded in trying new ideas.

Question  is the Khanda could have been changed back to it's original form. Why wasn't it?

It could have been at anytime.

Perhaps it is not as important as we like to think.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh and the Sikh Empire had many foreign Officers and Commanders  including American-Scottish generals - Italians and French mercs they used foreign manuals and had a elite division called the Fauj-i-ain which purely spoke in French commands,  the sikhs were the first modernized force in india.

Also there was never a "Khanda" original to begin with, they were all made from interpretations I believe arranged in one away or another and historically we used a kattar and a dal as well as a talwar on the standards.

Edit: Looked at what someone posted and seems like the Sikh Empire did have a Khanda design on one of it's standards I think Maharaja Ranjit Singh himself gave the order to create it.

Also 

http://www.<banned site filter activated>/heritage/Maharajas of Punjab/Nishan-i-Phul.pdf

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Whitey was already in Punjab before the took it over in 1849.

There were whiteys serving in the Khalsa Raj under Maharaj Ranjit Singh. 

These whiteys helped to develop the armies of the Khalsa Empire and helped turn it into one of the best armies in Asia.

We learnt things from whitey and they learnt things from us.

The British like all other Europeans wanted to come to India for it's riches. If they came for loot, what makes it worse than the looting that's been happening by the Mughals, Afghans, Arabs,  Persians and any other central asian marauders. 

After losing our empire, we siding with whitey only after 8 years helping them to defeat the mutiny.

These are Sikhs who felt the defeat more freshly. Who do you think they considered the bigger devils: whiteys of the East India Company or those backstabbing Indian troops who wanted to bring back the Mughal rule?

Playing devil's advocate. What wealth was looted from the ordinary peasant, how did their lives get worse in those 98 years they were under British rule compared to the centuries before?

What was looted from the Sikh Empire which we all revel about was that diamond we get obsessed about. That diamond that is kept in the Tower of London. 

It is the wealth of the elites, not the ordinary peasant. 

 

It was not only the diamond that was looted. If you look at British museums and auctions, they are filled with Sikh historical items. They literally stole our heritage. They have granths and pothis in auctions and museums. And shastars and who knows what else. 

About the ordinary people, you are probably right, their life probably did not change much. Except the inferiority complex they gained, from having been subjugated by a different culture yet again. 

Imagine if the Sikh empire was still going strong. If Maharaja Ranjit Singhs sons were anything like him, they would have bribed the europeans and built railroads, steamships, and cars, because it would have been military suicide to be behind in technology. And Ranjit Singh did try to keep up with the newest cannons and guns. Panjab wouldve had a strong infrastructure as well as a strong military. I wonder if we sikhs, would have revolted from the monarchy and wanted a democracy. Or how the empire wouldve dealth with communists. Was Maharaja Ranjit big on sponsoring artists and scholars? Cuz then we might have had a  strong science institution, but I dont think he was. Unlike the Persian courts, I dont recall any mathematicians in his court. 

About the Mutiny, it was more that we never thought of ourselves as Indian. So we wouldn't have even thought of helping the other indians. To our and India's deteriment. Also, the mutiny soldiers were looting and killing civilians, not really rebelling or fighting the british. From what i recall.  

I dont think the white people were especially evil or devious...except the way they kidnapped Dalip Singh was kinda sad. Other invaders were more brutal and straight forward, none of this pulling strings from behind the scenes. They say he was around 5, when he was seperated from his mom, Rani Jinda. And he cried for days for his mom. And the Britsh caretakers of him, felt really bad for him, and wrote that If this wasnt for the greatness of Britain and our Queen, I could not do it. Maybe the british were used to these underhanded tactics from dealing with the countless alliances and kingdoms in Europe, and finding ways to thwart the Pope. They were always killing heirs, or forcefully marrying them off. I mean the mughals were always killing their siblings for the throne, but didnt really play mindgames with their victims and so maybe the british were especially devious. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

It was not only the diamond that was looted. If you look at British museums and auctions, they are filled with Sikh historical items. They literally stole our heritage. They have granths and pothis in auctions and museums. And shastars and who knows what else. 

About the ordinary people, you are probably right, their life probably did not change much. Except the inferiority complex they gained, from having been subjugated by a different culture yet again. 

Imagine if the Sikh empire was still going strong. If Maharaja Ranjit Singhs sons were anything like him, they would have bribed the europeans and built railroads, steamships, and cars, because it would have been military suicide to be behind in technology. And Ranjit Singh did try to keep up with the newest cannons and guns. Panjab wouldve had a strong infrastructure as well as a strong military. I wonder if we sikhs, would have revolted from the monarchy and wanted a democracy. Or how the empire wouldve dealth with communists. Was Maharaja Ranjit big on sponsoring artists and scholars? Cuz then we might have had a  strong science institution, but I dont think he was. Unlike the Persian courts, I dont recall any mathematicians in his court. 

About the Mutiny, it was more that we never thought of ourselves as Indian. So we wouldn't have even thought of helping the other indians. To our and India's deteriment. Also, the mutiny soldiers were looting and killing civilians, not really rebelling or fighting the british. From what i recall.  

I dont think the white people were especially evil or devious...except the way they kidnapped Dalip Singh was kinda sad. Other invaders were more brutal and straight forward, none of this pulling strings from behind the scenes. They say he was around 5, when he was seperated from his mom, Rani Jinda. And he cried for days for his mom. And the Britsh caretakers of him, felt really bad for him, and wrote that If this wasnt for the greatness of Britain and our Queen, I could not do it. Maybe the british were used to these underhanded tactics from dealing with the countless alliances and kingdoms in Europe, and finding ways to thwart the Pope. They were always killing heirs, or forcefully marrying them off. I mean the mughals were always killing their siblings for the throne, but didnt really play mindgames with their victims and so maybe the british were especially devious. 

 

There were a selected few of the Brits that were devious. 

However, subcontinent culture is far more cunning and yet it was easily fooled. 

They say you cannot fool an honest man but the easiest people to fool can be the devious ones.

Maharaj Ranjit Singh's failure was to ensure that there was a succession to build upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest GuestSingh
16 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Whitey was already in Punjab before the took it over in 1849.

There were whiteys serving in the Khalsa Raj under Maharaj Ranjit Singh. 

These whiteys helped to develop the armies of the Khalsa Empire and helped turn it into one of the best armies in Asia.

We learnt things from whitey and they learnt things from us.

The British like all other Europeans wanted to come to India for it's riches. If they came for loot, what makes it worse than the looting that's been happening by the Mughals, Afghans, Arabs,  Persians and any other central asian marauders. 

After losing our empire, we siding with whitey only after 8 years helping them to defeat the mutiny.

These are Sikhs who felt the defeat more freshly. Who do you think they considered the bigger devils: whiteys of the East India Company or those backstabbing Indian troops who wanted to bring back the Mughal rule?

Playing devil's advocate. What wealth was looted from the ordinary peasant, how did their lives get worse in those 98 years they were under British rule compared to the centuries before?

What was looted from the Sikh Empire which we all revel about was that diamond we get obsessed about. That diamond that is kept in the Tower of London. 

It is the wealth of the elites, not the ordinary peasant. 

they took more than jus the koh i noor.

in addition to saroopa of guru granth sahib ji, pothia sahib n shastara etc. we also see loads of artwork/paintings, musical instruments, clothing, jewelry, thrones of 'kings' n so much more we dnt even knw about on show in the uk to entertain the masses n imo perpetuate a tale tht sikhs have been consigned to history for gd. tht they r no longer wat we see today. if u think about it, this not only keep us weak n therefore easier to control to possibly prevent any future revolts but also provide an income so their economy keeps growin?if it wasnt, y havent they been returned? if no ones asked yet but does so in the future, wat do u think the answer will be?

to answer ur questions, wat wud the ordinary peasant have to give away? possibly daughters to use as prostitutes? there are several accounts of the dirty white pig raping women all over 'india' cuz any partners/wives they had were in the uk. especially in places lyk kolkata wiv women on plantations hence so many mongrel 'anglo-indians' from tht place who r now dyin out.

n wud panjabis have considered ppl to the south as one their own? n therefore not feel backstabbed? we knw caste became more prevalent under whitey so a separate identity was already apparent. then wudnt it have become even stronger wen they manipulated certain clans to fight each otha? since we knw 'india' was comprised of states before whitey introduced the idea of amalgamation for convenience in more ease of control/power, wud this have united ppl or cause those clans to fight n kill each otha so whitey duznt need to do it themselves? to 'save face' wen history questions their decisions so they can say 'we didnt kill em, they killed each otha.'

look the question we should all ask ourselves is which is worse? the dogmatic n relentless physical destruction left behind by mughals/afghans etc. or the lesser physical but far greater physiological destruction by scheming n surreptitious whitey?

numbers can regrow but not history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, GuestSingh said:

they took more than jus the koh i noor.

in addition to saroopa of guru granth sahib ji, pothia sahib n shastara etc. we also see loads of artwork/paintings, musical instruments, clothing, jewelry, thrones of 'kings' n so much more we dnt even knw about on show in the uk to entertain the masses n imo perpetuate a tale tht sikhs have been consigned to history for gd. tht they r no longer wat we see today. if u think about it, this not only keep us weak n therefore easier to control to possibly prevent any future revolts but also provide an income so their economy keeps growin?if it wasnt, y havent they been returned? if no ones asked yet but does so in the future, wat do u think the answer will be?

to answer ur questions, wat wud the ordinary peasant have to give away? possibly daughters to use as prostitutes? there are several accounts of the dirty white pig raping women all over 'india' cuz any partners/wives they had were in the uk. especially in places lyk kolkata wiv women on plantations hence so many mongrel 'anglo-indians' from tht place who r now dyin out.

n wud panjabis have considered ppl to the south as one their own? n therefore not feel backstabbed? we knw caste became more prevalent under whitey so a separate identity was already apparent. then wudnt it have become even stronger wen they manipulated certain clans to fight each otha? since we knw 'india' was comprised of states before whitey introduced the idea of amalgamation for convenience in more ease of control/power, wud this have united ppl or cause those clans to fight n kill each otha so whitey duznt need to do it themselves? to 'save face' wen history questions their decisions so they can say 'we didnt kill em, they killed each otha.'

look the question we should all ask ourselves is which is worse? the dogmatic n relentless physical destruction left behind by mughals/afghans etc. or the lesser physical but far greater physiological destruction by scheming n surreptitious whitey?

numbers can regrow but not history.

Yes there was more than the koh-I-noor that was looted.

But what do we focus on?

The fact that you like most other Sikhs recognise what has happened, what are you going to do about it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest GuestSingh
27 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Yes there was more than the koh-I-noor that was looted.

But what do we focus on?

The fact that you like most other Sikhs recognise what has happened, what are you going to do about it?

 

well we cnt change history.

but wat we can n shud do is learn from it, inform those we knw etc. so certain mistakes r neva repeated again. we also have to try to change some things that have been changed n learn to pick our battles (

all of this is gna be very slow, difficult n seem almost impossible. the same mistakes r still bein repeated. but the process has already begun n nw it jus has to continue to grow n gather momentum until its tym to strike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GuestSingh said:

well we cnt change history.

but wat we can n shud do is learn from it, inform those we knw etc. so certain mistakes r neva repeated again. we also have to try to change some things that have been changed n learn to pick our battles (

all of this is gna be very slow, difficult n seem almost impossible. the same mistakes r still bein repeated. but the process has already begun n nw it jus has to continue to grow n gather momentum until its tym to strike.

The problem amongst our people is not ignorance but apathy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest GuestSingh
9 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

The problem amongst our people is not ignorance but apathy

its only wen trouble enters the home that they suddenly wake up from their slumber n start to care until it passes.

but u c this problem in otha communities too.

someone on here once sed tht the compassion is beaten out of our lot wen theyre growing up so they end up feeling unloved n numb on the inside n then as u say apathetic. but tht didnt change my thinking. my ideals/morals have stayed the same.

do u think a lot of these folk had any or little compassion from the start? or do we fall under the trap ourselves of excusing their shortcomings more than we shud?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

They've basically had a lot of help by outside forces that view them as geopolitically important. 

Did they? They basically stole nuclear plans and such. They have uranium in their territory, which used to be our territory.

I'm not aware that any power gave them anything.

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

I think a lot of our lot can't seem to step above rural farmer mentalities into global realities. It's like many of them are a stuck in a mental timewarp?

In an alternative history in which we had not lost our Raaj, the existence of a rural farmer would have mattered no more than the rural farmer or tribesman matters to the fact that Pakistan has near nuclear parity with India.

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

Or maybe they are just biologically unsophisticated through inbreeding? 

No, I think that would be Pakistanis, with their huge % of birth defects in the UK, much more than their percentage of the population.

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