Jump to content
shastarSingh

Proof of Sikhs taking cannabis in 1776

Recommended Posts

http://sikhcybermuseum.com/history/PolierLetter.htm

for the Seikhs, that formidable aristocratic republick, I may safely say, it is only so to a weak defenceless state, such as this is. It is properly the snake with many heads. Each zemindar who from the Attock1 to Hansey Issar,2and to the gates of Delhi lets his beard grow, cries Wah gorow3, eats pork,4 wears an iron bracelet, drinks 'bang', abominates the smoking of tobacco 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
2 hours ago, shastarSingh said:

http://sikhcybermuseum.com/history/PolierLetter.htm

for the Seikhs, that formidable aristocratic republick, I may safely say, it is only so to a weak defenceless state, such as this is. It is properly the snake with many heads. Each zemindar who from the Attock1 to Hansey Issar,2and to the gates of Delhi lets his beard grow, cries Wah gorow3, eats pork,4 wears an iron bracelet, drinks 'bang', abominates the smoking of tobacco 

Eats pork? Drinks 'bang' and what is a seikh? Do not post crap on here please, thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18th century was VERY harsh for sikhs. 

You're not declared illegal today or have bounty on your head. You're not forced to live in jungles. Stop justifying your addictions ! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 9:09 AM, Redoptics said:

Eats pork? Drinks 'bang' and what is a seikh? Do not post crap on here please, thank you. 

There are a few historical references along this line bro. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 3:03 AM, AjeetSingh2019 said:

18th century was VERY harsh for sikhs. 

You're not declared illegal today or have bounty on your head. You're not forced to live in jungles. Stop justifying your addictions ! 

Lol. You'd think you'd be more understanding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2019 at 11:03 AM, AjeetSingh2019 said:

18th century was VERY harsh for sikhs. 

You're not declared illegal today or have bounty on your head. You're not forced to live in jungles. Stop justifying your addictions ! 

If someone acknowledges certain aspects of Sikh history that people find uncomfortable today, it doesn't mean they do these things themselves or are addicts......

Grow up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100 or so years from now, historical observations from the late 80’s and early 90’s armed resistance of Khalistan Guerrilla Fighters is going to be examined and debated upon.  They will find some of the Guerrilla fighters used Afeem (Opium) to  help them stay alert and fight fatigue during the harsh times when they were being hunted or carrying out missions.  Examining this through the present we can say that by no means was ‘Afeem’ a part of their Rehit Marayada, or were they encouraged or given exemption by the Jathedar of Akal Takhat to do so.  They did this because they simply chose to do so.

Unless anyone can submit evidence from Sikh sources or written Hukamnama from the 18th Century that taking Bhang was part of Sikh Rehit Marayada, this is no more than an observation of ‘some Sikhs who chose to do so’.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TigerForce1 said:

100 or so years from now, historical observations from the late 80’s and early 90’s armed resistance of Khalistan Guerrilla Fighters is going to be examined and debated upon.  They will find some of the Guerrilla fighters used Afeem (Opium) to  help them stay alert and fight fatigue during the harsh times when they were being hunted or carrying out missions.  Examining this through the present we can say that by no means was ‘Afeem’ a part of their Rehit Marayada, or were they encouraged or given exemption by the Jathedar of Akal Takhat to do so.  They did this because they simply chose to do so.

Unless anyone can submit evidence from Sikh sources or written Hukamnama from the 18th Century that taking Bhang was part of Sikh Rehit Marayada, this is no more than an observation of ‘some Sikhs who chose to do so’.

You will be hated for making sense.  The poster above you will now call you the F word in punjabi.  Dolly101 cannot comprehend this type of deep thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TigerForce1 said:

100 or so years from now, historical observations from the late 80’s and early 90’s armed resistance of Khalistan Guerrilla Fighters is going to be examined and debated upon.  They will find some of the Guerrilla fighters used Afeem (Opium) to  help them stay alert and fight fatigue during the harsh times when they were being hunted or carrying out missions.  Examining this through the present we can say that by no means was ‘Afeem’ a part of their Rehit Marayada, or were they encouraged or given exemption by the Jathedar of Akal Takhat to do so.  They did this because they simply chose to do so.

Unless anyone can submit evidence from Sikh sources or written Hukamnama from the 18th Century that taking Bhang was part of Sikh Rehit Marayada, this is no more than an observation of ‘some Sikhs who chose to do so’.

The whole point about rehit-namas and the differences between them is a whole discussion in itself, but there is evidence in Bhangu's Panth Prakash, Sainapati's Gursobha, Prem Sumarag Granth. 

There is also notice of this in the earliest european sources from the late 1700s. 

No one is telling anyone to do these things, but to whitewash your own people's history is weak. 

As alluded to previously, the people who did partake aren't likely to have done so for what we call 'recreational reasons' today. It may as well have been medical reasons? Given how sukha da tehl is being increasingly investigated by modern science along this very line, it isn't implausible. It may well have been a carry over from pre-existing Ayurvedic practice?

Can't you people have a grown up discussion about this? 

Edited by dallysingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you're going to fight enemies of panth and need help of sukha , I don't see any excuse why I should exempt you from similar judgement as of any regular drug addict. People have for long perverted religion for their goals .

Nothing new here. Why not get high on naam instead 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

The whole point about rehit-namas and the differences between them is a whole discussion in itself, but there is evidence in Bhangu's Panth Prakash, Sainapati's Gursobha, Prem Sumarag Granth. 

There is also notice of this in the earliest european sources from the late 1700s. 

No one is telling anyone to do these things, but to whitewash your own people's history is weak. 

As alluded to previously, the people who did partake aren't likely to have done so for what we call 'recreational reasons' today. It may as well have been medical reasons? Given how sukha da tehl is being increasingly investigated by modern science along this very line, it isn't implausible. It may well have been a carry over from pre-existing Ayurvedic practice?

Can't you people have a grown up discussion about this? 

Veer ji can u please post pankitis from gursobha and prem sumarag about sukha?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

The whole point about rehit-namas and the differences between them is a whole discussion in itself, but there is evidence in Bhangu's Panth Prakash, Sainapati's Gursobha, Prem Sumarag Granth. 

There is also notice of this in the earliest european sources from the late 1700s. 

No one is telling anyone to do these things, but to whitewash your own people's history is weak. 

As alluded to previously, the people who did partake aren't likely to have done so for what we call 'recreational reasons' today. It may as well have been medical reasons? Given how sukha da tehl is being increasingly investigated by modern science along this very line, it isn't implausible. It may well have been a carry over from pre-existing Ayurvedic practice?

Can't you people have a grown up discussion about this? 

I don’t see how you see this practice as a part of our ancestral history.  What I chose to do independently outside of Sikhi cannot be associated with Sikhi practices. Similar as to how dietary influence is largely down to the landscape and culture of the region you belong to.  The same is for narcotics which are largely taken due to cultural influence and availability to the region.  Just because I eat potato chips in England this does not mean my future generations should adopt this, and somehow associate this with my religious identity.  Your cultural practices can be altered, discarded and chosen but your religious practices can never change,  whether that be in the 18th Century or the 21st.  

If you reword this with ‘medicinal, recreational drug use in the region of Punjab in the 17th-18th Century’, I would have no problem with this observation.  But as soon as someone quotes ‘Puratan Sikhs and use of Marijuana’, I am not comfortable with this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah heard many variations of this sakhi. Do you know what the actual source is? The point I was making is, throughout ithiaas, when Maharaaj seeked to change something, especially as big of a sanskaar as this, things have been clearer. I just find it odd that there isn't any Bani with the Sakhi - and - that a marriage ceremony came up only at the time of Guru Ramdas Ji. Big gap. Something doesn't quite add up. Hmm possibly with regards to the Pandit, although Vedic Saloks whilst walking around a Gutka? Idk about that.   Nobody is fooling themselves. For some reason, and I don't actually know why, you want the fire to be representitive of Agni Devta. A fire can symbolise many things. Meanings and definitions change (as is the case for many things within Sikhi itself); it doesn't necessarily mean it's anthropomorphized or personified in the way you want it to be. This is the same level of reasoning people use to reject the use of jyot (and other practises in common) in Gurdwaras.   I've always said, that if Namdharis were normal Sikhs, they would be one of the most rehitvaan, shardavaan Sampardas we have. Their Maryada is solid and they have many good qualities which they put into practise. Plus their Nitnem is big. I've been to Bhaini Sahib and it's really quite a sight. They have this little building where non-stop Jaap/Simran has been going on since like the 1920s. SGGSJ was prakash in one of the buidings as well; was some kinda of triple Akhand Paath going on. And fyi Ajeet, they do believe in Amrit Sanchar and Panj Kakkar, however they don't wear the Kirpan - they were banned from keeping Shastar during Brit rule and for some unbeknownst reason continued to stay without them. They have kept many Puratan traditions going. It's a shame they've fallen in other areas. And before anyone says it, no I am not promoting Namdharis or letting their manmat views off.
    • If I started this topic why does it bother u ? U probably thought I worship radasoami thete are so many fake babe in sikhi to making up fake storylines and confusing khalsa panth  
    • Sacha Sauda fake guru rampal  asaram gurbachana nirankari radasoamii  there are over 15 radasoami deer with different  guru  
    • Bro im not radasoami or going to be im proud to be guru Nanak patshah sikh I don’t need to join any fake path I had this pangti in mind which could u not explain 🙏   
    • Mate,   did you ask sikhs permission or her families permission when you entered into a relatioship with her ? If you go to smagams and have such high respect for our Guru sahiban and bani - why dont you embrace Sikhi altogether ? Does the religion matter or are you overcome by lust ? Seems like the latter is more applicable in your case. Fruitcake
×

Important Information

Terms of Use