Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Think his death anniversary is coming up according to the calendar. Here are some eyewitness accounts of his funeral, i read them years ago and the sati part left me thinking about it for several days

Another instance when a cultural practice that was unequivocally forbidden by the Gurus was perpetuated without remorse by the very people who should have shunned it. What exactly was "Sikh" about thi

Ranjit Singh himself wasn't even a religious Sikh. Don't get me wrong, I still appreciate his efforts, and he did a lot. But the true emperor/king of the empire, and any sort of Khalsa Raj is and alwa

Posted Images

Another instance when a cultural practice that was unequivocally forbidden by the Gurus was perpetuated without remorse by the very people who should have shunned it. What exactly was "Sikh" about this kingdom aside from superficial surface traits and adornments? The more I read about it, the more it pi55es me off. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

Another instance when a cultural practice that was unequivocally forbidden by the Gurus was perpetuated without remorse by the very people who should have shunned it. What exactly was "Sikh" about this kingdom aside from superficial surface traits and adornments? The more I read about it, the more it pi55es me off. 

I honestly believe this was a reason why it fell in the manner it did. They began to stray away from Sikhi. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, dharamyudh said:

I honestly believe this was a reason why it fell in the manner it did. They began to stray away from Sikhi. 

I agree. Historians and rationalists will point to other more sobre reasons for its fall, but I think, on a metaphysical level, the decline came about because it wasn't a Sikh empire at all. I think blessings were withdrawn; this phenomenon is not unique or unheard of in Sikhi. Sikhs aren't permanently endowed with God's grace even when the Sikh crosses over into doing wrong. God's grace remains for as long as the individual or the group lives according to His spiritual decrees. Once the deviation occurs, it's game over.

The Sikh empire was, to my mind, nothing more than a secular, multi-religious Punjabi Empire with an obviously perfunctory Sikh front. Sikh population numbers are largely irrelevant. If it's being lauded as a Sikh empire, then its priority should be to bring non-Sikhs into the fold. If only Hari Singh Nalwa possessed a little less honour, maybe he'd have been more of what SIKHS needed as a king.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

Another instance when a cultural practice that was unequivocally forbidden by the Gurus was perpetuated without remorse by the very people who should have shunned it. What exactly was "Sikh" about this kingdom aside from superficial surface traits and adornments? The more I read about it, the more it pi55es me off. 

A lot of people are going to do what they feel like regardless of what Guru hold them not to.

Feelz before realz. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

Another instance when a cultural practice that was unequivocally forbidden by the Gurus was perpetuated without remorse by the very people who should have shunned it. What exactly was "Sikh" about this kingdom aside from superficial surface traits and adornments? The more I read about it, the more it pi55es me off. 

Yh but to be fair the women that became sati were hindus and they chose to do it! They were even discouraged from doing it but they insisted! His Sikh wives like Jind Kaur refused to become sati ... 

Same thing happened with Sardar Sham Singh Attariwala who fought in the anglo sikh wars, his hindu wife mai desa became sati when he died. His daughter was married to Ranjit singhs grandson prince nau nihal singh, when nau nihal singh died she didnt become sati while his hindu wives did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranjit Singh himself wasn't even a religious Sikh. Don't get me wrong, I still appreciate his efforts, and he did a lot. But the true emperor/king of the empire, and any sort of Khalsa Raj is and always will be Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj. If Sikhs manage any raj in the future, it's a must we place SatGuru Maharaj on the highest seat of authority. True Khalsa rule. 

The 5 thieves won again, the empire was filled with it. Egos, lust and so on. You would think a Sikh Empire would make a lot of it's inhabitants Sikh instead of kissing up to them. I'm pretty sure, Bhai Ram Singh (Who I read was a gursikh and never claimed to be a Guru) split for that very reason. Just imagine the court of Ranjit Singh. Dancers, alcohol, all the typical stuff of a raja. That isn't Khalsa Raj though. It's crazy to see the shift in mentality once gaining power. Just imagine how the raj would've looked like if we had true gursikhs running it.     

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, puzzled said:

Yh but to be fair the women that became sati were hindus and they chose to do it! They were even discouraged from doing it but they insisted! His Sikh wives like Jind Kaur refused to become sati ... 

Same thing happened with Sardar Sham Singh Attariwala who fought in the anglo sikh wars, his hindu wife mai desa became sati when he died. His daughter was married to Ranjit singhs grandson prince nau nihal singh, when nau nihal singh died she didnt become sati while his hindu wives did. 

That's fair, but being married to a supposed Sikh in Ranjit Singh, one would imagine his non-Sikh wives adhering to their husband's belief system in something as fundamental as the life or death of the wife. He could've forbade these acts as a final command. Seems like it was a multicultural hellhole! 😁

This act of sati is something modern British Empire defenders have latched onto, and they've started to make it known that, when the British took control of India, they outlawed sati as part of a progressive social agenda for the population. I have no doubt as the aggression towards historical white imperialism and colonialism increases, these defenders will turn their attention to specific instances in that period where they actually did do some good for the people in those countries. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, don't get me wrong, I'm not being an armchair general after the fact. I can only imagine the mental toil and physical exertion of fighting for a kingdom and ruling over it for a while. It takes an extraordinary personality to even get that far. In matters of war, statesmanship, etc., I can express regret at missed opportunities and other issues, but again I don't envy anyone who had to deal with those myriad situations on a daily basis. 

But when it comes to leading by example in religious matters, there's no excuse for not at least making more of an effort to push Sikhi in a Sikh kingdom, numbers or not, and that comes from the top. I'm sure the Mughal emperor's weren't model Muslims in some of the more subtle and less noticeable matters of their faith, but by heck they enforced the edicts of their religion in the areas that it mattered. We seem more concerned with keeping others happy and contented, only to be betrayed at a later date, or at best be treated with a mild contempt at our gullibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

This act of sati is something modern British Empire defenders have latched onto, and they've started to make it known that, when the British took control of India, they outlawed sati as part of a progressive social agenda for the population. I have no doubt as the aggression towards historical white imperialism and colonialism increases, these defenders will turn their attention to specific instances in that period where they actually did do some good for the people in those countries. 

They already are, years ago i was watching that program the big question i think its called on the BBC and if i remember correctly Jagraj Singh was on it and some old colonized Singh sitting with the goreh. I think they were discussing the British Empire and started talking about how the British abolished sati, if i remember correctly Jagraj Singh mentioned how the Sikh guru had already abolished sati and then one gora dragged M.Ranjit Singh into it and how his queens became sati. Bhai Jagraj Singh then said something like M.Ranjit Singh is not a model for Sikhs and that he was not a religious leader. A lot of these goreh historians that look into the British Raj are very well aware about this sati incident! 

Thing is, Akal Takht and the empire were 2 separate things, Ranjit Singhs darbar never had a say in Sikh religious affairs or matters, anything to do with Sikhi had to be approved by the Akal Takht, so it really wasn't a religious empire, but the Akal Takt did have a influence in his darbar.  So it really wasn't a religious empire, you can say church and state were separate. 

This clash between Ranjit Singhs darbar and people loyal to Akal Thakt was very evident even back then. The Akali Nihangs were loyal to Akal Takht and disliked Ranjit Singh, but when it came to war they very always involved in defending Punjab and the Empire. There are historical accounts of the Akali Singhs openly hurling abuse at Ranjit Singh while riding on his elephant through Lahore/Amritsar! Akali Phoola Singh and Ranjit Singh clashed a lot, Akali Phoola Singh was very loud and clear about it, while Ranjit Singh was not. 

So he never really governed over any Sikh matters. The empire was basically an empire ruled over by Sikhs.

 

But its amazing what he was able to create in such a short period of time at such a young age, taking into account he basically came from a family of peasants just like most the other Sikh Misl leaders. I wonder why the years of the Sikh misl period are never counted into Sikh Raj? by the 1770s or even earlier Punjab was mainly ruled by Sikh Misls 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite remarkable what they manged to do. Sikhs were literally pushed to the brink of extinction by the 2 ghallugharas, yet continued to push on, and eventually established a respected empire, pushing all the way to the Khyber Pass. Imagine what the Nihangs would have done if they got to Kabul or even invaded it. Getting some Sirhind vibes from that. 

There are a lot of alternate history forums which discuss a surviving Sikh Empire. Someone produced a map, and man... What if...

tl-khalistan-zindabaad-1860ce-png.209555

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

But its amazing what he was able to create in such a short period of time at such a young age, taking into account he basically came from a family of peasants just like most the other Sikh Misl leaders. I wonder why the years of the Sikh misl period are never counted into Sikh Raj? by the 1770s or even earlier Punjab was mainly ruled by Sikh Misls.

He had a brilliant mind and achieved great things in a secular sense. For some reason, Sikhs have never produced a personality that plays the secular game on an equal footing with the best non-Sikhs, yet has the spiritual ability and decorum of a mahapurash, etc. I'm asking for too much, lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

He had a brilliant mind and achieved great things in a secular sense. For some reason, Sikhs have never produced a personality that plays the secular game on an equal footing with the best non-Sikhs, yet has the spiritual ability and decorum of a mahapurash, etc. I'm asking for too much, lol.

Sounds like the makings of Khalsa Raj Veer Ji. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

He had a brilliant mind and achieved great things in a secular sense. For some reason, Sikhs have never produced a personality that plays the secular game on an equal footing with the best non-Sikhs, yet has the spiritual ability and decorum of a mahapurash, etc. I'm asking for too much, lol.

I think we could of had leaders but lack of organization and government propaganda just doesn't allow it.

A lot of fake stories about Ranjit Singh were spread by the British during his lifetime, like how he struggled to have children and used to send his wives to other men so they can have children!  They really tried to push this!  They spread stories that his first wife adopted two boys while another wife had kids with a young muslim water carrier called Gullu. They spread stories about Rani Jindan having an affair with Bhaman Lal Singh indicating Duleep Singh was not Ranjit Singhs son.  I mean I'm pretty sure a man who had over a 100 dancing girls in his harem was more than capable of having kids!    it was all propaganda,  Its as if they knew these rumours would come in use once the empire collapses so people will question the credibility of his sons/heir to the throne ?    these British were extremely sly and crafty, very conniving   I'd say they even outwitted the Bhamans and even used them to become spies n the Anglo Sikh wars and then gave them a bit of land, but in reality they were still the masters of even these Bhamans. 

 

this is how they portrayed Rani Jind Kaur, just imagine how insulting and offensive this would of been to a Sikh woman in those days and to the Sikhs. The white stone on her belly is the Kohinoor diamond.

 Flashman and the Mountain of Light by George MacDonald FraserWhat do Indians think of 'The Flashman Papers' where the titular ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

He actually was thin and short 

the Frenchman Jacquemont wrote: "He is a thin little man with an attractive face, though he has lost an eye from small pox which has otherwise disfigured him little. His right eye, which remains, is very large, his nose is fine and slightly turned up, his mouth thin, his teeth excellent. He wears slight moustaches which he twists incessantly with his finger, and a long thin beard which falls to his chest

 

Link to post
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...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use