Maharaja Ranjit Singh funeral

[NaamTiharoJoJape]

Waheguru jio I have heard in the treaty of ropar (I think 1831) that when Maharaja ranjit singh proclaimed to the chief british ambassador his son Kharak singh as his successor, sardar hari singh Nalwa came at odds with him over the issue saying that only panth as a collective under panj pyaare have the right to instate a succesor to the ruler of khalsa raj 

Any thoughts?

Also has anyone heard of or read twarikh e punjab I think from 1846 by Mohammed Latif? I've heard it's not a good or reliable source of history  

[NaamTiharoJoJape]

On 6/28/2020 at 8:10 AM, 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. 

Nau nihal singhs wife was pregnant at time too

I think pregnant women or women still nursing children dont have to become sati either way

Plus with sardar sham singh Atari alive, he wouldnt let that happen I hope from what I've heard of him 

[NaamTiharoJoJape]

On 6/28/2020 at 11:43 AM, 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 appreciate secularism

But most of us should oppose the erosion of khalsa principles in a supposed khalsa raj 

Ranjit singh did not exhibit the qualities of his ancestors 

I dont want to get in habit of claiming sgpc or british influenced scholars

But this obsession with Maharaj ranjit singh is very confusing 

Similar to how most of panth has forgotten baba binod singh akali in veneration of baba banda singh bahadur 

[intrigued]

On 6/28/2020 at 2:43 PM, 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.

Besides Guru Sahib lol

[NaamTiharoJoJape]

Has anyone heard that maharaja ranjit singh might've killed his own mother at suspicion of illicit affair after death of maha singh? 

And rani Jindan weakening khalsa army in revenge of her brother nahar singhs death, thus assuring our loss in the sikh Anglo wars? 

Why couldnt ranjit singh just keep upto 3 or 4 wives like a normal king lol? Many of his presumed heirs have been rumored to be sited by someone else? And why the hell would he drink wine with crushed Pearl's? 

Was this the grandson of sardar charhat singh who chased abdali, or descendent of sardar Budh singh one of pyare who blessed sardar Kapur singh virk with nawabi? This man is so frustrating? 

[KhalistanYouth]

On 6/28/2020 at 1:30 AM, 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. 

Do you really think a empire could exist that will 100% follow the teachings of a "X" Religion?

If there was a Empire that was truly Sikh, it wouldn't last.

Indian kingdoms resort to brutality and violence to retain control, Maharaja Ranjit Singh knew this and created an modernized empire with Vicious foreign generals as governors, it'd be the only way for a kingdom to last.

The Sikh Empire, is only sikh in name, infact majority of our troops were muslim, and greatness did come from our Empire however it wasn't sikh, Maharaja Ranjit Singh wanted this Empire for his family not for the panth otherwise he would've listened to  Akali Phula Singh when it came to succession. (Making the successor someone that was capable, not his drug-addicted and inexperienced children.)  The Maharaja was also a alcoholic, but he did respect Sikhi when it came to being punished for his sins. 

[KhalistanYouth]

19 minutes ago, NaamTiharoJoJape said:

Has anyone heard that maharaja ranjit singh might've killed his own mother at suspicion of illicit affair after death of maha singh? 

And rani Jindan weakening khalsa army in revenge of her brother nahar singhs death, thus assuring our loss in the sikh Anglo wars? 

Why couldnt ranjit singh just keep upto 3 or 4 wives like a normal king lol? Many of his presumed heirs have been rumored to be sited by someone else? And why the hell would he drink wine with crushed Pearl's? 

Was this the grandson of sardar charhat singh who chased abdali, or descendent of sardar Budh singh one of pyare who blessed sardar Kapur singh virk with nawabi? This man is so frustrating? 

Also please remember that most of these western-sources are biased.

The Maharaja's life was written by a guy that left his service and went on to serve the Afghans, I believe Dost Khan? was the leader of the Afghans during this time, anyways he lost and most likely wrote a anti-Sikh propagated view point.

[KhalistanYouth]

On 6/29/2020 at 2:17 PM, dharamyudh said:

Reading more about this so-called royal family, you can see so much bakwas. No wonder the empire fell. In my opinion, the Akal Takht and Khalsa should have ruled the whole thing. I always found it weird how we had royal family within a Sikh Raj. It should've been the Khalsa. If everyone had worked together, as a collective, and with the right gursikhs leading, the possibilities could've been endless. You would still have leaders like Ranjit Singh, Hari Singh Nalwa and so on. Still could modernize and all that, it was all possible. If the Khalsa was to rule, Panjab would probably become a Sikh majority, which in itself could've changed the course of history. We really had to rely on a raja, leading a Khalsa Raj when he himself wasn't that religious. No wonder the Nihangs clashed with him, and you can clearly see what happened after his death. Treachery, betrayal, and a thirst for power. Once a prominent monarch is killed/dies, the whole thing can basically crumble due to this thirst. However, the Khalsa does not crumble. Regardless of the situation, the Khalsa always remains intact.

I still got respect for Maharaja Ranjit Singh, as stated before, he has done a lot. United the misls at a young age and established some sort of Sikh Raj not seen since the rise of Banda Singh Bahadur and the Singhs. But, he was more like your average king. Alcohol, dancers, all of that. I can't get down with that at all. 

I don't think the Khalsa would've been able to sustain against foreign threats, it's why Absolutism is needed at times, however too many people were greedy and power hungry within Ranjit singh's empire, and he didn't keep the British in check.

[NaamTiharoJoJape]

2 minutes ago, KhalistanYouth said:

I don't think the Khalsa would've been able to sustain against foreign threats, it's why Absolutism is needed at times, however too many people were greedy and power hungry within Ranjit singh's empire, and he didn't keep the British in check.

Lol try rewording the first sentence 

It is understandable that a king is not always a saint

But ranjit singh himself assured or accelerated the destruction of raaj 

[KhalistanYouth]

Just now, NaamTiharoJoJape said:

Lol try rewording the first sentence 

Purity and empires don't coexist.