Jump to content

Chaupa Singh rahit: Sikh from a bad background and an unruly selfish Sikh


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Objectively, it's fascinating reading, lol. Honestly, I do enjoy reading it. But to sincerely follow its edicts to the letter? Nah, it ain't kosher in my opinion.

Let me ask you another question:

Would you have liked it better if all extant puraatan texts like rahits were in full consonance with each other, in terms of post-annexation influenced thinking?

Is it even possible (let alone advisable!) for any evolved, literate culture to ever even have this level of homogeny? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

Objectively, it's fascinating reading, lol. Honestly, I do enjoy reading it. But to sincerely follow its edicts to the letter? Nah, it ain't kosher in my opinion.

You looking for some Sikh equivalent to 10 commandments bro? Our thing can't be broken down as simply as this! Check out Akaal Ustaat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Let me ask you another question:

Would you have liked it better if all extant puraatan texts like rahits were in full consonance with each other, in terms of post-annexation influenced thinking?

Is it even possible (let alone advisable!) for any evolved, literate culture to ever even have this level of homogeny? 

I wouldn't 'prefer' anything. I'm saying it contradicts the fundamentals of what gianis on stages around the world say our religion is about. I just want to know who's wrong: the mainstream orthodoxy or Chaupa Singh. 

Also, it's interesting how you rail against corrosive Anglo attempts at bastardising Sikhi either to promote colonial adherence or prioritise jatt prominence, but when something that undermines the underlying premise of the religion we follow is supposedly a thing of beauty and nuance worthy of further introspection! What?!? Absolute kekery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

I wouldn't 'prefer' anything. I'm saying it contradicts the fundamentals of what gianis on stages around the world say our religion is about. I just want to know who's wrong: the mainstream orthodoxy or Chaupa Singh. 

 

That whole concept of mainstream religious orthodoxy seems like a modern construct. Hammering dharam into religion. I just think it especially appeals to people who think in binary form, and seeing how rurals seem to either go to one extreme or the other i.e. super orthodoxy that is running towards Bhasauria mindsets, or outright amorphous pendu folk superstition, I understand why some thought they needed to be contained by simplistic concept of orthodoxy.  

I already said, the proBahmunh bits (which are small and easily detectable), are obviously the result of a fear of changing fortunes. They are actually contradicted by a lot of what else is contained therin. So they could be interpolations, or more likely just kneej erk statements that are easily identifiable and not in concert with the rest of the manuscript. 

If you think people take old rahits and try and follow them 'religiously' - well I've never met anyone doing so. Instead today they are more like historical curiosities for most. Or a window into our past.

 

Quote

Also, it's interesting how you rail against corrosive Anglo attempts at bastardising Sikhi either to promote colonial adherence or prioritise jatt prominence, but when something that undermines the underlying premise of the religion we follow is supposedly a thing of beauty and nuance worthy of further introspection! What?!? Absolute kekery.

Well firstly I don't think it's a religion, and secondly, that Bahmunh stuff has long been fully contained in the panth, but that can't be said about jut stupidity, which was obviously promoted because it made the panth easier to control by colonialists.  The former has long since passed to be a threat, the latter continues to drag us down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 I just want to know who's wrong: the mainstream orthodoxy or Chaupa Singh. 

Take out the couple of blatantly pro-baahmunh things out of the Chaupa Singh rahit and I think you've got a more accurate representation of original Singhs and their culture compared to what a modern day giani would tell you - in my opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

Take out the couple of blatantly pro-baahmunh things out of the Chaupa Singh rahit and I think you've got a more accurate representation of original Singhs and their culture compared to what a modern day giani would tell you - in my opinion. 

In that case today's gianis are bang out of order. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

In that case today's gianis are bang out of order. 

They are just products of their time. Do you ever hear any telling the sangat about panj hathiars that keep coming up in puraatan sources? How much studying do the sangats that they cater to, involve themselves in?

You know we had over a century of colonial subjugation that could not co-exist with real militant, weaponised Sikhi. 

We're just waking up to that. Gianis (from what I've seen) are usually scared they'll lose their position in a Gurdwara. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

I assume you've read the rehatnama? It seems to have an uncomfortable heavy bias in favour of Brahmin culture and those who originate from Brahmin backgrounds.

It's one thing for village nobodies to self-aggrandise themselves and their particular castes and backgrounds for secular advancement and perks, but for an author to emerge and claim his work is a divinely inspired order when it repeatedly contradicts the fundamental values of the religion he supposedly belongs to is taking the pi55.

Chaupa Singh's origins was surprise surprise  brahmin ...and he was often corrected by Guru ji for his bias , my guess is he took advantadge of his position of hazoori sikh  to 'add' later his own thoughts about brahmins sikhs to the rehitnama.

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