India's Four Religions Should Be Together

[Ranjeet01]

12 hours ago, proudkaur21 said:

These people truly have a weird obsession with us.

It is because we stick out like a sore thumb.

We are different from them and they hate us, however because we are different we do things our own way, they look up to us.

[Premi5]

Is is true to say most Naamdharis are from the Tarkhaan background ?

The only two I have met in the UK were (or said their family were). One was a little embarrassed when he told me. Neither wore those type of dastaars though

[proactive]

16 hours ago, Premi5 said:

Is is true to say most Naamdharis are from the Tarkhaan background ?

The only two I have met in the UK were (or said their family were). One was a little embarrassed when he told me. Neither wore those type of dastaars though

They were actually founded as a reform movement in Hazro, in the western border areas of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire in the early 1800s by Baba Balak Singh who was from the Arora background. Baba Ram Singh was a Malwai from village of Bhaini Rai in Ludhiana district. His background was Tarkhan and he served in the army of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. After the annexation of Punjab, the Namdhari aim was to restore the Khalsa Raj and they were an orthodox Sikh movement. After the British oppressed them and killed Namdharis by standing them in front of cannons, the movement subsided. At the time when they were founded they included a lot of Jats, Khatris and only the minority were Tarkhans. After the movement withered away, the only people left were mainly from the Tarkhan background. During this time a whole host of unorthodox ideas such as Baba Ram singh being the 12th Guru (Baba Balak Singh was 11th Guru) came into their beliefs as well as that Guru Gobind Singh lived on after Nanderh in disguise and visited Hazro to pass on Guruship to Baba Balak Singh. 

Due to this in the 1930s and 1940s with the foundation of the Akali Dal and SGPC there were active movements to oppose the Namdharis who were referred to as Kukas. There was a famous Kuka Kufr Torh Conference in the early 1940s at Mullahpur Dakha in Ludhiana district presided over by Master Tara Singh. 

If anyone is interested in the Sikh response to Namdhari beliefs then the famous book Kukian Di Vithia by Ganda Singh  available online Kukian di Vithya Vol. 1 - Dr. Ganda Singh : Sikh Digital Library : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

[Ranjeet01]

The last few days I have been watching some Abrahamic stuff. A lot of these are debates between Abrahamic 2.0 (Christianity) and Abrahamic 3.0 (Islam)

These two groups ( I cannot really call them a faith or a religion when I hear these guys speak)

They argue like lawyers, trying to prove and disprove each other.

Bhagti of Maharaj is quite a simple thing and these desert middle eastern ideologies are very neurotic and over-complicate everything. They tie themselves like knots.

When the Dharmics (Us Sikhs, Hindu schools and buddhists) debate it is more metaphysical. It is completely different. 

A lot of these theologans in 2.0 and 3.0 are very intellectual but they are fools.

We may reject aspects of the hindus in their mindless rituals and their murti worship, but the framework is completely different. 

When dharmics debate, we are trying to get to the truth, when abrahamics debate they are trying to show dominance and superiority over each other.

I think it is very unfortunate in this world that 4 billion people are categorised under these 2 groups.

What is even stranger is that Abrahamic 1.0 (Jews) look to Dharma.

It is a shame that we call us a "faith" or "religion" because we are using the abrahamic framework to define ourselves. It is far too limiting for us.

We are far better than that.

 

[MisterrSingh]

1 hour ago, Ranjeet01 said:

The last few days I have been watching some Abrahamic stuff. A lot of these are debates between Abrahamic 2.0 (Christianity) and Abrahamic 3.0 (Islam)

These two groups ( I cannot really call them a faith or a religion when I hear these guys speak)

They argue like lawyers, trying to prove and disprove each other.

Bhagti of Maharaj is quite a simple thing and these desert middle eastern ideologies are very neurotic and over-complicate everything. They tie themselves like knots.

When the Dharmics (Us Sikhs, Hindu schools and buddhists) debate it is more metaphysical. It is completely different. 

A lot of these theologans in 2.0 and 3.0 are very intellectual but they are fools.

We may reject aspects of the hindus in their mindless rituals and their murti worship, but the framework is completely different. 

When dharmics debate, we are trying to get to the truth, when abrahamics debate they are trying to show dominance and superiority over each other.

I think it is very unfortunate in this world that 4 billion people are categorised under these 2 groups.

What is even stranger is that Abrahamic 1.0 (Jews) look to Dharma.

It is a shame that we call us a "faith" or "religion" because we are using the abrahamic framework to define ourselves. It is far too limiting for us.

We are far better than that.

 

God damn Romans latched onto whatever half-baked nonsensical belief system they could find to hold onto their power.

[Jacfsing2]

38 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

God damn Romans latched onto whatever half-baked nonsensical belief system they could find to hold onto their power.

How was Christianity before Rome converted? Idk what Jesus actually taught, as it seems like a lot of the influence is from Romans. 

[GurjantGnostic]

1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

How was Christianity before Rome converted? Idk what Jesus actually taught, as it seems like a lot of the influence is from Romans. 

Exactly as they intended. 

Christianity before romans was full of sword wielding, meditating, praying Martyrs bro. 

[MisterrSingh]

49 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

How was Christianity before Rome converted? Idk what Jesus actually taught, as it seems like a lot of the influence is from Romans. 

They were persecuted rather severely. Hunted down, repressed, etc. Christian mystics and saints around this time came up with their various apocalyptic texts (The Book of Revelations being the main one) where they had visions of future times (the Second Coming), which supposedly gave them the confidence and belief to strive for a brighter future.

I think I've mentioned it previously, but one of the latter Roman emperors apparently had darshan of Jesus. He then converted to Christianity. Of course, this wasn't the sole reason for Christianity replacing the Roman belief system, but it's a pretty monumental contributor to the 180 turn.

[Ranjeet01]

2 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

God damn Romans latched onto whatever half-baked nonsensical belief system they could find to hold onto their power.

The Romans. 

That Constantine caused lots of problems. 

 

[Ranjeet01]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

They were persecuted rather severely. Hunted down, repressed, etc. Christian mystics and saints around this time came up with their various apocalyptic texts (The Book of Revelations being the main one) where they had visions of future times (the Second Coming), which supposedly gave them the confidence and belief to strive for a brighter future.

I think I've mentioned it previously, but one of the latter Roman emperors apparently had darshan of Jesus. He then converted to Christianity. Of course, this wasn't the sole reason for Christianity replacing the Roman belief system, but it's a pretty monumental contributor to the 180 turn.

Have you ever watched the film Agora.

You can see what happened to the Pagans as the Christianity took over the Roman Empire.