Panjab marriages and exodus

[Premi5]

19 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

I have to add. I am truly perplexed as to why they didn't historically convert to Sikh???

This is one of the most interesting questions/statements I've seen here recently.

Hindus and Sikhs have a lot of overlap in Panjab in terms of religious practices (not saying it's a good thing if you are Sikh and doing Pooja and following Hindu festivals etc but it's reality) and culture. Much more than with the Muslims in Panjab. 

@proactive might have answers. 

I think this applies more to Brahmins and (Hindu) Khatris especially who have the strongest Hindu identities in Panjabi Hindus ?

[GurjantGnostic]

6 hours ago, Premi5 said:

This is one of the most interesting questions/statements I've seen here recently.

Hindus and Sikhs have a lot of overlap in Panjab in terms of religious practices (not saying it's a good thing if you are Sikh and doing Pooja and following Hindu festivals etc but it's reality) and culture. Much more than with the Muslims in Panjab. 

@proactive might have answers. 

I think this applies more to Brahmins and (Hindu) Khatris especially who have the strongest Hindu identities in Panjabi Hindus ?

We've kind of touched on this before. And I've heard Sant Jarnail Singh Bhinderwale Shaheed Ji's speech on "Hindu ni". Wherein he explains all the figures of Vedas are Keshdhari, even the Rakesh, and that they reference Brahman and Brahmgiyani?

Hindu, is an ism. And a racist nationalized one now, but before it was total <banned word filter activated> ...

What was it? How would individual Dharmi sects refer to themselves? How is hinduism divided before it was conglomerated and ism'ed?

Like it's a pretty diverse blanket term isn't it for a lot of Dharams? That's not practicing or preserving anything. 

So what's really going on under the hood? Anyone actually practicing Dharam? Are there some Shiva, Brahma, Vishnu devotees for real? Hanuman? Is anyone practicing the actual Dharams?

Forgive me, I just struggle to figure out what this hinduism is exactly that everyone is acting like such a pos about? 

[Suchi]

3 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

We've kind of touched on this before. And I've heard Sant Jarnail Singh Bhinderwale Shaheed Ji's speech on "Hindu ni". Wherein he explains all the figures of Vedas are Keshdhari, even the Rakesh, and that they reference Brahman and Brahmgiyani?

Hindu, is an ism. And a racist nationalized one now, but before it was total <banned word filter activated> ...

What was it? How would individual Dharmi sects refer to themselves? How is hinduism divided before it was conglomerated and ism'ed?

Like it's a pretty diverse blanket term isn't it for a lot of Dharams? That's not practicing or preserving anything. 

So what's really going on under the hood? Anyone actually practicing Dharam? Are there some Shiva, Brahma, Vishnu devotees for real? Hanuman? Is anyone practicing the actual Dharams?

Forgive me, I just struggle to figure out what this hinduism is exactly that everyone is acting like such a pos about? 

It is a loose term defining the many sects within it. Basically anyone that believes in the following can be classed as a Sanathan Hindu/Dharmic:

1. Belief in karma and dharma according to any one of the texts within the Dharma ie. Gita/Ramayan/Vedas. As well as other schools of thought. 

2. Belief in reincarnation generally means you are a Dharmic as the Abrahamics believe in a one life/death Hell and Heaven theory.

3. Various sciences as per Yoga Sutras, Mantras, Ayurveda and any thought that developed in the geographic region defined as Bharat/India. 

4. Hence why Buddhism etc are included within the term Dharmic. 

5. People are free to add/edit/change their beliefs as per their conscience (true free will) as its Not Prescriptic as Islam/Christianity are. You don't go to hell if you do not believe.  This is why there are new schools of thought that become Hindu if there is a large following or its seen the test of Time.

 

 

[S1ngh]

On 2/2/2022 at 7:32 PM, Suchi said:

Hindus saw/see (now to a lesser extent) Sikhs as a warrior caste so not everyone needed to convert.  Only when they were needed to boost the numbers hence the eldest son was converted or when they were under threat they joined to fight the oppressors. That much is clear from the history. 

Whilst they are culturally close Sikhs themselves have more recently insisted they are a distinct and separate religion which was rejected by most Hindus. 

Hindu Punjabis in particular are less rigid, and more tolerant of Sikhs. Hinduism is also very broad so they are attached to their culture and teachings of Yoga, Ayurveda, Vedic rituals, Gita, Ramayana and the many festivals make them more inclined to stay within Hinduism. 

Sikhism was never meant to be a new religion but an additional Dharmic path. 

 

This is the root cause problem of the Punjabi Hindus that they don't want to give independency to Sikh community due to the fear that they will no longer be majority if Sikhi spreads thru out India. 

[GurjantGnostic]

On 2/2/2022 at 7:32 PM, Suchi said:

Hindus saw/see (now to a lesser extent) Sikhs as a warrior caste so not everyone needed to convert.  Only when they were needed to boost the numbers hence the eldest son was converted or when they were under threat they joined to fight the oppressors. That much is clear from the history. 

Whilst they are culturally close Sikhs themselves have more recently insisted they are a distinct and separate religion which was rejected by most Hindus. 

Hindu Punjabis in particular are less rigid, and more tolerant of Sikhs. Hinduism is also very broad so they are attached to their culture and teachings of Yoga, Ayurveda, Vedic rituals, Gita, Ramayana and the many festivals make them more inclined to stay within Hinduism. 

Sikhism was never meant to be a new religion but an additional Dharmic path. 

 

From Guru Nanak Dev Ji it's called Nirmal Paanth to Guru Gobind Sungh Ji Maharaja when it is called, in same fashion, Khalsa Paanth. The entirety of Gurbani, Vaaran, and Ithias indicate the seperate intended and actual nature of Sikhi. To be both seperate and above all other Dharams by the way in the command chain. 

Glad I have you here bro. Can you explain more about how all the Dharams have been squished into Hinduism? And to what degree any of the original Dharams are functioning?

And beyond tending their own Dharams, to be ready to follow our lead in Dharam Yudh, are they applying the teachings contained in the current living form of Sat Guru, Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Left for us by the incarnations of Vaheguru Akal Purakh themself, the Nehkalank above all things doing his work as only he can in this Kalyug, the previous Devte having failed now three Yughs?

Are the Dharmis fit? Are they resonnating with the Devte and seeing to surpass their previous limitations?

Are Hanuman's forces ready to join in action behind the Khalsa?

Or is hinduism a nationalized political mechanism that both erases all Dharams contained therein, as well as forms the poplace into a violent nationalized mob gone mad reminiscent of the Nazi party?

Like what is hinduism and what Dharam is being demonstrated? 

 

[GurjantGnostic]

Tldr,

Sikhi is distinct. 

You all work for us actually. 

What are you doing to be ready for that?

Don't try and absorb us, get the facts straight on Nirmal Paanth. 

I really am curious about hinduism in concept and function. 

Always fun to cross swords intellectually. 

[5aaban]

On 2/3/2022 at 2:32 PM, Suchi said:

Hindus saw/see (now to a lesser extent) Sikhs as a warrior caste so not everyone needed to convert.  Only when they were needed to boost the numbers hence the eldest son was converted or when they were under threat they joined to fight the oppressors. That much is clear from the history. 

Whilst they are culturally close Sikhs themselves have more recently insisted they are a distinct and separate religion which was rejected by most Hindus. 

Hindu Punjabis in particular are less rigid, and more tolerant of Sikhs. Hinduism is also very broad so they are attached to their culture and teachings of Yoga, Ayurveda, Vedic rituals, Gita, Ramayana and the many festivals make them more inclined to stay within Hinduism. 

Sikhism was never meant to be a new religion but an additional Dharmic path. 

 

About the Hindus making the elder son Sikh, I read somewhere this was because the Hindu family wasn't having a son so they would go to a Gurdwara or a saintly Sikh and prayed if they had a son he would become Sikh. This was only limited to some areas and communities. So the firstborn son was Sikh while others remained Hindus. 

[Suchi]

1 hour ago, 5aaban said:

About the Hindus making the elder son Sikh, I read somewhere this was because the Hindu family wasn't having a son so they would go to a Gurdwara or a saintly Sikh and prayed if they had a son, he would become Sikh and this was only limited to some areas and communities. So the firstborn son was Sikh while others remained Hindus. 

I think many made the eldest son due to Britishers favouring only Kalsa Sikhs with 5 kakkars (replacing 5 hatiar) with jobs, land and opportunities abroad so it was probably an economic decision after they came into power. 

[Suchi]

3 hours ago, S1ngh said:

This is the root cause problem of the Punjabi Hindus that they don't want to give independency to Sikh community due to the fear that they will no longer be majority if Sikhi spreads thru out India. 

It is certainly Not Hindus that are anti Sikh. It is Muslims and Christians (esp British) that were responsible for the destruction of the Sikhs. Hindus have always treated it as one of the Dharmic Paths. None of the 10 Gurus declared a separate religion. All took much of the teachings from texts that were already present. 

However with the rise of China and Islam there is a need to ensure the unity of India that the breaking India forces are determined to destroy. This is understood by the majority of all Indians. 

 

[Suchi]

4 hours ago, GurjantGnostic said:

From Guru Nanak Dev Ji it's called Nirmal Paanth to Guru Gobind Sungh Ji Maharaja when it is called, in same fashion, Khalsa Paanth. The entirety of Gurbani, Vaaran, and Ithias indicate the seperate intended and actual nature of Sikhi. To be both seperate and above all other Dharams by the way in the command chain. 

Glad I have you here bro. Can you explain more about how all the Dharams have been squished into Hinduism? And to what degree any of the original Dharams are functioning?

And beyond tending their own Dharams, to be ready to follow our lead in Dharam Yudh, are they applying the teachings contained in the current living form of Sat Guru, Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Left for us by the incarnations of Vaheguru Akal Purakh themself, the Nehkalank above all things doing his work as only he can in this Kalyug, the previous Devte having failed now three Yughs?

Are the Dharmis fit? Are they resonnating with the Devte and seeing to surpass their previous limitations?

Are Hanuman's forces ready to join in action behind the Khalsa?

Or is hinduism a nationalized political mechanism that both erases all Dharams contained therein, as well as forms the poplace into a violent nationalized mob gone mad reminiscent of the Nazi party?

Like what is hinduism and what Dharam is being demonstrated? 

 

Hinduism is a living philosophy. It is Not a Fixed entity. We believe that everything is subject to change and we must move with the flow.  

Before Islam Hindus didn't fight after sunset probably due to lack of light. So we followed rules. 

Hence we were caught by surprise by the Islamic hordes attacking during the night. To respond to this challenge we had to create a new policy to deal with this menace.

Hence probably why Sikhs are required to wake after midnight to pray so they are ready for any impending attack. Furthermore, Sikhs are required to never remove their Kirpan, hence be ever ready for battle. These rituals are still practised today according to my understanding. 

However, in my view there is a fundamental flaw in the teachings. That is to help the enemy who is down in battle, in the belief we are all One. The other was not to take land that had been captured from the enemy. Hence it seems more of a suicide mission as most, if not all, the fighters were killed and more Hindus were forced to join to boost the Fauj. 

That was until Banda Bahadhur joined the Khalsa, who was a Khatri versed in battle with proven spiritual powers that he used in battle following his agreement to come out of retirement and fight for GGSji.  He vanquished the enemy very quickly and recaptured stolen land for which he was reprimanded by GuruGobind Singhji wife who had made a pledge with the Moghul ruler who had promised her son would be rewarded. 

Furthermore, as Guru Nanakji had already attempted to appease the Muslims by declaring 'We are All One' and creating a new panth based on Sufi/Bhakti philosophy, this edict was followed by Guru Gobind Singhji which he could not veer from. 

The Bhakti teachings are not suitable for a Fauj/Army that has to protect its population and secure its borders.  War is about killing the enemy not helping them when they're losing! 

I'm aware that Maharaja Ranjit Singh did capture alot of land but it seems he was outmanoevered by the British who infiltrated his army, double crossed him and destroyed his entire family. 

The reality is that the British were joined at the hip with their European partners via their various secret societies which we are only just learning about. Hence why French, German and other nationals were working in tandem to overthrow Indian hegemony using any number of subversive tactics in a total transfer of wealth and assets to the whole of Europe and then USA.