Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ranjit singh'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


    • Agree to Disagree

Found 18 results

  1. I believe that, in more ways than one, this article might act as a potential eye-opener vis-a-vis the fall of Sikh Raaj. To quote an excerpt: 'The hidebound state which both the Hindu and Islamic doxas’ envision run on the concurrence of the power-wielder and it’s brokers viz. the Brahmin(s) or the Ulama. The socio-legal concepts devised, and implemented, in the Shastras and Shari’a are designed to keep the proletariat in check from whom the danger of mutiny is ever-constant. To shatter this inimical nexus of Babur (the state) and Bipar (religious hypocrisy), Guru Nanak Dev Ji laid the ideological foundations of the Khalsa which were later made manifest by his nine successors. On his deathbed, in 1708 A.D., the tenth Nanak enjoined the Khalsa to ‘march towards stability and enduring prosperity by renouncing dogmatic traditionalism and the writ of any sacerdotal class…’ (17) The Sikh Gurus, doubtless, were well aware of the sub-continental past. Empire after empire had followed one another to the grave and politico-religious oppression had confined the proletariat to the merciless whims of his superiors. Political impermanence had arisen out of either theocracy or Caesaropapism relegating many a kingdom to oblivion. The medieval epoch, in the sub-continental context, was marked by the rise and fall of various polities namely the Maurya and Gupta empires; the Harsha empire confined to the north; the Pala empires in Bengal and Behar and so forth. (18) With the Khalsa being inherently equal, the birth of any sacerdotal class was well arrested whilst a quasi-democratic outlook was bequeathed to the body vis-a-vis it’s political approach. The question remains, was this outlook ever implemented?' https://tisarpanthdotcom.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/raj/
  2. Victor Jacquemont (8 August 1801 – 7 December 1832) was a French botanist and geologist who visited Panjab during the early part of Ranjit Singh's reign (he met him). His journals were translated into English and published as PUNJAB, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, after his death. The work was translated and edited by H.L.O. Garrett, and first published in 1935 by the Punjab Government Record Office, Lahore. Here are some excerpts: *Jacquemont was wrong, Ventura had previously fought the Russians but Allard had not.
  3. Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma condemns the attack on Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale in the first statement he makes on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Foow6GCyow Dhumma says: These actions need to be condemned in harsh words. Everyone should speak out against it. Sikh Jathebandis should get together to answer back on these things and need to mobilize themselves to stop such ploys. Then in the following statement, Dhumma's words take a change in direction: Check the Facebook page of the news channel for a better version: https://www.facebook.com/abpsanjha/ Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma claims Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale have been making accusations for over 4 years and has made derogatory comments on Dam Dami Taksal's dastar and reputation. The derogatory comments are claimed to be of the very low and despicable character. I have yet to see evidence of the above claim. Dhumma believes Dhadrianwale should have looked at his own dastaar and realised it has the same honour and respect as someone else's. This is a comical suggestion as Dhumma himself criticized Dhadrianwale for his choice of dastaar style, a useless critique. Dhumma claims in 4 years he never made any derogatory comment against Dhadrianwale. This is proven false by Dhumma's critique a few weeks ago of Dhadrianwale and his dress, deferring to this chola as ghagri and making comments about his dastaar styleDhumma makes a point of Sikhs only supposed to be wearing 4 colours of dastaars. A fair point, but hardly something that warranted negative utterance toward another parcharik. Calling Dhadrianwale up and raising this concern and doing benti to stick to the four colours would have been the better move. Dhumma says that the Singhs that attacked Dhadrianwale wished to get him to stop his derogatory comments about Dam Dami Taksal. They did what they did for the the honour and respect of Dam Dami Taksal. A lot of people's feelings are connected with Dam Dami Taksal and that some can handle someone's attacks while others cannot. I have seen no evidence of Dhadrianwale making any defaming comments about the Dam Dami Taksal While it is a fair statement to say that people's feelings can get hurt and they take matter into their own hands, Dhumma comes across condoning the attack when he should be condemning it. Dhumma originally condemned the murder, but since the perpetrator are the student's and friends of his institution, the attack is now being condoned and justified. Hurt feelings over the alleged bad-mouthing of your institution's leader is not sufficient justification for attacking and attempting to murder someone Dhumma should be vehemently criticizing and denouncing what occured but instead has shifted to defending and tolerating the attack Was the killing of Bhai Bhupinder Singh, who made no utterances toward anybody, not wrong? Should his killing not be condemned? The vehicles being destroyed, while a minor misdeed in comparison to the life lost, is the loss of property funded by the Guru's sangat. Is that not worth expressing regret over? A chabeel was made part of the ruse to trick the targets into the trap. An age old tradition of seva was utilized by the perpetrators to commit murder. People will look toward chabeels with suspicion, the government has outlawed them without prior permission, and beadbi of the tradition has occured. Is that not worth condemnation from Dhumma? Dhumma says he will be supporting and helping those charged with these crimes. While raising concerns about potential police torture and brutality is legitimate, unequivocally supporting those who committed such disgusting acts is lunacy. The following is a news article following Dhumma's press conference on May 23rd, 2016: The article states: Dhumma admits the perpetrators and vehicles used are from Dam Dami Taksal Dhumma states he has no knowledge about the Chabeel being used as a tool in this attack (how is it possible to attempt to even feign ignorance about this). HERE'S A BOMBSHELL: The press note being used during the press conference (which Dhumma read from) was prepared by the media advisor of Punjab cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia and Dhumma read it word for word When the journalists had one on one interviews afterwards (as in the ABP Sanjha video above) what Dhumma read and what he said in those interviews went in opposite directions Questions that need answering: Why are the media advisors of Badal's cabinet ministers helping Dhumma with his press statements? Why is Dhumma putting up a farce in his statements? He is blatantly being deceitful and disingenuous by stating one thing through a press note (probably things he doesn't actually believe) and then airing his real thoughts and feelings in the interviews. Why the two-face bigotry? Overall, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has proven that he severely lacks skills in leadership, strategic thinking, conflict/crisis resolution, honesty, and accountability. Operating as the head of Dam Dami Taksal's Mehta faction, his weakness and ineptitude in being a competent leader does a disservice to the entire Dam Dami Taksal. This incident and the subsequent severe mishandling of the response by Dhumma has eroded the reputation and respect for Dam Dami Taksal in the eyes of Sikhs world wide. Those close to Dam Dami Taksal have to deliberate with themselves and ask, is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's handling of the situation helping the taksal? Will it help them engage and connect with the hearts of Sikhs? Will it help them prosper and flourish going into the future? If the answer is no, we may have someone in a job way above his skill set. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I did this quick analysis just pouring over the information on the internet. If you find any mistakes, any additional relevant information, or have any analysis of your own to air, I would welcome your feedback and will make any corrections necessary.
  4. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3545500/India-says-Koh-Noor-diamond-belongs-Britain.html So apparently an Indian solicitor has 'admitted' that "the Kohinoor was given voluntarily by Ranjit Singh to the British as compensation for their help in the Sikh Wars, in 1850" In 1850. 11 years after Ranjit Singh had died.... For British help in the ANGLO-Sikh Wars... Because their dismantling and subjugation of the Sikh nation was actually them helping us. Of course we have little right to this jewel, it was never really ours to begin with. We claimed it by right of conquest, as did the Brits. But this Indian lawyer's brazen distortion of the Sikh people's history in order to justify his country's cowardly surrender can't be ok.
  5. Can anyone tell me how the Badal government took over the Akal Takht and sent massands to take it over especially since the last Jathedar Bhai Ranjit Singh was the one who was there before Badal? Also how'd the Massands stay in power so long without anyone stopping them until recently with the Sarbat Khalsa? (I know it's changed since Jagtar Singh Hawara became the official Jathedar.)
  6. ***THE 2014 UK INTERVIEW*** Dhadrianwale | World Exclusive | Early Years, Panthic Vision & Gurmat Vichar | HD World famous Sikh Parcharak Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale made a brief visit to the UK during early September 2014. Renowned for their regular Kirtan, Katha and Tatt Gurmat Parchar Diwaans across the world, and attracting in excess of 100,000 people at events in India, the Parcharak is known to speak about Panthic affairs, explain the logic within Gurbani, speak openly against false Gurudom and Deravaad in Punjab, as well as discussing the social issues affecting the nation. A world exclusive interview recorded during their stay in the Midlands was broadcast by UK-based Sangat Television on Friday 5th September 2014 and well-received by millions of viewers worldwide. Conducted by Ranjit Singh Rana, the highly educational, informative and inspirational interview gives a glimpse of Baba Ranjit Singh Ji’s early years, education and an introduction to their vision. The interview can be watched in HD quality at -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVTy-iUSNq8 or http://youtu.be/vVTy-iUSNq8. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- During their few days stay, a Gurmat Diwaan took place at Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara, Sedgley Street, Wolverhampton on Sunday 7th September 2014 in which thousands of Sikhs gathered from across the UK at very short notice, while Sangat Television held its annual anniversary event, attended by many Panthic organisations. A recording of the live broadcast can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqI_sEk6Fjk&feature=youtu.be.
  7. BHAGTI OF TRUTH** Hear It - Understand It - Preach It | Beauty Of Sikh Logic For Mankind | Dhadrianwale Reference Link - ਅਸਲੀ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਿਹੜੀ ਹੈ http://youtu.be/mO6oNxH9DM0 20th September 2014, ਕਰਤਾਰਪੁਰ, ਦੋਆਬਾ - Within the deeply informative and thought-provoking live recording that can be watched in the reference link (ਅਸਲੀ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਿਹੜੀ ਹੈ), Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale discusses what 'Bhagti' is whilst speaking to the thousands who attended a Panthic Diwaan on 20th September 2014, organised by the Parmeshar Dwar Gurmat Parchar Mission in the Doaba region of Punjab within Jalandhar city's Kartarpur town. After doing 'Vaheguru Simran' with the Sangat present, a fundamental part of a Sikhs life, they explain with Gurmat justification that one form of 'Bhagti' is the truth (“Sach”). First Sikhs must hear the truth, then they must understand the truth and finally they should preach the truth. This is the beautiful concept in Sikh logic that is applicable to all of mankind. They explained that if they were to simply meditate on stage, no person would come into conflict with them. However, when the truth is spoken then certain people will enter into conflict, whether it be drug dealers, snake worshippers or those agencies working against the Khalsa Panth. They urged Sikhs to not fear what others may think as the person who looks at others is known as a “Moorakh”. As it is better for our body to stay hungry but not eat the wrong food, in the same way we must only feed our inner-being with truthful, right knowledge. If the wise Guru Nanak Dev Ji sat in Kartarpur meditating without propagating the truth, no person would have confronted them. In the same way Kalgidhar Guru Gobind Singh Ji could have kept quiet on the issue of castes, equality and authoritative power misuse and they could easily have lived a comfortable life in Anandpur, but instead they became a voice against injustice and propagated the truth. The world does not favour the Bhagti of speaking the truth. Those who understand the nations difficulties as their own, speak up for human rights and challenge corruption, they will always be targeted. Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa talked about the simple and just demands raised in the 1980's Anandpur Sahib Resolution and the truth that was spoken by the Sikh nations saint soldier Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale, where others afraid of the truth became traitors of the Khalsa Panth. Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale challenged the system, spoke against injustices and ultimately propagated the truth, hence the reason they became a target of army's and tanks. Also sitting within the Sangat was Sathkaarjog Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, father of the great martyr, warrior Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji.
  8. **GOLDEN PARENTS: CREATORS OF SOORME** Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, Mata Pyaar Kaur Ji & Bibi Surinder Kaur Ji | The Amazing Family Of Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji | Dhadrianwale ਧੰਨ ਪਰਿਵਾਰ - ਕਰਤਾਰਪੁਰ, ਦੋਆਬਾ - http://youtu.be/Hz4Pyf5Q_Zw Baba Ranjit Singh Khalsa Dhadrianwale talk about the fearless Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji, the incredible story of his wife Bibi Surinder Kaur Ji and the ultimate willpower of his parents, Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji and Mata Pyaar Kaur Ji, the creators of warriors. This live recording clip is from the Panthic Diwaan that took place on 19th September 2014, organised by the Parmeshar Dwar Gurmat Parchar Mission in the Doaba region of Punjab within Jalandhar city's Kartarpur town. Sitting within the Sangat was Sathkaarjog Bapu Tarlok Singh Ji, father of the great martyr, warrior Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji. ***RELATED VIDEOS*** 1) ANOKHA VIYAH (World Famous Diwaan) - The Unique Wedding Of Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh & Bibi Surinder Kaur:http://youtu.be/avhGsbjkcLk 2) BAPU TARLOK SINGH JI (Exclusive Speech) - Shaheed Bhai Satwant Singh Ji's Parents & Mandeep Singh 'Kubbe' Honoured:http://youtu.be/2_xPTcX14Ko
  9. Seeing NATO'S and USA'S surrender of their Afghan campaign, although kudos to the fact that they gave Islamic radicals a taste of their own medicine, I have decided to do a short article on Hari Singh Nalwa's conquest of Afghanistan. Presently I am doing an article on Nalwa himself, and would love to do a second one on his exploits in Afghanistan. I would like to incorporate and answer the following points in my article: - What makes Hari Singh's conquest of Afghanistan so different from prior conquests lead by the Macedonians and the Marathas? - What political, social and religious factors assisted Nalwa in consolidating his prowess in Afghanistan? - What military factors contributed towards Nalwa's victory in Afghanistan? - How does NATO'S campaign differ from Nalwa's? -What elements are similar in both historic and modern campaigns? -If anything what lesson can we derive from both Hari Singh Nalwa's and NATO'S campaigns? For those who don't know, tisarpanth blogspot is my intellectual possession and most of the articles on there are my work. However I am always on the lookout for a fresh perspective on matters and decided to inquire around on forums, to see what answers I can gain on this new topic of mine. Any historic sources you know of will also be appreciated in this matter.
  10. What do you guys think? It is very thought provoking isn't it? Res Publica. The rise and fall of the Sikh misls and the present day decay of Democracy. Often a commonwealth and/or a republic is built on the basis of the common good. The parameters which define this are however debatable and often victim to constant change. History is replete with examples of how the common good soon mutates into manifestations of corruption and avarice through the imperfectness of man. One such example is found in the rise and fall of the Sikh misls. A series of twelve confederacies (misls) which divided Punjab between themselves for the survival of the Sikh nation, but over time became hell bent on territorial conquest and achieving personal ambition. The concept, when presented to a mass gathering of Sikhs on March 29th 1748, was accepted with much gusto and cheering. At the time no one realised that the misls, which were to act as the lifeblood of the Punjab, would soon start to de-oxygenate it through their in-fighting. The misls, at first, were led by the glorious and Spartan Nawab Kapur Singh, a general whose only ambition was to create a united and singular nation for his community. His personality was the glue which bound the 11 confederacies together. At the time, this was no easy achievement. On one hand were the royal misls. Lead by successful and often wealthy leaders such as Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, and Charat Singh Sukarchakia; they were brave, resourceful and more often than not had their coffers full of finance. On the other hand was the reclusive Shahida, consisting entirely of the Akalis (traditional Sikh warriors) who relied on raids and looting to boost their financial position. Such a contrast could easily have caused divisions between the misls if it hadnt been for the strong-minded personality, of a single and militant leader. As time progressed each confederacy carved an extensive part of Punjab for itself. Obviously this lead it into conflict with the ruling regimes of the time. On one hand were the Mughals who occasionally approached them for help, on the other were the Marathas who were slowly consolidating their power on the sub-continent; whilst Afghanistan sent its raiders deep into Indian Territory for conquest and booty. By 1761, however, the confederacies were beginning to dominate Punjab and ultimately by 1780 had gained total control over Punjab. Long gone were the days of the Mughal and Afghani empires, now a new empire ruled Punjab and one which would become extensively synonymous with it; the Sikh empire. In the fashion of a true commonwealth it was moulded in a democratic form, with each and every one of the 11 chiefs holding a commune once a year at Amritsar (the religious capital of Sikh Dom) and bringing his/her problems to the attention of his/her companions. Yet reminiscent of todays democracies, strains of unease and tension were beginning to appear in these communes. Whereas at first there was a feeling of companionship and brotherhood, now there was an atmosphere of tension and unease. The maxim that power corrupts was beginning to take hold, and it was only a matter of time before past allies decided to drink each others blood. After the demise of Nawab Kapur Singhs charismatic successor, Jassa Singh Alhuwalia, in 1783 the confederacies declared open war on each other and the common good soon became clouded in the mists of profit and territorial conquest. The very leaders, who the common man relied on were now ignoring his wishes and setting his residence up for a fall. This inter-fighting saw the demise of many legendary warriors and politicians who would have contributed immensely in the growth of the Sikh sovereignty. The news of this in-fighting soon reached the ears of Zaman Shah, the Afghani emperor who decided to launch an offensive against Punjab. He succeeded in capturing the Sikh economical capital, Lahore, which weakened the confederacies even further. But rather than uniting together and facing this new threat, the confederates soon started extending their empire into North India towards Kashmir and Delhi. What was needed to preserve the common wealth of Punjab, and the common good was a shrewd and cunning leader. One who could unite the confederacies, by force if necessary, and give the state a new face. Only a few of the confederates possessed such a character, amongst them being Jassa Singh Ramgarhia, Mahan Singh Sukarchakia and the father son-duo (Jai Singh and Gurbax Singh) of the Kaniheya confederacy. However all were too busy in slaughtering each other and adding more area to their ever expanding territories. Furthermore Punjab so far had only ever been subject to imperial governing, whether at the hands of the Mughals, Afghanis and Sikhs was a different matter. So far a democratic imperial ship had failed the state. It had started off well but sunk half-way to its destination. What was needed was a change of government, the times required a single figure of power unlike Kapur Singh or Jassa Singh; a figure who retained the reins of power exclusively in his own two hands. So far corruption and avarice ran rife due to their being more than one powerful leader who paid tribute to the natural law of power, more than one powerful individual will always be a catalyst for conflict. This of course is reminiscent of many democracies, whichever leader rose to prominence in Punjab needed not only to subdue the confederacies but also demolish the old system. The catalyst for a new leader surprisingly was provided by the confederacies themselves. By this point in time all 11 had united against each other and were allying themselves with tributaries and kingdoms outside Punjab. It was to prevent an encroachment of external tributaries that the Kaniheyas and Sukarchakias bonded together in a pact. They also gave their solemn oath that if one was to attack any tributary of another confederacy, than he would share the profits with his partner. However it was not long before Mahan Singh, the ruler of the Sukarchakia confederacy, decided to break the pact. He along with his battalions attacked Kashmir and subdued its rulers, along with looting the state. This did not sit well with the Kaniheyas who decided to retaliate by crushing the Sukarchakias for once and for all. To this end Jai Singh sent his heir and son Gurbax Singh to attack Mahan Singh, who on the other hand allied himself with Jassa Singh Ramgarhia and Chief Sansar Chand. The battle which followed has gone down in history as the battle of Batala. Friend and foe alike slaughtered each other in a feast of blood and metal, steel clashed on steel and warriors thundered massive war cries as they charged at each other. Ultimately the fate of the battle was decided after the untimely demise of Gurbax Singh. The Kaniheyas were defeated, and the Sukarchakias, along with the Ramgarhias, carried the day. For many Sikhs at the time this was only another battle in a never-ending chain of battles. Yet this was the long-awaited catalyst needed for a refurbishment of Sikh sovereignty. When Jai Singh received news of his sons death, he instantly handed the reins of the Kaniheyas to his daughter-in-law, Sada Kaur. Not only did she gain a position of prominence in a much feared confederacy, but also became commander-in-chief of the said confederacys military power. It was expected that she, being possessed of a valorous spirit, would clash with Mahan Singh who was responsible for her husbands early demise; but she surprised even her most vocal critics when she sued for peace. Sada Kaur had seen Mahan Singhs young son, the prince Ranjit Singh. The boy, despite being in his teens, was extensively shrewd and heavily cunning. He also possessed great perseverance and strength of character, which was lacking in other potential confederate heirs. He had been a victim of chicken-pox on his birth, but had survived its initial effects. However as a result he was blind in one eye and was not much of a sight to view, yet despite these handicaps he had trained himself to become one of the best horsemen in Asia and was an expert in firing from a moving stead. Furthermore he was also possessed of a strong desire to see a reconstruction of the Punjab political scene; however he needed a strong mentor to keep him on track. Mahan Singh was constantly embroiled in his own conflicts, and the young Ranjit was often left to his own devices. He had already proved himself to be an apt general, and this combined with many other factors convinced Sada Kaur to betroth her daughter to him. Hence by the time Mahan Singh died, in 1792, Sada Kaur and Ranjit Singh had already discussed their plans to change the face of Punjab permanently. On one hand were the united Kaniheya and Sukarchakia confederacies, whilst on the other hand were the individual confederacies. Despite their differences, with each other, the confederacies at any given time could unite against the Kaniheya-Sukarchakia alliance and uproot it. To prevent this Sada Kaur and Ranjit Singh launched quick successive attacks on each and every confederacy. It was soon becoming evident to the confederates that Ranjit Singh would bring about their downfall if he was not stopped. But just as Lenin and his God, communism, became an unstoppable force in Imperial Russia; so too did Ranjit Singh in a divided Punjab. He was hell-bent on re-designing the commonwealth of Punjab and was not willing to let any obstacles interfere with his vision. To this end by the time he was in his twenties, he had succeeded in subduing 9 confederacies and only two remained. It is not known why he never pursued his course with Shahida. Maybe he was fearful of its legendary battle prowess, or respectful of its generals and commanders-in-chief. Whatever the reason, even up till his death he did not enter into any debate or conflict with Shahida. The Bhangi confederacy on the other hand was a different matter. They had been responsible for his fathers early demise and also controlled Lahore, which had been won back from Zaman Shah. Also in their possession was the Zamzama the most feared cannon in that part of Asia at the time. To this end and entranced by the prospect of gaining the economic capital of the state, Ranjit Singh planned an all-out attack. One which if he won guaranteed him absolute power over Punjab. Unbeknownst to him, however, was the fact that most of Lahores population wanted him to capture the city. It had become a heavily fought over region due to the confederacy in-fighting and Ranjit Singh presented it with the prospect of peace, in a long time. Other factors too convinced the residents of Lahore that Ranjit Singh was the right ruler for them. He wanted to rule solely, this would prevent an outbreak of internal conflict in the future as was the case with the confederacies. Not only did he want to become a sole figure of power, he was also possessed of extreme cunning. Rather than execute his vanquished opponents, he would grant them employment in his court and was also planning on extending Punjab. To this end he was eyeing China, Nepal, Tibet, Afghanistan and what remained of the Indian sub-continent. Thus not only was he expanding his empire, he was also giving it a strong political legacy. Disillusioned with a democratic-confederate state he had decided to take the burden of ruling solely on his own head. Such a man, the residents of Lahore reasoned, was worthy of power. Finally the day arrived which would decide the fate of the confederacies, 7th July 1799. Would democracy be victorious, or a dictatorial monarchy? The question hung heavy in the tense atmosphere. The Bhangis had extensive military equipment, and were expert tacticians. Ranjit Singh on the other hand had Sada Kaur and an army composed of high-spirited and valorous soldiers. By nightfall the fate of Lahore, and the confederacies as a result, was decided. Lahore had fallen. Ranjit Singh had succeeded in his designs to wipe out the confederacies and their democracy. The year 1799 finally announced a change in Punjabs fortunes and the birth of an empire which would stand on par with the undefeatable British Empire. This fall of the Sikh confederacies however is not solely intended to be a lesson in gaining allies and military victories. It is reminiscent of many political frameworks today. Democracy, which is accepted as being an epitome of equality, is increasingly distancing itself from its real purpose. Thus there is an increasing disillusion with the system, even within its fundamentalist supporters. How equal is an individual in a democracy? Is the main question. Democracy has mutated into nothing more than a battleground for the elite few. Whereas at first the Sikh confederacies listened to their citizens, and pursued courses in a collective manner, as time progressed they became heavily embroiled in their own personal matters and forgot the common-good. Once more the common man was left with no course to resort to, as the very leaders who he selected and supported turned against his welfare. Even today a majority of nations pursue a theoretically democratic policy, but in reality are battlegrounds of the elite; who have been granted the right to rule over the common man by the common man himself. Thus what the global village needs now, nay requires now, is a new form of governorship. Similar to Ranjit Singh wiping out the vestiges of the confederacy, a contemporary Ranjit Singh needs to vanquish the remnants of democracy and replace it with a much better system. One can argue, via a devils advocates perspective, that everything man creates is doomed to failure. But one can also argue that what man creates is subject to evolution, and democracy has long overstayed its own evolution.
  11. do ghost exists?

    i happened to see a dharna+kath of sant ranjit singh ji dhardriwale in which he says ghost do not exist then sri akal ustat sahib came in my mind ਗੰਪ੍ਰਬ ਜੱਛ ਰਚੈ ਸੁਭ ਚਾਰਾ ॥ Gaddhrab Jachch Rachai Soubh Chaaraa|| ग्मप्रब जछ रचै सुभ चारा ॥ He hath created Gandharvas, Yakshas and being of high character. ਕਹੂੰ ਜੱਛ ਗੰਪ੍ਰਬ ਉਰਗ ਕਹੂੰ ਬਿਦਿਆਧਰ ਕਹੂੰ ਭਏ ਕਿੰਨਰ ਪਿਸਾਚ ਕਹੂੰ ਪ੍ਰੇਤ ਹੋ ॥ Kahoon Jachchh Gaddhrab Urg Kahoon Bidyaadhar Kahoon Bhae Kinnarpisaanch Kahoon Pret Ho|| कहूं जछ ग्मप्रब उरग कहूं बिदिआधर कहूं भए किंनर पिसाच कहूं प्रेत हो ॥ O Lord! Somewhere Thou art Yaksha, Gandharva, Sheshanaga and Vidyadhar and somewhere Thou becomest Kinnar, Pishacha and Preta. here sant ranjit singh ji is wrong or i a moorakh is wrong? kindly explain http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZNK-b_ilKE