Guru_Da_Chella

Disrespect To Turban At Gurdwara Matrimonials From Sikh Females

is there too much hate towards sikh turban in gurdwara matrimonials?   90 members have voted

  1. 1. is there too much hate towards sikh turban from sikh females in gurdwara matrimonials?

    • yes
    • no
    • possibly
    • I do not know anything about gurdwara matrimonials

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

85 posts in this topic

It is very simple, but, we choose to complicate because we can !

Gurdwaras and their committees exist to promote Sikhi as according to the Akal Takht Mayada -whilst Sikhi promotes equality amongst all of humanity, it does NOT allow the promotion of anti Sikh tenants.

The very nerve of stupid people (exceptionally) to ask for clean shaven boys is blasphemeous.

My local gurdwara, Singh Sabha, southall Has a marriage service. Very well run. Unfortunately it allows anti-distaar requirements from prospective girls.

I need backup against the anti dasam Granth heretic committee to ensure they only allow positive promotion of the distaar -please post me for a peaceful demonstration.

Gurfateh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is very simple, but, we choose to complicate because we can !

Gurdwaras and their committees exist to promote Sikhi as according to the Akal Takht Mayada -whilst Sikhi promotes equality amongst all of humanity, it does NOT allow the promotion of anti Sikh tenants.

The very nerve of stupid people (exceptionally) to ask for clean shaven boys is blasphemeous.

My local gurdwara, Singh Sabha, southall Has a marriage service. Very well run. Unfortunately it allows anti-distaar requirements from prospective girls.

I need backup against the anti dasam Granth heretic committee to ensure they only allow positive promotion of the distaar -please post me for a peaceful demonstration.

Gurfateh

Did you get my message?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=461054053922382&set=a.461053030589151.113619.256338197727303&type=1&theater

TURBAN DISCRIMINATION IN THE LARGEST GURDWARA IN EUROPE: A turbanned male was banned from the Singh Sabha Havelock Southall matrimonials Facebook group, for promoting respect for turban and expressing the amount of discrimination against turbans promoted by many of the female members of the service, for which this gurdwara service doesn't bat an eyelid. The image above shows another member arguing with group admin against the ban, instead of receiving an answer to his 2nd post, he was also subsequently banned. The matrimonial service is held INSIDE the gurdwara, so Guru Granth Sahib is parkash is on the floor above the service.

Link to group: http://www.facebook.com/groups/41021874437/?ref=ts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why on Earth is Havelock Road Gurdwara even letting a Sikh and 'Hindu' Matrimonial Service to take place. It's a Gurdwara for heavens sakes, why is it providing services for Hindus? No offence to Hindus but obviously by doing this, we are bound to have problems arise like this one.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If hostlity towards turban is being allowed in the gurdwara, at such high numbers (I have evidence of the high numbers which I will hopefully upload on the net soon), then what does that say for the future?

I am pretty sure the sangat at the gurdwaras, such as the Havelock Singh Sabha Southall which would have a huge number in sangat, are mostly unaware of these services promoting such turban hostility inside gurdwara sahibs right below the sangats' noses. If only there was a way of making it sangat knowledge of what happens inside the gurdwara, although it doesn't happen behind closed doors, its still goes unnoticed. But seriously, the numbers are shocking!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anand Karaj should be for Sikh's only. That means a Keshdari Sikh and Amrithdari Sikh only. We youth need to start getting into these committees and make this change. If Hindus which believe in Sikhi but dont follow it, they can get the civil mariage. There is no need to go Anand Karaj. This is disrespectful to our Guru. I am not against Hindus etc but I am against people who disrespect the Guru.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL every groom comes to the wedding wearing a turban with a kirpan so hard to prove.

A lot of women prefer non turbaned 'sikhs' these days but banning them from the anand karaj is perhaps a step too far as then they will say why is the other person allowed to get married in the Gurdwara who is amrit dhari but eats meat and then the meat debates start etc etc LOL.

I think the real issue is not that all sikhs are allowed to marry at the Gurdwara but that many girls prefer guys that are non turbaned. If girls prefered turban guys they would all be tying turbans.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real issue is not that all sikhs are allowed to marry at the Gurdwara but that many girls prefer guys that are non turbaned. If girls prefered turban guys they would all be tying turbans.

Not always.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could not find anything that amusing that I would laugh out loud. No disrespect intended but the ego needs to breathe...

Simple fact is - there are Gurmukhs and there are Manmukhs, Gurmukhs are Gursikhs that try to follow SIkhi to its core ( there outer appearance shows that they have takken the FIRST step ) and Manmukhs are everything but. Lets not use ' oh he might be Amrithdari but they do this and that '. This is slander and Gurbani states that no one is perfect nor does anyone have the right to point their fingers on anyone's deeds/actions but, there is a fine line of what should be corrected and what should be left alone. Only a true Gurmukh will understand Gurbani and what its actually saying to the reader.

Back to the subject - Only Sikhs should be allowed to get married in front of the Guru with Sikhi appearance ! This is the true Anand Karaj. You are not a Sikh of the Guru if you cut your hair. This is the first thing you give to the Guru. Your body. Your Matha Tek. Everything else will come bit by bit depending on how much you pray for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One last point, love for Sikhi comes from the family and oneself. It depends on how truly you love Sikhi as an individual and how much you actually care for the future of Sikhi that you actually first and foremost, give your body to the Guru and at least look like a Sikh.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kaljugi its not always of course but I am irritated that a lot of men including sikh men try to do all they can to impress girls.

Ranjeet Singh it is not amusing but it is a fact. Everyone turns up dressed as a sikh on the wedding day. You cannot ban people from marrying unless they are sikh otherwise you need to be prepared for all the other problems:

people 'becoming' sikh for a few months just for the anand karaj

if the person must follow one important rule in sikhism of not cutting hair then the rest of the important rules also need to be followed. No one is going to accept that a sikh should just tick the outer appearance boxes. What if he has criminal convictions etc.

Also I just dont think the Gurus would have turned away anyone of any religion to marry according to sikhism.

I dont disagree with what everyone is saying I just think there would be many problems along with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kaljugi its not always of course but I am irritated that a lot of men including sikh men try to do all they can to impress girls.

Ranjeet Singh it is not amusing but it is a fact. Everyone turns up dressed as a sikh on the wedding day. You cannot ban people from marrying unless they are sikh otherwise you need to be prepared for all the other problems:

people 'becoming' sikh for a few months just for the anand karaj

if the person must follow one important rule in sikhism of not cutting hair then the rest of the important rules also need to be followed. No one is going to accept that a sikh should just tick the outer appearance boxes. What if he has criminal convictions etc.

Also I just dont think the Gurus would have turned away anyone of any religion to marry according to sikhism.

I dont disagree with what everyone is saying I just think there would be many problems along with that.

Please stick to the topic which is the disrespect to keshdahri Sikhs and turbans from

"sikh?" females at gurdwara matrimonials.

If you want to discuss your so called "many problems" start another thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kaljugi its not always of course but I am irritated that a lot of men including sikh men try to do all they can to impress girls.

Ranjeet Singh it is not amusing but it is a fact. Everyone turns up dressed as a sikh on the wedding day. You cannot ban people from marrying unless they are sikh otherwise you need to be prepared for all the other problems:

people 'becoming' sikh for a few months just for the anand karaj

if the person must follow one important rule in sikhism of not cutting hair then the rest of the important rules also need to be followed. No one is going to accept that a sikh should just tick the outer appearance boxes. What if he has criminal convictions etc.

Also I just dont think the Gurus would have turned away anyone of any religion to marry according to sikhism.

I dont disagree with what everyone is saying I just think there would be many problems along with that.

Sorry but I will go straight to the point and I am not being rude at all, just giving facts according to Gurbani...

Of course you can ban marriage under the Anand Karaj ceremony if they are not Sikh. Marriage itself fine, they can go ahead and get married in a Church or registry if leaving Sikhi means that much to them.

If no on agrees to the outer appearance from the offset they are Manmukhs, they are not Sikhs, they are not the Gurus Sikhs. As per Gurbani.

Back to the topic at hand, its the 'modern' Sikh parents diluting Sikhi to their each and individual needs. If the parents do this, then what chance do the children have in keeping Sikhi alive and true to its original core. There is no need to adapt Sikhi, Sikhi is complete. Our Guru, our true Guru is absolute and complete and as soon youth ( I still call myself a youth even though I am 30yrs old married with 2 kids, I find this amusing so LOL :) ... ) start getting involved in the running of GUrudwaras and stop this nonsense, the better.

I am trying to get into the committee at my local Gurudwara and I recommend that if anyone cares for the future of Sikhi that they do the same. Reason being is because someone will need to take over the running of the Gurudwara as the elders have moreless ruined it for financial gain and the youth of today are waking up and realising what is Sikhi and how beautiful it is. We can still make this change. We can still help organise events for the youth to understand what a Sikh is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh yes, the Gurus would not have turned them away, the Guru would have made them take Amrit and got them to become Sikhs before allowing the marriage to take place fullstop. Sikhs of the old actually jumped at the chance to take Amrit because they knew the importance of it if they wanted to be connected to the true Guru, Waheguru and wanted to be called a Sikh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess then why not have a small protest or something at the local gurdwaras that only amritdharis should be allowed to be part of the matrimonial service. It might close down for a few months (LOL) but then amritdharis will also start to use it.

Right now many amritdharis I know don't need the service as they have their 'sikh societies' to meet others and so many are marrying through that circle (right or wrong is irrelevant in this topic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess then why not have a small protest or something at the local gurdwaras that only amritdharis should be allowed to be part of the matrimonial service. It might close down for a few months (LOL) but then amritdharis will also start to use it.

Right now many amritdharis I know don't need the service as they have their 'sikh societies' to meet others and so many are marrying through that circle (right or wrong is irrelevant in this topic).

Please keep your laughable suggestions to yourself.

Matrimonial showing disrespect to the Sikhs' appearance and turbans

should be banned from Gurdwaras.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the girl has postive experiences of her Dad and Brother wearing turbans then she's more likely to be attracted to a boy who has a turban. If her Dad and Brothers are monay, then she's highly likely to be attaracted to a monay boy. If here Dad and Brother wear turbans, but are plonkers, then she'll probably not want to marry a boy who wears a turban.

The issue is deeper than the girls vanity, some of it may be based on a lame collective portrayal of the modern male Sikh image by modern male Sikhs themselves. Saying that, I know a few girls from complete non-Gursikh backgrounds who married Singhs because they admired the inner and outher qualities of the Sikh roop.

I agree with you on this. If the girl has bern around a lot of turban wearing men and guys she will have a different perspective than a girl who hasnt been around them. I will give u my example. For 10 years of my life i lived in a only white community and the only sardars there were my dad who wore a turban and my younger brother who wore a patka. I was about 16 till we were there and I had told myself I would only marry a mona because I was exposed to guys my age wearing paghs. Dad doesnt count! So we moved to Seattle which has a good amount of Punjabi community. And i would have thought there would be some guys my age wearings turbans but no. Most actually probably like 80% were monay and the others were either young and wore patkas or wore turbans like a maniac. So still i thought no way i will only marry a mona. So we went back to India for the first time in India at the age of 18 and I was so suprised at the guys wearing turbans. I know its more like a fashion trend but still they are wearing turbans. I was amazed how good a guy can look in a turban if its tied properly. And from then on my mind slowly started changing about marrying a mona over a turban guy. As we went back home in the next couple yrs i got even more determined that i would only marry a guy that wears a turban and thats what i did. A guy looks totally different in a turban than one as a mOna.

So basically it all depends on how much and what kind exposure one experienced in that particular category.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess then why not have a small protest or something at the local gurdwaras that only amritdharis should be allowed to be part of the matrimonial service. It might close down for a few months (LOL) but then amritdharis will also start to use it.

Right now many amritdharis I know don't need the service as they have their 'sikh societies' to meet others and so many are marrying through that circle (right or wrong is irrelevant in this topic).

yes why not? I dont find it amusing. To be honest it time to take shock value actions as the polite approach, people are taking the mick out of the whole service. If people want to marry out of Sikhi, honestly good luck to them. Waheguru knew they had the strength to become Sikhs but due to their own actions, they leave. Cool, we can do without fake 'Sikhs' anyway, theres too many already.

Time for shock tactics...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you on this. If the girl has bern around a lot of turban wearing men and guys she will have a different perspective than a girl who hasnt been around them. I will give u my example. For 10 years of my life i lived in a only white community and the only sardars there were my dad who wore a turban and my younger brother who wore a patka. I was about 16 till we were there and I had told myself I would only marry a mona because I was exposed to guys my age wearing paghs. Dad doesnt count! So we moved to Seattle which has a good amount of Punjabi community. And i would have thought there would be some guys my age wearings turbans but no. Most actually probably like 80% were monay and the others were either young and wore patkas or wore turbans like a maniac. So still i thought no way i will only marry a mona. So we went back to India for the first time in India at the age of 18 and I was so suprised at the guys wearing turbans. I know its more like a fashion trend but still they are wearing turbans. I was amazed how good a guy can look in a turban if its tied properly. And from then on my mind slowly started changing about marrying a mona over a turban guy. As we went back home in the next couple yrs i got even more determined that i would only marry a guy that wears a turban and thats what i did. A guy looks totally different in a turban than one as a mOna.

So basically it all depends on how much and what kind exposure one experienced in that particular category.

This is a very interesting story. Especially how you described going to India and for the first time seeing turbans in a fashionable light.

Most young men who wear turbans in Punjab trim their beards. But they tie VERY fashionable turbans!!

In the west, young men who wear turbans hardly seem to put any effort into tying them. They don't tie them right. Their turbans are not very impressive looking or fashionable.

I wonder if it might make a difference if guys in the west started wearing good looking pags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are missing the point.

What will eliminating the "prefer clean shaven" option from gurdwara matrimonials accomplish?

either:

1. No girls will be allowed to explicitly state their preference, but it won't matter because as soon as they see the guy is a pag wala, the talks will grind to a halt

2. Girls who are mostly or exclusively interested in clean shaven guys will stop using the matrimonial service. Then there will be like a half dozen people left using it and it'll be a complete joke.

In any case, the fundamental problem is left unaddressed:

How do we reverse this disturbing trend where the dhari and kesh have become extremely stigmatized in our community?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are missing the point.

What will eliminating the "prefer clean shaven" option from gurdwara matrimonials accomplish?

either:

1. No girls will be allowed to explicitly state their preference, but it won't matter because as soon as they see the guy is a pag wala, the talks will grind to a halt

2. Girls who are mostly or exclusively interested in clean shaven guys will stop using the matrimonial service. Then there will be like a half dozen people left using it and it'll be a complete joke.

In any case, the fundamental problem is left unaddressed:

How do we reverse this disturbing trend where the dhari and kesh have become extremely stigmatized in our community?

It is you who is missing the point.

Why should Gurdwara matrimonials be used by the girls and their families

to shamelessly and publically show their shameless preference for " clean shaven" sirgums.

There are heaps of other methods for these shameless people to get their shameless preferences.

THE MATRIMONIAL SERVICE IN GURDWARAS SHOULD ONLY BE FOR KESHDHARI TURBANNED SIKHS.

Please open another thread to discuss for your so called "fundamental problem."

I don't understand why some people want to over dramatize an issue by making statements

like " where the dhari and kesh have become extremely stigmatized in our community."

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is you who is missing the point.

Why should Gurdwara matrimonials be used by the girls and their families

to shamelessly and publically show their shameless preference for " clean shaven" sirgums.

There are heaps of other methods for these shameless people to get their shameless preferences.

THE MATRIMONIAL SERVICE IN GURDWARAS SHOULD ONLY BE FOR KESHDHARI TURBANNED SIKHS.

Please open another thread to discuss for your so called "fundamental problem."

I don't understand why some people want to over dramatize an issue by making statements

like " where the dhari and kesh have become extremely stigmatized in our community."

I agree with you that it's a shameful thing, but what what will restricting the matrimonial service to keshdhari turbanned sikhs accomplish?

As I pointed out earlier, it would become a joke: there would be like 7 people registered

Doing what you suggest would put an end to the shameless public display of clean shaven preference in one specific matrimonial service. But will it do anything to address the root of the problem? No.

This issue is not being over dramatized by me or anyone else. If you don't think there's a huge stigma attached to keeping your kesh and dhari in our community, then you've been living in a cave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you that it's a shameful thing, but what what will restricting the matrimonial service to keshdhari turbanned sikhs accomplish?

As I pointed out earlier, it would become a joke: there would be like 7 people registered

Doing what you suggest would put an end to the shameless public display of clean shaven preference in one specific matrimonial service. But will it do anything to address the root of the problem? No.

This issue is not being over dramatized by me or anyone else. If you don't think there's a huge stigma attached to keeping your kesh and dhari in our community, then you've been living in a cave.

So you want the shamefulness to continue to get more low quality, anti Panthic matrimonials

to increase the numbers of these advertisements at our Gurdwaras. No thank you.

As for your other over dramatized observation, I thought of this today,

WE ARE THE SINGHS, WE ARE THE KINGS.

WE ARE THE SINGHS WHO ARE PROUD OF OUR CROWNS.

WE DON'T CARE LESS FOR THE DRAMA QUEENS,

WHO FROWN AT OUR CROWNS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try and sound more serious next time but I wasn't joking I was serious.

Ban non keshdharis from the matrimonial service. You shouldn't be allowed to come to the Gurdwara and request to meet clean shaven people.

But at the same time as someone mentioned above you have the separate problem continuing that a lot of people are moving away from sikhi and that's something that needs to be worked on as well.

I think men in turbans always look good but like some mona men they don't care for their appearance generally and that is obviously not helpful but you should have enough love for your religion to want to a turbaned sikh over a mona anyday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will eliminating the "prefer clean shaven" option from gurdwara matrimonials accomplish?

either:

1. No girls will be allowed to explicitly state their preference, but it won't matter because as soon as they see the guy is a pag wala, the talks will grind to a halt

2. Girls who are mostly or exclusively interested in clean shaven guys will stop using the matrimonial service. Then there will be like a half dozen people left using it and it'll be a complete joke.

Right firstly, I think girls should be able to use the gurdwara matrimonial services if they have neutral thinking, in that they are ok with non-turbanned guys as long as they are fine with turbanned guys as well.

Secondly, if they don't like turbanned guys, then they should be told to go elsewhere as it amounts to discrimination and a behaviour not suitable in a gurdwara.

Lastly, being told this, some girls will actually think twice. The problem is, many of the girls are coconuts (in the USA you have ABCDs). If they are made to feel that its a really bad and discriminatory thing to look at turbans in a bad way, then it will help them gain respect for the turban.

The problem is, no one is stimulating the females brains, and helping them with etiquette.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I dont know about that but why some people on here found it hard to comprehend about what I stated about muslims were forced to convert to Sikhi is true according to what I have read and understood of the times and circumstances people lived in back in the 17th century. Forced conversions was what islamic rulers were doing and banda's men were merely returning the favor by forcing them to revert....it was karma. There is no doubt in my mind many cowardly muslims would rather have converted to Sikhi to save their lives than be massacred along with everyone else by banda's men and the other irregulars who had swelled his ranks looking for revenge and war booty. In those war like conditions and situations back then conversions weren't spiritual or by choice they are often forced to save ones own life.
    • Right, this just confirms what I stated: that there were loads of people who attached themselves to the invading army for the purpose of loot or revenge. BTW, even if you were quoting/reading Sikh historians, there are plenty of Islamophilic Sikh academicians whose histories are based (in the end) on Muslim sources, which would naturally play up the level of mayhem, bloodshed, and pillage, and also place the blame solely and squarely on the Sikh faith. Case in point: Dr. Fauja Singh, relying on Muslim sources, actually portrayed the execution of Guru Teg Bhadur Ji as just because the Guru was a brigand! Sirdar Kapur Singh, using authentic sources including Bachittar Natak, forced him to recant.
    • 1) I didn't say he was hindu all his life. I said he was from rajput hindu stock as he was born a hindu the operative word is "was" he converted to Sikhi while in the company of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. I didnt make this claim of soul saving your making this claim. I said muslims converted to Sikhi to save their lives from banda's brutal warriors and some muslims converted out of opportunism in plunder of war booty of rival mughul towns and some converted to sikhi because they were forced to convert to islam by the mughuls. The conversions of muslims to Sikhi wasn't to save their souls in theological spiritual terms it was a practical political demographics war tactic to ensure Sikh numbers grew and enemy muslim numbers decreased.  
    • Banda Singh Bahadur wasn't Hindu, (unless you believe Sikhs are Hindus like the Indian constitution claims). There were more Ksychatrias and Brahmin Sikhs percentage-wise then there is now, because of Banda Singh Bahadur taking the time to free those inside Punjab from their faiths. Also if he was so interested in saving people's souls like you claim, why did Sri Mata Sundri Ji not support him? Or Baba Deep Singh Ji for that matter? After all that, the Bandai Khalsas were formed and revered Banda Singh Bahadur, with Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji not given enough importance. If people did convert to Sikhi it wasn't because some king living in the jungles of Punjab, (because that's exactly where he lived, not out in the open), it would be because the Sikhs especially within Punjab did heavy Prachar. As great as his kingdom was, it was mostly skirmishes with the Mughals with only one real battle, (Sirhind/Fatehgarh Sahib).
    •   I don't refer to islamic history or their sources when saying Baanda Singh bahadhur and his warriors forced muslims of mughuls towns to convert, flee or get destroyed. But it also makes logical sense that in order to establish an area of self rule you would first destroy your enemies population and their institutions of authority. Banda singh bahadur wasn't a Guru he wasn't a overly religious pious man he was a warrior of hindu rajput stock, a warrior instructed to bring retribution to sirhind and mughul authorities for the cruel martyrdom of chotay sahibzaday. His mission wasnt one of compassion and niceties against murderous people..... his mission was one of bring a whirlwind of destruction of enemies of Sikhs and oppressed hindu's. And personally I am pretty comfortable with our hero's forcing muslims to chose between saving themselves and their towns by converting to Sikhi or be put to death through the warfare that would inevitable happen..... I see nothing wrong with those were were once forced to convert to Islam reverting back to a dharmic faith. "When the Sikhs left Ambeyta and advanced further, a large number of Gujjar from Rampur turned up to join the Sikhs. They declared that they were the followers of Guru Nanak and that they came there to take part in the Sikh religious war. By this strategem they were able to secure the advantage of making their own town and its surrounding area safe from pillage. Moreover, they also became partners in the plunder of Nanauta. The Gujjars had some old accounts to settle with the Sayyads. The Sikhs entered Nanauta on July 11, 1710, A.D. The Shaikhzadas of the town were brave fighters and expert archars. They contested every inch the Sikh onslaught in their part of the town. Three hundred Shaikhzadas lost their lives on that day during the courageous fighting in the courtyard of Sheikh-Mohammad Afzal's house alone. This sharp, bloody contest led to an utter destruction of the town. The royal mansions of the Sheikhs and of the Sayyads were destroyed. The whole town was left in ruins. It has been called Phuta Shahr or the town in ruins, since that day. " (BANDA SINGH BAHADUR and Sikh Sovereignty by HARBANS KAUR SAGOO) Gujjars were muslims whose hindu ancestors forced to convert to Islam decades and centuries earlier. There are other books and articles that I have read over the years that have made me come to that conclusion that a policy of forced conversions of muslims to Sikhi was enforced so that the inhabitants would escape mass slaughter at the hands of banda singh bahadurs men whereas their first course of action would have been to slaughter everyone and no mercy shown of converting to escape death.