Jump to content
Khalistanisinghni

Distinguishing Between Good and Bad

Recommended Posts

WJKK WJKF,

below are some parchariks who are worth listening to, as well as some who are ignorant and virus. (Feel free to add)

GOOD:

Giani Sher Singh ji Ambale wale 

Giani Kulwant Singh ji Ludhiane Wale 

Giani Thakur Singh ji Patiale Wale

Bhai Sukha singh ji UK

Basics of Sikhi

Giani Sant Singh ju Maskeen 

Bhai Pinderpal Singh ji

Giani Amarjit Singh

 

To avoid:

Panthpreet "Singh"

Sarbjit Dhunda

Ranjit "Singh" Dhadrianwale

Darshan "Singh"

Gurbakshn Kala Afghana

Dhumma

Others: linked to the above.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious to know why you've put  Ranjit "Singh" Dhadrianwale under bad? Am I missing something? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, simran345 said:

Curious to know why you've put  Ranjit "Singh" Dhadrianwale under bad? Am I missing something? 

I used to love them, honestly but their latest videos indicate how they have become so much like Panthpreet.

1. Messing with the history of Guru Tegh Bahadhur Maharaj ji- 26 years in pora sahib; Sant giani gurbachan singh ji has confirmed this and Dhadrianwale has been refusing to accept it, referring to a book written by the same person who addressed Sri Dasam Guru granth sahib ji as Kanjar Granth.

2. Says there is no point in doing simran.

3. Says he was doing Haramzaadgi by calling himself a sant.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

I used to love them, honestly but their latest videos indicate how they have become so much like Panthpreet.

1. Messing with the history of Guru Tegh Bahadhur Maharaj ji- 26 years in pora sahib; Sant giani gurbachan singh ji has confirmed this and Dhadrianwale has been refusing to accept it, referring to a book written by the same person who addressed Sri Dasam Guru granth sahib ji as Kanjar Granth.

2. Says there is no point in doing simran.

3. Says he was doing Haramzaadgi by calling himself a sant.

 

:)

I don't about the first point you've stated, as I don't listen to him much myself, so I can't comment on what I don't know of or not heard. 

Also never heard the other too points either, but then again I don't listen to him much, only when he comes on Tv. 

But I noticed, you call him by them and they, and that's normally used in respect of somebody, so seems like you like some of his parchaar, but not all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, simran345 said:

I don't about the first point you've stated, as I don't listen to him much myself, so I can't comment on what I don't know of or not heard. 

Also never heard the other too points either, but then again I don't listen to him much, only when he comes on Tv. 

But I noticed, you call him by them and they, and that's normally used in respect of somebody, so seems like you like some of his parchaar, but not all. 

Even avoided using DHADRIANWALA. Because they once did good parchar, and there will always be a part where I may not be able to disrespect them completely. For the betterment of the panth, it has to be distinguished 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

Even avoided using DHADRIANWALA. Because they once did good parchar, and there will always be a part where I may not be able to disrespect them completely. For the betterment of the panth, it has to be distinguished 

Ok you have your own opinion and I can't argue with that. Just wasn't sure if the reasons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a similar reaction , bhai Ranjit singh  in the early days he allowed bewakoof loki to matha tek etc but now he has matured the whole way up and told people to call him BHai because he has no claim on anything .

His latest parchaar vids have been calling out dodgy parchaar and behaviours in the panth and trying to encourage the sangat to lose their greed, lose the pakhandi baba habit and reattach to gurbani .

I have never heard him say naam simran is pointless (maybe you can provide the link). 

He openly admits his wrong behaviour of the past (isn't that a good thing?) and tells people NOT to call him anything if they must then brother.

I would put Giani Thakur SIngh patialawale in a third category questionable 

athough the general content of itihaasic katha is correct he embroiders a lot and make claims which makes sangat doubt the rest of the katha.

 

puzzled, but its your opinion

Edited by jkvlondon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

I had a similar reaction , bhai Ranjit singh  in the early days he allowed bewakoof loki to matha tek etc but now he has matured the whole way up and told people to call him BHai because he has no claim on anything .

His latest parchaar vids have been calling out dodgy parchaar and behaviours in the panth and trying to encourage the sangat to lose their greed, lose the pakhandi baba habit and reattach to gurbani .

I have never heard him say naam simran is pointless (maybe you can provide the link). 

He openly admits his wrong behaviour of the past (isn't that a good thing?) and tells people NOT to call him anything if they must then brother.

I would put Giani Thakur SIngh patialawale in a third category questionable 

athough the general content of itihaasic katha is correct he embroiders a lot and make claims which makes sangat doubt the rest of the katha.

 

puzzled, but its your opinion

Bhenji, 

dhadrianwale has changed. He is doing what these missionary parchariks are doing. If you listen to his latest videos, you will be shocked at his claims.

 

giani thakur singh are a gem. Just because our budi fails to believe and understand they are saying doesn't mean they should be questioned. (TRUST ME ON THIS ONE)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

Bhenji, 

dhadrianwale has changed. He is doing what these missionary parchariks are doing. If you listen to his latest videos, you will be shocked at his claims.

 

giani thakur singh are a gem. Just because our budi fails to believe and understand they are saying doesn't mean they should be questioned. (TRUST ME ON THIS ONE)

 

don't  worry I do believe in the avasta of sant ji  and the nature of the shaheeds but he should realise just speaking of them is enough .

latest vid of ranjit singh:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, muscleman said:

?? You seem to be planning or tellin someone to attack or use violence over here on someone lol. Very strange.

No. It's a reference to Star Wars. The Force? The mystical power that surrounds and permeates all living things which might be referred to as intuition, knowledge, etc, that is derived from an unseen source designed to guide us towards goodness and truth. 

I suggested that in order to decide who is "good" and "bad" we should look within and make use of the budhi we're supposed to cultivate through adherence to Sikh teachings.

It's quite sad i had to spell it all out, lol. The joke is dead.

Edited by MisterrSingh
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, muscleman said:

Thanks for elaborating. Time/effort well spent.

It's fine. Thanks for understanding.

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

    • Another point I would like to mention for fellow history lovers like is that generally if we look at all non Sikh sources mentioning Sihs and their practises we get a clearer picture than reading our Granths. The Granths were written from a certain mindset, schooling, 'sect' influence and sometimes even vested interests. While non Sikh authors usually wrote after observing Sikhs from several places and often even contrasting, comparing the behaviours of Sikhs across India. While narrow minded non Sikh narratives exist, a dozen sources can be found which clearly imply that Sikhi of the 18th century was more devoid of anti-Gurmat influences than that of the 19th century or Sikh literature (written mostly by Nirmalas who did not represent a majority of the Sikh dharam). Lots of non Sikh sources clearly mention that Sikhs generally did not observe casteist practises.
        “When a person is once admitted into that (Sikh) fraternity, they make no scruple of associating with him, of whatever tribe, clan or race he may have been hitherto; nor do they betray any of those scruples and prejudices so deeply rooted in the Hindu mind.”
      – Mir Ghulam Hussain Khan (Siyar ul mutakherin, 1783)
    • Chibber's narrative should be read in a context. He was born in a family which was held in great respect and esteem by the Sikh community; several prominent members of this family being treasurers, constant companions or martyrs of the Guru's house. The last notable Chibber in the community was Chaupa Singh who was executed in the 1720s. It seems that the Chibber influence within the community diminished in the coming decades, bolstering envy and rage amongt the Chibbers who had seen their parivaars influence wane over the decades. Hence there were several attempts in Chibber literature of the mid 18th century to infer a preferential ranking of Chibber Brahmins and introduce casteist practises once again (see Rehatnama Chaupa Singh for example). This a theory I have developed myself so can not quote scholars who advocated this theory but all the facts can be double checked. We always have to read into an authors background and motives for writing a certain text. The sect that manipulated Guru Nanak Dev's Janamsakhis saying the Guru married a Muslim woman did so to cover the defect of their own leader who had married a Muslim lady (and was thus viewed as an outcaste by the larger society). Similarly several writers have tried to link Mani Singh to their own lineage or caste (Gyani Gian Singh 'Dullat' made Bhai Mani Singh a Dullat as well despite the lack of proof in 18th century literature of any such claim).

      Therefore I do not believe the Sakhi posted by the OP to be true, Chibber had a vested agenda to promote casteism and more specifically the preferential ranking of the (Chibber) Brahmins. Ever noticed how the Chibber literature cleverly says a Chibber put Patasey in the first Khandi Di Pahul ceremony, were the first to take amrit and so on? (historically contradicted by all existing written sources) [Bansawlinama Chapter 10 I believe]. Similarly the Rehatnama (oldest copy 1765, written by Kesar Singh Chibbers father Gurbaksh Singh Chibber) asks Sikhs to give preferential treatment to Chibber Brahmins.
    •     I know why he got arrested.  And I am not saying they targeted him because they thought "oh he is a mona so it makes him an easy target."   I am saying that because he is a mona, and because he is used to being able to identify as a Sikh when it suits him and fly under the radar when it is inconvenient, he was not as vigilant as he should have been.  Someone who goes through their entire life being identifiable as a Sikh every minute of every day, and experiences all of the baggage that that entails, is not going to have any illusions about what would await him in India if he was behind a website like neverforget84.
×