Jump to content

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

+1, He did what he wanted to do, without thinking of everyone involved. But what's wrong with having Non-Punjabi Sikhs? I think our greatest problem is limiting the Prachar to Punjab. The worst thing was giving a falling empire to a family that was obsessed with being king, most of his successors only ruled for about a year.

Jashb said, "Non-Sikhs" not "Non-Punjabi Sikhs." There's a world of difference.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
43 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Jashb said, "Non-Sikhs" not "Non-Punjabi Sikhs." There's a world of difference.

 

1 hour ago, jashb said:

Furthermore, by appointing non-Sikhs and worse still even non-Panjabis to the government, he committed the fatal mistake that made the collapse of Khalsa Raj inevitable. These outsiders had no stake whatsoever in the continuing future as a going concern of Panjab. Even a fool with no respect for Guru Ji's hukams should have been able to see what was forthcoming. Yet, the Maharaja apparently didn't.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Ranjit Singh isn't someone who most Sikhs would look-up to. The true Sikhs during his time didn't really like him much either, for his lack of Maryada.

That's not that high of a standard, average Singhs and Kaurs today probably had a better Maryada then he did.

'Than' my friend, not 'then.' The latter is for time whereas the former for comparison.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
12 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

'Than' my friend, not 'then.' The latter is for time whereas the former for comparison.

Sorry spell-check.:clap: corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jashb said:

 

For me, there is no more complex a figure in Sikh history, no greater a paradox, no other man that evokes a more diverse range of opinions emotions and feelings within the Kaum, than Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

If the Kaum were to properly consider, and with balance, assess the life, successes and failures of this remarkable man, I have no doubt that this would provide great lessons that would help us manage the future.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh, for the first time in history, so successfully defended Panjab from foreign invasion that he was able to take the fight against the islamic onslaught into the very regions from which the jihadis emerged. He countered and comprehensively defeated the jihadis of his time, people with the same ideology as modern day islamists, those who can reasonably be said to be the antecedents of the present day ISIS and taliban. This was no mean feat.

While assessing his achievements one has to bear in mind that the overwhelming majority of the citizens of Khalsa Raj belonged to the same mindset as the Panth's enemies. Yet, he actually managed to earn their respect, admiration and loyalty, even after he defeated them, to such an extent that they welcomed him. Whether this was the result of his sense of tolerance, his political expediency, or his weakness in excessively pandering to the islamic population to the detriment of the entire region, is not definite. I suspect the answer lies somewhat in degrees of all three.

Now, having said all that, it would be a matter of pure dishonesty if one did not provide balance and address the fact that in so doing, he committed the very serious transgressions against Guru Ji's hukams that would eventually consign Khalsa Raj to history.

What troubles me the most about the way he went about this is that Khalsa Raj did not belong to Maharaja Ranjit Singh, nor was it his creation, nor was it for him to throw away.

In this respect, the speech delivered by General Hari Singh Ji Nalwa, the greatest and most successful General of his time, in response to Maharaja Ranjit Singh's announcement that his son would succeed him, is particularly poignant and relevant. When assessing the life and achievements of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, we must never overlook the fact that Sadde das lakh Sikh fought and died in multiple genocides in order to achieve Khalsa Raj. Khalsa Raj was built on the foundation of these shaheedis of huge numbers of Sikhs over several generations for the cause of Sikhi and out of love for Guru Maharaj. It did not belong to a single family alone. But by choosing to pass on his reign to his son, Maharaja Ranjit Singh consigned the Kaum to a fate that we are still reeling from 170 years later. This nepotism was acted out in an almost nonchalantly shameless and neglectful manner.

General Hari Singh Ji Nalwa was entirely correct when he said that Kharak Singh, whilst being his friend and brother, was unsuitable and incapable of shouldering the responsibility of running Khalsa Raj. Yet this advice, which merely repeated what was by then already apparent among sincere Sikhs who cared about the future of the Kaum, had little to no effect on a man that started off his life as a Gursikh in the true sense of the term, and ended it as something quite different, as a creature that sought to ape the myopic rajputs of old.

Furthermore, by appointing non-Sikhs and worse still even non-Panjabis to the government, he committed the fatal mistake that made the collapse of Khalsa Raj inevitable. These outsiders had no stake whatsoever in the continuing future as a going concern of Panjab. Even a fool with no respect for Guru Ji's hukams should have been able to see what was forthcoming. Yet, the Maharaja apparently didn't.

The result of his non-adherence is plain for all to see. Panjab, the sohni di chirri of our ancestors only a few lifetimes ago, was reduced to dust. The parasitic non-Sikh traitors that Maharaja Ranjit Singh passed control to leached off the Kaum in the same way that the jews profiteered off post-great war Germany. However, the Germans at least identified, opposed and later avenged this treason. We never have, and, due to deliberately planted defects in the transmission of our values to future generations, designed to protect our oppressors, we quite possibly never will.

Nobody put a gun to his head and forced Maharaja Ranjit Singh to ignore, neglect, and dismiss Sikhi rehat in the brazen way he did. He did so purely of his own will.

And yet, for all of that, I still possess an outstanding admiration for the man, who was at one point, one of the greatest Sikh leaders in history. He is one of the greatest paradoxes I have known. Maharaja Ranjit Singh is for me simultaneously a source of great inspiration and pride, and an object of revile and disgust.

Whatever you think about Maharaja Ranjit Singh, and there is much to think about, we could do a lot worse than learn from both the positive and negative aspects of his example, of how to obtain sovereignty, and how to subsequently lose it.

In conclusion, when faced with the sobering fact that we have yet to recover our stolen land, there are few better examples to look to in this respect than our own. I have faith that Guru Maharaj has greater things planned for the Kaum than we know at present. And I believe that we were given Maharaja Ranjit Singh to learn from his successes and failures for a reason.

That's the essence of the article I posted:

'Ranjit Singh, himself a descendant of the famed Sirdar Charat Singh, re-connected the Sikhs with the very sub-continental past which the tenth Nanak had ordered the Khalsa to discard. The authority of the corporate Guru Panth was usurped and replaced with Imperialism. In the end, the path to ruin was paved when the precepts of the Gurus were roundly ignored by one and all. The Sikh masses adopted an apolitical stance and acted as silent spectators whilst their Raj slowly began to drift towards oblivion. The demise of Ranjit Singh owing to the frailty of the heart; the prominence of the non-Sikh Dogras; the Dogras’ running of the Raj as an autocracy and the conflict with the British were only the symptoms of an otherwise subtle disease. In the end, what was left of the glorious Halemi Raj envisioned by the Gurus? Nothing but shards.'

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

 

 

You said "Non-Punjabi Sikhs," he didn't. Why'd you drag religion into it when he was referring to culture? You do understand why he made the distinction?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Yes, but it was mostly his own personal kingdom, with just a Sikh name. Whereas Banda Singh Bahadur would take his time out of his day to do some Prachar, Ranjit Singh mostly added some idols at the most famous Gurdwaras at the time. We have to view Ranjit Singh's victories as his own personal victories, he fought among the Misls. 

You talk about Banda Singh Bahadur like this but it appears as if he had his own issues with many high ranking members of the Khalsa who perceived some of his practices as a deviation from accepted norms. Read Bhangu's work to learn all about it.

You need to study more before you open your mouth.

And truth be told. One Ranjit Singh is worth (at least) a million of Singhs like you mate. He got 5hit done, and created a powerful modern country out of chaos, and whilst surrounded by enemies on all sides. All you've done is b1tch out the place on the net.  And I bet you still haven't started training, or going to a shooting range out there in the states. Do you even ever leave your house? 

Edited by dallysingh101
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

+1, He did what he wanted to do, without thinking of everyone involved. But what's wrong with having Non-Punjabi Sikhs? I think our greatest problem is limiting the Prachar to Punjab. The worst thing was giving a falling empire to a family that was obsessed with being king, most of his successors only ruled for about a year.

The non-punjabis in this case were Europeans, Americans, Hindus, Muslims not sikhs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

You talk about Banda Singh Bahadur like this but it appears as if he had his own issues with many high ranking members of the Khalsa who perceived some of his practices as a deviation from accepted norms. Read Bhangu's work to learn all about it.

You need to study more before you open your mouth.

And truth be told. One Ranjit Singh is worth (at least) a million of Singhs like you mate. He got 5hit done, and created a powerful modern country out of chaos, and whilst surrounded by enemies on all sides. All you've done is b1tch out the place on the net.  And I bet you still haven't started training, or going to a shooting range out there in the states. Do you even ever leave your house? 

He only got stuff done because of his highly political Mother-in -law ...she was the initial driving force with other Misl leaders

Share this post


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

He only got stuff done because of his highly political Mother-in -law ...she was the initial driving force with other Misl leaders

Yeah sure, none of his own efforts and characteristics played a part. It was all down to a women.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dallysingh101 said:

Yeah sure, none of his own efforts and characteristics played a part. It was all down to a women.....

you forget he was a just a teen  at the beginning and she was the general of her husband's misl after his death, and he was surrounded by khalsa of greater experience who did the spade work , do not diminish how much he owed to his elders and army. Without them he would not have achieved that much and would have been another minor leader ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2
3 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

You talk about Banda Singh Bahadur like this but it appears as if he had his own issues with many high ranking members of the Khalsa who perceived some of his practices as a deviation from accepted norms. Read Bhangu's work to learn all about it.

You need to study more before you open your mouth.

And truth be told. One Ranjit Singh is worth (at least) a million of Singhs like you mate. He got 5hit done, and created a powerful modern country out of chaos, and whilst surrounded by enemies on all sides. All you've done is b1tch out the place on the net.  And I bet you still haven't started training, or going to a shooting range out there in the states. Do you even ever leave your house? 

Ranjit Singh only got strong because of the hard workers who fought to make his dream a reality, what he did was betray the hard workers, for his own self-interests. Also it's not a Sikh country, just another random state, that if he wasn't so selfish could have been a theocracy. Banda Singh Bahadur brought justice to someone who made a Shaheed of my Guru, (Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji), and the Chote Sahibzade, if there is anything I feel bad about that, it's that it wasn't me. Otherwise he was perfectly fine for someone who's not Guru Sahib himself, he made Guru Sahib proud, and you are here insulting him while praising Ranjit Singh? His own child became a Shaheed, while Ranjit Singh's son converted to Pakhandi Baba Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Ranjit Singh only got strong because of the hard workers who fought to make his dream a reality, what he did was betray the hard workers, for his own self-interests. Also it's not a Sikh country, just another random state, that if he wasn't so selfish could have been a theocracy. Banda Singh Bahadur brought justice to someone who made a Shaheed of my Guru, (Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji), and the Chote Sahibzade, if there is anything I feel bad about that, it's that it wasn't me. Otherwise he was perfectly fine for someone who's not Guru Sahib himself, he made Guru Sahib proud, and you are here insulting him while praising Ranjit Singh? His own child became a Shaheed, while Ranjit Singh's son converted to Pakhandi Baba Jesus.

Maybe he was realistic about ruling a volatile swathe of land. You think you could have done a better job? I doubt you would have lasted a week in that environment. 

If his son was essentially kidnapped and brainwashed as a child,thousands of miles away from his people and family, it's hardly his fault that he converted is it.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Ranjit Singh only got strong because of the hard workers who fought to make his dream a reality, what he did was betray the hard workers, for his own self-interests. Also it's not a Sikh country, just another random state, that if he wasn't so selfish could have been a theocracy. Banda Singh Bahadur brought justice to someone who made a Shaheed of my Guru, (Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji), and the Chote Sahibzade, if there is anything I feel bad about that, it's that it wasn't me. Otherwise he was perfectly fine for someone who's not Guru Sahib himself, he made Guru Sahib proud, and you are here insulting him while praising Ranjit Singh? His own child became a Shaheed, while Ranjit Singh's son converted to Pakhandi Baba Jesus.

Ranjit Singh was very astute politically. He obvious understood human nature very well.

As a leader you cannot do it all yourself but you surround yourself with better people and delegate. That is what he did.

He was able to bring all these people together and create a successful state,  that is a talent/skill in itself.

It may not have been the perfect state or an Idealist Sikh state but it is best that we ever had.

  • Like 2

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

    • Do you have sources for this?
    • In urdu we also use 'Mauze' so i doubt if it is hindi word.It sounds like a persian one.Indians have problem prouncing words which end with sound 'z'.Just like Mumtaz Mehal became Mumtaj Mehal and now just Taj Mehal.
    • i have no issue using persian,hindi,english words in my day to day conversations in punjab.I just though a good opportunity to learn "shuddh" punjabi. 
    • Sikhism needs neither a reformation nor a philosophy of free will. Reformations are for religions that are at a primitive tribal level in the first place. Sikhi starts off with Guru Nanak Ji feeding people langar, and preaching meditation of Satnam. If you start off with capturing war booty and sex slaves killing all the males, yeah, you need a reformation. Philosophy is (mostly) for people trying desperately to understand the universe without real divine knowledge. These types of efforts are called ਸਿਆਣਪਾਂ in Gurbani. (You did you Japji this morning, right?) All of these sianapan don't amount to a hill of beans. We don't have the burning need for philosophy that Westerners do because we can obtain complete knowledge via simran. ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੈ ਸਿਮਰਨਿ ਸਭੁ ਕਿਛੁ ਸੁਝੈ ॥
    • it's my fault, i should have phrased things a bit better. Basically based on the data he gathered same sex couples are more likely to settle into a routine and are less likely to do things out of said routine (such as cheating, which according to the data he gathered was surprisingly low compared to straight couples). By similar attributes I mean people like them in terms of personality and taste. In straight couples you can usually note a sort of polarity in the way they behave and their personalities.  Again this is based on one study, nothing official or on a large scale really.
×