Jump to content
TheeTurbanator

"When all other methods fail, it is proper to hold the sword in hand" - Guru Gobind Singh Ji: A Response to those who Advocate Violence

Recommended Posts

Pranam  Gurjant SINGH JIO,

KIRPAN IS TO PROTECT YOU  AS YOU DO BHAGTI AS >KIRPAN IS VAHIGUROO JORR IN SPIRIT<_/\_

prove to me you can get Jaggi out using offensive force with Kirpan, because that is just what our  adversaries waiting for...how many more Shaheeds, that has only made them  more corrupt, receive more support and manipulate justice  more?_/\_

MAAN JEETAI JAG JEET!♡

Guru Nanak kirpa dya mehr karo Jio_/\_ 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 8:40 PM, TheeTurbanator said:

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!

 

Recently, there has been an assassination attempt on a man named "Kuldeep Singh" from Virginia, USA, over the desecration of the "Khand Di Phaul" Amrit Sanchaar ceremony of the Khalsa Panth. In May of 2016 a famous Sikh preacher named "Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale" was also faced with an assassination attempt, which was also carried out by not the Indian government or some external power, but by fellow Sikhs. Without going into the specific issues behind the motivation of their attempted assassinations or the issues themselves, I would like to discuss the very use of violence as per Sikhi.

To some Sikhs, it might be okay to make mockery of the religion, bring sudden drastic anti-Gurmat change. You based your whole post on two events and showed that somehow they are the victims. To folks like me, they are the well known perpetrators who should face stiff punishments. Your first paragraph saved me time to read rest of the thread. Know the person and his deeds first before throwing all support.

 

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, S1ngh said:

. You based your whole post on two events and showed that somehow they are the victims.

My post wasn't showing how they are the victims, it was that a non-violent act should not be met with violence. There are other ways we can combat this than go out and assassinate people for victimless crimes. 

 

36 minutes ago, S1ngh said:

To folks like me, they are the well known perpetrators who should face stiff punishments.

Of course they should face a punishment, however it should not be physical, let alone death. If someone changes a Khalsa practice, such as the Khand Di Phaul, then they should try to justify their views as per Gurmat, and if they fail. they should apologize, however even if they dont, they should not be killed, an excommunication and boycott is more than enough. 

 

39 minutes ago, S1ngh said:

Your first paragraph saved me time to read rest of the thread.

If you are going to rebut an argument, you should at least read the entire thing in context. 

 

39 minutes ago, S1ngh said:

Know the person and his deeds first before throwing all support.

I am fully aware of the perpetrators of these actions, and I still agree they should not be KILLED, and in the worse case excommunicated, do you have a problem with that? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

My post wasn't showing how they are the victims, it was that a non-violent act should not be met with violence. There are other ways we can combat this than go out and assassinate people for victimless crimes. 

LOL you are completely deluded. Please read some itihaas.

The corrupt masands met their end by being thrown into boiling oil as per guru ji's hukam. 

You are just attempting to spread your manmat, so please stop talking nonsense before you embarrass yourself further.  

  • Like 1
  • Confused 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, S1ngh said:

Know the person and his deeds first before throwing all support.

"Giani" (actually "agiani" ) Kuldeep "Singh" (the one who dropped 3 banis from Amrit Sanchar) is a bemukh, loser, fool, and &lt;banned word filter activated&gt;. He was on that website of Ragi Darshan Singh's (which I won't link to), posting a list inane "questions" for the Singh Sahibs undermining faith in basic Sikh tenets, including Dasam Patshah's bani.

I was quite shocked when "Giani" Kuldeep "Singh" took the step of arranging an "Amrit Sanchar" without the 3 banis from the Dasam Granth Sahib. I don't remember if I posted specifically about the Virginia "Amrit Sanchar", but I have posted regarding documentary evidence for the 5 Amrit banis. 

22 hours ago, S1ngh said:

To some Sikhs, it might be okay to make mockery of the religion, bring sudden drastic anti-Gurmat change. You based your whole post on two events and showed that somehow they are the victims. To folks like me, they are the well known perpetrators who should face stiff punishments.

That said, for me it is not OK to make a mockery of the religion, or to bring drastic (or gradual) anti-Gurmat change. They are definitely perpetrators, and they will face punishments in hell (as detailed in Gurbani, posted by me many times previously).

As for punishment in this world, Gur-Itihas does not show that Guru Sahib had propagators of anti-Gurmat killed. For example, Pirth Chand set up his own parallel Guruship (necessarily denouncing the legitimacy of the Guruship of Guru Arjan Dev ji) and his own "Darbar Sahib". I would say that that definitely qualifies as anti-Gurmat. But Guru Sahib did not have him killed.

Instead, the Guru's Sikhs (Bhai Gurdas ji/Baba Buddha ji) preached against the heretics, and warned the Sangat, including via text (Vaars). Which is exactly what we should be doing, with words (among our friends/relatives), katha, speeches, lectures, symposiums, pamphlets, Youtube videos, Internet discussion boards, Facebook, etc.

I think it's a wonderful thing that Sikhsangat is generally considered an anti-jihadi / anti-radical Islam website. But one of the reasons that people detest radical Islam is stuff like the fact that if you become an apostate in Islam, the punishment is death. By contrast, in our divine religion, the punishment (in this world) is merely that you go on your own way, with Sikhs having nothing to do with you.

That's why the Prophet Mohammed had Asma bint Marwan, a female Arab poet, killed for ridiculing him. See here. And on the other hand Guru Har Rai Sahib excommunicated (not executed) Ram Rai.

I think it would be extremely bad for Americans to start thinking that Sikhs are nothing more than Muslims with kirpans, killing anybody that doesn't agree with them. It will be very difficult for us to live in Western countries if that false notion takes hold.

I believe I have credibility to speak on this issue because I am one of the most conservative posters on this site. With the greatest of respect for you and other posters on this site, I hope that we will all come together to vigorously denounce Sikhs heretics like "Giani" Kuldeep "Singh" of Virginia while at the same time educating people that a death penalty for apostasy is not a part of Gur-Itihas. Bhulchuk maaf.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

My post wasn't showing how they are the victims, it was that a non-violent act should not be met with violence. There are other ways we can combat this than go out and assassinate people for victimless crimes. 

 

Of course they should face a punishment, however it should not be physical, let alone death. If someone changes a Khalsa practice, such as the Khand Di Phaul, then they should try to justify their views as per Gurmat, and if they fail. they should apologize, however even if they dont, they should not be killed, an excommunication and boycott is more than enough. 

 

If you are going to rebut an argument, you should at least read the entire thing in context. 

 

I am fully aware of the perpetrators of these actions, and I still agree they should not be KILLED, and in the worse case excommunicated, do you have a problem with that? 

Gursikhs will do what Gurbani tells them.  This is why Gursikhs reading Gurbani and don't attain manmat from your post or @N30S1NGH.  Both of you can make up all the theories in your head and write them on this forum and others, but no Guraikh will pay attention.  The Gursikhs face is turned to the Guru and they don't fear worldly punishment by so called democratic governments.  Neither of you can stop the Gursikhs.  

Those who will not do anything and will sink in the deepest ocean will bow their heads to n30singh theories.  

I'm satisfied with telling Sikhs to read Gurbani and do what Gurbani says on when to use the sword. Gursikhs do not adhere to Gurbani wrapped in western logic.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

Gursikhs will do what Gurbani tells them. 

Yeah, perhaps you could have bothered to post a bit of Gurbani on what Sikhs are supposed to do with bemukhs.

Gurbani tells Sikhs to boycott bemukhs.

It does not tell Sikhs to kill bemukhs.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you not read a single thing I wrote? I literally justified my views using Gurbani and History. What I say literally can’t be Manmat because I use Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s literal words to back it up. 

You are indirectly advocating terrorism. You are creating parallels with ISIS and radical Muslims who want to kill people who they disagree with. 

People like you need to calm down, drink some lassi, put your Kirpans in their sheets, and just contemplate Gurbani before you lecture others on things you don’t understand. 

I challenge you to a debate to prove your points using Gurbani and the Gurus history, will you accept? Or run away like the other coward! 

Edited by TheeTurbanator
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

People like you need to calm down, drink some lassi, put your Kirpans in their sheets, and just contemplate Gurbani before you lecture others on things you don’t understand. 

Although you can see from my posts in this thread that I agree with your main point, by posting this, I predict you will get into a shouting match with AkaliFauj and others, definitely not leading to you convincing him or others of the fact that Sikhi does not advocate countering apostasy with the death penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have already provided more than enough evidence to support my arguement, and the fact that this user has the audacity to tell me that IM a Manmukh when I literally quoted the Guru twice and provided multiple real life examples of the Guru, just shows how intellectually deficient he is. 

Its obvious that proper intellectual arguments aren’t going to work, and you have to sometimes speak their language. 

I also would like to point out that their position isn’t advocating Death for Apostasy in Sikhi, it’s for death for the desecration of the traditions of the Khalsa Panth. I’m sure they wouldn’t care if people leave Sikhi, they just care when they attack the Panth. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

I have already provided more than enough evidence to support my arguement,

No offense, but you didn't. You provided enough evidence, but not more than enough.

You provided an analysis of the chunkar pangti, plus analysis of issues surrounding targeted killings, including the backfiring of such attempts, almost all of which I agree with. The problem with this is, although I agreed with it, it's possible that others could disagree, and view it as just you spouting your opinions. You could have countered that by tying your analysis to concrete examples from Gur-Itihas.

But you provided zero examples from the history of the lifetime of the Gurus regarding the non-killing of Guru Sahib's opponents, that is Baba Sri Chand, Dasu, Datu, Pirthi Chand, Ram Rai, Suraj Mal, etc. That would be more than enough evidence, and could possibly have shut down your opponents in this thread before they got started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, superdupersingh said:

LOL you are completely deluded. Please read some itihaas.

The corrupt masands met their end by being thrown into boiling oil as per guru ji's hukam. 

You are just attempting to spread your manmat, so please stop talking nonsense before you embarrass yourself further.  

I was anticipating this argument, glad you bought it up.. here is good research thread on this. Whilst it maintains authenticity of this important historical event- it explores and provides much needed context to it for example- monarch times vs current democratic times where church and state are seperate and currently there are laws to deal with this-

http://www.sikhawareness.com/topic/16506-masand-story-is-been-used-as-precedence-for-panthic-policiing/

Share this post


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

Gursikhs will do what Gurbani tells them.  This is why Gursikhs reading Gurbani and don't attain manmat from your post or @N30S1NGH.  Both of you can make up all the theories in your head and write them on this forum and others, but no Guraikh will pay attention.  The Gursikhs face is turned to the Guru and they don't fear worldly punishment by so called democratic governments.  Neither of you can stop the Gursikhs.  

Those who will not do anything and will sink in the deepest ocean will bow their heads to n30singh theories.  

I'm satisfied with telling Sikhs to read Gurbani and do what Gurbani says on when to use the sword. Gursikhs do not adhere to Gurbani wrapped in western logic.

Sunny Hundal (brother of late great gursikh bhai jagraj singh ji) is doing better job than you these days, he tacking cdn media with whole current cdn sikh extremism narrative and is united with all sikhs-one voice against current onslaught conservative media with goi back drop influence and whilst you prefer keep fighting with fellow sikhs. 

Come on dude, we can settle our old scores when we were both retired on park bench in bc while our grand kids play in the park, time to become one voice now.

GOI trying to crave out divided another sikh body in canada besides wso to push their chapli water down version of sikhi and khalsa, and lets not let them and play into their hands.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another angle besides the obvious violence is never okay to settle non violent disputes:

Psychologically speaking

- fear based approach may work short term but hardly works in long run- history is witness take a look at the state of muslims and islam. Its good to learn from your mistakes but its even wiser to learn from other people mistakes.

-  Almost assassinated leader/preacher/journalist, gains more credibility /victim in masses /public opinion than academia rebuttal /massive sikhi parchar/ ignored/ troll one*, again history is witness whether is ujjal dosanjh (look at his influence in media),  tara singh hayer- journalist-before he was fuddu writer in des pardes when he was alive than he is revered matryr in journalist world , ranjit singh dhandrianwale before he was sant wanna be now after assignation attempt got huge following, and example op shared.

this is great thread by op and great article provided by op- https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnrampton/2015/04/09/10-tips-to-dealing-with-trolls/#52598ad454f4

- Even in elections world wide, no political opponent will use violence or force against political oppopent to sway public opnion as its counter intuitive, they will use other tactics- media, social media - recent huge news of shady manipulation by  cambridge analytica of tapping and exploiting deep underlining fears of swing voters.

So wake up from village mentality.

 

 

 

Edited by N30S1NGH
  • 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

    • Ahmediyas: a historically persecuted -- at the hands of mainstream Islam! -- Muslim sect that's held up as an example of the "good", acceptable, and tolerant side of Islam. Yet, this is what happens when you give any Islamic group an inch; they reveal their true hand, and reach for a mile! This is EXACTLY the reason I roll my eyes when people get misty eyed about fringe Muslim sects -- such as Sufis -- being an antidote to the mainstream khattar orthodoxy of the Sunni & Shia crews. The fact isn't that Ahmediyas and Sufis don't share the beliefs and the aim of their Ummah brethren, i.e. the establishment of the Caliphate and the subjugation of the Kaffir. The difference is these minor sects desire the same outcomes as their bigger brothers, only they aren't too fussed on getting to that destination in a hurry, as opposed to the Sunnis and Shia who want it all yesterday. The Ummah reigns supreme. Muslim apologists and sympathisers are either too dense to process this FACT, or are willfully omitting these inconvenient truths in order to strengthen their narrative of #notallmuslims.
    • As per usual,  our openness and tolerance is seen as weakness for others, and they take full advantage. 
    • This is nothing new. I tried setting up an initiative to defeat this trend; happened a good few years back on this forum, but some of us decided to establish a body of sorts which would publish and distribute literature regarding the falsity spread by other faiths vis-a-vis Sikhi. Because we were based in different countries we used to stay in contact via email to exchange ideas and finalize publications in our own respective countries. I wrote and dispatched a particular article on the falsity that Bhagat Fareed was a hardcore Muslim and by incorporating his Bani into the Adi Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the Sikh Gurus proved their respect for Islam and hence all Sikhs should become Muslims. Here are some examples of what I wrote: "For Bhagat Farid, and Sufis in general, life is but nihilistic. Such a perception, logically, leads to renunciation and asceticism. Farid asserts:

      'Farid, had my throat been slit on the same day as my umbilical cord, I would not have been prey to trouble nor weathered such hardship. Farid, I alone thought I was in pain, but the whole world is in pain. I ascended my roof and witnessed each and every house in flame.' 
      -Saloks 76 and 81, ASGGS, Ang. 1381-82.

      When Guru Nanak Dev Ji had entered Multan, the local Sufis had tried to eject him on the pretext of his criticism of the Sufi order. The Guru had rejected their renunciation and described their acts of obeisance as charades. With this particular incident in mind, Guru Arjan Dev Ji elected to reply to Farid with the following:

      'The world is akin to a garden, Farid, in which poisonous plants take root. They for whom the Master cares suffer not at all.' 

      And:

      'How sweet be this life oh Farid! With health the body blooms, but they who love their dear beloved Lord are rarely found.' 
      -Mohalla 5, Saloks 82-83, ASGGS, Ang. 1382.

      The writings of Farid were incorporated into the Sikh canon to refute the notion that life, in general, is painful. For the Gurus life is what one makes out of it. Ignorance, naturally, leads to pain whilst knowledge leads to joy. By positing their views below Farids', the Sikh Gurus refuted the Sufi notion of life being suffering in toto.'   "The Sufi path of asceticism is best summed up in the following conversation between Sayid Muhammad Gesu Daraz and a suppliant. Daraz was the acolyte of Shaikh Farid Nasir-u'd-Din-Chiarg-i-Delhi, the disciple of Nizam-u'd-din Auliya who was the successor to Baba Farid. This conversation is recorded in the 'Jawama-u'l-Kilam' and focuses on the physical suffering weathered by Baba Farid in his search for the Divine. Pledging his mind to the Lord's path, the latter Farid hung upside down in a well for forty days and nights. 

      'Then one day when Sayid Muhammad Gesu Daraz was recounting the pledge of (Baba Farid), a man queried: "how is it that blood does not run out of the eyes and mouth of the person who undertakes it and how is it that foodstuff and other bodily elements do not come out of him?" The Saint explained that in a body as emaciated as that of Farid, the question of food and blood no longer lingers as austerities have reduced such a body to mere skeleton.' 

      Bhagat Farid writes:

      'Farid, if one were to hack my body, not a drop of blood would ooze from it. Those who are imbued with the Lord's love have no blood left in their beings.' 
      -Salok 51, ASGGS, Ang. 1380.

      Guru Amardass Ji comments on this Shabad in the following way:

      'The body is all blood, without blood it cannot exist. Those who are imbued with the Lord's love have not a single drop of selfish blood in their bodies. When the fear of Divine enters one's being, it becomes emaciated, and the blood of greed departs. As flames purify metal, so too does the fear of the Divine cast out impure inclinations. They alone are beautiful, Nanak, who are dyed with the love of the Lord.'
      -Mohalla 3, ASGGS, Salok 52, Ang. 1380. 

      Farid's ascetic undertones are sidelined, by the Guru, to provide a more rational interpretation of his words. Farid's "blood" becomes "selfish blood" and the external is transformed into the internal. It is not the physical frame which matters but the internal, the spiritual. Only through spiritual austerities can inimical inclinations depart; physical austerities only invite weakness and prolonged suffering."   "Now, we will look at the Bani of Bhagat Farid along with the relevant commentary by the Sikh Gurus. 

      'Farid, she who did not enjoy her spouse when black-haired, will she enjoy him when grey-haired? Love the Lord with such love that your hair's color will never change!'
      -Salok 12, ASGGS, Ang. 1378.

      Bhagat Farid holds that youth is conducive to following the spiritual path, in old age it is a lost cause. Guru Amardass Ji, who became the third Nanak at the age of 72, provides a commentary on this shabad:

      'Farid, whether one's hair be black or grey, the Lord is ever present if one remembers him. True love does not come from one's own desire, that cup of the Master's love he himself gives to whomever he desires.'
      -Mohalla 3, Salok 13, ASGGS, Ang. 1378.

      Bhagat Farid believes effort to be necessary vis-a-vis the spiritual path; the Sikh Gurus concur but to an extent. All transpires due to the Divine Will and man's efforts have a limit. Divine Will is more pontificate than man's efforts; man should elect to reside in this will and recognize where effort ends. From a Nanakian perspective effort is necessary in the temporal paradigm, but in the spiritual paradigm success depends on the Divine initiative. Guru Nanak Dev Ji states:

      'Does it matter if one is a swan or heron on whom the Lord casts his glance? Sayeth Nanak that if he so desires, crowns turn into swans.'
      -Mohalla 1, Salok 124, ASGGS, Ang. 1384. 

      The Lord is supreme in all that he does.

      Bhagat Farid then utilizes martial scenery:

      'One who is not welcome by her in-laws, and who has not place at her parents' house; and whose spouse does not care an iota for her, is she truly a happily married wife?'
      -Salok 31, ASGGS, Ang. 1379. 

      The 'parents' house' symbolizes societal life, the 'in-laws' spiritual life and the 'spouse' the Lord. Bhagat Farid is commenting on those spiritualists, those devotees, who desire the best of both spiritualism and societal living. He feels that by pursuing both concepts, one ultimately fails in all that he/she commits to. Guru Nanak Dev Ji comments:

      'At her in-laws and at her parents' house, she belongs to her spouse, the Divine beloved who is inaccessible and unfathomable. Oh Nanak! That one is indeed a happily married bride, who pleases the indifferent one.'
      -Mohalla 1, Salok 32, ASGGS, Ang. 1379.

      In contrast to Farid, the Guru elaborates that via Divine Grace both the temporal and spiritual paradigms become successful for the devotees. The true spiritualist is one who pursues both fields rather than renouncing one over the other. Nonetheless, hypocrisy in both fields should be avoided."   "In Suhi Lalit, Bhagat Farid forewarns:

      'You could not construct a raft when required. Now that the ocean is full and overflowing, it is hard to traverse. Do not touch the saffron flower for it's color will depart, my beloved. Rahau.
      The bride is weak and her husband's command is too hard to bear. As the milk does not return to her breast, nor will the soul return to the body. Sayeth Farid, friends, when the spouse calls this soul departeth crestfallen and the body is reduced to ashes.'
      -Suhi Lalit 1, ASGGS, Ang. 794.

      Guru Nanak Dev Ji, prior to Farid's verse, expounds:

      'Make meditation and restraint the raft via which to traverse the flowing stream. Your pass will be comfortable as if there is no ocean or overflowing stream. Your name alone is the unfading matter with which this cloak is dyed; my Beloved Lord, this color is perennial. My dear companions have departed, how will they meet the Lord? If they are united in virtue, the Lord will unite them with himself. Once united the mortal does not separate if the union be true. The cycle of birth and death is nullified by the True, Eternal Lord. She who removes her own self-centrism sews herself a garment to please her spouse. By the Guru's words, she obtained the fruit of the nectar of the Lord's word. Sayeth Nanak, my companions, my spouse be dear to me. We be the Lord's handmaidens; he our husband.'
      -Mohalla 1, Suhi 4, Ang. 729.

      Bhagat Farid provides a picture of doom and gloom by lamenting lost opportunities. He focuses on old age, where mental and physical faculties are too frail to be attuned to Divine contemplation. Guru Nanak Dev Ji, instead, expounds that it is never too late to focus on the Lord (one should remember Guru Amardass Ji here) for the Beloved is not harsh nor his commands. Via the saffron flower, Bhagat Farid warns of the fleeting pleasures of the world -here today, gone tomorrow- Guru Nanak Dev Ji instead elaborates that all pleasures belong to the Lord and via merging with him, all pleasures become permanent for he is the highest pleasure of all. 

      For Farid, death is the final test; even the faithful, in his view, should fear it for the soul never returns to the body. Guru Nanak Dev Ji however believes death to be a joy and a privilege of the valorous, for it is via death that one perfects his/her union with the Divine.

      From a Nanakian perspective, Farids's words apply to the manmukh and not the Gurmukh. But even a manmukh is worthy of Divine Grace, provided he recants at the ultimate moment."   "Bhagat Farid, a Sufi, informs us:

      'My physical frame is oven-hot; my bones are the firewood. If my feet fail, I shall walk upon my head to meet my Beloved.'
      -Salok 119, ASGGS, Ang. 1384.

      Bhagat Farid utilizes the metaphor of a kiln to depict his love for the Lord. A Sufi, his ascetic concepts however were not in line with Gurmat. Guru Nanak Dev Ji refutes his call for such asceticism by commenting:

      'Do not heat your physical frame oven-hot; burn not your bones like firewood. What harm have they committed that you torture them such? Rather behold the Beloved within your soul, Farid.'
      -Salok 120, ASGGS, Ang. 1384.

      Bhagat Farid is of the mind that the human body is but a prison and the soul it's captive. The Sikh Gurus believe that the human body is a temple, a locus where the Lord resides and awaits his devotee. By utilizing this Shabad of Farid, the Gurus desired that their Sikhs imbue the same zeal as the Sufi did whilst also discarding his asceticism; hence the refutation. Throughout Bhagat Bani we find a similar concept at play. The Sikh Gurus initiate a written dialogue with the radicals of their time and provide an unalloyed picture of the Divine Truth. For Farid, creation is a falsity; for the Gurus it is a truth. Farid's asceticism renders the body as simply an object; the Gurus however perceive it to be divine and encourage their Sikhs to employ it in the service of the Divine by societal living." I printed all this out in pamphlet form and took it to a local Nagar Kirtan when I was in Australia and man, some of the Muslims burned. A few confrontations occurred, "how can you say Guru Nanak was a non-Muslim?!" "Gobind Singh made you anti-Muslim." "Your history is a lie, all Gurus were Muslims and they even married Muslims!" Basically they were clutching at straws. The pamphlets were enough to make the Sikhs ignore these idiots and they grew worried and left the scene. Later a famous attendant Gyani, from Taksal (and who I will not name), got hold of one of the pamphlets. After having it explained to him he called me over and asked me what jatha I belonged to. I told him none. Then he asked me where I got this information from. I told him my sources. Basically his problem was that I was not crediting any jatha on my pamphlet. He asked me to mention Taksal in them but I refused. Few days later all the pamphlets were thrown in the trash and I was told to abstain from publishing such (and here's how they described them) lies. The youth wanted more, but the Gurughar committee would have none of it. The main problem, here, is the liberal fuddu attitude our qaum has that respect all faiths at the expense of your own.  After this some of us decided to stick to the social media. There was veer Bijla Singh Ji with his Search Sikhism page which, back in the heyday of grooming, forced several Muslim preachers to quit their anti-Sikh proselytizing. There were a few more who set up Tisarpanth. Then there was The Truth of Sikhi and Shamshir Publications. Bijla Singh Ji advised us but out of the three initiatives set up, only one is going strong and the others were forced to close down. Why? Because they had to hit the streets and they faced the same problem which I did- our own elders were and still are shooting us down. If we had claimed affiliation with some jatha, then we would have been lionized.   
    • In that way you're right. It is a big deal. My heart would pain to see anyone lost to Islam especially on a large scale. And your cautionary message is well founded.  But in the fake news, shame Sikhi, propaganda way I feel it was being used. Pfft. In that context I feel more a response of "And? Big deal. Who gives a ****"
    • That's her father in law Tarsem Singh of Hushiarpur, he is the village Granthi.   Her father's name is Monohar Lal of Delhi and her name is Kiran Bala. Sikhs don't have names like Lal and Bala. These are typical Hindu names.
×