Thakur Dalip Singh Namdhari present head challenged RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat on his face

[Guest]

Ram Singh was not the only person who was known as "Guru" among his sangat.

After the demise of Guru Gobind Singh ji, there was quite frequent "siapa" among the Sikh communities of the Indian Subcontinent as to who was the next Guru, although Guru Gobind Singh ji had bestowed the Guruship to Adi Granth Sahib ji. Sources indicate people like Banda Singh (disputed), some Ajit Singh (and his sons) who lived near Delhi and who was thought to be a "son" of Guru Gobind Singh ji (modern historians say he was adopted by Guru ji)- which is quite contradictory, considering that there is a manuscript written in Persian that says he died in Rajasthan fighting in a skirmish between Sikhs and Rajput Castle Guards, during Guru Gobind Singh ji's way to Nanded with Bahadur Shah).  After the 1750s, Sikhs seem to have universally agreed on having Guru Granth Sahib as the 11th and eternal Guru.

Before the end of the Sikh empire, the title "Guru" was used quite frequently, even among the Sikhs, despite the fact that all Sikhs revered the ten Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib. Even today, kids that learn tabla and other instruments often refer to their teachers as "Gurus". So, Maybe it was used just for teachers and saints, as back then Sikhs and Hindus shared many practises, whilst the 11 original Sikh Gurus were distinguished?  Maybe the modern Namdharis have been misled to believe that their Guru-line is the real one? Maybe Ram Singh was intended to be a Saint, but later on his successors broke away? 

[jkvlondon]

2 hours ago, 5akaalsingh said:

Ram Singh was not the only person who was known as "Guru" among his sangat.

After the demise of Guru Gobind Singh ji, there was quite frequent "siapa" among the Sikh communities of the Indian Subcontinent as to who was the next Guru, although Guru Gobind Singh ji had bestowed the Guruship to Adi Granth Sahib ji. Sources indicate people like Banda Singh (disputed), some Ajit Singh (and his sons) who lived near Delhi and who was thought to be a "son" of Guru Gobind Singh ji (modern historians say he was adopted by Guru ji)- which is quite contradictory, considering that there is a manuscript written in Persian that says he died in Rajasthan fighting in a skirmish between Sikhs and Rajput Castle Guards, during Guru Gobind Singh ji's way to Nanded with Bahadur Shah).  After the 1750s, Sikhs seem to have universally agreed on 

Before the end of the Sikh empire, the title "Guru" was used quite frequently, even among the Sikhs, despite the fact that all Sikhs revered the ten Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib. Even today, kids that learn tabla and other instruments often refer to their teachers as "Gurus". So, Maybe it was used just for teachers and saints, as back then Sikhs and Hindus shared many practises, whilst the 11 original Sikh Gurus were distinguished?  Maybe the modern Namdharis have been misled to believe that their Guru-line is the real one? Maybe Ram Singh was intended to be a Saint, but later on his successors broke away? 

'Ajit' Singh was adopted by Mata Sundari ji after Guru Pita ji went towards Nanded after Talwandi Sabo so was never really acknowledged as anything more than an adopted son who made a name for disappointing his mother and showing arrogance .

 

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

'Ajit' Singh was adopted by Mata Sundari ji after Guru Pita ji went towards Nanded after Talwandi Sabo so was never really acknowledged as anything more than an adopted son who made a name for disappointing his mother and showing arrogance .

 

But there is a contemporary Mughal source that claims he died in Rajasthan, while later Sikh and non-Sikh sources both verify his existence and Guru claims. Most likely he lived to become a fake Guru. Quite ungrateful guy, indeed

[Guest]

22 hours ago, SuchaSoorma said:

These namdharis are not Sikhs. They say a lot but in the end but dont't follow through. They might say they are not hindus but they also pratice so many hindu rituals such as aarti standing up with thaals and they also do havans. If they were truly against the RSS and Hinduism they would start practicing actual SIkhi given to us not this Brahmin one they follow.

I do aarti aarta standing up with thaals, infront of my shastar prakash, and so do lots of other Nihangs. It was puratan rehat until the British attempted to change everything (which they did). (Hence why they teach colonial Sikhism at school).

[SuchaSoorma]

21 hours ago, DayaKaur said:

Please first clarify the definition of Sikh and Hindu. Who is Sikh? Who is Hindu? Please explain this. Ritual of Aarti is also carried out in Hazoor Sahib too. Aren't they Sikhs? And also in many more Gurudwaras disciples perform Aarti. Aren't they Sikhs? Our Gurus while elevating successor of Guru Gaddi, always put some coins and one coconut. Aren't they Sikhs? Please clarify.

Sikh is someone who follows the teaching of the 10 gurus.A hindu is people who believe in devtaey, aartis, etc. No the hazur sahib people won't be sikhs. they have gone so far from true sikhi that they are basically hindus. they rely on these karam kand elements of religion. They have gone away from the true message and root of sikhi. Gurus put coins and coconut I didn't say that was wrong. You can doubt what the gurus did, you can't compare them to regular sikhs. The gurus also never did any aarti standing up. Guru Ji set the aarti to be sung in kirtan form like how other shabad are sung (i.e on a stage).

[SuchaSoorma]

21 hours ago, DayaKaur said:

Has guru nanak dev and guru gobind singh ji said that I am sikh, is it written in any gurbani in sri guru granth sahib ji? Has guru nanak dev ji and guru gobind singh ji said ever that I belong only to the Sikhs or I am only the guru of the Sikhs? any answer according to the gurbani? 

Guru ji says they are the khalsa and apart of it. While guru ji can be guru of the whole world that does not mean everyone is a sikh. If Ram Rahim claims to be guru of world does not make him your guru right? You can only adopt someone as guru if you live life as they have said in texts. Guru ji clearly gives gaddi to SGGSG according to many sources not believing it and making random fairytales of guru ji living 100? and whatever year is wrong.

[SuchaSoorma]

On 4/7/2018 at 2:22 PM, monatosingh said:

I do aarti aarta standing up with thaals, infront of my shastar prakash, and so do lots of other Nihangs. It was puratan rehat until the British attempted to change everything (which they did). (Hence why they teach colonial Sikhism at school).

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SuchaSoorma said:

You and other nihang says might do a lot of stuff but does not mean its right. Guru ji criticized these empty rituals and told us to focus on the self and shabad itself. To do kirtan of the shabad not use them to do some hindu rituals. This is not the puratan rehat it is the corrupted rehat by Brahminical influences in the panth which have been there way before the british.

You link to puratan rehat a lot, but have you actually attempted to look at them?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, SuchaSoorma said:

Sikh is someone who follows the teaching of the 10 gurus.A hindu is people who believe in devtaey, aartis, etc. No the hazur sahib people won't be sikhs. they have gone so far from true sikhi that they are basically hindus. they rely on these karam kand elements of religion. They have gone away from the true message and root of sikhi. Gurus put coins and coconut I didn't say that was wrong. You can doubt what the gurus did, you can't compare them to regular sikhs. The gurus also never did any aarti standing up. Guru Ji set the aarti to be sung in kirtan form like how other shabad are sung (i.e on a stage).

how sure are you about your claims? do you have any historical source to back-up your claims?

 

[Guest Kaur 2]

VJKK VJKF

On 8 April 2018 at 9:19 AM, SuchaSoorma said:

You and other nihang says might do a lot of stuff but does not mean its right. Guru ji criticized these empty rituals and told us to focus on the self and shabad itself. To do kirtan of the shabad not use them to do some hindu rituals. This is not the puratan rehat it is the corrupted rehat by Brahminical influences in the panth which have been there way before the british.

If you don't believe it, then good for you. Why are you forcing your personal beliefs upon someone else? Guru Ji said a lot of other things too, about nimarta, seeing Vaheguru in others but we forget that and we want to discuss pointless things about whether to do aarti aarta with a thaal or not, its all about vishvaas and pyaar at the end of the day and not about being against hindus and nihangs. I don't understand whats so bad about doing aarti aarta with a thaal, clearly @monatosingh is not doing a puja at a mandir and even if he was (sorry veerji  ) how would it affect you? We need to cleanse our inside and have that pyaar for each other first as a family and change ourselves then we should criticise others. Who are we to criticise and speak manda about someone. Only Guru Ji has the authority to judge us. We really need to better ourselves as a kaum... smh

I'm sure that we can't change others actions but we can change our own. Cleansing ourselves fom the outside is so easy but when we try cleansing ourselves from the inside we truly struggle. If we can't accept others then we should go about it another way. Theres always 2 ways of doing things, the way that will land you with good consequences and the other way which will land you with bad consequences. Its up to us which path we choose to take. We can choose to see ourselves as lowly and pray to Vaheguru that: Ehnu sumat bakhsho Ji or we can choose to get into pointless arguements with that person. Its all about pyaar, if you explain to someone with kindness and respect why you think somethings wrong they will listen, if you start having a go at someone because of what they believe in they will have a go back at you. 

VJKK VJKF