tonyhp32

Singh2 In a debate one would assume that both persons would be aware of issues but in this case you do not have a clue about McLeod or Peshaura Singh. You claimed In the video on another thread he states that he made a handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and then he gave a photocopy of his handwritten copy to Guru Nanak Dev University. They might have microfilmed or microfiched this copy. But nowhere does he claim that he digitised manuscripts. I think you came up with this statement solely to defend your views on Mcleod Get off you high horse! Peshaura Singh agreed in 1994 at Akal Takht that his findings in his thesis were flawed but when he got back to the West he regurgitated the same bukwas in his following books. His favourite line of thought is that Guru Arjan Dev worked on a number of drafts of the Guru Granth Sahib and each and every manuscript he comes across which are from Mina sources he immediately ascribes to be 'an early draft of the Guru Granth Sahib'! If you are unaware of what Peshaura Singh has written then STOP trying to make him into some great scholar. What kind of fool takes a view on a controversial person like PS and yet knows next to nothing about his views! My suggestion to you is to stop writing pointless and ignorant posts on this thread, go away and do some research and come back in a few days after you know exactly what the issues are concerning Mcleod and Peshaura Singh. Btw stop trying to imply that I support Kala afghana. I don't.

Let's cut to the chase. Singh2 doesn't know that there is a big difference between digitising a document and making a handwritten copy! Now i wonder given McLoed's proclivity to mischief did it ever enter his head upon learning of the burning of the library that he could amend the only copy in existence to create further mischief? McLeod make a photo copy of his handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and gave it to Guru Nanak University. This seems to be the sum total of his 'digitising' the texts subsequently destroyed in the library in 1984. For this Singh2 is prepared to forgive McLeod and lionise his chelay like Peshaura Singh. McLeod's legacy is not just his own works but the network of chelay like Peshaura Singh, Harjot Oberoi and others who will infect Sikh studies in the west with McLeod's heretical views for generations to come. But to people such as Singh2 that's fine because he 'digitised' the lost texts of 1984! If you are a Sikh of Guru Sahib then how do you rationalise supporting Peshaura Singh the chela of McLeod who stated that the Mool Mantar was not given by Guru Nanak but was subsequently developed and given a final shape by Guru Arjan Dev?

It might not be Mcleod's fault that his supervisor of his PhD thesis was not an expert on Sikhism but it casts doubt on McLeod's qualifications in the field in which he subsequently taught and wrote about. It is all the more relevant as McLeod has consistently questioned the qualifications of those Sikhs who have counterted his mischief by stating that they do not hold them in the field of history. One question that comes to mind if why Mcleod did not choose to do his PhD at an Indian university? No doubt the snobs on here would reply that he wanted his doctorate to be from a well reputed western University but then why do a PhD at a place where he would have known that would have been unable to provide the supervisor who would have been an expert in this field? McLeod seems to have thought that he could kill two birds with one stone. He could get a doctorate from a well reputed western university without the danger that his substandard and mischevious research could have been challenged. With this doctorate he could become the 'foremost' scholar on Sikhism because his degree came for a reputable western university. The amusing thing is that most if not all of the controversial works of McLeod have been countered and yet he is still considered the foremost scholar on Sikhism. Never a truer statement made on this forum.

No those Jat comments don't give me sleepless nights. Why should they? If anything McLeod is giving us Jats a back handed compliment but for some like me the truth is worth more than cheap compliments. I know there are many Jat idiots but none so brazen to put forward the view that it is disappointing that none of the Gurus were Jats. What footnotes are you referring to? So Jats have said to you that the 5ks are a part of their culture and not the gift of Guru Gobind Singh? I doubt that. Your views on kalaafghana and Mcleod are not exactly objective. One doubts Bhai Gurdas's vaar and Chandi Charitar but he's ok because he has books published by Oxford and the other doubts Dasam Granth but he's evil because he publishes the books himself. Great logic. I have no doubt that given our friend Bahadur's associations in the academic field he could easily get a book about Sikhism with his warped views published by Oxford but then would you also give him the same respect and deference?

Forgot to mention Mcleod's other infamous theory about the whole militarisation of the Sikhs by Guru Hargobind was due to the influx into Sikhi of large numbers of Jats and not to any intent on the part of the Guru. I wonder how all those Amritdharis from a non-Jat background here feel about Mcleods theory that you guys are wearing the 5k's because they were a part of jat cultural norms?

I found the documentary a bit wishy washy and sentimental. It didn't cover many of the bukwas McLeod wrote and didn't give much coverage to those who do not find his writings honest.

What are you on about? I don't condone anyone's nonsense especially not the late Mr Mcleods. I don't follow Kala Afghana and i suppose you do know what being a devil's advocate is?

So if someone is a convicted thief or molester then it means he has lost his academic acumen and his views cannot be trusted! So going by your logic how can Mcleod be a great scholar of a religion when was an atheist?

Well I had to put the other side of the story in light of the subjective Mcleod love-in that seems to have taken place here. So someone who doubted the first vaar of Bhai Gurdas is in your view a great scholar. McLeod even went to the length of getting a 'new' translation done of the Baba Nanak inscription in Baghdad to disprove the first vaar of Bhai Gurdas! So why the bias against Kala Afghana? Is it because he is brown skinned and Mcleod was a gora and we all know goray can never be biased!

This forum never fails to surprise me! Unlike some of the people on this forum I came across McLeods work a few years after they were published. Mcleod was no friend of the Sikhs and his association with Peshaura Singh and Piar Singh do not come as a surprise. McLeod was known for his outrageous statements. The first one I came across was his statement that 'Jats are disappointed that there has never been a Jat Guru' No statement could be more mischevious and no doubt he made this statement up without any basis. His next one was about creating doubt about the vaisakhi of 1699. He was the first scholar to have questioned the veracity of the foundation of the Khalsa. He also stated that the 5 K's are are derived from Jat culture and were a later development and were not ordained by Guru Gobind Singh in 1699. This pet theory of McLeod was ably destroyed by Jagjeet Singh in the late 80s. Another equally mischevious statement made by McLeod in his early works was that there is a shabad of Guru Arjan Dev in the Kartarpuri Bir about the 'Mundan' or ritual hair cutting ceremony of the then young Guru Hargobind and that later the objectionable lines of this shabad were erased when the Kesh requirement came into vogue (from jat culture!). This theory was also demolished when Bhai Jodh Singh who had done a page by page analysis of the Kartarpuri Bir in his Kartapuri Bir de darshan and he stated that no such erasures were present and no shabad alluding to a mundan ceremony of Guru Hargobind was present in Kartarpuri Bir. McLeod was such a great scholar that he conjectured that even though the Dhirmalias had the KB in their possession yet being opponents of mainstream Sikhi they still chose to delete a shabad which would be inconvenient for the Khalsa! He also doubted that Guru Nanak ever went to Mecca thereby doubting not just the Janamsakhis but the first Vaar of Bhai Gurdas.

The Afghani Sikhs first arrived in UK around 1996 but the majority seem to have arrived since 2001. I agree with JB that most do not have any strong feelings about going back to Afghanistan. They have made good lives from themselves so why would they want to return to a shythole like Afghanistan where even the Muslims don't know when they will will get blown up in a suicide bomb attack. These people have probably been one of the most successful immigrants similar to the Jews and Ugandan Asians. When they originally arrived in the UK they were housed in the council estates but most now either own their own houses or rent in the private sector and not a burden on the state like other refugees like Somalis.

Just as I thought. There's no good guys in any of this. They want reforms you say, is that more hangings or less?

Weedol, I don't think that the demonstrations are due to western powers meddling in Iran. The initial demos appeared to be genuine and an outcome of the brief period of freedom enjoyed during the election campaign. Your contention that the protesters ceased their demonstrations because the ubermullah asked them to is patently false. Using the Police and Bassij thugs to shoot and beat people tends to have the effect of clearing the streets of demonstrators. One wonders how many millions will come onto the streets if there was no threat from the Police or Bassij.

It's mostly hype. You don't fight the mullahs with slogans like 'allah hu akbar'! That Moussavi guy is as bad as Ahmedinejad, he is for an Iranian nuclear bomb as well as having been instrumental in spreading Iranian/Shia influence into Lebanon and amongst the Palestinians through Hamas. Change will only come when the common people go beyond the Moussavi-Ahmedinejad tussle and begin a movement for true freedom. However there is a slight possibility that if the mullahocracy continues with it's oppression then the protesters may begin understand that you can't fight Islamic oppression with Islam.

Sikhchannel is just following the Akal Takht hukumnama in that no one who follows dehdhaaris should be allowed to do parchar from a Sikh stage. For some this is fanaticism but then they are free to set up their own sanatanchannel and have every tom dick and harry preach to the Sikhs! I propose our friend Chaudhri Rajinder Singh Nijjar for the first person who should be preaching on Sanatanchannel!

This is nothing new. I remember reading sometime ago that when the Punjabi Suba agitation was on, the state media was full of propaganda about how the Sikhs were separatists and Punjabi Suba was just a stepping stone to Khalistan. But when the Chinese invaded in 1962 and again during the Indo-Pak war of 1965 the state media immediately reverts to playing 'Deh Shiva Bar Mohe' and holding discussions on the life of Guru Gobind Singh. It's all very well for the Swami to make reference to Guru Tegh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh after the Mumbai attacks, does he make reference to the Gurus in most of his talks?

One has to consider why these problems don't occur in other communities who also migrated here under similar circumstances. Could it be that the religious leaders of non-Muslim communities don't keep harping on about the way women dress and referring to those women who do not dress modestly as being whores.

They weren't denied admission solely because they plucked their eyebrows or trimmed their beards, it was that they were not admitted to the course under the SIKH QUOTA. They were free to apply under the general quota. Minority run instututions are allowed to reserve a certain percentage of seats for members of their community. The SGPC pumps in crores of rupees in these institution so they have a right to decide whether they will let someone who doesn't keep kesh under the Sikh quota or those who keep their kesh. These places are always oversubscribed so they have to be able to sift through the applications and admit those who are deserving of places. These students wanted to be admitted under the Sikh quota even though they did not keep their hair. Obviously there were other candidates who kept their kesh so the management admitted them and not these students. Looking at the judgement of the court it seems like these students' counsel must have submitted a particularly odious argument such as Guru Ganth Sahib does not say that Sikhs need to keep Kesh blah blah blah. The nerve of these idiots is astounding!

Chatanga, The simple answer to your question is that Akal Takht has not issued a Hukamnama against AKJ instructing Gurdwaras not to allow AKJ members to perform Kirtan on a Gurdwara stage. Mischief makers such as Fatehsingh are the first to cry out about why their dambhi organisation is the only one that is banned and why not others. The Sikhchannel statement clearly says that along with namdharis are included the meenas, dhirmalias etc. The channel has clearly made the decision to be inline with what a majority of Gurdwaras already do with regard to namdharis. I am sure you will alson not see Inder Ghagga or any of the Kala Afghana guys on the channel as well. Although Sikhchannel has every right to decide who they use as kathakars, Manmeet Singh should ask for a reason why he was 'banned'. With the namdharis the Akal Takht Hukumnama is sufficient reason but any other Sikh should at least be told the reason for his ban.

I think the first attempt was made against Harbhagat Niranjania of Jandiala Guru in the 1750s. He escaped and called on Ahmed Shah Abdali to help him.

FatehSingh All these issues about Namdharis have been discussed previously and whenever your mischief has been challenged you run off crying. So lets leave it at that. The Sikh channel as the name implies is for Sikhs and Sikhs are those who believe that the Guru Granth Sahib is GURU. Please feel free to start your own channel if you want to see namdharis on tv.

Fatehsingh Stop trying to portray Namdharis as the victims. Your people have been playing a mischevious role since the death of Baba Ram Singh. They have invented sakhis about Guru Gobind Singh in order to create doubts about the Guru passing Guruship onto the Guru Granth Sahib. There have been occasions when Sikhs have attempted to deal with your fake Gurudom but the politicians have always got in the way especially after your pattar path episode in the 40s. The Sikh channel has every right to vet those who want to do Kirtan on the channel. Unlike the politicians like Badal who for the votes of a few namdharis will kiss the backside of your so-called Guru, the Sikh channel has shown some backbone and taken a stand and long may it continue. As for your story about Vedanti and Hanspal, it seems you guys are experts at creating such stories. FYI, it was the Sangat that forced Vedanti to act as he is well known to dance to Badal's tune and was quite happy for dambhis to flourish at the cost Sikhi as long as he had his air conditioned car and as long as he could come abroad and act like the Pope of the Sikhs! The present Sikh religious authorities will always look for a way out of a situation and it is only the Sangat which forces them to take action. They would much rather hold a meeting, take no concrete decision, use the excuse of an upcoming occasion such as Baisakhi, Diwali, Hola Mohalla etc as the reason for not taking a concrete decision. Then they will fix a further meeting and the agitation is left in a limbo. Meanwhile the politicians will work behind the scenes to work out a compromise that will allow the dambhis to cool things for a while until they next feel strong enough to challenge Sikhi. This is what has happened in the Sacha Sauda episode and this is what happened with the mischevious book Purakh Guru.

I for one am glad that Sikh Channel made the correct decision. Namdharis are on a par with Meenas and Ram Raiyas for their refusal to acknowledge Guru Granth Sahib as Guru and their creation of doubt in the life story of Guru Gobind Singh. Sikh Channel hasn't lost anything. It might lead to a few hissy fits by Namdharis on here and other forum but Namdharis need to realise that Sikh resources cannot be used to visually promote Namdharis.

The classic 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' strategy A very short sighted and dangerous strategy!

Dalsingh101 No offence but when was the last time you were in Punjab? I don't mean in some town or city like Ludhiana or Jullundur but in rural Punjab. It's all too easy to say that just because some idiot blasts 'putt jattan de' from his car stereo that Jats have a superiority complex and are driving away other castes from Sikhi. FYI the chamars in Punjab be they Hindu or Sikh have jobs reserved for them in government service as well as in schools. They have places reserved for them in colleges and universities. If a daughter is born to a chamar the government gives them 5100 rupees. Chamars get their fees paid in school. Now this might have been a good way in which the differences in economic conditions between so-called higher and lower castes could have been bridged after 1947 but to have such a system still in existence even after the chamars have had over 50 years of positive discrimination is outrageous. You might live under the impression that all Jats are millionaires and all Chamars are living in hovels but this is not the case. The Jats are having a hard time eeking a living from the land whilst the Chamars through virtue of their being so-called lower caste get free atta and dal! The ironic thing is that those so-called lower castes who are worse of economically such as Chuhras are denied the same benefits of jobs and places in education by the chamar mafia who having got into positions of power make sure that Chamars get an undue share of the reservations pie. You can say all you can against Jats but one thing that Jats have not tried to do but which other castes have done is to set up Gurdwaras that will only allow their own caste to hold the committee posts. Any non-Jat can become a member is a Gurdwara where the congregation is majority Jat and stand for office. It is up to him to garner the most votes. Given that Jats are accused of being so proud of their caste, is it not surprising that Jats do not as a rule become involved in sects outside the Sikh mainstream? Even in sects where the leader is a Jat, common Sikh Jats tend to steer clear of these sects as well. The leader of the Radhaswamis is a Jat, as is the leader of Dera Sacha Sauda yet Jats are very rarely their followers. Ironically it is the so-called lower castes who in the accepted discourse explaining their attachment to the sect is explained as an attempt to escape Jat 'oppression'. It is also not well known that even in the so-called 'Jat' Gurdwaras in the villages, the majority of the Granthis tend to be non-Jats. Another example of where Jats differ from other castes is that we never associate those Sikhs who did so much for Sikhi by referring to their caste. Jats do not refer to Maharaja Ranjit Singh as a Jat Maharaja, neither do we refer to Baba Deep Singh as a Jat Shaheed. They are referred to a Sikh Maharaja and a Sikh Shaheed. Sant Bhindranwale is also never referred to as a Jat Shaheed either. Compare this with Ramgarhias who have turned the name of a Misl into a caste! It's all very easy to accept the lazy excuse that Jat arrogance is the reason for non-Jats to gravitate towards sects on the fringes of Sikhism but the reason lies elsewhere.