Dera Sucha Sauda -Sikh conflict in India

05-23-2007, 01:09 AM

Ramana n Viren,
I agree with you and kept this thread to current issue but same Sandeep Bajwa is saying in this thread

QUOTE<b>My personal opinion is that All Hindus in India should become Sikhs to better serve their motherland and to become better Hindus.</b>
and these views are not isolated. He is trying to give picture which is neither a reality. facts are facts.

Even DSS or RadhaSawami had their own views and they are not Sikhs.

05-23-2007, 01:17 AM

QUOTEmaybe if you go check the 2001 census of India then you will know, according to evangelical figures the actual xtian % is 4%, 80% was the figure drawn up through census back then but it did not count in the crypto xtians and certain areas census were not taken.

You didnât genuinely understand my question or purposely pretending you did not understand it?

QUOTEHow would I know, whether or not they believe in Khalistan they do not wish to be called Hindus or is that too hard for you to understand?

My query âWhat percentage of Sikhs, according to you, actually believe in the ideology of âKhalistanâ? was in direct response to your earlier statement âthen the Khalistanis use it to show us as trying to swallow up Sikhismâ. I was trying to imply that majority of Sikhs do not believe in the concept of âKhalistanâ so to use the exact words from your own last post âis that too hard for you to understand?

QUOTEHindus are 800 million and if we unite

And how exactly do YOU propose to unite 800 million Hindus? Let us hear your plan. I am still waiting for an answer from you.

QUOTEAnd I don't think all this hunky dory bringing together is happening by your generalised comments about British East African Indians and Sikhs, imagine labelling the whole community as bigots and nuts and then expecting them to join you.

So have you all along been talking about Sikhs who have come from East Africa to UK or about Sikhs staying in India?

QUOTEIt's one thing to claim "Sikhs are Hindus" and then deal with Sikh seperatist claims objectively and another to keep repeating the same nonsense over and over, that certainly is the trait of a desperate loser.

When all other logic and reasoning fails, resort to âpersonalâ attacksâ¦This being the true âhallmark' of a desperate 'winner'...wink, wink, nudge, nudge... <!--emo& Smile

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />

And of course I still stand by my earlier statement âAnyway, point is.... is Sikhism a part of Hinduism???The answer would be 'yes'...but having said this, do some or let's say even most(not all) Sikhs see themselves as Hindus as of today??? Maybe notâ.

I rest my case.

05-23-2007, 01:47 AM

Is Sikhism part of Hinduism?

My answer is that "It depends upon what is Hinduism!!"

Culturally Punjabi Sikhs are Hindus since they belong to the land of the Sindhu valley civilization.

Sikh philosophy is very close to the Vedant Philosophy if we say that "Vedanta alone is Hinduism". Can or do we?

So.... Punjabi Sikhs themselves when they read Guru Granth Sahib's bani of Bhagat Ravidass, Bhagat Kabir, Sheikh Farid, Namdeo, Dhanna, etc... they themselves know that they are from the land of Saints called Bharat. IT IS A FACT THAT CANNOT BE DENIED!!

"Even DSS or RadhaSawami had their own views and they are not Sikhs. "
Once again they are Sikhs of their own Gurus who are DEHDHARI! Dehdhari means "a person" Guru. While 24 million people who call themselves Sikhs in this world do not believe in a DEHDHARI Baba., only a BOOK that they prefer to call their Guru.

That's the problem... Sikhs of Nanak believe that SGGS a book is their Guru... while Sikhs of Radhasoami or DSS believe in their own human gurus.

Sikhs believe that God is nirankar! (formless, timeless without gender), Aajuni (free from birth and death), saibhang (cannot be destroyed),,, and this is what was told by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji... and this is where SGGS starts...

05-23-2007, 01:51 AM

I cannot define hinduism!! if somebody can define hinduism then we can find out whether Sikhism is part of hinduism or not.

How about this defintion...

"Sikhs are those Hindus who have taken up Sri Guru Granth Sahib as their Guru and have become Singhs of Guru Gobind Singh's Khalsa Panth to upheld the ancient Indian values."

05-23-2007, 01:51 AM

QUOTEEven DSS or RadhaSawami had their own views and they are not Sikhs. 

I second that, what about the feelings of some members on this forum who may be followers of Radha Swami faith? Don't their feelings also count? Should they just stand on the sidelines and just listen to the false propaganda about âso and so faith being the only true faith in Sikhismâ.

Time we laid down some basic ground rules for all forum members contributing to this thread.

Otherwise as in communism where all members are equal but some are more equal than the othersâ¦ even on this forum either both Sikhs as well as members of letâs say Radha Swami faith should be allowed to air their point of view or there should be no discussion at all on Sikhism vs Radha Swami, DSS but discussion should only be confined around topics like how to control the current situation in Punjab.

Bharatvarsh · 05-23-2007, 02:00 AM

QUOTEWhen all other logic and reasoning fails, resort to âpersonalâ attacksâ¦This being the true âhallmark' of a desperate 'winner'...wink, wink, nudge, nudge...Â 
If you used your so called "logic" and "reasoning" then you would have dealt with those two quotes right away, so enuf said.

05-23-2007, 02:00 AM

Politically speaking..

1. Congies + DSS wants to consolidate their votebank. From the pictures and the events RamRahim fellow seems like a total idiot to me. So there might be some other drivers behind these actions while this fellow enjoys his wimmens in his gufaa or something.

2. Akalis see this as a great opportunity to consolidate the Sikh votebank and remove their dependence from coalition partners etc.. Khalistanis are seeing this as a great opportunity to make this a sikh-vs-hindu issue.

3. BJP has (inadvertently?) checkmated Khalistanis by condemning the DSS nut so no way can this be seen as a hindu-sikh issue. But Khalistanis are upping the stakes. They want no other deras in punjab - its their baap-ki-jaagir ? BJP/Hindus stand to loose with this development unless Sikhs come out and overwhelmingly say we have had enough of this.

IOW, the party who has the most to loose in this whole scenario is the BJP. Is this a fair reading ?

Bharatvarsh · (This post was last modified: 05-23-2007, 02:03 AM by Bharatvarsh.)

QUOTEMore Sikhs from Punjab were killed by British than any other community during the freedom struggle. So cut it out.
Any data on this?

This is certainly false and promoted these days by many Khalistani types to claim that once again they rescued India and people should be careful when they just repeat these claims.

05-23-2007, 02:04 AM

Also has anybody seen anything from commies ? Any lectures about freedom-of-expression etc ?

05-23-2007, 02:10 AM

QUOTEIOW, the party who has the most to loose in this whole scenario is the BJP. Is this a fair reading ?
No.
Congress will lose more. They may not come back again.
In Punjab, Hindus are in majority in Cities or big town only. Rural Punjab is completly Sikh. Now there is influx, as Bihar labor had moved to villages and rural Sikhs had moved to cities for business or jobs. So, BJP had strength in Cities only.
Akali have strong hold in rural area.

QUOTE2. Akalis see this as a great opportunity to consolidate the Sikh votebank and remove their dependence from coalition partners etc.. Khalistanis are seeing this as a great opportunity to make this a sikh-vs-hindu issue.

No, Actually hardliners are getting maximum coverage, they were in cold stoarge now they are out. Ruling Akali were able to sidelined them in last 6-7 years, but Congress played again a worst kind of trick and created 70s environment.
We must watch month of June. it is critical, we will know direction of politcs and key players for next 10 years.

QUOTEAlso has anybody seen anything from commies ? Any lectures about freedom-of-expression etc ? 
No. They have selective amnesia.

QUOTECongies + DSS wants to consolidate their votebank
With this combination they may lose more seats in Harayana.
DSS is well funded organisation and had very good business plan and no- tax complusion. But only problem, some top notch had key to purse. By creating rift between those key players they can change game.

05-23-2007, 02:15 AM

Khalistanis always come up with complete horse poop about how they saved Hindus during Mughal era and how they saved Hindus during the British Raj. Stop parroting their propaganda, it only bloats their already over-sized ego about being some superhuman martial race that is constantly saving the weak hindoo vegetarian.

05-23-2007, 02:38 AM

QUOTEKhalistanis always come up with complete horse poop about how they saved Hindus during Mughal era and how they saved Hindus during the British Raj. Stop parroting their propaganda, it only bloats their already over-sized ego about being some superhuman martial race that is constantly saving the weak hindoo vegetarian. 

2-3 quick points:

The media is purposely trying to raise this bogey of 'Khalistan'. I think the concept of Khalistan is (along with most Khalistanis) dead and buried now. Reasonâ¦ the 'mai baaps' of Khalistan were no.1 mostly Sikhs in UK in 1980...after July bombings in London last year I don't think UK govt. will be as indulgent towards these extremist Sikhs in UK as UK Govt. was towards them in the 1980s. No.2 Pakistan is in a bit of deep sh1t itself (recent strife in Pakistan, Balochistan problem etc). Yes Pakistan still has nuisance value but not as much as it had in 1980s.

While there is no doubt Congress is trying to create problems again in Punjab but I refuse to believe that it will again lead to militancy situation in Punjab as grim as like that in 1980s.

In my past posts I have tried to point out it were in fact Hindus time and again that saved Sikhs backsides... Banda Bahadur is a good example. And as far as I know, in fact Sikhs fought along with Brits in 1857 against Hindusâ¦.so when exactly did Sikhs save Hindus against Brits? But as Ramana pointed out earlier 'Sikhs made up for it in the 20th century(during India's freedom struggle against Brits)...This may be true but I can't recall many specific instances where Sikhs fought against the Brits to specifically save the Hindus.

This theory of martial race is history after Punjab strife in 1980s and the anti-Sikh riots in 1984. I think now Hindus mostly laugh at the martial race theory rather than believe in it or buy it anymore.

This theory about 'rice eating veg weak Hindoo' was started as bit of a joke in a particular context (to ridicule Pakis) on some other forum so time we stop talking about this stereotype over and over again as it is not funny anymore.

Anyway, I agree with Ramana, let's not turn this thread into a Sikh bashing thread...

05-23-2007, 02:40 AM

QUOTE(sbajwa @ May 22 2007, 09:06 PM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTEIn order to be a successful soldier, one has to have Krodh, Lobh, Moh & Hankaar.


How so? To fight a Dharam Yuddh!! you do not need Krodh or Lobh or Moh or Ahankaar.
[right][snapback]69172[/snapback][/right]
</div>

Different emotions for different needs.

For fighting Dharam Yuddh, you need to identify that adharma has happened. And once that has happened, you ought to have some anger to go and fight for your cause - Dharma. Emotions, just like nuclear energy, has positive and negative uses. A person has to be enraged at an act of dharma, to be able to build a team of army and fight for the cause. Be it littering on the road, urination on the road, spitting on the stair cases. When the adrenalin gets going, we achieve a lot. Under or Over use is an issue.

In fact I would say if you did not have the "moh" for Dharmam, why would you even go and fight for it?

Similarly Lobh, Moh, Ahankaar can be channelized to motivate soldiers. What do you think the Islamic invaders had when they pillaged and destroyed Indian cities?

05-23-2007, 02:47 AM

QUOTEThe media is purposely trying to raise this bogey of 'Khalistan'. I think the concept of Khalistan is (and along with most Khalistanis) dead and buried in 2007. Reasonâ¦ the 'mai baaps' of Khalistan were no.1 mostly Sikhs in UK in 1980...after July bombings in London last year I don't think UK govt. will be as indulgent towards these extremist Sikhs in UK as UK Govt. was towards them in the 1980s. No.2 Pakistan is in a bit of deep sh1t itself (recent strife in Pakistan, Balochistan problem etc). Yes Pakistan still has nuisance value but not as much as it had in 1980s.

Some people want this back, it is ticket to west. Five- Six years back, UK, EU and US stopped giving political asylum based on political situation in Punjab.

To twist India's arm, these cell can come active anytime by foreign government.

Pakistan is doing greater harm now by creating next generation of Punjab addicted to drugs. This is a very serious problem, slow poisoning. Media and politicians are ignoring ground reality.

05-23-2007, 04:59 AM

QUOTE(Mudy @ May 23 2007, 12:17 AM)<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<b>Punjab waits with bated breath </b>
Pioneer News Service | Chandigarh
Bandh total but tension simmers
.....Â Â

The threat of disturbance, however, still persists since the Akal Takht has also given an ultimatum to the Dera to vacate all deras by May 27.

The hardliners took out protest marches and <span style='color:red'>raised slogans of Khalistan in Amritsar and several other towns. </span>"The bandh was completely peaceful and essential services were maintained", claimed Harcharan Bains, media advisor to Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal.

.........

[right][snapback]69202[/snapback][/right]
</div>

Mudy Ji you cannot stop anyone from doing this.
Few die hards will keep doing this kind of things , we cannot make them as representative of majority.

This current crisis is caused by Congress by raising passion.
Mann, Amarinder etc are all together playing dirty politics .

05-23-2007, 05:09 AM

QUOTE(sbajwa @ May 23 2007, 01:47 AM)Is Sikhism part of Hinduism?

My answer is that "It depends upon what is Hinduism!!"

Culturally Punjabi Sikhs are Hindus since they belong to the land of the Sindhu valley civilization.Â

Sikh philosophy is very close to the Vedant Philosophy if we say that "Vedanta alone is Hinduism".Â Can or do we?

So.... Punjabi Sikhs themselves when they read Guru Granth Sahib's bani of Bhagat Ravidass, Bhagat Kabir, Sheikh Farid, Namdeo, Dhanna, etc... they themselves know that they are from the land of Saints called Bharat.Â IT IS A FACT THAT CANNOT BE DENIED!!Â

"Even DSS or RadhaSawami had their own views and they are not Sikhs. "
Once again they are Sikhs of their own Gurus who are DEHDHARI! Dehdhari means "a person" Guru.Â While 24 million people who call themselves Sikhs in this world do not believe in a DEHDHARI Baba., only a BOOK that they prefer to call their Guru.

That's the problem... Sikhs of Nanak believe that SGGS a book is their Guru... while Sikhs of Radhasoami or DSS believe in their own human gurus.

Sikhs believe that God is nirankar! (formless, timeless without gender), Aajuni (free from birth and death), saibhang (cannot be destroyed),,, and this is what was told by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji... and this is where SGGS starts...
[right][snapback]69212[/snapback][/right]


<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /> <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /> <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' />
Good answer.

The timing of this crisis is not strange,
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/From_La...how/2067969.cms
<b>From Lahore, Babbar Khalsa stokes Dera fire</b>
23
NEW DELHI: Pakistan has rushed to fish in troubled Punjab waters in the wake of the Sikh-Dera Sacha Sauda feud, with Babbar Khalsa International chief Wadhawan Singh Babbar, operating from Lahore under ISI patronage, seeking to stoke violence in the state.

Government sources in Punjab and here disclosed that Wadhawan, who is on Indiaâs 'Most Wanted' list, has been in touch with radical elements in the Sikh community at a time when the Dera fire have been raging.
They also said that Wadhawan had worked on the radical Sikh priest whose Gurudwara near Talwandi Sabo in Bathinda was the catalyst for setting off the clash with the Dera over advertisements featuring its chief, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, attired as Guru Gobind Singh.

Telephone intercepts with agencies clearly bring out the interest of the ISI auxiliary in fanning the confrontation which has triggered fears of revival of extremism in Punjab.

05-23-2007, 05:13 AM

Prem,
I agree, during 80s I remember everyone used to say it is just a "khap khana" by "payndus". Punjab suffered lot culturally and economically and we can still see effects. I don't think Punjabies had any will for nonsense. But old players are not dead and they just got another lease of life.

Longer this issue stays worst it will go. CBI should release report ASAP.

dhu · (This post was last modified: 05-23-2007, 08:30 AM by dhu.)

QUOTE(sbajwa @ May 23 2007, 01:47 AM)Is Sikhism part of Hinduism?

My answer is that "It depends upon what is Hinduism!!"

Culturally Punjabi Sikhs are Hindus since they belong to the land of the Sindhu valley civilization.Â

Sikh philosophy is very close to the Vedant Philosophy if we say that "Vedanta alone is Hinduism".Â Can or do we?

So.... Punjabi Sikhs themselves when they read Guru Granth Sahib's bani of Bhagat Ravidass, Bhagat Kabir, Sheikh Farid, Namdeo, Dhanna, etc... they themselves know that they are from the land of Saints called Bharat.Â IT IS A FACT THAT CANNOT BE DENIED!!Â

"Even DSS or RadhaSawami had their own views and they are not Sikhs. "
Once again they are Sikhs of their own Gurus who are DEHDHARI! Dehdhari means "a person" Guru.Â While 24 million people who call themselves Sikhs in this world do not believe in a DEHDHARI Baba., only a BOOK that they prefer to call their Guru.

That's the problem... Sikhs of Nanak believe that SGGS a book is their Guru... while Sikhs of Radhasoami or DSS believe in their own human gurus.

Sikhs believe that God is nirankar! (formless, timeless without gender), Aajuni (free from birth and death), saibhang (cannot be destroyed),,, and this is what was told by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji... and this is where SGGS starts...
[right][snapback]69212[/snapback][/right]


These brit manipulated Gandhi was responsible for discouraging Ambedkar from joining Sikhism, which is probably the greatest tragedy in modern Indian history. Otherwise, missionary and mulla problem would have been long over.

The truth is that dhyanam practices of Radhaswamis and similar sects with living guru traditions in Punjab are a very potent force, with the potential to completely transform India. (Unless you have been in presence of one of these people or attended their satsangs you will not understand). When you also include the fact that they are lower caste, this force has a mayawati type potential,. All the confusion is due to the misinterpretation that SGGS is the last guru whereas this is only true for Guru Gobind singh's line, since all his four sons were killed. It never meant that there cannot be any more living gurus.

05-23-2007, 08:50 AM

QUOTEWhen you also include the fact that they are lower caste
No, they are from every caste. I know lot of them.

05-23-2007, 01:05 PM

QUOTEThe truth is that dhyanam practices of Radhaswamis and similar sects with living guru traditions in Punjab are a very potent force, with the potential to completely transform India. (Unless you have been in presence of one of these people or attended their satsangs you will not understand). When you also include the fact that they are lower caste, this force has a mayawati type potential,. 

I can't speak about DSS as I don't know much about DSS but I personally know as a fact Radha Swamis consist more of/from upper Hindu caste than lower caste.

QUOTEMy answer is that "It depends upon what is Hinduism!!" 

With a lot of Sikh youths in Punjab getting their âkeshâ (hair) cut and not many Sikh youth keeping all 5 symbols in India, even I can turn around and ask 'how many Sikhs in Punjab are following pure Sikhism anyway these days'?

100 years from now, let's say if most Sikh youth give up wearing a turban and donât strictly following Sikhism (at least the sort of strict Sikhism practiced by some elder Sikhs today), what are the chances of Sikhism still being around in 100 years from now? Won't Sikhism just slowly die out and disappear all together with the passage of time?

Let's face it, one of the reasons Sikhism also flourished in the past was becoz Punjabi Brahmins made their first born son a Sikh and moreover, there were a lot of inter-caste marriages between Hindus and Sikhs. Possibility of that happening in future are also very low now. You(Sikhs) are just shooting yourself in the foot if you 'bite the hand that feeds you'. So don't expect much largesse from Hindus in the future the same way you did in the past.

Login




Remember me Lost Password?