(Updated on 12th July 2021)
Baba Banda Singh Bahadur
We are on the fifth part of the claims of AV. In this whole part we’ll be focussing on the life of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur. It’s a brief of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, where the main points will be circling around what’s mentioned on AVB.
The history of the eighteenth century is thoroughly discussed by many people, because it’s the beginning of the time when the Sikhs claimed the throne and ruled for years until the British took away that with the help of the Dogras and people outside of the Sikh Kingdom[1]. That’s a different topic anyway and will be discussed in future when needed.
The eighteenth-century period, especially the time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, is distorted severely in his article. Not only the wild imagination AV used while writing a piece of ‘history’ but also pointed out the incidents that never took place. And it’s his habit actually to beat around the bush. His way of narrating is also confusing because of the contradictions in his article. Blind readers with a single-digit IQ can be led to believe the ‘originality’ and the ‘truth’ in the article, but those who know the history, or at least read critically, they feel the betrayal of the cause which is claimed to be a historical work.
Before moving into the whole discussion, I want to put my thoughts together here about what I have observed on the blog of AV. Firstly, I really thought how a person could be lying so blatantly, and on whose command he’s distorting everything. He doesn’t even have the AdSense on his blog, so if he’s doing it all for money then it doesn’t make sense. But at the back end, is it possible that someone is paying him for everything that he’s writing? Or perhaps he is sick and suffering from a mental illness?
I heard about David Icke few months back and checked his YouTube channel where he discussed about such wild theories that some people believe them to be true. The same case we have of AV. If they’ve to be compared, David Icke is the father, and AV is just a toddler when it comes to create the false narratives.
Initially, people believe that AV is a person who’s writing the truth, soon, if some brain is used, they realise that is not the truth. On one hand, he’ll be talking about his religion and how great it is, on the other hand he will say that the religious texts of the Hindus have been mixed with the unoriginal details by the British or some other anti-Hindu elements. If it happens to be true, then on what basis he’s claiming that? Does he have the original unedited version of those texts? Or is it something like what YouTube channels and websites are doing which is to say how some of the things in Hinduism were not there at all and they’re added by some other people, because those rituals or practices can’t be taken as the truth in the 21st century? The mockery of the individual will make the practices a joke of the century. But the truth is the platitudeness and the shallow arguments and practices are nothing more than a revolution to revive the religion for this century’s people lest the trust of the devotees will be shattered.
The other piece on which AV writes mostly is the patriotism and the love for the country. With regards to that, he happens to be criticising almost everything in India related to the bureaucracy. He wrote an article too about Abolish the Rajya Sabha. Recently, about the Sabarimala Temple issue, he wrote on this blog, ‘KERALA IS NOW A POLICE STATE --WORSE THAT A STALIN DICTATORSHIP.. INNOCENT SABARIMALA PILGRIMS HAVE BEEN SLAPPED WITH MURDER CHARGES WITH MAGISTRATES/ JUDGES ( PERSONALLY LOYAL TO THE CM ) PLAYING COMMIE BALL.. CHECK OUT THE VARIOUS FALSE IPC CRIMINAL CHARGES SLAPPED ON RAHUL EASHWAR AS IF HE IS A TERRORIST .. WE WANT THE GUILTY POLICE OFFICERS AND MAGISRATES/ JUDGES TO BE INVESTIGATED AND GUILTY PUNISHED.. THE WORLDs LARGEST PILGRIMAGE SABARIMALA ( 6.1 CRORES ) HAVE BEEN IGNORED BY THE BENAMI MEDIA... THEY ARE MORE WORRIED ABOUT TIGRESS SAVNI..’ (Unnecessary Enters are removed while writing this.) Remember the time when the Sikhs were saying that they’re getting killed by the police for promotions and how the people turned a blind eye? But, hey, they’re ‘terrorists.’ Slow clapping.
Another example I have is of the then DGP of Punjab, Julio Ribeiro. He wrote an article in 2015 stating:
Today, in my 86th year, I feel threatened, not wanted, reduced to a stranger in my own country. The same category of citizens who had put their trust in me to rescue them from a force they could not comprehend have now come out of the woodwork to condemn me for practising a religion that is different from theirs. I am not an Indian anymore, at least in the eyes of the proponents of the Hindu Rashtra.
You will never know anything unless something is done to you, unless you’re getting targeted because of your religion, unless your identity has become a bull’s eyes for someone.
Anyways, this whole propaganda machine that AV runs is creating an army of brainless blind followers who will go against anything; telling them how the Hinduism in the current form is not in its original form and was changed after the British, as if everything was going smoothly before that.
He will criticize every other religion and will place the origin of many things in Kerala. He wrote an article about Sikhism with almost everything which’s not the part of history. On the other hand, his article I am proud Hindu says ‘WHO HAS GIVEN THIS "MAD MAN HUSSAIN" SUCH LICENSE TO INSULT SANATANA DHARMA, AND 1 BILLION HINDUS ?’ Sorry for the capitalization, I know it’s annoying but this’s how he wrote. If we talk the same about Sikhism that why he wrote so much of gibberish about Sikhism and insult us, he will have many wild theories to make his point. Here if some common man did something (not endorsing it if it’s hurting the sentiments of religious people), then that got to his nerves. So the question is: who gave him a license to insult Sikhi?
I remember while making one of the videos on him, I said all these things are coming from Nagpur. RSS. I said it without even going through his whole blog, because I’ve known many things and how they are created and spread and how people are led to believe them. He wrote an article on RSS. His father was in the RSS, but he’s ‘neither a RSS man, nor their supporter.’ The rest is just history.
Let’s get into the current discussion about the time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur. I will not be writing his lies one by one like I did in the earlier posts but just mention the number in brackets to show his libellous statement or the truth that he avoided. BTW, before starting his lies, he mentioned that ‘What I write here will NOT tally with India hating and desh drohi Khalistani version of history’, and it’s enough to know how the history is getting changed by using the name Khalistan. Whatever is there in Sikhism that he doesn’t agree with is either created by the British/Rothschild or the Khalistanis. Great!
In the whole article, a total of 61 times Khalistan(i/is) word comes. (Didn’t check if it’s written in the post or the comment, but you got the point.)
Guru Gobind Singh[2] ji didn’t go to the south to meet Baba Banda Singh Bahadur (17). And the person who told Guru Gobind Singh ji about Madho Das was not Sadhu Narayana Das (18). The name of the place was Narayana[3], not the name of the person. The name of the person was Jot Ram and he told Guru Sahib not to go to Madho Das’s place, totally opposite to what AV wrote (19).
After travelling through many places from the north to south, Guru Sahib arrived at Nanded Sahib and talked about a place where he used to live in the earlier times. Guru Sahib also showed the symbols of the place and eventually it’s bought by Guru Sahib[4]. One day when Guru Gobind Singh ji was hunting and was away from the place, he sat at the place of the sadhu. It happened to be the place of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur (will come to the earlier names too because AV has so many flaws in his story.)
When a person told Madho Das about Guru Sahib sitting at his place, he sent a person to throw Guru Sahib over the bed (palang). He used his whole force but couldn’t succeed. Another person was sent but in vain. Then Madho Das went himself and talked to Guru Sahib. Guru Sahib asked him who he was. Madho Das said it’s his guru’s place and he meditated here for a long time. Guru Sahib said that his guru became an insect after death.[5]
There’s a long talk between Madho Das and Guru Gobind Singh ji. And then Madho Das was baptised (20). Throughout his whole article, AV mentioned it several times that it’s a Hindu who was fighting and controlling everything in the battles in Punjab. Although there might be few Hindus too who joined with the army of the Khalsa Panth in a fight against the oppressors (some of them joined just for looting) [6]. But calling Baba Banda Singh Bahadur a Hindu is a lie. Some scholars also suggested that after the baptism, Madho Das’s name was changed to Gurbaksh Singh[7].
Some authors who said he’s baptised are the following:
1. Dr Ganda Singh[8]
2. Ahemand Shah Btaliya
3. Ali-u-din Mufti
4. Muhamad Ali Khan Ansari
5. Ganesh Das Badehra
6. Kanhayia Lal
7. Bakhat Mall
8. Jakaulla
9. Gulam Husain Khan
10. Iradat Khan
11. Froster
12. Mohamad Latif
AV gave an account of the book Ibtida-i-Singhan wa Mazahib-i-Eshan by Ahmed Shah Batalia, but didn’t talk about this author’s incident-mentioning[9] and the other authors who said that Madho Das was baptised. (It should be noted too that there’re few authors who said that he’s not baptised. But the motive of AV not accepting that he’s baptised has a different point of view which is not accepted by even those authors who said he’s not baptised.)
And no, Guru Gobind Singh ji didn’t meet Madho Das in 1696 (21). The first time when both met was back in 1708. There’s no ‘mutual admiration society’ in 1696 between them. I really am amazed that this psychopath wrote these stories without any base and saying that this’s a piece of history. Nonsense.
Here are some history lessons. The first name of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur was Lachman Dev. After he met Jaanki Parsaad, his name was changed to Madho Das according to the rules of the bairagi sect. He spent some time with Ramdas too and roamed with him to many religious places. At a place near the Godavari River, he met a jogi named Oagarh. He learned the techniques of jogis and magics from him and it’s said he gave him a book where many mantras and instructions to make some remedies were written. At this time, you can say that he became a tantric[10], but the name was changed before he met Oagarh (22).
When Guru Gobind Singh ji was going to give him the sword, the Sikhs asked the Guru that they’d been living with him for so long, Guru Sahib then gave Banda five arrows[11]. But the ‘historian’ says Guru Gobind Singh ji gave him a sword of honour, later, in the same article, he mentioned it’s ‘50 arrows and a bow.’ (23) Damn.
There’re pictures too that he included in the article where Baba Banda Singh is wearing the dress of Khalsa, but AV claimed he wasn’t baptised – I counted it four times in his article (can be more, but you got the gist). Dude, at least post the correct images to convey your wild theories. Picture 1 Picture 2 Picture 3 Picture 4
One thing that really confused me was the spree of lies written to cover up the previous lies. Guru Gobind Singh ji didn’t send Baba Banda Singh Bahadur to Punjab to avenge only his sons (24). The wars of the Sikhs with the rulers were always against injustice, can be of the old times or the new times. After killing the executioners of Guru Teg Bahadur ji and the sons of Guru Gobind Singh ji, the battles would have been over. That is not what history tells us. So the real reason behind sending Banda to Punjab was to fight the rulers who were oppressing and killing the people[12].
While fighting with the rulers, AV mentioned that ‘more and more Hindus’ joined the Sikhs, but he failed to give any name of a Hindu (25). On the other hand, the history talks about many Sikhs: Bhai Fateh Singh, Karam Singh, Dharam Singh, Nigahia Singh, Choorh Singh, Pichora Singh, Kishora Singh, Ali Singh, Maali Singh, Bhai Baaj Singh, Sham Singh, Bhai Binod Singh, etc.
Jalaludeen, Shashal Beg and Bashal Beg were living in Samana[13], not Garhi (26), and the Sikhs attacked Samana and killed them. I don’t find any Ali Hasan who deceived Guru Gobind Singh ji (27). I am going to take it as a lie unless the origin of the person is known.
Before understanding the battles in Punjab, a person should know which city lies where and how the battles took place. AV just Googled the cities in Punjab before writing, and, more importantly, reading the history. For example, he mentioned that Banda camped at Ropar and the Nawab of Sirhind sent his army there to stop him (28), the truth is Baba Banda Singh Bahadur was not present at Ropar at all. The Sikhs were coming from the Majha region of Punjab to meet Banda Singh Bahadur, and fought with the Mughals at Ropar who were sent by the Sooba Sirhind to not let them meet Baba Banda Singh Bahadur[14].
What a shameful blogger.
AV seems to be watching more movies than reading some books because his wild imagination made him write the dialogue of some D-grade Bollywood shit movie that Baba Banda Singh Bahadur said he’s a Rajput so let’s fight (29). It’s said to Wazir Khan according to him. Don’t think it could be lamer than that! No … wait … Baba Banda Singh Bahadur was hiding on a tree and used his archery skills (30). What type of bullshit is this? Does he even read his article before hitting that ‘publish’ button on the blogger? Or he knows that the blind followers of his blog don’t have any brains?
The death of Wazir Khan was written differently in history. Some suggested that Wazir Khan was burned alive, others said Fateh Singh cut him into two pieces from shoulder to upperpart of hip,[15] in Shamsher Khalsa it’s written he’s killed by Nahar Singh, some other researchers said he’s tied with a rope behind a horse and eventually fastened to a tree where the vultures feasted on his body[16].
The apologist warriors on the Internet spend so much time to change the history of Sikhs. This coward AV talks about Wazir Khan with hilarious dialogues but forgot to mention the name of Sucha Nand. Not only these lunatics not talk about the Hindus who fought with the Sikhs – AV said the Rajputs were not on the side of Mughals (31) – also they denied that Gangu (handed over the sons and Mother of Guru Gobind Singh ji to Mughals), Chandu (responsible for the martyrdom of Guru Arjan Dev ji) and Sucha Nand (responsible for the martyrdom of the sons of Guru Gobind Singh ji) ever existed. An unintelligent group with the name Agniveer is one of them. I am not saying all the Hindus were against Sikhs. But they should at least have a pair of balls to accept the truth that not all their ancestors were on good terms with the Sikhs. And those ancestors were in huge numbers and couldn’t be counted on the fingertips. The main Hindu leaders who stood against the Khalsa at the time of Banda Singh Bahadur were Raja Ajit Singh Jodhpuria, Raja Jai Singh Jaipuria, Raja Chatar Lal Bandela, Chooraman Jaat, Gopal Singh Bhadavrhia, Udit Singh Bundela, Badan Singh Bundela, Bachan Singh Kachwaha, etc.
In the 21st century, I find many flaws in few Hindus, including AV, because they’re trying to glorify a non-existing history of their ancestors and their pride, especially when it comes to the Sikh history. These days in India it’s become a habit of some people to link everything that’s ever invented in the world to Hinduism. I mean people can’t be that dumb, can they be?
I remember watching a video on YouTube channel named An Open Letter where a person talks about the unfairness of many other YouTube channels and the media and reporters, etc., that how they’re trying to malign the history of Hindus. I am fine if he’s exposing the people because if you find some fault in the system or the way it’s representing something among the masses and you know the truth, then it should be highlighted to public.
The thing that made me wonder was a video where the narrator said that the characters of the Marvel world might be inspired by the Mahabharat. I was a little shocked because these alleged theories can’t be validated against what was circling in the head of the creator of all these characters, but also in future some people will bring the similarities between them and how a YouTuber made a video about it, without mentioning any sources, and then soon it will be held as a ‘fact’ that the American movies were inspired by the Hindu scriptures.
AV goes by saying Binod Singh (with a V in his article) ruled the area between Sutlej and Yamuna (32). Also, he’s using a saffron flag (33). Later AV goes explaining that how Binod Singh asked Baba Banda Singh Bahadur that he shouldn’t sit on the throne. I will cover this baseless crap in the next paragraphs, but the question that arises here is on one side it’s said that Binod Singh was asked to rule using the saffron flag, on the other side it’s said he’s loyal to the Khalsa. Then how he accepted to rule under a Hindu flag (which he meant by the saffron flag) when the flag of Khalsa was blue then (later it’d another colour too)? And BTW, Binod Singh was kind of an ally to rule Thanesar with Ram Singh, not the area that AV lied about.
So many battles were fought between the Sikhs and the Mughals with their allies. To give you an idea, in Muyasir-l-umra it’s written there’re twenty-two battles between Sikhs and Shamash Khan[17]. These are the battles of Doaba. But there’s no battle at Bijwada (34). And at the time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, the rule was not upto the Ravi River (35); Lahore was still not conquered by the Sikhs.
As we are talking about the first half of the eighteenth century, I would like to tell you all that a command was given on 29th August 1710 that all the Hindus who’re working under the Badshah should cut their beard/hair. Now it’d become very clear for the Mughals and their allies to find out the Sikhs and kill them because a Sikh will never cut his hair[18]. This might be the time from where the Hindus started shaving in numbers out of fear. Nowadays, it’s become a fashion for them.
In the battles against the Sikhs, many Rajputs of Jaipur and Jodhpur joined the Mughal forces when asked by Bahadur Shah on 11th June 1710[19].
On 10th Dec 1710, the Badshah told Mahabat Khan that send the words to the generals to kill wherever the followers of Guru Nanak Dev ji were seen.
Without caring what he’s writing, AV goes on the road of hatred and wrote that Baba Banda Singh Bahadur wrote to Mata Sundri ji that ‘it’s not wise to forgive the Muslims invaders’ (36). The truth is the Sikhs were not against any religion. We’ve said it in many videos and articles that in this century people are using the Sikh Gurus and the Sikhs to paint a picture to show their unnecessary repulsion for the Muslims. They are so consumed by the hatred that they don’t even know what they are talking about. I believe this’s the result of the online propaganda machines (OPM) that lead them to believe all these nonsensical stories which’s no base.
Bagvati Das wrote on 28th April 1711:
Follower of Nanak (Baba Banda Singh Bahadur) was in Karnol on 19th (26th April 1711.) He gave his word that he would not hurt the Muslims. Whichever Muslim agrees to him, he provides him a salary to join him. He’s allowing Muslims to do their prayers and read their holy books. Five thousand Muslims are in his army; they are happy as they’re following their religion too under Banda[20].
No man named Ram Dayal was sent to Mata Sundar Kaur ji (37). The name that comes in Puratan Panth Parkash is Nand Lal[21]. Mata Sundar Kaur ji said he didn’t listen to her, but Nand Lal asked her to send a letter to Banda anyway. When Banda read the letter, he said he isn’t a Sikh. The victories made him ignorant, and he said he had the victories because of himself. It is the same like the Mughals did that the Guru didn’t give them the kingship. They forgot it, and the same mistake was made by Banda.
ਬੰਦੈ ਕਪ੍ਯੋ, ‘ਮੈਂ ਤਵ ਸਿੱਖ ਨਾਂਹੀ । ਮੈਂ ਬੈਰਾਗੀ ਬੈਸਨੋ ਆਹੀ ।
ਹਮ ਔ ਤੁਮ ਕੋ ਇਤਨੋ ਮੇਲ । ਲੇਂ ਪਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਹਮ ਅਪਨੇ ਖੇਲ ।।20।।[22]
And neither she’s upset with Banda because he didn’t release the coins on the name of the Sikh Gurus (38). AV just copied the verses from the Internet without going much into the detail. Banda Singh Bahadur actually released the coin in the name of Sikh Gurus with the following verses inscribed on it.
Sikka jad bar har do alam teg Nanak vahib ast
Fateh Gobind Singh shahe-shahan fazal sacha sahib ast
ਸਿੱਕਾ ਜ਼ਦ ਬਰ ਹਰ ਦੋ ਆਲਮ ਤੇਗ਼ਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਵਾਹਿਬ ਅਸਤ
ਫ਼ਤਿਹ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਸ਼ਾਹਿ-ਸ਼ਾਹਾਨ ਫ਼ਜ਼ਲਿ ਸੱਚਾ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਅਸਤ
The coin was struck in two worlds, blessings were given by Guru Nanak.
Victory is of the Emperor Gobind Singh, the blessings were given by the one true Lord.
Behind this coin, the verses were written that’re there on the Internet, which describe the praises of the capital of Sikhs at that time – Lohgarh:
Jarab b-amaan-dahir, musavarat shehar, jeenat-takhat, Mubarak bhakht
ਜ਼ਰਬ ਬ-ਅਮਾਨੁ-ਦਹਿਰ, ਮੁਸ਼ੱਵਰਤ ਸ਼ਹਿਰ, ਜ਼ੀਨਤ-ਤਖ਼ਤੁ, ਮੁਬਾਰਕ ਬਖ਼ਤ
Released from the peaceful place in the world, the beautiful city, from great capitol.
Then he released a stamp with the following inscription:
Ajmat Nanak Guru hum jahero hum baatan ast
Paadshahe dino dunia aap sacha saahab ast
ਅਜ਼ਮਤਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੂ ਹਮ ਜ਼ਾਹਿਰੇ ਹਮ ਬਾਤਨ ਅਸਤ
ਪਾਦਸ਼ਾਹਿ ਦੀਨੋ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਆਪ ਸੱਚਾ ਸਾਹਬ ਅਸਤ
Great is the praise of Guru Nanak, inside and outside (everywhere)
He is the protector of the world the Lord Himself.
After this, a new one came into picture:
Dego tego fateh o nusarat be-dirang
Yaafat aj Nanak Guru Gobind Singh
ਦੇਗੋ ਤੋਗੋ ਫ਼ਤਿਹ ਓ ਨੁਸਰਤਿ ਬੇ-ਦਿਰੰਗ
ਯਾਫਤ ਅਜ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ
Food, sword, victory, selfless service, beyond this world
Got them from Guru Nanak-Gobind Singh[23]
Next few lines of his article are plain nonsense to please the petty minds like his. He also called Hukamnama as some Islamic fatwa (39) without knowing that there’re many Hukamnamas sent by the Sikh Gurus to the Sikhs to give them a direction/instruction[24]. Even these days the Hukamnamas are given by the Panj Pyaare; and in the morning during the parkash of Guru Granth Sahib ji, a Hukamnama is taken.
Furthermore, adding more lies in his post, AV mentioned that in 1717 A.D., Banda Singh Bahadur sat on the throne (40). The failed student of history doesn’t even know that Banda Singh Bahadur died in 1716[25]. He also mentioned that Baba Binod Singh was present there (41). So who was present in 1717 A.D.? Foolish person. Although he mentioned in the next paragraphs that Banda was martyred on June 9, 1716. A contradiction? Don’t worry, we will cover this up at the end of this series.
Behind the death of Banda Singh Bahadur, people have different opinions. One is that he died in 1716, the other is when he’s declared dead and his body was thrown out, his followers found him; and he used some techniques to breathe again. He lived until 1736[26].
AV goes on explaining about Mata Sundar Kaur with his limited knowledge to deceive masses. Mata Sundar Kaur and her father were no Hindu (42). And they didn’t convert before the marriage[27] (43). (Now pay so much attention here. According to AV, Mata Sundar Kaur’s marriage with the Guru was in the year 1684. So before 1684 she converted to Sikhism. But in the earlier passages he mentioned that Sikhism was started in 1699. How come she converted to Sikhism in 1684 when it didn’t exist then? Moreover, as she’s a Hindu, she should be happy that a Hindu Banda was leading everything, no? If we say Mata Sundar Kaur ji was converted that’s why she couldn’t be happy with the victories of a Hindu, then the claim that the Khalsa was there just to protect and it’s an army of Hindus, who could jump from one religion to another whenever they needed, turns out to be wrong. All these contradictions and lame theories prove my point that AV is a wasted sperm.) They were Sikhs for so long and had been practising Sikhi for years. Also, the agitation between the Sikhs (and Mata Sundar Kaur ji) and Banda Singh Bahadur was not related to a new calendar started by him (44). It’s very much conspicuous to naked eye, if history is read, that the main reason behind the divide was he claiming himself to be the guru. The coin, that we’ve discussed above, was not the starting of a Hindu Kingdom but in the praise of the Sikh Gurus, their blessings, and the capital of the Sikh Kingdom then (45).
Remember we talked about glorifying the unhappened history by some Hindus? Here it’s the same where AV’s thick brain gives him instructions to write that Banda Singh Bahadur was a Hindu, so Mata Sundar Kaur had no power over him (46). Not only this shameful wool-headed stopped here but mentioned about the cries of ‘Jai Shri Ram, Har Har Mahadev, Jai Bharat … (47)’ in the battlefield. This is what happens when you don’t pay attention in a history class.
These self-obsessed Hindus are not letting the axe fall on their feet but jumping right over the axe. The major issue with these people is that they’d been oppressed for so long that they can’t just think for a second that they were nothing. Their kings wed their daughters with the Mughal kings to save themselves. This’s the character and ‘warrior spirit’ that they had. I am not implying in any way that all the Hindu kings were like that. No. So just pay attention. I am talking about some of them who these lunatics don’t bring into discussion lest of shame and denied their existence.
The life of Banda was undoubtfully great and he achieved many things in his life, but he’d gone astray. Guru Gobind Singh himself told him several things and one of them was he shouldn’t call himself a guru. Giving him arrows instead of a sword, when the Sikhs asked the Guru to give the sword to the Khalsa, confirms it[28]. If he goes the way of the Khalsa, he’ll have the victories; if goes in a wrong direction, the fall is inevitable[29]. So the fall of Banda was not because of Mata Sundar Kaur but of his actions (48).
Now comes the Panj Pyare. Again, the basic thing about the Khalsa Panth AV doesn’t know but writing about the Panj Pyare. AV’s toddler’s brain said that the three of the Panj Pyare were martyred at the banks of Sirsa (49), which is wrong because they were martyred in the Battle of Chamkaur. According to AV, Banda could have replied that the three out of the five were martyred and two died in Nanded, so there’s no one to obey. Damn. Have some good books to read rather than going wild with your imagination. The Panj Pyare can be any Gursikhs who follow rehat. When Banda was coming to Punjab, he stopped at a place and the Panj Singhs did ardaas[30]. So from where these Panj Pyare came?
Brainless idiot.
No Tat Khalsa Sikh left Mata Sundar Kaur and joined Banda (50). Actually Sikhs are those who follow the Code of Conduct. If he’s not following it, he’s not a Sikh.
The last battle of Banda Singh Bahadur was at Gurdaspur. Some say it the Battle of Gurdaspur, others say it’s the Battle of Gurdas Nangal[31]. The place where the battle took place is not far from the city. The place was under siege. No one from the Tat Khalsa came to join the forces of Mughal against Banda (51). There’s no Mughal group with the name Harwal Brigade (52). There’s no person named Meer Singh Khalsa in Tat Khalsa who fought against Banda (53). Banda didn’t retreat at all in the battle, because there’s no place to back off (54). No letter was sent by Banda Singh Bahadur to either Tat Khalsa or Mata Sundar Kaur while under siege (55). This battle was not won by Banda (56). He was captured here along with hundreds of other men. Afterwards, there’s no battle, so how Kalanaur and Sialkot came into the picture (57)?
And AV writes it down too that Baba Banda Singh Bahadur was captured at Gurdas Nangal after the siege, but before that he cooked up many stories and also didn’t know, which he usually doesn’t of anything, that Battle of Gurdaspur and Battle of Gurdas Nangal are same.
Matlab kuch bhi likhna hai! Gaanja fookta hai kya likhne se pehle?
AV is such a ballless and brainless scum that he can’t differentiate between two people. He put the picture of Bhai Taru Singh ji and said that Banda Singh Bahadur was scalped (58). Baba Banda Singh Bahadur actually married more than once[32] (59). The funny thing is AV posted the picture of the martyrdom of Baba Banda Singh; there it’s clearly written, ‘The martyrdom of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur and his four-year-old son Ajay Singh.’ If he doesn’t have a wife, what does it mean then? How he had a son? At least learn some basic Punjabi letters and then words before shitting on your blog. Your pictures are not even consistent with your narration.
I think AV shitted about Maharaja Ranjit Singh too; I will cover this up in future. There’s no doubt that before the starting of the Sikh Kingdom there’re Sikh Misls which were united by Maharaj Ranjit Singh. But the truth is none of these Misls were created by Banda Singh Bahadur (60). The year’s 1748 when the Misls were created on the day of Baisakhi i.e. 29th March – after the death of Banda[33].
The Sikhs fought with so much ferocity that the enemies thought Banda might be an incarnation of some deity. There’s not much sense to declare Banda an incarnation of Parshurama (61), will make sense to say he’s an incarnation of Vishnu or someone, maybe Kalki Avatar … incarnation of Parshurama is plain bullshit. Have you heard someone say a person is an incarnation of Ramchandra or Krishna? Though I know the point was that he’s killing the enemy like Parshurama killed the Kshatriyas.
Even the mountains were shaken by the battles. The king of Kehloor sent his army to fight with the Sikhs. 1300 Rajputs died in the battle (remember AV said that Rajputs were not on the side of Mughal? Then why they were fighting with the Sikhs? Shouldn’t they have joined the Sikhs and fought against the ‘Muslims’, like AV puts in? Think about it.) and their bodies were put in thirteen deep trenches, hundred in each[34]. The death[35] of Ajmer Chand is recorded to be in 1738 (62). Then how he was killed in a battle with Banda Singh Bahadur?
After the divide between Banda and the Khalsa, he started recruiting the Hindus, according to AV, and they left their daily chorus of reading the Vedas and business and joined him, but his army was not as strong as it’s earlier. If Banda was ‘meteor’, then why his army was not strong enough? If the battles were won solely because he’s a ‘Hindu’, then he should be able to win the battles without Khalsa too, no?
Mata Sundar Kaur didn’t falsely accuse Banda Singh Bahadur (63). He started using ‘Fateh Darshan’ instead of ‘Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh.’[36] There’s one paper too where Fateh Darshan was written by Banda. And it’s not because of Mata Sundar Kaur ji that British and Mughal ruled for years (64), it’s because of the impotent rulers of this country who gave their daughters to save themselves and please the rulers by giving them anything that they needed and be on the mercy of the Mughals. And later when the Sikh Kingdom was still standing on its legs, the British used the Hindu and Muslim forces, and the armies of the other kingdoms that they’d annexed, to take the Sikh Kingdom[37]. If the Hindus had stood with the Sikhs, there wouldn’t have been the annexation of the Sikh Kingdom, and eventually the whole India wouldn’t have faced the situations that it faced. And when the Sikhs stood with the British because of the agitation and the betrayals of the Dogras in the Anglo-Sikh wars, chomus like you cry the whole day that the Sikhs stood with the British. Grow a pair of balls to write the truth and don’t shield yourself with the non-existing pride of the ballless ancestors of yours.
It’s not the Sikhs who were fighting were the paid soldiers of the Mughals, but Hindus and Muslims (65). As already stated above, a command was given to the Hindus to cut their hair, and many are still following it like a puppet without knowing who told them to do so.
This gutless pig writes that Maharaja Ranjit Singh didn’t trust the Sikhs, so he had other religious people too in his army (66). The truth is the Sikh Kingdom was not there only for Sikhs. So, all the people from different religions were welcome. Even at the time of Guru Hargobind Sahib ji and Guru Gobind Singh ji, non-Sikh soldiers were there.
Let’s move to Amar Singh Nibber. When I read it the first time, I couldn’t recall the name. One good thing that AV did was he copied the verses from the Internet and pasted in his post. That helped a lot to get to the root of the story that he mentioned. You can check in the Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh, and somewhat similar is written in Shamsher Khalsa.
The reason behind the discord between the Tat Khalsa and Bandai Khalsa/Singh was the money in the Harmandir Sahib, that it should be distributed among all, means including the Bandai Singh too. Tat Khalsa said you didn’t follow the rehat and started following Banda Singh Bahadur, you started having Fateh Darshan, you started a different panth, so you do not have any rights. It’s a war of words.
Bhai Mani Singh was also present there. He tried to resolve the issue by saying put two slips in sarovar (it’s a common thing and there’re few incidents in history like this) with your fatehs, do ardaas, and whose slip would be floating would win. If both slips are floating, then both groups will have the share. A child was asked to put them in the sarovar.
Initially, both the slips were submerged into the water. But later the slip of Tat Khalsa was floating. Pachora Singh and Sangat Singh were the leaders of the groups of Bandai Singh, who joined the Tat Khalsa after this.
The matter was settled, and the money was used to build the gurudwara and for langar and other work that the Khalsa was doing.
The clash between the Khalsa and the Bandai Singhs happened in 1723 A.D. according to the Panth Parkash (Dr Ganda Singh wrote this year to be 1721 A.D.) It’s near the Akaal Bunga when a diwaan was going on. There’re some bitter conversations that led to the steel vs steel and Amar Singh died there. Dr Ganda Singh mentioned a wrestling match was held, and Bandai Singh’s wrestler lost, and apologised to the Tat Khalsa and joined them with others. Later, Tat Khalsa attacked the dera of Amar Singh[38]. And the lines that AV copied from the Internet, I am sure he doesn’t even know what they mean. Just like any other lunatic, he’s a copy-paster.
No, the Sikhs didn’t hold the land at the time of Banda Singh Bahadur more than the time of the Sikh Kingdom (67).
I think I’ve covered up almost everything related to Baba Banda Singh Bahadur that AV talked about. If I have missed something, will write in some other post. A total of 51 lies about the life of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, in general you can say. I am hoping for the lies to be around 200 in the whole of the article.
Before I end this post, I want to say that few scholars say there’s no discord between the Khalsa and Bandai when Banda was alive. Dr Ganda Singh was one of them. He wrote about the life of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur using, few times, the contemporary sources especially the parchments sent to the Mughal king. There was no mentioning of any bitterness between the Khalsa and Bandai. In general, he rejected what Giani Gian Singh and Ratan Singh Bhangu have written. But the Khalsa Panth believes that there’re some conflicts between the Khalsa and the Bandai, and Banda didn’t follow the rules and went against the Khalsa. And I believe the same.
As we’ve mentioned that Banda’s son was killed along him in Delhi. Another son Ranjit Singh was his next gaddi-nasheen. Here are the words of Baba Sardool Singh in 1934 A.D., who was the then gaddi-nasheen.
Our ancestor, Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, was baptised in 1765 Bikarmi from the hands of Guru Gobind Singh ji and left his Bairagi Panth forever, and became the Sikh of Guru Gobind Singh ji. After him, all the descendants were the Sikhs of the Sikh Gurus and are still now.
With the command of Guru Gobind Singh ji, Banda Singh Bahadur came to Punjab and then martyred (in Delhi.)
While he’s alive, he never called himself the next guru of the Sikhs, and he died while following the command of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Including him and the gaddi-nasheen of his are known as Baba.
There’s no quarrel between the Khalsa and Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, and the Khalsa didn’t leave him. Until his last day, around 800 Sikhs were martyred in Delhi. And no one ran away from the death and changed their religion.
The differences between the Tat Khalsa and Bandai Khalsa were after the death of Banda Singh Bahadur and it’d nothing to do with his life[39].
There is a place near Reasi, Jammu & Kashmir, known as Dera Baba Banda Bahadur. Dr Ganda Singh visited this place back in 1935 and observed that everything was according to Sikhism. After the dohra of ardaas, they exchanged the fateh – Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki fateh – and then delivered three jaikaare (Bole so nihal, sat shri Akaal!) They sang the verses in the praise of Guru Gobind Singh ji, and then talked about all the people from Baba Banda Singh Bahadur until the one before the current one gaddi-nasheen.
[1] Punjab utte Angreja da kabja (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2000
[2] ‘ਬਾਦਸ਼ਾਹ ਔਰੰਗਜੇਬ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੂੰ ਸਮਾਈ ਦੀ ਇਕ ਚਿੱਠੀ ਲਿਖੀ ਅਤੇ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਗੱਲਬਾਤ ਲਈ ਦੱਖਣ ਆਉਣ ਦਾ ਸੱਦਾ ਦਿੱਤਾ । ... ਪਰ ਬਾਦਸ਼ਾਹ ਇਸ ਵੇਲੇ ਬਹੁਤ ਬੁੱਢਾ ਅਤੇ ਕਮਜ਼ੋਰ ਹੋ ਚੁੱਕਾ ਹੋਇਆ ਸੀ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਦੀ ਸਿਹਤ ਦਿਨੋਂ ਦਿਨ ਡਿਗਦੀ ਜਾ ਰਹੀ ਸੀ । ... ਇਸ ਲਈ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਗੱਲ-ਬਾਤ ਕਰਨ ਲਈ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਦੱਖਣ ਜਾਣ ਦਾ ਇਰਾਦਾ ਕਰ ਲਿਆ ।’ - Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 4
[3] ਦੱਖਣ ਕੇ ਸਫ਼ਰ ਵਿਚ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੂੰ ਨਾਰਾਇਣਾ ਨਗਰ ਰਿਆਸਤ ਜੈਪੁਰ ਵਿਚ ਦਾਦੂ-ਪੰਥੀ ਮਹੰਤ ਜੋਤ ਰਾਮ ਪਾਸੋਂ ਨਾਂਦੇੜ ਵਿਚ ਟੀਕੇ ਹੋਏ ਬੈਰਾਗੀ ਮਾਧੋ ਦਾਸ ਦਾ ਪਤੇ ਲਗ ਗਿਆ ਸੀ ... ਖ਼ੁਦ ਮਹੰਤ ਜੋਤ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਲ ਭੀ ਉਸ ਨੇ ਕੋਝਾ ਵਰਤਾਓ ਕੀਤਾ ਸੀ । ਇਸ ਲਈ ਮਹੰਤ ਜੋਤ ਰਾਮ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੂੰ ਬੇਨਤੀ ਕੀਤੀ ਕਿ ਉਹ ਨਾਂਦੇੜ ਪੁੱਜਣ ਪਰ ਮਾਧੋ ਦਾਸ ਨੇ ਡੇਰੇ ਨਾ ਜਾਣ । - Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 6
[4] Suraj Parkash, Bhai Santokh Singh, translated by Ajit Singh Aulakh, Vol 11, 2007, ann 2, chapter 4, 5
[5] Suraj Parkash, Bhai Santokh Singh, translated by Ajit Singh Aulakh, Vol 11, 2007, ann 2, chapter 5
[6] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 32
[7] Mahan Kosh, Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha
[8] Dr Ganda Singh put the accounts of all these authors in his English version of Banda Singh Bahadur.
[9] ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ: ਮੈਂ ਇਸ ਲਈ ਆਇਆ ਹਾਂ ਕਿ ਤੈਨੂੰ ਆਪਣਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਸਜਾਵਾ ।
ਮਾਧੋ ਦਾਸ: ਮੈਂ ਹਾਜ਼ਰ ਹਾਂ ਹਜ਼ੂਰ ! ਮੈਂ ਆਪ ਦਾ ਬੰਦਾ (ਗ਼ੁਲਾਮ) ਹਾਂ । - Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 6
This is mentioned in Ahmed Shah Batalia’s work that AV didn’t quote.
[10] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, Chapter 1
[11] Suraj Parkash, Bhai Santokh Singh, translated by Ajit Singh Aulakh, Vol 11, 2007,Ann 2, Chapter 6
[12] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008 p 12-13
[13] ‘ਗੁਰੂ ਤੇਗ਼ ਬਹਾਦਰ ਨੂੰ ਦਿੱਲੀ ਵਿਚ ਸ਼ਹੀਦ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲਾ ਸੱਯਦ ਜਲਾਲੂਦੀਨ ਸਮਾਣੇ ਦਾ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਸੀ ਅਤੇ ਸਰਹੰਦ ਵਿਚ ਸਾਹਿਬਜ਼ਾਦਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਜ਼ਿਬਾਹ ਕਰਨ ਅਰਥਾਤ ਕੋਹ ਕੋਹ ਕੇ ਮਾਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਜੱਲਾਦ ਸ਼ਾਸ਼ਲ ਬੇਗ ਅਤੇ ਬਾਸ਼ਲ ਬੇਗ ਭੀ ਸਮਾਣੀਏ ਹੀ ਸਨ । - Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi) by Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, Page 19
[14] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 26
[15] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 34
[16] Banda the Brave, Bhai Sohan Singh Sher-i-Babar of Gujranwala, 1915, p 84
[17] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 65
ਦੁਆਬੇ ਦਾ ਫੌਜਦਾਰ ਖੁਦ ਸ਼ੱਮਸ ਖਾਨ ਭੀ ਸੁਲਤਾਨ ਪੁਰ ਵਿਚ ਆਰਾਮ ਨਾਲ ਨਾ ਰਹਿ ਸਕਿਆ ਅਤੇ ਮੁਆਸਿਰ-ਲ-ਉਮਰਾ (ਜਿਲਦ 3-128) ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਸ਼ੱਮਸ ਖ਼ਾਨ ਅਤੇ ਸਿੰਘਾਂ ਦੇ ਵਿਚਕਾਰ ਬਾਈ ਲੜਾਈਆਂ ਹੋਈਆਂ ।
[18] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 70
[19] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 70
[20] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 94
[21] Puratan Panth Parkash, Bhai Ratan Singh Bhanggu, edited by Dr Jeet Singh Seetal, 2005, p 188
ਤਬ ਭਾਈ ਨੰਦਲਾਲ ਬੁਲਾਯੋ । ਤੌ ਪਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੈ ਯੌ ਸਮਝਾਯੋ ।
‘ਤੁਮ ਜਾਯੋ ਮਾਤਾ ਜੀ ਪਾਸ । ਹਾਥ ਜੋੜ ਯੌ ਕਰੋ ਅਰਦਾਸ ।8।’
[22] Puratan Panth Parkash, Bhai Ratan Singh Bhanggu, edited by Dr Jeet Singh Seetal, 2005, p 189
[23] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 42
All these inscriptions were in Persian. Here the wording is given in roman, Gurmukhi and then in English translation.
[24] Hukamnaame by Dr Ganda Singh show many of these by Sikh Gurus and the Mehals of the Guru.
[25] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 136
[26] Shamsher Khalsa, Giani Gian Singh
[27] Mata Sundri ji: sangarsh ate shakhsheeat (Punjabi), Dr Paramvir Singh, 2012
[28] Shri Gur Partap Suraj Granth, Vol 14, edited by Bhai Vir Singh, ann 2, ansu 6, p 6243 (footnote by Bhai Vir Singh)
[29] Shri Gur Partap Suraj Granth, Vol 11, translated by Dr Ajit Singh Aulakh, 2007, ann 2, adhyai 6
[30] Shamsher Khalsa, Giani Gian Singh
[31] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, chapter 18
[32] Puratan Panth Parkash, Bhai Ratan Singh Bhanggu, edited by Dr Jeet Singh Seetal, 2005, p 204
ਦੂਜੋ ਲਯੋ ਉਨ ਜਤ ਗਵਾਇ । ਨਾਰਨ ਬਹੁ ਪਰਵਿਰਤ੍ਯੋ ਜਾਇ ।।11।।
[33] Sikh Mislan, Giani Sohan Singh Seetal
[34] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 88
[35] Concise Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, 2013, P 14
[36] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 142
[37] Punjab utte angreja da kabja (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh
‘I had an excellent opportunity of examining the varied materials of an Indian army. First were the English Horse Artillery; then the dashing dragoons of the 3d Queen's, most splendidly mounted and appointed; then came the stern, determined-looking British footmen, side by side with their tall and swarthy brethren from the Ganges and Jumna,—the Hindoo, the Mussulman, and the white man, all obeying the same word, and acknowledging the same common tie; next to these a large brigade of guns, with a mixture of all colors and creeds; then more regiments of foot, the whole closed up by the regiments of native cavalry: the quiet-looking and English-dressed Hindoo troopers strangely contrasted with the wild Irregulars in all the fanciful ununiformity of their native costume; yet these last are the men I fancy for service. Altogether, it was a most interesting sight, either to the historian or soldier, especially as one remembered that these were no men of parade, but assembled here to be poured across the Sutlej at a word.’ Twelve years of a soldier’s life in India by Major W. S. R. Hodson
[38] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 151-152
[39] Banda Singh Bahadur (Punjabi), Dr Ganda Singh, 2008, p 159
