e’ve come a
long way in this series. It’s the sixth part now.
The last two parts were mainly focused on the life of Baba Banda
Singh Bahadur and D. Petrie’s report. They needed to be discussed in more
detail so that the eyes of the Sikhs could be opened that how a dilettante is
writing anything without much sense and history, especially the life of Baba
Banda Singh Bahadur, whose life is getting changed into the life of a Hindu
than a Sikh by some Hindus. These days they don’t call him Baba Banda Singh
Bahadur but Veer Bahadur or Veer Banda Bahadur, doing the sudhikaran.
The first lie of this part of the series is related to the martyrdom
of Guru Teg Bahadur ji. According to AV, the words of the prophecy were sent
among the Sikhs to avenge the guru’s martyrdom. He mentioned this to
be before the 1857 revolution68. If this ‘prophecy’ had driven the
Sikhs into the battle with the others, then the sacrifices of the Sikhs at the
time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur wouldn’t have made any sense. If the Sikhs
hadn’t avenged the wrongdoings of the Mughals then, after destroying almost all
the Mughal things of that time, then I don’t know what avenge means. The first
time this prophecy was talked about by the British/European was in the work of
Macauliffe. So saying it’s before the revolution of 1857 will be wrong. Will
check some other books to confirm this though. Until now, I have not found it
in the work of other English/European authors before Macauliffe. Cunningham
also writes about the European and English but not in the sense in which
Macauliffe mentioned them. In Cunningham’s work, it’s written in the note of
page 125, ‘In the Grunt’h of Gooroo Govind there are at least four allusions to
Europeans, the last referring specially to an Englishman. 1st, in
the Akal Stoot, Europeans are enumerated among the tribes inhabiting
India; 2d and 3d, in the Kulkee chapters of the 24 Owtars,
apparently in praise of the systematic modes of Europeans; and 4th, in the
Persians Hikayuts, where both a European and an Englishman appear as champions
for the hand of a royal damsel, to be vanquished, of course, by the hero of the
tale.’
AV used the image of Hodson to
lie about the worshipping by the Sikhs69. By seeing the image with a
close scrutiny, it clears the doubt what AV is putting in the minds of the
readers. The image has nothing to do with his worshipping but like a surrender
of the people battling in 1857. Behind him you can see the men fighting and at
the bottom it says the mutiny of 1857.
Much part of his theory about the avenge by Hodson to fulfil the
‘prophecy’, mainly the take off of the dress and swords of Bahadur Shah, is
taken from Wikipedia’s
article,
which he usually calls not authentic. Now there’s a necessity to prove the
devotion of Sikhs to some British man, he cherrypicked the verses like many BHs
do. AV wrote that after killing the sons of Bahadur Shah, the prophecy was fulfilled70.
How foolish AV thinks the Sikhs are? Is there no sense remaining in
those few Sikhs who think this bullshit is for real? How the killing of sons of
some emperor hundreds of years after the martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur ji would
have called ‘avenging’? This is the foolishness of the highest order. Is it a
set of Game of Thrones where Martyn and Willem Lannister are killed by Rickard
Karstark to avenge his son? Damn man. Use some brains.
As far as the prophecy is concerned, let’s see that also what
Macauliffe has written, which has nothing to do with the martyrdom of the guru.
Guru Teg Bahadur ji is said to tell Aurangzeb, ‘I was looking in the direction
of the Europeans who are coming from beyond the seas to tear down thy pardas and
destroy thine empire.’ Somewhat same I found written in Twarikh Khalsa. While
making the sense of what is written in these books, a question arises that why
it’s written by both Macauliffe and Giani Gian Singh that the Mughals would be
obliterated, when first at the time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur and then during
the Misl period the Khalsa ruled the place, and there’s not much of the Mughal
rule remaining in Punjab and its surrounding areas.
But it should be noted that the major reason for the Sikhs to side
with the British was not to fulfil the prophecy but to avenge the killing of
the sons of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and the deceits and backstabbing of the
Dogras, who sided with the British to shake the Khalsa Raj and was able to do
so with the cleverness; and to hide that, AV mentioned it’s because of the
Rothschild71 not the Hindus who let that happen. I am pretty sure in
some distant future, AV would claim that he’s the son of Rothschild.
It’s not related to Sikhism, but I am taking the liberty to say
that the sons of Bahadur Shah Zafar were shot dead by Hodson, not beheaded71
and were not given the heads on platter to Bahadur Shah Zafar72. Also,
the head of the guru was not put for display at Chandni Chowk or anywhere73.
There’re two stories that I read: first one is that the head of the guru fell
in the lap of a Sikh, second is a Sikh ran quickly and took away the head and
showed to Guru Gobind Singh ji in Anandpur Sahib.
From 1469 to 1708, the gurus were in the form of body. After the Joti
Jot of Guru Gobind Singh ji, the guru of the Sikhs became Guru Granth Sahib
ji. Since then the Sikhs have been following Guru Granth Sahib ji. It’s not
just a book with divine messages or songs but the living guru for the Sikhs.
Sikhs have the same respect for the granth that they’d for the earlier
gurus. But with the passage of time and some writings of the FICOS, the message
of calling Guru Granth Sahib just a holy book and a very good source of moral
values is spread by many people. Guru Granth Sahib ji is the living guru and
the 11th guru of the Sikhs74. It’s not some conspiracy to
cut down the chance of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur75. Actually, when
Guru Gobind Singh ji sent Baba Banda Singh Bahadur and the Sikhs to Punjab, he
specifically mentioned him not to call himself a guru or start your own
religion, and follow the Khalsa.
ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਕੀ
ਪ੍ਰਭੁਤਾ ਪਿਖੀ
ਬਿਸਾਲਾ । ਪਰ੍ਯੋ
ਚਰਨ ਪਰ
ਧਰਿ ਕਰਿ
ਭਾਲਾ ।
'ਅਪਨੋ ਮਤਿ ਚਲਾਇਹੌਂ ਜਬੈ । ਪੰਥ ਆਪ ਕੋ ਬਿਗਰੈ ਤਬੈ' ॥੨੯॥ – ਸੂਰਜ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼, ਦੂਸਰਾ ਐਨ, ਅਧਿਆਇ ਛੇਵਾਂ
Namdharis had
their own rules and rituals which are not followed by the Sikhs. They believed
that the guruship was given to someone else but not Guru Granth Sahib
ji. If AV is talking about the Namdharis then AV’s illogical statement of
calling Banda Singh Bahadur the 11th guru of Sikhs becomes a joke. A
website talks about the points which are raised
by Namdharis and then answered them accordingly. Going into much details about
the Namdharis at this stage is not the topic of discussion, hence leaving that,
but thought of clearing this up because a ‘Sikh’ also told me to look at the
Namdharis and how they praise the deities and all other rules that they have.
Following something which’s against gurmat is not what I want to do with
my life. So I don’t care what the Namdharis believe in. You can check the
website’s link provided above to get into more details about their logic and
theories to claim the throne of the Sikh Gurus.
Gurbani was the
guru before Guru Gobind Singh ji declared. After the compilation of Guru Granth
Sahib ji, Guru Arjan Dev ji used to sleep on the floor and the granth
would be on the bed. This was the reverence paid by the guru himself, which
some FICOS claiming just fake ritualism because the guru talked about the
discourse of the verses than the rituals that the Sikhs have adopted.
Going with the
body and horse was not something created by the Rothschild76.
Actually, to avoid the embarrassment and the non-availability of the source to
point to, AV uses the word ‘Rothschild’ mostly. It’s very easy to do and
doesn’t require much of a brain, and the brainless followers believe that. Like
many fake preachers in Sikhism start calling the miracles in the Sikh history
bogus stories to entertain the sangat. The reason behind that is they
can’t explain that to the sangat. So they adopted the easy way out. Same
is true for AV.
It is not only in
the life of Guru Gobind Singh ji. If you read the life of Guru Nanak Dev ji,
the same thing happened. When the people picked the linen, below that only
flowers were there. I heard there’s no remaining of the Sikh Gurus after the last
rites. Wasn’t required to bring Rothschild in this matter.
I think the
agenda behind this sham article by an eight-year-old boy is to tell that it’s
not only the Hinduism, other religions are also there which were changed by the
Rothschild. If he says only the holy books of Hindus were affected, it creates
a doubt in mind. So to resurrect the Hindu religion, he’d to bring all the
incidents around the world to change and reinvent the religion that he follows,
without which it’ll not be possible to talk about Hinduism and Hinduism alone.
Guru Nanak Dev
ji’s visit to Mecca is very popular. The miracle that happened there is not
believed by many Muslims because they believe that the centre place of their
worship can’t be changed by anyone. This holds true to many people from
different religions about their holy places, and they believe it to be
unbelievable when someone speaks like this. Guru Nanak Dev ji didn’t tell the
Muslim to turn his legs in any direction77, there’s a talk with him,
and then a debate with other Muslims. It’s not a story that the British had
created or propagated. Contrary to that, AV’s blog is filled with the stories
of the miracles in the holy books of Hinduism. Let me quote from one post only.
1.
‘The moment Krishna took the child in his arms, the additional limbs and
eye disappeared.’
2.
‘Krishna wielded his chakra and directed it at Shishupal. It went revolving to Shishupal and severed
his neck from the rest of his body. Then
it returned to Krishna's hand.’
3.
‘Everybody present was frightened even to look at Krishna who had assumed
his divine colossal form (Virat Roop).’
You can find many
on the whole blog. My point is, in many religions there’re many inexplicable incidents
happened in history which do not make sense to the unenlightened people. So
saying that that they were all lies and conjured up by the British will be a
fool’s errand. You want to deny the miracles performed by Baba Ram Rai, but
conveying a chakra was twirling on Krishna’s finger …?! Makes sense. (sarcasm)
Macauliffe didn’t
write all the miracles78 which are there in the Sikh history. In his
own words, ‘Notwithstanding exaggerations, such as occur in all religions which
deal with avatars or incarnations, the Janamsakhi now under consideration is
beyond dispute the most trustworthy detailed record we possess of the life of
Guru Nanak. It contains much less mythological matter than any other Gurumukhi
life of the Guru, and is a much more rational, consistent, and satisfactory
narrative.’ When it comes to the story of Mecca, he wrote, ‘Upon this the priest
seized the Guru’s feet and dragged them in the opposite direction, whereupon,
it is said, the temple turned round, and followed the revolution of his body.
Some understand this in a spiritual sense, and say it means that Guru Nanak
made all Makka turn to his teaching. Those who witnessed this miracle were
astonished and saluted the Guru as a supernatural being.’
I do not see the
‘topiwala’ ‘white’ Sikh supporting the miracle79 but writing in a different way like Dhadrianwala preaches these days that
it’s the spiritual understanding of the people there, not actually changing the
direction of Kaba; also, he wrote ‘it is said’ which doesn’t sound like
supporting the miracle. Like I said, it’s the 21st century, people
just can’t understand the miracles, so deny them or change the way of their
happening (seems like in earlier century too some people didn’t believe in
miracles for so and so reasons.) So at least read the books of these people
that you’re quoting than writing anything baseless. BTW, I do not agree with
everything that Macauliffe has written.
Also, related to the miracles performed by
Baba Ram Rai, Malcolm wrote, ‘Their writers have endeavoured to supply this
chasm in their history by a fabulous account of the numerous miracles which
were wrought by their priests, Ram Ray, Har Crishn, and even the unfortunate Tegh
Behadur, at Dehli, all of whom are said to have astonished the emperor and his
nobles, by a display of their supernatural powers : but their wide difference
from each other, in these relations, would prove, if any proof was wanting,
that all the annals of that period are fabricated.’ So, yeah, stating the
authors proved all the miracles in Sikhism shows the lies told by AV.
Baba Banda Singh Bahadur’s life we’d discussed
in the last article. One point that I missed is that there’s no decision made
by Guru Gobind Singh ji that only the veg food would be served in the langar
because of Banda80. If we take into consideration the story told by
AV that the guru knew Baba Banda Singh Bahadur and they’re meeting the second
time at Nanded Sahib, then the Singhs would never had done the jhatka at
his place; the guru would have told them not to do that. Before the tenth guru,
and at his time and after his time, only veg food was served in the langar.
It’d nothing to do with Baba Banda Singh Bahadur. Although some meet-lover
Sikhs use the anti-gurmat stories from the historical granths
that the meat was served in the langar.
There’s no denying in eating meat in Sikhism.
But it’s not for taste. When the Sikhs were fighting and didn’t have anything
to eat, then they used to eat non-veg to live and fight and die for the panth
and righteousness.
This story of Hindus giving their first son to
the Sikh Gurus is very common. I am still trying to find the source of it, when
it’s come into picture, and where it’s originated from. And it didn’t make
sense though. Hindus didn’t make their own group but sent their firstborns to
the guru to fight against the oppressors?!
Fear of the British was not the Hindus giving
their first child to the guru81, nor it was the valour of the Hindus
which made the Sikhs the bravest people in the world82. Sikhism or
Khalsa Panth was not created to fight against the Islamic invaders but to fight
against the injustice83 and also be a saint at the same time. Sikhs
who AV is calling ‘rustic’84 saved thousands of their women taken by
the different ruling houses of that time. Inglorious bastard, it’s the people
like you who cause the Sikhs to loathe the Hindus and their interpretation of gurbani
and fake history. Mughals and the likes of AV are same: they do not remember
because of whom they’re ruling the place.
AV discussed about the authors who wrote books
on Sikhism. Why these names appear during discussions with BHs can be checked here, in the clichéd argument 10. Gulab Singh Raja was no
Lakshman85, but either Sumbh or Nisumbh, you can choose any one
which you like. If the BHs and the likes of AV call the Sikhs who follow Sikhi
as Khalistanis or separatists, then it will not be wrong to call Gulab Singh a Hindu
traitor. One more thing that I would like to highlight here is that AV will
never call the Hindus wrong. Never. If there’re some Hindus that he detests, he
would call them Jews or Rothschild agents, but never call them wrong … and
Hindus … at the same time.
The efforts of Malcolm to write the history of
Sikhs was just to give a brief view about the warlike nature of the Sikhs. This
was before the annexation of Punjab and fall of the Sikh Nation. His work
mainly focused on the lives of Guru Gobind Singh ji and Baba Banda Singh
Bahadur and later times, to tell a story how and from where the spirit of Sikhs
originated. The British was trying to win all the battles across the different
kingdoms of that period, the information to fight with the Sikhs was necessary
for them. It would give them a clear idea about the source of power of Sikhs.
His work didn’t set the foundation for Sikhs to support the British though86.
Read the book before writing.
Dr Ernest Trumpp is a very lovable scholar for
the anti-Sikh people. These people don’t quote him during their litter picking,
it’s not possible. They always do. He did translate Guru Granth Sahib ji in
English and it angered the Sikhs because of his inability to grasp what’s been
written in there, even when he knew different languages. He’s not chosen to
inject poison in the Sikh scripture though87. Neither his work was
to remove the references to the Vedas88.
He didn’t have any report to have Rothschild’s
focus on it89. If he had it, where is it? Why didn’t AV show that to
the readers? Like he said he looked for the Hukamnama of Mata Sundri ji, he
must have done the same for this report on the basis of what he’s writing it,
no?
Here are some praises of Dr Trumpp from my
darling author Dr Tirlochan Singh.
‘From Dr Ernest Trumpp, a fanatic Christian missionary of the nineteenth-century
to Dr William Hewat McLeod, a leading light of Batala-Berkley Christian
Missionary group of the twentieth-century critics of Sikhism, and from Swami
Dayanand leader of Anti-Sikh Arya-Samaj Hindu-cult to a host of turbanned and
bearded communists, atheists, agnostics, opportunists, bearing the name
"Singh" there have been a number of spiritually blind, intellectually
corrupt, highly conceited writers and scholars who have described Sikhs and
Sikhism in a manner, no ordinary person with even a rudimentary intellectual
honesty and historical insight can ever comprehend or describe.’
And I will happily put the names of AV and BHs in the above
praises.
Ernest Trumpp’s task was not to make a distinction between the
Vedas and the Sikh scripture90. He was chosen by Robert Needham Cust
as a scholar who could translate Guru Granth Sahib into English.
In his translation, Trumpp replaced Ik Oan(g)kaar with OM without
explaining its meaning at all. Not only this, he mistranslated many verses and
put the notes below which are totally against the Sikh religion. Ik Oan(g)kaar
and OM do not look same91. Some deceitful BHs say Ik Oan(g)kaar is
Omkaar or Omkaara, totally changing the pronunciation. They would tell how the
mantras in the Vedas should be enunciated with so much care and symmetry. For
the Sikh scriptures, they do not care much about the pronunciation. I talked to
a person who said the verses of gurbani were written in a way to just
rhyme them at the end, nothing more important is in there; but for their
scriptures, they talk about the different dictionaries which can be read to
understand the Sanskrit language. This is how they fool the young Sikhs.
Macauliffe didn’t delete anything from the scripture92.
Or added93. His work about the distinction of the Sikh religion is a
tight slap on the ugly face of this illogical, ballless scum, who calls himself
a writer who writes about history. Let me put the verses of Macauliffe’s work
here so that I could see these unintellectual beings’ blood boiling by hearing
the truth and seeing how their propaganda is going down into the pit that
they’d dug for themselves.
‘A movement to declare the Sikhs
Hindus, in direct opposition to the teaching of the Gurus, is widespread and of
long duration. I have only quite recently met in Lahore young men claiming to
be descendants of the Gurus, who told me that they were Hindus, and that they
could not read the characters in which the sacred books of the Sikhs were
written. Whether the object of their tutors and advisers was or was not to make
them disloyal, such youths are ignorant of the Sikh religion.’
All the Sikhs around the world
should know the truth behind the shallow article of AV about Sikhs. Not only
this but all the articles, books, videos, or anything for that matter, written
down by SSs, BHs, FICOS or any group that doesn’t have any idea about the Sikh
religion, history and meaning of gurbani. If you have knowledge, you
laugh at these jokers turned historians and translators. So one simple request.
Read historical granths and listen to katha.
Tat Khalsa had nothing to with the
separation of Sikhs and Hindus94. I am going to write it again,
doesn’t matter how many times it comes. No Sikh guru was a Hindu95.
Sikhism existed before Panj Pyare were created96.
Macauliffe didn’t do anything to
call the granth as guru97. AV mentioned the name of Malcolm;
he didn’t even read his work. I can bet anything on that because in his work he
clearly mentioned the Sikhs bowing to the granths at Amritsar. Check
page 120 of his book, ‘When the chiefs and principal leaders are seated, the
Adi-Grant'h and Dasama Padshah ka Grant'h are placed before them. They all bend
their heads before these scriptures, and exclaim, Wa ! Guruji ka Khalsa ! Wa
! Guruji ki Fateh !’ Not only this there’re many books available which talk
about Guru Gobind Singh ji giving gurtagaddi to Guru Granth Sahib ji.
Let’s say I’ve smoked a pot and believing everything that AV penned down, then
what Macauliffe’s writing about the holy book to be the guru of Sikhs had to do
with the chances, which were ‘cut’, of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur to be the next
guru? So Baba Banda Singh Bahadur and Macauliffe were in the same era? SMH.
Tat Khalsa, or the real Sikhs, I
would say, are the people who were there in the Singh Sabha Movements, before
Macauliffe started his work. How the Tat Khalsa believed that their fight was
with the Muslism98? After the Muslims, Hindus would come99?
Kuch bhi?
If the belief of Sikhs not Hindus
was incumbent on Macauliffe, how the books before he started writing came into
picture100? In the work of Giani Gian Singh, Bhai Santokh Singh,
Sainapati, Koer Singh, etc., it’s clearly mentioned that Sikhs are not Hindus.
Not only these people who put much efforts writing history, in gurbani
and Bhai Gurdas ji’s vaara too it’s evident that the Sikhs are not
Hindus. All these shaka people are so brainless that their endpoint will
always be declaring Sikhs as Hindus. All the nonsensical talks and logic and
opinions and references and faking and almost all the methods in their disposal
eventually conclude the Sikhs as Hindus. SSs failed to grasp that too.
Guru Granth Sahib ji is the only
holy text which was uttered by those who started the religion – the Sikh Gurus.
Nothing has been changed after the tenth guru. Removing the references of the
Vedas is very ridiculous101. I can write few verses here to prove AV
wrong.
ਸਪਤ ਦੀਪ ਸਪਤ ਸਾਗਰਾ ਨਵ ਖੰਡ ਚਾਰਿ ਵੇਦ ਦਸ ਅਸਟ ਪੁਰਾਣਾ ॥ - ਅੰਗ ੮੪
ਵੇਦੁ ਪੜਹਿ ਹਰਿ ਰਸੁ ਨਹੀ ਆਇਆ ॥ ਵਾਦੁ ਵਖਾਣਹਿ ਮੋਹੇ ਮਾਇਆ ॥ - ਅੰਗ ੧੨੮
ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਮੂਲੁ ਵੇਦ ਅਭਿਆਸਾ ॥ ਤਿਸ ਤੇ ਉਪਜੇ ਦੇਵ ਮੋਹ ਪਿਆਸਾ ॥ - ਅੰਗ ੨੩੦
ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਵੇਦੁ ਪੜੈ ਵਾਦੁ ਵਖਾਣੈ ॥ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਤਾਮਸੁ ਆਪੁ ਨ ਪਛਾਣੈ ॥ - ਅੰਗ ੨੩੧
The work of Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha
is very laudable. His books Mahan Kosh, Gurmat Sudhakar, Gurushand Diavakar, and
Gurmat Martand should be available in the libraries of all the Sikhs. And the
very informative and argumentative book of all times, which breaks the very
backbone of the BHs and SSs, which is still giving nightmares to them, which is
shunned by both BHs and SSs, for which all the arguments and stories were
invented and spread on the Internet is Hum Hindu Nahi. This book has all
the lame arguments of BHs and SSs and their realities. Find one BH or SS who
agrees with this book. Only one. They will wet their pants but will not agree
to this book even when it shows the shallowness of the arguments of BHs and
SSs. For this reason, AV said this book was vetted by Macauliffe102 because
they do not have the counter arguments for that.
Macauliffe didn’t write exactly
the comment of boa constrictor like it’s available on AVB103. Here
is the correct one, ‘but Hinduism surpasses all the religions that have ever
been invented in a social exclusiveness which professes to be based on divine
sanction. Truly wonderful are the strength and vitality of Hinduism. It is like
the boa constrictor of the Indian forests. When a petty enemy appears to worry
it, it winds round its opponent, crushes it in its folds, and finally causes it
to disappear in its capacious interior.’ Not only him, even Dr Sangat Singh
said, ‘What is the future of the Sikhs in India? Will Sikhism be able to
survive as a vibrant faith? Or, will it be overwhelmed by Hinduism, the boa
constrictor of all the faiths born in India?’
I do not agree with them. The BHs
are the boa constrictor, not Hinduism or the Hindus.
There’s no prophecy which said the
Sikhs would be loyal to British104. No toopiwala Sikh avenged
the guru105. The battles of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur avenged the
guru and the sons of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Somehow if the prophecy to be
discussed, you can see it’d nothing to do with the martyrdom of the guru or the
loyalty of the Sikhs to British.
A picture posted saying the 700
followers of Guru Teg Bahadur ji were martyred depicts, at least this is what I
got, their presence at the time of the martyrdom of the guru. 700 followers …
it didn’t happen106. At the time of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur it
happened, not during the martyrdom of Guru Teg Bahadur ji. It can be before or
after, Sikhism was there both the times107. A lie mentioned multiple
times doesn’t make it truth to intelligent people. The man with a brain could
easily understand.
Harmandir Sahib is the most visited gurudwara sahib among
non-Sikhs, I believe. It’s not some Vishnu Temple108. The Litter
Committee of BHs and SSs tell that Har in Harmandir means Vishnu, so it’s a
Vishnu Temple which’s built by the Sikh Guru. There’re many articles on our
blog where the meaning of Har is discussed.
Gurbani is not mistranslated by the Sikhs109. It’s the
onus of the BHs and SSs to show the reverence for the deities, for which they
mistranslate the verses of gurbani to prove their point. I think Sikhs
should start reading the scriptures of Hindus too to know what’s there. But the
Sikhs do not even read their granths, going to other religion’s
scriptures will be hard for many of them. If it’s possible to read other’s, you
will be shocked to see what’s been written in those books.
The Sikh Gurus were not Hindus110, and I agree that
there should not be any bashing of not only Hindus but of any religious person.
Many people call us, Sikhs and Sikhi, the separatists, or that we are creating
a line between Hindus and Sikhs. We do not. Our task is to tell the truth.
Living with the lies and when the truth has been spoken it’s called the hatred
is not right. We try to limit ourselves to not cross the line and start hating
the other religious person. It’s the ocean, youngsters. Once you put your feet
in the ocean of hatred, you start enjoying it and then you do not stop. You go
deep into that ocean to live your life and enjoy there forever. Need an
example? AV is the epitome of that.
The work of Macauliffe was not sent to Rothschild111,
but to some Sikhs to have their input about it. It’s a historical work, not
just writing anything and using ‘Rothschild’ wherever’s needed. For that, much
of the book should be accurate, if not the whole book; I saw some errors in his
work too though. It’s not only in the case of Macauliffe. Many Sikh writers
also sent the earlier copies of their books to some people to have the preface
written by them, or the praises of the books and the efforts put in by the
writers. Even a high school student knows this.
British’s conclusion was not always towards the Sikhs (or Tat
Khalsa, like AV puts in)112. D Petrie’s
report
perfectly says so that how there are the forces of Tat Khalsa that could take
away the rule of the British. I’ve written that in the fourth part of this series
also.
‘Again the Tat Khalsa must be judged largely by the direction taken
by the activities of its leaders, and the general nature of these activities
has been far from reassuring. If the whole of the adherents of the Tat Khalsa
are not political minded, there are assuredly many members of it who imbued
with nationalistic ideals. These enthusiasts aim not merely at forming a
homogenous Sikh community which will be able to defend itself against other
rival bodies but preach the revival of a Sikh Nation which will wrest the
sceptre from the hands of the British and again establish its rule in the
Punjab.’
Better read the whole of the books rather than just reading what AV
or the same-minded people have written on their websites/blogs.
Macauliffe didn’t have a say in the dohra that the Sikhs
read every day113. This dohra (aagya bhayi Akaal ki)
is present before the work of Macauliffe – check Giani Gian Singh’s Panth
Parkash and Rehatnama of Bhai Prahlaad Singh. Many people know the verses in
Panth Parkash, so I am writing only about Bhai Prahlaand Singh’s Rehatnama,
where the similar verses are present.
ਦੋਹਰਾ
ਗੁਰੁ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਮਾਨੀਅਹਿ ਪਰਗਟ ਗੁਰੂ ਕੀ ਦੇਹ
ਜੋ ਸਿਖ ਮੋ ਮਿਲਬੇ ਚਹਿਹ ਖੋਜ ਇਨਹੁ ਮਹਿ ਲੇਹੁ ।੨੪।
ਦੋਹਰਾ
ਲੈਣਾ ਦੇਣਾ ਖਾਲਸੇ ਆਨ ਦੇਵ ਸਭ ਝੂਠ
ਅਉਰ ਦੇਵ ਇਹ ਮਾਨੀਏ ਜਿਉਂ ਬਾਰੂ ਕੀ ਮੂਠ ।੨੯।
ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਕੇ ਬਚਨ ਸਿਉਂ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਚਲਾਯੋ ਪੰਥ
ਸਭ ਸਿਖਨ ਕੋ ਬਚਨ ਹੈ ਗੁਰੁ ਮਾਨੀਅਹੁ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ।੩੦।
The verses of raaj karega Khalsa could be read in the
Tankhahnama of Bhai Nanad Lal.
ਦੋਹਰਾ
ਰਾਜ ਕਰੇਗਾ ਖਾਲਸਾ, ਆਕੀ ਰਹਹਿ ਨ ਕੋਇ ।
ਖ੍ਵਾਰ ਹੋਇ ਸਭ ਮਿਲੈਂਗੇ, ਬਚਹਿ ਸ਼ਰਨ ਜੋ ਹੋਇ ।੩੬।
So, AV, you ignorant
scum, you’re plainly wrong here. Also, the first two verses (Dehli takhat pe
bahegi) were banned by the British, lest the Sikhs would have the ideas to
overthrow the ruling force. This idea of encouragement by the books and the
beliefs of Sikhs was not just during the rule of the British, these days also the
chanting of the verses can change the circumstances. For that reason only, the Supreme Court of India had a say if it’s seditious or not.
Macauliffe’s
books still daunt the masses of BHs and SSs.
You can see how
the Sikh rehat and distinction has been changed in AV’s article by just
using the word Macauliffe and Rothschild. The Google-search experts only got
these few writers who authored the books on Sikhism. There are many there who
these lunatics do not know. Once some websites start talking about them, these
people living in caves will change the narratives too. If the British and
Khalistanis and Tat Khalsa didn’t suit them, they will create something new to
have the less effect of those writings on the Sikhs and change them into SSs.
Macauliffe didn’t
solidify the idea of bowing only to the granth114. Before that it’s
been written down. Like I said, read the book of Malcolm where he mentioned
Sikhs bowing to the granths. If due to the psychological disorder you do
not want to read the books of some foreigners about the Sikhism, then check the
other books written down before Malcolm, by the Sikhs.
Singh Sabha Movements had a big role to talk about the real Sikhi
and leave the diluted minded people behind in the caves where they’d been
living before the Sikhism started. Much of the research started from that point
of time, and then cleaning the gurudwaras one by one which’re under the control
of Mahants, who were doing the ill-practices and following the Brahmanical
rituals shunned by the gurus. This is the major point that the BHs and SSs use
to tell how this revolution had a role to create two faiths from one. But the
truth is when the Khalsa was in the jungles, fighting and surviving away from
the cities, many cockroaches crawled into the holy places of Sikhs. They also
brought their practices to eradicate the Pureness of the Sikhism. Once they’d
spread the grim in the Sikhism, then started the cleaning process where the war
was not only related to the words and books; the Sikhs died in the process to
liberate their holy places. And the British tried their best to control
everything and did every single possible thing to not give the control of the
gurudwaras to the Sikhs. Eventually with so much efforts of the Sikhs, they had
the maryada re-established.
These movements created an impact on the BHs who were converting
the Sikhs into their tradition. For this reason, they wrote books and protested
openly to disgust the Sikh Faith. Out of their writings and reasoning and non-existing
intellectual understanding of Sikhism, the SSs were born. Also, Sikhs started
changing into SSs once the mainstream Sikhs with the knowledge went into the
jungles, or where the population of the Sikhs was very less and they were
surrounded by the BHs. Behind that only the barbarian rulers and BHs were left
to either guide them or kill them; the BHs were successful to change the minds
of some Sikhs. The writing of those Sikhs who’d the effect of BHs on them could
be seen in the works of Koer Singh and Kesar Singh Chibber. Their whole
writings couldn’t be neglected, but the smears of the Brahmanical thoughts are
visible on their works.
Macauliffe, who was bewitched by the beauty of the Sikhi, didn’t
start the Tat Khalsa or revived it115. The Singh Sabha Movements had
removed the Brahmanical thoughts which encroached into the House of Sikhi. If
Macauliffe had liked the idea of the Brahmanical rituals present at that time
in Sikhi, he would never have written against it so repugnantly. It’s the pure
Sikhi that touched him and then he started writing about the Sikhs. Why would
he start or revive something that would totally going to destroy the Brahmanical
thinking that he would have liked so much in the early days?
Another loophole of this article is if Macauliffe or the British
had a say in creating or reviving the Tat Khalsa, then it doesn’t make sense at
all because AV put the reports of the Punjab Administration where it’s talking
about the decline of the followers of Sikhism. So the British had to ‘act fast’
and they were cutting all the links of other people who in some Brahmanical way
were following the religion? If the ‘fear’ of the British was that the ‘warrior
class’ of Sikhs is because of the Hindus, then why the British would cut all
the Brahmanical factors which were making the Sikh Army great, that they used
in World Wars?! Also, the revive of the Tat Khalsa by ‘British’ happened after
1870s according to AV, then why they didn’t cut all the connections of the
Sikhs to Hindus before 1857 mutiny when the Sikhs squashed the rising forces,
which was because of the braveness of the Sikhs because of the Hindus giving
the first son (sarcasm), because of the agitation by losing the mighty Sikh
Empire? Doesn’t make any sense at all. Why the people do not think in this way
while reading these sham articles? Do they even have brains or not?
Macauliffe shows how the Sikhism was different than other religions
and its scriptures were written at the time of the guru period, which’s absent
in other religions. Here is the complete paragraph.
The Sikh religion differs as
regards the authenticity of that its dogmas from most other great theological
systems. Many of the great teachers the world has known have not left a line of
their own composition, and we only know what they taught through tradition or
second-hand information. If Pythagoras wrote any of his tenets, his writings
have not descended to us. We know the teaching of Sokrates only through the
writings of Plato and Xenophon. Budha has left no written memorials of his
teaching, Rung fu-tze, known to Europeans as Confucius, left no documents in
which he detailed the principles of his moral and social system. The Founder of
Christianity did not reduce his doctrines to writing, and for them we are
obliged to trust to the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The
Arabian Prophet did not himself reduce to writing the chapters of the Quran.
They were written or compiled by his adherents and followers. But the
compositions of the Sikh Gurus are preserved, and we know at first hand what
they taught. They employed the vehicle of verse, which is generally unalterable
by copyists, and we even become in time familiar with their different styles.
No spurious compositions or extraneous dogmas can, therefore, be represented as
theirs.
Some part of this paragraph was written by AV but he failed to put
forward its limitation that how it’s wrong. On his blog too, you can check him
talking about some millenniums ago the Vedas were penned down, before that they
were orally taught. The same is true for Quran. And the story of the Bible is
known to many. It is actually the truth and makes Guru Granth Sahib ji the only
authentic work of all those mentioned above which was compiled during the period
of the Sikh Gurus.
Guru Granth Sahib ji had 1430 angs, not 1431116.
He mentioned this bir to be present in Harmandir Sahib117.
Father of the Lamers. Actually, he just checked the total number of angs
which are written on the top of the pdf file, which’s 1431. But if you go to
the end, you will clearly see 1430 written at the top. So the angs where
the bani is written are 1430, if we add the ones where the shabads
and the ang numbers are written (index), it will be more than that. For both
Ernest Trumpp and Macauliffe, AV wrote they knew 17 languages118.
Although he used the word ‘may’ for Macauliffe.
No, 1431, which is 1430, angs of Guru Granth Sahib ji is not
full of Hinduism119. There is no denying the references of the kings
of old times and the pointing to the Vedas in few instances, like when Naam is
discussed; we read that in Anand Sahib in the morning.
Guru Granth Sahib ji is the expansion of Jap Ji Sahib. AV quoted
many verses from the English translation of Guru Granth Sahib ji by Sant Singh
Khalsa, which I do not endorse much. AV bolded the words like Vedas, Shiva,
Brahma to talk about the deities and how it’s written about Hinduism.😐 The translation of Jap Ji Sahib by Macauliffe talks about the
deities and Vedas too. If he’d the onus to obliterate all the references of the
Hindu texts from Guru Granth Sahib ji, why would he himself translate it and
didn’t change it?
Now let me have more lies here which AV implied in his article by
bolding the words.
Guru’s word is the wisdom (ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਵੇਦੰ)120. You can’t believe, some BHs are there who
translate this verse as the guru’s saying to Sikhs Gurmukhs are those who read
Vedas. Come on, guys, don’t be lamers. There’re many things written down in the
Vedas and other holy scriptures of Hindus. We never said they’re bad or
something. But you should at least think twice before you go to the anti-Sikh websites
and organizations where the cow dung is filled in your heads to hate the Sikhs.
For the Sikhs, the guru is everything for them; Shiva, Brahma,
Vishnu and their wives are not important for us (ਗੁਰੁ ਈਸਰੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਬਰਮਾ ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਮਾਈ ॥)121. For us, the guru plays the role of all of them. We
don’t seek the blessings of the demigods. This verse is mistranslated by many
BHs that the guru is saying Shiva, Brahma, Vishnu and their wives are his guru
– they are worshipped in these verses. If the context is not clear, then you
have the free hand to translate it any way. At the end of the this pauri,
Guru Sahib clears that he’s talking about only One. ਸਭਨਾ ਜੀਆ ਕਾ ਇਕੁ ਦਾਤਾ ਸੋ ਮੈ ਵਿਸਰਿ ਨ ਜਾਈ ॥੫॥ We wrote an article too on this
verse. You can check that out.
In eight pauri
Guru Nanak Dev ji talks about the importance of listening to Naam. By listening
to Naam so many humans and gods achieved many things. Without that, it would
not have been possible. The ninth pauri talks about the same – Listening
to Naam. This one’s quoted by our eight-year old. By listening to the Naam, the
three deities got their powers.122 (ਸੁਣਿਐ ਈਸਰੁ ਬਰਮਾ ਇੰਦੁ ॥) See, even the
demigods that Hindus worship listen to the Naam, sing the praises of Waheguru,
there is an authority bigger than them; but they are just spreading the fake
stories and cherry-picking the verses from the historical or the holy
scriptures of Sikhs that the gurus worshipped these demigods.
Even AV doesn’t
want to lag behind in this utter nonsense to label the Sikh Gurus as the
worshipper of these demigods whose existence is under time. As we are talking
about the pauria of Listening to the Naam, I will put one verse here to
show you all how the gurbani is getting manipulated in the hands of
Punjabi BHs, and the same is indirectly suggested by this child.
Guru Sahib says
that by listening to the Naam, the Shastras, Simrities, and Vedas can be
understood, meaning the Naam is bigger than that and by listening to the Naam
the person can know whatever is written in there without even reading them
because in Naam comes everything.123. ਸੁਣਿਐ ਸਾਸਤ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਵੇਦ ॥ But the anti-Sikh
forces say the guru is saying to listen to the Vedas and Shashtras. By going with
the same way of misinterpreting the verses, we can conclude that these verses ਸੁਣਿਐ ਸੇਖ ਪੀਰ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹ ॥ say we should
listen to the rulers. Isn’t it laughable to hear all these stories by the
misguided masses about the Sikh religion?
As the discussion
with the Sidhs goes on, Guru Nanak Dev ji said that there’s no bull under the
earth who’s having it over his head or horns. It’s the righteousness which’s
making the whole world liveable, without which the human race can’t even exist.
Think of it in this way, if the righteousness is gone from the world then only
the killing ground will be existing and everyone will kill everyone leaving
only desolation behind. And, suppose, if there’s a bull under the earth, then
on what that bull is standing? The Sidhs said there’d be another earth. By
saying this there would be a long pile of bulls and earths (ਧਰਤੀ ਹੋਰੁ ਪਰੈ ਹੋਰੁ ਹੋਰੁ ॥).124
It’s same like the story of tortoise and earth; I think in the Indian
subcontinent it’s famous with the bull. It should be noted that the above verse
is not quoted by AV. Why?
Because he wanted
to convey the message that the load on the bull is Lord Shiva. Lord Shiva is
very important in the articles of AV. Let me digress a little to narrate this
story also. AV believes Shivji is not a person like Vishnu; he writes him in a
way of cosmology or some pseudoscientific manner. And the Shivalinga is
something related to power or some other mumbo jumbo, not the private parts of
Shivji and his wife, according to AV.
Now the reason
behind the pseudoscientific stories on many websites is the shame that they’re
facing because of the people living in this century. They’re mocked to so much
extent that they’re feeling their ancestors were so wrong. For that reason, AV
has to come up with the injected stories by the Rothschild, because there’s no
other way for him to delete those horrific memories from the minds of the
devotees who worship the phallus.
When I was
reading the Ling Purana, a note was mentioned in
the beginning that people call Shivalinga with a very repugnant (the essence
was that) name. And in the Hindi translation of Shiv Purana, the whole chapter
which talks about the phallus form of Shivji was ignored by the translator. In
the original one, you can check that in the Kotrudrahansita, Chapter 12.
I remember
reading the first part of Suraj Parkash, edited by Bhai Vir Singh ji, that how
some people suggested to remove the stories which are not according to gurmatt.
But he let them be there and put the notes at the bottom. Even a Sikh was
suggesting that maybe in a later time those stories will be out of the
historical scripture. With or without those stories, gurbani can help us
distinguish between fake and real incidents. In the case of Hindus, they
proudly say that they do not have just one or two books to follow; they’ve the
whole library. But when these stories are talked about, they focus only on the
Vedas, not the Puranas. It’s true that the Puranas talk about the historical incidents.
Even if we go with the Vedas, the Puranas which show the different deities and
their lives can’t be ignored while talking about their history. Or they have
something in the Vedas, like we Sikhs say gurbani, on the basis of what
they can differentiate between the fake and real? Never heard of that.
The Hindus who
read the Sanskrit books say it openly that there’re many unrealistic and
repugnant stories and rituals which should be ignored and can’t be taken as the
truth because of their repulsive nature. And for this reason, the Hindi
translation of the Puranas wouldn’t have those stories. But wouldn’t it just
change the whole reason behind the origin of the Shivalinga or any ‘symbolic’
representation of the deities? With that, any stories can be created to please
the minds of the votaries.
I can’t write the
whole Chapter 12 from Shiva Purana, so just read the chapter here and check how the
mainstream Hindus who’re worshippers of Shivji do not even know this story
exists in their texts. Like in the beginning of the Ling Purana, it’s mentioned
that it’s just a symbol of Shivji; the same-minded devotees do not explore
their own scriptures. Also, the translator also mentioned the note that it
represents the ‘creative forces’, but the story as it goes shows a different
thing.
With AV’s
assertion of the Hindu texts getting changed by the Rothschild and Shivji
nothing more than some pseudoscientific form, although he got ready to have the
mass of the Earth on Shivji’s head who didn’t even exist in the form which he’s
trying to represent him, one can conclude that then Shiva Purana is not the
book originated among the Hindus; it’s added by the British. Going with that
notion, you can almost remove the whole books of Hindus. I don’t know with that
narration of his where AV is taking the Hindus living in the 21st
century.
I think Hindus
shouldn’t be ashamed of worshipping a phallus because Hinduism is not the only
religion which does that. You can search Kanamara Matsuri festival or Min (a
god). And many other where the people worship the phallus for various reasons.
Some proud Hindus were heard saying that it’s the reason which caused us to be
born in this world and we’re not ashamed to worship a phallus or vagina. I like
these Hindus who tell it openly without any hesitation than those
mind-controller pseudoscientific storytellers who are ready to transform the
Old Hinduism into a New Hinduism where the definitions will be according to the
‘science’, not how their ancestors wrote or talked about.
As Macauliffe is
an enemy in the eyes of the BHs and SSs, it gives me great pleasure to quote
him for that specific reason and because it is according to the gurbani.
‘Here Guru Nanak obviously rejects the Hindu story that the earth is supported
by a bull.’
Let’s come back
to the misrepresentation of gurbani. In the original verse (ਸੁਅਸਤਿ ਆਥਿ
ਬਾਣੀ ਬਰਮਾਉ ॥), it’s nowhere
written to bow to Brahma125. But in the English translation it’s
translated like that. The correct meaning here is that from Waheguru Brahma
came, or from Waheguru’s utterance of word the world came into existence.
There’re multiple meanings of this verse, but none of them is related to bowing
to a deity, which is profoundly infused in the Hindu scriptures. And the name
Purana doesn’t appear to worship them but to tell even the Puranas do not know
about the time126 when the world came into existence. In
Macauliffe’s words, ‘From the Self-existent proceeded Maya (athi), whence
issued a word which produced Brahma and the rest.’ Does it here show ‘bow to
Brahma’ thing? No. That’s why Macauliffe is hated by the BHs and SSs. Because
he at least tried to give the correct meanings which are rejected by the almost
non-existing intellectual of these anti-Sikh groups.
Guru Nanak Dev ji
not only talked about Puranas, but Kateba too that even in them no time or
season is mentioned. ਵੇਲ ਨ
ਪਾਈਆ ਪੰਡਤੀ
ਜਿ ਹੋਵੈ
ਲੇਖੁ ਪੁਰਾਣੁ
॥ ਵਖਤੁ
ਨ ਪਾਇਓ
ਕਾਦੀਆ ਜਿ
ਲਿਖਨਿ ਲੇਖੁ
ਕੁਰਾਣੁ ॥ Like it’s mentioned in the earlier post
too that a BH can see only the word Vedas or Puranas, not Kateba. Even the
lines that AV wrote have this verse too but he didn’t highlight that so that
only the readers could see what he wanted them to see.
Next, Guru Sahib tells the different people
singing the praises of Waheguru. (ਆਖਹਿ ਵੇਦ
ਪਾਠ ਪੁਰਾਣ ॥ ਆਖਹਿ
ਪੜੇ ਕਰਹਿ
ਵਖਿਆਣ ॥ ਆਖਹਿ
ਬਰਮੇ ਆਖਹਿ
ਇੰਦ ॥ ਆਖਹਿ
ਗੋਪੀ ਤੈ
ਗੋਵਿੰਦ ॥ ਆਖਹਿ
ਈਸਰ ਆਖਹਿ
ਸਿਧ ॥) If one is thinking of these verses as
the praises of some demigods127, then he’s just a fool. And the
reason why in Jap Ji Sahib many references to the Hindu scriptures is made was
because this’s the discussion of the guru with the Sidhs, who were Hindus.
During the talks with the Muslims, Guru Sahib used their books and beliefs to
guide them, like about the circumcision, and the rug that they used while
praying. This’s the greatness of the guru.
Actually, with a
close scrutiny reveals that AV has not even read the whole verses that he’s
quoting. Many of his articles point to the pseudoscientific terms for Shivji,
but the verses that he’s copying from the English translation of gurbani
say that Shivji sings the praises of Waheguru. Well, how is that possible? Or
is he going to write in future the Shivji word was added by the Rothschild in
the Sikh scriptures because Shivji is a mumbo jumbo that he writes about? LOL.
In the 27th
pauri, Guru Nanak Dev ji shows us a picture of Heavens where the deities
sing the praises of Waheguru. When Guru Nanak Dev ji went to Sachkhand, then a
similar shabad was sung by the guru. I remember a Hindu asking me on
Quora that the Sikhs agree that these deities exist up in there. I was amazed
to see many Hindus coming out and looking at the Sikh scriptures to validate
their beliefs. I do not deny the existence of the deities; gurbani gives
us many verses where the deities are mentioned, but it doesn’t say them to be
superior than Waheguru or doing the praises. That is the difference.
In this part of
AV’s article, he’s depicting in such a way that the gurbani is
worshipping the demigods. So Shivji, Brahma, Indra, etc., are shown doing the
praises of Waheguru, not worshipping them. And just saying these deities
showing their love for Waheguru in the form of His praises shouldn’t be
equivalated as ‘Hinduism’128. It’s more of like showing the people
that the deities that Hindus had raised to God were nothing but His servants.
35th pauri
of Jap Ji Sahib shows us the numerous Indra, Shivji, Krishna, etc129.
This whole world doesn’t have only one (ਕੇਤੇ
ਪਵਣ ਪਾਣੀ
ਵੈਸੰਤਰ ਕੇਤੇ
ਕਾਨ ਮਹੇਸ
॥ ਕੇਤੇ
ਬਰਮੇ ਘਾੜਤਿ
ਘੜੀਅਹਿ ਰੂਪ
ਰੰਗ ਕੇ
ਵੇਸ ॥ ਕੇਤੀਆ
ਕਰਮ ਭੂਮੀ
ਮੇਰ ਕੇਤੇ
ਕੇਤੇ ਧੂ
ਉਪਦੇਸ ॥ ਕੇਤੇ
ਇੰਦ ਚੰਦ
ਸੂਰ ਕੇਤੇ
ਕੇਤੇ ਮੰਡਲ
ਦੇਸ ॥) trinity of Vishnu, Brahma and Shivji.
There’re millions of the Brahmand, and in each Brahmand the trinity is doing
their work according to the command of Waheguru. Bhai Gurdas ji’s vaar
points to the different incarnations in different Brahmand.
ਓਅੰਕਾਰੁ ਆਕਾਰੁ
ਕਰਿ ਏਕ
ਕਵਾਉ ਪਸਾਉ
ਪਸਾਰਾ ।
ਪੰਜ ਤਤ
ਪਰਵਾਣੁ ਕਰਿ
ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ
ਅੰਦਰਿ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਣੁ ਸਾਰਾ ।
ਕਾਦਰੁ ਕਿਨੇ
ਨ ਲਖਿਆ
ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਸਾਜਿ
ਕੀਆ ਅਵਤਾਰਾ ।
ਇਕ ਦੂ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ
ਲਖ ਕਰਿ
ਲਖ ਬਿਅੰਤ
ਅਸੰਖ ਅਪਾਰਾ ।
ਇਕਸਿ ਇਕਸਿ
ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡਿ ਵਿਚ
ਦਸਿ ਦਸਿ
ਕਰਿ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਉਤਾਰਾ ।
ਕੇਤੇ ਬੇਦਿ
ਬਿਆਸ ਕਰਿ
ਕਈ ਕਤੇਬ
ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਯਾਰਾ ।
ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਇਕੁ
ਏਤਾ ਪਾਸਾਰਾ
॥੪॥ – ਵਾਰ ੧ ਪਉੜੀ ੪
On the 8th
ang, Guru Sahib again talks about the deities singing the praises of
Waheguru. I am not going to put a number for this because it’s already been
captured. He doesn’t even check that so dar has been talked about in Jap
Ji Sahib too. But as it gives him a pleasure to write blindly without much
sense, so he doesn’t care about the arbitrary points that he is raising again
and again. Same is true on the 9th ang because it’s some part
of so dar too.
Now we’ve the
part of Rehraas Sahib where Guru Sahib tells the different types of people
doing everything to please Waheguru. (ਤੇਰੇ
ਅਨੇਕ ਤੇਰੇ
ਅਨੇਕ ਪੜਹਿ
ਬਹੁ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ
ਸਾਸਤ ਜੀ
ਕਰਿ ਕਿਰਿਆ
ਖਟੁ ਕਰਮ
ਕਰੰਤਾ ॥ ਸੇ
ਭਗਤ ਸੇ
ਭਗਤ ਭਲੇ
ਜਨ ਨਾਨਕ
ਜੀ ਜੋ
ਭਾਵਹਿ ਮੇਰੇ
ਹਰਿ ਭਗਵੰਤਾ ॥੪॥) So just highlight Simrities to tell it
talks about Hinduism130? Come on, AV, you can do better with your
lies. It’s true that people lie because it’s the easiest thing to do which
doesn’t even require to have any base. You can lie about almost everything. The
problem comes when you’ve to back this up with facts. In the case of AV, he
backs up his lies with lies to spread the lies by writing more lies. BHs and
SSs are as dumb as AV, but at least they try to do their best by bringing some
cliché arguments, which is missing in the case of AV. I wonder what’ll happen
if the BHs and SSs adopt the same way of doing the analysis of history like AV
is doing!
It’s incumbent on
the BHs to mistranslate the verses. (ਅਠਸਠਿ ਤੀਰਥ ਕਾ ਮੁਖਿ ਟਿਕਾ ਤਿਤੁ ਘਟਿ ਮਤਿ ਵਿਗਾਸੁ ॥) This verse doesn’t imply to go bathe
in the holy places131, it’s to tell that the people who are drenched
in the Naam, by seeing them give the boon of 68 holy places. It’s also
translated as the ones who’re drenched in Naam and they’ve been enlightened,
they’ve bathed in the 68 holy places – it shows the advantages of Naam; Naam is
above all, even in Jap Ji Sahib we read that by listening to Naam one gets the
boon of 68 holy places (ਸੁਣਿਐ ਅਠਸਠਿ ਕਾ ਇਸਨਾਨੁ ॥), this’s how great the Naam is.
One of the pivotal
points missed by the non-Sikhs by reading the Sikh scriptures is that they do
not see the scripture different from theirs. E.g., the Shiva and Shakti are
translated by the BHs and SSs as Shivji and Parbati. They want the Shakti to be
a female aspect of God. Those who’re saying that God is always mentioned as a
He, not She, they have tried to use this terminology in the religious matters
to prove the one half of Waheguru as a female. And it also happened in Sikhism.
It’s visible in the work of Nikky-Gurinder Kaur Singh’s The Birth of the
Khalsa. A lady with the name of Shri Mataji has made the
similar types of points with not much sense but just to have a say that
Waheguru is a female also because the men-leading religions have been saying
it’s a He.
I’ve talked with
the Sikhs and Hindus who point to the same way as these people. I’ve told them
that Waheguru or Ram or Allah or any name for that matter, God is not some male
or female, He is beyond that. But then they bring the argument that they’re not
implying that God is having the man body parts or female body parts but the
muscularity or femininity which they’re talking about. Gurbani says that
Waheguru is Mother and Father both. But if we are calling Him Mother it doesn’t
mean that it’s showing the womanhood of Waheguru, and for Father he’s showing
the manhood. The normal people who just write with no understanding of
spiritualism decline every aspect of the religion but focus on their secular
thoughts and bring down the Almighty under the definitions of their own
understanding. Those who worship the Shakti – Sakatmattiye – they even change
the meaning of gurbani because they need to have a validation from the
Sikh scriptures. One BH even told me that Guru Gobind Singh ji worshipped
Shakti so he didn’t care about Vishnu and other deities. This is one of the
lamest arguments that I ever heard while debating with someone else. The truth
is Shakti and Shakta both are same. They are not different. Waheguru is neither
male nor female, neither masculine, nor feminine. God is God, but if someone
wants to have Him under his definitions, then he can do whatever he wants to
do.
At last he mentioned about the 8.4 million life cycle of birth and
death, which according to him is about Hinduism133. Actually, it’s
not only in Hinduism, it’s there in Sikhism too. This point and other
similarities between both the religions are taken by the BHs and SSs as the
shoot off of Sikhism from Hinduism. If asked how they got this knowledge about
the 8.6 million life cycle thing, they will proudly say they’d it from their
sages or from Brahma or some Rishis who meditated for so long and then gave
this divine knowledge to them. If the Sikhs say they got it from the gurus who
got it from Waheguru (although both are same), then they argue it to that
extent that they say it selfishly that these concepts are the copies from the
Hindu scripture. So the divine knowledge coming from the Divine/Enlightenment
is possible in your religion, but not in other religions? Hmm … bullshit.
AV quoted seven times from Jap Ji Sahib. Here is another example of
his inability to grasp the very thing about the Sikh scripture. All those Sikhs
who are reading this must be knowing that at the end of the pauri, the
gurus put the numbers to tell how many pauria are completed or total
number of shabads. But this brainless scum, who’s writing about the Sikh
history, doesn’t even know this thing. Instead of 5, 9, 16, 21, 26, 35, he
chose the numbers of pauria as 4, 8, 15, 20, 25, 34134
because before the beginning of the verses these numbers were written. The guy
doesn’t even know this basic thing, and he’s trying to find the verses added or
removed by the Rothschild or British. 😐 The only correct number that he got
is 27.
At the last of
this post, I want to confer that when it comes to the Hindu scriptures’
translation done by the non-Hindus, preferably some British or European, which
doesn’t match with the new narration of the Hindus, AV will call them
Rothschild’s agents, anti-Hindu, anti-Indian, blah blah. On the other side,
those who’ve admitted the profound knowledge in the Hindu scriptures they were
called the physicists. The most popular among the Hindus right now, which they
give example of, is J. Robert Oppenheimer, who quoted from Bhagavat Gita, ‘Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.’
But if the Sikhs
say that those who did the translation the way it’s right, they were called the
Rothschild agents by AV, or the guy to wedge between Sikhs and Hindus by the
BHs. And those who write against the very nature of the religion, they’re
called the truth-tellers, like Ernest Trumpp.
We’re not as brainless as AV and BHs and SSs that we can bring any
stories from the sky to talk about our religion. What is there is there. We don’t
stand behind the lies. I am pretty sure if we’re as intellectually drained as
them, we would have called Trumpp a crypto Jew who’s sent by Rothschild to
destroy our religion. Alas, we’re sensible; we can’t do that.
