Can women be Panj Pyare?

Quote

We already have our own nation its called Khalsa. The concept Raj Karega Khalsa was first pronounced to Ruka Din in Saudi Arabia. It had nothing to do with a Sikh Political State in Punjab; Raj Karega Khalsa was referring to spiritual kingdom of SIkhi which will extend to all four corners of the world. Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji came into this world and laid the foundation stone of a spirutual kingdom. A kingdom where one had access to Godly kingdom (sach khand) while living active this world while practicing Gurmat qualities

But please look at the verb "Karega". This is a verb denoting a future event. The spiritual kingdom of Guru Sahib has been there ever since this universe came into being. As for the spiritual kingdom of Khalsa, that happened as soon as first few Khalsa very formed by Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee. Therefore, this Dohra is definitely talking about the political Khalsa nation.

Please ponder upon the Dohra again:

Raag karega Khalsa, Aaki rahe na koe.
Khuaar huye sabh milenge, bache sharan jo hoe.

The verb "karega" and "milenge" clealry show that this is a future event that had not taken place even till the time of Siri Gobind Singh jee because if it had, then there was no need to read this Dohra. All this talk of having a spiritual kingdom and not a political state is ghaala-maala and a way to put our quom in Bhambalbhoosa (don't know the English for this word). When straightforward meaning of the Dohra is apparent, then what's the need to do such complicated meaning as you are doing?

Quote

Us Sikhs have forgotten about this kingdom because we are too busy crying about a political kingdom as if such a kingdom is the solution to all our problems.

No one is saying that having such political kingdom is the solution to all our problems. I can't understand, how Hindu rule or a Muslim rule on us can be better than self rule.

Quote

Sikhs have always faced disrcimination, atrocities, injustices and they never proposed having a poltical state to stop such actions. Sikhi strives in adversity.

This is such a naive statement. Pyare veer, as recently as 20 - 30 years ago, tens of thousands of Sikhs attained Shaheedi with "Khalistan" on their mouths and minds. It's one thing that we are not doing any effort to get Khalsa Raj but to oppose a political Sikh nation is "Ghadaari" to thousands of Sikhs who died for this cause. Don't take this comment personal but I have no hesitation in saying that any Sikh who opposes Khalsa Raj is a Ghadaar (traitor) of Khalsa Panth and Siri Guru Dasmesh jee will severely punish such Sikh and such Sikh will be denied Mukti (100 percent). How can you forget our Shaheeds? I believe any Sikh who goes against Panth and against Khalsa Raj is a Tankhaaiya.

All Mahapurakhs have predicted Khalsa Raj including Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee. If Khalsa Raj is already there, as you have stated, then what Raj are our Mahapurakhs predicting? I am not sure if you have done active work in opposing Khalsa Raj but if you have, you should get Tankhah from Sangat or Punj Pyare for doing so.

Fine, we are not doing any effort for Khalsa Raj, but at the very least, let's not opposed it either. Guru Sahib ne kadi muaaf nahi karna.

Kulbir Singh

ਨਾਨਕਿ ਰਾਜੁ ਚਲਾਇਆ ਸਚੁ ਕੋਟੁ ਸਤਾਣੀ ਨੀਵ ਦੈ ॥
Nanak established the kingdom; He built the true fortress on the strongest foundations.

ਨਾਨਕਿ ਰਾਜੁ ਚਲਾਇਆ

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU J KI FATEH

The discussion of whether we are to have an independent nation may be relatively moot - was it not the Panth's decision to declare an independent homeland? I did not know there was a retraction of this resolution.

One thing more Swiss has not any other income sources except their famous watches or their tourism industry. But khalistan has lots of sources their crops, waters, tourism and also toll collection from trade between India and Pakistan.Now from whole world sikh N.R.I.'s send their money to India utilized by Indian government.But when khalistan rise on map of world all forigen currency are deposit in khalistani banks by sikhs N.R.I 'S imagine it will be a very great boost to khalistan 's economy. And no doubt it will be richest and happiest country in the world .
dass di inni ku matt si jiss naal " AZAAD KHALSA RAAJ " "Khalistaan " da naksha khichan di koshish kiti hai je kujh vadh ghat likhia gia hovai tan muaaf karna Ji.

ਅਜ ਵੀ ਜੇ ਚਾਹੁਣ ਤਾਂ ਵਿਦੇਸ਼ੀ ਸਿਖ ਹਿੰਦ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਦੀ ਗੋਡਣੀਆਂ ਲਵਾ ਸਕਦੇ ਹਨ! ਉਹ ਵੀ ਬਿਨਾ ਕਿਸੇ ਗੋਲੀ ਜਾਂ ਗਲਬਾਤ ਦੇ ਬਸ਼ਰਤੇ ਸਿਰਫ ਆਪਸੀ ਮਤਭੇਦ ਭੁਲਾ ੲਿਕ ਨਿਸ਼ਾਨ ਹੇਠ ੲਿਕੱਠੇ ਹੋ ਜਾਣ!

Political sovereignty for Khalsa, according to this DOHA; is not an outcome of any political struggle or ambition or aim; as one is not supposed to talk about political insecurity or inadequacy after praying to Akal Purakh during Ardaas; it is the dominance of Khalsa over the spiritual, social including political system of the world, because of exhausting of all other systems to failure. As we say, Truth prevails ultimately, so we say Raj Karega Khalsa. Nothing is better than Khalsa way of life or constitution. So. every one is going to surrender to it, one day. Akal Purakh is Himself the KHALSA CHIEF (Khalsa Akal Purakh Ki Fouj). So, His rule is always there and it will also appear in physical terminology.

This is how I think. Bhul Chuk Muaaf Hove Ji.

Sukhdeep Singh Ji,

Quote

Secondly, Sikhi has always strived without their own state. They did so during the Gurus time and much after. Guru Sahib never proposed a SIkh state which would marginalize Sikhs from the global world. Gurumukhs including Sant Jarnail SIngh never really proposed a religious state

It is true that Sant Ji initially did not ask for an independent state, but did state that the day Zalam sarkar attack Darbar Sahib the foundation of Khalistan will be laid. The sarbat Khalsa in 86 also declared the need for Khalistan.

I do agree with one point that the administration of such a state at present will not be easy without chardikala leaders in charge.

In terms of the resolution you mention, the whole point of the morchey pre 84 was due to the Indian government not agreeing to the rights of Sikhs, under the Anandpur Sahib resolution.

Again, more incorrect statements written under false assumptions showing lack of foresight, proper understanding of Sikh history, concept of State and politics while at the same time being oblivious to post 47 Sikh history, Indian polity, policies and prevailing conditions. Remind me of politician Baldev Singh.

Quote

But please look at the verb "Karega". This is a verb denoting a future event. The spiritual kingdom of Guru Sahib has been there ever since this universe came into being. As for the spiritual kingdom of Khalsa, that happened as soon as first few Khalsa very formed by Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee. Therefore, this Dohra is definitely talking about the political Khalsa nation.

Please ponder upon the Dohra again:

Raag karega Khalsa, Aaki rahe na koe.
Khuaar huye sabh milenge, bache sharan jo hoe.

The verb "karega" and "milenge" clealry show that this is a future event that had not taken place even till the time of Siri Gobind Singh jee because if it had, then there was no need to read this Dohra. All this talk of having a spiritual kingdom and not a political state is ghaala-maala and a way to put our quom in Bhambalbhoosa (don't know the English for this word). When straightforward meaning of the Dohra is apparent, then what's the need to do such complicated meaning as you are doing?

Before quoting such verses please take quote in its entirety. This quote comes from " Sau Sakhi" and was recited by Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji in Saudia Arabia. Of course its written in future tense as he is telling how in the 10th form he will come and establish the Khalsa and they will have Raj of the Mughals. Again, read the text in its entirety, there is mention of taking over Delhi. This all happened. I have no idea how you interpret this to mean a modern day Khalistan. The Khalsa Raj in Sau Sakhis goes well beyond the boundaries of Punjab. Sometimes political people twise these verses around to mean Guru Sahib was referring to Khalistan in these verses. But if you study the text dilligently you will see such an assumption holds no weight.

Quote

No one is saying that having such political kingdom is the solution to all our problems. I can't understand, how Hindu rule or a Muslim rule on us can be better than self rule.

What you need to understand is that Sikhs are not the majority in Punjab. For them to ask for a seperate state is no different than Christians asking for a seperate state in Iraq. The interests of Punajb should take all minoritiy people into consideration. Since its history , Gursikhs have never been concerned just about themselves; Sikhs have always taken into consideration all of society. There are 1 billion people in India with most of them living below the poverty line. Creating a separate state will make India much more poorer then it already is.

As I have said before I am all for the Punjab state to have autonomy but to break in a seperate state it wouldnt survive and it would be practical. Secondly, it would be more practial for Sikhs to take over their own institutions like the SGPC instead of taking over secular institutions like the government. We cant even manage our Gurdwara Sahibs how on earth can we manage a state? This is a goal which is not practical in our current situation.

Quote

This is such a naive statement. Pyare veer, as recently as 20 - 30 years ago, tens of thousands of Sikhs attained Shaheedi with "Khalistan" on their mouths and minds. It's one thing that we are not doing any effort to get Khalsa Raj but to oppose a political Sikh nation is "Ghadaari" to thousands of Sikhs who died for this cause. Don't take this comment personal but I have no hesitation in saying that any Sikh who opposes Khalsa Raj is a Ghadaar (traitor) of Khalsa Panth and Siri Guru Dasmesh jee will severely punish such Sikh and such Sikh will be denied Mukti (100 percent). How can you forget our Shaheeds? I believe any Sikh who goes against Panth and against Khalsa Raj is a Tankhaaiya.

All Mahapurakhs have predicted Khalsa Raj including Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh jee. If Khalsa Raj is already there, as you have stated, then what Raj are our Mahapurakhs predicting? I am not sure if you have done active work in opposing Khalsa Raj but if you have, you should get Tankhah from Sangat or Punj Pyare for doing so.

Fine, we are not doing any effort for Khalsa Raj, but at the very least, let's not opposed it either. Guru Sahib ne kadi muaaf nahi karna.

Kulbir Singh

Veer Ji, its not polite to accuse someone as a traitor because he does not share the same politcal views as you. Im not a political person I dont care for politics, but I do know from studying politics at a collegiate level that such a proposition is impractical in todays day and age. A Sikh theocracy will not be accepted at an international level in the 21st century.

Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir SIngh Ji is talking about a Khalsa Raj without boundaries he is not referring to a modern nation Khalistan state that you propose. In fact, he spoke strongly against an India divided into three when such a propoisition was being discussed during his time. I dont know why you are comparing todays modern day Khalistanis with the Ghadris. The Ghadris for the glory fo their country fought against the slavery of the British. The Ghaddris were not just Sikhs they were Hindus and Muslims all fighting for the liberation of their country. Those Ghaddirs living in the West worked hard night and day for the freedom of the country. While most of todays Khalistanis shouts slogans of Khalistan at the Nagar Kirtans, but they cant even wake up for Amrit Vela. I dont really have any desire to discuss this political topic anymore. If there were Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs of Punjab all working together for the freedom to govern Punjab more independently then I would be for it no doubt. I have talken to people around during 1984. They told me Sant Jarnail SIngh Ji never fought for a Sikh state. He fought for the rights of Punjabis( not just Sikhs). This is the praupakaree SIkhi spirit, we fight for rights not for territory.

Subash Kirpekar one of the journalists, who met Bhindranwale on June 3 after the army had surrounded the Temple complex, asked him if he feared death. Bhindranwale replied, “One who fears death is not a Sikh.” He insisted that he was not responsi¬ble for the murders which had brought the army to the gates of the Golden Temple. When Kirpekar asked what could be done to stop the violence he replied, ‘Ask those who are responsible for it.’ He asked the Sant, ‘Is it your contention that Sikhs cannot live in India?’ The Sant replied, ‘Yes, they can neither live in nor with India. If treated as equals it may be possible. But frankly speaking I don’t think that is possible.’ This was the last interview which the Sant had with a journalist.

right... we were now no more live with these indians they just hate sikhs... almost every sikh child has faced hate crimes from other fellow children nd even elders.. if I punch them or knock out them they cry haha.. I feel great... but I sikh I knw.. they spit tamaku on him.. one tym... u c even today these things happening they spit tamaaku into our brother mouth.. ! m not talking dat all were like this but mostly all indians r like dat only.. they dont even care about our guru they burnt saroops even today etc. how could u say dat sikhs would not b safe in their home country... ??? if there were proper khalsa jathedaar... khalsa rules akaal takhat... we were allowed to wear bana anywhere like job n all.. !! our own army.. who could even safe guard other minorities.. hence gain respect... trust.. !

m not a proper sikh.. but I want to live with sikhs around gurmat bibeki sikhs...

sorry if m wrong but dat wt I think..

jaspreet singh

Sukhdeep Singh, Bhai Kulbir Singh was not talking about Ghadris, but Ghadaars (traitors). Guru Sahib has mentioned that the Khalsa will rule. Khalsa will rule Rome, Kabul, Ghazni, Mecca, Medina. The throne of this Kingdom will be at Delhi. I fully agree with Kulbir Singh, anyone that opposes Khalsa Raj is a traitor Ghadaar (not Ghadri.), such person will be punished severely by Guru Sahib. You do not have faith in Guru Sahib that he will make Khalsa Raj?

One of my favourite lines is this:

ਸੁਨਹੁ ਕਾਜ਼ੀ ਰੁਕਨ ਦੀਨ ਸਿੰਘ ਕਰੇੰਗੇ ਰਾਜ
ਮਲੇਛ ਸੇਖ ਖਪ ਜਾਏੰਗੇ ਪੀਰ ਮੁਰੀਦ ਸੁਹਾਬ
ਏਕੋ ਨਾਮ ਸਭ ਜਾਪੇੰਗੇ ਤਬ ਵੇਖਨ ਆਵੈ ਆਪ

Vaah! What a declaration by Guru Sahib! Beautiful! Guru Sahib is telling Rukan Deen: Listen! My Singhs will do Raaj! I can almost feel the Maan Guru Sahib has in his Khalsa and his Beautiful Singhs when he is saying this. My Khalsa will rule! Everyone will Jap the one Naam.

ਜੁੱਧ ਜਿਤੇ ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਸੁ ਦਾਨ ਕਰੇ ॥
ਅਘ ਅਉਘ ਟਰੈ ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਫੁਨ ਧਾਮ ਭਰੇ ॥
ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਸੁ ਬਿੱਦਿਆ ਲਈ ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਸਭ ਸ਼ੱਤ੍ਰੁ ਮਰੇ ॥
ਇਨ ਹੀ ਕੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਕੇ ਸਜੇ ਹਮ ਹੈਂ ਨਹੀ ਮੋਸੋ ਗਰੀਬ ਕਰੋਰ ਪਰੇ ॥੨॥

Dhan Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Jee Sri Dasmesh Pitha.

Quote

Sukhdeep Singh, Bhai Kulbir Singh was not talking about Ghadris, but Ghadaars (traitors). Guru Sahib has mentioned that the Khalsa will rule. Khalsa will rule Rome, Kabul, Ghazni, Mecca, Medina. The throne of this Kingdom will be at Delhi. I fully agree with Kulbir Singh, anyone that opposes Khalsa Raj is a traitor Ghadaar (not Ghadri.), such person will be punished severely by Guru Sahib. You do not have faith in Guru Sahib that he will make Khalsa Raj?

Gagan Singh, why are you and Kulbir Singh intermingling the concept of Khalistan and Khalsa Raj together. They are completley two different concepts. Khalistan is a Sikh National state within the borders of Punajb. On the other hand Khalsa Raj covers a vast area its authority comes directly from Sach Khand via Panj Pyaare But this raj is not around the corner . Again like others you are not reading the prophecy in its entirety. The prophecy of Khalsa Raj was recorded both by Bhai Sahib Singh Ji and Bhai Ram Koer, and then passed on orally by Gurmukhs. The accounts mention there is going to be a time in history where rulers rule their constituents with an iron first.These subjects will have no rights, they wont even be able to pay homage to their places of worship. Even Saudia Arabia will prevent Hajjis from doing Hajj. The people will starve and go around hungary. There will be many natural distaters further exacerbating the peoples condition. In the midst of this chaos the Khalsa Raj will rise. Everyone will come to the Khalsa for shelter as this is the spirit of the Khalsa to help those in need and not just themselves. Even the rights of animalls will be protected by the Khalsa. This Khalsa Raj will not be limited to Punajb but its capital will be in Amritsar. This Khalsa Raj is a completley different concept then a national self-interest state ran by selfish Khalistani politicians which Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji spoke strongly against.

Rite now we are currently very far from obtaining Khalsa Raj because we do not follow the panth we cant even establish our langar halls according to Gurmat and now you are crying for a state based on Gurmat? In addition, society is not at the state described by the prophecy. Rite now society is chasing after Maya they forget God they have no interest in spirituality. But when times get rough as predicted in the prophecy then people will turn to spirituality. Harsh times will come at some point when people basics rights of food and shelter are not met. This time will come and when it does Khalsa must be prepared. Most practical things to do is take control over our religious institutions like the SGPC, Sri Akal Takht and other takhts. Secondly, we should be builiding Gurmat institutions such as homeless shelters, Gurmat Theological Schools, Gurmat orientated businesses etc for the coming of Khalsa Raj. The concept of Khalistan is not practical in todays time and age nor is it practical because of the current condition of the panth. We cant even manage our Gurdwara Sahibs according to Gurmat how can we manage a state.

Secondly, I dont appreciate these type of " Giani Thakur Singh" remarks that you and Kulbir Singh are throwing at me. Who are you guys to say who gets mukhti and who doesnt? Neither one of you know nothing of me and my relationship with Sri Guru Gobind SIngh Ji. He is my one true love. He is my rock my iron tank! Like a father he was their with me from the day I was born and he will be with me the day I die. I have no doubt about this regardless of what any of you gianis say. What do you know about him taking me out of very difficult situations and always having my back through thick and thin? Its only though him that Im still alive. I have been around drug dealers, gang bangers, hustlers and heard some harsh comments directed towards me, but these harsh words cant compare even an iota to the bitter words you and Kulbir SIngh has said too me. You honestly think because I dont share your political views on Punajb I wont get mukhti. Im tired of this cultist mentality, I have nothing left to say on this forum. Again neither one of you know me or my relationship with the Guru . Sikhi has not come to me at a cheap price its nothing short of a miracle on how I got into SIkhi, and do you honestly think its going to be thrown away because I dont share the same views as politicians?

Quote

I have been around drug dealers, gang bangers, hustlers and heard some harsh comments directed towards me, but these harsh words cant compare even an iota to the bitter words you and Kulbir SIngh has said too me. You honestly think because I dont share your political views on Punajb I wont get mukhti.

I myself was pained when I wrote to you those words that hurt your feelings but you are thinking about only your own hurt feelings and are totally oblivious of how we all felt when our own brother, a rehitvaan Gursikh, came about in public and openly opposed one of the most sacred beliefs of Gurmat. Of course I understand the difference between Khalistan and the predicted Khalsa Raj but you fail to understand that by opposing self government for Sikhs, you have ignored the sacrifices of countless Sikhs in the post 1947 period. I think you need to read the history of Sikhs in the post 1947 era. A person who goes against Panth Khalsa gets Tankhah from Panth. Refer to the Saakhi of Bhai Subegh Singh and Bhai Shahbaaz Singh, who were employed by the Lahore Darbar and whenever they came to the congregation of Khalsa, before anything, they used to get Tankhah for working for the government when Khalsa was fighting the government of that time. Same way, today, you should not oppose the political aspirations of living Sikhs and hundreds of thousands who got Shaheed. Neither you, nor me, and nor others are doing anything politically but at the same time, we should oppose the concept of political independence of Sikhs and that too based on what you learned in the parochial political science class studied in USA. The Sikh political aspirations are not governed by the academic institutions of USA, Europe, Russia or India but are governed by the Baaghi-or-Baadshah concept of Puratan Sikhs.

I feel bad for hurting your feelings but can't take my comments about not getting Mukti or being a Tankhaiya back because that would by lying and I truly believe that a Sikh who opposes the aspirations of true Gurmukh Pyare collectively and works against the independence of Khalsa Panth is treading a very dangerous path that goes in the direction opposite of Sikhi. Such misled Sikh should seek forgiveness from Sangat so that this bad Karma of opposing the independence of Khalsa Panth does not harm his spirituality, Sikhi and afterlife.

There is nothing personal against you dear Veer Sukhdeep Singh. Tainu samjha rahe haan ke Panth de ult na jaa. Baaki teri marzi hai bhai.

Kulbir Singh

Quote

I myself was pained when I wrote to you those words that hurt your feelings but you are thinking about only your own hurt feelings and are totally oblivious of how we all felt when our own brother, a rehitvaan Gursikh, came about in public and openly opposed one of the most sacred beliefs of Gurmat. Of course I understand the difference between Khalistan and the predicted Khalsa Raj but you fail to understand that by opposing self government for Sikhs, you have ignored the sacrifices of countless Sikhs in the post 1947 period. I think you need to read the history of Sikhs in the post 1947 era. A person who goes against Panth Khalsa gets Tankhah from Panth. Refer to the Saakhi of Bhai Subegh Singh and Bhai Shahbaaz Singh, who were employed by the Lahore Darbar and whenever they came to the congregation of Khalsa, before anything, they used to get Tankhah for working for the government when Khalsa was fighting the government of that time. Same way, today, you should not oppose the political aspirations of living Sikhs and hundreds of thousands who got Shaheed. Neither you, nor me, and nor others are doing anything politically but at the same time, we should oppose the concept of political independence of Sikhs and that too based on what you learned in the parochial political science class studied in USA. The Sikh political aspirations are not governed by the academic institutions of USA, Europe, Russia or India but are governed by the Baaghi-or-Baadshah concept of Puratan Sikhs.

I feel bad for hurting your feelings but can't take my comments about not getting Mukti or being a Tankhaiya back because that would by lying and I truly believe that a Sikh who opposes the aspirations of true Gurmukh Pyare collectively and works against the independence of Khalsa Panth is treading a very dangerous path that goes in the direction opposite of Sikhi. Such misled Sikh should seek forgiveness from Sangat so that this bad Karma of opposing the independence of Khalsa Panth does not harm his spirituality, Sikhi and afterlife.

There is nothing personal against you dear Veer Sukhdeep Singh. Tainu samjha rahe haan ke Panth de ult na jaa. Baaki teri marzi hai bhai.

Kulbir Singh

You are making up you are own rules.

When some Akali Politicians proposed a three state solution in Hindustan based on British chalking, a state very similar to the concept of a Khalistan, Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji strongly opposed this proposition. The simple reason being, it was not beneficial for that day and time nor did this modern nation state support the ideals of Sikhi. Now the majority of Sikhs were for such a state but Bhai Sahib wasnt. Was he a tankhaiya for not agreeing with this state? Is he getting punished for his political views of that time? Is he a tankhiya for opposing Jhatka at at time when majority Sikhs strongly supported it? Is he a tankhaiya for progagating Keski as kakkar when majority of panth state Kes is a kakkar? In the 80's Khalistan was rightfully promulgated as a defiant stance against the Indian regime for the injustices. Today 2014, we live in a different reality. Situation is compleltely different in Punjab. Sikhs are completelly different in Punajb. Different circumstances cause for different solutions. The most obvious being taken control over our religious instiutions. A Khalistan is not practical . How many times do I need to remind you, Sikhs are not a majority in Punjab, nor are they interested in living in a theocracy.

My analysis on a seperate state in todays Punjab is not based on one college class. I have a college degree in Politcal Science. I studied polticial theory reading classics from the time when modern nation states were first being discussed. I know a thing or two about what it takes to build a modern nation state, and I can tell you a seperate Sikh state IN TODAYS TIME will cause more harm to Punajb,India , and Sikhi. Secondly, its impossible to build such a state in todays global world. The very concept of a modern national state contradicts the views of Sikhi. I think very few people on this forum do not understand what I mean when I use the term" Modrern Nation State", because they keep comparing Khalistan to the Sikh Raj of the past or the future raj ( Khalsa Raj) . Its a completlely different concept. Before discussing politics and nation states its best to understand this simple type of terminology. I have nothing left to say in this matter. When you keep making these poltical statements like Im a lesser SIkh for not supporting your political views I am reminded of ISIS who go on telling Muslims they are lesser Muslims for not supporting Islamic states. This type of Wahabi attitude is not supportive of Sikhi. SIkhi is about rising peoples spirits up , its not about trying to dampen their spirits because share different religious and poltical views. This type of fanatic attitude was not practiced by puratan Gursikhs.

Bhai Sukhdeep Singh jee, many kamayee-vaaley gurmukhs around the world are certain that Khalsa Raj is on it's way. It's a matter of whether you have bishwaash in the bachans of gurmukhs, or if your faith lies in your own understanding of western political theory. This daas has no knowledge what-so-ever, but if bhagti-oriented gurmukh pyarey are convinced that the time is NOW then I would have no doubt in this.

Jo jan sunai sharda bhagtee seti kar kirpa har nistaareh ||


It is a bentee from your concerned sister to please for once be willing to give up your chaturaee and surrender your mind to sangat.

Quote

When some Akali Politicians proposed a three state solution in Hindustan based on British chalking, a state very similar to the concept of a Khalistan, Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji strongly opposed this proposition. The simple reason being, it was not beneficial for that day and time nor did this modern nation state support the ideals of Sikhi. Now the majority of Sikhs were for such a state but Bhai Sahib wasnt.

Please let us know where and when Bhai Sahib opposed an independent Sikh state. And when did he say that the reason for it was that it was not beneficial for Sikhs? As far as we know, Bhai Sahib was very supportive of a independent Sikh state. He had proposed to Maharaja Yadwinder Singh Patiala to get pesh and that Singhs would make him the king of a Sikh state. Bhai Sahib was also very against Akalis mingling with Congress and other Aanmat parties. Where did you get the idea that Bhai Sahib opposed the Sikh state?

Quote

Is he a tankhiya for opposing Jhatka at at time when majority Sikhs strongly supported it? Is he a tankhaiya for progagating Keski as kakkar when majority of panth state Kes is a kakkar?

Very flawed logic. Eating jhatka was and is against Gurmat and was a wrong practice that Bhai Sahib opposed. Same way Keski was ignored in favour of Kes as Kakaar and Bhai Sahib opposed it. How can you compare this with your opposition of a Sikh state and favouring Hindu, Muslim or Atheist (secular) rule?

Quote

In the 80's Khalistan was rightfully promulgated as a defiant stance against the Indian regime for the injustices. Today 2014, we live in a different reality. Situation is compleltely different in Punjab. Sikhs are completelly different in Punajb. Different circumstances cause for different solutions. The most obvious being taken control over our religious instiutions. A Khalistan is not practical . How many times do I need to remind you, Sikhs are not a majority in Punjab, nor are they interested in living in a theocracy.

It does not matter if Sikhs are in majority or not; they will still establish their rule as per Hukam of our Guru Sahib - Raj karega Khalsa. When Raja Ranjit Singh established his semi-Sikh state, then too Sikhs were not in majority and were a very small minority but thankfully at that time, we did not have Western minded, political science student, Americanized Sikhs like you, otherwise, they would have opposed Raja Ranjit Singh's raj too on the basis of frivolous and meaningless issues like Sikhs are not in majority, Sikhs don't know how to manage Gurdwaras, then how can they manage a state, etc.

Veeriya, why are you wasting your energy on opposing Sikh state? If you don't want to see a Sikh state in the world, or if it pains you to see the concept of Raj karega Khalsa coming into being, then too you can keep quiet. If you don't want to support it, don't oppose it either. You can keep quiet.

Kulbir Singh

source: 52 Hukams of Dasmesh Pita

27.) Sutantar vicharna. Raaj Kaaj dian kamaan tae doosrae mutaa dia purshaan noo huk nahee daenaa|
Maintain independent rule. In the affairs of governing, do not give the power of religious authority to those of other faiths.

Kulbir Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It does not matter if Sikhs are in majority or
> not; they will still establish their rule as per
> Hukam of our Guru Sahib - Raj karega Khalsa. When
> Raja Ranjit Singh established his semi-Sikh state,
> then too Sikhs were not in majority and were a
> very small minority but thankfully at that time,
> we did not have Western minded, political science
> student, Americanized Sikhs like you, otherwise,
> they would have opposed Raja Ranjit Singh's raj
> too on the basis of frivolous and meaningless
> issues like Sikhs are not in majority, Sikhs don't
> know how to manage Gurdwaras, then how can they
> manage a state, etc.
>
> Veeriya, why are you wasting your energy on
> opposing Sikh state? If you don't want to see a
> Sikh state in the world, or if it pains you to see
> the concept of Raj karega Khalsa coming into
> being, then too you can keep quiet. If you don't
> want to support it, don't oppose it either. You
> can keep quiet.
>
> Kulbir Singh

Very true. The historic Sikh Raaj can be devided in 3 parts:

-During Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Jee's time period, Khalsa had Raaj over present day Punjab, Haryana and Himachal. Then Sikhs were a small minority.

-During Sikh Misl period, the Khalsa through various misles had established Khalsa Raaj from river Indus to Jamuna, each misl holding some territory. During this time period Sikhs were a small minority.

-During Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time period, politically the Sikhs were supreme from Punjab, J&K and NW Frontier. Then too Sikhs were a small minority. Even in the Sikh heartland of central Punjab Sikhs were a minority.

So Sikhs should not go for these modern western political notions that Sikhs cannot have Raaj because Sikhs are minority because historically whenever Sikhs have been blessed with Raaj, we were never a majority and Khalsa Raaj was like Satyug on earth. Khalsa Dharm is the Dharm established by Vaheguru. Non-Sikhs have nothing to fear in regards to Khalsa Raaj. It would only be due to the good Karams of such non-Sikhs that he be blessed to be living in Raaj ruled by Khalsa.

Look at today when Hindus and Muslims getting Raaj, it is a political, economic and social disaster. There are sectarian, caste based riots and violence. Corruption is rampent. Majority is not ruling farely with minorities. On the other hand when Sikhs were ruling, there was never any Hindu Muslim riots, Shia Sunni riots, Jaat Paat riots, even Kashmir was in complete peace. Khalsa had even supressed the Wahabis insurgency of Syad Ahmad Barelvi. Look at today how modern armies of Americans and Pak Fauj cannot supress Islamists in NW frontier.

DISCUSSION:

At certain stage of the discussion, some remarks were seemingly unnecessary. Those remarks not only annoy others but also make the real topic difficult to be solved fruitfully. (We have already shifted this topic from "Women in Panj Pyare" to "Khalsa Raj" thanks to some harsh comments). Comments telling about MUKTI should have been avoided at first place. No one can tell about that with gurantee.

Veer Sukhbir Singh Ji, please do not mind that. I ask forgiveness for that. You will surely get that if GURU SAHIB likes that.

SUBJECT:

For me, the subject of discussion is practicality vs aspirations about Khalsa Rule.

Secondly, what is the GURMAT prespective about Khalsa Rule.

We have GURBANI, which says that RAJ NAA CHAHO, MUKAT NAA CHAHO, MAN PREET CHARAN KAMLAARE.
WE have DOHA, which says that RAJ KAREGA KHALSA.

So we have to solve that puzzle of seemingly contradictory meanings. It is open to all. We must know it forehand that both are correct in its totality.

Quote

nor are they interested in living in a theocracy.

Do you assume yourself to be a spokesperson of every Sikh in Punjab and India? What evidence do you have to suggest that Khalistan will be a theocracy and thereby not have any element of secularism? If you knew anything about Sikhi you would not have made such comments.

Has your education not taught you that a community doesn’t need to have a majority to rule, establish its nation and survive in its homeland? Also, what evidence do you have to prove that after Khalistan is created, Sikhs will still be a minority? Are you assuming that in a Sikh State Arya Samaji Hindus will continue to be communal, Hindu media will continue to be biased, dera babas will continue to create factions, dehdharis will continue to thrive on State support and the youth will be in the same grip of apostasy, drugs and alcohol?

You may have your education but we have something that anti-Khalistanis will NEVER have and that is the support and blessings of Guru Sahib. With this, we shall make new realities and build a new nation and everything you consider impossible will be turned into a reality. You may perceive Khalistan to be different than Khalsa Raj but to us it is the beginning of Khalsa Raj that will continue to expand until the entire world comes under the Sikh rule and there are left no “aakis”.

Dal Bidar Jasprit Singh Jio...my ardas is also to live amongst Khalsa Sikhs if not in kalyug sansaar (where a worldly sikh look at sikh as dusht instead of Guru Roop Miterr Pyarey)...
Keep a low profile, avoid those who do beadbi to our Gurbani, kaum, and our dubdey kaum...
Gurbani reminds we can be in worst situation yet maintain Vahiguroo pyar, rehit...if we do not doubt Naam, Gurbani Jorr and drown svaas svaas in this LIMITLESS JORR THAT WILL THEN BRING ULTIMATE KHALSA RAJ!
RAJ KAREGA KHALSA! !!!!

Hnji.. ! but atleast we can respect our shaheed for wt they have done.. yet they remain calm, humble.. !

pella aasi khalistaani ta baniye.. khalsa raaj di ta door di gall aa.

Good point that Sikh state is the starting point for Khalsa Raj. Bhai Sukhdeep Singh, as you have studied politics I'm sure you could attest to the fact that empires are never established without there being a strong central political base first. Thinking about it, it only makes sense that Sikhs first and foremost need control over the land that is the foundation of Sikhi, because that soil holds the thaakhat of our Panth.

To be honest, I never supported Khalistan before taking amrit, and after taking amrit I didnt give it much thought as I didnt relate Khalistan with Khalsa Raj. This discussion has made me see the issue in a whole new light.

It is quite disheartening that whenever I am reading Veer Sukhdeep Singh's arguments, I feel like I am reading a post by an ignorant Hindu, Indian politician or a government agent. Sadly, you don't sound like my brother.

The systematic injustices against Sikhs in Punjab and India overall still continue until today. Nothing has changed. We are slaves in India. Please educate yourself about the systematic oppression against Sikhs since 1947. We have lost so many generations and our faith in Sikhi because of oppression.

Khalsa Raj (different from Khalisthan state) will come according to Maharaj, and many Mahapurakhs have talked about it as well. This is not an aspiration. When Khalsa as Akaal Purakh ki fauj rises, everyone will want to be ruled by us. Why? Because there will be degh and tegh (food and righteousness/justice) for everyone.

It is strange, how much intolerant we are to the opposite-view point; especially if it sounds against our religious belief. With that degree of intolerance in our debate-mode; we deserve to achieve nothing. If someone dreams about a "state" for us; we are so eager & happy to anounce him a great gurmukh and if a gursikh disagrees with us on a certain point, we find it so easy to doubt his motives. He sounds no longer a gursikh to us.

This should not be the behaviour of great spiritual ones.

I remember Bhai Sahib Fouja Singh Ji, over this issue. He was once heard to say, " With SIMRIN power, I sometime feel like having a control of the whole world in my hand."

We need so much or a small part of such confidence in our day to day life. Khalsa is born free. Khalsa can never be unfree.

------------

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.