Chatrik jeeo,
You are taking this argument in circles and adding in irrelevant points. You have not propely addressed anything I have raised. Those photos do not prove anything either.
Quote
piyasi chatrik
Yes, this is also where the Keerpan beyth Maryada for Degh & Langgar started.
No it isn’t jee, it was started much before this time.
You are misquoting that Salok of Bhagat Kabir Jee to justify your own weakness and compromise of lying to avoid Manmukhs, rather than giving a flat no response or remaining silent and staying firm and strong to Gurmat principle. A Gursikh does not need to lie to avoid “pushy” manmukhs, just how weak and spinless are you making Gursikhs look? Does Bhagat Jee say to run away and lie to avoid their company? No. Do you run away when you see a manmukh on the street? No. Please be sensible in the interpretation. Are there any Gurbani pangtees that say lying is OK in any situation? Not that I am aware of. Once again, for what is now the third or fourth time, lying, even for the sake of “saving dharma” is not acceptable in Sikhi. When we come across something in Gurmat that we don’t follow or can’t comprehend, instead of holding our hands up and admitting that we can’t follow it and giving shabash to those who do, we try and justify our not following it.
Quote
Veer Jaskirat Singh ji
Anyway, even if the version you have shared with us, is true jee, Nabi Khan & Ghani Khan were Muslims and were therefore not bound to tell the full truth at all costs regardless of protection of faith like Sikhs are.
Then you have just indirectly said that, SatGuroo was hypocrite. Because, SatGuroo guides his Sikhs to the right path and allowed these 2 Muslims brother to commit paap(of lying, as you see it) for the benefit of the Khalsa.
Historian and scholars have always & will always have their own piece of mind. This doesn't mean we start dismissing our history because their logic/interpretation sounds way better.
I think you have stepped over the line and gone too far by saying that I have called Satguru Jee a hypocrite. I do not mind if you call me a hypocrite, but to say that I directly or indirectly called Guru Jee a hypocrite is too much, I would have rendered my life useless by saying that. I would rather die than say that, directly or indirectly. Satguru Jee wore a Kalgi (aigrette), but Sikhs are not allowed to, does that create hypocrisy? No way. Look at the example of Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Jee’s Shaheedi, did they tell the Kashmiri Pandits to stop their beliefs and become Sikhs and then I will help you? Guru Jee has dismissed and rejected Hindu beliefs and practices in Gurbani and does not condone what they believe, but at the same time they gave Shaheedi for their protection, does that create hypocrisy? No it doesn't, it was for the sake that everyone is free to practice their own religion and beliefs. Chief Pandit Kirpa Raam was so amazed and totally astonished by Satguru Jee and their fearless sacrifice that they became a Singh and were named Bhai Kirpa Singh Jee of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Jee and were blessed with Shaheedi at Sri Chamkaur Sahib. Vaah! Vaah!
Guru Jee had many premis who were not Sikhs, Guru Jee never stopped anyone from following their own religion. He did not tell Muslims to stop eating halal or cutting hair or in this case the fact that they are allowed to lie for religious purposes, or Hindus from practicing their own beliefs and method of worship. But if they wanted to become Amritdhari Gursikhs, then of course they would have to abide by the code of conduct for the Khalsa.
If a historian or scholar proves beyond doubt that something is true/false and most importantly the point does not contradict Gurmat, then I think it is worth hearing their opinion. You have contradicted yourself by rejecting the opinion of scholars and historians and at the same time saying we should not dismiss our own history. Who do you think wrote our history? It was the scholars and historians who recorded events in the first place.
You have also bought irrelevant stuff about vikaars into this, this is not on topic. Truth is truth, lie is lie, regardless of intention.
Even if we assume the saakhi is true. Nabi Khan & Gani Khan said there was a ooch de pir inside? That is true, as we have agreed. They said the pir was on rozey (religious fast)? That is also true, because the Khalsa is on bhukh haRtaal (hunger strike) unless there is tyaarbartyaar Sarbloh Bibeki parshada available. So even if the saakhi you have shared is true, they didn’t tell any lies. Please carefully read and address the points written in the extract of the book and my earlier posts, if you still wish to. I also agree with Sukhdeep Singh Veer Jee, if a sakhi has some Gurmat lesson to be learned from it, then I will always happily accept it regardless of historical authenticity, but in this case, there is no such lesson.
Quote
piyasi chatrik
When Sikhs were being killed in Delhi in 84. Many Hindus lied to give shelter to Sikhs out of Daya from the mobs. How is this a Paap Jaskerat veer?
It is still a paap as per Gurmat jee. We should not be concerned with what other religions are doing and saying. Why don’t you think about the opposite Veerjee? If a Gursikh was sheltering some other religious group that was getting genocide committed on them, and then the mobs or authorities came knocking at the door to try and find and kill them and said is “X ethnic/religious group of persons inside” The Khalsa would never lie, they would laugh in their face and say of course there is, why don’t you try and come in and get them? In this way they would give glorious fight and perhaps attain Shaheedi, rather than take a cowardly way out by lying. Look at those so-called Sikhs at the time when Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Jee gave Shaheedi, when the authorities were looking for where Guru Jee’s sees and dhaR (head and body) went, they went around to Sikhs houses to try and find, these cowards said we are not Sikhs, Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Jee is not our Guru and tried to conceal their identity. Are they trying to preserve dharma for survival purposes?
You have also bought irrelevant stuff about vikaars into this, this is not on topic. Truth is truth, lie is lie, regardless of intention.
Even your points about nindiya etc, some clever people will try and say it is OK to do nindiya of a nindak, pakhandi saadh, or someone so-called “bad”, but look at this clear cut hukam:
ਨਿੰਦਾ ਭਲੀ ਕਿਸੈ ਕੀ ਨਾਹੀ ਮਨਮੁਖ ਮੁਗਧ ਕਰੰਨਿ ||nindhaa bhalee kisai kee naahee manamukh mugadh karann |
It is not good to slander anyone, but the foolish, self-willed manmukhs still do it.
Kisai kee naahee. Is is said by Guru Jee there is exception to this hukam for other nindaks, panthic dushts, pakhandi babas? I do not think so.
If you still wish to carry on doing with what you believe then please go ahead and chardikalaa to you piyasi chatrik jeeo. I am not trying to stop you. But do not recommend this same manmat to other people and claim it is OK with Gurmat.
I really do not enjoy arguing or debating with anyone, never mind Gursikhs. I have clearly addressed and thoroughly debunked all your arguments in this and all earlier posts chatrik veerjee, so I think you need to think carefully and re-evaluate your stance on this, and give attention to all previous points made before making any more posts.
ਸਤਿਗੁਰਬਚਨਕਮਾਵਣੇਸਚਾਏਹੁਵੀਚਾਰੁ॥
To answer your question jee, the two PaThan brothers Nabi Khan & Gani Khan were horse traders, and used to visit Sri Anandpur Sahib regularly to do business, and it was during these visits they would have darshan of Satguru Jee and therefore built up some love and sharda for Guru Jee and Guru Ghar. So that is how they were previously known to the Sikhs and Guru Jee, and that is why Guru Jee graced their house, nearby Macchiwara jungle, with their pavittr charan and stayed with them for two days and allowed them to do some seva. (not direct quote, same book as earlier, p. 279)
<>