Why so much sympathy on Bangladesh??????????????

[prashantacmet]

No problem. If you did not convey it properly but you conveyed other off topic things quite well.

I think root cause of your problem lies in the post where I called Sikhs sycophants of British & you are hurt n venting out that on me now. So lets address the root cause first. The questions you raised were already discussed thoroughly & i contributed in that , if i remember Upender was also there in that discussion. I will give you thread & post no's.

now why did I called Sikhs sycophants of British? It's not because they worked for then got tittle of sir or served in British Army . It's because many Sikh states & kings helped East India company militarily to fight war against Indians & to crush first freedom struggle of 1857. Do you know that ? Sikhs sided with East India company to kill & defeat Indians n helping British to establish colony in India.

read about fisrt freedom movement of India , 1857 mutiny.

that first freedom struggle of 1857 was not a freedom struggle at all Do you know that?

 

[abhikrana]

I did not want to contribute any further in digressing from the topic. However, since you raised this topic:

What is wrong in Sikhs or even Muslims reconverting to Hinduism if it is done by choice?

I am not sure if RSS proposed what you have copy - pasted, but are they issuing a fatwa or pressurizing anyone to reconvert?

yes ji..i read my link properly.. but i uess you read only some selective block. Let me paste for your convenience

"RSS activists proclaim that since Sikhism came into existence as the sword arm of Hindus against the Muslim invaders, and since such a situation no longer exists, the community should return to the Hindu fold. In fact a group of RSS leaders want to assimilate the Sikh community into the fold of Hinduism and disperse its religious identity."
"

"Hindus say that the Sikh guru Gobind Singh gave his followers a distinct militant identity by ordering them to wear the five Ks - kesh, kangha, kara, kachcha and kirpan - to protect Hindus from the tyranny of the Mughals."

- you belong to RSS . instead of asking me to stop spraedig rumor..why don't you ask t from RSS itself?
- is RSS conspiring?..why they are telling lies?
- is this site hinduism.com is a fake one?

by the way you did not reply " what is the status of sir chottu ram in your eyes?"

 

[prashantacmet]

What is wrong in Sikhs or even Muslims reconverting to Hinduism if it is done by choice?

I am not sure if RSS proposed what you have copy - pasted, but are they issuing a fatwa or pressurizing anyone to reconvert?

main jaata huin hidustan tum jaate ho pakistan..."kya maine kaha ki conversion galat hai? ya maine kaha ki unhone fatwa jaari kiya"

 

[prashantacmet]

Absolutely wrong. Sikhism was never formed to protect Hinduism. AFAIK , Guru Nanak was founder of Sikhism and waging war against Mughals was never his tenant or Sikhsim. Please do not spread any rumour based on wrong knowledge. Later on over the centuries when Mughals started persecuting Sikhs & gurus after many failures of truce, then it took form of a political & military entity.

I think swaich will guide you more on this if the foundation was done to save Hinduism or not & you will believe him as He is a Sikh.

PS: Jats were always brave as a community you do not need to a blanket cover of Sikhism to call our community brave. You can take references of Surajmal, churamal , Gokul & more.

Do you know Churaman hepled muslims to crush sikhs ..was churaman a sycophant of muslim?..please read churaman in detail

 

[abhikrana]

Because you pasted the following lines:

- you belong to RSS . instead of asking me to stop spraedig rumor..why don't you ask t from RSS itself?
- is RSS conspiring?..why they are telling lies?
- is this site hinduism.com is a fake one?

main jaata huin hidustan tum jaate ho pakistan..."kya maine kaha ki conversion galat hai? ya maine kaha ki unhone fatwa jaari kiya"

 

[rathiji]

yes ji..i read my link properly.. but i uess you read only some selective block. Let me paste for your convenience

"RSS activists proclaim that since Sikhism came into existence as the sword arm of Hindus against the Muslim invaders, and since such a situation no longer exists, the community should return to the Hindu fold. In fact a group of RSS leaders want to assimilate the Sikh community into the fold of Hinduism and disperse its religious identity."
"

"Hindus say that the Sikh guru Gobind Singh gave his followers a distinct militant identity by ordering them to wear the five Ks - kesh, kangha, kara, kachcha and kirpan - to protect Hindus from the tyranny of the Mughals."

- you belong to RSS . instead of asking me to stop spraedig rumor..why don't you ask t from RSS itself?
- is RSS conspiring?..why they are telling lies?
- is this site hinduism.com is a fake one?

by the way you did not reply " what is the status of sir chottu ram in your eyes?"

First of all , I am not a swamsewak or do not hold any primary membership of BJP/RSS. I find many good beliefs in thier ideology , that it.

Now as per discussion with you & as per ur copy/paste link.

RSS says Sikhism is branch of Hinduism, Sikhs says they are not, then you say they are. It means you agree with RSS here , I don't. I am not sure if RSS is upto converting Sikhs to Hinduism , if they are I disagree with them. If anyone wants to come back to religion of their forefathers by their own will then i am okay with that.

RSS is a nationalist organization not a religious assembly or authority. You know the political party which represent Sikhs most in India SAD is in alliance with BJP/RSS n it is a very strong alliance.

 

[rathiji]

Do you know Churaman hepled muslims to crush sikhs ..was churaman a sycophant of muslim?..please read churaman in detail

At the time of Churaman muslims were no more foreigners , they had stayed here for centuries. But Britishers were foreigners at that time & finally its British who had to leave not muslims. We are still staying with them.

 

[prashantacmet]

At the time of Churaman muslims were no more foreigners , they had stayed here for centuries. But Britishers were foreigners at that time & finally its British who had to leave not muslims. We are still staying with them.

I understand your logic..now plz carry on with your theme on the thread..sorry for the digression of the thread highness!

 

[rathiji]

I understand your logic..now plz carry on with your theme on the thread..sorry for the digression of the thread highness!

Unfortunately, thread is already digressed & I also contributed to this digression. I will also try not to do this anymore.

 

[virj]

sikshism was formed to protect hinduism..When the protector of Hinduism (baahman , rajpoot) were licking ass of Mughals..sikhs (read sikh jatts) and jats took on the mughals...
..

This is not true. It is a myth spread by a few.

 

[swaich]

so definition of terrorism given by you is fake & references to Hitler seems politically motivated. Done. Take your time read about the leader whom you can't condemn even after Sikh pogrom, once you finish reading we will discuss it. Its not wise to waste time when you don't have any knowledge about him. You failed miserably to defend Rajiv & to prove that How Modi & right wing are prone to violence. You might have some personal problem with right wing , well... Its ur problem not nation's.

You are putting your own twists on my comments. I have condemned Rajiv, don't need to do it as a proof to you. What I did not do is compare him to Hitler.

If your whole effort here is to say Rajiv is as bad as Modi or even worse, I don't want to contest that and will agree. Rajiv is dead and had it coming. Modi is now and concerns me more at this point in time.

Just because my understanding of history is different than yours doesn't mean I should adapt or read according to you. I will read what I want to read.

one more thing , if saving act by RSS/right wing is a drop of good deeds than killing them mercilessly on roads & burning them alive is an ocean of bad deeds by Rajiv & Congress. We ( right wing ) did what we thought was right , we dont need certificates. I am happy you don't represent Sikhs perspective towards right wing because I meet many who admire our work even the last years seva in Hemkund Sahib where RSS saved many Sikhs stuck there.

And the Sikhs you have met represent Sikhism? Everyone has their own views.

 

[swaich]

Rathi and Abhik - I think the underlying logic behind every post of yours directed at me is that Swaich is Congress supporter, who doesn't understand his own history, has a superficial understanding of issues and is just here to oppose the right wing, BJP, Modi etc. The day you can get that out of your heads it will be better for a discussion. We can't seriously debate or have any sort of conversation with that kind of pre-conceived notions.

 

[abhikrana]

Jaspreet, if you had a look at the posts preceding yours, you would have realized that everyone had already decided to not digress from the topic of the thread.

However, since you have already chosen to digress again, so be it.

Post after post, you overlook the gargantuan corruption, communalism and crime spread by the Congress for over 60 years of its misrule in the history of this young nation. You only choose to target Modi and take pride in calling all nationalists as Right wing.

Hindus have been victims and sufferers of Islamic and Sikh (earlier) terror and yet you and other educated Congress sympathizers ironically call Hindus as communal.

Rathi and Abhik - I think the underlying logic behind every post of yours directed at me is that Swaich is Congress supporter, who doesn't understand his own history, has a superficial understanding of issues and is just here to oppose the right wing, BJP, Modi etc. The day you can get that out of your heads it will be better for a discussion. We can't seriously debate or have any sort of conversation with that kind of pre-conceived notions.

 

[prashantacmet]

This is not true. It is a myth spread by a few.

I agree that it can not be associated directly. But still root lies there. Let me put forth few points and correct me if wrong

- Father of guru gobind singh , guru teg bahadur was executed for protecting hindu's rituals. kashmiri pandits approached guru teg bahadur...why the pandits sought help of a sikh rather than any rajput king or hindus? It is beacuse sikhs were more or less considered as hindus at that time . Rajpoot kings (exclude durgadas rathore) were busy in buttering mughals in delhi court...it was sikhs and jats who rebelled against aurangzeb...auragzeb who had the desire to convert entire country to Islam

- Sikhism rose to prominence during guru gobind singh..after khalsa formalisation ( to have a separate identity) most of the people came in sikhism fold..i don't think any muslim ever converted to sikhism..and most of the hindus converted into sikhism due to muslim tyranny (read aurangzeb)..that'why it is oftenly seen as protector of Hindusim ..

 

[swaich]

Jaspreet, if you had a look at the posts preceding yours, you would have realized that everyone had already decided to not digress from the topic of the thread.

However, since you have already chosen to digress again, so be it.

Post after post, you overlook the gargantuan corruption, communalism and crime spread by the Congress for over 60 years of its misrule in the history of this young nation. You only choose to target Modi and take pride in calling all nationalists as Right wing.

Hindus have been victims and sufferers of Islamic and Sikh (earlier) terror and yet you and other educated Congress sympathizers ironically call Hindus as communal.

By overlook you mean not condemn it or write about it as much as you. I agree. But that doesn't mean I support it. Just because I don't start threads about Congress and its misdeeds doesn't mean it doesn't matter to me.

We focus on issues that are more important to us than others.

Show me a post where I called Hindus as communal. I called RSS and its allied organizations communal. Thats not the same because RSS or BJP doesn't represent all Hindus even though they claim to do so. If they did, BJP would have won every election in every constituency where Hindus have a sizeable majority.

 

[virj]

Sikhism wasn't not and I repeat was not formed to protect Hinduism. The event you are referring to happened a few centuries after Sikhism was born.

We shouldn't judge everything by the lens of religions. Sikhism owe it's birth to Hinduism. Hindus has done lot of sacrifice as well. Hindu Families have devoted their sons to Sikhi. Kashmiri pundits have asked help from Guru Ji not because he was Sikh but because they respected him and he was capable to help. Hindus owe a lot to Sikhi and Sikhi owe a lot to Hindus. Sikhi was never considered a separate religion it was just considered a separate panth. Every religion or sect has it's own prime time and this was the prime time of Sikhi which lasted till Ranjit Singh's Rule.

Religious bigots from both side now try to show themself superior than the other.

Rajputs were great warriors and have fought with bravery against Mughals when they first entered and it's wrong to say that only Sikhs fought against Auranzjeb. Great Shivaji also fought bravely against his forces.

 

[prashantacmet]

Sikhism wasn't not and I repeat was not formed to protect Hinduism. The event you are referring to happened a few centuries after Sikhism was born.

We shouldn't judge everything by the lens of religions. Sikhism owe it's birth to Hinduism. Hindus has done lot of sacrifice as well. Hindu Families have devoted their sons to Sikhi. Kashmiri pundits have asked help from Guru Ji not because he was Sikh but because they respected him and he was capable to help. Hindus owe a lot to Sikhi and Sikhi owe a lot to Hindus. Sikhi was never considered a separate religion it was just considered a separate panth. Every religion or sect has it's own prime time and this was the prime time of Sikhi which lasted till Ranjit Singh's Rule.

Religious bigots from both side now try to show themself superior than the other.

Rajputs were great warriors and have fought with bravery against Mughals when they first entered and it's wrong to say that only Sikhs fought against Auranzjeb. Great Shivaji also fought bravely against his forces.

Bhai Vir jyani, I really don't agree on few points.. though I already stated that I did not convey the word "formed" correctly

- Before khalsa formalization, sikhism was not considered a separate religion...but after that it is surely a separate religion...sikhism was actually formed by guru gobind singh....no sikh religious body today is going to accept what you said.. before khalsa they were considered more or less as hindus and even the gurus were following hindus traditions and rituals.......that's why kashmiri pandits sought his help and guru teg sacrificed his life for hindu rituals

- In khalsa formalization, guru govind singh attained a separte identity for sikhs..he asked to leave all hindu rituals..and this "singh" and "kaur" concept came in picture

- you yourself are accepting that hindus devoted thier sons to sikhi..."ghar ka bada beta sardar banta tha"....does this not comply to protection of hindusim.....
- I was talking about aurangzeb era..and did not say that rajput were not brave..but during akbar and after that rajputs ( very few exceptions) were sycophants of mughals....it was jats and sikhs who rebelled against Aurangzeb in north..and shivaji was not a rajput
- I am not seeing everything from the lens of religion...please read earlier discussion...few people tagged here an entire community as sycophants..i don't have any issues neither with hindus nor sikhs

 

[virj]

When Hindus were sending their sons to serve Sikhi I don't think they considered Sikhi as a separate religion. Even today Sikh visit hindu temples freely and Hindu visit Sikh Gurudwaras without hesitation.

Are you saying Hindus sent their own sons to Sikhi to save themselves ? But then we sent our sons to Army to protect us as well. How does this work that till one point it wasn't considered a separate religion and after that it was. Even Arya Samaj denounce lot of Bhramnic rituals but they don't consider the self separate religion.

 

[rathiji]

Rathi and Abhik - I think the underlying logic behind every post of yours directed at me is that Swaich is Congress supporter, who doesn't understand his own history, has a superficial understanding of issues and is just here to oppose the right wing, BJP, Modi etc. The day you can get that out of your heads it will be better for a discussion. We can't seriously debate or have any sort of conversation with that kind of pre-conceived notions.

Please don't try to be victim of pre-conceived discussion. You yourself is a frontrunner in doing that. After all the violence , terrorist activities done by Sikhs, Muslims & outfits related to them, you find communalism in RSS or you label nationalist people communal.

You cry foul on Modi rise & selectively ignore every other by saying either they are dead or you don't know much about them. The distribution of secular/communal certificate by you is definitely superficial & ill-minded.

 

[swaich]

Please don't try to be victim of pre-conceived discussion. You yourself is a frontrunner in doing that. After all the violence , terrorist activities done by Sikhs, Muslims & outfits related to them, you find communalism in RSS or you label nationalist people communal.

You cry foul on Modi rise & selectively ignore every other by saying either they are dead or you don't know much about them. The distribution of secular/communal certificate by you is definitely superficial & ill-minded.

Clearly - the attempt to have a better discussion is futile. Sikhs and Muslim fundamentalist organizations are communal too, just like RSS. Why I talk about them is because the discussion is usually that way or someone is making an attempt to just blame one religion. Its essential to show all religions and its so called thekedar organizations are communal and mentally corrupt.

Can be superficial as I am not CBI or anything. What seems fair to me can be judgemental for others like you. But this goes both ways.