Religious Demographics in India

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by SHURIDH, Feb 1, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    Why not take the date as 1752 ? Why 1750 ? :rofl:

    ਹਰੀਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਤਿਨ ਕੇ ਸੁਤ ਵਏ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਤੇ ਤੇਗਬਹਾਦਰ ਭਏ ॥੧੨॥
    Har Krishan (the next Guru) was his son; after him, Tegh Bahadur became the Guru.12.

    ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age.

    ਸਾਧਨ ਹੇਤਿ ਇਤੀ ਜਿਨਿ ਕਰੀ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰਸੀ ਨ ਉਚਰੀ ॥੧੩॥
    For the sake of saints, he laid down his head without even a sigh.13.

    ਧਰਮ ਹੇਤਿ ਸਾਕਾ ਜਿਨਿ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਸੀਸੁ ਦੀਆ ਪਰਸਿਰਰੁ ਨ ਦੀਆ ॥
    For the sake of Dharma, he sacrificed himself. He laid down his head but not his creed.

    So for the sake of argument,

    Lets say all Sikh sources are lies, and invented except Bachitar Natak. And Kashmiris never came to Guru Tegh Bahadur.

    It quite clearly says that Guru Tegh Bahadur gave up his life for the sake of the Pandits to wear Tilak and Janeu.

    Now, to counter your assertion

    1. Sikhs couldn't save the Hindus because their Gurus couldn't save themselves, has been directly contradicted by Guru Gobind Singh

    2. Brahmins were the bulwark against Islam has also been proven false. The Sikh Guru did give up his life to save Brahmins.

    So either you are a liar or Guru Gobind Singh is a liar.


    Let us stop here and accept that you are a bigot.

    You have called Sikhism an Islamic Sect, Quasiabhramic sect, and a warrior cult. Laughed at their claims, rubbished Sikh sources, and have questioned the character of Sikh Gurus.

    ===
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  2. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    @Singh


    Why anyone is called juvenile as per IPC before 18 years and not before 18 years and 3 weeks?


    This is the passage i was talking about as it is open to many interpretations.
    This is no proof yet again as i do not see any pandit here.



    Correct and this I never disputed but where is kashmiri pandit in all this?


    There is no mention of kashmiri pandits nor of any other story. what it really says is that Guru Tegabahadurji gave his head to protect dharma which is open to many interpretations. You are inventing the rest stuff.

    1. Nothing has been contradicted as Guru Gobind Singh does tell us that his father had to give up his head which proves my point. Aurangzeb was not normal hindi filmi villain, he was a curse on humanity and so his becoming human is ridiculous.

    2. You are too ignorant to understand my second point which was that communities exposed to brahminic civilization were less likely to convert than other communities like east bengalis or Jats and Khokhars. I have much sophisticated theories than you may digest . I do not believe in brahmins were bulwark thing as brahmins were not fighters in muslim era.

    However, If you believe in coward brahmin things, do know that Peshwas ruled from Tamil Nadu to Peshawar a thing no other could do from indic stock( be it sikh, rajput , jat etc.).

    Do not bring him between us and there is no such thing as Gobind singhji never mentions story so since he is true, i am also true.

    Abuses are ten a penny.

    I have called sikhism an islamic sect based on writings of TP Hughes, quasiabrahmic sect by use of akali establishments of abrahmic concepts but i do not remember warrior cult thing.

    I have laughed at claims like freeing 52 rajput princes, saving hinduism in india etc. as they deserve much more than laughing and it was kind of me to just laugh at them.

    I have rubbished any non contemporary sources be they hindu, sikh or buddhist so I do not believe in pandyas living at time of Srirama.


    Last charge is lie and i am considering to give a defamatory notice to you if such thing is allowed here:rofl:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  3. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    @Singh

    This is my position on Bichittar Natak testimony



    So now i am waiting for you.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  4. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    You have not answered my question,
    Why are you taking the year 1750 as the cut off date ?

    =======

    To reiterate the passage says :

    ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age.


    So how will you interpret this passage ? You will triangulate this with Sikh history and tradition ?

    But since you claim that all of Sikh history and tradition is false. So we have nothing left to convince the great son of Kashi ie you otherwise.

    So lets try another approach.

    Guru Gobind Singh clearly states this

    "ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥"
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread which marked a great event in the kali age.

    Now which religious group wore Tilak and Janeu during that period ? He saved them.

    So, since Brahmins do(or atleast did) wear Tilak and Janeu he ie Guru Tegh Bahadur protected them.

    ===

    "
    ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."

    Now which religious group wore Tilak and Janeu during that period ? He saved them.

    So, since Brahmins do(or atleast did) wear Tilak and Janeu he ie Guru Tegh Bahadur protected them.


    ===

    The texts which specifically do mention them, you have discredited them. So, can't help it.

    ===

    No what it says is this
    "
    ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."

    To understand the rest of the passage you will have to rely on other Sikhs texts, which you claim are full of lies.

    ====
    To reiterate
    "ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."

    ====

    :rofl:

    ===
    Quite clearly, one community ie the Sikhs were not exposed to "Brahminic" civilization, and yet they ended up saving Hindus as is evident from this passage

    "
    ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."


    ===
    You had a crackpot theory about Brahminic Civilization. I never talked about Coward Brahmins.

    Your theory has been proved wrong.

    ===

    You just called all of Sikh history a lie, and on top of that you called Sikhism an islamic sect, a warrior cult and a quaisabrahmic sect.

    ===
    Pot. Kettle. Black.
    ===
    'You quoted Reverend Hughes of the Church. Why would you quote him, if you don't agree with him ?

    ===

    Stop being a goddamn coward.

    =====

    That day is called Bandi Chor Diwas and coincides with Diwali. If you read Sikh literature, you will find that it did happen.

    ====
    This is what Guru Gobind Singh writes
    "ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."

    Now you are laughing at his claim ? and yet calling him as truthful as you are.

    You are more than welcome to laugh at the Sikhs. From being a persecuted minority, today the Sikhs are synonymous with all that is positive.

    ====
    I dont' care what you rubbish. Who are you? Seriously ?

    ========
    this is what you said

    I don't think you are fit to be a member of this site.
    You have broken rules, insulted as many people as you can, your agenda is quite clear and if that wasn't enough you are threatening to file lawsuits.
    You are being banned pending consultation with staff.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  5. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    Yes, if you read Sikh texts, they clearly state the Sikh Gurus were not merely concerned with protecting Brahmins or "Hindu" Dharma per se. The fact is in their struggle against tyranny and injustice, they did end up saving Hinduism as is evident by the statement:
    " ਤਿਲਕ ਜੰਵੂ ਰਾਖਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਾ ਕਾ ॥ ਕੀਨੋ ਬਡੋਕਲੂ ਮਹਿ ਸਾਕਾ ॥
    He protected the forehead mark and sacred thread (of the Hindus)which marked a great event in the kali age."

    In fact when the Sikhs say Raj Karega Khalsa, they don't mean merely the Sikhs alone.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  6. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,836
    Likes Received:
    4,081
    Location:
    India
    I'm not sure why @MAYURA is in such denial. A casual search through Google Books throws up loads of non-Sikh references

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Foreign Author + Foreign Publisher :lol:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
    Singh likes this.
  7. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,313
    Likes Received:
    8,322
    Location:
    011
    He wants contemporary sources. And only those sources which prove him right, any source which he disagrees with, he disregards it.

    And he doesn't like anything foreign, or academic or scientific unless its by Reverend TP Hughes, who calls Sikhs an Islamic Sect in his seminal work published last century called "Dictionary of Islam".
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  8. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    When did I disregard Bichittar Natak written by Guru Gobind Singh?
    Anyway, I am yet to see any detailed account of persecution of kashmiri pandits being mentioned in any of the sikh sources of that time.
     
  9. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    Do you know negotiating the release of prisoners does not mean " freeing 52 Rajput princes". Princes was the term used by @Singh and now show me foreign authors talking about 52 "princes".
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  10. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    @Singh

    Giani Bishan Singh of khalsa college in Amritsar translated dasam granth and as per him suitable line is " almighty god protected the tilak and janeu of hindus in kali age".

    Now, you need to explain to me how a passage which is open to such differences of radical nature in its interpretation can be and should be read as you are insisting.

    That is why I said that even pro sikh Khuswant Singh has failed to give evidence of kashmiri pandits being saved in his monumental history of sikhs which goes into many volumes.


    You are ignoring entire context, fact that no mughal sources mention any directed attempt at conversion of kashmiri pandits and the last significant thing that your passage has been questioned by many sikhs also many who have achieved far more than you and me.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  11. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,836
    Likes Received:
    4,081
    Location:
    India
    Yet another casual search through Google Books. The keyword I used was "52 princes sikh". Pretty simple


    [​IMG]

    I'm sure you'll come up with better references after spending a few minutes.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  12. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    @Singh

    Did you reply my question which was pertinent to the context?


    My theory is supported by scholars unlike your sword arm theory popular in public.



    Where are the evidences for "52 princes" thing?

    It was the other way round as hindu marathas saved sikhs from mughal tyranny . The Sikhs did some remarkable service in saving honour of their hindu sisters in wake of Abdali invasion but that is different from saving hinduism. Ranjit Singh was a hindu king so his victories must be credited to brahmanism rather than sikhism.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  13. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    his claim was 52 rajput " princes" and do not joke princes does not mean lords or barons but simply sons of kings and where is the evidence for 52 rajput princes being freed by him?
     
  14. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    BTW, just because some whiteman in his account mentions traditional story does not mean he is damn right, if it has no primary source than no matter how entrenched one's position is , i do not take him seriously.

    JN Nehru tells to his daughter that ST. thomas came to india in 52 ad which is just a myth . Being PM does not make him correct so books you are throwing may be wrong if not supported by primary sources in both sikh and mughal.

    History is not as simple as people think. Xuangzang's account is one such example( perhaps you do not know about his flaws and how he has tricked the indologists ) of how even primary sources should be checked with other sources if available.
     
  15. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,836
    Likes Received:
    4,081
    Location:
    India
    Don't shift goal posts.

    This was was your original argument

    Now that I found a reference to "52 princes" (via 5seconds of Google), you've shamelessly changed it to "52 rajput princes".

    Apart from being a racist you're also dishonest

    I hope you see the irony in your statement.
     
    Singh likes this.
  16. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    I am not .


    No I do not see any irony in this statement as i have withdrawn my racist theory long ago.


    You need to read my post once again the line which you highlighted talks clearly of 52 rajput princes and if later on in that line i used princes how is that being dishonest?
     
  17. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    @LurkerBaba

    this was my original statement

    So the line clearly talks about rajput princes and if in next part i did not use rajput term it was because of laziness. it is amazing as why else would i dispute his claim? I am disputing his claim not my own .
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2015
  18. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,836
    Likes Received:
    4,081
    Location:
    India
    Err no. This is what you said.

    You merely dismissed them as common prisoners. But presented with references to them being Princes, you want me to confirm their caste :lol:

    The princes were in Gwalior fort. Take a wild guess at their caste
     
    Singh likes this.
  19. Mad Indian

    Mad Indian Proud Bigot Veteran Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    12,835
    Likes Received:
    7,730
    Location:
    Podigai Hills.
    And How and where exactly did Anti-Brahminism come in here? Seriously, seems like lot of venting out is happening here, now that more and more Shudras are joining Middle class ranks thanks to free market...

    Anyway interesting stuff.. Please continue:style:
     
  20. MAYURA

    MAYURA New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    Messages:
    888
    Likes Received:
    248
    Location:
    varanasi
    I have not started all this and i disputed his claim of " 52 rajput princes" and any future post will be in that connection only.

    I do not want anything but simply proof for the claim( i am not forcing anyone as i am a small rat on this forum but for sake of truth )

    1. That on diwali 52 Rajputs were released due to sixth guru

    2. they all were rajputs

    3. They were " princes" that is sons of kings of rajputana


    I am not saying this is impossible but i do need any primary source or i will take it as seriously as Srikrishna freeing 88,000 " kings" from clutches of Jarasandha.

    I use same scale and rigor when it comes to history.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page