Talk:Shaheed Bhai Mani Singh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Template:B Hi everyone. Its me shaiheeda-Class | This article has been rated as B Hi everyone. Its me shaiheeda-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Sikhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Sikhism. Please participate by editing the article Shaheed Bhai Mani Singh, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
|
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | |
 Archives |
|---|
Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed was born in early sixth decade of 1600, (~1660-1665) according to one version and in 1644 AD according to another version. He died in November/December 1737 according to one version and June 15, 1734 AD according to another version.
Bhai Mani Singh was indeed a great and illlustrious personality in Sikh history.
Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber was a Brahman and the son of Gurbaksh Singh, a Daroga of Harimandir Sahib. His had been a dedicated Sikh family of scholars/dedicated men in the service of Gurughar for several generations starting from Bhai Praga's ji. Bhai Mati Das Chibber and Bhai Sati Das Chibber, who were martyred at Chandni Chowk Delhi along with ninth Guruji, belonged to this illustrious Brahman Sikh family. According to Bhai Kesar Singh Chibber's own evidence, he (Bhai Kesar Singh Chibber) was born in 1699 AD and thus enjoyed the company of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed at Amritsar till his death (1737 AD). Bhai Chhibber proclaims loudly and with the beat of drum that Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed was of Kamboh/Kamboj lineage. It is also noteable that Bhai Kesar Singh was 38 years old when Bhai Mani Singh was executed in 1737 AD. Thus, Kesar Singh Chibber was very much a CONTEMPORARY of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed. Moreover, Chibber lived in Amritsar where Bhai Mani Singh also lived and acted as Granthi of Harimandir as well as the compiler of Adi Granth and Dasam Granth. Bhai Kesar Singh Chibber is thus supposed to have been very much knowledgeable and familiar with Bhai Mnai Singh's family particulars.
The readers are encouraged to contribute their views on this topic in this discussion forum.
Let us hear also from those who are keen to identify Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed either with the great grand father of Giani Gian Singh Dullat or else with Bhai Mani Ram Rajput from Alipore/Multan now in Pakistan.
Let it be clearly stated at the outset here that Giani Gian Singh (A Dullat Jat by caste himself---born in 1822---death in 1921)) claims Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed was a Dullat Jat. On the other hand, Giani Garja Singh Punwar/Vanjara Rajput(of Mehra Shimpa or Vanjara/Rajput by caste, who was born in the start of 20th century) has tried to put his claim that Bhai Mnai Singh Shaheed belonged to his Vanjara Rajput caste.
It is not the fault of these Gianis ji. The personality of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed is so glorious and illustrious that every body wants to associate himself with Bhai Sahib Ji and claim him as from his own lineage".
"This is indeed a great tragedy of Sikhism that the caste of great Sikh personality is being projected here, but both Giani Gian Singh ji and Giani Garja Singh ji must be blamed for this deplorable scenario.
Well, let the knowledgeable readers contribute on this topic in a detached manner, starting from the very fundamentals and let's verify who among these latter claimants is telling truth and who is telling the lies here.
KLS
Contents |
[edit] Sikhiwiki Spreading Misinformation on Bhai Mani Singh
The following extract is taken from Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed, an article on Sikhiwiki website: See Link: [[1]]
Bhai Mani Singh (1662 to 1737) was a Sikh scholar, warrior and leader during the eighteenth century during the times of Guru Gobind Singh. He is considered one of the most hallowed martyrs in Sikh history. The nature of his martyrdom has become a part of the daily Sikh Ardas (prayer). Bhai Sahib is believed to be born in about 1662 the son of Mal Das of Alipur in Muzaffargarh district (now in Pakistan) and a brother of Bhai Mani Ram whose five sons were among the first few to be initiated at the time of the inauguration of the Khalsa on 30 March 1699. It is believed that Bhai Mani Singh remained unmarried all his life.
Bhai Mani Singh took part in the battles of Anandpur both as an ensign and a fighting soldier. He also fought at battle of Chamkaur and was one of the three Sikhs who survived that critically unequal battle and came out with Guru Gobind Singh unscathed. Bhai Mani Singh constantly attended upon the Guru thereafter until his death in a chance skirmish with Mughal troops near Chittor during the Guru's march to the Deccan along with Emperor Bahadur Shah. A minor dispute between the foraging parties of the two camps had developed into a fierce encounter. Guru Gobind Singh sent Bhai Mani Singh to the scene to intervene and settle the issue, but a chance bullet hit him and proved fatal. The exact place and date of the incident are not known. While Giani Garja Singh, editor of Shahta Bilas quoting Bhatt Vahis, places the event in Chittor in Rajasthan (3 April 1708), Kavi Sainapati, a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh, in his Sri GurSobha records that the skirmish took place near the River Narbada (Narmada), which was crossed a few weeks after the date metioned in the former work. The Nihang Sikhs trace the origin of their order from Bhai Mani Singh.
NOW especially note the following statement in the above text:
"Bhai Sahib is believed to be born in about 1662 the son of Mal Das of Alipur in Muzaffargarh district (now in Pakistan) and a brother of Bhai Mani Ram whose five sons were among the first few to be initiated at the time of the inauguration of the Khalsa on 30 March 1699. It is believed that Bhai Mani Singh remained unmarried all his life"'.
COMMENTS ON THE ABOVE TEXT:
The writer/contributor who has put this erroneous and misleading information about Bhai Mani Singh on Sikhiwiki, is grossly ignorant of Sikh History.
Where is the evidence that BHAI MAI DAS OF ALIPORE, MUZZAFFARGARH DISTRICT, (NOW IN PAKISTAN) HAD TWO SONS namely (1) BHAI MANI RAM and (2) BHAI MANI SINGH?.
This person seems to have collected unproven/misleading/unauthentic hotchpotch stuff from different articles on BHAI MANI SINGH SHAHEED and pasted it on Sikhiwiki to draw a jumbled-up sketch of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed. If it is the intent of Sikhiwiki to connect Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed to Rajput family (of Alipore, Muzzaffargarh), then it MUST follow Giani Garja Singh in letter and spirit and write the birth year of Bhai Mani Ram as 1644 AD (and not 1662 AD). Furthermore, he must also write that Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Multani Rajput of Garja Singh) had fathered TWELVE (12) sons(!) [See his Shaheed Bilas, Giani Garja Singh], and he did not remain unmarried all through his life. Sikhiwiki is clearly spreading misinformation to the innocent readers.
According to Suraj Prakash of Bhai Santokh Singh Chudamani, Bhai Mai Ram (Rajput-- Vanjara) was son of Bhai Mai Das of Alipore (Muzzafargarh) and had visited the tenth guru with five sons viz: Bachittar Singh, Udai Singh, Anak Singh, Ajab Singh and Ajaib Singh and took Amrit from the tenth Guru. The same fact is attested in the famous Sikh Encylopedia by Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha. No authority, whatsoever --ancient or modern-- has ever attested that Bhai Mai Das Rajput of Alipore (Muzzafargarh) had TWO sons called (1) Bhai Mani Ram (married, having had numerous sons) and (2) Bhai Mani Singh (who remained unmarried). This is clearly the brainchild of this ignorant Sikhiwiki writer who has contributed a grossly erroneous and misleading information on the Sikhiwiki to mislead the unsuspecting readers. The relevant text, therefore, be removed from the Sikhiwiki, or else corrected as soon as possible.
FEW IMPORTANT FACTS ON BHAI MANI SINGH:
- Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Kamboh) was different from Bhai Mani Ram (Rajput), son of Bhai Mai Das of Alipore and the two Mani's were not related to each other.
- Bhai Mai Das Rajput had a son called Bhai Mani Ram (Rajput) who was married, according to Garja Singh. Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Kamboh) was not married (according to Prachin Panth Prakash, Bhai Rattan Singh BVangu) and, therefore, latter had no issue all. Sikhiwiki is therefore, trying to propagate gross misinformation.
- Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Kamboh) was born in/around 1662-1664 AD, while Bhai Mani Ram Rajput (Alipore) was born in 1644 AD (See: Shaheed Bilas, Giani Garja Singh).
- Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Kamboh) was a childhood friend of tenth Guru ji as per attestation of Giani Gian Singh (Panth Prakash) , and ancient Sikh traditions also attest that he was almost of the same age as Guru Gobind Singh ji (whose year of birth was 1666 AD), while Bhai Mani Ram Rajput of Alipore/Mulatn (date of birth 1644 AD) was about 22 years older to Guru Gobind Singh ji. How come this Bhai Mani Ram Rajput/of Alipore (born in 1644 AD) could be a childhood friend of tenth Guru ji(born in 1666 Ad)?.
- Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (Kamboh) remained unmarried all through his life (jati-sati, according Prachin Panth Prakash, Bhai Rattan Singh Bhangu), while Bhai Mani Ram (aka Bhai Mnai Singh Rajput of Bhai Garja Singh) had TWELVE sons, according to Giani Garja Singh (See Shaheed Bilas, by Giani Garja Singh).
- There many more gross historical discrepancies in the claim of Giani Garja Singh that Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed belonged to Rajput family of Alipore/Muzzafargarh. The modern research Scholars, including those from the Punjabi University, Patiala, have strongly disputed/disproved Giani Garja Singh's belated claim on Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed and have called Garja Singh's Shaheed Bilaas as an unproven document and a delibrate attempt of forged/fabricated documentation, and thus a subversion of genuine Sikh history (Kirpal Singh).
Satbir Singh 02:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Sikh Khalsa, Bhai Mnai Singh was not of Jat Lineage. Giani Gian Singh has mischievously tempered with Sikh history and has erroneously connected him with his own Dulat Jat family belongin to Longowal. He says that Bhai Mani Singh was his great grand father which is wrong and in no way provable.
Later, yet another Giani Ji, Giani Garja Singh, who took lead from Giani Gian Singh, also committed the temerity to link Bhai Mani Singh with his Vanjara Rajput lineage.
If that was not enough, some from Lubana brotherhood also have started claiming that Bhai Mnai Singh was a Lubana/Vanjara.
All this has been done just because every one wants to get connected to Bhai Mani Singh because of latter's prestigious position in Sikh history due to his glorious Martyrdom.
This article discusses the history and "presents all all the claims and views by different writers/claimants" in a reaasonable way on Bhai Mani Singh's ethnic background.
Hope this will help.
Satbir Singh (talk) 14:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] www.Sikhs.org Mani Singh
Hi from your response you seem like a good person. However, you can't put Wikipedia:No original research and your theories on wikipedia. Please refrain from violating wikipedia policies by putting Wikipedia:No original research on wikipedia and your theory. www.Sikhs.org the most trusted Sikh site on the Internet says he was of Jat lineage Sikhs.org Article 1 on Mani Singh.--Sikh khalsa (talk) 08:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism by Sikh Khalsa continues
NO, No, Bhai Mani Singh can not be a Jat, this is true beyond any doubt. Giani Giani Singh's claim on Bhai Mani Singh has also been earlier disproved beyond question in the "Shaheed Bilas" for many reasons. The Issue here is not of Original or Non-original research..the bigger issue is that of his true ethnic identity and that of sober history. Giani Gian Singh apparently laid a false claim on Bhai Mani Singh which is not proveable from scientific point of view also like the generation criteria which badly flies out off windows in case of Giani Gian Singh's Bhai Mani Singh. In view of Giani Gian Singh's claim, the gap between the BIRTH YEAR of a Great Grand Farther and BIRTH YEAR of his Great Grand son works out to be about 160 years which itself strongly refutes Gian Singh's false claim. According to Giani Giahn Singh's write-up, average generation in respect Giani Gian Singh's family (From his Mani Singh up to Giani Gian Singh) works out to be about 55 years (against 25 years average----or 20 minimum, 35 years maximum, under normal circumstrancs) which is absolutely absurd and ridiculous and is not possible at all. If some writer on www.Sikhs.org has wriiten Bhai Mani Singh as a Jat Sikh, the writer is simply and blindly following Giani Gian Singh's erroneous cliam. This does not mean that www.Sikhs.org is right in its claim on Bhai Sahib. Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber, a Brahman witness, who had long time been in the service of Guru Gobind Singh, and moreover a very contemporary of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed (and who claims to have met Bhai Mani Singh several times when Bhai Sahib was head Granthi at Amritsar), has given the true identity of Bhai Bhai Mani Singh (as Kamboh/Kamboj caste) and foe which, there is no reason to doubt except some ill-conceived motivation. Moreover, Giani Singh came a century after Bhai Sahib's martyrdom hence his claim/authority on the identity of Bhai Mnai Singh can not be greater than that of Bhai Chibber-- a contemporary who is very contemporary of Bhai Mnai Singh. One needs to have a logical and scientific mindset to look at the historical things.
Hope this would help.
Satbir Singh (talk) 23:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Stop writing POV Wikipedia:No original research nonsense
You can't put Wikipedia:No original research and your theories on wikipedia. Please refrain from violating wikipedia policies by putting Wikipedia:No original research on wikipedia and your theory. www.Sikhs.org the most trusted Sikh site on the Internet says he was of Jat lineage Sikhs.org Article 1 on Mani Singh. www.Sikhs.org the most trusted Sikh site on the Internet says he was of Jat lineage Sikhs.org Article 1 on Mani Singh.--Sikh khalsa (talk) 00:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Sikh Khalsa,
Dont get upset and lose your sense of logical thinking and fair judgement. www.Sikhs.org is 100% wrong in writing Bhai Mani Singh a Jat. The site is maintained by someone who is ignorant of historical facts and is merely putting a one-sided show.
You can not put a claim on Wikipedia which does not meet the scientific observations and is one-sided.
There are other similar or better sites on the internet which are claiming that Bhai Mani Singh was a born in Vanjara Rajput family, son of Maui Dass?. How would you explain that?.
So dont shut your eyes and ears to other views on Bhai Mani Singh.
Giani Gian Singh's writing is totally wrong since a generation can not be as large as 55 years and the difference between birth year of a great grands father and his great grand son can not be as large as 160 years. Wether this turns out be an original research or otherwise, this point can not be belied and ignored. So refrain from reverting the article. That would amount to vandalism. Bhai Mani Singh was not a Jat.
Satbir Singh (talk) 00:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] GIANI GIAN SINGH'S CLAIM IS TOTALLY BASELESS
Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed came, according to Bhai Kesar Singh ji Chhibbar (Bansawalinama, Charana 10, 13, Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber) his contemporary, of a Kamboj family, but according to Giani Gian Singh Dullat [1822-1921], the author of the Panth Parkash, of a Dullat Jatt family of village Kamboval (now extinct), near Sunam (Panth Parkash, Second Edition, Lahore, p 271, Giani Gian Singh) in Sangrur district of the Punjab. Since Giani Gian Singh himself belonged to the Dullat lineage, hence, he has claimed Bhai Mani Singh as one of his Dullat ancestors (Shaheed Bilaas, 1961, p 14, Giani Garja Singh; Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed, 2004, p 20-23, Kirpal Singh; also: Bhai Mani Singh and his caste, Dated Nov, 21, 1993, Dr Parkash Singh Jammuu, Punjabi University Patiala). Dr Parkash also observes: “Only Giani Gian Singh claims that Bhai Mani Singh was a Dullat from Kambohwal. But Giani Gian Singh’s writing comes a century and half after Bhai Sahib’s martyrdom; and since Giani Gian Singh was himself a Dullat Jat, hence his claim on Bhai Sahib can not be accepted in preference to the earlier evidence of Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber who, besides being a Brahmin scholar, was also a contemporary of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed. It is understandable that Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber did not have any personal motives to misrepresent Bhai Sahib’s ethnic identity like Gian Singh Dullat had”. On a critical review of various editions of his Panth Parkash as well as Giani's own family history, its chronology, and other relevant issues in the light of available physical evidence, it is virtually impossible to accept Giani Gian Singh's claim on Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed. It is important to know that Giani Gian Singh Dullat often changes his own statements about the basic parameters of his own ancestors in different editions of his Panth Parkash. There are numerous inconsistencies and discrepancies in his ancestral family particulars. This is sufficient to prove that Giani Gian Singh ji is not sure of what he is writing about. This adds enough elements of doubt to his professed claim on the actual Bhai Mani Singn Shaheed. According to Sikh Phulwari 2005, Bhai Mani Singh was a Labana Sikh.
Another important point to be noted here: Giani Gian Singh Dullat was born in 1822 AD. Bhai Nagahya Dullat was the elder brother of Bhai Mani Singh Dullat. If Bhai Mani Singh was born around 1662-1665 AD, then Bhai Nagahya Dullat must have been born, at least around 1660-1662 AD. Thus, there is an intervening period of over 160 years between the "year of birth" of Bhai Nagahya Dullat (great grand father) and that of Giani Gian Singh Dullat (great grand son), if we accept Giani Gian Singh's claim on Bhai Mani Singh. This involves only THREE human generations, which gives us about 54-55 years for one human generation. This number is preposterously huge (55 years/per generation) and virtually impossible. Based on the numerous generational data from Punjab and worldwide, the average human generation is often taken to be around 25 (i.e. 20 to 30) years by all scholars, though it may also extend upwards to as much as 35 or 40 years under special circumstances only. It is extremely important to note that if only ONE of these THREE generations (55 years each) of Giani Gian Singh's family, (from Naghahya, the great grand father to Giani Gian Singh, the great grand son) happens to be of the usual length of 30 years (for which there is an extremely high probability, statistically speaking), the average for the remaining TWO generations would then become about 68 years!. This number is utterly absurd and unacceptable! This single argument alone virtually negates all claims of Giani Gian Singh on Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed whom he calls Dullat Jatt from his own lineage). Even in the well-known classic Punjabi Mahankosh, the distinguished Sikh scholar of 20th century, Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, clarifies that the Dullat Jatt ethnicity of Bhai Mani Singh is being pressed forward solely and solely by Giani Gian Singh alone. Numerous other scholars/writers, on the other hand, invest Bhai Sahib with a Kamboj ethnicity (Encyclopaedia of Sikh Literature, Mahan Kosh, 1974, foot note, p 951). According to Giani Garja Singh, no person by the name Mani Singh, has ever been born in the known ancestral line of Giani Gian Singh (Shaheed Bilaas, 1961, p 14, Giani Garja Singh);In his Twarikh Guru Khalsa, Giani Gian Singh attests that village Longowal was founded by Baba Ala Singh of Patiala in 1731 AD with the blessings of Bhai Mulchand Baggi Bodi Wala faqir (Twarikh Guru Khalsa, Part III, 1894, pp 673-674). But in the fifth and final edition of his Panth Parkash published in the first decade of 20th century, Giani Gian Singh corrects himself and attests that Longowal was founded on the ruins of Kambohwal by Baba Ala Singh in 1749 AD (See: Panth Parkash, pp 1317-18, Republished by Bhasha Vibhag, 1970 etc). Giani Gian Singh further informs us that at the time of founding of Longowal, Bhai Kala Dullat (the father of Mania Dullat and Nagahya Dullat) was still alive and lived in active military service in the company of Baba Ala Singh, the founder of Patiala. It is also known from the Panth Parkash and Giani ji's other writings that Bhai Mani Singh was born in Kambohwal (now Longowal); and he was already born when the ninth Guru ji visited Akoi in Malwa, in 1665 AD (Panth Parkash, p 676, 1316-18 etc). This evidence verifies that Mani Singh Dullat of Giani Gian Singh may have been, at least, few years old in 1665 AD. This is the very reasons as to why some scholars fix Bhai Singh (Dullat)'s birth around 1662 AD. This tells us that Bhai Nagahya Dullat, the elder brother of Bhai Mani Singh Dullat, must have born, at least, in 1660 AD or even earlier. This leads one to conclude that Bhai Kala Dullat (their father), must have born at least in 1640 AD or earlier so as to bear a child (Nagahya) in 1660 AD. All this discussion establishes that Bhai Kala was already over 109 years old (at least) in 1749 AD and was still in active military service with Baba Ala Singh of Patiala. This scenario seems highly improbable. How come Bhai Kala, at least 109 years old, could still be in the active military service with Baba Ala Singh, at the time of founding of Longowal in 1749 AD? This is yet another extreme negativity in the professed claim of Giani Gian Singh on Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed).
Satbir Singh (talk) 13:37, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] www.Sikhs.org CLAIM on BHAI MANI SINGH IS TOTALLY BASELESS
SEE BELOW:
Bhai Mani Singh (1670 to 1737) Bhai Mani Singh was a great Sikh scholar and martyr who was the scribe of the final version of the Guru Granth Sahib under the guidance of Guru Gobind Singh and who compiled the Dasam Granth following the death of Guru Gobind Singh. Bhai Mani Singh was born to Jat parents at the village of Sunam in 1670. He was the younger brother of Bhai Dyala who was martyred along with Guru Tegh Bahadur in 1675. Bhai Mani Singh was raised from a young age with Guru Gobind Singh by the Gurus mother Mata Gujri. Bhai Mani Singh became a great preacher of Sikhism and spent almost a year with Guru Gobind Singh at Damdama Sahib compiling the final and current version of the Guru Granth Sahib in 1705. After the death of Guru Gobind Singh, Bhai Mani Singh was installed as the head granthi at the Golden Temple in 1721. Here he produced many works on Sikhism and under the insistence of Guru Gobind Singhs widow Mata Sundri compiled the works of Guru Gobind Singh and produced the Dasam Granth. In 1737 Bhai Mani Singh took permission from the muslim governor of Lahore for the Sikhs to celebrate Diwali at the Golden Temple on the payment of Rs. 5,000 as tax, a practice which had been banned. Not enough people attended Diwali that year because they were afraid of the muslim authorities and as a result not enough money was collected. The muslim authorities arrested Bhai Mani Singh and publicly executed him in Lahore.
IMPORTANT COMMENT: The guy who has written the above misleading, worthless and erroneous stuff on Bhai Mani Singh on "www.Sikhs.org" definitely needs some education on Sikh History. He is blatantly ignorant and outdated to a first degree. Perhaps he is following some outdated and erroneously secondary sources on Bhai Mani Singh ji or Bhai Dayala ji, writeen by some half-baked writer, a century or half ago. The modern research belies both the above claims of "www.Sikhs.org". Even Giani Gian Singh, who has otherwise laid a false and forged claim on Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed by calling him a Dullat Jat Sikh of Kambohwal village (now Longowal, according to same Gian Gian Singh) and co0nnecting him with his own Dullat family (he falsely calls himself as a great grandson of Bhai Nagahya, brother of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed) does not call Bhai Dayala ji as the younger/or elder brother of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed. But look at this this guy on "www.Sikhs.org". Besides calling Bhai Mani Singh as Jat, he has also made yet another very very revolutionary claim that Bhai Dayala ji was a younger brother of Bhai Mani Singh and thus also was a (Dullat) Jat.
According to last and revised Panth Prakash of Gian Gian Singh, Bhai Mani Singh had only one elder brother...whom Giani Gian Singh calls Nagahya (See: Fifth Edition, Panth Prakash, bHasha Vibhag, Punjabi University Patiala, revised Edition, reprint 1987, p 1317, Giani Giajn Singh). THis clearly belies "www.Sikhs.org" claim on Bhai Dayala ji as being a Jat and the younger or elder brother of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed
Thus, "www.Sikhs.org" is the LEAST RELIABLE and authentic website, especially for Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed or Bhai Dayala ji Shaheed . And this over-enthusiastic Sikh Khalsa on this talk-page or on this article on Bhai Mani Singh is showing himself doubly ignorant and naieve by repeatedly quoting that misleading website on Sikhism again and again. Perhaps, like the author on Bhai Mani Singh on "www.Sikhs.org" , this Sikh Khalsa too needs some education and positive learning on authentic and scientific Sikh History.
Satbir Singh (talk) 23:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Raidcmdr
Let's discuss the issue of ethnic background of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed in a scientific and rational way, divesting all the myths gathered around his identity over the years. That is the best approach rather than resorting to unwanted vandalism and distorting facts. It is not at all unusual in Sikh history and religion to lay false claim on glorious martyrs or other personalities by various Sikh communities or individuals. But come on and join in discussion to see if Giani Gian Singh's claim on Bhai Mani Singh being a Dullat Jat and from his own family of Longowal stands a closer scrutiny and bears the hard facts of history?
Thanks
Satbir Singh (talk) 13:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Satbir Singh
You need to get a grip and stop reverting to law... if you catch my drift. Your dialogue is not academic but instead sounds very biased referring to books and references of people you have never met.(People I have met)? You really need to get the big picture especially when it comes to critiquing content Sikhism/Hinduism. By the way every Dullat I have met has never associated themselves with so called Jatt clans and in punjab it is very rare to find them (Dullat) anyway. I know this I have lived their 5 years of my life knit picking the minds of Sikh Missionary College and DhamDami Taksal. Go figure who really writes your history and what agendas are their. What is yours my little brother? You have Placed so much emphasis on kamboj? Try editing your article as to what research shows rather than what you agree with or believe. Hint: stop trying to disprove or prove a point or your point just reference the materials without your opinion. This is not the law courts is it? You sound as if you have a Vendetta? Though universities are a good source of info, by no means can they be relied on in an ethnocratically run society such as India. Patiala University? Hmmm? G S Nayar? Hmmm? what did you say Bhai Vir Singh says about this subject?
Regards --Raidcmdr (talk) 08:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
HI Raidcmdr, it is great that you are on the discussion forum and let's us bring out the issues which may have great bearing on Bhai Mani Singh's ethnic background.
PART 1:
You write in the main article: "Most evidence regarding his Dulat last name and background can be traced to the Malwa region of Punjab where Bhai Mani Singhs descendants migrated and today live. It is well known amongst Sikh scholarly circles that Bhai Mani Singh was a Dulat and his descendants can be traced to the Malwa punjab region and in recent times to British Columbia Canada. Most people with disagreements try to refute these claims by adding their own biased opinions. Instead indirectly or even directly trying to show that Sikhs are descendants of Hindus, A claim shared only with the Indian/hindu community."
BTW. Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber (born in 1699 AD) wrote "Bansawalinama" in 1769AD and thus he was very much contemporary with Bhai Mani Singh (1662/63- 1737 AD). From his own writings, it is proved that he was about 38 years old at the martyrdom of Bhai Mnai Singh. At several places in his Bansawlinama, Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber also says that he enjoyed the sangat (company) of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed besisdes other Gursikhs whose castes he also invariably and correctly identifies. And at several places in same text, he also powerfully evidences that Bhai Mani Singh belonged to the Kamboh caste, and was martyred by being cut pieces by piece in Lahore. The entire Kamboj community of Majha, Doaba and Malwa has always been claiming Bhai Mani Singh as from their Kamboj lineage for the last 300 years. Dulat case is comparatively recent which started only after the publication of Panth Praksha by Giani Giahn Singh in 1880 AD. PLEASE ALSO COMMENT ON THIS MOST ANCIENT AND CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE ABOUT MANI SINGH in SIKH HISTORY .
AND ON THE DULAT/DOLAT/DULLAT/DULHAT:
The Dulats of Punjab are comparatively recent immigrants from Agra/Delhi which has always been their strong habitat. The tradition holds that their ancestor's children did not survive and, so his wife made a vow at Naina Devi that to visit the shrine twice for the mundan/tonsure ceremony of her son if she had one. Her son survived and was accordingly known by DO-LAT 'AL'( DOLAT/DULAT: from DO = two and LAT = lock of hair) [See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province (by Denzil Ibbetson, Sir Edward Maclagan, H.A. Rose, 1882, Vol II, p 247]
Dulat/Dulhat/Dullat is a clan of Jats found in Nabha, Patiala, and Ferozepore. They are also found in samll numbers in Amritsar/Gurdaspore. But their Sidh and Pir is known as Didar Singh whose shrine is located at Jind in Haryana. Rai Khanda (Khandaa Rao) is said to be their ancestor who held a Jagir in Jhajjar near Delhi. He had two brothers called Raghbir and Jagobir. They were killed during Nadir Shah's invasion of India and Delhi in 1719 AD, but Rai Khanda (along with his relatives and followers) escaped and fled to Siuna Gujarinwala, a village, now in ruins close to SUNAM and then a capital of a petty state (NOTE: GIANI GIAN SINGH HIMSELF ALSO EVIDENCES IN HIS PANTH PRAKASH THAT THERE WAS ONE GUJAR RULER IN GUJARIWALA in SUNAM who gave shelter to his Dulat fugitive ancestors e.g GUJAR NRIP HUTO TAB AIKE, SHEHAR SUNAM KER BAD NEKAI (PANTH PRAKASH, Latest edition, p 1314)). He sank to the Jat status by marrying the widows of his deceased brothers who were killedc by Nadir's forces [See also: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province (by Denzil Ibbetson, Sir Edward Maclagan, H.A. Rose, 1882, Vol II, p 247]
IMPORTANT COMMENT: From above information based on the authority of the Dulats themselves which was collected by Britisher scholars/ethnographers/writers during ninth century AD appeared in "Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province (by Denzil Ibbetson, Sir Edward Maclagan, H.A. Rose, 1882, Vol I, II, III)". One learns from this important piece of early information regarding the Dulats that the ancestors of Giani Gian Singh Dulat originally and traditionally had been living in Agra/near Delhi prior to 1739 AD and had moved to Siun Gujranwala near Sunam in Sangrur ONLY after Nadir Shah's Invasion of India. NOW THE STUDENTS OF HISTORY KNOW WELL THAT NADIR SHAH OF IRAN HAD INVADED INDIA IN 1738/39 AD. IT MEANS THAT THE DULATS OF PUNJAB i.e of NABHA/SANGRUR, FEROZEPORE ABND AMRITSAR had reached and settled in Punjab only after 1739 AD in the wake of Nadir Shah of Iran's Invasion in 1738/39 AD. The students of history are also aware that Bhai Mani Singh was martyred in Lahore in 1737 AD i.e a year or two before Nadir Shah's invasion and several years prior to the reported migration of Dulats from Agra/Delhi to Siuna Gujaranwala or Sunam side in Sangraru/Nabha. Now a question can be asked as to how Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed, who was born in Sunam/Kambohwal in 1662/63 AD, happened to be from these immigrant Dulats if these immigrants Dulats had migrated to this area from Delhi/Agra ONLY AFTER 1739 AD? PLEASE COMMENT ON THIS OBSERVATION OF THE EARLY BRITISH ETHNOGRAPHERS?SCHOLARS ABOUT DULATS' EARLY HABITAT AND MIGRATION TO PUNJAB AFTER 1739 AD.
NOTE: Another source of information on Giani Gian Singh's Dulat background reveals that an uncle (Tayia) of Giani Gain Singh Dulat held an office in the army of Khanda Rao, a Marhatha general, and held a fief (Jagir) in Jhajjar near Delhi. On the eventual collapse of Marhatha empire in earlier part of nineteenth century AD, this area came under British empire control and later it was purchased by the Patiala State. On the death of Giani Gian Singh's uncle, (who died childless), Patiala State by way of inheritance, gave a job to Giani Gian Singh in the revnue wing of Patiala State (Ref: Sri Guru Gobind Singh Abinandan, Editor Devinder Singh, Guru Nanak Dev University, 1983, p 213). This source also speaks of Khanda Rao (Rai Khanda) but in different capacilty, and not as an ancestor of Gian Singh Dulat.
Please respond to the observations above about Dulats of Nabha/Patiala/Ferozepore and then we will move further to part 2.
Thanks
Satbir Singh (talk) 01:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Very interesting indeed. I will get back to you soon on the topic but in the mean time please refrain from accepting these sources as gospel I am British to the core but am very suspect of sikh/punjabi history written by British and Hindu historians. I will only edit certain reference points and will leave an explanation as to why. I do enjoy your researching though. Another thing I may add is that many scholars delve into many ethnic bias issues the Aryan issue for an example, books may source this and refute but if you ask your Great Grandparents your answers are given to you on a gold plater not silver.humor me. I will give you my email link is perficere@hotmail.com
--Raidcmdr (talk) 23:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Sikhism is under cosntant threat from Hindu fanatics as they cannot tolerate a separate entity of the Sikhs. Many historians have warned about this hostility. For instance, in 1899, Max Arthur MacCaulfe wrote in the preface of his book ‘The Sikh Religion’ that ‘A movement to declare the Sikhs as Hindus in direct opposition to the teachings of the Gurus is wide spread for long duration.’ Therefore, the Sikh youth, who have to counter anti-Sikh propaganda must have proper understanding of historical perspectives in Sikhism. They need to study vast literature to come to appropriate conclusions, and liberate us from those who are out to malign and confuse the Sikh issues and Gurus’ writings. A bird’s eye view of Sikh history shows that from the very beginning of the Sikh movement there have been some who worked to interpolate into the holy verses of the Sikh Gurus. Quite a number of versifiers had cropped up even during the lifetime of the Gurus who would write verses in the style of the Gurus and would mislead the Sikhs. Even in Guru Arjan Dev’s compilation of the holy scripture – Adi Granth Sahib, there appear verses carrying Mahalla sixth and seventh in some birs. The fact is that the sixth and seventh Gurus never wrote a single line for inclusion into the holy Granth. From the very onset, Brahmanical influences have always remained hostile to the Sikh movement. A few instances would show how with this influence on people in general, some subverts were at work to subvert the movement from within. The move was so subtle that truth could not be sifted for long. Perhaps it took a century or two to find out. For instance, there was one Koer Singh who wrote Gur-Bilas Patshai Dasmi in 1751, 43 years after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh. He was a Vaishnav Hindu – Bishan Chand. He admits that he was a Sikh only by name. He invented a myth that before the creation of the Khalsa Guru Gobind Singh worshipped mythical Hindu goddess Durga and that he was blessed by other mythical gods and goddesses of the Hindus. He propagated that all Gurus of the Sikhs were in fact, avtars – incarnation of Lord Vishnu. This is pure blasphemy as we know from the studyof Gurbani. He did not stop short there. He wrote a ballad (vaar) in praise of Guru Gobind Singh under the pen name Bhai Gurdas Singh and had it added as vaar 41 of Bhai Gurdas who was contemporary of the Sikh Gurus (from third to sixth Guru). This vaar 41 mislead the Sikhs in believing that Khalsa was created by Guru Gobind Singh to put an end to the religion of Prophet Mohammed. This goes against the basic principles of the Sikh Gurus (ref: Pauri 16 and 17). Another mischievous attempt to subvert the Sikh doctrine was made by a Brahmin who was a ‘Sikh’ in name only. Kesar Singh Chhibbar wrote Bansawali nama (family tree) of the tenth Guru in 1769. In that, he states, that the Sikh struggle was nothing but anarchy. He could not reconcile to the inclusion of lower castes into the fold of Khalsa. He also states that goddess Durga blessed and ordered Guru Gobind Singh to create Khalsa Panth to fight against the Mughal demons. It is all a hang-over of the Hindu way of thinking. These attempts to subvert the Sikh doctrine are not confined to some distant past either. To our shock in the 21st century, it was discovered that within Gur-Bilas Patshahi Chhevin, there contained many utterances that were considered by many a Sikh scholars to be contrary to the Sikh theology. The book has since been banned. It takes centuries to sift truth from myths. No doubt the Nirmalas and the Udasi-Sadhus looked after the Sikh shrines as well as Sikh theology during their struggle for existence in the eighteenth century. It took another century to realise that a mischief had been played. In the early 20th century modern Sikh theologians and the conventional Sikh saints were vertically divided on the issue of Ragmala. Modern Sikh scholars considered it anathema, while others looked upon Ragmala as something sacred without giving any reasonable argument. The modern questionable (wanna be) scholars were: Kavi Santokh Singh; Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha; Prof. Piyara Singh Padam; Bhai Ashok Singh – a research scholar, SGPC, Amritsar; S. Kartar Singh Dakha; Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal; Babu Teja Singh Bhasaur; Giani Gurdit Singh; and Kavi Raj Giani Arjan Singh (see Annex 1).
The opposing but reputable traditional saints and scholars were: Dr Bhai Vir Singh, Dr Bhai Jodh Singh, Akali Kaur Singh and Giani Gurbachan Singh Head of Jatha Bhindranwala and a few other saints. My Dear friend the reason I have taken you to this issue is to bring to your attention what is at stake Are you a hindu? or are you a sikh? are you truthfully searching for the truth or only want to hear what you want to have you already made your decision? All the time I come across sikh youth that declare that they are related to Hindus and come from their ancestry. What is a Hindu anyway before you explain please have a quick read of Prasaraprana a book by ICS Kapoor singh you will love it. though you rerence many sikh scholars you must understand that the majority would always ask the later for advice many pro sikh scholars had very sutle Hindu/British influence around the time of India's Independence and long before that.Though sutle it did the Damage And continues to nothing to worry about though if you are a Singh? --Raidcmdr (talk) 16:46, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The opposing but reputable traditional saints and scholars were: Dr Bhai Vir Singh, Dr Bhai Jodh Singh, Akali Kaur Singh and Giani Gurbachan Singh Head of Jatha Bhindranwala and a few other saints. My Dear friend the reason I have taken you to this issue is to bring to your attention what is at stake Are you a hindu? or are you a sikh? are you truthfully searching for the truth or only want to hear what you want to have you already made your decision? All the time I come across sikh youth that declare that they are related to Hindus and come from their ancestry. What is a Hindu anyway before you explain please have a quick read of Prasaraprana a book by ICS Kapoor singh you will love it. though you rerence many sikh scholars you must understand that the majority would always ask the later for advice many pro sikh scholars had very sutle Hindu/British influence around the time of India's Independence and long before that.Though sutle it did the Damage And continues to nothing to worry about though if you are a Singh?
Getting back to the topic of ethnicity Hmmm, I like what you have to say but... the way you are going about saying it? --Raidcmdr (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
My friend Raidcmdr (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC), I can fully understand your emotions and concerns and completely sympathise with your line of thought, but what you are trying to say here is quite off-topic in this discussion. You may like it or not, we are discussing the ethnic background of Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed here which issue rightly or wrongly, was first projected by writers like Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber (and alluded to by Bhai Koer Singh) and then intentionally messed up and distorted by later Gianis ji like Giani Gian Singh ji Dulat Jat and Gianai Garja Singh Punwar Rajput(?) etc etc and thus was put on firm communal lines by these so-called Sikh Gianis. We are just trying to untangle the messy communal knot built-up by these Sikh Fellas and are trying to uncover the truth using logical and scientific criteria and reasoning---nothing more, nothing less here.
Whether you like it or not, it is important to remeber that, not only in case of Bhai Mani Singh alone, almost every important ancient Sikh has been ascribed a caste identity by these ancient Sikh writers like Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibber (who was a Brahman), Koer Singh (who was a Kalal), Rattan Singh Bhanngu (who was a Jat), Santokh Singh Chudamani (who was a Chhimba Sikh), Giani Gian Singh (who was a Dulat Jat) or Giani Garja Singh (who was a Mehra Shimpa or Vanjara Rajput) etc etc. What rescue operation do you want to suggest here? Rather than directing you wrath at me and questioning my intentions which are nothing except researching and restoring truth which some of these Sikh Fellas intentionally beclouded/communalized, you may want to shoot your arrowas at and blame these earlier Sikh Fellas who committed an unforgivable and un-sikh-like blunder by inserting a caste element into the elemental and glorious Sikh inheritance in their writings.
BTW, your circle of writers on Sikhism and Sikhs is too crimped to be of much use in our current topic and broader and objective Sikh study. And consequently, it seems like you too are also a bit cripmed in your personal views on Sikhism. But that is besides the topic and I have nothing more to say on this.
Cheers and have a great day.
Thanks.
Satbir Singh (talk) 23:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
LoL... you have no idea do you? I am only preparing you for the ride. A ride you may not like. If you think this is off topic you have another thing coming.It will show itself in time if you don't already see it? How can you not see what I am saying maybe you chose not to? Scientific what do you know of science and research? I have a thousand books all meaningless verbal diarrhea the writers and books you reference I read when you were learning to walk. Take this note once again in form you may better understand I do not judge weather you are right or wrong you may very well have a valid point BUT,,, --Raidcmdr (talk) 03:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
fuk! I hope that om kar you put in their was a typo on your behalf?--Raidcmdr (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Uncle raidcmdr
Wahiguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh!
fuk! I hope that om kar you put in their was a typo on your behalf?--Raidcmdr (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC). Agewise, you appear to be like my uncles. So need I to address you with regard. Uncle commander I (and may be, other readers too) are finding it difficult to understand your scriptural ( e.g fuk or fook) language? Can you switch to straight and simple Damdami style so that we can better understand your drift?
Is Giani Gian Singh also included in your list of saintly writers (traditional saints and scholars like Dr Bhai Vir Singh, Dr Bhai Jodh Singh, Akali Kaur Singh and Giani Gurbachan Singh Head of Jatha Bhindranwala)?
Thanks & regards
Satbir Singh (talk) 13:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
My beloved Khalsa friend
Wahiguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh!
Alright so I lost focus or regained consciousness? and pulled a Jatt for a moment? To aggressive for you? Then accept my apologies. But you still did not answer my question about om. Many writers have upsides and downsides and make up facts/stories of their own. The reason I gave you the former off topic discussion is to show you a how a simple thing like ragmala causes rifts and perpetuates violence it shows you how easily meek minds can be manipulated. They argue that it is hinduism what is hinduism?Is it even a religion? The proof which I have seen with my own eyes is the first page and last page of the Kiratpur Granth are written in the same ink. Ask these fools who have doubt and they come up with incoherent and very questionable references from this Uni and that Uni this prof. that Dr said this and he is more reputable than the Gurus themselves! My point I am writing a book soon you will be referencing my bullshit.( oops their goes my jatt mouth again) I am currently looking through the references you have referenced with my sources and will be discussing each point in greater detail.
--Raidcmdr (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Another point though Kahan Singh Nabha has nice literary work but he shows how small his mind really was with regards to the above topic I also suspect people may have played mischief and manipulated what he said to have the desired effect. I must thank you with regards to softening your tone in the article. I will be going extremely deep into this issue as I must admit I have not yet.Though I will reference materials with regards to the subject against and for to that matter. I will be the first to admit I will always be suspect of what these writers were saying and doing. Who was behind the scenes?
Saintly writers? Hmmm? did I really write that? Maybe I should be more careful when I cut and paste still trying to figure out how this machine works.Simple thought word of mouth is very powerful but dangerous but so is questionable books which may easily have been doctored. anyway what does Dr Bhai Vir singh say with regards to this topic on ethinicity of Bhai Mani Singh if anything at all. regards,
--Raidcmdr (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Giani Gian Singh was widly known as an "apheemchi/afeemchi" ? Do you know what I mean?
Be carefull when quoting the Gurpartap Suraj Granth and indicating two Bhai Mani singhs? The Great Dr himself has corrected it in accordance with quotations referencing the four Pandit writers that tried very successfully/unsuccessfully (depending on the way you read it and on how knowledgeable you are about the scripture)
Why do my margins keep messing up? when I edit, sorry still learning you should have emailed me I work better on word. --24.86.35.211 (talk) 20:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- because you put a space before the text. Doing that indends and scrolls the text in a wide box. Hope I fixed it. Instead to make a break use the colon symbol like my post did. (you can see in the edit box) hope that helps! :) 65.189.45.80 (talk) 06:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Uttering bullshits or foul verbiage is not an exclusive thing of the jat community alone; all communities in rural Punjab display similar phenomena, though some act bit more responsibly while others never fail to betray a doggery or swinish characteristics of theirs in due course.
This discussion forum is about a saintly person; by no means is this an article on lechery or licentiousness or an amphitheater of competing perverted or sick/arrogant egos; the sanctity of the forum has to be maintained so that the image of our saints is not staked out or tarnished on account of an absurd/dogged foolery or the trivial egos since many outsiders world-wide, also visit these wiki-fora regularly. If one participant chooses to stoop low, the wisdom requires that situation be controlled/diffused responsibly so that the sanctity of the forum is maintained and the image of our saints/pious persons is not besmeared in the public by foolish and unbecoming lecherous expressions.
I learnt this lesson the hard way not long ago and have been cautious since then. I could also have resorted to counter and aggressiver verbiage, yet I thought it rather a bold step not to foolishly engage and compete with my participant in exhchanging volleys of unbecoming bellingsgate and lecherous language-expressions which could also have their indirect reflection on the image of the illustrious Taksal (Uncle radcmdr, by his own admission, is connected with prestigious Damdami Taksal!). This way, I think, I was also able to create a sense of pseudo-victory in the ego of our commander uncle and has made his psyche a bit comfortable now.
Believe it or not, the caste system within Sikhism is a stark reality. Rather than dying out, the caste system, in the post-Guru era, received big boost more from the Jat people than any other Sikh community of Punjab. The Jats' stake/role in Sikhism is comparable to that of the Brahmans' role in Hinduism; in other words, the Jats may be said to be neo-Brahmins of the modern Sikhism. They have their own stake to keep the caste system alive.
Ironically, though connected with prestigious Sikh institution the Damdami Taksal, in his inner mind, our uncle Raidcomdr is not free from this evil when it suits his ego. If this not a phoniness, what else would one call it?
Thanks
Satbir Singh (talk) 02:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Tongue/mind twisting words? I have my Match! I could not have said it any better myself Bravo, Beautifully said!( I am not being sarcastic) Satbir Singh please humor me I mean no harm. I agree with what you are saying wholeheartedly I only speak foul mouthed because... I have a loud foul mouth. Take it on the chin. I am only playing the Devils advocate because you digressed from the heart of the issue and sounded as if you were Jatt bashing.( I bash Jatts on a daily basis weather they be family,friends or colleagues) I personally am not offended but if such issues are taken up and delved to deeply we are all doing the Guru a Dis-service by falling victim to the same quackery he abolished. All said and done I have called you my brother. If you see any vandalism with regards to this matter I hold know animosity and would be obdurate you be adamant and bequeath your original findings in amore neutral transparent tone. Regards, Your brother--Raidcmdr (talk) 06:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Question: Who was Bahi Mani Singh Shaheed?
Answer: Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed was Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed...a SINGH! --Raidcmdr (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
He also prepared a new version of Sri Guru Granth Sahib in which, he rearranged the writings according to which Guru had written them as opposed to leaving them in raag format. He did a similar thing with the Bhagat-bani also. It is stated that the segregation of Bani thus was disapproved by the Sikh-Sangat in general and Bhai Sahib was reprimanded for the sacrilege accordingly. HMMMMMM? what is wrong with this picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raidcmdr (talk • contribs) 07:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh Dear,Wait a minute? did you just admit to 6 billion+ people you have an ethnic bias/grudge issue against Jatt people, the neo-Brhamins as you have now racially labeled them?what did A Jatt ever do to you? I was only trying to be your friend? seems that all the hot air hard work research you have done has been a waste, for no good. And now the world has reverted back to calling Bhai Mani Singh Shaheed a Dullat Jatt.--Raidcmdr (talk) 05:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Bhai Mani Singh reverted to Dulat Jat?, impossible. No way. The claim does not bear scrutiny, in spite of Giani Gian Singh's professed claim and your repeated assertions.
Uncle raidcmdr
1. We have already noted that, based on their inquiries and investigations made from the knowledgeable elders (fathers/grand-fathers/great-grand-fathers) of the Dulat Jats of Nabha/Patiala and Ferozepore, as well as from their family traditions, the British investigators Denzil Ibbetson, Sir Edward Maclagan, H.A. Rose etc already wrote in 1882 that the Dulats migrated from near Delhi, in the wake of Nadir Shah’s destruction of Delhi, in 1739 AD [See: Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North West Frontier Province (by Denzil Ibbetson, Sir Edward Maclagan, H.A. Rose, 1882, Vol II, p 247]. This fact clearly shows that the Dulats' claim on Bhai Mani Singh is absolutely anachronistic and untrue since Bhai Mani Singh was born in 1662/1663 AD in Kambowal/Sangrur and was martyred in 1737 AD even before the Dulats ever moved from near Delhi to into Sangrur/Nabha, and later spread to Ferozepore/Amritsar. Just concentrate on this fact.
2. Now, another important consideration which is extremely hard to reconcile is the gap between the birth-year of Giani Gian Singh’s supposed great Grandfather, Bhai Nagahiya (around 1660 AD or earlier, based on Gian Singh’s Panth Prakash pp 162-169, 171, 675/676 and 1316-1318), and the birth-year of Giani Gian Singh himself (1822 or 1823 AD). This gap turns out to be about 160 to 162 years. Nagahiya’s son was Bakhta Singh , Bakhta Singh’s son was Bhag Singh and Bhag Singh’s son was Gian Singh (This is as per Giani Gian’s Singh’s own evidence See Panth Prakash p 1316/1318). Over all, therefore, there are three human generations involved. This makes one human generation about 53 or 54 years which is impossible. Moreover, out of three generations, even if one happens to be 25- 30 years (normal accepted human generation) for which there is 100% probability to happen, the remaining two generations would then turn out to be about 65 to 68 years-----virtually impossible. Thus, Gian Singh’s claim is defective and faulty and therefore, unaaceptable when seen in light of the arguments 1 and 2 above.
Uncle raidcmdr, you may be obdurate, but I am not necessarily adamant. I am reasonable and would simply ask you as how can you reconcile the second argument (argument 2) above? Can you do some investigations/calculations for your own family, your relatives, your friends or whatever, and come up with average generation and worst case generation figures for the interest of wiki-readers? This would really help the general readers in understanding this important argument better. Dont be undeservedly obdurate and inflexible--just concentrate on this issue objectively. And remember that about 100 a years ago, the average age of women was 45 years and that of men 50 years (you need to check and satisfy with these statistics). Moreover, the women have normal bioligical childbearing age uptil approx 40 years. And, in earlier times, on account of exigencies of family economics and other family needs, the children were married early in age so that they started bearing their own issues at about 18-20 years (average).
And thanks for calling me a friend.
Satbir Singh (talk) 01:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
No, No, No! You are not a friend you are my Brother! I love it ! your research has a beautiful impact.I truly did not need you to tell me that though as I beleive Kesar Singh Chhibar and Rattan Singh Bhangu without a flinch. All I was trying to say was when writing I would be less aggressive and more impartial and state some scholars beleived he was Jatt but with the following facts put forth this would seem highly improbable. I would love to discuss more historical facts with you, do you have MSN my email is perficere@hotmail.com I currently have a number of projects on the go and would appreciate your feedback I am currently in canada but soon flying back to the UK. Regards, Your Jatt Brother —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.35.211 (talk) 06:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC) --24.86.35.211 (talk) 06:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
