ARCHIVED FORUM: Gurdwara Tapoban Sahib
Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/11/2004 8:11 am
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Sadh Sangat Jio,
Baba Mitt Singh Ji is mentioned in inspirational stories:
The story is amazing.
my questions are:
- Given that he did not wish to kill any anmials that came to the Gurdvara Sahib, did he also not carry out Chatka?
- Did he consume Bhang?
i say this because as a Buddha Dal Nihang of that era, i am trying to understand whether or not he was a reformist within Buddha Dal or represented a break-away from these 'traditions'.
Also, the word 'shardaayee' is used. What does that mean?
Elsewhere, ADMIN have said the following about him:
'Baba Mitt Singh Jee, whose story you can read in "Inspirational Stories" section was a Singh of Buddha Dal and a staunch Sarblohi Bibeki Khalsa. Buddha Dal has created some great Singhs for the Panth. We oppose only the anti-Panthik elements in Buddha Dal'.
When you say anti-panthic do you mean those Nihangs who take bhang, commit chatka and 'stood by' at those times the Panth could really have used them?
Also, did the Buddha Dal Nihangs of those days, as well as the current crop of 'Akali Nihangs', acknowledge and respect him - indeed do they see him as someone who accepted and participated regarding Chatka, Bhang?
Thanks Sangat Jio.
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/13/2004 4:13 am
anyone.....?
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : Kulbir Singh
Date: 7/13/2004 1:20 pm
Vaheguru jee ka Khalsa Vaheguru jee kee fateh!
Very interesting questions Veer Jagroop Singh jeeo.
----------
- Given that he did not wish to kill any anmials that came to the Gurdvara Sahib, did he also not carry out Chatka?
------------
From the above indication it is clear that he did not advocate killing of animals but by the same token it seems that though he did not consume meat, he was tolerant to other nihungs in Budda Dal who consumed meat. But again, this is my personal observation only.
-----------
- Did he consume Bhang?
----------
It is unlikely that he consumed bhang. It is not written anywhere that he used to consume bhang and we cannot just assume that since he belonged to Budda Dal, he automatically was a bhang-addict.
------------
Also, the word 'shardaayee' is used. What does that mean?
-----------
Shardaayee means a drink made by mixing almonds, milk, black peppers and other nuts. Some nihungs add bhang to this and call it “Shaheedi Degh”. This practice is against Gurmat, in my opinion.
----------
Also, did the Buddha Dal Nihangs of those days, as well as the current crop of 'Akali Nihangs', acknowledge and respect him - indeed do they see him as someone who accepted and participated regarding Chatka, Bhang?
-----------
As for respecting him, I have heard that Nihungs considered him a pooran Brahmgiyani Singh. I have read this somewhere too that he is considered to be a pooran Brahmgiyani Singh by the Nihungs. I am not sure about the second half of your question. More research is required to answer that.
Daas,
Kulbir Singh
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : anon
Date: 7/13/2004 2:16 pm
what is chatka all about?? why are these animals killed??
what is bhang??
thank you
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : MR EGO
Date: 7/14/2004 3:00 am
Sri Guru Granth Sahib tells us that Meat, Bhang and Drink is Bad and not allowed as a sikh.
Kabeer, those mortals who consume marijuana, fish and wine
- no matter what pilgrimages, fasts and rituals they follow, they will all go to hell.
Bhagat Kabirji Guru Granth Sahib page 1377
So if you are a gursikh we have to follow the above, this is all I need, to say that the Nihangs that do this stuff are wrong. As a Gursikh would follow every word of Guru Jee.
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/14/2004 4:58 am
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Veer Kulbir Singh Ji,
Thanks for your thoughts and observations - they are very useful.
Can any of the 'Bhang supporters'/modern-day 'Akali Nihung' proponents, who sometimes post on this forum, answer these questions, or at least offer their thoughts.
Thanks in advance.
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : Harpreet Singh
Date: 7/14/2004 7:42 am
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh
Could anyone, such as veer Kulbir Singh, or Veer Jagroop Singh provide any evidence of their statements and views.
Are we going to insult individuals such as Baba Mit Singh simply because some members of the jatha do not agree with other people's traditions?
For the sake of our own Sikhi, please lets stop slandering people and at least persue more truthful pursuits. Veerjis, my benti to you is to provide some evidence to support what you say. If there is no evidence, is it not wiser to keep quiet than to feul rumours and allow ninda to occur?
You should be aware that many youth visit these forums and as such they see our behaviour and attitudes. If we start setting a good example, maybe we have some hope for the future of Sikhi. If we give into ninda, speculation and rumours, then the foundations of Sikhi will become weak. Then we will only have ourselves to blame.
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/14/2004 8:15 am
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Veer Harpreet Singh ji,
Dear Veer ji, i apologise if i have caused any offence - that was not my intention. Please cand Admin close this thread if they feel i have disresepcted anyone.
i just wanted to learn more about the Gursikh personality of Baba Mitt Singh.
Can i say though that i have not been blessed with Guru-Ka-Amrit yet and even if i were, i would not consider myself a member of any Jatha aside from the Khalsa.
Also, when you say provide 'evidence' Veer ji, which 'statements and views' are you talking about?
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : Harpreet Singh
Date: 7/14/2004 11:59 am
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh
Veer Jagroop Singh, being a self-proclaimed reporter on Sikh affairs, you of all people should know that we should use facts and evidence to back up any discussion or debate to make it worthwhile. Veer Kulbir Singh has presented no evidence but only his opinion. Does this mean his word should be accepted simply because he is a jatha Singh? (I mean no offence to Veer Kulbir Singh)
Whether you agree or disagree with Baba Mitt Singh Ji's dietary habits does not change the fact that he is considered by the Sikh Panth (ie, the vast majority of the Sikh world) to be a 'puran Gursikh'. Are you suggesting now that if he consumed 'bhang' or 'jhatka' that he should be relegated to the realms of being considered a patit?
As a Nihung Singh he also read the Ragmala, as I am sure all Nihung Singhs do. Does this also mean he is not a Gursikh because he does not follow the maryada of Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh?
Why does the jatha have to define Sikhi according to its own definitions? Have people not heard of the saying, live and let live? All this time spent arguing over other people's dietary habits and affiliations does not seem to be the actions of Gursikhs - does it?
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/15/2004 4:40 am
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Veer Harpreet Singh Ji,
Dear Veer ji, i have just responded to your last post on the 'Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji' thread and now know that you are a family man; i will sincerely endeavour not to take up too much of your time but i feel that i should address your post.
You wrote:
'Veer Jagroop Singh, being a self-proclaimed reporter on Sikh affairs, you of all people should know that we should use facts and evidence to back up any discussion or debate to make it worthwhile. Veer Kulbir Singh has presented no evidence but only his opinion. Does this mean his word should be accepted simply because he is a jatha Singh? (I mean no offence to Veer Kulbir Singh)'
> You have not mentioned the 'statement or views' you previously mentioned. Please help me here....otherwise my ego will probably take the opportunity to 'decide what you are you are referring to'.
You wrote:
'Whether you agree or disagree with Baba Mitt Singh Ji's dietary habits does not change the fact that he is considered by the Sikh Panth (ie, the vast majority of the Sikh world) to be a 'puran Gursikh'. Are you suggesting now that if he consumed 'bhang' or 'jhatka' that he should be relegated to the realms of being considered a patit?'
> If you read my original post you will see that i was trying to understand the 'historical context' surrounding, and the specific standpoint of, Baba Mitt Singh and the following two issues - Bhang and Maas. i personally find his story inspiring and this particular issue interesting. However, in response to your question, i certainly do not believe that the regular/superficial consumption of bhang, as some sort of sacrament, cannot be reconciled with a 'Gursikh lifestyle'. i am aware that it can be with the Rastafarian lifestyle but not the Sikhi lifestyle. That is my personal opinion...nothing more...nothing less so please treat it as such Veer ji.
You wrote:
'As a Nihung Singh he also read the Ragmala, as I am sure all Nihung Singhs do. Does this also mean he is not a Gursikh because he does not follow the maryada of Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh?'
> i can't understand how this question has emanated from your mind...the reasoning and thought processes behind it. Have i mentioned the reading of Ragmala in the same breath (no, Universe) as Bhang?
Veer ji, please take the opportunity to better acquaint yourself with the beliefs, reasoning and Gurmat lifestyle of Bhai Sahib. Hopefully then the question you have raised above will become defunct.
You wrote: 'Why does the jatha have to define Sikhi according to its own definitions? Have people not heard of the saying, live and let live? All this time spent arguing over other people's dietary habits and affiliations does not seem to be the actions of Gursikhs - does it?'
> i staunchly believe in 'live and let live'. However that is an overly simplified manner in which to diminish the importance of discussing Gurmat issues such as the consumption of drugs such as Bhang; especially given that the the reason this forum exists is to discuss 'Gurmat lifestyle'.
Also, previous to this statement Veer ji you said; 'Does this also mean he is not a Gursikh because he does not FOLLOW THE MARYADA of Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh'. It seems that you yourself place particular focus upon affiliations.
Veer ji, i continue to respect your opinions and your Vahiguru-given right to hold them. Please do not feel that i have in any way tried to discredit you - i simply wish to make myself clear because i know that i don't at the best of times.
Regarding this thread, can anyone help shed light upon Baba Mitt Singh's lifestyle / views?
Thanks.
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : Harminder Kaur
Date: 7/15/2004 4:27 pm
quick question when someone says that this or that person is pooran brahmgiana as said in this quote taken from the above message" As for respecting him, I have heard that Nihungs considered him a pooran Brahmgiyani Singh. I have read this somewhere too that he is considered to be a pooran Brahmgiyani Singh by the Nihungs. I am not sure about the second half of your question. More research is required to answer that."....
pooran mean poora, means complete.... are there brahmgianis that are ADHOORAY? meaning half or quater or 3/4 brahmgiani???
i thought when someone has the avastha of brahmgian.. he/she HAS it fully and is not in the middle of it.
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : jagroop singh
Date: 7/16/2004 8:19 am
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Bhain Harminder Kaur ji,
Perhaps its just used as an adjective...so it doesn't relate or affect the definiton of Brahmgiani, just adds to it...illustrates how 'great and complete' a Brahmgiani is...a 'Pooran' Brahmgiani.
For instance, a Gursikh and a 'great' Gursikh are really the same thing...are they not? They both refer to exactly the same kind of person...
i'm probably completely wrong! (((:-)>>
Can the GurSikhs answer this.
Vahiguru ji ka khalsa, Vahiguru ji ki fateh!
Re: Baba Mitt Singh
Posted by : Jarnail Singh Arshi Gyani
Date: 7/17/2004 12:32 am
Waheguru Ji Ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh.
Bhen Ji harminder Kaur Ji,
The POORAN BRAHMGIANI...... is a state of "perception" of the FOLLOWERS of the so called "pooran" brahmgiani...
I mean to say it all depends on which side of the fence you are on....
TO ALL memebers of Taksaal "A " for example their leader is "POORAN BRAHMGIANI"....but to members of Taksaal " B " ...this particular person my be just an ordinary sant, baba, mahapurash...and not so "pooran" at all. Some may even call him an ordinary person capable of ordinary human failings etc.
TO these B Followers their own Jathedar is the Ultimate "POORAN BRAHMGIANI" and no one else can even approach his "brahmgian"...
And so on and on..... to each his own. Every Jatha-DERA etc has its own PB
On the Kaswatti of GURBANI the ONE and ONLY POORAN BRAHMGIANI is SATGURU NANAK HIMSELF ( Waheguru is the PRIME POORAN BRAHMGIANI )...ALL those others are humans. A person who even "remotely approaches" this state of being a brahmgiani WILL BE GUPT and NOT KNOWN to ANYONE...... THAT is WHY He is described in SUKHMANI SAHIB...if a Pooran brahmgianai was that COMMON as it is TODAY, Guru Ji wouldnt NEED to describe him at all as everyone would know ??? Dont you agree ?? If everyone "knows" the place...there is NO NEED for a map, elaborate instructions..etc....Precisely because these Pooran Brahmginais were so "UNCOMMON and GUPT" was the need for Guru Ji to describe them . None of the "KNOWN" ones FIT the SUKHMANI SAHIB description... IF they DID then they wouldnt CALL themsleves "pooran brahmgianis" and nether would they ALLOW their chelas to call them so.
To cite an example; I came across a GUTKA of SUKHMANI SAHIB....beautifully bound and CARRYING PROMINENTLY on its COVER ( and at two other places prominently ) the Name of the Brahmgiani SPONSOR and His Organisation..... And come to think of it that the WRITER of the SUKHMANI SAHIB GURU ARJUN did not even WRITE HIS OWN NAME anywhere on the BANI.... The POORAN BRAHMGIANI who wrote SUKHMANI doesnt write HIS NAME....BUT the "pooran brahmgiani" SPONSOR of His GUTKAS writes his own name on the Cover ( and that also when he merely collected the FUNDS from his chelas ...)...and wonder of wonder.. there are SO MANY COMMON MISTAKES in the GURBANI GUTKA of this brahmgiani sponsor !!!!
So now you too can go ahead and measure out your own "pooran - not so pooran - absolutely not pooran...brahmgiani....Take your PICK.... there are HUNDREDS of them strutting about the GLOBE flying in Jet Planes from continent to continent...Jathedars, Babas. sants, mahapurashs, Gianis, Kirtaniyas, kathawachaks...Rotian karen pooreh taal...OR DITCH ALL OF THEM and stick with the REAL one - WAHEGURU-GURU NANAK-GURU GRANTH SAHIB JEE.( NO human needed)
Dass jarnail Singh
