# Namdharis



## CaramelChocolate (Jun 14, 2005)

Sat sri akaal,

Although the definition of a Sikh seems to be someone who believes in the teachings of the ten Gurus and believes in Adi Granth as the 11th and final Guru, GURU GRANTH SAHIB... There are Sikhs that do not believe this... Some Sikhs say this is wrong and that these people are not Sikhs and they actually hate the naamdharis. Fair enough, they do not consider them Sikhs, but why can't they consider them to be another faith worshipping Waheguruji with good values, since anyone from any religion can reach God?


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jun 14, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*



			
				CaramelChocolate said:
			
		

> Sat sri akaal,
> 
> Although the definition of a Sikh seems to be someone who believes in the teachings of the ten Gurus and believes in Adi Granth as the 11th and final Guru, GURU GRANTH SAHIB... There are Sikhs that do not believe this... Some Sikhs say this is wrong and that these people are not Sikhs and they actually hate the naamdharis. Fair enough, they do not consider them Sikhs, but why can't they consider them to be another faith worshipping Waheguruji with good values, since anyone from any religion can reach God?


 
I dont think the Sikhs have a problem with that..after all there are Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Jians, Buddhists, Taosits..and hundred other faiths..and anybody who claims that sikhs "hate" all these faiths is a lunatic..

BUT the Naamdharees are a different kettle of fish....you see they CLAIM they are just as SIKH as the Khalsa of Guru  Nanak Jyot - Gobind Singh Jyot- Guru Granth Ji jyot...

This is the same as a MUSLIM claiming he is muslim but doesnt beleive in Prophet Mohammed as the last prophet. Thus the Ahmediyas etc are NOT Muslim according to Islam because they have their own prophets after mohammed ji.  The Traditional Muslims also wouldnt have a problem with the Ahmediyas IF they stopped claiming they are also Muslims.

SIKHS have NO PROBLEM with namdharees IF they STOP claiming they are SIKHS..they are NOT..as one of the Fundamental Basis of SIKHE is to BELIEVE in ALL Gurus from Guru nanak to Guru granth Ji as one JYOT. The Naamdharees have their own set of gurus...

Jarnail Singh Gyani Arshi


----------



## Neutral Singh (Jun 14, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*

Very interesting set of questions. I found the following information about their philosophy.

*Namdharis*

Doctrines   The Namdharis believe in the soteriological efficacy of remembering the divine Name (nam-simaran), and the use of a rosary in this practice. They believe in the unorthodox view of personal Guruship - which did not end with the tenth and traditionally believed to be the last Guru, Gobind Singh. The Tenth Guru is believed to have escaped the assasination attempt on his life and lived in secret to the age of 146 (d.1812); old enough to pass on the guruship to Guru Balak Singh. They therefore believe in the doctrine of an unending Guru lineage; Guru Ram Singh is believed to be the next incarnation of Guru Gobind Singh. They are strict vegetarians who do not drink or smoke. They maintain the Hindu belief that the cow is sacred and should therefore not be killed for human consumption. Though they attach equal importance to the Adi Granth and the Dasam Granth, they do not accept the Adi Granth as the Guru Granth. They believe in certain ritualistic practices like the fire ceremony (havan or hom) which involves the practice of circummambulating the fire during a wedding ceremony (instead of the Adi Granth as in an orthodox wedding). They believe that food not prepared from their own hands should not be eaten. They also believe in the efficacy of mantras/sacred words (that are given to them at initiation), and do not believe in the initiation of Khande di pahul (baptism by a double-edged sword) of the Khalsa, though they emphatically promulgate the Khalsa appearance and their own code of conduct - unlike the Nirankaris (see entry). They do not believe in sacred sites (temples, village spots, shrines etc.) for they believed in the interiorization of faith via the divine Name - which they saw as an antidote to the sinful pleasures of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's rule. 

History   The Namdharis are also known as Kukas 'criers', for their shrieks (kuks) given in ecstatic meditative trance. The Namdharis were founded by Guru Balak Singh (1797-1862) in north-west Panjab. He was a puritan and stressed the importance of the divine Name for salvation and drew most of his followers from the poorer lower castes, namely the Jats - whom naturally opposed the richer Sikhs and the British. However, in Ludhiana their second Guru, Ram Singh (1816-85), had the greatest impact. He was the first reformer to emphasise the Khalsa Singh identity under colonial rule, but did not exclude the Sahajdharis in his addresses. Believing in the interiority of faith in 1866, the Namdharis set about destroying Sanatan Sikh-Hindu tombs, ancestral shrines, certain villages spots and other sacred sites. The British began to fear revolution and in 1863 ordered Ram Singh not to hold religious assemblies and not to leave his village. However the desecration continued and peaked about 1867 and some Namdharis were imprisoned. Ram Singh himself was imprisoned and eventually sent to Rangoon and then to Southern Burma where he remained imprisoned until his death in 1885. The Namdhari's notorious zeal for the protection of the cow brought them into direct conflict with the British government. Four butchers were killed by zealous Namdharis. As a result eight of them were captured and sentenced to death. Such incidents increased and in 1872 forty-nine Namdharis were killed by the British and sixteen more later. Through such protests and campaigns the Namdharis initiated the fight for the collapse of the British government. However before the end of the 19th century the Namdharis discarded their militancy to return to simple piety. They consider themselves the initiators of India's struggle for freedom since they boycotted British education, law courts, railways and post office services. 

Symbols   All Namdharis are at least Keshdharis (those with uncut hair). They wear only white home-spun clothing. Their turbans have a particular style, being tied horizontally across the forehead, called Sidha Pag (straight turban). Because the British, fearing revolution, banned the right to carry arms, Namdharis carried sticks to symbolise the sword of the Khalsa warrior. Many wore a knotted wolloen cord around their necks which served as a rosary. 

Adherents   In the 1891 census 706 Hindus and 12,319 Sikhs returned themselves as 'Kuka'. (Census of India, 1891, Vol.XX and Vol.XXI, The Punjab and its Feudatories, by E.D. Maclagan, Part II and III, Calcutta, 1892, pp.826-9 and pp.572-3. (See also the note at the end of the Explanatory Introduction). 

Headquarters/
Main Centre   Originally, under Guru Balak Singh, Namdharis were focused in the north-west of Panjab. However the headquarters shifted to Bhaini Sahib in Ludhiana under the second leader Guru Ram Singh.


----------



## Arvind (Jun 14, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*

For Naamdhaaris, I have total respect for their
1. efforts to maintain raga vidya - to sing kirtan in actual ragas
2. no effort to speak ill about other sikhs although they get termed as Narakdharis(!), which personally I take as an offence to them
3. role in indian freedom struggles. The Kukas were foremost for many sacrifices during that time.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Jun 14, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*

So just because they are a minority, have a different interpretation and do not follow orthodox views they cannot be called Sikhs? Come on, they are more Sikh than 90% of the hair cutting idol worshipping Sikhs... The problem with many orthodox Sikhs today is that they do not take Sri Guru Granth Sahib as an actual Guru, they think they can get away from deviating from his teachings, just because the 11th Nanak is not an a human form [here I am talking about non-amritdhari Sikhs]...
However, I am not sure about their practice of rosary, seems a little Hindu to me... SGGS specifically talks against the use of rosary...
Namdharis do believe in Gurus from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh ji but then it moves on to another human Guru rather than SGGS, that is the only difference but is still the same JOT...
I am also not sure of their practice of taking amrit everytime before they read SGGS/Dasam Granth...


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jun 14, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*



			
				Arvind said:
			
		

> For Naamdhaaris, I have total respect for their
> 1. efforts to maintain raga vidya - to sing kirtan in actual ragas
> 2. no effort to speak ill about other sikhs although they get termed as *Narakdharis*(!), which personally I take as an offence to them
> 3. role in indian freedom struggles. The Kukas were foremost for many sacrifices during that time.


 
No veer Ji, the Naamdharees are never called Narakdharees.  The NARAKDHAREES are the Followers of the NAKLI NIRANKAREES....Guru gurbachan Singh who was allegedly assasinated during Pre-1984 Bluestar time.
These Nakli Nirankaris, were responsible for teh shooting of the 13 Sikhs on vasakhi day in 1978...which event began the events leading up to 1984..and after..
The Nakli nirankari Guru, was openly INSULTING Sikh Gurus and Sikh History by having..Sat SITARAY ( seven STARS..to challenge the Panj Piyaras), he had woemn in his household named Mata Sundaree, Mata Sahib kaur etc...and many other outrageopus acts which set the Singhs under Fauja Singh ready to die to STOP this sacrilege. Later one Singh assasinated Gurbachan Singh who had fled to Delhi to avoid arrest for shooting dead 13 sikhs who were UNARMED.

These "nakli nirankaris" were thus referred to as Narakdharees by Bhinderwalah..and his singhs.

The ASLEE NIRANKAREES were very saintly PREACHERS, one of whom was Darbara Singh in the Pothar/Rawalpindi areas of Punjab and they were the ones to FIRST hold an ANAND KARAJ CEREMONY with Lavaan da Paath as we do today. This was about 1890's.Thsi was the Predecessor of teh Singh sabha Movement.

From the 1950's the Naklee Nirankaress took over this movement...and took an increasing ANTI SIKH stand on all matters.

Jarnail Singh Gyani Arshi

There is NO DISPUTE whatsoever as to the freedom Struggle fo the namdharee Founder Baba Raam Singh ji and his Kookas as the namdharees were called.

They began the Freedom Struggle and the Britihs had to Blow them in front of Cannons to STAMP out the Movement. Baba Raam Singh ji was Exiled for LIFE to NIcobar Prison where he died.  In personal letters Baba ji Raam Singh Ji has clearly stated that HE is NOT GURU but a simple GURU KA SIKH.

There is also no dispute that the namdharees are in the forefront of keeping the valuable Gurmat Raag Vidya alive... MOST SIKHS have dropped this Vidya in favour of Bollywood tunes in Kirtan and commercialised it for kaan rass.

The ONLY point of contention is on the position of GURU GRANTH JI. IF some agreement can be reached on this and on Khande Batte da Amrit....then the namdharees are a valuable section of Sikhs.  I fervently hope this agreement can be reached as i have many namdharee friends...but i have to keep them at level of my non-sikh friends, while i would love to treat them as my Gursikh Bhais.

Jarnail Singh gyani Arshi


----------



## Arvind (Jun 15, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*

Dear Gyani ji,

Your post, as usual, contains so much of information. Thanks for that 

I mentioned Narakdhari as I witness so many cyber fights by ignorants, where they use this term for Naamdhari, this hurts me so much. Perhaps they confuse a Naamdhaari with Nirankaari!

I happen to attend Naamdhari function, and also witnessed 
1. Guru Granth Sahib ji at a higher place than Satguru ji
2. Satguru ji bowing in front of Guru Granth Sahib ji
3. Gurmukhs asking people to getting larr-lao with Guru Sahib.

I am not aware of the contention of 'Khande Batte da Amrit', but as this is raised, I am going to get into more detail about this by asking fellow Naamdharis. In the mean time, you please tell us more.

Thanks, Arvind.


----------



## Singhstah (Jun 16, 2005)

*Re: Naamdharis*



			
				CaramelChocolate said:
			
		

> So just because they are a minority, have a different interpretation and do not follow orthodox views they cannot be called Sikhs?




No.

They cannot be called sikhs, because they lower the status of Satguroo Granth sahib ji Mahraaj, by saying guroo sahib is  a book

naamdhari;s nirankaris their all the same ogvernment funded dushts.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Jun 16, 2005)

OK if you want to be ignorant like that Singhstah without supporting your claims like you have done many times on this forum then I ask from you a quote from SGGS that claims "I AM THE GURU OF THE SIKHS". Or another quote say from Dasam Granth that says SGGS is the GURU.


----------



## drkhalsa (Jun 16, 2005)

Dear caramel

I would like that this in this world  nothing is black or white evry thing is shades of grey

I mean that I dont want to judge naam dhari as wrong or right but  I willtell you what I have experienced so far 

I had a friend naam dhari from india we studied together and from living with him what i felt that naam dhari people are more orthodox in their beliefs about their own philosohy and as contrast to common sikhs they take more care about the uncut kesh and beard at first I was quite impressed that they are really following sikhi very well but soon I realised their sikh is also just skin deep i mean external just like many present day sikh 

now why they are different my friend used to keep photograph of their guru (human) in room and used to light Jyot in front of photograph and this was the only treligious thing thing he used to do 
now on the contrary I know some people who thinks gurugranth Sahib as just a book and belive that it was never given status of guru and last Guru Guru Gobind Singh ji lived a secret life (hidden life that also at the time when whole sikh panth was in grave difficulty....which is really questionable) and passed on gurudom to next human form 

now just to mention that sikh religion is the only religion that belives in shabad Gur or Word Guru no other religious philosophy parralel this now what naamdhari belive is which is already prevelent philosophy of following living guru   I just mentioned it to show that we are so different that present day singh sabha sikh and naamdhari sikh cant be labelled under one label their is no doubt about it they have different philosohy 

Guru granth sahib ji cant be thought as last minute disscion of tenth guru to pass on guruship Instead it was well planned move to give existence to eternal guru the guide that can stay beyond physical existence for eternity now sikh philosophy cant be compromised at this point it would be totally wrong .

Like Gyani ji mentioned I would love to see a day when nammdhari would agree on these basic things and honour us to be part of sikh family


----------



## Randip Singh (Feb 14, 2008)

*Re: Naamdharis*



Singhstah said:


> No.
> 
> They cannot be called sikhs, because they lower the status of Satguroo Granth sahib ji Mahraaj, by saying guroo sahib is a book
> 
> naamdhari;s nirankaris their all the same ogvernment funded dushts.


 
The Namdhari's are in essence a cult, albeit a Sikh one. They do not represent mainstream Sikhism in so much they have a different Rehat Maryada. In this respect, the 3HO, AKJ, GNNSJ could be said to be cult because they follow divergent Rehat Maryada's.

THe Narankari's are two distinct and seperate parts. There are the Nakali Narankari's who are not Sikh's since they advocate embracement of teh 5 thieves, then their are the original Narankari's who have pretty much developed modern day Sikhism from teh 1920's onwards.


----------



## spnadmin (Feb 14, 2008)

DrKhalsa ji posted this way back in 2005. He makes some very good arguments. 



drkhalsa said:


> Dear caramel
> 
> I would like that this in this world  nothing is black or white evry thing is shades of grey
> 
> ...



One question that I have. Should we call 3HO Sikhs a cult? The idea of cult has the notion of brainwashing.   That has not been my experience of 3HO Sikhs. Also they follow the rehat followed by mainstream Sikhs, but add things like vegetarianism, numerology, astrology, hydrotherapy. And the things they add are related more to spiritual practice and not to rehat. Also they take Guruji as the 11th and last Guru after Gobind Singh. There are no human gurus among the 3HO Sikhs. In fact they warn against it over and over. 

So would it be better to call 3HO a sect rather than a cult? I don't know anything about the others.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.


----------



## Randip Singh (Feb 15, 2008)

aad0002 said:


> DrKhalsa ji posted this way back in 2005. He makes some very good arguments.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Call them a "Sect" then. Sorry for the use of Cult.


----------



## spnadmin (Feb 15, 2008)

Randip ji

Don't say "sorry." I was just really asking for some details.


----------

