Baba Manochahal's Warning of Ragi Darshan Singh at Panthic.org

Giani Sant Singh Maskeen ji's own words regarding Singh Sahib, Prof. Darshan Singh ji.
(he is talking about the period post 1984 pograms)


Gyani Ji Says:
(He is talking about the period post 1984 pograms)

I did not discourse for around 14 months... you would ask "why did you not do it"? ...the Panthic administrators did not provide me the time... They were afraid that they will get involved as i was visiting police stations every other
day (to seek welfare of Gursikhs arrested on various charges) and if these so called Panthic administrators would even wish me "Sat Sri Akal", they will get involved and the courts might summon them for clarfications... so for 13-14 months i did not get any time to do Katha/discourses... and then some people came from Seattle, US, they took me to some of the Gurdwaras... they said that this is not a right thing (that you are not speaking out)... i said These so called Panthic Administrators are afraid. They are even afriad to say Gurfateh to me! As, the other day i had said, there are many people who speak booastfully sitting in closed dark quarters/cabinets and everybody can do a big talk sitting in the closed chambers... at that moment, time and again, a shabad would stuck to my mind by Guru Teg Bahadur Ji "Sukh Main Bau Sanghi Bhae" , "In good times, you will find many friends surrounding you". Once upon a time, these People would listen to my discourses very fondly.. with great love... used to bestome a great respect for me and now they even do not reply back to my "Sat Sri Akal"!!
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/28701-baba-manochahals-warning-ragi-darshan-singh.html

I came to know that in Tihar Jail, Prof Darshan Singh has been impriosned... In Delhi there were/are more than a million Sikhs and not even a single Sikh could came to visit him there... i met Giani Kalyan Singh ji and said let us go (and meet Prof Darshan Singh in dreaded Tihar Jail.) i should not say but i have to say about the way i was introduced to Prof Darshan, he was having only Kachheera (Sikhi Under Garment) on his body and there was no other clothing... Why the Tihar Jail administation had kept him, only the almighty knows... or Prof Sahib would tell you himself... there was only a small piece of hankerchief on his head... he was not allowed to wear Sikh turban...

Even when i was allowed to meet him, there was a steel wired cage in between us and we were sitting four feet apart... (need help: could not understand the following line)... i said (to myself) this is just too extreme... just too bizarre... i had also brought some fruits for him... i thought they wont allow anything else so let's take some fruits for him... Jailor ordained "Take these fruits back with you... they are not allowed inside... you can not give him anything... you have got only two minutes to talk to him and that is it." ...Afterwards i repented over the fact that i did not even ask him why he was not wearing any clothings on his body... a soldier (he was a Singh) told me that two captive Sikhs had commited suicide by hanging with their kurtas (Sikhi long traditional t-shirts). One other Singh did commit suicide with his own turban. Due to this reason all clothings of the remaining captives have been removed except the Kachhera...

No Sikh would ever came to meet him in prison... and then my eyes were filled with tears when i saw wife of Prof Darshan sitting alone in Courts the whole day and there would be noone else besides her... noone was there... (People can speak a big talk in closed hidden chambers, nobody dared to open his voice in public)

"Vipt Paye Sab Hi Sang Chadat, Kou Na Avat Naere" , "In bad times, everybody leave you in lurch and nobody even comes near to you"

One day i met a crying sister of Prof Darshan... she said that herds of people would rush just to listen to Prof Darshan's performing gurbani kirtan and now when he is in trouble nobody comes near him... i consoled her by asking her to remember a shabad by Guru Teg Bahadur ji... "Sang Sakha Sab Taj Gaye", "Family Friends have Deserted (you)"...
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701

Let there be no delusion in our heart that "this or this or this person is my friend... nobody is your friend... "Sukh Mein Sabb Sanghi Bhaye, Dukh Mein Sang Naa Koyee"... and "Sang Sakha Sabb Taj Gaye, kau na nibyae saath, Kaho Nanank Ae Vipt Mein, Tek Ek Ragnath" ... Only the all prevading almighty will always be with you in the times of your trouble...

Admin Note: There would be many errors and omissions in the translations. please do pin point if anything is out of order...

Bhul Chuk Maaf

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

__________________

So this is what we hear from Gyani Maskeen ji -- someone whom no one should dare to slander!


Even when i was allowed to meet him, there was a steel wired cage in between us and we were sitting four feet apart... (need help: could not understand the following line)... i said (to myself) this is just too extreme... just too bizarre... i had also brought some fruits for him... i thought they wont allow anything else so let's take some fruits for him... Jailor ordained "Take these fruits back with you... they are not allowed inside... you can not give him anything... you have got only two minutes to talk to him and that is it." ...Afterwards i repented over the fact that i did not even ask him why he was not wearing any clothings on his body... a soldier (he was a Singh) told me that two captive Sikhs had commited suicide by hanging with their kurtas (Sikhi long traditional t-shirts). One other Singh did commit suicide with his own turban. Due to this reason all clothings of the remaining captives have been removed except the Kachhera...
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701

No Sikh would ever came to meet him in prison... and then my eyes were filled with tears when i saw wife of Prof Darshan sitting alone in Courts the whole day and there would be noone else besides her... noone was there... (People can speak a big talk in closed hidden chambers, nobody dared to open his voice in public)

"Vipt Paye Sab Hi Sang Chadat, Kou Na Avat Naere" , "In bad times, everybody leave you in lurch and nobody even comes near to you"

One day i met a crying sister of Prof Darshan... she said that herds of people would rush just to listen to Prof Darshan's performing gurbani kirtan and now when he is in trouble nobody comes near him... i consoled her by asking her to remember a shabad by Guru Teg Bahadur ji... "Sang Sakha Sab Taj Gaye", "Family Friends have Deserted (you)"...

Let there be no delusion in our heart that "this or this or this person is my friend... nobody is your friend... "Sukh Mein Sabb Sanghi Bhaye, Dukh Mein Sang Naa Koyee"... and "Sang Sakha Sabb Taj Gaye, kau na nibyae saath, Kaho Nanank Ae Vipt Mein, Tek Ek Ragnath" ... Only the all prevading almighty will always be with you in the times of your trouble...

This forum has been exposed to verbal assaults from the grave coming from some who would find Professor Darshan a traitor because he was installed by Tohra Singh and because he convened a Sarbat Khalsa to set goals and objectives that were not to the liking of Babbar Khalsa! This forum has read same posted to show that Professor Darshan should not be supported in his current "crisis" because of "misdeeds" that occurred decades ago.

So what is the lesson we are supposed to learn from all this criticism? You can sit naked and friendless in a Punjabi jail, partner to Singhs who committed suicide with their turbans, and be allowed 2 minutes with Gyani Maskeen ji because of your support of the Khalsa. In spite of this you are no more than a "traitor." You are a traitor because in 1986 and 1987 you did not agree to the rhetoric and agenda of Baba Manaochahal. Does anyone realize how wrong this seems to disinterested onlookers , and how good it looks to those who can use decades of rank accusations to separate Sikhs from their past, their traditions, and Sri Guru Granth Sahib?

Thanks Aman ji. This clears up some questions I had on a related matter.

Previously I offered to analyze the article at the link Panthic.org. I was willing to show that the article is neither news reporting nor responsible editorial writing. Rather it is for the most part propaganda. My analysis was described as defamation. Two days ago, another forum member requested a more detailed analysis of the article. I have complied.

My argument earlier was, and remains, that the article in panthic.org was manipulative, melodramatic, and nothing more than propaganda.

First let's explore what “evidence” is normally understood to be, and what "propaganda" is normally understood to mean.

evidence |ˈevədəns|
noun
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid : the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination.


propaganda |ˌpräpəˈgandə|
noun
1 chiefly derogatory information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view : he was charged with distributing enemy propaganda.
• the dissemination of such information as a political strategy : the party's leaders believed that a long period of education and propaganda would be necessary .

Now, let's take a second look at the following article: Prof Darshan Singh Ji KhalsaARSHAN SINGH - A TRAITOR AMIDST THE SIKHS from PANTHIC.ORG

Does it present evidence or is it mainly propaganda? Does it rise to the level of informed editorial opinion? Or is it an emotional exercise, which rmore like throwing a pot of spaghetti at the wall? Something against Professor Darshan Singh just might stick. Something might stick, and convince some readers sitting under a cloud of unknowing that the Professor is a traitor. Unlike spaghetti, once damage is done, no one will be required to clean the mess up.

The multi-part missive starts with the main article, parts of which are reproduced below. Black fonts are panthic.org and blue fonts are me. I will tackle the main article first. Then I will address several other articles tacked on at the end and offered as evidence in support of the main article.

Published on December 25, 2009

"seems controversy is not anything new for Darshan Singh, the heretic Ragi, who was recently declared a 'Guru-Nindak' and a 'Tankhaiya' by Sri Akal Takht Sahib, for disobeying the authority of the Supreme Seat of Sikhism."

The above is one sentence in which fact is mixed with fiction. Here is the part that is fiction. It is not an indisputable fact that Professor Darshan Singh disobeyed the authority of the Supreme Seat of Sikhism.To the contrary, the Takht may have misused its authority by not taking steps consistent with the Sikh Rehat Maryada. In other words, there is a question of fact as to whether the Akal Takht acted according to Gurmat principles. Akal Takht may have waived its authority by ignoring the Sikh Rehat Maryada.



"Evidence has surfaced that more than two decades ago, two major freedom fighting organizations, Bhindranwala Tigers Force, and Babbar Khalsa International were suspicious of the heretic Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaarshan Singh, and acknowledged that he was unfit to serve as the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib during those turbulent times."

Nothing in this paragraph is a fact. First, no evidence is presented that Bhindranwale Tigers and Babbar Khalsa are “two major freedom fighting organizations." They believe they are major freedom fighting organizations, and bill themselves as such. That is an opinion not a fact. Moreover, all the so- called “evidence” that “surfaced more than two decades ago” is evidence of their suspicions. Suspicions are opinions and not evidence.

Suspicions are not indisputable. Merely suspecting Professor Darshan was a heretic does not make him a heretic, no matter how many times the authors repeat their suspicions. Moreover, the authors have not proved their case. They interpret events to mean that the Professor was unfit to serve as Jathedar. Each new offer of fact turns out to be nothing more than another expression of opinion. I will make this clear later in my responses.

"Many have suspected that was Ragi a mole working for the Government agencies, installed to actively derail and torpedo the Khalistan movement in the late 1980s. New evidence and suspicions raised by prominent Sikh leaders of the past seem to validate this notion."

In this paragraph we read again about suspicions, that Professor Darshan Singh may have been a mole, and may have been installed as Jathedar to derail/torpoedo the Khalistan movement. We have no idea what the authors mean exactly by the "Khalistan movement" and this is important because the "Khalistan movement" took on many forms in the "late 1980's."

At this point in the article it seems the Professor is accused of having derailed some aspect of the movement. If we don't know what is meant by the "Khalistan movement" it is impossible to judge what he derailed, or whether he derailed anything at all. Later however we discover that he “derailed” Babbar Khalsa and its Khalistan agenda. This is perfect example of how propaganda works: i.e., the authors employ derogatory information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, to promote or publicize their particular political cause or point of view.

"Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaarshan Singh was installed by the Tohra led Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) in late 1986. Although Baba Gurbachan Singh Manochahal was also declared Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib by a section of the Khalistan freedom fighters, he later resigned for the sake of Panthic unity. Little did he know about the treachery that was unfolding under the leadership of his successor."

The above paragraph explains who "installed" Professor Darshan Singh as Jathedar. It was none other than the controversial Gurcharan Singh Tohra. There are many strikes against Gurcharan Singh Tohra. The authors omit 2 facts. The absence of these 2 facts is not only deafening, it makes my charge of propaganda even more serious. Fact 1: Tohra was elected head of the SGPC numerous times, when he was in favor, and when he was out of favor with Badal. That is a fact. As such it does nothing to help us understand why Professor Darshan Singh is a mole working for government agencies and installed to derail the Khalistan movement. Tohra at the time of Operation Bluestar backed Bhindranwale. To say that Baba Gurbachan Singh Manocchahal was declared Jathedar by a section of Kahlistan freedom fighters simply demonstrates how confused the authors of the article are about how one becomes Jathedar. Basically they are either out of touch with the political facts under the law, or they are deliberately persisting with misleading statements. To further state that Baba Gurbachan Singh Manocchahal resigned for the sake of panthic unity is not only a statement of opinion but it is a self-promoting and self-serving statement. More evidence of propaganda.

Fact 2: Professor Darshan Singh spent time in jail during the post-1984 period, following Bluestar and the Delhi pograms. He was imprisoned as part of a reign of terror that took over the Punjab.

These facts support the opinion that he was credible choice for Jathedar, and hardly a traitor.

The Chandigarh Tribune narrates this shifting of power at the Sikh Takhts in their July 13th, 2002 editorial interestingly titled 'Misdeeds' of stalwarts during militancy. The Tribune editor notes:

Now this related article in the Chandigarh Tribune is put forth as evidence that the preceding paragraphs should be taken seriously. We are informed that have been “misdeeds.” This is only one example of inflammatory language that is peppered throughout. An editorial titled "misdeeds of stalwarts during militancy" sets the reader up. The reader thinks he/she soon will make some important discoveries. What are these "misdeeds?" The next paragraph tells us what these misdeeds are.

"The SGPC under Mr Tohra had sacked the head granthi of Darbara Sahib and secured and accepted the resignation of Giani Kirpal Singh and secured and accepted the resignation of Giani Kirpal Singh as Jathedar Akal Takht.”

Now those are indeed statements of fact. Mr Tohra indeed sacked some people and forced the resignation of others. However, are they misdeeds? Or is there a more logical reading of the article? Is it not the case that the authors disagreed with the decisions taken by Mr. Tohra. Therefore to say misdeeds were committed is again misleading.

Moreover, this information has no bearing whatsoever on the accusations made against Professor Darshan Singh. How does that information help us understand that he was a mole or a derailer of the Khalistan movement? And how does it contribute to the charges that Professor is a heretic today? It does not clarify anything. The article cites decisions of Mr. Tohra that transpired 2 decades ago in order to smear the reputation of Professor Darshan Singh today, as "heretic.” This is not evidence and it does not help us understand why Professor Darshan Singh should be thought of as a mole, a traitor, a derailer, or a heretic. In what way does the Professor's relationship with Mr. Tohra 2 decades ago pertain to his stand on Dasam Granth today.

More editorial opinion follows that is offered as evidence.

"On December 31 (1986), Bhai Darshan Singh Raagi joined as jathedar. On January 23, 1987, the three head priests had also been dismissed and in their place, Giani Puran Singh, Giani Savinder Singh, Giani Jaswant Singh and Giani Kashmir Singh were appointed as high priests. The 'Sarbat khalsa' held on January 26, 1987, approved the resolution of April 29 for Khalistan and also the recent appointments of the high priests. In a recorded message of Gurbachan Singh Manochahal played to the gathering he resigned from the post of Jathedar, Akal Takht, to accommodate Bhai Darshan Singh in the larger interest of the Panth."

At this point in the article some historical facts are put forth regarding the installation of Professor Darshan Singh and the appointment of 3 individuals as "high priests." It is curious to read "high priests" as Sikhi has no clergy and panthic.org purports to represent the "Sikh panth" as they define "panth." So certainly panthic.org would know that high priests is a frivolous term.

Once again I find the claims made in the article to be clueless. How can anyone take seriously the claim that Gurbachan Singh Manochahal resigned from his post as Jathedar in order to accommodate the Professor and the larger interest of Panth? Manochahal was never the Jathedar to begin with. A better explanation would be this. There was some political wrangling between SGPC and Damdami Takht. Gurbachan Singh Manochahal believed himself to be the heir of the political and spiritual legacy of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. This is nothing more than a presumption on the part of Mr. Manochahal and his supporters. Mr. Manochahal in my humble opinion was a strategist trying to fill a gap left by the death of Jarnail Bhindranwale. He began by casting himself in as the lead actor and obvious choice for the part. We do not know from the article where Damdami Takht stood on his self-nomination.

Another editorial is placed in evidence to support the arguments of the main article.

(July 13, 2002 , Tribune India)


"Softening the Target : Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaarshan Singh and Shushil Muni


Furthermore, the former Joint Director of India's Intelligence Bureau, Maloy Krishna Dhar, in his memoirs, states:

"He (Rajiv Gandhi) has already played the peace card through Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaarshan Singh and a Jain preacher Sushil Muni…"
(Open Secrets – India's Intelligence Unveiled, Maloy Krishna Dhar, Manas Publications -2005) Perhaps, one of the strongest criticisms, and serious allegations leveled against the Ragi came from Baba Gurbachan Singh Manochahal. Baba Manochahal was the head of the Bhindranwala Tigers Force (BTF), and a key member of the Panthic Committee, at that time period."
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701

The persistent pattern of misleading the reader continues. Mr. Manochahal was in the habit of making strong criticisms and allegations against Professor Darshan Singh. Only this time the information is dressed up with a very dramatic statement in parentheses: "Open-Secrets - India's Intelligence Unveiled." Basically we are reading that Rajiv Gandhi played a peace card through Darshan Singh and a Jain preacher named Sushil Muni. Though it may be a fact that a peace card was played and that Professor Darshan Singh had a role to play, the authors make it sound as if it someone had to wrestle CIS to the ground to get the peace card by force. That is nothing short of hilarious. And how does a secret become an "Open Secret?"

Reconsider the scenario. A secret peace card was played. Darshan Singh had something to do with it. Indian intelligence knew all along. Ultimately the secret was revealed.

It is this kind of melodramatic and manipulative language that suggests to me that the entire article was written to serve propaganda interests of Babbar Khalsa. And even if one takes their side in this controversy of 1987 onward, all that means is that one shares the same opinion. It hardly proves that anyone was a "traitor." This is just more name-calling, and probably a reflection of their resentment that Mr. Manochalal was ignored.

Another editorial is offered as evidence. I have included excerpts. In the interests of not going on and on, some paragraphs were not included in my analysis here.

“the 'Sikh Convention' on August 4th, 1987,
an event that would be the catalyst for derailing the Khalistan Movement”

…


"The convention was called by the Takht Jathedars under the pretext that this assembly would 'define' the goals and objectives of the Sikh cause. Baba Manochahal and others openly questioned the need to define the Panth's goals and objectives when the Sarbat Khalsa had already done so. Baba Manochahal argued that the goal for the establishment of an independent Sikh Homeland, Khalistan had already been declared in 1984 and further ratified by the Sarbat Khalsa in 1986."

…

"At the gathering it was declared by the Ragi that the Sikh nation's goal was not an independent and separate homeland of Khalistan. Instead, the Sikhs should strive for a more more autonomy in India as promised by Pandit Nehru during the partition. The Sikhs no longer needed to fight an armed struggle declared the Ragi, self-governance and autonomy could only be gained through dialogue and votes."

"Chaos prevailed throughout at the convention, but this did not distract the Ragi from his task. This was perhaps the first direct attempt to derail the Khalistan struggle at the public level, and an insult to the declarations passed by the Sarbat Khalsa in 1986."

All of the above can be summed up in one short paragraph. Baba Manochahal and his associates were angry. Their Khalistan agenda was “derailed.” Their agenda was not supported. They were irked by the following developments. To press for “dialogue and votes” was in their view wrong because it was not Baba’s agenda. There was "chaos" and the convention was controversial (according to supporters of Baba Manochahal). Professor Darshan Singh was "chided" by Baba's representive Bhai Daya Singh Chohia for his backtracking on the BTF Khalistan agenda.

So what should we conclude from all of this? Professor Darshan Singh and the Singh Sahibans disagreed with Baba. That is it! Nothing more can be learned from this news insert. Disagreement is not treachery nor is it treason. Certainly it is not heresy. So why is this information destined to play any part in a discussion in which Professor Darshan Singh is painted as heretic and tankhiaya? It is the classic straw man argument. The reader should believe the authors: this guy Darshan Singh is a really bad guy because he disagrees with Baba.

Yet more editorial writing is offered as evidence against the Professor, including a “fiery” speech reproduced as an audio file in this thread. I have cast in bold the use of inflammatory language to demonstrate that we are reading propaganda.


…

"Some of main points and questions raised by Baba Manochahal to the Singh Sahibans were as follows:

* Has the Panth actually been fighting without an real objective/goal for the last five years?

* Since 1984, the struggle for Khalistan was lauched when the Indian Government attacked Sri Dabar Sahib. This is according to the words of Sant Jarnail Singh Ji Bhindranwale.

* All Sikh Jujharoo (freedom fighting) organizations are struggling for the establishment of Khalistan. What objective are you trying to define?

* Does this Sikh Convention want to put the Sikh Nation at the mercy of those so-called Sikh leaders who assisted the Government in the assault on Sri Darbar Sahib, Sri Akal Takht Sahib, and the destruction of hundreds of Saroops (of Guru Granth Sahib Ji), and the elimination of thousands of Singhs, Bibis, and children?

* Singh Sahibs, we smell the stench that you have joined the Center, who is all too eager to appease the Jujharoo Singhs on the basis of Sri Anandpur Sahib Resolutions. You are now speaking of defining goals, if you still have not understood the goals of the Panth, then what else can the Panth expect from you?

* Singh Sahibs, time will expose the truth. Is it not your intention at this program to weaken the resolve of the Sikh organizations fighting for Khalistan, and create chaos in the Sikh community?

* Do you still have faith in the Indian Government? The same government that is actively destroying and eliminating Sikh institutions, the Sikh identity, and Sikh culture?

* If you still have faith in such a Government, then there is no one who is in a dark pit than you, regardless of how high your current position is.

* All Sikhs respect Sri Akal Takht Sahib, and the positions of the Singh Sahibans, but no one will be allowed to become a government stooge while holding such a respectable position. It needs to be made clear that only those Singhs can serve the Panth that are ready and willing to sacrifice everything for the sake of the Panth."

More propaganda.

"Regardless of the strong opposition by Baba Manochahal and other Jujharoo Singhs, the Ragi and the convention organizers passed resolution that would attempt to derail the Khalistan struggle by redefining it as simply a movement for further autonomy for Punjabis in the current Indian framework."

"The next day Punjabi papers eagerly flashed the redefined objective by the Jathdars all over the front-pages. It seemed like the first steps of the Government planned coup to hijack the Sikh Freedom struggle from the Jujharoo organizations had been successfully accomplished – thanks to the Ragi, and his SGPC cohorts."

It is a fact that saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib were destroyed in Bluestar, and it is a fact, a horrendous fact, that scores of men, women and children became martyrs. Blood ran into the sarovar of Sri Hamindir Sahib. Blood ran in the streets in Delhi. It is also apparent that the authors are shamelessly using the suffering, martyrdom and sacrifices of these individuals to bolster their own political agenda, and they are hiding behind the reputation of these martyrs because they have no reputation of their own worthy of respect.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701

Instead of evidence we are given proclamations. The article is chest-thumping by political operatives who for some years have been marginalized. Instead of offering evidence, we read words like "at the mercy of" "smell the stench" "create chaos" "government stooge." The article also makes some assumptions of fact. For example it argues that To abandon Khalistan is to place the Sikh Nation at the mercy of Sikh leaders who assisted the Government. And that to abandon Khalistan is akin to destroying Sikh institutions. The article does make one interesting plea: that no one should become a government stooge while occupying the respectable position of jathedar. I agree with that in principle.

I share that opinion. Curiously, in our current crisis, jathedars have not so much become stooges of the government while holding positions of trust. Rather Badal, by 2003, had so strengthened his grip on SGPC that the position of jathedar had evolved into something that was clearly a post of civil servant.

More non-evidence offered so we will believe it.

Front page of Ajit on the Ragi organized 'Sikh convention'

"In a seperate audio, Baba Gurbachan Singh Mahochahal shared his views on the treachary by the Ragi his predecessors.

Voice of Shaheed Baba Gurbachan Singh Manochahal:
(click to listen)"


"The Ragi backtracked on his promise to uphold the resolutions on Khalistan, and has walked away from his duty. The Kharkoo Singhs put their trust in him, but he failed them. The Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib not be a person controlled by the Government.

- Shaheed Baba Gurbachan Singh Manochahal Bhai Daya Singh was later killed by the Indian forces near the village Jandiala Guru. Many members of Bhai Daya Singh were also killed in the coming months. Baba Gurbachan Singh Monchahal was killed in February 1993."

Exactly what was the hand that Professor Darshan Singh played as far as these deaths at the hands of Indian Forces is concerned? We are left with suggestions and there is nothing solid in the way of evidence to demonstrate that the above is true.

Another “news report” without any facts follows.

News report of Bhai Daya Sinh's Shaheedee

Babbar Khalsa Deputy-Chief Dissociates from Ragi

"When it became clear that the Ragi was working in the interest of the central government, activists of the Babbar Khalsa International, who like other Jujharoo organizations had originally supported the Ragi in his early days at the Jathedar, also became suspicious of his activities."


The following voluntary admission of a home invasion is considered by the authors to be an act justified by religious faith, fervor and devotion.

"An incident narrated by Babbar Khalsa International Deputy-Chief Bhai Sulakhan Singh Babbar stands out. Bhai Sahib was the main liaison between the Jathedars and the BKI leadership. During the late 1980s, Bhai Sulakhan Singh had made a surprise visit to the residence where Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaarshan Singh was staying."
…
The description of a home invation – or if you like, breaking and entering. Certainly this is a crime in India. Or if BTF is behind it does that make it an OK thing to do?

"When Bhai Sulakhan Singh entered the Ragi's residence he discovered that the Ragi was in the middle of a meal that included objectionable items, including eggs and omlet. Being a Rahitvaan Singh Bhai Sulakhan Singh immediately scolded the Ragi for being an Akal Takht Jathedar and violating the Sikh code of conduct. The Prof Darshan Singh Ji Khalsaefended the consumption of meat and stated they were considered Jhatka and thus allowed by the Panth. Bhai Sulakhan Singh further scolded him for making up such excuses, and for betraying the sacred position of the Takht, and stated this would be the last time he and the BKI organization would communicate with him."

From this article all I can glean is that Professor Darshan Singh had a meeting at his house. That various of his political opponents had suspicions. That Bahi Sulakhan Singh assumed he had the right to conduct a raid, but this in most other contexts this "raid" would be considered a felony.

The article reports that Professor was eating an omelet and possibly some other items, described as "offensive dietary habits" and "shady morals." To give them the benefit of the doubt, the individuals conducting the raid did not appear to know that the SRM does not forbid eating eggs or meat. The Professor stands accused of consuming alcohol, although it is not clear that alcohol was discovered during the raid. Those conducting the raid do not seem to view breaking and entering a home as evidence of their own shady morals.

…

"Interestingly, over the years further information has come out about the offensive dietary habits and shady morals of the Ragi, including the consumption of alcohol. Now he is often referred to as a "ਸ਼ਰਾਬੀ-ਕਬਾਬੀਜਥੇਦਾਰ" due to such transgressions."

…
"There is no question that the Ragi was unfit to lead the Sikhs during those turbulent times. So why was a man who has no religious or Panthic loyalty installed at the Sikhs' apex Takht? Perhaps it was for a different cause - to undermine the Sikh leadership of that time, and create chaos in the masses. Isn't that what the Ragi is doing now? Undermining the Sikh leadership and creating chaos?"

…

"The echoes of the warnings given by the great Shaheeds Baba Gurbachan Singh Manochahal and Bhai Sulakhan Singh Babbar are as relevant as they were two decades ago. The question is - are we listening?"

…

The authors pose this question: Are we listening? What are we supposed to listen to? Here is their bottom line. If you disagreed two decades ago with Baba Gurbachan Singh and Bahi Sulakhan Singh, and you were legally appointed to a high religious office, ate eggs or meat, attempted to explain what the SRM has to say about meat and jatka, had dietary habits that are less rigorous than the strict habits of Babbar Khalsa, abandoned Khalistan as a primary political goal, and favored dialog and votes, and if you take issue with home-invasions, obviously then you are guilty of creating chaos in the past and undermining the panth today.

Sangat ji – Let’s go back to the definition of propaganda.

1 chiefly derogatory information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view
• the dissemination of such information as a political strategy


That is all from me for now. I may come back to this later.

Unfortunately the world is full of many sad people and many Sun readers of which panthic.org is equivalent to.

I think there should be an effort to write biography of professor saahib ji.He has been a thinker and strategist during eighties. Such people can galvanize and mentally prepare people to achieve goals.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701
It would be an inspiration.
As stated by Maskeen Ji, he was the only person speaking out. No one was with him but he continued on his journey.
It is a shame on people who blame him now. I see people as young as 25 writing foul language without knowing history.
Now they have clear proof in the form of Maskeen Ji, What do they have to say?
Anyway, they do not seem to have much to say.... their affiliate sites are mostly down

The above is one sentence in which fact is mixed with fiction. Here is the part that is fiction. It is not an indisputable fact that Professor Darshan Singh disobeyed the authority of the Supreme Seat of Sikhism.To the contrary, the Takht may have misused its authority by not taking steps consistent with the Sikh Rehat Maryada. In other words, there is a question of fact as to whether the Akal Takht acted according to Gurmat principles. Akal Takht may have waived its authority by ignoring the Sikh Rehat Maryada.

Panth parmanit rehat marayad has been approved by the sikh scholars and clarifies the Sikh stance in the society . Earlier he sung the Gurbani from the dasam granth , here is the list of the shababd available he sung , now its been disappointed to Sikh bodies one who serves at the Sikh higest seat , has stated defaming the Sikh and hit at back. Did n’t he was not aware about the issues in Sikh panth during that time Didn’t he thought after ever while singing Shabad that these are from Dasam granth .
Now , Suddenly he came with a statements he woke up (Do this means he was sleeping ? and what ever he preaches was under sub-consious & senseless ?)

If this is true so do you support this man who twinigle and vanishes what he preaches . the establishment of khalsa path was false , ceremony of “Khande Baate ki Paul ” .
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701
Don’t you see & listen what he have been preaches ? He and his supporter challenges Ardass , Nitenem bani’s (Videos’s are available ) , SRM, and there is repeatedly demand from the their supporter to change the SRM , WHY?

Come on ! if you don’t know about the Sikh practice and move then stop spreading the crap. You are pointing your finger to Shaheed Singh who fought to full fill the Baba Sanit Jarnail Singh Bhindrawale, He declared if Government attack Sikh shirine Darbar Shiab ji foundation stone of Khalsithan woule be laid. To accomplished this Sikh were fighting


If you don’t knew about Khalsitan movment then you should watch the Baba Saint Jarnail Singh ji Video online availanlble . and it took many form only because of weak leader ship .
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=28701

Now , in the picture(Aman posted) which you have show on first page can you tell me when it was clicked , what the Jainin shashi muni is doing there ? Did shashi came for fighting for sikh panth or what ?FYI ,Shahsi was there when Shashi’s Yatra reches in Amritsar , panthic jathbandi came together.

only to protect Darshan you are Insulting the Shaheed Singh & Baba Thakur Singh ji ? SHAME

Now you started calling Gayni Sant Singh ji Maskken ji as sant ? Darshan lobby has claimed he was coward as he denies to speak truth in front of camera . Isn't you are using Gayani Maskeen ji for your benefit , if you trust So then he was pro- Dasam Granth. So now where you stand ?? with Darshan or Gayani Maskeen ji ??

I am quoting Randip Singh ji in reply to this post above. Derawale Babaji's need to calm down.There is not a whole lot more to say about it. Everyone to date, whether it is arya samaaj, or SGPC, or RSS, or Akaal Takht is either the puppet or the puppeteer in this ongoing foolishness about the dark deeds and nefarious words of Professor Darshan Singh. Some times they take turns at puppeteer or at playing the puppet. BKI today is not what was made of it in the fantasies of Baba.

We have already done an autopsy at SPN on this argument being put forward. Let me be brief. When Jarnail Bhindranwale was killed a power vacuum was created. Ego loves to fill a power vacuum. There were yet more bhais and babas who wanted to take his place for their own opportunistic reasons. Let us not portray these people as saints. They were not. Professor Darshan Singh would not play ball with them when he was Jathedar Akal Takht. They resented him because he was backed by Tohra Singh. One or another declared himself Jathedar. No one was paying any attention or thought these bhais and babas were either ridiculous or dangerous. The professor eventually resigned, the only jathdar in more than a decade who was not forced out.He proceeded to Canada. This is not the habit an egotist. Panthic continues to dredge up this story because its leadership would like to declare itself the puppeteer. After all SGPC elections are coming up.

There is also an interesting twist to this. Within the panth there are many political divisions. Some of them are really bitter.

One of these battles is between BKJ and Damdami. That is where Giani Thakur Singh fits into the puzzle. Though it is hard to imagine him spearheading such vindictive.


Manage to convince the quom that you are the savior with the keys to the kingdom of Sikhi on earth. You will be the winner! So it makes sense doesn't it to spread fear far and wide by reliving the past. Pass yourself off as the panthic solution.

Anyway for the cool headed reader. I will contact Sikh Siyasat and find out how much fog is being spread around the matter of BKI and the Professor.

As for Giani Makeen Ji - It is a fact that he was one of the few to visit Professor Darshan Singh when he was imprisoned during the dark days of suppression. Who else among professor's critics was sitting inside the Punjabi slammer then? And Who was visiting with Giani ji on the other side of the bars? When we have the answer it will be even easier to spot the hypocrites.