• Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

1947. ... Were Sikh Independent At That Time.

ravneet_sb

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
481
Likes
300
Age
47
Sat Sri Akaal,

Were SIKHs seeking indepence in 1947, or were humble sacrifying help to get independence.

What was the spirit behind struggle for
independence.
 

Logical Sikh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
155
Likes
21
Age
21
Sat Sri Akaal,

Were SIKHs seeking indepence in 1947, or were humble sacrifying help to get independence.

What was the spirit behind struggle for
independence.
They were seeking independence for PUNJAB..... They shook hands with india s thinkin' "The Enemy of your Enemy is your friend"... But that wasn't the case..... Didn't get Punjab.... was'Nt even given the status of a state for another 30 years.....
 

sukhsingh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
731
Likes
213
Age
43
Location
UK
They were seeking independence for PUNJAB..... They shook hands with india s thinkin' "The Enemy of your Enemy is your friend"... But that wasn't the case..... Didn't get Punjab.... was'Nt even given the status of a state for another 30 years.....
I'm not sure that is correct
 

sukhsingh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
731
Likes
213
Age
43
Location
UK
@Logical Sikh I'm not sure your characterisation that Sikhs were looking for a independent state is correct or that punjab was not a state until the mid 70s
 

Logical Sikh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
155
Likes
21
Age
21
They were seeking independence for PUNJAB..... They shook hands with india s thinkin' "The Enemy of your Enemy is your friend"... But that wasn't the case..... Didn't get Punjab.... was'Nt even given the status of a state for another 30 years.....
SORRY that was 20 years. ( till mid 60s )
 

Logical Sikh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
155
Likes
21
Age
21
@Logical Sikh I'm not sure your characterisation that Sikhs were looking for a independent state is correct or that punjab was not a state until the mid 70s
As of what the situation was in 1947, Sikhs were not looking for an INDEPENDENT STATE, But Rather an AUTONOMOUS state which was Promised by Indian and Pak officials.
Going with Pakistan would mean they'd have to give up PATNA SAHIB, Hazoor Sahib
Going with india would mean Give up NANKANA SAHIB.
Sikhs were given Same Offers from both india and Pakistan ( maybe more from Pakistan ), But there was a Trust issue with Pakistan as because of their History with mughals, So maybe thats why Sikh leaders decided to go with India at that time.
 
Last edited:

sukhsingh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
731
Likes
213
Age
43
Location
UK
As of what the situation was in 1947, Sikhs were not looking for an INDEPENDENT STATE, But Rather an AUTONOMOUS state which was Promised by Indian and Pak officials.
Going with Pakistan would mean they'd have to give up PATNA SAHIB, Hazoor Sahib
Going with india would mean Give up NANKANA SAHIB.
Sikhs were given Same Offers from both india and Pakistan ( maybe more from Pakistan ), But there was a Trust issue with Pakistan as because of their History with mughals, So maybe thats why Sikh leaders decided to go with India at that time.
The only sikh states that had any say were the princely states, most of the panjab did not have a choice
 

Harry Haller

Panga Master
SPNer
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
5,739
Likes
8,147
Age
49
As of what the situation was in 1947, Sikhs were not looking for an INDEPENDENT STATE, But Rather an AUTONOMOUS state which was Promised by Indian and Pak officials.
Going with Pakistan would mean they'd have to give up PATNA SAHIB, Hazoor Sahib
Going with india would mean Give up NANKANA SAHIB.
Sikhs were given Same Offers from both india and Pakistan ( maybe more from Pakistan ), But there was a Trust issue with Pakistan as because of their History with mughals, So maybe thats why Sikh leaders decided to go with India at that time.
I rather think the Sikh situation was a bit like pass the parcel, in the sense that we were passed round between both parties in the vain hope that someone would be able to take us, and then kill any ambitions for power sharing. One must remember that Nehru and Jinnah were both trained solicitors, and our Sikh representative, Masterji, could cook some really wonderful parathas, but unfortunately had no legal training at all, Nehru and Jinnah must have been {censored} themselves at the naive and trusting way we allowed ourselves to be sewn up
 

Logical Sikh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Sep 22, 2018
Messages
155
Likes
21
Age
21
I rather think the Sikh situation was a bit like pass the parcel, in the sense that we were passed round between both parties in the vain hope that someone would be able to take us, and then kill any ambitions for power sharing.
True.

Masterji, could cook some really wonderful parathas, but unfortunately had no legal training at all, Nehru and Jinnah must have been {censored} themselves at the naive and trusting way we allowed ourselves to be sewn up
it is true because all the decision making power was in no more than 2 or 3 sikh leaders, which were not even on the same line, and SHIT happens when you have only a few representatives and they too disagree with each other......... Same situation like today man......... nothing changed
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Top