Inder ji
The reason for my opening this debate comes from my conviction that nothing having to do with Sikhism, religion, or Dasam Granth has been the actual topic of an ongoing smear, by you and your associates on sikhsangat and sikhawareness forums, of SPN, its members, moderators and mentors. The sangat deserves more than they have been offered so far if they are truly able to evaluate the claim that SPN has been indulging in a slander of Dasam Granth.
There have even been some here at SPN who have serious reservations about the decision of SPN leadership to tackle head on allegations that have been made on the two independent forums, in threads entitled “Slander of Dasam Granth here at SPN.” Their reservations have for the most part been based on the importance of taking a noble path. These people have urged we instead commit ourselves even more energetically to our mission of providing a forum where diversity of views is valued, and expressions is censored only when violations of Internet etiquette are chronic.
Allow me to state emphatically why the “noble path” is not an option at this time. The discussion of Slander of Dasam Granth at SPN, which began with 2 identical posts by you, Inder Singh ji, on sikhawareness and sikhsangat, is not about Dasam Granth at all. The threads are nothing more than a flame war, and not that unusual as flame wars go.
What is a flame war?
Flaming is a hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users. Flaming usually occurs in the social context of a discussion board, Internet Relay Chat (IRC) or even through e-mail. An Internet user typically generates a flame response to other posts or users posting on a site, and such a response is usually not constructive, does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others. Sometimes, flamers attempt to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority over other users. Other times, a flamer is simply an individual who believes he or she carries the only valid opinion. This leads him or her to personally attack those who disagree. In some cases, flamers wish to upset and offend other members of the forum, in which case they can be called "trolls". Most often however, flames are angry or insulting messages transmitted by people who have strong feelings about a subject. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)
I submit that the
“strong feelings about a subject” are strong feelings about the authenticity of Dasam Granth. However, strong opinions about the authenticity of Dasam Granth are not new. Therefore it is truly puzzling why opinions expressed on SPN ongoing for more than 2 years would suddenly erupt into charges of slander SPN after all this time. The definition above suffices. “An Internet user typically generates a flame response to other posts or users posting on a site, and such a response is usually not constructive, does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others.”
This particular flame war began when an SPN member, Singh, objected to the opinions of several other SPN members who had posted their strongly-worded views on a number of topics. Their views were perceived to be anti-Gurmat by Singh ji (whose credentials to make such a judgment have yet to be proved authoritatively).
Singh ji, then proceeded to inform me by private message that SPN would not get away with permitting this anti-Gurmat activity, and that we at SPN would regret our willingness to allow these members to continue. In other words, I was threatened. SPN was threatened.
What happened next is a matter of record on both forums. After you posted the first comment in a thread on sikhawareness, forum member Singh aka One of Five, responded by naming 5 members of SPN who were slandering the Dasam Pita. This of course triggered a stream of moral outrage by other forum members. Fact is, the slandering was not of Dasam Granth but of the SPN members who were not aware that their reputations were being abused on that network.
There is no point in backing away from my charges because I have copied the entire archive of this thread on both sikhawareness and sikhsangat.
The flaming and slander continued for several days. Let us look again to the definition of a flame war.
“does not clarify a discussion, and does not persuade others.” Did this occur? It certainly did. As the discussion unfolded on both threads, other SPN members were targeted. I was one of them. My deficiencies included having a non-Sikh name and the notion that I have a “bob cut” – the latter, a hilarious statement since you do not know whether I have been keeping hair or not. Now I was amused by your comments, and touched by the remarks of one dalsingh101 who remarked about my piar. However another member UKguptKaur, also an SPN member under another name, attempted to redirect the conversation to the subject of parkash of Sri Dasam Granth with Sri Guru Granth Sahib. She was greeted with the reply “she should be slapped” and this was repeated by several other conversationalists in that thread. Eventually the kaur was put under moderation and can no longer post without moderation. This is hardly evidence of a any effort to clarify a discussion. It did manage to keep attention on the alleged slandering that was going on at SPN and to divert attention from any serious discussion of Dasam Granth.
The definition of flame war also includes this sentence,
“Sometimes, flamers attempt to assert their authority, or establish a position of superiority over other users.” Why is this notion applicable in the circumstance of this debate? Here is the answer. It provides the entire motivation for why the thread Slander of Dasam Granth at SPN was begun in the first place. Toward the middle of the now more than 18 pages of mind-numbing remarks in the thread, you are observed to ask another member, mithar, to send you a pm. You stated that you had a “strategy.” A strategy to do what may I ask?
Is it too far-flung an inference on my part that you had a strategy to destroy the reputation of SPN? We recall that Singh in his private messages did inform me that he would attempt exactly that on other Internet forums. He was dissatisfied with SPN moderation of some discussions and basically threatened me. You began the thread on the two named forums not longer afterward, and then One in Five (Singh) immediately provided you with the first list of SPN members and mentors requiring a critical evaluation of their opinions, in a kind of sharia court. And let me repeat, almost nothing in the discussion has yet clarified issues important to the Dasam Pita debate. Without this background, most participants on SPN, sikhsangat, or sikhwareness would not realize that they were being manipulated so that you could establish a position of superiority over other users.
All of this speaks to the deviousness of your strategy and your insatiable need to dominate discussions with ad hominem arguments, false claims, and refusal to back up statements and opinions with facts. That is just the way it is. Humans, all of us, are morally frail. And nothing I have described so far, nor any of the fatuous comments that you have made on this forum or other forums, would have deterred me from taking the “noble path.” Really, it was a different “authority” that you were assuming that led me to this debate.
- If you could diminish the reputation of SPN as a forum where a rich reservoir of literature, articles, commentary, and conversation on both sides of the Dasam Granth debate can be found;
- If you and your band could diminish the reputations of people like randip singh, Tejwant Singh (VaheguruSeekr ji), or Gyani Jarnail Singh Arshi;
- If you could demoralize the attempts of a young man, Bhagat Singh, who is committed to the critical evaluation of arguments no matter whether they are made by science, religion, culture, or philosophy, as is his right as one who was given a “beautiful mind" by Waheguru;
- If you could do all of that and assault SPN; and
- If no one peeped a single word of objection,
Why then you could fancy yourself master of the debate anywhere on any Sikh forum. If SPN were to cave into your fantastic style of vichaar, then what forum would be off limits?
What a power trip for you and your jatha! Now I close. Can you possibly accept the truth of the Guru that “no one is my enemy?” If you cannot then you are taking a position that is grounded in false ego. Sikhism has always been a universal forum for diverse points of view and debate. If you cannot live with that, then you are ignoring history. In sum, you are taking the position of a religious fanatic of the sort that is so insecure in his own faith that he cannot tolerate a world of balanced discussion. And that Inder Singh ji is what is dividing the panth today.
I am prepared in this debate to provide examples of the many false arguments, invalid assumptions, and miscarriages of facts as needed from the thread transcripts.
