An objective view from one of our readers

Her is an interesting quote from one of our readers posted as a comment on another article. We thought it warrants its own post as some important points are raised by Jaz Shoker.

Basing my view entirely objectively, with no bias, these statements do seem true. Those from Nidar’s camp should not be offended if these are the acts that they stand by, then they should stand by them. It is one thing to do the act and confess to doing it openly, it is another to doing an act and then completely argue the notion that you are not. In most civilised parts of the world, this is called ‘Dishonesty’, putting it politely. There is no “Shakespeareanism” involved here.

It is true that there have been several attacks on Sikhi now and in the past, yet these ‘khastriya warriors’ (again, using the term objectively, as that is evidently what the refer to themselves as) have done little to defend the Guru’s legacy in any way. Not even a whisper of protest against injustice, against the massacre of thousands of sikh men, women and children, not a word against the tyranny of thousands, not a raise of the sword (or any of the 60 he owns) to signify a stance against oppression happening in Punjab right now. Warriors – indeed. Go on – cry “bruuahhhhh” – how brave you are.

Currently we are fighting a “war” with the very monsters who are using our sikh women and sexually grooming them (british pakinstani muslims have been verified to be at the forefront by authorities – see sources and news). Nidar would not even consider the notion of helping in this battle – even with his 60-plus shastars (weapons/swords). His comment of a ‘nihang being a lion and should copulate with any women he sees fit’ is very goonish mentality and not beholding of the knights of old (western) who were created to help the poor and defenceless and uphold honour. These “knights” of Guru Gobind Singh were created to abide by the same rules, not train yourself all day, trains other for money, teach how to pick-pocket and loot, chatka a goat in the early afternoon and have a drink in the evening.

One could argue that even with all the alleged political agenda involved with Sant Jarnail Singh Bindrawale as mentioned by Nidar’s camp, he still stood up to tyranny in the form of Ghandi. The evidence was still there even in letters of protest against his disgust at Ghandi’s tactics which raped and killed many. If Nidar’s camp could show me some evidence that they were active in this battle against great injustice and tyranny, then perhaps I could back him up. Unfortunately, I cannot, as there only seems to be the contrary. I cannot think of any other acts of crime more suited to this warrior to fight against, yet he does the opposite. He does not like Bindrawale, that is a simple fact, no bias involved. He is after all, allowed to express his opinion, as are others.


Using this example in context, the only care these martial artists have is to their martial art. That is it. Again, this is no bias – as personally they would agree.
It is true that there is a significant lack of matha-tek to the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, doing this to just the shastars does not suffice. Thanks to the original article for bringing up the question: What do we defend? How are we helping humanity?
Our shaheeds are there who fought the British Raj also against the injustice suffered by the Sikhs. I do not recall anyone in Nidar’s camp ever mentioning anything in the remotest that they have done to help other Sikhs, in any way. The only thing they have done is offer shastar vidiya martial arts – and even that comes at a price that one is not obliged, but “expected” to pay for the classes. Nothing is free.

Without a doubt Nidar is very highly skilled, spending countless hours and years practising this martial art. But until the day I see him fight for something other than himself and his prospering reputation amongst the goreh martial artists – I will have to wait, and wait, and wait – well, doesn’t look like it is coming does it?


Nidar argues about ‘British Raj’ take-over Sikhi in the past, fair enough, we’ll take that into account, but the very people he associates with to enhance his martial arts reputation and career are – goreh! The Westerners love him. Going on Discovery channel and such media to spread his information through ‘British Raj’ channels and self-aggrandizing himself and the art- Nidar’s goons – let me ask you a question, isn’t that hypocritical?
Jaz Shoker

2 thoughts on “An objective view from one of our readers”

  1. Dear Admin,

    I think you guys should take a look at some of the issues that I feel have been overlooked. I bought ‘In the Masters Presence’ and have scanned through most of Paramjit and Niddars books.

    In these books they clearly make reference to the dilution of Sikh traditions following interventions by the British and the nature of Sikhism as being a tradition of four ‘original’ traditions – the Udasis being one.

    My issue with this stems from a number of sources. First there is Gurbani. The Var of Satta and Balwand clearly makes reference on Ang 966 to the fact that the sons of Guru Nanak turned their back on Guru Nanak, and calls them evil hearted and with sins on their back. How can the Udasis thus be an original ‘Order’ of Sikhism?

    The next reference is Bhai Gurdas. His writings are referred to as the key to Gurbani. He writes also of the sons of Nanak not following his way. This is in Vaar 1 Pauri 38. Again the question arises that how can any order that stems from these people be considered a ‘Sikh’ Order.

    The next point is the writings of Mobad in 1645. A Zoroastrian scholar Mobad is thought to have met Guru Hargobind Ji. He writes that the ‘Udasis are not deemed to be of commendable faith’. A translation of this is found in Sikh History from Persian Sources by J S Grewal.

    The final point is that much is said about the British changing things after they take over Punjab. Malcolm a British envoy writes in 1812, 37 years before the British take Punjab. His book ‘A Sketch of the Sikhs’ mentions again that the Udasis are not part of the Sikh faith.

    So, in my opinion, the view that SIkhism is made of 4 traditional orders as propounded by Niddar and his chaps is completely erroneous and seems much like a fabrication. Of course more research needs to be done, but as Learners we should all be questioning as Gurbani says – pehla vastu sinjaan kai tai keechay vapaar (Ang 1410).

    I hope this helps clear up some issues.

    1. thankyou for commenting, what your saying is partly true, although the udasis where diferent they still maintained a close relationship with the Sikhs, evidence of this comes from the fact that Mahant Kirpal, a famous udasi fought alongside Guru Gobind Singh ji in the battle of banghani, even though he was an ascetic(source: Bachittar Natak, Dasam Granth). the reason the udasis came into decline was when corrupt individuals infiltrated the udasis orders to take control of the gurdwaras during the early 1900’s. an important event to read up on is the Nanakana Sahib Massacre where evil mahants where abusing the gurdwaras funds and raping young girls. Unfortunately once the corrupt ones where removed the good udasis who supported gurdwara reform were also sidelined.

      A good article can be found here –

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *