39 replies to this topic

[Kam1825]

I have heard many people refer to this granth unfortunatly i know nothing about this.

Could someone please enlighten me on;
as to who is the author?
when was it created?
what is it about?
what is its relevance with sikhi?
where can i read it on the net?
most important where can i buy it from?

[N30 S!NGH]

Anyone? :?

[amardeep]

There is a document from the early 19 century that says it was writen by bhai Gurdass (singh).

[fatehsingh]

Kam1825, on Aug 13 2004, 11:22 AM, said:

I have heard many people refer to this granth unfortunatly i know nothing about this.

Could someone please enlighten me on;
as to who is the author?
when was it created?
what is it about?
what is its relevance with sikhi?
where can i read it on the net?
most important where can i buy it from?

It is yet another Granth attributed to Guru Gobind Singh. No clear date is known. In Satguru Ram Singh's Hukamnamas from Burma it is mentioned that the Prem Sumarag Granth Should be referred to when making any official/political decisions that are not covered by Sri Adi and Dasam Granth Sahib Ji. It is a book of Maryadas in a way. There are certain variations around as well just like all Granths, certain things are conflicting, i.e. Maryada with regards to vegetarianism etc. Amardeep, weren't you reading it some time back?

[amardeep]

yeah i was. its one of my favorite books

[valli singh]

I'd recommend the Mcleod translation for it's objectivity
(he took alot of heat for unapologetically going against the 'Tat Khalsa' grain by 'discovering' so-called Sanatan Sikhism)

it really gives an interesting picture of the early Khalsa,
it has been largely ignored and lambasted by every Neo Sikh scholar because it
doesn't conform to their pre-concieved notions which is why they try to label it a 19th century work
which it clearly is not (as Mcleod argues).

[shaheediyan]

McLeods work on this Granth is excellent.

No matter what people think of him, he has been the only person to bring this and many other rehit works to the English speaking world.

It was only because of McLeod that I ever found out this work existed. It truely does give a unique and rare insight into early 19th C Sikhi.

And when one reads the Granth - it becomes clear why Neo-modernist-revisionist Sikhs have never brought it to the public eye.

[valli singh]

Here's an unpublished reflection made by Mcleod on the text after it's release
talking about additional insights he would have added:

Reflections on prem Sumarag

[SURYADEV]

Just digressing a bit and concentrating on McLeod.
If it wasn't for him most of the early hukamname, rehit namas, and guru-signed documents, granths etc that were kept at the Sikh Library, Amritsar would have been lost for good. He was the only one who had the foresight to go and make copies of these treasures circa 1970/80.
Says a lot about Sikhs preserving their own history.

[Bijla Singh]

Mcleod’s whole point of writing books is to paint Sikhi as part of Hinduism instead of a separate religion. In his books he always ignores the vast amount of evidence from Gurbani and Vaars which advocate Gurmat as a separate Panth. He suggests that Guru Sahib was influenced by Bhagti movement or Sufism. Prem Sumarag had been published before Mcleod even heard about it. I suggest reading the text yourself rather than relying on Mcleod’s translation. His argument that Bhai Kahan Singh and Teja Singh are wrong about the date of this text because they were Tat Khalsa is simply irrational. Bhai Randhir Singh was also Tat Khalsa yet he dated it in late 18th century. Prem Sumarag does have many Hindu practices which cannot be justified from Gurbani and Vaars. It cannot be held as 100% correct. Mcleod has been refuted many times and instead of giving sound reasoning he defends himself by saying “my approach is different”. One who questions authenticity of Guru Granth Sahib and calls Gurbani a “revised/edited” work of Goindval Pothis cannot be trusted as a scholar of Sikh studies.
http://www.globalsik...nest_Trumpp.pdf

[Mithar]

Bijla Singh, on Jul 6 2009, 07:53 AM, said:

Mcleod’s whole point of writing books is to paint Sikhi as part of Hinduism instead of a separate religion. In his books he always ignores the vast amount of evidence from Gurbani and Vaars which advocate Gurmat as a separate Panth. He suggests that Guru Sahib was influenced by Bhagti movement or Sufism. Prem Sumarag had been published before Mcleod even heard about it. I suggest reading the text yourself rather than relying on Mcleod’s translation. His argument that Bhai Kahan Singh and Teja Singh are wrong about the date of this text because they were Tat Khalsa is simply irrational. Bhai Randhir Singh was also Tat Khalsa yet he dated it in late 18th century. Prem Sumarag does have many Hindu practices which cannot be justified from Gurbani and Vaars. It cannot be held as 100% correct. Mcleod has been refuted many times and instead of giving sound reasoning he defends himself by saying “my approach is different”. One who questions authenticity of Guru Granth Sahib and calls Gurbani a “revised/edited” work of Goindval Pothis cannot be trusted as a scholar of Sikh studies.
http://www.globalsik...nest_Trumpp.pdf

I agree with you brother. Unfortunately it seems very fashionable now days for people to just jump on the "we hate anything that isn't puraatan" bandwagon and just dismiss everything that was not written before a certain time period. Mcleod's approach is that of a western academic. I can understand for westerners who have no knowledge of Sikhi to read his books and beleive them, but sad thing is when our own people accept his books as some sort of standard authority on Sikhi.

[shaheediyan]

You are all getting melodramatic for nothing.

He is entitled to his views and he is not part of RSS or any Christian propoganda machine - his views are simply based on his research and findings, whether you agree with them or not. As has been noted, his efforts to research, translate and preserve are simply excellent - and put the majority of the Panthic 'Sikh' scholars to shame, their is no skipping over that fact. One does not have to agree with his views in order to enjoy his work and learn from his work.

And that he believes the Adi Granth is derived from the Goindval Pothis and Gur Harsahai Pothis before that isn't exactly a new OR non-Sikh academic theory is it? End of the day the man is an atheist, of course he is going to look for the non-divine roots of Gurbani, big deal. He still has utmost respect for Guru Sahiban and recognises them as exceptional and extra-ordinary beings.

Just because we don't understand something, or there are no logical or complete answers for it, we should not right the ideas off.

Why can't we just agree to disagree on points and celebrate the underlying work instead i.e. translatory... I suppose that would encompass a sense of civil behaviour which has obviously been problematic for the many cowards who have sent this now frail old man dying from cancer numerous death threats.

Typical.

[Matheen]

shaheediyan, on Jul 6 2009, 02:59 PM, said:

And when one reads the Granth - it becomes clear why Neo-modernist-revisionist Sikhs have never brought it to the public eye.

It isn't just the "neo-moderninst-revisionists" who have a problem with it. Firstly, it has no author, but most importantly, many of the practices described in it are contrary to Gurbani and known puratan rehits and rehni-behni of the Sikhs. Some old Nihang Singhs just dismissed it outright when asked for their thoughts on it.

Anybody could have written it. Imagine Sikhs 200 years from now getting hold of Bahadur's writings or Kala Afgana's rehit maryada........

Also, there are a few different Granths all called "Prem Sumarag".

[shaheediyan]

"Some old Nihang Singhs just dismissed it outright when asked for their thoughts on it."

Well thats not surprising - as the granth isn't intended for Nihangs!

[N30 S!NGH]

Quote

I suppose that would encompass a sense of civil behavior which has obviously been problematic for the many cowards who have sent this now frail old man dying from cancer numerous death threats.

If that's true its very sad and unfortunate indeed. Those people who have sent him dead threats should be ashamed of themselves instead of thinking as a amritdhari "mobs" they should refute this person in academia if they have problem with his approach. Even kala afghana types don't deserve this type of treatment and guru maharaj wouldn't have never approved it.