amardeep Posted May 30, 2008 Report Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh. Having just finished reading the Prem sumarag granth translation by h.w mcleod i thought it would be interesting to start a debate on it as i have a few questions. the book itself is without any doubt a true gem for people interested in knowing about the personal rehit that sikhs should follow. I truly recommend it for everyone to read. it can be purchased on amazon.com/amazon.co.uk. question 1: on page 14 on daily nitnem it talks about reciting japji sahib and jaap sahib 5 times. As far as i recall, most other rehitnames only mention the recitation of jaap sahib and japji sahib once. how literal is the number 5 to be taken in a indian context? is there anything symbolic regarding the number 5 or should it be taken literally? question 2. on page 17 it talks about keeping your simran techniques hidden from others. no one is allowed to know what techniques you have been given by the Guru (panj pyare). I guess this is where the akj'ers have adopted the doctrine of the secred techniques, but what are other rehitnames statement on this? does it contradict sikh Guru history or is it in line with our history and teachings of the Gurus? question 3. the granth seem to have quite an anti-muslim view which can be seen on page 13 where the muslim and hindu panth are calle false panth. on page 19 it is written that you should slander the Prophet if you are being attacked by a muslim. of course this is not somthing new as most rehitnames have this view towards muslims, but i was wondering if this has been a practice among sikhs in the early days of sikhism? im particularly interested in knowing if the doctrine of feeting newly converted sikhs with pork for 51 days in order to "purify" them from their muslim background (page 54)? question 4. on page 20 there are a few lines regarding the present manifestation of the Satguru as being Light. could someone expand more on this. is it talking about the Guru Granth here or the Guru Panth in the form of joining sangat. question 5. "The return of the Satguru" is mentioned as a theme throughout the book, especially on page 25 in great details. Is this a theme that can be found in other rehitnames or early granths as well? i find this theme in particular to be quite interesting. question 6. Chapter 4 deals with marriage instructions. i must say i was positively surprised to see how it deals with caste-issues. i noticed that the lavan is performed circling a fire instead of Guru Granth Sahib, and Anand sahib is not recited. Other rehitname clearly say that anand should be read during the marriage ceremony, so does it mean that during a particular time of sikh history, the anand karaj ceremony was replaced by the hindu way of marriage? As far as i recall Baba Ram Singh told his soldiers to follow the marriage instructions as given in Prem Sumarag,.. are these stil followed to this date with the various rituals described as well as the lavan around the holy fire+ question 7 page 47 talks about polygami and it is to be found at other pages of the book also even though monogamy is said to be the best. What are the views on polygami in early sikh scriptures? i recall a vaar of Bhai Gurdass saying sikhs should only have one wife. please dont make it into a discussion on whether the Gurus had multiple wives, im more intested in knowing if Sikhs can have more wives than one (lol) question 8. on page 61 it talks about eating food that has been cooked by others. i dont quite understand the first example of those who live "heedless of the Guru".. does that mean you should'n eat food prepared by non-sikhs? The next example seem to contradict this, but the third line seem to confirm it. It also says you shoul'n eat food that has been offered to gods. I know hare krishnas offer their food to Krishna Maharaj. they consider him to be the pooran avatar and brahman himself, so would it be ok for a sikh to eat food made with their hands? question 10. on page 68 it talks about women and their period and says that a woman should bathe three days after her period has ended. does is mean she can't bathe inbetween? question 11 the 8. chapter talks about political conduct, and the duty of the raja. It does not mention anything about how this raja should be selected. Are there any other sikh sources that mention this? And this raja, is he an avatar or can it be anyone? do all citizens in a sikh have to be sikhs? (page 92) question 12: page 93 talks about women being veiled and in the chapter on marriage it is said that the bride should wear a burka. Has this been a practice among sikhs in the early days? It says all women except prostitutes should wear a purda question 13 on page 123 it talks about the hindu and muslim panth. could someone explain to me what is being said as i dont understand this part. i was actually warned that this granth was quite controversial in its context but i actually did not find any "dodgy" places as such. there were a few ofcourse but i had expected a lot more. Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki fateh (or salaam as the book says the greeting should be ) Edited June 8, 2010 by amardeep 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted May 31, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 I would say that Prem Sumarag functions as a sikh sharia as it deals with personal rehit as well as that of society. a complete sytem so to say 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 It can't function as a 'Sikh Sharia' because many of the ideas are not compatible with Sikhi. There is a reason why no Samparda, old or new, follows the teachings of Prem Sumarag. It is an interesting book, but probably just 1 man's thoughts of what he believed. It was written during one of the darkest periods of Sikhi, when Parchaar was non-existant, so we can't blame the author, whoever he may be. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 It can't function as a 'Sikh Sharia' because many of the ideas are not compatible with Sikhi. There is a reason why no Samparda, old or new, follows the teachings of Prem Sumarag. It is an interesting book, but probably just 1 man's thoughts of what he believed. It was written during one of the darkest periods of Sikhi, when Parchaar was non-existant, so we can't blame the author, whoever he may be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted May 31, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 could you tell me what parts of it you dont find compatible with sikhi 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 what is the significance of 51 days? if you ask muslims they woudl probably say only one bite of a pig is enuf proof that sum1 has renoucneced islam. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted June 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 i dont know... maybe to make sure that they are serious about becoming singhs.. but it also talks about burrying them into the ground first... sounds weird 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithr Posted June 1, 2008 Report Share Posted June 1, 2008 question 12: page 93 talks about women being veiled and in the chapter on marriage it is said that the bride should wear a burka. Has this been a practice among sikhs in the early days? It says all women except prostitutes should wear a purda During the olden days, in some parts of Punjab where Muslims dominated the Punjab, Sikhs and Hindus did adopt many customs of the Muslims such as Purdah. In some parts women were not even allowed to come in a room where another man was present who was not related to her. After the Singh Sabha movement, the Purdah custom was no longer followed. But still in India, un married girls from Khandani, traditional families avoid going infront of men who are not related to them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eternal Sunset Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Where can I get that book? Sounds like an interesting read. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted June 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 try amazon.com 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matheen Posted June 2, 2008 Report Share Posted June 2, 2008 Guru Sahib forbade wearing the veil.......there's a sakhi that explains why. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted June 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2008 Does anyone know the arguments for/against it being a product of the early 18. century? I read it, and the devis and hindu mythology is hardly mentioned.. would'n this be evidence of it being written prior to 1750 where all the hindu devi devas starting coming into sikh litterature? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuttabanda2 Posted September 26, 2016 Report Share Posted September 26, 2016 On June 1, 2008 at 0:49 PM, amardeep said: i dont know... maybe to make sure that they are serious about becoming singhs.. but it also talks about burrying them into the ground first... sounds weird That's actually one of many  methods of torturous execution that the Nihang Singhs practiced with Captured Turkus. It was like a Maryada. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted September 27, 2016 Report Share Posted September 27, 2016 I've never heard of this. Do you know any instances where it happened? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted September 27, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2016 17 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said: That's actually one of many  methods of torturous execution that the Nihang Singhs practiced with Captured Turkus. It was like a Maryada. Please expand. The reference to burial is in regards to taking amrit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuttabanda2 Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 On 9/27/2016 at 5:14 AM, amardeep said: Please expand. The reference to burial is in regards to taking amrit Interesting. When I was informed about this , I met Nihang Singhs (from i think Tarna Dal/ Hariavelan) back in India, they said it was what they would do to a captured turk (especially of importance) they'd bury them neck high, feed him pork, then let the dogs, jackals, bobcats etc. (kutte billeh) have their way with them. Another method was digging a pit, throwing the prisoner in, and covering it with wood (with just a hole in the top) and Singhs would defecate in there or something. I haven't found any written evidence of this anywhere so far, so I'm not to quite sure if this is in fact true. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said: Interesting. When I was informed about this , I met Nihang Singhs (from i think Tarna Dal/ Hariavelan) back in India, they said it was what they would do to a captured turk (especially of importance) they'd bury them neck high, feed him pork, then let the dogs, jackals, bobcats etc. (kutte billeh) have their way with them. Another method was digging a pit, throwing the prisoner in, and covering it with wood (with just a hole in the top) and Singhs would defecate in there or something. I haven't found any written evidence of this anywhere so far, so I'm not to quite sure if this is in fact true. Damn! That shits crazy! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 11 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said: Another method was digging a pit, throwing the prisoner in, and covering it with wood (with just a hole in the top) and Singhs would defecate in there or something. Wasn't Lakhpat Rai given the above punishment? Â Bhul chuk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 9 hours ago, Singh123456777 said: Damn! That shits crazy! Â Hey Singh Ji, not long ago, you said that you had some old manuscripts of Gurbilas Patshahi 6. Do you still have these? 49 minutes ago, paapiman said: Wasn't Lakhpat Rai given the above punishment? Â yes 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 4 hours ago, chatanga1 said:  Hey Singh Ji, not long ago, you said that you had some old manuscripts of Gurbilas Patshahi 6. Do you still have these?  yes Yea 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuttabanda2 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Singh123456777 said: Yea .......  wonderful. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted October 1, 2016 Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 I just looked and the gurbilas patshai 6ve was made in 1894 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Singh123456777 Posted October 1, 2016 Popular Post Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted October 1, 2016 Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 It's not in the greatest condition cause of its age. The pages are really brittle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted October 1, 2016 Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 I also got two puratan janam sakhis. One is hath likhat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.