Changes made to the SGGS

[SURYADEV]

In the 50's/60's there was a major gathering of the mahapurshes of the panth. they were called together to come up with a solution to the changes that had been made to the SGGS - the manglacharan, changes/ommisions to the lagamatras (ie accents symbols), deletion of the ragamala, larrivar to padshed etc.

Do any of you guys know what was the outcome??

From what I understand they were unable to achieve the desired outcome to restore the SGGS to its original form. All the birs that contained mistakes were taken away secretly. Some sants, including Sant isher Singh ji of nanaksar decided that they could no longer tolerate this beadbi and wished to leave this earth ( according to Isher Chamatkar biography book).

It is my understanding that the current birs are full of mistakes and changes and deletions. you just need to watch a mass concurrent Akhand Path recitation and you will see that pages are turned over at different times even though they arer on the same verses/ sentances.

If you look at gutkas published by different groups you will still notice that manglacharans differ or that some are printed with pplenty of bindi's on many words, whereas others will not have them.

If this is the case, as I believe, then the Panth surely is damned for allowing this to happen, then not being willing to amend the mistakes!

PLEASE , no knee jerk reactions , just a cool sensible disscusion!

[Maha Kharag Singh]

from what ive heard, a nihung mahapursh whos name i wont mention went round the whole of bharat and made copies (by hand) of each puratan bir, and was willing to present his lifes work to the comittee responsible for standardising Sri Satguru Granth Sahib, he requested that his life's work be look at first before standarising a copy but his request fell upon deaf ears. it is said that there are as much as 10000 mistakes.

this is the ghor biadbi happening in this world

[Zen]

What i dont understand why did "sikhs" feel the need to change anything? Did some people just wake up one morning and think lets try something different? lol

Other than pad ched trying to make reading bani "easier" why was maglacharans changed? bindis added etc... ?

[Mithar]

When Padched first started, there were many mistakes within the Bir. The change in Manglacharan is a result of printing. There were no such mistakes in Padched or Manglacharan when Birs were Lariwar and hand written. Perhaps we should go back to our roots of hand writing Lariwar sroops. This is an extinct tradition within the Panth.

Anyone with really clean writing should try to write a Bir in his/her lifetime.

[Matheen]

They (Sant Samaj) did manage to stop the mangalacharans from being changed.

All Saroops are printed exactly the same, but during Akahnd Paaths, not all Pathis keep the same speed unless they are used to doing multiple Akhand Paaths together. In any case, Puratan Birs are still available for comparison.

When it comes to Gutkey Sahibs, there is not as much control and you end up with differences. Still, if you take Santhiya, you'll be shown where the mistakes are. Some years ago, Sant Mohan Singh Ji (of Taksal) arranged for a limited run of in-house printing of Nitnem Gutka Sahibs. These were individually checked and are shudh, but hard to get hold of.

[gsingh00]

singh from baba mohan singh taksal and other senior taksali singh have damdama sahib spellings preserved, they cAn even tell you individual laagamatars that have been changed in order to make bani work with viakaran. If someone who has done santhia reads a pothi by baba mohan singh taksal and then reads any other pothi,he will notice atleast 50 changes just in nitnem banis...changes in dasam bani is somewhat understandle cuz of differences in puraatan saroops but there are many changes in rehraas and anand sahib as well

[jsingh96]

so baba mohan singh jis gutkay have the correct spellings?

[Mithar]

singh from baba mohan singh taksal and other senior taksali singh have damdama sahib spellings preserved, they cAn even tell you individual laagamatars that have been changed in order to make bani work with viakaran.

So the original SGGSJ before this change had wrong grammer?

[Matheen]

So the original SGGSJ before this change had wrong grammer?

No, Guru Ji is perfect. There are some people who try to change Guru Sahib to fit into their way of thinking rather than the other way round.

@jsingh96: yes, if the Gutka has been checked, you know it is shud. (there is sometimes a small signature on the inside of the back cover)

[Guest]

This is problem with vikayaran prof sahib singh lovers that something does not make sense to them in gurbani via vikayaran they start playing around gurbani laga matra and that was a cause big uproar by panthic jath's, sampardava's/sant samaj.

There are few things regarding vikayaran which were discussed with tapoban singhs in the previous debates:

1. Ultimate Gurbani Vikayaran sidhant is still yet to be discovered by vikayaran ustads.

2. Vikayaran teekakars tried their best to apply vikayaran rules(niyam) to the shabads and pankitits which ultimately they failed to do so...some of the examples were exposed by sant gurbachan singh ji maharaj bhindranwale. Look at the below download link:

In this case, Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji mentioned how yet again vikayaran niyam which was applied in certain shabad cannot be applied consistently in other shabads. Here is the audio recording of sri guru granth sahib ji katha by sant gurbachan singh ji: please fwd it to 17:00 minutes.

http://www.gurmatveechar.org/audio/katha/0...mani.Sahib).mp3

[Mithar]

No, Guru Ji is perfect. There are some people who try to change Guru Sahib to fit into their way of thinking rather than the other way round.

But how can SGGSJ be perfect if it is grammatically wrong? Just as the Quran has perfect Arabic grammar, the Hindu scriptures have perfect Sanskrit Grammar, the Buddhist scriptures have perfect Pali grammar then why would SGGSJ is different in this regard? Or does grammar not matter for the Sikhs? I always read that the Gurus had all divine knowledge. They are infallible, perfect in every way yet they would write something that would be grammatically wrong? That would imply the Gurus were not infallible, is that the impression we would want Muslims and Hindus to have?

[Mithar]

please fwd it to 17:00 minutes.

http://www.gurmatveechar.org/audio/katha/0...mani.Sahib).mp3

N30 Singh Jee, I don't think that link is working. I tried to save it and it says I cannot save it. Is the link working?

[Matheen]

But how can SGGSJ be perfect if it is grammatically wrong?

Who said the grammar within Guru Sahib was wrong? Viyakaran is a recent development and has many flaws.

The link posted by Neo should clear things up. Copy and paste the whole link, don't just click on the blue bit.

[Mithar]

Who said the grammar within Guru Sahib was wrong? Viyakaran is a recent development and has many flaws.

What flaws does it have (grammatically speaking). Which rule of grammar do they not observe or break?

and I did, it is still not working.

[Guest]

N30 Singh Jee, I don't think that link is working. I tried to save it and it says I cannot save it. Is the link working?

try this:

right click and save target as:

http://www.gurmatveechar.org/audio/katha/0...ni.Sahib%29.mp3

[SURYADEV]

the kartarpuri bir is said to be the original version (which actually still exists?) . Would it not be simpler just to copy , word for word, the Kartarpuri Bir and add the bani of 9th Guru??

[amardeep]

There are some shabads in the kartarpur bir which were not addede to the Guru Granth Sahib by Guru Gobind Singh

[Matheen]

The Damdami Bir from 'Ik Oankaar upto 'Atarah Das Vees' is what Guru Ji gave us, and what we still have today.

Jattboot, what gave you the impression that Gurbani has been changed?

[fatehsingh]

Interestingly a similar topic came up in the Namdhari group a few weeks ago and so far it has gone unanswered as well. Basically the question was that in the currently available publications of the Sri Adi Granth Sahib there is a sentence that reads "Sudh Keechai" - Guru Arjan's Hukam for Bhai Gurdas to fix the Bani preceeding this sentence. I forgot which page it was on, 1393 I think. The question was that if there exists a Bir where this Hukam of the fifth Guru was fulfilled and the particular Bani's gramatical or poetic form was made 'Sudh'.

It would be interesting to see if anyone knows of the existence of such a Bir.

[SURYADEV]

Jattboot, what gave you the impression that Gurbani has been changed?

As stated earlier the Sant Smagam event that took place many years ago, also looking at the differing spellings used by different publishers og gutkas and pothis - not to mention the various ways santhia is taught by different schools.

Digressing for a moment - I was once told by a Mehta sudent that there are so many different ways of doing santhia from different sampardas and groups that he advised me not to get too hung up by getting it exactly right ( ie. where to stress a syllable to to place pauses), because as soon as I go to someone elsse I will have to re-learn the bani over again.

[Matheen]

The Sant Samagan 'event' was successful in preventing any changes from being made. As explained before, there is not as much control in publishing Gutkey as there is in printing of Guru Sahib birs.

If you start Santhiya from an Ustad you have faith in, you should ideally stick with him until you finish. Saying that, from my experience, good Ustads from the same same Taksal will always teach the same santhiya. Bear in mind that there is sometimes more than 1 way to read a line correctly.

[user2969]

But how can SGGSJ be perfect if it is grammatically wrong? Just as the Quran has perfect Arabic grammar, the Hindu scriptures have perfect Sanskrit Grammar, the Buddhist scriptures have perfect Pali grammar then why would SGGSJ is different in this regard? Or does grammar not matter for the Sikhs? I always read that the Gurus had all divine knowledge. They are infallible, perfect in every way yet they would write something that would be grammatically wrong? That would imply the Gurus were not infallible, is that the impression we would want Muslims and Hindus to have?

I know this is an old thread but I wish to add a reply to this question as nobody else has answered it and new readers may think that the questioner has a valid point that Gurus did not follow grammer properly or fully and that Gurbani is not according to grammer. Mithar said that Quran has perfect Arabic grammer so why does SGGSJ is different in this regard.

According to the Mithar's logic:

Quran is written in the Arabic language and that is why it follows Arabic grammer.

Hindu scriptures are written in Sanskrit language and therefore they follow Sanskrit grammer.

Question arises, in what language is SGGS written? and which language grammer should SGGS follow?

Language of Gurbani

The basic language of Gurbani is Sadh Bhasha or sadhukri, which was an amalgam of all major north indian language of the time. As for vocabulary Gurbani uses vocabulary from punjabi, brijh bhasha, sanskrit, arabic, persian and lot of other north indian languages.

Grammar of Gurbani

It has to be kept in mid that Gurbani is poetry. When you listen to a poem in punjabi you understand the meaning of the lines even though the subject, object and verb sequence does not follow the standard grammar. how? Because you in the background of the previous knowledge of the punjabi prose language you can easily see the variation and still derive meaning out of it. Similarly is the case with Gurbani.

So what is the issue with Gurbani Grammar?

When Gurus wrote Gurbani down they used a particular script and this script is known as Gurmukhi. While doing so they used unique spelling structures in which sihari, and aunkarh and other lagaas and matraas lent special meaning to the words according to their placements. In Gurus times these rules of lagaas and matraas were implicitly known and therefore the need to explicitly teach these or write these rules down never came up.

In modern times people like Prof Sahib Singh analysed the spellings and tried to discover the rules of these spellings or lagaa/matraas. But they were not 100% successful in finding out all the rules. There were many places of confusion and doubt. Therefore it is said that perfect Gurbani Grammar is yet to be discovered.

Is Gurbani independant of a grammar?

Many people, when they encounter a difficult gurbani pankti which cannot be understood according to the presently discovered Gurbani grammar, say that Gurbani is independent of a grammar. But they are wrong.

Why? Because: As long as a communication of a language is meaningful, it can NEVER be considered to be independent of a grammar, simply because grammar is just a description of inherent and hidden structure and meaning rules being followed in that communication. So while a meaningful sentence may not follow a particular grammar or a grammar rule it does NOT mean it does not follow ANY grammar rule. It simply means that we have not yet understood the rule it follows.

Here I'd like to re-iterate that Gurbani grammer is basically grammer of Gurbani's Lagaas and Matraas. The issue of understanding a Gurbani grammer is about deciphering why an aunkarh is used and why a sihaari has been used etc etc. The issue is of DECIPHERING the SPELLINGS, THE LAGAS AND THE MATRAS. It is NOT the spoken aspect but the written spellings which are the issue. Some spellings have been clearly understood while some have not yet been understood.

Confusion between the terms 'Gurmukhi' and 'Punjabi'

Punjabi is a language and Gurmukhi is the SCRIPT. Gurmukhi is the name of the punjabi alphabet (oorha, airha etc), also known as the varanmaala. Punjabi is the language which is spoken and understood. It should be pointed out here that Gurmukhi is NOT the only script in which Punjabi is written. In Pakistan Punjabi is written in SHAHMUKHI script, the urdu script. Any student of MA (Punjabi) knows this, that scores and scores of medieval manuscripts including kissa kaavs such as Waris Heer, Puran Bhagat Kadaryaar are mostly written in Shahmukhi script. So in olden times when Sikh students used to learn 'Gurmukhi' in gurdwaras they were NOT learning a language, they were learning a script, a way of writing the language down. It was another matter that along with that they were also Gurbani which uses not only punjabi but also other languages.

What is language and when does Grammar come in?

Ask any linguistic professor of a university (eg Prof Jagjit SIngh from PU Chandigarh or anybody from Punjabi University Patiala ) and he shall say, 'A Native speaker always speaks perfect Grammar!'. Why? To understand this we have understand the relationship between grammar and language.

When a cultural group communicates using vocal medium it reaches a point where its 'language' becomes complex ie the token sounds evolve into words which are not just 'names' of things, but also names of 'action' and names of qualities etc. And these tokens are sewn into complex formation known as sentences. These complex formations, the sentences, are themselves of various types, sizes, length etc and they come in various regional variations. At this point usually a script is created of adapted from pre-existing scripts (such as Gurmukhi script which is a derivative of ancient Brahmi script of India). After a loooong journey in time somebody comes along and decided to sit down and write a Grammar book of that language. He analyses the words and sentence structure of that language and how meanings are created through these complex formations and in this manner discovers the grammar of that language. If this set of rules is accepted by the majority of the population of that cultural group then this grammar becomes a reference point for the future. Usually a standard grammar is just a description of the dominant version of the language. There are always many regional variations and flavours. Modern linguists are of the view that just because these regional variations may differ from standard grammar of a particular language does not mean that they are not grammatically correct.

Therefore when a native speaker speaks, the issue of being grammatically correct never comes up, because grammar is nothing but a description of the abstract and hidden rules that the native speaker follows. Its the grammar who should follow the native speaker and not vice-versa.

[BhagatSingh]

Awesome response User. I hope to see more of you on the forum.