Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SikhKhoj

Bhagats Were Sikhs?

Recommended Posts

Heres an interesting article from Tapoban

In the aftermath of the Austrian incident misinterpretation in reference to the status of Bhagat Ravidas Jee has been widespread. I have seen some very strange comments being made in the media about who Bhagat Ravidas Jee was. I don’t think the problem is just that people are trying to say politically correct things. I find that there is a basic lack of knowledge on the subject. This is not any ones fault rather it has been caused by the misinterpretation of the subject by our scholars and historians. Even well known scholars like Prof. Sahib Singh have not been able to show true light.

The real tragedy is that we have not been able to recognise who Guru Nanak Dev Jee is. For this is the way Guru Jee has deemed fit in mystifying the world. Even those of us who claim to know who Guru Nanak Dev Jee really don’t know, all what we know is what we have read. Guru Nanak Dev Jee’s true status can only be recognised through touching the Feet of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. It is only then when you realise the power you have connected with, you can not understand or either explain this force but for those who have even had a glimpse of this they can not see no other Guru or anything that even comes close. It is for these reasons that when the Bhagats mentioned in Gurbanee after having darshan of Guru Nanak Dev Jee could not recognise any other Guru but Guru Nanak Dev Jee himself.

It is clear that Bhagat Ravidas Jee met Guru Nanak Dev Jee there are various proofs of this meeting which are mentioned below. It is also true that Bhagat Ravidas Jee’s Banee is the same not only in the message but also wording, there is ample proof of this in Guru Granth Sahib Jee. Apart from the ones that claim they did not meet most of the confusion is occuring on determining who influenced who when they met. Who is the Guru? who is the enlighter in this meeting? There are some elements that are saying Bhagat Ravidas was the Guru and there are others saying that they were at the same status and both were Gurus.

None of the above scenarios are true. If both were the same status then what was the purpose of Guru Nanak Dev Jee of coming to this was world? was he just a hymn collector! Why couldn’t Bhagat Ravidas fulfil the role of Sat Guru? Why the need for another Sat Guru? This role contradicts what Gurbanee is saying about Guru Nanak Dev Jee’s role and what history has written.

The claim that Bhagat Ravidas Jee was the Guru of Guru Nanak Dev Jee is also false.

In order to become Sat Gur you can not be a seeker in the sense your views have to be Sat. Truth/Sat does not change with time. History and Gurbanee tells us that Guru Nanak Dev Jee’s message/view did not change with time. The same can not be said for Bhagat Ravidas, historians and scholars have written that Bhagat Ravidas first believed in the Sargunn thought and then later he adopted the Nirgun thought. The proof of this can be found in the book called Pracheen Jeevan Katha-Guru Ravidas.

It is quiet evident that something was missing from his life and he was a seeker of Sat.

Bhagat Ravidas together with Bhagat Kabir, Sainh, PeePaa, Dhana Jee were contemporaries of Bhagat Ramanand. All were greatly influenced by Bhagat Ramanand in their early stages. Some have said that Bhagat Ramanand Jee was Bhagat Ravidas Jee’s Guru. However Bhagat Ramanand Jee became a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev Jee too, the detailed account of this is written in Pranh Sanglee. Further Bhagat Kabir Jee has written the following in an old text of his shabads :

“ ਪੂਰਨ ਗੁਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੂ ਕਿੰਚਤ ਰਾਮਾਨੰਦ ”

Bhagat Kabir Jee and Bhagat Ravidas Jee were peers, external sources have said that both had the same Guru. Ram Kumar Verma in the book titled “Sant Kabeer” has written

“ਇਨ ਅਵਤਰਣੋ ਸੇ ਗਯਾਤ ਹੋਤਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਕਬੀਰ ਔਰ ਰੈਦਾਸ ਏਕ ਹੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਸ਼ਿਸ਼ ਥੇ”.

Both have mentioned each other in their Banee. Bhagat Kabeer Jee writes the following

“ ਪੂਰਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੂ ” This is found in an old Janam Sakhi from outside India. The Goindhwal Pothia are one of the oldest sources for written Gurbanee . In here it is written "ਕਮੀਰ ਨਾਮਾ ਭਗਤ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬੇ ਕੇ" so from these sources we can conclude that Bhagat Ravidas too would have accepted Guru Nanak Dev Jee as the Pooran Guru. Below is a view of a page from the Goindhwal Pothia mentioning "ਕਮੀਰ ਨਾਮਾ ਬਾਬੇ ਦੇ ਭਗਤ "(the text is underlined)

scan0003nhf.jpg

Below are some proofs of the meeting between Bhagat Ravidas Jee and Guru Nanak Dev Jee :

There is a book written by Prithee Singh Azaad called “ Guru Ravidas” he has written on page 42 that the meeting between Bhagat Ravidas Jee and Guru Nanak Dev Jee occurred in 1555.

Guru Nanak Dev Jee stayed in Kanshee for 15 days. This is the period when the all the religious/spiritual figures from Banaras including the Bhagats came to visit Guru Nanak Dev Jee. There is a Gurdwara in this place called “Guru Kaa Baag”.

The Nephew of Guru Arjan Dev Jee Mehervaan in his Janam Sakhi has written the following –

ਤਬ ਅਯੁਧਿਆ ਵਿਖੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬਾ ਨਾਨਕ ਬੈਠਾ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਤਉ ਭਗਤਾਂ ਕਉ ਆਗਿਆ ਆਈ ਪਾਰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਜਿ, ਨਾਨਕ ਜੁਹਦੀ ਮੇਰੇ ਬਡਾ ਭਗਤ ਹੈ, ਸੁ ਅਯੁਧਿਆ ਮਹਿ ਆਇਆ ਹੈ I ਤੁਮ ਜਾਇਕਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਭਗਤ ਕਾ ਦਰਸ਼ਨ ਕਰ ਪਾਵਹੁ, ਜਿ ਤੁਮ ਮੇਰੇ ਨਾਮ ਕੀ ਮਹਿਮਾ ਅਧਿਕ ਪਛਾਨਹੁ I ਅਰ ਮੇਰੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਹੁ I ਮੇਰੀ ਜੋ ਉਸਤਤ ਹੈ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਾਨਤਾ ਹੈ I.................. ਤਬ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਪਾਰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕੀ ਆਗਿਆ ਸਾਥ ਸਭਿ ਭਗਤ ਮਿਲੇ I ਮਿਲ ਕਰ ਮਿਲਣ ਆਏ I ਨਾਮਾ, ਜੈਦੇਉ, ਕਬੀਰ, ਤ੍ਰਿਲੋਚਨ, ਰਵਿਦਾਸ, ਸਧਨਾ, ਧੰਨਾ, ਬੇਣੀ I

(From the above we understand that Bhagat Ravidas and the other Bhagats were instructed by WaheGuru to go and visit Guru Nanak Dev Jee and receive what they were seeking)

In the book called “Ravidas Pragas” on page 435 the following is written –

ਡੂੰਮ ਜਾਤੀ ਦਾ ਮਰਦਾਨਾ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਜੀ ਨਾਲ ਸੀ, ਜਦੋਂ ਇਹ ਬਨਾਰਸ (ਕਾਸ਼ੀ) ਵਿੱਚ ਗਏ ਸੀ I ਕਾਸ਼ੀ ਦੇ ਬ੍ਰਹਿਮਣਾਂ, ਖਤ੍ਰੀਆਂ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਜੀ ਨੂੰ ਕਿਹਾ ਤੁਸੀਂ ਨੀਚ ਜਾਤੀ ਵਾਲੇ ਰਵਿਦਾਸ ਚਮਾਰ ਪਾਸ ਗਏ ਹੋ ਅਸੀ ਤਾਂ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਚਮਾਰ ਜਾਤੀ ਵਾਲੇ ਢੇਢਾਂ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਛਾਵਾਂ ਨਹੀਂ ਲੈਂਦੇ I Listening to this Guru Nanak replied with the following Gurbanee :

ਨੀਚਾਅੰਦਰਿਨੀਚਜਾਤਿਨੀਚੀਹੂਅਤਿਨੀਚੁ ॥

ਨਾਨਕੁਤਿਨਕੈਸੰਗਿਸਾਥਿਵਡਿਆਸਿਉਕਿਆਰੀਸ ॥

ਜਿਥੈਨੀਚਸਮਾਲੀਅਨਿਤਿਥੈਨਦਰਿਤੇਰੀਬਖਸੀਸ ॥(Panaa 15)

To say Bhagat Ravidas was anything other than a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev Jee would be seen as an insult to Bhagat Ravidas. You can just imagine how disgusted he would be to see people using his name to slander and undermine the exact Sat Gur he praised. In fact Guru Nanak Dev Jee elevated the status of Bhagat Ravidas Jee in Louk and Parlouk and his so called followers would not know who he was unless Guru Nanak Dev Jee gave him this elevation.

True followers of Bhagat Ravidas should accept the Naam of Guru Nanak Dev Jee as the way Bhagat Jee did. For elements that do not want to follow in the footsteps of Bhagat Ravidas they should abandon and leave Bhagat Ravidas Jee and seek someone else.

I want a big debate on this, so sare jane, jithe vi ho, ithe ajaoo te karo behns.

Edited by SikhKhoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What rituals? Keeping kesh and wearing turban?

Well if they met Guru Nanak and Bhagat Kabeer Jee writes “ ਪੂਰਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੂ ” and the Goindhwal Pothis (one of the oldest sources for written Gurbani) say "ਕਮੀਰ ਨਾਮਾ ਭਗਤ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬੇ ਕੇ" then I think we should open up our minds a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very interesting. I remember listening to the Katha of Sant Gurbachan Singh Jee Bhindranwalay where Sant Jee mentions that all the Bhagats met Guru Nanak Dev Jee while they were on earth and even became his Sikhs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KDSingh, if all writers of Guru Granth Sahib had same avasthaa and soch, then all stand by lines such as Hindu Anna Turku Kaana, Doha Te Gyaani Siyaana.

But you are right that he is probably the only one who surely didn't meet Guru Nanak Ji.

Mithar, you are right, quite a few Taksalis have said this. Any more information from the Kathas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KDS's post illustrates the point perfectly.

I do believe that sometimes brothers make suggestions in fits of zealous imagination, that are...err...shall we say tenuous at best. Then we end up arguing over these at a later point in history. Religious discourse in the past (and indeed probably now too!) seemed to have a high element of one faith trying to sort of subordinate the exalted figures of another faith to prove their supremacy. This is unnecessary and I feel the lowest form of religion.

For me it matters little if the bhagats were Sikhs, all I need to now they were men of God - as verified by the men of God sent amongst our ancestor's midsts. I have a whole problem with fixing God to particular rasms these days, even ours. Jaap Sahib says the opposite to me. (I think Jaap Sahib is very significant to Sikhs because it gives a substantial and detailed account of the Sikh conceptualisation of God).

I'm not going down the 'all religions are equal route' but saying that surely Waheguru would recognise men of true faith, compassion and purity regardless of the tradition they come from. That doesn't mean we become laissez faire about preserving and protecting our own panth by the way.

We know for certain that Guru ji included the bani of bhagats who certainly weren't Sikhs into maharaj (i.e. Baba Fareed) so it certainly wasn't a prerequisite for acceptance into Sikh affections.

Edited by dalsingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats wrong in discussing this, many of our Bhagats were Sikhs. Bhagat Pipa became a GurSikh in Todanagar. We are trying to preserve some of our history (that we are losing due to negligence and typical mindsets of people like yourself), and if don't want to be a part of it, no need to reply again in this thread.

Refute the claims or add more information/questions.

Zealous imagination? I see, Mehervaan (cousin of Guru Arjan Ji) was having some weird imaginations too then.

For me it matters little if the bhagats were Sikhs

Then does it matter if Guru Nanak was born in 1469 or 1857? Does it matter if Guru Nanak visited Mecca or Ayodhya? Why preserve history.

I didn't expect such a reply from someone who makes 'big educational posts' from time to time.

Edited by SikhKhoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KDSingh, if all writers of Guru Granth Sahib had same avasthaa and soch, then all stand by lines such as Hindu Anna Turku Kaana, Doha Te Gyaani Siyaana.

But you are right that he is probably the only one who surely didn't meet Guru Nanak Ji.

Mithar, you are right, quite a few Taksalis have said this. Any more information from the Kathas?

The other question is he was also an active preacher of islam

Baba Farid ji visited a city called Mokhalpur, it is now called Faridkot in honor of the Baba Farid ji, it is the Indian part of Punjab. Then he turned towards the Punjabi mountains where he converted a tribe.

http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/events/farid.html

-----------------------------------------------------

So apart from his shabad's we cannot say that his thinking was in line with gurmat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading somewhere that the Baba Farid whose Bani is in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was Farid Sani a contemporary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee and who was also on the Gadhi of Baba Farid who was born 200-300 years earlier then Guru Nanak Dev Jee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KDSingh, if all writers of Guru Granth Sahib had same avasthaa and soch, then all stand by lines such as Hindu Anna Turku Kaana, Doha Te Gyaani Siyaana.

But you are right that he is probably the only one who surely didn't meet Guru Nanak Ji.

Mithar, you are right, quite a few Taksalis have said this. Any more information from the Kathas?

From what I remember from the Katha, Sant Gurbanchan Singh Jee Bhindrwanwalay said that many Bhagats had met Guru Nanak Dev Jee at Ayodhya where they became his Sikhs. He also said that this was mentioned by Giani Giani Singh. And when I checked my copy of Giani Gian Singh's Twareek Guru Khalsa, Giani Jee really did menion this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading somewhere that the Baba Farid whose Bani is in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was Farid Sani a contemporary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee and who was also on the Gadhi of Baba Farid who was born 200-300 years earlier then Guru Nanak Dev Jee.

I started a thread on the same issue but had little response. But I haven't been able to read much arguments from any side so I have sticked myself to the traditional view. But why not ?

I told you, Guru Granth Sahib authors have same views meaning all would go with 'Hindu Anna Turku Kaana' tuk.

Instead of just talking of Bhagat Fareed not meeting Guru Nanak, why not focus on others mentioned in Mehervaan Janamsakhi etc?

Gyani Gyan Singh got it from Mehervaan Janamsakhi, which states:

ਤਬ ਅਯੁਧਿਆ ਵਿਖੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬਾ ਨਾਨਕ ਬੈਠਾ ਭਗਤੀ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਤਉ ਭਗਤਾਂ ਕਉ ਆਗਿਆ ਆਈ ਪਾਰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਜਿ, ਨਾਨਕ ਜੁਹਦੀ ਮੇਰੇ ਬਡਾ ਭਗਤ ਹੈ, ਸੁ ਅਯੁਧਿਆ ਮਹਿ ਆਇਆ ਹੈ I ਤੁਮ ਜਾਇਕਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਭਗਤ ਕਾ ਦਰਸ਼ਨ ਕਰ ਪਾਵਹੁ, ਜਿ ਤੁਮ ਮੇਰੇ ਨਾਮ ਕੀ ਮਹਿਮਾ ਅਧਿਕ ਪਛਾਨਹੁ I ਅਰ ਮੇਰੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਹੁ I ਮੇਰੀ ਜੋ ਉਸਤਤ ਹੈ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਾਨਤਾ ਹੈ I.................. ਤਬ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਪਾਰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕੀ ਆਗਿਆ ਸਾਥ ਸਭਿ ਭਗਤ ਮਿਲੇ I ਮਿਲ ਕਰ ਮਿਲਣ ਆਏ I ਨਾਮਾ, ਜੈਦੇਉ, ਕਬੀਰ, ਤ੍ਰਿਲੋਚਨ, ਰਵਿਦਾਸ, ਸਧਨਾ, ਧੰਨਾ, ਬੇਣੀ I

Edited by SikhKhoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats wrong in discussing this, many of our Bhagats were Sikhs. Bhagat Pipa became a GurSikh in Todanagar. We are trying to preserve some of our history (that we are losing due to negligence and typical mindsets of people like yourself), and if don't want to be a part of it, no need to reply again in this thread.

Refute the claims or add more information/questions.

The problem is people not applying enough scrutiny. We know people exaggerate things, especially in religious contexts. You can't ignore this, and you have to watch out for it if you really are serious about finding the truth.

Nothing is worse then just accepting something because you like the sound of it. Provide proof yourself and show it wasn't over zealousness. Enthusiastic people sometimes need more sober, critical and grounded people for balance. I agree that some people can be too narrow minded and dismissive, I don't think I am one of them, but I point blank refuse to just go along with traditional accounts because, as you know yourself, frequently a closer study into received tradition shows up other things. I'm not suggesting we ignore or fail to record older traditional accounts, but we need to give them proper scrutiny. Like sullay do with hadiths. Do you know how much it damages people's faith to find things they have been told were 'certain' events since childhood looking otherwise from a proper inquiry of early sources of evidence. I know you do. All I'm saying is, don't add to this problem. In the end, such thing get used against us by the latest 'Sikh expert' or member of some preaching faith.

Zealous imagination? I see, Mehervaan (cousin of Guru Arjan Ji) was having some weird imaginations too then.

So are you suggesting that because someone is a relative of the Guru they are infallible? Thinking like this comes and goes. Look at how (according to old manuscripts) people used to think Guru Nanak Dev ji was a reincarnation of Raja Janak (read Dabistan), how many Sikhs think that now?

Then does it matter if Guru Nanak was born in 1469 or 1857? Does it matter if Guru Nanak visited Mecca or Ayodhya? Why preserve history.

What about those people who today claim Guru Nanak went to Rome, Africa etc. etc.? People still have flights of fancy based on the most tenuous evidence even today. What is wrong with being cautious about this apparently common human behaviour? Either we scrutinise it, or wait for the next Hew McLeod to do it and try and bash us on the head with it.

I didn't expect such a reply from someone who makes 'big educational posts' from time to time.

Maybe try understanding (not necessarily agreeing to) my position? We need to go through a 'hadith style' evaluation of many older 'traditions' in my opinion. This may well involve being cautious and not letting enthusiasm get in the way, when evidence is scant or 'weak'.

Anyway, I've made my point above and adding anything else to it is just falthoo. I'll leave you to it.

Edited by dalsingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did the enthousiasm get in the way? This is a simple discussion, so why not participate in it instead of making some useless comments that won't add much to the topic.

Mehervaan Janamsakhi is not without mistakes but it surely is a proof. Prove it wrong?

Nobody is saying only they are speaking the truth. Currently my view is that most Bhagats met Guru Nanak (very sure) and became Sikhs (quite sure), but it can change with the course of the discussion.

Please make another topic about Guru Nanak Sahib visiting Rome etc. I would like to discuss that too.

Next post should be relevant to the topic only, please. Facts/questions (anything that will add to our perspective on the topic), no unneeded 'speeches'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bhagats are not mentioned as Sikhs of Guru Nanak in the 11th vaar of Bhai Gurdaas nor are any of the sakhis in the Vaaran about their lives any way related to Guru Nanak.

Bhai Gurdas Dhian Varaan is not a Janamsakhi type scripture which presents jeevan sakhis of the Gurus or Bhagats. The saakhis that are mentioned in Bhai Gurdas Dhian Varaan are only used as Dristhaants.

Edited by Mithar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you think a thing as big as bhagats formally converting to Sikhi would have been clearly mentioned by Bhai Gurdas ji?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember reading somewhere that the Baba Farid whose Bani is in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was Farid Sani a contemporary of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee and who was also on the Gadhi of Baba Farid who was born 200-300 years earlier then Guru Nanak Dev Jee.

If this is true then Sikh sites should remove chapter of Old Farid and there should a chapter on real fareed ji whose bani is in Guru granth sahib.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bhai Gurdas Dhian Varaan is not a Janamsakhi type scripture which presents jeevan sakhis of the Gurus or Bhagats. The saakhis that are mentioned in Bhai Gurdas Dhian Varaan are only used as Dristhaants.

If Bhagats were really Sikhs then why the followers of Bhagats did not embrace Sikhism? There are somewhat 20 million Kabirpanthi's in India and I don't think they will accept that Kabir ji embraced Sikhism,Infact somewhere I read they do propaganda that Guru Nanak was follower of Kabir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are you suggesting that because someone is a relative of the Guru they are infallible? Thinking like this comes and goes. Look at how (according to old manuscripts) people used to think Guru Nanak Dev ji was a reincarnation of Raja Janak (read Dabistan), how many Sikhs think that now?

DalSingh,

I have read that the visit that was made to the nanakpanthi dera in dabistan-i-mazhab was actually a visit to a 'mina' dharamsal and that would make sense as prithi chand was the head administrator in guru ram das ji's darbar and had control over darbar sahib at that time...which would have still been considered the sikh spiritual center.

Now, according to the janam sakhis written by the minas (ie. bala janamsakhis...which comes from their lineage); guru nanak was raja janak and then later kabir was his guru....I will provide some references for this in a few hours. It is probably 11:15ish uk time for you, but it is only 6:15am in toronto and I'll be heading home in a few hours.

if at that point I can't back up what I'm saying....I'll do one of those fake 'das-maafi-khima de jaachak' spiels. If not, then we can continue dialoging.

My point in referencing this is that the mina's had an agenda where they had to prove the sodhi meherban and hariji were spiritually more elevated than guru arjan sahib and guru hargobind sahib. Some historians credit the vaars of bhai gurdas being a guide to what the guru-community should be following in the absence of guru hargobind sahibs exile in gwalior. It would make sense in many ways as people naturally thought prithi chand was the 'heir' as he was the administrative head and according to what I've read in the 'uthanka' guru arjan sahib had written 'kahe re man chitveheh' in rahraas sahib when bhai gurdas ji had come back from bengal (I believe) and was wondering why the 'maya' had decreased at darbar sahib.

just points to ponder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amardeep - Thats a good point. But so many other Sikhs are not mentioned in the vaars. If I'm not mistaken only 12 Sakhis from Gurus life were taken, does it mean all other didn't happen?

Bhai Lalo is mentioned in Gurbani but not in Vaaran Bhai Gurdaas, does that mean something?

Mithar is right, Vaaran Bhai Gurdas are not JanamSakhis, Bhai Gurdaas mentions only some basic Sakhis and many are left out.

KDSingh - Well some scholars such as Macauliffe believed Bhagat Fareed to be the second one. He probably had that view from Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, but I am not sure if Nabha supported these views.

It wouldn't be bad to hold a discussion on that aswell, but sadly I am not aware of arguments on both sides. If you know or find an artice, please do share in this thread.

Yes there are many Ravidasis, Kabirpanthis, etc. Most of the Ravidasis are 'ex-Sikhs' who want to seperate due to discrimination by so-called upper caste Sikhs. Kabirpanthis have large numbers and even have a Guru now (though I am not sure if his lineage goes back upto Bhagat Kabir). They do preach that Guru Nanak Sahib was influenced or even a Chela of either Bhagat Ravidas or Bhagat Kabir. Most agree that they had met - so question of the Bhagats being born earlier doesn't arise. But indeed I am also wondering why these Bhagats didn't preach Sikhi. But could it be that they met quite late and the Bhagats already had most of their followers?

Drawrof - You make some very valid points. Bala Janamsakhi is quite degrading to Guru Nanak Ji.

Edited by SikhKhoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read that the visit that was made to the nanakpanthi dera in dabistan-i-mazhab was actually a visit to a 'mina' dharamsal and that would make sense as prithi chand was the head administrator in guru ram das ji's darbar and had control over darbar sahib at that time...which would have still been considered the sikh spiritual center.

Interesting. I'll have a read of the translation I have later tonight.

Addition: Whoops no I can't, I packed my books up already.

Are you sure because I vaguely recall the account mentioning Prithi Chand and I'm sure the author was aware of the contention between the Gur Arjan/Guru Hargobind and the detractors?

Anyway, I'm detracting Sikhkhojees thread, but you should open up another one to look into the Dabistan thing maybe?

Edited by dalsingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debate on this link is directly related to the topic we are discussing now. I'm convinced that the Bhagats did meet with Guru Nanak Dev Jee.

http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.php?f=1&i=8841&t=8841&v=f

Edited by Mithar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

INTERESTING POINTS from your link Mithar,

"This is a very big misconception that many people have now a days. Not just Hindus but even some Sikhs believe in the misconception that the Bhagats were not the contemporaries of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee. This misconception was first started by the British scholar and historian Max Arthur Macauliffe a hundred years ago. Since then almost all scholars have just followed suit.

Sri Bharadwaj says based on facts, ancient Marathi Granths such as “Bhaghat Rasaimat Sindhuâ€, “Naamdev Jeevan Charitarâ€, says “Guru Nanak Mahaprabhu bhagat Nanak Swami and Naam Dev met at Kumar Teerathâ€. That is why Bharadwaj says “Bhagat Naamdev’s time period could not have been before Guru Nanak Jeeâ€. This opinion of Bharadwaj is based on research on old granths Naam Dev Charitar. In fact Bharadwaj has even written a book “Gyanashwar v Gyan Dev†in which he sites many sources and comes to the conclusion that “Naamdev and Guru Nanak were contemporaries.

The Bhagat were honoured with the fact that they were contemporaries of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Jee. They were influenced by Gurmati Shabadavli, Gurmat principals, Gurmat words, and even by the Gurmantar Satnaam. Some of the Bhagats had met Sri Guru Guru Nanak Dev Jee at Ayodhya.

Actually various Janamsakhis do mention the Bhagats meeting Guru Nanak Dev Jee. Ramanand and the Bhagats time period is actually between 1500-1600 Bikrami. This is the time when Guru Nanak Dev Jee was here in bodily form i.e. 1526-1596-97 Bikrami.

Bhagat Ravidas Jee was a contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. Mira Bhai who lived during the reign of Mughal Emperor Akbar was a disciple of Bhagat Ravidas Jee. This in itself proves that Bhagat Ravidas Jee was a contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. Mira Bhai’s time period was at the earliest 1555 BC, while some say she was born even later than 1555 BC.

Bhagat Kabir Jee was also a contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. There meeting are mentioned in Granths of the Kabir Panthis. This is confirmed by the writings of the first Kabir Panthi Dharam Daas. Puraatan Granths “Kabir Mansoor†mention meetings of Guru Nanak Dev Jee and Bhagat Kabir Jee several times.

Bhagat Pipa Jee was also a contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. Bhagat Pipa Jee like most of the Bhagats was in the “Ramanandi Shakaâ€. Bhagat Pipa Jee’s nephew Anant Das Jee’s commentaries (which were written in 1645 BC) mention an important meeting between Guru Nanak Dev Jee and Bhagat Pipa Jee.

Besides these, Meherwaans Janamsakhi mentions many of the Bhagats meeting Guru Nanak Dev Jee at Ayodhya. Infact there was even a Gurdwara built in the memory of this meeting hundreds of years ago which still exists today. The Bhagat who were present in this meeting were Nama (Naamdev), Jai Dev, Trilochan, Ravidas, Sadhana, Dhana, Banee.

Twareek Guru Khalsa (pg 80) also says “Namdev, Ravidas, Trilochan, Parsaa & Haso Rai, Dharam Daas (both followers of Kabir Ji), Nitya Nand (was a follower of Ramanand) all met Guru Jee.

A Granth belonging to Ravidas Panthis mentions an interesting story in page 435â€

“Mardhana was with Guru Nanak Jee when visiting Banaras (Kaashi). The Brahmans and Khatris of Kaashi said to Guru Nanak Jee “You have visited that low caste Chamar Ravidas, when we (the high caste) are not even suppose to get touched by their mere shadow. Hearing this, Guru Nanak said to them:

NEECHA UNDAR NEECH JAAT, NEECHI HU AT NEECH||

JITHAY TIN KAY SANG SAAT, VADIYA SIO KIA REES||

JITHAY JEECH SAMALIAN, THITHAY NADIR TERI BAKSHISH|| (siri raag M, 1 -15)

Baba Farid Jee whose bani is in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee is that of Farid Sani, and not the Baba Farid the Afghan who lived during the 12th century. Bhagat Farid Jee’s bani is the biggest proof of him being a contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee. Even the present head of Baba Farid Jee’s spiritual order Prof. Khalil Nizami says the bani in Guru Granth Sahib Jee is that of Farid Sani. Bhai Vir Singh Jee, Prof. Teja Singh Jee, and Budh Singh all agree to this opinion that the Bani written in Guru Granth Sahib jee is that of Farid Sani the contemporary of Guru Nanak Dev Jee, and not Baba Farid the Afghan who lived during the 12th century.

The proof of Baba Farid Jee meeting Guru Nanak Dev Jee is his Bani. Fareed Jee writes:

JO GUR DASAY WAATH MUREEDA JOLEA|| (Asa sheikh farid 477)

KAR KIRPA PRAB SAADHSANG MELEE|| (Farid soohi 794)

Muslim sufis never use words such as “Gurâ€, “Saadh†or "Prabh". According to a book written by Prof. Khalil Nizami spiritual head of Baba Farid Jee’s spiritual order these words were written by Farid Sani because he was heavily influenced by Guru Nanak Dev jee, this is confirmed by the writer of "Swanay Farid".

1) All Pakistani scholars agree that this Baba Farid jee did not write any baani at all. He was not a poet.

2) He was not a native of Punjab and as such could not have written such purely native countryside Punjabi. It is like asserting that Shakespeare was not English but a German writer. A non-English person could not have written what Shakespeare wrote. Same way, a non-Punjabi could not have written the kind of Punjabi that is in Gurbani under Baba Farid jee name.

3) The Punjabi used in Baba Farid jee’s baani in Siri Guru Granth Sahib jee is of the same time as Guru Nanak Sahib jee. All linguistics agree to this. If this baani had been written 300 years before Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee, it would have been drastically different. Just compare the Punjabi written today to Punjabi of Siri Guru Gobind Singh jee’s times.

4) Farid Shakarganj i.e. the Senior Farid, was a staunch Muslim who converted thousands of Hindus to Islam. He was very strict in Sharia and he would have never used non-Islamic words like “Saadh” in his baani.

Now the question arises that if the baani in Siri Guru Granth Sahib jee was not written by Baba Farid Shakarganj then who is the writer of this baani? The answer is very simple. As written in the Janamsaakhis, the writer of this baani was Farid Saani, who was sitting on the gaddi of the original Farid. His name was Sheikh Ibrahim but he was also known as Farid Saani and it was he who met Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee Maharaaj.

It is this Sheikh Ibrahim, whose spiritual thirst was quenched by Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee. He wrote the following shabad to Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee:

soohee lalith ||

baerraa ba(n)dhh n sakiou ba(n)dhhan kee vaelaa ||

.

bhar saravar jab ooshhalai thab tharan dhuhaelaa ||1||

hathh n laae kasu(n)bharrai jal jaasee dtolaa ||1|| rehaao ||

eik aapeenhai pathalee seh kaerae bolaa ||

dhudhhaa thhanee n aavee fir hoe n maelaa ||2||

kehai fareedh sehaeleeho sahu alaaeaesee ||

ha(n)s chalasee ddu(n)manaa ahi than dtaeree thheesee ||3||2||

This shabad of Baba Farid jee portrays the thirst of Baba jee very clearly. He is literally begging for spirituality. In response to this shabad, Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee wrote the following shabad:

soohee mehalaa 1 ||

jap thap kaa ba(n)dhh baerrulaa jith la(n)ghehi vehaelaa ||

naa saravar naa ooshhalai aisaa pa(n)thh suhaelaa ||1||

thaeraa eaeko naam ma(n)jeet(h)arraa rathaa maeraa cholaa sadh ra(n)g dtolaa ||1|| rehaao ||

saajan chalae piaariaa kio maelaa hoee ||

jae gun hovehi ga(n)t(h)arreeai maelaegaa soee ||2||

miliaa hoe n veeshhurrai jae miliaa hoee ||

aavaa goun nivaariaa hai saachaa soee ||3||

houmai maar nivaariaa seethaa hai cholaa ||

gur bachanee fal paaeiaa seh kae a(n)mrith bolaa ||4||

naanak kehai sehaeleeho sahu kharaa piaaraa ||

ham seh kaereeaa dhaaseeaa saachaa khasam hamaaraa ||5||2||4||

He cries that “bhar Sarvar jabb uchhalai, tabb taran dulela” but Guru Baba jee says “Na sarvar na uchhalai, aisa panth suhela”. He says that his spiritual path is very hard but Siri Guru jee says that the Gurmat path is very easy and full of bliss.

He says "BeRa bandh na sakhiyo" Siri Guru jee says, "Jap tap ka bandh beRla". He says that he has not been able to build his ship to swim across this ocean of world. Siri Guru jee says that if he has not build it yet, then he can now build the ship of Jap-Tap. What a great shabad Siri Guru jee's is! Just amazing. This shabad is most beautiful. I wish some gursikh sing this shabad and I may just listen to it till eternity.

Just compare the two shabads and no one can deny that one was written in response to the other one.

After hearing Siri Guru jee’s shabad, Farid Saani jee became disciple of Guru Nanak Paatshaah. There is no doubt about it. Sirii Guru jee and he met 3 times in total.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another one from the thread

“Actually various Janamsakhis do mention the Bhagats meeting Guru Nanak Dev Jee�

Please can you give real references as I have never seen Jenam Sakhi’s which show all the Bhagats meeting Guru Nanak. Whilst we know Guru Nanak visited Ayodha and a Gurdwara exists there now we do not have any proof that he met all the Bhagats mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib Ji there.

I have never read any Jenam Sakhi in which Bhagats Trilochan, Dhana, Ravidas etc held discourses with Guru Nanak, surely such a thing occurring would be recorded at least by Bhai Gurdas. What discussions are recorded of Bhagat Ravidas for example having with Guru Nanak, what updesh was given to them? If Guru Nanaks discussions with the Sidhs are recorded why aren’t his discussions and teachings to the Bhagats recorded (perhaps they never occured).

Just because Guru Nanak visited Ayodha where he debated with many holy men we cannot assume that every Bhagat mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib Ji was there, and that they all became Sikhs. Just think about it, if every single Bhagat in Guru Granth Sahib Ji met Guru Nanak and became his Sikhs at Ayodha would they have not visited their Guru again for instance at Kartarpur where Guru Nanak settled. Or did they all just meet Guru Nanak once and then didn't bother to visit their Guru ever again??? This contradicts their own Bani's in Guru Granth Sahib Ji

While you mention meetings with Kabir Ji and Bhagat Pipa you fail to account for the rest of the Bhagats in Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Concerning Bhagat Ravidas you have given some dates concerning his life period but no evidence for him meeting Guru Nanak. Are we to assume he was in the crowd at Ayodha; then again we can always say the Bhagats were there in the crowd in Medina, Mecca and any where else Guru Nanak went as well...

May be few Bhagats met Guru Nanak Dev ji but it still difficult to accept that all Bhagat became devotee of Guru Nanak .I am sure if this would have been true then millions of followers of these Bhagats had embraced Sikhism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...