From warriors to rulers: Nation building and patronage during the early Misl period: 1765 - 1783

[amardeep]

The following is an introduction to a work-in-progress paper im working on that describes the early Misl period and how a flourishing Sikh culture was being developed. It is vital to remember that the golden days of the Sikhs did not start with Maharaja Ranjit Singh, but was only inherited by him. Sikh intellectual and political dominance developed long before he was born. It only strengthened and matured under his liberal patronage.

I will post the paper once its done hoping for your critical feedbcak and inputs.

 

FROM WARRIORS TO RULERS
Nation building and patronage during the early Misl period: 1765 - 1783

The final, major battle between the Afghan forces of Durrani and the Dal Khalsa took place in Amritsar in 1764. The battle was bloody and there were great losses on both sides. At length, neither of the armies were inclined to continue the battle, and so, the Misls rulers led the Afghans retire during the night and march back to Afghanistan. Afterwards, both armies laid claim to victory; Durrani claimed himself the victor due to being able to march out of Punjab unmolested while the Dal Khalsa claimed victory for having expelled Durrani from the Punjab, never again letting his forces enter Lahore.

As the Afghans began their retreat from Punjab that year, the Dal Khalsa was now in a position to rule the land of their forefathers. Ruling over a large territory that stretched from Attock near Peshawar in the west to Karnal near Delhi in the East, a distance of some 700 kilometers (420 miles), the Dal Khalsa began to rebuild the territories that had seen the destruction of the several Persian and Afghan invasions. For the next 84 years, various Misls began to engage in urban planning, administration and governance which resulted in a political stability that provided traders, scholars and the general populace the right conditions to flourish.

This chapter will look into Punjab under Misl rule and shed light on some of the often neglected aspects of this period. Most traditional and modern scholarship on the Misl period limits their role and period to being merely a precursor to the later empire of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. While the focus on the Misl rulers is often narrowed down to their military campaigns and habitual in fighting, contemporary sources from the Europeans show that the Misl rulers were seeing themselves as rulers of the land rather than mere warlords.

In this regard it is vital to remember that Maharaja Ranjit Singh himself was a third generation ruler and thereby not the first ruler of the Sikhs. The maharaja inherited a structure and legacy that had been constantly developing for more than 34 years prior to him entering Lahore in 1799 where most authors of Sikh history begin their period of Sikh rule of the Punjab. The chapter will end at the year 1783 when Jassa Singh Ahluwalia, the community leader of the Sikhs, passed away. This year also marked the conquest of Delhi which initiated a new era in the history of the Misls. The chapter will look into the social and political conditions of the time by examining the conditions of trade, Sikh coinage, literature production, manuscript production, architectural projects, and how the Misls began to strengthen the institutions of the Sikhs.

[SikhKhoj]

Interesting topic. How long will it take ?

[SikhKhoj]

* Not much literature from the Misl period has survived. Didn't the Misl chief keep writers with them to write on the past Sikh history? A lot was done to identify Gurdwaras related to Gur Ithaas so wasn't penning the actual history down also considered an important task?

 

* And is 1765 'early' Misl period? Didn't the Misls start around the time of Nawab Kapur Singh ?

[amardeep]

You could argue that this is the early Misl period yes. My focus is not so much on the initial creation of the misls but rather on Punjab under Misl rule - so yes the headline could be a bit more precise.

The Misl sardars did'n patron litterature directly as such, but they created a political and social climate that resulted in the right conditions for scholarship and literature production to emerge and develop. Here is a small section on the litterature production theme:

The political stability created by the Misl rulers led to a rise in Sikh literature production. The chaotic decades prior to the establishment of Sikh rule in Punjab provide very little in terms of Sikh literature. However, with foreign invasions at a halt, the Sikh rulers had created a political stability that gave scholars, poets and writers the opportunity to develop their skills. While scribes were busy copying earlier books and scriptures, writers began to compile original works of Sikh history and philosophy. Amongst these are the Guruji ke siftan ki katha from the 1760s followed by Bhai Kesar Singh Chibbar’s Bansavalinama from 1769 that narrates the lives of the ten gurus. In total Bhai Kesar Singh Chibbar authored 12 books which also includes the Gurpranali, Sobha Sri Amritsar Ji Ki, Kal(yug) Pradhani etc.  A lesser known Janam Sakhi in 1770 was written by his brother Sant Singh Chibbar titled Janam Sakhi Sri Gur Nanak Shah ki.

This was followed by the voluminous Mahima Prakash only five years later in 1775 that narrate the lives of the ten Gurus in much greater detail and scope.  The writings of the Nirmala scholar Pandit Gulab Singh also fall within this period, the most popular of these being the Bhavras Amrit Granth of 1777 and the Moksh Panth Parkash of 1778 completed in Amritsar. Pandit Gulab Singh is said to have written some 40 books during this period, but only four appears to have survived.

 Towards the later Misl period are the Bhatt Vahis of 1790 written by Bhatt Sarup Singh Kausish and two commentaries of the Japji sahib; Japuparamarth by the Sewa Panthi scholar Bhai Ram Kishan in 1796 and the Japji sahib commentary by the Udasi Sikh scholar Anandghan from 1795. In 1797 the Gurbilas Patshahi 10 was completed by Bhai Sukha Singh of Anandpur while Kavi Sauda completed his Ustat Sri Amritsar Ji Ki the same year. Other late 18^th century Sikh writings include the Bhai Desa Singh Rahitnama.  It seems that the phenomenon of manuscript production soon in time extended to Kabul in Afghanistan where a manuscript of the above Janam Sakhi of Sant Das Chibbar was scribed in the Dharamsala of Mansa Singh in 1796. This beautiful manuscript contained rare miniature paintings of Guru Nanak which testifies to the high costs associated with its production.

 

---

For a full list of Bhai Kesar Singh Chibbars writings see Pyara Singh Padam. Bansavalinama Dasa(n) Patshahia(n) Ka. Amritsar: Singh Brothers, p. 16.

 

[SikhKhoj]

* Good for making the title more specific.

* Are you sure they did not patron authors? We do see the phenomena amongst latter Maharajas with scholars like Bhai Kahan Singh being pursued by Maharajas to produce works. I mean Kahan Singh wrote his first book on the insistence of Maharaja Nabha. And if Maharajas like Ranjit Singh or General Hari Singh Nalwa, Baba Baghail Singh could get hundreds of Gurdwaras built related to Gur Ithaas, wouldn't they haven taken care or atleast patronized Sikh literature too, especially being in a period of peace & stability? I think more research needs to be done as Guru Gobind Singh patronized authors as evident from his Darbari Rattan and we see a similar trend last century with the likes of Kahan Singh Nabha but what about the period in between? Try to look into it if possible.

* I would like to argue against your case of 'The chaotic decades prior to the establishment of Sikh rule in Punjab provide very little in terms of Sikh literature. However, with foreign invasions at a halt, the Sikh rulers had created a political stability that gave scholars, poets and writers the opportunity to develop their skills.'

It is a good assumption based as an historian but if we, try to compare both periods. Lets say 1700-1764 and 1765 to 1800 we do not find a significant increase in literature. Maybe its because many books lay unpublished so you may be right after all but lets look from the books we have presently from the first period: AmarNama, Jangnama, Vaar Singhan Ki, Chalitar Jyoti Jot, Tankhahnama, Sau Sakhi, Parchian Pt 10, Sri Gur Sobha, Mahima Parkash (Vartak), Gurbilas Kuer Singh, (Bhagat Ratnavli), (Gyan Ratnavli),  Sakhi Rehat Ki etc. it seems that the turbulent period of war did not deter Sikh literature as much as we would think. What say?

 

 

[amardeep]

I have'nt been able to find any specific references to any Misl sardar patroning any writings directly but it is not unlikely that they did. The first chapters of Sohan Lal Suri's Umdat-ut-Twareek was based on the notes he recieved from his father who was a munshi of Sardar Maha Singh, - Maharaja Ranjit Singh's father. Jassa Singh Ahluwalia also had a Munshi in his court from what I remember. So it is not unlikely. Its easier with the writings commisioned in the malwa areas since the names of the local sardars and raje are mentioned in the opening sections (even as early as the Garab Ganjani Teeka from the 1820s).

Regarding the sequence of writings there are some problems with the writings you have listed. Firstly I would start from 1708 instead of 1700 as the Guru was still alive and most likely still patroning litterature and poetry from 1700-1708. Many of the writings mentioned on your lists can't be dated precisely whereas the writings from the post-1765 period are much more firm  to date and have'nt caused that much scholarly discussions. The Amarnama, Jangnama, Vaar Singhan ki and most likely Thankhahnama all belong to the early period after Guru Gobind SInghs joti jot ie. pre 1710. Some authors hold that Parchian Patshahi Dasvi is a 1708 production as well as Gursobha being pre 1711 while some have argued that parts of the Sau Sakhi/Panj Sau Sakhi were already begun in the Anandpur court. 

The remaining 6 can surely be said to have been written in the 40 years between 1712-1751: Chalitar Jyoti ki, parts of Sau Sakhi, Gurbilas 10, Bhagat Ratnavali, Gyan Ratnavali, Mahima Prakash vartak and also the B40 Janam sakhi etc..

 

 

 

[SikhKhoj]

I have'nt been able to find any specific references to any Misl sardar patroning any writings directly but it is not unlikely that they did. The first chapters of Sohan Lal Suri's Umdat-ut-Twareek was based on the notes he recieved from his father who was a munshi of Sardar Maha Singh, - Maharaja Ranjit Singh's father. Jassa Singh Ahluwalia also had a Munshi in his court from what I remember. So it is not unlikely. Its easier with the writings commisioned in the malwa areas since the names of the local sardars and raje are mentioned in the opening sections (even as early as the Garab Ganjani Teeka from the 1820s).

​Maybe you could include a small para on it and ask for further investigation somewhat like scholars have done previously. But yes its not exactly the most important thing given the subject of your paper, altough I find it very interesting.

 

Regarding the sequence of writings there are some problems with the writings you have listed. Firstly I would start from 1708 instead of 1700 as the Guru was still alive and most likely still patroning litterature and poetry from 1700-1708. Many of the writings mentioned on your lists can't be dated precisely whereas the writings from the post-1765 period are much more firm  to date and have'nt caused that much scholarly discussions. The Amarnama, Jangnama, Vaar Singhan ki and most likely Thankhahnama all belong to the early period after Guru Gobind SInghs joti jot ie. pre 1710. Some authors hold that Parchian Patshahi Dasvi is a 1708 production as well as Gursobha being pre 1711 while some have argued that parts of the Sau Sakhi/Panj Sau Sakhi were already begun in the Anandpur court. 

The remaining 6 can surely be said to have been written in the 40 years between 1712-1751: Chalitar Jyoti ki, parts of Sau Sakhi, Gurbilas 10, Bhagat Ratnavali, Gyan Ratnavali, Mahima Prakash vartak and also the B40 Janam sakhi etc..

1. How do you expect the Guru to patronise literature post Anandpur war, when he was travelling all the time to different parts of the country (1704-1708)? Very unlikely if not possible.

2. I don't want to get into a discussion about the dating of books like Gur Sobha or Parchian Patshahi 10 which are better placed at 1740s. But lets keep that aside.

3. To be honest, when a book was begun doesn't count, the fact is that Sau Sakhi or Gur Sobha were not completed during Guru Gobind singhs lifetime but later on, when clearly there were turbulent times. That is our discussions; did turbulent times really deter writing or 'completing' these historical books. If people could COMPLETE their books during these turbulent times, then I don't see why other authors wouldn't have begun new books too?

And your argument invalidates your own assertion: you refer to Kesar Singh Chibber. But Kesar Singh was around 70 years old in 1769 which shows that he had begun writing his books earlier, i.e. in the so called turbulent times pre 1760. Why do you apply double standards; for Sau Sakhi and Gur Sobha you argue those books begun earlier but for Bansawlinama you take 1769 the completion date. I could also argue that such a vast Granth took years to write, and I'm sure that Kesar Singh did not write 12 books books after 1764 (when he was already in his mid 60s).

 

[amardeep]

Obviosly the amount of litterature 1700-1708 was smaller compared to pre 1700 but you still see writings being produced - though more in poetry form than actual translations. In the Lakhi Jungle for instance some compositions were composed by poets as well as the Amarnama further down south (if that is genuine).

The Bansavalinama is not a massive granth, its quite compact and could easily have been written in a year or so. It is about 100 pages or so. The historical Panj Sau Sakhi must have been quite a bulky granth and must have taken time to compile as sakhis kept being added to it which also explains the differences in manuscripts. Pyara Singh Padam mentions the likelihood of its origins being in the Anandpur darbar as far as I remember.

I think it makes sense to suggest that times of peace brings a greater focus on litterature and arts production. You wont find much litterature being produced in Syria these years obviosly but in times of peace people spend more time and energy on these matters since they are not fighting for their survival. It makes little sense to write books when you are fighting for your survival. However, in all warzones there are pockets of peace which could explain that litterature production still takes place even though war is taking place... While war was taking place in Lahore for instance there is nothing to suggest that books could'n be written in Amritsar. Its not as black and white as you're trying to make it - war in one place does'nt means everything stops... But tendencies are seen - for instance that much more litterature seems to be created Sikhi wise during certain decades (for instance 1680-1704 and 1760s-1840s) . These decades provide much more in litterature and manuscript productions than the 50 years spanning in between. If you disagree then try and list up all writings between 1708-1798 and see if there are any interesting developements taking place in certain decades. Also look at the scope of the writings.- not just the quantity but also the quality of the writing (for instance dont compare the short thankahnama, jyoti jyot chalitra  and Amarnama of the early period with the bulky Mahima Prakash Kavita and Moksha Panth Prakash of the later period)

Its not black and white so get rid of your whole crap again with accusing me of double standards. I can't be bothered with your way of debating - bring your points to the table and leave all your personal comments aside..Do you have a personal problem with me or something?

 

Edited June 2, 2015 by amardeep

[SikhKhoj]

* Amarnama was written personally by the author and not patronized by the Guru. It is highly unlikely that the Guru patronized writers at all post 1704, surely some Dhadhis and authors were there accompanying him but that is out of their own will and their literature was their personal choice. The fact that some of Gurus Sikhs kept diairies (one preserved with Bhai Natha Singh of Patna & Goajh Pothi) show again that even in times of trouble & panic, some Sikhs did keep notes.

* Bansawlinama may be compacter than other Granths out there, but don't forget that you are attributing 13 books to Kesar Singh Chibber who was born around 1699 and died in the late 1770s. Do you think he waited till Misls got power in 1764 as you put it, and then wrote 13 books (yes some of them are very small, still takes time to compile etc)?
I don't think he did, some of his 13 books were definitely written in the period of 1740 to 1760 which was a so called turbulent time. My main point again being that it is wrong for you to attribute Kesar Singh and his 13 books being a direct result of peace during Misl period of 1760s...

* It definitely makes sense that times of peace bring a greater focus on arts & literature. Its also something I would assume. However, you can't compare those times warfare, mostly guerilla, with todays bombardments where daily life 'hobbies' becomes non existent (+ the geographical differences with Syria but I know you were just trying to explain the main point).

I have also given examples of how even during Guru Gobind Singhs harder days some Sikhs, on personal initiative, kept notes in pothis. I have stated that atleast 8- 10 books were written during the pre 1764 period and some of the authors you mention actually were writing books even prior to the Misls (most probably, given Kesar Singh was already 65 in 1764 he surely must have written things before). So perhaps you need to carefully rephrase your para or do some extra research regarding the issue.

* Well you also quote insignificant and small Rehatnamas like Desa Singhs so don't feel bad when I quote Tankhahnama for example. 

* Wasn't the Sukha Singh author of Gurbilas 10 based in Patna (and not Anandpur as said in your paper)

* BTW, have you compiled a list of books of the 1700-1850? Would be interesting to take a look.

* I am not denying that greater peace periods do bring a boom in literature but I don't really see it when we compare title of books of early 18th century vs late 18th century? Thats also one of the reasons I asked if Misldaars actually patronized authors.

* I don't have a problem with you. 

Edited June 3, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[dalsingh101]

You wont find much litterature being produced in Syria these years obviosly but in times of peace people spend more time and energy on these matters since they are not fighting for their survival. 

 

That's not correct though is it. 

 

Apparently ISIS/ISIL/Daesh do publish magazines (via the Internet) and HAVE been producing what are essentially rehat-namas (codes of conduct). This can help shed light on our own history by its suggesting that the confusion regarding acceptable conduct in war times facilitates the production and distribution of 'manuals of behaviour'. 

 

Another factor to consider is the way many writers write out of compulsion. It appears to be something intrinsic inside of them that needs to be exercised. That could help explain why certain writers have written during periods of carnage. If anything the political, social upheaval around them may actually be a big part of what stimulates them to write? 

[SikhKhoj]

Thats ISIS and not common folks in Syria. We are discussing about people in general, the common folk, authors... and the boost a stable period gives to them. Isis has oil, money, power, support of some countries and millions of Muslims. They have luxurious lifestyles (the commanders). You can't compare that to guerilla warfare where Singhs spent most of their times in jungles till the 1740s. Singhs were roaming warriors in the 1700-1740s while ISIS has its own caliphate with a structure.

And we can't compare the lives of normal Syrians and normal Sikhs during those times either because bombardments do make day to day activities difficult while some, especially sahejdhari, Sikhs did live pretty comfortably even in those bad times (1700s - 1740s).

 

 

Edited June 3, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[dalsingh101]

" the common folk, authors.."

 

These are two very different things.

[SikhKhoj]

Still your comparison of ISIS to Khalsa of the 18th century is wrong on too many accounts. Their economical & political situations were not the same. Khalsa were rebels while ISIS controls vast portions of Syria and Iraq. ISIS is more comparable to Misls: constantly at war, but control over ground, resources and political power.

So in view of your observation on ISIS-literature, I would again stress on the fact that it is possible that Misldaars did patronize writers in their court because it was a tradition started by Dasam Pita and we see the remnants of the tradition somewhat in the last Maharajas (ie. Kahan Singh Nabha). The area does definitely need research.

To cut a long discussion short, Amardeep: name me ALL the major granths of 1764-1800? Not insignificant ones like Desa Singh Rehat or Gurpranalis etc.

Secondly, was Sukha Singh of Gurbilas fame based in Anandpur? Wasn't he the Granthi of Patna?

 

Edited June 4, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[dalsingh101]

Still your comparison of ISIS to Khalsa of the 18th century is wrong on too many accounts. Their economical & political situations were not the same. Khalsa were rebels while ISIS controls vast portions of Syria and Iraq. ISIS is more comparable to Misls: constantly at war, but control over ground, resources and political power.

I think you've over-read my comments. I was making the point that conflict and uncertainty (or clarification) of accepted behaviour seems to breed the production of codes of conduct. 

 

But you are right: the situation in Syria right now is more akin to the misl period than earlier.   

 

So in view of your observation on ISIS-literature, I would again stress on the fact that it is possible that Misldaars did patronize writers in their court because it was a tradition started by Dasam Pita and we see the remnants of the tradition somewhat in the last Maharajas (ie. Kahan Singh Nabha). The area does definitely need research.

We had someone post a family heirloom here recently that appeared to be just this: 

 

All I can tell is that these along with some other family heirlooms were passed down to my grandmother from her family,

she used to say that these were giving as a gift to her ancestors from the founding members of some "misls".

Edited June 4, 2015 by dalsingh101

[SikhKhoj]

Interesting topic there. It seems Peter_Pan removed the scans from his original post? Did you save the Janamsakhi one?

Sadly we have too many unpublished manuscripts lying around all over India, other countries and even in some Sikh historians libraries!

Edited June 4, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[SikhKhoj]

Amardeep for your research:

early 18th century

Guru Gobind Singh - Darbari Kavis

second part 18th century

no information

first part 19th century

Patiala King patronized Veer Singh Bal who wrote several granths about Sikhi

second part 20th century

Nabha King patronized Kahan Singh Nabha

 

[amardeep]

Quite busy these days so gonna write a short reply and get back later:
 

The amount of litterature written in the misl period is far larger than the decades before that - this is specifically in terms of the scope and bulkiness of many of the books. Im not talking about small rehitname and gurpranalis here. There are many other writings that have'nt been included in the above selected copy paste texts such as other texts of Kavi Sauda (who wrote about 12-15 books) though some of these also enter the post 1799 period. Likewise Kavi Budh Singh (late misl period) also wrote an extensive amount of books  - some say up to 500 though I doubt it was that large. Then there are the 40 books by Pandit Gulab Singh. Many of these authors wrote their books quite late in their careers - in their 60s, 70s etc. which is something im trying to find out why is so. I talked to a Nirmala once who told me that there used to be a tradition that you are not allowed to write any granths yourself unless your Ustaad has passed away or given you special permission to do so. This explains why many authors in the 19th century wrote quite late in their careers (Pandit Nihal Singh Nirmala, the authors of many Udasi Granths etc). This would explain why Kessar Singh Chibbar wrote his books so late.

My argument that much more litterature is produced in the misl period is also to be seen in the fact that there are many more manuscript copies from this period of earlier writings (Janam-sakhis, rahitname, Guru Granth Sahib saroops, Dasam Granth saroops etc) - these also play a role in the overall argument of the paper. Many of the hath likht saroops in Afghanistan for instance were from the early Misl period.

Veer Singh Bal wrote two granths in the 1830s from what i've been able to find so far which is interesting as it provides evidence that the Patiala sardars also patroned litterature. There is probably many more that needs to be dug out.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh had some 20 or so poets connected to his court - hindu, muslim and sikh. Most wrote panegyrics though and not books per say.

Im preety sure I remember having read Sukha Singh was from Anandpur and not Patna. I'll have to check up.

 

Now before you post anything, - edit your texts for any "smashing of arguments" and delete all personal attacks before pressing "submit reply" I can't be bothered with your way of debating..

 

[SikhKhoj]

Instead of making a vague statement like 'The amount of litterature written in the misl period is far larger than the decades before that' could you just name me the books that were written during the period you cover (i.e. 1764-1800)?

And you say some say Kavi Budh Singh wrote upto 500 books, but you doubt it (which is a good thing). The 40 books of Gulab Singh have not really survived have they? That way I know of a lot of literature written during Banda period that was lost too? Baaj Singh, Binod Singh are said to have written Granths. Baba Deep Singh had arabic birs shows that he was busy with literature during the pre-1764 period. I feel we should limit our discussion to the actually survived manuscripts and not the hearsay of 'flana flana wrote x amount of books but they're lost'. 

The theory of writing late in your career is interesting. It might also be that when they're younger they are not deemed knowledgable enough but still the theory doesn't make sense because then all books pre 1764 would have written by old men too which is not really the case

There is not a single proof that Kesar Singh wrote all or most of his books post 1764. As you make the claim, the burden of proof lies on you.

I have not much knowledge about manuscript copies from 1700-1750 vs 1764-1800 so I'll take your word for it.

Ofcourse, VS Bal was patronized by Patiala Darbar. Thats why I found it odd that Misldaars did not patronize literature. It needs more research, and if you are writing a paper you definitely should touch the topic if not in depth.

[SikhKhoj]

As I don't like to comment without proof I abstained from commenting on your theory that Kesar Singh Chibber most probably wrote his dozen or so books after 1765 due to the calm & flourishing atmosphere during the Misls. I found it strange that a person would wait all their life and then pen down 12 or so books in a span of a few years, even though it can't be completely ruled out.

But I have talked to a scholar from the GNDU and also read in a book by Trilochan Singh that Gurpranali Kesar Singh was written in 1727 for example. Same can be said for a few of his other books that were written prior to 1764.

As a fellow Sikh and with love for Ithaas I would suggest you to edit the paragraph accordingly as the theory you put forward is plausible BUT ONLY in absence of evidence... You should always be open to other ideas as a 'historian'.

Edited June 14, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[amardeep]

Thanks for that, I will research his other writings further for dating and accordingly revise the text.

[SikhKhoj]

Besides that Sukha Singh Patna would've written literature regardless of misls or not, as misls were confined to Punjab region and not outside (Bihar). Thus you should edit out the reference to him too, atleast in the 'misl influenced literary period' aspect. Baki teri marji, just pointing out some mistakes.

 

[Khojidas]

Can anyone shed light into the writings of Bhai Natha Singh & Goajh Pothi? 

[paapiman]

10 hours ago, Khojidas said:

Can anyone shed light into the writings of Bhai Natha Singh & Goajh Pothi? 

Who was Bhai Natha Singh jee? The Singh, who was the Nagarchi of Sri Satguru jee (Tenth Master)?

For Gojh Katha Pothi, please have a look at the topic below:

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Khojidas]

@paapiman ref. Natha Singh not sure which one. Is there only that produced a diary recounting Gurus activities? Bhai Natha Singh of Patna....

[paapiman]

2 hours ago, Khojidas said:

Is there only that produced a diary recounting Gurus activities?

The dairy of Sri Satguru jee (Tenth Master)?

 

Bhul chuk maaf