Jump to content
SikhKhoj

5 Pyare: selected by the Guru?

Recommended Posts

I know you don't like me, I don't like you either but research properly before debating me atleast, just don't do it for the sake of it, oye chatangea.

how do you know i dont like you?

​i don't like you because...

you don't like me because...

bit childish isn't it.

Edited by chatanga1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most probable meaning for chaant(na) is selection or to pick. What you say about chaant as in seperate is possible but its more about 'seperating from the rest by choosing it' which in other ways does become the same as selection.

And even if we take the meaning 'seperate'. The translation of 'keeay bhujangi chaant panj panjay jaat ginaye' = 'The Guru seperated five youths, one each out of the 5 castes'. First of all it doesn't make sense and secondly it again implies towards a selection even if we were to take a broader meaning

Attachment

 

photo.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol @ so called brahmgyanis having visions and knowing that some Bhagats came back, some didn't. Same way they predicted the end of world many times and also failed predictions of Bhindranwale being alive. Same way Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwala didn't know that Guru Har Rai had one marriage nor did he know that Quran was not a Vedic Granth unlike he read in Bansawlinama. 

I know what the sources say Amardeep. What do you think?

​Stay on the topic man.

Edited by paapiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first reference to the story of panj pyare and the call for heads is in Kuer Singh's Gurbilas Patshahi 10 from 1751. If I remember correctly it is also mentioned in the Bansavalinama. I can't remember how the storyline goes in the Mahima Prakash nor the Sau Sakhi.

 The sakhi is again repeated in Suraj Prakash Granth of 1843

​Bro, what about the account of the Muslim spy, sent by Aurengzeb? He was present that day too. He saw the beheading.

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Bro, what about the account of the Muslim spy, sent by Aurengzeb? He was present that day too. He saw the beheading.

 

​I don't think the beheading is under discussion here. It's about whther Guru Ji selected 5 from the sangat or whether 5 offered themselves. I cannot see 5 sikhs being selected in the formal manner that sikh khoj is presenting. This was supposed to be a test. If the selection was already made, it kind of negates that . Bhangu's words literally can be taken to assume that Guru Gobind Singh had selected 5 from the sangat but it just doesn't seem plausible.

I will have a look at Gurbilas 10 to see if Bhai Koer Singh has mentioned it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I don't think the beheading is under discussion here. It's about whther Guru Ji selected 5 from the sangat or whether 5 offered themselves. I cannot see 5 sikhs being selected in the formal manner that sikh khoj is presenting. This was supposed to be a test. If the selection was already made, it kind of negates that . Bhangu's words literally can be taken to assume that Guru Gobind Singh had selected 5 from the sangat but it just doesn't seem plausible.

I will have a look at Gurbilas 10 to see if Bhai Koer Singh has mentioned it.

 

​Bro, did the spy mention anything about the call for heads, in his report? If he heard the call, then it definitely means that they were not selected.

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paapiman and Chatanga:

There is also the possibility that the Guru had told the warriors beforehand not to rise when the call came. Like in school class when sometimes the teacher says to the top students not to raise their hands when a question is asked because the teacher wants to see how many of the "non-top students" know the answers to the subject etc.

This would explain why the other hundreds/thousands of warriors did not rise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pyaray Baba Daya Singh jee - was incarnation of Sri Luv jee Maharaaj (son of Sri Raam Chandar jee Maharaaj).

Pyaray Baba Dharam Singh jee - was incarnation of Bhagat Dhanna jee Maharaaj.

Pyaray Baba Mokham Singh jee - was incarnation of Bhagat Naamdev Dev jee Maharaaj.

​I have heard what paapiman has said above a few times, but wasn't sure about it's source. But whilst having look at Gubilas 10 by Bhai Koer Singh to see what he writes about historic vaisakhi day I found this in there.

lol @ so called brahmgyanis having visions and knowing that some Bhagats came back, some didn't.

I know what the sources say Amardeep.

​If you know what the sources say why make the flippant remark about brahm gianis having visions?

However, after looking at Gurbilas 10 by Bhai Koer Singh, the above is written about the 5 Pyare being avtars. You know what the sources say SikhKhoj, why didn't you say so? lol at your "i know what the sources say".

Koer Singh has also written that Guru Ji made a call to the sangat asking for a head.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Koer Singh did say that, Amardeep has already said earlier on the threat. But shall we take Koer Singhs word for everything? And I want to know if some other sources (oral or written) agree with Bhangu. I am not hell bent on proving my 'point of view' as I have not even formed an opinion, but I liked the idea of selection, or maybe Amardeeps last suggestion.

And Panj Pyare incarnation myth is mentioned in Daya Singh rehat, Bup Singh Nirmalas Granth etc so I know where the 'brahmgyanis' get it from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But shall we take Koer Singhs word for everything?

​Who said to?

And Panj Pyare incarnation myth is mentioned in Daya Singh rehat, Bup Singh Nirmalas Granth etc so I know where the 'brahmgyanis' get it from.

​so whats with the sarcastic remarks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm messing around with Paapi who thinks its god giften gyan. I.e. antaryami. While I continue saying that these Babay just reiterate what they read without usually analyzing the sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Bro, what about the account of the Muslim spy, sent by Aurengzeb? He was present that day too. He saw the beheading.

Bhul chuk maaf

​No one can find the original manuscript of that account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm messing around with Paapi who thinks its god giften gyan. I.e. antaryami. While I continue saying that these Babay just reiterate what they read without usually analyzing the sources.

​ok, but i'm sure that if a goat can find certain passages in a book babay can do a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​No one can find the original manuscript of that account.

​Sant Kartar Singh said that the original was in a university library (possibly aligarh in UP india). It was shown to and seen by Sikh professors there. Maybe this is a line of enquiry to be pursued.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another lie by Baba kartar Singh. Its not in Aligarh, professors have been there. Myths myths. It seems babay < goats 

The book is mentioned in several older books so it perhaps did exist, but not the account that is presented here online nor is it in Aligarh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was allegedly in Aligarh Uni but as alluded to earlier no searches have ever found it.

 

Now I'm not referring to this particular case but people today should be conscious of the possibility that under the pressures of challenges from other reformist movements and the contemporary  Protestant  Christian values (which were obviously used as a benchmark by the rulers at the time), some apnay may have succumbed to the temptation to twist things slightly (on one hand; like some Singh Sabhians did), to straight making supporting 'evidence' up (on the other extreme). It's an ugly truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like Sri Gur Katha is a fake tale written in the late 19th century perhaps as a way to justify Panj Kakkaar and Panj Bani rehat because most olders sources did not directly mention them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like Sri Gur Katha is a fake tale written in the late 19th century perhaps as a way to justify Panj Kakkaar and Panj Bani rehat because most olders sources did not directly mention them.

​Have you got it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Gur Katha has been published in 2 books in the 20th century. One by Gurmukh Singh and one by Niranjan Singh Arfi. One book is about Rangretas and Sikhi, the guy obtained the manuscript from some Rangreta family . I got the Rangreta book which contains the Gur Katha.

*Might have exaggerated tad bit with late 19th century source claim above though. But it is surely not authentic. Definitely written after the mid-late 18th century.

Edited by SikhKhoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. 

 

I just realised it was another work I was after not this one.

 

Das Gurkatha by Kankan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×