History of DG Examined...

[CdnSikhGirl]

It's not intent to have people just reply Nindak etc.  If you disagree with any points he has written, then please counter them with proof (actual sources and pages etc).  Obviously i didnt write this. But his sources are all in there in brackets and listed at the bottom.

History Of DG
By: Daljeet Singh

Introduction
Since the time the writings or pothis, to be later compiled and called the granth of the Tenth Master, were originally found, there has been a controversy about their authorship, authenticity and historicity. Very few persons have made a serious study about their genuineness. The issue is important, and writers like O'Connell and others have often made accusations like: "A conspicuous deficiency already mentioned is the general reluctance to grapple effectively with the Dasam Granth. The period whence it comes is absolutely crucial, and until it is adequately treated, we shall continue to grope in our efforts to trace the course of Sikh history or development of Sikh tradition". It is, therefore, necessary to assess the veracity of facts, and to indicate the probabilities of the issue, so that it is understood in its right academic perspective.

History- 18th Century Chhibber’s Story
Most of the evidence about the present work called the 'Dasam Granth' is negative. The earliest reference about some writings by the Tenth Master is by Chhibber in his 'Bansavalinama'. Contemporary historians of the period of Guru Gobind Singh like Sainapat, Bhai Nandlal, Chaupa Singh, Sewadas, Koer Singh or Bhai Mani Singh, make no mention of the Dasam Granth or any such writing in the period. This negative evidence is quite significant and strong.

For, had there been any compilation like the Dasam Granth, these contemporary chroniclers could never have failed to mention it. The first reference to some writings by the Tenth Guru is in Chhibber's 'Bansavalinama' written 71 years after the Guru's demise. This volume, as assessed by scholars like Jaggi, Kohli and others, has not been found to be very reliable as to its dates and other particulars. Besides, the author himself says that he is no chronicler, but has based the writing merely on hearsay, and just as a matter of his hobby: "I state what I had heard and what I could recollect." "This hearsay I record just by way of my hobby (shauk)."[1] Thus, Chhibber himself discounts the historical accuracy of his statements, for, he claims to belong only to the third generation of a Brahmin family whose head was a contemporary of the Tenth Master.

Further, two important points have also to be kept in view. First, most Brahmin writers always have a strong, natural and understandable bias to give a Brahminical colour to the Sikh religion and its history, even though all the Sikh Gurus were emphatic to proclaim the independence of their system and the Panth. The Fifth Master wrote:

"I keep not the Hindu fast, nor do I observe Muslim month of fast;
I serve only Him, who emancipates all; He is my Gosain;
He is my Allah; I have found release from the Hindus as from the Turks;
I visit not the pilgrim places of Hindus, nor go to Kaaba for Haj;
I serve only God, I serve not any other;
I worship not the Hindu way, nor say the Muslim prayers;
I bow to the one God within my heart;
I am neither a Hindu, nor a Muslim;
For, my body and life belong to Him, Allah and Ram."[2]

Second, Guru Gobind Singh had put the final seal on this complete separateness, by the creation of the Khalsa, the Nash Doctrine (Dharam Nash, Bharam Nash, Karam Nash, Sharam Nash and Janam Nash), and the declaration of Guru Granth Sahib as the sole Ideological Guide and Living Guru of the Sikhs. Yet, these writings have shown a subtle tendency to reshape and reframe Sikh events, so that these are accepted by the gullible as a part of the Brahminical tradition.

Following is what Chhibber records: The Guru got written a Granth (book) called 'Samundar Sagar'. Later he got it thrown in a river." "Later still he composed other writings." "But, during the battles at Anandpur, the leaves of these writings or packets (Sanchian) were scattered to the wind and lost."[3] Chhibber is vague about the contents or nature of these writings. Once he calls it 'Samundar Sagar', at another time 'Avtar Leela'. There is no reference at all to 'Dasam Granth', 'Bachittar Natak', 'Chandi Charitar', 'Chandi di Var', 'Charitropakhyan' or 'Chaubis Avtar', as these are called now.

It is clear that it was peace time when the Guru had thrown the Samundar Sagar Granth in the river. Could it ever happen that he would destroy gurbani, his own or that of earlier Gurus, or any thing of value to Sikhs? Gurbani has always been considered sacred, and been venerated more than even the Guru. Evidently, the writings were such as could conveniently be discarded. The argument applies doubly to the packets that were never completed or compiled, and were allowed to be scattered.

Thus, Chhibber's story adds nothing to our knowledge about the Dasam Granth writings, their compilation or loss. Therefore, the negative evidence of all contemporary chroniclers, coupled with the evidence of Chhibber's story, shows that till the end of the 18th century, there was nothing known about any granth of the Tenth Guru, or any writings now regarded as its chapters or contents. In fact, the only granth or compilation mentioned in the literature is 'Vidya Sagar' or 'Samundar Sagar Granth', the contents of which have no relation to the present Dasam Granth.

Chhibber’s Story Contradicted
Chhibber alleges three facts. First, that the Tenth Master initially created a granth called Samundar Sagar, and had it thrown into a river. Later, some papers (Sanchis) were prepared, but these, too, were scattered to the wind and lost in the time of battles. Second, he records that in 1725 A.D. Bhai Mani Singh compiled a granth combining the bani of Aad Granth and the writings that subsequently came to be called Dasam Granth.[4] For doing this mix-up, and thereby violating the prescribed sequence or method of writing gurbani, a poor Sikh, when he saw the combined granth, cursed Bhai Sahib saying that just as he had disjointed the gurbani and mixed it up, he would also be cut to pieces.[5] Chhibber never writes chronologically. For example, in a still later couplet no. 389, he writes that in 1698 A.D. Guru Gobind Singh rejected the request of the Sikhs to combine the Aad Granth with his own writings.[6] It is very significant that the entire book of Chhibber is packed with his use and narration of Brahminical practices, and stories of demons, fairies, Hom, Mantras, curses, etc., even though he knows that these are opposed to the doctrines in the Guru Granth Sahib. In short, his Brahminical faith and prejudices are glaringly evident.

In addition, the above version of Chhibber, we find, is contradicted both by Gian Singh and Sarup Das Bhalla on all the essential points concerning Dasam Granth writings. Gian Singh never mentions that Samundar Sagar Granth or Sanchis of Avtar Leela stories were prepared, thrown or lost. He also contradicts Chhibber that Sikhs at any time made a request to the Guru to combine his bani with the Aad Granth. All he states is that once Sikhs requested the Guru to compile his own bani, but he categorically declined to do so, saying that such a request should never be made again.[7] He also contradicts Chhibber's version that Bhai Mani Singh ever combined the two, and later suffered a 'curse' from a poor Sikh for doing so.

He only states that in response to a suggestion by some Sikhs, he wrote gurbani in separate words for the purpose of explaining its meaning (teeka), and that the sangat disapproved of it, saying that he would suffer for it. But the sangat conceded that his faith in the Guru will remain unshaken. This satisfied Bhai Sahib. [8] However, he indicates that on the request of Sikhs, he collected the bani of Guru Gobind Singh. [9]

'Mehma Parkash' of Sarup Das Bhalla, a late 18th century or an early 19th century production, materially gives the same impression as does Gian Singh. Bhalla, a non-Brahmin, contradics all the three assertions of Chhibber, namely, the preparation or loss of any granth like Samundar Sagar or Sanchis of other writings, the request of Sikhs to the Guru to add his bani to the Aad Granth,or any combined compilation by Bhai Mani Singh, and the curse by a poor Sikh. On the other hand, Bhalla gives the story that the Guru got prepared a granth, since lost, called Vidya Sagar, which constituted translations of Sanskrit literature.[10] He does not say that the Sikhs ever requested the Guru to include his bani in the Aad Granth, nor that Bhai Sahib ever produced any such compilation.

These being the realities, there is little doubt that Chhibber's version is not only unworthy of reliance, but is clearly the result of a prejudiced twist to facts as they really were. For, it is unthinkable that Bhai Sahib would ever combine the two, as alleged by Chhibber and as now sought to be supported by the presence of the Delhi and Sangrur birs, when he knew full well that the Guru had clearly frowned upon such an idea. Had Bhai Sahib prepared any bir, it would be the authentic version, and there could never have been the possibility of such widely variant versions of the granth, as actually exist now. For, every bir would have been a copy of it. Nor is there any reason for the complete disappearance of it. Because, we find, that the Delhi bir, which has no history, is certainly not Bhai Sahib's production.

For the reasons and facts given above there is little doubt that the story of Chhibber stands belied, and that the version that Bhai Mani Singh compiled the Dasam Granth, is a distortion that has no historical, ideological or factual basis or possibility.

19th Century
The existence of Dasam Granth is mentioned for the first time in mid-nineteenth century by Bhai Santokh Singh, and later by Giani Gian Singh and others. Later, Bhai Kahn Singh and others repeat the story of Bhai Santokh Singh, suggesting that the bir of Dasam Granth was compiled by Bhai Mani Singh. It is also stated that there were many objections to the compilation in one volume of the various writings that had earlier existed separately. But, the final decision to do so or not, rested on the chance factor of the success or otherwise of the mission of Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh against Massa Ranghar. The reality, however, is that none of these writers have given any shred of evidence to support the story of its compilation. In the absence of any authentic historical evidence, it is simply impossible to attribute the present collection, or any part of it, to Bhai Sahib. It is equally impossible to believe that if a respected contemporary of the Guru like Bhai Sahib had really compiled the granth, or any part of it, there could ever have been a controversy about it among the Sikhs so as to require them to resort to the chance decision depending on the success of Mehtab Singh and Sukha Singh. Bhai Mani Singh's position being pre-eminent as a trusted scribe and devout Sikh of the Guru, could any Sikh or Panth disregard or doubt his testimony about the Dasam Granth, if it had been there? There is, thus, little doubt that the story of Dasam Granth's compilation by Bhai Sahib has no historical basis. In fact, it is a motivated fabrication to give credence to the story of Dasam Granth compilation.

Letter by Bhai Mani Singh
The supportive story of a letter written by Bhai Sahib, about the collection of Charitropakhyan, to Mataji at Delhi is another fabrication. Dr Jaggi has examined in detail the veracity of this letter and found it to be unreliable. The method of writing separate words, as in this letter, was not at all in vogue in the time of Bhai Sahib. Nor is the practice visible in the contemporary manuscripts. The words or language used also relates to a later period. Besides, the use of bindi, other features, matras and shape of letters are comparatively modern. Very probably the letter is written by a metallic nib which was not available in those times. The words used are rather unsophisticated and could not have been from a learned gurmukh like Bhai Sahib. It is also strange that the letter mentions 303 Charitars or stories, whereas everywhere else the number is 404.[11] Nor has the letter been forthcoming from a natural custody. It was never heard of in the 18th or 19th centuries, and its appearance is only a mid 20th century phenomenon. It is strange that Dr Ashta who accepts it, has done so virtually without any examination of it. Charitropakhyan is a writing which no Sikh, granthi, or scholar has been willing to read or send to his mother, sister or daughter. No one has so far read it out in the open sangat. It is, indeed, unlikely that a gurmukh like Bhai Sahib would send its manuscript to venerated Mataji. It is, thus, historically baseless to connect Bhai Sahib or Mataji in any manner with the collection or compilation of Dasam Granth or any part of it.
The above rationale makes it plain that there is no evidence whatsoever of the existence of Dasam Granth or any part of it in the 18th or even the 19th century. All we now know is the later appearance of some manuscripts or Birs of the Dasam Granth. Four of them are regarded as the oldest. We shall consider their reliability or authenticity.

Bhai Mani Singh Bir
Raja Gulab Singh of Delhi purchased a bir in 1944-45, which is known as the Bhai Mani Singh Bir. Nothing historically verifiable is known about it, except a story given by him that a soldier of Ranjit Singh found or looted it during an attack on Multan in 1818 A.D. The soldier then shifted to and settled at Hyderabad. How the bir got to Multan and remained unknown for 125 years, is quite enigmatic and unexplained. External evidence about its history is completely missing. The bir is far from being a speaking manuscript. For, the authorship is unknown, as also the place or time of its compilation. In a corner of a page there is a slanting postscript, recording 1713 A.D. as the date of it. Jaggi's examination and its photocopy clearly show it to be a suspicious interpolation. The ink and writing of this entry are different from those of the original bir. The handwriting and shape of letters are also comparatively crude. Its introduction in slanting lines in a corner proves its belated character.[12] In fact, it is a thoughtless fabrication of the date. For, the story of Bhai Sahib's collection of its parts and the Panthic decision to have them in one volume following Massa Ranghar's death, relate to a time about two decades later.

All the internal evidence of the bir is against its authenticity. Jaggi finds that the writer of the bir does not seem to be a good scribe or to have a good knowledge of the Gurmukhi script or the Punjabi language.[13] Therefore, it is not at all possible to connect this bir with Bhai Sahib. On the other hand, the scribe is a Hindi-knowing person who is distinctly interested in distorting the Sikh doctrines and mixing up Sikh literature with Puranic literature. And this is, exactly what he has done. The bir comprises both the bani of the Gurus and that of the Dasam Granth. Gurbani has not been recorded as in Guru Granth Sahib, i.e., raag-wise. It is done Guru-wise and Bhagat Bani is mostly at the end of the combined volume. It shows conclusively that the scribe is a non-Sikh who, without any knowledge of the prescribed method of writing gurbani, is out to do the heretical distortion of mixing-up dhur ki bani with Puranic myths about worship of Devis and Avtars. For, no Sikh, and much less a gurmukh like Bhai Sahib, could ever plan to combine the two and flout the sacred sequence of gurbani (written raag-wise) laid down by the Gurus. The shape of writing and its language suggest that the distortion was done long after the demise of Bhai Sahib, when the Sikh world was engaged in its life and death struggle with the Empire and the invaders.

Thus, the lack of any history of the manuscript for over 200 years, its internal evidence of interpolation, shape of letters and language, together with the heretical change of method in writing gurbani, and its mix-up with Puranic and Avtar-worship literature, conclusively exclude the possibility of the bir being a production of Sikh quarters. On the other hand, the probability is that it is a compilation by those either unconversant with Sikh doctrines, tradition and literature, or those out to confuse the Sikh ideology. In any case, the manuscript has no historical or academic value as an authentic bir.

Moti Bagh Bir
The bir of Moti Bagh is another manuscript that has no verifiable history. In 1959, one Natha Singh stated that his ancestor,one Hakam Singh had given this bir to Maharaja Mohinder Singh (1862-1876 A.D.), that earlier one Nahar Singh had obtained it from Charat Singh, son of Sukha Singh, and that the former had been obtaining for it a grant from Maharaja Ranjit Singh.[14] But, no part of its history is verifiable, or is otherwise corroborated. Nor is there anything in the internal evidence of the bir to support the story or any part of it. The bir shows that it had been compiled by more than one person. Jaggi opines that the age of the paper and the character of words and writing show that it could not have been compiled earlier than a hundred years after the demise of the Tenth Guru.

Sangrur Bir
The granthi at gurdwara Deodi Sahib Dewan Khara, Sangrur, says that in 1857 A.D. the bir had been presented to the Raja by a Pathan of Delhi, when he had gone there in aid of the British. The bir was in two parts, pages 1 to 600 contained gurbani from Guru Granth Sahib, and pages 601 to 1166 the chapters that form Dasam Granth. The first part stands lost. Its history before 1857 A.D. is unknown.[15] Internal evidence suggests that it is a combined collection of bani from the Guru Granth Sahib and the chapters of Dasam Granth. Since the very system of combining dhur ki bani with Puranic and Avtar and other literature is opposed to the specific tradition laid down by the Gurus, the heretical mix-up has been done, as explained earlier, by non-Sikh elements. For, it is inconceivable that a composition like the Charitropakhyan, which even the SGPC, vide its letter no. 36672 dated 3. 8. 1972, has declared to be a composition from Hindu mythology and not by the Tenth Master, could have been combined with sacred gurbani by any Sikh. This fact alone shows conclusively that the Dasam Granth, which contains Charitropakhyan, could never be a compilation of Sikh quarters, much less could it be by the Tenth Guru. The bir, thus, is of no historical or academic value.

Patna Bir
The Patna Bir has also no historical value. Nothing worthwhile about it was narrated to Jaggi when he examined it there.[16] The writing is simple, except that red ink has also been used. The arguments against the authenticity of its compilation, production, and mix-up of the Tenth Master's bani with Charitropakhyan, as noted earlier, also apply to this volume. Jaggi feels that the condition of the paper, shape of letters, writing, etc., suggest that it is a production of the 19th century.

Internal Evidence
I. Historical Contradictions: There are, as detailed by Jaggi, many historical and other incongruities in the Dasam Granth which it would be naive to attribute to the Tenth Master.[18] We give only two instances.

(i) In the story of Prithoo Raja, the author has shown that the legendary Shakuntala had connection not with Prince Dushyant, but with the mythical Prithoo. According to Bhagwat Puran, Prithoo was an Avtar of Vishnu who appeared in Treta Yug. But Shakuntala's story of love with Dushyant in Bhagwat Puran is entirely different.[19] Thus, the writer who has joined Prithoo and Shakuntala, could not be concerned with the purity of Puranic stories. But his only interest appears to be to link the bani of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib with concocted Hindu legends, so that he is shown to be part of the Brahminical lore and legend.

(ii) Similarly, in the story of Raghu Raja, to say that Sanyasis regarded him as Dutt, Yogis as Gorakh Nath, Bairagis as Ramanand, and Muslims as Prophet Mohammad, shows that the interest of the story writer is not to narrate any rational history or myth.[20] He only seeks to represent that the Guru accepted Hindu mythology and tradition, and for the purpose to distort Sikh doctrines and ideas.

By no means can the authorship of such admin cut-and-bull stories be attributed to the lofty personality of the Guru. Obviously, the interest of the authors of these incongruities is quite extraneous to any faithful representation of events, doctrines, ideas, or even myths.

Another fact that seriously affects the historicity of these writings, is quite significant. Normally, the preparation, compilation or reproduction of a granth by a scholar is a great achievement, and the same is kept as a treasure, which the author or his family is always reluctant to part with. But, in the case of these manuscripts or birs not only their history and names or identity of compilers are unknown, but, we also find, that none of the compilers or custodians ever showed any reluctance to part with them. On the other hand, an apparent aim seems to have been that the compilation reaches an important place or a distinguished person, that could confer authenticity to it.

II. Ideological Contradictions: The unity of spirit of all the Ten Gurus is a fundamental of Sikhism, which stands emphasised and recorded in Guru Granth Sahib. The second basic and unalterable concept of Sikhism, as opposed to that of Brahminism, is that God does not incarnate. This concept is an integral element of the Creedal hymn (Mul Mantra)[21] of Guru Nanak in the very beginning of the Guru Granth Sahib. This concept is the corner-stone of Sikh theology. So much so, that the Guru says: "May that mouth burn which says that God incarnate."[22] "God alone is the one who is not born of a woman."[23] "God is self-existent, without form and incarnates not."[24] The Gurus clearly deny belief in the theory of incarnation of God. In order to dispel such ideas they state, "The Formless alone, Nanak, is without fear, many are Ramas as the dust of His Feet, many Krishnas. Many are their stories and many are the Vedas."[25] The Gurus write that He created Countless Brahmas, Sivas and Vishnus.

The above is the categoric thesis of the Gurus and the Guru Granth Sahib, the sole Ideological Guide of the Sikhs. We have to test any idea, doctrine or practice on the touchstone of gurbani. For, it is unimaginable that any Guru or Sikh could approve of anything incongruous with the Creedal statement of Guru Nanak. It is in the above context that we have to examine and test the authenticity of what is in any granth, not specifically authenticated by the Gurus.

Devi & Avtar Worship in the Dasam Granth
Dr Jaggi has made a detailed examination of the issue. He finds that except for about 70 pages of the Dasam Granth, including Jap Sahib, Swayyas, Akal Ustat (excluding hymns in praise of Durga), Asphotak Chhand and Zaffarnama, the other contents which involve worship of Avtars, Devis and Mahakal are mostly from the Puranic literature. Following are some instances of Devi Worship. (For details see chapter 9 of Jaggi's book).
i) Tribhangi Chhands (201-220, In Akal Ustat) are clearly in praise of the Devi.
ii) In Shashtarnama in the beginning there is a whole chapter (27 chhands) in praise of the Devi.
iii) Chandi Chariter I & II, Chaubis Avtar, Rudra Avtar including parts of Charitropakhyan, all relate to the Puranic myths that are in praise of the Devi and Avtars.
iv) Similarly, in the above Puranic stories there are numerous hymns in praise of Maha Kal, who is a Tantric or Sakat deity, pages 55, 56, 57, 58, 73, 156, 157, 183, 185, 254, 310, 612, 613, 642, etc.
v) Worship of Devi under the name of Kalika, Chandi, Siva or Durga is found at pages 74, 76, 99, 117, 255, 118, 309, 310, 116, 673, 675, etc., etc.
vi) Apart from the Var of Durga, there is the entire Puranic story of the Devi coming to the rescue of the mythical Indra and fighting battles with demon Maikhasur, involving trillions of soldiers (Devi worship Chhands and narration of the myth).
vii) In Chandi Charitar Ukat Bilas the author mentions that he has virtually made the composition from 700 slokas of Markand Purana. He adds that whoever hears or recites the same for any specific boon, the Devi would certainly grant it instantaneously (Chandi Chariter, Ukat Bilas - sloka 232).
viii) In Chandi Chariter II in the sloka 261 the author writes that whoever remembers or worships the Devi with devotion,shall attain salvation. Similarly, in the Durga Var the author writes that whoever recites the same, will achieve salvation and not be born again (stanza or pauri - 55).
ix) Whether it is Rama Avtar, Parasnath Avtar, Krishna Avtar, Brahma Avtar, or the other Puranic stories, these all relate to the worship to the Devi and Avtars.
x) Charitropakhyan, too, involves worship of the Devi and Kal or Maha Kal (Charitra 405, Chhands 52, 77, 126 and 132). The very facts that no Sikh is willing to read it in the presence of women or the sangat, and that the SGPC has called it a Puranic myth and not work of the Tenth Guru, show that it is no longer considered a part of the Dasam Granth.

The above few instances prove that, apart from the about 70 pages or so, the writings in the Dasam Granth positively accept and involve Devi and Avtar worship. Accordingly, these writings (Chandi Charitra and Chandi Di Var - 126 pages, Chaubis Avtar - 744 pages, Brahm Rudra Avtar - 383 pages, Charitropakhyan and Hikayat - 923 pages) are opposed to the doctrines of the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib.

Guru Granth Sahib on Devi and Avtar Worship
About mythical writings and Devi and Avtar worship Guru Granth Sahib records:
i) "O brother, fools worship gods and goddesses. They do not know that these imaginary deities can give nothing."[26]
ii) "The Vedas, Brahma, gods and goddesses know not His secrets, and have no knowledge of the Creator."[27]
iii) "The fools, the ignorant and the blind forget the Master Lord, and instead, worship His slaves, the goddesses and Maya."[28]

Guru Gobind Singh on Devi Worship
Hereunder we give the bani of the Tenth Master as in the Akal Ustat:
i) "There are millions of Indras and incarnations of Brahma, Vishnu and Krishna. But, without worship of God none are accepted in His Court." (stanza 38).
ii) "Millions of Indras are servants at His door. Countless are the insignificant Shivas, Ramas and Krishnas." (stanza 40).
iii) "Some worship Shiva (Mahadev); some say Vishnu is Master of the Universe, and that by devotion to him, all calamities disappear. O, fool, think over a thousand times and understand that at the last moment every one will leave you in the lurch to die alone. Remember only the One Lord who will never forsake you." (ibid).
iv) "There was a Shiva; he was gone, and there appeared another and he was gone too. There are innumerable Avtars like Rama or Krishna."

"Countless are Brahmas, Vishnus, Vedas, Puranas and Simritis that have come and gone". (stanza 77).
These being the categoric hymns of Guru Granth Sahib and the clear statements of the Tenth Master himself, does it make any sense that he approved of or could ever have accepted any of the writings mentioned earlier, which so clearly involve worship of Devis and Devtas, and some of which faithfully reflect and reproduce Puranic writings and myths in praise of Avtars and the Devis, suggesting faith in the efficacy of the mantar system discarded by Guru Granth Sahib?

Changing Name of the Granth
There is another important factor suggesting that major part of the Dasam Granth is actually taken from some other sources, and has been mistakenly or deliberately combined with the bani of the Tenth Guru.

For example, the writings were originally all separate and unconnected pothis, or compilations. For that reason these were first called 'Dasam Patshah Ka Granth'. This name does not suggest any authorship of the Guru, but only seeks to link his name by way of reference to his period or quarters. Later, the granth was called Dasam Granth and still later Sri Dasam Granth, and so on. The frequent changes in name only reflect the interests of the writers or the publishers.

That this is a deliberate mix-up, is evident from the fact that originally most parts of the granth were called Bachittar Natak Granth. This name appears 151 times in the Puranic parts of the compilation. It is repeated at the end of each composition, story chapter or poem. This name appears 19 times in Rama Avtar, 67 times in Krishna Avtar, 33 times at the end of the stories of other Avtars, etc.

The probability is that the mix-up has been done deliberately. For, Puranic Verses, and Chhands in praise of Devi are interpolated in the midst of what is clearly the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the light of Guru Granth Sahib. Similarly, some couplets, which are the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the context of Guru Granth Sahib, stand introduced in the midst of Puranic stories.

The bani in Guru Granth Sahib is the Sole Guru and Guide of every Sikh. It is the Light that alone shows us the way to truth, especially when one may be wavering or in doubt. May we ask if there is any objection to accepting what is clearly in consonance with it and avoiding what is admittedly, theologically and logically, opposed to it?

Conclusion
Our discussion makes it plain that such contents of the Dasam Granth as suggest worship of gods, goddesses and Avtars, are opposed to the doctrines of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and the Gurus. These are also opposed to the unanimously accepted bani of Guru Gobind Singh, quoted above. By no stretch of reason can it be suggested that those writings are consonant with the bani and doctrines of Guru Granth Sahib. On the other hand, they clearly support the theory of Avtarhood which the Gurus have emphatically rejected. Further, we find that there is not a shred of historical evidence to suggest that the Guru at any time approved of it. In fact, he had thrown away or permitted to be scattered, whatever was not worth presentation. On the other hand, Guru Granth Sahib was declared the Guru. Gurbani has been given to us to test what is valid or true and what is unacceptable or spurious. That test is final and unalterable.

It is also evident that none of the Devi or Avtar-worship writings are the collection of a Sikh or indicate the authorship of a Sikh as the original scribe or compiler. On the other hand, the manner in which this mix-up has been done, and the method of writing gurbani laid down by the Gurus, grossly violated in the old birs, show that the author could not be a Sikh. Further, already the SGPC has accepted the position that 923 pages of Charitropakhyan are Puranic myths, unconnected with the Guru.

Many outside scholars have clearly stated that in the absence of clarification of the position about the Dasam Granth, the stand and history of the Tenth Master cannot be clear. The oblique suggestion is that the Tenth Master brought the Panth into the Hindu fold, and drew inspiration from the Puranic past and the Shakti cult, even though it is a historical fact that the hill princes, the staunch worshippers of the Shakti or Devi cult, not only opposed the Guru, but also voluntarily accepted the supremacy of the Mighty Mughal instead of confronting him. Another scholar, Ramji Lal, writes that Sikhs are Hindus, saying, "The Khalsa was constituted to emancipate the Hindu society from the contemporary evils including idolatry, caste system, superstition and ritualism." "Again at that time among the disciples of the Great Guru Gobind Singh - Bhai Nand Lal, Bhai Kanahya and Mohkam Chand, all were Hindus. Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Dayala who sacrificed their lives along with Guru Tegh Bahadur, were also Hindus." "Not only this, but Guru Gobind Singh himself revered Hindu Goddesses - Chandi and Durga and the Hindu Avtars including - Sri Ram Chander and Lord Krishna."[29]

While it is well known that views of many scholars like Bhai Ardaman Singh of Bagrian, Dr Jaggi, Shamsher Singh Ashok,Prof. Jagjit Singh, Principal Harbhajan Singh, Principal Jagjit Singh, Dr Rann Singh, S. Harnam Singh, Maj. Gen. Narinder Singh, S. M.S. Marco, Bhai Ashok Singh and others are the same as ours. Open attempts at ideological erosion, as quoted above, are being made. Hence the need of academic clarification. For, no Sikh can accept that anything opposed to the categoric rejection of the doctrine of Avtarhood in Guru Granth Sahib, could ever be from an authentic Sikh source, much less from the Tenth Master. It is undeniable that Guru Granth Sahib is our Living Guru, and its principles and doctrines are our Sole Guide to test the veracity or acceptability of any idea, concept, writing, suggestion or activity.

References

• 1. Chhibber, Kesar Singh: 'Bansavalinama', p. 1
• 2. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1136
• 3. Chhibber, Kesar Singh: op. cit., p. 135
• 4. Ibid, p. 136
• 5. Ibid.
• 6. Ibid.
• 7. Gian Singh: 'Panth Prakash', p. 320
• 8. Ibid, pp. 688-689
• 9. Ibid, p. 321
• 10. Bhalla, Sarupdas: 'Mehma Parkash', p. 794
• 11. Jaggi, Rattan Singh: 'Dasam Granth da Karitartav', pp. 38-45
• 12. Ibid, pp. 92-93
• 13. Ibid.
• 14. Ibid, pp. 93-95
• 15. Ibid, pp. 95-97
• 16. Ibid, pp. 97-98
• 17. Gupta, H.R.:' The Sikh Gurus', p. 245
• 18. Jaggi, Rattan Singh: op. cit., pp. 152-154
• 19. Ibid, p. 152
• 20. Ibid, p. 153
• 21. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1
• 22. Ibid, p. 1136
• 23. Ibid, p. 473
• 24. Ibid, p. 547
• 25. Ibid, pp. 464, 1156
• 26. Ibid, p. 637
• 27. Ibid, p. 894
• 28. Ibid, p. 1138
• 29. Geholt, N.S.: 'Politics of Communalism and Secularism', Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1993, p. 67

[chatanga1]

http://sarbattkhalsa.weebly.com/history-of-sri-dasam-granth-shaib-ji.html

 

The History of Dasam  Guru's compositions begins with the time when these compositions were verbally spoken, composed and compiled by Guru Gobind Singh. These compositions in the form of booklets and Granths were created over various period of the Guru's life. Later (after 1708), they were combined in the form of the present-day granth or single volume by Bhai Mani Singh Khalsa, with help of otherKhalsa brothers. This was done on the direct instruction of Mata Sundri and this volume is presently recognized as Sri Dasam Granth Sahib

From historical books, Rehitnamas, old manuscripts and oral traditions of various Sampardas (sections of Sikhs), it can be observed that theSikhs had access to these compositions and they use to study, discuss and understand these compositions during the time of Guru Gobind Singh and also after his demise in 1708. 

These compositions include most of the important sections of the present-day Dasam granth namely, Jaapu Sahib, Akal Ustat, Bachitar Natak,Chandi Charitar, Chandi Di Var, Gyan Prabodh, Chaubis Avtar, Shabad, Thirty-Three Swayyas, Sawaiye, Shashtar Nam Mala, Ath Pakh-yaan Charitar Likh-yatay and Zafarnamah

 

Sri Dasam Granth Shaib Ji

18th Century

Guru Gobind Singh left his holy abode in 1708 at Nanded, India. In the late 17th Century (particularly after 1670 onwards) was the time when the Sikhs had to hide in jungles due to the constant attempts by the Mughal empire to eradicate them though various acts of persecution. There were very few attempts of writing Sikh history in this period in the 17th Century. Many of the compositions of Guru Gobind Singh were spread across India by Sikhs and a few more were shared by Mata Sundri at Delhi. Sikhs had access to various pothis (booklets) of Guru Gobind Singh writings. These were available from contemporary historians and writers who wrote about Guru Gobind Singh's life.

Sri Gur Sobha - Poet Senapat(1711)

The following are conclusive points reached about the Dasam Bani while studying Sri Gur Shobha:
 

1. Poet Senapati had access to the Bachitar Natak Granth.
2. Poet Senapati has narrated the conversation of Guru Gobind Singh and Akal Purakh, which is a part of Bachitar Natak.
3. Poet Senapati has written history of religion in the same way and style as in the Bachitar Natak Composition.
4. Poet Senapati used words like Sri Kaal, Chandi Sudhari in his poems which means, that these words were part of Sikh hymns of that time.
5. Poet Senapati used the language in futuristic accent as used in Kalki Avtar of Dasam Bani.

Following is a detailed explanation, which shows that the Bachitar Natak Granth was present up until 1711:

This was one of the first book to illuminate the writings in the Sri Dasam Granth. This book is written not only in the style and language of the Sri Dasam Granth but some verses are similar to the verses found in Sri Bachitra Natak, most notably the battles of Guru Gobind Singh. It is clear that the court poets wanted to emulate the writings of Guru Gobind Singh Ji as these were read in the Guru’s darbars and gatherings.

For Evidence Please See : http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&&note_id=169150433154709




Rehitnama Bhai Chaupa Singh (Early 18th Century)

This Rehitnama was written in early 18th Century. As per Prof. Ganda Singh, Prof Piara Singh Padam, this was written in early 18th Century after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh. The Rehitnama contains many couplets from Bani of the 10 Patshahi (tenth Guru).

Following facts about Guru Gobind Singh's compositions are present in this text:
 

1. Chaupa Singh quoted various couplets from Bachitar Natak Bani written by Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur Sahib.
2. Chaupa Singh also quoted various lines from Swaiyeys writen by Guru sahib.
3. Chaupa Singh also elaborated on the knowledge that Guru Gobind Singh had about Puranas (Hindu holy volumes) and Gurmukhi Lipi (alphabet).

This Rehitnama is available in the market in a book "Rehitnamey: Piara Singh Padam", published by Singh Brothers.

For Evidence:  http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.169147809821638.40041.100001792609548&saved





Rehitnama/TankhahNama Bhai Nand Lal(Early 18th Century)

Potrait of Bhai Nand Lal Goya

TankhahNama/RehitNama - Bhai Nand Lal (Early 17th Century): These were written by this famous Court poet of Guru Gobind Singh and he is well known to Sikhs. He mentoined the following parts of Guru Gobind Singh's compositions in his writings:
 

1. Jaap Sahib was present and was part of Daily Liturgy. It was read along side Japji Sahib, the first composition by Guru Nanak found at the beginning of the Guru Granth Sahib.
2. Bhai Nand Lal also believed that one should "Not blindly share important things and not to trust "blindly" anyone, especially sly women". This was as a warning to naive Sikhs to be vigilant and to be aware of people who act deceptively to trap them and violate their trust and their rights. This issue was first addressed by Guru Ram Das and then Guru Gobind Singh explained this with help of stories. This fact is acceptable in almost all Rehitnamas and historical books. Some people consider this text to be degrading to women folks but this is due to a misunderstanding of the intention of these writing.

This Rehitnama is also available in the market in a book "Rehitnamey: Piara Singh Padam", published by Singh Brothers.

For Evidence: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.169147326488353.40040.100001792609548&saved

 

 



Rehitnama Bhai Prahlad Singh

Rehitnama Bhai Prahlad Singh contains a line which says that Jaap Sahib is a Sikh Litergy. Bhai Prahlad Singh states:

ਬਿਨਾ 'ਜਪੁ' 'ਜਾਪੁ' ਜਪੇ, ਜੋ ਜੇਵਹਿ ਪਰਸਾਦਿ || ਸੋ ਬਿਸਟਾ ਕਾ ਕਿਰਮ ਹੂਇ, ਜਨਮ ਗਵਾਵੈ ਬਾਦ || 

This Rehitnama is available in the market in a book "Rehitnamey: Piara Singh Padam", published by Singh Brothers.

 




Guru Mahima - Poet Chand Svarankaar(Early 18th Century) 

Bibhour Sahib, where Guru Gobind Singh completed 404th Charitar,including Chopai Sahib of Ath Pakhyan Charitar Likhyatey

Poet Chaand Svarkaar was Court Poet of Guru Gobind Singh. The Poet mentioned in his composition that Guru Gobind Singh meditated on Kalika. Guru Gobind Singh mentioned this in Bachitar Natak.

ਕਲਿ ਮੈ ਹੈ ਏਕ ਮਰਦ ਨਾਨਕ ਹੈ ਨਾਮ ਜਾ ਕੋ || ਤਾ ਤੇ ਭਏ ਆਠ ਮਹਿਲ ਨਾਵਾਂ ਕਹਾਇਓ ਹੈ || 

ਤਾਤੇ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਕਾਲਕਾ ਮਨਾਈ ਹੋਈ || ਕਾਲ ਗਈ ਮਹਿਲ ਦਸਵਾਂ ਕਹਾਇਓ ਹੈ||





Chandd Narbad Singh Bhatt(Early 18th Century)

Narbad Singh Bhatt was a Court poet of Guru Gobind Singh. He mentioned that GUru Gobind Singh told him the real wisdom and real meaning of Saarda which Gobind Singh told in Akal Ustat and Krishna Avtar. Poet Said

ਸਿਮਰੂੰ ਸਾਰਦ ਮਾਤਾ ਦੇਵੀ ਸਤਗੁਰ ਸਚੇ ਗਿਆਨ ਬਤਾਇਆ || 

ਰਦੂਤ ਜਲਹਾਨੇ ਸਾਤੋ ਭੁਜਾ ਤੁਮ੍ਹਾਰੀ ਸਾਤੋਂ ਕਾ ਜੱਸ ਚੋ ਕੁੰਟੀ ਛਾਇਆ ||

Guru Gobind Singh told:

ਰੇ ਮਨ ਭਜ ਤੂੰ ਸਾਰਦਾ ਅਨਗਨ ਗੁਨ ਹੈ ਜਾਹਿ ॥

O mind! Remember the goddess Sharda of innumerable qualities;

ਰਚੌ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਇਹ ਭਾਗਵਤ ਜਉ ਵੈ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਕਰਾਹਿ ॥੬॥

And if she be kind, I may compose this Granth (based on) Bhagavata.6. (Krishna Avtar, Guru Gobind Singh)





Parchi Gobind Singh Ki - Bava Seva Dass (1741)
 

1. Parchian Prove this that the though process of Dasam Bani was prevelent during that time.
2. Parchian Quote a verse from Ram Avtar and 33 Svaiyey.
3. Parchian also mention presence of Zafarnama with Hikayats.
4. Parchian also include words like Bhagauti Sri Kaal etc.
5. Parchian also not include Peer Buddhu Shah in Battle of Bhangani, which seems to be Guru Gobind Singh haven't mentioned Peer Buddhu Shah due to Some special reason which should be get research by Historians.

Evidence: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=169148609821558&set=a.169148516488234.40042.100001792609548&&theater

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=169148626488223&set=a.169148516488234.40042.100001792609548&&theater

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=169148639821555&set=a.169148516488234.40042.100001792609548&&theater






Gurbilas Patshahi 10 - Koer Singh Kalal(1751)

Kavi Darbar Asthan. Paunta Sahib where mostly Bani was written by Guru Gobind Singh

The First ever authentic History book mentions incident of Guruship to Shri Guru Granth Sahib by Guru Gobind Singh, was written 43 years after the Death of Guru Gobind Singh, includes the direct names of Compositions of Guru Gobind Singh, the same compositions that are found in the present Dasam Granth. The most detailed History of Guru Gobind Singh is mentioned in this Book.

Key Facts regarding history of Dasam Guru's Compositions are:
 

1. Gurbilas mentions Krishna Charitar was written in Paonta Sahib, including Bisan Charitars.
2. Gurbilas Mentions Bachitar Natak granth was writrten By Guru Gobind Singh at anandpur
3. Gurbilas Mention that Chandi Di Vaar was written by Guru Gobind Singh.
4. Gurbilas mention that Jaap Sahib, Akal Ustat was written by Guru Gobind Singh.
5. It also mentions that all 11 Hikayats were written by Guru Gobind Singh and source of these persian tales are Charitropakhyan.

It is believed that he must collected this all material for more then 5-10 years which give us lighten that Compositions of Guru Gobind Singh was available before 1740. As verses mentioned in Sri Gur Sobha(1711) and Parchian Sevadas(1741), which gives us strong belief about it's Creation.

Evidence: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&&note_id=169155599820859






BansavaliNama Dasan Patshahi Ka - Kesar Singh Chibber (1769)

This is first attempt to write history post Guru Gobind Singh demise at large scale thats why it is target of Anti Dasam People to degrade this text as it mentions Dasam Bani was collected and made in form of Granth. It is called ""Chotha Granth"". This source mention all events of creating and purpose of creating Dasam Granth.

Evidence :

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=169148546488231&set=a.169148516488234.40042.100001792609548&&theater





Sri Guru Mahima Parkash - Sarup Chand Bhalla (1776)

Guru Mahima Parkash contains :
 

1. All Bachitar Natak History.
2. 404 Charitar was written by Guru Gobind Singh.
3. Chaubis Avtar was written by Guru Gobind Singh.

Evidence: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=169148586488227&set=a.169148516488234.40042.100001792609548&&theater





Guru Kian Sakhian - Svaroop Singh Kausish (1790)

The most referred book by any historian is Guru Ki Sakhian, which is too followed during Making of Nanakshahi Calendar.The books gave us so many versions about Compositions of Guru Gobind Singh. After Studying we get following facts.
 

1. Guru Kian Sakhian says that Bachitar Natak was written by Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur.
2. Sakhian mentions about writing Krishna Avtar which was written by Gobind Singh at Paunta.
3. Sakhian quotes various portions of 33 Swaiyey.
4. Sakhian quotes various terminology of Guru Gobind SIngh like Mahakaal, Chandi etc.
5. Sakhian quotes various lines from Shastarnaam mala and Bachitar Natak.

Evidence: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.169156416487444.40044.100001792609548&saved




Gurbilas Patshahi 10 - Giani Sukkha Singh (1797)

Gurdwara Zafarnama Sahib, Bathinda where Zafarnama, Including Hikayats were written.

Giani Sukkha Singh was Priest at Patna. He wrote about Gurbilas Patshahi 10.
 

1. Sukkha Singh mentioned about Hemkunt, but he haven't mentioned Hemkunt in geographical Location.
2. Sukkha Singh mentioned Akal Purakh and Guru Gobind Singh discussion.
3. Sukkha Singh mentioned about Zafarnama written by Guru Gobind Singh.

Das Guru Katha - Kavi Kankan(Late 18th Century)

Kavi Kankan was believe to lived during time of three Gurus and was one of Poet of Guru Gobind Singh's Darbar. In his book he mentioned history of 10 Gurus. He ended his narration of Guru's history upto Khalsa Panth creation. Scholars fixed Das Guru Katha, is to be Creation of 1699, but some affix it to be of late 18th Century. About Bani of Dasam Patshah, following facts comes out from his COmposition:
 

• He mentioned Many lines from Bachitar Natak
• He Mentioned that Guru Gobind Singh was not worshipper of Idol Chandi but his chandi is something else.

[chatanga1]

5 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

  If you disagree with any points he has written, then please counter them with proof (actual sources and pages etc). 

 

@Satkirin_Kaur  Can you tell us which points in this article you agree/disagree with?

[CdnSikhGirl]

I'll read it all later... but one thing I want to say I find it very hard to use Chaupa Singh Rhetnama as any kind of authority as the Brahaminical thinking exudes from it. There are also evidence of tampering over time. 

Examples (Would Guru Ji really think of us in this way?):

Gursikh men should never trust women, either their own or anothers (wow not even their own wife!) 
Women don't deserve kande di pahul,
Women cant read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in sangat
A woman should never berate or argue with a man (but no similar instruction exists for men, so its ok for men to berate and belittle women)
Men must never eat food left by a woman (because why? we desecrate it?? LOL)
Marriages should be in accordance to caste prescriptions (didn't Guru Ji remove caste distinction??)

Well I understand now why DDT place all these restrictions on us.  

After reading Chaupa Singhs rhetnama, as a female, I feel like killing myself...

[chatanga1]

8 minutes ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

but one thing I want to say I find it very hard to use Chaupa Singh Rhetnama as any kind of authority as the Brahaminical thinking exudes from it.

@Satkirin_Kaur

There is a lot of things in Chaupa Singh's Rehitnama that would be be anathema to Brahmans.

eg

to see Sikhs as Sikhs only, not Brahman, Khatri or Sood

to not care about Brahma

not associate with any rituals concerning tilak, janju, dhoti

don't use Brahmans at weddings.

so that shouldn't be a hindrance or denigrate what he has to say about Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth in any instance.

14 minutes ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

There are also evidence of tampering over time.

 

What evidence do you have to prove this? Also is this evidence your own work, or is it the work of the scholars you have been following lately?

 

16 minutes ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

 

After reading Chaupa Singhs rhetnama, as a female, I feel like killing myself...

 

Stop being so melodramatic.

[chatanga1]

6 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

For, had there been any compilation like the Dasam Granth, these contemporary chroniclers could never have failed to mention it. 

 

@Satkirin_Kaur Just reading this line in your essay shows the ignorance of the author. Daljeet Singh is a known anti-Dasam Granth nindak.

Can you explain how you came across such a ridiculous article, and for what reason did you paste it here?

[chatanga1]

32 minutes ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

I'll read it all later...

Are you saying that you pasted this article by daljeet singh on this board without even reading it?

[CdnSikhGirl]

This is why I find it difficult to view Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama as any sort of authority...

And the above thinking about women (in general) which all of you have tried to say that Charitropakhyan does NOT breed this thinking... but here is evidence that this thinking either existed prior to the Charitars or after as a result of them... either way, the ides is that women are bad, women are 'embodiment of deceit' such that a Gursikh male should never even trust his own wife! And here you guys have been saying that Charitropakhyan only talks about *some* women and that the purpose was not to make ALL males look down on ALL females. He doesn't say ...only females of low character. It's written NEVER trust a woman. NEVER is pretty strong a word!!!!!

Other things in there which seem to go against what SGGSJ says:

Don't give women kande di pahul (no Amrit for women)
Women can not read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in sangat/public 
A woman should never berate or argue with a man (but no similar instruction exists for men, so its ok for men to berate, argue and belittle women)
Men must never eat food left by a woman (because why? Our touch desecrates it??)
Marriages should be in accordance to caste prescriptions (but... I thought Guru Ji abolished caste istinction)
Oh and of course the whole wives see husbands as Gods over them thing...

Yes after reading Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama. decidedly I hate women too... I don't want to be one anymore.  How do I get off this ride?? 

 

[Singh123456777]

Lol satkiran that article you have shown to us has so many flaws. The first paragraph it says that the first mention of dasam Granth came from kesar Singh chibbers bansavalinama. The writer of the article says that kavi sanipat or bhai nand lal never mentions dasam Granth in their writings but that's false!!! They do mention dasam Granth bani etc. This person did not do their research properly.

 

Satkiran the proof is in dasam granths favour.

[chatanga1]

@Satkirin_Kaur   Have had a quick look through Chaupa Singh's rehatnama. Cannot see anything what you have posted. With look at it in more detail tomorrow.

Have noticed in that little pic you have put up, that one line ends in 341, and the next line ends in 100.

Where have you got that pic from? Give us a link to read the whole article.

One thing in Chaupa Singh rehatnama is:

"Nindak ki gat katu nahi"

I'll leave you to work it out.

[chatanga1]

12 minutes ago, Singh123456777 said:

Lol satkiran that article you have shown to us has so many flaws. The first paragraph it says that the first mention of dasam Granth came from kesar Singh chibbers bansavalinama. The writer of the article says that kavi sanipat or bhai nand lal never mentions dasam Granth in their writings but that's false!!! They do mention dasam Granth bani etc. This person did not do their research properly.

 

Satkiran the proof is in dasam granths favour.

 

Bro, don't worry, let her try and watch her fail again.

[GurpreetKaur]

15 minutes ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

This is why I find it difficult to view Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama as any sort of authority...

^ This is bad for men, they can't make good decisions no matter how much they excel in Engineering. More power to women, imagine those people making sure constantly that nothing ever goes into women's ears since we are such a deceitful creatures lol. Is that for amritdhari people and they really follow it? I feel bad for them. A husband always looking at his wife that she will deceive him. Nope, no peace for him.

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

No you guys win. I hate being female. You have successfully convinced me the female gender is vile and I don't want to do it anymore.  I can't go through rest of my life feeling like this about my gender. I have tried and tried to approach it hoping that maybe Guru Ji didn't think of us like this. But you guys are right. He hated us. Though of us as vile disgusting, deceitful, immoral etc. And it matters to me a lot what our Guru Ji thinks of me especially given we don't pick our gender. Now that I know Guru Ji hated us... there is no reason to live except to hope I will be reborn as a male. So this is the end...I can't do it anymore... 

Heres the link
http://www.academicroom.com/sites/default/files/book/107/McLeod,%20The%20Chaupa%20Singh%20Rahit-Nama.pdf

[CdnSikhGirl]

Just now, GurpreetKaur said:

^ This is bad for men, they can't make good decisions no matter how much they excel in Engineering. More power to women, imagine those people making sure constantly that nothing ever goes into women's ears since we are such a deceitful creatures lol. Is that for amritdhari people and they really follow it? I feel bad for them. A husband always looking at his wife that she will deceive him. Nope, no peace for him.

 

Gurpreet Kaur Bhenji... this Chaupa Singh is held in high esteem and the words are supposed to be from Guru Ji.  Meaning Guru Ji thought of us like this. And this is the result of the tales in Charitropakhyan. This kind of thinking. And if it came from our very Guru, how can we justify even living life being seen like this? I wish you well, but I can't do it anymore.  

 

[GurpreetKaur]

 

Super easy, if someone call you deceitful and immortal. Smile at them and walk away. Even if Vaheguroo tells me hey woman you are decietful, my answer be like oh well you created me. Lol

I don't understand rehit so I am no one to say anything about it. All I know if something does not feel right to me I will walk away from it. We people are always judging each other so much, if I use my last name people tell me oh you believe in caste system and if I use kaur, they tell me excuse me you are not amritdhari lol. So I thought I am an outsider in sikhi and probably don't deserve to fit in, but you amritdhari people don't even get along with each other. :(. 

 

[Singh123456777]

Wow melodramatic much.

[Guest J Singh]

I think the reaction was understandable. You guys have just managed to shatter a Singhni by painting picture of our Gurus as women haters. And before you lay blame on her, imagine for a moment, finding out that the Gurus you hold dear and revere, hated your gender and thought of you as deceitful and vile. To the point that early rhetnamas actually instructed Gursikh males to never trust any female and to see them as (in the screenshot above) the embodiment of deceit. Imagine being seen by the very faith you follow and hold close to your heart seeing you in this light and how that would feel. 

This forum has been perpetuating a negative image of women for awhile now, and I commend her for lasting as long as she did. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves though. Do you really think this is what our Gurus wanted? For us to treat women in this way? To dismiss them as lesser than ourselves and perpetuate distrust, to look at them as horrible and immoral compared to ourselves?

Dasam Granth is the single most vile piece of literature designed to make us hate our own Mothers, sisters, wives, daughters! Chaupa Singh's rhetnama is prime example. Actual instruction to never trust any woman. You all tried to say that its only speaking of certain types of women, but there you have it, proof that the message is not about only certain women but all women. Chaupa Singh instructs us to never trust any woman and to consider them all the embodiment of deceit and even specifies your own meaning your wife. Can you seriously look at your own wife who you love as the embodiment of deceit? I know I can't.  Should I start distrusting her? Is this what Guru Ji wants?

I can understand how bibis will be so disheartened at this realization. If Guru Gobind Singh did think of women in this way, then what does it mean for women when it comes to spirituality? It's a much deeper issue. Is she supposed to go through life hating herself? Thinking she was born in a female body as punishment? If our very Gurus looked at women in this light, then how are they supposed to feel about themselves? I can see how it would feel hopeless! If I made realization that our Gurus thought of me in this way I'd probably feel pretty low too. I read the MacLeod translation of Chaupa Singh's rhetnama posted above, it has many other implications for women as well like not giving women amrit, and considering food they touch to be polluted and more. And you guys have mentioned this document as a reliable source to the history of dasam granth.  Meaning if what he wrote in his rhetnama is true then Guru Gobind Singh did think this way of woman.

So exactly how are bibis supposed to feel Singh Ji???

I think it will be miracle if Satkiran even remains in the faith at this point.

You guys should feel ashamed perpetuating this view! Its like a cancer. Look in the mirror before making statement about bibis being deceitful and vile and be careful about pushing this view of our Gurus looking down on woman. 

[CdnSikhGirl]

8 hours ago, Singh123456777 said:

Wow melodramatic much.

Howd you feel if the very Gurus who you hold dear, think of you as nothing more than the 'embodiment of deceit' and told all the opposite gender to see you as such and never trust you? Even those in your close family... The very religion that defines your spirituality sees you as just an annoyance to the opposite gender, something to just serve them, be bossed around, and seen as lesser. Dismissed, belittled...

If Dasam Granth came before Chaupa Singhs rehetnama, then it's likley that instruction to never trust any woman, came from the psychological conditioning in charitropakhyan. And if if charitropakhyan came from our Guru Ji himself, then he obviously thought very lowly of us. If charitropakhyan was meant to be against only *some* women then why would Chaupa Singh write to never trust ANY woman and consider us ALL even your own wife, as embodiment of deceit? You guys keep using Chaupa Singh as a reliable authority so what he says must be how Guru Ji thought of us.

Thing is I tried and tried to come to some conclusion that Guru Ji didn't hate us. I just couldn't believe he would so I tried to find things to support that it was not true like Charitropakhyan possibly being written by another, that Chaupa Singh was brahmin background etc. But everything you guys have been saying points to the fact that Guru Ji saw us women as garbage... we were never meant to take amrit even, and were to be seen as embodiment of deceit even by our own fathers brothers and husbands. expected to see them as God, while they are allowed to belittle and demean us. Guru Ji hated us.

If that's the case I can no longer follow Sikhi (and before you mention my husband, maybe he shouldn't be following it either).

[GurpreetKaur]

I thought bhai chaupa singh ji is someone who might be a 19th or 20th century scholar but just googled and he was during the time of Guru ji. :0

I don't think men follow this, it's impossible. How can you spend your whole life with your wife thinking she's a deceitful creature lol. No trust =no love, no love = divorce lol. But, I kinda see why you struggling with CHaritropakhyan, since this rehatnama says ALL women are like this. Personally, all of this does not bother me. If someone is having a trust issue with me, he's more than welcome to walk outta my life anytime or I'll walk away. You should be lucky you have a husband who does not follow this. Deep down, when a guy is in love he will trust her, then no rules and regulation work. 

And don't give response to comments like oh it's a melodrama. People who ready to strike back when even a single finger is pointed at DG are not away from drama either . They just can't see it. We all do drama, without drama life is futile and no fun lol. 

I am gonna learn about bhai chaupa singh ji now, why he had thought like this lol OR maybe he never put that in rehatnama. I will google it out later on lol 

[Singh123456777]

1 hour ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

Howd you feel if the very Gurus who you hold dear, think of you as nothing more than the 'embodiment of deceit' and told all the opposite gender to see you as such and never trust you? Even those in your close family... The very religion that defines your spirituality sees you as just an annoyance to the opposite gender, something to just serve them, be bossed around, and seen as lesser. Dismissed, belittled...

If Dasam Granth came before Chaupa Singhs rehetnama, then it's likley that instruction to never trust any woman, came from the psychological conditioning in charitropakhyan. And if if charitropakhyan came from our Guru Ji himself, then he obviously thought very lowly of us. If charitropakhyan was meant to be against only *some* women then why would Chaupa Singh write to never trust ANY woman and consider us ALL even your own wife, as embodiment of deceit? You guys keep using Chaupa Singh as a reliable authority so what he says must be how Guru Ji thought of us.

Thing is I tried and tried to come to some conclusion that Guru Ji didn't hate us. I just couldn't believe he would so I tried to find things to support that it was not true like Charitropakhyan possibly being written by another, that Chaupa Singh was brahmin background etc. But everything you guys have been saying points to the fact that Guru Ji saw us women as garbage... we were never meant to take amrit even, and were to be seen as embodiment of deceit even by our own fathers brothers and husbands. expected to see them as God, while they are allowed to belittle and demean us. Guru Ji hated us.

If that's the case I can no longer follow Sikhi (and before you mention my husband, maybe he shouldn't be following it either).

No offended but you are really thick headed, dense etc. We have tried to tell you countless times that the charitars are about both male and female. You are only thinking its about females which it is not about!!! We have tried to tell you over and over and over again but you don't want to listen.

Males can be like we hate ourselves and there is no purpose for living cause the guru wrote negative about males in charitarphkiyan. 

How hard is it to understand that not all females and not all males are good people? Guru showed the negative of both genders in charitarphkiyan. So don't go assuming that its only about females. Males get put down as well in charitarphkiyan.

Nobody is pointing towards chaupa Singh rehitnama. The article you posted brought up chaupa Singh rehitnama. I can even quote it if you like.

"Most of the evidence about the present work called the 'Dasam Granth' is negative. The earliest reference about some writings by the Tenth Master is by Chhibber in his 'Bansavalinama'. Contemporary historians of the period of Guru Gobind Singh like Sainapat, Bhai Nandlal, Chaupa Singh, Sewadas, Koer Singh or Bhai Mani Singh, make no mention of the Dasam Granth or any such writing in the period."

Then chatanga brother posted some info to destroy the claims that the author in your article wrote which included chaupa Singh rehitnama. Then you said chaupa Singh rehitnama is altered because of so and so. 

What if chaupa Singh rehitnama is altered? What about the bhai nand lal Ji and his writing which talk about dasam Granth? Or what about kavi sanipat? Or Bhai mani Singh? Or koer Singh? These people all wrote about dasam Granth and your article failed to research that.

[CdnSikhGirl]

My point was that:

1. Assuming Guru Ji wrote Charitropakhyan, he painted women as deceivers and sluts. The only negative thing he painted men as, is gullible fools. (I'd much rather be accused of being a fool than a slut and deceiver. One is considered evil, the other a victim. Usually people feel sorry for the poor gullible one, and hate the deceiver / slut. See the difference? You cant compare it trying to say Guru Ji also makes men to look bad too... being seen as having the wool pulled over your eyes makes you a poor victim who was gullible [unknowingly at that], but that doesn't make you evil. Being described as deceiver and slut equates to being seen as evil. Huge difference which has real life repercussions for women. If the stories really were interchangeable male/female in both positions, then the early rhetnamas would have also stated women can not trust men either. Or that only certain women / men are not trustworthy. But that's not the case because...

2. Chaupa Singh makes the statement NEVER trust ANY woman, even your own wife or those close to you. Assuming the chicken came before the egg (that is that Charitropakhyan came before Chaupa Singh's rhetnama) then this is a good idea what the result of such writing from our 'Guru' causes in real life in practical sense. Men are seen as gullible in DG, and women are seen as deceivers / sluts. The asnwer Chaupa Singh comes up with as a result: Tell men to NEVER trust ANY woman, even women close to them. The practical result of it is women are not trusted, husbands won't "share secrets" with their wives (the one person they SHOULD be able ot trust), women are kept from leadership positions lest they deceive those they are leading (meaning men won't tolerate women in positions of leadership because they don't trust women leading them), men won't give them any sort of respinsibility because they don't trust they can do it etc. The result is, we as women become marginalized, controlled, given much less freedom and opportunity, using both DG and the rhetnamas as justfiication.

Do you see any restrictions, limitations, etc placed on you because of DG??? No! Instead you are only told not to trust any woman (we're the ones at fault you see). As a man, you are told don't become a victim. That's it. Women are told we are all evil, immorlal, deceivers. The one's who are at fault. The actual embodiement of deceit we are....which no men are to ever trust. This is the message of both Charitropakhyan, and the early rhetnamas.

3. MANY of you hold the early rhetnamas as the actual voice and words of Guru Ji. This coupled with Charitropakhyan means that Guru Ji may have saw you as being easily gullible, but he saw us as evil deceivers and sluts. Please answer this @Singh123456777: Which would you rather be seen as? Someone who is easily fooled (victim) or someone who is seen as innately untrustworthy, intentionally deceitful, immoral, slutty, evil (at fault)??

4.  Out of 6 early rhetnamas, only ONE speaks of equality of women including the ability to take amrit.... which was prem sumarg.  This says something if they are indeed following what Guru Ji taught.  So @gurpreet kaur its not just Chaupa Singh. It's nearly ALL of them from time of Guru Ji who saw us in this way.

So Singh Ji, please don't try to say Charitropakhyan makes you look bad too as some sort of consolation. It only makes men look like hapless victims (unknowing and unintentional). It makes us however look like intentional deceivers, sluts, immoral, untrustworthy (which equates to males placing lots of restrictions on us to keep us from being in positions where they would ever have to trust us.) That ia FAR worse and harder than being simply told to not become a victim by trusting women.

Guru Gobind Singh Ji, if he did in fact write this, undermined everything the other Gurus said about women. That seriously hurts. Because Guru = God. Our own creator thinks of us in this way. I don't know why Waheguru Ji doesn't just wipe out female gender and make males able to reproduce. In any case, this is why I am having trouble. I can't see our Guru being truly divine if this is how he really thought. So it actually compromises my belief in Sikhi. I believe in the philosophical aspects, the spirituality. But can't believe our own Creator would condemn half the human race to this fate. If it's true, I don't even want to live.

[paapiman]

1 hour ago, GurpreetKaur said:

I thought bhai chaupa singh ji is someone who might be a 19th or 20th century scholar but just googled and he was during the time of Guru ji. :0

 

Baba Chaupa Singh jee was a beloved Sikh of Sri Satguru jee. He did Darshan of four Masters. He was the male-nurse of Tenth Master. His name before Baptism (by Khanday wala Amrit), was Bhai Chaupat Rai jee. 

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[CdnSikhGirl]

7 minutes ago, paapiman said:

Baba Chaupa Singh jee was a beloved Sikh of Sri Satguru jee. He did Darshan of four Masters. He was the male-nurse of Tenth Master. His name before Baptism (by Khanday wala Amrit) was Bhai Chaupat Rai jee.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

@paapiman And as a beloved Sikh of Satguru Ji, he has condemned women. To instruct all men to never trust any woman (even those close to them), and to consider us all as the very embodiment of deceit, to make statement that it is a crime to give us amrit, and much more. It hurts very very much. To the point that as a Singhni realizing this, it becomes difficult to justify even continuing in this life because spirituality is supposed to be our ultimate goal. How can we even contemplate it, when we know our very creator Waheguru sees us as ceceitful immoral etc and has created in the minds of men, distrust such that our lives are only hell? I have actually contemplated how to end it, in the least painful way so I can be reborn as a male. I do not want to live in this body knowing my very creator hates me. I know you also condemn women, so do you have any methods that would end life quickly and what should I do as I am dying to ensure that I will be reborn as a male baby?

[Ragmaala]

16 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

@Satkirin_Kaur   Have had a quick look through Chaupa Singh's rehatnama. Cannot see anything what you have posted. With look at it in more detail tomorrow.Have noticed in that little pic you have put up, that one line ends in 341, and the next line ends in 100.Where have you got that pic from? Give us a link to read the whole article.One thing in Chaupa Singh rehatnama is:

Its on page 18, of the article she posted. Ctrl F 100.

I don't believe in that translation. Will either need original transcript, or just dismiss it plainly. 

Often times we get flies in our milk or tea, we simply remove the makhi.

@GurpreetKaur  I dont believe its the correct translation. Even if it is correct version, dismiss it. We dont have to follow rehitnamas word by word, they are a guideline. Somethings are common sense.

 

[Singh123456777]

Satkiran have you actually read charitarpkyian? If you did there are stories of men who are stupid. Of men who are sexual fiends. Of men who do the worst things. In charitarpkyian they have stories of women doing glorious things and noble things. You don't know shit about charitarpkyian.

Charitarpkyian means the characters of humans.