Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Guest

Missing compositions of SGGS

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest

I came across some Information stating that there were some compositions of the SGGS that were at some point taken out as they were concidered to be false. 

"The puraatan (old) saroops that did or do include Raagmala (like Bhai Banno Beerh) also included other compositions after Mundaavni (but before Raagmala), such as: (i) Jit Dar Lakh Mohammada, (ii) Siahi Di Bhidhi, (iii) Ratanmala, (iv) Hakeekatrah mukam, (v) Praan Sangli, (vi) Rab Mukam Ki Sabk, (vii) Baye Atisb (16 saloks) etc. All seven of these compositions that existed after Mundaavni (but before Raagmala) were all unanimously discredited by the Panth and it was acknowledged that mischievous individuals had over time included these compositions at the end of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji but had no standing against gurbani"

my questions are :

is this above true ?

if so, when we're these compositions out into SGGS ? How long were they in there and when were they taken out ? And by whom?

do we still have copies of them ?

who is bahi banoo beerah?

thanks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true in a historical sense. If you go to Punjab Digital Library you can find that some saroops of Guru Granth sahib contain extra banis at the end, also recipes for how to make ink, lists of the jyoti jyot dates of the Gurus, info about the scribe etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

who is bahi banoo beerah?

Srimaan Baba Bano jee was a famous Sikh of Sri Satguru jee (Fifth Master). He was given the completed saroop of Sri Ad Granth Sahib on his request. He made a copy of the holy saroop. He added some compositions to the copy without the permission of Maharaaj. He added Mira bai jee's (famous saint) shabad, some addition to Ramkali kee vaar, Sri Pran Sangli, etc. That copy of the saroop is known as Bhai Bano de beerh. Beerh means a corpus.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Guest Guest said:

I came across some Information stating that there were some compositions of the SGGS that were at some point taken out as they were concidered to be false. 

IMO, those compositions were not false, but were not part of the original saroop, which was compiled by Sri Satguru jee (Fifth Master).

Sri Pran Sangli is a composition of Sri Satguru jee (First Master). Fifth Master had sent a Sikh to Sangladeep (where this Gurbani was) to bring it back to Punjab. Maharaaj then decided to "Jal Parvah" the Pothi as he had said that my Sikhs don't need it. A Sadhu requested Maharaaj to give him the Pothi and he agreed.

 

Bhul chuk maaf 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, amardeep said:

It is true in a historical sense. If you go to Punjab Digital Library you can find that some saroops of Guru Granth sahib contain extra banis at the end, also recipes for how to make ink, lists of the jyoti jyot dates of the Gurus, info about the scribe etc.

Do all these Saroops contain the extra Gurbanis/Banis before Sri Raagmala Sahib?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some people say that these extra banis belong to the ucharans of the early Gurus and hence were still considered pavitar mukhvaak by the Sikhs even though Guru Arjan did not find them relevant to include in the saroop.

If you read the early Janam Sakhis you can see the Gurus reciting many shabads that are not in the Guru Granth Sahib. But because they were said by the Gurus the Sikhs still saw them as holy and therefore continued to transmit them. So many Sikh scribes would take these ucharans and put them at the end of Guru Granth Sahib as a way of preserving these banis. In the same way many hukamname were added to saroops etc. to preserve them in Sikh manuscripts.

That's one theory I heard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Reply

Ok - you guys are a bit advanced for me - 

ok so if these we're part of bani - why were they taken out ? And when? Are all 7 available still ?

where they still park of SGGS at the time of guru gobind Singh?

What does saroop mean inthe aboce context - I always thought it mean t handsome ?

so these compositions are not part of SGGS? Therefore not part of guru ji ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Reply

Also what does the Following words mean..

 ucharans

pavitaar mukhvaar 

When you say Janam sakis -which Ones are you referring to? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These banis were still around in the time of Guru Gobind Singh but like Guru Arjan he did not include them in the Final Guru Granth Sahib. 

They were probably taken out because their main message was targeted for a specific audience ie yogis etc 

Pavitar ucharan can be translates as holy words. Saroop is a manuscript of the Guru Granth Sahib.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't we say that bani, that which is composed by Mahaalla 2,3,4,  etc. and referenced as "Nanak", came from beyond maya, whilst Gurus where in states of Chautha pad. This includes bhagat, batt bani for which there is also a lot of complementing Gurus bani.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Guest Reply said:

Ok - you guys are a bit advanced for me - 

ok so if these we're part of bani - why were they taken out ? And when? Are all 7 available still ?

where they still park of SGGS at the time of guru gobind Singh?

What does saroop mean inthe aboce context - I always thought it mean t handsome ?

so these compositions are not part of SGGS? Therefore not part of guru ji ? 

Are you the same guy, who was posting in the topic Aurengzeb?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

@amardeep ok so if the saroop didn't have the additional text but were added by someone else - when we'd they take out.?

@paapiman - no ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Reply

@Soulfinder

thanks ... the 2nd link say  3 versions of sggs? Huh? Didn't know there were 3!

anyone have PDF of compositions that were taken out? English if possible.... thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

99,9% of the bani is the same, but the bhanno edition has some extra banis compromising maybe 5-10 pages extra. As far as I remember there are three versions that were prevalent in the 18th century

 

  1. The Adi Granth of Guru Arjan. Many copies were made of this throughout the 17th and 18th century. It does'nt contain the banis of Guru Tegh Bahadur
  2. The Bhanno bir. It contains all of the Adi Granth with some extra banis towards the end
  3. The Damdama Bir of Guru Gobind SIngh. It contains all of the Adi Granth and the banis of Guru Tegh Bahadur and became known as the Guru Granth SAhib.

The Adi Granth and Bhanno Bir were still copied throughout the 18th century (after Guru Gobind Singh had finalised the Guru Granth Sahib). In the case of the bhanno beer I think it was because many scribes were not aware of these extra banis (it's easy to miss 5-10 pages out of a Granth that contains several thousand pages). The Adi Granth was most likely copied in areas, where they already had an old Adi Granth saroop and therefore they copied it again and again to have more saroops in the local area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Reply

Are there missing compositions still available ? If so where ? I'm referring to the Ines taken out 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's quite a long article. But based on other articles i've read on that page, it probably does'nt hold any value. Lot of words, things out of context etc. I'll see if I can find the time to read the article during next week

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Guest Reply said:

I was trying to research this topic and I came across this webpage ... it's a bit long but are the claims inthe article true - that the SGGS has gone through a few alterations and has discrepancies in its manuscripts ?

link : http://www.islam-sikhism.info/kartarpuri-bir-pothi/

Are you a Sikh? You don't have to answer, but Daas was curious.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, amardeep said:

That's quite a long article. But based on other articles i've read on that page, it probably does'nt hold any value. Lot of words, things out of context etc. I'll see if I can find the time to read the article during next week

I'v read their articles, they're really poorly written. They take from whatever sources match up to theirs and themselves enjoy controversy. E.G the concept of Sargun/Nirgun being explained in wave particle duality is wrong according to them as basing it exclusively on science is wrong....but its ok for them to do it.  

Utterly hilarious as they do no favours for their own religion and their own credibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×