Kuttabanda2

The SGPC Rehat Maryada relied more on Khoj then "Seeneh Baseeneh di Chali aayi Maryada" which frankly is quite questionable, especially with practices and beliefs that these Sampardas are propagating and practicing now.

Are Dhumma and Rhode not sellouts? There are certain contemporaries that don't find certain Taksali figures (not including Shaheed Jathedar Gyani Gurdev Singh Kaunke) to be "pure". There are a lot of sellouts in Taksal too, the Mehta brush just paints them otherwise. Taksal as of now, is as bad as the SGPC of today.

That's because they all sprouted from the Nirmalas.

It's not like the sampardas have the most genuine Maryada either. The Singh Sabhas did their khoj, they made mistakes but it's not indicative of the Sampardas bearing orginal Gurmat Rehat Maryada.

It's not an abbreviated version, it's not from the same author either, it just happens to have the same name.

I think there are like around a dozen Granths that are by the name of Gurbilas Patshahi Chevin and Gurbilas Patshahi Dasvin, each probably from a different author.

Not sure what Gurpreet Singh is talking about. However, I know for a fact that there were 2 manuscripts (written, not printed) that were recieved from the Mazhabis, the manuscript Gurpreet Singh discussed is probably the 'uttara' (copy) of one of the two originals that Gyani Garja Singh was given, the copy is still around, but the manuscript is missing. Another manuscript (considered to be written by Shaheed Baba Jeevan Singh Ji himself) was found in Bhasha Vibhagh Ferozpur along with a manuscript of 'Panth Prakash', the Sri Gur Katha manuscript was kept with the Ranghretas of east India who were descendants of some 13th Bangsi Ranghreteh Misl warriors who were driven out of Punjab due to an apparent genocide (not sure if that's the right word) carried out against them by the other Sikhs, they had recorded their history in 'Bangsinama' which sadly was also lost before any analysis could be done of it.

Actually, that's wrong, it's in the same form as it was originally, It's not a translation, Who said it's not original?.....it's in print now too... so this shouldn't even be an argument. There still is a manuscript available, as far as I know, only one of two manuscripts have gone missing. To address your last point, People have been doctoring and interpolating texts to fit their preconceptions way before the annexation.

I've noticed that he lies quite often and claims to have 'connections with scholars' (a complete lie) and never shows any proof whatsoever, he seems to be a lost individual.

I personally don't see anything "murky". It's discovery doesn't seem fishy, there's still an extant manuscript. I also have a copy of the text at hand. If the fact that it mentions the Panj Baniya and Panj Kakkars throws you off, (considering the likes of McLeod have propagated the idea of the Kakkars and required Banis as a post-Dasmesh Ji concept that gradually evolved to where it is today.) It's not the only source that mentions the Panj Kakkars and Panj Banis. I have the books of Dr. Gurmukh Singh, Bhai Niranjan Singh Arifi, Neeti Singh, and Gyani Nishan Singh Ghandivind (his book is probably the most insightful) that deal entirely with Sri Gur Katha and it's history.

I do understand that. No one here is attempting to be an expert. Everyone is trying their best here with their own intellect and understanding. However, Sikhkhoj (considering he started is known to convoy claims and theories and pull them straight out of his behind, as he evidently has done. He doesn't even believe in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji ( which by the way has almost irrefutable evidence backing it's authenticity). Secondly, I'm not asking anyone to blindly or 'piously' accept every word of the scholars who have studied this document, but rather read their books and see their analysis of the text ( with the basis, methodology and frame work that they used for the analysis/study of the text) and How can one critically study a text when the priority was "debunking" it? The fact that the 5 Kakkars, 5 Banis, and Amrit Sanchar is mentioned within this text shouldn't be used or seen as evidence of a 'devilish, diabolical, anglican, Singh Sabha' scheme to super-impose their ideology over the entire Panth. That bias should not be used when studying this Granth. Also, the grammatical system that's used in other certain texts of the 1700s isn't strong evidence against Sri Gur Katha, Shaheed Bhai Jeevan Singh Ji had no reason to strictly abide by the vocabulary, grammatical structure, and poetic system of other Granths of that time.

No, it's describing the fact that the "analysis" of such a text was done poorly, terribly, negatively, and with a clear bias.

Bohut Vadya Hoya.

This thread is senseless, ignorant, and utterly foolish. No Scholar has ever doubted Sri Guru Katha By Shaheed Kavi Baba Jeevan Singh Ji. The language is not "new" in any form, you can probably find such similarities in other contemporary texts. Secondly, Gurpur Prakash by Shaheed Baba Binod Singh Ji matches up entirely with Sri Guru Katha. The word "Kakkar" or "Kakke" has also been in use since the times of Dasmesh Pita Ji, it's been used in Bhai Gurmukh Singh's own Rehatnama and the Chaupai that was attached to a manuscript of Mahan Kavi Bhai Prahlad Singh Ji's Rehatnama along with the incorrect Samapti Dohra that he also added. It's also been used in the Bhatt Vahis, and again, In Gurpur Prakash By Shaheed Baba Binod Singh Ji. You can speak to any present day credible and Panthic scholar, such as Dr. Harbhajan Singh, Neeti Singh, Dr. Gurmukh Singh, Dr Perhaps Dr. Kamalroop Singh, Dr. M.K. Gill, Dr. Anurag Singh, Bhai Kulwant Singh, etc. many of whom of have come across a and examined this priceless text. There should be no doubt on Sri Gursobha Granth by Maha Darbari Rattan Kavi Saina Singh/Sainapat Ji as Bakwaas Khoj has implanted in your minds. Unless you guys have analyzed the writing style, languages and literature of Guru Gobind Singh Ji's Darbari Kavis, and the poetry of that time, you can't pass any judgement or valid criticism of the text. The way the words are spelled in Sri Gur Katha is not evidence of it's inauthenticity, Gurbani Vyaakran of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the system and style of of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji's poetry and language can't be applied here at all, let alone any other Granth of the time. Thus the arguments are invalid and of no strong foundation.

The "sacred cow" verse is a metaphor. It's used metaphorically to refer to innocent or oppressed people. They used to say "Gau Brahman" Gau; Cow, Brahman:Brahmin to refer to the poor and Innocent. However, if we look at many early Rehatnamas, Brahmins aren't really treated well. In the Mukatnama, it's banned to eat pork, however, why wasn't there a restriction the cow, if it indeed was holy or highly esteemed? It's just a cultural thing that's been carried by the Hindus who converted to Sikhism. Secondly, the Uggardanti Bani isn't found in most Sri Dasam Granth sahib Sarroops. I personally believe it's Bani, but not many scholars do, considering it contrasts with many of the other compositions of Dasam Granth, in terms of writing style and heading.

True. Par naal hee sadi toki jandey aa

Have you any of you guys have any info about the so called "Baba" Vadhbag "Singh" Dera in Doaba? I read about him a while ago and how he's a descendant of Dhir Maaliyas, fled from the Turks and Khalsa, and how his Dera is not to be gone to or to associate with his followers, but I just found that my close Family members go to this Dera which is headed by a women who is related to a close family member. So does anyone got any info?

Ehna Paenchoda nu ta eh kam Ehsaan aa. Brits and other Europeans are all fossards. Isn't anyone concerned about the low life sentences and the benefits these assholes receive? This is what happens when you let a lot of Sullays into your country.

It's bakwaas nothing more.

Good.

Kes are required, but that doesn't mean Sehajdharis aren't Sikhs, just that they should plan on keeping Kes some time in their life if they can, if not, then sometime in their next life. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji doesn't mention Kes, as it does with many other things, like the history of the Guru Sahibans, early Rehat, etc. because of the pure nature, theme, and motive of Adi Bani. Anyone can keep Kes, it's effortless. But how many of us can commit to Amrit Vela, Naam and Bani Abhyaas, Gurbani and Gurmat Lekh Khoj, connect to and understand Bhagauti/Akaal, maintaining a good state of mind, having a good Charitar [character], being Bibeki, and living a Gurmat oriented life? Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and almost all of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji enlighten us on how to achieve the above. That's probably a reason why the Gurus didn't include any Bani relating or pertaining to physical Rehat inside their Granth(s). It's absence from SGGSJ doesn't necessarily mean it was completely absent, historical sources say otherwise.

Jesus is mentioned in Zindiginama I believe.

Does anyone have any information about Chand Svaarankar's Guru Mehima? Are Any of the of works of Guru Gobind Singh's poets available? With the exceptions Bhai Nand Lal Goya, Bhai Jeevan Singh Ji, Bhai Gurdas Singh, and Kavi Senapat? The Panjab Digital Library doesn't give any details whatsoever about the books and manuscripts they digitize. I read Piara Singh's book, but it only contains a few quotes and stanzas and he doesn't give any reference.

That cunning rat hasn't replied to the questions and refutations I made in private messages. He also is fond of making up claims and "having connections" with Scholars while he fails to defend his stance. Once cornered, he changes it as he pleases. He's also quite good with double standards, twisting verses, and hypocrisy. Anything that doesn't agree with his mentality is unauthentic. But what else could you expect from those who don't even have the brains to comprehend or understand the history and philosophy of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji? ਜੱਗਰ ਜੱਗਰ ਹੀ ਰਹਿੰਦਾ। ਮੱਤਹੀਨ ਦਾ ਕੋਈ ਇਲਾਜ ਨਹੀ।

In mythology, Ram did give Hanuman an undergarment representing chastity and abstinence, but that wasn't passed down to the Khalsa. The Gurus didn't believe them to be as Hindu Mythology portrayed them, they were just kings that were aggrandized, exaggerated, and worshiped by the people of India.