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.

On 1/26/2011 at 3:06 PM, dalsingh101 said:

One thing that no one can deny is how DDT have put themselves squarely on the Sikh map with their actions over the last few decades. They also don't have the stigma of 'political sellout gundh' the SGPC have now. They've so far managed to keep themselves pure of all that. I don't agree with every single opinion from them but one thing no one can ever say about them is that they are sell outs. They manage to reach the masses better than anyone else too.

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. 

On 1/26/2011 at 11:26 AM, Matheen said:

Another intersting point about the 'Taksal Maryada' is that it's the same as the Maryada followed by most Nirmala Sampardas as well, the ones who believe in Khandey Bhattey Da Amrit, anyway. e.g. Most of Bhai Daya Singh Samparda ( Hoti Mardan, etc) etc.

 

The SGPC system is really lacking from a spiritual point of view. If they had listened to all the Mahapursh who tried to contribute during its formation then it would have been ok.

That's because they all sprouted from the Nirmalas. 

On 1/25/2011 at 3:26 AM, dalsingh101 said:

They are both about 7/8 minutes long. Very interesting critique of the SGPC rehat maryada from Damdami Taksaal representatives. I think it may epitomise the position of sampardayas towards perceived modern innovations in the panth to an extent. Some powerful arguments are presented in my opinion.

 

 

Part 1

 

Part 2

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.

On 8/29/2015 at 1:03 PM, amardeep said:

The Mahima Prakash Vartak is said to be a shorter prose version of the same book. Its about 100-120 pages only and much easier to understand and read.

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

On 3/25/2016 at 3:06 PM, amardeep said:

According to Pyara Singh Padam this Bhagat Singh was the student of Kavi Dharam Singh who was a court poet of Guru Gobind Singh. And the whole Gurbilas Patshahi Chevi Granth is a book written on the basis of the katha sermons that Bhagat SIngh heard at Nankana Sahib from Bhai Mani Singh.

I've read very little from this book but I remember that I found the poetry quite beautiful. And it starts with Ik Oankaar Satgur prasaad which is quite interesting as it might indicate that it was written before Vahiguru ji ki fateh had become the standardized manglacharan.

On 3/28/2016 at 4:00 AM, chatanga1 said:

Kam, it's good to see you back bro.

 

 

The one I have says the author is Gyani Gyan Singh.

 

 

kala afghanas crew were putting, in their usual style, a perverse slant on some events of GP6. In my copy refered to above, there is a sakhi of Mata Kaula, where her life is at danger and Guru personally goes to rescue her from the Qazi's house and brings her to safety on his horse. kala afghanas crew portrayed this as Guru Ji eloping with the Qazi's daughter and therefore put a whole dark cloud over the story in GP6.

I was listening to an interview by the one of the sangh sabha international and he mentioned this, and how they successfully raised such a fuss in the media over it that vedanti backed down.

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.

6 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

The 2 years gyanis from missionary college are considered scholars by some.

 

Gurpreet Singh California in one of his recent kathas has said that he has personally seen the original manuscript. It was printed in 1952.

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.  

On 5/17/2016 at 2:13 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Do you know about its provenance? Apparently it isn't even in the original language it was composed in. And no original manuscript is available. How much more 'murky' can it get? For me, that alone is enough of a reason to go cautiously with it. 

Then: you know what translation is like, it's an imperfect process. That's the reason why we always try and use the original text along side translations here. Even if we accept it for what people claim it to be, we don't even have a way of checking if the interpretation of the original (now missing)  text is on point.   Plus you know our people have been doctoring texts to fit into some preconceptions since annexation, so we should be careful.  

 

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. 

On 5/16/2016 at 9:55 AM, chatanga1 said:

This guy khoj is a very coarse individual. He made this topic and now that you mention it, the word "debunking" in the title makes it apparent what his intentions were/are. Nevertheless if you read our replies to it, we haven't agreed with him in any way, we have just listened to his views. It would be good if maybe in the short future we could look at one or two chapters in this book.

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. 

On 5/16/2016 at 0:34 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Speak for yourself. 

 

The provenance of this granth is as murky as can be. I think it needs a hell of a lot more research before people start jumping on it like it was 'gospel'. 

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. 

17 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

That's your opinion. And no one is claiming that people are experts here. 

The only thing worse than what you claim above is brainless, blind 'pious' acceptance of texts on the basis of other people's opinions, because certain types (cough cough) can't be bothered to try and make the effort to critically study a text themselves on any level. Or they don't have to the mental strength to look at things from a perspective that might contradict their own preconceptions - which makes the whole endeavour useless anyway. 

 

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.

16 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I think this describes you. 

 

Getting over excited because some people are discussing and analysing a text. Give it a rest mate.

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. 

On October 29, 2015 at 4:39 AM, truthseeker546 said:

Ok thanks for all that.

Umm still a bit confused ... Jaikaara : you gave  quote above but didn't mention where is came from. Can I have the reference please.

"Sikhs gave their lives for cows " - I'm a bit confused as to how far the relationship of the cow is in Sikhism. One one had God is in everyone - so why give more importance to a cow then a human being - doesn't make sense - you would kill a human to protect a cow. Unless like Hinus the belief was that cows are somehow divine. 

And does this mean again that Sikhism is fundamentally an India religion, that can't shake off its cultural tires with India. For instance if Sikhism had spread to an Arab country, there are no cows in the desert. They use Camels for Meat, Milk, travel, Clothes, trade etc. Would Sikhs then give the same value to Camels as they do cows. Or horses in Eastern Turkey - each geographical area has its own Animal of choice.

Also I can appreciate that Sikhs and Hindu due to their own religious beliefs hold the cow scared - but when that belief is imposed on others others that don't hold that belief - isn't that religious intolerance / oppression ? I though Guru Nanak was against forcing your beliefs on anther people ? a bit confused.  

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.

On November 15, 2015 at 8:25 AM, dalsingh101 said:

Let's keep it real. Goray buthaa chak kay going into sullah lands to rob them of their resources or trying to install puppet 'leaders' doesn't exactly make them innocents. These assholes deserve each other. 

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.