Keerat Singh

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

Most the teeka's have given similar araths. 
I think maharaj is talking of events which are taking place rather than signs of things to come. 
If you take the pangti together then it seems men are continuing to do their moorakta, (hunting can mean plundering, murdering or even hunting for maya), women have joined in and have become advisers in such durmat.  
There is nothing negative in the comment women have become advisors, its only when we take the whole shabad together we can try to make sense of it. 
 This is one potential arath. It will be nice to see how others understand this shabad. 

Most the teeka's have given similar araths. 
I think maharaj is talking of events which are taking place rather than signs of things to come. 
If you take the pangti together then it seems men are continuing to do their moorakta, (hunting can mean plundering, murdering or even hunting for maya), women have joined in and have become advisers in such durmat.  
There is nothing negative in the comment women have become advisors, its only when we take the whole shabad together we can try to make sense of it. 
 This is one potential arath. It will be nice to see how others understand this shabad. 

viarkaran simply gives us some understand where is a word is for example plural, singular, guru referring to himself etc. What viakaran does not do is explain the antreev arath or give any explanation behind the shabad.
If you read Prof Sahib Singh's arath you will find plenty of examples where he says that arath do not make sense if he follows viakaran. Im not saying viakaran is useless, however everything should be considered and Prof Sahib Singh had to accept that the rules did not follow on some shabads. On the one had we say tera ant na jaye likhiya, on the other than we are saying Guru da ant is up to viakaran, 
I have also read books on viakaran. Where do the rules on viakaran not allow you explain shabads through history and stories?

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

It's a pattern that exists in Guru Granth Sahib.

The aunkarh and sihari are not always pronounced. They are sometimes used as symbols of grammar and there is a way to find out if that's the case.

There is no such thing as Male Authority. 
I personally find feminine qualities attractive. Definition is subjective.
I am not attracted to Masculine traits in a woman.
I do not intend to control or dominate or make decisions for someone. Get that straight.
I am not a spokesperson for Sikhism or any particular group or a particular gender. I write, what I like, based on  personal analysis.
You cannot change my views, I do not intend to change your thinking. The discussion is useless.
 
 
 

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

I have read that there is saroops without Ragamala aswell. I don't know which saroops they are. But the majority of saroops and especially ones signed by maharaj has Raagamala in.
The saroop Ram Rai took to Delhi and from which the pangti mitti musalman ki was questioned from also has Raagmala. This saroop is now at Dera Dun. There is another handwritten saroop there with Raagmala in.
a Saroop at Varanasi with Guru Tegh Bahadur jis signature also has Raagmala. 
The Damdama Sahib Saroop has Raagmala. 
There is over 15 hand written sarooops around The area of Varanasi with Raagmala in. 

It is uttam purakh.
Another point which those who adhere to Gurbani Viakaran fail to mention is that nearly all of Guru Tegh Bahadur jis shabads to do not follow the rules of Vaikaran. 
the main reason people are against Raag Mala is because they say it does not follow Gurbani Viakaran. Such an argument has no weight.  

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

From a practical point of view, it is unrealistic to believe that a group of people found every SGGS in India and added Raagmala. 
in the summer of 2000 I was travelling through India and went to Madhya Pardesh. A mahapursh told me of the sangat at the city of Burhanpur. The people of this city are not Punjabi. They become Sikhs when Guru Nanak Dev ji visited. When Guru Gobind Singh ji was travelling towards South India they reached Burhanpur and was welcomed by the Nanakpanthi. Maharaj stayed there for a number of days and the Sikhs took Amrit. SGGS was left with the Sikhs. The SGGS was completed at Agra (im sure this is recorded by Dr. Ganda Singh. The SGGS is signed by Guru Gobind Singh. Raagmala is in this saroop. 
The people of Burhanpur have no link with the Sikhs of Punjab. How would some person get to the middle of India, find this small group of Sikhs and manage to convince them to add Raagmala in. Its absurd. There is handwritten saroops in South Uttar Pardesh, in Nizamabad, Varanasi etc, all these old saroops have Raagmala in them. Practically its absurd how a band or people (or person) managed to get to all these places, find all the saroops, convince the Sikhs that Guru ji forgot to add Raagmala and then added Raagmala into the saroops. 

It is uttam purakh.
Another point which those who adhere to Gurbani Viakaran fail to mention is that nearly all of Guru Tegh Bahadur jis shabads to do not follow the rules of Vaikaran. 
the main reason people are against Raag Mala is because they say it does not follow Gurbani Viakaran. Such an argument has no weight.  

Viakaran uses spellings to explain how gurbani should be translated and pronounced . 
The word Ramdas comes in gurbani to refer to Guru Ram das ji, sect Ramdas and also the servants of Rab ji. 
The spellings of Ramdas 
Ramdas Sarovar nate - There us no unkar under Ramdas 
Jogi Jati Basino Ramdas - There is no unkar under Ramdas (this is referring to the followers of Ramdas)
Ramdas Sodhu Tilak deeya - there is no unkar under Ramdas (this is referring to Guru Ramdas ji)
Why is it that these three words have different meanings, yet all three has the same spellings? Viakaran will not provide the answer. 
People who follow vaikaran say that Ramdas sarovar nate does not refer to the Guru Ram Das, they say it refers to the lords servant. But if you look at the shabads which refer to the lords servant, they have an unkar under the sasa. For example:
Asee jugat Nanak Ramdas - Such is the way, O Nanak, of the Lords Servant. 
If Ramdas sarovar nate was to mean the Lords servant, surely it would be spelt the same as the above shabad. But it is not. People who follow Viakaran do not believe that by bathing in Ramdas sarovar, sins are erased. They therefore do not follow the trend in shabads which have an unkar under which refers to the Lords servant. 
It gets even more confusing, the following shabad has an unkar under, but it refers to Guru Ramdas ji,
 
Sohe Ramdas gur bal, bhan mil sangat than than karo. 
Why does this shabad have an unkar under? There is other shabads by the Bhatts referring to Guru Ramdas ji with an unkar under. Viakaran provides no answers for this. There is no set spellings for the word Ramdas which would indicate what the meaning is for each shabad with the word Ramdas. 

Poota mata kee asis, nimak na bisaroo tum ko har har ....
 
The word bisario has an oora with unkar under. Therefore according to gurbani viakaran the translation is first person and pronounced with a bindi. But the correct translation is:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That you may never forget the Lord Har Har,
If viakaran is followed the translation becomes:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That I may never forget the Lord Har Har,
Viakaran clearly does not work in this shabad. The translation makes no sense if we use the word "I" rather than "you", 
DDT as far as I understand do not teach viakaran. Although viakaran is great to understand shabads, the above example is proof that it is not final in understanding shabads as being made out. 
 

Was there meant to be one maryada as presented by the SGPC and advocated by all samparda? Everyone claims their maryada is the correct one. 
If an udasi could have been left with control of Sri Anandpur Sahib when Guru Gobind Singh ji left, Sevapanthi samparda flourished at the same time as did the Nirmala's, it makes one think whether the guru intended for their to be one maryada as the SGPC are trying to implement. 
Jin tu jata so grisht udasi parvan. 
Parvangee is not within our hands or the SGPC.   
Two separate maryada is accepted as being parvan in the shabad above, unity I believe will come in finding common ground and accepting differences in our paths.  

Poota mata kee asis, nimak na bisaroo tum ko har har ....
 
The word bisario has an oora with unkar under. Therefore according to gurbani viakaran the translation is first person and pronounced with a bindi. But the correct translation is:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That you may never forget the Lord Har Har,
If viakaran is followed the translation becomes:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That I may never forget the Lord Har Har,
Viakaran clearly does not work in this shabad. The translation makes no sense if we use the word "I" rather than "you", 
DDT as far as I understand do not teach viakaran. Although viakaran is great to understand shabads, the above example is proof that it is not final in understanding shabads as being made out. 
 

Poota mata kee asis, nimak na bisaroo tum ko har har ....
 
The word bisario has an oora with unkar under. Therefore according to gurbani viakaran the translation is first person and pronounced with a bindi. But the correct translation is:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That you may never forget the Lord Har Har,
If viakaran is followed the translation becomes:
O Son this is your mothers prayer, That I may never forget the Lord Har Har,
Viakaran clearly does not work in this shabad. The translation makes no sense if we use the word "I" rather than "you", 
DDT as far as I understand do not teach viakaran. Although viakaran is great to understand shabads, the above example is proof that it is not final in understanding shabads as being made out.