SikhKhoj

Charitropakhyan film has already been made. Watch MIRCH, a Bollywood movie which is based on ancient Indian stories (its not as explicit as the Charitars) Since Charitropakhyan offers mostly old recycled stories, the ancient stories featured in Mirch are actually very similar to the tales in Charitropakhyan because they have the same source.

This is my last post on this thread. 

First line says "ਸਾਹਾ ਗਣਹਿ ਨ ਕਰਹਿ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥". Guru Nanak starts of by saying: O Pandit, you make calculations (ਗਣਹਿ) to obtain an auspicious date for the wedding (ਸਾਹਾ), but you do not contemplate.
Contemplate what? The answer is: ਸਾਹੇ ਊਪਰਿ ਏਕੰਕਾਰੁ ॥ - that God is above these auspicious days.The one who meets the Guru - ਜਿਸੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਮਿਲੈ, realizes the (real) way (to ascertain auspicious days) - ਸੋਈ ਬਿਧਿ ਜਾਣੈ. How? By following Gurmat, one realizes Gods Will. 
ਝੂਠੁ ਨ ਬੋਲਿ ਪਾਡੇ ਸਚੁ ਕਹੀਐ ॥ - Pandit do not lie, speak the truth. Now it is clear from the context that the lie is about the calculations and auspicious dates. When egotism is removed with Shabd, then one finds his Home. (ਹਉਮੈ ਜਾਇ ਸਬਦਿ ਘਰੁ ਲਹੀਐ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥)
Calculating and counting, the astrologer draws the horoscope. (ਗਣਿ ਗਣਿ ਜੋਤਕੁ ਕਾਂਡੀ ਕੀਨੀ ॥) He studies it and announces it, but he does not understand reality. ( ਪੜੈ ਸੁਣਾਵੈ ਤਤੁ ਨ ਚੀਨੀ ॥ ) The Word of the Guru's Shabad is above all.   Do not speak of anything else (i.e. astrology); it is all just ashes. (ਸਭਸੈ ਊਪਰਿ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦੁ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥ ਹੋਰ ਕਥਨੀ ਬਦਉ ਨ ਸਗਲੀ ਛਾਰੁ ॥੨॥)
And so on, till we arrive at the tuk I quoted: 
ਗਣਤ ਗਣੀਐ ਸਹਸਾ ਦੁਖੁ ਜੀਐ ॥ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਰਣਿ ਪਵੈ ਸੁਖੁ ਥੀਐ
Astrological calculations about one's future create suspense or sorrow in one's heart; But by seeking the Guru's refuge, one always remains in peace and comfort.
It is crystal clear from the opening line that the Guru addresses a Pandit regarding the calculations he makes to draw a birth chart to eventually fix an auspicious date for the marriage. Guru Sahib tells him that he does not realize that Parmatma is above these; as all days are created by God. The Guru encourages to speak about nothing else than GurShabad (in this context the Guru is referring to the kundlis). And the Guru continues till he says that instead of creating suspense or sorrow in your heart by supposed revelations of your future; instead embrace the Guru and remain in peace and comfort (by living in his Will and accepting Hukam).

Guru Nanak Patshah says in Bani:
ਗਣਤ ਗਣੀਐ ਸਹਸਾ ਦੁਖੁ ਜੀਐ ॥
ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਰਣਿ ਪਵੈ ਸੁਖੁ ਥੀਐ
Astrological calculations about one's future create suspense or sorrow in one's heart;
But by seeking the Guru's refuge, one always remains in peace and comfort.

Being vegan does no good to you. Go Jhatka a Bakra or Soor (as Bhai Mani Singh Ji) and take it as Parshad. You might get some drishti into the larger picture.

I say this with the risk of being labelled a missionary. But the initiation ceremony should be called Khande Ki Pahul. Amrit existed prior to the Pahul ceremony and continues to exist beyond the Pahul ceremony too (in the case of sahajdharis, non Sikhs who attain a certain spiritual state).

Besides that, I kindly request anyone on this forum to find me the word 'amritdhari' in old writings (1700 - 1850). The chances are very slim that you will find it because the real word for the ones who had taken pahul was Kesdhari. A Sikh with hair and beard but not taken Pahul (like nowadays) did not really exist. You were either Keshdhari (i.e. amritdhari) or sahajdhari. This is evident from several Rahitnamas that frown upon people who look the part (i.e. full Kesh) but do not take Pahul (Daya Singh Rahitnama as an example).

Ambedkar embraced Budhism but Budhism is still 0.5% Indian population

1. Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha (anti Charitars according to Gurmat Martand)
2. Bhai Gurmukh Singh 'Professor'
3. S. Shamsher Singh Ashok (anti Charitars, Avtaars, Bachittar Natak, ..., pro Jaap and a few other 'Banis' like Zafarnama)
 
Add to  the list. And discuss?
 

No, only recognised scholars who have given years of their life to Sikh research and perhaps also written dozens of books. No lallu panju :) The contribution of the three men above to Sikhi can't be stated in words. 
Therefore I haven't included Teja Singh Bhasaur as I don't find him scholarly enough.

Guru Nanak Patshah says in Bani:
ਗਣਤ ਗਣੀਐ ਸਹਸਾ ਦੁਖੁ ਜੀਐ ॥
ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਰਣਿ ਪਵੈ ਸੁਖੁ ਥੀਐ
Astrological calculations about one's future create suspense or sorrow in one's heart;
But by seeking the Guru's refuge, one always remains in peace and comfort.

Guru Nanak Patshah says in Bani:
ਗਣਤ ਗਣੀਐ ਸਹਸਾ ਦੁਖੁ ਜੀਐ ॥
ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਰਣਿ ਪਵੈ ਸੁਖੁ ਥੀਐ
Astrological calculations about one's future create suspense or sorrow in one's heart;
But by seeking the Guru's refuge, one always remains in peace and comfort.

1. Post 20th century the Singh Sabha mindset has hurt the 'Sikh' numbers by sidelining and ignoring the Sehajdharis and Nanakpanthis.
For example: There was  a time when nearly all non Muslim Sindhis were Nanakpanthis, but the radicalisation post Singh Sabha made them move away. Ofcourse many of them also venerated Jhule Lal besides Guru Nanak Ji but still.
Years ago I was also shocked at the 2001 census having only 20k Sikhs for Bihar, the birth place of Guru Gobind Singh. But since I have discovered that Bihar once had a quite significant population of Sikhs (Nanakpanthis), which withered due to our own neglect and partly the Udasi sadhus 'reverting' to Hinduism post SGPC to prevent their Dharamshalas from getting under SGPC control.
Even today some indigenous Sikhs of Bihar can be found near Lakhmipur and other areas visited by Guru Tegh Bahadur.
2. I also used to believe that most Sikhs inhabiting foreign countries were of Punjabi descent, but I think a critical reading of the Janamsakhis is needed to ascertain this. The person who gave the elephant to Guru Gobind Singh Ji was a native Assami King, his ancestors having converted at the times of Guru Nanak.  The Raja Shivnabh of Sri Lanka also converted. More than a hundred Nanakpanthi native Arab families existed in 1930, Sikh since Guru Nanaks times (source: Mushtaq Hussain alias Prithpal Singh). Remember Salas Rai Johri the jeweller? His descendants are Nanakpanthis but in dire need of parchaar just like many other tribes and people but our SGPC is doing nothing, in a few generations they will also be back to Hinduism. Bihar used to have above 300 Dharamshalas, all with native Bihari Sikhs, such as Bhai Bhagwan during Guru Har Rais time (ex Buddhist).
While one may not take this statement too seriously but the Dabistan also talks of Sikhs living in most corners of the world. But you could argue that it talked of Punjabi Sikhs, which I doubt but fair enough.
3. So from the above we can assume that lots of non Punjabi Sikhs used to exist. But where did they all go?
a) reverted back over generations due to lack of parchaar, just as we are seeing right now with Johris.
b) many of them were not in Khalsa form and thus were neglected
 
4. We did not forcibly convert others. While forcing is the un Sikh way, I wish more was done to convert non Sikhs during the Misl and Ranjit Singh Kaal, but sadly we are too secular... We are even butt hurt at ex Sikh Christians returning back to Sikhi to avoid political disturbances in Punjab. This explains why we are only 10-20% of the total Punjabi population.
5. Indian census is not reliable, they do not count poor tribal Sikhs as Sikhs, who are atleast 2-3 million in number. Search for Sikligar, Vanjara, Lobana, Johri, etc.
 
 

You're showing your ignorance once again.
* A child is given Kirpan Da Amrit not Khande Da. Since a child does not choose it himself, he is not to blame for eventual errors. This in contradiction with Khande Di Pahul which is only taken when one is ready, every mistake or kurehat you do is counted and you're declared patit if you break Rehat.
* Secondly, Sevapanthi chiefs have always been sahejdharis. You can check their names from Bhai Kanhaiya onwards. They never became 'amritdhari'.
* Sant Gurbakh Daas was the head priest of KesGarh during the early 1700s (source: Mahan Kosh).
* Many other sahejdhari sikhs led congregations according to the remnant Hukamnmas of the Guru.
* Even Sau Sakhi says there are 3 type of Sikhs: khand, charan (non existent after 1708) and sahejdhari.
You're modern Singh Sabhia black white interpretation which infects people like Kulwant Singh too
I have backed up my every claim by quotes & sources. Come back with historical proofs and don't quote Desa Singh Rehatnama because I am sure people like you drink sharab and then quote Desa Singh Rehat.
 

This is from Desa Singh Rehatnama. The same Rehatnama says you can drink sharab. Tu sharab peeni a oye?
Sehajdharis have always been part and parcel of panth. They were non amritdharis like Moti Ram Mehra, Diwan Mittha Mal and many others.

There are people who claim Sarbloh was written by Guru Gobind Singh (albeit in a previous incarnation). There used to be people who seriously believed the Sau Sakhi was written by Guru Gobind Singh about a century back (Kahan Singh Nabha talks about this). There are who ascribe many granths to Guru Gobind such as the Puranmasi Katha, Prem Sumarg, etc
Truth is that we are gullible as a community in general, just associate anything with the Gurus and you will have fools ready to pay millions for it or worship it. Anything with the title Pt 10 was seriously considered as a Dasam Pita Bani just because of the heading - and mind you, I personally know dozens of people who still think that way. This fact was severely misused by our enemies and corrupt people, read the Naveen Panth Parkash to read how the son of Sukha Singh Patna (Granthi) actually imitated Guru Gobind Singhs handwriting and sold the writings for lots of money.
But since most of the compositions seem to have been composed in the Gur Darbar the Dasam Granth seems to have had more general authenticity over the years. But that is one evolution, it is in this aspect that you can not deny the Amrit Sanchar proofs from within Bansawlinama. You say 'thats another topic' but the title says 'Bansawlinama on DG' and since Amrit Sanchar has no DG banis it is very important to notice a trend and actually understand why and how DG became so popular.
If people like Kesar Singh believed in the 1760s that DG was by Guru Gobind Singh they also on the other hand showed Amrit Sanchar had no Dasam Banis. The Mukatnama from around the same time equally gives no DG Bani in the Nitnem. Theres a dozen sources confirming about the Nitnem. (don't quote unauthentic Rehats such as the so called 1695 Nand Lal rehat for Jap Jaap - Pyara Padam himself published them and said they're all later writings and not of Nand Lal or the respected others)

DG gained more importance in the late 18th and early 19th century because that is when things such as DG Banis started appearing in the nitnem, and DG Banis were added to Pahul. Even if we accept the flawed source of Guru Kian Sakhian for 5 Banis (including DG) it means no source prior to 1790 mentions those Banis. Even the Prem Sumarg that is so admired on this forum does not give Dasam Banis for Amrit Sanchar, which leads me to accept that it might have been written somewhere before the 1780s.

DG did not gain prominence because it was Dasam Krit but because it was made part of Nitnem and Amrit Sanchar. And that is how our community got fooled by having our main ceremonies depend on the Dasam Granth - and even today people still do not dare to question DG because our main ceremonies depend on it. So it is a complicated issue and needs full assessment. You can't just say Kesar Singh accepts DG banis as Dasam Guru Krit and leave out the fact that despite existence of DG there was  no DG in Amrit Sanchar which shows a evolution to include more DG (this is not a conspiracy theory, it is a fact you can establish by reading and taking notes of all manuscripts and you will notice the evolution yourself).
 

As I said earlier, a perspective is not formed on the basis of one book but several books, so I'll quote some works here, I am not vouching for the general authenticity of the accounts but simply stating that a point is being corraborated by several granths. And no, many Granths supporting a thing doesn't mean its true. But lets see:
Several older works only make 2 type of distinctions between Sikhs, the Amritdharis & the Sahejdharis. The Kesdharis are mentioned but synonymous with amritdharis, which is evident from some sources saying 'a kesdhari who does not take amrit will go to hell/is a bhekhi' (don't remember the source, might be Sau Sakhi). 
The thing is the sects you mention are not really a division, you can be a nirmala sahejdhari but also a nirmala amritdhari, you can be a sevapanthi sahejdhari (like the earlier ones) but also a sevapanthi amritdhari. The broad distinction are the two groups. I base this theory on my study of Sau Sakhi, Chaupa Rehat, Bhagat Ratnavli, Vijay Mukt, etc. Besides that I have not read Bhai Kanhaiyas successors book but apparently it supports the fact that they were not amritdharis. (18th century writing).

Stop being an illiterate fool and learn something about gurmat. Taking your head out of your backside will help for a start, then learn gurbani arths in shabad context and not seperate tuks.

So you are saying that because those Singhnis live in the West, their achievements do not matter at all?  I very highly doubt they support those things you mentioned.  They are just trying to contribute positively to society (by doing something more significant than slaving over a hot stove all day).  
And I am white... and I do not support any of those things that you mentioned!
And I can't believe you don't know who Bapu Surat Singh Ji is... he has been on hunger strike for months now, trying to get Sikh prisoners freed.  Even I know who he is! 

So recognizing courageous Kaurs also somehow means white power structure?? I am confused... these are not white Sikhs... they are Punjabi Singhnis.  You think Singhni's place is hiding in men's shadow being a domestic servant only?? These are Punjabi Singhnis, who wanted to make a difference in the world, and went for their dreams... is that somehow wrong to acknowledge their courage and bravery too?

Both in their own way.  I guess there are fewer examples of Singhnis participating in these things in India because well, they are still resctricted from doing these things in India.  However given the chance they would!  So we have to use examples in areas where they are not told "no...sorry dear men only" But if those things were open to them they would.  Actually I think there are Sikh women in the Indian army are there not?? I'm not sure if they are given limitations in the Indian army that the men don't have though but I am sure I have seen Sikh women in the Indian Army.
In the example I have shown though, those Singhnis are not doing anything that could be considered bad or wrong or against Sikhi.  They are fighting against tyranny, crime, etc. So how can we downplay their examples just because they happen to be in the west where they are given more opportunity.  Of course if you limit your examples to areas where women are discouraged from police, military service etc, then of course you will have less examples to quote (or none at all).

I think in general, Singhs and Singhnis were glocious in past. You can't say only Singhs had glorious history... somewhere along the line Singhnis were discouraged and became mere simple housewifes.  At least in the west, where they are not discouraged, Sikh women are stepping up as examples to others.  There are Singhs too... but if you are speaking purely about physial prowess, well then, as a general rule, I think there are huge issues!!! LOL Laziness... I blame the internet, gaming, TV
 

Maybe because I can't fathom treating anyone any different just because of colour.  And I live in Canada where for the most part we don't have these issues...  
 
And white privilege? Believe me, your male privilege outweighs any white privilege I might have, which is really none. Canada upholds the idea of equal opportunity.  Look at LCol Harjit Sajjan... look him up, and the history of the regiment he recently Commanded and it's links with Sikhs in the past.  
 
Anyway you are going off topic. I just wanted to point out that it's not only Singhs who are / were Brave and Glorious... 

Look who is getting scared all of a sudden above

it wasn't even doen respectfully, sikhkhoj called Sant Gurbachan Singh "gurbachana"  a mockery of his name but that was allowed.

Not one, there are three historical sources that confirm Shyam was one of the court Poets. And one source even goes on to say that these poets wrote the Charitropakhyan and Chaubis Avtar.

Really got irritated when Mcleod talked about several manuscripts of Chaupa Rehat and then concludes that the one with the hom ceremony is more authentic and the others without hom ceremony aren't because they appear to have 'omitted' the passage. He never even goes near the possibility that 1 ms might've been corrupted while 3-4 others do not even mention that incident, but he kept insisting the hom one was more authentic just because it was controversial.

What is sad is that I, being an anti Dasam Granthi, have to post proofs to show that Shyam was not a pen name but a court poet but pro DGs can get away with saying anything. Double standards.
Same with the source. Agreed its just one source but do you guys even have one which clearly says Guru Ji wrote Charitropakhyan?