Gupt Singh

this is a continuation from a previous discussion (this board or another i cant remember) where people were stressing that bhai chaupa singh was anti women. heres a post from the ever informative balpreet singh from tapoban.org: The Chaupa Singh rehitnama is interesting on different levels. Chaupa Singh was a Chhiber Brahmin and sometimes he seems to let a bit of a Brahmin bias enter into his work. At other times he is completely egalitarian and condemns caste in all forms. "Naa daekhai Khatree, naa daekhai Shood ki Vaish hai. Sikh Guru kaa daekhai, jaat barn naa daekhai" meaning "One should not look at whether someone is Khatri or Shudra or Vaish. One should look whether someone is a Sikh, one should not look at caste or clan." (77) All my references on this rehitnama come from the Padam book. The Chaupa Singh rehitnama also contains a number of internal contradictions which indicate that it has been tampered with. One very clear case is the situaton of "saluting the sun". "Guru kaa Sikh praatay outh kay sooraj noo(n) namastay aakh kay, Sikhaa(n) noo Vahiguru Jee kee Fateh bulai" (91) meaning, when a Sikh rises in the morning, he should say "namastay" to the Sun and then Fateh to the Singhs. That's problematic on a number of fronts, seeing as how Sikhs don't revere the sun and the sun hasn't risen when a Sikh gets up (last part of night ie. amrit vela). But the rehitnama later contradicts itself: "Jo sooraj dayvtay noo namaskaar karay, so Tankhaiyaa" (105), meaning, "One who salutes/does namaskaar to the sun is a Tankhaiyaa". And so I come to the issue of women in the Chaupa Singh rehitnama. This again is a very confused issue. I havn't seen the manuscript you quote which says not to give Paahul to women, but the common Chaupa Singh rehitnama says the following: "Jo Sikh, SikhNee noo(n) khanday dee paahul naa dayvay, so Tankhaiyaa" (105) meaning, "that Sikh who does not give khanday kee paahul to a female-Sikh, is a Tankhaiyaa". Even in regards to reading Sree Guru Granth Sahib, your references are correct, but the same rehitnama then goes on to say, "Guru kee SikhNee Granth Sahib pothee paRn sikhay..." (107) meaning a female-Sikh should learn how to read Sree Guru Granth Sahib. Overall, we can learn interesting things from rehitnamas, but we can't consider them to be the authority on rehit. Rehit has been passed down amongst Gursikhs and it's hard to find but it still exists. Only that rehit is authentic which can pass the test of GurbaaNee. so, conclusion.............i dont think someone would so blatantly contradict themseves.....do u think that rehats have been changed over time? i heard the original bhai chaupa singh rehatnamas remain? etc

can u provide evidence that hte taksali info on bhai randhir singh suddenly believing in ragmalla is tru other than kartar singh bhindranwales book? ask on a tapoban website, im not a don when it comes to knowing all bhai sahibs books off by heart. you say i should know this because ive done "loads of research"? where have i said i have done loads of research? i think you are over estimating my knowledge of sikhi and its history. i dont even know where kartarpur is in india if you want to know about puratan saroops i am not the one to ask. when it comes to birs the only 2 things i know are "kartarpuri bir" and "damdama bir" and a few old dodgy ones. and just because i am ignorant of saroops it doesnt mean that they dont exist. Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha Pyare Singh Padam (who then lists the following 20th century scholars/gursikhs etc who dont believe in ragmalla) 1. Pandit Tara Singh Nirotam 16. Giani Nahar Singh 2. Giani Dit Singh of Singh Sabha Movement 17. Principal Dharam Anant Singh 3. Prof. Gurmukh Singh of Singh Sabha 18. S.G.B. Singh 4. Giani Gian Singh 19. Principal Teja Singh 5. Sadhu Gobind Singh Nirmala. 20. Principal Ganga Singh 6. Pandit Hazara Singh 21. Prof. Dr. Ganda Singh 7. BaSant Singh 22. Prof. Dr. Sahib Singh 8. Bhai Kahan Singh 23. S. Shamsher Singh Ashok. 9. Bhai Randhir Singh 24. Pandit Kartar Singh Dakha 10. Master Mota Singh 25. Bawa Harkishan Singh 11. Giani Sher Singh 26. Prof. Kartar Singh 12. Baba Teja Singh 27. Prof. Gurbachan Singh Talib. 13. Master Mehtab Singh 28. S.Randhir Singh Research Scholar 14. Master Tara Singh 29. Giani Hira Singh 15. Dr Tarlochan Singh 30. Principal Gurmukh Singh again quoting from madan singhs essay: He further writes that in 1849 AD at the Baisakhi gathering of the Khalsa Panth at Amritsar it was unanimously adopted that Ragmala was NOT Gurbani. you say that teja singh had an influence on bhai randhir singh........have u read bhai randhir singhs autobiography? he states that teja singh tried to mess up his amrit sanskar, and also clarifies that FAKE rumours were going around that he had been given a dodgy gurmantar. teja singh didnt believe in bhagat bani. bhai randhir singh quoted loads from it. same with dasam granth - teja singh i think did not believe in akal ustat etc (?) whilst bhai sahib did. after teja singh was excommunicated, bhai randhir singh wrote a letter to him declining to meet him ever again till he had been readmitted to the panth after an invitation to meet up. as i said, im not as knowledgable as you guys on these issues. but i dont see the point in us talking about saroops etc when the previous parts of the debate has even been finished properly - the numbering system, the grammar, etc. why dont we sort that out before we move on?

snigga aka the wanna be nigga the damdami taksal website used to have a section about how bhai randhir singh alledgedly did believe in ragmalla and cited autobiographical notes from a taksali jathedar, but when it was found inaccurate the whole part of the article on ragmalla regarding bhai randhir singh was deleted. that pretty much proves my point on that. i dont need to quote from various books written by bhai sahib because ive only read a few of them. i know people who met bhai randhir singh themselves, and all singhs from his time say he rejected ragmalla. there are books which say it and if you post your question on tapoban.org you will get exact references. other than that do you have any more evidence for the ragmalla other than that website? :roll: lalleshvari............im not going to learn braj, sanskrit and every other language in the SGGS at the tender age of 16 just to be able to ask you why non plural words are used instead of plural ones considering im still a teenager and i can barely read the SGGS, its suprising a grown professional scholar cant even bring a few decent points across like some of the other people here have. BTW my apologies to all, i was incorrect about the plural/singular thing. the words apparently are neither plural nor singular - its still a gramattical anomoly, ive found madan singhs essay which explains: "Grammatical incoherence with Gurbani: Guru Arjan Dev ji evolved a unique system of grammer for Gurbani. This system is also followed by Bhai Gurdas in his poetry of Vaars. It is surprising to read rwg eyk sMig pMc brMgn ]; there is no Aunkar ( u) below rwg eyk to indicate plurality or singularity of rwg and eyk. However, both words here indicate singularity that any one Raga has five wives and eight sons. Similar examples of use of Mukta and Sihari in Ragmala that do not follow the grammar of Gurbani exist. Neither Guru Arjan Dev ji nor Bhai Gurdas ji could have varied the style of Guru Granth Sahib just for Ragmala. Obviously, it was neither written by Bhai Gurdas ji nor vetted by the fifth master." so i dont think i can compare it to "100 pupil in school" but basically the words are missing something which prevents them being read as plural - so its stil a bla-tant mistake.

im not asking people not to wear makeup or jewellry, im asking why they would want to wear it in relation to sikhi. this is a sikhi board afterall :roll: earrings are actually pretty bad.......if they are piercing ones.....cuz piercing is mutilating hthe body as discussed previously..... jewelery is more like rings, necklace etc......or if your a propa desi then ankle bell thingies lol

LOL orite man.......10pm aint late tho :roll: i do try n get early nites tho cuz im up early n btw im 16. nihal kaur.......i was hoping for something a little deeper than "because it looks nice to the wearer".......when you say this......do u mean ur ego is boosted? you feel more confident? etc....plez elaborate..... surely you cant see your own earrings unless u look in the mirror......and y wud u stare at urself in the mirro? sorry if ive offended ny1

guys theres really no need to stress on it....................bhai randhir singh is just as much a mahapursh and baba gurbuchan singh.....they are both gurmukhs no doubt.......because they have different views on something does that mean one is outright wrong and heretical? regarding the placement of mundaavni mahalla 5 at hte end of the guru granth, i have always taken the meaning of mundaavni as meaning SEAL thus it is the SEAL or end of the guru granth. i seem to recall it is a seal given relating to making food/dishes, which fits in since it says "on this plate x things have been presented" or something similar. ill admit i have little knowledge of raag. but i have never seen anyone totally match all the ragmalla rags with SGGS rags and vice versa. n30 singh that links has just been discussed. alot. the taksals been around since the gurus times but have all its views remained entirely static from the gurus times? i dont want to get into a discussion on it but just because the taksal says so isnt a valid argument. lalleshvari, could u please show me this argument for ragmalla? because as i have said about a million times, ive never seen a compelling argument either way! lalleshvari with your great scholarly skills, could you please explain the grammatical MISTAKES in ragmalla, and no matter how u look at it, they are mistakes!

rehatnamas are written by random people around the time of or after the guru. the rehat maryada is an amalgamation of gurbani, rehatnamas, historical sources, all examing by the finest scholars around......and its the conclusion they came to on what the rehat in the gurus times was probably like. of course there are a few points of controversy - meat, kakkars, etc.

WJKK WJKF ive got major props for you for sticking up in the situation you have either 1) you can get all your family round a table and voice these concerns and say its having a REAL impact on you or 2) you can grin and bear it, the situation wont last forever, keep naamjapin n ull feel peaceful all the time

now i feel guilty at least it wasnt a lalleshvari joke about a sex change or body piercings

nihal kaur in your post you gave great examples of the perfect life as a sikh - clenliness, namsimran, simple living, etc. what i fail to understand is why make up and jewelry is thrown in there! you are right what is on the outside is not *that* important. but hte motives for wearing jewelry and makeup definately come from the INSIDE......and those motives are going to be anything to do with sikhi. what exactly do you mean, dressing up for ones husband :? if its ok to wear fancy makeup, is it ok to wear expensive clothes? eat expensive food? why or why not? i dont see how its worse to eat posh food with hard earned money, than to rinse it on an ickle bit of gold to dangle off oneself with ones hard earned money. alot of men these days wear rings, necklaces.....i feel no need to wear a chain or ring even if its got a khanda on it....the furthest ive ever gone is wearing a malla for naamjaaping. if you could elaborate on why you feel in the need to have gold dangling off your body, or cover oneself in artificial chemicals to appear differently, i would be greatly appreciative.

Bestest Niranjana, Thanks for your opinions.......... my phrase was: please observe the term "copious". with loads of jewellry, any person is going to look a little bit on the seedy side. i agree my opinion might not be the right one, but its been formulated because no one has ever given a good reason to wear jewellry which ive seen to be inline with sikhi. sorry about calling u gangster but im sure in your teens you were accustomed to "slang" and "in terms"...were u not? unfortunately i havent considered a career in the rap business as a) sikhs havent penetrated that part of hte music market yet and i dont really like music (gave up rap a while ago) that isnt keertan or dhadi cuz i consider it a lil unneccesary, and, well kacchi bani bt thats another issue altogether

come on guys. talk like gursikhs. i cant imagine u cracking those kind of "jokes" infront of guru gobind singh.

excessive jewlery definately makes u look like a rundhee. piercing is definately against sikhi, no doubt. i have already quoted a rehatnama and there are definately SGGS tukhs that support it and i will try to find them its pretty obvious mata sahib kaur didnt wear jewelry because she was a simple, celibate woman. in the same way im pretty sure mata bhag kaur didnt have a nosepiercing when she was slicing up mughals. im well sorry if you do wear jewellry.....but as a personal question......why do u wear it? i always took it that jewelry for sikhs was an obvious one. oh, and no one in my family actually wears jewelry. especially not my gran. i think a few of my aunties and cousins wear lipstick though for what reasons would you support wearing jewelry, considering that a simple life with very little extra trimmings is what we all ultimately end to have (eventually anyway)?

if u read the ragmalla and u see it has blatant grammar mistakes in it......then does that make the guru wrong? did guru arjun make a mistake? all the gurus were 100percent infallible.....so why would there be basic grammar mistakes?

look.........i respect baba gurbachan singh MADLY......i dont see myself as knowing more than him......but there are gurmukhs who have opposing opinions on so many things.....and on this subject i have to go with bhai randhir singh cuz his argument just makes more sense to me....im sorry man...... this is the logic......there is one part right at the end of the guru granth.....it doesnt follow the grammar system or the infallible numbering system of the rest of the granth (incidentally used to prevent corruption)......we have no definate birs written by the gurus which can prove it (since the authenticity of the kartarpuri bir has bene doubted).....and the same ragmalla appears in a pornographic story written by alam.......there is plenty of other strange stuff at the end of birs like rattan malla and recipies so by removing it we are not taking away our guru.......gurmukhs like bhai randhir singh say it has no raas as other shabads do.......scholars like kahan singh nabha say its not real either........its not like the argument either way is like really really obvious....so YES discuss but dont make it out that its BLATANT the ragmalla is gurbani......because its not...its VERY VERY cloudy from whatever view u see it from. the mahalla thing has never been an issue to me, but the above stuff has.

its not nindya at all. a taksali told me that baba ji doesnt understand the grammar. please dont accuse me of doing nindya on baba jarnail singh, since hes like one of my favourite gursikhs ever NO ONE understands the grammar. can u tell me why singular words are used when plural words are? no one knows, its a fact! only guru arjan knows........if he wrote it......or if he didnt.....then ragmalla shouldnt be there! i wouldnt peg it out at the end of an akand paath, but my current feeling is that it isnt authentic. ive heard about all the taksali vids explaining ragmalla, all the other issues, but none have touched the grammar on WHY singular words are used instead of plural ones.....im gnna repeat it again......does this make sense to you and can u explain it: there are 1000 person at my school and there are 50 teacher. we do 4 subject a day, and a number of free period a week. can u give me some kind of explanation on why ive used singular words? no, because there isnt one :roll:

sant sahib niranjana akali maha-gangster singh when it comes to do with anything to to with brahmins or women i do not trust bhai chaupa singh. he claims himself to be one of the original panj pyare, he is also very anti women at times and very pro brahmin. but this doesnt mean we shouldnt discount EVERYTHING he says - but we should be very careful reading his version of the rehat, cross referencing it with other sources to prove what we are saying is right. the make up and jewelry thing, well its just common sense. women and men are expected to live a simple, modest lifestyle. they are told that they have no need to change their body from its natural form...why would they pierce themselves with earrings, cover their face with makeup or wear copious amounts of jewellry, frankly, like a rundhee? mata sahib kaur, etc all wore simple clothes and lived simply like the gurus did. theres a nice line from the guru granth that says "those who eat butter on their bread will sufffer in terrible pain" - what that means is live simply. i fail to see any purpose in wearing makeup or jewelry other than trying to beautify oneself or attract the opposite sex. and both these things are discouraged. there are also warnings against women wearing "ornaments" in the guru granth sahib i believe. but ill have to look that up. on the flip side we can also apply the same type of rationale to expensive clothes....which, believe me, i am very guilty of ..... its sumthing i need 2 sort out.......need 2 shop at oxfam frm now on hahahahahhaa

nihal kaur considering the fact that i am still a teen i dont have the resources to go to india, and if i did i would be going where my parents told me to go! believe me, once im 18 i will be doing alot of trekking and discovering in india.....and i will come back to you with the results at the moment the only person who has information on this bir is lalleshvari and he is yet to divulge any further information on it. lalleshvari, would u care to do so? btw, yes, patience is a virtue, and ill admit i can be a lil impatient at times

can u provide any more info on this bir.....like.....signatures......other proof of authenticity......why its dated pre 1699, why no one has heard of it, etc. with your immense scholarly knowledge, could you also refute biks points on the sarbloh granth?

thnx man. will do.

well in that case its directed at women because men dont wear lipstick and mascara. well you might, but thats none of my business.

actually i dnt tink bik is acting rudebwoy, hes asked u a question pretty humbly.......seriously not many ppl know alot about sarbloh granth so maybe as the cleverest here u cud share u gyan insted of saying "go find out urself"?

snigga do u believe in the "41st" var of bhai gurdas? would disowning it make you "dumb", considering varan is pretty much dhur kee bani?

thanks for ur stuff niranjana. 2 b honest at times i have beleieved in ragmalla, then not, but now im pretty sure i dont. im nt a singh yet. still non amritdhari now im no scholar or super clever image analyser either, but thats one page, and there are other pages written more dodgily. i believe that mcleod (yes i know hes white and i know his views arent always right but he has good pointa) and a fair few other people have spoken about the kartarpuri bir. that alleiviates like 1 or 2 of the rags (the first link explained why the 1st one is the first one) but the rest still make no sense at all. http://www.damdamitaksal.org/vichaar/raagm...o%20mahalla.htm even baba jarnail singh bhindranwale admitted he doesnt understand the grammar in ragmalla. that link was interesting but it doesnt explain why singular words are used when they should be plural. guru arjun was a poet inspired by god, he wouldnt make mistakes like "i went to school and saw lots of person" again that link was interesting but you see that in every circumstance (nearly) the 1 comes before a rahao - ive had a quick scan thru the SGGS on my pc and it seems that a 1 always comes before a rahao. in ragmalla there is no rahao BUT there are still 1s everywhere. the accounts above it.....hmm.....gurbilas was written by guru hargobind? doesnt gurbilas say that a spirit made guru arjuns wife pregnant? and alot of other weird things like that? the one thing that most people agree with kala afgana on, is that gurbilas is not the most reliable of books.....theyve edited it numerous times....and to be honest ive got no idea what shaheed bilas is so i cant comment on it. maybe u can enlightenme. thanks......they were nice links but ive read them all before and even the explanation by one of the taksali jathedars on the ragmalla on the spiritual meanings of ragmalla......i didnt understand it quite so i got someone else to translate it for me and even they admit that the spiritual meanings arent exactly solid. its not a question of me doubting the guru granth sahib........but u have to realise that old birs have ALOT of other stuff in them........its not like we are questioning japji sahib, its like the index to the guru granth and until anyone can point out a real solid spiritual meaning its presence will always be doubted.....and quite how this ragmalla managed to appear in alams kaam filled book done before the guru granth still confuses me (not talking about the alam in guru gobind singhs court :? as an interesting side note, guru gobind singh adapted one of alams stories, kaam kandlan, which has ragmalla at the end, for triyah charitrer (thats if it is gurbani)...which shows that he did live before that time. the damdami taksal article i believe has confused alam in gurus court to a previous alam who wrote for akhbar. the author of the website says that alam copied guru gobind singh, because guru ji would never "copy" anyone else, but i was always under the impression that gurujis 404 stories were an amalgamation of many different stories of the time (some were his) and were not meant to be all totally new stories....they all come from different sources. i could be wrong tho.

i doubt they were proper nihangees becuz "Do not wear make-up or jewellery. Do not commit adultery." Rehatnama Bhai Daya Singh Jee i really dnt tink that gursikh women wore jewelry. sarbloh stuff is good tho