ishvar2 Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Hopefully not a repost! http://www.scribd.com/doc/13264404/Hand-Wr...s-of-Sikh-Gurus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Hopefully not a repost! http://www.scribd.com/doc/13264404/Hand-Wr...s-of-Sikh-Gurus Has this been verified? I have a book on Hukamnama's at the moment (Guru Tagh Bahadhur), and over 50% of them have been proved to be fake. The classic dispute over Hukamna's came about when Bhai Randhir produced one allegedly from the 6th Master on the controversial topic of meat, and it was debunked as not being verified. Not even Gandha Singh could verify it, yet some believed it and it caused massive rifts amongst Sikhs. We have to be very careful in our verification of our Guru's handwritting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Who said it was Bhai Randhir Singh who made the hukamnama on meat? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Who said it was Bhai Randhir Singh who made the hukamnama on meat? You are missing the point. I don't care whether he wrote it or not but this Hukamnama was never verified and was very controversial and has caused massive splits amongst Sikhs. If the handwriting had been verified before this false Hukamnama would never have come forward and the controversy never started. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Has this been verified? I have a book on Hukamnama's at the moment (Guru Tagh Bahadhur), and over 50% of them have been proved to be fake. The classic dispute over Hukamna's came about when Bhai Randhir produced one allegedly from the 6th Master on the controversial topic of meat, and it was debunked as not being verified. Not even Gandha Singh could verify it, yet some believed it and it caused massive rifts amongst Sikhs. We have to be very careful in our verification of our Guru's handwritting. Which Bhai Randhir Singh are you referring to? There are two, one is the AKJ one who I doubt produced or referred to any puraatan hukamnama and the other Randhir Singh was the one who wrote the translation of Dasam Granth. I don't think he produced any such Hukamnama either. And what is the name of the book which supposedly proves 50% of the hukamnamas fake? who is the author? Ganda Singh's book has been given recognition SGPC as being Authentic hukamnamas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Which Bhai Randhir Singh are you referring to? There are two, one is the AKJ one who I doubt produced or referred to any puraatan hukamnama and the other Randhir Singh was the one who wrote the translation of Dasam Granth. I don't think he produced any such Hukamnama either. And what is the name of the book which supposedly proves 50% of the hukamnamas fake? who is the author? Ganda Singh's book has been given recognition SGPC as being Authentic hukamnamas. Hukamnama of Guru Tegh Bahadhur - A Historical Study Sabinderjit Singh Sagar - ISBN 81-7770-047-2 <<<has many fake Hukamnama's. On Dr Ganda Singh's approach Sabinderjit Singh is highly critical. I recommend getting this book. The AKJ one I think. I maybe mistaken (it says on page 2 Bhai Randhir Singh was dispatched to collect them, that is the same right?) was sent to collect Hukamnama's for Dr Gandha's Singh book. Hukamname (ed Dr Ganda Singh) Punjab University Patiala 1969 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 In that case it's obviously a different Bhai Randhir Singh from both the AKJ one and the translator of Dasam Granth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 In that case it's obviously a different Bhai Randhir Singh from both the AKJ one and the translator of Dasam Granth. Why obviously? I know Bhai Randhir Singh died in 1961 and Dr Ganda Singh in 1985 (b 1900)?, but this book was researched many many years before and published a few times no doubt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Why obviously? I know Bhai Randhir Singh died in 1961 and Dr Ganda Singh in 1985 (b 1900)?, but this book was researched many many years before and published a few times no doubt. Becuase Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal of AKJ was not a research scholar nor did he have interest in academic research projects. You have obviously not read his books. He always quoted from canonical Sikh writings rather than historical sources such as hukam namas. It could be the other Bhai Randhir Singh , but I doubt it was him either. Eitherway, the burden of proof is on you to prove it was Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal and not some other Bhai Randhir Singh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Why obviously? I know Bhai Randhir Singh died in 1961 and Dr Ganda Singh in 1985 (b 1900)?, but this book was researched many many years before and published a few times no doubt. I'd just like to add that (as you've already mentioned) Bhai Randhir Singh died in 1961, but the book Hukamname that Ganda Singh published was in the year 1967 by Punjabi University, six years after Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal died. So it seems to be another Bhai Randhir Singh. Nice try though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishvar2 Posted May 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 In answer to the question as to whether this effort by someone (not me) is verified, I'd say no. I imagine that it was done out of prem as opposed to deliberately mislead people or to cause a ruckus. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Becuase Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal of AKJ was not a research scholar nor did he have interest in academic research projects. You have obviously not read his books. He always quoted from canonical Sikh writings rather than historical sources such as hukam namas. It could be the other Bhai Randhir Singh , but I doubt it was him either. Eitherway, the burden of proof is on you to prove it was Bhai Randhir Singh Narangwal and not some other Bhai Randhir Singh. There is no burden of proof on me because I seek to prove nothing. I am merely reiterating what the author said, and I am more inclined to believe an academic researcher than someone on the internet. You also assume too much, I have read Bhai Randhir Singh's autobiography, of which some parts I find outrageous (meeting with Bhaghat Singh), to downright comical (theories on why teeth get eroded). As you can see I am not a big fan of his, but then again there were many of his ilk around at that time. Incidently there is a presentation here on the development of the Sikh Code of Conduct and another Bhai Randhir Singh ( or is it the same one) seems to sit along Dr Ganda Singh: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6375523/Kirpal-S...hsabha-Sikhswim Could it be the same one who walked out over the "Kuttha" issue? Maybe not, probably yet another Bhai Randhir Singh and there must have been 20 or so Bhai Randhir Singh's running around at that time with similar agenda. :rolleyes: The point still stands, the Hukamnama was never verified, and the "Bhai Randhir Singh" (whoever he was out of the hundreds running arund at the time), seemed to take the Hukamnama as gospel. Recent research have shown these Hukamnama's (in Dr Ganda Singh's book) to be fake's or not verified (as shown in the book mentioned above). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 In answer to the question as to whether this effort by someone (not me) is verified, I'd say no. I imagine that it was done out of prem as opposed to deliberately mislead people or to cause a ruckus. I do not doubt the intention, it is just we have to be careful. In the case I highlighted of Bhai Randhir Singh and Dr Ganda Singh 2+2= 4, but they did not consider it maybe 2-2 =0 or 2/2 = 1. It is human nature, and I am the biggest one guilty of it when I am doing my research. It is only when I cross refernce I usually find the truth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silence Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Bhai Randhir Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh. The first being the title given to bhai sahib by the panj thakths, second being name given by Guru Gobind Singh Ji, please do not forget this for next time, thanks ps. don't you find your signature rather contradictory? You say one is a sikh regardless of veg or no veg, yet your comment about vaishnavas seems to imply the veg sikhs are not sikhs? therefore do you really mean only a non-vegetarian can be a sikh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 Silence veer, please send him a pm to discuss the signature with him. Lets not go off topic on this thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh. The first being the title given to bhai sahib by the panj thakths, second being name given by Guru Gobind Singh Ji, please do not forget this for next time, thanks ps. don't you find your signature rather contradictory? You say one is a sikh regardless of veg or no veg, yet your comment about vaishnavas seems to imply the veg sikhs are not sikhs? therefore do you really mean only a non-vegetarian can be a sikh? There are are that many Bhai's Sant's and Baba's I tend to lose track. :-) Actually there is a massive difference between a Vegetarian Sikh who accepts the SRM and a Vashnavite. It is like the Sun and the Moon. Examples of vegetarian Sikhs are Aman Singh (SPN), N30 Singh. Examples of Vaishnavites Ekh Musafir ji. Like N30 Singhji says, pm me about my signature. Regards 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 What is a Vaishnavite? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 What is a Vaishnavite? Ekh Musafir Ji but seriously http://www.dvaita.org/docs/srv_faq.html#what 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Ekh Musafir Ji but seriously http://www.dvaita.org/docs/srv_faq.html#what But that link says a Vaishnavite means: "A Vaishnava is a devotee of Vishnu." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 But that link says a Vaishnavite means: "A Vaishnava is a devotee of Vishnu." Precisely (and all his Avtars for which some say the Guru's are). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.