.

[jsingh96]

MDS,

1. Whether the Sarbloh Granth has more Bir Ras than Dasam Granth is not the main issue here. The Nihangs claim that Sarbloh Granth is a Bir Ras Granth. What is important here is that a group which claims to be 'original' Khalsa and puritanical with it can so easily accept a text as genuine when it had not been available to them from over 100 years. This is all the more important given that scholars belonging to the sanatan mindset have dismissed the Sarbloh Granth as being the work of Sukha Singh from Patna Sahib written a few decades before it became available in Punjab.

Firstly it should be noted that Baba Inderjit Singh Rakhbe Vale, who learned from Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji, said that the Singhs always used to have Sarbloh Granth. When Maharaj completed/finished the saroop at Sri Hazur Sahib Nadar, Sarbloh Granth was read often by the Sikhs of that area. Sri Sarbloh Granth is well known to the Hazori Sikhs. However you are right that it was not well known back in Punjab, because the only people that brought it back were the Nihungs. And even when they did get back, they weren't so keen on spreading that particular granth.

MDS,

This is all the more important given that scholars belonging to the sanatan mindset have dismissed the Sarbloh Granth as being the work of Sukha Singh from Patna Sahib written a few decades before it became available in Punjab.

I believe only Bhai Kahan Singh and a few other gianis of the time refer to it as Sukha Singhs work. Akali Kaur Singh amongest many other very prominent Sikhs mantained a high faith in Sri Sarbloh Granth. I have in my notes a list of a few people who said it was Sukha Singhs work and the prominent Sikhs who believed it was Gurbani. Will post that soon.

[Malwe Da Sher]

Your problem is that your sole source of information is one website which you are using to make criticisms of an entire movement. What on earth is a sanatan mindset? What Nihangs say Sri Sarbloh Granth is only a Bir Ras Granth? The word Buchangi, Nihang and Akali has been interchangable throughout different times in history.

Kahan Singh and Gurbax Singh were not two examples out of lakhs, your posts are becoming more ridiculous now Tony. Kahan Singh was the son of Baba Binod Singh and Gurbax Singh was successor of Baba Deep Singh Shaheed. There is a huge difference in someones name being Nihang and the title nihang being inferred on someone before or after their name. According to Rattan Singh Bhangu it was the rehat of the Buchangis which the Bandai Sikhs challenged and the Tat Khalsa were the Nihang Singhs.

With regards to the colour blue this is also mentioned in Sri Guru Gobind Singh Jis bani as well as various other historical texts confirm the colour blue. You can choose not to accept them, this isnt the issue at hand.

The points you are making are becoming weaker and weaker and I have no interest in replying to any further posts which you will undoubtedly make as your phobia of Nihangs will not allow you to miss any opportunity criticise them. European writings from the early 1800s confirm that the Sikh masses considered the Nihangs/Akalis to be the original Khalsa and revered them as demi gods. Surely the Sikh masses would have been aware if this group had only developed in the past few decades. Logic, reason and objectivity all imply that Nihang Singhs were around at the time of the 10th Guru, of course though was has no need to heed to any of these when they are filled with such a phobia and hate.

Adios.

[Kam1825]

Re the comments by Jsingh96 regarding Taksals view on the Sri Sarbloh Parkash is that it is a work authored and compiled by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji at Sarbloh Bunga which is now Baba nidhan Singh Ji's Gurdwara. Bhai Balbir Singh Ji mentions it in his katha.

[tonyhp32]

MDS,

Stop going around in circles. I have answered all your points and all you have is that some writers stated that Nihangs were treated with respect and were revered as demigods. Which writers state this and when did they write this? So the Sikh masses (all of them non-Nihang) go from revering the Nihangs as demi gods in the early 1800s and yet a few decades later sit by while the maharaja of Patiala massacres them and the british issue shoot on sight orders. I hope none of us here are given this kind of reverential treatment! One swallow doesn't make a summer and one bujhangi doesn't make Nihangs the original Khalsa. The story of Baba Gurbaksh Singh is told in Parcheen Panth Parkash, the first text that exclusively calls Sikh warriors as Nihangs and when was it written? It was written in the 1840s.

Your claim about the word Bujhangi, Nihang and Akali having the same meaning in Sikh history is incorrect. Amritpal Singh clearly shows that Nihang in various texts could mean sword, horses, of just warrior (not exclusively Sikh). If you want to engage is a serious discussion I suggest to answer all the points made regarding this. The use of the word Nihang in early Sikh literature was your main point in showing the Nihangs to have been the original Khalsa. Nihang and Akali may mean the same thing now and it may even have meant the same thing in the 1770s but it did not mean the same thing between 1699-1760s as shown in the research by Amritpal Singh.

I have never disputed the use of the colour blue as the colour of the Khalsa so I fail to understand the reason for your making this an issue.

[jsingh96]

Re the comments by Jsingh96 regarding Taksals view on the Sri Sarbloh Parkash is that it is a work authored and compiled by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji at Sarbloh Bunga which is now Baba nidhan Singh Ji's Gurdwara. Bhai Balbir Singh Ji mentions it in his katha.

Jathedar Baba Santha Singh Ji also mentioned this in his katha, and this information is also found in the steek of Sri Sarbloh Granth Sahib. (about Sarbloh Bunga)