Changing Ardas in Finland by kala afghana

[Kam1825]

Again NEO this thread has gone way off topic, can these either be controlled, edited or closed due to a lack of progress!

[singh2]

That rehatnama is just as credible as the other ones. When Chaupai didn’t even exist in those times, how was it used during Amrit Sanchar

This is bankcruptcy of knowledge. Chaupai sahib very much existed before amrit sanchar of 1699. This is similar to their Guru ragi Darshan singh saying in a poisnous sermon that if Dasam Granth is work of guru Gobind singh ji then why Amrit sanchar of 1699 is not mentioned in that. There is audio available of that otherwise these people disclaim that.

[Kam1825]

Chaupai sahib very much existed before amrit sanchar of 1699

What would be more imporant is the Panj Granthi of Bhai Mani SIngh Ji which has the sanpooran nitnem, rehraas (with the saloks from the dasam granth) and the kirtan sohila. The same with the Panj Granhti of Baba Maharaj SIngh Ji Nourangabad Walae from the 19th century both of which are kept in the british library. These show the banis recited by the hazoori sinkh and that 100 years later the sadhus kept the traditions the same

[Kaljug]

in Kibber Choers Singhs book from 1769 the two grants are mentioned as two siblings. Adi Granth being the brother(masculine) and Dasam Granth being the sister (feminine) ..

Now when you say God is portrayed in masculine terms in Adi and feminine terms in Dasam it makes perfect sense why kibber singh made Dasam the sister and Adi the brother (for a long time i've wondered why Dasam was sister since it deals with masculine topics such as war etc, while Adi was the brother when it talks about "feminine" and soft topics such as pyar and longing after the beloved)

Fateh!

The bani in the two Granths serves two separate and distinct purposes: the Adi Granth describes the love of God's worshippers for Him and how one is to obtain Him, the Dasam Granth describes God's power and how She manifests it in Her creation.

Indic religions traditionally have always described God's Shakti in feminine terms and the Supreme Being in masculine ones, e.g., in Shakta tradition, whereas Shakti is dynamic and active, Shiva is passive, immutable and transcendent; however, one cannot exist without the other, and similarly the Adi Granth and Dasam Granth are two parts of a whole.

Regards,

K.

[Mithar]

Fateh!

The bani in the two Granths serves two separate and distinct purposes: the Adi Granth describes the love of God's worshippers for Him and how one is to obtain Him, the Dasam Granth describes God's power and how She manifests it in Her creation.

Indic religions traditionally have always described God's Shakti in feminine terms and the Supreme Being in masculine ones, e.g., in Shakta tradition, whereas Shakti is dynamic and active, Shiva is passive, immutable and transcendent; however, one cannot exist without the other, and similarly the Adi Granth and Dasam Granth are two parts of a whole.

Regards,

K.

Be careful brother, these Kala Afghanists do not believe Sikhism is part of the Indic tradition of religions. They have an allergy to anything Indian, especially anything relating to Hinduism. These Hindu Phobes have reduced Sikhism into a Semitic Middle Eastern faith.

[singh2]

Be careful brother, these Kala Afghanists do not believe Sikhism is part of the Indic tradition of religions. They have an allergy to anything Indian, especially anything relating to Hinduism. These Hindu Phobes have reduced Sikhism into a Semitic Middle Eastern faith.

They are their agents who are playing double roles.

[Xylitol]

ਸੁੰਨ ਮੰਡਲ ਇਕੁ ਜੋਗੀ ਬੈਸੇ ॥ ਨਾਰਿ ਨ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਕਹਹੁ ਕੋਊ ਕੈਸੇ ॥ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਣ ਜੋਤਿ ਰਹੇ ਲਿਵ ਲਾਈ ॥ ਸੁਰਿ ਨਰ ਨਾਥ ਸਚੇ ਸਰਣਾਈ ॥: Sunn mandal ik Yogi baise. Naar na purakh kahahu kou kaise. Tribhavan joti rahe liv laaee. Sur nar naath sache saranaaee: The Yogi, the Primal Lord, sits in the Realm of Absolute Stillness (state free of mind's wanderings or Phurne). (Since God) is neither male nor female; how can anyone describe Him? The three worlds center their attention on His Light. The godly beings and the Yogic masters seek the Sanctuary of this True Lord (sggs 685).

# ਆਪੇ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਨਾਰੀ ॥: Aape purakh aape hee naaree: You Yourself are the male, and You Yourself are the female (sggs 1020).

# ਆਪੇ ਨਰੁ ਆਪੇ ਫੁਨਿ ਨਾਰੀ ਆਪੇ ਸਾਰਿ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਪਾਸਾ ॥: Aapae nar aape fun naaree aape saar aap hee paasaa: He Himself is male, and He Himself is female; He Himself is the chessman, and He Himself is the board (sggs 1403).

[Sikh Answers]

I will keep it short and to the point to save my time.

That rehatnama is just as credible as the other ones. When Chaupai didn’t even exist in those times, how was it used during Amrit Sanchar?

False. This is a Granth called Siri Gur Katha which also includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and physical description of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It is not simply a rehatnama. It was completed before 1704. Chaupai Sahib was completed in 1696.

Give us the so-called rehatnama of Jeevan Singh to analyze it.

Who is “us”? You and who else? Why not get a copy yourself. Surely I can scan but will you accept it just by reading those few lines? I don’t think so. Here is the link which gives little more info. http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=38445&hl=

Same was the case for likes of Prof. Sahib Singh and others as they read kabeovaach benti chaupai from chariter 405 while knowing it is anti-Gurmat.

He would’ve written against it in one of his books but he did not. He called it Bani of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Or are you suggesting he lied and intentionally wrote false literature? He clearly says: ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਭੀ ਤਿੰਨ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹਨ-ਜਾਪੁ, ਸਵੈਯੇ ਤੇ ਚੌਪਈ।

He studied it, analyzed it and then came to the conclusion that it is Bani of Guru Sahib. In his steek of Jaap Sahib he supports Bhagauti unless you believe he wrote stuff without studying it which wouldn’t make him a Sikh scholar.

Everyone claims to have an eye witness account yet they all say something else. Shouldn’t Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama be eye witness account because he was actually in the ceremony?

If you believe Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama was written before 1708 then present some hard evidence.

Like come on, you can fool other blind followers with your statements but not me. How does he know which banis were read? Was he also on or near stage? Does he mention that or that needs to be added to the rehatnama to make it sound official? Were there speakers so Sikhs could hear what Guru Ji was saying?

How ridiculous and childish are your questions. He knows which banis were read because he was there. He took Amrit that day. He accompanied Guru Sahib all the time. Historians agree that Amrit Sanchaar kept going on for many days and 80,000 Sikhs took Amrit. Those who took Amrit also participated in giving Amrit and they all prepared Amrit the same way as Guru Sahib did. Therefore it is foolish to assume that no Sikhs would know which banis were read. You need to provide some solid evidence that it is a fake. A rational and sane person cannot reject a source without ever reading it first.

Also, how come the 11 sources I posted don’t mention the writings mentioned in Jeevan Singh’s?

Sources you mentioned were written later and are not considered eye witness accounts by any historian or scholar. Many sources mention JapJi Sahib, Chaupai Sahib and Anand Sahib. Some mention Jaap Sahib. In any case, most of the 11 sources mention Dasam Granth Banis. This simply throws out your case. Even if we assume that we do not know which banis were read it can easily be concluded that Dasam Banis were read. By the way do you consider these sources authentic or reliable? I don’t think you do so why even make a case out of them?

You can rely on rehatnamas all you want but I will rely on my Guru, Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Then why mention 11 historical sources? What does Guru Granth Sahib Ji say about preparing Khanday Da Amrit, nitnem banis, rehat maryada, four bajjar kurehats, Anand Karaj etc.? How about Nishaan Sahib, Akal Takhat, Fateh, Khalsa Bana, Panj Pyare etc.? Do you even know in which context was Guru Granth Sahib written and why these things are not mentioned? Do not reduce status of Guru Sahib to the level of a book of history or dos and don’ts. You lot have not grasped the true understanding.

please show me one quote from Guru Granth Sahib Ji where Bhagautee is used for God.

Show me a quote from Gurbani which rejects Bhagauti word being used for God.

Why is there no mention of Bhagats in Chandi Di Vaar?

Because it is not “Bhagtan Di Vaar”. It is Vaar of Bhagauti. Again, it is a Vaar. Do you know what is the purpose of Vaar and why is it composed and sung?

Since the writer says Durgaa Paath Bnaaya Sabhe Pauria, how is Bhagautee not part of Durgaa Paath then?

Second pauri makes it clear who the supreme shakti is. It is Bhagauti, Waheguru, that created everything and gave power to everyone. Translation (not word to word or direct one) starts from pauri 3 and ends at 55. The last two lines are simply summary of 29 saloaks written in Durga Saptshati.

Word Bhagauti has multiple meanings. In Gurbani it is used for Bhagat. In Dasam Granth it is used in different context and not always for goddess. Bhai Gurdas Ji uses it in different context.

ਲਈ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਦੁਰਗਸਾਹ ਵਰ ਜਾਗਨ ਭਾਰੀ ॥

If the word ‘Bhagauti’ means goddess then does, the above mean, “Durga caught hold of bhagauti (goddess) and hit her on the head of Raja Sumbh and she tasted his blood?”

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੈਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ (ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 1)

Hail to Siri (mighty) Bhagauti (Sword) that cuts sharp.

ਨਾਉ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਲੋਹੁ ਘੜਾਇਆ ॥

Name Bhagauti made of iron. (Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 25)

Show me one line in Chandi Di Vaar that tells the readers to worship a goddess and how to worship her. Show me one line that equates goddess to the level of God. It is highly against the Hindu belief to promote a female character and elevate her above the level of three gods.

Words Murari, Niranjan, Keshva, Hari, Narayan, Raam, Paarbrahma etc are also used by Hindus for their gods. Why didn't Guru Sahib invent new words instead of using the old ones for Waheguru?

[ekta]

The Khalsa Fauj, if you are going to reference something to back up your point you are required to provide at least an analysis (or link to a proper analysis). Your opinion without some sort of evidence or logical framework to back it up is not good enough here. Next time such things will be deleted without warning.

Moderators have been extremely tolerant of you so far, but I think it is time to enforce rules more strictly for you b/c of your spam, off topic posts, and opinions which are merely attacks with no reasoning or evidence behind them.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

In the apay fuon naree and apaay he purkhaa shabds,

shabad is talking about those who are attaching labels to themselves.

If you read shabads slowly and with time, you will undertand. I might make video files later and upload them if there is time. It takes time to understand proper aarths but it takes much much longer to put them into words. That is all I will say about those quotes. Like I said before, no point posting aarths which contradict basics of Gurmat or nirankaar, akaal moorat.

Other than that, on Pg. 1020, shabad also says apay mash kash.

Do you think God is fish and tutle?

Like I said before, it is easy to post quotes but hard to translate them and put them into words. THis is why live debate is much useful because it saves time and the person debating will have at least some basic knowledge of core gurmat principles.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

False. This is a Granth called Siri Gur Katha which also includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and physical description of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It is not simply a rehatnama. It was completed before 1704. Chaupai Sahib was completed in 1696.

I just read you link and picked up several anti-Gurmat point in the granth by just looking at the comments you posted about it there. Other than that, I will try to get it from Sacha Sauda and read it. Dates don’t mean much when the contents are in question. You can write something now and put date as 1973. Leave it for another 50 years and everyone will say 1973. Like I said before, get a scholar to accept debate on Dasam Granth and we will find out what is Gurmat and what isn’t.

Who is “us”? You and who else? Why not get a copy yourself. Surely I can scan but will you accept it just by reading those few lines? I don’t think so. Here is the link which gives little more info. http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=38445&hl=

Us = Those who are devoted to Guru Granth Sahib Ji only. I saw those scans before and they weren’t original paper from 1704.

He would’ve written against it in one of his books but he did not. He called it Bani of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Or are you suggesting he lied and intentionally wrote false literature? He clearly says: ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਭੀ ਤਿੰਨ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹਨ-ਜਾਪੁ, ਸਵੈਯੇ ਤੇ ਚੌਪਈ।

He studied it, analyzed it and then came to the conclusion that it is Bani of Guru Sahib. In his steek of Jaap Sahib he supports Bhagauti unless you believe he wrote stuff without studying it which wouldn’t make him a Sikh scholar.

All those missionaries that lived with him are lying? Maybe you don’t know but missionaries accept Chaupai from Ustat. Not the one from Charitropakhyan. I gave you evidence from Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha’s Gurmat Maartund. One side he says Mahakaal’s Sikh must drink alcohol and cannabis and on the other hand he says Mahakaal is God. Which one of his statements is the official one on that aspect? Truth is, he had to majbooree bus translate Mahakaal as God because otherwise he would have been booted from Panth by Aroor Singh and his buddies. Same crew that gave Siropa to General Dyer. He would have suffered what Prof. Gurmukh Singh suffered. Kahan Singh did what was right at the time.

If you believe Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama was written before 1708 then present some hard evidence.

You should also present hard evidence to prove that the Bhai Jeevan Singh book was written before 1704 and prove that all of it is according to Gurmat. Like I said before only Guru Granth Sahib Ji is without mixture. Every granth granth belonging to Sikhs has anti-Gurmat content. Even Bhai Nand Lal’s work has mixture as it says don’t trust women.

How ridiculous and childish are your questions. He knows which banis were read because he was there. He took Amrit that day. He accompanied Guru Sahib all the time. Historians agree that Amrit Sanchaar kept going on for many days and 80,000 Sikhs took Amrit. Those who took Amrit also participated in giving Amrit and they all prepared Amrit the same way as Guru Sahib did. Therefore it is foolish to assume that no Sikhs would know which banis were read. You need to provide some solid evidence that it is a fake. A rational and sane person cannot reject a source without ever reading it first.

Understandable but weren’t the likes of Sainapat, Nand Lal, Daya Singh, Chaupa Singh, etc. also there? Didn’t they also take Amrit with other Sikhs? Before calling other ridiculous and childish, look at own comments first also.

Sources you mentioned were written later and are not considered eye witness accounts by any historian or scholar. Many sources mention JapJi Sahib, Chaupai Sahib and Anand Sahib. Some mention Jaap Sahib. In any case, most of the 11 sources mention Dasam Granth Banis. This simply throws out your case. Even if we assume that we do not know which banis were read it can easily be concluded that Dasam Banis were read. By the way do you consider these sources authentic or reliable? I don’t think you do so why even make a case out of them?

What I am saying is none of those rehatnamas mention the banis read now. Why is that? Those guys took Amrit from someone else? When it comes to eye witness accounts, they are just as credible as other accounts. Could you please list a non-DG promoter considering granth linked to Bhai Jeevan Singh as an eye witness account?

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Then why mention 11 historical sources? What does Guru Granth Sahib Ji say about preparing Khanday Da Amrit, nitnem banis, rehat maryada, four bajjar kurehats, Anand Karaj etc.? How about Nishaan Sahib, Akal Takhat, Fateh, Khalsa Bana, Panj Pyare etc.? Do you even know in which context was Guru Granth Sahib written and why these things are not mentioned? Do not reduce status of Guru Sahib to the level of a book of history or dos and don’ts. You lot have not grasped the true understanding.

I mentioned them to show you that nothing outside of Guru Granth Sahib Ji is 100% reliable. Dasam Granth makes no mention of Bajjar Kurehits or Rehat Maryada or Anand Karaj or Nishan Sahib or Akaal Takht or Fateh or Khalsa Bana or 5 Pyaras.

I can understand why it makes no mention of contents past 1698 because dates are written to impose creation before 1698 but Akaal Takht, Darbar Sahib, Aaad Granth, etc. were already established before 1698. Like I said before, instead of gup shup online, it is only best to have proper debate which is live debate.

Show me a quote from Gurbani which rejects Bhagauti word being used for God.

Bhagautee is used in Guru Granth Sahib Ji for bhagat as jeev istree. Waheguru Ji is jeev istree? Also, if Bhagautee couldn’t mean God for almost 700 years from the time of Bhagats to Guru Gobind Singh Ji, how did it suddenly become God after 1708? There must be a reason why it isn’t used for God in Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Bhagautee is the feminine power of Mahakaal which is secondary to even Mahakaal. Have proper debate in public and we will prove who Bhagautee is based on Dasam Granth.

Because it is not “Bhagtan Di Vaar”. It is Vaar of Bhagauti. Again, it is a Vaar. Do you know what is the purpose of Vaar and why is it composed and sung?

What is there mention of 9 names of Nanak as separate entities doing in Bhagautee’s vaar? Since you said it is vaar and asked its purpose. I am sure you will say biir russ. I am not sure how Sikhs were able to gain birr russ by reading Durgaa’s vaar to fight Durgaa following Pahari Rajas. Also, couldn’t vaar have been written about Guru Nanak Ji or Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji or Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji or Bhai Bidhi Chand or someone else related to Sikh Dharam. I have asked you this question on other forms too but you have failed to give me a valid answer. There are three compositions related to Durgaa in Dasam Granth.

You can try to force Bhagautee to mean whatever you want but like I said, bring proper proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Bhagautee is female and Bhavanee is also female. Bring proper debate and we will talk there.

Second pauri makes it clear who the supreme shakti is. It is Bhagauti, Waheguru, that created everything and gave power to everyone. Translation (not word to word or direct one) starts from pauri 3 and ends at 55. The last two lines are simply summary of 29 saloaks written in Durga Saptshati.

So you are saying translation starts at pauri 3 and first two are writer’s own view? If yes, please use that in debate. Like I said, bring proper debate.

Word Bhagauti has multiple meanings. In Gurbani it is used for Bhagat. In Dasam Granth it is used in different context and not always for goddess. Bhai Gurdas Ji uses it in different context.

ਲਈ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਦੁਰਗਸਾਹ ਵਰ ਜਾਗਨ ਭਾਰੀ ॥

If the word ‘Bhagauti’ means goddess then does, the above mean, “Durga caught hold of bhagauti (goddess) and hit her on the head of Raja Sumbh and she tasted his blood?”

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੈਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ (ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 1)

Hail to Siri (mighty) Bhagauti (Sword) that cuts sharp.

ਨਾਉ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਲੋਹੁ ਘੜਾਇਆ ॥

Name Bhagauti made of iron. (Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 25)

Show me one line in Chandi Di Vaar that tells the readers to worship a goddess and how to worship her. Show me one line that equates goddess to the level of God. It is highly against the Hindu belief to promote a female character and elevate her above the level of three gods.

So you agree that Bhagautee is used for goddess in Dasam Granth? Why couldn’t the start been something like Pritham Bhagwant. Why didn’t it have to be Bhagautee? So Sikh remain confused and keep going at it against each other? Guru Ji never did kacha kam. It was always pakka when it comes to Gurbani. You saying Hindus don’t consider devi above devtas shows you lack of gyan of Dasam Granth and Hinduism. Please read Hindu granths first and also read Dasam Granth carefully.

Words Murari, Niranjan, Keshva, Hari, Narayan, Raam, Paarbrahma etc are also used by Hindus for their gods. Why didn't Guru Sahib invent new words instead of using the old ones for Waheguru?

Muraree means something, Hari means something, Raam means something, Paarbrahm means something. What does Bhagautee mean? You might be able to use this logic on those who don’t understand these words but I sure do.

[Kaljug]

Be careful brother, these Kala Afghanists do not believe Sikhism is part of the Indic tradition of religions. They have an allergy to anything Indian, especially anything relating to Hinduism. These Hindu Phobes have reduced Sikhism into a Semitic Middle Eastern faith.

Fateh!

What's to be careful about? These people have little learning and no bhagti or shakti. They may be able to spread their idiocy now, and foolish people may even be impressed by their non-existent phds and correspondence course degrees from their shanty town educational institutions, but when they die, they will be the one's being laughed at by Dharam Raj as jamdoots tear them apart limb from limb.

If Jung comes before then, they will also be the first to convert and shave their beards and trample their turbans under their feet because their lack of naam abhyaas and bhagti will mean that they lack the confidence and faith to face death with equanmity and acceptance of His Hukam.

Regards,

K.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Someone accused me on jumping and not replying to everything. How can I be in 10 threads at once and answer to people just doing copy paste from all over the internet? I haven't even had time to sit with family over the past few days since I have been replying contantly. Like I said before, to eliminate this issue, live debate is the best. It won't as time consuming and no one can dodge questions. Many of my questions haven't been answered either. Guys just keep posting quotes from GUru Granth Sahib Ji without understanding them. Gurbani takes days to translate. Don't expect me to given answers here. Especially when I have to reply to all sorts of posts. This is like a parade going on here. I answer 1 thread, there are 10 posts in another to answer. Like I siad, it is very easy to copy paste quotes from Guru Granth Sahib Ji but very very hard to translate and understand properly. My final post in this thread, bring proper live debate.

Also Kaljug, we saw who ran away in 80s to Canada to seek refugee status. Was it anti-DG people or pro-DG which are in control of most Guruduaras. Your logic about cutting hair failed right there. Also, the Dasam Granth reading nihungs took 3 crore from indira to rebuild akaal takht. Not only that, you dasam granth has no joined hands with the RSS as witnessed by reports and pictures all ove media.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:SmZp2e...=clnk&gl=ca

This is final post here, bring proper debate as I can't keep wasting time debting with those who don't have any stand and just post quotes from Guru Granth Sahib Ji without understanding them and do nothing but make assumptions.

[Kaljug]

The Khalsa Fauj:

Also Kaljug, we saw who ran away in 80s to Canada to seek refugee status. Was it anti-DG people or pro-DG which are in control of most Guruduaras. Your logic about cutting hair failed right there. Also, the Dasam Granth reading nihungs took 3 crore from indira to rebuild akaal takht. Not only that, you dasam granth has no joined hands with the RSS as witnessed by reports and pictures all ove media.

And what follower of Kala Afghana and Inder Gagga's gave shaheedi exactly? And what was it that Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindrawale said again about nastiks and Dasam Granth?

This is final post here, bring proper debate as I can't keep wasting time debting with those who don't have any stand and just post quotes from Guru Granth Sahib Ji without understanding them and do nothing but make assumptions.

Yes, that's right. Accuse everyone of being stupid because we clearly don't gave the special understanding of Sri Guru Granth Sahib that you do and then run away.

K.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

The Khalsa Fauj:

And what follower of Kala Afghana and Inder Gagga's gave shaheedi exactly? And what was it that Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindrawale said again about nastiks and Dasam Granth?

Yes, that's right. Accuse everyone of being stupid because we clearly don't gave the special understanding of Sri Guru Granth Sahib that you do and then run away.

K.

Like I said before, there is no point debating here. Previous post was final post on this topic. Bring your skills and knowledge to live debate. I hope mods approve this post.

[Guest]

The Khalsa Fauji,

It seems like you are fatigued, need a break from all this discussion ? Understandable. Just let us know whenever you are ready. However, i just wanted to remind, it was your friend- Guru Da Sikh who came on this forum start challenging core beliefs of gurmat sidhant- Sri Dasam Granth sahib, Bhai Gurdas Ji Varan and you came along with this joined the party after clarifying that you were not Guru Da Sikh to Mithar. All of this seems some what fishy, seemed like well planned orchestrated mission to come on the forum start engaging in guerrilla debate.

[singh2]

Like I said before, get a scholar to accept debate on Dasam Granth and we will find out what is Gurmat and what isn’t

.

Whole khalsa panth except a few heretics consider Dasam Granth as a scripture of tenth master. Why debate then. Moreover it is futile to debate with people who are liars of the first order and have no ethics.

.

One side he says Mahakaal’s Sikh must drink alcohol and cannabis and on the other hand he says Mahakaal is God. Which one of his statements is the official one on that aspect? Truth is, he had to majbooree bus translate Mahakaal as God because otherwise he would have been booted from Panth by Aroor Singh and his buddies. Same crew that gave Siropa to General Dyer. He would have suffered what Prof. Gurmukh Singh suffered. Kahan Singh did what was right at the time.

Stop degrading name of Bhai kahan singh and Gurmukh singh by bracketing them falsely with gurnindaks of Kala afghana tribe. We also do not believe the documents you are scanning and posting here because people of your scan are liars. Once you lose credibility it is difficult to get it back.

You should also present hard evidence to prove that the Bhai Jeevan Singh book was written before 1704 and prove that all of it is according to Gurmat. Like I said before only Guru Granth Sahib Ji is without mixture. Every granth granth belonging to Sikhs has anti-Gurmat content. Even Bhai Nand Lal’s work has mixture as it says don’t trust women.

We have digitized copies of manuscripts of dasam granth written in 1697 and 1698 here in USA. Are you willing to come and see those. That will shut your mouth forever.

Understandable but weren’t the likes of Sainapat, Nand Lal, Daya Singh, Chaupa Singh, etc. also there? Didn’t they also take Amrit with other Sikhs? Before calling other ridiculous and childish, look at own comments first also

.

Mention of dasam granth compositions in their account is proof enough to prove you guys as paid propagandists of anti sikh lobby.

What I am saying is none of those rehatnamas mention the banis read now. Why is that? Those guys took Amrit from someone else? When it comes to eye witness accounts, they are just as credible as other accounts. Could you please list a non-DG promoter considering granth linked to Bhai Jeevan Singh as an eye witness account?

These rehatnamas mention the banis of Dasam granth. Chaupa singh's rehatnama goes further and gives date of completion of Charitopakhayan. That date coinsides with the date in dasam granth.

[singh2]

Also Kaljug, we saw who ran away in 80s to Canada to seek refugee status. Was it anti-DG people or pro-DG which are in control of most Guruduaras. Your logic about cutting hair failed right there. Also, the Dasam Granth reading nihungs took 3 crore from indira to rebuild akaal takht. Not only that, you dasam granth has no joined hands with the RSS as witnessed by reports and pictures all ove medi

Fauji

People of your flock do not attack dasam granth. Their attack is on Amrit of tenth master and keshas of us . They want to finish our identity.

Jeonwala's parent organization in USA openly say that hair are not required for a sikh. If you want i can furnish proof of this here. You people are propagating to make us monas and convert us back to Hindus. That is the real intention of these fifth columnists.

[Sikh Answers]

You should also present hard evidence to prove that the Bhai Jeevan Singh book was written before 1704 and prove that all of it is according to Gurmat.

He became Shaheed in 1704 therefore he must have completed it prior to his shaheedi. Also, no one has raised any objection to it nor declared it work of later time. I bet you had probably never even heard of it before I mentioned it. It includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and so many other events that are not found anywhere else.

Understandable but weren’t the likes of Sainapat, Nand Lal, Daya Singh, Chaupa Singh, etc. also there?

Yes but no scholar believes that rehatnamas found today are the original ones or copies of the original. Rehatnamas of Bhai Chaupa Singh was huge in size but today we only get small portion of it. So unless you can provide an original rehatnama my point stands. Besides you have already accepted these to be unoriginal by calling them “mixture”. So why cry over rehatnamas being eye witness accounts?

What I am saying is none of those rehatnamas mention the banis read now.

Bhai Daya Singh mentions Sweyeas. Some mention Jap and Jaap. These banis are read today. Do you have any reference to prove that banis from only Guru Granth Sahib were read in 1699 or ever have been read to prepare Amrit during 18th century?

mentioned them to show you that nothing outside of Guru Granth Sahib Ji is 100% reliable. Dasam Granth makes no mention of Bajjar Kurehits or Rehat Maryada or Anand Karaj or Nishan Sahib or Akaal Takht or Fateh or Khalsa Bana or 5 Pyaras.

Are you rejecting Bajjar Kurehits, Rehat Maryada, Anand Karaj, Nishan Sahib, Akaal Takht, Fateh, Khalsa Bana, Panj Pyare etc just because they are not in Guru Granth Sahib? My point was that not everything about Sikh way of life is in Gurbani and therefore we must consider other sources.

Also, if Bhagautee couldn’t mean God for almost 700 years from the time of Bhagats to Guru Gobind Singh Ji, how did it suddenly become God after 1708?

If Hari, Murari, Raam, Narayan etc didn’t mean Waheguru for 100s of years then why all of the sudden their definitions changed? Why did Bhagat Naamdev Ji use “Beethal” for God? Why sudden change of definition? Allah was used for the biggest idol but Mohammad used it to refer to the only god. You did not provide any Gurbani tuk which says Bhagauti can never be used for Waheguru. Also, why do you think God’s name can only be masculine? Is he a man?

What is there mention of 9 names of Nanak as separate entities doing in Bhagautee’s vaar?

Because Guru Sahib did sifat of first 9 Gurus just like Bhai Gurdas Ji does sifat of six Gurus after mentioning Waheguru.

Also, couldn’t vaar have been written about Guru Nanak Ji or Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji or Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji or Bhai Bidhi Chand or someone else related to Sikh Dharam

.

Yes but how does it prove Chandi Di Vaar is not authentic. How does that take away bir rass? Vaar can be written for anyone. Guru Sahib wrote literature to wake up the spirit of majority of people who prescribed to the Hindu faith. Guru Sahib used Raam and Allah at many places (more than the word Wahgeuru) for the same purpose in Gurbani. He wanted the suppressed to stand against the oppression and the best way was to give examples from their beliefs. For Sikhs it is a good source of knowledge of ancient ithihaas/mithihaas. Sikhs don’t need to go to Brahmins to study Sanskrit to learn ancient texts.

So you are saying translation starts at pauri 3 and first two are writer’s own view?

Again it is not a “word to word” type translation. Source is ancient but translation’s language, representation and viewpoint is different. Second pauri makes it clear who the creator is i.e. Bhagauti/Waheguru.

So you agree that Bhagautee is used for goddess in Dasam Granth?

I never wrote that. Examples I gave show that Bhagauti is used for Waheguru, supreme power, sword etc. You need to prove why do you think it invokes goddess?

Why couldn’t the start been something like Pritham Bhagwant. Why didn’t it have to be Bhagautee?

So you are allergic to the word now? It could’ve been whatever Guru Sahib wished but since He chose Bhagauti, it is Bhagauti. Why are names from Hindu mythology in Gurbani? Why not invent new words like Waheguru?

Muraree means something, Hari means something, Raam means something, Paarbrahm means something. What does Bhagautee mean? You might be able to use this logic on those who don’t understand these words but I sure do.

All these words refer to specific Hindu deity. Why were they used for Waheguru only in Gurbani? Why sudden change of definition? Answer my question if you think you understand. Show me one word in Gurbani that doesn’t have multiple meanings.

For a live debate, find yourself a scholar who will debate. I will not do that for you. I am debating here. If you don’t like it then end it (which I believe you have)?

[singh2]

Muraree means something, Hari means something, Raam means something, Paarbrahm means something. What does Bhagautee mean? You might be able to use this logic on those who don’t understand these words but I sure do.

Do you know symbolism? If not please go to a school learn about it.

[singh2]

Understandable but weren’t the likes of Sainapat, Nand Lal, Daya Singh, Chaupa Singh, etc. also there? Didn’t they also take Amrit with other Sikhs? Before calling other ridiculous and childish, look at own comments first also.

Rehatnama of Bhai Dya singh ji does mention five banis for a khalsa. These are Japji sahib, Jaap sahib, Chaupai sahib, swaiyes and anand sahib. It is right on first page itself.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Like I said before, live debate is what would get the job done. Talk here is not proper as it takes too long so it isn't effectice or efficient. Bijlaa Singh, debates onliine will never solve any issue.

Inder Singh, I know you can't debate because you aren't allowed to. You are doing your job very well to be honored but bring you game to live debate.

[jsingh96]

Like I said before, live debate is what would get the job done. Talk here is not proper as it takes too long so it isn't effectice or efficient. Bijlaa Singh, debates onliine will never solve any issue.

Inder Singh, I know you can't debate because you aren't allowed to. You are doing your job very well to be honored but bring you game to live debate.

If you truely believe this, why do you keep posting your beliefs and debating with others on this forum? Looks like you just announced your retirement. Goodbye.

[singh2]

inder Singh, I know you can't debate because you aren't allowed to. You are doing your job very well to be honored but bring you game to live debate.

Inder singh is living abroad for the last over 30 years and is a qualified professional. He need not stoop to the level of your ill educated ilk who have neither formal education nor any spiritual strength. He is not a saleable commodity like policeman kala afghana , Darshan ragi and jeonwala.