Sarbloh Granth Questions

[Del Piero]

Well i read this on Sikhi wiki site http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sarbloh_Granth

Five points casting doubt on the ascribed authorship of Guru Gobind Singh.

1. The work is marked by extraordinary effusiveness and discursiveness of style, compaired to the compactness, so characteristic of Guru Gobind Singh's compositions collected in the Dasam Granth. Qualitatively, too, the poetry of Sarabloh Granth does not match that of Guru Gobind Singh's Chandi Charttras and Var Durga Ki dealing with the same topic of wars between the gods and the demons. The profusion of metaphor and superb imagery of the latter compositions are missing here.

2. The author of Sarbloh Granth often uses his name, 'Das Gobind' or the phrase 'Das Gobind fatah satgur ki', which is generally contrary to the style of Guru Gobind Singh.

3. The Sarbloh Granth contains, quite out of context, an account of the Sikh religion, which also includes a reference to the devolution of guruship on Guru Granth Sahib and Guru Panth (stanzas 3159-66). This would be out of place in a work of Guru Gobind Singh's own composition.

4. There is also a reference in it to Rup Dip Bhasha Pingal (stanza 2938/ 8), a work on prosody written by one Jaya Krishna in 1719, i.e. eleven years after the death of the Guru.

5. It uses dass Gobind or Fateh Gobind yet mentions Guru Granth Sahib being Guru. This means it is written after Guru Granth Sahib received Gurgaddi

if Guru wrote it then it wouldn't be dass gobind but Gobind Singh. that is if Guru was going to use his own name. But Guru Ji used Nanak as all Gurus had Guru Nanak's jot. So why would Guru Gobind SIngh Ji use something else? If 5th Nanak doesn't have permission to change 1 word from Guru Granth Sahib Ji, then how did 10th Guru get permission to change Nanak to Gobind?

Anyone want to clear any of the points up for me?

[dsd108]

Well i read this on Sikhi wiki site http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sarbloh_Granth

Anyone want to clear any of the points up for me?

Your idea is wrong because Kabir Sahib or the bhagats haven't used Nanak in Sri Guru Granth Sahib?

About Sarbloh Granth personally i haven't read it and from what i heard its recited by the Nihang sect?

[jvalasingh]

Five points casting doubt on the ascribed authorship of Guru Gobind Singh.

1. The work is marked by extraordinary effusiveness and discursiveness of style, compaired to the compactness, so characteristic of Guru Gobind Singh's compositions collected in the Dasam Granth. Qualitatively, too, the poetry of Sarabloh Granth does not match that of Guru Gobind Singh's Chandi Charttras and Var Durga Ki dealing with the same topic of wars between the gods and the demons. The profusion of metaphor and superb imagery of the latter compositions are missing here.

From my understanding and reading of Sarbloh Granth this is not entirely true. In Dasam Granth, if you look at some of the Rudhra Avatar sections, very similar type verses are used, i.e. Bisanpad etc.

Very similar chands are used as well.

2. The author of Sarbloh Granth often uses his name, 'Das Gobind' or the phrase 'Das Gobind fatah satgur ki', which is generally contrary to the style of Guru Gobind Singh.

What about the famous passage that is read in the daily liturgy by all Sikhs, "Bahe gahe kee laaj aas Gobind Daas Tuhaar", which is in the daily Rehraas Sahib (after Chaupai Sahib). That line is from Ramavatar in Dasam Granth, and there are many other passages in Dasam Granth where the same terms are used.

3. The Sarbloh Granth contains, quite out of context, an account of the Sikh religion, which also includes a reference to the devolution of guruship on Guru Granth Sahib and Guru Panth (stanzas 3159-66). This would be out of place in a work of Guru Gobind Singh's own composition.

What about the praise of the Khalsa in Dasam Granth? (i.e. the shabads, Judh kitey in hi prasaad). If Maharaj praised the Khalsa then why cannot he declare that Khalsa is also my Guru?

4. There is also a reference in it to Rup Dip Bhasha Pingal (stanza 2938/ 8), a work on prosody written by one Jaya Krishna in 1719, i.e. eleven years after the death of the Guru.

This is something I have been looking into but I cannot seem to find where this mention of Rup Dip Bhasha Pingal comes up. The verse number is either incorrect or the claim is of no substance.

5. It uses dass Gobind or Fateh Gobind yet mentions Guru Granth Sahib being Guru. This means it is written after Guru Granth Sahib received Gurgaddi

Again look above at the quote from Dasam Granth which says, 'Daas Gobind'.

if Guru wrote it then it wouldn't be dass gobind but Gobind Singh. that is if Guru was going to use his own name. But Guru Ji used Nanak as all Gurus had Guru Nanak's jot. So why would Guru Gobind SIngh Ji use something else? If 5th Nanak doesn't have permission to change 1 word from Guru Granth Sahib Ji, then how did 10th Guru get permission to change Nanak to Gobind?

This is a common argument used against Sri Dasam Granth. If one believes in Dasam Granth then this would not even be a question. The authenticity of Dasam Granth has been debated various times on this forum and can be researched elsewhere, I'll keep this thread focused on Sri Sarbloh Granth.

[Del Piero]

Thank youuu bruvv

Edited January 14, 2010 by Del Piero

[Maha Singh]

Thank youuu bruvv

People should endevour to go through these texts and then make their own minds up, rather then read propoganda over the net and take someone elses word as gospel

[GuptSingh1699]

Those questions are still valid. JvalaSingh, those are no answers.

When was Sarbloh Granth written? 1698 as some Nihangs say? Or In Guru's previous life and digged up later on? Both are fake.

Sarbloh Granth was written by Sukha Singh Patna.

[amardeep]

Sarbloh Granth was written by Sukha Singh Patna.

what is your evidence on this?

[GuptSingh1699]

Pandit Tara Singh Narotam.

[amardeep]

I dont have his book could you please explain what he uses as evidence to suggest it was written by Sukha Singh patna

[GuptSingh1699]

Puratan sources confirm the fact that Sukha Singh and his son were expert at imitating the handwriting of Guru Gobind Singh and earny money that way. Sukha Singh's son added 5 KHas Patras (which he himself wrote imitating Guru Ji's handwriting) etc.

I don't know, read Pandit Tara Singh on Sarbloh Granth. It is a fact that he said that. You want to know more about it, so research it.

[PAL 07]

GuptSingh1699 - the authenticity of sarbloh Granth is a different question altogether and one of little importance as 99% of Sikhs(whatever subgroup) will probably never get to read it.

However Delpiero's assumptions have been clearly refuted beyond doubt by Jvalasingh's post and furthermore emphazise that Sarbloh is the sacred writings of Guru Gobind Singh Ji as believed by the Nihangs since the times of Guru Ji themselves.

This leaves you with two options believe the Nihangs or believe Pandit Tara Singh...........

I know who i would choose ??????

[GuptSingh1699]

You choose Nihangs? So you also justify consumption of cannabis?

Sarbloh Granth is by Sukha Singh and not Guru Gobind Singh.

[PAL 07]

ITS NOT CANNABIS ITS HEMP........ WOULD HAVE THOUGHT YOU KNEW THE DIFFERENCE.

CANNABIS HAS TWO FORMS AND IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS GANJA .......HEMP IS COMPLETELY DIFFERERNT AND HAS ONLY 1 TO 3% THC(TETRA HYDRO CANNIBINOL)MOLECULES PRESENT.

AND YEH YOU WANT TWO'S ON MY BATA LOL

[jvalasingh]

You choose Nihangs? So you also justify consumption of cannabis?

Sarbloh Granth is by Sukha Singh and not Guru Gobind Singh.

Your logic is hilarious

So the question was Pandit Tara Singh Narotam vs Nihangs

He picked Nihangs, so you questioned the Nihangs beliefs. Thats fine.

What about Tara Singh Narotams belief that Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind SIngh were the only Puran Avatars out of the 10 Gurus. The other Gurus, according to his belief, were not Puran and were a lower level of Avatar.

So you also believe this? If so that is quite blasphemous

[GuptSingh1699]

I didn't say I believe Tara Singh over Nihangs. He said that between the two he picked Nihangs. So going by his logics I said that. Waheguru gave you a gift - grey cells. Use them.

I don't believe every single thing that Pandit Tara said. He was pro Dasam Granth, I'm not. But there is no harm in taking good points of others, is there?

From my understanding and reading of Sarbloh Granth this is not entirely true. In Dasam Granth, if you look at some of the Rudhra Avatar sections, very similar type verses are used, i.e. Bisanpad etc.

Very similar chands are used as well.

*Dasam Granth is not by Tenth Guru either. Doesn't prove your point. Sikh Guru's used Nanak, not Shyam, Kaal, Ram, Gobind Das or whatever.

What about the famous passage that is read in the daily liturgy by all Sikhs, "Bahe gahe kee laaj aas Gobind Daas Tuhaar", which is in the daily Rehraas Sahib (after Chaupai Sahib). That line is from Ramavatar in Dasam Granth, and there are many other passages in Dasam Granth where the same terms are used.

* Isn't written by Guru Gobind Singh.

What about the praise of the Khalsa in Dasam Granth? (i.e. the shabads, Judh kitey in hi prasaad). If Maharaj praised the Khalsa then why cannot he declare that Khalsa is also my Guru?

* Are you talking about Khalsa Mehma? It is taken from Sarbloh Granth if I'm not mistaken. Not exactly written by Guru Ji.

This is something I have been looking into but I cannot seem to find where this mention of Rup Dip Bhasha Pingal comes up. The verse number is either incorrect or the claim is of no substance.

* Are you sure that, the 1719 work isn't mentioned in whole of Sarbloh Granth?

Again look above at the quote from Dasam Granth which says, 'Daas Gobind'.

* Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth both aren't written by Guru Gobind Singh.

This is a common argument used against Sri Dasam Granth. If one believes in Dasam Granth then this would not even be a question. The authenticity of Dasam Granth has been debated various times on this forum and can be researched elsewhere, I'll keep this thread focused on Sri Sarbloh Granth.

* I don't believe in Dasam Granth. Last time we debate Dasam Granth, the moderators locked thread and haven't opened it yet, shows who was owning who.

[GuptSingh1699]

ITS NOT CANNABIS ITS HEMP........ WOULD HAVE THOUGHT YOU KNEW THE DIFFERENCE.

CANNABIS HAS TWO FORMS AND IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS GANJA .......HEMP IS COMPLETELY DIFFERERNT AND HAS ONLY 1 TO 3% THC(TETRA HYDRO CANNIBINOL)MOLECULES PRESENT.

AND YEH YOU WANT TWO'S ON MY BATA LOL

Well following Gurmat I don't consume that stuff... And neither do I deal that sort of stuff.. So, Mr. Expert, thanks for correcting about that.

[Chakarvarti]

so let me get this straight guptsingh you don’t believe in jaap Sahib or chaupai, tva prasaad?

question for you so what do you make of the amrit ceremony then? what is the nitnem of a sikh according to you?

[PAL 07]

GUPTSINGH1699 - IS JUST ANOTHER DODGY GUY ON FORUMS SPREADING POISION ABOUT THE TEACHINGS OF SIKHISM....

YOU SAY YOU ARE A GUPTSINGH SINCE 1699 AND YET YOU ENTER INTO DIALOGUE ON A FORUM OPEN TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE...YOU ARE FULL FOR CONTRADICTIONS

[GuptSingh1699]

so let me get this straight guptsingh you don’t believe in jaap Sahib or chaupai, tva prasaad?

question for you so what do you make of the amrit ceremony then? what is the nitnem of a sikh according to you?

Don't believe in anything besides my Guru, Guru Granth Sahib. Wheter its Jaap or Charitropakhyan, it is third party compositions and I don't recite them either.

Amrit Sanchaar: Panth shall decide when Sarbat Khalsa is called after majority of Panth has become Anti DG (many are becoming anti DG)

Daily Nitnem: All Banis in Guru Granth Sahib before the Sri Raag (1st raag). Japji Sahib in morning, Sodar and Sopurkh Sahib in evening and Sohila Sahib before sleeping. Besides that a Sikh can and should recite as much Bani as he can from the Guru Granth Sahib.

GUPTSINGH1699 - IS JUST ANOTHER DODGY GUY ON FORUMS SPREADING POISION ABOUT THE TEACHINGS OF SIKHISM....

YOU SAY YOU ARE A GUPTSINGH SINCE 1699 AND YET YOU ENTER INTO DIALOGUE ON A FORUM OPEN TO MILLIONS OF PEOPLE...YOU ARE FULL FOR CONTRADICTIONS

I never said I exist since 1699. Did you just consume 'hemp'?

[PAL 07]

GUPTSINGH - have you taken amrit ???? if so what did you say to the panjpiare when they were reciting jaap sahib savaye and choupai?? admin cut- Death threats are not allowed. We take death threats very seriously. You have been warned twice in less than 10 minutes, you have one more warning left after that you be put under moderation for quality purposes then possibly even ban

[PAL 07]

WHY IS IT MODERATORS DONT TAKE DESTRUCTION OF SIKHISM BY THESE PEOPLE SERIOUSLY ???

I THINK YOUR DOING MORE DAMAGE THAN GOOD TO SIKHISM BY ALLOWING THESE SORT OF PEOPLE TO TALK WHO SAY MARRIAGE WAS VEDIC AND AMRIT SANCHAR WAS WRONG, DASAM GRANTH IS WRONG ETC. YOU MODS ARE AS BAD AS PEOPLE LIKE GUPTSINGH AND WILL ALL BE LIABLE BEFORE GOD I TELL U THAT MUCH FOR FREE

Edited January 20, 2010 by PAL 07

[Maha Singh]

Amrit Sanchaar: Panth shall decide when Sarbat Khalsa is called after majority of Panth has become Anti DG (many are becoming anti DG)

So what the Panth has decided for the past 300+ yrs is not enough for you, and will only follow decisions when they are in favour of your beliefs?

Ive never really been bothered about argueing over Sri Dasam Granth over the interweb, as its impossible to change the minds of those who have already made them up. Best to read and contemplate the bani yourselfs then waste energy replying to rouge Sikhs.

Regardless of anything else in Sri Dasam Granth, the person who denies the authorship of Jaap Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh, doesnt even deserve being talked to let being heard in debate.

[singh2]

Panth has decided already and that decision is in practice.Just because a few heretics want it differently is not going to force panth change their maryada.

Those who do not want it differently can form their own sect.They should have followed kala afghana or may follow heretci ragi darshan on Jan 29.

Edited January 20, 2010 by singh2

[HarjasDevi]

WHY IS IT MODERATORS DONT TAKE DESTRUCTION OF SIKHISM BY THESE PEOPLE SERIOUSLY ???

I THINK YOUR DOING MORE DAMAGE THAN GOOD TO SIKHISM BY ALLOWING THESESORT OF PEOPLE TO TALK WHO SAY MARRIAGE WAS VEDIC AND AMRIT SANCHAR WASWRONG, DASAM GRANTH IS WRONG ETC. YOU MODS ARE AS BAD AS PEOPLE LIKEGUPTSINGH AND WILL ALL BE LIABLE BEFORE GOD I TELL U THAT MUCH FOR FREE

For what it's worth veer Ji I don't want to see your viewpoint under moderation. I think what the moderator Jeo was objecting to was your style. You have a valid opinion and you can calm down and put that into perfectly good points. Just accept that everyone is not going to agree with you. You wrote a lot of personal attack about me that was really childish in another thread. Why don't you channel your energies more wisely, and instaed point out why you think something is wrong, why you think something is dangerous.

Look, nobody has the power to destroy Sikhism. And you aren't a sant-sipahi qualified to defend it. Not like this with bitter words and spewing insults and threats and things. When you lose Dharma, there's nothing you can defend. The only right to force you have is in defense, when all other means have failed. Not over someone's opinions, dodgey or not.

You're going on about "bad people." I myself, seem to be one of them. Why not live and let live? You can't change my opinions and I can't change yours. But it's foolish to think you can have a fair and intelligent opinion forum filled with banning, censorship and intimidation of anyone who doesn't agree with a certain sampradaya, or certain view. Have you ever heard of Panthic Ekta? I would like to know who's going around telling these young and punky people they are God's gift to Sikhism and have the right to announce who should live and who should die?

If anyone is destroying Sikhism, it isn't open debate, analysis and the freedom to correct and contradict. But the people who are acting like thugs and bullying all viewpoints which disagree with them by baiting, threats, personal slanders, attacks and intimidation. These people are making Sikhism look like Taliban.

At the end of the day, our opinions about the truth don't matter. And in fact nobody has got it "right." Regardless what all the foolish people in the world "think," the eternal Truth will always be the "Truth." It can't be wounded, bullied, sullied or tarnished. It remains ever Pure. And that Niramal Sat is a Divine Presence who loves us. He is in love with all His creation. If we lose the message of love and justice, then we are out of tune with "Truth."

[PAL 07]

chu kar az hama helteh dar gujast halal ast bardan ba shamsheer dast (zafarnama)

when all means have failed it is justifiable to draw the sword....

YOU WROTE

If anyone is destroying Sikhism, it isn't open debate, analysis and the freedom to correct and contradict. But the people who are acting like thugs and bullying all viewpoints which disagree with them by baiting, threats, personal slanders, attacks and intimidation.

I SAY "you fit in this category cuz you have been clearly diproved on everything you say yet you cant accept it"

YOU LACK BASIC ANALYSIS SKILLS AND TO TALK TO YOU IS LIKE TALKING TO A BRICK WALL

Edited January 21, 2010 by PAL 07