1699 - Khande Di Pahul

[SikhKhoj]

Tell us your opinion when you're finished reading Dal.

Edited June 12, 2011 by SikhKhoj

[amardeep]

Story of panj pyare can be found in suraj parkaash on page 202 (in pdf document) here

http://www.ik13.net/PDFS/Rut3.pdf

Suraj parkaash and panth parkaash were written during the same time. Interesting that one has the story of panj pyare and the other does'nt.

[amardeep]

Maharaj asks for a head in the congregation on page 198

[SikhKhoj]

I don't think Kavi Santokh Singh made everything up. And Rattan Singh Bhangu not mentioning it doesn't mean it didn't happen. What you say?

[amardeep]

Rattan Singh Bhangu follows a tradition in Sikh litterature of showing to much family or caste affilitation. Bansavalinamah and chapa singh rehit has a great focus on enhanzing the status of their family in the court of the Gurus, same with Rattan Singh Bhangu who enhanzes the sacrifices of his family etc (he has a great ancestry without any doubt).. maybe he was not fond of the fact that none from his family stood up to offer their head in the congregation and therefore does not mention the incident lol.. who knows..

Edited July 17, 2011 by amardeep

[SikhKhoj]

Possible explanation.

[amardeep]

but still that does'nt explain the silence of Gursobha.. what does the gurbilas and mahima prakash say?

Edited July 17, 2011 by amardeep

[SikhKhoj]

GurSobha doesn't mention the ceremony itself, or any details, so its normal there are no Panj Pyare.

Mehma Parkash doesn't mention the ceremony aswel I think. Which gurbilas? Kuer Singh or Sukha Singh?

[amardeep]

both

[SikhKhoj]

Kuer Singh mentions Amrit ceremony, don't know about Sukha Singh.

[SikhKhoj]

I edited bits from an article and made points:

1. Sainapat began the writing of his work, Sri Gur Sobha, in 1701 (my note: 'probably written around 1741') - two years or so after the creation of the Khalsa in 1699. He completed it in 1711, within three years of the demise of Guru Gobind Singh. Having been an eminent poet of his court, both at Paonta Sahib and Anandpur Sahib, he would have been an eye-witness to all that happened on 30 March 1699 at Anandpur. But in spite of its being a contemporary historical significance and poetical excellence, it is quite silent over almost all those aspects and incidents of the event which are generally known to the people uptil now. He has referred, though, to the huge gathering on the occasion of Vaisakhi at Anandpur, without mentioning even its year, yet there is no explicit reference in it even to the thundering call for heads made by the Guru in that assemblage and what followed thereafter. He seems to have taken it for granted that unique and memorable event and the details associated with it were already known to his readers. Hence, he does not seem to have considered it necessary or useful to describe the same.

2. Sainapat’s Sri Gur Sobha is followed by Koer Singh’s Gurbilas which is also a versified account of the life of Guru Gobind Singh, and is probably the first available work that covers in detail almost the entire span of his life, completed within 43 years of his passing away. Commencing his narration in the relevant canto no. 9, as follows:

Yah bidhi panth banai hai27

He has mentioned it twice and both times 1746 BK.,28 corresponding to 1689 A.D., instead of 1699 A.D. universally accepted till now.

As hinted above, it is also the so-far-first available work in which are recorded some details of the event that led to the creation of the Khalsa. But its narration falls short not only in telling us a wrong and misleading date of its occurrence but also in several other elements and aspects of the subject. Unlike that of Sainapat and Kaushish, Koer Singh’s account is doctrinally heterodox in its nature, content and presentation. It runs counter to the tenets, teachings and writings of Guru Gobind Singh. Quite contrary to the glaring facts of history, most of these are figments of Koer Singh’s poetic fancy, leading not only to heterodoxy but also to heresy. Hence, there is very little of historical, factual and, therefore, credible element in his account.29

According to Koer Singh, the first Piara, Bhai Daya Ram, belonged to Lahore, but Bawa Sarup Das Bhalla, author of the Mehma Parkash (dated 1776), and Sarup Singh Kaushish have mentioned him as a resident of Sialkot or Shalkot, respectively. 30 He was a Sopat or Softi (not Sobti, as it is now pronounced) Khatri, according to all of them.

3. The next work, in chronological order, is Bansavalinama Dasan Patshahian Ka by Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibbar. He completed this poeticized work in 1769. There is no mention in it of the Sis-bhet episode nor of the very bold and spectacular method adopted by Guru Gobind Singh to select his Panj Piare (five Beloved ones).31 According to him, Guru Gobind Singh planned to create the Khalsa when the year 1750 Bk. (1693 A.D.) came to its end:

Sambat satara sai pachas pura hoya31

4. Mehma Parkash, dated 1776, by Bawa Sarup Das Bhalla, seems to have followed Koer Singh’s Gurbilas in repeating the same heterodoxical element.32 Its account is not only insignificant but is also incredible to a very large extent.

5. Sarup Singh Kaushish, author of Guru Kian Sakhian, wrote the above account of that great event 14 years after Bhalla, 21 years after Chhibbar and 39 years after Koer Singh, had steered clear of all such flights of poetical imagination, Brahmanical influences and heretical overtones. He seems to have followed only the first-hand information he found recorded in the Bhatt Vahis of his ancestors who remained in attendance with Sri Guru Gobind Singh and happened to be eye-witness to most of the events associated with his court and camp till he passed away.33

Basing his account on such an authentic and reliable contemporary source, Kaushish related the first "baptismal" ceremony, held at Keshgarh Sahib on the Vaisakhi Day (30 March) of 1699, in the next Sakhi, bearing no. 59, as follows:

That is, "now begins the anecdote regarding initiation with ambrosial baptism by the nectar of the double-edged broadsword."

[amardeep]

interesting.. when you say heterodox you mean puranic?

So Guru Kian SAkhian is the first source to mention the call for heads?

[SikhKhoj]

Well according to the article it is. But It seems a little bit similar to Bansawlinama.

Its not me but the author saying heterodox - I just sorted by paragraph.

[amardeep]

I bought Kuer Singhs Gurbilas Patshahi 10 in Southall (from 1751) being the first full account of Guru Gobind Singhs life.. It mentions the Sis-Bed episode of the panj pyare as well as the passing of the Gurgaddi to the Granth emphazising that there is no other Guru than the Granth in this age..

What we get from this is that the first ever account on the creation of the Khalsa is that of the Panj Pyare sis-bhed account... One can thus wonder why Bansavalinama and Panth Parkash gives another account...

Edited September 19, 2011 by amardeep

[SikhKhoj]

Interesting.

Don't you think that people would have written about this in the first years of the ceremony? I mean like on the actual day or just after. (The Mughal spy one has been proven wrong, if I'm not mistaken)

[amardeep]

I just read the Amrit Sanchar account in Sarup Das Bhallas "Mahima Prakash". The devi episode is mentioned but nothing about the calling for heads or any panj pyare

[ipledgeblue]

5. Were the Kakkaars given as we know them today? Or Trai Mudra as some Nihangs say (Kes Kach Kirpan). Or were Sikhs just ordered not to remove hair and keep weapons to defend the poor?

6. Did women get pahul? If so, were they ordered to keep the name Kaur? Did they wear Keskis / Dumalleh?

7. Did all Sikhs take pahul?

5. I have heard the rehat given by Guru was very simple.

Also about the kakkars thing, I know there is something that some sikhs bring up about the last page in some saroop of Dasam Granth having 5 kakkars written.

However, on one of these forums, there is someone who talks about the inclusion of this page accidentally and was not written by Guru ji. But I cannot seem to remember where the post was, it would either be on sikhsangat or on this forum.

6. Is the khanda a masculine symbol? Does khanda da amrit not only make Singhs and requires one to behave like a male, how can khanda amrit produce kaurs? Or is my logic flawed?

That is my thinking, that Khanda is a masculine respresentation, whereas kripaan is feminine. Those with ancient knowledge/gyaan can dvelve further.

When women demanded Amrit, did puraatan sampradaiye not start traditions using feminine symbol kripaan to give amrit like I have heard they do in Hazoor Sahib?

7. And obviously, the other sampradaiye show that not all sikhs could have taken khandeh dee pahul, especially those whose mission in sikh panth did not tally with kshatriya dharam.

[SikhKhoj]

Amardeep, could you summarise that?

I plan to make a table with year book and then words such as 5 pyare, date, Banis, so we can have a comparative study of all literature about the Khalsa

What do you say? Help me?

[SikhKhoj]

5. I have heard the rehat given by Guru was very simple.

Also about the kakkars thing, I know there is something that some sikhs bring up about the last page in some saroop of Dasam Granth having 5 kakkars written.

However, on one of these forums, there is someone who talks about the inclusion of this page accidentally and was not written by Guru ji. But I cannot seem to remember where the post was, it would either be on sikhsangat or on this forum.

6. Is the khanda a masculine symbol? Does khanda da amrit not only make Singhs and requires one to behave like a male, how can khanda amrit produce kaurs? Or is my logic flawed?

That is my thinking, that Khanda is a masculine respresentation, whereas kripaan is feminine. Those with ancient knowledge/gyaan can dvelve further.

When women demanded Amrit, did puraatan sampradaiye not start traditions using feminine symbol kripaan to give amrit like I have heard they do in Hazoor Sahib?

7. And obviously, the other sampradaiye show that not all sikhs could have taken khandeh dee pahul, especially those whose mission in sikh panth did not tally with kshatriya dharam.

Nice reply but I want answer from an historic point of view. Prem Sumarg does mention getting khande di pahul if Im not mistaken, but sadly we havent been able to ascertain the year it was written it, estimates vary from 1701 AD to 1800 AD.

Yes, that 5 Kakkaar sahabd is in Persian and not written by Guru Ji, but by Bhai Nand Lal (apparently)

[amardeep]

I did not understand much of the language as it was in verse and not in prose. But there was nothing mentioned of panj pyare, it just said the Guru took amrit himself and then began to give khande di pahul to sangat after having assembled the sangat.

in the preface to Gurbilas Patshahi 10 (1751) by Kuer Singh it says that this is the first source to mention the sis bhet episode....Kuer Singh says his source is Bhai Mani Singhs katha (which also mentions the devi episode as well as passing of Gurgaddi to the Granth).

Edited February 7, 2012 by amardeep

[ipledgeblue]

Yes, that 5 Kakkaar sahabd is in Persian and not written by Guru Ji, but by Bhai Nand Lal (apparently)

Hmm the post didn't mention Bhai Nand Lal; I think I found it through Googling, can the Admins find this post on this forum perhaps? Unless its not on here?

[amardeep]

Its written by Bhai Nand Lal the name Goya ocours

[chatanga1]

 Did this topic just come to an abrupt end then? No more research made by anyone?

Dal, what is that book like by Grewal?

I have read that post you mention. Was quite sick to write something like that. I don't like this gender equality getting into everything.

I wonder how his fanclub will take this.

 

[dalsingh101]

 Did this topic just come to an abrupt end then? No more research made by anyone?

Dal, what is that book like by Grewal?

 

Been a good while since I read it, but from what I can recall I thought it was quite anodyne myself. No major insights. I mean, you'd get infinitely more insights from reading Kulwant Singh's translation of Panth Prakash than Grewal's synopsis for instance. Same with Gursobha. They've done that thing where they've generally skewed things towards the 20th century (Singh Sabha) slant. 

It's too conservative for me. 

Edited September 2, 2015 by dalsingh101