SikhKhoj Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 I have read several translations of Rehraas Sahib, like by Bhai Sahib Bhai Veer Singh & Max Arthur Macauliffe, and both do not contain Chaupai Sahib in the Rehraas Sahib... Is this an error or was this the norm till the 1900s? Or were it only certain sampardas doing the current paath known as Sampuran Rehraas Sahib? Dhanvaad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 28, 2012 Report Share Posted May 28, 2012 There is a reference to 'Chaupai' being in the Rehras in a translation of a Prahlad Singh rehatnama published in 1876 by Attar Singh Bhadour. Try searching online (Google books etc.) you might find the book? It is called 'The rayhit namah of Prahlad Rai, or the excellent conversation of the Duswun Padsha.....' Good luck. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 Prehlad Singh rehatnama has been proven to be fake as far as I know. Actually most of the rehatnamas are, according to Piara Singh Padam. The only ones that might have been written before 1750s are Chaupa Singh, Tankhahnama and Prem Sumarg. Any other source? Because we have two historians not giving Chaupai Sahib in Rehraas Sahib which is kind of dodgy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 29, 2012 Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 (edited) Personally I think there was more variation in practice at ground level in terms of paat than a lot of people would accept today. For example older rehats strongly suggest Japji and Jaap Sahib were morning bani. People probably added as per their commitment and faith? What my last post does (possibly) show is that by the late 1800s, at least some people were including Chaupai into their Rehras. It isn't to much of a stretch to think that the practice had roots before this period (at some stage). So I'd say that the practice was possibly common amongst some Sikhs probably prior to annexation. Edited May 29, 2012 by dalsingh101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 29, 2012 Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 I should add, personally I think Chaupai would have been introduced either during or prior to all out war against the panth. That makes sense to me. It's like a plea to the all pervading, almighty for protection for ones self and ones family and people. This would become increasingly felt at times of crisis. Just a theory. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 (edited) Your point that Chaupai was part of Rehraas by the late 1800s is acceptable, but if it was during the Guru times, that we can't say (atleast not going by the Prehlad Singh rehat). Morning bani actually varies, some say Japji only others Japji Jaap, others Japji Jaap Anand. But the fact that Rehraas Sahib might have changed overtime is a little worrysome since some Sampardas now claim to do the 'Sampuran Rehraas' - but it appears that more and more Shabads and Banis got added to the evening prayer and now it is known as Sampuran while it is not really that authentic. Why did those learned scholars choose Sodar as Rehraas only? Another one who did it was Prof. Sahib Singh. What was the Rehraas during our Guru Gobind Singh Jis times? Yes your theory of war is a possibility. More research needs to be done. Edited May 29, 2012 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 29, 2012 Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 As a posited mechanism that leads to additions to nitnem, maybe the principle of 'more is better' or a sort of perceived accumulated positive effect of doing more bani is what may have theoretically caused expansion? I think Islam has a similar principle to what I'm trying to describe here? I noticed what you are saying about BVS and PSS's commentaries on Rehras myself. Maybe it was because that is the bare 'minimum' or 'core' of Rehras (as contained in SGGS ji) and the earliest practice? Those first few angs of SGGS ji seem to consist of the original core of nitnem by the time of Guru Arjan Dev? Some people claim that DDT have a puratan gutka (purportedly Baba Deep Singh's no less), with the sampooran version. If that is what is claimed, then firstly I wonder if the daily nitnem of someone like BDS, wouldn't be greater than an everyday Singh? It's also very easy to imagine various groups adding extras that resonate with them or that they feel are important, and these getting transmitted down to younger people and so forth. Jaap Sahib seems strongly to have been added to the daily litany by dasmesh pita. PSS thinks Guru Gobind Singh brought the daily recital of Jaap Sahib amongst apnay way before 1699. Personally I can't help but think that one part of what dasmesh pita ji was trying to do with Sikhs with this was to expand their vocabulary/minds wider than Panjabi myself. Linguistically speaking Jaap Sahib is VERY creative in terms of mixing and matching vocabulary from Indic/Persian/Islamic sources. PSS seems to think that Japji and Jaap Sahib was minimum prescription for the morning banis. The earliest surviving rehat (from 1718-1719) seems to mention only Japji, Rehras and alludes to Kirtan Sohila interestingly enough. Point to note is that whenever Rehras is mentioned in old rehats, it is done in a way that assumes knowledge of what it consists of. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2012 Doing more Bani is indeed better, but that doesn't mean we alter the core of our Banis right? Like some people like to recite Aarti in the evening, does it become a part of Rehraas? No it doesn't, our core Rehraas should remain the way it was, thats why I was wondering whether Chaupai Sahib was added lateron or was there already during Guru Jis times. Yes I have heard about the Gutka aswell, but how authentic is it? Yes Tankhahnama - 1719 mentions Japji Rehraas Sohila only. So does Mukatnama from Sau Sakhi - 1734. Maybe a coincidence but the pre-raag section of Guru Granth Sahib contain only these Banis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 30, 2012 Report Share Posted May 30, 2012 Doing more Bani is indeed better, but that doesn't mean we alter the core of our Banis right? You could argue that the core hasn't been 'altered' but appended to. And if more bani is better, then this is no bad thing. Like some people like to recite Aarti in the evening, does it become a part of Rehraas? No it doesn't, our core Rehraas should remain the way it was, thats why I was wondering whether Chaupai Sahib was added lateron or was there already during Guru Jis times. Okay but that hinges on the firm establishment of what was normative practice by Guru Gobind Singh's time. Truth is that the nitnem has evolved and expanded since the original order as given by Baba Nanak. Whatever Rehras was originally common at Kartarpur wasn't the same as the one of Guru Arjan Dev ji's time, as subsequent mahal's bani was incorporated. In this context it isn't surprising that dasam bani was added later. Whether this was by order of Guru Gobind Singh himself or a practice initiated by shardaloo, I don't know. And what if insufficient evidence is available today to clinch the issue irrefutably? What then? The subject is fascinating because even later during the Singh Sabha lehar, they saw reason to clip some off the sampooran version. So we have expansion and then a contraction. On a personal note, and I know many will vehemently disagree with me on this, as important as the bani is the faith of the reciter. Whether you do the 'sampooran' one or a shorter version, as far as I am concerned, doing it with sharda and trying to live the life associated with it will be rewarding. Other than that, if you are an Amritdhari, simply follow the instructions your panj piaray gave you? Yes I have heard about the Gutka aswell, but how authentic is it? Who knows. I know DDT are opposed to modern style 'textual analysis' so even if someone did this and found conclusive proof that it wasn't, it wouldn't matter to them. Yes Tankhahnama - 1719 mentions Japji Rehraas Sohila only. So does Mukatnama from Sau Sakhi - 1734. Maybe a coincidence but the pre-raag section of Guru Granth Sahib contain only these Banis. I don't think it is coincidence. Prem Sumarag mentions Japji, Jaap and Anand for morning incidentally. Professor Sahib Singh says this about the morning prescription: ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਰਿਆਸਤ ਨਾਹਨ ਵਿਚ ਸੰਨ 1684 ਈ: ਵਿਚ ਗਏ, ਤੇ ਉਥੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸਾਲ ਰਹੇ। ਉਨ੍ਹੀ ਦਿਨੀ (1684-87) ਉਸ ਰਿਆਸਤ ਵਿਚ ਜਮੁਨਾ ਨਦੀ ਦੇ ਕੰਢੇ ਦੀ ਇਕਾਂਤ ਵਿਚ ‘ਜਾਪੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ’ ‘ਸਵੈਯੇ’ ਅਤੇ ‘ਅਕਾਲ ਉਸਤਤਿ’ ਆਦਿਕ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਉਚਾਰੀਆਂ ਗਈਆਂ। ‘ਜਾਪੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ’ ਅਤੇ ‘ਸਵੈਯੇ’ ਰੋਜ਼ਾਨਾਂ ਪਾਠ ਵਿਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਲ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀਆਂ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹੋਣ ਕਰਕੇ ਬਹੁਤ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਹੋ ਗਈਆਂ, ਅਤੇ ‘ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ’ ਤਿਆਰ ਹੋਣ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਸਾਧਾਰਨ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਹੀ ਬਥੇਰੇ ਐਸੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਮਿਲ ਸਕੇ ਜਿੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਕੰਠ ਸਨ। Guru Gobind Singh arrived in the domain of Nahan in 1684 AD; and stayed there for 3 years. It was during these days (1684-87), in this very area, on the secluded (ਇਕਾਂਤ) banks of the River Jamuna, that (amongst others), the verses of ‘Jaap Sahib’, ‘Swaiyyay’ and ‘Akaal Ustat’ were espoused (ਉਚਾਰੀਆਂ ਗਈਆਂ). Due to the inclusion (ਸ਼ਾਮਲ) of ‘Jaap Sahib’ and ‘Swaiyyay’ into the [prescribed] daily prayers, a lot of Sikhs had memorised them and by the time of the preparation of [the first] Amrit, [one could] ordinarily (ਸਾਧਾਰਨ ਤੌਰ) encounter plenty of Sikhs who knew them by heart (ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2012 (edited) You could argue that the core hasn't been 'altered' but appended to. And if more bani is better, then this is no bad thing. Appended, but under the name of Rehraas. If they were added to evening prayers as independant Banis then yes, but now the Rehat states Rehraas consists of: 9 shabads (Sodar Sopurakh), Chaupai Sahib, Anand Sahib and few more Shabads. But is this true historically? Appending is not from Guru Kaal so why not follow Gur Maryada if we can do so by analysing teekas and puratan ithasak sources?</div> Okay but that hinges on the firm establishment of what was normative practice by Guru Gobind Singh's time. Truth is that the nitnem has evolved and expanded since the original order as given by Baba Nanak. Whatever Rehras was originally common at Kartarpur wasn't the same as the one of Guru Arjan Dev ji's time, as subsequent mahal's bani was incorporated. </div> <div> </div> <div>In this context it isn't surprising that dasam bani was added later. Whether this was by order of Guru Gobind Singh himself or a practice initiated by shardaloo, I don't know. And what if insufficient evidence is available today to clinch the issue irrefutably? What then? </div> <div> </div> <div>The subject is fascinating because even later during the Singh Sabha lehar, they saw reason to clip some off the sampooran version. So we have expansion and then a contraction. </div> <div> </div> <div>On a personal note, and I know many will vehemently disagree with me on this, as important as the bani is the faith of the reciter. Whether you do the 'sampooran' one or a shorter version, as far as I am concerned, doing it with sharda and trying to live the life associated with it will be rewarding. Other than that, if you are an Amritdhari, simply follow the instructions your panj piaray gave you?</div> The nitnem did evoluate after Guru Nanak. It was Sodar Aarti in evenings at that time and it evoluated, but don't you think the Gurus must've fixed it at some point? Well several authors from the 20th century have given Rehraas Sahib as being Sodar Sopurkh only, what are their reasons? Agree about doing bani with Sharda and the Panj Pyare rehat part.</div> Who knows. I know DDT are opposed to modern style 'textual analysis' so even if someone did this and found conclusive proof that it wasn't, it wouldn't matter to them. Yes agreed. I don't think it is coincidence. Prem Sumarag mentions Japji, Jaap and Anand for morning incidentally. Well the text of Prem Sumarg has been heavily edited. Some versions mention 5 times both Japji Jaap, some say 7 times Anand. More research is needed on Prem Sumarg and authentic manuscripts lying across colleges and universities of Punjab (or even the British museum - Dr Leyden translation - being done by GS Mann at the moment). Chaupa Singh says 5 times Japji in morning only. Professor Sahib Singh says this about the morning prescription:>ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਰਿਆਸਤ ਨਾਹਨ ਵਿਚ ਸੰਨ 1684 ਈ: ਵਿਚ ਗਏ, ਤੇ ਉਥੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸਾਲ ਰਹੇ। ਉਨ੍ਹੀ ਦਿਨੀ (1684-87) ਉਸ ਰਿਆਸਤ ਵਿਚ ਜਮੁਨਾ ਨਦੀ ਦੇ ਕੰਢੇ ਦੀ ਇਕਾਂਤ ਵਿਚ ‘ਜਾਪੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ’ ‘ਸਵੈਯੇ’ ਅਤੇ ‘ਅਕਾਲ ਉਸਤਤਿ’ ਆਦਿਕ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਉਚਾਰੀਆਂ ਗਈਆਂ। ‘ਜਾਪੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ’ ਅਤੇ ‘ਸਵੈਯੇ’ ਰੋਜ਼ਾਨਾਂ ਪਾਠ ਵਿਚ ਸ਼ਾਮਲ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀਆਂ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹੋਣ ਕਰਕੇ ਬਹੁਤ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਹੋ ਗਈਆਂ, ਅਤੇ ‘ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ’ ਤਿਆਰ ਹੋਣ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਸਾਧਾਰਨ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਹੀ ਬਥੇਰੇ ਐਸੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਮਿਲ ਸਕੇ ਜਿੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਇਹ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਕੰਠ ਸਨ। Guru Gobind Singh arrived in the domain of Nahan in 1684 AD; and stayed there for 3 years. It was during these days (1684-87), in this very area, on the secluded (ਇਕਾਂਤ) banks of the River Jamuna, that (amongst others), the verses of ‘Jaap Sahib’, ‘Swaiyyay’ and ‘Akaal Ustat’ were espoused (ਉਚਾਰੀਆਂ ਗਈਆਂ). Due to the inclusion (ਸ਼ਾਮਲ) of ‘Jaap Sahib’ and ‘Swaiyyay’ into the [prescribed] daily prayers, a lot of Sikhs had memorised them and by the time of the preparation of [the first] Amrit, [one could] ordinarily (ਸਾਧਾਰਨ ਤੌਰ) encounter plenty of Sikhs who knew them by heart (ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ). Well yes Prof Sahib Singh said that, but what source does he base this on? Especially since the accounts of Amrit Sanchar vary from account to account, so do the Amrit sanchar banis and nitnem. Edited May 31, 2012 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted May 31, 2012 Report Share Posted May 31, 2012 Do you honestly think that there is enough surviving early evidence to clinch the matter conclusively? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted June 1, 2012 Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 Some people claim that DDT have a puratan gutka (purportedly Baba Deep Singh's no less), with the sampooran version. If that is what is claimed, then firstly I wonder if the daily nitnem of someone like BDS, wouldn't be greater than an everyday Singh? Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji said about the Rehras of Taksal, that it is based on a gutka of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, which is in a Gurdwara in Rajasthan or Gujarat. I have seen the Gurdwara in a documentary about Guru Ji's travel from Damdama Sahib to Sri Hazur Sahib, but it never showed the Gutka but just said this is where Guru's gutka is. Guess it needs someone to go there and take photo's. Maybe Freed or Suryadev? Also concerning Baba Deep Singh, and his Nitnem, we could assume that it may be greater from another Singhs becasue of BDS Ji's sacrifice, but at that time, there were thousands of Sikhs who made similiar sacrifices, even Sehajdhari Sikhs as well. Well yes Prof Sahib Singh said that, but what source does he base this on? Especially since the accounts of Amrit Sanchar vary from account to account, so do the Amrit sanchar banis and nitnem. Concerning the original banis in original Amrit Sanchaar, Bijla Singh brought to cyber sangat attention a book by Bhai Sangat Singh i think, called "Siri Gur Katha", where it is written in that time era, about the Banis and the 5 K's that were given. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SURYADEV Posted June 1, 2012 Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 Seems like an interesting mission you're proposing Chatanga! Anyone know where this gurdwara is in Rajasthan/gujrat? Methinks i should start sending out Direct Debit forms to everyone so that you can send your daswand to me to help pay for this seva. I always thought that Reheraswas a composite bani, and that there is no proper, original version. I do the Nanaksar/Hazoor Sahib version yet I 've also heard Nihangs of Hazoor Sahib add chunks of Chandi di Vaar to their Reheras path. As Dalsingh stated, I also believe the 'more is better' philosophy of Reheras. The word is made up of two parts. Reh and ras. Meaning Correct/rightful and route('rasta'), respectively. Meaning it is a bani that puts you on the correct path. It is read at sunset/evening times because that is when traditionally one would start going on the 'wrong' path ie bring out the glassy, visit prostitutes, sit down with mates for idle gossip/nindiya etc. If you spend more time reading rehras then you will have less time to commit other deeds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted June 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 (edited) Do you honestly think that there is enough surviving early evidence to clinch the matter conclusively? Don't know, but if we keep this attitude, we will certainly lose chunks of our history as the years go by (we lost a lot in 1984 Sikh reference library damage). Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji said about the Rehras of Taksal, that it is based on a gutka of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, which is in a Gurdwara in Rajasthan or Gujarat. I have seen the Gurdwara in a documentary about Guru Ji's travel from Damdama Sahib to Sri Hazur Sahib, but it never showed the Gutka but just said this is where Guru's gutka is. Guess it needs someone to go there and take photo's. Maybe Freed or Suryadev? Also concerning Baba Deep Singh, and his Nitnem, we could assume that it may be greater from another Singhs becasue of BDS Ji's sacrifice, but at that time, there were thousands of Sikhs who made similiar sacrifices, even Sehajdhari Sikhs as well. I have read it before too, need to know its exact location and how it came at the present place. But then again you have puratan accounts which state mahaan Sikhs like Bhai Mani Singh only reading Japji Jaap in mornings. Concerning the original banis in original Amrit Sanchaar, Bijla Singh brought to cyber sangat attention a book by Bhai Sangat Singh i think, called "Siri Gur Katha", where it is written in that time era, about the Banis and the 5 K's that were given. The reason I can not take it seriously is because it is supposed to be written by Bhai Jaita Singh, so it is very valuable. Yet it is not mentioned in any of the puratan Granths, only discovered in 1993. I will give some examples, for example the Chaupa Singh Rehat is mentioned in Banswalinama Kesar Singh, Mukatnama is used in Suraj Parkash, yet such an important rehat was neglected and unknown to historians for centuries? Besides that, no offense (I believe in 5 ks), but the 5ks is more of a modern connotation. The Sarbloh Granth rather mentions Trai Mudra (kach kirpan kes) and so do most other Puratan granths. That makes me doubt the authenticity of the Rehatnama. Edited June 1, 2012 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted June 1, 2012 Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 The reason I can not take it seriously is because it is supposed to be written by Bhai Jaita Singh, so it is very valuable. Yet it is not mentioned in any of the puratan Granths, only discovered in 1993. I will give some examples, for example the Chaupa Singh Rehat is mentioned in Banswalinama Kesar Singh, Mukatnama is used in Suraj Parkash, yet such an important rehat was neglected and unknown to historians for centuries? personally i wouldnt use that as an reason to dismiss it, as there are many such transcripts coming to light even now, even of Aad and Dasam Guru Granth. It could have stayed in Bhai Jaita Ji's family as a personal treasure. I can relate to this, as I hate giving any of my books to anyone, as they are all precious to me, and you know punjabi's when it comes to returning books, newspapers, videos and dvds.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted June 1, 2012 Report Share Posted June 1, 2012 The Bhai Jaita document is suspicious if you ask me, it seems to totally go against the grain of all the other surviving early manuscripts. Where is the manuscript? The language of extracts I have read are way too modern as well. It's like someone conjured it up to reflect the modern 'orthodox' understanding of Sikh itihaas? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted June 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2012 Exactly what I said, even the mention of the 5ks in one sentence goes against all other Puratan rehats or Granths. It might have been written after the mid 1800s by the Singh Sabhias if you ask me. The language, customs are recent. It isn't mentioned in any of the Puratan granths etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 Hopefully Bjla SIngh has read it and can bring it to this forum. Dal Bhaji , where have seen this ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted June 8, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 8, 2012 I got the Sri gur Katha in book form and its dodgy. Any other source? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted June 9, 2012 Report Share Posted June 9, 2012 Hopefully Bjla SIngh has read it and can bring it to this forum. Dal Bhaji , where have seen this ? Look, all respect to Bijla and his commitment to the faith, but personally, from previous experience, I don't think a relative degree of impartiality is a strong point in the brother's arguments. And it isn't worth arguing because for some people accepting certain things as 'fact' is essential to their faith - and that's fine by me. So someone like that and me debating rarely goes well and gets deep and personal quickly. And I use the word 'relative' above with the understanding that none of us here can be truly impartial in such matters because we all have a various degrees and dimensions of strong attachments to that under discussion - Sikh things. And that's not the type of brother I want to argue with - because I know his loyalty lies with the panth, even if I strongly disagree with many of his perspectives/views on matters. And it usually degenerates to accusations of lack of faith and what not. I respect him because at least I know he isn't some gora EDL arselicking type, or trying to push some outsiders agenda on us. However, if a brother could post some of the text in some thread, maybe we could explore/discuss it together. Though I can't really download big images because it nachors my small amount of alloted dongle MBS. lol Someone should type extracts out in unicode and post them for this purpose......<cough.....Chatanga! ....cough, cough> 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.