Jump to content

Debunking Sri Gur Katha


Recommended Posts

Another idea to study it in terms of placing it in time is to look at the use of grammar notifications (such as siharis, onkarhs at the end of words denoting gender, verb, noun etc.) These were generally used as the norm until the mid 1700s apparently, so if this is a surviving, untampered with document of the early 1700s then maybe we could expect to see these conventions being used?

Plus, if you are serious about looking at it more deeply, we need longer, random extracts to look at Sikhkhoji.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does it begin?

How does it end?

A selection from the middle as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. One of the stanzas from this text - the language is modern (19th century easily). It just is not similar to any of the Puratan texts.

a ) ਸਵੈਯਾ - ਅਬ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਕਰਕੈ ਗੁਰ ਦੀਜੀਹ, ਦਿਬ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟ ਸਮ ਪੇਖਣ ਕੇਰੀ

ਜਿਹ ਕਰ ਭੂਪੀਟ ਰੰਕ ਭਿਖਾਰੀ, ਪਸ ਪਸੂ ਸਮਸਰ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਰੀ

ਕੀਟ ਪਤੰਗ ਪਖਾਨ ਪਰਿੰਦ ਮਹ ਜੋਤ ਅਕਾਲ ਅਖੰਡ ਬਸੇਰੀ

ਇਵ ਪਰਮ ਦੁਸਵਾਰ ਜੁ ਜਾਨਹੁ ਤੋਉ ਮਨਮੋਹਨ ਨਦੀਰ ਕਰੇ ਰੀ

b ) ਨਿਰਮਲ ਕੰਬਰ ਦੇਹ ਬਿਛਾਈ , ਸਬ ਤਿਸ ਕੰਬਰ ਆਸਨ ਕੀਜੈ

Interesting Bhaji, can you tell us who dont know, how this would differ from puratan text, as I cant tell the difference. Reading the above doesnt seem to be too different to the style of Sri Dasam Granth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes DalSingh you are right. For example older Granths tend to use ਵਾਹਗੁਰੂ , but we can't know for sure what the original text said because sihari bihari mistakes are mde while copying, still we will try. I will post more but I am somewhat busy these weeks, I will definitely post more from this granth by the end of this month, but when I transliterate it, the sihari biharis get lost and I can't get them in properly, any tips?

Well Chatanga veer, esp the line B seemed somewhat modern. The work has been highly influenced by Dasam Granth but that doesn't make it authentic does it. Sometimes it feels as if the writer forces Dasam Granth language or Puratan language just to show off its 'authenticity'.

The thing is that this manuscript would have been written between 1699 and 1704, and there are no other texts we could compare this too. There is the Gur Sobha which some place in 1711, but others place that in 1741, same for Parchian Seva Das. What book do we compare this to (language wise)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for putting that up. Will look at it, but to be frank the most telling text would be the main narrative, where Bhai Jaita is purportedly writing his own words. A lot of the opening invocations of Sikh works of this time follow standard forms (those of the Dasam Granth) which would be easy to mimic.

Also, lets blank our mind of preconceptions now, at the outset. As far as I am concerned, as of this moment, I have no idea whether this document is what it purports to be or not, and have not formed any opinion either way. We need to avoid being overly skeptical as much as gullible , and even if we can't draw a conclusion, the discussion we'll have will be a worthwhile one which which help our general gian grow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but when I transliterate it, the sihari biharis get lost and I can't get them in properly, any tips

I assuming you actually meant 'transcribe' as opposed to 'transliterate' above, as in typing it out in Gurmukhi?

What are you using to do this?

Actually, these scans don't seem to be too bad for me. Post them if it is easier, just try and keep their sizes relatively small.

Edited by dalsingh101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. Most of the earlier granths mention the initiation ceremony as Pahul (Sau Sakhi, Bansawlinama - like all 18th century manuscripts). It is only with time that Pahul became known as Khande da Amrit or simply Amrit, yet this text uses that term for the ceremony freely. Leave alone amrit, it uses a term called amritpaan which is very recent and not found in other puratan texts.

ਖਾਲਸ ਭਏ ਅਖਾਲਸ ਸਿਖ ਗਨ, ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਪਾਨ ਕੀਓ ਰੀ

Sabh to aad Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee Mahraj uses the term amritpaan so its not correct to say that amritpaan is a very recent term

ਹਰਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਪਾਨ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਾਧਸੰਗਿ ॥

3. No historical granth mentions the 5 Kakkaars, in fact the term was made popular post 19th century and is not found in any of the Puratan Granths. However the predecessor of the 5 Kakkars, the Trai Mudra is found in Granths uptill 1880 (including the Sarbloh Granth). So it is very dodgy that this granth does mention the 5 Kakkars.

ਪੰਚ ਕਕਾਰ ਦੀਏ ਗੁਰ ਨੇ ਪੰਜ ਪਾਂਚ ਕਾ ਪਾਂਚ ਬਿਕਾਰਾਨ ਮਾਰੇ

Its only dodgy if you don't believe in panj kakkar rehit.

Gurmantar being Waheguru, Sikhs having 5 Kakkaars, 5 Banis read during Pahul ceremony, anti-deities etc all show towards it being written by Singh Sabhia sympathisers post 1880.

I did not realise that believing in the most basic principles of Sikhi means you must be a Singh Sabhia sympathiser!

Vaheguru being gurmantar is in Bhai Gurdas Ji Di Vara, Sarbloh Granth and many many more sources.

Yes it is highly inspired from Dasam Granth

You are majorly contradicting yourself when on the one hand you say that the language is modern and unlike old texts, and then admit that its highly inspired by Sri Dasam Granth! Make up your mind!

What is the point of discussions like this? What exactly do you want to see? A confused and divided panth? A sikhi where no one actually knows anything at all and there are no agreed principles. Is that what you'd like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, first thoughts on a few scans:

(I'm going by the paragraph numbering in the original)

Para 1:

(End of first line) Jaat lakhay hain - is this saying 'has thousands of jaats'? If so, it seems to go against Jaap Sahib's statement?

I find the use of the word 'amoorat' very interesting, I haven't come across this before and it's interesting to compare to 'akaal moorat' (Can someone check amoorat in DG? I would do it myself if I wasn't on this expensive, slow dongle!)

I can't recall ever coming across ਵੇ in an older work before myself. Maybe check that in DG too.

Someone should check an online, searchable Dasam Granth for the following words and see if they occur in any place as well - ਭਰਮੇਯ and ਕਰਤੇਯ

Para 2:

ਤਰਹਿ & ਤਰਾਵੈ are interesting and should be searched in DG, I'm normally used to seeing them as:

ਤਰੇ ਤਾਰੈ in Gurbani

Para 5:

I also find kaal & akaal together like this interesting.

Overall impression, if this is a forgery, the writer is very familiar with older vocabulary used in Sikh scriptures. It also shows at least some familiarity with older grammatical forms. It's difficult to draw any conclusions solely from this extract.

People might want to read a few swaiyas of Gursobha (available on scribd) to compare the above language with a verified older work. My own initial impression on doing this was that the above text seems much more easier to understand.

Point to note: As far as I know, Bhai Jaita was a resident of Delhi, so when we look at further extracts from the main body of the text, if it is heavily Panjabi, should alarm bells be going off in our heads?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Para 1:

(End of first line) Jaat lakhay hain - is this saying 'has thousands of jaats'? If so, it seems to go against Jaap Sahib's statement?

When i read that, i thought the writer was talking about teh qualities of Waheguru, and then jaat Lakhay hain as meanin gthat the qualities of Waheguru cannot be written down. I didnt think too much of jaat denoting caste as we know it today. If in those puratan times, this may be looked at at Waheguru pervading through all jatis ie manav, sur, asur, gandharv etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sabh to aad Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee Mahraj uses the term amritpaan so its not correct to say that amritpaan is a very recent term

ਹਰਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਪਾਨ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਾਧਸੰਗਿ ॥

No doubt, but since when is Amrit Paan used to refer to the actual ceremony? The most common name was Pahul, Khande Ki Pahul (after Charan Pahul). Its only later that we see it becoming amrit, amrit sanchar, amrit paan. Amrit is a deep concept in Gurmat, lets not get into that here - it is just the use of amrit paan for the ceremony. Find me another puratan granth saying Amrit paan, I doubt that there is any. Sau Sakhi (1734); Bansawlinama (1769) etc all use the word pahul not amrit paan.

ਪਤਾਸੇ ਪਵਾਏ ਅਤੇ ਕਰਦ ਹਿਲਾਈ. ਨਾਓ ਧਰਿਆ ਪਾਹੁਲ (Kesar Singh, 1769, Banswalinama Dasan Patshahian Ka)

ਜਿਸ ਸਮੈ ਇਸਤ੍ਰੀ ਕਓ ਅਧਾਨ ਹੋਵੇ ਤਪਾਹੁਲ ਖੰਡੇ ਕੀ ਜਪੁ ਜਪੁ ਪੜ੍ਹ ਕਰ ਕਰੈ (18th century, Prem Sumarg Granth)

Its only dodgy if you don't believe in panj kakkar rehit.

I don't doubt it, just said that out of all puratan Granths this is the only Granth mentioning the Kakkars while even the Sarbloh Granth, Suraj Parkash and Panth Parkash say Trai Mudra. (only other granth mentioning kakkaars is Guru Kian Sakhian, but still)

I did not realise that believing in the most basic principles of Sikhi means you must be a Singh Sabhia sympathiser!

Vaheguru being gurmantar is in Bhai Gurdas Ji Di Vara, Sarbloh Granth and many many more sources.

Sarbloh Granth also says Trai Mudra instead of Panj Kakaar. So you either believe in Sarbloh Parkash or Sri Gur Katha.

You are majorly contradicting yourself when on the one hand you say that the language is modern and unlike old texts, and then admit that its highly inspired by Sri Dasam Granth! Make up your mind!

The language seems modern, the author has tried hard to pass it off as puratan and thus has highly taken from the Dasam Granth sometimes even replicating almost exact lines.

What is the point of discussions like this? What exactly do you want to see? A confused and divided panth? A sikhi where no one actually knows anything at all and there are no agreed principles. Is that what you'd like?

Critical reviewal of our literature like the Muslims did with their hadiths. Don't you think its highly time for that?

Besides you didn't comment on why the book is not mentioned in the collection of Rehatnamas in the 19th century? Why no one knew of its existence till late 1800s?

Edited by SikhKhoj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dal yes I meant transcribe, I use something very unprofessional - Google Transliterate (haha). Yes, I will post more scans just got some things going in personal life.

1. Jaat doesn't only mean caste, it has several other meanings in gurmat; creation, personality (ਸ਼ਖ਼ਸੀਯਤ) etc.

2. I found the amoorat very interesting aswell, it negates moorat by putting a in front. Didn't find it in Dasam Granth.

3. ਵੇ, ਭਰਮੇਯ and ਕਰਤੇਯ weren't found in the Dasam Granth.

4. No ਤਰਹਿ & ਤਰਾਵੈ in Dasam Granth. Closest I found was: ਉਤਰਹਿ and ਤਰਹਿਗੇ.

Chatanga, yes I have the whole text.

Fateh spelling is interesting indeed, even 'sri satguru ji ki fate hai' isn't that common. "the single letter of "n" to denote na" yes , just like in Jaap Sahib for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dal yes I meant transcribe, I use something very unprofessional - Google Transliterate (haha).

Try using the typing pad from the Punjabi University, Patiala website. It's the best.

Yes, I will post more scans just got some things going in personal life.

Cool, I don't think we should over read into this first page though. As I've said before, the main text should contain more clues.

1. Jaat doesn't only mean caste, it has several other meanings in gurmat; creation, personality (ਸ਼ਖ਼ਸੀਯਤ) etc.

I know, but even then, what does that last bit mean exactly? The structure of those first lines is interesting too. In a line you get a bunch of negative attributes, then it seems to end with a positive statement? So we have:

Line 1, Para 1 - No beginning, no end, no form, no colour, no name, no place, <then what appears to be a positive statement that> the 'jaat' is 'lakhay' ??

Chatanga, note it doesn't say, 'jaat na lakhay hai' - which would fit your hypothesis. The jaat here IS lakhay?? whatever that means??

Also:

Line 2, Para 1 - Doesn't have a mother, father son or relatives. No death, no colour. <then what appears to be another positive statement> ਜੋਨਿ ਭਰਮੇਯ ਹੈਂ i.e. the jonay IS bharmaya?? ਭਰਮੇਯ isn't in MK btw.

Here's the definition of ਜੋਨਿ from MK. ਜੋਨਿ = ਜਨਮ, ਉਤਪੱਤਿ 2: ਭਗ 3: ਗਰਭ 4: ਕਾਰਣ, ਸਬਬ 5: ਜੀਵਾਂ ਦੀ ਆਕਾਰ

If we take definition 5, it could be saying the 'forming of lives is a mystery'??

I mention this because I can't recall encountering any similar sentence structures which list negatives and end with a positive if you get what I mean. But I'm not that well read on such things so it could be an oversight on my part.

2. I found the amoorat very interesting aswell, it negates moorat by putting a in front. Didn't find it in Dasam Granth.

Interesting way of conveying formlessness which I can't recall encountering before.

3. ਵੇ, ਭਰਮੇਯ and ਕਰਤੇਯ weren't found in the Dasam Granth.

Nor are they in MK

4. No ਤਰਹਿ & ਤਰਾਵੈ in Dasam Granth. Closest I found was: ਉਤਰਹਿ and ਤਰਹਿਗੇ.

hhmmmm.....

This really highlights the need for us to create searchable documents of all our puratan texts so we can do deeper comparative analysis on the occurrences of specific words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

http://www.academia.edu/2026548/_Bhai_Jaitas_epic_Sri_Gur_Katha_a_New_Milestone_in_the_Sikh_Literature_paper_for_Hofstra_University_Conference

i was reading this paper, and it made quite a good point, in that the history in it is only written upto 1704, the year of Bhai Jeevan Singhs shaheedi.

Although it could be presented as such, if the "author" wanted to make it seem like Bhai Jeevan Singh had writtten it himself.

Its quite interesting.

Ok, so how far have we got with the above project, given that its almost 9 months from the last post before mine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

This thread is senseless, ignorant, and utterly foolish. No Scholar has ever doubted Sri Guru Katha By Shaheed Kavi Baba Jeevan Singh Ji. The language is not "new" in any form, you can probably find such similarities in other contemporary texts. Secondly, Gurpur Prakash by Shaheed Baba Binod Singh Ji matches up entirely with Sri Guru Katha. The word "Kakkar" or "Kakke" has also been in use since the times of Dasmesh Pita Ji, it's been used in Bhai Gurmukh Singh's own Rehatnama and the Chaupai that was attached to a manuscript of Mahan Kavi Bhai Prahlad Singh Ji's Rehatnama along with the incorrect Samapti Dohra that he also added. It's also been used in the Bhatt Vahis, and again, In Gurpur Prakash By Shaheed Baba Binod Singh Ji. You can speak to any present day credible and Panthic scholar, such as Dr. Harbhajan Singh, Neeti Singh, Dr. Gurmukh Singh, Dr Perhaps Dr. Kamalroop Singh, Dr. M.K. Gill, Dr. Anurag Singh, Bhai Kulwant Singh, etc. many of whom of have come across a and examined this priceless text. 

There should be no doubt on Sri Gursobha Granth by Maha Darbari Rattan Kavi Saina Singh/Sainapat Ji as Bakwaas Khoj has implanted in your minds. 

Unless you guys have analyzed the writing style, languages and literature of Guru Gobind Singh Ji's Darbari Kavis, and the poetry of that time, you can't pass any judgement or valid criticism of the text. The way the words are spelled in Sri Gur Katha is not evidence of it's inauthenticity, Gurbani Vyaakran of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the system and style of of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji's poetry and language can't be applied here at all, let alone any other Granth of the time. Thus the arguments are invalid and of no strong foundation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

This thread is senseless, ignorant, and utterly foolish. No Scholar has ever doubted Sri Guru Katha By Shaheed Kavi Baba Jeevan Singh Ji. 

I think this describes you. 

 

Getting over excited because some people are discussing and analysing a text. Give it a rest mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I think this describes you. 

 

Getting over excited because some people are discussing and analysing a text. Give it a rest mate.

No, it's describing the fact that the "analysis" of such a text was done poorly, terribly, negatively, and with a clear bias. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said:

No, it's describing the fact that the "analysis" of such a text was done poorly, terribly, negatively, and with a clear bias. 

That's your opinion. And no one is claiming that people are experts here. 

The only thing worse than what you claim above is brainless, blind 'pious' acceptance of texts on the basis of other people's opinions, because certain types (cough cough) can't be bothered to try and make the effort to critically study a text themselves on any level. Or they don't have to the mental strength to look at things from a perspective that might contradict their own preconceptions - which makes the whole endeavour useless anyway. 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

That's your opinion. And no one is claiming that people are experts here. 

The only thing worse than what you claim above is brainless, blind 'pious' acceptance of texts on the basis of other people's opinions, because certain types (cough cough) can't be bothered to try and make the effort to critically study a text themselves on any level. Or they don't have to the mental strength to look at things from a perspective that might contradict their own preconceptions - which makes the whole endeavour useless anyway. 


 

I do understand that. No one here is attempting to be an expert. Everyone is trying their best here with their own intellect and understanding.  

However, Sikhkhoj (considering he started  is known to convoy claims and theories and pull them straight out of his behind, as he evidently has done. He doesn't even believe in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji ( which by the way has almost irrefutable evidence backing it's authenticity). 

Secondly, I'm not asking anyone to blindly or 'piously' accept every word of the scholars who have studied this document, but rather read their books and see their analysis of the text ( with the basis, methodology and frame work that they used for the analysis/study of the text) and  

How can one critically study a text when the priority was "debunking" it? 

The fact that the 5 Kakkars, 5 Banis, and Amrit Sanchar is mentioned within this text shouldn't be used or seen as evidence of a 'devilish, diabolical, anglican, Singh Sabha' scheme to super-impose their ideology over the entire Panth. That bias should not be used when studying this Granth.

Also, the grammatical system that's used in other certain texts of the 1700s isn't strong evidence against Sri Gur Katha, Shaheed Bhai Jeevan Singh Ji had no reason to strictly abide by the vocabulary, grammatical structure, and poetic system of other Granths of that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said:

However, Sikhkhoj (considering he started  is known to convoy claims and theories and pull them straight out of his behind, as he evidently has done. He doesn't even believe in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji ( which by the way has almost irrefutable evidence backing it's authenticity).

This guy khoj is a very coarse individual. He made this topic and now that you mention it, the word "debunking" in the title makes it apparent what his intentions were/are. Nevertheless if you read our replies to it, we haven't agreed with him in any way, we have just listened to his views. It would be good if maybe in the short future we could look at one or two chapters in this book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

This guy khoj is a very coarse individual. He made this topic and now that you mention it, the word "debunking" in the title makes it apparent what his intentions were/are. Nevertheless if you read our replies to it, we haven't agreed with him in any way, we have just listened to his views. It would be good if maybe in the short future we could look at one or two chapters in this book.

Speak for yourself. 

 

The provenance of this granth is as murky as can be. I think it needs a hell of a lot more research before people start jumping on it like it was 'gospel'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...