Rise of the status of Dasam Granth

[CdnSikhGirl]

I don't care for you or others like you, I m concerned for forum in large. Why would you bother what I comment or not.

So you not only want to keep the wool pulled over your own eyes, but also over everyone else's eyes too eh?  

[Guest]

 

By Sardar

Guru Gobind Singh’s contemporaries and close associates like Sainapati, Nanad Lal, Prahlad Singh, Daya Singh and Sewa Das make no mention of Guru Gobind Singh’s writings though they mention Guru Granth and Guru Panth or Guru Khalsa pointing out that Guru Gobind Singh abolished the personal line of Guruship by vesting it jointly on the Sikh community (Panth) and the Granth (Aad Guru Granth Sahib) . Had Guru Guru Gobind Singh written such a large number of miscellaneous works as the contents of modern so-called Dasam Granth, it is difficult to imagine that Sainapati, Nanad Lal, Daya Singh, Prahlad Singh and Sewa Das would have failed to notice them? Further even the Rahitnamas attributed to Guru Gobind Singh’s close associates, Nand Lal, Daya Singh and Prahlad Singh make no mention of Dasam Granth or any of Guru Gobind’s writings while emphasizing Guru Granth and Guru Panth Khalsa.

 

Dasam Granth For Dummies

 

• Its October 7, 1708, Guru Gobind Singh merges into the Divine Light. Among his last instructions is the injunction that henceforth the Only guru of the Sikhs shall be the Sri Guru Granth Sahib. He also states that he will always render all assistance to The Khalsa but shall not do so when the Khalsa engages in Bipren Ki Reet (“emulation of the Brahmin and Brahminical practises“).

 

• It’s the year 1734: Bhai Mani Singh is martyred in the present day City of Lahore.

 

• It’s about 1782: A Brahmin named Chibber writes a book called Bansavalinama. In this book he states that Guru Gobind Singh has written a book.

 

• For the very first time, 74 years after The Guru’s merger into the Divine Light, a written allegation appears that The Guru wrote a book.

 

• Bansavalinama  contains stories about gods, goddesses, demons, fairies, homa, mantras, supernatural events, abnormal sex, curses, magical spells and all types of superstitious and godless trash.

 

• Brahmin Chibber writes in his book that he has heard that Guru Gobind Singh had written a book called Sumander Sagar but that the book had been destroyed while crossing the Sirsa river!

 

• Then Brahmin Chibber states that he has also heard that some other writings of The Guru were lost during the Anandpur Sahib battles.

 

• Brahmin Chibber isn’t sure what the name of the Guru’s book is. Sometimes he calls it Sumandar Sagar and sometimes he calls it Avtaar Leela. He can’t make up his mind. He never calls the book Dasam Granth. He does not describe the contents of the book.

 

• Chibber also says in Bansavalinama that in 1725 A.D. Bhai Mani Singh compiled a granth combining the Sri Guru Granth Sahib with other writings into One Great Big Granth. According to Brahman Chibber this is the Real Sri Guru Granth Sahib. No proof is offered.

 

• Bahmin Chibber does not speak from his own personal knowledge. It is all hearsay. Chibber admits this, he says that he is only recording what he has heard.

 

• Many illustrious poets and writers like Bhai Nandlal, Bhai Mani Singh, Sainapat, Chaupa Singh, Sewadas and Koer Singh are present at the darbar of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. These poets and writers chronicle the Guru’s life and times but never mention that Guru Sahib has witten a book or a granth.

 

• If Guru Sahib had written a granth then why was such a significant document not mentioned anywhere by the illustrious Bhai Nandlal, Bhai Mani Singh or other chroniclers?

 

• It’s 1757: The British East India Company defeats Sultan Suraj ud-Daula at the Battle of Plessey. The English gain control of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa.

 

• More time goes by, it is now about 1802: Saroop Das Bhalla writes a book called Mehma Prakash. He says that Chibber got it all wrong. Guru Gobind Singh never ever wrote any Granth or the Sumandar Sagar but had some Sanskrit literature translated and this granth was called Vidya Sagar.

 

• It’s 1805: Sir John Malcolm (1769-1833) visits Amritsar from Calcutta. With great difficulty he is able to procure a copy of The Adi Granth because the Sikhs jealously guard it and do not let strangers easily see it. Evidently a copy of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib is provided for Sir Malcolm by Nirmalas who have “deras” outside the Sri Harmandir Sahib but are not allowed inside the Golden Temple. The Nirmalas are trying to obtain control of the Harmandir Sahib. Malcolm observes that the Nirmalas are doing a parallel prakash of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib and a so-called dasam granth but this dual prakash does not occur inside the Golden Temple. These matters are recorded in his book A Sketch Of The Sikhs. At the end of his Book Sir John Malcolm clearly states that the Nirmalas will introduces changes in the Sikh Faith. He also observes in his book that aside from the Adi Granth, the Sikhs do not respect any other book

 

• It’s 1810: The English take control of the Gurdwara at Patna – erected in honour of the Birth Of Guru Gobind Singh. It’s managed by a Hindu mahant and some Pujaris. There is is no institution of Jathedar at Patna and there is no takht (Throne) there. The English put Mahant Sukha Singh (1766-1838), the author of Gurbilas Dasvin Patshahi) on an annual pension and he receives a regular supply of opium from the government. The English also provide Mahant Sukha Singh with a regular supply of prostitutes from Calcutta. Such is the perverted condition of the First Guardian of the so-called throne at Patna. Of course the Mahant is not doing anything unusual since it is a common practise at Hindu Temples for priests to take in young widows who then became temple dancers and prostitutes (“devadasis“). John Malcolm in his Sketch of the Sikhs says that a heretical priest of the Nirmala order who is living in Calcutta has explained the Sikh religious texts to him.

 

• It’s 1811: Nirmala Sikh priests trained in Benares provide one Dr. Leydon with information sufficient for him to make a translation of the Guru Granth Sahib. At this time, the English have sent political agents to Amritsar and know that the Jathedar of the Akal Takht has power superior to the Sikh Emperor, Maharajah Ranjit Singh and that the latter is subordinate to the Jathedar of the Akal Takht.

 

• Its 1812: It’s an apex time for the Sikhs. The English armies have stalled in Delhi unwilling to take on the Khalsa Army to the north. There is only one Sikh Throne – The Akal Takht and only one Jathedar. There is only one unitary doctrine – The Guru Granth Sahib and only one surname : Singh (Lion) for the males and Kaur (Princess) for the females. The English start machinations for the destruction of the Sikh Empire and the destruction of Sikhi. Fanatical Christian missionaries are salivating at the mouth to convert and enslave the Sikhs.

 

• It’s 1818: 84 years have passed since the martydom of Bhai Mani Singh. A book mysteriously surfaces in Amritsar claiming to be the Granth of Guru Gobind Singh as written by Bhai Mani Singh. This book has a strange and miraculous history. It is alleged to have been hidden by Bhai Mani Singh in a secret location and then discovered by a Muslim who kept it reverentially in his home in Multan until it resurfaced in Amritsar. The book is clearly profane since it mixes text from the Guru Granth Sahib with works claimed to be those of Guru Gobind Singh. The circumstances of this book has all of the hallmarks of that famous tribe of bandit story-tellers; who make their daily living by telling tall tales.

 

• More time passes. It is around 1850: Bhai Santokh Singh states that Guru Gobind Singh wrote a book called the Dasam Granth. This the first time the actual words “dasam granth” are used. He relies upon Bahmin Chibber as his authority. He suggests that Bhai Mani Singh compiled the Dasam Granth

 

• Its 1878: the Gurmat Granth Parchar Sabha assembles in Amritsar, this is an ad-hoc committee of unknown origin and backing. It collects 32 books which it considers to contain portions of the writings of Guru Gobind Singh. These books are collected from libraries, gurdwaras, village sources and so forth. The purpose of this Committee is to collate the writings into a version that can be designated as the “Bani” of the Respected Guru Gobind Singh. None of the 32 volumes collected are authentic historical documents. This Committee calls the edited and collated document the Dasam Granth. The collated book is created without the consent or debate of the entire Sarbat Khalsa (“The Khalsa Nation in assembly”). There was no public Sikh debate on the construction of this book. The book is created by a Committee of unknown credentials and backing in a process sub rosa. Who is behind this committee? The Arya Samaj movement? The English?

 

• 1878 onwards: The ball starts to roll. Giani Gian singh and Bhai Kahn Singh and other overly pious parrots start repeating the story of the dasam granth. They quote Bhai Santokh Singh as their authority.

 

• It’s 1897 Sir Khem Singh Bedi Sets Up The Sodak Committee: Sir Khem Singh Bedi claims to be a direct descendant of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji and consequently claims to be the 15th Sikh Guru. He is a tout of the British and has been bribed by them to undermine the Gurdwara Sudar Lehar and the Singh Sabbha Movement. He is knighted for his service to the British Empire. The Arya Samaj also uses him to strengthen Bipren Ki Reet (Brahminical Practises) in Gurdwaras and thus to Hinduize the Sikh Faith. He openly preaches that Sikhs are Hindus. He also claims that the Aad Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the fifth Veda of the Hindus which provides the essence of Purans and Upanishads. The influence of the RSS and Sanatan Dharma in various Dehras owe their origins to Sir Khem Singh Bedi. The Sikhs of the time refer to him pejoratively as KHEMU RAM. On the basis of finances given by the Arya Samaj, he sets up a Sodak Committee in 1897. This committee consists of his hand picked persons. The purpose of the Sodak Committee is to consolidate the 32 wildly different versions of the Bachitar Natak which had been introduced into The Punjab from Bengal via the Nirmalas between 1825 and 1985 . Sir Khem Singh Bedi is unsuccessful in this Endeavour but succeeds in introducing many Hindu texts and traditions into various Dehras (Sikh Cults). He accumulates an immense amount of wealth and builds a palace near Rawalpindi (in present day Pakistan). He dies a painful death from a prolonged illness.

 

• It is around 1910. Books start appearing in mass circulation with the title Dasam Granth. The Arya Samaj under the hand of Swami Dayanand is behind the move. The idea is to hinduize the Sikh faith by introducing the idolatry of the “dasam granth” into the religion.

 

• It’s 1921, the Hindu Mahants have been steadily assuming hereditary control of Sikh Gurdwaras since the loss of the Sikh Empire of Maharajah Ranjit Singh to the English. The English facilitate this takeover to weaken the Sikhs and their religion. The Jaito Ka Morcha agitation starts to wrest control of the Sikh Gurdwaras from the Brahmins. The Gurdwara Sahib at Nankana Sahib, the birth place of Guru Nanak, is controlled by a Brahmin called Narain Dass. Panthic Knight, Kartar Singh Jhabbar, vows to free this Gurdwara. Narain Dass shoots down one hundred and thirty unarmed Sikhs agitating to free the Gurdwara. Kartar Singh Bedi, the son of Sir Khem Singh Bedi is a staunch supporter of Narain Dass.
• A Hukumnamah is Issued: The Akal Takht responds to the threat of the Arya Samaj. A Hukumnama is declared: Sikhs must disregard the Dasam Granth, it is a fake.
• It’s 1945: Raja Gulab Singh of Delhi purchases the Bir allegedly written by Bhai Mani Singh in 1725. Sikhs start paying blind obiesance to the dasam granth bir. Guess who got scammed.

 

• It’s 1950: More scams . A suspicious letter surfaces. It is allegedly written by Bhai Mani Singh to Mata Sundri Ji. In this letter the inclusion of about 900 extremely profane and lewd verses (the Chritropakhian) into the dasam granth is mentioned. This letter is a complete forgery.

 

• It’s 1985, The Prime Minister Of India, Indira Gandhi, is gunned down in revenge for the attack on the Golden Temple. Amitabh Bachhan who is the great grandson of Sir Khem Bedi appears repeatedly on Television saying that the Sikhs have killed the mother of India. He incites Hindus to kill Sikhs. He raises the slogan: ‘Khoon ke chheente Indira ko marne walon ke gharon tak pahunchne chahiye (The bloodstains must reach the houses of those who killed Indira)’. The State controlled Television stations (controlled by Brahmins) stir the cauldron of mass hatred to a fever pitch. The movie star Amitabh Bachan is the grandson of Gurbaksh Singh Bedi who was the son of Khem Singh Bedi.

 

• Its 1989: The Aftermath Of The Golden Temple Attack: The Guardian of The Throne Of God, Jathedar Koenke refuses to prostitute himself to political power and do the bidding of the poltical masters. He is arrested on trumped up charges and brutally tortured in a police station. A Sikh policeman urinates on the tortured body of Koenke and taunts him thusly: “How do you feel now“. The next day Jathedar Koenke is taken to a remote spot, his hands are tied to a jeep and his legs to another jeep. The body is torn apart as the two jeeps separate. So drinks Koenke from the cup of martyrdom.

 

• It’s 1999: Bhai Ranjit Singh, Jathedar of the Akal Takht (Regent Sitting On The Throne Of God) the one who killed the fake Nirankari Guru and was sentenced to hang; is dumped from the Throne Of God by the Badal-RSS combine. He will be the last independent Jathedar of the Akal Takht.

 

• It is around 2000: The book is now being printed with the title: Shri Guru Dasam Granth. The pornographic book is now being called a Guru of the Sikhs

 

• It’s 2004: Joginder Singh Vedanti (ex Jathedar of The Akal Takht and Grandmaster Of The Rig Veda; Vendanti means one who is learned in the Vedas) and Principal Amarjit Singh translate the supremely heretical anti-Sikh text: “Gurbilas Patshahi 6” into the Punjabi language with the sole purpose of using it to distort authentic Sikhism. The know that this profane book distorts, Sikh theology, Sikh history, maligns Guru Har Gobind Sahib’s character, and is full of Puranic tales and stories of sexual depravity.|
• It’s late 2004: The Babbar Khalsa International distributes posters of Joginder Singh Vedanti, wanted dead of alive. The Indian Government immediately moves to protect it’s asset; the Priest Vedanti is given Z level security.

 

• It’s 2005: Giani Puran Singh, a stooge of the RSS declares that Sikhs are the progeny of the hindu mythical characters, Luv and Kush. He also repeatedly declares that Sikhs are the progeny of the mythical sexy Hindu god Ram.

 

• It’s 2007: The Kanjar Bani (Prostitutes Handbook) scam starts to fire on all eight cylinders. A massive video, internet and newspaper propaganda campaign is launched by the RSS and Indian Intelligence Agencies puppet to give the dasam granth equal status with the Guru Granth Sahib. Rumors circulate that over 70 crore rupees has been allocated to build pro dasam granth websites, youtube videos, buy agents fund content distribution channels.

 

• It’s late in the year 2007: The senile usurper Of The Akal Takht, Jathedar Vedanti (The Grandmaster of the rig-veda (and kama sutra too)) weighs in. He wants all Sikh households to bow before the Shri Guru Dasam Granth because it is the real and true bani of Guru Gobind Singh.

 

• It’s 2009: Rulda Singh aged 62 years, is gunned down outside his home in Patiala in The Punjab; allegedly by members of the Babbar Khalsa International. He is the head of Rashtriya Sikh Sangat (RSS), the controlled Sikh wing of the Hindu supremacist Paramilitary Organisation, The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Rulda has tried to install the Sikh Scripture, The Guru Granth Sahib in all Hindu Temples in The Punjab. It is a supremely heretical act. The Sikh Scriptures cannot be placed besides idols and pictures. Besides Sikhism and Hinduism are completely different religions. The intent of Rulda and the RSS is to completely absorb Sikhism into Hinduism.

 

• It’s February, 2010: The Great Pretender sitting on the Akal Takht (“Throne Of God”) , appointed head priest Mr. Gurbachan Brar, moves to excommunicate Singh Sahib Professor Darshan Singh Ji from the Sikh faith for voicing concerns over the authenticity of the so-called dasam granth. Professor Darshan Singh is the greatest living authority on the Guru Granth Sahib. This outrageous act by a poseur is designed to still all voices of opposition and install an idolatrous priestly caste completely prostituted to political power. The decision is made by self-styled priests acting in a secret conclave and in the absence of Professor Darshan Singh (who is in the Golden Temple at this time). This is the first time in Sikh History that an ex-communication has occurred in a secret hearing where the sangat is not present and where the accused is not afforded the opportunity to defend his views.

• It’s April, 2010: In Canada: Dasam Granth supporters in Brampton, Canada attack a lawyer with swords for inviting Singh Sahib Professor Darshan Singh to discourse on the dasam granth.

 

Click Here To View Other Sikh Archives Dasam Granth Articles

 

[ibrute]

So you not only want to keep the wool pulled over your own eyes, but also over everyone else's eyes too eh?  

Alright hon. Good luck.

[BhagatSingh]

Guys refrain from posting in the thread.

Let Amardeep and SikhKhoj duke it out themselves.

Post ONLY if
1. You have a question
2. You want clarity on something they said

I repeat let Amardeep and SikhKhoj debate. This thread was created specifically so they could debate each other.

A request to Amardeep and SikhKhoj. Please ignore anything that is not - 1. question, 2. request for clarity -  because otherwise it's gona be impossible to follow what you two are saying clearly.

Edited July 23, 2015 by BhagatSingh

[Guest]

I approved the article above for couple of reasons:

1. To jump start pro-dasam granth people to actually research and come up rebuttal research article against this article instead of quoting - my sant said so and sit on their lazy arses play xbox all day act like yo yo new age sikh youths (pardon my lingo but hoping to invoke some passion for research of sikhi among sikh youths) . So far Dr kamalroop singh ji and gs man are only visible knowledgeable singh/sikh who can actually support  dasam granth work of sri guru gobind singh ji in academia via scholary-shaastar vidya than whining/intimidation/bullyism/personl attacks etc. I am sorry i have to set the record straight.

2. It's actually lot easier to mass delete anti dasam granth posts/ ban people based on their beleif than actual go neck to neck with anti dasam granth posts and people and hold your nerves at the very end thats the sikh ways- holding calm collective constructive assertiveness charcha (vichar) all the way to the very end.

3. If anything, this discussion or debates around such topics, or points bought up can bring tolerance in all of us - both anti dasam granth (they used tasty lingo on other forums to push buttons and ban intimidate people or pro dasam granth people to debate/discuss old traditional gurmat way without loosing cool or personal attacks etc.

[SikhKhoj]

Okay so only 30 years after the Guru, the only historical writings from that period we have were:

1) familiar with the Dasam Granth and its writings.

2) Influenced by the Dasam Granth.

Just a small correction, you are wrong in saying that the only writings we have from the early post Guru Gobind Singh period were influenced or familiar with the Dasam Granth.

Naseehatnama shows no Dasam Granth influence, neither in its vocabulary nor in the Nitnem section and is dated a mere 11 years after Guru Gobind Singhs death.

The Mukatnama is also clear that only the Granth (GGS) is to be followed and again gives only Japji, Rehraas and Sohila as Nitnem. The Mukatnama has been placed in 1734 and was later re-used by Kavi Santokh Singh in his magnum opus Suraj Parkash. A very important thing to note is that while Santokh Singh re-iterates the earlier Mukatnama he alters the Nitnem to suit what had become common at his time in the 19th century; instead of Japji alone, the Mukatnama of Suraj Parkash gives Jap, Jaap, Tav Prasad as Nitnem.

Thus the real early sources are free of Dasam Granth influence both in the language and the contents of the Nitnem. The influence kicks in post the 1740s with Gur Sobha, Gurbilas Patshahi 10 and Bansawlinama slowly introducing Dasam Granth (while it was not yet part of Sikh ceremonies). As the years passed we start seeing both SGGS and Dasam Granth Banis equally in Nitnem and Amrit Sanchaar with some authors even going to the extent to ascribe only Dasam Banis to Amrit Sanchar for example (see Panth Parkash - 1843)

 

Edited July 23, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[BhagatSingh]

Sikhkhoj is it possible to reproduce some of these texts here?

[chatanga1]

I think it's a far larger injustice to propagate information without knowing the truth...

this coming from a person who blatantly told lies on this forum? come on.

[chatanga1]

Ofcourse, the Dasam Granth material was used by many people to emulate because there was a confusion: some thought it was Guru Krit (like Kesar Singh) while others knew it was court poet material.

was there confusion over whose crit it was? To my recollection a dispute arose over whether the 2 Granths "Bachittar Natak" and "Charitarpakhyan" should be put together in one granth.

[chatanga1]

 read the Naveen Panth Parkash to read how the son of Sukha Singh Patna (Granthi) actually imitated Guru Gobind Singhs handwriting and sold the writings for lots of money.

Naveen Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh or the recent one by Harjinder Singh Dilgeer?

[chatanga1]

Naseehatnama shows no Dasam Granth influence, neither in its vocabulary

Why would that make a difference? Bhai Nand Lal's other works stand apart from Gurbani.

[SikhKhoj]

Sikhkhoj is it possible to reproduce some of these texts here?

I will first wait for Amardeep to post his replies or it will become one mess. Which text would you like to see? The Naseehatnama is available in 2 versions and both are online (Kalaam E Goya by Pritpal Singh Bindra and Rehatnamey by Pyara Singh Padam); it is under the heading Tankhahnama as it is wrongly known even though the oldest manuscript says Naseehatnama.

Kavi Santokh Singh took the Mukatnama from Sau Sakhi (8th Sakhi) and edited it according to his own understanding (such as the nitnem part as I said above). Sau Sakhi as well as the Suraj Parkash are available online. English version of an earlier Sau Sakhi Mukatnama is also there in Macauliffes book.

 

[SikhKhoj]

Naveen Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh or the recent one by Harjinder Singh Dilgeer?

Gyan Singh.

Why would that make a difference? Bhai Nand Lal's other works stand apart from Gurbani.

Because Amardeep was quoting Bansawlinama, Gur Sobha and Gurbilas being influenced by DG language thus showing that the only early sources we have are DG influenced, and I showed him otherwise by giving some early sources that have no mention of DG Banis nor language influence.

was there confusion over whose crit it was? To my recollection a dispute arose over whether the 2 Granths "Bachittar Natak" and "Charitarpakhyan" should be put together in one granth.

Let us first conclude about Nitnem. Amardeep gave 4 sources for Jap Jaap out of whom 1 he has discarded (Desa) and I am positive that he will discard one more (Prehlad) due to the internal proof I provided.

[amardeep]

Sikhkhoj: This weekend will be quite busy with some seva Projects we got going locally, so give me a couple of days and I will get back to you.
 

In the mean time, can you post your thoughts on the Prem Sumarag Granth - authorship, dating and other interesting info regarding the granth you've come across. This granth is influenced by the Dasam Granth in many ways and its dating is very vital in this regard.

Edited July 24, 2015 by amardeep

[amardeep]

Influenced by the Dasam Granth in many ways - it tells people to read dasam bani during different life cycle rituals as well as in the evening (bachitar natak reference) as well as quoting from different dasam banis throughout. *** It also uses similiar terminology at Places.

[SikhKhoj]

No worries, this can be a long debate so there is no hurry about the replies.

I have to say, we have to be cautious when using undated manuscripts to support either of our statements. In my opinion we should base our main conclusions on the definitely dated manuscripts and books instead of trying to first date a book which can be far off the truth and then base opinions on that. You have to agree that books that are without doubt dated to the first half of the 18^th century hold more value than books we will assume as being from the early 18^th century.

But yes we will definitely try to go into the Prem Sumarag but as I am busy as well I’d like to wait for you to first reply regarding my earlier posts whose main points include to debunk Prehlad Rehatnama based on internal evidence, Prashan Uttars dating, an example of 18^th century Amrit Sanchaar Banis vs 19^th century sources for Amrit Sanchaar with predominantly more DG Banis & last but not least the comparison how a similar document (the Mukatnama) was edited in the 19^th century by Santokh Singh to accommodate more DG Banis in the nitnem (as comparable to the earlier version included in Sau Sakhi) thereby again confirming my claim that a trend existed to include more Dasam Bani over the years.

[amardeep]

Okay no worries.

There are hardly any books of the 18th Century where there are 'no doubt' regarding the dating. Some scholars believe the Gurbilas Patshahi 10 by Kuer Singh to be a 19th Century writing. The writing year of the Sau Sakhi does'nt seem to be established. Pyara Singh has argued for 1734 but much more research is needed. Very few scholars have looked into the Sau Sakhi.

The Bansavalinama claims a 1769 date just as the Tankhahnama claims a 1695. While the latter has been challenged, the former has'nt but im not even sure that many scholars have began critical analysis of it yet.

Yep lets continue Next week.

[SikhKhoj]

Okay no worries.

There are hardly any books of the 18th Century where there are 'no doubt' regarding the dating. Some scholars believe the Gurbilas Patshahi 10 by Kuer Singh to be a 19th Century writing. The writing year of the Sau Sakhi does'nt seem to be established. Pyara Singh has argued for 1734 but much more research is needed. Very few scholars have looked into the Sau Sakhi.

The Bansavalinama claims a 1769 date just as the Tankhahnama claims a 1695. While the latter has been challenged, the former has'nt but im not even sure that many scholars have began critical analysis of it yet.

Yep lets continue Next week.

Agreed.

Naseehatnama 1719 manuscript exists though.

Have to admit that Sau Sakhi 1734 date might be a bit early but parts of it are definitely early because they were already in vogue by the 19th century and at times heavily used by latter scholars such as Kavi Santokh Singh.

Some give 1779 date for Bansawlinama but others than that there has been no challenge about the date because the 1769/1779 claim is not an exceptional claim unlike the documents that beg for authenticity by giving internal dates that would place the documents during the times of Guru Gobind Singh or by ascribing its authorship to learned contemporary Sikhs of the Guru (as we see the trend of various writings attributed to Bhai Mani Singh, Nand Lal, etc).

[SikhKhoj]

Could you also find all references to Dasam Bani in the Prem Sumarag (with reference to chapter) so we can have a discussion on that once we conclude the previous points?

Edited July 24, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[amardeep]

Yep. I'll make a seperate topic for that then

[SikhKhoj]

I asked regarding DG in Prem Sumarag as I believe the Prem Sumarag is not as soaked in DG references or DG Banis as you claim. Barring the single reference to Bachittar Natak and 2-3 references to Japji Jaap (Ch 1 & Ch 3), most of the ceremonies are dependant of Anand Sahib (initiation ceremony, marriage, death, ...) and not any Dasam Bani.

This shows that it might have been written in a transition phase from the Bansawlinama (solely SGGS in ceremonies) to Panth Parkash (solely DG) types. This would mean a date between the 1760s and 1810s which does make complete sense and fits in my theory.

Besides that just like we did not count Chaupa Singh Rehatnama based on the 1700 date but the 1765 oldest manuscript date, we can only count Prem Sumarag as an 1815 source as that is the date oldest manuscript of the Prem Sumarag that is found (besides hearsay there is no proof that older manuscripts exist). It would be wrong to assume that the earliest PrS was identical to the one we possess now. In fact there are already differences between Dr Leydens PrS translation (1809) and the McLeod translation hinting that the two texts are not same, with the one we possess now being longer (as a result of additions and interpolations).

Edited July 24, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[SikhKhoj]

*

Edited July 24, 2015 by SikhKhoj

[SikhKhoj]

And to bring another perspective: years back, while reading Gurdas Dian Vaaran I came across the reference to Nitnem during Guru Nanaks time. He referred to Japuji as 'Jaap', I didn't think much of it back then but perhaps we need another perspective for Jap Jaap too. Think about it:

sodru AwrqI gwvIAY AMimRq vyly jwpu aucwrw]

Sodar and Arati were sung and in the ambrosial hours Japu was recited.

 

 

[chatanga1]

 

DG did not gain prominence because it was Dasam Krit but because it was made part of Nitnem and Amrit Sanchar. And that is how our community got fooled by having our main ceremonies depend on the Dasam Granth - and even today people still do not dare to question

Didn't you say on another topic that you have never said anything bad about Dasam Granth? Yet you say that our community are fools for depending on it?

Historically, early 1700 to 1760s literatue does not include Dasam Granth compositions in Nitnem. 

Ok, so what is included? That would be a good place to start.

Thus we see that Sikh rituals were mostly devoid of Dasam Granth influence in the early years after Guru Gobind Singh.

I don't see anything of the kind. There is nothing to see and that is precisely the point. What the eyes can't see, the mind will invent.

You see, your obsession with 18th century Sikh literature is not like a dog barking up the wrong tree. It's because there is no tree there. You are barking at thin air. You can make more or less any assumption about Sikhi and Sikh traditions from this time, because of the extremely limited material that exists. It's the same with the Namdhari Sikhs, they spout exactly the same arguments you are, only to reinforce their viewpoint that Gurgaddi was not given to Guru Granth Sahib.

Whether Dasam bani was part or not cannot be proved totally. Don't waste your time.

 

Do not post in this thread if you are unaware of historical Sikh sources and will just rant emotionally due to cognitive dissonance. 

Talking about cognitive whatnot, i see that liar Asatkirin has jumped to like your post.

 

[chatanga1]

And to bring another perspective: years back, while reading Gurdas Dian Vaaran I came across the reference to Nitnem during Guru Nanaks time. He referred to Japuji as 'Jaap', I didn't think much of it back then but perhaps we need another perspective for Jap Jaap too. Think about it:

Gurdas?