Social media and anti-Dasam Granth movement.

[chatanga1]

On 25/01/2016 at 8:33 PM, chatanga1 said:

 

  @Satkirin_Kaur   Maybe you would like to try answering this?

I would like to ask you though, why you re-posted the message by sikhkhoj misrepresenting the "role of the poets" in writing Sri CharitroPakhyan, when a more accurate and complete translation was made and posted here.

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

1 hour ago, chatanga1 said:

  @Satkirin_Kaur   Maybe you would like to try answering this?

I would like to ask you though, why you re-posted the message by sikhkhoj misrepresenting the "role of the poets" in writing Sri CharitroPakhyan, when a more accurate and complete translation was made and posted here.

 

Read back. I already did. I said his post was not the first time I came across the pen names and corresponding to court poets. It's a big coincidence. Also, why would Guru Gobind Singh Ji feel the need to hide behind pen names? And then too why use different ones instead of the same one over all his works? There isn't a clear history whether you like to think so or not. Both sides have compelling historical evidence. Are you mad because in my neutral stance on DG, I actually acknowledged that Sikh Khoj might have come across some compelling evidence that warrants examination??? 

Instead of finding ever more ways to make girls cry, and feel all big and manly and superior, why not actually post some evidence yourself? At least Sikh Khoj was doing his own research instead of blindly believing whatever others say.  And that still doesn't change my position as NEUTRAL.  Get over it!!!!  It doesn't mean I am 'vulgar' as you accused, nor make me a horrible human being. 

However, sending unsolicited PMs designed to make someone feel like crap and unwelcome very much DO!!! Hope you feel soo good up on your pedestal, feeling all perfect and superior.  Well I bow to you... you made me feel like a piece of sh*t last year.  And then continued to do so when I tried to stick up for myself. Congratulations... Does that make you happy you manly man, example of perfection? You even managed to goad Sikh Khoj to leave!! Such a shining example of a human being... you're right maybe I should start treating others like you do since you're the poster child for humanity.  

I have never seen you once post something positive on this forum... And definitely not about females. Every post you spew accusations and hatred. You want to see people hurt and feel good causing them that pain. You're such an example for all of us to follow... We should start a thread dedicated to you in the Sants sub forum! 

 

[chatanga1]

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

Read back. I already did. I said his post was not the first time I came across the pen names and corresponding to court poets.

 

That's not what I asked and you know it.

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

 There isn't a clear history whether you like to think so or not. Both sides have compelling historical evidence.

 

Both sides do not have compelling evidence. There is compelling evidence that the Granth was authored by Guru Ji. There is no evidence against Guru Ji not being the author. The only people using pen-names as an excuse are the nindaks. They have nothing else to use that's why. And the evidence has been shown here. And you know it.

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

 Are you mad because in my neutral stance on DG, I actually acknowledged that Sikh Khoj might have come across some compelling evidence that warrants examination??? 

 

You weren't neutral though were you? It hasn't been that long ago you were a fanboy of sikhkhojs post, only, and only because you felt he vindicated your stance towards Sri CharitroPakhyan Granth. There was no other reason. It's why you cling to his deviously mutilated representation of the "Role of the Poets" like it's a life-saver for you. You loved it. But when the fuller verse emerged (and remember how he refused to put it up) he skulked off. Leaving you looking humiliated.

But yet you still clung to that life-saver. So shameless.

Remember what you said about not believing every "baba" or "sant" ? yet your 2 anna scholar couldn't save. He could only give you false hope, and that fleetingly as well. Yet you stick to his lies.

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

Instead of finding ever more ways to make girls cry, and feel all big and manly and superior, why not actually post some evidence yourself? At least Sikh Khoj was doing his own research instead of blindly believing whatever others say. 

 

I did produce evidence. And what happened to the great scholar? I'm sure you read the evidence, and cried bitterly. What use is research when it intends to deceive? What use is your pretence of studying Gurmat, when you haven't even learnt to tell the truth?

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

However, sending unsolicited PMs designed to make someone feel like crap and unwelcome very much DO!!! Hope you feel soo good up on your pedestal, feeling all perfect and superior.  Well I bow to you... you made me feel like a piece of sh*t last year.  And then continued to do so when I tried to stick up for myself. Congratulations... Does that make you happy you manly man, example of perfection? You even managed to goad Sikh Khoj to leave!! Such a shining example of a human being... you're right maybe I should start treating others like you do since you're the poster child for humanity.  

 

Let's leave that to the side. You will never admit lying and I will never accept your lies. Let's concentrate on this topic. Social media and the anti-Dasam Granth movement. I'm very eager to know why you used a deliberately distorted piece of history on a social platform, when you knew there was a more comprehensive and accurate article to use. I mean you used it word for word!!!

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

I have never seen you once post something positive on this forum... And definitely not about females.

 

That's your prerogative to judge my posts.  I feel that you have damaged the prospects and opportunity for females to become part of this discussion and learning platform over your time here.

 

4 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

We should start a thread dedicated to you in the Sants sub forum! 

 

What's stopping you? Remember you started one for me to do a "sewa challenge"?

[JustAnotherSingh]

7 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

 

Read it and see.

Can you give me the link?

[amardeep]

Wow what a kindergarden

[CdnSikhGirl]

^^ this!! Why can't he just leave me alone? Why does he have to keep doing nindya of me? And writing my name with a in front? 

[GurpreetKaur]

2 hours ago, Satkirin_Kaur said:

^^ this!! Why can't he just leave me alone? Why does he have to keep doing nindya of me? And writing my name with a in front? 

In Punjabi language sometime we go aye _____. Like aye gurpeet and in short would be agurpreet. So that's how it's asatkirin. Don't take it to heart lol. If someone is doing ninda of you its great. Bless that person, when people do nindeya, they wash off sins ;).

[Ragmaala]

1 minute ago, GurpreetKaur said:

In Punjabi language sometime we go aye _____. Like aye gurpeet and in short would be agurpreet. So that's how it's asatkirin. Don't take it to heart lol. If someone is doing ninda of you its great. Bless that person, when people do nindeya, they wash off sins ;).

You are such a peacemaker. lol. Good for you.

I just  noticed, few days ago you were post 1, now you are on post 184 and 91 likes yay!

[Ragmaala]

Just for general information

a is a prefix used to negate a word's meaning in Indian languages.

satya = truth,  asatya = false; mrityu= death, amar= deathless; a is used a lot in Jaap Sahib too.  Abhoot Agam Ajai Ashoo Alai  Agam Ajanam Alekh Abekh Ashoot Anas Akas ...and so on...

[Guest]

So he was being condescending and rude by putting a then... not surprised. So should I call him achatanga1 then?
 

[chatanga1]

20 hours ago, JustAnotherSingh said:

Can you give me the link?

Look in the Sri Dasam Granth section please.

[chatanga1]

http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history

Beware of the The sikh coalition. It purports to helps Sikhs in the US (which it does well by it's own accounts) but there is this article on their website under Sikh history. It is written by that fool daljeet missionary. Why they would need such an article to be on  a website that wants to help americans understand  Sikhs is hard to understand.

 

I have emailed them but have had no reply as of yet.

 

[paapiman]

29 minutes ago, chatanga1 said:

http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/dasam-granth-its-history

Beware of the The sikh coalition. It purports to helps Sikhs in the US (which it does well by it's own accounts) but there is this article on their website under Sikh history. It is written by that fool daljeet missionary. Why they would need such an article to be on  a website that wants to help americans understand  Sikhs is hard to understand.

 

I have emailed them but have had no reply as of yet.

 

This is disappointing news. Really surprising that such an article is on their website. Is Malechh Khalsa on the rise?

What did you tell them in the email? How long has it been since they have not replied?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Guest Sukhdev]

 

Just wondering what your all take is on this:

Quoted from religion.wikia.com:

"In the early 1970s, Santokh Singh (a Sikh scholar) from Chandigarh wrote a letter to the Shromani Gurudwara Parbandak Committee (S.G.P.C.) quering the authenticity of the Dasam Granth as being of Guru Gobind Singh ji's hand.

On 3rd August 1973, he received a reply from the S.G.P.C. stating: ‘Chritter Pkhyan which are entered in the Dasam Granth, they are not the work of Guru Gobind Singh. They are ancient mythological stories of Hinduism.’(‘Dasam Granth Bareh Chonveh Lekh’ by Principle Harbhajan Singh, P.122-123)

The above reply was sanctioned by the then S.G.P.C. Jathedar (commander) of the Akal Takht, Sadhu Singh Bhaura, Chet Singh (Head Granthi of Golden Temple), Kirpal Singh Granthi and Sohan Singh (Granthi of Golden Temple)."
 

So Jathedar Akal Takht, Head Granthi of Darbar Sahib, and two other Granthis (one also from Darbar Sahib) in 1973 sanctioned an official statement to effect that the stories in Charitropakhyan are not original works of Guru Gobind Singh, but are just retelling of older Hindu stories. As far as I know, this statement was never retracted. So even though accepted banis from dasam granth are not in dispute, and Akal Takht prefers an attitude of lets all get along when regarding dasam granth (meaning that those who want to read it can, and those who don't are not being forced to) but the message in that statement was clear, that at least the Charitropakhyan was not considered to be original work of Guru Gobind Singh. Whether or not it was something that he had in his private collection (hey even I study all religions and have works from many different faiths in my home), does not mean that it was intended to be presented as gurbani or even as part of Sikhi at all.

Looking at how it was discovered, in third person in a time of turmoil, by Bhai Mani Singh. The only evidence is written in a letter stating "Among the books I sent per Jhanda Singh, there is one entitled "303 Chritra Upakhyans" by the Lord (Guru Gobind Singh). Give that to Sihan Singh in the Mahal (Matia Mahal in the interior of Delhi City). 

The above presents a few points: First and foremost, this work was never presented by Guru Gobid Singh himself while still on this earth.  Surely if it was important he would have mentioned it?
Second, What did Bhai Mani Singh actually mean when he said "by" the Lord? The word by does not necessarily mean authorship. It could mean a collected work by a person where the collected works were from others. For example, I collect a bunch of recipes I like and make them into a book. I didn't author the recipes but the book was "by" myself.
Again, all the Gurus encouraged study of all religions and knowledge, and this could have been Guru Gobind Singh's personal research, and not related to Sikhi at all. Like a collected works of older Hindu stories he kept for his personal use. The stories in Chartiropakhyan are retelling of older Hindu stories easily found in the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, the Puranas, the Hitopadesa, the Panchatantra etc. (Go ahead and look them up!)

Also, Bhai Mani Singh could have been purely mistaken or did he have any alterior motives or did anyone else? At that time, and even reading the rest of the letter itself, it was apparent that Hindu influence at that point in history was great. The same letter details "The Khalsa no more holds sway over the country and its power has waned. The Sikhs have migrated to the mountain retreats. The Malechhas reign supreme in the country. There is no security for the (Sikh) children and women in any habitation. They are hunted out and killed. The opposing states have also joined hands with them. The Hindalis spy on the Sikhs. All (the Sikhs) have deserted the Chak (The earliest name of Amritsar). The Mutsaddis (priests) have also fled." So its obvious that Sikhs at that time were running, that historical documents and religious texts left in the open, very well could have been adulterated by those with alterior motives (Hindu influence). So why is it so hard to believe that it might not be authored by Guru Gobind Singh? Or even if it were, that it might have never been meant as Sikh teaching, but instead was his personal collection of stories from other religions (namely Hindu)?

Please note I am not against Hinduism at all. I am just pointing out that very easily someone could have adulterated that material at that time, and it can not be coincidence that nearly all the stories can be found in other religious texts from (mostly) Hindu sources.  What if you staunch believers are wrong in the end? What if this text which is obviously harmful to general character of women, was planted to create distrust and disharmony in Sikh families in an already tumultuous time? I have come across posts even recently on here suggesting that Singhs should not trust even their wives? Is this not harmful to the family unit, the backbone of Sikh communities? Think of why a group might want to create that distrust in Sikh families at that time! Sikhs had solid families built on trust between husband and wife who were equals. Reading Charitropakhyan, most Singhs would have had at least a little less trust in even their own wives. I mean if this was coming from the Guru right? What is the practical result of that distrust? Husbands keeping secrets from wives? Not trusting their wives? Viewing their wives as being immoral, suspecting that they are keeping lies? Even suspicion of deceit creates a disease that only progresses and flares to end up causing much harm. What does this do to the overall Sikh community when an attack happens in the heart of Sikh families by those who would have loved to see Sikhi fail and have those people come back to the Hindu fold?

Just please don't blindly believe everything you are spoonfed.

Also I don't know any of you and have nothing against any of you. I just think we should not be so blindly accepting of everything we are told in this life. Some things are hidden from us and its up to us to uncover the truth ourselves.

Sukhdev S.

[chatanga1]

19 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

 

Some things are hidden from us and its up to us to uncover the truth ourselves.

Sukhdev S.

 

Mr Sukhdev S, totally agree with you about uncovering the truth oursleves. Do a search on this forum about the questions you have asked and you will uncover many things that will help you find the answers to your questions.

[Guest Sukhdev]

Chatanga1,

I am fairly discerning in my own search for truth.

Some other interesting points are that even though many scholars have based their claim that all of dasam granth was authored by the Guru himself, purely off the letter from Bhai Mani Singh Ji, the accuracy of the letter itself was called into question also by numerous scholars. Then there is the fact that saying 'by' does not mean authorship  necessarily. What I mean, is that even if the letter is authentic, and even if Bhai Mani Singh Ji truly believed that what he found was authored by the Guru, it could still have been that Guru Gobind Singh Ji had just collected these stories for his own use. As I said, I study all world religions, and because of that, I have numerous papers I have written in my own hand, laying around my place. If I were to die tomorrow, and someone came to my place to gather my things, they might think that I believe in jihad for example, simply because I have papers that I have written on the topic, for my religious thesis. Since all of the Gurus have encouraged study of all world religions of Sikhs (which means learner), then its not a far cry to think the Gurus themselves had personal notes with information from other religions. This is further compounded by the fact that the stories in Caritropakhyan are easily found in Hindu religious texts! It would be a huge coincidence if you are trying to claim that these stories are original works of Guru Gobind Singh and yet they share such resemblance to past Hindu stories, that if presented today would result in a plagiarism case! But in any case, the actual letter of Bhai Mani Singh Ji has been put into question by scholars. So we have scholars disagreeing with scholars. Certainly that creates enough doubt for a court case!

But there is more. There have also been raised the possibility that Chandi Charitar and Bhagauti ki War were translated by different hands. They were analyzed and recognized by anyone having even moderate knowledge of Hindi could tell that they were penned and translated by different individuals. Penmanship and linguistics have been used in high profile murder cases and found to be a very accurate scientific method.  I fear however, that even DNA evidence were to present itself in the ink somehow proving that Guru Gobind Singh did not write all of dasam granth, that some of you would still argue it. Especially if certain babas still held on the belief.

What do you say about the fact that in 1973 an official statement was sanctioned by Jathedar (Commander) Akal Takht, Head Granthi of Darbar Sahib, and two other Granthis (one also from Darbar Sahib) stating that Charitropakhyan was not original work of Guru Gobind Singh and was retelling of Hindu stories? This statement was never retracted or reversed.

Other facts, that Guru Gobind Singh never mentioned any of these compositions from dasam granth prior to leaving this world. He did however emphasize guruship of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Would he not have mentioned something he wished to be a granth for his Sikhs? After he left this world, there are sparse mentions of 'parts' of the contents of dasam granth in various works. Rhetnama Bhai Nand Lal mentions jaap sahib. RehitNama Chaupa Singh Chibber quotes various lines from Bachitar Natak, 33 Swiayey, Chopai Sahib, Jaap Sahib. (Still no mention of Charitropakhyan). In 1711, Sri Gur Sobha written by Poet Senapat mentioned Conversation of Guru Gobind Singh and Akal Purakh, and written three of its Adhyay on base of Bachitar Natak. In 1741, Parchian Srvadas Kian quoted lines from Rama Avtar, 33 Swaiyey and mentioned Zafarnama with Hikayats. (Still no mention of Charitropakhyan). In 1751, Gurbilas Patshahi 10 – Koyar Singh Kalal, mentioned Guru Gobind Singh composed Bachitar Natak, Krisna Avtar, Bisan Avtar, Akal Ustat, Jaap Sahib, Zafarnama, Hikayats etc. This is first Granth mentioned Guruship of Guru Granth Shahib.  (So its now 1751 and this is the first mention of an actual granth). In 1766, Kesar Singh Chibber mentioned history of Compilation of Dasam Granth by Bhai Mani Singh Khalsa on directions of Mata Sundri, as he was first who wrote history after death of Guru Gobind Singh.  (A lot can happen and a lot of history can be distorted in over half a century. Just look today even with our modern methods, how history of events even in our own lifetime can be skewed!) In 1766, Sri Guru Mahima Parkash – Sarup Chand Bhalla, mentioned about various Banis of Guru Gobind Singh and Compilation of Dasam Granth. (So the history says so far that Guru Ji did write several banis. Bhai Mani Singh compiled these banis into a granth. It was never compiled as such by Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself. This already leaves the possibility of error! How easy would it be to accidentally include something that was not his original works especially if he had kept personal notes as I mentioned before?)  In 1790, Guru Kian Sakhian – Svarup Singh Kashish, mentione Guru Gobind Singh Composed, bachitar Natak, Krishna Avtar, Shastarnaam Mala, 33 Swaiyey etc. In 1797, Gurbilas Patshahi 10 – Sukkha Singh, mentioned compositions of Guru Gobind Singh. In 1812, JB Malcolm, in Sektch of Sikhs mentioned about Dasam Granth as Bani of Guru Gobind Singh.  (So a full century later, someone makes assumption that all of the content of the now created dasam granth is all original works of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and with a name like 'Malcom' I am assuming was not even Punjabi.)  Still no mention of where Charitropakhyan came from. The ONLY mention is the letter from Bhai Mani Singh Ji, the authenticity of which is called into question by numerous scholars! And that too, only 303 (where were the other 102?) And even if the letter IS authentic, it doesn't mean that Charitropakhyan is, for the reasons I already mentioned!  Then we also have the use of poet names raam and shyam which coincidentally were also names of poets in Gurus court. If Guru Gobind Singh were to use aliases, why use aliases of poets that could cause confusion like that instead of names which were completely unique?

Sikhi was teaching equality of humans in a place and time where humans were pit against each other in a severe hierarchy of social status. So any chance that an outsider could cause influence of Sikhs to try and bring back casetism and gender bias, among other Hindu ideologies like idol worship - of course that opportunity would have been used, and I wholeheartedly believe this was the case. I truly believe that Charitropakhyan was an attack on the solidity of the Sikh family unit, causing rift between husbands and wives through distrust and suspicion of deceit etc. What better way to topple an enemy than to destroy their family cohesion!?

I do believe in the banis however that are mentioned over and over throughout history. Jaap sahib, swiayey etc.

 

[paapiman]

21 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

 

Just wondering what your all take is on this:

Quoted from religion.wikia.com:

"In the early 1970s, Santokh Singh (a Sikh scholar) from Chandigarh wrote a letter to the Shromani Gurudwara Parbandak Committee (S.G.P.C.) quering the authenticity of the Dasam Granth as being of Guru Gobind Singh ji's hand.

On 3rd August 1973, he received a reply from the S.G.P.C. stating: ‘Chritter Pkhyan which are entered in the Dasam Granth, they are not the work of Guru Gobind Singh. They are ancient mythological stories of Hinduism.’(‘Dasam Granth Bareh Chonveh Lekh’ by Principle Harbhajan Singh, P.122-123)

The above reply was sanctioned by the then S.G.P.C. Jathedar (commander) of the Akal Takht, Sadhu Singh Bhaura, Chet Singh (Head Granthi of Golden Temple), Kirpal Singh Granthi and Sohan Singh (Granthi of Golden Temple)."

Guest jee:

SGPC's reply is not God's word for Sikhs. Sikh's ultimate authority is Gurbani, not an organization made by some humans.

Did you know that there was a time that General Dyer (who was involved in the massacre of Sikhs) was given a siropa by the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib jee at that time? How do you feel about that?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

3 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

Chatanga1,

I am fairly discerning in my own search for truth.

Guest jee - All Sampradas (Groups), which trace their origin to Tenth Master's time, believe in entire Sri Dasam Granth Sahib jee. One has to be a big fool to still doubt any part of it. It is understandable that some people, due to their low spiritual levels, might have difficulty in understanding the concepts in Gurbani. The best solution for these people is to do more Naam Simran and listen to Katha by Saint-Scholars to improve their intellectual understanding.

Please become a registered member of this forum and learn more about Gurbani. More than enough evidence is available out there to prove that the entire Sri Dasam Granth Sahib jee is the work of Sri Satguru jee.

Please have a look at the below link.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

[paapiman]

22 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

Just please don't blindly believe everything you are spoonfed.

Getting spoonfed by Saints/Gurmukhs is completed acceptable in Sikhsim, but getting spoonfed by Heretics/Nindaks, etc, is very very dangerous. They will drag you to hell along with you.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

22 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

 

Have a look at this.

http://dailysikhupdates.com/you-will-never-question-dasam-granth-after-seeing-this-video/

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Guest Sukhdev]

8 minutes ago, paapiman said:

Guest jee:

SGPC's reply is not God's word for Sikhs. Sikh's ultimate authority is Gurbani, not an organization made by some humans.

Did you know that there was a time that General Dyer (who was involved in the massacre of Sikhs) was given a siropa by the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib jee at that time? How do you feel about that?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Paapiman Veerji,

Are you saying you openly do not follow Akal Takht Sahib?  Yes both SGPC and Akal Takht are authority figure in Sikhi whether you agree with them or not, and if you do not, then you are not mainstream Sikh. Also, when Jathedar of Akal Takht, head Granthi of Darbar Sahib, and two other Granthis (one also from Darbar Sahib) make a decision based on research conducted by numerous scholars, yes I do tend to give it credence. Especially since the argument on the opposite side comes down to one letter, the authenticity of which is in question along with any more details on Charitropakhyan itself.  

And yes Gurbani IS ultimate authority, so glad you and I agree! Now please reconcile how Guru Granth Sahib Ji can be in disagreement with dasam granth on many points? Particularly ਸੋ  ਕਿਉ  ਮੰਦਾ  ਆਖੀਐ  ਜਿਤੁ  ਜੰਮਹਿ  ਰਾਜਾਨ  ॥ when dasam granth has a whole section devoted to doing just that!  Perhaps you should instead follow this piece of advice from gurbani ਨਾਨਕ ਪਰਖੇ ਆਪ ਕਉ ਤਾ ਪਾਰਖੁ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ since you believe it is our ultimate authority!

 

 

 

[chatanga1]

5 hours ago, Guest Sukhdev said:

Chatanga1,

I am fairly discerning in my own search for truth.

Excellent. Make a permanent ID on this forum and let's some of the points you have made. I again ask you do do a search on this forum concerning your points as they have already been discussed.

[Guest Mehta4life]

Dhadrianwala, Panthpreet and Dhunda all claim that Charitro pakhiyan katha should not be done in the hazuri of SGGS Ji because they don't believe Dasme Paathshah wrote the Charitro pakhiyan as they want to deny that Dasam Pita was the greatest writer of all times.

[JasperS]

8 hours ago, Guest Mehta4life said:

Dhadrianwala, Panthpreet and Dhunda all claim that Charitro pakhiyan katha should not be done in the hazuri of SGGS Ji because they don't believe Dasme Paathshah wrote the Charitro pakhiyan as they want to deny that Dasam Pita was the greatest writer of all times.

I happen to agree with them and guest Sukhdev also as I cant believe how all of the Gurus tried to elevate status of women to equals and charitropakhyan only makes them look bad. You think this is the best writing of all time? I guess you don't read Guru Granth Sahib Ji then? Instead you like stories bashing women as deceitful adulterers. Stories which are graphic and even touching on sexual themes which I would call depraved. If it was only moral stories, then the finger would be pointed equally at both men and women, not just women and there would be no need for such descriptive depravity. The vast majority of the stories are showing women as intentionally deceitful, adulterers, cheating on husbands and so on. There are even a few stories in charitropakhyan that encourage vioelnce against women. This view of females was prevalent in other religions like Hinduism but not ours. 

[paapiman]

10 hours ago, Guest Mehta4life said:

Dhadrianwala, Panthpreet and Dhunda all claim that Charitro pakhiyan katha should not be done in the hazuri of SGGS Ji because they don't believe Dasme Paathshah wrote the Charitro pakhiyan as they want to deny that Dasam Pita was the greatest writer of all times.

Guest jee - Do you have any proof of the above for Dhandrianwale?

 

Bhul chuk maaf