Debating the Dasam Granth by Robin Rinehart

[dalsingh101]

 

I found this very perceptive and I've come to similar conclusions regarding Dasam Granth (bear in mind that I grew up in period when there was a lot of confusion and misinformation on DG, especially Charitrio Pakyaan). 

 

458994142-Debating-the-Dasam-Granth-by-Rinehart-Robin-z-lib-org-pdf (1).

[Premi]

On 3/13/2019 at 7:20 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Found this. Some pages are missing but there is enough there to give a taste of the contents. 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qe6WnpbT2BkC&pg=PA180&lpg=PA180&dq=gursharan+kaur+jaggi&source=bl&ots=UGf53GS57G&sig=ACfU3U2KLfFLpE682E8VGfqlSNf9CODAig&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitmIjl6P_gAhXiQxUIHf_zDQI4ChDoATAEegQIBhAB#v=onepage&q=gursharan kaur jaggi&f=false

Did you read it ?

[dalsingh101]

3 hours ago, Premi said:

Did you read it ?

Nah, never got hold of it. Tried ordering it from library years ago, but they told me they can't get it, and I have to go to the British Library for it. 

[dalsingh101]

458994142-Debating-the-Dasam-Granth-by-Rinehart-Robin-z-lib-org-pdf.pdf

 

Download full work from here!  

[dalsingh101]

19 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

458994142-Debating-the-Dasam-Granth-by-Rinehart-Robin-z-lib-org-pdf.pdf 772.98 kB · 0 downloads

I've been reading this. I really like the narration/translation/paraphrasing Rinehart has done with the Chandi/Gurga/Kalinarratives in DG and how she has tried to compare them to the original Markendaya source. 

 

  

[dalsingh101]

[Soulfinder]

12 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I've been reading this. I really like the narration/translation/paraphrasing Rinehart has done with the Chandi/Gurga/Kalinarratives in DG and how she has tried to compare them to the original Markendaya source. 

 

  

Dass loves reading Chandi Chirtars 1,2 and am happy that you shared this thanks veer ji.

[dalsingh101]

35 minutes ago, Soulfinder said:

Dass loves reading Chandi Chirtars 1,2 and am happy that you shared this thanks veer ji.

I was reading this book for a good few hours last night. I'm really impressed by it. The author does a really grand job of paraphrasing the DG Chandhi/Durga narratives in english and comparing them to the original Markendaya source. What could easily have been a dry, monotonous affair is turned into a stimulating read that I beleive reflects aspects of the original DG texts. 

Many of her perceptions seem very insightful, and I have drawn similar conclusions from my own limited interaction with Dasam Granth. Her analysis of CP is very good and goes beyond the usual tat about it being 'erotic stories' and whatnot.  

This work is definitely worth a Sikh's time.

 

@HSD You should read this, I think you'd like it? 

[paapiman]

31 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

I was reading this book for a good few hours last night. I'm really impressed by it. The author does a really grand job of paraphrasing the DG Chandhi/Durga narratives in english and comparing them to the original Markendaya source. What could easily have been a dry, monotonous affair is turned into a stimulating read that I beleive reflects aspects of the original DG texts. 

Many of her perceptions seem very insightful, and I have drawn similar conclusions from my own limited interaction with Dasam Granth. Her analysis of CP is very good and goes beyond the usual tat about it being 'erotic stories' and whatnot.  

This work is definitely worth a Sikh's time.

 

@HSD You should read this, I think you'd like it? 

But don't you think Paaji that Sikhs, in general, should first listen to Katha (or read Teeka) of Sri Dasam Granth by Sikh scholars (associated with Gyani Sampradai or Nihangs) and then read such books by non-Sikh scholars?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[GurjantGnostic]

2 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I was reading this book for a good few hours last night. I'm really impressed by it. The author does a really grand job of paraphrasing the DG Chandhi/Durga narratives in english and comparing them to the original Markendaya source. What could easily have been a dry, monotonous affair is turned into a stimulating read that I beleive reflects aspects of the original DG texts. 

Many of her perceptions seem very insightful, and I have drawn similar conclusions from my own limited interaction with Dasam Granth. Her analysis of CP is very good and goes beyond the usual tat about it being 'erotic stories' and whatnot.  

This work is definitely worth a Sikh's time.

 

@HSD You should read this, I think you'd like it? 

Definitely should read any and all Gurbani or Gurmat. 

[dalsingh101]

2 hours ago, paapiman said:

But don't you think Paaji that Sikhs, in general, should first listen to Katha (or read Teeka) of Sri Dasam Granth by Sikh scholars (associated with Gyani Sampradai or Nihangs) and then read such books by non-Sikh scholars?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Veer, I think you've hit on a really important topic here.

I agree with your sentiment, but personally speaking (and I'm not speaking on anyone else's behalf, but I suspect I'm not alone in feeling some of these things), I think that often the teekas have very literal, surface interpretations that don't contextualise the texts historically. They seem to lack any deeper internal comparative analysis too, which Rinehart has attempted here. It might be that the natural audience for some of these works are the general Panjabi Sikh population, and we already know that the vast majority seem to have some allergy to literature in general. Roop Dhillon constantly laments this very thing in many of his posts here.

Also, not everyone has the predisposition to gain their information in the traditional ways you mention. I've said it a few times before that I myself struggle to keep focus on verbally transmitted expositions (katha). It's like being at school and zoning in and out of what a teacher is lecturing on. And people have previously said that often they get more information reading a few pages of a well researched and written text than with listening to hours of traditional style katha. Language is a major issue too, and people raised abroad (and I suspect even the majority of desis) would struggle to read a text in Panjabi that utilised a more advanced vocabulary to what is generally spoken by the ahhm public. Maybe the fact that the majority of the panth is generally semi-literate ruralites plays a big part at what level katha and many teekas are pitched at? That isn't to say there can't be very advanced examples, but again, that language barrier I allude to, makes them inaccessible to the majority.

That all being said; your point is a very apt one. In my opinion we've already had nonSikh 'scholars' (and here McLeod comes to mind very strongly), who've done a lot of pseudo, motived 'interpretations' that fail to see to wood for the trees, and in my opinion come from a place of long-standing western academic 'imperialism' or what we call orientalism. It's important to note that the aforementioned was actually mentored and encouraged by (surprise surprise) someone from amongst our own (the recently deceased J. S. Grewal) who I believe had a very insidious agenda regarding representing Sikh ithihaas with a very motivated, skewed, pro-caste stance that threads its way through his work.  So we have to be extremely careful of not only nonSikh scholars but so-called scholars who come from Sikh backgrounds as well. A guard should always be up for these things, and your comment suggests you are doing just this.

I read Rinehart's work and found it quite balanced and not overtly subversive to Sikh culture like many others. That underscores another belief I have: that sometimes outsider, fresh eyes can see things that many of our own miss. Another example of this is the recent film Sardar Udham, which although directed and written by a nonSikh, does an infinitely better job in representing Sikh culture and ithihaas than any of the modern tat that comes from the indigenous Panjabi Sikh movie industry like this type of shyte:

 

 

[GurjantGnostic]

4 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

Veer, I think you've hit on a really important topic here.

I agree with your sentiment, but personally speaking (and I'm not speaking on anyone else's behalf, but I suspect I'm not alone in feeling some of these things), I think that often the teekas have very literal, surface interpretations that don't contextualise the texts historically. They seem to lack any deeper internal comparative analysis too, which Rinehart has attempted here. It might be that the natural audience for some of these works are the general Panjabi Sikh population, and we already know that the vast majority seem to have some allergy to literature in general. Roop Dhillon constantly laments this very thing in many of his posts here.

Also, not everyone has the predisposition to gain their information in the traditional ways you mention. I've said it a few times before that I myself struggle to keep focus on verbally transmitted expositions (katha). It's like being at school and zoning in and out of what a teacher is lecturing on. And people have previously said that often they get more information reading a few pages of a well researched and written text than with listening to hours of traditional style katha. Language is a major issue too, and people raised abroad (and I suspect even the majority of desis) would struggle to read a text in Panjabi that utilised a more advanced vocabulary to what is generally spoken by the ahhm public. Maybe the fact that the majority of the panth is generally semi-literate ruralites plays a big part at what level katha and many teekas are pitched at? That isn't to say there can't be very advanced examples, but again, that language barrier I allude to, makes them inaccessible to the majority.

That all being said; your point is a very apt one. In my opinion we've already had nonSikh 'scholars' (and here McLeod comes to mind very strongly), who've done a lot of pseudo, motived 'interpretations' that fail to see to wood for the trees, and in my opinion come from a place of long-standing western academic 'imperialism' or what we call orientalism. It's important to note that the aforementioned was actually mentored and encouraged by (surprise surprise) someone from amongst our own (the recently deceased J. S. Grewal) who I believe had a very insidious agenda regarding representing Sikh ithihaas with a very motivated, skewed, pro-caste stance that threads its way through his work.  So we have to be extremely careful of not only nonSikh scholars but so-called scholars who come from Sikh backgrounds as well. A guard should always be up for these things, and your comment suggests you are doing just this.

I read Rinehart's work and found it quite balanced and not overtly subversive to Sikh culture like many ohers. That underscores another belief I have: that sometimes outsider, fresh eyes can see things that many of our own miss. Another example of this is the recent film Sardar Udham, which although directed and written by a nonSikh, does an infinitely better job in representing Sikh culture and ithihaas than any of the modern tat that comes from the indigenous Panjabi Sikh movie industry like this type of shyte:

 

 

Oxford is using that nesbitt woman to attack the Paanth now. 

[dalsingh101]

[HSD]

On 1/27/2023 at 5:53 PM, dalsingh101 said:

@HSD You should read this, I think you'd like it? 

Is this the one?

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/019975506X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=

[dalsingh101]

On 2/6/2023 at 3:46 PM, HSD said:

Is this the one?

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/019975506X/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=

That's the one, you can download it from the 4th post in this thread.  

 

(You can now download it from the OP)

[dalsingh101]

https://podcasts.apple.com/dk/podcast/debating-the-dasam-granth-with-professor-robin-rinehart/id1533329730?i=1000534841587