Gupt Singh Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 actually i dnt tink bik is acting rudebwoy, hes asked u a question pretty humbly.......seriously not many ppl know alot about sarbloh granth so maybe as the cleverest here u cud share u gyan insted of saying "go find out urself"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidak Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 Narsingha, When you and your cohorts invite people to your "akhara", or offer "hadh torh" challenges, you claim it to be consistent with the maryada you follow - but when someone wants to meet you - one on one, man to man, you accuse him of displaying "southall rude boy" tendencies. To anyone other than you, that attitude smacks of fear - sure you might be a big bad nihang with the rest of your boys in the akhara, or when niddar singh is there to back you up, but when it comes down to you - one on one, you're not as tough or macho as you'd like us to think. Again, when you and your buddies have questions to ask, such as the lineage of the taksal, you expect people to take your questions seriously - yet when people ask you to provide information or references to back up the many claims you have made on your two websites, your only retort is "we are not going to spoon feed you". Bikramjit Singh has provided enough evidence on this thread to suggest that the Sarbloh Granth has a shady history at best - but rather than counter his arguments with something constructive, you resort to your all too familiar tactic of accusing him of being a fool for not believing in what you believe - is that representative of the "diversity" of snatan sikhi ? You accuse people of hiding behind their computers like cowards - one could say the same of you, except that you hide behind your fellow neo-nihangs and/or niddar singh. to the moderators: narsingha will surely accuse me of waging a personal vendetta , but i write this only to hihglight the blatent hyprocritical attitude which he has demonstrated on this forum time and time again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 There is a bir of Sarabloh Granth in Hazur Sahob at Gurdwara MaTA sAHIB kAUR. The date is 1698. Don't believe: go and see it for yourselves! The fact that it's not mentioned by Kahn SIngh Nabha does not mean it does not exist. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gupt Singh Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 can u provide any more info on this bir.....like.....signatures......other proof of authenticity......why its dated pre 1699, why no one has heard of it, etc. with your immense scholarly knowledge, could you also refute biks points on the sarbloh granth? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihal_Kaur Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 khalsa soulja its really easy to let others do the work, but why not go and check it out for yourself? patience is also a virtue...... 8) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narsingha Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 If people do not wish to accept Sarbloh Guru Durbar as Gurbani, that is their choice....why should anyone waste their time proving anything to the ignorant? :roll: Live and let live....(well, unless u happen to be a kattarpanthi) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 Bikramjit's arguments are based on Pandit Tara SIngh Narotam's work Gurmat Nirnay Sagar. Pandit ji states that Sarabloh Granth could not have been written by Guru Gobind Singh because of the language used in it. His argument is subjective and is determined by his own linguistic standards which he imposes on his analysis.Anyone who has studied linguistics knows that the use of subjective language standards cannot produce an obkective apraisal of a work. Anyone having studied Braj properly knows that there were two schools of thought regarding the use of 'desi' words. Pandit Ji is among those who are against it and that is why he is against Sarabloh Granth. His argument does not stand! Scholars like Ishar SIngh Nara believe Sarabloh GRanth to be written by Guru Gobind Singh. The bir is mentioned by Jeevan Deol . Bikranjit likes to quote Tara Singh Narotam and seems to hold him in high esteem. Does he also believe in avatars, puja, images etc.. as mentioned in the Gurmat Nirnay Sagar? What does he think of the two illustrations showing Mahakal? Does he accept those as well? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 Please get back to the post topic! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tSingh Posted November 9, 2003 Report Share Posted November 9, 2003 this is surely on topic Mr Singh!?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 Bikramjit's arguments are based on Pandit Tara SIngh Narotam's work Gurmat Nirnay Sagar. Pandit ji states that Sarabloh Granth could not have been written by Guru Gobind Singh because of the language used in it. His argument is subjective and is determined by his own linguistic standards which he imposes on his analysis.Anyone who has studied linguistics knows that the use of subjective language standards cannot produce an obkective apraisal of a work. Anyone having studied Braj properly knows that there were two schools of thought regarding the use of 'desi' words. Pandit Ji is among those who are against it and that is why he is against Sarabloh Granth. His argument does not stand! Scholars like Ishar SIngh Nara believe Sarabloh GRanth to be written by Guru Gobind Singh. The bir is mentioned by Jeevan Deol . Bikranjit likes to quote Tara Singh Narotam and seems to hold him in high esteem. Does he also believe in avatars, puja, images etc.. as mentioned in the Gurmat Nirnay Sagar? What does he think of the two illustrations showing Mahakal? Does he accept those as well? No I do not believe in Avatars or Puja of Images.. do you ?. It is yourself who hold Tara Singh Narotam in high esteem as evidenced by your use of his Gur Tirath Sangreh in a number of threads. I think you are being disingenous with regard to the reason why Tara Singh Narotam rejects the Sarbloh Granth as a work of Guru Gobind Singh. The Sarbloh Granth is not solely rejected on the ground of it having just 'desi' words. The grounds for rejection are it's history, it's lingusitics, and it's date of compilation. I have already written of it's history. You have stated that there is Bir of sarbloh Granth at Mata Sahib Kaur Gurdwara at Hazur Sahib. If so, you have certainly made a great discovery and I would assume that a scholar such as yourself would have made some notes about this Bir. What exactly is the full date given. Where is the date of writing given, at the beginning or at the end. Tara Singh Narotam writing over 70 years after the Sarbloh Granth is believed to have arrived in Punjab shows that it had still not been widely accepted even amongst the Nirmalas. This is the reason why those who believe that the Sarbloh Granth is Gurbani want us to believe in the concept of 'secret texts'. Without this explanation the Sarbloh Granth remains just the same as any other apocryphal literature such as Makke Madine di Goshti, Rattanmala etc. Date of composition is another factor. The Sarbloh Granth refers to the passing down of Guruship from Guru Nanak- Guru Gobind Singh down to Guru Granth and Guru Panth. If as you state there is a Bir dated 1698 which contains this then it is important as being the first piece of evidence which predates Sainapat's Sri Gur Sobha which makes mention of the passing down of Guruship to the Guru Granth and the Guru Panth. The Bachittar Natak only makes mention of the Guruship going from Guru Nanak to Guru Tegh Bahadur. As the rest of the Bachittar Natak contains the narrative of the events of Guru Gobind Singh's life it is assumed that the reader would know that the Guruship passed from Guru Tegh Bahadur to Guru Gobind Singh. Gurbachan Singh Nayyar in his book on the Sarbloh Granth alludes to the fact that it make refers to a book about poetry written in 1776 B.S. ( 1719 AD ). How can a text which you claim was written in 1698 make reference to another text written some 21 years after it ?. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 khalsa soulja its really easy to let others do the work, but why not go and check it out for yourself? patience is also a virtue...... 8) This is a discussion forum. So, if I put my views on this forum I assume that I will be asked to elaborate on them and answer any questions which the the other forum members have regarding my views. If you look at any of the posts by either myself or Khalsa Soulja you will realise that we always answer any question put to us as fully as possible. We do not make comments and then try to bypass inconvenient questions by saying 'see for yourself'. Unfortunately there are people on this forum who wish to just make statements and then expect that the other members will accept them as fact. Consdering Lallesvari has a history of making, how can I put this diplomatically, 'incorrect' statements then I can understand Khalsa Soulja's skepticism of his claims. Khalsa Soulja is asking Lallesvari to elaborate on his comment that there is a bir of Sarbloh Granth in Hazur Sahib. If lallesvari has seen this bir then we would assume that he would have taken some notes on it. KS is not asking Lallesvari to do his work for him, he is asking for further clarification. Considering that Lallesvari is a professonal scholar and both myself and KS are just amateurs I would assume that Lallesvari would have taken some notes on the Sarbloh Granth bir when he saw it. Do you really think that it is feasible for KS to get the first plane from Heathrow to Mumbai and take the train to Nanded in order to double check Lallesvari's comments ??? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 If people do not wish to accept Sarbloh Guru Durbar as Gurbani, that is their choice....why should anyone waste their time proving anything to the ignorant? :roll: Live and let live....(well, unless u happen to be a kattarpanthi) Who's the Kattarpanthi here, someone who refuses to discuss the reason he accepts a 'secret' text as Gurbani and whose only reply to being asked the reason for his acceptance is that he doesn't wish to waste his time with the ignorant. It's pretty obvious you accept the Sarbloh Granth as Gurbani because the Budha Dal does and Lallesvari tells you that it is. For those on this forum who wish to make up their own minds about 'secret' texts the fact that Budha Dal accepts it and Lallesvari says so are not enough to convince us that this text is Gurbani. On a personal note, you are in danger of becoming a caricature of everything that you accuse those who do not agree with you as being. Egotistical, fanatic, spoon fed, Kattarpanthi etc. Anyway congratulations on learning a new word. Don't forget to write Kattarpanthi and what it means in your vocabulary book. That should take your total vocabulary to double figures 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narsingha Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 Who's the Kattarpanthi here, someone who refuses to discuss the reason he accepts a 'secret' text as Gurbani and whose only reply to being asked the reason for his acceptance is that he doesn't wish to waste his time with the ignorant. It's pretty obvious you accept the Sarbloh Granth as Gurbani because the Budha Dal does and Lallesvari tells you that it is. For those on this forum who wish to make up their own minds about 'secret' texts the fact that Budha Dal accepts it and Lallesvari says so are not enough to convince us that this text is Gurbani. On a personal note, you are in danger of becoming a caricature of everything that you accuse those who do not agree with you as being. Egotistical, fanatic, spoon fed, Kattarpanthi etc. Anyway congratulations on learning a new word. Don't forget to write Kattarpanthi and what it means in your vocabulary book. That should take your total vocabulary to double figures Continue the cheap insults, I am sure they will add to your credibility someday... :wink: Just a minor correction is in order....No one has forced you to "accept" Sarbloh Guru Durbar as Gurbani. Whether do you or not wont affect anything, only your karams...and they are only known to Akaal Purakh. You overestimate your own importance Bikramjit....this is a Sikh forum on the internet...there is a real world out there...try living in it for a change. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kaur1699 Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 Fateh Ji, Just a note to members, this is a discussion forum (stating the obvious there) and everyone has the right to express their opinion, but please don't stoop to making sarcastic comments/cheap insults, or whatever you want to call it about each other, thats not going to get anyone anywhere. Lets stick to the topic of the thread and leave personal issues out of it. Any comments made that are nothing to do with the topic but are on a personal level will be deleted without any notice, if you have a burning desire to say something to someone you always have the PM feature to get your message across. I am not referring to just this thread with this post, I am talking about the forum as a whole. Apologies to anyone who I may have offended with anything I have said. Thanks :wink: ps, like always we ask you to state references to any quotes that are made etc etc... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 KS and Bikamjit can practice and believe whatever they want. I really don't mind at all.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihal_Kaur Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 I stand corrected Bikramjit Singh. :roll: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihal_Kaur Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 P.s my point about patience is a virtue was next time KS goes India, he could check out the proof, because even if lalleshvari gives the proof, its best to see for ourselves do you not agree? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 The Buddha said: Don't believe something just because I said it! Look for yoursleves and discover for yourselves! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gupt Singh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 nihal kaur considering the fact that i am still a teen i dont have the resources to go to india, and if i did i would be going where my parents told me to go! believe me, once im 18 i will be doing alot of trekking and discovering in india.....and i will come back to you with the results at the moment the only person who has information on this bir is lalleshvari and he is yet to divulge any further information on it. lalleshvari, would u care to do so? btw, yes, patience is a virtue, and ill admit i can be a lil impatient at times 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 I stand corrected Bikramjit Singh. :roll: I have a question ..... why is it that you cheaply insult narsingha at every opportunity, you seem incapable of discussing a topic with a person who does not agree with you without getting personal....i find it very un-singh like. examples are narsingha and lalleshvari who you seem to have made foes of even though this is just a message board... :shock: Yes, you are quite right I have issues with Lallesvari and Narsingha. The issues I have with lallesvari are-; 1. He lied in order to malign my favourite scholar, Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha accusing him of being inconsistant and implying that Bhai Kahan Singh has written something in his book which when I checked was not true. 2. Bringing his weird 'new age' and 'hippy' views to Sikhi. Making ignorant remarks claiming that the Akalis who liberated the Gurdwaras from the Mahants were acting illegally 3. Being fixated on trying to prove that mainstream Sikhi is a product of British influence, that Bhai Kahan Singh, Giani Ditt Singh, Bhai Gurmukh Singh were all stooges of the British. Narsingha For making statements and then accusing people who challenge them as being egotistical and fanatics 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted November 10, 2003 Report Share Posted November 10, 2003 Lallesvari As Kaur 1699 has posted references have to provided. I hope you're not gonna do 'a narsingha' ie make a statement and not have the references to back it up. Can you give us some further information on the 1698 bir. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tableji Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 lol, as naam is the only thing u need in this world, sarbloh n dasam granth dnt really matter. Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our guru! The panth is very clear on this matter, and the only reason why we read jaap etc, is coz its part of amrit sanchar dating back to the punj pyare! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 tableji, How can you say sarbloh and dasam granth dont really matter? Thats our guroo gobind singh ji bani's man.. and thats like you are disowing your satguroo satchaie patshah guroo gobind singh ji maharaj himself. Really sad people :roll: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hari Posted April 6, 2004 Report Share Posted April 6, 2004 and the only reason why we read jaap etc, is coz its part of amrit sanchar dating back to the punj pyare! You realise that by saying this you are doing complete and utter beizzati of Satguru.You know what happens to people who do beizzati of Satguru? In the end they say "Pata nahi kee paap keete!!" - when they suffer. Take note. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tableji Posted April 7, 2004 Report Share Posted April 7, 2004 yeah bt u eva thought why it wasnt compiled into the ggs ji?? why guru gobind singh ji kept it separate? yeah n u can say its for the khalsa, warrior etc. bt from the the sarbloh granth itself "Aatam ras jeh janhee so hai khhaalas dayv. " The one who has tasted the elixir of bliss that flows from realising the Essence of God within, is the pure one. "Khhaalsaa mayro satgur pooraa.Khhaalsaa mayro sajjan sooraa." The pyre one (who has realised the spirit within) is the Perfect Guru. He is my mighty friend and hero. U c i dnt dismiss sarbloh granth at all! All im sayin is, u dnt really need it. U can live without it! Guru manyo granth! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.