Mata Sahib Kaur Not The Giver Of Pataseh!

[navjot2]

It is very clear that Mata Sahib Devan was NOT there when the amrit sanchar took place.

1. She was shortly introduced to her future husband just before she got married.

2. One fails to see what a girl unknown to Maharaj's family circle would be doing there bringing patase.

Mata Sahib Devan's presence there is a later version of the event. The oldest rahitname do NOT mention her presence at the event.

1. based on what?

2. again mere speculation. who says she wasnt know to them? even then, why wouldnt she be at a public gathering?

why would rehitname mention the event or who was prsent?

[navjot2]

niranjana is this what you were refrring me to?:

I will reiterate and suggest the people try reading the text highlighted earlier - Sri Guru Sobha by Kavi Sainapati - this is, IMHO, one of the most reliable texts on Sikh history, however one of the most frequently ignored, particularly by modern day groups who like to dwell on Bhangoos Panth Prakash, which is, to frankly call a spade a spade, little more than Jatt propaganda. It also may well be regarded as the Nihang bible, however it is plain to see why given that it provides means to justify many of their supposed traditions and habits, strangely enough never found in any previous texts!

this arent facts.

incidentally, who is mata kivi jee?

[navjot2]

source: old & new Panth Parkash, Rattan Singh Bhangoo + Gyani Gyan Singh

where does this giani fit into the picture?

[navjot2]

The inital discussion provides links from the Namdhari website which clearly showed its textual sources (in any event, Fateh Singh has reiterated these again, for those who couldn't see it).

Javanmard has made mention of logical reasons as to why this maybe the case and expanded the discussion further to highlight other aspects of inconsistencies amongst the accounts for Vaisakhi (i.e. the chatka of goats, the names of the Punj Pyare etc). His posts and mine also provide the names of the Sikh texts that one can explore for further research.

So far the only "speculation" being provided is by Shaheediyan in his question as to how Mata Sahib Devan could have been at the event, which is fine since he is not proposing this as fact, merely asking a question, other than this, we have the famous www.sikhawareness.com ongoing Shia-Sikh theme which nicely finds its way into all discussions and sees the usual pro-and-anti Javanmard camps vent their emotional steam.

??? am i insane??? there are NO textual sources on that Namdhari page. Mention of so called logical reasons are not factual. also please pardon me but i do not have access to some arcane text library. that artical from sikhreview is also an ideological piece with little objective substance.

[navjot2]

ok people, regarding the sanchar itself, what do you think of this? "Bhai Veer Singh mentions Abu-ul-Trafi in his book. He was spying on Guru Gobind Singh for a year and a half. This is how the incident [amrit sanchar] is recorded in this spy's journal: "... Veer Singh isnt someone i hold much faith in interms of historical account. has anyone heard of this abu ul trafi fellow?

[fatehsingh]

Navjot II,

'This Gyani', despite being a nirmala who usually were not very wealthy, managed to secure and spend fundings of about 5000 RS for the sole purpose of researching Sikh history. In today's currency that is arguably about 5 million Rupees. While many of his works will probably never be published, those that have been (and unaltered) are regarded as diamonds by historians and those who give importance to boring things like 'names', 'dates' and 'locations'.

What r ur thoughts on this subject of who put Patase in Amrit and what facts do you have?

[shaheediyan]

"ok people, regarding the sanchar itself, what do you think of this? "Bhai Veer Singh mentions Abu-ul-Trafi in his book. He was spying on Guru Gobind Singh for a year and a half. This is how the incident [amrit sanchar] is recorded in this spy's journal: "... Veer Singh isnt someone i hold much faith in interms of historical account. has anyone heard of this abu ul trafi fellow?"

I have heard people have visited the library in question and they have never heard of this historical article.

In any case - in my opinion (if I am allowed to have one, seems dangerous to do so as of late), is that this account is manufactured, Guru Gobind Singh Ji stitching up the heads Frankenstein style is to fantastical for me and doesn't marry upto any other Sikh account.

"On the day Guru Gobind Singh Ji prepared Amrit in Anandpur, the attendance in the Diwan was about 35 to 40 thousands. The Mughals had four thrones (seats of Imperial Power), Delhi, Agra, Lahore and Kalanur, but the grandeur of Guru Ji's throne was in a class by itself. The grandeur of this throne was out of this world.

Guru Ji came to the Diwan and, unsheathing his sword, spoke in his thundering voice that he needed a head. No questions or hesitation at all, Bhai Dya Ram came forward to Guru Ji. Guru Ji right in front of all, cut off his head from the body in one stroke. Every body present was stunned. Then Guru Ji again thundered and demanded one more head. Right on Guru's call, Dharam Chand got up, came to Guru Ji, bowed his head and said here is my offering of my head. Guru Ji, again, in one stroke cut off Dharam Chand's head from his body.

Now there was a big commotion in the Diwan. But Guru Ji in his thundering voice went on demanding heads, one after the other. Himmat Rai, Mohkam Chand and Sahib Ram got up and offered their heads. Guru Ji cut off the heads of these three also.

Many from the congregation went to Guru Ji's mother, and narrated the whole happenings in the Diwan to Mata Ji.

Guru Ji cleaned up the blood from the five bodies and heads, and even washed the floor, Then the Guru of these infidels, stitched one head with other body, one by one. This process took about three hours. Then he covered these dead bodies with white sheets.

The Guru of the infidels then took a cauldron made of stone and put an iron wok without handles on top of it. Poured water into the wok and started preparing the "Amrit" (Aab-e-hyat - Elixir of life). The infidel Guru kept churning the water with his sword and kept on reciting his Kalma (Gurbani). This process went on for 1.5 to 2 hours. During this time, a lady from Guru's house came and put something in that water. Now the Amrit "Elixir" was ready.

From the corpses, he took the covering sheets off. First he sat on the head side of Dya Ram, and poured AMRIT "Elixir" in his mouth, then poured some on his head and sprinkled some on his body, and then he asked the dead body to say "Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh." As if on his Guru's Command, Dya Ram got up and repeated in his bold voice,"Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh."

It appeared that in the entire congregation every body was so stunned and as if stopped breathing. There was pin-drop silence. All those present were mesmerized with their Guru's miracle. In the same manner, one after the other, Guru made the other four alive too.

Then, he took all five of them inside a tent. After a while Guru Ji along with the five came out. The Five were now wearing new attire. Those five risen from the dead were standing in a line. Then Guru came in front of them and took the "Bir Asan" (Posture of the brave - kneeling on one knee) and asked for the Amrit "Elixir." At this point, these five asked, what are you offering to get this Amrit "Elixir." Then Guru said that I would sacrifice my parents and my sons for your sake. Then these five gave Amrit "Elixir" to Guru Ji, and his name was changed to "Gobind Singh." The word "Singh" was attached with other five's too - Dya Singh, Dharam Singh, Himmat Singh, Mohkam Singh and Sahib Singh.

Abu-el-Trafi writes that I was very remorseful and cried like a baby. After that, thousands took the AMRIT "Elixir". Even, I was attracted by a magnetic force and with utmost regret fell on Guru's feet. I requested Guru to give me Amrit (Aaab-e-hyat) too. Guru Ji already knew about my role as a spy and a traitor, put his hand on my back, gave me Amrit and changed my name to Ajmer Singh. Just with this act, my sins of numerous lives got washed away. I participated in many wars.

On that day, I sent my last report to Emperor Aurang Zeb. In this report I wrote my eyewitness account in details. I also warned Aurang Zeb in the strongest possible words not to dare challenge the incarnation of God, and desist from cruel policies and that if he did not listen to and act on my advise, then God forbid, he would lose all - his throne and family.

Gyani Dalip Singh "Komal" of Dhaunola informed that this book is lying in the archives of Aligarh University."

[Matheen]

There were some students at my uni (back in the day) who had seen copies of this text. IMHO it is 100%true.

Anyone know if the Durbar records from Aurangzeb's time still exist?

[chatanga]

Sant Kartar Singh Bhindranwale says that he and a professor who's name i cant remmember have seen this letter at the university, and were refused a copy of the letter by the unvirsity management.

[Niranjana]

niranjana is this what you were refrring me to?:

this arent facts.

incidentally, who is mata kivi jee?

Navjot,

These are expressing an opinion, the manner in which I have made the two two highlighted statements clearly indicate that these are my opinions.

As per facts, I have provided you with texts which reference the event (for further research), I see no speculation about the topic at hand in the above.

As per Mata Jee, I spelt her name wrong, it should read Mata Khivi and here is an initial link for information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mata_Khivi.

[Niranjana]

where does this giani fit into the picture?

Navjot,

Rattan Singh Bhangoo is the author of Panth Prakash (also called Prachin Panth Prakash).

Gyani Gyan Singh is also the author of a text by the same name called Naveen Panth Prakash.

Hence Fateh Singh's statement "old and new Panth Prakash" and respective references to their authors.

[Niranjana]

??? am i insane??? there are NO textual sources on that Namdhari page. Mention of so called logical reasons are not factual. also please pardon me but i do not have access to some arcane text library. that artical from sikhreview is also an ideological piece with little objective substance.

Navjot,

The textual sources have been provided by Fateh Singh.

The "Logical reasons" being presented are clearly based on factual evidence, i.e. dates.

The texts referred to time and again are available from regular libraries.

The article from the Sikh Review was provided since it referenced some of these texts and people were requesting that one be provided, not however as a piece of evidence in itself.

[Kharag Singh]

this is ground shaking information.

could someone reiterate the "real" story of vaisakhi 1699 then?

[shaheediyan]

I think the people that would have been able to do that left us a few centuries ago.

With all world history, varying accounts exist, it's for individuals to examine the evidence and and let their hearts lead them to their own conclusion.

The real story of Vasakhi is whatever you want it to be, the more important issue is, does it help build your character, your life and your journey towards God?

[singho]

Fascinating. This thread is SikhAwareness at its best. I never would have guessed that someone made up the story of 1699 Mata Sahib Kaur and the pataseh. Saudummer ehrlich

[navjot2]

people seem to be responding defensively. im sorry if i hit a nerve that wasnt my intention. i just want to KNOW. Speculation is empty.

Fateh thats very interesting about gyani. i hope his work is indeed the historical jewel that you make it out to be, as i might just look him up. as for me, i do not have any opinions to share, because like i said -being opinions- they are not of any use or value. nor do i have any facts. however i think every detail of Gurus lives, especially something as effecting as Amrit Sanchar, deserves serious attention. And to me it does matter to know who contributed and how at that historical Vaisakhi, though not from any ideological standpoint.

actually i would take this opportunity to say that the account from the Abu guy isnt 'too fantastical' or 'frankensein'ish from my perspective. i could believe such events occured. For with Prabh's blessing what is not possible? thats not to say that i do believe in the authenticity of the account. however the account appears to have something about it- its not obvious in the way you would expect an aprocryphal account to be. it itself is vague about who brought the Patase to Guru. And the details here and there. I am only putting it here to counteract others more cynical (for want of a better word) opinions.

dear niranjana, i did not even know who Mata Khivi was. Given some of the contributions of the singhsabha revisionist lot, the input of a 'gyani' hardly fills me with faith. these dates you say you refer to are also being taken for granted. there is arguement over the details of vaisakhi so you expect them to have got the dates of Mata Sahib Devi marrying Guru Gobind Singh correct?

i do not know much about the nirmalas but i have come to believe that the udasins have an extensive literature. i wonder if they report anything about the event.

dear shaheedyian, when you say "The real story of Vasakhi is whatever you want it to be, the more important issue is, does it help build your character, your life and your journey towards God?" well am i the only person who finds that disturbing?

[singho]

dear shaheedyian, when you say "The real story of Vasakhi is whatever you want it to be, the more important issue is, does it help build your character, your life and your journey towards God?" well am i the only person who finds that disturbing?

Officially, Sikhism comes under Anglican (Church of England), and SikhAwareness comes under 'being on message' with NuLab. Let him play.

[Xylitol]

The spy's account is perfectly plausible.

many of us here have seen miracles and ridh sidh in our own lives. some of these quite powerful. so what's so shocking or frankensteinish about the account - nothing hard to believe about the giver of ridh sidh and everything else being able to restore a decapitated man to life.

[Matheen]

There a Tuk in Bani which says:"....Mirtak Ko Jeevalanhara...."

Bringing the dead to life was no big deal for Guru Ji. Remember Baba Atal.....

[Guest Javanmard]

The issue guys is not the power of the Gurus but the veracity and authenticity of the manuscript. I know people at the university of Aligarh and they told me that their university does not have such a document. It's an issue about sources not doubting the powers of the Guru. It is well known that great saints have the grace of interceding to God to revive dead beings. Ayatollah Tabatabai is known to have had such powers himself. So the issue here is not the ridhian and sidhian but a plain question of locating the sources. In the absence of proof of that document I cannot as a scholar consider it a valid source. I can nevertheless mention the account as a "yet to verified oral account."

[shaheediyan]

Not thats important, seeing that the manuscript in question cannot even be found...

"Then the Guru of these infidels, stitched one head with other body, one by one. This process took about three hours."

My point was not to question Guru Sahibans manifest unlimited power, but to question what in my opinion does not constitute a miracle i.e. stitching up heads for 3 hours...

If Guru Ji wanted to bring them back to life, I am sure it would have been a simple matter of will, rather then a long drawn out surgical process... i.e. when Baba Atal Rai Ji raised his friend Mohan from the dead by simply speaking to him.

It could be that the incident is a metaphor, further emphasising the breakdown of varna by Guru Ji sowing the heads on to different bodies.

"dear shaheedyian, when you say "The real story of Vasakhi is whatever you want it to be, the more important issue is, does it help build your character, your life and your journey towards God?" well am i the only person who finds that disturbing?"

Well in case you haven't noticed, all the historical sources mentioned have different accounts of Vasakhi, and if you try speaking to a few Sikhs from different faces of the community and ask them their version, you will see there are differences as has been demonstrated by contributers understandings on this forum.

So what does that leave us with, regarding this and any other religious historical event (important to us) which has ever occured in history?

"does it help build your character, your life and your journey towards God?"

I see nothing disturbing about that.

[drawrof]

This leads to an important question, was there kheer available in langar that day?

[fatehsingh]

The important thing is the political motive and agendas behind the various versions. As Niranjana had pointed out, starting from the very basic fact of mispronouncing names like Sahib Kaur and painting an image that is historically incorrect in order to make women follow a certain dresscode so they may feel equality and eventually leads to fundraisings and other political agendas. Similarly meat-eating groups claim goats were killed and their meat served in langar while the mainstream 'Democratic Sikhism' supporters also feel it necessary to mention that the Guru gave up his soverign rule that day to those who he himself killed and brought back to life by becoming their chela and accepting Amrit from his own creation.

As for the spy-report, all that's present seems to be a 'copy' of the original. Which 99.9% of the time points to the fact that its untrue.

Just wanted to point out the obvious. its like throwing brick in a mud, better stay away.

[chatanga]

there are politocal agendas and motives behind every thing in life. I men a look at Gyani Gyan Singh , hiself an opium eater, so he wrote that Guru Gobind Singh ate opium.

[Beetlejuice]

LOL at Drawrof!!!