• Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Dasam Granth Ji - Its History By Daljeet Singh

Feb 7, 2008
529
83
You have not replied my question on the letter of Bhai Mani snigh ji.That means you people have no authentic conclusion to prove his letter to be fake.You guys have dreamt that it might be a fake.So the propaganda.

Yes RSS is proved wrong many times when they quote Dasam Granth out of context.They can be engaged in discussion to pove them wrong as Bhai kahn singh ji Nabha had done in his book "Hum Hindu Nahin".This book is in question and answer form.Here Bhai sahib quotes from Dasam Granth to prove Hindus wrong.

The chhand you are mentioning here is a myth,my friend.Myth is written to impart a moral lesson.Read the first line there the creation of world is given.Then the myth starts .In the end is moral lesson.

My dear friend learn first is what is a myth,metaphor,symolism and similies as
these are extensively used in Dasam Granth. these are ex
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
<<<<<<Sone pat a poet claims in his biography of Satgiuru ji that Satguru got married again after Damdma stay. Who Sikh can believe that trash? He also says one Sahibzada(Ajit Singh ji) escaped from Chamkaur Sahib. Such gaps( fabricated stories) were spread against Satguru ji and his family. Same people knowingly did that. If Sonepat can do that then Pundit Shibbar and Koer Singh, wouldnt do what? justify that How the line given above is authored by Satguru ji for the readers of SPN. Your kind but reasonable answer will be appreciated.>>>>>

Response

I have not understood what are you trying to say above?Let me clarify a little more in detaild.

Dasam Granth does not say that guru ji married again.I have book of Kavi sainapat with me.It is gurshobha.It does not say what you are trying to say.

It is rumour being spread by you.Can you tell us on what page Kavi sainapat wrote that guru ji married again?
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
<<<<<<Sone pat a poet claims in his biography of Satgiuru ji that Satguru got married again after Damdma stay. Who Sikh can believe that trash? He also says one Sahibzada(Ajit Singh ji) escaped from Chamkaur Sahib. Such gaps( fabricated stories) were spread against Satguru ji and his family. Same people knowingly did that. If Sonepat can do that then Pundit Shibbar and Koer Singh, wouldnt do what? justify that How the line given above is authored by Satguru ji for the readers of SPN. Your kind but reasonable answer will be appreciated.>>>>>

Response

I have not understood what are you trying to say above?Let me clarify a little more in detaild.

Dasam Granth does not say that guru ji married again.I have book of Kavi sainapat with me.It is gurshobha.It does not say what you are trying to say.

It is rumour being spread by you.Can you tell us on what page Kavi sainapat wrote that guru ji married again?

Inder Singh ji

For your judgemental mind, let me give you name of the book, it is up to you to understand fact and you will avoid directly accusing me of spreading rumour, here it is Sikh Itihas de Some, by Sohan Singh Seetal. Mr. Seetal just put together the writings of different guys. So I hope you will not accuse him spreading rumour either.
Other thing about understanding metaphor, just for your information, I have enough education to understand it in detail. If you read the whole passage of the line#14 I qouted, you shouldnt be calling it metaphor. A reason why earth is called medhna is given it is not metaphor. Come on, at least stay reasonable, you do not need to take it personal and start accusing others. We are talking about facts. Your stand is to believe in Dasam Granth in its totality and mine is to oppose those writings which do not have chance to be called Gurbani if they are compared with Guru Nanak Bani.
You havent proved so far with reason or any fact that it could be authored by Satguru ji. What havent you understood sir? You started answering it by just accusing me of thing which I couldnt do in my dreams. Do you know me sir? On this site I believe we avoid personal judgements. Whatever you have the right to say, so do I have. Take a deep breath, then answer what I asked you? I have asked you a few questions, none of your answer comes close to satisfactory one. SAtguru wrote Jaap Sahib, all Sikhs agree, right? Answer me why Satguru didnt add it in Guru Granth Sahib ji?
About the words in Guru Granth Sahib ji, like bhog, etc, this espect was well explained by Giani Jarnail Singh ji; however, you bear it in your mind that those words can be compared with those detailed sexual contents. Obviously you are not well aware of the well accepted measure of " obscene" and sexual. In Guru Granth Sahib ji, the words are related to sexual context, there is no obcenity appears in them at all. My request is that you could have answered it in a different way than comparing Guru Granth Sahib ji with Dasam Granth( Historically it was not even known as a Dasam Granth during Satguru time and a long time after that). As you get up set if Dasam Granth is not accepted Satguru's Bani in its totality, I feel offended when Guru Granth Sahib ji is compared with Dasam Granth. We are totally on two different sides. Well hoping this time you will stay cool honouring SPN rules.
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
For your judgemental mind, let me give you name of the book, it is up to you to understand fact and you will avoid directly accusing me of spreading rumour, here it is Sikh Itihas de Some, by Sohan Singh Seetal. Mr. Seetal just put together the writings of different guys. So I hope you will not accuse him spreading rumour either

Bhai sahib

It is not history of guru ji's period.This is not relevant to the subject at hand.So it is better not to bring in this discussion

.
Other thing about understanding metaphor, just for your information, I have enough education to understand it in detail. If you read the whole passage of the line#14 I qouted, you shouldnt be calling it metaphor. A reason why earth is called medhna is given it is not metaphor. Come on, at least stay reasonable, you do not need to take it personal and start accusing others. We are talking about facts. Your stand is to believe in Dasam Granth in its totality and mine is to oppose those writings which do not have chance to be called Gurbani if they are compared with Guru Nanak Bani.

Bhai sahib

I gave you the examples in general to say that taking literal meaning is wrong.It is not metaphor but a myth.Myth is not reality.That is why we should not take literal meaning of that verse.

Read the first line of that verse which you are writing about creation of universeਚੌਪਈ ॥
चौपई ॥
CHAUPAI

ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਕਾਲ ਜਬ ਕਰਾ ਪਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਤੇ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਉਪਾਰਾ ॥
प्रिथम काल जब करा पसारा ॥ ओअंकार ते स्रिसटि उपारा ॥
In the beginning, when KAL created the world, it was brought into being by Aumkara (the One Lord).

Bachitra natak,dasam granth



You havent proved so far with reason or any fact that it could be authored by Satguru ji. What havent you understood sir? You started answering it by just accusing me of thing which I couldnt do in my dreams. Do you know me sir? On this site I believe we avoid personal judgements. Whatever you have the right to say, so do I have. Take a deep breath, then answer what I asked you? I have asked you a few questions, none of your answer comes close to satisfactory one. SAtguru wrote Jaap Sahib, all Sikhs agree, right? Answer me why Satguru didnt add it in Guru Granth Sahib ji?

Bhai sahib

I have written that there is hazuri bir called anadpuri bir available here in USA
and India.It is written in 1697.there is date of compilation in that bir.What else we want.

About the words in Guru Granth Sahib ji, like bhog, etc, this espect was well explained by Giani Jarnail Singh ji; however, you bear it in your mind that those words can be compared with those detailed sexual contents. Obviously you are not well aware of the well accepted measure of " obscene" and sexual. In Guru Granth Sahib ji, the words are related to sexual context, there is no obcenity appears in them at all. My request is that you could have answered it in a different way than comparing Guru Granth Sahib ji with Dasam Granth( Historically it was not even known as a Dasam Granth during Satguru time and a long time after that).

Bhai sahib

You might have read my response to giani ji.The lines he is mentioning is in question answer form between husband and his wicked wife.It does not promote intoxicants .

When you put scritpures at academic level you cannot say that one is exclusive.

As you get up set if Dasam Granth is not accepted Satguru's Bani in its totality, I feel offended when Guru Granth Sahib ji is compared with Dasam Granth. We are totally on two different sides. Well hoping this time you will stay cool honouring SPN rules.
[/QUOTE]

Can you write here what is offensive?You mentioned Guru ji was durga bhagat.That was wrong and i quoted the relevant part to disprove that.Quote the verse and i will answer that.

The following is also from Bachitra natak a few lines before the verse you are mentioning out of contextਰਸਾਵਲ ਛੰਦ ॥
रसावल छंद ॥
RASAAVAL STANZA

ਜਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਹੂਏ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਮੂਏ ॥
जिते राम हूए ॥ सभै अंति मूए ॥
All the Ramas who incarnated, ultimately passed away.

ਜਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਜੈ ਹੈਂ ॥੭੦॥
जिते क्रिसन ह्वै हैं ॥ सभै अंति जै हैं ॥७०॥
All the Krishnas, who had incarnated, have all passed away.70.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦੇਵ ਹੋਸੀ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਜਾਸੀ ॥
जिते देव होसी ॥ सभै अंत जासी ॥
All the gods who will come into being in future, they will all ultimately expire.

ਜਿਤੇ ਬੋਧ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਛੈਹੈਂ ॥੭੧॥
जिते बोध ह्वै हैं ॥ सभै अंति छैहैं ॥७१॥
Alll the Buddhas, who came into being, expired ultimately.71.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦੇਵ ਰਾਯੰ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਜਾਯੰ ॥
जिते देव रायं ॥ सभै अंत जायं ॥
All the god-kings, who came into being, ultimately passed away.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦਈਤ ਏਸੰ ॥ ਤਿਤਿਓ ਕਾਲ ਲੇਸੰ ॥੭੨॥
जिते दईत एसं ॥ तितिओ काल लेसं ॥७२॥
All the demon-kings, who came into being, they were all destroyed by KAL.72.

Bachitra natak,Dasam granth
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
Bhai sahib

It is not history of guru ji's period.This is not relevant to the subject at hand.So it is better not to bring in this discussion

.BHai Sahib
This example was given to you because you, in a rage, accused me of spreading rumours about Satguru. I gave you a source( Read that book, your eyes will open, I am hundred percent sure about it if you revere Guru Sahiban in high esteem.) Now it is irrelavent.
A good way to avoid admitting mistake


Bhai sahib

I gave you the examples in general to say that taking literal meaning is wrong.It is not metaphor but a myth.Myth is not reality.That is why we should not take literal meaning of that verse.

Read the first line of that verse which you are writing about creation of universeਚੌਪਈ ॥
चौपई ॥
CHAUPAI

ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਕਾਲ ਜਬ ਕਰਾ ਪਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਤੇ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਉਪਾਰਾ ॥
प्रिथम काल जब करा पसारा ॥ ओअंकार ते स्रिसटि उपारा ॥
In the beginning, when KAL created the world, it was brought into being by Aumkara (the One Lord).

Bachitra natak,dasam granth


Bhai Sahib ji
Now you admit it is not metaphar but a myth. No body is taking literal meaning. For your kind information, Bachitar Natak is written in a historical form in poetry. Even if myth is quoted, it needs clarification. The writer of this composition keeps writing whatever he can think about old times as some time fantacy writers do. The quote you have just given is irrelavent to a statement made in Bachittar Natik about existence of earth..To make look like as if written by Satguru, a few lines matching Satguru's views are added in it, that is obvious.


Bhai sahib

I have written that there is hazuri bir called anadpuri bir available here in USA
and India.It is written in 1697.there is date of compilation in that bir.What else we want.

Bhai Sahib ji
What does that prove if there is bir written during that period. Just to tell you that how Sikh literature is made messy, I give you another example. Bhai banu wali bir. The guy added unapproved writings attributed to Satguru Nanak right at the time of Fifth Nank. Another example, as it is assumed that"Sikha dee Bhagat mala"is Mani Singh ji's composition but Bhai Sahib Veer Singh ji were forced to doubt it as some stuff in it was against Gurmat One more example in this context, dont say it is irrelavent because it is relavent when we see things of past are based on guesses, we need to have instances of that kind handy to varify in detail. Gyani Gyan Singh ji in his" Panth Parkash" clearly says people asked Satguru ji to prepare a Granth like Guru Granth(named earlier as Aad Granth), but Satguru advised them never to think that way, means never to have competition with Fifth Granth. Also Gyani ji further says that charhat Singh s/o Sukha Singh( who beheaded Massa Ranger)wrote like Satguru ji and added a few pages and made money out of it In 1942 Shamsher Singh Ashok logically proved in an essay, published in pUNJABI dUNYA, that some of Dasam Granth writings are promoting obscenity, drug, worship of Arms, bhagvati pooja( dont start interpretting bhagati stands for Waheguru, because it doesnt). This is highly appreciated by Sikh Missionary College in " Dasam Granth bare sankhep Jankari" . Another example of Dr. Jaggi( who under pressure took U turn Pity on him), in his doctorate thesis and a book named Dasam Granth Da Kirtitive, systematically proved that people who are attributing the entire Dasam Granth to Satguru ji have not come up with any unquestionable historical or scientific proof. He aligns with Shamsher Singh Ashok by saying only Jap, Akaal Ustat( save for swaye # 201-230), Sawaye 33 and Jafarnama are authored by Satguru ji. As Mr. Ashok pointed out, those obscene writings are written by persons like Ram and Sham. Supporters of Dasam Granth say that Ram and Sham are the pen names of Satguru. Wao! What a deep fantacy it is. ! Because there is no historical fact available that can prove that Satgur had those names. Common sense, Why he would do that any way. There are many people( smile you are not alone) still keep saying imaginative things regarding names Ram and Shyam etc

Regarding fake letter attributed to Mani Singh. First two points that help differentiating old from new, are just not acceptable to you. Well in the same letter there are 303"chrittar upkhyan" in reality there are 404 chrittar upkhyan available, including in the bir you are quoting repeatedly on this thread.


Bhai sahib

You might have read my response to giani ji.The lines he is mentioning is in question answer form between husband and his wicked wife.It does not promote intoxicants .

Bhai Sahib, Satgur felt that kind of urgency to exlain all that obscene material to make understand his followers because Gurbani was not enough to do so! Guess usually is taken by its own faults.

When you put scritpures at academic level you cannot say that one is exclusive.

Bhai Sahib ji
You are Gursikh( I believe ), Guru Granth Sahib is not merely a Scripture, it is Guru person for Sikhs.

Can you write here what is offensive?You mentioned Guru ji was durga bhagat.That was wrong and i quoted the relevant part to disprove that.Quote the verse and i will answer that.

Bhai Sahib ji
Be careful, I didnt mention that Guru ji was Durga bhagat. You claim to have read Dasam Granth but to continue your stand of pro Dasam Grant going on, you keep asking quotes when actually you know what I refer to.
Let me give you example though
" Pratham dhyaye bhagvati barno trya parsang
mo, ghat mai tum haiv nadi upho vak trang (Dasam Granth page 813)

( Note, bhagvati is not used here for Akaal Purakh)


There are other examples that should be unacceptable to you too, I hope!

Read on Page 1158, Chrit 244

kamatur hai ju trya purkh aavyee
ghor nark mehn prai, jo tehe n ravayee 20

on 1159 (244)
kamatr haiv jo tarn muhe bhaj kahai banaye
tahe bhajai jo nahe jan, nark parai pun jaye . 22

What education is this gentleman? Believe whatever you want, for God's sake do not attribute the whole Dasam Granth to Satguru and call it Gurbani. Its name was vidhya sagar in the beginning, then Dasam Granth, now some dare to call it 'Guru dasam Granth". What is going on. For Sikhs, there is only ONE Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji Period. Dasmesh ji certified it, mentality of mahant or brahmin wouldnt be able to change this fact ever. Nirankari, Radha swami and other Baba Sant, came and will go, forever will be Guru Granth Sahib ji !!
You never answered my question, a big one
WHY SATGURU GOBIND SINGH JI DID NOT ADD ANY COMPOSITION AUTHORED BY HIM INTO GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI ? Answer is obvious but I want to hear from you because you are a big supporter of "Dasam Granth in its totality as authored by Satguru and is Gurbani, So, must answer it.

Relavent answer will be appreciated
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
Bhai Sahib ji
Be careful, I didnt mention that Guru ji was Durga bhagat. You claim to have read Dasam Granth but to continue your stand of pro Dasam Grant going on, you keep asking quotes when actually you know what I refer to.
Let me give you example though
" Pratham dhyaye bhagvati barno trya parsang
mo, ghat mai tum haiv nadi upho vak trang (Dasam Granth page 813)

( Note, bhagvati is not used here for Akaal Purakh)


There are other examples that should be unacceptable to you too, I hope!

Read on Page 1158, Chrit 244

kamatur hai ju trya purkh aavyee
ghor nark mehn prai, jo tehe n ravayee 20

on 1159 (244)
kamatr haiv jo tarn muhe bhaj kahai banaye
tahe bhajai jo nahe jan, nark parai pun jaye . 22

What education is this gentleman? Believe whatever you want, for God's sake do not attribute the whole Dasam Granth to Satguru and call it Gurbani. Its name was vidhya sagar in the beginning, then Dasam Granth, now some dare to call it 'Guru dasam Granth". What is going on. For Sikhs, there is only ONE Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji Period. Dasmesh ji certified it, mentality of mahant or brahmin wouldnt be able to change this fact ever. Nirankari, Radha swami and other Baba Sant, came and will go, forever will be Guru Granth Sahib ji !!
You never answered my question, a big one
WHY SATGURU GOBIND SINGH JI DID NOT ADD ANY COMPOSITION AUTHORED BY HIM INTO GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI ? Answer is obvious but I want to hear from you because you are a big supporter of "Dasam Granth in its totality as authored by Satguru and is Gurbani, So, must answer it.
Relavent answer will be appreciated
Bhai sahib ji

In charitra you are quoting two lines and leaving the other two.This is called quoting out of context.That is what anti dasam granth people like missionaries do.

The full verse is

ਕਾਮਾਤੁਰ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਜੁ ਤ੍ਰਿਯ ਪੁਰਖ ਪ੍ਰਤਿ ਆਵਈ ॥
ਘੋਰ ਨਰਕ ਮਹਿ ਪਰੈ ਜੁ ਤਾਹਿ ਨ ਰਾਵਈ ॥
ਜੋ ਪਰ ਤ੍ਰਿਯ ਪਰ ਸੇਜ ਭਜਤ ਹੈ ਜਾਇ ਕਰਿ ॥
ਹੋ ਪਾਪ ਕੁੰਡ ਕੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਪਰਤ ਸੋ ਧਾਇ ਕਰਿ ॥੨੦॥

The alst two lines is a taeching that says

If a man goes to other woman's(not his wife) home and indulge in extra marital act he is bound to go to hell.

Yhis is the essence of the teaching that do not indulkge in extra marital sex that is bajar kurehit per khalsa principles.

Please quote the full verse with verse no and composition instead of just quoting one line of bhgawati.I will be thankful to you.

Nobody ever said that SGGS ji is not our guru.Why are you making it up on your own.At the same time Dasam Granth is our revered scriture.It is written by Guru Gobind singh ji.

Raed below how it condemns avtar vaad that is Hindu theory


Panthic Weekly: ਦਸਮ ਬਾਣੀ ਵਿਚ ਅਵਤਾਰਵਾਦ ਦਾ ਖੰਡਨ (Gurmukhi)

ਕਿਤੇ ਕਿਸਨ ਸੇ ਕੀਟ ਕੋਟੈ ਉਪਾਏ, ਉਸਾਰੇ ਗੜੇ ਫਿਰ ਮੇਟੇ ਬਨਾਏ॥
He hath Created millions of Krishnas like worms. He Created them, annihilated them, again destroyed them, still again Created them.
ਕਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਸੇ ਕੀਟ ਕੋਟੈ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਕਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਸੇ ਮੇਟਿ ਡਾਰੇ ਉਪਾਏ ॥
Somewhere He hath created millions of servants like Krishna. Somewhere He hath effaced and then created (many) like Rama. (pg.98)

ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਉਬਾਰ ਨ ਸਕਹੈ ਜਾਕਰ ਨਾਮ ਰਟੈ ਹੈ॥ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸ਼ਨ ਰੁਦ੍ਰ ਸੂਰਹ ਸਸਿ ਤੇ ਬਸਿ ਕਾਲ ਸਭੈ ਹੈ ॥੧ (ਸ. ਹਜਾਰੇ)
Ram and Rahim whose names you are uttering cant save you. Brahma, Vishnu Shiva, Sun and Moon, all are subject to the power of Death.1. .(pg.1349)

ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਅਨੇਕ ਕਹੈਂ ਮਤ ਏਕ ਨ ਮਾਨਯੋ॥ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬੇਦ ਸਭੈ ਬਹੁ ਭੇਦ ਕਹੈਂ ਹਮ ਏਕਨ ਜਾਨਯੋ॥ ਪਾਂਇ ਗਹੇ ਜਬ ਤੇ ਤੁਮਰੇ ਤਬ ਤੇ ਕੋਊ ਆਂਖ ਤਰੇ ਨਹੀ ਆਨਯੋ ॥ (ਰਾਮਾਵਤਾਰ)
O God ! the day when I caught hold of your feet, I do not bring anyone else under my sight; none other is liked by me now; the Puranas and the Quran try to know Thee by the names of Ram and Rahim and talk about you through several stories, but I do not accept these

ਜਾਕਰ ਰੂਪ ਰੰਗ ਨਹਿ ਜਨਿਯਤ ਸੋ ਕਿਮ ਸਯਾਮ ਕਹੈ ਹੈ॥ (ਸਬਦ ਹਜ਼ਾਰੇ ਪਾ.10)
He, whose form and colour are not, how can he be called Shyaam (black)? .(p1349)

ਕਾਹੂ ਕਹਯੋ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨਾਂ ਕਹੁ ਕਾਹੂ ਮਨੈ ਅਵਤਾਰਨ ਮਾਨਯੋ॥ ਫੋਕਟ ਧਰਮ ਬਿਸਾਰ ਸਭੈ ਕਰਤਾਰ ਹੀ ਕਉ ਕਰਤਾ ਜੀਅ ਜਾਨਯੋ॥...ਅੰਤ ਮਰੇ ਪਛੁਤਾਇ ਪ੍ਰਿਥੀ ਪਰ, ਜੇ ਜਗ ਮੈ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਕਹਾਏ॥(33 ਸਵੈਯੇ)
Someone calls Him Ram or Krishna and someone believes in His incarnations, but my mind has forsaken all useless actions and has accepted only One Creator.12. (p.1352)

ਕਾਲ ਹੀ ਪਾਇ ਭਇਓ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਗਹਿ ਦੰਡ ਕਮੰਡਲ ਭੂਮ ਭ੍ਰਮਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਕਾਲ ਹੀ ਪਾਇ ਸਦਾ ਸ਼ਿਵਜੂ ਸਭ ਦੇਸ ਬਿਦੇਸ ਭਇਆ ਹਮ ਜਾਨਯੋ
Brahma came into being under the control of time and taking his staff and pot his hand, he wandered on the earth; Shiva was also under the control of time and wandered in various countries far and near;

ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਔ ਬਿਸਨ ਜਪੇ ਤੁਹਿ ਕੋਟਿਕ ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਭਲੀ ਬਿਧਿ ਧਿਆਯੋ ॥ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਜਪਿਓ ਅਰੁ ਸੰਭੁ ਥਪਿਓ ਤਿਹ ਤੇ ਤੁਹਿ ਕੋ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਨ ਬਚਾਯੋ ॥……..ਤੋਹਿ ਬਚਾਇ ਸਕੈ ਕਹੁ ਕੈਸੇ ਕੈ ਆਪਨ ਘਾਵ ਬਚਾਇ ਨ ਐਹੈ ॥ਕੋਪ ਕਰਾਲ ਕੀ ਪਾਵਕ ਕੁੰਡ ਮੈ ਆਪ ਟੰਗਿਓ ਤਿਮ ਤੋਹਿ ਟੰਗੈਹੈ ॥
Thou hast meditated on millions of Krishnas, Vishnus, Ramas and Rahims. Thou hast recited the name of Brahma and established Shivalingam, even then none could save thee…….They cannot save themselves form the blow of death, how can they protect thee? They are all hanging in the blazing fire of anger, therefore they will cause thy hanging similarly. (pg111)

ਮੈ ਨ ਗਨੇਸ਼ਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਮਨਾਊਂ ॥ ਕਿਸ਼ਨ ਬਿਸ਼ਨ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨਹ ਧਿਆਊਂ ॥ਕਾਨ ਸੁਨੇ ਪਹਿਚਾਨ ਨ ਤਿਨ ਸੋਂ ॥ ਲਿਵ ਲਾਗੀ ਮੋਰੀ ਪਗ ਇਨ ਸੋਂ ॥੪੩੪॥ (ਕ੍ਰਿ.ਵਤਾਰ)
I do not adore Ganesha in the beginning and also do not meditate on Krishna and Vishnu; I have only heard about them with my ears and I do not recognize them; my consciousness is absorbed at the feet of the Supreme Lord.434.
ਖੋਜ ਰਹੇ ਸ਼ਿਵ ਸੇ ਜਿਹ ਅੰਤ ਅਨੰਤ ਕਹਿਓ ਥਕ ਅੰਤ ਨ ਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੀ ਬਾਤ ਸੁਨੋ ਤੁਮਰੇ ਮੁਖ ਤੇ ਸੁਕਦੇਵ ਇਹੈ ਠਹਰਾਯੋ ॥੨੪੦੩॥
He, whom Shiva etc. had been searching, but could not know His Mystery; O Shukdev ! relate to me the story of that Lord.2403.

ਜੌ ਕਹੌ ਰਾਮ ਅਜੋਨਿ ਅਜੈ ਅਤਿ ਕਾਹੇ ਕੌ ਕੌਸ਼ਲ ਕੁੱਖ ਜਯੋ ਜੂ ॥ ਕਾਲ ਹੂੰ ਕਾਲ ਕਹੈ ਜਿਹਿ ਕੌ ਕਿਹਿ ਕਾਰਣ ਕਾਲ ਤੇ ਦੀਨ ਭਯੋ ਜੂ ॥
If you consider Ram, the Lord as Unborn, then how did he take birth from the womb of Kaushalya? He, who is said to be the destroyer of death, then why did he become subjugated himself before death?
ਸੱਤ ਸਰੂਪ ਬਿਬੈਰ ਕਹਾਇ ਸੁ ਕਯੋਂ ਪਥ ਕੌ ਰਥ ਹਾਂਕ ਧਯੋ ਜੂ ॥ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੋ ਮਾਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਕਰਿ ਕੈ ਜਿਹ ਕੋ ਕੋਊ ਭੇਦੁ ਨ ਲੇਨ ਲਯੋ ਜੂ ॥੧੩॥
If he (Krishna) is called the Truth-incarnate, beyond enmity and opposition, then why did he become the charioteer of Arjuna? O mind! you only consider him the Lord God, whose Mysetry could not be known to anyone.13.
ਕਯੋਂ ਕਹੁ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਨਿਧ ਹੈ ਕਿਹ ਕਾਜ ਤੇ ਬੱਧਕ ਬਾਣ ਲਗਾਯੋ ॥ ਅਉਰ ਕੁਲੀਨ ਉਧਾਰਤ ਜੋ ਕਿਹ ਤੇ ਅਪਨੋ ਕੁਲ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਾਯੋ ॥
Krishna himself is considered the treasure of Grace, then why did the hunter shot his arrow at him? He has been described as redeeming the clans of others then he caused the destruction of his own clan;
ਆਦਿ ਅਜੋਨਿ ਕਹਾਇ ਕਹੋ ਕਿਮ ਦੇਵਕਿ ਕੇ ਜਠਰੰਤਰ ਆਯੋ ॥ ਤਾਤ ਨ ਮਾਤ ਕਹੈ ਜਿਹ ਕੋ ਤਿਹ ਕਯੋਂ ਬਸੁਦੇਵਹਿ ਬਾਪੁ ਕਹਾਯੋ ॥੧੪॥
If he (Krishna) is said to be unborn and without a beginning, then how did he come into the womb of Devaki? He, who is considered without any father or mother, then why did he cause Vasudev to be called his father? 14.
ਕਾਹੇ ਕੋ ਏਸ਼ ਮਹੇਸ਼ਹਿ ਭਾਖਤ ਕਾਹਿ ਦਿਜੇਸ਼ ਕੋ ਏਸ ਬਖਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਹੈ ਨ ਰਘ੍ਵੇਸ਼ ਜਦ੍ਵੇਸ਼ ਰਮਾਪਤਿ ਤੈ ਜਿਨ ਕੌ ਬਿਸ੍ਵਨਾਥ ਪਛਾਨਯੋ ॥
Why do you consider Shiva or Brahma as the Lord? There is none amongst Ram, Krishna and Vishnu, who may be considered as the Lord of the Universe by you;
ਏਕ ਕੋ ਛਾਡਿ ਅਨੇਕ ਭਜੈ ਸੁਕਦੇਵ ਪਰਾਸਰ ਬਯਾਸ ਝੁਠਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਫੋਕਟ ਧਰਮ ਸਜੇ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਹਮ ਏਕ ਹੀ ਕੌ ਬਿਧ ਨੈਕ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਨਯੋ ॥੧੫॥
Relinquishing the One Lord, you remember many gods and goddesses; in this way
ਕੋਊ ਦਿਜੇਸ਼ ਕੋ ਮਾਨਤ ਹੈ ਅਰੁ ਕੋਊ ਮਹੇਸ਼ ਕੋ ਏਸ਼ ਬਤੈ ਹੈ ॥ ਕੋਊ ਕਹੈ ਬਿਸ਼ਨੋ ਬਿਸ਼ਨਾਇਕ ਜਾਹਿ ਭਜੇ ਅਘ ਓਘ ਕਟੈ ਹੈ ॥
Someone calls Brahma as the Lord-God and someone tells the same thing about Shiva; someone considers Vishnu as the hero of the universe and says that only by remembering him, all the sins will be destroyed;
ਬਾਰ ਹਜ਼ਾਰ ਬਿਚਾਰ ਅਰੇ ਜੜ ਅੰਤ ਸਮੈ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਤਜਿ ਜੈ ਹੈ ॥ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੋ ਧਯਾਨ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਨਿ ਹੀਏ ਜੋਊ ਥੇ ਅਬ ਹੈ ਅਰੁ ਆਗੈ ਊ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਹੈ ॥੧੬॥
O fool ! think about it a thousand times, all of them will leave you at the time of death. Therefore, you should only meditate on Him, who was in the past, is there in the present and will also be there in the future.16.
ਕੋਟਕ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਕਰੇ ਜਿਹ ਕੋ ਕਈ ਕੋਟਿ ਉਪਿੰਦ੍ਰ ਬਾਨਇ ਖਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਦਾਨਵ ਦੇਵ ਫਨਿੰਦ੍ਰ ਧਰਾਧਰ ਪੱਛ ਪਸੂ ਨਹਿ ਜਾਤਿ ਗਨਾਯੋ ॥
He, who created millions of Indras and Upendras and then destroyed them; He, who created innumerable gods, demons, Sheshnaga, tortoises, birds, animals etc.,
ਆਜ ਲਗੇ ਤਪੁ ਸਾਧਤ ਹੈ ਸ਼ਿਵ ਊ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਕਛੁ ਪਾਰ ਨ ਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਨ ਭੇਦ ਲਖਯੋ ਜਿਹ ਸੋਊ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰ ਮੋਹਿ ਬਤਾਯੋ ॥੧੭॥
And for knowing whose Mystery, Shiva and Brahma are performing austerities even till today, but could not know His end; He is such a Guru, whose Mystery could not be comprehended also by Vedas and Katebs and my Guru has told me the same thing.17.

ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਨ ਭੇਦ ਲਹਯੋ ਤਿਹਿ ਸਿੱਧ ਸਮਾਧਿ ਸਭੈ ਕਰਿ ਹਾਰੇ ॥ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬੇਦ ਸਭੈ ਬਹੁ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਬਿਚਾਰ ਬੀਚਾਰੇ ॥
The Vedas and Ketebs could not comprehend His Mystery and the adepts have been defeated in practicing contemplation; Different kinds of thoughts have been mentioned about God in Vedas, Shastras, Puranas and smrities; (p1351)

ਸੋ ਕਿਮ ਮਾਨਸ ਰੂਪ ਕਹਾਏ॥ ਸਿਧ ਸਮਾਧਿ ਸਾਧ ਕਰ ਹਾਰੇ ਕਯੋ੍* ਨ ਦੇਖਨ ਪਾਏ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ (ਸ. ਹਜ਼ਾਰੇ)
How can He be said to come in human form? The Siddha (adept) in deep meditation became tired of the discipline on not seeing Him in any way…..Pause. (p.1348)

ਸ਼ੇਸ਼ ਸੁਰੇਸ਼ ਗਣੇਸ਼ ਮਹੇਸੁਰ ਗਾਹਿ ਫਿਰੈ ਸ੍ਰੁਤਿ ਥਾਹ ਨ ਆਯੋ ॥
ਰੇ ਮਨ ਮੂੜ ਅਗੂੜ ਇਸੋ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤੈ ਕਿਹ ਕਾਜਿ ਕਹੋ ਬਿਸਰਾਯੋ ॥ 4॥ 1350 33 ਸਵੈਯੇ
Sheshnaga, Indra, Gandesha, Shiva and also the Shrutis (Vedas) could not know Thy Mystery; O my foolish mind! why have you forgotten such a Lord. 4.
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
Bhai sahib ji

In charitra you are quoting two lines and leaving the other two.This is called quoting out of context.That is what anti dasam granth people like missionaries do.

The full verse is

ਕਾਮਾਤੁਰ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਜੁ ਤ੍ਰਿਯ ਪੁਰਖ ਪ੍ਰਤਿ ਆਵਈ ॥
ਘੋਰ ਨਰਕ ਮਹਿ ਪਰੈ ਜੁ ਤਾਹਿ ਨ ਰਾਵਈ ॥
ਜੋ ਪਰ ਤ੍ਰਿਯ ਪਰ ਸੇਜ ਭਜਤ ਹੈ ਜਾਇ ਕਰਿ ॥
ਹੋ ਪਾਪ ਕੁੰਡ ਕੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਪਰਤ ਸੋ ਧਾਇ ਕਰਿ ॥੨੦॥

Inder Singh ji

Why have you picked up this quote only, what about my question I have been asking you since we started this discussion on this thread. Why?
I tried to highlight that too.

Out of context you are telling me things all the time. Some time metaphor turns into myth as per your views. Some time obscenity( of Dasam Granth) is compared by you to a few words related with sexuality( In GGS Ji). Then instead of giving any logic you just throw the ball to my court with a peculiar accusation.
You never bother with the major question. Why? I do not call it discussion because people do not accuse others in discussion and they do not dodge any question either. I think it is a debate limited to beating around the bush. If not, please tell me why dont you answer my simple question.
Why did Satguru ji not add Jaap Ji in Guru Granth Sahib ji when it is aligned with Gurbani completely



Qt

Nobody ever said that SGGS ji is not our guru.Why are you making it up on your own.At the same time Dasam Granth is our revered scriture.It is written by Guru Gobind singh ji.

Inder Singh jio

What I am making up ?

You are promoting and advocating Dasam Granth as Gurbani, people started to publish it as " Guru Dasam Granth". Already it is installed in Gurudawara Sahiban. Dont you see that this will mislead the Sikhs to have two Gurus, totally against the wish of Guru Gobind Singh ji. When people buy it under the name of" Guru Dasam Granth" what they will think?
When Satguru himself didnt give importance to it why this advocasy against his will any way?
When you can give no logic in support of your views, you start accusing others right away.. It also shows that after writing you many times in this regard, your habit of accusing others stays in high spirit. I am not making up any thing. I studied a lot of literature in favour and against Dasam Granth. My stand was not against it but while studying( some portion of it bothered me), I started wondering if Satguru could write it all. There are others who close their eyes to reason and logic and follow the crowd. I am not one of them. Logic and resoning go against Mahant mentality which has been trying over centuries to keep interfering with the most pure religion of Satguru Nanak since it is based on logic and reasoning. How? These are the following points they give and none of them bear grounding
1. Ram and Sham are other pen names of Satguru Ji ( because only Satguru was habitual of changing pen nameswhile writing different compositions !!!)
2 There is a letter written by Bhai Mani Singh ji ( On scientific reasons, it is proved false due to its style, the way it is written, separate words instead of togather words, use of bindi, the language, then in the letter there is mention of 303 chrit but in reality there are 404, it contradicts itself..)
3. People have been believing it that it is by Satguru ( Since fine minds started analyzing its contents and style and low class description, they stated questioning it. The controversy about it, itself a proof of the weight of doubt that it carries .
4 There is a Bir available of it and it was written during that time. There are some leaves written by Satguru. ( what does it prove? Just after Satguru heavenly abroad, people started coping his signatures, his writing style as well)
5 The video you have put there, just shows how some supporters like you taught the Sangat that" Yes it is written by Satguru")
Where is the proof? None. Why these people dont explain the sangat that Satguru did not give any importance to it. It was compiled after Guru, was renamed many times, Sadh Sangat jio!!!.
Again my question
Why did Satguru not add his composition like Jaap Sahib in Guru Granth Sahib JI? If you do not have answer, I shall like to close this discussion because I do not believe in hearsay..

NO ACCUSATION PLEASE

 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
Let me give you example though
" Pratham dhyaye bhagvati barno trya parsang
mo, ghat mai tum haiv nadi upho vak trang (Dasam Granth page 813)

( Note, bhagvati is not used here for Akaal Purakh)

It is wrong to go for literal meaning.Here bhagwati means akal purkah in the same way as in beginning of ardas.Guru is addressing akal purakh here and asking blessing for writing charitro pakhayan.The last line says "Oh riverlike primal being,please be prakash in my heart in the form of waves of bani"

So my dear friend where is the ghost of Devi here.In teh same way you will misinterpret the following SGGS ji also

Gurmukh sangi Krishan Murarai” –

Majh M.5, p.98 SGGS ji

Let us try to learn instead of carrying out false propaganda against Dasam bani.
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
<<<<Why did Satguru not add his composition like Jaap Sahib in Guru Granth Sahib JI? If you do not have answer, I shall like to close this discussion because I do not believe in hearsay..>>>

Response

This is known to guru sahib only why he did not enter his bani in SGGS ji.But this does not make his bani next to nothing.Sikh rehat maryada says that a sikh is to believe in taechings and utterances of ten Gurus,

Are you an amritdhari singh?Had you been one you would have known the importance of this bani.
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
INDER SINGH AMRITDHARI JIO

You just cannot stop judging people. I believe after having amrit people dont do that, if they do, they just disobey Gurbani.
By the way, I am also amritdhari that hasnt stopped me to protect Satguru.s own wish! Believe in Guru Granth Sahib only.Guru Granth Sahib is enough to lead us. Any thing in question, should not be considered Gurbani; because we have Gurbani.
Why Satguru didnt add any of his composition? Answer lies right there in the question.
Since there is no discussion substance, I am closing it.
Thanks for sharing what you have in this regard.
WAHEGURU JI KA Khalsa
WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH
Peace
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
I
NDER SINGH AMRITDHARI JIO

You just cannot stop judging people. I believe after having amrit people dont do that, if they do, they just disobey Gurbani.
By the way, I am also amritdhari that hasnt stopped me to protect Satguru.s own wish! Believe in Guru Granth Sahib only.Guru Granth Sahib is enough to lead us. Any thing in question, should not be considered Gurbani; because we have Gurbani.
Why Satguru didnt add any of his composition? Answer lies right there in the question.
Since there is no discussion substance, I am closing it.
Thanks for sharing what you have in this regard.
WAHEGURU JI KA Khalsa
WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH
Peace

Response

First of all nobody disputes Guruship of SGGS.A mischief oriented mind will repaeat the same to digress from the main subject.Not only you we are all believers in SGGS ji's Guruship.

It is good to know that you are amritdhari.When we take amrit , panj piaras direct us what banis to read.Three banis are from Dasam Granth.Do not you read those?

We have been listening to barage of propaganda for the last 10 years against Dasam granth.Some policeman who cann't write punjabi properly wrote ten books.

Now is the time to get responses from sikhi point of view.Do not run away .Please be here to answer my points.

Inder singh
 

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)
Writer
SPNer
Jul 14, 2007
4,576
1,609
Cool it guys. The info flow is good. We all learn from each other. Yes you can speak your thoughts out, it's ok. But keep the debate healthy.

Thanks.
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
Naamjap

You might have noticed how these people cheat the reader.They write two lines and do not write the next lines as they give the essence.That is academic dishonesty and amounts to propaganda.The reader is taken in by this if he has not read the scripture.Dasam granth has been embedded in sikh psyche for 300 years.Some people have agenda to malign it.I have answered all questions of the gentleman.But once questions are answered there is no mention of these.

If A sikh and especially a khalsa writes suspecting Dasam granth there is something wrong.Eeither he has not read it or he is spreading mischief as edict of akal takhat says.
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
Inder Singh ji

Actually you are doing exactly what you are accusing others, not answering but keep beating around the bush by coming up with more verses fits in Sikhism. Calling historical description, a metaphor and then taking u turn by calling it a myth.
Secondly, at amrit ceremoney a sikh is not asked to recite those obscene verses as you just said. Why even have you mentioned it. Discussion needs a reasonable mind not a judgemental mind. I am not running, I have seen, whenever you have no supporting point, you draw your amritdhari sword and start giving references to people about whom I do not give a damn.Thirdly it was you who misunderstood the application of metaphor, now you are coming up with a Guru waak using krishna word and dreaming I would take its meaning different way.
Fourthly, you write to namjap that you answered the questions and there is no mention of it by the gentleman( Thanks). Well, read your posts and mine and judge yourself( if you are blessed with reason and logic), you will see how much you just ignore. Look in the last post I put before my decision to close it. I gave a list of points that doubts some of compositions were written by Satguru. Your reaction, a complete silence on that; however, your habit of accusing others never decreases in any context whether it is about a question about Dasam Granth or about your accusation.
So why to waste a time with an amritdhari having no patience and is grossly involved in accusations.
So its not running away, it is like leaving a shop where there is no substance one is looking for.
Last, I explained why I cannot agree with your views and call the whole dasam granth authored by Dasam Patshah with a hint that this can lead people to give equal status of Guru to Dasam Granth too. Your answer, accusation: hidden agenda!
No offence, you just cannot keep the discussion healthy with a substance.
I am out of it.
WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH
 

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)
Writer
SPNer
Jul 14, 2007
4,576
1,609
Dear Inder Ji and Pk70 Ji,

If you could provide me in a point-form manner on reasons why you are defending your stand on the issues involved, it would take away the unnecessary deviations from the subject at hand. Kindly do so, so that others and me can also begin to pour out their respective views.
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
Actually you are doing exactly what you are accusing others, not answering but keep beating around the bush by coming up with more verses fits in Sikhism. Calling historical description, a metaphor and then taking u turn by calling it a myth.

Bhai sahib

You are not speaking truth above.rather you are lying repeatedly.Below is my first reply to you.Please read and know i wrote it as Myth.

Question by pk70

You claim to read Dasam Granth throughly, explain me the way this earth came into existence as per Dasam Granth and as per Satguru Nanak ji. Why Satguru would give a ridiculous story about the earth when Satguru shatters doubts about it in Jap Ji you guys have no solid proof. What is hapening here is supporting pur blind faith even though even though about whom this advocay is in progress, stood against these things and protected Satgur Nanak panth. Because of this kind of support for Dasam Granth( writings Satguru never wrote), RSS and other agencies are proving Satguru to be worshipper of Durga etc which was denied Satguru himself while he wrote letter of victory. Come on, give me any scientific or historical proof? Just bashing the question can take us no where.

Answer by Inder singh

Earth in both Granths came into existence in a similar way.Give me the quotes you are referring to.Don't blame lack of your understanding of myths on dasam Granth.

The people who oppose Dasam granth are playing into hands of RSS.RSS will never support Granth that brings their Gods and Goddesses to human level and put them under command of Akal purakh.Read below beginning of Chandi Charitra.What other proof you want when everything is written in the composition itself.
Unquote

Can you see this and stop the distortion.Later i wrote in general that to understand Dasam Granth one should be able to understand myths,metaphors,similes and Symbolism.


Secondly, at amrit ceremoney a sikh is not asked to recite those obscene verses as you just said. Why even have you mentioned it. Discussion needs a reasonable mind not a judgemental mind. I am not running, I have seen, whenever you have no supporting point, you draw your amritdhari sword and start giving references to people about whom I do not give a damn.Thirdly it was you who misunderstood the application of metaphor, now you are coming up with a Guru waak using krishna word and dreaming I would take its meaning different wa

Response

I never said that one recites verses from Chariropakhayan in amrit ceremoney.These are stories that were retold by guru ji to impart a moral lesson.But a person like you is writing two lines and leaving the next two lines.It amounts to lying and propaganda.

Example of that verse is necessary from SGGS ji to tell ignorant persons that literal meaning should not be taken.

Fourthly, you write to namjap that you answered the questions and there is no mention of it by the gentleman( Thanks). Well, read your posts and mine and judge yourself( if you are blessed with reason and logic), you will see how much you just ignore. Look in the last post I put before my decision to close it. I gave a list of points that doubts some of compositions were written by Satguru. Your reaction, a complete silence on that; however, your habit of accusing others never decreases in any context whether it is about a question about Dasam Granth or about your accusation.
So why to waste a time with an amritdhari having no patience and is grossly involved in accusations.
So its not running away, it is like leaving a shop where there is no substance one is looking for.
Last, I explained why I cannot agree with your views and call the whole dasam granth authored by Dasam Patshah with a hint that this can lead people to give equal status of Guru to Dasam Granth too. Your answer, accusation: hidden agenda!
No offence, you just cannot keep the discussion healthy with a substance.
I am out of it.
WAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA WAHEGURU JI KI FATEH[/quote]

You had following queries

1 Creation of world is not correct in dasam granth

2 Mention of name of bhagwati being Devi is given

3 Selective quote out of context from Charitropakhayan

4 Durga being worshipped by guru ji

Have not all the above questions been answered with quotes from dasam granth itself.Certainly these have been.I did not state anything wrong.But you never acknowledged the answers and kept quiet.

you and me do not decide the status of Dasam granth.We have akal takhat who decides such issues.They have already decided its status and that is why Hukamnama is there to call its opponents as mischief mongers.

To clarify more on Durga,i give below

ਪਉੜੀ ॥
पउड़ी ॥
PAURI

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
खंडा प्रिथमै साज कै जिन सभ सैसारु उपाइआ ॥
At first the Lord created the double-edged sword and then He created the whole world.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥
ब्रहमा बिसनु महेस साजि कुदरति दा खेलु रचाइ बणाइआ ॥
He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and then created the play of Nature.

ਸਿੰਧੁ ਪਰਬਤ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਬਿਨੁ ਥੰਮ੍ਹਾ ਗਗਨਿ ਰਹਾਇਆ ॥
सिंधु परबत मेदनी बिनु थम्हा गगनि रहाइआ ॥
He created the oceans, mountains and the earth made the sky stable without columns.

ਸਿਰਜੇ ਦਾਨੋ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਤਿਨ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬਾਦੁ ਰਚਾਇਆ ॥
सिरजे दानो देवते तिन अंदरि बादु रचाइआ ॥
He created the demons and gods and caused strife between them.
ਤੈ ਹੀ ਦੁਰਗਾ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੈ ਦੈਤਾ ਦਾ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਾਇਆ ॥
तै ही दुरगा साजि कै दैता दा नासु कराइआ ॥
O Lord! By creating Durga, Thou hast caused the destruction of demons.

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਰਾਮ ਲੈ ਨਾਲ ਬਾਣਾ ਦਹਸਿਰੁ ਘਾਇਆ ॥
तैथों ही बलु राम लै नाल बाणा दहसिरु घाइआ ॥
Rama received power from Thee and he killed Ravana with arrows.

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਲੈ ਕੰਸੁ ਕੇਸੀ ਪਕੜਿ ਗਿਰਾਇਆ ॥
तैथों ही बलु क्रिसन लै कंसु केसी पकड़ि गिराइआ ॥
Krishna received power from Thee and he threw down Kansa by catching his hair.

ਬਡੇ ਬਡੇ ਮੁਨਿ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਕਈ ਜੁਗ ਤਿਨੀ ਤਨੁ ਤਾਇਆ ॥
बडे बडे मुनि देवते कई जुग तिनी तनु ताइआ ॥
The great sages and gods, even practising great austerities for several ages;

ਕਿਨੀ ਤੇਰਾ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ ॥੨॥
किनी तेरा अंतु न पाइआ ॥२॥
None could know Thy end.2.

Chandi di vaar,Dasam granth
 
Feb 7, 2008
529
83
Dear Inder Ji and Pk70 Ji,

If you could provide me in a point-form manner on reasons why you are defending your stand on the issues involved, it would take away the unnecessary deviations from the subject at hand. Kindly do so, so that others and me can also begin to pour out their respective views.

Naamjap ji

If you see my posts,the first post was in reply to Jarnail singh arshi who was stating here that SGGS only was Dasma patshah ka granth.I replied to him that he was wrong and i quoted from wriitngs of John Malcolm who was a Col and visited Punjab in 1805.He wrote a book sketch of sikhs.

KP 70 wrote back to me that Dasam Granth should not be attributed to Tenth master as RSS says that this promotes Durga puja by tenth master.The otehr was his objection to creation of earth mentioned in Dasam granth.

I replied alll his questions/My stand is on my study of Dasam granth scritpture that is being quoted by people wrongly as none of them have read these.Moreover i have cited the Hukamnama of akal takhat calling such people as mischievious elements.

Dasam Granth of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Akal Takhat Matta santsipahi.org
 

pk70

Writer
SPNer
Feb 25, 2008
1,582
627
USA
Inder Singh ji
Here you go again, read what you have just written
"as none of them have read these"
That is the base of your discussion.
Thanks Inder Singh ji.
I shall rather open up my notes and enjoy a shabad than wasting my time with you, no offense!
 
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:

Latest Activity

Top