Gurcharan Singh Jeonvala And Sukhbir Singh Discussion On Dasam Granth At Sur Sagar TV

[spnadmin]

So, if we call ourselves Sikhs then it is our duty to respect him and his decisions. Second guessing him nothing nut being insulting to him and one upmanship bred out of sheer ego and me-ism, which Sikhi is not about.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

Tejwant ji

Only good ideas in our remarks above. They are good because they do not stray from the fundamentals regarding Guru Gobind Singh ji. Some context.

An article among many articles has made its way forth from a kind of Dasam Granth think tank, patshai10.org. Much of the "second-guessing" comes from brief paragraphs in this article, paragraphs with headers intended to rebut the arguments of those who like you take our 10th Guru's decisions at face value. In the past month it appears that a cry has gone out from each and every house (web-site) of second-guessers to proselytize the various paragraphs from this article. Each week a different paragraph is the subject of incestuously inbred discussions, and then apostles manifest on other forums to spread the word. That is what is happening at SPN too.

This situation has to be watched very carefully because the tendency is to over-generalize from the poetry and thought of scholars like Gian Ditt Singh to resolve differences related to Dasam Granth. The only effective way to respond is the way you have done consistently.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Tejwant ji

Only good ideas in our remarks above. They are good because they do not stray from the fundamentals regarding Guru Gobind Singh ji. Some context.

An article among many articles has made its way forth from a kind of Dasam Granth think tank, patshai10.org. Much of the "second-guessing" comes from brief paragraphs in this article, paragraphs with headers intended to rebut the arguments of those who like you take our 10th Guru's decisions at face value. In the past month it appears that a cry has gone out from each and every house (web-site) of second-guessers to proselytize the various paragraphs from this article. Each week a different paragraph is the subject of incestuously inbred discussions, and then apostles manifest on other forums to spread the word. That is what is happening at SPN too.

This situation has to be watched very carefully because the tendency is to over-generalize from the poetry and thought of scholars like Gian Ditt Singh to resolve differences related to Dasam Granth. The only effective way to respond is the way you have done consistently.

Narayanjot ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for the encouraging words and also for sharing the happenings taking place back stage before the dress rehearsal.

SPN has the same concept of the four doors of Harmander Sahib. All are welcome here even with their own agendas and we, at SPN are aware of that and the best part of all this is that we are prepared with HIS grace to combat anything which is said against SGGS, our only Guru, thanks to the diligent, hardworking administrators and the leaders of this wonderful forum.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[explorer]

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh.

You are once again mixing apples and oranges, hence manufacturing circular arguments for the reasons only known to you. I have no idea if there is some hidden agenda behind it to discredit SGGS, our only Guru and embrace another book which no one knows who wrote it, ala neo- Ravidasis.

Allow me to talk about your whole post unlike you who take one sentence from mine and call it my first post.

{Originally Posted by explorer
This is your first post.
"All these pretenders are blowing their own whistles while riding on their own ego trains as they have deliberately missed the Gurmat train."}

Sikhi is a unique way of life unlike other religions. The fact of the matter is and I am sure you are aware of it that our Gurus only wrote Gurbani-the tool box for all of us to breed goodness within. They did not write any history, on purpose, because history is about the person and it can be distorted with time and by the literati and historians of the future. They could have also hired some great writers to write the events, but the fact is they did not choose to do that. They could have also hired great portrait artists who could portray them in beautiful paintings with the regalia,but the fact remains none of that happened and it is not accidental but a deliberate and a visionary move from our Gurus.

The reason being is that Sikhi is NOT about me-ism but about One-ism. Having done all the above would have emphasized the former, not the latter on which SGGS is based.

Case in point that Guru Nanak did not write in the SGGS his Udasis and we know through history that those took place. No mention of sacrifices of our 5th and 9th Gurus mentioned anywhere either.

So, if one goes with your logic above then these things were missing and what do you have to say about that?

Why no objection coming from you for these deliberate omissions?

SGGS is not a compilations of events in our Guru's lives but a blueprint for all humanity how to breed goodness within. That is the whole idea about the SGGS which has writings from all kinds of people from different faiths besides our 6 Gurus.

So, your question is irrelevant as far as SGGS is concerned.

Khandei di pahul was the icing put by Guru Gobind Singh on the cake of Khalsa Panth started by Guru Nanak.It was an event like many others- the sacrifices of the four Sahibzadas was one more among many and they are not mentioned in the SGGS either.

Once again, you are second guessing Guru Gobind Singh ji as you have done in your previous posts and put more credence to hearsays by the so called Sikh Scholars, which is sad The answer is only known to our Dasam Pita. He had the authourity,time and all other things needed to write that and many other things but chose not to. I have no idea why you have this disliking on the decisions that our Dasam pita took. Only you know the reasons.

So, if we call ourselves Sikhs then it is our duty to respect him and his decisions. Second guessing him is nothing but being insulting to him and one upmanship bred out of sheer ego and me-ism, which Sikhi is not about.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

Tejwant ji,

Let me make it clear, SGGS is the only guru of Sikhs, if there is an problem in the reflection of the same thought through any of my previous posts or if somebody feels that i think otherwise.

Secondly, I have nowhere mentioned that DG has to be embraced as Guru of Sikhs or Dasam Pita had give Guruship to Dasam Granth.

Its not that i am msissing something, its rather your point of view only.

SGGS is a universal scripture, it has to be read, comtemplated and meditated upon to achieve inner peace of mind.

The Bani inscribed by the Guru Sahib has a clear mandate of being "Dhur ki Baani aayi, tin sagli chint mitaayi"

Now the Baani, which has come from the divine communion of the Guru Sahib with Akal Purakh, has also references to Raam, Ravan, Sita, Lachman, Krishan, Jadavas and others like "Sulhi", Laalo(Babur Bani).

What is your view on the reference to Raam, Sita, Lachman, Baali , Ravan, Lanka mentioned in the Sabad
"Nanak Dukhiya Sab Samsaar"
Are these references mythological or historical?
And if they are mythological why they are required in the Gurbani tool-box?
And if they are history where would you go and corroborate evidence for the same elsewhere?

Secondly, Why did Guru Sahib give reference to Sulhi (in the Sabad, "Sulhi te Narayan Rakh" and Lalo if he was not to mention any historical contexts.

Now if you read through the Sabad of Guru Ramdas ji Maharaj about the Tapa who tried to heap insult on the Guru Amardas ji has no mention of name Khadoor, when this incident has taken place with Guru Amardas ji in Khadoor Sahib. If some detractors say that there is no mention of khadoor in this Sabad; it can not be attributed to Khadoor-tapai-wali-sakhi.

ਸਲੋਕ ਮਃ ੪ ॥
ਤਪਾ ਨ ਹੋਵੈ ਅੰਦ੍ਰਹੁ ਲੋਭੀ ਨਿਤ ਮਾਇਆ ਨੋ ਫਿਰੈ ਜਜਮਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਅਗੋ ਦੇ ਸਦਿਆ ਸਤੈ ਦੀ ਭਿਖਿਆ ਲਏ ਨਾਹੀ ਪਿਛੋ ਦੇ ਪਛੁਤਾਇ ਕੈ ਆਣਿ ਤਪੈ ਪੁਤੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਹਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਪੰਚ ਲੋਗ ਸਭਿ ਹਸਣ ਲਗੇ ਤਪਾ ਲੋਭਿ ਲਹਰਿ ਹੈ ਗਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਜਿਥੈ ਥੋੜਾ ਧਨੁ ਵੇਖੈ ਤਿਥੈ ਤਪਾ ਭਿਟੈ ਨਾਹੀ ਧਨਿ ਬਹੁਤੈ ਡਿਠੈ ਤਪੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਹਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਭਾਈ ਏਹੁ ਤਪਾ ਨ ਹੋਵੀ ਬਗੁਲਾ ਹੈ ਬਹਿ ਸਾਧ ਜਨਾ ਵੀਚਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਸਤ ਪੁਰਖ ਕੀ ਤਪਾ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਰੈ ਸੰਸਾਰੈ ਕੀ ਉਸਤਤੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਹੋਵੈ ਏਤੁ ਦੋਖੈ ਤਪਾ ਦਯਿ ਮਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਮਹਾ ਪੁਰਖਾਂ ਕੀ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਾ ਵੇਖੁ ਜਿ ਤਪੇ ਨੋ ਫਲੁ ਲਗਾ ਸਭੁ ਗਇਆ ਤਪੇ ਕਾ ਘਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਬਾਹਰਿ ਬਹੈ ਪੰਚਾ ਵਿਚਿ ਤਪਾ ਸਦਾਏ ॥ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬਹੈ ਤਪਾ ਪਾਪ ਕਮਾਏ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਅੰਦਰਲਾ ਪਾਪੁ ਪੰਚਾ ਨੋ ਉਘਾ ਕਰਿ ਵੇਖਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਧਰਮ ਰਾਇ ਜਮਕੰਕਰਾ ਨੋ ਆਖਿ ਛਡਿਆ ਏਸੁ ਤਪੇ ਨੋ ਤਿਥੈ ਖੜਿ ਪਾਇਹੁ ਜਿਥੈ ਮਹਾ ਮਹਾਂ ਹਤਿਆਰਿਆ ॥ ਫਿਰਿ ਏਸੁ ਤਪੇ ਦੈ ਮੁਹਿ ਕੋਈ ਲਗਹੁ ਨਾਹੀ ਏਹੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਹੈ ਫਿਟਕਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕੈ ਦਰਿ ਵਰਤਿਆ ਸੁ ਨਾਨਕਿ ਆਖਿ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ ॥ ਸੋ ਬੂਝੈ ਜੁ ਦਯਿ ਸਵਾਰਿਆ ॥੧॥
(SGGS : 315-316)

Can you just think when there are many references to the greedy Pandits, jogis etc what is need of writing this Sabad in SGGS, what additional message it conveys.

People who have ridiculed Bhai Randhir Singh and other gursikhs with regards to their reference of Jamdoots should go through any translations of the last two verses of this Sabad including the one by Prof. Sahib Singh ji.

-----------------------------

Further you have asked me about the case of omissions; let me put it straight.

I don't know why Guru Nanak Dev ji mentioned Bhai Lalo during Babur Baani only and did not mention the other event of the "Malak Bhago"

Guru knows about his deeds/thoughts/actions.

Now the case in the point about disrespect comes; tell me one thing?

All those people who say that there is no entity like Dharam Raj or Jamdoot, are they not insulting Guru Sahib when he has clearly mentioned in the above Sabad.

Third thing, the compilation of Dasam Granth was done by Bhai Mani Singh ji and this fact has not been challanged by the panth till we found our Galilieo in Dr R S Jaggi.

I would request you to mention one Gursikh widely accepted in the panth who proclaimed that Jaap Sahib and other bani recited during the Pahul were not penned by Gur Gobind Singh ji ( except the one post Dr. jaggi's research)


Thanks!!
Explorer

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Tejwant ji,

Let me make it clear, SGGS is the only guru of Sikhs, if there is an problem in the reflection of the same thought through any of my previous posts or if somebody feels that i think otherwise.

Secondly, I have nowhere mentioned that DG has to be embraced as Guru of Sikhs or Dasam Pita had give Guruship to Dasam Granth.

Its not that i am msissing something, its rather your point of view only.

SGGS is a universal scripture, it has to be read, comtemplated and meditated upon to achieve inner peace of mind.

The Bani inscribed by the Guru Sahib has a clear mandate of being "Dhur ki Baani aayi, tin sagli chint mitaayi"

Now the Baani, which has come from the divine communion of the Guru Sahib with Akal Purakh, has also references to Raam, Ravan, Sita, Lachman, Krishan, Jadavas and others like "Sulhi", Laalo(Babur Bani).

What is your view on the reference to Raam, Sita, Lachman, Baali , Ravan, Lanka mentioned in the Sabad
"Nanak Dukhiya Sab Samsaar"
Are these references mythological or historical?
And if they are mythological why they are required in the Gurbani tool-box?
And if they are history where would you go and corroborate evidence for the same elsewhere?

Secondly, Why did Guru Sahib give reference to Sulhi (in the Sabad, "Sulhi te Narayan Rakh" and Lalo if he was not to mention any historical contexts.

Now if you read through the Sabad of Guru Ramdas ji Maharaj about the Tapa who tried to heap insult on the Guru Amardas ji has no mention of name Khadoor, when this incident has taken place with Guru Amardas ji in Khadoor Sahib. If some detractors say that there is no mention of khadoor in this Sabad; it can not be attributed to Khadoor-tapai-wali-sakhi.

ਸਲੋਕ ਮਃ ੪ ॥
ਤਪਾ ਨ ਹੋਵੈ ਅੰਦ੍ਰਹੁ ਲੋਭੀ ਨਿਤ ਮਾਇਆ ਨੋ ਫਿਰੈ ਜਜਮਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਅਗੋ ਦੇ ਸਦਿਆ ਸਤੈ ਦੀ ਭਿਖਿਆ ਲਏ ਨਾਹੀ ਪਿਛੋ ਦੇ ਪਛੁਤਾਇ ਕੈ ਆਣਿ ਤਪੈ ਪੁਤੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਹਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਪੰਚ ਲੋਗ ਸਭਿ ਹਸਣ ਲਗੇ ਤਪਾ ਲੋਭਿ ਲਹਰਿ ਹੈ ਗਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਜਿਥੈ ਥੋੜਾ ਧਨੁ ਵੇਖੈ ਤਿਥੈ ਤਪਾ ਭਿਟੈ ਨਾਹੀ ਧਨਿ ਬਹੁਤੈ ਡਿਠੈ ਤਪੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਹਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਭਾਈ ਏਹੁ ਤਪਾ ਨ ਹੋਵੀ ਬਗੁਲਾ ਹੈ ਬਹਿ ਸਾਧ ਜਨਾ ਵੀਚਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਸਤ ਪੁਰਖ ਕੀ ਤਪਾ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਰੈ ਸੰਸਾਰੈ ਕੀ ਉਸਤਤੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਹੋਵੈ ਏਤੁ ਦੋਖੈ ਤਪਾ ਦਯਿ ਮਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਮਹਾ ਪੁਰਖਾਂ ਕੀ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਾ ਵੇਖੁ ਜਿ ਤਪੇ ਨੋ ਫਲੁ ਲਗਾ ਸਭੁ ਗਇਆ ਤਪੇ ਕਾ ਘਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਬਾਹਰਿ ਬਹੈ ਪੰਚਾ ਵਿਚਿ ਤਪਾ ਸਦਾਏ ॥ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬਹੈ ਤਪਾ ਪਾਪ ਕਮਾਏ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਅੰਦਰਲਾ ਪਾਪੁ ਪੰਚਾ ਨੋ ਉਘਾ ਕਰਿ ਵੇਖਾਲਿਆ ॥
ਧਰਮ ਰਾਇ ਜਮਕੰਕਰਾ ਨੋ ਆਖਿ ਛਡਿਆ ਏਸੁ ਤਪੇ ਨੋ ਤਿਥੈ ਖੜਿ ਪਾਇਹੁ ਜਿਥੈ ਮਹਾ ਮਹਾਂ ਹਤਿਆਰਿਆ ॥ ਫਿਰਿ ਏਸੁ ਤਪੇ ਦੈ ਮੁਹਿ ਕੋਈ ਲਗਹੁ ਨਾਹੀ ਏਹੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਹੈ ਫਿਟਕਾਰਿਆ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕੈ ਦਰਿ ਵਰਤਿਆ ਸੁ ਨਾਨਕਿ ਆਖਿ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ ॥ ਸੋ ਬੂਝੈ ਜੁ ਦਯਿ ਸਵਾਰਿਆ ॥੧॥
(SGGS : 315-316)

Can you just think when there are many references to the greedy Pandits, jogis etc what is need of writing this Sabad in SGGS, what additional message it conveys.

People who have ridiculed Bhai Randhir Singh and other gursikhs with regards to their reference of Jamdoots should go through any translations of the last two verses of this Sabad including the one by Prof. Sahib Singh ji.

-----------------------------

Further you have asked me about the case of omissions; let me put it straight.

I don't know why Guru Nanak Dev ji mentioned Bhai Lalo during Babur Baani only and did not mention the other event of the "Malak Bhago"

Guru knows about his deeds/thoughts/actions.

Now the case in the point about disrespect comes; tell me one thing?

All those people who say that there is no entity like Dharam Raj or Jamdoot, are they not insulting Guru Sahib when he has clearly mentioned in the above Sabad.

Third thing, the compilation of Dasam Granth was done by Bhai Mani Singh ji and this fact has not been challanged by the panth till we found our Galilieo in Dr R S Jaggi.

I would request you to mention one Gursikh widely accepted in the panth who proclaimed that Jaap Sahib and other bani recited during the Pahul were not penned by Gur Gobind Singh ji ( except the one post Dr. jaggi's research)


Thanks!!
Explorer

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh.

It seems when one of your arguments is rebutted and then you seem to ignore that altogether and start a new one like a magician pulling out another rabbit from his hat.

Your above post has nothing to do with your contentions in the previous post which I responded to. Sadly to say that you have ignored them totally and gone back to your group/team who it seems is desperately seeking to embrace DG and discredit SGGS and bring out a new rabbit to show.

You keep on giving more credit to your Sikh Scholars than to our Dasam Pita. It gives me the impression that you are looking for some kind of deh Guru/s, in this case Sikh Scholars who can tell you what you already know in your mind. In other words you are looking for a confirmation agent who can stamp your thoughts as the right ones. And you are not alone in this. There are a whole lot of people who are on the same band wagon as you are.

If other Banis beside the three in the SGGS, our only Guru were recited during Khandei di Pahul, then common sense dictates that our visionary Dasam Pita who was a polyglot and a great poet would have added them in SGGS as he added Guru Teg Bahadar's Bani. The fact is that he did not. Hence, common sense shows us that nothing else was recited other than what is in the SGGS, no matter what your Sikh Scholars proclaim.

Let's finish discussing your contentions which I explained in the previous post and stick to that, then we will come to your second rabbit.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[explorer]

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh.

It seems when one of your arguments is rebutted and then you seem to ignore that altogether and start a new one like a magician pulling out another rabbit from his hat.

Your above post has nothing to do with your contentions in the previous post which I responded to. Sadly to say that you have ignored them totally and gone back to your group/team who it seems is desperately seeking to embrace DG and discredit SGGS and bring out a new rabbit to show.

You keep on giving more credit to your Sikh Scholars than to our Dasam Pita. It gives me the impression that you are looking for some kind of deh Guru/s, in this case Sikh Scholars who can tell you what you already know in your mind. In other words you are looking for a confirmation agent who can stamp your thoughts as the right ones. And you are not alone in this. There are a whole lot of people who are on the same band wagon as you are.

If other Banis beside the three in the SGGS, our only Guru were recited during Khandei di Pahul, then common sense dictates that our visionary Dasam Pita who was a polyglot and a great poet would have added them in SGGS as he added Guru Teg Bahadar's Bani. The fact is that he did not. Hence, common sense shows us that nothing else was recited other than what is in the SGGS, no matter what your Sikh Scholars proclaim.

Let's finish discussing your contentions which I explained in the previous post and stick to that, then we will come to your second rabbit.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh

Tejwant ji,

When people run out of the arguments, they keep repeating same thing again and again; half of your post goes on telling me that i am discrediting SGGS becuase i am saying that there is another granth based on writings from Dasam Pita which is known as Dasam Granth(compiled by Bhai Mani Singh)

At least in two posts i have clearly mentioned that SGGS is the only guru and DG is not the guru for sikhs. This statement is no rabbit.

People read other scholars simply becuase they have better understanding than the common masses; the very same reason people read professor Sahib singh's Darpan. Not because they look at Prof Sahib Singh as an agent who has stamped some truth.

And you have been saying that Guru Gobind Singh was a ploygot and a great poet who had along with him 52 poets in his court.

i would request you to throw some light about some of the greatest poems/composition which Guru Sahib wrote based on which we could establish that he was a polygot and a great lover of poetry.

And to answer your question; i donot belong to any group/jatha etc; however i great respect for gursikhs from all over the world( kindly don't repeat the rhetoric about the i am looking for deh-dhari agents).
I have specifically mentioned this because your natural bias would show up again.

Thanks!!
explorer

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Gurbani - :from the mukh of Guru...
Guru now biraajmaan on Gurgadee of Nanak-Gobind Singh - SGGS
Therefore there is NO "Gurbani" other than that inside SGGS.
Since we all accept that we have ONLY ONE GURU..one vichaar One Shabad....then the word "GURBANI" can only apply to SGGS and no other.

Outside compositions can be called Banis..nitnem banis etc but NOT GURBANI...simply because they are NOT from the Mukh of SGGS...our One and ONLY GURU.

THIS statement of BELIEF must be affirmed and accepted by ALL Sikhs/Singhs/Khalsa before any subsequent discussions can proceed. NOTHING CAN BE AT PAR WITH SGGS under any circumstances...has been decided by SRM and REAFFIRMED via Hukmanamh by Akal takhat in 2009. ( REJECTED OUTRIGHT BY Dhumma and Sant Samaaj via Press Confrence on June 19th 2009 - they still remain as Loyal sikhs of Akal Takhat !! inspite of such public REJECTION ..but "others" face the wrath of these same powers that be under unfounded allegations yet to be proven....but that is how it is...no use crying over spilt milk..):happysingh::8-:happysingh:

 

[explorer]

Giani ji,

Again only SGGS is the guru and no one else is the guru.

My disappointment is that we agree to quote prof. sahib singh ji who himself translated Jaap Sahib and other banis.

And then also people stand still on a blind folded argument, i feel there is no point in discussion.

This thread started from the discussions that people like Jeonwala donot accept even jaap sahib as baani.

Different people have / had doubts over Dasam Bani; they keep discussing the same also but even the most modern scholars including Dr Devinder Singh Chahal hasnot rejected Jaap Sahib.

LET US PRACTICE TRUE SIKHISM, UNDERSTANDING SIKHISM, The Research Journal (Devinder Singh Chahal, Ph.D.)

Even he mentions tat most scholars agree on following:
e. Most scholars agree that the following banis were written by Guru Gobind Singh: Jap Sahib, Akal Ustat (without chhand # 201 to 230), Tetis Swayae, Zafarnama. (Khalsa Mehma is recorded here but it belongs to category (d) as discussed in the booklet).

(Pls note this is not my observations; this is observation of scholar mentioned in the above link)

So when people started saying that Jaap Sahib is also not a rachna of Guru Sahib and is a copy from Markenday Puraan, its bound to hurt.

Thanks!!

Explorer

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Explorer Ji,
The HURT is on BOTH sides...I am hurt terribly when chariatrpakhoyan are described as GGS autobiographical happenings..this is vastly more damaging than someone claiming Jaap Sahib isnt written by GGS....becasue the latter can be corrected easily..the GGS character assasination is hard to reverse...
There seems to be hardening of positions..which is bad for the Panth's Unity ( our enemies desperately wnat disunity so easier to demolish us )..Good sense can only prevail when both sides wnat dialogue..:happysingh:

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Another way of putting it...why ONLY SGGS and NONE OTHERS...

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa; Waheguru ji ki Fateh.

While agreeing with points raised by S. Gurmit Singh and S. Balbinder Singh, I will like to add another point that S. Harnek Singh of NZ made during a private discussion.
1. When a woman is unmarried, she has every right to compare the qualities of her prospective suitors.
2. Families of prospective suitors too have every right to campaign on behalf of their candidate, as well as try to expose the shortcomings of the competitor.
3. Once the unmarried woman has made her choice and has become the bride of one, not only the need to expose the shortcomings of all other suitors in order to reject them, becomes redundant -- the very existence of suitors should raise suspicion in the mind of the bride.
4. The virtuous bride is one who does not even acknowledge the existence of any suitor, let alone find reasons to reject -- reasons which can only result from a comparison with her husband. Once marriage has taken place, rejection of all existing or future suitors requires no reason.

Based on the above analogy, it follows -- a Sikh is married to Guru Granth Sahib and needs no reason to reject any other suitor. Those who are trying to justify Sikhs' worship of "dasam granth" are either not married to Guru Granth Sahib or are guilty of forwarding arguments like "my husband does not have enough bir ras, hence I also share my bed with another who does".

Kind regards,
Verpal Singh

With Thanks and acknowledhement: ANZ-SIKHS @Yahoo.groups.com

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh. ( I am surprised that you have never responded to the Fateh, not disappointed though).

You write:

When people run out of the arguments, they keep repeating same thing again and again;

I am not surprised that you have run out of arguments because whenever I rebutted you, you have been quick to change the subject. The proof is there for all to see.

I thought I would get the answers for my rebuttal from you in your previous post before you started pulling out another rabbit and was asked to respond, which you have failed to do again.

half of your post goes on telling me that i am discrediting SGGS

Yes, you have been trying to discredit SGGS. My rebuttal was all about that which you refused to respond to and tried to pull out one more rabbit to discredit SGGS again. Your previous post shows that quite vividly.

becuase i am saying that there is another granth based on writings from Dasam Pita which is known as Dasam Granth(compiled by Bhai Mani Singh)

Just answer my this question in an honest manner. Our Dasam Pita, who sacrificed his dad, his children, put the icing on the beautiful Khalsa cake started by Guru Nanak, added his father's Gurbani which ends with Nanak as all banis written by other Gurus, never added his own bani in the SGGS.

Would he be arrogant enough to write a Granth ( according to you) under his own name where whatever has been written does not end with Nanak, the prerequisite as established by our Gurus?

It is a shame that you posts show so well how much you loathe our Dasam Pita and his decisions and question SGGS in one post and then have a double speak of claiming that SGGS is our only Guru. This is borderline hypocricy to put it mildly.

At least in two posts i have clearly mentioned that SGGS is the only guru and DG is not the guru for sikhs. This statement is no rabbit.

Your last rabbit that you pulled out is nothing but your attempt to discredit SGGS, our only Guru and we will talk about that post in detail, provided you respond to my rebuttals first, line by line.

People read other scholars simply becuase they have better understanding than the common masses; the very same reason people read professor Sahib singh's Darpan. Not because they look at Prof Sahib Singh as an agent who has stamped some truth.

I agree with that but that does not give people like you or anyone else the right to disrespect and second guess our Dasam Pita's decision as you have been consistently doing. You put more credence on common people who call themselves Sikh Scholars rather than on our Dasam Pita, which is a shame.

And you have been saying that Guru Gobind Singh was a ploygot and a great poet who had along with him 52 poets in his court.

Do you doubt that he was not a polyglot and a great poet? It seems that you do. What has created those doubts in you?

These doubts are nothing but a double speak. It is like throwing something at a wall and hope that it sticks. If you do not believe that Dasam Pita was a polyglot and a great poet then why would you bring Dasam Granth into the equation? LOL. You see your doublespeak again and again?

Have you visited Paonta Sahib? I had the honour to visit it several times. You should and you will learn a lot about him.

i would request you to throw some light about some of the greatest poems/composition which Guru Sahib wrote based on which we could establish that he was a polygot and a great lover of poetry.

LOL. Once again you are doing nothing but showing your arrogance and disrespecting by second guessing our Dasam Pita. If he wanted to share what he wrote, then he would not need Bhai Mani Singh or anyone else. He would have easily done that himself.

And to answer your question; i donot belong to any group/jatha etc; however i great respect for gursikhs from all over the world.

We all belong to some kind of groups. I belong to SPN and many other groups on the internet. So, your claim sounds more like a hogwash or a cop out.

( kindly don't repeat the rhetoric about the i am looking for deh-dhari agents).I have specifically mentioned this because your natural bias would show up again.

You are the master of distorting the facts of what was said. All who pull out rabbits are good with it.


Following is my original statement:

"You keep on giving more credit to your Sikh Scholars than to our Dasam Pita. It gives me the impression that you are looking for some kind of deh Guru/s, in this case Sikh Scholars who can tell you what you already know in your mind. In other words you are looking for a confirmation agent who can stamp your thoughts as the right ones. And you are not alone in this. There are a whole lot of people who are on the same band wagon as you are."

I do not doubt your English skills and would never question them, which proves that your distortion of facts is a deliberate move. No where above I said that what you claimed, "the i am looking for deh-dhari agents'.

I will wait for the response of my earlier post which was a rebuttal to yours and then we can talk about the verses and the names you have mentioned in SGGS.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[explorer]

Tejwant ji,

Guru Fateh!!

You have a one point agenda i.e any body who speaks of something beyond SGGS; paint him as a discreditor.

Looks like you have started loving rabbits; I have few more rabbits in your sewa.

I wonder what do think about Bhai Gurdas ji who composed Vaars and Kabit while our Guru Arjan Dev ji was busy compiling SGGS.

And what is opinion on compositions of Bhai Nand Lal ji Goya, who was a companion
of Guru Gobind Singh ji.
Was he aslo not satisfied with the SGGS that he started writing his own compositions.

Now that the rabbits are out; looks like they will be difficult for you to catch.

By calling Guru Gobind Singh a polygot; you show your respect to him.
And when I asked you to share some compositions of Guruji; you have no answers.

When you call somebody a polygot; you should mention atleast one composition from each langauage known by the polygot, which would demonstrate the great poetic dimensions of the polygot in reference.

Thanks!!

Explorer

 

[Admin]

By calling Guru Gobind Singh a polygot; you show your respect to him.

How does calling anyone polyglot amounts to disrespect?

By dictionary meaning Polyglot is: who can speak (not write) in many languages or atleast 4 languages.

Regards

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh & thanks for the fateh btw.

You have a one point agenda i.e any body who speaks of something beyond SGGS; paint him as a discreditor.

Thanks for proving my point. The fact is that there is NOTHING beyond SGGS. SGGS is our only Guru. You have discredited yourself again by your own merits. So, congratulations. You deserve them.

Looks like you have started loving rabbits; I have few more rabbits in your sewa.

Yes, as a matter of fact I have. Thanks to people like you who try to pull out rabbits everyday and then when confronted disappear in thin air. I hope you stay because SGGS has a lot to teach both of us.

I wonder what do think about Bhai Gurdas ji who composed Vaars and Kabit while our Guru Arjan Dev ji was busy compiling SGGS.

And what is opinion on compositions of Bhai Nand Lal ji Goya, who was a companionof Guru Gobind Singh ji.
Was he aslo not satisfied with the SGGS that he started writing his own compositions.

Pardon my ignorance. I do not understand what point you are trying to make. Please elaborate it.However, the fact of the matter is that, neither Bhai Gurdas ji's vaarans nor the compositions by Bhai Nand Lal ji were added to the SGGS, our only Guru. You are the expert in second guessing our Gurus.

How dare I second guess them?! I take my Gurus on their face values and the facts they presented to us through SGGS, ouronly Guru.

Now that the rabbits are out; looks like they will be difficult for you to catch.

You seem a bit edgy and upset at me. I do apologise if I made you feel like that. Having said that, I want to thank you for making me practice the tricks how to catch the rabbits shown by you. Do not worry, it is very easy now, but I do appreciate your concern.

By calling Guru Gobind Singh a polygot; you show your respect to him.
And when I asked you to share some compositions of Guruji; you have no answers.

When you call somebody a polygot; you should mention atleast one composition from each langauage known by the polygot, which would demonstrate the great poetic dimensions of the polygot in reference.

Aman ji has responded this query of yours. One wonders why you did not check the dictionary online yourself.

But it is hillarious to say the least that at the same time you are peddling DG as the Granth written by our Dasam Pita and then pretend you do not know the answer about our Dasam Pita being a polyglot and a great poet. Is this one more rabbit that escaped?

Honesty is a Sikhi trait. We should all practice that.

I am still waiting for the response of my earlier posts. One wonders why the first rabbit which was exposed not be answered for! It does not bother me how many rabbits you pull out but have some responsibility as a Sikh to respond. Only be responding you can help all of us who visit this forum in learning.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[explorer]

Tejwant ji,

Guru Fateh!!

You original post has no greatness; just portraying all the Gursikhs who says something beyond SGGS as mislead peole- who have missed the gurmat train.

SGGS is the one and only one living guru for sikhs; this fact is stands unchallanged.

However,we have Bhai Gurdas ji, who has been mentioned as the top-most scholar amongst the sikhs during the Guru-period is a known fact.

The issue has less to do with your ignorance rather it has more to do with your rigid stand that you even are not ready to accept the fact there could be other granths(obiviously they are not our Guru) which are respectable for the community.

This fact is established by the presence of Bhai Gurdas ji who was a scribe for the compilation of SGGS has also written two additional granths(books) from which we recite "Satgur Nanak Pargatya, Mitti Dhund jagg chaanaN ho-aa"

Tejwant ji,

Read through Prof. Sahib Singh book ( Compilation of SGGS) shared within this thread only; you would get to know the role of Bhai Gurdas in the compilation of SGGS.

Again Prof. Sahib Singh quotes from the "Var's of Bhai Gurdas" extensively within this book only.

Catching rabbits can be fun but is not going to add anything valueable to your life.

Thanks!!
Explorer

 

[explorer]

How does calling anyone polyglot amounts to disrespect?

By dictionary meaning Polyglot is: who can speak (not write) in many languages or atleast 4 languages.

Regards

Aman ji,

Guru Fateh,

Thanks for the help.

Calling polyglot does not amount to disrespect for sure.

However I was wondering how do we know that he was a polygot.
Do we have source/evidence on this?

Thanks!!

Explorer

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Explorer ji,

Guru Fateh,

You write:

You original post has no greatness; just portraying all the Gursikhs who says something beyond SGGS as mislead peole- who have missed the gurmat train.

I am not looking for any greatness in my post. I have no idea where you got that from. I asked you some questions that you failed to answer. That's all.

SGGS is the one and only one living guru for sikhs; this fact is stands unchallanged.

I agree but then why if's and but's about it in your posts where you challenge Gurbani in the SGGS and the names mentioned in it. It is called doublespeak.

However,we have Bhai Gurdas ji, who has been mentioned as the top-most scholar amongst the sikhs during the Guru-period is a known fact.

What's your point? Please be kind enough to elaborate it.

The issue has less to do with your ignorance rather it has more to do with your rigid stand that you even are not ready to accept the fact there could be other granths(obiviously they are not our Guru) which are respectable for the community.

Pardon my ignorance but I still do not understand the point you are trying to make. Can you elaborate it in layman's terms?

This fact is established by the presence of Bhai Gurdas ji who was a scribe for the compilation of SGGS has also written two additional granths(books) from which we recite "Satgur Nanak Pargatya, Mitti Dhund jagg chaanaN ho-aa"

Yes, we do but once again what is all this to do with SGGS, our only Guru in which Bhai Gurdas is not mentioned anywhere by our Gurus?

Tejwant ji,

Read through Prof. Sahib Singh book ( Compilation of SGGS) shared within this thread only; you would get to know the role of Bhai Gurdas in the compilation of SGGS.

Again Prof. Sahib Singh quotes from the "Var's of Bhai Gurdas" extensively within this book only.

It is hillarious to see that you claim to know more about me than about yourself. What proof do you have that I have not read the book? I love your imagination that makes you jump to conclusions without any evidence. That's the reason I ask questions. Giving the benefit of the doubt is a Sikhi trait just in case you did not know it.

Catching rabbits can be fun but is not going to add anything valueable to your life.

Once again, thanks for judging others. It is you who has been pulling the rabbits as mentioned in my posts and shown to you. Only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone each of us is at. Neither you, or me nor anyone else can find that out. So it is nothing but arrogance to play Ik Ong Kaar.

Lastly, the name Sikh means a learner, a student and anything can teach us. I have learnt a lot by seeing you pull out rabbits.

Thanks and regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

1.Bhai Gurdass Ji the SCRIBE of SGGS in the presence of Guru Arjun Ji sahib. Not a single line of his vaars/kabits were given a place in the SGGS. Bhai Gurdass Ji lived till the Gurgadee of Guru Hargobind Ji...None of his writings or of others were included in the Pothi Sahib Bir of SGGS.

2. Bhai Mani Singh was SCRIBE of the SGGS in Guru Gobind Singh Jis presence. He neither wrote any vaars or kabits etc and neither did he bring forward any other compositions before GGS for inclusion in Damdami Bir of SGGS. That time is towards the Later FEW YEARS of the Life of GGS....even then NO OTHER Granths/vaars/kabits/poems etc were brought forward.

3. NO other "granths" were before GGS when Guru Ji decided to Parkash SGGS and Bestow Gurgadee to this Granth Sahib ji in the Presence of the Guru Khalsa Panth.

4. LONG AFTER the departure of GGS Ji form this earth in 1708...the name of Bhai mani Singh is being "joined" to another Granth....which doesnt seem to ring true as a Khalsa of the Stature of Bhai mani Singh Ji would have KNOWN VERY WELL the views of GGS on this subject.:advocate:

 

[explorer]

1.Bhai Gurdass Ji the SCRIBE of SGGS in the presence of Guru Arjun Ji sahib. Not a single line of his vaars/kabits were given a place in the SGGS. Bhai Gurdass Ji lived till the Gurgadee of Guru Hargobind Ji...None of his writings or of others were included in the Pothi Sahib Bir of SGGS.

2. Bhai Mani Singh was SCRIBE of the SGGS in Guru Gobind Singh Jis presence. He neither wrote any vaars or kabits etc and neither did he bring forward any other compositions before GGS for inclusion in Damdami Bir of SGGS. That time is towards the Later FEW YEARS of the Life of GGS....even then NO OTHER Granths/vaars/kabits/poems etc were brought forward.

3. NO other "granths" were before GGS when Guru Ji decided to Parkash SGGS and Bestow Gurgadee to this Granth Sahib ji in the Presence of the Guru Khalsa Panth.

4. LONG AFTER the departure of GGS Ji form this earth in 1708...the name of Bhai mani Singh is being "joined" to another Granth....which doesnt seem to ring true as a Khalsa of the Stature of Bhai mani Singh Ji would have KNOWN VERY WELL the views of GGS on this subject.:advocate:

Gyani ji,

This is looking at glass half-empty approach.

You acknowledge that there are Vaars and Kabits composed by Bhai Gurdaas ji.

However you donot address the point, why did he compose them at all, when he knew that each of the Gurus upto Guru Arjan Dev ji have composed bani and made SGGS as one volume.

And the importance of this question lies in the fact that the vaars contains information about the Guru Hargobind Sahib ji also.

How do we establish that Guru Gobind singh was a polyglot is also being conviniently skipped?

Once we had SGGS in place alongwith the Bani of Guru Tegh Bahadar sahib; what was the point that Guru Gobind Singh kept a company of 52 poets, specifically when SGGS was composed to its completion.

the need to keep company with not less that 52 poets merit attention and also needs to be understood specifically when the threat from Mughals and Hinddu kings of the hills was always mounting!!


Thanks!!
Explorer

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Explorer Ji,
Imho Bhai Gurdass Ji composed becasue he felt the inclination to...he is a poet par excellence..BUT his compositions didnt make the "grade"....Baba Sunder Ji wasnt such a great poet..BUT his one composition..the SADD made the mark/grade !!Bhagats such as Ravidass Ji, Kabir Ji wrote a whole lot of bani which failed to make the grade as well.
The ULTIMATE DECISION to inlcude/exclude rests with GURU JI.

2. Guru Gobind Singh Ji is a SACHA PATSHAH....and His Darbar is equal to none !! That is why Kings presented Gifts like the Parsadee Elephant..Nagaras and weapons of top calibre..the very ebst of the Arabian Imported horses...Chandoa etc etc etc. This was the ways of KIngs and Emperors....and Guru Hargobind Sahib and Guru gobind Singh Ji lived that way.
Kings/Emperors were also PATRONS..of the arts..music..painters..poets..etc etc..and Guru gobind Singh Ji laways had a long line of exceptional gifted people makign a beeline to His darbar to show him their best....once a newest Rifle was brought to Guru Ji to be tested...Guru Ji also had made a wooden Cannon and tested it in war. Bhai Nanad laal Goya was a Royal Poet of AURENGZEB...and he came to Guru Gobind Singh Jis sharan when Aurnaga wanted to CONVERT HIM. The Other 52 POETS, writers etc were also seeking Guru Jis blessings/inaam/baksheesh/gold and gifts for appreciating their works...and the PROOF of Guru Jis POLYGOTYISM..is in the 52 POETS...only a person who can relate to so many languages would be able to appreciate them/their poetry and reward them so they stayed....
4. imho GGS was palying HOST to these poets in order to propogate GURMUKHI ALPHABET as well....as this was ONE way of causing the spread of GURMUKHI far and wide...Promotion of GURMUKHI was VITAL as the SSGS was in this alphabet....and serious compettion from f{censored}e...Hindi etc had to be defeated for Gurmukhi to take root !!

My humble thoughts...
Thanks
JS

 

[explorer]

Explorer Ji,
Imho Bhai Gurdass Ji composed becasue he felt the inclination to...he is a poet par excellence..BUT his compositions didnt make the "grade"....Baba Sunder Ji wasnt such a great poet..BUT his one composition..the SADD made the mark/grade !!Bhagats such as Ravidass Ji, Kabir Ji wrote a whole lot of bani which failed to make the grade as well.
The ULTIMATE DECISION to inlcude/exclude rests with GURU JI.

2. Guru Gobind Singh Ji is a SACHA PATSHAH....and His Darbar is equal to none !! That is why Kings presented Gifts like the Parsadee Elephant..Nagaras and weapons of top calibre..the very ebst of the Arabian Imported horses...Chandoa etc etc etc. This was the ways of KIngs and Emperors....and Guru Hargobind Sahib and Guru gobind Singh Ji lived that way.
Kings/Emperors were also PATRONS..of the arts..music..painters..poets..etc etc..and Guru gobind Singh Ji laways had a long line of exceptional gifted people makign a beeline to His darbar to show him their best....once a newest Rifle was brought to Guru Ji to be tested...Guru Ji also had made a wooden Cannon and tested it in war. Bhai Nanad laal Goya was a Royal Poet of AURENGZEB...and he came to Guru Gobind Singh Jis sharan when Aurnaga wanted to CONVERT HIM. The Other 52 POETS, writers etc were also seeking Guru Jis blessings/inaam/baksheesh/gold and gifts for appreciating their works...and the PROOF of Guru Jis POLYGOTYISM..is in the 52 POETS...only a person who can relate to so many languages would be able to appreciate them/their poetry and reward them so they stayed....
4. imho GGS was palying HOST to these poets in order to propogate GURMUKHI ALPHABET as well....as this was ONE way of causing the spread of GURMUKHI far and wide...Promotion of GURMUKHI was VITAL as the SSGS was in this alphabet....and serious compettion from f{censored}e...Hindi etc had to be defeated for Gurmukhi to take root !!

My humble thoughts...
Thanks
JS

Gyani ji,

I respect the honesty of your opinions however i am not sure whether they are correct for the simple reasons:

1> You assume that Bhai Gurdas ji' composition didn't make the grade.
However Professor Sahib Singh has presented a different view which
been prevalent earlier also.
Kindly refer to page no. 176 of the book attached in the thread.
" His compositions are considered to be a key to the understanding of
SGGS"

Prof. Sahib Singh mentions that they are key to understanding of the SGGS whereas you feel they are failed-the-grade category.

Also can you cite any information which can help us understand how
did they fail the grade-test??


2> Finally we get an answer to the polyglot question?
He learnt so many languages only to reward poets, and he didn't compose anything of his own, not even a single line.

BTW what are you honest opinions about Jaap Sahib, Tav-Prasad Swayyiae, Sabad Hazaare ...... in terms of authorship and grade-tests?

Thanks!!
Explorer