Normal
raob1 jiThanks! And your logic is perfect. This is why I remain baffled as to the new talk now circulating on the forums about a Das Granth. This is a "granth" in which both Aad Grant and the Sodakh-committee-created-and-so-called Dasam Granth, are combined. This can only be a result of a motivation to blend Sikhism into the political waves of saffron samaj so that Sikhism disappears.And - to be somewhat argumentative-- in general and not with you personally. I think that neither Bacchitar nor Chaubis Avtar are consistent with the teachings of Guru Granth, and in fact think they are very contradictory. There have been historical problems authenticating them, and they have a point-of-view and content that are contrary to Guru Granth. I say this with complete respect for Gyani Maskeen ji.Many people, including Professor Darshan Singh, at one time considered these books of Bacchitar Natak to be metaphorical translations, and moral teachings by Dasam Pita. They have since reconsidered. Others too have reconsidered for good reason. We only know what Gyani Makeen ji believed when he was alive and we cannot say more than that.The inclination to smooth over stark differences between the two granths, so that the arguments will go away, is dangerous. Though motives may be genuinely good, when we do this we are turning a deaf ear and a blind eye for the sake of peace in the family to developments that are seriously undermining the unique standing of Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
raob1 ji
Thanks! And your logic is perfect. This is why I remain baffled as to the new talk now circulating on the forums about a Das Granth. This is a "granth" in which both Aad Grant and the Sodakh-committee-created-and-so-called Dasam Granth, are combined. This can only be a result of a motivation to blend Sikhism into the political waves of saffron samaj so that Sikhism disappears.
And - to be somewhat argumentative-- in general and not with you personally. I think that neither Bacchitar nor Chaubis Avtar are consistent with the teachings of Guru Granth, and in fact think they are very contradictory. There have been historical problems authenticating them, and they have a point-of-view and content that are contrary to Guru Granth. I say this with complete respect for Gyani Maskeen ji.
Many people, including Professor Darshan Singh, at one time considered these books of Bacchitar Natak to be metaphorical translations, and moral teachings by Dasam Pita. They have since reconsidered. Others too have reconsidered for good reason. We only know what Gyani Makeen ji believed when he was alive and we cannot say more than that.
The inclination to smooth over stark differences between the two granths, so that the arguments will go away, is dangerous. Though motives may be genuinely good, when we do this we are turning a deaf ear and a blind eye for the sake of peace in the family to developments that are seriously undermining the unique standing of Sri Guru Granth Sahib.