What Is Really In The Contents Of The Dasam Granth?

[Chaan Pardesi]

Going through the papers as given above, at once proves the claims that this issue happened "overnight"is wrong.The issue has been going on since it the so called dasam kitab was introduced or became known of.

It appears that there was some writings of the Guru sahib that were around but they were never binded into a book.The book dasam kitab is man made and being pushed by vested interests upon the sikhs as an adversary to Guru Granth sahib.That is very clear.

It appears even the British playe dtheir part in trying to manipulate this book dasam kitab and pushing it down the throat of the sikhs!

It is such a tragedy, that sikhs have lost the sanity that Guru Ji bestowed upon the Guru Ganth sahib , and are wandering helter skelter in pursuit and promotion of falsehood.

 

[justosh]

okay reading all the point, what SPNs view on the Jaap, Tva prasdah swaya, and all the other writings that praise God such as jale hari, and what about khalsa mero roop hai khass.. writings like that?

 

[spnadmin]

okay reading all the point, what SPNs view on the Jaap, Tva prasdah swaya, and all the other writings that praise God such as jale hari, and what about khalsa mero roop hai khass.. writings like that?

This has already been answered by individual members. Read back comments in the thread.

• SPN does not as a network have a doctrine, or required view on Dasam Granth.
• SPN mentors administrators and leaders have a variety of views.
• Some mentors administrators and leaders are convinced that all of the Dasam Granth is a hoax.
• Some accept all of Dasam Granth or wish to withhold judgement.
• Other SPN mentors administrators and leaders hold that some of the hymns are penned by Dasam Pita. Example would be Jap Sahib.
• Some SPN mentors administrators and leaders are amritdhari and do complete full paath because they have taken a vow to do so, even if they have doubts.
• SPN has a large collection of articles that critique the compilation of the Dasam Granth. The panth has waited a long time for authentication studies to be carried out. The questions raised by these articles will remain "live" until the matter can be settled in an intellectually honest way.
• At SPN many would like to see questions of the authenticity of what some call the "kitab" studied under the stern light of historical evidence.
• At SPN we also encourage discussion of individual hymns and prayers because these deserve attention. You will see threads on the "kitab" and thread discussions on a variety of individual prayers.
• Notice that almost no criticism has come against Ardas, Jap Sahib or prayers normally part of paath.

Dear brother, the debate about Dasam Granth is not a simple matter of black and white, right and wrong, heros and villains, good and bad. Pick a side and then become a blind follower. The debate is complex and it is important to read and study and then decide where one stands. It is also important to be ready to change one's mind if there is new evidence that is convincing.

SPN has seen members publish a wide range of viewpoints because we do not believe that Sikhs should ever abandon the merits of debate. We are not afraid of debate.

 

[Harry Haller]

If I were to bind a manuscript and include the works of plato, together with the kama sutra, would it still be plato?

The SGGS is given the respect it deserves by being raised and surrounded by what is clean and good. It is a pity the writings you mention have to be surrounded by the other not so great contents of the DG.

Those writings should be liberated

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

If I were to bind a manuscript and include the works of plato, together with the kama sutra, would it still be plato

Sir Harry

It would be difficult to call them the works of Plato as they all belong to his teacher .I think the discerning student would recognise Truth even if it was sitting next to something else.

 

[spnadmin]

Sir Harry

It would be difficult to call them the works of Plato as they all belong to his teacher .

Please explain so that we do not go off topic and into the direction of Greek philosophers. What difference does it make if we say "works of plato, together with the kama sutra" or "works of socrates, together with the kama sutra?"

The point made by Harry ji stands. If you put texts of one author together with texts by others, who is the author of the final product? If we don't know who wrote the individual hymns of Dasam Granth, who is the author of Dasam Granth?

Harry ji is raising, imho, a question, which more than any other question. strikes at the heart of debate about a granth called "guru," as in "Sri Guru Dasam Granth."

These are issues that were successfully resolved by Guru Arjan Dev in the compilation of the Aad Granth. Its authenticity was not doubted by Guru Gobind Singh.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

The So called "One Volume Bound SGGS + Dasam Granth" By Bhai MANI SINGH is also a HOAX..simply becasue the SGGS part is the BHAI BANNO BIR COPY...a granth thta was REJECTED BY GURU ARJUN JI HIMSELF as the KHAREE BIR - Salty compared to the Nectar sweetness of AAD GRANTH Kartarpuri Bir !!

Question arises as to WHY an Eminent Sikh SCHOLAR who penned the Damdami Bir of SGGS under the tutelage of GURU GOBIND SINGH JI HIMSELF..would a few years after the demise of Guru Ji at 1708 go ahead and write a REJECTED VERSION of the SGGS and BIND it to Dasam Granth and attempt to make SIKHS BOW to that ONE SPURIOUS VOLUME ? Dont you guys smell a RAT..a Large ROTTING RAT infested with maggots ??

The TRUTH is that BOTH these...the "One volume SGGS+DG" and the Letter to Mata Sundar kaur Ji by the so called BHAI MANI SINGH are FAKES. They cannot stand the LITMUS TEST of TRUTH...and these two fake manuscripts are the BIGGEST Proofs the PRO DG lobby has in its {censored}nal !! DUD GRENADES !!

 

[Chaan Pardesi]

".......Mata Sundar kaur Ji by the so called BHAI MANI SINGH are FAKES....."

Interesting statement.Let me paint a scenario.I have looked and looked into this scenario, but cannot find anything!It is similar to the scanario of the British attack upon the Sikh Raj across the satluj...but no body talks about the role of those Sikhs who lived east of the satluj and were already part of the British India Company, and many were soldiers of the east India company!Anyone ever wondered?

In the period after Guru Gobind Singh Ji, Sikhs suffered very badly!Their heads were hunted for a taka, and rewarded!The plains of the Punjab were empty of Sikhs!

Sikhs were in refuge here and there, and few lived openly!

But there was a lobby of Sikhs who were employed by the Mughals!These lobby worked against the Sikhs!

In this climate of torturous rape of the religion and killings,Mata Sundar kaur ji lived in relative calm and peace in Delhi!Just HOW was this possible?

Can anyone shed light and expand upon this period of Mata Sundar kaur's residence in Delhi with Mughal protection?I have searched high and low to understand this part.


Absolutely NOTHING is mentioned by anyone!Why suddenly this part of the story is very very silent!CAN anyone shed light upon this please.

I am in agreement with Giani Ji about the fake books written by Bhai Mani singh, and it is also possible that the dasam kitab was being compiled by him...but we just do not have real evidence...as it appeared 8 years after his demise.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

And to add to the Interesting points rasied by Chan pardesi Ji above...If I may add..the BANDA SINGH BAHADUR was also SABOTAGED by the so called TATT KHALSA LOBBY of Mughal Friendly Sikhs...IF the SIKHS had been UNITED..nothing could have stopped Banda Singh form establishing the Khalsa Raaj there and then. SIRHIND ( HEAD OF HIND ) had FALLEN..the Mughals were on the RUN..the Empire was in a shambles.....These Tatt Khalsa Lobby of Sikhs employed in Mughal Service or friendly to them also tried to "broker a peace deal" before the Final battle of muktsar in which the 40 muktas got martyred. Guru Gobind Singh ji refused such a deal and the battle was fought.

Many Sikhs..like one of my ancestors from the State of Patiala were also "traitors"..like the Founder of Patiala..Maharaja AAla Singh of Patiala was in alliance with the Invading Afghans Durranni and Abdali. Aala singh held the state of patiala on patti form the invaders...and of course later on these Princely States all were on the BRITISH SIDE against the Khalsa Forces of Lahore and led to the defeat of Sikh Kingdom and fall of the Khalsa Empire and annexation of Punjab into British India...

 

[spnadmin]

We reach a point after climbing a steep mountain and look down and behind us at a forest of old thinking and old ideas we have left behind. Realize how easy it is to lose our grip and slip back down the slopes into an ancient matt! Guru Arjan Dev extended his hand to aid our journey. In return we show our disrespect.

Just one practical question which is inspired by the point by point considerations of history so far. Some are calling Dasam Granth "Sri Guru Dasam Granth," and some are calling it the Second Canon of the Sikhs. However, we each have only one head to give to the guru. The entire controversy boils down to just that. We give our head to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, or we engage in a ludicrous juggling act.

Can any give his head to 2 gurus? So which "Guru" will it be?

and p/s If anyone wants to take things around in circles, and again suggests bundle the two together, there is more to say about the disgrace in doing that.

 

[Harry Haller]

I have noticed something about the pro DG folks, they seem unable to have a reasonable debate about the subject. Fire a few facts, and they vanish.

Personally I find it hard enough to give my head to the one Guru, so anyone juggling two must have more time on their hands than me...........

 

[spnadmin]

I have noticed something about the pro DG folks, they seem unable to have a reasonable debate about the subject. Fire a few facts, and they vanish.

Personally I find it hard enough to give my head to the one Guru, so anyone juggling two must have more time on their hands than me...........

Tell me! Anyone who had time to write Chaubis Avtar had more time on his hands than Dasam Pita.

 

[Chaan Pardesi]

"HARRY HALLER___I have noticed something about the pro DG folks, they seem unable to have a reasonable debate about the subject. Fire a few facts, and they vanish"

Very very true and not gone unnoticed over the last four years by me!

Or they say, read like we do and YOU will understand.....BUt what is the way they read like, they have never ever explained ..I have seen this repeated over and over and over again and again...

Personally, I feel we should not allow any more misleading and lies over this issue, if we are to stop this confusion being spread among Sikhs by the pro Dasam kitab lobby...into the next generations....

 

[Luckysingh]

okay reading all the point, what SPNs view on the Jaap, Tva prasdah swaya, and all the other writings that praise God such as jale hari, and what about khalsa mero roop hai khass.. writings like that?

SIMPLE !!
If someone does NOT do these paths as per rehat, then they are NOT a sikh of khalsa !!

I understand your point quite well, and it is a fair comment !
Your thoughts are obviously ''WHY?'' do we have Jaap, tav prasadh, akal ustat, ardas as part of daily rehat if they are NOT part of our shabad guru ??
Then, your further thoughts are ''WHY?'' is no regard given to these daily rehat paaths or the source they come from ??

You won't get any convincing answers, but it will make you question how the panth got itself into this mess !!

Personally, I cannot say that the paaths from DG that are part of rehat, are NOT bani. To me, a sikh's daily rehat read should and can only be bani.

Until the governing akal takht makes a final decision, then I have to disagree with people that regard gurbani as just being solely confined to Adi Granth sahib ji.
Because this leaves the question that you raise about the daily rehat with jaap sahib...etc..


So, sadly ALL I can say is that as long as the governerning body keeps these paaths in the DG, then DG will remain battling to be a part of sikhism.
I can't see any resolvement or conclusion in this matter unless some dramatic changes are made.

​

 

[Chaan Pardesi]

"Personally, I cannot say that the paaths from DG that are part of rehat, are NOT bani. To me, a sikh's daily rehat read should and can only be bani".

Personallly, I dont think one has read and understood the subject clearly!The 5% of the writings found in the DG is accepted as that of Guru Gobind Singh by the panth!
The learned of the panth agreed on that.The panth did NOT say this is bani, the people have termed it as bani.

What was said that is that Sikhs have got themselves twisted into knickers by using words like kachi bani and bani of the Gurus- causing a lot of confusion among the sikhs!The babadom has used this as their favourite weapon.making more confusion!The taksalis as I understand are now singing hymns from so called kachi bani, whatever that means!

If we are to accept Guru Gobind Singh Ji's instructions, then Guru Ji himself did NOT declare his writings to be included in the Guru Granth sahib.He specifically asked it to be kept out!The Gurus bani is in the Guru Granth sahib!The Guru Ordered the sikhs to only believe in one Guru Granth sahib!

Therefore technically anything outside it cannot be bani; but writings of the Guru.The correct term is rachna of Guru Gobind Singh!

Ardas is always completed in every Sikh karaj, but the ardas is an additional supplication prayer,it is NOT bani.

On what grounds and however the panth decided to order sikhs to follow the rehat as we do,at that time, I cannot answer.

But WHAT I do know is that in a conversation of panthic minds about 5/6 years ago,this question of the rehat and the associated paaths was supressed and covered up, as there are questions over it, and any discussion will expose issues that will undermine the last 300 hundered years of Sikh pratice!I heard it personally with my ears and I am looking for answers since.The jathedar of the takhat was the person who said....please leave it there...bas karo gal ethe hi rahen diyo...nahi te pishle 300 saal da sara ithas khatam ho javega...please read and try to analyse that answer..which I have been doing since...

 

[Luckysingh]

The point I made was for the common questions to arise from the younger generations.
We know that kids nowadays like to ask 'Why?', there are not raised like we were, where you are just instructed to do what elders say !!!
We were raised with assumption that all elders are wise or are 'siyaney'

It is these questions that make the upcoming sikhs realise what a mess the 'siyaney' in the panth have got us into !!

What was said that is that Sikhs have got themselves twisted into knickers by using words like kachi bani and bani of the Gurus- causing a lot of confusion among the sikhs!The babadom has used this as their favourite weapon.making more confusion!The taksalis as I understand are now singiung hymns from so called kachi bani, whatever that means!

Kachi bani refers to singing kirtan that is not as regulated by rehat and/or has been tampered with by adding extra lines, mixing one shabad line with another..etc..
You are correct that most people talking about kachi bani don't even understand what it really means.
There was a thread from some time back that I started to help clear up these misunderstandings of kachi bani.

 

[Chaan Pardesi]

Bibi Jugraaj Kaur Ji Bath speaks upon the dasam Granth, one of the latest view with great clarity that I have come across.This exposes clearly all the hyped up sanctification of the false book called dasam...KITAB!It was never a granth ever.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xucaMh25awk

 

[spnadmin]

SIMPLE !!
If someone does NOT do these paths as per rehat, then they are NOT a sikh of khalsa !!

I understand your point quite well, and it is a fair comment !
Your thoughts are obviously ''WHY?'' do we have Jaap, tav prasadh, akal ustat, ardas as part of daily rehat if they are NOT part of our shabad guru ??

The Dasam Granth as a kitab/granth was a changing collection of mismatched texts. Iaap, tav prasadh, akal ustat, ardas are part of daily rehat. How does it follow from that obvious point that Dasam Granth is shabad guru? Especially after Dasam Pita made it clear it is not. Dasam Pita did not declare Jaap, tav prasadh, akal ustat, ardas as Guru, or any part of Guru.

Then, your further thoughts are ''WHY?'' is no regard given to these daily rehat paaths or the source they come from ??

Plenty of thought was given during the past 2 centuries, concluding with the rehat maryada. In addition, little to no controversy surrounds these hymns. So to bring them up over and over again in the context of debate on Dasam Granth is called "gilding the lily", i.e., covering something with a thin layer of gold to make it look more attractive than it really is.

You won't get any convincing answers, but it will make you question how the panth got itself into this mess !!

We won't get any convincing answers because we don't have any convincing primary evidence favoring the authenticity of the KITAB THE THREAD IS ABOUT THE KITAB/GRANTH AND ITS CONTENTS. IT IS NOT A CRITIQUE OF REHAT.

Personally, I cannot say that the paaths from DG that are part of rehat, are NOT bani. To me, a sikh's daily rehat read should and can only be bani.

WHAT YOU ARE REALLY SAYING, MAYBE YOU DON'T REALIZE, IS THAT REQUIREMENTS MAKE BANI. The commando model. BECAUSE SIKHS ARE REQUIRED TO READ SOME PRAYERS, DOES NOT MAKE THOSE PRAYERS BANI.

Until the governing akal takht makes a final decision, then I have to disagree with people that regard gurbani as just being solely confined to Adi Granth sahib ji.

It is sad to read the above words. Guru Arjan Dev signed each page of the Aad Granth, declared the Bhanno Bir kharee and did not certify it. He rejected it. Guru Gobind Singh, added shabads of his father to the Aad Granth, and none of his own to it. He sealed the granth with the mundanavi, and declared the resulting granth guru in 1708.

As guru in the jyote of all the Nanaks, Guru Gobind Singh had the authority to add and to seal. Who is the guru in the jyote of the Nanaks who has the authority create new bani? The window closed in 1708. Does even Akal Takht have that level of gravitas? By your thinking Sarbloh Granth could be gurbani. Charritharpakyan could be gurbani.

Because this leaves the question that you raise about the daily rehat with jaap sahib...etc..


So, sadly ALL I can say is that as long as the governerning body keeps these paaths in the DG, then DG will remain battling to be a part of sikhism.

Where would you want these paths to be placed? If they are wrongly placed in DG, then where should they be re-posted? Should they have parkash with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? What new place would give them parkash with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Anyone who says they belong bound with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, then commits Bhanno's error, disrespects Guru Arjan Dev and disobeys Guru Gobind Singh.



I can't see any resolvement or conclusion in this matter unless some dramatic changes are made.

​

Luckysingh ji Maybe solving the theological problems of the panth works best when the panth is not being treated to fuzzy logic. And that is what the panth has suffered under for a long time.

 

[Luckysingh]

Luckysingh ji Maybe solving the theological problems of the panth works best when the panth is not being treated to fuzzy logic. And that is what the panth has suffered under for a long time.

I have absolutely no idea why you feel that I am disagreeing with the previous posts !!

My post that has been referred to is simply HIGHLIGHTING the many questions that are raised by younger sikhs like Justosh ji !!
Please, re-read and you may understand what I am talking about!
I thought I had explained this in the 2nd post.....

I have not changed the definition of shabad guru according to dasam pita.
When a young sikh asks if Jaap sahib is gurbani or not, -I have answered with my personal opinion.
Personal because NO-ONE can give a positive answer !

Why can't they give a positive closing answer ? (closing answer-finishes and answers the question and doesn't incite further questions)
Because then the young sikh asks further 'why read it if it's not gurbani??'





I made it clear that for those genuine questions, you won't get strong reasons for the 'why'.

You won't get any convincing answers, but it will make you question how the panth got itself into this mess !!

If my post shows me in a 'for or against' DG light, then I obviously failed to make my point.
I have no intention to speak for or against DG.
I also have no intention to demand prakash of DG.
I have no intention to claim that DG is guru.
I have no intention to tell any amritdhari that they are following a set of commando rules either.

I'm just tryiing to speak in a 'simple' language to 'simple' questions that arise everyday from upcoming sikhs.
If this simplicity comes across as offensive or direct, then I offer my deepest apologies.

I am here to learn and not to be making choices of which side of the dividing line I should go !
Remember, dividing lines and dualities are created by ourselves.

 

[spnadmin]

Luckysingh ji

Neutrality takes one only so far.

And yes, your sentences do seem to suggest that prayers in rehat are bani. Otherwise, what are you saying when you say

Personally, I cannot say that the paaths from DG that are part of rehat, are NOT bani. To me, a sikh's daily rehat read should and can only be bani.

.

So if I got it wrong, please rephrase so I can understand. A double negative is a positive. You say CANNOT and NOT in the quote above. That means to me at least that you are saying the Jaap, tav prasadh, akal ustat are bani, are shabad guru.

And I am asking how someone can be neutral on this point:

Until the governing akal takht makes a final decision, then I have to disagree with people that regard gurbani as just being solely confined to Adi Granth sahib ji.