Charitropakhyan Who Calls Charitropakiyan Gurbani? Jathedar Tarlochan Singh

[vikram9274]

Veer ji shall i repeat my question? What is mantree bhoopat sambadh? if it is story narrated by mantree than how can it be 10th masters bani?

secondly with regard to your baseless argument about prof darshan singh changing his mind. Let me ask you, did sajan tuug change his mind? did baba lehna change his mind?
Lehna did frequent worshiping to statues and hindu rituals but when he got gyan of guru he stopped and look what he became, Guru Angad Sahib ji.

So should we start saying hey lehna changed his mind he was wrong, he should of kept on doing what he was doing. You are wrong, if someone sees light and understands hey what i was doing before was wrong and i am going to fix it whats wrong with that?
Sajan tuug did it.

Even if you look at the sakhee of the singhs that gave vidhava to guru sahib and then came back shall we see hey they left now they can't come back?

Now jus answer this question like i did before i will be greatful, you went off track and diverted your answer.

What is mantree bhoopat sambadh? if it is story narrated by mantree than how can it be 10th masters bani? if it is pakiyan stories from other places, then how can it still be guru sahibs bani?

Kind Regards

Sir when a writer writes, he may create a character. Or he may tell a story from the point of view of another. That does not mean he did not come up with the story or write it. The Dasam granth was compiled by Bhai Mani Ji after the death of Dasmesh Pitah. Just because one does not write his name or from his point of view does not mean he did not write it at all. Once again, it is a style of writing. I gave you that answer before. I think you are expecting it to written in the same style as SGGS. Which is wrong of you. THere are many styles of writing. As for Darshan Singh changing his mind, I simply stated that I found it interesting. As in the case of Lehna and Sajan Thuug, they had Guru on their side. Lehna was convinced by Guru that the worship of stautes is wrong and Sajan Thuug was moved to stop stealing .Everyone knows stealing is bad, and Bhai Lehna became a Sikh. This argument is one of changing a view within Sikhism. What would you think if he tomorrow said that he believes Guru Gobind Singh was coward? I mean with your justification, he changed his mind. What would make him wrong then? But I question you, what of Bhagat Ravi Das, or Sant Kabeer. Their writings are in SGGS, are they your guru?

And as for Darshan Singh, he has said that he studied Dr. Jodh Singhs translation of Chritars of the Dasam Granth. He contorted the Dasam Granth. While doing Katha at a gurdwara in New York he stated a stoy that he said appears in charitar 21, when according to him Dasmesh Pitah went to a prostitute (Vaishya). he said that Guru Ji thought that if he had a relationship with the prostitute the child would be a Barhua (pimp), and if he doesn't she would shout and call people. According to Prof. Darshan Singh, Guru Sahib leaves his slippers and robe and starts running. On this the people gather and catch Guru Sahib. Someone gets hold of his beard; someone removes his turban and starts beating Guru Sahib with his slippers. The truth is that nowhere in Charitar 21 is Guru ji's name mentioned. In his statement, Dr Jodh Singh clarified that nowhere in Charitar 21, Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s name is stated. He also clarified that the story is about a Raja who goes to a wealthy woman who is inflicted by lust and who tries to lure him. But the Raja, keeping his high morals, doesn’t relent and manages to escape. Dr Jodh Singh also clarified that nowhere in the text of Charitar 21, word Bharua or Vesva, as told by Prof. Darshan Singh, has been used. He added that it’s from the example of high morality that the Raja sets in Charitar 21 that the Sikh Panth has picked up the deadliest bajjar kurahits of the prohibition of extramarital relationship

 

[spnadmin]

Sir when a writer writes, he may create a character. Or he may tell a story from the point of view of another. That does not mean he did not come up with the story or write it.

Please focus, vikram9274 ji, on the question related to mantree bhoopat sambadh.

Is the above your answer to the question? "He may create a character" or "tell the story from the point of view of another?" Who could have done that? Are you saying that Guru Gobind Singh might have created a character? Or that Guru Gobind Singh might have told the story from the point of view of someone else? Or did someone else make up this mantree bhoopat sambadh affair?

Because if Guru Gobind Singh might have done it, well, someone else might have done it too!

I have not included the rest of your answer because you are wrong on the facts, do not understand the history of Dasam Granth, and are trying to dodge by talking about people who could have changed their minds but didn't as far as well know.

 

[International Akaali]

Sir when a writer writes, he may create a character. Or he may tell a story from the point of view of another. That does not mean he did not come up with the story or write it. The Dasam granth was compiled by Bhai Mani Ji after the death of Dasmesh Pitah. Just because one does not write his name or from his point of view does not mean he did not write it at all. Once again, it is a style of writing. I gave you that answer before. I think you are expecting it to written in the same style as SGGS. Which is wrong of you. THere are many styles of writing. As for Darshan Singh changing his mind, I simply stated that I found it interesting. As in the case of Lehna and Sajan Thuug, they had Guru on their side. Lehna was convinced by Guru that the worship of stautes is wrong and Sajan Thuug was moved to stop stealing .Everyone knows stealing is bad, and Bhai Lehna became a Sikh. This argument is one of changing a view within Sikhism. What would you think if he tomorrow said that he believes Guru Gobind Singh was coward? I mean with your justification, he changed his mind. What would make him wrong then? But I question you, what of Bhagat Ravi Das, or Sant Kabeer. Their writings are in SGGS, are they your guru?

And as for Darshan Singh, he has said that he studied Dr. Jodh Singhs translation of Chritars of the Dasam Granth. He contorted the Dasam Granth. While doing Katha at a gurdwara in New York he stated a stoy that he said appears in charitar 21, when according to him Dasmesh Pitah went to a prostitute (Vaishya). he said that Guru Ji thought that if he had a relationship with the prostitute the child would be a Barhua (pimp), and if he doesn't she would shout and call people. According to Prof. Darshan Singh, Guru Sahib leaves his slippers and robe and starts running. On this the people gather and catch Guru Sahib. Someone gets hold of his beard; someone removes his turban and starts beating Guru Sahib with his slippers. The truth is that nowhere in Charitar 21 is Guru ji's name mentioned. In his statement, Dr Jodh Singh clarified that nowhere in Charitar 21, Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s name is stated. He also clarified that the story is about a Raja who goes to a wealthy woman who is inflicted by lust and who tries to lure him. But the Raja, keeping his high morals, doesn’t relent and manages to escape. Dr Jodh Singh also clarified that nowhere in the text of Charitar 21, word Bharua or Vesva, as told by Prof. Darshan Singh, has been used. He added that it’s from the example of high morality that the Raja sets in Charitar 21 that the Sikh Panth has picked up the deadliest bajjar kurahits of the prohibition of extramarital relationship

From Khalsa Fauj Blogspot:

I read a story in mantree bhoopat sambaad format. It says:

There was a baba from punjab. He lied in front of Guru Granth Sahib Ji for 20 years.

End of Story Mantree Bhoopat Sambaad. Afjoo.

Moral? Don't trust babas.

Story isn't intended at anyone. It doens't mention any last names, doesn't mention organization, doesn't mention city, doesn't mention religion, doesn't mention area either. Those who are smart know where this is going. Those who are smart and have done some research know who above is about. Now compare this story to story 21-23 from Charitropakhyan.

Town: Anandpur
Near: Nainaaa Devi
State: Kehloor
Name: Rai
Religion: Sikh
Status: Head of Sikhs
Followers: Sikhs
Religious status: Guru

Before crying about disrespect of baba, think about Chariter 21-23. No toleration of truth about baba but disrespect of Guru is acceptable? What could be done about brainwashed tools who consider babas to be greater than Guru?

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

you talked about bhai lehna and sajaan tug being out of sikhism. Then what about vidhawa the singhs gave to guru sahib during fighting. Is that an example within sikhism? Why do you need examples for everything, just get the point he didn't know before and he knows now. I gave you example of vidhawa to guru sahib. Either you want to understand or not i can't argue with you anymore.

 

[vikram9274]

Please focus, vikram9274 ji, on the question related to mantree bhoopat sambadh.

Is the above your answer to the question? "He may create a character" or "tell the story from the point of view of another?" Who could have done that? Are you saying that Guru Gobind Singh might have created a character? Or that Guru Gobind Singh might have told the story from the point of view of someone else? Or did someone else make up this mantree bhoopat sambadh affair?

Because if Guru Gobind Singh might have done it, well, someone else might have done it too!

I have not included the rest of your answer because you are wrong on the facts, do not understand the history of Dasam Granth, and are trying to dodge by talking about people who could have changed their minds but didn't as far as well know.

Deletion for violations of TOS of Sikh Philosophy Network. Poster has been warned.


Directed at INTERNATION AKALI- Sir why should I beleive someone who says i see the light now? What made him see the light? After years of studying the Dasam Granth and doing Katha from it, within years it all changed? I just have a hard time believing that. He should come out and give his complete account of what made him change sides completely. And I am not arguing, I have already said that I think this issue is being blown out of proportion and I am only angry at the way it is being handled by both sides. I personally believe in SGGS and consider it to be my GURU but I also believe that the writing of Dasam Granth have substance and we can learn from them. I have no problem of Dasam Granth being prakashed next to SGGS. Those are my beliefs, my views, and my opinions. Simple as that. If you don't think Dasam Granth was written by Dasmesh Pitah or it has anything worth reading, then don't. If you don't want it prakashed next to the SGGS, well then don't do it if you have a copy of SGGS in your house. I just think that destroying the panth over the fact that two takhats keep the Dasam Granth Prakahsed next to the SGGS is stupid because GURU JI wouldn't care and seeing as how SGGS is supposed to be our GURU, I don't think it really matters. I don't have the time or the Gyan to argue lines or charitars of Dasam Granth. I am not a professor or historian. I think it is a beautiful piece of writing and holds many extremely useful lessons and a lot of information that one can use in life. So to me, it is worth reading and learning from.

 

[spnadmin]

vikram ji

You do seem to grasp the issue that the parkash question at its root weakens the inviolate guruship of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, and you are making the most of that. It is your own loss. The information that undermines Sikhism by casting doubt on Sri Guru Granth Sahib has been deleted.

This is an official warning. Undermining Sikhism and the Sri Guru Granth Sahib is a violation of Terms of Service. Everyone has been very patient. If you do not remain on topic -- in this case a discussion of Charitthropakayan -- then you are working toward more than a warning.

 

[spnadmin]

Deletion for violations of TOS of Sikh Philosophy Network. Poster warned about undermining Sri Guru Granth Sahib.


Directed at INTERNATION AKALI- Sir why should I believe someone who says i see the light now? What made him see the light? After years of studying the Dasam Granth and doing Katha from it, within years it all changed? I just have a hard time believing that. He should come out and give his complete account of what made him change sides completely. And I am not arguing, I have already said that I think this issue is being blown out of proportion and I am only angry at the way it is being handled by both sides. I personally believe in SGGS and consider it to be my GURU but I also believe that the writing of Dasam Granth have substance and we can learn from them. I have no problem of Dasam Granth being prakashed next to SGGS. Those are my beliefs, my views, and my opinions. Simple as that. If you don't think Dasam Granth was written by Dasmesh Pitah or it has anything worth reading, then don't. If you don't want it prakashed next to the SGGS, well then don't do it if you have a copy of SGGS in your house. I just think that destroying the panth over the fact that two takhats keep the Dasam Granth Prakahsed next to the SGGS is stupid because GURU JI wouldn't care and seeing as how SGGS is supposed to be our GURU, I don't think it really matters. I don't have the time or the Gyan to argue lines or charitars of Dasam Granth. I am not a professor or historian. I think it is a beautiful piece of writing and holds many extremely useful lessons and a lot of information that one can use in life. So to me, it is worth reading and learning from.

Before the invention of the camera, there were many historical events that were not captured on film or on tape. Therefore the existence of documents that can be trusted because their authenticity can be verified is what the world has to go by. Yours is exactly the kind of implausible argument that has led to the very controversy that you find so unacceptable. Changes in parkash or anything else affecting doctrines and beliefs of the Sikh religion should be made according to collective decisions by representatives of world sangats. Not behind closed doors, nor by edicts issued without signatures, nor by political appointees in a country that is self-declared to be secular according to its own constitution. This process is "gurmatta" and its history begins with the formation of the khalsa panth. If you are not an historian, start studying Sikh history as soon as you can. It does you no good to claim Sri Guru Granth Sahib as your Guru and forget its history. Please stay on topic.

 

[vikram9274]

Before the invention of the camera, there were many historical events that were not captured on film or on tape. Therefore the existence of documents that can be trusted because their authenticity can be verified is what the world has to go by. Yours is exactly the kind of implausible argument that has led to the very controversy that you find so unacceptable. Changes in parkash or anything else affecting doctrines and beliefs of the Sikh religion should be made according to collective decisions by representatives of world sangats. Not behind closed doors, nor by edicts issued without signatures, nor by political appointees in a country that is self-declared to be secular according to its own constitution. This process is "gurmatta" and its history begins with the formation of the khalsa panth. If you are not an historian, start studying Sikh history as soon as you can. It does you no good to claim Sri Guru Granth Sahib as your Guru and forget its history. Please stay on topic.

ma'am once again, I did not say that the SGGS was not penned by the Gurus, i merely stated that if one wanted to get into the argument that the Dasam Granth could have been written by anyone then that could be argued for the SGGS also. I had the same point as you. As for the SGGS and the Dasam Granth being prakashed next to it, i once again will state that I have no problem with that. Keyword being "I", because like i have said before, i do not believe the Guru's would have had a problem with someone sitting next to them or walking beside them and i Believe that our present guru SGGS would not have a problem either. These are my views, I am no historian. I am just a Sikh who tries to apply as much as I can from the SGGS into my life, and that is it. If others want to argue on the validity of the Dasam Granth and tear the panth on issues such as the prakash of Dasam Granth next to SGGS, they can. Either way, I do not find the Dasam Granth to be porn-laden or against the teachings of SGGS. I find it highly useful and extremely interesting. I am done speaking on this matter because it seems that i have had to repeat my views numerous times and yet every time they get contorted into something else. Pul Chuk di khima, Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh.

 

[spnadmin]

ma'am once again, I did not say that the SGGS was not penned by the Gurus, i merely stated that if one wanted to get into the argument that the Dasam Granth could have been written by anyone then that could be argued for the SGGS also. I had the same point as you. As for the SGGS and the Dasam Granth being prakashed next to it, i once again will state that I have no problem with that. Keyword being "I", because like i have said before, i do not believe the Guru's would have had a problem with someone sitting next to them or walking beside them and i Believe that our present guru SGGS would not have a problem either. These are my views, I am no historian. I am just a Sikh who tries to apply as much as I can from the SGGS into my life, and that is it. If others want to argue on the validity of the Dasam Granth and tear the panth on issues such as the prakash of Dasam Granth next to SGGS, they can. Either way, I do not find the Dasam Granth to be porn-laden or against the teachings of SGGS. I find it highly useful and extremely interesting. I am done speaking on this matter because it seems that i have had to repeat my views numerous times and yet every time they get contorted into something else. Pul Chuk di khima, Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh.

vikram ji

You have made these same arguments again and again. In the end you are the one who concludes that they amount to your opinions based on your personal values. As such they can be stated, but the discussion has been taken off topic again and again. Please stay on the topic. You personally do not care about the question of equal parkash (Keyword being "I", because like i have said before, i do not believe the Guru's would have had a problem with someone sitting next to them or walking beside them and i Believe that our present guru SGGS would not have a problem either.") If the discussion is not important to you, then why are you persisting in the discussion. If you don't care, then bow out.

 

[vikram9274]

vikram ji

You have made these same arguments again and again. In the end you are the one who concludes that they amount to your opinions based on your personal values. As such they can be stated, but the discussion has been taken off topic again and again. Please stay on the topic. You personally do not care about the question of equal parkash (Keyword being "I", because like i have said before, i do not believe the Guru's would have had a problem with someone sitting next to them or walking beside them and i Believe that our present guru SGGS would not have a problem either.") If the discussion is not important to you, then why are you persisting in the discussion. If you don't care, then bow out.

Ma'am, I have stated that my problem is with the way the problem is being handled by our Leaders. That does deal with this thread because the title discusses the jathedars and their views on the Dasam Granth, their violations of their own hukamnama, etc. The way this problem is being handled is the biggest problem in all of this. Questioning something is not wrong, but the mishandling off all of this is tearing the panth apart. Both sides have made this issue so big, controversial and mishandled it. And as for personal values, you said that a decision should be made by the combined sangat, well people base decisions off of personal values. Anyways, I am done with this thread. I have stated my views enough times i believe.

 

[spnadmin]

There is a movie with a title "A Bridge Too Far." Sometimes our journey takes us on a march that is difficult. To bridge a gap is difficult. The thread is closed. The conversation has run its course, and it has run off course. Time to follow another aspect of this controversy on a different thread.