Inder Singh

I have to agree with V, you have to accept ALL the rulings of Akal Takht and not just pick and choose the ones that are in line with your Jatha. People who pick and choose have not credibility and are just playing their little games.

So to people like Inder Singh and Admin, can you confirm that you agree that as per Akal Takht Sikhs are allowed to eat Jhatka meat?

Btw isn't it amazing that a personality such as a former Akal Takht Jathedar that Darshan Singh was has suddenly been relegated to being plain Darshan Lal and even Darshan Lal Bhatra. I always knew him as just Darshan Singh Ragi but thanks to the investigative branch of SS we now know what his caste background is! We also learn that he is a sharabi, wonders never cease on this forum.

Does Darshan lal bhatra obeys akal takhat.He does not.Shame on you for defending a sell out

what was written abt him?

It was written he was in touch with rajiv Gandhi and was holding secret talks with his emissary.

What a hypocrite?On one side instigating boys to die for kahlistan and on other side holding talks with no 1 enemy of sikhs.

my frend if u dont not know let me tell u badal is greedy for his kursi and by kursi i do not mean dharmic kursi ...i mean the government kursi if he reeli wants to work for sikhism then y does he want to be a chief minister ...and stooping to the level where he merges with the party who had the RSS as its leading pressure groups...all the seats in the punjab cabinet are badals relitives...he has a property of 2000 crs and 2 5 star hotels.....is this helping sikhism ......evry second guy in punjab is patit......i think capt amarinder singh was the best cm punjab has had in last 20 years..

Sahib Bindra

Ragi Darshan lal is a selll out.His name appears in book "open secrets" written by MK Dhar who was cief of indian intelligence in militancy days.

Wow the Admin posting such bias views.

Didn't know Sikhsangat Admin also made official statements about individuals in the panth, and stooped as low as calling other people "names". Especially considering the latest Gurmatta from Akal Takhat. Wait I forgot. Akal Takhat Gurmattas are only used when it suits someones views

Maturity level is clearly decreasing

Wasn't expecting that from admins

V, Jathedar of the Akaal Takht actually asked scholars to step forward and defend the image of DAsam Granth Sahib ji.

V

They have the spirit of sikhs.They have said the right thing.It is time that sikhs take on agents like sarna and namak haram sharabi Darshan lal.

Is darshan lal listening to akal takhat?

hey guys, this is the Gurmatta from Sri Akal Takht Sahib.

there are few things, that are to be noticed.

Sri Akal Takht Sahib says "About the writings of dasam Granth, which has been accepted by Panth for Nitnem, Rehit Maryada and Amrit sanchar, no one has right to create any controversy about those creations".

"whole panth should know that Sri Dasam granth is inseperable part of Sikh history and literature but Guru Gobind Singh ji did not gave it same status equal to Sahib Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Gurta-gaddi was given to only and only Sahib Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji so parkash of any other granth CAN NOT be done equal to Sahib Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji."

original copy of Gurmatta is attached.

source: http://sgpc.net/akaltakhat_hukum/hukumnamas.asp

Wherever parkash of Dasam Granth is done people know that SGGS is eternal Guru.They have no intention to reduce the status of SGGS.

So this self created phobia by miscreants is a fable of wonderland.Wherever parkash of Dasam Granth is done it will remain as it is as it is backed by hundred years of traditions.So these singh sahibns should think twice before issuing such phoney statements.

when i said masands i didnt mean the singh sahibs everybody knows they dont make the decisions its the sgpc and akalis that make the decisions with directive from sarkar they are the true masands.

i actually feel sorry for singh sahib joginder singh he has been given the privelage to be jathedar but he hasnt got it in him to perform as he should be

the fact is all 3 singh sahibs from panjab will be in the hazoori of dhan sri guru granth sahib ji along with sri dasam guru granth sahib ji in just a few months at the 300 saalaa. ghor andhar you have admitted you wont do anything lets see if our singh sahibs can stop the parallel prakash at takht sri abchal nagar sach khand sri hazoor sahib

They cann't.It is a maryada of 300 years.Moreover prakash is on the side of SGGS.

There is prakash of Dasam Granth in all Nihung deras,Damdami taksals.So it is not a sudden development.

The issue at stake is not prakash.It is the abuses and insults hurled at Dasam Granth sahib by nastik lobby of kala afghana cronies.They have to listen what sikh sangat say.This is a pay back to them.

ou still dont get it, the granth from 1697 could not contain all the shabads of Guru Gobind Singh jee. For example how could shabads concerning the Khalsa and Zafarnama be within this granth? Therefore some gursikhs undertook an amazing seva in collecting the bani. You claim that the Dasam granth was always parkash since the Taksal came into existence, you have provided no proof of this. Rather this point is contrary to logic, if the Dasam granth was parkash from when the taksal came into existence, Baba Deep Singh jee would not have had to collect the bani. End of the day you will either follow the Panth or you wont. If you have a problem with gulshan, contact him. If you have a problem with the Akal Takhat contact them. If you got nothing new to add (like the evidence requested), then there is no point continuing to discuss as we have discussed what Gulshan has written in his book and what we said on the radio.

Yes they do not have zafarnama as it was written afterwards in 1704.That proves a point that Granth was compiled in 1697.It is a slap on the face of Gurnindaks who have no methodolgy to disprove Dasam Granth.

Tell me what are shabads of khalsa.That shows you do not know about Dasam Granth.

You do not understand and creating unnecessary doubts.There was no controversey on authenticity but a discussion if to keep granth as one or to separate Charirtropakhayan.That does not reflect on authenticity of Dasam Granth.You have no reference to prove your point and repeating the same irrelevant thing again and again.

The gurnindaks like missionaries,Darshan Bhatra are saying form the top of roof that this granth iS NOT WRITTEN by Guru ji but by some sakat.I WANT REFERENCE FOR THAT.HAVE YOU ONE.

However there is no mention of dasam Granth as a granth , in present form, before MALCOLM

Does that make it granth of someone else?Hoe does it matter?It does not change contents.

We had pothi sahib,adi granth,sri guru granth and then SGGS.

<<<....Veer Inder Singh je, I said Baba Deep Singh jee compiled a dasam granth, so whats your point? Veer Sun jee the point is that Baba Deep Singh jee compiled the dasam granth (he had to do so because it was not present with him), therefore how was the dasam granth parkash right from the existence of the Taksal (Before Oct 1708). There is no doubt that these Gursikhs worked hard to collect the bani during a time where we could not even live out in the open (which must have made it so hard to find the different writings). >>>

Response

Apart from that there were two manuscripts of Dasam Granth written in 1697 called hazuri bir and Patna bir.These two manuscripts along with khas patras (written by tenth master) are there in USA with a friend of mine.The dates of compilations are there and it bears signature of tenth master.

Is Namak haram Gulshan interested to see those manuscripts?Bet on it.

Veer Inder Singh jee, dont worry about me answering questions, Im still waiting for evidence that Gurbax Singh Gulshan does not have the intellect to understand the mataphors of the Dasam granth. And you cant blame your scanner on this one. Its easy to call people, lack in intellect, liars and crooks, but to then backing it up is something else. Veer jee simply look at Bhai Kahn Singh jee Nabhas Mahan Kosh under Dasam GRanth (page 616). Esp look at the arguments which took place on whether the Dasam granth should be in one granth or different pothi's. This was the issue which I was referring to.

If the Dasam granth was parkash since the Damdami Taksal came into existence, then why was Bhai Mani Singh asked to gather Guru Gobind Singh jees bani? He should have simply gone to Damdama Sahib. Why did Baba Deep Singh also gather Dasam Guru jees bani, it seems odd, the jathedhar of the Damdami Taksal has parkash of the dasam granth and did not know? Its obvious that there was no parkash otherwise why would baba Deep Singh try to find something which is supposed to be lost, but right under his nose.

Bhai Sahib AadSach I dont need such a light which you require and suggest, maharajs updesh is the light which we require, the following shabad makes it clear and will take me out of Ghorandhar: ਪਉੜੀ ॥ ਸਚਾ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਸੇਵਿ ਸਚੁ ਸਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਅੰਤਿ ਖਲੋਆ ਆਇ ਜਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਅਗੈ ਘਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਪੋਹਿ ਨ ਸਕੈ ਜਮਕਾਲੁ ਸਚਾ ਰਖਵਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਸਾਖੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਜਗਾਇ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਮਨਮੁਖ ਵਿਣੁ ਨਾਵੈ ਕੂੜਿਆਰ ਫਿਰਹਿ ਬੇਤਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਪਸੂ ਮਾਣਸ ਚੰਮਿ ਪਲੇਟੇ ਅੰਦਰਹੁ ਕਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਸਭੋ ਵਰਤੈ ਸਚੁ ਸਚੈ ਸਬਦਿ ਨਿਹਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਾਮੁ ਨਿਧਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਪੂਰੈ ਗੁਰਿ ਦੇਖਾਲਿਆ ॥੧੪॥

ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ਘਰੁ ੫ ॥ ਅਛਲ ਛਲਾਈ ਨਹ ਛਲੈ ਨਹ ਘਾਉ ਕਟਾਰਾ ਕਰਿ ਸਕੈ ॥ ਜਿਉ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਰਾਖੈ ਤਿਉ ਰਹੈ ਇਸੁ ਲੋਭੀ ਕਾ ਜੀਉ ਟਲ ਪਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਬਿਨੁ ਤੇਲ ਦੀਵਾ ਕਿਉ ਜਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਪੋਥੀ ਪੁਰਾਣ ਕਮਾਈਐ ॥ ਭਉ ਵਟੀ ਇਤੁ ਤਨਿ ਪਾਈਐ ॥ ਸਚੁ ਬੂਝਣੁ ਆਣਿ ਜਲਾਈਐ ॥੨॥ ਇਹੁ ਤੇਲੁ ਦੀਵਾ ਇਉ ਜਲੈ ॥ ਕਰਿ ਚਾਨਣੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਤਉ ਮਿਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਇਤੁ ਤਨਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਬਾਣੀਆ ॥ ਸੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਸੇਵ ਕਮਾਣੀਆ ॥ ਸਭ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਆਵਣ ਜਾਣੀਆ ॥੩॥ ਵਿਚਿ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਸੇਵ ਕਮਾਈਐ ॥ ਤਾ ਦਰਗਹ ਬੈਸਣੁ ਪਾਈਐ ॥ ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਬਾਹ ਲੁਡਾਈਐ ॥੪॥੩੩॥

ਆਸਾ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ ਦੀਵਾ ਮੇਰਾ ਏਕੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਦੁਖੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਪਾਇਆ ਤੇਲੁ ॥ ਉਨਿ ਚਾਨਣਿ ਓਹੁ ਸੋਖਿਆ ਚੂਕਾ ਜਮ ਸਿਉ ਮੇਲੁ ॥੧॥ ਲੋਕਾ ਮਤ ਕੋ ਫਕੜਿ ਪਾਇ ॥ ਲਖ ਮੜਿਆ ਕਰਿ ਏਕਠੇ ਏਕ ਰਤੀ ਲੇ ਭਾਹਿ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਤਲਿ ਮੇਰੀ ਕੇਸਉ ਕਿਰਿਆ ਸਚੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾਰੁ ॥ ਐਥੈ ਓਥੈ ਆਗੈ ਪਾਛੈ ਏਹੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਆਧਾਰੁ ॥੨॥ ਗੰਗ ਬਨਾਰਸਿ ਸਿਫਤਿ ਤੁਮਾਰੀ ਨਾਵੈ ਆਤਮ ਰਾਉ ॥ ਸਚਾ ਨਾਵਣੁ ਤਾਂ ਥੀਐ ਜਾਂ ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਭਾਉ ॥੩॥ ਇਕ ਲੋਕੀ ਹੋਰੁ ਛਮਿਛਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਵਟਿ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਖਾਇ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਬਖਸੀਸ ਕਾ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨਿਖੂਟਸਿ ਨਾਹਿ ॥੪॥੨॥੩੨॥

ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਬਾਤੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਤੇਲੁ ਲੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਪਸਾਰੇ ॥ ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ ਭਇਓ ਉਜਿਆਰੋ ਭਵਨ ਸਗਲਾਰੇ ॥੨॥

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ ਸੁਰਤੀ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਰਲਾਈਐ ਏਤੁ ॥ ਤਨੁ ਕਰਿ ਤੁਲਹਾ ਲੰਘਹਿ ਜੇਤੁ ॥ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਭਾਹਿ ਤਿਸੈ ਤੂ ਰਖੁ ॥ ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਲੈ ਅਥਕੁ ॥੧॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨੀਰਿ ਤਰਾਇ ॥ ਜਿਤੁ ਦੀਵੈ ਸਭ ਸੋਝੀ ਪਾਇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਹਛੀ ਮਿਟੀ ਸੋਝੀ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਤਾ ਕਾ ਕੀਆ ਮਾਨੈ ਸੋਇ ॥ ਕਰਣੀ ਤੇ ਕਰਿ ਚਕਹੁ ਢਾਲਿ ॥ ਐਥੈ ਓਥੈ ਨਿਬਹੀ ਨਾਲਿ ॥੨॥ ਆਪੇ ਨਦਰਿ ਕਰੇ ਜਾ ਸੋਇ ॥ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਵਿਰਲਾ ਬੂਝੈ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਤਿਤੁ ਘਟਿ ਦੀਵਾ ਨਿਹਚਲੁ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਪਾਣੀ ਮਰੈ ਨ ਬੁਝਾਇਆ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨੀਰਿ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੩॥ ਡੋਲੈ ਵਾਉ ਨ ਵਡਾ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਜਾਪੈ ਜਿਉ ਸਿੰਘਾਸਣਿ ਲੋਇ ॥ ਖਤ੍ਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਸੂਦੁ ਕਿ ਵੈਸੁ ॥ ਨਿਰਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਈਆ ਗਣੀ ਸਹੰਸ ॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਾਲੇ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੋ ਪਾਰੰਗਤਿ ਹੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥

Maharaj mehar kari.

The masands which you refer to are called Singh Sahib jee and you should read what the Guru Panth Khalsa means before you call people masands.

One last thing Veer jee, there is no such thing as the SGPC maryada, they have published it, this is the maryada of the Guru panth Khalsa (not any jhata) and signed by the AKal Takhat.. I hope this piece of information will take you out of ghorandhar :D .

Nice post Veer Bundha jee.

Veer Khalsaland jee we disagre on what Gurbax Singh jee said, however I dont understand why you did not ring the show? Also you can simply write a letter or ring Gurbax Singh. The controversy regarding the Dasam granth before 1970 can be found in Mahan Kosh. The controversy was mostly over issues as the Dasam granth being in one volume or more than one, the fact that this was discussed only shows that parkash was not done by Guru Gobind Singh jee, therefore the question was are we right to do what guru jee did not. Veer jee, I believe that the Dasam granth is the bani of Guru Gobind Singh jee, however as the direction of the Akal Takhat has been made clear I feel we should follow this decision. Ive also read your views, however, veer jee its clear when we read the panthic Sikh rehit maryada and the direction now given by the AKal Takhat.

The rehit maryada says the following: 'Sri Guru Granth SAhib jee di vakar (tull ) kishi pustaak.'

The Rehit maryada does not allow any other granth other than the Guru GRanth Sahib (note that only the guru Granth sahib jee is referred to as being parkash), Vakar means same as (to the guru granth Sahib) Tull means: matching, like, equal, equivalent, similar, proportional resembling, comparable. The panthic Sikh rehit maryada does not allow parkash of the Dasam granth or any other granth/pothi etc, furthermore Mata number 1 from the Akal Takhat does not allow parkash of the Dasam granth.

Guror andhar(absolute darkness)

What a funny post.I have given you the example of Gulshan not being able to understand the myth of creation as in Bachitra natak.

Can i get a refrence that says that dasam Granth was a disputed granth?You need to know that Baba Deeep singh himself had compiled Dasam Granth.Keeping dasam Granth in one or two volumes i.e. seprating charitropakhayan from rest of compositions does not make it a disputed Granth.

Please do not act like a crook.If you or your friend namak haram Gulshan has any refrence give it here.Otherwise say you do not have that.

Bhai Sahib Inder Singh jee, the reason why I asked for Audio or written evidence (from giani Gurbax Singh own pen or voice) is because I was not aware of his views on the bachittar natak, So please send us this evidence so we can also see his lack of intellect as you claim. (you still keep ignoring this issue and provide no evidence) :gg:

Like I said before, why did you not ring the radio programme? Or you could write him a letter or ring him. Before you do this you might want to read the following updesh from guru maharaj: imTqu nIvI nwnkw gux cMigAweIAw qqu ] So it might not be wise to use the language you do.

To use the word disputed granth is incorrect, I assume you did not read Bhai Kahn Singh jees Mahan Kosh. The appropriate word is controversey regarding the compilation. Ive not discussing the contents as I believe in it and the Akal takhat give us directions on this issue (Ive made this point so many times). Where has the issue of disputed granth come from? Its not something which we have been discussing and it seems your trying to put words into my mouth and divert the issue. I was asked for a referance proving some evidence of controversey before 1970, ive provided it, so end of issue. :D If I have called the Dasam granth a disputed granth (meaning the content is disputed) I ask for muafee.

Erm....Veer Inder Singh je, I said Baba Deep Singh jee compiled a dasam granth, so whats your point? Veer Sun jee the point is that Baba Deep Singh jee compiled the dasam granth (he had to do so because it was not present with him), therefore how was the dasam granth parkash right from the existence of the Taksal (Before Oct 1708). There is no doubt that these Gursikhs worked hard to collect the bani during a time where we could not even live out in the open (which must have made it so hard to find the different writings).

K_Z its for the Singh Sahiban to take action if they wish. Your suggestion would only lead to beadbi and arguments in Guru granth Sahib jees hazari, I feel this would shameful. Veechar is one thing, what you are suggesting would lead to similar storys as the bistee a few years back at Akal Takhat (Maan was involved).

Controversey on what?There was no controversey on the contents of Dasam Granth.

There was an opinion by some whether to keep charitropakhayan along with other compositions or it should be separate.How does it become controversey?Please explain me.

Bhai Kahan singh Nabha has himself acknowledged and revered Dasam Granth.Read his book "Hum Hindu Nahin" where he quotes extensively to prove Hindus wrong regarding banis of Dasam Granth.

So Show me the controversey from sikh history where there was question mark on authenticity of Dasam granth.

By the way are you an agent of these hidden forces like namak haram Darshan Lal bhatra and now Gulshan.

Veer Inder Singh jee, dont worry about me answering questions, Im still waiting for evidence that Gurbax Singh Gulshan does not have the intellect to understand the mataphors of the Dasam granth. And you cant blame your scanner on this one. Its easy to call people, lack in intellect, liars and crooks, but to then backing it up is something else. Veer jee simply look at Bhai Kahn Singh jee Nabhas Mahan Kosh under Dasam GRanth (page 616). Esp look at the arguments which took place on whether the Dasam granth should be in one granth or different pothi's. This was the issue which I was referring to.

If the Dasam granth was parkash since the Damdami Taksal came into existence, then why was Bhai Mani Singh asked to gather Guru Gobind Singh jees bani? He should have simply gone to Damdama Sahib. Why did Baba Deep Singh also gather Dasam Guru jees bani, it seems odd, the jathedhar of the Damdami Taksal has parkash of the dasam granth and did not know? Its obvious that there was no parkash otherwise why would baba Deep Singh try to find something which is supposed to be lost, but right under his nose.

Bhai Sahib AadSach I dont need such a light which you require and suggest, maharajs updesh is the light which we require, the following shabad makes it clear and will take me out of Ghorandhar: ਪਉੜੀ ॥ ਸਚਾ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਸੇਵਿ ਸਚੁ ਸਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਅੰਤਿ ਖਲੋਆ ਆਇ ਜਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਅਗੈ ਘਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਪੋਹਿ ਨ ਸਕੈ ਜਮਕਾਲੁ ਸਚਾ ਰਖਵਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਸਾਖੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਜਗਾਇ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਮਨਮੁਖ ਵਿਣੁ ਨਾਵੈ ਕੂੜਿਆਰ ਫਿਰਹਿ ਬੇਤਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਪਸੂ ਮਾਣਸ ਚੰਮਿ ਪਲੇਟੇ ਅੰਦਰਹੁ ਕਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਸਭੋ ਵਰਤੈ ਸਚੁ ਸਚੈ ਸਬਦਿ ਨਿਹਾਲਿਆ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਾਮੁ ਨਿਧਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਪੂਰੈ ਗੁਰਿ ਦੇਖਾਲਿਆ ॥੧੪॥

ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ਘਰੁ ੫ ॥ ਅਛਲ ਛਲਾਈ ਨਹ ਛਲੈ ਨਹ ਘਾਉ ਕਟਾਰਾ ਕਰਿ ਸਕੈ ॥ ਜਿਉ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਰਾਖੈ ਤਿਉ ਰਹੈ ਇਸੁ ਲੋਭੀ ਕਾ ਜੀਉ ਟਲ ਪਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਬਿਨੁ ਤੇਲ ਦੀਵਾ ਕਿਉ ਜਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਪੋਥੀ ਪੁਰਾਣ ਕਮਾਈਐ ॥ ਭਉ ਵਟੀ ਇਤੁ ਤਨਿ ਪਾਈਐ ॥ ਸਚੁ ਬੂਝਣੁ ਆਣਿ ਜਲਾਈਐ ॥੨॥ ਇਹੁ ਤੇਲੁ ਦੀਵਾ ਇਉ ਜਲੈ ॥ ਕਰਿ ਚਾਨਣੁ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਤਉ ਮਿਲੈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਇਤੁ ਤਨਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਬਾਣੀਆ ॥ ਸੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਸੇਵ ਕਮਾਣੀਆ ॥ ਸਭ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਆਵਣ ਜਾਣੀਆ ॥੩॥ ਵਿਚਿ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਸੇਵ ਕਮਾਈਐ ॥ ਤਾ ਦਰਗਹ ਬੈਸਣੁ ਪਾਈਐ ॥ ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਬਾਹ ਲੁਡਾਈਐ ॥੪॥੩੩॥

ਆਸਾ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ ਦੀਵਾ ਮੇਰਾ ਏਕੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਦੁਖੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਪਾਇਆ ਤੇਲੁ ॥ ਉਨਿ ਚਾਨਣਿ ਓਹੁ ਸੋਖਿਆ ਚੂਕਾ ਜਮ ਸਿਉ ਮੇਲੁ ॥੧॥ ਲੋਕਾ ਮਤ ਕੋ ਫਕੜਿ ਪਾਇ ॥ ਲਖ ਮੜਿਆ ਕਰਿ ਏਕਠੇ ਏਕ ਰਤੀ ਲੇ ਭਾਹਿ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਤਲਿ ਮੇਰੀ ਕੇਸਉ ਕਿਰਿਆ ਸਚੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾਰੁ ॥ ਐਥੈ ਓਥੈ ਆਗੈ ਪਾਛੈ ਏਹੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਆਧਾਰੁ ॥੨॥ ਗੰਗ ਬਨਾਰਸਿ ਸਿਫਤਿ ਤੁਮਾਰੀ ਨਾਵੈ ਆਤਮ ਰਾਉ ॥ ਸਚਾ ਨਾਵਣੁ ਤਾਂ ਥੀਐ ਜਾਂ ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਭਾਉ ॥੩॥ ਇਕ ਲੋਕੀ ਹੋਰੁ ਛਮਿਛਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਵਟਿ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਖਾਇ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਬਖਸੀਸ ਕਾ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨਿਖੂਟਸਿ ਨਾਹਿ ॥੪॥੨॥੩੨॥

ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਬਾਤੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਤੇਲੁ ਲੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਪਸਾਰੇ ॥ ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ ਭਇਓ ਉਜਿਆਰੋ ਭਵਨ ਸਗਲਾਰੇ ॥੨॥

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ ਸੁਰਤੀ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਰਲਾਈਐ ਏਤੁ ॥ ਤਨੁ ਕਰਿ ਤੁਲਹਾ ਲੰਘਹਿ ਜੇਤੁ ॥ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਭਾਹਿ ਤਿਸੈ ਤੂ ਰਖੁ ॥ ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਲੈ ਅਥਕੁ ॥੧॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨੀਰਿ ਤਰਾਇ ॥ ਜਿਤੁ ਦੀਵੈ ਸਭ ਸੋਝੀ ਪਾਇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਹਛੀ ਮਿਟੀ ਸੋਝੀ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਤਾ ਕਾ ਕੀਆ ਮਾਨੈ ਸੋਇ ॥ ਕਰਣੀ ਤੇ ਕਰਿ ਚਕਹੁ ਢਾਲਿ ॥ ਐਥੈ ਓਥੈ ਨਿਬਹੀ ਨਾਲਿ ॥੨॥ ਆਪੇ ਨਦਰਿ ਕਰੇ ਜਾ ਸੋਇ ॥ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਵਿਰਲਾ ਬੂਝੈ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਤਿਤੁ ਘਟਿ ਦੀਵਾ ਨਿਹਚਲੁ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਪਾਣੀ ਮਰੈ ਨ ਬੁਝਾਇਆ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਨੀਰਿ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੩॥ ਡੋਲੈ ਵਾਉ ਨ ਵਡਾ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਜਾਪੈ ਜਿਉ ਸਿੰਘਾਸਣਿ ਲੋਇ ॥ ਖਤ੍ਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਸੂਦੁ ਕਿ ਵੈਸੁ ॥ ਨਿਰਤਿ ਨ ਪਾਈਆ ਗਣੀ ਸਹੰਸ ॥ ਐਸਾ ਦੀਵਾ ਬਾਲੇ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੋ ਪਾਰੰਗਤਿ ਹੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥

Maharaj mehar kari.

The masands which you refer to are called Singh Sahib jee and you should read what the Guru Panth Khalsa means before you call people masands.

One last thing Veer jee, there is no such thing as the SGPC maryada, they have published it, this is the maryada of the Guru panth Khalsa (not any jhata) and signed by the AKal Takhat.. I hope this piece of information will take you out of ghorandhar :D .

Nice post Veer Bundha jee.

Veer Khalsaland jee we disagre on what Gurbax Singh jee said, however I dont understand why you did not ring the show? Also you can simply write a letter or ring Gurbax Singh. The controversy regarding the Dasam granth before 1970 can be found in Mahan Kosh. The controversy was mostly over issues as the Dasam granth being in one volume or more than one, the fact that this was discussed only shows that parkash was not done by Guru Gobind Singh jee, therefore the question was are we right to do what guru jee did not. Veer jee, I believe that the Dasam granth is the bani of Guru Gobind Singh jee, however as the direction of the Akal Takhat has been made clear I feel we should follow this decision. Ive also read your views, however, veer jee its clear when we read the panthic Sikh rehit maryada and the direction now given by the AKal Takhat.

The rehit maryada says the following: 'Sri Guru Granth SAhib jee di vakar (tull ) kishi pustaak.'

The Rehit maryada does not allow any other granth other than the Guru GRanth Sahib (note that only the guru Granth sahib jee is referred to as being parkash), Vakar means same as (to the guru granth Sahib) Tull means: matching, like, equal, equivalent, similar, proportional resembling, comparable. The panthic Sikh rehit maryada does not allow parkash of the Dasam granth or any other granth/pothi etc, furthermore Mata number 1 from the Akal Takhat does not allow parkash of the Dasam granth.

Guror andhar(absolute darkness)

What a funny post.I have given you the example of Gulshan not being able to understand the myth of creation as in Bachitra natak.

Can i get a refrence that says that dasam Granth was a disputed granth?You need to know that Baba Deeep singh himself had compiled Dasam Granth.Keeping dasam Granth in one or two volumes i.e. seprating charitropakhayan from rest of compositions does not make it a disputed Granth.

Please do not act like a crook.If you or your friend namak haram Gulshan has any refrence give it here.Otherwise say you do not have that.

<<<< Keep in mind that this parkash has been there from day one, from when the gurdwara sahib was first built by sant kartar singh ji. Now on one hand we all praise sant jarnail singh ji as being the one person who stood up for guru granth sahib jis satkar when maharajh was being attacked from all over, and yet now we accuse him of doing beadbi by having dasam granth sahib ji parkash as well!! >>>>

As we all know Sant Jarnail singh Ji would never do beadbi of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, could never do beadbi of Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Baba Ji were in the hazoori of Guru Granth Sahib Ji in 1984. THEREFORE .... maybe .....just maybe .... dare I say it........ just maybe..... we are at fault, we have such big heads (no offence) that we cannot see past them, we cannot accept or admit that we do not have the understand as we do not have the avastha.

On one hand Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our Guru, THERE IS NO QUESTION HERE, on the other we have bani of our Guru, Sri Mukh vaak of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and as such has as much respect and Mahanta as Guru Granth sahib Ji, there is NO DOUBT about this.

If you cannot see this, this is your own misfortune. People seem to be like the Musslay who cannot get their head around AkalPurkh being Nirgun and Sargun at the same time. Here Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our Guru and none other , and we have bani of Guru Gobind Singh Ji that has as much respect as all the bani, as it is also bani, so to have parkash of Guru Granth Sahib Ji and of Dasam Granth Sahib Ji is right and correct. If you have insecurities that you cannot handle this, then I am afraid that is your own problem.

Doing parkash of Dasam Granth is not beadbi of SGGS.What nonsense people make up on their own.

These parkash are there since Damdami taksal came into existence.Make no mistake about it.

Ghorandhar

Please do not beat about the bush.Give us a reference where it is written that Dasam Granth was controversial among sikhs except when Bhag ambala an arya samaji of Hindu religion who later became a sikh wrote derogatory about Dasam Granth.

Read malcolm's sketch of sikhs,Wilkinson's visit to patna sahib,Ibartnama of a persian writer that writes when ranjit singh went war two granths were going with his camp.

Veer S1ngh, since when do Janamsakhis make up a "strong foundation" of Sikhi. I thought that strong foundation was Gurbani

Veeray, I'm not saying sakhis aren't important, Gurbani itself tells us the extreme importance of sakhis, but they should always be taken in the context of Gurbani. I'm not really sure how the sakhi of Baba Deep Singh Ji (and the extreme power of his ardaas and prem) is relevant into this discussion

Khalsaland, although the SRM clearly forbids the parkash or another "pustak" paralell, I sugges tyou updates yourself with the mattas. Jathedar recently issued a hukamnama specifically forbidding parkash of DG.

Inder Singh, you have yet to provide evidence of Akal Takhat parkashing DG in 1942, esp considering Akal Takhat sending sanes about not allowing parkash of DG as early as 1934

Anyway, I'm out of here. Most people don't seem to care about what Akal Takhat has to say anyway, no matter how much they use Akal Takhat Gurmattas to suit their needs

Sikh panth has two granths Guru Granth and Dasam Granth.Make no mistake about it.

What makes foundation of sikhi?Does atheism make foundation of sikhi.That is what kala afghana and other touts of GOI are saying.

oye ghor.. yaar ik benti ya.. Tuh and teray kalay/chittay mittar ral keh ik nava cult shuroo karlo.. Saaanu karo maaf teh and saday dharam teh attack nah karo..

It exists.

This cult is called Akal Takhat

I'm actually surprised that those people who quickly point at the Akal Takhat Gurmatta condemning people rejecting Dasam Granth, are now REJECTING the Gurmatta that specifically REJECTS the practise of doing parkash of both Granth paralell.

Most people use Punnu, Dr Jodh Singh and G.S Lamba as their DG protectors - these people themselves say doing parkash of DG along Guru Granth Sahib is wrong.

Are you people seriously ok? All Gulshan's done is said "Decisions is already made by Panth. I accept the decision." Again and agian he said "I accept the decision." "I follow the decision?

Actually you know what, I think Ghorandhar Veer ji's lost it. He's lost the plot. He's following Akal Takhat to the point. He can't do that. That's not what Sikhs of that Panth do

Mr V

Why do not you ask gulshan if he has read DG even?He has not.

DG is a respected scripture of sikhs.It was in prakash at akal takhat till 1942.Heavens are not going to fall if it is in Prakash in gurudwaras.It does not have anything that is against sikh teachings.It is Granth without which sikhism will die.

oye ghor.. yaar ik benti ya.. Tuh and teray kalay/chittay mittar ral keh ik nava cult shuroo karlo.. Saaanu karo maaf teh and saday dharam teh attack nah karo..

It exists.

This cult is called Akal Takhat

I'm actually surprised that those people who quickly point at the Akal Takhat Gurmatta condemning people rejecting Dasam Granth, are now REJECTING the Gurmatta that specifically REJECTS the practise of doing parkash of both Granth paralell.

Most people use Punnu, Dr Jodh Singh and G.S Lamba as their DG protectors - these people themselves say doing parkash of DG along Guru Granth Sahib is wrong.

Are you people seriously ok? All Gulshan's done is said "Decisions is already made by Panth. I accept the decision." Again and agian he said "I accept the decision." "I follow the decision?

Actually you know what, I think Ghorandhar Veer ji's lost it. He's lost the plot. He's following Akal Takhat to the point. He can't do that. That's not what Sikhs of that Panth do

You seriously miss the point here. You obviously dont do the parkash of a granth parallel to Sri Guru Granth Sahib when you have to do katha from it!

SRM clearly states that a 'book' (pustak) cannot be 'installed' (asthapna) 'parallel' (vakar/tul) to Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Firstly, Sri Dasam Granth is not a 'pustak'. Secondly, whenever it is parkashed it is not done parallel to Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Even in Hazoor Sahib and Patna Sahib the parkash is not done parallel to Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Give it a thought

Ever noticed the parkash of Shasters on the main takhat at Akal Takhat...Sri Guru Granth Sahib is parkashed in the side...

Kale Afghaniyes will never understand these intricacies of Maryada

At takhats SGGS is to the side.At main place are weapons.When you go to akal takhat watch this.That is where DG ,Granth of khalsa,was till 1942.

Ghorandhar wrote

<<<<<Veer jee there is no rehitnama which says 5 bania and I have not come across any ithassic granth which gives the 5 bania, they all have different numbes with different bania. This does not mean its not 5 bania and neither does the writer say this. Veer jee could you scan Guru kian sakhiya and also tell us the author and publication as I have done with the book in question. Could you also do this with your 18th century documents. Ive not come across this. Thanks. The fact that he says 5 bania were decided after veechar and this is a panthic fainsla is something which you conviently miss out.>>>>

Response

Panj banis were decided by Sahib Guru Gobind singh ji in 1699.Read Guru kia sakhian by Bhai sarup singh Kaushish.It gives vivid details of the event.If you have not read that better keep quiet and noy create your own blasphemous fables.

Sikhism did not have discontinuity in its traditions.So traditions transferred from generation to generation since Guru ji's times.Crook Gulshan knows nothing about philosophical part of sikhism.He is a duki tikki who neither have read philosophy of sikh religion and nor has kamai of naam simran.Can he prove that so and so was his great grandfather.

It seems like the Damdmai Taksal, Nihangs and the IHRO and various people in the Punjab must all be dumb.

Case closed like i said.

Unfortunately you will have to do your own research: Guru Kian Sakhian written late 18th Century.

18th Century Dasam Granth manuscipts which i have inspected myself.

Convenient is it not? So you have no poof for the sources that you have written. I also suggest you email and ring Gurbax Singh with your evidence, but atleast give him more than you are giving me.

The Damdami Taksal and Nihangs dont follow the rehit maryada, your own sources (Taksal) attacks JAchak for saying women were allowed in the panj piyari, it seems they have also not read the rehit maryada. Not very reliable are they, these jhatas who dont even follow the panth.

Ghorandhar

Oldest rehat maryada of sikh panth is of Damdami taksal.This taksal was there when Baba Deep singh was there.

Ghorandhar wrote

<<<<What he says about the rehras is correct. Please read the Guru granth Sahib jee and you will come to the same conclusion. This has been concluded in the panthic sikh rehit maryada which he clearly says it is correct: Rather he says on page 64 at the bottom of the second paragaraph that neither the SGPC, any jhata or person has a right to change the maryada (either shorter or claiming its longer). Read the last sentence of that paragraph...

Response

What he says has no value.He is not pope of sikhism.He is an ordinary person with below average inteliigence.

This is not about jachak, you are just changing the topic and You have provided no proof. I dont know what his views on Dasam granth are, from reading his book ive not found the answer, you have come to a conclusion about him and have called him 'a crook, a liar', 'limited intellect' on the dasam granth, where is the evidence? please share it with us. Personally I will not make such statements about people when Ive not heard it from their mouths and ive not heard him make such comments. If he does make them in 2Nights show then fair enough, but until then, will you provide us with any referances?

What has Prof Darshab Singh got to do with this discussion. You were talking about Gurbax Singh Gulshan have limited intellect on the dasam granth. Im simply asking for some audio or written evidence. why come online and bad mouth other people without providing proof. If Gurbax Singh speaks against Dasam granth on the radio he is wrong, however for you to make assumptions on his views is just disgusting.

His rejection for the post of Head Granthi of Harmandir sahib twice is an evidence for his distorted theories about Dasam granth.Is that not enough?Surely it is.I do not need to give any more evidence against this liar,hypocrite and a crook.

Thanks for that i must buy the book as I can see why they want to excommunicate him now.

On page 204 he thinks he no mores than the Sikh panth and Khalsa.

He claims that the use of Nitem banis does not appear in any book or any Rahitnama until 1936.

I supose Guru Kian Sakhian 18th century is a fraud which clearly mentions the Five banis being recited and 18th Century Dasam Granth manuscripts bearing the composition Asphotak Kabitts which again mention the 5 banis.

And of course the Centuries held Sikh tradition that Guru Gobind Singh recited 5 banis at the time of the baptismal ceremony.

I was not aware that the theories of W.H. Mcleod had reached Gianis like him.

This misleading staement is a complete lie and fabrication. As a result the news items are 100% correct.

As the anti-Panthic forces like the Kala-Afgana lobby and Joginder Singh Spokesman, in the past kept brewing new troubles in the Panth, in the same manner the individual named Gurbaksh Singh 'Gulshan' in his book 'Darpan Sikh Rahit Maryada' has criticized and objected to the Sikh Rahit Maryada and (the Bani) Rahiras Sahib. Openly rejecting the Five Banees of the Amrit-Sanskar (ceremony), he has stated that their recitation in the Panth was started from 1936 only.

Case closed.

Punjab heritage

These are a bunch of thugs masquerading as sikhs and may be are on the payroll of anti sikh forces.The person who lies is not a sikh of the Guru.Gulshan is one of the lairs and traitor of sikh panth in the same way as kala afghana.

<<<<Veer Inder Singh can you provide us with some evidence that Gurbax Singh Gulshan does not understand the methaphors of the dasam granth, as you are sure his intellect is limited, I would like to see how you came up to this conclusion. Thanks.>>>

Response

Veer ji

An example,there is a myth of creation of the world in Bachitra natak wherein guru ji menntions about Madhu and kiteb,the demons.They take it as reality.They need to understand myth is not reality.Similar myths of creation are there in other religions also.

Guru ji has used metaphors such as saki(reference to waheguru) and piala(that is piala of Naam) in Hikayats.these stupids take it literal.They need to understand that similar metaphors are there in Bhai Gurdas ji di vaar 11.I can go on but will stop.

The proof of their hollowness is that they will neve r engage in any meaningful discussion like Darshan singh

Veer Punjab heritage jee, your sources say the following:

'The Damdami Taksal chief had alleged that except Giani Maan Singh, the other two priests had never served in any SGPC-run gurdwara.

He had also alleged that Giani Jaspal Singh was instrumental in the allowing baptised Sikh women to be part of "Panj Pyaras" (five beloved ones) who administered "Amrit" in "violation" of the established "maryada".'

The first point ive already made. The second point does not contradict the panthic Sikh rehit maryada. Further I could not find any points where Gurbax Singh has questioned the panthic Sikh rehit rehit maryada or the Dasam granth in his book or in your sources. Ive read his book and he does not question the panthic Sikh rehit maryada, once again I suggest you read the book instead of relying on other peoples research. I dont know what Gurbax Singhs views on the whole dasam granth are, however its clear from his book that he does not question the banis which you claim he does.

Veer Inder Singh jee what are you on about? The interview has not even taken place, yeah right im changing the topic :D the topic you have started is one day to early. In the first post by punjab heritage and links provided the following arguments have been made: nitnem bania, Amrit sanchar bania and rehraas sahib are questioned (this point was made in Punjab heritage's last post). All these issues are claimed to be written in the book darpan Sikh rehit maryada. However, I find it odd that Giani Gurbax Singh Gulshan does not even question any of these. Ive given the page numbers, so you guys can read up. So how am I changing the topic? Read the frist post and the links provided and you wont be confused. HAve you read the book?

Veer Inder Singh can you provide us with some evidence that Gurbax Singh Gulshan does not understand the methaphors of the dasam granth, as you are sure his intellect is limited, I would like to see how you came up to this conclusion. Thanks.

Veer Babbar Khalistani jee, I agree to a certain extent with you, however whatever the hukam of the Akal Takhat is parvan in my eyes. On the other hand look what happens when we do have debates as in this discussion, you've got people making comments about other people without even reading their books and then claiming the writer of the books has limited intellect :lol: . If there is going to be debate we first need to be able to sit together without shouting personal attacks and then we should read all the sources before we start a debate.

Ghorandhar ji

It is a known fact that Jagtar jachak and Gulshan are anti Dasam Granth.I have a question for you.

One of the qualifications to be considered for appointment as head Granthi of Harmandir sahib is to have belief and knowledge of Dasam Granth.If Gulashan does not believe in Dasam granth why he wants to take that post?Any logic for that.

The point is that he is not truthful but a rogue character unbecoming a khalsa.He is a meek,crook and a liar.

Notion of "healthy debates" only holds valid for discussions that are done in a positive spirit, and not for questioning the foundations of a faith. It has been proven beyond doubt that everyone who had criticised Dasam Bani, from Bhag Singh Ambala, to Kala Afghana, to Darshan Ragi had finally crossed their limits. Hence panth had to take actions against them by issuing Hukamnames.

Like we cant debate our paternity, we cant debate our religious scriptures...

I agree.These people like Gulshan have not seen the gates of institutes of higher learning.So their intellect has limitation.They do not have the ability to understand metaphors,myths,symbolism used extensively in Dasam Granth.They go for literal meanings and then create nonsense and expose their inadequacies.

Dasam Granth is one of the greatest pieces of sikh scriptural literature penned by tenth master.The more we understand it more strong khalsa panth will be.

I feel it's a very tricky situation. Hasn't our religion given us full freedon of speech? If yes why can't we debate such contentious issues be it gurmat or gurbani. I doubt if Guru Sahibans would have themselves passed such hukamnamas asking sangat to shut their mouths. To me it's pity that even so called Jathedars have also failed to understand the principles of Sikhi. Yes, they can issue hukamnamas regarding those people using bad language for bani or indulging in nindya but banning even healthy debates to me seems nothing short of dictatorship afterall those questioning dasam bani have valid points as well. Some have overstepped the lines and might have motives (who should be banned) but some do have valid argumentsas well, we shouldn't generalise them all and try to sideline them.

Bhul Chuk Muaff

Scritures of any religion are above personal scrutiny.Otherwise there will be chaos.

Ghor andhar ji

The issue here is not what he wrote in a particular book.The issue here is his blasphemous interview against Dasam Granth.He is also violating akal takhat sandesh.

I hope you get it and not divert the thread as you always do.

The so-called "Canadian Singh Sabha International" is worse than even the "typical" anti-Panthic missionary organisation.

The extremely large bulk of the video above speaks for itself in regards to their twisted ideology.

They are a small narrow-minded cult, there with the sole reason to twist Sikhi and cause internal Panth conflict.

Excommunicated former-Sikhs and anti-Panthic organisations are supported by the "Canadian Singh Sabha International", or even a part of the cult organisation.

Kala Afghana, Inder Ghagga, Darshan Ragi, Rozana Spokesman,…etc are all supported (and vice-versa) by this warped anti-Panthic cult.

The anti-Panthic cults website shows external links to the official websites such as that of Kala Afghana, Fateh Publications, Sikh Marg, Rozana Spokesman and UK-based Panjab Radio…etc.

Sikhs should have nothing to do with the self-styled "Canadian Singh Sabha International".

This oganization is singh in name only.It is a rogue sabha.They are an anti sikh organization.Beware of this

so called phoney singh sabha.

Akal Takht passed a resolutuion saying that the Dasam Granth was authentic and it was an important and historical Sikh scripture and integral part of panth. But it's 'prakash' cannot be done parallel with Guru Granth Sahib as Guru Sahib had given gurgaddi to Guru Granth only.

Agree more than 100%!!!

To all those nihangs and other sects who do parkash of SGGS and DG togheter, be aware, you are going AGAINST the hukumnama of Akal Takht Sahib.

What a stupid comment. If the "Jathedhaars" of Akhaal Thakath can't follow the HumanNameh; what posiiton are they in to present HukamNameh to others??

Nihang Singhs that do Parkaash of Dhasam Granth Banee, don't do do It's Parkaash in the same Dharbaar Saahb as Siree Guroo Granth Sahib Jee, they do it in a seperate Dharbaar Saahb.

There is nothing wrong in doing prakash of dasam granth.SGGS is our Guru and dasamgranth is scripture of tenth master.

Raagi darshan is lost. He is himself confused about DG. What is he going to teach others about it?

He has no intellect and mental level to comprehend DG.His lecture on DG in Singhsbha canada Gurudwara was foolish and incorrect.

He can only do kirtan from a written parchi.he is not a philosopher.

As would be easily evident from the comments...no one here is a scholar on the subject. *edited* While an example has been given of SGPC commitee, even they accepted that some of the parts were not from the pen of Dasam Pitah. The Udasis were good only till Gurujis time, don't forget that it were Udasis who brought Brahminical practises such as idol worship, seeing horoscopes etc. into Gurdwaras. And the less we talk about Virsa Singh the better. I have personally met him atleast twice, have also visited Gobind Sadan. He was, according to me, under brahminical influences. I lost respect for him after my second meeting.

Guys, personally, i would like to beat the <admin-profanity filter activated> out of this Darshan Singh. But, please don't forget that this year we are celebrating tri-cenetary of JUGO JUG ATAL SRI GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI MAHARAJ. So, lets not forget who our Guru is and where our actions should be directed.

And the work of Dasam Pitah in Dasam Granth is equally holy and divine, but not of his poets.

SGPC is no authority on scritpures.SGPC letter is fake.There is no signature on that.

I agree during this year there should be no controversy.But Darshan singh is raking up on purpose.

The collection of the 10th Guru's bani has had a number of name changes. Man I'm getting tired of this. there were 2 major panthic level conferences, one in late 1800's, one in 20th century by sgpc. they decided to keep it together as well.

Dasam Granth is a shortened version of Dasam Patshah ka Granth. Nothing wrong or bhramanical about this.

This discussion is going in circles. You guys keep ignoring key points. :lol:

Now, who are these bhramanical forces. Name the specific groups in the panth responsible. It seems liek these shadowy bhramanical forces seem to pop up whenever ignorant sikhs dislike something about the dharam.

yes, they decided to keep it together, but that does not mean that all of the work is of Guruji. Dasam Granth is no doubt a shortened version but devised by brahmins. You cannot ignore the fact that after banda Bahadurs death till rise of misls, Sikh history is full of dark bloody chapters. and no genuine sikh accounts exists during that period, because sikhs were fighting for existence. The brahmins were aided by UDASIS and NIRMALAS. The nirmalas did provided interpretation of Gurbani, but gave it vedantic interpretation. the Deras were originally established by nirmalas. After the death of Bhai mani singh and Nawab Kapur Singh, caste hindus such as Rama Randhawa , Karma Chinna etc. tried to subvert sikhi for their gains and aided brahmins in distorting sikh writings.

One of the famous distorters is Koer singh Kalal, who added 41st // in 'vaaran bhai gurdas' and showed guruji as worshipping Durga. he admiited that he was sikh only in name and took the name 'Kala'l to gain respect from name of Jassa singh kalal. (read 'gurbilas patshahi dasvin' 1751) then came large number of converts from vaishnav hindus, who are still posing a challange to sikhi.

then came your famous Kesar singh Chibber, who had devout sikh ancestors like Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Sati Das. He also distorted sikh doctrines.To him, the main purpose of sikh rule should have been protection of brahmins. (read 'banswali nama' 1769)

another was Sarup Das Bhalla (Mahima parkash, 1776), descendant of Guru Amar Das ji, tried to gain respectable positions for descendants of sikh gurus including dhir Mal, Prithi chand etc. who were detractors of sikhi.

There was also Gurbilas Patshahi 6, 1718, by sohan kavi, who brings in lot of rituals contradicting sikh theology.

baba virsa singh has named Ashok singhal as one of his trustees in his will.ashok singhal is head of RSS and claims sikhs are hindus. And it would be tiresome to include the names of many other sant babas, as list is too long.

I am not saying that dasam granth does not have gurujis bani. I am saying that not all of it is his work. i am unable to find the exact thing, but the sgpc committee agreed that some parts were not work of guruji.

All pasrts of Dasam Granth is from tenth master.We have two manuscripts in uSA that have all parts but no zafarnama and compilation dates go to year 1697.Zafarnama was written after Guru left Anandpur sahib and that is included in Bhai mani singh bir..

well we both got our points across.

something the panth hasn't been able to resolve in over centuries is not going to be resolved by two people on a forum.

my only suggestion is don't be so cynical about everything and everyone. because at the end of the day, the "two sides" which have been declared both say the same thing, we want to respect Guru sahib and not let RSS type people distort sikhi. I hear this from both sides. so everybody wants the same thing.

take care.

peace.

A ridiculous ,false and misleading statement.The panth has never doubted Dasam granth in 300 years.Some rogue characters and thugs masquersading as sikhs of akirtghan kala afghana have posed this as a probelm.This problem is festered and sustatined. by them.

I have read Dasam Granth and i can vouch as whole of Dasam granth is by tenth master.Do not quote portions out of context.This is dishonesty.See the essence of compositions of Chaubis avtar and bachitra natak and understand wht is myth,metaphor,symbolism and then read Dasam granth.None of these rogue chraracters who are not nitnemi sikhs have read DG.

Udasis are a cult / sect not Khalsa or Sikhs Sri Chand was a useless person no good for nothing,

Udasis may be anything but they also scarificed for khalsa panth.Their leader mahanat vKirpal showed an examplery bravery in battle of Bhangani alongwith guru ji.

Thos who bad mouth the scarifices of sikhs for khalas panth are not sons of their parents.

you are twisting things. these banis are not doing ustat of avtaars, instead they are showing that avtaars have flaws, are not perfect, and only one lord alone should be worshipped.

You use alarmist arguments like: "The supporters of so called Dasam Granth wants to merge Sikhs into Hindus and make them characterless as Iqbal Singh himself is."

However, Sant Jarnail Singh ji fully believed in and supported Dasam Granth Sahib ji. In fact, Dasam Granth is parallel prakash at Taksaali gurdwaras in India. Did Sant ji work to merge sikhs into hindus??

Here's a brief synopsis of some of the Dasam Granth banis with the word avtaar in the title:

CHOUBEES AVATAR

This is a very important literary piece. In this the stories of twenty-three Avatars of lord Vishnu have been included. These are Machch, Kachch, Nar, Narain, Mohini, Varaha, Narsingha, Baman, Parasram, Brahma, Rudra, Jallandhar, Bisan, Sheshmai, Arihant, Dev, Manu Raja, Dhanantar, Sooraj, Chandra, Ram Krishan, Nar (Arjan), Budh and Nehkalanki. Of these, Krishnavatar is the longest followed by Ramavatar and then Nehkalanki avatar. While some of the facts included are as per the scriptures, the writer has also used his own imagination to further elaborate on the facts.

At the beginning, Guru Gobind Singh Ji has clearly stated his aim for writing this literary piece. In this God has been referred to as the source and fountain head from which all avatars have come forth. Whenever the earth gets weighed down by evil and sin, God sends down lord Vishnu as an avatar. But even the avatars fall prey to their inflated ego hence face the displeasure of God who then sends another avatar. Each of these avatars is an expert at martial arts and strategies. It is this aspect of their personalities that is of utmost significance to the Guru.

UP AVATAR

This composition follows Chaubees Avatar. It begins by narrating the incidents and experiences of Brahma. But in this too there is the Îfallâ because of an inflated ego and excessive pride. At Godâs behest Brahma wrote the Vedas, but fell a victim to vanity. For this he was sent down on earth and it took him ages to rise again in the estimation of God. Finally, when he was successful in pleasing God, he was told that he would have to go down to earth and take the form of seven avatars. These were Balmik, Kashyap, Shukra, Brahaspati, Vyas, Sastrodharak and Kalidasa.

There are no such references in any of the existing scriptures. This composition is the outcome of Guru Gobind Singh Jiâs imagination.

The references to Brahma are followed by two avatars of Rudra-Dattatreya and Parasnath. Rudra too fell prey to conceit and suffered for it like Brahma. Similarly he had to take on the form of two avatars to redeem his mistake.

On reading these episodes on finds that the various avatars can be categorized under three heads. Shastradhari or those who took up arms and fought for right, Shaastradhari or those who on the strength of their knowledge fought for right and Kalyankari-these who transformed the world through their good deeds. Thus, whichever form they took, the fight was against the evil forces. The most important point that emerges on reading these compositions is that Guru Ji has not given undue and excessive importance to any avatar. He clearly states and believes that though an avatar has a divine spark in him, he is not God. Actually Guru Ji wanted to dispel the false belief that there can be different Gods. He wanted the people to understand that there is only One God.

KHALSA MAHIMA

This has four verses. It delineates the glory that is associated with the Khalsa. Guru Ji explains the role of the Khalsa to the priests who had come to perform a yagna. He says that it is only through the Khalsa that all achievements have been possible for him.

CHARITROPAKHIYAN

This composition highlights the various faces of woman. While the positive roles played by woman as a wife, as a mother, as a soldier are outlined, the negative aspect of some women who stoop to lowly activities has also been brought out.

It begins by elucidating the extreme bravery and courage of Devi Bhagwati and highlights her various deeds of glory. This is followed by the various positive ways in which women contribute to the welfare of their families in particular and society in general. The examples are drawn from the Mahabharata, Puranas, Brihat Katha, Katha Sahitya Saagar, Alif Laila, Ayaarey Dayish and other comtemporary literature. On reading about the various characters included in this composition one also gets an insight into the culture, tradition and values of the society and region of which they are a part.

Thus, through the given examples, Guru Ji has formulated a very strong value system for the reader, laying down rules to be upheld and followed by both men and women so that a society free from all mortal sins may be formed.

from gobindsadan.org

Veerji

You have extracted "from gobindsadan.org " which is a anti-sikh organization. They worship idols of Baba Sri Chand, Jesus Christ, Mother Mary. Visit Gobind sadan's web site http://www.gobindsadan.net/gallery2/main.php and see what they do.

You have written " However, Sant Jarnail Singh ji fully believed in and supported Dasam Granth Sahib ji. In fact, Dasam Granth is parallel prakash at Taksaali gurdwaras in India. Did Sant ji work to merge sikhs into hindus?"

Taksaali Gurudwaras are place of Brahamanical rituals. Read Giani Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale's book, " Gurbani Paath Darshan ", you will get to know what they want. Full of rituals. Sant Jarnail Singh was a warrior, what he did is matchless. But if he supported Dasam Granth doesn't mean his wordings are final and supreme. Taksaal made his Qurbani worthless by telling lies that he is Alive, for more than 20 years in front of SGGS.

If Sikhs can't learn from SGGS which is Shabad Guru, ordered by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji as "Sabh Sikhan ko Hukam hai, Guru Maneyo Granth", what they will learn from so called Dasam Granth which even he didn't promoted.

Sikh can read Dasam Granth, and other scriptures but our only Guru is SGGS. Do you do prakash of Bhai Gurdass ji's vaars, Bhai Nand Lal's ghazals, which are sung in Gurudwaras. NO........ then why DG.

Taksalis read Upnashids, Purans, Vedas and every other Hindu scriptures, then do the parallel prakash of these also with SGGS.

A complete nonsense by GOI agent Chak de phate.How many scarifices the anti dasam Bani brigade ahs given for sikh panth?All these rogues are agents of GOI.

Taksali maryada is oldest in sikh panth.I will take you to a taksali Gurdwara and show me where they believ in Hinduism>Accept the challenge.Reveal your locationa nd name.