khalsaland

According to the info on Youtube this first copy of the beerh was created by Bhai Balwinder Singh (Takhat Sri Hazur Sahib) and was presented to 'Sant Sipahi' magazine

ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕਾ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਫਤਿਹ

My Name is Robin Singh I am from Germany and well it's really sad what he is doing. Such a shame as a Ex Jathedar of Khalsa Panth.

The Seminar is Today in Frankfurt. And tomorrow they are gonna do a Nagar Kirtan with all Gurdwaras in Germany together. Our Gurdwara in Hamburg is not invited because i think we are Taksalis. The other Gurdwara Hamburg where Prof. Darshan (Singh) is coming on 7th-8th Oktober is invited. It's such a shame.

We will go 7-8th Okt. to the other Gurdwara in Hamburg and will try to talk with him. I know talking is not working now. Huun Shitar hi chalne pehnge. Guru Maharaj ji will support and help us with his being ang sang with us.

We burnt DVD's with the Seminars etc. of Dasam Bani and so on. which are on Santhsipai Magazin and Panthic weekly as you know. I collected all Gurdwara adresses of Germany and we are sending tomorrow all Cd's to them. One Chardikala Singh will be there and give all the Sangat Cd's of Prof Darshan Singh jis behaviour. We will send them with the Hukamname and other stuff.

If you can help us please support us. And if you can give us any advice to take action on this matter please help us as well.

Bhul Chuk Maaf ji

wjkk wjkf

Robin Singh Ji!

May Akalpurakh bless you with chardi kala!

There is no difference between Gurmeet Ram Rahim (Dera Sacha Sauda) and Darshan Ragi....Gurmeet is ridiculing the the concept of amrit, whereas Darshan is ridiculing the banees recited during the amrit.

Both are 'dokhis' of Guru panth and need to be confronted!

Sangat needs to be made aware of Darshan Ragi's deeds. Informing the sangat is the biggest seva that you are doing.

Darshan should get a clear message that sangat is taking cognizance of his actions, and he should refrain from acting like a drama queen and spread blasphemy and guru nindya from the stage of a Gurughar.

Its not a case of "difference of opinion" but a clear case of guru nindya.

Darshan Ragi has engaged in denigrating the same banees which he once held in high respect. Why? What happened? Why has he started using derogatory language against some banees which he himself was once doing keertan of?

He is answerable to the sangat...

We dont have "difference of opinion" with Nirankaris, Ashutosh, Bhaniyarevala and Gurmeet Ram Rahim. They all are guru nindaks, and so is Darshan Ragi.

fateh ji,

i'm from munich but my cousin lives there :gg:

Khalsa88 Ji!

Tell your cousin to print the following documents and pass them on to the organisers...Also if he can distribute them among the sangat then that will be a great seva...

-----

Akal Takhat Sahib Hukamnama regarding Prof. Darshan Singh (January 8, 2007)

Why is Prof. Darshan Singh facing the wrath of the Panth?

Panthic Weekly: Darshan Singh's Anti-Dasam Granth Phobia (op/ed)

Panthic Weekly: Toronto Sangat: Ragi Darshan Singh should refrain ...

Panthic Weekly: Ragi Darshan Singh: A Jathedar from Bollywood ...

Panthic Weekly: Akhand Kirtani Jatha Challenges Ragi Darshan Singh

Darshan Ragi has been invited to Germany on the occassion of tri-centenary celebrations. He is going to participate in a seminar on the 3rd October in Frankfurt.

This drama queen is again going to speak against Nitnem and Dasam banees as he has been doing on numerous occassions.

He has already defied Akal Takhat hukamnamas that have specifically warned him to stop his 'koor-prachar'.

Sangat in Germany needs to be educated on his anti-panthic deeds, and his actions need to be checked.

------

http://www.santsipahi.org/patshahi10/chargesheet-darshan-singh.html

The charges against Prof Darshan Singh for using derogatory remarks for Guru Gobind Singh Sahib's banee and becoming a turn coat from his earlier beliefs are very serious and cannot be ignored.

For some time now Darshan Singh has been cashing every opportunity to attack the banees of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib. Maybe under some misunderstand that his blasphemy will go unchecked he increased his assault on Gurbanee, Guitihas and Gurmaryada.

Now that finally the Panth has taken a serious cognizance of this, it is important that his blasphemy, hypocrisy and the charges against him be brought in front of the sangat.

It might be difficult to understand the U-turn of Darshan Singh from his own earlier beliefs and sermons, but it is not difficult to understand which group's skewed ideological views he is serving. All Panthic organizations have been unanimous in condemning Darshan Singh. As expected only a handful of people and groups who are vocally supportive of excommunicated Kala Afghana and his skewed ideology have come to his support.

If what Darshan Singh has said would have come from an unknown individual then his views would have been ignored as heretic. Because Darshan Singh's novel views even contradict his own previous position it is important to bring this to the notice of the Panth.

Just to ensure that the genuine issues surrounding Prof. Darshan Singh's blasphemous comments are not faded, here is a brief gist of things because of which Darshan Singh has faced the wrath of the Panth and Panthic institutions:

All through these years Darshan Singh had earned respect as a Panthic ragi by his devotion and belief in the Gurbanee. He himself has ceased that respect by denigrating the same banees.

These are serious issues requiring serious considerations. IHRO, AKJ and various Panthic organizations are fulfilling their Panthic and religious duty by bringing this out to the sangat.

Knowingly or unknowingly Darshan Singh is serving the cause of those who are aligned to the distorted and ostracized ideology of Kala Afghana, by becoming a handle of their anti-Panthic axe. This is evident from the support he is getting from these quarters. These people will come to the rescue of anyone who will accomplish their agenda of damaging the Sikh principles. The above views of Darshan Singh clearly prove that point.

Related Links

Source of Prof. Darshan Singh's Kirtan in his own words

Jagat Tamasha- An article based on Bachittar Natak written by Prof. Darshan Singh

Waheguru ji ka khalsa. Waheguru ji ki fateh

My veer and phenji's, can anyone assits me . I am looking for the shabad 'rogen tey ar sogen tey.....

Does anyone has the full shabad?

I understand that the shabad is from the sri dasam granth sahib jee bani. But i do not know which particular banee and please, if there is any more raksya dey shabads..please share with your sister.

Thank you

Waheguru ji ka khalsa. Waheguru ji ki fateh

Its from the Sawayyes (Dinan ki pritpaal...) from Sri Dasam Granth

Here is the text...

ਰੋਗਨ ਤੇ ਅਰ ਸੋਗਨ ਤੇ ਜਲ ਜੋਗਨ ਤੇ ਬਹੁ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਬਚਾਵੈ ॥

He protects in many blows, but none doth inflict thy body.

ਸੱਤ੍ਰੁ ਅਨੇਕ ਚਲਾਵਤ ਘਾਵ ਤਊ ਤਨ ਏਕ ਨ ਲਾਗਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥

The enemy strikes many blows, but none doth inflict thy body.

ਰਾਖਤ ਹੈ ਅਪਨੋ ਕਰ ਦੈ ਕਰ ਪਾਪ ਸੰਬੂਹ ਨ ਭੇਟਨ ਪਾਵੈ ॥

When the Lord protects with his own hands, but none of the sins even comes near thee.

ਔਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਤ ਕਹਾ ਕਹ ਤੋ ਸੌਂ ਸੁ ਪੇਟ ਹੀ ਕੇ ਪਟ ਬੀਚ ਬਚਾਵੈ ॥੬॥੨੪੮॥

What else should I say unto you, He protects (the infant) even in the membranes of the womb.6.248.

Giani Gurbachan Singh, Jathedar Sri Akal Takhat Sahib, talks about maryada and his tenure as sevadaar at Sri Darbar Sahib, Muktsar Sahib. He mentions how, he as a sevadaar, used to perform seva of doing parkash and taking hukamnama from Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Sri Dasam Granth Sahib.

http://santsipahi.wordpress.com/

Goodbye! Jathedar Joginder Singh

S. Gurcharanjit Singh Lamba

(Editor Sant Sipahi)

Both, the entry and exit of Jathedar Joginder Singh to the post of Akal Takhat Jathedar was very dramatic. Sardar Sukhdev Singh Bhaur and Rajinder Singh Mehta carried out the duty to collect the resignation of the Singh Sahib and removing him from the esteemed post.

Contrary to the Sikh philosophy that ensures equality of Religion and Politics, this decision was a "hat-trick" where Politics was again used to suppress the status of Religion. Even before this, the position of Jathedar Ranjit Singh and Giani Puran Singh was sacrificed to the panthic politics. None of them had a respectable exit from his post and no moral norms were used for their removal.

During his tenure as Jathedar, Giani Joginder Singh saw many ups and downs. Many times after his decisions as Jathedar of Akal Takhat Sahib, it felt as if he would now be shown the door from the esteemed position. But before any harsh decision was taken, every time a new panthic controversy germinated and his "exit" seemed to be deferred indefinitely.

Though he had his Gurmat education from The Damdami Taksal, he never let Taksal Maryada influence Akal Takhat Sahib or the Panthic Maryada.

When Giani Joginder Singh Ji was appointed the Jathedar it was decided that guidelines addressing the functioning and rules & regulations of Akal Takhat and its Jathedar be formulated. But it never happened. If this would have happened then perhaps this current situation could have been avoided.

Though Jathedar Ji has been forced to submit his resignation, but in the nation of "Satyamev Jayete", now the SGPC will try to deny any involvement in this and will declare that his resignation was voluntary. And the Shiromani Akali Dal will give its regular statement that it does not interfere in the functioning of either the SGPC or the Jathedar Akal Takhat.

When Master Tara Singh Ji was in the Almorah Jail every inmate had to sing "Raghupati Raghav Raja Ram.." in the morning prayers. Master Tara Singh told the Jailer that there are Muslim inmates too, so why are they forced to sing this. The Jailer replied that everyone sings by his choice. To this Master Ji said, "Then announce that those who want to sing this should sing and those who don't should not". The Jailer replied, "If we give such an order everyone will leave".

Looking back at what had happened during the previous Centenary celebrations too, it seems as if on the Panthic level someone is determined to taint the environment during every centenary celebration by behaving with the Jathedar of Akal Takhat in the same way as a local Gurdwara Committee does to its Granthi.

During his tenure as the Jathedar, Giani Joginder Singh had taken some historic decisions and issued important hukamnamas. Some of the historic Hukamnamas are as follows:

1. Issuing a hukamnama, during the quad centenary of Parkash of Guru Granth Sahib in 2004, declaring RSS as an anti Sikh organisation.

2. In 2006 appreciating the role of Sant Sipahi Magazine in exposing the fake letter of RSS in the name of Akal Takhat. This was another serious blow to the RSS.

3. Hukamnama against Deras where persons (Saadhs) are given more importance than Sri Guru Granth Sahib.

4. Hukamnama declaring the detractors of Sri Dasam Granth as mischievous miscreants.

5. Hukamnamas excommunicating, Joginder Singh (Spokesman), Kala Afghana, and his supporters.

Persian scholar Sheikh Sahdi once said, "You have got a short life. Say what you want to say, before the God says 'Shut-up". Every Jathedar should also realize that his life as a Jathedar is short. And before the "political masters" say 'Shut-up', he while addressing a panthic issue should use his powers considering what Guru Hargobind Sahib would have done or said.

Removal of Jathedar is not distressful, but the way he has been removed is indeed sad. Before his removal he should have at least been given a chance to express himself in the court of the sangat, and should have taken the permission of the sangat before his respectful exit.

I refuse to accept, as would any historian and not just an adherent, that DG ever existed as a granth during Guruji's time. I do not want to offend anyone with my point, sorry if i did that.

There are only four credible historical known birs of DG according to 'Panth Parkash', and the one of Patna Sahib which has pages attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, was according to 'Panth Prakash' written by Giani Gyan Singh "in 1832 AD Sukha Singh compiled a bir at Patna...and his son Charat Singh imitating the hand-writing of Guru Gobind Singh added five sheets to the bir, claiming it to be written by the Guru he charged much more times than the normal rate. He also wrote several birs and passed it as written by Guru Gobind Singh for monetry gains" - from 'Dasam Granth' : jagjit singh

Jagjit Singh was a heretic and a non-believer...most of his claims about Sri Dasam Granth are based on conspiracy theories...he just mentions them without giving any credible evidence to support his claims. Most of his claims have already been refuted.

Sri Dasam Granth was very much present in the form of a beerh during the time of Guru Sahib as is evident by the text above the 'table of contents' in Patna Beerh. Also at numerous places in Sri Dasam Granth, Guru Sahib himself wrote that he is writing compositions which are going to be a part of a ''Granth''. See this

http://www.santsipahi.org/patshahi10/quest.html#9

As for Khas Patras (pages hand written by Guru Sahib himself), there are many Beerhs that have Khas Patras in them. And the handwriting on all the Khas Patras are astonishingly similar. Darshan of the Khas Patras from different Beerhs:

http://www.santsipahi.org/patshahi10/hand-written-bani-2.pdf

Skepticism and desbelief has no end...

Sri Dasam Granth is not even a subject of debate...Those who plead otherwise should first understand the essence of Sri Dasam Granth.

Reading a few lines out of context and thinking that one has acquired intellect over Sri Dasam Granth is highly absurd.

However what actually is a debatable issue is the character and hypocrisy of crooks like Darshan who at certain point of their lives have had high respect for the banees and now have taken a U-turn from their earlier beliefs.

Sikhism is famous for those who have died for their beliefs. Shameless people like Darshan who change their beliefs depending on the 'political season' are black spots on Sikhism.

Here is a good writeup about crooks and Gur-dokhis like Darshan.

Hall of Shame : The Heretics in the Panth

http://www.panthic.org/news/129/ARTICLE/3830/2008-01-24.html

He says "In my conduct as Prime Minister I have also been inspired by the famous invocation of Great Guru Gobind Singh..."

------

Related news..

NEW DELHI, JULY 21 (PTI) A Sikh guru's battle cry was today invoked by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to affirm that he would not be deterred from the path of "good work", as he sought a vote of confidence in the Lok Sabha today.

"Deh siva // mohe eha, shubh karman te kabhu na tarru. Na daru ari so jab jaye ladoo, nischey kar apni jeet karun.Ar sikh hon, apne he man so, ehi lalach hon, gun ton uchroon. Jab aav ki oodh nidhan bane, at hi run main tab joojh maroon,"

Singh said reciting a verse of Guru Gobind Singh at the end of his speech moving the motion. (Oh God almighty, give me strength that nothing could deter me from the path of good work. And when I go to the battlefield I must emerge the winner. Give me strength so that I don't get distracted. I should be the winner even if I have to loose my life.)

.

Search for a quote from any 'puratan' source about the introduction of 'parkash' of 'Aad Granth' by Guru Arjan Sahib. You will realise how histories are written/made.

Fact is parkash of both the Granths have been done in Khalsa tradition. If you believe that this tradition has been introduced by mischief then prove it.

Else there is only one reason behind Sri Dasam Granth parkash...and that is respect for the Dasam Bani.

Why crave for a quote from history about Sri Dasam Granth parkash when we can see that it has been parkashed throughout history in Khalsa traditions...

First of all you have no way to prove that Sri Dasam Granth was not parkashed..

Secondly the fact is some of the oldest Khalsa Jathebandis, the Damdami Taksal, Nihang Jathebandis and others have been doing Sri Dasam Granth parkash throughout history.

Unless you have evidence to show that the parkash of Sri Dasam Granth was mischievously introduced into Sikhism there is no point to rattle a non-issue.

If you want to go back into history then you will not also bring idols back into the complex, you will also bring the pandits back into the complex, remember that it was not anand karag with took place, it was the rasaam created by brahmans and pandits.

Its not the first time Veer V jee made it clear that he is talking about the parkash and not the content. so there is no need to act like its a revelation, its just your failure to understand what others are saying.

Your comparing Sri Dasam Granth which is the source Granth of Amrit, Nitnem and Ardas with 'Pandits' and 'idols' speaks volumes about how much respect you hold for it.

You might cry loud that you are not against Sri Dasam Granth, but the fact is you cant hide it...can you?

If you want to stay on the topic, then - fact is, Dasven Patsha Ka Granth might have been "very much present", why was it not used during the Amrit Sanchar of 1699?

If you had known which banees constitute the Amrit Sanchar, you wouldnt even have asked this question.

How do you know that Dasvan Patshah Ka Granth was never parkashed during Guru Gobind Singh Sahib's time.

There are two things here 'Gurgaddi' and 'Parkash'. Time and again you are mixing up both these things.

Guru Sahib didnt give Gurgaddi to Sri Dasam Granth. This doesnt mean Sri Dasam Granth was never parkashed!

You ask for evidence that it was parkashed. Why not show evidence that it was not.

Khalsaland, you have again diverted the topic. By writings half of your post on Rehitnamas. I agree that rehitnamas were the basis of the Sikh Rehit Maryada. I fully support this maryada (which ironically rejects many of the statements in the rehitnamas you have mentioned.) Do you fully accept the Sikh Rehit Maryada as it as? Why the hypocrasy. Since you are bent on accepting all Rehitnamas, I assume you accept everything Chaupa Singh has written. I suggest you start reading the rehitnamas before commenting on them. Do you accept that bibis cannot have Khandey da Amrit, but should have Kirpan da Amrit?

Parkash of Dasam Granth is EXACTLY what the issue is about, considering Guru Gobind Sahib Maharaj made a decision to distinguish his writings from the first ten Gurus (of the same jyot.) It is YOU who are making an issue out of an issue already solved by the Panth - or does this faisla not suit your own belief? Maharaj Made the faisla. Panth clarified the faisla. The Sikh Rehit Maryada is clear about the issue. You are out their to misinterpret it to suit your needs.

Again, I'm waiting for evidence that Guru Gobind Singh Sahib did Parkash of Dasam Granth.

Hang on...Who diverted the topic? You questioned Rehatnama in order to prove your point and I gave you other sources and asked if you would like to question those too.

Keep your 'valuable' comments on others beliefs to yourself...Guru Maharaj made a decision to give Gurgaddi to Sri Guru Granth Sahib..and I havent come accross anyone who is challenging this.

As far as parkash of Sri Dasam Granth is concerned it is a non-issue...No one is forcing you to do parkash so cool down...

If you think those who do parkash of Sri Dasam Granth do out of disrespect to Sri Guru Granth Sahib, then you are so wrong!

The fact is, a 'Dasven Patshah Ka Granth' was very much present during the time of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib...

Ive just re read it the composition and it could be referring to the granth as a whole, ive always understood this was referring to the composition until veer jee gave his interpretaton. :D

The compositions have been written at different times over a span of a long time.Guru ji has given the date of their completion.If you take composition of Charitropakhayan and compare it with writing of Rehatnama of Bhai Chaupa singh ji the dates of compleiton exactly match.

Veer, Sorry I'm not sure how comparing rehitnama Chaupa Singh (out of All rehitnamas! The one who says there is not Khandey Batte di Pahul for women! They can "only" have Kirpan da Amrit, and includes many other obscure practises.) to prove it's reliability. I suggest you read Bhai Chaupa Singh's writings before "using it as a reference"

Point here is slander of Dasam bani by third rate people with lachar( obscene) writings be it Bhag Ambala ,kala afghana or Gurtej Ex iAS or Jasbir Mann.How can they ignore the impeccable proofs of internal evidence and use derogatory language for this granth.It is blasphemy and they should be dealt with severely.

No the point in this thread is whether or not the Dasam Granth should be parkash or not. Just like the Panth has issued a statement saying that the banis should be accepted (something we all should follow, until a new faisla is made); we have to accept that the Panth has decided that it should NOT be parkash. That's what the thread is about, not those questioning the banis of Dasam Granth. Let me remind you that the likes of Dr Jodh Singh, Dr Punnu and G.S Lamba; scholars you guys extensively use in your debate while proving bani in Dasam Granth is authentic.

This thread isn't questioning the authencity of it, but whether it should be parkash or not.

Fact remains, Maharaj decided not to do it. Our ithhas tells us no other Gurbani was parkash (whether by Bhai Gurdas Ji, or other writings accepted by Maharaj)

Now coming to parkash,Dasam granth was in parkash in patna sahib most probably since Guru ji's time as they have beer there dating back to 1698.Why so itchy of its parkash when we agrre that SGGS is our Guru eternal.

There is no evidence to prove this. We KNOW that Guru Arjan Dev Ji did Parkash of the Aad Granth (now Sahib Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji), but there are absolutly no proof, no rehitnamas, not ithhasic writings (as far as I'm aware) of Guru Sahib doing parkash of both. If anything we have proof that Maharaj distinguished the two Granth by NOT adding his bani into it.

If the Bani was the same; and to be treated the same, why a separate Granth - why did he distinguish his bani from bani in Aad Granth?

There are questions that still haven't been answered. The question isn't whether Jaap Sahib or Akal Ustat or other bani are bani or not, because we've gone past that, the question is whether the Granth (which was still being argued whether to be one volume or several, up until Mehtab Singh Sukha Singh.)

Also do you think the entire Panth was ignorant of the Granth og 1698, that they still argued whether it should be one volume or not?

A lot of our rehitnamas show that dating wasn't the best. Take the example of Bhai Prahlad Rehitnama which mention Guru Granth Sahib getting Guru Gaddi 1695, whereas Sikh traditions tell us that those were Guru Gobind Singh Ji's last bachans.

You dilly-dally on issues. First you claim that authenticity is a non-issue and then start questioning the rehatnamas which are the source of our current Sikh Rehat Maryada. Then you question the beerh of 1698.

Its not only Chaupa Singh Rehatnama which proves that Sri Dasam Granth as a ‘Granth’ and its banees have been integral to Khalsa rehat and maryada.

Some other prominent Gursikhs (some contemporary of Guru Sahib) whose writings prove this are Bhai Desa Singh, Bhai Nand Lal, Bhai Daya Singh, Kavi Senapat, Bhai Koer Singh, Bhai Kesar Singh

Just contemplate how much history and historical accounts you will have to make questionable before questioning that Sri Dasam Granth has always been an integral part of Khalsa rehat.

Parkash of Sri Dasam Granth is a non-issue.

No one is forcing anyone to do parkash…So bringing this thing again and again just proves the weakness of the ones who are hell bent at opposing Sri Dasam Granth as a Granth in the garb of its parkash-issue.

Dasam Bani was meant to be in one granth from the beginnning. in the Chritrs, which contain Chaupai Sahib, there is a stanza stating that this granth has been completed. It gives the date and location of completion. This shows that the bani is meant to be kept as a complete granth.

Good point.

Here is the exact quote from Charitropakhyaan

ਸੰਬਤ ਸਤਰ੍ ਹ ਸਹਸ ਭਿਣਜੈ ॥ ਅਰਧ ਸਹਸ ਫੁਨਿ ਤੀਨਿ ਕਿਹਜੈ ॥ ਭਾਦਰ੍ ਵ ਸੁਦੀ ਅਸਟਮੀ ਰਿਵ ਵਾਰਾ ॥ ਤੀਰ

ਸਤੁਦ੍ਰਵ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੁਧਾਰਾ ॥405॥

The Granth was completed on Sunday, the 18th day of month of Bhadon, in 1753 Bikrami

Sammat (September 14, 1696 A.D.) on the banks of river Satluj.

(Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib in ‘Charitropakhyan’)

There are similar quotes from other banees also which give exact dates and place of composition of that particular banee.

See also...

http://www.santsipahi.org/patshahi10/quest.html#9

A 9. Guru Gobind Singh ji Maharaj was not only the master of the iron-sword but also made dexterous use of the loh-kalams 'pens with the iron nibs', now adorned at Paonta Sahib. Neither the sword nor the pen of the great Guru ever dried.

At Paonta Sahib Guru ji took up the gigantic task of writing Granth voluminous tomes. In many occasions in his writings he himself made it clear that he was writing a Granth. While starting the compilation of the Bachitra Natak Guru ji invoked the blessings of Akal Purakh for completion of this Granth:

ਨਮਸਕਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੜਗ ਕੋ ਕਰੋਂ ਸੁ ਹਿਤੁ ਚਿਤੁ ਲਾਇ ॥

ਪੂਰਨ ਕਰੋਂ ਗਿਰੰਥ ਇਹੁ ਤੁਮ ਮੁਹਿ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਹਾਇ ॥1॥ (ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ)

Also in the beginning of Bachittar Natak Granth, Guru Sahib writes:

ਅਥ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਲਿਖਯਾਤੇ॥

Now the Granth entitled Bachittar Natak Granth is composed.

Similarly, the concluding lines of chritro-pakhyan also mention the completion of the Granth.

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਸਿਧੁਜ ਜਬ ਭਏ ਦਯਾਲਾ ॥ ਪੂਰਨ ਕਰਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਤਤਕਾਲਾ ॥

ਮਨ ਬਾਂਛਤ ਫਲ ਪਾਵੈ ਸੋਈ ॥ ਦੂਖ ਨ ਤਿਸੈ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਕੋਈ ॥ 403॥ (ਸ੍ਰੀ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰੋ ਪਾਖਯਾਨ)

Some other places where Guru Sahib clearly mentions that he was writing compositions which were going to be a part of a Granth

ਕਥਾ ਸਰਬ ਜਉ ਛੋਰ ਤੇ ਲੈ ਸੁਨਾਊਂ ॥ ਹ੍ਰਿਦੈ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਕੇ ਬਾਢਬੇ ਤੇ ਡਰਾਊਂ ॥੩੪॥

And if I describe the complete story from one end to the other, then I fear that the Granth will become very voluminous.34.

ਤਾਤੇ ਕਹੀ ਨ ਰੁਦ੍ਰ ਕਹਾਨੀ ॥ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਬਢਨ ਕੀ ਚਿੰਤ ਪਛਾਨੀ ॥

Keeping in mind the fear of making the Granth voluminous, I have not narrated the complete story of Rudra.

ਸਾਧ ਅਸਾਧ ਜਾਨੋ ਨਹੀ ਬਾਦ ਸੁਬਾਦ ਬਿਬਾਦਿ ॥ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਕਲ ਪੂਰਣ ਕੀਯੋ ਭਗਵਤ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥੮੬੨॥

Who (between Ram and Ravana) is a saint and who is not a saint is a controversial subject; This whole Granth has been completed by the Grace of God.862

Also in many occasions in the concluding lines of different compositions Guru Sahib clearly writes that the composition is a part of a Granth. A few examples:

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਬਰਨਨੰ ਨਾਮ ਪੰਚਮੋ ਧਿਆਇ ਸਮਾਪਤ ਮਸਤੁ ਸੁਭ ਮਸਤੁ ॥੫॥ਅਫਜੂ॥੨੧੫॥

End of the Fifth Chapter of Bachittar Natak Granth entitled 'The Description of the Spiritual Kings (Preceptors).5.

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਭੰਗਾਣੀ ਜੁੱਧ ਬਰਨਨੰ ਨਾਮ ਅਸਟਮੋ ਧਿਆਇ ਸਮਾਪਤ ਮਸਤੁ ਸੁਭ ਮਸਤੁ ॥੮॥ ਅਫਜੂ ॥੩੨੦॥

End of the Eighth Chapter of Bachittar Natak Granth entitled 'Description of the Battle of Bhangani.'8.320.

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਨਦੌਨ ਜੁੱਧ ਬਰਨਨੰ ਨਾਮ ਨੌਮੋ ਧਿਆਇ ਸਮਾਪਤ ਮਸਤੁ ਸੁਭ ਮਸਤੁ ॥੯॥੩੪੪॥

End of Ninth Chapter of Bachittar Natak Granth entitled 'Description of the battle of Nadaun.9.344.

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਰਾਮਾਵਤਾਰੇ ਕਥਾ ਸੁਬਾਹ ਮਰੀਚ ਬਧਹ ਜਗਯ ਸੰਪੂਰਨ ਕਰਨੰ ਸਮਾਪਤਮ ॥

End of the description of the story of the Killing of MARICH and SUBAHU and also the Completion of Yajna in Rama Avtar in Bachittar Natak Granth

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕੇ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਕਿਸ਼ਨਾਵਤਾਰੇ ਤ੍ਰਿਣਾਵਰਤ ਬਧਹ ॥

End of the description of the Killing of Tranavrata in Krishna Avatara in Bachittar Natak Granth.

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾਵਤਾਰੇ ॥

End of the description in Krishnavatara in Bachittar Natak Granth.

Hence from his own writings and from the internal evidences it is very clear that while at Paonta Sahib, Guru Sahib set out a mission to compile a whole Granth and not just few individual compositions. His aim was to write a Granth as he mentions numerous times in his writings. He was writing his compositions which were going to be a part of a Granth.

Hence the notion coming from an orthopedic surgeon turned Sikh scholar that no Granth with Guru Sahib’s writings was present during the time of Guru Sahib, and that it was a handiwork of British is nothing but mischievous, misleading and blasphemous.

Parkash of Sri Dasam Granth is a "non-issue". It has been done in Sikh History out of respect for Guru Gobind Singh Sahib banee. Playing the 'conspiracy theory card' is not only foolish but also has no historic background.

No one is forcing anyone to do parkash of Sri Dasam Granth. Moreover none of the regular gurdwaras has the parkash of Sri Dasam Granth. So why to ignite this non-issue? Those like Ragi Darshan who suddenly woke up realising the parkash of Sri Dasam Granth should first explain their main intent behind igniting this controversy.

Those who are opposing the parkash must think if it is not the same melign intent that is often reflected when opposing the banees of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib....those who oppose the parkash are the same bunch of people who oppose the Dasam banee in general. This also reiterates the fact that the 'parkash' is a non-issue!

A sevaadar at Hazur Sahib has much more respect for Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji than people like Ragi Darshan, whose main agenda is to attack the Dasam Banee by all means, and who is cashing it with the notion of restoring respect for Sri Guru Granth Sahib.

latest edict from Sri Akal Takht Sahib clearly states that "no1 has right to create controversies about Panth parwanit baanis of Nitnem, Amrit Sanchar from Dasam Granth" it doesnt say you cant discuss rest of the DG .

so no1 is defying anything.

What you claim is an assumption...The edict didnt state that one can criticise Sri Dasam Granth...However what the latest edict clearly state was that Sri Dasam Granth is an inseparable part of Sikhism (anikarvaan ang)

How can one criticise an anikharvaan ang and still claim not to defy this edict...

Ragi Darshan has just defied the latest edict of Akal Takhat Sahib dated June 6 by talking against Sri Dasam Granth. He was clearly warned not to rake up this issue, and he goes on doing the same.

Listening to him it is clear that he has no knowledge of history of Sri Dasam Granth, whatsoever. He mixes up things that make no sense.

Darshan bases all his arguments on the notion that there is challenge to the supremacy of Sri Guru Granth Sahib…Which is totally false…I am sure that a single Sevadar at Takhat Hazur Sahib has more respect for Sri Guru Granth Sahib than Darshan, Joginder Spokesman and all Kala cult put together.

Does anyone have more information on the author Dr Trilochan Singh who was close with bhai randhir singh. Is he still alive, if not does anyone have contact details for his family? thanks in advance.

Here's a brief note about Dr. Trilochan Singh that appears in his book ''The Turban and The Sword of the Sikhs''.

''Dr. Trilochan Singh (1919-1993) whose valuable researches have thrown new light on several aspects of Sikh History, religion and theology, was an authoritative exponent of Sikh History, theology, philosophy and culture. A crusading scholar, an adventurous and committed man of faith, an activists sharing his co-religionists' joys and anguish in full measure, he never compromised on Sikh doctorines and the interest of Sikhism. He had about 40 published works and 200 research papers to his credit which includes UNESCO sponsored Sacred Writings of the Sikhs...''

A couple of weeks ago Dr. Trilochan Singh's son, Dr. Anurag Singh was appointed the director of the 'Sikh History Research Board' by the SGPC.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20080604/punjab1.htm#7

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

Its better to check facts rather than making arbitrary statements...

Here is the beerh of Sri Dasam Granth from 1698, one year before the formation of Khalsa. And read the name of the granth and the date on the top...

Sri Dasam Granth Beerh from 1698

http://www.santsipahi.org/patshahi10/Beerh...201698%20AD.pdf

PS: Malcolm doesnt write "Dasam Granth" in his writings. Rather he writes "Dasama Padshah ka Granth". This was the actual name of the granth at that time and which i think is the appropriate way to address the granth of the tenth master!

Veer Khalsaland jee, Kala Afghana has nothing to do with this discussion, he is banned from the Sikh panth and people like Gulshan unlike yourselves 100% follow the panthic decisions and not pick and choose.

If Gulshan had respected Akal Takhat directives, he woudlnt have uttered that the so called controversy of Sri Dasam Granth is there since its inception...This is utter nonsense and false. How did he forget the latest Akal Takhat directive which says that Sri Dasam Granth is an "inseparable part" ('annikharvaan ang') of Sikhi and its controversy is "unwanted" (belora vivad). This sentence alone is a slap on the face of Darshan Ragi, and the cult of Kala Afghana who want to keep this useless controversy alive.

If according to Akal Takhat Sri Dasam Granth is an INSEPARABLE PART and its controversy is UNWANTED, then when Gulshan says that the "controversy" has to be addressed after the the gurgaddi celebrations are over, then he is clearly defying Akal Takhat's directives.

If Gulshan had respected the Akal Takhat directives then he should also have known that Akal Takhat had excommunicated Bhag Singh, Kala Afghana, Joginder Spokesman for branding Sri Dasam Granth controversial. This is the panthic stand on Sri Dasam Granth.

Sri Dasam Granth is an inseparable part and is non controversial. Anyone who does not believe in this is anti-panthic, and anti-Akal Takhat.

Historically there has been controversy, you cant re write history. However he then goes onto say and makes it clear that this vahad vihvaad and arguing needs to stop. Gurbax Singh then clearly says: hath jor ki bhenti karada Prof Darshan Singh nuu to stop what hes doing.

I like the way you are trying to edit what Gurbax Singh jee said (but its not going to work). He said rather than people calling each other to discuss here and there and challenging each other, all this should stop, we should wait until the gurgaddi celebrations are over and then a panthic smallen should take place rather than individual groups calling on each other. I cant see anything wrong with this opinion. I think its correct for a panthic smallen rather than the panth being split into 4 or 5 groups.

The same people who are arguing the dasam granth can be parkash with the Guru Granth Sahib are then supporting other parts of the Akal Takhat hukamnama, dont worry you are half way there.

Veer jee you should have rang in and presented your views. Alternatively you can ring Gurbax Singh or write him a letter. Let me know veer jee if you require the details.

Which ''history'' are you talking about when Sri Dasam Granth was controversial like it is now...Give me a single reference (in the form of writing/book) before 1970s when Sri Dasam Granth's authenticity was ever debated...Arya Samaji Bhag Mal Ambala's book was the first to start this non-issue.

I doubt you understood my point regarding 'parkash'. Please read my posts again.

I have heard Gulshan and I have quoted him in verbatim...

Read my previous post again regarding so called controversy of Sri Dasam Granth...In simple terms, Akal Takhat says there is no controversy...If Gulshan says there is and it needs to be addressed, he is defying Akal Takhat.

Coming back to the origin of the post, the organisations that had objected to Gulshan's appointment as the Granthi of Darbar Sahib where not wrong after all.

Veer Khalsaland jee, Kala Afghana has nothing to do with this discussion, he is banned from the Sikh panth and people like Gulshan unlike yourselves 100% follow the panthic decisions and not pick and choose.

If Gulshan had respected Akal Takhat directives, he woudlnt have uttered that the so called controversy of Sri Dasam Granth is there since its inception...This is utter nonsense and false. How did he forget the latest Akal Takhat directive which says that Sri Dasam Granth is an "inseparable part" ('annikharvaan ang') of Sikhi and its controversy is "unwanted" (belora vivad). This sentence alone is a slap on the face of Darshan Ragi, and the cult of Kala Afghana who want to keep this useless controversy alive.

If according to Akal Takhat Sri Dasam Granth is an INSEPARABLE PART and its controversy is UNWANTED, then when Gulshan says that the "controversy" has to be addressed after the the gurgaddi celebrations are over, then he is clearly defying Akal Takhat's directives.

If Gulshan had respected the Akal Takhat directives then he should also have known that Akal Takhat had excommunicated Bhag Singh, Kala Afghana, Joginder Spokesman for branding Sri Dasam Granth controversial. This is the panthic stand on Sri Dasam Granth.

Sri Dasam Granth is an inseparable part and is non controversial. Anyone who does not believe in this is anti-panthic, and anti-Akal Takhat.