FreshMind13

What SGPC and their sevadaars wear is Royal Blue (Bright Blue). Traditional Khalsa Blue has been Navy Blue (Dark Blue/ਸੁਰਮਈ).

The article is correct. There are extremists that have taken over gurdwaras. One example is Shaheed Ganj Bhai Taru Singh in Lahore, they give local Sikhs a hard time for doing keertan or paath at the small building. Though, the other gurdwaras mentioned after the first half of the article are in that condition because of neglect, not because of "systematic destruction".

From what I am aware of, a divorcee can no longer do seva in the Panj (even if they re-marry).

Read the last Saakhi from Guru Kian Sakhian.

While Ang can be used, nothing wrong with Panna or Page. It is Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Nothing wrong with using either, no disrespect was intended. Forgive me if I have made a mistake.

1. No. Have a mini chadar to put on the groud where the Rehal will be placed. Then place a white rumalla on the rehal before putting the Senchi. 2. I would advise keeping the Senchis in a high spot where sucham can be maintained. In my case, the room we do Parkash of SGGS Ji has a closet, we keep Gutkas and Senchis there. But you would need to find some sort of spot that maintains sucham. 3. Yes, just a rehal is fine. Just make sure it is big enough for the Senchi. 4. Yes, you can open to any page and start doing/continue Sehaj Paath or other do any Paath of a Baani.

Sri Dasam Granth was only called Sri Bachittar Natak Granth. Sri Dasam Granth is a name given after by Khalsa.

If aap ji knows of such a saroop we can call original, I do ardaas to Guru Sahib to have Darshan of this saroop. Otherwise, I will follow what Panthic scholars say on the matter.

This was already done, and the Birhs were stored in the Sikh Reference Library (which housed one of the most Shudh birhs) for vidhvaans to research. Sadly it was gone after 1984.

There is also another system called Pingal, only a few rare scholars know about it. Since Gurbani is poetry, it follows styles such as Chant, Solok, Dohira, etc. These systems have a sent count of Lagamatras (vovels) to be used in each stanza. I so far have not been able to do much research into this as there is much if any information on this. I know it is used a lot in modern Punjabi music, but I do not know if the same Pingal system can be applied to Gurbani or if Guru Sahib has created his own.

According to Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara and Former Jathedaar Bhai Joginder Singh Vedanti, the 4 Birhs that are claimed to be written by Baba Deep Singh are not authentic. When they did a compassion of the 4 Birhs, they found many mistakes between them. How can the same Likahri make different mistakes in the birh? Yes the birh that is Parkash daily ar Sri Darbar Sahib is larivaar, but it cannot be used for corrections. You cannot use 1 birh for corrections, there is no such thing as 1 shudh birh (maybe there is, but no one in modern history has had darshan of such birh). Anti-Sikh forces have been poking their noses in for a while. The saroops written during the time of Raja Ranjit Singh are mostly ignored as they are full of mistakes made by the hired likharis. Doesn't matter if the birh is from Hazur Sahib or from some other historical location, the authenticity of the birh is determined by the accuracy of the Gurbani in the birh itself. Gurbani Vyaakaran (knowlegde of how the lagamatras impact the grammer and arth of words) is needed to do this. After going thru the research, you can have a sigh of relief. 99% of the Gurbani in current printed Saroops are Shudh. The differences include lagamatras as you mention. But these aren't to be taken lightly, lagamatras can change the meaning of words. This is why knowledge of Gurbani Vyaakaran is needed. Very learned scholars (such as the khojis I mentioned) of Vyaakaran can tell mistakes in the text from the lagamatras alone, but this is rare. Also take into account Gurbani Vyaakaran is being suppresed by groups who want to maintain their own schools and methods. Aside from lagamatras, the 2nd most diffriencating thing are the Sirlekhs before baani and the Mangls. After that would be spelling of words and even some missing panktis of shabads. All I know is that SGPC in the 70's and 80's was actively funding and promoting reseach on puratan birhs. The modern corrupt SGPC probably doesn't even have this on their focus. I know some agencies are doing "Agan Bhet" of puratan birhs to get rid of our Virasat. Honestly, I am strongly agaisnt printing of Birhs. Sure maybe back when printing presses came to Punjab, the cause was noble. But now it is just a business, there is no respect left from mass producing birhs. This is the same problem that happened when during Misl and Raaj Era, rich Sikhs would commision birhs to be written en-masse. The only positive thing about printing is that printed saroops are more consistent, but thats about it.

There is no original saroop available today sadly. The Damdami Birh is lost, the authenticity of the current Kirtarpuri Birh is in question, we also don't have the Birh of Hazuri Likhari Bhai Hardaas Ji, which had included Ninth Patshah baani before Damdami Birh and was given Nishan by Dasam Patshah. Then we also have the Sikh Reference Library being looted in 1984 by the Indian Army (Not burned, it has been confirmed the birhs were stolen). We still do not know where these Birhs are even though Indian High Court ordered government to return them. While this may be a shock to common Sikhs, it is common knowledge in gupt scholarly circles who preserve the research done by late scholars like Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara, Bhai Randhir Singh (Scholar), Gyani Gyaan Singh Nihung, and others who spent decades going akhar by akhar, lagamatra by lagamatra comparing hundreds of puratan birhs.

This is nothing new, scholars are aware of the various textual differences between birhs of SGGS Ji. Their work has been compiled but kept gupt.

Which is why I mentioned where I base my knowledge from. Most ucharan is 95% similar anyway, its just the 5% that is higher/advanced/scholarly level. For the average person starting out, they should learn Muharni and the Lagamatras and not put too much dubdha in their minds.

Your first example is correct. It means ਰਜ਼ਾ, hukam de razza vich chalna. While it isn't needed as the meaning still stands, but it's nice to use the original pronunciation of the word. Second example is odd, there is santhiya that teaches where to pronounce pair bindi and not to. For example in Jaap Sahib: ਨਮੋ ਰਾਜਸੰ ਤਾਮਸੰ ਸ਼ਾਤ ਰੂਪੇ ॥ This is wrong, because it a reference to Rajo, Tamo, and Sato gun, correct pronunciation is: ਸਾਤ. (Notice there is no Bindi on Kanna Either) But later on in the Chand, we have: ਨਮੋ ਕਲਹ ਕਰਤਾ ਨਮੋ ਸ਼ਾਂਤ ਰੂਪੇ ॥ This is correct, because it refers to ਸ਼ਾਂਤੀ (Peace). I am a firm believer to have correct Arth you need Santhyia, if you do wrong ucharan you are unknowingly (or some are knowingly) changing arths. I'll admit my bias is more toward Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh's book Gurbani Lagamatra di Vilakhanta and Bhai Joginder Singh Ji's Shudh Uchaaran book (who researched Sampardaiye and Modern missionary pronunciation and spent decades doing Khoj on puratan birhs.) Their work is book form, hopefully it can taught as well.