Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'das patshian'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


    • Agree to Disagree

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



Found 1 result

  1. If I recall correctly, a few months ago I put up a post on this forum highlighting some of the discrepancies in the Suraj Prakash. A mod took it down because he felt it would offend a majority of the forum. I, however, feel that Sikh Sangat is not emulative of it's much maligned reputation i.e. a forum full of fanatics. In the latter spirit, then, I ask that can someone then explain the following passage from another traditional text- Chibber's Bansavalinamah: 'Kahan Singh Trehan from Goindwal and a descendent of Guruji. As a Sardar (chief) Sikh sat at the Bunga (Akal Bunga, Akal Takhat) himself. Sikhs came to the fair (organised by) local residents circumabulating (the Harimandar). A Sikh going in front of them met these Sikhs and embraced them. (4) These Sikhs also hugged him lovingly. They loved him very much. After hugging each other when they departed. Kahan Singh ji saw that particular sikh when all those Sikhs separated. (5) He (Kahan Singh) sent a man to bring that Sikh to him. Kahan Singh ji asked,”O Sikh! Which Sikh are you, what caste are you called by?” Sikh stood there hugely embarrassed. Then Singh ji again said,”What Sikh are you known as?” (6) Then he said, “Sir, I am a Mazhabi Sikh (a sikh originally from a low caste)”. Then Singh ji ordered those other Sikhs to be brought in as well immediately. Those local Sikhs all arrived, The ones who had embraced and hugged this other sikh lovingly. (7) (Singh ji) spoke thus, “Bhai Sikhs, do you know this sikh?” All those said.”Yes sir”. (Singh ji) spoke thus, “Which sikh is he, what is his caste?” They said, sir, landowner sikh and he is known as ‘Sandhu’ (8)(usually a jat surname but occasionally lower castes also may have this surname) Then he was asked in front of these Sikhs. “Bhai Sikh! What is your caste? He mentioned, ‘Mazhabi’ (sikh from low castes ) The local Sikhs were surprised on hearing this. These Sikhs said, “Sir, he has eaten food with us” (9) All of us Sikhs have served him food making him sit in our own kitchen. (persons of lower castes were not allowed to enter kitchen of higher caste persons) Food in (our) plate and water in the bowl was given to him to drink. This sikh (had) said ‘I am landowner sikh and am a local resident of Amritsar” All Sikhs have served him with food in their own homes one by one. (10) Singh ji asked (the ‘Mazhabi’ Sikh), “Why Bhai! Why did you do this?” He said,”Sir, I am sorry. I forgot (went astray)”. (Bhai Kahan Singh)Spake thus,”It is not you who forgot (went astry), it is these (Sikhs) who forgot (went astray). They only saw Guru’s insignia, didn’t see your body (person).” (11) Bhai Sikha! How could you forget? Why didn’t you check for your mother, father, brother, sister or relatives? Those in whose family you were born, grew up and had food together and socialise. How did you forget that (you are from that) family? (12) It is these Sikhs who got misled by just recognising Guru’s symbols. Why did you forget? You seem to be fairly knowledgable. You have done this intentionally. It is these Sikhs who got misled who saw only Guru’s symbols. (13) Following just the Guru’s symbols these Sikhs got misled. So that nobody may repeat this mistake (in the future). A barber was called and his hair were shaved. Making him sit on a donkey was taken around the town. (14) He was hanged by the side of Tunda Sar (a water pond ) And (Kahan Singh) asked this to the local resident Sikhs. “You arrange a Yag (a sacred purification Hindu worship), do Gurpurab, and prepare Parsad”. “You were misled by Guru’s symbols, so you are not stigmatised by this”. (15) “Do not talk about this in the township” “Keep the tenets of Sikhism in your mind”. “The Turks (muslim rulers) are eager to find faults lest some trouble arises” “There should not be any gossiping about this in the township at all”. (16) All the Sikhs said,”Sir, you did the right thing that you punished him”. None would repeat such a thing again. It created such a fear and respect for Sikhism. That even if someone dropped a thing somewhere, it would continue lying there, and no one would take it away. (17) (Fourteenth Chapter of “Bansavalinama Dasan Patshaheean Ka” “Genealogy of ten patshahis”) I don't claim any expertise on Sikh literature/historicity, but Chibber's narration does not fit in with an already established chronology regarding Baba Kahan Singh Ji. The Baba (let's get over his differences with Baba Banda Singh) is said to have catered to the lower castes and raised them to the levels of the higher castes. Initially I asked a Taksali Singh to explain this passage to me. The most he could say was that the text dealt with telling lies although it is evident that Baba Kahan Singh Ji, for Chibber, has the Singh executed for refusing to follow traditional Caste norms. Has the text been corrupted? Dr. Ganda Singh, utilizing the Suraj Prakash as a case study, had the following to say regarding the corruption of historic Sikh texts: 'Some writers allege that the reason for the rejection of Ram Rai was that he was born of a handmaid (Cunningham, p. 62). It would have been preposterous for him, as Narang says. to prefer this claim, if he had been born in that way. Really he had the same mother as Har Krishan. The story of Guru Har Rai having married seven wives, who were all sisters, is found only in one MS of Suraj Prakash and is written on unpaged leaves which are clearly an interpolation. Unfortunately this copy became the basis of the editions nowadays in vogue. Other copies mention only one marriage. Mahima Prakash, which is much older than this book, also mentions only one wife. See on this point the annotation of Bhai Vir Singh on Suraj Prakash.' -Dr. Ganda Singh, Baba Teja Singh; 'A Short History of the Sikhs,' vol. i, pg. 48. The mod in question informed me, last time, that the other thread would only be resurrected when he/she established the veracity of my post. Obviously by begging the question no veracity can be established much less manifested; I pray, then, that this thread be left open for some constructive debate on Sikh literature and/or it's authenticity on some points.

Important Information

Terms of Use