Jump to content
V

Sakhi Of The Raja And Anoop Kaur

Recommended Posts

V, that's the problem with translations - read the original (or listen to Katha) and note the difference. I don't know if thsi Bani is on-line though, maybe someone can post a link if it is.

In the Gurmukhi, there is no doubt that Guru Ji is narrating a story, not talking about themselves. Also bear in mind that disciples of any guru are called shish/sikh. But this is irrelevant in this case, as explained above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You definitely have a point that the Gurmukhi version can differ from the translation.

Have you personally read the gurmukhi version, or are you assuming that there is no doubt that Guru Ji is talking about someone else?

Also it’s quite a coincidence that (i) it’s a Raja from Anandpur (ii) who was also considered to be a GURU by the citizens (no, most people didn’t call the RAJA of the village for a GURU. (iii) who fulfilled everyone’s desires.

Quite a coincidence.

Also, if you do have the Punjabi version, please do post it here :@

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pirthipal Singh

Its funny, how people live in the cyberspace as sikh cyber warrior. Its the blind judging the blind without understanding what EGO really is. Mostly people cannot understand ego, perhaps only talking about it from what they've read. Most parcharaks, baba, jatherdars, so called endorsed gursikh within the sikh fold under the symptoms of the ego. You can only know what it is if your mind has stood still for a long period of time. This composition is very likely written by an unenlightened mind and the character of the guru portrayed in this story is also extremely unenlightened. Buddha said if you believe, it means you don't know and if you know, then you don't have to believe anymore. The theme of guru granth sahib especially from baba nanak and kabir sahib and the theme of some of the composition in dasam granth are incompatible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Guest Pirthipal Singh said:

You can only know what it is if your mind has stood still for a long period of time. This composition is very likely written by an unenlightened mind and the character of the guru portrayed in this story is also extremely unenlightened. Buddha said if you believe, it means you don't know and if you know, then you don't have to believe anymore. The theme of guru granth sahib especially from baba nanak and kabir sahib and the theme of some of the composition in dasam granth are incompatible.

I totally disagree. Dasam Granth is different from SGGS ji for sure, with a heavier focus on social matters, literature, psychology, language, politics, culture, Indic mythology etc. etc. Repurposing traditional narratives to suit contemporary Sikh needs has also been done.   

If Guru ji used narratives to explain things to Sikhs, it's on you to try and grasp the underlying themes and points of the narratives, not discard them because your own preconceptions and mental conditioning go against this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Singh
On 9/28/2020 at 1:23 PM, dallysingh101 said:

I totally disagree.

In effect, by doing so, are you categorically agreeing with Professor Piara Singh Padam's viewpoint?

http://www..org/articles/Anoop%20Kaur%20-%20Girlfriend%20of%20GGS.htm

Furthermore, are you also asserting that our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in Bachitar Natak (as opposed to Bibek Buddhi)?

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev%20Singh-Bachittar%20Natak%20A%20Strange%20Drama.doc

Bachitar Natak states that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of. 1699 destroyed the very concept of caste via Kul Naash.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest Singh said:

In effect, by doing so, are you categorically agreeing with Professor Piara Singh Padam's viewpoint?

http://www..org/articles/Anoop%20Kaur%20-%20Girlfriend%20of%20GGS.htm

Furthermore, are you also asserting that our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in Bachitar Natak (as opposed to Bibek Buddhi)?

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev Singh-Bachittar Natak A Strange Drama.doc

Bachitar Natak states that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of. 1699 destroyed the very concept of caste via Kul Naash.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste.

 

Nah, you just don't know how to analyse and read it. It's didactic narratives designed to make sense to the reader - not all historically based. 

 

A lot of it is based around literacy and explorations and adaptations of literary forms, jungh vidhya, bir raas, social issues, just governance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Singh

Fair play to you Dally that you disagree with Piara Singh Padam and Sant Samaj.

http://www..org/articles/Anoop Kaur - Girlfriend of GGS.htm

But are you of the opinion our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in the purportedly autobiographical section of Bachitar Natak (as opposed to GurGaddi transferring via the jyot of Bibek Buddhi)?

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev Singh-Bachittar Natak A Strange Drama.doc

Bachitar Natak claims that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of.

1699 destroyed the very concept of caste promoting the equality of all.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste at the same time.

It would be great if you could give your thoughts specifically relating to the above as such and not really concerning the other erotic stories from Charitropakhiyan. 

Thank you Dally Singh

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Guest Singh said:

Fair play to you Dally that you disagree with Piara Singh Padam and Sant Samaj.

http://www..org/articles/Anoop Kaur - Girlfriend of GGS.htm

But are you of the opinion our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in the purportedly autobiographical section of Bachitar Natak (as opposed to GurGaddi transferring via the jyot of Bibek Buddhi)?

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev Singh-Bachittar Natak A Strange Drama.doc

Bachitar Natak claims that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of.

1699 destroyed the very concept of caste promoting the equality of all.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste at the same time.

It would be great if you could give your thoughts specifically relating to the above as such and not really concerning the other erotic stories from Charitropakhiyan. 

Thank you Dally Singh

 

That paper is flimsy. The author clearly doesn't understand what they're reading friend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 11:57 AM, Guest Singh said:

But are you of the opinion our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in the purportedly autobiographical section of Bachitar Natak (as opposed to GurGaddi transferring via the jyot of Bibek Buddhi)?

This could be interpreted in multiple ways, other than the literal way you are suggesting. I don't think BN is simply autobiographical (in the modern sense) as you seem to be suggesting. It is a genre in itself. What may have happened here is a recounting of the Bedi/Sodhi traditional account of their ancestry. What Guru ji's feeling towards jaat-paat are is clear for anyone to see from their lives and actions, and people quoting passages out of the context of the lives and actions of Guru Sahiban are just people trying to manipulate to support their own personal views. Tva Parshaad Sahib gives a clear and explicit perspective on how Guru ji perceived 'royalty'. The section of Chaubees Avtaar that cover Rama (who was purportedly Dasmesh pita ji's ancestor), shows no pride or preferential treatment towards Lord Rama. 

On 9/30/2020 at 11:57 AM, Guest Singh said:

Bachitar Natak claims that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of.

1699 destroyed the very concept of caste promoting the equality of all.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste at the same time.

It would be great if you could give your thoughts specifically relating to the above as such and not really concerning the other erotic stories from Charitropakhiyan. 

As I alluded to earlier, the writings are not simple linear accounts that are interpretable on a surface level. You have to contextualise the text with the lives and times and actions of the Guru sahiban. If you approach it in the simplistic manner you appear to be doing, it's not going to help you. 

This is a personal experience I guess, if you approach the DG with modern day preconceptions and bias, you'll miss important aspects of it, that I think only those who make serious, independent effort deserve to grasp. I reiterate, simplistic surface interpretations (especially in the light of modern Singh Sabha westernised mindsets) won't work.  

That last point above also relates to how you've simplified CP into some collection of 'erotic stories' and it tells me a lot about the level of intellectual endeavour you've made to try and understand these complex and subtle texts, that can't be defined in the simple way you have done. 

It's not my job or desire to express my own personal opinion and experience with the texts, that's a personal experience between me and my Guru. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bir Rass

If anyone in any doubt about the importance of Gurbani (Charitropakhiyan) google about the chamar kudi Simran Nijher

On one hand Dera Ballan crying about chamars can only marry chamars but then there are $lags like this acting as bikes

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest Bir Rass said:

If anyone in any doubt about the importance of Gurbani (Charitropakhiyan) google about the chamar kudi Simran Nijher

On one hand Dera Ballan crying about chamars can only marry chamars but then there are $lags like this acting as bikes

 

Not that caste is a central feature of people behaving in this way, but all the Nijhers I've met haven't been chamars? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bir Rass
5 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Not that caste is a central feature of people behaving in this way, but all the Nijhers I've met haven't been chamars? 

True that as there's another rabidly anti-Sikh and Christian Jatt clown with a very similar surname. But this $lag is the daughter of one of the management committee member's of a famous Bhawan that now restricts chamars to marrying chamars and where Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was thrown out. And this is the ethnically pure super-race that the Dera Ballan has now produced = Simran Kumari Nijher!

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/woman-alleged-killer-joked-boyfriend-19061679

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bir Rass
On 9/30/2020 at 11:57 AM, Guest Singh said:

Fair play to you Dally that you disagree with Piara Singh Padam and Sant Samaj.

http://www..org/articles/Anoop Kaur - Girlfriend of GGS.htm

But are you of the opinion our Guru Sahibaan were Hindu Kings in their previous lives who divided up the actual GurGaddi of the future in a business deal (when they were Hindu Kings previously) as stated in the purportedly autobiographical section of Bachitar Natak (as opposed to GurGaddi transferring via the jyot of Bibek Buddhi)?

http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/articles/Baldev Singh-Bachittar Natak A Strange Drama.doc

Bachitar Natak claims that Guru Sahib had a caste that they were proud of.

1699 destroyed the very concept of caste promoting the equality of all.

So which exactly is it? As Vaisakhi 1699 and Bachitar Natak are mutually exclusive. One cannot be both pro-caste and anti-caste at the same time.

It would be great if you could give your thoughts specifically relating to the above as such and not really concerning the other erotic stories from Charitropakhiyan. 

Thank you Dally Singh

 

Of course Dashmesh Pita Ji wrote this Gurbani as the charitars explicitly reference the Guru/King of Sri Anandpur Sahib as Gobind which proves Sri Charitropakhiyan Sahib is Gurbani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2020 at 6:23 PM, Guest Bir Rass said:

True that as there's another rabidly anti-Sikh and Christian Jatt clown with a very similar surname. But this $lag is the daughter of one of the management committee member's of a famous Bhawan that now restricts chamars to marrying chamars and where Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was thrown out. And this is the ethnically pure super-race that the Dera Ballan has now produced = Simran Kumari Nijher!

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/woman-alleged-killer-joked-boyfriend-19061679

 

You seem to have inside info? 

 

Are you from the same area? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use