Did Bhai Bala Exist?

[lovekhalistan]

i think sunny you should change your picture, your words of filth dont suit that picture. pathetic.did bhai bala jee exist? huh.

AGREE

[Bijla Singh]

Ikh Baba Akal Roop, dooja Rababi mardana. I cant understand why Bala is missing in this tukh. Did he not go on the udasis?

Most likely he didn't which is why he is not mentioned.

The fact that 12 Sikhs are mentioned by Bhai Gurdas does not mean that there were only 12 Sikhs, those 12 Sikhs are important historically, however a person like Bhai Bala who wrote the first life story of Guru Nanak Dev jee is none existent.

So we agree then that there were not 12 Sikhs. So using Bhai Gurdas Ji's Vaar doesn't prove anything. Rai Bular is an equally important Sikh who is not mentioned. Bhai Lalo Ji is mentioned in Gurbani but not in Vaars. Is Bibi Nanaki, the first Sikh, mentioned in Vaars? Bhai Sahib's purpose was to show the greatness of Guru Sahib not to record every life incident. Purpose of Vaars was to show that Guru Sahib is the greatest and everyone all over the world bowed to Him. Bhai Behlo Ji, contemporary of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, mentions Bhai Bala Ji in his granth named Soochak Parsang Guru Ka.

historically if bala jee was also with Guru Nanak Dev jee, then Bhai Gurdas jee has made a major error or omission. If Bhai Bala jee did not go to Mecca, then why is it claimed that Guru Angad Dev jee asked him to write the Janamsakhi, The reason Bhai Bala was given this seva was because he went on the udasis with guru jee.

Was there any other Sikh who was more qualified to narrate the sakhis? Janam Sakhi might have been compiled by collecting sakhis from different Sikhs. Many sources claim that a Janamsakhi was written. It doesn't mean we have the same janamsakhi today. We don't have the original Damdami Bir but no one says that such was never written or Guru Gobind Singh Ji never existed.

I also find it amazing that Bhai Bala seems to be missing in alot of the sakhis. For example the udasis to the himalays, the story of Manikaran is known to all. Bhai Mardana was sent to get fire from the village and guru jee remained alone on the outskirts. If Bhai Mardana was asked to get fire, and Guru jee is said to be alone, where was Bhai Bala? or was he missing from this udasi aswell? Why in history does Bhai Bala often go missing in sakhis? Then in other sakhis he re appears.

I would like to know which source is the above based on? Bhai Bala Janamsakhi or any other Janamsakhi? Because all Janamsakhis vary and have different sakhis. Hafzabad and Puratan Janamsakhi also vary. Bhai Bala Janamsakhi has many errors and we may reject it but it doesn't, however, disprove the existence of Bhai Bala Ji. Since some sources claim that such Janamsakhi was written it is fair to assume that it might have been altered just like many of our other sources. Many Saroops of Guru Sahib have stories, narrations, and pictures of hindu deities but this doesn't prove that Guru Sahib never existed or Guru Granth Sahib is not the True Guru.

Sooraj Parkash is not an authentic granth when it comes to determining the correct dates. Bhatt Vahis and many other sources without a doubt point to Kattak Poornma.

Bhai Bala Ji's places such as Bala Kot and Bhai Bala Kooh exist today in Pakistan. Bhai Ishar Singh's book (which I have not read fully) is a good source and Dr. Kirpal Singh's article is in "Birtaant of Guru Nanak Dev Ji".

[kam1825]

What a stupid topic it has been discussed before. It seems quite obvious you start these threads without an ounce of research.

Again watch the Gurmat Ansaar Nirnay videos by Sant Hari Singh which can be downloaded from www.gurmatveechar.com

If Bhai Bala did not exist then you can forget the janamsakhi on Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Ithaas and Also the Sri Nanak Parkash from the Sooraj Prakash as both come from the same source Bhai Bala. also Bhai Mani Singhs Janamsakhi is based on the one by Bhai Bala and that of Meharbans

Maybe none of the sakhis of Guru Nanak Dev Ji are true as without both of these you only are left with a few puris from Bhai Gurdas Di Vaaran.

If you take Bhai Bala out you have a lot of gaps.

[anom7]

khalistan zindabad i duntthink ure anyone to tell another peson to not respect sant je

i dunt kno y eevryones attacking the guy for, he had a question

when did asking questions become wrong? who r u to tellanyone wat to do

look man ive said it before, stay united. if someone says something that doesnt agree with ure points, dont attack em

try to discuss it witht hem like bijla singh or the others who tried to post aanswers, thas the way to deal with it

if u dont the answer to a question, stay out of it

bijla singh, u make some really gud points

but just like bhai mardana, bhai bala wud have been someone who stayed with guru je his whole life

someone who stayed with guru je for SO long wud have shown up in bhai gurdas jes vaars

rai bullar were important sikhs, but they wernt with guru je for his whole life

but bhai bala supposedly was. the best thing to do is if there are any sources that have bhai bala in em, to just post em

that cud help clear some stuff up

and kam1825 it is true bhai bala is the source for a lot of sakhees, that makes u think he denifntley cud have existed

i think the main thing is, is there any source for bhai bala je, wheere trhey are mentioned?

if soene cud post this, it cud answer everything

[Bijla Singh]

Mahima Parkash, Bansavalinama, Granth of Bhai Binod Singh, Soochak Parsang Guru Ka by Bhai Behlo Ji, Gurbilas Patshahi 6, Janamsakhi Bhai Mani Singh Ji and many others not only mention Bhai Bala Ji but also Gurpurab being in Katak. Bhatt Vahis also mention celebrating Gurpurab on "Kartak Poornma". Bhai Gurdas Ji's Vaars are not the only source of information.

[anom7]

so there u go, sources have been cited

shud be gud for everyone now

[ghorandhar]

Ikh Baba Akal Roop, dooja Rababi mardana. I cant understand why Bala is missing in this tukh. Did he not go on the udasis?

Most likely he didn't which is why he is not mentioned.

The fact that 12 Sikhs are mentioned by Bhai Gurdas does not mean that there were only 12 Sikhs, those 12 Sikhs are important historically, however a person like Bhai Bala who wrote the first life story of Guru Nanak Dev jee is none existent.

So we agree then that there were not 12 Sikhs. So using Bhai Gurdas Ji's Vaar doesn't prove anything. Rai Bular is an equally important Sikh who is not mentioned. Bhai Lalo Ji is mentioned in Gurbani but not in Vaars. Is Bibi Nanaki, the first Sikh, mentioned in Vaars? Bhai Sahib's purpose was to show the greatness of Guru Sahib not to record every life incident. Purpose of Vaars was to show that Guru Sahib is the greatest and everyone all over the world bowed to Him. Bhai Behlo Ji, contemporary of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, mentions Bhai Bala Ji in his granth named Soochak Parsang Guru Ka.

historically if bala jee was also with Guru Nanak Dev jee, then Bhai Gurdas jee has made a major error or omission. If Bhai Bala jee did not go to Mecca, then why is it claimed that Guru Angad Dev jee asked him to write the Janamsakhi, The reason Bhai Bala was given this seva was because he went on the udasis with guru jee.

Was there any other Sikh who was more qualified to narrate the sakhis? Janam Sakhi might have been compiled by collecting sakhis from different Sikhs. Many sources claim that a Janamsakhi was written. It doesn't mean we have the same janamsakhi today. We don't have the original Damdami Bir but no one says that such was never written or Guru Gobind Singh Ji never existed.

I also find it amazing that Bhai Bala seems to be missing in alot of the sakhis. For example the udasis to the himalays, the story of Manikaran is known to all. Bhai Mardana was sent to get fire from the village and guru jee remained alone on the outskirts. If Bhai Mardana was asked to get fire, and Guru jee is said to be alone, where was Bhai Bala? or was he missing from this udasi aswell? Why in history does Bhai Bala often go missing in sakhis? Then in other sakhis he re appears.

I would like to know which source is the above based on? Bhai Bala Janamsakhi or any other Janamsakhi? Because all Janamsakhis vary and have different sakhis. Hafzabad and Puratan Janamsakhi also vary. Bhai Bala Janamsakhi has many errors and we may reject it but it doesn't, however, disprove the existence of Bhai Bala Ji. Since some sources claim that such Janamsakhi was written it is fair to assume that it might have been altered just like many of our other sources. Many Saroops of Guru Sahib have stories, narrations, and pictures of hindu deities but this doesn't prove that Guru Sahib never existed or Guru Granth Sahib is not the True Guru.

Sooraj Parkash is not an authentic granth when it comes to determining the correct dates. Bhatt Vahis and many other sources without a doubt point to Kattak Poornma.

Bhai Bala Ji's places such as Bala Kot and Bhai Bala Kooh exist today in Pakistan. Bhai Ishar Singh's book (which I have not read fully) is a good source and Dr. Kirpal Singh's article is in "Birtaant of Guru Nanak Dev Ji".

Veer jee I think what people dont understand is: Bhai mardana is given reference by Bhai Gurdas jee, then it seems at odds that Bhai Bala is missing. Rai Bular and other Sikhs unlike Bhai Mardana and Bhai bala did not travel with guru jee. I can understand what you are saying about the problems of mentioning all Sikhs, however the problem is why would bhai gurdas fail to mention the second companion (in any of the vara or kabitts) who wrote the first ever history of Guru Nanak Dev jee. This question will always persist because of the omission of such an important figure, bala's importance is excelled by the fact he has written the first history of Guru Nanak Dev jee and because he was present on Guru Nanak Dev jees travels, while the other Sikhs were not.

Bhai Sahib jee, to be honest I do not have a copy of Bhai Behlo jees granth, so could you please have alook if Bhai Bala jee is mentioned in storys of Mecca and Baghdad, maybe we can establish if he was there or not. Where is Bhai Bala referred to in this granth? In a few months time ill try to make a trip to a book store (its far from my home) and get a copy of this granth). Because I do not have a copy, Im just interested to find out which udasis he was present at. The referance I will give for Bhai Balas omission in the hamalyars, nepal and Tibet udasi is from the Sooraj Parkash. If you look at Adhaiee 22 under the story of Brahman udhar ati pind da parsang, you will find Bhai Bala missing in the storys from this udasi. Ive not read the whole udasi, so I dont know if Bhai Bala will turn up out of the middle of no where. Through out this udasi Guru jee only talks to Bhai Mardana while at times he remains alone when Bhai Bala is sent to meet someone. A good example is from Adaeee 22 of Bhai Balas ommission:

Nahee tahroo abb, cheel Mardana. Niksi vair gai ikh tana. Ikh dij danbee hutoo agaree, Bhoo Pakhand jin keen savari. Pauri 7.

So if Bhai Bala is missing in the Mecca Udasi and northern India, Nepal and Tibet Udasi, which udasi did he go on? Why did he not go on these udasis? If we look at oral history which is not based on any historical book, then the monks of Tibet only refer to Guru Nanak dev jee and Bhai Mardana as coming to meet them. Dr Tarlochan Singh jee went with the monks from Amritsar to investigate their storys of guru Nanak Dev jee, his essays were then published in the Sikh Review. So oral traditions of people who have no connection with Sikhs also fail to mention bhai bala as being a companion on this udasi.

It is claimed that Guru Angad Dev jee asked him to write the janamsakhi because he travelled with guru jee and had first hand accounts of the history. However the same Bhai Bala seems to be missing in two of the udasis. I also doubt Guru Angad dev jee asked him to write anything, guru Angad dev jee is jani jan and the jot of Guru Nanak Dev jee, Im sure Guru Angad Dev jee knew more than an absent Bhai Bala. Veer jee its not just the janamsakhi which have made people question the existence of Bhai Bala, but its also his omissions from history. So the evidence against Bhai Bala is not just presented from the janamsakhis, but his omission from the udasis, the very purpose of him writing the janamsakhi needs to be considered, because he was not even present in the udasis. Veer jee I did not know that the janamsakhi was created by other people (collection of storys from other people), if this is what you mean, then Bhai Bala is infact the editor of the Janamsakhi. However the Janamsaki is written as though Bhai bala himself is telling the story to Guru Angad DEv jee, so thats a new thing ive learnt, that Bhai Bala was actually the editor.

Veer jee page 305 or Prof Kartar Singh jees book (Guru Nanak Dev jee), he referances the following writers who have written Vaisakh rather than kattik as being the gurburabh of Guru Nanak Dev jee: Janamsakhi written during Guru Hargobind Singh jees time, Meharban Jansakhi (like you said we cant really trust it, but im just giving it as referance to what is written on page 305), Bhai Mani Singh jees Janamsakhi, mehma parkash by Bawa Sarup Das Bhalla (1776).

Prof Kartar Singh jee says that the first mention of Kattik is by Bidhi Chand, a descendant if Baba Handal. Handalis changed the date to kattik because a child born according to supersition in Katak was bad (handalis wanted to present according to there own custom that Guru Nanak Dev jee was low), so the handalis who were only interested in distortion tried to change guru jees purpurabh.

The Gurpurabh of Guru Nanak Dev jee was celebrated up to 1872 at Nanakana Sahib in the month of Vaisakh. Some of the granths you qoute are at odds with Prof Kartar Singh jees referances, for example Bhai Mani Singhs janamsakhi is referanced by him to say Vaiaskh. The confusion beween different writers who are using the same referances but coming up with different dates is really odd. Im not saying who is right or wrong, im just saying its suprising that people for vaisakh and people for Kattik are using the same granths.

I doubt whether bhai bala existed, I can only base by opinons on the facts infront of me, and if new facts come to light which clear some of my questions then I would change my stance. But what is the point of attacking a person who asks a question. If you are going to present some facts then fair enough, but to tell people that they cannot respect some one is amazing. Maybe if people did not ask questions, we would still have moortia in Harmander Sahib and go to brahmans to get married (rather than Anand Karag). Veer Bijla Singh jee has written some nice posts and ive learnt alot of things from him, unless you discuss the issue you will not understand the other side of the story, or are we to sit and live in pure ignorance?

[blinded]

[MOD EDITED]

This whole forum NOW, is a waste of time with just a bunch of muppets post all sorts of rubbish...............muppets like you and me...........

the name of this forum is sikhSANGAT what kind of sangat is this?

hmm our guru tells us that satsagat is where people are japping naam.............there's nothing like that here............

if u want giaan then listen to katha.............ur not going to get much gian with people like me and rainybondsingh typing away..........

i feel that it is best to get off this site, as it only leads to manmat.

Waheguru Ji Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fatheh.

[jassa]

[a]sikh missionariezzzz

[kam1825]

What is it with Sikhs today. You seem to think that everything before the time of Prof Sahib Singhs Teeka of Guru Granth Sahib everything was wrong? Modern day missionaries

Out of all of the sources you have given abd Bhai Gurdas Di Vaaran. Which one is the earliest? Which was written whilst in the shelter of the Gurus feet. Bhai Gurdas Ji was a mahan purkh was he also a liar?