Considering the fact that Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the Eternal Guru to all Sikhs, why is the Dasam Granth debated?

[jkvlondon]

17 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Is it considered authentic by many scholars? 

given that Guru ji completed and we have a saroop Of Dasam Guru ka Granth dated from 1698 I would definitely consider it authentic as Guru ji made the younger brother whole and seperate  in his Lifetime .

[TheeTurbanator]

8 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

given that Guru ji completed and we have a saroop Of Dasam Guru ka Granth dated from 1698 I would definitely consider it authentic as Guru ji made the younger brother whole and seperate  in his Lifetime .

Why would there be such a controversy over the Dasam Granth then? 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Why would there be such a controversy over the Dasam Granth then? 

Cause of the content inside of it. Guru sahib wrote so much but people cant understand it, so they try to label it as not guru sahibs.

[13Mirch]

12 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Why would there be such a controversy over the Dasam Granth then? 

The modern day Dasam Granth is heavily expunged. Several banis have been excised though some individuals still print them in the Granth.

https://tisarpanth.tumblr.com

[TheeTurbanator]

One main point of confusion that I see among anti dasam granth people is the whole argument of "why didnt the Guru include it in SGGSJ" or "are you saying SGGSJ is incomplete". How would you respond to that?

I would personally highlight the differance between the two, and state how the SGGSJ is meant for humanity, while the DG is more specialized towards the Khalsa. 

[13Mirch]

1 minute ago, TheeTurbanator said:

One main point of confusion that I see among anti dasam granth people is the whole argument of "why didnt the Guru include it in SGGSJ" or "are you saying SGGSJ is incomplete". How would you respond to that?

I would personally highlight the differance between the two, and state how the SGGSJ is meant for humanity, while the DG is more specialized towards the Khalsa. 

DG is corroborative.

[TheeTurbanator]

1 minute ago, 13Mirch said:

DG is corroborative.

towards what? please explain in detail what you mean 

[13Mirch]

3 minutes ago, TheeTurbanator said:

towards what? please explain in detail what you mean 

I have always perceived it in the same vein as Bhai Gurdas Ji's vaars. It augments the message of Guru Granth Sahib Ji allegorically whilst underscoring the importance of sovereignty for the Khalsa.

[TheeTurbanator]

I see people have three main interpretations:

1) raagi darshan/neo-missionaries who say DG was a brahmin (?) writing with no role historically. demonstrably false

2) The view that Adi Granth is the Guru, but Dasam Granth is also bani to be respected, revered, and read. this is the prevalent view today and what I think to be the historical view

3) That the "Guru Granth Sahib" is not one text but is in fact represented by three darbars. The Adi Guru Darbar, the Dasam Guru Darbar, and the Sarbloh Guru Darbar. This is propagated by some Nihang sites (I believe manglacharan as well) but I have not found any historical evidence for it - yet

[jkvlondon]

4 hours ago, TheeTurbanator said:

Why would there be such a controversy over the Dasam Granth then? 

why would Harmandir Sahib get attacked 4 times since independence , weakening of the sikh spirit...