Horrifying "minor" differences in modern baani of Sukhmani and that in Maharani's pothi sahib

[Guest]

I don't wish to open a can of worms here, but few weeks back someone had posted a thread abt british loot of sikh artifacts and there was one folio of Maharani Jinda's sukhmani sahib pothi on that thread 

That baani was not "pad cheed" , means all words are connected unlike in modern pothis and thats not an issue .

However as I was casually reading through the baani (it was Sukhmani sahib), I noticed it had differences with modern version of Sukhmani sahib . I attached my comparison below 

 

 

Did you guys noticed the difference already . In the first salok, it has "aad gurdev nameh" vs "aad gurae nameh" in modern forms.

And in other word highlighted "garrb" , it has "baba" in old versions compared to "bhabha" in modern ones. 

I have always believed gurbani to be without any change. I wonder how many such errors exist . Or is there errors in Maharani Jinda's pothi .

Do we have a concrete historical bir of Sri Guru Granth sahib to check against ?

[MrDoaba]

Jesus Christ this is horrifying, we must denounce the Maharaani and her family at once!

That was sarcasm btw. You are being a dramabaaz as usual without any facts.

Even modern day pothis have printing mistakes. On the off chance this wasn't considered a mistake (at the time of scribing) you don't know what source the scribe used for this - it could have been from a copy of a copy of SGGS. I'm sure some Saroops were acknowledged to contain mistakes or differences, especially the ones belonging to individuals or created for private use. This pothi may even have a panna where errors have been noted.

From all the main Birs in circulation a standardised version was made, which is what we have today. I'm no expert but I believe these were mostly the same give or take a few matre here or there.

Doing shudhaayi is important as is maintaing satkaar throughout the whole process...the rules are much tighter today.

[MrDoaba]

Also, if you read a teeka of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, rarely you'll find it actually does mention if there was a difference in matra or akhar in a particular Saroop.

Anyway there's no need to make a big fuss, if you look at pothis from back in the day a good few have mistakes.

 

EDIT: I mean just look at some gutke and pothis today, they add in bindi and adhak where they feel like it, and that too deliberately. Why doesn't anyone ever point that out?

[AkalkiFauj]

20 hours ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

That baani was not "pad cheed" , means all words are connected unlike in modern pothis and thats not an issue .

It is quite of an issue. Watch Bhai Manvir Singh’s How we are changing Sikhi 

[Guest]

16 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

Also, if you read a teeka of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, rarely you'll find it actually does mention if there was a difference in matra or akhar in a particular Saroop.

Anyway there's no need to make a big fuss, if you look at pothis from back in the day a good few have mistakes.

 

EDIT: I mean just look at some gutke and pothis today, they add in bindi and adhak where they feel like it, and that too deliberately. Why doesn't anyone ever point that out?

I understand what you're saying. But the whole point is Gurbani is so sacrosanct , and revealed word of god , we cannot even alter one maatra of it . The pad chhed is not a serious threat because I can always write separated words together with a line . But if we alter maatra, then it has the potential to change the meaning of words. I also can related to people putting maatras where it makes sense to put them but might not be  in original gurbani, for instance "gobid" , people find it somehow erroneous and try to put tipi there and make it "gobind" . 

BTW, how many historical birs we do have ? I guess there's one or maybe a few at harmandar sahib, then the ones at Sri Hazur sahib. Don't know others.

I also heard from someone RSS is taking away birs from Punjab by covert ways , often in connivance with some sikhs . 

[FreshMind13]

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.

 

[Guest]

6 hours ago, FreshMind13 said:

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.

 

this is horrifying ! 

So where is the original saroop ?

[FreshMind13]

22 hours ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

this is horrifying ! 

So where is the original saroop ?

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.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, FreshMind13 said:

There is no original saroop 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 Nisahn 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.

If we don't have original birs, then atleast I reckon we have birs written by prominent sikhs like Baba Deep Singh ji or others during that time or earlier. Because in Harmandar sahib, the bir which is done parkash of has words connected by single line and is basically obviously hand-written. It has wrinkly but shiny pages. So who wrote that ? I am assuming it is centuries older ? or atleast as old as before anti-sikh forces (baahmans ) could have poked their noses in . '

Same way , Hazur sahib has hand-written bir I reckon, of both SGGS and Sri Dasam granth. 

What is the oldest bir we do have ?

Also how much are the differences in most puratan birs ? like a few maatras here and there, or as significant as "aad gurdev nameh" vs "aad gurae nameh" ? 

Can you please answer this .

PS: Also is it true RSS has stolen and is still stealing birs in connivance with corrupt sikh officials , and that RSS is printing its own birs of SGGS to confuse sikhs . A sikh told me he has seen RSS printing center where they print sggs birs 

[FreshMind13]

6 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

If we don't have original birs, then atleast I reckon we have birs written by prominent sikhs like Baba Deep Singh ji or others during that time or earlier. Because in Harmandar sahib, the bir which is done parkash of has words connected by single line and is basically obviously hand-written. It has wrinkly but shiny pages. So who wrote that ? I am assuming it is centuries older ? or atleast as old as before anti-sikh forces (baahmans ) could have poked their noses in . '

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.

6 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Same way , Hazur sahib has hand-written bir I reckon, of both SGGS and Sri Dasam granth. 

What is the oldest bir we do have ?

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.

6 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Also how much are the differences in most puratan birs ? like a few maatras here and there, or as significant as "aad gurdev nameh" vs "aad gurae nameh" ? 

Can you please answer 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.

6 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

PS: Also is it true RSS has stolen and is still stealing birs in connivance with corrupt sikh officials , and that RSS is printing its own birs of SGGS to confuse sikhs . A sikh told me he has seen RSS printing center where they print sggs birs 

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.