Jump to content

Is suraj parkash right? is it a reliable source of info?


Recommended Posts

Just now, akaaliKhalsa1699 said:

can someone explain if suraj parkash is right or wrong? why is it reliable if it was written in 1843, which was way after guru jis time. I follow taksal maryada and i havent quite understood why the taksal has chosen to do suraj parkash parchar. 

Okay. Can you explain why you feel that way about this scripture? Did you hear about it from someone else (preachers negatively speaking about it)? Or you are actually reading and trying to figure out? Knowing the reasoning of why someone is asking such questions will be helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, S1ngh said:

Okay. Can you explain why you feel that way about this scripture? Did you hear about it from someone else (preachers negatively speaking about it)? Or you are actually reading and trying to figure out? Knowing the reasoning of why someone is asking such questions will be helpful.

yes firstly i have heard some parchariks saying negative things about suraj parksash. secondly, i am wondering why it would be reliable as suraj parkash was puplished way after guru jis time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of our history of Guru Sahib's time period is based on these ancient granths like the Janam Sakhis, Mahima Prakash, Sri Gur Sobha, Suraj Prakash etc. If we discard these granths then we have nothing left on our Guru jees.

It is only less than 2 to 3 percent of the Sakhis that are not according to Gurmat it doesn't mean we should discard the entire granth with all the authentic Sakhis. It's almost like throwing the baby along with the bath water.

Kavi ji was a great scholar.  Kavi Santokh Singh gathered Sakhis related to Guru Sahibaan where ever he could find them from all over Punjab. He wrote his monumental Granth in beautiful poetry which is why Katha is done of it for the benefit of Sangat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iv heard that kavi jis wife used to complain all the time and say how he is useless and wasting time, yet he was so devoted to his gurus.  They were poor yet he devotee his life to guru ji and writing this work       quite inspirational. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2020 at 10:44 PM, akaaliKhalsa1699 said:

can someone explain if suraj parkash is right or wrong? why is it reliable if it was written in 1843, which was way after guru jis time. I follow taksal maryada and i havent quite understood why the taksal has chosen to do suraj parkash parchar. 

Nothing is so simple. That u can write it as right or wrong. Only gurbani has the daraja that we can say its 100% correct and shudh as it was written by the Gurus themselves and checked by them. Even then there are small discrepencies between the different historical birs due to human error. 

So every thing else we cant say is 100% correct. BUT that does not mean we discard it. Look at the muslims and chriatians, there scriptures were written years later and are translated so many times from the original yet they still have faith. 

And unless this new wave of discard dasam granth discard this that is sweeping into the panth, it was the opposite in the olden days. Sikhs would read and learn from other faiths scriptures. now we r maligning our own. Theres always something u can learn from everything. 

Wheres the scholarly spirit of sikhs? Where u read different sources, compare and come to ur own nirna/formulation?  

On facebook, ppl used to write sikhs are so dumb they created most of history but did not write any of theirnown history.

And now we have history of the gurus time And WRITTEN BY SIKHS, and sikhs are complaining about it!!

Look bhai santokh singh and bhai rattan singh the respected writers of sooraj granth, panth parkash etc did their job and wrote down what they knew and what they heard from other sikhs and villagers. They acted like recorders and wrote down all that was prevalent at that time. So that those sakhis would not get lost. So we should be thankful! And if we dont agree with a sakhi, thats ok that was probably just a folklore that got added in. Look at the muslims, they have rated their hadiths on how accuruate they were. And they still kept the not so accurate ones but just noted that it wasnt thst authentic.

Also Taksal is about keeping the scholarly spirit of sikhi alive. In the olden days, its curriculum included reading hindu granths for comparison and debate education. Even now they read sarkitavali, a translation intl panjabi of a hindu puraan. And u want taksal to give up Sooraj parkash because of a few inaccuracies? Taksal is perfectly capable of explaining those inaccuracies and providing opposing evidence. They wont get brainwashed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dhan

1 hour ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

Nothing is so simple. That u can write it as right or wrong. Only gurbani has the daraja that we can say its 100% correct and shudh as it was written by the Gurus themselves and checked by them. Even then there are small discrepencies between the different historical birs due to human error. 

So every thing else we cant say is 100% correct. BUT that does not mean we discard it. Look at the muslims and chriatians, there scriptures were written years later and are translated so many times from the original yet they still have faith. 

And unless this new wave of discard dasam granth discard this that is sweeping into the panth, it was the opposite in the olden days. Sikhs would read and learn from other faiths scriptures. now we r maligning our own. Theres always something u can learn from everything. 

Wheres the scholarly spirit of sikhs? Where u read different sources, compare and come to ur own nirna/formulation?  

On facebook, ppl used to write sikhs are so dumb they created most of history but did not write any of theirnown history.

And now we have history of the gurus time And WRITTEN BY SIKHS, and sikhs are complaining about it!!

Look bhai santokh singh and bhai rattan singh the respected writers of sooraj granth, panth parkash etc did their job and wrote down what they knew and what they heard from other sikhs and villagers. They acted like recorders and wrote down all that was prevalent at that time. So that those sakhis would not get lost. So we should be thankful! And if we dont agree with a sakhi, thats ok that was probably just a folklore that got added in. Look at the muslims, they have rated their hadiths on how accuruate they were. And they still kept the not so accurate ones but just noted that it wasnt thst authentic.

Also Taksal is about keeping the scholarly spirit of sikhi alive. In the olden days, its curriculum included reading hindu granths for comparison and debate education. Even now they read sarkitavali, a translation intl panjabi of a hindu puraan. And u want taksal to give up Sooraj parkash because of a few inaccuracies? Taksal is perfectly capable of explaining those inaccuracies and providing opposing evidence. They wont get brainwashed. 

 

dhanwaad tera ji. thank u for giving a great explanation. i have another question. what is the difference between damdami taksals taksali gutka and the other ones like budha dal ones ect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2020 at 1:04 PM, akaaliKhalsa1699 said:

dhan

dhanwaad tera ji. thank u for giving a great explanation. i have another question. what is the difference between damdami taksals taksali gutka and the other ones like budha dal ones ect.

As far as I know. The difference is which banis are included. The buddha dal gutka contians more dasam bani. And prevalent sayings like shalok damale da and brahm kavach. Which may or may not be dasam bani. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Ik i'm a few (13) years late but basically: Get a single Mal-mal dastar (around 3-5 metres) and starch it. You just whisk 2 ladles of starch (Kershaw's, cornstarch or maida) with around 5 cups of water until it's completely smooth and mix it on low heat flame for around 20 mins until it goes clear and think like water. When this cools off, take a clean but damp turban and soak it into the starch and make sure you coat the whole dastar evenly You leave it out to hang dry in the sun/air. Once dry u can store it in a cool, dry place until you wanna tie it (for about 4 months) Take the dastar, sprinkle some water all throughout the turban to make it slightly wet and just soft enough to tie. Then you and another person hold the dastar at each end to make a stretched rectangle (two people holding one corner in each of their hands). Fold it in half width-wise 3 times. Tie the turban like this quite loosely. The starch will make it tighter as it dries BUT TIE IT STAIGHT ONTO YOUR HEAD. NO MINi-TURBAN BENEATH IT. JUST TIE YOUR FLATTENED JOORA ON TOP OF YOUR HEAD AND THE DASTAR DIRECTLY ON TOP Secure it with pins and wear it on your head until it has dried from the water you sprinkled before the pooni. After it has completely dried (give it around 3-4 hours just to make sure) you take it off your head DO NOT UNWRAP IT TAKE IT OFF IN IT'S SHAPE and the next time you need to wear you can just place it on your head over your flattened joora instead of tying this. You can do this for around 5 months after you first tied it until you have to ever tie it again.
    • I tie a Punjabi style dastar with starch. Why do people hate this so much? Once when I was tying my dastar my neck seized up and the apna doctor said staying in that position daily for more than 5 mins is dangerous. He recommended a starched pagg like his dad. And I respect my pagg more than my life. I put it on the top shelf of my cupboard whenever it isn't on my head, recite Waheguruji da naam whenever I am tying my joora, fifty and when i place the Dastar on my head and I mata thek and kiss  it before I do. And when I do tie it (every 4 months when the starch starts to weaken) I make sure that I pooni and tie it with much love and whilst reciting paath. I get that if someone treats their turban like a hat (eg: throwing it on the floor, cramping it or just disrespecting it) then this is unacceptable but just cos one puts their pagg on their head rather than tying it each time doesn't mean they treat it as such. (and let's be honest, starched or not we've all put our dad's pagg on our head like a hat when we were kids as a joke and meant no disrespect. Intention is everything). Ik Singhs who get angry tying their pagg and start doing maa/phen di gaaliyan, and when they take it off they just throw to the side and wait to tie it again next time. (Also, I'm from a Jat Sikh family so pls don't try to make this about "starched paggs are tarkhan/caste based" or anything stupid like that). PS: I do remember that stupidness in the 90s/early 2000s UK when Sikh men used to have a tiny starched paggs and were completely clean shaven or had a little goatee like Herbie Sahara/ Vijay from achanak. Now THAT was stupid and deserves all the hate but I just mean the concept of a starched dastar whether it's Punjabi Style, Kenyan style or whatever
    • Anyone know how to tie this turban? My Nani's dad tied it, it was starched but i can't work out whether the pooni was kenyan orpunjabi (like folded or an actual pooni). This was very common before partition, and uses a single dastar (not double stitched). Is it js Kenyan pagg with a higher larr?
    • It doesn't matter. What the nihangs did 100 years ago has no relevance today. Because people fight differently now. As a karate black belt, 90% of what we learn is useless, cos it revolves around how people fought 100 years ago. Today, most teenage boys likely to cause fights (at least in the uk) do boxing. But when boxing was really popular, people used to throw punches, hence why the "man to man fist fight" image was there. But now that UFC is popular, people do all sorts like grappling, knees and all (even with no training).  And also, I highly doubt anyone ever attacked a nihang Singh unarmed back then, just by seeing their saroop with shastaraan. What they did do, however, was Loh Mushti but that was more of a sport than a combat system. They definitely would have trained in basic fighting like wrestling and strikes but not a system. Because any good fighter knows that trying to find a "code" to fight by is stupid. But in terms of unarmed fighting, it was rare and probably revolved around disarming an armed attacker (do NOT even attemp to learn that, you will get killed and there's no point even trying to learn).   If you're interested for historical/ preservation purposed then great, but if you want to learn it for self defense or fighting tactics then pls don't, because what worked then won't work now and Nihangs were probably quite limited in hand to hand combat training cos they're armed to the teeth, deterring any unarmed attacker and killing one if they tried to fight
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use