Kavi Santokh Singh's Suraj Prakash and Nanak Prakash

recently reading Kavi Santokh Singh's work, i noticed many errors and blasphemous statements like Guru Sahibs took afeem. Guru Ji only read Jap Ji swayiye 5 paures anand sahib, when sikhs married they did the marriage like the hindus during 10 Gurus time. Theres alot more stuff like this. I know that Kavi Ji's work is used in most katha and stories gyanis usually tell, if it has this kind of stuff should we even allow the katha of it. Dhiral Mil only did one thing wrong and he was kicked out of Guru House. If this book has this kind of stuff should we even do katha from it.
*

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

SikhGiani ji

How do one know these are mistakes? How does one know they are not mistakes? If there are mistakes, how do we know whether to keep some or none of SP? I am always curious about the rules that we need.

Dear SPNAdmin ji, how did SikhGiani come to know there is a discrepancy here? Because of reading Guru Granth Sahib. Thankfully we have a frame of reference, where we know what were Gurus' teachings!

Thanks Kanwaljit Singh ji

I realize that. What I would like to see happen is some further detail on the part of Sikh Giani, and examples of his reasoning. That is why I posed questions. So that we can all understand the perspective he has and why he has that perspective.

Now you may not realize, but there are already SPN members who have notified me and the moderators that they are offended that Suraj Partap/Prakash has been questioned. They have their own views too. So in the interest of having a learning experience I have asked Sikh Giani to share his reasoning. in more detail.

I second both the responses above.
In addition,
- taking opium - opium is a pain reliever, need I say more?
- meditating on the banis you mentioned - seriously? this is blasphemous?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/36004-kavi-santokh-singhs-suraj-prakash-nanak.html

- marrying around a fire - before the tradition of marrying before Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, there was the Hindu tradition of marrying before the fire. Remember Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was not the Guru until Guru Gobind Singh ji declared it so (the tradition of marying beofre it devloped long after it became so). Before it was just a collection of writings of the first five Gurus and other Saints, regarded quite highly nonetheless but not as it is today. Also, today our Guru is shabad, not a person. Can you imagine walking around Guru Arjan Dev ji to get married? With all the marriages how would Guru Arjan compile Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji?

let me explien my position with evidence in GGSJ and Sikh Rehat Maryada we are told not to do nasha but in Suraj Prakash it says in 2nd rut ans 10 it says Guru Ji did Sukha and afeem. in 3rd rut ans 10 it says Guru Gobind Singh Ji only trusts in a devi. in 6 rut ans 9 towars end of 40th line it says Sikhs did afeem again. in 3rd rut ans 19 it says Guru Ji only read Jap Ji swayiye and 5 pauris of Anand Sahib, isn't that against maryada and 5 banis were read. kavi ji was amritdhari so didn't he know it was 5 banis.

Also whenever kavi ji starts a new chapter he always praise a devi, swarsati.

Im not against Kavi Ji's work but you have to realize and i heard it from many famous gyanis that there are errors in his work. I think what should be done is that a panthi committee should write sikh ithas using all material we have now so we can fix the errors and everyone can agree on it. also these great works should still be studed.

SikhGiani ji

Thanks for going into more detail. Let me share with you my personal perspective. I promise that I will not smooth things over but potentially make things worse.

You will find elsewhere on the forum where I have stated without apology that Suraj Partap/Prakash should never be used as an authoritative source regarding Sikh history or belief. It is historically valuable as a window on Sikhism in the 19th Century when puratan beliefs were widespread. The contents of Suraj Partap/Prakash are poetry. Many people take it to be an authentic record of events and words spoken at significant moments in Sikh history. They believe that Suraj Partap/Prakash clears up/resolves many questions. I take it to be unreliable as a historical reference, because it was written by Santokh Singh, based on family anecdotes and notes that were kept by father and grandfather, who was a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh. So for me there is too much room for individuals to add what was culturally and politically important for them to believe. And this found its way into SP.

Having said that, the question remains. Why is Suraj Partap/Prakash used for teaching, explaining the history and precepts of Sikhi? Could not the answer lie in the cultural and political instability in the years leading up to the completion and adoption of the Sikh Rehat Maryada? We know that controversy over the Raagmala split the Chief Khalsa Diwan, prompting Panch Khalsa Diwan to remove itself from the proceedings in protest against "a puratan text." In an attempt to build a consensus among factions, Chief Khalsa Diwan worked in the opposite direction to smooth over differences. The result: sangats may decide whether to recite raagmala, but they may not remove it from the granth. Consensus was important in that era of forging a unified Sikh identity.

Might is not also be the case that Suraj Partap/Prakash was let into gurdwara teaching for exactly the same reason? Frankly I don't know. This is my hypothesis. I do think anyone who has read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and thought about its message would take a skeptical view of Suraj Partap/Prakash as a dependable reference.

I do not think this will happen in the near future.

Sikh Giani ji,
There can be errors, no doubt.

I have hinted at the use of opium. One can imagine how it can be beneficial during a period of war.

With regards to Devi. Devi is "Shakti", and is considered the strength of the Timeless God. Gyani Sant Singh ji Maskeen descibes her as the heat (Devi) of the fire (God). They are not separate, what is fire without heat and heat without fire?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36004
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36004
You can see how meditating on this strength can provide the meditator with strength to fight wars. Also, notice how Guru Sahib writes Chandi di Vaar, an expression of that strength in mythological form. Chandi is Devi incarnate. Chandi di Vaar gives that transcendental strength a form, something tangible, something physical that can be read or listened to by peasants. It is designed to arouse the warrior spirit in them, to arouse them fight for the cause.

We also must acknowledge that there are many groups within the panth who are deeply invested in Suraj Partap/Prakash and do not take kindly to any evaluation or critique of its value as an historical source.