Guru Nanak Sahib: Real Date of Birth

spnadmin · #1 (**permalink**) 03-Jul-2011, 06:04 AM

Guru Nanak Sahib: real Date of Birth
by Harjinder Singh Dilgeer

(from SIKH HISTORY, by Harjinder Singh Dilgeer, vol 1, pages 101 onwards

Guru Nanak Sahib
[Some writers wrongly use ‘Dev’ as a suffix to Guru Nanak’s name]
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-gurus/36075-guru-nanak-sahib-real-date-birth.html

Guru Nanak Sahib founded Sikhism, as revealed to him by Akaal Purakh (God). Guru Nanak (20.10.1469 7.9.1539), son of (Mata) Tripta and (Baba) Kalyan Das (son of Baba Shiv Narayan and grandson of Baba Ram Narayan Bedi, was born at village Rai-Bhoi-Di-Talwandi (now Nanakana Sahib).
..
Another date (the 15th of April 1469) has also been mentioned by some writers as Guru’s birth date. This mistake occurred due to distortion by Mehrban (who wrote a biography of Guru Nanak suiting to his planning to establish himself in the Sikh world). Meharban, who had been functioning under the guidance of the Brahmins, who assert that a child born in Katak month of Bikrami calender (October-November of Gregorian calender or Common Era/ C.E.) is in-auspicious; hence he changed the date of birth of Guru Nanak. The date 15th of April 1469 has been accepted by those who have followed Janamsakhi Meharban Wali. Well known writer Karam Singh Historian too accepted the April date. Karam Singh, in his book Katak Ke Visakh, rejected the authenticity of the book Bhai Bale Wali Janamsakhi and proved that it (book) was the work of the descendants of Handal (of Jandiala, district Amritsar), who wanted to present Handal as superior to Guru Nanak. Karam Singh Historian totally rejected this 'Janamsakhi' and with this he rejected even the date of the birth of Guru Nanak Sahib. But, Karam Singh made a mistake; he accepted Meharban's date of birth of Guru Nanak without analysing it. (Meharban's Janamsakhi is the basis of the rest of the Janamsakhis, i.e. Bhai Mani Singh Wali Janamsakhi, Puratan Janamakhi, Wilayat Wali Janamsakhi etc).
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

But, there are numerous references in earlier and most authentic books mentioning the celebration of birthday of Guru Nanak by the sixth and the ninth Guru Sahib, in the Katak month. Several other works from earlier period confirm the date of Katak (the 20th of October). These include: Bhai Gurdas, 1630s (Kabit no. 345); Guru Kian Sakhian, 1790, by Swarup Singh Kaushish; Sakhi Pothi, 1726 (unknown author), Kesar Singh Chhiber, 1780, Bansavalinama Dasan Patsahina Da; Gulab Singh Nirmala, 1753, Guru Parnali; Sant Singh Chhhiber, early 19th Century, Janamsakhi Baba Nanak; Ram Sukh Rao, c. 1820s, Jassa Singh Binod & Sri Fateh Singh Partap Parbhakar, Santokh Singh, 1832, Nanak Parkash; Gulab Singh IInd, 1851, Gurparnali; Nihal Singh – Gurmukh Singh, 1890, Khursheed Khalsa; Sondha Kavi, end of 18h century, Guru Bansavali; Tara Singh Narotam, 1884, Gur Teerath Sangrah, J.D. Cunningam, 1848, History of the Sikhs and several others. For analytical study of this issue, read the book Nanakshahi Calender, 2010, by Dr Harjinder Singh Dilgeer.

[2] Only Meharban has written that Guru Nanak was born at Chahal, at the residence of his maternal grandfather (Nana in Punjabi), hence his name Nanak; and Meharban further says that Guru Nanak spent first seven years of his life at Chahal;, all other writers accept that he was born at Talwandi (now Nanakana Sahib). It is remarkable that several places of Nanakana Sahib are associated with Guru Nanak’s childhood whereas there is not a single such place at Chahal village. It seems that all the wrong traditions about Guru Nanak had been started by Meharban in his Janamsakhi; including his date (Visakh) and place (Chahal) of birth and date of death (22.9.1539 in stead of 7.9.1539) etc. Meharban shows Guru Nanak wearing Janeo and various other distortions go to his credit.

Copied with permission of the author
Source: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?not...14128241961678

Gyani Jarnail Singh · #2 (**permalink**) 03-Jul-2011, 08:41 AM

I think the "Alternative" Pretender Gurus line...of the REJECTED ones...who were fighting tooth and nail, accepting Mughal Imperial help as well, even to the extent of getting Guru Arjun Sahib Ji murdered in order to remove him from the stage..DID write those FICTITIOUS janamsakhis as well as pen fake "gurbani" which Guru Amardass ji issued a warning against in Ananad Sahib...Kachi bani..kehndeh kacche..sundeh kaccheh..SATGUR BINA hor Kachi bani...and the PRE-EMPTIVE Strike by Guru Arjun Ji sahib to collect and SEAL all AUTHENTIC GURBANI in the POTHI SAHIB (later to be Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ) and use such a superb iron clad adulteration proof method that it became IMPOSSIBLE to adulterate the Pothi sahib..are all important indicators.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075
AT one stage, Meherban who was a truly fabtastic Kathawachak - expositor of Gurbani..had so mesmerised the Sangats with his kathas that virtually ALL sangats began to divert to to him and Guru Arjun Ji was almost BANKRUPT. The Meharban Group was clever in that they took the Bheta form the Sangat BUT for the Langgar - they would send them to Guru Arjun ji's house. The situation became so bad that at one stage even the Utensils of Guru Arjun ji had been sold to provide langgar to the sangats who had matha tek their bheta to Mehrban !!
It was then, in this dire situation that Bhai Gurdass Ji, Baba Budha Ji, and a few other prominent Sikhs who put their heads together to find a solution. This solution was to go to the Four OUTER Gates of the Amrtisar town, and inform the incoming Sangats of the TRUE GURU _ Guru Arjun ji for Bheta and Gurbani darshan. Only when this happened did the Hijacking of the sangats slowly come to a stop and Mehrban/Prithiyah Gang deception was exposed.
I ma of the view that thus the Mehrban Group deliberately MISGUIDED the sangats on the BIRTH DATE of Guru nanak ji sahib in order to PROVE their own "Superiority and Competence" as the Better GURU than Guru Arjun Jis lineage of Gurus..this was why Guru nanak jis Birth was Shifted from APRIL to the INAUSPICIOUS 13th MONTH ( a fictitious "month of 30 days" ADDED every few years to the LUNAR CALENDAR due to the shortage of days with the Solar Calendar...its this 13th EXTRA MONTH that is INAUSPICIOUS and NOTHING GOOD is celebreated in it...and Guru nanak jis Birth was moved to it to prove that Guru nanak ji DID NOT EVEN KNOW which month to be born in ?? What type of Avtaar is He ?? Compared to Mehrban etc..who are the Real Avtaars becasue they are born in auspicious months/dates !!...........Mehrban Group in trying to make themsleves more authentic..were denigrating Guru Nanak ji...and this DELIBERATE DENINGRATION is apparent in all the Janamsakhis...this was the view of Karam Singh historian and I agree with him rather than dr Dilgeer. Guru nnak ji was Born in APRIL..and thats why Guru Gobind Singh ji alos chose to reveal the KHALSA on the Same Day in 1699...the JOURNEY thta began in 1469...is Completed in 1699 !! on Vasakhi day !!

spnadmin · #3 (**permalink**) 03-Jul-2011, 09:46 AM

Gyani ji

It appears you are saying that both Karam Singh and Harjinder Singh Dilgeer agree that the Meharban deliberately lied and manipulated information about the birth of Guru Nanak.

Quote:

Karam Singh, in his book Katak Ke Visakh, rejected the authenticity of the book Bhai Bale Wali Janamsakhi and proved that it (book) was the work of the descendants of Handal (of Jandiala, district Amritsar), who wanted to present Handal as superior to Guru Nanak. Karam Singh Historian totally rejected this 'Janamsakhi' and with this he rejected even the date of the birth of Guru Nanak Sahib.

However, they have come to different conclusions regarding his birth date. Hope that I have this correctly in view. I am stuck then on why Karam Singh and Harjinder Singh have a difference agreeing on the month.

This is the part I do not understand. What was missing in Karam Singh's analysis?

Quote:

But, Karam Singh made a mistake; he accepted Meharban's date of birth of Guru Nanak without analysing it. (Meharban's Janamsakhi is the basis of the rest of the Janamsakhis, i.e. Bhai Mani Singh Wali Janamsakhi, Puratan Janamakhi, Wilayat Wali Janamsakhi etc).

Just wondering how one knows which historian has it right?

Gyani Jarnail Singh · #4 (**permalink**) 03-Jul-2011, 16:46 PM

I agree that that both Karam and dilgeer agree on the mehrban adulteration of history...BUT karam heads WEST..while Dilgeer goes EAST !! on WHY Mehrban altered history/falsified the facts... ( btw there is an active lobby still active in Punjab academic circles bent on promoting the "Alternative Guru" side of the family....when the GURUS themsleves and the SRM Clealry BANS all contact/discussion/association with the Meenas, handalis, RamRaiyas etc etc. These academics have written books on trying to reconcile the two opposite sides as merely minor disagreements !!)
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

I am going to have a relook at Karams book (unfortunatley in Punjabi ONLY and karam unable to defend his theories..while Dilgeer is in a better position - more resources, internet, english language etc..) The Katak Visakh controversy is a MAJOR ONE..the SANTS/DERAS on the Kattak side (also raagmala is gurbani..dsm granth is 100% gurukirt..etc, Bikrmi claendar is right, etc etc ) and the SGPC (then) was on the vaisakh side (and anti raagmala, dsm pro -nankshai claendar etc.... THIS is one reason WHY in 2003 when Purewal finalsied his nanakshai calendar..the sant dera lobby stuck its heels in for Kattak and Diwali...and this compromise was agreed to by the Purewal lobby...BUt it wanst enough as the santdera lobby worked behind the scenes to KILL the nankshai calendar even then...

spnadmin · #5 (**permalink**) 03-Jul-2011, 17:25 PM

Gyani ji

Thanks a lot for your detailed reply. And... after thinking about what you have written, it does seem that this is more than a technical concern in light of the calendar controversy.

spnadmin · #6 (**permalink**) 04-Jul-2011, 22:05 PM

This article is by Verpal Singh, forwarded by SPN mentor Gyani Jarnail Singh "Arshi"

Guru Nanak was born in 1469 CE in this village (Talwandi) which has since been named as Nanakana Sahib (in the present-day district of Sheikhupura, now in Pakistan).

There has been a lot of controversy over the month in which he was born. Janamsakhis, i.e., the traditional biographical accounts of the life of Guru Nanak, give four different versions :

1. The Puratan Janamsakhi is based on the manuscript carried to England by H.T. Colebrooke, and preserved there in the old India Office Library. Its main characteristics are:

i) it does not mention Bhai Bala, who is a dominant figure in another Janamsakhi;
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

ii) its language is very precise, written in old style similar to that of the Adi Granth. It is believed to have been compiled in 1634 CE as this date has been indicated in its text;
iii) according to this version, Guru Nanak was born in the month of Vaisakh and not Katak.

2. Meharban's Janamsakhi, written by Manohar Das Meharban (1581-1640 CE), son of infamous Pirthi Chand. This Janamsakhi contains the earliest exposition and commentaries on the hymns of Guru Nanak. Like Puratan Janamsakhi it too does not mention Bhai Bala and gives Vaisakh, and not Katak, as the month of the Guru's birth.

3. Bhai Bala's Janamsakhi is the most popular version. It is claimed that it was dictated by a life-long companion of the Guru, viz., Bhai Bala, at the instance of the second Guru. However, the internal evidence does not support this claim. It was most probably produced in the second half of the 17th century. It has the following peculiarities :

i) It is dominated by Bhai Bala who introduces himself as life-long companion of the Guru.
ii) Since it has been the most easily available version, it has spawned numerous other versions scattered all over the country.
iii) The language used in this version is essentially colloquial and definitely dates later than that of Puratan Janamsakhi or Janamsakhi Meharban.
iv) This Janamsakhi gives the date of birth of Guru Nanak as Katak puranmassi (full moon day of Katak).

4. Bhai Mani Singh's Janamsakhi is credited to Bhai Mani Singh, a Sikh theologian-warrior, and martyr of first half of the 18th century. It is based on first var of Bhai Gurdas which is the earliest account of Guru Nanak's life. Though it does mention the name of Bhai Bala in its account, it definitely is not dominated by him in its narration. With regard to the date of birth of Guru Nanak, it endorses the date given in the Puratan and Meharban's Janamsakhis, viz., the month of Vaisakh.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

Dr Ernest Trumpp was the first non-Sikh scholar who made an effort to carefully study the Janamsakhis. According to him there are two sets of Janamsakhis, the old
tradition and the later tradition. In the old tradition he counts Puratan Janamsakhi where there is no mention of Bhai Bala. The later tradition which "pretends to have knowledge of all details of the life of Nanak was, therefore, compelled to put forth, as voucher for its sundry tales and stories, Bhai Bala, who is said to have been the constant companion of Nanak from his youth up, whereas our old Janamsakhi does not even once mention Bhai Bala. If Bhai Bala had been a constant companion of Nanak and a sort of mentor to him as he appears now in the current Janamsakhi, it would be quite incomprehensible why never a single allusion should have been made to him in old tradition.6

The writers who advocate that Guru Nanak's natal month was Katak give the following arguments :

i) The Sikhs have been celebrating the birth anniversary of the Guru in the month of Katak. Actually, nobody knows when this practice started, although Macauliffe stated that it started in the days of Maharaja Ranjit Singh.7 All the Sikhs could not have stopped celebrating Guru's birth anniversary in Vaisakh at the instance of one man (Giani Sant Singh in this case), however highly placed that person might have been. So, the actual practice of celebrating Guru's birthday goes a long way in favour of Katak.
ii) In the eyes of the faithful, Bhai Bala's Janamsakhi holds supreme. It is believed, albeit erroneously, that it had been written by the life-long companion of Guru Nanak, at the instance of Guru Angad, the second Guru. This gives the date of birth of the Guru to be in the month of Katak.
iii) In 1823 CE, Bhai Santokh Singh completed his Nanak Parkash, one of the most popular works being recited in the gurdwaras. It also gives the date of birth of the Guru in the month of Katak. It is, therefore, argued that had the date of Guru's birth been in Vaisakh, Bhai Santokh Singh would not have stuck to Katak

.

But the following arguments appear to be more convincing in favour of Vaisakh as the month of birth of the Guru.

i) All old records like Puratan Janamsakhi which is definitely older than Bhai Bala's and Bhai Mani Singh's Janamsakhis, give the Guru's natal month as Vaisakh. It is argued that these accounts should have mentioned Katak, had this been the natal month.
ii) There are a number of accounts of Guru Nanak written by the descendants of the Gurus besides Meharban, grandson of Guru Ram Das, who wrote the Janamsakhi mentioned above. One is Mehma Parkash compiled by Sarup Das Bhalla in 1776 CE. Another is Guru Nanak Bans Parkash by Sukhwasi Rai, an old manuscript recently published by the Punjabi University, Patiala. All these works mention that Guru Nanak was born in the month of Vaisakh.
iii) In another way too it has been proved that the Guru was born in the month of Vaisakh.

It is accepted that the life span of Guru Nanak was seventy years, five months, and seven days, and it is also accepted that the Guru died on Asu Sudi 10, 1596 BK. If we calculate on this basis, we come to the conclusion that the Guru was born in the month of Vaisakh. Karam Singh Historian, who conducted a thorough probe into the date of birth of Guru Nanak in his book, Katak ké Vaisakh, has proved conclusively that Guru Nanak was born in the month of Vaisakh.8

References:
6. Trumpp, Ernest : The Adi Granth, 'Introduction', London, 1877, p. 5.
7. Macauliffe, M.A. : The Sikh Religion, Vol. I, Delhi, reprint 1990, p. LXXXIV.
8. Karam Singh Historian wrote a research monograph on this issue which was published with the title Katak ké Vaisakh, Amritsar, 1912. He argued in favour of Vaisakh. Recently, another book came out by Ishar Singh, Vaisakh Nahi Katak, which argues in favour of Katak.

spnadmin · #7 (**permalink**) 06-Jul-2011, 06:56 AM

There has been a lively discussion of the matter of Guru Nanak's birthdate on more than one network. This information was also forwarded by Gyani Jarnail Singh ji but was composed by Gurmit Singh Australiawale. The comment chronicles the positions taken by various debaters and scholars.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

"...If majority reckons that Guru Nanak Sahib was born on 15 April 1469 then why Nanakshahi Calendar does notcommence from that Date? Please have a look at different Dates:

27 March 1469 S. Pal Singh Purewal (Canada);
14 April 1469 Institute of Sikh Studies, Chd. and S. PS Purewal;
15 April 1469 Late Karam Singh Historian, Bhai Kahn Singh, Prof. Sahib Singh, Dr. Gopal Singh, Dr. Ganda Singh, Khushwant Singh, Dr. Hari Ram Gupta, Principal Satbir Singh, Patwant Singh, Encyclopaedia of Sikhism by Punjabi Uni, Patiala;
20 October 1469 Dr. Tarlochan Singh and Dr. Harjinder Singh Dilgeer

But under the guidance of SGPC/SAD and their Officials, Birth Day is celebrated according to the Hindus' Puranmashi in Kartika month i.e. following after Diwali. Thus, different Dates under NSC? (This leads to confusion/spnadmin as follows)
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075

[19 November 2002]; 8 November 2003; 26 November 2004; 15 November 2005; 5 November 2006; 24 November 2007; 13 November 2008; 2 November 2009; 21 November 2010;

spnadmin · #8 (**permalink**) 06-Jul-2011, 07:01 AM

By now one should realize this is no simple matter. Another article forwarded by SPN Mentor Gyani Jarnail Singh "Arshi" illustrates the complexity of questions that have been considered. Different points of view surface. This one, in support of Professor Dilgeer's hypothesis, by Sarbjit Singh USAwale

ਸਤਿਕਾਰ ਯੋਗ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਜੀ , ਗੁਰ ਫਤਹਿ।
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075
ਸ: ਗੁਰਮੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਵਲੋ ਲਿਖੀਆਂ ਗਈਆਂ ਤਾਰੀਖਾਂ ਸਬੰਧੀ ਬੇਨਤੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ, Addressing Gurmit Singh's dates.
27 March 1469 :- ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਯੂਲੀਅਨ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਹੈ। ਇਹ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਕਦੇ ਵੀ ਹਿੰਦੋਸਤਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਲਾਗੂ ਨਹੀ ਹੋਇਆ। ਪਰ ਪਿਛਲਖੁਰੀ ਗਿਣਤੀ ਕਰਕੇ ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਲਿਖੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ। ਹਿੰਦੋਸਤਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਪ੍ਰਚੱਲਤ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਮੁਤਾਬਕ 27 March 1469 ਨੂੰ ਚੇਤ ਦੀ ਪੁੰਨਿਆ, 1 ਵੈਸਾਖ, ਦਿਨ ਸੋਮਵਾਰ 1526 ਬਿਕ੍ਰਮੀ ਸੀ। This date is according to the Julian Calendar calculated by going backwards to correspond to Full Moon Chet 1 Vaisakh of the Bikrmi Calendar. Julian Calendar had no standard in India as it was not used here.

14 April 1469 :- ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਗ੍ਰੈਗੋਰੀਅਨ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਹੈ। 1469 ਵਿਚ ਇਹ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਕੋਈ ਹੋਂਦ ਹੀ ਨਹੀ ਸੀ। ਇਹ 1582 ਵਿਚ ਹੋਂਦ ਵਿਚ ਆਇਆ ਸੀ। ਇਹ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਅੰਗਰੇਜਾਂ ਦੇ ਆਉਣ ਨਾਲ ਹਿੰਦੋਸਤਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਆਇਆ ਅਤੇ ਲਾਗੂ ਹੋਇਆ। 1 ਵੈਸਾਖ ਨੂੰ ਮੁੱਖ ਰੱਖਕੇ ਜੇ ਇਸ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਲਿਖਣੀ ਹੋਵੇ ਤਾਂ ਅੱਜ ਇਹ 14 April ਬਣਦੀ ਹੈ। This date is GREGORIAN CALENDAR. in 1469 this Gregorian Calendar was not even used yet because it came into force in 1582 and was popularised in Inda by the BRITISH much LATER. (Again base is Bikrami Full Moon Chet i ) Vaisakh translated to gregorian calendar.

15 April 1469 :- ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਵੀ ਗ੍ਰੈਗੋਰੀਅਨ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਹੈ । ਇਹ, ਇਕ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਨੂੰ ਦੂਜੇ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਵਿਚ ਬਦਲੀ ਕਰਨ ਵੇਲੇ ਹੋਈ ਤਕਨੀਕੀ ਗਲਤੀ ਹੋ ਸਕਦੀ ਹੈ। ਇਹ ਕੋਈ ਬੁਹਤ ਵੱਡਾ ਮੁੱਦਾ ਨਹੀ ਹੈ। ਮੁੱਖ ਮੁੱਦਾ ਹੈ ਕੱਤਕ ਜਾਂ ਵੈਸਾਖ। ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਵੀ ਵੈਸਾਖ ਦੀ ਹੀ ਹੈ। This date also GREGORIAN and may be the result of a slight miscalculation in the conversion. The ONE DAY difference between 14th April and 15th April is not a big deal. The real issue is KATTAK or VAISAKH.

20 October 1469 ਇਹ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਵੀ ਯੂਲੀਅਨ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਦੀ ਹੈ। ਹਿੰਦੋਸਤਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਪ੍ਰਚਲਤ ਕੈਲੰਡਰ ਮੁਤਾਬਕ ਇਸ ਦਿਨ ਕੱਤਕ ਦੀ ਪੁੰਨਿਆ, 21 ਕੱਤਕ ਦਿਨ ਸ਼ੁਕਰਵਾਰ 1526 ਬਿਕ੍ਰਮੀ ਸੀ। This date is based on JULIAN Calendar Based on bikrmi Full Moon of Katak 21 saturday 1526.

ਸੋ ਸਪੱਸ਼ਟ ਹੈ ਕਿ 27 ਮਾਰਚ,14 ਅਪ੍ਰੈਲ ਅਤੇ 15 ਅਪ੍ਰੈਲ ਮੁਤਾਬਕ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਜੀ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼ 1 ਵੈਸਾਖ 1526 ਬਿਕ੍ਰਮੀ ਭਾਵ ਚੇਤ ਦੀ ਪੁੰਨਿਆ ਨੂੰ ਹੋਇਆ ਸੀ। 20 October 1469 ਮੁਤਾਬਕ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਜੀ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼ ਕੱਤਕ ਦੀ ਪੁੰਨਿਆ, 21 ਕੱਤਕ ਦਿਨ ਸ਼ੁਕਰਵਾਰ 1526 ਬਿਕ੍ਰਮੀ ਨੂੰ ਹੋਇਆ ਸੀ। ਨਿਮਰਤਾ ਸਹਿਤ ਬੇਨਤੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਚਰਚਾ ਨੂੰ ਕੱਤਕ ਜਾਂ ਵੈਸਾਖ ਤੇ ਹੀ ਕੇਂਦਰਿਤ ਰੱਖਿਆ ਜਾਵੇ। SO all these dates show either Kattak or Vaisakh and thats the Main issue at hand. Lets not confuse it by bringing in all these dates.

ਡਾ ਦਲਗੀਰ ਦੇ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਨਾਲ ਮੈ ਪੂਰੀ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਸਹਿਮਤ ਹਾਂ ਕਿ ਭਾਈ ਬਾਲੇ ਵਾਲੀ ਪ੍ਰਚੱਲਤ ਜਨਮਸਾਖੀ ਵਿਚ ਬੁਹਤ ਮਿਲਾਵਟ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਜਨਮ ਸਾਖੀ ਤੇ ਤਾਂ ਯਕੀਨ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੀ ਨਹੀ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ। ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਦੀ ਇਹ ਦਲੀਲ ਵੀ ਮੰਨੀ ਜਾ ਸਕਦੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਅਸਲੀ ਜਨਮ ਸਾਖੀ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਜੀ ਪਾਸ ਹੋਵੇਗੀ। ਡਾਂ ਦਲਗੀਰ ਜੀ ਲਿਖਦੇ ਹਨ, “ ਅਜਿਹਾ ਜਾਪਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਜਦ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਨੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਵਾਰ ਲਿਖੀ ਤਾਂ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਕੋਲ ਉਹ ਜਨਮ ਸਾਖੀ ਅਜੇ ਮੌਜੂਦ ਸੀ ਕਿਉਂ ਕਿ ਉਸ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਉਸ ਵਾਰ ਵਿਚ ਏਨੀ ਤਫ਼ਸੀਲ ਨਹੀਂ ਸਨ ਦੇ ਸਕਦੇ।" ਸਵਾਲ ਪੈਦਾ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਕੀ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਵਾਰ ਵਿਚ ਜਦੋਂ ਹੋਰ ਐਨੀ ਤਫ਼ਸ਼ੀਲ ਨਾਲ ਲਿਖਿਆ ਹੈ ਤਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਬਾਲੇ ਦਾ ਜਿਕਰ ਕਿਓ ਨਹੀ ਕੀਤਾ? ਜਦੋਂ ਕਿ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਵਾਰ `ਚ ਭਾਈ ਮਰਦਾਨੇ ਦਾ ਜਿਕਰ ਮਿਲਦਾ ਹੈ
ਬਾਬਾ ਗਿਆ ਬਗਦਾਦ ਨੂੰ ਬਾਹਰ ਜਾਇ ਕੀਆ ਅਸਥਾਨਾ॥
ਇਕ ਬਾਬਾ ਅਕਾਲ ਰੂਪ ਦੂਜਾ ਰਬਾਬੀ ਮਰਦਾਨਾ॥ (ਵਾਰ 1 ਪਉੜੀ 35)
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36075
I am in complete agreement with Dilgeer's assertion that Bhai bala janmasakhi has lots of adulteration. It is also believable and probable that BHAI GURDASS JI had the Original unadulterated janamsakhi of Bhai bala !! But then the real issue is WHY Bhai Gurdass Ji DIDNT mention BHAI BALA in the First Vaar where he relates BIRTH INFORMATION of Guru Nanak ji and Mentions prominently BHAI MARDANA as THE SOLE OTHER BABA besides Baba Nanak Ji.

ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਲਿਖੇ ਕਬਿਤ "ਕਾਰਤਕ ਮਾਸ ਰੁਤਿ ਸਰਦ ਪੂਰਨਮਾਸੀ ਆਠ ਜਾਮ ਸਾਠਿ ਘਰੀ ਆਜੁ ਤੇਰੀ ਬਾਰੀ ਹੈ । ਅਉਸਰ ਅਭੀਚ ਬਹੁਨਾਇਕ ਕੀ ਨਾਇਕਾ ਹੁਇ ਰੂਪ ਗੁਨ ਜੋਬਨ ਸਿੰਗਾਰ ਅਧਿਕਾਰੀ ਹੈ । ਚਾਤਿਰ ਚਤੁਰ ਪਾਠ ਸੇਵਕ ਸਹੇਲੀ ਸਾਠਿ ਸੰਪਦਾ ਸਮਗ੍ਰੀ ਸੁਖ ਸਹਜ ਸਚਾਰੀ ਹੈ । ਸੁੰਦਰ ਮੰਦਰ ਸੁਭ ਲਗਨ ਸੰਜੋਗ ਭੋਗ ਜੀਵਨ ਜਨਮ ਧੰਨਿ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਮ ਪਿਆਰੀ ਹੈ ॥੩੪੫॥" ਸਬੰਧੀ ਬੇਨਤੀ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਜੇ ਇਹ ਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼ ਦੀ ਤਾਰੀਖ ਹੈ ਤਾਂ ਇਹ ਤਾਂ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਵਾਰ ਵਿਚ ਹੀ ਦਰਜ ਹੋਣੀ ਚਾਹੀਦੀ ਸੀ। ਇਸ ਦਾ ਕੀ ਕਾਰਨ ਹੋ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਇਸ ਨੂੰ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਵਾਰ, ਜਿਥੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਹੋਣ ਦੇ ਸਬੰਧੀ ਸਾਰੀ ਜਾਣਕਾਰੀ ਦਰਜ ਹੈ, ਵਿਚ ਦਰਜ ਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਬਜਾਏ ਕਬਿੱਤਾ ਦੇ ਵੀ ਮੱਧ ਵਿਚ ਦਰਜ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ? SECOND QUERY: IF this KABIT of Bhai Gurdass Ji is indeed related to the BIRTH DATE of GURU NANAK JI...WHY is it in the MIDDLE of a Random Number of KABITTS..instead of being in the Correct Place - the FIRST VAAR in whcih Bhai Gurdass JI gives information of Guru nanak jis BIRTH.

ਧੰਨਵਾਦ ਸਹਿਤ
ਸਰਵਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ Sarabjit Singh USA.
Sarbjit Singh