Ardaas Changed

[Tejwant Singh]

This thread has many things that need deep and open discussions. I thank Gyani ji for starting this thread which seemed mundane at first because come to think of it, who cares about one Gurdwara in Finland adding something to the Ardaas but then the wildfire of Gurmat understanding and interacting started which is the main idea of Sikhi, that is to discuss the disagreements openly.

In order for this discussion to happen, we should all have an open mind then only we can understand others' viewpoints no matter how much they are opposite to ours.

I would like to make a few points here.

1. What is Ardaas?

For me, Ardaas is an inner contemplation of thanks, strength and focus of our endeavours of whatever lies ahead or and what has been accomplished so far. That is the beauty of Ardaas. It can be done anytime,anywhere, alone, with people etc etc. And Ardaas can contain any wording provided we stick to our innerself.


2. What kind of Ardaas did our Gurus recite?

The answer to number 2 is that no one knows.

I asked the following sometimes ago in another forum which I would like to share with all of you:

Sadh Sangat,

We are all aware that Ardaas plays a very important part in our Sikhi
way of life.I have always been puzzled by Ardaas that we
do today.The word Ardaas is found 303 times in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, thanks to the Gurbani
search engine.However we all know that the contents of the Ardaas we
use today are NOT the same of how/what our Gurus did.

Does anyone have any idea what kind of Ardaas Guru Nanak did and then
how it was evolved with all other nine Gurus who followed him?

Some contents of the Ardaas we do today do not seem to be in line with
Gurmat.

Input from all would be appreciated.

Many people in the thread have insisted that the Ardaas was written by Guru Gobind Singh ji which I consider nothing but sheer arrogance laced with ignorance on their part. We all know our only Guru is SGGS. If Guru Gobind Singh ji wanted to add anything from himself,as history is the proof that he was a polyglot and a great poet, then he would have done so. The fact remains that he did not.

Our 10th Guru sacrificed his own Father, his 4 sons for the sake of justice for ALL, added his father, Guru Teg Bahadur ji's Gurbani in the SGGS and last but not the least, he gave us the true directions- the roadmap- by establishing the Khalsa Panth.

If we ponder on the above then we have nothing but great respect, admiration and we are at awe by the courage and vision of our 10th Guru.

3. Why would this great Guru call himself Patshah, Patshahee Dasveen(10th) when we know none of our Gurus called themselves Patshahs in SGGS? None of the saloks written by our Gurus in SGGS start with the word Patshahee Pehli,Dooji etc. etc.

In my opinion it is disrespectful to Guru Gobind Singh ji when we decide and claim some writings to be his without his permission and autorization.

Who are we to do that and how dare we?

So, let us not try to play Guru Gobind Singh by claiming that the Ardaas that we recite was written by him when he did not indicate that anywhere and once again, we need to remind ourselves as often as possible that Guru Gobind Singh ji could have added his vision in words in SGGS if he wanted to, but the fact remains that he did not so thinking or claiming otherwise would be undermining our 10th Guru. If we analyze the Ardaas from the Gurmat prespective what we claim was written by our 10th Guru, we will notice that it is against the Gurmat ideals given to us by our Gurus in the SGGS.

Now, regarding adding and changing Ardaas in Finland, I personally think this is not right as it has come to our knowledge that some person perhaps who calls himself a Sant asked the Gurdwara to do that.

Tejwant Singh

 

[spnadmin]

Many people in the thread have insisted that the Ardaas was written by Guru Gobind Singh ji which I consider nothing but sheer arrogance laced with ignorance on their part. We all know our only Guru is SGGS. If Guru Gobind Singh ji wanted to add anything from himself,as history is the proof that he was a polyglot and a great poet, then he would have done so. The fact remains that he did not.

Our 10th Guru sacrificed his own Father, his 4 sons for the sake of justice for ALL, added his father, Guru Teg Bahadur ji's Gurbani in the SGGS and last but not the least, he gave us the true directions- the roadmap- by establishing the Khalsa Panth.

If we ponder on the above then we have nothing but great respect, admiration and we are at awe by the courage and vision of our 10th Guru.

3. Why would this great Guru call himself Patshah, Patshahee Dasveen(10th) when we know none of our Gurus called themselves Patshahs in SGGS? None of the saloks written by our Gurus in SGGS start with the word Patshahee Pehli,Dooji etc. etc.

In my opinion it is disrespectful to Guru Gobind Singh ji when we decide and claim some writings to be his without his permission and autorization.

Who are we to do that and how dare we?

So, let us not try to play Guru Gobind Singh by claiming that the Ardaas that we recite was written by him when he did not indicate that anywhere and once again, we need to remind ourselves as often as possible that Guru Gobind Singh ji could have added his vision in words in SGGS if he wanted to, but the fact remains that he did not so thinking or claiming otherwise would be undermining our 10th Guru. If we analyze the Ardaas from the Gurmat prespective what we claim was written by our 10th Guru, we will notice that it is against the Gurmat ideals given to us by our Gurus in the SGGS.

Now, regarding adding and changing Ardaas in Finland, I personally think this is not right as it has come to our knowledge that some person perhaps who calls himself a Sant asked the Gurdwara to do that.

Tejwant Singh

Tejwant ji -- Thank you for passionate yet incisive analysis. There is a reason why many people in the thread are claiming that Sri Guru Gobind Singh wrote Ardaas. Both Wikipedia and Sikhiwiki make this claim -- i.e., that the first part of Ardaas was written by the 10th Nanak -- in a straightforward way (and BTW, the articles are identical therefore written by the same individual/s). However, various Sikh Scholars doubt that this is the case.

Macauliffe did not translate the 2nd and 3rd lines in his book History of the Sikhs. Dr. Gopal Singh, the first to translate the Sri Guru Granth into English, never translated the 1rst 3 lines of Ardaas inn his own translation of the prayer. Moreover Dr. Tharam Singh has aruged that the words Padhsahi 10 (10th Guru) were added to the 1rst pauree. Dr. Baldev Singh speculates, based on the writings of Bhai Kahan Singh, inexplanation of the word bhagauti, that the invocation to Chandi may have been added after the death of Bhai Mani Singh, "at the time these so-called Bachittar Natak Granths first surfaced." http://www.sikhspectrum.com/112005/ardas.htm Or by implication forgeries of Dasam Granth. Dr. Baldev Singh's own bias may be reflected in the materials quoted in the previous sentence. However, he is basing his interpretation on the fact that the 1rst pauree in part is a reduction of the hymn to Chandi that may pre-date the 10th Nanak.

So there is confusion about the authorship of Ardaas. After noting the widely different arguments about the authorship of Ardas, the confusion in the thread makes a certain amount of sense.

 

[Inder singh]

Many people in the thread have insisted that the Ardaas was written by Guru Gobind Singh ji which I consider nothing but sheer arrogance laced with ignorance on their part. We all know our only Guru is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. If Guru Gobind Singh ji wanted to add anything from himself,as history is the proof that he was a polyglot and a great poet, then he would have done so. The fact remains that he did not.

If bani of Guru gobind singh is not in SGGS ji, it does not mean that it has no significance.It is as holy as any composition of our other gurus irrespective of the fact whether it is included in SGGS or not.

If people have proof that ardas is not from the pen of tenth master , they should cite here from sikh history otherwise it is a personal heretic opinion.

3. Why would this great Guru call himself Patshah, Patshahee Dasveen(10th) when we know none of our Gurus called themselves Patshahs in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? None of the saloks written by our Gurus in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji start with the word Patshahee Pehli,Dooji etc. etc.

Just because his bani starts with patshahi 10 does not make the writing spurious. Tomorrow some ignorant head may say that why he was wearing kalgi.

In my opinion it is disrespectful to Guru Gobind Singh ji when we decide and claim some writings to be his without his permission and autorization.

Who are we to do that and how dare we?

Akal takhat is overseeing authority for sikh religious matters.That is why by a Hukamnama akal takhat has declared that those who question dasam granth are mischief mongers.

f we analyze the Ardaas from the Gurmat prespective what we claim was written by our 10th Guru, we will notice that it is against the Gurmat ideals given to us by our Gurus in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Let us know what is against gurmat.Just saying so does not help. May lack of understanding on the part of some may be reason for such an opinion.

Now, regarding adding and changing Ardaas in Finland, I personally think this is not right as it has come to our knowledge that some person perhaps who calls himself a Sant asked the Gurdwara to do that.

They were advised by none other but by a chela of kala afghana Inder Ghagha who has been earlier excommunicated by akal takhat for passing adverse remarks against Guru nanak dev ji and Guru Arjan Dev ji in his book " Sada bera aiyon Garkia".

 

[Inder singh]

So there is confusion about the authorship of Ardaas. After noting the widely different arguments about the authorship of Ardas, the confusion in the thread makes a certain amount of sense.

There is no confusion about ardas. We have three digitised copies of manuscripts of Dasam Granth in uSA. Two of those date to 1697 and 1698. Both include ardas and hand written pages ( Khas patras ) of tenth master.

 

[spnadmin]

Inder ji

In response.

If bani of Guru gobind singh is not in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji, it does not mean that it has no significance.It is as holy as any composition of our other gurus irrespective of the fact whether it is included in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji or not.

Our Ardaas is our holy prayer. I agree -- nothing regarding authorship takes away from that truth.

If people have proof that ardas is not from the pen of tenth master , they should cite here from Sikh history otherwise it is a personal heretic opinion.

It is impossible to prove a negative. You yourself stated that even if the Ardaas is not by our gurus it remains a holy and significant statement of Sikhism and beliefs of Sikhs. Though it is impossible to prove a negative -- that Gobind Singh may not be the author of the first pauree -- it is possible to question a positive -- question whether the 10th master did write the 1rst pauree based on consistency with other Sikh scriptures. That is essentially the approach taken by Bhai Kahan Singh. That is essentially the argument of Tejwant ji. No one however is disputing that Ardaas is inviolate and would take more than a self-styled mahant traveling to Finland to come up with an acceptable revision.

There is no confusion about ardas.

Who is confused about ardaas? Not me! There is confusion regarding the authorship of the first pauree.

 

[Inder singh]

Aaad 002

Bhai kahan singh nabha had no doubt on ardas or chandi di vaar else he would not be quoting it in his famous book" Hum Hindu Nahin". Dr Baldev singh is a chela of kala afghana sect. so i will think many times before believing what he says.

The point here is that panth accepts ardas and these heretics are no one to cause confusion among sikhs.If they do not believe in ardas they can form another sect. It is not ardas only dasam bani forms part of our nitnem, and amrit ceremony.

 

[spnadmin]

Inder ji

The point here is that panth accepts ardas and these heretics are no one to cause confusion among Sikhs.If they do not believe in ardas they can form another sect. It is not ardas only dasam bani forms part of our nitnem, and Amrit ceremony.

I agree 100 percent. I said so some posts back in this thread.

 

[Inder singh]

It is impossible to prove a negative.

If there is no proof for negative then how did negative take birth? Just from the top of head. Have these people analysed the writing as a whole in Dasam Granth? Have they analysed the invocation of chandi di vaar. Invocation defines the belief of writer. Is Durga eulogised in invocation? If not then why they are making blasphemous statements?

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Jios..BUT...
1. FACTS are facts....in 1708..and NOW..and Forever.

2. IN GURMATT...( Sikhism) there has ALWAYS been ONLY ONE GURU on the Gurgadee of NANAK...even when Guru Nanak ji was ALIVE....and had handed over the GURGADEE offcially to Bhai Lehna Ji..ONLY GURU ANGAD JI sat on the THRONE of Nanak Ji. ( Guur Nanak ji left for Sachkhand a few days after bestowing Gurgadee on Guru Angad ji)....THAT is the DAY OF GURGADEE of Guru Angad Ji and His "reign" begins. ( it doesnt matter that Guru Nanak Ji is still alive )
2a. Guru Arjun Ji also bestowed Gurgadee to Guur Hargobind Ji before going to Lahore for His Martyrdom...

2b. Guru Teg bahadur Ji also bestowed Gurgadee on GobindRai before He left for delhi for His Martyrdom.
So its is an undeniable FACT that there has been and will always be ONLY ONE GURU....and that GURU from 1708 is GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI. Therefore GURBANI is that which is contained in our Present GURU. Period. It is GURBANI that we Sikhs have NO AUTHORITY to change/modify/add/subtract/whatever in any way.

3. SGGS is GURU and SGGS is the Embodiment of ALL TEN GURUS that came before 1708. SGGS is the NANAK-GOBIND SINGH COLLECTIVE !! No GURU is left out simply because His "gurbani" is NOT included in SGGS...Guru Hargobind Ji, Guru Har rai Ji, and Guru Harkrishan Ji and Guru Gobind Singh ji are also in the SGGS as they belong to the Gurgadee of Nanak Ji...And thus this is why when we BOW to SGGS and acknowledge sggs as our ONE and ONLY GURU..is becasue ALL TEN Gurus are represented in SGGS as ONE. DASSAN PATSHAIHAN DEE JYOT.

4. To make SGGS even MORE VISHAAL....and UNIVERSAL...in His Greatness..GURU NANAK JI SAHIB decided to GIVE EQUAL IMPORTANCE to OTHER GOD MEN....the 35 Bhagats, Bards, Sunder Ji, etc etc by incorporating their "GURBANI" with His own Teachings as He went on his travels COLLECTING these...and then GURU ARJUN JI gave them a permanent place of HONOUR by placing thei GURBANI in the SGGS. THus NOW SGGS also has the GURBANI and JYOT of all these God Men..the Bhagats, the Bhatts, the Bards Satta and Balwand Ji..and Sunder Ji. The SGGS bestowed Gurgadee by Guru Gobind Singh ji in 1708 in the Presence of the Sangat of Khalsa panth and Panj Piyaraes is Truly UNIVERSAL..reflecting the CREATOR to which the Khalsa panth Belongs.

3. It is also an undeniable FACT that Guru Gobind Singh Ji...although being a Poet par excellence in so many varied languages...DECIDED TO NOT INCLUDE A SINGLE LINE OF HIS POETRY IN THE SGGS. PERIOD. Guru Gobind Singh ji certianly had the Opportunity...as He had the entire SGGS REWRITTEN at Damdma Sahib and He took thsi opportunity to INSERT the GURBANI of his father Guru teg bahadur Jiat the VARIOUS PLACES in the Various RAAGS already positioned by Guru Arjun Ji Sahib...Guru Teg bahadur Ji wrote GURBANI in all the Raags...so His Gurbani appears throughout the SGGS...and NOT just towards the END as it would be logical IF His Gurbani was added LAST !! NO..His GURBANI is all over the SGGS in the appropruate places and that is PROOF that Guru Gobind Singh Ji had the time and the inclination and He made the DECISION to INCLUDE that GURBANI consciously...and that He also made the SAME DECISION to KEEP ALL HIS OWN WRITINGS OUT OF SGGS.

5. COPIES of this Bir of SGGS were Made by Baba deep Singh Ji and Bhai mani Singh Ji and despatched to all the Takhats and its this BIR that is parkash in ALL Gurdawras the world over. Guru Gobind Singh Ji NEVER "attached" piggy back etc any other granth to the HOLY GURU GRANTH..yet we have some who have done so..and are trying to justify that sacrilege as well. They attach this "sacrilege" to the August name of Bhai mani Singh . WHY would the person who SCRIBED the SGGS in Guru Gobind Singh ji presence..later on go about ATTACHING another granth of equal pages into one huge granth ?? Defies normal logic. Are we trying to foist our own faulty beleifs on Bhai mani Singh Ji..
The FACT is that the "dsm" Granth may..."look like the guru...seem like the guru..feel like the guru.. even come from the guru..read like the gurbani...etc etc BUT its NOT the GURU...that HONOUR goes to SGGS. THUS the DSM granth CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be ATTACHED to SGGS and parakshed/kept anywhere..even a private Library. ( BTW this look like seem like quote has a malaysian background..recently a Royal Commission of Enquiry was set up in malaysia to find out the truth about allegations that Judicial appointments were fixed....at this enquiry a Video Tape of a Famous Lawyer was tendered as evidence...in it he was clearly seen fixing judges appointments...BUT when his turn came in the wittness box...he said..."the person in the Tape..certainly LOOKS like me, Sounds like me...BUT its NOT ME !!!!."...).

Elsewhere Tejwant Ji ahs given an excellent piece on the Ardass..He makes convincing arguments.
The Ardass we recite today is MAN MADE and may be adulterated. About the One and only GURBANI that is CERTIFIED PURE and adulteration FREE is the SGGS. The "Bhagauti..the Ardass..in SGGS is entirely different from what we recite....about time we took stock and rectified the situation.
A Comprehensive study into the matter is warranted . Blind Faith was NEVER a part of Gurmatt anyway.

I DONT fall for the.."today its ardass..tomorrow..that and then that..etc etc" arguments. Whats got to be fixed..must be allolowed to be fixed...and what DOESNT NEED FIXING..has no fear of any disturbance.. Some are even going as far as saying..all thsi puts the Guru Khalsa Panth in danger...NO WAY. The Guru Khalsa Panth belongs to WAHEGURU and its FOUNDATIONS are set in the BLOOD of Shaeeds....hundreds of thousands of them....and the roots now reach the pataal..the nether regions..impossible to uproot...not today and not tomorrow...BUT the WEEDS in the Field can and should be UPROOTED and destroyed. These WEEDS got time to grow and prosper simply becasuse the Khalsa was busy fighting for its survival and had no time to guard its literature and Gurdwaras...

 

[Inder singh]

It is impossible to prove a negative. You yourself stated that even if the Ardaas is not by our gurus it remains a holy and significant statement of Sikhism and beliefs of Sikhs.

As far as i remember i did not write ardas beginning is not from Guru sahiban? If you believe i did please show me.

 

[spnadmin]

If there is no proof for negative then how did negative take birth? Just from the top of head. Have these people analysed the writing as a whole in Dasam Granth? Have they analysed the invocation of chandi di vaar. Invocation defines the belief of writer. Is Durga eulogised in invocation? If not then why they are making blasphemous statements?

Inder ji

You mixed some things up here. How did negative take birth? I have no idea what you are asking i that statement. Are you asking about negative attitudes? If you are asking for evidence that Guru Gobind Singh did not write the first pauree, then your question is illogical. There can never be evidence to prove the absence of something. Think about it.

Now when you ask have these people analyzed the writing as a whole in Dasam Granth, the answer is some have and some haven't. Who are you referring to when you say some people?

Is Durga eulogised in invocation?
Most respsonsible scholars do not believe that Durga is being eulogized, including Dr. Baldev Singh and Bhai Kahan Singh, as well as Dr. Gopal Singh, based on my understanding of the article cited. And other reading I have done. In fact there are many who argue that bhagauti should not be translated as sword.

 

[spnadmin]

As far as i remember i did not write ardas beginning is not from Guru sahiban? If you believe i did please show me.

Inder ji,

There is an old African proverb that says, “When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you.”

 

[Inder singh]

I may point out in the beginning that there is no dispute that SGGS ji is guru of sikhs. People to divert the topic keep on writing as if Dasam Granth has taken over guruship from SGGS ji. This is like creating a phantom when there is none,

If these people have so much respct for tenth master that they beleive in his verbal edict to obey SGGS ji as Guru of sikhs then why they are so allergic to accord respect to his bani? This is like having best of both.

People say that so and so say that ardas is adulterated? Can they furnish a refrence in support of their claim. There is a lot of contemporary literature of that period. have they raed that literature. Making statements without back up is not proper.

So far we have one central religious authority over sikhs and that is akal takhat. That accords recognition to Dasam bani. All have to oibey that. There is no if and but here.

 

[spnadmin]

I may point out in the beginning that there is no dispute that SGGS ji is guru of sikhs. People to divert the topic keep on writing as if Dasam Granth has taken over guruship from SGGS ji. This is like creating a phantom when there is none,

If these people have so much respct for tenth master that they beleive in his verbal edict to obey SGGS ji as Guru of sikhs then why they are so allergic to accord respect to his bani? This is like having best of both.

People say that so and so say that ardas is adulterated? Can they furnish a refrence in support of their claim. There is a lot of contemporary literature of that period. have they raed that literature. Making statements without back up is not proper.

So far we have one central religious authority over sikhs and that is akal takhat. That accords recognition to Dasam bani. All have to oibey that. There is no if and but here.

Inder ji

I join you in decrying the problem of creating a phantom when there is no phantom.

 

[Inder singh]

Let me reteirate in the beginning that all sikhs agree that SGGS ji is our Guru. There is no dispute over this unless some vested interests want to create phantoms out of nowhere and pit one granth against the other.

nevertheless Dasam granth has bani of our tenth master.It is our resepected scripture al along in sikh history. We just can not ignore this. Writings of our Gurus is bani . So is dasam granth.

Some people are making claim that ardas pauri is adulterated. We have contemporary sikh literature of that period. Do they mention that? If they have read that please let us know.

Akal takhat is central sikh authority over religious issues. They accord recognition to Dasam bani. If some do not want to obey that the only alternative for them is form a new sect like radhasoami,sindhis, etc. They are the ones who disown tenth amster.

 

[Inder singh]

aad0002 ji

This may be interesting for you to read

Charles malcolm was a British general posted with Governor General of India during Sikh rule.Holkar ,a maratha chief, had taken shelter with maharaja Ranjit singh. Charles Malcolm came to Amritsar in 1805 in pursuit of Holkar.


While at Amritsar he was a witness to a Gurmatta conducted at Amritsar in 1805. Later he wrote a book “Sketch of sikhs” in 1812. On page 120 to 123 , he writes the presence of Dasam granth at Gurmatta

quote

Guru-mata
When Gurmata or great national council, is called, (as it always is, or ought to be, when any imminent danger threatens the country, or any large expedition is to be undertaken) all the Sikh chiefs assemble at Amritsar. The assembly, which is called the Guru-mata, is convened by the Acalis; and when the chiefs meet upon this solemn occasion, it is concluded that all private animosities cease, and that every main sacrifices his personal feelings at the shrine of the general good; and, actuated by principles of pure patriotism, thinks of nothing but the interests of the religion, and commonwealth, to which he belongs.
When the chiefs and principal leaders are seated, the Adi-Granth and Dasama Padshah ka Granth are placed before them. They all bend their heads before these scriptures, and exclaim, Wa! Guruji ka Khalsa! Wa! Guruji ki Fateh! A great quantity of cakes, made of wheat, butter, and sugar, are then placed before the volumes of their sacred writings, and covered with a cloth. These holy cakes, which are in commemoration of the injunction of Nanac, to eat and to give to others to eat, next receive the salutation of the assembly, who then rise, and the Acalis pray aloud, while the musicians play. The Acalis, then the prayers are finished, desire the council to be seated. They sit down, and the cakes being uncovered, are eaten of by all classes of Sikhs: those distinctions of original tribes, which are, on occasions, kept up, being on this occasion laid aside, in token of their general and complete union in one cause. The Acalis then exclaim: “Sirdars! (Chiefs) this is Guru-mata!” on which prayers are again said aloud. The chiefs, after this sit closer, and say to each other: “The sacred Granth is betwixt us, let us swear by our scripture to forget all internal disputes, and to be united.” This moment of religious fervor and ardent patriotism, is taken to reconcile all animosities. They then proceed to consider the danger with whcih they are threatened, to settle the best plans for averting it, and to choose the generals who are to lead their armies against the common enemy. The first Guru-mata was assembled by Guru Govinid; and the latest was called in 1805, when the British army pursued Holkar into the Penjab.
(pages. 120-123)
________________________
*Sir John Malcolm (May 2, 1769 ‑ 1833) was a Scottish soldier, statesman, and historian. He held various distinguished posts, being Ambassador to Persia, Resident of Gwalior (1803-1804) and Governor of Bombay 1827-1830. He was the author of several valuable works regarded as authorities, viz., Sketch of the Sikhs, a singular nation in the province of Penjab (1812), A History of Persia (1815), Memoir of Central India (1823), Political History of India from 1784 to 1823 (1826),and Life of Lord Clive (1836).

From Sketch of sikhs by Charles Malcolm

 

[GillAUS]

So-called 'scholars' and 'professors' cannot even begin to fathom the knowledge that has flowed from the pen of the Tenth Master.

They way I look at it is that whatever these doubters don't understand, they dismiss as being false.

Most Brahmgianis will never doubt the Bani of the Tenth Master. We should be looking at these individuals because they have the knowledge of God. The knowledge of worldly scholars cannot compare.

In my opinion, yes it is the Sri Guru Granth Sahib that is our Guru. It is also the Guru for mankind. That is why its contents is purely spiritual in nature, and are not limited to Sikhi alone. It contains a message for all paths to follow.

Sri Dasam Granth is the temporal, rather than spiritual scripture. It is the scripture that addresses the Khalsa.

Putting it another way, Sri Guru Granth Sahib is like Harimandir Sahib - with four doors and welcoming people of all backgrounds. Sri Dasam Granth is like the Akal Takht. It addresses spirituality in a temporal and worldly manner.

 

[Inder singh]

Putting it another way, Sri Guru Granth Sahib is like Harimandir Sahib - with four doors and welcoming people of all backgrounds. Sri Dasam Granth is like the Akal Takht. It addresses spirituality in a temporal and worldly manner.

Very well said.

Gilding of Sri harmandir sahib was done in late eighteenth century under the supervision of Lehna singh majithia. At the entrance door is inscription of pauri of ardas from the pen of tenth master.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Inder Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for responding to my post. I hope we keep an open mind so we can discuss this from the Gurmat stand point rather than from some personally cultivated beliefs.

If bani of Guru gobind singh is not in SGGS ji, it does not mean that it has no significance.It is as holy as any composition of our other gurus irrespective of the fact whether it is included in SGGS or not.

First of all let us talk about the facts.

1.Only Guru Gobind Singh ji knows what he wrote. No one else can make the claim about his writings no matter how much he/she claims to have the scholarly skills.

2. Only our 10th Guru knows why he decided not to share what he wrote. We all know through history that he had many poets with him at Poanta Sahib who also must have written a lot of poetry. One wonders where is that!

As I mentioned in my post that our 10th Guru was a polyglot and a great poet. So to decide on our own which are his thoughts is sheer self centeredness and disrespect to our 10th Guru by second guessing his decision

If people have proof that ardas is not from the pen of tenth master , they should cite here from sikh history otherwise it is a personal heretic opinion.

I am confused about your baseless claim. What proof do you have that Ardaas was written by the 10th Guru? It is you who needs to show the proof. We have the proof which Guru wrote which Gurbani in SGGS. As Antonia ji said, one can not prove the negative.

Just because his bani starts with patshahi 10 does not make the writing spurious. Tomorrow some ignorant head may say that why he was wearing kalgi.

Once again, how do you know it is our 10th Guru's bani when he himself did not claim it? Arn't we being arrogantly ignorant here? His wearing kalgi or not has nothing to do with anything and has no bearing in this discussion.

Akal takhat is overseeing authority for sikh religious matters.That is why by a Hukamnama akal takhat has declared that those who question dasam granth are mischief mongers.

Declaring something without showing the detailed researched reasons based on Gurmat ideals and keeping the spirit of SGGS in the decision is blasphemy in my opinion. I have no idea what it means by mischief mongers. If that is part of the decision then it proves that Akaal Takhat does not want to have an honest debate with those who disagree which is again against Gurmat ideals because Sikhi is based on questioning. Our Gurus questioned what they deemed wrong and once again not even Akaal Takhat has the right to second guess our 10th Guru. No one does. There is no authority who can do that. It is disrespect to our 10th Guru and when Akaal Takhat does that, we as Sikhs and the followers of SGGS should raise our voice rather than keeping mum.

Let us know what is against gurmat.Just saying so does not help. May lack of understanding on the part of some may be reason for such an opinion.

That is a very valid point. Please translate the first part of Ardaas for us that you claim was wirtten by our 10th Guru in English so we can discuss about it. While doing so, keep SGGS as our only Guru in the picture and IK ONG KAAR- THE SOURCE OF ALL. No one, nothing else.

They were advised by none other but by a chela of kala afghana Inder Ghagha who has been earlier excommunicated by akal takhat for passing adverse remarks against Guru nanak dev ji and Guru Arjan Dev ji in his book " Sada bera aiyon Garkia".

Now, here you go accusing others of something that you have no proof of. Is this the Sikhi way you claim to adhere to?

Personal attacks at others without proof is anti Gurmat and shows a lot more about the accuser than anything else.

Let us just focus on the subject in the thread rather than false accusations. This will help us have an open mind which will result in making us better Sikhs.

I hope to have a civilised discussion with you which is the Gurmat way.

Tejwant Singh

 

[Inder singh]

So to decide on our own which are his thoughts is sheer self centeredness and disrespect to our 10th Guru by second guessing his decision

tejwant ji

His writings are in Dasam granth sahib whose manuscripts are avaialble. Only a conditioned and biased mind will think otherwise.

I am confused about your baseless claim. What proof do you have that Ardaas was written by the 10th Guru? It is you who needs to show the proof. We have the proof which Guru wrote which Gurbani in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. As Antonia ji said, one can not prove the negative.

Proof is Dasam granth. It is there and panth is following that. It is you who is doubting that. What are the basis for your opinion against it. It is you who is to show us. You also have to show us what you wrote that ardas pauri is eulogising Durga.

Once again, how do you know it is our 10th Guru's bani when he himself did not claim it? Arn't we being arrogantly ignorant here? His wearing kalgi or not has nothing to do with anything and has no bearing in this discussion.

The place and date of completion of most banis is mentioned. This you will only know if you read Dasam bani. Contemporary sikh writings starting from Sewa dass, Guru kian sakhian, rehtnamas mention that.

Declaring something without showing the detailed researched reasons based on Gurmat ideals and keeping the spirit of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in the decision is blasphemy in my opinion. I have no idea what it means by mischief mongers. If that is part of the decision then it proves that Akaal Takhat does not want to have an honest debate with those who disagree which is again against Gurmat ideals because Sikhi is based on questioning. Our Gurus questioned what they deemed wrong and once again not even Akaal Takhat has the right to second guess our 10th Guru. No one does. There is no authority who can do that. It is disrespect to our 10th Guru and when Akaal Takhat does that, we as Sikhs and the followers of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji should raise our voice rather than keeping mum.

Sikhs are followers of SGGS ji and also followers of Dasam granth , sikh traditions, sikh history and sikh ethos that keep the faith alive. Sikhs are not only pujaris that ared one Granth . Sikhs are saint-soldiers.

That is a very valid point. Please translate the first part of Ardaas for us that you claim was wirtten by our 10th Guru in English so we can discuss about it. While doing so, keep Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji as our only Guru in the picture and IK ONG KAAR- THE SOURCE OF ALL. No one, nothing else.

Please point out what is anti gurmat in ardas?

Now, here you go accusing others of something that you have no proof of. Is this the Sikhi way you claim to adhere to?

Personal attacks at others without proof is anti Gurmat and shows a lot more about the accuser than anything else.

Let us just focus on the subject in the thread rather than false accusations. This will help us have an open mind which will result in making us better Sikhs.

I hope to have a civilised discussion with you which is the Gurmat way.

Tejwant ji

Please read the news given the starting post in proper. Inder Ghagha's name is there.

This is the proof of my claim. please keep abreast of news before claim.

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Punjab

Sikh missionary excommunicated
for blasphemous writings
Varinder Walia
Tribune News Service

Amritsar, October 22
Taking strong and suo-moto exception to the alleged blasphemous writings and statements by Prof Inder Singh Ghagha, an alumnus of Sikh Missionary College, Ludhiana, Akal Takht today directed the Sikh sangat to stop him forthwith from carrying out his religious activities all over the world.

In a directive issued on the letter head of Akal Takht, the Jathedar also took similar action against Prof Ghagha's associates, including Mr Gurcharan Singh Jeeonwala, Mr Manjit Singh Sahota, Mr Karamjit Singh Gill, Mr Amandeep Singh Kang, Mr Gurmit Singh , Mr Parminder Singh Parmar, Mr Jasbir Singh Mangat and their associates.

The development is considered unprecedented since Prof Ghagga and his associates were not given an opportunity to clarify their respective positions.

Finding the remarks too obnoxious, the Akal Takhat this time directed the Sikhs not to allow Prof Ghagha and his associates to speak from any gurdwara or panthak stage.

Earlier, one Bhag Singh of Ambala was also excommunicated on the same grounds for writing against 'benati choupai' and 'ardas'. However, he had presented himself before the Akal Takht and sought forgiveness. Later, Mr Gurbax Singh Kala Afghana was excommunicated from the Sikh panth for the same reasons.

Of late, many petitions had been pouring in against Prof Ghagha, He and his group had been indulging in blasphemous writings against the Sikh ideology and 'gurbani', they allege.

Interestingly, Ghagha claims himself to be associated with missionary colleges but the Sikh Missionary College, Ludhiana, declared that he was not associated with the institute. The same statement had come from Gurmat Gian Missionary College where Ghagha was teaching. Mr Gurcharanjit Singh Lamba, editor of the community journal Sant Sipahi, criticsed these statements saying that merely saying that he was not associated with them had no meaning unless these institutions condemned the writings of Ghagha and Kala Afghana.

Prof Ghagha who had been an ardent supporter of cop-turned- Sikh scholar Gurbakhsh Singh Kala Afghana, is presently in Canada. His speeches there triggered physical clashes between rival groups and the atmosphere was getting surcharged.

Ghagha started with casting aspersions against the 'bani' of Guru Gobind Singh and then came down to passing adverse remarks on the 'bani' and history of all the gurus.

The Akal Takhat directive has also given a stern direction to Sikhs not to cooperate in any of the seminars and conventions organised by Ghagha and his associates.

​

vBulletin Message Cancel Changes

The following errors occurred with your submission Okay

Message:


​