Historicity of Dasam Granth
Current controversy about the Dasam Granth is totally uncalled for. Recognized Banis of Sikh Baptismal accepted by Sikh Code of Conduct and recitation of daily prayers has been there since the creation of Khalsa. Guruship was bestowed only on Guru Granth Sahib, therefore, no other Granth can be installed along with Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
Currently published Dasam Granth is the same one which was finalized in 1897-1902 by Sodhak Committee, after consulting 32 different Dasam Granths and deleting some compositions. The British floated Colebrook Dasam Granth, which is almost same as Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth, with minor changes. Why would they go through the charade of changing or Sodh the compositions of Guru Gobind Singh and even Bhai Mani Singh if they consider them to be the writings of the Guru and/or Bhai Mani Singh to begin with? Authenticity of this currently published Dasam Granth as compiled by Sodhak committee needs a thorough independent inquiry by Panthic Scholars under the guidance of SGPC and Akal Takth Sahib to end this matter.
When the earthly sojourn of Guru Gobind Singh Ji was nearing its end at Nanded, He gathered his devotees around Him, and declared in an emphatic but in a revelational tone: "I am soon leaving my visible abode of divine law, but I will not leave you in utter loneliness. I entrust you to the ambrosial reservoir of immortal word, the finality of which is preserved by my super insight in the Damdami Bir (Guru Granth Sahib). I bestow the divine gift of Gurgaddi upon Guru Granth Sahib, an everlasting spirit of the Ten Guru-Prophets." The Sikhs have been finding solutions by referring to their great Scripture, and thus paying obeisance to no other Scripture as their Guru ever since the physical departure of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. There is no gap of history, and contradiction or any obstruction in the endless flow of this divine practice. Thus the prophetic faith of 10th master, transcending all illusory forms of knowledge and rejecting all false masks of apostasy, embracing none but the “supreme word”, revealed his final commitment to Guru Granth Sahib as the only eternal Guru of the Khalsa Panth. Neither Tenth master nor any of His Darbari Kavis - Sainpath ("Sri Gur Sobha") Koer Singh ("Gur Bilas Das" or “Parchian Sewa Das”) and so forth - mentioned the existence of Dasam Granth or its historic wherabouts anywhere. In fact, no reference to Dasam Granth or any other such literature is found anywhere in any such literature in the Guru period at all. It is only in the Sikh literature of the post-Guru period that one comes across sketchy references to some composition of the Tenth Guru.
Choronologically, the so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh to Mata Sundri Ji is the first link, as alleged by few scholars, between the compilation of Dasam Granth and Bhai Mani Singh. This letter could not have been written earlier than 1716 A.D, as it mentions the rumour of Banda Bahadur having escaped from mogul custody, for he was arrested and executed in that year. Dr. Rattan Singh Jaggi believes this letter to be fake. In all the Gurmukhi prose writings of that period (e.g, the Hukamnamas of Guru Gobind Singh and Banda Bahadur) words constituting a sentence were joined together without leaving blank spaces between them and this method of writing continued to be followed right upto 1867A.D. as shown by a copy of the newspaper (Akhbar Sri Darbar Sahib) published in that year. But the words in so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh are not joined together,and are separated by blank spaces. Also, as discussed by Dr Jaggi in detail, the shape of letters and liberal use of bindi of Gurmukhi script in the letter are different from the writing of Bhai Mani Singh's period. This clearly shows that the so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh is forged as it was drafted at a much later date than 1867A.D. This letter is a fraudulent attempt to associate Bhai Mani Singh's name with CHARITROPAKYAN. It is unthinkable that a learned Sikh like Bhai Mani Singh would send CHARITROPAKYAN to venerable Mata Ji, as it is a document which Sikhs will never read or recite in the presence of a lady or in Sangat. Furthermore, the metallic Nib used on this letter was not available in those times.
Second document of note is “Bansavalinamam Dasan Patshahian Ka” written by Kesar Singh Chhiber, a Brahmin of Jammu. He completed his work in 1779A.D, 71 years after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh and 45 year after the martyrdom of Bhai Mani Singh. He writes in the very begining, that his account is based on his recollections of hearsays “Suni Sunai bolke joi rahi hai yaad”. Again “Soi Kahani Suni sunai, apni sauk nal pothi hai banai.” How can such memory or record be taken to be reliable? He was over 70 year old when he completed his work and clearly has made mistakes in the dates he recorded.
Third document is “Mehma Parkash” (1800A.D). It tells us of Granth named “Vidya Sagar” that was compiled at the time of Guru Gobind Singh. Beside these three documents we have noted above, there are “Guru Gyan Suraj” by Bhai Santokh Singh (1843), “Panth Prakash”by Gyani Gyan Singh (1930A.D) and “Mahan Kosh” (1930A.D). All these sources are of very later period and appear only to reiterate in one form or other what had been written earlier.
There is no historical evidence for linking the Dasam Granth with Tenth Master Bhai Mani Singh or with the literature that was allegedly thrown away or was lost. Additionally, there are four so-called Birs available with us: 1.Bhai Mani Singh Bir; 2.Baba Deep Singh Bir; 3.Patna Wali Bir; and, 4. Sangrur wali Bir. Textual analysis of all these Birs is very imperative to check their authenticity. Let us discuss the history and internal evidence of these four Birs along with some other Birs available to us.
(A) History of Bhai Mani Singh Bir:
(Raja Gulab Singh Sethi bought it from Jamandar Para Singh in 1945. Raja Gulab Singh took it to Lahore and later his family settled in Delhi after partition. This Bir is supposed to have been found by a military person during Multan Victory in 1818A.D. He moved to Hyderabad in South India and after retirement settled in Nanded area in Maharashtra. The Bir is said to have reached Delhi later on. The date on this Bir is 1713A.D; however, the ink and handwriting of recording of the date is different than that of original handwriting. The scribe recording the date of the manuscript seems to lack proficient knowledge of Gurmukhi and Punjabi language and is far below Bhai Mani Singh's caliber. On the other hand the scribe is apparently interested in distorting the Sikh Scripture as well in promoting the Puranic literature. The author has combined Guru Granth Sahib's bani with Dasam Ganth Literature. The contents of the Bir are unlike in Guru Granth Sahib, not recorded, in sequential order of Ragas. Additionally, it separates Bhagat Bani and Dasam Granth Literature.
(B) History of Baba Deep Singh Bir:
Giani Gian Singh in his book “Panth Prakash” reports that this Bir was written by Baba Deep Singh in 1763A.D. Bhai Randhir Singh writes in his book "Shabadmoorat" (page 51) that “Giani Gian Singh did not see the real manuscript of this Bir." Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha in 1931 reports that Bhai Mani Singh Bir and Baba Deep Singh Bir are the same. But Textual analysis of this Bir tells us that history goes only up to 1857A.D. There is no known history of this Bir and it is not traceable anywhere anymore.
(c) History of Sangrur Bir:
This Bir is reported to have been received by Raja Sarup Singh in 1857A.D. from a Pathan when the Raja went to Delhi to help British during the Indian Mutiny. The Bir has two portions: first is Guru Granth Sahib and the second is Dasam Granth. It has extra compositions like Sansahar Sukhmana, Var Malkkauns Ji, and Chakha Bhagota Ji Da, which was deleted by Sodhak Committee in 1897.
(D)History of Patna Ji Misal Bir:
No detailed history of this Bir is available. Its reference is found only in Bhai Randhir Singh's writings. According to Bhai Randhir Singh, this Bir was prepared by sewadars at Takhat Patna in Samat 1821 or 1764A.D.
(E) History of Two Patna Sahib Birs:
First one has no colophon. No history of these two Birs is available. Though the recorded date of their compilation is 1755 (1698CE), yet inclusion of Zafarnama (written in 1705 CE) at the end in the same handwriting calls that claim into question. It was probably written by Sukha Singh Granthi at Patna. These two Birs have extra compositions, which were deleted by Sodhak Committee in 1897A.D. Giani Gian Singh reports that Sukha Singh wrote the Dasam Granth in 1775A.D., but no colophon is available. What happened to the Bir mentioned by Giani Gian Singh?
Beside the above mentioned Birs there are several other manuscripts: 1. Moti Bagh Gurdwara Bir written in 1775A.D, 2. Anandpuri Bir goes back to the period of Maharaja Ranjit Singh(1800-1839), 3. MSS D5 Punjabi HT Colebrook 1805, 4. Mss D6 Devnagari in British Library London has colophon indicated 1847, 5. Mss Punjabi E1 1859A.D, 6. Mss ADD 21452, 1841 and their tatkaras tell us that all these manuscripts are different in terms of total numbers of compositions, and Chhand count.
BRITISH CONNECTION WITH DASAM GRANTH
Historical evidence shows that no such granth as Dasam Granth or Dasmi Pathsahi Granth or simply Granth comparable to the presently published Dasam Granth, was in circulation in any language in 18th century Punjab or Delhi area.
British were well aware of emerging Sikh power of the Sikhs. Warren Hastings recorded his opinion in 1784. He regarded the Sikh power extending from the most western branch of Attock to the walls of Delhi as a new subject worth serious contemplation. The Sikhs, so eminently suited to the military profession, could not become very powerful because of their spirit of independence and frequent internal warfare but they were prompt to rally together at the call of common danger. It appears that the British knew very well about Sikh history and were aware of their binding force at the time of common danger and their firm belief in Guru Granth Sahib.
William Tenet, a Christian Missionary, writes about expanding missionary work in Punjab precisely on Sikhism in 1796. Malcolm came to Punjab in 1815 accompanied by Raja Bhag Singh of Jind. Malcolm succeeded in obtaining a copy of Guru Granth Sahib but not of Dasam Granth, as there was no Dasam Granth in Punjab at that time. Raja Bhag Singh had very close relations with the British and was awarded an estate and an annual grant of 11000 pounds. By 1809 the British bought land between Sutluj and Jamuna by giving protection to Cis-Satluj States. Dasam Granth came with them. Evidence shows that Dasam Granth was to be found more in Malwa (Pepsu) Gurdwaras as campared to other parts of Punjab. In 1810 John Malcolm introduced Dasmi Patahahi Ka Granth procured by "Colebrook with indefatigable research." The top of title page of this Dasami Patshahi Granth read “NANAK PANTHI KABHYA” in Devnagri (Hindi) and "Gurmukhi Dasmi Patshashi Granth" on the first page inside. This is the first time the name “Dasam Granth” appeared in history with association with 10th Guru Ji. The compositions and their arrangements as noted in the current Dasam Granth (Corrected by Sodhak Commitee in1897) clearly matches with this Granth. This manuscript bears no name of any scribe but small loose folio tells us the date of 1840 Miti Poosshabdi 15 Mangalvar on one side. The use of word “Pooshbadi” indicates scribe is from outside Punjab and is from Hindi Belt area. Charles Wilkin in 1781AD reported another Granth in Patna in “HINDOOVE AND SANSKRIT” and wished to get it translated in future. There, however, is no evidence of translation anywhere. Then Colebrook procured this Dasmi Patshahi ka Granth (with tittle in Devnagari but granth contents in Gurmukhi) which was used by Malcolm in his book "Sketch of Sikhs". It appears that Nirmala priest Atma Ram of Calcutta, along with Mahants at Patna, also helped Malcolm in the writing of "Sketch of Sikhs" (Patna City in late 1800 was part of State of Bengal). Probably this Dasam Patshahi Granth was procured by Colebrook and planted into Indian office Library as well at Patna Sahib. Malcolm account clearly accepts services of Nirmala Atma Ram at Calcutta, and also understanding of Sikh History. Chhand 201 in Akal Ustat reads as Atma Uchrio (pronounced or produced by Atma) and four Chhands 126-130 in Gian Prabodh written by Atma Ram indicates his involvement in creation of Dasam Patshahi Granth. Malcolm writes on page 186 of his book "Sketch of the Sikhs" that Khalsa was created on Friday 8th month of B'hadra in samat 1753 (1696A.D). He also writes on same page 186, "Agreeably to this author Guru Gobind was initiated on Friday the8th month of B'HADRA IN THE SAMAT 1753 (1696A.D) and on that day his work, the Dasam Padshah Ka Granth or book of tenth king was completed." This date matches with the date where Chiritro Pakhiyan ends in the currently published Dasam Granth. This is obviously a nefarious attempt by the British and anti-Sikh elements from the Indian (Nirmalas and Brahmins) society to obfuscate the genuine and real historic milestones in Sikh theological history. It's also a cowardly attempt to create an environment for the posterity to believe that somehow Guru Gobind Singh's spiritual philosophy was different than the previous nine Guru-Prophets. Malcolm writes in his book summary "Nirmals and Shahid, who read the sacred writing, may hereafter introduce some changes". Devanagri Dasam Granth was written under British supervision in 1847, after Anglo Sikh war, Ek Onkar from Gurmukhi was changed to OM in Devnagri in this Manuscript. Shabad Hazaray was changed to Khyal Patshahi 10.
Up until 1849 the British considered Sikh Nation as a separate identity, but in 1855 census Sikhs were clubbed with Hindu but it was changed later. Special reservation were given to Khalsa Sikhs after 1857 Mutiny. But the internal British policy of controlling Sikh instituted by the Pujaris was always there, especially in Darbar Sahib and Akal Takhat. Deputy Commander of Lahore sent a note in 1859 to Queen that reads "Copy of original with signature of Guru himself and now in possession of his descendents, Guru Sadhu Singh's family had only Original Kartarpuri Bir compiled by Guru Arjan and no original Dasam Granth." Why such a wrong note about the history of Dasam Granth was added by British Officials? Furthermore, in 1881, Viceroy of India sent a proposal to Governor of Punjab to give back control of Sikh institutions into Sikh Hands but Governer Eggerton of Punjab opposed this advice. "I think it will be politically dangerous to allow the management of Sikh Temples to fall into the hands of a committee, emancipated from Government control, and trust, your Excellency will resist passing such orders in the case, as will enable to continue the system, which has worked successfully for more than 30 years"(MS ADD 43592, British Library).
By now we can say that the British had political and Christian missionary interest in Punjab. By promoting a parallel, second Guru Scripture (Dasam Granth), it would have weakened the Sikh cause of One Panth, One Granth, One Maryada. It has always been a notorious tactic of political power to deny a distinct unity to populations, it seeks to govern and treat them as contingent indeterminate. There is very apparent connection of the British to divide the Sikhs for Political and Missionary expansion through a handy tool of Brahmin ideological sects as Nirmals and Udasis to diffuse, divide the uniqueness of SIKH ideology of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Nirmalas and Udasis remains main sects of Hinduism and their Sampardas.
SODHAK COMMITTEE OF DASAM GRANTH (1897-1902)
British were behind the so called Sodhak Committee, from beginning to the end. It was formed by Gurmat Granth Pracharak Sabha at the request of Khalsa Diwan Amritsar. Singh Sabha was controlled by Baba Khem Singh, a direct descent of Guru Nanak. He was prompted by the British to control Sikh institutions, and a Jagir of 28,742 acres and a title of honorary Munsif was given to him in reward in 1878. He was also nominated to Viceroy's Legislative Council Punjab in 1893. He conspired with the British to confuse Sikhs with a new Scripture of Dasam Granth and, due to fact of being a direct descendant of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, declared himself a Guru. But mainstream Sikh Institution such as Khalsa Diwan Lahore and other Sikh organizations did not approve the Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth as parallel second Scripture at all. Even Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha never mentioned this Sodhak Committee, he only tells us about Bhai Mani Singh and Mahant Sukha Singh's Dasam Granth and further mentioned that some munmauji and manmukhs have added so many compositions in these granths. We have already discussed the authenticity of these two manuscripts. Currently published Dasam Granth is the same one which was finalized in 1897-1902 by Sodhak Committee, after consulting 32 different Dasam Granths and deleting some compositions. The British floated Colebrook Dasam Granth, which is almost same as Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth, with minor changes. Why would they go through the charade of changing or Sodh the compositions of Guru Gobind Singh and even Bhai Mani Singh if they consider them to be the writings of the Guru and/or Bhai Mani Singh to begin with? Authenticity of this currently published Dasam Granth as compiled by Sodhak committee needs a thorough independent inquiry by Panthic Scholars under the guidance of SGPC and Akal Takth Sahib to end this matter.
SIKH RAHIT MARYADA AND PRESENT DASAM GRANTH
Guru Panth in (1927-1936) did not use the document of presently published Dasam Granth, while making their decision on Sikh Rahit Maryada. Their deciding factor was oral evidence practiced by family to family and whatever written sources available to them since Khalsa’s birth in 1699. They excluded two extreme views and approved on October 12, 1936 a resolution and a final version was completed on February 3rd, 1945. Gurdwara Act passed in 1925 recommends Sikh institutions to follow only Guru Granth Sahib Ji. This act reinforces again in section 2 Definitions and section 134.G (dealing with powers of committee to dismiss office holders. Ministers and office holders must perform duties per teachings of SGGS).
CONCLUSION
Dasam Granth in one volume was an outcome of post-Guru period. It did not exist in the Tenth Guru time. The master under his supervision prepared the authentic version of Guru Granth Sahib and before his physical departure he conferred on it the honor of Guru Scripture of the Sikh Jagat. Bhai Mani Singh, the last scribe of the authentic Damdami Bir, did not make any suggestion to the Guru to compile his Bani in one volume. It is equally important that he did not receive any direction in this matter from the Tenth Guru. This fact of creative history is known to the common Sikh of today that the Khalsa-brotherhood of Guru-period generally committed to their memory the Banis of Dasam Guru entitled Jap Sahib, Akal Ustat and Sawayyas and also Zafarnama. It was easy to preserve them in the written form on loose sheets or in bound copies and therefore, the Sikhs faced on indispensability to incorporate them in a bulky volume such as Dasam Granth. Then why did this passionate desire to create Dasam Granth out of the mass of anti-gurmat literature enter Bhai Mani Singh's brain at Amritsar after 1725 A.D.? Dasam Granth associated with the name of Bhai Mani Singh, includes in its contents of Adi Granth in addtion to the supposed Bani of Dasam Granth. Bhai Mani Singh could never commit such an act of betrayal by desecrating of the original form of the undisputed Guru Granth Sahib. SIKH NATION HAS ONLY ONE GRANTH (GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI) ONE PANTH AND ONE MARAYADA.
Current controversy about the Dasam Granth is totally uncalled for. Recognized Banis of Sikh Baptismal (Khanday Batay Da Amrit Chhakauna) accepted by Sikh Code of Conduct, recitation of daily prayers has been there since the creation of Khalsa. Guruship was bestowed only on Guru Granth Sahib, therefore, no other Granth can be installed along with Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Time and time again, SGPC and Akal Takht have issued edicts to reiterate the same. In their letter #36672 it is clearly stated "Chritropakhyan” is not Dashmesh Bani; Chritropakhyans are in fact old Hindu Mythihas Stories. Recently, Akal Takht Sahib has issued another Gurmata on June 6th, 2008, Tercentenary of Gurta Gaddi Diwas. “In obedience of Guru Gobind Singh Ji's last command "Accept Granth As Guru . This is my order for the panth". The Sikh Panth has always stood by it and has been consistently blessed with guidance by the living light, eternal Guru for the solution of every national crisis.
Finally, Guru Gobind Singh ji had put the final seal of complete separateness by creating Khalsa, the Nash doctrine of Dharm Nash: Bharam Nash, Karam Nash, Sharam Nash, Janam Nash and declaration of Guru Granth Sahib as the sole ideological guide, the living Guru of the Sikhs.
Reference:
http://worldsikhnews.com/2%20December%202009/HISTORICITY%20OF%20DASAM%20GRANTH.htm
Current controversy about the Dasam Granth is totally uncalled for. Recognized Banis of Sikh Baptismal accepted by Sikh Code of Conduct and recitation of daily prayers has been there since the creation of Khalsa. Guruship was bestowed only on Guru Granth Sahib, therefore, no other Granth can be installed along with Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
Currently published Dasam Granth is the same one which was finalized in 1897-1902 by Sodhak Committee, after consulting 32 different Dasam Granths and deleting some compositions. The British floated Colebrook Dasam Granth, which is almost same as Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth, with minor changes. Why would they go through the charade of changing or Sodh the compositions of Guru Gobind Singh and even Bhai Mani Singh if they consider them to be the writings of the Guru and/or Bhai Mani Singh to begin with? Authenticity of this currently published Dasam Granth as compiled by Sodhak committee needs a thorough independent inquiry by Panthic Scholars under the guidance of SGPC and Akal Takth Sahib to end this matter.
When the earthly sojourn of Guru Gobind Singh Ji was nearing its end at Nanded, He gathered his devotees around Him, and declared in an emphatic but in a revelational tone: "I am soon leaving my visible abode of divine law, but I will not leave you in utter loneliness. I entrust you to the ambrosial reservoir of immortal word, the finality of which is preserved by my super insight in the Damdami Bir (Guru Granth Sahib). I bestow the divine gift of Gurgaddi upon Guru Granth Sahib, an everlasting spirit of the Ten Guru-Prophets." The Sikhs have been finding solutions by referring to their great Scripture, and thus paying obeisance to no other Scripture as their Guru ever since the physical departure of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. There is no gap of history, and contradiction or any obstruction in the endless flow of this divine practice. Thus the prophetic faith of 10th master, transcending all illusory forms of knowledge and rejecting all false masks of apostasy, embracing none but the “supreme word”, revealed his final commitment to Guru Granth Sahib as the only eternal Guru of the Khalsa Panth. Neither Tenth master nor any of His Darbari Kavis - Sainpath ("Sri Gur Sobha") Koer Singh ("Gur Bilas Das" or “Parchian Sewa Das”) and so forth - mentioned the existence of Dasam Granth or its historic wherabouts anywhere. In fact, no reference to Dasam Granth or any other such literature is found anywhere in any such literature in the Guru period at all. It is only in the Sikh literature of the post-Guru period that one comes across sketchy references to some composition of the Tenth Guru.
Choronologically, the so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh to Mata Sundri Ji is the first link, as alleged by few scholars, between the compilation of Dasam Granth and Bhai Mani Singh. This letter could not have been written earlier than 1716 A.D, as it mentions the rumour of Banda Bahadur having escaped from mogul custody, for he was arrested and executed in that year. Dr. Rattan Singh Jaggi believes this letter to be fake. In all the Gurmukhi prose writings of that period (e.g, the Hukamnamas of Guru Gobind Singh and Banda Bahadur) words constituting a sentence were joined together without leaving blank spaces between them and this method of writing continued to be followed right upto 1867A.D. as shown by a copy of the newspaper (Akhbar Sri Darbar Sahib) published in that year. But the words in so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh are not joined together,and are separated by blank spaces. Also, as discussed by Dr Jaggi in detail, the shape of letters and liberal use of bindi of Gurmukhi script in the letter are different from the writing of Bhai Mani Singh's period. This clearly shows that the so-called letter of Bhai Mani Singh is forged as it was drafted at a much later date than 1867A.D. This letter is a fraudulent attempt to associate Bhai Mani Singh's name with CHARITROPAKYAN. It is unthinkable that a learned Sikh like Bhai Mani Singh would send CHARITROPAKYAN to venerable Mata Ji, as it is a document which Sikhs will never read or recite in the presence of a lady or in Sangat. Furthermore, the metallic Nib used on this letter was not available in those times.
Second document of note is “Bansavalinamam Dasan Patshahian Ka” written by Kesar Singh Chhiber, a Brahmin of Jammu. He completed his work in 1779A.D, 71 years after the demise of Guru Gobind Singh and 45 year after the martyrdom of Bhai Mani Singh. He writes in the very begining, that his account is based on his recollections of hearsays “Suni Sunai bolke joi rahi hai yaad”. Again “Soi Kahani Suni sunai, apni sauk nal pothi hai banai.” How can such memory or record be taken to be reliable? He was over 70 year old when he completed his work and clearly has made mistakes in the dates he recorded.
Third document is “Mehma Parkash” (1800A.D). It tells us of Granth named “Vidya Sagar” that was compiled at the time of Guru Gobind Singh. Beside these three documents we have noted above, there are “Guru Gyan Suraj” by Bhai Santokh Singh (1843), “Panth Prakash”by Gyani Gyan Singh (1930A.D) and “Mahan Kosh” (1930A.D). All these sources are of very later period and appear only to reiterate in one form or other what had been written earlier.
There is no historical evidence for linking the Dasam Granth with Tenth Master Bhai Mani Singh or with the literature that was allegedly thrown away or was lost. Additionally, there are four so-called Birs available with us: 1.Bhai Mani Singh Bir; 2.Baba Deep Singh Bir; 3.Patna Wali Bir; and, 4. Sangrur wali Bir. Textual analysis of all these Birs is very imperative to check their authenticity. Let us discuss the history and internal evidence of these four Birs along with some other Birs available to us.
(A) History of Bhai Mani Singh Bir:
(Raja Gulab Singh Sethi bought it from Jamandar Para Singh in 1945. Raja Gulab Singh took it to Lahore and later his family settled in Delhi after partition. This Bir is supposed to have been found by a military person during Multan Victory in 1818A.D. He moved to Hyderabad in South India and after retirement settled in Nanded area in Maharashtra. The Bir is said to have reached Delhi later on. The date on this Bir is 1713A.D; however, the ink and handwriting of recording of the date is different than that of original handwriting. The scribe recording the date of the manuscript seems to lack proficient knowledge of Gurmukhi and Punjabi language and is far below Bhai Mani Singh's caliber. On the other hand the scribe is apparently interested in distorting the Sikh Scripture as well in promoting the Puranic literature. The author has combined Guru Granth Sahib's bani with Dasam Ganth Literature. The contents of the Bir are unlike in Guru Granth Sahib, not recorded, in sequential order of Ragas. Additionally, it separates Bhagat Bani and Dasam Granth Literature.
(B) History of Baba Deep Singh Bir:
Giani Gian Singh in his book “Panth Prakash” reports that this Bir was written by Baba Deep Singh in 1763A.D. Bhai Randhir Singh writes in his book "Shabadmoorat" (page 51) that “Giani Gian Singh did not see the real manuscript of this Bir." Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha in 1931 reports that Bhai Mani Singh Bir and Baba Deep Singh Bir are the same. But Textual analysis of this Bir tells us that history goes only up to 1857A.D. There is no known history of this Bir and it is not traceable anywhere anymore.
(c) History of Sangrur Bir:
This Bir is reported to have been received by Raja Sarup Singh in 1857A.D. from a Pathan when the Raja went to Delhi to help British during the Indian Mutiny. The Bir has two portions: first is Guru Granth Sahib and the second is Dasam Granth. It has extra compositions like Sansahar Sukhmana, Var Malkkauns Ji, and Chakha Bhagota Ji Da, which was deleted by Sodhak Committee in 1897.
(D)History of Patna Ji Misal Bir:
No detailed history of this Bir is available. Its reference is found only in Bhai Randhir Singh's writings. According to Bhai Randhir Singh, this Bir was prepared by sewadars at Takhat Patna in Samat 1821 or 1764A.D.
(E) History of Two Patna Sahib Birs:
First one has no colophon. No history of these two Birs is available. Though the recorded date of their compilation is 1755 (1698CE), yet inclusion of Zafarnama (written in 1705 CE) at the end in the same handwriting calls that claim into question. It was probably written by Sukha Singh Granthi at Patna. These two Birs have extra compositions, which were deleted by Sodhak Committee in 1897A.D. Giani Gian Singh reports that Sukha Singh wrote the Dasam Granth in 1775A.D., but no colophon is available. What happened to the Bir mentioned by Giani Gian Singh?
Beside the above mentioned Birs there are several other manuscripts: 1. Moti Bagh Gurdwara Bir written in 1775A.D, 2. Anandpuri Bir goes back to the period of Maharaja Ranjit Singh(1800-1839), 3. MSS D5 Punjabi HT Colebrook 1805, 4. Mss D6 Devnagari in British Library London has colophon indicated 1847, 5. Mss Punjabi E1 1859A.D, 6. Mss ADD 21452, 1841 and their tatkaras tell us that all these manuscripts are different in terms of total numbers of compositions, and Chhand count.
BRITISH CONNECTION WITH DASAM GRANTH
Historical evidence shows that no such granth as Dasam Granth or Dasmi Pathsahi Granth or simply Granth comparable to the presently published Dasam Granth, was in circulation in any language in 18th century Punjab or Delhi area.
British were well aware of emerging Sikh power of the Sikhs. Warren Hastings recorded his opinion in 1784. He regarded the Sikh power extending from the most western branch of Attock to the walls of Delhi as a new subject worth serious contemplation. The Sikhs, so eminently suited to the military profession, could not become very powerful because of their spirit of independence and frequent internal warfare but they were prompt to rally together at the call of common danger. It appears that the British knew very well about Sikh history and were aware of their binding force at the time of common danger and their firm belief in Guru Granth Sahib.
William Tenet, a Christian Missionary, writes about expanding missionary work in Punjab precisely on Sikhism in 1796. Malcolm came to Punjab in 1815 accompanied by Raja Bhag Singh of Jind. Malcolm succeeded in obtaining a copy of Guru Granth Sahib but not of Dasam Granth, as there was no Dasam Granth in Punjab at that time. Raja Bhag Singh had very close relations with the British and was awarded an estate and an annual grant of 11000 pounds. By 1809 the British bought land between Sutluj and Jamuna by giving protection to Cis-Satluj States. Dasam Granth came with them. Evidence shows that Dasam Granth was to be found more in Malwa (Pepsu) Gurdwaras as campared to other parts of Punjab. In 1810 John Malcolm introduced Dasmi Patahahi Ka Granth procured by "Colebrook with indefatigable research." The top of title page of this Dasami Patshahi Granth read “NANAK PANTHI KABHYA” in Devnagri (Hindi) and "Gurmukhi Dasmi Patshashi Granth" on the first page inside. This is the first time the name “Dasam Granth” appeared in history with association with 10th Guru Ji. The compositions and their arrangements as noted in the current Dasam Granth (Corrected by Sodhak Commitee in1897) clearly matches with this Granth. This manuscript bears no name of any scribe but small loose folio tells us the date of 1840 Miti Poosshabdi 15 Mangalvar on one side. The use of word “Pooshbadi” indicates scribe is from outside Punjab and is from Hindi Belt area. Charles Wilkin in 1781AD reported another Granth in Patna in “HINDOOVE AND SANSKRIT” and wished to get it translated in future. There, however, is no evidence of translation anywhere. Then Colebrook procured this Dasmi Patshahi ka Granth (with tittle in Devnagari but granth contents in Gurmukhi) which was used by Malcolm in his book "Sketch of Sikhs". It appears that Nirmala priest Atma Ram of Calcutta, along with Mahants at Patna, also helped Malcolm in the writing of "Sketch of Sikhs" (Patna City in late 1800 was part of State of Bengal). Probably this Dasam Patshahi Granth was procured by Colebrook and planted into Indian office Library as well at Patna Sahib. Malcolm account clearly accepts services of Nirmala Atma Ram at Calcutta, and also understanding of Sikh History. Chhand 201 in Akal Ustat reads as Atma Uchrio (pronounced or produced by Atma) and four Chhands 126-130 in Gian Prabodh written by Atma Ram indicates his involvement in creation of Dasam Patshahi Granth. Malcolm writes on page 186 of his book "Sketch of the Sikhs" that Khalsa was created on Friday 8th month of B'hadra in samat 1753 (1696A.D). He also writes on same page 186, "Agreeably to this author Guru Gobind was initiated on Friday the8th month of B'HADRA IN THE SAMAT 1753 (1696A.D) and on that day his work, the Dasam Padshah Ka Granth or book of tenth king was completed." This date matches with the date where Chiritro Pakhiyan ends in the currently published Dasam Granth. This is obviously a nefarious attempt by the British and anti-Sikh elements from the Indian (Nirmalas and Brahmins) society to obfuscate the genuine and real historic milestones in Sikh theological history. It's also a cowardly attempt to create an environment for the posterity to believe that somehow Guru Gobind Singh's spiritual philosophy was different than the previous nine Guru-Prophets. Malcolm writes in his book summary "Nirmals and Shahid, who read the sacred writing, may hereafter introduce some changes". Devanagri Dasam Granth was written under British supervision in 1847, after Anglo Sikh war, Ek Onkar from Gurmukhi was changed to OM in Devnagri in this Manuscript. Shabad Hazaray was changed to Khyal Patshahi 10.
Up until 1849 the British considered Sikh Nation as a separate identity, but in 1855 census Sikhs were clubbed with Hindu but it was changed later. Special reservation were given to Khalsa Sikhs after 1857 Mutiny. But the internal British policy of controlling Sikh instituted by the Pujaris was always there, especially in Darbar Sahib and Akal Takhat. Deputy Commander of Lahore sent a note in 1859 to Queen that reads "Copy of original with signature of Guru himself and now in possession of his descendents, Guru Sadhu Singh's family had only Original Kartarpuri Bir compiled by Guru Arjan and no original Dasam Granth." Why such a wrong note about the history of Dasam Granth was added by British Officials? Furthermore, in 1881, Viceroy of India sent a proposal to Governor of Punjab to give back control of Sikh institutions into Sikh Hands but Governer Eggerton of Punjab opposed this advice. "I think it will be politically dangerous to allow the management of Sikh Temples to fall into the hands of a committee, emancipated from Government control, and trust, your Excellency will resist passing such orders in the case, as will enable to continue the system, which has worked successfully for more than 30 years"(MS ADD 43592, British Library).
By now we can say that the British had political and Christian missionary interest in Punjab. By promoting a parallel, second Guru Scripture (Dasam Granth), it would have weakened the Sikh cause of One Panth, One Granth, One Maryada. It has always been a notorious tactic of political power to deny a distinct unity to populations, it seeks to govern and treat them as contingent indeterminate. There is very apparent connection of the British to divide the Sikhs for Political and Missionary expansion through a handy tool of Brahmin ideological sects as Nirmals and Udasis to diffuse, divide the uniqueness of SIKH ideology of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Nirmalas and Udasis remains main sects of Hinduism and their Sampardas.
SODHAK COMMITTEE OF DASAM GRANTH (1897-1902)
British were behind the so called Sodhak Committee, from beginning to the end. It was formed by Gurmat Granth Pracharak Sabha at the request of Khalsa Diwan Amritsar. Singh Sabha was controlled by Baba Khem Singh, a direct descent of Guru Nanak. He was prompted by the British to control Sikh institutions, and a Jagir of 28,742 acres and a title of honorary Munsif was given to him in reward in 1878. He was also nominated to Viceroy's Legislative Council Punjab in 1893. He conspired with the British to confuse Sikhs with a new Scripture of Dasam Granth and, due to fact of being a direct descendant of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, declared himself a Guru. But mainstream Sikh Institution such as Khalsa Diwan Lahore and other Sikh organizations did not approve the Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth as parallel second Scripture at all. Even Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha never mentioned this Sodhak Committee, he only tells us about Bhai Mani Singh and Mahant Sukha Singh's Dasam Granth and further mentioned that some munmauji and manmukhs have added so many compositions in these granths. We have already discussed the authenticity of these two manuscripts. Currently published Dasam Granth is the same one which was finalized in 1897-1902 by Sodhak Committee, after consulting 32 different Dasam Granths and deleting some compositions. The British floated Colebrook Dasam Granth, which is almost same as Sodhak Committee's Dasam Granth, with minor changes. Why would they go through the charade of changing or Sodh the compositions of Guru Gobind Singh and even Bhai Mani Singh if they consider them to be the writings of the Guru and/or Bhai Mani Singh to begin with? Authenticity of this currently published Dasam Granth as compiled by Sodhak committee needs a thorough independent inquiry by Panthic Scholars under the guidance of SGPC and Akal Takth Sahib to end this matter.
SIKH RAHIT MARYADA AND PRESENT DASAM GRANTH
Guru Panth in (1927-1936) did not use the document of presently published Dasam Granth, while making their decision on Sikh Rahit Maryada. Their deciding factor was oral evidence practiced by family to family and whatever written sources available to them since Khalsa’s birth in 1699. They excluded two extreme views and approved on October 12, 1936 a resolution and a final version was completed on February 3rd, 1945. Gurdwara Act passed in 1925 recommends Sikh institutions to follow only Guru Granth Sahib Ji. This act reinforces again in section 2 Definitions and section 134.G (dealing with powers of committee to dismiss office holders. Ministers and office holders must perform duties per teachings of SGGS).
CONCLUSION
- Historical, textual and academic analysis of various available Dasam Granth Birs or manuscripts tells us that there was no Bir/Granth/Manuscript of Dasam Patshahi Da Granth or Bacchitar Natak Granth anywhere prior to the 18th century in Punjab, which can be traced back to or associated with Bhai Mani Singh, Baba Deep Singh and Tenth Guru Ji. Further evidence shows us that individual Granth such as Chaubis Avtar, Chritro Pakhyan and Bachitar Natak (14 cantos) were available, but who compiled them together by inserting Bani of Tenth Guru and similar Chhands which were popular in Sikh Daily usage (Gutkas or Oral remembrance) into this heterogeneous Dasami Patsahahi Da Granth with no sanctification of Tenth Guru ji? The role of Henry Colebrook, an attorney and administrator in Calcutta, who never visited Punjab, shows us a Granth as NANAK PANTHI KABHYA in Devnagri with a note "Dasmi Patshahi Granth". It appears that Colebrook assisted in creating, compiling and reasearching this Granth after procuring it from Nirmals Atma Ram and Mahants of Patna Sahib and later placed this Granth in British library where Charles Wilkin was a Librarian. Malcolm also mentions about this Bir in his book History and mentions that the British recognized Sikhs’ power in North and that the British also knew about their strong belief in Guru Granth Sahib ji. They intentionally assisted in Dasam Granth's creation and promotion to gain entry in Punjab and for their political, missionary purpose. Malcolm, assisted the transplantation of this Granth in Punjab Gurdwaras through Nirmalas and Shahids during the time of Khalsa Raj to confuse and divide the Sikhs. Furthermore, Colebrook Dasam Granth (British) and the current Dasam Granth corrected by Sodhak Committee in 1897 are same with minor variations.
Dasam Granth in one volume was an outcome of post-Guru period. It did not exist in the Tenth Guru time. The master under his supervision prepared the authentic version of Guru Granth Sahib and before his physical departure he conferred on it the honor of Guru Scripture of the Sikh Jagat. Bhai Mani Singh, the last scribe of the authentic Damdami Bir, did not make any suggestion to the Guru to compile his Bani in one volume. It is equally important that he did not receive any direction in this matter from the Tenth Guru. This fact of creative history is known to the common Sikh of today that the Khalsa-brotherhood of Guru-period generally committed to their memory the Banis of Dasam Guru entitled Jap Sahib, Akal Ustat and Sawayyas and also Zafarnama. It was easy to preserve them in the written form on loose sheets or in bound copies and therefore, the Sikhs faced on indispensability to incorporate them in a bulky volume such as Dasam Granth. Then why did this passionate desire to create Dasam Granth out of the mass of anti-gurmat literature enter Bhai Mani Singh's brain at Amritsar after 1725 A.D.? Dasam Granth associated with the name of Bhai Mani Singh, includes in its contents of Adi Granth in addtion to the supposed Bani of Dasam Granth. Bhai Mani Singh could never commit such an act of betrayal by desecrating of the original form of the undisputed Guru Granth Sahib. SIKH NATION HAS ONLY ONE GRANTH (GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI) ONE PANTH AND ONE MARAYADA.
Current controversy about the Dasam Granth is totally uncalled for. Recognized Banis of Sikh Baptismal (Khanday Batay Da Amrit Chhakauna) accepted by Sikh Code of Conduct, recitation of daily prayers has been there since the creation of Khalsa. Guruship was bestowed only on Guru Granth Sahib, therefore, no other Granth can be installed along with Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Time and time again, SGPC and Akal Takht have issued edicts to reiterate the same. In their letter #36672 it is clearly stated "Chritropakhyan” is not Dashmesh Bani; Chritropakhyans are in fact old Hindu Mythihas Stories. Recently, Akal Takht Sahib has issued another Gurmata on June 6th, 2008, Tercentenary of Gurta Gaddi Diwas. “In obedience of Guru Gobind Singh Ji's last command "Accept Granth As Guru . This is my order for the panth". The Sikh Panth has always stood by it and has been consistently blessed with guidance by the living light, eternal Guru for the solution of every national crisis.
Finally, Guru Gobind Singh ji had put the final seal of complete separateness by creating Khalsa, the Nash doctrine of Dharm Nash: Bharam Nash, Karam Nash, Sharam Nash, Janam Nash and declaration of Guru Granth Sahib as the sole ideological guide, the living Guru of the Sikhs.
Reference:
http://worldsikhnews.com/2%20December%202009/HISTORICITY%20OF%20DASAM%20GRANTH.htm
