| Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia | 21 April 2016 | Asia Samachar |
The Malaysian Gurdwaras Council (MGC) has voiced concerns that a planned kirtan and katha of Dasam Granth by a local Sikh outfit has the ‘potential of splitting the Sanggat and causing disunity’.
MGC has requested Gurdwara Sahib Titiwangsa, a gurdwara in Kuala Lumpur where the ‘Akaal Ustat Semagam’ is to be held for three-days starting tomorrow, to reconsider its permission.
The programme is organised by the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Academy (SGGS Academy), a Kuala Lumpur-based Sikh organisation that conducts study circles on the GGS.
In a letter dated 7 April 2016 to GS Titiwangsa, MGC noted that in many gurdwaras abroad where such ‘Dasam Granth’ semagams were oganised it resulted in conflicts and disruptive activities leading to incidents of violence.
“The MGC is therefore gravely concerned that a similar situation may arise Malaysia leading to disunity in the Sikh Sanggat, which should be avoided at all costs,” MGC president Jagir Singh said in the letter.
A copy of the letter was made available to Asia Samachar.
“The gurdwara has yet to respond to the letter,” Jagir told Asia Samachar when contacted today.
GS Titiwangsa is a member of the MGC, an umbrella body for some 108 gurdwaras in Malaysia.
When contacted, GS Titiwangsa secretary Sudarshan Singh confirmed that the committee had yet to discuss the MGC letter.
At the time of writing, Titiwangsa gurdwara management committee (GMC) president Paviter Singh and the SGGS Academy had yet to to respond queries on the matter.
Dasam Granth, which is projected as the writings of the tenth Sikh Guru, Guru Gobind Singh, has been a controversial topic in the Sikh world. Some quarters claim it to be the writing of the Guru, while other quarters dispute the claim. Akaal Ustat is supposed to be one of the writings in the Dasam Granth.
SEE MGC LETTER TO GS TITIWANGSA
Among others, the three-day programme by SGGS Academy includes a seminar entitled ‘Sri Dasam Granth: Facts Beyond Doubt’ and katha (discourse) on the the Dasam Granth.
When contacted, a local lay preacher Dr Karminder Singh said he was in support of the letter where MGC has called on Titiwangsa GMC to abide by the stipulations of the Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM) with regards to what is allowed for kirten and katha in a gurdwara programme.
SEE ALSO: Q&A with Dr Karminder Singh on Dasam Granth issue
“The issue is not about discussing. Scholars and researchers on both sides of the divide (for and against Akall Ustat) do it all the time.
“This semagam at Titiwangsa aims to sing this composition in kirtan form and to do its katha in the diwan in the presence of the sangat and in the presence of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. This is not right,” he said in response to queries from Asia Samachar.
He added that the composition was not in the SGGS.
“It is not sanctioned as Kirtan and Katha in the sangat in the diwan. The SRM is clear – Kirtan and Katha only from SGGS, Bhai Gurdas jji and Bhai Nand Lal Ji,” he said in a text reply.
“So the issue is over the contravention of SRM and established maryada of Kirtan and Katha in the sangat. The issue is over an attempt to ‘smuggle’ this controversial composition into the maryada of Kirtan and Katha in the Gurdwara under the disguise of ‘discussing’ it.”
In a related matter, the MGC has also questioned the so-called ‘endorsement’ of the programme by the Sri Akaal Takht Jathedar via a video clip.
In a statement to Asia Samachar, the MGC commented on the video clip which has been widely circulated via the social media amongst the Malaysian Sanggat. It shows the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht purpotedly endorsing the programme, applauding the SGGS Academy for the effort.
In its statement, MGC states: “The Akaal Takht Jathedar clearly stated that the programme is of Kirtan and Katha of SGGS Ji di Bani and Nitnem dian Bania Kiti Janeh hai. The Akaal Takht Jathedar did not even once mention ‘Dasam Granth’ or Akaal Ustat. The sanggat will be aware that right from the first SMS sent regarding the programme and followed by flyers all mentiond about ‘Dasam Granth’ and ‘Akaal Ustat’ di Katha and Kirtan. Was Akaal Takht Jathedar informed of this?”
[ASIA SAMACHAR is an online newspaper for Sikhs in Southeast Asia and surrounding countries. We have a Facebook page, do give it a LIKE! Visit our website: www.asiasamachar.com]
Redefining Vaisakhi (Asia Samachar, 16 April 2016)
Momentous Vaisakhi celebration in Canada (Asia Samachar, 14 Apr 2016)
Canadians share Khalsa Panth ideals: Justin Trudeau (Asia Samachar, 11 April 2016)
Jup is not chanting: Karminder (Asia Samachar, 9 April 2016)
Vaisakhi unrecorded leave for Malaysian Sikh civil servants (Asia Samachar, 6 April 2016)
Vaisakhi 2016 programme listing: Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia (Asia Samachar, 17 March 2016)
You want to respect Guru, make shabad accessible (Asia Samachar, 14 Jan 2016)
JAGIR: Without guidance, all gurdwaras would be on their own (Asia Samachar, 20 Nov 2015)
JAGIR: MGC managing granthi entry, standardising maryada at gurdwaras (Asia Samachar, 20 Nov 2015)
SGGS Academy signs MOU with Punjabi University (Asia Samachar, 16 Oct 2015)
Sikh Nishan Sahib demystified (Asia Samachar, 2 Oct 2015)
On sects and denominations in Sikhi (Asia Samachar, 27 Sept 2015)
SGGS Academy to open centres in US, Canada (Asia Samachar, 21 June 2015)
Are our Gurdwaras Dysfunctional? The Assessment. (Asia Samachar, 9 Jan 2015)
Your comment should be civil and not insult anyone by using words which insult. I am referring to words like
‘arrogant male’ and ‘filthy man lies and smell of arrogance.
There is no choice in this neither should an arrogant male speak in the manner he thinks he can.perhas charitropkahyan has interested him.
I know where the filthy man lies,With eyes open or closed, either way, smells of arrogance..
Accepting filth is not one of them, that one may see with eyes shut and brain closed to reasonableness.
See with eyes open and brain open and used to distinguish the filth and then decide accordingly.
I think enough has been said and leave with the conclusion: TO EACH HIS/HER OWN.
There is also beauty in among those who cheat, fraud and manipulate the finances!There is beauty of the non transparent intelligence and and methodology they use to get away.Surely that beauty cannot be ignored nor faulted simply because there is the old adage you sow what you plan.
Now when one talks of law, the whole scenario changes….there is SIKH law.
Accepting filth is not one of them, that one may see with eyes shut and brain closed to reasonblness.
If what you say is what you believe that ‘they can be bought to say anything by the powerful anti-Sikhi forces if the price is right’ then the same may be asked from you: What is your price and who bought you?’
You say ‘I prefer to use my God given intellect and SGGS based thinking. I have read the stories in Bachitar Natak and in Chitro Pakyaan – these constitute 80% of Dasam Granth. One word describes it all: FILTH.
Following is my own experience when I was staying in Jln TAR KL:
About three decades ago a US journalist was photographing the back lanes rubbish of the Jln TAR in K.L. When I inquired as to why he was doing this his reply was to show the rubbish ridden streets of Malaysia.
To this my response was that IF HE WAS LOOKING FOR RUBBISH RIDDEN ROADS THESE HE CAN FIND THEM ALL IN THE STATES OF US INCLUDING IN HARLEM IN NY, WASHINGTON AND SAN FRANCISCO AND THUS THERE WAS NO NEED FOR HIM TO WASTE TIME AND MONEY BY COMING TO MALAYSIA. He apologized and left.
There is an old saying and that YOU FIND WHAT YOU SEEK AND LOOKS LIKE YOU WERE SEEKING ‘FILTH’ IN THE DASAM GRANTH AND SO YOU FOUND FILTH’.
There is beauty and wisdom in all creations. Just look at Picasso’s painting to many it is scribbles but to some they are valuable pieces of art.
It is a matter of intention.
I searched and listened to Maskeen, Dr Shoba and Dr Mohinder.
They are twisting and turning, resorting to downright ludicrous arguments to defend the indefensible.Their basic message is the same – Guru Gobind Singh is trying to “educate” his Sikhs in every conceivable matter.
Lewdness in the name of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and in the name of Gurbani cannot be defended under any circumstances except by depraved minds.
Now a days, parcharaks, professors and researchers come CHEAP. They can be bought to say anythingby the powerful anti-Sikhi forces if the price is right.
I prefer to use my God given intellect and SGGS based thinking. I have read the stories in Bachitar Natak and in Chitro Pakyaan – these constitute 80% of Dasam Granth. One word describes it all: FILTH.
Even the corrupted pujarees at Hazoor Sahib (where DG is in “parksah” read the “hukumnama” in silence if it comes from the “banees” of Chitryo Pakhyan and Bathittar Natak. So much for education.
having invited the enemy through the back door, let us understand the reality.Simply saysing it was written is not enough.
I dare these anti Sikhs to conduct the path of charitropkahyan, if they really have the nerve and honesty about them.
Intersting, they have remained silent.
Dasam Granth- Its History
Since the time the writings or pothis, to be later compiled and called the granth of the Tenth Master, were originally found, there has been a controversy about their authorship, authenticity and historicity. Very few persons have made a serious study about their genuineness. The issue is important, and writers like O’Connell and others have often made accusations like: “A conspicuous deficiency already mentioned is the general reluctance to grapple effectively with the Dasam Granth. The period whence it comes is absolutely crucial, and until it is adequately treated, we shall continue to grope in our efforts to trace the course of Sikh history or development of Sikh tradition”. It is, therefore, necessary to assess the veracity of facts, and to indicate the probabilities of the issue, so that it is understood in its right academic perspective.
History- 18th Century Chhibber’s Story
Most of the evidence about the present work called the ‘Dasam Granth’ is negative. The earliest reference about some writings by the Tenth Master is by Chhibber in his ‘Bansavalinama’. Contemporary historians of the period of Guru Gobind Singh like Sainapat, Bhai Nandlal, Chaupa Singh, Sewadas, Koer Singh or Bhai Mani Singh, make no mention of the Dasam Granth or any such writing in the period. This negative evidence is quite significant and strong.
For, had there been any compilation like the Dasam Granth, these contemporary chroniclers could never have FAILED to mention it.
The FIRST reference to some writings by the Tenth Guru is in Chhibber’s ‘Bansavalinama’ written 71 years AFTER the Guru’s demise. This volume, as assessed by scholars like Jaggi, Kohli and others, has not been found to be very reliable as to its dates and other particulars.
Besides, the author himself says that he is no chronicler, but has based the writing merely on hearsay, and just as a matter of his hobby: “I state what I had heard and what I could recollect.” “This hearsay I record just by way of my hobby (shauk).” Thus, Chhibber himself discounts the historical accuracy of his statements, for, he claims to belong only to the third generation of a Brahmin family whose head was a contemporary of the Tenth Master.
Further, two important points have also to be kept in view. First, most Brahmin writers always have a strong, natural and understandable bias to give a Brahminical colour to the Sikh religion and its history, even though all the Sikh Gurus were emphatic to proclaim the independence of their system and the Panth. The Fifth Master wrote:
“I keep not the Hindu fast, nor do I observe Muslim month of fast;
I serve only Him, who emancipates all; He is my Gosain;
He is my Allah; I have found release from the Hindus as from the Turks;
I visit not the pilgrim places of Hindus, nor go to Kaaba for Haj;
I serve only God, I serve not any other;
I worship not the Hindu way, nor say the Muslim prayers;
I bow to the one God within my heart;
I am neither a Hindu, nor a Muslim;
For, my body and life belong to Him, Allah and Ram.”
Second, Guru Gobind Singh had put the final seal on this complete separateness, by the creation of the Khalsa, the Nash Doctrine (Dharam Nash, Bharam Nash, Karam Nash, Sharam Nash and Janam Nash), and the declaration of Guru Granth Sahib as the sole Ideological Guide and Living Guru of the Sikhs. Yet, these writings have shown a subtle tendency to reshape and reframe Sikh events, so that these are accepted by the gullible foolish “sikhs” like we see now,but called “nice fellows” as a part of the Brahminical tradition.
Following is what Chhibber records: The Guru got written a Granth (book) called ‘Samundar Sagar’. Later he threw into a river.” “After that , he composed other writings.” “But, during the battles at Anandpur, the leaves of these writings or packets (Sanchian) were scattered to the wind and lost.” Chhibber is vague about the contents or nature of these writings. Once he calls it ‘Samundar Sagar’, at another time ‘Avtar Leela’. There is no reference at all to ‘Dasam Granth’, ‘Bachittar Natak’, ‘Chandi Charitar’, ‘Chandi di Var’, ‘Charitropakhyan’ or ‘Chaubis Avtar’, as these are called now.
It is clear that it was peace time when the Guru had thrown the Samundar Sagar Granth in the river. Could it ever happen that he would destroy his own writings or the Gurbani of earlier Gurus, or any thing of value to Sikhs? Gurbani has always been considered sacred, and been venerated more than even the Guru. Evidently, the writings were such trash ,as could conveniently be discarded. The argument applies doubly to the packets that were never completed or compiled, and were allowed to be scattered.
Thus, Chhibber’s story adds nothing to our knowledge about the Dasam Granth writings, their compilation or loss. Therefore, the negative evidence of all contemporary chroniclers, coupled with the evidence of Chhibber’s story, shows that till the end of the 18th century, there was nothing known about any granth of the Tenth Guru, or any writings now regarded as its chapters or contents. In fact, the only granth or compilation mentioned in the literature is ‘Vidya Sagar’ or ‘Samundar Sagar Granth’, the contents of which have no relation to the present Dasam Granth.
Chhibber’s Story Contradicted
Chhibber alleges three facts. First, that the Tenth Master initially created a granth called Samundar Sagar, and had it thrown into a river. Later, some papers (Sanchis) were prepared, but these, too, were scattered to the wind and lost in the time of battles. Second, he records that in 1725 A.D. Bhai Mani Singh compiled a granth combining the bani of Aad Granth and the writings that subsequently came to be called Dasam Granth. For doing this mix-up, and thereby violating the prescribed sequence or method of writing gurbani, a poor Sikh, when he saw the combined granth, cursed Bhai Sahib saying that just as he had disjointed the Gurbani and mixed it up, he would also be cut to pieces. Chhibber never writes chronologically.
For example, in a still later couplet no. 389, he writes that in 1698 A.D. Guru Gobind Singh rejected the request of the Sikhs to combine the Aad Granth with his own writings. It is very significant that the entire book of Chhibber is packed with his use and narration of Brahminical practices, and stories of demons, fairies, Hom, Mantras, curses, etc., even though he knows that these are opposed to the doctrines in the Guru Granth Sahib. In short, his Brahminical faith and prejudices are glaringly evident.
In addition, the above version of Chhibber,is found to be contradicted both by Gian Singh and Sarup Das Bhalla on all the essential points concerning Dasam Porno writings. Gian Singh never mentions that Samundar Sagar Granth or Sanchis of Avtar Leela stories were prepared, thrown or lost. He also contradicts Chhibber that Sikhs at any time made a request to the Guru to combine his bani with the Aad Granth. All he states is that once Sikhs requested the Guru to compile his own writings , but He categorically declined to do so, saying that such a request should never be made again. He also contradicts Chhibber’s version that Bhai Mani Singh ever combined the two, and later suffered a ‘curse’ from a poor Sikh for doing so.
He only states that in response to a suggestion by some Sikhs,Bhai mani Singh wrote Gurbani in separate words for the purpose of explaining its meaning (teeka), and that the sangat disapproved of it, saying that he would suffer for it. But the sangat conceded that his faith in the Guru will remain unshaken. This satisfied Bhai Sahib.  However, he indicates that on the request of Sikhs, he was collecting the writings of Guru Gobind Singh. 
‘Mehma Parkash’ of Sarup Das Bhalla, a late 18th century or an early 19th century production, materially gives the same impression as does Gian Singh. Bhalla, a non-Brahmin, contradics all the three assertions of Chhibber, namely, the preparation or loss of any granth like Samundar Sagar or Sanchis of other writings, the request of Sikhs to the Guru to add his writings to the Aad Granth,or any combined compilation by Bhai Mani Singh, and the curse by a poor Sikh. On the other hand, Bhalla gives the story that the Guru got prepared a granth, since lost, called Vidya Sagar, which constituted translations of Sanskrit literature. He does not say that the Sikhs ever requested the Guru to include his writings in the Aad Granth, nor that Bhai Sahib ever produced any such compilation.
These being the realities, there is little doubt that Chhibber’s version is not only unworthy of reliance, but is clearly the result of a prejudiced twist to facts as they really were. For, it is unthinkable that Bhai Mani singh would ever combine the two, as alleged by Chhibber and as now sought to be supported by the presence of the Delhi and Sangrur birs, when he knew full well that the Guru had clearly frowned upon such an idea. Had Bhai Sahib prepared any bir, it would be the authentic version, and there could never have been the possibility of such widely variant versions of the granth, as actually exist now. For, every bir would have been a copy of it. Nor is there any reason for the complete disappearance of it. Because, we find, that the Delhi bir, which has no history, is certainly not Bhai Sahib’s production.
For the reasons and facts given above there is little doubt that the story of Chhibber stands belied, and that the version that Bhai Mani Singh compiled the Dasam Granth, is a distortion that has no historical, ideological or factual basis or possibility.
The existence of Dasam Granth is mentioned for the first time in mid-nineteenth century by Bhai Santokh Singh, and later by Giani Gian Singh and others. Later, Bhai Kahn Singh and others REPEAT the story of Bhai Santokh Singh, suggesting that the bir of Dasam Granth was compiled by Bhai Mani Singh. It is also stated that there were many objections to the compilation in one volume of the various writings that had earlier existed separately.
But, the final decision to do so or not, rested on the chance factor of the success or otherwise of the mission of Sukha Singh and Mehtab Singh against Massa Ranghar. The reality, however, is that none of these writers have given any shred of evidence to support the story of its compilation. In the absence of any authentic historical evidence, it is simply impossible to attribute the present collection, or any part of it, to Bhai Sahib. It is equally impossible to believe that if a respected contemporary of the Guru like Bhai Sahib had really compiled the granth, or any part of it, there could ever have been a controversy about it among the Sikhs so as to require them to resort to the chance decision depending on the success of Mehtab Singh and Sukha Singh. Bhai Mani Singh’s position being pre-eminent as a trusted scribe and devout Sikh of the Guru, could any Sikh or Panth disregard or doubt his testimony about the Dasam Granth, if it had been there? There is, thus, little doubt that the story of Dasam Granth’s compilation by Bhai Sahib has no historical basis. In fact, it is a motivated fabrication to give credence to the story of Dasam Granth compilation.
“Letter” by Bhai Mani Singh
The supportive story of a letter written by Bhai Sahib, about the collection of Charitropakhyan, to Mata Sundari at Delhi is another fabrication. This has been examined in detail, the veracity of this letter and found it to be unreliable. The method of writing separate words, as in this letter, was not at all in vogue in the time of Bhai Sahib. Nor is the practice visible in the contemporary manuscripts.
The words or language used also relates to a later period. Besides, the use of bindi, other features, matras and shape of letters are comparatively modern. Very probably the letter is written by a metallic nib which was not available in those times. The words used are rather unsophisticated and could not have been from a learned gurmukh like Bhai Sahib.
It is also strange that the letter mentions 303 Charitars or stories, whereas everywhere else the number is 404. Nor has the letter been forthcoming from a natural custody. It was never heard of in the 18th or 19th centuries, and its appearance is only a mid 20th century phenomenon. It is strange that Dr Ashta who accepts it, has done so virtually without any examination of it.
Charitropakhyan is a writing which no Sikh, granthi, or scholar has been willing to read or send to his mother, sister or daughter. No one has so far read it out in the open sangat.
It is, indeed, unlikely that a gurmukh like Bhai Sahib would send its manuscript to venerated Mataji. It is, thus, historically baseless to connect Bhai Sahib or Mata Sundari in any manner with the collection or compilation of Dasam Granth or any part of it.
The above rationale makes it plain that there is no evidence whatsoever of the existence of Dasam Granth or any part of it in the 18th or even the 19th century. All we now know is the later appearance of some manuscripts or Birs of the Dasam Granth. Four of them are regarded as the oldest. We shall consider their reliability or authenticity.
Bhai Mani Singh Bir
Raja Gulab Singh of Delhi purchased a bir in 1944-45, which is known as the Bhai Mani Singh Bir. Nothing historically verifiable is known about it, except a story given by him that a soldier of Ranjit Singh found or looted it during an attack on Multan in 1818 A.D. The soldier then shifted to and settled at Hyderabad. How the bir got to Multan and remained unknown for 125 years, is quite enigmatic and unexplained. External evidence about its history is completely missing. The bir is far from being a speaking manuscript. For, the authorship is unknown, as also the place or time of its compilation. In a corner of a page there is a slanting postscript, recording 1713 A.D. as the date of it.An examination and its photocopy clearly show it to be a suspicious interpolation. The ink and writing of this entry are different from those of the original bir. The handwriting and shape of letters are also comparatively crude. Its introduction in slanting lines in a corner proves its belated character. In fact, it is a thoughtless fabrication of the date. For, the story of Bhai Sahib’s collection of its parts and the Panthic decision to have them in one volume following Massa Ranghar’s death, relate to a time about two decades later.
All the internal evidence of the bir is against its authenticity. Dr Jaggi finds that the writer of the bir does not seem to be a good scribe or to have a good knowledge of the Gurmukhi script or the Punjabi language. Therefore, it is not at all possible to connect this bir with Bhai Sahib. On the other hand, the scribe is a Hindi-knowing/speaking person who is distinctly interested in distorting the Sikh doctrines and mixing up Sikh literature with Puranic literature. And this is, exactly what he has done.
The bir comprises both the bani of the Gurus and that of the Dasam Granth. Gurbani has not been recorded as in Guru Granth Sahib, i.e., raag-wise. It is done Guru-wise and Bhagat Bani is mostly at the end of the combined volume. It shows conclusively that the scribe is a non-Sikh who, without any knowledge of the prescribed method of writing gurbani, is out to do the heretical distortion of mixing-up dhur ki bani with Puranic myths about worship of Devis and Avtars. perverted Sex actions by women. For, no Sikh, and much less a gurmukh like Bhai Sahib, could ever plan to combine the two and flout the sacred sequence of Gurbani (written raag-wise) laid down by the Gurus. The shape of writing and its language suggest that the distortion was done long after the demise of Bhai Sahib, when the Sikh world was engaged in its life and death struggle with the Empire and the invaders.
Thus, the lack of any history of the manuscript for over 200 years, its internal evidence of interpolation, shape of letters and language, together with the heretical change of method in writing gurbani, and its mix-up with Puranic and Avtar-worship literature, conclusively exclude the possibility of the bir being a production of Sikh quarters. On the other hand, the probability is that it is a compilation by those either unconversant with Sikh doctrines, tradition and literature, or those out to confuse the Sikh ideology. In any case, the manuscript has no historical or academic value as an authentic bir.
Moti Bagh Bir
The bir of Moti Bagh is another manuscript that has no verifiable history. In 1959, one Natha Singh stated that his ancestor,one Hakam Singh had given this bir to Maharaja Mohinder Singh (1862-1876 A.D.), that earlier one Nahar Singh had obtained it from Charat Singh, son of Sukha Singh, and that the former had been obtaining for it a grant from Maharaja Ranjit Singh. But, no part of its history is verifiable, or is otherwise corroborated. Nor is there anything in the internal evidence of the bir to support the story or any part of it. The bir shows that it had been compiled by MORE than one person. Dr Jaggi opines that the age of the paper and the character of words and writing show that it could not have been compiled earlier than a hundred years after the demise of the Tenth Guru.
The granthi at gurdwara Deodi Sahib Dewan Khara, Sangrur, says that in 1857 A.D. the bir had been presented to the Raja by a Pathan of Delhi, when he had gone there in aid of the British. The bir was in two parts, pages 1 to 600 contained gurbani from Guru Granth Sahib, and pages 601 to 1166 the chapters that form Dasam Granth. The first part stands lost. Its history before 1857 A.D. is unknown. Internal evidence suggests that it is a combined collection of bani from the Guru Granth Sahib and the chapters of Dasam Granth. Since the very system of combining dhur ki bani with Puranic and Avtar and other literature is opposed to the specific tradition laid down by the Gurus, the heretical mix-up has been done, as explained earlier, by non-Sikh elements.
For, it is inconceivable that a composition like the Charitropakhyan, which even the SGPC, vide its letter no. 36672 dated 3. 8. 1972, has declared to be a composition from Hindu mythology and not by the Tenth Master, could have been combined with sacred gurbani by any Sikh.
his fact alone shows conclusively that the Dasam Granth, which contains Charitropakhyan, could never be a compilation of Sikh quarters, much less could it be by the Tenth Guru. The bir, thus, is of no historical or academic value.
The Patna Bir has also no historical value. Nothing worthwhile about it was narrated to Jaggi when he examined it there. The writing is simple, except that red ink has also been used. The arguments against the authenticity of its compilation, production, and mix-up of the Tenth Master’s bani with Charitropakhyan, as noted earlier, also apply to this volume. Jaggi feels that the condition of the paper, shape of letters, writing, etc., suggest that it is a production of the 19th century.
I. Historical Contradictions: There are, as detailed by Jaggi, many historical and other incongruities in the Dasam Granth which it would be naive to attribute to the Tenth Master. We give only two instances.
(i) In the story of Prithoo Raja, the author has shown that the legendary Shakuntala had connection not with Prince Dushyant, but with the mythical Prithoo. According to Bhagwat Puran, Prithoo was an Avtar of Vishnu who appeared in Treta Yug. But Shakuntala’s story of love with Dushyant in Bhagwat Puran is entirely different. Thus, the writer who has joined Prithoo and Shakuntala, could not be concerned with the purity of Puranic stories. But his only interest appears to be to link the bani of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib with concocted Hindu legends, so that he is shown to be part of the Brahminical lore and legend.
(ii) Similarly, in the story of Raghu Raja, to say that Sanyasis regarded him as Dutt, Yogis as Gorakh Nath, Bairagis as Ramanand, and Muslims as Prophet Mohammad, shows that the interest of the story writer is not to narrate any rational history or myth. He only seeks to represent that the Guru accepted Hindu mythology and tradition, and for the purpose to distort Sikh doctrines and ideas.
By no means can the authorship of such cock-and-bull stories be attributed to the lofty personality of the Guru. Obviously, the interest of the authors of these incongruities is quite extraneous to any faithful representation of events, doctrines, ideas, or even myths.
Another fact that seriously affects the historicity of these writings, is quite significant. Normally, the preparation, compilation or reproduction of a granth by a scholar is a great achievement, and the same is kept as a treasure, which the author or his family is always reluctant to part with. But, in the case of these manuscripts or birs not only their history and names or identity of compilers are unknown, but, we also find, that none of the compilers or custodians ever showed any reluctance to part with them. On the other hand, an apparent aim seems to have been that the compilation reaches an important place or a distinguished person, that could confer authenticity to it.
II. Ideological Contradictions: The unity of spirit of all the Ten Gurus is a fundamental of Sikhism, which stands emphasised and recorded in Guru Granth Sahib. The second basic and unalterable concept of Sikhism, as opposed to that of Brahminism, is that God does not incarnate. This concept is an integral element of the Creedal hymn (Mul Mantra) of Guru Nanak in the very beginning of the Guru Granth Sahib. This concept is the corner-stone of Sikh theology. So much so, that the Guru says: “May that mouth burn which says that God incarnate.” “God alone is the one who is not born of a woman.” “God is self-existent, without form and incarnates not.” The Gurus clearly deny belief in the theory of incarnation of God. In order to dispel such ideas they state, “The Formless alone, Nanak, is without fear, many are Ramas as the dust of His Feet, many Krishnas. Many are their stories and many are the Vedas.” The Gurus write that He created Countless Brahmas, Sivas and Vishnus.
The above is the categoric thesis of the Gurus and the Guru Granth Sahib, the sole Ideological Guide of the Sikhs. We have to test any idea, doctrine or practice on the touchstone of gurbani. For, it is unimaginable that any Guru or Sikh could approve of anything incongruous with the Creedal statement of Guru Nanak. It is in the above context that we have to examine and test the authenticity of what is in any granth, not specifically authenticated by the Gurus.
Devi & Avtar Worship in the Dasam Granth
Dr Jaggi has made a detailed examination of the issue. He finds that except for about 70 pages of the Dasam Granth, including Jap Sahib, Swayyas, Akal Ustat (excluding hymns in praise of Durga), Asphotak Chhand and Zaffarnama, the other contents which involve worship of Avtars, Devis and Mahakal are mostly from the Puranic literature. Following are some instances of Devi Worship. (For details see chapter 9 of Jaggi’s book).
i) Tribhangi Chhands (201-220, In Akal Ustat) are clearly in praise of the Devi.
ii) In Shashtarnama in the beginning there is a whole chapter (27 chhands) in praise of the Devi.
iii) Chandi Chariter I & II, Chaubis Avtar, Rudra Avtar including parts of Charitropakhyan, all relate to the Puranic myths that are in praise of the Devi and Avtars.
iv) Similarly, in the above Puranic stories there are numerous hymns in praise of Maha Kal, who is a Tantric or Sakat deity, pages 55, 56, 57, 58, 73, 156, 157, 183, 185, 254, 310, 612, 613, 642, etc.
v) Worship of Devi under the name of Kalika, Chandi, Siva or Durga is found at pages 74, 76, 99, 117, 255, 118, 309, 310, 116, 673, 675, etc., etc.
vi) Apart from the Var of Durga, there is the entire Puranic story of the Devi coming to the rescue of the mythical Indra and fighting battles with demon Maikhasur, involving trillions of soldiers (Devi worship Chhands and narration of the myth).
vii) In Chandi Charitar Ukat Bilas the author mentions that he has virtually made the composition from 700 slokas of Markand Purana. He adds that whoever hears or recites the same for any specific boon, the Devi would certainly grant it instantaneously (Chandi Chariter, Ukat Bilas – sloka 232).
viii) In Chandi Chariter II in the sloka 261 the author writes that whoever remembers or worships the Devi with devotion,shall attain salvation. Similarly, in the Durga Var the author writes that whoever recites the same, will achieve salvation and not be born again (stanza or pauri – 55).
ix) Whether it is Rama Avtar, Parasnath Avtar, Krishna Avtar, Brahma Avtar, or the other Puranic stories, these all relate to the worship to the Devi and Avtars.
x) Charitropakhyan, too, involves worship of the Devi and Kal or Maha Kal (Charitra 405, Chhands 52, 77, 126 and 132). The very facts that no Sikh is willing to read it in the presence of women or the sangat, and that the SGPC has called it a Puranic myth and not work of the Tenth Guru, show that it is no longer considered a part of the Dasam Granth.
The above few instances prove that, apart from the about 70 pages or so, the writings in the Dasam Granth positively accept and involve Devi and Avtar worship. Accordingly, these writings (Chandi Charitra and Chandi Di Var – 126 pages, Chaubis Avtar – 744 pages, Brahm Rudra Avtar – 383 pages, Charitropakhyan and Hikayat – 923 pages) are opposed to the doctrines of the Gurus and Guru Granth Sahib.
Guru Granth Sahib on Devi and Avtar Worship
About mythical writings and Devi and Avtar worship Guru Granth Sahib records:
i) “O brother, fools worship gods and goddesses. They do not know that these imaginary deities can give nothing.”
ii) “The Vedas, Brahma, gods and goddesses know not His secrets, and have no knowledge of the Creator.”
iii) “The fools, the ignorant and the blind forget the Master Lord, and instead, worship His slaves, the goddesses and Maya.”
Guru Gobind Singh on Devi Worship
Hereunder we give the bani of the Tenth Master as in the Akal Ustat:
i) “There are millions of Indras and incarnations of Brahma, Vishnu and Krishna. But, without worship of God none are accepted in His Court.” (stanza 38).
ii) “Millions of Indras are servants at His door. Countless are the insignificant Shivas, Ramas and Krishnas.” (stanza 40).
iii) “Some worship Shiva (Mahadev); some say Vishnu is Master of the Universe, and that by devotion to him, all calamities disappear. O, fool, think over a thousand times and understand that at the last moment every one will leave you in the lurch to die alone. Remember only the One Lord who will never forsake you.” (ibid).
iv) “There was a Shiva; he was gone, and there appeared another and he was gone too. There are innumerable Avtars like Rama or Krishna.”
“Countless are Brahmas, Vishnus, Vedas, Puranas and Simritis that have come and gone”. (stanza 77).
These being the categoric hymns of Guru Granth Sahib and the clear statements of the Tenth Master himself, does it make any sense that he approved of or could ever have accepted any of the writings mentioned earlier, which so clearly involve worship of Devis and Devtas, and some of which faithfully reflect and reproduce Puranic writings and myths in praise of Avtars and the Devis, suggesting faith in the efficacy of the mantar system discarded by Guru Granth Sahib?
Changing Name of the Granth
There is another important factor suggesting that major part of the Dasam Granth is actually taken from some other sources, and has been mistakenly or deliberately combined with the bani of the Tenth Guru.
For example, the writings were originally all separate and unconnected pothis, or compilations. For that reason these were first called ‘Dasam Patshah Ka Granth’. This name does not suggest any authorship of the Guru, but only seeks to link his name by way of reference to his period or quarters. Later, the granth was called Dasam Granth and still later Sri Dasam Granth, and so on. The frequent changes in name only reflect the interests of the writers or the publishers.
That this is a deliberate mix-up, is evident from the fact that originally most parts of the granth were called Bachittar Natak Granth. This name appears 151 times in the Puranic parts of the compilation. It is repeated at the end of each composition, story chapter or poem. This name appears 19 times in Rama Avtar, 67 times in Krishna Avtar, 33 times at the end of the stories of other Avtars, etc.
The probability is that the mix-up has been done deliberately. For, Puranic Verses, and Chhands in praise of Devi are interpolated in the midst of what is clearly the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the light of Guru Granth Sahib. Similarly, some couplets, which are the bani of the Tenth Guru, as seen in the context of Guru Granth Sahib, stand introduced in the midst of Puranic stories.
The bani in Guru Granth Sahib is the Sole Guru and Guide of every Sikh. It is the Light that alone shows us the way to truth, especially when one may be wavering or in doubt. May we ask if there is any objection to accepting what is clearly in consonance with it and avoiding what is admittedly, theologically and logically, opposed to it?
Our discussion makes it plain that such contents of the Dasam Granth as suggest worship of gods, goddesses and Avtars, are opposed to the doctrines of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and the Gurus. These are also opposed to the unanimously accepted bani of Guru Gobind Singh, quoted above. By no stretch of reason can it be suggested that those writings are consonant with the bani and doctrines of Guru Granth Sahib. On the other hand, they clearly support the theory of Avtarhood which the Gurus have emphatically rejected. Further, we find that there is not a shred of historical evidence to suggest that the Guru at any time approved of it. In fact, he had thrown away or permitted to be scattered, whatever was not worth presentation. On the other hand, Guru Granth Sahib was declared the Guru. Gurbani has been given to us to test what is valid or true and what is unacceptable or spurious. That test is final and unalterable.
It is also evident that none of the Devi or Avtar-worship writings are the collection of a Sikh or indicate the authorship of a Sikh as the original scribe or compiler. On the other hand, the manner in which this mix-up has been done, and the method of writing gurbani laid down by the Gurus, grossly violated in the old birs, show that the author could not be a Sikh. Further, already the SGPC has accepted the position that 923 pages of Charitropakhyan are Puranic myths, unconnected with the Guru.
Many outside scholars have clearly stated that in the absence of clarification of the position about the Dasam Granth, the stand and history of the Tenth Master cannot be clear. The oblique suggestion is that the Tenth Master brought the Panth into the Hindu fold, and drew inspiration from the Puranic past and the Shakti cult, even though it is a historical fact that the hill princes, the staunch worshippers of the Shakti or Devi cult, not only opposed the Guru, but also voluntarily accepted the supremacy of the Mighty Mughal instead of confronting him. Another scholar, Ramji Lal, writes that Sikhs are Hindus, saying, “The Khalsa was constituted to emancipate the Hindu society from the contemporary evils including idolatry, caste system, superstition and ritualism.” “Again at that time among the disciples of the Great Guru Gobind Singh – Bhai Nand Lal, Bhai Kanahya and Mohkam Chand, all were Hindus. Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Dayala who sacrificed their lives along with Guru Tegh Bahadur, were also Hindus.” “Not only this, but Guru Gobind Singh himself revered Hindu Goddesses – Chandi and Durga and the Hindu Avtars including – Sri Ram Chander and Lord Krishna.”
While it is well known that views of many scholars like Bhai Ardaman Singh of Bagrian, Dr Jaggi, Shamsher Singh Ashok,Prof. Jagjit Singh, Principal Harbhajan Singh, Principal Jagjit Singh, Dr Rann Singh, S. Harnam Singh, Maj. Gen. Narinder Singh, S. M.S. Marco, Bhai Ashok Singh and others are the same as ours. Open attempts at ideological erosion, as quoted above, are being made. Hence the need of academic clarification. For, no Sikh can accept that anything opposed to the categoric rejection of the doctrine of Avtarhood in Guru Granth Sahib, could ever be from an authentic Sikh source, much less from the Tenth Master. It is undeniable that Guru Granth Sahib is our Living Guru, and its principles and doctrines are our Sole Guide to test the veracity or acceptability of any idea, concept, writing, suggestion or activity.
1. Chhibber, Kesar Singh: ‘Bansavalinama’, p. 1
2. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1136
3. Chhibber, Kesar Singh: op. cit., p. 135
4. Ibid, p. 136
7. Gian Singh: ‘Panth Prakash’, p. 320
8. Ibid, pp. 688-689
9. Ibid, p. 321
10. Bhalla, Sarupdas: ‘Mehma Parkash’, p. 794
11. Jaggi, Rattan Singh: ‘Dasam Granth da Karitartav’, pp. 38-45
12. Ibid, pp. 92-93
14. Ibid, pp. 93-95
15. Ibid, pp. 95-97
16. Ibid, pp. 97-98
17. Gupta, H.R.:’ The Sikh Gurus’, p. 245
18. Jaggi, Rattan Singh: op. cit., pp. 152-154
19. Ibid, p. 152
20. Ibid, p. 153
21. Guru Granth Sahib: p. 1
22. Ibid, p. 1136
23. Ibid, p. 473
24. Ibid, p. 547
25. Ibid, pp. 464, 1156
26. Ibid, p. 637
27. Ibid, p. 894
28. Ibid, p. 1138
29. Geholt, N.S.: ‘Politics of Communalism and Secularism’, Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi, 1993, p. 67
‘Giani Sant Singh Ji Maskeen About Sri Dasam Granth (Charitropakhyan)’
Due to the ongoing differing views on the proposed Akaal Ustat Semagam and a planned kirtan and katha of Dasam Granth I decided to listen to some views on youtube. These included:
[a] ‘Katha by the late Giani Sant Singh Ji Maskeen”
[b] ‘Sri Dasam Granth Study : Interview with Dr. Shobha Kaur’ and
[c] ‘Dr. Mohinder Kaur Gill on Sri Dasam Granth & Charitropakhiyan’.
All provides more details and understanding of the contents of Dasam Granth.
It is humbly requested to those who are opposing the programme to listen to the views of these three and other personalities for more understanding of Dasam Granth. Of course there are other views opposing the Dasam Granth.
Thus it is left to the individual to take his/her own choice.
let us look at another one of the “holy” stories from the porno book….the chariter 324–tale of apsra mati.
It will be worthwhile to share the porno teachings from this book.
The minister commenced the story in which a raja was engrosed in wild love.In the city of surat , there was a raja named surat sen, who was the embodiment of the cupid.
His wife Achra Devi was as if moulded out of moulten gold
Apsra mati was their daughter who was enticed by the humans, demons and the gods.
Surid sen was the son of a shah , tere was none other like him
The pricess fell in love with him and lost all her sensibilities.
She sent a clever maid , who brought him back disguised as a female.
when the youth met the youth, they heartily revelled in wild sex unthinkable.
They adopted a variety of positions and postures,and kissed each other licking their tongues dry
He was extremely indulged in her m he lost sense of going back.
He adorned the attire of a female but whatever the lady asked for he did for her in sex.
He would indulge in sex adopting many posses aand through many techniques, endowed her blis and sexual appetite.
The father had no perception of the reality and took him as his daughters companion
One day, in the presense of her father, she was imersed in wild love making.
She decalared him as a male,conducted swayamber and married him.
the story goes on to say how the raja and rani undressed him and discovered what the daughterhad told them in a poetic form!
So the Mahaan Guru Ji was sitting and writing such stories for Sikhs.
A daughter makes love in front of the father?
So guru Ji was writing Gurbani or such low leved stories?can the highly educated newly researched scholars tell us how does this teach the Sikhs?
trying to understand.
Only akal takht can give the final verdict and impose sanctions.
Frankly I disagree with mgc as they have contradicted themselves.
A few NOTES WORTH CONSIDERING abt the contents of this book.
1. A book written by George Forrester in 1783 states that the Sri Guru Granth is the only book admitted by the Sikhs into their places of worship and Sikhs are directed to address their prayers to One God instead of any intermediary diety.
2. In the Guru Granth Sahib the vowel ‘adhak’ is not used at all in the dasam granth it is used extensively. Meaning the book had been compiled at a time after the adhak vowel came into existence, in late 1875
3. Before the Singh Sabha movement reforms the Prakash of the so-called Dasam Granth occuured but the Singh Sabha movement put an end to this idolatry.
4.Sir John Malcolm (1769-1833)) came to Amritsar from Calcutta in 1805 with great difficulty he was able to procure a copy of The Adi Granth because the Sikhs jealously guarded it and did not let strangers to easily see it. Evidently a copy of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib was obtained from Nirmalas who had “deras” outside the Sri Harmandir Sahib but were not allowed inside the Golden Temple. The Nirmalas were trying to obtain control of the Harmandir Sahib. He observed that the Nirmalas were doing a parallel prakash of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib and a so-called dasam granth but this dual prakash did not occur inside the Golden Temple. These matters are recorded in his book Sketch Of The Sikhs. At the end of his Book Sir John Malcolm clearly states that the Nirmalas will introduces pollutant changes in the Sikh Faith. He also observes in his book that aside from the Adi Granth, the Sikhs DO NOT respect any other book.
5.In 1936 Giani Bhal Singh wrote a book Dasam Granth Milna — A Dasam Ganth found. (evidently the book warns that a dasam book will be created).
6.There is no connection in writing style and terminology between the Sri Guru Granth Sahib and the so-called dasam ganth. In the entire Sri Guru Granth Sahib the punctuation mark the adhak is not used at all, in the dasam granth this punction mark is used continuously.
7.In The Sri Guru Granth Sahib all shabads begin with the salutation, IK On Kaar Sat Gur Parsad, this convention is not followed in the dasam grant.
8. The dasam granth contains a lot of coarse and vile stories written in vulgar peasant-style language. here is an example from the Bhacchitar Natak in the so-called dasam granth – then Prabhu (God) sent Mohammad and made him King of the Arabs and he (Mohammad) started his own religion and he forced all the Arab Kings to be circumcised.
9.The word Nanak appears were infrequently in the so-called dasam granth, the words Kal, Shyam, Ganshyam, ram and buddh appear with great frequency. These are hindu dieties and intricately connected with the Hindu religion.
10. The names of mahants (priests), uuch mahants (high priests) and upmahant (lofty priest) appear in the dasam granth with equal or greater frequency to the word Nanak. The words mahant, uuch mahant and upmahant are used in the so-called dasam granth. This indicates that this book was crafted in deras. It is worth recalling that Sri Gobind Singh was going to consign mahants to the fire in Dehradun for the calumnies that they were heaping in his very own time on the Sri Guru Granth Sahib).
11.The Hindu poet Udho Kavi’s name appears in the tract (if this is a pen name – who was he?)
12.The so-called dasam granth was written in the nineteenth century by Nirmalas who were trained in the Hindu religious centers in Benares and Vrindhaban.
13.The Charityophakyhan portion of the dasam granth was presented by Tara Singh Kavi (poet) to the Maharajah Of Patiala as a gift.
14.English words have been used in the so-called dasam granth. An example is: the word near. The reason for this was that the priesthood in Hindu religious centers always learned the language of the Rulers in order to obtain service and employment in their regime. Thus when the Persians conquered India they learned Persian (Farsi). when the Sikhs conquered Northern India they learned Gurmukhi and when the English conquered India they endevoured to learn English in order to please their masters.
The story lustful of Laila Majnu is among the 404 chariters, is also narrated. All sexually explosive, that the blinded followers claim to caution the men from the women.If their logic is followed, the porno story books should be introduced in schools, so the children and men can learn about the “evility” of womenhood!
My respectful female sisters, please take a note of this.You are evil, that men cannot trust! But the men, like Bhen ji Ajit Kaur ji and kalwant kaur Ji have said are selfishly clean and pure without any vice? The women corrupt them? Do men need such stories to conduct lustful and immoral actions? Can you buy this rubbish alledgedly from Guru Gobind Singh ji – a near magnomious miraculously magnificent who created a near miracle from down trodden-then asking men to trod upon women?
This are simple observations,can made by simple reading.We can share more charitters.
Asia Samachar and MGC has done well to stand for panthic interests.
Thank you sir,I was about to do that.In fact there is one I have put on the facebook, where Guru Gobind Singh is said to the character visiting a prostitute.But it is always amazing, that these fellows do NOT wish to discuss the contents, except keep repeating it is Gurus writings.
I will share a few of these chariters and the definition of the Universe and God-from the dasam contradicts the Guru Granth sahib.
So effectually these fellows are saying Guru Gobind Singh ji went against the previous One jot 9 saroops of the Gurus?
Interesting, that they rat on about “new Evidence”..but they have NOT produced a single evidence.If the new evidence they are referring to is from the mentally deranged kamalroop, and the clean shaven Gurinder maan-this evidence is NOT new it was already known since 1903, and Piara Singh padam has this even in his book, published in 1965.
Amrjit Singh should share the new evidence from these “nice fellows” who are preaching what our enemies have been trying to do since the 1850s.
Indeed the enemy is within the compound.
I thought I will share some verses from Dasam Granth here.
The “Banee” name is Triya Chritar appears from page 809 till 1386 of Dasam Granth under the heading Patshahi 10. Triya Chritar means “stories about women.”
The “Banee” runs a total of 578 pages and it contains a total of 404 Chritars.
Here is Chritar number 160. It contains 15 paras in total and appears on page 1048 of Dasam Granth. The translation is taken from: Dr Rattan Singh Jaggi’s Teeka of Dasam Granth.
Paras 1 -5 of Chritar number 160 talk about A King named Balwant Singh who had 63 wives and he took turns to have sex with them. One day his most beautiful wife queen sent her servant named Krishen Klaa to request the king to come to her bed.
But Kirshen Klaa wanted to have sex with the King herself.
Paras 6 – 10 have the details of what Krishen Klaa did as she appeared before King Balwant Singh.
Sudh Bhule More Sbhey, Behe Bikel Bhayo Ang. Kaam Kel Mo So Karo Heh Heh Re Sarbang. 
She told the King: I have lost all my senses and my body is gone crazy. Tear all my limbs apart and have sex with me.”
Chaupai. Jub Rajey aisey Sun Payeo. Ta Key Bhog Het Lalchayeo.
When the King heard this. He wanted to have sex with her with intense desire.
Lipet Lipet Ta So Rat Karee. Chimat Chimat Asan Tan Dhree 
She clung to him hungrily and they had sex. She grabbed him in various positions.
Chimat Chimat Ta So Rat Mnee. Kama To Hove Triya Laptani
She clung to him and enjoyed sex. Filled with desire she grabbed him more.
Nrip Bar Chanuk Na Choreo Bhavey Geh Geh Tahe Gre So Lavey 
She did not want to leave the King even for a minute. She hugged him close to her chest.
Dohra. Bhant Bhant Asan Laye Chumban Kare Bnaye.
She had him in various positions and kissed him variously.
Chimat Chimat Bhogat Bhayeo ganna Ganee Na jaye.
She clung to him and had sex of which the description is not possible.
Khaye Bandejan Ke Bareye Nrip Bhang Chabaye Afeem Chhrayee.
After taking semen stopping pills, the King chewed bhang and got high on opium.
Peet Shraab Birajat Sundar Kaam Ke Reet So Preet Machayee.
They drank liquor and enjoyed sex even more while expressing their love.
Assan Aur Alingan Chumban Bhant Anek Leeay Sukhdayee.
She took various comfortable positions for sucking his penis.
Yoh Te Tor Kuchan Mror So bhor lagey Jhuk Jhor Bajayee. 
Twisting and squeezing her breasts, he banged her throughout the night.
Paras 11 – 14 talk about Krishen Klaa finally going back to the queen wife’s room the next morning to lie about what happened and why she did not bring the King the previous night. The conclusion is in para 15.
Sun Bach Ranee Chup Rahee Ja Key Roop Apaar.
After hearing it, the very beautiful queen remained quiet.
Chul Ko Chiddar Na Kich Lakheyo Em Chalgee Bar Naar  Page 1048 Dasam Granth.
She never figured out that she had been deceived.
Question 1: This is written by Guru Gobind Singh Ji?
Question 2: Amarjit Singh ji, does the “New Research” you mention show such stuff is Guru Gobind Singh’s banee?
Question 3: Would any sane Sikh believe the claim that “Chitro Pakhyaan” has been found in Guru Gobind Singh’s handwriting?
Question 4 (to Malin Singh and other supporters of Dasam Granth): Do you want to dare me to put up ALL 404 sexual Chritars here? And another 100 plus (worse even) from the other ‘banee” called Bachittar Natak?
Question 5 to Gursharan Singh ji: Will you recommend to the academy to have kirtan and katha of Chitro Pakhayn next because you “fail to see the cause of the dispute between banees in the SGGS and dasam granth.”
WAKE UP Sikhs. The Dasam Granth is a CRUEL joke on all of us by the sworn enemies of Sikhi. You have been taken for a HUGE RIDE. It is an EVEN MORE CRUEL attack on the character of our beloved Guru Gobind Singh.
WAKE UP MALAYSIAN SIKHS. The enemy of Sikhi has arrived at our door steps assisted by their local agents.
It suprises me reading some of the comments here.”nice fellows”we read these banis in gurdwaras, etc, clearly shows someone somewhere has been sleeping with eyes shut and allowed these sick actions to carry on.Also no body seems to be interested in the Panth descisions, but their own voices , despite the fact one of them, knows the in depth controversy over this planted book.Like a herd, they keep repeating the Guru wrote this book, when the reality is ONLY abt 92% of the content can be related to the Guru.
It appears clearly the sick GGSA has used to a video clip to mislead the sangat to get their agenda aboard.It has been working silently for a number of years to germinate the minds of the young and certain people, with wrong information without the realisation of the greater community , an agenda that is anti Sikh.
Now the bottom line here, GGSA is NOT the panth to over ride years of practice guided by the Panthic Led guidelines, nor the agents of provocateurs voicing for it, while it hides behind a wall;The MGC had a duty of care to alert and challenge this evil actions of these “nice fellows”with an agenda.The MGC can be applauded, for defending the interests of the panth.
The final decision here lies with the Akal Takhat who should be investigating this academy and its so called SIKHI credentials -not with tom dick and harry minons.
The SGGS Academy should stop misleading the sangat and change it’s name to dasam grunt Academy- if indded it has the guts to stand for the truth panthic Unity.
For women, like me, I would suggest strongly you read this book and you will decide how it demeans the women as evil, manipulative, a sex symbol…an argument the followers say, it is to advice men to be careful…are these people really claiming that men are pure and not manipulative liars?That they need such stories to save them from women.Are women then seen as evil by the Guru?
Quite the contrary, it encourages the men to commit abuse against us women. It justifies that the men to conduct immorally, is this what the Guru would be teaching the Sikhs?
The Holy SGGS is 1430 pages and yet most Ragis-Kirtaniaas-Granthis-Missionanries-Kathakar generally talk and explain with examples only a few of the Shabads/Banis contained in the Holy SGGS. Almost 90% of the Shabads in the Holy SGGS are almost totaly neglected by all and the possible reason given by the late Maskeen Ji was that very few of the Ragis-Kirtaniaas-Granthis-Missionanries-Kathakar even understand the whole of SGGS.
As the Dasam Granth Ji is by/of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and this is not disputed by anyone then why all the fuss on having a seminar on the Dasam Granth which will only make the Sanggat more aware of the writing by/of the Tenth Guru Ji and hopefully understand it? The Dasam Granth Ji may be considered as a Supplement to the Holy SGGS and the two should not be pitted against each other.
Let some individuals not be fanatical as fanaticism only destroys the unity.
As it is there are so many factions such as Naamdharis, Ravidasis and several others let one more not be created as the many factions have already divided the Sanggat.
Our KL Gurdwaras are already divided with memberships/management being restricted along specific lines such as Jat-Malwaia-Arrorras-Majha-etc for sectional interest. When Pandit Manggal Singh visited KL some years ago he was not allowed to stay at a particular Gurdwara and he said that he came to the Gurdwara which is the House of Guru Nanak and thus do not need to give any prior notice. The then Granthi had no answer. When told that the Gurdwaras in KL were based on castes he asked which is GURU NANAK’S GURDWARA and for this no one had any answer.
I fail to see the cause of the dispute between the Banis in SGGS and the dASAM GRANTH except some personal interests.
WHO SAID RELIGION IS PEACEFUL MAY NOT HAVE KNOWN ITS TRUE MEANING AS TO-DAY THERE APPEARS TO BE DISPUTES IN ALMOST ALL RELIGIONS AROUND THE WORLD WITH VIOLENCE BEING COMMON IN SOME CASES AND ON-GOING FOR DECADES. THIS DISPUTE APPEARS TO GIVE CREDENCE TO THIS VIEW.
If one reads, it is very easy to understand how he three stand alone banias were added.it is obvious people do not read widely but rattling on their own irrelevent personal views.
It is NOT Asia samachars duty to go after these so called not so” nice “fellows to seek their view.They should come with their view, obviously it looks like they have ben caught lying and also misusing the video to lie.
There is no new evidence, a mon gurinder sinh and a semi mentally dranged kamalroop hav of late been paid to do this dirty job to push this so called new evidence, which was already published as long as 1920 and 1979 in books.
they have said Ram Raheem is a very nice fellow.bin laden was a nice fellow.I know badal is a VERY nice fellow, as he stays with a family in Singapore and I have met him.
by he way what is so nice about fellows undermining the Sikh kaum with literature that is not the Gurus?May be someone should share some of these literature here especially charitropkahyan.
This is an evility planted and fools wh hav enever read it are suddenly academcians.
it is book that belittles women as sex symbols.
Little knowledge is very dangerous. THE issues are not abt how lovely these fellows are.Even Ram Rsherm is said to be Lovely. .so was Bin Laden.
It is abt protocol agreed and instructed by the Panth. OBVIOUSLY the kaum has been sleeping while this people have been planting infection under the very noses.
I find this book dehumanised women and among others emphasises upon hindu gods and is CONTRARY to GURU Granth sahib.
It is amazing how without providing the so called “NEW EVIDENCE”..someone makes claims to “protect” the nice fellows who have just brain washed him.
This matter should b taken to Akal Takhat. ..these devious actions of these fellows and the numerous fellows trying to support this should and can ask the Akal Takhat to explain. .what they do not understand is anti Sikh actions.These nook is not written by Guru ji.and instead of ratting “new evidence” share it here.
Cannot even understand the 5 baniyas properly n now talk about Dasam Grant. Getting a rejected Jathedar to endorse the programme, which he only restricted to nitnem, is misleading the public at large that he supports this whole programme. Hundreds if not thousands of semagams Hv been held in Msia n ironically this is the first such programme being sanctioned by a rejected Jathedar. What’s the motive, pls enlighten us!!
There are many other important issues MGC and Akaal Takhat should be addressing about the Sikh community. They should not be firing ’empty bullets’ at a lovely group of Gursikhs whom in my opinion are are doing a GREAT GREAT service (for FREE) to educate and unite the Sikh community is Malaysia and other parts of the world.
I personally have had the pleasure to attend a few classes on Dasam Granth in SGGS Academy at Wisma Tatt Khalsa. After witnessing the many children and families who are involved in their learning classes, I must ask MGC what have you done to date?
As far as the Akaal Ustat bani is concerned, did you even know NEW EVIDENCE has surfaced about the authenticity of it and scholars have verified a hand written bir of Charitro Pakhyian which was personally hand written by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself? Please editors and MGC, do your fact finding first then slam any quarters.
From the way I look at it, after reading the article above, I think MGC and this news piece has the ‘potential of splitting the Sanggat and causing disunity’.
May I suggest to the editor to meet with SGGS Academy organizing committee and scholars to verify their findings and understand the other side of the story as well. A coin has 2 sides am i right?
For those who still feel Dasam Granth banis are not to be recited or sang in kirtan style, then perhaps they should also stop reciting Sri Jaap Sahib, Tav Parsaad Swaiyeay and Chaupai Sahib banis because these banis are from Dasam Granth. The same Dasam Granth which has Akaal Ustat bani, Charitro Pakhyiaan, Bachitar Natak which undisputedly after the recent findings, they have found enough proof to say it is authentic and were written by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself.
Please attend the Akaal Ustat program this weekend and see the evidence for yourself. Thank you ji!
In 1903, three stand alone writings of Guru Gobind Singh ji were added to the dasam, when the Sodhak Committee 1895 standardised the dubious book from 33 different versions.The sant smajis then took control of the 33 books and destroyed so that no reference could be made to verify anything about those books.
A couple of copies of this book are found in a village near Saharanpur, research tells us,and it is clearly stated Ram and Shaym are poets who write.Further evidence comes from the Markandiye, Shiv Puran and Sri Vismad puran, which are vedic litertaure books written many years before even Guru Nanak ji.Stories from these books word for word are found in the DG.
It must be remembered that the snatan sant samaj was strong in those days.Questions do arise now how these got added.These originally were NOT part of the DG.
Currently, as the PANTH has made the decision, we have to stand by it, as much as the decision made over the DG-that it is not entirely the writing of the Guru ,bar the three added writings and some swaiye.
The kaum was instructed never to discuss this issue, but allowed to read as additional matter.No Gurduaras keep any copy of this book, apart from Nander and Patna, where one part of this book was written by Sukha Singh and his son.For those who may not be aware, this book is read at these two places, but when the charitropakhyan parts [60%]are reached the reading is done silently.If indeed these are the writings of the Guru , why is this silenced?
The Panth through central body-SINGH SABHA LAHORE & AMRITSAR has issued a no debate or discussion on this dubious book. The decision by the Panth was taken as early as 1903 following the 1895 sodhak comittee report.It was re-iterated in 1925 by the Sikh Gurduara Board,that later emerged as SGPC .The order was issued through the Akal Takhat by Jathedar Udham Singh Nagoke.
The subsequent Central maryada makes it very clear ONLY Gurbani can be recited with Sikh Gurduaras.Having said that ocassionally the writings of Guru Gobind Singh ji are also sung,mainly by taksalis and snat smaj parcharaks… have the parbandhaks been closing an eye to these all these years, as they themselves did not know?Allowed a contradictory message to develop, inadvertently?
Hence no Gurduara stores this book.HOWEVER some dubious and nefarious groups have since 1999 been pushing this book to be sat next to the Guru Granth Sahib in some gurduaras…esspecially sant smajis and Taksali gurduaras…going against the direction given.These people have been pushing this dubious book,while majority of sangat has been watching quite shocked.
Now Sikhs groups are questioning what is their motive to sit a dubious book next to the Guru Granth Sahib.
Since this issue was highlighted,I have been wandering what is the motive of an organisation called GURU GRANTH ACADEMY to be running sessions on akal ustat ..a writing that is not part of the Gurbani in Guru Granth Sahib.
As it stands the Panth decided it may be a writing by the Guru ji..but not Gurbani.. as it is not within the declared Guru Granth Sahib .
So why ,what ,was the motive of Guru Granth Academy to create this and confuse the sangat?It appears it has also used a misleading video clip from Akal Takhat to get credence for their action.Why mislead the sangat?This is a very clear attempt to create confucion and mislead sangats over the dubious book.
I have observed there are a number of what may be termed as half baked followers of these groups who do not have sufficient knowledge or understanding , who are trying to force acepptance of this book.
One simpleton even went as far to say MGC is not the Panth, But then neither is the GGSA.but there is factual panthic history from which we can draw our pathway.
MGC has taken necessary action, and must be supported to keep the sanctity of the Sikh Code of Conduct intact.The Akal Takhat has been alerted.We an expect a response.
These synthetic Sikh academy is using this stepping stone in the next step to then claim that this book can be set next to Guru Granth sahib, and Sikhs are broken off from Guru Granth sahib.
“Dasam Granth” was non-existent during the time of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. At the time Aad Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was given the Eternal Gurgeddi, there was no such granth as “Dasam Granth”. “Dasam Granth” (known by many other names) is in fact a compilation of several books of literary works of different authors, including some valuable bani of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, author of the Mahan Kosh, has shed some light on this. He mentions the circumstances and the approach that was adopted to decide whether or not to combine the books into a single volume. (do check it out under the key word “Dasam Granth”) Sikh scholars of today should make a genuine collective effort to separate the authentic bani of the Guru from that which is obviously not, and dismantle the form of ‘Granth’ that it has taken today, into separate books that they formerly were.
Bhul chuk maaf karni ji.
Shame on revisionists who do not believe in guru gobind Singh’s bani. They should read Sikh rehat maryada carefully. It says bani of ten gurus. That means bani of sggs and dasam Granth.
Shame on you akhoti leaders of MGC. Don’t forget JAAP SAHIB, CHAUMPI SAHIB, AMRIT SAWEYE AND ARDAAS is Guru Gobind Singh bani which seems like you all no longer practice because you refuse to accept.
Question to Asia Samachar is Reciting 5Bania Rehraas Sahib and Amrit Sanchaar is Wrong too?? Write on this if you dare enough.
I agree with MGC .
It is a crying shame that an organisation that calls itself SRI GURU GRANTH SAHIB Academy is hell bent on promoting this fake dasam granth which is littered with stuff that degrades Sikhi, disrespects our Gurus and puts down women as sex objects.
Academy, please stop this nonsense. Or change your name to dasam granth academy. You can install it at your head quarters and bow to it. You have lost all your credibility.
Titiwangsa comittee, please come out of hiding. Wake up and don’t let your gurdwara to be made use of by people with an agenda.
The sangat of titiwangsa – you will go down history as the place where all the ugliness started. Please speak up now.
All other Sikhs – please stand up to defend the honor of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Our only Guru. Guru Arjun Ji gave his life for Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. And SGGS was appointed as Guru by Guru Gobind Singh Ji.
There is no need for any other granth. Guru Gobind Singh himself said that when he gave his hukam “Sabh Sikhan Ko Hukam Hai Guru Manio Granth.
Would be interesting to know how well versed and knowledgable are those supporting or opposing this programme? Personally I know nothing about DASAM GRANTH but have seen o youtube different views.