Vedanti Invites Patna Sahib Jathedar For Meeting

[me moorakh mugadh]

Amritsar, June 29

In a significant development, Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti, Jathedar, Akal Takht, has asked Giani Iqbal Singh, Jathedar, Patna Sahib, to attend the crucial meeting of Sikh clergy, scheduled to be held at the Akal Takht Secretariat here on July 10. The meeting would discuss the issue of Mr Mohinder Singh Romana, president, Takht Patna Sahib, who was declared “tankhaiya” for using derogatory language against the Sikh high priests at Chicago.

Interestingly, jathedars of Patna Sahib and Hazoor Sahib are not called to attend the routine meetings of Akal Takht.

However, it is learnt that Jathedar Iqbal Singh is likely to abstain from the proposed meeting as he has already convened a meeting of the Sikh clergy at Patna Sahib tomorrow to discuss the issue. Giani Iqbal Singh had already declared that he won’t let the case of Mr Romana be transferred to Akal Takht on the pretext that Sikh high priests of Patna Sahib were competent to declare any Sikh as “tankhaiya”. However, Jathedar Vedanti and Mr Romana had stated that Akal Takht had the sole right to take such action as per the Sikh traditions. Mr Romana had also represented to Jathedar Vedanti that he was ready to appear before the Akal Takht and not before the Sikh clergy of Patna Sahib.

Akal Takht has already sought the advice of the religious advisory body to sort out the matter.

It is pertinent to mention here that Jathedar Vedanti and Giani Tarlochan Singh, acting Jathedar, Takht Keshgarh Sahib, were also present in the religious function at Chicago when Mr Romana had used some “derogatory” words against the jathedars. Jathedar Vedanti has also got the recording of the speech of Mr Romana

and found he (Mr Romana), in his speech, had also criticised the SGPC for not propagating Sikhism in a proper way, which had resulted in the spread of drugs among Sikhs.

Mr Romana had also stated that ‘Dasam Granth’ (the bani of Dasam Granth Sahib is recited at Patna Sahib and Hazoor Sahib every day) could not be equated with the holy Guru Granth Sahib. The Jathedar of Hazoor Sahib has already supported the decision of Takht Patna Sahib for declaring Mr Romana as “tankhaiya”.

link---http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030630/punjab1.htm

[GABROO KHALISTAN DAH]

the rifts created, why can't sikh just = sikh

[Deep Singh]

I think ALL Takhts should be together when a person is going to be declared a tankhaiya.........it is not so hard is it? it would be better cause like than a person would not say 'i am not a tan..' because Akal Takht or Patna Sahib has not declared that...!?!?

however on certain issues the opinions of Akal Takht and Hazoor Sahib and Patna Sahib are different, like on Dasam Granth, perhaps they have different Rehits......some say Akal Takht goes the "Tat Khalsa" way......Hazoor Sahib & Patna Sahib go the Nihang Way......

i am not sure about the traditions at Damdama Sahib and Kesgrah Sahib.....the Jathedar of Damdama Sahib is some how moderate.....maybe they follow the modern Singh Sabha way......mainly Kesgarh Sahib and Damdama Sahib and Akal Takht are together, and the dakhni Takhts are not contacted (?)..... B)

[me moorakh mugadh]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

can someone enlighten i have heard that first there use to be be four takht damdama sahib was added later on or is it am wrong :D

[Deep Singh]

Sat Sri Akal Jee...

Yes you are right Veerjee.....Sri Damdama Sahib was officially declared a Takht in the 60's....it is one of the amendments made to our Panthic Rehat Maryada....saying 'There are 5 Takhts of the Sikhs', probably also made in the Ardas.

All the other 4 Takhts were declared by Gurus......Akal Takht by Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib and the rest by Sri Guru Gobind Singh. The reason why Damdams Sahib was declared is because here Guru Gobind Singh Jee completed the Sikh Scripture....Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee....later on the place became a 'teological / religious' centre....

Maybe u have heard of a Sikh scholar, Sirdar Kapur Singh....he was against making of a 5th Takht....here are his views from the book Parasaraprasna....:

<<<<<<<<

The following is written between pp. 281 – 284 in the book “Parasaraprasna – The Baisakhi of Guru Gobind Singh”. Between pp. 276 – 287, Sirdar Kapur Singh writes an article about Ardas – the Sikh Congregational Prayer.

Actually, this is a long note on the word “Think of the Five High Seats of Sikh Authority11…” – pMjW qKqW11, srbq gurdAwirAW dw iDAwn Dr bolo jI vwihgrU !..from the Ardas

Sirdar Kapur Singh on the Takhts:

@ 1959

Note p. 281

11. There are and legitimately remain only four High Seats of Sikh Authority, the takhts and a recent innovation of a fifth takht set up by ignorant heresiarchs and new controllers of the official Board of Management of the Sikh Historical Shrines (SGPC [shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee]) is altogether repugnant to and unwarranted by the true Sikh doctrine or the metaphysical postulates and mythological traditions

of our ancestors, the Hindus.

Takht is a Persian word signifying ‘the Imperial throne,’ a concept of total and all-pervasive focus of worldly temporal power such as was supposed to inhere in the shahinshah, the emperor, of the Achaemenian throne. Ex-hypothesi, there cannot be more than one takht in the empire and indeed, in the entire world, for, a true and logically whole empire must tend to acquire a total ecumenical sway and the doctrine of co-existence of more than one takht, which is a true takht, is a self-stultification. But since the Sikh doctrine of Double Sovereignty, miri piri, envisages a sway over the minds and souls of mankind, the entire world and does not contemplate a coercive bondage of the bodies of men as the imperial throne does, it validates and promulgates a plurality of takht, coexistent, coeval and complementary.

The concept of these takhts, thrones of Double Sovereignty, originates from a Hindu tradition of religious dominion which is grounded in metaphysical postulates of ancient acceptance.

Dominion of religion in the world of phenomena is bound up with the concept of ‘space’ and the Hindu ‘space’ is a flat four-directional extension, innocent of Einsteinian curvature of depth impregnated into it by the progression of ‘Time’. This Hindu ‘pure space’ is conceptual sankalpabhu …

(p. 282)

… independent of the progression of ‘Time’ as both are viewed as distinct categories of mind imposed upon the sensibilia, a metaphysical insight formulated at least two thousand years earlier than Immanual Kent, “Verily the Space arise out of the Mind” is an Upanishadic formulation: etasmad atama akas smmbhutah., says the Taittreyopanishad (II, I). This ‘space’ is four-directional, east, west, north, south. I t is this ‘space’ in which is encompassed the entire phenomenal world samsara, the reality that is appearances and the religion as it impinges upon the minds of men while it is permanently there in the souls of all men-flourishes in relation to this ‘space’. The spread a

nd sway of religion in this world, therefore, must be comprehended and as four-directional.

Again, numbers’ occupy a prominent place in Hindu occultism and the concept of ‘numbers’ permeates a great deal many branches of Hindu speculation. Infinities are of particular fascination, circumscribed in cyclic concepts of Time and cosmic Ages of the universe. The branch of knowledge, Numerology, ganati is conceived as a branch of Ontology, and the numeral ‘I’, as the first signature and word in the Sikh Scripture is grounded in this modality of Hindu metaphysical thought.

According to this Hindu Numerology, while the symbol ‘zero’, (shunya) being the absence of all, comprises all things, the number, ‘one’ is the number of Divinity, of the fundamental symbol, lingam, of the Sun, signifying brightness, light, unity, wisdom. Number ‘four’ in this system of thought is the perfect number, as it represents all four directions of the space Satapathabrahmana tells us that, ‘ as the cow requires four feet, so the yajna, sacrifice must have four Vedas and four officiants’. Commenting on the description of the ‘mind-stuff’ in the Upanishads as Chaturpada, Sankara, explains, “like the four feet of a cow.”

These concepts about the nature of the ‘space’ and numerological significations are then linked-up with the spread and sway of religion in the world in the Hindu tradition and history, and that explains why whenever a Hindu sect or denomination of religion has laid claim to ecumenical status, it has set up or recognized four chief or primary places of its reverential focii. In the Guru Granth it is to this mode of understanding of the matter that a reference exists to the omnipotent comnipresence of God: chatur disa kino balu apna GGS, p. 681 and it is according to this mode of thought that in the ancient Vedic tradition four rajatirathas, royal centres of holiness, were recognised, such as Pushararaj, Prayagaraj, Kasiraj to each of which one of the cardinal directions, E.W. N. or S. was assigned. Likewise, in B

rahmanism, chaturdham, four residences of the gods, Jaganath (E), Dwarikavati (W), Badrinath and Ramesvaram (S) are recognised. Sankaracharya established chaturmatha, four abbeys, to represent is true interpretation of the Vedas, Vedanta, such as Jaganmatha (E) Dwarikamatha (W) Badrimatha and Sringerimatha (S).

(p. 283)

Of Vaisnavite Hinduism, there are recognised chaturpuri, the four holy towns beloved of the God, Jagannath Puri, DwarikaPuri anf so on. Gautam, the Buddha, before his mahaparinirvana, the great demise, specified four places, that of his birth, his enlightenment, his first sermon and his demise as the places worthy of homage for the Buddhists, Lumbanivan, Gaya, Sarnath and Kushinar, representing four directions of the Hindu ‘space’, and more signifying ecumenical claim.

It was to this ancestory of religious ecumenical claim that Guru Har Gobind, the founder of the first Sikh takht accorded recognition when he established in concurrence with Baba Sri Chand, the elder son of Guru Nanak and the founder of the Udasi sect of Sikh monks, four Ascesis-fires, dhuans, under the supreme pontiff ship of his own son, Baba Gurditta, with a view to preach Sikhism as a World Religion. Baba Gurditta is acclaimed by the Udasis as ‘the Seal of the Glory of the this world and the next’, din duni di tikki, that clearly adumbrates the true status and functions of the Sikh takhts.

Again, there are recognised two categories of holy places in our Hindu tradition, sthapt, established or appointed and svayambhu, over-there, self-existent. A centre of holiness may be set up or created by historical accident, association or appropriate ceremonies, or it may be there since the beginning of creation in the unseen world, but may be discovered through a sign, accident, or authoritative pointing out. There are temples of Visnu and Shiva of hoary antiquity that were so discovered through a royal dream or yogic flash and then magnificent buildings and idols were set up there and there are temples that were def

initely ‘established’ at a contingent point of time, before which established they were not.

It is this context that the significance and validity of chartakht, the Five [actually S. Kapur Singh might have meant/written ‘Four’, as it is clear from Punjabi char-takht, four takhts, it is tough a misprint and written ‘Five’ in my book] High seats of Sikh Authority, must be appreciated. These takhts do not originate and are not validated by historical occurrences, though they may be accidentally associated with the birth or sojourn of a Sikh Guru or it may be the case, that as Akaltakht, it was ‘build-up’ and signified by a Sikh Guru. These takhts essentially are and remain svayambhu, ever-there, and nobody or no contingent occurrence has created them.

There cannot be more then four takhts because ‘4’ is a perfect number, ecumenical in signification and grounded in the ancient metaphysical postulates of our race, while number, ‘5’ is not a perfect number, and it is not a significator of ‘space’ or territory while a takht must be such a significator. ‘5’ reduces much diversity to meaningful measure and hence signifies men and things, panchajanya panchatattva, panchagavya etc. and ‘panj-takht’ is a silly and unwarranted concept.

Nor the word, “takht” inscribed on some seal used by keepers of a historical Sikh shrine, such as occurs in the seal preserved at Damdameh Sahib in Punjab, can make the place a takht a ‘High seat of Sikh Authority’ of the…

(p. 284)

…category to which the traditional four takhts belong. In this seal the world, “takht” occurs in its dictionary meaning, in the sense that a royal personage, technically a Sikh Guru, rested, sat or held audience here. Indeed, the inscription on this particular seal itself makes the matter quite clear, which it says that it is the seal pertaining to “takht, Jagah Guru Gobind Singh Ji,” that is the throne-locus of the place where Guru Gobind Singh stayed’. On the basis of such a citation to declare the holy Sikh Shrine; Damdameh Sahib as the fift

h High seat of Sikh Authority is simply absurd. Bhai Kahan Singh also in his Mahankosh, the Encyclopaedia of Sikh Literature, gives precisely these as the true meaning of the word “Takht” as it occurs in Sikh writings and he is categorical that there are only four valid Sikh takhts (p. 1386). At Kirtarpur, there is a historical Sikh shrine known as Takht Sahib but it has never been deemed or claimed as one of the High Seats of Sikh Authority.

Damdameh Sahib now is in the Bathinda District of Punjab, as a holy and important Sikh shrine of great historical importance and sanctity, but it is not the fifth takht, in the meaning of a High seat of Sikh Authority, and there is no human authority now or ever, which can create new takhts valid in and acceptable to the Sikh doctrine.

<<<<<<<<<<

..............

My comments:

Sirdar Kapur Singh taking historic proof in action claims that there are only Four Takhts. That can be acceptable. But saying that number ‘5’ is not a perfect number, is not right. We know that we have got five symbols or kakars; kach, kara, kirpan, kangha, kesh, and Guru Gobind Singh baptised panj-piare. Well, S. K. Singh does point out that five is a number regarding human beings, and both panj-piare and panj-kakar are human associations. So this is really a matter to discuss.

Deep Singh, Oslo @ 2002-07-21

....................

However the Nihangs still say that THERE ARE FOUR TAKHTS PLUSS THE FIFTH TAKHT THEMSELVES!! this is what you can read from their site.....

Takhat Sri Budha Dal: Budha Dal is said to be the "Ladlian Faujan" of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Originally, Budhadal is said to be the 5th and the final takhat. However, as mentioned earlier that SGPC is now the governing body and all the major religious properties are under their control. They are forcefully changing the history once again, by alleging that Dam Dama Sahib is the fifth takhat. Which is historically NOT TRUE. This is jus

t another thorn in the history of brave Nihangs.

http://www.budhadal.com/hisofbudhadal.htm

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[Deep Singh]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Here is an update....

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030702/.../punjab1.htm#10

Priests can’t sack me: Romana

Our Correspondent

Faridkot, July 1

Mr Mohinder Singh Romana, president of the management committee of Takht Patna Sahib, who is also a member of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, has rejected yesterday’s decision of the five priests of the Takht to sack him, which was reported in a section of the Press today.

The five priests — Giani Gurinder Singh (Head Granthi), Giani Baldev Singh (Senior Vice-Granthi), Giani Dalip Singh and Giani Nihal Singh (both Granthis) and the Takht head, Giani Iqbal Singh had said yesterday that Mr Romana, declared ‘tankhaiya’ on May 20 for using derogatory remarks against the Jathedar and Dasham Granth during the three-day function on the eve of celebrations of 400 years of Gur Gaddi at Chicago, had failed to clarify his position by the June 30 deadline. Mr Romana said the priests had no power to sack him and only Akal Takht could give such a decision.

“The priests have not only misused their powers but also violated the Sikh maryada. Under the 1953 Act of the constitution of Takht Patna Sahib, even a no-confidence motion against a president, senior vice-president, vice-president or general secretary of the management cannot be brought after the expiry of two-years-and-a-half of the management term. Even Mr Gurcharan Singh Tohra, Sant Harchand Singh Longowal and a former President, Giani Zail Singh, had rejected the decision of the priests of Takht Hazur Sahib w

ho had misused their powers to excommunicate the leaders in 1984,” said Mr Romana.

Mr Romana said he had said at the function that, in the presence of Guru Granth Sahib, the recitation of Dasham Granth was against the Sikh Maryada, as said by Guru Gobind Singh. Even the Supreme Court had, last year, described Guru Grandth Sahib as the juristic person for the Sikh nation. On this occasion, Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti, Jathedar Akal Takht; Giani Rajinder Singh, Head Granthi of Gurdwara Sis Ganj in New Delhi; Mr Harbhajan Singh Walia of the Delhi Gurdwara Management Committee, Jathedar Kesgarh Sahib and many other senior Sikh leaders had been present. He said he would accept any punishment given by Akal Takht and had already written to Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti to give his side of the story. The Jathedar had told him to appear before Akal Takht on July 10. He said the priests had acted at the behest of some politicians and he would soon file a defamation suit against all of them.

Yesterday, the Takht head, Giani Iqbal Singh, talking to our Amritsar reporter from Patna Sahib, had clarified that the clergy had not excommunicated Mr Romana, a confidant of Mr Parkash Singh Badal, from the Sikh Panth.

Giani Iqbal Singh said he would not attend the meeting of Akal Takht as the “chapter of Mr Romana” was closed.