Proof that Sri Chand handed over his sect to Guru Hargobind Sahib Jee!

[Akalifauj]

On 24/02/2017 at 9:33 PM, Sukhvirk76 said:

Now as I have qualified my assertion can you please qualify yours.. what evidence do you have that he didn't accept guru Angad Dev ji? 

Proof is when a person provides an authentic source to what you are claiming is true.  You have not done so.  

[jkvlondon]

13 hours ago, Koi said:

 

Ok so quoting Gobind Sadan pakandi guru who also happened to be Yogi Harbhajan's guru (not Guru Sahiban) is supposed to be some sort of proof ??? They are paid interference agents

[Koi]

8 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Ok so quoting Gobind Sadan pakandi guru who also happened to be Yogi Harbhajan's guru (not Guru Sahiban) is supposed to be some sort of proof ??? They are paid interference agents

Regardless of who sung this, this aartaa was written by Baba Sri Chand Ji Maharaj as a worship of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj.

[jkvlondon]

Just now, Koi said:

Regardless of who sung this, this aartaa was written by Baba Sri Chand Ji Maharaj as a worship of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj.

Bro 

1. not disputing it is written in praise of Guru Nanak Dev ji but it  is NOT gurbani so irrelevant to sikhs in terms of praying

2. The image given of Sri Chand is WRONG as we have proven in the other thread about Guru Sahiban depictions as there is the photo of seli topi of Sri Chand ji given to Baba Gurditta ji and now with descendents of Bibi Rup Kaur ji . He was not an ash wearing dhoti wale with jattan. He carried on the Bedi tradition of wearing seli topi so we can make an educated guess that he was keeping his kesh clean and tangle free as most udasi of sampardya are like now , wearing long robes of saffron colour.

This current fashion of depicting him as ash-smeared yogi is to sell yoga in sikhi nothing more or less.

 

[Kira]

10 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

i suggested the presence of the brahmbota akhara within the precient of the Sri Harmandir sahib suggests there was a closer connection than we may like to recognise. In addition the fact Baba Gurditta took over the Udasi Sampadra suggests a connection. I don't understand your hostitlity. 

Bro, Gurbani calls Baba Sri Chand Ji evil hearted for turning his back to Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Did you even bother to read my response? The Brahmbota you're talking about came in much later, far after the departure of Guru Gobind Singh Ji in his physical form, it was put up by humans not Guru Sahib himself. That's like me putting up a Quran on shelf in Harmandir Sahib and saying there's a link between Islam and Sikhism now. That Akhara came hundred of years after Guru Sahib, so that presented as evidence is completely invalid. 

 

As for Baba Gurditta Ji, you need to read the Sakhi properly. Guru Hargobind Ji met Baba Sri Chand and said that since he is of the blood linege of Guru Nanak Guru Sahib would give him anything he wanted. Baba Sri Chand Ji asked for Baba Gurditta and so Guru Hargobind Ji obliged. This isn't even a one off encounter, it happened again in Guru Gobind Singh Ji's time (this is in the Sau Sakhi) where one of Guru Sahib's Sikhs was reborn into a woman's family and he started a new sect or something along those lines. (will search this up as I read it ages ago.) 

For all we know there may have been an old Debt being settled or simply it was Guru Sahib's unimaginable generosity. 

[Koi]

23 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Bro 

1. not disputing it is written in praise of Guru Nanak Dev ji but it  is NOT gurbani so irrelevant to sikhs in terms of praying

2. The image given of Sri Chand is WRONG as we have proven in the other thread about Guru Sahiban depictions as there is the photo of seli topi of Sri Chand ji given to Baba Gurditta ji and now with descendents of Bibi Rup Kaur ji . He was not an ash wearing dhoti wale with jattan. He carried on the Bedi tradition of wearing seli topi so we can make an educated guess that he was keeping his kesh clean and tangle free as most udasi of sampardya are like now , wearing long robes of saffron colour.

This current fashion of depicting him as ash-smeared yogi is to sell yoga in sikhi nothing more or less.

 

1. It is the ustat of our Adi/Jagat Guru, making it completely relevant to Sikhs even though it is not Gurbani *shock*.

2. His appearance, whether jattadhari or not, is irrelevant to his immense importance to Sikhi.

Dhan Dhan Baba Sri Chand Ji Maharaj

[jkvlondon]

Just now, Koi said:

1. It is the ustat of our Adi/Jagat Guru, making it completely relevant to Sikhs even though it is not Gurbani *shock*.

2. His appearance, whether jattadhari or not, is irrelevant to his immense importance to Sikhi.

Dhan Dhan Baba Sri Chand Ji Maharaj

1. I didn't mean ustat is bad , just it is NOT Gurbani so should not be be given similar darja to Gurbani which some may do and thus create the effect of validating praising of Sri Chand beyond what should be .

2. Please realise that the Udasis are now actually undermining their ancestors work because they have fallen into hindumat  again from their original mandated sewa by Guru Sahiban by creating arguments to back up of the hinduising of the panth as illustrated by the sri chand idol worshippers ... My point is distorting history and images is the starting point where is the end ? Everyone praying to statues of the Gurus and Srichand and sitting in yoga poses and using mudras because GURBANI IS NOT ENOUGH?

[Kira]

11 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

I'm sorry but I'm not sure your entirely correct. .the presence of Sri chand is recognised as being there since guru arjun dev ji time. .the building housing the akhara itself may well have come later. .and bani doesn't mention Sri chand explicitly nor does the translation say evil hearted

No you s to look the history of the Akhara, it was put up in the 1800s. There was never one there before that during Guru Sahib time. The akhara was put up not for Baba Sri Chand but someone else completely, Sri Chand was always an acetic, something Sikhism discouraged. Using it as an argument that that it was put up by Guru Sahib is foolish, further more the Gurbani calls them Dhil Khottai  

 

 

That translates roughly to vile hearted, evil hearted etc. Read ang 967, it clearly refers to the sons of Nanak. So please tell me who were the sons of Nanak? Evidence Is against you, Gurbani is against you bro, at you saying you know more than Guru Gran Sahib Ji?

 

Im my sure you quite understood my post so I'll reclarify. The Akhara you're talking about was put it was in the 1800s, it never existed before that in the time of the Original construction of Harmandir Sahib. Further more the person who oversaw the construction of Harmandir Sahib was Baba Buddha and not Baba Sri Chand, that's just plain false. You're trying to heighten his importance in Sikhism.  Further more the Akhara you keep talking about it was put up by Pritam Das Ji, Not Baba Sri Chand and definitely not any of the Guru Sahib, that's another fact you've drawn out of thin air. So all your attempts to inflate Baba Sri Chands importance are are based on false assumptions and facts. I strongly urge you to read the Gurbani before trying to place him on the same Platform as Satguru Nanak

 

[Kira]

1 hour ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

I didn't say it was put up by guru Sahib where did you even read that.  Your anger clouds any critical thinking you can apply. I definitely didn't write it was put up by guru sahib nor did I imply it was some parallel temple. 

Its easy being a armchair historian being fed a narrative and becoming a champion bigot.. not qualities that should ever be associated with Sikhi. . 

Bro, you're the one saying that someone putting up that Akhara proved that there's a deep connection between Baba Sri Chand and Guru Sahib, I presented evidence which countered that. Nowhere in my post am I angry nor have I done anything OTHER than critical thinking, really it isn't my issue if in this post alone all you've done is attack me and not counter a single point I made. I did my own research into this as I was genuinely intrigued. If you're a historian then please, put up your degree here with all the facts you've gathered about your assertions, with evidence from sources with proper referencing, put up stuff from Gurbani too which shows us that Guru Sahib respected Baba Sri Chand and his way of life. Gurbani called them Khotta Dhil, you can take that to mean anything you want but the bottom line is our opinions are worth less than nothing compared to Guru Sahib. 

 

Just because you want something to be true doesn't mean that it is true. There's a fine line between respecting someone and completely bowing to them. Guru Arjun Dev Ji had a respect for Mian Mir Ji however they never advocated any of his teachings. Baba Sri Chand stuck to an acetic way of life till his death. Guru Nanak Dev Ji and all the Guru Sahibs were staunchly against that, so you tell me how that looks in terms of if he thought Guru Nanak Dev Ji was Akaal roop or not.

[Kira]

4 hours ago, Sukhvirk76 said:

you seem to be conflating the issues.

the site of the present day akhara is located on the site that baba sri hand stayed on invitiation of guru arjun dev ji during the construction of Har Mandir Sahib. A Akhara and physical building may well have been built in the 1800s. Baba Gurditta Grand son of Guru Arjun Dev Ji, Son of Guru Hargobind Ji and father Guru Har Rai took over the udasi's order.

 

Bro once again, you're behaving like a total hypocrite here. You called me an armchair historian yet you've not provided a single shred of evidence for that claim. The well documented fact is that Baba Buddha Ji was the one who oversaw the construction of Harmandir Sahib, Baba Sri Chand didn't. Once again the Akhara was put there because of the Butta planted there by Pritam Das Ji, the Akhara grew from there. There was no links to Baba Sri Chand other than the fact that Pritam Das Ji was a follower of Baba Sri Chand Ji. 

 

Yes and I already pointed out that Baba Gurditta taking over the Udasi could have a myraid of reasons. Guru Hargobind Ji asked Baba Sri Chand if he wanted someone and Baba Sri Chand said (since he was heirless) he would like his son. Did you ever wonder why Bab Gurditta's name was just that? That's where his name comes from "Given by the Guru", Guru Sahib gave him to Baba Sri Chand because Baba Sri Chand asked. Don't look too into it, Baba Gurditta Ji completely changed the Udasi order, it was definetely nothing like the way that Baba Sri Chand followed it.

Quote

My point being that the common popular narrative doesn't quite seem to fit.

The common narrative is Baba Sri Chand was the son of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, but he rebelled. Regardless people still respect him. The narrative fits fine, the problem is people like you just want to over-complicate things because you see it as "un-sikh" if someone says anything remotely negative even if its a fact. Like I said before, if you think Gurbani is wrong then please put it here, History and more importantly Guru Sahib wrote that Baba Sri Chand turned his back on Guru Sahib's teachings. Yes Guru Ram Das Ji and Guru Hargobind Ji had a really healthy relationship based on respect for him. However Baba Sri Chand stuck to preaching the ascetics lifestyle, that's the polar opposite to what Guru Sahib taught. The respect for offspring of the Guru Sahib's physical children has always been there, Guru Gobind Singh Ji met Baba Ram Rai Ji despite him being excommunicated because he was the child of Guru Har Rai Ji. That's the historical fact that the respect of the Guru Sahibs is what compelled these relationships.

Quote

ie baba sri chand/usadis = bad. the role of baba sri chand and the udasis on the face of seems to be much more significant than we commonly led to believe.

I have no idea what History books you keep reading, but not one person in this thread (or in any contemporary history book) claims that the Udasi's didn't do their fair bit in helping Sikhs. You need to stop victimising them and then attempting to inflate their contribution.