dallysingh101

Dasmesh pita on Singhs retaliating for rape by enemy army (Translation of Suraj Prakash text)

35 posts in this topic

Original text from Suraj Prakash Granth. Translated in 2011. 

 

 

ਮਮ ਸਿਖ ਤੁਰਕਣਿ ਸੰਗ ਨ ਕਰੈ।

ਏਕ ਬਾਰ ਹੀ ਭੋਗੈ ਕੋਇ।

ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਸੋ ਤਤਛਿਨ ਹੋਇ।

ਜੋ ਨਰ ਹਿੰਦੁ ਧਰਮ ਕੋ ਧਰੈ।

ਬਚੈ ਤੁਰਕਣੀ ਤੇ ਸੋ ਤਰੈ।

ਜੋ ਪਰ ਨਾਰਿ ਭੋਗ ਪਛੁਤਾਵੈ।

ਕੁਛ ਪ੍ਰਾਸ਼ਚਿਤ ਅਘ ਹਿਤ ਕਰਿਵਾਵ ॥15॥

ਕੈ ਗੁਰ ਸਿੱਖਨ ਤੇ ਬਖਸ਼ਾਵੈ।

ਸੋ ਸਿਖ ਅਘ ਤੇ ਬਖਸ਼ਯੋ ਜਾਵੈ।

ਜੋ ਤੁਰਕਨਿ ਸਿਖ ਭੋਗਹਿ ਜਾਇ।

ਸੋ ਨਹਿਂ ਬਖਸ਼ਯੋ ਜਾਇ ਕਦਾਇ ॥16॥

ਪਾਕੋ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਹ੍ਵ੍ਵੈ ਸੋਇ।

ਪ੍ਰਥਮ ਅਜਾਨ ਜਿ ਭੂਲੈ ਕੋਇ।

ਮਿਲਿ ਤੁਰਕਨਿ ਸੰਗ ਸਿਖ ਬਨ ਜਾਇ।

ਸੋ ਭੀ ਛੂਟ ਜਾਇ ਗੁਰ ਧਯਾਇ ॥17॥

ਪੁਨ ਸਿੰਘਨਿ ਬੂਝੇ ਗੁਨ ਖਾਨੀ।

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

ਸੁਨਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਬੋਲੇ ਤਿਸ ਬੇਰੇ।

ਹਮ ਲੇ ਜਾਨੋ ਪੰਥ ਉਚੇਰੇ।

ਨਹੀਂ ਅਧੋਗਤਿ ਬਿਖੈ ਪੁਚਾਵੈਂ।

ਯਾਂ ਤੇ ਕਲਮਲ ਕਰਨ ਹਟਾਵੈਂ ॥19॥

ਪੰਥ ਭੂਤਨਾ ਕੋ ਹੈ ਜੋਈ।

ਲਿਯੇ ਸੰਭਾਲ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸੋਈ।

ਨਹਿਂ ਨੀਚਨ ਕੀ ਰੀਤਿ ਅਛੇਰੀ।

ਪਿਖਿ ਅਪਮਾਨ ਕਰਹਿਂ ਸਭਿ ਬੇਰੀ ॥20॥

 

Translation:

 

 

A Sikh of mine should not have (physical) relations with a Turkni. If one has (such) sex even on a single occasion, he will become a Muslim at that very instant. The man who adopts the Hindu faith should be wary of Turknis, remaining aloof from them. That man who regrets having sexual relationships with a woman that was not his own and performs some penance for his sin, (15) the Guru will be benevolent towards that Sikh, and he will be pardoned for his sin. The Sikh who enjoys a Turkni will never be forgiven. (16) That person will become a thorough Muslim. If someone has previously had physical relationships with a Turkni in ignorance, and later becomes a Sikh, they will also be pardoned by the Guru. (17)

Then the Singhs comprehended the character of the Khans. Turks hordes were ravishing Indian women. If the Sikhs took revenge [by raping in retaliation] it should be recognised as good. Why does the Guru’s instruction (note: ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ implies a written code of conduct i.e. a rahitnama) prevent them [from doing this]? (18)

Listen to what the Guru said on this matter:

I have recognised this [Khalsa] path as an exalted one. Without base degradation assimilated within.That is why I prevent you from committing [such] sins. (19) That path which adopts Mohhamad, is one of demons.The ways of those lowly ones are not good.Observe how they commit outrages at every opportunity. (20)

Edited by dallysingh101
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dallysingh101 said:

That path which adopts Mohhamad, is one of demons.The ways of those lowly ones are not good.Observe how they commit outrages at every opportunity. (20)

Some SJWs should really read this especially the, "all religions are equal", Pakhandis.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Some SJWs should really read this especially the, "all religions are equal", Pakhandis.

Remember the text was written over a century after the event. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

ਜੋ ਨਰ ਹਿੰਦੁ ਧਰਮ ਕੋ ਧਰੈ।

Note: "Hindu Dharma" here does not mean the Sanatana Dharma. One has to keep in mind that the term Hindu back then applied to every non-Moslem and not necessary to a follower of the set of Indian traditions, known as Hinduism. Just like Englishmen, Scotts and Welsh are called British. It was later, when the British came and dictionaries were written and the meaning of the word Hindu was standardized.

 

1 hour ago, Jacfsing2 said:

SJWs

Brother, please enlighten me, who are SJWs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 5akaalsingh said:

Brother, please enlighten me, who are SJWs?

SJWs are an extreme group of the Regressive Left who wish to bow to all sorts of cultural and religious immorality.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Remember the text was written over a century after the event. 

Still, even if you ignore the entire theological arguments on why mating with Muslims is a bad idea; on a purely genetic and scientific route the idea of mating with them is also ridiculous, Muslims are the most inbred group there is in the world, this is permanent damage to their gene pool. (Compare that with Punjabis who are the second most interbred with different ethnicity groups, and the only group more interbred are Hispanics).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jasdeepsingh2k125 said:

Hindu is used for hindus in guru granth sahib ji

Screenshot_2017-01-30-02-06-01.png

This is an anglophonic translation. Every verse needs to be contextualized separately for relative understanding of the matter. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Original text from SPG:

 

 

ਮਮ ਸਿਖ ਤੁਰਕਣਿ ਸੰਗ ਨ ਕਰੈ।

ਏਕ ਬਾਰ ਹੀ ਭੋਗੈ ਕੋਇ।

ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਸੋ ਤਤਛਿਨ ਹੋਇ।

ਜੋ ਨਰ ਹਿੰਦੁ ਧਰਮ ਕੋ ਧਰੈ।

ਬਚੈ ਤੁਰਕਣੀ ਤੇ ਸੋ ਤਰੈ।

ਜੋ ਪਰ ਨਾਰਿ ਭੋਗ ਪਛੁਤਾਵੈ।

ਕੁਛ ਪ੍ਰਾਸ਼ਚਿਤ ਅਘ ਹਿਤ ਕਰਿਵਾਵ ॥15॥

ਕੈ ਗੁਰ ਸਿੱਖਨ ਤੇ ਬਖਸ਼ਾਵੈ।

ਸੋ ਸਿਖ ਅਘ ਤੇ ਬਖਸ਼ਯੋ ਜਾਵੈ।

ਜੋ ਤੁਰਕਨਿ ਸਿਖ ਭੋਗਹਿ ਜਾਇ।

ਸੋ ਨਹਿਂ ਬਖਸ਼ਯੋ ਜਾਇ ਕਦਾਇ ॥16॥

ਪਾਕੋ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਹ੍ਵ੍ਵੈ ਸੋਇ।

ਪ੍ਰਥਮ ਅਜਾਨ ਜਿ ਭੂਲੈ ਕੋਇ।

ਮਿਲਿ ਤੁਰਕਨਿ ਸੰਗ ਸਿਖ ਬਨ ਜਾਇ।

ਸੋ ਭੀ ਛੂਟ ਜਾਇ ਗੁਰ ਧਯਾਇ ॥17॥

ਪੁਨ ਸਿੰਘਨਿ ਬੂਝੇ ਗੁਨ ਖਾਨੀ।

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

ਸੁਨਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਬੋਲੇ ਤਿਸ ਬੇਰੇ।

ਹਮ ਲੇ ਜਾਨੋ ਪੰਥ ਉਚੇਰੇ।

ਨਹੀਂ ਅਧੋਗਤਿ ਬਿਖੈ ਪੁਚਾਵੈਂ।

ਯਾਂ ਤੇ ਕਲਮਲ ਕਰਨ ਹਟਾਵੈਂ ॥19॥

ਪੰਥ ਭੂਤਨਾ ਕੋ ਹੈ ਜੋਈ।

ਲਿਯੇ ਸੰਭਾਲ ਮੁਹੰਮਦ ਸੋਈ।

ਨਹਿਂ ਨੀਚਨ ਕੀ ਰੀਤਿ ਅਛੇਰੀ।

ਪਿਖਿ ਅਪਮਾਨ ਕਰਹਿਂ ਸਭਿ ਬੇਰੀ ॥20॥

 

Translation:

 

 

A Sikh of mine should not have (physical) relations with a Turkni. If one has (such) sex even on a single occasion, he will become a Muslim at that very instant. The man who adopts the Hindu faith should be wary of Turknis, remaining aloof from them. That man who regrets having sexual relationships with a woman that was not his own and performs some penance for his sin, (15) the Guru will be benevolent towards that Sikh, and he will be pardoned for his sin. The Sikh who enjoys a Turkni will never be forgiven. (16) That person will become a thorough Muslim. If someone has previously had physical relationships with a Turkni in ignorance, and later becomes a Sikh, they will also be pardoned by the Guru. (17)

Then the Singhs comprehended the character of the Khans. Turks hordes were ravishing Indian women. If the Sikhs took revenge [by raping in retaliation] it should be recognised as good. Why does the Guru’s instruction (note: ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ implies a written code of conduct i.e. a rahitnama) prevent them [from doing this]? (18)

Listen to what the Guru said on this matter:

I have recognised this [Khalsa] path as an exalted one. Without base degradation assimilated within.That is why I prevent you from committing [such] sins. (19) That path which adopts Mohhamad, is one of demons.The ways of those lowly ones are not good.Observe how they commit outrages at every opportunity. (20)

I thought this was from the Sau-Saakhi. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2017 at 11:26 PM, 13Mirch said:

I thought this was from the Sau-Saakhi. 

It's in both. And almost verbatim too, so either one was used for the original source of the other - or they both used a common source. However, I notice the last sentence in the Sau Sakhi version, which condones caste doesn't appear to be in the Suraj Prakash version. 

 

1.jpg2.jpg

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's some notes from when the piece was originally translated a few years ago:

Quote


The sakhi from SPG is very interesting. We can trace it's movement and development a bit. It starts of as the small sakhi in dasmesh pita's contemporary Sewa Das's 'Parchian', in the form of the Sakhi of the brother who came wailing into Guru ji's darbar after having been captured by sullay and forcibly had his kesh cut, and was fed Muslim meat and circumcised (ouch!) etc. Then he is reassured that he hasn't been made a sullah because he refrained from willingly having sex with a sulli etc. etc. In parchian the Sakhi is pretty short. It next seems to appear in the infamous 'Sau Sakhi' around the middle of the 1800s. Here it's significantly elaborated upon and extra dialog appears which give more detail about why physical relations with a 'Turkni' are so seriously prohibited, with the passage where Singhs ask about retaliating to sullah balathkaars in kind.

 

Then it appears in Suraj Prakash Granth which was also apparently composed by the mid 1800s by the famous Santokh Singh but really became known amongst the Sikh masses after Bhai Vir Singh published his annotated edition between 1927-35.

 

Judging by Attar Singh's English translation of Sau Sakhi (published in 1873), the texts in the Sau Sakhi and SPG appear to be identical or verbatim.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/29/2017 at 7:48 AM, dallysingh101 said:

Then the Singhs comprehended the character of the Khans. Turks hordes were ravishing Indian women. If the Sikhs took revenge [by raping in retaliation] it should be recognised as good. Why does the Guru’s instruction (note: ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ implies a written code of conduct i.e. a rahitnama) prevent them [from doing this]? (18)

Listen to what the Guru said on this matter:

I have recognised this [Khalsa] path as an exalted one. Without base degradation assimilated within.That is why I prevent you from committing [such] sins. (19) That path which adopts Mohhamad, is one of demons.The ways of those lowly ones are not good.Observe how they commit outrages at every opportunity. (20)

Was the bold supposed to be a question from the Sikh? Since the period confused me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 0:40 PM, dallysingh101 said:

It's in both. And almost verbatim too, so either one was used for the original source of the other - or they both used a common source. However, I notice the last sentence in the Sau Sakhi version, which condones caste doesn't appear to be in the Suraj Prakash version. 

 

1.jpg2.jpg

The last sentence vis-a-vis Guru and Shasters (Hindu precepts and not weaponry) seems to be an injunction of the author or an addition to the original text. Seems to be quite out of place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/01/2017 at 5:14 PM, Preeet said:

Was the bold supposed to be a question from the Sikh? Since the period confused me.

The person translating has made a huge mistake.  It should have been fixed immediately.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

The person translating has made a huge mistake.  It should have been fixed immediately.  

Yeah.. I thought so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

The person translating has made a huge mistake.  It should have been fixed immediately.  

What do you think it should be then? The whole point of posting the thing is for people to comment and feedback on it. 

Try not using it to do your cry-baby thing btw.

 

Here's the original text:

 

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

 

Quote

The last sentence vis-a-vis Guru and Shasters (Hindu precepts and not weaponry) seems to be an injunction of the author or an addition to the original text. Seems to be quite out of place. 

My thoughts exactly. It's like some appended thing that promotes caste, worked in at the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dallysingh101 said:

What do you think it should be then? The whole point of posting the thing is for people to comment and feedback on it. 

Try not using it to do your cry-baby thing btw.

 

Here's the original text:

 

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

 

My thoughts exactly. It's like some appended thing that promotes caste, worked in at the end. 

Why don't you answer poster Preet's question.  Just in case you skipped over her question here it is: 

Quote

 

      On ‎29‎/‎01‎/‎2017 at 7:48 AM, dallysingh101 said:

Then the Singhs comprehended the character of the Khans. Turks hordes were ravishing Indian women. If the Sikhs took revenge [by raping in retaliation] it should be recognised as good. Why does the Guru’s instruction (note: ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ implies a written code of conduct i.e. a rahitnama) prevent them [from doing this]? (18)

Listen to what the Guru said on this matter:

I have recognised this [Khalsa] path as an exalted one. Without base degradation assimilated within.That is why I prevent you from committing [such] sins. (19) That path which adopts Mohhamad, is one of demons.The ways of those lowly ones are not good.Observe how they commit outrages at every opportunity. (20)

 

Was the bold supposed to be a question from the Sikh? Since the period confused me.

Edited by Akalifauj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me heretic but i don't believe this text to be written by dashmesh pita. 

Calling muhammadan faith demonic and specifically excluding muslim women from adultery are the reasons why i believe its not work of guru gobind singh ji. 

Why would guru ji specifically mention muslim women? So sex with hindu women is ok? Sex outside marriage is immoral be it with hindu, sikh or muslim women.  Also the author seems combines sikh and hindu as one

I can't believe it. 

This text doesn't pass universality values of guru gobind singh ji

Edited by AjeetSinghPunjabi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Call me heretic but i don't believe this text to be written by dashmesh pita. 

Calling muhammadan faith demonic and specifically excluding muslim women from adultery are the reasons why i believe its not work of guru gobind singh ji. 

Why would guru ji specifically mention muslim women? So sex with hindu women is ok? Sex outside marriage is immoral be it with hindu, sikh or muslim women.  Also the author seems combines sikh and hindu as one

I can't believe it. 

This text doesn't pass universality values of guru gobind singh ji

You are correct that this piece of literature isn't written by Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, (none of the rehatnamas are), and that this is written by Bhai Santokh Singh. This; however, is correct in Gurmat standards that Muhammad still was a pakhandi baba; that is something Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji directly stated: 

"ਮਹਾਦੀਨ ਤਬ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਉਪਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਅਰਬ ਦੇਸ ਕੋ ਕੀਨੋ ਰਾਜਾ ॥੨੬॥
Then I created Muhammed, who was made the master of Arabia.26.

ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਝਕ ਪੰਥ ਉਪਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਲਿੰਗ ਬਿਨਾ ਕੀਨੇ ਸਭ ਰਾਜਾ ॥
He started a religion and circumcised all the kings.

ਸਭ ਤੇ ਅਪਨਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਾਹੂੰ ਨ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਾਯੋ ॥੨੭॥
ਸਭ ਅਪਨੀ ਅਪਨੀ ਉਰਝਾਨਾ ॥ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਾਹੂ ਨ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥
He caused all to utter his name and did not give True Name of the Lord with firmness to anyone.27. Everyone placed his own interest first and foremost and did not comprehend the Supreme God."
(Guru Gobind Singh, Bachitar Naatak – DG, p. 135-136)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Try not using it to do your cry-baby thing btw.

Whats with the personal attacks? That does not give shobha to a sikh, nor is it a lakshan of a sikh.. Learn to speak mitha like how were supposed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/01/2017 at 3:48 PM, dallysingh101 said:

 

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

Here I would take shaastar to mean "law".

 

On 31/01/2017 at 11:40 PM, dallysingh101 said:

It's in both. And almost verbatim too, so either one was used for the original source of the other - or they both used a common source. However, I notice the last sentence in the Sau Sakhi version, which condones caste doesn't appear to be in the Suraj Prakash version. 

 

1.jpg

 

Is this online ? I have never jeard of it being translated into english before.

 

9 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

My thoughts exactly. It's like some appended thing that promotes caste, worked in at the end. 

It is translated to read that, but it is a poor translation of it.

What do you feel about this text looking at the translation 5 years on Dal?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

What do you think it should be then? The whole point of posting the thing is for people to comment and feedback on it. 

Try not using it to do your cry-baby thing btw.

 

Here's the original text:

 

ਬ੍ਰਿੰਦ ਤੁਰਕ ਭੋਗੈਂ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਨੀ।

ਸਿਖ ਬਦਲਾ ਲੇ ਭਲਾ ਜਨਾਏ।

ਕਯੋਂ ਗੁਰ ਸ਼ਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਰਜ ਹਟਾਏ? ॥18॥

 

My thoughts exactly. It's like some appended thing that promotes caste, worked in at the end. 

I believe the translation-cum-transliteration was first produced during the tenure of the Amritsar Singh Sabha. To quote Mandair on this point:

  'The Amritsar Singh-Sabha (Sanataan) was set up and backed by conservative Sikhs belonging to the Khatri Caste, many of whom were descendants of early Sikh Gurus. They included men such as Baba Khem Singh Bedi, a direct descendant of Guru Nanak, Thakar Singh Sandhanwalia, Avtar Singh Vahira and Giani Gian Singh, a noted Sikh scholar of the time. The conservation of this Amritsar based group stemmed from the fact that they saw the Sikh Panth as one among the myriad streams constituting "Sanataan Dharma," the so-called eternal tradition that identifies its source of authority as the Veda. These self-styled 'Sanataan Sikhs' can be traced to those groups that refused to take Khalsa initiation on the grounds that the "Khande-Ka-Pahul" ceremony polluted their ritual boundaries and threatened their Caste status which they regarded as primary.  Though they resented the democratic tendency within the Khalsa groups, they continued to co-exist within the broader Sikh Panth even as they remained aloof from the mainstream Khalsa practices.'

Mandair, 'Sikhism: A Guide for the Perplexed,' pg. 83.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

You are correct that this piece of literature isn't written by Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, (none of the rehatnamas are), and that this is written by Bhai Santokh Singh. This; however, is correct in Gurmat standards that Muhammad still was a pakhandi baba; that is something Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji directly stated: 

"ਮਹਾਦੀਨ ਤਬ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਉਪਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਅਰਬ ਦੇਸ ਕੋ ਕੀਨੋ ਰਾਜਾ ॥੨੬॥
Then I created Muhammed, who was made the master of Arabia.26.

ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਝਕ ਪੰਥ ਉਪਰਾਜਾ ॥ ਲਿੰਗ ਬਿਨਾ ਕੀਨੇ ਸਭ ਰਾਜਾ ॥
He started a religion and circumcised all the kings.

ਸਭ ਤੇ ਅਪਨਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਾਹੂੰ ਨ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਾਯੋ ॥੨੭॥
ਸਭ ਅਪਨੀ ਅਪਨੀ ਉਰਝਾਨਾ ॥ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਾਹੂ ਨ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥
He caused all to utter his name and did not give True Name of the Lord with firmness to anyone.27. Everyone placed his own interest first and foremost and did not comprehend the Supreme God."
(Guru Gobind Singh, Bachitar Naatak – DG, p. 135-136)

It is believed that Kavi Santokh Singh utilized an unadulterated version of the Sau Saakhi to compose his Suraj Prakash. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

I believe the translation-cum-transliteration was first produced during the tenure of the Amritsar Singh Sabha. To quote Mandair on this point:

  'The Amritsar Singh-Sabha (Sanataan) was set up and backed by conservative Sikhs belonging to the Khatri Caste, many of whom were descendants of early Sikh Gurus. They included men such as Baba Khem Singh Bedi, a direct descendant of Guru Nanak, Thakar Singh Sandhanwalia, Avtar Singh Vahira and Giani Gian Singh, a noted Sikh scholar of the time. The conservation of this Amritsar based group stemmed from the fact that they saw the Sikh Panth as one among the myriad streams constituting "Sanataan Dharma," the so-called eternal tradition that identifies its source of authority as the Veda. These self-styled 'Sanataan Sikhs' can be traced to those groups that refused to take Khalsa initiation on the grounds that the "Khande-Ka-Pahul" ceremony polluted their ritual boundaries and threatened their Caste status which they regarded as primary.  Though they resented the democratic tendency within the Khalsa groups, they continued to co-exist within the broader Sikh Panth even as they remained aloof from the mainstream Khalsa practices.'

Mandair, 'Sikhism: A Guide for the Perplexed,' pg. 83.

 

 

but badla in this sense could mean simply chatka of the turk ... as often was the response to beadbhi of many kinds at this time period no mucking about . Guru pita cannot on one hand say pariyaan maat dhi bakhne and then tell go take badla of same nature against innocent women.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

It is believed that Kavi Santokh Singh utilized an unadulterated version of the Sau Saakhi to compose his Suraj Prakash. 

Not even arguing about that topic, the main topic which I stood on was Muhammad was a Pakhandi Baba, which he is and should not remotely be appreciated by Sikhs in any sense whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now