Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to comment
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. 

Link to comment
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.

Link to comment
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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2
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)

Link to comment
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?

 

Link to comment
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.

 

 

Link to comment
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. 

Link to comment
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use