Jump to content
dallysingh101

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

Recommended Posts

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
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2   
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)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chatanga    1,068
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
13Mirch    884
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
13Mirch    884
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
jkvlondon    3,532
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.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jacfsing2   
Guest Jacfsing2
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
dallysingh101    1,585

Here's Piara Singh Padam's text of the sakhi for those interested. He basically translated the original text Sau Sakhi text into modern Panjabi:

sau sakhi psp.jpg

Edited by dallysingh101
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dallysingh101    1,585
Quote

 

If the Sikhs took revenge [by raping in retaliation] it should be recognised as good.

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

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.

 

The bit in square brackets is my inference, translators can use this to keep the flow of text/ideas going. People who've learnt English to any sort of decent degree should know this. But people are asking good questions. Yes, I think the posted bit above (minus the portion in the square brackets) is supposed to be a question from Singhs. 

Looking at the text now, I see that the nature of this badla that Singhs are talking about is not explicitly specified. What is clear is that (according to the text) Singhs were not expected to retaliate in any lowly way for the abuse of females by the enemy. It explicitly mentions that the Sikh path was considered to be morally higher one that the enemies faith, and that Singhs should restrain themselves from acting like the enemy. In this context I think Guru jee explicitly forbidding retaliating against females of the enemies is the clear idea. Plus we know from early Persian texts (Jangnama I think) that Singhs did actually abide by that dictate in the early days of the Khalsa.

That all being said. Please remember that the original text was compiled well over a century after the events. Until we find this a Sau Sakhi or Panj Sau Sakhi that can irrefutably be dated back closer to Guru ji's time, valid critical historiography will  ask the question of whether this actually represents an actual discussion or not. 

Quote

 

 '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.

 

Interesting. Have you read the whole book? What did you think of it? I'd like to see Mandair's evidence for this though - "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." Some of those people listed above weren't Khatris, so his point seems a bit dubious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dallysingh101    1,585
Quote

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

https://www.scribd.com/doc/73649680/Sau-Sakhi-English-Translation-by-Attar-Singh-1873

Was done a long time ago, in reaction to the Kuka revolt (and use of the work) I believe?

Quote

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

Mate, I so miss the days when I had the time and energy to do stuff like this. I wish I was a rich man who could devote more time to these things instead of chasing money to live, but chalo. Waheguru's will. 

The most I'd say to your question is that I think the translation is a reasonable one. 

Another thing I will say is that unless we are constantly engaged in translating/reading old texts it becomes very easy to forget the meaning of archaic vocabulary you've previously encountered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5akaalsingh    87
33 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

The bit in square brackets is my inference, translators can use this to keep the flow of text/ideas going. People who've learnt English to any sort of decent degree should know this. But people are asking good questions. Yes, I think the posted bit above (minus the portion in the square brackets) is supposed to be a question from Singhs. 

Looking at the text now, I see that the nature of this badla that Singhs are talking about is not explicitly specified. What is clear is that (according to the text) Singhs were not expected to retaliate in any lowly way for the abuse of females by the enemy. It explicitly mentions that the Sikh path was considered to be morally higher one that the enemies faith, and that Singhs should restrain themselves from acting like the enemy. In this context I think Guru jee explicitly forbidding retaliating against females of the enemies is the clear idea. Plus we know from early Persian texts (Jangnama I think) that Singhs did actually abide by that dictate in the early days of the Khalsa.

That all being said. Please remember that the original text was compiled well over a century after the events. Until we find this a Sau Sakhi or Panj Sau Sakhi that can irrefutably be dated back closer to Guru ji's time, valid critical historiography will  ask the question of whether this actually represents an actual discussion or not. 

Interesting. Have you read the whole book? What did you think of it? I'd like to see Mandair's evidence for this though - "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." Some of those people listed above weren't Khatris, so his point seems a bit dubious.

Well, we have many sources from the pre-Misl era, that mention the great treatment of women by Sikhs. However, when we go to Sikh empire era (when many Hindus took Amrit and enlisted into Khalsa, thinking Sikhi was a warrior sect of Hinduism) there are a few sources that claim that Sikhs actually raped Afghan women in retaliation of Afghan atrocities. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranjit_Singh#Mughal_accounts)

But, these sources are mostly written by Moslems and are not to be taken seriously. Plus, A lot of non-Sikhs served in the Khalsa Army including Pashtuns, Punjabi Moslems, Gurkhas and Punjabi Hindus.

Edited by 5akaalsingh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kira    1,264
35 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/73649680/Sau-Sakhi-English-Translation-by-Attar-Singh-1873

Was done a long time ago, in reaction to the Kuka revolt (and use of the work) I believe?

I heard there was some Singh who had the original SAu Sakhi pothis but refuses to share them due to some instructions, can you shed some light on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dallysingh101    1,585
2 hours ago, Kira said:

I heard there was some Singh who had the original SAu Sakhi pothis but refuses to share them due to some instructions, can you shed some light on that?

I've not heard that but it doesn't surprise me. It's becoming increasingly obvious that many families have ancient pothis in their private possessions that they are loathed to share with anyone for whatever reason. I just pray that these don't become destroyed (through neglect or natural deterioration) before they are copied for posterity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5akaalsingh    87
On 2/5/2017 at 10:15 PM, dallysingh101 said:

I couldn't actually find that in the link you posted? 

Well, yes you can't find that on Wikipedia.  I can list some sources which mention what I said: 1.Sohan Singh Seetal (1971). Rise of the Sikh Power and Maharaja Ranjeet Singh. Dhanpat Rai. p. 56. OCLC 6917931. (note: the original book has 667 pages; the open access version of the same book released by Lahore Publishers on archive.com has deleted about 500 pages of this book; see the original)

2.Gardner, Alexander (1898). "Chapter XII". Memoirs of Alexander Gardner – Colonel of Artillery in the Service of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. William Blackwood & Sons. p. 211.

3. The Pathans by Olaf Caroe

  • Like 1

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


×