Talk:Bachitar Natak: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
Hari Singh Ji, now it's upto you if you want such things online, one side you gave me huge lecture i want you to give the same to sunny. ([[User:Hpt lucky|Lucky]] 17:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)) | Hari Singh Ji, now it's upto you if you want such things online, one side you gave me huge lecture i want you to give the same to sunny. ([[User:Hpt lucky|Lucky]] 17:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)) | ||
Harpreet dont make a scene here. Dirty stories STAY dirty stories, whatever Nihangs interpretations are. They have 3 granths as guru, I have only one. Bala Janamsakhi is fake as proven. Bachitar Natak and Charitropakhyan are fake aswell. BUT ANYTHING OF SGGS CANNOT BE DOUBTED, NOR BHAGAT NOR BHATT BANI ! | |||
Thand bohti na pava tu, bas siddi mere naal vichaar kar. Tu ja nihanga kol, jo katha karna kar leh katha. | |||
Poet Ram/Shyam (writers of Dasam Granth) are not my Gurus. Are they yours? My Gurus wrote Bani with name Nanak, because they had same jot... [[User:SunnySinghDoad|SunnySinghDoad]] 20:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:23, 18 December 2009
Sikhs have till not decided about the full authenticity of Dasam Granth and its author. It contains many objectionable things which are against the basic principles of Sikhism.
user:sarbjeet_1313me: 25 Oct 2007
This composition contradicts Gurbani. I can show some pieces. If moderators join me here, we, as SikhiWiki team can decide to take a Anti Bachittar Natak stance or not. Who is with me? SunnySinghDoad 23:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Guys: Pls don't Show researches which only based on Criticism. Charitropakhyan have some researches which support that it's not that what criticizers think. Hari Singh Ji, Kindly do not support any researches by Anti party. You could continue the Anti DG discussions. Go to Nihungs to get real essence of this Dasam Bani. Thanks (Lucky 10:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
ਜਿਸਦਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ ਅਪਣਾ ਜੀਵਨ, ਉਹ ਪੰਥ ਦਾ ਕੀ ਸਵਾਰੇਗਾ
ਦਸਮ ਗਰੰਥ ਦੇ ਗਿਆਨ ਦੇ ਬਾਰੇ, ਦਰਸ਼ਨ ਰਾਗੀ ਕੀ ਗਿਆਨ ਉਚਾਰੇਗਾ
ਕਾਫਿਰ ਬਣਕੇ ਤਰਦੇ ਰਹਿੰਦੇ, ਦਰਸ਼ਨ ਵਰਗੇ ਲੋਕ ਬਥੇਰੇ
ਇਹਨਾ ਦੇ ਗਿਆਨ ਦੇ ਦੀਵੇ ਹੇਠਾਂ, ਮਿਲਣ ਗੇ ਬਹਤ ਹਨੇਰੇ
ਅੱਜ ਜ਼ਰੂਰਤ ਹੈ ਅਸੀਂ ਜਿਸ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਨੂੰ ਰੋਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਪਡਹਦੇ ਹਾਂ
ਉਸਦੇ ਅੱਖਰ ਅੱਖਰ ਨੂੰ ਸੱਚ ਕਰ ਦਈਝ
ਖਾਲਸਾ ਜੀ ਕੇ ਬੋਲ ਬਾਲੇ ਜ਼ਰੂਰ ਹੋਣਗੇ
- ਕਿਰਨਜੀਤ
harpreet, lets create a page and have debate; open to the world. you agree with me? if not, then atleast i must have permission to create an article Bachitar Natak (contra) SunnySinghDoad 16:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Sunny, I want, you to come to India if you have time. Go to Nihung Jathebandi at Tarna Dal, Khanna or Karnal. Seek for their interpretations. These people do not have electronic media to keep their interpretations. These people are not able to communicate through internet(youtube, Orkut, Facebook, Sikhiwiki). First collect interpretations of all these person. Put them online. Then Compare and contrast. now if you will put view of one party then you are loosing something.
Kal Charitropakhyan Ajj Bachitar Natak Kal Nitnem Banis Parson Bhai Bala Janmsakhi then BHAGAT BANi then Bhatt Bani then Gurbani, fir pavegi thand?
Hari Singh Ji, now it's upto you if you want such things online, one side you gave me huge lecture i want you to give the same to sunny. (Lucky 17:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC))
Harpreet dont make a scene here. Dirty stories STAY dirty stories, whatever Nihangs interpretations are. They have 3 granths as guru, I have only one. Bala Janamsakhi is fake as proven. Bachitar Natak and Charitropakhyan are fake aswell. BUT ANYTHING OF SGGS CANNOT BE DOUBTED, NOR BHAGAT NOR BHATT BANI !
Thand bohti na pava tu, bas siddi mere naal vichaar kar. Tu ja nihanga kol, jo katha karna kar leh katha.
Poet Ram/Shyam (writers of Dasam Granth) are not my Gurus. Are they yours? My Gurus wrote Bani with name Nanak, because they had same jot... SunnySinghDoad 20:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
