Abuse filter log

'[[Category:Sikh Community Leaders]] From Wiki <br> '''Gurinder Singh Mann''' is from [[California]], USA. Religious Qualifications, Background, Current activities, Academic Responses to Professor Mann [http://www.global.ucsb.edu/faculty/images/Singh-Mann-Gurinder.gif] == Religious qualifications == 1965-71 M A, English, Baring Union Christian College, [[Batala]], [[Punjab (India)|Punjab]] (at the same time as late [[Dr. W. Hew Mcleod|Dr. W.H. McLeod]]), Ph.D. in Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures, Columbia University, and now Kundan Kaur Kapany Chair in Sikh Studies at University of California, Santa Barbara, USA. == Background == The resumé of Prof. Gurinder Singh Mann’s qualifications and credentials states that he graduated in 1965 with Master’s Degree in English from Baring Union Christian College in Batala, Punjab; India, earned his second MA in English in 1975 from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK, and Master’s Degree in Theology Studies from Harvard University. He topped his enviable resumé with Ph. D. in religion from Columbia University. Prof. Mann was a student of WH Mcleod. The late Dr Mcleod saw potential is this shy, retiring, introverted but gifted child. Mcleod influenced Mann to the extent that even in Mann's academic career, early on in his dissertation ‘The Making of Sikh Scripture’, Gurinder Singh Mann quotes and controverts Dr. W. H. McLeod’s views. In total Mann represents a Western, or Protestant hermeneuticof [[Sikhism]]. That can be found in the work of Mcleod, Macauliffe, Teja Singh Bhasauria, and Cunningham. == Current activities == From Wikipedia <br> Gurinder Singh Mann is an interesting Professor as can be seen from his rating pages at the University of Santa Barbara: http://ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=597238&page=3. He has a number of influential works to his name for example ' ''Making of Sikh Scripture'''. He chairs the ''Journal of Punjab Studies'', and has a great influence over the Punjab Research Group UK, as well as global influence on other Sikh Study programs. He has openly stated in public that in his academic opinion that the [[Dasam Granth]] was not written by [[Guru Gobind Singh]]. In general he follows the same theory as the Sikh [[Heresy|heretic]], Teja Singh Bhasauria, and often borrows from Teja Singhs (1919) works without openly stating his major source of inspiration. ==Academic Responses to Professor Mann== Many scholars, historians, theologians, intellects, etc. have responded to the misinterpretations and nonfactual writings of Mann. <br> <br> Here are some books and writings in general by various accomplished scholars that respond to Mann: <br> <br> * [http://www.singhsabhacanada.com/?p=460 The Making of Sikh Scripture’: Gurinder Singh Mann abets Adverse Controversies] <br> * [http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/pdf/early%20sikh%20scripture.pdf Early Sikh Scriptural Tradition: Myth and Reality] <br> * [http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/pdf/Studying%20the%20Sikhs%20%20Issues%20for%20North%20America.pdf Book Review of 'Studying the Sikhs: Issues for North America] <br> * [[Response to Gurinder S. Mann]] <br> * Also See: [http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Dr._W._Hew_Mcleod#Responses_to_McLeod_by_Sikh_Scholars Responses to McLeod by Various Sikh Scholars] <br> *[http://www.scribd.com/doc/68910162/E-Trumpp-and-H-McLeod-as-Scholars-of-Sikh-History Book by Dr. Trilochan Singh] ==Letters== '''Sikh Studies Chairs: Letter from Sri Akal Takhat''' <br> <br> This letter was received today (July 6, 2004) --Editors <br> <br> Giani Joginder Singh Jathedar <br> Number: AT-8P-NY-CAL-2004 <br> July 4, 2004 <Br> <br> '''Beware of Antipanthic Writings''' <br> <br> <br> The [[Sikh]] religion founded by [[Guru Nanak]] to accomplish his divine mission, is now known all over the world for its distinct socio-religious identity. A large part of Sikh community is settled abroad. These Sikhs form a strong Diaspora which is an invaluable asset of the Sikh community. In order to promote better understanding of Sikhism, the Sikh Diaspora of North America has done commendable job to establish Sikh Studies Chairs in a few Canadian and American universities. <br> <br> Unfortunately the professors appointed on these Chairs instead of studying Sikh history, religion and literature in an objective and impartial manner have taken interest to propagate and establish a particular school of thought which is highly prejudiced against the established facts of Sikh history and religion. This school founded and patronized by W.H. McLeod and carried on by his flag carriers is hell bent to distort the Sikh history and religion. One of these Chairs is also functioning at the University of California, Santa Barbara in California. The professor, Gurinder Singh Mann, appointed on this Chair is also not performing according to the expectations and aspirations of the Sikh community. <br> <br> For example, his remarks that the text of Sri Guru Granth Sahib is still going under evolution is totally uncalled for. He does not fully subscribe to the revelatory character of Gurbani. His reluctance to accept that the final canonization of [[Guru Granth Sahib]] occurred at the hands of [[Guru Gobind Singh]] at [[Damdama Sahib]], Talwandi Saboo, Bathinda in 1706 and Guru Gobind Singh had conferred Guruship on Guru Granth Sahib at Nanded in 1708 are very unfortunate. <br> <br> Similarly his observation that initial five weapons were a part of the Khalsa rehit is established by Guru Gobind Singh and five kakkars were not in vogue is totally unfounded and historically incorrect. He does not accept Guru Arjan Dev and Guru Tegh Bahadur as martyrs but puts them as if they were criminals who suffered executions at the hands of the Mughals. In his recent book he has recommended “suggested further reading” of a book which alleges that the birth of Guru Hargobind was the outcome of niyoga between Baba Buddha and Mata Ganga, wife of Guru Arjan. All these writings by this professor are highly condemnable. I strongly urge the Sikh sangat all over the world that they remain beware of above type of scholars and take appropriate academic measures to counter their activities. <br> <br> (signed) <br> Joginder Singh Jathedar <br> Sri Akal takhat Sahib <br> Amritsar <br> Tel./Fax: 91-183-2540820 <br> <br> '''Sri Akal Takhat Sahib Sri Akal Takhat Sahib, Sri Amritsar (Pb.) India No. A: 3/06/3488 Date: 17-01-2006 <br> <br> Resolution <br> <br> (Gurmata)''' <br> <br> Sri Guru Granth Sahib is not only a scripture but also the eternal Guru for the Sikhs. The seal on its totality and authenticity of this sacred source of Divine knowledge has been put by the Sikh Gurus themselves. Hence, there is no controversy amongst the Sikhs regarding the originality and history of its text. For doing research on the text, history and tenants of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, one requires concentration of mind and honesty of the highest order, but it is regrettable that in the recent past some scholars in the garb of academics have resorted to mean ways to create unsavory controversies regarding Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Among such type of scholars the names of Piar Singh, Pashaura Singh and Gurinder Singh Mann are especially mentionable. It should be remembered that Sikh sangats and Sikh scholars had raised serious objections to Piar Singh’s and Pashaura Singh’s carelessly derived conclusions by using controversial sources regarding the text and canonization of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Both these so called scholars had individually appeared at Sri Akal Takhat Sahib and begged for forgiveness. On 25-06-1994, Pashaura Singh had apologized in writing and accepted the punishment (Tankhah) pronounced by Sri Akal Takhat Sahib in order to absolve himself. He had promised, at that time, not to publish his thesis as it was and had promised to make necessary corrections in it. Now the Sikh congregations from India and abroad as well have brought to the notice of Sri Akal Takhat Sahib that Pashaura Singh in his book: The Guru Granth Sahib Cannon Meaning and Authority, has again repeated the same controversial conclusions of his thesis. On 01-07-05 Sri Akal Takhat Sahib directed The Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee to constitute a committee of Sikh scholars to look into the above mentioned complaint. After studying Pashaura Singh’s book the committee resolved that in publishing the pre-conceived conclusions of his thesis in the form of a book, Pashaura Singh has willfully exhibited obduracy which is a clear violation of the promise that he had given to Sri Akal Takhat Sahib on 25-06-1994. Singh Sahib, Giani Joginder Singh, Jathedar of Sri Akal Takhat, had issued on 01-07-2005, a directive to the Sikhs regarding the writings by Pashaura Singh. After that, on 29-07-2005, Pashaura Singh submitted his explanation to Sri Akal Takhat Sahib. In it besides mentioning the other matters he referred to Gurinder Singh Mann’s research work in which he has also concluded that MS # 1245 was prepared by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji before 1604 and therefore “Only I to be accused that I produced objectionable literature is totally baseless”. Sri Akal Takhat Sahib had directed Mr. Pashaura Singh on 15-08-2005 that in addition to providing material concerning the controversial research studies by Gurinder Singh Mann, he should send the clarification to the following questions: <br> <br> 2 <br> <br> 1. Whether Sri Guru Arjan Dev’s demise date i.e. Jeth Sudi 4, 1663 BK (1606 AD) recorded in MS # 1245, is in the hand of original scribe or not? <br> <br> 2. Have you written or not on page 46 of your book that MS # 1245 was prepared by Guru Arjan in 1599 AD? <br> <br> 3. Does the manuscript under question comprise Kachi Bani attributed to the Sikh Gurus or not? <br> <br> 4. Have you expressed or not in your book on pages 45-46 that MS # 1245 (which includes Kachi Bani) was shown by Sri Guru Arjan Dev to emperor Akbar? <br> <br> 5. Have or haven’t you in the book on pages 31, 46-50 concluded that Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji prepared this Manuscript and then used it to fix the final text of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji? <br> <br> 6. Have or haven’t you affirmed on pages 23, 42-43 of the book the role of Baba Budha as a caretaker to preserve the above-mentioned Manuscript? <br> <br> 7. On pages 84-90 of the book, have you drawn or not the conclusion that the original mul mantar was different than that of the present one and Sri Guru Ram Das Ji and Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji had made changes in it from time to time? <br> <br> 8. By considering the text of Japu Ji Sahib recorded in MS # 1245 as the original one, have you drawn or not the conclusion that Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji had revised the present text from language, vocabulary and poetic viewpoints? <br> <br> 9. On the basis of MS # 1245 (book pages 102-105), have you mentioned or not that Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji had revised the bani of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji from poetic and vocabulary point of view? Pashaura Singh has submitted vide his letter dated 12-09-2005, the controversial extracts of Gurinder Singh Mann’s book “The Making of Sikh Scripture”, but he is totally silent in responding to questions concerning him. The Sikh Panth should know that Pashaura Singh had given a word to Sri Akal Takht Sahib on 25-06-1994 that he would revise the controversial conclusions of his thesis and the edict issued in this regard by Sri Akal Takht Sahib on 27-6-1994 for his compliance has been openly violated by him which is highly condemnable and is a heinous act from religious aspect. Gurinder Singh Mann, in addition to deriving other controversial conclusions, has accused Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji for once editing out the Bhagat Bani from the Sikh Scripture but later on some how he included in it. For the sake of deriving preconceived conclusions regarding the compilation, originality and history of the text of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, Pashaura Singh and Gurinder Singh Mann have proved that the MS # 1245 was prepared by Guru Arjan Dev Ji before 1600 AD, and it had remained in the custody of Baba Buddha Ji and his descendents. This claim of theirs does not conform to the rules of historical criticism and academic standards in any manner. Likewise, in order to prove their pre-conceived formulations both these scholars have relied on Guru Har Sahai Pothi and the extant Goindval Pothis and have attributed their origin and history with Sri Guru Nanak Ji and Sri Guru Amar Das Ji respectively. The methodology adopted by the above mentioned scholars to study the Guru Har Sahai Pothi, extant Goindval Pothis and MS # 1245 is not an analytical one but attempts to establish the pre-determined notions. They have ignored historical and academic standards to judge the authenticity and veracity of these Pothis and employ them only to indulge in fabricating the evidence for their convenience. The research on these Pothis by Sikh scholars confirms that these Pothis had no role to play in the compilation, editing and canonization of Sri Guru Granth Sahib nor the origin or upkeep of these Pothis has been done by any Sikh personality. The Sikh Panth should know that Guru Har Sahai Pothi, extant Goindval Pothi, and MS # 1245 are rife with Kachi Bani. Sri Guru Amar Das Ji had established the thesis of Sachi Bani versus Kachi Bani and had ordained that Kachi Bani had no religious significance for the Sikhs. The Pothis of Kachi Bani like the above had been discarded once for all, firstly by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji in 1604 and again by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji in 1706. Thus, Guru Har Sahai Pothi, extant Goindval Pothis, MS # 1245 and others of their ilk, which contain Kachi Bani, are the product of the camps opposed to the Guru’s house. Their aim in circulating Kachi Bani was to distort the concept of Sachi Bani. Hence these Pothis are entirely irrelevant for the Sikh Panth from the religious point of view. The Sikh Panth needs to be highly watchful of the conclusions derived on the basis of these Pothis regarding the compilation, editing and originality of the text of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. It is a matter of serious concern for the Sikhs that the books which are based on the above Pothis, have been published by the Oxford University Press, Delhi. Why is the Oxford University Press publishing books which do not conform to the norms of historical criticism and academic standards and the aim of which is not analytical study but to establish pre-determined notions and those in one way or the other confuse the readers regarding the beliefs and practices of the Sikhs? We need to think over it. Towards the end it is an appeal to the Sikh Panth especially to the Sikhs residing in foreign countries that they do not give any significance and recognition to the research regarding Sri Guru Granth Sahib done by Pashaura Singh and Gurinder Singh Mann nor they should be given any office in an institution or organization of the Sikhs. Besides the Sikh institutions should make suitable arrangements for the dissemination of cogent and correct knowledge of the text, history and teachings of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. <br> <br> Sd- Sd- <br> Iqbal Singh Joginder Singh Jathedar, Takhat Sri Harimandir ji, Jathedar, Sri Akal Takhat Sahib Patna Sahib (Bihar) <br> <br> Sd- Sd- Sd- Tarlochan Singh Pratap Singh Balwant Singh Jathedar, Takhat Sri Keshgarh Sahib Head Granthi Jathedar, Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib Sri Anandpur Sahib (Ropar) Takhat Sach Khand Talwandi Sabo (Bathinda) Sri Hajoor Sahib Nander (Maharashtra) <br> <br> 4 <br> <br> Translation of Gurmata (Resolution by the heads of the five Takhats) into English done by Dr. Jagdev Singh Dhaliwal and Edited by Dr. Baljeet Singh Sahi. Copy of the original document was provided by Sardar Raminderjit Singh Sekhon. == External links == * http://www.history.ucsb.edu/people/person.php?account_id=78 * http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/r_link/reviews.htm * http://www.singhsabhacanada.com/Articles/312 * http://www.global.ucsb.edu/faculty/mann.html'