Talk:Bachitar Natak: Writing of Guru Gobind Singh?

From SikhiWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Ideological mistakes

Poets father did pilgrimages

  • The writer's father visited many places of pilgrimages, which is against Sikhism and thus this shows that the writer cannot by tenth Guru and Guru Tegh Bahadur couldn't be the father who it is argued would not visit places of pilgrimage.

“My parents went on a pilgrimage to the eastern country to bathe at holy places and give charity. As a consequence thereof, their prayers were answered and my mother was blessed with me in her womb.” Here the writer contradicts his earlier statement: “When I was meditating on Mahankal (Shiv Ji) and Kalika (goddess) on a snowy mountain called Hem Kunt, my parents were praying to God and perfecting their Yogic discipline. When God was pleased with them, He ordered me to take birth in the age of Kalijug.”

Here again the writer does not know that Sikh Gurus had rejected the essentials Hinduism. So, their going to sacred Hindu centers to perform rituals to seek the boon of a child does not arise.

  • First of all you should have proper Santhya of Gurbani and Dasam Bani. It's Mahakaal Kaal Ka Aradhi, not Mahakaal Kalika Aradhi. Writer knows that Pathar Puja is rejected and so the pilgrimages. If you have read bachittar natak properly poet mentioned in beginnig "ਸਦਾ ਝਕ ਜੋਤਯੰ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸਰੂਪੰ ॥" What is Ajooni? What is Ek Jot? (paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))
  • The changes made to the above article are not acceptable for the following very important and critical reasons:

Point 1

  • the quotations used in the article from the Dasam Granth are not acceptable at all. For example you quoted: “My parents went on a pilgrimage to the eastern country to bathe at holy places and give charity. As a consequence thereof, their prayers were answered and my mother was blessed with me in her womb.”
  • This is a completely incorrect translation. Where did you get it from?
  • The actual lines are at: Bachitar Natak: Birth of the Poet and the English translation is: "My father proceeded towards the east and visited several places of pilgrimage. When he went to Triveni (Prayag), he passed his days in act of charity.1. I was conceived there and took birth at Patna."
  • the line "ਪ੝ੰਨ ਦਾਨ ਦਿਨ ਕਰਤ ਬਿਤਝ" "Punn daan din karat bitae" says that "His days were spent doing Punn - Good/virtuous deeds and Daan - give in charity"
  • There is no connection between doing these things and that due to these things the birth of GGS (Guru Gobind Singh) - The translation is - While in Prayag, my father spent his day doing good deeds and giving in charity; I was also conceived here and my birth took place in Patna. There is NO "As a consequence thereof" in the original text. Also there is NO "their prayers were answered and my mother was blessed with me in her womb". Where does it say these things in the original text?

As these are extremely poor interpretation of the text, I have moved all the text from the article page to the discussion page and reverted back the article. It is clear that your text and ideas are based on a very poor translation of the Gurmukhi text.

Point 2: God of Bachitar Natak

The God described in “my own story” is helpless, frustrated and confused. He is more like an incompetent manger without control over his subordinates. The God described in “my own story” is contradictory to the God described in AGGS, Who is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent, Creator and Controller of every thing in the creation and is happy and content watching it.

In the above section you give no quotes or comparisons to back the point that you make. In a Wiki, this is not acceptable, especially as this challenge is so important and critical to the panth. Please add quotes to backup your point otherwise this section cannot stay in the article. The same applies to some of the other sections. Please review and discuss on the discussion page. I hope that you have used a better translation in coming to these conclusions!

Under the circumstances, please do not change the article until you have answered the points mentioned here and please discuss any changes on the article discussion page as it will save someone (probably me) having to spent many hours trying to correct the changes. Many thanks and kind regards, Hari Singhtalk 05:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Condemns all previous "prophets"

  • The Poet says that all prophets before him are fake. Poet tried to break communal Harmony; this not in keeping with the tone of the holy Guru Granth.

ਜੇ ਜੇ ਭਝ ਪਹਿਲ ਅਵਤਾਰਾ ॥ ਆਪ੝ ਆਪ੝ ਤਿਨ ਜਾਪ੝ ਉਚਾਰਾ ॥ All the earlier incarnations caused only their names to be remembered.

ਪ੝ਰਭ ਦੋਖੀ ਕੋਈ ਨ ਬਿਦਾਰਾ ॥ ਧਰਮ ਕਰਨ ਕੋ ਰਾਹ੝ ਨ ਡਾਰਾ ॥੪੪॥ They did not strike the tyrants and did not make them follow th path of Dharma.44.

ਜੇ ਜੇ ਗਉਸ ਅੰਬੀਆ ਭਝ ॥ ਮੈ ਮੈ ਕਰਤ ਜਗਤ ਤੇ ਗਝ ॥ All the earlier prophets ended themselves in ego.

ਮਹਾਪ੝ਰਖ ਕਾਹੂੰ ਨ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥ ਕਰਮ ਧਰਮ ਕੋ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਜਾਨਾ ॥੪੫॥ And did not comprehend the supreme Purusha, they did not care for the righteous actions.45.

Pro Bachitar Natak people often say that the poet has mentioned 9 Gurus in a nice way, and only condemned others IS FAKE. As we can see above, the poet says JE JE, means ALL. He contradicted himself here, as done by him several times; such as in the 'Poet confusion'

  • Was Guru Nanak a Avtar or a Prophet? (paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))
  • The criticism of previous incarnations is rightly justified as they did indeed give more prominence to themselves rather than to the real Master. This can be appreciated by looking at how the Guru Granth begins with the word "Ek onkar" - One God. I believe that this prominence is unique. Further the tenth Guru clearly warns the world: "Whosoever shall call me the Lord, shall fall into hell. Consider me as His servant. 32." Page 137 Hari Singhtalk 19:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

God of Bachitar Natak

The God described in “my own story” is helpless, frustrated and confused. He is more like an incompetent manger without control over his subordinates. The God described in “my own story” is contradictory to the God described in AGGS, Who is Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent, Creator and Controller of every thing in the creation and is happy and content watching it.

  • That's Poetry man. Shingar Rass. read it and find the essence. Motive of Poet was not to tell omnipresent and omnipotent motive was something else. Why are we Lakeer de fakir? (paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))
  • Please give actual quotations from both Granths to make your point. I disagree with your statement. Hari Singhtalk 19:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Poet confusion

“Whatever I have created and whosoever I have sent to the world so far, did not bring Me glory. Son, all my hopes are on you, go there, straighten out the world and spread My glory.” After this God narrated the story of creation: “After creating the world, I created the demons, who turned out to be unfaithful. These tyrants stopped My worship. So I got angry at the demons and destroyed them in a moment and replaced them with Shiv Ji, Vishnu, and Brahma. They too turned out to be untrustworthy; as they refused to recognize Me and instead proclaimed themselves to be God. Then I created eight witnesses to monitor the actions of living beings. But they too proclaimed that there is no one else other than them worthy of worship. Instead of worshiping Me, stupid people started worshiping gods, sun, moon, air, and fire. Many of them started worshiping stones and performing rituals. Then I created human beings, who got enchanted by the material world (maya) and started worshiping idols.”

Here, the storyteller is confused. If human beings were the last in the sequence of creation then who were worshiping sun, moon, fire, and air and stones and performing rituals? Were they not human beings? Did they belong to another kind of human species? Besides, why did God choose the writer of “his own story,” who was also a worshiper of Mahan Kal and Kalika, to glorify His name?

Chronological mistakes

“After this, I sent ascetics and saints with supernatural powers, who turned out to be rascals. They started their own sects and did not recognize Me. Then I sent Gorakh Nath followed by Rama Nand and Prophet Mohammed, who like their predecessors, established their own sects and led people astray and ignored Me.”

Poet places Ramanand in history before Muhammad. If we study history, Ramanands birth is said to be between 1366 and 1400, and Muhammad was born in 570. Such a big mistake could not have been made by Guru Gobind Singh.

Here the writer displays his ignorance of history and the teachings of Ramanad and Prophet Mohammed. Prophet Mohammed was born several hundred years earlier than Gorakh Nath and he believed in “One and only God” he called Allah. And Rama Nand was a monotheist who adored God, that is why his composition is in AGGS. Moreover, the followers of the Prophet Muslims controlled vast territory in Asia, Africa and Europe. On the other hand Gorakh Nath’s followers believed in millions of gods and goddesses and their country was ruled by Muslims. Besides, Gorakh Nath’s followers were free loaders they made living by exploiting others through trickery and witchcraft.

  • This point is completely baseless. The Ramanand referred to in the Dasam Granth is not Bhagat Ramanand. Please drop this point as you do not know about Dutt, Gorakh, etc so it follows that you do not know about the Ramanand referred to in the D/G (Dasam Granth). If you are an expert on ancient Indian history then tell us what you know about all the other spiritual leaders mentioned in the D/G Hari Singhtalk 19:25, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Other mistakes?

  • The description of circumcision is vulgar ling bina - without penis instead of the proper Arabic word, sunat (suMnq) used in the AGGS. It is vulgar, because it means 'without penis' which is also an incorrect term, and a hateful description of the circumcision. [citation needed]
    • It is not Vulgar? We make words vulgar remember. (paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))
    • Please provide original text and page number. It is common to refer to circumcised people as "having it cut off" - everyone know what is meant. It is easier to shorten it to that rather than say you only have the foreskin cut off and not the rest, etc, etc. The fact remains that an action is taken to modify the God given body for personal Manmat reasons and superstitious reasons not based on science or medicine. Why do you do it? That is why it is not acceptable for a God-aware person and show that the person may be subject to superstition and ritualistic behaviour. Hari Singhtalk 16:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Writer hates Circumcision but Sikhism is not against Circumcision or you can show no hate to circumcision. Writer against Idol worship and Sikhism supports it.
  • It is noteworthy that in this story the writer makes no mention of other Semitic prophets, Moses and Jesus Christ.
    • So what? Gaus word denote all aulias and prophets. (paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))
    • The Dasam Granth is not a history book - the writer is making a point - all the prophets and religious leaders before the Sikh Gurus did not emphasis the unique position of the Lord. It is not important to include leaders which the common person in India had not heard of in that period. This text was aimed at these people - most of them living in India would not have heard of Moses or Jesus in the late 1600s or early 1700s.Hari Singhtalk 16:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Says that first three Gurus were Bedis, while second Guru was Trehan and third was Bhalla. Even SGGS (Panna 1396 and 1401) says that third Guru was a Bhalla.

Guru Tegh Bahadurs Shaheedi

In chapter five the writer says that Guru Teg Bahadar sacrificed his life was for the protection of the frontal mark and the sacred thread of the Brahmans. This is a very narrow and sectarian interpretation of Guru Teg Bahdur’s unique and unparalleled martyrdom. Guru Teg Bahadar sacrificed his life to defend the human rights of all the subjugated Indian people. It was a sacrifice in the defense of religious tolerance and freedom of worship and conscience and against bigotry. It is a historical coincidence that Kashmiri Brahmans sought his help to protect their religion. If the circumstances have been reverse, he would have done the same for Muslims. Guru Hargobid Sahib built a masque called “Guru KI Maseet” for the Muslims. It is preserved as a historical monument in the district of Gurdaspur, Punjab.

Guru Sahib just gave brief description he was not writing his Father history. Atam Katha means history of himself. What he wrote about Guru Sahib marks strong impact. Sees diya par see na uchri, Dharam het saka jin kita(paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))


Battle of Bhangani

There is no mention of the sacrifice of Pir Budhu Shah in the battle of Bhangani and the help by Khan brothers, Rai Kalah and others to Guru Gobind Singh.

What's problem if not mentioned. If Bhai Gurdas didnot mentioned name of whole sikhs of baba nanak it means whole vaars are false?(paapi 07:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC))

No Humility

Statements that contradict Sikh ethics humility, forgiveness and compassion. The ones that didn't participate

jy jy nr q~h n iBry dIny ngr inkwr ] je je nar tah na bhire deene nagar nikar. jy iqh Taur Bly iBry iqnY krI pRiqpwr ] je teh thaur bhale bhire tinai karee paritpar.

“Those who did not participate in the battle (to help us) were forced to leave the town, whereas those who did were rewarded.”

Sikhs know that Guru Har Gobind Sahib forgave Emperor Jahangir, who was responsible for the cruel death of his father, Guru Arjan Dev. Sikhs also know that Guru Gobind Singh forgave Emperor Aurangjeb, who was responsible for the death of his father, mother, four sons and hundreds of Sikhs. Sikh Gurus were the embodiment of humility, compassion and forgiveness. How could any Sikh in his right mind believe that Guru Gobind Singh forced people to leave the town simply because they did not help him in the battle? Treatment of enemies

Talking about the treatment of the enemies the writer say: “The wicked) ones were tortured and they died like dogs.” tWg tWg kir hny indwnw ] tang tang kar hane nidana. kUkr ijim iqn qjy pRwnw ] kookar jim tin the prana. Now compare this statement with the story of Bhai Kanhyia. When Sikhs complained to Guru Gobind Singh that Bahi Kanhyia was helping the wounded enemies, he hugged Bhai Kanhyia and honored him by calling him a true Sikh. How could any Sikh believe that Guru Gobind Singh degraded his enemies to the level of dogs and tortured them to death?


for reference only, Hari Singhtalk 07:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Guru Gorakh nath

....Guru Gorakh Nath is the supreme manifestation of supreme devinity. The shaastras tell stories in which the great trinity (Brahma, Vishnu & Maheshwor) seek his grace in times of difficulty. No one on the earth has yet been able to trace out where and how of his incarnation. Historians and research scholars have tried to construct his biography by studying and analyzing relevant materials from ancient texts, inscriptions and legends but to no avail. This centre (Siddhashram Shakti Kendra, Kathmandu) has been making efforts to collect and disseminate whatever information about the great guru and his teaching is available so that we could restore and revive the spiritual world as it was in the distant past.

.....There are allusions (indirect references) in Vedas and Purans to the great protective aspect of the personality of guru Gorakh Nath. The Lalitapur and Brhmanda Purans describe him as the siddha yogiraj living in perfect bliss in the world of the great winds called ‘Mahadyuti’ with divine yogi around him . In the 42nd chapter of the ‘Kedar Khanda’ part of the ‘Skanda Puran’ , lord Shiva tells his spouse Parvati that Goraksha Nath lives in ‘Gorakshya Ashram’ which is recognised as one of the holiest places. In the seven chapter of the Shiva Puran there are verses in which Brahma calls Gorakh Nath as the incarnation of lord Shiva. The ‘Goraksha Geeta’ presents an episode where Indrayani, request Brihaspati the guru of gods to go to Gorakhnath and beseech him to help bring her husband Indra back on the throne of the heavens. All these anecdotes and episodes adequately, prove the untraceable antiquity of Goraksh.

Horse Sacrifice


for reference only, Hari Singhtalk 07:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Misunderstanding? Please clarify this

Sunny ji

A very Happy New Year to you and your family.

Chotta veer ji, In the article you state:

Moreover, according to Bhai Vir Singh’s “Kalgidhar Chamatkaar”, Guru Tegh Bahadur was in Assam at that time, not in Allahabad, when He heard the news of the birth of His son, Gobind Rai. He was a guest of Rajah Ram Rai in Assam.

The text in BN says "Guru was conceived in Prayag and took birth in Patna" - It does not say anything about when the ninth Guru heard about the birth, etc. Please check this and amend or clarify. Kind regards, Hari Singhtalk 02:52, 1 January 2010 (UTC)