Talk:Guru Granth Sahib
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Authorship of the Guru Granth Sahib
- Gay think it is necessary to add a section or at least write about the authors of the Guru Granth Sahib 17:36 05 September (UTC+1)
- The first sentence is completely wrong, isn't it? What about Joseph Smith? What about Muhammad? There must be others also. Am I missing something, or does it need to be axed? Jwrosenzweig 00:58, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Gurmukhi
"The text used is a script called Gurmukhi, which is considered a modern development of the ancient language called Sanskrit."
- I'm not sure what this line means. How can a script be a modern development of an ancient language? I'm sure it could be a modern development of Devanagari (which it is not, incidentally) but surely not a language. All sources indicate that Gurmukhi was actually derived from Landa and standardised by Guru Angad Dev. Sure, it was adapted and used to write Sanskrit and other languages in the SGGS, but it was itself not a 'development' from either of these.
Anyone disagree? 82.37.161.188 14:58, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Adi Granth
What is called the Guru Granth Sahib by some Sikhs is also called the Adi Granth by other Sikhs and urtsadfgbudfbsdbdubidufdhfsdxhfbfbsdfs;hdfgs\dbfiusafbby many scholars. It would be helpful to the article if someone knowledeable could clarify the subject. 12.74.168.70 14:33, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I hope this clarifies things:
- "The Adi Granth is often — incorrectly — used to refer to the Guru Granth Sahib. The Adi Granth only forms the portion of the Guru Granth Sahib which Guru Arjan compiled in 1604."
-
- I think that the picture of the Adi Granth (as beautiful as it is) should be replaced by a picture of the Guru Granth Sahib, as that is what the article is about. It only adds confusion to the issue. Mandy Kaur 17:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] change it
dont refer to the limbs of the guru as pages. The guru is considered to be living and as such has limbs not pages. All sikhs refer to the guru as having 'angs' (limbs) so this FACT should be included in the article
- The Guru Granth Sahib is viewed as a book, because that's what it is. Its significance as an eternal guru is mentioned quite regularly throughout Wikipedia. However, this personification is not something that should be prescribed to in a neutral enyclopedia and as such, the pages are referred to as pages. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Guru Granth Sahib Ji
- Should the title be more respectful? Is Guru Granth Sahib Ji more appropriate? BookwormUK 11:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- No, we don't add honorifics such as 'Ji' as Wikipedia aims to be a neutral encyclopedia. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- This edit has raised this issue again. Anthony Appleyard 07:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup of History and Writing Section
It starts with this sentence:
- From about 1479, when Guru Nanak was abon the evenings.
What does "abon the evenings" mean? It looks like this sentence was inadvertently cut off. But since I have no idea what is trying to be said here, I can't really help correct it. Msalt 21:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- I have found and restored the original, by ferreting back through the history. The damage happened in this edit: [1] Anthony Appleyard 19:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Languages
It would be great if someone could explain a little more about which language the scripture is written in. From what I understand a good deal of it is in Braj Bhasa. Ahassan05 17:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)ahassan05
I thought it was written in Punjabi and Hindi! Or perhaps Urdu: I am not sure if Hindi was defined as a language of it's own in that time. Apparantly, many more language were used. Do anyone have a list of all language used to write Guru Granth Sahib? If possible I also want to know to what extent they where used.
2007-03-27 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
- The granth contains many languages, some of which were Hindi, old Punjabi, old Lahnda (Western Punjabi) and others. However, please remember that even today, Punjabi and Hindi are quite similar and as the entire Granth is written in Gurmukhi script, it could be read by someone who didn't read Devanagari.
What I really want to know is which languages where used to write Guru Granth Sahib.
2007-06-22 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
[edit] Hindus trying to make SGGS look like a Hindu book
Look at this paragraph for example "A near-exact count is given in K.P. Agrawala: Adi Shrî Gurû Granth Sâhib kî Mahimâ (Hindi: “The greatness of the original sacred Guru scripture”), p.2, and in Ram Swarup: “Hindu roots of Sikhism”, Indian Express,
The name of the Hindu god Shri Ram, is recited 2,400 times, (the gods name whose constant repetition leads to salvation). Hari (Vishnu) over 8,300 times, 630 times by Guru Nanak alone, Parabrahman, 550 times, Omkara, (the primeval sound of OM) 400 times. Please note the names of countless other Hindu gods are also mentioned and are one and the same.
In contrast the name Mohammed is never mentioned and the name allah is used but a couple of times, merely as an example. It is interesting to note that the Granth itself contains banis from seven of the sikh gurus, two muslim Sufis, but eighteen Hindu saints and pandits.
The religious source of Sikhism is Hinduism, Sikhism is a tradition developed within Hinduism. Guru Granth Sahib reflect Vedantic philosophy, the Vedanta of Rishi Vedvyas who wrote the Mahabharat. The Japji Sahib is based on Upanishads."
Ram, hari, parabraham, and omkara are just ways to refer to the infinate one. Guru Nanak Ji maharaj has no interest in your hindu gods and such. in fact Guru Nanak Dev Ji says, aape patti kalame aap upar lek bhi toon. Ekko keheai nanaka dooja kahe koo. dooj kahe simre jamme te marr jai. ekko simro nanaka jo jal thal reha samai.
Guru Nanak says why would worship others such as Devi devte when they too die and are in the cycle of kaal. He says worship the one who is always in teh ground and water and everywhere else the infinate waheguru.
The religous source of Sikhism is not Hinduism, the source is Waheguru not hindu vedas and what not. Guru nanak in countless places puts emhpasis on how sikhs should not follow the vedas and puranas as they do not comphrehed the infinate. And the Japji sahib the most sacred bani in SIkhism you have just put down saying it is based on Upanishads. BS!! It is an original piece of work that comes staright from Guru Nanak Dev Ji.
I say only sikhs should be allowed to edit sikhsim realted topics. The stupid Hindu missionaries are trying to make the divine Sikhi look like a little panth of Hinduism. We are anything but!! We are SIkhs a diiferent quam or religion. I am going to erase those paragraphs soon. Sikhs are not Hindus in any way or form. Stick to your own vishnu or whatever we dont need your shit. To understand the god in SIkhism one must read teh holy Jaap Sahib by Shri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji. It illistrates how Sikhs view the divine and how they view your lowly earthly Devis, who cannot give you mukti. They too are joon like humans or aniamals they are just another living being who takes birth, lives and dies. No need to worship them. If Hindus want to fine but dont add your bs to pure sikhi articles. If Wikipedia is a nuetrals article it should have the truth on it not biased Hindu comments on it. Alawys trying to blend in teh two religions. yes Guru Nanak was from a hindu familky but he made his own religion by being enlightened by the Incomprehendable. LIke hwo Jesus came from a jew family but started Christianity. SAme concept.
Bhull chuk maaf.
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa!! Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!!
User:Sikhsta12
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa! Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh! The Guru Granth Sahib was in fact, complied by a Sikh. Its not Hindus trying to make it look like a Hindu book. Also, Guru Nanak Dev Ji mentions Hindu deities many times, and in fact, acknowledges their exsistance, except he said they are all One God, which is true. Allah, Ram, and Shiva are the same God. So it is not a Hindu trying to change it. TurbanatorX (talk) 01:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I have this controversial matter in a new file Hindu influence on the Guru Granth Sahib, so the disputing parties can argue about it there without continually disturbing the page Guru Granth Sahib. Anthony Appleyard 16:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Page Hindu influence on the Guru Granth Sahib was deleted as a copyvio; but its text is also at http://www.topix.net/forum/religion/hindu/TTIKLKNR3I2A8KB1S . Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Etymology of “Guru”
The explanation of the word guru’s origin is a folk etymology. Actually, “guru” simply means “teacher” in Sanskrit.
2007-07-10 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
[edit] Lead paragraph
Hi guys. In my humble opinion, the lead paragraph lays undue stress on gurmata, which detracts from the main subject of the article and is confusing. Can we move that to some part later in the article? Thanks. ReluctantPhilosopher (talk) 18:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- what's stoping you? but please make sure you don't mess up anything. Ajjay (talk) 18:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Urdu Wikipedia
- The title of this page's corresponding page in the Urdu Wikipedia is گرنتھ صاحب, i.e. merely "Granth Ṣāḥib" without the "Guru". Is this correct? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Juristic person
Here is references [2] (PDF Document)
The court does not equate it with an idol, and recognized it as a sole successor of sikh gurus.
Also i was only adding, what i thought was relevent information, you can delete the whole para , if you find it is not relevent.thanksAjjay (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- No, I believe it is relevant, though perhaps not in the lead. The SC seems to have said "The Granth replaces the Guru after the tenth Guru. We unhesitatingly hold Guru Granth Sahib to be a juristic person." But also clearly lays out legal dispute-related reasons why it would be necessary to do so, so I think both perspectives need to be mentioned clearly. Relata refero (talk) 14:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- But the court also states that it cannot be compared to an idol, or other religious texts. And the succession was invested by the last guru...now it is a living guru of sikhsAjjay (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed, but that is the historical background. After that passage, the Court says "In this background and on overall considerations..." before going on to deliver the judgment. Relata refero (talk) 14:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- So how do you think it should appear?Ajjay (talk) 14:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I made this edit. What do you think? Relata refero (talk) 14:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think it is ok, but we need a clear elaboration on differnce between deity and the granth. Besides , as the judgement pronounces, "a gurudwara cannot be without Guru granth placed in it.Ajjay (talk) 15:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- How is this re-wording? I think it is just fineAjjay (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- No, I believe it is relevant, though perhaps not in the lead. The SC seems to have said "The Granth replaces the Guru after the tenth Guru. We unhesitatingly hold Guru Granth Sahib to be a juristic person." But also clearly lays out legal dispute-related reasons why it would be necessary to do so, so I think both perspectives need to be mentioned clearly. Relata refero (talk) 14:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Insecticide and fungicide
- What does Sikh religion say about treating a copy of the Guru Granth Sahib with insecticide and fungicide to prevent or stop attack by insects (e.g. bookworm) and fungi? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
- There isn't any as such. In sikh religion, the Holy book is opened and taken care atleast twice in a day(It is mandatory). A clean dry cloth is kept, with which pages are cleaned, before reading and turning over of pages, this prevents fungus etc. You cannot keep the granth lying idle ( like in a store or bookshelf). It has to be kept carefully wrapped in a special cloth, that is changed daily. When a book gets old, or becomes unusable, it is taken and burned on a pyre, just like a dead human, on a special day. I hope this answers your query.Shalimer (talk) 06:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)