Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview with Gurvichar … MGC lame response More LIES abound … Comments Part 3

170507 Jooth Na Bool Pandey

Shabad:  Jhooth Na Bol Pandey – Bhai Harjinder Singh Jee Sri Nagar Wale 

by Harnaak Singh

Dear Sangat Ji and Mr Jagir

In Part 1, posted on 01-05-2017, I addressed the first 6 pages of Jagir’s (President of MGC) response dated 27-04-2017 to Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview posted on Gurvichar.

First let us summarise the main points from Part 1.

  • Considering that Jagir has time to address correspondence related to Gurdwara Boards of East Africa, Jagir’s statement “time should be better spent in Guru Ki Sewa”, instead of addressing local issues raised in Datuk Sucha’s interview, appears highly hypocritical.
  • Kirtan/Katha on Dasam Granth Bani has been conducted in Malaysia from the time of our forefathers.  Jagir must have been living in oblivion before 22-04-2016 for him to say that there was no Dasam Granth related programs conducted in Malaysian Gurdwaras for 130 years.  
  • Jagir even got the meaning of the SGGS Ji verse he quoted in his support wrong.  This has been a problem with Jagir and his cohorts, giving wrong messages using verses from SGGS Ji.
  • There is much to be said about Jagir’s pitiful understanding of the Gurmatta (he quoted) and the Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM).  He is giving wrong and misguided messages using these.
  • Jagir quotes a FALSE DOCUMENT “Resolution No. 36672” in support of his claim.

Then in part 2 we exposed some lies Jagir is propagating in relation to Part Two of Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview.  These are 

  • Jagir, saying that “ਪ੍ਰਤੀਕ” means “PROOF”, cannot even get the meaning of “ਪ੍ਰਤੀਕ” which means “SIGN”.  This leads to a misinterpretation of the Akal Takhat Matta.
  • Nor is Jagir’s understanding of the SRM even satisfactory.  He totally misinterprets and states SRM sanctions only Jaap, 10 Sawaeyay and Chaupaee.  He forgot that the SRM sanctions Ardaas which is from Chandi Di Vaar and also Charitro Pakhyan (of which Chaupaee is a part of).
  • Jagir further misleads the reader by stating that there is no Akal Ustat Banee in DG.  He claims it to be Kaal Ustat.  The Tatkara (contents) of the handwritten DG dated 1698 at Patna Sahib clearly shows that “Ustat Akal Ji Ki”, which essentially means “Akal Ustat”, Banee in DG.
  • Jagir does not recognise and understand that SGGS Ji states that the knowledge of Vedas is in Gurbani and the DG includes this knowledge which is an exposition to the mythological references SGGS Ji.
  • Jagir does not understand, in fact lies, misinterprets and misleads in relation to the contents of these Gurmatta and Matta from Akal Takhat.  Combined these documents say that no one has the right to question DG Banee and Gursikhs should respond appropriately to those questioning DG Banee.
  • Jagir does not even know/ understand what he wrote in the letter dated 12-07-2016, whence he claims that he did not ban the Ardas. It is explicitly clear that he passed an edict that only Jaap, 10 Sawaeyay and Chaupaee can be recited from DG.  This automatically excludes any other Banees or parts therefrom from DG.
  • Jagir misinterpret the word Gurbani, and then also questions the phrase “Guru Granth’s and Guru Gobind Singh’s hymns” in the authentic English translation of the SRM.  It appears he neither understands, nor abides by the SRM.

Now I will look at the pages 10 to 12 of Jagir’s letter starting from “Part Three (of interview)” on page 10.  Having seen the extent of the misleading/ misguiding messages by Jagir as exposed in Parts 1 and 2, it would be no surprise to expect more of the same nonsense in rest of the letter.

  1. Jagir claims that Giani Iqbal Singh’s statement that the Dasam Granth is Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Banee is against the SRM and hence a transgression of SRM.  Jagir further goes on ranting about the personal lives of Giani Iqbal Singh and Giani Joginder Singh Vedanthi and quotes some verses from SGGS Ji misinterpreting the meanings of these verses to mean SGGS rejects Avtars.  He did not provide evidence of any of his claims.   

Firstly I will question you, Jagir, on personal matters, because you are introducing a  personal tone (towards the Takhat Jathedars) in your comments.  I put it to you that I believe that you were NOT AMRITDHARI, which is one of the requirements of the MGC constitution, when you assumed the president-ship of MGC.  I say this because the word is that you only took Amrit during Vaisakhi 2017.  If you were Amritdhari when you assumed president-ship of MGC what was the need of taking Amrit in 2017.  Did you illegally take up the presidency of the MGC?  If this is so you have CHEATED the Gurdwaras and the Sangat of MalaysiaI think what you claim Gianis’ Iqbal Singh and Joginder Singh have done, PALES AS COMPARED TO WHAT YOU MAY HAVE DONETheirs appears a personal matter and unlikely to affect the duties they performed (for example consider your doctor; who your doctor sleeps with, cheating on his/her partner, is no concern of yours, it does not affect his/her duties as a doctor and you keep going to this doctor).   Remember it takes Panj Piaray, not just one person (e.g. Giani Ji) to make the decisions for the Panth.  You, on the other hand, may have cheated and deceived the all the Gurdwaras and the entire Sangat of Malaysia.

Had you been Amritdhari when you assumed presidency, it was your duty to ensure that you maintain your Amritdhari status throughout your tenure, this being one of the preamble requirements of the constitution.  If you had failed to maintain your Amritdhari status any time during your tenure, you should have immediately resigned or taken Amrit: this is your moral responsibility to the MGC, the Gurdwaras and the Sangat.

Additionally, it is your duty to ensure that every one of the four Vice-Presidents are Amritdhari, follow the SRM and are knowledgeable in Gurmat Sikhi etcAre all the four Vice-Presidents Amritdhari and have the appropriate knowledge

You too should, as well be following the SRM and be knowledgeable in Gurmat Sikhi etc Are you?

The next question is related to the SRM which you so dearly quote at every opportunity giving me and everyone an impression that the SRM is very close to your heart. 

In accordance with the SRM, have you been getting up every morning in the ambrosial hours, recite Jap, Jaap and Ten Sawaeyay and perform Sodar Rehras in the evening after sunset and Sohila at night before you go to bed (SRM Chapter III Article IV English Version see Figure 1)?  Have you been reciting the Ardas as stipulated in the SRM?  This is a requirement especially of an Amritdhari Sikh; more so if one is President of MGC. 


Figure 1: Extract from SRM

170511 SRM Nitnem

Giani Iqbal Singh has rightly so stated that Guru Gobind Singh Ji composed the Dasam Granth.  The Gurmatta-1 dated 06-06-2008 bears testimony to this.  Gurmatta refers to Dasam Granth as a whole.  It does not put any exceptions, if it was believed that the Dasam Granth or parts of it were not composed by Guru Gobind Singh Ji it would have been stated so in the Gurmatta.  Should the Gurmatta be applicable to composition of other Faiths? No, it should not; this is why the Gurmatta would have excluded the sections from DG it believed were not Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Banee, BUT it did NOT.  This is simple common sense.  

Evidence of the authenticity of the Dasam Granth is documented at Link A.  Substantial further evidence is articled at Gurvichar (gurvichar.com) and in “Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Q & A by G S Man and Kamalroop Singh.  Kamalroop Singh, who did his PhD in textual history of Dasam Granth, cites seven handwritten most famous early copies with dates ranging from 1695 through 1765 in this book (Sri Dasam Granth Q & A).  

I think Jagir YOU ARE THE ONE WHO is transgressing the Supreme Authority of the Sikh Panth by claiming that the Dasam Granth is not a composition of Guru Gobind Singh Ji.  

  1. Jagir claims that Takhat Patna Sahib cannot issue a hukamnama 

According to Mahan Kosh, a HUKAMNAMA means Shahi Farman” (Royal edict i.e. an order or proclamation issued by an authority).  Mahan Kosh further states that the HUKAMNAMA can be issued by the FOUR TAKHATS (note there were four Takhats when the Mahan Kosh was written but there are FIVE TAKHATS NOW). 

The essentials of a Hukamnama are 

  • order of proclamation
  • from one of the Takhats.

Jagir clearly does not understand what a hukamnama is and who can issue it.  OR  Jagir,  are you dreaming up definitions as you go along to suit your agenda?  

My God, what Gurmat/Sikhi related ignorance on the part of Jagir who is the President of MGC!

(Note that the Mahan Kosh by Bhai Kahn Singh is the most authoritative Gurbani related Dictionary/Encyclopaedia)

  1. Jagir claims that the highest religious body of the Sikh World is the SGPC 

SRM in Chapter IV Article V (p) defines the supreme body, or throne or seats of high authority for the Sikh.  This is shown in the extract from the SRM in Figure 2.

Figure 2: The Sikh Supreme Body defined in the SRM 

Takhats - SRM definition

Now where did Jagir DREAM UP SGPC AS THE HIGHEST AUTHORITYJagir, are you living in a DREAMWORLD? Do you really understand the SRM?

  1. Jagir quotes a FAKE hukamnama 36672 to support his slander of Dasam Granth 

This is a favourite of Jagir.  The issue of FAKE HUKAMNAMA 36672 has been addressed in Part 2 Point 5 CHARITRO PAKHYAN.  Not only Jagir has transgressed the Supreme Authority (the Five Takhats) but fabricates LIES to support his DISTORTION OF THE TRUTH.  In his position as President of the MGC, this is absolutely unacceptable.

  1. Jagir quotes some verses from SGGS Ji misinterpreting the meanings of these verses to show that our Gurus rejected Avtars.

We will first analyse the verses quoted by Jagir.  We refer to Professor Sahib Singh’s teeka for the explanation of the verses. The explanation is presented below.  

In verse 1, GuruJi says that, Indra (God of Devtas) who was overcome by sexual desire when he saw Ahalia, wife of Gautam (a hermit).  Gautam cursed Indra and the result was Indra’s body was marked by a thousand female sexual organs in which instance Indra regretted his lustfullnes.

In verse 2, Guru Ji says that succumbing to the three qualities ਗੁਣ of Maya, Devtas Brahma, Vishnu and Shiv become morbid, because they acted in Ego.  They forgot God who created them.

In verse 3, GuruJi says, hey Pandit, you state that the Shiv you are devoted to, can curse or destroy in anger.  How can you be devoted to such a Shiv?  Your Shiv was seen riding a white bull to a store-keeper’s house for a banquet.  Possibly because the food was not satisfactory, Shiv cursed and caused the death of the store-keepers son.

I am at a loss to appreciate the connection to rejection of Avtars in these verses.  The three verses are merely statements related to certain actions and their consequences.  Notwithstanding this, without studying the complete Shabad, it is impossible to understand the true meaning of the verse.  In fact Gurbani acknowledges Avtars as shown in the following verses

Kaee Kot Hoey Avtar SGGS 276 Garudi M: 5

Many millions are the divine incarnations.

Bhagat hayt Avtar leeo hai bhag bado bpra ko raySGGS 338 Gaurdi Kabir

Because of his devotion, Krishna was incarnated in his home; how great was the good fortune of this poor man!

Now briefly consider the “Ek Granth..” Concept promoted by Jagir.  I have a question regarding the reference to the mythology, Gautam, Indra, Shiv, Brahma, Mahadev, white bull, in the three verses Jagir quoted.  I searched the SGGS Ji but could not find the meaning/ explanation/ history of these.  Jagir, can you direct me to where I could find the explanation of these in the SGGS Ji?  I bet you cannot.  The answer lies elsewhere. Jagir does not understand the true teaching in SGGS Ji is “food for our soul”.  

The history behind mythological references is not taught in SGGS Ji, these being used to illustrate e.g. the message related to the five evils (Kam, Krodh, Lob, Moh, Hangkar); the assumption, in SGGS Ji, is that the historical basis of the reference is known.  For example in Jagir’s quoted verse 1, the message is that we should control our Kaam otherwise the consequences will not be good and we will regret in the end.  This message applies universally for all the five evils.  Anyone who succumbs to one or more of the five evils will eventually pay the consequences and regret.

Notice how in the crux of the message the mythology is not referred to, BUT we must know sufficient information about this mythology to understand the message Gurbani is teaching us.  This is precisely what is meant when we say that SGGS Ji teaches us Nirgun (transcendent) related knowledge.  The mythology is referenced merely as a metaphor.  Therefore a metaphor is only an aid to understanding.  THIS IS THE REASON WHY SGGS JI, OUR LIVING GURU, SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A METAPHOR.  This, that SGGS Ji is a METAPHOR, is unfortunately subscribed to by Jagir and his cohorts.

Jagir is caught LYING AGAIN, there being no evidence of rejection of Avtars in SGGS Ji.  

Jagir, understand the REAL MESSAGE behind the FIRST verse you quoted and you will not regret.

  1. Jagir claims that  Global Sikh Council Inc. being declared Panth Dokhi is wrong because the video Hukamnama is not acceptable to him. 

The meaning of and who can issue Hukamnama is explained in Point 13 above.  The video hukamnama was issued at Takhat Patna Sahib by the Panj Piarey that declared Global Sikh Council Inc. as Panth Dokhi.  What more evidence is needed in this modern world of MULTIMEDIA?  The two criteria, THE ORDER OR PROCLAMATION and FROM TAKHAT PATNA SAHIB are satisfied and that is a Hukamnama.  

Anyway let us analyse what Panth Dokhi means,

Dokhi means “virodhi” (Mahan Kosh).  Virodhi means “going against” or “antagonist”.  Let’s consider the views of Global Sikh Council Inc. aided by MGC 

  • propagating Dr Chahal’s ideology pertaining to .  He is proposing changes to how this word is pronounced.  Refer to Link B for details.  This is against the practice of the Panth,
  • claiming that SGGS Ji, our LIVING GURU “is a metaphor” is in opposition of what the Sikh Panth accepts presently as well as the edict of Guru Gobind Singh Ji.  See Point 16 (for the implication of metaphor) above as well as Link C for details,
  • inclination towards DEIST (see Link D and Link E) thought which has many elements which are against the teaching of our Gurus accepted and followed by the Sikh Panth,
  • rejection of the Dasam Granth as one of the Sikh Scriptures, which has been accepted and practiced in the Sikh Panth from the time of our Gurus.

The dot points above, clearly list at least four known Sikh Panth Virodhi thinking of the Global Sikh Council Inc.  How can the MGC claim that Global Sikh Council Inc. is not Panth Dokhi?

There is another very important point to take note of.  Jagir has been very critical of the installation of Dasam Granth in the presence of SGGS Ji and even calls those who do this as transgression of the SRM.  Let me put it to you Jagir  that, this is because, in your mind you do NOT take the SGGS Ji as a LIVING GURU, you consider it a METAPHOR.  So essentially, for you and your cohorts, the SGGS Ji is merely a Granth (book of knowledge) that you use to acquire our Gurus teachings.  So when there is an installation of the Dasam Granth in the presence of SGGS Ji, you consider both as Granths (books of knowledge) and you interpret this as being ON PAR.  

On the other hand the Sikh Panth who accept the Dasam Granth, BELIEVE that SGGS Ji is their LIVING GURU therefore an installation of Dasam Granth in the presence of SGGS Ji is NEVER CONSIDRED ON PAR BECAUSE SGGS JI IS A LIVING GURU AND DASAM GRANTH IS NOT.  

Sangat Ji, PLEASE UNDERSTAND AND SEE THROUGH THIS falsehood about the DG being on PAR with SGGS Ji that is being propagated by Jagir and his cohorts.  WHICH he is propagating in line with his and his cohorts Kala Afghana/ Ragi Darshan agenda.

… to be continued in Part 4

170512 mgc lame response part 3.jpg