Four or Five Takhats

I wish to know why Damdama Sahib was given the status of a takhat? Was the historic evidence considered? From what I have recently read, it was Fateh Singh (Sant) who introduced this idea and using his influences passed the resolution. Scholars like Sirdar Kapur Singh and Dr. Trilochan Singh as well as dozen other scholars did not agree with this step. Khalsa panth has the power to make any change but as far as I know Sarbat Khalsa was not called and it was some politicians and SGPC that made the change. If anyone could shed some light on this, it would be great. Guru Rakha

regarding the question of four or five, i think it would have to be five, the leadership of which would be panj piyara when needed.

as to whether the fifth takht is damdama sahib... nihangs of budha dal have their own theory on that, but i've never heard it questioned by the rest of the panth...

nihangs consider Budha Dal to be the 5th tkhat,

oddslot

Two Takhats outside Punjab, were always likely to disagree with the decisions dictated by SGPC; so to create a majority count in Punjab with three out of five ratio; the fifth takhat suited the Akali Politics. Thus Damdama Sahib was named as Takhat.

I need to confirm it.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

As far as I've heard in Katha, Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj personally declared Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib as the 5th Takhat.

There is proof, at Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib you will find the following:

- Hukamnamay written by Guru Gobind Singh Ji (with signature) that clearly have written "Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib" in the Hukamnama text.
- A stamp with the text: "Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib" which was used by Guru Gobind Singh Ji is still present there today.

Several Puraatan Jathay such as Damdami Taksal have always recognized Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib as a Takhat. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji mentions this in Katha. The SGPC however operates with their own mindset as we all know. SGPC officially recognized Takhat Sri Damdama Sahib as the 5th Takhat in the mid 60's.

Just a side note: Parkaash of Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji was done until 1973. SGPC stopped the Parkaash then.

Bhul chuk maaf kario.

Isn't that hukamnama kept by descendents of Bhai Dall Singh? Neither is it published nor available for scholars to study. If the proof existed then it doesn't explain why the step was taken very late and eminent Sikh scholars rejected this step. Is there any historical record mentioning Damdama Sahib as takhat? I remember reading it being a “Manji” but not a Takhat.

May we know that how these (four or five) Takhat Sahibaan were given the status of Takhat? Who gave this status and when? Regarding Akal Takhat we know that, Guru Sahib Himself advised the sangat. What about other Takhats? As Sevadar84 Ji says that Guru Gobind Singh Ji, Himself said Sri Damdama Sahib to be the FIfth Takhat; does it imply that other four were Takhats, by that time?

Quote

eminent Sikh scholars rejected this step

who rejected the step and why?

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

MB Singh Ji,

My apologies, I was wrong in my previous post. I was not clear and should've said that Guru Gobind Singh Ji named Damdama Sahib a Takhat, I shouldn't have said "5th Takhat" because Guru Sahib still had to travel to Hazur Sahib so there couldn't have been a total of 5 Takhats while Guru Jee was at Damdama Sahib.

daas will be going to Damdama Sahib next year and I will try to take pictures of the Hukamnama Sahib and Guru Ji's stamp which is present there. I will try to find historical references that mention Sri Damdama Sahib as Takhat.

Apologies for wrong doings.

Scholars like Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, Dr. Trilochan Singh, Sardar Kapoor Singh, Dr. Taran Singh. Prof. Kartar Singh, Surinder Singh Kohli, Giani Partap Singh and many more advocated four Takhats only. In historical records, Damdama Sahib is given the status of Manji or ‘Parchar Kendar’. Akal Takhat was built by Guru Sahib himself, Guru Gobind Singh Ji took avtar at Patna so it was considered a takhat, Khalsa Panth established at Kesgarh Sahib so it was called a takhat, Gurgaddi was given to ‘Granth and Panth’ at Hazoor Sahib so it was called a takhat. Maryada of takhats was/is different than regular Gurdwaras. Damdama Sahib was never given any status of takhat nor was maryada of takhat was ever observed there prior to later 60s. Readers can read works of scholars to find more evidence about four takhats.

Only advocate of the fifth takhat worth the name is Giani Gurdit Singh whose arguments were refuted by some of above mentioned scholars. Principal Satbir Singh was appointed by the SGPC to submit a report along with Giani Gurdit Singh. While former supported four takhats, latter supported the move to make the fifth takhat. Harchand Singh Longowal was appointed its first “Singh Sahib”. I do not know why the resolution was passed and what evidence was considered acceptable but I think this serious matter needs to be probed and reevaluated. Guru Rakha

knowing the significance of the number ੫ in sikh history, and understanding that the leadership of each takht would naturally come together as panj piyaras for panthic decisions, it seems that five takhts simply makes more logical sense.

i am curious to understand the logic behind there being only four.

thanks for the list of scholars who supported four takhts. is there some document which they all contributed to/signed that can be read to understand their arguments? or can you list the books in which they say four?

sorry to bother you, but i'm not as familiar with sikh scholars and history, so i'm not sure where to start if i want to learn more on this subject.

It is off the topic.

Takhats always had a big board displaying Sikh Rehat Maryada in brief. Sri Akal Takhat Sahib is not displaying that after 1984.

There was also a sign board near the Parkash Asthaan to say that "ETHE PATIT DEE ARDAAS NAHIN HUNDI". That I am sure. May be it also included Be-Amriti i.e. "ETHE BEAMRITI ATE PATIT DEE ARDAAS NAHIN HUNDI". That is also missing after 1984.

What about other Takhat Sahibs? If anybody knows about that?

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

Not claiming any expertise in the matter, but Budha Dal has claimed to be the Fifth Takht for the longest of times. Bhai Pyara Singh "Padam"'s Rehatnamae book mentions Takht Damdama Sahib as the fifth Takht and then in parenthesis, says (home/station of the Budha Dal). Perhaps that association may need to be researched and may provide a basis for that decision?

Quote
MB Singh
May we know that how these (four or five) Takhat Sahibaan were given the status of Takhat? Who gave this status and when?

Hazoor Sahib
On the place where Guru Sahib use to sit and hold his darbar, the khalsa built a room over the platform where Guru ji used to sit while holding his court and installed Guru Granth Sahib on it. They called it Takhat Sahib.

On the day Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Maharaj gave Gurgadhi to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, this was the first hukamnama on that occasion :

ਸੂਹੀਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
ਅਬਿਚਲਨਗਰੁਗੋਬਿੰਦਗੁਰੂਕਾਨਾਮੁਜਪਤਸੁਖੁਪਾਇਆਰਾਮ ॥

ਮਨਇਛੇਸੇਈਫਲਪਾਏਕਰਤੈਆਪਿਵਸਾਇਆਰਾਮ ॥

ਕਰਤੈਆਪਿਵਸਾਇਆਸਰਬਸੁਖਪਾਇਆਪੁਤਭਾਈਸਿਖਬਿਗਾਸੇ ॥

ਗੁਣਗਾਵਹਿਪੂਰਨਪਰਮੇਸੁਰਕਾਰਜੁਆਇਆਰਾਸੇ ॥

ਪ੍ਰਭੁਆਪਿਸੁਆਮੀਆਪੇਰਖਾਆਪਿਪਿਤਾਆਪਿਮਾਇਆ ॥

ਕਹੁਨਾਨਕਸਤਿਗੁਰਬਲਿਹਾਰੀਜਿਨਿਏਹੁਥਾਨੁਸੁਹਾਇਆ ॥੧॥
Reading the Hukamnama's alone, makes it clear about the greatness of Hazoor Sahib & why it is Khalsa's Takht. Guru Sahib named this place ਅਬਿਚਲ ਨਗਰੁ himself.

Takht Patna Sahib
When Guru Nanak Dev Sahib Maharaj visited Patna, the Diamond incident with Mardana happened where Silas Rai occurred. Silas Rai then bacame a Sikh of Guru ji and turned his haveli into a Dharamshala. My assumption is remained the headquarters of Sikhi in East India for a long period of time till Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Maharaj came
When Guru Ji did came with his family Raja Fateh Chand Maini demolished the old house of Silas Rai and built a new house over same place, where Guru jis family stayed.
When Guru Sahib left for punjab with Gobind Rai and other family members for Punjab, the house continued to remain ontinued to be maintained as a holy place of worship. There is a hukamnama by Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib where he refers to it as Takht Patna Sahib.Due to the birth of Sri Guru Gobind Rai ji. Just cant recall where Chatrik saw it. But it was called as a Takht ,as Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib himself conferred the title 'Takht' to it.Historically it has been accepted as Takht by Khalsa.

-------------------------------------------------------

Personally don't see why there should be an issue, why Sri Damdama Sahib cannot be called a Takht. It is the place where the current Guru of Khalsa, SriGuruGranthSahibJi was given its 'current form', which we accept as Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.It must have been an important Sikh center if people like Baba Deep SIngh ji remained there for years after Sri Guru ji had left it.
Maybe some people have an issue with it as it was not called a Takht from Guru Sahib's period itself. But this doesn't Damdama Sahib is any less important.

Chota veer

By the way, why Nankana Sahib is not a Takhat?

MB Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> By the way, why Nankana Sahib is not a Takhat?


dont worry it'll become one when Singhs take over

WaheGuruJiKaKhalsa ll WaheGuruJiKiFateh ll

Akal Takhat always has been the supreme takhat of all the others. Sarbat Khalsa was called only at this takhat and Gurmattas and hukamnamas were passed here. Role of other takhats has been to support the decision of Akal Takhat. Having a single person as “jathedar” of any takhat is simply contrary to Gurmat. Akal Takhat is throne of Akal Purakh himself where His hukam reigns supreme. Therefore, only army of Akal Purakh i.e. Panj Pyare in whom authority of Akal Roop Guru Sahib is invested can become jathedar of Akal Takhat and the panth. Similarly, all takhats are supposed to have Panj Pyare as jathedar. No takhat can issue hukamnama in opposition of Akal Takhat or can become its rival. Gurmat is not like other religions where authority is invested in a single person like Brahmin, Pope or Qazi.

Darbar Sahib has played more important role in Sikh history than Nankana Sahib because it was built by Guru Sahib himself while Nankana Sahib was built by Sri Chand and was managed by him until udasis became part of Sikhi during Guru Hargobind Ji’s time. Then why not convert Darbar Sahib to a takhat? Mixing up a takhat and a Gurdwara should not happen. Both play a different role. I am not aware of any procedure which can be used to convert a Gurdwara to takhat. When Guru Hargobind Ji’s sword broke during a battle he refused to use the other sword since the other sword represented piri. It shows Guru Sahib did not mix miri and piri or used piri sword in place of miri. Then why should we convert a Gurdwara representing piri to a takhat to represent miri? Damdama Sahib has always been a gurdwara. It has been called a ‘manji’ or religious center.
Guru Granth Sahib was finalized at Damdama of Anandpur Sahib. I have read about at least 2 saroops that exist that were compiled by Guru Gobind Singh Ji prior to leaving Anandpur Sahib. I am still studying this topic more but to me it makes sense that Guru Ji must have completed Guru Granth Sahib at Anandpur Sahib. If he could compile Dasam Granth (without Zafarnama) prior to 1699 then why not Guru Granth Sahib. My purpose for starting this topic was to find out if anyone knew any valid legitimate reason for declaring Damdama Sahib a takhat not debating on why it shouldn’t be. I have copies of rehat maryada from 1936 and 1950 published by SGPC. Both have ardaas as ਚੋਹਾਂ ਤਖਤਾਂ ਸਰਬੱਤ ਗੁਰਦਵਾਰਿਆਂ ਦਾ ਧਿਆਨ ਧਰ ਕੇ ਬੋਲੋ ਜੀ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ।

Those who want to learn more can read article of Dr. Trilochan Singh published in Sikh Review magazine in 1971 and Naven Takhat Bare booklet by Giani Partap Singh. Both I think are up on panjab digital library website. Guru Rakha.

Bijla Singh Veer Ji, you said that u have copies of old prints of Rehat Maryada. That is fine. Can we have a list of changes made in Rehat Maryada, by comparing 1936 and 2010 prints. Did u ever try?

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

Bhai Bijla Singh, please post up the 1936 Rehat Maryada and the 1950 Rehat Maryadas. If they are complete, there are other answers needed in them to verify.

Thanks!

Veer BIjla Singh Ji,

Wow these are some very interesting findings indeed. I especially like the following statement:

> Akal Takhat always has been the supreme takhat of
> all the others. Sarbat Khalsa was called only at
> this takhat and Gurmattas and hukamnamas were
> passed here. Role of other takhats has been to
> support the decision of Akal Takhat. Having a
> single person as “jathedar” of any takhat is
> simply contrary to Gurmat. Akal Takhat is throne
> of Akal Purakh himself where His hukam reigns
> supreme. Therefore, only army of Akal Purakh i.e.
> Panj Pyare in whom authority of Akal Roop Guru
> Sahib is invested can become jathedar of Akal
> Takhat and the panth. Similarly, all takhats are
> supposed to have Panj Pyare as jathedar. No takhat
> can issue hukamnama in opposition of Akal Takhat
> or can become its rival. Gurmat is not like other
> religions where authority is invested in a single
> person like Brahmin, Pope or Qazi.