Shasha instead of Sasa?

I've always been wondering why most people pronounce Sasa as Shasha, even though it is written as Sasa.

What is the correct way?

I know that Taksaal belive to say Sasa e.g Sabad, Saheed.

I personally say sasa as that is how Guroo Sahib wrote it.

I fully agree with your views.
One might be doing it differently because of sheer ignorance.Initially I have also been making such a mistake when a
gursikh pointed me out I immediately accepted his suggestion and started the way you feel about this.


Bhul chuk Maaf

Daas

Prakash.s.Bagga

Vaaheguroojeekaakhalsaa Vaaheguroojeekeefatehh Jee..

From what I have heard from Gursikhs is that through proper santhiya can one totally understand how Gurbani is meant to be read and understood. There are a lot of instances where Sasaa is written in the Gurbani but is pronounced as Shasha. The reason behind that is that due to the Urdu influence 6 alphabets were added to the Paintee akhars of Gurmukhi (Shasha, Khakha pair bindee, Gagga pair Bindee, Jhajha pair bindee, phapha pair bindee and lalla pair bindee). Since these alphabets were added to Punjabi Language after Shri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was complied, the places where shasha was meant to be pronounced we can see sassa written.

Only through correct pronunciation can the right vyaakheya be done since the meanings can change all together if they are not pronounced i the correct way.
The right pronunciations to words with Sasa are Shaheed, Shabad, Patshaah, Shahu and so on.

Im sure Bhai Kulbir Singh Jee can tell us more.

Bhul Chul Dee Khima..

This is a post by Bhai Kulbir Singh briefly explaining why there are different sounds for same letter:

Gagan Singh jeeo,

You are correct that separate alphabets for the sounds of Shasha and Zazza were not around at the time Gurbani was written but this does not mean that these sounds too were not around. Farsi contains both of these sounds and Sanskrit contains the sound of Shasha. Both of these languages have been around for long time.

Many alphabets in Gurmukhi have more than one sound and the alphabet that we today call Sassa, broadly speaking, has two sounds - Sassa and Shasha. The greatest proof of this is that in Bawan Akhri, Guru Sahib has clearly used one alphabet ਸ for the sounds of Shasha and Sassa. In Sanskrit the sounds of Sassa and Shasha are present and Guru Sahib used one alphabet ਸ for both sounds.

In English we see that the alphabet "C" sometimes has the sound similar to "S" and sometimes similar to "K". Same way some alphabets in Punjabi change their sound as they appear in the beginning of the word, in the middle and in the end.

The problem is that we should not read Gurmukhi through the lenses of modern Punjabi. Today we have created many more alphabets in Punjabi because there are more sounds than the original 35 letters but in olden days the same 35 letters were used for all sounds. If we try to read Gurbani by learning Punjabi, we would read it wrong. Punjabi today has up to 41 alphabets and as many or more sounds but Gurmukhi has 35 alphabets and more sounds. So many times these alphabets have multiple sounds.

Think about it. Many shabads have been created by Guru Sahib while talking to Pandits and Muslim Faqirs. Do you think while talking to Pandits, Guru Sahib was not saying "Shanti" or "Shabad"? Do you think Guru Sahib would be saying 'Sabad" and "Saanti"? Same way while talking to Muslim Kazis and Mullahs, Guru Sahib spoke Arabic and Farsi. There are pure Farsi shabads in Gurbani. Guru Sahib was adept in Sanskrit, Farsi and Arabic languages. How could Guru Sahib pronounce wrongly the Farsi and Sanskrit words?

Rest Bhai, Guru Sahib knows.

Kulbir Singh

Preetam Singh

Quote
Think about it. Many shabads have been created by Guru Sahib while talking to Pandits and Muslim Faqirs. Do you think while talking to Pandits, Guru Sahib was not saying "Shanti" or "Shabad"? Do you think Guru Sahib would be saying 'Sabad" and "Saanti"? Same way while talking to Muslim Kazis and Mullahs, Guru Sahib spoke Arabic and Farsi. There are pure Farsi shabads in Gurbani. Guru Sahib was adept in Sanskrit, Farsi and Arabic languages. How could Guru Sahib pronounce wrongly the Farsi and Sanskrit words?

Bhai Kulbir Singh Jio, the most convincing touch Daas has ever read. Today it's like saying to an English man that "Would you like to add SOOGAR in your tea".

Bhai Kulbir Singh Jio, the most convincing touch Daas has ever read. Today it's like saying to an English man that "Would you like to add SOOGAR in your tea".

VERY INTERESTING.

One should always keep in mind that exceptions can never become a Rule.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Daas

Prakash.S.Bagga

vaheguroo jee

i still don't understand what people insist on not pronouncing the sh sounds, no one has yet been able to tell me what the word "sabad" , "saran" and "saster" mean. Bagga jee, these words are not exceptions, the sh sound is supposed to be pronounced while reading it, they were pronounced when guru sahib was doing ucharan of them, and they have to be pronounced now. just use your own common sense, how can you pronounce the word kushiyaan as kusiyaan... what the hell does that even mean?!??!?

This needs to be confirmed whether the pronunciation of words in Gurbanee is left for the common sense of
the reader of Gurbanee.
Then this does not require any discussion except for making use of Common Sense..There may be different
level of common sense for different persons.

In this regard I can only say as long as any pronunciation does not affect the essense of the meaning of the
word one should be able to make his common sense.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Daas

Prakash.S.Bagga

Vaheguroo jee

Bagga jee then i suppose we should call you Prakas S. Bagga now

Daas

Bagga jee then i suppose we should call you Prakas S. Bagga now

In fact many people do so and I understand them comfortably.

Daas

Prakash.s.Bagga

Bagga Ji, using "common sense" does not mean, that we are ignoring Gurmat way. Within Gurmat, we have to have it. We need to use it. What we learn from Gurmat, becomes part of our common sense, in itself. This is Gurmat sense. When someone says that, Guru Sahib will not have pronounced Kusian to the word KHUSHIAN; that makes sense. Most of us will agree to it, only those who are taught to do it in a particular way; will try to stick to the ancestoral way; defying logic and common sense.

Some of our sikh brothers, also try to stick to no BINDI sound, when it is not there. This is again wrong.

I personally feel that, those who try to say like that (i.e. no bindi sound, no shasha sound; when not written) suppress their natural flow of reading Gurbani.

I think there is nothing on record how Gurbanee words used to be pronounced by any of our GuRu
in their times.
So the matter of pronunciation is going to remain subjective .I am of the view that instead being
subjective for pronunciation it would always be woth to pronounce the word as wrtitten.

Why to indulge in an ever inconclusive point in context of Gurbanee .?

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Daas

Prakash.s.bagga

Just so im clear on what you're saying... You dont know how guru sahibs used to say it so instead of saying the actual words, you are going to replace them with words that dont even exist? What about words that have multiple meanings? Like sah (breath) and shah (king)?

Many Sikhs consider reading Gurbani without adding any additional bindis to be accurate. They sometimes quote the pangtee below in support of their arguments:

ਅਖਰ ਲਿਖੇ ਸੇਈ ਗਾਵਾ ਅਵਰ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ਬਾਣੀ ||੧|| ਰਹਾਉ ||
akhar likhae saeee gaavaa avar n jaanaa baanee |1| rehaao |
I sing the Word which You have written; I do not know any other Word. ||1||Pause|| (Ang 1171)

The first problem with quoting the pangtee ਅਖਰ ਲਿਖੇ ਸੇਈ ਗਾਵਾ ਅਵਰ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ਬਾਣੀ ||੧|| ਰਹਾਉ || in support of pronouncing Gurbani exactly how it is written, is that this pangtee is not referring to alphabets and written word on paper but it is actually referring to the lekha that is written on the forehead.

Secondly, the hyprocrisy of using the above pangtee in support of not adding bindis is evident in the fact that when pronouncing the word ਗਾਵਾ they themselves add a bindi to pronounce it as ਗਾਵਾਂ

If a bindi was not added, and it was pronounced as ਗਾਵਾ the meaning would not be sing, it would mean cows or village. This would be a total un-arth of the Gurbani pangtee. Whenever a Gurbani pangtee should have a bindi or bindis added to its pronunciation but does not, an un-arth occurs.

A pangtee where ਗਾਵਾ is correctly pronounced without the bindi is presented below:

ਦੇਹੀ ਗਾਵਾ ਜੀਉ ਧਰ ਮਹਤਉ ਬਸਹਿ ਪੰਚ ਕਿਰਸਾਨਾ || (ਅੰਗ ੧੧੦੪)

For more information please see the attached file from the book Gurbani Paath Parampra Nirney by Giani Harbans Singh.

How can it be possible to justify adding bindis on the top but not at the bottom of an alphabet?

Even modern paathis from groups who do not believe in adding bindis have begun doing so in recent years. For example in this recording , the bindis are added in the pangtees ਦੇਦਾ ਦੇ ਲੈਦੇ ਥਕਿ ਪਾਹਿ || and ਚੰਗਿਆਈਆ ਬੁਰਿਆਈਆ ਵਾਚੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਹਦੂਰਿ ||
In the same recording an adhak is added to the word ਮਸਕਤਿ in the pangtee ਜਿਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਗਏ ਮਸਕਤਿ ਘਾਲਿ || how can one on one hand say adding bindis on the bottom of words is incorrect, but quite happily add bindis on top, adhaks, and tippis?

I think someone who is genuinely innocent and unaware of bindis and the importance of adding them whilst reciting Gurbani, does Paath in this fashion they would not be doing a disservice to Gurbani or Guru Sahib. However, I think the disrespect lies amongst educated people who stubbornly choose to ignore Gurbani Grammar and the requirement of adding bindis in spite of plain evidence presented in front of them. Not only are they misguided, but they are also misguiding others by propagating these views.

Very well said Trust Singh jeeo.

Kulbir Singh

WOW Trust Singh Jee, you nailed it! This article by Trust Singh Jee should be added to the literature section of this site.

I think WAHiGuROO is the only judge.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

Daas

Quote
Prakah S Bagga
I think WAHiGuROO is the only judge.

Not sure why people are against *common sense*

You can end any discussion by quoting that Vaheguroo Ji is the judge. Vaheguroo Ji has also blessed his GurSikhs with Gurmat Bibek that's why we do ardaas for *Bibek Daan*. Using Bibek Budhi given by Guru Sahib is in the best interest of a GurSikh.

Vaheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa
Vaheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!

You can end any discussion by quoting that Vaheguroo Ji is the judge


While I agree with your views
.In context of Gurbanee deliberations one may agree or disagree
depending upon the level of Bibek gifted by VahiGuROO ji.
But Vahi GuRo ji does not auhorise any one to become JUDGE..


Bhul Chuk Maaf

Daas

Prakash.s.Bagga

Quote

If a bindi was not added, and it was pronounced as ਗਾਵਾ the meaning would not be sing, it would mean cows or village. This would be a total un-arth of the Gurbani pangtee. Whenever a Gurbani pangtee should have a bindi or bindis added to its pronunciation but does not, an un-arth occurs.
A pangtee where ਗਾਵਾ is correctly pronounced without the bindi is presented below:
ਦੇਹੀ ਗਾਵਾ ਜੀਉ ਧਰ ਮਹਤਉ ਬਸਹਿ ਪੰਚ ਕਿਰਸਾਨਾ || (ਅੰਗ ੧੧੦੪)

i agree with this part, especially on how by not adding the bindi’s in the proper places un-arths are done.

Thats why people should get santhya so they know where to put the bindi's and adaks etc. in the proper places in order to prevent un-arths of gurbani from occurring.

Quote

Even modern paathis from groups who do not believe in adding bindis have begun doing so in recent years. For example in this recording , the bindis are added in the pangtees ਦੇਦਾ ਦੇ ਲੈਦੇ ਥਕਿ ਪਾਹਿ || and ਚੰਗਿਆਈਆ ਬੁਰਿਆਈਆ ਵਾਚੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਹਦੂਰਿ ||

According the Taksal, there is nothing wrong with adding bindi’s at this particular pangti. If you add or do not add bindi’s here, there is no un-arths being done.

Quote

In the same recording an adhak is added to the word ਮਸਕਤਿ in the pangtee ਜਿਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਗਏ ਮਸਕਤਿ ਘਾਲਿ ||

Lol, obvousliy you are very narrow minded person and have no clue on the type santhya that the Damdami Taksal teaches. The correct way to pronounce this pangti ਜਿਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਗਏ ਮਸਕਤਿ ਘਾਲਿ|| is to add an adhak ਮਸੱਕਤਿ, if you don’t add one, and then there will be a unarth.

Quote

how can one on one hand say adding bindis on the bottom of words is incorrect, but quite happily add bindis on top, adhaks, and tippis?

Again, first you should go understand how the Taksal teaches Santhya instead of indirectly accusing them of being hypocrites and misguiding people. The Taksal does believe in adding bindi’s and adhaks where it is necessary, but the Taksal does not believe in adding bindi’s at the bottom of akhars.
For example, ਗੁਰੁ ਈਸਰੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਬਰਮਾ ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਮਾਈ||
Some paathi’s that HAVE NOT STUDIED IN THE TAKSAL EVER IN THEIR LIFE, would recite ਈਸਰੁ as ਈਸ਼ਰੁ
But this type of recitation ਈਸ਼ਰੁ is not accordance with maryada of the Taksal.
Just to make it clear, the taksal does not believe in adding ਸ਼ ਲ਼ ਗ਼ etc. to any shabads in gurbani while reciting gurbani.
Maybe you should go talk to Bhai Jarnail Singh i think they live in Toronto about the above accusation you made towards him. From what I have heard from their recording nothing that they have recited is against the marayda of the taksal. Can you please show me if they have added any ਸ਼ ਲ਼ ਗ਼ in their ucharan?
Also, you can go talk to the students of Vadey Mahapurkh such as Sodhi Jee or Bhagat Jaswant Singh Jee (I think they are currently in Toronto) about why the taksal does not believe in adding ਸ਼ ਲ਼ ਗ਼ etc. in gurbani recitation.
Damdami Taksal does add bindi's in the appropriate places(which are added on top never on the bottom) in order to prevent unarths of gurbani from occuring.

Furthermore, the below examples show the shud ucharan of gurbani according to the Damdami Taksal from Vadey Mahapurakhs and Sant Kartar Singh Jee's time period.

For example bindi's are added in these places.

ਸੁਣਿ ਗਲਾ ਆਕਾਸ ਕੀ ਕੀਟਾ ਆਈ ਰੀਸ|| Here ਗਲਾ is pronounced as ਗੱਲਾਂ
ਇਕਿ ਫਿਰਹਿ ਘਨੇਰੇ ਕਰਹਿ ਗਲਾ ਗਲੀ ਕਿਨੈ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ|| here ਗਲਾ and ਗਲੀ are pronounced as ਗੱਲਾਂ ਗੱਲੀਂ since here guru sahib is referring to talking(Some wander around, babbling on and on, but none obtain Him by babbling.) bindi's must be added


Adhaks are added in certain instances such as

ਨਾਨਕ ਹੁਕਮੈ ਜੇ ਬੁਝੈ ਤ ਹਉਮੈ ਕਹੈ ਨ ਕੋਇ||੨||
In the above pankti ਬੁਝੈ is recited as ਬੁੱਝੈ (ie. kaaskay bolana not pola(softly)) Therefore an adhak must be added because if the paathi singh recites this ਬੁਝੈ (ie. ਪੋਲਾ which means not kaskay or without an adhak). He will make a big mistake by doing unarth of the pangti. ਜੇ ਤ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾ, ਪਿਆਸ, ਅੱਗ, ਦਿਲ ਦਾ ਬੁਝਣਾ ਅਰਥ ਬਣੇ ਤਾਂ ਬੁਝੈ ਪੋਲਾ ਪੜ੍ਹਨਾ, ਪਰ ਜਿੱਥੈ ਹੁਕਮ ਗਿਆਨ ਨਾਮ ਪ੍ਰਸ਼ਨ ਪ੍ਰਮੇਸ਼ਰ ਬੁੱਝਾਰਤ ਬੁੱਝਣ ਦਾ ਅਰਥ ਬਣੇ, ਉ੍ਨਥੇ ਬੁੱਝੈ ਪੜ੍ਹਨਾ
So as you can see the proper arth of this pankti ਨਾਨਕ ਹੁਕਮੈ ਜੇ ਬੁਝੈ ਤ ਹਉਮੈ ਕਹੈ ਨ ਕੋਇ||੨|| is as follows
O Nanak, one who understands His Command, does not speak in ego. ||2||

Furthermore, in some cases an adhak is not added in order to prevent an unarth from happening.
For example, ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੈ ਸਿਮਰਨਿ; ਤ੍ਰਿਸਨਾ ਬੁਝੈ||
In the above example, ਬੁਝੈ is recited ਪੋਲਾ(ie without an adhak).
Well lets see Trust Singh, why would the Taksal not put an adhak here and put it some other places like the above example that i showed you?

Well thats quite obvious, here in this pangti Guru Sahib is talking about quenching thirst. Ex. In the remembrance of God, thirst is quenched. Thats why ਜੇ ਤ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾ, ਪਿਆਸ, ਅੱਗ, ਦਿਲ ਦਾ ਬੁਝਣਾ ਅਰਥ ਬਣੇ ਤਾਂ ਬੁਝੈ ਪੋਲਾ ਪੜ੍ਹਨਾ

There are numerous more example, that I can present forth to you, but I think this is enough for you and others to understand.
I don’t want to debate you or anyone else because we will not get anywhere by doing that.
I think what we must all agree on is that the Taksal has a different ucharan views than the ‘missionary type style’ santhya that is supported on this forum. And it is best to let people choose what they feel is best for them.

Quote
Kulbir SIngh
Think about it. Many shabads have been created by Guru Sahib while talking to Pandits and Muslim Faqirs. Do you think while talking to Pandits, Guru Sahib was not saying "Shanti" or "Shabad"? Do you think Guru Sahib would be saying 'Sabad" and "Saanti"? Same way while talking to Muslim Kazis and Mullahs, Guru Sahib spoke Arabic and Farsi. There are pure Farsi shabads in Gurbani. Guru Sahib was adept in Sanskrit, Farsi and Arabic languages. How could Guru Sahib pronounce wrongly the Farsi and Sanskrit words?

One of the reasons I believe binds should be prononced is because it does not make sense that Sri GUru Ji would mispronounce words. Many SInghs do not hesitate reciting bindis even though they are not physically apparent in Gurmukhi, but at the same time they hestiate reciting foot letters (ਸ੍ਰ ,ਸ੍ਵ , ਸ੍ਹ) the alphabets next to sasa which are not apparent but must be recited to make sense.

For example in the following verse

ਦਾਹਤ ਹੈ ਦੁਖ ਦੋਖਨ ਕੌ ਦਲ ਦੁੱਜਨ ਕੇ ਪਲ ਮੈ ਦਲ ਡਾਰੈ ॥

I believe ਦੁੱਜਨ should be recite as Durjan to make sense. The same way in Sri Jap Ji Sahib I think the proper pronunciation of Bhagat Dhroo is Dhroo not Dhoo. How come people do not recite the missing foot letters. Talwara Ji mentions in modern day printed saroops and gutkey sahibs many of these alphabets have been omitted. SO why do we not pronounce these alphabets. IF we are to apply the logical that we should recite words as they make sense does it make sense to say Dhoo instead of DHroo?

You are wrong. Bhai Jarnail Singh adds SH sound. Listen to his Sukhmani Sahib recording he says Ashtpadi. Baba Avtar Singh, grandson of Sant Gurbachan Singh adds bindia, says shabad, sharan, darshan etc. Even Sant Gurbachan Singh adds Bindia in his katha, he says : sajjan sacha patshaa. Lots of Taksali singhs have now started to add bindia and are slowly slowly starting to follow viakarn.


ਕੂੜ ਨਿਖੁਟੇ ਨਾਨਕਾ ਓੜਕਿ ਸਚਿ ਰਹੀ ॥2॥
Falsehood will come to an end, O Nanak, and Truth will prevail in the end. ||2||

Bhai Ji,

I read paath in the Taksal style as that's how I was taught and learned finer pronunciation through listening to Sant Kartar Singh Ji's tapes. Saying all this, I agree with Trust and Joban Singh that there are discrepancies in how Taksal read various words. Sometimes they add subtle bindian and some not, some read sihari, adhak and laav with full force and some not. There is no consistency amongst Taksal paathis from what I've heard. This is especially true of Taksaali Keertanees. This is all very confusing for a novice.

Quote

You are wrong. Bhai Jarnail Singh adds SH sound. Listen to his Sukhmani Sahib recording he says Ashtpadi.

Actually, i used a software called audacity and isolated the time when he says the shabad ਅਸਟਪਦੀ and i took a loser look, it sounds like he is saying ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ.
First to prove my point that he doesnt say ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ, i would like you to pronounce ਅਸਟ a couple of time, if you pronounce it with all muktay and no ਸ਼, you will see that when you pronounce the ਸ, you will create sssssss sound when the air flows out your mouth and it will sound similar to a ਸ਼ but it's not, maybe thats why you are confused and thats why you think he is saying ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ but he is actually saying ਅਸਟਪਦੀ.

Quote

Baba Avtar Singh, grandson of Sant Gurbachan Singh adds bindia, says shabad, sharan, darshan etc.

i have never really listened to their grandsons recordings, so i wouldnt know.

Quote

Even Sant Gurbachan Singh adds Bindia in his katha, he says : sajjan sacha patshaa.

The paathi singh always recites bani and he never pronounces any ਸ਼ etc. I can guarantee you that vadey mahapurkh doesnt pronounce ਸ਼ when is reciting bani while doing katha. But i know for a fact that he does pronounce ਸ਼ while he is doing katha. For example, when he says Guru Gareeb nivaj sachay patsha, or Sachay Patsha Guru Gobind Singh Jee etc. There is nothing wrong about that becuase they are not reciting bani, and are just talking.......

Quote

Lots of Taksali singhs have now started to add bindia and are slowly slowly starting to follow viakarn.

Look man, we all know that the Taksal at the present time is not what it used to be like back in the day during vadey mahapurkhs, sant kartar singh jee, and sant jarnail singh jee's time. The santhya in the taksal at the present time is not what it used to be like back in the day, there is no strictness in santhya and maryda etc anymore.

Quote

I read paath in the Taksal style as that's how I was taught and learned finer pronunciation through listening to Sant Kartar Singh Ji's tapes.

Those recordings were made before Sant Kartar Singh Jee was still a student of the Taksal and not when he became a Jathedar, so they are not that shud.

if you want to learn shud taksali santhya then go to Gursevak.com

Bhai Ji,

Just to make my stance clear, I personally prefer Taksaal style of paath as I feel it's the correct and shud way of reading Gurbani.

Your answers above however are contradictory. On one hand you refer to the previous generations as having superior santhya but on the other that Kartar Singh Ji was still learning at the time of the recording. Are you referring to the same recording where they mention at the end that all 5 banis should be recited instead of 3 mentioned in the Rehat Maryada? Why would they allow someone to record their Nitnem knowing full well it was going to be distributed to the wider sangat if as you say thought it was not shud?

I know Bhagat Ji through indirect association, but have only had the fortune to speak to them once on the phone. The goal they have set themselves is amazing. I use the site to teach Muharni to my son.

bhai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are wrong. Bhai Jarnail Singh adds SH sound.
> Listen to his Sukhmani Sahib recording he says
> Ashtpadi.
>
> Actually, i used a software called audacity and
> isolated the time when he says the shabad
> ਅਸਟਪਦੀ and i took a loser look, it
> sounds like he is saying ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ.
> First to prove my point that he doesnt say
> ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ, i would like you to pronounce
> ਅਸਟ a couple of time, if you pronounce it
> with all muktay and no ਸ਼, you will see that when
> you pronounce the ਸ, you will create sssssss
> sound when the air flows out your mouth and it
> will sound similar to a ਸ਼ but it's not, maybe
> thats why you are confused and thats why you think
> he is saying ਅਸ਼ਟਪਦੀ but he is
> actually saying ਅਸਟਪਦੀ. >

I am not confused he says Ashtpadi, you can choose to believe it or keep coming up with fairy-tale like answers as excuses.


> Baba Avtar Singh, grandson of Sant Gurbachan Singh
> adds bindia, says shabad, sharan, darshan etc.
>
> i have never really listened to their grandsons
> recordings, so i wouldnt know.


Listen to this: [www.youtube.com]
Or you can just listen to any Katha file of his, he uses a lot of Bindia.

Even Bhai Hari Singh Randhwawale uses Bindia. I'm sure you listen to his Katha.


> Even Sant Gurbachan Singh adds Bindia in his
> katha, he says : sajjan sacha patshaa.
>
> The paathi singh always recites bani and he never
> pronounces any ਸ਼ etc. I can guarantee you that
> vadey mahapurkh doesnt pronounce ਸ਼ when is
> reciting bani while doing katha. But i know for a
> fact that he does pronounce ਸ਼ while he is doing
> katha. For example, when he says Guru Gareeb nivaj
> sachay patsha, or Sachay Patsha Guru Gobind Singh
> Jee etc. There is nothing wrong about that becuase
> they are not reciting bani, and are just
> talking.......

No I am talking about Gurbani. When Sant Gurbachan Singh recites the Pangti Sajjan Sacha Paatshaah Sir Shaha Patshaah he recites the Bindia. Even in other cases I have heard him use Bindia. I am not making this up. Sant Gurbachan Singh's Katha is up on the internet for everyone to listen to.


> Lots of Taksali singhs have now started to add
> bindia and are slowly slowly starting to follow
> viakarn.
>
> Look man, we all know that the Taksal at the
> present time is not what it used to be like back
> in the day during vadey mahapurkhs, sant kartar
> singh jee, and sant jarnail singh jee's time. The
> santhya in the taksal at the present time is not
> what it used to be like back in the day, there is
> no strictness in santhya and maryda etc anymore.


The Paathi Singhs that I am talking about are older Singhs. Students of Sant Gurbachan Singh recite Bindia. If you listen to the Bhindree Santhia online at www.gurmatveechar.com the Ustaad who is an older Singh of the Taksal uses Bindia. He says Raag Ratan Parvaar Shabad Gaavan Aaaeenaa.


> I read paath in the Taksal style as that's how I
> was taught and learned finer pronunciation through
> listening to Sant Kartar Singh Ji's tapes.
>
> Those recordings were made before Sant Kartar
> Singh Jee was still a student of the Taksal and
> not when he became a Jathedar, so they are not
> that shud.
>
> if you want to learn shud taksali santhya then go
> to Gursevak.com


Excuses. Its time to accept that there is no one Taksal left anymore. There hasn't been for a long time. Most of the Singhs gave Shaheedi with Baba Deep Singh. The modern day Taksal was started by Sant Sundar Singh. His Ustaad Baba Bishan Singh passed his Gaddi/Leadership onto another person at the village Murale.

If there are so many differences in the Taksal today. How do we know which is the right one? Which style of Santhia is the one Guru Gobind Singh taught the Sangat at Damdama Sahib. You can't say Sant Gurbachan Singh and Sant Kartar Singh both taught the same thing, thats not right. We can see differences in reciting Gurbani from their Katha files.

Regarding Bhagat Jaswant Singh he teaches an entirely different Santhia style then other Taksali Ustaads. Some of the vishrams he puts and ucharan is very different.

No one can claim to have had their Santhia directly from Guru Sahib, there is no "Guru Sahib's Jathebandi" No Samparda can claim to be 100% right. No Jatha can even claim to be 100% right. Its time to accept that the Taksal is no more. How can they claim to be 100% in line with what Guru Gobind Singh taught them 300+ years ago, when they are not even the same as they were 50 years ago. They need to lose the arragonce they have that we are right and everyone else is wrong.

Quote

The modern day Taksal was started by Sant Sundar Singh. His Ustaad Baba Bishan Singh passed his Gaddi/Leadership onto another person at the village Murale.

I heard this and read the paper, it's full of so much nonsense and bs, all taksali singhs laugh at this statement you and other have made in the past.
Obvousily, you have no respect for the taksal so there is no point in me wasting my time on here over such a childish debate that wont get us anywhere.

Unjaan,

I asked one of my freinds from the taksal, he told me that this recording was made when Sant Kartar Singh Jee just had entered the taksal, and they made the recording for themsevles to listen to, it was never ever meant to be distributed to the sangat. Someone got thier hands on the recordings and put it online.Thats what i was told.
He told me that overall all the recordings were shud, but there are minor mistakes and this is only because he was a student and had just entered the taksal when he made the recordings.

The reason why i am pointed this out is becuase indiviauls such as Joban Singh that go around pionting their fingers at certain jathedars from the taksal and saying how they made mistakes in their ucharan should know the true circumstances inwhich the recordings were made.

bhai Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The modern day Taksal was started by Sant Sundar
> Singh. His Ustaad Baba Bishan Singh passed his
> Gaddi/Leadership onto another person at the
> village Murale.
>
> I heard this and read the paper, it's full of so
> much nonsense and bs, all taksali singhs laugh at
> this statement you and other have made in the
> past.
> Obvousily, you have no respect for the taksal so
> there is no point in me wasting my time on here
> over such a childish debate that wont get us
> anywhere.


I have respect for the Taksal. All I am saying is that when the Taksal says that they have perserved the Santhia and Maryada 100% from Guru Sahib's time yet they themselves have many differences in Santhia and Maryada that have crept up. The Maryada is not even the same as it was 50 years ago, how in the world do you expect it to be the exact same from 300+ years ago?

One difference is the Uchar of ਤ੍ਵ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ

Some Taksali Ustaads recite it as tuay and some as tua. How do we know which one is right? Both say they are correct and the other one is wrong. Which one did Guru Sahib teach the Singhs at Damdama Sahib, Tuay or Tua? There are many more instances where these disrepencies within the Taksal come.

Why do some Taksali Singhs believe eating Jhatka is ok and some say its a Bujjer Kureit?


I urge you to listen to Katha of Sant Gurbachan Singh, where he cleary uses Bindia whilst reciting Gurbani.

Again I am not hating on the Taksal. The Taksal has given a great deal to the Panth. However to claim that they are "Guru Sahib's Jathebandi" or give them any special treatment because they are a "Puratan Samparda" does not make sense. There are other so called "Puratan Sampardas" that claim that they are even older than the Taksal (Udasis, Bidhi Chand Dal) and they have many differences of opinion with the Taksal. How do we know which "Puratan Samparda" is right and which is wrong?


Ultimately we must use Gurbani to test what is Gurmat and what is not. Gurbani Dee Kasvati is final. Taksal is a part of the Panth, it is not THE Panth. It is a Jathebandi within the Panth like any other Jathebandi.