| Revision as of 04:11, 17 August 2015 editHuman3015 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,614 edits →Prophet: divine??← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:15, 17 August 2015 edit undoCushionMail (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,525 edits →ProphetNext edit → | ||
| Line 443: | Line 443: | ||
| I do not even know how to address this childish and immature remark, apart from simply asking him to go and read the meanings of the word "Prophet" "a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God." And I can give you uncountable number of references, spoken by the Gurus themselves asserting that whatever they profess is directly coming from the creator. So please please stay out if you do not know anything at all about the Sikh faith. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | I do not even know how to address this childish and immature remark, apart from simply asking him to go and read the meanings of the word "Prophet" "a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God." And I can give you uncountable number of references, spoken by the Gurus themselves asserting that whatever they profess is directly coming from the creator. So please please stay out if you do not know anything at all about the Sikh faith. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 00:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :{{ping|Js82}} GGS never claimed that he was prophet, neither Guro Grantha Sahib mentions that these Gurus were 'Prophets'. Unless there is self-claim or claim in Holy book, we can't write that in article. Moreover, Guru Grantha Sahib itself is written by various Human scholars, that book is not sent by God. --]] 04:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC) | :{{ping|Js82}} GGS never claimed that he was prophet, neither Guro Grantha Sahib mentions that these Gurus were 'Prophets'. Unless there is self-claim or claim in Holy book, we can't write that in article. Moreover, Guru Grantha Sahib itself is written by various Human scholars, that book is not sent by God. --]] 04:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC) | ||
| I find your claims ridiculous and hilarious. Are you a scholar on Guru Granth Sahib and the Sikh Gurus ? You are so immature and childish, I even feel sympathy for your many times. | |||
| Please go and read the Guru Granth Sahib first, and then come back and discuss with me. Given the sensitivity of these issues, and given what I know of you, I would humbly request you to please stay away, unless you are willing to devote time and effort to do research a priori. | |||
| And for the record of others who might be thinking of jumping in, the official biographies of the Gurus from the webpage of SGPC (= Sikh version of Vatican) (that has been referenced in the article) mentions the Prophet word. So this should satisfy you. However, with the purpose of providing those who have genuine further interests in understanding Sikh faith and Sikh Gurus, I can also give you numerous references from the Guru Granth Sahib itself, proclaiming that the Gurbani (the Guru Granth Sahib) is "God's word". | |||
| Here are some: | |||
| "Jaisī mai āvai kẖasam kī baṇī ṯaisṛā karī gi▫ān ve lālo." | |||
| "As the Word of the Lord comes to me, so do I express it, O Lalo." | |||
| (Guru Nanak on page 722 of Guru Granth Sahib). | |||
| "Dhur Ki Baani Aayi, Tin Sagli Chint Mitaayi" | |||
| "From the primal One, has emanated the Gurbani; and it has effaced all the anxiety." | |||
| (Guru Nanak on page 628 of Guru Granth Sahib). | |||
| "Sach Poore Gur Updesya, Nanak Sunave". | |||
| "The complete Lord has delivered the truth, and Nanak is speaking it" | |||
| Numerous more ... Hence, since all of these words (God's words) have been delivered through the Gurus, there should be no doubt at all on Prophecy. | |||
| Thank you. Please no edit warring. | |||
| ] (]) 05:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 05:15, 17 August 2015
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NPOV Dispute
Hello, I've added the NPOV tag to this article, in a dispute of its neutrally. In my opinion, this page reads much, much more like religious anecdote than actual, factual article. In particular, the article references many 'faith' events in Sikh cannon whilst citing "in character" recitals of religious materials embedded within other texts. The article needs to be rewritten in a neutral and, most importantly, impartial point of view. Citations should preferably be drawn from critical analysis, rather than quotations-of-quotations-of religious canon. Sparky222b (talk) 07:34, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
- good idea. I suggest you make a start with that. Apuldram (talk) 10:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Facts disputed wife
Guys there is a mistake ,the guru was only married once,more research needs to be done here as i have read this is a common mistake which is said about the guru. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.160.139 (talk) 21:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC) Blaaaa blaa sed guru the teacher — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.118.210 (talk) 17:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
Facts disputed
The references contradict the teachings of the SGGS, the Sikh holy book and are from sites which are not supported by any official Sikh organisation.
Guru disappear with his horse ? If i tell somebody this "my guru disappear with horse" they think i am foolish. how it is possible in 1700. when you read east India company history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.219.2.36 (talk) 18:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Date of birth
Top of page states Guru Gobind as passing 19 October 1708. Bottom of page states 7 October 1708. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.238.216.156 (talk) 09:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- It's 7 October, according to the references cited in the article as well as other sources. utcursch | talk 12:57, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Last Living Guru
He proclaimed himself the last living Guru (indeed, this was in Nanak's plan)
I'm wondering where this comes from? I know he was proclaimed the last living guru, but where in Nanak's teachings or sayings does it put forth that it was his plan? I don't mean to challenge this view, I would merely like to read further as to this matter. Thanks - Hidoshi 13:13, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not 100% sure about this, so I'd vote to remove the "(indeed, this was in Nanak's plan)" until the issue is clarified. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
- I'd say it's appropriate to remove. It seems far too POV. - Hidoshi 05:07, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Guru Gobind Singh had proclaimed that after him the Guru Granth Sahib would be the Guru and Sikh's would not worship any living being as a guru. The tenets of Sikhism as we know it today are more based on Guru Gobind Singh than Guru Nanak. The 5 K's were not given by Guru Nanak either. It might be Guru Gobind's POV but that is how it is.Haphar 08:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Guru Gobind Singh and Rama
I read somewhere that Guru Gobind Singh had stated that he is a descendant of Lord Rama, through one of his twin sons, Luv. Is this a true statement that is recognized by all Sikhs?
Thanks.
Raj2004 14:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- How can you be a decedent of a mythological Hindu god? its not possible --Street Scholar 16:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
dont presume Rama was a myth.
- I presume you mean 'descendant'? Many people believe he existed so yes, it is possible. However, whether he actually was a god is another matter altogether. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib has elucidated and elaborated his genial descent from the Suryawanshi Ishwakoo Rajput lineage of Rama of Ayodhya through Rama's son Kush who had settled in Madra earlier Punjab, in his own biography the Vichitra Naatak.Lutfullah (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, Guru Gobind Singh himself wrote about it. It is also mentioned in Sri Guru Granth Sahib.
No, Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib's lineal descent from the house of Ramachandra, king of Ayodhya, is no where to be seen in Sri Guru Granth Saahib Ji. This is a misstatement! In fact the Holy Granth does not carry a single line composed by the pen of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib!Lutfullah (talk) 07:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Lutfullah
No, neither it is true nor Guru Gobind Singh had written about it. There is no claim or refrence in Guru Granth Sahib about this. Please be confirmed and make a research before posting such a bogus claims. TheSingh 12:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Guys --- Whatsoever is written above and few quotes of fgangu
Please do a proper investigation before positing such bogus claims. There is no relationship between Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Jee and Hindu Ram.
Gobind Singh jee Bani is compiled in Granth named Dasam Granth. A Sikh daily routine of reciting 5 Banis in the morning contains 3 Banis recited by Guru Gobind Singh Jee.
There are many occurrences of word RAM in Sri Guru Granth Sahib and they all refer to Almighty God (Akal-purakh).
Nope that is not true that is what many Hindu extremist groups are saying to convert Sikhs, sad really.
Go to www.sikhlionz.com or go to google and type in sikh lions, then go to one of the top links which is probably called anti Sikh groups or something, read those articles.
- I've heard something along these lines was written in Bichitra Natak. However, I'm in no position to decide whether that's legitimate or not. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, It is true. I request to people who are actually intrested to know shoul read dasham Granth. Where one can find out that Guru Nanak Sahib was from Kush Vansh and and fourth guru fro Sodhi's was from Luv Vansh. There are four Yugas ie Satjug,Dwapar, Treta and finally Kaljug. God had taken Visible forms in all the yug and with seperate powers. Like 16 kala avtar. 9 kala avtar in Kalyug with sarv ie all kala avtar in the form of Shri Guru Nanak Sahib. The same jot ie Spirit transformed to ten gurus. No one can challange that, as the only true path for salvation as was in oldr yugas in Kalyug is Sikkism.
i dnt know about that, but all i know is dat in sikhism not hinduism there are 11 gurus an Gods name is the highest. Our goal in life is to reach God.
Those are just coincedinces, they don't mean anything!
He never said anything relating to this
This only goes to show how ill informed and parochial today's Sikhs have become! Like modern day Muslim fanatics who lack the basic facts of Islamic history and are eager to have their say however ridiculous! The topic here is whether Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib was born to the family of Ayodhya's king Ramachandra. The topic IS NOT about Sikhs recognizing or worshipping Ramachandra as God! Instead of understanding this simple fact a lot of meaningless argument has poured in this page from uninformed people who do not even care to research on the works written by the founder of the Sikh faith. This is the state of their awareness of their Guru who had departed the world in 1708! Only 3 centuries have passed and they don't bother to read his autobiography! I wonder what shall be the state of these people's awareness of their Guru three centuries from now !Lutfullah (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Lutfullah —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lutfullah (talk • contribs) 20:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
I want to make it clear that word Ram in Guru Granth Sahib refers to Almighty God not to Rama the Hindu god.
However there are some references about Hindu god Rama but these are to clear the confusion between the Almighty God and Hindu Rama. Sikh Gurus always worshiped the Almighty God and not any Hindu God (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiv, Rama, Krishan etc.). If some people are spreading such rumours then they are wrong and trying to misinterpret the Sikh Gurus And Guru Granth Sahib.
RSS is misinterpreting sikh history.Following are few examples i want to mention:
1) Every sikh knows that it was Gangu Brahmin who cheated Mata Gujri ji and Chhote Sahibzade and informed the Subedaare Sirhind causing their arrest and hence the executions.
RSS is spreading that Gangu was not a brahmin but a muslim Gangu-ul-Haq who did all this.
2) A common misinterpretion that is being spread by RSS and hindu extremist groups is that sikhs don't have any independent existance but they were created as an army to serve hindus.
However hindus themselves don't know who was the founder of "hinduism" and why they are called hindus.
"Jagey dharm Hindu ! Sakal bhand bhaajey ! - Vichitra Natak by Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib.Lutfullah (talk) 07:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Lutfullah
Guys i don't know who has written on such a communal page ......... people respected by deeds ... and there are various examples in every religion caste of good and bad people and people using the bad people example as bench mark as mention above the case of Gangu to make others mockery .... love all and use the below lines for referring bench mark :)
Baba Banda Singh Bahadur (Original name Laxman Das Bhardwaj, A Marathi Bhardwaj Brahman, later became a great yogi as Sant Madho Das Bairagi
TheSingh 10:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC) TheSingh
What with all this anti-hindu stuff? Ram should be respected, and within the Guru Granth Sahib ji it is possible that their name is mentioned. Just like Shiva ji. But the whole point is, is that there is one God and these are just forms off God. Even Guru Gobind Singh ji said that if they were his Sikhs then they should also respect Mata ji (one of the 'hindu Gods'). What is anti-hindu stuff here? Also i did not disrespect Rama.
Now i want to make this clear that any reference to hindu gods in Guru Granth Sahib does not mean that Sikh Gurus worshiped hindu gods. Sikh Gurus wordhiped only Almighty God and none else.In Guru Granth Sahib there are also some references about Allah, Rahim, Holy Kuraan. But that does not mean that Gurus workshipped Mohammad Sahib or any muslim Paigumber.
Guru Gobind Singh never told sikhs to worship any hindu goddess 'Mata Ji'. Please provide the source of information for your comment.
"Sikh naahi piyaara mohey! Pahiley rahat piyaari!" - Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib!
Alas that this lot of uninformed people, uneducated of Sikh tenets, keep entering their ignorance here with great conviction, without bothering to do their basic homework! Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib commences his Jaapji with the lines "Shri Bhagwati Ji Sada Sahai! and also Pratham Bhagwati!. This Bhagwati Ji is Hindu deity Mata Durga. Also in his famous composition which even an unlettered Sikh in Punjab may have heard umpteenth times, Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib writes " Deh Shiva! Var mohey ih shubh karman te kabahoon na taraun!" Who is this Shiva from whom Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib is seeking blessings? It is Shiva Shankara the spouse of Bhagwati referred to earlier here and the most revered and worshiped deity of Hindus also known as Mahadeva. It is indeed ridiculous of Sikhs contributing here to show off themselves as non Hindus and also to distance themselves from the very teachings of the greatest reformer and epic Guru of the Hindus perhaps without whose efforts the Hindu faith may have been wiped off the face of the Indian subcontinent, Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib! He had commented to his wife Mata Sundari Ji on his last meeting her at Delhi after his being invited there by Aurangzeb's successor Muazzam Shah Alam Bahadur Shah, on the loss of his four sons in his strife against the Mughal tyranny on Hindus "In putran key kaarney waari diyo sut chaar! Muey chaar to kya hua? Jeewit kayi hazaar!" For these thousands of sons of mine (these Hindus) I have sacrificed my own begotten four sons! It is the greatest tragedy in India and Pakistan that this monumental and tall beyond perception humanist figure to whom my Muslim head bows in salute and reverence, has been totally forgotten by both Hindus and Sikhs today. The Hindus are little aware of the protector of their faith. The Sikhs who have descended from the Hindu contributors to the Grand Khaalisa Panth of Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib, today in India alienate themselves from Hindus declaring themselves as a minority community in India separate from the majority of Hindus. They keep the facade of the Guru's tenets in their appearance, attire and religious practice but possess nothing of the divine and all encompassing spirit of Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib who had the mercy and magnanimity in raising the orphan child of a Muslim assassin that had come all the way from Sirhind to Nanded in the garb of a horse seller with orders to kill the Guru while he slept in his chamber! When the assassin's plans were revealed and he with his accomplice was killed by the Guru Ji's bodyguards, his minor son was put forward to his court next morning for further action. The benevolent and merciful Guru Ji took the child in his lap and asked his following to adopt him. Seeing their silent refusal he him selves adopted the killer's son and raised him like a Muslim by hiring a Maulavi for that child's education! We have read thousands of books in human history on heroes but are yet to come across such grand examples of humanity which make lives like Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Saahib immortal and to be respected and revered by the entire human race.Lutfullah (talk) 08:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Lutfullah
Acccording to Sikh philosophy God is formless(Ajuni) God never comes in forms. If other religions believe that God comes in forms as is done in Hinduism then this is their own belief.
Also dear friend please leave your name with your comment. TheSingh 12:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
the only thing is that the sikhs today are following the same way as the muslims been from ages......they just want to live isolated from hindus because they do not want their relation with hindus gods and godesses....i am a hindu by religion but i always go to sikh temple because i do not find any difference among two places.....all the persons posting comments here just tell me one thing honestly ....have you ever seen a sikh visiting a hindu temple...they never go there because they do not want to agree that sikhism is the same to all other religiongs......plz ma friends sikhism have got a lot of respect in the whole world just because sikh gurus fought for the people of other religion ...thats the thing which shows how great they are.......so stop claiming all these and lets live together happily so that when ever our guruji looks at us he feel proud of his children
thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.230.187.169 (talk) 03:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Gobind Singh's age
dont know much about Guru Gobind Singh, but was he only 9 years old when he became Guru? I just feel that he was very young or unlogic to become a leader in such a young age. So the question is actually, are the date of birth and year of becoming a guru correct? Dhirad 23:56, 08 Feb 2006 (UTC)
ANSWER: the age of a person does not determine his wisdom or spirtuality or even his logic.
I didnt ask qustion about his wisdom or spiritualty, only if a 9 year old child is capable of managing the whole sikh army --Dhirad 21:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes and its happened, and it wasen't a army, Guru Gobind Singh Ji created the Khalsa.
Ram is refernce to god. and sikh is not different from hindu or muslim. brotherhood is the prime message of sikhism. Please do not distort the message to seek identities. for god is the one to judge.
Improvements needed.
This article needs many improvements. i dont think it is upto the acceptable quality. the material is not very well organized , and misses out on many important aspects of guru gobind singh ji's life. There should be more additions to the content and reordering/rewording of the existing content.
Yes, I agree too. The final part of "Final Days" needs a a quality check.
Prasadksap (talk) 12:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
his death
is there any account of gurujis death. if anyone knows it, please tell me on my talk page.
thanks.
nids 18:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
i got the answer.nids(♂) 08:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
There was no "death" it was ascension Guru Ji ascended and were never murdered thats completly stupid this article needs to be re done or deleted and we are not related Hinduism what so ever so there is no relationship between Guru Gobind Singh and "Lord Ram"
This entire article needs to be reworded to be less biased and use less glowing language. It also needs historical verification, and it needs critiques on Gobind's statements, actions, and philosophy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.249.96.252 (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Reply: I do agree - the point of[REDACTED] is to be as factual as possible, putting aside your own emotions. Let Guru Gobind Singh's life, words, actions, and sacrifices speak for themselves. They do speak very loudly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shazirah (talk • contribs) 01:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC) the guru Nank was the first Guru.
The final days of the Guru has been cleared up and is fair to all Sikhs and non Sikhs (all of it is factual) : 'The Guru reportedly passed away, along with his horse Dilbagh (aka Neela Ghora) on 7 October 1708 at Nanded, before which he had declared the Guru Granth Sahib as his successor. A section of the Namdhari Sikhs dispute this version, and instead believe that the Guru did not die at Nanded: he secretly exited from the funeral pyre (which he had forbidden others from seeing). Later, he settled in Nabha, where he stayed for 103 years under the guise of "Baba Ajaypal Singh" and declared Balak Singh as his successor' - explains everything and incorporates all the Sikhs beliefs. Lets leave it at that.
The organization of this article
The article's organization (I have nothing to say on the content) needs to be cleaned up. There are two 'chronology' sections, which makes very little sense, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shazirah (talk • contribs) 01:35, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Regarding wound as cause of death
Someone (possibly by the name of dave green) is reverting my edit in the box in "cause of death") The reference he cited is not a reliable source. Further the cause of death, as also described in the same ref. is the one i stated, which he is reverting. it states he died eventually because of the wound. Does not state that it was immediatly after the wound. it does not mention that the wounds were sewn up, which can be found in my ref. That is , excessive bleeding due to re-opening of wound. The cause of death is re-opening of wound, and not attack. The cause of wound is attack by the two pathans. There is a lot of difference between, cause of wound and cause of death. Please don't manipulate the statements in ref. Ajjay (talk) 13:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
How can it not be reliable source as the cause of his death is clearly cited in many references as having been stabbed by Wazir Khans merceraries, yes he was wounded and dies as a result of a STAB WOUND. Its even mentioned in the article, in fact some cites reference say he was stabbed and dies, so don't distort it by suggesting the wound was some act of divine will that appeared all by itself. That would amount to political abuse of historical facts. DG —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- No body is claiming that the wound was an act of divine will. Further the cause of death was re-opening of the wound which was sewn-up. The wound was sewn-up and re-opened two or three days later, which resulted in his passing away. So stabbing was an in-direct cause, not direct. Direct cause was re-opening of the wound. Even your ref. mentions that the guru passed away, eventually, because of the wound. it fails to mention sewing up,inbetween.
- Besides, what is the difference betweem stabbed by Wazir Khans merceraries, yes he was wounded and dies as a result of a STAB WOUND.
- Do you know that an English surgeon, by the name of COLE, treated Guru Gobind Singhs wound. It might be an out of nowhere fact for you.Ajjay (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes I did mention that in the article but thanks to you you deleted it
Shall I put it back up ?
"Guru Gobind Singh stabbed by Jamshed Khan, a hired assasin. Evening of the day when Baba Gurbakhash Singh left for Punjab, Guru Gobind Singh was visited by two Pathans. One of them was commissioned by Wazir Khan, Subedar of Sirhind. to assasinate Guru Gobind Singh. Wazir Khan was afriad of the ongoing talks between the Guru and Emporer Bahadhur Shah who had ordered Wazir Kahn to pay Guru Gobind Singh a sum of Rupees 300/day."
Hpefully a moderator will be able to see that you deleted it as it was referenced which as I understand you have had several warnings for already Ajjay.
One of the Pathans, Bashal Beg kept a vigil outside the Guru's tent while Jamshed Khan, the hired assassin stabbed the Guru twice. He was killed in one stroke by the Guru himself, while those outside altered by the btumult killed the other. The wound was sewn up the following day, by an English Surgeon, named Cole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 11:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps it was a little scratch that got out of hand ????????? Get real —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- It is you who needs to get real,not meAjjay (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
The assasin in question was Jamshed Khan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 17:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- So !, are you going to bring up his testimony!!Ajjay (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Third opinion
Hi. I'm here as the result of a request for a third opinion. It's hard for me to tell what the exact question I'm supposed to answer here, and I think the biggest problem I see is a lack of polite, respectful discussion. I'd ask the anonymous editor to create an account and log in; it makes discussions smoother.
That said, If the question is what to put in the info box, then it should be a summary of what is in the main text. I've only got one reference handy that covers the death, but that seems to match roughly with our (unreferenced) text here. So if I were looking for a non-controversial summary, I'd suggest, "complications from an assassin's wound". That conveys the essentials, which is all the box needs. If that were too long, I'd just go with "stabbed by assassin". Yes, he didn't die that instant, but there seems to be no question that the wound caused his death.
Another alternative is just to leave the cause of death out of the info box. None of the other Sikh guru articles have it now. William Pietri (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think the third option is the best, as there is always going to be debate over how it should be written. I am removing the "cause of death" from info-box. Serves no purpose. Thanks for your help.Ajjay (talk) 04:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Actually, cause of death due to 'complications from an assassin's wound' is apt. As for why there is no mention on how and why the other Gurus cause of death is NEVER mysteriously mentioned on[REDACTED] or left out beats me since most were butchered alive by the Mughal Emperors or imprisioned, but I guess that will be airbrushed out of history too, another sad but political abuse of historical facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't looked at the other articles, but I agree there's nothing particularly indirect about how he died. The one-word summary for his death would be "assassinated". The early US president James A. Garfield took two months to die of his wound, but he is still regarded as assassinated. If how the Sikh gurus died is culturally or historically significant, which 90.196.3.244 suggests, then it should be part of all the info boxes, rather than none of them. William Pietri (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you William, and thanks for pointing out about the lack of information regarding the assassinations of other Gurus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 20:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- about the lack of information regarding the assassinations of other Gurus???
Perhaps you need to go through these books.
- (This book is by a retired indian foreign service officer (diplomat), and his knowledge is undisputable, plus he reveals facts, which were not known before, and lots of govt. hidden info. thats supposed to be TOP SECRET)
Besides there is a lot of difference between an assassination attempt and assassination. Further the identity of the persons who stabbed is given as varying in different accounts, and involvement of Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah is also not ruled out.
I am placing an argument that was originally pointed by Sikh historian
_______
We live in a time when everyone thinks everything is on the internet. Yes you have a lot of quantity but not quality (the information is shallow 10% and does not cover the subject in dept 90% falling short). The only way to get more confidence in a subject is by reading books -they are usually far more reliable (8-10 times) than websites. It take aleast year to write book, 6 months for peer review research paper, whereas a web article 15 minutes by ANYONE!!!
best & most reliable sources of information:
Books Peer reviewed research papers These are Good books to get you going into understanding Sikhism (priority order):
- Encyclopaedia of Sikhism by Harbans Singh ISBN-10: 8173802041 (One of the best 20th century *Sikh historians & scholars - if EVER in doubt you use one of his books to read)
- The Sikhs of the Punjab ISBN-10: 0521637643
- Khalsa: Sikhs and Non-Sikh Perspectives ISBN-10: 8173045801
- Understanding Sikhism ISBN-10: 1903765153 (cheap to buy)
- Sikhism: A Very Short Introduction ISBN-10: 0192806017 (cheap to buy)
- A History of the Sikhs ISBN-10: 0195673093
- Sikhism ISBN-10: 0140252606
Current Sikh websites don't trust 100% only trust with 40% confidence. Only exception being www.sikhs.org This is the MOST reliable Sikh site = trust 70% confidence. Therefore really with Sikhism you have to read books to understand -because most Sikh websites are RUBBISH.
Ajjay, its a well known fact that people try to change history to suit their political or other objectives, this is classed as the abuse of history. When we read many historical texts many years ago and compare with what teens splash out on the web which is based on cheap political sentiment, then its pretty obvious to the maturer reader of history to differentiate.
Yes, you say many sikh websites are rubbish but thats because you don't agree with historical facts so will subvert truth, integrity and honesty at its expense (which is a common phenomenon these days) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Mr Sikh 'Historian'
You say "Besides there is a lot of difference between an assassination attempt and assassination. Further the identity of the persons who stabbed is given as varying in different accounts, and involvement of Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah is also not ruled out"
You give too many reasons which contradict the many many sources that suggest he was stabbed by Jamshed Shah.
If you are a qualified legitimate historian, then use a real name.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
who is this user luftullah
instead of inserting your comments as replies to comments that are more than a year old, why dont this user start a new topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turniplp (talk • contribs) 02:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
About picture in infobox
The infobox needs a picture. But the picture has to be a real definitive photo that represents actual facial features. There is no actual picture of Guru Gobind Singh. In that sense it misleads the reader into assuming that Guru Gobind Singh looked like the picture. If a picture is to be put in infobox, it has to be in a way which does not make one see things in a particular manner. Turniplp (talk) 07:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Clarification reqd
I ve heard people saying that Guru Gobind Singh JI had 3 wives,but Guruji himself said that a true sikh should not have no relations other than his wife.
Bold text—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpnalhaslo (talk • contribs) 15:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Guru_Gobind_Singh"
Dasam Granth is wrongly claimed to have been written by Guru Gobind Singh
The article page in its current form says the following:-
Wrong claim/ POV" Guru Gobind Singh Ji was the last human Sikh Guru; he finished the Sikh holy book, the Dasam Granth, and also declared that the Guru Granth Sahib as the next permanent Sikh Guru.Bichitra Natak, considered to be his autobiography, is one of the many sources for the information about his life. It is a part of the Dasam Granth, literary collection attributed to Guru Gobind Singh, and was compiled by Bhai Mani Singh."
Problems:-
- . Any form of Dasam Granth is not considered "Holy" as claimed by those lines above.
- . There is no one book which can be called "Dasam Granth". There are several versions of this book circulating today under this name.
- . There is no proof that the the various forms of current versions named "Dasam Granth" were entirely written by Guru Gobind Singh. The name "Dasam Granth" is also fake and has been imposed long-long after demise of the Guru to project this book on Sikh minds.
- . There is no consensus among historians and Sikh theologians that the chapter "Bachchiter Natak" is either written by Guru Gobind Singh or if that is his autobiography. Many history researchers have done extensive work to show that major events from Gurus life are not mentioned while trivial ones are mentioned and there are several other flaws in this chapter.
- . There is no consensus that Bhai Mani Singh compiled this current form of book. The only source of information (which is debated) being used is a letter allegedly written by Bhai Mani Singh. Historians have shown several flaws in that letter like the use of different punjabi style which was not prevalent in Bhai Mani Singh's time. Therefore, this claim is unverifiable.
All the claims made by the lines in question are extra-ordinary claims and must accompany extra-ordinary evidence. Otherwise,[REDACTED] readers should not be exposed to such baseless misleading claims. Regards, --Roadahead (talk) 00:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Date of creation of Khalsa
Is it 30 March 1699 or 13 April 1699?
An anonymous user changed it to 13 April 1699, but the SGPC site says 30 March 1699. So, I'm reverting this edit.
Fundamentalisms observed (Page 59) by Martin E. Marty etal. says "...the unusual happening of 13 April (some say it was on 30 March) 1699" -- maybe we can mention this in the article. utcursch | talk 11:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Confusing sentence
"The impression of Guru Gobind Singh has not only elevated and altered the constitution of the minds of the Sikhs, but has operated materially and given amplitude to their physical frames." I have read this several times, and I have no idea what it is supposed to mean. It needs, at the very least, a reference to justify it, but I think it also needs to be rewritten in a more "international English" style - it sounds like Indian dialect to me, and may therefore be difficult to understand for others.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 18:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- Reframed for readability. My impression was that the sentence was trying to convey that his life and teachings influenced Sikhs ideologically as well as in their daily living. So reframed. prashanthns (talk) 08:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
The birthday clarification of the topic is required.....
as in the published diary book of Letts, the birthday is different from what it is written in this topic--222.64.221.26 (talk) 12:32, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
BTW, the publishing company's website is at www.letts.co.uk --222.64.221.26 (talk) 12:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
info about his birthday from Google scholar
--222.64.221.26 (talk) 12:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.221.26 (talk) 12:47, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
--222.64.221.26 (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I'm editing the last lines because the English is not clear. Also, no disputes should be taking place over "Lord Ram" and his relation to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, because no such relations exist and never will exist.
Namdhari POV of Guru's Last Days
I am of the opinion that the last couple of lines regarding the Namdhari POV ought to be removed, or simply modified to maintain something along the lines of, "Although disputed, it is commonly believed that..."
Considering the mythical nature of the region's history, minor discrepancies are aplenty for all of the region's main actors.
I am deferring until consensus is made.141.217.232.90 (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Move proposal
I propose to rename this article Gobind Singh (currently a redirect) as using the honorific title "Guru" in the article title is poor practice for names of people. --Fæ (talk) 07:03, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
- As it has been two weeks with no comment, I'll move in line with policy. --Fæ (talk) 08:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
File:Guru Gobind Singh 1.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|
An image used in this article, File:Guru Gobind Singh 1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC) |
File:Guru gobind singh ji khalsa akili nihang.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|
|
An image used in this article, File:Guru gobind singh ji khalsa akili nihang.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 28 November 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC) |
File:Guru gobind singh at home.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|
|
An image used in this article, File:Guru gobind singh at home.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 28 November 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC) |
File:Akali nihang guru gobind singh.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|
|
An image used in this article, File:Akali nihang guru gobind singh.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC) |
File:The 10 guru.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
|
|
An image used in this article, File:The 10 guru.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Misplaced Pages. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC) |
Request to Semi protect this Article
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
(VPS 07:46, 10 October 2012 (UTC))
Not done: requests for changes to the page protection level should be made at Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection.. You will need to provide a valid reason for protecting this article as well. —KuyaBriBri 16:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
I have seen in the history someone change the Name of this page from the image, Please see the Article History, that's why I request to Protect this page and Guru Gobind Singh is also the 10th Guru of Sikh's.(VPS 16:50, 10 October 2012 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloggersingh (talk • contribs)
- You have clearly read the second sentence of my response above; please read the first. —KuyaBriBri 17:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Guru disappear with his horse ?
I don't believe this> When you study history e.g. East India company history and other history of first Indian migrant to Russian or Europe etc. When you study English law. you want me to believe in 1700 century a person disappear with his horse. If you research (not on internet). Go to university in Portugal, France and other dutch university. READ east Indian companies history. So called Sikh history is even shorter than east India Company.
Why Khalasa Diwan and Singh Sabaha came into existence? Who funded it? Why funded it? When i read their version. I get confused? Thanks to a Sikh who discover that guru Nanak visited Vatican and Alaska. Why we never came to know Guru Gobind Singh may be encounter with British. We are too narrow minded in studying beyond what these so called sikh religious institute teach us.
Their is story that "A British showed Guru gobind Singh gun and asked to test and his follower came forward to allow Guru to shoot on them to test if it real kills. But Sikh education says there were no British at that time in India.
Guru disappear with his horse ? If i tell somebody this "my guru disappear with horse" they think i am foolish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.219.2.36 (talk) 17:59, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Prophet
Starting this section to address anyone who has any issues with the usage of the word prophet. To start off, Mr. user: Human3015 makes the completely astounding claim that "He was not Prophet, he was human being". I do not even know how to address this childish and immature remark, apart from simply asking him to go and read the meanings of the word "Prophet" "a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God." And I can give you uncountable number of references, spoken by the Gurus themselves asserting that whatever they profess is directly coming from the creator. So please please stay out if you do not know anything at all about the Sikh faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Js82 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Js82: GGS never claimed that he was prophet, neither Guro Grantha Sahib mentions that these Gurus were 'Prophets'. Unless there is self-claim or claim in Holy book, we can't write that in article. Moreover, Guru Grantha Sahib itself is written by various Human scholars, that book is not sent by God. --Human3015 04:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I find your claims ridiculous and hilarious. Are you a scholar on Guru Granth Sahib and the Sikh Gurus ? You are so immature and childish, I even feel sympathy for your many times. Please go and read the Guru Granth Sahib first, and then come back and discuss with me. Given the sensitivity of these issues, and given what I know of you, I would humbly request you to please stay away, unless you are willing to devote time and effort to do research a priori.
And for the record of others who might be thinking of jumping in, the official biographies of the Gurus from the webpage of SGPC (= Sikh version of Vatican) (that has been referenced in the article) mentions the Prophet word. So this should satisfy you. However, with the purpose of providing those who have genuine further interests in understanding Sikh faith and Sikh Gurus, I can also give you numerous references from the Guru Granth Sahib itself, proclaiming that the Gurbani (the Guru Granth Sahib) is "God's word".
Here are some:
"Jaisī mai āvai kẖasam kī baṇī ṯaisṛā karī gi▫ān ve lālo." "As the Word of the Lord comes to me, so do I express it, O Lalo." (Guru Nanak on page 722 of Guru Granth Sahib).
"Dhur Ki Baani Aayi, Tin Sagli Chint Mitaayi" "From the primal One, has emanated the Gurbani; and it has effaced all the anxiety." (Guru Nanak on page 628 of Guru Granth Sahib).
"Sach Poore Gur Updesya, Nanak Sunave". "The complete Lord has delivered the truth, and Nanak is speaking it"
Numerous more ... Hence, since all of these words (God's words) have been delivered through the Gurus, there should be no doubt at all on Prophecy.
Thank you. Please no edit warring.
Js82 (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- C-Class India articles
- Mid-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class Punjab (India) articles
- Top-importance Punjab (India) articles
- C-Class Punjab (India) articles of Top-importance
- WikiProject Punjab (India) articles
- WikiProject India articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- B-Class Sikhism articles
- B-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles