The Inauthenticity of the Kartarpuri Birh
Irrefutable Evidence that the Kartarpuri Birh was not written by Guru Arjan Dev Ji and Bhai Gurdas Ji
Introduction
The Sodhis of Kartarpur, the descendants of Guru Ram Das Ji, claim to have the original Aad Granth written by Bhai Gurdas Ji under Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s supervision. They claim that they have had custody of the Granth from the time of Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji. After a thorough examination of this Birh, it becomes apparent that this Birh cannot be the original Aad Birh written by Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji.
Although these days the Sodhis very rarely allow Sangat members to view this Birh, in the 1900s many scholars were given opportunities to thoroughly examine it. One of these scholars was the respected Dr. Jodh Singh, who after examining the Birh, came to the conclusion that it was indeed the very same one that Bhai Gurdas Ji wrote under Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s supervision. Numerous other scholars too have reached this conclusion. However, their remain several more scholars who also examined the Kartarpuri Birh such as Giani Gurdit Singh, Bhai Randhir Singh (Research Scholar), Swami Harnaam Das Udasi, and Piara Singh Padam that reject this Birh as being the original Aad Birh.
The original Birh written by Bhai Gurdas Ji has unfortunately been lost to history. This is not an attack on Guru Granth Sahib, but just a sad reality of history. We still have hundreds of Saroops from the 1600 to 1800s that form our understanding of the corpus of Sri Guru Granth Sahib today. So it must be said that the rejection of this particular Kartarpuri Birh is not a rejection of Guru Granth Sahib or an attack on Sikhi. Many defenders of this Birh being the original Aad Birh, defend it because they see its rejection as an attack on the Sikh faith and on Gurbani itself. Although the sharda (loving faith) of these Sikhs is commended, it can not be accepted as an argument for its authenticity. In fact, to consider this Birh to be the original Aad Birh written by Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji would be an attack on Guru Arjan Dev Ji, due to the number of mistakes and other errors so obviously present in it. Even a regular scholar, let alone Guru Arjan Dev Ji or Bhai Gurdas Ji, would not have made such obvious mistakes, and then not have fixed them. Therefore, the conclusion one must reach after careful consideration of the evidence presented, is that the Kartarpuri Birh is not authentic.
Problems with the Current Katarpuri Birh
The Kartarpuri Birh that is currently claimed to have been written by Bhai Gurdas Ji under Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s guidance has several problems that are hard to ignore. These problems are listed and expanded upon below:
In the Kartarpuri Birh there are ten Shabads that appear within the Birh but are not present in the Tatkara. Are we to believe that Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji simply forgot to include these within the Tatkara? Surely, they did not make such a simple error? Five of these Shabads that are missing from the Tatkara are given below:
ਏਕੁ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਮਨ ਮਾਹੀ ॥੧॥
ਜਾ ਕਉ ਭਏ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਲ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਸੇਈ ਜਪਾਤ ॥
ਠਾਕੁਰ ਹੋਏ ਆਪਿ ਦਇਆਲ ॥ ਭਈ ਕਲਿਆਣ ਅਨੰਦ ਰੂਪ ਹੋਈ ਹੈ ਉਬਰੇ ਬਾਲ ਗੁਪਾਲ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਸੰਤਨ ਕੈ ਬਲਿਹਾਰੈ ਜਾਉ ॥ ਸੰਤਨ ਕੈ ਸੰਗਿ ਰਾਮ ਗੁਨ ਗਾਉ ॥
ਨਰਨਰਹ ਨਮਸਕਾਰੰ ॥ਜਲਨ ਥਲਨ ਬਸੁਧ ਗਗਨ ਏਕ ਏਕੰਕਾਰੰ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
Furthermore, in the Kartarpuri Birh there are eight Shabads that have a different spelling within the Tatkara and the actual Birh. For example, in the Tatkara it is written:
ਦੁਖ ਭੰਜਨੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਨਾਉ ਜੀ
While in the Birh the spelling is correctly written as:
ਦੁਖ ਭੰਜਨੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜੀ
Another example is:
ਹਮ ਧਨਵੰਤ ਭਾਗਠ ਸਚ ਨਾਇ ॥
Where in the Birh the paath comes correctly as ਧਨਵੰਤ but in the Tatkara it is written as ਭਗਵੰਤ
There are eight total mistakes like this in the Tatkara. Even if we believe that Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji made such simple mistakes, are we to believe that they did not notice these simple mistakes and then correct them?
The Tatkara also mentions that the ending of the Saroop should be at Raagmala, followed by Singhaldip Raja Shivnabh Ki Bidh. However at the end of the Saroop, only Raagmala is present. Clearly Singhaldip Raja Shivnabh Ki Bidh was removed at some point to make the Birh appear authentic, as current standardized Saroops end at Raagmala. If this is the original Aad Birh, why is an extra composition (Kachi Bani) mentioned in the Tatkara? If it is mentioned in the Tatkara, why is not present at the end of the Birh? The Sodhis clearly manipulated the Birh to make it appear authentic to give themselves more authority within the Panth.
When we look at the above picture we must ask ourselves another question. Did Bhai Gurdas Ji run out space? Why did he have to finish Singhaldip Raja Shivnabh Ki Bidh outside of the margin? Did he not know how much space to leave? Someone as qualified as Bhai Gurdas Ji surely would have known how much space to leave in the Tatkara. All of this points us in the direction of this Birh being inauthentic.
Additionally, this Birh has a Nishan (autograph) claimed to be of Guru Arjan Dev Ji. According to Swami Harnam Das Udasi, who examined the Birh closely, this Nishan (Ik Onkar to Gurparsad, or the “Mool Mantar”) has been carefully planted onto the paper to make it appear to be a part of the Birh.
According to Swami Harnam Das Udasi, in the Nishaan the word ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ occurs without the aunkar as ਨਿਰਵੈਰ. However, in the rest of the Birh the word occurs with the aunkar, including in Jap Ji Sahib on the ang next to the Nishan. If Guru Arjan Dev Ji wrote the word as ਨਿਰਵੈਰ, why did Bhai Gurdas Ji feel the need to add the aunkar and make it ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ? Swami Harnaam Das believes that the Nishan is fake and that it was added to the Birh by the Sodhis to gain favour during the rule of Ranjit Singh. By claiming to have the original Aad Birh, the Sodhis were given grants of land and money and did not have to pay tax.
To add to the above point, in the alleged Nishan of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, the word ਗੁਰਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ appears with a full Rara as: ਗੁਰਪਰਸਾਦਿ. However, in Jap Ji Sahib it appears as ਗੁਰਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ. Did Bhai Gurdas Ji know better than Guru Arjan Dev Ji? Did he know to change the spelling of the word ਗੁਰਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ? Of course not, leading us to believe that this Nishan is fake.
Furthermore, Bhai Randhir Singh Research Scholar, who also examined the Birh in 1946, writes that in the Tatkara it states the Nishan of Guru Arjan Dev Ji is on Ang 29 however in the actual Birh the Nishan appears on Ang 45. Bhai Randhir Singh believes that a clever writer has tried to present this Birh has the original Aad Birh, but in fact it is a copy of the Bhai Banno Birh.
Below are pictures of the alleged Kartarpuri Birh. Although it is difficult to read the Nishan fully, one can clearly see that Gurparsad is written as ਗੁਰਪਰਸਾਦਿ and as ਗੁਰਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ in Jap Ji Sahib:
This Birh also includes a Nishan of Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji. How can Guru Hargobind Sahib’s Nishan as Guru appear within the Aad Birh that was compiled during Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s guruship. We would have to believe that Guru Hargobind Sahib was already called the 6th Guru, several years before he was formally installed as the 6th Guru. This becomes problematic, what is more likely is that this Birh is not the original Aad Birh.
The fact of the matter is that we do not know for certain what Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s handwriting looked like. There are several different Nishans claimed to be of Guru Arjan Dev Ji that do not match up and have many differences in the writing. If these Nishans were similar enough, we could say for certain what Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s writing looked like, but unfortunately we cannot do so.
Moreover, Swami Harnam Das believes that the writing style of the letters does not match how Gurmukhi letters were written in the 1600s, when the original Aad Birh was written. In fact, he says the writing style of letters such as ਹ and ਲ point to the Birh being written in the late 1700 to 1800s. Therefore, it is impossible for it to be the original Aad Birh.
To expand on the above point, Bhai Randhir Singh (Research Scholar) writes that the use of the vowel Kanaura (ਔ) did not develop until the time of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji. How then does the Kartarpuri Birh, supposedly written during the time of Guru Arjan Dev Ji make use of the Kanaura vowel? This again points to the fact that the Kartarpuri Birh cannot be the original Aad Birh.
Bhai Randhir Singh has further stated that the Kartarpuri Birh uses the Bindi for nasal sounds. The Bindi for nasal sounds was a later development, how does it appear in the Kartarpuri Birh then? In fact, the Bindi within the Kartarpuri Birh has been used at incorrect spots, where it is not needed. Not only has the writer used the Bindi (which was not used during Guru Arjan Dev Ji) but they have used it incorrectly!
With the above evidence it becomes clear that the Kartarpuri Birh that the Sodhis have today is not the original Aad Birh. However, we can examine even more evidence about the Kartarpuri Birh that proves this fact even further.
Number of Writers of the Kartarpuri Birh
Another major problem with the Kartarpuri Birh is the fact that there are several distinct writers of the Birh. Sikh tradition maintains that Bhai Gurdas Ji is the only person to have written the Aad Birh, with Guru Arjan Dev Ji having made small edits and changes. That would put the maximum number of writers at two. Bhai Jodh Singh after doing a meticulous study of the Kartarpuri Birh wrote his book: Sri Kartarpuri Birh de Darshan. He concludes that there are six total writers of this Birh. Other scholars too after examining the Birh have concluded that there are too many differences within the writing for the Birh to have only one writer.
Furthermore, Bhai Randhir Singh writes that there are are several Shabads that have been first written and then crossed out, by a second writer.
Let us examine this in more depth. There are is a Shabad of Guru Arjan Dev Ji that appears written by this different writer. The Shabad is:
ਦਰਸਨ ਕਉ ਲੋਚੈ ਸਭੁ ਕੋਈ ॥
Daljit Singh, the author of The Authenticity of the Kartarpuri Bir, an ardent supporter of the Kartarpuri Birh being authentic, believes that this Shabad, although not in the hand of Bhai Gurdas Ji, is in the hand of Guru Arjan Dev Ji himself. This is problematic to accept because there is a composition of Bhagat Kabir Ji that is also written in this same handwriting. However this composition of Bhagat Kabir has then been crossed out. Meaning that Guru Arjan Dev Ji both wrote and crossed it out. Why would Guru Arjan Dev Ji first include and then delete it? Guru Sahib would not add a composition that does not belong within Guru Granth Sahib. This writing is not of Guru Arjan Dev Ji and this Birh is not the Aad Birh.
Another composition of Bhagat Kabir Ji has also been included and then erased from the Kartarpuri Birh, in the same handwriting that is claimed to be Guru Arjan Dev Ji’s. This composition is very problematic as the language used towards Ram (God) is disrespectful. The composition with a translation is presented below:
ਦੇਖਹੁ ਲੋਗਾ ਹਰਿ ਕਿ ਸਗਾਈ॥ ਮਾਂ ਧਰਿ ਪੂਤ ਧੀਆ ਸੰਗ ਜਾਈ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ॥
Look O people! the betrothal of the lord. Mother has wed her son and she goes with her husband.
ਹਮਹਿ ਬਾਪ ਰਾਮ ਪੂਤ ਹਮਾਰਾ॥ ਮੈ ਬਹਨੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਮੋਰਾ ਸਾਰਾ॥੧॥
I am the father and Ram is my son. I am his sister’s husband (bahinoi) and Ram is my brother-in-law (sala).
ਅਬ ਮੇਰੀ ਰਾਮੁ ਕਹੈਗੀ ਬਲਈਆ॥ ਰਾਮ ਮੇਰੋ ਸਸੁਰ ਮੈਂ ਰਾਮ ਜਵਾਈਆ॥੨॥
Why should I say ‘Ram’ now! Ram is my father-in-law (sasur) and I am Ram’s son-in-law (javayyia).
ਕਹਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਸੁਨਹੁ ਰੇ ਪੂਤਾ॥ ਰਾਮ ਜਪਹਿ ਤੇਈ ਨਰ ਕੂਤਾ॥੩॥
Says Kabir: Listen O son! Those people who repeat Ram are the real appraisers (kuta).
This Shabad is obviously anti-Gurmat and Guru Arjan Dev Ji or Bhai Gurdas Ji would never include it within the Aad Birh to begin with. The fact that the Kartarpuri Birh first adds then deletes it cements the fact this Birh was not the work of Guru Sahib and Bhai Gurdas Ji, but of other less qualified writers.
Another instance of a Shabad first added and then crossed out is that of Mira Bai’s Shabad. Mira Bai was a female Bhagat and one of her Shabads has been included in several other Birhs as well. Why would Guru Arjan Dev Ji first add this Shabad and then cross it out? Did Guru Sahib change his mind? Did Guru Sahib not know that this Shabad was not acceptable at first? Of course not.
To accept the Kartarpuri Birh as authentic would be blasphemy. It would paint both Guru Arjan Dev Ji and Bhai Gurdas Ji regular writers and editors capable of making such mistakes as including Shabads within Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that clearly do not belong, and then deleting them.
Other Mistakes in the Kartarpuri Birh
A team of scholars from Tarn Taran studied the Kartarpuri Birh for fourteen weeks from October 19th 1924 to January 9th 1925. This team came to the conclusion that the Kartarpuri Birh had been edited using another Birh. How could the original Aad Birh have been edited against another Birh? It is called the Aad (First) Birh for a reason.
Dr. Piar Singh in his book Gatha Sri Adi Granth and the Controversy writes (page 125):
The Tarn Taran team tells us that Kartarpuri Bir (folio 174) had originally govinda with the nasal sign (tippi) on it. Later on, it was changed to read govida by removing the nasal sound represented by tippi with hartal, the yellow paste. A correct reading rendered wrong! Yet another instance of a similar unwarranted correction. On page 472 of the Kartarpuri Bir, a correct heading ਸੋਰਠਿ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ is seen to have been changed with hartal to read ਸੋਰਟਿ in place of ਸੋਰਠਿ. There are many other instances of unwarranted corrections. Rendering correct readings wrong by the use of hartal cannot be said to be the work of an expert amanuensis like Bhai Gurdas, nor could it have the sanction of Guru Arjun. They are, indeed, the result of a misplaced check-up of the Kartarpuri Bir by some novice with some other codex.
There are thousands of minor mistakes and errors like this in the Kartarpuri Birh. The scholars from Tarn Taran Sahib were staunch believers that the Kartarpuri Birh was the original and authentic Birh. So much so that they recorded within their notes that they did not wish the obvious mistakes of this Birh to become public. Dr. Piar Singh who examined their notes writes in his book Gatha Sri Adi Granth and the Controversy, a translation from the notes of the scholars:
“Bhai Narain Singh went back by the 2 p.m. train. [Before he left] we prayed, ‘Let secrets of Baba Ji (the Adi Bir) remain with Baba Ji!’
“Let secrets of Baba Ji remain with Baba Ji”.
If we do indeed have the original Aad Birh written by Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji we should be proud of this fact. Why should we need to hide it? Clearly, the Kartarpuri Birh is so full of errors that scholars wish for them to be hidden, lest we bring shame on the name of our complete and perfect Guru.
Moving on, there are several places within the Birh where Shabads have been left out. The writer wrote ਮਹਲਾ ੫: but then left the space blank and did not include the Shabad. Are we to believe that Guru Arjan Dev Ji did not have his own Shabads ready? If the missing Shabad was of a previous Guru or a Bhagat, we can accept that perhaps Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Sahib were waiting to receive the Shabad from another Pothi. But how can Guru Sahib not have their own Shabad?
There are a lot of places where the writing is very small and tight and in other places the writing is large and spaced out. Meaning the writer was inexperienced and did not know how to correctly space out the Shabads. Are we to believe that Bhai Gurdas Ji would be chosen by Guru Arjan Dev Ji if he was not a capable writer? There are so many instances where Shabads have first been written then crossed out. Hartal has been used excessively in this Birh. These all point to this Birh being a copy and not the original Aad Birh. Tradition maintains that Guru Arjan Dev Ji recited the Bani and Bhai Gurdas Ji wrote it down. Should we believe that Guru Sahib changed their mind about which Shabads to include and then crossed them out? There are instances where the writer ran out of space and wrote outside of the Margins. Would these mistakes occur if Bhai Gurdas Ji was the writer under the guidance of Guru Arjan Dev Ji? Of course not!
Sikhs were not ready to accept that the original Aad Birh had been lost to history, so they desperately wanted to accept the Sodhi’s claim of having that Birh as can be seen from the Tarn Taran scholars above. So these obvious mistakes were ignored.
Other scholars too such as the respected Sant Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale and Manna Singh Pathi who have examined the Kartarpuri Birh have left behind lists of hundreds of mistakes and text differences. Dr. Piar Singh best summarizes the issues with the Kartarpuri Birh when he writes on page 104 of his Gatha Sri Adi Granth and the Controversy:
First, several objectionable hymns, first entered and then penned through, stare in the our face. Secondly, numerous deletions, corrections and emendations hopelessly mar the above picture. Lastly, even after having undergone countless alterations and corrections… [allegedly] at the hands of Bhai Gurdas and Guru Arjan, the Bir continues to be as poor of a specimen of work as we shall feel ashamed of presenting it to the world as a work of a highly competent amanuensis like Bhai Gurdas, much less an infallible Guru of the caliber of Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji.
Conclusion
Although it is a sad fact that we Sikhs have lost the original Aad Birh written by Bhai Gurdas Ji and Guru Arjan Dev Ji, this does not allow us the liberty to put in its place an inauthentic Birh and then claim it to be the original. Doing so makes our perfect Guru, appear imperfect. It shows Bhai Gurdas Ji as an inexperienced and incompetent writer and scholar. The above article has delved into several issues with the current Kartarpuri Birh that cements the fact that it cannot be the original Aad Birh. From simple errors as small spelling mistakes to entire Shabads being first added and then crossed out. From the excessive use of Hartal to entire Shabads of Guru Arjan Dev Ji that are missing. We as Sikhs must use our intellect that has been given to us by our Gurus to determine what is true and what is false, simply relying on stories and tradition will not suffice. By giving the Kartarpuri Birh a thorough examination, we have to conclude that it is not the original Aad Birh.
References
Singh, Daljeet The Authenticity of Kartarpuri Birh
Singh, Dr, Jodh Kartarpuri Birh de Darshan
Singh, Dr. Piar Gatha Sri Adi Granth
Singh, Dr. Piar Gatha Sri Adi Granth and the Controversy
Singh, Bhai Randhir Research Scholar
Udasin, Swami Harnam Das Puratan Beera te Vichar
I do not wish to offend anyone, but why did the author not consult the seminal work of Dr. Balwant Singh Dhillon who also studied this issue? I am linking his book below
https://archive.org/details/EarlySikhScripturalTraditionMythAndReality/page/n1/mode/1up