Read on Twitter
This thread is a very good example of blatant lies and strawman arguments of a typical propagandist.
First of all, the Janamsakhi paintings of Guru Nanak are among his earliest available paintings whose authenticity is beyond question (unlike fake paintings these guys share) https://twitter.com/sialmirzagoraya/status/1359875673377042436
First of all, the Janamsakhi paintings of Guru Nanak are among his earliest available paintings whose authenticity is beyond question (unlike fake paintings these guys share) https://twitter.com/sialmirzagoraya/status/1359875673377042436
One of the illustrations actually dates back to 17th century which is earlier than any of these sources (which we see below).
Secondly, this entire thread is a strawman. Nowhere have I even talked about the "martyrdom" of Guru Tegh Bahadur or contested it in my thread.
Secondly, this entire thread is a strawman. Nowhere have I even talked about the "martyrdom" of Guru Tegh Bahadur or contested it in my thread.
Now let us examine the so called "Bhat Vahi" that he is tom-toming as a "contemporary source". https://twitter.com/sialmirzagoraya/status/1359876509851291653
His "evidence" is this screenshot taken from Fauja Singh's book "Guru Tegh Bahadur: Martyr and Teacher".
Where does Fauja Singh get this source? Fauja Singh cites Bhat Vahi and Guru Kian Sakhiyan. He gets it from the work of Chajju Singh.
NOTE: This is NOT contemporary
Where does Fauja Singh get this source? Fauja Singh cites Bhat Vahi and Guru Kian Sakhiyan. He gets it from the work of Chajju Singh.
NOTE: This is NOT contemporary
The Bhat Vahis and Guru Kian Sakhiyan do not exist in their contemporary form. They were originally written in Bhattakshari script.
This was later converted to Gurmukhi by Chajju Singh in 1868. What is extant now is not the original but Chajju Singh's version
This was later converted to Gurmukhi by Chajju Singh in 1868. What is extant now is not the original but Chajju Singh's version
Scholars and professional historians are still skeptic about its the origin of Chajju Singh's version of Bhat Vahi and Guru Kian Sakhiyan. Its fate as a genuine source is hanging in the air.
The eminent historian of Sikh studies, Mcleod is of the opinion that Guru Kian Sakhiyan was interpolated in 19th century
The Sikh eminent historian profession Grewal admits that Bhat Vahis have not yet been critically examined to evaluate their authenticity.
Giani Garja Singh was the only person to have ever worked on these Vahis.
The Bhatt Vahis have not been subject to critical examination and have not even been published yet.
So much for "contemporary source".
cc @Koenraad_Elst
The Bhatt Vahis have not been subject to critical examination and have not even been published yet.
So much for "contemporary source".
cc @Koenraad_Elst
Yet, unlike these propagandists, I will not dismiss a source like they dismissed the paintings to suit their agenda.
It is actually the contents of Bhat Vahi that are most damaging to these propagandists. Read on
It is actually the contents of Bhat Vahi that are most damaging to these propagandists. Read on
