Bhai Sahb Jasjit Singh jee had come over yesterday to daas's greh and was doing seva of Sri Sehaj Paath Sahib that is meant to be finished on Vaisaakhee day.

Sitting near him, I heard a peculiar uchaaran and would like to ask Sangat's opinion on how this punctuation has come about, where it comes from, and how it should be pronounced. Bhai Sahb told me it is very rare and does not come anywhere else in Gurbanee. I have attached a photograph of it, they look like a "colon" ( : ) at the end of the Panktee.

Also I have another question regarding "ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ਗਾਥਾ" Does ਗਾਥਾ just refer to another sort of format? Like Dhuni or Vaar? Or is there some interesting history behind it.

Bhagatjot Singh

Response to the above stated Question:

Quote

Sitting near him, I heard a peculiar uchaaran and would like to ask Sangat's opinion on how this punctuation has come about, where it comes from, and how it should be pronounced. Bhai Sahb told me it is very rare and does not come anywhere else in Gurbanee. I have attached a photograph of it, they look like a "colon" ( : ) at the end of the Panktee.

This colon-like alphabet is called Visarga and is basically pronounced as you would pronounce the "Haha" alphabet. In Sanskrit this alphabet is used but use of it in Hindi and Punjabi has stopped. In Sanskrit where this h-visarga comes, it is pronounced as extension of the previous vowel. As an example if this Visarga comes after Ram, it is pronounce as Ramah. In Gurbani, the Visarga is pronounced as Haha alphabet.

In Sanskrit, if there is no halant at the end, then the echo of the Mukta word too is observed. If there is Halant, then the sound of Mukta is not pronounced. Many times we wonder why the words Raam and Krishan in English are written as Rama and Krishna. The reason for this is the absence of Halant in the end of these words which forces the reader to say the Mukta sound. When the experts of Sanskrit wrote the Sanskrit words without Halant in the end, in English, they wrote Rama and Krishna which is not fully correct. If you pronounce Krishna as a full Kanna, then it becomes a feminine gender noun which would be an error in case it means Siri Krishna (who was a male). One of the names of Drupadi was Krishna (because her colour too like Siri Krishna was Saawla) with full Kanna but the Mukta sound is much subtle than the Kanna. The Mukta sound is not the Kanna sound. If the Mukta sound is not said subtly it becomes a Kanna.

In Gurbani too the Halant appears but I believe the use of Halant in Gurmukhi, now a days, is not same as the use of Halant in Sanskrit. I have heard Sampradayak Gianis suggesting that the Halant be pronouced similar to the modern day Addhak which does not seem to be correct. I think, more research is required in this field.

Quote

Also I have another question regarding "ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ਗਾਥਾ" Does ਗਾਥਾ just refer to another sort of format? Like Dhuni or Vaar? Or is there some interesting history behind it.

Gaatha is an ancient language and perhaps it is another name for Sahaskriti, which is the mother of Prakrit and Paali languages. Gaatha as a word means story or tale and here it means the Katha or description of Naam.

Kulbir Singh