Talk:Bulleh Shah

Siraiki is described by many other sources as a dialect of Punjabi, not Sindhi. Is Siraiki a dialect of Punjabi or Sindhi? Or is it a combination of these two languages. 24 July, 2005

Many people consider it a dialect of Punjabi, others don't! But it's normally classed with Punjabi or a separate language, not usually with Sindhi. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:46, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Mustansir Hussain Tarar, in his book, Bahhao (بھا و) (Flow) present a thesis that sindhi and punjabi are actually same race. And it seems very rational because the language changes from Sindhi to Punjabi as we move twords north. changing gradually from Sindhi, sindhish Saraiki, Saraiki, punjabish Saraiki and finally Punjabi. I can't really present a proof, but you can feel it as you listen people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.157.130.68 (talk) 07:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Whoever keeps trying to stick in links to this website under "Related Articles", can you please STOP?

"Related Articles" is for Wikipedia articles. "External Links" is for links to external websites.

The English version of the Bulleh Shah page from the kasur.20fr.com site is already listed under links. Sarabseth 17:14, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Why there is no reference to ustad nusrat fateh ali khan's contribution to Baba bulleh shah's work

- Anudeep Toora

Sfacets changed "the abstruse metaphysical poem Bullah Ki Jaana" to "the poem Bullah Ki Jaana", calling it pov wording.

I actually regard that as a factual description. It is definitely a metaphysical poem (surely there can be no dispute about that?), and it is widely regarded as one of his most difficult poems to understand, hence abstruse seems appropriate.

I'll leave it to others to decide whether it should say "the poem" or "the metaphysical poem" or "the abstruse metaphysical poem". Sarabseth 11:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm yes, maybe pov was a bit strong a term. (my apologies, it was late at night, my vocabulary was rather limited at the time) It is indeed a good description, however placing "abstruse metaphysical poem" next to "pop song"creates a pejorative denotation, casting the modern renditions of said poems in a bad light.

But I see your point. Sfacets 12:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

If anything, my point was really how improbable it is that an abstruse metaphysical poem would become a big pop hit.

So what would you like to do with that sentence? Add back the "abstruse metaphysical" or make some other change? Sarabseth 03:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Was he a contemporary of Bulleh Shah? --Sarabseth 12:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the fact that the quotations are not in English should be the issue. They can be easily translated if they're worth keeping.

So maybe the issue is: who are these people who are being quoted? If Bulleh Shah was their teacher, the quotes have to be taken from historical texts. If someone can provide citations, perhaps the quotes are worth restoring? --Sarabseth 15:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's better to put his birth name first. He wrote under the name Bulleh Shah. The title for his entry is also Bulleh Shah not Abdullah Shah.

Should the Bob Dylan entry start: "Robert Zimmerman, better known as Bob Dylan, was a ..."?

(For the record, that entry starts: "Bob Dylan (born Robert Allen Zimmerman, May 24, 1941)...")

It's exactly the same issue, I think. --Sarabseth 14:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Oops- you're right. I changed it because I misread MoS:BIO. I thought it specifically stated that the birth name should come first, but it doesn't have to. johnpseudo 15:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I did not provide the external link to the song "Aik Alif" with English Subtitles and Punjabi text because I was promoting either the song or the band. For the record, I have no connection to the band, though I heard them perform once. I added the link because I find this kind of link helpful as a teacher and as a student. It is possible that I am, through my ignorance of the field, unfairly promoting this one band. If there are many other, perhaps better, modern renditions of Bulleh Shah's work available on the web with text and English subtitles, I would love to see those links posted. I have no desire to promote one artist arbitrarily. But given that there is not a space issue, I do not see the problem with keeping the link. If you think I'm wrong, let's talk about it on this talk page.ReadHowell (talk) 19:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

There are probably several videos of Bulleh Shah songs on YouTube with English translations, links to which cannot be posted as per WP policy.

This link properly belongs on the Sain Zahoor page, where it already exists. (apart from possible copyright violation issues, that is...)

Linking to the Sain Zahoor page, as you did, in the "Modern Renditions" section is sufficient, I think.

Under the circumstances, I think we should remove the link from "External links". --Sarabseth (talk) 23:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. My understanding of the WP on links to YouTube is that there is not a problem with posting links to YouTube unless the YouTube postings are copyright violations. The other links are on those pages because I put them there, not because I found them there. 67.247.213.180 (talk) 14:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

80.134.9.40 (talk) 10:25, 21 March 2017 (UTC) The link "Littérateurs of the Punjabi language" is broken. 2017-03-21.

Hello. I just wanted to explain my removal of the word "hugely". It seemed to be challenged here. I think that "it became hugely popular" sounds peacock-ish and that the "hugely" is hugely unnecessary ;) especially since it is not sourced. That being said, I don't really care, I just saw the challenge of the word and did what I thought was the best way to deal with it. Cheers! Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 22:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi! It's hard to read the mind of the person who inserted that "not hugely". Could be just pointless vandalism, for instance. That sentence has read that way for a very long time, with no objections. I think it reads better with the word "hugely" than without. That song was indeed a huge hit; maybe a reference can be found. --Sarabseth (talk) 22:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

That was easier done than said. There were references at Bullah Ki Jaana. --Sarabseth (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw that, nice job. No objections from me anymore, not that you'd have had anymore fro me anyway :) Cheers! Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 22:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed the following material from the article:

Banda Singh Bahadur was a contemporary of Bulleh Shah. In retaliation for the murder of Guru Gobind Singh's two sons by Aurangzeb, he sought revenge by killing common Muslims. Baba Bulleh Shah tried to convince Banda Singh Bairagi to renounce his campaign of revenge. Bulleh Shah told him that the same sword which fell upon Guru Gobind Singh's sons and innocent Sikhs also fell upon innocent Muslims. Hence killing innocent Muslim was not the answer to Aurangzeb's reign of oppression.

[CLARIFICATION About Baba Banda Singh Ji Bahadur: Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Ji never killed any innocent civilians. He was a saint and was living in highest stages of spirituality. He only took a sword against bad Islamic rulers. He also had support from some highly acclaimed spiritual leaders of islaam (for example Peer Budhu Shah Ji)].

Please do not re-insert into article without citations in support. --Sarabseth (talk) 12:05, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sarbath
Would you please provide reasons for your deletion.
If the reason is an absence of an english translation , please provide one . Incidently you did not only remove the Gurmukhi but also the Hindi text ...perhaps you could add a shahmulhi text .
I have provided a proper citation to the content I introduced . Incidently the citations in this article could be improved
Intothefire (talk) 10:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Who, I wonder, is Sarbath?

I guess I should have said "Gurmukhi and Hindi" in my edit summary.

There was more than one reason for the deletion. First, it doesn't make sense to insert material in foreign languages into an English article (since the article is for English-speaking readers). At the very least, it should be in transliteration form (i.e. Roman Punjabi), with a translation. Equally importantly, some reason or context needs to be provided for the insertion. In the absence of any explanation from you, it appears that all you are doing is saying: "Hey, everybody, these are my favorite Bulleh Shah verses!" Apart from everything else, that qualifies as a POV edit. Finally, you inserted it into an inappropriate place in the article; it should be before "Further Reading", not after "See Also". --Sarabseth (talk) 12:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sarabseth ,
Sarbat da bhalla.
Apologies for the misspelling .
You win

Since you seem to be a Bulle Shah aficionado
Please suggest a good translation of the English poem you deleted .(the one you call Hey, everybody, these are my favorite Bulleh Shah verses)

And Bulle Shah in Hindi , Gurmukhi scripts foreign language :) ?... would you prefer Shahmukhi ?
Sir would you permit ,a little content in (native !!) languages scripts with English transliteration or translation of Bulle Shah in this article ?
Respectfully
an e-murid
Intothefire (talk) 04:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

It's possible you're trying to be funny (though it's hard to tell). --Sarabseth (talk) 12:34, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

See my initial message , I requested your collaboration , your response was arrogant .

Your deletion was unexplained , sans discussion on the talk page .

Its not my intention to edit war specially on this page but I certainly believe judicious content(in all or any of the three scripts used for Punjabi) of some of Bulley Shah 's works properly explained would enhance this Punjabi sage's page .

Too often custodianship by one editor hinders a page's development ,

please reflect .

Intothefire (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

"See my initial message , I requested your collaboration , your response was arrogant ." You asked me the reason for the deletion; I explained my reasons. What part of that do you find arrogant?

"Your deletion was unexplained , sans discussion on the talk page ." Every deletion or reversion hardly needs to be explained on the Talk page. Besides, many people would consider an edit summary saying "deleted Gurmukhi insertion" pretty self-explanatory. The moment you asked me to explain the deletion, I did so.

If you find any of that objectionable or arrogant, I believe you are the one who needs to please reflect, not me. --Sarabseth (talk) 12:06, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

This discussion between user Sarabseth and me was a consequence of the following cited content I contributed to this page .

ਬੇਕੈਦ

ਸੈਂ ਬੇਕੈਦ ,ਸੈਂ ਬੇਕੈਦ ;

ਨਾ ਰੋਗੀ , ਨਾ ਵੈਦ |

ਨਾ ਮੈ ਮੋਮਨ , ਨਾ ਮੈ ਕਾਫਿਰ ,

ਨਾ ਸੈਧਦ ,ਨਾ ਸੌਦ | ^[1]

मै बेकैद , मै बेकैद ,

ना रोगी ना वैद |

ना मै मोमन , ना मै काफर ,

ना सैयद ,ना सैद |^[2]

Ok so Sarabseth we wont put it on the article but can you provide a good English translation !

Intothefire (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Intothefire (talk) 15:12, 19 January 2011 (UTC)