What do you know of Raag Mala?

The literal meaning of Raag Mala (ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ) is “a garland” or “series” (Mala) of Raags (musical measures). These lists vary depending on the author and the school of Indian classical music, and multiple such versions are found in traditional music texts. Raag Mala is also the name of a short composition of twelve stanzas (around sixty lines), which outlines a set of classical Raags in a style associated with the Hanuman Mat school of music.

This composition appears in the appendix of standard printed editions of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, following Mundaavani (ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ)—the concluding seal placed by Guru Arjan Dev Ji to mark the completion of the revealed text. As an appended composition, Raag Mala forms part of the appendix, not the main body of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji which contains the Gurbani, the divinely revealed scripture of the Sikh Gurus and Bhagats.

Historically, in older handwritten manuscripts, Raag Mala often appears alongside other compositions added by scribes, many of which are universally recognized as not being part of Gurbani, and thus not considered essential to the structure or content of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Its presence does not alter or compromise the authenticity, integrity, or spiritual authority of the main body of the holy text.

Importantly, Raag Mala should not be viewed as a table of contents for the Raags used in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. It includes musical Raags not found in the scripture and omits others that are present. Its classification system—using Raags, Raagnis (female counterparts), and sons—is distinct from the musical system of Gurbani, further affirming its position as a separate, appended composition.

In summary, while Raag Mala is included in printed volumes due to historical and traditional practices, it resides in the appendix and does not form part of the divinely revealed Gurbani. Its inclusion in the physical compilation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in no way compromises the sanctity, completeness, or authority of the eternal Guru.

English Translation of the Full Text of Raag Mala

Raagmala (the garland/list of musical melodies):

Each raag has five wives. The singers express each raag with their eight sons. The singers express the first (beginning) raag, Raag Bhairo. Along with this, they recite five Raagnis. They first sing Bhairavee; then second, Bilaavalee; then third, Punni-aakee; and then fourth, Bangalee. Then comes the turn of the fifth, Asalekhee. These are the five wives of Raag Bhairo. Then the sounds of (1) Pancham, (2) Harakh, and (3) Disaakh; the songs of (4) Bangaalam, (5) Madh and (6) Maadhav are being sung. ||1||

The singers sing Lalat and Bilaaval in their own individual ways. There are eight sons of Raag Bhairo, that are being sung by the accomplished actors. ||1||

The second raag they express is Maal-kausak. Along with this Raag, they express five Raagnis. (1) Gond-karee and (2) Dev Gandhaaree. (3) Gandhaaree and (4) Seehutee are recited. Along with (5) Dhanaasaree, these five are sung. These Raagnis are sung along with Maal-kausak. Then (1) Maaroo, (2) Mast-ang, (3) Mevaaraa, (4) Prabal-chandd, (5) Kausak, (6) Ubhara, (7) Khau-khatt and (8) Bhauraa-nad were sung. They sing along with these eight sons of Maal-kausak. ||1||

Then comes Raag Hindol with his five wives and eight sons. When the singers touch these notes on the strings then waves rise of sweet-voiced chorus sings. ||1||

The wives of Hindol are (1) Telangee, and (2) then comes the Raagni Dev-karee. Then (3) the beautiful Basantee, and (4) Sandoor. Then the finest of women is (5) Aheeree. These five wives come together (i.e. join together and sung). The sons: (1) Surmaa-nand and (2) Bhaaskar come. Then, beautiful (3) Chandra-binb and (4) Mangalan follow. (5) Sarasbaan and (6) Binodaa then come. Then (7) Basant and (8) Kamodaa are sung with bliss. I have clearly stated the list of the eight sons (of Hindol). Then comes the turn of Raag Deepak (and its wives). ||1||

Expressing (1) Kachhelee, (2) Pattamanjaree and (3) Todee. The Raagnis (4) Kaamodee and (5) Goojaree come became established with Deepak. ||1|| (1) Kaalankaa, (2) Kuntal and (3) Raamaa. (4) Kamal-kusam and (5) Champak. And, (6) Gauraa, (7) Kaanaraa and (8) Kelaanaa. These are the eight sons of Deepak known (to the singers). ||1||

These learned singers come together to sing Siree-Raag. The singers accompany this Raag with five wives. They are (1) Bairaaree, and (2) Karnaattee. (3) Gavree and (4) Aasaa-varee are sung. Then (5) Sindhavee is expressed after them. These are the five wives of Siree-Raag. ||1||

(1) Saaloo, (2) Saarang, (3) Saagaraa, (4) Gond and (5) Gambheer. (6) Gund, (7) Kumb, and (7) Hameer are the eight sons of Siree-Raag. ||1||

These learned singers sing Megh Raag in sixth place. They accompany it with its five wives. They are, (1) Sorat’h, (2) Gond, and (3) the sweet melody of Malaaree. Then skilful sing (4) Aasaa. They then utter in a high tone (5) Soohau Raagni. These five females are identified with Megh Raag. ||1||

(1) Bairaadhar, (2) Gajdhar, and (3) Kedaaraa. (4) Jabalee-dhar, (5) Natt, and (6) Jal-dhaaraa. Then they sing (7) Shankar, and (8) Shiaamaa. These are the names of the eight sons of Megh Raag. ||1||

All these singers sang six Raags (Bhairo, Maal-kaus, Hindol, Deepak, Siree-Raag & Megh) together with thirty Raagnis. And the sons of all the Raags total as 18 + 10 + 20 (i.e. forty-eight). ||1||1||

Musical Concept of Raag Mala

Indian classical music, over centuries, has seen the development of numerous Raags and schools of thought. Different teachers and musicians have divided and arranged these Raags into unique styles, where particular Raags are highlighted and paired with others to create new, composite Raags. These combinations of Raags are known as Raag Malas.

An analogy often used to explain this concept is that of a family. Raags are paired with their corresponding Raagnis (female musical melodies), and together, they "give birth" to new Raags, much like how a family creates a new generation. However, each combination is distinct and cannot be directly compared to another. These pairings vary according to different schools of thought in Indian classical music.

Popular Raag Malas

Some of the most well-known Raag Malas include:

• Shiv Mat (ਸ਼ਿਵ ਮੱਤ) 
• Kalinaath Mat or Krishan Mat (ਕਾਲੀਨਾਥ ਮੱਤ ਜਾਂ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨ ਮੱਤ)
• Bharat Mat (ਭਰਤ ਮੱਤ)
• Hanuman Mat (ਹਨੂਮਾਨ ਮੱਤ)
• Sidh Sarsavat Mat (ਸਿਧ ਸਾਰਸਵੱਤ ਮੱਤ)
• Ragarnav Mat (ਰਾਗਰਨਵ ਮੱਤ)

Other schools of classical music may have additional Raag Malas, some of which include:

• Somnath Mat (ਸੋਮਨਾਥ ਮੱਤ)
• Matang Mat (ਮਤੰਗ ਮੱਤ)
• Paastik Mat (ਪਾਸਟਿਕ ਮੱਤ)
• Saarang Mat (ਸਾਰੰਗ ਮੱਤ)
• Kashiap Mat (ਕਸ਼ਿਅਪ ਮੱਤ)
• Bhaav Bhatt Mat (ਭਾਵ ਭੱਟ ਮੱਤ)
• Sangeet Ratnaakar Mat (ਸੰਗੀਤ ਰਤਨਾਕਰ ਮੱਤ)

These Raag Malas are named after specific teachers, schools, or traditions in Indian classical music. They are collections of Raags, sometimes structured in a way that reflects familial relationships (husbands, wives, sons, etc.), although these are symbolic and based on musical theory rather than any literal familial connections.

The Diversity of Raag Malas

The essential takeaway is that each Raag Mala is distinct. In one Raag Mala, a Raag’s wife might be paired with another Raag, while in another Raag Mala, it could be the son of a different Raag, or the daughter of yet another. In the fourth Raag Mala, it might even represent a Raag’s daughter-in-law. 

This system is crucial for Indian classical musicians, as it helps them understand how various Raags, through subtle variations in musical tunes, can be formed. By grasping the relationships between these Raags and their corresponding Raagnis, musicians are able to explore the vast possibilities for creating new Raags.

The Infinite Nature of Raags

It is important to remember that Raags are not people or living beings, and therefore, they do not have actual relationships such as husbands, wives, or children. These familial identities are purely the imaginative constructs of Indian classical musicians.

Raags are not limited to a specific number, whether 84, 132, or 180. The number of Raags continues to grow and evolve. There is no end to the families of Raags and Raagnis, and no limit to those who use Raag to sing praises of the Divine.

As expressed in Japji Sahib:

ਕੇਤੇ ਰਾਗ ਪਰੀ ਸਿਉ ਕਹੀਅਨਿ ਕੇਤੇ ਗਾਵਣਹਾਰੇ ||
"So many Raags, so many musicians sing Your Praises."
(Japji, 6)

Thus, the diversity of Raags is a reflection of the infinite creativity and devotion that can be expressed through music, with no boundaries to the ways in which they can be used to celebrate the Divine.

Literary Origins and Historical Records

The text of the appended Raag Mala appears, almost identically, in a 16th-century poetic work titled Maadhav Nal Kaam Kundla written in 1583 by Kavi Alam, a Sufi-Muslim poet during the reign of Mughal Emperor Akbar. The story is a romantic narrative centered around Maadhav Nal, a court scholar and expert in classical Indian music, and Kaam Kundla, a court dancer of Kashmiri origin. According to the story, Kaam Kundla performed a sequence of 84 Raags, which are listed in the Raag Mala.

Historical references, such as the Archaeological Survey of India Report No. 9, mention the remnants of structures related to this tale and affirm its basis in older Indian cultural history. Manuscripts of Maadhav Nal Kaam Kundla, which includes Raag Mala in stanzas 34–38 out of 179 total, are preserved in various institutions such as Punjabi University Patiala, Punjab University Library Lahore, and the Sikh Reference Library Amritsar.

Scholars have noted that while the wording of Raag Mala in Alam’s poem and in the appendix of copies of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are nearly the same, slight variations exist due to transcription into Gurmukhi script. For instance, terms like "ਅਸਲੇਖੀ" (Asalekhee) appear as "ਆਸਾਲੋਭੀ" (Asalobhee), and "ਚੰਦ੍ਰਬਿੰਬ" (Chandrabimb) as "ਚੰਦ੍ਰਗ੍ਰਸਨ" (Chandragrassan).

 

Historical Notes on Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji

The Aad Granth Ji (the first canon of scripture), also known as Kartarpuri Beerh, was compiled by the Fifth Nanak in 1604. It does not contain the worldly appendix compositions of Rattan Mala, Hakikat Raah Mukaam, Shiv Naabh Ki Bidhi, or Raagmala in its appendix. It also did not include the Gurbani revealed through Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji, as expected. To ensure its preservation without the possibility of corruption or alteration, a locking system was put in place, and all the prominent Sikhs of the time were made to memorize and internalize the Gurbani, safeguarding the purity and authenticity of the Divine message for generations to come.

Giani Gian Singh writes in Tvaareekh Guru Khalsa:

"ਸਾਰੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਲਿਖਾ ਕੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਅੰਤ ਨੂੰ ‘ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ’ ਉੱਤੇ ਭੋਗ ਪਾ ਦਿੱਤਾ, ਕਿਉਕਿ ‘ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ’ ਨਾਮ ਮੁੰਦ ਦੇਣ ਦਾ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਿਸੇ ਚਿੱਠੀ ਪੱਤਰ ਨੂੰ ਲਿਖਕੇ ਅੰਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੋਹਰ ਲਾ ਕੇ ਮੁੰਦ ਦੇਈਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਏਦੂੰ ਅੱਗੇ ਹੋਰ ਕੁਝ ਨਹੀ…"
“After writing all of Bani, Guru Ji completed it by concluding with ‘Mundaavani’ — so named because it serves as a seal, just like a letter that ends with a stamp to indicate that nothing more should follow.”
(Tvaareekh Guru Khalsa, p. 419)

In 1703, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was completed, also known as the Damdami Beerh. It included the Gurbani of the Ninth Guru, and does not contain Rattan Mala, Hakikat Raah Mukaam, Shiv Naabh Ki Bidhi, or Raagmala in its appendix. Guru Sahib included the Gurbani revealed by Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji but did not break the seal of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, which is the “Mundaavani Mahalla 5.” The Gurbani revealed by Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji was added before this seal.

In 1708, in Nanded, Maharashtra, Guru Gobind Singh Ji entrusted the gur-gaddi (throne of guruship) to the fully revealed Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, known as the Damdami Beerh. Carefully compiled, meticulously checked, and divinely approved, this sacred scripture was established as the undisputed eternal Guru, the home of the Divine Creator’s Voice (shabad) and Divine Light (jyot).

History of the Discussion on Raagmala's Status & Necessity as an Appendix Composition

The inclusion of Raag Mala in the appendices of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji has been a subject of historical inquiry for centuries. These reflections are rooted not in theological disputes, but in manuscript practices, textual analysis, and historical context. The following points aim to clarify the origins and status of the appended Raag Mala, based on documented Sikh scholarship:

The Bhagat Ratnavali, also known as Sikhaa di Baghat Mala, a historic text dating back to 1724 and attributed to Shaheed Bhai Mani Singh Ji, records that some Sikhs approached him with concerns about potential false interpolations in the Janam Sakhis by mischievous writers seeking to undermine Sikhi. Fearing similar fabrications in an appendix to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, they sought guidance. Bhai Mani Singh Ji affirmed that the Bhog (completion) of this Divine 'Gosht' (i.e., Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji) is marked by Mundaavani (“The Final Seal”), ensuring that any subsequent additions remain unauthorized and not Gurbani. The text states (pages 269-270):

“…ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੇ ਅਰਦਾਸ ਕੀਤੀ ਜੋ ਗੋਸ਼ਟਾਂ (ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ) ਅੱਗੇ ਹੋਈਆਂ ਹੈਨਿ ਸੋ ਮੇਲ ਵਾਲੀਆਂ ਗੋਸ਼ਟਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਆਪਣੀ ਮਤ ਦੀਆਂ ਬਾਤਾਂ ਲਿਖ ਛੋਡੀਆਂ ਹੈਨ … ਐਸੇ ਐਸੇ ਵਚਨ ਲਿਖਕੇ’ ਗੋਸ਼ਟਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਦੂਖਨ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ। ਤਾਂ ਇਸ ਗੋਸ਼ਟ ਦੇ ਭੋਗ ਤੇ ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਲਿਖਦੇ ਹਾਂ। ਤੇ ਸਾਖੀਆਂ ਸਭ ਗਿਣ ਛੋਡਦੇ ਹਾਂ। ਏਨਾਂ ਸਾਖੀਆਂ ਥੀ ਬਿਨਾਂ ਜੋ ਹੋਰੁ ਸਾਖੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਕੋਈ ਲਿਖੇ ਨਹੀਂ।”
Translation: The Sikhs made a prayer that the Gosht (Gurbani) that followed was written with their own views, and in such compositions, the teachings of others had been included. Therefore, we write Mundaavani at the conclusion of this Gosht, and all the compositions that followed the Guru’s teachings are abandoned. No one can write in the other Sakhis without the Guru’s permission.

In 1780, Bhai Bhagat Singh, a student of Bhai Mani Singh, reiterated Bhai Mani Singh’s statement on Mundaavani, recorded in Gurbilas Patshahi 6. The Gurbilas Patshahi 6 states that Guru Arjan Dev Ji completed the Bhog (completion) of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji at Mundaavani:

ਵਾਰ ਵਧੀਕ ਸਲੋਕ ਲਿਖ, ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਔਰ ਲਿਖਾਇ ॥ ਤਤਕਰਾ ਲਿਖ ਸਤ ਗੁੰਬ ਕਾ, ਭੋਗ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਜੀ ਪਾਇ ॥
("After writing ‘Salok Vaar Te Vadeek,’ the Granth Ji was concluded with ‘Mundaavani’ and the Index was written.")

However, the author later notes that some Sikhs, lacking a full understanding of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, began treating the appended compositions as Gurbani itself, deeming their inclusion and recitation necessary. Shamsher Singh Ashok, a 20th-century SGPC researcher, suggested that the appended Raag Mala may have been added by scribes on blank pages at the end of manuscripts for reference or study. At that time, it was common for scribes to include devotional or technical notes on these blank pages, left after Mundaavani. This practice was especially prevalent during periods when the Khalsa was focused on survival struggles rather than on textual standardization. The author of Gurbilas Patshahi 6 records how some Sikhs, in their blind devotion, began to recite appended compositions and even started performing Bhog at Raag Mala:

ਰਾਗਮਾਲਾ ਪੜ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਸੇ ਭੋਗ ਜਪੁਜੀ ਤੇ ਪਾਏ।
("Reading the appended Raagmala with love, some Sikhs began doing Bhog at Japji Sahib.")

It is noteworthy that in 2010, the SGPC and Akal Takhat acknowledged Gurbilas Patshahi 6 as controversial due to its inclusion of elements that disrespect the Sikh Gurus and teachings, revealing evidence of historical adulteration. However, the republished edited texts were not banned, as they remained a historical source to be read with discretion. Only content fully aligned with Gurbani and not contradicting undisputed historical Sikh texts is considered acceptable to Sikhs.

In 1843, Bhai Santokh Singh (Kavi Santokh Singh), a student of the respected Nirmala scholar Giani Sant Singh Ji, clarified the authorship of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Raag Mala in his historic work, Sri Gur Prataap Suraj Granth (pp. 430-431). Aware that some Sikhs had begun reciting appended compositions as part of the Bhog of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Bhai Santokh Singh asserts that Guru Arjan Dev Ji completed the Bhog up to the final seal of Mundaavani:

ਰਾਗਮਾਲ ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਨਿਹਂ, ਹੈ ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਲਗਿ ਗੁਰ ਬੈਨ । ਇਸ ਮਹਿਂ ਨਿਹਂ ਸੰਸੈ ਕੁਛ ਕਰੀਅਹਿ, ਜੇ ਸੰਸੈ ਅਵਿਲੋਕਹੁ ਨੈਨ । ਮਾਧਵ ਨਲ ਆਲਮ ਕਿਵ ਕੀਨਸਿ, ਤਿਸ ਮਹਿਂ ਨ੍ਰਿਤਕਾਰੀ ਕਹਿ ਤੈਨ । ਰਾਗ ਰਾਗਨੀ ਨਾਮ ਗਿਨੇ ਤਿਹਂ, ਯਾਂ ਤੇ ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਅਰਜਨ ਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਹੈ ਨ ॥੪੦॥
“Only up to Mundavani is Gurbani; Raag Mala is not the work of Guru Sahib. There is no doubt in this, for doubt is dispelled with clear vision. Raag Mala is the dance chapter from the novel Madhav Nal written by poet Alam, listing musical measures (Raags and Raagnis). Therefore, it is not the divine word of Guru Arjan Ji.” ||40|| (Sri Gur Prataap Suraj Granth, vol. 2, p. 431)

In 1853, a Panthic gathering at the Dera of Sant Dyal Singh concluded that the appended Raag Mala was not Gurbani and therefore not necessary to read or include in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Giani Gian Singh recorded this as follows:

“In Samvat 1906 Bikrami (1853 AD), during the month of Kattak, at the Dera of Sant Dyal Singh, a large Panthic gathering took place. On the Diwali day, after detailed exchange of ideas and considerations, it was concluded that appended Raag Mala is not considered Gurbani.”

After Bhai Santokh Singh, one of the most noted Sikh scholars to strongly argue against the reading or inclusion of Raagmala as an appendix to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was Pandit Tara Singh Narotam (1822–1891), a renowned scholar from the Nirmala school. His work was influential in spreading the message that the reading or inclusion of Raag Mala was unnecessary and it did not hold the status of Gurbani. Pandit Tara Singh wrote:

“ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਦਾ ਪਾਠ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਸਮਾਪਤੀ ਸਮੇਂ ਆਪਨੀ ਮੁਹਰ ਰੂਪ ਕਰ ਅੰਤ ਮੇਂ ਰੱਖਾ, ਰਾਗਮਾਲਾ ਕਾਹੂੰ ਨੇ ਪੀਛੇ ਸੇ ਪਾਈ, ਜੈਸੇ ਭਾਈ ਬੰਨੋ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਸਾਹਮਣੇ ਹੀ ਦੂਸਰੀ ਬੀੜ ਮੈ ਕਈ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਚੜ੍ਹਾਈ, ਜਿਨ ਕੋ ਸੁਨ ਕਰ ਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਉਸ ਕਾ ਨਾਮ ਖਾਰੀ ਬੀੜ ਧਰਾ ਹੈ।”
“The scriptural composition of Mundaavani has been kept as seal at the end of the reading of Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Why was Raag Mala not added before this? Just as Bhai Banno included extra compositions when submitting the second copy of the sacred scripture to the Guru, the Guru hearing this called it khaaree beerh.”

With the rise of the Lahore and Amritsar Singh Sabha Movements, Sikh scholars like Giani Sardool Singh, Dr. Charan Singh, and Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha worked to clarify that the appendix of Raag Mala was neither Gurbani nor necessary for inclusion in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Similarly, in 1899, prominent Sikh scholar, Bhai Vir Singh, asserted through his Khalsa Samachar that the appendix of Raag Mala was not Gurbani and was unnecessarily included in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, influencing his followers to cease reading it. However, after a falling out with Babu Teja Singh, Bhai Vir Singh altered his stance, defending the inclusion of Raag Mala and equating its status to that of Gurbani. He also speculated that poet Jodh copied Raag Mala from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in his poem Maadhav Nal Kaam Kundula. However, Bhai Vir Singh could not provide historical documentation to validate the inclusion of Raag Mala in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji during the Guru’s time.

In 1900, the Chief Khalsa Diwan printed Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji without the appendix of Raagmala, emphasizing that its inclusion was irrelevant and unnecessary. This printing was part of the effort by organizations like Tat Khalsa and the Chief Khalsa Diwan to oppose the reading of the appendix composition of Raag Mala when concluding a reading of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

The discussion surrounding Raag Mala continued into the 20th century, with significant decisions made in 1917 and 1918. In 1917, Bhai Kahn Singh Ji of Nabha concluded that Raag Mala was neither authored by the Sikh Gurus nor part of the main body of the holy text, thus not considered Gurbani. A year later, Giani Sher Singh and other scholars published works to reinforce the stance that Raag Mala should not be read as part of the complete reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

By 1936, the first edition of the Sikh Rehat Maryada stated that the Bhog or completion of the reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji should conclude at Mundaavani, affirming that the appended Raag Mala was not Gurbani and should not be read during the Akhand Paath or Sehaj Paath. 

In 1945, the SGPC conducted research on historical manuscripts, concluding that Raag Mala was not authentic, further solidifying the view that it was unnecessary to include in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. In 1970, the SGPC issued a letter confirming that Raag Mala was not Gurbani, and its recitation was not obligatory, whilst offering an option for localized practices.

By 1984, despite opposition from some quarters, the Maryada practiced at Sri Akal Takht Sahib remained unchanged, and all recitations of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji concluded at Mundaavani. Difference in practices continued, though the practice of reciting Raag Mala remained a topic of personal or localized choice, with no official mandate for its inclusion.

This history reflects the evolving practices and understanding of the status of the appendix of Raagmala in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, from its original exclusion to its later contested inclusion in various Sikh practices.

Claims Regarding Old Saroops & the Status of Raag Mala as an Appendix Composition

Those who consider the appendix of Raag Mala to be necessary and important of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji often refer to its inclusion in the Beerhs (manuscripts) in possession of the Sodhi clan, blood relatives of Guru Arjan Dev Ji, in the town of Kartarpur. For them, its presence in that manuscript and others serves as evidence of its status. However, scholars and historians point to key historical details that offer important context:

• According to Professor Jodh Singh, in his detailed study (Kartarpuri Bir De Darshan, pp. 121–122), the arrangement of the final angs (holy pages) of the manuscript from the Sodhi clan in Kartarpur does not support the idea that appended Raag Mala was part of the main scriptural body containing Gurbani. He notes that Mundaavani appears on Ang 973/1, while Angs 973/2 and 974/1 are blank, and the appended Raag Mala is written on Ang 974/2. He further explains that multiple appendix texts—including Raag Mala—would require more space than these blank sides could accommodate, suggesting the appended Raag Mala was not originally intended as part of the scripture.

• Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, the renowned author of Mahan Kosh, also recorded that Ang 974 of the manuscript of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji found in Kartarpur was blank. If Raag Mala now appears there in the appendix, it may imply that either a different manuscript is currently presented by the Sodhi clan or that the manuscript underwent changes after Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha Ji's time. This further supports the understanding of Raag Mala as an appendix composition, added after the main body of Gurbani was completed.

• Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha Ji also highlighted how Sikh Gurus used line counts and page totals in their Hukam-namas to safeguard against textual tampering. This same practice was applied to early manuscript saroops. At the conclusion of the manuscript found in Kartarpur, the following note appears:

  ਸੰਨ ੧੬੬੧ ਮਿਤੀ ਭਾਡੋ ਵਦੀ ੧ ਪੋਥੀ ਲਿਕ ਪਹੁੰਚੇ || ਸਾਰੇ ਪਤ੍ਰੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬੇ ਜੀ ਦੇ ੯੭੪ ||
  Translation: “Year 1661, date Bhadon Vadi 1, the Pothi has been written and completed. All of the pages of Guru Baba Ji’s Pothi are 974.”

  This statement clearly records that the entire content of the Pothi ends at 974 angs, with Mundaavani appearing on Ang 973 and the remaining half of that page blank. The presence of the appended Raag Mala beyond this page count affirms its placement as a post-script or appendix composition, not part of the original Gurbani.

 

Respected Sikh scholars such as Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara and Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti (a former student of Damdami Taksaal and former Jathedar of Akal Takht Sahib) conducted independent investigations into historical saroops attributed to Shaheed Baba Deep Singh Ji. After thorough study, they reported that no saroop could be verified as definitively written by Baba Deep Singh Ji, as the various copies presented for analysis did not match one another, and none bore the definitive features expected of an original manuscript by such a significant figure. To date, no academic scholar has authenticated the existence of a manuscript scribed by Baba Deep Singh Ji that includes the appendix of Raag Mala. 

It has been observed that some individuals or groups within the Panth have made public claims about saroops allegedly handwritten by Baba Deep Singh Ji or bearing the stamp and signature of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, often in support of the belief that Raag Mala is a necessary and important of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. While such claims can influence public perception, especially among those unfamiliar with the historical development of manuscripts, it is essential to distinguish devotional belief from verified historical fact.

In a recent case, a saroop was presented on television as having been written by Baba Deep Singh Ji. An expert featured in the broadcast claimed it was 250 years old. However, the custodians of this saroop declined an offer by a team of scholars from Sri Harmandir Sahib to examine it, while at the same time requesting public donations for its preservation. Such claims, without verification or peer-reviewed authentication, cannot be relied upon as scholarly evidence.

It is also worth noting that the term ‘puraatan’ (ਪੁਰਾਤਨ) simply means "old." A handwritten or printed copy of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that is 50 or 100 years old can be called puraatan, but that designation alone is not sufficient to establish its origin, historical significance, or connection to the Guru period.

In Sikh manuscript history, saroops are typically grouped by period:

• Guru-Kaal (Guru period): saroops written from the time of Guru Arjan Dev Ji to Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

• Post-Guru period: saroops produced after 1708 CE.

• Misl period: 18th-century saroops created during the rise of Sikh Misls.

• Sikh Raj period: during the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, when many elaborately decorated saroops were commissioned, often featuring gold detailing and miniature paintings.

To validate the authenticity of any saroop, one must use scientific tools such as carbon dating of both paper and ink. Unfortunately, in some cases, individuals make unverified claims about saroops being “puraatan” as a way to support their view that Raag Mala is Gurbani, without undergoing the necessary scholarly scrutiny.

In his book Blue Star Ghalughara (1991), Dr. Mohinder Dhillon describes rare and historical manuscripts housed in the Sikh Reference Library, which was destroyed during Operation Blue Star in 1984. He states:

“There were many copies of Guru Granth Sahib which were extremely valuable. There also was a manuscript prepared by Guru Gobind Singh Ji five years after the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji, to which he himself added the Bani of the Ninth Guru at Damdama Sahib. The date of this copy was 1739 Bikrami. Additionally, there existed a rare version of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, acquired with difficulty by S. Gian Singh, Chief Minister of Patiala, from Talwandi Sabo. This version did not contain Raag Mala. All of this was reduced to ashes during Operation Blue Star.”

In contrast to unverified claims, a recently discovered Anandpuri Beerh of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji has undergone scientific testing. The ink and paper have been carbon dated to the Guru period, specifically to the time of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. This saroop includes a stamp and signature attributed to Guru Sahib, and researchers have matched the handwriting and ink to that used in the Zafar-namah by Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Importantly, this saroop does not contain Raag Mala, providing further historical context that Raag Mala is an appendix composition, not part of the original corpus of Gurbani.

In summary, while Raag Mala appears in some early manuscripts, the evidence of blank pages, historical accounts, and scribe practices clearly indicate it is an appendix composition added after the closing seal of Gurbani. Its presence in the appendix does not affect the spiritual completeness or integrity of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, whose revealed content ends with Mundaavani, as compiled and authenticated by Guru Arjan Dev Ji and later, Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Why Raag Mala Is Distinct from Gurbani

Below are key scholarly observations which illustrate why Raag Mala is considered an appendix composition, distinct from the main body of Gurbani:

---

1. Not All Raags Used in Gurbani Are Listed in Raag Mala

There are eight raags employed in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that are not mentioned in Raag Mala. These include:

• Bihagara

• Wadahans

• Manjh

• Jaitsri

• Ramkali

• Tukhari

• Prabhati

• Jaijawanti

Additionally, Mali Gaura is not named in Raag Mala, although Gaura is. This inconsistency highlights that Raag Mala does not represent the complete musical system of Gurbani.

---

2. Distinct Approach to Raags and Raagnis in Gurbani

In Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, all musical measures—whether traditionally called Raag or Raagni in classical systems—are simply presented as Raags, without hierarchical relationships. Each is given independent status. There is no classification of raags having wives (Raagnis) and sons, as seen in Raag Mala. Sikh musical tradition (Gurmat Sangeet) evolved its own style, separate from classical Indian music systems.

---

3. Similar Raagmalas Exist Outside Gurbani

The structure and content of the Raag Mala found as an appendix composition is closely aligned with Hanuman Mat, a known classical music tradition. By contrast, the arrangement of raags within Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji more closely resembles the Saiv Mala or Kalinath Mat, both of which give prominence to Siree Raag. Only the Bharat Mat system includes all the raags and sub-raags actually used in Gurbani. Raag Mala does not establish a unique Sikh musical framework and mirrors existing traditions.

---

4. Inconsistency with Gurbani’s Message and Structure

Raag Mala opens with the line:

"Pratham Raag Bhairo vai karehi"
(“First, Raag Bhairav is sung...”)

This conflicts with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, where Siree Raag is described as the foremost Raag:

"Raagan vich Siree Raag hai je sach dhare piaar" (Ang 83)
“Among raags, Siree Raag is supreme—if one holds true love.”

Bhai Gurdas Ji also affirms:

"Raagan mai Siree Raag Paaras Pakhaan hai" (Vaar 42, Pauri 376)

This contradiction raises important scholarly questions: If Raag Mala places Bhairav first, while Gurbani places Siree Raag first and supreme, the two systems are clearly different. Therefore, Raag Mala cannot be representative of the musical system embedded within Gurbani.

---

5. Absence of Authorial Attribution (Mahalla)

Every composition in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji follows a consistent format—raags are followed by the authorial signature (Mahalla), e.g., Mahalla 1, Mahalla 5, etc. Raag Mala contains no such designation, leaving its authorship unidentified, which is uncharacteristic of all Gurbani compositions.

---

6. Inconsistency in Structural Numbering

Gurbani follows a highly organized and hierarchical stanza numbering system, designed by Guru Arjan Dev Ji to prevent alterations or additions. Every couplet and shabad is numbered, including totals, which prevents insertions. Raag Mala lacks this consistency. For example, in describing Raag Bhairav’s family, not all names are included within a single stanza, and the system of stanza numbering (||1||) is repeated uniformly, including twice at the end (||1|| ||1||), which deviates from the structured system found throughout Gurbani.

---

7. Stanzas Are Not Self-Contained

In Gurbani, each band (stanza) is self-contained and complete in meaning. In Raag Mala, stanzas frequently refer to information continued in the next stanza, as seen here:

"Asht putar mai kahe savaari || Pun aai Deepak ki baari || 1 ||"
(“I have mentioned the eight sons [of Hindol]; now it is Deepak's turn.”)

Such transitions differ from the style of Gurbani, where every stanza concludes with spiritual or musical completeness.

---

8. Grammatical Divergence from Gurbani Standards

Gurbani employs a distinct grammatical structure, developed by Guru Arjan Dev Ji and followed by Bhai Gurdas Ji. Raag Mala does not adhere to this grammatical framework. For example:

"Raag ek sang panch barangan"

Here, the lack of appropriate suffixes (such as aunkar or sihari) creates ambiguity about singularity or plurality—an inconsistency not found in Gurbani, which maintains precision in linguistic style throughout.

---

Summary and Reflections

While Raag Mala appears as an appendix composition in many saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, its structure, grammar, musical framework, and style differ significantly from the body of revealed Gurbani. The composition does not align with the musical, linguistic, or theological system established by the Sikh Gurus.

As The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism notes:

“The composition is not integral to the theme of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and it has little musicological, instructional, or spiritual significance.”

img

img

img

img

img

According to Dr. S. S. Kapoor, Sikh scholars have noted differing historical interpretations regarding the inclusion of Raag Mala—an appendix composition—at the end of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. While some traditional schools maintain that Raag Mala is a necessary part of the intergral body of the scripture and regard it as an index of the raags used in the text, this perspective is not supported by the internal content and musical structure of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

One reason cited by traditional schools is that Raag Mala appears in some early manuscripts and is written using the same ink and script style as the rest of the volume. However, this observation does not serve as definitive proof of authorship or scriptural status, since most scribes of that period used similar ink, writing instruments, and styles, making handwriting difficult to distinguish with certainty.

The claim that the appended Raag Mala serves as a raag index is also challenged by a key factual inconsistency:

• Several raags listed in Raag Mala do not appear in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and

• Conversely, a number of raags used in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are not listed in Raag Mala.

This mismatch indicates that the appended Raag Mala does not reflect the internal musical system of Gurbani and is, instead, a general list from a pre-existing classical music tradition.

Some modern scholars suggest that the inclusion of Raag Mala—along with other compositions not accepted as Gurbani—in the appendix may have occurred during the time when the Guru Arjan Dev Ji's elder brother's son, Meharban, became an antagonist of the Sikh community and claimed his own line of guruship in direct challenge to the Sikh Gurus. 

In his widely respected encyclopedic work, Mahan Kosh, Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha describes Raag Mala as follows:

“Raag Mala: The 63rd to 72nd meters from the Hindi version of Madhavanal Sangeet, composed by the poet Alam, including six raags, with five raagnis and eight sons each.”

This attribution aligns with earlier scholarly findings that the Raag Mala appended to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is textually and structurally similar to the Raag Mala section found in the Hindi poetic work Madhav Nal Kaam Kundla, composed by Kavi Alam in 1583.

img

Sikh Scholars and Saints Who Identified Raag Mala as an Appendix Composition

Many other respected Sikh scholars, historians, and saints have expressed the view that Raag Mala is not Gurbani, based on detailed study of language, structure, scriptural grammar, and manuscript evidence. Among them are:

• Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha (author of Mahan Kosh)

• Giani Gian Singh

• Giani Ditt Singh

• Prof. Gurmukh Singh

• Pandit Tara Singh Nirotam

• Prof. Sahib Singh

• Dr. Ganda Singh

• Sadhu Gobind Singh Nirmala

• Principal Ganga Singh

• Bhai Randhir Singh

• Prof. Gurbachan Singh Talib

• Shaheed Bhai Fauja Singh, Shaheed Bhai Sukhdev Singh Babbar, Shaheed Bhai Anokh Singh Babbar, and many more.

Arguments For the Reading & Inclusion of Raagmala

Bhai Sahib Bhai Vir Singh: In his early life, Bhai Sahib Vir Singh, a Sikh scholar, did not consider Raag Mala as been authored by any of the Sikh Gurus and therefore it shouldn’t be included in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. However, he later came to the opinion that the Raag Mala contained in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is Gurbani. He has been quoted as stating Guru Arjan Dev Ji was the author and another occasion Bhai Gurdas Ji was the author. But his opinion near the end of his lfie was that Raag Mala was prepared by Guru Nanak Dev Ji and it contains a list of popular raags of that period of time.

Giani Baba Gurbachan Singh (Jatha Bhindran): According to Giani Baba Gurbachan Singh, Guru Arjan Dev Ji was getting Mundaavani scribed down and completing the Sri Aad Granth, and at the moment the raags (musical measures) come to meet Guru Ji in the form of Naarad Muni (a sage). Guru Ji witnessed the terrible state of the raags in the form of Naarad Muni and asked what had happened. Naarad Muni replied (i.e. the raags, musical notes): “Someone sings us at night (i.e. brothels), normal people sing us, everyone seems to use us and ignorant people have lost our value. We are being dishonoured.” Bhai Gurdaas had the scribe in his hand. One by one all the raags came to the Sanctuary of Guru Arjan Dev asking to be saved. Guru Ji told Bhai Gurdaas, “These raags have come here for Protection, the “Bhog” (completion) is just about to come. Add the raags into the end of the Granth so that they are saved.” Bhai Gurdas accepted the Hukam. As each raag (musical measure) prostrated in front of the Guru, the raags were scribed down and that’s how the composition of “Raag-Mala” came to be scribed.

Audio Link: Baba Giani Gurbachan Singh (Bhindranwale) –Raagmaala–Ang-1429

 

Responses given to arguments (source: www.damdamitaksaal.org):

“Raagmala being the heading does not indicate which of our Great Gurus wrote Raagmala and since there is no mention whatsoever of the word ‘Nanak’ in the writing it is comprehensible that our Great Gurus had no hand in writing Raagmala.”
RESPONSE: Raagmala has something in common with Japji Sahib. Both do not indicate which of our Gurus wrote them. ‘Nanak’ doesn’t appear in 7 paurees (verses) of Japji Sahib.
[Note: However the word ‘Nanak’ appears 39 times in Japji Sahib though. Also there is no dispute in the whole Panth that Guru Nanak Dev Ji revealed Japji Sahib. However those who argue for Raagmala cannot even reach a consensus on who is the author Raagmala – Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Guru Arjan Dev Ji or Bhai Gurdaas Ji?].

“The order in which various raags are mentioned in Raagmala do not correspond to the order in which the same raag appears in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The first raag, which is also considered supreme, in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Bhai Gurdaas Ji’s Bani is ‘Sri Rag’, while in Raagmala it is ‘Bhairo.”
RESPONSE: The order of raags that appear in Raagmala are irrelevant to the writing of it as it is not an index of the raags in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Ragmala and Gurbani in general have deeper mystical meanings if we don’t understand or can’t comprehend these deeper hidden jewels that does not mean we should simply disregard it as we don’t understand.
[Note: However the issue of Sri Raag being supreme Raag has not been addressed. It is not simply an issue of order of Raags.]

“The following raags which are contained in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji do not emerge in Raagmala i.e. raags Maajh, Bihaagra Jaitsri, Ramkali, Mali Gaura, Tukhari, Prabhati, and Jaijavanti. Therefore the assertion that Raagmala is a mala (rosary) of the raags in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not true.”
RESPONSE: Nobody argued that Raagmala is a mere rosary of the raags in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Guru Ji decided what raags to include in Raagmala. In Gurbani the word raag also means prem (love) so Raagmala is also a rosary of love it is not merely a rosary of raags based on deeper mystical meanings.
[Note: However, this particular Raagmala can be found existing outside of Gurbani and is not something exclusive or new to the Sikh Gurus.]

“In Raagmala the counting system of phrases is totally different to the system used in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji i.e. in Raagmala ||1|| or No. 1 appears after each phrase and the end of Raagmala. In Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji the totalling system is 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc and this can be clearly seen in the first hymn in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji i.e. in Jap Ji Sahib the first pauree (stanza) has 1 and the last has 38.”
RESPONSE: This statement is incorrect as Jap Ji Sahib actually has two ‘1’s at the start and a ‘1’ at the end after the Salok. The 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc numbering system is present in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji but is not consistent throughout. Just as in Jap Ji Sahib there are other verses of Gurbani that have the No. 1 after paurees that follow each other – do we then also discount these as Gurbani as they are not adhering to this stringent numerical system.
[Note: In Jap Ji Sahib, “Jap” has four double dandees (|| ਜਪੁ||) which clearly separates it from the Mool Mantar and defines Jap as a title of the Bani. Afterwards comes “Aad Sach” which is a Salok (couplet). This is very similar to one of the Saloks in Sukhmani Sahib. The Salok is indicated through the numbering of “||1||”. The same number “||1||” is given to the Salok at the end of Japji Sahib. If you look carefully at Sukhmani Sahib, each Salok ends with number “||1||” even though there are twenty-four Saloks. The end Salok of Japji Sahib is not numbered “||2||” (i.e. to show that there are a total of two Saloks) because the number only increases if one Salok comes directly after the next. However, in this case and in the case of Sukhmani Sahib, the Saloks are spaced out and therefore the number goes back to “||1||” .]

“The word ‘Mundavani’ means ‘the seal of closure’ and therefore anything after Salok Mahalla 5 really cannot be accepted as Gurbani. Since Raagmala is after Salok Mahalla 5 it cannot be sanctioned as part of Gurbani.”
RESPONSE: If Mudavani is the seal of closure then technically we cannot accept Salok Mahalla 5 as this is a separate Shabad which comes after Mudhavani Mahalla 5. In fact the word Mudavani is present on two other occasions in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji on Ang 645 within the same Shabad in Vaar of Sorat(h). So if we follow this line of argument anything after this Shabad is not Gurbani – how ludicrous is that! The meaning of Mudavani is not ‘seal of closure’ but on the contrary it means ‘riddle’ – a riddle that Guru Ji is stating in this Shabad. Guru Ji states in Mundavani that: “Upon this Plate, three things have been placed: Truth, Contentment and Contemplation. The Amrit Naam, the Name of our Lord and Master, has been placed upon it as well; it is the Support of all. One who eats it and enjoys it shall be saved. This thing can never be forsaken; keep this always and forever in your mind. The dark world-ocean is crossed over, by grasping the Feet of the Lord; O Nanak, it is all the extension of God. ||1||”. The riddle is understanding the true meaning of these lines which is that in the platter of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji the Amrit Naam of Shabad has been placed by contemplating and studying this Shabad one attains truth and contentment.
[Note: Firstly, Salok Mahalla 5 is connected to Mundavani and therefore not separate. Secondly, the word ‘Mudaavanee’ (ਮੁਦਾਵਣੀ) which is without tippee sound ( ੰ ) that makes a ‘un’ sound, means ‘riddle’. This word is used in the Shabad of the Third Guru on ang 645. However, ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ, spelt with the tippee sound ( ੰ ) included means ‘closing seal’ or ‘sealed stamp’. According to the Mahaan Kosh (Sikh Encyclopaedia) written by Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, the main meaning of Mundavani means ‘Seal of closure,’ however it can also mean ‘Riddle’ or ‘Hidden’. In closing Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it would make sense that you would ‘seal’ it. As a consequence of this Guru Teg Bahadar Ji’s Bani was added before Mundavani. If didn’t mean “seal of closure” it would have been added after.
ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ- mundhāvanī – मुंदावणी
ਮੁਦ੍ਰਣ (ਮੁਹਰਛਾਪ ਲਾਉਣ) ਦੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਯਾ. ਮੁੰਦਣਾ. ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥਸਾਹਿਬ ਵਿੱਚ ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਦੋ ਥਾਂਈਂ ਆਇਆ ਹੈ.#ਭਾਰਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਰੀਤਿ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਮਹਾਰਾਜਿਆਂ ਦੇ ਖਾਨ ਪਾਨ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੰਧ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲਾ ਸਰਦਾਰ, ਆਪਣੇ ਸਾਮ੍ਹਣੇ ਭੋਜਨ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਵਾਕੇ ਦੇਗਚੇ ਆਦਿ ਬਰਤਨਾਂ ਪੁਰ ਮੁਹਰ ਲਾਦਿੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਤਾਕਿ ਕੋਈ ਅਸ਼ੁਭਚਿੰਤਕ ਜ਼ਹਿਰ ਆਦਿ ਭੋਜਨ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਾ ਮਿਲਾ ਸਕੇ. ਫੇਰ ਜਦ ਥਾਲ ਪਰੋਸਦਾ ਹੈ ਤਦ ਕੀ ਥਾਲ ਪੁਰ ਸਰਪਸ਼ ਦੇਕੇ ਮੁਹਰ ਲਾ ਦਿੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਅਰ ਉਹ ਮੁਹਰ ਜਿੰਮੇਵਾਰ ਸਰਦਾਰ ਦੇ ਰੂਬਰੂ ਮਹਾਰਾਜਾ ਦੇ ਸੰਮੁਖ ਖੋਲ੍ਹੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ. ਇਸ ਉੱਪਰਲੇ ਭਾਵ ਨੂੰ ਲੈਕੇ ਇਹ ਵਾਕ ਹੈ- “ਏਹ ਮੁਦਾਵਣੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਪਾਈ ਗੁਰਸਿਖਾਂ ਲਧੀ ਭਾਲਿ.” (ਮਃ ੩. ਵਾਰ ਸੋਰ) ਭਾਵ ਇਹ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਗੁਰਉਪਦੇਸ਼ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਦੇ ਮਨ ਦ੍ਰਿੜ੍ਹ ਕਰਾਕੇ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਨੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਮਰਯਾਦਾ ਦੀ ਮੁਹਰਛਾਪ ਲਾ ਦਿੱਤੀ ਹੈ, ਤਾਕਿ ਨਿਯਮਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਗੜਬੜ ਨਾ ਹੋਵੇ.#ਦੂਜਾ “ਮੁੰਦਾਵਣੀ ਮਃ ੫” ਸਰਲੇਖ ਹੇਠ ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥਸਾਹਿਬ ਦੇ ਭੋਗ ਪੁਰ ਪਾਠ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਭਾਵ ਅੰਤਿਮ ਮੁਹਰਛਾਪ ਹੈ. ਸਮਾਪਤੀ ਪੁਰ ਮੁਦ੍ਰਣ ਕਰਕੇ ਇਹ ਉਪਦੇਸ਼ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਇੱਥੇ ਧਰਮਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਦੇ ਪਾਠ ਦਾ ਭੋਗ ਹੈ। ੨. ਬੁਝਾਰਤ. ਅਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਕੂਟ.] (Mahaan Kosh: Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha)

“In some hand written versions of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji the following works appear:
Salok Mahalla 1 Jit Dhar Lakh muhammada…
Salok Mahalla 1 Bia aatas aab
Rag Ramkali Ratan Male
Hakikat Rah Mukam Raja Sivnat Ki
In all the handwritten Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ragmala appears at the end of all other works. Since it is acceptable that the works are not Gurbani how is it that pro-Raagmala accept Raagmala as Gurbani and that the other works are not Gurbani even though they come before Raagmala this seems a very illogical attitude on their part.”
RESPONSE: In 1945 the SGPC set up a sub-committee to investigate whether Raagmala is included in the original Kartpuri Beerh of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that was compiled by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji. The following is from their: “We can most definitely say that nobody other than Bhai Gurdas Jee who was the scribe included Raagmala in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Raagmala is an ang of Sri Guru Granth Sahib.” They also stated that they the ink paper and handwriting of Raagmala was consistent with the rest of the saroop. When this first saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was compiled many had made supplications to Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji to include their writings but Guru Ji rejected many only those who had merged with God could utter Gurbani as it is the word of God Himself. The final Saroop of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji as we know it today was compiled by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji and Baba Deep Singh Ji compiled 4 other Saroops of this final version and they were sent to all Five Takhats. All these Saroops have Raagmala in them again it is written in the same handwriting ink and upon the same paper. The above mentioned works are not present in any of these Saroops and they unanimously accepted not as the writings of the Guru and only few Saroops have these works in them.
[Note: The problem with the entire Raagmala debate is that we in general don’t do the research or study ourselves. We rely on what others tell us and become emotional about the issue. Please read the findings of Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha shown in this article. The SGPC sub-comittee did not conclude that Raagmala is written by the Sikh Gurus and if that was the case the Sikh Rehat Maryada would have been changed to state that everyone should read Raagmala and there would be no issue left. Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha writes that that when the Sikh Gurus would write Hukamnamas (edicts) to the Sangats (congregations) they would safeguard these letters from adulteration by writing in words how many lines they have written after their signature. Similarly, this practice was followed up to the time of the Ninth Guru that every copy of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji had its page numbers written down at the end of the contents. Following this rule, the Kartarpur Bir has the following written at the end of the contents: “ਸੰਨ ੧੬੬੧ ਮਿਤੀ ਭਾਡੋ ਵਦੀ ੧ ਪੋਥੀ ਲਿਕ ਪਹੁੰਚੇ || ਸਾਰੇ ਪਤ੍ਰੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਬੇ ਜੀ ਦੇ ੯੭੪ ||” (Translation: “Year 1661, date Bhadon Vadi 1, the Pothi has been written and arrived. All of the pages of Guru Baba Ji is 974”). On page 973 of the Kartarpur Bir is written Mundavni but the second half of page 973 is blank. From this is clear that the original Pothi ia a total of 974 pages and nothing beyond. Raagmala appears after.
Then we come to the issue of Bhai Mani Singh saroops and saroops by Baba Deep Singh. After study, Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara could not find any such saroop that he felt was authentic since none matched any other. No academic scholar has ever said there existed any such Beerh which they have been able to find. If someone can show me these Beerhs or give some concrete information about them, it would be helpful to the whole Panth.
Finally, Dr. Mohinder Dhillon writes in his book “Blue Star Ghalughara” (1991) about the Sikh Reference Library that was ransacked by the Indian army in June 1984. He states: “There were many copies of Guru Granth Sahib which were extremely valuable. There also was a manuscript which was prepared by Guru Gobind Singh five years after the martyrdom of Guru Teh Bahadar Ji. He himself added the Bani of the Ninth Guru in that manuscript at Damdama Sahib. The date of this copy of Guru Granth Sahib was 1739 Bikrami. In addition there was rare copy of Guru Granth Sahib that was obtained with great difficulty by S. Gian Singh, Chief Minsiter of Patiala from Damadama, Talwandi Sabo. This version of Guru Granth Sahib did not have Ragmala at the end. All of this was reduced to ashes in Operation Blue Star.”

“Raagmala which comes after Mudavni in the printed versions of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was not written by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji. It is part of a book called Mudhavnal Kamkandla written by poet Alam in 1640 Bikramee (1583 AD) 21 years before Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was compiled by Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji.”
RESPONSE: It was a poet named Jodh who wrote Madhvanal Kamkandla in 1583 AD – Raagmala or anything even resembling it is not present in the original version of this book. The poet Alam lived from 1655 to 1717 AD and after listening to or reading Raagmala he wrote a book called Madhvanal Sangeet that was mostly copied work from other poets including Jodh. There is also a poem in this compilation which doubters of Raagmala believe is Raagmala but it is actually very different to Raagmala. In the past century people have mistakenly linked the work of these poets’ as one and the same because Alam plagerised much of his work from Jodh and they try to prove that Raagmala is not Gurbani with this mistaken line of argument. Historically there are 11 different versions of Raagmala they all differ from the original which is in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji different writers over time have gained inspiration from Raagmala in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and then gone on to write their own versions of Raagmala. In Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji there are 2 different versions of Barah Maha one in Raag Maaj and the other in Raag Tukaree. There are also many versions of Barah Maha written by various authors should we then argue that these two Barah Maha’s are not Gurbani?

“Pro-Raagmala people preach that whatever is contained in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji should be read. Then why don’t they read the 11 angs (pages) containing the index to the contents of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji or the seal of certification? Why the hypocracy?”
RESPONSE: This line of argument is obviously of one who does not view Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji with reverence and it may be pointed out that such people also argue that you don’t have to do Bhog to food in the presence of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji or even doing Bhog is a mere ritual. The faithful offer food to Guru Jee to bless and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee is the living embodiment of the 10 Guru’s thus it is logical to offer food in the presence of the Guru. [Note : That has not answered the question.]

“The following are some of the great modern scholars, saints, and freedom fighters spiritual Gursikhs who believed that Raagmala is not Gurbani:

• Great Poet Bhai Santokh Singh
• Historian Giani Gian Singh
• Pandit Tara Singh Nirotam
• Giani Dit Singh
• Professor Gurmukh Singh (founder of Singh Sabha movement)
• Giani Gian Singh
• Sadhu Gobind Singh Nirmala
• Pandit Basant Singh
• Sant Arjun Singh Vaid
• Prof. Hazara Singh
• Bhai Sahib Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, the author of Mahan Kosh
• Master Mota Singh
• Master Mehtab Singh
• Master Tara Singh
• Gyani Sher Singh
• Giani Nahar Singh
• Principal Dharmanant Singh
• Giani Bishan Singh Teeka-kar
• Sant Baba Teja Singh Mastuana Wale
• Principal Ganga Singh
• Dr. Ganda Singh
• Professor Sahib Singh
• S. Shamsher Singh Ashok Research Scholar of S.G.P.C.
• Bhai Randhir Singh, research scholar
• Pandit Kartar Singh Daakhaa
• Principal Bawa Harkishan Singh
• Principal Narinjan Singh
• Professor Gurbachan Singh Talib
• Principal Gurmukhnihal Singh
• Professor Piara Singh Padam
• Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh (Narangwal)
• Shaheed Bhai Fauja Singh
• Shaheed Bhai Sukhdev Singh Babbar
• Shaheed Bhai Anokh Singh Babbar etc.”

RESPONSE: It would be very easy to make a list of Gursikhs who were held in high regard that believed Raagmala is Gurbani as well. Similar to the above list it would include great scholars freedom fighters spiritualists and selfless servants of the Khalsa Panth. The other point to note is that Sikhs throughout the world read Raagmala and it only a minority who question or doubt it’s authenticity there are only a few Gurdwaras throughout the world where Raagmala is not recited and it is recited at Sri Harimander Sahib (Golden Temple).
[Note: In regards to Sri Harmander Sahib, it should be noted that Raagmala was never recited at Sri Akal Takht Sahib, by even during the times Baba Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale were staying there. In 1986 when Jasbir Singh Rode became Jathedaar and changed this and forced the reading of Raagmala. There is a specific protocol or Maryada for changing the running at Akal Takht; the Jathedar cannot do as he pleases.] 

Summary

The majority of Sikhs today are not familiar with the background or context of Raag Mala, nor the historical discussion regarding its place in relation to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Since Raag Mala appears at the very end of most printed saroops, following the concluding Mundaavani Mahalla 5, many naturally read it without knowing it is part of the appendix, and not the core body of Gurbani revealed by the Sikh Gurus.

In recent years, some have passionately advocated for the reading of Raag Mala and, at times, criticized others who do not. However, it must be understood that personal choice in reading or respectfully concluding with Mundaavani is fully in line with Panthic guidance. The Sikh Rehat Maryada, endorsed by the Akal Takht Sahib, allows for either practice, affirming that no Sikh should be criticized for their position regarding Raag Mala.

Moreover, it is important to remember that majority practice does not define scriptural status. For example, many Gurdwaras globally allow non-Amritdhari individuals to prepare Langar or Degh. While this may be widespread, it doesn’t necessarily reflect ideal Sikh practice. In the same way, the widespread reading of Raag Mala doesn't automatically establish it as Gurbani. The question is not about acceptance of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji—it's about understanding the role of Raag Mala as an appendix composition.

Throughout modern Sikh history, respected Gursikhs—saints, scholars, and martyrs—have differed in their views on reading Raag Mala. Both perspectives have been held with reverence, and all these Gursikhs deserve respect. No one should be belittled for reading or not reading Raag Mala, especially as the central body of Gurbani is untouched and complete, and the discussion solely concerns an appended composition following the final seal of Mundaavani.

Panthic Unity in Modern Times

In 1936, the first official Sikh Rehat Maryada, approved by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) and endorsed at Sri Akal Takht Sahib, established that the completion (bhog) of a full reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji should take place after the Mundaavani Mahalla 5 composition. This recognised Mundaavani as the formal closing seal of Gurbani, while also acknowledging the presence of Raag Mala as an appendix composition.

To address ongoing differences of opinion, Jathedar Bhai Mohan Singh Nagoke convened a Panthic gathering of scholars and saints at Sri Akal Takht Sahib in 1945. While some groups supported the inclusion of Raag Mala in bhog ceremonies, consensus could not be reached. To preserve Panthic unity, Jathedar Nagoke declared that Raag Mala may be read or omitted, according to individual or local tradition, but should not be a source of division. He further announced that Raag Mala would not be recited at Sri Akal Takht Sahib, reflecting the agreed Maryada of the time.

This decision was respected across the Sikh world, including by Giani Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale, head of Damdami Taksaal, who communicated acceptance of the Akal Takht Sahib’s position through Giani Lal Singh. For decades, the matter remained settled in practice, with historical Gurdwaras such as Nankana Sahib, Khadur Sahib, and Tarn Taran Sahib observing bhog after Mundaavani Mahalla 5 and Salok Mahalla 5.

It’s important to emphasise that this guidance concerned only the appendix section of the Granth, and never the main body of revealed Gurbani, which is universally accepted by the entire Sikh Panth.

Even during the leadership of Shaheed Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, who personally believed in the sanctity of Raag Mala, no attempt was made to alter the established Maryada of Sri Akal Takht Sahib. In fact, when a family member tried to impose Raag Mala reading at the Takht, he actively corrected the action, upholding the Panth-approved protocol.

In April 1986, during the Sarbat Khalsa, a full reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was conducted by students of Damdami Taksaal, and once again, Raag Mala was not recited at bhog, in line with the Maryada of the Akal Takht Sahib.

It was only in March 1988, when Bhai Jasbir Singh Rode, nephew of Sant Jarnail Singh Ji, was appointed Jathedar of Akal Takht Sahib, that a directive was issued to begin reading Raag Mala at Sri Akal Takht Sahib, introducing a change to the long-standing Panthic Maryada. Although the SGPC initially objected, political circumstances delayed the restoration of the original Maryada. Eventually, in May 1993, the SGPC formally decided to revert to the earlier practice at both Sri Akal Takht Sahib and Sri Harmandir Sahib, recognising that Raag Mala remains an appendix composition and its reading is optional, not compulsory.

Guidance from the Panthic Sikh Rehat Maryada

The first official edition of the Sikh Rehat Maryada was released in 1936. The document aimed to provide clear, sanctioned by the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib and the main representative Sikh body of the time, Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), to provide guidance on Sikh practice and tradition.

The Rehat Maryada confirmed that the recitation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji—whether in a Sadharan Paath or an Akhand Paath—formally concludes with the composition titled Mundaavani Mahalla 5, which serves as the closing seal of Gurbani. It acknowledged that while Raag Mala appears as an appended composition in many manuscript and printed saroops, there has been historical variation in its reading.

In light of this, the Rehat Maryada initially noted:

“The complete recitation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji should conclude with Mundaavani. (Note: There exists a diversity of opinion in the Panth concerning the appended Raag Mala. Therefore, it should not be removed from any handwritten or printed copy of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.)”

Recognizing the differing traditions across the Sikh world, an update was made in 1945 to further clarify the Panthic position. The revised edition formally included guidance that provided space for both practices—those who choose to read Raag Mala after Mundaavani, and those who respectfully conclude at Mundaavani.

The updated Article XI (a) of the Sikh Rehat Maryada reads:

“The complete reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji (whether Sadharan or Akhand) is to be concluded with the recitation of ‘Mundaavani.’ The appended composition ‘Raag Mala’ may be recited or omitted, depending on local tradition or the wishes of the individual(s) who arranged the Paath. (Note: Due to differences of opinion within the Panth, Raag Mala should not be removed from any saroop—handwritten or printed—of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.)”

This balanced directive ensures that no Sikh is censured for choosing either approach. It affirms both the sacredness of the scripture and the unity of the Panth, providing guidance that honors spiritual tradition while allowing for conscientious choice.