Who wrote the Dasam Granth, and why does the question matter?

The claim: Critics inside the Panth say that not all of the Dasam Granth can be Guru Gobind Singh's and that no second scripture should sit beside the Guru Granth Sahib. In May 2000, amid an RSS-linked plan to translate parts of the book, the Tribune quoted unnamed Sikh scholars saying that the entire text could not be attributed to him, that some chapters promote reincarnation and gods and goddesses, and that "Only Granth Sahib is our Guru". Prof Darshan Singh (Ragi), a former Akal Takht Jathedar, argues that "The whole controversy ends if the Dasam Granth is removed" (IANS, 2010).

The sourced facts:

• The text. The Encyclopaedia (Loehlin and Jaggi) calls it the collection attributed to the Guru, kept apart from the Adi Granth; Kesar Singh Chhibbar says the Guru refused in 1698 to bind them together. Compositions headed "Sri Mukhvak Patshahi 10" are generally accepted as his; those with a short heading or none "may or may not be".
• Compilation. The Encyclopaedia says Bhai Mani Singh compiled it at Amritsar some two decades after the Guru's death. Kamalroop Singh concludes that it was compiled in the Guru's lifetime.
• The letter. An English version published by Damdami Taksal students gives a letter from Mani Singh to Mata Sundari, dated Baisakh 22 and placed in April 1716, saying he has sent books including "303 Chritra Upakhyans" and cannot trace the "Nam Mala". The page cites no manuscript. Mann reports that Rattan Singh Jaggi called it a fake in the 1960s and that Harbhajan Singh of Punjabi University holds it real.
• The revision. Thirty-two copies were studied at the Akal Takht from 1895 to February 1896 by the Sodhak committee of the Gurmat Granth Pracharak Sabha; reports followed on 14 October 1897 and 11 February 1898, the second saying the volume was compiled at Anandpur in 1698.
• The banis. The Sikh Rehat Maryada prescribes the Japji, Jaapu and Ten Savaiyye in the morning and the Rehras, with the Benti Chaupai, in the evening; Jaap, Savaiyye and Chaupai are also read at Amrit Sanchar. The Encyclopaedia places the Jap at the head of the Dasam Granth, the Savaiye in Akal Ustati, the Chaupai at the end of its last tale, and the opening of Chandi di Var in the ardas. The Maryada adds: "No book should be installed like and at par with the Guru Granth."
• The Akal Takht. In 2000 Joginder Singh Vedanti told scholars not to comment publicly; in July 2003 he said debate was banned and the SGPC had formed no panel. On 6 June 2008 the Sikh clergy called the controversy "unwarranted", asked the Sangat not to raise controversy over the hymns chanted at Amrit Sanchar and warned Prof Darshan Singh (The Tribune); a Khalsa Press note lists "Sri Dasam Granth being an inseparable Scripture of the Sikh Panth". Takht Hazur Sahib rejected the gurmatta; the Tribune says it and Takht Patna Sahib believe the Guru wrote it. IANS reports Ragi excommunicated in December 2009.

The Panthic answer: The Panth is divided. In 2008 the Akal Takht called the controversy unwarranted and the book an inseparable scripture; Takht Patna Sahib and Takht Hazur Sahib hold that the Guru wrote it. Gurinder Singh Mann and Kamalroop Singh hold that all of it is his and, as reviewer Harjeet Singh Grewal summarises them, that the Sodhak committee confirmed this. Ragi and the scholars the Tribune quoted doubt that all of it is. Robin Rinehart's Oxford study (2011) is described by its publisher as finding the manuscript evidence inconclusive. Bhai Ajmer Singh argues that the Gurgaddi belongs to Sri Guru Granth Sahib; the Dasam Granth is worthy of respect, and much can be gained from it, but the two are not equal and cannot be, so it must be read in the light of Guru Granth Sahib: everything other than Gurbani, he holds, must be understood by the reference of Gurbani, the only measure the Gurus left us. Both camps, he says, have taken extreme positions and are shelling each other from them; he refuses both the elevation and the wholesale rejection, and warns that without that measure a line can justify anything.