166 replies to this topic

[Bijla Singh]

Bhai Kahan Singh gives multiple meanings of the word "Jug". First meaning he gives is "two" or pair. The context of Pauri prevents us from coming up with multiple meanings. Sikhs are specifically asking how many forms will be more and the answer "in every yug satgur takes avtar" is not valid and does not address the question. Further, Satguru does not come and go. Satguru is not like other avtars that have limited powers. Satguru is Akal Purakh Himself. Read all of the Vaars and you will see it yourself. Guru Sahib is placed at the highest place. Even Gursikhs are called better than many of the bhagats like Kabir Ji, Dhru Ji, Naamdev Ji, Janak etc.

[N30 S!NGH]

I couldn't find multiple meanings from bhai kahn singh nabha mahan kosh, i was searching through mahan kosh online, just found the meaning i posted above. Please share other meaning bhai sahib explained from mahan kosh in Gurmukhi or just give the page number. I will look it up.

Sant baba gurbachan singh bhindranwale talks about six different types of avtars of vahiguroo for understanding where guru sahib comes first- guru avtar then followed by puran hari avtar- krishan/ram thats more consistently fit with bhaita da swaiye gurbani and concept of avtar laid out in gurbani.

I think i have already discussed three different context of satguru shabad in gurbani with you in the past. The problem is always been semenatics and your attempts to make satguru nanak dev ji as standlone prophet through all the yugs to put down other dharams or other avtars like krishan, ram chandar ji, narsingha, janak, bal avtar. Either way its all in wording, i don't have major issue with wording but have major concerns with your intent, because for me there is no difference between sargun and nirgun but for the sake of non duality-advait and for sake of staying in align with sidhant in mool mantar/jaap sahib of nirgun vahiguroo lachan just like puratan samparda's , i would like to use Nirgun Parbhram Vahiguroo transcendent its different kala/attributes (upon need) into respective avtars of various yugas to benefit human kind and gave them marg towards bhramgyan.

If one wishes to argue and say- our satguru were shabad naam all along not bodies, thats fine, no problem in essence that is indeed the reality. That same shabad gurmat naam resonance also created everything along shud satoguni avtars like- guru maharaj ji panj bhootak choola along with other avtars and sargun parsara. Shabad resonance is sanjha and its been there since aad.. we(sikhs) don't have monopoly over ongkar or aumkar(difference in nasal sound). So all this talk of differentiation or aucha nivha or even dharam is gone off the window. RIP.

[N30 S!NGH]

Also going back in topic, sant gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale who spent close to 50 years studying all granths including sanatan ones said gurmat marg has nirole tat gyan of nirgun vahiguroo but that does not make other school of thoughts/marg/matts false, they also have tat gyan of nirgun bhram too for eg- vedant, ant of vedas- tat nichor of vedas, but its hard for normal person to decipher due to linguistic barriers and unncessary karam kaands mentioned in them.

[Bijla Singh]

In pdf file look on page 1873 under the word “Jug”. Multiple meanings are given. According to the context of the Pauri interpretation 2+2 fits better.

Quote

I think i have already discussed three different context of satguru shabad in gurbani with you in the past. The problem is always been semenatics and your attempts to make satguru nanak dev ji as standlone prophet through all the yugs to put down other dharams or other avtars like krishan, ram chandar ji, narsingha, janak, bal avtar.

Had you studied Vaars and Gurbani in proper context you would’ve known the truth. Your understanding of the word “Satguru” is incorrect and not in context with Gurbani. Vaars clearly make Guru Sahib the greatest. Everyone else is a bhagat not Satguru because a person whose avastha changed over time and eventually became mukat is a bhagat whereas Satguru’s avastha stays the same and is already mukat. I don’t put others down. I advocate Gurmat. It is you who brings Guru Sahib down to the level of avtars most of whom are mythology characters. Gurbani makes clear that many characters were simply kings of their time periods and people made them out to be avtars i.e. “Jugeh Jugeh Kay Rajay Kieay Gaveh Kar Avtaari..” and even then they are not Waheguru but part of His creation. Bhai Gurdas Ji calls true Gursikhs “better” than bhagats. Study Vaars first. Bhai Veer Singh Ji also says that only Satguru Nanak Sahib Ji is the greatest. Kabir, Farid etc were bhagats because Guru Sahib called them bhagats “Bani Bhagat….Ji Ki”. If you want to do veechar on individual bhagats and their status based on Gurbani and Vaars I am open to it but I am not willing to debate as it leads to personal attacks, angry posts and wastes much of my time. Gursikhs are supposed to do veechar anyways.

Quote

Also going back in topic, sant gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale who spent close to 50 years studying all granths including sanatan ones said gurmat marg has nirole tat gyan of nirgun vahiguroo but that does not make other school of thoughts/marg/matts false, they also have tat gyan of nirgun bhram too for eg- vedant, ant of vedas- tat nichor of vedas, but its hard for normal person to decipher due to linguistic barriers and unncessary karam kaands mentioned in them.

I respect Sant Ji but he was not god. He was a human and did make mistakes in interpreting Gurbani. Just pick up Gurbani Paath Darpan and see it yourself. He used to say that Gurbani has no limits then why should we limit the interpretation to him only. Have you studied Gurbani from viyakaran perspective? How about interpretation of Bhai Kahan Singh, Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhai Veer Singh, Prof. Sahib Singh, Prin. Teja Singh etc? Giani Gurdit Singh spent more than 30 years in researching about Bhagats and their banis. His work cannot be matched by anyone else and facts he has brought forward cannot easily be ignored. I do not say other religions are 100% false (meaning have no truth) but they are not complete and cannot give muktee. They will give gyan, may help one progress spiritually but salvation is only in the house of Guru Nanak Sahib. Gurbani gyan is not as same as gyan of Vedas or other books. Daya Nand stated that Gurbani is “vedan da saar” and your statement is not any different if gyan is the same. Vedas are full of hypocritical stories and karam kaand whereas Gurbani is not. This is a long topic but Gurbani says that Vedas cannot give muktee even if one reads them for four yugs. Vedas are not Guru. Only Poora Guru gives muktee and Gurmat does not give status of Guru to anyone but Guru Nanak Jot.

Your understanding of Gurbani is very limited. So I suggest you study Vaars first in proper context and also study bhagat bani. Do not simply limit yourself to a certain sant and take his words to be absolute truth. Study with reasons and disagree with reasons. Once again I can only do veechar as it leads to Sikhs learning from each other by keeping their personal opinions below the authority of Gurbani. Veechar is done with an open mind and if at the end two people disagree, it does not end with frustration and personal attacks but with happiness and joy.

[Kaljug]

Fateh!

NeoSingh:

From a strictly historical point of view, it's pretty clear that the devas like Indra and Durga are originally nothing more than deities of natural events and places, the Indian cognates to the Greek Zeus and Athena or the Roman Jupiter and Bellona.

Are you saying that worship of any of the deities of any pantheon will grant similar results to worship of Nirguna Parbrahma? If not, and this only applies to the deities of the Hindu mythological pantheon, why do they deserve such an honour?

Regards,
K.

[N30 S!NGH]

Quote

Are you saying that worship of any of the deities of any pantheon will grant similar results to worship of Nirguna Parbrahma? If not, and this only applies to the deities of the Hindu mythological pantheon, why do they deserve such an honour?

Kalyug veer, your question was already answered in the thread that you opened up where sargun and nirgun upasana was discussed.

[Kaljug]

N30 S!NGH, on Aug 7 2009, 10:29 PM, said:

Kalyug veer, your question was already answered in the thread that you opened up where sargun and nirgun upasana was discussed.

Fateh!

From what I could make of your argument, it seemed to suggest that it was only prem that was important. Am I correct in my understanding?

If this is correct, why is worshipping Krishna as the form of Waheguru any different to worshipping Zeus (or Superman for that matter) as a form of Waheguru, since at the end of the day it is only prem bhagti and the upasak's belief that matters? If this is so, what difference is there between worshipping a stone and imagining that it is Akal Purakh?

Regards,
K.

[amardeep]

When we say Satguru is sadaa, are'nt we refering to his nirgun state? Several times in Gurbani it is stated that the Guru's took birth:

Page 1390, Line 5
ਧੰਨਿ ਧੰਨਿ ਗੁਰੁ ਧੰਨਿ ਜਨਮੁ ਸਕਯਥੁ ਭਲੌ ਜਗਿ ॥

Blessed, blessed, blessed and fruitful is the sublime birth of the Guru into the world.

Dasam Granth

ਬਹੁਤ ਕਾਲ ਇਹ ਭਾਂਤਿ ਬਿਤਾਯੋ ॥ ਜਨਮ ਸਮੈ ਨਾਨਕ ਕੋ ਆਯੋ ॥੩॥
बहुत काल इह भांति बितायो ॥ जनम समै नानक को आयो ॥३॥
A long time passed like this till the birth of Nanak.3


ਇਹ ਕਾਰਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਮੋਹਿ ਪਠਾਯੋ ॥ ਤਬ ਮੈ ਜਗਤਿ ਜਨਮ ਧਰਿ ਆਯੋ ॥
इह कारनि प्रभ मोहि पठायो ॥ तब मै जगति जनम धरि आयो ॥
For this reason the Lord sent me and I was born in this world.

Other's however say that the guru pargat and parkash'ed into this world..

[N30 S!NGH]

Kaljug, on Aug 7 2009, 07:20 PM, said:

Fateh!

From what I could make of your argument, it seemed to suggest that it was only prem that was important. Am I correct in my understanding?

If this is correct, why is worshipping Krishna as the form of Waheguru any different to worshipping Zeus (or Superman for that matter) as a form of Waheguru, since at the end of the day it is only prem bhagti and the upasak's belief that matters? If this is so, what difference is there between worshipping a stone and imagining that it is Akal Purakh?

Regards,
K.

Singh sorry, but can you please carefully read this thread you opened - http://www.sikhaware...showtopic=11526 . I thought i was very clear what i meant in discussion with bijla singh. Hint Hint- Please read lines in bold in my post. Your query should be best discussed in the other thread that you opened veer , its already been discussed there anyway but if still unsure we can discuss it there. I don't want to go off-topic on this thread as this is different topic all together.

[tSingh]

Gurfateh

Bijla Singh said 'Your understanding of Gurbani is very limited.'

I think thats a little cheap Bijla Singh. Just because Neo Singh chooses to adopt the line taken by the majority of Brahamgyanis, Sants, Pandits, Gurmukhs, Gyanis from the last four centuries rather than the mat of academic revisionists of the last hundred years hardly makes it 'very limited'! I'm sure the majority of people on this forum will recognise that Neo Singh's posts are rich with learning and insights taken from the teachings of the Sant Mandali.

Each to their own Bijla Singh, but spoken with respect.

t

[N30 S!NGH]

Bijla Singh,

I will respond back to your initial post in next couple of days, this weekend is quite busy for me. stay tuned.

[Bijla Singh]

Quote

I think thats a little cheap Bijla Singh. Just because Neo Singh chooses to adopt the line taken by the majority of Brahamgyanis, Sants, Pandits, Gurmukhs, Gyanis from the last four centuries

I hardly doubt every "brahmgyani" accepts the same interpretation or has the same viewpoint about Gurmat. They don't know everything about Gurbani and Gurbani interpretation is not limited to them. I did not take a cheap shot but respectfully told him what I think. Scholars have done much research on Bhagats and facts they have brought forward are not known in sampardas. I am correct when I made that statement. He does not know the context of the word "Satguru". Internal evidence of Gurbani, Bhagat Bani and Vaars prove my point. Bhagat Bani shows how Gurmat prema bhagti is different from bhakti movement. Many Hindu scholars have written PhD thesis on Kabir Ji, Farid Ji and Naamdev Ji. They know more about Bhagats than Sikhs and sampradas whereas it should be the other way around. Anyways, my intent was not to insult him but point out that other scholars' work needs to be studied because Gurbani has no limits.

[Kaljug]

tSingh, on Aug 9 2009, 10:02 AM, said:

Gurfateh

I think thats a little cheap Bijla Singh. Just because Neo Singh chooses to adopt the line taken by the majority of Brahamgyanis, Sants, Pandits, Gurmukhs, Gyanis from the last four centuries rather than the mat of academic revisionists of the last hundred years hardly makes it 'very limited'

Fateh!

Most of these "Brahamgyanis, Sants, Gurmukhs, Gianis" have been influenced by Nirmalay who have in turn been influenced by Vaishnavism. That is the reason you still get Sants ignoring all of Sikh History and claiming that meat is anti-Sikh, shikaar is anti-Sikh, Sukhnidaan is anti-Sikh, respect for shastar is anti-Sikh, etc etc.

There is nothing in Gurbani to suggest that Krishna or any of the avatars are worthy of worship or have the avastha of Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

Regards,
K.

Edited by Kaljug, 10 August 2009 - 06:58 PM.

[Xylitol]

Kaljug, on Aug 9 2009, 01:30 PM, said:

Fateh!

Most of these Brahamgyanis, Sants, Gurmukhs and Gianis have been influenced by Nirmalay who have in turn been influenced by Vaishnavism. That is the reason you still get Sants ignoring all of Sikh History and claiming that meat is anti-Sikh, shikaar is anti-Sikh, Sukhnidaan is anti-Sikh, respect for shastar is anti-Sikh, etc etc.

There is nothing in Gurbani to suggest that Krishna or any of the avatars are worthy of worship or have the avastha of Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

Regards,
K.

You should be more careful in throwing around the term bhramgiani ji, brahmgiani don't promote things which go against Sikhi, as their ignorance has been entirely eradicated. However, sants and those who pretend to be brahmgiani often do have gaps in their education.

[Kaljug]

Xylitol, on Aug 10 2009, 07:39 PM, said:

You should be more careful in throwing around the term bhramgiani ji, brahmgiani don't promote things which go against Sikhi, as their ignorance has been entirely eradicated. However, sants and those who pretend to be brahmgiani often do have gaps in their education.

Fateh!

I was quoting the last person's list. My bad, it should have been in quotes. Corrected now.

Regards,
K.