Language Of Sarbloh Granth

[dalsingh101]

Dalsingh101

Sikh rehat maryada only says that eating meat by halal is bajar kurehit. It does not support eating meat. it is quiet on this subject. In other words it leaves the choice to an individual.

In other words it leaves the choice to an individual.

I haven't said anything contrary to your statement above.

[singh2]

Darshan Singh former Jathedar is spreading this in the name of Akaal Takhat

"There is no evidence available that Guru Gobind Singh wrote, authenticated or sanctified any Dasami Patshahi Da Granth in his own hands as was done by him in the case of Damdami version of Guru Granth Sahib in 1706 and 1708 and similar to Guru Arjan Dev in the case of Aad Granth in 1604. The framing of the Rehat Maryada in 1927-1946 was a monumental task. There were several Rehat Maryadas prevailing at that time. The best of the practical life of Sikhs over generations, oral history and written sources available were taken into consideration. All sources confirmed the Sikh concept of Guru Panth and Guru Granth. The Bani of Guru Granth Sahib was the sole canon to accept or reject any idea, concept or suggestion. Dasam Granth, therefore has no recognition in Sikh Rahat Maryada and the 1925 Sikh Gurudwara Act. The Banis of the tenth Guru that have been accepted in the Sikh Rahat Maryada which and sanctified by Guru Panth (1927-1945) are final and unquestionable: Jaap Sahib, ten Swayyas (Swarg Sudu Waley 21-30 Akal Ustat), Benti Chaupai up to Dushat dokh tay, Dohra and Swayyas in Rehras (as sanctioned in Rehat Maryada)."

Darshan singh ragi is a mischievous, heretic and traitorous character sikhism has seen for decades.

Dasam grnath is a very much canonised scripture. We have five banis of nitnem that form regimen of a sikh's religious life. Three banis are from Dasam granth. Our ardas pauri is from dasam granth. We get baptized with three banis of Dasam granth.

Ragi darshan singh had been doing kirtan of Dasam banis all his life and made his fortune from that money. Today he is speaking a traitor's language.

He also says that there is no proof that nitnem banis formed part of sikh's nitnem. It is all on record.

[jsingh96]

from what the first few pages in the sarbloh steek says, many languages were used in the bani. from arabic/persian to a watered down (but very similar) sanskrit (if you wanna see that bit i'll post page numbers etc)

the arabic/persian is similar (from what i know which is nothing of either langauge), but by looks of it looks very similar to zafarnama.

there are parts that are very similar to aadi guru granth sahib as well (in terms of language and style of poetry), so i think those parts could be classified as sadhu bhasha.

according to baba inderjit singh ji he was telling me how sarbloh is like a combination of dasam granth and aadi guru granth sahib. you'll be shocked how many portions are extremely identical to adi guru granth sahib, take a look and skim through the steeks and you'll find portions.

[amardeep]

Is'nt Sarbloh Granth mostly about the hindu myths?

[jsingh96]

Is'nt Sarbloh Granth mostly about the hindu myths?

its about one story, about a demon called beerajnaad and his battle with Sarbloh , an avatar of Mahakaal.

after this there are parts similar to chaubis avatar in dasam. there are sections of the following avatars:

Avatar Katha

- Mach, 838

- Kach

- Barhaa

- Nar Singh

- Purshraam

- Beej Ramaein 869

- Krishna avatar 936

(the number is the page number in the steek, volume 2)

[amardeep]

interesting. and what parts is it that you say are similiar to the shabads in Guru Granth? The persian hymns, are they also talking about the avatars or are they talking about other subjects+

[jsingh96]

interesting. and what parts is it that you say are similiar to the shabads in Guru Granth? The persian hymns, are they also talking about the avatars or are they talking about other subjects+

will post some parts that are similar to shabads in guru granth, the ones i read were talking about bhagati, different levels of bhagati etc etc

the persian parts i read were just description of some of the battles however there are large sections which are in pure persian so they could be talking about anything

[The Khalsa Fauj]

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਪਹਿਲਾ ਅਧਾਯ- ਦੇਵੀ ਅਤੇ ਅਕਾਲ ਦੀ ਮਹਿਮਾ, ਦੈਤਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਹਾਰਕੇ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਦਾ ਦੇਵੀ ਦੀ ਸ਼ਰਣ ਆਉਣਾ, ਦੇਵੀ ਨੇ ਹੋਰ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਦੀਆਂ ਸ਼ਕਤੀਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਨਾਲ ਲੈ ਕੇ ਭੀਮਨਾਦ ਦੈਤ ਨਾਲ ਲੜਨਾ ਅਤੇ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਮਾਰਨਾ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਦੂਜਾ ਅਧਾਯ- ਭੀਮਨਾਦ ਦੀ ਇਸਤ੍ਰੀ ਦਾ ਸਤੀ ਹੋਣਾ, ਭੀਮਨਾਦ ਦੇ ਭਾਈ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ (ਵੀਯਨਾਦ) ਨੇ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਲੜਨ ਦੀ ਤਿਆਰੀ ਕਰਨੀ, ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਨੇ ਸਭ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਸਹਾਇਤਾ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਚਿੱਠੀਆਂ ਲਿਖਣੀਆਂ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਤੀਜਾ ਅਧਾਯ- ਦੋਹਾਂ ਦਲਾਂ ਦੀ ਚੜਾਈ, ਵਿਨੁ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਪਾਸ ਨਾਰਦ ਦਾ ਦੂਤ ਹੋਕੇ ਜਾਣਾ, ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਨੇ ਸੁਲਹ ਤੋਂ ਇਨਕਾਰ ਕਰਕੇ ਜੰਗ ਕਰਨ ਦਾ ਇਰਾਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਕਰਨਾ, ਜੰਗ ਵਿੱਚ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਦੇ ੧੧. ਸੈਨਾਪਤੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਮਰਨਾ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਚੌਥਾ ਅਧਾਯ- ਘੋਰ ਸੰਗ੍ਰਾਮ ਹੋਣਾ, ਜੰਗ ਵਿੱਚ ਮਰੇ ਹੋਏ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਦੇ ਕੇ ਵਿਨੁ ਨੇ ਜਿਵਾਉਣਾ, ਅੰਤ ਨੂੰ ਦੈਤਾਂ ਨੇ ਜੰਗ ਜਿੱਤਕੇ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਨੂੰ ਕੈਦ ਕਰਨਾ, ਵਿਨੁ ਨੇ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਦੇ ਬੰਧਨ ਕੱਟਣੇ, ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਨੇ ਫਤੇ ਪਾਕੇ ਇੰਦ੍ਰਪੁਰੀ ਪੁਰ ਕਬਜਾ ਕਰਨਾ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਪੰਜਵਾਂ ਅਧਾਯ- ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਦਾ ਦੁਖੀ ਹੋਕੇ ਈਸ਼ਰ ਅੱਗੇ ਪੁਕਾਰਨਾ, ਪ੍ਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਨੇ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਧਾਰਨਾ. ਯਥਾ- ''ਸਰਬ ਅੰਗ ਬਜਰੰਗ ਹੇ, ਧਾਰੋ ਪੁਰਖ ਅਸੰਗ ਹੇ, ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਅਵਤਾਰ.'' (ਛੰਦ ੬੫) ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਪਾਸ ਗਣੇਸ਼ ਦਾ ਦੂਤ ਹੋ ਕੇ ਜਾਣਾ, ਸੁਲਹਿ ਦੀਆਂ ਸ਼ਰਤਾਂ ਨਾਮਨਜੂਰ ਹੋਣ ਪੁਰ ਪਰਸਪਰ ਘੋਰ ਸੰਗ੍ਰਾਮ ਮੱਚਣਾ, ਦੇਵੀ ਅਤੇ ਹੋਰ ਸ਼ਕਤੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਸਹਾਇਤਾ ਲਈ ਜੰਗ ਅੰਦਰ ਆਉਣਾ, ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਨੇ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਤੋਂ ਛੁੱਟ ਬਾਕੀ ਸਾਰੇ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਅਤੇ ਦੈਤਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੇ ਵਿੱਚ ਲੀਨ ਕਰਨਾ. ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਨੇ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਦੀ ਉਸਤਤਿ ਕਰਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਾਰਥਨਾ ਕਰਨੀ ਕਿ ਫੇਰ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਹੋ ਕੇ ਮੇਰੇ ਨਾਲ ਜੰਗ ਕਰੋ, ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਨੇ ਫੇਰ ਭਿਆਨਕ ਰੂਪ ਧਾਰਕੇ ਭਾਰੀ ਜੰਗ ਕਰਨਾ ਅਤੇ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਦਾ ਸਿਰ ਕੱਟਕੇ ਸਿਵ ਨੂੰ ਮੂੰਡਮਾਲਾ ਦਾ ਮੇਰੁ ਬਣਾਉਣ ਲਈ ਦੇਣਾ ਅਤੇ ਸਭ ਦੇਵਤਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਖਿਲਤ (ਸਿਰੋਪਾ) ਦੇਕੇ ਵਿਦਾ ਕਰਨਾ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਇਸ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿੱਚ ਲਿਖਿਆ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਇਹ ਪੁਸਤਕ ਸ਼ੁਕ੍ਰ ਭਾ ਦਾ ਸਾਰ ਹੈ ਯਥਾ-

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

''ਤੇ ਸਭ ਕਥੇ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਕ ਕਰਨਿਰਣਯ ਸੁਕ੍ਰਾਭਾਸਹਿਛੰਦ,

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਇਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਹ ਭੀ ਲੇਖ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਅਤੇ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਨਾਦ ਦਾਨਵ ਦਾ ਇਹ ਜੰਗ ਨਹੀਂ, ਕਿੰਤੂ ਵਿਵੇਕ ਅਤੇ ਮੋਹ ਦਾ ਸੰਗ੍ਰਾਮ ਹੈ. ਯਥਾ- ''ਨ੍ਰਿਪ ਬਿਬੇਕ ਅਬਿਬੇਕ ਸੇਨਾਨੀ ਭਟ ਪ੍ਰਧਾਨ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੀ ਧੁਜਨੀ.''

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਵਿੱਚ ਬਿਨਾ ਹੀ ਪ੍ਰਕਰਣ ਖਾਲਸਾ- ਧਰਮ ਸੰਬੰਧੀ ਭੀ ਕਈ ਲੇਖ ਆਏ ਹਨ. ਯਥਾ- ''ਗੁਰੁਗਾਦੀ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹੀ ੧੦''- ''ਖਾਲਸਾ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼'' ਅਤੇ ''ਬਖਸ਼ਿਸ ਹਜੂਰ'' ਸਿਰਲੇਖਾਂ ਹੇਠ ਲਿਖਿਆ ਹੈ-

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਦੰਥਾ.'' ... ਪੰਡਿਤ ਤਾਰਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਖੋਜ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਭਾਈ ਸੁੱਖਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ ਰਚਨਾ ਹੈ, ਜੋ ਪਟਨੇ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੀ ਸੀ. ਉਸ ਨੇ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਕੀਤਾ ਕਿ ਮੈਨੂੰ ਇਹ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਜਗੰਨਾਥ ਦੀ ਝਾੜੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਇੱਕ ਅਵਧੂਤ ਉਦਾਸੀ ਤੋਂ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਹੈ, ਜੋ ਕਲਗੀਧਰ ਦੀ ਰਚਨਾ ਹੈ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਅਸੀਂ ਭੀ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਨੂੰ ਦਸ਼ਮੇਸ਼ ਦੀ ਰਚਨਾ ਮੰਨਣ ਲਈ ਤਿਆਰ ਨਹੀਂ, ਕਿਉਂਕਿ ਇਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਰੂਪਦੀਪ ਭਾ ਪਿੰਗਲ ਦਾ ਜਿਕਰ ਆਇਆ ਹੈ. ਰੂਪਦੀਪ ਦੀ ਰਚਨਾ ਸੰਮਤ ੧੭੭੬ ਵਿੱਚ ਹੋਈ ਹੈ, ਅਤੇ ਕਲਗੀਧਰ ਸੰਮਤ ੧੭੬੫ ਵਿੱਚ ਜੋਤੀਜੋਤਿ ਸਮਾਏ ਹਨ, ਅਤੇ ਜੇ ਇਹ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਸੰਸਕਾਰ ਤੋਂ ਪਹਿਲਾ ਹੈ, ਤਦ ਖਾਲਸੇ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਸੰਗ ਅਤੇ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਪੰਥ ਨੂੰ ਗੁਰੁਤਾ ਦਾ ਜਿਕਰ ਕਿਸ ਤਰਾਂ ਆ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ? ਜੇ ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤਸੰਸਕਾਰ ਤੋਂ ਪਿੱਛੋਂ ਦੀ ਰਚਨਾ ਹੈ, ਤਦ ਦਾਸ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ, ਸ਼ਾਹ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਆਦਿਕ ਨਾਮ ਕਿਉਂ?

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਇਹ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਭੀ ਆਣ ਲਿਖਾਰੀਆਂ ਦੀ ਅਨਗਹਲੀ ਨਾਲ ਉਤਨਾ ਹੀ ਅਸ਼ੁੱਧ ਹੈ ਜਿਤਨਾ ਕਿ ਦਸਮਗ੍ਰੰਥ. ਗਯੰਦ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਨਇੰਦ, ਓਪ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਵੋਪ, ਸਾਮਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਸਮਾਕਰਨ, ਤ੍ਰਿਭੰਗੀ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਤ੍ਰਿਕੁੰਗੀ, ਵਖਟਕਾਰ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਬਖਤਕਾਰ, ਨਿਦ੍ਰਾ ਦੀ ਥਾਂ ਨਿਧਾ ਆਦਿਕ ਸੈਂਕੜੇ ਪਾਠ ਵਿਗਾੜੇ ਹੋਏ ਹਨ.

ਸਰਬਲੋਹ

ਭਾਈ ਧਾਨ ਸਿੰਘ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਕੱਟੂ (ਰਿਆਸਤ ਨਾਭਾ) ਨਿਵਾਸੀ ਮਹਾਤਮਾ ਨੇ ਦਸਮਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿਚੋਂ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਕੱਢਕੇ ਸਰਬਲੋਹ ਸ਼ਾਮਿਲ ਕਰਕੇ ਇਕ ਬੀੜ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਾਈ ਸੀ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਚਾਰ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋਇਆ.

http://searchgurbani.com/main.php?book=mah...8%AC&page=3

I got the above info from Mahan Kosh. Feel free to use it any way you like. I haven't studied Sarabloh Granth so I can't give personal comment on it.

[dalsingh101]

Do some people not see something strange in Sikh reliance on retold Hindu myths as some magical source of military strength? Must be just me with the Singh Sabha influence.

[Kaljug]

Do some people not see something strange in Sikh reliance on retold Hindu myths as some magical source of military strength? Must be just me with the Singh Sabha influence.

Fateh!

The recitation of heroic poetry recounting the deeds of great fighters (historically real or mythologically real) on the battlefield is a part of many warrior cultures.

The use of the mythology of the Indian people to tap into their racial unconscious to ignite the desire to destroy the Mughal malechh was a divinely inspired stroke of genius, in my opinion. But, it's the language of Dasmesh Pita's dhur ki bani in Dasam Granth that contains the real power, not the myths themselves. If this was not the case, the Hindu Kshatriyas would have been able to utilise these myths to rid the country of despotic Islamic rule themselves.

K.

[dalsingh101]

What about worldview.

As Sikhs do we revert back to the old Hindu cosmology (understandable because bani sort of does this if we take it literally, i.e Brhma, Vishnu etc. being mentioned in the genesis accounts) or do we take on the modern science based perception of the world aligned with darwinian thought? We cannot do the latter if we literally believe in Hindu mythological accounts.

An alternative would be a fake synthesis where we try and hammer the Hindu cosmology into the "enlightened" framework or vice versa.

Seeing as we have clear, irrefutable evidence of the existence of dinosaurs and none of gods and goddesses fighting demons, what is the score?

I think some of the Singh Sabha guys were grappling with issues like this FTR.

[singh2]

Fateh!

The recitation of heroic poetry recounting the deeds of great fighters (historically real or mythologically real) on the battlefield is a part of many warrior cultures.

The use of the mythology of the Indian people to tap into their racial unconscious to ignite the desire to destroy the Mughal malechh was a divinely inspired stroke of genius, in my opinion. But, it's the language of Dasmesh Pita's dhur ki bani in Dasam Granth that contains the real power, not the myths themselves. If this was not the case, the Hindu Kshatriyas would have been able to utilise these myths to rid the country of despotic Islamic rule themselves.

K.

The battle episodes are written by guru sahib completely new. There is a lot of misunderstanding prevailing on this. People have not read Dasam granth and make comments. For example people think that krishna avtar is in praise of krishna. But it is not.it is completely incorrect assumption.

Krishna avtar has there sections bal leela , ras mandal and yudh parbandh. Yudh parbandh is completely new, forms largest part ,not from any hindu text and fully written by guru sahib. Hero of krishna avatar is Kharag singh and not krishna. Kahrag singh fights a war of righteousness against krishna and floors him.

ਜਬਹਿ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨ ਸ਼ਿਵ ਭਜਤ ਨਿਹਾਰਿਓ ॥ ਇਹੈ ਆਪਨੈ ਹ੍ਰਿਦੈ ਬਿਚਾਰਿਓ ॥ਅਬ ਹਉ ਆਪਨ ਇਹ ਸੰਗ ਲਰੋ ॥ ਕੈ ਅਰਿ ਮਾਰੋ ਕੈ ਲਰਿ ਮਰੋ ॥੧੫੨੯॥

When Krishna saw Shiva running away, then he reflected in his mind that he would then fight with the enemy himself; either he would kill the enemy of die himself.1529.

ਜਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕਉ ਨਿਤ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਸਚੀਪਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਸਨਕਾਦਿਕ ਹੂ ਜਪੁ ਕੀਨੋ ॥ ਸੂਰ ਸਸੀ ਸੁਰ ਨਾਰਦ ਸਾਰਦ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੈ ਧਿਆਨ ਬਿਖੈ ਮਨੁ ਦੀਨੋ ॥

He, whose name is muttered ever by Brahma, Indra, Sanak etc.; He, on whom Surya, Chandra, Narada, Sharda meditate;

ਖੋਜਤ ਹੈ ਜਿਹ ਸਿੱਧ ਮਹਾਮੁਨ ਬਿਆਸ ਪਰਾਸੁਰ ਭੇਦ ਨ ਚੀਨੋ ॥ ਸੋ ਖੜਗੇਸ਼ ਅਯੋਧਨ ਮੈ ਕਰ ਮੋ ਹਿਤ ਕੇਸਨ ਤੇ ਗਹਿ ਲੀਨੋ ॥੧੫੩੧॥

He, whom the adepts search in their contemplation and whose mystery is not comprehended by the great sages like Vyas and Prashar, Kharag Singh caught him in the battlefield by his hair.1531.

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਹਰਿ ਸ਼ੱਤ੍ਰ ਅਨੇਕ ਹਨੇ ਤਿਹ ਕਉਨ ਗਨੇ ਕਬਿ ਸਯਾਮ ਪ੍ਰਬੀਨੋ ॥ ਕੰਸ ਕਉ ਕੇਸਨ ਤੇ ਗਹਿ ਕੇਸਵ ਭੂਪ ਮਨੋ ਬਦਲੋ ਵਹ ਲੀਨੋ ॥੧੫੩੨॥

That Krishna, who had knocked down many enemies with skill and killed Kansa by catching him from his hair; the name Krishna has been caught by his hair by the king Kharag Singh; it seems that he has avenged the killing of Kansa by catching his hair.1532

ਚਿੰਤ ਕਰੀ ਚਿਤ ਮੈ ਭੂਪਤ ਜੋ ਦਿਹ ਕਉ ਅਬ ਹਉ ਬਧ ਕੈ ਹਉ ॥ ਸੈਨ ਸਭੈ ਭਜ ਹੈ ਜਬ ਹੀ ਤਬ ਕਾ ਸੰਗ ਜਾਇ ਕੈ ਜੁੱਧੁ ਮਚੈ ਹਉ ॥

The king then thought that if he killed Krishna, all his army would run away; with whom then he would fight?

ਹਉ ਕਿਹ ਪੈ ਕਰਿਹੋ ਬਹੁ ਘਾਇਨ ਕਾ ਕੇ ਹਉ ਘਾਇ ਸਨਮੁਖ ਖੈ ਹਉ ॥ਛਾਡ ਦਯੋ ਕਹਿਓ ਜਾਹੁ ਚਲੋ ਹਰਿ ਤੋ ਸਮ ਸੂਰ ਕਹੂੰ ਨਹੀ ਪੈ ਹਉ ॥੧੫੩੩॥

To whom then he would inflict a wound or from whom he be wounded himself? Therefore, the king set Krishna free and said," Go away, there is no other warrior like you."1533.

krishna avtar, dasam granth

Edited August 21, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

So Singh2, are you saying they are essentially fictional stories that use Hindu references?

[Kaljug]

What about worldview.

As Sikhs do we revert back to the old Hindu cosmology (understandable because bani sort of does this if we take it literally, i.e Brhma, Vishnu etc. being mentioned in the genesis accounts) or do we take on the modern science based perception of the world aligned with darwinian thought? We cannot do the latter if we literally believe in Hindu mythological accounts.

An alternative would be a fake synthesis where we try and hammer the Hindu cosmology into the "enlightened" framework or vice versa.

Seeing as we have clear, irrefutable evidence of the existence of dinosaurs and none of gods and goddesses fighting demons, what is the score?

I think some of the Singh Sabha guys were grappling with issues like this FTR.

Fateh!

I think you're confusing mythological truths with recorded history - they are two separate things entirely. Gurbani does not propagate the reality of actual divinities running around and brawling with horned and pitchfork carring asuras, but that does not mean that mythologised history does not have a value of its own on a purely psychological and spiritual level.

You should read some of the work of the anthropologist and folklorist Joseph Campbell who wrote some brilliant books on the power of myth and the universal symbols that such myths contain. I found his books really useful in helping me understand the use of mythology in Gurbani in specific and religious scriptured in general.

You might even be able to find his 6 part series on this subject called The Power of Myth. There is some info on him on the Joseph Campbell Foundation website:

http://www.jcf.org/

Regards,

K.

[amardeep]

try to watch this 10 minute clip on mythology in christianity and see how people back then, made stories out of natural events in order to teach people. Ie world natural cosmology order becomes the story of crusifiction ..

After that, please read hindu mythology and try to reflect on what the inner real meaning of these myths really are

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNf-P_5u_Hw

[singh2]

So Singh2, are you saying they are essentially fictional stories that use Hindu references?

These are Indian refrences and not hindu references. We have to dig deep to reply to your question.

per krishna avtar kharag singh fights krishna to avenge death of his friend Jarasandh. now jarasandh has historical context. but war scenes are new. So Guru gobind singh uses characters who dispaly bravery in battlefield to drive home his message.

To link these to any particular religion and label Dasam granth as influenced by Hinduism is sheer ignorance.

[Kaljug]

Fateh singh2!

The battle episodes are written by guru sahib completely new. There is a lot of misunderstanding prevailing on this. People have not read Dasam granth and make comments. For example people think that krishna avtar is in praise of krishna. But it is not.it is completely incorrect assumption.

Some of the myths, like Chandi's battle with Sumbh and Nisumbh in Chandi di Var, are old Hindu myths, but the way in which they are described are new. Agreed, none of Chaubis Avatar is written to praise these devas and neither does it imply that these deities exist in the way that Hindus suggest.

Krishna avtar has there sections bal leela , ras mandal and yudh parbandh. Yudh parbandh is completely new, forms largest part ,not from any hindu text and fully written by guru sahib. Hero of krishna avatar is Kharag singh and not krishna. Kahrag singh fights a war of righteousness against krishna and floors him.

I completely agree with you in this regard. Sikh scholars teach that Kharag Singh is the Khalsa Panth here, and Krishna represents the previous Hindu philosophy.

K.

[Mithar]

But why can't Durga and other characters from Hindu "mythology" (for lack of a better word) really exist? Maybe they do exist in another plain of existence seperate from our own. I mean just because we cannot see ghosts and spirits does not mean they do not exist. Similarly just because we cannot see (due to our limited vishion) Devi- Devtas, Jamdoots, Devdoots does not neccessarily mean they do not exist. If Gurbani mentions them, it is more than what I need to know that such entities do exist.

If we did not have the huge stone in Panja Sahib with the imprint of Guru Nanak Dev Jee's hand, I'm sure most of us here would be saying that that story was a myth. If Bhai Gurdas Jee did not mention Guru Nanak Dev Jee going to Makkah and Baghdad and performing their divine miracles there with the power of Naam I'm sure most of us would believe that those stories were myths as wel.

Sometimes looking at things with too much western rationality is not always the positive thing to do. There are other spiritual forces at work beyond our comprehension in Vaheguru's vast creation.

[singh2]

Some of the myths, like Chandi's battle with Sumbh and Nisumbh in Chandi di Var, are old Hindu myths, but the way in which they are described are new. Agreed, none of Chaubis Avatar is written to praise these devas and neither does it imply that these deities exist in the way that Hindus suggest.

Kalyug ji

Waheguru ji ki fateh

I should have written battle scenes and not episodes. What i meant was power of words for example Chandi di vaar is so powerful in words it is easy to conclude no human can write it. It is only Guru sahib who can write such poetry.

In yudh parbandh of krishna avtar, Muslims come to the side of krishna against kharag singh. In actuality there were no muslims that time. The religion was not born yet. Kharag singh's head was cut and he keeps on fighting without head.

These were future happenings Guru sahib was writing. These events occurred. Hindu hill rajas roped in moghlas against guru sahib. Baba Deep singh fought without head. How true Guru sahib wrote these before hand.

[dsd108]

Is'nt Sarbloh Granth mostly about the hindu myths?

The word Hindu is not used in the 4 Vedas or Bhagavad Gita Mahabharata. It is used countless times in Guru Granth Sahib Ji not to describe the Vedhantis but the people of Hindustan.

The word Hindu first appeared in the Old Persian language which was derived from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. The usage of the word Hindu was further popularized by the Arabic term al-Hind referring to the land of the people who live across river Indus.

Edited August 21, 2009 by dsd108

[singh2]

The word Hindu is not used in the 4 Vedas or Bhagavad Gita Mahabharata. It is used countless times in Guru Granth Sahib Ji not to describe the Vedhantis but the people of Hindustan.

The word Hindu first appeared in the Old Persian language which was derived from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local appellation for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. The usage of the word Hindu was further popularized by the Arabic term al-Hind referring to the land of the people who live across river Indus.

I have lived in many parts of india and for many years in south India. Hindu deities of North such as krishan and especially rama are looked down upon in South india. People of south India are from race of asuras.

Guru Gobind singh ji writes in Bachitra natak that God first created Asuras.

[Kaljug]

But why can't Durga and other characters from Hindu "mythology" (for lack of a better word) really exist? Maybe they do exist in another plain of existence seperate from our own. I mean just because we cannot see ghosts and spirits does not mean they do not exist. Similarly just because we cannot see (due to our limited vishion) Devi- Devtas, Jamdoots, Devdoots does not neccessarily mean they do not exist. If Gurbani mentions them, it is more than what I need to know that such entities do exist.

If we did not have the huge stone in Panja Sahib with the imprint of Guru Nanak Dev Jee's hand, I'm sure most of us here would be saying that that story was a myth. If Bhai Gurdas Jee did not mention Guru Nanak Dev Jee going to Makkah and Baghdad and performing their divine miracles there with the power of Naam I'm sure most of us would believe that those stories were myths as wel.

Sometimes looking at things with too much western rationality is not always the positive thing to do. There are other spiritual forces at work beyond our comprehension in Vaheguru's vast creation.

Fateh!

I should have been more specific. The deities probably exist, but they are not the universal gods that hindu mythology portrays them to be. Likewise, the gods of the Greek pantheon exist at some level, and it's the same with other gods of other religions. Every pantheon has a deity of the sky, for example, and each of the sky gods is claimed to be the supreme god ruling over all the deities of the pantheon. However, each god from individial pantheons has its own name, its own myth and its own ritual of worship. They all represent the same reality, a universal symbol of the awe that primitive man had for the immensity of the sky, but Hindus claim that their Indra is the only such god, while Greeks worshipped him as Zeus.

Or something like that. I need some caffeine.

K.

[dsd108]

I have lived in many parts of india and for many years in south India. Hindu deities of North such as krishan and especially rama are looked down upon in South india. People of south India are from race of asuras.

Guru Gobind singh ji writes in Bachitra natak that God first created Asuras.

The Vedhantis are Brahmins who have kept India together for thousands of years. They will add new Gods (like Buddha) and remove the old ones. Shabad Guru is eternal for Sikhs.

The caste system was made to keep India together - like divide and conquer.

[singh2]

The Vedhantis are Brahmins who have kept India together for thousands of years. They will add new Gods (like Buddha) and remove the old ones. Shabad Guru is eternal for Sikhs.

The caste system was made to keep India together - like divide and conquer.

My point of telling was that south indians have different Gods than North indians. There were no brahmins in South india. India was not a unified country till British made it one.

sikhism is a separate religion.

Edited August 21, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

Fateh!

I think you're confusing mythological truths with recorded history - they are two separate things entirely. Gurbani does not propagate the reality of actual divinities running around and brawling with horned and pitchfork carring asuras, but that does not mean that mythologised history does not have a value of its own on a purely psychological and spiritual level.

You should read some of the work of the anthropologist and folklorist Joseph Campbell who wrote some brilliant books on the power of myth and the universal symbols that such myths contain. I found his books really useful in helping me understand the use of mythology in Gurbani in specific and religious scriptured in general.

You might even be able to find his 6 part series on this subject called The Power of Myth. There is some info on him on the Joseph Campbell Foundation website:

http://www.jcf.org/

Regards,

K.

I am not disputing the usefulness of mythological tales in conveying important messages. The problem in my eyes are when we are expected to believe in such mythological accounts as literally true.

If we Sikhs are all agreed that the use of such tales are allegorical then there is no problem. (definition of allegory - The representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form). In this context, the use of Chandhi is understandable. But that is very different to actually believing in the prior existence of Chandhi and her exploits on this earth.

That distinction is causing the conflict in the panth we see today. People are essentially saying that if we literally believe the avtaar stories we place ourselves firmly within the Hindu cosmology. If, however we all agree that the use of such characters is purely a vehicle of a greater message that does not involve having to literally believe in their existence, it makes sense. The truth however is likely to be that many of our ancestors (who came from simple backgrounds) did probably believe them to be literally true.

Where do we stand on this today?