Sikh Guru's And Their Marriage Relationship

[CdnSikhGirl]

If Guru Nanak Dev Ji IS incarnation of God can u please explain:

1. Why Mool Mantra says God does not take birth or death (formless) and that all forms occur within God?

2. Why did Guru Nanak Dev Ji disappear for three days at the river where he was said to be in 'presence of' that divine and had the revelation revealed to him about reality... Of Which he wrote down as Mool Mantra?

3. Why he would claim that he is but a servant of God?

I thought Sikhi does not believe God takes direct incarnation / avatars.... That we believe in the One timeless formless Akal Purakh??

I think I posted the concept of Nirgun Sargun in another thread... But suffice to say that if ALL forms occur within the One then no one form could ever be the sum of that One.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

If Guru Nanak Dev Ji IS incarnation of God can u please explain:

1. Why Mool Mantra says God does not take birth or death (formless) and that all forms occur within God?

2. Why did Guru Nanak Dev Ji disappear for three days at the river where he was said to be in 'presence of' that divine and had the revelation revealed to him about reality... Of Which he wrote down as Mool Mantra?

3. Why he would claim that he is but a servant of God?

I thought Sikhi does not believe God takes direct incarnation / avatars.... That we believe in the One timeless formless Akal Purakh??

I think I posted the concept of Nirgun Sargun in another thread... But suffice to say that if ALL forms occur within the One then no one form could ever be the sum of that One.

Good questions, but two of them are very easy to answer. I will answer them later.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[paapiman]

If Guru Nanak Dev Ji IS incarnation of God can u please explain:

1. Why Mool Mantra says God does not take birth or death (formless) and that all forms occur within God?

2. Why did Guru Nanak Dev Ji disappear for three days at the river where he was said to be in 'presence of' that divine and had the revelation revealed to him about reality... Of Which he wrote down as Mool Mantra?

3. Why he would claim that he is but a servant of God?

I thought Sikhi does not believe God takes direct incarnation / avatars.... That we believe in the One timeless formless Akal Purakh??

I think I posted the concept of Nirgun Sargun in another thread... But suffice to say that if ALL forms occur within the One then no one form could ever be the sum of that One.

Your questions will be answered.

In the meantime, here are the proofs that Satguru Sri Guru Nanak Dev jee Maharaaj is God himself.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[CdnSikhGirl]

Using that logic, ALL of us are also God. Because there really is only ONE... we are just cut off and experiencing through a tiny peep hole, but the 'doer' the 'experiencer' in all of us is ONE and the same. God is everything and everyone here is the proof (which you can not dispute because you are using the same proof to say Guru = God):

Page 35, Line 1
ਸਭ ਕਿਛੁ ਆਪੇ ਆਪਿ ਹੈ ਹਉਮੈ ਵਿਚਿ ਕਹਨੁ ਨ ਜਾਇ ॥
Sabẖ kicẖẖ āpe āp hai ha▫umai vicẖ kahan na jā▫e.
God Himself is everything; those who are in their ego cannot even speak of this.

Page 39, Line 4
ਸਭੁ ਕਿਛੁ ਆਪੇ ਆਪਿ ਹੈ ਦੂਜਾ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥
Sabẖ kicẖẖ āpe āp hai ḏūjā avar na ko▫e.
He Himself is everything; there is no other at all.

Page 1403, Line 17
ਆਪੇ ਨਰੁ ਆਪੇ ਫੁਨਿ ਨਾਰੀ ਆਪੇ ਸਾਰਿ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਪਾਸਾ ॥
Āpe nar āpe fun nārī āpe sār āp hī pāsā.
He Himself is male, and He Himself is female; He Himself is the chessman, and He Himself is the board.

Page 2, Line 6
ਨਾਨਕ ਏਵੈ ਜਾਣੀਐ ਸਭੁ ਆਪੇ ਸਚਿਆਰੁ ॥੪॥
Nānak evai jāṇī▫ai sabẖ āpe sacẖiār. ||4||
O Nanak, know this well: the True One Himself is All. ||4||

Our purpose is to realize our true self. That we ALL are this ONE. That God is no further than within ourself:

Page 60, Line 13
ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਆਪੁ ਪਛਾਣੀਐ ਅਵਰ ਕਿ ਕਰੇ ਕਰਾਇ ॥੯॥
Gurmukẖ āp pacẖẖāṇī▫ai avar kė kare karā▫e. ||9||
When one becomes Gurmukh and realizes his own self, what more is there left to do or have done? ||9||

Page 86, Line 1
ਗੁਰਮਤੀ ਆਪੁ ਪਛਾਣਿਆ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਪਰਗਾਸੁ ॥
Gurmaṯī āp pacẖẖāṇi▫ā rām nām pargās.
Follow the Guru's Teachings, and recognize your own self; the Divine Light of the Lord's Name shall shine within.

Page 97, Line 3
ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਘਰ ਮਹਿ ਪਾਇਆ ॥
Parabẖ abẖināsī gẖar mėh pā▫i▫ā.
I have found the Immortal Lord within the home of my own self.

Page 163, Line 15
ਸਜਣੁ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਪਾਇਆ ਘਰਿ ਸੋਹਿਲਾ ਗਾਇਆ ॥
Sajaṇ har parabẖ pā▫i▫ā gẖar sohilā gā▫i▫ā.
I have obtained the Lord God as my Best Friend, within the home of my own self. I sing the Songs of Joy.

Page 386, Line 13
ਥਿਰੁ ਘਰਿ ਬੈਠੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਪਾਵਹੁ ॥੨॥
Thir gẖar baiṯẖe parabẖ apnā pāvhu. ||2||
Remain steady and stable within the home of your own self, and find God. ||2||

Yes we are told that:

Page 123, Line 11
ਆਤਮ ਰਾਮ ਪਰਗਾਸੁ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਹੋਵੈ ॥
Āṯam rām pargās gur ṯe hovai.
The Divine Light of the Supreme Soul shines forth from the Guru.

But we are also told ....by Guru Nanak Dev Ji himself:

Page 599, Line 2
ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਏਕ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮੋਈ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥
Gurmukẖ ek ḏarisat kar ḏekẖhu gẖat gẖat joṯ samo▫ī jī▫o. ||2||
As Gurmukh, look upon all with the single eye of equality; in each and every heart, the Divine Light is contained. ||2||

Page 663, Line 8
ਸਭ ਮਹਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਹੈ ਸੋਇ ॥
Sabẖ mėh joṯ joṯ hai so▫e.
The Divine Light is within everyone; You are that Light.

Page 1041, Line 16
ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਨਿਰੰਤਰਿ ਪੇਖੈ ॥
Ahinis joṯ niranṯar pekẖai.
see the Divine Light deep within your nucleus, day and night.

Further this Shabad puts it into perspective that God is ALL of us. We just need to realize this fact. We are ALL just characters being played by the ONE same God:

ਬਾਜੀਗਰਿ ਜੈਸੇ ਬਾਜੀ ਪਾਈ ॥

Bājīgar jaise bājī pā▫ī.

The actor stages the play,

ਨਾਨਾ ਰੂਪ ਭੇਖ ਦਿਖਲਾਈ ॥

Nānā rūp bẖekẖ ḏikẖlā▫ī.

playing the many characters in different costumes;

ਸਾਂਗੁ ਉਤਾਰਿ ਥੰਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਿਓ ਪਾਸਾਰਾ ॥

Sāʼng uṯār thamiĥa▫o pāsārā.

but when the play ends, he takes off the costumes,

ਤਬ ਏਕੋ ਏਕੰਕਾਰਾ ॥੧॥

Ŧab eko ekankārā. ||1||

and then he is one, and only one. ||1||

Also using dreams an analogy as Gurbani mentions several times... the dreamer would never be able to fully 'incarnate' within their own dream. The dream would collpase as there would no longer be a dreamer! We are told in Gurbani, that EVERYTHING is WITHIN God. ALL consciousness is God's. There is only ONE dreamer and only ONE dream. We are all just characters within it. However, even though all the characters can interact within the dream and even though they are all really aspects of the Dreamer, no single dream character could ever be equal to the dreamer, or else the dream (no longer having a dreamer to create it) would collapse - the dreamer would just awaken. Even if I gain full waking consciousness within my own dreams at night... I am not 'incarnated' in that dream. I am still dreaming the dream from my vantage point outside of the dream. I am simply the dreamer AND the dream, AND all of the characters within it.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[mahanpaapi]

please add this note to your discussion that loss of one drop of semen equals loss of about 90 loss of blood drops. therefore, more loss less spirituality, and for procreation a drop may suffice.

[CdnSikhGirl]

A drop may suffice... IF that drop happens to make it all the way. Fact is, female reproductive tract is not hospitable to sperm. Most never make it. In fact each time a couple has sex, there is less than an 8% chance of becoming pregnant. If sex were only about procreation, then one would think the odds would be much closer to 100%. But, nature seems to be hinting that humans should do it more, not less. Animals have a much higher rate of pregnancy per coupling. Dogs for instance, have a near 100% rate ensuring most only mate once to become pregnant.

The emotional aspect in human coupling (absent in animals), also suggests that with this low 8% rate of pregnancy, it's meant more for bonding than procreation... the emotional bonding can not be ignored. Spouses feel different love towards each other than they do with a brother or sister. And that love can not be expressed in a platonic relationship.

You guys are seriously worried about a few nutrients?? haha I can't believe what I am reading! I can't believe you'd forgo intimacy with your spouse and deprive her of that emotional bond, in order to be selfish about retaining a few nutrients that your body would replace within a few hours anyway! How selfish and petty! Isn't love supposed to be SELFLESS?

If you want to remain celibate its your choice (please don't get married then either) but that won't get you to God. Guess what? I actually LIVE LIFE, and do not renounce it. And I have had multiple experiences which can only be explained as spiritual. I didn't try to deprive myself of everything in hopes that God might be pleased with me. I was given those experiences with his Grace without asking. I realized that God is not some old bearded guy sitting on a cloud that you have to please through suffering and renouncing his creation. God is WITHIN you! Your only task in this life is to FIND God WITHIN yourself! The Gurus taught us to do this while actually living in this world. By treasuring life, and this chance to learn from one another, by giving of ourselves selflessly, helping others. Not by renouncing living!

Its your own choice but please do not try to force that view on everyone... it goes against what the Gurus were trying to say. As in, I think some of you have completely missed the point! If we didn't need to actually live life for some reason, we wouldn't be here. If we didn't need to form emotional bonds with a spouse, then we would not feel anything emotionally toward our husband or wife. Everything that happens is his hukam. I live life to the fullest, to see the beauty of creation, but I also have realized the divine is within all of us. I have actually experienced consciousness outside of the physical realm. I am approaching 40, and a child is not guaranteed at this age. But I am not going to live with my husband as if he were my brother. We are supposed to have emotional bond as spouses, to become one soul in two bodies, each helping one another on the same spiritual journey. That would be impossible if a husband and wife lived as platonic partners.

I think some of you are so caught up in enforcing rules that you are missing out on the actual experience itself! If merely following all these rules were a ticket to Akal Purakh, then the yogis would have achieved it and there would be no need for Sikhi. That's all I am going to say on this topic.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

please add this note to your discussion that loss of one drop of semen equals loss of about 90 loss of blood drops. therefore, more loss less spirituality, and for procreation a drop may suffice.

Thanks bro for reminding me about this issue.

"According to the Ayurvedic understanding of the creation of body tissues (dhatus) it takes anywhere from 60-100 drops of blood to make one drop of semen." [1]

[1] - http://www.semenloss.info/content/ayurvedic-intro/

We can use that precious blood to donate someone in need and also, for the benefit of our own health. As Satkirin jee said that there is less than 8% chance for a wife getting pregnant during one sexual act; married Gursikh males will definitely need to preserve it, as sex will have to be repeated for the procreation act to come to fruition.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Edited April 16, 2015 by paapiman

[jaikaara]

:wub: :wub: :D :P... hahahhaahahahaha !

Thanks bro for reminding me about this issue.

"According to the Ayurvedic understanding of the creation of body tissues (dhatus) it takes anywhere from 60-100 drops of blood to make one drop of semen." [1]

[1] - http://www.semenloss.info/content/ayurvedic-intro/

We can use that precious blood to donate someone in need and also, for the benefit of our own health. As Satkirin jee said that there is less than 8% chance for a wife getting pregnant during one sexual act; married Gursikh males will definitely need to preserve it, as sex will have to be repeated for the procreation act to come to fruition.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[mahanpaapi]

"....Braham Binde So Satgur Kaheeye..."

[paapiman]

In the katha snippet below, Gyani Inderjit Singh jee Raqbewale talks about the miraculous birth (by non-sexual act) of Dattatreya jee (Guru of Sanyasis). This should give people an idea of the capabilities of Sri Satguru jee.

Please start listening after 11:40 min:

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/02_Present_Day_Katha/Sant_Giani_Inderjeet_Singh_(Raqbe_wale)/Sri_Gurpartap_Sooraj_Parkash_Katha/07_Sri_Guru_Har_Rai_Ji/Giani.Inderjeet.Singh.(Raqbe.wale)--Sooraj.Parkash.Katha.-.Ras.09.Adhyai.07.-.Rajay.Hathi.Mangan.Ayi.-.1996-03-10.mp3

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[JasperS]

On 2/20/2017 at 4:06 AM, paapiman said:

In the katha snippet below, Gyani Inderjit Singh jee Raqbewale talks about the miraculous birth (by non-sexual act) of Dattatreya jee (Guru of Sanyasis). This should give people an idea of the capabilities of Sri Satguru jee.

Please start listening after 11:40 min:

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/02_Present_Day_Katha/Sant_Giani_Inderjeet_Singh_(Raqbe_wale)/Sri_Gurpartap_Sooraj_Parkash_Katha/07_Sri_Guru_Har_Rai_Ji/Giani.Inderjeet.Singh.(Raqbe.wale)--Sooraj.Parkash.Katha.-.Ras.09.Adhyai.07.-.Rajay.Hathi.Mangan.Ayi.-.1996-03-10.mp3

 

Bhul chuk maaf

If they had such power to remove sexual intimacy from the equation, did they also remove the rather traumatic and painful aspect of birth from the woman as well? Maybe they beamed the baby outside the body so she didn't have to endure labour or pushing. Since a baby has to be born through a sexual organ normally and since some seem to think that the Gurus would never be associated with anything sexually, then do you think the baby was kind of beamed outside the woman's body so she also wouldn't have to sully herself with using her sexual organs to push the baby out? Or did the Mother not matter?

For the record since the Gurus taught that marital relations were not only ok but a natural part of marriage, I do not see how they would then consider it to be a nasty thing when it came to themselves. There is no shame or impurity associated with sexual reproduction. Kaam is not sex. Someone can be affected by kaam for gambling for example. And marital sex in right conditions, done between a committed spouse can also exist without kaam. To suggest that the Gurus would not have any relations with their own wives, suggests that there is something inherently impure or nasty about it. But the Gurus never contradicted themselves did they? So then why would they not advocate asceticism? And we know they did not. Guru Nanak spoke against asceticism as a means to find God. And if they thought sexuality was so nasty for themselves, wouldn't they also relieve their wives of the correspondingly nastiness and impurity of the birth, not to mention the physical trauma and pain?

This sounds off to me. Not to mention against what is written in gurbani about marriage and birth which are both seen as sacred. 

 

 

[akalpurkh]

You will not like me after reading this.

If God grant me one wish, I would ask God to not let any humans (Sikhs, non-Sikhs, anyone) to join this forum.

Seriously, because only thing I see and read in this forum is nothing but Brahmanwaad Ver 2.0.

Everyone, except few people like @CdnSikhGirl, are doing nothing but just ripping apart Sikhi.

The Sachi-Suchi Practical, Heuristic, Realistic and Simplistic philosophy of Guru Nanak Ji is nowhere seen here. All Guru ji lived a normal human life doing all functions which a normal human do, but the only thing that differentiates them was their VIRTUES. They had the Gyaan. They had all the VIRTUES such as Charity,compassion, courage, courteousness, diligence, discipline, empathy, endurance, fairness, faith, fidelity, forgiveness, fortitude, generosity, honesty, honor, hopefulness, hospitality, humility, impartiality, innocence, integrity, joy, kindness, mercy, modesty, morality, patience, peacefulness, perseverance, prudence, purity, purposefulness, respectfulness, self-discipline, sincerity, sympathy, temperance, thankfulness, trustworthiness, truth, wisdom etc. which a human of high moral standard should possess.

They lead a normal life but it was a life of SIGNIFICANCE, and they lived a practical life to teach and make us understand. They showed us ways by setting example for us in every aspects of life.

Guru Nanak Ji didn't perform any magic shows to attract people during their udasis (trips). It was the GYAAN, the Reformed and Revolutionized KNOWLEDGE, which people got attracted to. What I see in this forum is only the  ALIF-LAILA version of Sikhi. Behind every action there is some supernatural and mystical things associated to it.

As long as sex is concerned, what Guru ji taught was simple.
Having sex with neighbor's wife makes us a bad Human (or for that matter not even a Human), and on the other side having sex with our own wife and being loyal and faithful makes us a good Human. Simple as that, period.
What I see in this forum is whole mystical thing revolving around whether Guru Ji had sexual intercourse or not. Was our Guru ji aliens? Why would they not have sex with their wives? What's wrong in that? This is how all humans are born. Nobody is ever born in this world without it.

Having children without sex doesn't makes our Guruji great, it's the Loyalty, Trust and Faithfulness that makes them Great.

I was happy initially when I joined this forum but now I would never want anyone to see what's going inside this.

I know, now people will start bashing me.

[akalpurkh]

On 4/10/2015 at 10:25 PM, Ragmaala said:

@truthseeker, satkirin

 

When Mata Sulakhni Ji ( wife of Guru Nanak) asked Guru Nanak for the blessing of sons, she was blessed with two cloves as a blessing. The prashad/blessing in the form of cloves lead to birth of Sri Chand Ji and Lakhmi Chand Ji. You may find this in the katha of Suraj Prakash Granth by Kavi Santokh Singh Ji.

 

There are many concepts in Sikhi which are very subtle and not apparent at first. This understanding only comes after the company of Saints, Mahapurakhs and spiritually elevated beings through their physical presence, books, biographies, discourses or a personal experience.

 

Nirankar/God took the sargun form of Guru Nanak and 9 Gurus. The idea was to lead by example. They led a householders life to teach us. But that does not mean that Guru operates the same way as we do. We simply cannot fathom the workings of our Guru whether he hunted, had more than one wife, sacrificed himself for Truth, sat in a basement for 28 years etc etc.

 

Gurbani teaches us to follow the teachings of the Guru , but not to emulate Guru. We simply cannot copy our Guru. Guru operates in mysterious ways beyond our understanding. Gur Kaheya so kaar kamavo Gur ki karni kahe dhavo.

 

When Guru Nanak disappeared there was no physical body left, Same thing happened when Guru Arjan Dev Ji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji disappeared, no physical bodies were found. Same things happened when sons of Guru Gobind Singh were martyred, their bodies simply disappeared for a while. So what can we say about the physical body of a Guru ?

 

If we cannot understand the physicality of Guru, how can we compare Guru to a normal human being and say that he had a body, enjoyed bodily pleasure and engaged to have kids. This sentiment is shared by all the highly elevated spiritual beings like Baba Nand Singh Ji etc etc and many other Gursikhs. You might not find it written in many books.

 

Gurbani also says that liberated ones do not come into the cycle of birth and death.

The birth of a elevated spiritual being is different than the rest of humans. This applies to great saints.

The body of child is created in womb for 9 months, everything is happening like a normal human baby. When the baby is delivered, the atma/soul/jeev/spiritual being enters the body at that time. That already liberated being does not have to spend 9 months in the womb.

 

And Guru is not even born, nor does he go anywhere. He has been present since the beginning, in the present and for the future. Satguru mera sada sada na aave na jaave. Guru is ever present , he neither comes nor goes.

 

These sentiments are not my own personal or indvidual opinions or feelings. But this is a common sentiment shared by many saint traditions like Nanaksar Samparda, Damadami Taksal, Rara Sahib etc etc.

I do not have links for you where you can read up on such things, but maybe other posters may have sources that provide a written evidence.

 

 

 

 

You seem to be reading Alif Laila stories a lot lately...

[tva prasad]

17 hours ago, akalpurkh said:

You seem to be reading Alif Laila stories a lot lately...

Brother, what's wrong with "supernatural" and "mystical" things?

P. S. Alif Laila is great, you should read it too.  

[angy15]

On 3/13/2017 at 10:56 PM, akalpurkh said:

You will not like me after reading this.

If God grant me one wish, I would ask God to not let any humans (Sikhs, non-Sikhs, anyone) to join this forum.

Seriously, because only thing I see and read in this forum is nothing but Brahmanwaad Ver 2.0.

Everyone, except few people like @CdnSikhGirl, are doing nothing but just ripping apart Sikhi.

The Sachi-Suchi Practical, Heuristic, Realistic and Simplistic philosophy of Guru Nanak Ji is nowhere seen here. All Guru ji lived a normal human life doing all functions which a normal human do, but the only thing that differentiates them was their VIRTUES. They had the Gyaan. They had all the VIRTUES such as Charity,compassion, courage, courteousness, diligence, discipline, empathy, endurance, fairness, faith, fidelity, forgiveness, fortitude, generosity, honesty, honor, hopefulness, hospitality, humility, impartiality, innocence, integrity, joy, kindness, mercy, modesty, morality, patience, peacefulness, perseverance, prudence, purity, purposefulness, respectfulness, self-discipline, sincerity, sympathy, temperance, thankfulness, trustworthiness, truth, wisdom etc. which a human of high moral standard should possess.

They lead a normal life but it was a life of SIGNIFICANCE, and they lived a practical life to teach and make us understand. They showed us ways by setting example for us in every aspects of life.

Guru Nanak Ji didn't perform any magic shows to attract people during their udasis (trips). It was the GYAAN, the Reformed and Revolutionized KNOWLEDGE, which people got attracted to. What I see in this forum is only the  ALIF-LAILA version of Sikhi. Behind every action there is some supernatural and mystical things associated to it.

As long as sex is concerned, what Guru ji taught was simple.
Having sex with neighbor's wife makes us a bad Human (or for that matter not even a Human), and on the other side having sex with our own wife and being loyal and faithful makes us a good Human. Simple as that, period.
What I see in this forum is whole mystical thing revolving around whether Guru Ji had sexual intercourse or not. Was our Guru ji aliens? Why would they not have sex with their wives? What's wrong in that? This is how all humans are born. Nobody is ever born in this world without it.

Having children without sex doesn't makes our Guruji great, it's the Loyalty, Trust and Faithfulness that makes them Great.

I was happy initially when I joined this forum but now I would never want anyone to see what's going inside this.

I know, now people will start bashing me.

I agree with you.They have reduced sikhi to Alif Laila kind stories.Sprouting  stories out of nowhere  fooling sangat. This forum is hijacked by brahmanvaad ideology.

[DeNiro]

On ‎9‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 4:53 AM, tva prasad said:

Brother, what's wrong with "supernatural" and "mystical" things?

P. S. Alif Laila is great, you should read it too.  

ha ha

The Truth itself is 'supernatural' and 'mystical'

Truth is not maya.

Behind the veil of maya is the truth. 

 

On ‎10‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 9:44 PM, angy15 said:

I agree with you.They have reduced sikhi to Alif Laila kind stories.Sprouting  stories out of nowhere  fooling sangat. This forum is hijacked by brahmanvaad ideology

Do only brahman know what's behind veil of maya?  Maybe only brahman knows the supernatural and mystical.

I don't know anything about brahmans, so not speaking against them. Don't know much about  taksal, nanaksar, akj,  so i'd be a fool to speak against them. I learned a little more about naamdharees on another thread, so I can assume they don't know who my guru is. They're not in my boat and my foot's not in theirs. 

Tell me more on Alif Laila, because I don't know anything about it.  If you do, i'll tell you more about Adam and Eve an also my favorite "gingerbread" man story.

 

[chatanga1]

On 9/18/2018 at 12:53 PM, tva prasad said:

Brother, what's wrong with "supernatural" and "mystical" things?

Nothing. It is the bedrock of beleiving in some entity you can't see.

[tva prasad]

Things that are beyond the perception or understanding of our untrained mind, by us are termed "mystical" and "supernatural". Since people as such are unable to comprehend them they think they were made up by someone or are false. The trained and stilled mind knows that these things are the truth of the universe coming forth.