Creation according to Gurmat

[BhagatSingh]

@paapiman

To be ether-like, to be space, is to be empty, is to be Nirankar.

Look Gunahgar got it -

1 hour ago, Gunahgar said:

What you said above also reminds me about a Shabad by Bhagat Kabir ji where he gives examples of being a stone on road, and then being a dust, not satisfied with that being water , and not satisfied with all three, being like Hari himself only. Maybe that is also similar to transformations in ones journey.

This is it.

(It is a teaching for different levels of students as well.)

ਕਬੀਰ ਰੋੜਾ ਹੋਇ ਰਹੁ ਬਾਟ ਕਾ ਤਜਿ ਮਨ ਕਾ ਅਭਿਮਾਨੁ ॥
Kabir says be a pebble and renounce your ahankar, your sense of self that is distinct from everyone else
ਐਸਾ ਕੋਈ ਦਾਸੁ ਹੋਇ ਤਾਹਿ ਮਿਲੈ ਭਗਵਾਨੁ ॥੧੪੬॥
If one becomes a servant without ahankar, then one will find Bhagwan.

Pebble is gross.

ਕਬੀਰ ਰੋੜਾ ਹੂਆ ਤ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਪੰਥੀ ਕਉ ਦੁਖੁ ਦੇਇ ॥
Kabir says, so what if you have become a pebble, so what? A pebble hurts the feet of travellers.
ਐਸਾ ਤੇਰਾ ਦਾਸੁ ਹੈ ਜਿਉ ਧਰਨੀ ਮਹਿ ਖੇਹ ॥੧੪੭॥
Your servant is like dust on the earth. (Dust does not hurt the feet of travellers)

Dust is gross but more subtle than pebble.

ਕਬੀਰ ਖੇਹ ਹੂਈ ਤਉ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਜਉ ਉਡਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਅੰਗ ॥
Kabir says, so what if you have become dust, so what? Dust flies and dirties the body.
ਹਰਿ ਜਨੁ ਐਸਾ ਚਾਹੀਐ ਜਿਉ ਪਾਨੀ ਸਰਬੰਗ ॥੧੪੮॥
The servant of Hari should be like water, which cleans the body.

Water is more subtle than dust.

ਕਬੀਰ ਪਾਨੀ ਹੂਆ ਤ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਸੀਰਾ ਤਾਤਾ ਹੋਇ ॥
Kabir says, so what if you have become water, so what? It becomes hot and cold.
ਹਰਿ ਜਨੁ ਐਸਾ ਚਾਹੀਐ ਜੈਸਾ ਹਰਿ ਹੀ ਹੋਇ ॥੧੪੯॥
The servant of Hari, shouldbe like Hari.

That is the follower of Hari should be as subtle as Hari.

 

1 hour ago, Gunahgar said:

Where do you learn this stuff...this one is quite amazing I have to say. What are your secret sources lol

The secret is Ustad Nar Singh ji Narayan.

I am an ant when it comes to gyan.

[GurpreetKaur]

2 hours ago, Gunahgar said:

Where do you learn this stuff...this one is quite amazing I have to say. What are your secret sources lol

What you said above also reminds me about a Shabad by Bhagat Kabir ji where he gives examples of being a stone on road, and then being a dust, not satisfied with that being water , and not satisfied with all three, being like Hari himself only. Maybe that is also similar to transformations in ones journey.

 

I wove dish . :)

[Ragmaala]

good video above, great for kids

@das take note .

[dalsingh101]

Quote

You are coming at me with so much of your own baggage. How can I even communicate with someone, who has a put up a wall, a shield of presumptions, criticisms and other baggage? But of course I must.

No baggage. Just experience. Try and grasp that. If I'm talking about something that seems strange or wrong to you - don't totally discount the possibility that it could be down to your own lack of understanding due to no experience in those matters. Simple. You talk about my baggage, I sense persistent fear and avoidance of earth-like matters from you.

Same way I have to deal with areas where you have absolutely no experience and try and make you understand; you probably feel you are in a similar position regarding areas you regard yourself as knowledgeable and experienced in. If you saw it properly, you'd grasp that pretty simple truth quickly. 

I think ultimately mine and your situation is that your ether inclined and struggle with earth - which is where all theory gets tested - this dharamsaal as Japji Sahib puts it. And me, yep, I acutely aware of my limitations in the ether regions, and am growing increasingly conscious of this. 

Might be just that we need different teachers to help us develop those respective sides of ourselves. I do feel I have made some progress in this matter. But I've previously stated on this forum, that I'm not one for too much sharing of personal simran experiences - just so that in itself doesn't become another egocentric trip up. 

And I do get the idea of letting it all go - that's what I try and do (with varied success) when I meditate. If I don't go on about - understand why in light of the last bit of the previous para. 

 

Quote

When it comes to knowledge and the battle with ego, then you are fighting with shit that is extremely subtle. You must be the ant.

I would have thought, after all the conversations we've had, you would know that I understand this. 

I'd like to ask you: how do you personally think you have done in your battle with your ego? Because you seem to suffer from it's effects no less than the rest of us? 

 

 

 

Actually, don't even answer that. We'll talk about it one on one soon. 

[BhagatSingh]

23 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

No baggage. Just experience.

Experience is baggage.

Do you see that?

23 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

If I'm talking about something that seems strange or wrong to you

It neither seems strange nor wrong, rather it seems you are missing the point entirely.

I was about to give you one thing but instead, you took something else from me lol.

 

23 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

You talk about my baggage, I sense persistent fear and avoidance of earth-like matters from you.

23 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

I'd like to ask you: how do you personally think you have done in your battle with your ego? Because you seem to suffer from it's effects no less than the rest of us? 

You are making this too personal.

I was neither speaking about your personal baggage, nor anyone's particular brand of baggage, just that everyone has baggage that is to be unloaded.

If I said, let's meet up in New York, you'd be in California, asking me where the hell I was. lol ....That's roughly how much you missed the point, in gross terms.

3 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

To me the really interesting thing is how, due to colonialism, we see the emergence of teekas that are in all essence experimental in their explanations. Before western science came to Panjab via colonisation, no one would ever interpret bani in this way. They'd be much more likely to do it along Indic lines. 

On a deeper level what do we make of that? 

I saw this post coming from a mile away. 

This is what I mean when I say you missed the point, because that was the question I was answering to begin with. What is the Indic interpretation? What is the deeper interpretation? That is what I am talking about in my posts on this thread.

You ignored it and started focusing on other things.
Of course, I am sharing is my experience. Of course, I have to deal with shit, with ahankar. Of course, I have my own brand of baggage.

But that doesn't mean you can't get something from what I am sharing. It doens't mean there is no truth in what I am sharing.

So if you are interested in the Indic interpretation or the deeper level interpretation. Re-read what I have posted and let's begin this conversation anew.

[BhagatSingh]

"Mate, all your use and definitions of 'subtle' seem to have originated from your mind more than anywhere else."

But have they really?

ਤੂੰ ਸੂਖਮੁ ਹੋਆ ਅਸਥੂਲੀ ॥   तूं सूखमु होआ असथूली ॥   Ŧūʼn sūkẖam ho▫ā asthūlī.   From the very small and subtle, You have become huge and manifest.

(God) You are subtle (spiritual) and have become gross (material).

 

ਆਪਹਿ ਸੂਖਮ ਆਪਹਿ ਅਸਥੂਲਾ ॥   आपहि सूखम आपहि असथूला ॥   Āpėh sūkẖam āpėh asthūlā.   He Himself is subtle and etheric; He Himself is manifest and obvious.

(God) He is by himself subtle and he is by himself gross.

 

ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਥੂਲ ਸੂਖਮ ਸਭਿ ਜੰਤਾ ॥   सिमरहि थूल सूखम सभि जंता ॥   Simrahi thūl sūkẖam sabẖ janṯā.   All beings, both subtle and gross, meditate in remembrance.

All subtle and gross beings meditate on God.

Is it a stretch to say what I did?

This is ancient lore but it has a deeper meaning.
1. Guru Sahib is saying -

 ਸਾਚੇ ਤੇ ਪਵਨਾ ਭਇਆ ਪਵਨੈ ਤੇ ਜਲੁ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਜਲ ਤੇ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਣੁ ਸਾਜਿਆ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮੋਇ ॥
From the subtle came the gross.
From the most subtle (ਸਾਚੇ) Hari, spiritual, came (ਪਵਨਾ) the less subtle elements. From the less subtle elements came (ਜਲੁ) even less subtle elements. These elements then forms the "watery womb of Maya", material, from this material came bodies and places of living.

 

I have merely understood what is meant by sublte and gross - ਸੂਖਮ and ਅਸਥੂਲ.

And I tried to explain it in English.

 

PS

@dalsingh101Dude I am sharing spiritual concepts here.

You can't take everything I say as my interpretation and ignore it as such, otherwise you will entirely miss what I am actually sharing. You have to be attentive and alert, and be able extract what is relevant to you.

[dalsingh101]

1 hour ago, BhagatSingh said:

"Mate, all your use and definitions of 'subtle' seem to have originated from your mind more than anywhere else."

But have they really?

ਤੂੰ ਸੂਖਮੁ ਹੋਆ ਅਸਥੂਲੀ ॥   तूं सूखमु होआ असथूली ॥   Ŧūʼn sūkẖam ho▫ā asthūlī.   From the very small and subtle, You have become huge and manifest.

(God) You are subtle (spiritual) and have become gross (material).

 

ਆਪਹਿ ਸੂਖਮ ਆਪਹਿ ਅਸਥੂਲਾ ॥   आपहि सूखम आपहि असथूला ॥   Āpėh sūkẖam āpėh asthūlā.   He Himself is subtle and etheric; He Himself is manifest and obvious.

(God) He is by himself subtle and he is by himself gross.

 

ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਥੂਲ ਸੂਖਮ ਸਭਿ ਜੰਤਾ ॥   सिमरहि थूल सूखम सभि जंता ॥   Simrahi thūl sūkẖam sabẖ janṯā.   All beings, both subtle and gross, meditate in remembrance.

All subtle and gross beings meditate on God.

Is it a stretch to say what I did?

This is ancient lore but it has a deeper meaning.
1. Guru Sahib is saying -

 ਸਾਚੇ ਤੇ ਪਵਨਾ ਭਇਆ ਪਵਨੈ ਤੇ ਜਲੁ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਜਲ ਤੇ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਣੁ ਸਾਜਿਆ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮੋਇ ॥
From the subtle came the gross.
From the most subtle (ਸਾਚੇ) Hari, spiritual, came (ਪਵਨਾ) the less subtle elements. From the less subtle elements came (ਜਲੁ) even less subtle elements. These elements then forms the "watery womb of Maya", material, from this material came bodies and places of living.

 

I have merely understood what is meant by sublte and gross - ਸੂਖਮ and ਅਸਥੂਲ.

And I tried to explain it in English.

 

PS

@dalsingh101Dude I am sharing spiritual concepts here.

You can't take everything I say as my interpretation and ignore it as such, otherwise you will entirely miss what I am actually sharing. You have to be attentive and alert, and be able extract what is relevant to you.

That's better! 

Share your root concepts from the source, so they can be clearly identified. 

Gives your arguments a thousand times more authority. 

Don't you think by separating this 'gross' and 'subtle' there is a danger of bringing duality into the mix? 

 

Quote

This is what I mean when I say you missed the point, because that was the question I was answering to begin with. What is the Indic interpretation? What is the deeper interpretation? That is what I am talking about in my posts on this thread.

No dude you misunderstood, I KNOW you are the person most likely to be on this around here! lol I know this is what you would share. 

I was just trying to show other forum brothers and sisters a clear example of 'cultural shift' in the interpretation of the bani - and more importantly, what knowledge influenced the new interpretation. I've come across BVS subtly using Christian theological terms (and other western ethnology sources) before but it was the first time I've seen such a blatant use of modern physics in his work. It's a big thing for me. You know from my profile that I'm interested in how colonialism changed Sikhs perception of Sikhi as well as science. This is exciting stuff - couldn't just let it slip by without comment!

We have to highlight this, because otherwise people may think that the modern interpretation is a puratan one because Bhai Vir Singh ji's name is associated with it. 

Now when you come out with your reading, people can understand why they will be so different. 

I think over the next few months we try and compare pre-colonial and colonial period interpretations of the same verses - I think we will learn a lot from this:

 

The floor is all yours. Just refer back to root sources frequently! It strengthens your arguments as well as allays a lot of concerns. 

[BhagatSingh]

4 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Share your root concepts from the source, so they can be clearly identified. 

Just refer back to root sources frequently!

It's much more complicated than me just sharing it written source material/root source, straight up because I have already understood the concepts and integrated it into my experience of life. I find myself talking from my experience, however this knowledge has been previously integrated into my experience, and it is available to be analyzed when I share my experience.

Often times I know the stuff, but I forget where it comes from, and whether or not I have ever read it. I didn't have those SGGS verses on my mind when I was posting about subtle and gross. When you said that I made it all up, then I had to retrace my steps. That's when I thought "I am sure what I said exists in SGGS". So then I looked and lo and behold, there it was.

Sometimes I get concepts from Ustad Nar Singh ji Narayan before I find written examples of those concepts (in Guru Granth Sahib or other books).

Haha such is the play!

 

4 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

We have to highlight this, because otherwise people may think that the modern interpretation is a puratan one because Bhai Vir Singh ji's name is associated with it. 

This is important on so many levels.

And it goes back to the Bhagawati thread. Because a lot of what I said on that thread was an attempt to take people back to the puratan understanding of the scripture, instead of a modern one.

And the modern understanding doesn't even have to come from any particular Sikh scholar e.g. Bhai Vir Singh or through influence of British and Christian missionary attack on Indic heritage. Although those factors are there, it could simply be the product of a mixing of Indic cultures and religions to the point where you get a homogenized soup.

What has happened to our scriptures is a mixing and homogenizing, that is actually not (in part) the result of British Singh Sabha, rather it is  (in part) the result of the coming together and mixing of various Indic religions. And in this mixing you gain a new perspective on all those religions but you also lose the particular flavours of individual religions.

Like in a soup, you lose the flavour of the individual ingredients but the soup itself as a flavour of its own.

The product of that mixing up was taught by the British Singh Sabha types. That is taught by Prof Sahib Singh ji as well. And this is the modern mainstream view, not just held by modern Sikhs but also by other modern Indians.

And so this mixing has occurred so much so that our people have forgotten their original source and what their ancestors were about. They have forgotten the meanings of things like Bhagawati and Mahakal and Vishnu. And the meanings they give these terms is the meanings they derive from their modern understanding, post-mixing, post-soup era.

This was happening during the times of the Gurus as well. Hence why in Guru Granth Sahib they use the word Hari instead of Vishnu. Back then the word - Vishnu - had become corrupted (it had lots most of its meaning) amongst the masses, similar to how the word - God - has lost its effect nowadays.

In due time, there will be new popular words to describe the Supreme Reality, such as the words - Supreme Reality - itself. So this is just something we have to accept and go with, whilst we develop a better understanding of the modern and ancient.

4 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

The floor is all yours.

I think this subtle-gross concept is related to the nirgun sargun concept. A lot of times when people talk about nirgun sargun on this forum, what they actually mean to do is talk about suksham asthool.

Because Nirgun and Sargun are only referring to the three Gun, three qualities - sattv, rajas, and tamas. Whereas Suksham and Asthool are referring to the formlessness and form-ness, to the spiritual, etheric reality and the material, solid, reality.

Suksham "does not register on the radar" and the Asthool "registers on the radar". That which registers on the radar is what we tend to focus on and spend our energy on so that's why there must be a journey from the Asthool, Gross realm, gradually into the Suksham, Subtle realm. On that journey we slowly discover new things that were previously not on our radar.

You will have noticed this process while studying history.

 

4 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Don't you think by separating this 'gross' and 'subtle' there is a danger of bringing duality into the mix? 

ਤੁਧੁ ਆਪੇ ਆਪੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥ ਦੂਜਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਕਰਿ ਦਿਖਲਾਇਆ ॥

Duality is a law of the universe.  Day and night are reality! You cannot deny that there is such a thing as day and such a thing as night. Hot-cold, fast-slow, remembering-forgetting, etc. These are all dualities.

The most fundamental duality is the Subtle-Gross and Object-Subject and even more fundamental is the Self-God duality.

 

So

Duality is reality. But people become attached to duality and engrossed in it. They allow duality to leave impressions on themselves.

If we are clay, duality is a stamp, and we get imprinted on by the stamp of the world.

And these imprints are not necessarily bad. Things like -  respect your elders - is actually a good imprint. So are - eat healthy food, meditate, exercise, etc. There are much subtle imprints as well, which form the basis of our very identity. And these must be discovered on the way inwards, where we observe our selves in action.

But the idea is to transcend those imprints, all of them. No matter how closely we hold them.

Because they maybe useful in the gross reality (often are). However to understand that which is most subtle, Hari, these imprints must be transcended because they will interfere in understanding of Hari.

The Analogy used by Kabir ji explains exactly why that is -

ਹਰਿ ਭਇਓ ਖਾਂਡੁ ਰੇਤੁ ਮਹਿ ਬਿਖਰਿਓ ਹਸਤੀਂ ਚੁਨਿਓ ਨ ਜਾਈ ॥
Hari is like sugar mixed in with sand and spread out, an elephant cannot pick out the sugar.

ਕਹਿ ਕਮੀਰ ਕੁਲ ਜਾਤਿ ਪਾਂਤਿ ਤਜਿ ਚੀਟੀ ਹੋਇ ਚੁਨਿ ਖਾਈ ॥੨॥੩॥੧੨॥
Kabir ji says, leave behind your baggage* and be an ant and eat the sugar.
(baggage - your tribe, fanclub, profession, ancestory, status etc your identity, even your acquired knowledge and experience)

The nature of the subtle reality, of Hari, is such that it is mixed in your everyday experience. And when you are so focused on the world, on the gross elements, you lose sight of the subtle elements. You lose sight of Hari, who is most subtle, and who is mixed into your experience, and so he does not show up on your radar.

Hari is right under your nose, but the reason you might not see him is because you are looking for him incorrectly. So Kabir ji tries to explain how to look for him correctly.

 

[Jatro]

9 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Tried translating it, this is as far as I got. 

It's obvious BVS is using basic science he has learned from his western education and is experimenting with applying it to Gurbani. Specifically the second para is directly speaking about what is known as 'kinetic theory' which is core material for 15 year olds learning physics in the UK.

To me the really interesting thing is how, due to colonialism, we see the emergence of teekas that are in all essence experimental in their explanations. Before western science came to Panjab via colonisation, no one would ever interpret bani in this way. They'd be much more likely to do it along Indic lines. 

On a deeper level what do we make of that? 

This is partly the reason why i like the Faridkot teeka explanation better, it basically gives the traditional 5 element explanation and the 'pavan devta' explanation. I think that is probably more in line with what the Guru meant. This can also be seen in the "So dar', especially the 'gavan tudno...'. If we consider 'pavan, paani, baisantar' as devta-s then it becomes easy to interpret those verses. If we don't do that and instead rely on a more "scientific" explanation we end with more difficulties IMO.

[Jatro]

7 hours ago, amardeep said:

Its cool to have you here on the forum. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us and welcome to the forum :)

Thanks brother :)

[Lucky]

@BhagatSingh @dalsingh101

Good posts here and you both got good points but we have to remember to not get too associated in one aspect or the other.

The Kabir sloks quoted are very important and they are not only about gross/subtle, physical and non-physical , sargun/nirgu but they are about the stages of transformation and learning for a Sikh. I think that they are way too difficult to put into words and describe, which is why parables and metaphors are used.

These 4 sloks are mentioned by kathavachaks quite often but even most of them just stay on the literal meanings, whereas they go much beyond that and are centered in around the complete aspects of maya in it's totality.

@BhagatSingh- you've touched on the messages and into the directions of the non-literal meanings quite well. I will just give a little of my understanding but we have to remember that it is not complete, since these 4 couplets can never be penned in their totality as Duality will always be present  as long as maya does

KABIR SLOK 146 to 149

ਕਬੀਰ ਰੋੜਾ ਹੋਇ ਰਹੁ ਬਾਟ ਕਾ ਤਜਿ ਮਨ ਕਾ ਅਭਿਮਾਨੁ ॥

Kabīr roṛā ho▫e rahu bāt kā ṯaj man kā abẖimān.

Kabeer, let yourself be a pebble on the path; abandon your egotistical pride.       

   

   He says pay attention to pebble, be a pebble that has no identity, no Ego.

Become the rolling stone that gets kicked and rolled along and doesn't have an ego occupying gross space as compared to a larger rock/stone that stays set in it's position and occupies the space and identity of "that big rock on the road"  ie. takes up fixed and set ground space and refuses to move. 

 The 1st step is to become the pebble.......to drop the  ego.

 

ਐਸਾ ਕੋਈ ਦਾਸੁ ਹੋਇ ਤਾਹਿ ਮਿਲੈ ਭਗਵਾਨੁ ॥੧੪੬॥

Aisā ko▫ī ḏās ho▫e ṯāhi milai bẖagvān. ||146||

Such a humble slave shall meet the Lord God. ||146||           

 

 

ਕਬੀਰ ਰੋੜਾ ਹੂਆ ਤ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਪੰਥੀ ਕਉ ਦੁਖੁ ਦੇਇ ॥

Kabīr roṛā hū▫ā ṯa ki▫ā bẖa▫i▫ā panthī ka▫o ḏukẖ ḏe▫e.

Kabeer, what good would it be, to be a pebble? It would only hurt the traveler on the path.            

 

  Then he rejects the previous slok because the one who is WALKING on the path can get hurt.

This means others and even your ego-less self....because you(the pebble) still have the power/energy to HURT and cause pain. Both, to others and experience yourself ............he's saying that you may have NO EGO but you can still have energies and qualities to give and experience DUKH

 

 

ਐਸਾ ਤੇਰਾ ਦਾਸੁ ਹੈ ਜਿਉ ਧਰਨੀ ਮਹਿ ਖੇਹ ॥੧੪੭॥

Aisā ṯerā ḏās hai ji▫o ḏẖarnī mėh kẖeh. ||147||

Your slave, O Lord, is like the dust of the earth. ||147||         

 

  Gives solution to previous slok so as not to cause DUKH, what should he do? ... Become the dust i.e., when the pebble is completely eroded and grind,.. then it can become DUST and be DUKH-less.

Let the pebble be pebble be ground to less gross matter and not cause DUKH

 

ਕਬੀਰ ਖੇਹ ਹੂਈ ਤਉ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਜਉ ਉਡਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਅੰਗ ॥

Kabīr kẖeh hū▫ī ṯa▫o ki▫ā bẖa▫i▫ā ja▫o ud lāgai ang.

Kabeer, what then, if one could become dust? It is blown up by the wind, and sticks to the body.

 

  -Still has problem after getting to this level because it will stick to the bodies of others and make them dirty, make their clothes dirty.

One has to Wash because they accumalate layers of dirt and dust. 

The dust still has energy to make others dirty.

It is also influenced and dictated by the SUBTLE wind, whereas when you were pebble it was whoever kicked you along the path as a rolling stone.

 

The wind, the pavan represents the subtle emotions, the feelings the inner affects that good/bad sangat can influence you with.

Whatever type of emotion and mind influencing sangat surrounds you can dictate on what gross areas you end up sticking and what gross actions you commit.

This is quite a heavy affect on our inner being and state of mind. It is this influence that brainwashes the likes of fundamentalists, who let the emotions and feelings of senses (subtle), affect their gross behaviours and actions of suicide bombings and what they believe is shaheedi in the name of God.

 

 

               

ਹਰਿ ਜਨੁ ਐਸਾ ਚਾਹੀਐ ਜਿਉ ਪਾਨੀ ਸਰਬੰਗ ॥੧੪੮॥

Har jan aisā cẖāhī▫ai ji▫o pānī sarbang. ||148||

The humble servant of the Lord should be like water, which cleans everything. ||148||  

 

   Solution to overcoming the Kheh state that is not affected by emotions and senses is to  become like water because the water washes dirt and cleans.

Be the water, ...the water will always FLOW, become flowing he is saying, because the water finds it's settling direction by always flowing downwards and  will continue to flow until it reaches the estuary, ocean or pond/pool of water.

 

The water Flowing level will seem the perfect answer for most because at this level of overcoming affects of physical and mind emotions, one would believe they are in complete flowing hukam and letting the hukam dictate their path

 

Kabit ji summarizes that after stripping layers,  after shedding from outer gross layers and going inwards towards the subtle qualities, he still finds duality even when flowing in Hukam..

Even when in the state of water, where EGO has been DISSOLVED. and the direction of flow is not in water's own control, he is still affected with duality.  This duality is explained in the next slok.

 

 

ਕਬੀਰ ਪਾਨੀ ਹੂਆ ਤ ਕਿਆ ਭਇਆ ਸੀਰਾ ਤਾਤਾ ਹੋਇ ॥

Kabīr pānī hū▫ā ṯa ki▫ā bẖa▫i▫ā sīrā ṯāṯā ho▫e.

Kabeer, what then, if one could become water? It becomes cold, then hot.               

 

 Because it has duality of becoming hot and cold, angry and cool.,  Kabirji says that "I've become this inward state, EGO is Dissolved and letting the downward flow take me wherever it may lead. However, I can still be affected by the duality of tata- sira, hot-cold, boiling rage-cool calm..etc.

 

He has described being the pebble, the dust and then the water.  This is 3 states, 3 layers, 3 avasthas, 3 stages of transformation, 3 forms of maya.

 The 3 important and inescapable qualities of maya is just one of the directions that i've touched with. 

Pavan is the Guru of maya as in Pavan guru pani pita.

Pavan influences as wind at the dust level, which is easily sensed, but it can also influence at more discreet subtle level as radiating heat to water.. Just think of the 3 forms of heat transfer as Conduction, Convection and Radiation. ... This is what I mean that we can go on and on with discussing maya aspects that are relative to these sloks but we have to really attempt experiencing to actually ever know.

 

ਹਰਿ ਜਨੁ ਐਸਾ ਚਾਹੀਐ ਜੈਸਾ ਹਰਿ ਹੀ ਹੋਇ ॥੧੪੯॥

Har jan aisā cẖāhī▫ai jaisā har hī ho▫e. ||149||

The humble servant of the Lord should be just like the Lord. ||149||           

 

He finalises and concludes that the only way is to be like the Lord. 

 

We can strip layers, wash, transform,... but all of this is done in maya and even in the most subtle and dissolved ego state of letting the flow take you,....we are still affected by Maya..  Existing in the matrix will always mean being part of the matrix.

 

The only avastha, state or layer that you can be Ik-Mikh (one and the same) with the Lord, is when you are "jaisa Har"..just like Har.

 

The question will be that "how do we become like the Lord then"?

When you can momentarily become jivan mukht and totally liberated from Maya. When you are out of the boundaries beyond all spiritual illusions and in to deeper sunn samadhi.

In abyaas avastha, this can ONLY happen when the 9 doors close and the Dasam duar opens. When the Lord himself reveals the Truth to you, the darshan, the prakash, the becoming of Ik-mikh with Sach..... this is jaisa har and this is what you have to work on.......to get more and more antarghat, inwards,,,,more subtle until you are walking in hukam. Even then you have to completely let go and let your dissolved state take you into mool

[dalsingh101]

6 hours ago, Jatro said:

This is partly the reason why i like the Faridkot teeka explanation better, it basically gives the traditional 5 element explanation and the 'pavan devta' explanation. I think that is probably more in line with what the Guru meant. This can also be seen in the "So dar', especially the 'gavan tudno...'. If we consider 'pavan, paani, baisantar' as devta-s then it becomes easy to interpret those verses. If we don't do that and instead rely on a more "scientific" explanation we end with more difficulties IMO.

Any chance of sharing it? 

[amardeep]

43 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

Any chance of sharing it? 

You can find the Faridkot Teeka on www.srigranth.org .. Find your shabad and go to settings on top of the page and set it to fareedkot teeka.. There is also the Sahib Singh teeka to cross reference and compare.

[SAadmin]

Here is another take by gurbani on creation -

 

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
खंडा प्रिथमै साज कै जिन सभ सैसारु उपाइआ ॥
At first the Lord created the double-edged sword and then He created the whole world.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥
ब्रहमा बिसनु महेस साजि कुदरति दा खेलु रचाइ बणाइआ ॥
He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and then created the play of Nature. 

 

Both aspects(shabad/shakti) are correct in their right as realities of creations are perceived differently by different school of thoughts/aspects within gurbani, where gurbani says from shabad whole creation came -there gurbani is talking from shabad (ong sound vibration) aspect of akaal purkh and where gurbani says from khanda(double edge sword) - whole creation came, there gurbani is talking from aad shakti aspect of akaal purkh. Both aspects are of akaal purkh himself..Hence, both are correct..we must see these in different aspects context then only we should be able to reconcile shabads together.

[BhagatSingh]

The Flash goes from Gross to Subtle by increasing his speed. And when he runs so fast, he accesses the essence of who he is. He is essentially "speed", and he calls that essence  "the speed force" and he says "it is a beautiful place, a magical place", and that he doesn't want to come back.

By increasing the essence of who he is (speed), he gains access to that essence (speed force).

So similarly, we can go from Gross to Subtle by increasing our awareness, and when we increase it a lot, we can access the essence of who we are, the atma, and that is a beautiful, magical place, from which we may not want to come back from. And when we don't want to come back from it, then the Ava gawan, coming and going, stops.

By increasing the essence of who we are (atma), we gain access to that essence (parmatma).
 

 

[BhagatSingh]

On 2016-03-14 at 4:16 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Some people who overtly profess spirituality are essentially extreme physical cowards, because the trauma of the dealing with the 'gross' (as you term it, but what is essentially physical, earthly reality to me) is beyond their psychological and physical abilities to confront directly.

[paapiman]

22 hours ago, N30 S!NGH said:

Here is another take by gurbani on creation -

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
खंडा प्रिथमै साज कै जिन सभ सैसारु उपाइआ ॥
At first the Lord created the double-edged sword and then He created the whole world.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥
ब्रहमा बिसनु महेस साजि कुदरति दा खेलु रचाइ बणाइआ ॥
He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and then created the play of Nature. 

Paaji, do you know of any Gyani jee, who has done an in-dept katha of the the above verses? If so, please do post it.

Thanks

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[samurai]

2 hours ago, paapiman said:

On 3/15/2016 at 2:38 PM, N30 S!NGH said:

Here is another take by gurbani on creation -

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
खंडा प्रिथमै साज कै जिन सभ सैसारु उपाइआ ॥
At first the Lord created the double-edged sword and then He created the whole world.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥
ब्रहमा बिसनु महेस साजि कुदरति दा खेलु रचाइ बणाइआ ॥
He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and then created the play of Nature. 

Paaji, do you know of any Gyani jee, who has done an in-dept katha of the the above verses? If so, please do post it.

Thanks

 

Bhul chuk maaf

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audio.php?q=f&f=%2FKatha%2F02_Present_Day_Katha%2FGiani_Pooran_Singh_%28Delhi_wale%29%2FChandi_Di_Vaar_Katha

I recommend listening from start or you can jump to part 3...

[paapiman]

19 hours ago, samurai said:

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audio.php?q=f&f=%2FKatha%2F02_Present_Day_Katha%2FGiani_Pooran_Singh_%28Delhi_wale%29%2FChandi_Di_Vaar_Katha

I recommend listening from start or you can jump to part 3...

Thanks bro.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

Explanation (Three meanings) in Amir Bhandar teeka:

 

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

[tva prasad]

what does asthool mean (subtle or gross)?

[paapiman]

1 hour ago, tva prasad said:

what does asthool mean (subtle or gross)?

Gross

 

[tva prasad]

8 hours ago, paapiman said:

Gross

 

thx 4 answering my question : D

[WakeUp]

This conversation reminds me of something:

From the Emerald Tablet of Hermes

1) Tis true without lying, certain & most true.
2) That wch is below is like that wch is above & that wch is above is like yt wch is below to do ye miracles of one only thing.
3) And as all things have been & arose from one by ye mediation of one: so all things have their birth from this one thing by adaptation.
4) The Sun is its father, the moon its mother,
5) the wind hath carried it in its belly, the earth its nourse.
6) The father of all perfection in ye whole world is here.
7) Its force or power is entire if it be converted into earth.
7a) Seperate thou ye earth from ye fire, ye subtile from the gross sweetly wth great indoustry.
8) It ascends from ye earth to ye heaven & again it desends to ye earth and receives ye force of things superior & inferior.
9) By this means you shall have ye glory of ye whole world & thereby all obscurity shall fly from you.
10) Its force is above all force. for it vanquishes every subtile thing & penetrates every solid thing.
11a) So was ye world created.
12) From this are & do come admirable adaptaions whereof ye means (Or process) is here in this.
13) Hence I am called Hermes Trismegist, having the three parts of ye philosophy of ye whole world.
14) That wch I have said of ye operation of ye Sun is accomplished & ended.