Is Sikhism a religion

[angy15]

2 hours ago, amardeep said:

If one wants to know what the meaning of these Words are, you will have to look up the meanings in vedantic writings and literature.

Yes but it is not necessary with that same meaning you try to translate and understand Gurbani . My explanation of the word Jup explains  this argument

[amardeep]

38 minutes ago, angy15 said:

If we read and understand we will get to know their is rule working you may call it principle.

Just like Prof Sahib Singh found out their is a Grammar working throughout .

To understand Rule/Principle  lets see two different meaning of word Jup  in Gurbani

Accepted form

Jup : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  mind.

Rejected form

ਜਪੁ ਤਪੁ ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਸੰਜਮ ਥਾਕੀ ਹਠਿ ਨਿਗ੍ਰਹਿ ਨਹੀ ਪਾਈਐ ॥
Jap ṯap kar kar sanjam thākī haṯẖ nigrahi nahī pā▫ī▫ai.
Practicing intensive meditation, chanting and self-discipline, people have grown weary; stubbornly practicing these rituals, they still have not found Him.

Understanding/Meaning  of the word Jup is coming  from SGGS itself and  the Rule(Accepted/Rejected)  for the word Jup will be consistent throughout SGGS.

 

 

 

Thanks for the example. There is a difference between the meaning of a Word, and the meaning of a sentence. The meaning of a Word can be looked at through a dictionary, but to understand the meaning of the Whole sentence you will have to look at the context in which the Words appear in (including grammar etc). The understanding and use of vedantic terminology is a must when trying to understand Gurbani - and then surely the Guru in his creativity will play with some Words in some shabads and adapt/broaden the meaning. But the root meaning of the Words will always remain the same. That's why I say, there is no such case where red suddenly means blue. .. And the nirmales, udasis and sewapanthis have been doing this for centuries and remained consistent through out even though they have also had their fair share of debates on interpretation.  But it is wrong to say that their interpretation is wrong and unlike Gurbani.

[amardeep]

It's also vital to note that Professor Sahib Singh's approach is an innovation in terms of Sikh tradition. No other scholar before him had done an entire commentary based on grammar alone. While this is praiseworthy, commendable and adds light to the glory of Gurbani, it is not a "principle" of Gurmat. If it was, you would have seen many more scholars prior to him interpreting Gurbani such.  Grammar was important for the early scholars - you can find Kavi Santokh Singh in the garabganjani teeka using grammar in some verses, and Baba Ganga Ram was teaching grammar in the bungas of Amritsar during the Sikh raj - but the grammar was just a small component of many other methods of interpretation. 

 

Professor Sahib Singh's massive Work is indeed Unique, but you can't say his approach is part of a principle of Gurbani. It is rather an innovation - but a good one as it adds to the plurality and intellectual exercises of the Sikh scholars of history.

Edited November 15, 2018 by amardeep

[angy15]

26 minutes ago, amardeep said:

The understanding and use of vedantic terminology is a must when trying to understand Gurbani - and then surely the Guru in his creativity will play with some Words in some shabads and adapt/broaden the meaning.

whats your opinion on the two  meaning of Jup  in the above verses .

 

[angy15]

10 minutes ago, amardeep said:

While this is praiseworthy, commendable and adds light to the glory of Gurbani, it is not a "principle" of Gurmat.

I mentioned their is rule of Grammar  working throughtout  SGGS.

[amardeep]

1 minute ago, angy15 said:

whats your opinion on the understanding of Jup  in the above verse .

 

One of the basic messages of Sikhi is that even a good act can become a dead ritual if the right intention/Heart is not in it. In the Sri Japji Sahib we read the following:

ਤੀਰਥੁ  ਤਪੁ  ਦਇਆ  ਦਤੁ  ਦਾਨੁ  ॥ ਜੇ  ਕੋ  ਪਾਵੈ  ਤਿਲ  ਕਾ  ਮਾਨੁ  ॥

Now this is quite strange, as ਦਇਆ  (compassion) is normally considered a good thing. How can ਦਇਆ  then be described as useless? This is because of the Gurmat philosophy that says even good Things can be regarded as bad. In Guru Granth Sahib, Dasam bani and the rahitname you have many examples of kesh, simran etc being described as without merit in some cases. This is the strenght of Sikhi - that it even has a critical look at itself as a religion - if it is not practiced correctly. Then even the sadhanas of Sikhi can become useless.

So jup in the above has two different meanings as you correctly state. In one tuk jup is used positively because it is practiced in the proper way, whereas in the other it is used 'negatively' because it is used in a context of empty rituals. 

The context and wider philosophy is key.

[amardeep]

5 minutes ago, angy15 said:

I mentioned their is rule of Grammar  working throughtout  SGGS.

There might be, but equating grammar with interpretation is a recent thing. It has no tradition behind it.

[MrDoaba]

When writing commentaries and making Gurbani interpretation there is a system, part of which is as follows:

• Vyakaran - grammar analysis.
• Nirukta - etymology analysis.
• Uthanka - historical context.

And two types of Arth:

• Bhav Arth - outer layer, surface meaning, literal meaning.
• Antreev Arth - inner layer, deep explanations, metaphors, analogies etc.

 

All this must be taken into consideration.

[angy15]

5 minutes ago, amardeep said:

So jup in the above has two different meanings as you correctly state. In one tuk jup is used positively because it is practiced in the proper way, whereas in the other it is used 'negatively' because it is used in a context of empty rituals.

My point of argument is

  The meaning of the word Jup in first verse is not the same  as in the second verse.

Jup in first verse   : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

Jup in the second verse: chanting (as per vedantic philosophy)

 

Your view on this please.

[amardeep]

13 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

When writing commentaries and making Gurbani interpretation there is a system, part of which is as follows:

• Vyakaran - grammar analysis.
• Nirukta - etymology analysis.
• Uthanka - historical context.

And two types of Arth:

• Bhav Arth - outer layer, surface meaning, literal meaning.
• Antreev Arth - inner layer, deep explanations, metaphors, analogies etc.

 

All this must be taken into consideration.

Fantastic for bringing this up. Thanks. 

[amardeep]

9 minutes ago, angy15 said:

My point of argument is

  The meaning of the word Jup in first verse is not the same  as in the second verse.

Jup in first verse   : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

Jup in the second verse: chanting (as per vedantic philosophy)

 

Your view on this please.

Who says jup only has one meaning in the vedantic tradition? Considering the sophistication of Vedanta, why would this word only have one meaning in a millennia old philosophical system ? Have you looked it’s meanings up? 

I don’t see a problem in the two examples you’ve given, they make sense and can reasonably be argued for. I haven’t argued anywhere that the gurus didn use old words with new meanings.  

What I’m saying is that they did not cancel the old meanings per se (as some akj’ers have argued in the past where they say ALL references to Vedant and mythology means something completely different ie red suddenly means blue. 

[amardeep]

“According to Sage Patanjali (400 CE), Japa is not the repitation of word or phase but rather contemplation on the meaning of the mantra,^[11] this definition sometimes persists across different sources.^[12][13]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japa

[chatanga1]

8 hours ago, angy15 said:

 ONE Fundamental Rule of SGGS is that meaning of words should be found from SGGS and they should be consistent throughout and words with different meaning should be understood contextually .

 

Ok, that's a start of sorts. Let's see how the argument proceeds...

 

8 hours ago, angy15 said:

 Redefining doesn't means Red becomes blue or tree means sun. Redefining means understanding words in context of the shabad the (Bhav) and not just literal meanings

 

Oh twadi. Fell flat on your face. Why can't redefining mean the sun has become a dog, or a carrot is now a lion???

YOU were the one, angy, who redefined Gurbani to omit Guru Sahibs name.

 

6 hours ago, angy15 said:

Accepted form

 

Jup : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  mind.

In YOUR own translation or redefinition or whatever you call it where are the following words:

 

ਹਰਿ

ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ

ਰਿਦੈ

ਧਿਆਈ

 

and the english words you have used to redefine Gurbani, where are they in the actual Gurmukhi:

 

philosophy

Guru  

 mind.

 

I can't find these words in the Gurmukhi above.

 

 

6 hours ago, angy15 said:

Yes but it is not necessary with that same meaning you try to translate and understand Gurbani . My explanation of the word Jup explains  this argument

 

You have not explained it yet. You have just posted your redefinition (ie distortion) of Gurbani.

 

6 hours ago, amardeep said:

Thanks for the example.

 

Thanks? Have a look at what he has written.

 

5 hours ago, angy15 said:

whats your opinion on the two  meaning of Jup  in the above verses .

 

My opinion is that, again, you have distorted Gurbani. You have entered words that don't exist in the gurmukhi text, and omitted words that do feature in the Gurbani.

 

 

5 hours ago, angy15 said:

My point of argument is

  The meaning of the word Jup in first verse is not the same  as in the second verse.

Jup in first verse   : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

Jup in the second verse: chanting (as per vedantic philosophy)

 

Your view on this please.

 

My view is that you need to forget redefining (distorting) gurbani.

[angy15]

14 hours ago, amardeep said:

What I’m saying is that they did not cancel the old meanings per se (

 

11 hours ago, amardeep said:

“According to Sage Patanjali (400 CE), Japa is not the repitation of word or phase but rather contemplation on the meaning of the mantra,^[11] this definition sometimes persists across different sources.^[12][13]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japa

Just as Patanjali defined what Japa  is Guru Nanak clearly defines what Jup  is  :

ਜਪੁ : Name of the banee  because it outlines the process of ਜਪਿ

What is  the process: Listening ,Believing Accepting and Living

Outside of SGGS, Jup means chanting,repetition of a word or a phrase.

Above principle is to be kept in mind  when understanding Jup in SGGS

This is what is meant by redefining

 

14 hours ago, amardeep said:

t cancel the old meanings per se

You have to discard  the old meaning with redefined meaning   wherever it is meant to be  (as i cited in the  First verse) to understand the shabad  otherwise it  becomes mistranslated

 

[angy15]

8 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

 

Ok, that's a start of sorts. Let's see how the argument proceeds...

 

 

Oh twadi. Fell flat on your face. Why can't redefining mean the sun has become a dog, or a carrot is now a lion???

YOU were the one, angy, who redefined Gurbani to omit Guru Sahibs name.

 

In YOUR own translation or redefinition or whatever you call it where are the following words:

 

ਹਰਿ

ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ

ਰਿਦੈ

ਧਿਆਈ

 

and the english words you have used to redefine Gurbani, where are they in the actual Gurmukhi:

 

philosophy

Guru  

 mind.

 

I can't find these words in the Gurmukhi above.

 

 

 

You have not explained it yet. You have just posted your redefinition (ie distortion) of Gurbani.

 

 

Thanks? Have a look at what he has written.

 

My opinion is that, again, you have distorted Gurbani. You have entered words that don't exist in the gurmukhi text, and omitted words that do feature in the Gurbani.

 

 

 

My view is that you need to forget redefining (distorting) gurbani.

Putting out garbage of your mind .You have again proved yourself what Gurbani  means  to you in your own words.

On 11/11/2018 at 4:44 PM, chatanga1 said:

lot of nonsense but it is not against the principles of Gurmat.

 

[angy15]

.

 

On 10/13/2018 at 6:26 AM, tva prasad said:

I think it is a western influence. Missionaries that are influenced by western science, "logic", etc. always promote single scripture, one rehit maryada, and stuff. They don't understand the importance of sampardas, etc. 

@Tva Prasad  Logic is very much a important part of Sikhi Guru Nanak had incorporated logic, reason t within his spirituality .Infact Logic is a antithesis to the notion of blind faith.

When we look at the sakhi of Guru Nanak he refused to wear the Janeiyu he used logic and reason to  prove his point.

He told to the Pandit the kind of Janeiyu he likes to wear 

ਦਇਆ ਕਪਾਹ ਸੰਤੋਖੁ ਸੂਤੁ ਜਤੁ ਗੰਢੀ ਸਤੁ ਵਟੁ ॥ ਆਸਾ ਕੀ ਵਾਰ:

Make compassion the cotton, contentment the thread, modesty the knot and truth the twist.

So Guruji says: “I prefer the janeiyu made of from the cotton of compassion, from the threads of contentment and one that is knotted in morality with truth.”

ਏਹੁ ਜਨੇਊ ਜੀਅ ਕਾ ਹਈ ਤ ਪਾਡੇ ਘਤੁ ॥

This is the sacred thread of the soul; if you have it, then go ahead and put it on me.

So, if you can, Paanday, then weave this sort of Janeiyu for the soul and for the mind.

Such a Janeiyu is for all humanity. It will raise the spirituality of all humans regardless of gender, creed, cast; to becoming one with humanity and becoming one with God.

Such powerful logic,  and so convincing an argument!

Secondly I don't understand what you mean that "Missionaries are influenced by Western Science".

We are living in the 21st century  We are living in a scientific world ,people have become more logical and science oriented .Spirituality will not mean anything to them unless it is offered as  science.

Personally i dont see any conflict between Science and Gurbani.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

@Tva Prasad :Firstly thank you for giving a great methodology  of making Gurbani Interpetation.

Secondly can you explain which part of the Gurbani interpretation principle mentioned below  does Missionaries don't follow . Infact Missinoaries are expert  when using Grammar Analysis and Antreev Arth .

 

16 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

When writing commentaries and making Gurbani interpretation there is a system, part of which is as follows:

• Vyakaran - grammar analysis.
• Nirukta - etymology analysis.
• Uthanka - historical context.

And two types of Arth:

• Bhav Arth - outer layer, surface meaning, literal meaning.
• Antreev Arth - inner layer, deep explanations, metaphors, analogies etc.

 

All this must be taken into consideration.

[chatanga1]

2 hours ago, angy15 said:

Putting out garbage of your mind .

 

Garbage out my mind or not, you haven’t got an answer for it. You can’t have an answer for it. But I have an answer for it. You are simply following your cult leader ghaghri in distorting Gurbani. Adding words here, removing words there, thinking about the time ghaghri kissed you to make you a follower...

[chatanga1]

1 hour ago, angy15 said:

We are living in the 21st century  We are living in a scientific world ,people have become more logical and science oriented .Spirituality will not mean anything to them unless it is offered as  science.

 

Ok prove to us that God exists using science. I asked you before but you never answered. 

[angy15]

16 hours ago, amardeep said:

Who says jup only has one meaning in the vedantic tradition? Considering the sophistication of Vedanta, why would this word only have one meaning in a millennia old philosophical system ? Have you looked it’s meanings up? 

I don’t see a problem in the two examples you’ve given, they make sense and can reasonably be argued for. I haven’t argued anywhere that the gurus didn use old words with new meanings.   

What I’m saying is that they did not cancel the old meanings per se (as some akj’ers have argued in the past where they say ALL references to Vedant and mythology means something completely different ie red suddenly means blue. 

So this brings us to the starting point where you were  questioning me of critising Sampardyas ,Nirmalas of mistranslating Gurbani .

let me again  reproduce the two definitions of Jup

1.Jup : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna), A process of Listening ,Believing Accepting and Living

2. Jup : chanting, repetition of mantras in  a ritualistic  way to effect a certain result

Their is a book 'Sharda Puran Granth'  where the author from Page 10 to page 31  categorizes each pauri  of Jup Banee and to be chanted this number of times and for this particular days  to attain desired results just like customary practices of vedas verses .Its surely 2nd definition of Jup which is being used here discarding the first.

Its an absolute representation of Mantar-Tantar which Gurbani rejects

ਤੰਤੁ ਮੰਤੁ ਪਾਖੰਡੁ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ਰਾਮੁ ਰਿਦੈ ਮਨੁ ਮਾਨਿਆ ॥

I know nothing of Tantric spells, magical mantras and hypocritical rituals; enshrining the Lord within my heart, my mind is satisfied.

The above ritualization of Jup Banee  can also  be found out in Kavi Santokh Singh Suraj prakash Granth too.

The author has reduced Jup Banee to  a level  of an  instrument ,tool  fit for chanting purpose only.

Whereas  Jup Banee is not at all has to be understood in this way

Infact very first pauri of Jupji rejects all kinds of meditations.

 

 

ਪੜਿਐ ਨਾਹੀ ਭੇਦੁ ਬੁਝਿਐ ਪਾਵਣਾ ॥

Not by reading , but through Understanding, is the Mystery Realized

 

Ang Sang Waheguru

 

[chatanga1]

20 hours ago, amardeep said:

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

 O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  mind.

 

3 hours ago, angy15 said:

ਤੰਤੁ ਮੰਤੁ ਪਾਖੰਡੁ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ਰਾਮੁ ਰਿਦੈ ਮਨੁ ਮਾਨਿਆ ॥

I know nothing of Tantric spells, magical mantras and hypocritical rituals; enshrining the Lord within my heart, my mind is satisfied.

What does ਰਿਦੈ mean?

[angy15]

1 hour ago, chatanga1 said:

 

What does ਰਿਦੈ mean?

Sorry typo  in the translation    ਰਿਦੈ  heart

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  heart

[chatanga1]

1 hour ago, angy15 said:

Sorry typo  in the translation    ਰਿਦੈ  heart

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  heart

Great! But I can’t see the word “Guru” in the line you are translating. 

[angy15]

28 minutes ago, chatanga1 said:

Great! But I can’t see the word “Guru” in the line you are translating. 

You mean to say in the shabad.

[chatanga1]

20 minutes ago, angy15 said:

You mean to say in the shabad.

Of course. You are translating from Gurbani. I can’t see the word “Guru” in there.

[amardeep]

I think you need to spend some more time studying what Vedanta is. A lot of the things you ascribe to the Gurus can already be found in Vedanta, - that is why the Nirmale and others started to interpret Sikhi in this lense. This does not mean that Sikhs are Hindus – but it is a common framework to interpret reality.

For instance, many people think that Sikhi rejects the Vedas because Sikhi puts naam and Brahmgian at the front while it limits the importance of the Vedas. This stance, however, is a key component of Vedanta!!! The Mundaka Upanishad divides wisdom into two categories: The higher and the lower. The higher form of wisdom is Brahmgyan while the lower is knowledge of Vedas, phonetics, grammar, etymology, meter, astronomy and the knowledge of sacrifices and rituals.  This atittude towards Vedas is entirely in line with both Vedanta and Gurmat.

In this regard, your understanding of Jup can most likely easily be found within the terminology of Vedanta and is not unique to Gurmat. And terms like karma, samsara, jeev, brahman, maya, prakrit etc are all from the Vedantic corpus of philosophy.  Gurbani was revealed through shabads that came individually to different people at different times. If Guru Nanak in South India used the word Atma, it is expected that the Hindu would understand what this word meant without having to read 600 shabads of Guru Nanak (revealed in Northern India) to understand what is being said to him. Gurbani was revealed over centuries, - it does’nt make sense that only people who had studied all the shabads would be able to understand what they were being told when the Guru revealed shabads to them.

Your approach seems to be heavily depend on logic. But Sikhi defies logic. This does not mean that Sikhi is all Disney world and mythology. But a traditional premise is that Sikhi breaks the make up of the mind. You say that Jup comes from the process of Jupi.  You equate jup with jupi. This is very logical, that X is connected with Y and therefore through doing X you will attain Y. BUT the foundation of Gurmat through the Sri Japji Sahib is ਸੋਚੈ  ਸੋਚਿ  ਨ  ਹੋਵਈ  ਜੇ  ਸੋਚੀ  ਲਖ  ਵਾਰ  and ਚੁਪੈ  ਚੁਪ  ਨ  ਹੋਵਈ  ਜੇ  ਲਾਇ  ਰਹਾ  ਲਿਵ  ਤਾਰ .  So here clearly the Guru is breaking common logic by going the other way and saying Soch does NOT happen through Sochai. And chup does not happen through chupai! This is a clear break with the way we understand logic and how Things are connected.  

Your idea that SIkhi fits with grammar, science and logic is fair to have but it does not have any tradition behind it. Whereas the Sampradays stretch back hundreds of years and that in itself Means their ideas have to be taken seriosly.

You say that jupi happens through Listening ,Believing Accepting and Living. This is called shravan, manan, and nididhyasana in Vedanta and is a key component in understanding reality and transcending the self. Again, your use of grammar takes you back to a Vedantic mindset which the sampradays could easily have done through their traditions, uthankas etc.

Again – there is NO way Gurbani discards the old meaning of these words. Gurbani is didactic – it is supposed to change your ways and by this , it implies that the orders given are understood by the people. If Gurbani says to do X it must be inferred that people understand what X means. And not that they have to study six hundred pages of philosophy and grammar to understand what is really meant. In your example, it means that the Panth was dillued for 300 years until Professor Sri Sahib Singh wrote his teeka. That does NOT make any sense and defies all logic of what a coherent, strong and independant religion is about.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2018 by amardeep