In praise of Vishnu-Krishna Bhagvan (Sargun Vahiguru)

[Hari]

This is a Shabad by Satguru Arjun Devan Dev in praise of Vishnu-Krishna Bhagvan (Sargun Vahiguru):

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=3794

You will see names of Krishna Bhagvan like: Madhusudan (Killer of Madhu demon), Damodar, Rikhikesh, Govardhan Dhari (lifter of Gavardhan mountain), Murali-Manohar (Manohar the player of the flute), Mohan, Madhav, Murari (the flute player), Narsingh (man-lion Avatar), Narayan (the abode of man), Bavan (Avatar of Vishnu), Ram Chand, Chakrapani (wielder of the Sudarshan Chakra), Gopi-nath (Master of the Gopi's), Basudev, Niranjan and loads more.

You will love this Shabad, especially if you are a Vishnu-Krishna hater.

Dhan Dhan Shri Krishna Maharaj!

Dhan Dhan Satguru Arjun Maharaj!

[Hari]

The Shabd is in Rag Maru, by Satguru Arjun, 1082 Ang.

[Pheena]

Wow, that is one of a kind veer, a much needed slap upon the faces of those who confine themselves to their narrow perception.

[HeyDudesWassup]

Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Sahib Ji

Dhan Dhan Jesus Sahib Ji

Dhan Dhan Krishna Sahib Ji

[challenge_everything]

sabh gobind hai sabh gobind hai

[Guest SAdmin]

Great! Punjabi translation is available at http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/1082.html

[karmjeet]

But this produces a furna in my mind :

Then why did Guru Gobind Singh ji said " Maain na ganesah pritham manayoon kisan bisan kabhoon na dhyayo kaan sune pehchan na tin so liv laagi mori pag inso " (chopai sahib)

"akal purakh ki deh meh kotan bisan mahesh"

"tumhe shaad koi avar na dhyayoon jo bar chaho so tume te paayoon"

"kaal paaye brahma avtara kaal paaye sivju avtara kaal paaye kar bisan prakasa sakal kaal ka kiya tamsa "

all this clearly states that krishan , shivji etc . avtars are not themselves AKAl Purakh .

i think there is a different story with Guru Arjan Dev ji's shabad . which i dunno know .

don't think i m a hater of any god . they all are respectable . and we should respect every faith whether we agree or disagree

" hum nahi change bura nahi koi "

bhul chuk maaf

[DHANBABANANAK]

have u heard about the next avtar? coming very soon! theres gona be a big guy with a khanda in his hand. Gona go round world in no time...... all the sinners will be destroyed only the true sikhs would stay leading to sat jug. Raj Kherga Khalsa!

[Dynamic_Banda]

karmjeet Ji

I had that Furna (love that word) for ages so I will share my understanding,

Reading the shabad Har har Jan doe ek hai bib bichar kach nai, Jal te up tarang Jio Jal hi Bikeh Samai,

In a way kinda put it all into prespective, because I not only had a problem getting around the should we respect avtaars or not, I also had problems understanding is Guru God or not.

I so far by the grace of Satguru have come to a theory which I am currently content with, that the avtaars vishnus shivs etc, are all respected in a duniavee way according to duniavee gian, and may all be enlightened so for that reason they should be respected, however they are not God in God intirity if you get what I mean. They are waves on the ocean but not the whole ocean, They may raise to towering heights and contain emence power but it is only while the ocean allows it, when the ocean desires they disappear back into the ocean and the sea is calm.

The avataars are Sargun Vaheguru, and we respect that however we follow akaal purakh meaning both the sargun and nirgun, and beyond gun ..

[unbreakable]

..

[tSingh]

The 'truth' as you contrive it is clearly evident in the shabad for it celebrates BOTH sagun and nirgun qualities of the avatar. English translation here poor since it attempts to underplay the historical avatars being mentioned within.

Now lets look at this shabad clearly; this parmatama, parmeshwar is in the very next line described as 'the one who lifted Govardhan hill'. Krishna lifted this hill for shelter for a week. The site is located near Mathura and is a place of pilgrimage for all vaishnavs. The follows a sequence of specific names for Krishna himself; mohan, maadhav, krishna, muraare - the slayer of mur demon. The this same personality is said to be 'in each and every heart'. If there was any question over the nature of Hari avatar, it is cleared further when the Guru explains that Sri Ram Chander's true nature is 'without form'. Hence it is nothing but parmeshwar. The Guru then adores the physical characteristics of Krishn bhagvan.

No how people try to explain this as, not sagun I really don't know!

It, by consequence, leads the Sikh to comprehend the true nature of avatars not as 'devtay' but as the sagun form of satchitanad brahman.

My problem is also with people who distort the truth using ignorance as their marker. Please tell me unbreakable the difference between Krishna and Paratma?

Sant Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale does a beautiful and thorough job explaining the qualities of both historical avatars and Guru avatar ni his steek on Japuji Sahib. Ram and Krishan were pooran hari avatar. They are not something seperate from Nirankar, they were nirankar within space and time. Hence Guru Arjun Dev ji very explicitly teaches that the physical avatar was pooran nirankar in this maya.

Ths is aethiest mat. It is essential for people to read gurmukhi and get the correct definitions for words. For example Gobind Singh Manuskhani (or whatever hes called) SERIOUSLY distorts Bhai Gurdas' Varan in english translation and has a REAL agenda in his selection of which vaars to translate.

[Hari]

I concur with TSingh above.To unbreakable: Hari Om Jai Shri Om.

[unbreakable]

..

[Pheena]

Dymanic_Banda I agree with you totally.

Hari - that Shabad does not praise Khrishna, more over it praises God, Read on further and then take the whole Shabad and try to understand it.

Not saying I have a problem with these avtars, not at all, I respect them all, like I respect all faiths. My problem is with people who distort the "truth". Sorry no offense is intended.

Indeed like all Gurbani, that shabad is beautiful in that Guru Ji talks about the many roops of Waheguru/Satnam/Allah..etc.

Ultimately Guru Ji says we must beg that the Lord taks us into his sanctuary.

Waheguru.

I do not mean to intrude here, but i do have a question. You said that the Guru is not talking about Krishna, then you agree that Krishna and Waheguru are the same. So then what exactly seem to be the problem when speaking of Krishna synonymously as spkeaing of Nirankaar?

[unbreakable]

..

[Kamal_chauhan]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa,

Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh

Hey guys all I want to say that there is no difference between the true Guru and the Lord. So in that context Visnu and Krishna are the same as the lord but the one thing is that the god has no limits and when people worship in hindu temples they worship stones and say that they are the god. So the one thing is that the true lord in not the body in which visnu and krisna were in, it was their spirit and the same thing can be said for all our guru's from Siri Guru Nanak Dev ji to Siri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Here are few links which shows translation of what I am trying to say

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/1142.html (First Translation and specially the last line)

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=4086 (Specially read the last line)

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/0235.html (It is the second translation and carefully read the last line of it)

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=731 (20th line or last line of 4th Pauri)

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/0208.html (It is the third translation and the seventh line of it - Which clarifies that there is no difference between the saints and the true lord)

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=654 (Eight line)

The thing to notice is that the Guru ji is not the human body, it is the words which are said by the guru which are the true Guru and they guide you to find the true lord.

Hari ji, this topic that you have introduced is very difficult and one needs quite a bit of knowledge to understand it, and it requires quite an in-depth research and the thing to notice is that Guru ji has never said that we should worship stones becuase they are not the lord because lord is everywhere and it is not restricted in size. But what some Hindus believe in that the lord can just be found in Mandirs (Hindu temples) and that is very wrong and I seriously disagree with that.

So in the end I just want to say that if you want to worship visnu then worship the spirit not the human body (remember god is neither male or female and it is formless) or the statue which is made out of stone.

Bhul Chuck Maaf (Pls forgive me if I have said anything offensive or if I have hurt you in any way) :wink:

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa,

Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh

[Dynamic_Banda]

I see where the questioning arise Pheena Ji,

It may be the way I word things but im saying the same as TSingh he just makes more sense and I dont. Gift from akaal purakh on my part. !!

[Kamal_chauhan]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa,

Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh

The thing is that the god created Visnu ji , Brahma ji, Shiv ji and so on and these people worshiped and meditated on gods name and then they merged with oneness of god. But we must remember that these Avtars were created by god (This is written in Caupai Sahib ji ).

Here are links of other translations

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=1654 (Third Translation second last line)

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/0447.html (Third Translation second last line)

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/1375.html (Seventh Translation)

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=5172

http://srec.gurmat.info/srecarticles/srida...ntichaupai.html (Translation number 9)

Bhul Chuck Maaf (Pls forgive me if I have said anything offensive or if I have hurt you in any way)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa,

Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh

[Pheena]

Read the Shabad and come to your own conclusion. Simple.

Its pretty straight forward to me. Maybe you want to see an association with Khrishan, thats fine, thats your choice. But that does not mean I have to agree with you. (read your reply to hari above). I certainly don't have to explain to you either nor do i expect you to do the same, you may if you wish, to show how much you know, but thats your choice.

I never said I have a problem with khrishan. (read my posts people) In my view and may Waheguru help me, that Shabad like all Shabads are ultimately praising God. If you don't believe me, go to ang 1081, it starts from the middle, read it from the start to the end.

You can take any line from Gurbani and make a mountain of it, thats wrong.

adios.

First of all veer there is no need to get defensive. No one is here to take you views away from you. You can hold on to them as tightly as you want. This is a 'Discussion' where personal views or interepetations are present and then perhaps questioned by others in order to be refuted or clarified by the one who said it. If you don't feel the need to explain something that doesn't make sense to others, then what is the purpose of writing it in the first place. Atleast that is how i see a discussion, perhaps you might see it differently. well neways.

Let us start over and you can clarify my understanding of your post if you wish to. You said, "Indeed like all Gurbani, that shabad is beautiful in that Guru Ji talks about the many roops of Waheguru/Satnam/Allah..etc. "

Then you stated, "Hari - that Shabad does not praise Khrishna, more over it praises God,"

So then what is the difference between God and Krishna? Is Krishna not the Sargun roop of the Nirgun Nirankaar which is obviously being stated in that Shabad.

He assumed the beautiful form of the blue-skinned Krishna; hearing His flute, all are fascinated and enticed. ||9||

He is adorned with garlands of flowers, with lotus eyes.

His ear-rings, crown and flute are so beautiful.

He carries the conch, the chakra and the war club; He is the Great Charioteer, who stays with His Saints. ||10||

So is the Shabad not Praising the Sargun roop (Krishna) of that Nirgun Nirankaar?

[tSingh]

To my mind this is the danger. I agree in multiple interpretations of things, and that is fine, but when someone starts saying a kirpan is not a weapon, or that there is no sagun devotion in sikhi, then the point is they are simply off the ball.

Unbreakable, maybe you have problems reconciling the fact that Waheguru is essentially immanent, is pervading this reality. Perhaps you view waheguru as unreachable a bit like Allah in sunni Islam. The thought that Waheguru can actually consciously manifest itself may seem disturbing but gurbani supports the idea. That part is unquestionnable, unless you deliberately choose to misinterpret the Guru. What is debateable perhaps is the nature of avatar and the nature of the Guru. Samprdas including Taksal acredit Guru ji as avatar of this yug. Others of a reformist mindset hold a seemingly more semitic idea of prophethood. The Guru is god's messenger.

Now, you said that we are all Waheguru and hence krishna and ourselves are one an the same. This is true to a degree in the sense that aatma and parmaatma are of the same essence. However where as we are clouded in self maintained ignorance, avatar is a conscious projection, taking on the illusory qualities of the trehguna but being untainted by them, to uphold dharm in this reality. We are in that sense not the same. Likewise because of this the avatars hold specific qualities that ordinary atmas do not have. 5 essential ones for Puran avatar, although Krishna has 16 if I remember correctly.

[unbreakable]

..

[tSingh]

A great reply, and some very pointed questions in there.

Yes, it is clear as you state that when one fully practices gurupdesh, then one may reach the state of oneness with Waheguru. That is clear, Sikhi is without doubt non-dual meaning, no creation and waheguru as two separate things.

One only takes the likeness of avatar in becoming one with Waheguru. The specific quality of avatar is that it is, in pooran form, self-conscious whereas we are striving to attain that same state to become jeevanmukt.

So, yes absolutely correct.

[Singh47]

Hari, you have to read the whole Shabad in it entirety rather than just the first few lines. At the end of the Shabad the fifth Guru has written his view by saying:

Kirtam naam kathay teray jehba||

Satnaam tera paraa poorbalaa||

Guru Mahraj says, Oh Lord! Using their intellect and perception people hail you through countless kirtam(qualitative) names as mentioned above, but none of these are your real names. Your original root name is Satya, which is the unchanging essence through all the ages. Guru Nanak Dev Jee describes Satya as:

Aad sach jugaad sach||

Habhi sach nanak hosie bhi sach||

In Gurbani you will come across many names which are associated with certain deities (avtars/devtas), but many times those same names are used by Guru Jee for Vaheguru. Without understanding this, many people under a false impression go without understanding the true essence of Gurbani.

The following are just a few of the Tukhs which are in reference to Vaishnava Gods, and judge for yourself from this if Vishnu and Vaheguru are the same or not in Guru Jee’s eyes.

…hor ketay Raam raval||(464)

…ketay Kaan Mahesh||(7)

…Raam geyo, Ravan geyo||(1429)

…Brahma Bishan Mahadeo trea gun rogee||(735)

[Hari]

Singh47, tell me something I don't know.

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakal!

Hari Ji!

You referred the wonderful Shabad from Gurbani.

You also sent a painting of Sri Krishna.

Please elaborate your views.

Which part of the painting of Sri Krishna represents his character Madhusudan, Damodar, Rikhikesh, Govardhan Dhari, Niranjan etc.

I did not see a flute, a single Gopi or a lion on this picture of Sri Krishna. Why and how this painting represents Him as Murli-Manohar, Gopi-Nath or Narsingh. Please guide me.

Balbir Singh