~ Atamgian Katha between Bhai Dya Singh Ji & Sangat ~

[namjap]

Just let me ask you one question ? What do you stive to achieve in life?

Is Mind necessary to obtain Gian ? Of course, please don't take this as an attack. It isn't my intention to anyway. But, definitely you may figure out some fragment of an answer to put across to me in reply.

[Guest]

namjap,

I think you will agree me with on this but not everyone at this kalyug, here is as pure as as innocent as bhagat dhanna.

In order to fall in love with vahiguroo, you need gyan of antishkaran, panch kosh, atma, paratama, mind, body, diet, naam japan techniques, mindcontrolling tecniques, bairaag,upasana.

We need to understand essence of one self, where we come from, where we going ?, karam theory, our mind relation with our body, desires, feeling, subtle body and soul relations with our subtle body(man, chitt, budd, ahankar), and body and soul relation with paratama.

[gsingh00]

I dont agree. Having knowledge about those types of things is useful no doubt, but not necessary...even if you don't start of with the same sharda/pyaar as bhagat dhanna jee.

To say that it is necessary to learn all those things to develop pyaar with vaahiguroo is completely undermining gurbani in my opinion. Would you not think someone that does 5 sukhmani sahibs a day can 'fall in love' with vaahiguroo? Guru Nanak Dev Jee left us with such a simple path, one that any person living a grisht jeevna could follow and find liberation. The fact of the matter is that the majority people living a grisht jeevan don't have the time to learn vedant in depth, and in my opinion they don't need to. 'Vaahiguroo gurmantar hai, jap houmai khoee', and where there is no houmai, how can there be anything other than pyaar? Now i expect the reponse to this to be that how can you do jaap of gurmantar without gyaan, but honestly, do you not think guru sahib will take care of their Sikhs that follow their hukam? There is no need for us to overcomplicate Sikhi and say vedant is necessary.

Don't take this post the wrong way, im not saying you shouldn't learn vedant, but instead that it isn't necessary...the brahmgian given by Gurbani is higher than vedant.

[Kam1825]

i listen to katha as i want to know what i am saying when reciting gurbani, what is the essence of Gurbani, why was it recited in the first place, what can it teach us.

i am not happy to just read gurbani from granths and not know what i am saying. It would be like reading a frech book for me. i could read it without any understanding. That is the reason i enjoy katha

I do understand that this life is here for a soul to become one with God as stated in Asa Raag in the Rehraas by Guru Arjan Dev Ji ' Bhae Prapat Manukh Dehria, Gobind Milan Ki Eh Teri Baria" But without the katha again i may not have known this.

I think it is good to have some knowledge of what and why you do things

[Guest]

gurpreet singh,

you said: does 5 sukhmani sahibs a day can 'fall in love' with vaahiguroo?

I ask- whats in sukhmani sahib? is not gyan? its full of gyan, sharda, pyaar. I think you will agree with me, doing one sukhmani sahib with vichar is more fruitful than 5 sukhmani sahib or 5 banis with no vichar just parroting it as an empty ritual. No doubt, both get counted in the dargah.With vichar your mind is not wandering around anywhere, this is what sri guru nanak dev ji told mullahs in mecca when they were acting they were doing 5 namaz.

If there was no need for vichar of gurbani then there wouldnt many tekaas, steeks, katha's by bhramgyanis, gurbani vichars. I think idea is not to undermine sharda and pyaar but at the same time not to undermine vichar gyan sagar either, just have a balance.

How could one do panj sukhmani sahib with sharda/pyaar with claiming that he/she didnt pay attention whats being recitten? (I am not talking about advance spiritual stages i m talking about begineer stages) doing vichar while reciting an tuk, occupy your mind, make your mind chase whats being recitten and try to understand whats being reciten is vary essence of vichar, gyan.

the brahmgian given by Gurbani is higher than vedant.

I dont agree with you there, no one is higher or lower. Whole purpose of vedant(veda da ant)-tat gyan[nichoor] of all the vedas is vedant which is - karam(do good karams), upasana(prem towards) ishat dev(sargun), atamdev(nirgun), gyan- knowledge of atma, bhram, vigyan ie- 5 tats, 25 parkrityas, 5 karam indree, 5 gyan indree, man, buddh, chit, ahnkar.

[gsingh00]

i agree with you 100%, that reading bani with vichar is the most important thing. But, where in gurbani (other than maybe gyan parbodh which I have no knowledge about) does it require you to have in depth knowledge of vedant?

Let me give an example. If a Singh without gyaan of vedant does abhyaas, his chakars will open even though he may not understand why it is happening. If he continues his abhyaas, if guru sahib does kirpa, his jaap will eventaully take him to his dasam duaar, even if he doesn't know about chakars. If someone with the gyaan does abhyiaas the same thing will happen to them, except they will understand the specific details of what is happening to them.

Kam, having listened to Sant Gurbachan Singhs katha of guru granth sahib, you will have them say over and over that so much gyaan is not necessary. Even in baavan akhree katha they do aarth of 'aae prabh sarnagatee, kirpa nidh dyaal. Eak akhar har man basat nanak hoth nihaal' and say that even if just a person obtains understanding of the updesh of just one of the 52 letters, it is more thn enough for them to be nihaal (dukh tho rehit).

Lastly, why do you need to know vedant to do veechar of bani? Sure it can help, but it isnt necessary. Why would you need knowledge of vedant to do veechar of a tuk such as 'simrou simar simar sukh pavou. kal kalaes tan maahi mitaavou.'?

In no way am I undermining gyaan by saying vedant is not necessary. I myself try to listen to katha of gurbani/ithihaas every as per hukam of guru gobind singh jee. All i said was knowledge of vedant is useful but necessary in a reply to you saying "In order to fall in love with vahiguroo, you NEED gyan of antishkaran..."

[Guest]

gurpreet singh veer, perhaps we have two different definations of gyan of vedant.

Gyan of vedant- is all about realization- karam, upasana, gyan, vigyan.

May be you are applying more generic defination of vedant in this topic which is - self mechanisism, things are there, realize it yourself , no need for guru -no grace is needed.

Its my fault, my intial post to namjap should been clear, lack of clarity.

may be tsingh can enlighten the sangat with better choice of words.lol..

[gsingh00]

you are probably correct that we have different understandings of vedant.

my understanding of vedant is that it is similar to gurmat in the sense that it is about connecting your mind to your atma, or connecting your surat to shabad... but goes veery indepth in terms of chakars, koshas, different levels, etc.

[namjap]

I also like to comment over here. I would like to touch on the subject of Sadhana. Btw, N30 has made a point about the needed awareness of knowledge. But I feel that such knowledge should be sought after only when the dire need arises. On the individual level, one should first understand that what is most important is life itself. By this I mean, without your respiratory system, you couldn't possible be alive.

So one has to go back to basics first. The very thing that keeps us alive via breath is taken for granted as if it is the least important thing in our lives.

Every breath is as priceless as stated in Gurbani. We are utilizing this breaths either to become more self-aware or for entertaining the mind.

Mind is the time-waster. Mind has no problem reading or writing a religions book full of spiritual principles. But when you sit down to do your meditation, the mind won't let you, because it is no more in-charge of your life. So you have to emerge on your own strength with the help of a meditation group to get involved in Naam Simran. It has to be done now because there is no such thing as tomorrow. I'm sure your mind is getting amused reading this article. YOU be in charge from now.

[tSingh]

Gurpreet Singh ji,

Why the need for Vedant? Because Gurbani explicitly talks of the four fold antahkaran, the 4 avasthas, kaivalya mukhti, etc. When the Guru talks of the four states, what do you derive from that? How then do you interpret references to the 'body' being unveiled by the Guru? Which body? When he talks of the 'fourth' state in Sidh Gosht, what does that mean? What is the nature of jivan mukt? What are the forms of praman or valid knowledge for Gurmat? What about the guns? What is meant by going beyond the three gunas? How? What is meant when bhai Gurdas Ji talks of vasna? What is the real meaning of the term? What is the nature of the 'unseeing seeing'? etc, etc. This is where Vedant comes in. It is used to explain the basic structural model of human consciousness, its components and its interactions in Gurmat. From that you will notice other bits of Gurbani which before you read over mindlessly, now they ring out with new meaning. It is also used to explain the subtlest aspects of the highest experiences (not necessarily the initial process of rising vivek). How else can you explain the existence of the study of Vedant for the last 400 years of Sikh history by gursikhs (recall Bhai Gurdas studied in Kashi and is using Vedantic concepts in his Kabits) or Kavi Sukhdev's 'Adhyatam Prakash'? I thought you were Taksali?! You should know that some Taksalis study this stuff and that Baba Sundar Singh Ji is said to have studied Moksh Panth Prakash by Pandit Gulab Singh Ji, Vichar Sagar and other Vedantic granths with his two Udasin gurdevs.

One clarification, vedanta doesn't talk about chakras, thats kundalini. I haven't found its mention in any old Nirmalay granths to date at all. I guess it maybe more a yogic thing and thus from the Udasis?????

I agree with Gurpreet Singh in one sense. One initially without learning can reach such states, but I do not believe that the one who has a very high avastha reached through the path of Satiguru will contradict the concepts of Gurmat. Like the Guru says, through that experience they know the secrets of the Vedas, in otherwords through that experience they intuitively know that non-dual oneness. They will then find within Gurbani the language and concepts to explain that state. It goes without saying that knowing Adhyatam vidya and tasting it are different BUT they are inherently interrelated. As Pandit Tara Singh Narotam says, gyan of the 'mahavakyas' is essential to orient the bhakti for kaivalya mukhti. Without that gyan the bhakti gets waylaid. Where do we get this gyan of the 'mahavakyas' (i.e. formless non-duality) from? Gurbani, but again through the real understanding of the meaning of Gurbani.

Again a lack of clarity in namjap's post - what do you mean by mind? Its too vague! Gurbani pretty much condemns 'man' or mind but accredits 'budhi' with the capacity for this. So be careful, budhi is not necessarily a 'time-waster' for this where vivek arises, without which nothing happens!

[namjap]

I agree with gurpreet_singh for saying, "Why would you need knowledge of vedant to do veechar of a tuk such as 'simrou simar simar sukh pavou. kal kalaes tan maahi mitaavou.'? "

When a sikh already knows in her heart that GuruJi is "Satgur mera behmotaj, satgur mera sacha saaj, ...." and does Sukhmani Sahib paht everyday it is pointless to climb two ladders to get to the roof. One ladder is enough.

Gurbani mentions about Brahma with all the gian he had couldn't take him beyond the realm of duality.

[gsingh00]

tsingh,

I have never claimed to be taksali, living outside of India it isn't easy become a true vidyarthi of taksal, although it can be done. Once again, in response to saying that gursikhs from the past studied vedant, I reitterate that I believe that learning it is useful, but not necessary, although I do see your point. With regards to taksal and the study of vedant, I have been told and have heard in katha by Baba Hari Singh that in the days of Sant Gurbachan SIngh vidyarthees that were learning katha had to learn vidya sagar, so once again, I don't disupte its 'usefulness'.

After reading your response, I have to agree with you, to interpret bani, the basic definitions are required, and this minimum gyan is given by kathavachaks (talking about real kathavachaks here, not the modern day 'i completed an online course about gurbani' kathavachaks). Seeing the it is hukam of Guru Gobin Singh Jee to listen to katha everyday, I guess this gyaan can be obtained without a detailed study of vedant

But in terms of it being a necessity, 'jo pranee govind dhiavai. parriaa, anparriaa, param gat paavai'...I expect the response to be 'to do abhyiaas you first need the gyaan', if this is the case, I guess it would be best to agree to disagree?

[namjap]

"Bani Guru Guru Hai Bani,

Vich Bani Amrit Saarey,

Bani Kehay Sewak Jann Maney,

Partakh Guru Nistarey.

Is there a parallel of this verse in Vedanta ?

btw why am I not allowed to answer 2 topics ? Never caused any upheaval there ? The topics are (1) Purpose of Amrit and (2) What would you do if GuruJi gave you darshan.

Admin Jee, where are you ?

[Guest Javanmard]

No equivalent of it in Vedanta, but the exact equivalent exists in the Shi'a hadiths:

'Ali is the Qur'an and the Qur'an is 'Ali.

[amardeep]

There is also one saying:

The truth is with Ali, and Ali is with the Truth. Whereever he turns, so it follows..

[tSingh]

Gurpreet Singh Ji, of course I can agree to disagree, I was just clarifying the point.

Namjap and Javanmard - be clear about what 'Vedanta' means, any coherent attempt at reconciling the non-dualistic/monistic doctrine of the Veds which has a set of ideas and terminology found in Gurbani also. Javanmard you should know that there have been various models that abridge will and grace of God with nonduality.

The direct phrase does not exist, but the primacy of Shabad Praman does exist as stated in the Brahmsutras. i.e. the unquestionnable truth given by God, on which we then listen, consider and implement. Without which there is no nothing.

Namjap, until you have clarified your definition of Vedanta you will see two ladders to climb. According to the last 300 years of scholars and saints, it is essential to listen to those who have climbed the ladder to aid and assist you safely getting to the top, otherwise you may get off at the wrong rung and...ouch! They used Vedantic terminlogy to elaborate concepts found in Gurmat, i.e. to draw out subtleties of the higher states. Did they forsake the concepts of Hukam and Razai? No. Did they go to Tehran or start directly mapping onto Sikhi a bit of Henri Corbin? No they didn't. How do we know this? Because they wrote it down from the 1730s onwards. If it was really all coming back to Ali doesn't that suggest everyone including the learned scholars of the Gurus themselves got it all wrong? Doesn't that actually cast aspersions about the effectiveness of the Guru's teaching to clarify? Or perhaps this is this all about taqiya, occultation and divine secrets?

[namjap]

Thank you N30 for your good sewa. Already very difficult re-writing all this over here. Let's say, if I want to discuss these stages of awareness with someone already on the path, who can I get in touch with?

[tarkhansingh]

well said tSingh

[drawrof]

I fink tsingh dun get the bigga' pic-cha!

Its about pyaar, and look naamjap paw-ji has so much pyaar that he japs naam so much he uses the name japnaaam inni'.

puratan singhs would carry their battay underneath their armpits when they walked.

[drawrof]

a more serious comment,

and maybe this should be a seperate thread on its own, but something worth discussing. It is about perspective as opposed to hard facts and I believe the most beneficial way to answer this question is to provide facts herein.....

Let me give a scenario: An attractive lady is in a shower, behind a fogged shower screen and all you can make out is that someone is there...as you get closer and closer and closer you can make out more and more and more...but out of our own decency and fear, we are not too keen on infringing on the person's privacy.....what are our obstacles

our desire

our morality

our decision to proceed or stop

our decision to approach further and then probe

our hope that she touches the screen by accident so you can see through the mist.....

I purposely chose a challenging situation as each step of the way, one has to assess things and decide how much they will and can perceive.

We all accept that god is uncreated, ever existing, and has a creative element agreed?

and then there is creation, and that creation has many levels of smokescreen, visualize the above situation (90% are thinking about a soap commercial for sure), but my question comes down to what is it that draws us?......is it the fact that the uncreated has created something and one feels absolutely elated that the structure has been understood (hukam) or is it the innate desire we have within to gaze upon the body?.....is it the body and its structure or is it our desire...or are they interelated? does the person who does not engage on the peeping tom marag miss the point?....and is the punishment encroached in the fact that they missed the opportunity to see piece?....do I make sense?......

well let me take this back now. you have seers/sages and prophets. Both are highly revered yet the functionality is different. (I am not refering to any thought, but giving the 'layman' perception). One professes attainment of something greater through which they share ways of attaining to that state and their perceptions, and the other is seen as the chosen one who delivers directives to humanity. The latter isnt' said with any disrespect or condescendence. I am merely contrasting self effort and grace through this example....and it begs the question..... continual gyan-bhagtee strive to experience the relationship with god or the strive to understand the construct of creation through which we attain grace....both require grace the means is different....or are they one in the same as the core qualities to be cultivated and expressed are the same?

[Guest]

good post drawrof sion,

btw, whos the lady in the shower? huh? tut tut tut tut lol

[drawrof]

N30 would you like to share your wahabi thoughts with the sangat?....the essence or crux of my question is whether understanding the aspect of creation or the the process of how divinity is transmitted takes precedence over the process of striving/learning to worship/realise god...or are they the same point. My only concern is people get too caught up in structures and miss the point, in which case I'd say 'do a freakin' physics degree, design a vehicle (any structure you want) that gets people from A to B in the shortest and safest possible time....and then make millions, give me a cut...and that'll be my parshaad'

[Guest]

i got it yaar, sorry i was just pulling your kachera before

[drawrof]

ney yaar, you always pull my kashera.....you need to go deeper, and pull something else now...btw, Im coming back very soon!...so then we can do it gupt

[SAadmin]

I just checked my own post, i think defination of Prarabdh Karam is wrong.

Here is the review of all the karams.

Sanchit Karams: It is the sum of one's past karmas – all actions (good and bad) from one's past life follow through to the next life.

Kriyamana karma: It's the karma that human beings are creating in the present, the fruits of which will be experienced in the future.

Prarabdha: Its is that portion of the past karma which is responsible for the present body. That portion of the sanchita karma which influences human life in the present incarnation is called prarabdha. It is ripe for reaping. It cannot be avoided or changed. It is only exhausted by being experienced. You pay your past debts. Prarabdha karma is that which has begun and is actually bearing fruit. It is selected out of the mass of the sanchita karma."

In vedantic literature, there is a beautiful analogy. The bowman has already sent an arrow and it has left his hands. He cannot recall it. He is about to shoot another arrow. The bundle of arrows in the quiver on his back is the sanchita; the arrow he has shot is prarabdha; and the arrow which he is about to shoot from his bow is agami. Of these, he has perfect control over the sanchita and the agami, but he must surely work out his prarabdha. The past which has begun to take effect he has to experience.

There is another beautiful analogy also. The granary represents the sanchita karma; that portion taken from the granary and put in the shop for future daily sale corresponds to agami; that which is sold daily represents prarabdha.