angy15

1 hour ago, tva prasad said:

No wonder pappiman veer ji blocked you. What's the point of arguing with you?

You too can run off from the discussion just like him. 

On 11/19/2018 at 1:59 PM, tva prasad said:

Of course you are going to say something about Brahm Kavach, since Dhadri (whom you devotedly follow)

I don't know what dhadri might have said but i do definitely  know what my Gurus have said abt reciting bhram kavach both in SGGS and Dasam Granth .Let me quote you one shabad from Dasam Granth

ਭੂਜੰਗ ਪ੍ਰਯਾਤ ਛੰਦ ॥

  ਬਿਨਾ ਸਰਨ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਨ ਅਉਰੈ ਉਪਾਯੰ ॥ ਕਹਾ ਦੇਵ ਦਈਤੰ ਕਹਾ ਰੰਕ ਰਾਯੰ 

Without coming under His Refuge, there is no other measure for protection, may be a god, demon, pauper or a king. 

ਬਿਨਾ ਸਰਨ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਨ ਕੋਟੈ ਉਪਾਯੰ ॥੭੬॥

May be the Sovereign and may be the courtiers, without coming under His shelter, millions of measures for protection will be useless. 76. 

  ਜਿਤੇ ਜੀਵ ਜੰਤੰ ਸੁ ਦੁਨੀਅੰ ਉਪਾਯੰ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਕਾਲੰ ਬਲੀ ਕਾਲ ਘਾਯੰ ॥

All the creatures created by Him in the world will ultimately be killed by the mighty KAL. 

 ਬਿਨਾ ਸਰਨ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਨਹੀ ਔਰ ਓਟੰ ॥ ਲਿਖੇ ਜੰਤ੍ਰ ਕੇਤੇ ਪੜ੍ਹੇ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਕੋਟੰ ॥੭੭॥

There is no other protection without coming under His shelter, even though many Yantras be written and millions of Mantras be recited.77. 

Choice is yours whom to follow Gappi Thakur or Guru Gobind Singh .

Well it seems some members who were debating "Science conflict with Guru Nanak philosophy  did not reply with  any evidence how does it? 

This is my understanding of Concept of God both in terms of Gurbani Science and this also reply to @ chatanga  from where this misunderstanding  originated.

On 11/18/2018 at 9:06 PM, chatanga1 said:

OK, so what is human knowledge of God based on science and logic.

You seem really scared to answer this question.

Lets  conceptualize the God of Guru Nanak:

1. God was created by itself from Sunn and exists forever

2.Then he created the Nature(Laws of Nature,Laws of Universe) and pervades in it

3.Every action and reaction in the universe and in the living beings is happening under  the LAws of NAture 

4. God is Agam(Inaccessiable) and Agochar (Unfathomable)

5. Their is no effect of time and space on God.

Therefore from above points we can see God of Guru Nanak is Transcendant Entity (beyond our comprehension) that means God is Nirgun and also Sargun in respect of it being laws of Nature 

Famous cosmologist and mathematicians Stephen Hawkings  defined God as:

"Yes,If God is meant the  the emoidment of the 'laws of the universe'"

Great  philospher Baruch Spinoza said 

God is nature .Nature is the true expression of God.And each of us are part of it

When above quote was posed to Albert Einstein  do you believe in God? His answer

I believe in God of Spinoza

It is clear that modern scientists and philosopher are thinking about God in the same line as conceptulized by Guru Nanak .

An interesting article  on Science and Philosophy of Guru Nanak

ARTICLE 1: SCIENCE EXPLAINS TRUE RELIGION? |

Science ਸਾਇੰਸ ਨੇਂ ਤਾਂ ਅਸਲੀ ਧਰਮ ਦੀ, ਵਿਆਖਿਆ ਕੀਤੀ ਹੈ **Is the saying “religion begins where science ends” actually valid?** **A powerful discussion on the validity of the so-called “Science Vs Religion” debate** Contrary to popular belief, can it be that science has in actual fact explained and interpreted TRUE RELIGION? The cover-up of true religion with hocus-pocus magic has been fashioned through distorted interpretations by self-proclaimed “God-men”, people who had created their own religion or had desired their own following. What has happened is that another’s product has been re-branded as one’s own. It is man which has altered himself to become a part of a man-made religion. How can one be branded as a Muslim or a Hindu or a Christian etc when the product source is the same, when the creator is one? Religion itself cannot be made by man. The true religion is that which is already made by the Creator God. It is universal. One cannot make religion, one can only become religious. A religious person is that person who follows the laws of God. Worshipping God is following the laws of God. If one walks into fire, they will burn. That is the law of the universe. One cannot defy the law of gravity, a law which is applicable to all beings on the planet Earth. The laws of God are applicable to all, it’s only the laws of man which are applicable to their own sect. That person which understands these true laws of God is indeed religious. Science has interpreted many of God’s laws. Whereas some have waited for magic planes to fly them to the heavens, science has allowed hundreds of people sitting in an aircraft to fly through the skies across the world. Science has done this by understanding the laws of God. Perhaps religion is God’s laws, and science does not go outside of those laws? In fact, it would be impossible for science to go outside of such universal laws, the laws of God. Then science is that which explains the laws of true religion, i.e. not the laws of a religion made by man, but THE religion of God? Science cannot go against such laws. Science will understand that it’s the ear which hears the sound, then after understanding that law of God it will invent hearing-aids. Science will interpret the laws, then it will develop remarkable creations like the flying passenger aircraft, mobile telephone communication, cameras, sound systems etc. Then why is it some people have said science is wrong, that science and religion cannot mix? Science is an explanation of God’s religion, not a religion made by man. The saying “religion begins where science ends” is perhaps not a notion which necessarily sits well with the philosophy of the Sikh Guru’s.

@Jageera

I think You are talking a lot but saying nothing.

25 minutes ago, tva prasad said:

God cannot be defined by science. If he could, everyone would know him. God is only known through stilling the mind, thus freeing oneself from the chains of illusion.  

Don't get confused we  are debating Whether the concept of God as described by Guru Nanak is in conflict  with Science?

15 minutes ago, tva prasad said:

Using mantras to do things in physics,chemistry,enginerring. what ridiculous justification.

 I am more fascinated abt your above claim .Do you really believe what you wrote.

16 minutes ago, tva prasad said:

Of course you are going to say something about Brahm Kavach,

It doen't matter what Dhadri speaks abt. But those who believe in Braham Kavach distrust Guruji bani of  SGGS and DG . I have quotedhow Gurbani rejects it.

2 hours ago, Jageera said:

Are you really a Punjabi Sikh?You sound like brown man with white backside,totally self hating slave mentality.I don't see anything backwards with tva prasads beliefs.Reading this thread it has dawned on me that you are the backwards fallen one with no faith.

And pray tell how is the system being pushed by you people going to change anything?What has your type of beliefs contributed to the panth?Any tangible results?You guys are just able to exist on the fringes of Sikhi just like a parasite with a minimal following.Tell me if anyone wanted to learn science they would obviously go get educated in a University.Why does Sikhi have to be scientific?I cant understand your faithless thought system.Like harry haller,I believe you too think Sikhi is a "secular religion"?

Mr Jhangeera : I could not find answers to my question in your reply. Let me repharase again to you

Do you see any conflict in Guru Nanak's philosophy and Science when it comes to concept of GOD?

2 hours ago, Jageera said:

Why does Sikhi have to be scientific

Why he shouldn't .Hasn't our asks us to use our God given gifts of intelligent discrimantion (Bibek Buddhi) to avoid irrational rituals and superstitions which you guys advocate .

Sikhi is faith which encourages to question irrational practices and beliefs in the name of religion.Our Gurus are role model for us.A wonder example  is the saakhi of his visit to Haridwar

2 hours ago, Jageera said:

if anyone wanted to learn science they would obviously go get educated in a University.

offcourse he should go to a university  because our deras  are dysfunctional both at spiritual level and scientific level.

Infact  a Sikh  should see God's Glory in science ,any discovery made by science is a celebration of the marvels of  God and his creations .There are so many references in Gurbani  expressing the exhalations of the creator (Kadar) through praising his creations(Kudrat). In Kritan Sohlia out Guru sees all of nature constantly doing aaarthi and glorifying God.

1 hour ago, tva prasad said:

@angy15 The ancients were much more advanced than us. They used the spiritual and scientific aspects together. They used sounds and mantars to do things as well as physics, chemistry, engineering, etc. unlike us now who use fossil fuels and destroy the planet in the process. Ancient society had a better understanding of the universe (both spiritual and physical aspects).  

Why do I even bother? *sigh* 

Are you really from australia.Your response like this suggests you  belong to a remote backward area of a poor under developed country.  Using mantras to do things in physics,chemistry,enginerring. what ridiculous justification.

How  has 10000 of  Yugs ,havans and mantras benefited history of India?Not at all .All it gave us is 1000 years of slavery.Fake mantras  like Braham Kavach  what benefits has it done to sikh community  NOTHING.Really you guys are not doing any justice to the name of this forum. Do some research in SGGS  and DG and find out how mantra ,jantras are rejected by our Gurus

9 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

@angy15  ?

 

@angy15  ?

 

The god that is in the mool mantar.

Look  I am not going in for silly argument with you for first two question and this was not in respond to your any query  .Its crystal clear what i have said .If You dont understand leave it.

Regarding Mool Mantar  where does Science  conflicts with  Mool Mantar?

Stephan Hawkins concept of God was

"Yes , If by God is meant emboidment of the laws of the universe " t

that is  similar to concept of Nanak's viewpoint

1 hour ago, chatanga1 said:

OK, so what is human knowledge of God based on science and logic.

You believe Science cannot  not prove or understand  God.(It depends what kind of God you are referring to )

a. So let me know through you What is Nanak definition  or understanding of God?

b. Why do you believe rationality and Gurbani are not compatible?I believe Sikhi encourages rationality

On 11/15/2018 at 9:37 PM, 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.

Thats a good piece of information you have given and  I would like to add  some more to it .

1. Contextual Analysis  :Understanding  a passage in the context of the stanza 

2. Principle of Gurbani Interpetations:

 Principles that will help us accrately interperet the shabad of SGGS.These principle are embedded in the SGGS itself.We don't need to go beyound the boundaries of SGGS to determine the meaning of scriptures . As i stated earlier in this discusiion SGGS interpret itself.

3. The Grammatical Principle : involves the study of words meaning ,grammar and synthax for proper understanding of scripture.

Prof Sahib Singh and Missionaries holds on to these principles while interpreting Gurbani.

Similarities  between Saudi Cleric (in the video ) and  Gappi Thakur

Both are stand up comedians of their respective  faiths having common syllabus

20 hours ago, amardeep said:

Beautiful quote by Prof Puran Singh. Thanks for sharing. He is right In a way. Some nirmalas have taken things to far and you can also find the samprdaic  Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale accusing the nirmale and Udasis of the same in his Gurbani Paath Darshan. The samprdayas are not perfect, they make mistakes and it’s good to have a panthic discussion on that. But it’s rather extreme to just reject it all, throw the baby out with the bath water and dismiss 300 years of tradition just because they might make a few mistakes here and there. 

No one(personally I aleast ) is rejecting it all together infact one can find few key historical incidences in the lives of Guru from these  Samprdiya texts.But their are many stories recorded in it that cannot pass the test of Gurbani ,Science and logic and  these  texts has done more harm than good to sikhi . It is very important to do research and critical analysis in this regard to provide authentic Sikh History

On 11/16/2018 at 9:15 PM, amardeep said:

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.  

Yes one can find terms of Gurbani in Vedaanta but that is different from saying one can find "understanding" in the vedanta.

One can find the terms "hardware, mouse,mother,board etc in a 4000 year old dictionary.But the "understanding " that a 21st century computer needs relating to these words cannot be found out in that 4000 year old dictionary .

The mouse of 4k  old dictionary is not the mouse of the 21st century computer knowledge .

Guru Nanak used the words of spirituality of that were prevalent  in those or before him but he either (a) redefined them (b) critiqued them.

On 11/16/2018 at 9:15 PM, amardeep said:

I think you need to spend some more time studying what Vedanta is.

My guru studied it researched it and gave us their conclusion

ਬਹੁ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬਹੁ ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤੀ ਪੇਖੇ ਸਰਬ ਢਢੋਲਿ ॥

ਪੂਜਸਿ ਨਾਹੀ ਹਰਿ ਹਰੇ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਾਮ ਅਮੋਲ ॥੧॥

On 11/16/2018 at 9:15 PM, amardeep said:

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.

Its a self contradictions you are making you said we need to study vedas to understand vedanta.but we shouldn't read all shabads to understand Guru revealed shabad.What the purpose of 1429 pages if there no need to study it all , again a classic tactics  of drifting sikhs away from Gurmat.

Regaading Logic

@tva prasad

On 11/16/2018 at 9:15 PM, amardeep said:

our 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.

thats defing logic: just because something is older doesn,t mean its TRUER

For example for 1500 years Christian believed and accepted that the sun sun revolved around the earh .But Galileo did not have any tradition .We can say for the same for any discovery -NO TRADITION.

Actually entire human knowledge is based on science and logic their isn't a single language that is devoid of grammar.Our Guru  deployed the tradition of grammar ,science and logic .the matter of fact that these truths took sikh hundred of years to discover and delay was primarily because it was hijacked for centuries

20 hours ago, amardeep said:

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.

 

 

Its clear from your arguments that your believe   Guru Nanak has simply recycled the message already revealed in vedas and associate hindu text there is nothing Nirmal in Nanaks  Enlightened Philosophy  its just  reformed and simplified Sanatana Dharma of medieval times & this is what Sikhi has become a esotreic,mystic ,mantra chanting ,ritualistic religion known as sikhism today  . While  Guru Nanak was busy  challenging the ancient mythology ,cast division and rituals which have their origins in classical hindu texts the irony  that after few centuries if we  examine the effects of teaching Guru Nanak  on Sikhs in particular it is not difficult to come to conclusion that what sikhs are doing today is contary to Nanak Philosophy because of entrapment in layers with   vedantic philosophy or lack of understanding of Gurbani.

You boosting of "Sampradays having a long history and thus taking their ideas  seriously" , we can see what nirmalas has reduced sikhi  to  how its being practiced today whether its chanting of jap banee to fullfill your personnel desires or slaughtering of animals in Gurudwaras or doing arthee ,havaan Tsumani of akand paths etc etc .

How were these Nirmalas were able to infilitrate into psyche  of Sikhi can be traced to time of Banda Singh Bhadhur where majority of Sikhi were living in the forests and during this period preaching of Gurbani feel into the hands of anti gurmat forces and during 18th and 19th century where the sikh insitutes were still under Anti Gurmat forces all sikh history and literature published were full of misinterpetations of Gurbani .Any effort taken by any scrupulous Sikh scholar to preach authentic sikhi were treated very badly and this is been done even today.

. But all is not lost we have a School of Modern Scholars like Prof Sahib Singh ,Principle Teja Singh and many more contemporary scholars and missionaries who are showing Gurbani can be interpreted through gurbani context  and not outside  and they are the real threat to sampridya traditions.

I believe Gurbani is for here and Know. Most important question  of Nanak Philosophy  "How to become Sachiaar" and SGGS has all the ingredients to help us to become Sachiaar only we sikhs have to use bibek buddhi to understand it.

Yours and other Sampridyas  understanding of Gurbani is well described by  Prof Puran Singh  in1920 :

"It is to be regretted that Sikh and Hindu scholars are interpreting Guru Nanak in the futile terms of the colour he used, the brush he took; are analyzing the skin and flesh of his words and dissecting texts to find the Guru’s meaning to be the same as of the Vedas and Upanishad! This indicates enslavement to the power of Brahmanical tradition. Dead words are used to interpret the fire of the Master’s soul! The results are always grotesque and clumsy translations which have no meaning at all."

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.

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

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

.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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 .

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