Jump to content

Sikh Answers

Members
  • Posts

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Sikh Answers's Achievements

  1. Second Part I disagree with this point. Idol is idol regardless of what one believes or thinks. This is about the truth not about perception. Hindus can justify their idol worship by saying that they don’t believe Waheguru is limited to their idol but it doesn’t change the fact..”Pahan Mein Parmeshar Nahin”. Pictures are not different either. Creation gives no gyan only the eternal Shabad does. Waheguru’s saroop is Shabad. Gurbani is the true saroop of Waheguru because it will never die and is above maya. My point was to highlight the fact that Shabad is not sargun but nirgun roop. Sahabd is not defined as sargun but as a separate roop. It is Jot parkash of Waheguru. “Waho Waho Bani Nirankar Hai” or “Satgur Shabad Shabad Hai Satgur”. Shabad never dies. It is eternal. Bhai Nand Lal Singh Ji praises Guru Gobind Singh Ji because Guru and Waheguru are the same. He is not praising the body which is temporary. It is the “Gur Moorat Gur Shabad Hair” principle. Bhai Gurdas Ji praises Guru Nanak Sahib the same way. Creation is not praised but the creator is. , Again, the question is this: Whether Shabad is Nirgun or Sargun who is being praised? The creator or the creation? Even when one does jaap of Waheguru, Akal Purakh is being worshipped. Shabad is His true saroop. Gurbani is His form and He Himself is the word. Even when the creation is destroyed, Naam will still remain even if you do not have the akhars to write it. Naam is His saroop and will remain always. I asked before the same question. Define Nirgun bhagtee if everything in Gurmat (mool mantar, gurmantar and Gurbani) is sargun. What would happen once the surti goes to nirgun? How does one do ustat and get naam rass? Gurbani says Naam rass is eternal and will never go away and Naam gives muktee. Since you admit there is no jot of Waheguru in stones then worshipping Waheguru through stones is not possible. Pictures give you inspiration but they are not worthy of worship. One can look at a picture and praise Akal Purakh (acceptable in Gurmat) but saying that worship of a picture is worship of Akal Purakh because His jot is in it is not acceptable. First you said that worship of Akaal through His creation is acceptable. This is why I raised this point. Since there is jot of Waheguru within these papis isn’t worshipping Akal Purakh through them also acceptable? One doesn’t have to limit Waheguru to them but they can justify it using your argument. They simply have to say they are praising Waheguru through His creation (worshipping dehdharis and papis) and it is all Gurmat. I see a serious problem here. You will have to cut down to what can be worshipped and what not if you want to keep the argument of praising Akaal through His creation. In summary, I believe the difference remains here: You state praising Akaal through His creation is acceptable and I do not. Akaal is worshipped because He is everywhere and creation should not be worshipped just because His Jot is in it. I do not like to boast I have learned from so and so and from this mahapurash but what I have learned is not all “my own” khoj but much of it comes from somewhere else and I rather keep it to myself. I must admit this was one of the healthiest discussions (not debate or bickering) with you and I enjoyed it. We are all on the path to learn more and more Gurmat and become better Sikhs of Guru Sahib. I will not post anymore on this topic as it is very time consuming and everything I wanted to say has been said unless someone asks for some clarification. No need to drag it further. Das ji, If you read Gurbani and Vaars you will come to know that Naam is His aasli (true) saroop. Gurbani came from Waheguru and it will take us to Waheguru. Your example is not right. Satguru and Waheguru are one. Naam is the savior because it is Satguru or Akaal Purakh Himself. He is not limited to just one Shabad but He is achieved through the Shabad. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh
  2. Neo Singh, your last post made some things clearer for me to understand your viewpoint. However, I disagree with some points while agreeing with other points. This post should make it clear for you what my viewpoint is. This would be a true statement only if Gurbani proof was provided. Stating that sargun is saroop of Waheguru does not prove that sargun must be worshipped. I would also like to see where in Gurbani it is stated that first stage is sargun pooja and then one moves on to nirgun. Also, when one rises to nirgun pooja, what happens then? How does one do ustat of Akal Purakh and gets naam rass? If Naam is only sargun then clearly Naam cannot take us to nirgun. It will take us as far as it goes and that is end of sargun. Gurbani states that Naam is roop of Nirgun Waheguru and there is no difference. It has no form and it is not an object. It is above rajo, tamo and sato maya gunns. This is why it is not sargun and capable of taking us to sachkhand and make “joti jot ralee..” possible. This I disagree with. According to your opinion, one has to go through sargun pooja to become a brahmgyani and then establish a connection with nirgun. If one has to be a brahmgyani to do nirgun pooja then how does one become a brahmgyani without doing sargun pooja? Satguru Ji showed us the direct path. Pooja Akal Ki by doing naam japp. No form, no idol, no demi gods, pkahand etc. Direct link to Jot Shabad saroop Akaal. This is nirgun. Shabads you posted only show that Waheguru is everywhere. Not a single line advocated worshiping the creation. All the Shabads praise Akaal Purakh because He is everywhere. Not two different terms but two different things. Human is inter-related to Waheguru because Jot is within a human but they are different. Human is not Waheguru just like a drop of water is not an ocean. Anyways, let’s discuss the Shabad: In this Shabad, the essence is that Waheguru is within everyone and His Jot shines everywhere and for this reason no one is the enemy. It does not state that since His Jot is within the creation, the creation deserve to be worshipped. Thank you for posting Akaal Ustat Bani. I try to do its paath everyday. I enjoy it very much and what I understand is that Guru Sahib sees His Jot everywhere. He sees His darshan in sargun (creation). But think about it again, who does Guru Sahib praise? Obviously, Akaal Purakh. This is why it is called Akaal Ustat. Creation is not praised. I will post it in Punjabi to highlight the small but significant difference between your and my understanding. ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਨੂੰ ਸਿਮਰੋ ਜੋ ਕਿ ਹਰ ਥਾਂ ਰਮਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ ਨਾ ਕਿ ਉਸ ਰਚਨਾ ਨੂੰ ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਉਹ ਰਮਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ । ਉਸਨੂੰ ਰਚਨਾ ਵਿਚ ਦੇਖ ਕੇ ਉਸਦੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਨੀ ਅਤੇ ਰਚਨਾ ਦੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਨੀ ਦੋ ਅਲੱਗ ਅਲੱਗ ਕਰਮ ਹਨ ਇੱਕ ਨਹੀਂ । I believe that this creation is simply a tamasha, an act or play or “mrig trishna” hence temporary which means worshipping it is not according to Gurmat since it is not Akaal. The only difference I have with you is that I believe Shabad to be nirgun. Even if you call it sargun, still only Akaal is being worshipped and not something He created. This is my point. Only Akaal is worthy of praise. Waheguru Ji has nirgun and sargun attributes. No doubt but He still is Akaal. In Mool Mantar who do Sikhs worship and praise? Akaal Purakh and not the sargun pasara or the creation. My whole point is that Akaal Purakh can be worshipped because He has sargun attributes but worshipping the sargun creation is not acceptable since it is a tamasha. Otherwise one can justify worship of anything such as snakes, fire, sun, moon, humans, animals, trees etc. You call it sargun, I call it Nirgun because recitation of Mool Mantar is praises of the Almighty One who is the supreme power and the creator of all. Creation and creator are not the same. Creation is temporary whereas the creator is permanent. . I agree and never disagreed with you on this one. Point still remains. Why worship the creation which is temporary? All the Shabads you have posted so far praise Akaal Purakh only and one of the reasons is that He is everywhere but not a single pankti praises Him through his creation. Gurbani says He is in water, fire, on land, in sky etc everywhere but water, fire, land, sky are not praised because He is in them. He is praised because He is in them. It is the other way around. ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਦੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਨੀ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਕਿ ਹਰ ਥਾਂ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਉਸਦੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਰਨੀ ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਉਹ ਹੈ ਦੋ ਅਲੱਗ ਅਲੱਗ ਕਰਮ ਹਨ ਇੱਕ ਨਹੀਂ । ਸਿਮਰੋ ਉਸਨੂੰ ਜਿਸਨੇ ਸਭ ਕੁਝ ਬਣਾਇਆ ਨਾ ਕਿ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਜਿਸਨੂੰ ਉਸ ਨੇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ਹੈ । You misunderstood one big point and simply putting words in my mouth. Having pictures to understand something is not a sin but worshipping pictures even thinking Waheguru Ji is within them is simply wrong. I was inspired by Sant Harnaam Singh Ji’s autobiography and all the sakhis my father told me about Sant Kartar Singh Ji. But not once did I ever worship them or bowed to their pictures. What are the pictures for? Worship or just to understand something? Worship of pictures is wrong. Pictures in langar hall are there for a purpose which is to educate us about our history and remind us of where we come from and the struggle our ancestors went through. Not a single person can come to the conclusion that they are there to be worshipped. I say Fateh to Nishaan Sahib because Sant Ji used to say that Shaheed Singhs do pehraa around it. Whether or not it’s true, it reminds me of all the sacrifices Sikhs made for the chardi kala of the Panth and Nishaan Sahib reminds me of them. Many Sikhs who bow also do for the same purpose. But not a single one worships it like Guru Granth Sahib or considers it Jot of Guru Sahib. Worship of Nishaan Sahib as Waheguru or His Jot is not practiced in the Panth.
  3. Here is the last portion of the post. For some reason it won't allow the entire post. We both agree that Jot of Waheguru is everywhere and within everyone. I understand you do not negate Nirgun and call it the ultimate goal in Gurmat. I disagree and I call it the only goal in Gurmat. You propagate that worship of anything that has Jot of Waheguru is sargun pooja and acceptable in Gurmat as long as one also does nidhaasna. Then please answer these questions. 1) What is the proof that Jot of Waheguru is in stones? Dasam Granth says otherwise and in Zafarnama Guru Sahib calls Himself “idol breaker”. 2) If one assumes that Indira Gandhi, Mir Mannu, Hitler, Massa Ranghar, Ashutosh, Bhanearawala, Radha Swami, Gurmit Ram Rahim etc all have Jot of Waheguru and therefore they should be worshipped. Would you concur that they are right and would you call it sargun pooja? Assume that their followers are also doing nidhaasna. Please explain. 3) Are animals and humans included in sargun pooja? 4) I have Jot of Waheguru within myself. Then shouldn’t I worship myself and call it sargun pooja? If no, why not? If yes, how would I escape from haumai? Please provide Gurbani proof that creation worship is acceptable. Guru Sahib taught us to Naam Japna which is not sargun worship. He said “Pooja Akal Ki” which is also not sargun. Also, please provide proof that Gurbani accepts Shabad saroop as sargun saroop. This is simply foolish. That so-called mahapurash should’ve known that Sikhs do not worship money, home, wife, children etc. Idol worship is idolizing Waheguru in a form and worshipping it. Guru Granth Sahib is Shabad saroop of Waheguru. No Sikh believes that Waheguru is limited to Shabad because Waheguru Himself is the Shabad that pervades everywhere. In that case, Shabad can only take us as far as it goes which according to your mahapurash is below Waheguru. If Shabad cannot take us to Waheguru then what will? Consider these panktis: ਵਾਹੁ ਵਾਹੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਹੈ ਤਿਸੁ ਜੇਵਡੁ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥ 515 ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਸਤਿ ਸਰੂਪੁ ਹੈ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਬਣੀਐ ॥ 304 ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਸਤਿ ਸਤਿ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਣਹੁ ਗੁਰਸਿਖਹੁ ਹਰਿ ਕਰਤਾ ਆਪਿ ਮੁਹਹੁ ਕਢਾਏ ॥ 308 ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਬਚਨ ਬਚਨ ਹੈ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪਾਧਰੁ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਜਨਾਵੈਗੋ ॥5॥ 1309 ਧੁਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਆਈ ॥ 628 ਜੈਸੀ ਮੈ ਆਵੈ ਖਸਮ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਤੈਸੜਾ ਕਰੀ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥ 722
  4. Sargun pasara and sargun worship are two different things. While sargun pasara is accepted in Gurbani (in fact only Satguru preached this during that time), sargun pooja is not supported. I would appreciate you providing some Shabads which advocate sargun pooja. Word Sargun is defined as ਸਰਗੁਨ - ਗੁਨ ਸਹਿਤ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਰਜੋ ਤਮੋ ਸਤੋ ਤਿੰਨੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਗੁਣ ਹੋਣ । Those who worship sargun will never rise above the maya because they are worshipping the creation (maya) and not nirgun. One cannot rise above something they are worshipping. It is irrational to assume that one worshipping creation will have their surti above it. Mind of the devotee is concentrated or absorbed in something that is being worshipped and never above it. Nirgun worship will result in devotee seeing Jot everywhere and have darshan of Waheguru everywhere and will experience hearing Shabad dhunni in every movement of nature (fire, water, babiha, etc). This is why Guru Sahib, Bhagats and gursikhs worshipped Nirgun Waheguru and saw His Jot everywhere. Then they called the creation a mere illusion or a tamasha. Once they had become one with Nirgun Waheguru they saw Him everywhere: ਸਭ ਜੋਤਿ ਤੇਰੀ ਜਗਜੀਵਨਾ ਤੂ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਹਰਿ ਰੰਗ ਰੰਗਨਾ ॥ The Saloak and the Astpaddi is about Waheguru becoming from Afur to Safur. He said one word (Ik kawayo) and the creation came into existence. This means that He created everything and His Jot is everywhere. This entire Astpadi does not advocate sargun worship. In fact it supports Nirgun worship because Guru Sahib says that the Lord is the one who created everything and whose light shines throughout the creation then why not worship this great one. Gurbani is teaching us to worship the great one not something he created. This Shabad from Sidh Goast is also not any different. Nirgun became Sargun which means He created everything. Sargun refers to creation which is entrapped by maya jaal. The same Shabad says: ਏਕੇ ਕਉ ਸਚੁ ਏਕਾ ਜਾਣੈ ਹਉਮੈ ਦੂਜਾ ਦੂਰਿ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਸੋ ਜੋਗੀ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦੁ ਪਛਾਣੈ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਕਮਲੁ ਪ੍ਰਗਾਸੁ ਥੀਆ ॥ This makes it clear that a true Sikh realizes that there is only one truth, the ultimate truth and he is realized through the Shabad Guru. No sign of sargun worship. In this Shabad Bhagat Naamdev Ji says that he sees Gobind everywhere and this soojh bhoojh was blessed to him by Satguru. Shabad says that people are influenced by maya and believe that this world is permanent and they are absorbed in it but in fact this world (Parpanch) is simply a tamasha (leela) of Waheguru and this is all temporary. By the grace of Satguru one wakes up from this dream and realizes that the great one is everywhere and He alone is permanent. Everything else is naaswant. This entire shabad does not even remotely mention sargun worship. It preaches Nirgun Waheguru worship who is the creator. Creation worship is not advocated. Creation is called a tamasha and temporary. In this Shabad, creation is also called an act or a play (baazi). Guru Sahib says that Waheguru has created this act many times, created many forms and then destroyed them. Look at some important panktis: ਸਾਂਗੁ ਉਤਾਰਿ ਥੰਮ੍ਓਿs ਪਾਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਤਬ ਏਕੋ ਏਕੰਕਾਰਾ ॥1॥ but when the play ends, he takes off the costumes, and then he is one, and only one. ||1|| ਓਹੁ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਬਿਨਸਤ ਨਾਹੀ ॥ ਨਾ ਕੋ ਆਵੈ ਨਾ ਕੋ ਜਾਹੀ ॥ ਗੁਰਿ ਪੂਰੈ ਹਉਮੈ ਮਲੁ ਧੋਈ ॥ ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਮੇਰੀ ਪਰਮ ਗਤਿ ਹੋਈ ॥4॥1॥ He is imperishable; He will never pass away. He does not come, and He does not go. The Perfect Guru has washed away the filth of ego. Says Nanak, I have obtained the supreme status. ||4||1|| Clearly, Guru Sahib preaches to worship the supreme who does not come and go instead of attaching ourselves to creation which has been created and destroyed many times like a bubble in a water. Other Shabads you quoted also support Nirgun worship and reject sargun worship. Guru Sahib calls this world a khel, tamasha, an act, play, a wave in an ocean, a bubble in a water etc. Not a single pankti teaches us to worship the creation. Once again, His Jot is everywhere but worshipping creation is not mentioned or preached. I have read Akaal Ustat and everywhere His Jot is seen by Guru Sahib but at the end “Fir Ek Hain”. He is One and He alone is permanent. Creation goes away then why worship it? Guru Sahib preached to worship the Akaal that is always alive and permanent. Idol worship is idol worship not matter what one assumes. A poison is poison even if we mix it with honey. Action of a thief is still wrong even if he steals to donate the money. Similarly, idol worship is idol worship even if one assumes Waheguru is not limited to that idol. Could you provide your opinion on this pankti: ਕਾਹੇ ਕਉ ਪੂਜਤ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਉ ਕਛੁ ਪਾਹਨ ਮੈ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਨਾਹੀ ॥ Why do you worship stones? The Lord-God is not within those stones; Guru Sahib calls himself “breaker of idols”. Clearly he did not see Waheguru in idols. Humans are better than idols, animals are better than idols but a mere stone is nothing. It gives no gyan. I think people are mistaking Shabad Roop Waheguru as Sargun saroop which is not correct. According to Bhai Nand Laal rehatnama, three roops of Satguru are defined “Nirgun, Sargun and Shabad”. Shabad and Nirgun are one because Bhai Gurdas Ji says that Waheguru Himself is Shabad and Shabad is Waheguru “Satgur Shabad, Shabad Hai Satgur”. Shabad or Dhunni does not come and go and is not part of maya jaal. Sargun is everything under maya but Shabad is above it because Gurbani is “Nirankar” (nir-akaar or formless). Shabad surat abhiyaas is nirgun not sargun. By singing Gurbani or jaap of gurmantar we are doing ustat of Akaal Purakh directly instead of doing ustat through a form or an idol. Hence, Gurbani is not sargun. Bani is Nirankar and true saroop of Akal Purakh. You are putting limits to the power of Shabad by saying that Shabad can only take one to a certain height and then there is no Shabad. Gurbani takes us directly to Sachkhand. Read the sakhi of Himayu bird told by Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Just like its wings took the arrow to its country, Gurbani will take the bhagat to Sachkhand from where it came. Gurbani is Sat Saroop. Sat or truth is nirgun. The Shabad about nine types of bhagtee does not support sargun worship. Guru Sahib describes that some do smadhee, some keep quiet, some absorb in dheyaan, some call themselves yogis, sanyasis etc but all have claimed to have darshan of Waheguru. Guru Sahib says he does not agree with it because only he can have darshan on whom Waheguru does kirpa. Guru Sahib describes the popular ways of the time to reach salvation but Guru Sahib gives his matt at the end. Rahao pankti supports prema bhagtee over all the nine ways described. It is your opinion that shabad is sargun because it is also created but shabad is without any maya attributes whereas as picture, idol etc are part of maya. When one rises above sargun and absorbs in nirgun then how do they do bhagtee or meditate? How is the ustat done? Meditating upon shabad and having surtee in the dhunni is the Gurmat way because Shabad is Waheguru Himself and not just a creation. I suggest reading entire Bavan Akhri would help. Bhagat Ji says, words cannot describe how great and powerful Waheguru is. He is beyond words. Guru Nanak Sahib also says the same in JapJi Sahib but again His ustat is also done through words. Limiting Him in words is one thing but doing His ustat in words is another.
  5. My posts are not showing up? If I am under moderation then for what reason?
  6. I could have misunderstood. You wrote in your post If a bhagat does bhagtee of a devta in a form of an idol thinking it is his ishtdev or waheguru, would he not get brahmgyan according to you? Sargun worship always involves some type of form or idol. Sargun refers to maya or the creation which means sargun worship is worship of anything that is within maya. So anyone worshipping maya will never be able to rise above it. The creation is temporary and an illusion in a sense. Also, what is “bout pooja”? I took it as idol worship or “butt parasti”. Idol worship is idol worship. It does not matter whether one believes it is Waheguru itself or Jot of Waheguru. It still is idol worship and changing the terminology doesn’t make anything different. Besides Gurbani and Dasam Granth make it clear that there is no God in idol and one would not find anything in it. Guru Sahib called it “koor kriya” without any exception. Guru Sahib did not say “As long as you see Jot of Waheguru in idols, worshipping them is acceptable”. Bhagat Kabir Ji saw god in a dog. Guru Sahib saw him everywhere but neither advocated worshipping Waheguru in any type of form. Before Guru Sahib appeared, sargun pooja was widely practiced but Guru Sahib preached only nirgun pooja while preaching that Jot is everywhere. Could you provide some quotes from Gurbani and Vaars that sargun pooja is acceptable. Granted that Jot of Waheguru is everywhere but creation is not the creator. Gurbani rejects worshipping creation. Jot of Waheguru is also within humans and one can easily justify dehdhari gurudom using your argument. Please clarify. It would be much better if you explained from Gurbani so I can understand your viewpoint and perspective better. For karam naam and kirtam naam, one can watch the video lecture by Dr. Harbhajan Singh on youtube. The original topic is about what happens to those who worship idols. This Shabad provides the answer. ਗੋਂਡ ॥ ਭੈਰਉ ਭੂਤ ਸੀਤਲਾ ਧਾਵੈ ॥ ਖਰ ਬਾਹਨੁ ਉਹੁ ਛਾਰੁ ਉਡਾਵੈ ॥1॥ ਹਉ ਤਉ ਏਕੁ ਰਮਈਆ ਲੈਹਉ ॥ ਆਨ ਦੇਵ ਬਦਲਾਵਨਿ ਦੈਹਉ ॥1॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਸਿਵ ਸਿਵ ਕਰਤੇ ਜੋ ਨਰੁ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥ ਬਰਦ ਚਢੇ ਡਉਰੂ ਢਮਕਾਵੈ ॥2॥ ਮਹਾ ਮਾਈ ਕੀ ਪੂਜਾ ਕਰੈ ॥ ਨਰ ਸੈ ਨਾਰਿ ਹੋਇ ਅਉਤਰੈ ॥3॥ ਤੂ ਕਹੀਅਤ ਹੀ ਆਦਿ ਭਵਾਨੀ ॥ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਕੀ ਬਰੀਆ ਕਹਾ ਛਪਾਨੀ ॥4॥ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਗਹੁ ਮੀਤਾ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਣਵੈ ਨਾਮਾ ਇਉ ਕਹੈ ਗੀਤਾ ॥5॥2॥6॥
  7. Neo Singh quotes from Akal Ustat to justify that sargun worship is also acceptable but the pankti itself only supports prema bhagti. Next paragraph makes it clear what is not acceptable. The Shabad is: ਕਾਹੂ ਲੈ ਪਾਹਨ ਪੂਜ ਧਰਯੋ ਸਿਰ ਕਾਹੂ ਲੈ ਲਿੰਗੁ ਗਰੇ ਲਟਕਾਇਓ ॥ ਕਾਹੂ ਲਖਿਓ ਹਰਿ ਅਵਾਚੀ ਦਿਸਾ ਮਹਿ ਕਾਹੂ ਪਛਾਹ ਕੋ ਸੀਸੁ ਨਿਵਾਇਓ ॥ ਕੋਊ ਬੁਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਤ ਹੈ ਪਸੁ ਕੋਊ ਮ੍ਰਿਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਨ ਧਾਇਓ ॥ ਕੂਰ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਉਰਝਿਓ ਸਭਹੀ ਜਗ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਵਾਨ ਕੋ ਭੇਦੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਓ ॥੧੦॥ In Shabad Hazaray, Guru Sahib says: ਕਹਾ ਭਯੋ ਜੋ ਅਤਿ ਹਿਤ ਚਿਤ ਕਰ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਸਿਲਾ ਪੁਜਾਈ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਾਨ ਥਕਿਓ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਹ ਪਰਸਤ ਕਛੁ ਕਰ ਸਿਧ ਨ ਆਈ॥1॥ Clearly, idol worship is rejected by Guru Sahib and he called all such pakhand “koor kriya” regardless of what one thinks or assume. Those who worship idols believe they are worshipping God in form of an idol or shivling or a statue but Guru Sahib simply rejects idol worship without any exception. Gurbani says: ਜੋ ਪਾਥਰ ਕਉ ਕਹਤੇ ਦੇਵ ॥ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਬਿਰਥਾ ਹੋਵੈ ਸੇਵ ॥ ਜੋ ਪਾਥਰ ਕੀ ਪਾਂਈ ਪਾਇ ॥ ਤਿਸ ਕੀ ਘਾਲ ਅਜਾਂਈ ਜਾਇ ॥1॥ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਹਮਰਾ ਸਦ ਬੋਲੰਤਾ ॥ ਸਰਬ ਜੀਆ ਕਉ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਦਾਨੁ ਦੇਤਾ ॥1॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਦੇਉ ਨ ਜਾਨੈ ਅੰਧੁ ॥ ਭ੍ਰਮ ਕਾ ਮੋਹਿਆ ਪਾਵੈ ਫੰਧੁ ॥ ਨ ਪਾਥਰੁ ਬੋਲੈ ਨਾ ਕਿਛੁ ਦੇਇ ॥ ਫੋਕਟ ਕਰਮ ਨਿਹਫਲ ਹੈ ਸੇਵ ॥2॥ Their service is useless. Those who fall at the feet of a stone god their work is wasted in vain. ||1|| My Lord and Master speaks forever. God gives His gifts to all living beings. ||1||Pause|| The Divine Lord is within the self, but the spiritually blind one does not know this. Deluded by doubt, he is caught in the noose. The stone does not speak; it does not give anything to anyone. Such religious rituals are useless; such service is fruitless. ||2|| (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ang, 1160) ਏਕੈ ਪਾਥਰ ਕੀਜੈ ਭਾਉ ॥ ਦੂਜੈ ਪਾਥਰ ਧਰੀਐ ਪਾਉ ॥ ਜੇ ਓਹੁ ਦੇਉ ਤ ਓਹੁ ਭੀ ਦੇਵਾ ॥ ਕਹਿ ਨਾਮਦੇਉ ਹਮ ਹਰਿ ਕੀ ਸੇਵਾ ॥4॥1॥ One stone is lovingly decorated, while another stone is walked upon. If one is a god, then the other must also be a god. Says Naam Dayv, I serve the Lord. Guru Gobind Singh Ji in Zafarnama says: ਮਨਮ ਕੁਸ਼ਤਨਮ ਕੋਹੀਯਾਂ ਬੁਤ ਪਰਸਤ ॥ ਕਿ ਓ ਬੁਤ ਪਰਸਤੰਦੁ ਮਨ ਬੁਤ ਸ਼ਿਕਸਤ ॥95॥ I have killed hill Rajas (kings) who are bent on mischief. They are stone idol worshippers, I break idols and I worship one Lord. (Zaffarnama, Guru Gobind Singh Ji) Mohsan Fani in Dabistan writes: ਨਾਨਕ ਪੰਥੀ ਜੋ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਹੈਨ, ਓਹ ਬੁੱਤ ਔਰ ਬੁੱਤਖਾਨਿਆਂ ਪਰ ਨਿਸ਼ਚਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਰੱਖਦੇ । Followers of Guru Nanak (Sikhs) do not have faith in idols and temples of idols. There are numerous Shabads in Gurbani that reject idol worship or any type of sargun worship which idolizes Waheguru. Gurbani teaches to worship Nirgun only and this is the way that was taught and preached by Guru Sahib only. If one thinks they can reach muktee by worshipping idols, trees, graves etc they are highly mistaken and wasting their time. Gurbani teaches to focus on “Gur Moorat” which is Shabad. Bhai Gurdas Ji also states the same in Vaars. Guru Gobind Singh Ji also supports nirgun worship. He wrote abundantly on sargun Kaal but never ever advocated worshipping it. ਕਾਹੇ ਕਉ ਪੂਜਤ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਉ ਕਛੁ ਪਾਹਨ ਮੈ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਨਾਹੀ ॥ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੋ ਪੂਜ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਕਰਿ ਕੈ ਜਿਹ ਪੂਜਤ ਹੀ ਅਘ ਓਘ ਮਿਟਾਹੀ ॥ ਆਧਿ ਬਿਆਧਿ ਕੇ ਬੰਧਨ ਜੇਤਕ ਨਾਮ ਕੇ ਲੇਤ ਸਭੈ ਛੁਟਿ ਜਾਹੀ ॥ ਤਾਹੀ ਕੋ ਧਯਾਨੁ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਨ ਸਦਾ ਇਨ ਫੋਕਟ ਧਰਮ ਕਰੇ ਫਲੁ ਨਾਹੀ ॥੨੦॥ Why do you worship stones? The Lord-God is not within those stones; you may only worship Him, whose adoration destroys clusters of sins; with the remembrance on the Name of the Lord, the ties of all suffering are removed; ever mediate on that Lord because the hollow religious will not bear any fruit. (33 Swayeas, Guru Gobind Singh Ji) In Dasam Granth, Guru Sahib focused more on Karam Naams instead of Kirtam Naams "Karam Naam Barnat Sumatt".
  8. He became Shaheed in 1704 therefore he must have completed it prior to his shaheedi. Also, no one has raised any objection to it nor declared it work of later time. I bet you had probably never even heard of it before I mentioned it. It includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and so many other events that are not found anywhere else. Yes but no scholar believes that rehatnamas found today are the original ones or copies of the original. Rehatnamas of Bhai Chaupa Singh was huge in size but today we only get small portion of it. So unless you can provide an original rehatnama my point stands. Besides you have already accepted these to be unoriginal by calling them “mixture”. So why cry over rehatnamas being eye witness accounts? Bhai Daya Singh mentions Sweyeas. Some mention Jap and Jaap. These banis are read today. Do you have any reference to prove that banis from only Guru Granth Sahib were read in 1699 or ever have been read to prepare Amrit during 18th century? Are you rejecting Bajjar Kurehits, Rehat Maryada, Anand Karaj, Nishan Sahib, Akaal Takht, Fateh, Khalsa Bana, Panj Pyare etc just because they are not in Guru Granth Sahib? My point was that not everything about Sikh way of life is in Gurbani and therefore we must consider other sources. If Hari, Murari, Raam, Narayan etc didn’t mean Waheguru for 100s of years then why all of the sudden their definitions changed? Why did Bhagat Naamdev Ji use “Beethal” for God? Why sudden change of definition? Allah was used for the biggest idol but Mohammad used it to refer to the only god. You did not provide any Gurbani tuk which says Bhagauti can never be used for Waheguru. Also, why do you think God’s name can only be masculine? Is he a man? What is there mention of 9 names of Nanak as separate entities doing in Bhagautee’s vaar? Because Guru Sahib did sifat of first 9 Gurus just like Bhai Gurdas Ji does sifat of six Gurus after mentioning Waheguru. . Yes but how does it prove Chandi Di Vaar is not authentic. How does that take away bir rass? Vaar can be written for anyone. Guru Sahib wrote literature to wake up the spirit of majority of people who prescribed to the Hindu faith. Guru Sahib used Raam and Allah at many places (more than the word Wahgeuru) for the same purpose in Gurbani. He wanted the suppressed to stand against the oppression and the best way was to give examples from their beliefs. For Sikhs it is a good source of knowledge of ancient ithihaas/mithihaas. Sikhs don’t need to go to Brahmins to study Sanskrit to learn ancient texts. Again it is not a “word to word” type translation. Source is ancient but translation’s language, representation and viewpoint is different. Second pauri makes it clear who the creator is i.e. Bhagauti/Waheguru. I never wrote that. Examples I gave show that Bhagauti is used for Waheguru, supreme power, sword etc. You need to prove why do you think it invokes goddess? So you are allergic to the word now? It could’ve been whatever Guru Sahib wished but since He chose Bhagauti, it is Bhagauti. Why are names from Hindu mythology in Gurbani? Why not invent new words like Waheguru? All these words refer to specific Hindu deity. Why were they used for Waheguru only in Gurbani? Why sudden change of definition? Answer my question if you think you understand. Show me one word in Gurbani that doesn’t have multiple meanings. For a live debate, find yourself a scholar who will debate. I will not do that for you. I am debating here. If you don’t like it then end it (which I believe you have)?
  9. Answers, rebuttals and debates can be found here http://searchsikhism.com/islam.html On this forum the debate took place around December 2006. Umar isn't active anymore.
  10. I will keep it short and to the point to save my time. False. This is a Granth called Siri Gur Katha which also includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and physical description of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It is not simply a rehatnama. It was completed before 1704. Chaupai Sahib was completed in 1696. Who is “us”? You and who else? Why not get a copy yourself. Surely I can scan but will you accept it just by reading those few lines? I don’t think so. Here is the link which gives little more info. http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=38445&hl= He would’ve written against it in one of his books but he did not. He called it Bani of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Or are you suggesting he lied and intentionally wrote false literature? He clearly says: ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਭੀ ਤਿੰਨ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹਨ-ਜਾਪੁ, ਸਵੈਯੇ ਤੇ ਚੌਪਈ। He studied it, analyzed it and then came to the conclusion that it is Bani of Guru Sahib. In his steek of Jaap Sahib he supports Bhagauti unless you believe he wrote stuff without studying it which wouldn’t make him a Sikh scholar. If you believe Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama was written before 1708 then present some hard evidence. How ridiculous and childish are your questions. He knows which banis were read because he was there. He took Amrit that day. He accompanied Guru Sahib all the time. Historians agree that Amrit Sanchaar kept going on for many days and 80,000 Sikhs took Amrit. Those who took Amrit also participated in giving Amrit and they all prepared Amrit the same way as Guru Sahib did. Therefore it is foolish to assume that no Sikhs would know which banis were read. You need to provide some solid evidence that it is a fake. A rational and sane person cannot reject a source without ever reading it first. Sources you mentioned were written later and are not considered eye witness accounts by any historian or scholar. Many sources mention JapJi Sahib, Chaupai Sahib and Anand Sahib. Some mention Jaap Sahib. In any case, most of the 11 sources mention Dasam Granth Banis. This simply throws out your case. Even if we assume that we do not know which banis were read it can easily be concluded that Dasam Banis were read. By the way do you consider these sources authentic or reliable? I don’t think you do so why even make a case out of them? Then why mention 11 historical sources? What does Guru Granth Sahib Ji say about preparing Khanday Da Amrit, nitnem banis, rehat maryada, four bajjar kurehats, Anand Karaj etc.? How about Nishaan Sahib, Akal Takhat, Fateh, Khalsa Bana, Panj Pyare etc.? Do you even know in which context was Guru Granth Sahib written and why these things are not mentioned? Do not reduce status of Guru Sahib to the level of a book of history or dos and don’ts. You lot have not grasped the true understanding. Show me a quote from Gurbani which rejects Bhagauti word being used for God. Because it is not “Bhagtan Di Vaar”. It is Vaar of Bhagauti. Again, it is a Vaar. Do you know what is the purpose of Vaar and why is it composed and sung? Second pauri makes it clear who the supreme shakti is. It is Bhagauti, Waheguru, that created everything and gave power to everyone. Translation (not word to word or direct one) starts from pauri 3 and ends at 55. The last two lines are simply summary of 29 saloaks written in Durga Saptshati. Word Bhagauti has multiple meanings. In Gurbani it is used for Bhagat. In Dasam Granth it is used in different context and not always for goddess. Bhai Gurdas Ji uses it in different context. ਲਈ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਦੁਰਗਸਾਹ ਵਰ ਜਾਗਨ ਭਾਰੀ ॥ If the word ‘Bhagauti’ means goddess then does, the above mean, “Durga caught hold of bhagauti (goddess) and hit her on the head of Raja Sumbh and she tasted his blood?” ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੈਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ (ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 1) Hail to Siri (mighty) Bhagauti (Sword) that cuts sharp. ਨਾਉ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਲੋਹੁ ਘੜਾਇਆ ॥ Name Bhagauti made of iron. (Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 25) Show me one line in Chandi Di Vaar that tells the readers to worship a goddess and how to worship her. Show me one line that equates goddess to the level of God. It is highly against the Hindu belief to promote a female character and elevate her above the level of three gods. Words Murari, Niranjan, Keshva, Hari, Narayan, Raam, Paarbrahma etc are also used by Hindus for their gods. Why didn't Guru Sahib invent new words instead of using the old ones for Waheguru?
  11. This topic is about Bhagauti not Chrittars or Akal Ustat. So what exactly did you prove by quoting him? Nothing. Stick to the topic. I never got mad at him. I don’t need to run to the mods for anything. Do you have any fact to back up your claims? Your statement has nothing to do with this topic. Ever wonder why you are getting warnings from mods on this forum? Once again, this topic is about Bhagauti but you choose to jump around and never stick to the topic. Reminds me of the debate Singhs had with Noormahal’s chela who kept changing the topic and never addressed the points. Pathetic. Chaupai Sahib from Chrittars is the one read during Amrit Sanchaar so do not foolishly try to prove anything without any evidence. Regarding Amrit and Banis that must be read. Read what Shaheed Bhai Jeevan Singh Ji has written in his eye witness account called Siri Gur Katha: ਜਪੁ ਜਾਪ ਸਵੈਯੇ ਚੌਪਈ ਅਨੰਦ ਕੋ ਪਾਠ ਸੋਂ ਪਾਹੁਲ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰੀਜੈ । ਪਾਂਓ ਚੁਲੇ ਮੁਖ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਸੋ ਯਾਜਕ ਏਤ ਹੀ ਨੇਤਰ ਕੇਸ ਪਵੀਜੈ ।੧੧੩। Full details of 1699 are written by him along with how Amrit should be prepared, five kakakrs and what happened on that particular day. Missionaries are so pathetic. On one hand they reject all historic sources by calling them creation of “Brahmins” and on the other hand they use the same sources in a futile attempt to disapprove Amrit and five Banis to which even Prof. Sahib Singh agrees. Do you have anything to add from your own or are you going to waste our time by copying what others have written? Why not stick to the topic instead of getting personal and defending or attacking others?
  12. Go here http://www.sikhmarg.com/your-view.html Post by Surjeet Singh dated June 1, 2009 has all the names but mine is not listed. His statement has no link, no official proof and he did not include any email to support his allegations. Anyone can fabricate a statement and put any names in it. I know Inder Singh and some of PW members and they are not RSS. Regardless, stick to the topic and stop making up lies. I am not ignoring anything. You stated his name first so it is your obligation to defend your position. You hid behind his name and when presented with contradictory evidence you run around by declaring everyone else wrong because they are not perfect. Well, by the same argument you are not perfect and therefore you are wrong. Now, randip singh can see why people cannot debate in a rational manner. Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha supported Dasam Granth in Hum Hindu Nahin, Gurmat Sudhakar, Mahan Kosh and Gurmat Maartand. On top of that he wrote steek on Chandi Di Vaar so you need to defend why you are right and why bhoomika which could’ve been edited or written later is correct in the face of five sources written by Bhai Sahib and published during his lifetime? Otherwise, simply state your reasons and not hid behind anyone’s name, They were great scholars and did not write anything without studying it properly. It is simply foolish to discredit them without any shred of evidence. You (kal da shokra) do not know better than these scholars. He did not write a steek of Chaupai Sahib but doesn’t mean he did not believe in it. Prof. Sahib Singh declared Chaupai Sahib Bani of Guru Sahib and I provided you with the quote. Here it is again: "ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਸਿੰਘਾਂ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਜ਼ਰੂਰੀ ਹੈ, ਕਿ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਪੰਜ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਹੋਣ, ਜਿਹੜੀਆਂ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਨ ਵੇਲੇ ਪੜ੍ਹੀਦੀਆਂ ਹਨ। ਉਹਨਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਭੀ ਤਿੰਨ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹਨ-ਜਾਪੁ, ਸਵੈਯੇ ਤੇ ਚੌਪਈ। ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਸੁਤੇ ਹੀ ਅਨੁਮਾਨ ਲੱਗ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਸਿੱਖ ਸੰਗਤਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਕਰਨ ਦਾ ਉਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਆਮ ਸੀ, ਅਤੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਬਾਣੀਆ ਭੀ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਯਾਦ ਸਨ”। He believed in Bachittar Natak as well but we can discuss it later in a different topic. I thought you would’ve had grown up a little but you are the same old kid. If samra doesn’t believe in chrittars then why have a favorite one? Those who believe in Dasam Granth do not look at Charittars as sex stories but only pick out the morals. I do have a favorite chrittar. It is chrittar of Noop Kuar in which the character (king) beautifully explains why illicit relation with other woman is against religious principles. This is how I look at it. Clearly, my perspective is different than that of samra’s or yours. Mentality shows who thinks like a Sikh and who thinks like a kaami person. Those who only see, think and talk about kaam are immoral and unethical people. Period. I personally think you are a besharam who instead of learning anything about morality only looks at sexual contents and then absorbs his mind in it. If anti-Dasam Granth people like yourself considers themselves to be true Sikhs then why is it that you people always twist chrittars and have nothing but lust on your minds? This topic was about Bhgauti but once again you brought in chrittars. Shows how rationally you are capable of debating and what exactly is in your mind all the time. Kujh sharam kha tay akal kar. Now are you ready to stick to the topic and discuss Bhgauti like a grown up? Then Chrittars can be discussed one by one. Discuss the contents in proper context. Funny, first you said you won’t debate online but you are the one posting more than all others. What a character.
  13. I am pretty sure you have read it. He stopped responding and did not address my single question. Instead he started citing his favorite stories from charittars in a shameful manner. A Sikh posts his favorite sakhi. Funny, as I have not seen it myself. I do not know anyone from RSS. You must be on their guest list as you receive their program agenda. Do you have any facts or just hypothesis? Comment on the post and stick to the topic. Present evidence that Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha twisted facts in his book. I posted direct quote from Gurmat Martand. Also see an article by a missionary who admits that Bhai Sahib believed in Dasam Granth http://www.sikhmarg.com/2009/0510-pritham-bhagauti.html. Further, what is your position on Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha's Chandi Di Vaar steek. I can post direct quotes if you wish. In Hum Hindu Nahin and Gurmat Sudhakar he supports Bhagauti word used to refer to Akal Purakh. His son Bhagwant Singh wrote two important books on Dasam Granth. Surely he would've received his education from his father. So do not malign this great scholar and hide behind his name. Now come to Prof. Sahib Singh who is considered a great scholar by missionaries. 1) He wrote Jaap Sahib steek. 2) Regarding Bhagauti he writes: ੴ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਫਤਹਿ॥ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਜੀ ਸਹਾਏ॥ਪਾਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੀ 10॥ਏਥੇ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹੀ 10 ਦਾ ਭਾਵ ਇਹ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਅਰਦਾਸ ‘ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਭਗਉਤੀ’ ਤੋਂ ਲੈਕੇ ‘ਸਭ ਥਾਈਂ ਹੋਇ ਸਹਾਇ’ ਤੱਕ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਉਚਾਰੀ ਹੋਈ ਹੈ॥ ਏਥੇ ਅੰਕ 10 ਦਾ ਪਾਠ ‘ਦਸ ਕਰਨਾ ਅਸ਼ੁੱਧ ਹੈ,ਸੁੱਧ ਪਾਠ ਦਸਵੀਂ’ ਹੈ॥…ਹਾਂ, ਅਰਦਾਸ ਵਾਲੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਉਚਾਰੀ ਹੋਈ ਹੈ, ਇਸ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਇਸਦੇ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਵਿਚ ਪੜ੍ਹਨਾ ਹੈ ‘ਸ੍ਰੀ ਮੁਖਵਾਕ ਪਾਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਦਸਵੀਂ’”। 3) In Jeevan Birtant Guru Gobind Singh Ji on page 88 he writes: ਇਤਿਹਾਸਕ ਗਵਾਹੀ- ਜੰਗ ਤੋਂ ਪਿੱਛੋਂ ਛੇ ਮਹੀਨੇ ਹੋਰ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਪਾਉਂਟੇ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਹੀ ਟਿਕੇ ਰਹੇ। ਭੰਗਾਣੀ ਦੇ ਜੰਗ ਦਾ ਸਾਰਾ ਹਾਲ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਉਥੇ ਹੀ ਬੀਰ-ਰਸ-ਭਰੀ ਕਵਿਤਾ ਵਿਚ ਲਿਖਿਆ, ਜੋ ‘ਬਚਿਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਟਕ’ ਦੇ ਅੱਠਵੇਂ ਅਧਿਆਏ ਵਿਚ ਦਰਜ਼ ਹੈ”। On page 92 he writes: “ਵੇਲੇ ਦੀ ਸੰਭਾਲ-ਪਰ ਨਿਰੇ ਹਥਿਆਰ ਕਿਸੇ ਕੰਮ ਨਹੀਂ, ਜੇ ਹਥਿਆਰ ਫੜ੍ਹਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਦੇ ਅੰਦਰ ਬੀਰ ਰਸ ਦਾ ਹੁਲਾਰਾ ਨਹੀਂ।ਜਿਵੇਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹਰਿਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖਤ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਦੀ ਇਮਾਰਤ ਬਣਵਾ ਕੇ, ਉਸਦੇ ਸਾਹਮਣੇ ਢਾਡੀਆਂ ਪਾਸੋਂ ਜੋਧਿਆਂ ਦੀਆਂ ਵਾਰਾਂ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਸੰਗ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਕਰਵਾਏ ਸਨ, ਤਿਵੇਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਭੀ ਕੀਤਾ।‘…ਰਮਾਇਣ’ ਅਤੇ ‘ਮਹਾਂਭਾਰਤ’ ਦੇ ਜੰਗਾਂ ਦੀਆਂ ਸਦੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ ਪੁਰਾਣੀਆਂ ਕਥਾਵਾਂ ਸੰਸਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਵਿਚ ਲਿਖੀਆਂ ਮੌਜੂਦ ਸਨ।ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਨਵੇਂ ਸੱਚੇ ਵਿਚ ਢਾਲ ਕੇ ਨਵੇਂ ਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ ਲਿਆਂਦਾ”। On page 133 he writes "ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਸਿੰਘਾਂ ਵਾਸਤੇ ਜ਼ਰੂਰੀ ਹੈ, ਕਿ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਪੰਜ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਹੋਣ, ਜਿਹੜੀਆਂ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਤਿਆਰ ਕਰਨ ਵੇਲੇ ਪੜ੍ਹੀਦੀਆਂ ਹਨ।ਉਹਨਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਭੀ ਤਿੰਨ ਬਾਣੀਆਂ ਹਨ-ਜਾਪੁ, ਸਵੈਯੇ ਤੇ ਚੌਪਈ। ਇਸ ਤੋਂ ਸੁਤੇ ਹੀ ਅਨੁਮਾਨ ਲੱਗ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਸਿੱਖ ਸੰਗਤਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਜ਼ੁਬਾਨੀ ਯਾਦ ਕਰਨ ਦਾ ਉਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਆਮ ਸੀ, ਅਤੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੀਆਂ ਬਾਣੀਆ ਭੀ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਯਾਦ ਸਨ”। In Babania Kahaneeya he quotes many times from Dasam Granth especially Bachittar Natak. All great scholars from different thought of school supported Dasam Granth. Those who didn't were excommunicated.
  14. Here is what Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha writes in Gurmat Martand part 2 on page 567 ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ-ਲੋਕ ਪ੍ਰਸਿੱਧ ਦਸਵੇਂ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ, ਜਿਸਦਾ ਸੰਖੇਪ ਨਾਮ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਹੈ, ਉਸਦੀ ਅਸਲਿਯਤ ਇਹ ਹੈ-ਕਾਵਯ ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਸ਼ਾਂਤ ਵੀਰ ਰਸ ਆਦਿਕ ਰਸ ਪੂਰਤ ਮਨੋਹਰ ਰਚਨਾ ਆਪ ਲਿਖਦੇ ਅਤੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਦਰਬਾਰੀ 52 ਕਵੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ ਨਿਰੰਤਰ ਲਿਖਵਾਇਆਂ ਕਰਦੇ ਸਨ…ਸੰਮਤ 1778 ਵਿਚ ਮਾਤਾ ਸੁੰਦਰੀ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਭਾਈ ਮਨੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੂੰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ ਦੇ ਦਰਬਾਰ ਹਰਿਮੰਦਰ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੀ ਥਾਪਿਆ, ਭਾਈ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਇਹ ਸੇਵਾ ਉਤਮ ਰੀਤਿ ਨਾਲ ਨਿਭਾਹੀ ਅਰ ਇਸ ਸਮੇ ਕਈ ਪੁਸਤਕ ਲਿਖੇ…ਇਸਤੋਂ ਭਿੰਨ ਇਕ ਦਸਵੇਂ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਲਿਖਿਆ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਵਿਦਿਆ ਸਾਗਰ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਦੇ ਕੁਛ ਭਾਗ,ਜੋ ਯਤਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਕਵੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ ਹੱਥ ਲੱਗ ਸਕੇ ਏਕੱਤਰ ਕੀਤੇ… ਦਸਮੇਸ਼ ਪਿਤਾ ਅਵਤਾਰਾਦਿਕ ਦੀ ਕਥਾ ਵਿਚ ਕਿਤੇ ਕਿਤੇ ਆਪਣਾ ਸਿਧਾਂਤ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਕਰ ਦੇਂਦੇ ਸਨ, ਜਿਸ ਤੋਂ ਪਾਠਕਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਟਪਲਾ ਨਾ ਲੱਗੇ; ਜਿਵੇਂ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾਵਤਾਰ ਵਿਚ ਇਹ ਚੌਪਈ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਸਾਫ ਲਿਖਿਆ ਹੈ ਕਿ-‘ਕਿਸਨ ਬਿਸਨ ਕਬਹੂ ਨ ਧਿਆਊਂ’॥ ਐਸੇ ਹੀ ਰਾਮਾਵਤਾਰ ਦੇ ਅੰਤ ਪਾਠ ਹੈ-‘ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਅਨੇਕ ਕਹੈਂ ਮਤ ਏਕ ਨ ਮਾਨਯੋ॥ ਅਰ ਚੌਬੀਸ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਕਥਾ ਦੇ ਮੁੱਢ ਆਪਣੀ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਭੁਮਿਕਾ ਲਿਖ ਕੇ ਹੋਰ ਭੀ ਸਪਸ਼ਟ ਕਰ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਹੈ-‘ਜੋ ਚੌਬੀਸ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਕਹਾਏ॥ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਤੁਮ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ! ਤਿਨਕ ਨ ਪਾਏ’॥…ਭਾਵੇਂ ਬੀੜਾਂ ਤਾਂ ਬੇਅੰਤ ਹਨ, ਪਰ ਮੁਖ ਦੋ ਹੀ ਹਨ-ਇਕ ਭਾਈ ਮਨੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ, ਜਿਸਦਾ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਮ ਭਾਈ ਦੀਪ ਸਿੰਘ ਵਾਲੀ ਭੀ ਹੈ*, ਦੂਜੀ ਭਾਈ ਸੁੱਖਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ ਜਿਸਨੂੰ ਖਾਸ ਬੀੜ ਭੀ ਸੱਦਦੇ ਹਨ। *ਕਿਉਂ ਕਿ ਬਾਬਾ ਦੀਪ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਇਸ ਦੀਆਂ ਕਈ ਕਾਪੀਆਂ ਕਰਾਈਆਂ ਸਨ”। Regarding Bhagauti, one can read steek of Chandi Di Vaar written by him. It leaves no doubt that he believed in Dasam Granth. His son Bhagwant Singh spent 30 years studying Dasam Granth and wrote two important books.
  15. Bhai Kanh Singh Nabha says cleary in Mahan Kosh under the entry for this 'rehitnama' that this was not written by Bhai Mani Singh and that Guru Gobind Singh would not have given such hukams. Please see Mahan Kosh for the entire entry. Macleod also agrees that this does not seem authentic.
×
×
  • Create New...