navjot2

this is called an excuse. why do you think Gurus words to you/sangat need to be 'interpreted'? you have been brainwashed to think that way by people with ideological interests what will happen if you take it as its written? have you ever thought to?

??? SCHOLARS like SINGH2? yeah from the University of GOOGLE. n30 im seriously doubting your intelligence friend. these so called fanatics you talk about describe singh2 etc perfectly. you only have to look at their last couple of responses. Singh2 i havent even heard of Sumer Singh, because i dont read bullshit written by others I only read the Original. And 'accept' the language in it. If you people want to run to others because you get scared when Guru uses -'GASP!'- a 'Hindu' word and you need some made up explanation or excuse for it thats your choice. but in the process you have become the chela of that 'scholar'. it is filth like you who are 'anti-panthic'. now your last hope is come out screaming 'oh he is RSS' so no one reads my stuff. oh well. im not on some 'heoric crusader' trip, you can delete my posts and ban me if you want i honestly dont give a shit.

when did i say siksh are a hindu sect? you are projecting your own 'enemy of sikhism' fantasies that get you so excited

so you people are saying sarguna Durga is some kind of low concept? so what is this: "ਨਮੋ ਚਤੁਰ ਬਾਹੀ ਨਮੋ ਅਸਟ ਬਾਹਾ ॥" O Goddess ! thou art four-armed, eight-armed, (292)

"I sing infinite Names (of the Lord), and meet the Supreme Purusha.35." that is what i have been saying all along. But like the part i quoted He and His Shakti are differentiated (Kal and Kaalika). im not expert on Hindi grammar but in Panjabi i was taught by my panjabi teacher that when you want to show respect for a female elder you refer to her in male terms. so i assume imilar in Hindi type languages. Hence out of respect it says 'Hamara' (male case).

lol seriously PARANOID

very well said. i think you hit the nail on the head. i disagree that we should make excuses for them. what is sacred should be left alone.

whats so offensive about that story? this is brilliant stuff i dont understand the contraversy?

now the caste issue too? doesnt it say somewhere in Dasam Granth (correct me if I am wrong I might have misunderstood it) that part of the signs of Kaljug will be high and low castes intermarrying, Brahmans will act like shudras and shudras will act like Brahmans, and other stuff there will be incest etc i think in the part about Kalki Avtar. not that im hung up on caste. just mentioning it because you brought it up.

exactly! Durga is also Him- But you cant accept that because, as has become clear, you are hinduphobic. Also what exactly has Manu Smriti got to do with our discussion of Dasam Granth? Akal and His Shakti have been specifically differentiated: "ਸਰਬ ਕਾਲ ਹੈ ਪਿਤਾ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਬਿ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਮਾਤ ਹਮਾਰਾ ॥" He, my Lord is Father and Destroyer of all, the goddess Kalika is my mother. 174 So Mahakal/Akaal and His Shakti are two different reference points.

so thats their dharam, i wouldnt know. who says that every Hindu conforms to Manu Smriti? Also, is there Dev Dasi system at your local Mandir? you are just grasping at straws. its no water of my back if you criticise others you have just exposed your mindset. whereas those people cant accept Dasam Bani because of its Hindu references you have built up this thing about it being some kind of anti-Hindu text. you are mirror image of them. keep your ideological filth away from our scipture.

see, hatred of Hindus. Anyway, to each their own. I dont have to concern myself with what Hindus (or Muslims) do, certainly not to feel better about myself.

hi sorry know its been a while: selective quoting just isnt convincing. like i said your ideology comes first, then you selectively quote to back it. by repeating it over and over you think you can bludgeon everyone into accepting it. this is called fanatical behaviour. its now coming to the stage when you are just quoting something and then insisiting something else like that makes what you are saying true. ਪਲੰਗੀ ਪਵੰਗੀ ਨਮੋ ਚਰਚਿਤੰਗੀ ॥ पलंगी पवंगी नमो चरचितंगी ॥ O the rider of the steed-like lion; ਨਮੋ ਭਾਵਨੀ ਭੂਤ ਹੰਤਾ ਭੜਿੰਗੀ ॥ नमो भावनी भूत हंता भड़िंगी ॥ O Bhavani of beautiful limbs! Thou art the destroyer of all engaged in the war. now tell me, do swords ride lions? " Namo Bhavani "- you know yourself what that refers to. I alredy showed where it says Devi ki Ustat and Sharada Devi etc but if you want to remain in denial about what is actually written thats your choice/ a little while back i googled over some keywords from your arguements and low and behold- all this i find on other peoples web pages. you have filled your mind with other peoples views. treating Bani like an ideological document seems misguided, sorry. saying that Guru Gobind Singh only translated part of the Devi's Purana as part of your arguement isnt relevant. Who are you to second guess his intention? Further, as you should know, Dasam Bani was compiled from what Mani Singh Ji could find. theres only One. When it is the form of a Goddess being described in Bani it is still the same One. You neednt get scared. all i want to say is that a person who reads Bani with faith and sincerety they will get the right idea for themselves and shouldnt listen to anyone else (including me). We should be silent infront of GurBani. Not use it to incaluclate our own biases into people.

as i understand it, Durga (Shivaa) is shakti rupa of Akal just like four armed Vishnu/Krishna is used as sargun bhagti Rupa of Akal in SGGS.

" Kā▫i▫ā anḏar barahmā bisan mahesā sabẖ opaṯ jiṯ sansārā. " Within the body, are Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, from whom the whole world emanated. Ang 754

see you could not help but slander hindus, why? you say they have descrinimation of women but what about female infantocide in Panjab? and i have yet to see a woman doing kirtan or even reading paath at Harimandar etc you say we have to protect our heritage from them- but its so called kar sevaks who demolished sikh historical buildings.

in Sukhmani it says a Bhram Giani is Nirankar Itself. So in that way you could look at a Brahm Giani and say 'you form is so beautiful, your teeth so beautiful' why not the same with Krishna rupa?

this is one way of looking at it, but in this instance we would not differentiate God and His Shakti. By seperating them we are implying a differentiation for devoted purposes. here Shakti is Akals servant. Durga is both Shiva and Shakti. She is a rupa (form/representation) of Akal. So I guess it is not correct to say Shivaa is Akal, but you are ignoring the special use of the word Shivaa, as in via Durga.

You have brought into Arya Samajs explanation of itself. Like i said, read what it says about Vashnavas, Shaivas, Shaktas. You think these groups agree with them?

You understanding of Sargun is flawed in sukhmani it says nothing is born and nothing dies (to paraphrase- 'na kichu jamia na kichu marai' nothing is born and nothing dies). there are different ways of udnerstanding things, does not mean one way is better than the other. you are dodging. tell me who is this four armed person described? you are not giving any explanation of the shabad to back what you are saying. the shabad says He (Vishnu-Rupa) is met by Bhole bhakti. you are saying how can God has four arms when he wasnt born. when was Vishnu born? And it is in Gurbani Him being described as four-armed, not something I am saying myself.

If you think this Hari is a different Hari why would He use this word in the first place? Do you know what Hari in Hinduism esssentially is? Peoples understanding of the Naam may differ but the Naam remains the same, as does the one signified by it. This is interesting so you are of those 'Sati Naam' people in conflict with people who say only Gurmantra is Vaheguru? are there any RSS pposting here bad things about the Guru? no. why should i write about them? to incalculate insecurity into people who read this thing?

hey singh, you are right about bhagauti meaning sword in some instances, but only as a symbol of Shakti. this i must admit now, because i was reading Dasam Granth and came across something. look: ਨਮਸਕਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੜਗ ਕੋ ਕਰੋਂ ਸੁ ਹਿਤੁ ਚਿਤੁ ਲਾਇ ॥ ਪੂਰਨ ਕਰੋਂ ਗਰੰਥ ਇਹੁ ਤੁਮ ਮੁਹਿ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਹਾਇ ॥੧॥ look at the word kRRG- another word for sword. but why ask a sword for help in writing? because it symbolises the same thing that Sharaada, Devi etc do- Shakti

kahan nabha singh nabha. whatever his name is. nabha is enough to idenify him to me. i really dont care which is his first and last name. where am i celebrating fanatical Hindu literature? its either one or the other in your simple mindset isnt it? shudhi =arya samaj ceremony. where did i say i am fan of arya samaj? im not interested in them at all. they convert any sikh good for them, likewise with muslims etc clearly wasnt much of a sikh in the first place so good riddance YOUR ideology is misleading sikhs. you are competing with these so called Hindus you keep going on about, so you feel threatened by them. They dont pretend not to be Hindus. You are doing you dirty work from the inside, under the guise of 'protecting sikhi'. it doesnt need your crappy protection, which is really just your insecure lurching for 'seperate identity' (which is already intrinsicly there) to be affirmed. I have not even read Markandey purana. Am I supposed to be offenced by you calling it mine? Im happy to take it thanks. Now I can understand the references my Guru makes to Bhavani Durga etc hopefully read Durga Saptashati know who Chandi is.

funny you can only now say 'you are wrong'. instead of explainging why. Let me explain to you simple language: the ocean is in the drop and the drop is in the ocean. the sunlight is not seperate from the sun. you know the sun by its 'sun'light. Is Nirguna Akal Purakh four-armed? is kabirs four-armed purakh different form the one in Guru's saloks- the one with discuss. I said Vishnu Rupa. Akal in the *form* of Vishnu. You show me what is in the whole shabad that I am missing?

see what i mean about insecurity and fixation on how others see us? at least he is honest though. so sikhs can only define ourselves in terms of what other people think of us? thats all there is to for you? funny Jains, Buddhists dont have these problems or insecurities. and they're even smaller minority who is saying sikhs arent entitled to seperate laws or identity etc? so long as they are natural and or/necessary and not manufactured out of pettiness/fear. im not proud of Guru Tegh Bahadurs matrydom I'm humbled by it. trying to take credit for acts of Gurus and great Sikhs has made modern sikhs very ignorant/vain and self-conceited.