navjot2

the reason that there is "no evidence against this" is because it is not a fact but your own faith in them and what they teach. you have no evidence to prove that Guru Arjan Dev said they are 'key to Gurbani' other than faith in what these peopl have told you. if that is enough for you so be it, nothing wrong with that for you, but dont expect other people who dont follow these groups to have to accept to what they say. it seems obvious to me that it is being 'pushed' upon us a part of some cannon. theres no evidence for us that texts like this and Nand Lal ji are 'cannonical' because tehre is no sign they were approved by any of the Gurus. therefore why would we accept anything to be put 'beside' Guru Granth at all in terms of status or importance?

gurmat? wheres the Gurmat part? At least the Kabir cartoon taught his lines why is the cartton wrong?: 1.this is based on someones imagination to 'fill in the gaps', 2. real people in serious situations from history have been depicted as cartoon characters. 3. the intent is to emotionally 'bribe' children into feeling 'pride for sikhi'. its disgusting!

kaljug... 'jini kal raakhi meri'. i didnt object to someone liking their own prophet most of all (which in normal instances is human nature anyway) i objected to the use of belittling others. it wasnt neceesary. at the end of today if tommorow some hindu or muslim puts up a similar artical sleighting a Guru then you people will probably start screaming your heads off rather than saying 'oh but its natural for them to think that...' jsingh yawn keep playing rhetorical games if you want to, its a classic sign of 'trying to win an arguement'. the tone of the artical is obvious. if you want to try and put Mehtab Singhs self congratulatory nonesense in line with Gurbani in order to play a rhetorical game to protect your ideological brothers' face then thats just sad. your analogy with the apple is so pathetic in this respect that im speachless. i suggest you reread. like i said to kaljug "jini kal raakhi meri'. You didnt even bother quoting this part in your english rendering. You are so shameless that you just grabbed what you could. This salok is saying (it seems to me?) though the speaker knows nothing except that greater than knowing anything great (look at the salok preceding) is knowing Guru Nanak who held his back the speakers sins. are you so sly and shameless that you think you can take half of a salok to push your arguments? p.s. sidenote- i wouldnt usually even comment on any Salok if i had no understanding of Gurbani Grammar, but its obvious here that neither of you do either

you want to talk about poetic license, let alone descration of history? : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPbUCuuP_CU i just find this insulting

oh dear. so you are seriously comparing this mehtab singh to Guru Arjan? if that is indeed the meaning of the salok you quoted (im not so sure it is) then tell me where Guru Arjan is belittering others to make this point? theres a difefrence between 'oh my teacher is greatest...he did this for me/he has this quality' and 'oh my teacher is great...because theirs is weak'. i cant even believe i have to explain this!

the reason you dotn call your father or grandfather by the first name is because theya re your father and grandfather. it was a stupid comparison. you were just trying to undermine me. where did you get these janamsakhis of Guru Hagobind from? And are you saying that these sampardas have retained the knwoledge that i am referring to- grammar, 'ghar'? because my research suggest otherwise. "Gurbani and its meanings are exactly what the Taksals teach! Please prove otherwise." again if you are making the claim it is for you to prove. you bring the evidence. this seems a strange claim anyway. hey if you want to follow them im not discouraging you. "Obviously not every single verse or bani is the same. The comments about their effect are from personal experience, which is why I told you to try it for yourself. Do you know what bir-rass means?" so now you are taking a u-turn? so is your or shaheediyan's of some taksaals 'personal experince' the standard for everyone else ot absorb? when he mentions bir raas i assume he is talking about instililng warrior spirit/inspiration. I did not say Gurdas Ji's Vaars contain propagnda i said that sikh propagandists have been pushing them. you go talk to any panth that hasnt entertained kathaks and tell me if they have heard of Gurdas Ji. The fact is that certain people/schools are pushing that Gurdas Ji's vaars are indispensable. Wheres the evidence? You people are making the claims, therefore you prove to me that Guru Arjun Dev said they are 'key to Gurbani'. i am not attacking Gurdas ji's vars at all and i am not discouraging anyone from reading them. I am questioning the status that people are pushing regarding them. How are they being considered as 'key to Gurbani' 'an explanation of Gurbani' etc oh so you thought you would google my username and try and 'dig up some dirt'. i can assure you that i havent been fixated on Gurdas ji at all. please show me this 'same stuff' that i've been posting for '2-3 years'. i was posting on sikhnet on and off for that time, then later Tapoban, on a variety of topics. if i have mentioned this before its because it seemed so obvious to me from the start.

jsingh69, i think you are making a poor attempt to be clever rather than giving any sincere response. but this seems common on this site so i will entertain your post for once: so you are saying that in this statement it is Guru Arjun himself who is speaking and He is calling Himself Nanak (and not Nanak) and is singing his own praise? and can you please elaborate with regards to the grammar how you came to conclusion? p.s. would you please provide the logical step from my post to yours?

by the way you are upholding this idea of emualting these great figures, but your own behaviour is hardly proof that it works. quite the contrary. maybe you should try emulating them more.

Shaheediyan, i have notice that you cant argue with someone without trying to undermine their personality. is this because you dont believe your points have any weight to convince in themselves? "Peope are a product of their knowledge..." what nonesense. so if i memorised a religious text that would make me a great Sage? What knowledge were Deep Singh ji or Ghaniya Ji operating on? I think it was tehir innate nature expressing itself. How can that be imitated? If anything it is Knowledge that makes people fake. a wolf in sheeps clothign isnt a sheep. A saint could be existing on nothign but pure faith without any mental formations of inner morality code. By making it into a principle you make it inhuman and empty. if you have so much idea baout what you are talking about why dont you give us a summary, in place of telling us to go look it up. there are others reading this forum, why dont you educate us all? otherwsie its just a diversion technique. I agree you are putting stuff up based on sikh 'rvaaj'.

matheen "Do you call your dad by his first name?" is Gurdas Ji is your Dad? or Do you call your Dad, 'Bhai Pita Ji Sahib Ji Maharaja Panth Rattan'? If so im sure he must be thrilled. i didnt even bring in the word 'emulate'. when you say "Gurbani tells us to learn from Gursikhs who have attained high avasthas." i can only see this in for example talking advice from saints, keeping company of sadhs (in a religious sense). where is it telling you to worship anyones personality? What oral tradition are they mentioned in? Suraj Prakash Granth dates from 1800s- you are only proving my point with this citation. Your sampardas couldnt even retain understanding of Gurbani Grammar or Raag formations or even keep a understanding of what the 'Ghar' word references. Again you are calling them Bir Raas. So what about the narration of Krishna playing with the Gopis in Dasam Granth. are you going to call that Bir Rass? Ceratinly a very beautiful idea. But what makes you so sure about the effect they have on people? Someone has conditioned you to think they have a certain effect.

hi i must admit my manner is quite abrupt so i apologise if you were upset

some people may not have the inclination to read Paath at all. this would introduce them to it in a way thats invites faith and appeals to them.

i didnt even get as far as seeing the reference to Jesus. I always found that 'Why hast Thou forsaken me' deeply profound and not something that detracts from Christ's divinity at all. kaljug he could have made this point about Guru Arjans humanity- if he was even making that point at all- without these comparisons. so the use of comparisons is not what you are trying to make out. who is the person being praised in that artical? Guru Arjun, or the person's 'own prophet'- who happens to be Guru Arjan Ji. This person is praising themself not Guru Arjan.

well... you know if they're reading 130 books or whatever about a religion- i think the signals are quite clear. lol.

i didnt say Mani Singh Ji wasnt a "good Gursikh example". whether he was a good Gursikh or not is not in question, what i am questioning is the 'example' part, as if we should idolise and imitate him (or to be more blunt the image someone else has created of him in their minds). maybe you think Singhs/sikhs at learge 'emulate' but this is classic case of people projecting their own ideas on sikhi and proclaiming it sikhi. but why fill other peoples minds with this pyschological pollution and subtle egotistical 'pakhand'. Dhadi Vaaran- are you sure it was 'introduced'. for all we know it was a tradition amongst Panjabis anyway. for all we know it Guru ji reviving old yet native arts been drowned out by fofeign influence. we can say that these things are inspirational- but that doesnt mean the intention is to copy them. Deep Singh Ji was astounding figure, so do you think you are Deep Singh Ji? Or are you trying to become Deep Singh Ji? why? Are you going to copy him? Why? And who was Deep Singh Ji emulating? Or was he just being himself? I dont agree with your titling of 'bir ras' the compositions in Dasam Granth. This is so obviously modern interpretation in order to 'explain away' the Hindu myth. pure conjecture. "Why do we emulate the amrit sanchaar the Pany Pyare partook in..." do we emulate THAT Amrit Sanchar? Uh obviously not. The ceremony specifics might be the same, but that is because it is a ceremony, it needs to be kept the same in order to transfer Shakipat/Gur Prasad, initiation. I am talking about people and their personalities. "Why do we emulate the kirtan done by the Rababis and Raagis..." "Why do we emulate the correct pronounciation as preserved by the Taksaals..." Again Im talking about people, not knowledge. "Why do we aspire to emulate sacrifice, as taught to us by Guru Arjun Dev Ji, Guru Tegh Bahadur, 4 Sahibzadey, 40 Muktey and innumerable Sikhs thereafter... " urm, tell me in what way you are emulating these people, in this day and age? "Why do we emulate the compassion and selfless and indiscriminatory service taught to us by Bhai Ghanaiya..." Why do you need to emulate it? Who was he emulating? No offence but was he the only good person in history? Do we think that if we imitate some saintly personality we can win God's favour? i doubt 'whole panth' have even heard of Bhai Gurdas vaaran. even if it is widely esteemed, this could be because of the ideological fashion and propaganda of 'sikh scholars' past 100 years. please explain why this text is so prized and yet many many sikhs wouldnt even be able to name something like Gur Sobha, Tankahnamma of differentiate between differant Janam Sakhis? if anyone is filling sikh minds with 'manmatti' its your 'emulation culture', which is the product of your own thought patterns.

Mods, of course i will respect your protocol on referring to revered figures, however i have to say that i also think this habit of dressing names in epithets is a 'dirty habit' panjabis picked up past 150 years from Hindi/Urdu (modern lanuages). seems to me that in old panjabi refering to people directly wasnt considered 'rude'.

"It was Guru Arjan Dev who called Bhai Gurdas Ji's varan as the "key" to Sri Guru Granth Sahib." -WHEN AHD WHERE? i did read his older threads, they werent the same. i didnt think so anyway.

basically that he worshipped God in the form of a stone with true sincerity. he felt grieved when it appeared that God didnt accept his offering, and then the stone came alive and in this way God accepted his offering (ate the parshad he offered to Him). the point is basically about the purity of Bhagat Dhana's heart.

i would have thought that over time sikhs would have got more and more into deeply understanding Raags and become a thoroughly musical community in this respect (e.g. Raag knowledge would be common amongst Sikhs- they could know a Raga by ear). but someweher along the line they lost this? where exactly? i also think its sad that people are mistaking it for a performance art. i mean i rarely see sangat joining in the singing.

i recognise your bizarre username from tapoban. i knew you lot were a bunch of 'wanttobe' muslims, now its confirmed

sorry but this idea of 'ideal sikhs' is complete nonesense. why should anyone imitate Gurdas or Mani Singh? and who called them ideal. people just keep filling others sikhs minds with increasing amoount of admin cut regarding Gurdas funny how some admin opend a thread asking people who dont 'follow' him to provide historical proof- funny how since you are the one supporting him we would think the onus is on you. and then Balbir Singh started giving good arguements oh look thread was closed. lets get this straight, is anyone seriously entertaining the notion that Gurdas Vaaran is Gurbani? I hope not. Or that he is indespensable? This is the invention of others. Mod's Note: Please address puratan gursikhs with respect, if not bhai sahib, can we request at least address them with Ji. Your intentions might be good, but lot of youths come on to this forum. We should set an example for them.

you praised Guru Arjan Dev by slighting other peoples' religious figures? is that the best you could do? 'oh our prophet was better than theirs'

Thanks Chatanga for another useless post. keep attacking others if it makes you feel better, i mean theres nothing else in your post. your mere interpretation of Gurbani is not the 'wisdom' of Gurbani. sorry if you think it is. i havent ideologised Gurbani and gone around lecturing people. you people self righteously telling someone who is half hindu to drop their pooja, but what do you know? you're not in a position to give people instructions. lets just compare you attitude to that of deepsingh on this thread... says it all really. thanks Mit for the AKJ edited version of the story...

awesome! so Raag Mala japa can grant Raaga Vidya ?

i think your confusion has arisen from erraneous appraoch. you need to turn your drisht (vision) COMPLETELY inwards to Naam Japa and not outwards to 'others'. from Sukhmani we realise that Sat Sangat is where Naam is sung. So as far as any sangat or group is conerned, your only interest is whether Naam is being sung, and if so, is your full attention on Naam and Naam alone. as i have learned i have shared/