tSingh

Gurfateh Re the Akhara. Right now there are no plans to do so. Its far less hassle for all involved if people buy the book directly. Bulk orders - I am a bit old school about this. I'm of the view that those who are interested will make the effort to buy it themselves. This is not a book that I wish to be readily available in all bookshops. Its not an snobbish elitist thing. In the old days it was very much an issue about only teaching this knowledge to those who are qualified (adhikaari) because it is subtle and difficult. Nowadays that is not possible, but if you wish to get any books published by Nirmale or Sevapanthis you have to go to the Dera/Sant/Mahant. All the best t

IMPORTANT Unfortunately DHL messed up and they failed to deliver the books yesterday. That means that I cannot start processing orders until Friday. I sincerely apologise to those of you who have ordered for this delay. I should have guessed that it was a bad idea to announce the release of the book before they had physically arrived. Also, if anyone reading this is thinking of ordering multiple copies of the text could they please delay placing their order until the paypal option on the webpage has been corrected. At the moment it is only charging the initial fixed amount of p+p and not adding further p+p per book.

Pradipika means an 'a profound illumination on' meaning a detailed commentary. Gyani Gyan Singh used the term in the title of one of his granths, Svami Madhusudan Sarasvati before him also has used the term.

Gurfateh Shaheediyan, the web link is above for getting the book via paypal.

gurfateh. The books arrive on monday. I'll send off these orders on tuesday. I'm hoping 4 pounds will cover airmail.

Vivek Pradīpikā by Tīrath Singh Nirmalā The Bibeksār was composed by Srīmān Sant Bhāī Adan Shāh Jī in the mid 18th Century. It is a masterful exposition of the metaphysical and theological principles of Gurmat Sidhānt. It remains unparalleled amongst the adhyātamic literature of the Sevāpanthī Sampradāya. Tīrath Singh Nirmalā was initiated into the Nirmala Sampradāya and schooled in its traditions by Srīmān Sant Sher Singh Jī. He provides an extensive commentary that is at once illuminating and authentic. Paperback, 338 pages, ISBN 978-0-9562367-0-8 This will be available from Monday. Orders can be made using paypal through this website; www.nectpublications.com The website also has a sample excerpt from this text and Bhavrasamrit Tika as pdf files.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/30/india-punjab-children-uranium-pollution Observer investigation uncovers link between dramatic rise in birth defects in Punjab and pollution from coal-fired power stations.

Gurfateh Bijla Singh, relax, there is no need to get emotional! I don't desperately try to justify anything. We're discussing Gurmat here not football so we should do so in a calm and respectful manner. To answer your question, yes I have read the pauri line by line! I was contextualising Bhai Veer Singh Ji's interpretation of 'jugi jugi', not the meaning of the four names referred to from the four yugas. I was not being disrespectful to Bhai Sahib but pointing out that if a scholar is willing to edit sections out of a text to fit his understanding of Gurmat, you will not find him giving credence to an interpretation that does not accord with his particular view. I think his act of editing amply illustrates how strongly he felt about the correctness of his own stance on such issues. Yes I have Vaheguru Mantrarth by Pandit Tara Singh Narotam Ji, and yes I concur with you that the interpretation of each constituent of the Vaheguru mantra you have given is that of Pandit Tara Singh Narotam Ji, with slight differences of expression. It might be worth pointing out that Pandit Ji uses this interpretation to justify his argument (which is not accepted among the majority of Nirmale) that Sargun Braham is therefore Vishnu Bhagvan! Mahant Ganesha Singh Ji, Pandit Narayan Singh Ji and others on the other hand accepts the three earlier names as reference to the mantras from earlier yugas. So yes I agree with you that there are differences in the interpretation of the constituent parts of Vaheguru mantra...but on jugi jugi, it is my view that it makes more sense to accept that the answer to the question is that in 'Kaliyug' the remaining guru avatars will be of 'sodhi' vans as described by Guru Maharaj at the beginning of Bachitar Natak, which is a suryavanshi lineage of kshatriyas. As for future yugas, then Satiguru-Bhagvan will again manifest. As we all know Sri Guru Maharaj states in Bachitar Natak 'jab jab hot arisht apaaraa, tab tab deh dharat avtaaraa'. With respect I have read you arguments on this before so no need to repeat yourself. t

Gurfateh Yes Bijla Singh I'm referring to the last line of pauri 47...which is entirely contextualised by the following pauri using the same term 'jugi' in the context of earlier avatars and the term sat jugi, kaljugi. It also reads like a direct paraphrase of the Gita regarding 'yada yada'. The following pauri directly draws parallels between avatars in earlier 'jugi's and the historical 'Satiguru'. That is the interpretation of Pandit Narayan Singh also. The two plus two interpretation I find a little odd and inconsistent with references elsewhere in Gurbani. plus I think we are all aware of Dr. Veer Singh Ji's agenda as seen in his editing sakhis out of Prachin Panth Prakash (see elsewhere). There was no way on earth that he would be willing to accept that line as it is. Kalyug, To your first question...no. You have misunderstood what I have written. Continuity with earlier avatars does not mean that our dharam is the same as earlier dharam. I tried to explain to you in simple terms why there is a need to think and clarify where we stand in relation to vaishnavs. Secondly, there are a number of errors in your post. Firstly Sikhs are not 'beyond the gunas'. This is to become something termed gunateet and is an indicator of one who has obtained brahamgyan. The antahkaran is inherently shaped by the influence of the three gunas, so to be removed of the three gunas is an indicator of what is called manonash, the end of the modifications of the mind. A Sikh is undertaking the teaching and practice of the Guru to achieve that state. To achieve this one has to first remove the blemishes within the mind and that means keeping it fixed in satoguna. Then even this has to be removed. Your reference to 'hindu sadhus' is by proxy also a reference to the majority of the brahamgyanis who have manifested through the Guru Panth, because if you read of their jivans you find that they all usually undertook intensive sadhana and austerity to achieve brahamgyan. This teaching is found in the very khalsa mehima section written by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself on the nature of the khalsa. Therefore what you find among Nihangs, Nirmale, Sevapanthis, Udasis, Gyanis of the last few centuries is a recognition that when Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji created the khalsa panth he recognised the svabhaav of his different Sikhs and instituted differnet practices for different natures. At its most intense the shaastardhari yudh Khalsa - those great warriors constantly engaged in battle, constantly focused on the need to kill effectively - are to follow practices different from others, and vice versa, those who followed the sant roop were to follow different practices. The sant path is satoguni, the soorbir path is either said to be tamoguni or rajo-satoguni depending on which nihangs you speak to. I have yet to meet a pukka Nihang in the UK or India who rejects the place of Udasis and Nirmale in the Panth as Guru instituted orders. Lets not get too technical but bhang means cannabis which is the key ingredient in sukhnidhaan! You state you have spoken to a number of Nirmale about this. Could you tell me who you have spoken to? Who exactly do you mean by Nirmale? The reason I ask is because I'm surprised that you think Nirmale are killing off the sant-sipahi tradition among Sikhs because Nirmale are numerically small and have marginal influence these days. Plus the Nirmale I know and the Nirmale who over the last two centuries have written on this don't agree with eating meat for themselves but accept that it is one path that exists. The reference to the Udasi mahant is because you stated that i) all sants have been influenced by the nirmale and ii) influenced by the supposed vaishnav dietary habits adopted by nirmale. Udasis are quite distinct from Nirmale and are certainly not vaishnav. I'm surprised that from reading your post you do not see a place for satoguni sants in your definition of Sikhs. A couple of questions for you: 1) What are your feelings about Bhai Kanhaiya, Sant Sundar Singh Bhindranwale, Sant Nand Singh, Sant Attar Singh, Sant Ishar Singh Rarewale..to name a few? They were not Sikhs right? 2) From your reading of Gurbani what is the means of gaining moksh with regards to spiritual practice? t

Gurfateh Kaliyug, your argument doesn't stand. Nirmale were not bringing vaishnav thought into Sikhi, its already there. Anyone trying to explain the writings of the Satigurus and scholars like Bhai Gurdas Ji are required to make a decision about the extent to which Sikhi is influenced by vaishnav thought. Bhakti of that era was nearly entirely vaishnav. All our beloved bhagats were vaishnav sants. The vast majority of the names for Sargun Braham in Gurbani are vaishnav. The sakhis found in Bhai Gurdas Ji's writings and alluded to in Gurbani are vaishnav (Ajamal, Dhru, Prehlad, etc), from the Ramayan, Mahabharat and Bhagvat Purana. Valimiki Ramayan and Bhagvat Purana were translated from sanskrit into bhasha by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself! In Bachittar Natak Guru ji writes in detail about his suryavanshi lineage! Even in Uggardanti bani about the Devi, the male aspect to that shakti is still Visnu Bhagvan (Krishan, Ram, Narsingh, etc). Bhai Gurdas Ji defines Vaheguru mantra as simran of Vishnu bhagvan in earlier yugas. Vaishnav bhakti is the source of nau prakar bhakti including naam simran, kirtan, and seva. Sri Guru Arjan Dev Ji himself includes the bani of the Bhats praising He Himself as the present avatar of Vishnu in Kalyug. Where is the shaiva influence? So the Nirmale respond to it by acknowledging a continuity with earlier avatars, but generally (not all) maintain the sargun Braham as Akal Purakh rather than chaturbhuji Visnu svarup. Nothing in their practice steps out of Gurmat practice because they are more concerned with the nirguna - there are no murtis, no vaishnav mantra, no karamkhand, etc. It also doesn;t make sense that the authors of the historical works stating that the Satigurus hunted were Nirmale themselves! What you are talking about regarding hunting and eating meat is gunas. Satoguni action among all sadhu orders in and outside of Sikhi includes the prohibition of meat eating and killing animals - its not the way of a sadhu. We see this in Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji's transformation of Banda Bahadur from a sadhu to a warrior in the mold of a kshatri. Udasis who are most certainly shaiva nowadays also don't go hunting or eat meat, and among the ones I have spoken to feel quite antagonistic toward nihangs for doing so, one of whom was one of the four current sri mahants of the Udasin samprdai. Regarding the use of bhang in adhyatmic practice, I'd say most of the panth except nihangs accept that the effect of bhang on the antahkaran is one that clouds it in tamoguna rather than making it more subtle and satoguna. Thats not vaishnavism saying that. t

Gurfateh Bijla Singh said 'Your understanding of Gurbani is very limited.' I think thats a little cheap Bijla Singh. Just because Neo Singh chooses to adopt the line taken by the majority of Brahamgyanis, Sants, Pandits, Gurmukhs, Gyanis from the last four centuries rather than the mat of academic revisionists of the last hundred years hardly makes it 'very limited'! I'm sure the majority of people on this forum will recognise that Neo Singh's posts are rich with learning and insights taken from the teachings of the Sant Mandali. Each to their own Bijla Singh, but spoken with respect. t

Satinam I would say that the predominant definition of a Sant among the sangat (particularly overseas where unlike India, there isn't a host of resident sants in your village/towns radius) that I've come across is more a 'sidh purush', one who has the miraculous accomplishments that many books on Baba Sri Chand, Baba Nand Singh, and many others describe. From my experience among Sant orders that definition applies to some, but certainly not all. A Sant is a fairly broad term that ranges from a serious mumukshu through to a brahamgyani. Further it means one who has adopted the sant or nivirtti marg. It is also given to a person who is serious enough about brahamgyan to undertake initiation into the sant mandali. That being the definition, it makes it possible to talk of bad 'sants' and fully realised 'sants'. From what i can see it is not the case that there is an increase in the number of sants (there were undoubtedly a lot more in the 18th and 19th centuries), I would argue that less nowadays are single-mindedly devoted to obtaining moksh through sadhana and tapasya as they were in the past. Furthermore, as has been said before, the term 'gurmukh' is also used a lot in Gurbani to refer to someone of a similar status, and is a term that is in fact bandied around far more often than the term sant. Regarding the use of the exact title, sevapanthi literature from 1750s refers to their mahapurush as 'sants', i've seen it elsewhere too. Why Udasis don't use it nowadays is because immersing back into the sanatan hindu world the term 'muni', 'swami', 'mandaleshvar' is more common. Pandit Tara Singh Narotam also notes a change in their titles after Bava Pritam Das Nirban. Sant is more a punjabi/haryana thing. Whether baba, gyani, bhai, sant, mahapurush, swami, etc does not really matter. The terms were used to indicate elevated status and/or brahamgyan. That part of the definition remains constant. Again, in 18th century literature the word 'gyani' is often used to explicitly refer to a brahamgyani who obtained it through gyan marg. Interesting topic

A little busy right now, so I cannot go into detail but...nirmala works usually open with a mangalacharan to nirgun then sagun Braham followed by their guru pranali, and since the samprdais are disciplic lineage, they will offer salutations to the Satiguru and their gurdev. Lineages trace back to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj, not to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. You find this in most nirmala texts old and new, from Pandit Gulab Singh Ji back in the 1700s all the way to Mahant Ganesha Singh at the beginning of the 1900s who opens his Nirmal Prabodh granth with a mangalacharan to Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, then Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji and then his guru Pandit Hameer Singh Ji. That is his lineage. Pandit Gulab Singh offers mangalacharans to Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, then Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then his guru Pandit Maan Singh Ji. That is his particular lineage. A further point to assure you, in one composition of Bhai Sehaj Ram Sevapanthi from the mid 1700s you have no mangalacharan to Sri Guru Granth Sahib but you have reference to the importance of the Sant as a means to achieve moksh, and importantly reference also to shabad as Guru on which one should meditate throughout the aath peher.

The term Ram very much refers to nirgun braham in both gurbani and other scripture. Take for example 'aatam raam raam hai aatam', atma which is pure chetan cannot be bhagvaan sargun parmeshvar, it is identical to nirgun braham. Adhyatam Ramayan translated by Pandit Gulab Singh ji makes it abundantly clear that the real identity of Sri Ram Chandra was satchitanand nirgun braham. Bhagat Namdev uses the terms Ram and Raghu Rai interchangably, referring to the actions of Ram. Therefore the sargun svarup extends into the nirgun form. Some would take the distinction between sagun Vishnu Bhagvan and Mahavishnu as this same distinction (depending on the theological position of the commentator on the Bhagvatam). There is no break in identity between the sargun and nirgun, otherwise its starts to fall into polytheistic notions. Regards mukti, sargun upasana leads to sargun mukti (of four types) and nirgun upasana leads to kaival mukti. Therefore vaishnavs look down upon kaival mukti as inferior to closeness or companionship with Bhagvan's essential and eternal sargun personal svarup, Vedantists look down upon the incomplete sarvikalap samadhi of the vaishnav. hope this helps

Sorry for the delay! I'm not an Udasi, so treat my words with caution. However, I have spent time with a few Udasis, and visited a lot of Udasi ashrams/deras across north India. It would be very inaccurate to state that Sri Guru Granth Sahib is the ishtadev at Udasi ashrams, since all of the ones I've seen outside of punjab do not have prakash of sri guru granth sahib. There is always generally a shaiva leaning at Udasi ashrams because of Baba Sri Chand's identity and perhaps also because Shiva is the ideal for tapasvi svarup that Udasis adopt. Prachar of Gurmat, I think this is still there, but perhaps not as explicitly as in the past. There are many incredibly learned scholars and realised saints among the Udasis, but with it a lot of diversity. Its important to remember that a sadhu is a sadhu, meaning that they are all generally working towards the same goal. On Murti Puja - there are always murtis at Udasin ashrams of devi devte, at the very least a shiva-ling, often the panch devtas because many of the Udasis I've come across have panchdev upasana as a basic set up for the ashram. The panch devte not only bring together all the division sections of the Hindu community (shaiva, vaishnav, shakta, followers of ganesh, etc), but are said to represent the five mahabhuta gunas. While this is the form of upasana for devotees, Udasis are generally nirguna advaita-vadis (gurmat) thus strive for brahamgyan. I once had a book, now stolen, called 'Murti Puja' by Svami Shankar Das Chakravarti (i think) printed in the early 20th century, during the time of the Akalis, defending the practice of murti puja as part of not only udasi mat, but also gurumat. Regards the devi, whatever people feel here, I think there will always be a diversity of views about whether the devi manifested. Our older historical sources say that the Devi did manifest. Devi puja seems to be something well established among the Udasis also. The important issue is how the devtas are understood. Obviously Mahakaal and Mahakaalikaa can be taken as Shiva and Devi, they are also taken to be Sargun Parmeshvar and dynamic Maya-prakrti-shakti. There doesn't necessarily have to be any opposition between these two interpretations, although certainly Nirmale opt for the latter. This difference of opinion comes through in the 19th century clash between Kavi Santokh Singh and Swami Anandghan on the status of the devtas and Japuji Sahib. This suggests that this emphasis on the devte among many Udasis is not merely a post-Singh Sabha thing. Whatever the earlier reality, Udasis have been maintaining for a long time (see the writings of the great saint Swami Gangeshvaranand Ji, Mahant Anantananda Ji, Bada Udasin Panchayti Akhara, etc) that Baba Sri Chandar ji was part of a lineage traced back to Brahmaa, that Shiva took avatar as Baba Sri Chand to restore sanatan hindu dharam, etc. From my experience, these practices are not i) for the sake of keeping their independence from the SGPC ii) to attract Hindus into the ashram to then do prachar of gurumat. Both are explanations that are too simplisitc. Again from my limited knowledge I would acknowledge that the last century has seen the Udasis make a concerted shift towards the Hindu mainstream, but I think there has always been that strong and influential base of Hindu followers in the north west of what was pre-partition india and beyond. Yet...Udasis continue to hold the Guru Sahiban in the highest esteem as avatars of Bhagvan, continue to do prachar of the nirguna advaita vaad of gurumat, and continue to emphasise meditation through naam (I once spent a hot afternoon scowering the banks of mathura for a very old asthan of Sri Guru Nanak Dev, where he took ishnan in sri yamuna, presided over by the Udasis. Eventually there was a small kind of ashram set up, with bare rooms for udasin saadhs at a very quiet bank. Outside the kutiya was a very small mandir in which was a small murti of Baba Sri Chand and in devanagri above in silk was 'satinam', which says everything about the key feautures of Udasi mat) Hope this helps.

Matheen Udasis manage to do it, so I'm sure mit can as well. Its about recognising the real identity of shiva maharaj. There is not necessarily a conflict as long as you recognise that there are different levels of upasna and that murti puja is at the most elemental rather than the most advanced.

Rejection of the status and importance of the Sant is absolutely antithetical to Gurmat: - Because if you read Gurbani you will find in there repeated references to the 'prasad' of the Sant, you meet with Brahamgyan. What pleases the Sant pleases Bhagvan. - Because following the Guru's updesh, Brahamgyan is your purusharth, your goal in life, because all is else is as fleeting 'like a wall of sand' (Sri Guru Tegh Bahadar). - Because the Sant who has achieved Brahamgyan, takes you to the door of moksh, helps you to purify yourself, get you prepared, to then be acknowledged by Braham with moksh. - Because your Satiguru stated explicilty in Gurbani 'I drink the water I used to clean the feet of the saints', 'I live to have the dust from the feet of the Saints', etc. - If you haven't met a Sant so far, try harder, their sangat is vital.

Thank you so much. That is fascinating. Was he a prolific author?

Anything and everything. He was invited to pen the preface to the Nirmal Panchaiti Akhara's edition of Nirmal Panth Pradipika by Gyani Gyan Singh.

Gurfateh Could anyone, probably Fateh Singh, tell me more about this famous Namdhari? thank you t

The etymology of 'naanak' is 'na' and 'anik', meaning not many or not a plurality, meaning 'one alone'.

You're both mistaken, Vaikunth is the realm of Vishnu. In vaishnav literature it is the highest abode for types of moksh like sameep, etc. Since Sri Guru Granth Sahib's language for saguna braham is generally vaishnav (most of the names for saguna Braham are vaishnav - hari, ram, bhagvan, narayan, etc), the nau prakaar practices originate in vaishnav traditions, many of the puranic narratives are vaishnav - ajamil, ganika, raja janak, etc, since even the word Bhagvan links to mahavishnu, since the bhagats in Sri Guru Granth Sahib are generally arising out of the ramanandi vaishnav tradition (bhagat namdev, ramanand, parmanand, bhagat dhanaa, bhagat ravidas), then its not too surprising that vaikunth would be the word used to refer to the realm of Bhagvan/Parmeshvar. One shabad of Bhai Gurdas distinguishes between the realms of the 'devtas' and the 'baikunth' of 'bhagvaan'. In Bhagat Namdev's bani you find reference to ajamil going to 'vaikunth' - a narrative in which the messangers of Vishnu intervene after he called out for his son 'narayan'. He also refers to Bhagvan 'with chakra' in 'Baikunth', again linking it to Mahavishnu. There are also references in Gurbani to the realms of the devtas (indralok, brahmalok, etc) as being part of Maya, afflicted by the three gunas. Whether you think this is mahavishnu or simply 'saguna braham' is up to you. I've seen a couple of texts by sants referring to sachkhand/vaikunth as the realm of mahavishnu, and others which don't. A small request, BHram means false cognition or error. Braham, or brahmaa does not have an 'h' after the B.

Gurfateh Good questions. I'll answer forward-backward's first - how much of the jiva is agyanta and how much is atma svarup? The notion of mutual superimposition between sakshi atma and the jiva identity (termed tadatmaya adhyas) states that the quailities of consciousness and existence are reflected into the jiva's nature. All else that arises out of that is through bhed, bhram stemming from agyaan - gurbani 'antar agyan dukh bhram hai vich parrda door piaas', the parrda (veil) of bhram (false cognition). There are in fact five types of bhram; sang, kartar-tva, satya-tva, vikaar, bhed. All that arises from this is false. The bhram ka parrda is gurbani's way of explaining the shakti (power) of aavaran, one of the two results of agyaan at the level of the jiva (not something Paramishvar is affected by). Atma chintan - well, strictly speaking you can never truly objectify the atma, totally impossible, and this is because of the distinction between proksh (indirect) and aproksh (direct) gyaan. Any knowledge which you can understand through the mind is mediated through the triputi of object of perception, perceptor and the process of perception (thus it is sarvikalap). When the mind is in ekaagar, when the thoughts fall away, then the empty consciousness of smadhi is entered into 'sun smaadhi'. There is a very important distinction to be made between avatar and a brahamgyani. The latter has obtained knowledge of braham...but it does not say that the brahamgyani has become avatar, nor has she become bhagvaan. Imagine you walk into a hall of distorted mirrors. The person is reflected in one mirror as a small squat person, in another mirror as a huge collosal person. Whenever that person is being reflected by different mirrors that person appears in different forms. This metaphor only conveys some of what is being explained here. Don't take it as a perfect metaphor. A jiva is affected by agyaan. When it becomes brahamgyani, it continues to be situated in the sthul sareer until prarbdha karam is finished. During this time, it continues to take the jiva's sareer (squat person mirror), and not the vairat sargun braham form of bhagvaan (tall person mirror), even though the essence of both is the same (the same 'person' being nirgun braham). Like I said, avatar and bhagvan is maya-pati. The two, maya and braham are personified in dasam bani as mahakaal and mahakalikaa, and there are clear references to mahakalika residing at the feet of mahakaal. Adhyatam Ramayan has the same with sita being maya-prakriti and Ram as sadchidanand braham. hope this helps.

sargun pasara is not the result of 'agyan' for that implies that Braham suffers ignorance of its own nature. This is the point. The sargun form through to the vairat sargun svarup of braham (jale hari thale hari) is all in the context of maya-pati, sarbgya, antarjami parmatma, meaning controlled by He who is unafflicted by maya, also referred to as the samashti roop. Only the jiva is afflicted by ignorance (avidya, agyan, etc). The jiva is nirgun chetan (atma svarup) reflected in that ignorance. Its qualities are derived from that. To argue that jiva and parmeshvar (rather than jiv and braham) are the same in having the same nirgun and sargun qualities would lead to the conclusion that a brahamgyani becomes the universe (which is a form of sargun parmeshvar only). There is a distinction between sargun braham and the jiva. Even after brahamgyan there remains a distinction. Many sadhus have written that even after becoming jivanmukt the gyani continues to be devoted to bhagvan, because that will always be distinct. I think you need to study some of the key ideas of adhyatam again. there are some misunderstandings you have that once cleared will help to solve this, such as the distinction between shudh sattva maya-prakriti + chetan = sargun parmeshvar and srishti, and malin sattva guna maya + chetan = jiva and agyan. There is a very important distinction to be made here. We suffer agyaan and bhram, whereas trehguna prakrti is 'sabh teri maya'.

Gurfatehji, Atma cannot be sargun for simple reasons. For Atma and Braham to be one and the same (advaita) they must be of the same essence (sadchidanand). When consciousness is associated with the pure sattvaguna of maya it is called Parmatma/Bhagvan/Ishvar. This is the cause of the gross and subtle manifestation. Braham in sargun form is the ruler of maya. In turn, that same consciousness afflicted by agyaan becomes the jeeva, but it is not possessing sargun attributes in any true sense, for that would imply a real modification of its nature - in other words Maya has given it actual qualities. This form (jeev) which appears to have qualities is a result of ignorance (i.e. the quality of agency, of quality of independence, etc). Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji has written in Gyan Prabodh that Atma and Braham are no different and that their shared qualities are being free of karam, death, difference, illusion, desire, etc. Therefore Atma remains nirgun in essence. Its apparent form as a dynamic living thinking feeling independent being is the result of agyaan. Hope that helps. t