Jump to content

HarjasDevi

Members
  • Posts

    427
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by HarjasDevi

  1. Wow. I find it pretty offensive that you would compare Akali Nihang Singhs with the Waffen SS. Thats about the most Adharmic group imaginable. Are you saying you really believe the Akali Nihang were like them? Waffen SS cutting the beard of an elderly Jewish man. The Waffen SS left a legacy of horror and repulsion by butchering millions. Are you saying fanatical intolerance is NOT a bad thing? How is this a good thing? The problem with fanaticism is that it's blind. It's cultic, regimented, unthinking, unfeeling, blind obedience to evil authority creating unspeakable oppression. Is this what you think a sant-sipahi is? Someone who butchers entire racial and religious groups because they are different? Is that a quality of "strength?" That's a very sad definition of strength. One of the greatest qualities of strength is it's ability to be gentle, to be just and fair and decent. Butchering people is an act of weakness, not strength. There is no military victory in atrocities. "Fanaticism is the cause of most religious hatred."Fanaticism
  2. Show me where exactly with citation so that I can go look it up to read. Is it from Sarbloh Granth or Dasm Granth Sahib Jis? Again, please show me the citation. And the problem arises since Panthically, neither Sarbloh Granth nor Dasm Granth have full Panthic acceptance and so are not accepted as Gurmat by all Sikhs. So you are wrong to impose that All the Guru's Sikhs believe this. For certain this statement does not exist in Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Again, it is most likely an interpretation imposed on the bani. Sikhs of the Guru will follow "true spirituality" found in all religious paths but not follow a "corrupted religious path." There can't even be a third religion since Hinduism and Islam are simply 2 forms of religion and their are hundreds. Hinduism isn't even one Path by itself but probably includes dozens. And as I already stated, not all Sikh Jathas accept Shri Dasm Granth and Shri Sarbloh Granth as Gurbani. please show me the page numbers and citations. Oral tradition is prone to distortion. This is the rehitnama given for the kirpan. I don't dispute it, but it's not at all clear that it is a kakkar, or that it is part of panj kakkars. So this is the problem with rehitnamay, some of which list only 3 kakkars. The point being, there is a lot of room for discussion and interpretation. You made wild claims about what a neat package Sikhism is in, then just base it on "you say." Show us all where the citations and authority is please and we can continue this discussion. Otherwise you simply prove my point that different people will have different opinions and that having opinions is not "disrespecting." Don't be smart. Not every Sikh accepts Shri Sarbloh Granth as Gurbani. So the question of Khalsa roop as being Guru's roop is not even accepted by all Sikh Jathas, why do you complain if Hindu's or sanatan Sikh Jathas disagree and have another opinion? To have another opinion isn't showing you disrespect. This isn't a point of contention for me personally, I believe in the panj kakkars and in the Gurbani of Shri Sarbloh Granth and Shri Dasm Granth. but I was giving an example that not everyone shares the same INTERPRETATION of Sikhism and that different opinions ARE NOT disrespect. All Vaishnav sampradyas had a problem with brahminism. Not just Guru Sahibaan. When Guruji is speaking out against hypocrisy of religious practice is it not the same thing as condemning ALL religious practice. So this is a matter of interpretation. Guru Sahib had a problem with hypocrites and evil people. He did not have harsh words anywhere for sincere people who practice differently. You think Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji sacrificed his life for hypocritical rituals? No! He sacrificed his life to defend Dharama and for people to be free of the curse of forced conversion and forced beliefs. So I believe you misinterpret the Gurbani when you say Guru Sahib had harsh words for "Hindu" practices. ਜਾਤਿ ਵਰਨ ਤੁਰਕ ਅਰੁ ਹਿੰਦੂ ॥ jaath varan thurak ar hindhoo || Social classes, races, Muslims and Hindus; ~SGGS Ji ang 237 Here Gurbani is using Hindu as meaning nationality, not religion. It is comparing with nationality of Turks who are not a religion. ਇਕ ਹਿੰਦਵਾਣੀ ਅਵਰ ਤੁਰਕਾਣੀ ਭਟਿਆਣੀ ਠਕੁਰਾਣੀ ॥ eik hindhavaanee avar thurakaanee bhattiaanee thakuraanee || The Hindu women, the Muslim women, the Bhattis and the Rajputs ~SGGS Ji ang 418 Here Gurbani is differentiating between Hindu's and Turks. Why then would it mention Bhattis and Thakurs as separate from Hindu religion? Because the usage of Hindu in Gurbani is interchangeable with nationality of Hindustan as well as religion of the people of Hindustan. ਹਿੰਦੂ ਸਾਲਾਹੀ ਸਾਲਾਹਨਿ ਦਰਸਨਿ ਰੂਪਿ ਅਪਾਰੁ ॥ hindhoo saalaahee saalaahan dharasan roop apaar || The Hindus praise the Praiseworthy Lord; the Blessed Vision of His Darshan, His form is incomparable. ~SGGS Ji ang 465 It's wrong to over-generalize that Gurbani is against Hindu nationality and Hindu Dharma because it criticizes and corrects corrupted spiritual practices. And in this thread calling as mo fo's, cow piss drinkers and turds is civilized? There was no religion before Sanatana Dharama. I have never heard of him.
  3. It is the teaching of the Singh Sabhia Tat Khalsas that Sikhism should be separated from association with Hindu ideologies. Modern Tat Khalsa Sikhs who adhere to the basic institutions of modern Sikhism, such as SGPC and Akal Takhat political pre-eminance, who reject as "Hindu ritualism" such sanatan practices as Nihang Jatha and Hazoori Jatha practice of jhatka, or aarati, or prakash of all 3 Granths, or placing blood tilak on shastars, etc. are in fact espousing Singh Sabhia ideology and beliefs. These are political beliefs interjected into the Sikh Panth within the last 100 years and have no purataan parallel. Moreover, if you hadn't noticed there has been an escalating conflict between Pakistan and India since the partition. China has been trying to claim Kashmir and arming the Pakistani intelligence agencies, who in turn arm the Islamic mujahideen. The fact remains that Pakistan and China have infiltrated the Punjab region in their efforts to break Indian National Unity. The Sikh militant organizations which sought refuge in Pakistan have long been working together with the Islamic Mujahideen and Pakistani National interests. 'China should break India into 20-30 states' New Delhi: In an article likely to raise Indian hackles, a Chinese strategist contends that Beijing should break up India into 20-30 independent states with the help of “friendly countries” like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan... China Think-Tank to Dismember India China projects Kashmir as a separate country KATHMANDU: Besides issuing separate visas to Indian passport holders from Jammu and Kashmir, China is also projecting the disputed territory as an independent country in other ways. Visitors to Tibet, especially journalists invited by the Chinese government, are given handouts where Kashmir is indicated as a country separate from India...China Projects Kashmir as a Separate Country Monster turns on Frankenstein Pakistan’s rationale for fueling militancy and separatism in Jammu & Kashmir and terrorism in other parts of India is based on the premise that it is the sole custodian of Muslim interests everywhere, even more so in India. Having fought four wars with us and having been defeated in all of them, it is now fathering terrorist groups to wage jihad against India... Monster Turns On Frankenstein Even an old clip of Operation Bluestar shows the weapons of the Sikh Militants were of Chinese manufacture implying Chinese government manipulation to support civil war to divide the Indian state. As we from today the rising Maoist Naxal insurgency actually threatens civil war. So these political considerations are serious and continuing. What is to be gained by breaking Indian National Unity and strengthening terrorist threats and enemy foreign governments? How does that benefit Indian citizens which includes Sikhs? So when analyzing the real forces which are behind the Sikh-Hindu disunity efforts, it doesn't take very long to find the criminal hand of Pakistan and China. India prepares new assault on its 'biggest threat' India has sent 20,000 more troops to eastern states where a Maoist Naxalite insurgency is gaining strength. Some analysts question whether India has the breadth and strength for an escalated campaign. Naxal Insurgency Most Hindu's and Sanatan Sikhs believe current political situation is a gross manipulation of holy Sikh religion by hostile forces. And as for the naive assertion that the "weapons were planted by the Indian government," yeah, right. For example Simranjit Singh Mann, former head of Shiromani Akali Dal Amritsar videotaped shouting "Pakistan Zindabad" and praising their propaganda to achieve alliance with Sikhs and recognition of Khalistan together with his arrest for treason paint the picture that some radical Sikhs groups are actively collaborating with Pakistan. So when Sikhs begin to post hate speech against Hindu's and Hinduism and justify the murder of Sanatan Sikh dera leaders and trash Sikh-Hindu Unity efforts while many times promoting aims of the Pakistani Intelligence forces, then yes, it is reasonable to assume some people will believe you are acting in the interests of Pakistan to further divide India as a sovereign country and to spread the kind of hate and disunity which leads to violence. Is there a spiritual purpose behind it? See, many Sanatan Sikhs believe these political manipulations and corruptions defile Sikhi and don't represent it at all. This is some of things they have posted under the guise of Hindu-Sikh unity : calling the 5 ks useless. sayng that Guru Arjan copied Bhagat Bani without their consent. calling 8 of the Guru's a joke. claiming that Guru Harkrishan was given gurgaddi cos Ram Rai was the son of a lowcaste maid of Guru Har Rai. saying that Gurus beleeived in caste discrimination. What you are talking about are a collection of individuals with a collection of opinions, not one of which represents Hindu Dharma or even a particular sanatan Sikh sect. If you have a problem with those opinions, write you're rebuttal. But analyzing some of the issues under debate, can you explain WHY someone would believe the panj kakkars are "useless" from a spiritual perspective? Can you please tell me in a decent way how wearing Kacchera makes someone modest? You see, it's a symbolic representation to remind someone of modesty. Now, if you believe, as I do, that Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave hukam that Khalsa were to keep the panj kakkars on their person at all times, you will disagree with other opinions. But other opinions have no authority to challenge your faith. There's no reason to lose peace or get angry because Namdharis don't believe in kirpan, for example. Do you want to eliminate all Namdharis to punish them for a different belief? Does a dhaari really make anyone holy? Haven't we known kesdhari and even amritdhari people who fail to live up to Khalsa ideals, who maybe are sharaabis or beat their wife and kids? So the criticism isn't entirely false. Just having hairs doesn't make anybody spiritual. But it's the commitment to a spiritual ideal which should be behind the practice of keeping kakkars. So what, are you going to do, condemn the world for having an opinion? What exactly have you done to live up to the Khalsa ideal which would persuade anyone that disbelieving in panj kakkars is wrong? Now, you are mixing apples with oranges in this phrase: "saying that Gurus beleeived in caste discrimination." There is a difference between caste "discrimination" and believing in the caste-varna-jati system. So here again, we're back to the issue of differing opinions and not "disrespect of teachings." ਆਪੇ ਤੰਤੁ ਪਰਮ ਤੰਤੁ ਸਭੁ ਆਪੇ ਆਪੇ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਦਾਸੁ ਭਇਆ ॥ aapae thanth param thanth sabh aapae aapae thaakur dhaas bhaeiaa || He Himself is the supreme essence, He Himself is the essence of all. He Himself is the Lord and Master, and He Himself is the servant. ਆਪੇ ਦਸ ਅਠ ਵਰਨ ਉਪਾਇਅਨੁ ਆਪਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਆਪਿ ਰਾਜੁ ਲਇਆ ॥ aapae dhas ath varan oupaaeian aap breham aap raaj laeiaa || He Himself created the people of the eighteen varnas; God Himself acquired His domain. ਆਪੇ ਮਾਰੇ ਆਪੇ ਛੋਡੈ ਆਪੇ ਬਖਸੇ ਕਰੇ ਦਇਆ ॥ aapae maarae aapae shhoddai aapae bakhasae karae dhaeiaa || He Himself kills, and He Himself redeems; He Himself, in His Kindness, forgives us. He is infallible ~SGGS Ji ang 553 It can easily be interpreted from the sanatan perspective that the Guru Sahibaan believed in the varna system because Gurbani says the Lord Himself created the people with differences in nature and temperament along which the varna exists. But this is not the same thing as the hateful, racism which the British Raj insinuated into the Varna system. Many Sanatan Sants and Bhagats had spoken against abuses and corruption of the Vedic caste system. Vaishnav sants initiated a caste based reform hundreds of years before Guru Nanak Dev Ji was even born. And these teachings of spiritual evolution and equality are what appear in Vaishnav bhagat bani. These teachings are based on the Srimad Bhagavatum which teaches that a persons gunas, his temperament, not his birth determine his true varna, and that everybody is intended to be a brahmana, servant and devotee of God. So in the original Vedic system, even the lowly Shudra can be a brahmin, and a born brahmin a shudra based on his mentality. And it is this Vaishnav reform philophy which is found in Sikh Gurbani. ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਸੋਢੀ ਤਿਲਕੁ ਦੀਆ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦੁ ਸਚੁ ਨੀਸਾਣੁ ਜੀਉ ॥੫॥ raamadhaas sodtee thilak dheeaa gur sabadh sach neesaan jeeo ||5|| The Guru then blessed the Sodhi Ram Das with the ceremonial tilak mark, the insignia of the True Word of the Shabad. ||5|| ~SGGS Ji ang 923 You do not find ANYWHERE in Gurbani, rejection of the caste-varna system. You do not find ANYWHERE promotion of caste discrimination. But the issue comes down to a matter of different opinions and different knowledge people bring to these discussions. Simply to read the Gurbani literally and believe the Vedic Vaishnav reform in the Varna system, together with the historical fact that not a single Guru Sahibaan ever married out of his caste and that Guru Granth Sahib records Guru caste surnames, or that historical pothis record what caste the panj piare were reflects that complete "rejection" of the caste-Varna system did NOT occur, although rejections of the CORRUPTIONS of it did. ਖਤ੍ਰੀ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣ ਸੂਦ ਵੈਸ ਉਪਦੇਸੁ ਚਹੁ ਵਰਨਾ ਕਉ ਸਾਝਾ ॥ khathree braahaman soodh vais oupadhaes chahu varanaa ko saajhaa || The four castes - the Kh'shaatriyas, Brahmins, Soodras and Vaishyas - are equal in respect to the teachings. ~SGGS Ji ang 747 ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਖਤ੍ਰੀ ਸੂਦ ਵੈਸ ਚਾਰਿ ਵਰਨ ਚਾਰਿ ਆਸ੍ਰਮ ਹਹਿ ਜੋ ਹਰਿ ਧਿਆਵੈ ਸੋ ਪਰਧਾਨੁ ॥ braahaman khathree soodh vais chaar varan chaar aasram hehi jo har dhhiaavai so paradhhaan || There are four castes: Brahmin, Kh'shaatriya, Soodra and Vaishya, and there are four stages of life. One who meditates on the Lord, is the most distinguished and renowned. ~SGGS Ji ang 861 ਸੋ ਬ੍ਰਾਹਮਣੁ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਜੋ ਬਿੰਦੇ ਹਰਿ ਸੇਤੀ ਰੰਗਿ ਰਾਤਾ ॥ so braahaman breham jo bindhae har saethee rang raathaa || He alone is a Brahmin, who knows the Lord Brahma, and is attuned to the Love of the Lord. ~SGGS Ji ang 68 ਬਬਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਜਾਨਤ ਤੇ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ॥ babaa breham jaanath thae brehamaa || BABBA: One who knows God is a Brahmin. ~SGGS Ji ang 258 ਅਧਮ ਚੰਡਾਲੀ ਭਈ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਣੀ ਸੂਦੀ ਤੇ ਸ੍ਰੇਸਟਾਈ ਰੇ ॥ adhham chanddaalee bhee brehamanee soodhee thae sraesattaaee rae || The lowly outcaste becomes a Brahmin, and the untouchable sweeper becomes pure and sublime. ~SGGS Ji ang 381 It sounds like a foolish opinion of someone who doesn't know any better. But I don't read anything "bad" into it. Not even every Sikh understands the passing of the Jyoth from one Guru to another, why would you expect eveyone to have the same undertsanding as you do? Instead of calling him names, why don't you share that gyaan which you gain from dhyaan with him instead? If you can't do Sikhi parchaar why drop to the level of insults in the name of defending Sikhi? perhaps you could kindly make it clear what these holy devotees of Vishnu are trying to do? You should know that not every Hindu is a Vaishnav. And the people who have different opinions about the meaning of Gurbani or the historical relationships and stories withing different Sikh sampradayas are not all going to agree on things. But your comment about "holy devotees of Vishnu" following calling as mo fo's and turds is "disrespectful" of Gurbani. ਬਬਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਜਾਨਤ ਤੇ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ॥ babaa breham jaanath thae brehamaa || BABBA: One who knows God is a Brahmin. ਬੈਸਨੋ ਤੇ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਸੁਚ ਧਰਮਾ ॥ baisano thae guramukh such dhharamaa || A Vaishnaav is one who, as Gurmukh, lives the righteous life of Dharma. ਬੀਰਾ ਆਪਨ ਬੁਰਾ ਮਿਟਾਵੈ ॥ beeraa aapan buraa mittaavai || One who eradicates his own evil is a brave warrior; ~SGGS Ji ang 258 Gurbani calls a Vaishnav as Gurmukh. ਬੈਸਨੋ ਸੋ ਜਿਸੁ ਊਪਰਿ ਸੁਪ੍ਰਸੰਨ ॥ baisano so jis oopar suprasann || The true Vaishnaav, the devotee of Vishnu, is the one with whom God is thoroughly pleased. ਬਿਸਨ ਕੀ ਮਾਇਆ ਤੇ ਹੋਇ ਭਿੰਨ ॥ bisan kee maaeiaa thae hoe bhinn || He dwells apart from Maya. ਕਰਮ ਕਰਤ ਹੋਵੈ ਨਿਹਕਰਮ ॥ karam karath hovai nihakaram || Performing good deeds, he does not seek rewards. ਤਿਸੁ ਬੈਸਨੋ ਕਾ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਧਰਮ ॥ this baisano kaa niramal dhharam || Spotlessly pure is the religion of such a Vaishnaav; ਕਾਹੂ ਫਲ ਕੀ ਇਛਾ ਨਹੀ ਬਾਛੈ ॥ kaahoo fal kee eishhaa nehee baashhai || he has no desire for the fruits of his labors. ਕੇਵਲ ਭਗਤਿ ਕੀਰਤਨ ਸੰਗਿ ਰਾਚੈ ॥ kaeval bhagath keerathan sang raachai || He is absorbed in devotional worship and the singing of Kirtan, the songs of the Lord's Glory. ਮਨ ਤਨ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਗੋਪਾਲ ॥ man than anthar simaran gopaal || Within his mind and body, he meditates in remembrance on the Lord of the Universe. ਸਭ ਊਪਰਿ ਹੋਵਤ ਕਿਰਪਾਲ ॥ sabh oopar hovath kirapaal || He is kind to all creatures. ਆਪਿ ਦ੍ਰਿੜੈ ਅਵਰਹ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਵੈ ॥ aap dhrirrai avareh naam japaavai || He holds fast to the Naam, and inspires others to chant it. ਨਾਨਕ ਓਹੁ ਬੈਸਨੋ ਪਰਮ ਗਤਿ ਪਾਵੈ ॥੨॥ naanak ouhu baisano param gath paavai ||2|| O Nanak, such a Vaishnaav obtains the supreme status. ||2|| ਭਗਉਤੀ ਭਗਵੰਤ ਭਗਤਿ ਕਾ ਰੰਗੁ ॥ bhagouthee bhagavanth bhagath kaa rang || The true Bhagaautee, the devotee of Adi Shakti, loves the devotional worship of God. ~SGGS Ji ang 274 Gurbani calls the Vaishnav who worships Gopaal, name of Har Krishna as attaining the liberation. Nothing anywhere in Gurbani rejects or disrespects Vaishnavism or Har Krishana. Neither should you.
  4. First of all do you accept that not every Sikh Jatha believes that Sikhism is a new Panth? There are traditional Jathas which have always been a part of Hinduism. So the dividing line which separates "Hindu religion" from "Sikh religion" does not exist for some as it exists for others. But why would anyone get emotionally hostile about a belief? Different people and sects are going to have different views. So is the conclusion to be "intolerance of differect sects?" Or even supporting and justifying "attacks and assassinations" of different sect leaders? But simply to have the interpretation that Sikhism is a continuation of the Sant Mat of the past which is reflected in Bhagat bani of Vaishnav Bhagats and fitting within the umbrella of sanatana Dharma philosophy is no "insult" or "threat to Sikh identity." It's a viewpoint. Denigration in this usage is in the interpretation of the perceiver. There's no denigration, for example, to show that Buddhist teachings originate from Shaiva Tantra. It's not "denigrating" something to show relationship or origination. den·i·grat·ed, den·i·grat·ing, den·i·grates 1. To attack the character or reputation of; speak ill of; defame. 2. To disparage; belittle: Denigrate People who use inflammatory words like "denigration" in context of a "discussion of belief systems" and "personal interpretations" invent a conflict where there is none in an effort to intimidate other viewpoints and cast aspersions on them. as⋅per⋅sion 1. a damaging or derogatory remark or criticism; slander: casting aspersions on a campaign rival. 2. the act of slandering; vilification; defamation; calumniation; derogation: Such vehement aspersions cannot be ignored. Aspersion So rather than conscientious discussion of spiritual topics, it becomes SLANDER of Hindu religion and of beliefs of Sanatan sects. Simply to point out that Sikh philosophy and spiritual teachings originate and derive from Sanatana Dharma is not "denigrating" them. Merely to make an accusation without proving it is another slander. Did you get all that? What you falsely attribute as "disrespect" is NOT the same as disbelief or disagreement. Traditional Sikh sects have not held the exact same views even among themselves. Traditional Sikh undertstandings which have long been at odds with Singh Sabhia views. But that is NOT "disrespect" to hold different opinions. Sikhs claim belief in panj kakkars as coming from hukam of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. I don't personally disagree. But someone else could easily challenge, where is the proof of that? Where is it written? Because in fact, several rehitnamay talk about 3 kakkars only. So traditionally, there is not the hard and fast doctrinalism of the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia. To speak of this, or make questions along this line on a discussion forum is NOT "disrespect." Sikhs claim Guru Gobind Singh Ji made the Khalsa His roop. Where is the proof? Because a bunch of Tat Khalsa Singhs have always said so? Where is it written? And in fact, it is in Shri Sarbloh Granth Sahib Ji. "Khalsa mero roop hai khaas. The Khalsa is my complete image. Khalse maih hau karo nivaas. I dwell in the khalsa." But is different mainstream Sikh Jathas do not even accept Sarbloh Granth Sahib as bani, and there are bitter debates whether even Shri Dasm Granth Sahib Ji is bani. Why are the Hindu's and Sanatan Sikhs singled out as "disrespecting" what they do not agree with, or who discuss these issues from their viewpoints? But when Tat Khalsas do the same thing, it's not "disrespect" it's "discussion?" disrespectful - exhibiting lack of respect; rude and discourteous; Disrespect Explain please about the Sikh Rehat Maryada being "disrespected?" No rude comments are written from the perspective of Sikh-Hindu Unity. Although some individuals may be disrespectful, just as some Tat Khalsas are disrespectful of Hinduism, calling perjorative names and insults. Even violating the very same SGPC Sikh Rehat Maryada which says: e. The Khalsa should maintain its distinctiveness among the professors of different religions of the world, but should not hurt the sentiments of any person professing another religion. SGPC SRM It isn't "disrespect" to question or challenge the authority of something from an ideological perspective. It is challenging the authority and political interpretations of the SGPC, not Guru Sahib. We see here a perfect example of how the SGPC imposes an interpretation which various sects within Sikh tradition disagree with. Take for example the simple interpretation of the word "Guru." The Sanskrit does not confer the meaning of Guru as a teacher and an honored person. Guru means the one who is beyond the qualities of rajo-sato-tamo gunas and is thus a Divine Being able to confer brahmgyan on a chela because He has attained the God Realization. ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਬੁਝਿਆ ਗੁਰ ਜੇਵਡੁ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥ sathigur har prabh bujhiaa gur jaevadd avar n koe || The True Guru understands the Lord God. There is no other as Great as the Guru. ~SGGS Ji ang 39 ਜੇਵਡੁ ਆਪਿ ਜਾਣੈ ਆਪਿ ਆਪਿ ॥ jaevadd aap jaanai aap aap || Only He Himself is that Great. He Himself knows Himself. ~SGGS Ji ang 5 ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ gur paramaesar paarabreham gur ddubadhaa leae tharaae ||2|| The Guru is the Transcendent Lord, the Supreme Lord God. The Guru lifts up and saves those who are drowning. ||2|| ~SGGS Ji ang 49 Also, the SGPC Sikh Rehat Maryada goes so far as to interpolate political interpretations into RULES for amritdhari Khalsas in the name of living in consonance with the Guru's tenets. But they are not the Guru's tenets at all, they are INTERPRETATIONS of the Singh Sabhias codified into a set of rules. It is additions like this which have political interpretations against Hindu practices as being at odds with Sikhism which is the Singh Sabhia ideology. The traditional Sanatan Sikhi has no problem with it, only the Tat Khalsas make it a problem and then invent a rulebook making sanatan Sikh observances "wrong," or worse, "anti-Gurmat," "anti-Sikh." So the traditional Sikh practices are what is being attacked and what is being criticized by Tat Khalsas. Political opinions interpolated into the Sikh Rehat Maryada is a point of INTERPRETATION and NOT GURMAT. To challenge that is a viewpoint, not denigration or disrespect.
  5. What exactly is the problem with Sikh-Hindu unity? Can someone please explain to me in a decent manner? I read through the site. I didn't read disrespect of Guru Sahiban or their Sikhi. Perhaps someone could kindly make it clear besides making juvenile insults about cow piss drinkers, which is clearly disrespect. Thank you. ~Om Namah Shivayah
  6. In thread #35 Kalyug writes: Gurbani teaches: ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਨਾਦੰ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਵੇਦੰ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਸਮਾਈ ॥ guramukh naadhan guramukh vaedhan guramukh rehiaa samaaee || The Guru's Word is the Sound-current of the Naad; the Guru's Word is the Wisdom of the Vedas; the Guru's Word is all-pervading. ਗੁਰੁ ਈਸਰੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਬਰਮਾ ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਮਾਈ ॥ gur eesar gur gorakh baramaa gur paarabathee maaee || The Guru is Shiva, the Guru is Vishnu and Brahma; the Guru is Paarvati and Lakhshmi. ਜੇ ਹਉ ਜਾਣਾ ਆਖਾ ਨਾਹੀ ਕਹਣਾ ਕਥਨੁ ਨ ਜਾਈ ॥ jae ho jaanaa aakhaa naahee kehanaa kathhan n jaaee || Even knowing God, I cannot describe Him; He cannot be described in words. ਗੁਰਾ ਇਕ ਦੇਹਿ ਬੁਝਾਈ ॥ guraa eik dhaehi bujhaaee || The Guru has given me this one understanding: ਸਭਨਾ ਜੀਆ ਕਾ ਇਕੁ ਦਾਤਾ ਸੋ ਮੈ ਵਿਸਰਿ ਨ ਜਾਈ ॥੫॥ sabhanaa jeeaa kaa eik dhaathaa so mai visar n jaaee ||5|| there is only the One, the Giver of all souls. May I never forget Him! ||5|| ~SGGS Ji ang 2 ekam sad vipra bahudha vadanti agnim yamam matariswanam ahuh Truth is One, sages call it by many names, Agni, Yama, Matariswan. ~Rig Veda Samhita 1.164.46 ਗਣ ਗੰਧਰਬ ਸਿਧ ਅਰੁ ਸਾਧਿਕ ॥ gan gandhharab sidhh ar saadhhik || The servants of God, the celestial singers, the Siddhas and the seekers, ਸੁਰਿ ਨਰ ਦੇਵ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾਦਿਕ ॥ sur nar dhaev breham brehamaadhik || the angelic and divine beings, Brahma and those like Brahma, ਚਤੁਰ ਬੇਦ ਉਚਰਤ ਦਿਨੁ ਰਾਤਿ ॥ chathur baedh oucharath dhin raath || and the four Vedas proclaim, day and night, ਅਗਮ ਅਗਮ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਆਗਾਧਿ ॥ agam agam thaakur aagaadhh || that the Lord and Master is inaccessible, unapproachable and unfathomable. ਗੁਨ ਬੇਅੰਤ ਬੇਅੰਤ ਭਨੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਕਹਨੁ ਨ ਜਾਈ ਪਰੈ ਪਰਾਤਿ ॥੨॥੨॥੩੫॥ gun baeanth baeanth bhan naanak kehan n jaaee parai paraath ||2||2||35|| Endless, endless are His Glories, says Nanak; they cannot be described - they are beyond our reach. ||2||2||35|| ~SGGS Ji ang 535 I would like to ask if Kaljug is Randip Singh from SPN, and if you disbelieve in the reality of devas which Gurbani teaches about as a mythology of made up stories, do you believe in God? And believing in God, but not in avataras do you believe in a Satguru? Because if the Divine we call God is a splendor of glory, paragas, and devas are shining spiritual beings why believe in one but not the other? Also if an avatar is the Divine Presence descending into sansaar, how is this different from the definition of Satguru which is the Divine Truth which is Light which shines in darkness fundamentally different? You believe in the Light-Sound which can't be perceived, Nirguna Parabrahma, yet you disbelieve in the Light-Sound which can be perceived, the sargun swaroop. Does this make any sense? If the Divine is all pervading the creation, and is formless and yet has uncountable forms why would you disbelieve in manifestations of millions of Jyots of varying degrees of brightness, including not only devas but every single atma? If Guru is that being which proceeds from what is beyond perception vibrating Shabda/Spanda from the Primal Nada/Omkara into this sansaar as Shabda/Naam/Gurmantra, how is that a different definition than an avatar? There is no difference. But if you are saying these beings and definitions are mythology and made up stories, then what is your opinion of Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji which teaches them to us as Gurmat? Do you bow your hairs to Guru Granth Sahib because you believe it is filled with made up stories and false definitions? Or do you not believe in Gurbani? Shiva Sutras teach: अतो विन्दुरतो नादो रूपमस्मादतो रसः। प्रवर्तन्तेऽचिरेणैव क्षोभकत्वेन देहिनः॥१०॥ Ato vindurato nādo rūpamasmādato rasaḥ| Pravartante'cireṇaiva kṣobhakatvena dehinaḥ||10|| From this (Unmeṣa) (átaḥ... átaḥ... asmāt átaḥ), Vindú --divine light-- (vindúḥ)1, Nādá --divine sound-- (nādáḥ), Rūpá --divine form-- (rūpám) (and) Rása --divine taste-- (rásaḥ) soon (acireṇa evá) appear (pravartante) to an embodied soul (dehinaḥ) as a disturbing factor (kṣobhakatvena)||10|| 1 It can also be written "Bindú". दिदृक्षयेव सर्वार्थान्यदा व्याप्यवतिष्ठते। तदा किं बहुनोक्तेन स्वयमेवावभोत्स्यते॥११॥ Didṛkṣayeva sarvārthānyadā vyāpyavatiṣṭhate| Tadā kiṁ bahunoktena svayamevāvabhotsyate||11|| When (yadā) (a Yogī) desiring to see (didṛkṣayā), as it were (iva), all (sárva) objects (arthān), abides (avatiṣṭhate) pervading (vyāpī) (them all), then (tadā), what (is the point) (kim) of saying (uktena) much (about it) (bahunā)? He will perceive or experience (that) (avabhotsyate) by himself (svayám evá)!||11|| Spanda Karika Sargun manifestation can be described as as Divine Light, Divine Sound, Divine Form, Divine Taste (rasnaa). If the God, Parmeshvar is all-pervading, how can there be a mythology of His manifestations? The difference between the perjorative use of "mythology" as opposed to "symbolism" is to deny the validity of something. But in this case it is denying the validity of concepts taught in Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. If a person, who is an atma can be embodied as human, die and be embodied as a pig, a dog, or be a bhoot. Why disbelieve in devas? Gurbani speaks of devas and avatars. If these are all mythological or metaphorical concepts, then what is God? Is God also a mythological concept? If the Eko Brahman pervades the sansaar we call that Parabrahm because it's the unity of the finite and the infinite. So it is no longer Brahma of sargun swaroop symbolic of the three gunas of created matter. It pervades to include the infinite as well and becomes Parabrahm. But without the gunas of the Mahadevas: Brahma, Mahesh, Vishnu, there is no brain, no materiality with which to perceive the God. The Totality is the total of all reality, manifest AND unmanifest. If these things are mythological, then God is mythological.
  7. On post #43 of this thread Kaljug writes: Gurbani says: ਏਕ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨੰ ਸਰਬ ਦੇਵਾ ਦੇਵ ਦੇਵਾ ਤ ਆਤਮਾ ॥ eaek kirasanan sarab dhaevaa dhaev dhaevaa th aathamaa || The One Lord Krishna is the Divine Lord of all; He is the Divinity of the individual soul. ~SGGS Ji ang 469 Gurbani says: ਆਪੇ ਗੋਪੀ ਕਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਬਨਿ ਆਪੇ ਗਊ ਚਰਾਹਾ ॥ aapae gopee kaan hai piaaraa ban aapae goo charaahaa || The Beloved Himself is the milk-maid and Krishna; He Himself herds the cows in the woods. ~SGGS Ji ang 606 Gurbani says: ਕ੍ਰਿਸ੍ਨਾ ਤੇ ਜਾਨਊ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਚੰਤੀ ਨਾਚਨਾ ॥੧॥ kirasaa thae jaanoo har har naachanthee naachanaa ||1|| Know that, through Krishna, the Lord, Har, Har, the dance of creation dances. ||1|| ~SGGS Ji ang 693 Gurbani says: ਅਚੁਤ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਅੰਤਰਜਾਮੀ ॥ achuth paarabreham paramaesur antharajaamee || The Supreme Lord God is imperishable, the Transcendent Lord, the Inner-knower, the Searcher of hearts. ਮਧੁਸੂਦਨ ਦਾਮੋਦਰ ਸੁਆਮੀ ॥ madhhusoodhan dhaamodhar suaamee || He is the Slayer of demons, our Supreme Lord and Master. ਰਿਖੀਕੇਸ ਗੋਵਰਧਨ ਧਾਰੀ ਮੁਰਲੀ ਮਨੋਹਰ ਹਰਿ ਰੰਗਾ ॥੧॥ rikheekaes govaradhhan dhhaaree muralee manohar har rangaa ||1|| The Supreme Rishi, the Master of the sensory organs, the uplifter of mountains, the joyful Lord playing His enticing flute. ||1|| ਮੋਹਨ ਮਾਧਵ ਕ੍ਰਿਸ੍ਨ ਮੁਰਾਰੇ ॥ mohan maadhhav kirasa muraarae || The Enticer of Hearts, the Lord of wealth, Krishna, the Enemy of ego. ਜਗਦੀਸੁਰ ਹਰਿ ਜੀਉ ਅਸੁਰ ਸੰਘਾਰੇ ॥ jagadheesur har jeeo asur sanghaarae || The Lord of the Universe, the Dear Lord, the Destroyer of demons. ਜਗਜੀਵਨ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਠਾਕੁਰ ਘਟ ਘਟ ਵਾਸੀ ਹੈ ਸੰਗਾ ॥੨॥ jagajeevan abinaasee thaakur ghatt ghatt vaasee hai sangaa ||2|| The Life of the World, our eternal and ever-stable Lord and Master dwells within each and every heart, and is always with us. ||2|| ਧਰਣੀਧਰ ਈਸ ਨਰਸਿੰਘ ਨਾਰਾਇਣ ॥ dhharaneedhhar ees narasingh naaraaein || The Support of the Earth, the man-lion, the Supreme Lord God. ਦਾੜਾ ਅਗ੍ਰੇ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮਿ ਧਰਾਇਣ ॥ dhaarraa agrae prithham dhharaaein || The Protector who tears apart demons with His teeth, the Upholder of the earth. ਬਾਵਨ ਰੂਪੁ ਕੀਆ ਤੁਧੁ ਕਰਤੇ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਸੇਤੀ ਹੈ ਚੰਗਾ ॥੩॥ baavan roop keeaa thudhh karathae sabh hee saethee hai changaa ||3|| O Creator, You assumed the form of the pygmy to humble the demons; You are the Lord God of all. ||3|| ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਾਮਚੰਦ ਜਿਸੁ ਰੂਪੁ ਨ ਰੇਖਿਆ ॥ sree raamachandh jis roop n raekhiaa || You are the Great Raam Chand, who has no form or feature. ਬਨਵਾਲੀ ਚਕ੍ਰਪਾਣਿ ਦਰਸਿ ਅਨੂਪਿਆ ॥ banavaalee chakrapaan dharas anoopiaa || Adorned with flowers, holding the chakra in Your hand, Your form is incomparably beautiful. ਸਹਸ ਨੇਤ੍ਰ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਹੈ ਸਹਸਾ ਇਕੁ ਦਾਤਾ ਸਭ ਹੈ ਮੰਗਾ ॥੪॥ sehas naethr moorath hai sehasaa eik dhaathaa sabh hai mangaa ||4|| You have thousands of eyes, and thousands of forms. You alone are the Giver, and all are beggars of You. ||4|| ਭਗਤਿ ਵਛਲੁ ਅਨਾਥਹ ਨਾਥੇ ॥ bhagath vashhal anaathheh naathhae || You are the Lover of Your devotees, the Master of the masterless. ਗੋਪੀ ਨਾਥੁ ਸਗਲ ਹੈ ਸਾਥੇ ॥ gopee naathh sagal hai saathhae || The Lord and Master of the milk-maids, You are the companion of all. ਬਾਸੁਦੇਵ ਨਿਰੰਜਨ ਦਾਤੇ ਬਰਨਿ ਨ ਸਾਕਉ ਗੁਣ ਅੰਗਾ ॥੫॥ baasudhaev niranjan dhaathae baran n saako gun angaa ||5|| O Lord, Immacuate Great Giver, I cannot describe even an iota of Your Glorious Virtues. ||5|| ਮੁਕੰਦ ਮਨੋਹਰ ਲਖਮੀ ਨਾਰਾਇਣ ॥ mukandh manohar lakhamee naaraaein || Liberator, Enticing Lord, Lord of Lakshmi, Supreme Lord God. ਦ੍ਰੋਪਤੀ ਲਜਾ ਨਿਵਾਰਿ ਉਧਾਰਣ ॥ dhropathee lajaa nivaar oudhhaaran || Savior of Dropadi's honor. ਕਮਲਾਕੰਤ ਕਰਹਿ ਕੰਤੂਹਲ ਅਨਦ ਬਿਨੋਦੀ ਨਿਹਸੰਗਾ ॥੬॥ kamalaakanth karehi kanthoohal anadh binodhee nihasangaa ||6|| Lord of Maya, miracle-worker, absorbed in delightful play, unattached. ||6|| ਅਮੋਘ ਦਰਸਨ ਆਜੂਨੀ ਸੰਭਉ ॥ amogh dharasan aajoonee sanbho || The Blessed Vision of His Darshan is fruitful and rewarding; He is not born, He is self-existent. ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਜਿਸੁ ਕਦੇ ਨਾਹੀ ਖਉ ॥ akaal moorath jis kadhae naahee kho || His form is undying; it is never destroyed. ~SGGS Ji ang 1082 It is my humble benti that Gurbani clearly describes Krishna and the Yuga avatars of Vishnu, Narasimha, Ramachadra, Vamana the dwarf, as being Parabrahm and Akal and Jagadeshvar. ਨਿਰਗੁਨ ਤੇ ਸਰਗੁਨ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਾਰੰ ॥ niragun thae saragun dhrisattaaran || From formless, He appeared as form. ~SGGS Ji ang 250 So you may have an opinion, but what is the truth of what Gurbani says?
×
×
  • Create New...