BhagatSingh

See this thread where we discussed different perspectives. Start from Wakeup's comment and keep reading the remainder of page 2 and page 3.

In order to see other perspectives, you must contemplate how one Beingness, Consciousnes, can be perceived as Energy or Time by Saints from different traditions. Then you will enjoy the taste of Chandi di Vaar (the eulogy of Energy) and Bichitra Natak (the eulogy of Time).

Why are you splitting this into 3 schools of thought when it is actually one school of thought. In Gurbani, it states that there is non-dual oneness of Consciousness or Being Hari ji that appears as Hari-Maya (or Shiv-Shakti) and that everything that is perceived is coming One Universal Vibration (Aum), that is "uttered" by Hari ji. The Oneness Advait Consciousness appears as Dual Consciousness and Energy, and it is through the vibration of the Onkar. That is all one perspective in Guru Granth Sahib. 2. The second perspective comes from Chandi di Vaar because it puts Bhagawati/Adi Shakti ji, which is Energy/Power, at the top, instead of Hari ji, Consciousness. That is Shaktism's perspective. 3. The third perspective comes from Bichitra Natak, which puts Mahakal ji, which Time/Death, at the top instead of Energy or Consciousness. So you might ask how can Time be the creator of Consciousness and Energy. Well contemplate this phrase - Eternal Now. Ultimately, when there is an experience of Oneness, then all these perspectives merge into one. Monotheism into Polytheism into Pantheism, and Advait into Dvait and Vaishavism into Shaktism into Shaivism. So ultimately it simply IS. However for the sake of understanding different approaches are there. Different paths up the same mountain, like they say.

In Vaishnavism, it is Consciousness that came first. You can see this view mirrored in Guru Granth Sahib. In Shaktism, it is Energy or physicality that came first. You can see this view mirrored in the opening lines of Chandi di Vaar. This is the fundamental duality. Both worldviews recognize that fundamentally consciousness and energy are the same but there is a duality there that is perceived. That duality is referred to as Shiv-Shakti. Guru sahib says - Jaha dekhan taha Ravi rahe, Shiv Shakti ka mel - wherever I look I see Ravi (Sun, light and radiance) of the union of Shiv and Shakti (Consciousness and Energy) In Chandi Di Vaar, Khanda is referring to Consciousness and it dividing (Khandan) the Oneness of Energy in to distinct Khands/sections, into objects, locations, people, etc, and that's creates our world. Bhagawati Devi (Adi Shakti, Energy) first creates the Khanda that is Consciousness and then the process of Creation, Preservation and Destruction (here Brahma-Vishnu and Mahadev are referring to processes rather than to Supreme Consciousness). The flip version of this is expressed in Guru Granth Sahib. Where Hari ji creates Maya (Energy), which then creates duality within the Oneness of Consciousness. Maya divides one singular consciousness in to multiple bodies, in multiple forms. Maya entices Consciousness - Brahma Bishan Mahadev moheya - to its variety of forms and this is why the servants of Hari must learn to remain detached from Maya so that they see the Oneness. Baishno so jis upar suprasan, Bishan ki Maya te hoye bhin. Hope that clears things up.

Thanks for the link Paapiman. One thing I like is that he teaches how to pronounce Siharis correctly and to enunciate words clearly but other than that basic stuff I am not impressed at all. First of all - Ik Onkar is not pronounced as Ik Oankar. Aida is silent and is only a placeholder for Tippi. 2. He is not pronouncing any bindis even on words where clearly there is a bindi ie plural nouns. These two things are common knowledge and seems to be lost on the paathi sahib. 3. We haven't even got to pronouncing Siharis and Aunkars at the end of words and pronouncing D/J as Z, and all that good stuff, which are not common knowledge. The rest of the recitation is the same as how everyone else does it. If this is the best we've got, then I am not impressed by what our best is offering.

That explains why in Gurmukhi we say Z for these words because we were influenced by Persian and not Arabic. In Arabic its not Hadrat or Hazrat but rather Hadhrat; Qazi is Qadhi. If Gurus had known this, then they would have spelled such words with Dhadha, clearly. However they spell these words with Dadda and more commonly Jajja. So it seems to me that they are indicating a Za sound.

How can I listen to Taksal santhya online?

I answered all of your questions above. If you have any more or if you want more clarification, you can message me or start a new topic. Let's get back to the topic of this thread.

Allah, Mahakal, Shiva, yes. Smelly socks... no but if that's what you meditate on then more power to you. Hindu refers to any native living south of the Sindh river. That is what I mean by geographical identity. Just like Turk can mean geographical identity or religious identity. E.g. A Sikh who is a native of Turkey, is a Turk but not a Muslim. Does that make sense?

which reacts when you touch it - this is important to the definition of the word. ਛੂਈ - touch ਮੂਈ - death

Vishnu is name of that essence which pervades the cosmos. As geographical identity yes, but not as a religious identity.

Evolution doesn't say that Humans evolved from Apes. Evolution states that Apes and Humans are two different species, both of which have a common ancestor.

I have an ego, haumai, which is why I have attached myself to Akal Purakh Sahib's feet. While I am attached to his feet, I can easily drop the burden of the ego, and be a free-flowing vessel of Akal Purakh Sahib. And that's the process whereby I create my paintings. You don't have to like my work. It doesn't effect me. I know what kind of things you say about me on the forums. You don't have to like me either. It doesn't effect me. I don't think people on this site are pumping me up, I think they always speak their mind and always challenge me to do better. They always disagree with me if they feel disagreement and they agree with me, where they feel agreement. I appreciate them for that. I think they are good people and I need their disagreements in order to improve myself and refine my views. In Guru Granth Sahib, Akal Purakh Shaib is known as Hari and Ram. The stories in Guru Granth Sahib are stories of Hari and Ram, meaning they are stories of Akal Purakh Sahib, and in those stories his name is Hari or Ram. The saints whose bani appears in Guru Granth Sahib, always chanted "Hari" and "Ram". These are the two mantras that appear again and again in Gurbani. This is not my belief, this is simply an observation. I think it is self-evident to anyone who studies Guru Granth Sahib. I've been reading Guru Granth Sahib my whole life. But my reading has improved in the recent years due to Akal Purakh Sahib's blessing. Since we are told not to pronounce Siharis, I never pronounced them until a few years ago when I started to discover that they are important in the pronunciation of a word that ends in a sihari. It took me some time after that to confirm that indeed, all siharis at the end of a word are pronounced. And part of that confirmation process has been to talk to members here and take into account their views.

It might help to look at the context of the verse as well.

Now imagine if Guru Sahib was wearing Seli and Topi in the movie, like he did in actual life... These guys would go mad.

I did go off topic first but I was not talking about going off-topic. I was saying that the differences between the Punjabi and Hindi speakers, is irrelevant to the discussion. Since the discussion is about about how to speak Punjabi accurately. There is nothing wrong with it, as long as it is recognized to be slang or informal pronunciation and not the correct pronunciation of those words, especially by those who seek to learn the correct pronunciation of Gurbani. See the examples I gave earlier - ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ is correctly pronounced as Amritsar, not Ambarsar. ਹਰਿਮੰਦਰ ਸਾਹਿਬ is correctly pronounced as Harimandar Sahib, not Harmandar Saab. ਸਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਕਾਲ is correctly pronounced as Satye Shree Akaal, not Sasreekaal. Here the common way of pronouncing the words, is wrong or informal or slang. Add these to the above list - ਸਿਧ ਗੋਸਟਿ is correctly pronounced as Siddh Goshti, not as Sidh Gost. ਗੁਰੂ ਹਰਿ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ is correctly pronounced as Guru Hari Gobind, not as Guru Hargobind.

I think your alternative translation is more accurate because here - ਗਿਆਨੁ ਗੋਸਟਿ ਚਰਚਾ ਸਦਾ ਅਨਹਦਿ ਸਬਦਿ ਉਠੇ ਧੁਨਕਾਰਾ। Discussions for the sake of knowledge and the melodies of unstruck sound were ever heard there. - The word is Gyan is with an aunkar, which indicates singular, masculine word - knowledge. It does not indicate "of knowledge" otherwise there would be a sihari on Gyan, and it would be Gyani. This is more accurate for that reason because it accounts for wisdom separately Now one more thing - ਸਦਾ ਅਨਹਦਿ ਸਬਦਿ ਉਠੇ ਧੁਨਕਾਰਾ। Look at this part more closely. Sada (always) anhadi shabdi (through the unspoken words, or of the unspoken words) uthai dhunkaara (arose the melodies) Wisdom, spiritual sermons and discussions took place, all the while melodies of the unspoken words, arose at all times. Now if you look even closely - There is a quality to stuff is that is said, that is spoken, and there is a quality to stuff that is not said, that is not spoken. The author is talking about spoken words in the first half and the unspoken words in the second half. ਗੋਸਟਿ ਚਰਚਾ - spoken words ਅਨਹਦਿ ਸਬਦਿ - unspoken words So there are melodies of discussions (spoken words) and melodies of unspoken words - Wisdom, and the Vibrations of discussions and silence were always present there. I am not sure which of the two is more accurate.

That's no reason to eat siharis for breakfast. It also does not apply to this discussion since we are not talking about the difference between the two languages rather we are talking about how to pronounce Punjabi more correctly. I wouldn't say that is Punjabi. That is more akin to slang like "gonna" and "wanna", these are not English words, nor are they the correct way to pronounce "going to" and want to". ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ is correctly pronounced as Amritsar, not Ambarsar. ਹਰਿਮੰਦਰ ਸਾਹਿਬ is correctly pronounced as Harimandar Sahib, not Harmandar Saab. ਸਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਕਾਲ is correctly pronounced as Satye Shree Akaal, not Sasreekaal. You are confusing slang pronunciations with Punjabi pronunciations. And you are completely wrong about Hindu native speakers pronouncing Punjabi correctly. They also say Harmandar Saab and Sasreekal. especially Sasreekaal... When did we devolve into this "Sasreekaal" BS?

1. Yes. Yes. 2. Yes. 3. No, unless it is your time. 4. No. It is not a hallucination but it is also not the ultimate reality. It is another transient, dream like this 3D world. 5. Yes. 6. a) Yes. b) Not sure. My knowledge of Astral Projection is limited to what I have researched and hear from other people who have claimed to have done it. However with regards to Samadhi I can speak from some experience. 7. a) Samadhi is related to astral projection in that doing meditation will help you project your consciousness outside of your body. Some people have had astral projection experiences while in samadhi state due to the absorption in consciousness and dissociation from the body. 7. b) Sachkhand isn't some place out there that you travel to. Sach khand is available here and now, and Samadhi is the act of merging with Waheguru and experiencing him here and now. When the mind settles into its own awareness, then it comes to reside in Sach khand.

Mahan Kosh Encyclopedia ਸੰ. ਗੋਸ੍ਠ. {ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ}. ਗਊਆਂ ਦੇ ਠਹਿਰਣ ਦਾ ਥਾਂ. ਗੋਸ਼ਾਲਾ। (2) ਸੰ. ਗੋਸ੍ਠੀ. ਸ਼ਭਾ. ਮਜਲਿਸ। (3) ਭਾਵ- ਸਭਾ ਵਿੱਚ ਵਾਰਤਾਲਾਪ. ਚਰਚਾ. "ਗੋਸਟਿ ਗਿਆਨ ਨਾਮ ਸੁਣਿ ਉਧਰੇ". (ਸੋਰ ਮਃ ੫).

I urge you guys to please eat rotis instead of siharis. Leave my beloved siharis alone. They deserve to live! XD

Goshti means gathering so perhaps it is referring to a discussion in a gathering. Charcha simply means discussion so it can be applied to any context.

ਗੋਸਟਿ - Gathering ਚਰਚਾ - Discussion