BhagatSingh

4 hours ago, tva prasad said:

so if u told the guy ur brother's gone out of the house that'll be telling the truth?

Yes if you had a desire to save your brother then if you misdirected the assassin, that will be coming from a place of truth.

If you had a desire to save your brother and if you told the assassin the facts, then that will not be coming from a place of truth.

This is known as truthful living in that quote by Guru Nanak Dev ji.

Recognizing the situation for what it is (knowing the truth) and acting from from a place of recognizing this truth (truthful living) and doing so with utmost clarity and equanimity (truthful living) is what Guru sahib was talking about.
 

13 hours ago, JasperS said:

 Do you tell the truth and your brother gets shot? Or do you lie and save his life?

Your using a definition of truth that is not the same as the one Guru Nanak Dev ji is using.

Because your brother is your brother and his life is valuable to you. This is also truth. And saving him can only be done by directing the assassin elsewhere. This is also truth.

So you speak that which is core to your heart, you speak that which you embody. Do your  have desire to save your brother? or not?

If you have desire to save your brother and you tell the assassin where he is. Then you lied. You did not speak from a truthful place.

Contemplate this.

We've been force-fed certain views, certain beliefs, ideas, that are not present in Guru Granth Sahib.
Other ideas that are present in Guru Granth Sahib were ignored because they did not fit their narrative.

The pure understanding of Guru Granth Sahib thus has become very difficult to do, and very difficult to teach, since many people hold these other beliefs very strongly.
It is already very difficult to grasp begin with and having strong opinions makes it even harder.

It won't stop me from trying though.

Kalki Avtaar just means "Kaliyug's avtaar". It includes any avtars that might come after the previous ones were recorded.

So our Gurus are Kalki Avtaars. But there will be more Kalki avtaars.

There is no limit to his avtaars.

On 2016-11-04 at 2:28 AM, tva prasad said:

that's all right. I saw it on google images. Did bhagat kabir g wear a seli topi as well? What is the significance of the seli?

Yea he is often depicted with one as well. A lot of the Gurus did wear it. Bhagat Kabir ji and many other Bhagats were Gurus with their own followings.

When a successor Guru was appointed, they would put the topi on his head, put seli around the neck and on topi, and put tilak on forehead and do the arti plate ceremony.

There's even a shabad in Guru Granth Sahib describing this process, but I can't seem to remember it very well or find it.

Now here Guru Arjun Dev ji is wearing a turban. This is a late 1800s painting and the artists of this time never painted Gurus 2-5 with a cap, only Guru Nanak Dev ji.

On 2016-11-03 at 6:38 AM, paapiman said:

 

@BhagatSingh - What do you think bro?

It looks like the Nanaksar turban. But it could be a topi in shape of a nanaksar turban lol.

There is seli on top of the turban/cap that's good. It should be around the neck or across the chest (like gatra) as well.

@tva prasad

Well you can believe whatever you want. However all puratan artwork from 1600s, 1700s, 1800s show Guru Nanak Dev ji with a cap. We also have historical records that say Guru Hari Gobind ji changed the Seli-Topi tradition that the previous Gurus maintained.

It was only during recently during 1900s that Guru Nanak Dev ji was painted with a turban. That painting you think is from Baghdad was also painted in modern time, in 1900s.

Thakur Singh ji is encouraging people to wear a turban because it is a dying tradition nowadays. It is important that Sikhs maintain it.

That's my view anyways.

1 hour ago, tva prasad said:

do u mean they didn't wear that sort of turban?

Gurus 1-5 wore a particular type of cap.

They also wore a Seli, which is this black string you see across Guru Nanak Dev ji's chest, in this painting. Sometimes he is depicted wearing it on his cap.

In the post below, I am explaining the different faces of God. It is difficult to see them without meditation and developing what is traditionally known as Divya Drishti, divine sight, which comes from meditation and grace.

Avoid reading theories upon theories without meditating. It will not get you anywhere.
So this post is not a replacement for meditation. and this post cannot be understood fully without meditation.

When in doubt always meditate (instead of thinking). Thinking cannot clear doubt.
 

22 hours ago, WakeUp said:

If time is a base reality of all then it would be hard wired and would be the same everywhere. But we know it's affected by gravity. So God is not 'time' rather God creates time.

You (and me) are defining God as consciousness. Yet consciousness is also something within creation.

This is because God Consciousness is not the same as Man Consciousness. Absolute Consciousness vs Relative Consciousness.

God Time is not the same as Man Time. Absolute Time vs Relative Time (that changes with perception and gravity).
 

Quote

Time can not be the base reality, because even within this reality the passing of time changes depending on the location of the observer. Time is only change or a measurement of change.

So when Guru Granth Sahib is talking about God Consciousness and says time is an illusion. They are speaking from the point of view and from the belief system of Consciousness, where time is changing or a measurement of change.

Guru Granth Sahib says Consciousness is ultimately outside of Time. That it is God Consciousness who is entering Time-Space to protect devotees for instance. Guru Amardas ji tells the story of Prahlaad ji, for whom the God Consciousness, Narsingh, appeared before everyone to save him. Absolute Consciousness (Narsingh) entering Time-Space to protect devotees for instance.

Guru Amardas ji says
ਭਗਤਾ ਕਾ ਅੰਗੀਕਾਰੁ ਕਰਦਾ ਆਇਆ ॥ ਕਰਤੈ ਅਪਣਾ ਰੂਪੁ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ॥
He always protects his devotees. Once again, the Creator, Narsingh, has showed himself!

Dasam Granth considers God Time as the reality and speaks from that and says that Consciousness entering and leaving Time, that is not God. Consciousness is not absolute, consciousness is consumed by God Time.

According to Dasam Granth (in Vachitra Natak Granth),
ਨਰਸਿੰਘਾਵਤਾਰੰ ॥ ਵਹੈ ਕਾਲ ਮਾਰੰ ॥
Narsingh is simply something appearing in Time, that was destroyed by Time (Kaal) afterwards.

From the perspective of Time, Consciousness appears and disappears, Time does not.


In Guru Granth Sahib Narsingh is Absolute Consciousness. Hence why they worship Narsingh.
ਕਹਿ ਨਾਮਦੇਉ ਹਮ ਨਰਹਰਿ ਧਿਆਵਹ ਰਾਮੁ ਅਭੈ ਪਦ ਦਾਤਾ ॥
Says Nam Dev, I meditate on Narsingh, the giver of fearlessness, the liberator.
 

So Guru Granth Sahib is saying Kaal is an illusion inside Narsingh. And Dasam Granth is saying that Narsingh is an illusion inside Kaal.

Two very different paradigms.
 

Quote

Ultimate reality is oneness which is unchanging yet contains all change, time is just a perception like reading a story within a book vice looking at the closed book on the table.

Yes and Time is the ultimate oneness and is unchanging and contains all changes.

Every change is happening in Time. It is the Eternal Present Moment. Time is also perceived as a moment but the perception also takes place in Time.


Dasam Granth (in Vachitra Natak Granth) -

ਜਿਤੇ ਹੋਇ ਬੀਤੇ ॥ ਤਿਤੇ ਕਾਲ ਜੀਤੇ ॥
All things that came into being, were conquered by Time.

ਜਿਤੇ ਸਰਨਿ ਜੈਹੈਂ ॥ਤਿਤਿਓ ਰਾਖ ਲੈਹੈਂ ॥੭੫॥
Whoever goes into the sanctuary of Time (called Present Moment), they are saved.

 

Quote

Actually according to science gravity is more of a base truth than time simply because time is affected by gravity and not the other way around. Gravity is affected by density. (Higgs Bosun - the God particle) but all of those things still exist within creation and are not unchanging.

Scientific theories are always limited to a certain paradigm. Current science lives in the materialistic paradigm that the Physical Universe is the ultimate reality and everything exists within the Physical only, and the Physical Universe has generated Consciousness through evolution.

That's one face of God.


We believe that Consciousness generates the physical universe. Physical universe lives inside Consciousness. Hence why Vishnu is called Shri Niwaas, the house of the world itself.

Rupert Spira is very good at explaining this.

That's another face of God.

Keep watching and Rupert also gives a Time-Centric explanation at - 12:38. Maybe you'll understand him better than me.


Paradigms with Time at the center is another face of God.

Eckharte Tolle is very good at explaining this Time-centric view as well. Read "The Power of Now".

In terms of scientific theories - If you listen to Stuart Hammeroff's theory of consciousness. He says it is Space-Time Geometry that collapses into Happenings, which is defined as a moment of Perception. He is essentially saying Time generates Consciousness.

Stuart is the guy on the left with the white beard and bald head.

1 hour ago, Singh123456777 said:

I like how you are trying to recreate the old way of tying dumala

Thanks man.

I think I've pretty much got how to tie it, I just need to practice so that I can consistently get that shape, and find out how our ancestors got it to look so neat (that is if they ever tied it neatly).
 

1 hour ago, Singh123456777 said:

Can we get this picture again?

It should appear in that post now that I've uploaded it to the forum.

34 minutes ago, tva prasad said:

I agree. What time is the style from?

In terms of Sikh gurus - Guru Hari Gobind ji to Guru Gobind Singh ji.

As far as I know, previous gurus, Guru Nanak Dev ji to Guru Arjun Dev ji did not wear a turban.

On 2016-10-31 at 11:35 PM, tva prasad said:

r u the guy in photo on sikhi arts that bought sahibzada ajit Singh ji's painting? (battle of chamkaur)

That's a different guy.

On 2016-10-31 at 6:15 AM, tva prasad said:

wow u r such a good artist bro.

Thanks brother. Glad you liked it.

Oh no friends. No joke.

All measurements (theories) that say time is relative is only really relative to the measurement that is being made.

All consciousness that perceives time is only perceiving a portion of time (time that is relative to consciousness).

All measurements performed and all consciousnesses perceiving, are getting only portions of time, not the vast present moment in they were measuring and being aware.

Time is beyond measurement and it is beyond consciousness.

It is the all encompassing eternity.

It is the eternal now.

The immeasurable now.

It includes all relative time that you can understand. But it beyond all relative time. Black holes come and go from existence, consumed by time.

It is Mahakal, incomprehensible, immeasurable, imperceptible.

You guys understand your paradigms well.

Wakeup you understand the paradigm that is Consciousness-centric. You think time and energy are within the field of consciousness. And that limits you from understanding the energy-centric paradigm which Opal presented and time-centric paradigm that I presented.

Opal you understand the paradigm that is Energy centric. You think consciousness and time are within the field of energy. And that limits you from understanding the consciousness-centric paradigm that Wakeup presented and time-centric paradigm that I presented.

Now I want you to go into your experience of your paradigm. The most pure experience you can generate.

Really do it.

Clarify your experience, trust it and let it sit and observe it.

Can you see how that appears as Consciousness and Energy and Time depending on how you approach it?

See the reality of it all, that transcends any individual paradigm, including your own.

This is the most boring fight ever. BOOOOO!!

*throws all popcorn into garbage*

Edit - Oh wait, missed the post by Wakeup above.

*Pulls out Popcorn from garbage*

If time is an illusion did I ever throw away the popcorn?

1 hour ago, opal said:

I see what you mean now.

-_-

I got my popcorn ready for nothing.

Don't "I see what you mean now" him. He's saying that everything, including energy, arose from consciousness - Vishnu - and it is all basically awareness unfolding in forms. Throw some arguments back with your philosophy on Shakti - how everything is energy, how even consciousness is born of energy.

2 minutes ago, opal said:

We can't because our vibrational frequencies are different. Of course, we can pinpoint the present moment by becoming aware of it.  Our awareness is also composed of energy, operating at a different frequency.  Pure awareness is energy which travels at the speed of light. Scattered thoughts dissipitate energy, once focused, we capture the present moment. It is magical. The present moment is also energy moving at a different and very subtle frequency. We can only capture it by aligning ourselves with it. We can do so by becoming aware and focused with our own energy.  We have to 'tune in' with this wonderful energy, so to speak, in order to establish it.  It is our present moment that lays the foundations for our next stage of evolution. So, don't let it go wasted, capture it. 

Known as Adi Shakti!

6 minutes ago, Kuttabanda2 said:

Suraj Prakash is not the oldest record, Gur Rattan Mal (Shudh and Puraatan version/form) and Malwe Desh Rattan Di Sakhi Pothi is what Kavi Santokh Singh used when writting about the ninth and tenth Patshahis. 

Malwe Desh Rattan Di Sakhi Pothi was first thought to have been written in between 1700-1730s, It contains quite a few anecdotes and narrations that are written like travelogues and records, as in quite a few places, the author is most likely a close associate and contemporary of Mahala 9-10th as his work indicates.

Very nice. Can you post excerpts talking about Mai Bhago and even other famous personalities?

5 hours ago, LiquidSky said:

I know Arti is a praise for God that everything is doing God's Arti. I was merely trying to talk about flat earth and trying to answer what "Guest NKaur" asked. But I think your maybe be blocking everyone from answering the question just by dismissing it. We live in a physical reality and the spritiual aspect does manitest physically. Why ive brought up flat earth on this forum is for people to question their reality, rather then just in blind faith execpt a globe model. In the Vedas it says the earth is flat, a much older text than Guru Granth Sahib. What has inspired people to talk about theses things?

Just image this for a second.

Everyone believes the earth is flat but there are religious books which say the earth is round? Peoples conclusion would then be most likely to laugh it off and then say this book is telling fairy tales. Sounds Familar? How is anyone going to take any spritual teaching seriously if it does not relate to the world they live in?

Guru Gobind Singh Ji clamied that he was a decendent of Luv and Kush (Childern of Sri Ram Chander) but people will say that Ram did not exist but was merely part of a mythological story.

Good points.

What I have been seeing over times is this pattern -

- people ignore the meaning of the story

- they want to justify that scripture contains modern science (or as athiests - dismiss the scripture as bad science)

- they want to look for itty bitty details without having understanding

I'd be the first to search and study flat earth references. But I am that position to do so because I have first made efforts to understand what the value of the story, the meaning, the message, is.

Now that I understand it, I can satisfy my thirst for finding flat earth references. But if that's the first thing I did is to go looking for flat earth references then I missed the point entirely.

And this is what happens.

Let's say someone believes that the Earth is round. And in some spiritual book it says the earth is flat. They get so focused on the flat earth part, that they then reject the entire book. This is what modern atheists do.

And that is a foolish thing to do in my opinion.

I had a Muslim guy show me that verse from the aarti and said look it says Sun and Moon are lamps. We know Moon does not generate its own light, it reflects light, so this is wrong.

I just face-palmed. He missed the point.

If some flat-earther says look at this verse from aarti, it says Sun and Moon are lamps. I have a theory that moon is a flat disk that generates its own light, and Gurbani confirms it.

Its just as cringe-worthy as above. He also missed the point.

So first step should be to understand the meaning of the story, the poem.

56 minutes ago, Kuttabanda2 said:

From what I read, not a single reference was made to bring dishonor to one's family. Did you derive this from Suraj Prakash? 

 Guru Sahib explicitly told her to wear a Kacherra in Malwe Desh Rattan Di Sakhi Pothi.

Yea it was Suraj Prakhash. I read that portion a while ago, couldn't remember where it came from.

When was - Malwe Desh Rattan Di Sakhi Pothi - written?

On 2016-10-23 at 7:23 PM, LiquidSky said:

If you listen to the shabad Arti. Sounds like the thal is the Flat Earth. 

That's because it's being talked about from the perspective of standing on the ground and looking up at the sky.

But if you are going into Arti trying to see if the Earth is flat or not, you are missing the point.

5 hours ago, Kuttabanda2 said:

Mata Bhag Kaur Ji was given Hukam to adorn a Kacherra, Baana, and Keski-Dastaar.

Mai Bhago ji did so much bhagti she lost attachment and worry of clothes, and walked around naked.

When this was brought to Guru Gobind Singh ji's attention Guru Sahib then intervened and told her to cover her body and her head and that walking naked would bring dishonour to her family.

That's the original and oldest reference we have to this sakhi.

1 hour ago, jaikaara said:

i am still to understand why is celibacy being hyped ? it is a natural process, if hte person is getting involved in the sadhana he wants to focus on his kriya rather than pleasure and wants to cultivate his vigour for reaching higher consciousness ...many have gone to advanced stages and twice as many would have failed ..if your body is not able to hold the energy no matter what you do at the slightest opportunity you would give in . even Rishis were not spared. I feel it comes from inside ..to enforce externally will not help.

In addition, you can be a celibate while having sex.

Just like you can be Nehkarm (without action) while performing karm (action).

The person who is able to hold energy the energy without letting it spill, know him to be Brahmchari...

...whether they have sex or not.

18 minutes ago, tva prasad said:

i 100 percent agree with u bro. I think i was a bit unclear in my post. Anyway thanx 4 the correction bro.

Evolution just means change. Things change over time in different ways.

Life itself is change.

Evolution is the name given to the changing living organisms.

15 hours ago, Ragmaala said:

I think for that to happen, a person must have reached a certain level of awareness, where he or she already sees or desires to see Waheguru in everyone.

But if we talk about a Brahmgyani Grihasthi, he is already Waheguru, would he still have desire for Waheguru ? Because Waheguru is Afur, without thoughts & without desires...so that makes a Brahmgiani without desire..there fore he wont have any desire, not even sexual desire for Waheguru, because he has already achieved it, we can say he is in a complete state of unbroken orgasm or bliss, and in constant union with waheguru...or maybe there are certain times when he comes out of this state and comes down to level of normal people...so in order to go back to the same state he might have a desire for union....lol I am debating with my own self... should i delete this post

ah well i will keep it.

Dude can I be real with you?