BhagatSingh

6 hours ago, paapiman said:

Most likely, there must be some mention of Evolution in Gurbani too.

There isn't any mention of evolution in Guru Granth Sahib or Vishnu Puran for that matter.

This is because evolution,as a phenomenon for diversification of species, was discovered after they were written.

It's the same reason why cellphones are not mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib and Vishnu Puran.

6 hours ago, paapiman said:

Anyways, let's keep this topic focused on Darwin's theory. 

Why? When the opening video is not focused on Darwin's theory, and instead goes on to make nonsensical claims, why can't there be more dicussion of Saints and their view of evolution?

10 hours ago, paapiman said:

Good ideas, but IMHO Darwin's focus was more on the physical body, and less on the mental/spiritual aspects of the human body.

Yea Darwin was only talking about physical forms. But it takes a Saint like Aurobindo ji to understand that evolution is a phenomenon of the Spirit.

Just now, LiquidSky said:

Darwinian Evolution and Evolution of the Spirit are two different things. 

No they are the same.

Spirit evolves in to the diversity of life forms that you see, it's all one Spirit.

This Spirit is known as Vishnu, Brahmn, Shiva, Purush, Parmatma, Waheguru, in different religions.

The One Spirit evolves into Matter, (Maya, Prakriti) and then into various lifeforms.

The One Spirit is known as Atma, which is a manifestation of Spirit in a Life Form.

Once spirit becomes human, it cannot evolve materially, not because it is unable to but because it has now created such technology that it has modified the environment to suit itself.

Evolution happens when Spirit changes its body to suit the environment but when that body creates technology and modifies the environment to suit itself then there is no need to evolve materially.

So at the human level, only mental and psychic evolution can take place.

This is being referred to as spiritual evolution.

But it is referring to the evolution of the mind and its desires and its limitations.

When you really focus on your mind and notice all the little things you can improve, that you can make small tweaks to it.

Small tweaks towards what?

Towards speaking and acting the truth, meditating on the Spirit with each breath, doing good deeds at all levels of being from yourself, to your family to everyone, etc.

And when you start making those small tweaks and improve your self in that direction, then you will begin to notice the evolution in your self.

You will notice yourself evolving into another level of being.

Your body will be that of a human but your mind will be evolving into higher level.

11 hours ago, paapiman said:

Isn't  ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾ and  ਬੰਨਾ੍ pronounced the same way?

No because-

1. ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ has a hahha sound, which comes from the original - ਬੰਧਾਂ

2. ਬੰਨਾ੍  has been written incorrectly.

Halant is used where there is no matra, so that the reader does not confuse the | , full stop, with the 'A' matra, which is also written as |. In larhivaar format, where all words are connected, halant is used to indicate a difference between | as full stop and | as A.

So ਬੰਨਾ੍ is not correct grammatically.

Nanna can't have a halant and a kanna at the same time.

 

For example this line from my Yog Sutra translation thread-

विपर्ययो मिथ्याज्ञानमतद्रूप प्रतिष्ठम् ॥८॥
ਵਿਪਰ੍ਯ੍ਯੋ ਮਿਥਯਾਙਾਨਮਤਦ੍ਰੂਪ ਪ੍ਰਤਿਸ਼ਠਮ੍ [[੮]]
[[8]] (ਵਿਪਰ੍ਯ੍ਯੋ) Intellect is that (ਮਿਥਯਾ) mythical/idealized (ਙਾਨ) knowledge (ਤਦ੍ਰੂਪ) of various forms  (ਪ੍ਰਤਿਸ਼ਠਮ੍) that is eminent.

Notice the last word has a halant and no other matra on Mamma.

 

If you read other lines, when the last letter has a matra, they do not have a halant.

11 hours ago, paapiman said:

Why did you add a bindi (ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ)? There is no bindi on this word.

Due to rules of grammar, there is a bindi already on it.

 

There is no bindi written on ਭੁਖਿਆ either but it is also pronounced with a Bindi on the ਆ.

There is no bindi written on ਪੁਰੀਆ either but it is also pronounced with a Bindi on the ਆ.

 

So the full sentence -

ਭੁਖਿਆ ਭੁਖ ਨ ਉਤਰੀ ਜੇ ਬੰਨਾ ਪੁਰੀਆ ਭਾਰ॥

Is pronounced as -

ਭੁਖਿਆਂ ਭੁੱਖ ਨ ਉਤਰੀ ਜੇ ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਪੁਰੀਆਂ ਭਾਰ॥

 

In this one sentence, there are three different grammar rules that determine the three bindis -  ਭੁਖਿਆਂ , ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ , ਪੁਰੀਆਂ

 

Regarding ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ, it is being used as first-person action - "if I do it" - so grammatically it will have a bindi.

 

Modern punjabi example -

ਜੇ ਮੈਂ ਤੇਰਾ ਕੱਮ ਕਰਾਂ, ਕਿ ਤੂ ਮੇਰਾ ਕੱਮ ਕਰੇਂਗਾ ?
If I do your work, will you do mine?

Notice how ਕਰਾਂ has a bindi.

It would not be ਕਰਾ

(and certainly not ਕਰਾ੍ )

 

So verbs in this first-person format have a bindi.

More examples -

ਜੇ ਮੈਂ ਤੈਨੂੰ ਛੱਡਾਂ ...
If I let you go...

ਜੇ ਮੈਂ ਤੈਨੂੰ ਸਿਖਾਵਾਂ ...
If I teach you...

 

Coming back to Jap ji Sahib -

ਜੇ ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਪੁਰੀਆਂ ਭਾਰ ...

ਜੇ ਮੈਂ ਢਿੱਡ ਉੱਤੇ ਪੂੜੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਭਾਰ ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ  ...
If I tied a big load of fried bread on my waist...

 

So the first-person action verbs, whatever they are called, all have bindis.

ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ is one of those, so that is why ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ has a bindi.

 

 

11 hours ago, paapiman said:

Is this an Arabic word? It is used in Urdu for sure as ਮੁਸ਼ੱਕਤ.

Yes Urdu might be it.

11 hours ago, paapiman said:

So, why would you say that ਮਸਕਤ will be pronounced as ਮਸ਼ੱਕਤ and not as ਮਸੱਕਤ?

We must know the words and how to pronounce them prior to reading Guru Granth Sahib.

In case of ਮਸਕਤ -

1. We know that in many words Sassa makes a Sha sound, even when it is not indicated (it never is).

2. We know that in many words Adhak is used, even when it is not indicated (it never is).

3. We know that the word is from another language, Urdu, and pronounced as ਮੁਸ਼ੱਕਤ.

So when we see ਮਸਕਤ , we pronounce it as ਮੁਸ਼ੱਕਤ.

14 hours ago, paapiman said:

The stress is on ਭੁ, not on ਖ.

It is pronounced as ਭੁੱਖ.

That's what I meant.

 

14 hours ago, paapiman said:

ਬੰਨਾ is pronounced as ਬੰਨਾ੍. The halant is pronounced to differentiate between the two words (ledge and tie).

No it's not a halant it's a Hahha.

Banha  ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ comes from Bandha ਬੰਧਾਂ, meaning to Tie.  So ਬੰਨਾ is pronounced as Banha ਬੰਨ੍ਹਾਂ  (to tie) and not as Banna ਬੰਨਾ(ledge)

14 hours ago, paapiman said:

If it is pronounced as ਮਸਕਤ (with sassa with adhak), will the meaning of the word change?

I am not familiar with whatever language that word comes from so I can't say.

 

But my point with Bhukh, Banha and Mushakat is to show that many words are not pronounced exactly like what you see written down.

Guru Grantth Sahib was written at a time when the common people didn't read or write and speaking orally was the dominant way to communicate by far.

So the written language being subordinate was only there to remind people how to pronounce the actual word, which would have been known beforehand.

Nowdays we - me included - have been reading Gurbani letter for letter based on how it was written, with no understanding of how it was spoken.

This leads to incorrect pronunciation of Gurbani.

On top of that we are told not to say Sihari and Aunkar, for no apparent reason.

So our pronunciation of Gurbani is quite distorted and with some small tweaks, it can be improved greatly.

6 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Could be but I dont think they are sticking to it. I think they already have the variation of the word in old arabic. Look at this this line from "1001! Arabian Nights. (towards the end of the first paragraph.)

Wow good find!

Thanks for taking the time to share that.

Seems like you are right.

I looked at the alphabet (6:30), and compared it to the spelling of Qazi on wikipedia, even the entry is called Qadi, and the letter is

قاضي

ض

is Dadh

He says the letter doesn't exist in other languages but I would argue it's the letter Dhadha from Punjabi

 

On 1/4/2016 at 12:16 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Some of you lot are gay or at least aren't attracted to women.  

 

Face it. 

lol

The way to tackle strong emotions like Lust is to do something really meaningful for you.

You  know when you are doing meaningful, is when you are totally engaged, totally immersed in that activity.

When you listen to Kirtan, you feel it. It moves you, it vibrates all around you and you feel in heaven.

That is what it is like to do something very meaningful.

Your body reacts to it and melts into it like butter.

It could be any activity, chanting naam, kirtan, paath, or biking, hiking, weightlifting, or singing, playing table, playing dilruba, or painting, drawing, doodling, or gaming, reading, running a business, job, trucking, driving.

Any activity which is so meaningful that you feel in heaven when you do it, do that activity and your mind will not wander.

Your mind will automatically be drawn to that activity.

When it does wander, sometimes you can't help but let yourself carried by it and let it control you.

It's ok.

No need to feel guilty about it.

Due to past karma, we are who we are, and changing that is tough.

Try harder to not let emotions control you next time around.

It builds up slowly.

Always remember the name of God, whenever emotions are plundering the body.

Bring the presence of God, into life at all times, and especially, try to become aware of God's presence the moment you feel lust.

Do whatever you must while remaining attached to the feet of God.

Because ultimately, all other tactics, are weak and only by bringing the presence of God in our lives, can we become better and improve our state of being.

And those who do this, they are not touched by malicious emotions, malicious bodies and malicious spirits.

Ram kavach das ka sannah, doot dusht tis pohit nahi.

Ram naam is the armour of the servant, enemies cannot touch one who brings his presence into their life.

12 hours ago, rinkal said:

So menu kuch rasta dasso ke me ki kara 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Rabb to bhul chuk muaf karao bhaji.

Enhiyan bhullan to baad vi je banda sahi rah pe jave ta Rab sabh paap bhula dinda hai.

Guru Granth Sahib di shuruwaat Satya to hoyi hai.

Isliye Satya de rah te chalan naal hi banda apne aap nu sudhar sakda hai.

Sach bolo, ate Satya anusaar kam karo,

Aisa kam na karo jisde de baare tusi baad vich Sach bolan to daro.

 

8 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

I've ordered the english one. Hate reading books from a screen.

Paper books are just so relaxing.

5 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Thanks for the info. But I don't think the muslims would have stuck to any Sikh traditions concerning names of places. They never have in the past .

The name of the place was originally Qazi Maji and began to be commonly pronounced as Qadian after Sikhs.

So apparently they are sticking to it.

5 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Ok. ਸਿਮਰਨ is also pronounced as Sim-ran ਸਿਮ ਰਨ rather than si-maran ਸਿ ਮਰਨ ||

Commonly, it is pronounced both ways.

The original word is smaran.

So ਸਿਮਰਨ can be pronounced as simaran.

On 3/14/2018 at 4:30 AM, angy15 said:

i think   the title  should be  "Hindu not a Relgion,its just a Geographical Identity?"

Because  Hindusim is related to Sanatan Dharma and Hindu are  people born in Indian region.

Even today if you visit Israel, Iran they call christian, sikh, muslim as Hind and not by there religion identity

Snatan Dharma means Original Dharma.

This is term is not referring to any one particular religion even though people seem to associate it with Hinduism.

The Original Dharma is the Dharma of every individual, it is the Responsibility of every individual.

What is that responsibility?

That responsibility is to bring into harmony their own self with their environment, their family, their tribe*, other tribes, all animals, all other life forms, the earth, the universe.

All actions should be carried out from this harmony, so that they have a positive effect that resonates through your self, your environment, your family, your tribe, other tribes, all animals, all life forms and the universe.

*Tribe means any boundaries you choose to draw between people in order to classify them in to group/groups.

On 3/11/2018 at 6:59 AM, dalsingh101 said:

Whilst I understand that focusing on particular, narrower aspects of Akal Purakh (as metaphorically represented by the pantheon of gods and goddesses) is infinitely more easier for humans and would alleviate

By narrow we mean something that can fit in our mind.

You can believe that Akal Purakh is only formlessness and that would be just as narrow. Because you imagine that formlessness as a concept rather than the actual thing.

Similarly the Deity is only narrow if you imagine them only as a concept or only a physical being and not the actual thing.

 

It is narrow if you only know it as a concept, but when you have an experience of him, then it is not narrow.

 

Furthermore, it is not just about worship or meditation only.

Any understanding of Akal Purakh sahib which does not include him as a Human Being is incomplete.

If Akal Purakh sahib is only ever an abstract idea, then that is NOT Akal Purakh sahib.

Nirankar is only one aspect of Akal Purakh sahib.

The other is Maya, Mother Nature.

The other aspect is Human Being, a living breathing being, who undergoes the trials and tribulations of all living beings.

 

This is why Akal Purakh sahib is called... get ready to have your mind blown to bits... Purakh, which means Human Being.

Akal Purakh sahib means, the Timeless Human Being.

 

Valmiki ji calls him Purukhottam, Superior Human Being.

And this completes our understanding of who Akal Purakh sahib is.

The abstract idea of "formlessness",  or "the source of all" or "prime mover" , these cannot help you behave in a moral way.

Knowledge of the idea of formlessness cannot give you a moral grounding.

 

In order to create a strong moral grounding, we need to understand Akal Purakh sahib, as specifically HUMAN, in order to imprint upon our minds a superior moral code of conduct.

When the Saints talk about  Akal Purakh Sahib ss Human, we call that an Archetype or an Ideal.

And we can use that ideal as a Moral Compass.

 

 

On 3/11/2018 at 6:59 AM, dalsingh101 said:

if what Nirpal's mother was previously doing is 'Sikh' practice, what makes it any different to Hinduism? 

You are right lol. It's not any different to what Hindus do.

You can say its both.

But to say its NOT Sikh is misguided.

And to say Hinduism is one unified religion is also wrong.

Because Hinduism is a term for collection of Indian Religions, each with their own Code of Conduct and Spiritual Traditions.

So comparing Sikhism and Hinduism is also a misguided thing to do.

They are not even the same category of things.

On 3/11/2018 at 6:59 AM, dalsingh101 said:

(not the simplistic, villager-mentality placating deities to alleviate fear stuff)

See even a simplistic practice can bring great results.

That's exactly what the practice of Bhagat Dhanna ji teaches.

He was a villager, who just wanted help in his fields. The pandit he went to, told him that Thakur, Akal Purakh Sahib, can do a lot of work for him.

So in order to get free labour he sought after him.

It is simplistic thinking and practice but it can work if the intention is there.

Attention and Intention are two key components of spiritual practice.

 

As Sikhs fasting should not be our ONLY Practice.

That's what I would tell Nirpal's mother.

As a Sikh, the chanting of Waheguru naam or the mantras like Ram Naam, Hari Naam given in Guru Granth Shaib should be the core of our practice with Fasting and Pilgrimage or anything else as supplementary practices.

Fasting and Pilgrimage can be very powerful for attaining higher states when done correctly.

But it becomes an issue when Fasting or Pilgrimage is our only practice and we half-ass even that.

If we are to be called Sikhs then we must follow the teachings of Guru ji and do naam simaran.

When we do the core practice of naam simaran, and we taste Amrit, the timeless state, then we become Gursikhs.

And when we do that we come to understand how to increase our avastha during fasting and pilgrimage, and all kinds of other spiritual practices, which are peripheral to our tradition.

 

 

 

 

On 3/11/2018 at 2:40 PM, chatanga1 said:

Bhagat Singh is the Ustad and Samprda himself

Lol!

On 3/11/2018 at 1:41 PM, paapiman said:

@BhagatSingh - What is the source of your information? If you have an ustad, which samprada does he belong to?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

My Ustad is the Ustad of all Ustads...

Ustad Nar Singh ji Narayan. ;)

He belongs to all Sampradas.

 

My source is mainly the Mahan Kosh by Kahn Singh ji Nabha.

My methodology comes from the Universal Ustad ji who has guided me to research into the way grammar works in Gurmukhi, and how pronunciation works in Gurmukhi by looking at the original word and how it is pronounced and looking at related words and how they are pronounced.

If you want to know how I come to specific conclusions about specific letters or maatras, then let me know I can go into more depth the individual cases for you.

Anyone can come to same conclusion that I reached if they understand the evidence.

On 3/11/2018 at 12:24 PM, Xylitol said:

vir ji, I would say that the letter is always pronounced as written, especially a dadda.

That's simply not true.

ਭੁਖਿਆ ਭੁਖ ਨ ਉਤਰੀ ਜੇ ਬੰਨਾ ਪੁਰੀਆ ਭਾਰ ॥

ਭੁਖ has an addak. Bhukhkh, with a stress on the Kh. Not simply Bhukh.

But even more interesting is -

ਬੰਨਾ is pronounced as Banha, which means to tie, not banna which is a ledge.

ਮਸਕਤ is pronounced as Mushakkat. Not maskat.

Sassa here is pronounced as Sha with an addak.

In this manner, dadda is sometimes pronounced as Z.

 

Guru Grantth Sahib was written at a time when the common people didn't read or write and speaking orally was the dominant way to communicate by far. So how words are pronounced would have been understood through memory and practice rather than relying upon written text.

So pronunciation would be understood without creating a unique character for every sound.

Sa and Sha share the same lette, Sassa.

Z sound shares the letters as Dadda and Jajja.

Shatkone sound shares the letter as Khakha and sometimes Sassa.

Addak and Bindis are pronounced even when they are not indicated directly.

On 3/11/2018 at 2:24 PM, chatanga1 said:

Bhagat Singh Ji, do you know there is a place in Gurdaspur called "Qadian" which is pronounced just as it is written in Gurmukhi. Even the Muslims pronounce it this way with a "d."

They are pronouncing it incorrectly due to wrong tradition that WE have started.

Because of his religious beliefs, he named the center of the 80 villages 'Islam Pur Qazi' and governed from there. Over time, the name of the town changed to 'QaziMaji' ('Maji' means 'bull', referring to the animal still found in abundance in Qadian). Later, it was called just 'Qadi' and eventually became known as 'Qadian'.

Why was it later called Qadi/Qadian? because -

Qadian and the surrounding areas later fell to the Ramgharia Sikhs who offered the ruling Qazis, two villages which they refused. In 1834, during the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the region consisting of Qadian and five adjoining villages was given to Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, father of Ghulam Ahmad in return for military support in Kashmir, Mahadi, the Kulu valley, Peshawar and Hazara.^[2]

So we are pronouncing it wrong and now they are doing the same.

On 3/11/2018 at 2:24 PM, chatanga1 said:

In Arabic there are 4 ways to pronounce "z", even though in Persian there is only 1. It may be that a different pronunciation of the arabic "z" resulted in it becoming a "d" but that is exactly what it is.  

It didn't become a D, it is still a Z, pronounced by raising the tongue and touching the top row of front teeth like youdo when you say D, instead of lowering the tongue and touching the bottom gums, which is how we pronounce Z in Jazz.

It is spelled with D because that's the closest letter than indicates its pronunciation.

 

 

1 hour ago, hsingh6 said:

Excellent suggestion and direction Bhai Sahib. One request. Guru Arjan Badshah has not used the word "Sant" for Namdev. His bani is under Bhagat Bani. Please let us not change the nomenclature used by Guru Sahib himself. Thank you for your consideration.

Maharaj actually did use this "nomenclature".

Santa(n) ke karaji aape khaloya Hari kam karavan aya Ram.
The Lord himself helps out his Saints, he does everything for his Saints.

Who are the Sant in the above line?

One of them is of course the respected Sant Nam Dev ji

- for who Ram ji came and spun the temple

- for who Ram ji came and protected him from the drunk elephant

- for who Ram ji came and saved him from getting killed by the Sultan, by fulfilling the terms set forth by the Sultan and reviving the slaughtered cow, as part of those terms.

 

So tell me bhai sahib ji, who could be more of a Sant than Sant Nam Dev ji?

3 hours ago, paapiman said:

The above is the state of a Gurmukh Brahamgyani. Not only does he see deities as Sri Akaal Purakh, he sees Waheguru jee everywhere (and in everyone) and considers himself to be Waheguru too (Anna al Haq state).

While everything is Akal Purakh sahib, there is a difference between a deity and a plant.

A deity is a spiritual presence of Akal Purakh sahib. Whereas a plant is a material presence.

 

A deity is the face of Akal Purakh sahib, which you cannot see the way you can see a plant.

When a devotee has a glimpse of Akal Purakh sahib, then he experiences the face of Akal Purakh sahib looking back.

That face is the deity.

Only by his grace, bhagti and becoming truthful, can one see his face.

 

Those Gurmukhs, those Saints who see his face, they talk about it, they sing about, they write hymns on it and they write stories on it.

 

Sant Valmiki ji when he connected to Akal Purakh sahib, he saw his face.

This inspired him!

From this inspiration he wrote the Ramayan whose central character is Akal Purakh sahib.

Valmiki ji even reveals that it is Akal Purakh sahib that he is talking about.

 

Sant Valmiki ji wrote that story so that new generations may take inspiration from the moral lessons presented therein.

Akal Purakh sahib's interactions with the situations he faces in the story, reveals him to be a superior man.

All men can look up to his ideal and implement it into their way of being.

Ramayan is where the name Purakhottam comes from.

 

You know that Akal Purakh sahib is known by different names.

Where did all those names come from?

They came from the Saints like Valmiki ji.

 

In Sant Valmiki ji's story, Akal Purakh sahib takes birth in the Raghu clan.

So he is called the Lord of Raghus or King of Raghus.

Ramayan is where the names Raghupati and Raghu Rai come.

 

The bow that Akal Purakh sahib wields is known as Sharang.

So that's why he is known as Sharangdhar, the Wielder of the Sharang bow.

 

You read these names in Guru Granth Sahib and you don't realize that they are referring to the a deity, a face of Akal Purakh sahib that a Saint, Valmiki ji, saw thousands of years ago.

 

Just like how Valmiki ji talked about Akal Purakh sahib in a story format, in this way, many other Saints from different religions talked about Akal Purakh sahib in in their own way.
 

 

In India, the Saints called Akal Purakh Sahib by different names, such as Shiv ji, Vishnu ji and Mahakal ji.

 

In other countries, the Greek Saints called him Zeus. The Nordic saints called him Wodin.

In this manner, different religions and traditions were born. Some survived others died out.

 

It is the Saints who gave Akal Purakh sahib a variety of names and characters.

 

Quote

One can also argue that if everything is Sri Akal Purakh, then why not we start worshiping animals, plants, humans, etc. 

No one is worthy of worship, other than the one and only Sri Akaal Purakh Sahib jee. This is the basic core principle of Sikhism. But, we do need to respect the deities. There is no doubt about it.

You can legitimately worship anything and connect to Akal Purakh sahib.

That's what the story of Bhagat Dhanna ji is about! He literally sat there a worshipped a black stone.

 

Akal Purakh sahib can show his face from anywhere!

Just like he showed himself to Dhanna ji, he showed himself from a pillar to Bhagat Prahlaad ji.

 

ਥੰਮ੍ਹੁ ਉਪਾੜਿ ਹਰਿ ਆਪੁ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ॥
Tearing the pillar, Akal Purakh sahib showed himself!

ਅਹੰਕਾਰੀ ਦੈਤੁ ਮਾਰਿ ਪਚਾਇਆ ॥
He destroyed the ahankari Hiranyakashup.

ਭਗਤਾ ਮਨਿ ਆਨੰਦੁ ਵਜੀ ਵਧਾਈ ॥
The mind of his devotee, Prahlaad, was filled with happiness.

ਅਪਨੇ ਸੇਵਕ ਕਉ ਦੇ ਵਡਿਆਈ ॥੯॥

He blessed his servant with greatness.

 

In Sikh tradition, we worship Akal Purakh through Naam Simran.

What is Naam Simran?

It is essentially 1. making a sound and 2. focusing on it.

But when the intention of making that sound is to connect to Akal Purakh sahib, then it has a sacred effect and the sound becomes sacred. It is becomes Akal Purakh sahib's name.

 

A child cannot speak the language of the mother when he is born. He simply cries and makes noises and the mother comes running.

In this way Akal Purakh sahib comes to those who intend for him to come to them.

 

Without the intention you are just worshipping noises.

With the intention there, you are worshipping Akal Purakh sahib.

 

It comes down to attention and intention.

Focus on the goal and Desire to move towards the goal.

That goal being Akal Purakh sahib.

 

Bhagat Dhanna ji was just worshipping a stone, but his intention was to seek Akal Purakh sahib.

So his worship was approved.

 

Those who do this, to them Akal Purakh sahib reveals his face.

And that face is a deity.

 

Those who become masters at it like Sant Nam Dev ji and Bhagat Dhanna ji, to them Akal Purakh sahib himself comes and helps them out, just like how he helped Prahlaad ji.

Some masters like Sant Valmiki ji, they write stories on Akal Purakh sahib, from which we get all these names of Akal Purakh sahib and from which millions of people today derive inspiration.

 

On 3/3/2018 at 5:43 AM, Kaur Inder said:

Hanji. But why is that people say not to do that. Not to focus on agya chakra

I'm guessing they don't know any better.

12 hours ago, paapiman said:

She is not aware of the basics of Sikhism as she is fasting for Shivjee, Durga jee and Santoshi jee. She seemed to be worshiping deities and that too multiple ones (making the problem worse). Sikhism denounces worship of any one, other than the one Almighty Lord, Waheguru.

All of the deities are Akal Purakh sahib only, nothing else.

He creates a play, a drama, between himself and his devotee. 

By taking these plays/dramas, out of their context and saying these are all enacted by a different author, other than Akal Purakh sahib, is grossly mistaken.

Said, another way, if you think the deities are something other than Akal Purakh sahib, then you are mistaken.

6 hours ago, Soulfinder said:

ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਗਹੁ ਮੀਤਾ ॥

Guramath Raam Naam Gahu Meethaa ||

Follow the Guru's Teachings, and hold tight to the Lord's Name, O friend.

ਗੋਂਡ (ਭ. ਨਾਮਦੇਵ) (੬) ੫:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮੭੪ ਪੰ. ੧੬ 
Raag Gond Bhagat Namdev

ਪ੍ਰਣਵੈ ਨਾਮਾ ਇਉ ਕਹੈ ਗੀਤਾ ॥੫॥੨॥੬॥

Pranavai Naamaa Eio Kehai Geethaa ||5||2||6||

Thus prays Naam Dayv, and so says the Gita as well. ||5||2||6||

ਗੋਂਡ (ਭ. ਨਾਮਦੇਵ) (੬) ੫:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮੭੪ ਪੰ. ੧੭ 
Raag Gond Bhagat Namdev

Nam Dev ji is devotee of Ram ji.

He says, through the Guru's teachings worship Ram naam only. Humbly, he says, this is what the Gita also teaches.

• Why does he mention Gita? Who is the main character of Gita?
• He mentions Gita because Gita also teaches worship of Ram Naam. The main character of Gita is God, more specifically in this book, the Almighty is known as Krishan ji, who is Ram.

 Nam Dev ji was a famous Guru in his time.

He even once manifested Akal Purakh sahib in the above-mentioned form that he saw him in.

However being a Guru, Nam Dev ji is discouraging his followers from wandering off the path of Ram naam, the path of one deity. He is telling them to stick to meditation on Ram Naam, and forego other practices that involve worship of other deities.

Nam Dev ji believed that one must be strict to one path in order to make progress. And the path he taught was of devotion to Ram ji and Krishan ji.

• If Nam Dev ji was born earlier and encountered for example, Adi Shankar ji who is not a devotee of Ram ji but of Shiv ji, then Nam Dev ji wouldn't tell him to not worship the deity he worships, he wouldn't tell him to worship Ram naam. Adi Shankar ji is already strict on one path.
• If Nam Dev ji was born later and encountered a devotee of Mahakal ji, he would not tell him to not worship Mahakal ji and to worship Ram naam instead. They are already strict on one path.

In the hymn which comes after this, this is made clear by Nam Dev ji.

So in my opinion, these verses must be understood within this larger teaching of  - sticking to one path and not wandering off it. That's the gist of it.

Anyway I will leave you guys with this shabd of Nam Dev ji, which I love to listen to.  In it he expresses his devotion to Ram ji / Krishan ji.

 

 

It took a few years but I have finally figured out how to read Guru Granth Sahib correctly. While I am still in the process of learning and refining my pronunciations and developing a better flow, I have got the basics down.

 

One of the things we are taught is that you don't pronounce Sihari ( ਿ  ) and Aunkar (   ੁ ) at the end of a word. 

This is wrong.

 

1. You always pronounce the Sihari.

 

 

2. You always pronounce the Aunkar if it is part of the actual word.

You don't pronounce it when its sole purpose is to indicate a masculine singular noun.

 

 

In this thread, we will be looking at how to pronounce Dadda ਦ

 

Now in most words Dadda ਦ is going to make the Th- sound where you touch your tongue behind the top row of your front teeth.

This I will call the hard Th-.

There is another sound though, which is a soft Th-, and it almost sounds like Z.

If you are from the west, say - 'this', 'there', 'although'.

If you have an Indian accent, you won't notice it. You will pronounce a hard Th- that sounds exactly like Dadda ਦ from Punjabi.

But if you have a western accent, Canadian, Amercan, etc. You will hear that 'th' is not exactly the Dadda ਦ from Punjabi.

It is softer and borderlines on the Z sound.

This is because in the West we don't touch the back of your teeth, but actually we tough the bottom of the teeth, which softens the sound.

 

My point is that sometimes when Guru ji came across Arabic, words, that had a special type of Z sound that was pronounced by touching the teeth. They used Dadda ਦ to indicate it because Dadda is the closest letter to that type of Z sound.

 

Dadda ( ਦ ) as Hard Th-

The normal Dadda.

ਦੁਖ

Pronounced as Dukh

ਹੁਕਮੀ ਉਤਮੁ ਨੀਚੁ ਹੁਕਮਿ ਲਿਖਿ ਦੁਖ ਸੁਖ ਪਾਈਅਹਿ ॥

hukmee uttam neech hukmi likhi dukh sukh paeeyeh

ਹੁਕਮਿ, ਲਿਖਿ - Remember from past lesson that the Siharis are pronounced all the time.

ਉਤਮੁ , ਨੀਚੁ - Also remember that when Aunkar is solely used to incidate singular masculine and is not part of the word then it is not pronounced.

 

ਦਾਤਿ

Pronounced as Daati

ਗਾਵੈ ਕੋ ਦਾਤਿ ਜਾਣੈ ਨੀਸਾਣੁ ॥

gavai ko daati jaanai neeshaann

 

Dadda as Soft Th- or Z

Special Dadda.

 

ਨਦਰੀ

Pronounced as Nazaree

ਕਰਮੀ ਆਵੈ ਕਪੜਾ ਨਦਰੀ ਮੋਖੁ ਦੁਆਰੁ ॥

karmee aavai kaprda Nazree mokh(sh) duar

ਨਦਰ - Notice how we pronounced the ਦ as Z - Nazar.

Mokh(sh) - This will be covered in a future lesson.Just like how Dadda sometimes make the Z sound, Khakha sometimes makes the Shatkone sound.

 

ਹਾਦਰਾ

Pronounced as Haazraa

ਹਦੂਰਿ

Pronounced as Hazoori

ਗਾਵੈ ਕੋ ਵੇਖੈ ਹਾਦਰਾ ਹਦੂਰਿ ॥

Gavai ko vekhai Haazraa Hazoori

 

ਕਾਦੀਆ

Pronounced as Qazeeaan.

ਵਖਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਓ ਕਾਦੀਆ ਜਿ ਲਿਖਨਿ ਲੇਖੁ ਕੁਰਾਣੁ ॥

Vakht na paayo Qazeeaan je likhni lekh kurann

Why is the n there? Here it is plural so we add a bindi to the end indicated by n.

If Guru Sahib was calling out to a Qazee "Hey Qazeeaa" then there would be no bindi (n) sound.

4 hours ago, paapiman said:

It is very much clear from the above that this lady did not even know the basics of Sikhism.

What's wrong with fasting?

4 hours ago, paapiman said:

Not completely true. One can probably achieve faster results with relative ease, while meditating in Saadh Sangat.

True. In sangat, you have the benefit of experiencing the greater vibration of the mantra when everyone is chanting in unison. The vibration is much more powerful simply because of the number of people chanting and creating sound waves.