BhagatSingh

Keeping a mishary/sugar crystal in the mouth 24x7 is the best way I can describe it. It's as strong as it gets. I have had the privilege of drinking left over Amrit from an Amrit sanchar. This taste is just like drinking that all the time. I have just come to accept it as part of the process and almighty grace. It does subside if i stop simran for weeks but doesn't take much to trigger it again. Just needs focused dhyaan on Gurmantar for a few days and boom it's back. 
I think Kabirs references are to the 2nd one I'm talking about. 
 

Maybe this will help clear things up for Paapiman
Eulogy of God's Name
A name of any thing is very essential to know it or to convey its knowledge. Without name, there will be no knowledge. Name and knowledge are closely associated like the body and skirt. It is also a fact that every animated being and thing come in this world without name. Name is prevalent in the human world only, because knowledge has been developed in the human world only. Name was given to those things and beings which were used by man or were near him. Man has named all the vegetation. These are flowers and out ofthese, this is marigold, this is rose and this is jasmine. Man has given these names. No flower has said that I am flower or rose, or marigold. Every visible and invisible thing is having no name. After naming vegetation, man gave names to animals and birds. This is cow, or lion or horse or dog. All names have been designated by man.
Man has also given names to the world of birds. Only man has endeavoured to give names to aquatic animals, terrestrial animals and worms etc. It is a different matter that there are many names of the same animated being or thing. This is due to different languages of different people. Man has named animated beings according to his language, mental impressions and nature. Man has named hills for identification. He also named rivers and oceans. Man looked up in the sky and named shining world as stars, planets, sidereal, Sun, Moon, Mars, Saturn etc. Then the thinking of man started giving names to the invisible world. For example he gave names to diseases and invisible souls.
In the end the thought of man went towards Omnipotent by whom this universe-in-action came into existence. When man saw the universe as a creation, he named the creator as Karta Purakh (Creator). When he saw Him as 'spreading' (Ramiya), he called Him 'Ram'. When man saw Him separate from time, he called Him 'Akal' (Immortal), i.e., beyond time. Being wide spread at every place and remover of faults, man called Him 'Hari'. The meaning of 'Hari' is thief also and whenever He enters in any body's mind unnoticed and He takes away mental impressions full of many faults of many births in a moment. After becoming blissful, a person comes to know that God had come in my heart. Therefore the Bhagats give this unique lovely name to that Omnipotent. By seeing His amorous sport to become astonished, and to give great brilliance after removing darkness, etc. - by seeing these grand virtues, Universal Guru, Baba Nanak Dev ji uttered 'Waheguru'. In this way 'Waheguru' mantra manifested by meditating which, meditators remove their ignorance and attain ecstatic state. By his foresight and intellect man gave those names to his children which are names ofGod. So that he may remember that he is worshipper of God and has taken birth in this world to manifest God in his heart.
All the Names are Godly whether in Hindu, Jain, Boudhas, Sikh or Islam religions and are religious. When some one's name is forgotten, then his related knowledge is also forgotten. On remembering name, the whole knowledge is manifested. While repeating His name, it is essential to keep conception of God in the mind since God is beyond name.
anaam hain. akaam hain.30.
Thou hast no Name and art without Lust
Parents give names to their children. But the Bhagats of the perfect God of the world give Him name since they are nearest to Him and are His sons. On repeating God's name, His nature is manifested in the mind. This is called Name has settled in the mind. Then tongue becomes silent and Name dwells in every particle of the body and the meditator becomes the form of Naam.
naamae naaraaein naahee bhaed.
There is no difference between Naam Dayv and the Lord.
ab tou jaae chadhae singhasan milae hai saringapani.
Now. I have mounted to the throne of the Lord; I have met the Lord, the Sustainer of the World.
raam kabira eaek bheae hai koe na sakai pachhani.
The Lord and Kaooer have become one. No one can tell them apart.
In this way, by repeating God's name and on erasing duality(othemess), the meditators become His form and only God is visible to them everywhere.
 
Source : Prabhu Simran, Giani Sant Singh ji Maskeen

What Dally was talking about was changing facts to suit your own historical narrative.

For example, if someone believes that only people who have taken khande di pahul can be a sikh, then they will revise and edit and misrepresent history to show that all sikhs like Bhai Kanhaiya ji, etc took khande di pahul.

And they have done this, and many people including me have believed their shit at some point.

I read Bhai Kanhaiya ji did not undergo khande di pahul. Mai Bhago ji as well. Mahant Kirpal Das ji.
There's a lot of sikhs who did not take khande di pahul.

As for the title.
The real meaning of Sehajdhari is one who is immersed in sehaj avastha.
The real meaning of Amritdhari is one who is immersed in A-mrityu/non-death/eternal moment.
The real meaning of Naamdhari is one who is immersed in Naam simran.

If you know the meaning of sehaj, amrit and naam, then you know they all mean the same thing. ;)

Lololo
So I got sweet taste in my mouth the other day while I was meditating, planning to do some painting.
It was in the back of my throat.
I tried cleaning it with water, with clean air (because the sweet quality kinda felt air-like), and then later on, I tried flooding it with masala and sweets and stuff.
It still remained, although at a reduced level.
Then I went to bed and it was gone when I woke up.
Twas cool! :D

Bhagat!!!! You want to tell us anything??? lols

From the period of Guru Hargobind up to Guru Hargobind the minas were in charge of the Sri Harimandir Sahib. Shortly after 1699 Bhai Mani Singh and a jatha of soldiers wrested it back and kicked the minas out

Bhai Balbir Singh ji is awesome. I am not phased by the video one bit.

Bhai Balbir Singh ji is awesome. I am not phased by the video one bit.

Yea Prof Sahib Singh got it wrong. He got a lot translations wrong.
The english translators copied him and that's why they got it wrong as well.
 
PS Bro it seems you can read punjabi.
Try reading the Freed Kote Teeka (from 1800s Punjab), I think it will be the next step for you.
http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1&g=1&h=1&r=1&t=1&p=0&fb=0&k=2

Bhai Balbir Singh ji is awesome. I am not phased by the video one bit.

You are talking from sargun bhagti perspective which is fine as bhakti is integral part of Sikhi but nirgun gyan such as mahavak in gurbani is also integral part of Sikhi as well as they both go hand in hand two wings of sikh. As sakhi of Baba Buddha Ji being described as mukh bhagti hirde gyan. 
 
Gurmat is bhakti gyan samoocha vad. 

Sri guru granth sahib ji has many mahavaks/gyan shaloks of ekta of jiva and bhram which needs to contemplated but with that being said- Vedas/upanishads also have mahavaks of ekta of jiv and bhram, they have gyan slokas as well. Please see two very interesting threads below from japji sahib teeka on gurmat position on vedas by sant gyani gurbachan singh bhindranwale:
http://www.sikhawareness.com/topic/15768-gurbani-position-on-vedas-beautifully-explained-by-sant-gyani-gurbachan-singh-khalsa-bhindranwale/
http://www.sikhawareness.com/topic/15795-~~deep-gnosis-behind-mahavak-in-gurbani~/ 

Yea Prof Sahib Singh got it wrong. He got a lot translations wrong.
The english translators copied him and that's why they got it wrong as well.
 
PS Bro it seems you can read punjabi.
Try reading the Freed Kote Teeka (from 1800s Punjab), I think it will be the next step for you.
http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1&g=1&h=1&r=1&t=1&p=0&fb=0&k=2

According to my understanding, divine has no rule as such against  greif, showing emotions via form- as everything is divine expression, in fact once we start boxing divine based on our pre-conceived notions and ideas we get into really slippery slope and confined divine based on our feeble limited conceptual mind. We should keep it open to both divine expression of satguru ji showing greif along with satguru showing no emotions as both are divine expressions and boxing them into which one is better one or another. then we start talking in duality as soon we do that, we loose a plot gurmat advait sidhant: undivided non dual reality.

Right now I am in the mood to correct things. So in this 'Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji' series, I want to highlight shabads, poems from Guru Granth Sahib, that have been translated incorrectly, which give the reader the wrong impression about the belief system of the author or about the message in Guru Granth Sahib ji.

When I read the English translation of Guru Granth Sahib ji. I notice that there are certain mistakes embedded in these translations that are over-looked by most sikhs, who rely on them to make out the meaning of the shabad. These incorrect beliefs then become internalized and lead to incorrect understanding. The incorrect understanding is then propagated in real life and in online forums, it seeps into discussions and the mindset.
 
One of the shabads I see the most, is a botched translation of Sant Kabir ji's shabad, where Kabir ji talks about the importance of your approach to Naam Simran. Do you approach Naam Simran to get something? What is it that you want to get out of it? Bhagat Kabir ji talks about the correct approach to Bhagati. He highlights a distinction in two approaches - the approach of Saint and the approach of Miracle-worker, who may appear similar to those who are unfamiliar.


But what does the English Translation of this shabad say? Something completely unrelated. It is as I say, completely botched.

Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji  - Part 1
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabeer, it does make a difference, how you chant the Lord's Name, 'Raam'. This is something to consider.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
Everyone uses the same word for the son of Dasrath and the Wondrous Lord. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabeer, use the word 'Raam', only to speak of the All-pervading Lord. You must make that distinction.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā ek samānā ek. ||191||
One 'Raam' is pervading everywhere, while the other is contained only in himself. ||191||
 
Now just read the Gurmukhi -
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
 


Notice these 3 things as you read the Gurmukhi.
1. It does not say "Son of Dashrath" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
2. It does not say "Only to speak of all-pervading lord" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
3. It does not say "pervading everywhere" or "contained only in himself" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.

The English translation is mistranslated and is used to misrepresent this shabad.

This is not what Sant Kabir ji is talking about and these are not the views he holds. This is not what Guru Granth Sahib ji is talking about either, and this mistranslated  shabad is used to misrepresent the Guru.


So the big question -
What is this shabad actually talking about?
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabir says there is a difference in how one says "Ram", let me share one thought.

So now he mentions Kautakahar. Kautakhar are those people who perform miracles to entertain. Kabir ji is saying -

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
All (saints) say "Ram" and so do the ka▫uṯakhār, those who perform miracles or entertain.
(i.e. the saints chant Ram because they have Prem/love for Ram. The kautakhar chant Ram to obtain ridhi sidhi, power to perform miracles, which they will show off. The latter have Prem for ridhi sidhi not Ram.)

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabir says do say "Ram" but in saying it recognize this difference/ this thought (bibek).

The difference is in intention!
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
That one merged in the many, and the other one merged in the One.
"pervading everywhere" (noun) or "contained only in himself" (noun) are incorrect translations of these Verbs.
ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ - is a verb, it's the act of doing ie. merging
ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ - is a verb, it's an act of doing ie. merging
That those who were after the power to perform miracles merged with (verb) those powers, meaning they never achieved mukti. But those (saints) who were after Ram merged with Him, the One (verb).
They are both doing Bhagati but their intentions are worlds apart, this is what Kabir is talking about in this shabad. The bibek you need to have to do Bhagati matters as it ultimately determines what result you get.


Why does Bhagat Kabir ji feel the need to point this out?

Since both Saints and Miracle-Workers can do kautaks, miracles, to the unfamiliar eye it might appear that they are the same. To new student of meditation, it might appear that meditation should be done to achieve these miraculous powers. They might think that it is miraculous powers that makes one into a Saint.

Sant Kabir ji guides his sikhs and tells them. There is a difference that must be recognized. The Saints are into Naam Simran, meditation, for Ram. The miracle-workers, kautakhars, are into Naam Simran for Kautaks.

He says that those who are in it for Ram, merge with Ram, and those who are in it for miracles, merge with the many miracles.

Bhagat Kabir ji is encouraging his sikhs to be in it for Ram.

So you see now what Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about? He's talking about differences in goals and aims, differences in intentions and purpose. And this is absolutely clear if you just read the Gurmukhi.

Just let that sink in. Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about aims and intentions.
 

It doesn't say the word Saint in the Gurmukhi, either. Where are you getting that from?
As you can clearly see, I wrote it as "(saints)"; I put it in brackets in my translation.

So I know it doesn't say "saints" in the Gurmukhi.
However it really is talking about saints even though Kabir doesn't use the word "saint". This is because in the very last tuk, he says that these "people" merge into the One, into Ram. Since they merged into the One, they can be called saints. 

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
"That one have merged in the many, and one have merged in the One."
One has become engrossed in the many kautaks/miracles, and the other one has merged into the One. Since the other one merged into the one, he can be called a saint.

Again, Kabir ji's point is this -
We know that Saints can also do miracles. We know that Kautakhars can also do miracles.
So the naturally the question gets asked - Is there a difference? If so, what is the difference between the two groups?
The entire shabad addresses this question.
Kabir ji answers that the Saints meditate on Ram out of pure love. Where as Kautakhars, meditate on Ram to gain ability to show kautak. And this difference is important to recognize because it ultimately leads to those goals. It has to be kept in mind while chanting "Ram, Ram".
If your goal is to achieve powers, then that's all you will get (ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ) .
If your goal is to get Ram, then that's who you will get (ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ) .
So here's same translation using different words. I won't use the word saint in brackets and you'll see that the meaning is the same.

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
Kabir says there is a distinction in saying "Ram", let me share this notion.

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
That "Ram" everyone chants, that "Ram" the ka▫uṯakhār also chant.
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir says definitely say "Ram, Ram" but in saying it recognize the distinction.

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
That one group, the kautakhars, has become engrossed in the many powers, and the other group has merged with the One (with Ram).
 
 
It says ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ. Doesn't ਰਾਮੈ mean "all-pervading"? Isn't it an adjective?
That wouldn't change the meaning I posted because that's what Ram means but when we are translating from Gurmukhi, we have to stick to the words.
ਰਾਮੈ is not an adjective.  ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. They are both the same name.

For example, Kabir ji says -
ਮੁਆ ਕਬੀਰੁ ਰਮਤ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਾਮੈ ॥੫॥੧੫॥
I died meditating on "Shri Ram"

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ . In another example, Kabir ji says
ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਰਮਤ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਵੈ ॥੪॥
Chanting "Ram, Ram" one attains peace.
ਰਮਤ means to permeate ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ/Ram, Ram

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ
In this example, Guru Sahib says -
ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮੈ ਨਾਮਿ ਬਸਾਈ ॥ ਅਸਥਿਰੁ ਰਹੈ ਨ ਕਤਹੂੰ ਜਾਈ ॥੪॥
Through the Guru's teachings, those who have enshrined "Ram Naam" (the name of Ram) in their hearts, they becomes Asthir, permanent, ie they become free of births and deaths.

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. Just like how ਨਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਨਾਮਾ (Namdev ji's nickname)
ਜਨ ਨਾਮੈ ਤਤੁ ਪਛਾਨਿਆ ॥੩॥੩॥
Servant Namdev (ਨਾਮੈ) has recognized reality.


So keep those examples in mind and read the tuk again -
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir ji says, do chant "Ram, Ram", and have this bibek while chanting.
 
 
But does Bhagat Kabir ji make any distinction between Ram and Ram in another shabad?

Bhagat Kabir ji makes absolutely no distinction. To Kabir ji they are the same.
Bhagat Kabir ji in his other shabads refers to Shri Ram, Son of Dashrath, as the Archer, Purushotam, the Leader of Raghu Dynasty, amongst His other epithets.
This is a big, multi-faceted discussion.

Yes and what is perceived to be a different faith. My next one was going to be "hindu anna turk kana", the author is critizing his own group of people here not people of a different faith.
Like Jaikaara gave an example of the verses used to malign Brahmins. Those guys are talking about their own people. Or talking very neutrally. But it is twisted to mean something else entirely.
Another example, the gurus actually speak favourably of the Vedas, Puranas, Bhagwad Gita etc. However people today use verses to misrepresent that.
The same goes for Ram Chandra ji also. He will be my major theme to begin with. He is perhaps the most misunderstood even amongst open-minded sikhs, and it is due to botched translations like the one above.

Yes just like the anti brahmans talk ..kshatriyan ko poot houn baahman ko naahi..the next line is Kaiy Tapp Aavat Hon Jo Karon - I am son of Khatri and not of Brahman who does 'Tapp'
Does Maharaj criticize the brahman ? No. Maharaj is simply saying i am a son of a warrior not of brahman who would do penance..is Maharaj criticizing penance ? No. Maharaj is pointing out his karma. But see how it is used to curse brahmans .

Right now I am in the mood to correct things. So in this 'Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji' series, I want to highlight shabads, poems from Guru Granth Sahib, that have been translated incorrectly, which give the reader the wrong impression about the belief system of the author or about the message in Guru Granth Sahib ji.

When I read the English translation of Guru Granth Sahib ji. I notice that there are certain mistakes embedded in these translations that are over-looked by most sikhs, who rely on them to make out the meaning of the shabad. These incorrect beliefs then become internalized and lead to incorrect understanding. The incorrect understanding is then propagated in real life and in online forums, it seeps into discussions and the mindset.
 
One of the shabads I see the most, is a botched translation of Sant Kabir ji's shabad, where Kabir ji talks about the importance of your approach to Naam Simran. Do you approach Naam Simran to get something? What is it that you want to get out of it? Bhagat Kabir ji talks about the correct approach to Bhagati. He highlights a distinction in two approaches - the approach of Saint and the approach of Miracle-worker, who may appear similar to those who are unfamiliar.


But what does the English Translation of this shabad say? Something completely unrelated. It is as I say, completely botched.

Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji  - Part 1
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabeer, it does make a difference, how you chant the Lord's Name, 'Raam'. This is something to consider.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
Everyone uses the same word for the son of Dasrath and the Wondrous Lord. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabeer, use the word 'Raam', only to speak of the All-pervading Lord. You must make that distinction.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā ek samānā ek. ||191||
One 'Raam' is pervading everywhere, while the other is contained only in himself. ||191||
 
Now just read the Gurmukhi -
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
 


Notice these 3 things as you read the Gurmukhi.
1. It does not say "Son of Dashrath" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
2. It does not say "Only to speak of all-pervading lord" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
3. It does not say "pervading everywhere" or "contained only in himself" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.

The English translation is mistranslated and is used to misrepresent this shabad.

This is not what Sant Kabir ji is talking about and these are not the views he holds. This is not what Guru Granth Sahib ji is talking about either, and this mistranslated  shabad is used to misrepresent the Guru.


So the big question -
What is this shabad actually talking about?
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabir says there is a difference in how one says "Ram", let me share one thought.

So now he mentions Kautakahar. Kautakhar are those people who perform miracles to entertain. Kabir ji is saying -

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
All (saints) say "Ram" and so do the ka▫uṯakhār, those who perform miracles or entertain.
(i.e. the saints chant Ram because they have Prem/love for Ram. The kautakhar chant Ram to obtain ridhi sidhi, power to perform miracles, which they will show off. The latter have Prem for ridhi sidhi not Ram.)

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabir says do say "Ram" but in saying it recognize this difference/ this thought (bibek).

The difference is in intention!
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
That one merged in the many, and the other one merged in the One.
"pervading everywhere" (noun) or "contained only in himself" (noun) are incorrect translations of these Verbs.
ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ - is a verb, it's the act of doing ie. merging
ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ - is a verb, it's an act of doing ie. merging
That those who were after the power to perform miracles merged with (verb) those powers, meaning they never achieved mukti. But those (saints) who were after Ram merged with Him, the One (verb).
They are both doing Bhagati but their intentions are worlds apart, this is what Kabir is talking about in this shabad. The bibek you need to have to do Bhagati matters as it ultimately determines what result you get.


Why does Bhagat Kabir ji feel the need to point this out?

Since both Saints and Miracle-Workers can do kautaks, miracles, to the unfamiliar eye it might appear that they are the same. To new student of meditation, it might appear that meditation should be done to achieve these miraculous powers. They might think that it is miraculous powers that makes one into a Saint.

Sant Kabir ji guides his sikhs and tells them. There is a difference that must be recognized. The Saints are into Naam Simran, meditation, for Ram. The miracle-workers, kautakhars, are into Naam Simran for Kautaks.

He says that those who are in it for Ram, merge with Ram, and those who are in it for miracles, merge with the many miracles.

Bhagat Kabir ji is encouraging his sikhs to be in it for Ram.

So you see now what Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about? He's talking about differences in goals and aims, differences in intentions and purpose. And this is absolutely clear if you just read the Gurmukhi.

Just let that sink in. Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about aims and intentions.
 

It doesn't say the word Saint in the Gurmukhi, either. Where are you getting that from?
As you can clearly see, I wrote it as "(saints)"; I put it in brackets in my translation.

So I know it doesn't say "saints" in the Gurmukhi.
However it really is talking about saints even though Kabir doesn't use the word "saint". This is because in the very last tuk, he says that these "people" merge into the One, into Ram. Since they merged into the One, they can be called saints. 

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
"That one have merged in the many, and one have merged in the One."
One has become engrossed in the many kautaks/miracles, and the other one has merged into the One. Since the other one merged into the one, he can be called a saint.

Again, Kabir ji's point is this -
We know that Saints can also do miracles. We know that Kautakhars can also do miracles.
So the naturally the question gets asked - Is there a difference? If so, what is the difference between the two groups?
The entire shabad addresses this question.
Kabir ji answers that the Saints meditate on Ram out of pure love. Where as Kautakhars, meditate on Ram to gain ability to show kautak. And this difference is important to recognize because it ultimately leads to those goals. It has to be kept in mind while chanting "Ram, Ram".
If your goal is to achieve powers, then that's all you will get (ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ) .
If your goal is to get Ram, then that's who you will get (ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ) .
So here's same translation using different words. I won't use the word saint in brackets and you'll see that the meaning is the same.

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
Kabir says there is a distinction in saying "Ram", let me share this notion.

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
That "Ram" everyone chants, that "Ram" the ka▫uṯakhār also chant.
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir says definitely say "Ram, Ram" but in saying it recognize the distinction.

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
That one group, the kautakhars, has become engrossed in the many powers, and the other group has merged with the One (with Ram).
 
 
It says ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ. Doesn't ਰਾਮੈ mean "all-pervading"? Isn't it an adjective?
That wouldn't change the meaning I posted because that's what Ram means but when we are translating from Gurmukhi, we have to stick to the words.
ਰਾਮੈ is not an adjective.  ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. They are both the same name.

For example, Kabir ji says -
ਮੁਆ ਕਬੀਰੁ ਰਮਤ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਾਮੈ ॥੫॥੧੫॥
I died meditating on "Shri Ram"

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ . In another example, Kabir ji says
ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਰਮਤ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਵੈ ॥੪॥
Chanting "Ram, Ram" one attains peace.
ਰਮਤ means to permeate ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ/Ram, Ram

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ
In this example, Guru Sahib says -
ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮੈ ਨਾਮਿ ਬਸਾਈ ॥ ਅਸਥਿਰੁ ਰਹੈ ਨ ਕਤਹੂੰ ਜਾਈ ॥੪॥
Through the Guru's teachings, those who have enshrined "Ram Naam" (the name of Ram) in their hearts, they becomes Asthir, permanent, ie they become free of births and deaths.

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. Just like how ਨਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਨਾਮਾ (Namdev ji's nickname)
ਜਨ ਨਾਮੈ ਤਤੁ ਪਛਾਨਿਆ ॥੩॥੩॥
Servant Namdev (ਨਾਮੈ) has recognized reality.


So keep those examples in mind and read the tuk again -
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir ji says, do chant "Ram, Ram", and have this bibek while chanting.
 
 
But does Bhagat Kabir ji make any distinction between Ram and Ram in another shabad?

Bhagat Kabir ji makes absolutely no distinction. To Kabir ji they are the same.
Bhagat Kabir ji in his other shabads refers to Shri Ram, Son of Dashrath, as the Archer, Purushotam, the Leader of Raghu Dynasty, amongst His other epithets.
This is a big, multi-faceted discussion.

Right now I am in the mood to correct things. So in this 'Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji' series, I want to highlight shabads, poems from Guru Granth Sahib, that have been translated incorrectly, which give the reader the wrong impression about the belief system of the author or about the message in Guru Granth Sahib ji.

When I read the English translation of Guru Granth Sahib ji. I notice that there are certain mistakes embedded in these translations that are over-looked by most sikhs, who rely on them to make out the meaning of the shabad. These incorrect beliefs then become internalized and lead to incorrect understanding. The incorrect understanding is then propagated in real life and in online forums, it seeps into discussions and the mindset.
 
One of the shabads I see the most, is a botched translation of Sant Kabir ji's shabad, where Kabir ji talks about the importance of your approach to Naam Simran. Do you approach Naam Simran to get something? What is it that you want to get out of it? Bhagat Kabir ji talks about the correct approach to Bhagati. He highlights a distinction in two approaches - the approach of Saint and the approach of Miracle-worker, who may appear similar to those who are unfamiliar.


But what does the English Translation of this shabad say? Something completely unrelated. It is as I say, completely botched.

Botched Translations of Guru Granth Sahib ji  - Part 1
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabeer, it does make a difference, how you chant the Lord's Name, 'Raam'. This is something to consider.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
Everyone uses the same word for the son of Dasrath and the Wondrous Lord. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabeer, use the word 'Raam', only to speak of the All-pervading Lord. You must make that distinction.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā ek samānā ek. ||191||
One 'Raam' is pervading everywhere, while the other is contained only in himself. ||191||
 
Now just read the Gurmukhi -
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
 


Notice these 3 things as you read the Gurmukhi.
1. It does not say "Son of Dashrath" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
2. It does not say "Only to speak of all-pervading lord" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.
3. It does not say "pervading everywhere" or "contained only in himself" anywhere in the Gurmukhi, nor is it implied.

The English translation is mistranslated and is used to misrepresent this shabad.

This is not what Sant Kabir ji is talking about and these are not the views he holds. This is not what Guru Granth Sahib ji is talking about either, and this mistranslated  shabad is used to misrepresent the Guru.


So the big question -
What is this shabad actually talking about?
 
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
कबीर राम कहन महि भेदु है ता महि एकु बिचारु ॥
Kabīr rām kahan mėh bẖeḏ hai ṯā mėh ek bicẖār.
Kabir says there is a difference in how one says "Ram", let me share one thought.

So now he mentions Kautakahar. Kautakhar are those people who perform miracles to entertain. Kabir ji is saying -

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
सोई रामु सभै कहहि सोई कउतकहार ॥१९०॥
So▫ī rām sabẖai kahėh so▫ī ka▫uṯakhār. ||190||
All (saints) say "Ram" and so do the ka▫uṯakhār, those who perform miracles or entertain.
(i.e. the saints chant Ram because they have Prem/love for Ram. The kautakhar chant Ram to obtain ridhi sidhi, power to perform miracles, which they will show off. The latter have Prem for ridhi sidhi not Ram.)

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
कबीर रामै राम कहु कहिबे माहि बिबेक ॥
Kabīr rāmai rām kaho kahibe māhi bibek.
Kabir says do say "Ram" but in saying it recognize this difference/ this thought (bibek).

The difference is in intention!
ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
एकु अनेकहि मिलि गइआ एक समाना एक ॥१९१॥
Ėk anekėh mil ga▫i▫ā (verb) ek samānā ek (verb). ||191||
That one merged in the many, and the other one merged in the One.
"pervading everywhere" (noun) or "contained only in himself" (noun) are incorrect translations of these Verbs.
ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ - is a verb, it's the act of doing ie. merging
ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ - is a verb, it's an act of doing ie. merging
That those who were after the power to perform miracles merged with (verb) those powers, meaning they never achieved mukti. But those (saints) who were after Ram merged with Him, the One (verb).
They are both doing Bhagati but their intentions are worlds apart, this is what Kabir is talking about in this shabad. The bibek you need to have to do Bhagati matters as it ultimately determines what result you get.


Why does Bhagat Kabir ji feel the need to point this out?

Since both Saints and Miracle-Workers can do kautaks, miracles, to the unfamiliar eye it might appear that they are the same. To new student of meditation, it might appear that meditation should be done to achieve these miraculous powers. They might think that it is miraculous powers that makes one into a Saint.

Sant Kabir ji guides his sikhs and tells them. There is a difference that must be recognized. The Saints are into Naam Simran, meditation, for Ram. The miracle-workers, kautakhars, are into Naam Simran for Kautaks.

He says that those who are in it for Ram, merge with Ram, and those who are in it for miracles, merge with the many miracles.

Bhagat Kabir ji is encouraging his sikhs to be in it for Ram.

So you see now what Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about? He's talking about differences in goals and aims, differences in intentions and purpose. And this is absolutely clear if you just read the Gurmukhi.

Just let that sink in. Bhagat Kabir ji is talking about aims and intentions.
 

It doesn't say the word Saint in the Gurmukhi, either. Where are you getting that from?
As you can clearly see, I wrote it as "(saints)"; I put it in brackets in my translation.

So I know it doesn't say "saints" in the Gurmukhi.
However it really is talking about saints even though Kabir doesn't use the word "saint". This is because in the very last tuk, he says that these "people" merge into the One, into Ram. Since they merged into the One, they can be called saints. 

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
"That one have merged in the many, and one have merged in the One."
One has become engrossed in the many kautaks/miracles, and the other one has merged into the One. Since the other one merged into the one, he can be called a saint.

Again, Kabir ji's point is this -
We know that Saints can also do miracles. We know that Kautakhars can also do miracles.
So the naturally the question gets asked - Is there a difference? If so, what is the difference between the two groups?
The entire shabad addresses this question.
Kabir ji answers that the Saints meditate on Ram out of pure love. Where as Kautakhars, meditate on Ram to gain ability to show kautak. And this difference is important to recognize because it ultimately leads to those goals. It has to be kept in mind while chanting "Ram, Ram".
If your goal is to achieve powers, then that's all you will get (ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ) .
If your goal is to get Ram, then that's who you will get (ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ) .
So here's same translation using different words. I won't use the word saint in brackets and you'll see that the meaning is the same.

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
Kabir says there is a distinction in saying "Ram", let me share this notion.

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
That "Ram" everyone chants, that "Ram" the ka▫uṯakhār also chant.
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir says definitely say "Ram, Ram" but in saying it recognize the distinction.

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
That one group, the kautakhars, has become engrossed in the many powers, and the other group has merged with the One (with Ram).
 
 
It says ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ. Doesn't ਰਾਮੈ mean "all-pervading"? Isn't it an adjective?
That wouldn't change the meaning I posted because that's what Ram means but when we are translating from Gurmukhi, we have to stick to the words.
ਰਾਮੈ is not an adjective.  ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. They are both the same name.

For example, Kabir ji says -
ਮੁਆ ਕਬੀਰੁ ਰਮਤ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਾਮੈ ॥੫॥੧੫॥
I died meditating on "Shri Ram"

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ . In another example, Kabir ji says
ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਰਮਤ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਵੈ ॥੪॥
Chanting "Ram, Ram" one attains peace.
ਰਮਤ means to permeate ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ/Ram, Ram

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ
In this example, Guru Sahib says -
ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਰਾਮੈ ਨਾਮਿ ਬਸਾਈ ॥ ਅਸਥਿਰੁ ਰਹੈ ਨ ਕਤਹੂੰ ਜਾਈ ॥੪॥
Through the Guru's teachings, those who have enshrined "Ram Naam" (the name of Ram) in their hearts, they becomes Asthir, permanent, ie they become free of births and deaths.

ਰਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਰਾਮ. Just like how ਨਾਮੈ is the same thing as ਨਾਮਾ (Namdev ji's nickname)
ਜਨ ਨਾਮੈ ਤਤੁ ਪਛਾਨਿਆ ॥੩॥੩॥
Servant Namdev (ਨਾਮੈ) has recognized reality.


So keep those examples in mind and read the tuk again -
ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
Kabir ji says, do chant "Ram, Ram", and have this bibek while chanting.
 
 
But does Bhagat Kabir ji make any distinction between Ram and Ram in another shabad?

Bhagat Kabir ji makes absolutely no distinction. To Kabir ji they are the same.
Bhagat Kabir ji in his other shabads refers to Shri Ram, Son of Dashrath, as the Archer, Purushotam, the Leader of Raghu Dynasty, amongst His other epithets.
This is a big, multi-faceted discussion.

Best thing you can do is to fill up all the areas in your life where you are not meditating and start meditating in those areas.
You can practice techniques described by Sat and Lucky above, and insert them in the following activities.
You can also try to experience the activity in its fullest, I will describe this below, along with some example of activities during which you could easily meditate.
Let's start

1 you wake up - start meditation immediately
- open your eyes, look around the room as you would if you woke up in a strange location
like an alien visiting earth, study every in the room
- feel the bedsheets, listen to the early morning sounds
- when you get up feel the weight of your body sitting on the bed, then feel your feet touch the floor.

2. brushing teeth - focus on the sounds and sensations of the brush
- the touch of water, how wet is it, how hot/cold,
- feel the water move around in your mouth, on your hands, face

3. washing dishes - again focus on the sensations of the water, the temperature, the flow
- feel the dishes as you would a newborn child, touch them, what do they feel like
- what does the soap feel like
- how does the water look like when it hits the dish, how does it flow down the dish

4. walking from one place of the house to another
- bring your attention to your feet and feel the floor/carpet you walk on
- think about the texture and the hardness
- feel the muscles of your feet in action

5. every now and then just take a deep breath
- as soon as you remember this take a deep breath
- if you waiting for someone or something, just take a deep conscious breath
- focus on the breath as it goes in and comes out
- if you can look out of a window, look at the sky, the trees, listen to the birds and take a deep breath

Just fill up all the space, all the routine tasks with meditation and you will see a HUGE difference in your life

Ragmaala
1. In that shabad, the basic principle is that who you meditate on, you gain the qualities of.
What you focus on, you become.
If you focus on people's ignorance, you too will become ignorant.
 
2.  Bhagat Namdev ji is also preaching his own religion. He worships Hari, Ram, Krishna.
Bhagat Namdev ji says in the end "With guru's teachings, meditate on Ram, and that the Bhagwad Geeta also says to do this".
He says not to meditate on Gods of other religions.
 
3. Bhagat Namdev ji is advocating certain types of qualities. When he says to meditate on Ram, he says you should become Ram.

(Kabir also says this "Hari jan aisa chahiye jaisa Hari hi hoe)
In the world, be Ram, be purushotam, be a superior man, a high quality spiritual man, who upholds the dharmic values and traditional sanksar of Indian society. In the mind, be formless with expanded awareness. Recognize that atma is everywhere, as parmatma.

He considers it his guru. move on.

12 forms? Is he counting Banda Singh as Guru?

You are probably studying some bullshit subject someone else picked for you and not what you wanted to study.
You gotta find your own passion (by trying different things) and follow those passions.
Never look to society to dictate what you should do. Be your own man, and carve out your own path.
I have devoted my life to Waheguru which coexists with my passion for other things, other subjects. And I studied these in school with great enthusiasm.
Do a job where you can do naam simran while you are on the job.
This way you can be with Waheguru and be productive, providing value to your family and to society.
I work with my hands so that I can do simran with my mind.