Jump to content

The Three deities as repreentatives of God & significanc


Xylitol
 Share

Recommended Posts

seems kinda pointless to reply to this thread...but...

Guru Nanak was waheguru himself. But disappeared in the river for a period to be formally initiated by waheguru, ie. to get a Guru b/c that is the maryada of this world.

He was not given Amrit by vishnu or by imam Ali. pointless revisionism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was not given Amrit by vishnu or by imam Ali. pointless revisionism.

I knew what Javanmard was trying to say. God has many forms but has no form. Some call God Ram some call God Kodha. The fact that Guru Nanak taken Amrit from Waheguru, made Guru Nanak Waheguru himself, Guru Nanaks light is indifferent, Guru Nanak is the divine Guru himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guru Nanak was waheguru himself even before amrit. he didn't need it, but accepted it to fulfill rahit maryada of this world.

Vishnu is not waheguru. mool mantr says Waheguru is unborn and undying. yet vishnu is born and dies according to Bani. although the jyot inside is one with God, the same can be said of the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you have also forgotten what Vishnu means. Preserver.

True, but you're missing the point Xylitol's trying to make - Waheguru is everything - preserver, destroyer, etc. Everything is under Waheguru's hukam, there is nothing higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dude vishnu, brahma , shiva... they are nothing infront of WAHEGURU.

All that exists is WAHEGURUWAHEGURUWAHEGURU.....WAHEGURU CONTROLS EVERYTHING.

Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma from what I can understand is just an analogy for humans to understand the creative, destructive, preserve process.

and no body prays to Brahma..do u know that !!!

as for Shiva... he also gets incited by Kaam .. and ppl pray to him {-_-}

that shiva lingam, is nothing but the representation of male sex organ and the femal sex organ in intercourse. the milk they through on the lingam is nothing but signification of semen... and thats what it really means..and thats what they pray and bow to !!! SHOCKING

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bhrama, vishnu, shiva all exist. all the guns that they have, waheguru has. *but they are not him*. The Guru never preached they were the same.

they have been given separate identity. Gurbani teaches that all beings long for the human janam. This is the only janam that can realise God. Even bhrama, vishnu, shiva cannot fully realise God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that shiva lingam, is nothing but the representation of male sex organ and the femal sex organ in intercourse. the milk they through on the lingam is nothing but signification of semen... and thats what it really means..and thats what they pray and bow to !!! SHOCKING

Supposing for just a second that this misconstrued Tantrik interpretation of Shiv-ling is the only widely acknowledged version (which isn't true, but anyway). What would be so shocking about that?? Surely if you're shocked by this, it means you would be happier in Iran, which according to you is a bastion of 'moral' sexual repression? Doesn't SGGS acknowledge Shiva? And Guru Gobind Singh exhorts Shiva? And nihang Singh is image of Shiva? And Shiva in form your described represents your father's line? At least Iran is free from such hypocrisy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wahegurubol,

Are you sure that these people really regard the Shivaling as God?

Are you familiar with the history of the Shivalingam and its other representations - as Singho as alluded that representation that you are offering is one that has gained currency in the West and amongst non-Hindus in particular, perhaps have another look at the issue.

Singho - you stated:

"Doesn't SGGS acknowledge Shiva? And Guru Gobind Singh exhorts Shiva? And nihang Singh is image of Shiva? And Shiva in form your described represents your father's line?"

Please for clarification, could you expand on what you mean by 'acknowledge' and 'exhort' in the above statements and also why you consider a Nihang Singh, the image of Shiva (is he not semi-naked, jattadhari, smeared with ash and hence more akin to some forms of Udasi Sadhus rather than the clothed, keshdhari Nihangs?) I also wasn't able to fully follow your last statement about "your father's line".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Sikh I believe only and only in SGGS. Shiva is there , Shiva exist. I respect Shiva, but I dont pray to Shiva, nor do I take refuge in Shiva.

Guru Gobind Singh ji exhorted Shiva, cos in those days people believe in Shiva a lot and he did it only to make the patriotism come out from them, but Guru Gobind Singh ji also says in His Parvitar... that He prays to ONLY ONE GOD AND NO BODY BESIDES THAT...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

w-bol, my question was simple. You asserted that the Shivalingam is nothing but a representation of Shiva's penis and the milk poured on top of it a substitute for semen.

This type of thinking is also apparent amongst many Muslims (of the variety that you describe) I have met, who use such thinking to justify their right to destroy the idols of the Tantriks, however I am asking you, if you are aware of the alternative views regarding what the Shivalingam represents and are you aware of the view you have only gaining popularity in relatively recent times?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please for clarification, could you expand on what you mean by 'acknowledge' and 'exhort' in the above statements and also why you consider a Nihang Singh, the image of Shiva (is he not semi-naked, jattadhari, smeared with ash and hence more akin to some forms of Udasi Sadhus rather than the clothed, keshdhari Nihangs?) I also wasn't able to fully follow your last statement about "your father's line".

Sure thing. I find the following article persuasive concerning both the numerous references in Sri Guru Granth Sahib to Shiva and as to what 'Shiva' is supposed to mean or represent (i.e. lingam is jyotir-lingam):

http://www.gurbani.org/webart147.htm

Therefore I hold that Sri Guru Granth Sahib acknowledges the existence of Shiva, by refering to Shiva.

The definition of 'Shiva' has remained fluid and adaptable through the millenia, and is likely to remain so. The phrase 'Namah Sivaya' was said to have been an invocation of all that's 'good' rather than a personal deification in itself originally, and is a recurrent Vedic theme.

Guru Gobind Singh's writings in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib also refer to Shiva ('Deh Shiva bar mohe' etc.)., and so I think there are good grounds to assert that Guru Gobind Singh actually invoked Shiva.

On the subject of the nihang Singhs, from what I understand in my conversations with them, they have an ancient oral tradition that every detail of the dress of the nihangs (including kesh that holds the Ganga) is supposed to represent Shiva. Puranic Shiva is 'neelakantha' which traditionally means 'naked' as per the sadhus and Udasis, but whch literally means 'blue-clad' (the sky is blue too). So, to me it seems that various groups have an honest claim to representing the form of Shiva.

On Shiva representing the patrilineage of a person, this is a difficult subject which touches at the soul of Indian civilisation. In Indian tradition, your gotra comes from your father, not your mother, and it defines who you are, what your beliefs and practices and duties are. So, in some traditional circles, the worship of Shiva is associated with honouring the ancestors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Singho.

Only comments from my side are:

1. I am familiar with referenced article, as you say "The definition of 'Shiva' has remained fluid and adaptable through the millenia, and is likely to remain so".

2. Guru Gobind Singh's Chandi Charitr Utki Bilas from where the shabd "Deh Siva Bar Mohe" is actually a reference to the Devi Durga (Siva) rather than Shiva.

3. I am aware of Nihang Oral traditions, however I would like to understand a little more about how "neelakantha' traditionally meant 'naked' vs. blue-clad" and the connection with the sky.

4. This is interesting and worth further exploration, do you have any additional information?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Niranjana: Sorry - I hang around SikhAwareness to try to find out more information from yourself and others on this subject and many others. Chandi Charittar is about Chandi, but I thought as Shiva is the giver of boons invoked by Ram, etc. then it makes sense to read 'Deh Siva' as a reference to the male Shiva.

On the matter of the neelakantha attribute, this appears in several south Indian strotrams and seems to have been a folk belief that originated in the Puranic times. A South Indian pundit would know more, as would a Sanskrit scholar such as JM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

deh shiva is Guru describing the power of God, ie sword aka Chandi. This at the end of the Chandi Charitar which describes the power of God Chandi against evil ie rakshas. at the end Guru Says Please Chandi(shiva) aka sword/God give me this boon...

For many moons i couldnt make out why Guru Ji wrote Shiva, until I read about Shiv Ji nad found that Shiv Ji actually accorded the status of Shiva to Parbati who was an incarnation of Chandi.

tis quite complicated, and dumbasses make a lot of mileage out of this, including my Sikh friend who used this line to "prove" that Sikhs were part of the Hindu religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...