Jump to content

Theesra (3rd) Panth?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sant Seva Singh ji is a student of Baba Harnam Singh ji, a mahan sant who stood up for human rights and took part in the morcha prior to his swargvas (which happened peacefully before '84).

They are not part of any samprada or jatha, so may be able to answer your questions. the website with his katha on it is called http://www.rampurkhera.net/. I highly recommend reading Baba Harnam Singh ji's jeevan sakhi, it's most inspiring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

When one tries to comprehend contradictory views, mind opens up to bigger truth. Teesra panth is synthesis, the higher level of truth as Hegel said.

Thesis - there are many gods

antitheses - there is only One God

Synthesis - There is One God, with number of Sargun Roops.

Edited by laalsingh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One God with various saroops is an integral part of hindu mat and did not start with the Gurus

I am not very familiar with Hindu mat. What I have learned from Vaishnavs, when they say Krishna, that means one of the das avatar. Their focus is on cow herder of ancient India, not Akaal (his Creator).

Similarly, Shaivites focus on Shiv as primary God.

Hinduism is so vast, you can find a strand similar to any religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The final comment you said is very true yes. However Upanishads(including the Bhagavad Gita) are some of the basic scriptures of hindu mat and they promote One God in many forms, as does gurmat.

There is a beautiful saying of Krishna "Behind a million demigods you will find my face"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

laalsingh you are mistaken. The image of Krishna or Shiva is a Sanketa - a sign signal or gesture- that indicates something else. Much like the word Akaal is a Sanketa of something else, the word itself is not what is signified by 'Akaal'. It is not the symbols - (be they words or images) - in themselves that are firstly important, but the meaning assigned to the symbols, what they signify. Unless a person has a direct experience of what the symbol signifies then we have to recourse to tradition in order to interpret the symbol. No, one symbol can be said to be better than another, only more apt to use in prevelant societal conditions. It may be of value for Sikh youth to consider how far the Signs or Sanketa they use have become divorced from what they are meant to signify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sri Krishan Ji when teaching Arjuna, talks of himself, not as the cowherder (sansaari roop) but as the supreme consciousness - he sees the immutable and indestructable Brahman only (within) - who is beyond gunas, absolutely free and the creator of the Universe.

He does not claim this 'awareness' for himself only - he tells Arjuna that he too can become 'aware of Brahman' if he develops the right understanding. He is trying to transfer this 'vision of truth' to his disciple.... ultimately, he is saying there is no difference between them, but it is for Arjuna to develop that divine undertanding and pure concsiousness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

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...

×
×
  • Create New...