Who were the avatars in previous kalyugs ?

[Ragmaala]

The question I am about to ask is very senseless. Because no one can know what I am asking except God himself.

If we assume that time works in cycles satyug, dvapar , treta , kalyug.

And from gurbani and dasam bani we know that millions of ramchandra, krishan , ashvini kumars et etc have come and gone , that leads us to believe that since ram krishan were in different yugas , these yugas might have been repeated many times like millions

if we assume the time to be cyclical , that means kalyugs must have been repeated too

now my Question is this Since we all know that Kalyug is under Guru Nanak Dev ji's control or pehra or supervision , do u think Guru Nanak came a million times too ? my intuition tells me that this is not the case , Guru Nanak has come this time and wont be gone because who can end God himself right .

And since Guru Granth Sahib is jugo jug attal there will be no destruction of the universe ? because who can destroy the Gurbani right ?

sorry for throwing out random and out of order ideas out there , this is senseless topic because we cannot know the working of God. ignore if you dont like it

and ADVANCED BEST WISHES TO ALL ON GURU NANAK DEV JIs APPEARANCE ON THIS EARTH !!!

[jsingh96]

good question

[shaheediyan]

Millions of Sri Krishnas, Sri Ram Chandras, millions of planets, millions of dimensions, millions of planes of existence... the references in Gurbani are not scientific or historical - they are supposed to be understood outside of academic thought - the point is to show us that it is beyond our meagre comprehension - yet our haumai still entertains us and we continue to force understanding.

The question re Guru Nanak Dev Ji goes back to the debate of whether individuality continues to exist seperately after the soul leaves the body.

Sant Jagjeet Singh has answered these questions perfectly in my opinion -All are part of the same - and merge with the same - they only continue to exist in our minds as a tool for our learning and aspiration, and we have darshan of Parmatma in that formn which is dear to us.

Ultimately there is only one entity/personality in existence.

[chatanga1]

is that entity Bruce Forsyth?

[Maha Kharag Singh]

lol: so wed all better play our cards right

[shaheediyan]

To see you...nice.

[amardeep]

There is a sakhi of Guru Gobind Singh where he says he has taken avatar in all the yugas. i think its in sau sakhi...

Bhai Gurdas also says the Satguru takes avatar in alll yugas

[Mithar]

Just a question but say if there are other civilisation in the universe much like our own, then would Guru Nanak Dev Jee have taken avtar there as well?

[amardeep]

Hare Krishnas belive that there are several planets in the universe each governed by a devta and the highest of these is governed by the Highest Krishna. I dont know if we as sikhs belive the same thing, but i think humans are the only ones who can achieve mukhti.

[Silence]

Guru Nanak Dev Ji is not avataar but NIRANKAAR.

Avtaar is nothing compared to what Guru Nanak Dev Ji is.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj is the Guru of ALL AGES, all these avtars were NOTHING, all they did was work as instruments of Guru Maharaj, the true saviour of all time. Its like in the past three yugs maharaj was using a hammer (the hammer being the avatars) to nail something, in kalyug the only difference is Maharaj is doing it by hand without the tools. All the time it was none other than Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj doing it all.

We have to understand who Guru Nanak Dev Sahib Ji Nirankaar Maharaj is, then we won't get questions like this.

When you say "did Guru Nanak Sahib come a million times too", the question itself is wrong. Guru Nanak Dev Ji IS GOD, God doesn't come or go, he is the very reason for our existence:

Satgur mera sada sada na avaeh na jaeh

oh abinsaee purakh hai sabhna rahia samae

My true Guru forever and ever, does not come and go

He is the imperishable creator lord, he is permeating and pervading among all.

These questions really can't be answered because as i said earlier, imo, they themselves are incorrect.

Have a read of this, hopefully they should prevent the need of these questions in the first place. (please don't be put off by the url, the article in the first link is by bhai sahib bhai randhir singh ji, all backed up by Gurbani)

http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.php?f=1...12&t=101120

and second one explains about avatars using gurbani

http://www.tapoban.org/forum/read.php?1,81,81#msg-81

[unbreakable]

.

[Guest]

Silence, well according to puratan samparda and taksal sri guru nanak dev ji were pooran tam guru avtar of vahiguroo. so you and your clan are welcome to stick to ferengi missionary type sikhi but allow others to beleive in what's being beleived seena-basina via puratan mahapursh of various samparda's.

Sukha_Singh, posted this quote from sri sarbloh granth in other thread dedicated to sri guru nanak dev ji parbhram being avtar :

"Satgur Nanak Aap Parmeshar, Avtar Leeyo Shubh Bans Pardhanaa - Sri Sarbloh Granth Sahib Ji"

Whats you have to say now? sarbloh granth isnt bani because bhai sahib bhai randhir singh ji never talked about it?..typical bhausaria mentality... its about time people get attached with Gurbani instead their small little boxes made by tribes.

[amardeep]

Page 1389, Line 17

ਗਾਵਹਿ ਕਪਿਲਾਦਿ ਆਦਿ ਜੋਗੇਸੁਰ ਅਪਰੰਪਰ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਵਰੋ ॥

गावहि कपिलादि आदि जोगेसुर अपर्मपर अवतार वरो ॥

Gāvahi kapilāḏ āḏ jogesur aprampar avṯār varo.

Kapila and the other Yogis sing of Guru Nanak. He is the Avataar, the Incarnation of the Infinite Lord.

[Kam1825]

Neo the Pooran TAm avtar stated in the Sato Gali Teekas means higher then a complete manifestation. If you read further in that and the taksal steek it states that Guru Nanak Dev ji were not the manifestation of God by the Lord manifest to save the earth fromt he sins in Kaljug

[Maha Kharag Singh]

Mr Kam,

This is one thing which fathoms me, previous avtars like the likes of Krishna cannot be considered as manifestations of God, then why do we consider Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji as a direct manifestation of God.

Doesnt this go against the whole "science" of God, that Sri Mahakaal cannot take birth.

Sri Satguru Nanak in my eyes was the physical manifestation of Brahmgian, something which is the knowledge of Brahm or God but not God itself, otherwise how different would we be from mainstream hindus who consider each of their kul devta as GOD.

as for my version of the whole concept of yugs heres a coppied bit from another thread.

Just to add to the theory as to how such a concept can be translated in such a cynical "Richard Dawkins" society, in my humble opinion, just as faith, social structure, human conciousness etc has developed over time these four Yugs are periods of development of mankind's perception of faith and sociology.

Where as our primitive minds developed over time, newer technologies and philosophies dawned on us and when we made a significant break through development it had been labelled as the end or start of a Yug, e.g. the dark ages and then the renaissance.

One prime example which comes to mind is how religion/society developed, where we moved from privative sun/moon worship to paganism and then to polytheism and then to monotheism and now to atheism etc. etc. where all of these levels of faith drove individuals outlook on how society should be structured (e.g. hierarchies to divine rule etc.) and then lead to political movements such as crusades etc.

One may also perceive the days and nights of Brahma as the cycles of periods of intellectual development and periods of ignorance have flourished throughout world history e.g. the dark ages which lead to the flourishing of knowledge during the prosperous reign of the Roman empire where Greek phillosophy was born taking mankind out of the rut of polytheism and barbaric ritualism to make mankind think (virtue theory) which after the demise of the Roman empire plunged us back into the dark ages an age of great ignorance and religious dictatorship after which came the renaissance a revival of philosophy and knowledge that had been lost for hundreds to thousands of years, which then led to another dark period of religious dictatorship which was broken by the enlightenment or romanticism.

I know its a bit long winded but a pattern can be seen ignorance - knowledge - ignorance etc

Therefore in conclusion, maybe these concepts arent to be taken seriously but as poetic genious of our Satgurus and the ancient rishi munis who came up with these concepts.

[Guest]

I think discussion in this thread is kind of leading to same direction which was discussed not long ago :

http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...opic.php?t=8645

Please refer to previous discussion.

As far as orginal thread goes, excellent question by ragmalla veer, i m in total agreement with shaheediyan on this one. It all depends on how one's surti preceives meta reality(sargun saroop) as sant jagjit singh ji discussed.

Typical example - if one does dhyaan of sri guru gobind singh ji physical saroop (just an example, not promoting or discouraging you should or shouldnt) if one does dhyaan of sri guru gobind singh ji physical saroop in sadhu banna in full bairaag, eventually that jaiagaso will darshan of sri guru gobind singh ji in that sadhu bana not neela bana and vice versa.

Kam, my take on this subject of avtara ( I may be wrong) - I think when mahapursh does katha of sikh guru sahiban avtar being high, they do katha in intention of increasing sharda of jaigaso towards guru maharaj but mostly we misinterpret them based on your buddhi or surti. At bhramgyan level, if one want to discuss tat nichoor of all sargun avtars of vahiguroo- they cannot be described as higher or lower because tat nichor sidhant of gurmat is advait and other avtars came from nirgun paratama not *SATAN*. In Gurmat there is no concept of satan or separate entity, its all his tamasha, as sant jagjit singh ji harkhowale said in audio discourses its up to vahiguroo to decide how much kala in avtar is needed based on time(yugas)/sins so on and so forth but some elitist groups in the panth have hijacked this beautiful concept turn this into ferengi missionary sharia sikhi.

[unbreakable]

.

[Matheen]

Mr Kam,

This is one thing which fathoms me, previous avtars like the likes of Krishna cannot be considered as manifestations of God, then why do we consider Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji as a direct manifestation of God.

It's all explained in Sri Dasam Granth.....and we've discussed it on here a few times too. Previous Avtars all failed at the end and got themselves worshipped. Guru Sahib, despite being Akaal Purkh themselves, avoided this.

It is interesting to note that Nehklank and Mehdi will also succomb to that mistake.

Also, we can't classify Guru Ji amongst the other Avtars. It is degrading to their status. Guru Sahib is the giver of Mukti, the other Avtars were not mukt themselves. Only Akaal can give Mukti, hence Guru Sahib = Akaal.

Doesnt this go against the whole "science" of God, that Sri Mahakaal cannot take birth.

Why? We can't place limits on what Waheguru can and can't do. They are all-powerful and have no limits.

"Ajooni" means He is not subject to the cycle of 84Lakh. It also means He was always there, i.e. unborn.

No matter what we do, we can't know Akaal until we become Akaal.

[Matheen]

Here is another question, how do you do dhyaan on God? You can't see God! Am I making sense?

Guru sahib has told us that Shabad is one of Akaal Ji's forms. So we place our dhyaan on Gurmantar.

If you read Gurmukhi, I can direct you to the personal diary of Sant Isher Singh Ji who explain how to do this. (and the final stage as well - where there is no longer a difference between your Atma and Parmatma)

If you take Amrit, the 5 Pyare also explain how to do Simran, or if you know a real Mahapursh he/she can do the same.

[Guest]

It's all explained in Sri Dasam Granth.....and we've discussed it on here a few times too. Previous Avtars all failed at the end and got themselves worshipped. Guru Sahib, despite being Akaal Purkh themselves, avoided this.

Parts of bachitar natak and ram avtar is never meant to be be seen as disrespect to previous avtars - sri krishan and ram chandar ji or shouldn't be taken avtars themselves failed the movement that would imply vahiguroo sargun avtar have failed.. people have used it to push elitist sikhi... guru's intention is not to degard them at all personally, why he would degard them since they themselves took avtar of same vahiguroo that sri guru gobind singh ji did..sargun came from nirgun..main source becomes nirgun paratma...to say sargun avtars have failed in other words it means nirgun paratma didn't transcedent in perfection.

To understand shabad which talks about sri ram chandar ji or krishan ji in sri dasam granth.. lets look at the conditions of both dharams- islam and hinduism around sri guru gobind singh ji time- these dharam followers start idiolizing their prophets instead of focusing on the prophets message they start bickering among each other who's prophet is better? and started idiolizing their prophets mind you this happens at sikh dharam as well which is sad, . anyway coming back to the point, around that time, this was a condition of the people who represented hinduism and islam.

Guru maharaj looking at the sad state of people he deannouced this idiolizing of devi's/devta's and hari avtars like krishan/ram by reciting this tuk - Main Na Ganesha pritham maniyoo Kishan bishan kabhoo na Dhiayoo Kaan sune pehchan na tin ko Liv laagi mori pag unso" - I don't worship deities Krishna,Ganesha or Bishan

I have heard about them but do not recognise them. My saviour is One God, the almighty.

Now this is very important in the same sri dasam granth sahib bani- sri guru gobind singh ji warns his sikhs too regarding this of this grave danger that many hindus and muslims fell into idiolizing their prophet, he warned his sikhs by also reciting the tuk - aad ant eka avtara sohi sumjaieo guru hamera || that my guru is vahiguroo himself but when you look at sri guru gobind singh ji sahib life, his father was sri guru tegh bahudar sahib ji was his gyan data guru despite of that he said my guru is vahiguroo himself so that sikhs dont go astry idiolizing the deh or avtars. not only that in bachitar natak itself sri guru gobind singh ji went far as saying- those who call me god will burn in hell, one shouldnt take this tuk literally nor one should take that tuk as form of showing nirmata, guru ji had very clear message behind this, we should try to understand what guru ji is saying- guru ji again warning his sikhs not to idiolize me but focus on my message- shabad guru. Sri guru gobind singh ji is warning his sikhs not fo fall for this

Also to further reinforce my point, guru ji is avtar of vahiguroo we all agree so as krishan and ram. To future reinforce my point that krishan maharaj and ram chandar ji and sri krishan were avtars of vahiguroo.. sri guru gobind singh ji mentions this tuk in sri dasam granth sahib:

nirgun vahiguroo actualy transcedent in form of avtar in satyug/dvapar/treta from beginning of avtars birth to give gyan and benefit human kind we seem to ignore bhai gurdas ji varan and sri dasam patsah bachan in sri dasam granth sahib :

Jab Jab Arsat Hot Sansara ||

Tab Tab Deh Dharat Avtara He said in sri dasam bani again-

Then Bhai gurdas ji mentions: Jag Jag Satgur Dharie Avatari ||

In each age, the true guru will take avtar - nirgun vahiguroo transcedent itself into avtar.

Sri Guru gobind singh ji was very blunt in his message in his rachna- sri dasam guru granth sahib but that shouldnt be taken as form of disrespect to hindu gods but an reality of sargun avtars(which includes him as well). Here is another one

Ek Shiv bhai ek gyaie ek pher paie ram chandar kai avtar bhi anek hai ... (Sri Akaal Ustat)

He is telling us the reality of avtarhood that we(avtars) come go give the message of vahiguroo, its very important to follow the messsage not idiolize the messenger because avtars bodies were also made of 5 elements..one day they have to transcedent back to where they came from.

In essence, guru ji never criticized the krishan or ram he critized the people who idiolized them in above manner.

the other Avtars were not mukt themselves. Only Akaal can give Mukti, hence Guru Sahib = Akaal.

Really? Well may be according to your own understanding, not according to sant isher singh ji maharaj audio divans on and harkhowale vaadie mahapursh.

I would end my post with general quote:

"Half knowledge is more dangerous than no knowledge at all"

I would rather have no knowledge in Gurmat than having half knowledge, atleast i will not be guilty unintentionally or intentionally misinterperting Gurmat by putting my own mat infront.

[Matheen]

It isn't disrespect, it's what happened.

Krishan Ji himself said that he was God.

Please provide links to the Deevans of Sant Ji you mention.

[amardeep]

How could previous avatars give mukhti if they were not mukht themselves:

Page 981, Line 14

ਪਰਸ ਨਪਰਸ ਭਏ ਕੁਬਿਜਾ ਕਉ ਲੈ ਬੈਕੁੰਠਿ ਸਿਧਾਰੇ ॥੧॥

Krishna was pleased, and so he touched the hunch-back Kubija, and she was transported to the heavens. ||1||

Sri Ram Chander is called Dharam Dhamang many places in Dasam Bani meaning abode of dharma.

ਸੁਨੀ ਏਮ ਬਾਨੀ ਸੀਆ ਧਰਮ ਧਾਮੰ ॥ ਰਚਿਯੋ ਏਕ ਬਾਗੰ ਮਹਾਂ ਅਭਰਾਮੰ ॥

Listening to the orders of Ram, the abode of Dharma, a very beautiful garden was created;

and it is said about him:

परं पारगंता सिवं सि्धि रूपं ॥ बुधं बुधि दाता रिधं रि्ध कूपं ॥

He was the giver of salvation, blissful, adept-like, giver of intellect and the store-house of wealth of powers;

and

ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਜੂ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਜੈ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਭੈ ਹੈ ॥੭੦੬॥

प्रभू है ॥ अजू है ॥ अजै है ॥ अभै है ॥७०६॥

That Ram is God, Infinite, Unconquerable and Fearless.706.

ਅਜਾ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਤਾ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਲੈ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਜੈ ਹੈ ॥੭੦੭॥

अजा है ॥ अता है ॥ अलै है ॥ अजै है ॥७०७॥

He is the Lord of nature, he is Purusha, he is the whole world and higher Brahman.707.

Page623 Line 10

ਪਠਯੋ ਤੀਰ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੰ ਦੀਯੋ ਏਕ ਰਾਮੰ ॥ ਮਹਾਂ ਜੁੱਧ ਮਾਲੀ ਮਹਾਂ ਧਰਮ ਧਾਮੰ ॥

Ram gave him an arrow after reciting a mantra which was a great weapon from Ram, the abode of Dharma.

[Matheen]

Amardeep Ji, please give me the links to the lines you quote. Some of them don't mention Ram at all in the Gurmukhi versions......

Also, you have to place the usage of the word Ram (and other names) in context. Sometimes Guru Ji is referring to Waheguru, sometimes to Ram Chander. Sometimes there is a spelling difference, sometimes not.

[amardeep]

Sorry ji. The first one with Krishna is from Sri Guru Granth Sahib:

http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.g...=t&id=42080

The rest are from Dasam Bani, all from Ramavatar.

http://www.sridasam.org/dasam?Action=Page&...=t&id=89011

ਸੁਨੀ ਏਮ ਬਾਨੀ ਸੀਆ ਧਰਮ ਧਾਮੰ ॥ ਰਚਿਯੋ ਏਕ ਬਾਗੰ ਮਹਾਂ ਅਭਰਾਮੰ ॥

Listening to the orders of Ram, the abode of Dharma, a very beautiful garden was created;

परं पारगंता सिवं सि्धि रूपं ॥ बुधं बुधि दाता रिधं रि्ध कूपं ॥

He was the giver of salvation, blissful, adept-like, giver of intellect and the store-house of wealth of powers;

http://www.sridasam.org/dasam?Action=Page&...=t&id=88849

http://www.sridasam.org/dasam?Action=Page&p=624

ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਜੂ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਜੈ ਹੈ ॥ ਅਭੈ ਹੈ ॥੭੦੬॥

प्रभू है ॥ अजू है ॥ अजै है ॥ अभै है ॥७०६॥

That Ram is God, Infinite, Unconquerable and Fearless.706.

[Matheen]

You'll notice that Ram is not actually mentioned in some of those Tuks, despite what the translation says.

As for the Tuk from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, please listen to Katha by Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji Khalsa on gurmatveechar.com. They cover that Tuk in detail, just search by Ang no.