Jump to content

can someone post this on sikhsangat behalf of me?


Recommended Posts

can anyone post this on sikhsangat behalf of me?


Basically i have written an reply to bijla singh ji on some of the stuff he has to say on vedas under the thread above but my messages are not being approved by some of the moderators there for whatever reason.

reply as follows:

Here are some of the interesting observation in bijla singh post and topic on gurmat take on vedas:

1. People in this thread seems to make this is an vikayaran arths vs samparadiac arths issues when they talk about bijla singh post but this isn't seem to be case when you look at vikayaran arths done by prof sahib singh ji (master of vikayaran) you be suprised on this shabad, source- http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/1350.html

Prof sahib singh ji was considered vikayaran martand by tribal people living in the group/jathas etc, whenever his interpretation suited their mindset but when it doesn't they dump his interpretation, stick to their deep bigotry exist in their mind. This seem to be the case with bijla singh as well, one can search by his previous post.This has nothing to do vikayaran and samparadaic arths at all, but everything to do with this obsession with deep bigotry proving other dharam text wrong.

2. Bijla Singh seem to suggest that somehow gurbani rejects vedas on all levels, he seems to suggest or trying to prove that gurbani is consistent when it talks about status of vedas on all levels. During his attempts, he is actively looking for other teekakars gurbani interpretation of gur shabad listed above which matches with his twisted mindset of outright rejection of vedas. I like to stress that inconsistency does not automatically constitutes as contradiction which he likes to claim. From scholarly perspective inconsistency may have negative con nations but from bhramgyani perspective it has do with dealing with gurbani meanings on different levels.

In this case, very very simple example for the sangat, no one is claiming vedas is higher than sri guru granth sahib ji. But please try to understand the concept. There are many shabads in gurbani which rejects rituals in vedas and many on same token which does upma or are neutral of vedas. For our friend bijla singh because of his black and white approach in sikhi- hows that possible? for him thats contradiction, but he goes out for mission. He tries to attempt misinterpreting gurbani which talks about netural or upma of vedas and push them as rejection by his vikayaran skills off course taken off from mish-mash set of scholars that he looked for and trying to push that as gospel truth by using vikayaran as his token. umm nice try but vikayaran martand- prof sahib singh which your tribal groups have run off to many times to suit their agenda have himself rejected such interpretation.

This is what it comes down to, no one is denying gurbani don't do rejection of baseless rituals in vedas but that does not automatically becomes outright/total rejection of vedas may be in your black and white sikhi world but not in actual sikh dharam. The very fact vedas also has tat/atamgyan which is similar to advait gurmat sidhant is very proof of this. Here is the link where i have discussed this with bhai kulbir singh ji of tapoban in very great detail - http://www.tapoban.org/forum/read.php?1,4508,page=1 (warning you will find views which is totally against vedas/vedant or totaly for vedas/vedant, i don't support any of them).

How could guru sahib reject vedas totally/outright when tatgyan of gurmat sidhant is same as tatgyan of vedas which talks about nirgun samaie, upma of nirgun vahiguroo, shabad surat marg.? I can fill up the forum where atamgyan/tatgyan of vedas is very similar with atamgyan/tatgyan of gurbani but i ll let people do their own khoj on this. Only people with deep bigotry, insecurity or taliban type mullahs when try to compare two religious text, look for differences first then get caught up it in and forget about similarities or tatgyan of both religious text and base their so called comparative study on this.

Gurbani rejects vedas based on low levels of shariat baseless rituals but on higher level, gurbani accepts vedas tatgyan not just vedas but all holy books may have all baseless rituals but essence is same like mystic traditions of other dharams- gnostics in christianity, Islam has sufism/shiaism, Buddhism have zen, trvide buddhism, hinduism have advait vedanta, Ramanuja, Madhva, Nimbarka, Vallabha, Kashmiri Shaviasm, Gautamvaida.. what gives sri guru granth sahib bit of edge over them? few reasons - a) its very brand new dharam which gurbani being non altered compare to other scriptures despite of many failed attempted of internal bhausaria panthis. B) As some of other mystic traditions of dharams focus more on sargun upasana which only* sometimes can lead away from ultimate goal of nirgun, Gurmat straight focuses on nirgun via shabad marg and advait prem bhagti/gyan marg c) Gurbani have very straight- parchand tat gyan not clouded by shariat rules unlike other dharam scriptures which also have tat gyan but are clouded by shariat rituals( karam kaands).

All this above points we should be quite proud of, but having pride of above advantages of Gurmat over other mat is one thing but preserving this pride is another. Unfortunately, looking at the sad state of affairs of sikhs these days, it appears they are making the panth more in dubta whether its do with bhausaria panthis creating unnecessary doubts over gurbani in sri guru granth sahib ji and sri dasam granth sahib ji, bhai gurdas ji varan..sometimes even rejection or to do with idiolizing their tribalism over the ultimate goal.

At this point where it stands we are failing to preserve this pride of Gurmat but instead more interested in bhandi parchar, we have made putting down other dharams without reading their mystic traditions as our panthic mahan seva. I am sure Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji is waiting for us to give us sairopa on the other end.

3. This might be my lame observation but i ll share it anyway. But i been following this topic. This was first posted in general discussion for purposely extreme exposure to the sangat by bijla singh but then it was moved by sane moderator of this forum to gurmat section but one would think thats where it belongs but again with less than 24 hrs it was moved back to general discussion for extreme exposure but then back to gurmat section. I will not and i cannot convince bijla singh ji of his deep bigotry views against other dharam and his attempt to make sikhi typical like another semetic religion but i ll stand by against his views. I will make sure readers, especially youths read both side of the debate and decide it for themselves than falling prey to any kind of brainwashing, black and white sikhi.

I ll post more detail response on his vikayaran arths in next couple of days. Thats it for now.

Anandmangal !

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.

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.

  • Create New...