Terms Used In Sri Dasam Granth

[navjot2]

He used the word siva for akal purakh who was there before Durga, is there and will always be there.

when was 'before Durga'? And this same Shivaa (and for third time its Shivaa not Shiva) is living on Mount Kailash and rides a lion. Have you even looked at Chandi di Vaar?

Durga- Hindus would say Durga will always be there too, dont you think?

[navjot2]

Navjot: how would you write Siva in Gurmukhi? Also, sri Gur Katha has not suddenly appeared out of nowhere. It's been known of in traditional taksals for a very long time, just never published or translated. Just because you haven't heard of it before doesn't make it suspicious.

so you can read Gurbani eh? welldone! So you know that theres only one 'S' sound, unlike in Devanagri? Very good! So you also know that the word that has been used has a 'kanna' (half line vowel sign) so the word is actually Sivaa?

If you want to know how 'S' becomes 'Sh' go ask your 'santhia' masters at your taksalis who are teaching people such things.

By the way the first post is saying some text came out of nowhere recently with new information not me.

[navjot2]

He wrote Siri Gur Katha

granth which remained hidden from the panth until recently. Even today most

of the Sikhs are unaware of its existence. Bhai Sahib wrote much more but it

is believed that due to wars and persecution it was lost. What remained

stayed in the family of a gursikh.

Luckily, what remained is perhaps the most crucial information Sikhs need

today...

there you go Matheen!

[singh2]

And the Shiva you think is being descrbied in Chandi di Vaar is Akal and is someone different from the Shiva mentioned elsewhere in Gurbani? Strange! And how do you determine which is which? Whatever suits your fancy?

--

siva in Gurbani always refer to akal purkah who is formless and is unborn. below siva refres to akal purakh

ਸਿਵ ਸਿਵ ਕਰਤ ਸਗਲ ਕਰ ਜੋਰਹਿ ਸਰਬ ਮਇਆ ਠਾਕੁਰ ਤੇਰੀ ਦੋਹੀ

Siva siva karat sagal kar jorahi sarab maiaa thaakur teree dohee

Everyone calls upon You with their palms pressed together, chanting Your Name, "Siva Siva". O Merciful Lord, everyone cries out for Your Help

ang 207 SGGS ji.

Term siva is also used for Hindu demi God Shiva but he will appear in context of other Hindu demi gods. So it is easy to identify him. Guru ji does not leave anything to someone's fancy otherwise RSS mafia would have eaten us by now.

See below is ref. to Demi god siva

ਸਵ ਬਿਰੰਚਿ ਅਸੁਰ ਸੁਰ ਜੇਤੇ ਕਾਲ ਅਗਨਿ ਮਹਿ ਜਰਤੇ

Siva biranchi asur sur jete kaal agan mahi jarate

Shiva, Brahma, angels and demons, all burn in the fire of death

(ang 1267).

What you quoted also- Yes those words refer to Krishna. Otherwise how is Akal Purakh, who I assume is Nirgun, being described as with a Flute (murraray) or the slayer of demon Madhu? Isnt that sakhi fo Krishna slaying Madhu?... Is it perhaps that It is Akal who is in Essence Krishna? And vice versa? GASP

!

Guru ji uses science here describing someone who is not human in terms of human characteristics.

Hence and not to krishna of bidar. Read whole shabd and you will know.

For example in SGGS ji guru sahib writes for akal purakh

Terai bankey loein dunt rasala

Sohney nuk nuk lumrai vala

kanchan kaya sohney ki dhala---

(Your eyes are beautiful and your teeth are delighting

------)

First you are saying that Shivaa is refering to Akal Purakh and not Durga even though it is a name of Durga and in the text Itself it describes this same 'Shivaa' living on mount Kailash, who rides a lion. So you cannot run away that this Shivaa is that same Chandi who is wielding the sword (i.e. Durga

).

Invocation says it is God who created them and Guru sahib salutes the greatness of God who is formless. in shakat sect of Hinduism Durga is absolute god and there is no God above her. Guru ji says that it is God who created her. Guru ji sings praises of God and not of Durga. Durga is a creation of God. She is created for a specific purpose and has no independent potential. There lies the difference

To Hindus Durga is: 1. union of shiva and shakti (where Shiva means Akal and Shakti means power of nature) 2. the protector of the Devas (which is what is happening in the story- Indra has sought out a Devi named Shivaa who lives on Mount Kailash). 3. Power of Shiva (what you call Akal). (That is my understanding anyway).

In sikhism akal purakh is supreme who creates and keeps these demi gods under control. For sikhs shakti of akal is represented by Bhagauti symbolised by sword or sarab loh ,right in the beginning of composition when Guru ji writes

sri bhagauti ji sahai

also read below

ਨਮਸਕਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੜਗ ਕੋ ਕਰੋਂ ਸੁ ਹਿਤੁ ਚਿਤੁ ਲਾਇ ॥

नमसकार स्री खड़ग को करों सु हितु चितु लाइ ॥

I salute the Glorious SWORD with all my heart`s affection.

ਪੂਰਨ ਕਰੋਂ ਗਰੰਥ ਇਹੁ ਤੁਮ ਮੁਹਿ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਹਾਇ ॥੧॥

पूरन करों गरंथ इहु तुम मुहि करहु सहाइ ॥१॥

I shall complete this Granth only if Thou Helpest me. I.

Dasam granth

So you can say make up whatever little explanations you want (which frankly anyone can do, be they RSS, Kala Afghana, Charlie Chaplins descendents etc etc) it doesnt mean anything. How are you going to run away from the fact that here he has used the word Shivaa, given the way it is used in the rest of the text?

Nothing is left to misinterpretation. In the beginning is invocation by writer. That invocation is addressed to god who is infinite, formless, unborn for example

स्वैया

SWAYYA

ਆਦਿ ਅਪਾਰ ਅਲੇਖ ਅਨੰਤ ਅਕਾਲ ਅਭੇਖ ਅਲਖ ਅਨਾਸਾ ॥

आदि अपार अलेख अनंत अकाल अभेख अलख अनासा ॥

The Lord is Primal, Infinite, Account less, Boundless, Deathless, Garbless, Incomprehensible and Eternal.

Chandi Charitra ukti bilas

Then there is war episode and in the end again is belief system of poet. So whole composition is to be read as one. Poet is not going to change his belief in the end. His eulogy is to formless God in the beginning and is to formless God in the end.

Edited August 9, 2009 by singh2

[Matheen]

So you also know that the word that has been used has a 'kanna' (half line vowel sign) so the word is actually Sivaa?

Don't patronise me.

How would you write 'siva' as opposed to 'sivaa', since you're making a big deal of this. Guru Sahib has made it very clear when they are referring to deities and when they are using a particular name to refer to God. I guess you choose to ignore all that and see what you want.

The granth was known of for a long time, but not by the mainstream.

Edited August 8, 2009 by Matheen

[singh2]

when was 'before Durga'? And this same Shivaa (and for third time its Shivaa not Shiva) is living on Mount Kailash and rides a lion. Have you even looked at Chandi di Vaar?

Durga- Hindus would say Durga will always be there too, dont you think?

Guru ji is writing and asking boon from that siva who was there when this world did not exist. So Durga did not exist either that time.

Demi gods are creation of that akal purakh and they existed in space an time. They vanished when death came. Akal takhat is going to stay here forever. Guru ji does not ask boon from such demi Gods.

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥

खंडा प्रिथमै साज कै जिन सभ सैसारु उपाइआ ॥

At first the Lord created the double-edged sword and then He created the whole world.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥

ब्रहमा बिसनु महेस साजि कुदरति दा खेलु रचाइ बणाइआ ॥

He created Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva and then created the play of Nature.

ਸਿੰਧੁ ਪਰਬਤ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਬਿਨੁ ਥੰਮ੍ਹਾ ਗਗਨਿ ਰਹਾਇਆ ॥

सिंधु परबत मेदनी बिनु थम्हा गगनि रहाइआ ॥

He created the oceans, mountains and the earth made the sky stable without columns.

ਸਿਰਜੇ ਦਾਨੋ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਤਿਨ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬਾਦੁ ਰਚਾਇਆ ॥

सिरजे दानो देवते तिन अंदरि बादु रचाइआ ॥

He created the demons and gods and caused strife between them

ਤੈ ਹੀ ਦੁਰਗਾ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੈ ਦੈਤਾ ਦਾ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਾਇਆ ॥

तै ही दुरगा साजि कै दैता दा नासु कराइआ ॥

O Lord! By creating Durga, Thou hast caused the destruction of demons.

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਰਾਮ ਲੈ ਨਾਲ ਬਾਣਾ ਦਹਸਿਰੁ ਘਾਇਆ ॥

तैथों ही बलु राम लै नाल बाणा दहसिरु घाइआ ॥

Rama received power from Thee and he killed Ravana with arrows.

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਲੈ ਕੰਸੁ ਕੇਸੀ ਪਕੜਿ ਗਿਰਾਇਆ ॥

तैथों ही बलु क्रिसन लै कंसु केसी पकड़ि गिराइआ ॥

Krishna received power from Thee and he threw down Kansa by catching his hair.

ਬਡੇ ਬਡੇ ਮੁਨਿ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਕਈ ਜੁਗ ਤਿਨੀ ਤਨੁ ਤਾਇਆ ॥

बडे बडे मुनि देवते कई जुग तिनी तनु ताइआ ॥

The great sages and gods, even practising great austerities for several ages;

ਕਿਨੀ ਤੇਰਾ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ ॥੨॥

किनी तेरा अंतु न पाइआ ॥२॥

None could know Thy end.2.

Vaar sri Bhagauti ji ki

Edited August 8, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

so you can read Gurbani eh? welldone! So you know that theres only one 'S' sound, unlike in Devanagri? Very good! So you also know that the word that has been used has a 'kanna' (half line vowel sign) so the word is actually Sivaa?

If you want to know how 'S' becomes 'Sh' go ask your 'santhia' masters at your taksalis who are teaching people such things.

By the way the first post is saying some text came out of nowhere recently with new information not me.

Guru sahib writes about these demi Gods in Jaap sahib

ਦੇਵ ਭੇਵ ਨ ਜਾਨਈ ਜਿਹ ਬੇਦ ਅਉਰ ਕਤੇਬ ॥:

Dev bhev na jaanayee jih beda or kateb:

The mystery of God is unknown to any demigod and it is also indescribable by the scriptures -- Vedas, Qran, Bible, and all others (Guru Gobind Singh Jee, Jaap Sahib )

[navjot2]

Don't patronise me.

How would you write 'siva' as opposed to 'sivaa',

how am i supposed to answer such an obvious question without being patronising?

SIVA= SIHARI -SASSA-VAVVA

SIVAA= SIHARI- SASSA-VAVVA-KANNA (like i already explained)

Edited August 8, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

some points ot answer what you have brought up:

1. at the beggining on the Vaar it says it is Bhagauti's Vaars. I.e. Bhagauti is the same Durga described in the text. ( Which is the same bhagauti that appears in the Ardas, itself lifted from this part of Dasam Granth).

2. Look at page 280 of Dasam Granth, this is part of the Vaars. Here Durga sends Shiva (spelt as Shiv) as her messenger to warn the demon. Shiv decribes Durga as Jagatmata. Now think back to the end of Chaupai where it says 'kirpa karo hum par jagmata'. So these are two different Jagmatas? Also note here that the spelling Shiva has appeared, as contrasted with Shivaa. Because Shivaa is a distinct word, refering to Durga ('Parabhram ka shakti' as Kahna Singh says- so ven that fanatic relents on this point).

For some bizarre reason you are still not relenting that the word is spelt Shivaa and not Shiva.

now look:

ਨਮੋ ਅੰਬਿਕਾ ਤੋਤਲਾ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਵਾਨੀ ॥੧੩॥੨੩੨॥

O Ambika ! o Bhavani ! I salute Thee. (note the word Namo- as in Salute). ( page289)

These are names of the Goddesses. So they are essenitally Akal Itself. Akal is their essence.

Now look this exlplains the differentiation between Kaal and Bhavani:

ਪ੍ਰਥਮ ਕਾਲ ਸਭ ਜਗ ਕੋ ਤਾਤਾ ॥

First of all the Lord as KAL is the primal farther of the whole universe;

ਤਾਤੇ ਭਥੋ ਤੇਜ ਬਿਖਯਾਤਾ ॥

And from him emanated the Powerful Lustre;

ਸੋਈ ਭਵਾਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਹਾਈ ॥

The same Lord was considered as Bhavani,

(That was given the name of Bhavani).

ਜਿਨ ਸਿਗਰੀ ਯਹ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਉਪਾਈ ॥੨੯॥

Who created the whole world.29. (page 422)

Now look here to see the 'rider of the lion', who fought the battle, being equated with the Lords Power Itself, and as the Granter of Boons:

from page 295:

ਪਲੰਗੀ ਪਵੰਗੀ ਨਮੋ ਚਰਚਿਤੰਗੀ ॥

O the rider of the steed-like lion;

ਨਮੋ ਭਾਵਨੀ ਭੂਤ ਹੰਤਾ ਭੜਿੰਗੀ ॥

O Bhavani of beautiful limbs! Thou art the destroyer of all engaged in the war.

ਨਮੋ ਭੀਮਿ ਰੂਪਾ ਨਮੋ ਲੋਕ ਮਾਤਾ ॥

O the mother of the universe having large body!

ਭਵੀ ਭਾਵਨੀ ਭਵਿਖਯਾਤਾ ਬਿਧਾਤਾ ॥੩੫॥੨੫੪॥

Thou art the power of Yama, the giver of the fruit of actions performed in the world, Thou art also the power of Brahma! I salute Thee.35.254.

ਪ੍ਰਭਾ ਪੂਰਨੀ ਪਰਮ ਰੂਪੰ ਪਵਿਤ੍ਰੀ ॥

O the most pure power of God!

ਪਰੀ ਪੋਖਣੀ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੀ ਗਾਇਤ੍ਰੀ ॥

Thou art the maya and Gayatri, sustaining all.

ਜਟੀ ਜੁਆਲ ਪਰਚੰਡ ਮੁੰਡੀ ਚਮੁੰਡੀ ॥

Thou art Chamunda, the wearer of the necklace of head, Thou art also the fire of the matted locks of Shiva;

ਬਰੰ ਦਾਇਣੀ ਦੁਸਟ ਖੰਡੀ ਅਖੰਡੀ ॥੩੬॥੨੫੫॥

Thou art the donor of boons and destroyer of tyrants, but Thou Thyself ever remain indivisible.36.255.

ਸਭੈ ਸੰਤ ਉਬਾਰੀ ਬਰੰ ਬਯੂਹ ਦਾਤਾ ॥

O the Saviour of all the saints and the donor of boons to all;

ਨਮੋ ਤਾਰਣੀ ਕਾਰਣੀ ਲੋਕ ਮਾਤਾ ॥

The one who ferries across all over the terrible sea of life, the primary cause of all causes, O Bhavani! The mother of the universe.

ਨਮਸਤਯੰ ਨਮਸਤਯੰ ਨਮਸਤਯੰ ਭਵਾਨੀ ॥

I salute Thee again and again, O the manifestation of the sword!

ਸਦਾ ਰਾਖਿ ਲੈ ਮੁਹਿ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਕੈ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਨੀ ॥੩੭॥੨੫੬॥

Protect me ever with Thy Grace.37.256.

Note that the epithets are in the feminine, e.g. Paarabrahmee! why didnt He just write Parabrahma?

also note how all these things are equated= the Devi on the Lion is that same Parabrahmee.

3. So just like you say all demigods are subordinate to Akal, same way Durga devotees say all demigods are subordinate to Her, and all Krishna devotees say all demigods are subordinate to Him. Its essentially the same thing. These are also forms of the One. People use their language to appraoch and describe It. It seems to me that Gurbani uses all of these forms and limits itself to none. By saying Akal we speak of him as Unconditioned. But dont forget that in Dasam Granth epithet Mahakal is also used- which Shaivas and Tibetan Buddhists also use.

[navjot2]

Guru sahib writes about these demi Gods in Jaap sahib

ਦੇਵ ਭੇਵ ਨ ਜਾਨਈ ਜਿਹ ਬੇਦ ਅਉਰ ਕਤੇਬ ॥:

Dev bhev na jaanayee jih beda or kateb:

The mystery of God is unknown to any demigod and it is also indescribable by the scriptures -- Vedas, Qran, Bible, and all others (Guru Gobind Singh Jee, Jaap Sahib )

of course. same thing is reiterated in Guru Granth, right from the start in Japji. This is not in dispute.

[amardeep]

SIVA= SIHARI -SASSA-VAVVA

does'nt that say Siv?

[amardeep]

So what is your view on this subject navjot? Do you think the bani's in Dasam Granth worships the devi devtas or+?

Edited August 8, 2009 by amardeep

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all!

The true Guru is singing many Names. The Muktee is possible by singing One of those Names.

Ignorant go on rejecting these Names claiming that they are wise.

Singh2 Jee,

You revere Dasam Granth Sahib Jee.

Have you ever thought what when its wisdom showers on you?

Balbir Singh

[singh2]

some points ot answer what you have brought up:

1. at the beggining on the Vaar it says it is Bhagauti's Vaars. I.e. Bhagauti is the same Durga described in the text. ( Which is the same bhagauti that appears in the Ardas, itself lifted from this part of Dasam Granth).

If you show me bhagauti is same as Durga, i will rest my case. Bahaguti is power of akal purakh symbolised by sword.

In vaar sri bhgauti ji ki there is a line

Lai Bhaguti durg sah varjagan bhari

( Durga took fire emitting sword and fought heroically)

If Durga is bhagauti how can she take hold of bhagauti.

. Look at page 280 of Dasam Granth, this is part of the Vaars. Here Durga sends Shiva (spelt as Shiv) as her messenger to warn the demon. Shiv decribes Durga as Jagatmata. Now think back to the end of Chaupai where it says 'kirpa karo hum par jagmata'. So these are two different Jagmatas? Also note here that the spelling Shiva has appeared, as contrasted with Shivaa. Because Shivaa is a distinct word, refering to Durga ('Parabhram ka shakti' as Kahna Singh says- so ven that fanatic relents on this point).

Please refer to the subject verse from Chandi charitra here.

In Chaupai sahib jag mata is a reference to God of the world or supreme lord and not to any deity. Just because shiv ji says Durga as jag mata ( Was she not wife of shiv ji) Jag mata does not mean Durga everywhere.

To know it proper read invocation of Charitropakhayan and you will know what jag mata Guru sahib is talking about. The line from invocation is given below

Tu hi Jog maya, Tu hi bak bani

Tu hi aap rupa , tu hi sri Bhavani

Tu hi bishan tu brahm tu rudar raje

Tu hi bisav mata sada jai biraje

( You are mother of Yoga you are sarswati

You are rupa you are bhavani

You are Vishnu, Shiva Brahma and

ever present in the form of Mother of word)

Tu hi Dev Tu Daint tai jash upaye

Tu Turk Hindu Jagat main banaye

( you are the creator of Demi gods, demons

Turk,Hindus of this world)

The above leaves no doubt who is jag mata in the end of Chartiropakhayan. It is no durga but akal purakh himself.

Where does Kahan singh says so.Give reference. kahan singh says that Bhagauti is not Durga.

For some bizarre reason you are still not relenting that the word is spelt Shivaa and not Shiva.

I go by what is written in Dasam granth. It is siva and not shiva or shivaa.

These are names of the Goddesses. So they are essenitally Akal Itself. Akal is their essence.

It is all praise of akal and not any Goddess. It means God manifests in all of us including these deities. It does not mean that we or these deities become akal purakh. in other words God manifests in all of us and we are part of him. But we do not become Him. Akal purakh is creator of crores of such Goddesses.Read below

ਕਹੂੰ ਦੇਵਬਾਨੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਸਾਰਦਾ ਭਵਾਨੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਮੰਗਲਾ ਮ੍ਰਿੜਾਨੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਸਿਆਮ ਕਹੂੰ ਸੇਤ ਹੋ ॥

कहूं देवबानी कहूं सारदा भवानी कहूं मंगला म्रिड़ानी कहूं सिआम कहूं सेत हो ॥

Somewhere Thou art the divine speech, somewhere Sarada and Bhavani, somewhere Durga, the trampler of corpses, somewhere in black colour and somewhere in white colour.

Now look this exlplains the differentiation between Kaal and Bhavani:

The subject verse says that Lord in the form of kal created this universe and then parkirti. Here bhavani is refrence to parkirti.It is quite clear in next verse

ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਤਿਨ ਕਹਾ ॥

प्रिथमै ओअंकार तिन कहा ॥

First of all, He uttered `Oankar`:

ਸੋ ਧੁਨ ਪੂਰ ਜਗਤ ਮੋ ਰਹਾ ॥

सो धुन पूर जगत मो रहा ॥

And the sound of Onkar` Pervanded the whole world,

ਤਾ ਤੇ ਜਗਤ ਭਯੋ ਬਿਸਥਾਰਾ ॥

ता ते जगत भयो बिसथारा ॥

There was expansion of the whole world,

ਪੁਰਖ ਪ੍ਰਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਜਬ ਦੁਹੂ ਬਿਚਾਰਾ ॥੩੦॥

पुरख प्रक्रित जब दुहू बिचारा ॥३०॥

From the union of Purusha and Prakriti.30.

Chaubis avtar

Kal purakh ki deh main

Kotak bishan mahesh

(In the body of kal purakh there are

crores of Vishnu and shivas)

Kot Inder brahma kite

rav sis krore jalesh

( There are crores of Indras, Brahmas

Suns , moons and varuna devta in His body)

Vishnu avtar

3. So just like you say all demigods are subordinate to Akal, same way Durga devotees say all demigods are subordinate to Her, and all Krishna devotees say all demigods are subordinate to Him. Its essentially the same thing. These are also forms of the One. People use their language to appraoch and describe It. It seems to me that Gurbani uses all of these forms and limits itself to none. By saying Akal we speak of him as Unconditioned. But dont forget that in Dasam Granth epithet Mahakal is also used- which Shaivas and Tibetan Buddhists also use.

They are not the same thing.In sikhism these demi gods are subordinate to akal purakh.They do not have independent potential. Mahakal in Dasam Granth does refer to great God of destruction. In tantrik hinduism maha kal is absolute God in the form of deity shiva. there is a big big difference. Sikh philosophy of creation is different from hinduism . Hinduism believes trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and shiva creates , sustains and destroys creation. Sikhism rejects that. In sikhism God whose attributes are in mool mantra creates, sustains and destroys creation.

Edited August 9, 2009 by singh2

[The Khalsa Fauj]

This thread is wicked. Some people seem confused. Others seem lost. Others seem to have an agenda. All in all, both sides are trying to shed light based on their own understandings. Many don't know aarths of Gurbani shabads. It is best to discuss Dasam Granth in public than online. Online will never reach a solution.

Madsoodan, etc. etc. have their explanatons while Dasam Granth, Shiv, Shiva, Mahakaal have their own explanations. Some rely on old granths, some rely on dedhdhari babas, some rely on manmat, some rely on Hindu granths, some rely on fake rehatnamas, some rely on brahmani granths, some rely on karamkaadi sakhis, true ones rely on Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Hamoo Ko Bharosa Guru Granth Maharaaj Pay

[singh2]

This thread is wicked. Some people seem confused. Others seem lost. Others seem to have an agenda. All in all, both sides are trying to shed light based on their own understandings. Many don't know aarths of Gurbani shabads. It is best to discuss Dasam Granth in public than online. Online will never reach a solution.

Madsoodan, etc. etc. have their explanatons while Dasam Granth, Shiv, Shiva, Mahakaal have their own explanations. Some rely on old granths, some rely on dedhdhari babas, some rely on manmat, some rely on Hindu granths, some rely on fake rehatnamas, some rely on brahmani granths, some rely on karamkaadi sakhis, true ones rely on Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Hamoo Ko Bharosa Guru Granth Maharaaj Pay

This is a typical example of two sides who msiinterpret Dasam granth.

One side says that dEvi/devtas described in Dasam granth are akal purakh

and Guru sahib venerates them.

The otherside rejects Dasam Granth altogether.

Both are wrong.

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Inder Singh is right? Why doesn't Inder Singh come prove his point in Toronto?

[navjot2]

SIVA= SIHARI -SASSA-VAVVA

does'nt that say Siv?

the short 'a' sound (called 'mukta' in panjabi) does not have a signifier in Gurmukhi script but is implied. Though in modern speech it is usually not pronounced at the end of words.

no offence but anyone with a basic understanding of panjabi (i.e. a school kid) would know this.

[navjot2]

You say "Bahaguti is power of akal purakh symbolised by sword". so why has Akal purakh's power been differnetiated from Akal Purakh? and personified as a feminine word for sword? (that is to say why are we asking for help from Akal Purakhs power- because it has been differentiated from Akal Purakh himself!). I.e. it represents His Shakti. Now what I dont understand is why you find a sword is an ok representation of this but Durga is unacceptable as a symbol of this to you? You are just playing wordgames, i.e. using the word power rather than Shakti.

Your translation doesnt correlate with what is written. My understanding that here Bhagauti refers to Chandi- who sprang forth from Durga. Chandi is an aspect of Durga. Earlier before this part we see Chandi being described as fighting alongside Durga and actually striking the killer attacks (page 307).

and why is it, that given the length of this Vaar, only at this instance is the 'sword' called Bhagauti, which is right near the end of this section?

Also is this the same word 'Bhagauti' as mentioned in Sukhmani, that Nabha says means devotee? So Bhagauti acoording to your ideology means both 'sword' and 'devotee'??? The context it is used in Sukhmani doesnt seem to imply it can mean sword.

Also you are saying this is a different Jagmata. But at the end of this text look what the Author has written:

ਚਉਦਹ ਲੋਕਾਂ ਛਾਇਆ ਜਸੁ ਜਗਮਾਤ ਦਾ ॥

"The praise of the mother of the universe spread over all the fourteen worlds." (325)

The above is not the speech of Shiv but the author.

also who is the 'ek maee' who 'jagat viaee' in Japji? Is it not the One Shakti, or MoolaMaya?

"Please refer to the subject verse from Chandi charitra here." ??? not sure what you mean here sorry. i gave you the page number didnt I?

Your quote from 'Charitropakhayan' the words are 'Tu Hi' the 'hi' is emphasis. So I would say that Guru is saying that 'You ARE Joga Maya'- i.e. that Akal Purakh is the Essence. There is Only One- and these are His Forms. I am not disputing that the text explains that Devas are his creation ('saaji').

Look let me try and illustrate. Look at Guru Nanak there are two ways of understanding him- 1. as Akaal's servant 2. As Paramata Himself. Arent both froms expressed in SGGS? Guru Nanak is in Essence the Lord Himself. do you see? However if you say to some people that Guru Nanak is the Lord, they will get confused, be cause they think of him as a man. But the devotee first sees Guru Nanak as a man, then as a Guru (Guru being aspect of God Itself) then as a form of God Itself. But also then Guru Nanak is a worshipper of the Lord. He is both!

The Manifest, is in essence He Himself, but He Himself is Unmanifest (Akaal). Manifest such a Krishna, Bhavani, Shiva are none but He Himself.

Now if Gurus can praise/venerate a devotee, why cant they praise a goddess who here is being described (in my opinion) as the Ultimate Devotee of Akal (hence the name Bhagauti)?

One of your ideological buddys has graffitied Nabhas explanation of 'Shivaa' on Wikipedia. You can go search it out, Im not polluting my intellect by reading though his nonesense.

"I go by what is written in Dasam granth. It is siva and not shiva or shivaa." You are deluded. I already copied and pasted for you and you can go look for yourself. The text says Sivaa (which is Shivaa). If you want to remain in denial its your choice.

You can keep imagining explanations. The text I quoted says 'Namo' which means I salute you and then a Goddesses Naam. That is what is actually written. You can imagine differently if it makes you feel better.

The word in the verse you quoted is Prakriti. The word is verse I quoted is Bhavani. Now look where the Author Himself has chosen to use Prakriti and where He hase chosen to use Bhavani. He Himself wrote it there. But you chose to interpret or substitute the word with whatever you want to see, which is ridiculous. If he wanted to mean prakriti he would use that word, but the fact is he used the word Bhavani.

"They are not the same thing.In sikhism these demi gods are subordinate to akal purakh.They do not have independent potential. Mahakal in Dasam Granth does refer to great God of destruction. In tantrik hinduism maha kal is absolute God in the form of deity shiva. there is a big big difference. Sikh philosophy of creation is different from hinduism . Hinduism believes trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and shiva creates , sustains and destroys creation. Sikhism rejects that. In sikhism God whose attributes are in mool mantra creates, sustains and destroys creation"

No, Krishna-Vaishnavas belive that all deities are subordinate to Krishna- go refer to the BHagavad Gita. Likewise Shaivas believe that all dieties are suboridnate to Shiva. They has two aspects of their Vishnu/Shiva- those that refer to the part of the trinity and those that refer to that Above this trinity. Why has Guru Nanak seen fit to use Vaishnava signifiers like Hari, Raam, Narayana for Akal? Or let me guess do those words actually mean 'something else' and he just used them- well why did he use those specific words? If they wanted to use only Akaal for everything they would have.

btw sikhism doesnt necessarily disagree that Bhahma Vishnu Shiva trinity, but it says they are not Supreme. Arent they mentioned in Japji in this respect? Well I do not know what kind of bizarre imagined interpretation syou have of these things.

Basically the import of the above statement if your is that you are anti-hindu, this is your starting point, and all you reasoning is based upon this point. likewise you want to project this on Sikhi. You are Nabha-fanatic ka chela.

Edited August 9, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

You people just like to project your own ideas on Gurbani. You dont have the guts to just shutup and let Guruji express Himself. Rather you get scared at the mention of a 'hindu' word and then go running to some steek or kathak to go get some kind of excuse or explanation for its presence. You basically fixated on the word Akaal because Hindus dont tend to use it much- but Gurus have not used it much either.

You are not prepaired for a second to try and understand what Durga signifies. Nihungs have no problem talking baout Chandi, Durga etc because they live the warrior lifestyle, so they know what She signifies.

Guru ji has chosen to use a certain word at a certain place, yet you are running of to say 'oh but he really means some other word' !

Edited August 9, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

This thread is wicked. Some people seem confused. Others seem lost. Others seem to have an agenda. All in all, both sides are trying to shed light based on their own understandings. Many don't know aarths of Gurbani shabads. It is best to discuss Dasam Granth in public than online. Online will never reach a solution.

Madsoodan, etc. etc. have their explanatons while Dasam Granth, Shiv, Shiva, Mahakaal have their own explanations. Some rely on old granths, some rely on dedhdhari babas, some rely on manmat, some rely on Hindu granths, some rely on fake rehatnamas, some rely on brahmani granths, some rely on karamkaadi sakhis, true ones rely on Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Hamoo Ko Bharosa Guru Granth Maharaaj Pay

Why does Gurbani need aarths/ externally explained or 'interpreted'? are you too scared to take it as it is? how many times did i ask you to explain your understanding of vyakaaran and you ran off. what exactly are you arths based on?

what is so special about discussing it in person that you cannot say online?

why does Madhusudan etc need an explanation?

Clearly you dont rely on Guru Granth if you are hiding behind aarths. You are some Kathak ka chela.

And what exactly have you contributed to this discussion before making these claims? oh look, nothing!

Edited August 9, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

So what is your view on this subject navjot? Do you think the bani's in Dasam Granth worships the devi devtas or+?

Amardeep I agree with what Balbir said directly after your post.

Edited August 9, 2009 by navjot2

[singh2]

Your translation doesnt correlate with what is written. My understanding that here Bhagauti refers to Chandi- who sprang forth from Durga. Chandi is an aspect of Durga. Earlier before this part we see Chandi being described as fighting alongside Durga and actually striking the killer attacks (page 307

).

Chandi is an aspect of Durga. But Bhagauti is not durga. Markandey purana uses more than 100 names for Durga but Bhagauti is not one of those. Can you support your assertion by quoting from Dasam granth.

and why is it, that given the length of this Vaar, only at this instance is the 'sword' called Bhagauti, which is right near the end of this section?

Also is this the same word 'Bhagauti' as mentioned in Sukhmani, that Nabha says means devotee? So Bhagauti acoording to your ideology means both 'sword' and 'devotee'??? The context it is used in Sukhmani doesnt seem to imply it can mean sword.

Bhagauti comes in the beginning of many other Dasam granth compositions as well and these compositions have nothing to do with Durga. It is there in the beginning of Gian probodh also.For example

ਸ਼ਸਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਮ ਮਾਲਾ

शसत्र नाम माला

SHATRA NAM MALA

ੴ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜੀ ਕੀ ਫਤਹ ॥

ੴ स्री वाहिगुरू जी की फतह ॥

The Lord is One and the Victory is of the True Guru.

ਅਥ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਸ਼ਸਤ੍ਰ ਨਾਮ ਮਾਲਾ ਪੁਰਾਣ ਲਿਖਯਤੇ ॥

अथ स्री शसत्र नाम माला पुराण लिखयते ॥

Shastra-Nama Mala Purana (the Rosary of the Names of weapons) is now composed

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਜੀ ਸਹਾਇ ॥ ਪਾਤਿਸ਼ਾਹੀ ॥੧੦॥

स्री भगउती जी सहाइ ॥ पातिशाही ॥१०॥

With the support of the primal power by the Tenth King.

Your quote from 'Charitropakhayan' the words are 'Tu Hi' the 'hi' is emphasis. So I would say that Guru is saying that 'You ARE Joga Maya'- i.e. that Akal Purakh is the Essence. There is Only One- and these are His Forms. I am not disputing that the text explains that Devas are his creation ('saaji')

The Manifest, is in essence He Himself, but He Himself is Unmanifest (Akaal). Manifest such a Krishna, Bhavani, Shiva are none but He Himself. .

God is manifest in his creation. He is manifest in you , me and others in the same way as he was manifest in Krishna, bhavani, durga. But we as well as Durga,krishna do not become akal purakh. In sikhism God is formless and his attributes are given in Mool mantra. He does not incarnate as avtars.

Now if Gurus can praise/venerate a devotee, why cant they praise a goddess who here is being described (in my opinion) as the Ultimate Devotee of Akal (hence the name Bhagauti)?

Same Words will mean differenlty per context of use. Bhagauti means devotee some place as in SGGS and same word means power of akal purakh in Dasam granth. For example Ram is used for akal purakh and Ram is also used for Ram of ayodhaya. both are to be interpereted per context.

One of your ideological buddys has graffitied Nabhas explanation of 'Shivaa' on Wikipedia. You can go search it out, Im not polluting my intellect by reading though his nonesense.

We have dealt with siva already. if you want to discuss this put the quote instead of passing unwarranted remarks for someone.

In Gurbani siva means God who is unborn. When Gurbani refers to shiva of Hindu trinity he is qualified in specific and Gurbani writes that Shiva of trinity is a lost soul and we need not to pray to him as his essence is maya

The status of demi Gods does not change from one granth to another. Dasam granth has described them as keet( worm)

ਦੇਵੀ ਦੇਵਾ ਮੂਲੁ ਹੈ ਮਾਇਆ ॥:

Devi devaa mool hai Maya:

Maya is the origin of demigods

(sggs 129). .

The word in the verse you quoted is Prakriti. The word is verse I quoted is Bhavani. Now look where the Author Himself has chosen to use Prakriti and where He hase chosen to use Bhavani. He Himself wrote it there. But you chose to interpret or substitute the word with whatever you want to see, which is ridiculous. If he wanted to mean prakriti he would use that word, but the fact is he used the word Bhavani.

You quoted the following verse. The verse says that bhavani was creation of God. It is no different than

in Japji sahib Gur issar, Gur Gorakh brahma, Gur parbati mai.

ਚੌਪਈ ॥

चौपई ॥

CHAUPAI

ਪ੍ਰਥਮ ਕਾਲ ਸਭ ਜਗ ਕੋ ਤਾਤਾ ॥

प्रथम काल सभ जग को ताता ॥

First of all the Lord as KAL is the primal farther of the whole universe;

ਤਾਤੇ ਭਥੋ ਤੇਜ ਬਿਖਯਾਤਾ ॥

ताते भथो तेज बिखयाता ॥

And from him emanated the Powerful Lustre;

ਸੋਈ ਭਵਾਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਹਾਈ ॥

सोई भवानी नामु कहाई ॥

The same Lord was considered as Bhavani,

ਜਿਨ ਸਿਗਰੀ ਯਹ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਉਪਾਈ ॥੨੯॥

जिन सिगरी यह स्रिसटि उपाई ॥२९॥

Who created the whole world.29.

No, Krishna-Vaishnavas belive that all deities are subordinate to Krishna- go refer to the BHagavad Gita. Likewise Shaivas believe that all dieties are suboridnate to Shiva. They has two aspects of their Vishnu/Shiva- those that refer to the part of the trinity and those that refer to that Above this trinity. Why has Guru Nanak seen fit to use Vaishnava signifiers like Hari, Raam, Narayana for Akal? Or let me guess do those words actually mean 'something else' and he just used them- well why did he use those specific words? If they wanted to use only Akaal for everything they would have.

btw sikhism doesnt necessarily disagree that Bhahma Vishnu Shiva trinity, but it says they are not Supreme. Arent they mentioned in Japji in this respect? Well I do not know what kind of bizarre imagined interpretation syou have of these things.

Guru sahib has used words Rahim,karim,allah,khuda also for akal purakh.By that logic you will also say since Guru ji has used word Ram for akal purakh it is same Ram of ayodhaya.

Sikhism does not accord any special status to them.

ਦੇਵੀ ਦੇਵਾ ਪੂਜਹਿ ਡੋਲਹਿ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਨਹੀ ਜਾਨਾ ॥

ਕਹਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਅਕੁਲੁ ਨਹੀ ਚੇਤਿਆ ਬਿਖਿਆ ਸਿਉ ਲਪਟਾਨਾ ॥:

Devee devaa poojahi dolahi paarbrah nahee jaanaa.

Kahat Kabeer akul nahee chetiaa bikhiaa siyu lapataanaa:

O man, you worship gods and goddesses, but you do not know the Supreme Being.

Says Kabeer, you have not remembered the Lord who has no ancestors; you are clinging to your corrupt ways

(ang 332).

ਮੈਲਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਮੈਲਾ ਇੰਦੁ ॥

ਰਵਿ ਮੈਲਾ ਮੈਲਾ ਹੈ ਚੰਦੁ ॥੧॥

ਮੈਲਾ ਮਲਤਾ ਇਹੁ ਸੰਸਾਰੁ ॥

ਇਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਨਿਰਮਲੁ ਜਾ ਕਾ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਰੁ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

ਮੈਲੇ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡਾਇ ਕੈ ਈਸ ॥ ਮੈਲੇ ਨਿਸਿ ਬਾਸੁਰ ਦਿਨ ਤੀਸ ॥੨॥

ਮੈਲਾ ਮੋਤੀ ਮੈਲਾ ਹੀਰੁ ॥ ਮੈਲਾ ਪਉਨੁ ਪਾਵਕੁ ਅਰੁ ਨੀਰੁ ॥੩॥

ਮੈਲੇ ਸਿਵ ਸੰਕਰਾ ਮਹੇਸ ॥ ਮੈਲੇ ਸਿਧ ਸਾਧਿਕ ਅਰੁ ਭੇਖ ॥੪॥

ਮੈਲੇ ਜੋਗੀ ਜੰਗਮ ਜਟਾ ਸਹੇਤਿ ॥ ਮੈਲੀ ਕਾਇਆ ਹੰਸ ਸਮੇਤਿ ॥੫॥

ਕਹਿ ਕਬੀਰ ਤੇ ਜਨ ਪਰਵਾਨ ॥ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਤੇ ਜੋ ਰਾਮਹਿ ਜਾਨ ॥੬॥੩॥:

Brahma, Indra, sun, moon, and this world are polluted (with "Mala") — meaning they are limited and transitory ||1||.

Only the One Supreme Being is Immaculate; He has no end or limitation ||1||rahaaou||.

The rulers of kingdoms, nights and days, months, pearls, diamonds, wind, fire and water are polluted ||3||.

Shiva, Shankara and Mahaysh are polluted. The Siddhas, seekers and strivers, and those who wear religious robes, are polluted ||4||.

The Yogis and wandering hermits with their matted hair are polluted. The body, along with the Jeeva, is polluted ||5||. Says Kabeer, those humble beings are approved and pure, who know the Supreme Being ||6||3||

(sggs 1158).

Basically the import of the above statement if your is that you are anti-hindu, this is your starting point, and all you reasoning is based upon this point. likewise you want to project this on Sikhi. You are Nabha-fanatic ka chela.

To clarify the teachings of my Gurus does not make me anti hindu. Rebut those with constructive arguements. There is also no use of cursing Kahan singh ji Nabha . He exposed fanatic Hindus who were intolerable to other religions by writing a book" Hum Hindu nahin" He quoted bani from Dasam garnth profusely to disprove rabid communalist hindus who wanted to devour sikhism by dirty tricks.

Fanatic Hindus used imposters posing as British Govt. agents to threaten Bhai sahib so that he does not write the book. But he remained steadfast and exposed the dirty design of sick mind sets.

Edited August 10, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

You people just like to project your own ideas on Gurbani. You dont have the guts to just shutup and let Guruji express Himself. Rather you get scared at the mention of a 'hindu' word and then go running to some steek or kathak to go get some kind of excuse or explanation for its presence. You basically fixated on the word Akaal because Hindus dont tend to use it much- but Gurus have not used it much either.

You are not prepaired for a second to try and understand what Durga signifies. Nihungs have no problem talking baout Chandi, Durga etc because they live the warrior lifestyle, so they know what She signifies.

Guru ji has chosen to use a certain word at a certain place, yet you are running of to say 'oh but he really means some other word' !

this is what guru sahib expresses

ਕਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਸੇ ਕੀਟ ਕੋਟੈ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਕਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਸੇ ਮੇਟਿ ਡਾਰੇ ਉਪਾਏ ॥

किते क्रिसन से कीट कोटै बनाए ॥ किते राम से मेटि डारे उपाए ॥

Somewhere He hath created millions of the insects like Krishna.

Somewhere He hath effaced and then created (many) like Rama.

ਮਹਾਦੀਨ ਕੇਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਿਥੀ ਮਾਂਝ ਹੂਏ ॥ ਸਮੈ ਆਪਨੀ ਆਪਨੀ ਅੰਤ ਮੂਏ ॥੨੭॥

महादीन केते प्रिथी मांझ हूए ॥ समै आपनी आपनी अंत मूए ॥२७॥

Many Muhammads had been on the earth.

They were born and then died in their own times. 27.

ਜਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਸੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਹੁਇ ਬਿਸਨ ਆਏ ॥ ਤਿਤਿਓ ਕਾਲ ਖਾਪਿਓ ਨ ਤੇ ਕਾਲ ਘਾਏ ॥੨੮॥

जिते राम से क्रिसन हुइ बिसन आए ॥ तितिओ काल खापिओ न ते काल घाए ॥२८॥

All the incarnations of Vishnu like Rama and Krishan were destroyed by KAL, but they could not destroy him. 28.

ਜਿਤੇ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਸੇ ਚੰਦ੍ਰ ਸੇ ਹੋਤ ਆਏ ॥ ਤਿਤਿਓ ਕਾਲ ਖਾਪਾ ਨ ਤੇ ਕਾਲਿ ਘਾਏ ॥

जिते इंद्र से चंद्र से होत आए ॥ तितिओ काल खापा न ते कालि घाए ॥

All the indras and Chandras (moons) who came into being were destroyed by KAL, but they could not destroy him.

ਰਸਾਵਲ ਛੰਦ ॥

रसावल छंद ॥

RASAAVAL STANZA

ਜਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਹੂਏ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਮੂਏ ॥

जिते राम हूए ॥ सभै अंति मूए ॥

All the Ramas who incarnated, ultimately passed away.

ਜਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਜੈ ਹੈਂ ॥੭੦॥

जिते क्रिसन ह्वै हैं ॥ सभै अंति जै हैं ॥७०॥

All the Krishnas, who had incarnated, have all passed away.70.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦੇਵ ਹੋਸੀ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਜਾਸੀ ॥

जिते देव होसी ॥ सभै अंत जासी ॥

All the gods who will come into being in future, they will all ultimately expire.

Bachitra natak,

[singh2]

Amardeep I agree with what Balbir said directly after your post.

This is called beating about the bush. Decency demands that reply what he said instead of

running in circles.