Terms Used In Sri Dasam Granth

[singh2]

To sum up the discussion in its essence

to start with navjot2 wrote

You can make whatever petty squibles you want, saying 'oh its not Hindu God Shiva/Durga'. But the fact is that Guru used the word Sivaa. Not Vaheguru or Akal Purakh. If you cant even accept that what kind of 'sikh' are you?

The above is refrence to shabad in Chandi charitra

Deh siva bar mohe aihe-- --------

We are being told by navjot2 that Guru ji is asking boon from Durga in this shabad.

my stand is that it is wrong to take literal meanings since the writer i.e. Guru ji

is invoking akal purakh in the beginning and likewsie he is seeking boon from akal purakh in the end.

No sikh invokes any deity as our belief is in akal purakh as supreme entity.

Now Durga is wife of Hindu demigod shiva. Per dasam granth demigod Shiva himself meditates

on akal purakh.

ਜੀਯ ਮੋ ਸਿਵ ਧਯਾਨ ਧਰਾ ਜਬ ਹੀ ॥ ਕਲਿ ਕਾਲ ਪ੍ਰਸੰਨਿ ਭਏ ਤਬ ਹੀ ॥

जीय मो सिव धयान धरा जब ही ॥ कलि काल प्रसंनि भए तब ही ॥

When Shiva meditated in his mind on the non-temporal Lord, the Lord was pleased at the same time.

jalandhar avtar

It is ignorance even to imagine that guru ji is asking blessing from someone else other than akal purakh.

Edited August 10, 2009 by singh2

[The Khalsa Fauj]

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!

So we should never do aarths of Gurbani? It has nothing to do with take it as is. We can take it as is but not everyone will understand. We provide translation so people can understand and learn.

Aunkar comes when Guru Nanak addresses himself or when someone addresses Guru Nanak.

Without aunkar is the stamp of Guru Nanak.

When there is Sihari on kakka in Nanak, it means Nanak nay.

Reason we need to do aarth of Gurbani is because too many people link Gurbani to Hindu myths and devi devtas. As I have said before, if someone names himself Nanak, he/she will not become Nanak. Same way, if someone names himself Akaal Purakh or Raam, that person will not become Akaal Purakh or Raam.

Raam of Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the Omnipresent Lord.

Raam means omnipresent.

Hari means all-pervading.

Madsoodan needs explanation because some link Madsoodan to krishan of yasoda.

Anyways, you have your answer about viakaran. You can also learn viakaran from Gurbani itself. When we study Gurbani, we learn viakaran.

We also learn that God is Madsoodan, Nirankaar, Hari, Damodar, etc.

[Kaljug]

Navjot:

Are you the guy who thought that it was all fine and dandy to worship stone idols of Shiva?

Singh2 has given you an excellent answer. I hope you read through it with care and realise that Gurbani utilises names like Ram, Gopal, Hari to refer to the Supreme since these were names common in the times. However, while Hindus believe that their deities by these names are the Supreme Being themselves, this is not true according to Gurbani - and to claim that this is anti-Hindu is, like saying we are being anti-Muslim for not believing that Allah and Rahim of Gurbani are the same as the deity in the Quran, usually the typical response of those with a hidden agenda.

Do you believe that Sikhs are just a sect of Hinduism?

Nihang understanding of Chandi is also very different from the Hindu belief the Devi. For a Nihang, Chandi is his shastar, not a multi-limbed goddess riding a tiger.

Regards,

K.

[singh2]

Navjot:

Are you the guy who thought that it was all fine and dandy to worship stone idols of Shiva?

Singh2 has given you an excellent answer. I hope you read through it with care and realise that Gurbani utilises names like Ram, Gopal, Hari to refer to the Supreme since these were names common in the times. However, while Hindus believe that their deities by these names are the Supreme Being themselves, this is not true according to Gurbani - and to claim that this is anti-Hindu is, like saying we are being anti-Muslim for not believing that Allah and Rahim of Gurbani are the same as the deity in the Quran, usually the typical response of those with a hidden agenda.

Do you believe that Sikhs are just a sect of Hinduism?

Nihang understanding of Chandi is also very different from the Hindu belief the Devi. For a Nihang, Chandi is his shastar, not a multi-limbed goddess riding a tiger.

Regards,

K.

Very well summed up Bhai sahib. Such people are here with agenda. They are doing biggest harm to their own religion by misinterpreting sikh scriptures.

Here is what Nihung chief is saying about so called deities in Dasam Granth

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all!

Quote from Singh2 Jee "Deh siva bar mohe aihe----------We are being told by navjot2 that Guru ji is asking boon from Durga in this shabad."

The reverend Guru has used the word Sivaa here, not Durgaa.

Quote "No sikh invokes any deity as our belief is in akal purakh as supreme entity."

Who taught Sikhs to reject any deity?

Did the true Gurus ever ask someone to believe in Akaal Purakh as supreme entity?

Quote "Now Durga is wife of Hindu demigod shiva."

Has any of the true Gurus ever said this?

Quote "Per dasam granth demigod Shiva himself meditates on akal purakh."

Did Guru Jee use the word demigod for Shiva?

Please do not provide borrowed translations when you want to express your experiences.

Thanks for referring the Vaak from Gurdev.

Today my understanding of the Vaak is this.

ਜੀਯ ਮੋ ਸਿਵ ਧਯਾਨ ਧਰਾ ਜਬ ਹੀ ॥ ਕਲਿ ਕਾਲ ਪ੍ਰਸੰਨਿ ਭਏ ਤਬ ਹੀ ॥

जीय मो सिव धयान धरा जब ही ॥ कलि काल प्रसंनि भए तब ही ॥

In Heart Siv meditation is held whenever. Kali, Kaal got pleased right away.

Quote "It is ignorance even to imagine that guru ji is asking blessing from someone else other than akal purakh."

Many are imagining that Guru Jee is asking blessing only from Akaal Purakh. Have they become enlightened?

Better seek the path where Jeev realizes God's blessing.

*****

Quote from Khalsa Fauj Jee "We provide translation so people can understand and learn."

Do you provide the wisdom of Guroo's word also?

Quote "Reason we need to do aarth of Gurbani is because too many people link Gurbani to Hindu myths and devi devtas."

Is that the reason and necessity to do aarth of Gurbani?

Gurbaanee is to enliven.

Balbir Singh

[singh2]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all!

Quote from Singh2 Jee "Deh siva bar mohe aihe----------We are being told by navjot2 that Guru ji is asking boon from Durga in this shabad."

The reverend Guru has used the word Sivaa here, not Durgaa.

Quote "No sikh invokes any deity as our belief is in akal purakh as supreme entity."

Who taught Sikhs to reject any deity?

Did the true Gurus ever ask someone to believe in Akaal Purakh as supreme entity?

Quote "Now Durga is wife of Hindu demigod shiva."

Has any of the true Gurus ever said this?

Quote "Per dasam granth demigod Shiva himself meditates on akal purakh."

Did Guru Jee use the word demigod for Shiva?

Please do not provide borrowed translations when you want to express your experiences.

Thanks for referring the Vaak from Gurdev.

Today my understanding of the Vaak is this.

ਜੀਯ ਮੋ ਸਿਵ ਧਯਾਨ ਧਰਾ ਜਬ ਹੀ ॥ ਕਲਿ ਕਾਲ ਪ੍ਰਸੰਨਿ ਭਏ ਤਬ ਹੀ ॥

जीय मो सिव धयान धरा जब ही ॥ कलि काल प्रसंनि भए तब ही ॥

In Heart Siv meditation is held whenever. Kali, Kaal got pleased right away.

Quote "It is ignorance even to imagine that guru ji is asking blessing from someone else other than akal purakh."

Many are imagining that Guru Jee is asking blessing only from Akaal Purakh. Have they become enlightened?

Better seek the path where Jeev realizes God's blessing.

*****

Quote from Khalsa Fauj Jee "We provide translation so people can understand and learn."

Do you provide the wisdom of Guroo's word also?

Quote "Reason we need to do aarth of Gurbani is because too many people link Gurbani to Hindu myths and devi devtas."

Is that the reason and necessity to do aarth of Gurbani?

Gurbaanee is to enliven.

Balbir Singh

Balbir

What Navjot2 is writing here same thing you have been pedaling on various sites

for the last so many years. you think you are too clever but your agenda

is well known to me.

Read Dasam granth sahib and you will know that Durga is wife of demigod shiva.

What Dasam Granth think of demigods is given above. If you need more i can put

some quotes for you.

[navjot2]

Khalsa di Fauj

that was a really sincere and honest response you just gave so thanks I liked reading that post.

i also notice that you dont take to petty remarks in your post

[navjot2]

its hilarious that your post has Bhagauti translated as 'primordial power'. you know full well that 'power' in panjabi would be 'shakti'. so who is this 'primodial power'? that same that was called Bhavani, like I quoted to show you earlier. The Goddess Herself is that Primordial Power personified. You are also claiming that a sword has been perosnified. Akal was before and Is Beyond Power, so it is differentiated from him.

I can quote alot from Dasam Granth. But you will remain in denial. Here you go:

in sections of other parts of Dasan Granth there are:

"ਅਥ ਦੇਵੀ ਜੂ ਕੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਥਨੰ ॥" (p 645)

-Now begins the description (kathan) in praise (ustat) of the goddess (devi)

"ਰੇ ਮਨ ਭਜ ਤੂੰ ਸਾਰਦਾ ਅਨਗਨ ਗੁਨ ਹੈ ਜਾਹਿ ॥ "

-Here Saarada (Sharada) is Saraswati, another aspect of the Goddess.

"ਦੇਵੀ ਬਰ ਲਾਇਕ ਸਬੁੱਧਿਹੂ ਕੀ ਦਾਇਕ ਸੁ ਦੇਹ ਬਰ ਪਾਇਕ ਬਨਾਵੈ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਹਾਲ ਹੈ ॥੭॥"

The same goddess is capable of bestowing the boon and good intellect; by her Grace this Granth can be composed.7.

Look here can it be any more obvious for you:

ਅੱਦ੍ਰ ਸੁਤਾ ਹੂੰ ਕੀ ਜੋ ਤਨਯਾ ਮਹਿਖਾਸੁਰ ਕੀ ਮਰਤਾ ਫੁਨਿ ਜੋਊ ॥

अद्र सुता हूं की जो तनया महिखासुर की मरता फुनि जोऊ ॥

She, who is the daughter of the mountain and the destroyer of Mahishasura;

ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਕੋ ਰਾਜਹਿ ਕੀ ਦਿਵਯਾ ਕਰਤਾ ਬਧ ਸੁੰਭ ਨਿਸੁੰਭਹਿ ਦੋਊ ॥

इंद्र को राजहि की दिवया करता बध सु्मभ निसु्मभहि दोऊ ॥

She, who is the bestower of the kingdom on India by killing Sumbh and Nisumbh;

ਜੋ ਜਪ ਕੈ ਇਹ ਸੇਵ ਕਰੈ ਬਰ ਕੋ ਸੁ ਲਹੈ ਮਨ ਇੱਛਤਾ ਸੋਊ ॥

जो जप कै इह सेव करै बर को सु लहै मन इछता सोऊ ॥

He, who remembers and serves her, he receives the reward to his heart`s desire,

ਲੋਕ ਬਿਖੈ ਉਹ ਕੀ ਸਮ ਤੁੱਲ ਗਰੀਬ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਨ ਦੂਸਰ ਕੋਊ ॥੮॥

लोक बिखै उह की सम तु्ल गरीब निवाज न दूसर कोऊ ॥८॥

And in the whole world, none other is the supporter of the poor like her.8.

How can Akal, in its form as Nirguna Akal, be called 'daughter of the mountain'? That refers to Durga/Parvati and you know it does.

These are just random quotes. Im sure you can find the same.

You are saying other compositons have nothing to do with Durga yet Bhagauti is invoked, yet other forms of the Goddess are also rememebered (above quote is not from CHandi di Vaar). Which basically equates the two. Also why would the Author keep invoking a sword when talking about say Krishna leela? Or non-war stories?

Now instead of running hither and tither why dont you actually respond to the quotes I have given you for once?

"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."

Look ealier werent we looking at a quote from Dasam Granth where it says 'Tu Hi Bhavani'? 'You Are Bhavani'. Could it be any clearer? But you are saying the above?

In Sikhism God is not always formless. This is your own conditioning. I would say God is beyond form and formless. in that respect your fanatical insistence on formlessness is irrelevant. yes Akal pervades everything, everything is in essence Him. There is Only One. No one is disputing that. I am saying the same. Krishna, Bhavani, Durga are in essence Him. Because there is only One. Go read page 96 on SirDasam.org i honestly think it will help clear your confusion about Akal's relation to all these Holy Forms.

Yes He Himself does not manifest as avtars, in Dasam Granth it says Vishnu etc took avtar as per His command.

Sying He manifests in you me and others- saying this theoretically is one thing but Realising the Truth of the statement is another thing (Jeevan Mukti). ApayGur Chela. (He Himself is Gur and Student).

"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."

you are just playing deceitful word games. e.g. Muraarey means of the flute, clearly refers to Krishan rupa. Likewise I have seen in Guru Granth the Lord refered to as Raghunatha (clear reference to Saguna Rama). Also like I already said, if Bhagauti means power of Akal Purakh =Shakti of Akal Purakh= Bhavni etc. See quotes above.

I have dealt with Shivaa. you are in denial. I think you need to go look. Its Shivaa with a kanna. You are still saying Shiva for some reason. He wrote Sivaa, not Siva, not Akal, not Vaheguru etc You still dont admit it so go look at it for yourself

You give the quote about the root of Devi Deva being Maya. But what is Maya? MahaMaya as they say? You are still refering to someonthing other than the Lord. In this case His power to deceive. Maya is to Vaishnavas as Shakti is to Shaivas.

And how are you relating the quote about Bhavanis Origin to that of Gur in Japji? It doesnt even make sense

You are anti Hindu to the core because the very route of yoru approach is to deny anything Hindu, you start from there and interpret all these quotes from that stance. the motvation is hatred.

The quotes from Guru Granth- no one is disputing that. But your take on them is tinged with hatred, which you are someonehow equating with Divine Gyan of Kabir? Are you even accepting the full extent of what he is saying, that body and jeev are also polluted? see these are great statements but your approach is so petty.

Guru Gobind Singh, who we attribute DasamGranth to, he Knew the Supreme Being. And He has given the correct understanding of Him in relation to Devas etc. It is His work we are refering to.

You are trying to approach Gurbani lilke an ideologist your whole approach is polluted. These so called people like Nabha etc filled Sikhs minds with paranoia and fear for which they should be hated. Your fixation with 'enemies of sikhism' 'devouriong sikhism' is the pollution these people have put there. RSS, Kala Afghana are not a threat to sikhs, no matter how fanatical they become. When a devotee reads SGGS or Dasam Bani with pure mindset, how can they go wrong? Only when kathatks and others start acting as intermediaries between the masses and Gurbani.

If theres no sincere Devotess then religions remains unaffected anyway.

[navjot2]

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

running in circles.

running in circles is your forte.

Balbir put it beautiful. woudl you like me to elaborate on my personal take?

There is Only One.

All Great Names are His Names,

All Great Forms are His Forms

the Devas when looked at in one angle are His Creation- they sing his glories (Gavaaei like in Japji)

when looked at in singularity they can become signifiers of the Supreme Himself. There person who devotes themselves to Shiva comes to the Essence of Shiva- the very self same Shiva your refer to.

[singh2]

its hilarious that your post has Bhagauti translated as 'primordial power'. you know full well that 'power' in panjabi would be 'shakti'. so who is this 'primodial power'? that same that was called Bhavani, like I quoted to show you earlier. The Goddess Herself is that Primordial Power personified. You are also claiming that a sword has been perosnified. Akal was before and Is Beyond Power, so it is differentiated from him.

I can quote alot from Dasam Granth. But you will remain in denial. Here you go:

in sections of other parts of Dasan Granth there are:

"ਅਥ ਦੇਵੀ ਜੂ ਕੀ ਉਸਤਤ ਕਥਨੰ ॥" (p 645)

-Now begins the description (kathan) in praise (ustat) of the goddess (devi)

"ਰੇ ਮਨ ਭਜ ਤੂੰ ਸਾਰਦਾ ਅਨਗਨ ਗੁਨ ਹੈ ਜਾਹਿ ॥ "

-Here Saarada (Sharada) is Saraswati, another aspect of the Goddess.

"ਦੇਵੀ ਬਰ ਲਾਇਕ ਸਬੁੱਧਿਹੂ ਕੀ ਦਾਇਕ ਸੁ ਦੇਹ ਬਰ ਪਾਇਕ ਬਨਾਵੈ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਹਾਲ ਹੈ ॥੭॥"

The same goddess is capable of bestowing the boon and good intellect; by her Grace this Granth can be composed.7.

Look here can it be any more obvious for you:

ਅੱਦ੍ਰ ਸੁਤਾ ਹੂੰ ਕੀ ਜੋ ਤਨਯਾ ਮਹਿਖਾਸੁਰ ਕੀ ਮਰਤਾ ਫੁਨਿ ਜੋਊ ॥

अद्र सुता हूं की जो तनया महिखासुर की मरता फुनि जोऊ ॥

She, who is the daughter of the mountain and the destroyer of Mahishasura;

ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਕੋ ਰਾਜਹਿ ਕੀ ਦਿਵਯਾ ਕਰਤਾ ਬਧ ਸੁੰਭ ਨਿਸੁੰਭਹਿ ਦੋਊ ॥

इंद्र को राजहि की दिवया करता बध सु्मभ निसु्मभहि दोऊ ॥

She, who is the bestower of the kingdom on India by killing Sumbh and Nisumbh;

ਜੋ ਜਪ ਕੈ ਇਹ ਸੇਵ ਕਰੈ ਬਰ ਕੋ ਸੁ ਲਹੈ ਮਨ ਇੱਛਤਾ ਸੋਊ ॥

जो जप कै इह सेव करै बर को सु लहै मन इछता सोऊ ॥

He, who remembers and serves her, he receives the reward to his heart`s desire,

ਲੋਕ ਬਿਖੈ ਉਹ ਕੀ ਸਮ ਤੁੱਲ ਗਰੀਬ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਨ ਦੂਸਰ ਕੋਊ ॥੮॥

लोक बिखै उह की सम तु्ल गरीब निवाज न दूसर कोऊ ॥८॥

And in the whole world, none other is the supporter of the poor like her.8.

How can Akal, in its form as Nirguna Akal, be called 'daughter of the mountain'? That refers to Durga/Parvati and you know it does.

These are just random quotes. Im sure you can find the same.

You are saying other compositons have nothing to do with Durga yet Bhagauti is invoked, yet other forms of the Goddess are also rememebered (above quote is not from CHandi di Vaar). Which basically equates the two. Also why would the Author keep invoking a sword when talking about say Krishna leela? Or non-war stories?

Now instead of running hither and tither why dont you actually respond to the quotes I have given you for once?

"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."

Look ealier werent we looking at a quote from Dasam Granth where it says 'Tu Hi Bhavani'? 'You Are Bhavani'. Could it be any clearer? But you are saying the above?

In Sikhism God is not always formless. This is your own conditioning. I would say God is beyond form and formless. in that respect your fanatical insistence on formlessness is irrelevant. yes Akal pervades everything, everything is in essence Him. There is Only One. No one is disputing that. I am saying the same. Krishna, Bhavani, Durga are in essence Him. Because there is only One. Go read page 96 on SirDasam.org i honestly think it will help clear your confusion about Akal's relation to all these Holy Forms.

Yes He Himself does not manifest as avtars, in Dasam Granth it says Vishnu etc took avtar as per His command.

Sying He manifests in you me and others- saying this theoretically is one thing but Realising the Truth of the statement is another thing (Jeevan Mukti). ApayGur Chela. (He Himself is Gur and Student).

"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."

you are just playing deceitful word games. e.g. Muraarey means of the flute, clearly refers to Krishan rupa. Likewise I have seen in Guru Granth the Lord refered to as Raghunatha (clear reference to Saguna Rama). Also like I already said, if Bhagauti means power of Akal Purakh =Shakti of Akal Purakh= Bhavni etc. See quotes above.

I have dealt with Shivaa. you are in denial. I think you need to go look. Its Shivaa with a kanna. You are still saying Shiva for some reason. He wrote Sivaa, not Siva, not Akal, not Vaheguru etc You still dont admit it so go look at it for yourself

You give the quote about the root of Devi Deva being Maya. But what is Maya? MahaMaya as they say? You are still refering to someonthing other than the Lord. In this case His power to deceive. Maya is to Vaishnavas as Shakti is to Shaivas.

And how are you relating the quote about Bhavanis Origin to that of Gur in Japji? It doesnt even make sense

You are anti Hindu to the core because the very route of yoru approach is to deny anything Hindu, you start from there and interpret all these quotes from that stance. the motvation is hatred.

The quotes from Guru Granth- no one is disputing that. But your take on them is tinged with hatred, which you are someonehow equating with Divine Gyan of Kabir? Are you even accepting the full extent of what he is saying, that body and jeev are also polluted? see these are great statements but your approach is so petty.

Guru Gobind Singh, who we attribute DasamGranth to, he Knew the Supreme Being. And He has given the correct understanding of Him in relation to Devas etc. It is His work we are refering to.

You are trying to approach Gurbani lilke an ideologist your whole approach is polluted. These so called people like Nabha etc filled Sikhs minds with paranoia and fear for which they should be hated. Your fixation with 'enemies of sikhism' 'devouriong sikhism' is the pollution these people have put there. RSS, Kala Afghana are not a threat to sikhs, no matter how fanatical they become. When a devotee reads SGGS or Dasam Bani with pure mindset, how can they go wrong? Only when kathatks and others start acting as intermediaries between the masses and Gurbani.

If theres no sincere Devotess then religions remains unaffected anyway.

That power is not any Goddess like multi armed Durga. Bhagauti is not a reference to any Devi. you have failed to show me this so far.

Guru ji attributes this power or shakti to kirpan/weapons and they symbolize akal purakh.

Read shashtra nam mala . Invocation reads as Bhagauti ustat . Read below

ਅਸ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਨ ਧਾਰਾਧਰੀ ਸੈਲ ਸੂਫ ਜਮਦਾਢ ॥ ਕਵਚਾਂਤਕ ਸੱਤ੍ਰਾਂਤ ਕਰ ਤੇਗ ਤੀਰ ਧਰਬਾਢ ॥੨

O Lord ! you are as, Kripan (sword), Dharaddhari, Sail, Soof, Jamaadh, Tegh (saber), Teer (saber), Teer (arrow), Talwar(sward), causing the destruction of armours and enemies.2.

ਅਸ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਨ ਖੰਡੋ ਖੜਗ ਤੁਪਕ ਤਬਰ ਅਰੁ ਤੀਰ ॥ ਸੈਫ ਸਰੋਹੀ ਸੈਹਥੀ ਯਹੈ ਹਮਾਰੈ ਪੀਰ ॥੩॥

As, Kripan (sword), Khanda, Khadag (sword), Tupak (gun), Tabar (hatched), Teer (arrow), Saif (sword), Sarohi and Saihathi, all these are are my Gurus.

Shashtra nama mala, Dasam granth

The above should leave no doubt in a person's mind what is meant by Bhagauti in Dasam granth sahib.

Look here can it be any more obvious for you:

ਅੱਦ੍ਰ ਸੁਤਾ ਹੂੰ ਕੀ ਜੋ ਤਨਯਾ ਮਹਿਖਾਸੁਰ ਕੀ ਮਰਤਾ ਫੁਨਿ ਜੋਊ ॥

अद्र सुता हूं की जो तनया महिखासुर की मरता फुनि जोऊ ॥

She, who is the daughter of the mountain and the destroyer of Mahishasura;

ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਕੋ ਰਾਜਹਿ ਕੀ ਦਿਵਯਾ ਕਰਤਾ ਬਧ ਸੁੰਭ ਨਿਸੁੰਭਹਿ ਦੋਊ ॥

इंद्र को राजहि की दिवया करता बध सु्मभ निसु्मभहि दोऊ ॥

She, who is the bestower of the kingdom on India by killing Sumbh and Nisumbh;

ਜੋ ਜਪ ਕੈ ਇਹ ਸੇਵ ਕਰੈ ਬਰ ਕੋ ਸੁ ਲਹੈ ਮਨ ਇੱਛਤਾ ਸੋਊ ॥

जो जप कै इह सेव करै बर को सु लहै मन इछता सोऊ ॥

He, who remembers and serves her, he receives the reward to his heart`s desire,

ਲੋਕ ਬਿਖੈ ਉਹ ਕੀ ਸਮ ਤੁੱਲ ਗਰੀਬ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਨ ਦੂਸਰ ਕੋਊ ॥੮॥

लोक बिखै उह की सम तु्ल गरीब निवाज न दूसर कोऊ ॥८॥

And in the whole world, none other is the supporter of the poor like her.8.

Chandi chairtra ukti bilas has 233 verses. Chandi charitra has 262 and vaar sri bhagauti ji ki has 55. Let us know from which compositions you are taking these lines . Also number those correctly. These are not from these.

Nobody said that daughter of mountain does not refer to Durga. What i am saying is that Bhagauti does not refer to Durga. If yes show me. Do not un in circles.

There is one devi ji ki ustat in krishna avtar. If you are referring to that ,read it carefully as it is not eulogy to any goddess but to akal purakh. Raed without tinted glasses. Moreover what a Devi is doing in krishan avtar. Are not not they different denominations of Hindus?

Which quotes you have given. I have given reply above.Your quotes are vague . Do not make praise of Akal purakh to any multi armed devi.

The verse says that it is God who created creation. In that creation comes all these characters. It is all praise of God and nothing more than that. Do not turn praise of god to make deities as God.

Read below

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

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.

ਕਹੂੰ ਧਰਮ ਪਾਮੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਸਰਬ ਠਉਰ ਗਾਮੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਜਤੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਕਾਮੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਦੇਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਲੇਤ ਹੋ ॥

Somewhere Thou art abode of Dharma (righteousness), somewhere All-Pervading, somewhere a celibate, somewhere a lustful person, somewhere a donor and somewhere a taker.

ਕਹੂੰ ਬੇਦ ਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤਾ ਸਿਉ ਬਿਪਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤ੍ਰਿਗੁਨ ਅਤੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਸੁਰਗੁਨ ਸਮੇਤ ਹੋ ॥੪॥੧੪॥

Somewhere Thou workest in accordance with Vedic rites, and somewhere Thou art quite opposed to it; somewhere Thou art without three modes of maya and somewhere Thou hast all gldly attributes.4.14.

akal ustat, dasam granth

have not you read my earlier quote. I give it again

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 )

These deities fall under the above category. When they are not able to comprehend God how can they become God. How can Guru sahib ask boon from such devis? It is sheer ignorance to say like this.Moreover sikhs believe in shabadguru? if you learn this simple thing you will have no questions.

Yes He Himself does not manifest as avtars, in Dasam Granth it says Vishnu etc took avtar as per His command.

If he does not manifest as avtar then vishnu and party are not Him. He creates and decimate crores of such characters.

you are just playing deceitful word games. e.g. Muraarey means of the flute, clearly refers to Krishan rupa. Likewise I have seen in Guru Granth the Lord refered to as Raghunatha (clear reference to Saguna Rama). Also like I already said, if Bhagauti means power of Akal Purakh =Shakti of Akal Purakh= Bhavni etc. See quotes above.

Here either you are an ignorant which you are not or a propagandist. It does not translate to any deity at all. It is a reference to akal purakh. Per sikhism God does not take birth and hence how can we give a name to him. In Gurbani Gurbani God has been called by various names and these are called functional names.

Hence the refrence is to God and not to krishna of bidar.

kirtam naam kathay tayray jihbaa.

With my tongue I chant the Names given to You.

sat naam tayraa paraa poorbalaa.

'Sat Naam' is Your perfect, primal Name.

ang 1083

In the same way shabad below is describing the personal looks of god. But God is not born and how can he have personal looks. This is a way of praising Him.

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

------)

I have dealt with Shivaa. you are in denial. I think you need to go look. Its Shivaa with a kanna. You are still saying Shiva for some reason. He wrote Sivaa, not Siva, not Akal, not Vaheguru etc You still dont admit it so go look at it for yourself

Whatever siva is Guru sahib does not invoke any deity when he clearly writes that these deities are not able to comprehend God.

Read below

ਚਰਨ ਸਰਨਿ ਜਿਹ ਬਸਤ ਭਵਾਨੀ ॥

चरन सरनि जिह बसत भवानी ॥

The goddess Durga takes refuge at His Feet .

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨ ਅੰਤੁ ਨਹੀ ਪਾਇਓ ॥

ब्रहमा बिसन अंतु नही पाइओ ॥

Brahma and Vishnu Could not know His end.

ਨੇਤਿ ਨੇਤਿ ਮੁਖ ਚਾਰ ਬਤਾਇਓ ॥੫॥

नेति नेति मुख चार बताइओ ॥५॥

The four-headed god Brahma described Him ad `Neti Neti` (Not this, Not this).5.

Dasam granth, akla ustat

You give the quote about the root of Devi Deva being Maya. But what is Maya? MahaMaya as they say? You are still refering to someonthing other than the Lord. In this case His power to deceive. Maya is to Vaishnavas as Shakti is to Shaivas.

Vaishnhava cult says that these deities are absolute god. Per them they are supreme and There is no power above them. Sikhism rejects that. Guru sahib says that they are created by God. There lies the big difference.

Hindus have idols of these deities and worship them as God. But it is a sin for sikhs to indulge in worship of anyone else other than akal purakh whose attributes are given in Mool mantra.

You are anti Hindu to the core because the very route of yoru approach is to deny anything Hindu, you start from there and interpret all these quotes from that stance. the motvation is hatred.

Hatred is in you about sikhs when you are making our Gurus as devi bhagat by misinterpreting their writings.

The quotes from Guru Granth- no one is disputing that. But your take on them is tinged with hatred, which you are someonehow equating with Divine Gyan of Kabir? Are you even accepting the full extent of what he is saying, that body and jeev are also polluted? see these are great statements but your approach is so petty.

But SGGS ji also say that these deities burn in hell of fire. Do you deny that?

Guru Gobind Singh, who we attribute DasamGranth to, he Knew the Supreme Being. And He has given the correct understanding of Him in relation to Devas etc. It is His work we are refering to.

He is giving message to people of that time who were considering these deities as absolute God that absolute God is akal purakh and these are his creations. It is futile to worship them.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਮਹੇਸਰ ਬਿਸਨ ਸਚੀਪਿਤ ਅੰਤ ਫਸੇ ਜਮ ਫਾਸਿ ਪਰੈਂਗੇ ॥

ब्रहम महेसर बिसन सचीपित अंत फसे जम फासि परैंगे ॥

Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu and Consort of Sachi (Indra) would ultimately fall in the noose of death.

ਜੇ ਨਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਪਤਿ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਸ ਹੈਂ ਪਗ ਤੇ ਨਰ ਫੇਰ ਨ ਦੇਹ ਧਰੈਂਗੇ ॥੮॥੨੮॥

जे नर स्री पति के प्रस हैं पग ते नर फेर न देह धरैंगे ॥८॥२८॥

But those who fall at the feet of Lord-God, they would not appear again in physical form. 8.28.

akal ustat , Dasam granth

I have cited the correct story about kahn singh nabha. Arya samaj was converting sikhs into hindus by deceit. Daya Nanad had name called Sikh Gurus in stayarth parkash. It is that time he rebutted Hindu propaganda by quoting from dasam granth that sikhs do not revere any Hindu deity.

A fanatic Hindu was sent to him to influence upon him not to write his book' Hum HIndu nahi". That imposter said that he was a British Govt. CID agent and Govt had very bad report on Bhai nabha as he was going to stir communal controversey

between Hindus and sikhs by writing that book. Kahan singh nabha did not budge. later it proved a trick of fanatic Hindus.

RSS is no angel for sikhs. already these thugs have circulated pictures of a cow with our Gurus inside its womb with Gurbani tuk

Puta mata ki asis

What type of a sikh (if at all you are one) you claim to be by calling such fascist organization as benign.

you wrote

In Sikhism God is not always formless. This is your own conditioning

Read below:

ਹਰਿ ਜਨਮ ਮਰਨ ਬਿਹੀਨ ॥ ਦਸ ਚਾਰ ਚਾਰ ਪ੍ਰਬੀਨ ॥

हरि जनम मरन बिहीन ॥ दस चार चार प्रबीन ॥

The Lord is sans birth and death, He is skiful in all eighteen sciences.

ਅਕਲੰਕ ਰੂਪ ਅਪਾਰ ॥ ਅਨਛਿੱਜ ਤੇਜ ਉਦਾਰ ॥੧॥੩੧॥

अकलंक रूप अपार ॥ अनछि्ज तेज उदार ॥१॥३१॥

That unblemished Entity is Infinite, His Benevolent Glory is Everlasting. 1.31.

Edited August 11, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

running in circles is your forte.

Balbir put it beautiful. woudl you like me to elaborate on my personal take?

There is Only One.

All Great Names are His Names,

All Great Forms are His Forms

the Devas when looked at in one angle are His Creation- they sing his glories (Gavaaei like in Japji)

when looked at in singularity they can become signifiers of the Supreme Himself. There person who devotes themselves to Shiva comes to the Essence of Shiva- the very self same Shiva your refer to.

This is the question for you again. Reply yes or no.

Question

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

[navjot2]

Since when do swords ride around on lions or live on mountains? I already showed you these quotes.

You people have played some funny mind games with yourselves. I am showing you what is written but rather than awknowledge that you run of and find a quote from somewhere else. my friend you are only deceiving yourself.

Now you are trying to quote Naam Shashtra Mala. You have not responded to what I said just quoted another section! How does that constitute a discussion. Even now you are wrong because look here:

"ਸਭੈ ਨਾਮ ਜਗਮਾਤ ਕੇ ਲੀਜਹੁ ਸੁ ਕਬਿ ਸੁਧਾਰਿ ॥੩੨॥" (line 32)

the translator on SriDasam.org translated Jagmaata as Durga.

"ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਸ਼ਕਤਿ " is also used (line 47).

look here:

"ਭੂਤਾਂਤਕ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਵਤੀ ਭਵਹਾ ਨਾਮ ਬਖਾਨ ॥ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਵਾਨੀ ਭੈ ਹਰਨ ਸਭ ਕੋ ਕਰੌ ਕਲਯਾਨ ॥੬॥"

It is described as the goddess bringing the end of all elements and the destroyer of all the sufferings; O the sword-Bhavani (goddess) ! You are the destroyer of fear; bring the happiness to all.

(page 1360).

This text- Shastra Jap Mala- is amazing dense where Guru ji appears to be equating weapons with mantras. You wouldnt know what it means and so shouldnt touch it.

So Devi Naam (Bhavani) is clearly making an appearance. By the way the part you quoted didnt support what you were trying to say but dont worry I saw the part you meant to quote, but even then in light of the above- there you go!

heres some more incase you are still doubting:

"ਸ਼ਸਤ੍ਰ ਸ਼ੇਰ ਸਮਰਾਂਤ ਕਰਿ ਸਿੱਪਰਾਰਿ ਸ਼ਮਸ਼ੇਰ ॥ "

Now tell me whose weapon- of which form- the lion (sher) is? Hint hint- she is depicted with four arms- as you put it. Durga aka Sherwani.

look at line 23:

"Thou art the sword and dagger chopping the enemies and considering Indra as Thy devotee; Thou didst bestow on him the position of the king of gods.23." (line 23) this is SriDasam.Org's translation. personally i do not knwo if it is correct, but if it is who is this form who helped Indra? Chandi Di Vaar. Durga rupa.

Edited August 13, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

The page numbers of those quotes are there, otherwise just google the translation lines. Does where these quotes appear somehow change their meaning?

Follow the arguement, you will see how Durga refers to Shakti, as does Bhagauti. theres no circles just you running around clutching at straws. If it is saying Bhagauti di Ustat in a place where Bhavani is mentioned, also if like it says Bhagauti di Ustat in another part of Dasam Granth it says Devi di Ustat (like i quoted earlier) arent the two equatable

you are like a broken record. you look at the actual words quoted. if you are just going to say every word used is Akal you are not even worthy of dicsussion. When are you going to face the fact that the Bani doesnt only use the word Akal it uses other specific words? Are you really so ignorant?

It doesnt matter since what I am saying is that these are all forms of what you can only understand as 'Akal' anyway.

What is the Devi doing in Krishna Avtar? Do you really have to ask? The Author is invoking her blessing to relate the events/descriptions. this is obvious. This happens continually thorught Dasam Granth it seems to me.

"It is all praise of God and nothing more than that. Do not turn praise of god to make deities as God. "

I agree with the first part, but these are different forms of the One, hence the different Names. Its the other way around to your second sentence. these deities are none other than forms of Him. It is Him being praised. Like page 96 I told you before.

You are not accepting that these are His Forms, which is what the part of Dasam Granth bani (someonewhere Thou Art) seems to me to be saying.

It seems like you cant accept Him being associated with the Holy Forms venerated by Hindus. Like you dont want to accept the two are related. This is your ideological bigotry.

[navjot2]

If he does not manifest as avtar then vishnu and party are not Him. He creates and decimate crores of such characters.

When Guruji says that Akal creates and destroys crores of Krishnas- the way I understand it is that it is Praise of the Unmanifest. Afterall is Krishna a small thing? Krishna is considuered one of/if not The Mightiest Forms. I understand that it is being said as Great as Manifestated Forms are, the Unmanifest is Much Greater- so we not limit or underestimate its potential. At all.

So whereas I see this as gyana/ustat of Akal you see it as a hateful statement towards Hindus and an statement against Krishna. This shows your mindset.

[navjot2]

These deities fall under the above category. When they are not able to comprehend God how can they become God. How can Guru sahib ask boon from such devis? It is sheer ignorance to say like this.Moreover sikhs believe in shabadguru? if you learn this simple thing you will have no questions.

lol see what I mean about it being you who runs around in circles.

If There is Only One, then who are these deities? And arent they being refered to by Naams throughout Dasam Bani. They are all His Forms. Like you quoted 'Tu Hi Bhavani'.

These Goddesses are His Boon-granting Form. that is what I Understand.

Look say there is one man. when he goes to work he puts on a police unifrom so people reocgnise his job as policeman. we he goes on holiday he puts on casual clothes so people know he is carefree. it is one man but different forms. do you see?

look, not every sikh was from the same background that time. Guru ji was above religions. He could use all these dharams language with ease, perceiving directly what they actually meant. If you wouldnt understand what he means in some of these texts a Hindu from one of those schools would get it right away. So it would confuse you but they would get it.

At the end of the day these names like Bhavani, Shivaa, Saraada. The Author Himself utilised them. Why would he do this rather than just using the word Akal? why do you think you know better?

I dont fundamentally disagree with you (He is Only asking Boons from the One). But you cant get over seeing Him as anything other than the word 'Akal', so you psychologically censor whenever you see a different Naam used.

[navjot2]

You are a funny fellow. first you say God does not take birth so we cannot give a naam to him. even before that you say we believe in shabadguru. and now after that you yourself call him Akal? Then you quote me a translation saying 'Sat Naam' is His Actual Naam?

now you are saying that the names in Gurbani are functional names? Yet right the start of Sukhmani it says that He and His Naams are One. They are not seperate.

How does Kirtam equate to 'merely descriptive' please explain? and what does 'para poorbala' mean?

Its becoming clear to me that you put your manufactured ideology even above both SGGS and DG, and think these are to be interpreted in light of your own ideology, which someone else taught (brainwashed) you. 'Akal Purakhism'. The biggest give away to knowing that someone has been brainwashed by those people is there writting has 'Guru Sahib' in it.

Yes God does not take birth, but- to paraphrase- 'adi ant eko avtaara'- He Is Everything. You cant seem to think of Him as anything except Transcendent.

I already explained about deities relation to God. see above when I am explaining more about agreeing with Balbir. no point repeating myself.

Also Jama is not hell, it is death. And Sri Pati is the word used in what you quote, as in The Auspicious Master. As in One Supreme. that is my understanding. And I accept 100% what He says there, just like I accept 100% when He says 'Tu Hi Bhavani' etc.

Edited August 13, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

Arya Samajis are themselves Anit-Hindus. You would know that if you knew about Satya Prakash. Didnt they refuse to be categorised as Hindus when imprisoned in British time?

actually what they were trying to do was put sikhs down by equating them with Hindus, who they had already insulted.

you are acting as if he (Nabha) wrote that book for sikhs, when he actually wrote it for non-sikhs, as a violent gesture. hence its in Hindu.

Nabha singh mirrors Arya Samaji in their fanaticism. they were competing. like minded people felt threatened by each other.

what do we care how people external to us view us? unless the fixation is on external identity/politics

Edited August 13, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

This is the question for you again. Reply yes or no.

Question

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

since you used plural, the answer is no.

but by writting or+ he was inviting elaboration. so it has already been answered

Edited August 13, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

Read below:

ਹਰਿ ਜਨਮ ਮਰਨ ਬਿਹੀਨ ॥ ਦਸ ਚਾਰ ਚਾਰ ਪ੍ਰਬੀਨ ॥

हरि जनम मरन बिहीन ॥ दस चार चार प्रबीन ॥

The Lord is sans birth and death, He is skiful in all eighteen sciences.

ਅਕਲੰਕ ਰੂਪ ਅਪਾਰ ॥ ਅਨਛਿੱਜ ਤੇਜ ਉਦਾਰ ॥੧॥੩੧॥

अकलंक रूप अपार ॥ अनछि्ज तेज उदार ॥१॥३१॥

That unblemished Entity is Infinite, His Benevolent Glory is Everlasting. 1.31.

this never was in dispute! beautiful shabad.

[singh2]

If it is saying Bhagauti di Ustat in a place where Bhavani is mentioned, also if like it says Bhagauti di Ustat in another part of Dasam Granth it says Devi di Ustat (like i quoted earlier) arent the two equatable

Just show me where in Dasam Granth BHAGAUTI IS REFERRED as deity Durga? I will rest my case if you are able to. Your interpolations are wrong.

Guru sahib is praising God and writing it is God whose potential is in everyone. Nothing more than that.Keep in mind just writing

ab devi ji ku ustat does not make eulogy to Devi. Read the whole ustat and it is clear whom Guru sahib is referring to. term Bhagauti ji sahai

comes in many compositions of Dasam granth even though they have nothing to do with Durga. So get over it. If due to your

upbringing you cann't then do not preach a skewed agenda here.

The topic started when you wrote that Guru sahib is asking boon from deity Durga in Chandi Chritra in shabad " Deh Siva bar mohe---"

The answer to that is big NO. It is wrong to take literal meaning of any word.Guru sahib has clearly written that God created Durga.Hence

she is not absolute God. You agree to it.

If i accept your logic then then you will apply same logic elsewhere for example wherever Ram is referred to as God , you will say that it is Ram of ayodhaya.

You are already saying it in terms of Krishan. You are dead wrong.

The conclusion is that Guru sahib has described these deities as engrossed in maya. It is a mistake to imagine that Guru sahib will ask boon from someone

who is Other from them.

Edited August 13, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

You are a funny fellow. first you say God does not take birth so we cannot give a naam to him. even before that you say we believe in shabadguru. and now after that you yourself call him Akal? Then you quote me a translation saying 'Sat Naam' is His Actual Naam?

now you are saying that the names in Gurbani are functional names? Yet right the start of Sukhmani it says that He and His Naams are One. They are not seperate.

How does Kirtam equate to 'merely descriptive' please explain? and what does 'para poorbala' mean?

Its becoming clear to me that you put your manufactured ideology even above both SGGS and DG, and think these are to be interpreted in light of your own ideology, which someone else taught (brainwashed) you. 'Akal Purakhism'. The biggest give away to knowing that someone has been brainwashed by those people is there writting has 'Guru Sahib' in it.

Yes God does not take birth, but- to paraphrase- 'adi ant eko avtaara'- He Is Everything. You cant seem to think of Him as anything except Transcendent.

I already explained about deities relation to God. see above when I am explaining more about agreeing with Balbir. no point repeating myself.

Also Jama is not hell, it is death. And Sri Pati is the word used in what you quote, as in The Auspicious Master. As in One Supreme. that is my understanding. And I accept 100% what He says there, just like I accept 100% when He says 'Tu Hi Bhavani' etc.

I gave you an example that Guru sahib wrote on ang 98

gurmukh sangee krisan muraaray.

The above is refrence to God and should not be translated to mean deity Krishna. You say that the refrence is to

deity Krishna.

Read whole shabad to know what it means. All these names are functional names.

maajh mehlaa 5.

Maajh, Fifth Mehl:

paarbarahm aprampar dayvaa.

The Supreme Lord God is Infinite and Divine;

agam agochar alakh abhayvaa.

He is Inaccessible, Incomprehensible, Invisible and Inscrutable.

deen da-i-aal gopaal gobindaa har Dhi-aavahu gurmukh gaatee jee-o. ||1||

Merciful to the meek, Sustainer of the World, Lord of the Universe-meditating on the Lord, the Gurmukhs find salvation. ||1||

gurmukh maDhusoodan nistaaray.

The Gurmukhs are emancipated by the Lord.

gurmukh sangee krisan muraaray.

The Lord becomes the Gurmukh's Companion.

da-i-aal damodar gurmukh paa-ee-ai horat kitai na bhaatee jee-o. ||2||

The Gurmukh finds the Merciful Lord. He is not found any other way. ||2||

nirhaaree kaysav nirvairaa.

He does not need to eat; His Hair is Wondrous and Beautiful; He is free of hate.

kot janaa jaa kay poojeh pairaa.

Millions of people worship His Feet.

gurmukh hirdai jaa kai har har so-ee bhagat ikaatee jee-o. ||3||

He alone is a devotee, who becomes Gurmukh, whose heart is filled with the Lord, Har, Har. ||3||

)

amogh darsan bay-ant apaaraa.

Forever fruitful is the Blessed Vision of His Darshan; He is Infinite and Incomparable.

vad samrath sadaa daataaraa.

He is Awesome and All-powerful; He is forever the Great Giver.

gurmukh naam japee-ai tit taree-ai gat naanak virlee jaatee jee-o. ||4||6||13||

As Gurmukh, chant the Naam, the Name of the Lord, and you shall be carried across. O Nanak, rare are those who know this state! ||4||6||13||

Edited August 13, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

Arya Samajis are themselves Anit-Hindus. You would know that if you knew about Satya Prakash. Didnt they refuse to be categorised as Hindus when imprisoned in British time?

actually what they were trying to do was put sikhs down by equating them with Hindus, who they had already insulted.

you are acting as if he (Nabha) wrote that book for sikhs, when he actually wrote it for non-sikhs, as a violent gesture. hence its in Hindu.

Nabha singh mirrors Arya Samaji in their fanaticism. they were competing. like minded people felt threatened by each other.

what do we care how people external to us view us? unless the fixation is on external identity/politics

Learn to be truthful sometimes. That is outright a lie. Who was Gulzari lal Nanda who gave most of punjabi speaking areas to haryana as a Home miniter. He was a hindu and also an arya samaji. Who was Pandit shardha

Ram Phillauri who shot the first anti sikh shot in Punjab. he was arya samaji and a Hindu. Who were Chaudhry charan singh, Mahasha press of Lahore and then jalandhar who hated sikhs. Of course they were Hindus and arya samaji also.

The following is from two Hindu writers

AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OF HINDU-Sikh CONFLICT IN PUNJAB

Dr. K. T. Lalvani (London) - S. Raghunath Iyengar (Lagos)

It did not take us long to trace the roots of this conflict way back to over thirty years ago, at the time when perhaps not even one Hindi daily paper existed in the East Punjab, when suddenly a vast majority of Punjabi Hindus influenced by Arya Samaj, Jan Sangh and local R.S.S, falsely claimed to be Hindi speaking almost overnight.

Unquote

Hindus were saying that Guru Gobind singh was doing pooja of Durga. The same thing you are stating here. Bhai sahib wrote his book to blunt the propaganda of these fanatic hindus . The book is in question answer form between a Hindu and a sikh. You are repeating here what Hindu is saying in the book. Read

http://www.searchsikhism.com/hind11.html

Hindu states in Hum Hindu nahin

Hindu: At Ardaas (congregational prayer) Sikhs always recite:

ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਸਿਮਰ ਕੈ...॥

In the beginning I remember Bhagauti..

It clearly shows that in Khalsa Dharma there is worship of the goddess. In fact the word “Bhagauti” is ‘Bhagwati’ which means goddess. Guru Gobind Singh Ji used to write poetry in Persian script and hence Bhawati and Bhagauti are written in the same way. The writers of the Gurmukhi script, without understanding the concept pronunciation made it into Bhagauti.

Sikh replies to Hindu In Hum Hindu nahin

Sikh: In Gurmat Sudhakar the word ‘Bhagauti’ is discussed in details that will remove your doubt. Here are a few questions that should satisfy you.

a) It is written in the Vaar of Chandi:

ਲਈ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਦੁਰਗਸਾਹ ਵਰ ਜਾਗਨ ਭਾਰੀ ॥ ਲਾਈ ਰਾਜੇ ਸੁੰਭ ਨੋ ਰਤੁ ਪੀਐ ਪਿਆਰੀ ॥

Durga held out her sword, appearing like great lustrous fire; She struck it on the king Sumbh and this lovely weapon drinks blood.

If ‘Bhagauti’ means goddess then does the above mean “Durga caught hold of bhagauti (goddess) and hit her on the head of Raja Sumbh and she tasted his blood?” What kind of goddess is this bhagauti? Is she a tool that can be used to hit others?

Do you also believe that Guru Arjan Dev Ji also wrote in Persian script from which Bhai Gurdas Ji was mislead in copying.

ਭਗਉਤੀ ਭਗਵੰਤ ਭਗਤਿ ਕਾ ਰੰਗੁ ॥ ਸਗਲ ਤਿਆਗੈ ਦੁਸਟ ਕਾ ਸੰਗੁ ॥

ਮਨ ਤੇ ਬਿਨਸੈ ਸਗਲਾ ਭਰਮੁ ॥ ਕਰਿ ਪੂਜੈ ਸਗਲ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ॥

ਸਾਧਸੰਗਿ ਪਾਪਾ ਮਲੁ ਖੋਵੈ ॥ ਤਿਸੁ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਕੀ ਮਤਿ ਊਤਮ ਹੋਵੈ ॥…..

ਹਰਿ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਹਿਰਦੈ ਬਸਾਵੈ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਐਸਾ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਭਗਵੰਤ ਕਉ ਪਾਵੈ ॥3॥

The true Bhagaautee, the devotee of Adi Shakti, loves the devotional worship of God. He forsakes the company of all wicked people. All doubts are removed from his mind. He performs devotional service to the Supreme Lord God in all. In the Company of the Holy, the filth of sin is washed away. The wisdom of such a Bhagaautee becomes supreme……… The Lotus Feet of the Lord abide in his heart. O Nanak, such a Bhagaautee attains the Lord God. ||3||

You should pay attention and tell us is it Bhagauti or Bhagwati? And what is its gender? The word ‘Bhagauti’ here is used as masculine and hence it cannot mean goddess.

c) In the Bhagauti Stotar (Panegyric verse) and in the writings of Bhai Gurdas Ji we find:

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੈਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ (ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 1)

Hail to Siri (mighty) Bhagauti (Sword) that cuts sharp.

ਨਾਉ ਭਗਉਤੀ ਲੋਹੁ ਘੜਾਇਆ ॥

Name Bhagauti made of iron. (Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 25)

Does it mean that Bhagauti (goddess – if that is the meaning) is made of iron? In Dabistan-Mazahib, Mohsanfani has given an event to which he himself was a witness. That should show how much respect the Sikhs had for goddess Durga.

ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਕੀਰਤਪੁਰ ਪਹੁੰਚੇ, ਜੋ ਤਾਰਾ ਚੰਦ ਦੀ ਰਾਜਧਾਨੀ ਵਿਚ ਸੀ । ਉਥੋਂ ਦੇ ਲੋਕ ਮੂਰਤੀ ਪੂਜਕ ਸਨ । ਪਹਾੜ ਦੇ ਸਿਰ ਪਰ ਇਕ ਨੈਣਾਂ ਦੇਵੀ ਦਾ ਮੰਦਰ ਸੀ, ਜਿਸ ਨੂੰ ਪੂਜਣ ਲਈ ਆਸ ਪਾਸ ਦੇ ਲੋਕ ਆਇਆ ਕਰਦੇ ਸਨ । ਇਕ ਭੈਰੋਂ ਨਾਮੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਸਿਖ ਨੇ ਮੰਦਰ ਵਿਚ ਪਹੁੰਚ ਕੇ ਨੈਣਾਂ ਦੇਵੀ ਦਾ ਨੱਕ ਤੋੜ ਸੁੱਟਿਆ । ਇਸ ਗੱਲ ਦੀ ਚਰਚਾ ਸਾਰੇ ਫੈਲ ਗਈ । ਪਹਾੜੀ ਰਾਜਿਆਂ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਪਾਸ ਪਹੁੰਚ ਕੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਦੀ ਸ਼ਿਕਾਇਤ ਕੀਤੀ । ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਭੈਰੋਂ ਸਿੱਖ ਨੂੰ ਰਾਜਿਆਂ ਦੇ ਸਾਹਮਣੇ ਬੁਲਾ ਕੇ ਪੁੱਛਿਆ, ਤਾਂ ਉਸ ਨੇ ਆਖਿਆ ਕੇ ਦੇਵੀ ਤੋਂ ਪੁੱਛਣਾ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਓਸ ਦਾ ਨੱਕ ਕਿਸ ਨੇ ਤੋੜਿਆ ਹੈ । ਇਸ ਪਰ ਰਾਜਿਆਂ ਨੇ ਭੈਰੋਂ ਨੂੰ ਆਖਿਆ ਕਿ ਹੇ ਮੂਰਖ! ਕਦੇ ਦੇਵੀ ਭੀ ਗੱਲਾਂ ਕਰ ਸਕਦੀ ਹੈ? ਭੈਰੋਂ ਨੇ ਹੱਸ ਕੇ ਜਵਾਬ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਕਿ ਜੋ ਦੇਵੀ ਬੋਲ ਨਹੀਂ ਸਕਦੀ ਔਰ ਆਪਣੇ ਅੰਗਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਨਹੀਂ ਬਚਾ ਸਕਦੀ, ਤੁਸੀਂ ਓਸ ਤੋਂ ਨੇਕੀ ਦੀ ਕੀ ਉਮੈਦ ਰਖਦੇ ਹੋ? ਇਸ ਗੱਲ ਨੂੰ ਸੁਣ ਕੇ ਰਾਜੇ ਚੁੱਪ ਹੋ ਗਏ ।

Guru Gobind Singh Ji reached Kiratpur, which was in the state of Raja Tara Chand. People of that state worshipped the goddess. On the hill top there was a temple of Naina Devi (goddess) and people used to come there for worship. There was a Sikh Bhairo. He cut the nose of the goddess (idol). News spread all over, the hill kings complained to the Guru. The Guru enquired from the Sikh in front of the kings. He said, “It should be asked from the goddess who has cut her nose.” On this the kings said, “Bhairo, are you an idiot? You know the goddess cannot speak.” Bhai laughed and replied, “if the goddess (idol) cannot speak and cannot protect the body then what good you expect of her?” Then the kings were quiet.

Here it will be worthwhile to say something about the goddess to our Sikh brethren.

Dear followers of Guru Nanak: First of all, consider who goddess was and what good she has done for the world? From the Puranas we learn that she was daughter of Himalayas and was married to Shiva. That is why she is known by various names such as Parvati, and Girja. She helped the gods and fought against demons. She helped a number of times Indra to gain his throne and Indra is that god who spends all his day in watching the dance and show of beautiful maidens and passes his time in pleasures. From the Puranas we learn that there is hardly a Rishi (saint) whom Indra has not disturbed in his meditation and for that he sent bad character women. He himself indulged with the wives of the saints. One such story is that of Aahaleya. What comfort the goddess procured for the world by helping such as indulgent and bad character person? What reforms Indra introduced on taking his throne?

The story about Naina Devi and Jwala Mukhi is as follows. In a Yajna arranged by Dakhsha his daughter came there without invitation. She saw that there was no share in the Yajna for her husband Shiva and she jumped in the Havan Kund (sacred fire). Having come to know this Shiva picked the burning Sati on his trishul (three pronged spike). At that time parts of her body were scattered all over. Wherever a part of the body fell that place became worthy of worship. The place where eyes fell that became Naina Devi, where fell the tongue that became Jwala Mukhi and so forth.

From this story if we learn any lesson that is that women should also learn how to fight and they should respect their husbands, even more than their life. Beyond that this story does not serve any purpose.

Some self-willed say that they do not worship the daughter of Himalaya, i.e. the goddess with eight arms, but they believe in the Eternal power of God. We ask them, is God’s power separate from Him? Is it Eternal? If you accept Devi (goddess) separate from God, conscious, primal and eternal and worship that, then you do not accept Ik Oankar (One God) concept of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. And that is not Sikhi. If goddess is not separate from God then to worship her by giving her a separate image is ignorance and lack of sagacity. If goddess is some transient (non-eternal) identity even then according to Sikh religion she is not worthy of worship. In principle there is no justification for the worship of goddess.

Dear Sikh brothers, in our religion there have been noble women such as Bibi Nanaki, Bibi Amro, Bibi Bhani Ji, Bibi Veero Ji, Mata Sahib Kaur Ji and Mayee Bhaag Kaur Ji. Study their lives, remember their good deeds, follow them and instruct your daughters to gain good qualities like theirs. Thereby your human birth will be fruitful and you will be worthy of being called the sons of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. That will make you reformers in the country.

There is another goddess with which Guru Gobind Singh Ji has blessed you. Without that you are much away from religion. By dint of that goddess you removed injustice from this country and you were respected by Muslims and British. That goddess is:

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੈਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ ਕਰੇ ਏਕ ਤੇ ਦਵੈ ਸੁਭਟ ਹਾਥ ਸੋਹੀ ॥

(ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 1-2)

Hail to Siri (mighty) Bhagauti (Sword) that cuts sharp. That makes two of one and is beautiful in hand.

ਜੋਊ ਮੰਯਾਨ ਤੇ ਬੀਰ ਤੋ ਕੋ ਸੜੱਕੈ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਲੈ ਕਾਲ ਕੇ ਸਿੰਧ ਬੱਕੈ ਕੜੱਕੈ ॥

ਧਸੈ ਖੇਤ ਮੈਂ ਹਾਥ ਲੈ ਤੋਹਿ ਸੂਰੇ ॥ ਭਿਟੈ ਸਾਮੂਹੈ ਸਿੱਧ ਸਾਵੰਤ ਸੂਰੇ ॥

(ਭਗਉਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ ਸਤਰ 21-24)

When the brave take thee out of the sheath, they roar and pass the ocean of death. They advance in the battle field and fight advancing forward.

By turning your backs on these devis (noble women) you have offered many riches to these blood thirsty goddesses. If you had spent that on the well being of your daughters, the name of the Sikhs would have been known like the sun all over the world and coming generations would have been grateful to you. Still there is time. If you want progress for your Quam (community) and country, establish schools and colleges where Sikh character can be infused and reinforced and nourish devis (noble women) who are strong, praise worthy and worthy of Dharma. By that your decedents will learn of the counsel of Guru Nanak Dev Ji and they will change the kali-age (age of darkness) into Satyug (age of truth).

Unquote

Old arya samajis are reborn as RSS people. They are the ones in the fore front in attacking our scriptures and religion

Read this and click on link for photographs

http://www.info-sikh.com/PageRSS1.html

The recent announcement by the VHP of putting portraits of Guru Gobind Singh Ji and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in Hindu Mandirs has shocked Sikhs worldwide. The fact is that attacks on the Sikh faith and history have been ongoing for years in order to show Sikhs to be a part of Hinduism.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) was created over 75 years ago to spread Hindu culture. The group is organised through Shakhas or camps where members meet and train. In their daily prayers the RSS sing before the Bhagava Dhwaj (Saffron flag), which is regarded as the supreme Guru. The slogan of the RSS is ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ – Long live mother India. The mission of RSS is to unite and rejuvenate the ‘Bharat’ nation on the sound foundation of Hindu Dharma. The RSS is striving for a strong and united Hindu society and the vision of Hindutva. It’s definition of ‘Hindu’ is anyone born and belonging to India. This includes Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains. The RSS is opposed to anyone who tampers with India’s unity and integrity, it has 30,000 branches in India and 35 abroad.

The Rashtriya Sikh Sangat group, which is a branch of the main Rashrtiya Swayamsevak Sangh and also known as RSS was formed in Punjab in 1986 claiming to promote Sikh-Hindu relations. It’s main aim however is to attack and swallow the Sikh religion, and how is it trying to do this ? Over the last two years, the RSS has intensified its attention on Sikh affairs in Punjab. At every given opportunity, it has tried to build inroads into Sikh institutions and attacked the basic Sikh philosophy and way of life. By any means possible it is trying to undermine the history, the beliefs and institutions of the faith.

A disgusting depiction of the Gurus by the RSS

The attempt to subjugate the Sikh identity by the dominant and elite Hindu stream is nothing new. In the earlier part of the nineteenth century, Swami Dayanand Saraswati of Arya Samaj came down heavily against Sikh Gurus, Sikh scriptures and the Punjabi language, in response to which Bhai Kahan Singh wrote the famous book, 'Hum Hindu Nahin' – We are not Hindus. The current threat to the Sikh identity assumed serious proportions when the RSS chief, K. Sudarshan, while participating in the Rashtriya Sikh Sangat Convention in Amritsar (April 2000) said that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism while the Khalsa is a part of mainstream Hinduism which was created to protect Hinduism from Mughal tyranny. From that time on, many Sikh organizations undertook protest marches against Sudarshan and pointed out that Sikhism is a religion in its own right and that they will not tolerate the RSS efforts to undermine their separate Sikh identity.

The spokesperson of Dal Khalsa went on to say that, the RSS was trying to impose a centralized monolithic society in India and that they would oppose this hegemonic agenda. Meanwhile, many other Sikh organizations pointed out that the RSS was interfering in the religious, cultural, social and political matters of Sikhs – an act which should be condemned and opposed. In the Lok Sabha, one MP alleged that the RSS was distributing anti-Sikh literature through the Sangat. It was responsible for disturbing the religious harmony in Punjab. This MP also criticized the Ministry of Human Resource Development for giving Rs. 17 crore to the RSS for propaganda work.

The Rashtriya Sikh Sangat has been formed as a branch of theRSS and as a new member of Sangh Parivar. In addition to others, it is being spearheaded by one Shri B.L. Sharma 'Prem' -- a BJP/VHP old hand. Since then, he has got himself baptized to Sikhism and is now acting as the Trojan Horse of RSS in the Sikh community.

The establishment of the kingdom around the Sikh Gurus led to the cycle of conflict with neighbouring Hindu rulers and the Delhi-based Mughal Empire and took its extreme form with the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Guru Gobind Singh Ji stood firm while Aurangzeb was brutally suppressing all the rebellions against the Mughal Empire. Guru Sahib Ji’s immediate tussle was with the Raja of Bilaspur who eyed Guru Ji’s popularity and influence with great concern. This led to the battle in which Guru Sahib Ji was victorious over the Raja of Bilaspur. The victory brought in the hostility of many of the rajas of the hill states towards Guru Gobind Singh Ji. In due course Emperor Aurangzeb, along with the Hindu rajas, drove Guru Sahib Ji away from Anandpur Sahib and in the battle, his sahibzaday (children) were caught, tortured and put to death. Later there was an attempt at rapprochement from Aurangzeb's side after he received the Epistle of Victory (Zafarnama) from Guru Ji, and he invited Guru Gobind Singh Ji to meet him in the Deccan. As Guru Ji was on his way to meet him, Aurangzeb died, but the process of reconciliation with the Mughal sultanate continued and in due course Aurangzeb's son Bahadur Shah, thankful for Guru Ji’s assistance in his battle for succession became friendly. Now, the distorted interpretation of these historical fact forms the base of 'select historiography', whereby the clash between Guru Sahib Ji and the Mughal sultanate is projected to the forefront and the conflict between the Hindu rajas and Sikhs is suppressed or glossed over.

The current opportunism of the Sikh political party, The Akali Dal, in allying with the RSS and the BJP is making it blind to the real project of the RSS. The severe setback to the Sikh community due the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom is projected to show the devil in Congress alone. The real role of the RSS in backing up the Indira-Rajiv onslaught on the Sikhs is deliberately underplayed. It is interesting to note that one of the significant articles by a top RSS ideologue, Nanaji Deshmukh, which subtly supports Rajiv's turning the other way, in the face of the post-Indira-assassination-anti-Sikh pogroms, is hardly known. Mr. Deshmukh in a document circulated to the top echelons of political leadership in the wake of the '84 pogroms presents them as the genuine feeling of anger of Hindus against the Sikhs. He presents the whole thing as though the whole Sikh community was supporting the act of the two guards of Mrs. Gandhi and that because of the assassination, they should quietly bear this attack on the innocent Sikhs.

In the same article he blesses the Rajiv regime while blaming the Sikh intellectuals for alienating the Sikhs from the Hindu community (Moments of Soul Searching by Nanaji Deshmukh, translated and published in the Hindi journal, Pratipaksh, Nov. 25, 1984). Incidentally this weekly journal at the time was published by none other than the erstwhile secular-socialist, George Fernandes, who is currently enjoying the warmth of BJP's lap. A leopard can change its spots, but RSS cannot overcome its politics of Hindu rashtra in pursuance of which it wants to subjugate other religious streams, which have emerged in the subcontinent

How did this begin?

Brahminism has always feared the Sikh faith. The Sikh Gurus proclaimed the equality of all humanity and rejected practices like caste, holy threads and worship of the cow. The exploitation of simple people by the Brahmin was eliminated. Although Hindu fundamentalists have taken a keen interest in destroying Sikhism for centuries, this latest cycle of Hindu attacks on Sikhism can be traced to 1993. The Sikh Liberation Movement had been brutally crushed in Punjab and was on its final breaths. Sikh villagers were afraid of being identified as being practicing Sikhs and roves of young Sikh men were cutting their hair so that they would not be harassed or killed by the police.

It was at this point that a new “Sikh” organization, the Rashtri Sikh Sangat (RSS) began to enter Sikh villages. This organization began to distribute literature about the Sikh faith and hold meetings. Many villagers thought that it was an attempt to revive Sikh pride, but in fact, the literature was written to show Sikhs to be a part of Hinduism.

The “Akali” party of Punjab, while claiming to represent Sikhs, is lead by the same old men who allowed the 1978 Amritsar massacre and the martyrdom of Bhai Fauja Singh and 12 other fellow Singhs. They are the same ones who let Gurbachana Narakdhari go unpunished.

The linking of the Guru's with the Hindu Om.

The Akali party, in an alliance with the Hindu BJP began to rule Punjab. The RSS activity in Punjab also increased. Sangh programs were held in places like Guru Nanak Dev Stadium (Ludhiana) with the presence of Parkash Badal and other Akali/BJP leaders. On November 16, 1997, Badal while introducing the new RSS chief sad, “I can say with confidence that the Sangh, under the leadership of Raju Bhaiya is working towards removing all its shortcomings. Whenever this country has faced either internal or external danger, the Sangh and it’s workers have been on the front lines.

Today, I am feeling very lucky to be a part of this gathering.”

Raju Bhaiya in his speech that day, in the presence of Badal, declared, “All Hindus are Sikhs and Sikhs Hindus. We are all one. Some grow hair and some don’t. I say that All Hindus are Sikhs and all Sikh are Hindus. Our principles are the same. With the help of unity, we become very powerful…People are right when they say that Hindus have the power to make Hindustan a leader in the world!”

Badal and RSS leaders

An RSS poster for the Punjab

Under the watchful guidance of this unholy alliance, the RSS increased its parchar amongst the Sikhs. It was a perfect time to move in for the kill. The Sikhs had been beaten very badly by the Indian government and their confidence had been shaken. The RSS would give the Sikhs sweet poison. They shouted loudly that the RSS and all Hindus LOVED Sikhs. They would preach that Sikhs were after all no different than Hindus. The Sikh Gurus were true Hindus and Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu blessed the Sikh faith. The Sikhs, they claimed, should feel proud as the sword-arm of Hinduism.

In this way, the RSS has tried to make the Sikh masses try to take pride in establishing a link between Sikhism and Hinduism. Once this link becomes solid, the RSS has already devised a plan to decay the foundations of the Sikh faith and history

Who is the Rashtriya Sikh Sangat?

The Rashtriya Sikh Sangat (RSS) was officially formed on November 23, 1986 in Amritsar. The founder was one “Shamsher Sinh”

The express goals of the RSS are

1) To strengthen the bonds between Sikhs and Hindus to promote National unity, awareness and patriotism.

2) To make Guru Nanak’s “Hindustan Smaalsee Bola” a reality and maintain national patriotism and unity.

3) To promote Sri Guru Bani fro Sri Guru Granth Sahib

4) To perform seva with “Sarbat Da Bhala” in mind.

The Rashtriya Sikh Sangat has 500 branches across India and publishes the magazine “Sangat Sandesh”.

Other goals of this organization are the creation of a Mandar at Ayodhya’s “Ram Janam Bhoomi” and also a Gurdwara to commemorate visits by Guru Nanak, Guru Tegh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji shown as an 'Indian' hero.

Every month, the Rashtriya Sikh Sangat has a function in which occasionally Sri Guru Granth Sahib is parkash and sometimes not. Usually the function takes place with paintings of Guru Nanak, Guru Tegh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh at the front. These paintings are accompanied by paintings of Ram and Krishna. The paintings are garlanded with flowers.

The meeting begins with 5 readings of the Mool Mantar and then 20 minutes of keertan. After this, Sukhmani Sahib or Ram Avtar or Krishan Avtar are read. This is followed by a singing of “Vanday Matram”.

The meeting concludes with a 20 minute lecture on the history the original RSS founder Golvarkar and discussion of the role of Sanskrit in Sri Guru Granth Sahib or some other similar topic.

Ganesh superimposed on a Gurnwara

Some Quotes…

* “Instead of sacrificing humans, Guru ji sacrificed goats and started the tradition of Punj Pyaaray. All five Pyaaras were followers of the Hindu faith” {Dr. Himmat Sinh in Rashtra Dharam)

* “The Sikh Gurus showed faith in the Hindu faith and visited Hindu pilgrimage sites to show this” (Rashtra Dharam, p. 31)

* “When Guru Arjan was doing the Kar Seva of Harimandeir, Vishnu reflected and said, “Lakshmi, the Guru is my own form. There is no difference between us. He is making my temple. Let us go and see the building of our new temple…” (Rashtra Dharam, 90)

* “The difference between Hindus and Sikhs was the creation of the English mind.” (Rashtra Dharam, 98)

* “If today someone were to make a portrait of Guru Nanak without a beard and turban, his life would be in danger but in fact, the practice of keeping long hair and beards began only in the 20th Century. (Madhu Kishvara, Hindustan Times Aug 21, 1999)

* “Guru Arjan Dev and Guru Tegh Bahadur used to pay obeisance to the feet of the Devi” (Surindar Kumar, Jag Bani)

* “Guru Gobind Singh with the blessings of the Avtars (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva) created the Khalsa Panth.” (Sangat Sandesh, Sept 1998)

* “Maharana Partap, the Rani of Jhansi and Guru Gobind Singh were all great patriots” (Rashtra Dharam)

* “The Sangh [RSS] is the Khalsa” (Ravani, Dec 1997)

Edited August 13, 2009 by singh2

[navjot2]

so just to clarify:

Keep in mind just writing ab devi ji ku ustat does not make eulogy to Devi.

It is wrong to take literal meaning of any word. Guru sahib has clearly written that God created Durga.

If i accept your logic then then you will apply same logic elsewhere for example wherever Ram is referred to as God , you will say that it is Ram of ayodhaya.

You are already saying it in terms of Krishan. You are dead wrong.

the first sentence shows laughable denial. the second shows how you cant face up to what is written (why is it wrong to take literal approach?). (keep in mind SGGS is written in Hymns and Dasam Granth is sections, so neither necessarily read in order of layout, therefore your referencing inbetween bani's as if they are philosophphical treatises is flawed).

my interpolations are direct and simple. yours are based on ideological 'interpolations', so you hide behind metaphor.

Durga is represents His Shakti 'primordial power'). Clearly delineated in quoted sections above. But whats the point in argueing with someone in denial?

What I said about Krishan /Vaishnavas is wrong? courtesy of www.SriGranth.org:

"Cẖaṯurā▫ī na cẖaṯurbẖuj pā▫ī▫ai. Rahā▫o." (324)

Through cleverness, the four-armed Lord is not obtained

and just in case you dont know who four armed Lord is it is Vishnu rupa:

"Ḏẖār kẖel cẖaṯurbẖuj kahā▫i▫ā."

He has staged His play; He is called the four-armed Lord.

"Sāval sunḏar rūp baṇāvėh beṇ sunaṯ sabẖ mohaigā. ||9||"

He assumed the beautiful form of the blue-skinned Krishna; hearing His flute, all are fascinated and enticed. ||9||

"Sankẖ cẖakar gaḏā hai ḏẖārī mahā sārthī saṯsangā. ||10||"

He carries the conch, the chakra and the war club; He is the Great Charioteer, who stays with His Saints. ||10||

(1084)

You see- conch, chakra, club- Vishnu Rupa.

So when Guru Nanak met Chaitanya Bhagat at Puri and they dang kirtan together do you think they were singing to different Lords?

Edited August 14, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

his trash was aimed at Hindus to be Anti Hindu (hence the Hindi) and neither of any worth nor interest to sikhs.

you are calling me a liar? go look at satya prakash and what it says about vaishnavas, shaivas, devi pujaris etc obviously it fits your hateful fantasy/hero-complex that all Hindus are somehow 'enemies of sikhi'

i told you im not interested in the false filth of Nabha Singh. you can read it yourself given you have basically schooled you self on the nonesense that these idiots followers have put up on the internet. i was wondering how long it would take you to start pasting the trash you have been reading directly then trying to pass it off as your own knowledge

where is this copy and paste anything like what i have been saying? At least my arguements were my own. you can compare them.

I already told you that Bhagauti ('devotee' according to your Nabha Baba) is Chandi, who spang froth from Durga's own form. You tell me what the word 'gharieaa' means from the BHai Gurdas quote?

Lord and His Power differentiated as here in Guru Granth:

"Kamlākanṯ karahi kanṯūhal anaḏ binoḏī nihsangā." ||6||

Lord of Maya (Kamlakanta), miracle-worker, absorbed in delightful play, unattached.

(Ang 1082)

You might get scared when you look at the above quote but rest assured a Vaishnava would 'get it' straight away, without needing to 'interpolate'.

p.s. my interpolations are wrong but yours are right...because you say so? it just shows how perverted your intellect/approach is that rather then allow Guru Granth or Dasam Granth talk for itself you believe that it needs a commentary or external explanation. You fanatics have tried to create a Mullah culture where we have to get 'right explanation' of Bani from you.

and one more thing you are saying 'these names are descriptive names'. well duh- descriptions- forms- of Him. Isnt everyname a description? But you are ignoring Sukhmani that says He and His Naams are One. oh well better to ignore what doesnt suit your arguement hey?

you still havent explained how 'kirtam' is related to sanskrit word for 'artificial' or whatever tenuous connection they/you are claiming. also a shabad quoted by you yourself above is equating ਹਰਿ with Akal.

Edited August 14, 2009 by navjot2

[singh2]

so just to clarify:

the first sentence shows laughable denial. the second shows how you cant face up to what is written (why is it wrong to take literal approach?). (keep in mind SGGS is written in Hymns and Dasam Granth is sections, so neither necessarily read in order of layout, therefore your referencing inbetween bani's as if they are philosophphical treatises is flawed).

my interpolations are direct and simple. yours are based on ideological 'interpolations', so you hide behind metaphor.

Durga is represents His Shakti 'primordial power'). Clearly delineated in quoted sections above. But whats the point in argueing with someone in denial?

What I said about Krishan /Vaishnavas is wrong? courtesy of www.SriGranth.org:

"Cẖaṯurā▫ī na cẖaṯurbẖuj pā▫ī▫ai. Rahā▫o." (324)

Through cleverness, the four-armed Lord is not obtained

and just in case you dont know who four armed Lord is it is Vishnu rupa:

"Ḏẖār kẖel cẖaṯurbẖuj kahā▫i▫ā."

He has staged His play; He is called the four-armed Lord.

"Sāval sunḏar rūp baṇāvėh beṇ sunaṯ sabẖ mohaigā. ||9||"

He assumed the beautiful form of the blue-skinned Krishna; hearing His flute, all are fascinated and enticed. ||9||

"Sankẖ cẖakar gaḏā hai ḏẖārī mahā sārthī saṯsangā. ||10||"

He carries the conch, the chakra and the war club; He is the Great Charioteer, who stays with His Saints. ||10||

(1084)

You see- conch, chakra, club- Vishnu Rupa.

So when Guru Nanak met Chaitanya Bhagat at Puri and they dang kirtan together do you think they were singing to different Lords?

You are repeating the same thing without understanding the meanings. Let me explain in a simple language.

A wave arising out of sea is part of sea water. But it does not become sea itself. A ray of sun is part of sunlight but it dees not become sun in itself.

In the same way God is present in his creation but creation does not become God.

Now you are talking complete nonsense when you quote as below and says that kabir ji asking that chaturbhj is Vishnu.

Quote by navjot2

"Cẖaṯurā▫ī na cẖaṯurbẖuj pā▫ī▫ai. Rahā▫o." (324)

Through cleverness, the four-armed Lord is not obtained

and just in case you dont know who four armed Lord is it is Vishnu rupa

:

Let me ask you a question. Are you equating God with vishnu? Read the whole shabad and get out of ignorance.