Terms Used In Sri Dasam Granth

[singh2]

see, hatred of Hindus.

Anyway, to each their own. I dont have to concern myself with what Hindus (or Muslims) do, certainly not to feel better about myself.

You smell the truth being stated here as hatred for Hindus. Manu smrities are part of Hinduism. In those low shudras are not considered

as humans. they are described as vassals of brahmins. Women are considered as inferior to men.

You have these inbuilt tyranny in your scriptures and if i someone quote those it becomes hate for Hindus. Go and preach this in RSS shakhas.

[singh2]

see, hatred of Hindus.

I made to inbuilt in equalities in Hindu religious texts such as manu smrities. Navjot2 is very concerned and call this as hatred

towrads Hindus.

Either he is not aware of manu smrities or he is trying to hide those due to his higher catse.

Though thisis not connected with sikhism i am quoting some manu smrities for him so that his knowledge is enhnaced.

http://hinduapartheid.blogspot.com/2006/08...ng-slavery.html

A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of high caste shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or [the king] shall cause his buttock to be gashed. (Any form of punishment for this 'crime').

If out of arrogance he [a Shudra] spits [on a superior] the king shall cause both his lips to be cut off.

If he [a Shudra] lays hold of the hair [of a superior] let the [king] unhesitatingly cut off his hands.

He who strikes [a Brahmin] even with a blade of grass . shall appease him by a prostration. But he who, intending to hurt a Brahmin, threatens [him with a stick and the like] shall remain in hell for a hundred years; he who [actually] strikes him [shall remain in hell] for a thousand years.

A Chandala (the 'lowest' caste), a village pig, a admin cut, a dog, a menstruating women and a eunuch must not look at the Brahmins when they eat.

Let him [a Brahmin] not dwell in a country where the rulers are Shudras . nor in one swarming with men of the lowest caste . Let him not give advice to a Shudra . for he who explains the sacred law [to a Shudra] or dictates him to a penance will sink together with that [man] into the hell [called] Asamvrita. Let him not recite [the Vedas] indistinctly, nor in the presence of Shudras . When he [a Brahmin] has touched a Chandala, a menstruating woman, an outcast, a woman in childbed, a corpse or one who has touched [a corpse], he becomes pure by bathing . Let him not allow a dead Brahmin to be carried out by a Shudra while men of the same caste are at hand, for that burnt offering which is defiled by a Shudra's touch is detrimental to [the deceased's passage to] heaven. A Brahmin who unintentionally approaches a woman of the Chandala or of [any other] very low caste, who eats [the food of such persons] and accepts [gifts from them] becomes an outcast, but [if he does it] intentionally he becomes their equal.

The dwellings of Chandalas and Svapakas [people of very 'low' caste] shall be outside the village and their wealth [shall be] dogs and donkeys. Their dress [shall be] the garments of the dead, [they shall eat] their food from broken dishes, black iron [shall be] their ornaments, and they must always wander from place to place . At night they shall not walk about in villages and in towns. By day they may go about for the purpose of their work, distinguished by marks at the king's command, and they shall carry out the corpses [of persons] who have no relatives-that is a settled rule.

A man of low caste, who, through covetousness, lives by the occupations of a higher one, the king shall deprive of his property and banish. It is better to [discharge] one's own [appointed caste] duty incompletely than to perform completely that of another; for he who lives according to the law of another [caste] is instantly excluded from his own . Let a [shudra] serve Brahmins, either for the sake of heaven or with a view to both [this life and the next], for he who is called the servant of a Brahmin thereby gains all his ends. The service of Brahmins alone is declared [to be] an excellent occupation for a Shudra, for whatever else besides this he may perform will bear him no fruit.

No collection of wealth must be made by a Shudra, even though he be able [to do it], for a Shudra who has acquired wealth gives pain to Brahmins.

He who has associated with outcasts, he who has approached the wives of other men and he who has stolen the property of a Brahmin becomes [after death] a brahmarakshas [fierce devil]. It is declared that a Shudra woman alone [can be] the wife of a Shudra, she and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Vaishya, those two and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Kshatriya, those three and one of his own caste [the wives] of a Brahmin . Twice-born ('upper' caste) men, who, in their folly, wed wives of the low [shudra] caste soon degrade their families and their children to the state of Shudras. According to Atri and to [Gautama] the son of Uthaya, he who weds a Shudra woman becomes an outcast . A Brahmin who takes a Shudra wife to his bed will [after death] sink into hell; if he begets a child by her he will lose the rank of a Brahmin.

A [man of ] low [caste] who makes love to a maiden [of] the highest [caste] shall suffer corporal punishment.

The property of a Brahmin must never be taken by the king, that is a settled rule; but [the property of men] of other castes the king may take on failure of all [heirs]. Let the king corporally punish all those [persons] who either gamble and bet or afford [an opportunity for it], likewise Shudras who assume the distinctive marks of twice-born [men].

Never slay a Brahmin, though he [may] have committed all [possible] crimes . No greater crime is known on earth than slaying a Brahmin. A king, therefore, must not even conceive in his mind the thought of killing a Brahmin. A Brahmin, be he ignorant or learned, is a great divinity, just as the fire, whether carried forth [for the performance of a sacrifice] or not carried forth, is a great divinity. Thus, though Brahmins employ themselves in all [sorts of] mean occupations they must be honoured in every way, for [each of] them is a very great deity. [The king] should order a Vaisya to trade, to lend money, to cultivate the land or to tend cattle, and a Shudra to serve the twice-born castes . A Brahmin who, because he is powerful,out of greed makes initiated [men of the] twice-born [castes] against their will to do the work of slaves, shall be fined by the king six hundred [panas]. But a Shudra, whether bought or not bought, he may compel to do servile work, for he was created by the Self-Existent (swayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmin. A Shudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude; since that is innate in him, who can set him free?

A Brahmin may confidently seize the goods of [his] Shudra [slave], for, as that [slave] can have no property, his master may take his possessions . That sinful man, who, through covetousness, seizes the property of the gods or the property of Brahmins feeds in another world on the leavings of vultures. The Brahmin is declared [to be] the creator [of the world], the punisher, the teacher [and hence] a benefactor [of all created beings], to himlet no man say anything unpropitious nor use any harsh words.

[navjot2]

so thats their dharam, i wouldnt know. who says that every Hindu conforms to Manu Smriti? Also, is there Dev Dasi system at your local Mandir? you are just grasping at straws. its no water of my back if you criticise others you have just exposed your mindset.

whereas those people cant accept Dasam Bani because of its Hindu references you have built up this thing about it being some kind of anti-Hindu text. you are mirror image of them.

keep your ideological filth away from our scipture.

Edited August 24, 2009 by navjot2

[navjot2]

At some places it may be written Ab devi ju ki ustat but if you read it and have some head to understand that Devi is none else but Akal purakh who does not take birth , does not die and is creaetor of all these deities.

exactly! Durga is also Him- But you cant accept that because, as has become clear, you are hinduphobic. Also what exactly has Manu Smriti got to do with our discussion of Dasam Granth?

Akal and His Shakti have been specifically differentiated:

"ਸਰਬ ਕਾਲ ਹੈ ਪਿਤਾ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਬਿ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਮਾਤ ਹਮਾਰਾ ॥"

He, my Lord is Father and Destroyer of all, the goddess Kalika is my mother.

174

So Mahakal/Akaal and His Shakti are two different reference points.

[navjot2]

now the caste issue too?

doesnt it say somewhere in Dasam Granth (correct me if I am wrong I might have misunderstood it) that part of the signs of Kaljug will be high and low castes intermarrying, Brahmans will act like shudras and shudras will act like Brahmans, and other stuff there will be incest etc

i think in the part about Kalki Avtar.

not that im hung up on caste. just mentioning it because you brought it up.

[SAadmin]

you guys are going totally off-topic on this thread, this topic is temporarily locked so that admins can split the off-topics post into a new thread.

[SAadmin]

Ok this topic is re-opened now under new tittle- Terms used in Sri Dasam Granth.

Please stay on topic, all off-topics/personal attacks will be deleted without any notice

[singh2]

exactly! Durga is also Him- But you cant accept that because, as has become clear, you are hinduphobic. Also what exactly has Manu Smriti got to do with our discussion of Dasam Granth?

Not only Durga the whole creation is Him. But sikhs are not to revere anyone in physical shape. We are followers of shabad guru. Worshipping someone in sarguna sarup is prohibited in sikhism.

"ਸਰਬ ਕਾਲ ਹੈ ਪਿਤਾ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਬਿ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਮਾਤ ਹਮਾਰਾ ॥"

He, my Lord is Father and Destroyer of all, the goddess Kalika is my mother.

174

Here kalika does not mean a physical entity. Had it been so It would have been maat Hamari and not maat hamara.

It is very similar to what we get in SGGS.

thoo(n) maeraa pithaa thoo(n)hai maeraa maathaa ||

You are my Father, and You are my Mother.

ang 103

Both refrences are to God. Moreover Guru sahib says very clearly in Dasam granth sahib

ਪਖਾਣ ਪੂਜ ਹੋਂ ਨਹੀਂ ॥ ਨ ਭੇਖ ਭੀਜ ਹੋ ਕਹੀਂ ॥

पखाण पूज हों नहीं ॥ न भेख भीज हो कहीं ॥

I do not worship stones, nor I have any liking for a particular guise.

ਅਨੰਤ ਨਾਮੁ ਗਾਇ ਹੋਂ ॥ ਪਰਮ ਪੁਰਖ ਪਾਇ ਹੋਂ ॥੩੫॥

अनंत नामु गाइ हों ॥ परम पुरख पाइ हों ॥३५॥

I sing infinite Names (of the Lord), and meet the Supreme Purusha.35.

ਨ ਧਿਆਨ ਆਨ ਕੋ ਧਰੋਂ ॥ ਨ ਨਾਮ ਆਨਿ ਉਚਰੋਂ ॥੩੮॥

न धिआन आन को धरों ॥ न नाम आनि उचरों ॥३८॥

I do not meditate on anyone else, nor do I repeat the Name of anyone else.38.

ਤਵਿਕ ਨਾਮ ਰਤਿਯੰ ॥ ਨ ਆਨ ਮਾਨ ਮਤਿਯੰ ॥

तविक नाम रतियं ॥ न आन मान मतियं ॥

I am absorbed only in the Name of the Lord, and honour none else.

ਪਰਮ ਧਿਆਨ ਧਾਰੀਯੰ ॥ ਅਨੰਤ ਪਾਪ ਟਾਰੀਯੰ ॥੩੯॥

परम धिआन धारीयं ॥ अनंत पाप टारीयं ॥३९॥

By meditating on the Supreme, I am absolved of infinite sins.39.

Bachitra natak, Dasam granth

[Kaljug]

exactly! Durga is also Him- But you cant accept that because, as has become clear, you are hinduphobic. Also what exactly has Manu Smriti got to do with our discussion of Dasam Granth?

Akal and His Shakti have been specifically differentiated:

"ਸਰਬ ਕਾਲ ਹੈ ਪਿਤਾ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਬਿ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਮਾਤ ਹਮਾਰਾ ॥"

He, my Lord is Father and Destroyer of all, the goddess Kalika is my mother.

174

So Mahakal/Akaal and His Shakti are two different reference points.

No, the Hindu Durga is the one who makes use of all those arms that Akal (that's Waheguru to you not some pre-literate Shamanic deity called Shiva) gave her to sweep the dust from the House of Nanak. This Hindu Durga is also the goddess that Bhai Lehna abandoned when he met Guru Nanak to become Guru Angad Dev Ji with the blessings of Waheguru.

First we had Bahadur claiming Sikhi was part of Islam now we have navjot2 claiming that we are part of the Hindu sect.

This forum never fails to amuse me at how much bullshit is allowed to be spewed here out of some misguided respect for others' beliefs, no matter how retarded they are.

I especially liked the "you refuse to be good little Hindus, therefore you are Hinduphobic" touch. I'm going to have to use a variation of that when I next argue with my Born Again Xian work colleague. Obviously he refuses to become a Sikh because he is Sikhiphobic.

K,

Edited August 24, 2009 by Kaljug

[singh2]

No, the Hindu Durga is the one who makes use of all those arms that Akal (that's Waheguru to you not some pre-literate Shamanic deity called Shiva) gave her to sweep the dust from the House of Nanak.

First we had Bahadur claiming Sikhi was part of Islam now we have navjot2 claiming that we are part of the Hindu sect.

This forum never fails to amuse me at how much bullshit is allowed to be spewed here out of some misguided respect for others' beliefs, no matter how retarded they are.

I especially liked the "you refuse to be good little Hindus, therefore you are Hinduphobic" touch. I'm going to have to use a variation of that when I next argue with my Born Again Xian work colleague. Obviously he refuses to become a Sikh because he is Sikhiphobic.

K,

That is what this navjot2 a hard core hindu is doing here for the last one month.

The topic started when he said that in shabad deh siva bar mohe--- Guru ji is asking boon from Durga.

He was given numerous verses to disprove his logic. But he kept on diverting the topic. He is a disciple

of hard core Hindu writer Sumer singh Chauhan who says that sikh Gurus were followers of Ram of ayodhaya.

These people have no rspect for religious sentiments of others.

[SAadmin]

This forum never fails to amuse me at how much bullshit is allowed to be spewed here out of some misguided respect for others' beliefs, no matter how retarded they are.

We don't follow talibanistic approach of banning contoversial views of sikhism of people , we allow debates instead so all the sansa's/doubts of people with such beliefs or new readers can be cleared by scholars like singh2 and others on this forum.

It's easy for people to live and sit in comfort zones/boxes and pretend everything is fine and dandy. If we cannot tackle rss/bjp/islamic propaganda online, how can we tackle them in real life? There was a time, where scholar knights of the panth would challenge rss/arya samajis for debate, now its other way around where rss/arya samajis want to engage for debate and some sikhs instead of engaging with scholarly debate, they flex their muscles around and call sort of names. This seriously make our people look like bunch of insecure sissies who just like hue and cry for banning people with controversial views existence from the internet. If one wants to follow sikhi dharam yudh maryada not mullahs then read this- if you want to tackle propaganda spread with pen against sikhi then use the pen to give answers not the sword. If anti panthic elements use physical force then use the bhaugati not the pen.

[Kaljug]

We don't follow talibanistic approach of banning contoversial views of sikhism of people , we allow debates instead so all the sansa's/doubts of people with such beliefs or new readers can be cleared by scholars like singh2 and others on this forum.

It's easy for people to live and sit in comfort zones/boxes and pretend everything is fine and dandy. If we cannot tackle rss/bjp/islamic propaganda online, how can we tackle them in real life? There was a time, where scholar knights of the panth would challenge rss/arya samajis for debate, now its other way around where rss/arya samajis want to engage for debate and some sikhs instead of engaging with scholarly debate, they flex their muscles around and call sort of names. This seriously make our people look like bunch of insecure sissies who just like hue and cry for banning people with controversial views existence from the internet. If one wants to follow sikhi dharam yudh maryada not mullahs then read this- if you want to tackle propaganda spread with pen against sikhi then use the pen to give answers not the sword. If anti panthic elements use physical force then use the bhaugati not the pen.

Fateh!

What you are not getting is that some people do not want to debate, they are simply here to spread propaganda and lies in the hopes of convincing the simple-minded and the ignorant. Why allow them a venue to do so on a Sikh forum? I read this forum to learn about Sikhi, not to have to defend every single basic belief about Sikhi from people like Bahadur with his Islamic crap and now navjot with his RSS rubbish.

There is nothing wrong with debate in an arena for such matters, but you don't let propagandists into your house to tell you that your Father was lying to you and actually practised whatever mumbo jumbo fairy stories that they want to propagate.

Navjot2 has been shown time and time again that Sikhi forbids pathar puja, that Gurbani uses names like Ram to refer to Waheguru not the mythological characters of Hindu bedtime stories (except when it is clear from the context - and then they are never said to be Waheguru), that Bhagauti refers to Waheguru's power not some genetically altered goddess with perpetual PMS. Yet he continues to spew the same bullshit over and over like a broken record.

If Navjot2 says "I'm a Hindu, I want to debate some points in Dasam Granth" that's all fine, but the fact that he is not interested in such a thing is evident by his use of a disguise of being a Sikh who simply wants to show us the truth - which is that our Gurus were Hindus who worshipped mythological characters who are historically nothing but accretions of diverse legends of the various peoples of India.

How do you debate someone who lies about even being here to represent his RSS views?

K.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Kaljug

[Kaljug]

We don't follow talibanistic approach of banning contoversial views of sikhism of people , we allow debates instead so all the sansa's/doubts of people with such beliefs or new readers can be cleared by scholars like singh2 and others on this forum.

By the way, do you consider the rehat maryada that forbids association with, and entertaining the views of, Dhirmalias and Ram Raiyas talibanistic? Would you allow them to spread their propaganda here if they so chose? What if some kurimar came here and decided to advise us that foetal infanticide is all fine and dandy according to Sikhi, and misquoted Gurbani to prove his point, or twisted basic facts like that all Gurus were male, or that God is conceived in mostly maculine terms in Gurbani, as evidence that females are considered inferior in Sikhi?

Why is this any different to allowing the views of those who misinterpret Gurbani - and clearly ignore all tuks that are in contradiction to their beliefs - in order to propagate their own version of Hindumat? Does it become acceptable when such people pretend to be Sikhs in order to spread their filth?

K.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Kaljug

[SAadmin]

Fair points kalyug veer thats why we have quality control and we have rules were direct blunt attacks/bold statements against guru maharaj/gurbani will not be tolerated, if any members come across with direct attacks/bold statements please use report feature. But in essence at end of day sikh suppose to follow foot steps of Guru Maharaj. If Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji can bring down demon/dushat like auranzeb with pen when he wrote zafarnama then why cannot his sons/ sikhs use power of pen? I understand guru maharaj ji is samarath, they didn't take asra power of pen but used pen as a form to shake auranzeb when he read zafarnama which ultimately lead to his death, this was done to show us power of pen.

[Kaljug]

Fair points kalyug veer thats why we have quality control and we have rules were direct blunt attacks/bold statements against guru maharaj/gurbani will not be tolerated, if any members come across with direct attacks/bold statements please use report feature. But in essence at end of day sikh suppose to follow foot steps of Guru Maharaj. If Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji can bring down demon/dushat like auranzeb with pen when he wrote zafarnama then why cannot his sons/ sikhs use power of pen? I understand guru maharaj ji is samarath, they didn't take asra power of pen but used pen as a form to shake auranzeb when he read zafarnama which ultimately lead to his death, this was done to show us power of pen.

Fateh!

Look, veer ji, I know that your intention are all good, but I feel you need to differentiate between healthy debate and propaganda. They are two very different things.

I was fine with the Muslim Uthman guy (or whatever his name was) coming here and holding a debate with Bijla Singh about the relative merits of Islam and Sikhi, and the differences between them, because, although the Muslim was misguided, at least he was honest enough to tell us what he believed so that Bijla Singh could show him the errors in his logic and his weak understanding of Sikhi.

What navjot is doing is a great deal more nefarious. Such people are too cunning and too cowardly to come right out with their real beliefs and attack Gurbani directly.

Remember also that Dasmesh Pita made it clear in Zafarnama to Aurangzeb that Aurangzeb was a cunning liar before he went to war with the Mughal soldiers who had lied on the Quran. Guru ji didn't sit down and have a debate with Aurangzeb when it was clear that Aurangzeb did not care about the truth and only wanted to spread his beliefs by whatever means necessary.

K.

Edited August 25, 2009 by Kaljug

[singh2]

Fair points kalyug veer thats why we have quality control and we have rules were direct blunt attacks/bold statements against guru maharaj/gurbani will not be tolerated, if any members come across with direct attacks/bold statements please use report feature. But in essence at end of day sikh suppose to follow foot steps of Guru Maharaj. If Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji can bring down demon/dushat like auranzeb with pen when he wrote zafarnama then why cannot his sons/ sikhs use power of pen? I understand guru maharaj ji is samarath, they didn't take asra power of pen but used pen as a form to shake auranzeb when he read zafarnama which ultimately lead to his death, this was done to show us power of pen.

N30singh ji

navjot2 is doing propaganda in a very subtle way. They are trained in this warfare.

He was maintaining that Bhaguti is Devi Durga and inspite of giving him various examples

that Bhagauti in Dasam granth is not Durga he kept on saying this while abusing sikh scholars.

Finally he agreed a few days back saying

quote

By navjot2

hey singh, you are right about bhagauti meaning sword in some instances, but only as a symbol of Shakti. this i must admit now, because i was reading Dasam Granth and came across something. look:

ਨਮਸਕਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੜਗ ਕੋ ਕਰੋਂ ਸੁ ਹਿਤੁ ਚਿਤੁ ਲਾਇ ॥

ਪੂਰਨ ਕਰੋਂ ਗਰੰਥ ਇਹੁ ਤੁਮ ਮੁਹਿ ਕਰਹੁ ਸਹਾਇ ॥੧॥

look at the word kRRG- another word for sword. but why ask a sword for help in writing? because it symbolises the same thing that Sharaada, Devi etc do- Shakti

I thought he has understood that he was wrong. But he was back again with same theory. These people are not here for debate. They are here for carrying out their propaganda.

Edited August 25, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

deleted

Edited August 25, 2009 by singh2

[navjot2]

lol

seriously PARANOID

[navjot2]

"I sing infinite Names (of the Lord), and meet the Supreme Purusha.35."

that is what i have been saying all along. But like the part i quoted He and His Shakti are differentiated (Kal and Kaalika).

im not expert on Hindi grammar but in Panjabi i was taught by my panjabi teacher that when you want to show respect for a female elder you refer to her in male terms. so i assume imilar in Hindi type languages.

Hence out of respect it says 'Hamara' (male case).

[navjot2]

No, the Hindu Durga is the one who makes use of all those arms that Akal (that's Waheguru to you not some pre-literate Shamanic deity called Shiva) gave her to sweep the dust from the House of Nanak.

K,

so you people are saying sarguna Durga is some kind of low concept? so what is this:

"ਨਮੋ ਚਤੁਰ ਬਾਹੀ ਨਮੋ ਅਸਟ ਬਾਹਾ ॥"

O Goddess ! thou art four-armed, eight-armed,

(292)

[navjot2]

when did i say siksh are a hindu sect? you are projecting your own 'enemy of sikhism' fantasies that get you so excited

[navjot2]

We don't follow talibanistic approach of banning contoversial views of sikhism of people , we allow debates instead so all the sansa's/doubts of people with such beliefs or new readers can be cleared by scholars like singh2 and others on this forum.

It's easy for people to live and sit in comfort zones/boxes and pretend everything is fine and dandy. If we cannot tackle rss/bjp/islamic propaganda online, how can we tackle them in real life? There was a time, where scholar knights of the panth would challenge rss/arya samajis for debate, now its other way around where rss/arya samajis want to engage for debate and some sikhs instead of engaging with scholarly debate, they flex their muscles around and call sort of names. This seriously make our people look like bunch of insecure sissies who just like hue and cry for banning people with controversial views existence from the internet. If one wants to follow sikhi dharam yudh maryada not mullahs then read this- if you want to tackle propaganda spread with pen against sikhi then use the pen to give answers not the sword. If anti panthic elements use physical force then use the bhaugati not the pen.

??? SCHOLARS like SINGH2? yeah from the University of GOOGLE.

n30 im seriously doubting your intelligence friend. these so called fanatics you talk about describe singh2 etc perfectly. you only have to look at their last couple of responses.

Singh2 i havent even heard of Sumer Singh, because i dont read bullshit written by others I only read the Original. And 'accept' the language in it. If you people want to run to others because you get scared when Guru uses -'GASP!'- a 'Hindu' word and you need some made up explanation or excuse for it thats your choice. but in the process you have become the chela of that 'scholar'.

it is filth like you who are 'anti-panthic'.

now your last hope is come out screaming 'oh he is RSS' so no one reads my stuff. oh well. im not on some 'heoric crusader' trip, you can delete my posts and ban me if you want i honestly dont give a shit.

[Matheen]

I only read the Original....

Do you speak the languages used by Guru Sahib? Have you studied how to interpret literature, especially poetry?

[cul]

He told you this is an open forum for any opinion so untwist your panties, sit down and stop hyperventilating.

??? SCHOLARS like SINGH2? yeah from the University of GOOGLE.

n30 im seriously doubting your intelligence friend. these so called fanatics you talk about describe singh2 etc perfectly. you only have to look at their last couple of responses.

Singh2 i havent even heard of Sumer Singh, because i dont read bullshit written by others I only read the Original. And 'accept' the language in it. If you people want to run to others because you get scared when Guru uses -'GASP!'- a 'Hindu' word and you need some made up explanation or excuse for it thats your choice. but in the process you have become the chela of that 'scholar'.

it is filth like you who are 'anti-panthic'.

now your last hope is come out screaming 'oh he is RSS' so no one reads my stuff. oh well. im not on some 'heoric crusader' trip, you can delete my posts and ban me if you want i honestly dont give a shit.

Edited August 26, 2009 by cul

[singh2]

im not expert on Hindi grammar but in Panjabi i was taught by my panjabi teacher that when you want to show respect for a female elder you refer to her in male terms. so i assume imilar in Hindi type languages.

Hence out of respect it says 'Hamara' (male case)

Your punjabi teacher may tell you anything and we have no source to verify that.

Do you know how Hindus address Durga when they sing bhajans of Mata Durga? They address her in feminine terms

Like sheran wali and not sheran wala. of course that is the right way and in the same way Guru sahib has addressed her in Vaar sri bhagauti ji ki.

But anyway in the line you referred " Deb kalika" is not any physical entity but it is refrence to akal purakh.

This has been proved by quoting many verses where Guru sahib writes about his beliefs.