Devi Pargat By Guru Gobind Singh?

[laalsingh]

Somebody may already have posted it. Ramakant Tiwari on his visit to Harminder Sahib.

MY RECENT VISIT TO HARIMANDIR SAHIB AT THE GOLDEN TEMPLE, AMRITSAR TURNED OUT TO BE A UNIQUE AND MEMORABLE EXPERIENCE. THE TEMPLE IS A UNIQUE SHIVALAYA WITH AMRIT-KUND AS THE JALAHARI AND SHABAD BEING POURED CONTINUOUSLY AS THE JALA OVER THE HARIMANDIR SAHIB.

DURING TWO DAYS THAT I SPENT THERE, I DEDICATED MY DEEP REVERENCE FOUR TIMES AT THE HARIMANDIR SAHIB, ACCEPTED KARAA-PRASAD SEVERAL TIMES, DECLINED & RETURNED THE LANGAR-PRASAD DUE TO PRESENCE OF ONION AND GARLIC ( INSTEAD, I ACCEPTED KHEER WITH DEEP REVERENCE ! ), VISITED SIKH-MUSEUM AND CAME OUT WITH BAD VIBES IN MY MIND…

HOW IS THAT SIKHS DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE 'RAMJANMABHUMI MOVEMENT' ? THEN FOR LIBERATION OF 'KRISHNAJANMABHUMI' AS WELL AS KASHI VISHVANATHJI ? DO YOU SIKHS BELIEVE, YOU CAN SURVIVE AND FLOURISH WITHOUT HINDUS ?? DO YOU SIKHS BELIEVE THAT SIKHISM CAN SURVIVE IN ABSENCE OF HINDUISM ??

Good one.

THEN TO MAINTAIN DISTANCE FROM HINDUISM, IT IS SAID THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ADDITIONS TO THE ‘SGGS’ BY SOME ‘FAQUIRS’. LET ME TELL YOU WITH MAXIMUM CONVICTION AT MY COMMAND, NO MUSLIM ‘FAQUIR’ HAD BEEN A TRUE ‘FAQUIR’. THEY WERE ALL MUSLIMS, OUT TO DESTROY THE SO-CALLED ‘KAFIRS’ AND CONVERT THEM TO ISLAM. HOW IS THAT THOSE ADDITIONS HAVE NOT BEEN DELETED FROM THE ‘SGGS’ THOUGH I AM NO AUTHORITY ON THE SUBJECT ?? THAT TOO, AFTER SO MUCH OF TORTURE AND OPPRESSION BY THOSE MUGHAL BIGOTS AND DESPOTS UPON THOSE BRAVE HINDUS / SIKHS ??

[HarjasDevi]

not long ago we had a shia who "proved" that langar was a persianconcept which was brought to india. if the vaishnavs did it, it didntcatch on very well did it?

I think the point being made is that holy people have always done it. It's certainly not a new innovation started in 16th century. I don't doubt there was such a thing in Persia as well, probably you will find some history of free kitchens and langar-style paramilitary halls throughout the world. Christian saints and their religious orders certainly have. The fact that Persians and even Christinas didn't really have a caste system makes the point moot since the objection has been raised that caste system was rejected because of the langar hall. However, despite not having a recognized caste system, the whole world really does. You see it in the designations of elite versus the rabble, rich versus poor, or political power remaining in certain families for hundreds of years. There is a power structure that human societies develop along. Caste-varna is really only saying that, there are 4 colors of men, there are 4 ages, there are 4 walks of life. And that really is the truth. The true brahmin is exactly as Guruji said it was, the one who is a bhakta of God. And just as the clear teachings of bhagat bani from Vaishnav bhaktas who were from shudra caste have become great and holy saints and their bani has ow become a part of Gurubani, that TRUTH is front and center for all the world to see.

What's the debate? Oh, of course. The debate is Hindu's are evil, corrupted, superstitious and incapable of having those wonderful things which only the SIKHS have. Well, you're wrong, I'm sorry. I simply wanted to point out the truth that Vaishnav bhagats already had a caste-free free kitchen before there was a Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Because reform of the caste system can be found in those Vaishnav Ram-Naami bhagats who lived BEFORE Guru Nanak Dev Ji and their authentically spiritual message of equality.

This particular argument simply goes back to the reality that Sanatana Dharma is an eternal Truth of our duty in this life to the creation and to the Creator as well as to ourselves. It hasn't got anything to do with a book of rules or any strict definition of religion. Within the Sanatana Dharma Paradigm is this unbroken Truth and how far apart from it or near we come to it. Guru Sahib spoke and wrote the Truth because He was One with the Truth. As Guru He rejected the false and hypocritical "religion" of what people always try to make true into by clearly rejecting the corruptions and abuses of the day. Of that there is no doubt.

But to think Guru Sahibaan were the only ones to do that is false. To think Hindu Dhamr has had no saints or spirituality at all is false. To think Hindu Dharm represents only the grossest corruptions is a really poor reflection on the person who thinks that way. To be quite honest, there have been saints of every religion, in every time period known to man. Because there is a universal truth. That universal truth is the original Sanatana Dharm. But it would be equally wrong to say those wise philosophies have not been part of the preserved heritage of Hindustan, and worldwide are also know as Hindu Dharm for this reason.

You see, your argument is only that Hindu's have nothing, are nothing. But that can easily be disproved.

firstly, the todays udasis dont even recognise their founder anymore!and the nirmalas look at everything thru vedant goggles. Im sure thereare exception to these, so i apologise for the generalisation aboutboth samprdayes. Sorry.

Udasi have always revered Baba Sri Chand, their founder. He is their root Guru. Nirmalay originated as Sanskrit and Vedic scholars. How has their role changed? Their purataan interpretations of Sikhi are a matter of history.

now harjas kaur, can you make your mind up! you first said that dharmais eternal and doesnt change, and now you say the requirements ofdharma change in every age. how is that possible is dharma is eternal?

DHARMA which represents righteousness is ETERNAL. What is required to fulfill the obligations of that Dharma changes based on whether you are a human being or a dog in this incarnation, whether you are a man or a woman in this incarnation, whether you are from a religious family, a business family, a poor family, etc. Just as the atma is ETERNAL yet manifests in various forms of temporary identity, so do the requirements of Dharm change from person to person just as they change from age to age.

Requirements of Dharma change within your very life. When you are a son, you have a particular duty to your parents. When you marry and have wife and children you become the parent and Dharm includes greater responsibilities. But Dharm is still Dharm. How we relate to it due to OUR changeability is the point. In the Iron Age of technology and corruption Dharma has lost the legs it stands on and people lose spirituality but one leg remains standing, cling to the NAAM the boat of mukti. Guruji has explained beautifuly. Of what need is there to become argumentative and debate nonessentials such as accusation Dharma itself changes when the very definition is unchanging?

Is this really your own misperception or are you trying so desperately to disqualify Hindu Dharm that you would even stoop so low as to attack the meaning of Dharma itself? Because that Dharma is the same term and concept in Gurbani. If you distort it's definition, you also distort the term in Gurbani. Dharma doesn't change. We change. The age of mankind changes. Our relationship to Dharma changes because of our changing roles and change of society.

[Chakarvarti]

When was the word sanatan dharma first coined up ?

[HarjasDevi]

Why Laalsingh are the opinions of a member of RSS expressed on a Sangh Parivaar forum now propagandistically blasted all over Sikh forums?

And Why oh why is that article linked here, to this debate if not further evidence of your incredibly distorted HATRED and misunderstanding of Hindu religion? RSS is a political organization. It is not a spiritual group. While it has religious MEMBERS, it cannot be misconstrued as representative of Hindu religion. Now, we are discussing the heritage of sanatana Dharma philosophies as espoused by various sampraday and not even what has been tried to fit into a neat little western-style box "Hindu religion." But I would have to do linguistic flip flops.

For purposes of clarity in this discussion: Hinduism is too many sects to count, but generally agrees on Sruti as being primary. Hinduism includes the truths of that Sruti which reflect the eternal Dharm, AS WELL AS all the legalistic innovations good and bad which make for a religion. Hinduism can be criticized. But Sanatana Dharma cannot. So I'm trying to make a distinction between the man-made parts of religion versus the pure truths of spirituality.

As I'm discussing the Pure Truths of spirituality (independant of the man-interpreted parts), along comes this derailing article from some RSS guy all ticked off about onions in the langar and Bhindranwale portrait!

Can we try to have some restraint here and stay focused? Are you really so completely out of your mind that you can't stand for one minute any intelligent discussion of Sants who influenced Gurbani reform and the truths of Sanatana Dharma that you have to throw the milking cow and the RSS aunty at it? Can you please restrain yourself long enough to explain the bugaboo about onions having to do with Devi? And he is right, onions and garlic are traditionally considered both rajasic and tamasic foods and strict sadhus can't eat them. So any langar with them has sent clear message that Sadhus aren't welcome, and I think we all understand that point.

Truly Hindu's whose beliefs are deliberately distorted are hated and despised by Sikhs and not at all welcome.

But that's another topic.

[Chakarvarti]

Hinduism can be criticized. But Sanatana Dharma cannot.

Is that not the problem then Hinduism is claiming to be Sanatana Dharma.

[HarjasDevi]

When was the word sanatan dharma first coined up ?

Wiki has a very nice article on it.

The Sanskrit term Sanātana Dharm (Hindi: सनातन धर्म) or Dharmam Sanātanam (transliterated in Pali: Dhammo Sanatano), lit. "the way of life", is an epithet used natively in Dharmic Traditions, notably Hindu Dharma and early Buddha Dharmato collectively refer to their religious practices and beliefsrespectively. While Hindus use the Sanskrit term, early Buddhist textsused the Pali equivalent. Sanātana Dharm also refers to "Eternal Law" and is sometimes designed under the term "Manu Law".In modern times Hindus also refer to their religion as "Sanatana Dharma".

The first use perhaps comes from Kathopanishad. For example, the Kathopanishad declares: "Eso's' vatthah sanatanah."^[1]

The Manu Smriti (4-138) goes on to declare:

Satyam bruyatpriyam bruyanna bruyatsatyamapriyam.Priyam cha nanrtam bruyadesa dharmah sanatanah.Translation: "Speak the truth, speak the truth that is pleasant.Do not speak the truth to manipulate. Do not speak falsely to please orflatter someone. This is the quality of the Sanatan Dharma".

The Bhagavad Gita reads:

Traigunya vishaya veda nistraigunyo bhavarjuna (Gita II-45)

Translation: "O Arjun, the Vedas deal with the three gunas (sattva, rajas and tamas). You should transcend these three gunas."

The Bhagavata Purana reads:

"At the end of each cycle of four yugas, the rishis, throughtheir asceticism, saw the collections of srutis swallowed up by time,after which the eternal (Sanatanah) dharma (was re-established)."^[2]

Eternality of Dharma

Further information: RtaThe concept of Dharma being eternal is a recurrent concept in the Hindu literature and Buddhist literature from the 1st millennium BCE. It occurs in the Epics Mahabharata & Ramayana as well as in the Pali Canon and points to a common origin of the concept. In the Vedas, the eternal Dharma is called by the name Rta, while in Old Persian and Zoroastrian scripture (in Avestan), the cognate is called Arta and Asha respectively and can therefore be taken as a continuation of a common Proto-Indo-Iranian religious concept. The eternality (sanātanatvā) of Dharma implied also its constancy and invariability.

Absolute Truth/Righteousness

Further information: Brahman"O Indra, lead us on the path of Rta, on the right path over all evils."-- (Rig Veda Book X, Chapter CXXXIII, Verse 6)Subject to context, Rta- is also frequently translated as "rightworking" or "[that which is] right". The word then (cf. Bartholomae'sand Geldner's translations as German "Recht") has the same range ofmeaning of "right" as in the English language: truth, righteousness,rightfulness, lawfullness, conformity, accord, order (cosmic order,social order, moral order).

The eternality of the Dharma was also an important factor as it represented the idea of an absolute truth, which had its VedanticBrahman, the unchangeable immortal existence of absolute truth. While the eternality of Dharma was emphasized in the tradition of Purva Mimamsa, the equivalent absolutist concept of Nirguna Brahman was the preserve of Vedanta as represented by the Upanishads. parallel in the concept of

Its existence is referred to in Sanskrit as truth or satya, or Avestan haithya- (from Indo-European *sat- "being, existing")

Representation of Infinity

Further information: Infinity (philosophy)#Early_Indian_views_of_infinity The concept of eternality and invariability of Dharma also takes into account the principle of infinity of the holy law i.e Dharma^[3]. The Isha Upanishad of the Yajurveda states that "if you remove a part from infinity or add a part to infinity, still what remains is infinity".

Pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idam (Infinity is that, infinity is this)pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate (infinity comprises infinity)pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya (When infinity is subtracted from infinity)pūrṇam evāvasiṣyate (Infinity alone remains) - Isha UpanishadThe essence of this verse is that the Infinite cannot be measuredarithmetically - Brahman is viewed as this Infinite Eternal and holyreality i.e Sanatana Dharma. Sanatana Dharma

[HarjasDevi]

Hinduism can be criticized. But Sanatana Dharma cannot.

Is that not the problem then Hinduism is claiming to be Sanatana Dharma.

Hnduism modernly is too many sects, schools of philosohy, practices etc which do not all agree on all things. What they do agree on is Sruti of Vedas and in varying measures depending on sampradya Puranas, Shastras and Smritis. But the Smritis for example are not Sruti. So those elements within different sampraday which have always debated can be criticized or open to debate. But those eternal principles which are part of Sruti canot be criticized simply because they are Truth.

Hinduism is a part of Sanatana Dharma teaching just like Buddhism because the foundation and origination of the beliefs is Sruti, that which was revealed to the Rshis and was sung in Vedic mantras which came to be written down as Vedas. SO Hindu religion is not wrong to call itself Sanatana Dharma. But it can't be ignored that Hinduism is never going to fit into a neat little box where everybody agrees on everything. It is the religion(s) plural which originate which Sruti teachings. Sikhism is a part of Sanatana Dharma, else why is Dharma so central to the philosophy? But this doesn't mean Sikhi isn't independent in interpretations or has not got innovations. Just means it clearly shares brotherhood with Dharmic faiths.

[Chakarvarti]

thanks for reply

But those eternal principles which are part of Sruti

im not really knowledgable so what is Sruti and what are the eternal principles?

Edited January 25, 2010 by Chakarvarti

[singh2]

Harjas

You go on following your santana dharma or any dharma. We have no objection to that. We should respect your choice.

Please do not try to foist your beliefs on us here.We follow sikhism and though we respect all other religions but are not interested to learn in detail about their beliefs.

[kdsingh80]

And he is right, onions and garlic are traditionally considered both rajasic and tamasic foods and strict sadhus can't eat them. So any langar with them has sent clear message that Sadhus aren't welcome, and I think we all understand that point.

By this logic we should also ban use pure ghee milk and milk products in Langars as vegans Don't use any animal products.We should now also presume that vegans are not welcome in Langar?

[HarjasDevi]

By this logic we should also ban use pure ghee milk and milk productsin Langars as vegans Don't use any animal products.We should now alsopresume that vegans are not welcome in Langar?

You missed the part in the article where he said no other prasadam anywhere contains onions and garlic, and that this was a new innovation even for Sikhs. So it isn't a question of silly comparisons of milk-free purely vegan diets, but what is traditional and what was original and what is now being modified out of ignorance politically to create more artificial separations from Hindus which did not formerly exist.

[kdsingh80]

You missed the part in the article where he said no other prasadam anywhere contains onions and garlic, and that this was a new innovation even for Sikhs. So it isn't a question of silly comparisons of milk-free purely vegan diets, but what is traditional and what was original and what is now being modified out of ignorance politically to create more artificial separations from Hindus which did not formerly exist.

According to some sources Earlier langars were used to be non veg.Its quite strange that Bahadur singh who later fully embraced shia islam blamed sikhs for tempering langar and embracing vegetarian Langar because of pro Hindu mentality on this site.so who is right and who is wrong.Some blame sikhs for embracing pro hindu mentality while others blame them embracing anti hindu mentality.

Anyway there is nothing in Gurmat that ban garlic and onions.That person has no authority to say anything about Langar

[HarjasDevi]

Anyway there is nothing in Gurmat that ban garlic and onions.That person has no authority to say anything about Langar

I could care less about his opinion to be honest, it was just a way for Laalsingh to derail the topic and make comparison between Hindu philosophy and some RSS guy. I could also care less about some Shia Muslim guy.

There is a tradition of goat meat langar among Shaktas following jhatka sacrifice for Kali puja and Aghouri Sadhus practice cannibalism. This means something? The traditional practice in every Indian temple excludes onions and garlic. If this was a former Sikh practice and modernly changed, then it does in fact reflect deliberate rejection of tradition of the past.

But as I said before, I could care less about debating onions.

[Kaljug]

But as I said before, I could care less about debating onions.

Phew! For a minute there I thought you were going to start arguing that onions were a Singh Sabha innovation.

K.

[HarjasDevi]

I actually eat a lot of them. They're delicious!

[Kaljug]

I actually eat a lot of them. They're delicious!

LOL

For a moment after I posted that I regretted it because I thought you were going to go to the trouble of having to post a long multi-coloured essay with lots of quotes.

Good to see that you're relaxing a bit here (and that humour is still part of your Sanatan Dharma ;-) ).

K.

[singh2]

The traditional practice in every Indian temple excludes onions and garlic.

I have seen many Hindu temples throughout India including massive ones in Southern part.I have not come across any temple that serves food or langar to visitors.Harjas is ill informed about system of temples.There is no langar there.

[chatanga1]

why is garlic forbidden to sadhus?

[HarjasDevi]

You go on following your santana dharma or any dharma. We have no objection to that. We should respect your choice.

Please do not try to foist your beliefs on us here.We follow sikhismand though we respect all other religions but are not interested tolearn in detail about their beliefs.

The title of the discussion thread here is " Devi Pargat By Guru Gobind Singh?" So the topic thread naturally relates to my beliefs. I have alreadyspoken with the forum moderator and I am welcome to post here providedI follow the forum rules and treat others and these issues withrespect. Now, if you're not interested to learn in detail, then don't read answers to questions others have asked.

Moreover, I cannot foist my own beliefs onto a subject which isintimately related to my own beliefs as including subject matteroverlapping sanatan teaching. You follow a very narrowinterpretation within Sikhism and are attempting to disqualify thepurataan interpretations which do in fact exist and have their ownvalidity.

Now take for example where Guru vaak is discussing Dharma. What does it mean, Dharma? And what if Guru Vakia is discussing Sruti? You say you don't want to know, then don't read the post. You don'tspeak for Sikhism. And you can't determine for the rest of us what isor is not within the realm of Sikhi.

The question asked was, "What is Sruti?"

And you answered, that it was nothing to do with Sikhism and nothing you needed or wanted know as it pertains to details about "other religions." Okay. That is your view. Don't read any further or disturb yourself.

ਆਦਿ ਅਪਾਰ ਅਲੇਖ ਅਨੰਤ ਅਕਾਲ ਅਭੇਖ ਅਲਖ ਅਨਾਸਾ ॥ आदि अपार अलेख अनंत अकाल अभेख अलख अनासा ॥

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

ਕੈ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤ ਦਏ ਸ੍ਰੁਤਿ ਚਾਰ ਰਜੋ ਤਮ ਸਤ ਤਿਹੂੰ ਪੁਰ ਬਾਸਾ ॥ कै सिव सकत दए स्रुति चार रजो तम सत तिहूं पुर बासा ॥

He created Shiva-Shakti, four Vedas and three modes of maya and Pervades in three worlds.

~Shri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji (SGPC Translation) p. 175

The God's own design was to create the energy and pakriti manifestationof the material universes. The God Himself created Brahma and theVedas.

ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਕਹਹੁ ਮਤ ਝੂਠੇ ਝੂਠਾ ਜੋ ਨ ਬਿਚਾਰੈ ॥

baedh kathaeb kehahu math jhoothae jhoothaa jo n bichaarai ||

Do not say that the Vedas, the Bible and the Koran are false. Those who do not contemplate them are false.

~SGGS Ji ang 1350

Scriptures are not bad, neither are they wrong.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਦੀਸੈ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਪਸਾਰੁ ॥

guramukh dheesai breham pasaar ||

The Gurmukh sees God pervading everywhere.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਤ੍ਰੈ ਗੁਣੀਆਂ ਬਿਸਥਾਰੁ ॥

guramukh thrai guneeaaan bisathhaar ||

The Gurmukh knows that the universe is the extension of the three gunas, the three dispositions.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਨਾਦ ਬੇਦ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥

guramukh naadh baedh beechaar ||

The Gurmukh reflects on the Sound-current of the Naad, and the wisdom of the Vedas.

ਬਿਨੁ ਗੁਰ ਪੂਰੇ ਘੋਰ ਅੰਧਾਰੁ ॥੧॥

bin gur poorae ghor andhhaar ||1||

Without the Perfect Guru, there is only pitch-black darkness.

~SGGS Ji ang 1270

Analyze this vaak: "guramukh naadh baedh beechaar."

The Gurmukh is learning/reflecting on the wise teaching/vichaar which is coming from Naad and Vedas.

Now we know that memorizing Vedas is a waste of time. We know thatendless debates about the Vedas is a waste of time. We know thatpandits spending their lives reading Vedas are not finding the boat ofmukti. So, if Vedas are not bad, then how are they good? What is the essence of Vedas whose wise vichaar is contemplated by Gurmukh and which resounds out of the Primal Naad?

I tell you that essence is Sruti.

ਇਕ ਨਾਮ ਬਿਨਾ ਨਹੀ ਕੋਟ ਬ੍ਰਤੀ ॥ ਇਮ ਬੇਦ ਉਚਾਰਤ ਸਾਰਸੁਤੀ ॥

Ik naam binaa nahoo kot bratoo|| Im Bed uchaarat Saarsutoo||

Without One Lord’s Name, one cannot be saved even by millions of fasts. The Superb Shrutis (of the Vedas) declare thus.

ਜੋਊ ਵਾ ਰਸ ਕੇ ਚਸਕੇ ਰਸ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਤੇਊ ਭੂਲ ਨ ਕਾਲ ਫੰਧਾ ਫਸਿ ਹੈਂ॥੨੦॥੧੬੦॥

Jooo vaa ras ke chaske ras hain|| Teoo bhool na kaal phandhaa phas(i) hain||20||160||

Those, who are absorbed with the ambrosia of the Name even by Mistake, they will not be entrapped in he snare of death.20.160.

~Shri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji (SGPC translation) p. 64

So, what is Sruti?

ਅਖਰ ਮਹਿ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਨ ਪ੍ਰਭਿ ਧਾਰੇ ॥

akhar mehi thribhavan prabh dhhaarae ||

In the Word, God established the three worlds.

ਅਖਰ ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਬੇਦ ਬੀਚਾਰੇ ॥

akhar kar kar baedh beechaarae ||

Created from the Word, the Vedas are contemplated.

ਅਖਰ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਪੁਰਾਨਾ ॥

akhar saasathr sinmrith puraanaa ||

From the Word, came the Shaastras, Simritees and Puraanas.

ਅਖਰ ਨਾਦ ਕਥਨ ਵਖ੍ਯ੍ਯਾਨਾ ॥

akhar naadh kathhan vakhyaanaa ||

From the Word, came the sound current of the Naad, speeches and explanations.

ਅਖਰ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਭੈ ਭਰਮਾ ॥

akhar mukath jugath bhai bharamaa ||

From the Word, comes the way of liberation from fear and doubt.

ਅਖਰ ਕਰਮ ਕਿਰਤਿ ਸੁਚ ਧਰਮਾ ॥

akhar karam kirath such dhharamaa ||

From the Word, come religious rituals, karma, sacredness and Dharma.

ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਿਮਾਨ ਅਖਰ ਹੈ ਜੇਤਾ ॥

dhrisattimaan akhar hai jaethaa ||

In the visible universe, the Word is seen.

~SGGS Ji ang 241

ਅਖਰ Akhar, is derived from the Sanskrit Akshara which means "indestructible." Akshara also means "word-syllable." And hence it is a NAAM of the Supreme as SOUND, Shabda Brahman. It is the single syllable Ek Akshara, which is the OM, as can be seen from the translation of the Bhagavad-Gita.

oḿ ity ekākṣaraḿ brahma

vyāharan mām anusmaran

yaḥ prayāti tyajan dehaḿ

sa yāti paramāḿ gatim

oḿ — the combination of letters oḿ (oḿkāra); iti — thus; eka-akṣaram — the one syllable; brahma — absolute; vyāharan — vibrating; mām — Me (Kṛṣṇa); anusmaran — remembering; yaḥ — anyone who; prayāti —

leaves; tyajan — quitting; deham — this body; saḥ — he; yāti — achieves; paramām — the supreme; gatim — destination.

After being situated in this yoga practice and vibrating the sacred syllable oḿ, thesupreme combination of letters, if one thinks of the SupremePersonality of Godhead and quits his body, he will certainly reach thespiritual planets.

~Bhagavad-Gita 8:13

ਬੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸੁਧਾਖ੍ਯ੍ਯਰ ॥

baedh puraan sinmrith sudhhaakhyar ||

The Vedas, the Puraanas and the Simritees, the purest of utterances,

ਕੀਨੇ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਇਕ ਆਖ੍ਯ੍ਯਰ ॥

keenae raam naam eik aakhyar ||

were created from the One Word of the Name of the Lord.

~SGGS Ji ang 262

Sruti is intimately related to the Shabda Brahman, which is a Word-Akshara which vibrates-Spanda. Sruti is that which is heard vibrating from higher dimensional realityof Divine Sound Roop. As such it is the essence of Truth and Gyaan ofthe Vedas. Sruti is that which has been perceived directly and transmitted to mankind in a form we can understand, language. But carried within the words by vibrational Truth is the Sound Presence of the Divine and the means to Divine Perception and liberation. Only a Satguru can give us the grace to perceive Divine Truth on this level. It can never be understood simply by reading or reciting the words.

Śruti (Sanskrit: श्रुति, IAST: śrúti, lit. "hearing, listening"), often spelled shruti or shruthi, is a term that describes the sacred texts Hinduism and is one of the three main sources of dharma and therefore is also influential within Hindu Law.[1]These sacred works span the entire history of Hinduism, beginning withsome of the earliest known Hindu texts and ending in the early modernperiod with the later Upanishads..[2] This literature differs from other sources of Hindu Law, particularly smṛtior “remembered text”, because of the purely divine origin of śruti.This belief of divinity is particularly prominent within the Mimamsatradition.[3] The initial literature is traditionally believed to be a direct revelation of the “cosmic sound of truth” heard by ancient Rishis[4] Sruti

From this (Unmeṣa-Appearance), Bindú --divine light, Nādá --divine sound--, Rūpá --divine form-- and Rása --divine taste-- soon appear to an embodied soul as a disturbing factor.

~Spanda Karikas Section 1, aphorism 10.

ਨਾਮੁ ਨਿਧਾਨੁ ਸਤਗੁਰੂ ਦਿਖਾਲਿਆ ਹਰਿ ਰਸੁ ਪੀਆ ਅਘਾਏ ॥੩॥

naam nidhhaan sathaguroo dhikhaaliaa har ras peeaa aghaaeae ||3||

The True Guru has revealed to him the Treasure ofthe Naam, the Name of the Lord;

he drinks in the Sublime Essence of theLord, and is satisfied.

~SGGS Ji ang 29

"One whose prabhava i.e., udaya or appearance or manifestation(abhivyakti) comes about from the vibhava i.e. the inner unfoldment ofthe mass of light i.e., the divinities of the senses (rasmi punja)(i,e, Sankara who is manifested by an inner development of the senses). The sense is that the recognition of the highest Lord is brought abouteffortlessly by the practice of perception of the inner nature." The Yoga of Pulsation and Divine Vibration

[chatanga1]

Udasi have always revered Baba Sri Chand, their founder. He is their root Guru. Nirmalay originated as Sanskrit and Vedic scholars. How has their role changed? Their purataan interpretations of Sikhi are a matter of history.

DHARMA which represents righteousness is ETERNAL.

udasi's today beleive that Baba Sri Chand started udasi samprdaye? lol. recheck your facts. if you beleive that you know nothing about them.

nirmala's mission was to learn vedic texts, not that these had any knowledge that wasnt in Aad or Dasam Guru, but not to represent gurmat as an ang of hindu religion.

so the treatment of shudras in the other 3 yugs is still dharma in this yug?

and we should follow the rightouesness that has been the example?

what about dharma that represents unrighteousness? is that eternal?

[HarjasDevi]

Read this:

"You missed the part in the article where he said no other prasadam anywhere contains onions and garlic..."

and

"Thereis a tradition of goat meat langar among Shaktas following jhatkasacrifice for Kali puja and Aghouri Sadhus practice cannibalism. Thismeans something? The traditional practice in every Indian templeexcludes onions and garlic."

The article was talking about prasadam. "The traditional practice (OF SERVING PRASADAM) in every Indian temple excludes onions and garlic."

There fixed for clarification. Happy now?

FYI: I linked a video earlier which clearly shows Temple Langar in Kerala state at Amritapuri. Here, let me show it again. The word langar is Persian, so you won't see that word describing the vegetarian free kitchens of Hindu temples that serve prasadam. But you are mistaken if you think such practice is exclusive to Sikhs.

Langar is the practice, common to a number of Asian religions, of community eating. Langar

[Maha Singh]

why is garlic forbidden to sadhus?

Because its a root vegetable which is high in rajas and tamas properties according to Ayurveda. However if that is your stance, then you wouldnt eat a whole load of foods apart from fresh fruit, fresh vegies, yoghurt and use only some pressed oils in your diet.

The key is balance, a small amount of garlic or onions is not bad for you, plus if you live a dynamic lifestyle with plenty of excercise you can "burn" the exessive rajas and tamas off in a good way.

[HarjasDevi]

"udasi's today beleive that Baba Sri Chand started udasi samprdaye? lol.recheck your facts. if you beleive that you know nothing about them."

Udasi is a religious, ascetic sadhu sect, which considers itself a denomination of Sikhism focused on the teachings of its founder, Sri Chand (1494-1643), son of Guru Nanak Dev, the founder and the first Guru of Sikhism. Later, Baba Gurditta, son of Guru Hargobind and father of Guru Har Rai...Udasi, comes from the root word 'udas' which means detachment, renunciation, and, unlike some Sikh groups, they do not prohibit shaving or cutting one's hair. Accordingly, not all Udasi males have beards and long hair, as other Sikh, belonging Khalsa do [4]. Udasi mahants have maintained accurate records of the chain of succession from Sri Chand. Udasi

The Udasi sampradaya (tradition) was founded by Baba Sri Chand Ji Maharaj, the elder son, and sikh (disciple) of Sri Sadguru Nanak Dev Ji. Its adherents not only revere Sri Guru Granth Sahib, but have in their treasure-house of sacred texts, Sanskritic scriptures such as the Veda, the Shastras, the Puranas, the Itihasas viz. the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, etc., along with works associated with the Gurus. To Udasis, also known as Nanak-putras (sons of Nanak), Guru Nanak Dev Ji is none other than the avatar of Sri Vishnu, and Baba Sri Chand Ji of Bhagavan Shiva. While the purpose of both was to protect the sanatan or eternal Dharma (moral and cosmic Order), the particular mission of Baba Ji was to spread the message of his Guru and father, Nirankar-svarup (the form of the Formless) Jagadguru Nanak Dev Ji. Thus, in the spirit of their founder, the scholarly Udasis were the missionaries of Gurmat.

The Udasis engage in pancadevopasana, the worship of a combination of five deities or the five qualified facets of the Brahman, namely Shiva, Vishnu, Surya, Durga, and Ganesh, and their philosophy is that of monistic or advaita Vedanta as popularised by Adi Sankaracarya. Amongst Udasis, some are celibate ascetics, others householders, some are jatadhari (dreadlocked) ash-covered Sadhus, and others have no distinctive appearance. Not only are they scholars of Sanskrit, their particularly adept in Ayurveda, the tradition Indian medicine. When the Khalsa Singhs were involved in war against the Mughals, it was the Udasis that kept the Guru's tradition alive by becoming custodians of the Gurdwaras. Udasi.org

nirmala's mission was to learn vedic texts, not that these had any knowledge that wasnt in Aad or Dasam Guru, but not to represent gurmat as an ang of hindu religion.

Why were they becoming Sanskrit scholars and learning Vedic texts if not to gain knowledge which was outside of Gurubani? The problem with "representing Gurmat as an ang of Hindu religion is a modern construction. Here is the Udasi view directly off their website.

one may wonder who the Udasis are and whether they are confused. There are three possibilities of explanation:

1. either they do not know whether they follow 'Hindu-ism' or 'Sikh-ism', or

2. they have taken parts of both, or

3. it is in fact the world who is mistakenly confused by seeing things in black and white and it is the Udasis who, amongst other legitimate sampradayas going back to the Gurus, truly follow and understand the teachings of the Great Sovereign Masters. It is not they who have problems of identity, but everyone else. Their reality depicts a diminishing truth, while the rest of the modernist world has been unknowingly duped into the duality of these two artificial and until recently, non-existent religious categories viz. 'Hindu-ism' and 'Sikh-ism' created by British Colonialists.

This is not how it used to be. After all the suffix ism which is the crux of our problem of understanding the truth as it stood before the time of the Raj, conceptually and linguistically belongs to the Western world, and is alien to the traditional Indian mind. To understand the reality of religiosity before the intellectual impact of the British Raj in Panjab, and thus the world of the Udasis and other puratan (ancient) traditions, one must understand it from its own perspective, not from the foreign concepts and categories of western thought. Udasi.org

Regardless of your personal opinion about Udasis, they are a historical purataan sampradaya which has blended Sanatan and Sikhi concepts from their origination. It is not the Udasi Sampradaya which has a problem with identity, but the British influence which forced a separation of a more inclusive, universal Sanatan, within the body of ancient tradition, interpretation of Guru Sahibaan own Mat.

"so the treatment of shudras in the other 3 yugs is still dharma in this yug?"

The treatment of shudras is a politically contrived misconception owing much of it's animosity to the deliberate racism of the British Raj. Shudra as traditionally conceived was a classification according to vasanas and temperament.

Whilst the origins of the other varnas can be traced to Proto-Indo-European words, the word is translated as the Sanskrit word for color of the soul. In the Shanti Parva of Mahabharata, it is said that there was only one Varna - Brahmana - in the beginning. The other Varnas were formed depending on the dominance of the three Gunas - Sattwa, Rajah and Tamah- in one's self...

The etymology of the word is not certain. One theory is that Shudra comes from the word śuchāt dravanam (शुचात् द्रवनम्) [citation needed] a person who is in suffering/mourning/pain, who needs mental or physical cleansing. This theory is however intended to demean the significance of the Varna system. Shudra was a common Sanskrit word, any person regardless of his/her varna to could be addressed as shudra. An implied version of this common form has become traditionally associated with the varna system. It is also mentioned in the purusha-sukta of Rigveda where shudras are said to have emanated from the feet of the lord (पद्भ्याम् शूद्र् अजायत padbhyām śūdro ajāyata)[citation needed]. A very symbolic statement indeed. It denotes that the three other varnas which made up the parts of purusha (पुरुश, the lord) were supported by the shudras as the feet form the supporting system of the entire body.[citation needed] This can be understood clearly from the fact that the shudras were basically farmers, potters, cobblers etc (anything the other three varnas would not do viz, teaching, fighting and trade)[citation needed] and hence they formed a support system for the entire society. Unfortunately, direct misinterpretations of these vedic hymns have caused a lot of unrest and confusion in the modern Hindu society. Vedas do not establish supremacy of any varna over the other nor do they say head of the Lord is superior to his feet. Sri Krishna in Bhagavad Gita clarifies (Chapter 4 verse 13) states "catur-varnyam maya srstam guna-karma-vibhagasah tasya kartaram api mam viddhy akartaram avyayam" meaning that the fours varnas were established based on one's karma/duties. Shudra

Indiansociety has consisted since ancient times, of several thousands oftribal and occupational groups, castes or communities called Jāti. The phrase "Hindu Caste System" mixes up two different schemes - the Varna (class/group)^[3], theoretical scheme based on idealized Brahminical traditions and some medieval codes, and the Jāti system prevalent in Indian society since historical times.

Faced with a bewildering array of thousands of autonomous andhierarchically fluid communities (Jatis), the late 19th century Britishcolonial administration decided to categorise and rank the entire Hindupopulation of India by placing each of the Jatis within the theoreticalVarna scheme for the purposes of the decennial Census, and ostensiblyfor eventual administrative convenience. The 1901Census was led by Herbert Hope Risley,an ICS officer with strong pet racial beliefs about the Indianpopulation. Simultaneous with this first ever codification into secularlaw of Varna-based caste identities during the British empire,communities (Jatis) sought to place themselves on higher levels ofVarna categories. On the other hand, most of the Jatis grouped into thelower caste categories rejected the Varna categories as they found thisarbitrary classification unreasonable, unfair and unacceptable, as itdid not reflect the reality.

This newly frozen materialization of castecreated a growing resentment firstly against the system itself andsecondly against the Brahmins, who were seen to be the beneficiaries ofthe arrangement which now officially anointed their place at the top ofthe social hierarchy. The revolt of the Justice Party and Periyar in the south, by the Maharaja of Kolhapur and the outstanding scholar Dr Ambedkarin western India against this, in the early decades of the twentiethcentury, has had a profound, long-lasting impact on the Indian societyand politics, which continues to this date.The British Colonial melding of the ubiquitous and fluid Jati withthe theoretical and rigid Varna scheme starting from the 1901 Censushas resulted in many people erroneously assuming that the entire Hindusociety was organized according to the Varna scheme since ancienttimes. In fact, India's diverse population viewed the artificiallyrigid scheme as unjust and arbitrary. Modern Indian society hasstruggled with this flawed, inflexible imposition of caste implementedby the British since the 1901 Census. Caste System

"and we should follow the rightouesness that has been the example?"

Righteousness is righteousness whatever the age, whatever the culture, race of religion. Even a little child or a dog knows the difference between good and evil. Why are you deliberately trying to confuse the terms to equate Hindu Dharm with deliberate evil? You can't see your' own illogical and deliberate propagandistic distortion?

"what about dharma that represents unrighteousness? is that eternal?"

There is no Dharma which is unrighteous. Please do your own study before making blatently irrational statements. Dharma as a term MEANS RIGHTEOUSNESS. How can that which represents righteousness also mean unrighteousness? By clever misrepresentation of facts you make the conclusionary assumption that Dharma represents unrighteousness in order to stigmatize and demonize Hindu religion and Hindus.

Krishna, born in a shudra (cow-boy) family not onlybecame a kshatriya by proper education at Sandipana rishi's ashrama andlater a king, but was also a great philosopher and author ofBhagvad-Gita. He was also accorded the status of incarnation of GodVishnu by the Hindus. Krishna was born in a shudra family of milkmen.In around 1000 A.D. the Hindus believed that Krishna was born to shudraparents, and this fact has been recorded by al-Biruni, a MuslimHistorian who visited India in about 1000 A.D. Al-Biruni mentions, "Vasudeva (Krishna) was a descendant of a Shudra family." (Alberuni'sIndia,tr. by Sachau, Edward, Indialog Publications, New Delhi, 2003,p.69). Vyasa, illegitimate son of an unmarried fisherwoman, became agreat sage and author of the Mahabharata. Ratnakara, basically a hunterand criminal who looted and killed highway travelers and was fromobscure and low origins became the sage Valmiki, adopted brahmanicalprofession of teaching, taught Lava and Kusha and authored theRamayana. The Supreme Court majority Judgment in the Indira Shawney(Mandal) case also accepts this fact on Page 636, AIR 93, If what ishanded down to us as history is to be believed, then the epicMahabharata was penned by Vyasa, who was born to a fisherwoman;Ramayana was authored by Valmiki, who belonged to a tribe forced tolive by depredations. The immortal poet Kalidasa's ancestry is notknown. Thus heredity was not an obligate factor for status for theancient Hindus.

Another such example from the Chandogya Upanishad is of Satyakama.When Satyakama approached Haridrumata Gautam to take admission in hisschool (gurukula), the teacher asked his father's name, lineage etc.Satyakama did not know and went to ask his mother. She told him, "Mychild, I do not know of what lineage you are. I who was engaged asparicharini (maid-servant, attendant) attending to many people got youin my youth. Having been such, I could not know what lineage you are."(Chandogya Upanishad, 4.4.2) Satyakama returned to Gautama Rishi andtold him his mother's words. This made the Rishi satisfied and happy,because he thought truthfulness was the most essential character of anyone who wanted to become a Brahmana, and he imparted education to thechild. Satyakama was known after her mother's name Jabala. Therefore weknow him today ad Satyakama Jabala. (Chandogya Upanishad, 4.4.1-5).This story clearly proves that belonging to a respectable family wasnot a prerequisite for getting education for Hindus in ancient India.Here the boy did not know even the name of his father. In modernterminology, he was a bastard child. If we consider the present dayyardsticks, social status of children of unmarried mothers is thelowest. But such a stigmatizing notion did not exist in the Vedicperiod...

The south Indian king Prolaya was born in a shudrafamily, and he declared that he considered himself fortunate that heborn out of the feet of God, "Punsah puranasya padadudirnam varnamyamahu kalikalavaryam." (Kunal, p. xi) Many smriti texts have comparedthis king Prolaya with God Varahavatara because he defended the nationfrom the foreigners, "Anshavatirno bhagavan ivadyah Prolakshitishovasudham vibharti." (Kunal, p. xi).

Thus it is clear that during the ancient period, the Brahmana-hoodand kshatriya-hood were acquired by study and other qualities and notby birth. The famous Sanskrit saying states, Janmaan jayate shudrah,karmana Brahmanah. Meaning everyone is born shudra (low), it is byeffort that one becomes a Brahmana. This fact is also supported by DrAmbedkar's statement quoted by the Supreme Court in the majorityjudgment in the Indira Shawney Case. Dr B. R. Ambedkar noted that castedid not exist during the ancient periods and that the class whichexisted was varna and not caste. (AIR, 1993 SC p. 549-550, para 76 ofJudgment). Were Hindu social classes (or varnas) hereditary in actual practice?

[laalsingh]

..

Edited January 26, 2010 by laalsingh

[Kaljug]

The treatment of shudras is a politically contrived misconception owing much of it's animosity to the deliberate racism of the British Raj.

You seriously talk a lot of unsabstantiated nonsense. So now the caste prejudice of the Hindus is the fault of the British? Do you know that Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji offered amrit to the Hindu Hill rajas and they refused because they would have to drink from the same bowl as the low caste Sikhs?

And you quote from Udasi.org as some kind of evidence of for absurd beliefs? It is a single page that has not been updated since 2003 and which could have been written by anyone!

Your problem is that you read any kind of nonsense on the web in English and accept anything that accords with your beliefs and reject anything that does not as a Singh Sabha innovation, because you are too lazy to learn Gurmukhi fluently and consult puratan texts or speak to actual Udasis.

You can see sarbloh.info for some English translations of writings by Udasis which show that they accept Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji as their Primal Guru and that they certainly did not identify as Hindu.

Here is a video of Swami Brahmdev Udasi of Udasi Dera Badhni Kalan, Moga categorically stating that Sikhs are not Hindus in his katha on Dasam Granth:

You'd learn a lot more if you stop wasting your time writing long-winded essays justifying your own quirky beliefs as some sort of eternal form of Sikhi and actually go and study with these people who you are trying to speak for.

K.