Devi Pargat By Guru Gobind Singh?

[chatanga1]

harjas kaur ji, for someone who cant read gurmukhi prorperly, do you think you may be over-relying on english translations, which can be wildly inaccurate?

[PAL 07]

harjas kaur ji, for someone who cant read gurmukhi prorperly, do you think you may be over-relying on english translations, which can be wildly inaccurate?

wow is it true that she cant even read ????? and yet she makes all this fuss lol.

[Kaljug]

Thanks for referring true Guru's Vaaks in original also. This is the truth through these Vaaks as God is explaining it to me.

Your "God" needs to take basic santhiya.

K.

[Kaljug]

Singhs, not so rough with Harjas Kaur. I believe she is trying to learn Gurmukhi and Gurmat Sidhant but doesn't have access to the santhiya and learning that some of you knowledgable Singhs have had, and she is trying to make sense of it all through the more easily available Vedanta writings.

It's better, for Harjas Kaur and for the less well read people like me who are reading, if y'all explain the differences between Gurmat Sidhant and Vedant, and explain where the errors in Harjas Kaur's interpretation of Gurbani lies rather than pour scorn on her.

K.

[PAL 07]

Your "God" needs to take basic santhiya.

K.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

[PAL 07]

Balbir Singh, on 19 January 2010 - 09:41 AM, said:

Thanks for referring true Guru's Vaaks in original also. This is the truth through these Vaaks as God is explaining it to me.

Your "God" needs to take basic santhiya.

K.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all and Kaljug Jee!

You wrote "Your 'God' needs to take basic santhiya."

I have conveyed your desire in prayers.

God replied "Kaljug's santhiyas are to hold fast in Kalijug. They are learning to pronounce it correctly."

Balbir Singh

[HarjasDevi]

YOU ALSO HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT THE SARGUN AKAAL IS ONLY TEMPORARY AND HISREAL FORM IS NIRGUN......NIRGUN VAHEGURUU HAS NO ARMS NEVER MIND 4 ASYOU SEEM TO THINK......HOWEVER IN SARGUN FORM HIS ARMS COULD BEINFINITE LOOK AT A CENTIPEDE CREATURE, IT HAS HUNDRED LEGS.....LETS SAYON EARTH THERE ARE 100 THOUSAND CENTIPEDES THAT WOULD MEAN THAT GOD HAS100000x100 LEGS...BIT OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR YOU.

NEVERTHELESS YOUR NOT AS INTELLIGENT AS YOU APPEAR ON THIS SITE ANDAGAIN YOU KEEP ON POSTING TONS OF IRRELEVANT STUFF AND YOU APPEARCONFUSED AND CRAZY...WHY IS YOUR AVATAAR A PICTURE OF DEVI THIS ISMANMAT AS SIKHS ARE NOT DEVOTEES OF DEVI, AGAIN THIS SHOWS THAT YOU ARELACKING BASIC KNOWLEDGE OF SIKHISM.........

I THINK YOUR BETTER OF ON SOME HINDUISM FORUM

You are doing what is called a straw man fallacy. You are setting up that my points are something ridiculous so you can pat yourself on the back while tearing down the ridiculous thing. The problem is the lie in your mouth distorting what I have said as ridiculous. I said sargun is temporary and finite. Why would you lie that I said otherwise? I said Nirguna is without and beyond form. What exactly is your objection? I did not abuse your personal characteristics to call as stupid and insane veer ji. Why don't you take a look in the mirror at what kind of person you really are.

Why is every few posts always telling me to go away to the Hindus? Do you really believe I have no right to express an opinion here? Is this about censorship and using flaming abuse of personal characteristics to bully a certain political viewpoint which is anti-Hindu? What's wrong with a picture of Devi? I like what She represents. Especially there are so few holy and powerful images of females in the world which are not playthings for manmukh men. Devi is a wonderful role model. Why trash that?

.WHY IS YOUR AVATAAR A PICTURE OF DEVI THIS ISMANMAT

Why is a picture manmat? I had an experience of Devi. That was manmat too? Why are you trashing Hindu religion and someone's personal beliefs? Is that because Sikh's are haters of any view not in their own sampradaya or box? Wouldn't that be "manmat?"

[HarjasDevi]

The Lord being described here is unmistakably Krishna, not AKAAL.

Harjas ji, you are great in rest of the post. But isn't Krishna the One in Vaishnav mat? Same One is Shiva in Shaivitism, Allah in Islam, (thougth not mentioned in Gurbani, Jesus in Christanity).

Yes, Krishna is AKAAL. But the formless aspect is not being described as blue-skinned, murali, vrindavan, with gopis, etc. So obviously what is being described is a sargun aspect. And that aspect is unmistakably Krishna roop, not AKAAL. It is not a translation error.

[PAL 07]

Singhs, not so rough with Harjas Kaur. I believe she is trying to learn Gurmukhi and Gurmat Sidhant but doesn't have access to the santhiya and learning that some of you knowledgable Singhs have had, and she is trying to make sense of it all through the more easily available Vedanta writings.

It's better, for Harjas Kaur and for the less well read people like me who are reading, if y'all explain the differences between Gurmat Sidhant and Vedant, and explain where the errors in Harjas Kaur's interpretation of Gurbani lies rather than pour scorn on her.

K.

SANGATS BENTI I FOLLOW BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT HARJAS IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME - MOORAKH NAAL NA LOOJEYEH

[HarjasDevi]

"The Lord being described here is unmistakably Krishna, not AKAAL. And the adventures being described all come from Puranic and Shastric literature."

I think the point Bhenji, is that the lord being described is Akaal - as Akaal is the true essence behind Sri Krishna Ji.

I agree with Laal Singhs above post.

AKAAL is the true essence of Krishan Ji. However, what is being described is sargun roop of Krishan Ji is not exactly the same thing as formless AKAAL. Otherwise why didn't the bani just negate every reference to Krishan Ji's roop and simply write AKAAL. Obviously there has to be some meaning for it. The error is not the clear description of Krishan Ji in Gurbani, but the refusal to acknowledge it. Just because the God is nirgun and sargun doesn't mean that we should get hysterical at every mention of some sargun roop or avtaray and immediately try to fit it into nirgun box. Even this is a mental concept not grasping the significance that bani being cited and discussed is Vaishnav bhagat bani of Nam Dev, and hence clearly and unmistakeably references to sarguna in form of Krishan Ji. How many hoops you want to jump through to deny it and blame translations?

[HarjasDevi]

SANGATS BENTI I FOLLOW BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD THAT HARJAS IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME - MOORAKH NAAL NA LOOJEYEH

Thanks for the tip.

Yas tu sarvani bhutany

atmany evanupasyati

sarva-bhutesu catmanam

tato na vijugupsate.

A person who sees everything in relation to the Supreme Lord, and sees all entities as His parts and parcels,

and who sees the Supreme Lord within everything, never hates anything, nor being.

~Shri Isopanishad mantra 6

[singh2]

Yes, Krishna is AKAAL. But the formless aspect is not being described as blue-skinned, murali, vrindavan, with gopis, etc. So obviously what is being described is a sargun aspect. And that aspect is unmistakably Krishna roop, not AKAAL. It is not a translation error.

No, he is not akaal.gurbani does not recognise him as akal.

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

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

Somewhere He hath created millions of the servants like Krishna. Somewhere He hath effaced and then created (many) like Rama.

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

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

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

Dasam Granth sahib

[PAL 07]

HARJAS WRITES "AKAAL is the true essence of Krishan Ji. However, what is being described is sargun roop of Krishan Ji is not exactly the same thing as formless AKAAL. Otherwise why didn't the bani just negate every reference to Krishan Ji's roop and simply write AKAAL. Obviously there has to be some meaning for it. The error is not the clear description of Krishan Ji in Gurbani, but the refusal to acknowledge it. Just because the God is nirgun and sargun doesn't mean that we should get hysterical at every mention of some sargun roop or avtaray and immediately try to fit it into nirgun box. Even this is a mental concept not grasping the significance that bani being cited and discussed is Vaishnav bhagat bani of Nam Dev, and hence clearly and unmistakeably references to sarguna in form of Krishan Ji. How many hoops you want to jump through to deny it and blame translations?"

ERR ??? WHAT ARE YOU ON SOME DRUGS FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA OR SOMETHING. O AND YOU CAN TYPE ASWELL CUZ IT SEEMED THAT YOU KNOW ONLY HOW TO COPY AND PASTE.PLEASE GIVE US A MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION I WANT ATLEAST A COUPLE OF PAGES OF STUFF HERE, THE SHORT RESPONSE TECHNIQUE YOUR TRYING DOESN'T SUIT YOU. LOL

NAMDEV ISN'T A VAISHNAV BHAGAT HE ADOPTED GURMAT SIDDANT.

HARJAS YOUR WELL DODGY MAAN !!! I SUGGEST YOU BE BANNED FROM HERE ON THE GROUNDS OF DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY AND BE SENT TO A SECURE PSYCHIATRIC UNIT STRAIGHT AWAY.

Edited January 20, 2010 by PAL 07

[singh2]

Harjas describes Bhagat Namdev as vaishnva.Vaishnva is a follower of vishnu and his avtars like Krishna and Rama.

She needs to read Gurbani before making such nonsense claims.

ਪਾਂਡੇ ਤੁਮਰਾ ਰਾਮਚੰਦੁ ਸੋ ਭੀ ਆਵਤੁ ਦੇਖਿਆ ਥਾ ॥

paaNday tumraa raamchand so bhee aavat daykhi-aa thaa.

O Pandit, I saw your Raam Chand coming too

ਰਾਵਨ ਸੇਤੀ ਸਰਬਰ ਹੋਈ ਘਰ ਕੀ ਜੋਇ ਗਵਾਈ ਥੀ ॥੩॥

raavan saytee sarbar ho-ee ghar kee jo-ay gavaa-ee thee. ||3||

; he lost his wife, fighting a war against Raawan. ||3||

ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥

hindoo poojai dayhuraa musalmaan maseet.

The Hindu worships at the temple, the Muslim at the mosque.

ਨਾਮੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਜਹ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਨ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥੪॥੩॥੭॥

naamay so-ee sayvi-aa jah dayhuraa na maseet. ||4||3||7||

Naam Dayv serves that Lord, who is not limited to either the temple or the mosque. ||4||3||7||

SGGS 874

[HarjasDevi]

ERR ??? WHAT ARE YOU ON SOME DRUGS FOR SCHIZOPHRENIA OR SOMETHING. OAND YOU CAN TYPE ASWELL CUZ IT SEEMED THAT YOU KNOW ONLY HOW TO COPYAND PASTE.PLEASE GIVE US A MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION I WANT ATLEAST ACOUPLE OF PAGES OF STUFF HERE, THE SHORT RESPONSE TECHNIQUE YOUR TRYINGDOESN'T SUIT YOU. LOL

NAMDEV ISN'T A VAISHNAV BHAGAT HE ADOPTED GURMAT SIDDANT.

HARJAS YOUR WELL DODGY MAAN !!! I SUGGEST YOU BE BANNED FROM HERE ONTHE GROUNDS OF DIMINISHED RESPONSIBILITY AND BE SENT TO A SECUREPSYCHIATRIC UNIT STRAIGHT AWAY.

Bhagat Nam Dev Ji was born in 1270, died 1350.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji was born in 1469.

So, he adopted Gurmat Siddant 119 years before Guruji was born... And I should be banned because it's crazy to inform the Sikh Awareness sangat that he was a devotee of Vishnu roop Visoba and wrote what is essentially Vaishnav Mat 100 years before there was a form of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. He is a famous reformer of Sanatana Dharma from within the bhakti movement, that makes him a Vaishnav.

If it makes you happy to accuse me falsely in degrading ways, then I thank you for carrying my sins. But veer ji, your logic and motivation are still not right. Neither is your conclusion denying the obvious. Perhaps if you used less grade school baiting and flaming technique, your discussion of spiritual issues would be useful to someone. No one can learn anything in an atmosphere of abusive talk and hatred and banning. I invite you to reflect on how you are presenting Sikhi to the world. As I said before, this kind of representation has lost the boat of mukti and has nothing to offer a suffering world.

ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਬਹੁ ਭਾਰੁ ਉਠਾਵੈ ਬਿਨੁ ਮਜੂਰੀ ਭਾਰੁ ਪਹੁਚਾਵਣਿਆ ॥੪॥

nindhaa kar kar bahu bhaar outhaavai bin majooree bhaar pahuchaavaniaa ||4||

By continually slandering others, they carry a terrible load, and they carry the loads of others for nothing.

~SGGS Ji ang 118

andham tamah pravisanti

ye'sambhutim upasate

tato bhuya iva te tamo

ya u sambhutyam ratah.

Those who are engaged in the worship of demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance,

and still more so do the worshippers of the Absolute.

~Isopanishad mantra 12

It is not by our worship or by our belief and understanding that we will find the path to mukti. It is only by Guru's grace. Whether we worship and believe in the murthi or it's symbolic representations or claim to be devotees of AKAAL, we are trapped in the avidya and darkness of our minds, we remain captive to the lusts and ego in our hearts that puts ourselves higher and another lower. So the Upanishad is warning that those who try to worship that which is beyond worship and form are in the greater ignorance than those who worship demi-gods. "Only He Himself can know Himself." We cannot worship what the mind can't even conceive. We can only surrender to the gyaan and piare of Satguruji. Through bhakti and bairaag we will cling to the Guru's charan, and put those charan on our hearts and on our minds and be freed from the terrible bondages burning there.

It has never mattered what people think about the Divine. It's not by our thoughts that liberation can come. But for certain the despising of others, ridiculing them and egoistic hatred will take us far from the path of grace and love.

Edited January 20, 2010 by HarjasKaur

[HarjasDevi]

Harjas describes Bhagat Namdev as vaishnva.Vaishnva is a follower of vishnu and his avtars like Krishna and Rama.

She needs to read Gurbani before making such nonsense claims.

ਪਾਂਡੇ ਤੁਮਰਾ ਰਾਮਚੰਦੁ ਸੋ ਭੀ ਆਵਤੁ ਦੇਖਿਆ ਥਾ ॥

paaNday tumraa raamchand so bhee aavat daykhi-aa thaa.

O Pandit, I saw your Raam Chand coming too

ਰਾਵਨ ਸੇਤੀ ਸਰਬਰ ਹੋਈ ਘਰ ਕੀ ਜੋਇ ਗਵਾਈ ਥੀ ॥੩॥

raavan saytee sarbar ho-ee ghar kee jo-ay gavaa-ee thee. ||3||

; he lost his wife, fighting a war against Raawan. ||3||

ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥

hindoo poojai dayhuraa musalmaan maseet.

The Hindu worships at the temple, the Muslim at the mosque.

ਨਾਮੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਜਹ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਨ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥੪॥੩॥੭॥

naamay so-ee sayvi-aa jah dayhuraa na maseet. ||4||3||7||

Naam Dayv serves that Lord, who is not limited to either the temple or the mosque. ||4||3||7||

SGGS 874

What exactly veer ji did you find against Vaishnavism in that Guru vaak? Those stories of Ramayana are known by everybody. It was no insult to Vaishnav sampradaya to point it out. It was the Bhakti reform of Vaishnavism which first accepted all castes, foreigners like Musalims, and women. It was this Sant Mat Bhakti which had such influence on Sufism.

The problem seems to be the distorted definition of Sanatana Dharma as only the worst and most outrageous excesses, Brahminism, etc, that blinds people to the real history of what the saints within Sanatana Dharma have been teaching for hundreds of years. The tuuk is saying that Naam Dev Ji has turiya consciousness and has transcended. It is not saying anybody's worship is false. It is only pointing out that people's understanding of spirituality is limited and stuck in duality. Any Hindu knows that Ram and Sita and also Ravan are within ourselves. There is a profound symbolism in the teachings. The sants like Nam Dev understood the essence directly. But nothing is a condemnation of Vaishnavism, das avtaray, Ram, Vishnu, or anything like it.

[PAL 07]

HARJAS IM GETTING MORE WORRIED ABOUT ABOUT YOU DAY BY DAY - admin cut- Personal attacks not allowed on this forum, this is your first warning, there are three warnings in total, after that you be put under moderation and possibly be ban.

HOWEVER I DECLARE ONE THING AND THAT IS THAT I AM SICK AND TIRED (AND EXHAUSTED) OF TALKING TO YOU...

I HAVE ALREADY CLEARLY PROOVED TO YOU THAT GOD ISN'T SOME 4 ARMED SUPERMAN TO WHICH YOU HAVE DISAGREED. THEN YOU SAY KRISHNA IS GOD WHEN HE IS VISNU'S AVTAAR........NOW YOUR SAYING NAMDEV WORSHIPPED VISHNU. GURBANI CLEARLY DISPROVES YOUR THINKING BUT IF ITS NOT GETTING INTO YOUR THICK SKULL THEN THATS NOT MY FAULT AND YOU SHOULD THANK ME FOR ATLEAST TRYING.....IF YOUR GONNA TWIST AND TURN GURBANI, REJECTING COMMON SENSE AND SAMPARDAI ARTH TO SUIT YOUR OWN PSYCHOTIC INCLINATIONS THEN I CAN ONLY SUGGEST A GOOD STRONG PRESCRIPTION BY A DOCTOR.

[shaheediyan]

PAL )7,

A few bentiyan:

1 - Please stop typing in capitals, it's annoying for everyone to read as it assumes you are perm shouting, a bit like Dom Jolly with his giant mobile phone;

2 - Lay off Harjas Kaur, this forum isn't just about you. She isn't trying to spread any propoganda in my opinion, but is sharing her deeply held beliefs, be them right or wrong. She is a lady, learn to speak with resptect. There isn't just one version or interpretation of Gurbani, even amongst Sampryada.

She has clealry stated a number of times, she worships Nirgun Akaal, but understands that the light behind Devtai is that of the same Akaal, hence has deep respect for them - and DOES NOT worship them.

This is not a million miles away from Gurmat. Nihangs and Namdharis recite Chandi di Vaar, not for amusement, but toinvoke Bir/Yudh Ras and the shakti needed to fight Dharmic Yudh (both internal and external) - so Khalsai clearly have respect for Chandis exploits, it matters not if one sees them as imaginery, metaphoric or historical - they are a means to an end.

Same goes for the regular mentions of Sri Ram Chandar and Sri Krishna Ji by all traditional Kathavaachak in terms of giving examples of ideal dharmic behaviour.

Now please, chill out and stop making it personal.

[PAL 07]

yes your right shaheediya....actually im just messing about, trying to wind her up. also i wanna take a break from this forum and concentrate on some other stuff so ill see all you guys in a couple years time.

Gurfateh to all (except harjas .........................only joking)

[chatanga1]

AKAAL is the true essence of Krishan Ji. However, what is being described is sargun roop of Krishan Ji is not exactly the same thing as formless AKAAL. Otherwise why didn't the bani just negate every reference to Krishan Ji's roop and simply write AKAAL. Obviously there has to be some meaning for it. The error is not the clear description of Krishan Ji in Gurbani, but the refusal to acknowledge it. Just because the God is nirgun and sargun doesn't mean that we should get hysterical at every mention of some sargun roop or avtaray and immediately try to fit it into nirgun box. Even this is a mental concept not grasping the significance that bani being cited and discussed is Vaishnav bhagat bani of Nam Dev, and hence clearly and unmistakeably references to sarguna in form of Krishan Ji. How many hoops you want to jump through to deny it and blame translations?

harjas kaur ji,im getting the feeling that you place emphasis of viakarn arth of gurbani only. do you recognise the antreev arths at all? you have also great reliance on the work of others, prob sttm and their english translation of gurbani.

[singh2]

Harjas ji

You wrote That Bhagat Namdev was a follower of vaishnavism. I gave you his verse that says he was a believer of Nirgun God.

You are saying the same thing in reply but in a different way.Let us see first what is Vaishnavism .

Web definition of vaishnavism is given below

Vaishnavism is a tradition of Hinduism, distinguished from other schools by its worship of Vishnu

Vishnu or his aaociates avtaras Rama and krishna as original and supreme God.

Unquote

Sikh philosophy of our Gurus discard the above. Only those writings of Bhagats were included in SGGS ji which fell

in line with our Gurus philosophy.

Gurbani says

ਸਵ ਬਿਰੰਚਿ ਅਰੁ ਸਗਲ ਮੋਨਿ ਜਨ ਗਹਿ ਨ ਸਕਾਹਿ ਗਤਾ ॥

: Siv biranch aru sagal moni jan gahi na sakaahi gataa:

Shiva, Brahma and all the silent sages cannot understand the state of the Supreme Being

SGGS 498

ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਔ ਬਿਸਨ ਜਪੇ ਤੁਹਿ ਕੋਟਿਕ ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਭਲੀ ਬਿਧਿ ਧਿਆਯੋ ॥

क्रिसन औ बिसन जपे तुहि कोटिक राम रहीम भली बिधि धिआयो ॥

Thou hast meditated on millions of Krishnas, Vishnus, Ramas and Rahims.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਜਪਿਓ ਅਰੁ ਸੰਭੁ ਥਪਿਓ ਤਹਿ ਤੇ ਤੁਹਿ ਕੋ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਨ ਬਚਾਯੋ ॥

ब्रहम जपिओ अरु स्मभु थपिओ तहि ते तुहि को किनहूं न बचायो ॥

Thou hast recited the name of Brahma and established Shivalingam, even then none could save thee.

ਤੇ ਹਮ ਤਮਕਿ ਤਨਕ ਮੋ ਖਾਪੇ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਕੀ ਠਉਰ ਦੇਵਤਾ ਥਾਪੇ ॥

ते हम तमकि तनक मो खापे ॥ तिन की ठउर देवता थापे ॥

I destroyed them in no time and created gods in their place.

ਤੇ ਭੀ ਬਲਿ ਪੂਜਾ ਉਰਝਾਏ ॥ ਆਪਨ ਹੀ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਕਹਾਏ ॥੭॥

ते भी बलि पूजा उरझाए ॥ आपन ही परमेसुर कहाए ॥७॥

They were also absorbed in the worship of power and called themselves Ominipotednt.7.

ਮਹਾਦੇਵ ਅਚੁੱਤ ਕਹਾਯੋ ॥ ਬਿਸਨ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਕੋ ਠਹਿਰਾਯੋ ॥

महादेव अचु्त कहायो ॥ बिसन आप ही को ठहिरायो ॥

Mahadeo (Shiva) was called Achyuta (blotless), Vishnu considered himself the Supreme.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਆਪ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਬਖਾਨਾ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੋ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਨ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਜਾਨਾ ॥੮॥

ब्रहमा आप पारब्रहम बखाना ॥ प्रभ को प्रभू न किनहूं जाना ॥८॥

Brahma called himself Para Brahman, none could comprehend the Lord.8.

Dasam Granth sahib

[HarjasDevi]

harjas kaur ji,im getting the feeling that you place emphasis ofviakarn arth of gurbani only. do you recognise the antreev arths atall? you have also great reliance on the work of others, prob sttm andtheir english translation of gurbani.

There is always the claim made that the translation is wrong. I am not reading the bani in English. Most of the words which contain potent philosophical and spiritual concepts are Sanskrit translated into Punjabi. Veer ji, for the sake of having bani which is readily accessibly for discussion purposes I cite what can be directly copied and pasted. I also accept that the English translation isn't optimal. I am happy for you to point out particular arths and problems with translation please.

Let me show you an example:

Acẖuṯ pārbarahm parmesur anṯarjāmī.

Maḏẖusūḏan ḏāmoḏar su▫āmī.

Rikẖīkes govarḏẖan ḏẖārī murlī manohar har rangā.

Mohan māḏẖav krisan murāre.

Jagḏīsur har jī▫o asur sangẖāre.

Jagjīvan abẖināsī ṯẖākur gẖat gẖat vāsī hai sangā.

Ḏẖarṇīḏẖar īs narsingẖ nārā▫iṇ.

Ḏāṛā agre paritham ḏẖarā▫iṇ.

Bāvan rūp kī▫ā ṯuḏẖ karṯe sabẖ hī seṯī hai cẖanga.

Sarī rāmcẖanḏ jis rūp na rekẖ▫i▫ā.

~SGGS Ji ang 1082

Can you provide an appropriate translation please which shows that the nirgun God is somehow the only true God and the devatay and avtaray are like "false" gods? Because very clearly the bani is saying the das avtaray ARE Parabrahm, and hence sargun manifestation of the nirgun Lord. And the descriptors given are beyond dispute Vaishnav definitions of God which includes the sargun as well as nirgun aspects. Please explain the English translation problems please. As I am not reading in English.

om purnam adah purnam idam

purnat purnam udacyate

purnasya purnam adaya

purnam evavasisyate

om shanti shanti shanti

That is the whole, this is the whole;

from the whole, the whole becomes manifest;

taking away the whole from the whole,

the whole remains.

Om. Peace! Peace! Peace!

~Isopanishad invocation

The roop of the das avtaray is a manifestation of the wholeness. It is a plenary portion, as is the phenomenal world. The whole could not completely manifest in the finite, or the finite would cease by expressing the fullness of the infinite.

tad ejati tan naijati

tad dure tan vantike

tad antarasya sarvasya

tad u sarvasyasya bahyatah

The Supreme Lord walks and does not walk.

He is far away, but He is near as well.

He is within everything, and again,

He is outside everything.

~Isopanishad mantra 5

Because the Supreme Lord is nirgun AND sargun, He is both formless and with form. You cannot say the God cannot have form because that would be putting a limit on the infinite. And there is no limit to His powers or His ability to manifest and veil Himself through powers of Mayajog. Certainly there is no tuuk in Gurbani which says there is a limit to the Supreme. There is no tuuk which says the God does NOT manifest as avtaray. But in many places is saying the Parabrahm incarnates in Yuga cycles to maintain Dharma of the world. The forms are very clearly identified,

*Who lifted up Govardhan mountain?

*Who saved Dropati's honor?

*Who plays the flute?

*Who has blue-skin and is called keshava?

*Who carries the Sudarshana Chakra?

It's not a mystery. Why would Gurbani have all these specific details if God has no form? Why are the names Shri Ramachandra, Narasingh, Hari, Krishan even in the bani? Because they all mean nirguna? No. Impossible. Because they all refer to the sargun manifestation of the nirguna. There are millions of Rams and millions of Krishnas on millions of worlds. The God is INFINITE. But in this sansaar, to limited beings, the INFINITE manifests in the perceivable finite. If you doubt this, then you doubt Guru. Because that manifestation is the same thing as what a Satguru is, perceivable form of the INFINITE. If not, then the bani of such a Master would have no power to lead us safely across the ocean of sansaar.

Sarīrang baikunṯẖ ke vāsī.

Macẖẖ kacẖẖ kūram āgi▫ā a▫uṯrāsī.

Kesav cẖalaṯ karahi nirāle kīṯā loṛėh so ho▫igā. ||8||

Nirāhārī nirvair samā▫i▫ā.

Ḏẖār kẖel cẖaṯurbẖuj kahā▫i▫ā.

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

Banmālā bibẖūkẖan kamal nain.

Sunḏar kundal mukat bain.

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

Pīṯ pīṯambar ṯaribẖavaṇ ḏẖaṇī.

Jagannāth gopāl mukẖ bẖaṇī.

Sāringḏẖar bẖagvān bīṯẖulā mai gaṇaṯ na āvai sarbangā. ||11||

~SGGS Ji ang 1082

*Who lives in Vaikuntha? ...Vishnu

*Who became the fish and turtle? ...Vishnu

*Who is Keshava, the Lord of beautiful hairs? ...Krishna

*Who is without hate? ...Krishna

*Who carries the conch, the chakr, the club? ...Vishnu Hari

*Whose clothes are yellow-color....Hari!

*Who is Jagannatha Gopal? ...Hari Krishna

*Who is the Archer who has many limbs? ...Ram of Avodya

It's not a mystery. And these are not English descriptions. Neither are they mistranslations.

Fresco depicting a scene from Markandey Puraan where Durga crushesMahikasur (a demon),

at the Guru Ram Rai Udasin Akhara at Dehradun,Uttranchal, India

Guru Ram Rai Udasin Akhara

Gurdwara of Sikh Guru Ram Rai. Dehradun. The Gurdwara was built in1687, but the gate

(from which this detail was taken) was built at theend of the 19th century. Ram and Laxman.

Guru Ram Rai Dehradun

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Harjas Kaur, good work. You are using exactly the same quotes these guys use against me. Good work. Keep it up.

[chatanga1]

i will have a look at the shabd you have posted.

in the meantime your signature says:

ਗੁਰੁ ਈਸਰੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਬਰਮਾ ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਮਾਈ ॥

gur eesar gur gorakh baramaa gur paarabathee maaee ||

The Guru is Shiva, the Guru is Vishnu and Brahma; the Guru is Paarvati and Lakhshmi.

~SGGS Ji ang 2

this is a translation of sikhi to the max., a simple word for word traslation gives you Guru Shiva, Guru Vishnnu, etc, but the antreev katha in panjabi of this by Giani Thakur Singh and others, is that this line is replying to the Sidhs , and Guru Nanak Says that my Guru is the Guru of Shiv, Guru of Vishnu, etc.

When you chose this as your signature, did you research it, or did you listen to any katha by any knowledgeable persons as to what this line means? or did you copy and paste it just cos it (in your mind) reinforced what you thought?

Edited January 21, 2010 by chatanga1