Devi Pargat By Guru Gobind Singh?

[Guest]

Anyways i think both sides have put their points fwd in this thread. Can we get volunteers from both sides to summarize whats being discussed from scriptures, ithashik granths before we lock this topic?

[chatanga1]

neo bhaji, whats the hurry?

is the forums police coming after you or summat for allowing this thread to go on?

[The Khalsa Fauj]

Gyani Thakur Singh's arths are good. Not bad at all.

I have another version but I won't post them here.

[chatanga1]

oops!

Edited January 21, 2010 by chatanga1

[Guest]

not really chatanga veer, i m just pondering after close to 200 replies, people are still unsure are unable take tat out of this topic, you think another 100+ replies will?

[HarjasDevi]

this is a translation of sikhi to the max., a simple word for wordtraslation gives you Guru Shiva, Guru Vishnnu, etc, but the antreevkatha 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?

Either one will accept what it so clearly says "word for word" which is illustrating a principle found in earlier Puranas. Or one will listen to the katha of "knowledgeable" Singh Sabha oriented persons who have to impose a political slant and interpret to suit a Tat Khalsa agenda, thereby ALTERING the very clear and literal meaning of the vaak.

My Guru is the Guru of...

My Guru is...

That's a significant alteration. God is the Guru. All His creation are a part of the One without a second. God is nirgun AND sargun. To impose the politically correct change which only allows for God to be nirguna is not correct. It implies the Tat Khalsa intolerance that God is also manifest in the plenary portions of sarguna, Brahma,Vishnu, and Mahesh. And that fundamentally alters Gurmat.

Quite simply 100 years ago the Singhs wanted to politically and ideologically separate Sikhism from the sanatan heritage. Not only did they whitewash sanataan murals, but they imposed a NEW scholarship which imposed a NEW definition. The sole and fundamental purpose being to DENY the role and importance of devatay and avtaray thereby altering the profound symbolism of how the macrocosm is also a microcosm. What is above is also represented by what is within us.These devatay symbolize our own physicality, in all it's beauty AND in it's corruption, and pervading within us is the nirguna which is an indivisible wholeness.

Don't you see, it is WE OURSELVES who are nirgun AND sargun,only in our portion, we are jeev, and thereby identified with the purely physical, the purely finite and this is the source of our suffering. Only through the grace of a Satguru and keeping faithful practices of Nama Jap can we stabilize the fickle mind and purify the 5 demons in the heart. Only then will the consciousness merge with the nirguna, which is our truest and original identity.

The weakness lies in the ignorance of Hinduism. But blind ritualism is not the authentic spiritual message of Sanatana Dharma. Guru Sahib knew this, that's why he didn't speak against Dharmic teaching,but against adharmic and corrupted, hypocritical practices of unenlightened people. Clearly Guruji recognized the enlightenment of the (sanatan) sants.

HOWEVER what you are doing now is teaching against Sanatana Dharma as if it was the SAME as adharmic, corrupted,hypocritical practices of unwise people. That is where the error lies.

Ekam evadvitiyam

"He is One only without a second."

~Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1

Do you think the Hindu saints and enlightened sages really worshiped stone gods? Why do you keep posing the fake definition that Vaishnavism teaches worship of the demi-gods? Just to recognize the Guru Jyot within them is NOT THE SAME as worshiping in futile, ritualistic and ignorant way. And THAT is profound misrepresentation of Sanatana Dharma teaching. When will Sikhs stop trying to promote the Tat Khalsa theory that ALL Hindu philosophies are some brahminvaad corruption?

gandharvā ūcuḥ

aḿśāḿśās te deva marīcy-ādaya ete

brahmendrādyā deva-gaṇā rudra-purogāḥ

krīḍā-bhāṇḍaḿ viśvam idaḿ yasya vibhūman

tasmai nityaḿ nātha namas te karavāma

The Gandharvas said: Dear Lord, all the demigods, including Lord Śiva, Lord Brahmā, Indra

and Marīci and the great sages, are all only differentiated parts and parcels of Your body.

You are the Supreme Almighty Great; the whole creation is just like a plaything for You.

We always accept You as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we offer our respectful

obeisances unto You. ~Srimad Bhagavatam 4.7.43

You will NEVER understand Devi puja. You don't even have a concept of who Devi is.

Who told you Hindu's believe doing pujas to murthis was a boat of mukti? It is just a traditional way of honoring the God who is only One. Didn't you know that Jhatka is a part of Kali pujas? And the"ritual" observed in Hazoori Sahib of placing blood tilak on shastars is also from Kalipuja? But it is NOT to worship demi-god!!!!! It is to worship the Divine potency of the Almighty through imagery of what Devi represents, in the very form of weapons to defeat evil.

"I am Manifest, Unmanifest, and Transcendent Divinity;

I am Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva,

As well as Saraswati, Lakshmi and Parvati.

I am the Earth, the Sun and the Stars,

And I am also the Moon.

I am all animals and birds,

And I am the outcaste as well, and the thief.

I am the low person of dreadful deeds,

And the great person of excellent deeds.

I am Female, I am Male, and I am Neuter."

~Devi Bhagavatam Purana

Edited January 21, 2010 by HarjasKaur

[Malwe Da Sher]

is it even still on topic lol?

[HarjasDevi]

ਅਖਰ ਮਹਿ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਨ ਪ੍ਰਭਿ ਧਾਰੇ ॥

akhar mehi thribhavan prabh dhhaarae ||

In the Word, God established the three worlds. ~SGGS Ji ang 261

What is that One word? Ek Akshara? It is OM. How do I know this?

ਅਖਰ ਨਾਦ ਕਥਨ ਵਖ੍ਯ੍ਯਾਨਾ ॥

akhar naadh kathhan vakhyaanaa ||

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

~SGGS JI ang 261

The Word comes from the Naad. In the Vedas it teaches that from the Para Nada comes the Pranava/Omkara.

Ek OM Kar. Mandukeya Upanishad states that Omkara is everything/idam sarvam.

So the entire expanse of uncountable universes is included. So the meaning changes to: "One created all that is." Not "One Creator God."

sarvam khalv idam brahma

"All this that we see in the world is Brahman"

And with Bhai Gurdas vaar, "One has subsumed all forms in Himself."

ayam ātmā brahma

"The Self (or the Soul) is Brahman"

Waheguru is a mantra:

ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ਆਕਾਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਰੂਪੁ ਅਨੂਪ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ।

nirankaaru aakaaru kari joti saroopu anoop dikhaaiaa|

The formless Lord has been beholden in the form of the light (in Guru Nanak and other Gurus).

ਵੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਅਗੋਚਰਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ ।

vayd katayb agocharaa vaahiguroo gur sabadu sunaaiaa|

The Gurus recited Word-Guru as Vahiguru who is beyond the Vedas and Katebas (the semtic scriptures).

~Vaar 12 Pauri 17 of Vaaran Bhai Gurdas Ji

The formless Lord took the form of Light, which is the definition of God in aspect of Hari, and became Guru, a Light which shines in darkness. Then why is it impossible that the Light which created all through the instrumentality of the 3 mahadevas Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh,who Gurbani says represents the material form of three gunas? Why is it impossible for that Great Light to shine/manifest through the limited and corruptible instrumentality of the sargun world of form,which includes devatay and avtaray?

Wouldn't it be foolish to worship limited forms of Light and shadow when the only worship which really matters is the one which can liberate you? And that worship is of the sound current by Nama Japa which alone has the power to transform us and wash away the veil of illusion. The ERROR is presuming Hinduism is foolishly worshiping lesser lights with blind brahministic ritualism AND BELIEVING IT IS A FORM OF MUKTI. Guruji clarified the truth on the matter. And the truth is what is actually the original Sanatana Dharma teachings, not the later corruptions of unwise people.

ਜਤ ਕਤ ਪੇਖਉ ਏਕੈ ਓਹੀ ॥

Jaṯ kaṯ pekẖa▫o ekai ohī.

Wherever I look, I see that One Lord alone.

ਘਟ ਘਟ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਆਪੇ ਸੋਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Gẖat gẖat anṯar āpe so▫ī. ||1|| rahā▫o.

Deep within each and every heart, He Himself is contained. ||1||Pause||

ਆਪੇ ਸੂਰੁ ਕਿਰਣਿ ਬਿਸਥਾਰੁ ॥

Āpe sūr kiraṇ bisthār.

He Himself is the sun, and the rays emanating from it.

ਸੋਈ ਗੁਪਤੁ ਸੋਈ ਆਕਾਰੁ ॥੨॥

So▫ī gupaṯ so▫ī ākār. ||2||

He is concealed, and He is revealed. ||2||

ਸਰਗੁਣ ਨਿਰਗੁਣ ਥਾਪੈ ਨਾਉ ॥

Sarguṇ nirguṇ thāpai nā▫o.

He is said to be of the highest attributes, and without attributes.

ਦੁਹ ਮਿਲਿ ਏਕੈ ਕੀਨੋ ਠਾਉ ॥੩॥

Ḏuh mil ekai kīno ṯẖā▫o. ||3||

Both converge onto His single point. ||3||

~SGGS Ji ang 387

The nirgun and the sargun converge on a single point. And that is the Nasal bindu of the Pranava.

It is the OM which is the unity of Light and Sound manifesting from the Primal Naad vibrating beyond sight and sound from infinite potentiality. And that Purest nirgun essence which we call diversely as Parabrahm, AKAAL, Narayana, Hari manifests without limit into infinite Krishnas and infinite Raam avtaras. But the essence of Krishna, the essence of Raam, the essence of Devi, and the essence of we ourselves, is theinfinite Divine Potential who is without form, beyond form, and within every form. So you cannot remove significance of devatay and avtaray from Gurbani without fundamentally altering the ancient wisdom teachings.

Neither can you falsely attribute demi-god worship to significance of Devi puja. Devi is in true unity as Divine Mother with the Divine Father. They are one and the same, because the God is without form, but in created dimension expresses in forms of male and female. Devi symbolizes Divine Power to right injustices and destroy evil. A puja is simply honoring the Divine Qualities of the ONE All-Pervading as we best understand them. Because none of us really understand them.

So this entire thread is much hullabaloo about nothing. It arises from misunderstanding the true teachings of Sanatana Dharma posing it to be deliberately anti-Gurmat when Gurmat INCORPORATES so many of these teachings.

5. Thathpurusha is with eight letters (Aa, Ka, Cha, Ta, Tha, Pa, Ya, Sa) and is in the eight petal lotus and is normally surrounded by air.It has five fires, protects effects of mantras, personification of the fifty consonants, has the form of Atharva Veda, is the chief of several crores of Ganas, has the shape which is extremely big, red coloured, gives whatever is asked for, medicine for worry and diseases and the root of Srishti (creation), Sthithi (upkeep) and Laya (merging). It is the basis of all strengths. It is the Thureeya which is beyond the three common states and is the thing called Brahman. It is worshiped by Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. It is the philosophy from which all others originate.

6. You should understand that Ishana is the witness for intelligence and is the activator of the brain. It is the aspect of sky and cannot be seen. It is decorated by the sound of "Om". It has the shape of all devas. It is peaceful. It is beyond peace. It is beyond sound. It is Aa and occupies the headship of vowels. It is the form of Pancha Brahma which is everywhere and activates the five actions of creation, upkeep, destruction, disappearance and blessing. It hides the Pancha Brahmas within itself and exists as itself and shines beyond the Pancha Brahmas by its light. It shines in the beginning, middle and end without any causative reason. All those devas who are all under stupor by the illusion of Maheswara would not understand properly that Mahadeva who is the teacher of the universe, is the cause of all causes. His shape does not appear before the eye. This world is shining because of that Parathpara Purusha in whom the world exists. It merges in him. That Ishana aspect is the Para Brahmanwhich is the upper boundary of peace. The knowledge that the ParaBrhaman is oneself and the rise of Sathyo Jatam (birth of truth) is Para Brahman. Pancha Brahma Upanishad

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all!

Gurdev has Darshan of Devee Durgaa.

A translator explained true Guru's Vaak.

ਦੁਰਗਾ ਕੋਟਿ ਜਾ ਕੈ ਮਰਦਨੁ ਕਰੈ ॥

दुरगा कोटि जा कै मरदनु करै ॥

durgaa koti jaa kai mardan karai. SGGS 1162

Such is he, whose feet millions of goddesses shampoo.

*****

The reverend Gurus also have Darshan of Devaas, the one from this world and from the Devaa beyond also.

Guru Raamdaas Jee is singing.

ਹਰਿ ਕੇ ਸੰਤ ਮਿਲਹੁ ਮਨੁ ਦੇਵਾ ਜੋ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਮੁਖਿ ਚਉਦਾ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥

हरि के संत मिलहु मनु देवा जो गुरबाणी मुखि चउदा जीउ ॥२॥

Hari ke sant milahu manu devaa jo gurbaaNee chaudaa jeeo. SGGS 95

+++++

Guru Arjan Dev Jee is singing.

ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਅਪਰੰਪਰ ਦੇਵਾ ॥

पारब्रहम अपर्मपर देवा ॥

Paarbrahma Aprampara Devaa. SGGS 98

*****

These are my prayers today. God! There may be many dumb dummies around. You have a big choice though. Please give Your Darshan as Devee Devaa.

Thanks for listening.

Balbir Singh

[singh2]

Guru sahib says about the status of these deities

ਫਿਰੈ ਚੌਦਹੂੰ ਲੋਕਯੰ ਕਾਲ ਚਕ੍ਰੰ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਨਾਥ ਨਾਥੇ ਭ੍ਰਮੰ ਭਉਹ ਬਕ੍ਰੰ ॥

फिरै चौदहूं लोकयं काल चक्रं ॥ सभै नाथ नाथे भ्रमं भउह बक्रं ॥

All the fourteen worlds are under the Command of KAL. He hath stringed all the Naths by turning about the slanting evebrows.

ਕਹਾ ਰਾਮ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨੰ ਕਹਾ ਚੰਦ ਸੂਰੰ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਹਾਥ ਬਾਧੇ ਖਰੇ ਕਾਲ ਹਜੂਰੰ ॥੮੩॥

कहा राम क्रिसनं कहा चंद सूरं ॥ सभै हाथ बाधे खरे काल हजूरं ॥८३॥

May be Rama and Krishna, may be the moon and sun, all are standing with folded hands in the presence of KAL.83.

ਕਾਲ ਹੀ ਪਾਇ ਸੁਰਾਸੁਰ ਗੰਧ੍ਰਬ ਜੱਛ ਭੁਜੰਗ ਦਿਸਾ ਬਿਦਿਸਾ ਹੈ ॥

काल ही पाइ सुरासुर गंध्रब ज्छ भुजंग दिसा बिदिसा है ॥

At the instance of KAL, the gods, demons, Gandharvas, Yakshas, Bhujang, directions and indications have appeared.

ਔਰ ਸੁਕਾਲ ਸਭੈ ਬਸ ਕਾਲ ਕੇ ਏਕ ਹੀ ਕਾਲ ਅਕਾਲ ਸਦਾ ਹੈ ॥੮੪॥

और सुकाल सभै बस काल के एक ही काल अकाल सदा है ॥८४॥

All the other prevalent object are within KAL, only One supreme KAL is ever Timeless and eternal.84.

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.

ਕੋਟ ਕਰੀ ਤਪਸਾ ਦਿਨ ਕੋਟਿਕ ਕਾਹੂੰ ਨ ਕੌਡੀ ਕੋ ਕਾਮ ਕਢਾਯੋ ॥

कोट करी तपसा दिन कोटिक काहूं न कौडी को काम कढायो ॥

Thou hast observed millions of austerities for millions of days, but thou couldst not be recompensed even for the value of a couldst not be recompensed even for the value of a cowrie.

ਕਾਮਕੁ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਕਸੀਰੇ ਕੇ ਕਾਮ ਨ ਕਾਲ ਕੋ ਘਾਉ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਨ ਬਚਾਯੋ ॥੯੭॥

कामकु मंत्र कसीरे के काम न काल को घाउ किनहूं न बचायो ॥९७॥

The Mantra recited for fulfillment of worldly desires doth not even bring the least gain and none of such Mantras can`t save from the blow of KAL.97.

ਕਾਹੇ ਕੋ ਕੂਰ ਕਰੈ ਤਪਸਾ ਇਨ ਕੀ ਕੋਊ ਕੌਡੀ ਕੇ ਕਾਮ ਨ ਐਹੈ ॥

काहे को कूर करै तपसा इन की कोऊ कौडी के काम न ऐहै ॥

Why doth thou indulge in false austerities, because they will not bring in gain of even one cowrie.

ਤੋਹਿ ਬਚਾਇ ਸਕੈ ਕਹੁ ਕੈਸੇ ਕੈ ਆਪਨ ਘਾਵ ਬਚਾਇ ਨ ਐਹੈ ॥

तोहि बचाइ सकै कहु कैसे कै आपन घाव बचाइ न ऐहै ॥

The cannot save themselves form the blow (of KAL), how can they protect thee?

Dasam Granth sahib

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all and Singh2 Jee!

Thanks for quoting the wonderful Vaaks from The Dasam Granth.

You have again provided borrowed translations with the original Vaaks from Gurdev.

The enlightened Gurus suggest doing Japu. They never suggest doing Tap that also imitating austerities.

ਕਾਹੇ ਕੋ ਕੂਰ ਕਰੈ ਤਪਸਾ ਇਨ ਕੀ ਕੋਊ ਕੌਡੀ ਕੇ ਕਾਮ ਨ ਐਹੈ ॥

काहे को कूर करै तपसा इन की कोऊ कौडी के काम न ऐहै ॥

Why to do false Tap like them, nothing brings in gain of a cowrie.

ਤੋਹਿ ਬਚਾਇ ਸਕੈ ਕਹੁ ਕੈਸੇ ਕੈ ਆਪਨ ਘਾਵ ਬਚਾਇ ਨ ਐਹੈ ॥

तोहि बचाइ सकै कहु कैसे कै आपन घाव बचाइ न ऐहै ॥

How can someone save you, own wounds are not saved by them.

*****

I have a curiosity. Please answer it.

Gurdev is proving here again that He did have Darshan of Krisan, Bisan, Raam, Raheem and Brahma japping their Mantra. Is it not so? Without their Darshan, how can someone write about them?

*****

Balbir Singh

[Xylitol]

Harjas Kaur ji, Gyani Thakur Singh is from damdami taksal, not from Singh Sabha / SGPC. If you are not content with his explanation, I suggest you listen to some other kathas on www.gurmatveechar.com, a website which hosts sampradic katha.

[HarjasDevi]

Guru sahib says about the status of these deities

Did you READ the quotes provided from Pancha Brahma Upanishad and Sriman Bhagavatam? They are teaching EXACTLY the same as Gurmat. Only false allegations about what Sanatana Dharma teaches makes Guruji's references seem like rejection of a false religion they set up as worshipping of demi-gods.

FYI, Sanatana Dharma does not teach the practice of worship of demi-gods, let alone for mukti. Can I make it any clearer than to cite directly from Vaishnav Puranas? Your whole argument is based on a radical misunderstanding and deliberate Tat Khalsa misrepresentation to cause division where there is none.

The Gandharvas said: Dear Lord, all the demigods, including Lord Śiva, Lord Brahmā, Indra

and Marīci and the great sages, are all only differentiated parts and parcels of Your body.

You are the Supreme Almighty Great; the whole creation is just like a plaything for You.

We always accept You as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and we offer our respectful

obeisances unto You. ~Srimad Bhagavatam 4.7.43

Thathpurusha... It is the basis of all strengths. It is the Thureeya which is beyond the three common states and is the thing called Brahman. It is worshiped by Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu. It is the philosophy from which all others originate...

It is decorated by the sound of "Om". It has the shape of all devas. It is peaceful. It is beyond peace. It is beyond sound...

It is the form of PanchaBrahma which is everywhere and activates the five actions of creation,upkeep, destruction, disappearance and blessing. It hides the PanchaBrahmas within itself and exists as itself and shines beyond the PanchaBrahmas by its light. It shines in the beginning, middle and endwithout any causative reason...

Allthose devas who are all under stupor by the illusion of Maheswara wouldnot understand properly that Mahadeva who is the teacher of theuniverse, is the cause of all causes. His shape does not appear beforethe eye. This world is shining because of that Parathpara Purusha inwhom the world exists. It merges in him. That Ishanaaspect is the Para Brahman.. ~Pancha Brahma Upanishad

If the Devi Bhagavatam Purana has said Devi is the nirgun as well as sargun, then you are no longer dealing with Devi as mere plenary portion but in that expansion which is the Totality, AKAAL. Devi is both the servant of AKAAL and merged with AKAAL in Greater aspect. How is this concept different from believing that Panj Piare have become the Guru roop? Same thing as Krishna, he was born, lived and died. There are MILLIONS of Krishnas. HOWEVER, when not speaking from the distinction of embodiment in the created realm, when speaking from UNITY of turiya consciousness as an avataar, Bhagavan has become one of the NAAMS of liberation.

It is true, we do not jap NAAM of Devi. But that aspect of Devi as UNITY with Divine Father as Divine Mother, we do not reject, absolutely do not.

If you want to make radical distinctions rejecting Devi and Das Avtaray, why then do you not expunge the Waheguru Mantra? Because your notion of rejection is hypocritical. You have not proved Guruji's "rejection" at all. Because you do not understand the very Vaishnavite teachings reflected in the Puranas which Guruji was making "reference to" and not "rejecting." Guruji was clarifying the truth of the matter, not rejecting the very Puranic concepts he was placing into Gurmat.

ਸਤਿਜੁਗਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਵਾਸਦੇਵ ਵਵਾ ਵਿਸਨਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਵੈ ।

satijugi satigur vaasadayv vavaa visanaa naamu japaavai|

In Satyug, Visnu in the form of Vasudev is said to have incarnated and ‘V’ Of Vahiguru reminds of Visnu.

ਦੁਆਪਰਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਹਰੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਹਾਹਾ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਵੈ ।

duaapari satigur haree krisan haahaa hari hari naamu japaavai|

The true Guru of dvapar is said to be Harikrsna and ‘H’ of Vahiguru reminds of Hari.

ਤੇਤੇ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਰਾਮ ਜੀ ਰਾਰਾ ਰਾਮ ਜਪੇ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਵੈ ।

taytay satigur raam jee raaraa raam japay sukhu paavai|

In the the treta was Ram and ‘R’ of Vahiguru tells that rembering Ram will produce joy and happiness.

ਕਲਿਜੁਗਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਗਗਾ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਨਾਮੁ ਅਲਾਵੈ ।

kalijugi naanak gur gobind gagaa gobind naamu alaavai|

In kalijug, Gobind is in the form of Nanak and ‘G’ of Vahiguru gets Govind recited.

ਚਾਰੇ ਜਾਗੇ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਪੰਚਾਇਣ ਵਿਚਿ ਜਾਇ ਸਮਾਵੈ ।

chaaray jaagay chahu jugee panchaain vichi jaai samaavai|

The recitations o f all the four ages subsume in Panchayan i.e. in the soul of the common man.

ਚਾਰੋ ਅਛਰ ਇਕੁ ਕਰਿ ਵਾਹਗੁਰੂ ਜਪੁ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਜਪਾਵੈ ।

chaaro achhar iku kari vaahaguroo japu mantr japaavai|

When joining four letters Vahiguru is remembered,

ਜਹਾ ਤੇ ਉਪਜਿਆ ਫਿਰਿ ਤਹਾ ਸਮਾਵੈ ॥੪੯॥੧॥

jahaa tay upajiaa dhiri tahaa samaavai ॥49॥1॥

The jiv merges again in its origin.

~Vaar 1 Pauri 49 of Vaaran Bhai Gurdas Ji

Bhai Gurdas Ji is telling clearly that Satguru Nanak Dev Ji is Himself an avatar of the Kaliyug in the lineage of Das Avtaray.

ਕਬਿ ਕਲ ਸੁਜਸੁ ਗਾਵਉ ਗੁਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਰਾਜੁ ਜੋਗੁ ਜਿਨਿ ਮਾਣਿਓ ॥੩॥

kab kal sujas gaavo gur naanak raaj jog jin maaniou ||3||

KAL the poet sings the Sublime Praises of Guru Nanak, who enjoys mastery of Raja Yoga. ||3||

ਗਾਵਹਿ ਕਪਿਲਾਦਿ ਆਦਿ ਜੋਗੇਸੁਰ ਅਪਰੰਪਰ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਵਰੋ ॥

gaavehi kapilaadh aadh jogaesur aparanpar avathaar varo ||

Kapila and the other Yogis sing of Guru Nanak. He is the Avataar, the Incarnation of the Infinite Lord.

ਗਾਵੈ ਜਮਦਗਨਿ ਪਰਸਰਾਮੇਸੁਰ ਕਰ ਕੁਠਾਰੁ ਰਘੁ ਤੇਜੁ ਹਰਿਓ ॥

gaavai jamadhagan parasaraamaesur kar kuthaar ragh thaej hariou ||

Parasraam the son of Jamdagan, whose axe and powers were taken away by Raghuvira, sing of Him.

ਉਧੌ ਅਕ੍ਰੂਰੁ ਬਿਦਰੁ ਗੁਣ ਗਾਵੈ ਸਰਬਾਤਮੁ ਜਿਨਿ ਜਾਣਿਓ ॥

oudhha akroor bidhar gun gaavai sarabaatham jin jaaniou ||

Udho, Akrur and Bidur sing the Glorious Praises of Guru Nanak, who knows the Lord, the Soul of All.

~SGGS Ji ang 1389

ਅਵਤਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਨਹਿ ਅੰਤੁ ॥

avathaar n jaanehi anth ||

Incarnated beings do not know His limit.

~SGGS Ji 894

This doesn't mean avataray are futile. It means they are within the creation of three gunas and veil of Mayajog. This is why Guruji as Himself incarnation wrote Japji Sahib to teach us that the human being is so limited we cannot even praise the God properly and would end ourselves trying to write all the praise that He is. HOWEVER, when the sargun manifestation is in turiya consciousness He has Brahmgyaan, He knows God and IS GOD. This is why we don't worship Guru Nanak Dev Ji, but rather His bani has become boat of liberation just as the NAAM.

If you read the Puranas, nothing says worship Krishan Ji's physicality. It most definitely says do not worship the demi-gods. What is being worshipped is not the plenary portion or the incarnation itself, but the EXPANSION, which is the Divine Totality of infinite opulances and Lights, nirguna AND sarguna. And absolutely clear distinction is made on this point. Just as Gurbani is clear to say the One who is pervading all is Parabrahm, and also calling as Jagannatha Gopal, a NAAM of Krishan Ji.

[laalsingh]

This doesn't mean avataray are futile. It means they are within the creation of three gunas and veil of Mayajog. This is why Guruji as Himself incarnation wrote Japji Sahib to teach us that the human being is so limited we cannot even praise the God properly and would end ourselves trying to write all the praise that He is. HOWEVER, when the sargun manifestation is in turiya consciousness He has Brahmgyaan, He knows God and IS GOD. This is why we don't worship Guru Nanak Dev Ji, but rather His bani has become boat of liberation just as the NAAM.

If you read the Puranas, nothing says worship Krishan Ji's physicality. It most definitely says do not worship the demi-gods. What is being worshipped is not the plenary portion or the incarnation itself, but the EXPANSION, which is the Divine Totality of infinite opulances and Lights, nirguna AND sarguna. And absolutely clear distinction is made on this point. Just as Gurbani is clear to say the One who is pervading all is Parabrahm, and also calling as Jagannatha Gopal, a NAAM of Krishan Ji.

For a Sikh, it is Guru and God. There is no place for demi-gods or physical Krishnas. I agree that One who is pervading all is Parbraham is called Jaganath Gopal. Is this of any particular significance? Gopal is one of infinite kritam names of Lord.

In your previous posts

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.

Devteys and avtaray are not false. But they are not gods either, as there is only One God. There is only one Karta and rest is His Krit. Karta is not apart from His krits, that does not mean individual krit is Karta Himself. As you said,

Ekam evadvitiyam

"He is One only without a second."

~Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1

As a feature 'being dark-skinned' can't desribne greatness of Krishna, similarly any of the avatars or whole lineup of Vaishnav avatars can not desribe Lord. As you said,

The whole could not completely manifest in the finite, or the finite would cease by expressing the fullness of the infinite.

Another thing

If you read the Puranas, nothing says worship Krishan Ji's physicality. It most definitely says do not worship the demi-gods.

and

*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.

Harjas ji, there is only One Karta. All these miracles were performed by Him only (in His different forms).

Then why we are debating that these miracles are performed by mortal Krishna?

Edited January 22, 2010 by laalsingh

[laalsingh]

"I am Manifest, Unmanifest, and Transcendent Divinity;

I am Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva,

As well as Saraswati, Lakshmi and Parvati.

I am the Earth, the Sun and the Stars,

And I am also the Moon.

I am all animals and birds,

And I am the outcaste as well, and the thief.

I am the low person of dreadful deeds,

And the great person of excellent deeds.

I am Female, I am Male, and I am Neuter."

~Devi Bhagavatam Purana

Perfect. That is our beloved One. But how it ends up being multi arm lady riding tiger?

[HarjasDevi]

"I am Manifest, Unmanifest, and Transcendent Divinity;

I am Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva,

As well as Saraswati, Lakshmi and Parvati.

I am the Earth, the Sun and the Stars,

And I am also the Moon.

I am all animals and birds,

And I am the outcaste as well, and the thief.

I am the low person of dreadful deeds,

And the great person of excellent deeds.

I am Female, I am Male, and I am Neuter."

~Devi Bhagavatam Purana

Perfect. That is our beloved One. But how it ends up being multi arm lady riding tiger?

Can you not see that the teaching is coming from Devi Bhagavatam Purana? A Hindu scripture describing the form of Devi as riding a tiger. And yes, I am glad you acknowledged the symbolism of this imagery isn't literal. My point being, it isn't literal for Hindu's either. The difficulty seems to be the Singhs want to make Sanatana Dharma into worst excesses of honoring demi-gods as boat of mukti. So I am grateful you are seeing this point. As the concept of Devi as the Divine expansion, meaning Divine Mother as Nirguna AND sarguna represents that She, in this aspect is none other than AKAAL.

My personal opinion is that if Guru Gobind Singh Ji was writing about Devi or even if He did puja of Devi, that it was NOT of the paper tiger imagery, but of the AKAAL pervading in the representation of that form, i.e., shastars, justice, power to defeat evil, etc.

But that is not coming from Guruji. That is coming from Hindu scriptures own teaching. The problem we are having is only that you didn't understand that Sanatana Dharma makes the same distinctions between sargun form and nirguna and ALWAYS gives pre-eminence to nirguna. But it does this without side-tracking devatay and avtaray.

[Balbir Singh]

Pray Truth for all and say Satsriakaal!

Dear all and Harjas Kaur Jee!

You wrote "But that is not coming from Guruji. That is coming from Hindu scriptures own teaching."

In my view, the correct version may be this. "Truth that is coming from Guru Jee, the same Truth is also coming from enlightened Rishis. One can understand it according to his conscious mind as written in Sri Guru Granth Saahib Jee and ancient scriptures."

Truth and the source of it are the same for all.

Balbir Singh

[chatanga1]

Harjas Kaur Ji. that shabad you asked for the meaning of. i have listened to the katha of this shabad from Snat Gurbachan Singh. It was amazing katha, and if anything i wish to thank you for making me get off my fat backside and listen to this katha. The depth of the katha is truly amazing, and the words of Sant ji, i cannot translate into english cos me duz not have the budhi to.

so i am going to request that you may listen to it instead :

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/katha.php

click on puratan katha, then Sant Gurbachan Singh, then Guru Granth Sahib folder, then vol 12 and it is page 1082.

I was listening to it last night, but i wont share what i felt, until you have heard it yourself, as i would like to hear your views on it first. hope you dont mind.

now, going back to your signature. there are many pauris in japji sahib, which were discussion between siddhs and Guru. The line that you have posted, is an answer to the siddhs on who Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Guru is. His Guru is the Guru of the Tri-Dev, not the Tri-Dev themselves, as the rest of Japji Sahib says time and time again that the Tri-Dev sing HIS praises, not their own.

for clearer understanding of this Giani Thakur Singh has given good explanation on the Japji Sahib katha, and you will also learn the difference between OM and OMKAAR.

you have insinuated that this katha is of singh sabha mentality, therefore it is not worth much, you are mistaken if you think that the samprdayes have changed their explanations of Gurbani just cos of the sabha.

looking on Srigranth.org website, this is from the Faridkot wala teeka, which was done by nirmalas. Now I know your gurmukhi isnt fluent so ask if you have any probs reading this:

ਗੁਰੂ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਹੀ (ਈਸਰੁ) ਸਿਵਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ (ਗੋਰਖੁ) ਬਿਸਨ ਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ (ਬਰਮਾ) ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਜੀ ਹੂਏ ਹੈਂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਜੀ (ਮਾ) ਲੱਛਮੀ ਜੀ (ਈ) ਸੁਰਸਤੀ ਜੀ ਹੂਈ ਹੈ ਵਾ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੀ ਸਰਬ ਦੇਵ ਰੂਪ ਹੈਂ ਈਸਰ ਕਾ ਗੁਨੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਸਿੱਖੋਂ ਕਾ ਅਗ੍ਯਾਨੁ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਕਾ ਗੁਣ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਸੁਭ ਗੁਣੋਂ ਕੀ ਪਾਲਣਾ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਆਦਿ ਗੁਨ ਉਤਪੰਨ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਇਸੀ ਭਾਂਤ ਪਾਰਬਤੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਅਵਗੁਣੋਂ ਕਾ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਲੱਛਮੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰਕਰ ਦੈਵੀ ਸੰਪਦਾ ਕੇ ਗੁਣੋ ਕਾ ਦਾਤਾ ਹੈਂ ਸੁਰੱਸ੍ਵਤੀ ਕਾ ਗੁਣੁ ਧਾਰ ਕਰ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਾ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਹੈਂ॥ ਪ੍ਰਸ਼ਨ: ਐਸੇ ਗੁਰੋਂ ਕੀ ਮਹਿਮਾ ਔਰ ਭੀ ਕਹੀਏ॥ ਉੱਤਰ:

Edited January 22, 2010 by chatanga1

[Mithar]

Harjas Kaur,

You cannot prove an argument false by simply labelling it "Singh Sabha". You need to explain WHY it is false in accordance to Sikh scriptures or literature. Another thing is, not a single Sikh scholar of the past or present has ever done any arth/translation of "Guru Issar Gur Gorakh Brama Gur Parbati Mayie" as you have. If you are calling Sampradhayak as Singh Sabha, then obviously you have not read the history of the Sikh Sampradhahs. I do not understand why you insist on turning us into worshipers of Hindu Gods. Sometimes you are fanatically Vaishnava, then you turn into a fanatical Devi worshiper. Quite frankly, I'm confused as to what your religious views are.

[HarjasDevi]

You wrote "But that is not coming from Guruji. That is coming from Hindu scriptures own teaching."

In my view, the correct version may be this. "Truth that is coming fromGuru Jee, the same Truth is also coming from enlightened Rishis. Onecan understand it according to his conscious mind as written in SriGuru Granth Saahib Jee and ancient scriptures."

Truth and the source of it are the same for all.

While I agree with you veer ji, what I meant was the citations are Hindu Puranas directly, not specifically from Shri Guru Granth Sahib. And purpose of this is so that Singhs may see the Puranas have taught exactly the same as what Guru Sahib taught so false assumption of Hindu mat being automatically "anti-Gurmat" can be corrected.

[HarjasDevi]

You cannot prove an argument false by simply labelling it "SinghSabha". You need to explain WHY it is false in accordance to Sikhscriptures or literature.

Singh Sabha is an ideology which attempts to expunge Hindu Mat from Sikhi by deliberately pretending to ignore it's historical footprints in Sikh history, granths, and Gurbani. It isn't specifically "false" as it is it's own valid viewpoint and currently the mainstream Panthic viewpoint. By labelling it Singh Sabha, I'm pointing out that the agenda is to deliberately dissociate as if with an allergy from any Hindu source material or teachings, regardless of the logic or illogic for doing so.

I used the Puranas to show the error of the Singh Sabha based accusations that Hindus worship demi-gods as a boat of mukti. I don't know what more I can do to explain than cite directly from Puranic source material. The Puranas are explaining in great detail the differences between the plenary portions and the expansions of the Divine and clarifying devatay and avtaray.

Singh Sabha distorts bani in it's interpretation. For example many on this thread have said the devatay are meaningless, or futile, or useless. I stated the clarification as the devatay represent the demi-gods and the avtaray represent the Supreme God Jyoti-jyot from age to age although in the limitation of sargun form. For this reason the Waheguru mantra is names of avtaray and not demi-gods.

Arguments AGAINST Devi have been made lumping Her together with Krishan who is an avatar, and devatay who are demi-gods as if there were no difference. This reflects confusion all right. People are not making critical distinctions, and hence lumping Devi as among the lowest demi-gods when in actuality per Devi Purana is describing the Divine Mother in expansion as both nirguna and sarguna. And it is from this clarification that the Baugwati and the Divine Sword in bani are not refering to AKAAL specifically, as a sword is a form, and AKAAL is that Totality beyond form, yet pervading in form. In this respect the Devi who washes the feet of the sants and is the servant of AKAAL is demi-god aspect and sarguna. But the Devi aspect which is Pritam Baugwati Adi Shakti, is the Primal Lord, nirguna and sarguna. Both of Her aspects are reflecting an internal unity. But the role is different. The demi-god is in the role of Holy servant and shining angel (dhaev). But the expansion of the symbolic qualities of finite AND infinite means they have changed discussion from demi-god to DIVINE LIGHT.

Reason for this clarification is if Guru Ji was doing Devi puja it was to honor the Divine Mother aspect of the All-pervading ONE, and not the demi-god. But people are missing the point between plenary portions and expansions and that would be foolishness to worship the symbolic representation of a demi-god. Guru Ji would NEVER do this. Now many Hindu people do this. But Puranas directly taught something else. Guru Ji taught same as what Puranas taught. YES IT IS FOOLISH TO WORSHIP THE DEMI-GOD. THIS CONVERSATION IS RIDICULOUS.

Another thing is, not a single Sikh scholarof the past or present has ever done any arth/translation of "Guru Issar Gur Gorakh Brama Gur Parbati Mayie"as you have. If you are calling Sampradhayak as Singh Sabha, thenobviously you have not read the history of the Sikh Sampradhahs. I do not understand why you insist on turning us into worshipers of Hindu Gods.

Hinduism teaches there is only One Supreme God, AKAAL. I don't understand what your problem is.

Since the Singh Sabha have taken a razor and cut off the legitimacy of sanataan sampradayas, then your statement makes sense. But apart from the radical rejection of traditional sanataan sampradayas which actually do share some beliefs and interpretations with me, then your comment is false.

Edited January 22, 2010 by HarjasKaur

[HarjasDevi]

Damdami Taksal not influenced by dominant Singh Sabha reform of Sikhism?

This Takhat was officially recognized as the fifth Takhat on November 18, 1966. On demand from the Sikhs, a sub-committee was appointed by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, Amritsar by a General Meeting Resolution No: 789 on July 30, 1960...

The standard manual entitled Sikh Rahit Maryada was published under the auspices of the SGPC in 1950 after reaching a general consensus within the Sikh community. It has ever since been regarded as an authoritative statement of Sikh doctrine and behavior. The SGPC maintains that this manual is a representative of the "collective personality of the Panth" and dial no single group has any right or authority to challenge it. It is, however, important to note that the Sikh Rahit Maryada was produced as a result of the Tat Khalsa reforms, which represented the dominant component of the Singh Sabha movement. It seeks to establish Sikhism as "a monolithic, codified and reified religion" with universal norms of orthodoxy and orthopraxy. To this day its wide circulation of approximately two hundred thousand copies represents a measure of Singh Sabha success. Its reading certainly accentuates the image of a uniform Khalsa identity...

The main centre of the present-day Damdami Taksal (Jadia Bhindran-Mehta) is located at Gurdwara GurdarshanParkashat Mehta in Amritsar district. It is actually a branch of a major school of traditional Sikh learning known as die Bhindran Taksal. Although that Taksal was established by Sant Sundar Singh(1883-1930) of Boparai Kalan (in Ludhiana district) in 1906, it achieved prominence through its second incumbent, Sam Gurbachan Singh Khalsa (1902-69) of Bhindran Kalan (hence the name "Bhindran Taksal").33 He devoted his entire life to teaching correct enunciation and intonation in reciting die Sikh scriptures. He trained a large number of gianis (traditional Sikh scholars) through his mobile seminary. When he died in 1969 he was succeeded by two contenders,Giani Mohan Singh (1919-) and Sant Kartar Singh (1932-77). Sikh Rehit

To deny the profound doctrinal and interpretive influence of Singh Sabha on modern Sikhism, Major Sikh institutions such as Akal Takht and SGPC, Sikh Rehit Maryada, and even DamDami Taksal Sampradaya is just illogical. DDT and AKJ are probably the closest among all the sampradayas, and the AKJ are so Tat Khalsa as to be considered neo-Bhasaurias.

I never said Singh Sabha reformist view was "false." It is in fact the majority view. I said I disagreed with it. You can't have a heritage where murals of devatay are removed from all over purataan Gurdwaras thereby providing a radically different face of "modern" Sikhism to suit the new interpretations of "rejection." If this reformist and anti-Sanatan view is in fact the purataan version of Sikhi, how do you explain the loose ends, the references to Chandi puja, the Battle flags and murals of devatay and avataray in purataan Gurdwaras existing still, even after the literal whitewashing of murals from most. How do you explain the murthis of Chandi and Krishna removed from "Hari" mandir Sahib in 1906?

Yes, I know the Singh Sabha story about the evil brahmin mahants and how they tried to change Sikhi and make it Hindu and are ever the threat to the fragile Sikh identity. Even as the Mahants were from Guru's direct lineage families and descendants of Sanskrit scholars who were in Guruji's Darbar. What's fragile is the flimsy fanatical ideology of Sikhism as rejecting avtaray and devatay and having pretended profound difference from Sanatana Dharma. Now I never said Sikhi wasn't distinct and unique. But clearly the points of departure are not as dramatic as Singh Sabha wanted to make.

I'm not representing a sampradaya so I'm not pretending to speak for anyone but myself. But these views are actually in-line with older purataan concepts which were once the mainstream Sikhi. I'm showing you footprints which haven't yet been erased by the fanatically intolerant Singh Sabha. Absolutely, they are not new. Most of the Sikh princes of royal states, including Maharaja Ranjit Singh all kept sanatan practices, including Devi puja and attended Gurdwara and Hindu mandir without discrimination which exists today. And strangely, if this were a corruption or aberration, there was no fuss made or even single comment about it being "wrong." Not until the British and the Singh Sabhas.

Sometimes you are fanatically Vaishnava, then you turn into a fanatical Devi worshiper. Quite frankly, I'm confused as to what your religious views are.

I'm not a Vaishnava simply to have studied the Vaishnav scriptures and philosophy and recognize them in Gurbani. You simply can't have definitions of God as Hari, Krishna, Ram, Gopala, Govinda, Jagannatha, Keshava, Murali, etc and it NOT be a Vaishnav influenced definition. Vaishnavs only worship the Supreme God. But explaining this to you doesn't make me a fanatic Vaishnav.

Now I am a fanatical Devi worshipper? Is this because I cited the Devi Purana which describes the expansion of Devi as being the Divine Mother who is Parabrahm or because I have Devi avatar picture? How can you be confused about my religious views? They aren't hiding. I have said already I am a Hindu Sikh. I'm not Radhasoami, Nirmala, Nihang, Nanaksari, Ravidasi. I'm not Sevapanthi. I'm not Sant Nirankari. I'm not Namdhari. I don't belong to any of the purataan Sikh sampradayas or sects. So good luck with the label. Oh, yes, I'm not RSS,really!

I was a Naam abhiyasi amritdhari in the Akhand Kirtani Jatha. If I stopped believing in one thing, why does that make me a fanatic? Maybe I was a fanatic before and got out of a little box. As an amritdhari I went to visit a Hindu sant and had a spiritual experience that threw me very far out of the AKJ. What else do you want to know?

Sorry for all the edits, my formatting on this browser is really messed up.

Edited January 22, 2010 by HarjasKaur

[laalsingh]

Asan amritdhari I went to visit a Hindu sant and had a spiritualexperience that threw me very far out of the AKJ. What else do youwant to know?

So that is where you had experience with devi (as you mentioned in another post)?

I think this is a important subject. We need another thread.

Question is, would you change your convictions if you come across a miracle/experience or see a dream of devi/pir or whatever?

Isn't Gurmat bigger than miracles or some experiences? Some people do not believe in miracles or experiences, so they should stay away from this discussion.

[HarjasDevi]

now, going back to your signature. there are many pauris in japjisahib, which were discussion between siddhs and Guru. The line that youhave posted, is an answer to the siddhs on who Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Guruis. His Guru is the Guru of the Tri-Dev, not the Tri-Dev themselves, asthe rest of Japji Sahib says time and time again that the Tri-Dev singHIS praises, not their own.

Why do you think I disagree on this? I have written almost a book illustrating the difference between the devatay and the One Prabrahm All-pervading. Why would anybody think worshipping the gunas of materiality would benefit them? By the same token, Krishna, as avatara is NOT the same as devatay. Neither is Devi in aspect of Parabrahm as Divine Mother.

for clearer understanding of this Giani Thakur Singh has given goodexplanation on the Japji Sahib katha, and you will also learn thedifference between OM and OMKAAR.

There are dozens of texts on the subject if only Tat Khalsa rejecting mentalities would care to learn the ancient source teachings before jumping to conclusions intended to make distinctions from sanatana Dharma. For the best teachings about Om and vibrational power of mantra you should all be reading Jaideva Singh's translations of the Kashmiri Shaiva sutras. If you wanted to undertsand the ancient heritage of these teachings, why would you be listening to modern day Kathakars who are influenced by anti-sanatan viewpoints and seek only to distance interpretations of Sikh teaching FROM the ancient sources?

you have insinuated that this katha is of singh sabha mentality,therefore it is not worth much, you are mistaken if you think that thesamprdayes have changed their explanations of Gurbani just cos of thesabha.

I never said it had no worth. I said it was coming from a viewpoint intending to reject Sanatan sources, even jumping like a gymnast though convoluted hoops trying to interpret bani to make it not say what it clearly says, or completely wrench Sanskrit terms out of context and invent new and creative ones. These are valid views. They are accepted and respected as Panthic mainstream. And I am well familiar with them. But if you read the sanatan sources, and you read the sanatan Sikh granths and sources, and you look at the murals left behind, the Singh Sabha REJECTION and REDEFINITIONS are rather unconvincing.

To many Sikhs Giani Thakur Singh is a respected Mahapurash. How can I say anything bad about his views? I don't agree with them. While he is extremely wise within his own sampradaya teachings and therefore can't be invalidated, he is not a recognized historical genius like Shri Abinavagupta. So all these DDT kathakars are doing is explaining the Tat Khalsa rejection of ancient Hindu definitions. That is their role as kathakars within a mainstream Panthic anti-sanataan Singh Sabha reform movement.

looking on Srigranth.org website, this is from the Faridkot wala teeka,which was done by nirmalas. Now I know your gurmukhi isnt fluent so askif you have any probs reading this:

The Faridkot Vala Teekha IS the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabha commentary veer ji. Those views did not exist before the Singh Sabha. Look, here is the history.

The first Udasi exegete of this period who left a written recordof his scriptural studies was Anandghana, who completed his tika ofJapu in 1795, followed by exegeses of several other banis. Anandghanawas the first to separate historical account from interpretativecomment.His interpretations are saturated with Upanisadic lore and aredensely Vedantic rather than Sikh, and are apparently a consciousreincubation of Hindu ideology in Sikh thinking.

Notice the bias in the account. The Udasi commentary on Adi Granth (Guru Granth Sahib Ji) is the earliest and it is clearly sanatan. Yet the article goes on to say it is Hindu and NOT Sikh, as per Tat Khalsa definitions. But even still the point is made, the EARLIER interpretations of Gurbani were clearly within Vedantic framework, and hence it is ludicrous to assume such interpretations have never been made before.

Nirmala scholarsgenerally echoed the Udasi trend of interpreting Sikh scriptural textsin the inflated style prescribed by Hindu commentators on Upanisadicand Vedic texts. Bhai Santokh Singh (1788-1843), the most prominentamong the Nirmalas, did write his Garabganjani Tika (Tika to humble thegarab, i.e. pride, of Anandghana) in criticism of Anandghana`sinterpretations in his Japu Tika, but he too was writing from withinthe Hindu framework and represented a deep Brahmanical influence.

The article is clearly written from Tat Khalsa bias because it is making the same mistake of accusing Vedantic scholarship of BRAMINISM. When in reality, Vedanta coincides with what Guruji teaches in Gurbani. Moreover, the popular Vaishnav reform movement was itself a reaction AGAINST Brahminism. So it is the most illogical accusation that Vaishnav interpretations are BRAHMINICAL.

A new phase of exegetical writing began with the advent of Westernlearning. It was, in fact, a Westerner scholar, Ernest Trumpp who firsttook up an end to end English translation of the entire Guru GranthSahib. But Trumpp`s scorn for traditional interpretations of the faithand his overt antipathy towards it earned him the reproach of theentire Sikh people. Following the publication of Trumpp`s work in 1877,unfinished though it remained.

Raja Bikram Singh, ruler of Faridkot (1842-98) and patron of the Amritsar Khalsa Diwan, commissioned a full scale commentary in Punjabi on Guru Granth Sahib. Faridkot Tika

The British were mischievously Christianizing and distorting the translation of the bani and the TAT KHALSA SINGH SABHA SCHOLARS wrote a rebuttal from their own perspective at once contradicting the efforts of the British AS WELL AS undermining, attacking, reinterpreting the TRADITIONAL UDASI AND NIRMALAY SCHOLARSHIP which existed prior to the British Raj.

[HarjasDevi]

For a Sikh, it is Guru and God. There is no place for demi-gods or physical Krishnas. I agree that One who is pervading all is Parbraham is called Jaganath Gopal. Is this of any particular significance? Gopal is one of infinite kritam names of Lord.

Veer ji, do you accept that sanatan sampradayas within Sikhism do not share your Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhian interpretation, and therefore your claim "for a Sikh," is already ignoring a rich history within Sikhism which does not share your views?

For a Sikh, it is Guru and God. There is no place for demi-gods or physical Krishnas.

But you cannot explain while roop of Das Avtaray and Devatay are all over Guruji's bani. If there is "no place for them," why are they even mentioned? You are making a huge conclusion that Gurbani rejected avtaray and devatay. That is in line with the Tat Khalsa ideology. But where is your proof?

Gurbani says very clearly the entire creation rests upon the forms of the three Mahadevas: Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh. So obviously there is a place for them, and that place is the physical universe of three gunas. That's literally every perceivable thing.

Devteys and avtaray are not false. But they are not gods either, as there is only One God.

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਇਕ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਆਪੇ ਕਰਤਾ ਕਾਰੀ ॥੧੨॥

brehamaa bisan mehaes eik moorath aapae karathaa kaaree ||12||

Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are manifestations of the One God. He Himself is the Doer of deeds.

~SGGS Ji ang 908

ਕਾਇਆ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸਾ ਸਭ ਓਪਤਿ ਜਿਤੁ ਸੰਸਾਰਾ ॥

kaaeiaa andhar brehamaa bisan mehaesaa sabh oupath jith sansaaraa ||

Within the body, are Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva, from whom the whole world emanated.

~SGGS Ji ang 754

We need to understand the meaning of ਦੇਵ dhaev. The root of Deva means "to shine." The interpretation "gods" really is Western imposition and not very accurate.

Devas, in Hinduism, are celestial beings that control forces of nature such as fire, air, wind, etc. They are not to be confused with the One and the Supreme God or His personal form, Saguna Brahman which can be visualized as Viṣṇu or Śiva. God (see Ishvara) or Brahman (the Supreme Spirit) is the ultimate controller. A famous verse from the Katha Upanishad states: “From fear (here, power) of Him the wind blows; from fear of Him the sun rises; from fear of Him Agni and Indra and Death, the fifth, run." In actuality, Brahman is the only Ultimate Reality, and all Devas are simply mundane manifestations of Him.

The Vaishnavites (who often translate deva as "demigod") cite various verses that speak of the devas' subordinate status. For example, the Rig Veda (1.22.20) states, oṃ tad viṣṇoḥ paramam padam sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ: "All the suras (i.e., the devas) look always toward the feet of Lord Vishnu." Similarly, in the Vishnu Sahasranama the concluding verses state: "The Rishis (great sages), the ancestors, the devas, the great elements, in fact all things moving and unmoving constituting this universe, have originated from Narayana," (i.e., Vishnu). Thus the Devas are stated to be subordinate to Vishnu, or God.

In the Bhagavad Gita Krishna himself states that worshipers of deities other than the Supreme Lord, Vishnu, are incorrect (Gita 9.23) Deva

However, everything really is God. These distinctions that we're making exist only in sansaar due to duality consciousness. We see in pieces and not the Whole. And so our understanding is flawed. A true sant worships the One Divine Reality pervading all things, and not the parcels and shadows.