Where Is Sach Khand?

[BhagatSingh]

Creating a new topic.

Sach Khand is beyond the region of Braham

Harsharan,

Your sentence above is faulty. By definition Brahmn is everything and beyond.

Brahmn includes Sat Chit Anand - Truth, Consciousness and Bliss

Thus, Brahmn is where sach khand is. sach=sat

[dalsingh101]

I sometimes think sachkhand is the state of mind where all illusions have been shattered and the perceiver can see within and without sans maya.

But then this conceptualisation relies on the concept of a cognising mind.

[Surreywalasingh]

Find a sangat that does Simran and try to experience sachkhand

[harsharan000]

Creating a new topic.

Harsharan,

Your sentence above is faulty. By definition Brahmn is everything and beyond.

Brahmn includes Sat Chit Anand - Truth, Consciousness and Bliss

Thus, Brahmn is where sach khand is. sach=sat

Excuse me Bhagat Singh,

my sentence above is not faulty at all.

Let me clarify a little bit more that my statement.

First of all, I am talking about khands, planes or regions as per the other thread, where the O.P was talking about Sach Khand.

See, I am using the word Brahmand, not Brahmn, as you mention.

I have found a suitable and satisfactory answer on the net, to what is reffered as Brahmand, as well as other regions at the same time, and to which I very much agree.

There are four divisions of Creation, as seen from the top:

The first one is Sach Khand:

there where is absolutely Pure Spirit and refulgence = Wahiguru Akal Purukh / Nirankar/ Satnam.

The second one:is Brahm and Maya Desh (Brahmand), there where is admixture of Universal Mind and pure Maya, with Surat or spirit, this region is called Brahmand, which has nothing to do with the word Brahmn as you mention.

While you refer to level of Consciousness with the term Brahmn; with the word Brahmand, I mean to say , the plane where that level of consciousness(universal mind and maya) permeates.

This Brahmand, is also known by many as the Causal region.

The third one is called And or known as the astral plane.

The fourth one is: Pind, where spirits(souls) are clothed in coarse matter (physical bodies) knotted with individual mind.

This is our material creation.

It is you who have changed per your perception/interpretation, the word Brahmand to Brahmn.

But as far as I know, both the terms exist, and have different meanings.

Sat Sree Akal.

Edited January 16, 2015 by harsharan000

[BhagatSingh]

Harsharan ,

You used the word Braham, which is ਬ੍ਰਹਮ. (In Sankrit, it is spelled as ब्रह्मन् so I use the Brahm+n, spelling.)

Braham means -

ਬ੍ਰਹਮ also Akal Purakh, Nirankar and often Hari, Ram. These are all synonymous and used interchangeably in Guru Granth Sahib.

It's the supreme reality. Everything, no-thing and beyond.

Brahmand is ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ, ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾਂਡ (In Sanskrit, ब्रह्माण्ड)

ਦੁਨੀਆਂ, ਰਚਨਾ, ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟੀ, ਸੰਸਾਰ

Creation, world,

Question: What is the relationship of ਬ੍ਰਹਮ and ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ?

Answer: ਕੋਟਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ ਕੋ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਸਰਬ ਜੀਆ ਕਾ ਦਾਤਾ ਰੇ ॥

Here ਠਾਕੁਰ ਸੁਆਮੀ, Lord Master is referring to ਬ੍ਰਹਮ, ਹਰਿ, Supreme Reality.

So Braham is the master of all Brahmand He creates. He then nourishes and sustains it.

It is you who have changed per your perception/interpretation

No you spelled it wrong. Here is your original sentence - "Sach Khand is beyond the region of Braham, there where, there is no trace of maya, mind or kal"

With the wrong spelling this sentence becomes faulty.

Had you written - Sach khand is beyond the region of Brahmand, where there is no trace of maya. Then I would agree with this.

So we are saying the same thing. However due to spelling it came across like you were saying something else, something that you were not intending to say.

All clear now?

Edited January 17, 2015 by BhagatSingh

[BhagatSingh]

I sometimes think sachkhand is the state of mind where all illusions have been shattered and the perceiver can see within and without sans maya.

Dally what is your experience of Maya?

But then this conceptualisation relies on the concept of a cognising mind.

Indeed and conceptualization is very limited to the more grand scheme of things.

What is your experience of the mind?

What do you think is the relationship between Maya and mind?

[harsharan000]

Bhagat Jee,

spelling would be faulty, if it was one word. But no, these are 2 words.

One is braham, which means, doubt, illusion, falseness, transitory..... it is so, because in Brahmand, the power ruling under the hukum of Wahiguru, is the Universal Mind, or call it Braham.

You see, if one is not well versed with spirituality through Gurmat, those souls, who by jap, tap, yog, reach the initial spiritual stages, they are deluded by the Universal mind or Kal, who makes them believe with its refulgence, they have reached the last stage of their destination. So those souls even after so much hardships still get stuck in the web of mind and maya.

Usually the ruling power here in the causal region is known as Braham or Kal.

Braham is not my invention, and exists as a reality, that is why the Bani uses many a times the word Parbraham, for example when Dhan Dhan Satguru Arjun Dev Maharaj says :

ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਪੂਰਨ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਮਨ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਓਟ ਗਹੀਜੈ ਰੇ

Paarabreham Pooran Paramaesur Man Thaa Kee Outt Geheejai Rae

पारब्रहम पूरन परमेसुर मन ता की ओट गहीजै रे

He is the Supreme Lord God, the Perfect Transcendent Lord; O my mind, hold tight to the Support of the One.

He is telling us that, that reality, that power, beyond the region of Braham, is the Tue Lord Wahiguru, thus only is called Paarbraham, because it is beyond the reach of mind, maya, births and deaths .

And it is to this Power, beyond Braham, to which Guru Jee is point us, to which we should devote and meditate, thus free our souls from the cycle of 84, not otherwise.

Parbraham is to Braham, what day is to night, or what Truth is to untruth.

So paa jee, as per the title of the thread, Sach Khand, the realm of Truth, can only be where Parbraham Pameshwar is, not below it.

Some write Parmeshwar, some Parmeswar... but it is the same thing.

But Braham, or Brahmn with N in the end, as you mention, are two different things.

The term Brahamn you refer is to the Supreme Power, the term Braham I refer, is referred to the power reiging in the second region or causal plane and below it. So as far as I understand, there is no faulty spelling mistake, and if any doubt, look the whole context with a broader view, you will see, that while I am reffering to one thing, you perceived it from a different perspective.

I do not blame you, myself in the begining, used to mistake with similar words, as Braham, Brahma, Brahman or Brahmn ....until slowyly, and with the help of Bani, I came to undestrand a bit of all these things and differentiate them.

I know nothing of sanskrit, nor any other sciences .... for me Gurmat is the perfect science and perfect religion.

If anything needed, it is Gurabani I refer to, to satisfy my spiritual thirst and hunger, and believe it, it is more than enough Parsad, at least for me.

I do not like to go into discussions, though on spiritual topics they maybe, they lead nowhere, just ego boosting and unncessary misunderstandings.

So brother Bhagat Jee, if you are clear with what you think correct, then you are mubarak, cause I am no one to make you understand or convince you, it is all under His Hukum.

Sat Sree Akal.

Edited February 28, 2015 by harsharan000

[dalsingh101]

Dally what is your experience of Maya?

What is your experience of the mind?

What do you think is the relationship between Maya and mind?

They are profound questions. I can only stumble around in the dark with them:

The mind is an amorphous thing. Asides deconstruction of the brain along biological, electrical and chemical basis, it appears to be a largely autonomous 'processing' device. It appears to have built in software that attempts to 'solve' or make sense of things. These mechanisms seem to be the source of the constant dialogue (rabbiting) that appears to go on when you still the mind. It's like an inbuilt biological learning device.

Maya, which I interpret as all of the material world around us and the (often invisible) mechanisms/rules that govern this, itself is animated by some curious energy which I'm intuitively led to believe is sourced by that referred to as Brahm.

As yet, I've only had a very few, momentary glimpses into the void that exists behind the chattering mind. It appears to be a place of previously unexperienced stillness.

I can only think that the mind is a rudimentary device to interact with maya, but also paradoxically a device that we used to try and transcend it (what else would we use?)

The question that would lead to some understanding of the topic on my part concerns just what relationship (if any) our sentience upon death has with the sentience of life.

How does my soul experience something without the hardware (i.e. the brain) that I use to experience things now?

What is the nature of the perception of the soul?

Edited January 17, 2015 by dalsingh101

[BhagatSingh]

Bhagat Jee,

spelling would be faulty, it it was one word. But no, these are 2 words.

One is braham, which means, doubt, illusion, falseness, transitory..... it is so, because in Brahmand, the power ruling under the hukum of Wahiguru, is the Universal Mind, or call it Braham.

Harsharan, Lol I see what's going on here. You have got the transliterations all mixed up.

The word you are looking for is

Bharam, ਭਰਮ

Which means doubt, ignorance of the illusion, false beliefs

And then there is

Braham/Brahmn/Brahman, ਬ੍ਰਹਮ, also known as ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ, Parbraham/Parbrahmn/Parbrahman

Who is achieved once the bharam is gone. Brahmn is the ultimate reality, the being of all beings, the totally void, the master of all forms and the one who is perceived as form.

Brahmn =/= Bharam

ਬ੍ਰਹਮ =/= ਭਰਮ

[BhagatSingh]

They are profound questions. I can only stumble around in the dark with them:

The mind is an amorphous thing. Asides deconstruction of the brain along biological, electrical and chemical basis, it appears to be a largely autonomous 'processing' device. It appears to have built in software that attempts to 'solve' or make sense of things. These mechanisms seem to be the source of the constant dialogue (rabbiting) that appears to go on when you still the mind. It's like an inbuilt biological learning device.

Dally

Perhaps the brain is more like a television. There are no channels in the television per se. The television receives them from elsewhere and relays those things to the viewer. Similarly the brain may not house the mind, only channel it, the way a TV does.

Maya, which I interpret as all of the material world around us and the (often invisible) mechanisms/rules that govern this, itself is animated by some curious energy which I'm intuitively led to believe is sourced by that referred to as Brahm.

Yes. I would put it in a way that connects the two more directly.

Maya is the perception of the reality that is Brahmn. When we perceive Brahmn, we automatically cause reality to become fragmented, separated, with lots of distinctions between many, many, many... countless parts of the reality. A lot of these parts then are not something our faulty perception can take in and so we don't pay any attention to them.

So this is not full perception. This is partial, unalert, unaware, fragmented perception. If it was full perception we would recognize that Brahmn is the underlying operating system and what we see on the surface is Maya.

As the old metaphor goes, the mind is like a prism. Brahmn is the light, and the rainbow is Maya.

This is the way the mind filters and makes sense of Brahmn. Seeing a rainbow, we become attached to the rainbow and forget that the source of the rainbow is the light.

As yet, I've only had a very few, momentary glimpses into the void that exists behind the chattering mind. It appears to be a place of previously unexperienced stillness.

That's great. What is the experience like in the stillness?

I can only think that the mind is a rudimentary device to interact with maya, but also paradoxically a device that we used to try and transcend it (what else would we use?)

We'd use Brahmn to transcend it.

Now I am making a distinction between mind and consciousness, between man and jot, between Haumai and Hari as the Antaryami (in-dweller). (different words)

Once we access the consciousness,jot, antaryami, once we recognize that for what it is, then our understanding can expand and we can recognize that our individual consciousness is part of a universal consciousness, of Hari/Brahmn.

So the right side of the prism, the rainbow, is the mind or that fragmented perception.

The prism part is individual consciousness, the one who perceives.

And everything to the left is universal consciousness.

The prism center and what is to the right is the known.

The left side is the unknown.

That is not to say that it cannot be experienced. It can be experienced as existing outside of experience.

One can say intuitively "known" as the unknown.

You cannot experience it, experience is by definition that which is the rainbow.

What is to the right is experienced.

The prism is the one who experiences.

What is to the right is one who experiences everything but itself cannot be experienced (at least in the ordinary way of experiencing, which is sensory-based experience. This new kind of "experience" maybe called revelation, en-Lighten-ment or Brahmngyan).

Because experience is made up of distinctions and separateness. And the Light is completely Oneness.

(As an aside: That's why Light is a such powerful metaphor. Because light is completely undifferentiated. And it cannot be seen. Light can only be seen when it shines on objects. And when it does, you get colours.)

And this is the most fundamental bharam, delusion. The delusion is not recognizing where the experience is coming from and it is perpetuated by focusing solely on the experience itself.

The question that would lead to some understanding of the topic on my part concerns just what relationship (if any) our sentience upon death has with the sentience of life.

What do you mean? Like are you wondering about what the experience is of life and the experience of death?

How does my soul experience something without the hardware (i.e. the brain) that I use to experience things now?

For that you'd have to go to the next level. The level which you described was at a place where there was no dialogue. So now you have to go further and see if you can be at a place where there is no sense experience. Try to go as far to the left of the prism as you can.

What is the nature of the perception of the soul?

That is the question I am working on as well. I have made some progress. But in order to find out one must die without physically dieing, and whenever I encounter that step I fearfully turn away.

[PAL 07]

If you follow the rule of Gurbani that is "jatha parkaran, thatha arth" then since the other 4 khands before sachkhand refer to the human being and his spiritual progression, sachkhand can only refer to the highest state of spirituality ie brahmgian. Complete merger with truth from deh akaar to brahm akaar such as that of Ramana Maharishi or Sant Baba Nand Singh

Edited February 21, 2015 by PAL 07

[harsharan000]

Dalsingh Jee,

if allowed, I would like to share my personal opinions on some questions or matter, in your post of above of 17th Jan 2015.

Maya, which I interpret as all of the material world around us and the (often invisible) mechanisms/rules that govern this, itself is animated by some curious energy which I'm intuitively led to believe is sourced by that referred to as Brahm.

I do agree with this your opinion

I can only think that the mind is a rudimentary device to interact with maya, but also paradoxically a device that we used to try and transcend it (what else would we use?)

The question that would lead to some understanding of the topic on my part concerns just what relationship (if any) our sentience upon death has with the sentience of life.

Life and death ocurr as long as we are bound within the three bodies. It is only when we cross the boundaries of the creation to a point where we shed off these coverings(which contain karmas, sanskaras, trishnas, vikars...) on the soul, with the aid and power of Shabad Guru, that the souls is freed for once and forever, from the chaurasee ka chakar, and is then fit to return back to Sach Khand and merge in Wahiguru Akal Purukh.

How does my soul experience something without the hardware (i.e. the brain) that I use to experience things now?

What is the nature of the perception of the soul?

Dalsingh jee, the soul is a particle of that Supreme entity known as : Sach-Chit-Anand, and as such, it has the same attributes. You see outwardly, all our perception is dependentant on our five sense organs, which send this information to the brain, and this information is processed there, and accordingly reactions/results/interpretations take place ....

But the Bani referring to the soul´s ability and capability and its state in those higher planes,says :

ਅਖੀ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਵੇਖਣਾ ਵਿਣੁ ਕੰਨਾ ਸੁਨਣਾ

Akhee Baajhahu Vaekhanaa Vin Kannaa Sunanaa

अखी बाझहु वेखणा विणु कंना सुनणा

To see without eyes; to hear without ears;

ਪੈਰਾ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਚਲਣਾ ਵਿਣੁ ਹਥਾ ਕਰਣਾ

Pairaa Baajhahu Chalanaa Vin Hathhaa Karanaa

पैरा बाझहु चलणा विणु हथा करणा

To walk without feet; to work without hands;

In these two lines above, Guru Jee is telling us, that, even without any physicall organs, the soul can move about, and see and hear without having actually eyes or ears....The brain is after all an organ which persihes with the body....and once one dies, in the astral plane, and causal plane the boundary of Brahm, the soul sees and hears all through the mind, as it is knotted with it. Only when it crosses this region of Brahm, the soul is naked, is pure, without any covering or mind, there it sees the Jot and listens the Dhun emanating from the Shabad reverberating non stop all the time.

ਜੀਭੈ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਬੋਲਣਾ ਇਉ ਜੀਵਤ ਮਰਣਾ

Jeebhai Baajhahu Bolanaa Eio Jeevath Maranaa ||

जीभै बाझहु बोलणा इउ जीवत मरणा ॥

To speak without a tongue-like this, one remains dead while yet alive.

And in this line above, Guru Jee is telling us, that, when we meditate on Him, through His Nam Simran, one´s life is changed to an extent.

Then only we are more interested in the Parmarath(spirituality) than the swarth(world), and we appear to be dead to the world.

As we practice His Simran more and more, we start getting more and more "rus" in that meditative state, and we stay for higher periods of time in it..

So we may appear to be dead for that time being, but, at the same time we are awakened, and get in tune with the higher truths, higher reality, in the subtle spiritual planes.

It is just a question of detaching ourselves from the world, and attaching our surtee with Nam or Shabad.

Sat Sree Akal.

Edited April 19, 2015 by harsharan000

[Guest]

Found previous deep interesting discussion on this subject, here are the links:

http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/6890-destination-sachkhand/?hl=destination

http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/9444-become-god-in-sachkhand-shankara-non-dualistic-theory-aling

http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/7183-gurmat/

Most recent one i managed to put it together:

http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/14813-gurmat-relations-towards-advait-marg-bhakti-marg/

[Lucky]

question ''Where is sach-khand'' ?

Well, where is God himself ?,, where is the ek-onkar ?

We all know and say that he is everywhere and amongst everything.. so why do we get confused wondering where sachkhand or the name given to his dwelling is ?

so, ''Where is sach-khand?"

My answer as per my understanding is that it is everywhere amongst everything in the whole 'cosmic universe'.

When you are in sach khand, then you will be in the whole COSMIC Existence..You will be here, there, everywhere, from the room you are sat in right now to stars and planets millions of light years away in ALL directions and ALL at the same time....since there will be NO space or time!

There is NO ego,complete advait-non dual, therefore no identity of you to think you are a little drop in the universe.

It is when ALL barriers are completely broken down.. You could say it is the definition of 'existence' itself ?

Note that in Japji sahib it names the khands before sach-khand as below......

ਧਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Ḏẖaram kẖand
ਗਿਆਨ ਖੰਡ -Gian kẖand
ਸਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Saram kẖand
ਕਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Karam kẖand

ਸਚ ਖੰਡਿ- Sach khand

Not long ago, someone bought to my attention a closer look at the grammar ??

Notice how 'khand is spelt as ਖੰਡ

But when it says sach-khand it is written specifically with a sihari as ਖੰਡਿ

and Guruji says....

ਸਚ ਖੰਡਿ ਵਸੈ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ॥
Sacẖ kẖand vasai nirankār.

In the realm of Truth, the Formless Lord abides.

You notice ??

It seems there is some important significance in this and throughout gurbani if we pay attention to grammar we can pick up a few pointers and clarifications.

One major significance is that the other khands, levels or stages of progression and development.... are not permanent places of rest or abodes.

You see, from each khand, one moves for more development to the next..but when they get to 'sach-khand- which they get joined ('jor')from the completion of karams. (note that "jor" in "Karam kẖand kī baṇī jor", may mean 'to join' and not necessarily 'power' as it says in translation).

When at Sach-khand, everything and I mean even the last bit of identity(associated with ego), that tells us I am "I" or I am ''me''...is completely shed and gone.... You are no longer a drop/bubble in the vast ocean but you are the Whole Ocean itself in all it's cosmic expanse.

This is Sach-khand from what i can imagine, Where you cab be here, there and everywhere all at the same moment. ..The infinite and supreme Consciousness in it's entirety.

just to add a little-

If anyone seen the movie 'Lucy'' - which is based on theories that we only use something near a low 10% or something of our brains capacity. ....In the movie, she is able to unlock her mind's full potential to 100% and then finally she becomes manifest in everything and everywhere at the same time. in the end you can hear her voice and she says she is everywhere and in everything.

Those familiar with science will know that everything is made up of atoms. If we look at an atom,.it has a very small positive nucleus and the circulating electrons outside ,..but more than 99% is empty space. If the whole existence is made of atoms which in turn contain 99% empty space, we live in a universe with all it's constituents that contain the same 99% empty space as we know it.

So, where does the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-pervading,...the Adrisht, Agochar,Aprampar Lord reside ?

Edited April 21, 2015 by Lucky

[BhagatSingh]

Lucky
Hate to keep doing this to your friends. (Im sorry )

ਧਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Ḏẖaram kẖand
ਗਿਆਨ ਖੰਡ -Gian kẖand
ਸਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Saram kẖand
ਕਰਮ ਖੰਡ - Karam kẖand

ਸਚ ਖੰਡਿ- Sach khand

Not long ago, someone bought to my attention a closer look at the grammar ??

The reason for that sihari on Sach Khand is because -

ਧਰਮ ਖੰਡ ਕਾ ਏਹੋ ਧਰਮੁ ॥

ਗਿਆਨ ਖੰਡ ਕਾ ਆਖਹੁ ਕਰਮੁ ॥

ਗਿਆਨ ਖੰਡ ਮਹਿ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਪਰਚੰਡੁ ॥
ਸਰਮ ਖੰਡ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਰੂਪੁ ॥
ਕਰਮ ਖੰਡ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਜੋਰੁ ॥
ਸਚ ਖੰਡਿ ਵਸੈ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ॥ - where is ਮਹਿ like in ਗਿਆਨ ਖੰਡ ਮਹਿ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਪਰਚੰਡੁ ॥

The Sihari fills in for ਮਹਿ. Sihari means "belonging to X". In this case X is Sach Khand.
If this wasn't poetry you would write - ਸਚ ਖੰਡ ਮਹਿ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ਵਸਦਾ ਹੈ
But because this is poetry, you can't write it as a normal sentence, it has to fit within a pattern that has been set prior to the sentence. So gurbani has this grammar to fill in where there no words. So we get ਸਚ ਖੰਡਿ ਵਸੈ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੁ ॥

Edited April 21, 2015 by BhagatSingh

[Lucky]

Good point Bhagat. ....still learning it.(slowly though!)....i wasn't too sure, that's why I put the question marks at the end.

[Guest]

I think it's better sachkhand remains sort of mystery not fully solidified defined otherwise our conceptual mind will take over and deprive us from experience it. lol

[Ragmaala]

Is Sachkhand a place or spiritual state ? Answer by Santren Daya Singh Ji:

http://www.4shared.com/audio/6mX5AP4q/Sachkhand.html

[BhagatSingh]

Good point Bhagat. ....still learning it.(slowly though!)....i wasn't too sure, that's why I put the question marks at the end.

We are in the same boat bhaji.

[shastarsewak]

;

Edited May 17, 2015 by shastarsewak