SAadmin Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 vaheguroojikakhalsavaheguroojikifateh, I would like to know why sikhs of today have more faith in scholars than our past-saints??? Where scholar has gyan and saint has bhram + gyan...still our sikhs will rely on scholars who would first doubt gurbani and filter out the parts in gurbani just because it doesnt make sense to them... is this really right??? I mean, where is old singhs with 120% faith in guroo sahiban...doesnt matter if it makes sense to them or not...Its faith that counts... I say we lack faith big time in guroo's sahiban. Also why we as western sikhs rely on english translations of sikh scriptures rather than learning gurmukhi and different languages such as- sanskrit, braj, arabi, farsi...do u see this is an issue in next 3-4 yrs where people are keeping english translations of siri guroo granth sahib ji at home rather than actual granth ??? Our guroo's have learned 5-6 different languages...and spreaded "atam updesh" to muslims, hindus in their language....here we are cant even learn from our guroo's and learn one simple languaged yet...(including me) :cry: I have seen many times that punjabi viakhaya of gurbani is much more accurate than english... i guess there are some gurbani tukhs that cant be described in english accurately..... Please share your views here... I have this issue in my mind for a long time.. i posted in sikhnet.com... they didnt let my message in ...so posting it on here... Note: I m talkin about scholars and sikh scriptures in general.. Keep it clean 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 honestly speaking I think it's quite the opposite. people today have more faith is sant's and the "scholars" well, there aren't that many around appart from rof Pritam Singh and Rattan SIngh Jaggi. Al the other real SIkh scholars who mastered Sanskrit Persian Braj and Arabic are gone. Piara SIngh Padam, the good man, died recently and it really leaves us with recreational scholars who follow ideology instead of actually reading bani. I think the question is not asked the right way. In SIkh history we have many cases of scholars who were saints at the same time like Sant Sundar SIngh and Sant Gurbachan SIngh from the Bhindranvale Taksal. Then of course Baba Deep SIngh Shaheed who was both Nirmala and Nihang and translated Adi Guru Granth Sahib in four languages! The whole insistence on faith is a Protestant influence. The emphasis in SIkhi is not on believing in Akal Purakh but on loving the Beloved One. Scholarship is not contradictory: it's an ornament of the soul-bride! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted November 23, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 Thanks for your input veer ji... But i guess it all depends one's perception... like for myself.. the neighbourhood i live in.... not many sikhs have faith in any mahapursh's we had.. though they can trust anything in 2 dollar book who is not even a real scholar... I reckon thats a very serious problem in long run.. as i said before: Where scholar has gyan and saint has bhram + gyan...still our sikhs will rely on scholars who would first doubt gurbani and filter out the parts in gurbani just because it doesnt make sense to them... is this really right??? I mean, where is old singhs with 120% faith in guroo sahiban...doesnt matter if it makes sense to them or not...Its faith that counts... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 well I think the people you talk about are part of this legion of fake scholars that infest the Panth like a plague. All these dentists, retired policemen, doctors and ingeneers who think it's enough to know Panjabi to interpret bani and sell their books for 2 dollars. They're only successful because... let's be honest: classical culture in the Panth has been going down big time in the 20th century. No one wants to spend time learning Sanskrit , Braj, Urdu, Farsi and Sadhu Bhasha before studying Gurbani. The traditional scholars of the Taksal, Nirmale etc.. had to learn languages then learn classical Indian and Islamic literature before even being allowed to get santhia of Japuji Sahib. Really disgraceful the state of affairs nowadays! Just look at World SIkh University if you want to have an idea of what a cultural nightmare looks like! N3O Sahib, the problem is not the scholars but all these fake scholars!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted November 23, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 The traditional scholars of the Taksal, Nirmale etc.. had to learn languages then learn classical Indian and Islamic literature before even being allowed to get santhia of Japuji Sahib. Really disgraceful the state of affairs nowadays! Just look at World SIkh University if you want to have an idea of what a cultural nightmare looks like! N3O Sahib, the problem is not the scholars but all these fake scholars!!! Yes i completely agree with you here...sowwie i meant fake scholars too..sowwie about confustion there.. Got a question though: You said takshal, nirmalaie had to learn classic indian and islamic literature before being allowed to get santhia of Japji sahib.. i wanted to know.. from where they get that vidiya from??? from the giani's/mahapursh/scholars within their dharamsala... or they go search for teachers??? Also, when they do have vidiya of indian and islamic literature.. do they go out and do missionary work... because i heard sant baba gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale maharaj used to go different places and teach gurbani to different races in their own languages... did soo much missionary work...i wanted to know do nirmalie, takshal scholars/mahapursh still go out and preach gurbani to different races and relegion in their language... hows the missionary work comin along in punjab and parts of india?? Thanks in advance 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 depending on the taksals or deres and their respective mahapurush that vidya was given by the gurdev himself. Afterwards if a chela wanted to specialise let's say in Sanskrit he would send him to Sanskrit scholar to deepen his knwoledge of Sanskrit. Nirmale still do "missionary" work in the sense that they preach Dharam. My gurdev told me that our aim like that of Guru Nanak was to make the Muslim a better Muslim, a Christian a better Christian. If afetrwards people wanted to come to Sikhi then they would be most welcome. In fact as Sahajdharis they could still remain what they were before and have our Gurus as their spiritual master. That's how Nirmale and Udasi converted the SIndhis. Sant Nikka SIngh and Sant Ram SIngh of Rishikesh did and still do brilliant prachar. You should see in Haridvar all these Hindus and Muslims reciting Sukhmani Sahib with the peacocks around in the garden...And Sant Ram Singh doing katha of bani to them... Anand hi Anand Akal hi Akaaaaal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 Sweet veeer ji.. i was giving hope here...Indeed, there are still few good more lotuses in this dirty pond (kalyug) who are willing to do this seeva from our guroo's to help this "crying universe" Akaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal hee akaaaaaaaaaal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tSingh Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 For Nirmalae, away from Kankhal/Haridwar/Rishikesh, if the Mahant of an akhara did not have the required ability to teach Sanskrit or other languages/shaastras, then the dera/akhara would fund the student to study in Benaras or Haridwar for the required number of years. The specifics of how learning took place depended on the institution and the gurdev. For example, one friend explained that his gurdev took over 12 months of a once-a-week lesson just explaining 'Ik omkar' from Mool Mantar! There are references to having spent days on end, reading a text over and over again. I have a good friend who is at Nirmal Ashram, Rishikesh (Thakurdyal upsamrda; Mahant Ram Singh ji), who explained that the reason this upsamprda has done so well for itself (it has a lot of property and sangat in Rishikesh) is mainly due to, as Lalleshvari said, the prachaar they did. This group spent many years going from village to village at a grassroots level, rather than just falling back on it's laurels, like other Nirmalae. Furthermore, their centre at Karnal is famous for it's elucidation of the Ramayan among both Sikhs and Hindus and both study there. Both Nirmal Ashram and Nirmal Bhag in Kankhal are impressive and affluent institutions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xylitol Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 I think a lot of this has to do with the age we are living in. It is an age of skepticism and reason, so those who are regarded as thinking using reason instead of faith, the scholars, are given more due by some. It is just like how science is emphasised not only as A method of knowing, but THE method of knowing. So people put way more FAITH in science, and by association, scientists. Unfortunately, scientists personal opinions (as well as those others associated with the age of reason) which may have absolutely no scientific or rational basis are given more weight than the opinion of someone who may be seen as operating based on faith. I think a lot of it has to do with the seperation of the catholic church and science. Their history is one of mutual animosity and the two are seen as being unable to coexist. This understanding spread to the way people look at all religion b/c this is a christian dominated world. It seems like starting from a position of skepticism instead of starting from a position of faith is regarded as being much more ''reasonable'' and ''scientific''. This despite the fact that most scholars do not even understand the rudiments of science. Sorry for rambling. Peace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexy_singh Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 face it .. we are a bunch of backward people.. we dont believe in thinking we believe in following.. we are bunch of sheep .. thats our problem its bad to think because thats man mukhi .. scholars are full of crap because they are talking about someting they've never experienced and so how can they get it? they simply cannot.. everyone needs a guru, if i wanna learn something i find someone to teach me. even if it means reading a book. there is nothing wrong with that, its just a necessity of life. there are many gurus for many things, and you follow your need to learn. if someone is full of crap, then dont follow em. easy. nothign to get worried about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.