OOOOOaaMMMMmmmmm

[Pheena]

http://www.khalis.net/SikhAwareness/Audio/...0Om%20(Aum).mp3

20 Mins long

12.6MB

thanks Ryu for the file

[karmjeet]

om is a mantar for hindu , brahman s...

its not for sikhs , sikhs should concenterate on their gurmantar only

morever , om doesn't symbolise GOD

om= a+u+m

a=brahma

u=vishnu

m=mahesh

these r the 3 devtas symbolised ny om .

(Ik onkar=GOD)

there's no benefit on concenterating OM , ( altough u may get spirituality by continous parctise but not gursikhi jeevan )

[Hari]

Ek Omkar does not equal God.

Ek Omkar is greater than God.

Ek Omkar>God

You do know Karmjeet that the Omkar name existed before Satguru Nanak became manifest on this plane?You know that right?

Om is That Which Is, and Omkar is the manifestation of That Om.By your thinking then Karmjeet, Sikhiya of Satguru Nanak is Hindu-puna.By your thinking.

Hari Om.Jai Shri Om....

[Guest]

Please listen to gyani thakur singh ji bachan on this,

He explained how shristi(universe, multi-verse etc) was created by "ikongkar"

[HeyDudesWassup]

Aum aum aum Aum Aum try it and you will see for yourself...

Karmjeet, the universe(s) is one, me and you are one, don't try to label and differientiate.

[karmjeet]

first of all , its not " ek omkar "

its " ek oangkar " ( g is silent , its like a tippi on aida , but g is not pronounced )

hari wrote :Ek Omkar does not equal God. Ek Omkar does not equal God.

Ek Omkar is greater than God.

Ek Omkar>God

i don't understand u . wt do u mean by that ?

hari=god

gopal=god

ram=god( not ramchandra ji )

waheguru=(god)

parmatma=(god)

ishwar=(god)

ik ongkar = god

and as i already told u its not ek omkar . its ik ongkar

hari wrote:You do know Karmjeet that the Omkar name existed before Satguru Nanak became manifest on this plane?You know that right?

no omkar didn't exist before . " oang" existed .

Om is That Which Is, and Omkar is the manifestation of That Om

i don't know about omkar , but "ik ongkar " is not the manifestation of om .

By your thinking then Karmjeet, Sikhiya of Satguru Nanak is Hindu-puna.By your thinking.

no , its not . sikhi is a completely different panth .

|| nanak nirmal panth chalaya ||

Hari Om.Jai Shri Om....

hindus recite it

[HeyDudesWassup]

Karmjeet, Om is the universal rhythm, you recite it, I recite it even though we may not be conscious of it. jmho

[karmjeet]

Aum aum aum Aum Aum try it and you will see for yourself...

Karmjeet, the universe(s) is one, me and you are one, don't try to label and differientiate.

je toon aum aum .... japna hai taan japi jaa , mainu pagal kutte ne vadya ,jehda main Guru Nanak ji da ditta hoya ida vada Gurmantar shad ke aum aum karan lag jaavaan ?

Sikhan layi gurmantar ton vada koi mantar nahi hai .

And tell me wt label did i put ?

i know that in everything there is God , u , me , universe , hathii , sher , kutta , jaanvar , kidi ....

i m telling the reality that om represents the 3 devtas , not the akal purakh

[Pheena]

The Yoga Sutras I.27:

Tasya vachakah pranavah

Isvara is expressed and represented (vachakah) by the vibratory energy contained in the pranava (the sacred syllable, om).

Commentary: Isvara can not be defined or limited because Isvara by definition is indefinable infinite mind, however he can be symbolically represented by the expression of pranava - by the vibratory essence that the sacred sound, om, approximates. Thus isvara is often accessed through the pranava which is om.

" Tasya means "it"

Vacakah means "expression" from the root vac to speak.

Pranavah means "the sacred syllable AUM" derived from "pra" (before) and nava (from the root, sound)

So the straight translation is simply, Its' (referring to isvara as the teacher of all the teachers as discussed in the previous three sutras) expression is the pranavah (the sacred sound).

Notice Patanjali himself never mentions AUM, but rather pranava. It is also of interest that Patanjali does not say "word", but rather pranava, sacred "sound". "

*******

Swami Venkatesananda says in his book "The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali",

"That indwelling omnipresent sole reality is verbally alluded to as OM - which is the ever-new and eternal cosmic sound that is heard in all natural phenomena (thunderclap, roaring of the ocean, wind rustling trees in the forest, and the conflagration) and even in the reverberations of the musical instruments, the hum of engines, and the distant din of the carnival crowd."

Swami Venkatesananda's commentary:

"What is God called so that I may call Him by his proper name? Patanjali says that God has no name, but His presence is indicated by OM. When you listen to any undifferentiated sound -- the sound in which your mind does not create a division in terms of vowels and consonants, etc. -- it is OM. When all these blend into one homogenous sound, that is OM; and that is heard everywhere and all the time. It is not absent from anywhere at any one time....

Pranava means OM. It is very difficult to translate vacaka, it is a kind of verbal indicator. So we say OM is the verbal indicator of God or isvara. So OM is not the name of God. It is important to understand that though that we do say that OM, Siva, or Krsna is the name of God, it does not need a name because it is omnipresent and eternal. That which is everywhere does not need to be called anything."

[karmjeet]

listen to first 2 kathas

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audio/Giani_T..._Sahib_Viakhya#

[glow=red:1d33878804]everything is clearly explained[/glow:1d33878804]

[Hari]

Hari Om.Jai Shri Om.

(I am not a Hindu)

[tSingh]

I was recently assured by a Swami friend of mine (who runs the only strictly traditional advaita vedantic ashram in the UK) that when given as a mantr with the correct guidance it is always effective in making the individual vairagya, and would lead to giving up the house and kids within months! The Vedantic understanding is very deep and in fact, understanding the multi layered implications of the meaning can move the meditation through the numerous stages (fine to finest, subtle to subtlest, etc) of (advait) vedantic meditation to the final 'brahmvidya' of oneness.

[Hari]

I believe Om Mul Mantra is mimicry of Anhad Nad, which may eventually lead to That Anhad Nad thingy-majig-what-jama-call-it.

Brahm Shabd Svarup Satguru Nanak may well have used Om as His meditative device.

[Guest]

I believe Om Mul Mantra is mimicry of Anhad Nad, which may eventually lead to That Anhad Nad thingy-majig-what-jama-call-it.

Brahm Shabd Svarup Satguru Nanak may well have used Om as His meditative device.

There is no may or I think that so and so mantra was used by Satguru Nanak.

It's either yes or no.

Satguru nanak used ik-ongkar as bij mantar and this what he preached.

"Ik ongkar Satnam Karta Purkh Nirbhau Nirvair Akaal Murat Ajoni Sahiban Gurparsad".

Satguru nanak used "ong" not "om" and I don't know where you getting the impression that satguru nanak used om where in his teaching it is ik"ong"kar.

[karmjeet]

Waheguru Gurmantar is the best .

all these puratan mantras from vedas , and om were for previous yugs .

For Kalyug its only Waheguru gurmantar .

"kalyug vich guru nanak da pehra hai "( Baba Nand Singh Ji)

Waheguru = vasudev+hari+gobind+ram

waheguru = 4 times saying hari , or gobind , or ram .

waheguru maybe =100-10000000000 times saying om .

y do u guys worrying about this om . it s for hindus , arya samajis , ....

Waheguru japooooooo!!!!!!!!!

[Hari]

Okay so He may have used Hari Om or Hare Ram.Hari and Ram are after all the most used names of Vahiguru in Gurbani, something which can't be denied.

And Om/Aum isn't just interpreted as Trimurti, it also is interpreted as the three states of being:

A = waking state

U = dreaming state

M = sleeping/unconscious state

And the dot above the letter "m" is the anusvara, which is a heavy nasal sound.The anusvara (Gurmukhi: tippee or bindi) represents the Turiya state, beyond the Traigun.Mandukya Upanishad is an authority on Om which has been known as Mul Mantra before Satguru Nanak manifested.Om and Omkar (Oankar) are synonymous.

http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/mandukya.htm

8. That same Self, from the point of view of the syllable, is Om, and viewed from the stand point of the letters, the quarters are the letters, and the letters are the quarters. The letters are a, u and m.

9. Vaisvanara seated in the waking state is the first letter a, owing to its all-pervasiveness or being the first. He who knows thus verily accomplishes all longings and becomes the first.

10. Taijasa seated in the dream is u, the second letter (of Om), owing to the similarity of excellence or intermediate position. He who knows thus verily advances the bounds of his knowledge and becomes equal (to all) and none who is not a knower of Brahman is born in his family.

11. Prajna seated in the state of deep sleep is m, the third letter (of Om), because of his being the measure or the entity wherein all become absorbed. He who knows thus measures all this and absorbs all.

12. That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

Maitrayaniya Upanishad is also good for understanding Om:

http://www.geocities.com/advaitavedant/maitrayani.htm

Don't be scared by Om/Aum.........................................................

It is your Atma.