What Is Bhagauti?

[mahanpaapi]

[GurpreetKaur]

3 hours ago, mahanpaapi said:

No laughing Buddha ! :(

[dalsingh101]

17 hours ago, Guest guest said:

Sanskrit grammar is currently much better understood then Gurbani grammar.  Infact, Prof Sahib Singh started as a Sanskrit grammar student, and used his learning from there to start (e.g. the different karakas).

Fair point.

[dalsingh101]

Quote

The bhagats ideas were all coherent, they all believed the same thing along with the Gurus, that's why they were all added to Guru Granth Sahib. They had the same concept of Dharma, whether you read Sant Nam Dev ji's bani from 1200s, Ramanand ji from 1300s or Kabir ji from 1400s or Guru Sahibs from 1400s to 1600s.

I've read opinions from some people who've studied this matter say otherwise. They say that Guru Arjan Dev ji actually carefully selected from the written work of the bhagats and only chose those that were in consonance with Gurbani to include it in SGGS ji, making sure they left out those shabads of the bhagats that weren't in alignment with Sikhi. 

And how would you know the above for sure until you've really studied the full range of writings by the bhagats,  including the mass of their writings that weren't included in SGGS ji in their original forms?

I guess I'm going to have to try and find that source now. lol

[amardeep]

@BhagatSingh Baba ji dont get me wrong. I have huge respect for the Sri Bhagats and I dont agree with the views that none of the Bhagats had attained liberation untill they came back to recieve khande di pahul.

However it is a historical fact that none of the Indian bhagats left behind any writings of theirs. , The Guru Granth Sahib is the first compilation in history to have their bani in written form - this includes the banis of Bhagat Naamdev, Bhagat Kabir, Baba Ravidas etc etc... Before that we dont have any pothis that brings their bani. This is also one thing that makes Guru Granth Sahib that more relevant in the study of the Bhagti traditions because many of the scholars of Indian mysticism dont really have anything earlier than the Guru Granth Sahib in their method to study the aforementioned bhagats. Even in the case of Mira Bai, - the Sikhs were amongst the first to write down a narrative of her life - and she is not even a bhagat of the Guru Granth Sahib!

The kabir panth, naamdev panth etc are all recent phenomenon. The Kabir panthis can't be traced earlier than the 1700s or so and have no historical parampara that traces them back to the historical Kabir. The same way the Ravidasis today is a modern phenomenon that has no parampara that traces them back to the historical Sri Ravidas. None of these Bhagats compiled their own bani in book format and passed it on to their followers. The Bijay Mukht Granth associated with the Kabir Panthis is also from the 1700s or so.

The Guru's differ in the history of Indian bhagats/bhatkas in the sense that the Gurus surely do fall within the bhakti tradition of wider Indian,- however they differ as well. One vital aspect and difference is that Guru Nanak actually appointed a succesor,- another is that he wrote down his own bani into a pothi.  The later Gurus organized the panth into a structured community with its own rites, places of pilgrimage, central authority etc. You can't find this with the other bhaktas..

 

[BhagatSingh]

@amardeep

I agree that none of the others compiled their writings into a book. That's the reason why Guru Arjun Dev ji did so, it was to preserve them.

If the motive was preservation -> then it follows that Guru Arjun Dev ji did not add poems from Bhagats who had already transferred their poems to writing format.
Such as Bhagat Tulsidas ji, who composed Ramacharitramanas.
Also perhaps Bhagat Tukaram ji and his followers who compiled Tukaram Gatha.
 

"The kabir panth, naamdev panth etc are all recent phenomenon."
I believe that they are modern revivals of ancient panths.

"Guru Nanak actually appointed a succesor"
I also agree that Gurus appointed one successor... as opposed to multiple successors.

 

Several questions -

1. How did Guru Arjun Dev ji get a hold of their poems?

2. Are you saying the Bhagats had no followings?
-> If they had followings then that means they are Gurus and their own panths.
-> If they didn't have followings then how did their bani get passed down orally?

3. What about Geet Govind by Bhagat Jai Dev ji? A bhagat who is recordedin Guru Granth Sahib but also has his own writings.

4. There is a birh of Guru Granth Sahib with Mira Bai's shabad. Thoughts?

5. What rites, pilgrimage, central authority did they introduce? (as opposed to the ones we attribute to them.)

[amardeep]

Quote

I believe that they are modern revivals of ancient panths.

Could be but it is difficult to prove. Is the modern day Ravidasi panth a revival of an old panth or is it a product of contemporary caste (jatt) supremacy?

Quote

"Guru Nanak actually appointed a succesor"
I also agree that Gurus appointed one successor... as opposed to multiple successors.

Exactly. None of the other bhagats are known for having appointed a succesor. Their chele might have continued the parchaar after their Guru passed away but thats not the same as having an official, centralised successor. Guru Nanak did this.

 

Several questions -

Quote

1. How did Guru Arjun Dev ji get a hold of their poems?

I dont know. The mahima prakash and bansavalinama goes into this but i havent read those parts.

 

Quote

2. Are you saying the Bhagats had no followings?
-> If they had followings then that means they are Gurus and their own panths.
-> If they didn't have followings then how did their bani get passed down orally?

No they had followings. They were Gurus for their chele during their lifetime. Bhagat Ramanand was the Guru of Kabir. Bhagat Ravidas was the Guru of Meera Bai etc.

 

Quote

3. What about Geet Govind by Bhagat Jai Dev ji? A bhagat who is recordedin Guru Granth Sahib but also has his own writings

Is that the same Jaideva? And can his writings of the Guru Granth Sahib be found within the Geeta Govinda or other books of his? Or is the Guru Granth Sahib the first time these shabads were written down?

.

Quote

4. There is a birh of Guru Granth Sahib with Mira Bai's shabad. Thoughts?

If I remember correctly it is written in the birh of Baba Ram Rai in Dehradun and is concluded with the line "This shabad is not to be found within the birh of Bhai Gurdas" or something similiar. The scribe wrote it in there.

 

Quote

5. What rites, pilgrimage, central authority did they introduce? (as opposed to the ones we attribute to them.)

Nitnem in the morning, Kartarpur and Goindwal as places of pilgrimage and the central authority of the Guru in terms of making offerings and daswandh etc. This was later reorganized into the masand system. - again an organizational system that was not seen amongst the other bhagats.

 

[BhagatSingh]

32 minutes ago, amardeep said:

Could be but it is difficult to prove. Is the modern day Ravidasi panth a revival of an old panth or is it a product of contemporary caste (jatt) supremacy?

Well those are not mutually exclusive.

32 minutes ago, amardeep said:

Exactly. None of the other bhagats are known for having appointed a succesor. Their chele might have continued the parchaar after their Guru passed away but thats not the same as having an official, centralised successor. Guru Nanak did this.

It would be difficult to prove this since there are so many Gurus in India like thousands or millions. You'd have to study each one.

But suppose that is the case, and no guru in the entire history of India ever appointed 1 main successor (which now sounds ridiculous). I don't see why that's a big deal.

It begs the question, so what?

32 minutes ago, amardeep said:

Is that the same Jaideva? And can his writings of the Guru Granth Sahib be found within the Geeta Govinda or other books of his? Or is the Guru Granth Sahib the first time these shabads were written down?

Yes it's the same guy. I haven't read Geet Govind.

 

 

32 minutes ago, amardeep said:

Nitnem in the morning,

Lol seriously? Do you think no other Guru said, "hey amrit vela is a good time to meditate"

 

Quote

Kartarpur and Goindwal as places of pilgrimage

Interesting. I thought you would say Hari Mandir.

What makes you think that Kartarpur and Goindwal were places of pilgrimage?

And how come you did not mention Amritsar or Harimandir Sahib?
 

Quote

and the central authority of the Guru in terms of making offerings and daswandh etc.

Wait that's not a new concept either. What is Guru dakshina then if not offerings to the guru who is your central authority.

This idea of Guru being the central authority was already there as well. The Guru's teaching was your dharam, hence the term 'Dharm Guru', your main teacher amidst other gurus. And making offerings to the Guru, to give back for the things he gave you, was also part and parcel.

Quote

This was later reorganized into the masand system. - again an organizational system that was not seen amongst the other bhagats.

 

One could argue that the Masand system is the product of having only one successor. The 'masands' filled the role of having 'multiple successors'.

[amardeep]

Quote

 

It would be difficult to prove this since there are so many Gurus in India like thousands or millions. You'd have to study each one.

But suppose that is the case, and no guru in the entire history of India ever appointed 1 main successor (which now sounds ridiculous). I don't see why that's a big deal.

It begs the question, so what?

 

It is quite a big deal. The appointment of a successor shows that Guru Nanak had in mind that his teachings were to spread and continue. We dont really see this with the other main bhagats of the bhakti tradition. Many of these communities died out within decades of the main bhagat having passed away.

Quote

Lol seriously? Do you think no other Guru said, "hey amrit vela is a good time to meditate"

I said nitnem on purpose,- not simran. Do you know of any other spiritual community in India where the founder told his followers to recite his own compositions? Nothing suggests that the followers of Kabeer and Ravidas had a nitnem of their own based on their respective Gurus writings.

Another defining feature is also like mentioned earlier that Guru Nanak had his own writings written down and passed on to his succesor.

 

Quote

What makes you think that Kartarpur and Goindwal were places of pilgrimage?

And how come you did not mention Amritsar or Harimandir Sahib?

These were newly etablished cities with the Guru having a central role. The Sikhs at the time would travel in large numbers to this city to have darshan of their Guru.

 

Quote

 

Wait that's not a new concept either. What is Guru dakshina then if not offerings to the guru who is your central authority.

This idea of Guru being the central authority was already there as well. The Guru's teaching was your dharam, hence the term 'Dharm Guru', your main teacher amidst other gurus. And making offerings to the Guru, to give back for the things he gave you, was also part and parcel.

 

The offerings to the Sikh Gurus was of a different kind with a fixed percentage. This meant that the community around the Guru became quite a political factor for the rulers to reckon with.

Quote

One could argue that the Masand system is the product of having only one successor. The 'masands' filled the role of having 'multiple successors'.

Yes most likely.

 

 

[BhagatSingh]

7 hours ago, amardeep said:

It is quite a big deal. The appointment of a successor shows that Guru Nanak had in mind that his teachings were to spread and continue. We dont really see this with the other main bhagats of the bhakti tradition. Many of these communities died out within decades of the main bhagat having passed away.

That's not the case.
1. The other Gurus also had successors. But they weren't limited to one. Guru Ramanand ji had a flourishing community because he had so many successful students, Kabir, Ravi Das, Sain, Pipa, etc etc. That was a much bigger community than what Guru Nanak Dev ji had.

Do you think after having so many enlightened students passing on the message...they just died in decades?
What is more likely is that we are missing this information in our study, in our mental database, 5 centuries later.

2. Their communities couldn't have died out in decades if centuries later, people still remember them, key events in their lives and their poems.
Bhagt Nam Dev ji is still popular when our Gurus arrive on the scene 200 years later.

3. It wasn't Guru Nanak Dev ji who did this. It was the later Gurus who used his pen name 'Nanak', to continue his legacy. (Which then begs a certain question from Dasm Guru)


I think you are over-estimating the uniqueness of our Dharm Gurus when compared to other Gurus.

 

Quote

I said nitnem on purpose,- not simran. Do you know of any other spiritual community in India where the founder told his followers to recite his own compositions? Nothing suggests that the followers of Kabeer and Ravidas had a nitnem of their own based on their respective Gurus writings.

You should fully elaborate your point with some evidence, some support, writings, etc.

On a side note - Nitnem means daily discipline. It could be anything that you do on a daily basis.

 

Quote

Another defining feature is also like mentioned earlier that Guru Nanak had his own writings written down and passed on to his succesor.

Like I said, this is one of those - "well duh" moments.
Obviously it seems like that because those who did pass on their poems in writing were not added to Guru Granth Sahib.

I agree that none of the others compiled their writings into a book. That's the reason why Guru Arjun Dev ji did so, it was to preserve them.

If the motive was preservation -> then it follows that Guru Arjun Dev ji did not add poems from Bhagats who had already transferred their poems to writing format.
Such as Bhagat Tulsidas ji, who composed Ramacharitramanas.
Also perhaps Bhagat Tukaram ji and his followers who compiled Tukaram Gatha.

So those that did not need to have their poems preserved (because they did so themselves) were not preserved by Guru Arjun Dev ji. And those that never wrote anything down, inspired Guru Sahib to preserve their legacy and undertake this massive project.
 

Quote

These were newly etablished cities with the Guru having a central role. The Sikhs at the time would travel in large numbers to this city to have darshan of their Guru.

Do you honestly believe that even after a guy raises a slaughtered cow back to life and milks her, that no one comes to see him from another city?

You cannot take missing information in your mental database as evidence for differences. You must keep in mind that it maybe that you just don't have the full story, the full  picture of the activities and daily lives of the Gurus from 1200s.

 

On a side note - You must also keep in mind that there are other Gurus in India, who are as popular if not more so that our Dharm Gurus. When you are making comparisons, you must look at the full range of Gurus and their accomplishments and get a bigger picture. Like Guru Ramanuj (1000s), Guru Smarth Ram Das ji (1600s) etc. And from other religions, Gurus like guru Adi Shankar ji (700s).
This is relevant because what a lot of what those guys did, (because they became really popular, so we have more info on them) is similar to what the Gurus in medieval India did (whom we may not have enough info)

.

Quote

The offerings to the Sikh Gurus was of a different kind with a fixed percentage. This meant that the community around the Guru became quite a political factor for the rulers to reckon with.

Which rulers are you talking about exactly?

If you mean Jehangir or Aurangzeb, then that never happened.

Banda Singh ji was the only one to have an army big enough that had the potential to grow further, to the point where it would match the power of the Mughal rulers. But his momentum was squashed by fellow Sikhs.

[amardeep]

Whats your email,- i'll send you an essay by the US Gurinder Singh Mann wherein he analyzes what we know about the early kartarpur community that developed around Guru Nanak. It answers a lot of the questions you have.

[amardeep]

Quote

That's not the case.
1. The other Gurus also had successors. But they weren't limited to one. Guru Ramanand ji had a flourishing community because he had so many successful students, Kabir, Ravi Das, Sain, Pipa, etc etc. That was a much bigger community than what Guru Nanak Dev ji had.

Do you think after having so many enlightened students passing on the message...they just died in decades?
What is more likely is that we are missing this information in our study, in our mental database, 5 centuries later.

2. Their communities couldn't have died out in decades if centuries later, people still remember them, key events in their lives and their poems.
Bhagt Nam Dev ji is still popular when our Gurus arrive on the scene 200 years later.

3. It wasn't Guru Nanak Dev ji who did this. It was the later Gurus who used his pen name 'Nanak', to continue his legacy. (Which then begs a certain question from Dasm Guru)


I think you are over-estimating the uniqueness of our Dharm Gurus when compared to other Gurus.

Did these Gurus appoint these succesors themselves or was it the disciples who were set up as succesors by people around them? Note that there is a huge difference here. Guru Nanak himself appointed Guru Angad. A contemporary example is that of the naamdharis were Baba Jagjit Singh last year did not appoint a successor. So his followers had to appoint one themselves whereafter they've set up Thakur Singh and Uday Singh. Both are not running their own communities.

Nothing was written down about these Gurus by their followers - much of what we know about them come from Sikh sources or later hagiographies many hundred years after their heavenly departure.

If you wanna argue that the kabir panthis and ravidasis etc are revivals of old panths instead of being reactions to contemporary circumstances then please provide some evidence that these panths existed in a structured form in the past. There must be some Mughal or Indian language accounts that mention their followers.

Quote

 

You should fully elaborate your point with some evidence, some support, writings, etc.

On a side note - Nitnem means daily discipline. It could be anything that you do on a daily basis.

 

Bhai Gurdas talks about the Sikhs in kartarpur reading the japji sahib in the morning. The puratan janam sakhi also states the same. Its in the essay that i will send you.

Quote

 

Do you honestly believe that even after a guy raises a slaughtered cow back to life and milks her, that no one comes to see him from another city?

You cannot take missing information in your mental database as evidence for differences. You must keep in mind that it maybe that you just don't have the full story, the full  picture of the activities and daily lives of the Gurus from 1200s.

 

On a side note - You must also keep in mind that there are other Gurus in India, who are as popular if not more so that our Dharm Gurus. When you are making comparisons, you must look at the full range of Gurus and their accomplishments and get a bigger picture. Like Guru Ramanuj (1000s), Guru Smarth Ram Das ji (1600s) etc. And from other religions, Gurus like guru Adi Shankar ji (700s).
This is relevant because what a lot of what those guys did, (because they became really popular, so we have more info on them) is similar to what the Gurus in medieval India did (whom we may not have enough info)

 

Which cities became places of pilgrimage during their Gurus lifetime and in the centuries after? And provide evidence of this instead of speculating that it could have happened.

And im not talking about the various Gurus pre 1200s. Im talking about the Gurus that are knows as the bhaktas of the Bhakti tradition of India. The wandering saints,- many of them are included in the Guru Granth Sahib, the greatest being Ravidas, Kabir, Naamdev etc.

Quote

 

Which rulers are you talking about exactly?

If you mean Jehangir or Aurangzeb, then that never happened.

Banda Singh ji was the only one to have an army big enough that had the potential to grow further, to the point where it would match the power of the Mughal rulers. But his momentum was squashed by fellow Sikhs.

 

Im talking about the early Gurus and early Mughals. Guru Ramdas and Guru Arjan had risen to such prominence that the Mughals had starting becoming alert of them, - especially Guru Arjan. His succes and his monetary financial situation had worried the mughals to the extent that even a rebel prince went to Guru Arjan to ask for support in his claim for the throne. This shows a lot about his position in Indian society at the time. Even the famous nakshbandi leader Ahmad Sirhindi saw Guru Arjans fame as a prime competitor why he heralded his death in his letters.... Many historians call Guru Arjan's reign a "state within the state".

You dont see this political stature and organization among any of the other bhaktas.

Edited March 23, 2016 by amardeep

[BhagatSingh]

11 hours ago, amardeep said:

Did these Gurus appoint these succesors themselves or was it the disciples who were set up as succesors by people around them? Note that there is a huge difference here.

I am still waiting to hear about this "huge difference".

You said "choosing ONE successor means they wanted their teachings to continue"
Well this is even true even if you have multiple successors. So it's not much of a difference.

"Many of these communities died out within decades of the main bhagat having passed away."
Where is the evidence of this?

You provided none. No evidence, no writings, not even any back up reasoning.
Whereas I explained that this couldn't possibly be true, just going by the fact that their popularity had remained 2 centuries after their death.

 

Quote

If you wanna argue that the kabir panthis and ravidasis etc are revivals of old panths instead of being reactions to contemporary circumstances then please provide some evidence that these panths existed in a structured form in the past. There must be some Mughal or Indian language accounts that mention their followers.

It goes both ways mate. You are the one making the claim that they did not have their own panths.
You have to provide evidence of that.

My logic is simple if these guys were popular (which they were, they were known by many people), if their poems had power and spread to the general population, meaning they had influence (which they did) and they had a message to convey, certain practices they wanted people to adopt, then that automatically means they have a panth. All of them had Gurus and all of them had Sikhs. That is known as a panth, whether it is recorded or not.

This is further supported by the fact that their bani had been remembered over centuries and was sought after by Guru Arjun Dev ji. They were remembered by Guru Ram Das ji as heroes, as spiritual masters.

We have evidence of their teachings. We have evidence of their influence and popularity, right in Guru Granth Sahib.

That's the evidence I am going by.

So you are contradicting that simple logic and the evidence as seen in Guru Granth Sahib, with your claims. Thus you must provide that evidence.

 

Quote

Which cities became places of pilgrimage during their Gurus lifetime and in the centuries after? And provide evidence of this instead of speculating that it could have happened.

11 hours ago, amardeep said:

Nothing was written down about these Gurus by their followers - much of what we know about them come from Sikh sources or later hagiographies many hundred years after their heavenly departure.

Ok so that means that you are not sure whether it happened, and that you don't have enough information. So you are calling this a difference, why exactly? If you are not sure whether other Gurus built cities or communities, the don't you think you should do some research first? or at least remain open minded to the idea?

Instead, you making the claim that they had no established cities. Where is your evidence for that mate?

See I can play this game too.

 

Quote

And im not talking about the various Gurus pre 1200s. Im talking about the Gurus that are knows as the bhaktas of the Bhakti tradition of India. The wandering saints,- many of them are included in the Guru Granth Sahib, the greatest being Ravidas, Kabir, Naamdev etc.

 

You missed the point -

This is relevant because what a lot of what those guys [gurus] did, (because they became really popular, so we have more info on them) is similar to what the Gurus in medieval India did (whom we may not have enough info) [like Nam Dev ji, Ramanand ji, etc]

And

Obviously it seems like that because those who did pass on their poems in writing were not added to Guru Granth Sahib.

So those that did not need to have their poems preserved (because they did so themselves) were not preserved by Guru Arjun Dev ji. And those that never wrote anything down, inspired Guru Sahib to preserve their legacy and undertake this massive project.

And

You cannot compare only a handful of Gurus (bhagts) to our Dharm Gurus (bhagts). You must look at the all the Gurus (bhagts) of India.

Remember this was your original post -
 

Quote

 

1. The Gurus can't be compared to any of the bhagats/bhaktas that were seen in India at the time.

2. The Gurus ideas were far more coherent as well as the fact that their concept of dharma was more wide.

3. Also, the Gurus were the only ones who actually setup a panth, a scripture and organization. The other bhaktas did'n.

 

All of these points are wrong when you compare Dharm Gurus to "Any of the Gurus that were seen in India at the time."

 

And

You also ignored the Gurus/bhagats, who did pass on their writings.
Tulsidas ji
Tukaram ji
Smarth Ram Das ji
If you only count those mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib as bhagts then you would again be wrong because there were many more bhagats and gurus aside from those mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib. Such as the above.

 

Quote

Im talking about the early Gurus and early Mughals. Guru Ramdas and Guru Arjan had risen to such prominence that the Mughals had starting becoming alert of them, - especially Guru Arjan. His succes and his monetary financial situation had worried the mughals to the extent that even a rebel prince went to Guru Arjan to ask for support in his claim for the throne. This shows a lot about his position in Indian society at the time. Even the famous nakshbandi leader Ahmad Sirhindi saw Guru Arjans fame as a prime competitor why he heralded his death in his letters.... Many historians call Guru Arjan's reign a "state within the state".

You dont see this political stature and organization among any of the other bhaktas.

 

[OnPathToSikhi]

@BhagatSingh is a rat here with some agenda. People please be vary. I have been monitoring his posts. I am not sure if anyone here feels the same, but I surely do.

As for you bhagtu - Keep yapping . Tere tagde chittar pein wale aa ...

[Rock]

1 hour ago, OnPathToSikhi said:

Tere tagde chittar pein wale aa ...

Why would you say that ? You think this is a MMA tournament or something .

1 hour ago, OnPathToSikhi said:

I have been monitoring his posts

Are you a mod here ?

[paapiman]

12 hours ago, OnPathToSikhi said:

@BhagatSingh is a rat here with some agenda. People please be vary. I have been monitoring his posts. I am not sure if anyone here feels the same, but I surely do.

As for you bhagtu - Keep yapping . Tere tagde chittar pein wale aa ...

Bro, Bhagat Singh jee does seem to have plenty of knowledge.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[BhagatSingh]

@OnPathToSikhi

I am your younger brother. You are allowed to beat me up lol.

[paapiman]

15 hours ago, BhagatSingh said:

@OnPathToSikhi

I am your younger brother. You are allowed to beat me up lol.

This is a Gurmukh's way of thinking.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Koi]

On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 10:46 PM, GurpreetKaur said:

What is Jaganath? 

 

The one on the right 

[GurpreetKaur]

7 minutes ago, Koi said:

The one on the right 

My right or your right? 

[Koi]

9 hours ago, GurpreetKaur said:

My right or your right? 

:)

Looking straight at the picture, the one on the right. Black faced.

[dalsingh101]

6 hours ago, Koi said:

:)

Looking straight at the picture, the one on the right. Black faced.

He looks like one of the Tellytubbies.

[Letsdiscuss]

I think unmanifest and manifest need to be understood. Like water as a substance is different from 'water' word or symbol H2O, people who started depicting such matters in form or language were really wise sages. For a primary school level, we start with a pictures of fruits vegetables or something else to make them acquainted witht the world. With their level of education they move to higher mathematics, abstract algebra or theoretical physics without pictures or forms they still are using language to think. Therefore, language or a form are key ingredients to immerse or break the illusion of this maya! Once it is broken then you can the mirage was not the water. I think bagauti is the inner power of bhagwant, which is the same thing as shown in myths in Hinduism. We need to understand the symbols and myths to get the gist of the matter. Thats why gurbani was a way to make us understand the depth behind the myth. Without understanding the language the symbol or form we may not understand the meaning/ semantics.

[Shivshkti]

Yoni has and creating everything which is stree no purush maha purush adi purush or any purush can give birth only yoni can give birth you can see million of examples in this planet only yoni - stree is giving birth which is true. There can be no purush - male be a creator because purush is not purn - complete only yoni is Purna - complete this is why she is first