gurparsad

[drawrof]

What is the role of the guru in sikhi?

(after seeing endless commentaries on ranjit singh dhadrian wallay; I thought I'd ask something thought provoking)

if guru in sikhi means guru nanak's jyot...does that mean that sikhi wasn't

'universal'??

looking forward to the responses

[unbreakable]

...

[Guest Javanmard]

Vâhigurûjîkâkhâlsâ Vâhigurûjîkîfateh

I would like to thank dwarof to introduce this most important of subjects, the basis of our faith and our tradition and divert us from other less important subjects. By the same token I wish to thank unbreakable for his post which was very accurate. If you allow me I would like to add the following to this thread:

1. Let us go back to grammar, the basis for any correct understanding of scripture. The word gurprasâdi in the Mûlmantar plays a crucial role in our understanding of the role, nature and function of the Gurû. The Mûlmantar can be divided into two sections: the first one stating essential attributes of the Divine and the role of the Divine Guide and the second one stating the first section’s relationship to creation. The mention of the Gurû is interestingly enough placed between the first and the second part:

First part: One-Omkar (ikomkâr), the True Name (satinâmu), the Creating (Active) Being (Person) (kartâ purakhu), without fear (nirbhau), without hatred (nirvair), unborn (lit. without a womb) (ajuni), self-existing (saibham), in the grace of the Guru (gurprasâdi).

Second part: Repeat (japu). This was true in the primordial time (âdi sachu), at the beginning of the ages (jugâdi sachu), it is true now and (hai bhi sachu), o Nanak (nânak), it shall be true in the future (hosi bhi sachu).

From a grammatical point of view the word "gurprasâdi" is in the locative case expressing the sense of location ("in the grace of the Gurû"). The sihari in gurprasâdi is the usual ending of the locative. The locative also has also an instrumental use in gurbani, thus gurprasâdi also has the instrumental meaning of “through the grace of the Gurûâ€. In its locative dimension gurprasâdi signifies the fact that the essential attributes of the Divine are manifested in the Gurâ Himself whereas the instrumental dimension refers to the fact that it is through the Gurû that the Divine manifests its attributes. The Divine Guide is so to speak the signifier aspect of the Divine whereas the Unknowable Essence remains the signified aspect and as such the he is the name of God.

2. Having thus established the primordial importance of the Gurû through the meaning of gurprasâdi we can move on to understand the implications of this. In its locative sense this means that in the Gurû the divine attributes hence also kartâ purakhu etc... In order to clarifiy this we need to also focuss on âdi sachu. The word âdi refers to the state before any creation thus meaning that the Gurû pre-exists creation. This hence emplies that there is what we can call the eternal Gurû of which the 10 historical are the manifestation. Gurû Arjan Dev Sâhib refers to this reality right in the opening words of Sukhmanî Sâhib "âdi gure namah". The eternal Gurû is hence the akâl murati, the timeless image of the Divine and hence plays a demiurgic creative role. As expressed in Japujî Sâhib he is Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva and Shakti meaning that he is the creator, sustainer, destroyer and uncreated energy of all.

On a more comparative note I would like to add that the notion of the eterenal Gurû is very similar if not even identical with that of the eternal Imâm in esoteric Shi'ism or the Christos Angelos in mystical eastern Christianity.

3. It is pretty clear from gurbânî that the eternal Gurû has manifested Himself before and will continue to manifest Himself. As the Mûlmantar clearly says referring to gurprasâdi: "jugâdi sachu hai bhî sachu nânak hosi bhî sachu" . In the Bhattan de svayye it is clearly stated that the Gurû manifested Himself in previous avatârs such as Krishna and Râma. Thus the prophets and avatârs of the past are manifestations of the eternal Gurû.

4. A few words need to be added to the confusion between avatâr and incarnation. These are NOT the same thing at all and the Gurûs made sure we wouldn't make that confusion. We all know the famous statements by Gurû Arjan and Gurû Gobind Singh:

Let that mouth burn that says that the Lord (Thakur) takes birth. He is not born, nor does he die. He does not come and go (through the cycle of rebirths). AGGS 1136

Those who call us the Supreme Lord (Paramesar) shall all fall in the realm of hell. Know me as his servant and do not think of any difference between me and Him. BN VI: 32

Yet at the same time we have statements like these:

The Guru is Govind, and Govind is the Guru, O Nanak; there is no difference between the two, o brother.||4||1||8||AGGS 442

There is no difference between the Supreme Lord and the Guru. ||4||11||AGGS 1142

So Mathura speaks: there is no difference between God and Guru; Guru Arjun is Hari himself manifested.||7||19||AGGS 1409

The Divine Guide as theophany or divine manifestation (avatâr) is indeed God revealed but limiting God to one of his earthly manifestations (incarnation, lit. becoming flesh) is to transform it into an idol. The notion of incarnation implies that God becomes human in flesh whereas the notion of theophany implies that God (or more exactly the Eternal Gurû who is the saguna aspect of God) manifests Himself in the form of the historical avatârs.

I hope this helps.

[drawrof]

I thank both unbreakable and javanmard for their eloquent answers. I hope to imbibe this understanding while doing veechar of gurbani, my question to both you and the rest of the sangat then comes to....

the meaning of aad gureh namah, jugaad gureh namah, satgureh, namah, sri gurdeveh namah.

please feel free to give interpretations from different traditions...thanks

[Guest Javanmard]

Vâhigurûjîkâkhâlsâ Vâhigurûjîkîfateh

"âdi gurae namah jugâdi gurae namah satigurae namah srî gurdevae namah"

1. As ususal let us just first of all focuss on grammar and rhetorics. These are four nominal sentences with a dative construction imitating similar structures in Sanskrit. The ending of guru as "gurae" is in fact an imitation of the Sanskrit dative case. The same sentence in Sanskrit would be:

"âdigurave namah jugâdigurave namah satigurave namah shrî gurudevâya namah"

Gurû Arjan hence opens his Sukhmanî Sâhib with a Sanskritic sounding mangalâcharan opening.

Thus the meaning of Sukhmanî Sâhib's opening is: "Honour be to the Primordial Guru, honour be to the Guru of the beginning of ages, honour be to the True Guru, honour be to the Divine Guide."

2. This verse looks into different aspects of the Gurû. First there is the atemporal pre-existential state of the Gurû (âdi gurû). Then there is the Gurû as the being there at the beginning of ages i.e. the first being. This notion is close to that of Adam in the Shi'a tradition as being the first Prophet and Imâm and manifestation of God's attributes. In all this aspects he always remains the True Gurû (satigurû) in whom and through whom Truth is manifest. In His relationship with each of His individual Sikh he remains the Divine Guide and Master (sri gurudev).

I hope it helps

[unbreakable]

...

[Xylitol]

The Guru is God Himself, He also is the one who guides us along this path, helps us and protects us. Without Amrit intiation, we do not have a Guru (from somewhere in Bhai Gurdass ji's Vaars).

Btw, it is Ik Onkar, not 'omkar'. Om according to Giani Takhur Singh ji's Japji katha, refers to something much lower - the trinity of vishnu, shiva, brahma. Onkar refers to the one God alone. Omkar, in fact, is so low that I recall him saying that your phall will be less if you do jap of that mantr out loud.

bhul chuk maaaf.

[Guest Javanmard]

Omkar or Onkar is the same: it's a nasalisation signified by "m" or "n". Makes no difference. Scholarly conventions transcribe a nasalisation with either "m" or "n" both with a dot above them. And regarding Giani Thakur Singh's idea of what "om" is, I am sorry to say that in many Indian philosophical traditions it does refers to the One as well, not just the trimurti.

[Iron-Singh]

The Guru is God Himself, He also is the one who guides us along this path, helps us and protects us. Without Amrit intiation, we do not have a Guru (from somewhere in Bhai Gurdass ji's Vaars).

Btw, it is Ik Onkar, not 'omkar'. Om according to Giani Takhur Singh ji's Japji katha, refers to something much lower - the trinity of vishnu, shiva, brahma. Onkar refers to the one God alone. Omkar, in fact, is so low that I recall him saying that your phall will be less if you do jap of that mantr out loud.

bhul chuk maaaf.

I'm sorry but I don't recall Gyani ji talking about "Omkar", I think he was just talking about "om" and "oankaar". Infact, I don't think the word "omkaar" was even used previously. "om" and "oang" mean the same thing I believe.

When Gyani ji says "om" refers to trimurti, he's saying it in the sense of the core meaning of the word. Some traditions may in fact use "om" to refer to the One, but the word itself, if it is broken down, is a description of the trimurti.

[Guest Javanmard]

Sorry to add this but the fact that "om" corresponds to the trimurti is ONE interpretation among many others, it's not what om as such means.

[tSingh]

Exactly, and Mandukya Upanishad along with Gaudapad's karikas gives the Vedantic interpretation of Om/Omkar denoting the different states of consciousness culminating in Turiya.

[tSingh]

Exactly, and Mandukya Upanishad along with Gaudapad's karikas gives the Vedantic interpretation of Om/Omkar denoting the different states of consciousness culminating in Turiya.

[unbreakable]

..