Gurmat : Who Is The Deciding Authority

hps · May 7, 2007

Is wahe guru a God?...No.....No....No....No.

:roll:
7.05.2007

This is a forum where the member discuss things related to sikhism and allied related topics. There may be occassions when a member posts something interpreting the line/Tuk of gurbani in his way. The co-member may state that the position of interpretation is not as per Gurmat.

One is faced with a peculiar situation. In case there is a suggestion by the objector the same can be looked into by the person who is posting.However, where the person claiming something to be Not as per Gurmat does not give any considered reason ,how and who will be the person or an authority who will decide that the matter is as per gurmat or not.The person may start creating nuisance claiming a person possessed with superior knowledge.

Thus for me 'WAHEGURU' Is not a GOD? He should be, if HE is, always next and inferior to Ek Onkar ,Sat Naam ,Karta Purukh, Nirbhau, NIrver , akalmurut ajuni Saibhung.........,..

hps
E&OE
"What is that word, what is that virtue, and what is that magic mantra? What are those clothes, which I can wear to captivate my Husband Lord? Humility is the word, forgiveness is the virtue, and sweet speech is the magic mantra. Wear these three robes, O Sister, and you will captivate your Husband Lord." (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 1384)

Harjas Kaur Khalsa · May 16, 2007

Re: Gurmat :Who is the deciding Authority.

Gurmat is what is in Gurbani, consistent with all shabads of Gurbani (in other words won't be contradicted by another pauri unless it's a misinterpretation) is consistent with Panthic authority: primarily Akal Tahkt, all the 5 Takhts, the Panj Piare, the accepted Panthic Rehit Maryada, the Rehitnamay, and the vaaran of Bhai Gurdas.

If any point of Gurmat still remains a personal point of contention with all the above authorities and any stated positions, the individual holding the contradictory interpretation becomes less and less credible. If you are looking for Gurmat interpretation solely in the Shabadguru Ji, you will find much contention because all of Gursikhi Gurmat is not written in Shabadguru Ji. Some things are gupt like proper way of reciting Naam Gurmantar. Some things were spoken by Guru Gobind Singh Ji but not written in Gurbani, and were passed to Panj Piare and later written down as rehitnamay. Some valid Sikh traditions were simply distorted over time by mahants and were hidden and preserved by small sections of the Panth. This is one reason why Akal Takht and Sikh scholars are only now trying to analyze the role of Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth as in relation to Gurbani and all the accepted rehitnamay.

Certain views are considered anti-Panthic and have hukamnamas against them by Akal Takht, such as RSS and certain Hindutva interpretations. Anyone violating these hukamnamas is subject to Panthic boycott. Thus personal views exist, contradictory positions exist within the Panth, but a fine line exists between what is accepted as Gurmat and what is not. And these are the accepted Sikh authorities for any Panthic dispute of interpretation.

Is wahe guru a God?...No.....No....No....No
Thus for me 'WAHEGURU' Is not a GOD? He should be, if HE is, always next and inferior to Ek Onkar ,Sat Naam ,Karta Purukh, Nirbhau, NIrver , akalmurut ajuni Saibhung.........,..

Ek Onkar, Satinaam , Karta Purakh, Nirbhau, Nirvair, Akal Murat, Ajhooni Saibhung, Gur Prasad:There is one God, His name is truth, Creator, without fear, without hatred, eternal, unborn, self-existing, understood by Guru's Grace.

These are not separate gods but all describing qualities of the Ek Oankaar (the One God). Waheguru is the Gurmantar according to vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji who Guruji Himself said was the key to understanding Gurbani.

Vaheguru is the (V =Vishnu, H = Har, G = Gobind, R = Ram) name of the One ineffable Lord encompassing all qualities which have been attributed to separate gods. So it is impossible for Waheguru to be inferior in any way to Himself. The Gurmantar is just a way of calling, remembering again qualities of the ineffable One. But it is power laden word because it is Gurmantara. And if Naam is given by Panj Piare, the Naam Waheguru Gurmantar is infused into you.

When someone takes amrit they are instructed to greet other amritdharis with "Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!" (The Khalsa belongs to God. The Victory belongs to God.) And this has come to us through the Panj Piare from Guru Gobind Singh Ji Himself. So here is perfect example that Waheguru is the proper way for an amritdhari to refer to the One God.

siqjug siqgur vwsdyv vwvw ivSnw nwm jpwvY]
sathijug sathigur vaasadhaev vaavaa vishanaa naam japaavai||
In Satyug, Visnu in the form of Vasudev is said to have incarnated and ‘V’ Of Vahiguru reminds of Visnu.
Line 1
duAwpr siqgur hrIikRSn hwhw hir hir nwm iDAwvY]
dhuaapar sathigur hareekrishan haahaa har har naam dhhiaavai||
The true Guru of dvapar is said to be Harikrsna and ‘H’ of Vahiguru reminds of Hari.
Line 2
qRyqy siqgur rwm jI rwrw rwm jpy suK pwvY]
thraethae sathigur raam jee raaraa raam japae sukh paavai||
In the the treta was Ram and ‘R’ of Vahiguru tells that rembering Ram will produce joy and happiness.
Line 3
kiljug nwnk gur goibMd ggw goivMd nwm jpwvY]
kalijug naanak gur gobindh gagaa govindh naam japaavai||
In kalijug, Gobind is in the form of Nanak and ‘G’ of Vahiguru gets Govind recited.
Line 4
cwry jwgy chu jugI pMcwiex ivc jwie smwvY]
chaarae jaagae chahu jugee panchaaein vich jaae samaavai||
The recitations o f all the four ages subsume in Panchayan i.e. in the soul of the common man.
Line 5
cwroN ACr iek kr vwihgurU jp mMqR jpwvY]
chaaron ashhar eik kar vaahiguroo jap manthr japaavai||
When joining four letters Vahiguru is remembered,
Line 6
jhW qy aupijAw iPr qhW smwvY ]ôù]ñ]
jehaan thae oupajiaa fir thehaan samaavai ||aa||a||
The jiv merges again in its origin.
Line 7

Abgq gq Aibgq dI kÎoN AlK lKwey]
abagath gath abigath dhee kaon alakh lakhaaeae||
How is the dynamism of the Unmanifest known?
Line 1
AkQ kQw hY AkQ dI ikauN AwK suxwey]
akathh kathhaa hai akathh dhee kioun aakh sunaaeae||
How can the story of that ineffable Lord be told?
Line 2
Acrj noN Acrj imlY hYrwn krwey]
acharaj non acharaj milai hairaan karaaeae||
He is wonderful for the wonder itself.
Line 3
ivsmwdy ivsmwd hoie ivdmwd smwey]
visamaadhae visamaadh hoe vidhamaadh samaaeae||
The absorbents in the wondrous realization get themselves elated.
Line 4
vyd n jwxY Byd ikhu SyKnwg nw pwey]
vaedh n jaanai bhaedh kihu shaekhanaag naa paaeae||
The Vedas also do not understand this mystery and even the Sesanag (mythological snake having thousand hoods) cannot know its limits.
Line 5
vwihgurU swlwhxw gur Sbd Alwey ]ñó]
vaahiguroo saalaahanaa gur shabadh alaaeae ||aa||
Vahiguru, God, is eulogised through recitation of the Word of the Guru, Gurbani.
Line 6

inrMkwr Awkwr kr joiq srUp AnUp idKwieAw]
nirankaar aakaar kar joth saroop anoop dhikhaaeiaa||
The formless Lord has been beholden in the form of the light (in Guru Nanak and other Gurus).
Line 1
vyd kqyb Agocrw vwihgurU guru Sbd suxwXw]
vaedh kathaeb agocharaa vaahiguroo gur shabadh sunaayaa||
The Gurus recited Word-Guru as Vahiguru who is beyond the Vedas and Katebas (the semtic scriptures).
Line 2
cwr vrn cwr mzhbw crx kvl Srnwgiq AwXw]
chaar varan chaar mazehabaa charan kaval sharanaagath aayaa||
Therefore all the four varnas and all four semitic religions have sought the shelter of the lotus feet of the Guru.
Line 3
pwrs prs Aprs jg AStDwq iek Dwq krwXw]
paaras paras aparas jag ashattadhhaath eik dhhaath karaayaa||
When the Gurus in the form of Philosopher’s stone touched them, that alloy of eight metal changed into one metal (gold in the form of Sikhism).
Line 4
pYrIN pwie invwiekY haumYN rog AswD imtwXw]
paireen paae nivaaeikai houmain rog asaadhh mittaayaa||
The Gurus giving them place at their feet removed their incurable malady of ego.
Line 5
hukm rjweI clxw gurmuK gwfI rwhu clwXw]
hukam rajaaee chalanaa guramukh gaaddee raahu chalaayaa||
For Gurmukhs they cleared the highway of God’s will.
Line 6
pUry pUrw Qwt bxwXw ]ñ÷]
poorae pooraa thhaatt banaayaa ||aa||
The perfect (Guru) made the perfect arrangements.
Line 7

bhull chuk maaf karni ji

lovely_silky · May 17, 2007

Harjas Kaur Khalsa said:
If you are looking for Gurmat interpretation solely in the Shabadguru Ji, you will find much contention because all of Gursikhi Gurmat is not written in Shabadguru Ji.

What is this madam khalsa ji?

Posing to be a khalsa and not know that all Gurmat is IN GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI. What are you preaching? How do you(being a Sikh) even dare to think of saying this? It shows you dont have any respect for Guru Ji in your heart, madam.

GURU IS GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI-

SABH SIKHAN KO HUKAM HAI GURU MANEO GRANTH
GURU GRANTH JI MANEO PARGAT GURA KI DEH
JO PRABH KO MILBO CHAHE KHOJ SHABAD MAIN LEH

How can gurmat be more valid outside Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Yes we can always use rehat namas from valid Gursikhs and then see that Guru Ji(Guru Granth Sahib Ji) supports it in full, i mean if it is according to gurmat.

GURMAT COMES FROM THE GURU. GURU IS ALWAYS THE FIRST AND THE FOREMOST- THE LEADING AUTHORITY

Harjas Kaur Khalsa said:
Some things are gupt like proper way of reciting Naam Gurmantar.

If a Gursikh namimg herself KHALSA says this it shows how STUPID AND ANTI-GURMAT AND ANTI-SIKH this person can be. Haathi Ke daant khaane ke aor, Dikhane ke aor. MUH ME RAM RAM BAGAL MAIN CHHURI.

ANY BODY WHO READS GURBANI KNOWS THAT 'HOW TO DO NAAM SIMRAN' IS MENTIONED MANY TIMES IN GURU GRANTH JI. HARJAS, YOUR STATEMENT IS PURELY INVALIDATING GURU JI, IT IS A SHAME.

hps ji why are you even looking for translations, why dont you learn Gurmukhi and find out the truth for yourself, if there are so many doubts in your mind. GURU IS GREAT- ANSWERS EVERY QUESTION

SAAS SAAS SIMRO GOBIND
NAAM JAPO JI AISE AISE
AMRIT BANI HAR HAR TERI

GURBANI IS ALL GURMAT, EVERY WORD OF IT, SAADH SANGAT JEO

Harjas Kaur Khalsa · May 17, 2007

If a Gursikh namimg herself KHALSA says this it shows how STUPID AND ANTI-GURMAT AND ANTI-SIKH this person can be.

Why thank you for your compliments.

GURBANI IS ALL GURMAT, EVERY WORD OF IT, SAADH SANGAT JEO

I never said anywhere Gurbani was not Gurmat or that Gurmat did not come from the Guru. So stop distorting my words. The Khalsa Panth is not decided on issue of Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth as being Gurbani at this time, and I do believe Akal Takht asked people not to debate this until scholars can research more.

How can gurmat be more valid outside Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Yes we can always use rehat namas from valid Gursikhs and then see that Guru Ji(Guru Granth Sahib Ji) supports it in full, i mean if it is according to gurmat.

GURMAT COMES FROM THE GURU. GURU IS ALWAYS THE FIRST AND THE FOREMOST- THE LEADING AUTHORITY

Because the issue is contentions within the Panth and both sides quoting the Shabadguru Ji. In this case I explained the secondary source material of rehitnamay and vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji being authoritative to clarify and settle disputes or questions. We know that these sources are Gurmat sources. Guruji Himself said Bhai Gurdas Ji was the "key" to understanding the Shabadguru Ji. So obviously Guruji must have felt that the Panth would have questions or disputes over the interpretation of Gurbani and require a key to unlock the mystery. Moreover, Bhai Gurdas Ji is recognized by the Panth as a brahmgyani, so we can't go wrong with the vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji when it comes to settling points of confusion or contention within the Panth.

Posing to be a khalsa and not know that all Gurmat is IN GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI. What are you preaching? How do you(being a Sikh) even dare to think of saying this? It shows you dont have any respect for Guru Ji in your heart, madam.

I'm not posing to be a Khalsa, I am an amritdhari Sikh. Again, thank you for your kind attacks on my personal qualities and deliberate distortion of my words. As I explained very clearly regarding any question of dispute or contention over meaning of Gurmat teaching within the Panth, whether or not (in part or in full) the Dasam Granth or Sarbloh Granth is to be accepted as Gurbani has yet to be decided as a consensus within the Khalsa Panth. And this would be an example of something being hidden from the Panth until recently. As far as I understand, Damdami Taksal has accepted both. While both may be Gurbani, (words of Guru) neither would ever receive the status of Guru Granth in the same way as Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaaj. But this would be an example of things like (in Dasam Granth) we get some Nitname banis. Again, if you are amritdhari, you say your nitname, but nitname is not appearing in Shabadguru Ji. Is it invalid? Does this somehow infer we have no respect for Shabadguru Ji Maharaaj because the nitname banis are found in another source like Dasam Granth? If nitname banis (I believe 3 come from Dasam Granth, and not written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, does this invalidate Guruji? Are we invalid because we are reciting nitname from source other than Shabadguru Ji?

When it comes to scholarly discussion of matters such as sarbloh bibek or Naam drirh, these are not new, but have been preserved within the Panth. As things such as Naam drihr continues to be Gupt and only given by Panj Piare during amrit sinchaar, I cannot discuss the technique. Suffice to say, they are valid examples of Panthic practices which are not widely kept or even understood by majority of the Panth. Also something which was kept gupt was the khande de Pahul. The things which people debate and have contentions with so often are what does NOT expressly appear in Gurbani. Things such as getting amritchukk, keeping Panj Kakkars, requirement for Sikh to keep kes, wearing sarbloh kara and sarbloh kirpan also do not appear as something you can quote from Gurbani. Yet we know these are valid Sikh traditions and teachings that come from the Guru, thus are legitimate part of Gurmat Gursikhi. Some of this was kept gupt unless you became amritdhari. And in some cases the tradition and history of the practice was lost to the Panth in general, while preserved by certain sections of the Panth because of infiltration by mahants, the British, and armed warfare, and persecution. this is simply stating a historical and scholarly reality. It has nothing to do with disrespecting Guruji or invalidation authority of Gurbani. Even the validity of Panj Piare are not expressly written in Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaaj. Does this mean we disrespect validity of Gurbani? Does this mean we disrespect validity of Panj Piare?

It is accepted Panthic tradition that Guru Ji Himself established the Panj Piare. But there is no citation anywhere in Gurbani to prove this. That is why to narrow Gurmat Gursikhi to Shabadguru Ji alone is not even possible. If you eliminate as Gurmat anything NOT written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, you eliminate a lot. And this is really the root of where errors and anti-Panthic distortions come in, where people say things like, "Sikhs don't need to wear panj kakkars because it doesn't say so Gurbani." Or, "Sikhs don't need to keep their kes, it doesn't even say so in Gurbani." Or "Sikhs don't need to become amritdhari, it doesn't say so in Gurbani." But if you consult Panthic authorities on these matters, such assertions will be shown false. Gurmat Gursikhi involves some things which are not expressly found in Shabadguru Ji Maharaaj. And must be because Guruji's sargun saroop is not only in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, but also in His Takhts, also in His Panj Piare, also in His Panth. AND IMPORTANTLY, these sources do not CONTRADICT. I ALREADY SAID ANYTHING WHICH CONTRADICTS THE GURBANI IS FALSE. These sources CLARIFY, that is the difference.

Just because something is not directly cited in Gurbani, doesn't mean there isn't secondary source material which has supported it, or that Panj Piare or the Takhts, or Akal Takht has not clarified this for the Panth.

Waheguru/Vaheguru Gurmantar is not found written in the Shabadguru Ji. Yet, we know from vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji that Waheguru is the Gurmantar of Guruji. So this would be an example that some things which are Gurmat and Panthic are not expressly stated in the Shabadguru Ji. This is not to imply that Shabadguru Ji is incomplete, but rather, as I stated clearly, that certain things were kept gupt. You are given Gurmantar when you take amrit. And it is received from the sargun saroop of Guruji Himself in the form of the Panj Piare. And since the Panj Piare and Akal Takht are the sargun saroop of Guruji Himself, whatever is their hukam is also the hukam of Guruji. And this hukam is obviously Gurmat, not contradicting Shabadguru Ji, but nonetheless, will not appear in Gurbani. So this is what I mean when I say some Gurmat teaching is not written expressly in Shabadguru Ji but comes from sources such as Akal Takht, Panj Piare, etc.

ANY BODY WHO READS GURBANI KNOWS THAT 'HOW TO DO NAAM SIMRAN' IS MENTIONED MANY TIMES IN GURU GRANTH JI. HARJAS, YOUR STATEMENT IS PURELY INVALIDATING GURU JI, IT IS A SHAME.

That is not correct. Naam drirh is based on saas giras simran (which is stated many times in Gurbani), but is a technique which is not imparted to everybody. It can only be imparted by Panj Piare. We can read saas giras in Gurbani, but what does this mean? Is it the same as saas saas simran? Is it just a way of doing pranayama with the Gurmantar? Are we all clearly certain what the Gurmantar is since it isn't written in Gurbani? If you gather several Sikhs at a camp, they are all doing differently. Some are quietly meditating on a meaningful shabad. Some are practicing meditation. Some are saying over and over the word, Waheguru. Some are singing Waheguru. Why is this if everybody who reads Gurbani knows how to do it? Why is it that many amritdharis were never even taught what the Gurmantar even is, and instead chant "satinaam," or "Om?" It is because it is NOT evident from the Gurbani, it is gupt, and certain portion of the Panth has completly forgotten how to do and teach Naam simran. But since you are criticizing and correcting me, and you state that anybody who can read Gurbani knows how to do Naam Simran, would you please take the time and explain it for us all? You won't, because you don't know, and you will only expose what you don't know. So saying everybody knows, then not even clarifying what it is everyone knows is just argumentative and sharing nothing. You really believe everyone in the Panth clearly understands and knows how to do Naam simran? Then why is it a contentious issue (point of disagreement) within the Panth?

As far as I know the Panj Piare speaks the word of Guru Ji, although it is not expressly "Gurbani." I do not have the power to invalidate Guruji. Guruji established the Panj Piare so that certain Gurmat things gupt to everyone else would be preserved and known by Guru's Sikhs.

AGAIN bhull chuk maaf karni Ji.
Apart from talking about my personal characteristics, I fail to see you explain an alternative to the initial question or where the explanation given is in error, except to assume that everything Gurmat is written about in Shabadguru Ji, and clearly that is not the case, or Sikhs would not have amrit, Panj Piare, kakkars, nitname, Takhts, Naam simran using Waheguru Gurmantar, or even support why they keep kes. This is because what is Gurmat isn't only known by what is written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. But what is Gurmat Gursikhi does not contradict Shabadguru Ji. Everything which is Gurmat absolutely comes from the Guru.

I did not say Gurbani is invalid or incomplete or should not be respected. I did not say Gurbani is not Gurmat or Shabdaguru Ji is not Guru. I said when there is contention about Gurmat understanding, the Panth can validly look to secondary sources for clarification, to Rehitnamay, Vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji, to Panj Piare, and can even take it all the way to Akal Takht. And Panthic means the consensus of the Panth. Because Khalsa Panth as a corporate body is also sargun saroop of Guruji. So if something is not accepted by the Panth, you can rest assured, there is a problem with it. Example being Hps definition that "no no no, Waheguru is not God." And nowhere in Shabadguru Ji does it say "Waheguru." But in vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji, it says clearly "Waheguru, God." And "The Gurus recited Word-Guru as Vahiguru who is beyond the Vedas and Katebas." So this is an example of how Gurmat understanding is obtained during disagreement using secondary sources to clarify what is gupt within Gurbani (here is example of Waheguru/Vahiguru Gurmantar which otherwise does not directly appear in Gurbani, but it can be inferred and does not contradict, and is expressly stated by the person Guruji said was the "key to understanding Gurbani.".)

lovely_silky · May 17, 2007

dont act smart

what is all this about-

Harjas Kaur Khalsa said:
If you are looking for Gurmat interpretation solely in the Shabadguru Ji, you will find much contention because all of Gursikhi Gurmat is not written in Shabadguru Ji.

IF ONE SAYS GURBANI IS DIFFERENT THAN GURMAT- CAN THAT PERSON IS CONSIDERED A SIKH.

What is this-

Harjas Kaur Khalsa said:
Some things are gupt like proper way of reciting Naam Gurmantar.

Where Guru Gobind Singh Ji said- i am keeping Naam Gupt, This Granth is your Guru But go and ask others for naam. WHERE- EXPLAIN THIS.

ALL OF GURBANI TALKS ABOUT NAAM-SIKHI DOES NOT EXITS WITHOUT NAAM-

AND YOU ARE MAKING IT GUPT- you know who says this- CULTS AND FAKE BABAS WHO WANT TO BE ABOVE GURU JI.

Some are still asking for proof for Waheguru to be gurmantra-

Gurbani says

vwihgurU vwihgurU vwihgurU vwih jIau ]
kvl nYn mDur bYn koit sYn sMg soB khq mw jsod ijsih dhI Bwqu Kwih jIau ]
dyiK rUpu Aiq AnUpu moh mhw mg BeI ikMknI sbd Jnqkwr Kylu pwih jIau ]
kwl klm hukmu hwiQ khhu kaunu myit skY eIsu bMm´ü g´wnu D´wnu Drq hIAY cwih jIau ]
siq swcu sRI invwsu Awid purKu sdw quhI vwihgurU vwihgurU vwihgurU vwih jIau ]

Harjas Kaur Khalsa · May 17, 2007

IF ONE SAYS GURBANI IS DIFFERENT THAN GURMAT- CAN THAT PERSON IS CONSIDERED A SIKH.

You are distorting. I did not say Gurbani is different from Gurmat. I said what is Gurmat is not always expressly stated in Gurbani and must be found in secondary sources. Can you please cite the shabad which explains the procedure for amrit sinchaar? Can you please locate the Gurbani which says Panj Piare are the sargun saroop of Guruji?

Yet, you dare imply that a Sikh who follows the authority of Panj Piare as sargun saroop of Guruji, who has taken amrit is not a Sikh because these things which are Gurmat Gursikhi do not appear in Gurbani? Are you saying then, that anything which does not appear in Gurbani is not Sikh? Is not Gurmat? That would be an error, as we would be without the 5 Takhts, the 5 Beloveds, the 5 kakkars, etc.

Where Guru Gobind Singh Ji said- i am keeping Naam Gupt, This Granth is your Guru But go and ask others for naam. WHERE- EXPLAIN THIS.

ALL OF GURBANI TALKS ABOUT NAAM-SIKHI DOES NOT EXITS WITHOUT NAAM-

AND YOU ARE MAKING IT GUPT- you know who says this- CULTS AND FAKE BABAS WHO WANT TO BE ABOVE GURU JI.

I already have explained. You are not accepting the obvious. Are you now accusing the Damdami Taksal and the Akhand Kirtani Jatha of being cults and fake babas who want to be above Guruji? Guru Gobind Singh Ji established the Panj Piare. Where in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji does it say this? Where is the guru, any guru who gives a gurmantar which is not gupt? It is obvious when you actually read the vaaran of Bhai Gurdas ji, how much deep intelligence and hidden wisdom is actually within the Shabadguru ji. But without the "key" or the Panj Piare we would not have it on our own.

Here is where you may find the vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji which I already explained and quoted tells the hidden (gupt) Gurmantar which is Waheguru/Vahiguru. I said very explicitly, you do not ask others for Naam, that Naam can only be imparted to you by the Panj Piare which are Guruji's sargun saroop on this earth. It is not something just anybody can read in Gurbani and have for themselves. It is supposed to be received when a person becomes amritdhari.

Vaaran Bhai Gurdas :Vaar1Pauri49:SearchGurbani.com

Again, if Waheguru is such a big mystery, doesn't it occur to you strange that all amritdharis refer to God as Waheguru when they greet each other with fateh?

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa
Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh!

You may look back over my previous post. I was still fixing some passages and spelling when you posted these new. BTW, I am not making anything gupt. These things existed long before I was ever born. You give me too much credit.

Harjas Kaur Khalsa · May 17, 2007

My posts are being witheld again. This is annoying.

Harjap Khalsa · May 17, 2007

biba Harjas kaur Khalsa,

you are stating:

"If you are looking for Gurmat interpretation solely in the Shabadguru Ji, you will find much contention because all of Gursikhi Gurmat is not written in Shabadguru Ji. "(posted by Harjas Kaur Khalsa) in one of the above posts.

This is most explicit statement against Gurmat i ever read. What contention. Amrit is stated in Gurbani, 5 kakaar are not but if we contemplate on the significance of these(what they depict), that way of life is taught throughout Gurbani multiple times. All rehatnaams are already contemplated by our chosen Singh Sahibs and they made it sure that everything is according to Gurmat. Gurmat comprises of all that Gurbani teaches us, it is not the other way around. Whatever else you say now- this above statement of yours is dissolving all the essence away. Changing your explanation many times doesnt do much, it only confuses the reader more and reduces the credibility even more.

Then in addition you added fuel to the fire by saying:
"Some things are gupt like proper way of reciting Naam Gurmantar."(posted by Harjas Kaur Khalsa in one of the above posts) How can a Sikh say this. Gurbani depicts even the minutest of details about Naam. It is loaded with infinite wisdom of all the kinds, not just the proper way of Naam Recitition alone. This Wisdom is repeated multiple times too, to engrave it into our deeper conscious for good. It seems like you are being either mislead or misunderstand the true essence of sikh dharma.

luv4u · May 17, 2007

I have followed the thread very closely.
It appears to me that no one has read the question in the context Of which it has been put into.
Let us see that has been posed as a question.

"One is faced with a peculiar situation. In case there is a suggestion by the objector the same can be looked into by the person who is posting.However, where the person claiming something to be Not as per Gurmat does not give any considered reason ,how and who will be the person or an authority who will decide that the matter is as per gurmat or not.The person may start creating nuisance claiming a person possessed with superior knowledge."

Mr. hps has very clearly stated the matter so faras the interpretation of the bani and this post is concerned oin the site if one member makes a nuisance in the thread. I see also that there is some thread about ' need guidance in interpretation....." where one surinder kaur cheema ji has been poking herself as a person of great knowledge.It is in this context that the question probably was posed.She had stated something as going against the 'gurmat' and on being asked had not responded.

It may be further be observed that it is in this forum itself some person want to establish monoploy ,then the problem arises.

Thus for me 'WAHEGURU' Is not a GOD? He should be, if HE is, always next and inferior to Ek Onkar ,Sat Naam ,Karta Purukh, Nirbhau, NIrver , akalmurut ajuni Saibhung.........,..'''

Regarding the above it can be clarified that waheguru is not a physical God, it is probably the one of the name of the God. There is no doubt that waheguru 'gurumanter' is not a part of approved bani so far and hence a very tricky question.
It is as per my understanding.You may kindly like to opine as well.

It is also suggested that one should stop monopolising the areas Of interpretation else this site is likely to suffer as well.I am not likely to visit the site again.It is full of egotistic write ups.

lovely_silky · May 17, 2007

lagda hai aj sari SPN tusi monoplize kar leni he

luv4u · May 18, 2007

Nan Silky ji, Tohanu ini ini lambi lambi post likhni andi hey.Tussi gre8 ho ji.

Sashikal ji ,Silky ji...Rab toahnu chardi kala ch Rakhe ji. sashikal ji once again c u.

ISDhillon · May 28, 2007

In my opinion, if bani is the spiritual embodiment of the guru then bani is pure truth, every letter is a diamond and therefore there is no harm or misrepresentation in taking a sentence out of a verse. And then used to support a an argument especially when the argument is in full support of the fundamental practices of the sikh religion. One could only argue that their has been misrepresentation if their was a rule governing the way any part of sri guru granth sahib ji is interpreted, for eg, when i isolate ekonkar from mulmantar it speaks volumes, the same could be said for satnam, the meaning of these words in isolation from mul mantar speak volumes. However, they together form the mulmantar which has great spiritual power. That does not mean we cannot take a line out of sri guru granth sahib ji and discuss it for the fruitful activities and social reform.
Noone has a right to set the rules on how we partake of our guru, the translators are not divine, guruji asks all to experience individually, everybody has their own technique or preference, some like to examine the whole text, some like to read it parrot fashion, some like to sing shabad it depends on your own preference, love comes to all individually for gurshabad. Lets not make our practices rigid.

roopk · May 28, 2007

I am young and fully agree with you that Bani cannot be standardised in a rigid format. English Translation has done much damage though it has simplified the job for young ones in India. For some it may be a deep philosphical work for some a 'parrot like' interpretation.

venod · May 28, 2007

Mr Dhillon ji,

Although, I do agree with you in principle but if we leave everything to everyone there are chances that most of the things would get distorted. Let us take the sacred word 'weahguru' . It does not owe its origin to Holy Granth, in the manner that something divine is associated with it. It might have been taken from somewhere else. But to say that waheguru is not a sacred word would be incorrect. Even we Hindus know this.

I however, cannot make much of this post. 'Wahguru' may or may not be reflective of all the attributes as stated in the beginning but that does not mean that 'wahguru' is not one of the name of God.

I do believe that these things should be handled by a single authority Of Sikhs and there is standardisation. With the net culture everything is available at the click of mouse and things become easy and more prune to manipulations.

Tejwant Singh · May 29, 2007

First and foremost VAHEGURU-WAHEGURU is not a name for any diety nor for any entity. It is a salutation, the Sense of 'WOW' when we look around ourselves, when we are looking at the dark sky on a clear night and see other specks of sand like ours twinkling at us.

If one names the INFINITE then it becomes FINITE. Our Gurus were very aware of that. Hence according to SIKHI, IK ONG KAAR has no name yet many like Ram, Gobind etc etc. just as a mere reference.

It is hard to meet the CREATOR of the Universe and beyond, our Divine Master. IK ONG KAAR's form is immeasurable, inaccessible and unfathomable. IK ONG KAAR is all-pervading everywhere.

IK ONG KAAR is above all formless and indescribable, so sublime as to be totally beyond human powers of recognition, description, or conception.

Hence it is called AJUNI- SEHBHUNG- THE CREATIVE ENERGY. And a Sikh can only immerse into this CREATIVE ENERGY via GURBANI, the foundation of GURMAT VALUES.

Tejwant

venod · May 30, 2007

Dear Tejwant ji,

I fully agree that you have stated is correct. I have just stated that ‘wahegur’ is a term not reflective of any entity but of attributes that you have clarified . He is nameless as well. [10th Guru sahib] .Tru infinite cannot be named but we try to do so as we want to remember Him. ’Wahguru’ is supposedly a Mantra for Sikhs. A ‘Naam’, a name. You are free to correct me.

One who knows the Supreme Lord as the Ultimate Truth the ‘Sat’, the eternal ever existent and ever being that you call as ‘Saibhang’ as what is real, as what is knowledge and as what is infinite.[ simultaneously existing within the heart of all living entities as well as in the eternal spiritual world]. Transcending to that state of awareness which consists of total bliss, descending and ascending in various worlds, assuming the form one desires, all actions manifesting according to one's desires, one sings and chants the holy names of the Lord.

I do presume that there is a significant importance laid down on ‘Naam’ in Sikhism as well. [Even the word ‘Ong-kaar’ is a version of the pious words of hindu’s ‘Om’, the most vibrant and subtle vibrations.]

There is no difference Of opinion here. All I want to suggest is that there should be standardization in the work of interpretations of scriptures of Sikhs.

There are many other points where we can disagree but not here. I know that 'waheguru' is not a diety . Even Hindus ,now do not worship dieties. No one has the time these days.Rest assured I shall not trouble you unnecessarily and you should reciprocare.

Amarpal · May 30, 2007

Dear Khalsa Ji,

'Gur' is the way or process or method.

'Guru' is the one who knows the 'Gur' and from whom student or disciple learns.

'Mat' is the frame of mind which leads to a specific way of living.

'Gurmat' is the learning imparted by Guru.

For me my Guru is 'Siri Guru Granth Sahib'.

The learning that 'Siri Guru Granth Sahib’ imparts to me is 'Gurmat' to me.

Sikh religion is a corporated religion, it does not have any priestly class. Priestly class was abolished by Guru Sahib. Within the general frame work of Sikh religion each Sikh has to decied from himself. Sikhi has to be lived and just not enacted outwardly. Convictions cannot be forced from outside, they come from within. Only when you are convinced about something you will follow, hence it is for the individual to discuss the doubts and clarify points that come to your mind after reading 'Gurbani'. This interaction is suggested in 'Siri Guru Granth Sahib'. Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji did not have any formal Guru, he learnt through interaction and finally realised 'The Sat' when he said 'There is no Hindu and no Musalman'.

Within the general frame work of Sikhi and Khalsa Panth, you are the deciding authority for yourself.

Please do not close your mind on something you has decided upon. As you progress with your life and learn more and more the old understand will start fall away and new more precise one will take their place. This process has to be continued, this in fact is evolution and the spiritual way to divinity. It ends only when you have realised 'The Sat'. When this happens every entity of this creation will merge into 'ONE', and you will see 'The Sat' every where.

In this corporate religion 'Sikhi' you are your boss taking spiritual sustenance from 'Siri Guru Granth Sahib.

With love and respect for all.

Amarpal Singh

simpy · May 30, 2007

Respected Vinod/Venod Ji,

wah wah-

Venod said:
Even Hindus ,now do not worship dieties.

this is how much you know??????????
hun mukdi gal eh hai ke tusi maha confused is uselessly trying to confuse others, sir ji these tricks dont work everywhere .................
WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WILL BELIEVE YOUR STATEMENT GIVEN ABOVE..... may be somebody on a different planet

endless thanks to you for showing your true color every once in a while

humbly asking for everybody's forgiveness

spnadmin · May 30, 2007

Venod ji

When you say Although, I do agree with you in principle but if we leave everything to everyone there are chances that most of the things would get distorted. you are forgetting that interpretation of Gurbani is not a free-for-all. Not at all like the end of a soccer-match. There are always individuals who are more learned than others who give a deeper and more complete interpretation of the text of the Guru. Their views are always seriously considered-- right here in the forum we have several people like that.

But Amarpal has summed up the essence of your issue. Read his answer carefully. Sikhi and Gurmat are attractive to intelliigent people precisely because we do not have to rely on a higher level of religious personalities who lead us around by the nose, tell us what to think, in order to find spiritual fulfillment, and peck away at our wallets and pocketbooks looking for tribute.

This is very important -- intellectual freedom, personal responsibility, equality, reliance only on Waheguru.

tarlochan singh · May 30, 2007

DEAR VINOD JI
WAHE GURU JI KA KHALSA
WAHE GURU JI KI FATHE

Even Hindus ,now do not worship dieties

WHAT HAPPENED VINOD JI ARE YOU SCARED OF THE RADICULE HINDUISM IS FACING ie: SIX ARMED GODDESS,ELEPHANT HEADED GODS
THAT HINDUS ARE FINALY ADMITTING THAT THIS WAS ALL A MYTH,
NOW THAT YOU HAVE COME OUT OF YOUR COCOON MAY WAHE GURU
ENLIGHTEN YOU IN YOUR JOURNEY OF SIKHISM.

AS THE TEHTH MASTER SRI GURU GOBIND SINGH JI SAID
MEIN NA PREETHME GANESH MANAOON
KISAN BISAN KABI NA TEAOON

GURFATHE
TARLOCHAN

Gurmat : Who Is The Deciding Authority

hps

Harjas Kaur Khalsa

lovely_silky

Harjas Kaur Khalsa

lovely_silky

Harjas Kaur Khalsa

Harjas Kaur Khalsa

Harjap Khalsa

luv4u

lovely_silky

luv4u

ISDhillon

roopk

venod

Tejwant Singh

venod

Amarpal

simpy

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

tarlochan singh

Latest Activity