Singh ji
Another Granth Sahib? I guess I am stumped then.
Still not getting it! :rofl!!:We'll leave this one as a mystery then.
A Sikh Without His Flowing Hair And Turban
Still not getting it! :rofl!!:We'll leave this one as a mystery then.
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
Singh ji when u gave me the hint and I replied "Doesn't ring a bell...
"I was being sarcastic. it was Guru Gobind Singh ji who gave gurugaddi to Guru Granth Sahib.That does not answer my question.
Now another question is posed.When a guru gives guru gaddi to a different "thing". Do we go back and listen to the previous guru or do we follow what the new one has to say?
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
He is and I agree. My question: where it is written? If written at all. Followed up by the question i posed earlier.
So if the bold is true (which it is), I am thinking that khalsa was a temporary thing. Since SGGS was meant to last forever. If khalsa was not added to SGGS means it was not there to last forever. It was not given much importance by Guru Gobind Singh ji, BUT he considered it to be important at the time IF he encouraged SIkh to take amrit. Either way since he did not preserve Khalsa discipline in SGGS, it is not important. this is the conclusion i am coming to, at the moment.
And that is what I had to say! :yes:
If this is the conclusion you are coming to then here’s the other half you missed. In the whole Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji it does not say Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru of the Sikhs. By your logic this would mean since Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji did not write it down, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji has no important in today’s time and was not to last forever and was only a temporary thing and Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji did not give much importance to it.
Both were said by Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, if one is temporary then that makes the other temporary, etc.
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
Try harder...
You've completely twisted what I had to say.
You've missed half that story and therefore, your conclusion and logic is flawed.
I stick by what I had earlier.
What you are missing is:
Since Guru Gobind Singh ji was the guru when he gave guru gaddi to SGGS, we listen to the Guru and accept SGGS as our guru. But now SGGS is our guru not Guru Gobind Singh, and since the Khalsa is nowhere to be found in SGGS, this leads to my conclusion...
Singh ji, Bhagat ji
There is a lot of confusion in the discussion. The 5 k's were asked by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji in 1699, when he asked for 5 heads, gave amrit, took amrit -- and that is the date when keeping hair becomes one hallmark of the khalsa panth.
In 1708 one day before his death, he made Adi Granth the Sri Guru Granth Sahib -- the eternal Guru of the Sikhs.
On that same day he said that if the panth sought him after his death they need only look among themselves to find him. This statement (and we can post the exact quote if necessary) raises two questions which have been debated for a long time.
1. Did Guru Gobind Singh intend that the khalsa panth be considered Guru in the same sense as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharj? Or was he talking about something else?
2. Did Guru Gobind Singh imply that only the Khalsa (those who took amrit) were the khalsa panth? This is another question that occupies serious discussion of the question "Who are the Khalsa?"
Both questions have been discussed many times over several threads on SPN since the beginning of this forum. There are some interesting issues to consider. One example would be this question. At Gurdwara we all recite Rag Karega Khalsa! at the end of Ardaas. Some in the Darshan Sahib have taken amrit, and others have not. But everyone recites this. Is this to say that all in the Darshan Sahib are among the panth who are khalsa? Or is the panth only the amritdhari? Are they true panth? Are we chanting in praise for them alone?
The thread is about flowing hair and turbans. The bestowing of 5 K's took place in 1699. So why are we discussing events of 1708 unless there is a need to deal with the question of who are the khalsa as a kind of connected debate. And if that is so, then it should go to another thread. Apologies for speaking at length about this.
Please let me also point out that Sikhs who keep hair do so with hair neatly tied and under their turbans. Sikhs with flowing hair is a jarring thought.
There is a lot of confusion in the discussion. The 5 k's were asked by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji in 1699, when he asked for 5 heads, gave amrit, took amrit -- and that is the date when keeping hair becomes one hallmark of the khalsa panth.
In 1708 one day before his death, he made Adi Granth the Sri Guru Granth Sahib -- the eternal Guru of the Sikhs.
On that same day he said that if the panth sought him after his death they need only look among themselves to find him. This statement (and we can post the exact quote if necessary) raises two questions which have been debated for a long time.
1. Did Guru Gobind Singh intend that the khalsa panth be considered Guru in the same sense as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharj? Or was he talking about something else?
2. Did Guru Gobind Singh imply that only the Khalsa (those who took amrit) were the khalsa panth? This is another question that occupies serious discussion of the question "Who are the Khalsa?"
Both questions have been discussed many times over several threads on SPN since the beginning of this forum. There are some interesting issues to consider. One example would be this question. At Gurdwara we all recite Rag Karega Khalsa! at the end of Ardaas. Some in the Darshan Sahib have taken amrit, and others have not. But everyone recites this. Is this to say that all in the Darshan Sahib are among the panth who are khalsa? Or is the panth only the amritdhari? Are they true panth? Are we chanting in praise for them alone?
The thread is about flowing hair and turbans. The bestowing of 5 K's took place in 1699. So why are we discussing events of 1708 unless there is a need to deal with the question of who are the khalsa as a kind of connected debate. And if that is so, then it should go to another thread. Apologies for speaking at length about this.
Please let me also point out that Sikhs who keep hair do so with hair neatly tied and under their turbans. Sikhs with flowing hair is a jarring thought.
I did not twist anything. Your logic has a flaw in it and i pointed it out. Lets put it in simple sense. Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji said A being Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru of the Sikhs and B being his Hukam of taking amrit. A and B are not in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. So if A is not important then B is not important. If B is not important then A is not important. Both of them go hand in hand. Also Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji gave the Khalsa Panth the power of being called Guru Khalsa Panth. Also when five Khalsa are present they represent Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji. So this further shows the importants of the Khalsa Panth and the importants of taking amrit. Also when he gave this order there was no confusion for who Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji was refering too as the Khalsa Panth. He was refering to the Amritdhari who obeyed his hukam and took amrit. As when Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is not present and a decision has to be made, then this decision is to be made by the Five beloved ones that will represent Guru ji. All of this clearly shows the importants given to the Khalsa Panth.
Your not getting the point Bhagat Singh how can you move on to say Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru, when it does not say this in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Maybe someone else can make this clear for you because i have made this clear as day over and over again. I am gettin repititive here.
Also to speak on the thing you said i missed to answer. I did not answer this because it was disrespectful of you for calling Guru a thing and calling Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji new Guru. As you would know Guru ji is not a thing and there is no such thing as new Guru. Guru is Bani and Bani is Guru. There is no difference from Guru Nanak Dev ji to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. All the teaching and orders that were given by Guru Gobind Singh sahib ji are not in the Sri Guru Granth sahib ji as my above paragraphs show. Also elaborate on when you say Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji is not the Guru and Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is the Guru. When there is no difference between the two, where is the distinguishth you are make?
To conclude your conclusion it has a flaw in it and it doesn't make sense. So revise what you have said and maybe a mod other than Aad ji or another member can come in and make this clear to you. Also if you listen to the Guru that would mean for you to listen to Guru Gobind Singh ji's Hukam.
Singh ji, Bhagat ji
There is a lot of confusion in the discussion. The 5 k's were asked by Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji in 1699, when he asked for 5 heads, gave amrit, took amrit -- and that is the date when keeping hair becomes one hallmark of the khalsa panth.
In 1708 one day before his death, he made Adi Granth the Sri Guru Granth Sahib -- the eternal Guru of the Sikhs.
On that same day he said that if the panth sought him after his death they need only look among themselves to find him. This statement (and we can post the exact quote if necessary) raises two questions which have been debated for a long time.
1. Did Guru Gobind Singh intend that the khalsa panth be considered Guru in the same sense as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharj? Or was he talking about something else?
2. Did Guru Gobind Singh imply that only the Khalsa (those who took amrit) were the khalsa panth? This is another question that occupies serious discussion of the question "Who are the Khalsa?"
Both questions have been discussed many times over several threads on SPN since the beginning of this forum. There are some interesting issues to consider. One example would be this question. At Gurdwara we all recite Rag Karega Khalsa! at the end of Ardaas. Some in the Darshan Sahib have taken amrit, and others have not. But everyone recites this. Is this to say that all in the Darshan Sahib are among the panth who are khalsa? Or is the panth only the amritdhari? Are they true panth? Are we chanting in praise for them alone?
The thread is about flowing hair and turbans. The bestowing of 5 K's took place in 1699. So why are we discussing events of 1708 unless there is a need to deal with the question of who are the khalsa as a kind of connected debate. And if that is so, then it should go to another thread. Apologies for speaking at length about this.
Please let me also point out that Sikhs who keep hair do so with hair neatly tied and under their turbans. Sikhs with flowing hair is a jarring thought.
There is a clear distinction who is Khalsa and who is Sikh only and has not taken amrit. Here is a part of ardas that speaks to only the Khalsa Panth
First, there is supplication for all the Khalsa Panth. May the Lord bestow upon His Khalsa the gift of His remembrance, Vaheguru, Vaheguru,Vaheguru, and may the merit of this remembrance be happiness of all kinds. O God, wherever are the members of Khalsa, extend Your protection and mercy on them; let the Panth be ever victorious, let the sword be ever our protector. May the order of the Khalsa achieve ever-expanding progress and supremacy. Utter O Khalsa, Vaheguru!.
This next part speaks to the Sikhs( the part in this color) and then the rest of the congregation, there is two parts here combined as one
May God grant to the Sikhs, the gift of faith, the gift of uncut hair, the Keshas, the gift of discipline, the gift of spiritual discrimination,the gift of mutual trust, the gift of self confidence and the supreme gift of all the gifts, the communion with Vaheguru, the Name, and the gift of bathing in Amritsar, May the administrative centres, banners, the cantonments of Khalsa ever remain inviolate. May the cause of truth and justice prevail everywhere at all times, utter O Khalsa, Vaheguru!.
This part of ardas makes a clear indication that Sikh are the ones with uncut hair and have not accepted the discipline yet; as this would not apply to the Khalsa Panth they already obey to this Hukam, they follow the discipline, and already have faith in the Lord. Yes when it says utter o Khalsa, Vaheguru this is for the whole congregation as one, but they are on different levels of there spiritual journey; just being Sikh one level and beyond this level being a Khalsa and the last, the communion with Vaheguru.
Guru ji made this variation to show, yes we are all one congregation, but the Sikhs need to progress on there spiritual journey and Guru ji reminds them of this wherever ardas is done.
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
EDIT: read post below, first! I forgot to submit it.
It wasn't in simple enough sense for you, before? Ok let us proceed then.
So what is the difference between A and B?
A = the Guru of Sikhs is going to change to SGGS
B = hukam of the previous guru
Question raised: Do we follow upcoming Guru or go back to the previous one?
B has not been mentioned in upcoming Guru, SGGS!
Level of importance has declined.
Valid point.
But A does not HAVE to be in SGGS. Do you understand that? It is the nature of A. Don't read further if you do not understand what I am talking about here!!
When A was put out, B became less important because it was not found in SGGS. You are giving A and B equal values but when A happens B becomes of less value/importance!
WRONG! read above.
Nope
Read my reply to Aad ji post just below.
NO it is not that simple. Is khalsa someone who is pure of heart or an amritdhari?
Khalsa could definitely be both, but let's look at a case where Khalsa isnt both.
Person x has not taken amrit but is what GGS would consider Khalsa.
Person y has taken amrit but is GGS would not consider Khalsa.
I am getting your point, don't worry.
Guru Gobind SIngh ji did not say he was guru. Am I correct? Yet we "moved on" to him. When SGGS was made guru it was time to "move on" to SGGS.
That is because you have not even considered the fact that maybe, just maybe SGGS is what we have to follow, and Khalsa was not given as much importance by GGS.
I am NOT saying agree with me!!
By thing I meant either person or object, no one is getting disrespected here, calm down. SGGS would be considered the new Guru since it was granted guruship by the old/previous one. I thought that would be obvious.
What's a thing?? Please clarify what you mean by thing. Since you bringing it up again.
When we say they are the same, we don't mean physically the same. WE mean their teaching are the same.
Ya so since he did not preserve the orders, we simply ignore them. Of course, we study them and they are of importance but were only of importance when they were given out and in the context they were given out.
Guru Gobind Singh ji was a man, SGGS is a book. There is a HUGE difference. GGS fought many wars, SGGS did not! Another HUGE difference. GGS could move on his own!!
If you mean the teachings then of course!! Another similarity:
GGS was revolutionary, SGGS is GOING to be revolutionary!!! :happy:
To conclude you didn't consider the part you missed in the conclusion.... again, so no.
Anyone else want to make is clear for me? Please don't hesitate. I am not saying I am right and you are wrong, just trying to bring up confusing parts of our history.
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
Yes you got that correct Aad Ji, I would not differ from that in anyway.
Here is the crucial point, in my opinion, now do we start to follows SGGS or still follow Guru Gobind Singh?
How about something else in the case of 1?
He wanted us to be like him. He wanted us to raise a voice against in justice and oppression. In a sense that each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we take on leadership and guide people in the right direction! each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we raise a voice against injustice!! each one of us is Guru Gobind Singh ji when we start projects like Sarbloh Warriors, Sundri etc!!
But I am probably wrong! :shutup:
Beautiful questions Aad ji!
Or are we saying the "pure ones" will rise ? the ones with Naam in their heart. Accoridng to guru Nanak dev ji, if you have God in your heart then you are pure.
pure ones = khalsa, pure = khalis
Haha, you just brought up an amzing point here!The thread is about flowing hair and turbans. The bestowing of 5 K's took place in 1699. So why are we discussing events of 1708 unless there is a need to deal with the question of who are the khalsa as a kind of connected debate. And if that is so, then it should go to another thread. Apologies for speaking at length about this.
Please let me also point out that Sikhs who keep hair do so with hair neatly tied and under their turbans. Sikhs with flowing hair is a jarring thought.
How CAN you have flowing hair AND a turban that keeps them from flowing!EDIT: read post below, first! I forgot to submit it.
It wasn't in simple enough sense for you, before? Ok let us proceed then.
So what is the difference between A and B?
A = the Guru of Sikhs is going to change to SGGS
B = hukam of the previous guru
Question raised: Do we follow upcoming Guru or go back to the previous one?
B has not been mentioned in upcoming Guru, SGGS!
Level of importance has declined.
Valid point.
But A does not HAVE to be in SGGS. Do you understand that? It is the nature of A. Don't read further if you do not understand what I am talking about here!!
When A was put out, B became less important because it was not found in SGGS. You are giving A and B equal values but when A happens B becomes of less value/importance!
WRONG! read above.
Nope
Read my reply to Aad ji post just below.
NO it is not that simple. Is khalsa someone who is pure of heart or an amritdhari?
Khalsa could definitely be both, but let's look at a case where Khalsa isnt both.
Person x has not taken amrit but is what GGS would consider Khalsa.
Person y has taken amrit but is GGS would not consider Khalsa.
I am getting your point, don't worry.
Guru Gobind SIngh ji did not say he was guru. Am I correct? Yet we "moved on" to him. When SGGS was made guru it was time to "move on" to SGGS.
That is because you have not even considered the fact that maybe, just maybe SGGS is what we have to follow, and Khalsa was not given as much importance by GGS.
I am NOT saying agree with me!!
By thing I meant either person or object, no one is getting disrespected here, calm down. SGGS would be considered the new Guru since it was granted guruship by the old/previous one. I thought that would be obvious.
What's a thing?? Please clarify what you mean by thing. Since you bringing it up again.
When we say they are the same, we don't mean physically the same. WE mean their teaching are the same.
Ya so since he did not preserve the orders, we simply ignore them. Of course, we study them and they are of importance but were only of importance when they were given out and in the context they were given out.
Guru Gobind Singh ji was a man, SGGS is a book. There is a HUGE difference. GGS fought many wars, SGGS did not! Another HUGE difference. GGS could move on his own!!
If you mean the teachings then of course!! Another similarity:
GGS was revolutionary, SGGS is GOING to be revolutionary!!! :happy:
To conclude you didn't consider the part you missed in the conclusion.... again, so no.
Anyone else want to make is clear for me? Please don't hesitate. I am not saying I am right and you are wrong, just trying to bring up confusing parts of our history.
Woooooooooowwwwwwwwww, I don't even know where to begininng here. I'm let someone else deal with your illogical posts.
BhagatSingh
SPNer
- Apr 24, 2006
- 2,921
- 1,656
:down: Don't call someone's post illogical just because you cannot see any logic in it. Read SGGS and bring humility in your heart.
Archived_Member5
(previously jeetijohal, account deactivated at her
Whilst young Sikhs in an attempt to integrate into what is a diverse and multi cultural populations have shed their traditional armour of what is a distinctive Godly appearance, as they age and grow older they invariably return to the distinctive appearance of Sardar that Punjabis are so proud of and are lent an austere God like demeanour with the donning. Such outwards mantles are not gotten easily, or are for the lacking in courage and independence of thought. Sheep like mentality, motivates the mob mostly towards conforming to any given standard mostly dictated by the highly dubious and questionable ethics of a volific media.
Shall we in defence our the Sikh faith of Warlords and Saintly men say it is only the highly honourable and courageous Lionhearts able to go against market trends and social fads and have the confidence to don this prestigious look. Maybe all that will remain is a league of the most beautiful devoutest, wise Sikh Sardars in full regalia carrying the faith and religion for lesser followers and adherents of Sikhism.
Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh ....
Shall we in defence our the Sikh faith of Warlords and Saintly men say it is only the highly honourable and courageous Lionhearts able to go against market trends and social fads and have the confidence to don this prestigious look. Maybe all that will remain is a league of the most beautiful devoutest, wise Sikh Sardars in full regalia carrying the faith and religion for lesser followers and adherents of Sikhism.
Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh ....
Archived_Member5
(previously jeetijohal, account deactivated at her
PK70, The Punjab is the Motherland of all Sikhs regardless of where in the world they dwell and abide. It is not a matter of contention but of honouring the homeland.
hmm ok this in reply to an earlier post iu can;t find lol:
maybe it is in the tat khalsa neo-seeq bible?
if there is something in Sri Dasam Granth or Sri Sarbloh Granth, or even rehitnameh, then the gurdwaray are surely not even using these banis and texts to justify using lines of them.
maybe it is in the tat khalsa neo-seeq bible?
if there is something in Sri Dasam Granth or Sri Sarbloh Granth, or even rehitnameh, then the gurdwaray are surely not even using these banis and texts to justify using lines of them.
ok, and for khalsa all of Adi Guru Granth, dasam granth and sarbloh granth is guru, they r also seen as guru when amrit is taken
Lion_PrinceJatinder ji,
Now you have posted something that truly reminds me of my ignorance. Please explain how all three granths are guru when amrit is taken. I am aware that prayers from Dasam Granth are recited along with the Bani in the Adi Granth during amrit ceremony. Would appreciate hearing from you as to how all three are guru.
Thanks
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:
