harmanpreet singh
SPNer
- Nov 14, 2008
- 283
- 419
these can be discussed
Mukti to me means " Oneness" of our Soul(AAtma ) with Supereme Soul (Parmatma) and its very much present in Sikhi .
Debate: Spiritual Vs Non Spiritual Interpretation Of Gurbani
- Thread starter Harkiran Kaur
- Start date
- Replies 227
- Reads 39K
- Status
these can be discussed
Mukti to me means " Oneness" of our Soul(AAtma ) with Supereme Soul (Parmatma) and its very much present in Sikhi .
aristotle
SPNer
Sikhi believes in 'Jeewan-Mukat', Hindu concept of Mukti is a lot different. Its not just Hindu rhetoric.
harmanpreet singh
SPNer
- Nov 14, 2008
- 283
- 419
Are you sure "Jeewan-Mukat" is exclusive Sikh and not a Dharmic Concept that predates Sikhi ?
aristotle
SPNer
I am sure it was never used before in a way it is presented in Gurbani. In other philosophies, it equals renunciation and a hermit-like life. I would like to go into the details, but I don't think it will do justice to the topic of this thread.
aristotle
SPNer
One more thing before I take leave from this discussion. I urge all forum members to maintain decorum and refrain on name-calling other forum members. Simply because someone does not think like you do does not make him/her an atheist. Religious arrogance is not good.
harmanpreet singh
SPNer
- Nov 14, 2008
- 283
- 419
dear "Jeewan Mukta" is core / fundamental Dharmic concept that is present there from Pre Historic Times . and it has nothing to do with hermite -like life .
Jivanmukta (derived from the word, Jivanmukti, a combination of Sanskrit words jiva and mukti) is someone who, in the Advaita philosophy of Hinduism, has gained dradh nishthaa, firmly assimilated knowledge of the Self- and is liberated while living in a human body, free from rebirth
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jivanmukta
aristotle
SPNer
Advaita Hinduism is a huge votary of renunciation. If your primary source of knowledge about Hinduism is Wikipedia, I seriously would not want to argue then. Thanks.
harmanpreet singh
SPNer
- Nov 14, 2008
- 283
- 419
Sir Authenticity of your source of knowledge was evident when you said
" Sikhi believes in 'Jeewan-Mukat', Hindu concept of Mukti is a lot different. Its not just Hindu rhetoric",
you just wanna dissociate good from others and critisize them and that s not the way our Guru Sahib shown us .Thanks
Sikhi is in noway atheistic.
Also none here need to tell me that I'm not seeing jewels in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, for me a warning is a jewel itself, it tells me what I'm doing wrong it kinda motivates me on my journey.
Like there is a hole in the ground, they put a warning sign next to it.
So the warning is about something negative however if you follow it will be positive for you.
Also we were talking about why Guru's didn't care to sacrifice themselfs for others.
I do believe it is cause the Guru's had obtained everything in this world. The same did not apply for other people. What Guru's want from us is to be in the same state they were in.
Bhagat Farid Ji even said "Those who recognize the True Lord - I kiss their feet".
Also none here need to tell me that I'm not seeing jewels in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, for me a warning is a jewel itself, it tells me what I'm doing wrong it kinda motivates me on my journey.
Like there is a hole in the ground, they put a warning sign next to it.
So the warning is about something negative however if you follow it will be positive for you.
Also we were talking about why Guru's didn't care to sacrifice themselfs for others.
I do believe it is cause the Guru's had obtained everything in this world. The same did not apply for other people. What Guru's want from us is to be in the same state they were in.
Bhagat Farid Ji even said "Those who recognize the True Lord - I kiss their feet".
aristotle
SPNer
Perhaps you don't know what criticism means. Anyways, I have better things to do than justify my knowledge or Sikhi before a person who would call me an Atheist if I don't agree with him.
You can kindly show me in another thread if you wish, where they directly rejected theology.
Remember that only the brahmins were funded by kings and leaders of the land to study and to teach/preach. And they surely abused these positions by charging monies, making up hocus pocus and diversion of true messages at their own leisure.
This resulted in massive blind following practices, false promises, completely blind rituals, misleading and self gaining schemes for brahmins and pandits able to take liberties.
Is Guna not attributes ?
3 gunas mentioned clearly in many places and below is just 3 examples
ang 1123
ਰਜ ਗੁਣ ਤਮ ਗੁਣ ਸਤ ਗੁਣ ਕਹੀਐ ਇਹ ਤੇਰੀ ਸਭ ਮਾਇਆ ॥
Raj guṇ ṯam guṇ saṯ guṇ kahī▫ai ih ṯerī sabẖ mā▫i▫ā. Raajas, the quality of energy and activity; Taamas, the quality of darkness and inertia; and Satvas, the quality of purity and light, are all called the creations of Maya, Your illusion.
ਚਉਥੇ ਪਦ ਕਉ ਜੋ ਨਰੁ ਚੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਤਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਹੀ ਪਰਮ ਪਦੁ ਪਾਇਆ ॥੨॥
Cẖa▫uthe paḏ ka▫o jo nar cẖīnĥai ṯinĥ hī param paḏ pā▫i▫ā. ||2||
That man who realizes the fourth state - he alone obtains the supreme state. ||2||
ang 1038
ਰਜ ਤਮ ਸਤ ਕਲ ਤੇਰੀ ਛਾਇਆ ॥
Raj ṯam saṯ kal ṯerī cẖẖā▫i▫ā.
Your Power is diffused through the three gunas: raajas, taamas and satva.
ang840
ਚਉਦਸਿ ਚਉਥੇ ਥਾਵਹਿ ਲਹਿ ਪਾਵੈ ॥
Cẖa▫uḏas cẖa▫uthe thāvėh lėh pāvai.
The Fourteenth Day: One who enters into the fourth state,
ਰਾਜਸ ਤਾਮਸ ਸਤ ਕਾਲ ਸਮਾਵੈ ॥
Rājas ṯāmas saṯ kāl samāvai.
overcomes time, and the three qualities of raajas, taamas and satva.
I have no idea what illustration you are referring to.
Again, look..... Gurbani makes references to Janak, Prahlaad, Dhroo, Bidar, Naraad...etc and many many other characters.
In these cases we don't need to read the vedas but the people of that day had basic understanding to contexts of the shabads quoted with such references. Unfortunately, we don't have that same awareness.
Therefore, just a basic ''look thru their spectacles'' is required to understand the context of the shabads in question isn't it ??
For example, Dhroo is clearly mentioned in a number of places in Gurbani as the 5 yr old that went beyond 3 gunas and met the Lord.
ਧ੍ਰੂ ਕਉ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਹਰਿ ਨਿਸੰਗ ॥੧॥
Ḏẖarū ka▫o mili▫ā har nisang. ||1||
The Lord definitely met Dhroo. ||1||
Therefore, I cannot understand why you seem to imply that to look thru vedic specs to understand context of shabad, one has to be in hindu vicinity or in a mandir ???........This is nonsense!
When one becomes more spiritual, you begin to see and acknowledge the layers under the surface and see ''Sabh Gobind hai, Gobind binh na koi''
........... Yes again, that is a statement I am making and I stand strongly by it.
If you understand all faiths as different people looking at whole mankind thru their own specs, then their is no difference between you seeing the rest of the prejudice in the world as a norm thru your own tints.
If you segregate the way a Hindu see's thru his specs compared to your specs, when you don't even know what he sees, then you will also see caste segregation in Jatt attitude to life Vs Chamar attitude, lohar vs kumar..etc..
.....What in Christ's name is gurmat about that ?
aristotle
SPNer
Lucky Ji,
You believe that simply because a term appears in the Gurbani, it means Guru Sahib endorsed it. Gurbani is beautiful poetry, if you translate poetry into black and blue, it is not going to lead you to the spirit of that poetry. I hope you understand that.
Consider this Shabad by Baba Farid Ji,
Baba Farid Ji clearly refers to the MIslamic messenger of death Malikul-Maut. But the meaning implied here is not the messenger of death, but the coming of death over a person. By your theory, Malikil-Maut should also exist, robbing people of their lives as decreed by Allah.
That was basically my point. Gurus preached in the language of the people, using metaphors and examples which the people of their time could understand. Because Dhruv, Prahlad, Janak and other characters of Hindu mythology are referred to in the Gurbani does not necessarily mean they existed, it just means Guru Sahib used their examples to
drive home their own message. The same is the case with the then widely used terms like Mukti, Maya, Brahm etc. The most important thing is the big picture, not the linguists or mythology.
By looking through 'Vedic specs' I mean distorting the meaning of Shabads such as these to suit one's own needs. This Shabad can very well be used by an arguer to prove that Dhruv existed in flesh and blood sometime in history, and that Hindu God Vishnu appeared before him and granted him Dhruvapada. There is no justification against such an argument, but you see, it just misses the big picture.
I am not looking to segregate anyone, perhaps you just assumed that, and you should not. A Hindu is perfectly justified in believing in the Hindu mythology, as is a Christian if he believes in his Bible. But how is looking for the central meaning of a Shabad, and stating that we should give importance to the big picture rather than the metaphors, become an attack on Hinduism? I strongly stand by my point that Gurbani was not intended for the elite, it was written in metaphors the commonfolk could understand; if the Gurus had preached somewhere in the Mid-East they would probably have predominantly used Abrahamic examples instead of Vedic terms, because, you see, it is not the terms or words that are important, it is the central meaning that is. I don't understand why this thing is too hard to accept for some people.
You believe that simply because a term appears in the Gurbani, it means Guru Sahib endorsed it. Gurbani is beautiful poetry, if you translate poetry into black and blue, it is not going to lead you to the spirit of that poetry. I hope you understand that.
Consider this Shabad by Baba Farid Ji,
Baba Farid Ji clearly refers to the MIslamic messenger of death Malikul-Maut. But the meaning implied here is not the messenger of death, but the coming of death over a person. By your theory, Malikil-Maut should also exist, robbing people of their lives as decreed by Allah.
That was basically my point. Gurus preached in the language of the people, using metaphors and examples which the people of their time could understand. Because Dhruv, Prahlad, Janak and other characters of Hindu mythology are referred to in the Gurbani does not necessarily mean they existed, it just means Guru Sahib used their examples to
drive home their own message. The same is the case with the then widely used terms like Mukti, Maya, Brahm etc. The most important thing is the big picture, not the linguists or mythology.
By looking through 'Vedic specs' I mean distorting the meaning of Shabads such as these to suit one's own needs. This Shabad can very well be used by an arguer to prove that Dhruv existed in flesh and blood sometime in history, and that Hindu God Vishnu appeared before him and granted him Dhruvapada. There is no justification against such an argument, but you see, it just misses the big picture.
I am not looking to segregate anyone, perhaps you just assumed that, and you should not. A Hindu is perfectly justified in believing in the Hindu mythology, as is a Christian if he believes in his Bible. But how is looking for the central meaning of a Shabad, and stating that we should give importance to the big picture rather than the metaphors, become an attack on Hinduism? I strongly stand by my point that Gurbani was not intended for the elite, it was written in metaphors the commonfolk could understand; if the Gurus had preached somewhere in the Mid-East they would probably have predominantly used Abrahamic examples instead of Vedic terms, because, you see, it is not the terms or words that are important, it is the central meaning that is. I don't understand why this thing is too hard to accept for some people.
Let me sum it up with quote from gurbani once for all. Gurbani jivan mukta is ਜੀਵਤ ਮਰਹੁ ਮਰਹੁ ਫੁਨਿ ਜੀਵਹੁ ਪੁਨਰਪਿ ਜਨਮੁ ਨ ਹੋਈ ॥ over here it is referring to 'no rebirth of evil deeds, destructive thoughts' whereas as I can see in advaita philosophy it is rebirth of physical body. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.1103. As gurbani tells, ' ਭਏ ਅਨੰਦ ਮਿਲਿ ਸਾਧੂ ਸੰਗਿ ਅਬ ਮੇਰਾ ਮਨੁ ਕਤ ਹੀ ਨ ਜਾਇ ॥੧॥ p.302 once I am in bliss now my mind does not think of superfluous deeds.
- Dec 21, 2010
- 3,387
- 5,690
kggr01 ji thanks for your post and being specific in describing your understanding. I am not a judge but if I were to think aloud I believe vast number of Sikhs will agree with what you have stated as Sikhi. Again, I am not a judge and I am quite sure that most participate here to extend their understanding beyond simply what others tell or do. I have three questions about your points as the rest are generally congruent with my own understanding too.
Sat Sri Akal.<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--> Sikhi does believe in reincarnation.
Sikhi believes in Ek Onkaar.
- What will happen to me when I die? Does my soul immediately lock stock and barrel enter another life form body?
Sikhi does warn us everytime to find the lord before it's to late.
Sikhi believes this world is a dream. (Doesn't mean that we shouldn't do anything worldy related).
- It does warn us against complacency and wastage of time for sure. For me find the lord/creator is knowing as much as we possibly can as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji also tells that we are not capable of knowing all. What is your level or target to declare that you found the lord because I think I already have?
Sikhi tells use you can Merge with the lord on this planet and here after. (For me Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is proof for this.)
Sikhi tells us to look gold and iron as alike.
- We are already part of creator and creation the only part Sikhi for me teaches us is to understand this and in practical terms. For me merging is understanding what is your definition of merging?
Sikhi tells us that this human form is very hard to obtain.
Sikhi tells us to immerse our mind in lord, like the fish in the water.
Sikhi does tell us that whatever you plant, you shall harvest.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w
- Jul 20, 2012
- 1,393
- 1,921
I did not call anyone an athiest. Rather I said that a non-spiritual interpretation of Sikhi is athiestic in belief. If you look at the definition of an athiest they acknowledge that they can never know whether there is a [God] or not, or if there is anything past physical existence or not, which equates to most as there being no [God] and being no existence beyond the physical (it can't be proven so therefore it must not exist OR it's worthless to even think about it) There ARE those of you who fall into that category... only focusing on the physical life and that's it. All interpretation of Gurbani pertains to some 'state of mind' or 'animalistic behaviour' or 'death of evil deeds' etc and not an interpretation in the sense of an actual [Conscious Creator] (notice in previous posts I am not describing the Christian concept of God etc. or existence outside of the physical or transmigration (notice my take is not the same as the traditional body hopping version of reincarnation but more spiritual progress of the ONE universal consciousness).
When I read Gurbani I fail to see how someone would go to such lengths to confuse people into believing outward metaphors that speak of [spirituality] only to have hidden some meaning that is so far removed from the words they have written that only a very few even come up with that meaning... (case in point, I still fail to see how japji gets some of the ideas he does out of the shabads he posted... as there is nothing made obvious at all to the meaning he is deducing).
To me, in Gurbani I see a wonderous message that we are not merely this physical body. That we exist on a much higher level... and in fact the Creator and Us are one in the same - just that we are an inward reflection thereof, only a small part while the Creator is the whole. To me, I see a wonderous message that we can surpass this lowly physical state and realize who we truly are. I don't see inward realization of [God] as somehow cheating (as was suggested by Harry Ji). Attaining that state is no easy feat. But the good message is we ALL have the potential to! Guru Nanak Dev Ji told us this... when he stated he is just a man... he was saying we can ALL attain this state of realization.
I have also acknowledged that maybe BOTH messages can be written in the same words... but those who have interpreted it as physical meaning, have not ackniowledged that there is any meaning in there that pertains to anything more than simply telling you how to have a swell physical life.
To me what I see that some of you have reduced that message to, is simply a manual on how to get along with your neighbours, live out this puny physical life in 'harmony' with the earth and nature... and die and cease to exist with no message of hope that there is anything more. The Creator has been reduced to just a metaphor for the physical universe and science, and any message of existence beyond the physical has been reduced to changing states of mind only.
I simply to refuse to believe that! And if that is the 'true' meaning of Sikhi... I mean japji and gyani ji have both stated their interpretations as fact and harry ji pretty much stated that there is no need for anything more... if this is all true, then I should not take Amrit. It wouldn't be right for me take Amrit - because I would aldready break the very first chapter and first paragraph where it states definition of a Sikh and v. states that they do not owe allegiance to any other religion. Since I DO believe in more than the physical (and more than belive, I know with my full being that there is) and I see the message clearly written in Gurbani, then I must not be Sikh in my beliefs and hence I would not fit the definition as laid out in the SRM. That is why I have decided to not take Amrit.
My beliefs and what I know deep inside have not changed one iota... it's just that I always thought that my beliefs and knowledge aligned with Sikhi and if what you write is true, then they do not... and hence I am not a Sikh. I am something else...
Now what to do about the fact that I started tying dastaar... etc. And how to explain to to my sangat here who all believe the same in line with me... maybe we should all call ourselves something else then as we are not the 'discerning Sikhs' that some of you have termed are the gems..
When I read Gurbani I fail to see how someone would go to such lengths to confuse people into believing outward metaphors that speak of [spirituality] only to have hidden some meaning that is so far removed from the words they have written that only a very few even come up with that meaning... (case in point, I still fail to see how japji gets some of the ideas he does out of the shabads he posted... as there is nothing made obvious at all to the meaning he is deducing).
To me, in Gurbani I see a wonderous message that we are not merely this physical body. That we exist on a much higher level... and in fact the Creator and Us are one in the same - just that we are an inward reflection thereof, only a small part while the Creator is the whole. To me, I see a wonderous message that we can surpass this lowly physical state and realize who we truly are. I don't see inward realization of [God] as somehow cheating (as was suggested by Harry Ji). Attaining that state is no easy feat. But the good message is we ALL have the potential to! Guru Nanak Dev Ji told us this... when he stated he is just a man... he was saying we can ALL attain this state of realization.
I have also acknowledged that maybe BOTH messages can be written in the same words... but those who have interpreted it as physical meaning, have not ackniowledged that there is any meaning in there that pertains to anything more than simply telling you how to have a swell physical life.
To me what I see that some of you have reduced that message to, is simply a manual on how to get along with your neighbours, live out this puny physical life in 'harmony' with the earth and nature... and die and cease to exist with no message of hope that there is anything more. The Creator has been reduced to just a metaphor for the physical universe and science, and any message of existence beyond the physical has been reduced to changing states of mind only.
I simply to refuse to believe that! And if that is the 'true' meaning of Sikhi... I mean japji and gyani ji have both stated their interpretations as fact and harry ji pretty much stated that there is no need for anything more... if this is all true, then I should not take Amrit. It wouldn't be right for me take Amrit - because I would aldready break the very first chapter and first paragraph where it states definition of a Sikh and v. states that they do not owe allegiance to any other religion. Since I DO believe in more than the physical (and more than belive, I know with my full being that there is) and I see the message clearly written in Gurbani, then I must not be Sikh in my beliefs and hence I would not fit the definition as laid out in the SRM. That is why I have decided to not take Amrit.
My beliefs and what I know deep inside have not changed one iota... it's just that I always thought that my beliefs and knowledge aligned with Sikhi and if what you write is true, then they do not... and hence I am not a Sikh. I am something else...
Now what to do about the fact that I started tying dastaar... etc. And how to explain to to my sangat here who all believe the same in line with me... maybe we should all call ourselves something else then as we are not the 'discerning Sikhs' that some of you have termed are the gems..
You can take a horse to the poolside..thats all...and its a FACT...but it cant be forced to drink..and Thats a Fact too...and I can write anything.( My opinion)...:green-pargi:.and someone/anyone cna coem along and call it "fact" (even when I havent )..thats a fact too...:green-pargi:fcats are facts..folks..make the Horsie DRINK !!! even if it dies from it..
- Jul 20, 2012
- 1,393
- 1,921
Ambarsari Ji... I put my answeres to your questions in red... as I understand it, and Gurbani to me supports it completely.
Originally Posted by kggr001
Sikhi does believe in reincarnation.
Sikhi does warn us everytime to find the lord before it's to late.
Sikhi believes this world is a dream. (Doesn't mean that we shouldn't do anything worldy related).
Sikhi tells use you can Merge with the lord on this planet and here after. (For me Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is proof for this.)
Originally Posted by kggr001
Sikhi does believe in reincarnation.
- What will happen to me when I die? Does my soul immediately lock stock and barrel enter another life form body?
IRRELEVANT - There is only ONE - the Creator. We are merely different costumes, different characters played by the ONE. There is only ONE all pervading Universal Consciousness, out of which everything in known physical existence emenates. (this agrees with quantum physics) So even though that ONE Consciousness continues on as other characters, and some fragments of memory from past characters played may still remain and resurface, there is in effect only ONE actor and there was only ever ONE actor. 'Ambarsaria' or 'Akasha' is EGO - they are just characters being played. The YOU that is experiencing and is conscious is NOT Ambarsaria. Remember who you are.
Sikhi does warn us everytime to find the lord before it's to late.
- It does warn us against complacency and wastage of time for sure. For me find the lord/creator is knowing as much as we possibly can as Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji also tells that we are not capable of knowing all. What is your level or target to declare that you found the lord because I think I already have?
Finding is the realization that this world is as a dream and you are not merely your physical shell. Realize that 'HE IS ME' - YOU and the ONE Universal Consciousness are ONE in the same. Therefore, finding is the realization of this fact and is why EGO needs to be shed. We need to stop thinking as 'Ambarsaria' or 'Akasha' and find that bit of us inside that is the divine light... stop thinking as the character and wake up as the actor. Since this takes inward reflection and realization that ALL IS ONE, it takes time. It also takes the level of consciousness as a human to contemplate. Therefore we are told that this life is precious and is our chance to realize this. And the time we have to do so is limited, or this chance as this character has been wasted.
Sikhi believes this world is a dream. (Doesn't mean that we shouldn't do anything worldy related).
Sikhi tells use you can Merge with the lord on this planet and here after. (For me Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is proof for this.)
- We are already part of creator and creation the only part Sikhi for me teaches us is to understand this and in practical terms. For me merging is understanding what is your definition of merging?
IRRELLEVANT - there is only ONE. There is no merging... only the realization that we have always been merged. Separation is an illusion. There is only ONE Universal Consciousness. Therefore, merging simply means regaining awareness of that fact... awakening to the fact that 'HE IS ME'.
- Dec 21, 2010
- 3,387
- 5,690
Akasha ji thanks for your post.
Sat Sri Akal.
- Jan 31, 2011
- 5,769
- 8,194
- 55
since when did I transform from class clown/heretic/fat bald idiot/comic relief to some sort of authority figure?
Akashaji, I have my opinions, you have yours, we debate them, I may not agree with you, you may not agree with me, I concede I can be sarcastic and possibly even seem to be aggressive, its all comic relief, its just gallows humour, I am sorry if you found it offensive, the thought that it may influence your amrit is terrible,
I do not pray, I have not been to a Gurdwara in years, all I know is what I feel, just like you, I am no expert, What I feel is for madmen only.
just to clarify
Akashji Jee
would be obliged if you can cite where my interpretation sounds out of context. I will try to re-write and explain.
I very eagerly am looking for S.Tejwant Singh jee. Hope you are not upset. please come back.
- Status
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:
