- May 9, 2006
- 3,261
- 5,193
If hukam is natural law, then we have no choice but to follow it. I can't disobey gravity or I die. Wouldn't it make the science of physics the ultimate religion?
Nevertheless, I agree hukam is natural law, but isn't it also more than that? More subtle, involving human interactions? For instance, Guru Arjun Ji was accepting the bhanna (pleasure/will) of god by allowing the events to unfold as they did, but the events are not natural law, they are man made interferences.
Also, how can anyone have a choice if their action becomes hukam for someone else? Is the perpetrator not acting as an agent of hukam, like a puppet?
I asked my Christian friend what she thought about fate/destiny. Her answer was that she doesn't use those terms, she uses 'God's plan'. God has a plan for her in life, but it is up to her whether she follows it or not. If she follows it, she fulfills her destiny. But she has a choice not to follow it and reap the consequenses.
I said, what if it's your destiny NOT to follow the plan? And with that, the discussion died.
It appears the whole 'pre-determined' translation arises from trying to convey the sense that 'if you do X, they Y will happen'. For instance, taking the tuk Embersji cited:
If the faithless slanderer gets around being faithless and nasty, then he's setting himself up for failure. If you set the pot of water on the heat, it is the FATE of the water to boil. If you refuse to do good deeds, it is your FATE right from the beginning of your endeavour, to miss out on Realisation. It is not pre-ordained by God since the dawn of time that there would exist Sam the Slanderer and he would slander and be nasty and die in loneliness. It is the natural course of events from the beginning of Sam slandering that he dies in loneliness.
I think the translations are the problem. gingerteakaur
Nevertheless, I agree hukam is natural law, but isn't it also more than that? More subtle, involving human interactions? For instance, Guru Arjun Ji was accepting the bhanna (pleasure/will) of god by allowing the events to unfold as they did, but the events are not natural law, they are man made interferences.
Also, how can anyone have a choice if their action becomes hukam for someone else? Is the perpetrator not acting as an agent of hukam, like a puppet?
I asked my Christian friend what she thought about fate/destiny. Her answer was that she doesn't use those terms, she uses 'God's plan'. God has a plan for her in life, but it is up to her whether she follows it or not. If she follows it, she fulfills her destiny. But she has a choice not to follow it and reap the consequenses.
I said, what if it's your destiny NOT to follow the plan? And with that, the discussion died.
It appears the whole 'pre-determined' translation arises from trying to convey the sense that 'if you do X, they Y will happen'. For instance, taking the tuk Embersji cited:
Page 280, Line 13
ਕਿਰਤੁ ਨਿੰਦਕ ਕਾ ਧੁਰਿ ਹੀ ਪਇਆ ॥
किरतु निंदक का धुरि ही पइआ ॥
Kiraṯ ninḏak kā ḏẖur hī pa▫i▫ā.
The fate of the slanderer is pre-ordained from the very beginning of time.
Guru Arjan Dev
I think, from my very small knowledge of Gurbani, that it shouldn't say 'from the beginning of time' because that is confusing.ਕਿਰਤੁ ਨਿੰਦਕ ਕਾ ਧੁਰਿ ਹੀ ਪਇਆ ॥
किरतु निंदक का धुरि ही पइआ ॥
Kiraṯ ninḏak kā ḏẖur hī pa▫i▫ā.
The fate of the slanderer is pre-ordained from the very beginning of time.
Guru Arjan Dev
If the faithless slanderer gets around being faithless and nasty, then he's setting himself up for failure. If you set the pot of water on the heat, it is the FATE of the water to boil. If you refuse to do good deeds, it is your FATE right from the beginning of your endeavour, to miss out on Realisation. It is not pre-ordained by God since the dawn of time that there would exist Sam the Slanderer and he would slander and be nasty and die in loneliness. It is the natural course of events from the beginning of Sam slandering that he dies in loneliness.
I think the translations are the problem. gingerteakaur
Last edited: