Shaktism

[spnadmin]

roab1 ji

Thanks. I will check the Suraj Partap. From a logical point of view your answer makes sense. We just need to find the background on this.

When we do it will help me put some things into perspective also. As there is no reason to equate Guru Gobind Singh with Shakti -- he could balance the forces of good and evil on his own without help from anyother than the Satguru that dwelt within him.

I did not mention previously. Your idea of simply going through "Dasam Granth" as if with the eyes of a Vedantic scholar is an excellent strategy. It should help clarify many many themes and images getting to the bottom of the chapters' messages. Using a set of fresh eyes we might be able to sharpen our focus. :welcome:

It will make it easier in the end to discard the notion that Dasam Pita was trying to teach by using Vedic metaphors. There no evidence that he wrote any of it -- as evidence exists for Aad Granth. There is therefore no way to validate the granth as his bani. By taking your approach it can actually lead to a clear sense of the agenda for binding those books together to begin with as if they were "Sikh scriptures."

roab1 ji

If you are not crying out in pain, let me do it for you. Don't give up that easily. The tourism industry in Amritsar is making a bundle guiding tours to the birthplace of Luv and Kush -- practically on top of Harmandir Sahib. Some people fall for it. Others do not. We do have choices. Guru created us to be free.

 

[roab1]

Another pointer towards Sikhs being Shakti Pujaks.


Note: 1. Generally Bhagauti is recognised and perceived in its material form. The ‘sword’ is construed as the embodiment of Bhagauti. But ‘Bhagauti’ has much deeper significance; it is Shakti, the Faculty and Integrity. It represents the celestial authority and eternal power. It is the latent prowess and capability.

^ taken from P Bindra translation of charitropakhyan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakti

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandi_di_Var

 

[spnadmin]

roab1 ji

Both links take me to Wikipedia where there is a lot to chew on and none of it is consistent with Gurmat. It does not point to Pritpal Singh Bindra or his writing. Would you tell me where Pritpal Singh Bindra himself equates Shakti with a celestial authority? Or is this equation strictly limited to his/someone's interpretation of the Charittars as an example of Shakti puja (to coin a phrase)? Would you explain?

You are saying:

"Note: 1. Generally Bhagauti is recognised and perceived in its material form. The ‘sword’ is construed as the embodiment of Bhagauti. But ‘Bhagauti’ has much deeper significance; it is Shakti, the Faculty and Integrity. It represents the celestial authority and eternal power. It is the latent prowess and capability."

This would be a correct understanding of Shakti in the Vedic metaphysical system. How would it be connected by P Singh Bindra to Gurmat?

 

[spnadmin]

P/S

I think P Singh Bindra is explaining the concept of Shakti in writing infused with some Hindu thought. It occurs to me that is all his is saying in that note. It is a translator's note.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Isn't Shakti the bottle which has a big label stating, " 5 hour energy"? One can buy it at one's local 7-11 for $1.99.

 

[roab1]

All these translations are taken from Bindras translations.

p14

You are the Broad Sword with decapitating edge. You are the Arrow, Dagger, (and the sword from regions of) Halb, South, and West. I can envision you to the limits of my perception.(1) You are the capable deity - Sarswati, Roopa and Bhawani. You are the divinity - Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva, and, Majestically, you are established in motherly form


Bhagauti is referred to as Sword in Sikhism, which is what the writer describes in the verse.

p14

Guising as Narsing, the Sphinx, you smashed Harnakash.

SGGS also mentions about God saving prahlad, son of Harnaksh.

p14

You are known as Jalpa, Kalka and are the Rani of the fourteen
continent.

In Bachitar Natak, Guru Gobind Singh mentions 'Mahakal Kalka aradhi'.

DG followers often point out that it is Kalka and not Kalika, and reading Chariter One it becomes clear that Kalka is not Kalika but it is also not God, but another form of Shakti. Read below

P15 last line

And God Almighty is your protector.

Shiv is known as Mahakal. Mahakal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mahakal Kalka would refer to divine two formed shiv and parvati. (see attached image)

p16-17

When the mother of the Universe (Bhagauti) looked down with irritation, all those brilliant ones were beheaded and chucked down on the earth. All those, with lotus eyes, who did not tremble but remained alert like lions, were annihilated by Shakti.

Bhagauti is Shakti.

So i think it is pretty clear that in Chariter One, Shakti is Bhagauti but is not GOD and is created by Akalpurakh to exterminate evil. Writer accepts power of Devi and seeks blessings from her in first Chariter. She is doer of all things and grants various boons.

Isn't Shakti the bottle which has a big label stating, " 5 hour energy"?

If it been availbale when DG was compiled then i am sure it would be mentioned as another form of Shakti.

 

[spnadmin]

"So i think it is pretty clear that in Chariter One, Shakti is Bhagauti but is not GOD and is created by Akalpurakh to exterminate evil. Writer accepts power of Devi and seeks blessings from her in first Chariter. She is doer of all things and grants various boons" (see post above).

Well roab1 ji

As you said -- you are tying to look at this through the eyes of a hindu or vedanctic scholar. So you are indeed approaching this in a systematic way.

If the person who wrote this is saying (1) Shakti is not God but was created by Akaalpurakh to eradicate evil and (2) Shakti is the doer of everything --- then the writer is confused. If Akaalpurakh could create Shakti, the doer of everything, then certainly Akaalpurakh is also the doer of everything -- but in this account delegates his authority to Shakti.

One additional observation -- Akaalpurakh who is the doer of everything, in creating Shakti who is the doer of everything, would certainly invite trouble in paradise from time to time. Trouble can double whenever the Doer of Everything, Akaalpurakh, and the Doer of Everything, Shakti, were not in agreement as to what to go about doing. This problem BTW is one of the classic arguments in favor of montheism. Just a thought.

That bolsters my suspicions. Excellent choice of a passage to review.Thanks.

 

[roab1]

is it true that the term 'Bir Ras' doesnt find mention in DG ?

 

[spnadmin]

I checked using the Gurmukhi spelling and did not find it ("bir ras"). There are passages that do mention how warriors savor the taste for war. But the term per se is not included. Of course search engines are not infallible. I may have missed it.

Good teachable moment roab1 ji...

It would be nice if this were a conversation between more than the 2 of us.

 

[roab1]

Yeah! I was actually reading another forum that i came upon during searching for chandi and there i found a poster pushing same view with all the might. And boy did that poster fail ! I think if that poster were to come on this thread promoting same view, would get really torn apart by many members knowledge of Gurbani. I hold high regard for your knowledge of Gurbani of what i have seen so far. And with that i rest my case. Thanks for tolerating me.

 

[spnadmin]

roab ji

You are very kind, but my knowledge of Gurbani is fair to midlin' as they would say here in the US -- but I appreciate the opportunities you have given me to "think outside of the box." You are really taking a very radical approach. A thinking approach to this problem, much like a detective would do. No one else has thought of it and you are asking fresh questions instead of giving tired, stale speeches. And it is paying off.

I am learning from this -- keep the questions flowing.

 

[roab1]

I was right afterall. Pro whole-DG forum has finally accepted that the the Devi of DG is none other than Adi-Shakti. I will some part quote here from their article. You can read the whole article over there.

" In 48 verses, the character of 'Chandi' has been described, but here Chandi is not a revered Devi of Hindu or any Tantric faith. Chandi is that force of Akal Purakh which, from the beginning of time, has been active in destroying impious forces. This force is also the sword, and also the blade. It is one such sword, the rein of which is diverse and widespread even in far off lands, in all four corners; therefore, it is inappropriate to group and limit this maternal-force to India and its religions. It is Jogmaya (the force with which the universe is created), Saraswati (the Devi of knowledge) and mighty Bhawani. It has brought about the existence of Brahma, Vishnu, and Mahesh....

In above verses, we can see that this force manifests itself as the source of creation of not only numerous Devis but also the three main Devtas. In no way it is a Devi of Hindu faith, for it is the creator of this entire universe and also of people of different faiths and beliefs. Not only that, the spread of different faiths and religions is its own expansion. All those who live in remembrance of Akal Purakh are created by this very force. It has got extremely horrific appearance and it is also like an extremely beautiful, virgin girl. These paradoxical forms presented above are worth contemplating on. Here, instead of being a Devi, the source of creation, or the Primal Force, it takes on the form of a female. The protagonist of 403 Charitars is a nymph of ugly proportions whereas the protagonist 'Baala' of 'Sabudh Baach' is pure and chaste girl that is decorated with pure qualities; she is someone whose chastity can never be violated."

If you have spent time reading whole of it, you will understand that the source strength of Sikh warriors and Guru Gobind Singh and that of Khalsa was Adi-Shakti. If you have patience and desire to learn more then read this too below.

" The Chandi of Charitropakhyan is the source of creation, the Devi, the force of Maya, slayer of demons in the form of deadly weapons, and in the form of cultured and virtuous woman too. Not only it is the destroyer of demons like 'Sumbh-Nisumbh', 'Chand-Mund', 'Rakhatbeej', etc.; it also is the source of the enunciation of all four Vedas. This primal force is also the creator of all struggles and conflicts in this world. It manifests as 'Narsingh' and destroys the demon 'Harnakash'. This force also takes on the form of brave men and courageous women. It is creator of this universe and also its destroyer. It takes on the form of Ram in order to destroy 'Ravana' and it also takes on the Avatar of Krishna for the destruction of demon 'Kans'. In these situations, it does not remain the primal force of Shaakats and Tantriks; instead it emerges as the constructive force of Akal Purakh Waheguru Ji, the mention of which appears in 'Anand Sahib' Bani of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj:


ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤਿ ਆਪਿ ਉਪਾਇ ਕੈ ਕਰਤਾ ਆਪੇ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਵਰਤਾਏ ॥

Similarly, there is also mention of this force in Guru's Arjan Dev Ji's Bani 'Maaru Di Vaar'. Here, we are told of Waheguru Ji's dominance and command over this force of creation. In 'Devi Bhagvat Puran' too, the Devi is the force of creation – 'Namō Devai Parkaritai' (ਨਮੋ ਦੇਵਯੈ ਪ੍ਰਕ੍ਰਿਤਯੈ). In reality, the Devi of Hindu Shaastras is both the force of 'Sankhai Shaastar' as well as the force of God. It is present as the force of Maya of God, above the forms of wife of Devtas and those of numerous Devis. This quote from 'Devi Bhagvat Puran' verifies the above stated fact - "Brahma asked: 'Are you male or female?' To this, Devi replied: 'The One and Only truth is Brahm, there is no difference between us. Whatever He is, I am that. Due to ignorance, people differentiate between me and Him. Only that Brahm is supreme, He is indestructible and has been present even before the beginning of time (Snatan). During the process of creation of this universe, it takes up countless different forms and that is when we both appear different, like a reflection in the mirror. At the end of the universe, I cease to exist as a male or female.... ". This Devi, the force of Maya, is definitely different from the Devi that is worshipped as the wife of Devtas. In some areas of the Tantric faith, it appears to have superiority over the male or Shiva. According to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj however, this force performs its actions as per the Hukam of Akal Purakh Waheguru:


ਹਾਠਾ ਦੋਵੈ ਕੀਤੀਓ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤਿ ਵਰਤਾਈਆ ॥
ਸਿਵ ਅਗੈ ਸਕਤੀ ਹਾਰਿਆ ਏਵੈ ਹਰਿ ਭਾਈਆ ॥
(Ang 1096, SGGS Ji)

The girl 'Baala' of Charitropakhyan is also shown to perform her actions within the sweet Hukam of Waheguru, although absolute victory in 'holy war' initiated by the male is depicted to be impossible without 'Baala' bursting into the battle scene. To win over 'Kaal-Purakh' in husband form is her penultimate goal. In this case, she is the soul-bride and Kaal-Purakh Waheguru as husband. In contrast to the indecent and ignominious union of male and female that was mentioned in the dialogues of minister 'Bhoop', this establishes the male and female union of limitless purity and pulls mankind out of the sorry state of that disgraceful situation; and even though narrative style may appear to be different from that of Bani of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the similarity in the levels of purity depicted in its final form is unparalleled and inseparable. "

All in all the existence of such force of nature was always denied by the pro whole-Dg group. They always claimed Durga is creation of Akal Purakh, Chandi is creation of Akal Purakh, Krishna is worm, Ram is fake etc etc. They claimed Dg eulogized only bravery of various avtars, nothing else. But left out the primal force, mother force, out of discussion.

Now they have admitted the real link between Akal purakh and the world. Adi Shakti. Only if the Sikhs learned Hindu scriptures they will realise their true self. Just like Nirmalas and Udasis did, after learning Hindu shasters. In the light of this whole concept, the Sikh Gurus are a small part in this whole drama, just like Ram, Krishna etc. Ram came to destroy evil in form of Ravana, Krishna came to destroy Kans and Kauravs and Guru Gobind Singh came to destroy Mughals ! And another mission of tenth Guru was to make people realise the fakeness of Ram, Krishan and that of himself. Everybody dies in the end. Mortals ! Only God remains and the Power, Adi-Shakti, which sustains the world. And this power is source of strength of DG. Same as in Shaktism, albeit with some variations but that happens with every belief system. What matters is in Both DG and Shaktism, source of creation is Adi-Shakti, God is there but plays no active role. Both have to turn to Shakti to sustain.

Now all that is left for Sikhs to realise and pro whole-Dg to reveal is the supreme entity Brahman.

 

[spnadmin]

roab1 ji

You have provided yet again a very incisive analysis of what is going on right before our eyes in the discourse on Dasam Granth.

Given your conclusions, what implications do you see? What is your reaction to these DG themes that have been given voice on several pro-DG sites?

Specifically to this particular theme,

And another mission of tenth Guru was to make people realise the fakeness of Ram, Krishan and that of himself. Everybody dies in the end. Mortals ! Only God remains and the Power, Adi-Shakti, which sustains the world. And this power is source of strength of DG. Same as in Shaktism, albeit with some variations but that happens with every belief system. What matters is in Both DG and Shaktism, source of creation is Adi-Shakti, God is there but plays no active role. Both have to turn to Shakti to sustain.

Does this compare favorably or unfavorably to the premise of all of Sri Guru Granth Sahib? Ik Oan Kar - Sat Nam - who is Karta Purakh and also Akaal Murat - and who later in Gurbani is said among other things, to be like this ...

ਐ ਜੀ ਸਦਾ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਦਇਆ ਕਰਿ ਰਵਿਆ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਭ੍ਰਮਨਿ ਚੁਕਾਈ ॥
ai jee sadhaa dhaeiaal dhaeiaa kar raviaa guramath bhraman chukaaee ||
Through His Kindness, the Kind Lord pervades us; through Guru's Teachings, our wanderings cease.

I do not find any evidence that the kind and all pervading God (the bhraman) makes use of secondary power sources or abandons his Creation. What do you think?

 

[roab1]

Obviously in the light of DG's acceptance of Adi-Shakti as a primal force who created the world and sustains it does not favour God as master.

Until now Sikhs have mostly followed SGGS and only GOD as the creator and sustainer. Swords and weapons have been a part of life, but not dominant. They are there for defence. They are not Divine. Various Gods and Godess are nothing but maya, an illsion which takes one further away from God.

But, as far i am able to understand DG, i have stated earlier that i have no knowledge about it so have to depend upon translations and right now the pro whole-DG people claim to be only scholars on it, and going by their beliefs the picture for Sikhs is very grim with regard to beielf in Gurus and God as protectors.

As per whole-Dg group, and it is a large one now, it turns out Bhaguati is Sword but primarily is Adi-Shakti, a variance of God. This is pure Hinduism in my opinion. SGGS and DG are contradictory.

There is an opinion of mine regarding this

1. Guru Nanak started a nirmal path with belief in One God. With passage of time Guru Gobind Singh added another dimension to it, that of another primal force besides God. God could no longer be depended alone for sustaining in this cruel world. True, he is master but there is another power which runs the world and it has to be worshipped. Maybe it was always there with some veild references in SGGS. Guru Gobind Singhs mission was different from Guru Nanak which is specifically stated in Bachitter Natak. The eight Gurus from 2 to 9 did not claim to come from God, but the first and last did, and with different explanations. Guru Nanak maybe knew but did not experience this Adi-Shakti which aided and empowered the tenth Guru.

What i want to know are there any historical proofs about claims of scholars that the tenth Guru worshipped weapons?

Please see the theme " And another mission........... have to turn to Shakti to sustain. " are my opinions.

 

[roab1]

The problem between Sikhs and Hindus is same as is between Sikhs and modern so called 'Ravidas Dharam' people.

Sikhs claimed to be distinct people, just like Ravidas Dharam people do. Sikhs claim would there be Ravidas if there was not SGGS?

Why dont Sikhs answer would there be Adi-Shakti without Hinduism?

Hypocrisy to the extreme ! By Sikhs.

 

[roab1]

DG shares a lot with quran.

Lots of wrong facts. Giving new twists to former faiths cherished traditions. Old wine in new bottle.

 

[Kamala]

Narayanjot, just by seeing your name you seem Hindu (not that hindus are bad, but you are always so sikhi but with a name like that[no offense]):S Narayan as in Vishnu may I ask?

 

[Kanwaljit.Singh]

ਨਾਰਾਯਣ - nārāyana
- ਸੰ. ਨਰਾਂ (ਮਨੁੱਖਾਂ) ਦਾ ਸਮੁਦਾਯ ਨਾਰ, ਉਹ ਹੈ ਅਯਨ (ਘਰ) ਜਿਸ ਦਾ. ਅਰਥਾਤ ਸਭ ਨਰਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਿਵਾਸ ਕਰਤਾ।
- ਨਰ (ਕਰਤਾਰ) ਤੋਂ ਪੈਦਾ ਹੋਏ ਤੱਤ ਨਾਰ, ਉਹੀ ਹਨ ਘਰ ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਰਥਾਤ ਤੱਤਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਵ੍ਯਾਪਕ ਰੂਪ
- ਨਰ (ਬ੍ਰਹਮ) ਦੇ ਪੁਤ੍ਰ ਜਲ ਹਨ ਨਾਰ, ਉਹ ਪੂਰਵਕਾਲ ਵਿੱਚ ਹਨ ਘਰ ਜਿਸ ਦਾ, ਉਹ ਨਾਰਾਯਣ.
- ਜਲਜੰਤੁ. ਪਾਣੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਜੀਵ. "ਨਾਰਾਯਣ ਕੱਛ ਮੱਛ ਤਿੰਦੂਆਂ ਕਹਿਤ ਸਭ." (ਅਕਾਲ ੫. ਦੇਖੋ, ਨਾਰਾਇਣ.

NARAYAN means God which Dwells in all Beings

There are so many Names of God. Why? So that we can Remember God (Simran)? Is that it? Then one Name would have been enough. No, as Gurbani reminds us, each Name also represents a quality of God! So that when we repeat the Name, we remember that quality of God and maybe try to bring/realize/create/maintain that quality in ourselves.

 

[spnadmin]

‪Bhai Gurpreet Singh (Shimla Wale) - Narayen Narpat Namaskare‬‏ - YouTube