Hard Talk Taking One Liners Out Of Context From Gurbani To Allow Intellectual Independence?

[Harkiran Kaur]

and I happen to agree, so the question is then, why the need to keep referring to the Vedas to validate and understand Sikhism? All it does is encourage the continuing dilution of Sikhism

Well it doesn't... In my case you were actually the one that called the concepts I referred to as Vedic and not me. I have always maintained that they were universal concepts found in many religions... Like transmigration as one example (some people call reincarnation but I think transmigration is better descriptor).

 

[Harry Haller]

Well it doesn't... In my case you were actually the one that called the concepts I referred to as Vedic and not me. I have always maintained that they were universal concepts found in many religions... Like transmigration as one example (some people call reincarnation but I think transmigration is better descriptor).

actually its not me that keeps the reference going, its Originalji, I have no problem with common concepts at all

 

[Tejwant Singh]

No comment, although, I feel within the academia homogenisation certain formalities ought to be relaxed to allow intellectual independence to harness the essential features of the subject matter rather than rummage through incidentals for completeness.

Original ji,

Guru Fateh.

Please elaborate with your wonderful background as a barrister how we can do this at SPN and I am sure all here at SPN would like you be the flag bearer of this homogenisation by writing the rules based on Gurmat ideas so they can be utilised here.

Thanks.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Well it doesn't... In my case you were actually the one that called the concepts I referred to as Vedic and not me. I have always maintained that they were universal concepts found in many religions... Like transmigration as one example (some people call reincarnation but I think transmigration is better descriptor).

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have seen you expressing the above several times. Yes, Sikhi does acknowledge the belief in Hinduism about reincarnation which is based on caste system. But if I understand properly from your posts regarding reincarnation/transmigration, you are implying that this belief is also part of Sikhi. If you claim that, please post the whole Shabads with this acceptance in Sikhi as per your view so we can learn from it.

Thanks.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥ ਤਾਤੀ ਵਾਉ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਸਰਣਾਈ ॥ ਚਉਗਿਰਦ ਹਮਾਰੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਾਰ ਦੁਖੁ ਲਗੈ ਨ ਭਾਈ ॥੧॥ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਪੂਰਾ ਭੇਟਿਆ ਜਿਨਿ ਬਣਤ ਬਣਾਈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਅਉਖਧੁ ਦੀਆ ਏਕਾ ਲਿਵ ਲਾਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ਰਾਖਿ ਲੀਏ ਤਿਨਿ ਰਖਨਹਾਰਿ ਸਭ ਬਿਆਧਿ ਮਿਟਾਈ ॥ ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਭਈ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਭਏ ਸਹਾਈ ॥੨॥੧੫॥੭੯॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 819}
..you definitely know how to pick your shabds. This one has a beautiful ring to it. The "nucleus" ram kar [ਰਾਮ ਕਾਰ] around which Guru Arjun Dev Ji builds the rest of the Shabd has its roots in the great Indian epic Ramayana [poem]. Guru Ji captilises on the main theme of the poem, God the protector [ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਸਰਣਾਈ] and works through to distil and flavour the entire text. In so doing, Guru Ji praises the achitect God is [ਬਣਤ ਬਣਾਈ] and how by remaining steadfast to the covenant [ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਅਉਖਧੁ ਦੀਆ], made with Him is one saved from all difficulties. Moreover, the name of God [nam] acts as the red ring [ram kar], within which one is protected indefinitely.
The idea of God the protector originated from the great tale of Ramayna. It goes something like this:

• Ram is told to go to an exile for fourteen years in the forest. His wife Seeta and brother Lakshman decide to join him, and all three spend the fourteen years in exile together. While in exile, Seeta sees this beautiful deer and requests her husband Ram to catch it for her. Ram sets out to catch the deer, but before he sets out on the chase he instruct his brother not to leave Seeta on her own in case she get's abducted by the evil Ravaan. Ram disappears into the thick of the forest in pursuit of the deer, and moments later a loud scream is heard. Seeta panics, thinking something has happened to Ram, she hurries Lakshman to go after Ram. Lakshman declines because Ram had left specific instructions for Seeta not to be left unattended . Moral dilemma, what to do ? Seeta comes up with a solution, "round ring the house O' Lakshman with "ram-kar" so no evil can enter". Lakshman accordingly, draws a line around the home and instructs Seeta not to go outside it. This line [ram kar lakeer] has divinal properties so that no evil could enter.......

Guru Arjun Dev Ji places emphasis on the relationship between humankind and God. And, how those that remain faithful remain protected.

...I take it your middle name is "honey" ! You're too sweeeeeet !

Original ji,

Guru Fateh.

I want to thank you for unmasking your Hindutva slowly. Please do not take this in a negative manner. We are what we are no matter what we pretend or intend to be.

Just one request though. Please do not mix your Hindu fairy tales of Rama and Sita with Sikhi. It is demeaning to the myth that so many believe in as yourself the way you have gallantly shown above for which I am thankful to you.

Seeta comes up with a solution, "round ring the house O' Lakshman with "ram-kar" so no evil can enter"

Is "ram-kar" above the same as ramkar in the Shabad by Guru Arjan mentioned above?

If yes, please provide references from the SGGS, our only Guru.

Lastly, as requested before please provide the English translation of the Shabad/s for the non Gurmukhi reading people here.

Thanks.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

I suppose there is no denial in that the father of my faith was conceived by a Hindu mother and the seed deposited for fertilization was that of a Hindu father, which makes me organically Hindu and religiously Sikh. So yes, not just me but the whole of Sikh is Hindu-Sikh. Goodness gracious, you're a genius, I never thought of it like that. !

Whilst we're at it, can you scan to see if I'm a bit of a Moslem, Buddhist, Christian and the rest, for if that'd be true than "bingo" unity in diversity confirmed. Isn't that what Sikhism is ?

Waiting earnestly for a response ! Cor' I'm all excited, can't wait ! Thank you Baba Harry Ji.

PS can we name you as the "midwife" for helping plonkers like me give birth to universal truths.

Original ji,

Guru Fateh.

What do the genes have to do with one's religion? Please explain with your vast background of wisdom. If this were true, then Sri Chand would have been our second Guru according to your depth of Sikhi knowledge rather than Guru Angad.

If your claim is right, then according to your own admittance, Harkiran ji, Admin Kaur ji, NK ji and many others who had no such genes can not be Sikhs. So are all these 3 ladies Sikhs or not?

Sadly we lost NKji who was Antonia before turning into Narayanjot Kaur.

Thanks

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have seen you expressing the above several times. Yes, Sikhi does acknowledge the belief in Hinduism about reincarnation which is based on caste system. But if I understand properly from your posts regarding reincarnation/transmigration, you are implying that this belief is also part of Sikhi. If you claim that, please post the whole Shabads with this acceptance in Sikhi as per your view so we can learn from it.

Thanks.

Infact I have before. The Hindu view of reincarnation as you pointed out condones casteism. Transmigration is different. Though people often use the words interchangeably.
Sikhi teaches that all is ONE. Meaning that ultimate reality is formless ONE and unchanging. In other words all that truly exists is Waheguru. Everything else, manifests within that ONE. I shouldn't have to post shabads as these are basic knowledge. Though on Ang 736 you will find a shabad that compares this reality to a play, where Waheguru is the director of the play, and also playing the parts of ALL the characters (us). Meaning there really is only ONE universal consciousness behind everything. Ego (haume) identity is what makes us seem separate but that separateness is illusion. When the costumes are removed, we see there is only ONE (Waheguru) and it asks where did all these forms come from (since we know Waheguru is formless) but from this formlessness, comes ALL form.

These too, are basic Sikhi concepts. So when speaking of transmigration, we are not speaking of individual souls body hopping ala the typical thoughts of reincarnation. Instead, its the constant unfolding and progression of the ONE universal consciousness, Waheguru which is behind EVERY conscious entity on the planet. I have explained this before and you seem to keep jumping back to the Hindu version of body jumping of individual souls and that's not what Gurbani talks about at all. Though yes people do use the terms interchangeably.

I tried to explain it before as a dream. If I have a dream tonight, that I am a doctor trying to save a patient, was I any less the patient than I was the doctor? How about the operating table, the instruments, the nurses etc? They were ALL forms created WITHIN my own mind, so I was in essence ALL of them. But in reality, I was not even the doctor. I was the FORMLESS consciousness who conceived the entire dream. Though I have form outside of that dream, but ask yourself... what if this is another dream?

Since there is only ONE universal consciousness, then transmigration is not separate 'souls' going body hopping but it is the process of the ONE universal consciousness Waheguru experiencing every character within his Creation (and keep in mind the use of 'his' is only because english doesn't have a way to describe an entity or consciousness, without use of gender and 'it' doesn't sound good).

So yes, transmigration IS a Sikhi concept. But it's not the same as reincarnation as Hindus believe. And no caste has nothing to do with it. Anyway we have been through this before, I post the whole shabad, you disagree and change it to mean just some state of mind in psychology (like multiple personalities or something) and we end up just disagreeing on interpretation so it goes nowhere to keep doing it over and over.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Infact I have before. The Hindu view of reincarnation as you pointed out condones casteism. Transmigration is different. Though people often use the words interchangeably.
Sikhi teaches that all is ONE. Meaning that ultimate reality is formless ONE and unchanging. In other words all that truly exists is Waheguru. Everything else, manifests within that ONE. I shouldn't have to post shabads as these are basic knowledge. Though on Ang 736 you will find a shabad that compares this reality to a play, where Waheguru is the director of the play, and also playing the parts of ALL the characters (us). Meaning there really is only ONE universal consciousness behind everything. Ego (haume) identity is what makes us seem separate but that separateness is illusion. When the costumes are removed, we see there is only ONE (Waheguru) and it asks where did all these forms come from (since we know Waheguru is formless) but from this formlessness, comes ALL form.

These too, are basic Sikhi concepts. So when speaking of transmigration, we are not speaking of individual souls body hopping ala the typical thoughts of reincarnation. Instead, its the constant unfolding and progression of the ONE universal consciousness, Waheguru which is behind EVERY conscious entity on the planet. I have explained this before and you seem to keep jumping back to the Hindu version of body jumping of individual souls and that's not what Gurbani talks about at all. Though yes people do use the terms interchangeably.

I tried to explain it before as a dream. If I have a dream tonight, that I am a doctor trying to save a patient, was I any less the patient than I was the doctor? How about the operating table, the instruments, the nurses etc? They were ALL forms created WITHIN my own mind, so I was in essence ALL of them. But in reality, I was not even the doctor. I was the FORMLESS consciousness who conceived the entire dream. Though I have form outside of that dream, but ask yourself... what if this is another dream?

Since there is only ONE universal consciousness, then transmigration is not separate 'souls' going body hopping but it is the process of the ONE universal consciousness Waheguru experiencing every character within his Creation (and keep in mind the use of 'his' is only because english doesn't have a way to describe an entity or consciousness, without use of gender and 'it' doesn't sound good).

So yes, transmigration IS a Sikhi concept. But it's not the same as reincarnation as Hindus believe. And no caste has nothing to do with it. Anyway we have been through this before, I post the whole shabad, you disagree and change it to mean just some state of mind in psychology (like multiple personalities or something) and we end up just disagreeing on interpretation so it goes nowhere to keep doing it over and over.

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for the long explanation but it still does not answer my question. I would be obliged if you did that.

Please post the whole Shabad of reincarnation from the SGGS and let's see if this is true in Sikhi as you claim it is. We must be clear, we are using the word reincarnation as per Hinduism because that is what is in the SGGS, our only Guru.

 

[Harry Haller]

Infact I have before. The Hindu view of reincarnation as you pointed out condones casteism. Transmigration is different. Though people often use the words interchangeably.
Sikhi teaches that all is ONE. Meaning that ultimate reality is formless ONE and unchanging. In other words all that truly exists is Waheguru. Everything else, manifests within that ONE. I shouldn't have to post shabads as these are basic knowledge. Though on Ang 736 you will find a shabad that compares this reality to a play, where Waheguru is the director of the play, and also playing the parts of ALL the characters (us). Meaning there really is only ONE universal consciousness behind everything. Ego (haume) identity is what makes us seem separate but that separateness is illusion. When the costumes are removed, we see there is only ONE (Waheguru) and it asks where did all these forms come from (since we know Waheguru is formless) but from this formlessness, comes ALL form.

These too, are basic Sikhi concepts. So when speaking of transmigration, we are not speaking of individual souls body hopping ala the typical thoughts of reincarnation. Instead, its the constant unfolding and progression of the ONE universal consciousness, Waheguru which is behind EVERY conscious entity on the planet. I have explained this before and you seem to keep jumping back to the Hindu version of body jumping of individual souls and that's not what Gurbani talks about at all. Though yes people do use the terms interchangeably.

I tried to explain it before as a dream. If I have a dream tonight, that I am a doctor trying to save a patient, was I any less the patient than I was the doctor? How about the operating table, the instruments, the nurses etc? They were ALL forms created WITHIN my own mind, so I was in essence ALL of them. But in reality, I was not even the doctor. I was the FORMLESS consciousness who conceived the entire dream. Though I have form outside of that dream, but ask yourself... what if this is another dream?

Since there is only ONE universal consciousness, then transmigration is not separate 'souls' going body hopping but it is the process of the ONE universal consciousness Waheguru experiencing every character within his Creation (and keep in mind the use of 'his' is only because english doesn't have a way to describe an entity or consciousness, without use of gender and 'it' doesn't sound good).

So yes, transmigration IS a Sikhi concept. But it's not the same as reincarnation as Hindus believe. And no caste has nothing to do with it. Anyway we have been through this before, I post the whole shabad, you disagree and change it to mean just some state of mind in psychology (like multiple personalities or something) and we end up just disagreeing on interpretation so it goes nowhere to keep doing it over and over.

I agree with you fully and completely, provided the above all takes place in a single lifetime. See we are getting somewhere!

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Original ji,

Guru Fateh.

..phaji, there is a saying in Punjabi " galti gummare di gussa gaddi teh" [fault is the potter's, punishing he the mule]. The word muzzled is used within my social circle to mean "silenced". It was a complement on my part to Sherdil for providing an acceptable interpretation.

You may take as much liberty contorting/changing your personal meanings like a pretzel as you wish but it does not change the meaning.

Muzzled is NOT a compliment but rather to the contrary. You with you great educational background should know better. Please do not distort the meaning for your convenience. Mind you, you agreed to act like a Sikh in your post. So, let's try that Sikh virtue again. Here is the meaning of Muzzled as per dictionary:

muz·zle
ˈməzəl/
verb
past tense: muzzled; past participle: muzzled

1. put a muzzle on (an animal).
   • prevent (a person or group) from expressing their opinions freely.
     "the politicians want to muzzle us and control what we write"
     synonyms: gag, silence, censor, stifle, restrain, check, curb, fetter
     "attempts to muzzle the media"

Please share with us via your Sikhi wisdom, how is the above complimentary to Sherdil ji after the true meaning has been posted without any distortion?

You, as a barrister fought for the human rights according to your many posts here at SPN. Actually you fought against muzzling Vox Populi-People's Voice.

It is bewildering to me to see how you have created your own meaning against your own value system.
For what?

.. don't know about bravery, but what I do know [perception] is that you are a wonderful man who has passion and commitment for Sikh. I used your name without any reservation because I feel a brotherly relationship exists between me and you. And, that relationship is underpinned by our culture, tradition and above all, by our faith - Sikh. It is that relationship which is unqualified, unconditional and everlasting. No explanations available if you ask me [from a farmer's perspective], but yes one could be found if you were to delve deep into sociologists perspectives.

All in all, I meant well. The Sher bit was to ward-off the rest of the players, "hey people, beware, you're touching a Lion's tale [meaning you] and there's no easy way out". Warrior folklore has it, thus, " don't mess with the best coz the best don't mess". Especially a sher !

Originalji, please stop giving yourself liberty of changing the meanings of the words after you have been called out for changing them for your own benefit rather than admitting that you are wrong in the beginning. Never forget we are Sikhs and agreed mutually to act like the ones.

Let me remind you the name Singh you and I carry means Lion-Sher as far as Bravura in a Sikh is concerned and our short Sikh history is its proof. However, your explanation after it was challenged is nothing but timid which is opposite of the name Singh.

Your comment towards me with this phrase "sher di poosh nu hath la ka kitha janna" (Do not step on lion's tail if you are not looking for trouble), shows your cop out once again. This phrase is used NOT in a complimentary manner but rather to the contrary. It shows the lion's anger/ire, not good traits for a Singh and I am sure you will agree with that. One can only step on the lion's tail when the lion is sleeping or lying down, otherwise it is not possible and when it wakes up after its tail has been stepped upon, it may devour the one who has stepped on it. This is what you meant. If you want to deny it, then you are not keeping your promise of acting like a Sikh,a Singh, a Sher.

.I will do, let me know what takes your fancy and I will gladly honour. Looking at Sufi mat might be a good idea and will yield dividends of immense proportions, what do you think ?

..what I'd like us to do is to educate our children with the basic of Gur Ghar Sikh'ya, that is, " you can soar the sky only if you have two wings;

1. sansarik vidya
2. dharmik vidya

Meaning, sociology and theology.

Thanks for offering to pitch in.It is an honour for SPN to have a learned person like you to be a part of SPN team. I would not call it Sufi mat but just Gurmat.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for the long explanation but it still does not answer my question. I would be obliged if you did that.

Please post the whole Shabad of reincarnation from the SGGS and let's see if this is true in Sikhi as you claim it is. We must be clear, we are using the word reincarnation as per Hinduism because that is what is in the SGGS, our only Guru.

I'm not using the word reincarnation as per Hinduism! Does that clear it up??
I said Transmigration better describes what Sikhi teaches. However I said SOME people (not me) like to use the word reincarnation, but they are using it to mean transmigration.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

I agree with you fully and completely, provided the above all takes place in a single lifetime. See we are getting somewhere!

Sure, as long as that lifetime is the lifetime of Waheguru (which has no birth nor death) and not a lifetime of a human. And since Waheguru is the only ONE that truly exists, then we can be on the same page eh?

 

[Harry Haller]

However I said SOME people (not me) like to use the word reincarnation, but they are using it to mean transmigration.

I have a similar problem, some people I know keep using the word 'no' (not me), but I know they really mean 'yes'

 

[Tejwant Singh]

I'm not using the word reincarnation as per Hinduism! Does that clear it up??
I said Transmigration better describes what Sikhi teaches. However I said SOME people (not me) like to use the word reincarnation, but they are using it to mean transmigration.

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

But Reincarnation is used in the SGGS as per Hinduism and you seemed to have agreed with it also as a Sikhi belief in your earlier posts which made me request you to post the Shabads on the subject so we can discuss about it.

 

[Harry Haller]

Sure, as long as that lifetime is the lifetime of Waheguru (which has no birth nor death) and not a lifetime of a human. And since Waheguru is the only ONE that truly exists, then we can be on the same page eh?

A lifetime of a human is shorter than the lifetime of Waheguru, so I guess we are not even reading the same chapter

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

But Reincarnation is used in the SGGS as per Hinduism and you seemed to have agreed with it also as a Sikhi belief in your earlier posts which made me request you to post the Shabads on the subject so we can discuss about it.

Not in same context. We have been here before and we will be here again. That is transmigration. And yes at one time I was using reincarnation as term for it however I never meant in same context as Hinduism. It was because at the time I myself was not aware the difference between reincarnation and transmigration and that people get so up in arms about exact terminology. So pls forget I used reincarnation and instead I meant transmigration.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Not in same context. We have been here before and we will be here again. That is transmigration. And yes at one time I was using reincarnation as term for it however I never meant in same context as Hinduism. It was because at the time I myself was not aware the difference between reincarnation and transmigration and that people get so up in arms about exact terminology. So pls forget I used reincarnation and instead I meant transmigration.

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

Yes, we will, again and again. This is what learning,unlearning and relearning is all about in Sikhi for us to become better Sikhs.

Let's try to separate things for the sake of discussion and separate these two words in the literal sense and use SGGS, our only Guru to understand them.

My question: Is reincarnation ( Avan janah-comings and goings, 8.4 million times) part of Sikhi?
Yes or No please.

If you like you can open another thread, " Difference between Reincarnation and Transmigration as per Sikhi. Are they one and the same in the SGGS"?

Thanks

 

[Harry Haller]

Careful Batman, its a trap!

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Why can't you just do a search rather than posting same things over and over. There was a whole thread on it before!

But if you are interested in reading on it:

Total Cessation Of The Transmigratory State

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Why can't you just do a search rather than posting same things over and over. There was a whole thread on it before!

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have threads filled with my opinion on this here at SPN. You started with the discussion of Reincarnation/Transmigration in this very thread again. I requested you that if you like, you may start a new thread so we can discuss this matter separately, then it is being discussed here.
I do have questions about the difference between the two.

In fact in your post#27 you wrote:

Also Hinduism was prevalent in that time, so it's used a lot in Gurbani to provide context... But that doesn't mean that every little bit of what Hinduism taught is wrong or condemned by Sikhi. Idolatry we know was condemned, useless ritual etc. But the idea of being here more than once is not... An an example. I also believe Hinduism teaches that everything is ultimately ONE as well.

The goal of tangible rituals like Pilgrimages and taking dips in different Holy Waters in Hinduism is for the sole reason to be 'reborn' in a better form during reincarnation. Our Gurus rejected these rituals for this very reason. This was the charade of "purification" for this and the coming lives in Hinduism.

Please do not feel offended by this.We are all in the same Sikhi boat, perhaps with different perspectives, which is OK.