3. If you still wear the Pug, then you are insulting Sikhi and all that it stands for and it shows that you stand for nothing but a dogmatic religion in which the angry, jealous, vengeful God raped a married woman and created a baastard whom he killed later on. What a shame!
Gyani ji,
This is relevant only to your post and not to subject of the thread.
My humble submission is that you cannot become a Gurmukh overnight. It requires "Ghal" and HIS "Mehar". So if this requires Chanting, reading Banis of SGGS without understanding but WITH FAITH then so be it. It is a process of refinement of very ordinary mortals first aspiring to be to be just GurSikhs. Becoming a Gurmukh is a long haul.
Once a person starts reciting Gurbani, then listening or reading authentic gurbani Vichar, then the seed starts germinating within a person and the process of metamorphosis has begun and with HIS Mehar and Hukam the person will transform into a Gurmukh.
And of co{censored} a Gurmukh chanting one akhar, is completely different qualitatively than a ordinary mortal or a manmukh doing the same.
But a person like me who is both a manmukh and with limited intelligence has to make beginning. So Gyaniji, please do not discourage persons like me to start mechanically chanting Gurbani without understanding it.
Gurfateh Tejwant ji,
Nobody is over and above the forum rules/guidelines... if we insist that we be polite and respectful towards fellow forum members, then this basic guideline includes you, me and for that matter every SPN'er. Guidelines also clearly state: Let us discuss the issue, not the personality and we solicit due consideration on this important tenant of SPN functioning from our entire membership.
I firmly believe that there is no argument/discussion in this world that can be debated by resorting to personal insults or comments. And there is simply no argument that can be made more powerful or assertive or effective by resorting to this same method. In my view, this method results in losing the effectiveness of our arguments. We got to do some introspection here.
In the context of this topic, all i am requesting you is that when you made the following comments on Jesus... please provide the readers any references to the testament or page no. in The Bible, where this stuff is mentioned... or for that matter anywhere it is mentioned. Like many fellow SPNers, i have very little or simply no knowledge of what Bible says. :shy:
Gurfateh,
Aman Singh
The Christians may not like it..may be offended...BUT the Truth is as Tejwant Ji has stated..and its not double speak/forked tongue/or misinterpretation..the BIBLE is very very CLEAR on the attributes of the GOD of Abraham..Moses..etc etc.
There is NOT a Single word in SGGS that has those attributes of WAHEGURU...although the NAMES of Him are the common ones already known to all..ALLAH, Raam, Hari, Krishan, Naryaan..etc etc etc...Bed, Katebs are mentioned so Guru ji knew about these books.
The CREATOR in SGGS..always speaks SOFTLY, is Compassionate to the highest limit..is kind, gentle, has NEVER DESTROYED...a single ANT..let alone CITIES like that in Soddom and Gomrrah.. or sent FLOODS, PLAGUES to PUNISH and FORCE acceptance of HIM. Waheguru of SGGS has nO FAVOURITES..no special Nations under hIm and others not favoured as "gentiles"..etc and also the CREATOR of SGGS doesnt allow any others to do "ON OUR BEHALF"..each is responsible for what one sows...so in ESSENCE the CREATOR loved by the Hosue of nanak is VASTLY DIFFERENT form the God/Jehovah/of the Bible/Old Testament/Koran etc. IN FACT He is NOT that at all..not in the REMOTEST WAY...!!
ALL the Sants, Bhagats, Sheikhs, GURUS..who contributed to SGGS..were BORN as Normal HUMANS....from MARRIED MOTHERS, Normal Fathers, in turn Married and had families just like us...and OBEYED all NATURAL LAWS without any attempt to BEND/BREAK natural laws (miracles). His HUKM..His WILL is SUPREME. THere is NO Virgin Birth, virgin wives, no original sins, no angels, no devil, no prophets with revelations and fortune tellers, ascensions to heaven with human body, etc etc etc in GURMATT. Gurmatt is Total submission to HUKM.
TRUTH is BITTER..and although the "language" used by tejwant Ji may be a bit harsh..i have no beef with that as it is basically the TRUTH. EUPHEMISMS..dont hide the TRUTH..and "virgin mother" are just that..playing with words to hide a bitter truth that WILL NOT be accepted by any Court/normal human beigns TODAY..IF a Woman were to turn up with a Baby..and no husband to lay claim to him..no body will buy her claim of being a Virgin Mother...IN ISLAMIC SOCITY she will be STONED TO DEATH...other societies will PUNISH her in various means..ostracise her...in Fact ther cna be no more Virgin mary....and in contrast..in Sikhism..there have been not one or two..BUT hundreds of thosuands who...followed in the footsteps of the Gurus..sat on hot plates, had their bodies sawed in half..skin removed while alive, cut from joint to joint...and never wavered from their Faith..the GURUS DUPLICATED THEMSELVES..and still do..and will do in the FUTURE..that is GURMATT...producing ORIGINALS...from ORIGINALS..while others cant even produce photocopies form originals..
i.Unless you are a critical thinker, you cannot understand Bani
Turban and beard does not make you a Sikh but a Fanatic who died during the 1984 riots. Sikhi is of the heart and not of the physical body that is tribe related. I am a Jatt of physical body and a Sikh of heart. A Sikh is never born and never dies but the physical tribal self.
Narayanjot ji,Originally Posted by Narayanjot Kaur
Bhagat ji
Here is the key line in the shabad as posted.
एकु अखरु जो गुरमुखि जापै तिस की निरमल सोई ॥३॥
Ėk akẖar jo gurmukẖ jāpai ṯis kī nirmal so▫ī. ||3||
One who, as Gurmukh, chants the One Word, acquires a spotlessly pure reputation. ||3||
Naturally if one reads the Sri Guru Granth Sahab one is not guaranteed liberation. There are scholars of every stripe who read it for academic purposes and they are not even looking for liberation. There are people who are Sikhs who read SGGS and are not liberated. Rather the point: The tuk is saying if one chants the one word, akhar (the Word of the Lord), as a Gurmukh, one will become pure nirmal.
The mere act of reading scriptures is not helpful. The emphasis is, not on reading the Granth, but chanting/reading as a Gurmukh.
Thanks for re-posting my DELETED comment which I had requested. I totally agree with you about the forum rules and guidelines, but if the comment had not been deleted and had been asked the reasons of the comment as you have done from the poster, which is myself, then we would not have to go through all of this about guidelines. If I am not following the guidelines and the comment had already been deleted then it is futile and shall I say uncalled for to ask for the explanation of the said deleted comment as I am not following the guidelines. The matter finishes there and then and time to move on. In other words, we can not have it both ways and place someone in a CATCH22 position as it was done. However, I do apologise if I have not followed the guidelines.Nobody is over and above the forum rules/guidelines... if we insist that we be polite and respectful towards fellow forum members, then this basic guideline includes you, me and for that matter every SPN'er. Guidelines also clearly state: Let us discuss the issue, not the personality and we solicit due consideration on this important tenant of SPN functioning from our entire membership.
I am a bit puzzled by your above comment. Personal comment or insults to whom? I do not know Jesus personally. You have asked me to explain about my comment about Jesus. So, I apologise for not understanding your implication here. And, I agree that Sikhi is based on introspection but that has nothing to do with the comment that was deleted.I firmly believe that there is no argument/discussion in this world that can be debated by resorting to personal insults or comments. And there is simply no argument that can be made more powerful or assertive or effective by resorting to this same method. In my view, this method results in losing the effectiveness of our arguments. We got to do some introspection here.
Now we are finally at my comment which I would love to respond to as asked.In the context of this topic, all i am requesting you is that when you made the following comments on Jesus... please provide the readers any references to the testament or page no. in The Bible, where this stuff is mentioned... or for that matter anywhere it is mentioned. Like many fellow SPNers, i have very little or simply no knowledge of what Bible says. :shy:
Tejwant ji
You are welcome. Indeed the translation from the Khalsa Consensus Translation by Dr. Sant Singh ji is over the top with respect to its translation of "nirmal" as well. It is rather melodramatic. For our purposes the meaning rather than the translation is more important.
I am still working on a better translation for "akhar" -- translated as "Word of the Lord " - and this is systematic throughout most accepted translations (Sant Singh and Manmohan Singh). However, that cannot be as close as we might like. There is no Sanskrit equivalent for "akhar." The closest I get in Sanskrit is "aakhaara" which means "form." Possibly then the deeper meaning refers to Divine Presence (i.e., form) and not "Word of the Lord". The problem with this theory is that aa+khaara has a different phonetic root when compared to a+khar.
"Word of the Lord" is found constantly throughout Christian readings of the New Testament. There is a modern Punjabi equivalent for "word " which is "akhan," but not "akhar." Perhaps the word "akhar" is a Persian or Urdu derivative. What do you think?
I wonder if these so-called Sikhs of beard and turban know who was the Mother of Khalsas and why the relationship was not consumated or remained Virgin?
Who remained Virgin? I lost the thread of your logic Veer ji.
I beg to differ with you. Dr. Sant Singh's literal translation is full of distortions, misleading and does disservice to the beautiful Gurbani. I have no idea what you mean by melodramatic. Can you please elaborate that for the better understanding because that kind of term is used for soap operas not to understand and put Gurbani into practice?Tejwant ji
You are welcome. Indeed the translation from the Khalsa Consensus Translation by Dr. Sant Singh ji is over the top with respect to its translation of "nirmal" as well. It is rather melodramatic.
I have no idea what you mean by the " Global meaning does suffice". What is the global meaning of what? Are you talking about the whole Shabad or the said verse or the word " Nirmal"?For our purposes global meaning does suffice.
Narayanjot ji,I am still working on a better translation for "akhar" -- translated as "Word of the Lord " - and this is systematic throughout most accepted translations (Sant Singh and Manmohan Singh). However, that cannot be as close as we might like. There is no Sanskrit equivalent for "akhar, having the meaning of "word." The closest I get in Sanskrit is "aakhaara" which means "form." Possibly then the deeper meaning refers to Divine Presence
(i.e., form) and not "Word of the Lord". The problem with this theory is that aa+khaara has a different morphological root when compared to a+khar.
A second possibility from Sanskirt is the word that means, the base or root of a word. It is अङ्ग aGga -- so maybe this is the deeper sense of akhar.
"Word of the Lord" is found constantly throughout Christian readings of the New Testament. So, the translation may be giving a christianized slant in the translation that is not really true to Gurbani.
There is a modern Punjabi equivalent for "word " which is "akhan," but not "akhar." Perhaps the word "akhar" is a Persian or Urdu derivative. What do you think?
I wonder if these so-called Sikhs of beard and turban know who was the Mother of Khalsas and why the relationship was not consumated or remained Virgin?
The Third Wife of Sachae Patshah Gobind Rai Ji. What was her name?
Narayanjot ji,
Guru Fateh.
You write:
I beg to differ with you. Dr. Sant Singh's literal translation is full of distortions, misleading and does disservice to the beautiful Gurbani. I have no idea what you mean by melodramatic. Can you please elaborate that for the better understanding because that kind of term is used for soap operas not to understand and put Gurbani into practice?
I have no idea what you mean by the " Global meaning does suffice". What is the global meaning of what? Are you talking about the whole Shabad or the said verse or the word " Nirmal"?
Narayanjot ji,
The way I try to understand Gurbani, one can not take one word, in this case the word " Akhar" and find the literal translation and sees how it fits the best. The message that our Gurus want us to understand is in the RAHAO of each Shabad. If we understand the RAHAO part which is like the nectar of flower, then all petals falls into their respective places.
I will just post the RAHAO part of this beautiful Shabad from our 5th Guru and in a couple of days I will share with the cyber Sadh Sangat the way I understand the whole Shabad.
ਸੰਤਹੁ ਸਾਗਰੁ ਪਾਰਿ ਉਤਰੀਐ ॥
संतहु सागरु पारि उतरीऐ ॥
Sanṯahu sāgar pār uṯrī▫ai.
O Saints, cross over the world-ocean. Page 747.
Here, Guru Sahib is calling all of us Saints. What an honour and privilege and a way to motivate all of us who are down trodden! He is telling us to confront all odds, negative things, obstacles, pot holes in order to lead a saintly life.
Now the question arises, what tools do we need/ have in order to live this life of Miri- Piri?
The next line explains that:
ਜੇ ਕੋ ਬਚਨੁ ਕਮਾਵੈ ਸੰਤਨ ਕਾ ਸੋ ਗੁਰ ਪਰਸਾਦੀ ਤਰੀਐ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
जे को बचनु कमावै संतन का सो गुर परसादी तरीऐ ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
Je ko bacẖan kamāvai sanṯan kā so gur parsādī ṯarī▫ai. ||1|| rahā▫o.
One who practices the Teachings of the Saints, by Guru's Grace, is carried across. ||1||Pause||
Kamavai literally means to earn something. In other words to make a living.
How can we make our spiritual living?
Let's not forget that Guru Sahib has already called us Saints in the first verse, So once again the English litertal translation is distorted because we as Saints have no teachings of our own as the translation would suggest.
We are Saints because we have Ik Ong Kaar with us as our Tillerman who can steer us across this ocean of Maya with His grace.
And how do we have this connection with Ik Ong Kaar?
It is by practicing the teachings given to us in the SGGS, our ONLY GURU.
Now, keeping this central idea of RAHAO in mind, let me get back to the verse which has the word "AKHAR" in it.
Ėk akẖar jo gurmukẖ jāpai ṯis kī nirmal so▫ī. ||3||
One who, as Gurmukh, chants the One Word, acquires a spotlessly pure reputation. ||3||
One who starts practicing even a single message ( Ek Akhar) of Gurbani, starts being on the Gurmat path and is called a Gurmukh which is neither a title, nor a destination but a start of the Gurmat journey because we all know that Sikhi path is a journey. Once this journey begins then he/she, the Gurmukh, finds the tools with the grace of Ik Ong Kaar to keep his/her spiritual collar clean.
The fact of the matter is that we as humans get dirty often around our collars.
Regards
Tejwant Singh