Quote:

I am not questioning the legitimacy of the panj piare, I am questioning what sounded to me like an implication of their deity.

I have answered your question a few times now.

Guruka Singh Khalsa is a very nice man, but he's not exactly sharing mainstream Sikh teaching. Take the best of what you find here. Ultimately you have to follow a path of your own choosing. And that is perfectly fine. I am happy to try and answer any question you ask, and you don't even have to agree. (Definitely question what I say, I'm a morakh!) You're starting to wear kara and want to tie dastaar. I applaud you and hope you dive very deeply into Sikhi. 3HO people do a lot of good things as a Jatha. They were friends of Bhai Fauja Singh Shaheed at a time when being a friend was dangerous. I respect that.

Quote:

"So Guru gives you a secret, he gives you a formula. And that is, for you, a thing you need individually and personally to connect yourself to that touchstone within yourself. And that thing is unique for each person. And that thing is what we call Naam. So people who are rigid in saying, "this is the only mantra or Naam is this and Naam is not that... It's a state of being. It's a frequency. It's an experience. It's deep. It's universal. No one owns it. It doesn't belong to this religion or that religion. It's much deeper than that." -Guruka Singh Khalsa

According to this rather loose definition of Naam ਨਾਮੁ (which literally means God's Name), it's a thing unique for each person, it's univeral, it doesn't belong to this or that religion. And it's only people being "rigid" who say "this is the only mantra...no one owns it..."

Well the deciding factor for a Sikh isn't anyones or even his own opinion, but what is Gurmat (mind and intention of the Guru). And unequivocally Gurbani is Gurmat. And if Gurbani says Naam is chanting the Name of the Lord, no other definition could be there. No matter if somebody had 20 million fantastic experiences and claimed to be a brahmgyani and fireworks were going off... he could not persuade a single Sikh to believe against Gurbani. Because Sikhism is about submission to a Satguru.

Even Harbhajan Singh Yogi. He was a Tantric yoga master. Did he write instructions about how to do yoga that 3HO follw? Or did he say, do it any way you like, whatever works and is unique to you is Tantric yoga and you can call yourself a Master? Last I checked, Kundalini Research Institute has very definite guidelines for their yoga practices and kundalini teacher training courses. Guruka Singh Khalsa is saying Naam is very loosely defined and individual and unique and no one has a monopoly on what it means. It can mean whatever an individual wants it to mean... But he wouldn't pass certification as a Kundalini yoga instructor with the 3HO seal if he didn't conform his yoga teachings and definitions to precisely what Yogi Bhajan and Sikh Dharma teach.

Is Yogi Bhajan more of a Master than Guru's bani?













Forgive my assumption, but a lot of converts bring some prior religious teaching into Sikhism. Perhaps I'm mistaken. But the terminology of "legalism" is really an artifact of Christianity and used by those who challenge either their own Church traditions or even Judaism based on biblical passages where Jesus corrected corrupt religious leaders as legalistic and unspiritual. Protestant Christians get so annoyed over a concept like praying to the Virgin Mary, because that implied Catholic Christians were going against the Bible to make her a deity.

When you said, "Are the Panj Piare human beings?" I remembered if I shared something about any other religious teacher, my family would say in accusatory tone: "are they human beings?" It wasn't a question. The implication was only Jesus is God. They are human, they are fallible and make mistakes. Only Jesus is infallible. No disciples, no Church, no Popes, no doctrine could stand between an individual's interpretation and experience... and Jesus. But it doesn't translate to Sikhism.

Sikh teaching is somewhat different. And I suppose it's confusing because people talk about 10 Guru's. But, it isn't 10 Guru's, it's 1 Guru in 10 physical forms. All the 10 Guru's and the 11th Shabad Guru Ji Maharaaj have the same Jyot. The Shabad Jyot passed from one form to another like transmission. And when Guru passed Gurgaddhi (Guruship) to the Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, he also passed Gurgaddhi to the 5 beloved ones, and also to the Panthic body of the Khalsa (Guru Panth). This is why Sarbat Khalsa can be convened over difficult matters. Because the Sarbat Khalsa, like the Panj Piare has the Guruship. They have the right to pass Gurmattas (declarations of Guru's intention).

Now as Jasleen Kaur Ji pointed out, an ordinary Singh goes for Panj Piara seva. But when the 5 are together, and only for the time they act as the 5 beloved ones, they have the transmission, they are Guru's sargun (perceivable) saroop (form). The moment the Singh comes out of Panj Piara seva, he is no longer a Panj Piara, but only an ordinary Singh. Guru Panth plus Guru Granth and Guruship of the Panj Piares is mainstream Sikh teaching. Naam


~Please forgive my mistakes and assumptions