A Conversation about the Grammatical Forms of Raam and Simran

Moved from a related thread at http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sukhma...sabad-1-a.html by spnadmin

AMBARSARIA ji,

I feel that the message of the PART of ASTAPADI interprated by your goodself
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/general-discussion/37746-conversation-about-grammatical-forms-raam-simran.html
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37746
is for the first person.This makes the interpretation quite different from what is being suggested.
How can we consider the word SIMAR-u as SIMAR-O.?
We can look at the interpretation with above consideration.One can refer to the meaning of the word SIMAR-u by Prof Sahib Singh .

Similarly the word MOH(i) in the last line is not connected to Guru Nanak as person.
The word Guru Nanak is PLURAL this should be considered.We should bear in mind that Guru Nanak in ierson is saying nothing.NAMAK in person has only conveyed the message He listened from GuR.
Prakash.S.Bagga

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

TARANJEET SINGh Ji,
You will surprise to know that the word RAAM NAAMu is not related to the word RAAM.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37746
You can see that the word RAAM is ADJECTIVE means OMNIPRESENT .Now you can understand the meaning of the word RAAM NAAMu/RAAM NAAM.
Prakash.S.Bagga

AMBARSARIA Ji,
If the word SUKHMANI is reference for Pearl of Peace then this word would have been a PROPER NOUN.You can notice that PROPER NOUN words are denoted with a Matra of AUKAD only.
So the meaning for the word SUKHMANI as givenin Mahankosh is appropriate.
Prakash.S.Bagga

Respected Sir,

I am very grateful for the pains you have taken for educating me on grammatical aspects of bani and do hope that I shall receive your blessings on continued basis.
I was not aware that RAAM was used as adjective.

But what is meant by RAAM /Raam was to convey GOD. [It is also presumed that Bhagat kabeer ji also used the word RAAM to indicate GOD and not Husband of Sita or son of Dashrath who are supposedly mythological figures.]


Thank you Sir and warm Regards!

TARANJEET SINGH Ji,

You can see that the word RAAM is PLURAL( Msculine) too so how this can be used to refer GOD (SINGULAR,MASCULINE) which is not any reference in Gurbani.In fact we are getting confused by making use of the word GOD in Gurbani.Whereas this is not a word of any reference in Gurbani.
We can not use any word by our own choice in interpretation of Gurbani.This is the beauty of Gurbani.
Similarly you can see that our preachers make use of the word PARAMATMAA .You can see that this word has not been used anywhere in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.It should be important to analyse equally.

It can be seen that all the references like RAAM,GOBIND,GOPAL,PARBRAHAM,PARMESAR etc......are for GuR JOT(i)
and this GuR JOT(i) in Gurbani is GuR(PLURAL,MASCULINE).This GuR JOT(i) has also been refered as GuRoo-GuR .
So pl try to analyse this observation from Gurbani.
Prakash.S.Bagga