Gurmat : Who is the deciding Authority

FiveLovedOnes · #31 (**permalink**) 07-Jun-2007, 23:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harjas Kaur Khalsa

Why thank you for your compliments.

I never said anywhere Gurbani was not Gurmat or that Gurmat did not come from the Guru. So stop distorting my words. The Khalsa Panth is not decided on issue of Dasam Granth and Sarbloh Granth as being Gurbani at this time, and I do believe Akal Takht asked people not to debate this until scholars can research more.

Because the issue is contentions within the Panth and both sides quoting the Shabadguru Ji. In this case I explained the secondary source material of rehitnamay and vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji being authoritative to clarify and settle disputes or questions. We know that these sources are Gurmat sources. Guruji Himself said Bhai Gurdas Ji was the "key" to understanding the Shabadguru Ji. So obviously Guruji must have felt that the Panth would have questions or disputes over the interpretation of Gurbani and require a key to unlock the mystery. Moreover, Bhai Gurdas Ji is recognized by the Panth as a brahmgyani, so we can't go wrong with the vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji when it comes to settling points of confusion or contention within the Panth.

I'm not posing to be a Khalsa, I am an amritdhari Sikh. Again, thank you for your kind attacks on my personal qualities and deliberate distortion of my words. As I explained very clearly regarding any question of dispute or contention over meaning of Gurmat teaching within the Panth, whether or not (in part or in full) the Dasam Granth or Sarbloh Granth is to be accepted as Gurbani has yet to be decided as a consensus within the Khalsa Panth. And this would be an example of something being hidden from the Panth until recently. As far as I understand, Damdami Taksal has accepted both. While both may be Gurbani, (words of Guru) neither would ever receive the status of Guru Granth in the same way as Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaaj. But this would be an example of things like (in Dasam Granth) we get some Nitname banis. Again, if you are amritdhari, you say your nitname, but nitname is not appearing in Shabadguru Ji. Is it invalid? Does this somehow infer we have no respect for Shabadguru Ji Maharaaj because the nitname banis are found in another source like Dasam Granth? If nitname banis (I believe 3 come from Dasam Granth, and not written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, does this invalidate Guruji? Are we invalid because we are reciting nitname from source other than Shabadguru Ji?

When it comes to scholarly discussion of matters such as sarbloh bibek or Naam drirh, these are not new, but have been preserved within the Panth. As things such as Naam drihr continues to be Gupt and only given by Panj Piare during amrit sinchaar, I cannot discuss the technique. Suffice to say, they are valid examples of Panthic practices which are not widely kept or even understood by majority of the Panth. Also something which was kept gupt was the khande de Pahul. The things which people debate and have contentions with so often are what does NOT expressly appear in Gurbani. Things such as getting amritchukk, keeping Panj Kakkars, requirement for Sikh to keep kes, wearing sarbloh kara and sarbloh kirpan also do not appear as something you can quote from Gurbani. Yet we know these are valid Sikh traditions and teachings that come from the Guru, thus are legitimate part of Gurmat Gursikhi. Some of this was kept gupt unless you became amritdhari. And in some cases the tradition and history of the practice was lost to the Panth in general, while preserved by certain sections of the Panth because of infiltration by mahants, the British, and armed warfare, and persecution. this is simply stating a historical and scholarly reality. It has nothing to do with disrespecting Guruji or invalidation authority of Gurbani. Even the validity of Panj Piare are not expressly written in Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaaj. Does this mean we disrespect validity of Gurbani? Does this mean we disrespect validity of Panj Piare?

It is accepted Panthic tradition that Guru Ji Himself established the Panj Piare. But there is no citation anywhere in Gurbani to prove this. That is why to narrow Gurmat Gursikhi to Shabadguru Ji alone is not even possible. If you eliminate as Gurmat anything NOT written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, you eliminate a lot. And this is really the root of where errors and anti-Panthic distortions come in, where people say things like, "Sikhs don't need to wear panj kakkars because it doesn't say so Gurbani." Or, "Sikhs don't need to keep their kes, it doesn't even say so in Gurbani." Or "Sikhs don't need to become amritdhari, it doesn't say so in Gurbani." But if you consult Panthic authorities on these matters, such assertions will be shown false. Gurmat Gursikhi involves some things which are not expressly found in Shabadguru Ji Maharaaj. And must be because Guruji's sargun saroop is not only in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, but also in His Takhts, also in His Panj Piare, also in His Panth. AND IMPORTANTLY, these sources do not CONTRADICT. I ALREADY SAID ANYTHING WHICH CONTRADICTS THE GURBANI IS FALSE. These sources CLARIFY, that is the difference.

Just because something is not directly cited in Gurbani, doesn't mean there isn't secondary source material which has supported it, or that Panj Piare or the Takhts, or Akal Takht has not clarified this for the Panth.

Waheguru/Vaheguru Gurmantar is not found written in the Shabadguru Ji. Yet, we know from vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji that Waheguru is the Gurmantar of Guruji. So this would be an example that some things which are Gurmat and Panthic are not expressly stated in the Shabadguru Ji. This is not to imply that Shabadguru Ji is incomplete, but rather, as I stated clearly, that certain things were kept gupt. You are given Gurmantar when you take amrit. And it is received from the sargun saroop of Guruji Himself in the form of the Panj Piare. And since the Panj Piare and Akal Takht are the sargun saroop of Guruji Himself, whatever is their hukam is also the hukam of Guruji. And this hukam is obviously Gurmat, not contradicting Shabadguru Ji, but nonetheless, will not appear in Gurbani. So this is what I mean when I say some Gurmat teaching is not written expressly in Shabadguru Ji but comes from sources such as Akal Takht, Panj Piare, etc.

That is not correct. Naam drirh is based on saas giras simran (which is stated many times in Gurbani), but is a technique which is not imparted to everybody. It can only be imparted by Panj Piare. We can read saas giras in Gurbani, but what does this mean? Is it the same as saas saas simran? Is it just a way of doing pranayama with the Gurmantar? Are we all clearly certain what the Gurmantar is since it isn't written in Gurbani? If you gather several Sikhs at a camp, they are all doing differently. Some are quietly meditating on a meaningful shabad. Some are practicing meditation. Some are saying over and over the word, Waheguru. Some are singing Waheguru. Why is this if everybody who reads Gurbani knows how to do it? Why is it that many amritdharis were never even taught what the Gurmantar even is, and instead chant "satinaam," or "Om?" It is because it is NOT evident from the Gurbani, it is gupt, and certain portion of the Panth has completly forgotten how to do and teach Naam simran. But since you are criticizing and correcting me, and you state that anybody who can read Gurbani knows how to do Naam Simran, would you please take the time and explain it for us all? You won't, because you don't know, and you will only expose what you don't know. So saying everybody knows, then not even clarifying what it is everyone knows is just argumentative and sharing nothing. You really believe everyone in the Panth clearly understands and knows how to do Naam simran? Then why is it a contentious issue (point of disagreement) within the Panth?

As far as I know the Panj Piare speaks the word of Guru Ji, although it is not expressly "Gurbani." I do not have the power to invalidate Guruji. Guruji established the Panj Piare so that certain Gurmat things gupt to everyone else would be preserved and known by Guru's Sikhs.

AGAIN bhull chuk maaf karni Ji.
Apart from talking about my personal characteristics, I fail to see you explain an alternative to the initial question or where the explanation given is in error, except to assume that everything Gurmat is written about in Shabadguru Ji, and clearly that is not the case, or Sikhs would not have amrit, Panj Piare, kakkars, nitname, Takhts, Naam simran using Waheguru Gurmantar, or even support why they keep kes. This is because what is Gurmat isn't only known by what is written in Dhan Dhan Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. But what is Gurmat Gursikhi does not contradict Shabadguru Ji. Everything which is Gurmat absolutely comes from the Guru.

I did not say Gurbani is invalid or incomplete or should not be respected. I did not say Gurbani is not Gurmat or Shabdaguru Ji is not Guru. I said when there is contention about Gurmat understanding, the Panth can validly look to secondary sources for clarification, to Rehitnamay, Vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji, to Panj Piare, and can even take it all the way to Akal Takht. And Panthic means the consensus of the Panth. Because Khalsa Panth as a corporate body is also sargun saroop of Guruji. So if something is not accepted by the Panth, you can rest assured, there is a problem with it. Example being Hps definition that "no no no, Waheguru is not God." And nowhere in Shabadguru Ji does it say "Waheguru." But in vaaran of Bhai Gurdas Ji, it says clearly "Waheguru, God." And "The Gurus recited Word-Guru as Vahiguru who is beyond the Vedas and Katebas." So this is an example of how Gurmat understanding is obtained during disagreement using secondary sources to clarify what is gupt within Gurbani (here is example of Waheguru/Vahiguru Gurmantar which otherwise does not directly appear in Gurbani, but it can be inferred and does not contradict, and is expressly stated by the person Guruji said was the "key to understanding Gurbani.".)

It is a good discussion between both of U n i appreciate ur love for sikhi in both of U.good for both of u to have this wonderful discussion n clearing each other's minds.But again finally following is the last resort.Sikhi means following Guru's bachaans.Those who love their guru's feet days n nights love everything he offered us-namely SHRI GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI MAHARAJ,DASAM GRANTH,SARABLOH N OTHERS GREAT THINGS INCLUDING 5K'S.Only those who have less trust n love for Guru come out with ambiguities like this of accepting guru granth sahib Ji n not other granths.All belong to Guru n so all r ours.Follow all as they r words of Guru n blessings from the Dearest Guru who loves n cares about us days n nights.See all his things as same,treat all Gurus as same n give equal respect to saints n devotees as they have already found the beloved Master.
Whenever I remember Guru I Love to keep the image of all ten gurus before my eyes as i see them all as same one god form.So dear friends treat n understand all ur Guru's blessings as same.No less n No more.

SAT SHRI AKAL.

luv4u · #32 (**permalink**) 07-Jun-2007, 23:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sachchasoda

ang 36

mnmuK mYlu n auqrY ijcru gur sbid n kry ipAwru ]
munumukh mail n outhurai jichur gur subadh n kurae piaar
The filth of the self-willed manmukhs is not washed off; they have no love for the Guru's Shabad.
and
cwry kuMfw Biv Qky mnmuK bUJ n pwie ]
chaarae kunddaa bhav thukae munumukh boojh n paae
The self-willed manmukhs grow weary of wandering around in all four directions, but they do not understand.
selfishness acts the same way for an individual or a community.
gurshabad is the only solution for all

A nice quote jeo. You are doing all fireworks today.
Gurushabad should be word uttered by Guru Sahibs, I hope. Kindly elaborate for our benefit.

sachchasoda · #33 (**permalink**) 08-Jun-2007, 00:01 AM

Gurshabad for a Sikh is what Guru Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is saying.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/15306-gurmat-who-is-the-deciding-authority.html

luv4u dear do you have any doubts?

FiveLovedOnes · #34 (**permalink**) 28-Dec-2009, 11:14 AM

To me,the discussion topic itself makes no sense.when hps says that there is one god n that is not waheguru,the whole discussion comes to an end....hps has not yet evolved from childhood(mind level) yet n haven't learnt yet that One true God has his name Waheguru.This name is becoz of his virtues.All he do,has done n will be doing is all praiseable n he makes his sikhs who follow him also praised by all..example Bhai mani Singh Ji,bhai Taru Singh Ji,Bhai Budda Ji n lot many others.....His virtues got him this name.besides this he has many more names n all represent his virtues.Example Gopal.This name he got becoz he alone single handed takes care of all his creation,provide food,heals injuries of his creatures when injured,n lot lot miliions millions such tasks.In fact his tasks r countless.....N he does it with great ease n never gets tired of it...In fact he enjoys serving his creation n so he got the name "Gopal".That's why sikhism has great importance for seva.Sikhs should follow Waheguru n adopt his some virtues too as taught by ten gurus n Gurubani.... Likewise he has lot many names...Ek Onkar ,Sat Naam ,Karta Purukh, Nirbhau, Nirver , akalmurut ajuni Saibhung........r all his virtues...So the question of discussion itself is not proper....SIMPLE.......

......

....:ha ppy:.....

.....

Narayanjot Kaur · #35 (**permalink**) 28-Dec-2009, 11:52 AM

Piaaree Five Loved Ones ji

hps ji is no longer active on SPN. However others will appreciate your message.

max314 · #36 (**permalink**) 31-Dec-2009, 08:24 AM

Those who compete with their egos to be seen as the 'most pure', the 'most noble', the 'most obedient' of all Guru's däs will forever be condemned to being anything but.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=15306

Those who follow the interpretations of other men blindly and without reflection in an attempt to be seen as the 'most pure', the 'most noble', the 'most obedient' of all Guru's däs will forever be condemned to being anything but.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=15306

And those who wish to be seen as the 'most pure', the 'most noble', the 'most obedient' of all Guru's däs for reasons they cannot explain will be forever condemned to being anything but.

Nothing happens without He who wills it to happen. The Guru's will is absolute and inescapable. Whatever choice you make is the choice you are meant to make.

Be at peace with this, for the journey outwards is illusion. The only reality is the journey in the opposite direction.