Literal Meaning of Gurbani

Daanveer · #1 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 00:05 AM

Literal Meaning of Gurbani

Gurbani is dear to many. Some read Gurbani every day, some as a rehat, some read it occassionaly.

I have noticed some people question the acceptance of the literal meaning of Gurbani. I am surprised to see that happening even under 'GURMAT VICHAAR' Section.

If we say that literal meaning is wrong: Isn't that imply that we are saying-GURU IS LYING.

CAN A TRUE GURU LIE TO HIS FOLLOWERS?

In my neechan neech budhi- GURU IS RIGHT IN LITERAL SENSE.

If anybody is telling me a meaning that does't go in line with the literal meaning of that Gurbani Line- CAN NOT BE REGARDED AS GURMAT.

For Example:

ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥
गुरु नानकु नानकु हरि सोइ ॥४॥७॥९॥
Gur Nānak Nānak har soė. ||4||7||9||
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/20491-literal-meaning-of-gurbani.html
Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is the Lord Himself. ||4||7||9||

Any person who knows Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu, khari boli will tell you that it tells us- Guru Nanak is God Himself. So Guru is telling us- GURU NANAK IS LORD HIMSELF.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491

If somebody comes to us and tells us, No it is the literal meaning, He cant be God.

Should I listen to him/her or My Guru?

Obviously my Guru: GURU KNOWS BETTER THAN US AND HIM/HER.

LITERAL MEANING IS ALWAYS RIGHT- INTERPRETATION HAS TO GO IN LINE WITH THE LITERAL MEANING.

carolineislands · #2 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 00:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daanveer

Literal Meaning of Gurbani

Gurbani is dear to many. Some read Gurbani every day, some as a rehat, some read it occassionaly.

I have noticed some people question the acceptance of the literal meaning of Gurbani. I am surprised to see that happening even under 'GURMAT VICHAAR' Section.

If we say that literal meaning is wrong: Isn't that imply that we are saying-GURU IS LYING.

CAN A TRUE GURU LIE TO HIS FOLLOWERS?

In my neechan neech budhi- GURU IS RIGHT IN LITERAL SENSE.

If anybody is telling me a meaning that does't go in line with the literal meaning of that Gurbani Line- CAN NOT BE REGARDED AS GURMAT.

For Example:

ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥
गुरु नानकु नानकु हरि सोइ ॥४॥७॥९॥
Gur Nānak Nānak har so*ė. ||4||7||9||
Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is the Lord Himself. ||4||7||9||

Any person who knows Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu, khari boli will tell you that it tells us- Guru Nanak is God Himself. So Guru is telling us- GURU NANAK IS LORD HIMSELF.

If somebody comes to us and tells us, No it is the literal meaning, He cant be God.

Should I listen to him/her or My Guru?

Obviously my Guru: GURU KNOWS BETTER THAN US AND HIM/HER.

LITERAL MEANING IS ALWAYS RIGHT- INTERPRETATION HAS TO GO IN LINE WITH THE LITERAL MEANING.

I am new to Sikhi and it seems from the largest percentage of posts on this topic that most of the people (at least on this board) believe that Guru IS God and that there is no difference. That says to me that Sikhs actually DO believe that Guru Nanak was God incarnate. Which logically would prove that Sikhs (at least some Sikhs) actually DO worship the Guru as God. In which case, new people coming in who ask this question should be told the truth about it. When I first came in I asked if Sikhs worship Guru and see Guru as God and was told no, they do not. Now I'm thinking, but they DO.

So my suggestion is that when new people come in asking if you worship Guru as God and believe there is no difference between Guru and God, you should tell them yes. You believe Guru IS God. In which case the general perception that Sikhi is the most pure monotheism might not actually be accurate.

I mean no disrespect, so I apologize if anyone is offended by this.

Narayanjot Kaur · #3 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 00:44 AM

Caroline ji

These two comments back and forth then raise another question

Who is Guru -- of course also answered on several other threads.

When new people are told that Guru is God will they know what "Guru" refers to? Or is it better for new people to go through an evolving process to understand the idea of "Guru? The process of discussion, reflection, re-thinking, and questioning may be a way to make a complicated idea in the end something that one understands in all of its complexity.

ekmusafir_ajnabi · #4 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daanveer

Literal Meaning of Gurbani

Gurbani is dear to many. Some read Gurbani every day, some as a rehat, some read it occassionaly.

I have noticed some people question the acceptance of the literal meaning of Gurbani. I am surprised to see that happening even under 'GURMAT VICHAAR' Section.

If we say that literal meaning is wrong: Isn't that imply that we are saying-GURU IS LYING.

CAN A TRUE GURU LIE TO HIS FOLLOWERS?

In my neechan neech budhi- GURU IS RIGHT IN LITERAL SENSE.

If anybody is telling me a meaning that does't go in line with the literal meaning of that Gurbani Line- CAN NOT BE REGARDED AS GURMAT.

For Example:

ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥
गुरु नानकु नानकु हरि सोइ ॥४॥७॥९॥
Gur Nānak Nānak har soė. ||4||7||9||
Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is the Lord Himself. ||4||7||9||

Any person who knows Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu, khari boli will tell you that it tells us- Guru Nanak is God Himself. So Guru is telling us- GURU NANAK IS LORD HIMSELF.

If somebody comes to us and tells us, No it is the literal meaning, He cant be God.

Should I listen to him/her or My Guru?

Obviously my Guru: GURU KNOWS BETTER THAN US AND HIM/HER.

LITERAL MEANING IS ALWAYS RIGHT- INTERPRETATION HAS TO GO IN LINE WITH THE LITERAL MEANING.

Danveer ji,

ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥
गुरु नानकु नानकु हरि सोइ ॥४॥७॥९॥
Gur Nānak Nānak har soė. ||4||7||9||
Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is the Lord Himself. ||4||7||9||

If you care to give the tuk another glance you my have a different experience. The ending word is ਸੋਇ and NOT ਸੋਈ.

If it were the latter then I would have whole heartedly agreed with you. Many who along with you think that during the presence of Guru Nanak Dev ji on this Earth that He was God, I can categorically say this that you are all wrong. Once the soul mearges with God then it becomes God and cannot be seperated. Then there is no Guru Nanak but God Himself. The translation should be as follows:
ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ = Nanak the Guru
ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ = Nanak also belongs to the Lord. (He is also of the Hari hence ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ . if it were written as ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਈ then one would have translated as "He is the HAR". None of the Gurus have laid claims that they were God. It is a grave misunderstanding of Sikhs. I can sympathise with those whose mother tongue is not Punjabi but those whose mother tongue is Punjabi they need to brush-up thier knowledge before making these statements.

Ekmusafir_ajnabi

Daanveer · #5 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 02:17 AM

Caroline Ji,
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491
I haven't said that there are multiple Gods.

Monothism: meaning Believe in One God. Guru tells us the same thing. Guru Ji explains very clearly this over and over again. Calling 'Guru is God', doesn’t lead me neechan neech to think that there are more than one God. If it's leading you to believe that- Waheguru help you.

Truth is truth, remain the same: Guru Nanak is God Himself.

Here is another one in the same context:
"Jot Roop HARAap Guru Nanak Kahayio"
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ang (1408)

"The Lord Almighty caused Himself to be called as Guru Nanak"

Ek Ji,

Guru is not limited to a body made of flesh and blood Ek Ji.
BRAHMGYANI AAP PARMESAR.

EK JI – I NEVER SAID IT IS Soei with Bari EE Di Matraa=Bihaari. It seems like you are teaching some new grammer rules- when were they made?
Or is this Punjabi some different language, and Punjab somewhere else: other than northern India?

And my mother tongue is Punjabi(spoken in PUNJAB-INDIA). And I am in that Punjab 50% of the time, speaking and teaching SHUDH PUNJABI, nowadays. Before I was in the same Punjab solely for 61 years.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491

SABH GOBIND HAI SABH GOBIND HAI

carolineislands · #6 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 02:47 AM

With all due respect, the misunderstanding could be because of language differences. I do not speak Punjabi and am a native English speaker with only English and Caribbean French languages at my command. I do see that many of the concepts in Sikhi are UNwestern enough that it takes a little effort on the part of those of us who aren't raised in Sikhi to grasp them. I also am coming from a background in which a religion that claims to be monotheistic has taken their founder (Jesus) and elevated him to the level of God, calling him God in the flesh. It seems that Jesus never really meant to be thought of as God from his teachings and yet people have elevated him to actually be one and the same with God. Therefore they have created a concept very similar to the one I am reading here about Guru and God as one.

And yet there are some very learned Sikhs who do not agree that Guru IS God. Many believe that God is in Guru and God is in us but neither Guru Nanak OR any other human IS actually God.

This Sikhs don't agree on this topic, obviously. Which is just a part of being human and understanding things in different ways.

Now, from what little I have learned so far about the message of Guru Nanak, he taught that each person should question and seek for understanding and praise and worship only God and that human beings, even though we have part of God IN us, are all fallible and lowly. That we are powerless without God. I also understand Guru Nanak's message to be very inclusive and non-judgemental in that no one person is to be declaring what is true and correct to another, but that each person comes to truth in their own way, thus the concept of all religions belonging to God even though they have so many different (and seemingly conflicting) ways of understanding God and practicing their faith.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491

But I am a native English speaker and I'm sure there is much about Gurbani that I will never fully understand. What is important to me is that God is not limited in the message of the Guru, and the limitless God is adored and sought after with all the heart. And I also love the inclusiveness of Sikhi.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491

I will always be a little sceptical of concepts that elevate human beings to the level of God. I personally don't believe that Guru Nanak meant to be elevated in that way as his writings seem very humble and always point to the singularity of Waheguru and the lowliness of humanity.

Ekmusafir's post seems to have evidence that Guru Nanak did NOT mean to be elevated to the level of God.

Pyramid · #7 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daanveer

Literal Meaning of Gurbani

Gurbani is dear to many. Some read Gurbani every day, some as a rehat, some read it occassionaly.

I have noticed some people question the acceptance of the literal meaning of Gurbani. I am surprised to see that happening even under 'GURMAT VICHAAR' Section.

If we say that literal meaning is wrong: Isn't that imply that we are saying-GURU IS LYING.

CAN A TRUE GURU LIE TO HIS FOLLOWERS?

In my neechan neech budhi- GURU IS RIGHT IN LITERAL SENSE.

If anybody is telling me a meaning that does't go in line with the literal meaning of that Gurbani Line- CAN NOT BE REGARDED AS GURMAT.

For Example:

ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਇ ॥੪॥੭॥੯॥
गुरु नानकु नानकु हरि सोइ ॥४॥७॥९॥
Gur Nānak Nānak har soė. ||4||7||9||
Nanak is the Guru; Nanak is the Lord Himself. ||4||7||9||

Any person who knows Hindi, Punjabi, Urdu, khari boli will tell you that it tells us- Guru Nanak is God Himself. So Guru is telling us- GURU NANAK IS LORD HIMSELF.

If somebody comes to us and tells us, No it is the literal meaning, He cant be God.

Should I listen to him/her or My Guru?

Obviously my Guru: GURU KNOWS BETTER THAN US AND HIM/HER.

LITERAL MEANING IS ALWAYS RIGHT- INTERPRETATION HAS TO GO IN LINE WITH THE LITERAL MEANING.

Very Well Said.

There will always be people who wont read Gurbani themselves to find the truth.
Like the example you have given: I cant even count times Guru Ji says that Guru/God Oriented/Saint/Brahmgyani is God Himself. There is no distinction at all between Guru and God. Guru Ji has confirmed this in many different ways.
About this question in general:'Is Guru God?': Guru Ji answers every question of a seeker in very plain words. He has said this many many times and many many ways that Guru is God, No difference between God Oriented and God.
Many Many times words 'Guru' and 'God' is used interchangebly: A PRACTICAL DISPLAY OF THE TRUTH-no distiction between Guru and God.

HE NEVER SAYS EVEN A SINGLE TIME: There is a difference between Guru and God.

Literal Meaning cant change- like this one is:
Hum Kookar Tere Darbaar, Bhonkay aagay badan pasaar.
Can the explanation change what is being said-No.

Who can change Guru's Word- No one.

Tuhada Das
Yograj

Pyramid · #8 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 03:52 AM

The same concept is repeated several different ways. So there cant be a chance of error at all.

Danveer Ji,

Even regarding the translations in english and Punjabi, I see that you get the idea - the essence- what is being said by Guru Ji.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=20491

Tuhada Das
Yograj

Pyramid · #9 (**permalink**) 13-Mar-2008, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daanveer

Here is another one in the same context:
"Jot Roop HARAap Guru Nanak Kahayio"
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ang (1408)

"The Lord Almighty caused Himself to be called as Guru Nanak"

SABH GOBIND HAI SABH GOBIND HAI

This is another one goes with the first example.
Good.

Tuhada Das
Yograj