Naam and Name

Waheguru ji ka khalsa! Waheguru ji ki fateh !!
dear khalsa ji , in gurbani guruji has never mentioned about any concearn about worldly achievements , though he has taken examples from this naashwan world . Here nirdhan means the person who doesnt have blessings of GOD ,who is not his beloved one. and same stands for nithawan . In gurbani it is mentioned HUM RULTE FIRTE KOI BAAT NA POOCHTA !! here it dosent mean one is unnoticed in this useless world , the saying as said by Guruji himself means O'LORD it is you who cares for us. I may be wrong in interpretation please forgive me if I have done any blunders while expressing my views .

 
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!

Gurfateh.

Naam Simran is the process of cleansing the soul. As the soul gets cleansed, a strange sense of pure joy or Chardian Kalan starts enveloping the person. Of coarse we being ordinary mortals do tend to slide back but Naam again puts one back on the track. It is a case of two steps forward and one step backward. As one gets into the state of Chardisn Kalan, the person gains confidence and becomes capable of providing for his legitimate physicsl needs. And if help comes his way he becomes capable of making proper use of it and does not squander it.

If Bill Gates through his philanthrophy helps the needy his must understand that he is able to do this work because of HIS Hukam and not because he (Bill Gates) has desired it. If such a realisation strikes him he will experience the true bliss of Seva. This will bring him closer to the ONE and he will not get emotionally entangled with those God has led him to help.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/23952-naam-and-name.html

So both, those with wordly wealth and those without benfit equally through Naam Simran to whatever religion they may belong.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

In our Ardas we say, "Sikhan da man neevan, mat uchi, mat da rakha aap Waheguru"
So those Sikhs who endeavour to keep the desires of their "Man" in control through superior "Mat" with the help of Naam then Waheguru helps them in their endevour.

Whatever I have written above are not my original thoughts but are just recollections of my inferior intellect of Kathas heard in the company of Sadhsangat.

May I be forgiven for any incorrect understanding.

Harbans Singh

Gurmit_Singh ji
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

You said, After indicating the given Password and log in, I could not proceed further due to plenty directions just as excess of everything is bad. I will try again with the help of some
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

Forgive the digression. If you can read this message, send a moderator an email message to figure out why you had a problem logging on. Or contact Aman Singh ji -- you don't have to be logged in to do it. You can just select the Contact Us link at the top of the page.

I agree with Gyani Jarnail singh Arshi that name of god is a requirement of both the rich and the poor.

One of my Gurbani students made the following observation on Naam in Gurbani. Name is usually a Proper Noun....and given to us by our Parents/authority figure/etc. Since God doesnt have any parents/authority over Him...He has NO PROPER NOUN as a "Name" as we all do. All the "Names" of God...are Descriptive/adjectives/...attributes of Him...and given by his followers..
I disagree. The Lord has created humans that only can name Him, actually they name for every thing. Gyani ji, you name it to what we don’t name. There are many proper names that qualify the persons or a thing. Guru Gobind Singh ji named his Singh’s to qualify their qualities. Theory of proper name in concept of Lord’s name is not acceptable, I call HIM quiet often Dad...... what kind of attribute it can be? ..As long as a word brings His memory into mind, it’s His Name…….. After all, only a word is used to click memory button.

As such some call Him Raam..the All Permeating Lord....Rahim..the Giver...the Sustainer..The Beneficient..the Kind One..etc etc. These are called KIRTAM Names in Punajbi lingo.

In the light of this observation....my student observed that in Sukhmani ashtpadee 3..TERO NAO....Nirdhan ko tero Nao....usually translated as..To the POOR..wealth is YOUR NAME...to the shelterless..shelter is YOUR NAME...etc etc doesnt make sense.
It does make make sense Gyani jio, nirdhan means poor, so as per Gurbani, we are all poor without the Lord, do not take it as the world takes its meaning because Maya(including wealth) is useless for the Lord’s seeker.
ਪੰਨਾ 855, ਸਤਰ 9
ਧਨਵੰਤਾ ਅਰੁਨਿਰਧਨਮਨਈ ਤਾ ਕੀ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਕਾਨੀ ਰੇ ॥
Ḏẖanvanṯā ar nirḏẖan man▫ī ṯā kī kacẖẖū na kānī re.
It gives no special consideration to either the rich or the poor.
ਭਗਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਜੀ
ਪੰਨਾ 964, ਸਤਰ 2
ਜਿਸ ਨੋ ਵਿਸਰੈ ਨਾਉ ਸੁਨਿਰਧਨੁ ਕਾਂਢੀਐ ॥
Jis no visrai nā▫o so nirḏẖan kāʼndẖī▫ai.
One who forgets the Name, is known as a poor person.
ਮਃ 5
If whole concept is taken, it actually looks more beautiful

The "NAME" as in the case of the POOR would be Someone who gives them WEALTH....a human donor.... Philanthropist.... like Bill Gates who follows GOD in his heart and wishes to donate his GOD given wealth among the POOR. This ACTION of Bill gates woudl be acting out God's KIRTAM NAME as THE BENEFICIENT..the GIVER..the SUSTAINER....
Not exactly, it has no value in Gurmat, giving away or charity is questioned many times and considered not important if the Lord is not remembered, in living in His love, purpose of the charity changes because
ਪੰਨਾ 56, ਸਤਰ 13
ਪੁੰਨਦਾਨਚੰਗਿਆਈਆ ਬਿਨੁ ਸਾਚੇ ਕਿਆ ਤਾਸੁ ॥
Punn ḏān cẖang▫ā▫ī▫ā bin sācẖe ki▫ā ṯās.
you may give donations to charity, and perform good deeds, but without the True One, what is the use of it all?
ਮਃ 1
So only the Charity considered worth is Lord’s Name (Given by Guru as per Gurbani). Lord’s name projects Lord’s image in mind in simple words, that is the real charity the seeker seeks, seekers of wealth are shooting in their own feet in context of spiritual world because all we wish actually drag us deep into attachment

. ਪੰਨਾ 91, ਸਤਰ 15
ਨਿਤ ਦੇਵਹੁਦਾਨੁ ਦਇਆਲ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ॥
Niṯḏevhu ḏān ḏa▫i▫āl parabẖ har nām ḏẖi▫ā▫i▫ā.
O Merciful God, please grant me the gift of continual meditation on the Lord's Name.
ਮਃ 4
Real GIVER is Him, Bill Gate is medium, spiritual seekers take all done is executed by Him, including what they do. Following Guru Vaak stresses the above stated idea in concept of Lord and other deeds praised by the world. Guru is not met, Lord is not realized, acting like Hari Chand(or Bill Gate) will get praise from the world but what kind of use this praise has as per Gurbani? He is “Karta” Active Creator, His ferformance is seen through the mediums
ਪੰਨਾ 174, ਸਤਰ 13
ਆਪੇ ਜਗਤੁ ਉਪਾਇਦਾ ਮੇਰੇ ਗੋਵਿਦਾ ਹਰਿਦਾਨੁ ਦੇਵੈ ਸਭ ਮੰਗੀ ਜੀਉ ॥
Āpe jagaṯ upā▫iḏā mere goviḏā har ḏān ḏevai sabẖ mangī jī▫o.
He Himself created the world, O my Lord of the Universe; the Lord gives His gifts to all who beg for them.
ਮਃ 4
ਹਰੀਚੰਦੁ ਦਾਨੁ ਕਰੈ ਜਸੁ ਲੇਵੈ ॥
Harīcẖanḏ ḏān karai jas levai.
Hari Chand gave in charity, and earned public praise.
ਬਿਨੁ ਗੁਰ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇ ਅਭੇਵੈ ॥
Bin gur anṯ na pā▫e abẖevai.
But without the Guru, he did not find the limits of the Mysterious Lord.
You see, mere acts of Hari Chand remained useless in spiritual journey due to not having a true Guru as Guru convinces who actually deserves the credit of all this

Similarly whoever builds HOMES for the HOMELESS is follwiing Gods NAME as the Sustainer..builder..giver etc...

SO NIrdhan KO DHan tero Naao means to a Poor man to be Given wealth is like "acting out" One of your Names....
You have misunderstood Guru vaak totally. It means the Lord is real wealth

NAAM should be WEALTH to ALL....why single out the POOR ONLY ??

As stated above, all are poor, when His Name is obtained then real wealth is obtained, what wealth is this that is left here for others. In spiritual world, what is big deal in worldly show becomes meaningless for the Lord Seeker.
Can the POOR survive ONLY on "Naam" ??
It is no about biological needs, it’s about spiritual diet, be aware.
Dont the wealthy need such "Naam" ??
Wealthy of this world are the poorest if they don’t have Lord in mind, Gurbani stresses on it, it is a concept, either take the whole or don’t, and never take it in parts otherwise it will be horrible interpretation
So to say ONLy the Nirdhan take your "Naam" as wealth is patronising translation...why wouldnt the welathy take it as "wealth" too ?? Since Gurbani is always correct..the transaltions interpretations must be faulty..
As put very correctly by Aman Singh ji on another thread, one is limited as per one’s limited knowledge, mastery over English doesn’t guarantee to make some one the best interpreter, Khuswant Singh is one good example of it and many others too fall in this category. I agree with you hundred percent, all translation I have come across is faulty regardless the author. Unfortunately, Gurbani literally cannot be translated in complete sense, only in essence, Guru Message can be conveyed. Worse things happen when translator fails to go beyond the word that carries much more weight then its appearance.
Gyani jio, I have just presented my views as I understand Gurbani, I have not intended to prove you wrong at all, so forgive me if my words hurt you any way.

[quote=VaheguruSeekr;93166]
The moment we name the infinite, it ceases being The Infinite but becomes finite.
Infinite remains infinite only one becomes aware of His infinity, please do not limit concept of “the Infinite”, even who experienced Him didn’t say that.

To know Ik Ong kaar, the Infinite, is to measure one's actions and deeds when no one is looking.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952
It would have been better if you have said as Gurbani says “to know Him is to abandon “self”, after that actions change any way, one cannot measure one’s action if “Self” goes deep into “self righteousness” I admit, the idea you have conveyed is good though and I am just adding to it.

These are the building blocks that Gurbani teaches us to build our character on.

Ik Ong Kaar is an experience: "Gungei di Mittheaaiee - No words can describe Ik Ong Kaar.
Well said, I cannot agree more than that and that is another reason many fail to understand what Guru ji and Bhagatas say about their experience with HIM, a few seekers would get it.

Guru Granth says: "Merei Laal jeeoh, tera anth nah janah/ Tun jul, thul maheehal, bhurh bhur leena, tun aapei sarab samanah." - My beloved, you are Infinite, you are in organic and in inorganic form and you create yourself.

In other words, Ik Ong Kaar is Creative Energy - Ajauni Saibhang. So what name shall we give THE ONE that encompasses all that and beyond?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952
Wonderful names are already given by Guru ji” Ikkonkaar, Kartar, Pritama…”

And what I understand by NAAM is that it is the Tool Box which help us build the bridge from Me-ism to One-ism as mentioned before, which is called character .
I disagree. Tool box has limits, you need them to modify time to time. Naam is Him, falling for Him changes every thing in us like our behavior, deeds and approach to even deal with evil deeds or face the death

Note No disrespect is intended if my comments felt otherwise please forgive me.

PK7o Ji,
Gurfateh.

You wrote..<<<Gyani jio, I have just presented my views as I understand Gurbani, I have not intended to prove you wrong at all, so forgive me if my words hurt you any way.<<<<<<

How could you even think such a thought Jio....IF I knew everything and was always correct..i wouldnt need anyone/anything.....NO..we are all learning....un-learning and RE_learning..ALL the time. Our Only Perfect Teacher..the One who really Knows ALL is GURU-GURUBANI...we are all somewhat inadequate interpreters in our own way..BUT we do complete the picture when we come together...
You NEVER have to write the above quote...to any reply of mine..ever. ( I used to get angry..offended....decades ago....when i was immature and young....NOT any more ( BUT again I am OLDER..not necessarily "mature" as compared to before...but the GURBANI has managed to douse many fires i have..one of them is krodh...)
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

Pk70,

Guru Fateh.

I think your posts are interesting. We all see different angles of the same prism called Gurbani. So when one says one disagrees with the other without giving a counter point but just twisiting what one has expressed, to me it is just for the sake of argument rather than pitching in. But I do appreciate your input and I thank you for that.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

I will just give you one example in order to avoid any argument. Like you said Tool box is limited. Well, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is only 1430 pages which is limited but not in its usage to make ourselves better. Now you can envision this in anyway you like.

I can dissect each of your statements and create a counter argument but that is not the point of this thread nor of my posts. Let's learn to pitch in, add and enhance others. Disagreements can be found the way each of us breathe if one wants to find them.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=23952

Tejwant Singh

Guru Fateh Vaheguruser ji

What do you mean by that? You are thanking me for what? You believe I twisted your views and I feel I didn’t. Elaborate it please because I didn’t mean what you are stating.

Well this is pretty funny. Sree Guru Granth Sahib is not limited as tool box could be because Guru Message goes beyond modification, tools fail as new technology comes, some are modified, Sri Guru Granth Sahib doesn’t need that. The fact is this my respected SPN member, you have failed to acknowledge my last statement where I put healing words in case your mind feels pinch but it didn’t work unfortunately.

Please do, I want to learn from you; however, threats are worthless.

If you reread my response, you should see "I disagreed; I pitched in" but look what it has done to you? You are threatening to dissect my posts; you are thanking me but still accusing me of twisting your views. I used word "add” that is pitch in, did you get it? No. All I read is a reaction of an angry mind who is desperately trying to control to sound civil. Well, I am open to hear my limitations, if it is you who can teach me, what more I can ask for. Go ahead.