Kavi Santokh Singh's Suraj Prakash and Nanak Prakash

Findingmyway ji,
How can that be? I am in agreement with you. If one wants to understand Sikhism, one must read and contemplate Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji PERIOD

If the focus is to know history then for that we will have to read historical texts, and do so without the veils of judgement and analysis first. (This is hard because like you say it's so easy to start judging) But your understanding of the text will be much stronger this way. After we read them then we can judge and analyze all we want, of course.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/36004-kavi-santokh-singhs-suraj-prakash-nanak.html
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36004

Kavi ji was of Maharaja's time. Reading his works provides insight into that time period (insight into political, religious, etc factors) and into that which he is writing about. The more books on a particular subject one reads the more insight is available. In the end, if one wants to understand Sikhism, one must read and contemplate Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

When it comes to beliefs, you give great advice. I would add that practice must be present with belief.

Spnadmin ji,
You are welcome and more power to you! Though I don't think it's so hard for people to see religion as different. Like you said it's pretty straight forward.

On the other hand, it's a steep cliff to see the One in it all, and no thesis can get you there (if you can write one that does, I will give you everything I have, for it). The shabad talks about both aspects of it all. It says religions are different (maybe in disagreement with each other) and yet there is the One in them and their goal is that One. This kind of respect that Guru ji had is much deeper than what you are I are familiar with. Since it's not language-based, it can not be put into words (hence no thesis can be written about it, sorry no paintings for you ). Guru Sahib advises that if one wants to experience this level of respect, if one wants to know what he is talking about, one should meditate on Naam. You already know that though.

Anyways, do let me know when you complete writing it. I am particularly interested in how you argue that visions of God are different.

 
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!

__________________
The intellect of the mind is like a drunken elephant. Whatever one utters is totally false, the most false of the false. - Guru Nanak, 351

I think the Shabad points out to different ways people are trying to reach God, and how God Himself is the controlling factor in what is revealed and what is not! God reveals and it is up to you to ask for more, more visions and wisdom from God. E.g. in the first of line of this Shabad, the Persian word Khwdai (خدای) means Lord, Master, Ruler etc and the word Ram means Ramya hoya, i.e. ਸਰਬ ਵਿਆਪੀ, so Guru Sahib is saying that God is one Ruler who is part of his Kingdom. Not like kings of ol' who went about in charriots, atop elephants or VIP of today who go about in car fleets.

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
Raamkalee, Fifth Mehl:

ਕੋਈ ਬੋਲੈ ਰਾਮ ਰਾਮ ਕੋਈ ਖੁਦਾਇ ॥
Some call Him, 'Raam, Raam', and some call Him, 'Khudaa-i'.

ਕੋਈ ਸੇਵੈ ਗੁਸਈਆ ਕੋਈ ਅਲਾਹਿ ॥੧॥
Some serve Him as 'Gusain', others as 'Allaah'. ||1||

ਕਾਰਣ ਕਰਣ ਕਰੀਮ ॥
He is the Cause of causes, the Generous Lord.

ਕਿਰਪਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਰਹੀਮ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
He showers His Grace and Mercy upon us. ||1||Pause||

ਕੋਈ ਨਾਵੈ ਤੀਰਥਿ ਕੋਈ ਹਜ ਜਾਇ ॥
Some bathe at sacred shrines of pilgrimage, and some make the pilgrimage to Mecca.|

ਕੋਈ ਕਰੈ ਪੂਜਾ ਕੋਈ ਸਿਰੁ ਨਿਵਾਇ ॥੨॥
Some perform devotional worship services, and some bow their heads in prayer. ||2||

ਕੋਈ ਪੜੈ ਬੇਦ ਕੋਈ ਕਤੇਬ ॥
Some read the Vedas, and some the Koran.

ਕੋਈ ਓਢੈ ਨੀਲ ਕੋਈ ਸੁਪੇਦ ॥੩॥
Some wear blue robes, and some wear white. ||3||

ਕੋਈ ਕਹੈ ਤੁਰਕੁ ਕੋਈ ਕਹੈ ਹਿੰਦੂ ॥
Some call themselves Muslim, and some call themselves Hindu.

ਕੋਈ ਬਾਛੈ ਭਿਸਤੁ ਕੋਈ ਸੁਰਗਿੰਦੂ ॥੪॥
Some yearn for paradise, and others long for heaven. ||4||

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਪਛਾਤਾ ॥
Says Nanak, one who realizes the Hukam of God's Will,

ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਕਾ ਤਿਨਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਜਾਤਾ ॥੫॥੯॥
knows the secrets of his Lord and Master. ||5||9||

Guru Sahib also talk about people recognizing God with different places and different forms of clothing. The followers call themselves with different names, but don't know the secrets of God.

I don't think that visions of God in completeness are different. But most people see God in some things and don't in others. Some see God in their love for children, some love their pets and thank God for their company. Some think about God while going for a walk and seeing the nature beauty all around them. It is a bit about how your senses are heightened to experience God. You experience God more when you try to connect with God more, like you said, using Naam.

Bhagat ji

Please do not patronize. When has Akaal ever threatened his Sikhs either through a Guru or directly? Here is a "Tale of Two Cities." And of two Gods: Only one does not seek expiation from his people, and one does.

Here is "God" speaking to the Israelites through isaiah as a warning for their sins

The Warning to Jerusalem (from the Hebrew Bible: Isaiah 28)

Following is Guru Nanak speaking about the historical event, the destruction of Lahore by Babar. In this shabad God is not making far-ranging threats against his "chosen" people. Rather Nanak is teaching, i.e., fixing moral consciousness where it belongs, for the benefit of armies and rulers driven by greed and ego, and on those who worship ignorance ignorantly. He uses the story of Hanuman, he is speaking to Hindu people, to illustrate his point. Yet liberation of the spirit even in this life is possible, by being centered in dharma. Wisdom is given when ego is forsaken. And Lahore is taken to be an ambrosial pool. Whereas Jerusalem is threatened with destruction.

There could not be 2 more different visions of God.

Forgive the brevity of my comments. I am not inclined at this moment in time to do a complete analysis of the shabad.

Kanwaljit ji

I do not draw your conclusion from the shabad. The shabad is part of a body of hymns composed when Guruji was on an Udassis. He was respectfully acknowledging that people do all these sorts of things. He was also rejecting these in favor of one thing

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਪਛਾਤਾ ॥
Says Nanak, one who realizes the Hukam of God's Will,

ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਕਾ ਤਿਨਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਜਾਤਾ ॥੫॥੯॥
knows the secrets of his Lord and Master. ||5||9||

The shabad is Guru Nanak's rejection of robes, rituals, colors of devotion, baths in sacred palces.... a very kind and respectful rejection... in favor of being a Gurmukh...one who turns his face away from distractions that appear religious and toward the Guru. The aim is to realize God's Will and leave behind the rest. Why am I adamant? Because the rehao iine is

ਕਾਰਣ ਕਰਣ ਕਰੀਮ ॥
He is the Cause of causes, the Generous Lord.

ਕਿਰਪਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਰਹੀਮ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
He showers His Grace and Mercy upon us. ||1||Pause||

This kartar purakhu who is akaal, without anger or enmity (unlike all the other representations of God in history) is Generous, full of Grace and Mercy, which he gives without asking for anything in return. Please forgive me. What could we give him? A pig, a goat, gold, an ox, a virgin? He is formless and needs nothing. He is the Giver of Everything not the Taker (unlike other gods). He is in everything and thus has everything, needs nothing, and never makes threats.

Many people approach history with assumptions and preconceptions. It is not used for validation but is used as informative. For example your statement earlier that Maharaja Ranjit Singh practiced Sikhi closer to the Guru's time. These assumptions are often dangerous as they colour understanding of Gurbani rather than Gurbani colouring the understanding of history. Our approach is where we differ. It is this very history that has caused do much Hindutva influence to remain in modern day Sikh practices-the very things the Guru's preached against.


There is a distinction between saying God is in all and believing concepts from other religions. Respect of others and accepting God in all does not mean I will start believing in Moses parting the sea or the Hindu gods as portrayed in their stories. This distinction is vital to stop us becoming slaves of Hindu mythology from which we were freed by the Gurus.

Spnadmin ji,
Yes I may have sounded patronizing though that was not my intention.

Yes words and concepts of different religions are different. For one That can be Vengeful for the other That is always Peaceful. What is important it to know That which is written about in scriptures in various ways.

It will be hard to respond to you (if you are looking for one from me) as I get the feeling you are very lost in the words and concepts. Lost meaning nothing else but that you are analyzing them and looking only in them for the Truth.

Remember, the Dao that can be named (fully - described, analyzed, judged, etc) is not the Dao.
[Though it's funny how Lao Tzu goes onto describe the Dao right after.
Guru Nanak does the same thing. Says I cannot describe Karta Purakh even if I could write at the speed of hurricanes and had ever flowing scrolls... then goes to do it anyways. ]

It's the only thing we have - language - to try and give form to the Formless. But Language cannot encapsulate the Formless. It is certainly part of the formless, and that's the only reason why it can even attempt to give the formless some form.

Think of the Karta Purakh as ink. Think of all the cultures, eras, people, views, environments, as different stamps. (or the other way around, it doesn't matter) When the ink (formless) makes a mark (form) through the stamp, it appears different because of the individual stamp used. We can quickly see how the mark is different but difficult to see the ink because it is taken for granted. The ink is on the stamp and the ink is in the marks, yet it is invisible. We are so used to the ink being there for us. WE are blind to it. But those who see the ink, know the secret. They have inner peace. They have no need to quarrel over what mark is what. It's all in the ink they say!

This is the essence of that shabad stated by stamp of Bhagat. You are also expressing that same essence with your stamp, as did Kanwaljit Singh ji. It's awesome isn't it? So many stamps, so many marks! The ink allows the mark-making, and yet goes unnoticed!

Findingmyway ji,
Yes but just to let you know, I did not say which you are claiming I said.
This is why I tell myself that reading should be done with a clear mind, and this applies not just to historical documents but to other people, etc, everything.

Yes exactly.

More good advice.

Thank you both

Bhagat ji

I reject most of this. You are speaking sant mat, not gurmat.




But you are certainly free to make this statement, as long as we both understand you are writing with the stamp of Bhagat Singh and not giving views per Gurmat vichaar. Please also consider the possibility that findingmyway is reading with a clear mind, as may be others who do not share your views. Otherwise you know action will need to be taken. Sat Nam.

Yes

Please tell me about sant mat and gurmat, and what the difference is. I don't know anything about the two. I am ready to listen, to learn.

Bhagat ji

You know me. I am always keen to jump in. But just out of curiosity... are there other members with an interest? There are more than 15,000 members and some percentage of them are very learned people who would give thoughtful answers backed up with knowledge. As a matter of principle: if someone or two or three (besides you, Kanwaljit Singh, findingmyway, Giani ji, SikhGiani, and I) don't give you a reply today, I will respond. .

On another matter: We want to tie our replies to the thread title, Kavi Santokh Singh...etc...so that we do not go off topic.