☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
Are The Important Scriptures Of World Religions, Simply Opinions?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sunmukh" data-source="post: 136997" data-attributes="member: 11050"><p>Ek OnKaar Sat Naam</p><p></p><p>Dear Tejwant Singh ji</p><p></p><p>Gurfateh ji </p><p></p><p>Thank you for your further post and feedback.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Guru Nanak Dev Ji paid considerable attention to Bhagats such as Ravidaas ji, Farid ji, Kabeer ji, Naam Dev ji and Trilochan ji. They possibly influenced him to a big degree</p><p></p><p>These Bhagats have shabds enshrined in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.Guru Arjan Dev ji decided they were of sufficient merit to be included therein. </p><p></p><p>Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji includes abundant references to Hindu practices and deities, and to practices of other religions such as Islam and Jainism. There are some common features with some other religions, such as dharma, karma, sangat. </p><p></p><p>There is a theme of pushing one to attain mukti or enlightment whilst living, through dealing with emotions that affect how one thinks, to realise the Truth. Dealing with emotions is common with Buddhism. The idea of a “lotus” developing and blossoming whilst still living in the mud (of the external world), is common with Buddhist ideology</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Theology I had understood to be the study of God, based on the latin roots of “theo” and “logy</p><p>.</p><p>Pragmatism, I had understood to be a very commonsensical, practical way of viewing matters, which lead to a more objective and discerning perspective</p><p></p><p>Today I looked up the words and found these definitions on dictionary.reference.com</p><p></p><p>Theology:: 1. the field of study and analysis that treats of god and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity. </p><p>2. a particular form, system, branch, or course of this study. </p><p></p><p>Pragmatism</p><p>1. character or conduct that emphasizes practicality. </p><p></p><p>2. a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t feel I am way out with my understanding of the words, although I may be misapplying them when I use them. I am currently of the understanding that Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is pragmatic, but advocates full faith in a single deity. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t believe so. Dogma is related to obdurate, obstinate, stubborn close-minded attitudes. Theology is not necessarily dogmatic. Theology is simply study of divinity. The concepts of divine spirits, studied by theologians such as Guru Nanak Dev Ji have evolved over time. Techniques to study divinity have also evolved, from speaking to people of various beliefs (eg as by Guru Nanak Dev Ji) to laboratory studies to what happens to the mind when in a meditative state. Then Guru Nanak Dev Ji version of Sikhi gradually evolved further and was added to with concepts such as langar during 3 Nanaks time, miri being enhanced under 6 Nanaks time, and introduction of Khalsa in 10 Nanak’s time. This required analysis and review of what was important at the time, and this implies a study, even if it was not academic in any significant way. However as stated above, decision making on which bani was to be included and what was to be excluded, suggests a prior theological study. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I found two essays, which are similar save for the responses. On one, an essay from a Ek Ong Kaar Kaur is included as a form of reply and some of it is in common with what I believe Guru Nanak Dev Ji was driving at. </p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.sikhdharma.org/pages/mool-mantra-eokk?page=0,0" target="_blank">http://www.sikhdharma.org/pages/mool-mantra-eokk?page=0,0</a></p><p></p><p>(Mool Mantar - The Blueprint of Sikhi Marg.)<a href="http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/16256-mool-mantar-the-blueprint-sikhi-marg.html" target="_blank">http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/16256-mool-mantar-the-blueprint-sikhi-marg.html</a></p><p>I will write a little on that thread in a few days time. </p><p></p><p>Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji portrays a vision of a creator, although the various names given to such creator are wide-ranging. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don’t think theology is limited to any dogma. Theology is simply a study of beliefs related to God/divinity. Dogma on the other hand is a rigid way of perceiving matters. Ego is very much in control. One then puts faith in a fixed set of concepts, which is the dogma. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji does not suggest a dogmatic way of life, and in fact advocates totally the opposite. It does refer to sikhs, and in the generic sense sikhs are learners. This implies study of spiritual matters. It would be pointless to study, if there was a dogmatic attitude. If one is not willing to change direction based on what one has learned through a theological study ( as Guru Nanak Dev Ji conducted) , then one need not consider oneself a sikh, as one will be dogmatic and egotistical. Studies can continue throughout life. Fixed rehats and hukamnamas run against the very idea of being a sikh. This is dogma. No doubt it will be argued that one is learning from 11 Guru Sahiban. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Please forgive me for muddling up this thread with politics. Essentially this thread has over-spilled into many different aspects, and I am principally to blame. I prefer to stay out of politics, but when people are disenfranchised I do get interested. These are as you say separate topics, so I will stop here</p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>All noted. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I will write on the Blueprint of Sikhi Marg thread soon. Thank you for sharing your thoughts thereon and above, which I read with interest. It does open up new ways of thinking for me, but I do believe in a single God, and my mind is blocking any idea of not believing in God/Waheguru. My life revolves around such belief.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>I came across that thread when searching for the one related to the Mool Mantar. I don’t think it matters too much if a term is borrowed from an abrahmic religion, or any religion, to epitomise “Ik Ong Kaar”, unless you feel words like prabhu, waheguru, takhar, malik do not do sufficient justice to “Ik Ong Kaar”, but then you will meet a problem as such words do appear very frequently in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji (save for waheguru). People tend to use a limited section of their vocabulary, and others tend to understand from just this small range. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree “Unknowable”does convey a sense of the infinite nature of Ik Ong Kaar. It also conveys a sense a lack of certainty about the nature of Ik Ong Kaar. By virtue of such statements all the sections relating to the nature of Ik Ong Kaar are then opinion. </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਪਾਰਬਰ੍ਹਮ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਅਪਰੰਪਰ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਦੇਵਾ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Mangal'">॥</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">paarbarahm aprampar dayvaa.</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: #000081"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">The Supreme Lord God is Infinite and Divine;</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਅਗਮ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਅਗੋਚਰ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਅਲਖ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'">ਅਭੇਵਾ</span></span><span style="color: #810000"><span style="font-family: 'Mangal'">॥</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">agam agochar alakh abhayvaa.</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"><span style="color: #000081"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">He is Inaccessible, Incomprehensible, Invisible and Inscrutable.</span></span> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Raavi'"><span style="color: #810000"></span></span></p><p></p><p> It is commendable that Gurus and Bhagats admitted this. In unison with acknowledging the lack of knowledge, they principally turned to faith as the means to achieve the state of mind that was sought. Along with this ran psychological techniques to control behaviour and emotions. This is exactly what made Sikhi unique and a pragmatic way of life, and distinguished if from faiths that claimed knowledge of the Lord. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I feel this difference only differentiates between <strong>an individual</strong> who accepts in pauri 12, as opposed to <strong>groups</strong> who accept in pauris 13 to 15. I don’t think either refer to understanding – only acceptance/surrender in faith. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Faith is the keystone that continues to keep away doubt when there is lack of knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar, and leads to a nirankaar, (or formless creative enactor), both nirgun and sargun (both without attributes and with attributes). Without the keystone of faith all the walls fall down. Each of us will develop understanding as we do vichaar/contemplate bani. Likewise all contributors to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji will have developed an understanding of the nature of Ik Ong Kaar, how to live their lives, and what to suggest to any followers. This can be carried back in human history to time immemorial. It can be carried forward likewise. All this time, whilst individuals continue to express their opinions on the nature of Ik Ong Kaar, the nature of Ik Ong Kaar is neither lessened or increased, and Truth unchanges. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I guess you are referring to pauris 8 through 11. It is best this is discussed on another thread. You may be right about references to listening, in those particular pauris, but you may not. I think there may be a big difference between in pauris 8 through 11.</p><p></p><p> The sihari in place of a bihari may be making a huge difference. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> </p><p>I do contradict myself sometimes, and over time probably quite frequently. What I understood 2 years ago will not be the same as I what I understand today. </p><p>I don’t think I have contradicted myself here though. One refers to expression of opinion, ie a speculative theory, (opinions relating to a creator in this case) and the other relates to onward communication of statements (hearsay) I have said repeatedly that if the oral traditions and the oral history like Sakhis contradict Gurmat ideals of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji then they should be rejected vehemently and can not be made part of the Miri-Piri concept of Sikhi. </p><p>I agree with you, but it is up to individuals to decide what to believe, and Sikhi is evolving however much people deny it and try to prevent such evolution.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your last paragraph above suggests you have fully understood what I have been trying to suggest all along, when I have been suggesting all scriptures represent opinions of humans, so no-one should be offended if another human passes any comments on them. That is all the section in bold is re-emphasising. That there is only human input and no other. As to the God I believe in, I will leave to the Blueprint of Sikhi Marg thread</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A vision when expressed in words is a form of opinion. Both can be substantiated or not. When there is no knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar, and the authors themselves (Sikh Gurus in this case) openly admit to this within their own words, they emphasise their opinions are theory. They also urge one to be a sikh. To be a sikh is to be a learner, and I wish to learn. Whilst doing so, I can believe in One God and try hard to follow the teachings in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. I can await SatGuru’s grace, and any understanding I develop will be in accord with Sikhi. Sikhi does not require one to have prior knowledge of a set path, and to stay on such a narrow path. That runs against Sikhi, as Sikhi is complete freedom from such dogma.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I haven’t said I don’t do this. If I resisted you might claim I am being obstinate or dogmatic. </p><p></p><p>I don’t think I need to add to what I have written now, and I have tried at great length to explain why it is important to recognise and accept any scriptures as expressions of humans, made with limited knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar. When one begins to treat them as more than what they are, then one shifts to emotional attachment which in the case of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is against advice therein. </p><p>Thank you all for your patience and your insight. </p><p></p><p>Sat Sri Akal</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sunmukh, post: 136997, member: 11050"] Ek OnKaar Sat Naam Dear Tejwant Singh ji Gurfateh ji Thank you for your further post and feedback. Guru Nanak Dev Ji paid considerable attention to Bhagats such as Ravidaas ji, Farid ji, Kabeer ji, Naam Dev ji and Trilochan ji. They possibly influenced him to a big degree These Bhagats have shabds enshrined in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.Guru Arjan Dev ji decided they were of sufficient merit to be included therein. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji includes abundant references to Hindu practices and deities, and to practices of other religions such as Islam and Jainism. There are some common features with some other religions, such as dharma, karma, sangat. There is a theme of pushing one to attain mukti or enlightment whilst living, through dealing with emotions that affect how one thinks, to realise the Truth. Dealing with emotions is common with Buddhism. The idea of a “lotus” developing and blossoming whilst still living in the mud (of the external world), is common with Buddhist ideology Theology I had understood to be the study of God, based on the latin roots of “theo” and “logy . Pragmatism, I had understood to be a very commonsensical, practical way of viewing matters, which lead to a more objective and discerning perspective Today I looked up the words and found these definitions on dictionary.reference.com Theology:: 1. the field of study and analysis that treats of god and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity. 2. a particular form, system, branch, or course of this study. Pragmatism 1. character or conduct that emphasizes practicality. 2. a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. I don’t feel I am way out with my understanding of the words, although I may be misapplying them when I use them. I am currently of the understanding that Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is pragmatic, but advocates full faith in a single deity. I don’t believe so. Dogma is related to obdurate, obstinate, stubborn close-minded attitudes. Theology is not necessarily dogmatic. Theology is simply study of divinity. The concepts of divine spirits, studied by theologians such as Guru Nanak Dev Ji have evolved over time. Techniques to study divinity have also evolved, from speaking to people of various beliefs (eg as by Guru Nanak Dev Ji) to laboratory studies to what happens to the mind when in a meditative state. Then Guru Nanak Dev Ji version of Sikhi gradually evolved further and was added to with concepts such as langar during 3 Nanaks time, miri being enhanced under 6 Nanaks time, and introduction of Khalsa in 10 Nanak’s time. This required analysis and review of what was important at the time, and this implies a study, even if it was not academic in any significant way. However as stated above, decision making on which bani was to be included and what was to be excluded, suggests a prior theological study. I found two essays, which are similar save for the responses. On one, an essay from a Ek Ong Kaar Kaur is included as a form of reply and some of it is in common with what I believe Guru Nanak Dev Ji was driving at. [url]http://www.sikhdharma.org/pages/mool-mantra-eokk?page=0,0[/url] (Mool Mantar - The Blueprint of Sikhi Marg.)[url]http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/16256-mool-mantar-the-blueprint-sikhi-marg.html[/url] I will write a little on that thread in a few days time. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji portrays a vision of a creator, although the various names given to such creator are wide-ranging. I don’t think theology is limited to any dogma. Theology is simply a study of beliefs related to God/divinity. Dogma on the other hand is a rigid way of perceiving matters. Ego is very much in control. One then puts faith in a fixed set of concepts, which is the dogma. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji does not suggest a dogmatic way of life, and in fact advocates totally the opposite. It does refer to sikhs, and in the generic sense sikhs are learners. This implies study of spiritual matters. It would be pointless to study, if there was a dogmatic attitude. If one is not willing to change direction based on what one has learned through a theological study ( as Guru Nanak Dev Ji conducted) , then one need not consider oneself a sikh, as one will be dogmatic and egotistical. Studies can continue throughout life. Fixed rehats and hukamnamas run against the very idea of being a sikh. This is dogma. No doubt it will be argued that one is learning from 11 Guru Sahiban. Please forgive me for muddling up this thread with politics. Essentially this thread has over-spilled into many different aspects, and I am principally to blame. I prefer to stay out of politics, but when people are disenfranchised I do get interested. These are as you say separate topics, so I will stop here All noted. I will write on the Blueprint of Sikhi Marg thread soon. Thank you for sharing your thoughts thereon and above, which I read with interest. It does open up new ways of thinking for me, but I do believe in a single God, and my mind is blocking any idea of not believing in God/Waheguru. My life revolves around such belief. I came across that thread when searching for the one related to the Mool Mantar. I don’t think it matters too much if a term is borrowed from an abrahmic religion, or any religion, to epitomise “Ik Ong Kaar”, unless you feel words like prabhu, waheguru, takhar, malik do not do sufficient justice to “Ik Ong Kaar”, but then you will meet a problem as such words do appear very frequently in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji (save for waheguru). People tend to use a limited section of their vocabulary, and others tend to understand from just this small range. I agree “Unknowable”does convey a sense of the infinite nature of Ik Ong Kaar. It also conveys a sense a lack of certainty about the nature of Ik Ong Kaar. By virtue of such statements all the sections relating to the nature of Ik Ong Kaar are then opinion. [FONT=Raavi][COLOR=#810000][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਪਾਰਬਰ੍ਹਮ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਅਪਰੰਪਰ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਦੇਵਾ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Mangal]॥[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=AnmolUniPr][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=black][FONT=Tahoma]paarbarahm aprampar dayvaa.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000081][FONT=Tahoma]The Supreme Lord God is Infinite and Divine;[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਅਗਮ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਅਗੋਚਰ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਅਲਖ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Raavi]ਅਭੇਵਾ[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=Mangal]॥[/FONT][/COLOR][COLOR=#810000][FONT=AnmolUniPr][/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=black][FONT=Tahoma]agam agochar alakh abhayvaa.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000081][FONT=Tahoma]He is Inaccessible, Incomprehensible, Invisible and Inscrutable.[/FONT][/COLOR][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman] [COLOR=blue][/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE] [/COLOR][/FONT] It is commendable that Gurus and Bhagats admitted this. In unison with acknowledging the lack of knowledge, they principally turned to faith as the means to achieve the state of mind that was sought. Along with this ran psychological techniques to control behaviour and emotions. This is exactly what made Sikhi unique and a pragmatic way of life, and distinguished if from faiths that claimed knowledge of the Lord. [/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR] I feel this difference only differentiates between [B]an individual[/B] who accepts in pauri 12, as opposed to [B]groups[/B] who accept in pauris 13 to 15. I don’t think either refer to understanding – only acceptance/surrender in faith. Faith is the keystone that continues to keep away doubt when there is lack of knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar, and leads to a nirankaar, (or formless creative enactor), both nirgun and sargun (both without attributes and with attributes). Without the keystone of faith all the walls fall down. Each of us will develop understanding as we do vichaar/contemplate bani. Likewise all contributors to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji will have developed an understanding of the nature of Ik Ong Kaar, how to live their lives, and what to suggest to any followers. This can be carried back in human history to time immemorial. It can be carried forward likewise. All this time, whilst individuals continue to express their opinions on the nature of Ik Ong Kaar, the nature of Ik Ong Kaar is neither lessened or increased, and Truth unchanges. I guess you are referring to pauris 8 through 11. It is best this is discussed on another thread. You may be right about references to listening, in those particular pauris, but you may not. I think there may be a big difference between in pauris 8 through 11. The sihari in place of a bihari may be making a huge difference. I do contradict myself sometimes, and over time probably quite frequently. What I understood 2 years ago will not be the same as I what I understand today. I don’t think I have contradicted myself here though. One refers to expression of opinion, ie a speculative theory, (opinions relating to a creator in this case) and the other relates to onward communication of statements (hearsay) I have said repeatedly that if the oral traditions and the oral history like Sakhis contradict Gurmat ideals of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji then they should be rejected vehemently and can not be made part of the Miri-Piri concept of Sikhi. I agree with you, but it is up to individuals to decide what to believe, and Sikhi is evolving however much people deny it and try to prevent such evolution. Your last paragraph above suggests you have fully understood what I have been trying to suggest all along, when I have been suggesting all scriptures represent opinions of humans, so no-one should be offended if another human passes any comments on them. That is all the section in bold is re-emphasising. That there is only human input and no other. As to the God I believe in, I will leave to the Blueprint of Sikhi Marg thread A vision when expressed in words is a form of opinion. Both can be substantiated or not. When there is no knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar, and the authors themselves (Sikh Gurus in this case) openly admit to this within their own words, they emphasise their opinions are theory. They also urge one to be a sikh. To be a sikh is to be a learner, and I wish to learn. Whilst doing so, I can believe in One God and try hard to follow the teachings in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. I can await SatGuru’s grace, and any understanding I develop will be in accord with Sikhi. Sikhi does not require one to have prior knowledge of a set path, and to stay on such a narrow path. That runs against Sikhi, as Sikhi is complete freedom from such dogma. I haven’t said I don’t do this. If I resisted you might claim I am being obstinate or dogmatic. I don’t think I need to add to what I have written now, and I have tried at great length to explain why it is important to recognise and accept any scriptures as expressions of humans, made with limited knowledge of Ik Ong Kaar. When one begins to treat them as more than what they are, then one shifts to emotional attachment which in the case of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is against advice therein. Thank you all for your patience and your insight. Sat Sri Akal [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
Are The Important Scriptures Of World Religions, Simply Opinions?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top