Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

Sikhi Does Waheguru Intervene?

Discussion in 'Sikh Sikhi Sikhism' started by Ishna, Dec 1, 2015.

  1. Ishna

    Ishna
    Expand Collapse
    On hiatus
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    5,002
    Beyond creating and bestowing Grace, does "God" (Guruji, Ik Onkar, Akaal Purakh, Waheguru) intervene in human affairs or natural events?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads Forum Date
    Does Reading Baani Magically Affect Our Body And Psyche? And Does The Effect Depend On The Bani Read Intellectual Translations by SPNers Apr 30, 2016
    Does God Care What You Wear? Gurmat Vichaar Apr 23, 2016
    Hard Talk Does Amrit Erase All Sins? Hard Talk Apr 1, 2016
    What Believing In God Does To Your Brain Interfaith Dialogues Mar 26, 2016
    Interfaith I Have More Sikhs In My Cabinet Than Modi Does - Trudeau Interfaith Dialogues Mar 12, 2016

  3. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Ishna ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    Good question. Only Deities on which many religions are based on believe in that. This is their sales pitch to lasso the followers. Sikhi has no deity, hence no intervention by the SuperBeing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    Respected Tejwant Singh Ji... can you please define how you are using the word Diety? Because depending on how you define it, affects whether or not Sikhi has one!

    We don't have a 'diety' in the sense of a bearded guy sitting on the clouds...but Sikhi does teach us about the Creator... right from Mool Mantra! ... Timeless, Immortal, Formless being, ONE who posseses creative, conscious potential (Nirgun) from whom ALL forms arise, and permeates everything (Sargun) which is reflection of the Nirgun. Referred by numerous names in Gurbani but most commonly, Akal Purakh / Waheguru. Some may still refer to Akal Purakh as a 'diety' under the meaning, of 'Creator' being. So I guess it depends on how you define the word 'diety' do you mean an entity having form as in an 'avatar' or idol?? Or do you mean 'diety' as in a general term for creator? Because it's two different meanings... We don't have Gods / Godesses as in avatars, having form etc. But we DO have the ONE creator who is formless, and encompasses ALL = Waheguru / Akal Purakh.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Harkiran Kaur ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    First of all, congratulations on your nuptials. You took the bold step. Just keep the fan off for sometime. :)

    Deity is what i mentioned in my initial post 'the SuperBeing'.

    Creator is a very misleading word often used for Ik Ong Kaar which is sad indeed. The creator is a super being. In other words a deity.

    We should stop using the word Creator as Ik Ong Kaar, in the same way we have started saying Gurdwaras rather than Sikh Temples.

    Tejwant Singh

    PS: It is ineresting to notice that Akalpurkh is only used twice in the SGGS, our only Guru, as per srigranth.org which is amazing because it is one of the second words used after Vaheguru for Ik Ong Kaar by Sikhs. Perhaps, because it gives them the notion of a deity.
     
    #4 Tejwant Singh, Dec 1, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2015
  6. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    Respected Tejwant Singh Ji,

    Again, (and not to start negative debate) but I think it depends on how you are defining 'superbeing' as well! If you mean a personal God similar to Abrahamic religion then no. But there is a consciousness or conscious energy that is the base reality to the Universe. It's proven through science that the base of reality is not matter but is instead energy, and that consciousness pervades everything / affects everything. So what do I mean by consciousness? (Since I know that will be your next question) I don't mean wakefulness in the physical sense. It's not something that is 'of' the physical body. It's difficult to put into words but easy to understand... behind every human (or animal etc) once you remove all the acquired attributes of mind gained throughout the lifetime (memories, experiences etc) there still exists an awareness. It is this awareness behind ALL that is what I am referring to. It is formless and IS the creative potential in the Universe. As I mentioned in another post, when we zoom in on anything we consider to be 'matter' we literally see it dissappear into nothingness. The article I referenced mentions a coin, you can hold it in your hand, you can feel it... see it etc. But zoom in to it's subatomic structure, and you see that there really is nothing there... there is no coin.... all that exists are invisible energy vortices. So how can something invisible (energy) give way to the physical matter we experience as reality?? When we zoom in on our own body structure, we see the same thing... it dissolves into nothingness as well. So what's left that IS real is the energy and the energy is self aware. Gurbani even explains it on Ang 736, likening it to a play (physical reality) All the costumes (us) are worn by the same ONE actor (Waheguru) who is also the director / creator of the play. Then it tells us, that once the play is done, and the costumes are removed (us/Ego), we see that the whole time it was ONE consciousness, ONE actor playing ALL. Gurbani also tells us there is an intrinsic relationship between consciousness and matter on Ang 21. (Again not consciousness as in physical wakefulness but the base awareness - the 'doer' or 'experiencer').
    So Sikhi DOES believe in a 'Creator' but not in the sense as something separate from Creation, like a being (the word 'being' implies some sort of body or form). Instead, Gurbani speaks about ONEness... a FORMLESS reality (Nirgun) which is the base truth - awareness, consciousness / pure frequency or vibration. Out of which ALL form arises (Sargun). Sargun is the formed expression of the conscious / formless Nirgun. Which is why Gurbani likens it to a dream in numerous places. Because we can imagine how our formless consciousness can create form within our own dreams. Science too agrees that the base of everything is vibration or frequency. Cymatics can show how simple frequencies can give rise to more and more complex forms through vibration. Light, sound, electromagnetism, heat, radiation, radio, microwaves, even thought are all different bands of frequency. Gurbani also speaks about frequency, vibration... and primal or unstruck sound. Not to complicate everything... LOL But there very much IS a 'Creator' it's just not in the sense of a separate entity from creation as most religions believe but instead IS creation... but also exists beyond creation. We don't have to go somewhere else to experience the divine (and even that word is misleading) but we only have to go within because the doer the experiencer behind ALL these sets of eyes is ONE and the same. As someone else quoted online "There is only ONE of us here!"

    Albert Einstein “Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.”

    Nikola Tesla "If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”

    This base energy of the Universe pure frequency / vibration is the 'Creator' as it is pure consciousness. And there is only ONE. Many faiths and spiritual paths have come to the same conslusion over the ages "Know Thyself and thou shall know God and the Universe" - Oracle at Delphi. Meaning, know the real self. I am not Harkiran, you are not Tejwant Ji... there is only ONE consciousness and THAT is the true 'self'.

    And this teaching is not purely my own thinking. Though I can not subscribe to the traditional athiestic view of only material matter exists and our consciousness is only an emergent property (because it's long since been disproven by the advent of quantum physics). But this understanding of Gurbani is also held by numerous Sikh scholars. Sure, the shabads can work on a purely psychologial level too but there is much more to existence.

    Quoted from Reflections on Gurbani (The Actor is Creator and we are merely characters in the play)
    http://www.gurbani.org/articles/webart206.htm
    THE ACTOR

    When Baajeegar (an actor, a juggler, etc.) stages his play (ਬਾਜ਼ੀ ਪਾ ਕੇ ਵਿਖਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ); he plays many characters in
    different costumes. But when his play (ਬਾਜ਼ੀ, Tamaashaa) ends, he takes off the costumes, and then he remains just one - Baajeegar.
    (Similarly, this universe is God-Baajeegar's Play - Jagat Tamaashaa - and He pervades in this Play of His so
    many different ways, etc., but when He takes off the costumes and stops His Expanse - Play -,
    then He the only One remains) ||1|| (sggs 736).
    <><><><>
    Here the Gurbani uses very popular as well as very powerful simile of an actor to drive the message home. The point is to teach us as to how one should live a detached life amidst the happenings of the ever changing world. Assume for a moment that you are standing at the edge of the river bank, and your body's shadow falling in the water. Notice that, even though the body's shadow is in the water, however, your body does not feel any wetness. The body would feel wet only when you jump in the water. In the same way, as long as we play our part in life without attachment, and stand aside and witness the passing show as a passing show (Leelaa, Cosmic Play or "Jagat Tamaashaa"), the false ego-sense or Haume (Maya's knot) is no more.
    • ਬਾਜੀਗਰਿ ਜੈਸੇ ਬਾਜੀ ਪਾਈ ॥ ਨਾਨਾ ਰੂਪ ਭੇਖ ਦਿਖਲਾਈ ॥ ਸਾਂਗੁ ਉਤਾਰਿ ਥੰਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਿਓ ਪਾਸਾਰਾ ॥ ਤਬ ਏਕੋ ਏਕੰਕਾਰਾ ॥੧॥: Baajeegar jaise baajee paaee. Naanaa roop bhekh dikhlaaee. Saang utaar thanmiho paasaaraa. Tab eko ekankaaraa ||1||: When Baajeegar (an actor, a juggler, etc.) stages his play (ਬਾਜ਼ੀ ਪਾ ਕੇ ਵਿਖਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ); he plays many characters in different costumes. But when his play (ਬਾਜ਼ੀ, Tamaashaa) ends, he takes off the costumes, and then he remains just one - Baajeegar. (Similarly, this universe is God-Baajeegar's Play - Jagat Tamaashaa - and He pervades in this Play of His so many different ways, etc., but when He takes off the costumes and stops His Expanse - Play, Tamaashaa, etc. -, then He the only One remains) ||1|| (sggs 736).
    • ਨਟੂਆ ਭੇਖ ਦਿਖਾਵੈ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਜੈਸਾ ਹੈ ਓਹੁ ਤੈਸਾ ਰੇ ॥: Nattooaa bhekh dikhaavai bahu bidh jaisaa hai ouhu taisaa re: The actor displays himself in many disguises, but he remains just as he is (sggs 403).
    On the other hand, however, by sticking to the play and roles an actor plays and identifying with them, the actor will only regret later. In other words, if an actor is playing the role of a beggar or a villain, and if he identifies (or attaches) with that in real life, he will surely regret it. In reality he is neither a beggar nor a villain, because he remains detached from those roles he plays. It's just the role he was playing on the stage! The Wise person in the state of eternal witness lives in this material world just like an actor, or just as a bird that flies in the sky without leaving any footprints or mark behind, or just like a lotus flower that grows in the mud but remains untouched by it! If a person does not live like that, he will surely regret it later. Once the breathing stops, all acting and music will come to an abrupt end.
    • ਸ੍ਵਾਂਗੀ ਸਿਉ ਜੋ ਮਨੁ ਰੀਝਾਵੈ ॥ ਸ੍ਵਾਗਿ ਉਤਾਰਿਐ ਫਿਰਿ ਪਛੁਤਾਵੈ ॥: Savaangee siou jo mann reejhaavai. Savaang utaariai phir pashutaavai: One who loves the actor in his mind, later regrets it (after seeing the actor's reality) when the actor takes off his costume (sggs 1145).
    • ਮੰਦਲੁ ਨ ਬਾਜੈ ਨਟੁ ਪੈ ਸੂਤਾ ॥: Mandal na baajai natt pai sootaa: The drum does not sound, and the actor has gone to sleep (sggs 478).
    This world-appearance is the stage. We are all actors on this stage, playing our parts. Also known as Divine Leelaa (Cosmic Dance), we all are part of this play, which is Mithiya or illusion (neither real nor unreal). It exists as the product of the reflection in the Transcendental Consciousness. In this Play, we experience our own Vaasnaas (latent tendencies, past memories or undigested desires). Some of these experiences are the repetition of the old experiences, and some are new. This Play of mirage-like world-appearance gets in action on account of the rise of false ego-sense (Haume). Hence it is our physical ego (false "I") who is the transitory actor in this Drama. Only the Spiritual Beings (Gurmukh) fully established in the eternity of the "now" can understand the illusion of this world and the nature of the Truth. The rest of us begins to identify with the roles (duality) we play, and suffer in the process.
    • ਆਖਾਰ ਮੰਡਲੀ ਧਰਣਿ ਸਬਾਈ ਊਪਰਿ ਗਗਨੁ ਚੰਦੋਆ ॥: Aakhaar mandalee dharan sabaaee oopari gagan chandoaa: The whole earth is the dance stage, with the canopy of the sky overhead (sggs 884).
    • ਮਾਇਆ ਕਾਰਣਿ ਪਿੜ ਬੰਧਿ ਨਾਚੈ ਦੂਜੈ ਭਾਇ ਦੁਖੁ ਪਾਵਣਿਆ ॥: Maya kaaran pirr bandhi naachai doojai bhaai dukh paavaniaa: For the sake of Maya, they set the stage and dance, but they are in love with duality, and they obtain only Dukha or suffering (sggs 122).
    • ਮਾਇਆ ਮੋਹਿ ਨਟਿ ਬਾਜੀ ਪਾਈ ॥: Maya mohi natt baajee paaee: The Actor has staged the drama of emotional attachment to Maya (sggs 230).
    • ਅਪੁਨੇ ਚਲਿਤ ਆਪਿ ਕਰਣੈਹਾਰ ॥: Apune chalit aap karanaihaar: In His own play, He Himself is the Actor (sggs 279).
    • ਅਪਨਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਆਪਿ ਕਰਨੈਹਾਰੁ ॥: Apanaa khel aap karanaihaar: He Himself is the play, and He Himself is the actor (sggs 280).
    • ਤਪੀ ਤਪੀਸੁਰ ਮੁਨਿ ਮਹਿ ਪੇਖਿਓ ਨਟ ਨਾਟਿਕ ਨਿਰਤਾਏ ॥: Tapee tapeesur mun mahi pekhiou natt naattik nirataaye: I have seen Him among the men of severe self-discipline, the silent sages, the actors, dramas and dances (sggs 1139).
    The dance of Maya (or imagination or ignorance) sets in motion with the birth of the identification with the body-mind-intellect apparatus (ego or Haume). In ignorance of the Unconditioned Reality, we identify with the actor and perform reactionary or causative Karma, which in turn keeps our worldly or transmigratory existence in a spin. The Eternal Law (Hukam, Divine Will, Bhaanaa, Waheguru, Divine Principle, etc.) brings back the results of one's actions to him. This is the underlying principle, from which there is no easy escape. This is what the Gurbani means when it says: "As it pleases the Divine, people dance." To put it in simple language, the Sansaar — illusive flow of the world-appearance — is the stage on which we dance to the tune of our Karma.
    • ਨਾਨਾ ਰੂਪ ਜਿਉ ਸ੍ਵਾਗੀ ਦਿਖਾਵੈ ॥ ਜਿਉ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਭਾਵੈ ਤਿਵੈ ਨਚਾਵੈ ॥ ਜੋ ਤਿਸੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਸੋਈ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੂਜਾ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥੭॥: Jiyu prabh bhaavai tivai nachaavai ...: As it pleases the Divine, people dance. In various costumes, like actors, they appear. Whatever pleases Him, comes to pass. Nanak, there is no other at all ||7|| (sggs 278).
    The Gurbani urges us to just play our role like a detached actor, but not to get attached to that role. Due to ignorance, however, if we get attached to the roles we are plying, we are sure to regret it later! Here the Gurbani gives us an another popular example of a king. It is just like that king, who in his dream became a beggar. Now, if upon waking up, he still behaves as a beggar not as the king that he is, then he is certain to make a fool of himself!
    • ਨਰਪਤਿ ਏਕੁ ਸਿੰਘਾਸਨਿ ਸੋਇਆ ਸੁਪਨੇ ਭਇਆ ਭਿਖਾਰੀ ॥ ਅਛਤ ਰਾਜ ਬਿਛੁਰਤ ਦੁਖੁ ਪਾਇਆ ਸੋ ਗਤਿ ਭਈ ਹਮਾਰੀ ॥੨॥: Narapati eku singhaasani soiaa supane bhaiaa bhikhaaree. Ashhat raaj bishhurat dukhu paaiaa so gati bhayee hamaaree ||2||: It is like a king, who falls asleep upon his throne, and dreams (that he has become a) beggar. (Although) his kingdom is intact, but separated from it (in his dream), he suffers pain. Such is our condition. ||2|| (sggs 657).
    Think sitting in front of a television set, watching all sorts of pictures projected on the screen of the picture tube. Some of these pictures are of rain, murder, gun shots, romance, and so on. When the show is over, the screen neither becomes wet from the rain, nor has blood stains from the murder, nor bullet holes from the gun shots, nor emotions from the romance. The screen itself is clean and unchanging; for the projections are ever changing (thus unreal), and the screen is real. The mind (deluded consciousness) is the creation that arises out of the Pure Self. We are this screen. All the manifestation we see on this screen is the projection of our Vaasnaas that fall across our mind. This projection of Vaasnaas causes us to identify ourselves as the projected watcher of the drama or movie. The problem starts the moment we run after the projections thinking they are real. With this delusion (or duality) comes the perception that the seer is different than the seeing and seen. But in reality, the "seer", "seeing" and "seen" are one and the same!
    Just as the cloud obscures the sun, so does the mind's negativity, false concepts, restrictions, assumptions, self-identification or self-limitations in time and space (false ego) obscure the Reality. But a Giaani's mind (the Wise person or the Gurmukh) enjoys completeness and perfection; for it is Pure thus lacks nothing. His mind is like the sun, who knows no darkness. In other words, his mind is nothing but the Unconditioned Self, dispassionate witness, the "Joti-Svaroopa", beyond the glamour of the enchanting world-appearances. His every moment is free and spontaneous (Sahaj). He does not identify with the actor! He simply reads his part, detached, in all situations! In other words, he enjoys the Leelaa as it happens; without attachment, desire and fear. Such enlightened person (Gurmukh) is like a dry leaf.. Having no desire and fear of his own, without a personal agenda or preconceived ideas at all, he moves about in the world in utter freedom from ego or Haume.
    • ਅੰਤਰਿ ਕ੍ਰੋਧੁ ਪੜਹਿ ਨਾਟ ਸਾਲਾ ॥: Antar krodh parrahi naat saalaa: but if there is anger within him, he is merely reading his part, like an actor in a play (sggs 832).
    • ਸ੍ਵਾਂਗੀ ਸਿਉ ਜੋ ਮਨੁ ਰੀਝਾਵੈ ॥ ਸ੍ਵਾਗਿ ਉਤਾਰਿਐ ਫਿਰਿ ਪਛੁਤਾਵੈ ॥: Savaangee siyu jo mann reejhaavai. Savaang utaariyai phir pashutaavai: One who loves the actor in his mind, later regrets it when the actor takes off his costume (sggs 1145).
    • ਹਸਤੀ ਘੋੜੇ ਦੇਖਿ ਵਿਗਾਸਾ ॥ ਲਸਕਰ ਜੋੜੇ ਨੇਬ ਖਵਾਸਾ ॥ ਗਲਿ ਜੇਵੜੀ ਹਉਮੈ ਕੇ ਫਾਸਾ ॥2॥ ਰਾਜੁ ਕਮਾਵੈ ਦਹ ਦਿਸ ਸਾਰੀ ॥ ਮਾਣੈ ਰੰਗ ਭੋਗ ਬਹੁ ਨਾਰੀ ॥ ਜਿਉ ਨਰਪਤਿ ਸੁਪਨੈ ਭੇਖਾਰੀ ॥: Hastee ghorre dekh vigaasaa. laskar jorre neb khavaasaa. gal jevrre haume kr phaasaa. maanai rang bhog bahu naaree. Jiou narapat supanai bhekhaaree: Man is pleased at the sight of his elephants and horses and his armies assembled, his servants and his soldiers. But the noose of egotism is tightening around his neck. ||2|| His rule may extend in all ten directions; he may revel in pleasures, and enjoy many women - but he is just a beggar, who in his dream, is a king (sggs 176).
    • ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਆਵੈ ਜਾਇ ਨਿਸੰਗੁ ॥: Gurmukh aavai jaai nisang: The Gurmukh comes and goes without fear (sggs 932 ).
     
  7. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Harkiran ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    Interaction is the cornerstone of this wonderful forum called SPN because it is Sikhi's DNA. Hence nothing negative here.

    Please do me a favour and start another thread with your thoughts.

    Having said that, please allow me to quote the quotes of the quotes and I agree with the both.

     
  8. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    I guess my answer to the original question is, that since ALL is really the ONE, then depending on how you look at it LOL. If our identity is as characters in a play being played by the same one actor (Waheguru) then you could say that EVERYTHING is being orchestrated by Waheguru, our separate (ego) identity is false. Possibly why we are told its only through Waheguru's 'Grace' that we can wake up from this amnesia to the truth.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988

    Harkiran ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    Can you please quote some shabads in full with YOUR OWN understanding so we can have a healthy interaction?

    Thank
     
  10. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    See above post which quotes the shabad on Ang 736 though it's from an article my thinking and understanding is the same as the author from reflections on Gurbani. No need to re type the exact same thing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Ishna

    Ishna
    Expand Collapse
    On hiatus
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    5,002
    Thank you Harkiran and Tejwant Jios.

    Harkiran Ji, thanks for the article from Reflections on Gurbani. I think the website asks for their articles not to be reproduced, and if the author has a problem with the content above as pasted by Harkiran, they can contact me it will be removed immediately. Meantime, I will leave it there as it is valuable and interesting for Sikhs to read and learn, and has been fully referenced and linked back.

    Harkiran Ji, I think your comment about everything being One is interesting. Gurbani reiterates continually that "He" is the Doer, we do nothing of our own. I struggle reconciling the terrible things humans do to each other, and the actions in the natural world that my human mind does not like.

    The real question I'm trying to ask, though, is; "If I pray for a physical result, will Waheguru make it happen?" Many Sikhs pray to get the new job, pray for rain, pray to pass exams, pray for their discussion forums to be healthy and vibrant (hehe), but do they do so actually believing that Ik Onkar will actually intervene on their behalf?

    What you've hit on, bhainji, is the overarching perspective to be maintained; there is no need to pray for anything except for Gur Prasad / Naam. Because when your perspective is on the Oneness of All Things, your Maya-mind takes a back seat and Ik Onkar actually does become the doer of absolutely everything, anyway.

    Picking up on the consciousness aspect, though, does Ik Onkar consciously make the decision to kill people with a natural disaster? And if so, what does that say about the nature of Ik Onkar, and in particular Its regard for Its creation? If it doesn't "care" enough to worry about destroying lives and homes by tsunami or asteroid collision, then why would it "care" enough to answer one person's prayer to pass an exam, for instance?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Harkiran ji,

    Guru Fateh.
    I have been talking about Ik Ong Kaar as Energy for many many years. To be honest, you have no idea what consciousness means/is or what is a layer behind the layer of awareness is. It is just a play of words because as you yourself eloquently said, "It's not something that is 'of' the physical body. It's difficult to put into words but easy to understand... ". If you can not explain what it is, then I am not sure what you understand about it. Actions can also explain if one has no words for it.

    You further write:
    Harkiran ji, this is just a theory and one does not have to go to the 'magic tricks' based on quantum values of physics to understand and hence have a Sikhi living. Then it ceases be a universal message for all humanity where anyone and everyone can feel bliss which a Sikh has a duty to put into practice.

    Energy is omnipresence. It matters naught what form it is in. Taking your example of a coin as a matter. The coin has energy till we find tangible ways to make it disappear on a quantum level. Then it becomes invisible energy. Sikh life as a householder couple does not need a quantum level to become one jyot but a pragmatic way to be able to balance all that that life throws at us.

    I am a bit confused by your definitions of Nirgun and Sirgun. According to Sikhi, Nirgun means sans attributes and Sirgun means with all attributes. One does not have to have a quantum knowledge to grasp what they mean in my opinion.

    Regarding the shabad you mentioned on page 736, I do not understand the relationship between that and what you are saying. Please elaborate and btw, ਬਾਜੀਗਰਿ -Bhajighar does not mean Actor as translated by the translator. It means a magician, a confidence trickster.

    One liners do not do any justice especially when a person is writing an article has his/her agenda to prove his /her point. One liners are an insult to Gurbani when we are discussing in this depth and I have checked the others above in the article, and the shabads do not seem to match what the writer is trying to say by using what fits in his thought which is quite unfair.

    A Creator is a Being no matter how you twist it which has nothing to do with Ik Ong Kaar, hence nor with Sikhi.

    Regards

    Tejwant Singh
     
  13. Ishna

    Ishna
    Expand Collapse
    On hiatus
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    5,002
    What about "karta purakh" in our Mool Mantar?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    Okay so let me ask you, do you believe that the physical is all there is and that our awareness / consciousness is only limited to this physical life and this physical life is all we have / will ever have? And that the awareness behind the mind, is limited to only this life (ie the emergent property argument)? As in, do you believe that SGGSJ is merely a psychology manual for living a physical life with nothing existing beyond this physical life? (Basically atheistic in belief)? I think based on your rejections of anything beyond the physical, this is what you believe? If not, then please explain because it seems that way.

    I am sorry, I can not nor will I ever have this line of thinking. I very much do believe in the ONEness of everything and that ONEness is consciously aware. In fact, I believe the base to the physical Universe is consciousness. This is based on science, philosophy, and religion in synthesis... and this idea of Sikhi being the same thing as Atheism is very very new to me, and limited only to several people on this forum. I am taking the two year course from Sikh Missionary College and they do not teach this thinking at all!

    My understanding of consciousness, or the awareness... the 'I AM' that is behind the physical body - I very much understand. The reason its difficult to put into words to convey to others, is that any attempt to do so would rely entirely on physical only references. (Language can only go so far!) So for example if I say this world is like a dream (of the Creator) you will accuse me of saying this whole reality is just a literal dream, when instead I am using it as a reference point (as does Gurbani) because it's at least a physical reference that we can use to try and comprehend the nonphysical.

    Using the dream analogy... when I dream at night, I am fully immersed within the character I am playing in the dream. I am fully conscious of the dream character body, and I am unaware of any existence beyond that. Let's say I was a doctor in the dream. The persona of being the doctor, is not real.. it's false. But it's all I know while in the dream. However, the consciousness operating through the doctor is not really a doctor at all. That doctor character, that ego is false. When I wake up I realize I was never the doctor at all. The doctor didn't 'die' when I woke up because the doctor was never real to begin with. Just like the shabad on Ang 736 describes it as a play. When I wake up I realize that the doctor was not real. It was still my consciousness that was operating as the doctor however, and not just the doctor but in fact EVERYTHING in the dream was really being controlled by me. Even though everything seemed separate it was not. It was all one thought... So though I am not trying to say that this reality is a literal dream... as 'Creator' would have no need for a dream in our physical sense... but it gives us a frame of reference to understand how consciousness can be something separate from the identity and the physical body. And how everything can really be within one consciousness.

    So, you ask me to explain in my own understanding... but if I do, you accuse me of limiting things to the references I have used. But I can only use physical references to try to explain! This is the plight of trying to explain something which exists beyond the physical, having only physical references to use! No matter how we try to explain, our explanation can not adequately covey it, even if we understand the concepts.

    For me, matter / physical = false. It's illusion in a very real sense. All that exists is the base energy from which everything arises. (We can agree on the energy thing yeah?) And if matter is really just this energy at a very slow vibration, then our bodies are also false. Can we agree on this? So, where we disagree is where our awareness comes from. Since quantum physics has shown, not in theory but through reproducible experiments, that consciousness affects whether electrons behave as either a wave or a particle, and since without conscious observation electrons behave as a wave... something not physical in itself but instead is energy moving through a medium, and since our *physical* brains are made of the very same electrons, which make up atoms, which make up... etc. etc. Then consciousness at least A consciousness must have existed to observe us into existence! Not just us but ALL matter... so either our consciousness is something separate from the consciousness which observed the universe into existence (if you believe the emergent property theory) or our consciousness is part of the ONE primal (existing before the physical) consciousness. Since Gurbani IS very clear on ONEness... there must only be one consciousness. And by the way those experiments have shown that human consciousness DOES affect the outcome of the experiment... it collapses the quantum wave function - mere observation, by a conscious observer. I realize its complicated... and doesn't fit the idea of a God in say an Abrahamic sense. But to me, this makes MUCH more sense, agrees with Gurbani without having to reduce Gurbani to a mere psychology book. And makes much more sense than limiting existence to only matter and limiting our consciousness to being just an emergent property of the complexity of our brains, and trying to say that all this complexity just 'happened' without guidance or conscious design at all. To me, that view is very limited.

    To me Gurbani can be applied to both physical life, and also spiritual (that part of us which exists beyond physical) both Miri and Piri... temporal and spiritual.

    It is not my wish to argue with anyone or change their beliefs. Just that to say that Sikhi does not teach spiritual aspect at all, is wrong. Or to say that Sikhi does not teach about a conscious creator... is also wrong because whether or not that creator has form, or is seen as an entity / being as we label beings etc. does not matter... there is still conscious and creative design to the Universe and even if we can't put in words or even if someone can not comprehend it, doesn't mean there isn't or that the creator is not 'God'. (btw the term God does not have to mean having form or a body etc. or even be a personal deity as many religions have - it's simply a word for the creative consciousness which gave rise to the Universe).
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Ishna ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    Karta Purakh comes 4 times in the SGGS. As Guru Nanak started this long march which took more than 2 centuries, to change the paradigm of the Psyche of the dwellers of India because of the atrocties by the Mughals and other invaders, in my opinion, the phrase was used then for people to gravitate towards what Ik Ong Kaar is because all believed in the Creator Being.

    According to Mahan Kosh Encyclopedia Purakh does not mean a person but 'the one that is omnipresent'.

    Guru Nanak being a wordsmith used this term for the weaklings to connect to something they were familiar with, who were lost in their own religious dogmas with nonsensical rituals when it was actually time to change not just the mind but the mindset of the people so they become capable of defending all the down trodden and outcast.
     
  16. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    Ishna Ji:
    Kartaa means 'Doer' as I understand it and Purakh refers to reality. So Kartaa Purakh means the Doer (creator, the one who puts into motion) reality.
    The words used to describe Creator / Creation as ONE are Omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time), Omnipotent (unlimited universal power), and Omniscient (intelligent, conscious, aware, perceiving).

    So even if we understand Creator to be pure energy underlying the Universe. Then that energy must be aware / perceiving the creation. But to answer your question about praying to anything? To me, it doesn't make sense because the ultimate truth is ONEness right? So everything IS the creator... who would be praying to who??
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    I honestly can't fathom how the probably the most important verse in all of SGGSJ would be merely something to rope people in and mislead them... or misdirect them by using misleading terminology. Was that what Guru Nanak Dev Ji was about??? We are told when he disappeared for three days in the river, and he stated he was in the court of the divine during that time, this is when he was revealed the truth which was written in the Mool Mantra. The base truth that we are told everything else in SGGSJ reflects upon is supposedly summed up in the Mool Mantra. So I find is very difficult to think that it was just a ploy designed to trick people or deceive them into following Sikhi.
     
  18. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Harkiran ji,

    I do not only believe in that but that is what I know. I do not pretend to know the unknowable. I would simply say, I just know this life the only one I know and I am doing my best to take the best out of it. As a Sikh I am rather proud to say about many things I do not know, like afterlife in this case. I have not the faintest notion nor am I interested in any self concocted prophecies.

    I am sorry, I had no idea someone was forcing you into this line of thinking or is it the other way around? :) How you live your life is your goal, no one else's. I never said,"this idea of Sikhi being the same thing as Atheism". Judging others is your right but how right you are about others, you have no inkling.

    That is your understanding and it should be respected as you should respect others' understanding.

    I am sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about with your dream analogy. As far as Shabad on page 736 is concerned, it does not describe this world as play but it is about me-ism and how we play different roles and fool ourselves in them. I would urge you to study the whole shabad. Please focus a bit on Rahao pankti. It has nothing to so with the topic being discussed as mentioned earlier. The same goes for the one liners posted in the articles. If you want, post one shabad at a time with your own understanding in a different thread and we can learn from each other's understanding.

    Please stop being judgmental. I have disagreed with you many times like now but I have never accused you of anything. Let's be honest when we are having this kind of discussion.

    Please provide some Shabads with your understanding of your claim.


    Please elaborate what is in bold with concrete examples, if you do not mind.

    No, we do not disagree on that. You claim to know and I claim to Not Know. Simply put.

    Can you please post the URL's of the above for my better understanding. Quantum Physics and its working is still a fetus with a potential to become a baby one day.

    .

    Can you please post some shabads with your claim above or are these your personal conclusions?

    I agree with the former but have not the faintest about the latter. Is the latter your personal conclusion? If it is, then what part of Gurbani is it based on?

    Before, you claimed that,"or our consciousness is part of the ONE primal (existing before the physical) consciousness". If this is your opinion then where does the above in quotes fit in?

    I am fine with whatever you think. After all it is your personal journey.

    Your above statement seems self contradictory. Spiritual does not exist beyond physical. If it did, then the concept of Miri Piri would not exist. Sidh Gosht by Guru Nanak explains it very eloquently, how to mix this "water and oil" in a perfect blend.

    .

    No one is creating an argument here nor is anyone interested in changing anyone's beliefs. We are here to interact and learn from each other. No one said what you claim, "Just that to say that Sikhi does not teach spiritual aspect at all, is wrong". Once again you are accusing people for nothing which is uncalled for.

    . We are all fellow travelllers and only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone each of us is at.

    Regards

    Tejwant Singh
     
  19. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,559
    Likes Received:
    6,988
    Harkiran ji,

    How did you concoct the above from what I said? Is acknowledging reincarnation ends up in its belief in Sikhi?

    Guru Sahib spoke the language of the common people, unlike the Pandits or Mullahs who claim to know more about their respective religions than the lay persons. Please do not distort what is being said. If you do not understand what I said, please ask rather than jumping to conclusions in a negative manner.

    As per so called disappearance for 3 days of Guru Nanak is concerned, it contradicts the Sikhi concept given to us in the SGGS, our only Guru.

    If you believe in this kind of fairy tale which is contrary to the Sikhi values, go ahead. There are many Sakhis in Sikhi that contradict Gurmat, hence false.
     
    #18 Tejwant Singh, Dec 2, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2015
  20. Ishna

    Ishna
    Expand Collapse
    On hiatus
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,942
    Likes Received:
    5,002
    Harkiran Ji

    Kartaa translates to 'doer' and 'maker', 'creator', etc. Thanks for pointing it out, actually, because I only ever thought 'creator' when understanding the word.

    Purakh is a trickier word. I'm of the mind to combine your definition with Tejwant Ji's into "omnipresent reality". The creative, omnipresent reality, the doer of everything.

    Regarding awareness/consciousness, you're right in that I'm one of the 'consciousness is an emergent property of the brain' people. I should clarify that by saying "consciousness as we know it". It is from this place that we develop our haumai, delusion of separation, and act out in Maya. We have our own mind, and that is what enables us to be cruel. I come to this conclusion because how else can I explain cruelty without putting the blame squarely on Akaal Purakh? And if Akaal Purakh really is the doer of those deeds, then why would I want to remember It constantly and with fond love?

    To describe Akaal Purakh as 'consciousness' is equally limited, from my point of view. Gurbani is clear that It is essentially unknowable, unfathomable, and at best, completely indescribable with words. Science may explain how our universe works, is observed, etc., but I'm not sure it can ever find or explain the Ik Onkar. You make a great point about It being 'aware', though. You said;

    That sentence gave me shivers when I read it.

    It also relates back to my thread topic; if It is aware and perceiving things, then what is to stop It from influencing what It sees? If it has consciousness, can't It make decisions?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    1,778
    I am sorry Tejwant Singh Ji, no matter how many times I read this I just don't see that it can be speaking only of states of mind or as yo put it 'meism'...
    Not sure if this is the whole thing or not I think it is... because another ||1|| is after this... I am still confused on how to tell where one beghins and another ends etc.

    ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ ਮਹਲਾ ਘਰੁ
    रागु सूही महला ५ घरु १
    Rāg sūhī mėhlā 5 gẖar 1
    Raag Soohee, Fifth Mehl, First House:
    ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ
    ੴ सतिगुर प्रसादि ॥
    Ik▫oaʼnkār saṯgur parsāḏ.
    One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The True Guru:
    ਬਾਜੀਗਰਿ ਜੈਸੇ ਬਾਜੀ ਪਾਈ
    बाजीगरि जैसे बाजी पाई ॥
    Bājīgar jaise bājī pā▫ī.
    The actor stages the play,

    (The actor, that is the one doing the acting or playing the parts, is also staging the play where they are being played. The play being spoken of is this reality and not a state of mind as we will see below).

    ਨਾਨਾ ਰੂਪ ਭੇਖ ਦਿਖਲਾਈ
    नाना रूप भेख दिखलाई ॥
    Nānā rūp bẖekẖ ḏikẖlā▫ī.
    playing the many characters in different costumes;

    (We are those characters. Further down it equates these characters with 'form' If it was merely speaking of meism and states of mind, then it wouldn't associate these characters to form. Instead they would be formless having only to do with the mind.)
    ਸਾਂਗੁ ਉਤਾਰਿ ਥੰਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਿਓ ਪਾਸਾਰਾ
    सांगु उतारि थम्हिओ पासारा ॥
    Sāʼng uṯār thamiĥa▫o pāsārā.
    but when the play ends, he takes off the costumes,

    (When this reality ends, and 'he' stops playing the part of these characters... as in these ego identities, us. )
    ਤਬ ਏਕੋ ਏਕੰਕਾਰਾ ॥੧॥
    तब एको एकंकारा ॥१॥
    Ŧab eko ekankārā. ||1||
    and then he is one, and only one. ||1||

    (We see that the whole time, it was really Waheguru who was playing ALL the characters... we see there is only the ONE... Ik Onkar... if it was speaking of mere states of mind, then why refer to what remains after we remove the costumes, as Ik Onkar? If it were mere states of mind and meism as you stated, then why is what remains after we remove these states of mind or meisms, still labelled Ik Onkar in this shabad?? This for me is the clincher... because if you only believe in consciousness as an emergent property and only in the physical and that this is speaking of meism and states of mind, thenits still saying by removing these states of mind, what is left is Ik Onkar!!! So even taking your explanation Tejwant Ji, these states of mind, are what we associate with US - our Ego Identity, and after we remove these Ego identities, or meisms as you call them, we still have something left... which is equated to Ik Onkar!)
    ਕਵਨ ਰੂਪ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਿਓ ਬਿਨਸਾਇਓ
    कवन रूप द्रिसटिओ बिनसाइओ ॥
    Kavan rūp ḏaristi▫o binsā▫i▫o.
    How many forms and images appeared and disappeared?

    (Here it is saying forms and images... again meism and states of mind are not 'form' they are not something tangible that we see but rather that we experience. So had it been speaking of mere states of mind a different descriptor would have been used but it's very clearly saying 'form'. Since you do not subscribe to the same belief as I do regarding the illusion of matter, thoughts and states of mind do not posses 'form' as they are formless abstract as thoughts and behaviours. It`s speaking of forms. And even if it`s speaking of identies as personalities or Ego or meisms, then above we are still told that in absence of them, Ik Onakr is what remains!)
    ਕਤਹਿ ਗਇਓ ਉਹੁ ਕਤ ਤੇ ਆਇਓ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ
    कतहि गइओ उहु कत ते आइओ ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
    Kaṯėh ga▫i▫o uho kaṯ ṯe ā▫i▫o. ||1|| rahā▫o.
    Where have they gone? Where did they come from? ||1||Pause||

    (Where have these FORMS gone, and where did they come from? Again, if it were speaking of states of mind going and coming, then the line immediately preceeding it would not have referred to them as having form. And even if you somehow metaphorically equate it to meism it still asks us to ponder where did they come from? The obvious answer if it were thoughts or states of mind, would be that they came from us - our mind.... but then why ask where they came from if that is the obvious answer?? Why make us dig deeper and pause on that thought?? It's making us think deeper... who REALLY is the doer behind it all??? Even if its speaking of meism or states of mind, if I remove all of these what is left would be the TRUE me right?? But we are told what remains is Ik Onkar! So if Ik Onkar is what remins when they are gone, who created them to begin with??
    So to me, it would STILL lead to the ONE Creator consciousness who is beind everything.)


    Continued next message... ran out of space!
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page