☀️ 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
Hindu Legends
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="Harjas Kaur Khalsa" data-source="post: 78970" data-attributes="member: 2125"><p>The pauri precisely states that the God was in the form of Krishna who is recognized in Gurbani as an avataar (manifestation/incarnation/ descending of the God to earth) for that particular age. Can their be any disagreement? We know that Gurbani also corrects that all the major Hindu devas fell into Maya. I agree with you completely, that when Krishna as an avtar spoke from God-consciousness in Bhagavad-Gita it was not as personality of Krishna. But Gurbani clearly states that:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">ਆਪੇ ਗੋਪੀ ਕਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਬਨਿ ਆਪੇ ਗਊ ਚਰਾਹਾ ॥ </span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">aapae gopee kaan hai piaaraa ban aapae goo charaahaa ||</span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">The Beloved Himself is the milk-maid and Krishna; He Himself herds the cows in the woods. </span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue"></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">ਆਪੇ ਸਾਵਲ ਸੁੰਦਰਾ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਆਪੇ ਵੰਸੁ ਵਜਾਹਾ ॥ </span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">aapae saaval sundharaa piaaraa aapae vans vajaahaa ||</span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">The Beloved Himself is the blue-skinned, handsome one; He Himself plays on His flute. </span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue"></span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">ਕੁਵਲੀਆ ਪੀੜੁ ਆਪਿ ਮਰਾਇਦਾ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਕਰਿ ਬਾਲਕ ਰੂਪਿ ਪਚਾਹਾ ॥੨॥ </span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">kuvaleeaa peerr aap maraaeidhaa piaaraa kar baalak roop pachaahaa ||2||</span></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><span style="color: Blue">The Beloved Himself took the form of a child, and destroyed Kuwalia-peer, the mad elephant. ||2||</span></p><p></p><p></p><p>So how can it be so objectionable what is written in Bhagavad-Gita that an avtaar of the God spoke from God-consciousness, as that is the identity and purpose of the descent of an avataar into sansaaric realms. How can this be a sin against rehit if I'm reading Gurbani to the best of my ability to gain understanding. We acknowledge Krishna is a Deva and an avtar of the God for specific age. We don't honor Krishna or worship him as the supreme manifestation of Parabrahm, Ek Oangkar like the Vaishnavs do. But even Gurbani clearly states in many pauris that vaishnav bhagkti and bhairaag are the way to approach the Supreme. So it is clear that Vaishnav school of Hinduism is acknowledged in Gurbani as having been a path to God and sincere religion for the age.</p><p></p><p>So why would we find it objectionable? It is not the boat of salvation for the current age. Guruji has gone higher in advancement and spiritual understanding than any previous avtar and has grasped the absolute limits of the unknowable Parabrahm, and thus is secure, Maya cannot touch Guruji and lead to corruption as was witnessed in incarnations of the past. Gurbani cannot contradict. It has to be reconciled as giving One True testimony of events, and this is the only objection I have to Namjap in labeling every aspect of Hinduism in Gurbani as mythological, legends and stories. Clearly there are places where Gurbani says this. But not ALL references are mere historic references to placate a Hindu population. Clearly there are elements of truth and profound symbolism behind these alleged "stories" which relate to the very nature of Sikh theology.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I mean, how far do we want to take this theme? Is the concept of avataar untrue and legend because it's rooted in Vaishnav tradition? So then when we read Gurbani say that Guruji is an avataara, we contradict it and say it isn't true, doesn't mean what it clearly says? See this is what I object to. Also Hindu religion is living, vibrant religion for Hindu people. To label ALL their devas and beliefs and symbols under heading of "legends" implies everything is untrue, like we are reading ancient Greek mythology about quaint historical beliefs and which have no reality. I object to the assumption that <em>anything</em> in Gurbani is intrinsically devoid of reality or symbolically untrue or mere historic curiosity simply because we do not understand. I am of the conviction that entire Gurbani is revealed, Divine, and supernatural truth which penetrates mysteries of the nirgun and sargun aspects of the Parabrahm Vaheguru. Gurbani brings into sansaaric realm hyperdimensional realities even beyond comprehension of a human brain. We do our best to understand, but Guru perceives what we cannot. And so I show respect for entire Gurbani as Living, true and real, even what I cannot grasp.</p><p></p><p>Descriptions of the Mahadevas are not said to be mythology, but reality. I would find it completely offensive as a Sikh, if a Hindu was posting that stories of Guru in Gurbani were all legends and untrue. It would be showing the heighth of disrespect for our sentiments. And for this reason I request that the title be changed to something less dismissive and disrespectful to:</p><p></p><p>"Hindu symbolism"</p><p></p><p>Which neither implies complete reality and we can question and evaluate those elements clearly said to be legend from Gurbani, and neither implies total disregard for reality to offend Hindu sentiments and insult Gurbani as being mythological or untrue. But otherwise, I thank Namjap Ji for bringing these little known details and symbolism to our understanding, as all knowledge is a blessing from the Vaheguru. And clearly here, no one is elevating a Hindu deva for veneration by the Sikh community which WOULD be something contrary to Khalsa rehit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Harjas Kaur Khalsa, post: 78970, member: 2125"] The pauri precisely states that the God was in the form of Krishna who is recognized in Gurbani as an avataar (manifestation/incarnation/ descending of the God to earth) for that particular age. Can their be any disagreement? We know that Gurbani also corrects that all the major Hindu devas fell into Maya. I agree with you completely, that when Krishna as an avtar spoke from God-consciousness in Bhagavad-Gita it was not as personality of Krishna. But Gurbani clearly states that: [INDENT][COLOR="Blue"]ਆਪੇ ਗੋਪੀ ਕਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਬਨਿ ਆਪੇ ਗਊ ਚਰਾਹਾ ॥ aapae gopee kaan hai piaaraa ban aapae goo charaahaa || The Beloved Himself is the milk-maid and Krishna; He Himself herds the cows in the woods. ਆਪੇ ਸਾਵਲ ਸੁੰਦਰਾ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਆਪੇ ਵੰਸੁ ਵਜਾਹਾ ॥ aapae saaval sundharaa piaaraa aapae vans vajaahaa || The Beloved Himself is the blue-skinned, handsome one; He Himself plays on His flute. ਕੁਵਲੀਆ ਪੀੜੁ ਆਪਿ ਮਰਾਇਦਾ ਪਿਆਰਾ ਕਰਿ ਬਾਲਕ ਰੂਪਿ ਪਚਾਹਾ ॥੨॥ kuvaleeaa peerr aap maraaeidhaa piaaraa kar baalak roop pachaahaa ||2|| The Beloved Himself took the form of a child, and destroyed Kuwalia-peer, the mad elephant. ||2||[/COLOR][/INDENT] So how can it be so objectionable what is written in Bhagavad-Gita that an avtaar of the God spoke from God-consciousness, as that is the identity and purpose of the descent of an avataar into sansaaric realms. How can this be a sin against rehit if I'm reading Gurbani to the best of my ability to gain understanding. We acknowledge Krishna is a Deva and an avtar of the God for specific age. We don't honor Krishna or worship him as the supreme manifestation of Parabrahm, Ek Oangkar like the Vaishnavs do. But even Gurbani clearly states in many pauris that vaishnav bhagkti and bhairaag are the way to approach the Supreme. So it is clear that Vaishnav school of Hinduism is acknowledged in Gurbani as having been a path to God and sincere religion for the age. So why would we find it objectionable? It is not the boat of salvation for the current age. Guruji has gone higher in advancement and spiritual understanding than any previous avtar and has grasped the absolute limits of the unknowable Parabrahm, and thus is secure, Maya cannot touch Guruji and lead to corruption as was witnessed in incarnations of the past. Gurbani cannot contradict. It has to be reconciled as giving One True testimony of events, and this is the only objection I have to Namjap in labeling every aspect of Hinduism in Gurbani as mythological, legends and stories. Clearly there are places where Gurbani says this. But not ALL references are mere historic references to placate a Hindu population. Clearly there are elements of truth and profound symbolism behind these alleged "stories" which relate to the very nature of Sikh theology. I mean, how far do we want to take this theme? Is the concept of avataar untrue and legend because it's rooted in Vaishnav tradition? So then when we read Gurbani say that Guruji is an avataara, we contradict it and say it isn't true, doesn't mean what it clearly says? See this is what I object to. Also Hindu religion is living, vibrant religion for Hindu people. To label ALL their devas and beliefs and symbols under heading of "legends" implies everything is untrue, like we are reading ancient Greek mythology about quaint historical beliefs and which have no reality. I object to the assumption that [I]anything[/I] in Gurbani is intrinsically devoid of reality or symbolically untrue or mere historic curiosity simply because we do not understand. I am of the conviction that entire Gurbani is revealed, Divine, and supernatural truth which penetrates mysteries of the nirgun and sargun aspects of the Parabrahm Vaheguru. Gurbani brings into sansaaric realm hyperdimensional realities even beyond comprehension of a human brain. We do our best to understand, but Guru perceives what we cannot. And so I show respect for entire Gurbani as Living, true and real, even what I cannot grasp. Descriptions of the Mahadevas are not said to be mythology, but reality. I would find it completely offensive as a Sikh, if a Hindu was posting that stories of Guru in Gurbani were all legends and untrue. It would be showing the heighth of disrespect for our sentiments. And for this reason I request that the title be changed to something less dismissive and disrespectful to: "Hindu symbolism" Which neither implies complete reality and we can question and evaluate those elements clearly said to be legend from Gurbani, and neither implies total disregard for reality to offend Hindu sentiments and insult Gurbani as being mythological or untrue. But otherwise, I thank Namjap Ji for bringing these little known details and symbolism to our understanding, as all knowledge is a blessing from the Vaheguru. And clearly here, no one is elevating a Hindu deva for veneration by the Sikh community which WOULD be something contrary to Khalsa rehit. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
Hindu Legends
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