Guru Maharaj say "Is dehi ko t{censored}y dev" meaning that the Devi's and Devta's yearn for this body/a body. The reason is that in order to achieve salvation one has to route through this body that we have. Although Devi's and Devtas possess (God like) Spiritual Powers, they do not become Gods.
Devas are gods in the traditional sense of having powers beyond the physical and existing in dimensions which are beyond human. They yearn for the human body because it is through the human vehicle that enlightenment can be achieved according to God's own design. Even the devas take birth. Gurbani even says the demons take birth. And the other thing not mentioned is that human beings are at core not even physical beings, but atmas and have come from a spiritual dimension. The only linguistic awkwardness has to do with the English definitions of gods and goddesses which are largely Judeo-Christian, and thus Abrahamic. So English as a language does struggle to express concepts which are foreign to the traditional Judeo-Christian world-view. But deva is still meaning higher order of extra-dimensional being and compared to human experiential limitation, for lack of any better defintion, are gods, or demi-gods. And Gurbani acknowledges there are hierarchies among them with greater and lesser. Just as physics postulates there are higher and lower dimensions. Deva is basically talking about a higher order of intelligences, and therefore of a nature of spiritual entities. While foreign to the traditional Judeo-Christian English world-view, they are also well understood by traditional indigenous Shamans with thousands of years of history behind this understanding. In other words, while the English language is awkward grammatically to express these conceptualizations, the concepts are actually well-defined in cultures which now speak English, and we can work around that awkwardness. And since the word deva is actually Sanskrit and not English, it's not hard to get beyond the awkwardness of the translated definition "demi-god." All you are doing by saying "deva does not mean deva," is denying the truths of Gurbani, and not saying anything about English translation.
Deva -- Angel or celestial being belonging to a kingdom in nature evolving parallel to humanity, and ranging from sub-human elementals to super-human beings on a level with a planetary logos.
Deva, jiva and jara (inorganic matter) are, in their real, as opposed to their phenomenal and illusory, being, the one Brahman
Deva (Sans.) A god, a "resplendent" Deity, Deva-Deus, from the root div, "to shine." A Deva is a celestial being-whether good, bad or indifferent-which inhabits "the three worlds," or the three planes above us.
The One Supreme Parabraham is nirgun, meaning, we cannot perceive the fullness of with the limitation of human materiality. This does not mean demi-gods do not exist, or that alternate dimensions which are beyond the physical and are more refined, even higher vibratory state do not exist. This does not mean that anything which Western scientific reductionism has not validated is fictitious, or mythological, or has no reality. It does speak to what has been described as the "limits" of human perception, and of something beyond what human instrumentality can perceive.
Neither of your objections postulate anything more than creative interpretation. Where does the Gurmukhi say that devas are not devas? Where is the English translation of ਦੇਵ wrong? We are just back to the same debate, "yoga doesn't mean yoga, chakr doesn't mean chakr, and now deva doesn't mean deva." It's obvious from Gurbani that the gods are created out of the Parabrahm, that they are created in Maya, doubt and delusion and the three gunas. They do not become gods? You do realize everything that Gurbani is saying is from the Vedas and the Vedas say this same thing that the gods come from the Parabram. So why does deva mean god in one sense, and then not mean god in another? This is creative translation. I think you fail to realize that first, all creation is a manifestation of the Divine Parabrahm. Second, there are hierarchies of creation. And if you studied physics you would know that there is an implicate and explicate order of infinities and that deeper enfolded dimensionality has the characteristics of our 3 dimensions of space, and 4th dimension of time, but a higher dimensional entity (per theoretical physics!) would have capabilities beyond our own, would be able to walk through walls, become invisible at will, be able to foretell the future because time would not be a limit, etc.
So it comes down to the definition of what is a god.
Deva (देव in Devanagari script, pronounced as /'d̪ev.ə/) is the Sanskrit word for "god, deity". It can be variously interpreted as a spirit, demi-god, celestial being, angel, deity or any supernatural being of high excellence. In Hindu text and tradition, the devas opposed the corrupted demonic Rakshasa...
Nature devas are responsible for 'things' such as fire, air, rain and trees - most of them assumed a minor role in the later religion. Certain other deities rose into prominence. These higher devas control much more intricate tasks governing the functioning of the cosmos and the evolution of creation. Mahadevas, such as Lord Ganesha, have such tremenduous tasks under their diligence that they are sometimes called themselves gods under the Supreme One God. The Trimurti is composed of Brahmā, Vishnu and Shiva. (Note: Mahadeva generally refers to Shiva)
There are also many other lesser celestial beings in Hinduism such as Gandharvas or celestial musicians.
Vayu or the Lord of the wind is an example of an important deva. Also, Death is personified as the deva Yama.
Devas, in Hinduism, are celestial beings that control forces of nature such as fire, air, wind, etc. They are not to be confused with the One and the Supreme God or His personal form, Saguna Brahman which can be visualized as Vishnu or Shiva. God (see Ishvara) or Brahman (the Supreme Spirit) is the ultimate controller. A famous verse from the Katha Upanishad states: “From fear (here, power) of Him the wind blows; from fear of Him the sun rises; from fear of Him Agni and Indra and Death, the fifth, run." In actuality, Brahman is the only Ultimate Reality, and all devas are simply mundane manifestations of Him.
The Vaishnavites (who often translate deva as "demigod") cite various verses that speak of the devas' subordinate status. For example, the Rig Veda (1.22.20) states, oṃ tad viṣṇoḥ paramam padam sadā paśyanti sūrayaḥ: "All the suras (i.e., the devas) look always toward the feet of Lord Vishnu." Similarly, in the Vishnu sahasranama the concluding verses state: "The Rishis (great sages), the ancestors, the devas, the great elements, in fact all things moving and unmoving constituting this universe, have originated from Narayana," (i.e., Vishnu). Thus the devas are stated to be subordinate to Vishnu, or God.
In the Bhagavad Gita Krishna himself states that worshipers of deities other than the Supreme Lord, Vishnu, are incorrect (Gita 9.23) as such worship leads only to temporal benefits, rather than to the Lord Himself (Gita 7.23). Krishna also says: "Whatever deity or form a devotee worships, I make his faith steady. However, their wishes are granted only by Me." (Gita: 7:21-22) Elsewhere in the Gita Lord Krishna states: "O Arjuna, even those devotees who worship other lesser deities (e.g., devas, for example) with faith, they also worship Me, but in an improper way because I am the Supreme Being. I alone am the enjoyer of all sacrificial services (Seva, Yajna) and Lord of the universe." (Gita: 9:23)
Swaminarayan, the founder of the Hindu Swaminarayan sect, a Vaishnavite sect, according to this site,[1], said in verse 115 of their scripture, Shikshapatri, "Shree Krishna Bhagwan and Shree Krishna Bhagwan's incarnations alone are worthy of meditation. Similarly, Shree Krishna Bhagwan's images are worthy. And men or devas, even if they are devotees of Shree Krishna Bhagwan or brahmavettaa (knowers of divinity), are still not worthy of meditation - and thus one should not meditate upon them."
Deva (Hinduism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You see, the classical Hindu definition of the devas is not even different from the definition given in Gurbani. All the devas are subordinate to the Parabrahm and reflect at His feet. The difference is whether Brahma or Vishnu is the Supreme that all the others derive from. And Gurbani has made it clear that the Parabrahm precedes even Brahma and Vishnu. So instead of following the Vaishnav tradition of elevating the das avtaara of Bishan as supreme manifestation, Gurbani says greater than these is the One Supreme uncreated Ik Oangkar. Since Hinduism itself as a religious philosophy also teaches the same thing, that the devas exist, are subordinate to the One Supreme, yet deva still means deva... how did modern Sikhism get this imaginative interpretation that a deva now doesn't mean deva? Explain!
ਕਈ ਕੋਟਿ ਦੇਵ ਦਾਨਵ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਸਿਰਿ ਛਤ੍ਰ ॥
kee kott dhaev dhaanav eindhr sir shhathr ||
Many millions are the demi-gods, demons and Indras, under their regal canopies.
ਸਗਲ ਸਮਗ੍ਰੀ ਅਪਨੈ ਸੂਤਿ ਧਾਰੈ ॥
sagal samagree apanai sooth dhhaarai ||
He has strung the entire creation upon His thread.
~SGGS Ji p. 276
ਸੁਰ ਸਿਧ ਗਣ ਗੰਧਰਬ ਧਿਆਵਹਿ ਜਖ ਕਿੰਨਰ ਗੁਣ ਭਨੀ ॥
sur sidhh gan gandhharab dhhiaavehi jakh kinnar gun bhanee ||
The angels,the Siddhas,the beings of spiritual perfection,the heavenly heralds and celestial singers meditate on You. The Yakhsha demons,the guards of the divine treasures,and the Kinnars, the dancers of the god of wealth chant Your Glorious Praises.
ਕੋਟਿ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਅਨੇਕ ਦੇਵਾ ਜਪਤ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਜੈ ਜੈ ਕਾਰ ॥
kott eindhr anaek dhaevaa japath suaamee jai jai kaar ||
Millions of Indras and countless gods and super-human beings meditate on the Lord Master and celebrate His Praises.
ਅਨਾਥ ਨਾਥ ਦਇਆਲ ਨਾਨਕ ਸਾਧਸੰਗਤਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਉਧਾਰ ॥੨॥
anaathh naathh dhaeiaal naanak saadhhasangath mil oudhhaar ||2||
The Merciful Lord is the Master of the masterless, O Nanak; joining the Saadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy, one is saved. ||2||
ਕੋਟਿ ਦੇਵੀ ਜਾ ਕਉ ਸੇਵਹਿ ਲਖਿਮੀ ਅਨਿਕ ਭਾਤਿ ॥
kott dhaevee jaa ko saevehi lakhimee anik bhaath ||
Millions of gods and goddesses of wealth serve Him in so many ways.
~SGGS Ji p. 455
It's too simplistic to say it's an English translators problem, since these words clearly originate in Sanskrit. We are dealing with Sanskrit definitions.
Deva: "A shining one," a god-greater or lesser in the evolutionary hierarchy; a semi-divine or celestial being with great powers, and therefore a "god." Sometimes called a demi-god.
In Vishishtadvaita, Ishvara is the Supreme Cosmic Spirit who maintains complete control over the Universe and all the sentient beings, which together also form the pan-organistic body of Ishvara. The triad of Ishvara along with the universe and the sentient beings is Brahman, which signifies the completeness of existence. Ishvara is Parabrahman endowed with innumerable auspicious qualities (Kalyana Gunas). Ishvara is perfect, omniscient, omnipresent, incorporeal,[4] independent, Creator of the world, its active ruler and also the eventual destroyer. He is causeless, eternal and unchangeable — and is yet the material and the efficient cause of the world. He is both immanent (like whiteness in milk) and transcendent (like a watch-maker independent of a watch). He is the subject of worship. He is the basis of morality and giver of the fruits of one's Karma. He rules the world with His Māyā — His divine power.
According to the Dvaita school, Ishvara possesses all the qualities seen in Vishishtadvaita. However, Ishvara is only the efficient but not the material cause of the Universe and the sentient beings. Thus, Dvaitism does not separate Ishwara and Brahman, and does not believe that the highest form of Brahman is attributeless, or that Ishwara is incorporeal.[2] Instead, Ishvara is the highest form of truth and worship of God involves belief in God as an infinite and yet personal and loving being.
Thus, in addition to their belief in the abstract principle of Brahman, most Hindus worship God on a day-to-day basis in one of God's less abstract personal forms, such as Vishnu, Shiva, or Shakti. Some Hindus worship these personal forms of God for a practical reason: it is easier to cultivate devotion to a personal being than to an abstract principle. Therefore, the Hindu scriptures depict God not only as an abstract principle or concept, but also as a personal being.
Ishvara - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you look closely at some of the different philosophical schools of Hindu thought, you see that the Supreme nirgun is beyond human comprehension and is more of an abstract principle because it isn't physical, the physicality can't comprehend it. It defies human logic. When people think or conceptualize, we do so in the symbolism of words, and in the feeling tones of emotion. It is true that every word you utter to express things beyond this dimension loses something of the reality of that dimension (and not even the nirguna, but just to conceptualize a deva is beyond human speech.) And this is because the translation of the brain in human concepts diminishes those elements which are beyond it and can't be expressed. We wind up with a human version, and not a symbolic facsimile. For example, if I say the word, "house" we have a common definition. But if we are talking of something beyond the comprehension of ordinary human experience, we diminish that beyondness by forcing the definition to fit a human concept.
This explains Plato's allegory of the cave, where we live in a world which is like a cave and perceive only shadows and lights, but the fullness of reality escapes us because of the limitation of the human senses, and the logic of human concepts. So when we are talking about a concept like devas, we are talking about the hyperdimensionality of the other worlds, but doing so in a way which seeks to categorize them scientifically, or mythologially. And I have the interpretation that this is incorrect.
An example would be Stephen Gaskin. He said when he had been a college student, he was a biology major. And when he looked at a tree, he looked at it analytically, categorizing it by shape and appearance. He looked at the leaves like you would dissect a frog and considered which flora, which fauna, which species. Then one day, he took peyote under the guidance of Indian elders. The world of the mind was never the same again. And as he describes it, "The next time I saw a tree, I bowed in reverence to the life force within it. For the first time I recognized the brotherhood of trees. I greeted the tree as another living being."
First of all, the Western world-view which is born out of the Abrahamic religious traditions does not see the atma pervading in all living beings. To the Abrahamic conception of the world, everything is soulless, with the exception of humankind. Everything is exploitable, and given for the use of mankind. And it is from this fundamental spiritual disconnection from the life-force present in ALL life, that Western scientific materialism and Western religious dogmas of Monotheism originate. And it is a sign of the Kaliyuga that such philosophies predominate. Because the tradition of the entire world and indigenous human races is radically different. The indigenous and original cultures world-wide have ALL believed that the whole world is a living being, and there are dimensions of intelligences. And this is largely because psychoactive plants and later yogic and meditative practices have induced the experience of other worlds in Native traditions which is refered to as "mysticism, pertaining to spiritual mysteries."
Gurbani is rich with mysticism and depth spirituality which is concordant with every indigenous religion on the planet. But these Western, modernistic Abrahamic definitions disconnect the reality of those fundamental truths and create another kind of Islamic world-view, which is neither accepting the literal definitions of the concepts and words expressed in Gurbani, nor the validity of the experience of other worlds.
The gods speak in a language of symbol. If you want a modern day example of this, study the life of Srinivasa Ramanujan the mathematician. He was self-taught mathematical genius and eccentric who died very young after being sponsored at Cambridge University. He left the world a legacy of old notebooks which had been unedited. In recent decades the mathematical world was after the last work of Dr. Albert Einstein. Einstein's last work was called the Grand Unification Theory. Mathematicians built from that work and developed advanced equations which contributed to Superstring Theory, then M-Theory. These advanced equations and theories could not have been worked out without the research into Srinivasa Ramanujan's modular function equations. It has been described by leading theoretical physicists that this was 21st century mathematics dropped into the 20th century.
How did Ramanujan get these advanced mathematics he scribbled in his journals without even the benefit of the education? He said the goddess whispered into his ear at night and spoke to him in a language of symbol. In the morning he would try to remember what she had said.
There are uncountable stories of angelic encounters, advanced spirit guides, bodhisatvas, gods which have aided people in times of need. Yet, are Sikhs going to ignore the reality of these presences which are spoken of in Gurbani, and deny them completely to force Sikh religion to fit into a modernistic context which is spiritually devoid of mysticism and nearly agnostic in it's disbelief of anything otherworldly, with the exception of the One God who is believed to be distinctly separate from His creation, and thus conformed to the Abrahamic world-view?
The evidence for higher beings exists. The references to higher beings in Gurbani exists. It conforms to the classical Hindu philosophies about higher spiritual beings which derive from and are subordinate to the Uncreated, nirgun Parabrahm. What is not in evidence is the materialistic, Western scientific, skeptical world-view or how Gurbani could squeeze it's Indic mysticism into those limitations.
How could we even talk about a nirgun God which defies comprehension? The manifestations in the sargun are so we can know God. This is why Guru is sargun. Without Guru, it would be impossible to grasp or come close to a God which in truest aspects comes closer to the Buddhist definitions of shunyata. Emptiness, shunyata, isn't even fully empty. If you do any Buddhist Abidharmic studies, you will see the Geshes describe the shunyata (emptiness) as pregnant with creative potential. It is like the pause before the spoken word or visible form. And moreover, Abidharma studies teach that shunyata is the union of absolute emptiness and light. What is powerful is, while Buddhism is an atheistic religion, it really is not so. It just has a definition of God which isn't personal, which is abstract. Abidharma studies concentrate on trying to define the nirguna. And even in Buddhism, there are hierarchies of manifestation, sargun buddhas of greater dimensionality than human.
Only the Wasichu (disconnected Western man) looks at the world blindly and says there are no intelligences pervading within and without. The indigenous man looks at the world and has intuitive awareness that everything is alive, even to the very cells of your own body. Your own body is a universe in which generations of cells have lived and died. But so disconnected is the driver of this body-vehicle, that he lives largely unaware of the beings within him who have struggled and died to keep him existing in this dimension. Moreover, even your ego-identity isn't solid as you may assume, but when we speak of personality we must of necessity speak of pluralities. To the Western man the world is dead, inanimate, exploitable. To the indigenous tribal people, the world has always been teeming with uncountable lifeforms. To the indigenous even a worm has a soul and the God permeates the soul of all beings. To the indigenous all the universes are filled with spiritual hierarchies, orders of beings, some good, some evil, some neutral, some advanced, some lower. And it has nothing to do with Western devaluations of mythology or hallucination.
But some people won't accept spiritual realities. Deep down, intuitively and subconsciously people know but they don't want to know. We look in the mirror at the flesh but we are not what we see. We are spirit beings who come from another dimension of reality. This earth is only a temporary home. To confront this is to confront our mortality and the divestiture of ego-identity. It is to glimpse realms of terror and madness and the archetypal unconscious as well as rapturous and holy. It is to nearly lose your mind in the conventional sense, and Maya resists this. The ego, which religions all over the world teach must be overcome, is also a tool for interacting in the real world. To lose your ego is to confront madness. True depth psychology and mystical spirituality is a journey into the heart of the madness of the human soul. And it is easier to deal with mundane concepts, mundane realities and the temporary security of an earth which is firm. But the truth is, all that you see here now is passing away. You cannot hold on to your body. You cannot hold on to your identity, your culture, your race, your bank account. And you must necessarily take this journey into the other realms, when your time is up, whether you are ready or not. Spirituality is not a social climbing for respect in the material world. Spirituality is a preparation for when you have no physical body and must travel to imaginal realms of psychic force and even duress. It is to confront what is deepest, what is disturbed, what is even demonic in your own mind.
I will give you a hint... nothing of the spiritual dimensions can be perceived physically with the senses. You cannot "look" and see. You cannot "listen" and hear. You cannot "touch" and feel. It's a different kind of perception. And if you don't have it? Well I guess you don't have it. And you can stand on the mountainous vistas with the Western scientists and pull out your telescopes and textbooks and try to find and explain God. And I wish you the best of luck, because thats a set up for failure.
Any religion which takes that approach doesn't have a clue. And this is a problem in modern religion, even Gurdwaras. Most people socialize in them and never get beyond the senses. Religion is a custom. Respect is there. Love is there. But the perceived reality isn't. Modern people are frightened and dissociated from spiritual reality, just as they are frightened of their own dreams That's why modern religious people are great believers in medicine and science and business. They are a great material success. But spiritually, mystically? Most people are totally out of touch and disconnected. Even to the point where they read their own holy books like a school book and try to correct the "primitivism" they find, try to excise out all the mystical other-worldly teachings and references (which they can't imagine could be real), and ultimately make their religion as powerless and devoid of reality, as the scientist makes a tree into a lifeless object of study. Dead people trying to logically comprehend what is perceivable to them only as a dead world is no basis for a religion at all. If you only understood that this isn't even the Real world. This is the shadow reality.
But I don't know how to explain to you if you can't accept that the word deva means deva, and insist on coming up with something new and Western to describe it. The supernatural simply means that which is beyond nature and thus not fully understood. To the modern mentality it means the impossible and the fictitious.
~Bhul chak maaf
