☀️ 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
Sikh Sikhi Sikhism
MUKTI- Different Types And What Gurbani Says
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="Archived_member14" data-source="post: 175592" data-attributes="member: 586"><p>Chazsingh ji,</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To be clear, according to me, leading the life of a recluse vs. the householder are not two different *ways* to reach the Truth. They simply reflect difference in accumulated tendencies of more or less similar kind to that which distinguishes between say, an artist vs. a politician. As I said, the ideal recluse is a natural outcome of the accumulated inclination to seeing the harm in sensuous attachments. Such a person will find himself seeking to avoid sense contacts so as to be able to maintain wholesome states of mind. It is like having come to see the strong heat in living the household life; he knows how this can be avoided. And like I said, this is *not* the path to Truth.</p><p></p><p>However, just as it is with the householder, if such a person does come to know what the path to Truth is, he will not think to change his lifestyle / circumstance, but continue to develop understanding in whatever situation he finds himself in. Just as for the householder, his indulgence to sense objects will not suddenly disappear, the recluse's movement away from sense pleasures will continue.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Would not the concept of God require “understanding” to have any meaning?</p><p>What do you understand by “understanding” and what decides that this understanding has its limits and can at some point, be rejected? And what is it that judges something else as more valuable?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are saying that he is not only the puppeteer but the puppet itself as well?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This will sound assuming, but I doubt that you understand what self-view is. Because while I may sometimes fall prey to it, I know not to encourage it when making a statement about what is the Path and what is not the Path. You on the other hand are suggesting a path involving self-view, and this would make it in fact the wrong path. In other words, in my case, self-view arises in spite of some understanding about its wrongness, but in your case it arises not only because you do not know what it is, but because you actually encourage it in the name of right.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is just what *is*. </p><p>Attachment is known for what it is not because it stands in contrast to detachment, but because it is a reality with a particular characteristic, function, manifestation and with particular set of proximate cause. Likewise aversion, ignorance, detachment, wisdom, these are all realities known not because of the existence of some opposite, but because they are very *real* when conditioned to arise.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Indeed cold and hot are both different intensities of the one kind of physical phenomenon, namely the Fire element. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>What if I uttered the following:</p><p></p><p>“God is a fiction, a lie. Oh no, he is the great Deceiver. He is great, powerful, and omniscient. Divine is his creation. Divine am I. He is praising himself through me. He is someone who has nothing better to do but play games / masturbate. He is me. He is not me. Psychotic, schizophrenic am I, is He.”</p><p></p><p>Would you not naturally be inclined to identify the cause for such utterance as existing within me, unrelated to anyone or anything else? You find the God concept appealing, but does it not come with contradictions?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is only wishful thinking. And we don’t learn the Truth from “situations”, but from the realities that make up our moment to moment experience.</p><p></p><p>We are born to receive the fruits of our actions, the rest depends on the accumulated tendencies, whether we plant seeds for more going round the cycle of existence, or gradually getting off it. By comparison only a handful makes up the latter.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>When it comes to the matter of seeing the value of good and the harm in evil, and the development of wisdom and reduction of ignorance, the above again is only wishful thinking. </p><p>Wrong does not lead to right. Good is developed on the basis of good in the past, wisdom on wisdom in the past. Normally what happens is that one learns to avoid particular situations where attachment just finds a different object to cling to. And one of these objects happens to be the idea that one has learnt from / seen through certain situations / grown wiser. This is why I said that understanding the Truth is not based on concepts of situations, but on reality. And the test of this is “now”.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Archived_member14, post: 175592, member: 586"] Chazsingh ji, To be clear, according to me, leading the life of a recluse vs. the householder are not two different *ways* to reach the Truth. They simply reflect difference in accumulated tendencies of more or less similar kind to that which distinguishes between say, an artist vs. a politician. As I said, the ideal recluse is a natural outcome of the accumulated inclination to seeing the harm in sensuous attachments. Such a person will find himself seeking to avoid sense contacts so as to be able to maintain wholesome states of mind. It is like having come to see the strong heat in living the household life; he knows how this can be avoided. And like I said, this is *not* the path to Truth. However, just as it is with the householder, if such a person does come to know what the path to Truth is, he will not think to change his lifestyle / circumstance, but continue to develop understanding in whatever situation he finds himself in. Just as for the householder, his indulgence to sense objects will not suddenly disappear, the recluse's movement away from sense pleasures will continue. Would not the concept of God require “understanding” to have any meaning? What do you understand by “understanding” and what decides that this understanding has its limits and can at some point, be rejected? And what is it that judges something else as more valuable? You are saying that he is not only the puppeteer but the puppet itself as well? This will sound assuming, but I doubt that you understand what self-view is. Because while I may sometimes fall prey to it, I know not to encourage it when making a statement about what is the Path and what is not the Path. You on the other hand are suggesting a path involving self-view, and this would make it in fact the wrong path. In other words, in my case, self-view arises in spite of some understanding about its wrongness, but in your case it arises not only because you do not know what it is, but because you actually encourage it in the name of right. There is just what *is*. Attachment is known for what it is not because it stands in contrast to detachment, but because it is a reality with a particular characteristic, function, manifestation and with particular set of proximate cause. Likewise aversion, ignorance, detachment, wisdom, these are all realities known not because of the existence of some opposite, but because they are very *real* when conditioned to arise. Indeed cold and hot are both different intensities of the one kind of physical phenomenon, namely the Fire element. What if I uttered the following: “God is a fiction, a lie. Oh no, he is the great Deceiver. He is great, powerful, and omniscient. Divine is his creation. Divine am I. He is praising himself through me. He is someone who has nothing better to do but play games / masturbate. He is me. He is not me. Psychotic, schizophrenic am I, is He.” Would you not naturally be inclined to identify the cause for such utterance as existing within me, unrelated to anyone or anything else? You find the God concept appealing, but does it not come with contradictions? This is only wishful thinking. And we don’t learn the Truth from “situations”, but from the realities that make up our moment to moment experience. We are born to receive the fruits of our actions, the rest depends on the accumulated tendencies, whether we plant seeds for more going round the cycle of existence, or gradually getting off it. By comparison only a handful makes up the latter. When it comes to the matter of seeing the value of good and the harm in evil, and the development of wisdom and reduction of ignorance, the above again is only wishful thinking. Wrong does not lead to right. Good is developed on the basis of good in the past, wisdom on wisdom in the past. Normally what happens is that one learns to avoid particular situations where attachment just finds a different object to cling to. And one of these objects happens to be the idea that one has learnt from / seen through certain situations / grown wiser. This is why I said that understanding the Truth is not based on concepts of situations, but on reality. And the test of this is “now”. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Sikh Sikhi Sikhism
MUKTI- Different Types And What Gurbani Says
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