Were The Guru's Really Divine (prophets) Or Where They Just Enlightened? | Sikh Philosophy Network
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Were The Guru's Really Divine (prophets) Or Where They Just Enlightened?

Currently reading:
Were The Guru's Really Divine (prophets) Or Where They Just Enlightened?

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
So, as I study more and more of Sikhism, I am starting to have a concern with my fellow Sikhs and their particular dogmatic views on Sikhism. As realize from the beginnings of Sikhi it was more of a mystic and spiritual type and was simply looking within your self, and looking through God. Even Guru Nanak Dev Ji said he was lowly of the lowly and was a humble of servant of God. Heck, I just feel that Sikhism wasn't even supposed to be a religion in the first place, but a philosophy or a way of life, but as we get deeper down into Sikhism I realize that it becomes more political and religious. I also realised that there was nepotism, instead of caste as Guru Amar Das Ji's daughter made a "beanti" request for the next Guru's to be "sodhi's", and Guru Amar Das Ji said so.I mean Guru Nakak Dev Ji was a Bedi, Guru Angad was a Trehan, and Guru Amar Das Ji a Bhella. Yes, they were Khatri's; however, they didn't choose their own family members, but chose those that were close. I also felt, that if Guru Amar Das Ji's daughter didn't make that request. Than made Bhai Buddha Ji would've been a Guru and the first non Khatri. As a result every Guru was a Sodhi, but I realised it wasn't exact nepotism as they didn't chose their direct son's, but also tested them. Choosing their sons over their relatives and such, but Guru Gobind Singh's sons died, and he had no one to pass the torch, so he passed it to the Guru Granth Sahib. Look, I am not criticising them, I respect their teachings. Especially Guru Gobind Singh Ji who put the layer on the cake by allowing so many lower caste, women, and outcasts into Sikhi. I am just saying that they were regular human beings who were just enlightened, and not just mere prophets from God like Judeo Christainity. It concerns me how so many Sikh's worship these Guru's as literal Gods, even the Guru Granth mentions Guru Nanak as a mere servant as well. I am a sinner, saved only by the company of the Guru. He has bestowed the Teachings of the Lord's Name, which saves me. What glorious virtues of yours can I describe, O my true Guru? When the Guru speaks, I am transfixed with wonder. Can anyone else save a sinner like me? The true Guru has protected and saved me. O Guru, you are my father. O Guru, you are my mother. O Guru, you are my relative, companion and friend. My condition, O my true Guru, is known only to you. I was rolling around in the dirt, and no one cared for me at all. In the company of the Guru, I, the lowly, have been raised up and exalted. Blessed is the Guru of servant Nanak; meeting Him, all my sorrows and troubles have come to an end (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 167).
I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines. I serve the One Lord, and not any other. I do not perform Hindu worship, nor do I practice the Muslim prayers. I have taken the One Formless Lord into my heart; I humbly worship Him there (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 1136).

Look I am saying that the Guru's werent perfect, they were enlightened, but they made the same mistakes. Such as neptoism, and even though Sikhism allows only monogamy. There are controversial reports saying that the Guru's had more than more wives, in the late era of Sikhism. Such as Guru Hargobind, Guru Har Rai (Well, they claim he had 8 wives which is absurd), and Guru Gobind which claim he either had 1 wife with 2 names, but I accept he had 2 wives, one the spiritual mother of Khalsa the other the mother of the Char Sahib Jade, yet I understand that they were married young so it wasn't their fault, also the Guru's couldn't refuse as they the girl would've been shunned, and people would wanted their daughters to get married to the Guru's so I understand the frusteration. But for me, I just tend to realise the issue with all religions is that after they died, they just tend to make up fake stories about them like mythlogies, even though they were similar enlightened people who became one with God, or for the Buddha, finding the truth and seeking liberation.

So in the shortrun is.. Was Sikhism suppose to be a religion, or was it more likely to be a philsophy like Taoism, or some sort of mysticism. I just felt that Guru Nanak Dev Ji, when he said there was no hindu or no muslim. In my meaning said that you don't have to be a Hindu, or a Muslim or be dogmatic to seek God, as God is without creed or faith. I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines. I serve the One Lord, and not any other. I do not perform Hindu worship, nor do I practice the Muslim prayers. I have taken the One Formless Lord into my heart; I humbly worship Him there (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 1136).
As this quote mentioned, I just feel that Sikhism is losing that mystic touch that Guru Nanak Dev Ji had, and now has become more militaristic and dogmatic. For me I realise that all of these religous figures were simply englithened humans who found the truth within themselves.


For myself, I am not an atheist, nor am I doubter. I questioned myself regarding god and once considered myself an Agnostic, and the thedoices such as the problem of evil, and I realised that suffering is a human construct. I mean animals don't complain about it. For God, I just realise that there is a God and it is beyond the human view. That we are all part of God, and everything is part of it. I do not believe in a personal God that is anthropomorphic. that interves in humanity, but a God that created the universe, and we are all connected with God. So consider myself a Pantheist, Panentheist, Deist, whatever. I know there is a higher power, and it is consciouness. I believe that there is life after death, and our consciouness will join another shell, as there are reports saying that people were aware that they died, but they are not sure if it continures, and rats also realise that they have perished too.
After death, you’re aware that you’ve died, say scientists
https://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/pdf Here is a more accurate general
Life and death come to all who are born. Everything here gets devoured by death. (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 15).
I know that death is a natural process, and I shouldn't be scared as I am only 16. I understand that my views are controversial, and no I am doubting Sikhism. I just realise that some parts of Sikhism have been edited or changed. Just like Christainity, I mean the Bible has been edited by outside sources for their own gains. Apparently Jesus taught reincarnation, but it was removed, and there wasn't supposed to be a church to worship. As Act 17:24 mentions The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. Which is why I am a Sikh, I am a student and I am a disciple, trying to learn the secret path of God through my own style. All of these religions met God in their own spritual paths, I want to do it my way. I know in the eyes of the SGPC, and the Rehat Maryada, I am not a Sikh.
A Sikh is defined as any person, male or female, who faithfully:

  • believes in the existence of One Eternal God
  • follows the teachings of, and accepts as their only Spiritual guides, the Guru Granth Sahib and the ten human Gurus
  • believes in the baptism (Amrit Sanchar), as promoted by the tenth Guru
  • does not owe allegiance to any other religion
As I am a filthy patit nasteek in their eyes as I am a mona, but they are the SGPC. A manmade organization that monoplies their money on God. They are responsible for crashing Sikhism into the ground, and causing the younger generations like me into doubt. I do not accept the Janamshaki's, but I believe. I believe in God, afterlife, and such. I accept the teachings of Guru Nanak, and the Guru Granth, but I do not accept that they were mere prophets. Just regular human beings who were enlightened by God.

P.S
Sorry for the long rant, but I do not want to insult Sikhism, and I am fanascied by Sikhi. Especially by Guru Nanak as in my eyes he was a rationalist, a person who questions. He questioned the teachings of rituals, and such, but I realize that Sikhism has become dogmatic and people just listen to wait their parents taught them. Aren't we all supposed to learn God or Whaeguru in our own paths. I am not rejecting Sikhism, but I realise that every religion has a good intention, but their followers and those with greed and ego tend to corrupt it. So in my opinion I consider Sikhism as a philosphy, but as the years went by. It soon became more of a dogmatic practice due to political and religous influence.
 
Last edited:

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
3,380
Likes
5,677
So, as I study more and more of Sikhism, I am starting to have a concern with my fellow Sikhs and their particular dogmatic views on Sikhism. As realize from the beginnings of Sikhi it was more of a mystic and spiritual type and was simply looking within your self, and looking through God. Even Guru Nanak Dev Ji said he was lowly of the lowly and was a humble of servant of God. Heck, I just feel that Sikhism wasn't even supposed to be a religion in the first place, but a philosophy or a way of life, but as we get deeper down into Sikhism I realize that it becomes more political and religious. I also realised that there was nepotism, instead of caste as Guru Amar Das Ji's daughter made a "beanti" request for the next Guru's to be "sodhi's", and Guru Amar Das Ji said so.I mean Guru Nakak Dev Ji was a Bedi, Guru Angad was a Trehan, and Guru Amar Das Ji a Bhella. Yes, they were Khatri's; however, they didn't choose their own family members, but chose those that were close. I also felt, that if Guru Amar Das Ji's daughter didn't make that request. Than made Bhai Buddha Ji would've been a Guru and the first non Khatri. As a result every Guru was a Sodhi, but I realised it wasn't exact nepotism as they didn't chose their direct son's, but also tested them. Choosing their sons over their relatives and such, but Guru Gobind Singh's sons died, and he had no one to pass the torch, so he passed it to the Guru Granth Sahib. Look, I am not criticising them, I respect their teachings. Especially Guru Gobind Singh Ji who put the layer on the cake by allowing so many lower caste, women, and outcasts into Sikhi. I am just saying that they were regular human beings who were just enlightened, and not just mere prophets from God like Judeo Christainity. It concerns me how so many Sikh's worship these Guru's as literal Gods, even the Guru Granth mentions Guru Nanak as a mere servant as well. I am a sinner, saved only by the company of the Guru. He has bestowed the Teachings of the Lord's Name, which saves me. What glorious virtues of yours can I describe, O my true Guru? When the Guru speaks, I am transfixed with wonder. Can anyone else save a sinner like me? The true Guru has protected and saved me. O Guru, you are my father. O Guru, you are my mother. O Guru, you are my relative, companion and friend. My condition, O my true Guru, is known only to you. I was rolling around in the dirt, and no one cared for me at all. In the company of the Guru, I, the lowly, have been raised up and exalted. Blessed is the Guru of servant Nanak; meeting Him, all my sorrows and troubles have come to an end (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 167).
I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines. I serve the One Lord, and not any other. I do not perform Hindu worship, nor do I practice the Muslim prayers. I have taken the One Formless Lord into my heart; I humbly worship Him there (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 1136).

Look I am saying that the Guru's werent perfect, they were enlightened, but they made the same mistakes. Such as neptoism, and even though Sikhism allows only monogamy. There are controversial reports saying that the Guru's had more than more wives, in the late era of Sikhism. Such as Guru Hargobind, Guru Har Rai (Well, they claim he had 8 wives which is absurd), and Guru Gobind which claim he either had 1 wife with 2 names, but I accept he had 2 wives, one the spiritual mother of Khalsa the other the mother of the Char Sahib Jade, yet I understand that they were married young so it wasn't their fault, also the Guru's couldn't refuse as they the girl would've been shunned, and people would wanted their daughters to get married to the Guru's so I understand the frusteration. But for me, I just tend to realise the issue with all religions is that after they died, they just tend to make up fake stories about them like mythlogies, even though they were similar enlightened people who became one with God, or for the Buddha, finding the truth and seeking liberation.

So in the shortrun is.. Was Sikhism suppose to be a religion, or was it more likely to be a philsophy like Taoism, or some sort of mysticism. I just felt that Guru Nanak Dev Ji, when he said there was no hindu or no muslim. In my meaning said that you don't have to be a Hindu, or a Muslim or be dogmatic to seek God, as God is without creed or faith. I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines. I serve the One Lord, and not any other. I do not perform Hindu worship, nor do I practice the Muslim prayers. I have taken the One Formless Lord into my heart; I humbly worship Him there (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 1136).
As this quote mentioned, I just feel that Sikhism is losing that mystic touch that Guru Nanak Dev Ji had, and now has become more militaristic and dogmatic. For me I realise that all of these religous figures were simply englithened humans who found the truth within themselves.


For myself, I am not an atheist, nor am I doubter. I questioned myself regarding god and once considered myself an Agnostic, and the thedoices such as the problem of evil, and I realised that suffering is a human construct. I mean animals don't complain about it. For God, I just realise that there is a God and it is beyond the human view. That we are all part of God, and everything is part of it. I do not believe in a personal God that is anthropomorphic. that interves in humanity, but a God that created the universe, and we are all connected with God. So consider myself a Pantheist, Panentheist, Deist, whatever. I know there is a higher power, and it is consciouness. I believe that there is life after death, and our consciouness will join another shell, as there are reports saying that people were aware that they died, but they are not sure if it continures, and rats also realise that they have perished too.
After death, you’re aware that you’ve died, say scientists
https://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(14)00739-4/pdf Here is a more accurate general
Life and death come to all who are born. Everything here gets devoured by death. (Guru Granth Sahib Ji, 15).
I know that death is a natural process, and I shouldn't be scared as I am only 16. I understand that my views are controversial, and no I am doubting Sikhism. I just realise that some parts of Sikhism have been edited or changed. Just like Christainity, I mean the Bible has been edited by outside sources for their own gains. Apparently Jesus taught reincarnation, but it was removed, and there wasn't supposed to be a church to worship. As Act 17:24 mentions The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. Which is why I am a Sikh, I am a student and I am a disciple, trying to learn the secret path of God through my own style. All of these religions met God in their own spritual paths, I want to do it my way. I know in the eyes of the SGPC, and the Rehat Maryada, I am not a Sikh.
A Sikh is defined as any person, male or female, who faithfully:

  • believes in the existence of One Eternal God
  • follows the teachings of, and accepts as their only Spiritual guides, the Guru Granth Sahib and the ten human Gurus
  • believes in the baptism (Amrit Sanchar), as promoted by the tenth Guru
  • does not owe allegiance to any other religion
As I am a filthy patit nasteek in their eyes as I am a mona, but they are the SGPC. A manmade organization that monoplies their money on God. They are responsible for crashing Sikhism into the ground, and causing the younger generations like me into doubt. I do not accept the Janamshaki's, but I believe. I believe in God, afterlife, and such. I accept the teachings of Guru Nanak, and the Guru Granth, but I do not accept that they were mere prophets. Just regular human beings who were enlightened by God.

P.S
Sorry for the long rant, but I do not want to insult Sikhism, and I am fanascied by Sikhi. Especially by Guru Nanak as in my eyes he was a rationalist, a person who questions. He questioned the teachings of rituals, and such, but I realize that Sikhism has become dogmatic and people just listen to wait their parents taught them. Aren't we all supposed to learn God or Whaeguru in our own paths. I am not rejecting Sikhism, but I realise that every religion has a good intention, but their followers and those with greed and ego tend to corrupt it. So in my opinion I consider Sikhism as a philosphy, but as the years went by. It soon became more of a dogmatic practice due to political and religous influence.
Jasdeep118 ji thanks for your post. Your's is not a rant! It is a very good expose on Sikhism from its roots to the present.

I encourage you to stay flexible and open in thought and be a Sikh for life (a learner who with every passage of time finds the oneness expounded repeatedly in SGGS). Remember the beautiful gift of Sikhism'd roots, a freedom to think for yourself with no intermediaries between you and the proverbial God/creator. Our Guru ji's for me were great teachers. Sikhism thought and philosophy has survived and grown in kind and quality over the years. People like you are examples. When I was your age, I was not even 10% of who you are right now.

I do suggest that you keep an open mind, don't harden and explore further the following areas as I excerpt from your post;

  • You state, "I believe that there is life after death, and our consciousness will join another shell, as there are reports saying that people were aware that they died, but they are not sure if it continures, and rats also realise that they have perished too."
  • You state, "I just feel that Sikhism is losing that mystic touch that Guru Nanak Dev Ji had, and now has become more militaristic and dogmatic."
    • Your statement has merit. However, we must recognize that to allow for the survival of Sikhism philosophy, was an uphill battle. The religions of the day hated the Sikh philosophy which freed people from the clutches of strict regimens and hierarchies in Islam and Hinduism. Many a sacrificed their lives, many went through torture, and the Sikh history is filled with such sacrifices made by people who believed in Sikhism all dogmas or other hangups aside. Sikh philosophy and Sikhism will be always under attack. Sikhism has shut down many profitable arrangements for managers of many of the dominant eastern religions. Be it ready made solutions for salvation, tveets and gems for good fortune, a place in heaven if you comply and so on. I hope and assume you get the drift.
    • In such situations there are at least two approaches; pacifist or active. Sikhism never was pacifist and SGGS does not teach us to be so nor any of the Gurus. Not being pacifist does not simply translate into militaristic and dogmatic but it may for some. But that is the freedom Sikhism gives to all in this regard the only caution is that it is a personal choice that may not be thrust upon others. Here sometimes there are failings and it is regrettable. We however cannot throw the baby out with the bath water. Work on the good and expand the good. The bad will diminish naturally.
Again I wish you much more brilliance with time and keep up your good posts and writings.

Sat Sri Akal
 

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
Jasdeep118 ji thanks for your post. Your's is not a rant! It is a very good expose on Sikhism from its roots to the present.

I encourage you to stay flexible and open in thought and be a Sikh for life (a learner who with every passage of time finds the oneness expounded repeatedly in SGGS). Remember the beautiful gift of Sikhism'd roots, a freedom to think for yourself with no intermediaries between you and the proverbial God/creator. Our Guru ji's for me were great teachers. Sikhism thought and philosophy has survived and grown in kind and quality over the years. People like you are examples. When I was your age, I was not even 10% of who you are right now.

I do suggest that you keep an open mind, don't harden and explore further the following areas as I excerpt from your post;

  • You state, "I believe that there is life after death, and our consciousness will join another shell, as there are reports saying that people were aware that they died, but they are not sure if it continures, and rats also realise that they have perished too."
  • You state, "I just feel that Sikhism is losing that mystic touch that Guru Nanak Dev Ji had, and now has become more militaristic and dogmatic."
    • Your statement has merit. However, we must recognize that to allow for the survival of Sikhism philosophy, was an uphill battle. The religions of the day hated the Sikh philosophy which freed people from the clutches of strict regimens and hierarchies in Islam and Hinduism. Many a sacrificed their lives, many went through torture, and the Sikh history is filled with such sacrifices made by people who believed in Sikhism all dogmas or other hangups aside. Sikh philosophy and Sikhism will be always under attack. Sikhism has shut down many profitable arrangements for managers of many of the dominant eastern religions. Be it ready made solutions for salvation, tveets and gems for good fortune, a place in heaven if you comply and so on. I hope and assume you get the drift.
    • In such situations there are at least two approaches; pacifist or active. Sikhism never was pacifist and SGGS does not teach us to be so nor any of the Gurus. Not being pacifist does not simply translate into militaristic and dogmatic but it may for some. But that is the freedom Sikhism gives to all in this regard the only caution is that it is a personal choice that may not be thrust upon others. Here sometimes there are failings and it is regrettable. We however cannot throw the baby out with the bath water. Work on the good and expand the good. The bad will diminish naturally.
Again I wish you much more brilliance with time and keep up your good posts and writings.

Sat Sri Akal
Thank you Ambarsaria, the issue is with this current and modern generation in Canada is a wide array of issues. I mean people just follow what their parents do. For example when I went to the Gurduwara I would always touch my hand on the platform of the nishan sahib, the stairs and the entry before I enter the darbar sahib and I realise that it was all pointless worship. I understand doing matha tek for the Guru Granth, its our spiritural guru a teacher. Its giving respect to your teacher, but it gets ritualistic to a point where you cover it in blankets, and tucking in it to bed. And for the Guru's, I realise that the later Guru's were hypocrites them selves with them marrying more than one wife, and I realise that there is a nepotism after Guru Amar Das Ji. One last thing are the Sikh Gurus prophets from God, or are they just enlightened souls who understood God? Also was Sikhism was supposed to be a religion, or was it suppose to be Philosophy, because Guru Nanak himself didnt' mention he created a religion I am not sure. Was it just simply a Bhakti Philosophy from the Bhakti Movement. The issue I was stating before is that I realize that so many Sikhs take Sikhism word for word. Like believe in the miracles of the Guru's, the beheading of Baba Deep, etc. I don't believe any of them as they were written after his death the Janamshaki's, written by many authors. I follow the Guru Granth with respect, but the issue is. People tend to misunderstand what is a metaphor and what is to be literal, and thats what I love about the religous texts. I mean these prophets never mention if they are literal or metaphor so it is open to the readers interpertation.
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
3,380
Likes
5,677
Jasdeep118 I see what you see too. You are a thinking man so don't need to be robotic in actions or thinking. Don't get caught up in sementics either and don't sweat the small stuff.

As a child grows they follow as in monkey see - monkey do. That is almost genetic in the growth of humans in almost all societies. You certainly get freedom to unshackle yourself as you progress in life. Sakhis (stories) are that, stories with art of narration, entertainment, respect and even reverence for the people who the sakhis relate to, and so on. A thinking man takes all that into account in this regard and you have done that.

I personally do not believe that some of your language regarding the Guru ji's is appropriate, it diminish and does not enhance oneself to say bad about others be those Guru ji's or other people. Positivity will go a long way if you so choose.

In terms of what others do or follow, you will find the company you want to keep. So find such company and don't worry so much about literal or metaphor messages people take from SGGS. Many a times there are two sides to people. One internal and the other external. Very rarely, if ever, you will get to know the internal of others and that generally has lot in common among many versus the external which is more likely to be quite different among many.

Jasdeep118 ji the other thing to remember about SGGS is that it is poetry. Poetry is rarely if ever literal and hence many people will take something different from the same poem. Similarly the SGGS gives you the opportunity to expand your mind (metaphors, etc.) versus being written or translated into prose. It has been established by scholars with capabilities much beyond mine that poetry cannot be translated precisely to express its essence. As such you will see people express their understandings differently and literal is an example of the same.

Sat Sri Akal
 

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
Jasdeep118 I see what you see too. You are a thinking man so don't need to be robotic in actions or thinking. Don't get caught up in sementics either and don't sweat the small stuff.

As a child grows they follow as in monkey see - monkey do. That is almost genetic in the growth of humans in almost all societies. You certainly get freedom to unshackle yourself as you progress in life. Sakhis (stories) are that, stories with art of narration, entertainment, respect and even reverence for the people who the sakhis relate to, and so on. A thinking man takes all that into account in this regard and you have done that.

I personally do not believe that some of your language regarding the Guru ji's is appropriate, it diminish and does not enhance oneself to say bad about others be those Guru ji's or other people. Positivity will go a long way if you so choose.

In terms of what others do or follow, you will find the company you want to keep. So find such company and don't worry so much about literal or metaphor messages people take from SGGS. Many a times there are two sides to people. One internal and the other external. Very rarely, if ever, you will get to know the internal of others and that generally has lot in common among many versus the external which is more likely to be quite different among many.

Jasdeep118 ji the other thing to remember about SGGS is that it is poetry. Poetry is rarely if ever literal and hence many people will take something different from the same poem. Similarly the SGGS gives you the opportunity to expand your mind (metaphors, etc.) versus being written or translated into prose. It has been established by scholars with capabilities much beyond mine that poetry cannot be translated precisely to express its essence. As such you will see people express their understandings differently and literal is an example of the same.

Sat Sri Akal
I understand your views, and I am sorry for disrespecting the Sikh Gurus, but I was wondering if the Guru's were like prophets or messiahs like the Judeo-Christain Faith like Moses, Jesus, or Mohammed, where they just enlightened humans? Like I respect all of the Guru's, they have done such a contribution to Sikhism. Especially Guru Gobind Singh who allowed women, lower caste, and outcasts to join Sikhi, but as I heard. Some of them had more than one wife, such as Hargobind, Har Rai, and Guru Gobind I know it is controversial, but I mean they are human beings. We all make mistakes.
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 21, 2010
Messages
3,380
Likes
5,677
I will say, " very very ..... enlightened humans" :seachlightsingh: :rofl::reallyangrysingh::mundabhangra:

Simply "Gurmukhs" who none of us had the opportunity to be physically with but many have done so spiritually. I often close my eyes and try to visualize the environs of when a shabad or a part of it was written, sung/expressed or discoursed by Guru ji..

Sat Sri Akal
 

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
I will say, " very very ..... enlightened humans" :seachlightsingh: :rofl::reallyangrysingh::mundabhangra:

Simply "Gurmukhs" who none of us had the opportunity to be physically with but many have done so spiritually. I often close my eyes and try to visualize the environs of when a shabad or a part of it was written, sung/expressed or discoursed by Guru ji..

Sat Sri Akal
Well, you were right Ambarsaria, I was on reddit when I stumbled upon this random quote. I checked it on a lot of sites seeing if this quote was true it was. On Ang 933.

ਗੁਰਿ ਕਹਿਆ ਸਾ ਕਾਰ ਕਮਾਵਹੁ ॥

Gur Kehiaa Saa Kaar Kamaavahu ||

Do those deeds which the Guru has ordained.

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੨੭):੭ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੩੩ ਪੰ. ੮
Raag Raamkali Dakhni Guru Nanak Dev


ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਕਰਣੀ ਕਾਹੇ ਧਾਵਹੁ ॥

Gur Kee Karanee Kaahae Dhhaavahu ||

Why are you chasing after the Guru's actions?

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੨੭):੮ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੩੩ ਪੰ. ੮
Raag Raamkali Dakhni Guru Nanak Dev

I guess in my view it is saying listen to what the Guru's have taught you, don't go after their actions. Man, I don't know if this was pure luck or coincidence, that I found this quote. Really helped with my doubts.
 

Rajveer_97

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
43
Likes
29
Age
22
ਗੁਰਿ ਕਹਿਆ ਸਾ ਕਾਰ ਕਮਾਵਹੁ ॥

Gur Kehiaa Saa Kaar Kamaavahu ||

Do those deeds which the Guru has ordained.

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੨੭):੭ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੩੩ ਪੰ. ੮
Raag Raamkali Dakhni Guru Nanak Dev


ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਕਰਣੀ ਕਾਹੇ ਧਾਵਹੁ ॥

Gur Kee Karanee Kaahae Dhhaavahu ||

Why are you chasing after the Guru's actions?

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ (ਮਃ ੧) (੨੭):੮ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੯੩੩ ਪੰ. ੮
Raag Raamkali Dakhni Guru Nanak Dev

I guess in my view it is saying listen to what the Guru's have taught you, don't go after their actions. Man, I don't know if this was pure luck or coincidence, that I found this quote. Really helped with my doubts.
For me this only created more doubts. Because the thing that came to my mind was - this could give any leader a bit of a free pass. Shouldn't a leader lead by example? I'm really not sure how I feel about this verse. I welcome any further analysis to understand it.
 

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
For me this only created more doubts. Because the thing that came to my mind was - this could give any leader a bit of a free pass. Shouldn't a leader lead by example? I'm really not sure how I feel about this verse. I welcome any further analysis to understand it.
Hello Rajveer Bhaiji, I saw your post where you had doubts regarding Sikhi. So, how is your journey going trying to find the truth.

Regardless, in my opinion, I just listen and follow what the Guru's teach and the philosophy. I come to peace regarding the history of the Gurus and such. So what, I mean they weren't Messiah's sent here from God like in Judeo-Christain, but I just believe that they were simply enlightened humans who recognized the truth. I know some Sikh's believe that the Guru's were literally sent by Whaeguru, but I don't believe in that. In my opinion, I believe that every religious figure was simply enlightened and found the truth on their own paths. Also, the Guru's are humans, and just like humans they make mistakes. I know everyone has their own views on the Guru's, but that's my opinion.

Rajveer, I was in the same boat as you I questioned why the Guru's were all Khatri's, the polygamy and such, I read the history. I just realized that they were simply human beings who tend to make mistakes like every other human being. Regardless of what, I am not denying it or ignoring it, but I simply came with peace. I also realized that people forget there were 11 Gurus, I mean this Guru has no gender, no caste, not a human, and such it is the Guru Granth Sahib. I was also in the same boat as you as I was an Agnostic doubting God, but I now believe that there is a high being out there and such, but God or Whaeguru is beyond human comprehension just like Guru Nanak Dev Ji said.

Also, the reason why I like Sikhi because it means that you are trying to find the True Guru within yourself. And Sikh means in Punjabi, student. I am simply a student trying to find the true path within Waheguru through my own ways. Thats what I think Guru Nanak Dev Ji preached, that the Truth is everywhere. It isn't within the confines of Priests, or the words of men, but that truth can be sought everywhere and anywhere. It doesn't mean that one religion has all of the truth, but every religion is equal and has their own unique ways of finding the truth. In my opinion, I just follow Sikhi not in a dogmatic fashion where I go to the Gurudwara and pray, as I realize that within myself and heart. That my body is a Gurdwara, Mosque, Monastery, Church, Synagogue, and Temple. Within it, God is inside. As Bullah Shah said
"Tear down the mosque and temple too, break all that divides
But do not break the human heart as it is there that God resides."

That's what Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Guru Arjun Dev Ji said.
Page 1002, Line 3
ਬਾਹਰਿ ਢੂਢਨ ਤੇ ਛੂਟਿ ਪਰੇ ਗੁਰਿ ਘਰ ਹੀ ਮਾਹਿ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ਥਾ ॥
बाहरि ढूढन ते छूटि परे गुरि घर ही माहि दिखाइआ था ॥
Bāhar dẖūdẖan ṯe cẖẖūt pare gur gẖar hī māhi ḏikẖā▫i▫ā thā.
I have quit searching outside; the Guru has shown me that God is within the home of my own heart.
Guru Arjan Dev
ਅੰਤਰਿ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਏਕੁ ਪਛਾਣੈ ਇਉ ਘਰੁ ਮਹਲੁ ਸਿਞਾਪੈ
अंतरि बाहरि एकु पछाणै इउ घरु महलु सिञापै ॥
Anṯar bāhar ek pacẖẖāṇai i▫o gẖar mahal siñāpai.
Realize that the One God is inside and outside; understand this, that the Mansion of His Presence is within the home of your heart.

ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਨੇੜੈ ਹਰਿ ਦੂਰਿ ਜਾਣਹੁ ਏਕੋ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਸਬਾਈ
प्रभु नेड़ै हरि दूरि न जाणहु एको स्रिसटि सबाई ॥
Parabẖ neṛai har ḏūr na jāṇhu eko sarisat sabā▫ī.
God is near at hand; do not think that God is far away. The One Lord permeates the entire universe.

ਏਕੰਕਾਰੁ ਅਵਰੁ ਨਹੀ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਨਕ ਏਕੁ ਸਮਾਈ ॥੫॥
एकंकारु अवरु नही दूजा नानक एकु समाई ॥५॥
Ėkankār avar nahī ḏūjā Nānak ek samā▫ī. ||5||
There in One Universal Creator Lord; there is no other at all. O Nanak, merge into the One Lord. ||5||
Note: This is Page 930

Regardless Rajveer Bhaiji, I know that my answer and response isn't satisfactory, and I am pretty sure it doesn't relate to your question, but in my own way. That's why you are a Sikh Rajveer, its not because go to the Gurudwara and listen to the Guru Granth Sahib, but you are simply a student trying to realize the truth for yourself. Regardless, good luck on your journey friend and I hope you will seek all the answers you want.

In a nutshell, I just follow Sikhi as a philosophy, and I was in the same doubts as you. I had an existental crisis, and had a depression back in 2015 when I first joined this forum. I was a wavering Agnostic, but I don't know honestly, I just came to peace with it.
 
Last edited:

Rajveer_97

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
43
Likes
29
Age
22
Hello Rajveer Bhaiji, I saw your post where you had doubts regarding Sikhi. So, how is your journey going trying to find the truth.

Regardless, in my opinion, I just listen and follow what the Guru's teach and the philosophy. I come to peace regarding the history of the Gurus and such. So what, I mean they weren't Messiah's sent here from God like in Judeo-Christain, but I just believe that they were simply enlightened humans who recognized the truth. I know some Sikh's believe that the Guru's were literally sent by Whaeguru, but I don't believe in that. In my opinion, I believe that every religious figure was simply enlightened and found the truth on their own paths. Also, the Guru's are humans, and just like humans they make mistakes. I know everyone has their own views on the Guru's, but that's my opinion.

Rajveer, I was in the same boat as you I questioned why the Guru's were all Khatri's, the polygamy and such, I read the history. I just realized that they were simply human beings who tend to make mistakes like every other human being. Regardless of what, I am not denying it or ignoring it, but I simply came with peace. I also realized that people forget there were 11 Gurus, I mean this Guru has no gender, no caste, not a human, and such it is the Guru Granth Sahib. I was also in the same boat as you as I was an Agnostic doubting God, but I now believe that there is a high being out there and such, but God or Whaeguru is beyond human comprehension just like Guru Nanak Dev Ji said.

Also, the reason why I like Sikhi because it means that you are trying to find the True Guru within yourself. And Sikh means in Punjabi, student. I am simply a student trying to find the true path within Waheguru through my own ways. Thats what I think Guru Nanak Dev Ji preached, that the Truth is everywhere. It isn't within the confines of Priests, or the words of men, but that truth can be sought everywhere and anywhere. It doesn't mean that one religion has all of the truth, but every religion is equal and has their own unique ways of finding the truth. In my opinion, I just follow Sikhi not in a dogmatic fashion where I go to the Gurudwara and pray, as I realize that within myself and heart. That my body is a Gurdwara, Mosque, Monastery, Church, Synagogue, and Temple. Within it, God is inside. As Bullah Shah said
"Tear down the mosque and temple too, break all that divides
But do not break the human heart as it is there that God resides."

That's what Guru Nanak Dev Ji and Guru Arjun Dev Ji said.
Page 1002, Line 3
ਬਾਹਰਿ ਢੂਢਨ ਤੇ ਛੂਟਿ ਪਰੇ ਗੁਰਿ ਘਰ ਹੀ ਮਾਹਿ ਦਿਖਾਇਆ ਥਾ ॥
बाहरि ढूढन ते छूटि परे गुरि घर ही माहि दिखाइआ था ॥
Bāhar dẖūdẖan ṯe cẖẖūt pare gur gẖar hī māhi ḏikẖā▫i▫ā thā.
I have quit searching outside; the Guru has shown me that God is within the home of my own heart.
Guru Arjan Dev
ਅੰਤਰਿ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਏਕੁ ਪਛਾਣੈ ਇਉ ਘਰੁ ਮਹਲੁ ਸਿਞਾਪੈ
अंतरि बाहरि एकु पछाणै इउ घरु महलु सिञापै ॥
Anṯar bāhar ek pacẖẖāṇai i▫o gẖar mahal siñāpai.
Realize that the One God is inside and outside; understand this, that the Mansion of His Presence is within the home of your heart.

ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਨੇੜੈ ਹਰਿ ਦੂਰਿ ਜਾਣਹੁ ਏਕੋ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਸਬਾਈ
प्रभु नेड़ै हरि दूरि न जाणहु एको स्रिसटि सबाई ॥
Parabẖ neṛai har ḏūr na jāṇhu eko sarisat sabā▫ī.
God is near at hand; do not think that God is far away. The One Lord permeates the entire universe.

ਏਕੰਕਾਰੁ ਅਵਰੁ ਨਹੀ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਨਕ ਏਕੁ ਸਮਾਈ ॥੫॥
एकंकारु अवरु नही दूजा नानक एकु समाई ॥५॥
Ėkankār avar nahī ḏūjā Nānak ek samā▫ī. ||5||
There in One Universal Creator Lord; there is no other at all. O Nanak, merge into the One Lord. ||5||
Note: This is Page 930

Regardless Rajveer Bhaiji, I know that my answer and response isn't satisfactory, and I am pretty sure it doesn't relate to your question, but in my own way. That's why you are a Sikh Rajveer, its not because go to the Gurudwara and listen to the Guru Granth Sahib, but you are simply a student trying to realize the truth for yourself. Regardless, good luck on your journey friend and I hope you will seek all the answers you want.

In a nutshell, I just follow Sikhi as a philosophy, and I was in the same doubts as you. I had an existental crisis, and had a depression back in 2015 when I first joined this forum. I was a wavering Agnostic, but I don't know honestly, I just came to peace with it.
Hello Jasdeep ji,

My journey is still one without a clear path or end is it! It's definitely turning out to be quite educational though. I loved reading your post, because you basically wrote thoughts which mirror mine, but only a much better and clearer way and I'm inclined to agree with the points you make. I am also treating Sikhi as a philosophsy, I find it hard to abandon it simply because there is so much knowledge and beauty in the SGGS Ji. The lives the Gurus led are exemplary, one everyone can learn from - whether Sikh or not. However, it does seem to me like Sikhi has turned into something it maybe wasn't meant to be. At which point this diversion started I am not sure, but it sure happened. For one I find too many gaps and uncertainties in the history and teachings (which goes for every religion I've so far looked at). One true absolute Truth may be hard to follow, but if it really is the absolute Truth then it shouldn't be easily prone to misinterpretation and uncertainties. I might get heat for this, but please sangat ji realise my intent is not to harm anyone's sentiments, but for example the Rehit, it's changed throughout history (which is fine) but shouldn't there have been some guideline over how to modify it with the time? What's set in stone and what's not? According to the offical SRM most of Sikhs are really not Sikhs. I've now come across some Sikhs, adopting an exclusive mindset, saying that to attain liberation one needs to be born into a Sikh family. To me as well the Guru's were englightened teachers. Maybe they did indeed have a connection with God and maybe they were indeed given a mission by God. But they were also humans and maybe they did make small mistakes here and there. As you basically said, all thats happened is at it's birth Sikhi rejected many rituals but now in present day all that has happened is those rituals have been replaced with new unnecessary ones. These issues are also so complicated and deep that many people will struggle to find the time and energy to dig truly deep and find clarity - this leads to them taking the word of popular speaker's as gospel.

So what then? It'd be an error to assume when one falls out of love with a religion's orthodoxy they should necessarily shun the whole religion and fall down to the atheist or agnostic stance. Would I consider myself either of those two? No, after long thinking it makes sense to me there is SOMETHING out there. All I can do is keep on questioning and learning. Explore different philosophies. Be critical in thinking and try to follow what seems right. Would I still consider myself a Sikh? Depends. If by Sikh one means, as you said, a disciple/learner of the Truth. But as per SRM no.

I have to be really honest with myself. I love Sikh teachings but I feel I've always felt practicing it the way it is, may not be for me. I ignored that feeling for a while, thinking with time I'll learn more, maybe it's just my ego in the way, etc etc but it just caused inner turmoil. Or maybe I'm just not ready to fully submit myself. I can't be. The story of people having faith crises and in the end reverting to their original beliefs more strongly is one I've now seen and read several times with different religions and it all follows the same story generally. If I am to find the truth I can't do this, I need to look at everything with as open a mind as possible.
There is beauty to be found in several teachings out there which are worth exploring with an open mind. As a famous philosopher once said (can't remember his name apologies), if you want to get closer to the Truth then at some point you have to be able to question everything.

Bhul Chuk Maaf
 

Jasdeep118

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Dec 5, 2015
Messages
85
Likes
28
Age
29
Hello Jasdeep ji,

My journey is still one without a clear path or end is it! It's definitely turning out to be quite educational though. I loved reading your post, because you basically wrote thoughts which mirror mine, but only a much better and clearer way and I'm inclined to agree with the points you make. I am also treating Sikhi as a philosophsy, I find it hard to abandon it simply because there is so much knowledge and beauty in the SGGS Ji. The lives the Gurus led are exemplary, one everyone can learn from - whether Sikh or not. However, it does seem to me like Sikhi has turned into something it maybe wasn't meant to be. At which point this diversion started I am not sure, but it sure happened. For one I find too many gaps and uncertainties in the history and teachings (which goes for every religion I've so far looked at). One true absolute Truth may be hard to follow, but if it really is the absolute Truth then it shouldn't be easily prone to misinterpretation and uncertainties. I might get heat for this, but please sangat ji realise my intent is not to harm anyone's sentiments, but for example the Rehit, it's changed throughout history (which is fine) but shouldn't there have been some guideline over how to modify it with the time? What's set in stone and what's not? According to the offical SRM most of Sikhs are really not Sikhs. I've now come across some Sikhs, adopting an exclusive mindset, saying that to attain liberation one needs to be born into a Sikh family. To me as well the Guru's were englightened teachers. Maybe they did indeed have a connection with God and maybe they were indeed given a mission by God. But they were also humans and maybe they did make small mistakes here and there. As you basically said, all thats happened is at it's birth Sikhi rejected many rituals but now in present day all that has happened is those rituals have been replaced with new unnecessary ones. These issues are also so complicated and deep that many people will struggle to find the time and energy to dig truly deep and find clarity - this leads to them taking the word of popular speaker's as gospel.

So what then? It'd be an error to assume when one falls out of love with a religion's orthodoxy they should necessarily shun the whole religion and fall down to the atheist or agnostic stance. Would I consider myself either of those two? No, after long thinking it makes sense to me there is SOMETHING out there. All I can do is keep on questioning and learning. Explore different philosophies. Be critical in thinking and try to follow what seems right. Would I still consider myself a Sikh? Depends. If by Sikh one means, as you said, a disciple/learner of the Truth. But as per SRM no.

I have to be really honest with myself. I love Sikh teachings but I feel I've always felt practicing it the way it is, may not be for me. I ignored that feeling for a while, thinking with time I'll learn more, maybe it's just my ego in the way, etc etc but it just caused inner turmoil. Or maybe I'm just not ready to fully submit myself. I can't be. The story of people having faith crises and in the end reverting to their original beliefs more strongly is one I've now seen and read several times with different religions and it all follows the same story generally. If I am to find the truth I can't do this, I need to look at everything with as open a mind as possible.
There is beauty to be found in several teachings out there which are worth exploring with an open mind. As a famous philosopher once said (can't remember his name apologies), if you want to get closer to the Truth then at some point you have to be able to question everything.

Bhul Chuk Maaf
Thank you very much Rajveer Bhaiji, me and you faced a lot of tough challenges. I had issues with depression, and it really affected my life. I am a big historical buff as you, and I realize throughout history, religion changes quite a bit, like after the death of a leader it sort of tumbles down. Like for example Buddhism, Buddha lead a good movement of finding the truth just like Sikhism and trying to achieve Nirvana, but soon after he died. The leader of his sects started to fight and quibble and as a result, it turned into 3 Sects of Buddhism Vajrayana, Mahyanana, and Theravada. Same with Christianity, I mean Jesus taught a lot of good things, and apparently there was a conspiracy that he actually taught reincarnation, but Paul I think censored it. I mean the Bible has a lot of good teachings trust me, but throughout history people censor it in their own will. Apparently the Vatican has some secrets about Christainity in their secret library. Same with Hinduism, I mean I know modern Hinduism is controversial, but in Vedic Hinduism, it wasn't that bad. Yes, there was a caste system, but it was based on skill not on birth, I forgot but it was like we are all born Shudra's; however, as time passed and the people who held higher power (Brahmins) soon used it to their control and made laws such as Manusmriti which many Hindu's don't accept. If you read it, its very sexist and racist. In the Vedas there is no mention of caste by birth but by varna. Vedic Hinduism was quite unique, it had schools of philosophy. I think around 2/6 Schools were Atheistic in which they denied God, but believed in God. Astika and Nastika schools search it up Indian philosophy - Wikipedia, I also realised that women had better rights in the past. They were allowed to get their thread tied, the Rishi's or composers of the Vedas were women, it sang praises of Women as well, but as history changed, hinduism changed. Hell, they even had a Atheistic Materialistic School (Charvka), but now people in India hate Atheists which is ironic as there were many Hindu Atheists, including the founder of Hinduvuta (ironically). There was also intercaste marriage, and researchers found out when they stopped intermarrying, it had an effect on the genomes. The caste system has left its mark on Indians’ genomes Hinduism has a wide variety of beliefs such as Atheist, Agnosticism, Pantheism, Deism, Panentheism, Monotheism, Polytheism, etc. Sad thing is that religions have been always used for good, but when power is involved people have become corrupt like the SGPC. They are going to add new gold to the Harminder Sahib, they should use it for food and such, they don't allow women in the Harminder Sahib, etc. The issue is that history is gonna change, and so is religion. People are going to add their own things for their own benefit.

Another issue is that people in these days focus on the Dogmatic aspects of Sikhism, or the militaristic instead of the spiritual side. Like in my view there are 2 types of Sikhs, the Mystical Sikhs who follow Guru Nanak Mainly, and the Khalistani/Militaristic Sikhs who follow Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Also, thats the same issue I have too, like I look at God in a mystical way, you know. The issue is for me is I guess with the Dogma, and I mean earlier from Sikhism it was mysticail or spirtual, but as you go down to the later Guru's it becomes more dogmatic, and political sided due to the Mughal's. Also, it's okay to question, you know Guru Nanak Dev Ji questioned about religion so much. He questioned about Hinduism and Islam, if he didn't question then Sikhi, wouldn't of happen. Also you know the reason why the Bhakti movement happen, because people realised that you don't have to be dogmatic to seek God, but you can be spiritual and question in order to learn. Overall, good luck my friend.

P.S
I agree with you, in SGPC eyes I would be consider a patit nasteek or patit mona.
 
Last edited:

swarn bains

Poet
SPNer
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
496
Likes
139
i put some remarks on sikh net a while back that writers who wrote sggs were illetrate. and my younger brother threatened me first, but later on he deleted his remarks. though i and ambarsaria live close by to each other but so far he has not harmed me. so thank u ambarsaria jee.
 

swarn bains

Poet
SPNer
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
496
Likes
139
divine or prophet is the one who is enlightened by birth. In my knowledge there are two krisha and guru nanak. i might be wrong. the guru is God according to sggs. when the prophet touches or speaks mind to mind with sosmeone with intent, he transfers the knowledge or even telepathically and enlightens the next one. the sewak acquires the attributes of his guru depending upon his ability due to dedication and love and becomes enlightened or the same as his or her guru.
 

Loveisthereason

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Apr 7, 2019
Messages
28
Likes
2
Age
39
It's weird I never grew up questioning any part of my religion. I don't understand why it happens, what makes people read into something that isn't there. A question by one group is met by questions from another group who are in opposition. I think parenting plays a huge role in shaping a child's approach to the way they view things. At some point we realise our parents are not perfect and we reach a fork in the road. Some of us will try to figure our own way out and in such a process become adults and accept responsibility for our limitations. Others will drop their parents and look for a more perfect replacement and in doing so pick holes in others as their limitations. All people do not have the answers to everything that doesn't mean that there isn't an answer which is understandable for why things are the way that they are. For example what are the short term and long-term implications of decisions taken by our Guru's? There really isn't a negative impact. So what is there then? "I believe this decision was less than perfect". See how silly this approach is. We live in a time where things happen at an incredibly fast pace just imagine the mental juggling required from someone who has to seek out perfection before they can move on from what they are struggling with. Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji named the city in Nanded Abchal Nagar, what does this word mean? Some say it is Steadfast, some say Unshakable Root, Firmly fixed. I believe this is the disposition of a Sikh and I like the word because it describes exactly what I am, there is no contraversey or schism that could come up which would make me doubt SIKHI it is very hard to explain how it is to be like this. It is not fanaticism or arrogance, it is not extreme or obsession, it is "Abchal Nagar". In the future people will have to become like this if their SIKHI is to survive, your SIKHI should never be a disguise it should be what you firmly are.
 

IJJSingh

Writer
SPNer
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
6
Likes
4
Age
59
I remember a joke from my childhood about two foreigners after seeing dung cakes on a wall arguing about how the cow managed to climb the wall. My point: Arguments can become absurd if one focuses on the superficial and ignores the full context. If one wishes to understand the Gurus, then one must read gurbani. In my opinion, relying on guru-sakhis, or using our wisdom to classify the Guru as Prophet vs. Enlightened-being would all lead us astray.

I also realised that there was nepotism, instead of caste as Guru Amar Das Ji's daughter made a "beanti" request for the next Guru's to be "sodhi's," and Guru Amar Das Ji said so.
Its not possible to judge an action as pure or impure without knowing the intent behind it. It is not the action but the “expectation of result” (kamna) we attach to our act that pollutes the action. Once we become “nehkami ”, and perform actions in his will without attaching our kamna, then these acts are Godly, and at that time there is no difference between us and God (SGGS 286). Trying to make sense of gurmat using less than reliable sakhis is a risky endeavor.

The Guru repeatedly stresses one-ness in gurbani i.e. there is nobody else other than God. According to gurmat, the Guru is no more or no less God than you or I, or an animal, or an object, because all of these are God. When there is ego we will see only his creation but not God; when ego departs nothing but the ONE is left. The ego too is created by God as his world-play to confuse his own parts. The God himself is the the confuser, the confused and the Guru to help the confused. Guru is the method (the Shabad) for removing ego; it has not changed, and will not change. Guru was not born ten times starting in 1469AD.

ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਸਦਾ ਸਦਾ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨਾ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਓਹੁ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਹੈ ਸਭ ਮਹਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਸਮਾਇ ॥ My True Guru, forever and ever, does not come and go. He is the Imperishable Creator Lord; He is permeating and pervading among all. (SGGS 759).

If we continue to analyze the Guru as a person or keep getting into the prophet vs. not-a-prophet debate, we are missing the Guru’s message entirely, and we run the risk of getting into absurd debates of how the cow climbed the wall.
 

Harry Haller

Panga Master
SPNer
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
5,761
Likes
8,154
Age
50
I remember a joke from my childhood about two foreigners after seeing dung cakes on a wall arguing about how the cow managed to climb the wall. My point: Arguments can become absurd if one focuses on the superficial and ignores the full context. If one wishes to understand the Gurus, then one must read gurbani. In my opinion, relying on guru-sakhis, or using our wisdom to classify the Guru as Prophet vs. Enlightened-being would all lead us astray.



Its not possible to judge an action as pure or impure without knowing the intent behind it. It is not the action but the “expectation of result” (kamna) we attach to our act that pollutes the action. Once we become “nehkami ”, and perform actions in his will without attaching our kamna, then these acts are Godly, and at that time there is no difference between us and God (SGGS 286). Trying to make sense of gurmat using less than reliable sakhis is a risky endeavor.

The Guru repeatedly stresses one-ness in gurbani i.e. there is nobody else other than God. According to gurmat, the Guru is no more or no less God than you or I, or an animal, or an object, because all of these are God. When there is ego we will see only his creation but not God; when ego departs nothing but the ONE is left. The ego too is created by God as his world-play to confuse his own parts. The God himself is the the confuser, the confused and the Guru to help the confused. Guru is the method (the Shabad) for removing ego; it has not changed, and will not change. Guru was not born ten times starting in 1469AD.

ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਸਦਾ ਸਦਾ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨਾ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਓਹੁ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਹੈ ਸਭ ਮਹਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਸਮਾਇ ॥ My True Guru, forever and ever, does not come and go. He is the Imperishable Creator Lord; He is permeating and pervading among all. (SGGS 759).

If we continue to analyze the Guru as a person or keep getting into the prophet vs. not-a-prophet debate, we are missing the Guru’s message entirely, and we run the risk of getting into absurd debates of how the cow climbed the wall.
so how did the cow climb the wall?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Gurbani Quotes

Coming Soon! 6

Latest posts

Top