# 'Lord' As IK ONG KAAR?



## Tejwant Singh (Jul 1, 2004)

Pyari Cyber Sadh Sangat,

Guru Fateh.

The  sikh scholars of yesteryears tried to emulate the style of the writings in the Bible. Hence they threw in the words like -Thee,Thou,shalt etc etc- from archaic english in their alphabet soup which they used to transliterate THE GURU SHABAD - THE NECTAR OCEAN- GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI.

Perhaps they thought that in order to understand GURBANI one had to give it a biblical slant.

From the alchemy of the alphabet concoction they used the word 'LORD' as IK ONG KAAR.

Who, rather, What is LORD?

Christanity and many other world religions are personality based where God  is a being, a physical being. Christians consider Jesus as God in flesh.So Jesus the person became Lord, The Savior.

Whereas Sikhi is the only religion in the world thats idea based. We seek the FORMLESS which has no names and many names.

Later on 'lord' was used as a title by the landowners who thought themselves as saviors of the down trodden, without giving it a second hoot that the stage of down trodden, in which these people found themselves, was the effect caused by the ill treatment of the 'lords'.

Thanks to the Brits the word 'lord' became the symbol of 'aristocracy' on the Indian farmlands specially in the fertile fields of Punjab.

Today in The U.K., one can buy the title 'lord' with a few pounds. In fact there are some asians including some sikhs with the title 'lord' before their names.

After knowing all this, my question to the Cyber Sadh Sangat is:-

Should we keep on using the word 'lord' as IK ONG KAAR?


Peace and Love

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Amarpal (Jul 1, 2004)

I fully agree with Khalsa Jee (VaheguruSeekr). Through the borowed words the implied meaning an their way of conceptualisation creeps into out thought process and ultimately into our religion.

I, in future will use EK ONKAR or VAHEGURU all my postings.

With Love and Respect for all.

Amarpal


----------



## Admin (Jul 2, 2004)

Can you establish difference between "Ek *Om*Kar & Ek *Ong*Kar ? Many people including mysefl get confused differentiating between both of the words and their meaings.

Thankyou.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Jul 12, 2004)

Slightly off track, but anyway:

In terms of religious/spiritual common sense it is pretty clear that God is one - IK ONKAR, but why is it there? The mool mantar is the basic root prayer of Sikhism, so it is crystal clear that this is the foundation of the belief system within Sikhism. Similar to the shahadah in Islam:
There is no God but God himself and Muhammad is his messenger.

The first part enforces the base of Islam, tawheed - strict monotheism, where God has no partners and God is everywhere [this is given more depth with the 99 names of Allah].

So I feel it is the same with Sikhism - the beginning of the mool mantar we see the same monotheism simply promoted, with IK ONG KAAR, then it goes on to promote the depth of this statement with the rest of this statement. Then Guruji carries this on by talking of the greatness of this ik onkar and how you can find enlightenment with this ik ong kaar.

~CaramelChocolate~
The little philosopher


----------



## Arvind (Jul 21, 2004)

Extension to the off-track of CC:

Ik Ong Kaar is ONE - the main riddle. Mool Mantra is an explanation of Ik Ong Kaar. Guru Granth Sahib ji is the ultimate explanation of this Mool Mantra or Ik Ong Kaar.

Coming back slightly, these are just two different ways of writing by people who attempted to write original Ik Ong Kaar in English and started writing as 'Ek OmKar' or  'Ek OngKar' or 'Ik Ong Kaar'. However, we may appreciate that most of the times, it is not possible to have exact literal translation in different languages.

Regards.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Dec 5, 2004)

Waheguru ji ka khalksa waheguru ji ki fateh.


I respectfully agree with you all.  There is no "English" or other language translations of words like for example: KIRPAN. The KIRPAN is not a Dagger, /symbol/ it is Not a short knife,/weapon/ it is not for defence or offense..IT is ALL these and yet not at all. SO what the Sikhs must do is use the Word KIRPAN for the KIRPAN..and not try to translate it.

Similarly our GURU GRANTH JI is not a Bible/Koran/Ved/Upansishad/Puraan/Old Testament/Holy Book  etc etc...IT is UNIQUE and should be written as GURU GRANTH JI only

Similarly a GURDWARA SAHIB is not  a  Sikh Temple/Mandir/sikh church/sikh masjid etc etc..a GURDWARA is a GURDWARA.

There is no need for us to bend over backwards in order to make others "understand" our terminology....lets stick to our unique terms and let those interested find out exactly what we eman by them. Ours is a totally unique religion with unique personality....lets not dilute it to please others..

Jarnail Singh


----------



## Arvind (Dec 6, 2004)

Instances of dilution to please others, or perhaps sound ourselves more accomodating, other terms often seen are:
Karra = Bangle
Kachehra = Undergarment
Eternal Guru Granth Sahib ji = Holy Bible
Kirpan = Dagger/Knife
Gurudwara = Church

Without trying to sound as a hard-liner, IMHO, we should use correct terms, as the actual terms contain meaning much more than the translated terms.

Please correct me if you feel otherwise.

Regards.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Dec 6, 2004)

Sevadaar Singh said:
			
		

> Instances of dilution to please others, or perhaps sound ourselves more accomodating, other terms often seen are:
> Karra = Bangle
> Kachehra = Undergarment
> Eternal Guru Granth Sahib ji = Holy Bible
> ...


I slightly disagree. You should not say a Gurdwara is a Gurdwara. They will not understand. You should explain in this manner, for example:

Kara - A steel bangle which symbolises  ??.
Kachehra - Name of special undergarment which symbolises chasity.
Guru Granth Sahib Ji - The central Sikh scripture, also regarded as the current and eternal Guru [teacher] for Orthodox Sikhs.
Kirpan - A dagger-like object which symbolises ??, not to be used as an actual weapon.
Gurdwara - Sikh place of worship, means 'door of the Guru'. Sikhs go here to see the Guru Granth Sahib and to pray.

How shameful that I do not know the symbolism of kara and kirpan...

~CaramelChocolate~


----------



## Arvind (Dec 6, 2004)

CaramelChocolate,

Thanks for expanding this, to which I agree. About Karra, Kirpan, there are brief meanings on following threads, which you may like to look at for more information, in fact initiate more discussion, as those are kind of dead threads right now.


Regards.


----------



## kggr001 (Jul 6, 2014)

Imo it doesn't really matter if someone call Ik Ong Kaar as lord. You can call him whatever you want. If you prefer to give him an unique name thats ok. Ik Ong Kaar is known by many names.


----------



## Harkiran Kaur (Jul 6, 2014)

I just want to throw in my two cents... 

God is formless.  But without form, and yet containing all form. Nirgun / Sargun at the time time. Both Creator and Creation itself.  It's seems like an impossible concept to grasp... but really it's not.  (Just think of a dreamworld you create in your mind at night... you are the creator of the dream, and the dream itself, and all characters within it at the same time)

I think a lot of people equate formless in an atheistic sense... as in there is no creator who is conscious of creation.  Those who fall into the atheistic thinking take it to mean the universe itself, with no creative guidance as to how its being created.  It just always was... and things happened just... well because they did. I personally believe this thinking is wrong... it's like saying that we are all accidents, the planets and galaxies were accidents born of chaos, the rules to the universe somehow wrote themselves by accident.... 

but I am pretty sure I read in Gurbani where it says we were given this life not by accident, but on purpose.... and that this life was given to us specifically as our time to meet the creator.  

'Creator' implies creativity... creativity requires thought / planning... or else nothing would have been set into motion... If something just 'happened' then it's not a creation... it's an accident. Rules imply a rule maker... So somewhere, nowhere, and yet everywhere, exists a formless Creator who contemplated (thought) creation... 

For me, it's easy for me to envision how can Waheguru Ji be both creator and creation... be formless and yet contain all form... when instead of looking only at the physical... look even deeper, particles dissolve into smaller particles, which are 99.9999% empty space held together by invisible force (electromagnetic fields) and then the smallest of subatomic particles observed seemingly disappear and reappear into and out of thin air - randomly!  Electrons can behave as both a wave and a particle... so how does this have anything to do with the subject?  Because it means the base of our reality is not matter as we experience it... but pure energy.  Even time in the quantum state does not exist as linear... and certain particles can time travel!  Others can exist in two places at once, meaning space/time construct as we know it really IS an illusion.  So what's left then??? Energy... energy is frequency... frequency is vibration and everything in the universe is basically energy vibrating at different frequencies.  (heat, light, sound, matter, energy, magnetism, electricity, etc).  So this energy that exists outside of the construct of space and time as we know it... everything must be arising out that base energy through vibration at different frequencies.  (Cosmic Vibration, Celestial Sound / Vibrations - sound familiar?) And this energy MUST have creative potential.  Creative potential and INTENT.  

For me, its easy... I truly believe the Universal Field talked about in science is consciousness.  It just fits... it explains how everything is really one, how we are all connected, consciousness is formless, and exists within everything (yes some even say minerals possess a dormant kind of consciousness, also plants, the animals... and well, everything outside of those categories are made up of those things).  We have seen in experiments how consciousness observers can actually affect the outcome.  (double slit experiment) It also explains how / why we would be able to go within our own mind / consciousness to find the divine within.  

Of course I am not saying that Universal consciousness would be anywhere limited like our own.  But just that the creator must be aware of its own creation.  

Of course I could also be out in left field but it just makes so much more sense to me than a energy without intent or thought or creative potential.


----------



## Seeker9 (Aug 5, 2015)

Good question. In short, I think the word "Lord" is meaningless as is any other descriptor that would attempt to put parameters/boundaries on that which has none. Mool Mantar tells us all we need to know


----------



## chazSingh (Aug 6, 2015)

i use the word 'lord' 'god' 'ikongkaar' 'satnaam' 'waheguru' 'beloved' without any conditioning from other religions or ideas....

i have no idea what/who my waheguru/lord/ikongkaar is...one day i Hope waheguru allows this realization to happen...

i guess what i took from Tejwants ji's post was...Lord is just a label...it can mean whatever a person wants it to mean...it will mean whatever it means to the individual as He/She progresses to waheguru realization...for some a physical entity sat in the clouds...through to someone who realizes it is something formless they seek...to someone who is bathing in the lords\wahegurus\ikongkaars embrace (whatever that will be)...

the Word in the end is not important...the amazing journey one takes from one point to the other is the most important...the game of love...where the individual enraptured by the wonders of creation...suddenly stops and looks behind to see what created it all...a game of sacrifice, perserverance, joy, surrender


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 6, 2015)

chazSingh said:


> i use the word 'lord' 'god' 'ikongkaar' 'satnaam' 'waheguru' 'beloved' without any conditioning from other religions or ideas....
> 
> i have no idea what/who my waheguru/lord/ikongkaar is...one day i Hope waheguru allows this realization to happen...
> 
> ...



Chaz Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

I can write pages to prove the inconsistencies in your post which I would not do because a person like you loves to sit on the fence rather than defending his convictions. It is all about feel good, as Harry ji put it so eloquently many a times, a drug high.

It seems, you did not understand what I said in the article, which is fine. Just make an effort to read Amarpal Singh ji's post who is a great Sikh Scholar. His interpretation  of Jap Ji which is posted here is worth looking at because for me it is the best.

Enjoy your journey.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## chazSingh (Aug 6, 2015)

Tejwant  ji

That is fine...I wouldn't want you to lose precious breaths and time over proving inconsistencies in my posts.

There will always be inconsistencies  because my destination is indescribable...only a fool (me) tries to explain the indescribable. 

The greatest scholar is waheguru Himself. In this early hour my heart calls out to waheguru...I pray He envelopes me in His love. This moment is priceless. This drug is immense...how much does it cost...what currency do I use to purchase it...?

The only currency I have is my beating heart..my love...my longing...

Just like the heart of person in love causes the person to utter 'I love you' to their lover...my mouth utters waheguru...A reflection of what is occurring deep with...

Enjoying the journey...enjoying the flight of the meditator...

God bless..


----------

