# Kavi Santokh Singh's Suraj Prakash And Nanak Prakash



## SikhGiani (Jun 26, 2011)

recently reading Kavi Santokh Singh's work, i noticed many errors and blasphemous statements like Guru Sahibs took afeem.  Guru Ji only read Jap Ji swayiye 5 paures anand sahib, when sikhs married they did the marriage like the hindus during 10 Gurus time.  Theres alot more stuff like this.  I know that Kavi Ji's work is used in most katha and stories gyanis usually tell, if it has this kind of stuff should we even allow the katha of it.  Dhiral Mil only did one thing wrong and he was kicked out of Guru House.  If this book has this kind of stuff should we even do katha from it.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 26, 2011)

SikhGiani ji

How do one know these are mistakes? How does one know they are not mistakes? If there are mistakes, how do we know whether to keep some or none of SP? I am always curious about the rules that we need.


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh (Jun 26, 2011)

Dear SPNAdmin ji, how did SikhGiani come to know there is a discrepancy here? Because of reading Guru Granth Sahib. Thankfully we have a frame of reference, where we know what were Gurus' teachings!


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 26, 2011)

Kanwaljit Singh said:


> Dear SPNAdmin ji, how did SikhGiani come to know there is a discrepancy here? Because of reading Guru Granth Sahib. Thankfully we have a frame of reference, where we know what were Gurus' teachings!




Thanks Kanwaljit Singh ji

I realize that. What I would like to see happen is some further detail on the part of Sikh Giani, and examples of his reasoning. That is why I posed questions. So that we can all understand the perspective he has and why he has that perspective. 

Now you may not realize, but there are already SPN members who have notified me and the moderators that they are offended that Suraj Partap/Prakash has been questioned. They have their own views too. So in the interest of having a learning experience I have asked Sikh Giani to share his reasoning. in more detail.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 26, 2011)

I second both the responses above. 
In addition, 
- taking opium - opium is a pain reliever, need I say more?
- meditating on the banis you mentioned - seriously? this is blasphemous?

- marrying around a fire - before the tradition of marrying before Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, there was the Hindu tradition of marrying before the fire. Remember Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji was not the Guru until Guru Gobind Singh ji declared it so (the tradition of marying beofre it devloped long after it became so). Before it was just a collection of writings of the first five Gurus and other Saints, regarded quite highly nonetheless but not as it is today. Also, today our Guru is shabad, not a person. Can you imagine walking around Guru Arjan Dev ji to get married? With all the marriages how would Guru Arjan compile Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji?


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 26, 2011)

spnadmin said:


> Thanks Kanwaljit Singh ji
> 
> I realize that. What I would like to see happen is some further detail on the part of Sikh Giani, and examples of his reasoning. That is why I posed questions. So that we can all understand the perspective he has and why he has that perspective.
> 
> Now you may not realize, but there are already SPN members who have notified me and the moderators that they are offended that Suraj Partap/Prakash has been questioned. They have their own views too. So in the interest of having a learning experience I have asked Sikh Giani to share his reasoning. in more detail.



let me explien my position with evidence in GGSJ and Sikh Rehat Maryada we are told not to do nasha but in Suraj Prakash it says in 2nd rut ans 10 it says Guru Ji did Sukha and afeem.  in 3rd rut ans 10 it says Guru Gobind Singh Ji only trusts in a devi.  in 6 rut ans 9 towars end of 40th line it says Sikhs did afeem again.  in 3rd rut ans 19 it says Guru Ji only read Jap Ji swayiye and 5 pauris of Anand Sahib, isn't that against maryada and 5 banis were read.  kavi ji was amritdhari so didn't he know it was 5 banis. 

Also whenever kavi ji starts a new chapter he always praise a devi, swarsati.  

Im not against Kavi Ji's work but you have to realize and i heard it from many famous gyanis that there are errors in his work.  I think what should be done is that a panthi committee should write sikh ithas using all material we have now so we can fix the errors and everyone can agree on it.  also these great works should still be studed.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

SikhGiani ji

Thanks for going into more detail. Let me share with you my personal perspective. I promise that I will not smooth things over but potentially make things worse.

You will find elsewhere on the forum where I have stated without apology that Suraj Partap/Prakash should never be used as an authoritative source regarding Sikh history or belief. It is historically valuable as a window on Sikhism in the 19th Century when puratan beliefs were widespread. The contents of Suraj Partap/Prakash are poetry. Many people take it to be an authentic record of events and words spoken at significant moments in Sikh history. They believe that Suraj Partap/Prakash clears up/resolves many questions. I take it to be unreliable as a historical reference, because it was written by Santokh Singh, based on family anecdotes and notes that were kept by father and grandfather, who was a contemporary of Guru Gobind Singh. So for me there is too much room for individuals to add what was culturally and politically important for them to believe. And this found its way into SP. 

Having said that, the question remains. Why is Suraj Partap/Prakash used for teaching, explaining the history and precepts of Sikhi? Could not the answer lie in the cultural and political instability in the years leading up to the completion and adoption of the Sikh Rehat Maryada? We know that controversy over the Raagmala split the Chief Khalsa Diwan, prompting Panch Khalsa Diwan to remove itself from the proceedings in protest against "a puratan text."  In an attempt to build a consensus among factions, Chief Khalsa Diwan worked in the opposite direction to smooth over differences. The result: sangats may decide whether to recite raagmala, but they may not remove it from the granth. Consensus was important in that era of forging a unified Sikh identity.

Might is not also be the case that Suraj Partap/Prakash was let into gurdwara teaching for exactly the same reason? Frankly I don't know. This is my hypothesis.  I do think anyone who has read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and thought about its message would take a skeptical view of Suraj Partap/Prakash as a dependable reference.

I do not think this will happen in the near future. 





> I think what should be done is that a panthi committee should write sikh ithas using all material we have now so we can fix the errors and everyone can agree on it. also these great works should still be studed.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

Sikh Giani ji, 
There can be errors, no doubt.

I have hinted at the use of opium. One can imagine how it can be beneficial during a period of war.

With regards to Devi. Devi is "Shakti", and is considered the strength  of the Timeless God. Gyani Sant Singh ji Maskeen descibes her as the  heat (Devi) of the fire (God). They are not separate, what is fire without heat and heat without fire?
You can see how meditating on this  strength can provide the meditator with strength to fight wars. Also, notice  how Guru Sahib writes Chandi di Vaar, an expression of that strength in  mythological form. Chandi is Devi incarnate. Chandi di Vaar gives that transcendental strength a form, something tangible, something physical that can be read or listened to by peasants. It is designed to arouse the warrior spirit in them, to arouse them fight for the cause.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

We also must acknowledge that there are many groups within the panth who are deeply invested in Suraj Partap/Prakash and do not take kindly to any evaluation or critique of its value as an historical source.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat Singh ji

However true your words may be



> You can see how meditating on this strength can provide the meditator with strength to fight wars. Also, notice how Guru Sahib writes Chandi di Vaar, an expression of that strength in mythological form. Chandi is Devi incarnate. Chandi di Vaar gives that transcendental strength a form, something tangible, something physical that can be read or listened to by peasants. It is designed to arouse the warrior spirit in them, to arouse them fight for the cause.



does that make a text a reliable source of historical evidence? That is the nature of the debate raised by SikhGiani.


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 27, 2011)

BhagatSingh said:


> Sikh Giani ji,
> There can be errors, no doubt.
> 
> I have hinted at the use of opium. One can imagine how it can be beneficial during a period of war.
> ...



in 11th ras ans 1 kavi ji praises God  then Sursatee devi and then the 10 Gurus.  When i look at the writings of Bhai Gurdas Ji He starts his vaars with Namaskar Gurdav Ko why didn't he also mention devi.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

Yes, I would recommend reading (to myself as well) as many historic documents as possible. That will give the best picture. We can further check historical locations, artifacts, etc  mentioned in the granth to verify its authenticity but other than that...

These books give a more accurate account to history than we can conjure up after living in the 21st century. I mean these guys were closer to the traditional, historical Sikh ways and culture than we are. (Kavi Sahib was around during Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time)

We should not be so quick to judge things as right or wrong, anti or pro gurmat (not pointing fingers, just general advice for me to keep in mind).


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat Singh ji

This is exactly the problem


> These books give a more accurate account to history than we can conjure up after living in the 21st century. I mean these guys were closer to the traditional, historical Sikh ways and culture than we are. (Kavi Sahib was around during Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time)



What is accurate about the examples in Suraj Partap,  given by Sikh Giani? How much is political propaganda from that era? Why and how were "these guys" closer, in the raj of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, to traditional, historical Sikh ways and culture than we are? Some of his wives went to sati at his death. It was not uncommon then. Seems a lot is very far from the teachings of Guru Nanak. Being "puratan" means original and authentic,  from a very subjective and political stance. "Puratan" is a politically loaded term. The entire SinghSaba movement was formed and energized to overturn what had happened in the panth during the 18th and early 19th Century.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

SikhGiani said:


> in 11th ras ans 1 kavi ji praises God  then Sursatee devi and then the 10 Gurus.  When i look at the writings of Bhai Gurdas Ji He starts his vaars with Namaskar Gurdav Ko why didn't he also mention devi.


Looks like evidence that everyone is different and connects to God differently. 
Also, it appears to me that Sarsvati maybe a particular focus of meditation for a historian/ writer as she is represents knowledge. She is the consort of Brahma the creator. The connection is present on a deeper level that may not be apparent. Knowledge is received through meditation on the creation. Sarswati is the wisdom of the Timeless One. Through this wisdom the creation comes into being (Brahma is the creative aspect of the Timeless one, the part where the creation comes into being)
Sarswati is also the daughter of Shakti.

I find it helps to see the Hindu mythology as (learned) Hindus do. They see the different Gods as aspect of the divine. They see unity underneath all that multiplicity, at least that is the goal.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat Singh ji

Don't you see this as contrary to the teachings of SGGS? 





> I find it helps to see the Hindu mythology as (learned) Hindus do. They see the different Gods as aspect of the divine. They see unity underneath all that multiplicity, at least that is the goal.



And do you realize that this thread has now taken on the exact same coloration of the Divisions in the panth of the last half of the 19th Century, early 20th Century. Chief Khalsa Diwan versus Panch Khalsa Diwan, Tat Khalsa versus "puratan" interests? 

One reason not to have such a thread is that it continues the division in a nonsensical way. At least "those guys" really believed what they were arguing for. Here we are just pulling patka.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

SikhGiani ji

Do you really want to know? Or are you seeding the forum with rhetorical questions about texts to get everyone riled up? This would be the 3rd time in less than a week.


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 27, 2011)

BhagatSingh said:


> Looks like evidence that everyone is different and connects to God differently.
> Also, it appears to me that Sarsvati maybe a particular focus of meditation for a historian/ writer as she is represents knowledge. She is the consort of Brahma the creator. The connection is present on a deeper level that may not be apparent. Knowledge is received through meditation on the creation. Sarswati is the wisdom of the Timeless One. Through this wisdom the creation comes into being (Brahma is the creative aspect of the Timeless one, the part where the creation comes into being)
> Sarswati is also the daughter of Shakti.
> 
> I find it helps to see the Hindu mythology as (learned) Hindus do. They see the different Gods as aspect of the divine. They see unity underneath all that multiplicity, at least that is the goal.



Sorry Bhagat Singh  but isn't saying that sarswati is the wisdom of God and we should mediate on her.  Why didn't the Gurus mediate on her should we mediate on Akal Purakh who created everything not just a part of Him or His Wisdom. Couldn't Kavi Ji just asked Waheguru to complete the work.

 i hear this alot that kavis usually praise the devi of learning to get there work done,  but why not just praise The Gurus or Akal Purakh why are we going backwards into hindu mythology.  One Big Truth is Bhai Gurdas Ji didn't in his work praise a devi.  

Sorry for sounding like this its just that i think hindu mythology is creeping back again.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

I think so too



> i think hindu mythology is creeping back again.


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 27, 2011)

spnadmin said:


> I think so too



I think we should end it here and say believe in Guru Granth Sahib Ji ONLY and reads and study any literature that doesn't contradict Guru Granth Sahib Ji. WAHEGURU


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat Singh ji

I hesitated to delete an earlier post. Now this one required it. If you are speaking as a member of all world religions, your comment would indeed reflect that. For Sikhs, Guru Granth is Guru. Not a "pointer." 

So sorry to have to do this. Perhaps another forum leader will find my decision too harsh. I do not know.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

> I think we should end it here and say believe in Guru Granth Sahib Ji ONLY and reads and study any literature that doesn't contradict Guru Granth Sahib Ji. WAHEGUR



Sikh Gianii ji

You began this conversation. Now you want to end it. I do not think the time is right. Let's give some other members Tat Khalsa and adherents of "puratan" views a chance to debate. So far it has been only 3 of us. Presumably Tat Khalsa would only agree with your pro-Guru Granth point of view.


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 27, 2011)

spnadmin said:


> Sikh Gianii ji
> Presumably Tat Khalsa would only agree with your pro-Guru Granth point of view.



Isnt everyone believer in Guru Granth Sahib so every one is Tat Khalsa.

*Apparently not everyone is Tat Khalsa, nor in the past has everyone been Tat Khalsa who blieved in Guru Granth Sahib. Otherwise there would not be more than 200 years of debate on different sides of the aisle.  spnadmin *


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

*Bhagat Singh ji

I am not talking about granth the book, but Shabad Guru which is in the book. And you know that. 

After writing a detailed response to you, I have deleted it. No intention of getting into a debate on the matter of a TOS vioation.

Your statements also take us off tangent into the realm of whether Sikhism is another form of Vedic philosophy.*


----------



## SikhGiani (Jun 27, 2011)

spnadmin said:


> Sikh Gianii ji
> 
> You began this conversation. Now you want to end it. I do not think the time is right. Let's give some other members Tat Khalsa and adherents of "puratan" views a chance to debate. So far it has been only 3 of us. Presumably Tat Khalsa would only agree with your pro-Guru Granth point of view.



my views are that Using Guru Granth Sahib Ji and work of Bhai Gurdas Ji and Bhai Nand Lal Ji we should examine everything through these works.  

When we don't use these as our standard to judge everything then we get off into hindu ideas which Guru Nanak Sahib brought us out of, When we get away from Bani we start to bring Vedant into Gurdwaras and explien the meanings of vedant granths in Gurdwara.  We should study all religious works but we should also know that Gurbani doesn't believe in them.  Shouldnt Gurbani be the final solution.  I remember listening to a Nirmal Sadhu who said that you must believe in Bani as Sat and Ved Bani as Sat. Can't people see the difference in vadas and Gurbani.  

Gurbani is Jag main Chanan.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

Sikh Giani Ji, contemplate this shabad from SGGS:
YouTube        - ‪Bhai Maninder Singh (SriNagar) - Koi Bole Ram Ram Koi Khuda - Sikh, Hindu, Sufi, Islam, etc‬&rlm;

Then if there are any other issues with the book, please let me know, as I want to eventually get into reading this book as well.


----------



## findingmyway (Jun 27, 2011)

BhagatSingh said:


> Yes, I would recommend reading (to myself as well) as many historic documents as possible. That will give the best picture. We can further check historical locations, artifacts, etc  mentioned in the granth to verify its authenticity but other than that...



I take the opposite view. I focus entirely on Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and have stopped taking heed of other texts as they all have some inaccuracies. I don't need anything other than Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji to understand Sikhi. The principles of Sikhi go much beyond culture and traditions so those things are secondary.



> These books give a more accurate account to history than we can conjure up after living in the 21st century. I mean these guys were closer to the traditional, historical Sikh ways and culture than we are. (Kavi Sahib was around during Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time)



I disagree. From the little history I know about Maharaja Ranjot Singh, I would say he was very far from Sikhi!! Knowing history is not necessary to follow Sikh principles as shown by the people who come from completely different backgrounds and cultures and still find solace in Sikhi. History is easily distorted and can only be guessed, never known for 100% sure (this is what we learnt in history lessons at school) so focus on Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and let history be a secondary interest rather than history dictating your beliefs.



> We should not be so quick to judge things as right or wrong, anti or pro gurmat (not pointing fingers, just general advice for me to keep in mind).


It is very easy to judge what is pro and anti gurmat and that is by comparing to Gurbani. This is VITAL so we do not fall into traps and move away from the Guru's word.

Bhagat Singh ji, using a different word for God is completely different to validating the concept of a devi!


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Thanks for the video Bhagat ji. I am writing an article entitled, All Religions are Not ONE! All Visions of God are not the Same! And can use the shabad to demonstrate that Guru Nanak is talking about respect for all paths. That is not the same thing, of course, as a corporate merger. A pretty straightforward thesis. Disagreement is not disrespect.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

Findingmyway ji,
How can that be? I am in agreement with you. If one wants to understand Sikhism, one must read and contemplate Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji PERIOD

If the focus is to know history then for that we will have to read historical texts, and do so without the veils of judgement and analysis *first*. (This is hard because like you say it's so easy to start judging) But your understanding of the text will be much stronger this way. After we read them then we can judge and analyze all we want, of course.

Kavi ji was of Maharaja's time. Reading his works provides insight into that time period (insight into political, religious, etc factors) and into that which he is writing about. The more books on a particular subject one reads the more insight is available. In the end, if one wants to understand Sikhism, one must read and contemplate Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

When it comes to beliefs, you give great advice. I would add that practice must be present with belief.

Spnadmin ji,
You are welcome and more power to you! Though I don't think it's so hard for people to see religion as different.  Like you said it's pretty straight forward.

On the other hand, it's a steep cliff to see the One in it all, and no thesis can get you there (if you can write one that does, I will give you everything I have, for it). The shabad talks about both aspects of it all. It says religions are different (maybe in disagreement with each other) and yet there is the One in them and their goal is that One. This kind of respect that Guru ji had is much deeper than what you are I are familiar with. Since it's not language-based, it can not be put into words (hence no thesis can be written about it, sorry no paintings for you ). Guru Sahib advises that if one wants to experience this level of respect, if one wants to know what he is talking about, one should meditate on Naam. You already know that though.

Anyways, do let me know when you complete writing it. I am particularly interested in how you argue that visions of God are different.


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh (Jun 27, 2011)

> It says religions are different (maybe in disagreement with each other) and yet there is the One in them and their goal is that One.


 
I think the Shabad points out to different ways people are trying to reach God, and how God Himself is the controlling factor in what is revealed and what is not! God reveals and it is up to you to ask for more, more visions and wisdom from God. E.g. in the first of line of this Shabad, the Persian word _Khwdai_ (خدای) means Lord, Master, Ruler etc and the word Ram means Ramya hoya, i.e. ਸਰਬ ਵਿਆਪੀ, so Guru Sahib is saying that God is one Ruler who is part of his Kingdom. Not like kings of ol' who went about in charriots, atop elephants or VIP of today who go about in car fleets.

ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
Raamkalee, Fifth Mehl:

ਕੋਈ ਬੋਲੈ ਰਾਮ ਰਾਮ ਕੋਈ ਖੁਦਾਇ ॥
Some call Him, 'Raam, Raam', and some call Him, 'Khudaa-i'.

ਕੋਈ ਸੇਵੈ ਗੁਸਈਆ ਕੋਈ ਅਲਾਹਿ ॥੧॥
Some serve Him as 'Gusain', others as 'Allaah'. ||1||

ਕਾਰਣ ਕਰਣ ਕਰੀਮ ॥
He is the Cause of causes, the Generous Lord.

ਕਿਰਪਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਰਹੀਮ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
He showers His Grace and Mercy upon us. ||1||Pause||

ਕੋਈ ਨਾਵੈ ਤੀਰਥਿ ਕੋਈ ਹਜ ਜਾਇ ॥
Some bathe at sacred shrines of pilgrimage, and some make the pilgrimage to Mecca.|

ਕੋਈ ਕਰੈ ਪੂਜਾ ਕੋਈ ਸਿਰੁ ਨਿਵਾਇ ॥੨॥
Some perform devotional worship services, and some bow their heads in prayer. ||2||

ਕੋਈ ਪੜੈ ਬੇਦ ਕੋਈ ਕਤੇਬ ॥
Some read the Vedas, and some the Koran.

ਕੋਈ ਓਢੈ ਨੀਲ ਕੋਈ ਸੁਪੇਦ ॥੩॥
Some wear blue robes, and some wear white. ||3||

ਕੋਈ ਕਹੈ ਤੁਰਕੁ ਕੋਈ ਕਹੈ ਹਿੰਦੂ ॥
Some call themselves Muslim, and some call themselves Hindu.

ਕੋਈ ਬਾਛੈ ਭਿਸਤੁ ਕੋਈ ਸੁਰਗਿੰਦੂ ॥੪॥
Some yearn for paradise, and others long for heaven. ||4||

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਪਛਾਤਾ ॥
Says Nanak, one who realizes the Hukam of God's Will,

ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਕਾ ਤਿਨਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਜਾਤਾ ॥੫॥੯॥
knows the secrets of his Lord and Master. ||5||9||

Guru Sahib also talk about people recognizing God with different places and different forms of clothing. The followers call themselves with different names, but don't know the secrets of God.



> I am particularly interested in how you argue that visions of God are different.<!-- google_ad_section_end -->


 
I don't think that visions of God in completeness are different. But most people see God in some things and don't in others. Some see God in their love for children, some love their pets and thank God for their company. Some think about God while going for a walk and seeing the nature beauty all around them. It is a bit about how your senses are heightened to experience God. You experience God more when you try to connect with God more, like you said, using Naam.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat ji

Please do not patronize. When has Akaal ever threatened his Sikhs either through a Guru or directly? Here is a "Tale of Two Cities." And of two Gods: Only one does not seek expiation from his people, and one does. 

Here is "God" speaking to the Israelites through isaiah as a *warning* for their *sins*

*The Warning to Jerusalem* (from the Hebrew Bible: Isaiah 28)



> 14 	 ¶ Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
> 15 	 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
> 16 	 therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste. Rom. 9.33 ; 10.11 · 1 Pet. 2.6
> 17 	 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
> ...



Following is Guru Nanak speaking about the historical event, the destruction of Lahore by Babar. In this shabad God is not making far-ranging threats against his "chosen" people. Rather Nanak is *teaching, * i.e., fixing moral consciousness where it belongs, for the benefit of armies and rulers driven by greed and ego, and on those who worship ignorance ignorantly. He uses the story of Hanuman, he is speaking to Hindu people,  to illustrate his point. Yet liberation of the spirit even in this life is possible, by being centered in dharma. Wisdom is given when ego is forsaken. And Lahore is taken to be an ambrosial pool. Whereas Jerusalem is threatened with destruction.

There could not be 2 more different visions of God. 



> *The destruction of Lahore* (from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Ang 1412)
> 
> ਸਭਨੀ ਘਟੀ ਸਹੁ ਵਸੈ ਸਹ ਬਿਨੁ ਘਟੁ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥
> Sabẖnī gẖatī saho vasai sah bin gẖat na ko▫e.
> ...



Forgive the brevity of my comments. I am not inclined at this moment in time to do a complete analysis of the shabad.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Kanwaljit Singh said:


> Guru Sahib also talk about people recognizing God with different places and different forms of clothing. The followers call themselves with different names, but don't know the secrets of God.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think that visions of God in completeness are different. But most people see God in some things and don't in others. Some see God in their love for children, some love their pets and thank God for their company. Some think about God while going for a walk and seeing the nature beauty all around them. It is a bit about how your senses are heightened to experience God. You experience God more when you try to connect with God more, like you said, using Naam.



Kanwaljit ji

I do not draw your conclusion from the shabad. The shabad is part of a body of hymns composed when Guruji was on an Udassis. He was respectfully acknowledging that people do all these sorts of things. He was also rejecting these in favor of one thing

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਪਛਾਤਾ ॥
Says Nanak, one who realizes the Hukam of God's Will,

ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਕਾ ਤਿਨਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਜਾਤਾ ॥੫॥੯॥
knows the secrets of his Lord and Master. ||5||9||

The shabad is Guru Nanak's rejection of robes, rituals, colors of devotion, baths in sacred palces.... a very kind and respectful rejection... in favor of being a Gurmukh...one who turns his face away from distractions that appear religious and toward the Guru. The aim is to realize God's Will and leave behind the rest. Why am I adamant? Because the rehao iine is

ਕਾਰਣ ਕਰਣ ਕਰੀਮ ॥
He is the Cause of causes, the Generous Lord.

ਕਿਰਪਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਰਹੀਮ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
He showers His Grace and Mercy upon us. ||1||Pause||

This kartar purakhu who is akaal, without anger or enmity (unlike all the other representations of God in history) is Generous, full of Grace and Mercy, which he gives without asking for anything in return. Please forgive me. What could we give him? A pig, a goat, gold, an ox, a virgin? He is formless and needs nothing. He is the Giver of Everything not the Taker (unlike other gods). He is in everything and thus has everything, needs nothing, and never makes threats.


----------



## findingmyway (Jun 27, 2011)

BhagatSingh said:


> Findingmyway ji,
> How can that be? I am in agreement with you. If one wants to understand Sikhism, one must read and contemplate Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji PERIOD
> 
> If the focus is to know history then for that we will have to read historical texts, and do so without the veils of judgement and analysis *first*. (This is hard because like you say it's so easy to start judging) But your understanding of the text will be much stronger this way. After we read them then we can judge and analyze all we want, of course.
> ...



Many people approach history with assumptions and preconceptions. It is not used for validation but is used as informative. For example your statement earlier that Maharaja Ranjit Singh practiced Sikhi closer to the Guru's time. These assumptions are often dangerous as they colour understanding of Gurbani rather than Gurbani colouring the understanding of history. Our approach is where we differ. It is this very history that has caused do much Hindutva influence to remain in modern day Sikh practices-the very things the Guru's preached against.




> On the other hand, it's a steep cliff to see the One in it all, and no thesis can get you there (if you can write one that does, I will give you everything I have, for it). The shabad talks about both aspects of it all. It says religions are different (maybe in disagreement with each other) and yet there is the One in them and their goal is that One. This kind of respect that Guru ji had is much deeper than what you are I are familiar with. Since it's not language-based, it can not be put into words (hence no thesis can be written about it, sorry no paintings for you ). Guru Sahib advises that if one wants to experience this level of respect, if one wants to know what he is talking about, one should meditate on Naam. You already know that though.



There is a distinction between saying God is in all and believing concepts from other religions. Respect of others and accepting God in all does not mean I will start believing in Moses parting the sea or the Hindu gods as portrayed in their stories. This distinction is vital to stop us becoming slaves of Hindu mythology from which we were freed by the Gurus.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 27, 2011)

Spnadmin ji,
Yes I may have sounded patronizing though that was not my intention.

Yes  words and concepts of different religions are different. For one _That_ can be Vengeful for the other _That_ is always Peaceful. What is important  it to know _That_ which is written about in scriptures in various ways.

It will be hard to respond to you (if you are looking for one from  me) as I get the feeling you are very lost in the words and concepts.  Lost meaning nothing else but that you are analyzing them and looking  only in them for the Truth. 

Remember, the Dao that can be named (fully - described, analyzed, judged, etc) is not the Dao. 
[Though it's funny how Lao Tzu goes onto describe the Dao right after.
Guru  Nanak does the same thing. Says I cannot describe Karta Purakh even if I  could write at the speed of hurricanes and had ever flowing scrolls...  then goes to do it anyways. ]

It's the only thing we have -  language - to try and give form to the Formless. But Language cannot  encapsulate the Formless. It is certainly part of the formless, and  that's the only reason why it can even attempt to give the formless some form.

Think  of the Karta Purakh as ink. Think of all the cultures, eras,  people, views, environments, as different stamps. (or the other way  around, it doesn't matter) When the ink (formless) makes a mark  (form) through the stamp, it appears different because of the individual stamp used. We can quickly see how the mark is different but difficult to see the ink because it is *taken for granted*. The ink is on the stamp and the ink is in the marks, yet it is invisible. We are so used to the ink being there for us. WE are blind to it. But those who see the ink, know the secret. They have inner peace. They have no need to quarrel over what mark is what. It's all in the ink they say!

This is the  essence of that shabad stated by stamp of Bhagat. You are also expressing  that same essence with your stamp, as did Kanwaljit Singh ji. It's awesome isn't it? So many stamps, so many marks! The ink allows the mark-making, and yet goes unnoticed!

Findingmyway ji,


findingmyway said:


> Many  people approach history with assumptions and preconceptions. It is not  used for validation but is used as informative. For example your  statement earlier that Maharaja Ranjit Singh practiced Sikhi closer to  the Guru's time. These assumptions are often dangerous as they colour  understanding of Gurbani rather than Gurbani colouring the understanding  of history. Our approach is where we differ. It is this very history  that has caused do much Hindutva influence to remain in modern day Sikh  practices-the very things the Guru's preached against.


Yes but just to let you know, I did not say which you are claiming I said. 
This  is why I tell myself that reading should be done with a clear mind, and  this applies not just to historical documents but to other people, etc,  everything.



> There is a distinction between saying God is in all and believing  concepts from other religions. Respect of others and accepting God in  all does not mean I will start believing in Moses parting the sea or the  Hindu gods as portrayed in their stories. This distinction is vital to  stop us becoming slaves of Hindu mythology from which we were freed by  the Gurus.


Yes exactly.

More good advice. 

Thank you both


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 27, 2011)

Bhagat ji

I reject most of this. You are speaking sant mat, not gurmat. 




> Yes words and concepts of different religions are different. For one That can be Vengeful for the other That is always Peaceful. What is important it to know That which is written about in scriptures in various ways.
> 
> It will be hard to respond to you (if you are looking for one from me) as I get the feeling you are very lost in the words and concepts. Lost meaning nothing else but that you are analyzing them and looking only in them for the Truth.
> 
> ...





But you are certainly free to make this statement, as long as we both understand you are writing with the stamp of Bhagat Singh and not giving views per Gurmat vichaar. Please also consider the possibility that findingmyway is reading with a clear mind, as may be others who do not share your views. Otherwise you know action will need to be taken. Sat Nam.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jun 28, 2011)

Yes

Please tell me about sant mat and gurmat, and what the difference is. I don't know anything about the two. I am ready to listen, to learn.


----------



## spnadmin (Jun 28, 2011)

Bhagat ji



> Please tell me about sant mat and gurmat, and what the difference is. I don't know anything about the two. I am ready to listen, to learn.



You know me. I am always keen to jump in. But just out of curiosity... are there other members with an interest? There are more than 15,000 members and some percentage of them are very learned people who would give thoughtful answers backed up with knowledge. As a matter of principle:  if someone or two or three (besides you, Kanwaljit Singh, findingmyway, Giani ji, SikhGiani, and I) don't give you a reply today, I will respond. . 

On another matter: We want to tie our replies to the thread title, Kavi Santokh Singh...etc...so that we do not go off topic.


----------



## jassasingh (Jul 3, 2011)

I have taken santheya of most of the work of kavi santokh singh ji and if you look at the volume of the itehas and that to in perfect poetry. 

It is impossible to write even 10% percent of it without guru jis kirpa. 

Its katha is done every day at all the takths and major gurdwaras. The errors now where not errors even 50 - 60 years back because people were more into gurbani and itehas veechar then today.

Regarding one of the error anyone can do an independent research the current form on anadkarj we see was started by nirankari samparda (when they were a part of sikh dharma).

Before that it was around fire. Thanks to printing press we have parkash of guru granth sahib in gurdwaras . During Baba Deep singh jis time there were only 6 to 8 Guru Granth sahib jis sroop this world. Its not even practical possible to do anadkarj as we do today in the hazuri of guru Granth sahib. 

When you will test itehas about anadkarj and other things in suraj parkash from other sources most of your doubts will be clear


----------



## findingmyway (Jul 3, 2011)

jassasingh said:


> The errors now where not errors even 50 - 60 years back because people were more into gurbani and itehas veechar then today.



Where is your proof for this? From what I have seen my parents and grandparents seem to be more influenced by Hindu practices and thinking than my generation!


----------



## BhagatSingh (Jul 3, 2011)

> Hindu practices and thinking


Jasleen ji what are these practices and thinking followed by your elders?

And what "Sikh practices and thinking" do you do?


----------



## aristotle (Aug 2, 2011)

I myself have listened to the katha of Suraj Prakash in the local Gurudwara, and if one was to blindly follow this book, it gives validity to the Hindu concept of Gods and Godesses, Considers Gurus as the incarnation of prominent Hindu Gods, considers miracles as commonplace happenings and what not. But thankfully enough, we have our true guide, The Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, who guides us from confusions and doubts into the realm of eternal knowledge. We should only keep the substance and reject the chaff. I understand that the Suraj Prakash may be the source of many kinds of important historical information, but we should also keep in mind validating the book by advanced historical research and not just follow it word to word.
Waheguru


----------

