# Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak?



## ExploringSikhi (Aug 13, 2013)

Sat Sri Akal everyone,

I have been researching Sikhism for a while now and am enjoying it very much. It is rational, does not require me to believe in superstitions, and the Guru Granth Sahib emphasizes living this life to the fullest without worrying so much about the next. It is nice and I like it.

There is just one problem. As I understand it, Guru Nanak rejected miracles and claims of supernatural abilities. The thing that stumps me though is the story about how Guru Nanak was granted Guruship- going missing in a lake for 3 days, coming out, saying 'there is no Hindu, no Muslim", reciting the mool mantar etc... Sikhs proclaim that Guru Nanak was summoned in the court of God and awarded Guruship by Waheguru Himself. Is this not a miracle? Is it not superstitious/asking me to believe something that can't be proven?

Furthermore, I thought that Waheguru was omnipresent, how could Guru Nanak be summoned in the court of God if Sikhism rejects reincarnation/heaven/hell i.e. there is no court, the Abrahamic faiths proclaim a court of God because they believe in the day of judgement, but Sikhism doesn't, so was it a figure of speech? 

How did Guru Nanak survive 3 days under water though, everyone thought he was dead, it sounds like a miracle, unless the story is made up and something else happened. If this did happen, then does that mean Sikhi accepts the possibility of miracles? Then why not believe that Jesus turned wine into water or that Muhammad split the moon?

Other than that, I also have a question about Guru Granth Sahib. The way I understand it, the Adi Granth was compiled by Guru Arjan Dev, he included his work and the work of the 4 previous Gurus, as well as devotees such as Bhagat Kabir. Between that time and when Guru Gobind Singh added further hymns to the text, what guarantee is there that nothing additional had been added, that it was not changed/unpurified? After that, how do Sikhs know for sure that the Guru Granth Sahib has not been changed since the time of Guru Gobind Singh?

Just a few questions on my mind. Thank you to anyone who responds.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ishna (Aug 13, 2013)

What makes you think he went underwater for 3 days?  Are you sure he didn't just go to the river, maybe come out the other side, chill out in his mind for 3 days and then come back with his bright idea?

Can't help you with your Guru Granth Sahib Ji questions.

Good to have you on the forum, welcome.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 13, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji

Welcome to SPN. 

With some searching of this forum you will find threads related to your basic questions. Let me talk about 2 in brief because I am getting kind of tired right about now.

1. One can read the sakhis in perhaps 3 different ways. a) literal accounts of the life of Guru Nanak; b) imaginative morality stories intended to teach spiritual lessons, but not to be taken as the literal life sketch; c) for the most part completely bogus, and written to insert into Sikhi ideas more akin to the brahmin culture that Guru Nanak challenged.

Many of the sakhis that tell of incredible tales are those said to be written by Bhai Bala. There is a strong historical argument that Bhai Bala never existed. He is never mentioned by Bhai Gurdas in his vaaran. Bhai Gurdas was the biographer of 6 Gurus and the trusted colleague of Guru Arjan Dev when he compiled the Aad Granth. I am keeping this short as I said. The motive to re-write the life of Guru Nanak can be explained by political rivalries in his immediate circle of family and friends.

Not all collections of the janaamsakhis are under suspicion. This is a electronic book by Dr. Kirpal Singh who does a balanced job of analyzing the Janaamsakhis - life sketches of Guru Nanak. It is long but you seem like the kind of kaur who would enjoy it. http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/pdf/janamsakhi.pdf

2. The integrity of the text of the Aad Granth is another very important issue. There are disputed texts also dating back to the times of the Minas, the group often associated with the questionable tales told in the Sakhis. One topic to search in the forum is that of the Mina conspiracy. However, more helpful in the short run is this book, written by Professor Sahib Singh, http://www.globalsikhstudies.net/pdf/Compilation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.pdf

He explores in depth how the Aad Granth was compiled in such a way to prevent add-ons and extensions from being inserted. There is a lot of reading there, but it is written in a way that is both educational and entertaining.

Challenges to the authenticity and integrity of the Aad Granth were put forward by McLeod, and something called the Banno Bir is at times suggested as a text that rivals the Aad Granth. This article by Daljit Singh takes you through the charges made and puts them to bed.http://www.sikhcoalition.org/about-sikhs/history/authenticity-of-kartarpuri-bir

Discussion is good, but so is the detective work of reading solid research. Not all opinions are equally informed. Let me know if you want links to more information.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 13, 2013)

I forgot something. You ask, "Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak?" The only thing Guru Nanak asks us to believe is the Mool Mantar. All of the Ripley's believe-it-or-not stuff comes from other sources.


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Aug 13, 2013)

Sikhism is a religion founded by Guru Nanak Sahib and 9 successors. They are known as  Nanaks. The poetic utterances of Gurus are contained in Guru Granth sahib. It is treated as eternal successor of Gurus and is worshiped as an embodiment of Eternal divine ‘Word’ communicated to the world through the words[_Bani_] of  Nanaks who were in carnation of the ‘Word” [_Shabad _or _Sabda_] and whose words [Bani] came straight from the source as already pointed out by *spnadmin ji.* 
Let us take up your question in three parts 

1. About Dargeh
2. His omni presence and oneness
3. About Guru Nanak ji.

1. The exact word employed in Guru Granth sahib [GGS] for Court of Lord is ‘Dargeh’. It has appeared more than 500 times in GGS.
If one believes in the GGS one need to believe in what is inked therein. It may be a physical place or otherwise. It can be one’s mind also besides hosts of other possibilities.

2. He is present every where yet he is one. He is one yet many. The one is the unformed and all forms. He is full of qualities and yet beyond all qualities. He remains one in Himself and in multiple creations. He created the world of forms and He inter relates all forms with all forms with one thread. 

3. I shall answer the third one by quoting the meaning of a single line that has appeared in GGS [ ref: Sukhmani Sahib]. Only Brahmgyani can know the state of another Brahmgyani. 

Besides, I totally agree with *spnadmin ji* in regard to her classification of sakhis or stories.


----------



## ExploringSikhi (Aug 13, 2013)

Ishna said:


> What makes you think he went underwater for 3 days? Are you sure he didn't just go to the river, maybe come out the other side, chill out in his mind for 3 days and then come back with his bright idea?
> 
> Can't help you with your Guru Granth Sahib Ji questions.
> 
> Good to have you on the forum, welcome.


 
Thank you for the welcome 0 I got my info from here: http://www.sikhs.org/guru1.htm

Here is an excerpt: "Early one morning accompanied by Mardana, Guru Nanak went to the river Bain for his bath. After plunging into the river, *Guru Nanak did not surface* and it was reported that he must have drowned. The villagers searched everywhere, but their was no trace of him. Guru Nanak was in holy communion with God. The Lord God revealed himself to Guru Nanak and enlightened him"



spnadmin said:


> I forgot something. You ask, "Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak?" The only thing Guru Nanak asks us to believe is the Mool Mantar. All of the Ripley's believe-it-or-not stuff comes from other sources.


 
Firstly, thank you for your well-thought out post above, I appreciate it 

As for this, I am basically asking, why should I believe Guru Nanak when he says that he went to the court of God and got Amrit from God. This is the reason Sikhs believe Guru Nanak to be a figure of authority, right? To me, it seems to contradict with other teachings of Guru Nanak, like God is all-around (how do you get "summoned" when God is omnipresent?), rejection of reincarnation/heaven/hell (why does God even have a court if not to judge you?) and rejection of miracles (sounds superstitious to me).

Now that I have had time to collect my thoughts a bit, I would also like to know, in addition to the above:

1) There are parts of Guru Granth Sahib that talk about having your deeds read out in the presence of the lord of Dharma, about how according to your deeds you will be judged. How does this reconcile with no belief in reincarnation/heaven/hell?

2) Is God in Sikhi interfering, or does He tend to stay out of human affairs? If he is interfering, why is it so implausible to believe that He could help people perform miracles? If not interfering, why did He "summon" Guru Nanak to His court?

3) Kind of ties in with the above, but Guru Nanak sometimes talks about spreading God's message. This implies that it was given to Him by God, which implies that God does interfere in human life. Sikhism emphasizes the life of the householder, that it is possible for ordinary people to realize God, that you don't need mediators. Why then was this message given to the Gurus and a select few other people? If I live an honest life, will God also communicate with me and give me the message? Also, what then about the messengers of Islam/Judaism/Christianity etc... did they too get the message from God, or were they fakes?

Thank you to everyone who replied and will reply.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 14, 2013)

>>>>>>>>>As for this, I am basically asking, why should I believe Guru Nanak when  he says that he went to the court of God and got Amrit from God. This  is the reason Sikhs believe Guru Nanak to be a figure of authority,  right? To me, it seems to contradict with other teachings of Guru Nanak,  like God is all-around (how do you get "summoned" when God is  omnipresent?), rejection of reincarnation/heaven/hell (why does God even  have a court if not to judge you?) and rejection of miracles (sounds  superstitious to me).>>>>>>>>>

CAN YOU SPECIFICALLY QUOTE THE SHABADS THAT SAY THIS ?   sikhs only beleive in whats written in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji under Mahalla 1 as what GURU NANAK JI says.
The Translations at sikhs.org are too literal...the metaphorical meanings are lost on most. When Guru nanak ji says..He gave me a Job...it doesnt mean God summoned him to attend an interview and gave him a job as you and me get a job..when Guru nank Ji says he got a sirapao..a robe of honour..there is no yellow robe, or yellow ribbon or sheriffs star pinned to his chest by the Supreme Sheriff in the Sky..we have to go beyond the literal to get the metaphorical meanings buried deep...that takes effort and study and  a frame of mind..so there is no "physical Court" where God is seated on a gilded throne..long beard and red turban etc..with servants waving flags over his head etc etc...no physical dharamraajs with pens and paper or huge books with your crimes recorded etc..etc..Gurmatt REJECTS all these notions which are more suited to christain/jewish ideas of God as in the Bible..


----------



## aristotle (Aug 14, 2013)

> I also have a question about Guru Granth Sahib. The way I understand it, the Adi Granth was compiled by Guru Arjan Dev, he included his work and the work of the 4 previous Gurus, as well as devotees such as Bhagat Kabir. Between that time and when Guru Gobind Singh added further hymns to the text, what guarantee is there that nothing additional had been added, that it was not changed/unpurified?


Guru Arjan Dev Ji was not the first one to include the hymns of _Bhagats_(including those of Bhagat Kabir, as you have correctly pointed out) in the Granth. Historical sources point out that Guru Nanak Sahib carried the _Pothi_, literally the notebook, wherever he went during his _Udasis_, compiling the hymns and wisdom of Bhagats, which were later to become a part of the Granth. An instance,


> *ਪੁਛਨਿ ਫੋਲਿ ਕਿਤਾਬ ਨੋ* ਹਿੰਦੂ ਵਡਾ ਕਿ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨੋਈ?
> They asked Baba Nanak *to open and search in his book* whether Hindu is great or the Muslim.
> 3 ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੧ ਪਉੜੀ ੩੩ ਪੰ. ੩


This Bani was handed over to the succeeding Gurus. The following example reinforces this fact,


> Kabir Sahib Salok (Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj, Page 555),
> ਸਲੋਕ ॥ Shalok:
> ਕਬੀਰਾ ਮਰਤਾ ਮਰਤਾ ਜਗੁ ਮੁਆ ਮਰਿ ਭਿ ਨ ਜਾਨੈ ਕੋਇ ॥
> Kabeer, the world is dying - dying to death, but no one knows how to truly die.
> ...



The following example is even more evident, for the sake of keeping the post brief, I shall post only the 'Rahau' tuk (although you can always go back and search the whole Shabad..)


> Here is a Shabad by Bhagat Baba Farid,
> ਸੂਹੀ ਲਲਿਤ ॥ Soohee, Lalit:
> ਬੇੜਾ ਬੰਧਿ ਨ ਸਕਿਓ ਬੰਧਨ ਕੀ ਵੇਲਾ ॥
> You were not able to make yourself a raft when you should have.
> ...



This proves beyond doubts that all the Gurus before Guru Arjan Dev Sahib not only possessed the Bani of the Bhagats, but also continuously studied the same and added their own explanation wherever they felt necessary to clear any apparent ambiguity.
So contrary to the popular belief, Guru Arjan Sahib was not the one to 'include' the Bani of the Bhagats, but he did 'compile' the whole Bani of the previoius Gurus(worthy of mention here, is that counterfeit non-canonical works like 'Praan Sangali', 'Bacahan Bilaas' were rejected, which would not have been possible in absence of a source of reference for these Banis), that of the Bhagats, and his own Bani into what came to be known as the _Adi Granth_.
The point to consider here is that the copy of the _Adi Granth _ at the Harmandir Sahib, Amritsar was not the only one existing at that time. _Dharamsals_,(literally 'place of religiousness), or the then Sikh places of worship, had been setup throughout the North India and faraway places like The Gangetic plains and Bangladesh. Here the Sangat would gather and meditate upon the Gurbani, which was copied from the _Adi Granth_ by the Sikhs.


> ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਹਥਿ ਸਕਥ ਹਨਿ ਸਾਧਸੰਗਤਿ ਗੁਰ ਕਾਰ ਕਮਾਵੈ।
> Worthy are the hands of the Sikh who in the holy congregation do the Guru's work.
> ਪਾਣੀ ਪਖਾ ਪੀਹਣਾ ਪੈਰ ਧੋਇ ਚਰਣਾਂਮਤੁ ਪਾਵੈ।
> Who draw water, fan the sangat, grind the flour, wash the feet of Guru and drink the water therefrom;
> ...



Needless to say, 'if any' discrepancy would have been there in the Adi Granth regarding the copy originally 'compiled' by Guru Arjan Dev Sahib, it would have been pointed out by comparison with the existing copies present at multiple places the country at that time. 
At the time of the crossing of Sutlej, when the copis of Adi Granth and the works of the court poets of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib were lost to the flooding waters of the river, the Guru Granth Granth Sahib was still compiled afterwards(the works of court poets could not survive because the only copies were lost, they are available now only in fragments) from the other existing copies, and the Bani of Guru Teg Bahadur Sahib was included. 
After the coronation as the Guru, Guru Granth Sahib was carefully preserved, one can judge by comparison of the _Birs_ or canons of the Granth Sahib that not even slight discrepancies like that of _matras_ or accent marks are there.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 14, 2013)

And MOST IMPORTANT of all....GURU NANAK JI NEVER COMMANDS.."Beleive in ME..to be "saved"..that command is reserved by Jesus (and others) but NOT Gurus of Sikhs. Gurmatt - following and believing in GURUS/Bhagats/Sheikhs/Bhatts  of SGGS is entirely VOLUNTARY with no strings attached, no promises..NOTHING. 110% VOLUNTARY beleiving and following after one has reached an AGE OF MATURITY !! So no such thing as .."I believe in Guru Nanak ji because my FATHER told me to...either. So your QUESTION is basically and fundamentally flawed as well.


----------



## aristotle (Aug 14, 2013)

> Here is an excerpt: "Early one morning accompanied by Mardana, Guru Nanak went to the river Bani for his bath. After plunging into the river, Guru Nanak did not surface and it was reported that he must have drowned. The villagers searched everywhere, but their was no trace of him. Guru Nanak was in holy communion with God. The Lord God revealed himself to Guru Nanak and enlightened him"


If such an important incident had really happened, would not it have been included in the Guru Granth Sahib or the Vaars of Bhai Gurdas(Remember, Banis of important historical significance like the 'Siddh Gosht', 'Oankaar', and the Shabad on the fate of 'Sulhi Khan-Sulbi Khan' are included in the Guru Granth Sahib). Why is it that we get these 'miraculous' Saakhis from spurious or third hand sources, well that is because they never happened.



> As for this, I am basically asking, why should I believe Guru Nanak when he says that he went to the court of God and got Amrit from God. This is the reason Sikhs believe Guru Nanak to be a figure of authority, right?


Guru Nanak Sahib never claimed to have 'visited' the court of the Lord' or to 'get Amrit from God'. You cannot sccuse of contradictions without having studied the Gurmat philosophy in its most pristine form, The Guru Granth Sahib. The more you study the Gurbani, the more you will realise that these 'contradictions' heapeed upon the Gurbani are nothing but baseless accusations.


> Kind of ties in with the above, but Guru Nanak sometimes talks about spreading God's message. This implies that it was given to Him by God, which implies that God does interfere in human life.


See, you have not specified a single Shabad in your list of questions-counter questions, means you have only read what you wanted to read. You are basing your questions on nothing more than what you may have 'heard' from others. Until you keep your cup of misconceptions and prejudices empty before studying the Gurbani, the cup will always spill.
:gingerteakaur:


----------



## aristotle (Aug 14, 2013)

> So no such thing as .."I believe in Guru Nanak ji because my FATHER told me to...either.


Can you imagine a boy of a middle class Hindu family refusing the _Yagyopaveet_ ceremony in front of a whole gathering of relatives, neighbours and friends, simply because because he saw no logic in blindly following age-old rituals?  
Guru Nanak Sahib did such a thing. 
He questioned everything, and so should we, but the onus of first studying about a philosophy before questioning it always lies on the questioner.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 14, 2013)

aristotle said:


> Can you imagine a boy of a middle class Hindu family refusing the _Yagyopaveet_ ceremony in front of a whole gathering of relatives, neighbours and friends, simply because because he saw no logic in blindly following age-old rituals?
> Guru Nanak Sahib did such a thing.
> He questioned everything, and so should we, but the onus of first studying about a philosophy before questioning it always lies on the questioner.




And that wasnt a small ceremony either..imagine the crowd, the food cooked (a whole live Bakra was slaughtered),...and the imposing Brahmin, elders of the community etc etc..and the YOUNG LAD NANAK saying "NO" - No janeau unless you can show me a "thread" that wont break, wont be soiled, wont be burnt with my body at cremation etc...and then NANAK spelled it out word by word WHAT an actual JANEAU should be made of..a janeau that He would be PROUD TO WEAR !! This Shabad is also metaphorical...the "Cotton" etc used to make this SPIRITUAL JANEAU cannot be seen/touched/felt with the PHYSICAL SENSES...


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 14, 2013)

I come back to this thread to check progress and find an entire crash course in some of the most critical issues in Sikhi explored in detail. 

I am grateful to Exploring Sikhi ji for bringing this thread to us, or the the replies would not be here to read, and all in one place. The thread is rich in examples, and verses from SGGS.

These are the issues to pursue in sangat. Are they so pursued? So many thoughtful replies here! So many critical details! So many basic principles for understanding Gurbani!


----------



## harmanpreet singh (Aug 14, 2013)

ExploringSikhi said:


> 3) .  Kind of ties in with the above, but Guru Nanak sometimes talks about  spreading God's message. This implies that it was given to Him by God,  which implies that God does interfere in human life.Sikhism emphasizes the life of the householder, that it is possible for ordinary people to realize God, that you don't need mediators. Why then was this message given to the Gurus and a select few other people? If I live an honest life, will God also communicate with me and give me the message? Also, what then about the messengers of Islam/Judaism/Christianity etc... did they too get the message from God, or were they fakes?



Welcome ExploringSikhi  ji ,


its not like Mr GOD sitting in court with Prophets , allotting  heaven to one and hell to others . 

in Sikhi GOD is all pervading and one can attain this understanding /self realization/enlightenment   by following ShabadGuru Granth Sahib ji  .

and the story of "Guru Nanak and river" is like that  of "Buddha and Bodhi tree "at Gaya  where Buddha  attained  perfection ,Nirvaana .


----------



## Aisha (Aug 14, 2013)

ExploringSikhi Ji,

while I am not as learned on Sikhi as the other members here, I still want to add my two cents, more specifically, pertaining to this bit here:



ExploringSikhi said:


> As for this, I am basically asking, *why should I believe Guru Nanak when he says that he went to the court of God and got Amrit from God.* This is the reason Sikhs believe Guru Nanak to be a figure of authority, right? To me, it seems to contradict with other teachings of Guru Nanak, like God is all-around (how do you get "summoned" when God is omnipresent?), rejection of reincarnation/heaven/hell (why does God even have a court if not to judge you?) and rejection of miracles (sounds superstitious to me).



Like Giyani Ji has already pointed out, if you read Guru Granth Sahib Ji, you should not do it literally. The entire thing is poetry, it is full of metaphors and allusions, it was never meant to be taken at face-value.

I get what you are saying. Being "summoned" to the court of God sounds like you are going to a detached place somewhere far away, and as Sikhi rejects heaven/hell/reincarnation, it makes no sense to you. When faced with situations like this, I tend to go to Guru Granth Sahib Ji and find other places the term is also mentioned, to see if it might be able to shed some light. I did a quick search of "court" in Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and here is an instant where Guru Nanak Ji refers to the "court of the Lord":

ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥
सिरीरागु महला १ ॥
Sirīrāg mėhlā 1.
Siree Raag, First Mehl:

ਅਮਲੁ ਗਲੋਲਾ ਕੂੜ ਕਾ ਦਿਤਾ ਦੇਵਣਹਾਰਿ ॥
अमलु गलोला कूड़ का दिता देवणहारि ॥
Amal gal o lā kūṛ kā ḏiṯā ḏevaṇhār.
The Great Giver has given the intoxicating drug of falsehood.

ਮਤੀ ਮਰਣੁ ਵਿਸਾਰਿਆ ਖੁਸੀ ਕੀਤੀ ਦਿਨ ਚਾਰਿ ॥
मती मरणु विसारिआ खुसी कीती दिन चारि ॥
Maṯī maraṇ visāri▫ā kẖusī kīṯī ḏin cẖār.
The people are intoxicated; they have forgotten death, and they have fun for a few days.

ਸਚੁ ਮਿਲਿਆ ਤਿਨ ਸੋਫੀਆ ਰਾਖਣ ਕਉ ਦਰਵਾਰੁ ॥੧॥
सचु मिलिआ तिन सोफीआ राखण कउ दरवारु ॥१॥
Sacẖ mili▫ā ṯin sofī▫ā rākẖaṇ ka▫o ḏarvār. ||1||
*Those who do not use intoxicants are true; they dwell in the Court of the Lord.* ||1||

ਨਾਨਕ ਸਾਚੇ ਕਉ ਸਚੁ ਜਾਣੁ ॥
नानक साचे कउ सचु जाणु ॥
Nānak sācẖe ka▫o sacẖ jāṇ.
O Nanak, know the True Lord as True.

ਜਿਤੁ ਸੇਵਿਐ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਈਐ ਤੇਰੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਚਲੈ ਮਾਣੁ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
जितु सेविऐ सुखु पाईऐ तेरी दरगह चलै माणु ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
Jiṯ sevi▫ai sukẖ pā▫ī▫ai ṯerī ḏargėh cẖalai māṇ. ||1|| rahā▫o.
Serving Him, peace is obtained; you shall go to His Court with honor. ||1||Pause||

ਸਚੁ ਸਰਾ ਗੁੜ ਬਾਹਰਾ ਜਿਸੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਸਚਾ ਨਾਉ ॥
सचु सरा गुड़ बाहरा जिसु विचि सचा नाउ ॥
Sacẖ sarā guṛ bāhrā jis vicẖ sacẖā nā▫o.
The Wine of Truth is not fermented from molasses. The True Name is contained within it.

ਸੁਣਹਿ ਵਖਾਣਹਿ ਜੇਤੜੇ ਹਉ ਤਿਨ ਬਲਿਹਾਰੈ ਜਾਉ ॥
सुणहि वखाणहि जेतड़े हउ तिन बलिहारै जाउ ॥
I am a sacrifice to those who hear and chant the True Name.

ਤਾ ਮਨੁ ਖੀਵਾ ਜਾਣੀਐ ਜਾ ਮਹਲੀ ਪਾਏ ਥਾਉ ॥੨॥
ता मनु खीवा जाणीऐ जा महली पाए थाउ ॥२॥
Only one who obtains a room in the Mansion of the Lord's Presence is deemed to be truly intoxicated. ||2||

ਨਾਉ ਨੀਰੁ ਚੰਗਿਆਈਆ ਸਤੁ ਪਰਮਲੁ ਤਨਿ ਵਾਸੁ ॥
नाउ नीरु चंगिआईआ सतु परमलु तनि वासु ॥
Bathe in the waters of Goodness and apply the scented oil of Truth to your body,

ਤਾ ਮੁਖੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਉਜਲਾ ਲਖ ਦਾਤੀ ਇਕ ਦਾਤਿ ॥
ता मुखु होवै उजला लख दाती इक दाति ॥
and your face shall become radiant. This is the gift of 100,000 gifts.

ਦੂਖ ਤਿਸੈ ਪਹਿ ਆਖੀਅਹਿ ਸੂਖ ਜਿਸੈ ਹੀ ਪਾਸਿ ॥੩॥
दूख तिसै पहि आखीअहि सूख जिसै ही पासि ॥३॥
Tell your troubles to the One who is the Source of all comfort. ||3||

ਸੋ ਕਿਉ ਮਨਹੁ ਵਿਸਾਰੀਐ ਜਾ ਕੇ ਜੀਅ ਪਰਾਣ ॥
सो किउ मनहु विसारीऐ जा के जीअ पराण ॥
How can you forget the One who created your soul, and the praanaa, the breath of life?

ਤਿਸੁ ਵਿਣੁ ਸਭੁ ਅਪਵਿਤ੍ਰੁ ਹੈ ਜੇਤਾ ਪੈਨਣੁ ਖਾਣੁ ॥
तिसु विणु सभु अपवित्रु है जेता पैनणु खाणु ॥
Without Him, all that we wear and eat is impure.

ਹੋਰਿ ਗਲਾਂ ਸਭਿ ਕੂੜੀਆ ਤੁਧੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਪਰਵਾਣੁ ॥੪॥੫॥
होरि गलां सभि कूड़ीआ तुधु भावै परवाणु ॥४॥५॥
Everything else is false. Whatever pleases Your Will is acceptable. ||4||5||

From the above shabad, it is clear that the "court of the Lord" is not somewhere far away, out-of-reach of the ordinary man and woman. The Gurmukhs reside in the court of the Lord. What is a Gurmukh? Someone who has control over the 5 evils, remembers Waheguru/sees the light in all, lives an honest life and serves humanity selflessly. It is clear that Guru Nanak's message was that "the court of the Lord" is within each of us, it is when we overcome our own personal desires and have complete control over ourselves at all times, anyone can enter the court of the Lord irrespective of religion or background, simply put, being in the court of God means having a certain state-of-mind.

Now, growing up, Guru Nanak Ji was exposed to both Islamic and Hindu belief systems. He had friends of diverse backgrounds and was exposed to a multitude of schools of thought. What do I think happened on the day he got Guruship? My understanding is that he most likely had a bunch of ideas floating around his head, he was definitely living an honest life, knew what was important so had control of himself, but had no concrete "belief system". On that day, absorbed in meditation, like Ishna Ji suggests, he probably had his "AHA!" moment, everything fell into place, he was finally able to express his beliefs in the form of the mool mantar, and from that utterance, the rest of Sikhi took form. I don't think that he "spoke" to God, like you said, it makes little sense from a Sikhi perspective, in my mind, it was the day he was finally able to present his ideas and beliefs in verbal form (mool mantar).

To other SPN users, I do think that OP deserves a break, especially about the story of Guru Nanak's "meeting" with God. To be honest, I understand his confusion 100%, I have heard the same thing myself far too many times to count. A lot of Sikhs, when asked, will tell you that Guru Nanak Ji went under water in the river, and didn't come out for three days. That he had gone to meet God, and had come back with a message. Most users on here know to stick to Guru Granth Sahib Ji for that kind of stuff, but a non-Sikh probably doesn't know that (myself included when I started out), when every Sikh around you is telling you the same thing, you'd take it as truth and assume it was from the scriptures. Of course, I have come to realize that most stories about the Guru's have very little scriptural basis. OP, have you heard the one about Guru Nanak going to Mecca? You probably have, it is the most widely-circulated Guru Nanak story out there. He goes to Mecca, points his feet towards the Kaaba, an angry Muslim tells him to move them, Guru Nanak tells the Muslim man to move his feet in the direction where God doesn't exist, the Muslim man points them in the opposite direction, but the Kaaba is still there. No matter which direction the man moved Guru Ji's feet, the Kaaba would be in front of them. Guru Nanak Ji then proceeds to "enlighten" the man about how God doesn't live in any specific place, and the man stands there, amazed at what he is hearing.

The entire story smacks of ignorance. First of all, Muslims do not believe that God resides in the Kaaba. To suggest such a thing is disrespectful of Islam. Secondly, it is a big slap in the face of Guru Nanak Dev Ji. He had been exposed to Muslims his entire life, his most trusted companion was a Muslim man, you'd think he would know the basics of the religion. Furthermore, it is another "miracle" story. Guru Nanak Ji rejected miracles. To have a story of Guru Nanak Ji performing a miracle be perpetuated by his own followers is just sad, he would be rolling over in his grave if he knew.

Here is my advice to you:

1) Do not read Guru Granth Sahib Ji literally. To do so makes you miss the entire message behind it, you won't understand anything if you choose to do so, not only that, it will be downright confusing, a literal interpretation of Guru Granth Sahib Ji has every page contradicting the last. Read it, but keep in mind it is poetry, a lot of things are metaphors/allusions and should be treated as such. If someone quotes something from Guru Granth Sahib Ji and it seems odd, like it goes against what the Gurus would have taught, most likely the person is interpreting it literally. Do not make that mistake.

2) Take any story not featured in Guru Granth Sahib Ji with a pinch of salt. A lot of them have been created (by Sikhs, ironically) to make the Gurus look like road-side magicians. The people who come up with them probably think they are doing good, but it is a huge disservice, not only because it is lies, but because it causes a lot of confusion and doubt among youngsters and anyone in general who may not know much about Sikhi. There may be some authentic stories out there, but it would be a really big headache trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, do yourself a favor and stick to Guru Granth Sahib Ji, there is no lesson in those stories that you wouldn't be able to learn in Guru Granth Sahib Ji anyways.

What I am curious to know though, from the sangat on this site, is how come that story of Guru Nanak Ji is the most widely-circulated one when it comes to how he obtained Guruship? Where did it originate? When? I watched this video a few days ago: Who made Guru Nanak a Guru? - Question #1 - YouTube watch from 1:28 to 3:33   what do you guys have to say about that? Is it any wonder people are so confused?

I am also curious to know about the "having your deeds read out in the presence of Lord of Dharma" and "being judged according to your deeds", I do not know much about that, if any member could enlighten me as well, I would appreciate it


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 14, 2013)

> I am also curious to know about the "having your deeds read out in the  presence of Lord of Dharma" and "being judged according to your deeds", I  do not know much about that, if any member could enlighten me as well, I  would appreciate it



hmmmm you need to post that one on a Vedic forum maybe........


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 14, 2013)

aisha ji

Unfortunately you cannot ask your question about the sakhi without posting the video. I believe your question was rhetorical -- no answer needed.

p/s much of the foolishness originates with the janamsakhi of the possible "Bhai Balo." Dr. Kirpal Singh did a complete analysis of all versions of the janamsakhi and probably has the answer as to Guru Nanak's 3-day sojourn to the gurgaddi.

My favorite however is the story of Guru Nanak bringing a dead cow to life -- I believe in Delhi.


----------



## Inderjeet Kaur (Aug 14, 2013)

I suppose I sound a bit like an echo.

You shouldn't believe Guru Nanak ji. You should explore and study and reach your own conclusions.  I mean not just study Sikhi, but other ways of life as well.

I believe that blind faith is not a part of Sikhi and that, further, it is the cause of most of the strife in the world today.   

To me, one of the most compelling facts of Sikhi is that it doesn't expect me to believe things that I know are impossible.   I believe our Creator created this universe to run according to the Natural Law that It set up and that's that.  When things happen that appear miraculous to us, that shows that our knowledge is limited, our ignorance great, and the universe is stranger than we thought, nothing more.


----------



## Astroboy (Aug 14, 2013)

Maybe what is being expressed by the OP is that the bani of Guru Nanak is very scientific in nature but the miracle-based story of guru Nanak does not add up. So maybe it is an attempt to project a different perspective of Guru Nanak based on His far advanced knowledge as proven by His bani.
JMHO


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 14, 2013)

Guru nanak ji given "Amrit"..and then Guru Gobind Singh ji had to go an make it again in 1699...the One and ONLY *AMRIT* is GURBANI and we have it word for word in the SGGS pg 1-1429.  The Creator is not seated in any physical place...and He is not giving out any Amrit bottles...thats is all HINDU MYTHOLOGY...you wnat to read about such then go read the mahabharta gita vedas whatever..all sorts of devtas churning oceans and having amrit vessels etc etc..  Bhai GURDASS Vaars are NOT 100% Authentic....they are ADULTERATED. FINAL BASIC TEST is SGGS GURBANI.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 14, 2013)

aisha ji

To begin I do agree that ExploringSikhi does deserve a break, and for the reasons you give -- the Internet has become in many ways a source of buzzing confusion. Also, harry ji's remark about posting on a Hindu forum triggered something for me. We are considering the story that Guru Nanak was lost in a river for 3 days -- and emerged enlightened instead of water-logged.

In the vedic tradition, and depending on the branch of the believer, either Krishna or Shiva re-created themselves in water. Their identity is self-created. They are born in the all-pervading water - Narayan who is all pervading and formless like water. (Narayan again depending on tradition is either an avatar of Vishnu or precedes Vishnu, but in any case represents the all-pervading aspect of the divine.) From this the idea of re-birth in water symbolizes spiritual re-birth or awakening, self-created, from an all-pervading source.

It is my suspicion - obviously I have no way to prove it - that the sakhi of Guru Nanak receiving the gurgaddi after 3 days in a river originates with the vedic account of Krishna/Shiva reborn in Narayan. Guru Nanak would be the most unlikely individual to become enlightened by spiritual rebirth in a body of water; however I believe the analogy with Shiva/Krishna was invented by those around him who were deeply threatened by his challenges to prevailing brahmin beliefs.

Guru Nanak offers as Gyani ji has clearly explained "amrit" or spiritual rebirth in the nectar of Gurbani.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 14, 2013)

By the time of Ramanand in the tradition of the bhagats, the rebirth is seen in a different way (Ang 1195) ... and the sacred texts are no longer the authority, a different kind of encounter is described, and rebirth takes a different form.

ਰਾਮਾਨੰਦ ਜੀ ਘਰੁ ੧
Rāmānanḏ jī gẖar 1
Raamaanand Jee, First House:

ੴ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥
Ik▫oaŉkār saṯgur parsāḏ.
One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The True Guru:

ਕਤ ਜਾਈਐ ਰੇ ਘਰ ਲਾਗੋ ਰੰਗੁ ॥
Kaṯ jā▫ī▫ai re gẖar lāgo rang.
Where should I go? My home is filled with bliss.

ਮੇਰਾ ਚਿਤੁ ਨ ਚਲੈ ਮਨੁ ਭਇਓ ਪੰਗੁ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
Merā cẖiṯ na cẖalai man bẖa▫i▫o pang. ||1|| rahā▫o.
My consciousness does not go out wandering. My mind has become crippled. ||1||Pause||

ਏਕ ਦਿਵਸ ਮਨ ਭਈ ਉਮੰਗ ॥
Ėk ḏivas man bẖa▫ī umang.
One day, a desire welled up in my mind.

ਘਸਿ ਚੰਦਨ ਚੋਆ ਬਹੁ ਸੁਗੰਧ ॥
Gẖas cẖanḏan cẖo▫ā baho suganḏẖ.
I ground up sandalwood, along with several fragrant oils.

ਪੂਜਨ ਚਾਲੀ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਠਾਇ ॥
Pūjan cẖālī barahm ṯẖā▫e.
I went to God's place, and worshipped Him there.

ਸੋ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਬਤਾਇਓ ਗੁਰ ਮਨ ਹੀ ਮਾਹਿ ॥੧॥
So barahm baṯā▫i▫o gur man hī māhi. ||1||
That God showed me the Guru, within my own mind. ||1||

ਜਹਾ ਜਾਈਐ ਤਹ ਜਲ ਪਖਾਨ ॥
Jahā jā▫ī▫ai ṯah jal pakẖān.
Wherever I go, I find water and stones.

ਤੂ ਪੂਰਿ ਰਹਿਓ ਹੈ ਸਭ ਸਮਾਨ ॥
Ŧū pūr rahi▫o hai sabẖ samān.
You are totally pervading and permeating in all.

ਬੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਸਭ ਦੇਖੇ ਜੋਇ ॥
Beḏ purān sabẖ ḏekẖe jo▫e.
I have searched through all the Vedas and the Puraanas.

ਊਹਾਂ ਤਉ ਜਾਈਐ ਜਉ ਈਹਾਂ ਨ ਹੋਇ ॥੨॥
Ūhāŉ ṯa▫o jā▫ī▫ai ja▫o īhāŉ na ho▫e. ||2||
I would go there, only if the Lord were not here. ||2||

ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਮੈ ਬਲਿਹਾਰੀ ਤੋਰ ॥
Saṯgur mai balihārī ṯor.
I am a sacrifice to You, O my True Guru.

ਜਿਨਿ ਸਕਲ ਬਿਕਲ ਭ੍ਰਮ ਕਾਟੇ ਮੋਰ ॥
Jin sakal bikal bẖaram kāte mor.
You have cut through all my confusion and doubt.

ਰਾਮਾਨੰਦ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਰਮਤ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ॥
Rāmānanḏ su▫āmī ramaṯ barahm.
Raamaanand's Lord and Master is the All-pervading Lord God.

ਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਸਬਦੁ ਕਾਟੈ ਕੋਟਿ ਕਰਮ ॥੩॥੧॥
Gur kā sabaḏ kātai kot karam. ||3||1||
The Word of the Guru's Shabad eradicates the karma of millions of past actions. ||3||1|| 

This from the bani of Bhagat Ramanand is in the house of Guru Nanak. Already a revolution had taken place. Guru Nanak however brought a message of rebirth that spread among the masses; it gained so much traction that he had to have alarmed the orthodox believers. They put him in a river, bringing him out an enlightened soul. Guru Nanak himself did not insult the sangat with far-fetched stories about his own life.


----------



## ExploringSikhi (Aug 14, 2013)

It would be too much of an eye-sore to quote everyone who responded, so I will just send out a BIG THANK YOU to everyone who responded right here, I cannot express how appreciative I am of you guys putting in the effort to respond so eloquently.

I have been conversing with a fellow non-Sikh about Sikhi for a few days now. I told him a bit about the philosophy of Guru Nanak, like not believing in miracles and whatnot, as well as some other things (what Guru Granth Sahib Ji actually means when it talks about heaven/hell/reincarnation etc...). He also asked me why Guru Nanak Ji was considered a Guru, and I told him the same things Sikhs told me when I had asked, that he went missing for 3 days, had spoken (literally) to Waheguru, was ordered to spread the message. He was the one that said, well doesn't that contradict with the whole "no miracle" thing? I had never really thought about it before, which is why I wanted to ask, amazing how much you can learn talking with someone who has a different perspective lol.

I am afraid that is not all though  He asked me other questions as well, I may as well just quote them word-for-word, everyone here seems really knowledgable on Sikhism, so I trust that the answers I get will be genuine.

1) 





> "Speaking of which, isn't Nanak emerging from a Lake in which he supposedly was commissioned in the "waheGuru's court" a sort of Miracle?
> 
> Without believing in such said miracle, you are stripping the authority (as you claimed earlier this was his claim to fame) away from Nanak."


 
Okay so obviously the first part about the "miracle" has been answered. But what about the second part? This person in particular is a Muslim (I am also spending some time studying Islam, so am conversing with Muslims as well). So you could say that his thinking is very "Abrahamic". Muhammad claims to have gotten revelations from the angel Gabriel, that is why he is an authority figure for Muslims. Christians believe Jesus to be the actual Son of God, that is why he is an authority figure for them. Jews believe Moses to have gotten direct revelations from the (Abrahamic) God, that is why he is an authority figure for them. In each case, the "prophet" has laid claim to some sort of communication with a divine source, LITERAL communication, like words were actually exchanged.

After reading through this thread, I have come to realize that this is not the case in Sikhi. Guru Nanak Ji, it would seem, did not actually claim to have "communicated" with God, at least not in the way most people understand "communication" to mean. Instead, it sounds more like Sikhism is his own personal opinion, after having been exposed to a multitude of different belief systems, after being witness to the chaos of the world around him due to the Mughal invasions, after seeing the damage hypocrisy does to society and people, he set out to live an honest life, do good for others, and instead of using religion as a means to divide people, he wanted to use it to unite people. Instead of making God an angry old man in the sky, he taught people to see God in all, that we are all the same, that we should treat others the way we would treat the Lord himself. Is this correct?

If so, what exactly makes him an authority figure? In other words, if Sikhi is his (Guru Nanak Ji's) opinion of the best way to do things, how do I explain to an Abrahamic, someone who believes that only those in direct communion with the divine should be trusted, that it is logical and rational to live my entire life according to the opinions of a man, a very humble and wise man, but ultimately a man who did not claim to have spoken to anything supernatural?

2) And his other question: 



> "What differentiates the Guru Granth from a book like the Communist Manefesto? (Other than the fact the Communist Manifesto has less authors and has had more of an impact on the world)."


 
Sort of ties in with the above. If Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a manifestation of the *opinion* of the 10 Gurus and other devotees of the best way to live life, highlighting what is wrong in society and how it can be fixed, how is it different to the Communist Manifesto, which although I haven't read, also does seem to talk about what is wrong in the world and lays out solutions to fixing the issues.

3) And my own personal question that I do not believe has been answered yet: In certain parts of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it talks about having your deeds read out in the presence of the Lord of Dharma and also about how you will be _judged_ according to your actions. Examples:

ਸਲੋਕੁ ॥
सलोकु ॥
Salok.
Shalok:
ਪਵਣੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਪਾਣੀ ਪਿਤਾ ਮਾਤਾ ਧਰਤਿ ਮਹਤੁ ॥
पवणु गुरू पाणी पिता माता धरति महतु ॥
Pavaṇ gurū pāṇī piṯā māṯā ḏẖaraṯ mahaṯ.
Air is the Guru, Water is the Father, and Earth is the Great Mother of all.
ਦਿਵਸੁ ਰਾਤਿ ਦੁਇ ਦਾਈ ਦਾਇਆ ਖੇਲੈ ਸਗਲ ਜਗਤੁ ॥
दिवसु राति दुइ दाई दाइआ खेलै सगल जगतु ॥
Ḏivas rāṯ ḏu▫e ḏā▫ī ḏā▫i▫ā kẖelai sagal jagaṯ.
Day and night are the two nurses, in whose lap all the world is at play.
ਚੰਗਿਆਈਆ ਬੁਰਿਆਈਆ ਵਾਚੈ ਧਰਮੁ ਹਦੂਰਿ ॥
चंगिआईआ बुरिआईआ वाचै धरमु हदूरि ॥
Cẖang▫ā▫ī▫ā buri▫ā▫ī▫ā vācẖai ḏẖaram haḏūr.
*Good deeds and bad deeds-the record is read out in the Presence of the Lord of Dharma.*
ਕਰਮੀ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣੀ ਕੇ ਨੇੜੈ ਕੇ ਦੂਰਿ ॥
करमी आपो आपणी के नेड़ै के दूरि ॥
Karmī āpo āpṇī ke neṛai ke ḏūr.
According to their own actions, some are drawn closer, and some are driven farther away.
ਜਿਨੀ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਗਏ ਮਸਕਤਿ ਘਾਲਿ ॥
जिनी नामु धिआइआ गए मसकति घालि ॥
Jinī nām ḏẖi▫ā▫i▫ā ga▫e maskaṯ gẖāl.
Those who have meditated on the Naam, the Name of the Lord, and departed after having worked by the sweat of their brows -
ਨਾਨਕ ਤੇ ਮੁਖ ਉਜਲੇ ਕੇਤੀ ਛੁਟੀ ਨਾਲਿ ॥੧॥
नानक ते मुख उजले केती छुटी नालि ॥१॥
Nānak ṯe mukẖ ujle keṯī cẖẖutī nāl. ||1||
O Nanak, their faces are radiant in the Court of the Lord, and many are saved along with them! ||1||


And also:

ਰਾਤੀ ਰੁਤੀ ਥਿਤੀ ਵਾਰ ॥
राती रुती थिती वार ॥
Rāṯī ruṯī thiṯī vār.
Nights, days, weeks and seasons;
ਪਵਣ ਪਾਣੀ ਅਗਨੀ ਪਾਤਾਲ ॥
पवण पाणी अगनी पाताल ॥
Pavaṇ pāṇī agnī pāṯāl.
wind, water, fire and the nether regions -
ਤਿਸੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਧਰਤੀ ਥਾਪਿ ਰਖੀ ਧਰਮ ਸਾਲ ॥
तिसु विचि धरती थापि रखी धरम साल ॥
Ŧis vicẖ ḏẖarṯī thāp rakẖī ḏẖaram sāl.
in the midst of these, He established the earth as a home for Dharma.
ਤਿਸੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਜੀਅ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਕੇ ਰੰਗ ॥
तिसु विचि जीअ जुगति के रंग ॥
Ŧis vicẖ jī▫a jugaṯ ke rang.
Upon it, He placed the various species of beings.
ਤਿਨ ਕੇ ਨਾਮ ਅਨੇਕ ਅਨੰਤ ॥
तिन के नाम अनेक अनंत ॥
Ŧin ke nām anek ananṯ.
Their names are uncounted and endless.
ਕਰਮੀ ਕਰਮੀ ਹੋਇ ਵੀਚਾਰੁ ॥
करमी करमी होइ वीचारु ॥
Karmī karmī ho▫e vīcẖār.
*By their deeds and their actions, they shall be judged.*
ਸਚਾ ਆਪਿ ਸਚਾ ਦਰਬਾਰੁ ॥
सचा आपि सचा दरबारु ॥
Sacẖā āp sacẖā ḏarbār.
God Himself is True, and True is His Court.
ਤਿਥੈ ਸੋਹਨਿ ਪੰਚ ਪਰਵਾਣੁ ॥
तिथै सोहनि पंच परवाणु ॥
Ŧithai sohan pancẖ parvāṇ.
There, in perfect grace and ease, sit the self-elect, the self-realized Saints.
ਨਦਰੀ ਕਰਮਿ ਪਵੈ ਨੀਸਾਣੁ ॥
नदरी करमि पवै नीसाणु ॥
Naḏrī karam pavai nīsāṇ.
They receive the Mark of Grace from the Merciful Lord.
ਕਚ ਪਕਾਈ ਓਥੈ ਪਾਇ ॥
कच पकाई ओथै पाइ ॥
Kacẖ pakā▫ī othai pā▫e.
The ripe and the unripe, the good and the bad, shall there be judged.
ਨਾਨਕ ਗਇਆ ਜਾਪੈ ਜਾਇ ॥੩੪॥
नानक गइआ जापै जाइ ॥३४॥
Nānak ga▫i▫ā jāpai jā▫e. ||34||
O Nanak, when you go home, you will see this. ||34||


Seeing as Sikhi rejects the concepts of heaven/hell/reincarnation, and no one is going to "judge" you when you die, and there is no 'record" of your deeds since Sikhi (as per my understanding) also rejects the concept of sin, how exactly do you reconcile those beliefs with what is being said in the Shabads above? How are "the record is read out in the presence of the Lord of Dharma" and "by their deeds and their actions, they shall be *judged*", how does that somehow apply to THIS life?

I hope I haven't caused any offence, that wasn't my intention, I am just trying to figure all this out, as I am currently not educated enough on Sikhi to be able to answer these questions on my own.

Regards,

ExploringSikhi.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 14, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji

Rather than causing offense, I believe you have started a thread that took on a life of its own. 

:welcome: I cannot tell you how much I have learned both from having to think carefully about my own understanding and from the responses of other members. This btw is what should happen in Sikhi: there are no clergy and the pursuit of dialog about the very issues you have raised is central to growing and learning. 

To be able to stimulate this level of conversation has been your gift to me. Now I await replies to your continuing questions.


----------



## harmanpreet singh (Aug 15, 2013)

> ExploringSikhi;
> 
> If so, what exactly makes him an authority figure? In other words, if Sikhi is his (Guru Nanak Ji's) opinion of the best way to do things, , that it is logical and rational to live my entire life according to the opinions of a man, a very humble and wise man, but ultimately a man who did not claim to have spoken to anything supernatural?


Sat sri akaal Exploringsikhi ji ,

for me Guru Nanak is authority bcoz i feel satisfied  on living accordings to his words . 



> how do I explain to an Abrahamic, someone who believes that only those in direct communion with the divine should be trusted


Sikhis view of God unlike Abrahmic is Pan(en)thiestic . Mixing Abrahmic thought with Sikhi is causing confusion here . realization of Self is realization of GOD in Sikhi .
ਘਰਿ  ਹੋਦਾ  ਪੁਰਖੁ  ਨ  ਪਛਾਣਿਆ  ਅਭਿਮਾਨਿ  ਮੁਠੇ  ਅਹੰਕਾਰਿ  ॥ 
घरि होदा पुरखु न पछाणिआ अभिमानि मुठे अहंकारि ॥ 
Gẖar hoḏā purakẖ na pacẖẖāṇi▫ā abẖimān muṯẖe ahaŉkār. 
The Primal Being is within  their own home, but they do not recognize Him. They are plundered by  their egotistical pride and arrogance


moreover you can ask abrahmics "is their GOD shy, why HE gave message to Prophets thru some Angels or Jinns  but not directly  ?



> Sort of ties in with the above. If Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a manifestation of the *opinion* of the 10 Gurus and other devotees of the best way to live life, highlighting what is wrong in society and how it can be fixed, how is it different to the Communist Manifesto, which although I haven't read, also does seem to talk about what is wrong in the world and lays out solutions to fixing the issues


do communist believe in Soul and Oneness with  Supereme (Paramaatma )
?

.



> 3) And my own personal question that I do not believe has been answered yet: In certain parts of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it talks about having your deeds read out in the presence of the Lord of Dharma and also about how you will be _judged_ according to your actions. Examples:
> 
> ਸਲੋਕੁ ॥
> सलोकु ॥
> ...


Exploring Sikhi ji ,

here recording of our deeds simply mean we are responsible for our actions , we reap what we sow .just like touching an  electric wire one will experiance electric Shock .


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 15, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji

It is not easy for me to be concise. I think you are asking very complex questions. Though I wanted to write about dharma, instead I wrote this to respond to Question 1 and 2. Opinion may not be the best way to describe Guru Nanak's teachings.  



> opinion |əˈpinyən|
> noun
> a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge : I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance | that, in my opinion, is dead right.
> • the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing : the changing climate of opinion.
> ...


Many Sikhs liken Guru Nanak’s philosophy to science. I do not. However, Guru Nanak depended on a method of inquiry, not unlike inquiry used by scientists. He used observation, the perception of patterns, intelligent propositions (which could be compared to hypothesis testing). Instead of applying this method of  inquiry to the physical world, he applied it to the world of human suffering. Guru Nanak asked how patterns of moral and political bankruptcy could be responsible for that suffering. In all of Gurbani, in every shabad, Guru Nanak lays out a moral or ethical question, and answers using patterns of observation regarding pride, ego, attachment, greed, lust and anger. He suggests that these patterns lie behind the suffering inflicted on ordinary people, and also behind the suffering we inflict on ourselves. And then he discloses how being Gurmukh, turning one’s face to the Guru, is the way out of the traps humans have created. The authority of a scientific model and that of Guru Nanak are essentially the same. Does the message have internal consistency? Does it describe and explain a problem using observations and patterns from the reality before us in a way that rings true? Can we see how moral and ethical problems work?

So is this process of inquiry simply the making of opinion? Is Newton’s model of how gravity works an opinion? Is Guru Nanak’s philosophical model of how we find ourselves in spiritual distress and moral despair an opinion? Both Newton and Guru Nanak tried to make sense of real-world problems by analyzing the effects of unseen truths on the real world. 

In my opinion, the word “opinion” is used much too loosely. Opinions don’t make room for careful inquiry. Guru Nanak’s authority in part comes from his ability to apply his observations and analysis of the lives of people around him, and society and its suffering, to the larger questions of how to cope with the immorality of power and how to live ones' own moral life. For some of us, Sikhs, the fact that Guru Nanak did not receive his insights from a “higher authority” is his strength. Following orders from on high, taking a message from an external authority, leads to obedience; neither morality nor ethics is about obedience. Morality and ethics require a reasoning mind. 


Guru Nanak stresses the importance of discernment or "bibek" throughout Shabad Guru to discover a higher moral truth and to live in a truthful way. My answer will be entirely unsatisfactory to anyone who believes that spiritual authority must be funneled to ordinary mortals from supernatural sources in order to be authoritative. Then Guru Nanak was not an ordinary man. 

There are at least 2 other ways to think about spiritual authority: 1) a greater force brings a spiritual teacher forward; 2) the validity of the message because the message is intelligible, it makes sense, to those who hear the message, and freely choose to follow it.

To the first point, Bhai Gurdas in varaan 1, pauree 23 says 

ਸੁਣੀ ਪੁਕਾਰਿ ਦਾਤਾਰ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਗ ਮਾਹਿ ਪਠਾਇਆ।
Sounee Poukaari Daataar Prabhu Guru Naanak Jag Maahi Patdaaiaa.

The benefactor Lord listened to the cries (of humanity) and sent Guru Nanak to this world.

And previously in pauree 22,  Bhai Gurdas describes the divine principle as one that is just, and seeing suffering in the world designed to help humanity restore the rightness of dharma through Guru Nanak.

To the second point. Was Guru Nanak’s teaching intelligible and did he connect with humanity?  Unlike the bhagats before him, one did not have to seek Guru Nanak out because he reached out in his pilgrimages. Unlike the Muslim overlords he never mandated submission to “the one true god.” He made himself and his ideas easy to access. He reasoned with people and they were attracted to a message that said anyone can make the vital connection with the satguru, that eternal truth which is the light that dispels darkness. He did not rebuke or speak of damnation; he spoke of God as a “raft” that would take each and everyone “over the terrifying world ocean” to a place of “sukh." To get there one had to live a moral life; one had to trust that devotion was the key to making that connection; one had to treat everyone else as a brother and sister in spirit. Bhai Gurdas describes how the message of Guru Nanak was affirmed by those who heard it. 
ਜਿਥੇ ਬਾਬਾ ਪੈਰ ਧਰਿ ਪੂਜਾ ਆਸਣੁ ਥਾਪਣਿ ਸੋਆ।
Jiday Baabaa Pairu Dharay Poojaa Aasanu Daapani Soaa.

Wherever Baba put his feet, a religious place was erected and established. 

ਸਿਧ ਆਸਣਿ ਸਭਿ ਜਗਤ ਦੇ ਨਾਨਕ ਆਦਿ ਮਤੇ ਜੇ ਕੋਆ।
Sidhaasani Sabhi Jagati Day Naanak Aadi Matay Jay Koaa.

All the siddh-places now have been renamed on the name of Nanak.

ਘਰਿ ਘਰਿ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਧਰਮਸਾਲ ਹੋਵੈ ਕੀਰਤਨੁ ਸਦਾ ਵਿਸੋਆ।
Ghari Ghari Andari Dharamasaal Hovai Keeratanu Sadaa Visoaa.

Every home has become a place of dharma where all are singing.

As long as this comment is, it is inadequate to the job. There is more to ask. Perhaps other members will help me and forgive my errors.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 15, 2013)

The "Fault" lies with the INTERPRETORS....those that wrote the FARIDKOTEE TEEKA..were seeing GURBANI through  heavily BHAVA COLOURED glasses....they SAW EVERYTHING IN ORANGE..for every "explanation" they went back to the Vedas, the Puranas etc...in the end they "concluded"..SGGS is nothing except a Simplified version of VEDAS. PERIOD. And Guur nanak ji is simply naother awtar of vishnu brahma ...another raam another krishan.period. Nothing new or revolutionary....

The SECOND types are heavily influenced by the ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS..christain concepts of God, hell, heavens, original sin, punishment etc etc..They look for DharamRaaj angels of death and angels of deliverance and satan and devils and demons, they look for rivers of death to be crossed, etc etc..hence the terms LORD GOD etc etc..thrown in amply in their interpretitions. They have a pre- set notion that GOD is some oldie with a long beard, sitting on his throne somewhere in the sky, waving wands, torturing sending down plagues and thunderballs and speaking through lighted bushes that dont burn to ashes..

So when the read Darbar..they immediately get back to their pre conceived mental picture of God in beard seated on throne..blah blah blah..Panch Parvaan as Panch getting HONOURED as supposedly the prophets get it by being seated at His right hand or left hand side or blah blah..

What is the reality ?

The reality is GURU NANAK JI is ENTIRELY SOMETHING BRAND NEW---latest GYAAN. No hocus pocus, no burning bushes, no Gabrielles flitting around on wings, no revelations via dreams ...no demanding sacrifices of the beloved SON and then releasing the son and feeling ok with a lamb instead...JAISEE MEHN AVEH KHASAM KI BANI>>TESRRA KARIN GYAAN ve LALO....As I RECEIVE my HUSBANDS COMMANDS..I DELIVER !! the GYAAN..the KNOWLEDGE >>>   DIRECT.

This GYAAN is NOT for the "hereafter"..not for the Heavens or the Hells..not for the dharamraajs or angels or satans...the GYAAN IS FOR the HUMAN LIFE !! ON THIS EARTH...in THIS LIFE...in this HUMAN LANGUAGE...in human INK..on Human PAPER..in a Human BOOK. Its NOT for the cows or the buffaloes..its not for the dogs or "souls" in animal bodies !!!! Its NOT for "reincarnated parrots..or cats..whatever that means ?? Its NOT for those who JUST DIED ( Akhand paaths sehaj paaths, BHOGS and kiratn darbars for B{censored}es anniversaries are a WASTE in every way becasue the GURBANI is NOT for the DEAD - its for the LIVING. POSTMORTEMS should NOT be confused with MEDICAL PROCEDURES..one is for the DEAD..one for the LIVING. GURBANI is for the LIVING. Gurbani is NOt for those supposedly in heaven..or in hell..or reincarnated as dogs or wolves..THOSE concepts are for those wearing ORANGE GLASSES..they do beleive in bad persons being reborn as Dogs and wolves..and thus feeding saradhs is ok for them..BUT its NOT GURU Nank Jis WAY/GYAAN. GURBANI may be a PRISM..it makes WHITE LIGHT into a RAINBOW....BUT its NOT orange coloured glass/blue coloured glass/white coloured glass..GURBANI has NO COLOUR...so it has NOTHING shared with the Bible. the koran..the torah the vedas..whatever...SGGS stands ALONE !!!

1. *SAADH WITHIN*. Gurbani declares that the SAADH is WITHIN. This SAADH is the CREATOR....and HE is WITHIN. (Those wearing Orange glasses will see the "saadh" as the dehdharee holy man..sant/saint/etc etc who is ESSENTIAL in Brahminised religious thought BUT Totally IRRELEVANT in GURBANI. Thus the deras, snats, saadhs, etc will stress the VEDIC version because IF they DONT..they have no standing left..no LOCUS STANDI...they are "holy..they are saintly..they have people bowing to them, drinking their dirty water, left over foods etc..BECAUSE they MISINTERPRET Gurbani to POINT to themsleves instead of to the CREATOR.

2. PANCH - WITHIN.   We all have the PANCH...kaam krodh lobh moh hankaar INSIDE of US. We also ahve the SAADH inside of us. Where the SAADH resides is HIS "DARBAAR"..his "COURT"...and the PANCH are also in his court...inside of us...NOW IF..we through the GYAAN of GURBANI...manage to "CONTROL" these FIVE..( as opposed to them controlling us )..then the FIVE are "oarvaan..under control..and they are in hsi darbaar..inside of us...and IF these Panch are parvaan..in  ahuman being..He is a Perfect Human being...he has  anger Management, .. pride controlled,  lobh attachmnet..LIMITED...MOH is controleld...and thus when such a Human DIES..he LEAVES with a CLEAN FACE...he is in SACHI DARGAH..with a SACHA FACE. His LIFE was an OPEN BOOK..everyone is full of praise for him, his deeds are remembered..BY THE LIVING..the ones he left BEHIND...and the opposite is cursed by all and sundry..people spit on his grave..(Acts also done by the LIVING).

the Fundamental rule is GURBANI is a Brand NEW GYAAN..its fundamentals are WITHIN ITSELF. We have to approach it with a absolutely CLEAR HEAD...no preconceived notions borrowed form OTHERS. Then we can see the Pristine clarity of SGGS...its concepts, its vocabulary, its terminology, its philosophy..EVERY SINGLE THING is DIFFERENT. The GURU even went so far as to USE a different SCRIPT _GURMUKHI to write down GURBANI....although he had a choice of many already established scripts !! The Vocubalarya dn terminology used in Gurbani may seem the same as previously used..BUT when we look into it thoroughly we see that GURU uses the same words BUT with a GURMATT MEANING. This Gurmatt Meaning becomes clear if we bother to look INSIDE GURBANI ITSELF ratehr than jump to conclusions based on OUTSIDE USAGE of such words.  Apologies for a rather long post..i hope i make sense..


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 15, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji

In re-reading Harmanpreet Singh ji's reply to you I picked up your reference to the Communist manifesto. Karl Marx and Marxism in general asserts that the individual and her lot can be perfected by perfecting the environment. It is a proposal for a political and economic experiment. The goal is to relieve political and economic tyranny. I think we can see from Gyani ji's reply that Guru Nanak was tuned into something quite the reverse, and not any kind of experiment. Guru Nanak says we change the world when we change ourselves. When we change ourselves we change our environment. When we change ourselves we change the lot of everyone around us. We do it through gyaan - it by gyaan that we rid ourselves of the 5 evils by making an attachment to Waheguru.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 15, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji,

Guru Fateh and welcome to the forum.

You ask:



> Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak?



First, this seems like a half baked question. It makes little sense to me. Believe in what? His words, actions or both, or neither?

My question to you is:

Why should you?

Tejwant Singh


----------



## ExploringSikhi (Aug 15, 2013)

Tejwant Ji,

Sat Sri Akal. 

What I initially meant by "why should I believe Guru Nanak" was that throughout Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Guru Nanak downplays miracles and magic tricks. Obviously, it means he did not believe in them, nor did he perform them. But then the story of how he became Guru sounded very much like a miracle story, so I wanted to know why I should believe it, if he did not believe in miracles, why is he asking me to believe in one?

Now that has already been answered. I guess now what I mean by "Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak" is that, if by using his powers of observation, Sikhi is Guru Nanak Ji's answer to the problems that the world faces, why should I not believe that perhaps someone else out there has also asked themself these questions and come up with  better answers? Why should I not use my own powers of observation and come to my own conclusions about the best way to live my life, instead of relying on someone else?

I have just started to read the answers I got to my previous post and will reply back later after I have finished reading them and have had time to gather my thoughts.

Thank you everyone,

Take care


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 16, 2013)

ExploringSikhi ji

If the only thing you are selecting from my longish comment is Guru Nanak's "using his powers of observation" then you have missed 99 percent of what I said. We all have  powers of observation. Everyone in Newton's day observed that apples fall from the tree limb to the ground. He was the only one who explained the apple's fall as a scientific law. Many in Guru Nanak's day also observed political, economic and religious tyranny. If blogs on the Internet existed in those days, I am certain they would be buzzing with solutions -- assuming the bloggers did not run afoul of their Mughal overlords. Assuming they did not end up sewn up into the fresh butchered hides of pigs, thrown onto the back of a mule, and paraded about town in the blazing sun until the hide dried tight about their bodies, slowly suffocating those precocious bloggers to death. 

Guru Nanak was more than a little different from the average guy with an informed opinion based on his observations. Please tell your Muslim friend who is plying you with questions. Guru Nanak was looking at entrenched misery and the entrenched social structures he believed caused them,  including but not limited to Muslim invaders who sucked India dry for centuries, and their brahmin cronies whom they needed to weaken the locals by continuous economic and spiritual subjugation. 

Newton demonstrated a law of gravity.  Nanak discovered some "laws" too! One of them was (PLUNDER + RUTHLESSNESS) x (MORAL BANKRUPTCY + RELIGIOUS SELF-INTEREST) = DE-MORAL-IZATION. Guru Nanak, like Newton, explained  when others did not (excepting a few Sufs who were put to the sword). Guru Nanak also proposed that rituals and sacrifice and the cleansing of karma kept the brahmins rich and the Muslims at ease, and did nothing to RE-MORAL-IZE anyone. After diagnosing the problem he went on to propose a cure. The diagnosis came from his intellect; the cure came from the SAT.

Opinion and observation will take one only so far. Guru Nanak turned inquiry and genius into something we can apply to solve moral malfunctioning and rid us of our suffering. Sri Guru Granth Sahib is both the diagnostic manual and the prescription for change. It has sustained us  through centuries of genocide and misfortune. That is pretty good work.

Can you do that? I can't. Also, holding off on talk of dharma. Don't have that much time to spend on it if we are running up against a da'wah. Hope not!


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Aug 16, 2013)

what reason or logic is there in   "i beleive" ......because so and so walked on water..so and so had angel visit him in his bedroom..and dictated to him even though the said person was illeterate and didnt know how to write a single alphabet..and DID NOT IN FACT WRITE ANYTHING DOWN HIMSELF....you simply have to "believe" because he said so..and because many millions do....just as many millions still gather at hardwar to send water to the Sun so that their dead ancestors can have a SIP !! Why ? Because they also "believe"

Guru Nanak ji NEVER asked/requested...anyone to "beleive"...He simply related what He experienced..He never asked anyone NOT to believe either..thats the FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE between Gurmatt and all others...the FACTOR OF VOLUNTARY CHOICE. NONE give this CHOICE..its either YOU are WITH ME or AGAINST ME types.:japosatnamwaheguru:


----------



## arshdeep88 (Aug 16, 2013)

Where there is unconditional love and faith there is no questioning brother.
For me the answer lies in the life of Bhai Lehna Ji who transformed into Guru Angad Dev Ji.


----------



## harcharanjitsinghdhillon (Aug 16, 2013)

sat sri akal first please understand sri guru granth are revealations from creator without the help of anything inbetween example angels.. if you read the muslim scriptures their founder brought down the revealations thru a journey.. in sikhism this journey was not stated because from the point of sikhism, journey is taking place because the mind is still there not surrendered yet completely.. for example when you a travelling in a train, you will see the outside scenes are moving.. you think the outside is moving, actually it is the mind in the train moving forward. so in sikhism we are talking more on surrendering the whole mind thru meditation with the help of a satguru. this is the reasons why guru nanak disappeared, he did not mention of any journeys.. first ego and god cannot coexist together, and with the help of ego or haumai you cannot bring down true revealations.. so ego must be surrendered completely.. mind is the idiot which reassemble the ego.. so when mind is completely surrendered our true spirit will manifest.. this is who we are, but not the ego..yes no reincarnation in sikhism but it is transmigration of souls


----------



## findingmyway (Aug 17, 2013)

ExploringSikhi said:


> I have been researching Sikhism for a while now and am enjoying it very much. It is rational, does not require me to believe in superstitions, and the Guru Granth Sahib emphasizes living this life to the fullest without worrying so much about the next. It is nice and I like it.



Then use the lessons as your litmus test. Whenever you hear a story, measure how it matches up with Gurbani. If the story does not fit in with the teachings of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji then discard the story. Only Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is important. I urge you to explore and contribute to the Shabad of the Week and Gurmat Vichaar sections of the site as that is where you will learn the true meaning of Sikhi.




> There is just one problem. As I understand it, Guru Nanak rejected miracles and claims of supernatural abilities. The thing that stumps me though is the story about how Guru Nanak was granted Guruship- going missing in a lake for 3 days, coming out, saying 'there is no Hindu, no Muslim", reciting the mool mantar etc... Sikhs proclaim that Guru Nanak was summoned in the court of God and awarded Guruship by Waheguru Himself. Is this not a miracle? Is it not superstitious/asking me to believe something that can't be proven?





> If so, what exactly makes him an authority figure? In other words, if  Sikhi is his (Guru Nanak Ji's) opinion of the best way to do things, how  do I explain to an Abrahamic, someone who believes that only those in  direct communion with the divine should be trusted, that it is logical  and rational to live my entire life according to the opinions of a man, a  very humble and wise man, but ultimately a man who did not claim to  have spoken to anything supernatural?





> I guess now what I mean by "Why Should I Believe Guru Nanak" is that, if  by using his powers of observation, Sikhi is Guru Nanak Ji's answer to  the problems that the world faces, why should I not believe that perhaps  someone else out there has also asked themself these questions and come  up with  better answers? Why should I not use my own powers of  observation and come to my own conclusions about the best way to live my  life, instead of relying on someone else?





> 3) Kind of ties in with the above, but Guru Nanak sometimes talks about  spreading God's message. This implies that it was given to Him by God,  which implies that God does interfere in human life. Sikhism emphasizes  the life of the householder, that it is possible for ordinary people to  realize God, that you don't need mediators. Why then was this message  given to the Gurus and a select few other people? If I live an honest  life, will God also communicate with me and give me the message? Also,  what then about the messengers of Islam/Judaism/Christianity etc... did  they too get the message from God, or were they fakes?


All the above thoughts are interlinked and have largely been answered by Gyani ji and Spnadmin ji's expert observations as well as others. The sakhis are largely manufactured and are unimportant. Focus your attention on Gurbani and the more of this gem you will explore, the more you realise how amazing the message is. Implementing the teachings in your life is another matter and a very personal one but with teh help of sangat!! 

Why do we go to school? Why not just learn by ourselves? It is to benefit from the wisdom and experience that teachers can share with us. This is the same case as learning from our Guruji. The learning process is very individual but we all need help. Even Guru ji did not learn alone, but drew on the strength and wisdom of those around him, including his supportive sister Bibi Nanaki.

The only authority you need is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and anyone who studies it, is awed by its wisdom and insight. What more authority do we need? I do believe in miracles - the miracle of people who are able to do the right thing in the face of adversity, the miracle of human strength, the miracle of some people who are able to remain in chardi kala despite the odds, the miracle of how all life works together, the miracle of a waterfall or the sunset and the miracle of finding SPN sangat at a time in my life when I was desperately spiritually alone. Whether you follow Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is your choice, whether you become a Sikh is your choice, the authortiy you choose is your choice. My only advice is to use your bibek buddhi, your discerning intellect to find the right path for you. Guru ji also believed in the miracle of the human spirit, which is why he empowered the common man with the pearls of Gurbani, unlike the Brahmins who insisted only they had this power.




> Furthermore, I thought that Waheguru was omnipresent, how could Guru Nanak be summoned in the court of God if Sikhism rejects reincarnation/heaven/hell i.e. there is no court, the Abrahamic faiths proclaim a court of God because they believe in the day of judgement, but Sikhism doesn't, so was it a figure of speech?





> 3) And my own personal question that I do not believe has been answered  yet: In certain parts of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it talks about having  your deeds read out in the presence of the Lord of Dharma and also about  how you will be _judged_ according to your actions. Examples:


Ik Oankaar is in each and every one of us. When I am rude to someone or about someone, I judge myself and feel terrible. I die a spiritual death as I judge myself negatively and move away from a Gursikh ideal. When I am kind to another being, I feel more connected and closer to being a Gurmukh. I judge myself positively and am closer to spiritual life. This is the rue judgement.



> Other than that, I also have a question about Guru Granth Sahib. The way I understand it, the Adi Granth was compiled by Guru Arjan Dev, he included his work and the work of the 4 previous Gurus, as well as devotees such as Bhagat Kabir. Between that time and when Guru Gobind Singh added further hymns to the text, what guarantee is there that nothing additional had been added, that it was not changed/unpurified? After that, how do Sikhs know for sure that the Guru Granth Sahib has not been changed since the time of Guru Gobind Singh?


There is a locking system in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The numbers and system of it being set out ensure it cannot be tampered without being noticed. I think the system is covered in one of the attachements from Spnadmin ji earlier in the thread.


----------



## ExploringSikhi (Aug 21, 2013)

Thank you for posting everyone!

@spnadmin ji, thank you for clearing up what you meant, it makes a lot more sense after your last post above. Sorry I did not reply sooner, I have been busy with University registration and shopping for supplies :winkingmunda:





harcharanjitsinghdhillon said:


> *sat sri akal first please understand sri guru granth are revealations from creator without the help of anything inbetween example angels*.. if you read the muslim scriptures their founder brought down the revealations thru a journey.. in sikhism this journey was not stated because from the point of sikhism, journey is taking place because the mind is still there not surrendered yet completely.. for example when you a travelling in a train, you will see the outside scenes are moving.. you think the outside is moving, actually it is the mind in the train moving forward. so in sikhism we are talking more on surrendering the whole mind thru meditation with the help of a satguru. this is the reasons why guru nanak disappeared, he did not mention of any journeys.. first ego and god cannot coexist together, and with the help of ego or haumai you cannot bring down true revealations.. so ego must be surrendered completely.. mind is the idiot which reassemble the ego.. so when mind is completely surrendered our true spirit will manifest.. this is who we are, but not the ego..yes no reincarnation in sikhism but it is transmigration of souls


 
That being said, it is things like the bold part above that tend to confuse me, it (bold part above) sounds like Guru Nanak ji was actually talking to God, the same way Moses talked to God as per Jewish teachings.

Which leads me to my next point, why is there so much disagreement among Sikhs when it comes to the interpretation of Guru Granth Sahib Ji? I do not believe Sikhi advocates reincarnation/heaven/hell because of the writings of Professor Baldev Singh, he is of the belief that it goes against Nanakian Philosophy. That being said, this is the only sangat I have ever been a part of that rejects the belief in reincarnation or some form of reward/punishment in the afterlife. Why is this? I was discussing this very issue with a few Sikhs last week and was branded a "heretic", someone even said I had been brainwashed and was not learning the true teachings of Sikhi. After reading Professor Baldev Singh's work, I guess I went through Guru Granth Sahib Ji with a bias and read every shabad in a way that would fit my preconceived notions of what the Gurus were trying to say. I always read it in a way so that reincarnation/heaven/hell applied to this life, and not the next. And it wasn't just a one time thing either, I have been told multiple times by Sikhs in the past that my beliefs about Sikhi were wrong, that they were too "Atheistic", that I was changing Sikhi and had strayed from the message of the Gurus.

So, pretty much, how do you guys know that your "version" of Sikhi is right, so far Professor Baldev Singh is the only "scholar" I have come across who would agree with the members of SPN about miracles/reincarnation/heaven/hell, everyone else would disagree, and the Sikhs I know in real life would disagree.

And perhaps it is a discussion for another day, but really quick without getting into too much detail, what is the general SPN consensus on the Dasam Granth? Some Sikh told me about how there is something in there about Guru Gobind Singh Ji being the reincarnation of Krishna, so do you think it has been changed? If you disregard it, what about Banis such as Japu Sahib, isn't that something Sikhs are supposed to read on a daily-basis? So do the practicing Sikhs of SPN who think Dasam Granth was changed also not recite Japu Sahib?

Thank you and Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## aristotle (Aug 22, 2013)

> o far Professor Baldev Singh
> is the only "scholar" I have come across who would
> agree with the members of SPN about miracles/
> reincarnation/heaven/hell, everyone else would
> ...


I haven't come across Prof Baldev Singh's works and I wouldn't be able to comment on him or his philosophy.
But yes, apparently he isn't the only one reinforcing the ideals of Sikhism in this regard. Try reading the works of Harinder Singh Mehboob, Harjinder Singh Dilgeer, Karam Singh Historian, Prof Sahib Singh and the likes(you can always research more, these are just the authors I have came across, this isn't a definitive list).


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 22, 2013)

Exploring Sikhi ji

I just sent you a pm pleading exhaustion this evening. But I am so appreciative of aristotle ji  for providing you with this list. Of particular note on that list are Karam Singh and Harjinder Sigh Dilgeer. Baldev Singh is really one of the frontiersmen to write in English extensively, and concurrently with the Internet, making his ideas more widely available. As I said in my pm, I will hopefully do a better job later on.


----------



## Luckysingh (Aug 22, 2013)

Not all members deny reincarnation and karma, although most are certain about no existence of heaven and hell realms.
Some of us respect the writings in dasam bani and are influenced by them and some are certain that they are all fabricated.
Same goes for simran and meditation because some believe it is a waste of time and just parroting whereas some of us can't find a better tool for self development.

So don't get the wrong idea that SPN has the same kind of general views which others label as 'missionary'.


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 22, 2013)

> Some of us respect the writings in dasam bani and are influenced by them and some are certain that they are all fabricated.



I think it is a given that the DG contains valid writings, I think some of us recoil at the thought that such gems are forced to live next door to the titulation and Vedic sex manuals, however, if truth can be obtained from a heavy metal track, and if one can be influenced by such, and it is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then who cares?



> Same goes for simran and meditation because some believe it is a waste  of time and just parroting whereas some of us can't find a better tool  for self development.



I do not think there is anything wrong with simran or meditation, provided it is used as one of many tools, and not a sole method of connection.

The danger of course is the addiction to the feeling of escapism/bliss/contentment, and a bigger danger is the equation that connection is this feeling, when in my view, connection involves actions as well as thoughts. 

For those that find the balance, Luckyji, and I think you are one of them, it can be a useful tool


----------



## findingmyway (Aug 22, 2013)

ExploringSikhi said:


> Which leads me to my next point, why is there so much disagreement among Sikhs when it comes to the interpretation of Guru Granth Sahib Ji? I do not believe Sikhi advocates reincarnation/heaven/hell because of the writings of Professor Baldev Singh, he is of the belief that it goes against Nanakian Philosophy. That being said, this is the only sangat I have ever been a part of that rejects the belief in reincarnation or some form of reward/punishment in the afterlife. Why is this? I was discussing this very issue with a few Sikhs last week and was branded a "heretic", someone even said I had been brainwashed and was not learning the true teachings of Sikhi. After reading Professor Baldev Singh's work, I guess I went through Guru Granth Sahib Ji with a bias and read every shabad in a way that would fit my preconceived notions of what the Gurus were trying to say. I always read it in a way so that reincarnation/heaven/hell applied to this life, and not the next. And it wasn't just a one time thing either, I have been told multiple times by Sikhs in the past that my beliefs about Sikhi were wrong, that they were too "Atheistic", that I was changing Sikhi and had strayed from the message of the Gurus.
> 
> So, pretty much, how do you guys know that your "version" of Sikhi is right, so far Professor Baldev Singh is the only "scholar" I have come across who would agree with the members of SPN about miracles/reincarnation/heaven/hell, everyone else would disagree, and the Sikhs I know in real life would disagree.


 
I come to my own conclusions after studying Gurbani. In my research work I would never take  what another researcher says at face value. We meet, discuss findings, look at source documents, critically analyse findings, and assess how well this fits in with what is already known.

When I study Gurbani, I employ a similar approach. I analyse and try to understand in the context of other shabads I know. Sikhi is very pragamatic and grounded in the real world so it should make sense and not require blind faith. Most people (in my experience) who preach that you MUST believe in reincarnation have a superficial understanding of SGGS or are very influenced by Hindu teachings. This influence has come from the time after Guru Gobind Singh Ji was assassinated and the Sikhs at the time were hiding in the forests until the right time to fight. The Gurdwaras were taken over by Brahmins and our history has been infiltrated since. Brahmins are threatened by Sikhs as our philosophy challenges their supremacy.

Sikhi should be a personal journey without judgement of others. Work on understanding and exploring for yourself. Constantly learn, unlearn and relearn as Tejwant ji so well explains!



> And perhaps it is a discussion for another day, but really quick without getting into too much detail, what is the general SPN consensus on the Dasam Granth? Some Sikh told me about how there is something in there about Guru Gobind Singh Ji being the reincarnation of Krishna, so do you think it has been changed? If you disregard it, what about Banis such as Japu Sahib, isn't that something Sikhs are supposed to read on a daily-basis? So do the practicing Sikhs of SPN who think Dasam Granth was changed also not recite Japu Sahib?



This is a topic that has been discussed extensively. There is a whole sub-forum on the topic!! Please take time to explore and investigate for yourself adn come to your own conclusions. Sikhi teaches us to think for ourselves! The search box at the top of the page is a brilliant resource for specific questions-one I use frequently! The second part of your question was discussed in a thread recently started by Ishna ji. See you in the DG section!!


----------



## harmanpreet singh (Aug 23, 2013)

ExploringSikhi said:


> Which leads me to my next point, why is there so much disagreement among Sikhs when it comes to the interpretation of Guru Granth Sahib Ji? I do not believe Sikhi advocates reincarnation/heaven/hell because of the writings of Professor Baldev Singh, he is of the belief that it goes against Nanakian Philosophy. That being said, this is the only sangat I have ever been a part of that rejects the belief in reincarnation or some form of reward/punishment in the afterlife. Why is this? I was discussing this very issue with a few Sikhs last week and was branded a "heretic", someone even said I had been brainwashed and was not learning the true teachings of Sikhi. After reading Professor Baldev Singh's work, I guess I went through Guru Granth Sahib Ji with a bias and read every shabad in a way that would fit my preconceived notions of what the Gurus were trying to say. I always read it in a way so that reincarnation/heaven/hell applied to this life, and not the next. And it wasn't just a one time thing either, I have been told multiple times by Sikhs in the past that my beliefs about Sikhi were wrong, that they were too "Atheistic", that I was changing Sikhi and had strayed from the message of the Gurus.
> 
> So, pretty much, how do you guys know that your "version" of Sikhi is right, so far Professor Baldev Singh is the only "scholar" I have come across who would agree with the members of SPN about miracles/reincarnation/heaven/hell, everyone else would disagree, and the Sikhs I know in real life would disagree.
> 
> ...



hi Exploring Sikhi ji 

ya ,only at SPN you will find  members denying death/birth Cycle mentioned in Gurubani .

very recently i started a thread related to Sikhi After life ,you can have a look at it 
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/41257-sikhi-after-life.html


blessings


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 23, 2013)

harmanpreet singh said:


> hi Exploring Sikhi ji
> 
> ya ,only at SPN you will find  members denying death/birth Cycle mentioned in Gurubani .
> 
> ...



I also deny Goblins, demons, ghosts all of which are mentioned in Gurbani, a mention in Gurbani does not automatically mean whatever is mentioned exists, one needs to read what Gurbani states relevant to the mentioned word.


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 23, 2013)

Not exactly true that one finds a different take on reincarnation at SPN only!

Let me elaborate in a few different ways. 

*The word "deny" gives the wrong impression of SPN. Some members deny; some question; some believe. *

A wide range of views is presented here. The difference is that at SPN, no matter where you stand on the reincarnation question,* it is expected and encouraged that you explain yourself, preferably with reference to ShabadGuru.* Other sites squelch the opposition; and some sites are content with the idea that personal opinion is a substitute for Shabad Guru. 

No matter what your view you will not be called a "chand" or a "lal" or an apostate. *You may leave in a huff because you can't take the heat. But you will leave walking on your own feet.*

There are other sites that question reincarnation. This is probably the only English language site that allows for questions of reincarnation. For that reason alone it makes it seem as if SPN is somehow an oddball site. SPN provides views that may not be available to English only speakers.

Please always keep in mind that the majority opinion is not by default the correct opinion. A majority can be totally wrong, as often it has been in the realm of science. A majority can also be correct in their views about the soul after death. There is no telling.

 It is truly striking that about 1/4 of the people in the US believe in reincarnation. Yet, a majority are Christians, and reincarnation is absolutely rejected by Christian religions. A majority of Christians believe the soul travels to heaven or hell, even when many important Christian theologians question heaven and hell.

People believe what feels good in the tummy, even when we really do not know. Opinions can be informed or uninformed. Important for us all is to have a variety of resources so we can decide for ourselves.


----------



## harmanpreet singh (Aug 24, 2013)

aristotle said:


> Try reading the works of Harinder Singh Mehboob, Harjinder Singh Dilgeer, Karam Singh Historian, Prof Sahib Singh and the likes(you can always research more, these are just the authors I have came across, this isn't a definitive list).




sat sri akaal aristotle  ji

i don't know abt others ,but i have objection over including  Prof Sahib Singh ji  in your list, just to give en example i m quoting from Guru Granth Darpan by him 



> ਸੋਰਠਿ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ ਤੂ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਦਾਤਾ ਦਾਨਿ ਮਤਿ  ਪੂਰਾ ਹਮ ਥਾਰੇ ਭੇਖਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ ॥ ਮੈ ਕਿਆ ਮਾਗਉ ਕਿਛੁ ਥਿਰੁ ਨ ਰਹਾਈ ਹਰਿ ਦੀਜੈ ਨਾਮੁ  ਪਿਆਰੀ ਜੀਉ  ॥੧॥ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਰਵਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਬਨਵਾਰੀ ॥ ਜਲਿ  ਥਲਿ ਮਹੀਅਲਿ ਗੁਪਤੋ ਵਰਤੈ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦੀ ਦੇਖਿ ਨਿਹਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਮਰਤ ਪਇਆਲ  ਅਕਾਸੁ ਦਿਖਾਇਓ ਗੁਰਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਧਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ ॥ ਸੋ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਅਜੋਨੀ ਹੈ ਭੀ ਹੋਨੀ ਘਟ  ਭੀਤਰਿ ਦੇਖੁ ਮੁਰਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥* ਜਨਮ  ਮਰਨ ਕਉ ਇਹੁ ਜਗੁ ਬਪੁੜੋ ਇਨਿ ਦੂਜੈ ਭਗਤਿ ਵਿਸਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ *॥ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਮਿਲੈ ਤ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ  ਪਾਈਐ ਸਾਕਤ ਬਾਜੀ ਹਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ ॥੩॥ *ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਬੰਧਨ ਤੋੜਿ ਨਿਰਾਰੇ ਬਹੁੜਿ ਨ ਗਰਭ ਮਝਾਰੀ  ਜੀਉ* ॥ ਨਾਨਕ ਗਿਆਨ ਰਤਨੁ ਪਰਗਾਸਿਆ ਹਰਿ ਮਨਿ ਵਸਿਆ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੀ ਜੀਉ  ॥੪॥੮॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 597-598}
> 
> ਅਰਥ: ਹੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਜੀ! ਤੂੰ  ਸਾਨੂੰ ਸਭ ਪਦਾਰਥ ਦੇਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈਂ, ਦਾਤਾਂ ਦੇਣ ਵਿਚ ਤੂੰ ਕਦੇ ਖੁੰਝਦਾ  ਨਹੀਂ, ਅਸੀ ਤੇਰੇ (ਦਰ ਦੇ) ਮੰਗਤੇ ਹਾਂ। ਮੈਂ ਤੈਥੋਂ ਕੇਹੜੀ ਸ਼ੈ  ਮੰਗਾਂ? ਕੋਈ ਸ਼ੈ ਸਦਾ ਟਿਕੀ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਨਹੀਂ।  (ਹਾਂ, ਤੇਰਾ ਨਾਮ ਸਦਾ-ਥਿਰ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈ) ਹੇ ਹਰੀ! ਮੈਨੂੰ ਆਪਣਾ ਨਾਮ ਦੇਹ, ਮੈਂ ਤੇਰੇ ਨਾਮ ਨੂੰ ਪਿਆਰ  ਕਰਾਂ।੧।
> ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਹਰੇਕ ਸਰੀਰ ਵਿਚ ਵਿਆਪਕ ਹੈ। ਪਾਣੀ ਵਿਚ ਧਰਤੀ ਵਿਚ, ਧਰਤੀ ਦੇ  ਉਪਰ ਆਕਾਸ਼ ਵਿਚ ਹਰ ਥਾਂ ਮੌਜੂਦ ਹੈ ਪਰ ਲੁਕਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ।  (ਹੇ ਮਨ!) ਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਦੀ ਰਾਹੀਂ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ  ਵੇਖ।ਰਹਾਉ।
> ...


m assuming you can read Gurmukhi "ਜਨਮ((birth) ਮਰਨ(death) ਦਾ(of)  ਗੇੜ (cycle)".



*ਬਹੁੜਿ(again) ਨ(no) ਗਰਭ (WOMB)ਮਝਾਰੀ(IN) .


*it simply means in english that attachment to maya leads to death-birth Cycle . and one without maya( ਨਿਰਲੇਪ) breaks this cycle of again being in the WOMB with the grace of Satguru .


same is translated by Bhai Manmohan Singh JI (below) AND Dr Sant singh ji Khalsa .


<table cellspacing="5"><tbody><tr></tr><tr><td>  ਜਨਮ  ਮਰਨ  ਕਉ  ਇਹੁ  ਜਗੁ  ਬਪੁੜੋ  ਇਨਿ  ਦੂਜੈ  ਭਗਤਿ  ਵਿਸਾਰੀ  ਜੀਉ  ॥ 
जनम मरन कउ इहु जगु बपुड़ो इनि दूजै भगति विसारी जीउ ॥ 
Janam maran ka▫o ih jag bapuṛo in ḏūjai bẖagaṯ visārī jī▫o. 
This wretched world is subject to birth and death and in another's love it has forgotten the Lord's meditation. 
   </td></tr> <tr><td>  ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ  ਮਿਲੈ  ਤ  ਗੁਰਮਤਿ  ਪਾਈਐ  ਸਾਕਤ  ਬਾਜੀ  ਹਾਰੀ  ਜੀਉ  ॥੩॥ 
सतिगुरु मिलै त गुरमति पाईऐ साकत बाजी हारी जीउ ॥३॥ 
Saṯgur milai ṯa gurmaṯ pā▫ī▫ai sākaṯ bājī hārī jī▫o. ||3|| 
When the True Guru is met, then is the Guru's wisdom obtained. The mammon-worshipper loses his life-game. 
   </td></tr> <tr><td>  ਸਤਿਗੁਰ  ਬੰਧਨ  ਤੋੜਿ  ਨਿਰਾਰੇ  ਬਹੁੜਿ  ਨ  ਗਰਭ  ਮਝਾਰੀ  ਜੀਉ  ॥ 
सतिगुर बंधन तोड़ि निरारे बहुड़ि न गरभ मझारी जीउ ॥ 
Saṯgur banḏẖan ṯoṛ nirāre bahuṛ na garabẖ majẖārī jī▫o. 
Snapping my bonds the True Guru has freed me, so I shall not be cast into the womb, again. 
   </td></tr> <tr><td>  ਨਾਨਕ  ਗਿਆਨ  ਰਤਨੁ  ਪਰਗਾਸਿਆ  ਹਰਿ  ਮਨਿ  ਵਸਿਆ  ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੀ  ਜੀਉ  ॥੪॥੮॥ 
नानक गिआन रतनु परगासिआ हरि मनि वसिआ निरंकारी जीउ ॥४॥८॥ 
Nānak gi▫ān raṯan pargāsi▫ā har man vasi▫ā nirankārī jī▫o. ||4||8|| 
Within me, O Nanak, is the light of he jewel of gnosis and the Formless Lord has taken abode within my mind.



http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=598&g=1&h=1&r=1&t=2&p=0&k=0&fb=0
 
  </td></tr></tbody></table>



if you have any other interpretation kindly share ..



harman


----------



## spnadmin (Aug 24, 2013)

When Professor Sahib Singh gives a translation, without offering his opinion of the meaning/meanings, it is tempting to make a verse mean what we want, or what a "majority" of our peers believe it means. It is hard to break away from the comfort of familiar traditions that surround us. Reincarnation is not a required belief or a "dogma" in Sikhism; there is flexibility on this point. 

I can remember a time not that long ago when the work of Professor Sahib Singh was ignored. The "majority" preferred the very brahminical translations and interpretations of other scholars. SPN from the beginning explored his work when he was ignored elsewhere on the net.

The advice of findingmyway ji makes a lot of  sense because it breaks away from the morass of majority opinion. Read several translations and then THINK about how the specific meaning of a specific word or line fits into a bigger pattern throughout the shabad and throughout Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. A narrow scope is not different from spending your entire life inside one room and trying to understand the world by looking from one window.

Examples abound here of how the translation of a single line changes completely when we see how a verse fits into an entire shabad. The difference can be dramatic when we see how a possible meaning changes against the backdrop of many shabads, or all of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. 

This advice will not suit anyone who needs to cling to "certainty" as in "I need to be completely convinced as to the total acceptability of what I am reading because if I am not certain then somehow my world of religious need and familiar belief, seen from that one room and its one window, will fall apart."

BTW where does the idea of "jewel of gnosis" come from? 

Nānak gi▫ān raṯan pargāsi▫ā har man vasi▫ā nirankārī jī▫o. ||4||8||
Within me, O Nanak, is the light of he jewel of gnosis and the Formless Lord has taken abode within my mind.

"gian" does not mean "Gnosis."

Gnosis is a construct from Graeco-Roman philosophy later grafted onto early Christian belief. Why would someone take it as a model translation of the original words? Why ignore the strangeness of this translation; yet quickly latch onto a meaning of reincarnation for other material in the text? See what I mean? Our eye falls where we find the safe and familiar, and then the mind follows. Ask questions !!!!!!!!!! Both "gnosis" and "reincarnation" may be wrong-headed and need to be questioned.


----------



## aristotle (Aug 24, 2013)

> sat sri akaal aristotle ji
> i don't know abt others ,but i have objection over
> including Prof Sahib Singh ji in your list, just to give en
> example i m quoting from Guru Granth Darpan by him


Singh Ji,
Prof. Sahib Singh has not claimed to have produced a 100 percent accurate translation of Guru Granth Sahib. In fact, Gurbani is so deep and enriching that no single interpretation or translation can be said to fully represent the text.
But few people, if any, can parallel the contribution of Prof Sahib Singh in apllying grammatical principles and scientific method to the understanding of Gurbani.
In my view, the Guru Granth Darpan is the closest to the best we have right now.


----------



## ExploringSikhi (Sep 20, 2013)

Dear all,

I wish to thank everyone who contributed in this thread, and apologize for leaving cold turkey. This thread deserves a conclusion, and I just wanted to say that I am very pleased with the answers I received, they were very logical, rational and I do not feel as if I am forced to believe something that cannot be proven.

I ended up getting more from this thread than I had initially expected, and I can only pin it down to the excellence of the members who participate on this forum, as well as the moderator and administrative team that makes sure everything continues to run smoothly. If I have any more questions in the future, I know where I will be asking them  And since this seems like such a cool place to hang out, perhaps I will stay and participate in other discussions, so I can learn more and contribute what I know lol.

Sat Sri Akal everyone!


----------

