# Is 'Wah-e-Guru' The Name Of God?



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

The term ‘wah’ is a typical Urdu and often-used form of exclamation of appreciation which is not dissimilar to ‘wow’ in English. ‘Wah-e-Guru’ is an expression that shows appreciation or praise for the guru and is comparable to ‘Jai Gurudev.’

The term Wah-e-Guru does not appear in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS). I repeat, IT DOES NOT OCCUR IN THE GRANTH SAHIB EVEN ONCE!! Its current use as a generic name for the Supreme Lord is a recent phenomenon and has no precedence in the SGGS.

‘So what!’ you may say. We have been using it for many years now and we are happy; it seems to work for us. That’s all that matters. 

Okay, but that’s a very sentimental answer and before you make up your mind, please read this article to the end.  

The SGGS lays great stress on the Name. Indeed, it goes on and on about the Name. Why? The reason is as such. According to the SGGS it is by associating with the Supreme Lord that one can gain liberation. By the way, that is why you pray. You are not I hope under the false illusion that you are praying for food on the table and a Mercedes in the car park. No, you are praying to attain liberation from the birth death cycle. Having established that, your next question will be, ‘how does one go about attaining liberation.’

The answer to that is the Name. The ‘Name’ is the ticket to heaven. Why so? Because, the Names of the Supreme Lord are considered non-different from the Supreme Lord himself. That means you can associate with the Lord by taking his Name, by chanting it, singing it, hearing it, and so on.  This process will gradually purify you and make you eligible for liberation. This is why one chants the Names of the Lord. In short, let it be understood that only the Supreme Lord is the 'scouring or cleansing' agent. Since He is not around to personally associate with, the next best thing is, associate with Him by chanting and hearing His Name. This is the ‘spiritual science’ that is repeated endlessly in the GS.  

Incidentally, 'repentance' as the Christians understand it, does not cleanse either. Saying or often repeating, ‘I am sorry for my sins’ does not lessen the burden of sins. Indeed, you can spend the whole day in church saying 'I am sorry' till you are blue in the face, but at the end of the day, you will still find all your sins waiting patiently for you by the blueberry bush near the cemetery.

Having established the science behind the often repeated instruction of taking the ‘Naam’ in the SGGS, let us examine the term Wah-e-Guru. Is it a bona fide name? Answer. No. Does not occur in the SGGS? No, not even once. Does it gain you liberation? No. Does it gain you anything? No. 

In short, Wah-e-Guru, while it may increase ones attachment to the guru, it cannot be said to have the spiritual cleansing potency of that a real Name of the Supreme such a 'Hari' is said to have. Chanting ‘Wah-e-Guru’ is not a bona fide means of cleansing and gains very little, and no committee's dictates or extensive use of this 'chant' by the populace will make it bona fide. It cannot be used instead of the bona fide Names of the Supreme Lord which Guru Nanak so lovingly uses. 

On the other hand, chanting the names of the Lord such as ‘Hari,’ ‘Ram,’ ‘Gopal’, ‘Govind’, ‘Murari’, ‘Jagdeesh’, ‘Mohan’ etc, all of which are repeatedly mentioned in the SGGS almost on every page and are indeed recommended by Guru Nanak, will gain you an eternity of happiness in the spiritual realm referred to as 'Baikunth' or spiritual world. It is to be understood to be a very real place that is said to exist outside the material cosmic manifestation.

To conclude, while the SGGS repeatedly emphasizes chanting the Name of the Lord, and is indeed the only sacred literature that makes such a song and dance about it, its modern-day followers, that is us, have rendered this sublime instruction entirely useless by stupidly substituting the name with an arbitrary term, one that has absolutely no spiritual potency what so ever. 
Wah-e-Guru is not the name of the Supreme Lord.  

If you want to make spiritual progress and go back to Baikunth, please chant the real names of the Supreme Lord such as ‘Hari,’ ‘Ram,’ ‘Gopal’, ‘Govind’, ‘Murari’, ‘Jagdeesh’, ‘Mohan’ or any other bona fide name mentioned in the SGGS instead of ‘Wah-e-Guru.’ 

Sat Sri Akal


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

Ummm I'm not so sure.  I mean WaheGuru is certianly not a name, and please do let me know if I have this wrong, but I understand it to translate into English as wondeours enlightener.

So yes Waheguru is not Gods name.  So what is? When I read 'Ik onkar Sat naam'

Literaly: 1 God, true name.

What do I get from it?

Well 1 God is easy, 1 God, God is 1, God is all.

What about true name?

Does it mean that Gods name is simply 'true', or perhaps even 'truth'?

No that is not what I get, although this word truth does hit a chord.  When we name something we define it, so Sat Naam.  Is telling me that this thing that we name God, or Ram, or Hari, or even YHVH, Or Odinn, Or Allah , indeed any other name for God that you have ever heard is the only absolute truth.

If God is all and the only absolute truth then we can call God anything, as there is not one single word that is not God, there is not one single part of teh creation that is not God.

Akal Purkh Ji, we can even use your own name and mean God.  It is not the words we use it is the intent that is important.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

You say: [I mean WaheGuru is certainly not a name, and please do let me know if I have this wrong, but I understand it to translate into English as wondeours enlightener.]


Wah-e-guru does not translate to 'wondrous enlightener.' Its Urdu for 'Wow, what a guru.' I can assure you of that. Now, I have heard some pretty convoluted explanations too myself, wherein the ' w' stands for this 'ah' stands for that, and so on. But thats all imagination on magic mushrooms or something.


You say: [Akal Purkh Ji, we can even use your own name and mean God.  It is not the words we use it is the intent that is important.]

'Intent' is what we bring to the table, I agree and therefore, it might appear to be the primary moving factor. Indeed, I can well hear a Christian priest solemnly saying, 'Be sincere my son, show intent, and God will hear your prayers.' 

If intent were the operative word, then it shouldn't matter if it were good intent or bad. Right? In which case, if Lee intent to rob that bank. Would that work in your corner of the world? My lord, he showed great intent. We must not imprison him!     

That is not how it works in the spiritual realm. In the spiritual realm, only the Supreme Lord works. And, association with the Supreme, in this case with His Holy name alone will cleanse your heart. This is what the SGGB states or for that matter the Vedic scriptures. The naam is the operative word. Which is why SGGB sings about it endlessly on almost every page. 

The Supreme Lord is indeed the leading and only brand of scouring agent that will cleanse your blackened heart. 

Intent, for that matter, is probably what got you into trouble in the first place! Intent is cheap my friend.  

SSA


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> ]
> 
> 'Intent' is what we bring to the table, I agree and therefore, it might appear to be the primary moving factor. Indeed, I can well hear a Christian priest solemnly saying, 'Be sincere my son, show intent, and God will hear your prayers.'
> 
> ...


 

Ahh my friend you have given us here what we call a false dichotomy I'm afraid.

Please understand the meaning of my last post.  I said in essance as God is all it matter not what name you call God by, it is your intent.  If I performed Simran using Allah, or Ram, or Thor, or Waheguru, it does not matter if my intent is to focus on the One God.

So you see I mean a very specific kind of intent.

Consider this though.  In your first post you mention as a proper name fof God 'Gopal'.  Now please correct me if I am wrong but that word looks very much to me the Hindu version of Gurpal.

Gurpal means beloved of Guru.

Why would the tile 'Beloved of Guru' be any fitter name for God than 'wounderous enlightener'?

Neiter are names but titles.  Also consider this.  You wish us to use Gods real name or names instead of the title Waheguru, what are God's real names, and how do you know this?


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> You say: [I mean WaheGuru is certainly not a name, and please do let me know if I have this wrong, but I understand it to translate into English as wondeours enlightener.]
> 
> 
> Wah-e-guru does not translate to 'wondrous enlightener.' Its Urdu for 'Wow, what a guru.' I can assure you of that. Now, I have heard some pretty convoluted explanations too myself, wherein the ' w' stands for this 'ah' stands for that, and so on. But thats all imagination on magic mushrooms or something.
> ...


 

This has left me dispionted my freind.  Why do you say I have a black heart?  Why am I 'in trouble'?

let us take this word.  Waheguru.

Now I have been told that Wahe means wonderous, this may of course be wrong.  However I know without any doubt, as in, it is some knowledge that I posesse that Guru, is in fact two Sanskrit words.

Gu=Darkness Ru=Light.

So the connation of the word Guru, is  somebody that takes you from the darkness into the light, a teacher, or an enlightener.

However all of that aside, I'm a little puzzled by your tone.  Do you alsways set upon those who disgaree with you in such a manor?


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> The term ‘wah’ is a typical Urdu and often-used form of exclamation of appreciation which is not dissimilar to ‘wow’ in English. ‘Wah-e-Guru’ is an expression that shows appreciation or praise for the guru and is comparable to ‘Jai Gurudev.’
> 
> *The term Wah-e-Guru does not appear in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS). I repeat, IT DOES NOT OCCUR IN THE GRANTH SAHIB EVEN ONCE!! Its current use as a generic name for the Supreme Lord is a recent phenomenon and has no precedence in the SGGS.*
> 
> ...



GURU PIYARIO JIOS...

You seem so SURE about the claim you made ..and You made it in CAPITAL LETTERS....to make it cast in Stainless Steel/Titanium !!!
BUT YOU ARE WRONG....DEAD WRONG....because you havent read the SGGS at all or you WONT Have MISSED the WAHEGURU used so Enchantingly and MULTIPLE TIMES in SGGS.
I Will NOT spoon feed you with the Page Numbers...simply becasue you made the Preposterous claim as if you know the SGGS like the back of your hand...(Not even a SINGLE TIME ??? the joke is on YOU guru piayario...becasue WAHEGURU is in SGGS..not once..not twice..not three times..not four times..BUT....Find OUT just How many times...by actually READING the SGGS.

Apologies in advance if sentiments get hurt...but then we must make preposterous claims if  ??????

Jarnail Singh


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

WAHE-GURU is *PRAISE* of GOD/GURU/SATGURU/AKAL PURAKH/The Creator..Thus its an ADJECTIVE..WONDROUS....CREATOR....


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

You say: [However I know without any doubt, as in, it is some knowledge that I posesse that Guru, is in fact two Sanskrit words. Gu=Darkness Ru=Light. So the connation of the word Guru, is  somebody that takes you from the darkness into the light, a teacher, or an enlightener.]

The etymological claims that 'gu' means darkness and 'ru' means light therefore 'guru' literally means 'the one who brings you from darkness to light'  is an idea popularized by frauds and is complete nonsense. 

Guru is an adjective in Sanskrit meaning 'heavy'. So, the guru means Grave or 'heavy' as in heavy with knowledge, heavy with responsibility, heavy with love of the Supreme. 

Seriously, which dictionary do you use?


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

Gyaniji your Gyan is suspect. Wah-e-Guru simply means 'Wow, what a guru!" Besides, you seem to think that what I am saying is not in the SGGS. Read it again. What I am saying here is there on every page. Yes, and I will repeat it in capitals. ON EVERY PAGE. 

If there exists an obscure mention of Wah-e-Guru in the SGGS, be sure its not one of those fancy American-Sikh translations. Even if it occurs in the original Gurbani, I am sure it does not have the exalted mean it now carries. Wah-e-Guru is not the name of the Supreme. And as such, it has absolutely no spiritual cleansing properties as the real Naam of the Supreme carries.        

Arguing with me on this issue is pointless, for this is not my statement. This is what the good book says.


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> You say: [However I know without any doubt, as in, it is some knowledge that I posesse that Guru, is in fact two Sanskrit words. Gu=Darkness Ru=Light. So the connation of the word Guru, is somebody that takes you from the darkness into the light, a teacher, or an enlightener.]
> 
> The etymological claims that 'gu' means darkness and 'ru' means light therefore 'guru' literally means 'the one who brings you from darkness to light' is an idea popularized by frauds and is complete nonsense.
> 
> ...


 

Again my friend I feel this negativeity towards me in your words, can I ask why?

It seems when I consult an online Sanskrit dictionary you are almost correct.

GuruH does indeed apear to mean heavy or weighty.  Yet it reports Guru as teacher.

However that is all an aside, you have not yet addressed all of the other pionts I have put to you, do you intend to do so?


----------



## Admin (Nov 12, 2009)

Dear All, Let us focus on the topic in hand and avoid making personal comments... this is the only way of evolving... Thanks in advance.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

No. I really don't have the time to spoon feed you my friend. Besides, I believe I have answered all your main points. If there is any misc. bit that I have left out and you dying to have me blow it right out of the water, do ask. I'll be happy to oblige. SSA


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

No?

Heh okay then please answer the following.

Whatever Waheguru means why should we not use it when we can use (according to you) Gopal?  What does Gopal mean?

What do you understand the word 'Naam' to mean?

Is it okay do you think to call God Allah?  Why, why not?

Can you list some acceptable names of God and their meanings?

How do you know all of what you say is true?


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

These are the two most discussed upon from the Vaaran of Bhai Gurdas ji

2.     Vaar 11 Pauri 3  Line 4  Who may be called a Sikh of the Guru
  	 ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਪੁਰਖ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਹੋਇ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਸਚੁ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ ।
  	 satiguru purakh daiaalu hoi vaahiguroo sachu mantr sunaaiaa|

	                       3.     Vaar 11 Pauri 8  Line 8  Love of the gurmukhs
  	 ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਡੀ ਵਡਿਆਈ ॥੮॥
  	 vaahiguroo vadee vadiaaee ॥8॥


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

Ik Ong Kaar has many names yet none. If one names the Infinite, then the Infinite becomes finite.

Vaheguru is a salutation. It means, "I am in awe with whoever created my surroundings- the nature".

There is no reverse osmosis nor any filtration system in SGGS, our ONLY GURU, which tells us to chant like a parrot to " purify" oneself, no matter what name one screams, chant, parrot Ik Ong Kaar with.

The only way which SGGS, our ONLY GURU teaches us is to study Gurbani and by doing so, then only we can practice it in our real lives, so that we can breed goodness within which we should share with others.

Goodness has no particular name, nor any hue,creed or faith.

So, chanting like a parrot with whatever name one chooses from many given in SGGS can only make one a good parrot, not a Gursikh.

It is just irrelevant rhetoric laced with me-ism. Nothing more.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

My own memory of the facts fails me sometimes. But here are some additional facts. Tejwant ji has dealt well with the giaan IMHO


1.  Page1402 Line 11  Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Ram Das: Ga-yand

  ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿ ਜੀਉ ॥
vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahi jeeo ||
   Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o.

            2.  Page1402 Line 14  Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Ram Das: Ga-yand

  ਸਤਿ ਸਾਚੁ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਨਿਵਾਸੁ ਆਦਿ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਸਦਾ ਤੁਹੀ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੧॥੬॥
  sath saach sree nivaas aadh purakh sadhaa thuhee vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahi jeeo ||1||6||
   You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being. Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o. ||1||6||

            3.  Page1402 Line 18  Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Ram Das: Ga-yand

  ਸਤਿ ਸਾਚੁ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਨਿਵਾਸੁ ਆਦਿ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਸਦਾ ਤੁਹੀ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥੭॥
  sath saach sree nivaas aadh purakh sadhaa thuhee vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahi jeeo ||2||7||
   You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being. Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o. ||2||7||

            4.  Page1403 Line 2  Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Ram Das: Ga-yand

  ਸਤਿ ਸਾਚੁ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਨਿਵਾਸੁ ਆਦਿ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਸਦਾ ਤੁਹੀ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੩॥੮॥
  sath saach sree nivaas aadh purakh sadhaa thuhee vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahi jeeo ||3||8||
   You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being. Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o. ||3||8||

            5.  Page1403 Line 18  Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Ram Das: Ga-yand

  ਕੀਆ ਖੇਲੁ ਬਡ ਮੇਲੁ ਤਮਾਸਾ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਤੇਰੀ ਸਭ ਰਚਨਾ ॥
  keeaa khael badd mael thamaasaa vaahiguroo thaeree sabh rachanaa ||
   You have formed and created this play, this great game. O Waahay Guru, this is all You, forever.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

(quoted material)

*The term Wah-e-Guru does not appear in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS). I repeat, IT DOES NOT OCCUR IN THE GRANTH SAHIB EVEN ONCE!! Its current use as a generic name for the Supreme Lord is a recent phenomenon and has no precedence in the SGGS.

*My analysis* 
*These problems arise when we are misguided by transliterations. The English language has many alternate ways to make the same sound, unlike Gurmukhi which has far fewer. So Wah e Guru will not necessarily seem to be in Gurbani, but in fact is using an alternate phonetic strategy. Whether one is successful in one's search depends on the transliteration system being employed. There are around 3 that are standard (Professor Thind has authored moe than one). Search engines do not use a single transliteration scheme. So linguistic confusion can be misleading. *

*But there you have it!  This by the way is an old discussion topic and tends to return to the forum like the 7-year locust. The Sanskrit of this is another complicated issue. Let's try not to get wound up. Tejwant given us some important insights. *
*


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

Oh yeah right,  I forgot your 'gopal' means 'gurupal' bit or word jugglery. 'Gopal' means one who 'paals' 'go.' 'Paal' means to 'take care.' 'Go' means 'cow,' or 'mother earth.' So, 'Gopal' would mean... 'one who takes care of cows or one who takes care of the world.' These are the standard Sanskrit meanings. 

'Naam' means holy name of the Supreme. Therefore, it may be understood to be a specific name, and not a generic one or an imagined one or a concocted one. Naam is given great stress in the SGGS. It is unfortunate that even after so much stress is laid on this one fact, we have gone and manufactured one in foundries of Ludhiana.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

All the verses that you have quoted are couplets that have this following structure. The first line says somehting about the Supreme Lord, and the second is more like a chorus, that spontaneously bursts into praising the Guru who has delivered the wisdom given in the first line. This is the standard practice. 

Take one of you quotes for instance:   

You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being. 
Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o!​||2||7||

The first line praises the Supreme Lord by stating,'You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being!' 

In the second, you praise the Guru who delivered this wisdom by singing, 'Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o!'

Its not that complicated really, unless that is you want to complicate it intentionally.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

All the verses that you have quoted are couplets that have this following structure. The first line says something about the Supreme Lord, and the second is more like a chorus, that spontaneously bursts into praising the Guru who has delivered the wisdom given in the first line. This is the standard practice. 

Take one of you quotes for instance:   

You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being. 
Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o!​||2||7||

The first line praises the Supreme Lord by stating,'You are forever True, the Home of Excellence, the Primal Supreme Being!' 

In the second, you praise the Guru who delivered this wisdom by singing, 'Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o!'

Its not that complicated really, unless that is you want to complicate it intentionally. The Wah-e-Guru mentioned here is certainly not in reference to the Supreme and it certainly cannot be mistaken as the name of the Supreme.


----------



## Lee (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> Oh yeah right, I forgot your 'gopal' means 'gurupal' bit or word jugglery. 'Gopal' means one who 'paals' 'go.' 'Paal' means to 'take care.' 'Go' means 'cow,' or 'mother earth.' So, 'Gopal' would mean... 'one who takes care of cows or one who takes care of the world.' These are the standard Sanskrit meanings.
> 
> 'Naam' means holy name of the Supreme. Therefore, it may be understood to be a specific name, and not a generic one or an imagined one or a concocted one. Naam is given great stress in the SGGS. It is unfortunate that even after so much stress is laid on this one fact, we have gone and manufactured one in foundries of Ludhiana.


 

Please my friend stop with this language of disrespect.  I asked when I mentioned Gopal and Gurpal to be corrected if I am wrong.

You see there is no 'word jugglery' from me, only open and honest questing for the truth, you must see by my name that I have no connection to the Punjab and so must expect my knowledge of the language to be inferior.

Naam as I understand it does not only equate to name, but has other meanings too, perhaps that is the basis for this misunderstanding?

I understand Naam to also mean sound, or word, or utterance.  Again, if I am incorrect here perhaps one of our more learned members can correct me.


Are you going to answer the rest of my questions?


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh ji,

Guru Fateh.

You write:


> *Naam' means holy name of the Supreme.*



1.Would you be kind enough  to describe what NAAM is in lay man's terms? 

2.How does one attain,get, receive NAAM once its definition is established? 

3.Who/ what is Supreme?

4.What do you mean by *"HOLY NAME of the Supreme"*? Your implication indicates that there is also an unholy name. What is it? 

Thanks and hope to learn from your insights.

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> Oh yeah right,  I forgot your 'gopal' means 'gurupal' bit or word jugglery. 'Gopal' means one who 'paals' 'go.' 'Paal' means to 'take care.' 'Go' means 'cow,' or 'mother earth.' So, 'Gopal' would mean... 'one who takes care of cows or one who takes care of the world.' These are the standard Sanskrit meanings.
> 
> 'Naam' means holy name of the Supreme. Therefore, it may be understood to be a specific name, and not a generic one or an imagined one or a concocted one. Naam is given great stress in the SGGS. It is unfortunate that even after so much stress is laid on this one fact, we have gone and manufactured one in foundries of Ludhiana.




Now a word of warning before I log off to go to work! Gopal and Gopi come from the same root. No question that Gopal is referring back to Vedantic references. In fact it is a reference to "cows" - but in the most concrete sense. An un-nuanced  transposition from Sanskrit syllables to a giaan of SGGS is a transposition trapped in literality.

I hope this reference from Sant Ravidas illustrates my point,

ਜਨਮ ਮਰਣ ਕਾ ਭਉ ਗਇਆ ਭਾਉ ਭਗਤਿ ਗੋਪਾਲ ॥
  janam maran kaa bho gaeiaa bhaao bhagath gopaal ||
   The fear of death and rebirth is removed by performing loving devotional service to the Lord of the World.

SGGS refers to "the wish-fulfilling cow" but neither a Vedic scholar nor a scholar of Gurbani would say that God is literally a Cow. I am going to leave for the time being with that thought. When I return -- if the level of interpretation does not rise to something higher, then it may turn out that I or another mod or admin will decide that Guru Granth is being undermined and action may be needed.

Something to consider. Try to draw on your capacity to understand metaphor. This is the moment for discriminating intellect.

ਇੰਦ੍ਰੀ ਸਬਲ ਨਿਬਲ ਬਿਬੇਕ ਬੁਧਿ ਪਰਮਾਰਥ ਪਰਵੇਸ ਨਹੀ ॥੨॥ 
eindhree sabal nibal bibaek budhh paramaarathh paravaes nehee ||2||
Our passions are strong, and our discriminating intellect is weak; we have no access to the supreme objective. ||2||

 
 ਕਹੀਅਤ ਆਨ ਅਚਰੀਅਤ ਅਨ ਕਛੁ ਸਮਝ ਨ ਪਰੈ ਅਪਰ ਮਾਇਆ ॥ 
keheeath aan achareeath an kashh samajh n parai apar maaeiaa ||
We say one thing, and do something else; entangled in endless Maya, we do not understand anything.
 

ਕਹਿ ਰਵਿਦਾਸ ਉਦਾਸ ਦਾਸ ਮਤਿ ਪਰਹਰਿ ਕੋਪੁ ਕਰਹੁ ਜੀਅ ਦਇਆ ॥੩॥੩॥ 
kehi ravidhaas oudhaas dhaas math parehar kop karahu jeea dhaeiaa ||3||3||
Says Ravi Daas, Your slave, O Lord, I am disillusioned and detached; please, spare me Your anger, and have mercy on my soul. ||3||3||
 

ਸੁਖ ਸਾਗਰੁ ਸੁਰਤਰ ਚਿੰਤਾਮਨਿ ਕਾਮਧੇਨੁ ਬਸਿ ਜਾ ਕੇ ॥ 
sukh saagar surathar chinthaaman kaamadhhaen bas jaa kae ||
He is the ocean of peace; the miraculous tree of life, the wish-fulfilling jewel, and the Kaamadhayna, the cow which fulfills all desires, all are in His power.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

You say: [These problems arise when we are misguided by transliterations. The English language has many alternate ways to make the same sound, unlike Gurmukhi which has far fewer. So Wah e Guru will not necessarily seem to be in Gurbani, but in fact is using an alternate phonetic strategy. Whether one is successful in one's search depends on the transliteration system being employed. There are around 3 that are standard (Professor Thind has authored more than one). Search engines do not use a single transliteration scheme. So linguistic confusion can be misleading.]

I say: This is not correct; most of us here can read SGGS in Gurbani. At any rate, I see no point in this argument, for I see no ambiguity with regards to the name in the SGGS. There are countless instances in the SGGS wherein the actual names of the Supreme Lord, such as 'Gopal, Ram, Hari, Mohan, Thakur (generic but specifically referring to Krishna)' etc., are mentioned. I really don't need a Thind 'who has authored more than one book' to sort this out for me. Nor, indeed should you.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

akaalpurakh ji

You can say This Is Not Correct until the cows come home  Not only are your own facts completely off, but you are taking a very literal-minded view of the topic and perhaps not realizing that you are winding people up.

Bye for now.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

Don't you worry about me dear. I know exactly where I am going. Can you follow? That is the real question.


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

Sorry Lee. I got to go now. Catch you all tomorrow.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

Narayanjot Kaur said:


> These are the two most discussed upon from the Vaaran of Bhai Gurdas ji
> 
> 2.     Vaar 11 Pauri 3  Line 4  Who may be called a Sikh of the Guru
> ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਪੁਰਖ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਹੋਇ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਸਚੁ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਸੁਣਾਇਆ ।
> ...



Vaheguru occurs many times in the SGGS...on Page 1402 it occurs numerous times in the way it is commonly written..waheguru.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Nov 12, 2009)

GOPAL..is simply COWHERD..Caretaker of Cows..and this image is alos used in the Bible.as Jesus is SHEPHERD..herder of SHEEP. Indians venerated the COW..so GOPAL..herds His cows..we also ahve the Ellysian COW...that grants all wishes etc etc.
Ram is one who is Ramiah hoiah..in everything..etc etc all "KIRTAM NAMES" mean something...are ADJECTIVES.
HUMANS CANNOT Give  a "NAME" to the CREATOR..just as a Child cannot Name his father..only the Father can Name his child...BUT HUMANS have always tried to eb smarter..hence all these Names..whcih are essentially ADJECTIVES describing soem attribute of the Creator....


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> Don't you worry about me dear. I know exactly where I am going. Can you follow? That is the real question.




akaalpurakh ji

Yes -- I have a theory about where you are headed. And as I have said previously -- we have been down that road before. 

I would like to return to 3 things you have said where common sense are not aligned with the facts. 
*

```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````*
1. You say that *The term Wah-e-Guru does not appear in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS). I repeat, IT DOES NOT OCCUR IN THE GRANTH SAHIB EVEN ONCE!! Its current use as a generic name for the Supreme Lord is a recent phenomenon and has no precedence in the SGGS. *(quoted material)

I next pointed out to you that both Bhagat Gayanand and Bhai Gurdas have used the term. In the transliterated version we can see it is in just this one example (There are several others in this thread):

ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਹਿ ਜੀਉ ॥
vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahiguroo vaahi jeeo ||
   Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Guru, Waahay Jee-o.

You then reply that you have no need of transliterations. 
You say: "This is not correct; most of us here can read SGGS in Gurbani. At any rate, I see no point in this argument, for I see no ambiguity with regards to the name in the SGGS. There are countless instances in the SGGS wherein the actual names of the Supreme Lord, such as 'Gopal, Ram, Hari, Mohan, Thakur (generic but specifically referring to Krishna)' etc., are mentioned. I really don't need a Thind 'who has authored more than one book' to sort this out for me. Nor, indeed should you."  (quoted material)
Now please tell me what this says! In Gurmukhi! Since you don't need transliterations! *ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ **
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
* 
2. My next concern is based in amazement.  Let's go back to your statement as follows:  
"I really don't need a Thind 'who has authored more than one book' to sort this out for me. Nor, indeed should you."

In Sikhi - seva is a pre-eminent obligation.  And in transliterating the words of the Gurus, Professor Thind is a sevadhar both to the panth and to *ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ  *He is making the Shabad Guru accessible to a host of Punjabi speakers who cannot read Gurmukhi but can connect their phonetic understanding to the Gurus' meaning. Professor Thind devised fonts, transliterations, shabads for printing, and we reap the fruit of his deep linguistic knowledge. He never took a cent for his work. His wife and children continue his legacy.* 

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
3. Guru and Gopal: W**hat is there to say about that? *
Sanskrit more than even Punjabi is a language in which meaning is contextualized. So the meaning of any word depends on the context of use. Three major contexts: poetic, liturgical, ordinary language. That is why the major dictionaries give so many meanings, and that is why translators rely on them for contextual applications. This is basic stuff.

*3.a *The translation of _Guru_ from the Monier Williams Dictionary. Which choice makes sense?  In a liturgical or a poetic context? The one in bold red font...a spiritual parent or preceptor...makes more sense than heavy in the stomach, or "heavy" as you claim when you analyze the word "guru."

*Guru **गुरु
*(H1) गुरु[SIZE=-1] [p= [URL="http://www.sanskrit-lexicon.uni-koeln.de/cgi-bin/monier/serveimg.pl?file=/scans/MWScan/MWScanjpg/mw0359-gupta.jpg"]359[/URL],2][/SIZE][SIZE=-1] [L=65987][/SIZE]  _mf_(वी)_n._ ([SIZE=-1]cf.[/SIZE] गिर्/इ ;  [SIZE=-1]comp.[/SIZE]ग्/अरीयस् , once °यस्-तर , गुरु-तर , superl. गरिष्ठ , गुरुतम » [SIZE=-1]ss.vv.[/SIZE]) heavy , weighty (opposed to लघ्/उ) [SIZE=-1] RV.  i , 39 , 3 and iv , 5 , 6[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1] AV. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE] ([SIZE=-1]g.[/SIZE]शौण्डा*दि [SIZE=-1] Gan2ar.  101[/SIZE])      [SIZE=-1] [L=65988][/SIZE]   heavy in the stomach (food) , difficult to digest [SIZE=-1] MBh.  i , 3334[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1] Sus3r. [/SIZE]    [SIZE=-1] [L=65989][/SIZE]   great , large , extended , long [SIZE=-1] Ya1jn5. ??[/SIZE] (» -क्रतु) [SIZE=-1] Bhartr2. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE]     [SIZE=-1] [L=65990][/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Pra1t. [/SIZE] (a vowel long both by nature and by position is called गरीयस् [SIZE=-1] RPra1t.  xviii , 20[/SIZE]) [SIZE=-1] Pa1n2.  1-4 , 11 and 12[/SIZE]        (in prosody) long by nature or position (a vowel) [SIZE=-1] [L=65991][/SIZE]   high in degree , vehement , violent , excessive , difficult , hard [SIZE=-1] RV. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] MBh. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE]      [SIZE=-1] [L=65992][/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Megh.  80[/SIZE]       grievous [SIZE=-1] [L=65993][/SIZE]   important , serious , momentous [SIZE=-1] MBh. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE]     [SIZE=-1] [L=65994][/SIZE]   valuable , highly prized [SIZE=-1] Ya1jn5. ?? ii , 30[/SIZE]गुरु = गरीयस्) [SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE] (    [SIZE=-1] [L=65995][/SIZE]   haughty , proud (speech) [SIZE=-1] Pan5cat. [/SIZE]    [SIZE=-1] [L=65996][/SIZE]   venerable , respectable    (H1B) गुरु[SIZE=-1] [L=65997][/SIZE]  _m._ any venerable or respectable person (father , mother , or any relative older than one's self) [SIZE=-1] Gobh. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] S3a1n3khGr2. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Mn. [/SIZE][SIZE=-1] &c [/SIZE]       (H1B*)गुरु[SIZE=-1] [L=65998][/SIZE] m. a spiritual parent or preceptor (from whom a youth receives the initiatory मन्त्र or prayer , who instructs him in the शास्त्रs and conducts the necessary ceremonies up to that of investiture which is performed by the आचार्य* *[SIZE=-1]Ya1jn5. ?? i ,[/SIZE]* 34)  RPra1t.  A1s3vGr2.  Pa1rGr2.  Mn.  &c (H1B)  गुरु [L=65999]  _m._ the chief of (gen. or in  comp.)  Ca1n2.  Ragh.  ii , 68     (H1B)  गुरु [L=66000]  _m._ (with शाक्तs)  author of a मन्त्र     (H1B) गुरु [L=66001]  _m._ " preceptor of the gods " , बृहस्पति Mn.  xi     (H1B) गुरु [L=66002]  _m._ (hence)  the planet Jupiter  Jyot.  VarBr2S.  Bhartr2.  &c (H1B)  गुरु [L=66003]  *m. " **पाण्डु**-teacher " *, द्रोण L. (H1B)  गुरु [L=66004]  _m._ प्रभा-कर (celebrated teacher of the मीमांसा , usually mentioned with कुमारिल)  SS3am2kar.  vi , 50 ; xv , 157     (H1B) गुरु [L=66005]  _m._ (=धर्म) " venerable " , the 9th astrological mansion  VarBr2S.  i , 

 *I hope no one chooses the planet Jupiter just to be clever. And it is wrong to pick the meaning that is going to favor a personal theory you are about to spring on us! **

3.b. Gopal, from the Cologne Digital Sanskrit Dictionary. the Sanskrit word to search on is Gopa**
**gopa* m. *(= %{-pA4} s.v. %{go4}) a cowherd , herdsman , milkman (considered as a man of mixed caste Para1s3.) Mn. viii MBh. (ifc. f. %{A} , i , 3213) Hariv. &c. ; a protector , guardian RV. x , 61 , 10 Ta1n2d2yaBr. Ka1tyS3r. MBh. ; the *superintendent of several villages , head of a district L. ; a king L. ; `" chief herdsman "' , Kr2ishn2a MBh. ii , 1438 ; a particular class of plants BhP. xii , 8 , 21 ; = %{-rasa} L. ; N. of a Gandharva (cf. %{go-pati}) R. ii , 91 , 44 ; of a Buddh. Arhat W. ; 

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
The translation that I favor is the one that is consistent with the Shabad itself. *ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ *is our protector, our guardian, the one who herds us to safety. Akaal is the Nourisher and Supporter is referred to with the name Gopal, and by analogy to Krishna. *
*And that too is the meaning of Sant Ravidas when he says.* 
*ਸੁਖ ਸਾਗਰੁ ਸੁਰਤਰ ਚਿੰਤਾਮਨਿ ਕਾਮਧੇਨੁ ਬਸਿ ਜਾ ਕੇ ॥ 
sukh saagar surathar chinthaaman kaamadhhaen bas jaa kae ||
He is the ocean of peace; the miraculous tree of life, the wish-fulfilling jewel, and the Kaamadhayna, the cow which fulfills all desires, all are in His power.     

When one part of Gurbani echos other parts in the way words are used, that is how you know the meaning. 
*

*


----------



## akalpurkh (Nov 12, 2009)

Narayanjot Kaur ji you indeed are an ocean of convoluted arguments; you seem to have taken a PhD in it! No matter, if you would kindly present these snake like argument to me one by one, I will gladly chop them to bits with concrete arguments based on the scriptural evidence. I would consider this a great service to the Guru and the community for I am now convinced that American Sikhs are a bane to our community. We initially accepted you because we were simple-minded and praised the guru for showing his mercy across the oceans, but it has now become increasingly clear to us that your intentions are questionable. You have corrupted Sikhism beyond recognition. 

If you really have the guts, stand and fight rather than threaten to exercise your role as moderator and remove or isolate me from this forum. This is an open challenge. Let the world see how much of a Sikh--a warrior--you really are. Bring it on dearest, but kindly observe the rule of logic. No devious moves, bluffs or shabby subterfuges will be permitted. And, yes, please note, the SGGS (extending to its obvious Vedic source books) are the authorities. Not your Thind with his dubious PhD.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 12, 2009)

akalpurkh said:


> Narayanjot Kaur ji you indeed are an ocean of convoluted arguments; you seem to have taken a PhD in it!
> 
> What is convoluted and I will try to simplify it?:yes:
> 
> ...




I think your theory is slowly emerging. That is why I am concerned. We may have to move parts of this thread to the Interfaith dialogs section if I am correct.


----------



## seeker3k (Nov 13, 2009)

This is very serious topic and mostly misunderstood.
This writing is not for the SPN administrators. I already know what they are going say.
Nanak’s philosophy is based on Hinduism. All he did was taken out the stupid rituals. We Sikhs are allergic to any thing come from Hinduism.  
 Whaheguru word is in SGGS. It was recited by Bhatts not by any Gurus or by any other bhagats. 

The name what all are talking about is not name it is naam. Naam can be said as shabad,manter,bani gian dhun. There can be many names for this naam. In the bible it is said: in the beginning there was WORD, the WORD was with God and God was WORD. Nanak emphasized on naam more then any one. And other guru also said with out naam there is no salvation. This naam is the blessing of guru. One can make his own word but will not work because it has to be given by guru. Not just any guru, the guru has to be real. There are many gurus but only few are real guru.

The word used in moolmanter satnam does not mean true. True is sash not sat. Sat is what that is everlasting. As we Sikhs claiming the first symbol of the moolmanter ekong kar. It was just ek aum. This Hindu philosophy. All Hindus say aum before they start any thing. It was also the manter is used to do mediation. Only the Brahman can meditated on aum. Lower cast were forbidden to use aum. This is where Nanak said all humans are same and the naam should be the same for every human. The whole writing in the sggs is to glorify the Naam. Acording to Hindus and Nanak it is not just recite aum. It is the sound that aum produce when it is recited in cretin way. That way should be learned from guru. It is strange Than Nanak praised naam yet he never told us what is that naam. We have to wait for the bhatts to recite it then we started to use it. Mostly it was Gobind Singh used it when he said Waheguru ji ka Khals Wahe guru ji ke fate, That became Singhism. This it lot different from Sikhism.

It is this naam when guru give it to us that can lead one to salvation by the sound of it. We should not ask for this naam. The guru will give it by his own. When we ask for any thing it become begging (bhiksha) When guru give it by himself then it become blessing (daan). By meditating on this naam if one chose to then he can go to brahma. Who is considerd to be creator. That is why we call some pakhandi brahmgiani. Brahmgiani is one who has merged in brahma. If he is merged in brahma how can he be living? He is also called brahm puter (son of brahma) God. This is what Jesus was trying to tell his followers. No one can go to my father accept through son of god brahputer. In Hinduism  to reach brahma only through guru. There are two ways one can get the salvation. One is by meditation which is very long process. Other is get the naam from guru.
How can we know who is real guru or not? If there are the guru ask his chela to do the rituals to please brhama  then that guru is fake. All this guru want is you to keep coming to him. He is the only one who can solve our problems. Don’t forget we creat our own problem and then we pray or go to guru to solve it. Haha. If one tell chela no ritual no meditation do nothing. But do no harm to others then at the time of his death the naam will protect his soul he will get salvation. We can not get out of ritiuals we are conditioned by fake religions. We can not get any thing with out doing some puja or. It is not what we do after we get the naam it is what we do before we get the naam. If we are not ready and not worthy to receive naam the guru will not appear to him. Real guru is not in the body it is the naam. That what Nanak told the sidhs. That my guru is naam dhun sound.

If one accept A religion he have to do the rituals. He can not refuse it. He can not get what Nanak said. No one been able to tell me what is the naam. Many people say it is all what is ion SGGS. Many of new generation can not read SGGS. So there is no hope for them? It is not reading SGGS or Geta or Bible it is put it in prectis. We want the easy way. Most Sikhs believe that will go to heaven because they have acceped SGGS as their guru. And they know with out guru one can not go to heaven.
Were there real people as brahma,vishu, shivji? No they were not real people. Hinduism was not a religion to begin with. It was theory of science. People of that time did not understand the science  so they started to worship brahma vishu shivji and made their idols and worship.
There have been many religions in mankind and many have gone into winds.Many more will go as the science will be taught all over.

What are we getting salvation from? Some say from rebirth. Are they right? What those do not believe in rebirth? That mean they are all have the salvation?  In reality it is our maan we need salvation from. What ever we do is of from our maan. When we accept guru we are doing so from the maan. Did the guru accept us as his chela. Any thing we do out of maan can not lead us to salvation. What we see and what we hear and what we feel touch. Create our thoughts. It is thought that is controlling us. We react out of our maan. There is a way to control one’s thoughts. Most people think thoughts can not be controlled.

seeker


----------



## Lee (Nov 13, 2009)

Yes Seeker ji,

There is much truth and wisdom in what you say.


----------



## simran_kaur (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k said, "This writing is not for the SPN administrators. I already know what they are going say."

I agree completely. The SPN should not intervene or try to stop this discussion. The person (akalpurkh) appears to have something of importance to say.  


Seeker3k said. "Nanak’s philosophy is based on Hinduism. All he did was taken out the stupid rituals. We Sikhs are allergic to any thing come from Hinduism." 

Here again I agree completely. Perhaps it is time we curbed this aversion and tried to get to the root of the matter. 

This is all I have to say. :happykaur:


----------



## Admin (Nov 13, 2009)

Indeed! its time we curbed the aversion... its time for some more housekeeping!! *akalpurakh* thank you for showing your true colors, *simran kaur* is your multiple id and You are *Banned*!! :welcome:


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k said:


> This is very serious topic and mostly misunderstood.
> This writing is not for the SPN administrators. I already know what they are going say.
> Nanak’s philosophy is based on Hinduism. All he did was taken out the stupid rituals. We Sikhs are allergic to any thing come from Hinduism.
> Whaheguru word is in SGGS. It was recited by Bhatts not by any Gurus or by any other bhagats.
> ...



seeker3k ji

So far the SPN administration has banned someone for posting under a dual identity. That is called forum management. Enforcing the rules.

So far nothing has been deleted or modified in any way. In fact -- an error on my part was pointed out by Gyani ji and I have fixed it. That is called behaving like a mature adult. As far as your idea that SPN administration might "ruin" things -- I have to chuckle. Because  disrespect to Professor Thind and his work has been expressed by a poster, now banned. And, a misreading of Sanskrit has been pointed out. Not to mention the fact that a completely fabulous claim has been made that Waheguru does not appear anywhere in SGGS. 

SPN administration has to intervene when that kind of blatant commentary takes place -- especially when there is a clear agenda to undermine the Bani of the Gurus by slipping in that same old argument that we read too often -- Sikhs are reconstituted Hindus and SGGS is reconstituted Vedanta. That is wrong. That is the kind of argument put forward by collusion to demoralize Sikhs.

You are personally entitled to your own opinion above. But here is something else to consider. Unless you are a member of a sect, maybe one of the sanatan sampardayas or maybe one of the break-away sects that follow Sant Mat, there is no guru/chela arrangement in Sikhism. I mean -- how many times is it necessary to repeat this simple fact? Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj ji is the Guru Granth. And in addition.
_
"He who keeps alight the unquenchable torch of truth, and never swerves          from the thought of One God; he who has full love and confidence in God          and does not put his faith, even by mistake, in fasting or the graves          of Muslim saints, Hindu crematoriums, or Jogis places of sepulchre; he          who recognises the One God and no pilgrimages, alms-giving, non-destruction          of life, penances, or austerities; and in whose heart the light of the          Perfect One shines, - he is to be recognised as a pure member of the Khalsa"          (Guru Gobind Singh, 33 Swaiyyas)_


----------



## Astroboy (Nov 13, 2009)

REHAT


v*aa*h*i*g*u*r*oo* n*i*th bachan o*u*ch*aa*r*ae* || v*aa*h*i*g*u*r*oo* k*o* h*i*radh*ai* dhh*aa*r*ai* ||
He repeats the True Name of 'Vaheguru' daily. He enshrines Vaheguru in his heart.
Rehatnama Bhai Desa Singh


----------



## jazlim (Nov 13, 2009)

Narayanjot Kaur ji, 
Your justification of banning Akalpurkh and censuring another senior member for more or less supporting Akalpurkh point of view is unprofessional. Perhaps you forget that this is a community forum and that you are curtailing the rights of the Sikhs, who you claim to represent, to a lively debate on a topic of grave importance to them. 

You might want your Sikhism entirely divorced from its Sanatan dharmic roots. But then again, you cannot deny the truth. There is a substantial amount of borrowing from the Vedic Literature in the SGGS. However, there is no shame in it as you seem to make out. On the contrary, it is a prerequisite. Peer-reviewing is an important part of Indian spiritualism. We want it that way, for then the chance of being led astray is minimized. This is the system. Indeed, if you truly have a PhD, as it claims in your profile, then you should know that not a line may be said with it being peer-reviewed by pervious authorities. 

However, you are right. Sikhism is different from Hinduism. And we know that! The Hindus follow the varna-ashram system, worship countless demigods, and so on. For you kind information, Sikhism is a vibrant and legitimate prong of the Bhakti Movement that took place in India in the 14-15th century. Sri Guru Nanak Devji is considered one of the foremost teachers of this reform movement. 

The underlying reformation thread that connected all of the prongs was their stress on bhakti, and on taking the naam. All of the prongs also rejected the caste or varna-ashram system. The Vaishnavas, under the leadership of Chaitanya, which forms another prong, too has rejected the varna-ashram system. Individual saints such as Meera bai, Tukaram, etc., too are counted as catalyst or reform teachers who made meaningful contribution to the sub-continental spiritual reform movement. 

It is thus that Sikhism is different from Hinduism. You do not need to create artificial divide by speculatively misinterpreting the SGGS! Indeed, who gave you the authority to do this?      

Also, for you kind information, the various prongs, shared common teachers. The prominent Indian saint by the name of Jayadeva was one of them. For you kind information, the baani (original verses) of Jayadeva in enshrined the SGGS. For us Indians whose spiritualism demands rigorous peer-reviewing, and would rather have a bona fide School of Thought to monitor our spiritualism, having a Jayadeva on our board is a matter of great pride to us! 

*But what indeed would you know of all this fine tradition?*

Madamji, I seriously think that you are unfit as a moderator for this forum. Please don't take offense. But I request the other moderators to view this heavy-handed moderation of a philosophical discussion with the express view to safe guard speculative ideologies as a grave breech of trust of the community.


----------



## Astroboy (Nov 13, 2009)

This is the full Rehat Nama in Amrit Kirtan page 1014

ran m*ae* j*aa*e n kabeh*oo*(n) bh*aa*j*ai* ||
dhr*i*rr kar shhathr*ee* dhharam l*o* g*aa*j*ai* ||
shasathreh*ee*n e*i*h kabeh*oo*(n) n h*o**ee* ||
reh*i*thava(n)th kh*aa*las h*ai* s*o**ee* ||
reh*i*th beh*i*th n kabeh*oo*(n) th*i**aa*g*ai* ||
sanam*u*kh lar*ai* n ran th*ae* bh*aa*g*ai* ||
k*u*t(h)*aa* h*u*k*aa* charas tham*aa*k*oo* ||
g*aa(n)*j*aa* tt*o*p*ee* th*aa*rr*ee* kh*aa*k*oo* ||
e*i*n k*ee* our n kabeh*oo* dh*ae*k*ai* ||
reh*i*thava(n)th s*o* s*i*(n)gh v*i*s*ae*kh*ai* ||
*vaahiguroo* n*i*th bachan o*u*ch*aa*r*ae* ||
*vaahiguroo* k*o* h*i*radh*ai* dhh*aa*r*ai* ||
*aa*g*ae* *aa*vath s*i*(n)gh j pav*ai* ||
*vaahiguroo* k*ee* fath*ae* b*u*l*aa*v*ai* ||
ka(n)gh*aa* dh*o*n*o* vakath kar p*aa*g ch*u*n*ai* kar b*aa(n)*dhh*ee* ||
dh*aa*than n*ee*th kar*ae*e n*aa* dh*u*kh p*aa*v*ai* l*aa*l j*ee* ||
t(h)a(n)dd*ae* p*aa*n*ee* j*o* neh*i* nh*aa*v*ai* b*i*n jap parrh*ae* pras*aa*dh j kh*aa*v*ai* ||
b*i*n reh*i*r*aa*s sam*aa(n)* j*o* kh*o*v*ai* k*ee*rathan parrh*ae* b*i*n*aa* j*o* s*o*v*ai* ||
ch*u*gal*ee* kar j*o* k*aa*j b*i*g*aa*r*ai* dhhr*i*g th*i*s janam j dhharam b*i*s*aa*r*ai* ||
pr*aa*thak*aa*l sathasa(n)g n j*aa*v*ai* thanakh*aa*hadh*aa*r veh vadd*aa* keh*aa*v*ai* ||
sathasa(n)g j*aa*e kar chth dd*u*l*aa*v*ai* har yas s*u*nath*ae* b*aa*th chal*aa*v*ai* ||
n*i*radhhan dh*ae*kh n p*aa*s beh*aa*v*ai* s*o* thanakh*aa*h*ee* m*oo*l keh*aa*v*ai* ||
kathh*aa* k*ee*rathan man neh*i* l*aa*v*ai* sa(n)th s*i*kh ko b*u*r*aa* al*aa*v*ai* ||
n*i*(n)dh*aa* j*oo**aa* h*i*r*ai* j m*aa*l meh*aa(n)* dh*u*kh*aa*v*ai* th*i*s k*o* k*aa*l ||
g*u*ras*i*kh reh*i*th s*u*nah*u* h*ae* m*ee*th parabh*aa*th*ae* o*u*t(h) kar h*i*th ch*ee*th ||
*vaahiguroo* g*u*r ma(n)thr s j*aa*p kar e*i*san*aa*n parrh*ai* jap j*aa*p ||
sa(n)dhh*i**aa* sam*ai*(n) s*u*n*ai* reh*i*r*aa*s k*ee*rathan kathh*aa* s*u*n*ai* har y*aa*s ||
e*i*n m*ai* n*ae* j e*ae*k kar*aa*e s*o* s*i*kh amar*aa*p*u*r*ee* meh*i* j*aa*e ||
dh*u*h*oo* gra(n)thh m*ae* b*aa*n*ee* j*o**ee* ch*u*n ch*u*n ka(n)t(h) kar*ae* n*i*th s*o**ee* ||
reh*i*thav*aa*n g*u*r s*i*kh h*ai* j*o**ee* kar o*u*p*aa*e dhhan kh*aa*tt*ai* s*o**ee* ||
th*aa*h*ee*(n) kar ghar k*o* n*i*rabeh*ai* p*oo*j*aa* bh*oo*l n kabeh*oo* geh*ai* ||
j*o* k*o**ee* s*i*(n)gh p*u*j*aa*r*ee* ah*ai* s*o* bh*ee* p*oo*j*aa* bah*u*th n geh*ai* ||
than n*i*rab*aa*h m*aa*thr s*o* l*ae*v*ai* adhh*i*k h*o*e tha jeh*i*(n) keh*i*(n) dh*ae*v*ai* ||
dhas nakh kar j*o* k*aa*r kam*aa*v*ai* th*aa(n)* kar j*o* dhhan ghar m*ai* *aa*v*ai* ||
th*i*s th*ae* g*u*r dhasaa(n)adhh j*o* dh*ae**ee* s*i*(n)gh s*u*yas bah*u* jag meh*i* l*o**ee* ||
g*o*lak r*aa*kh*ai* n*aa*h*i* j*o* shhal k*aa* kar*ai* vap*aa*r ||
keh*ai* g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh l*aa*l j*ee* b*o*g*ai* narak haz*aa*r ||
dhasava(n)dhh g*u*r*oo* neh*i* dh*ae*v*ee* jh*oo*t(h) b*o*l j*o* kh*aa*e ||
keh*ai* g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh l*aa*l j*ee* th*i*s k*aa* kashh n b*i*s*aa*h ||
j*o* pras*aa*dh shhakan*ae* lag*ae* h*aa*thh s*u*ch*ae*th kar*ae*e ||
e*ae*k*aa*k*ee* beh*i* kh*aa*h*i* neh*i* avaran k*o* bh*ee* dh*ae*e ||
*aa*p s*i*(n)gh j*o* r*aa*j*aa* h*o**ee* n*i*radhhan s*i*(n)ghan p*aa*l*ai* s*o**ee* ||
paradh*ae*s*ee* s*i*(n)ghan jab dh*ae*kh*ai* o*u*n k*ee* s*ae*v*aa* kar*ae* b*i*s*ae*kh*ai* ||
madhh*u*r bachan sabeh*i*n k*o* bh*aa*kh*ai* ch*aa*kar s*i*(n)ghan k*o* h*ee* r*aa*kh*ai* ||
s*i*(n)gh s*i*(n)gh s*o* n*ae*h s karan*o* v*ai*r bh*aa*v man th*ae* pareharan*o* ||
dhhan k*ee*rath s*u*kh r*aa*j badd*aa**ee* ||
y*u*vath*ee* s*u*th v*i*dh*i**aa* bah*u* bh*aa**ee* ||
e*ae* sabh dh*aa*th g*u*r*oo* k*ee* j*aa*n*ai* ||
th*aa(n)* th*ae* neh*i* abh*i*m*aa*neh*i* t(h)*aa*n*ai* ||
aradh*aa*s b*i*n*aa(n)* j*o* k*aa*j s*i*dhh*aa*v*ai* bh*ae*tt k*ee*e*ae* b*i*n kashh m*u*kh p*aa*v*ai* ||
th*i**aa*g*ee* vasath greh*i*n j*o* kar*ai* b*i*n thr*i*a apan*ee* s*ae*j j dhhar*ai* ||
ath*i*thh dh*ae*kh neh*i* dh*ae*v*ai* dh*aa*n s*o* neh*i* p*aa*v*ai* dharageh*i* m*aa*n ||
m*aa*l ath*i*thh k*aa* bal kar shhal*ai* ||
jap thap th*aa(n)* k*o* kashh neh*i* fal*ai* ||
dhasam*ee* *aa*dh g*u*r*oo* dh*i*n j*ae*th*ae* p*u*rab sam*aa*n keh*ae* h*ai*(n) th*ae*th*ae* ||
th*i*n m*ae*(n) kashh paras*aa*dh ban*aa*v*ai* kar karr*aa*h khh*aa*las*ae* kh*u**aa*v*ai* ||
karr*aa*h karan k*ee* b*i*dhh s*u*n l*ee*j*ai* th*ee*n bh*aa*g k*o* samasar k*ee*j*ai* ||
l*ae*pan *aa*g*ai* bah*u*kar dh*ee*j*ai* m*aa(n)*jan kar bh*aa(n)*jan dhh*o*v*ee*j*ai* ||
kar e*i*san*aa*n pav*i*thr hv*ai* beh*ai* *vaahiguroo* b*i*n avar n keh*ai* ||
kar th*i**aa*g chaak*ee* par dhhar*ai* ch*aa*r our k*ee*rathan beh*i* kar*ai* ||
j*o* pras*aa*dh k*o* b*aa(n)*tt h*ai* man m*ae* dhh*aa*r*ae* l*o*bh ||
k*i*s thh*o*rr*aa* k*i*s agal*aa* sadh*aa* reh*ai* th*i*s s*o*g ||
lag*ae* dh*i*v*aa*n m*oo*l n j*aa*v*ai* reh*i*th b*i*n*aa* pras*aa*dh brath*aa*v*ai* ||
s*oo**aa* peh*i*r le*ae* nasav*aa*r g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh h*o*e s khav*aa*r ||
m*aa(n)*e bh*ai*n j*o* *aa*v*ai* sa(n)g*i*th dhr*i*shatt b*u*r*ee* dh*ae*kh*ae* th*i*s pa(n)gath ||
s*i*(n)kh h*o*e j*o* kar*ae* kar*o*dhh ka(n)n*i**aa* m*oo*l n dh*ae*v*ai* s*o*dhh ||
dhh*ee*a bh*ai*n k*aa* p*ai*s*aa* kh*aa*e g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh dhhaak*ae* yam l*aa*e ||
*vaahiguroo* b*i*n keh*ae* j p*aa*v*ai* v*ae*sh*aa* dhav*aa*r*ae* s*i*kh j j*aa*v*ae* ||
par e*i*sathr*ee* s*i*o n*ae*h lag*aa*v*ai* g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh veh s*i*kh n bh*aa*v*ae* ||
par b*ae*tt*ee* k*o* b*ae*tt*ee* j*aa*n*ai* ||
par e*i*sathr*ee* k*o* m*aa*th bakh*aa*n*ai* ||
apan*ee* e*i*sathr*ee* s*o* rath h*o**ee* ||
reh*i*thav*aa*n g*u*r k*aa* s*i*(n)gh s*o**ee* ||
paran*aa*r*ee* j*oo**aa* asaath ch*o*r*ee* madh*i*r*aa* j*aa*n 
p*aa(n)*ch *ai*b y*ae* jagath m*o* thaj*ai* s s*i*(n)gh s*u*j*aa*n ||
khhalak khh*aa*l*i*k k*ee* j*aa*n k*ai* khhalak dh*u*kh*aa*v*ai* n*aa*h*i*
khhalak dh*u*kh*ai* j*o* na(n)dh j*ee* khh*aa*l*i*k k*o*p*ai* th*aa*h*i* ||
jagath m*aa(n)*h*i* h*ai* pa(n)thh s j*ae*th*ae* kar*ai* n*i*(n)dh neh*i* kabeh*oo*(n) th*ae*th*ae* ||
namar s*u*bh*aa*v n kabeh*oo*(n) th*i**aa*g*ae* ||
dh*u*rajan dh*ae*kh dh*oo*r th*ae* bh*aa*g*ae* ||
dh*u*rajan k*ee* sa(n)gath s*u*kh n*aa*h*ee*(n) ||
kar b*i*ch*aa*r dh*ae*kh*o* man m*aa*h*ee*(n) ||
v*i*nay b*i*b*ae*k dhharam dhr*i*rr r*aa*kh*ai* m*i*thh*i**aa* bachan n kabeh*oo* bh*aa*kh*ai* ||
kar*ai* bachan j*o* p*aa*l*ai* n*aa*h*ee*(n) g*o*b*i*(n)dh s*i*(n)gh th*i*s t(h)aar n *aa*h*ee* ||
vaadt*ee* l*ae* kar n*i**aa*e n kar*ee*e*ae* ||
jh*oo*t(h)*ee* s*aa*kh*aa* kabeh*oo*(n) n bhar*ee*e*ae* ||
g*u*r*oo* sar*oo*p khh*aa*las*aa* h*ee*e*ae* ||
j*aa(n)* k*ee* tteh*i*l param s*u*kh leh*ee*e*ae* ||
j*ae* k*u*reh*i*th*ee*e*ae* jag dharas*aa*vath p*aa*h*u*l p*ee*e k*u*karam kam*aa*vath ||
th*i*n s*o*(n) varathan n*aa*h*i*(n) m*i*l*aa*v*ai* reh*i* n*i*ral*ae*p param s*u*kh p*aa*v*ai* ||
sa(n)n*i**aa*s*ee* b*ai*r*aa*g*ee* j*ae*v*ai* aar o*u*dh*aa*s*ee* y*o*g*ee* th*ae*v*ai* 
ja(n)gam v*aa*m*ee* avar j k*o**ee* th*aa(n)* k*aa* j*oo*t(h)*aa* kab*ee* n l*ae**ee* ||


----------



## Admin (Nov 13, 2009)

UPDATE: *akalpurakh*, *simran_kaur and jazlim* are one and the same person shamelessly using multiple ids and Now *Banned*!! :welcome:


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

Admin note: When someone questions the unique status of  Everlasting Guru, based on contrary theories, one can do so forums other than SPN. If one wishes to contest a "sanatan dharma" view one can do that in Interfaith Dialogs. If one wishes to debate a sectarian view related to the original 4 sampardayas of Sikhism, one can post in the Sanatan Sikhism section of the forum. Terms of Service specifically forbid undermining of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj ji. When in the judgment of moderators and mentors, _this has occurred, expect deletions and/or discpilinary action. _When the Banee is blatantly misquoted or misinterpreted, you should expect disagreement. Multiple identities lead to a ban from the forum. Thank you, Narayanjot Kaur


----------



## aman1234 (Nov 13, 2009)

waheguru, allah, ram, hari, and all others are name of gods.
one cannot differenciate between any of them or cast them as high or low.
when u r saying ram or waheguru or hari, the eternal beloved should be in ur mind. thats the only point of view u should have.
And another thing, guru arjan dev ji called God thakur,pritam,prabh and in so many other names. guru Ramdas ji called God Ram. Guru Gobind Singh ji gave us the everlasting fateh " Waheguru ji ka khalsa Waheguru ji ki fateh"
Tell me now which guru is right.
can you ????
if u can then u r completely mistaken or out of ur mind.
When there is no difference between Guru's( all are one jyot) then how can we differenciate between the names they take.
If after so much talkings and sikhi prachars we r only able to discuss on such a useless topic then its no way that we can term ourselves as "Those on the path of sikhi". plz plz plz rethink abt what u posted.
don't worry about the name, my freind !
god will see ur intent


----------



## seeker3k (Nov 13, 2009)

Narayanjot Ji,

Unless you are a member of a sect, maybe one of the sanatan sampardayas or maybe one of the break-away sects that follow Sant Mat, there is no guru/chela arrangement in Sikhism. I mean -- how many times is it necessary to repeat this simple fact? Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj ji is the Guru Granth. And in addition.

Why don’t you answer the question I raised in my post, instead accusing me a member of  sant-mat. I have stated that I have no religion. I am spiritual man.  You still can’t get it?

Are there no one reading this forum other then you moderators? 
As it was pointed out by other moderator that Buddhism lost because hindu rituals crept into Buddhism. This is going to happen to Sikhism. We are willingly increasing the rituals into Sikhism.

seeker


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k ji

You were not the person I was addressing those comments to. In fact I took special care *not  *reply to *your specific arguments* because I thought there were some interesting things that you said and that Lee was going to discuss. I was instead pointing out why I took the actions I took. These comments pertained to the ideas put forward by 
akalpurakh, simran kaur, and jazlim -- who are the same person, and who have been banned.

Please carry on with your comments. Sorry for any misunderstanding.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k ji

Let me give you an example: 

This comment is not about you per se. It is explaining why SPN administration takes the actions it takes. 

SPN administration has to intervene when that kind of blatant commentary takes place -- especially when there is a clear agenda to undermine the Bani of the Gurus by slipping in that same old argument that we read too often -- Sikhs are reconstituted Hindus and SGGS is reconstituted Vedanta. That is wrong. That is the kind of argument put forward by collusion to demoralize Sikhs.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k ji

Here is where I am explaining that no one has deleted anything or modified anything just because of a point of view.

So far nothing has been deleted or modified in any way. In fact -- an error on my part was pointed out by Gyani ji and I have fixed it. That is called behaving like a mature adult. As far as your idea that SPN administration might "ruin" things -- I have to chuckle. Because disrespect to Professor Thind and his work has been expressed by a poster, now banned. And, a misreading of Sanskrit has been pointed out. Not to mention the fact that a completely fabulous claim has been made that Waheguru does not appear anywhere in SGGS.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 13, 2009)

seeker3k ji

This is where perhaps I need to re-state and re-clarify. I can see how you would take this personally. 

You are personally entitled to your own opinion above. But here is something else to consider. Unless you are a member of a sect, maybe one of the sanatan sampardayas or maybe one of the break-away sects that follow Sant Mat, there is no guru/chela arrangement in Sikhism. 

You are entitled to your own opinion.  Now when I said, "Unless you are a member of a sect,"  what I should have said is, "Unless someone is a member of a sect." That is my mistake and I apologize for not being clear. 

The rest of the paragraph was a general comment.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Nov 13, 2009)

Aman1234 Ji,

Gurfateh.

Its NOT a case of which GURU is right or wrong...HOW can that be when they are ALL GURU NANAK JI SAHIB. THAT is why ALL of them used the Pen Name NANAK in their Gurbani. By themsleves they just gave NUMBERS as ID....1,2,3,4,5 and 9. ( 6,7,8) DIDNT WRITE ANY GURBANI. One of the reasons put forward is that Mehrban son of Prithiya was a fantastic Kathawachak of Gurbani and could write bani that looked almost like the Original. FAKE Bnai had already begun making its debut during the tiem of Guru AMARDASS JI..and thus He warns us about KACHI BANI in Anand Sahib..Kachi bnai..kehndeh kacheh, sundeh kacheh !! A sort of Health Warning on Fake Medicine...made by Fakes..Taken by Fakes..WILL LEAD TO DEATH - Physical Death in case of fake Medicine and SPIRITUAL DEATH in case of Kachi Fake Bani. BUT by the Time of MEHRBAN ( Incidentlaly proofs exist that THIS is the TIME the FAKE BHAI BALA JANAMSAHI was prepared by the Mehrban Group to DISCREDIT GURU NANAK LINE OF GURUS..and PROMOTE their OWN LINE as AUTHENTIC.) MEHRBAN and Gang were wriitng Bnai under the MEHLA Chhevan 6 ...etc. ) This is speculation as no one really knows the answer..but its probable that the Guru hargobind Ji and Guru har rai ji abstained from writing any Gurbani to defeat the chaalbaaz Mehrban Group. The SANGATS would then soon know that since Guru hargobind Ji is not writing any Gurbani..all that under Mahalla 6 must be FAKE. By the Time fo the Ninth Guru this fake propoganda had become well known..In fact its a historical fact that Sangats were indeed drawn to Kathas of Mehrban as he did katha so well.mesmerised large crowds...even taking away so much sangats that Bhai Buddha Ji, Bhai Gurdass Ji and other prominent Sikhs had to stand guard at the four directions to inform the sangats of the true Guru....this was perhaps the one way to defeat him..take away what he "copies"....
Anyway I digressed...

1. NOTE that GURU NANAK JI Gave us ORIGINAL...Preamble...EK OANGKAAR..SATNAAM..KARTA PURAKH...NIRBHAU, NIRVAIR, AKAL MOORAT, AJOONEE SAIBHANG, GURPARSAAD. This is the BASIC FOUNDATION of GURMATT. ALL of this Preamble is ORIGINAL and EXCLUSIVE to GURU NANAK...including the Figure 1 adjoining the Open ended Oorrah EK-OANGKAAR. This is not a WORD..its not a NUMBER..its a UNIQUE COMBINATION coined by our FOUNDER to set GURMATT APART from ALL that came Before and will come after.... Thus we find that GURU NANAK JI has already set the PARAMETRES of His NEW totally DIFFERENT GURMATT PHILOSOPHY..WAY OF LIFE that is to Follow.
2. Carefully chosen  and TESTED GURUS followed...NONE tried to show his "independence''break away from the Original parametres..or show He is better..more right..etc etc. EACH followed the EXACT Parametres already established by the Founder. Each used the Same PREAMBLE in His Gurbani. IN Fact they also dropped their own Names and used ONLY NANAK. In their TITLE they used the NUMBER...2,3,4 following the NUMERAL ONE for Nanak Himself. What else could be clearer ???

3. The Following GURUS..then used the PARCHALAAT "names"..of the CREATOR..Raam, Gopal, Thakur..Narayan..Allah, Rahim...etc etc etc as these were parchalaat..meaning well established in the MINDS of the Spiritual Masses.. This is Normal...IF the GURU wants to address the HINDU MASSES.He of NECESSITY has to use the "names" they are FAMILIAR WITH....the Bhgats also use the Names they are familiar with...that is why when Guru Ji addresses the Islamic Masses He uses ALLAH.and RAHIM. Who will listen to Guru Ji using ALLAH at HARDWAAR ?? OR..THAKUR at MECCA ?? The "use" is merely a Formality..those like Bhagat Kabir Ji who has also understood the deeper substance and gone beyond the superficial..uses Allah and Raam INTERCHANGEABLY..thye even QUESTION that IF..the Creator is RAAM and HE is only looking after the EAST (Hindu lands)..then who looks after the WEST (Islamic lands)..Allah Raam ke Pind Paraan MERGES the "superficial Names"..deeper down its the SAME CREATOR... Its the MESSAGE that is important..not the "name" per se.... So its more a case of Prevailing CULTURAL and RELIGIOUS sensibilities that these names are used..the Masses get the MESSAGE is more important than what particular name is important/more/less/ etc. This is an exercise in *FUTILITY*.
4.
Each Guru beginning with Guru Nanak Ji gave the "Naam" Gurmantar as GURU-DEEKHYA to each Disciple.. Those among the Disciples who were OUTSTANDING and emerged tried and true..were given the Ultimate..the GURGADEE...example Bhai Lehnna Ji...became Guru Angad Ji. But its  a FACT beyond Dispute that EACH disciple ahd to receive GURU DEEKHYA from the GURU personally before he/she/ could become a SIKH. There is No record of any so called SIKH..who sitting at home all by himself decided that..from today I am Sikh of this or that GURU. THIS Cannot happen. The Disciple has to approach the GURU....MATHA TEK..and ask the Guru to accept him/her as His disciple...

5. With Guru Gobind Singh Ji..the HUMAN LINE of DEHDHAREE GURUSHIP came to an END. THUS GUru Gobind Singh Ji came up with the Next Best way of GURU DEEKHYA.....becasue Gurgadee was to be passed to the Sri Guru Granth sahib Ji SGGS...the GURU DEEKHYA part of the equation was thus invested in the PANJ. In order to ESTABLISH the AUTHORITY of the PANJ to be BEYOND FUTURE DISPUTES...Guru Gobind RAI Himself Bowed before the PANJ. begged Guru deekhya PAHUL/GURMANTAR from them on Bended Knees and CHANGED His name to GURU GOBIND *SINGH*. Thus He OBLITERATED the Line between Guru and Chela ESTABLISHING the PANJ as the Next Instiutution that will henceforth take over the GURU DEEKHYA part REQUIRED/ of a SIKH.
THIS is why the PANJ are vested with the GURU DEEKHYA AUTHORITY...but WITHIN the AGEIS....TABIAH of the SGGS. 'INDEPENDENT"... of the SGGS the Panj have no power.

6. Now the Vital and important part. The Naam/Guru deekhya that was given personally by each Guru...has now been vested in the PANJ. This GURU-DEEKHYA is the GURMANTAR that the PANJ give to EACH abhilakhee of Khandey batte dee PAHUL. ONLY the PANJ can Give this....and GURU GOBIND SINGH JI ESTABLISHED this Fact in 1699 when He inspite of being defacto "GURU"..went down on Bended KNee to ask the Panj for the Pahul/Gurmantar and change of name. THUS...NO ONE can lay claim to being a "disciple" of SGGS ONLY all by himslef/herself...He/she has of necessity to appear BEFORE the PANJ to be ACCEPTED as a SIKH...be given the Guru-deekhya/GURMANTAR. From 1699, this GURMANTAR has been WAHEGURU. GURU GOBIND SINGH JI in His GURU Capacity Gave us this..and as SIKHS we have to accept it.period. Anyone going "back" to examples used by Guru Nanak Ji or Guru Arjun Ji sahib and insisting that he/she is a "sikh" and only wants to say har har etc is only FOOLING himself/herself...that Har har is "better'..and so on are all self delusional arguments........No one can stop you..its personal choice...and to chose an "argument" put forward by one of my students..why would someone who has been awarded a PHd Degree by a University..be keeping that in a shoe case and flaunting his Kindergarten "certificate"....will he get  a "job" with his kindergarten cert or his PHd Degree ?? No one can Stop the kiddie cert carrier..but people will laugh at his "wisdom"...:welcome:


----------

