# Janam Sakhi Are True Events



## Arvind (Aug 23, 2004)

'Sikh' ji pointed about "Janam Sakhis". 

Considering:
"Janam Sakhis" are not mere stories, actually those are events which truly took place. I tend to agree with this 100%. How do you view these?

Thanks.


----------



## S|kH (Aug 23, 2004)

haha,
so once again this debate will start. I hope I dont get banned.

Janam Sakhris are NOT true events, they are scientifically impossible. They were created and designed for the sole purpose to incite courage and other features which the average person could assosciate with.

I ask you this, if you regard Janam Sakhris as true, then do you regard other stories which various religions state as true also?


----------



## Neutral Singh (Aug 24, 2004)

> so once again this debate will start. I hope I dont get banned.



Dear S|kh,

Rest assured on above aspect... this forum is for people who like to think aloud with logical reasoning and with good examples to support their arguements. I see no reason for knowledgiable persons like you getting banned from any forums... certainly not in this forum... 

Banning is a not a threat in this forum and only  members will decide the fate of member up for banning, in an open court.

So, think aloud and share your views and as i like to say... enjoy !!! 

Best Regards


----------



## Arvind (Aug 24, 2004)

S|kH said:
			
		

> Janam Sakhris are NOT true events, they are scientifically impossible.


I think, correct word is Janam Sakhi instead of Janam Sakhri. Please correct me if needed.

Please cite an example(s) of Janam Sakhi(s) which ones are you talking/doubting about?


----------



## S|kH (Aug 24, 2004)

ThinkingOne said:
			
		

> I think, correct word is Janam Sakhi instead of Janam Sakhri. Please correct me if needed.
> 
> Please cite an example(s) of Janam Sakhi(s) which ones are you talking/doubting about?



I believe you are correct, sorry for the typo, and thanks for correcting me. I've been typing "Sakhris" for a while and no one bothered to fix me up. 

Ok, lets pick a Janam Sakhi to speak of...Baba Deep Singh.
He fought with his head off during battle. 

If you believe this to be true, do you also believe the story of Achilles to be true, in which he was almost immortal and only could die if someone stabbed his heel? 

You see my point...if you believe the "Sikh-stories", then why don't you believe the others? Or are they not capable of performing such deeds because they were not "Sikhs" ?

I am not saying Baba Deep Singh was never alive, he probably was. And he was probably an extraordinary fighter, and would have won the medal of honor in todays wars. So, when the author of the book wrote down his story, he wanted to amplify Baba Deep Singhs courage, bravery, and skill. It came out perfect, why not say that this man fought without his head, how much bravery does that show, and skill with the sword. 

You see? Achilles may as well have existed like that same point.


----------



## Mr §ingh (Aug 24, 2004)

S|kh actually the 'story' or Baba Deep Singh ji, has actually been noted down by Muslim historians - as we need to remember tha most of the SIkh history wasn't even written down by Sikhs, but mostly by Muslims and hindus!
why would muslims want to give credit to a brave Sikh warrior?

Regards


----------



## S|kH (Aug 24, 2004)

Theres plenty of reasons..
money from selling the book, or perhaps and unbiased opinion of an extraordinary fighter.

You know, theres American books about the "Red Baron" from WWII, and how much of an extraordinary fighter Red Baron. They highlight Red Baron as one of the greatest pilots ever. 

Not every muslim or hindu has to hate Sikhs...remember.

-S|kH

P.S. are you the say Mr.Singh as the other forums...Amardeep on the hub? ;-)


----------



## Arvind (Aug 24, 2004)

S|kH ji,

I see where u coming from. 

okay, first of all, let us say 'sikh sakhis' or 'sikh stories' only. 'Janam Sakhi' has a different meaning.

Is this the only sikh story, or there are loads of them, u want to talk about. If yes, just hint on most of those. I am just trying to get the idea of direction of this thread, which it may get into.

Thanks.


----------



## S|kH (Aug 24, 2004)

Guru Nanak holding the huge rock boulder with one hand.
Not a true story. 

Theres others, which I am sure you are aware of...recall some controvesial ones, and we can debate them.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 24, 2004)

*Correction needed.*

Yes, Similar question was raised by me in another post, which was also questioning the Sakhi. I am pasting that as-it-is, for further discussion:



> If the above happened to Baba Deep Singh, then how come Guru Teg Bahadur ji did not walk away with his head in his hand after having had been beheaded? After all He was our 9th Guru. If someone had the powers then he sure did.
> 
> I seek help from the learned members of this forum to clear up the above doubts.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 24, 2004)

*Gurdwara Bhatha Sahib*

Does anyone know the sakhi about the above? 

Tejwant


----------



## Arvind (Aug 24, 2004)

Ref: http://allaboutsikhs.com/gurudwaras/gd-bhatha.htm

This Gurudwara commemorates the visit of tenth Guru Sri Gobind Singh. There is a fascinating story about this place. Here by the touch of the hoof of Guru's horse the red hot brick kiln (Bhatha) instantaneously cooled down. The then local Pathan Chief, Nihang Khan a sincere devotee of the Guru at a great personal risk, looked after the Guru and his followers. The gurudwara is on the main highway from Chandigarh to Kulu and Kangra valleys. Nearest airport Chandigarh is only 40 km away. It is only at a distance of 5 km from Ropar on the left bank of the river Sutlej, where remains of an old Harappan city of ancient civilization were discovered by Archaeological Department of Government of India. The tourist bungalow on the left bank of the river Sutlej, is frequented by large number of tourists on their way to Bhakra Nangal, Kulu Valley, and Anandpur Sahib.
Gurdwara Bhatta Sahib is a historical Gurdwara where Guru Gobind Singh came four times. Guru ji came here for the first time in 1745 B.K. He was returning to Anandpur after winning the battle of Bhangani. It is said that when Guruji asked for a place to stay, the labourers working at the Bhatta - Kiln pointed towards the burning `Kiln'. Ignorent labourers did not realised whom they were talking too. As soon as the horse of Guru stepped on the burning kiln it became cold. Chaudhary Nihang Khan the owner of the Bhatta who was in his Qila was informed about this event. He rushed to Bhatta and to his astonishment saw Guru Gobind singh Ji sitting on the Bhatta. Chaudhary bowed his head in front of the Guru and asked for pardon. He took Guruji to his fort and gave necessary amenities to his army. For the second time Guru Gobind Singh Ji came to the engagement of Alam Khan the son of Nihang Khan in 1752 BK. For the third time in 1759 after returning from Kurukshetra, Guruji came to Bhatta Sahib. For the fourth time, the Guru Ji came to Bhatta after leaving Anandpur Sahib forever in 1761 B.K. Prakash Diwas of 1st, 5th and 10th Patshahi, Sangrand with Amrit Sanchar, Jor Mela from 1st Poh to 4th Poh and Anniversary of Baba Jiwan Singh Ji on 11th are organised here. 

Location: Gurdwara Bhatta Sahib is situated in village Kotla Nihang on Ropar Chandigarh Road. It is 3 km. from the Ropar Railway Station and 40 km. from Anandpur Sahib.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 25, 2004)

Thankyou ThinkingOne/Sevadaar ji for responding to my query so quickly. This could be an interesting starting point for us to immerse in Gurmat via JanamSakhis of our Gurus.

I would like to have opinion of the Sadh Sangat on the above Sakhi.

1. Those who believe in the above Sakhi to be true, give reasons why you think it is true. Please express your viewpoint based on Gurmat.

2. Those who think it is not true, also give Gurmat reason on why not.

Input from all is urged.

Tejwant


----------



## S|kH (Aug 25, 2004)

The horse of Guru Gobind could change things from hot to cold,
but Guru Arjan could not change the pot he was burning in to a moderate temperature? 

Or perhaps that story has only a very little truth...like the actual event could have been a small fire, and then Guru Gobind wrapped a towel around the horses feet, and the horse stomped the fire out...so everyone else thought it walked through, and now that area had become cold...everyone had thought the horse made it turn to cold miracously. 
Perhaps Guru Gobind was just the first smart person to try to put out this fire using that method, so the viewers hailed it as a miracle. 

And I'm not even going to speak about how the story doesnt make scientific sense.


----------



## Neutral Singh (Aug 26, 2004)

Dear S|KH Ji, 

Now, let us take, for example, his much debated visit to Mecca. It is reported that during his sojourn in Mecca, one day he stretched his feet towards the "Ka'bah", the House of God. On the objection of some Muslims that the feet must not be directed to the House of God, Guru Nanak is reported to have said that his feet might be turned in any direction they desired. The keepers of the House turned his feet in the opposite direction but, lo! the House also turned around and followed the feet of the Guru. Muslim and many non-Sikh scholars reject this and other similar stories, obviously for different reasons. 

However, there is no reason for anyone to be disturbed if this or other stories fail to satisfy the requirements necessary for scientific and objective study. In fact, such stories, whosoever its main character may be, *should not necessarily be taken literally*. They are basically meant for teaching people certain realities of life. For example, the above mentioned travelogue of Guru Nanak seems to have been narrated to hammer into people's head the idea of the omnipresence of God.

Bhul Chuk Maaf Karni Ji


----------



## tuaprasaad (Aug 26, 2004)

Right, so what most people here are saying is don't take the sakhi's quite so literally?



Guru Arjan Dev Jee went through the torture that They went through because They believed in submitting to Waheguru's bhana. Just because the story sounds abit too wild to be true, doesn't mean its not true. 



Guru Arjan was made to sit on the red hot iron pan and burning sand was poured over his bare body. He was seated in red-hot caldron, and was bathed in boiling water. Guru's body was burning and was full of blisters.
His friend and devotee, Mian Mir, a Muslim saint, rushed to see him. When Mian Mir saw the ghastly scene, he cried out and said,"O Master! I cannot bear to see these horrors inflicted on thee. If you permit me, I would demolish this tyrant rule (Mian Mir is said to have possessed supernatural powers at that time)." The Guru smiled and asked Mian Mir to look towards the skies. 



The Guru addressed Mian Mir,"Mian Mir, you are perturbed too soon. This is the Will of my Master (God), and I cheerfully submit and surrender to His Sweet Will." The Guru repeated and exemplified in action the meaning of this verse:

_*"Tera kia meetha lagei*_

_*Har Nam padarath Nanak mangei."*_

_*(Asa Mohalla 5, p-394)*_

_*'Sweet be Thy Will, my Lord*_

_*Nanak beseecheth the gift of Nam.'*_


Guru Ji wasn't your average person like you and me, They were Guru Ji and so were able to do things that we now think are not to be taken so literally.







*DHAN DHAN GURU ARJAN DEV JI MAHARAJ*


----------



## etinder (Aug 27, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

i believe these sakhis to be true i might not be able to prove there truth or credibility at this point of time but i believe that our guru's were capable of so many things which my small tiny brain is not capable of comprehending.
i wud like to quote albert eindtein here he used to say "where physics ends metaphysics starts".
and there is a alternate stream of study called parapsychology is there that studies para normal incidents,events n people.


----------



## singh99 (Aug 27, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

WJKK WJKF

There seems to be some confusion here regarding Janamsakhis and stories from Sikh history. Janamsakhis are stories written about incidents in Guru Nanak's life and there are a number of different Janamsakhis written by various authors.  

Sikh

It seems that you are over analysing the Janamsakhis. What the Gurus did such as stop a boulder, sit is complete equipose on a hot plate, etc they could do because they were enlightened beings whose jot were attuned to Waheguru. We can analyse each and every Sakhi and pick holes in at according to your knowledge. Particulary pointless is trying to analyse why one Guru in one situation did something and another Guru did not. 

Baba Deep Singh - You say that it is not possible for Baba Deep Singh to carry on fighting even after his head had been severed from his body. The way I look at this event is that anything is possible for Gursikhs or Brahmgianis. We should not try and place limitations on what Brahmgianis can do or cannot do just because we mortals have such limits. The story shows that a Brahmgiani's vow such as Baba Deep Singh had made to die in fighting in the precincts of the Harmandir Sahib always comes to pass. 

This incident is so inspiring because of the way the Sikhs gave their lives to protect the sancity of the Harmandir Sahib. Only a few hundred of the Sikhs with Baba Deep Singh were veteran fighters, the rest were just Sikhs from the villages en route to Amritsar. These Sikhs joined Baba Deep Singh knowing that most if not all would never return. They wore the clothes of bridegrooms on their way to their marriage ( death ).


----------



## tuaprasaad (Aug 27, 2004)

*Re: Correction needed.*




			
				VaheguruSeekr said:
			
		

> Yes, Similar question was raised by me in another post, which was also questioning the Sakhi. I am pasting that as-it-is, for further discussion:


 
In reference to this Sakhi about Shaheed Baba Deep Singh Ji, Baba Ji carried on fighting after they received the blow to their neck, because they had pledged to reach Harimandir Sahib before breathing their last.

In contrast to Guru Tegh Bahadar Ji Maharaj, They went to Dehli knowing fore well what was to come, if this was not the case why would Guru Sahib have passed on GurGaddi to their son Gobind Rai (later Guru Gobind Singh Ji) before leaving? 

When the Kashmiri Brahmins, led by Pundit Kirpa Ram came to Guru Tegh Bahadur at Anandpur in 1675 for protection against atrocities of Aurungzeb. They had faced stiff taxes, atrocities, and cruelty under Muslim Mughal governor of Kashmir. Honour of their daughters was being lost and they were losing their religion to the fanatic zeal and activities of Islamic crusaders. They asked for a solution. Guru Ji replied, "Such activities can only be stopped by a sacrifice of a great person". Just then 8 years old son of Guru Tegh Bahadur, Gobind Rai (Later Gobind Singh) came along and saw his father in deep thoughts. He enquired about the reason. He offered a possible solution by saying "who else is greater then you, O father". Guru Tegh Bahadur knew immediately about his Dharma. He told Kashmiri Brahmins "Go tell Aurungzeb that if they can convert your Guru then you will all become Muslims." Kirpa Ram obliged and Aurungzeb issued summons for Guru. Guru performed the ceremony and declared that next Guru will be his son, Gobind Rai.  Therefore Guru Ji knew what was to come.


The difference between the example of Guru Ji and Baba Deep Singh Ji in my eyes is that, Guru Ji went to Dehli and made a sacrifice for another religion, and that is what They had set out to do.

Baba Deep Singh Ji had gone out to fight, and received a blow to the neck before they could reach Harimandir Sahib, and thus they carried on fighting until they reached there. Baba Ji was someone who had done a tremendous amount of Sewa and kamai during their lifetime, and I without a doubt believe that they were able to continue fighting until they reached Harimandir Sahib. 

I again refuse to take this Sakhi as an example of something, which is should not necessarily be taken literally. Just because it may seem a bit too unbelievable to be true for some of us now, it doesn’t mean it did happen. Back then Sikhs did an unbelievable about of kamai, making it possible for them to do unbelievable things.







*DHAN DHAN GURU TEGH BAHADUR JI MAHARAJ*



*



*​*DHAN BABA DEEP SINGH JI SHAHEED*


----------



## tuaprasaad (Aug 27, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Well said singh99


----------



## Neutral Singh (Aug 27, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Well said everybody... my intention was not to offend anybody, regards


----------



## etinder (Aug 27, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

i also agree with tuaprasad n singh 99


----------



## plamba (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Mr §ingh said:
			
		

> ... actually the 'story' or Baba Deep Singh ji, has actually been noted down by Muslim historians



Please provide names of books containing the writings of "Muslim historians" supporting the myth that Deep Singh participated in battle while in a headless state.

Puneet Singh Lamba
Boston, MA
http://sikhtimes.com


----------



## plamba (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Neutral Singh said:
			
		

> In fact, such stories, whosoever its main character may be, *should not necessarily be taken literally*. They are basically meant for teaching people certain realities of life. For example, the above mentioned travelogue of Guru Nanak seems to have been narrated to hammer into people's head the idea of the omnipresence of God.



These stories aren't meant to be taken literally because they're not true, correct?

My view is that these exaggerated stories fail to make the intended impact precisely because they use a "hammer" to drive their point home.

Puneet Singh Lamba
Boston, MA
http://sikhtimes.com


----------



## tuaprasaad (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

plamba bro,

What makes you think that these stories are exaggerated?

Why would we need to tell exaggerated stories to make points? Don't you think our ancestors had enough in them to be able to go through whatever is mentioned in these sakhi's?

Are we not belittling our own ancestors and our own history by making such comments?


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

The question is not whether the Sakhis are true or not but do they pass the GURMAT BENCHMARK??

Sakhis that compliment GURMAT can be accepted as true but those that contradict GURMAT should be looked at with  jaundiced eyes. 

Lets not forget that SGGS is our only measuring stick.

Tejwant


----------



## plamba (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				VaheguruSeekr said:
			
		

> The question is not whether the Sakhis are true or not but do they pass the GURMAT BENCHMARK??
> 
> Sakhis that compliment GURMAT can be accepted as true but those that contradict GURMAT should be looked at with  jaundiced eyes.
> 
> ...



Why is the truth not a good enough criteria?

Are you opting to use Gurmat as a yardstick because it is a stricter criteria than the truth or because it is a more lenient criteria than the truth?

Puneet Singh Lamba
Boston, MA
http://sikhtimes.com


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



> Why is the truth not a good enough criteria?
> 
> Are you opting to use Gurmat as a yardstick because it is a stricter criteria than the truth or because it is a more lenient criteria than the truth?
> 
> Puneet Singh Lamba


Puneet Ji,

For me GURMAT IS THE TRUTH and TRUTH needs no criteria, it itself is suffice.

We are talking about the events which may or may not have happened during our GURUS' times. In order to check their veracity from the spiritual viewpoint, we only have SGGS as our measuring tool because SGGS explores and explains what SAT - TRUTH- is.

Tejwant


----------



## plamba (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				tuaprasaad said:
			
		

> Are we not belittling our own ancestors and our own history by making such comments?



No, but mythical sakhis do belittle the intelligence and spirituality of every Sikh who reads them.

Puneet Singh Lamba
Boston, MA
http://sikhtimes.com


----------



## S|kH (Aug 28, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				singh99 said:
			
		

> WJKK WJKF
> 
> There seems to be some confusion here regarding Janamsakhis and stories from Sikh history. Janamsakhis are stories written about incidents in Guru Nanak's life and there are a number of different Janamsakhis written by various authors.
> 
> ...



In the first paragraph, you say the Gurus were enlightened beings, and they could perform such acts our human brain can not. Are they so enlightened that they can defy the laws of various sciences?
And if they are so enlightened, wouldn't some members of the Khalsa, be just as or more enlightened? Besides, Guru Gobind did regard some members of the Khalsa as his Gurus and his teachers now, and took amrit from them. So, can not these acts from such "enlightened people" also be prevalent today?
What about stories from other religions, do you believe those also? I'm sure you consider Prophet Mohammand, Moses, and Jesus intelligent right?
Do you think Moses could separate the sea, or Jesus could walk on water?
Or do you not believe them because they are not "Sikhs". 

And now for the Baba Deep Singh...you say he could fight without his head, because the sancticity of the Golden Temple was being broken. What happened when Bhindranwale tried to defend it? Like, I have stated before, the story is true, that Baba Deep Singh was a great fighter who defended the Golden Temple. But, the part of him fighting with his head is simply false. There are multiple other ways to highlight his signficance during the battle than straight out lie. 
Also, if you believe Baba Deep Singh, do you also believe the story of Achilles? Or was Achilles 'not one with Waheguru' ?

The incident of Baba Deep Singh is very inspiring...just as the incidents of WWII battles, and so forth. 

I agree with plamba on this thread. There are other ways to make stories inspirational and 'hammered'. An inspirational story does not make a story true. 

-S|kH


----------



## Mr §ingh (Aug 29, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Plamba i will get back to you with some names of some historians
but kepe in mind that most historians of the time wer MUSLISM and hindus 



			
				S|kH said:
			
		

> In the first paragraph, you say the Gurus were enlightened beings, and they could perform such acts our human brain can not. Are they so enlightened that they can defy the laws of various sciences?


If Ramrai could - then it's a piece of cake for te Gurus ...



> And if they are so enlightened, wouldn't some members of the Khalsa, be just as or more enlightened? Besides, Guru Gobind did regard some members of the Khalsa as his Gurus and his teachers now, and took amrit from them. So, can not these acts from such "enlightened people" also be prevalent today?


why not - as long as they're 'nayare'
'Jabh lag Khalsa Rehe Nayra tabh lagjao deyo maI SARA - JABH E GE BbIPRAN kI RIT MAI NA KARO IN KI PARTIT'
Thing is - most peopel keep their ridhya SIdhya Gupt  



> What about stories from other religions, do you believe those also? I'm sure you consider Prophet Mohammand, Moses, and Jesus intelligent right?


kind depends on your own opinions...



> Do you think Moses could separate the sea, or Jesus could walk on water?
> Or do you not believe them because they are not "Sikhs".


If they did nuff naam Japma - i bet they could - and do a lot more...



> And now for the Baba Deep Singh...you say he could fight without his head, because the sancticity of the Golden Temple was being broken. What happened when Bhindranwale tried to defend it? Like, I have stated before, the story is true, that Baba Deep Singh was a great fighter who defended the Golden Temple. But, the part of him fighting with his head is simply false.


 No it shows the power of his ARDAAS - he had SOOOOOOOOO MUCH naam kamai - unbelievable it's  hard for a 'muter-brain' like me to comprehend how much Bani they had!
Could a normal Swordsman hold a 18 kg Khanda and swing it around a chop of people's heads?




> There are multiple other ways to highlight his signficance during the battle than straight out lie.
> Also, if you believe Baba Deep Singh, do you also believe the story of Achilles? Or was Achilles 'not one with Waheguru' ?


that's between him and Waheguru, not u and me..



> The incident of Baba Deep Singh is very inspiring...just as the incidents of WWII battles, and so forth.
> 
> I agree with plamba on this thread. There are other ways to make stories inspirational and 'hammered'. An inspirational story does not make a story true.
> 
> -S|kH


and i usggest you read a bit of history.


----------



## tuaprasaad (Aug 29, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				plamba said:
			
		

> No, but mythical sakhis do belittle the intelligence and spirituality of every Sikh who reads them.
> 
> Puneet Singh Lamba
> Boston, MA
> http://sikhtimes.com


 
How does it belittle the intelligence and spirituality who reads them?  You are making a lot of statements but not providing any reasoning behind them.


----------



## xylitol (Oct 4, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Well, in 1699 do you think the Guru cut the head off of goats? wouldn't people have heard the goats crying out after their heads were cut off? Who got the benefit of amrit, the humans or the goats? The Guru is all powerful, he cut off the heads of the body and gave Amrit to the punj pyare. He then set an example of Amrit's importance to the rest of us by begging for it. 

Just b/c something you hear doesn't fit into your mental construct of what is possible or not does not automatically put it into the ''made up'' category.

Love the sharda expressed by many


----------



## S|kH (Oct 5, 2004)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				xylitol said:
			
		

> Well, in 1699 do you think the Guru cut the head off of goats? wouldn't people have heard the goats crying out after their heads were cut off? Who got the benefit of amrit, the humans or the goats? The Guru is all powerful, he cut off the heads of the body and gave Amrit to the punj pyare. He then set an example of Amrit's importance to the rest of us by begging for it.
> 
> Just b/c something you hear doesn't fit into your mental construct of what is possible or not does not automatically put it into the ''made up'' category.
> 
> Love the sharda expressed by many



Do you really believe he cut the heads off of humans and put them back on, and the panj pyare came back as if they were untouched? 

Because if you believe that story, than you must believe Moses rifted the ocean with his mast, and Jesus came back alive, and that he could heal the blind and so forth.  What about the stories related to Zeus? For he performed many miracles. 

Or do you deny these stories and accept the story of Guru Gobind because Guru Gobind was "Sikh" and he was just the character you were raised up believing was "all-powerful" and you were not raised as familiar with the other humans?


----------



## rosethorne (Jan 26, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

WJKK WJKF

One thing I point out of dear Sikhji, that these Janam Sakhis have no scietific relevance. Ok.....Dear Sikhji, At the Time when these Sakhis were written in the books, There were a time that was horrible for Gursikhs, May you don't believe this as no scientific relavance it has. Mughals were so brutal that no human on Earth can believe the Martyr's stories of Sikhi. But Some Hindu and Muslim guys Dare to write that, not for the money but for thier conciousness. Nobody can build money at that time of Moghuls for writing anything good about Sikhs. Anybody who is raising any questions about the relavance of Sakhis with science then pls.... Sikhji, Can you say something about the moon which is standing into the air with no holds. What is the scientific relavance in that. I want to know Sikhji. Whatever our brain accepts that only relavent to us. Otherthan that may be it is our Guru or our Guru's Janam Sakhis, We find confused of ourselves. Why it is happening to ourselves? There is lack of acceptance of PAHUL. The only reason of upcoming these kind of questions. Once Dear Sikhji, Get the Pahul, then he will realize the facts about Janam Sakhis.


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 26, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

:}{}{}: 
All janamsakhis are true the reason why today the janamsakhis of sikhs have some under the spotlight is because after all the apologist arguments have failed religious leaders have realised that historical truth claims are are the only source of evidence that bear winess to their faith even existing.  Sikhism not only has the greatest recollection of historical truth claims it also has the most artefacts ever and dna samples of their gurus in hair fibres etc, it is best to turn a deaf ear to the vain prattle of those who just wake up in the morning and decide they are going to disagree with something, in the wake of the historical documents they just have personal opinions which I think we can all agree amount to zero.

Gurfateh!!!:u): 

ISDhillon


----------



## Prabjyot Kaur (Jan 26, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

If our human mind can't comprehend something; it does not make it non-existant. I beleive everything that was written about our beloved Gurus and Mahaan Shaheed of the sikh history. Let us try to understand what Satguru Guru Nanak Dev ji is trying to explain to our mortal & egoistic mind.

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/0003.html

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/0003.html 
Fyr purwxy smyN ivc keI irSI munI jMgl ivc qp krdy rhy, ijnHW ny aupinSdW ilKIAW[ ieh bhuq purwxIAW Drm-pusqkW hn[ keIAW ivc ieh ivcwr kIqI geI hY ik jgq kdoN bixAw, ikauN bixAw, ikvyN bixAw, ikqnw ku v`fw hY, ieiq Awidk[ BgqI krn gey irSI BgqI dy QW iek Aijhy au~dm ivc l`g pey jo mnu`K dI smJ qoN bhuq pry hY[ ie`Qy siqgurU jI ies aukweI vl ieSwrw krdy hn[ Aijhy koJy jqnW dw hI ieh nqIjw sI ik Awm lokW ny ieh imQ ilAw ik AswfI DrqI ƒ iek bld ny cu`ikAw hoieAw hY[ ieh imswl lY ky siqgurU jI ies dI inKyDI kr ky AwKdy hn ik kudriq byAMq hY, qy ies dw rcnhwr BI byAMq hY[
DOlu Drmu dieAw kw pUqu ] 
sMqoKu Qwip riKAw ijin sUiq ] 
jy ko buJY hovY sicAwru ] 
DvlY aupir kyqw Bwru ] 
DrqI horu prY horu horu ] 
iqs qy Bwru qlY kvxu joru ] 
ArQ :- (Akwl purK dw) Drm-rUpI b`JvW nIXm hI bld hY (jo isRStI ƒ kwiem r`K irhw hY)[ (ieh Drm) dieAw dw pu`qr hY (Bwv, Akwl purK ny AwpxI imhr kr ky isRStI ƒ itkw r`Kx leI ‘Drm’-rUp nIXm bxw id`qw hY)[ ies Drm ny AwpxI mrXwdw Anuswr sMqoKu ƒ jnm dy id`qw hY[ jy koeI mnu`K (ies aupr-d`sI ivcwr ƒ) smJ ley, qW auh ies Xog ho jWdw hY ik aus dy AMdr Akwl purK dw prkwS ho jwey[ (nhIN qW, i^Awl qW kro ik) bld au~qy DrqI dw ikqnw ku byAMq Bwr hY (auh ivcwrw ieqny Bwr ƒ cu`k ikvyN skdw hY?), (dUjI ivcwr hor hY ik jy DrqI dy hyT bld hY, aus bld ƒ shwrw dyx leI hyT hor DrqI hoeI, aus) DrqI dy hor bld, aus qoN hyTW (DrqI dy hyT) hor bld, Pyr hor bld, (iesy qrHW A^Irly) bld qoN Bwr (shwrn leI aus dy) hyT ikhVw Awsrw hovygw?


----------



## Arvind (Jan 26, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Prabjyot Kaur said:
			
		

> If our human mind can't comprehend something; it does not make it non-existant.


 
I so agree with this. Human brain is as they say - so much unused or less understood!


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 26, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Prabjyot Kaur said:
			
		

> If our human mind can't comprehend something; it does not make it non-existant. I beleive everything that was written about our beloved Gurus and Mahaan Shaheed of the sikh history. Let us try to understand what Satguru Guru Nanak Dev ji is trying to explain to our mortal & egoistic mind.


 
Fateh,

Firstly i would like to say it is very encouraging to see how much pyaar and respect eveyrone has for the guru sahibaan. Regardless of which side of the fence one stands on with regards to the authenticity of janamsakhis it is evident that both sides show equal pyaar towards the guru.

With regards to Sakhis there is a very important fact we should always remember. And that is while gurbani is written first hand by the hands of the gurus themselves the same can not be said of the janamsakhis. The latter were written by 2nd hand sources, in some cases decades (or hundred years after) the deaths of the gurus. Thus while there is no contesting that we should accept gurbani as being the authentic word of the guru it would be naive to assume that every word written in the janamsakhis is equally authentic and true.

The gurus took great pains to ensure that after their death they did not become beings which ppl would worship as superhuman beings.  They wanted ppl to get attached to the message and not the messenger.  This is why as long a they were alive they forbid anyone to make paintings or drawings of them, did not write a collection of their own personal life stories (nor did they authenticate any written by someone else). Unfortunately these same measures were not taken with the live of Jesus and we can clearly see the end reslut of that -- the elevation of jesus to some supernatural, miracal filled angel/prophet and more focus on worship of him rather than his message

This is not to say that we should completley disregard every story of sikh history. Most are filled with invaluable lessons and we should learn from them instead of getting fixated on the petty details of the story. For instance, the bible is also full of many great stories with good moral lessons but taking the stories literaly and all that is in them to be factual and true multiple problems have arisen. Science is daily disproving the myths of many biblical accounts, but if ppl rather than takin them as true history regard them for that they are -- metaphors and analogies to explain concepts and instill virtues in man then this problem woudl be avoided.

The same dillema today exists with the janamsakhis. The vast majority are filled with so many metaphors and similes that over time these metaphors themselves have become to be taken as the truth rather then the hidden message contained within them.

Lets take a simple common story prevalent amongst the majority of sikhs today: "kawda the cannibal and guru nanak." In short, while travelling thru the jungles mardana was captured by kawda who then placed him over a fire and was preparing to cook and eat him. mardana prayed to guru nanak for help, and then upon arrival of the guru and his divine presence the fire instantly became cool and went out. Thus mardana was saved from the fire and kauda 'rakash' (cannibal) was transformed itno a disciple of the guru.

Now if we analyse this story according to the philosophy of gurbani we will see that it goes completley against gurmat. No guru ever engaged in any miracles or use of miraculous powers. Be it to shower rain on a dry field, to stop a gigantic boulder with their hand or to save someone elses life. If we examine these stories we will see they raise many points which make the gurus contradictory and hypoctires.

Why would one guru be willing to use miraculous power to save his own life (guru nanak stopping the bolder) yet another guru openly walk to his own execution (guru tegh bahadaur)? Why would the guru be willing to use miracles to make rain fall on a dry land simple cuz ppl wanted crops to grow while at another time the guru ostracize his own son (ram rai) for performing miracles to impress someone (as well as altering the bani)?

With regards to the above story, if the presence of the guru was enought to put out the fire why did the fire not go out when guru arjan dev ji sat on the boiling cauldron full of water?

In so many cases the guru is telling us to accept the will of god, bhanna mun-na, yet in their lives we have sakhis where on one hand they are openly accepting their fate (tortures, executions) yet at other hands the gurus are going against the will and using their own special powers to alter the course of events for petty worldy things (be it to save someones life, to make rain fall, or to teach a lesson). And we cannot simply argue that the guru used miracles to teach lessons, cuz the only thing the guru said is worhty to help man change is love and gurbani.

Finally about the above story, in order to make it more appaeling to the listeners, much like they do in hollywood, storytellers and historians have mixed in a great deal of hype and spice to the truth. Firstly, Kauda was not a rakash, i.e. he was not a man eater. He belonged to a group of people, nomads who used to typicaly live in forests, jungles (much like many native americans in north america lived in jungles prior to colonization). Due to their limited contact with regular rural and city folk very little ws known bout them and most ppl viewed them as wierdos. And stories would grow bout how these jungle ppl were evil, possessed or wud eat men. 

(when the person ur spreading rumours about isnt around to disprove them u can come up with whatever u want n many ppl will eevntually start belieiving it. For instant, the sasquatch isnt around (cuz it doenst exist) to disprove any of the myths about it so we can make up whatever stories we want about it)

ANyways, due to limited contact, false myths being created bout them, most ppl viewed n treated these jungle men with very little respect or care. They were regarded as almost less than human animals. Thus one can see that when there was any rare contact between regular ppl and these jungle men, the conversations were usually not pleasent.

In this light, what is most likely is when mardana n guru nanak did come across these people, for guru nanak travelled all over and interacted with all people, initially kauda probably looked upon them as ordinary rural folk and with this prejudice approached them with anger and resentment. He probably thoght they were out to mock or ridicule him and became defensive as a result of all the years of social conditioning. He may even have become verbally and physically agressive. But when Guru Nanak spoke, he always spoke with sincere honest heart full of love. And Guru Nanak always tried to reason with people using language and examples they would understand. He probably asked Kauda what he would gain by hurting either of them, what benefit it would serve, and if he did hurt or kill them if he could bring them back to life. This made Kauda think if i cant give life why wud i want to take theirs away. And if they arent causing me harm why should i harm them. Though this interaction of love and reason Kauda came to understand Guru Nanak and became his disciple.

There was no miracle or magic involved. We need to start looking at the traditional sakhis which have been passed down (jus like folk stories and fables) and start analysing them accordign to gurbani and see whetther they could actually be true or are more likely been made up (at least segments of them). And above all, we need to rise above any sakhi and instead of focusing on the minor details about them, understand the hidden message in them.


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 27, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

I have to say I disagree with the last post if we look at gurbani it quite rightly does reject miracles but only in the sense of man not being capable to perform such acts which are will within the capability of human nature and not supernatural, their is nothing supernatural when we have gift of naam the "kaar naunidh aaavai thai" what we see as miracles are not something greater than us its just we have not acheived that state. The next argument about the fact that one guru did something which has been termed a miracle and then why did the other gurus not use miracles to prevent their own martyrdom, this is about perception when guru arjan dev ji took shaheedi he did so to set a stone of martyrdom in sikhism this is why he responded to mian mir that "please do not stop my execution you laid the foundation stone of harimandar and i am going to lay the foundation stone of martyrdom", their were political reasons for why the gurus carried out what they did, it is the will of god that guru showed the power of naam through what people today term as miracles and it is through the power of naam that guru performed the sacrifice of martyrdom. Science is a system of inquiry it is not capable of examining the power of naam.

"The Guru replied that he had no miracles except the True Name, and he uttered the following Sabad: 
"Were I to put on a dress of fire, construct a house of snow and eat iron;
Were I to turn all my troubles into water, drink it, and drive the earth as a steed;
Were I able to put the firmament into one scale and weigh it with a tank;
Were I to become so large that I could be nowhere contained;
and were I to lead every one by the nose;
Had I such power in myself that I could perform such things or cause others to perform them, it would be all in vain.
As great as the Lord is, so great are His gifts; He bestoweth according to His pleasure.
Nanak, he on whom God looketh with favor obtaineth the glory of the True Name."
(Majh di Var, Slok Mohalla 1, p-147) "

So I would not be lossed in words, miracles are something which are pleasing to those who do not have the treasure of naam, with the naam you can do anything all is a possible and natural and the will of god and nothing is supernatural.

ISDhillon


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 27, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				ISDhillon said:
			
		

> The next argument about the fact that one guru did something which has been termed a miracle and then why did the other gurus not use miracles to prevent their own martyrdom, this is about perception when guru arjan dev ji took shaheedi he did so to set a stone of martyrdom in sikhism this is why he responded to mian mir that "please do not stop my execution you laid the foundation stone of harimandar and i am going to lay the foundation stone of martyrdom", their were political reasons for why the gurus carried out what they did, it is the will of god that guru showed the power of naam through what people today term as miracles and it is through the power of naam that guru performed the sacrifice of martyrdom.


 
With all due respect veer ji, i agree with you, what the average person views as miracles are merely an extension of those powers of God which man does not fully understand or has become familiar with.  And yes, these "miracles" are indeed possible for nothing is impossible when we realize that Gods Grace is behind all actions.

Hwever the point i was making was that regardless a miracle being possible or not, no guru would ever dare to partake in the display of any such power, or shuktee, regardless what the reasoning or motive was.  Why would Guru Nanak try to stop a boulder with his bare hand?  Cuz he was afraid of dying?  He wanted to show ppl the power of Naam?  Was he not willing to live life by the same means as the everage person and use the same means in every aspect of his life, including confronting danger?

On the other hand, why would guru gobind singh fight four wars with his bare hands, let thousands of his fellow singhs and singhnees be killed if he could simply excercise the power of naam and dispell all the attacks?  DId he not posses the power of naam?  If guru nanak was not willing to let himself get injured or die at the hands of a rock why would guru gobind singh be willing to not only let himself die but thousands of other ppl die along with him if he cud of prevented it?

The reason is that Guru Gobind SIngh, regardless of the powers he possessed, wanted to show that all men should live by the same means (no matter how much shukthee they may acquire thru naam).  That is why every guru, ate, slept, fought with their own bare hands like any average human being.  To show humanity that every man and woman is capable of the same things they did so long as they put full faith in the One Creator.  No guru would ever do something which would contradict the actions or teachings of another guru.

If we argue that the guru wanted to show the power of naam by display of what we call miracles, then why was ram rai dispelled from the panth for the use of these same powers when he shwed them to the emperor?  Because the Guru watned every sikh to realize that no sikh is allowed to excercise of any of thse powers (ridhee sidhees) regardless if he acquires them.  A sikh shall always live byt he same simple means that all other men live as.  And that is thru honest hard effort.


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 27, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Satsriakal Kharkoo Ji 

“Why would Guru Nanak try to stop a boulder with his bare hand? Cuz he was afraid of dying? He wanted to show ppl the power of Naam? Was he not willing to live life by the same means as the everage person and use the same means in every aspect of his life, including confronting danger?”

This all happened by divine hukum of akal purakh we should not try to second guess the mind of our gurus, the parable shows how the valli khandari was humbled when he saw the power and then he discovered the truth that he had been living his whole life as a lie.  Also if I were to second guress the mind of the guru I would not say the event never happened I would say the guru had a lot more work to do in the body of nanak before the jot was passed to angad, but again I am not one to speculate because its poitless I accept the traditional view whole heartedly I also know that if guru tegh bahadar did not give his shoulder to makkan shahs boat no one would have known who the true guru was in a village of pretenders, how do you explain that one?, and this guru also attained martyrdom.

You then make a statement then answer it yourself, the guru is already the purpose of sikhi which is self-realisation therefore has the power of naam, but the ordinary sikh does not but with devotion will achieve with guru kirpa, this is the reason why he organised a temporal body known as khalsa to conduct and deal with people as all human beings would, he did not do it because he thought it was outrageous to show miracles, you yourself say that the guru created the panth so they could behave as ordinary human beings but this does not mean the guru did not have shakti, plenty of sant mahapurash have shown takht of akal with guru kirpa, lets stopping calling it a miracle.

Ram rai was not expelled for showing a miracle he was expelled for saying "mitti baimaan ki" instead of "mitti mussalmaan ki" in the moghul court, but I know atal rai was admonished for bringing his friend mohan back to life because he was bit by a snake, then baba atal rai committed suicide and guru ji built a tower in his honour it is a hexagonal shaped building at harimander.  Its funny you believe that ram rai was expelled for showing miracle but guru ji couldn’t have shown a miracle?, guruji can show a miracle only guru can as akal purakh is guiding guru but dhirmalias were occultist the 2 are different, my gurus miracles are apart of divine order not free choice.

Gurfateh! 

indy


----------



## S|kH (Jan 27, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				ISDhillon said:
			
		

> Satsriakal Kharkoo Ji
> 
> “Why would Guru Nanak try to stop a boulder with his bare hand? Cuz he was afraid of dying? He wanted to show ppl the power of Naam? Was he not willing to live life by the same means as the everage person and use the same means in every aspect of his life, including confronting danger?”
> 
> ...



Miracles can't happen, specifically the ones you speak of. These go against the nature of science. Do not get faith and logic twisted. 

Also, why can't we question the minds of the gurus ? I think thats ont of the key points in learning how the gurus minds worked -- is by questioning why they did what they did. I question them all the time, and sometimes even disagree -- am I bad human or sikh?

Is that not what the Gurus wanted...for them to lay a foundational belief system and then we build off it by ourselves?

No one brought anyone back alive from the dead. No one stopped a huge boulder with one hand. No one fought a war while holding their head in their hand. These are all myths. Read science, read logic...these things go against basic laws of life.

No one is above these laws of life, no matter how "divine" or "big" other people think you are.

One of the things I love about Sikhi is that the Gurus were normal human beings, there were not superhuman or divine. They were just extraordinary in thought and action. A turn-off for me is when people like to claim the gurus were like Christ, or even that Christ was so extraordinary, so superhuman, he was resurrected from the dead. 

I don't understand how anyone thats alive in 2006 can believe such stories. But, to each their own.


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 28, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Fateh,

If you wish to believe that the gurus engaged in performane of miracles or display of supernatural shakti for whatever reasons they deemed necessary, then that is a choice you are entitled to.  But i for one do not view the gurus as superhuman who needed to display extraordinary powers for any reason whatsoever.

For me, the fact that they were able to live the virtuous lives of highest character given the intense obstacles and hardships they had to face is a miracle enough in it self.  The fact they lived the same life as you and me, using the same means as you and me yet still were able to become 'one with god' is enough inspiration.  I do not see the need of any miracle laced stories to prove to me what great men the gurus were.

The "traditional views" you talk for mostly originate from sakhis and stories written much after the demise of the gurus.  In most cases these stories are filled with brahmincal influences, and innumberable concepts, idead which go completely against the very fundamental tenets of gurmat.  To accept them as authentic proof of actual events simpply cuz of tradition or past generations taught us about them or believed in them would be tantamount to blind faith.  SIkhi on the other hand runs completely on the other end of the spectrum and is founded on logical reasoning and questioning.  

One cannot be a student unless one is willing to learn, and one cannot learn unless they have questions which they are willing to ask.  To question eevents in the gurus life is not a sin, nor is it a show of disrespect.  If anything, simply accepting any story one conjures up about the gurus as being true, simply cuz the gurus name is used in it, or some sant or baba told it in some katha would be a real show if disregard for the true sanctity and values that the gurus stood for.

Indeed sikhi should be founded on a strong commitmment and faith in the guru, but this faith should not be blind.  It should be developed on a ground of logical reasoning and discerning intellect.  Otherwise the sikhi we follow and teach others will quickly become (as it already is in many cases) no different then the heavily diluted mytholigical story driven hindu dharam.


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 28, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

The last 2 responses show a myopic understanding of sikhism and its doctrine, yes you can presume what the guru thought but you cannot rule out the miraculous happenings, the reason why you all reject it today is because you are not capable of doing the same, i couldnt care less whether it was 2050 the simple fact remains that the guru was not operating from their maan the were one with god all times and therefore sat kartar flowed with gods hukum whenever the need arises.  Just because science and logic has failed to account for my guru and other transcendetal phenomenon does not  mean i am going to let go of my gurus hand and accept the law of science, NO WAY!!!!, All the sakhis are true and if you fear brahmanism they you need to do some naam simran because you are being directed by panj chor.

Their are gurdwaras all over the world in far off places where such divine happenings took place are these all myths or conspiracies, wake up everybody you are being consumed by atheist scientific culture and dont even realise it.  The gurus were allpowerfull and we as sikhs can also be allpowerful but that should never be our premise for bhagti.

and what about bhai gurdas is he a liar:

Vaar 1 Pauri 32 At Mecca
bwbw iPr m`ky gXw nIl bsqR Dwry bnvwrI]
Donning blue attire then Baba Nanak went to Mecca.
baabaa fir maakae gayaa neel basathr dhhaarae banavaaree||
Line  1   

Awsw h`Q ikqwb k`C kUjw bWg mus`lw DwrI]
He held staff in his hand, pressed a book under his armpit, caught hold of a metal pot and mattress.
aasaa haathh kithaab kaashh koojaa baang musaalaa dhhaaree||
Line  2   

bYTw jwie msIq ivc ijQy hwjI h`j gujwrI]
Now he sat in a mosque where the pilgrms (hajis) had gathered.
baithaa jaae maseeth vich jithhae haajee haaj gujaaree||
Line  3   

jW bwbw su`qw rwq nUM v`l mihrwby pWie pswrI]
When Baba (Nanak) slept in the night spreading his legs towards the alcove of mosque at Kaba,
jaan baabaa suthaa raath noon vaal mehiraabae paane pasaaree||
Line  4   

jIvn mwrI lq dI kyVHw suqw ku&r ku&wrI]
the qazi named Jivan kicked him and asked who was this infidel enacting blasphemy.
jeevan maaree lath dhee kaerrhaa suthaa kur kuaaree||
Line  5   

lqW vl ^udwie dy ikauNkr pieAw hoie bjgwrI]
Why this sinner is sleeping his legs spread towards God, Khuda.
lathaan val khhudhaae dhae kiounakar paeiaa hoe bajagaaree||
Line  6   

tMgoN pkV GsIitAw iPirAw m`kw klw idKwrI]
Catching hold of the legs he lynched (Baba Nanak) and lo and behold the miracle, the whole of Mecca seemed to be revolving.
ttangon pakarr ghaseettiaa firiaa maakaa kalaa dhikhaaree||
Line  7   

hoie hYrwn kryn juhwrI ]óò]
All got surprised and they all bowed.
hoe hairaan karaen juhaaree ||aa||


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 28, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



> ISDhillon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 28, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

:u): 

“If anything, one who follows the guru without any questions in their mind (in beginning at least) would be tantamount to living by blind faith”

A wise man once said it is ok to have blind faith for it is the religion which has the vision, so the mind is actually blind, and anyway guru wants you to surrender to his message not refute it eg, je tu prem killen ka chaau sir tal talli galli mere avauh”,

“I reject the display of miracles by the gurus becaue they go against the fundamental tenets of gurmat.”

Gurmat says that all mracles are from naam therefore what you see in the guru is a product of naam its not his fault that he has power of naam why do you presume he wants to impress people he is just doing his job. Look:

3 BairaarheeGuru Ram Das​iriD buiD isiD suK pwvih Bju gurmiq hir rwm rwm ]1] rhwau ] 
Riches, wisdom, supernatural spiritual powers and peace are obtained, by vibrating, meditating on the Lord God, under Guru's Instruction. ||1||Pause||



Look when gurgaddi was passed to guru angad dev ji supernatural powers were passed also:


*20. **Page1392 Line 18 Raag Sava-yay (praise of Guru Amar Das: Kal*

iqqu nwim risku nwnku lhxw QipE jyn sRb isDI ] 
*thith naam rasik naanak lehanaa thhapiou **jaen** srab sidhhee || *
Nanak delighted in the Naam; He established Lehnaa as Guru, who was imbued with all supernatural spiritual powers.

Not everything that we can see is the measure of existence in this regard look what gurmat says about intellect:


*Page50 Line 5 Raag Sriraag: Guru Arjan Dev*jo dIsY so ivxsxw mn kI miq iqAwgu ]1] rhwau ] 
*jo dheesai so vinasanaa man kee math thiaag ||1|| rehaao || *Whatever is seen, shall pass away. Abandon the intellectualizations of your mind. ||1||Pause||
Intellect is only awakened through naam:


*Page92 Line 4 Raag Sriraag: Saint Kabir*aupjY shju igAwn miq jwgY ] 
*oupajai sehaj giaan math jaagai || *Intuitive peace and poise well up within, and the intellect is awakened to spiritual wisdom.
So in reality gurmat does not say that janamsakhis are untrue because they are not miracles they are well within the capability of those who have power of naam so my guru is represented by fair account in janamsakhis in full respect of gurmat.

“They didnt simply jus look at him and magically say we wanna follow u.”

this where you and me differ on an intellectual level, I believe that we don’t have to understand the words of bani because they are for your soul and that is why people took to the gurus because the gurus words awakened the soul within them, but it is good to understand the words if you want to but we should not make that the rule of law because that is your opinion. Bani is god.

“Which true lover of sikhi would not be worried bout this and wish to put a halt to this and restore sikhi to its true form?”

sikhi is about transcending duality we cannot do this if we keep trying because ultimately you just need to do what you as an individual have to do as a sikh and when you are saved you will save those around you, it starts with you no one is stopping your sikhi it is just fear in you.

“As for doing naam simran, thank u for the suggestion, but might i also suggest perhaps you do some study of what naam simran is. Naam simran is not some sort of magical mantar one recites which makes one spiritual and fight off the five vices”

this is your personal opinion you are not the guru everyone has their own sikhi there is not one way our practices are not rigid if I have learned from bani that I can become spiritual and fight of the 5 vices then that’s my progress if you achieved something more then you are free to dwell In it but I disagree, can you from now on back up your comments from gurbani I will too:

*30. **Page32 Line 1 Raag Sriraag: Guru Amar Das*

AMDI nwmu n cyqeI sB bwDI jmkwil ] 
*andhhee naam n chaethee sabh baadhhee jamakaal || *
The spiritually blind do not even think of the Naam; they are all bound and gagged by the Messenger of Death.

*45. **Page59 Line 8 Raag Sriraag: Guru Nanak Dev*

igAwnu iDAwnu Duin jwxIAY AkQu khwvY soie ] 
*giaan dhhiaan dhhun jaaneeai akathh kehaavai soe || *
Know that from the vibration of the Word, we obtain spiritual wisdom and meditation. Through it, we speak the Unspoken.



*59. Page94 Line 4 Raag Maajh: Guru Ram Das*

guir pUrY hir nwm isiD pweI ko ivrlw gurmiq clY jIau ]1] 
*gur poorai har naam sidhh paaee ko viralaa guramath chalai jeeo ||1|| *
The Perfect Guru has attained spiritual perfection in the Name of the Lord. How rare are those who follow the Guru's Teachings. ||1||

and there are many more quotes.
I am not saying that showing powers would make someone egotistical I never said that, I said that even though the powers come to bhagat we should never want anything but if when attuned to god his hukum asks for power to be used then it is by his order it has nothing to do with ego don’t twist my words. I also believe that mool means divine essence and we all have 1 divine essence, but there is only one god but we are the same quality of god in essence but not god at the same time and yes we have the same power as god, “man to jot saroop hai apna mool pachaan” we then use formula of mool which is mool mantar to discover our own ik onkar, don’t try to use your personal opinion of Sikhism as being exclusive yours is but a personal opinion as is mine.

I don’t know about the fake babas but my gurus weren’t fake and they were capable and did carry out such “miracles” people believed then but with time faith becomes diluted and some people stop believeing and start having a pick and choose sikhi.

“If u wish to believe them as being true it is ur choice.”

It is also your choice to reject the truth as it is in plain language rather than look for hidden meanings I accept the gurus message as it is and for me bani is not poetry but something which is supernatural and it guides my spirit even when I do not understand the meaning. We are both approaching the faith from different perspectives, I believe it is ok to understand bani to mould your life for the greater good of societal reform but that is not the premise of bani, it is for the soul and self-realisation. But you can follow your sikhi the way you want and I will too.

Good day  

Isdhillon


----------



## drkhalsa (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Dear Khalsa ji

I agree with Indy ji as per my current understanding

Miracles are possible as all of them are from akal himself 

Journey of any quest is from known to unknown and the thing that cause progression is Creativity 

Laws of science are the known facts but there was a time when they were unknown facts but creativity of some sciectist/philosopher lead to it and it become known 

Akal is the only creative force and leads to new scientific laws and this will continue in future as well just like flying in air was miracle few centuries ago but it is scientific law now 

Same is true for miracles . and akal is not bound by Scientific laws but our understanding is .



Jatinder Singh


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

The contention is not whether "miracles" can or can not happen.  God is infinite and His powers are infinite as well.  For one whose powers are so feeble (us humans) in comparison to the Creator it would be pointless to argue whether miracles can or cannot happen.  It would be akin to trying to describe and quantify all of Gods attributes -- a futile endevour from any approach.

The whole discussion (or at least my point) was around the fact whether the gurus would ever voluntarily engage in the display of these miracles to others.  The gurus always stressed the need for man to live by the Hukam of Waheguru.  That is why in in so many stories we hear of average folk goin to sadhus, yogis etc to fulfill their wishes (i.e. make rain fall when their fields were in prolongued drought).  IN each case the guru would stress to the people why go to these men to get ur wishes filled, instead keep faith in the One Creator and accept all that He does as good.  In effect, the gurus openly rejected the use of any special powers (ridhis sidhis).  So why then would they for their own individual purposes, whatever they may have been, themselves went against their own philosophy and engaged in miracles?  It would make them hypocrites.

Nearly all other religions are filled with stories of how the founders, or prophets engaged in various miracles to prove that these men were truly one with god.  But the beauty of Sikhi lies in that each Guru, though being completely in oneness with god, ALWAYS LIVED THE SAME SIMPLE LIFE AS ANY AVERAGE MAN.  They always used the same means of hard honest effort to achieve any goal they set out to.  And they only relied on logical reasoning, seasoned with love and tolerance to convey their message to everyone around them.  IS it not enough that the gurus were able to achieve miraclous success in transforming the average mans psyche and spirit from the lowest of the low to lofty heights all thru regular everyday means?  Why do we need to follow the path of other religions and add the use of "miraculous powers" to the gurus undertakings?  WIll their value as a guru lessen if they used ordinary efforts like everyone else?  Will they be any less inspiring if they didnt perform any miracles?

The majority of the sakhis in which these miraculous accounts are written are full of so much information, events, and ideas which are contrary to gurmat that any honest follower of Sikhi would be forced to at least analyze these stories individually using the kusvutee of gurbani.  Whehter the inclusion of miracles in these janamsakhis was done intentionaly to confuse and dilute sikhi with brahminological ideology or was done innocently merely as a metaphorical tool to help drive home a deeper meaning one thing remains certain:  That sikhs as a whole seem to be more infatuated and fixated on the miracles of the guru rather than the underlying message of the guru.  And I believe the only way one can undo this damage is by taking time to read and understand gurbani so that we can get a clearer picture of gurmat philosophy in its true form.  And once we do this, i think it become very clear that the gurus performing any sort of miracle could never be true.

Rab Rakha


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

I agree with Dr Khalsa   all that happens even miracles are from akal why do we devalue the human, the greatest defiance of the law of non-contradiction is that we share the same divine essence as akal but we are not akal at the same time,

With respect to Kharkko4life Ji. 

You seem to be holding on to this idea that sikhs who accept miracles are salvaging a sense of self worth and if i may say so in you mind set that "is not cool", that the current trend should be to have the gurus as human beings and that their words were theonly thing that amazed people and then logically if they did perform miracles then that would mean that they were trying to be famous this is silly!:}--}: 

“IN each case the guru would stress to the people why go to these men to get ur wishes filled, instead keep faith in the One Creator and accept all that He does as good.”

Well guru arjan dev ji sent mata ganga ji to baba Buddha ji so she could have a baby why did she not just sit back and say oh well guess its not in my karam, all is gods hukum even going to sadhus, where does gods hukum start and stop there is no answer to any of these questions.

“themselves went against their own philosophy and engaged in miracles?”

it is your personal opinion and not gurus philosophy when you talk of miracles why don’t you provide solid evidence to back up your claims.

“ALWAYS LIVED THE SAME SIMPLE LIFE AS ANY AVERAGE MAN.”

AND THE AVERAGE MAN IS CAPABLE OF WHAT YOU DEEM AS MIRACLES HOWEVER AS PER MY UNDERSTANDING OF SIKHI MIRACLES ARE JUST PART AND PARCEL OF BEING HUMAN.

“Why do we need to follow the path of other religions and add the use of "miraculous powers" to the gurus undertakings?”

Well miracles mean nothing to me I listen and take advice of plenty of people including my lectururers but they never performed any miracles, but guess what I would respect the guru whether they did miracles or not but I am not going to reject the miracles because someone thinks my level of faith is appeasement through miracles that is your presumption and I am sure people are impressed by such things but trust me a person can believe in miracles but the words or bani still means more to them.

“i think it become very clear that the gurus performing any sort of miracle could never be true.”

Good luck my personal view is that it will never happen because there are plenty of individuals like me who do understand the underlying message and still accept the janamsakhis as being true, not everyone is out to bigup their faith just because of miracles you just accept and move on cos in reality my guru is here today and that’s all I need I don’t need history of past gurus everytime I read path I am with my guru.

Please readjust your thoughts,OMG 

ISDhillon:{;o:


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Fateh,

Much Thanks for the silly-faced icons. Dont know what place those faces hold in a discussion about gurmat, or if u felt that perhaps their use would somehow make me more likely to be left in amazement of ur remarks and be more inclined to accept ur viewpoint. By the way, looking at the volatile range of emotions displayed in the icons u used, seems like perhaps a little relaxation mite be a gud idea (hehe).




			
				ISDhillon said:
			
		

> You seem to be holding on to this idea that sikhs who accept miracles are salvaging a sense of self worth and if i may say so in you mind set that "is not cool", that the current trend should be to have the gurus as human beings and that their words were theonly thing that amazed people and then logically if they did perform miracles then that would mean that they were trying to be famous this is silly!:}--}:


 
Firstly, i am not trying to make ppl see the gurus as human beings. That is already a fact! They were not avtaars, incarnations, demi-gods, or superhumans etc., they were the same old regular type of human beings as you and I. The only difference was they were living at a completely different spiritual level (i.e. the highest state of brahmgyani, or anotherwords completely immersed as one with God). I have no need to make ppl believe this, for the fact they were human like us is common sense.

As for what part of the guru amazed ppl, i never stated it was just their words. In fact, for me everything about the gurus is amazing. How they thought, how they spoke, how they acted. It was not just their words which was amazing but also all their actions. The only caveat to this is that their actions did not include the need for display of any miracles. The regular ordinary actions they performed, i.e. never being afraid, always speaking out for others rights, always acting out of love even to the cruelest of attackers etc. amidst the most difficult and threatening of environments, to me these actions themselves are amazing and beyond belief sometimes. I have no need to see the gurus performing miracles to validate their greatness.

As for why they would perform miracles, i have yet to see a single reasonable answer. To simply state that the miracles happened and we should just accept them as true is a very naive and immature argument. To say that i believe every 100% of what is written in the janamsakhis simply cuz it is written is tatamount to blind faith, not reason based faith of a true learner (sikh).





> Well guru arjan dev ji sent mata ganga ji to baba Buddha ji so she could have a baby why did she not just sit back and say oh well guess its not in my karam, all is gods hukum even going to sadhus, where does gods hukum start and stop there is no answer to any of these questions.


 
The above sakhi u quote goes to show just how ridiculous some of the contents of purataan janamsakhis is and how heavily influenced they are by brahmincal ideology. Firstly, if someone came to the guru for a baby why would guru arjan dev on one hand accept their request and grant them a baby (be it thru them or 2nd person like baba budha) while at the same time be compiling SGGS as the eternal guru in which it states:

jMmxu mrxw hukmu pCwxu ]1]
_Understand that birth and death come according to the Lord's Will. (p.412)_
jMmxu mrxw hukmu hY BwxY AwvY jwie ]
_Birth and death are subject to the Command of the Lord's Will; through His Will we come and go. (p.472)_

Did guru arjan dev ji consider baba budha ji equivalent to God that mata ganga should go to him for a child? Isnt it ironic how much this story resembles the then (and in many cases still present ritual) of ppl going to pandits, sadhus, brahmins etc in hopes of gettin a certain wish filled. The brahmins of then (and now) would say if u want a child come to me with ur prayers and do such and such service for me and then i will grant u the gift of a child (by myself doing various 'special' prayers and mantars). The only difference in this story is that mata ganga is told to take her prayers to baba buda ji and do some sewa of him and by that she will be blessed with a child. Whatever happened to the notion that Guru Nanak stated above that all birth comes about thru Gods Will? Why then would a sikh go to another human being in hopes of having a birth in their family? This is what i mean by the janamsakhis in many cases contain so much unchecked information that if analyzed with a critical eye they make the gurus into complete hypocrites both when compared to other gurus and compared to the gurbani they wrote.





> it is your personal opinion and not gurus philosophy when you talk of miracles why don’t you provide solid evidence to back up your claims.


 
You are right, i am not claiming to be an all knower of sikhi and neither do i claim every word of mine shud be accepted as pure truth, for the only pure truth i would ever advise anyone to accept is gurbani period. However with regards to providing solid evidence, i am not sure what u are referring to, but i could definitely ask you of the same. When u say that miracles did happen what evidence do u have? The janamsakhis? Do u consider them to be of equal level as gurbani? And where in gurbani does it show the guru engaging in any kind of miracle or for that matter condone the displayin of miracles by any man?






> AND THE AVERAGE MAN IS CAPABLE OF WHAT YOU DEEM AS MIRACLES HOWEVER AS PER MY UNDERSTANDING OF SIKHI MIRACLES ARE JUST PART AND PARCEL OF BEING HUMAN.


 
You seem to be in too much of a hurry to try and break down my argument that you fail to properly read my posts. I never contested whether one is or isnt capable of engaging in "miracles". The powers of the human mind, once in complete harmony with the Lord are beyond description. My whole argument was and is whether the gurus would ever perform miracles and if so why.

Every action the gurus did they always provided reason for it. They never simply did something and said ok you must simply accept this cuz i am your guru. How would that make them any different than the self-righteous pandits, and brahmins who preached to the masses to follow their every word simply cuz they were "brahmins"? The gurus wanted to pass on the torch of sikhi to each memebr of the panth equaly, and the only way this could be done is through the dissemination of the same knowledge and understanding that they possessed to the followers. That is why, if the gurus made a certain remark, or did a certain action and the sikhs questioned them of what the purpose of that was the gurus would always give them answers with clear reasoning behind it. Only thru this process of sharing their own understanding would the gurus be able to be sure that the sikhs could then pass this same understanding onto others.

gurU isKu isKu gurU hY eyko gur aupdysu clwey ]
_The Guru's Sikh, and the Sikh's Guru, are one and the same; both spread the Guru's Teachings. (p.444)_

The Gurus teachings werent simply teh guru did this so u must accept it, or the guru says do this so go do it. The gurus teachings were all founded on logical reasoning which every person could understand and be able to realize the significance of. Thus if we are to accept the gurus as performing miracles i must ask, since the gurus always gave reasons behind their actions, they surely must have given reason behind the miracles that they engaged in, so would you be so kind as to share those reasons with everyone else. Why did they perform the miracles that they did? What was their purpose? What did they achieve thru them?





> Good luck my personal view is that it will never happen because there are plenty of individuals like me who do understand the underlying message and still accept the janamsakhis as being true, not everyone is out to bigup their faith just because of miracles you just accept and move on cos in reality my guru is here today and that’s all I need I don’t need history of past gurus everytime I read path I am with my guru.


 
IF u wish to accept the janamsakhis as true, then by all means keep doing so i would never force anyone not to. And if u already understand the deeper message of gurbani than i honestly am happy for you. However, as im sure u are aware, the great majority of ppl out there, particularly the youth, have a very weak understanding if any of Sikhi. For someone with a strong knowledge of gurbani (as it seems u have) they are unaffected by whether miracles did or didnt happen cuz to them the message is more important than the means used to convey it, for they already know the deeper message and can focus on that. But for newcomers, they will be more drawn and fixated on the 'miracles', 'powers' of the gurus shown in these stories rather than the deeper underlying message. For them, having a concrete picture of the sakhis (i.e. whether miracles did or didnt happen) is much more important and cant simply be left with the attitude "dont worry about it and just focus on the shabad guru"





> Please readjust your thoughts,OMG
> 
> ISDhillon:{;o:


[/quote]

You will be glad to know that I am always readjusting my thoughts as i learn new things. For anyone to ever claim i never have to readjust my thoughts would mean they already know everything and could never be wrong. However, whenever i do adjust my thoughts, i make sure to use one standard guideline, and that is gurbani. If it is in accorandance with gurbani then i will accept it and change my thoughts, but if gurbani says otherwise then i will not.

Sincerely,


----------



## ISDhillon (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

     

“I have no need to see the gurus performing miracles to validate their greatness.”

Nor do I but I still accept them as being true.

“To simply state that the miracles happened and we should just accept them as true is a very naive and immature argument”

janamsakhis were the evidence, you have adopted an opposition argument what may I ask is the evidence which supports your opposition, it is wishful thinking to suggest that the janamsakhis must be proved their will be no account on video as it was invented much later on, therefore you must also reject the guru granth sahib also because these were words that were written also where is your evidence that the granth was written by the guru and how do you prove it?

“Whatever happened to the notion that Guru Nanak stated above that all birth comes about thru Gods Will?”

this statement is a clear indication of how your attempt at logic is lame, why is it that the will of god is not in going to a baba and asking for blessings of a child like I said in my previous post where does gods hukum start and finish, the fact that I am writing this post now is also gods hukum if I was to ask a baba to write my post for me that would also be gods hukum, the gurus wife was mata ganga and he sent her himself to a sikh it was to show that you should go and do service of gurmukhs it was not to show that the guru endorsed jantar mantar.

“they make the gurus into complete hypocrites both when compared to other gurus and compared to the gurbani they wrote.”

I think I have addressed above how this statement is irrelevant I don’t mean to sound knowledgable on sikhi but your idea of gurmat is incorrect.

“Every action the gurus did they always provided reason for it.”

No they did not. Prove it?

“The gurus teachings were all founded on logical reasoning which every person could understand and be able to realize the significance of”

no it was not this is what you would personally like it to be where is your proof of all of this, in fact I have provided you plenty of quotes from sggs in my previou post none of which you have addressed because deep down inside you know your position is flawed, the guru is noor ilahi the radiant form of the guru was enough to not shatter any faith or question the guru.

“Why did they perform the miracles that they did? What was their purpose? What did they achieve thru them?”

because it was the will of god, and these questions are in fact pointless because I have already said that no –ne can second guess the mind of the guru but I am willing to do this just for you so lets look at a few youll be surprised how simple the answers are it doesn’t take a genius:

valli khandari: to stop a boulder and give water to mardana
evil kauda: to stop him from eating mardana
mecca: to show that god exists everywhere
makkan shah: to show what is possible with true devotion to guru
Baghdad: to show there are many other worlds than just this and falisification of semitic revelations

I could go on but from the above, the miracles were never to show the guru was an amazing person or to appeal to wider public, the guru takes away people ignorance, the guru used spiritual power some used physical power some used mental power there is nothing that is condoned or disallowed, it just is, their does not have to be a reason. the wandering mind is afflicted by such questions, are you doing your bhagti? If so your questions will stop and you would seek all answers from bani but not use bani to look into past history their is nothing gained from that just more questions.

“But for newcomers, they will be more drawn and fixated on the 'miracles', 'powers' of the gurus shown in these stories rather than the deeper underlying message”

I hope you don’t feel that I am always disagreeing with you but I am this time, the youth are more obsessed with shaheeda because the martial aspect of sikhi has always been overplayed especially in sakhis, 

Isdhillon


----------



## kharkoo4life (Jan 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Fateh,

Do not worry.  I do not take anything personally and do not see this as an "argument" but rather as an open discourse between two people, each with their own thinking and perspectives, both in hopes of learning from the other.

Who is ultimately right and who is ultimately wrong only the guru/god knows.  I do respect your views as well as ur right to believe in what you choose to.  In the same way i choose to hold onto my own beliefs.  As long as we can both make use of our own beliefs in understanding and realizing the Gurus message (to be kind,caring individuals out to help others) then it becomes a moot point of who is right or wrong.  Hopefully our aim is the same (to become immersed in waheguru) though our thought processing may be different.

However, for the sake of debate  i shall answer ur questions shortly when time permits.  Until then, stay in anticipation.

Rab Rakha


----------



## Sugmad (Apr 23, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				S|kH said:
			
		

> haha,
> so once again this debate will start. I hope I dont get banned.
> 
> Janam Sakhris are NOT true events, they are scientifically impossible. They were created and designed for the sole purpose to incite courage and other features which the average person could assosciate with.
> ...


 

There are those who try to understand things solely with their mind. In the Japji Sahib is written that you can think millions of times but you will never understand the path to GOD through your mind. This path of lofty height was given by the Gurus to those Gurmukhs only. Manmukhs have their own way of thinking and rely solely on temporary things. Things that are beyond their understanding do not exist. This path is the path of the SOUL. The Soul came from Sach Khand and on its way picked up the mind as its instrument that also is a curse.GOD does not need to prove anything to anybody and neither were the Gurus.
ALL POWER comes from GOD and before that LORD nothing can stand.
There are believers and then there are disbelievers. This game will never end. Whether the Janam Sakhis are true or not is for the Gyan(knowledge) of that particular individual. Grace comes from GOD only and if grace is not given,there is no way to proceed. Grace comes to those that GOD himself deems ready to proceed back to him.Guru Nanak Ji was not an ordinary Guru. He was sent by Akal Purush. There are those who will shudder to hear the name of the Guru spoken and others who dont feel anything.
We are not here to prove anything. The intellectuals
will never understand because they are using the mind.
The existence and the method of the SOUL they know not.
There are people who said why Jesus , Guru Arjan Dev Ji,
Guru Tegh Bahadur and others didn't defend themselves as they had all these powers.
As you will understand,they were beyond the realm of the senses of pain and pleasure.
Jesus didn't cry in pain as portrayed in movies. He didn't show any emotions. So were the great Gurus.People try to understand things that are beyond themselves and try to bring them lower to their own puny selves to understand.
Life or Death meant nothing to them but to us is something else. So who are we to understand GOD ?
Can you understand something that is beyond the MIND? The ways of the Gurus
are also beyond the ways of the Mind.
Only the real Khalsa can understand the other real Khalsa. In this world there are very few indeed.

Satnam Sri Waheguru Ji


----------



## Archived_member2 (Apr 24, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Satsriakal to all and dear Sikh Ji!
Your first post on this topic was on 24.08.2004. Your last post on this topic was on 28.01.2006.
In both the posts your age is mentioned twenty (20). 

Is this a miracle too?

**************

People act as God's Will. Some persons write about people's activities. Many others read and discuss about it without recognizing Truth.

One, who realizes Truth, finds miracles in all activities and silence at the same time. He does not argue what came first, the egg or the hen.

You want to know the origin of both. I hope you are bored watching the evolution.

**************

Fairy tales make a person aware of miracles. 

Miracles become true with Naam Simran.


Balbir Singh


----------



## dalsingh (Aug 5, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Janam sakhis are not literally true in my opinion. 

I think it is important to bare in mind that Panjab in the past (and even now!!) is full of illiterate people with whom rational reasoning is difficult. In the past preachers may have made their points through the use of miraculous stories which impress such people. So for example when Guru Nanak goes to Bhai Lalo's house, avoiding rich Malik Bhago's feast, which ends in the miracle where milk pours from food from Lalo's house and blood from that of Malik Bhago's, the deeper point is one regarding honesty, exploiting the vulnerable and ostentatiousness and stuff. This is the deeper meaning, the important message I believe. It should also be noted that an old version of the sakhi actually doesn't include a miracle but ends with Guru Nanak simply *'saying' *that the milk of humility is contained in Lalo's food and the blood of the poor in Bhago's. Possibly the miracle was added later to a true story in this case. But other stuff like stopping boulders, talking to animals, making stuff appear from nowhere and bringing dead folk back to life are suspect.



Dasam Granth

Page 131. Bachitar Natak. Guru Gobind talking about his fathers sacrifice and failure to produce a miracle infront of the emperor:


*Naatak chetak kooe kukaajaa|| Prabh logan kah aavat laajaa||14||*
*The saints of the Lord abhor the performance of miracles and malpractices.*


No miracles please I'm educated. Don't bring our Gurus to the same level as fairies and conjurors.

*Plus it would be nice if the miracle believers explain the above quote!*


----------



## Sugmad (Aug 10, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

The Gurus by themselves live in the WILL (MAUJ) of GOD ALMIGHTY. They by themselves do not defend themselves as their WILL has merged into GOD . Whatever happens , is GOD's will . The realm of miracles is not outside of GOD's plays but are sometimes shown.
GOD can appear inside a rock if there was faith great enough to produce it. Without that great faith , there is nothing inside that rock. That faith comes through intense love and sewa of the Lord. The Faith of the Gurmukh Khalsa is beyond description. In the old days
were also stronger people mentally. We live in a present age where our crops are sprayed
with pesticides,fruits are laden with toxins, processed foods that make us sicker in body and mind. Many of our chores are simpler. You only need to read or see Ripley's Believe it or not and see for yourself the things that cannot be done by ordinary folks. Many strange things are there in this world of ours. Truth is Stranger than Fiction. The biggest miracle
for me was the coming of GURU NANAK DEV JI to this world of ours and to give us the
message from GOD HIMSELF. 

Sat Sri Akaal



			
				dalsingh said:
			
		

> Janam sakhis are not literally true in my opinion.
> 
> I think it is important to bare in mind that Panjab in the past (and even now!!) is full of illiterate people with whom rational reasoning is difficult. In the past preachers may have made their points through the use of miraculous stories which impress such people. So for example when Guru Nanak goes to Bhai Lalo's house, avoiding rich Malik Bhago's feast, which ends in the miracle where milk pours from food from Lalo's house and blood from that of Malik Bhago's, the deeper point is one regarding honesty, exploiting the vulnerable and ostentatiousness and stuff. This is the deeper meaning, the important message I believe. It should also be noted that an old version of the sakhi actually doesn't include a miracle but ends with Guru Nanak simply *'saying' *that the milk of humility is contained in Lalo's food and the blood of the poor in Bhago's. Possibly the miracle was added later to a true story in this case. But other stuff like stopping boulders, talking to animals, making stuff appear from nowhere and bringing dead folk back to life are suspect.
> 
> ...


 
Was there any other way for Guru Nanak Dev Ji to bring light to that man's folly. Eduaction has nothing
to do with miracles. The way of the Saint's are strange enough. They do not abide by any rules . They do produce miracles if permission is
given by GOD himself. They do not live outside of God but from within 
GOD's Loving heart.That quote says abhor . Saints can if they want to
but they will not do it for their own sake. Didn't that miracle showed
the mistake that was done by that
guy and that story has comed down to us later generation to teach us
to EARN OUR OWN LIVING and not live on others blood. Truth is Highest
but Higher still is Truthful Living.
Content on our state and be happy and share whatever little we have.
This after all is the Way of the Gurus.


----------



## dalsingh (Aug 10, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

I'm not saying our Gurus weren't powewful. But the inconsistencies regarding miracles is so plain in Sikhism. Guru Arjan Dev Ji didn't perform a miracle, nor Guru Tegh Bahadhur despite being asked before they were martyred. Ram Rai was excommunicated for it. Traditional accounts say that Baba Gurditta died early because he had performed a miracle. Guru Gobind explicitly condemned it as in the quote. Despite this we still subscribe to miracles. It isn't like the Gurus message isn't big enough without them.

Sugmad Bhai Ji, do you not even consider the possibility that there may be later exaggerations in the Janam Sakhis?


----------



## Sugmad (Aug 11, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				dalsingh said:
			
		

> I'm not saying our Gurus weren't powewful. But the inconsistencies regarding miracles is so plain in Sikhism. Guru Arjan Dev Ji didn't perform a miracle, nor Guru Tegh Bahadhur despite being asked before they were martyred. Ram Rai was excommunicated for it. Traditional accounts say that Baba Gurditta died early because he had performed a miracle. Guru Gobind explicitly condemned it as in the quote. Despite this we still subscribe to miracles. It isn't like the Gurus message isn't big enough without them.
> 
> Sugmad Bhai Ji, do you not even consider the possibility that there may be later exaggerations in the Janam Sakhis?


 

YES


----------



## dalsingh (Aug 12, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Sugmad said:
			
		

> YES


 
So where does the miraculous stuff fit in?

Shouldn't we discount it all?


----------



## Jazz (Sep 12, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

WGJKK WGJKF

Are the earliest Janam Saakhis available to us? which ones are and which ones are not?  Are they all in Gurmukhi, or are there any in the english language?

Jaswinder Singh


----------



## dalsingh (Sep 19, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



			
				Jazz said:
			
		

> WGJKK WGJKF
> 
> Are the earliest Janam Saakhis available to us? which ones are and which ones are not? Are they all in Gurmukhi, or are there any in the english language?
> 
> Jaswinder Singh


 
I think the oldest one yet discovered is here in London and is referred to as the Colebrook Janam Sakhi. It is the source of much contested debate and the existence of the alleged writer, Bhai Bala, is disputed quite heavily.

Most traditional works you may have read about Guru Nanak are generally influenced by Janam sakhis. My own early experience of Sikhism as a child involved a colourful book from India, which recounted Guru Nanak's life janam sakhi style. 

Macauliffes, the Sikh religion, first published in 1909, contains a paraphrasing of janam sakhi material (vol 1) and is generally available. 

McLeod has done extensive research on janam sakhis but he seems to TOTALLY discount EVERYTHING in them. Besides most Sikhs are suspicious of his intentions.

Interestingly, the recent exodus of Sikhs from Afghanistan highlighted that they were in possesion of some early janam sakhis, but some of these have been sold on the open market and are probably in the hands of non Sikh collectors. I wonder if there is anything in these that is new?


----------



## dalsingh (Sep 29, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Illustrations from some Janam sakhis. Just out of interest.


----------



## serinakaur (Sep 29, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Ok, so we will always find people who will agree the sakhis are true factual events that did occur and others who won't.

Personally i believe 100% that they are true, some events are beyond common reasoning, but whoever said we have the mental capability to understand anything, even an iota of what Waheguruji does.

I would give a relevant sakhi to illustrate but seeing as the truth they contain is doubted....... ok some science instead. Tell how do we know that the air exists when we can't see it, how can we tell that atoms and molecules exist, and in there absence we create a vacuum, or conversly why don't we think the scientists have got it all wrong and the vacuum actually exists bween there ears instead! After all,the basic chemical periodic table had to be rewritten when theY realised the had got the data incorrect.

More basically how do we know 2+2 makes 4? We all rely on the efforts of a more knowlegeable individual in finding what you believe to be an acceptable correct answer, an adept in the matter, and for us with regards to spirituality ,it is the Guruji (cos we are far too trapped in the net of Maya to see beyond the wall of duality).

Your doubt is the effect of kaal yug, and its a major battle of the mind to overcome, we all have it at different times (if not all the time), and those are the instances we fall down in life. It takes strength to believe, because it flyies in the face of everything we are taught here in the west, and everything that is respected in the west.

With regards to why guru Teg Bahadur ji didn't show his spiritual powers, because none of the gurujis ever did. When you reveal a spiritual gift you are exhibiting ego, (meditating on the Naam gives you spiritual gifts or ridih sidhis,) and we all know and love and repect our gurujis for the humility they exhibited, which we could never dream of possessing, so unlike some prophets, Sikh Gurujis never "did" miracles.

When Guruji was matyred there was a lesson being taught to all his sikhs, it was of identity and courage,which was powerfully taught. Nobody would collect our Master's body after the event. People were afraid the mughuls would kill them too, so in a way they denied they were Guruji's Sikh. Hencefourth the 10 th guruji established the 5 kakars so you would be instantly recognised.

Guruji was brave (bahadur means courage, teg is the name of a sword), he died to save the Hindu faith. Mughul rein was so brutal that the Hindu raja's came to Guruji in desperation because their non-violence philosophy left them defenceless.

We remember Guru Teg Bahadhur Ji mostly by his philosophy, I will not create fear neither will i accept others who enforce fear on others.

Some Hindus still remember, my brother went to a global music festival in the uk recently, and a Hindu man in saffron robes respectfully came up to him and said " I want to thank you, the Sikhs saved our religion from the Mughuls."

Hope this helps a little  Bharji, its just the way i see it from my limited understanding.

Gurfateh

Serina kaur




.


----------



## serinakaur (Sep 29, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

 Ok, so we will always find people who will agree the sakhis are true factual events that did occur and others who won't.

Personally i believe 100% that they are true, some events are beyond common reasoning, but whoever said we have the mental capability to understand anything, even an iota of what Waheguruji does.

I would give a relevant sakhi to illustrate but seeing as the truth they contain is doubted....... ok some science instead. Tell how do we know that the air exists when we can't see it, how can we tell that atoms and molecules exist, and in there absence we create a vacuum, or conversly why don't we think the scientists have got it all wrong and the vacuum actually exists bween there ears instead! After all,the basic chemical periodic table had to be rewritten when theY realised the had got the data incorrect.

More basically how do we know 2+2 makes 4? We all rely on the efforts of a more knowlegeable individual in finding what you believe to be an acceptable correct answer, an adept in the matter, and for us with regards to spirituality ,it is the Guruji (cos we are far too trapped in the net of Maya to see beyond the wall of duality).

Your doubt is the effect of kaal yug, and its a major battle of the mind to overcome, we all have it at different times (if not all the time), and those are the instances we fall down in life. It takes strength to believe, because it flyies in the face of everything we are taught here in the west, and everything that is respected in the west.

With regards to why guru Teg Bahadur ji didn't show his spiritual powers, because none of the gurujis ever did. When you reveal a spiritual gift you are exhibiting ego, (meditating on the Naam gives you spiritual gifts or ridih sidhis,) and we all know and love and repect our gurujis for the humility they exhibited, which we could never dream of possessing, so unlike some prophets, Sikh Gurujis never "did" miracles.

When Guruji was matyred there was a lesson being taught to all his sikhs, it was of identity and courage,which was powerfully taught. Nobody would collect our Master's body after the event. People were afraid the mughuls would kill them too, so in a way they denied they were Guruji's Sikh. Hencefourth the 10 th guruji established the 5 kakars so you would be instantly recognised.

Guruji was brave (bahadur means courage, teg is the name of a sword), he died to save the Hindu faith. Mughul rein was so brutal that the Hindu raja's came to Guruji in desperation because their non-violence philosophy left them defenceless.

We remember Guru Teg Bahadhur Ji mostly by his philosophy, I will not create fear neither will i accept others who enforce fear on others.

Some Hindus still remember, my brother went to a global music festival in the uk recently, and a Hindu man in saffron robes respectfully came up to him and said " I want to thank you, the Sikhs saved our religion from the Mughuls."

Hope this helps a little Bharji, its just the way i see it from my limited understanding.

Gurfateh

Serina kaur




.


----------



## kharkoo4life (Sep 29, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

sorry, i know its a really long post, but cutting n pasting only a section of it wouldnt have the same effect as the passage in its entirety.  so read n reflect....



DO MIRACLES REALLY NOT EXIST? 

I am sorry to disappoint you, but I can't help it. 
I cannot give you the consolation that has been given by all the religions down the centuries. I cannot do it because that consolation has cost too much. It has not given anything; on the contrary, it has taken away your very religiousness. 
I cannot say anything that in the short-term may seem to help your growth towards religion, but in the long-term is simply poison. That's what the idea of a miracle is. 

The human mind is begging for it. It is the need of a sick mind -- but all minds are sick. Mind as such is the sickness of man. When the mind disappears you are, for the first time, really healthy and whole. Mind needs all kinds of poisons to continue to exist. The idea of miracles is one of the most important. The idea is absolutely against existence. 
First you have to understand, what does a miracle mean? It means that existence is not trustable, that nature is not unprejudiced, that the laws of life allow exceptions. This is an absolute absurdity. Existence has no prejudices -- that for Jesus it has a soft corner in the heart, and not for you; that it allows Mohammed to go beyond natural laws, but it does not allow you. A miracle simply is a condemnation of the fairness of existence. 

No, there is no such thing as a miracle -- never has been, never will be. If miracles happen then science cannot happen; and we know that science has happened. And as science has grown, miracles have diminished in exact proportion. The more science grows, the less and less are there miracles. If you go farther back you can find thousands of miracles happening. 

Most of those miracles are just stories invented to create messiahs, prophets, reincarnations of God -- because how can you manage to put a certain man above all humanity? How can you manage to make him superhuman? His body follows nature, his life follows nature. From birth to death there is not a single exception. 
But the fools around the world will not accept an ordinary man as enlightened. They need a superman, only then is their mind satisfied: Of course, he is a superman, a messenger of God; he can be enlightened -- but how can we poor human beings be enlightened? 

And how to prove that he is superior to you? Just look: Jesus is not superior as far as intelligence is concerned, shows no special intelligence. There were hundreds of more learned rabbis, great scholars of profound intelligence; he is just an uneducated, unpolished carpenter's son. By intelligence he cannot prove -- nor can his followers -- that he is superior, that he is special, that he is the only begotten son of God. By physical strength he cannot prove that either. Any Muhammad Ali will throw him flat. Just by a single hit on his nose he is finished. Physically he cannot prove that he is superior. 

Now these are the only two things in human life where you find.... Somebody is an Albert Einstein, a Bertrand Russell, a Jean-Paul Sartre -- they have proved intellectually they are sharper, more talented. But a strange thing is, they don't claim they are the only begotten son of God. No intelligent person can claim such an unintelligent thing. Or there are people who are physically talented. They may come first in the Olympic race, in some game, in some wrestling, but that simply shows a difference between you and them of quantity, not of quality. Howsoever powerful a man may be, he is only quantitatively different from you; and the difference of quantity is no difference at all. 

If you had worked on the same lines with the same gymnastics for the same time, perhaps you might have proved even a better wrestler, a better runner. All that is proved is that this man has practiced a certain talent. Certainly he should be respected -- but he does not become the messenger of God. It is only a question of training. The difference is only of degrees, there is no difference of quality. He is just as human a being as you are. 
Then how to prove that Jesus, Mohammed, Mahavira, Buddha, Krishna -- that these people are not just ordinary like you? The way that has been discovered is called the miracle. That makes them qualitatively different from you, because whatsoever you do, you cannot get trained in walking on water. Whatever you do you will be drowned again and again. So it is not a question of training, discipline, knowing certain strategies -- no, nothing will help. How can you turn stones into bread? How can you turn water into wine? These stories are invented for a certain purpose -- to make that man qualitatively higher than you. 

But this is exploiting humanity, corrupting human consciousness, giving people false ideas. Just look at these miracle-men of the world and you can see that of all those miracles, ninety percent were invented by the followers or in some cases by the originators themselves. It is difficult at such a long distance to know who started them. Most of them must have been started by the originators themselves, and of course followers go on adding to them. It becomes an absolute necessity for followers to go on adding more and more miracles, because it is a competitive business and everybody has to prove his messiah the highest, the greatest. Everybody else is below him. Now, only miracles can do that miracle, there is no other way. 
Jainas have 24 tirthankaras, 24 messiahs. Because Jainas had 24, Buddhists were at a loss; they had only one -- Gautam Buddha. In the market -- and this whole world is a market and every human being is a customer -- when you are selling your messiah, your religion, your holy book, small things count. A Buddhist feels at a loss because people ask how many buddhas there have been. Just one? Looks very poor -- Jainas have 24! 

Hindus up to that moment had ten incarnations of God. They immediately changed to 24 because 10 looked poor before 24. The idea of Jainas having twenty-four.... Before Mahavira, all Hindu scriptures talk of ten avataras; after Mahavira suddenly a great change happens -- Hindus start talking about twenty-four. Buddhists are at a loss because their religion starts with Buddha, so where to put twenty-four buddhas? But they have to be a little more creative. They started talking about twenty-four lives of Gautam Buddha -- this was the twenty-fourth life. He had been an awakened one twenty-three times before. You can see a clever legal process. They had no historical grounds to prove that there had been twenty-four buddhas. Even Buddha cannot say that because he was the originator. But this was easy, to invent twenty-three previous lives. 

Coincidences perhaps may have happened in the lives of Buddha, Jesus, Krishna, but it would have been far more honest of them to say that these were coincidences, that nature had not broken its law, it had not given a special power to somebody. But they or in most cases their followers remained silent about it. Silence is a support. Perhaps there was not any bad intention, because it has been noted that people are not in search of truth but in search of power -- and the miracle is a symbol of power, not of truth. Truth has nothing to do with miracles 
But who is interested in truth? 
Everybody is interested in power. 

So when you see a man of miracles you are immediately impressed: here is a man who has power. And that is your deepest urge -- the will-to-power. Then you start following this man. In fact, if somebody tries to explain to you that these are not miracles you don't want to listen because he is taking away your power; your only hope he is destroying. So the people who believe in miracle-men are not ready to listen for the simple reason that you may destroy their faith, their belief You may be able to prove that either it is magic -- that means just conjuring tricks -- or it is simply a coincidence, or it is just an invented story. And many things can be managed very easily.... 

I used to know in Jabalpur a man from south India. He must have come some thirty, forty years before from Madras, and he had lived in Jabalpur for forty years; still he was known as Madrasi Baba because he was from Madras. It was known that he had revived dead people. I was a student in the university; I heard this many times so I collected a few people and one night we went to Madrasi Baba. 

He used to live in a small hut outside the town, so it was very easy. We all entered his hut, and we took hold of him -- he was lying down on his cot. We tied his feet and hands, and I told him, "You have to tell the truth -- we are not going to tell anybody, but if you don't tell us the truth then today we are going to do a miracle." 
He said, "What kind of miracle?" 

I said, "Today we are going to turn an alive man into a dead man. Just in front of your house there is a big lake; we are going to throw you into it. And we will make every certainty and surety that you cannot survive. We have big rocks outside which we are going to put on your chest, bind with your cot and throw the whole cot with you and the rocks. And you will go down -- unless you tell us how you managed to revive a man." 

He said, "I will tell you but please don't tell anybody; otherwise my whole life will be ruined. I live only on that miracle." 
I said, "First tell us." And what miracles had he done? 

It was one of his friends who pretended to be dead. He was a practitioner of yoga, they both were practitioners of yoga. If you practice yoga then there is a possibility that for at least ten minutes you can stop your breathing. With certain exercises it is possible that your heart goes on at the minimum, the pulse at the minimum, and your breathing completely stops -- but for not more than ten minutes. But ten minutes are enough to prove a man dead, you don't need more. 

One morning he declared that his friend had died. People came, they looked, they took his pulse; it was gone. There was no breathing, his heart was not beating -- he was dead. They covered him, and then Madrasi Baba chanted some mantras in Telugu, in his language, so nobody knew whether he was chanting mantras or singing film songs. And after seven rounds of chanting and throwing some invisible power over the man he took off the cover, put his hands on the nose of the man, looked upwards -- and slowly slowly, the breathing came back, the pulse came back and the heart started beating. 

The man is still alive, the other man. And we confirmed the story through this other man also, in the same way; we had to because there was no other way. We said that Madrasi Baba himself had told the whole story, "but now you are also in the same situation. So you just tell us, otherwise you will go; we will perform the real miracle." 
And he said, "It is true, I conspired with him -- we are partners. Whatsoever money he gets, half he gives to me. For these forty years life has been very pleasant, without any work, without any trouble; we have lived comfortably, and people respect us. Now I am his disciple in people's eyes, but really I am a partner in his business." So either miracles are invented.... 

Now, nobody can say this Lazarus was not a partner in the whole conspiracy. He was a friend of Jesus' -- that much is reported. And why only Lazarus? There were so many people dying. Did he have to wait to do the miracle only when Lazarus died? And Lazarus was young -- it was not his time to die either. He was Jesus' friend so there is every possibility that Jesus may have told him, "Just pretend you are dead." He had learned all yoga practices in India, in Egypt; both countries know the secrets about stopping the breath. 

Either it is a coincidence, or it is a conspiracy, or it is just a myth created when the person is gone. But you can judge very easily. Jesus can revive a dead man, but when he is feeling thirsty on the cross he cannot materialize a single glass of water, or just a Coca-Cola. That would have been a real miracle -- if he had produced Coca-Cola. Then I would never say that miracles don't exist, because to produce Coca-Cola at that time would not have been possible. Even today you cannot make it, because the secret of Coca-Cola is absolutely preserved, there is no way.... There are so many cold drinks available in the world, but nothing comes close to Coca-Cola. If Jesus had produced that, with the label of Coca-cola and the bottle and everything, then there would have been no need for any other proof; they could have just preserved the Coca-Cola bottle in the Vatican. 
But whatever he did is not of much significance, and he could not do it when he was himself in need. 

He could revive the dead but he could not change those apostles, transform their beings. What to say of transformation -- even on the last night when Jesus is to depart he says to them again and again, "Remain awake, don't fall asleep! This is my last night; tonight they are going to catch me. Remain awake so that I can pray silently -- and be watchful!" 
And after each hour he comes and he finds his disciples are fast asleep, snoring. He wakes them up and tells them again, "Have you forgotten?" 
Again and again, the whole night that drama continues, but they are not ready. You can't change people's minds just a little bit but you can raise people from the dead? It doesn't seem to be possible. 

There are miracles around Buddha -- that when he passes, trees blossom out of season. The whole forest might be dry if the season was fall and all the leaves had fallen, but if Buddha passes through the forest it looks disrespectful -- those barren trees without leaves, without flowers. No, suddenly the whole forest changes its course of millions of years; suddenly there are leaves, suddenly there is greenery, flowers, fruits. 
I
 can say this must be a myth because Buddha himself has a personal physician continuously moving with him. For what? If even trees understand, won't his body understand? The most famous physician of those days, Jivakar, was continuously with him, just like a shadow, taking care of his body -- and still he died of food poisoning. Not a great way to die, through food poisoning. 

If some glutton dies of food poisoning he can be forgiven, but not Buddha. The poison had no consideration for Buddha, the food had no consideration, the body had no consideration -- and the trees and the forest and the mountains had consideration for him? 

He was sitting in meditation, and his brother, his own brother, Devadatta, who was a follower... but he wanted Buddha to declare him his successor. Buddha said, "That is not possible. You are not yet capable of such a position. And there are people -- Mahakassapa, Sariputta, Moggalayan -- so many people who are already enlightened. How can I declare you, an unenlightened person, as my successor? I am not going to declare anybody my successor because there are so many people who are capable of being my successor -- how am I to choose?" 

But Devadatta was very angry, so angry that he left Buddha, taking five thousand disciples of Buddha with him.  And he tried many ways to kill Buddha. One was that while Buddha was meditating, sitting on a rock Devadatta slid a big rock from the mountain top aimed exactly to hit Buddha.  And it would have simply crushed him -- there was no chance -- but the rock, just on the way, thought, "There is Buddha, and this would not be right, to go on falling in the traditional way." It moved, changed its course -- which was very strange because there was no reason for it to change its course, no obstacle that moved it from its course. 

Devadatta brought a mad elephant who was known to have killed many people and so was kept always in chains. He brought him and left him without chains close to where Buddha was sitting. And the elephant came rushing, because after many days he had got the chance to kill somebody. He was murderous. But just coming close to Buddha, a sudden break: no, this is not the man to kill. He lowered himself, went on his knees and touched Buddha's feet. 

Now if elephants, mad elephants, rocks and trees are so careful about Buddha -- and I would like them to be so careful, there is no harm in it. I would like them to be so careful about everybody, why only about Buddha? But when he eats the poisonous food his own body does not bother; the poison takes no care. That proves that all other stories are beautiful stories created to make Buddha a superhuman being. 

The same is true about all your miracle-men. As far as I am concerned, a miracle is something against nature, against existence; hence it is impossible. Yes, your mind wants it because your mind is sick. It is hungry for power and it would like its master to be a man of power. Then of course you can hope that some day you can manage -- by serving the master, by trusting the master, by surrendering to the master -- you can get some power yourself. 

It is a deep desire for power that goes on asking again and again whether miracles happen or not. I say categorically they have never happened, because in the very nature of things a miracle is an absurdity. It simply means suddenly nature forgets its laws, existence changes its course. No, existence is fair, it is equal to all, exactly the same to all. And it is good that it is fair and equal; otherwise there would be the same bureaucracy and hierarchy that goes on in governments. 

And that's what religions have been trying to create. What is this Christianity? A certain kind of bureaucracy from God, the Holy Ghost, Jesus, the messiah; then the pope, his representative; then the cardinal, then the bishop, and so on and so on.... It goes on and on to the lowest priest in the village. 
This is a hierarchy, a bureaucracy. But everything is based on the miracles of Jesus. That's why I want to hammer those miracles as forcibly as possible. 

If they are broken completely the whole hierarchy and bureaucracy falls down; they have nothing else to support them. And the same is true about all religions 
I
 know only of one miracle which is not included in your question about miracles; and that miracle is a jump of consciousness between the Master and the disciple. 
Something transpires, but it is not done by the Master, it is not done by the disciple. Both are surprised when it happens. 
The Master is available. 
Whenever the disciple is also available, it simply happens. 
This is the only miracle I know of 

But it is not to be categorized with other miracles because it is really the ultimate law of existence. It is not something against existence, it is something which is the deepest, most central, most fundamental part of existence itself. 

Just look for this miracle, wait for this miracle, and forget all nonsense about everything else. 
If you really want to be religious, if you really want to be transformed, then you have to destroy all barriers between you and the transformation you are searching. 
Yes, that miracle is possible. That miracle is possible any moment -- here, now. So prepare for that. Don't go on digging in bullshit. 


THE END.


----------



## dalsingh (Sep 29, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

One factor that needs considering in my opinion is that in this day and age technology has enabled us to explore and record most of the earth. 

The picture emerging from this is a world apart from that of the janam sakhis where all sorts of weird and mystical creatures existed.

I think the lack of facilities for extensive travel in the past coupled with lack of education meant that peoples imagination was fertile regarding what existed "out there", hence they were predisposed to think of an "enchanted world" out there. Documentaries and extensive exploration has changed this picture and we know have a clearer perception of what there is all over the globe.

Plus the Guru's never indicated they performed ANY miracles in their writings. They instead seem to condemn and play down "ridhian sidhian". It is the janam sakhis, all written a long time after Guru Nanak's passing that report miracles by the Guru, not the Gurus themselves.


----------



## serinakaur (Sep 30, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Dear kharkoo,

miracles are happening everyday,every minute, every second. Do you not regard your birth as a miracle, i don't know how long your mother's labour was, but i'm sure she regarded you as her "little miracle", when you finally poped out ending her agony. 

It's too easy to disagree, as you've shown with a post full of double negatives and contradiction. Personally i don't have the time to argue so agressively, the issue doesn't offend me. But i certainly hope you find peace of mind one day, i hope the great miracle-maker, blesses you with happiness, gratitude, oh and maybe a few miracles too!

Take care, and make peace......with yourself.
:wink: serina kaur


----------



## kharkoo4life (Oct 6, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



serinakaur said:


> Dear kharkoo,
> 
> miracles are happening everyday,every minute, every second. Do you not regard your birth as a miracle, i don't know how long your mother's labour was, but i'm sure she regarded you as her "little miracle", when you finally poped out ending her agony.
> 
> ...


 
Dear Serina Kaur,

Thanx for the reply.  I think u may have misunderstood my post.  FIrstly, my post was not intended as an "agressive argument" and secondly the passage was not mine but from a book i recently read.  (double negatives, contradicting comments etc is an intentionall hallmark of the author, and understanding its significance is probably 2much to discuss in detail here)

As for ur question regarding birth, YES i do consider the birth (of any living creature) a truly marvelous and amazing event..so much so, that a word less then "miracle" would not do justice to this wonderous process...Life/Nature/Existence/God whatever u may call it is full of unfathomable, limitless creative potential....i do not doubt nor disbelieve in its infinite capacities...its wonders and powers are such that they are beyond verbal/written expression...only an intimate individual with the Divine can allow one to fully appreciate its beauty and vastness...

however, one must be very cautious to correlate this aspect of the Divine with the ability by man to perform illustrious, magical feats which defy the most basic scientific principles...and then to justify their disagreement with sound rational logic by simply labelling them as "miracles" is a very naive approach...i am never one to impose my own views on another for to say i am right and another is wrong would first require me having experienced the Truth...only a (enlightened) being who has become one with existence can categorically claim to know the real deal...something which i definitly have not attained...but i do hope thru sincere open discussion we can at least all take a few steps closer to the Ultimate Truth

by the way peace of mind is something i usualyof struggle we all experience) and i await patiently for these few moments to disappear as well  ...i do hope u too find a similar peace of mind and may ur own answers to questions about life/religion etc be answered thru ur own individual experience (rather then listening to and accepting others ideas/beliefs, including mine)..for the path to the Truth is a long arduous journey we must all take as solitary travellers

rab rakha
sandip singh


----------



## Prabhjoyt Singh (Oct 15, 2006)

*re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Fateh 

I have heard alot about Janam Sakhi and sau Sakhi abd from what i know it conatains our history but also alot of nonsense e.g Guru Sahibaans doing Hindu Rituals etc. But dont you think by saying Guru Gobind Singh killed goats instead of cutting the heads of the Piare, your calling Guru Sahib a fraud, con artist, liar and a pakhandee? can such a mans sons aged so young give up their lives and keep their faith? and as for Gurus not being GOd 

Awip nrwiexu klw Dwir jg mih prvirXau ]
*aa*p nar*aa*e*i*n kal*aa* dhh*aa*r jag meh*i* paravar*i*yo ||
_The Lord Himself wielded His Power and entered the world._

inrMkwir Awkwru joiq jg mMfil kirXau ]
n*i*ra(n)k*aa*r *aa*k*aa*r j*o*th jag ma(n)ddal kar*i*yo ||
_The Formless Lord took form, and with His Light He illuminated the realms of the world._

jh kh qh BrpUru sbdu dIpik dIpwXau ]
jeh keh theh bharap*oo*r sabadh dh*ee*pak dh*ee*p*aa*yo ||
_He is All-pervading everywhere; the Lamp of the Shabad, the Word, has been lit._

ijh isKh sMgRihE qqu hir crx imlwXau ]
j*i*h s*i*kheh sa(n)greh*i*ou thath har charan m*i*l*aa*yo ||
_Whoever gathers in the essence of the teachings shall be absorbed in the Feet of the Lord._

nwnk kuil inMmlu Avqir´au AMgd lhxy sMig huA ]
n*aa*nak k*u*l n*i*(n)mal avathar*i*yo a(n)gadh lehan*ae* sa(n)g h*u*a ||
_Lehnaa, who became Guru Angad, and Guru Amar Daas, have been reincarnated into the pure house of Guru Nanak._

gur Amrdws qwrx qrx jnm jnm pw srix quA ]2]16]
g*u*r amaradh*aa*s th*aa*ran tharan janam janam p*aa* saran th*u*a ||2||16||
_Guru Amar Daas is our Saving Grace, who carries us across; in lifetime after lifetime, I seek the Sanctuary of Your Feet. ||2||16||_


----------



## spnadmin (Jan 18, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



Prabhjoyt Singh said:


> Fateh
> 
> I have heard alot about Janam Sakhi and sau Sakhi abd from what i know it conatains our history but also alot of nonsense e.g Guru Sahibaans doing Hindu Rituals etc. But dont you think by saying Guru Gobind Singh killed goats instead of cutting the heads of the Piare, your calling Guru Sahib a fraud, con artist, liar and a pakhandee? can such a mans sons aged so young give up their lives and keep their faith? and as for Gurus not being GOd
> 
> ...




Prabhjyot Singh ji

I know personally some very pious, amridhari Sikhs who will not allow their children even to be exposed to the janam sakhis--  because they feel that the stories are historically incorrect and distract from serious reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. In my humble opinion there is no lack of pure faith by a person who does not believe that Guru Gobind Singh cut off the heads of the panj pyare and brought them back to life. 

Here is my reason. No one was in the tent except Guru Gobind Singh and the 5 beloved when this occurred to provide eye-witness testimony or evidence. Those gathered together saw 5 men go into a tent one at a time and they saw Guru Gobind Singh come out after each one with blood on his sword. Then the 5 beloved emerged with their heads. That is the sum totoal. All the accounts of this event were given after the event occurred. It is very possible that these stories were made to sound "fabulous" in order to stir up emotion in the sikhs of that time. Many of them were simple people who had been raised on a diet of tales of miracles. 

Also -- Our Gurus in fact discouraged belief in miracles. So if someone does not believe the story of a real beheading, they are in tune with the ShabadGuru. 

ਸਿਧੁ ਹੋਵਾ ਸਿਧਿ ਲਾਈ ਰਿਧਿ ਆਖਾ ਆਉ ॥ 
sidhh hovaa sidhh laaee ridhh aakhaa aao ||
If I were to become a Siddha, and work miracles, summon wealth
  

 ਗੁਪਤੁ ਪਰਗਟੁ ਹੋਇ ਬੈਸਾ ਲੋਕੁ ਰਾਖੈ ਭਾਉ ॥ 
gupath paragatt hoe baisaa lok raakhai bhaao ||
and become invisible and visible at will, so that people would hold me in awe
  

 ਮਤੁ ਦੇਖਿ ਭੂਲਾ ਵੀਸਰੈ ਤੇਰਾ ਚਿਤਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਨਾਉ ॥੩॥ 
math dhaekh bhoolaa veesarai thaeraa chith n aavai naao ||3||
-seeing these, I might go astray and forget You, and Your Name would not enter into my mind.

Ang 14
Guru Arjan Dev ji


----------



## spnadmin (Jan 18, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



dalsingh said:


> Most traditional works you may have read about Guru Nanak are generally influenced by Janam sakhis. My own early experience of Sikhism as a child involved a colourful book from India, which recounted Guru Nanak's life janam sakhi style.
> ....



It is true that there were several versions of the janam sakhis, and they do not agree in every instance or historical detail.

Dalsingh ji, this is a great answer because it allows the intellectually curious to follow up on some leads. 

The value of the janam sakhis -- perhaps the greatest value comes when one reads them as an adult. They are morality tales, and this is how they teach:  every one of them teaches moral lessons in an unforgettable way.


----------



## neech (Jan 18, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

To the person who wrote:-

"Also, why can't we question the minds of the gurus ? I think thats ont of the key points in learning how the gurus minds worked -- is by questioning why they did what they did. I question them all the time, and sometimes even disagree -- am I bad human or Sikh?"

Yes you are.


----------



## spnadmin (Jan 18, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



neech said:


> To the person who wrote:-
> 
> "Also, why can't we question the minds of the gurus ? I think thats ont of the key points in learning how the gurus minds worked -- is by questioning why they did what they did. I question them all the time, and sometimes even disagree -- am I bad human or Sikh?"
> 
> Yes you are.



neech ji

You know deep down inside whether you are a good or a bad human or Sikh. No one else can make that judgment. Some may try and some will but none have the right. But trying to understand the Gurus, trying to understand what they did and why they did it, do you not end up each time so aware of what amazing people they were. If you do... then it is worth your while to think about what they said and did.


----------



## Archived_Member4 (Jan 18, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



aad0002 said:


> Prabhjyot Singh ji
> 
> I know personally some very pious, amridhari Sikhs who will not allow their children even to be exposed to the janam sakhis-- because they feel that the stories are historically incorrect and distract from serious reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. In my humble opinion there is no lack of pure faith by a person who does not believe that Guru Gobind Singh cut off the heads of the panj pyare and brought them back to life.
> 
> ...


 
Aad ji the Shabad does not say what you have said about it. This shabad is talking about the one who performs the miracle will forget the Lord and go astray performing it. Now are you saying after Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji beheaded the Panj Pyare he went astray and forgot the Lord or there is a chance he went astray and because of the sangat aweing Guru ji there is a chance Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, our Guru went astray.

Also please explain to me the blood on Guru Sahibs sword after he came out of the tent. Where did that blood come from?

Did it come from a sheep as some have said about this Sakhi. If so this would mean Guru Sahib lied to the Sangat by taking the Panj Pyare in a tent out of sight then coming out into the sangat with a ****** sword but not the blood of the Panj pyare and making it look like it was the Panj Pyare. Would our Guru Sahib deceive his Sikhs in such a way.

Before any one asnwers All our Gurus believed in Truthful living above all. 


Blessed, blessed is Guru Raam Daas; He who created You, has also exalted You. Perfect is Your miracle; the Creator Lord Himself has installed You on the throne. The Sikhs and all the Congregation recognize You as the Supreme Lord God, and bow down to You. You are unchanging, unfathomable and immeasurable; You have no end or limitation. Those who serve You with love . You carry them across. Greed, envy, sexual desire, anger and emotional attachment . You have beaten them and driven them out. Blessed is Your place, and True is Your magnificent glory. You are Nanak, You are Angad, and You are Amar Daas; so do I recognize You. When I saw the Guru, then my mind was comforted and consoled. || 7 || The four Gurus enlightened the four ages; the Lord Himself assumed the fifth form. He created Himself, and He Himself is the supporting pillar. He Himself is the paper, He Himself is the pen, and He Himself is the writer. All His followers come and go; He alone is fresh and new. Guru Arjun sits on the throne; the royal canopy waves over the True Guru. From east to west, He illuminates the four directions. Those self-willed manmukhs who do not serve the Guru die in shame. Your miracles increase two-fold, even four-fold; this is the True Lord.s true blessing. The four Gurus enlightened the four ages;​the Lord Himself assumed the fifth form. || 8 || 1 || ang 968

Read the above shabad sangat ji

After reading this shabad I am willing to say and have said anyone that says the Sakhi of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji beheading each Panj Pyare as they went into the tent is a false Sakhi then that person themselves is false. And please understand the depth of what I have just said here.

Our Great Guru are able to do all things as the above Shabad says the Lord took the form as the Fifth Guru, now how is some one going to come out and say the Sakhi is false.

The way I wrote this post as I write many sound like I am mad, but I am not mad at anyone because they wrote somethng. The ones where I am mad, well the members know which post those are.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: Correction needed.*



VaheguruSeekr said:


> Yes, Similar question was raised by me in another post, which was also questioning the Sakhi. I am pasting that as-it-is, for further discussion:



May i put in a small "difference" into the equation....

1. Guru Teg bahadur Ji travelled TOWARDS DELHI with Five Companions..TO GIVE their Heads. The objective was Shaheedee in DELHI.

2. Baba deep Singh also had made a vow to...**** ^^^ REMAIN ALIVE until he was in the Harmandir Sahib to liberate it from the enemy occupier. Thus when his head was severed long before he could reach his objective...he carried it along until he could .

Thus just as Guru Teg bahdur ji couldnt be shaheed until he had met Aurengzeb as he was ordered to be in Delhi by the Emperor...Baba Deep Singh ji couldnt be "shaheed" on the way to harmandir Sahib.

4. Another point to note...althogh Baba deep Singh Ji is the more famous "headless fighter"...there are a few more ( if i am not mistaken)..Baaba Gurbaksh Singh is one name i have heard... SIR-LATH warriors. 

There is a LOT of myth/tall tales/Arabain Night materials as well as Aesops fables types mixed up in gneuine Sikh history.... its our duty to keep sifting chaff from wheat...."miracles" or MIRACLOUS INCIDENTS ??..ie. "TRUTH" or "FICTION"...and as they say TRUTH is STRANGER even than FICTION !!!.....Achilles Heel could be "pure fiction"....BUT Baba deep Singh ji's story could be the "TRUTH that is stranger than Fiction"???? could it be ?? IS all "truth stranger than fiction..a lot of hot air ?? We owe it to our descendants to settle the dust...

Gyani Jarnail Singh


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

EXACTLY SAID aAD0002 JI....
The GURU did it all in the TENT - behind closed walls...and ONLY the 5 and Guru Ji as well as Waheguru knows whatever transpired. PERIOD.
Why He did it..how he did it..when he did it..what he did..etc etc are just idle mental calisthenics of idle people.....IF GURU JI wnated everyone to see ALL..he woudl have doen everything in the OPEN....( But then again is THAT a guarantee that we will ALL agree ?? Just look at another Historical event..Nanded 1708...the GURU publicly and in full view of everyone present...had the Paraksh of SGGS...He matha tek to SGGS..and even ORDERED ALL PRESENT...This SHABAD GURU is from today..your ONE and ONLY GURU..in Body and in Spirit... SAABH SIKHAN KO HUKM HAI>>GURU MANIYO GRANTH...is a sexplicit and public statement as any..... BUT go to Hazoor Sahib/Patna Sahib..today and you will find that the SGGS is NOT the only  GURU Parkash to whcih one must matha tek.... WHO made this decision that is ULTRA VIRES the HUKM of GURU GOBIND SINGH JI ??  Can one imagine..IF  The Guru's HUKM had NOT been this EXPLICIT and PUBLIC ?? IF the GURU had told this fact to 5 Singhs inside a Tent ?? I shudder at the very thought....in every Gurdwara there would be ROWS and ROWS of various "granths" as Parallel Gurus...as the 22 manjis in baba bakala !!
Thankfully GURU ji DID NOT keep this fact "secret".

:happy:


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

a little joke about "agreeing"..
Some one was betting 200USD that 2+2=5. His wife pulled his pajama and whispered in his ear...What stupidity. How can you WIN this bet....everyone knows 2+2=4.
Shut up..says the hubby...How can I LOSE ?....because..I WILL NEVER "ADMIT" 2+2=4...and as long as I DONT ADMIT it..i can NEVER LOSE !!
Such is the state of many "Sikhs" today....Main Na MANNUU..I will Never say die !!


----------



## spnadmin (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

.IF Guru JI wnated everyone to see ALL..he woudl have doen everything in the OPEN....( But then again is THAT a guarantee that we will ALL agree ?? Just look at another Historical event..Nanded 1708...the Guru publicly and in full view of everyone present...had the Paraksh of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji...He matha tek to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji..and even ORDERED ALL PRESENT...This SHABAD Guru is from today..your ONE and ONLY Guru..in Body and in Spirit... SAABH SIKHAN KO HUKM HAI>>Guru MANIYO GRANTH...is a sexplicit and public statement as any....

There is a LOT of myth/tall tales/Arabain Night materials as well as Aesops fables types mixed up in gneuine Sikh history.... its our duty to keep sifting chaff from wheat...."miracles" or MIRACLOUS INCIDENTS ??..ie. "TRUTH" or "FICTION"...and as they say TRUTH is STRANGER even than FICTION !!!.....Achilles Heel could be "pure fiction"....BUT Baba deep Singh ji's story could be the "TRUTH that is stranger than Fiction"???? could it be ?? IS all "truth stranger than fiction..a lot of hot air ?? We owe it to our descendants to settle the dust...

I so agree, Gyani Singh ji!

If only people would cease and desist with "romanticizing" Guru Gobind Singh ji and step back, take a deep breath, and think about his life decisions as they unfolded, then HIS COMPLETE AND WONDROUS GENIUS AND ESPECIALLY HIS WISDOM IN ALL SPHERES OF LIFE WOULD OVERWHELM THEM.  Religion, politics, spirituality, history, poetry, music, moral philosophy, military tactics, leadership -- I am leaving something out I know -- and He was also a humble and deeply compassionate human being! Then everyone would sober up and ask how his example can shine a light into every corner of our existence here on earth, body mind and spirit. Guru GOBIND SINGH ji HIMSELF was the MIRACLE! The reality of his life and example are much more impressive than so-called tent-shows now seen as "miracles."


----------



## Archived_Member4 (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



aad0002 said:


> .IF Guru JI wnated everyone to see ALL..he woudl have doen everything in the OPEN....( But then again is THAT a guarantee that we will ALL agree ?? Just look at another Historical event..Nanded 1708...the Guru publicly and in full view of everyone present...had the Paraksh of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji...He matha tek to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji..and even ORDERED ALL PRESENT...This SHABAD Guru is from today..your ONE and ONLY Guru..in Body and in Spirit... SAABH SIKHAN KO HUKM HAI>>Guru MANIYO GRANTH...is a sexplicit and public statement as any....
> 
> There is a LOT of myth/tall tales/Arabain Night materials as well as Aesops fables types mixed up in gneuine Sikh history.... its our duty to keep sifting chaff from wheat...."miracles" or MIRACLOUS INCIDENTS ??..ie. "TRUTH" or "FICTION"...and as they say TRUTH is STRANGER even than FICTION !!!.....Achilles Heel could be "pure fiction"....BUT Baba deep Singh ji's story could be the "TRUTH that is stranger than Fiction"???? could it be ?? IS all "truth stranger than fiction..a lot of hot air ?? We owe it to our descendants to settle the dust...
> 
> ...


 
To all that question what happened behind that tent.

On that day before Bhai Daya Singh ji went into the tent, what did Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji ask for?  Guru ji asked for one head and what did he have in his hand?  A naked sword.  Now put these two together.  Guru ji comes before the Sangat with a naked sword and asked the Sangat I need one head.  Now Bhai Daya Singh ji gets up from where he was sitting and walks toward Guru ji and asked Guru ji to accept is apology for not getting up on the first call.  Guru ji and Bhai Daya Singh ji walk behind the tent and after a while Guru ji comes out of the tent just as he came before the sangat prior to Bhai Daya Singh ji going in with him.  But something was different this time, Guru Gobind Sngh Sahib jis sword had blood dripping from it.  

Now this is where the questions and Skepticism arises.  Some say how do you know what happened behind the tent and only Guru ji, Panj Pyare, and the Lord know what happened.  They make a good point, but have not taken the facts into consideration.  As I said in my last post Guru ji holds Truthful living above all.  Guru ji came before the sangat with a naked sword asking for a head.  Now those who think Guru ji asking for a head is a metphar are being really naive or purposely ignoring the naked sword with blood on it.  Now the next thing the skeptics question is where did the blood come from.  As Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji asked for 5 heads with a sword in hand, Guru ji got *5 heads.*

To say Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji got the blood on his sword from an animal or a different body part of the Panj Pyare is calling Guru ji a deceiver, for he asked from the sangat 5 heads not 5 arms or 5 legs or a dead sheep or any other animal. 



> Guru GOBIND SINGH ji HIMSELF was the MIRACLE! The reality of his life and example are much more impressive than so-called tent-shows now seen as "miracles."


 
If this is directed at me then I have this to say about it.

Aad ji the person who called it a miracle is you by using the shabad about miracles.  Also this was no tent show ( I hear the sarcasm in your writing) this took place to finalize the formation of the Khalsa Panth.


----------



## spnadmin (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*

Singh ji

Nothing was directed at you and I was completely serious, not sarcastic. My comments were completely and only a response to respected forum member, Gyani ji. 

In post number 78, you can see that I quoted Gyani ji's remarks (they are the sections in blue font). And then after the quote I addressed Gyani ji directly (in black font). So sorry that you were offended by my remarks. They had nothing whatsoever to do with you or your comments.


----------



## pk70 (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



Singh said:


> Aad ji the Shabad does not say what you have said about it. This shabad is talking about the one who performs the miracle will forget the Lord and go astray performing it. Now are you saying after Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji beheaded the Panj Pyare he went astray and forgot the Lord or there is a chance he went astray and because of the sangat aweing Guru ji there is a chance Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji, our Guru went astray.
> 
> Also please explain to me the blood on Guru Sahibs sword after he came out of the tent. Where did that blood come from?
> 
> ...



*Singh ji*

*I have a big problem with your application of this quoted Shabad at SGGS968 because it doesn’t state Guru actually did miracles or can do miracles. In SGGS Ji, miracles are credited to the Lord in all cases, Guru ji also went on saying, all the miracles expressed in the History were done by the Lord. In this very shabad, same honor of the Lord is kept and miracles are credited to the Lord, lets see it*
*ਧੰਨੁ ਧੰਨੁ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਗੁਰੁ ਜਿਨਿ ਸਿਰਿਆ ਤਿਨੈ ਸਵਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਪੂਰੀ ਹੋਈ ਕਰਾਮਾਤਿ ਆਪਿ ਸਿਰਜਣਹਾਰੈ ਧਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਸਿਖੀ ਅਤੈ ਸੰਗਤੀ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਕਰਿ ਨਮਸਕਾਰਿਆ **॥ *
*Blessed, blessed is Guru Ramdas. The Lord, who created thee; He alone has embellished thee. **Complete is thy miracle. The Creator Himself has installed thee on the throne. **Deeming thee as the Transcendent Lord, thine followers and congregation bow before thee. *
*ਗੁਰੂ* *ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਧੰਨ ਹੈ ਧੰਨ ਹੈ! ਜਿਸ ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਨੇ (ਗੁਰੂ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਨੂੰ) ਪੈਦਾ ਕੀਤਾ ਉਸੇ* *ਨੇ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਸੋਹਣਾ ਭੀ ਬਣਾਇਆ**। **ਇਹ ਇਕ ਮੁਕੰਮਲ ਕਰਾਮਾਤਿ ਹੋਈ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਸਿਰਜਣਹਾਰ ਨੇ* *ਖ਼ੁਦ (ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ ਉਸ ਵਿਚ) ਟਿਕਾਇਆ ਹੈ**। **ਸਭ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਨੇ ਤੇ ਸੰਗਤਾਂ ਨੇ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ* *ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਦਾ ਰੂਪ ਜਾਣ ਕੇ ਬੰਦਨਾ ਕੀਤੀ ਹੈ**। *
*The Lord created the Guru and embellished the Guru. It is a miracle(done by the Lord); Lord Himself installed Himself in Him. Being one with Lord, Sangat revered the Guru as Lord’s own form (roop). To whom credit is given? Answer is to the Lord.*
*ਅਟਲੁ ਅਥਾਹੁ ਅਤੋਲੁ ਤੂ ਤੇਰਾ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਰਾਵਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਜਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੀ ਤੂੰ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਭਾਉ ਕਰਿ ਸੇ ਤੁਧੁ ਪਾਰਿ ਉਤਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਲਬੁ ਲੋਭੁ ਕਾਮੁ ਕ੍ਰੋਧੁ ਮੋਹੁ ਮਾਰਿ ਕਢੇ ਤੁਧੁ ਸਪਰਵਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਧੰਨੁ ਸੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਥਾਨੁ ਹੈ ਸਚੁ ਤੇਰਾ ਪੈਸਕਾਰਿਆ **॥ *
*Thou art Unshakable, Unfathomable and Unweighable. Thou hast no end or bounds. **They, who serve thee with love Then thou ferrieest across. **Thou hast beaten and driven out avarice, covetousness, sexual desire, wrath and worldly love with all their ramifications. **Praiseworthy is Thy place and true are thine bounties. *
*(**ਹੇ* *ਗੁਰੂ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ!) ਤੂੰ ਸਦਾ ਕਾਇਮ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈਂ**, **ਤੈਨੂੰ ਤੋਲਿਆ ਨਹੀਂ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ** (**ਭਾਵ**, **ਤੇਰੇ ਗੁਣ ਗਿਣੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਜਾ ਸਕਦੇ**; **ਤੂੰ ਇਕ ਐਸਾ ਸਮੁੰਦਰ ਹੈਂ ਜਿਸ ਦੀ) ਹਾਥ* *ਨਹੀਂ ਪੈ ਸਕਦੀ**, **ਪਾਰਲੇ ਤੇ ਉਰਲੇ ਬੰਨੇ ਦਾ ਅੰਤ ਨਹੀਂ ਪੈ ਸਕਦਾ**। **ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬੰਦਿਆਂ ਨੇ* *ਪਿਆਰ ਨਾਲ ਤੇਰਾ ਹੁਕਮ ਮੰਨਿਆ ਹੈ ਤੂੰ ਉਹਨਾਂ ਨੂੰ (ਸੰਸਾਰ-ਸਮੁੰਦਰ ਤੋਂ) ਪਾਰ ਲੰਘਾ* *ਦਿੱਤਾ ਹੈ**, **ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਅੰਦਰੋਂ ਤੂੰ ਲੱਬ**, **ਲੋਭ**, **ਕਾਮ**, **ਕ੍ਰੋਧ**, **ਮੋਹ ਤੇ ਹੋਰ ਸਾਰੇ* *ਵਿਕਾਰ ਮਾਰ ਕੇ ਕੱਢ ਦਿੱਤੇ ਹਨ**। (**ਹੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ!) ਮੈਂ ਸਦਕੇ ਹਾਂ ਉਸ ਥਾਂ ਤੋਂ* *ਜਿਥੇ ਤੂੰ ਵੱਸਿਆ**। **ਤੇਰੀ ਸੰਗਤਿ ਸਦਾ ਅਟੱਲ ਹੈ**। *
*Now the praise of Guru is expressed who has become one with the Lord. Now question is, how to serve the Guru, is it limited to physical service or it goes beyond it. Hypocrites are very good at doing physical service that is not what Guru wants. It was surrendering the ego to Guru and obeying doubtlessly. Who did it they were saved (will be). Again here Guru’s helping the people is praised.*

*ਨਾਨਕੁ ਤੂ ਲਹਣਾ ਤੂਹੈ ਗੁਰੁ ਅਮਰੁ ਤੂ ਵੀਚਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਗੁਰੁ ਡਿਠਾ ਤਾਂ ਮਨੁ ਸਾਧਾਰਿਆ **॥**੭**॥ *
*Thou art Nanak, thou art Angad and thou art Guru Amardas. So do I deem thee. **When I saw the Guru, then was my soul sustained. *
*(**ਹੇ* *ਗੁਰੂ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਜੀ!) ਤੂੰ ਹੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਹੈਂ**, **ਤੂੰ ਹੀ ਬਾਬਾ ਲਹਣਾ ਹੈਂ**, **ਮੈਂ ਤੈਨੂੰ* *ਹੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਅਮਰਦਾਸ ਸਮਝਿਆ ਹੈ**। (**ਜਿਸ ਕਿਸੇ ਨੇ) ਗੁਰੂ (ਰਾਮਦਾਸ) ਦਾ ਦੀਦਾਰ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ* *ਉਸੇ ਦਾ ਮਨ ਤਦੋਂ ਟਿਕਾਣੇ ਆ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ**।**੭**। *
*Who met Guru Nanak, his second Mehal Guru Angad, third Mehal Guru Amardas, their mind got stilled, this is the way Guru changed the lives of many.*
*ਚਾਰੇ ਜਾਗੇ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਪੰਚਾਇਣੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੋਆ **॥ *
*The four Gurus illumined their own four times. Thou, O Nanak, thyself hast assumed the fifth form. *
*ਚਾਰੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣੇ ਸਮੇ ਰੌਸ਼ਨ ਹੋਏ ਹਨ**, **ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਉਹਨਾਂ ਵਿਚ) ਪਰਗਟ ਹੋਇਆ**। *
*Through these four forms, the Lord Himself showed Himself to save people.*
*ਆਪੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਆਪੁ ਸਾਜਿਓਨੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਥੰਮ੍ਹ੍ਹਿ ਖਲੋਆ **॥ *
*Thou Thyself didst create the world and thyself art its ever standing pillar. *
*ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ ਨੇ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ (ਸ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਟੀ ਦੇ ਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ) ਜ਼ਾਹਰ ਕੀਤਾ ਤੇ ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਗੁਰੂ-ਰੂਪ ਹੋ ਕੇ) ਸ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਟੀ ਨੂੰ ਸਹਾਰਾ ਦੇ ਰਿਹਾ ਹੈ**। *
*Again praise goes back to the Lord who is able to do all this because He is the support of this; He creates such enlightened ones and supports them. Again it is the Lord gets all credit.*
*ਆਪੇ ਪਟੀ ਕਲਮ ਆਪਿ ਆਪਿ ਲਿਖਣਹਾਰਾ ਹੋਆ **॥ *
*Thou thyself art the tablet, thyself the pen and thyself hast become the writer. *
*Praise continues, the Lord Himself does all (Hint is about Gurbani to guide the souls.)*
*(**ਜੀਵਾਂ ਦੀ ਅਗਵਾਈ ਲਈ**, **ਪੂਰਨੇ ਪਾਣ ਲਈ) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਪੱਟੀ ਹੈ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਕਲਮ ਹੈ ਤੇ (ਗੁਰੂ-ਰੂਪ ਹੋ ਕੇ) ਆਪ ਹੀ ਪੂਰਨੇ ਲਿਖਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈ**। *
*ਸਭ ਉਮਤਿ ਆਵਣ ਜਾਵਣੀ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਨਵਾ ਨਿਰੋਆ **॥ *
*Thine followers are all subject to coming and going. Thou art ever safe and sound. *
*ਸਾਰੀ ਸ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਟੀ ਤਾਂ ਜਨਮ ਮਰਨ ਦੇ ਗੇੜ ਵਿਚ ਹੈ**, **ਪਰ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਆਪ (ਸਦਾ) ਨਵਾਂ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਨਿਰੋਆ ਹੈ (ਭਾਵ**, **ਹਰ ਨਵੇਂ ਰੰਗ ਵਿਚ ਹੀ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਨਿਰਲੇਪ ਭੀ ਹੈ)**। *
*Again the eternity of the Lord is expressed*

*ਤਖਤਿ ਬੈਠਾ ਅਰਜਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਖਿਵੈ ਚੰਦੋਆ **॥ **ਉਗਵਣਹੁ ਤੈ ਆਥਵਣਹੁ ਚਹੁ ਚਕੀ ਕੀਅਨੁ ਲੋਆ **॥ *
*Guru Arjan is seated on Guru Nanak's throne and the True Guru's canopy shines over him. **From east to west, thou hast illumined the four directions. *
*(**ਉਸ* *ਨਵੇਂ ਨਿਰੋਏ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਬਖ਼ਸ਼ੇ) ਤਖ਼ਤ ਉੱਤੇ (ਜਿਸ ਉੱਤੇ ਪਹਿਲੇ ਚਾਰੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣੇ* *ਸਮੇ ਰੌਸ਼ਨ ਹੋਏ ਸਨ**, **ਹੁਣ) ਗੁਰੂ ਅਰਜਨ ਬੈਠਾ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ**, **ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਦਾ ਚੰਦੋਆ ਚਮਕ ਰਿਹਾ* *ਹੈ**, (**ਭਾਵ**, **ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਅਰਜਨ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਦਾ ਤੇਜ-ਪ੍ਰਤਾਪ ਸਾਰੇ ਪਸਰ ਰਿਹਾ ਹੈ)**। **ਸੂਰਜ ਉੱਗਣ* *ਤੋਂ (ਡੁੱਬਣ ਤਕ) ਅਤੇ ਡੁੱਬਣ ਤੋਂ (ਚੜ੍ਹਨ ਤਕ) ਚਹੁੰ ਚੱਕਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਇਸ (ਗੁਰੂ ਅਰਜਨ)* *ਨੇ ਚਾਨਣ ਕਰ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਹੈ**। *
*It states that Guru Arjan sits on Guru Nanak’s thrown and his canopy shines means Guru ji is accepted and revered as Guru guides the people towards the Lord*
*ਜਿਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਨ ਸੇਵਿਓ ਮਨਮੁਖਾ ਪਇਆ ਮੋਆ **॥ **ਦੂਣੀ ਚਉਣੀ ਕਰਾਮਾਤਿ ਸਚੇ ਕਾ ਸਚਾ ਢੋਆ **॥ **ਚਾਰੇ ਜਾਗੇ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਪੰਚਾਇਣੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੋਆ **॥**੮**॥**੧**॥ *
*The apostates, who serve not their Guru, die an ignoble death. **This is the True Guru's true blessing on thee that thine miracles increase two-fold and four-fold. **The four Guru's illumined their own four times, Thou, O Nanak, thyself has assumed the filth form. *
*ਆਪਣੇ* *ਮਨ ਦੇ ਪਿੱਛੇ ਤੁਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬੰਦਿਆਂ ਨੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਦਾ ਹੁਕਮ ਨਾਹ ਮੰਨਿਆ ਉਹਨਾਂ* *ਨੂੰ ਮਰੀ ਪੈ ਗਈ**, (**ਭਾਵ**, **ਉਹ ਆਤਮਕ ਮੌਤੇ ਮਰ ਗਏ)**। **ਗੁਰੂ ਅਰਜਨ ਦੀ (ਦਿਨ-) ਦੂਣੀ ਤੇ* *ਰਾਤ ਚਾਰ-ਗੁਣੀ ਬਜ਼ੁਰਗੀ ਵਧ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ**; (**ਸ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਟੀ ਨੂੰ) ਗੁਰੂ**, **ਸੱਚੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੀ ਸੱਚੀ* *ਸੁਗ਼ਾਤ ਹੈ**। **ਚਾਰੇ ਗੁਰੂ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣੇ ਸਮੇ ਵਿਚ ਰੌਸ਼ਨ ਹੋਏ**, **ਅਕਾਲ ਪੁਰਖ (ਉਹਨਾਂ ਵਿਚ)* *ਪਰਗਟ ਹੋਇਆ**।**੮**।**੧**। *
*Miracle of the Lord to create Guru is expressed, good name of the Guru has been kept over time by the Lord, again the credit is given to the Lord who Himself through Guru Nanak and his other Mehalas infused the light in the people. Who didn’t obey the Guru, they suffered, who followed they got saved as stated earlier.*
*So Singh Sahib ji, this shabad is not saying what you are claiming, please do not try to use Gurbani to support what you believe is right. Whatever you believe, I am fine with that. Gurmat gives credit of Miracles to the Lord only if we the followers of Guru ji take that honor away from the Lord, we truly are not following Guru ji. Who becomes one with the Lord, why would he need credit of such things? Only one who deserve credit of all miracles is the Lord Himself*


----------



## Archived_Member4 (Jan 19, 2009)

*Re: 'Janam Sakhi' Are True Events*



pk70 said:


> *Singh ji*
> 
> *I have a big problem with your application of this quoted Shabad at SGGS968 because it doesn’t state Guru actually did miracles or can do miracles. In SGGS Ji, miracles are credited to the Lord in all cases, Guru ji also went on saying, all the miracles expressed in the History were done by the Lord. In this very shabad, same honor of the Lord is kept and miracles are credited to the Lord, lets see it*
> *ਧੰਨੁ ਧੰਨੁ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ਗੁਰੁ ਜਿਨਿ ਸਿਰਿਆ ਤਿਨੈ ਸਵਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਪੂਰੀ ਹੋਈ ਕਰਾਮਾਤਿ ਆਪਿ ਸਿਰਜਣਹਾਰੈ ਧਾਰਿਆ **॥ **ਸਿਖੀ ਅਤੈ ਸੰਗਤੀ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਕਰਿ ਨਮਸਕਾਰਿਆ **॥ *
> ...


 
PK70 ji 

You put a smile on my face with this post.  I completely agree with you the credit for all miracles go to the Lord.  The reason why I presented this shabad is because of the last tuk.  Neither have I stated that this shabad says Guru ji did miracles or can do miracles.

The four Gurus enlightened the four ages;the Lord Himself assumed the fifth form. || 8 || 1 || ang 968

I was simply pointing out this last tuk in the shabad and it just happened in this shabad Guru ji spoke about miracles.  I should have made the tuk bold, but was hasty in my response.  I apoligize for the confusion and will try to be more clear next time.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jan 20, 2009)

PK70 ji and Singh Ji..alls well that ends well..
Miracles to prove sainthood///guruhood//prophethood/Gurbanai's powers etc etc....???? has no place in Gurmatt/Sikhi.
Thank  you both for a well wrtten expalnation.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Mar 3, 2010)

another sakhi full of holes...but very popular with sant baba types of story tellers..

The sakhi of  Saman..and Moosan..father and Son sikhs of Guru Arjun Ji Sahib...ostensibly too poor to feed the Guur and His Sangat..BUT desirous of hosting a Diwan and Guru ka Langgar at their premises...so they invite the Guru and His Sangat..and BREAK into a local rich mans home/hattee through the ROOF..and steal the RATIONS etc for the Diwan. However when exiting the place...the Father goes through the hole, and also the Bag of goodies..BUT the Son gets STUCK. In order to ESCAPE being Identified as thieves..the Father CUTS off the HEAD of his son....and leaves behidn the headless BODY. He takes home the head and hides it. The Next Morning, the rich man discovers a Headless body in his store...and rushes to the Moosan home and begs the Guru Ka Sikh to help him by REMOVING the BODY as soon as possible..and he will pay him a large sum of money too....and so Moosan brings home the body of his son...happy that his secret is preserved...and he gets a huge sum of cash as well...He places the Head and Body on a Manja and covers it with a Chadar...

Meanwhile the  Guru Arjun ji and his sangats arrive...and all goes well. Then Guru Ji asks Moosan..where is your son Samman...and Moosan says he is sleeping...so Guru Ji Calls out..Samman Beta...Samman beta..come here...and miracolously the Severed Head joins the Body and Samman comes and matha teks to Guru Ji...ALL IS WELL !!

Lets consider a few points:

1. Guru Ji sees no problem with enjoying the fruits of stolen goods//dead thieves...to boot...So BOTH Guru Jia nd His Sikhs are thieves/accomplices in enjoying fruits of thievery...

2. These thieves..BROKE through the ROOF...while its normal to break through WALLS...as Roof break in needs a LADDER..before and after the event..who HELD THE LADDER ??

3. A Headless body...can be revived..even after a long period and all blood having drained out and brain etc being dead...But such didnt happen to the Hundreds of thousands of SIKH SHAHEEDS..none were REVIVED !!:woohoo:

4. The House owner didnt wake up on hearing the BODY fall..he didnt RECOGNISE his neighbours sons BODY (even if no head )...clothes, body shape etc ?? He then asks his neighbour to HIDE the crime ?? why is he afraid ???:yippie:

5. The Father got through..the Bag of stolen Goods got through..BUT the Son got stuck ?? But wait..didnt the SON also go thorugh on the WAY IN ?? How did that happen ?? did he EAT a huge meal on his way out ?? or he gained weight ??happymunda
Apart from these holes the size of the Ozone Layer Hole in the Sky....what an insult to Guru Ji that teaches us HONEST LABOUR, sharing the fruits of that Honesty...not stealing..NOT.....even for the Guru ??? NO WAY..as Guru Ji declares..CHOR KEE HAMMAH BHAREH NA KOI..no one pays wittness to the THIEF...

This fake fable is based on Guru Arjun Jis chaoboleh on Page 1363 of SGGS..actual viakhiyah doen by Pof Sahib Singh gives the Gurmatt view...


----------



## Randip Singh (Mar 4, 2010)

Gyani Jarnail Singh said:


> another sakhi full of holes...but very popular with sant baba types of story tellers..
> 
> The sakhi of Saman..and Moosan..father and Son sikhs of Guru Arjun Ji Sahib...ostensibly too poor to feed the Guru and His Sangat..BUT desirous of hosting a Diwan and Guru ka Langgar at their premises...so they invite the Guru and His Sangat..and BREAK into a local rich mans home/hattee through the ROOF..and steal the RATIONS etc for the Diwan. However when exiting the place...the Father goes through the hole, and also the Bag of goodies..BUT the Son gets STUCK. In order to ESCAPE being Identified as thieves..the Father CUTS off the HEAD of his son....and leaves behidn the headless BODY. He takes home the head and hides it. The Next Morning, the rich man discovers a Headless body in his store...and rushes to the Moosan home and begs the Guru Ka Sikh to help him by REMOVING the BODY as soon as possible..and he will pay him a large sum of money too....and so Moosan brings home the body of his son...happy that his secret is preserved...and he gets a huge sum of cash as well...He places the Head and Body on a Manja and covers it with a Chadar...
> 
> ...


 
It amazes me the amount of time people spend on Sakhi's and everyone just wants to believe the bits they want to.

1) Several Sakhi's I have read attest to Guru Nanak eating meat on the way to Kurukshetra. Point that out and AKJ'rs blow a fuse.
2) I am not aware of any Sakhi's that state Guru Gobind Singh cut of the Panj Pyareys heads, yet we believe that.

The real question, is, find out when the Sakhi's were written and you will have your answer.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Mar 5, 2010)

Randip  Ji wrote:
The real question, is, find out when the Sakhi's were written and you  will have your answer.         .>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

A 64 million Pound Sterling observation.

Date of composition of....Gurbilas Patshai Chhevin..Gurbilas Patshai Dasveen..Bhai Bala Janamsakhi...Sau Sakhi..Dsm Granth etc etc...will tell you a lot...and EXPOSE the TRUTH......NOTE that each word in SGGS has an AUTHOR clearly stated...NOT so the other books mentioned above....the Vaar 41 surreptiously attached to Vaars of Bhai Gurdass also has NO AUTHOR !!!happymunda


----------

