# One Infinite Creator In Sikhism, What Does It Mean?



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

Infinity is a very large and larger than large limit indefinable concept.  It can be given a symbol *∞* but from non-mathematical descriptions, it can require tremendously large resources even for a specific real number, concept and dimension.

  Creator is infinite in dimensions (virtues, capabilities, functions, etc.) and infinite within each of these.  So when Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji describes such to be limitless, beyond description, not enough words to describe, not enough time to describe, we need to pay heed.  If we don’t do that we will run into lot of issues in following the teachings of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

  Let us check some of the possible common thoughts or expressions that one comes across within Sikhs and other communities.

*EXAMPLE 1:  *Creator as being some specific form.
*OBSERVATION 1:  *It goes without saying that a form and infinite do not go together if form is defined in concept or fact.  

  This has the impact of dissipating all concepts of Ram, Krishna, other deities as well as representation of creator in murtis/statues, carvings, prayed to forms, etc.

*EXAMPLE 2:  *Getting in touch with one creator.
*OBSERVATION 2:  *There is often talk of contact with the creator in Sikhism believers as well as others.

  It is not uncommon to hear Sikh people say,


Doing Darshan/Visualization of the creator
Merging one self with the creator
   It may relate to other religions in the concepts of resurrection, direction towards Hell or Heaven, and so forth.

  None of this is plausible, achievable or worth targeting.  The one infinite creator is not available by the very concept of infinity and all such are forms of illusions, misguided pursuits or false promises unchecked.

*EXAMPLE 3:  *Wanting to fully understand all about one infinite creator.
*OBSERVATION 3:  *Noble as this cause or approach is, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji repeatedly states the futility of setting this as an objective.

  Instead the objective as stated for reality and realistic living is to always be in mode to understand more.  Further, learning is not an end to itself.  The teaching in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is towards ever increasing understanding and equally if not more importantly living with the ever increasing understanding.

  Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Mar 12, 2012)

_EXAMPLE 1: Creator as being some specific form.
OBSERVATION 1: It goes without saying that a form and infinite do not go together if form is defined in concept or fact. 

This has the impact of dissipating all concepts of Ram, Krishna, other deities as well as representation of creator in murtis/statues, carvings, prayed to forms, etc._

Ambarsariaji

Wonderful post Veerji, and completely in line with my own thinking, however, While I also reject the notion of a 'living' God, could these people have existed and just been very connected? This fails somewhat as to me, being very connected would also give you high levels of humility and grace, and to do some of the things that some Gods do are more egoistical and arrogant. I am talking about all depiction of personality of God, both in eastern and western religion. From the mind game playing and rather angry God of the west to some of the cruel and unforgiving Gods of the east, I do not see a representation of Creator in any of these, certainly not the Creator as described in Mool Mantra. 

I am not advocating Sikhism as the only religion to find enlightenment, but to say that Creator has no personality, no end, no start, no form, no record of speech or presence, seems rather more enlightened than religions that attempt to personify Creator


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 12, 2012)

> realistic living is to always be in mode to understand more


 
Veer Ji how can one really understand more about that which is infinite,it is a mistake to think one understands more,the only approach to adopt is that 'I understand nothing about the specific form of the infininte formless form'.


----------



## Harry Haller (Mar 12, 2012)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veer Ji how can one really understand more about that which is infinite,it is a mistake to think one understands more,the only approach to adopt is that 'I understand nothing about the specific form of the infininte formless form'.



If we talk about infinity, and rather than use a symbol, use the best number we can to give us the best answer, than 999,999 would give us a more accurate answer than 1. 


I also think, dear Spji, that you are confusing the form of Creator of having some significance, whereas it has none, however, I think we can all agree that for someone to have no enemies, it does intimate love for all, so we have several qualities now, love, bravery, freedom from births and deaths, without form, 

We will never be able to write down the full numerical value of infinity, but of understanding allows us to make that 999,999 into 99,999,999 we are a bit closer to not only understanding, but emulating, which in my view, is what it is all about.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 12, 2012)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veer Ji how can one really understand more about that which is infinite,it is a mistake to think one understands more,the only approach to adopt is that 'I understand nothing about the specific form of the infininte formless form'.


 
My dear Scarlet mundahug

I agree! We never fathom or understand God as God is is in Itself - that is as it is in its Essence. The great mystic St John of the Cross (1542 – 1591) wrote "*That thou mayest know everything, seek to know nothing*". St Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) also advocated the via negativa because God is not an object in the universe and it is not possible to describe the Deus absconditus with words or to grasp Supreme Reality with our finite intelligence. The highest form of knowledge is not via the intellect but through love, which pierces the great cloud of unknowing between ourselves and God. Where our finite intellect fails to comprehend the Infinite God, love fills the gap and draws us to the bosom of our creator. As Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464) explained, "*I know, that everything which I know, is not God, and that everything I conceive, is no comparison to Him*, *but rather He excels it. God is unknowable by Human Beings; all that we can really know is that we are ignorant, so our knowledge of God is what He is not. Therefore God is nothing.*" 


Yes you read that - Catholics regard God as "NOTHING" literally "NO-THING". 

God's essence remains eternally unknowable and impenetrable. However, it is clear that God has revealed Himself to man and is encountered by man. It is through God's energies that we encounter God. Because God does not change, else we slip into a deistic conception of the Divine, a distant God who does not reveal himself to man through revelations. God's energies are eternal. Take, for example, God's love. God has never been without love, so God's love must be eternal. And these 'energies' are knowable, while his Essence is not. 

When I speak about God's Essence I'm essentially speaking of His divinity, His (and forgive me the male pronoun which is not indicative of gender at all) _'God-ness'_ or _'Is-ness'_. When I speak of His energies I am speaking of His actions. To understand the first we'd have to be God Himself, because only He has the capacity to understand that and therefore He IS, as the God, wholly transcendent and otherly. But, His Energies are knowable because they show us who He is and what He does. His Energies thus understood are His Providence, and Grace. In this way we can know about God's love, God's Will, God's Goodness without compromising the fact that he is utterly unknowable in Essence nor denying God's simplicity. 

The ousia or Essence of God in Catholic Christianities, is God as God is in himself. God, as He is in Himself, cannot be understood by any save Himself. 1 Timothy 6:16, "*Dwelling in that inaccessible light, whom no man has seen or can see*." Its like my mind. You cannot know my private thoughts. In the same way you cannot posses God's mind and private thoughts. However you can know what I am thinking in my mind through my actions and speech. In the same way God's mind - his Essence - is revealed through his actions and activities in the world. The attributes of God tell us what He is and who He is. It is the energies of God that enable us to experience something of the Divine. St John Damascene (676 – 749) states that "*all that we say positively of God manifests not his nature but the things about his nature*."

His energies are also "Uncreated" along with the Essence. 

This is the Catholic teaching. Some quotes: 


"...The finest thing that we can say of God is to be silent concerning him from the wisdom of inner riches...Lord I have sought you in all the temples of the world and lo, I find you within myself. If a man does not find the Lord within himself, he will surely not find him in the world..." 


_- Saint Augustine_ (354–430 C.E) 


"...You should not wish to understand _anything_ about God, for God is beyond all understanding. A master says: "If I had a God that I could understand, I would not regard him as God." If you understand anything about him, then he is not in it, and by understanding something of him, you fall into ignorance...All that God asks of you most pressingly is to go out of yourself - and let God be God in you..." 

_- Meister Eckhart_ (c. 1260 – c. 1327)


However there is no contradiction between the unknowability of God and the recognition of aspects of God in ourselves. God is not *absolutely* unknowable in terms of _energies/attributes_ since even inanimate objects point to His existence and creative power, although he is *completely* unknowable in Essence. God is after all IN ALL THINGS. We can thus 'know' something of God's attributes through his creation, his indwelling within ourselves and in others etc. His love is evident in the immense value of life and our love for Him is itself a form of knowledge - it is in fact love which is the bridge to God where finite knowledge ultimately fails. 


I also do get what our dear brother Ambarsaria was saying in this respect and I agree with him too. 

Most journeys can be understood in three parts – leaving, traveling, and arrival. We leave with a particular destination in mind. There is a point of arrival. We have probably all asked or heard the familiar travel questions: “Are we there yet?” “How much longer?” “When will get there?”

However the spiritual journey is not like this at all. Arrival is not the destination of the spiritual journey. Are we there yet? No. How much longer? Eternity. When will get there? Never. The answers on the spiritual journey are different. The spiritual journey is one of eternal progress towards God. This is sometimes called the doctrine of epektasis and attributed to St. Gregory of Nyssa. 


"_And so every desire for the Beautiful which draws us on in this ascent is intensified by the soul’s very progress towards it. And this is the real meaning of seeing God: never to have this desire satisfied. But fixing our eyes on those things which help us to see, we must ever keep alive in us the desire to see more and more. And so no limit can be set to our progress towards God: first of all, because no limitation can be put on upon the Beautiful, and secondly because the increase in our desire for the Beautiful cannot be stopped by any sense of satisfaction._"

*- St. Gregory of Nyssa in The Life of Moses (335 – c. 395)*


St. Paul describes his own journey as one of stretching and straining forward [epekteinomenos] toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:13-14). Paul is describing a constant move forward in an attempt to grasp something. For Gregory this movement describes the soul’s eternal progress in grace and perfection in God. Our longing for God is fulfilled in our progress towards God but is never satisfied. The grace of an unsatisfied soul calls us forward, deeper into the heart of the divine. 

Based on the scriptures and the teaching of the fathers, Saint Gregory of Nyssa works out his doctrine of theosis as an infinite process which he calls Epektasis. In his Life of Moses he brilliantly presents his principal doctrine that human goodness is a continual progression towards an infinite God. It is precisely in this context that the spiritual idealism of Philippians 3:13-14 is realized. The virtuous life in this work is full of paradoxes; it is a mixture of standing on the rock which is Christ and forever moving forward, a mixture of running and standing still. Though we are already in Christ we are summoned to an ever increasing truth. In contrast to the Creator, ‘change’ is one of the distinguishing marks of creation. According to Nyssa this capacity for constant change in humans is a guarantee for progress in deification: 

“*let no one be grieved if he sees in his nature a penchant for change…. Become greater through daily increase… For this is truly perfection: never to stop growing toward what is better and never placing any limit on perfection*.” 

(On Perfection, Gregory of Nyssa) "*Perfection is an ongoing progress. Even in the eternal abode it is not a static experience but an infinite advance. There the journey goes on, with the eternal Bridegroom, into greater and greater delights, joys and beauties*". 


Do we Catholics make sense or do we sometimes speak gobble-de-gook? motherlylove


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 12, 2012)

> Do we Catholics make sense or


Veera Regardless of faith that which is spoken by a Saint must be sensible.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 12, 2012)

This is my all time favourite descrition of God's Unknowable Essence from St John of the Cross (1542 – 1591). 


*The Song of the Soul that Delights in Reaching the Supreme State of perfection, that is, the union with God, by the path of spiritual negation *


*- Verses on the Ecstasy of Deep Contemplation*



_I entered where there is no knowing,_

_and unknowing I remained,_

_all knowledge there transcending._

_I_

_Where no knowing is I entered,_
_yet when I my own self saw there_

_without knowing where I rested_

_great things I understood there,_

_yet cannot say what I felt there,_

_since I rested in unknowing,_

_all knowledge there transcending._

_II_

_Of peace and of holy good_

_there was perfect knowing,_

_in profoundest solitude_

_the only true way seeing,_

_yet so secret is the thing_

_that I was left here stammering,_

_all knowledge there transcending._


_III_


_I was left there so absorbed,_

_so entranced, and so removed,_

_that my senses were abroad,_

_robbed of all sensation proved,_

_and my spirit then was moved_

_with an unknown knowing,_

_all knowledge there transcending._


_IV_


_He who reaches there in truth_

_from himself is parted though,_

_and all that before he knew_

_seems to him but base below,_

_his knowledge increases so_

_that knowledge has an ending,_

_all knowledge there transcending._


_V_


_The higher he climbs however_

_the less he’ll ever understand,_

_because the cloud grows darker_

_that lit the night on every hand:_

_whoever visits this dark land_

_rests forever in unknowing,_

_all knowledge there transcending._


_VI_


_This knowledge of unknowing_

_is of so profound a power_

_that no wise men arguing_

_will ever supersede its hour:_

_their wisdom cannot reach the tower_

_where knowing has an ending,_

_all knowledge there transcending._

_VII_


_It is of such true excellence_

_this highest understanding,_

_no science, no human sense,_

_has it in its grasping,_

_yet he who, by self-conquering_

_grasps knowing in unknowing,_

_goes evermore transcending._





_VIII_



_And in the deepest sense,_

_this highest knowledge lies,_

_of the divine essence,_

_if you would be wise:_

_his mercy so it does comprise,_

_each one leaving in unknowing,_

_all knowledge there transcending._

_Its source I do not know because it has none._
_And yet from this, I know, all sources come,_
_Although by night._

_"I know that no created thing could be so fair_
_And that both earth and heaven drink from there,_
_Although by night._

_Its radiance is never clouded and in this_
_I know that all light has its genesis,_
_Although by night._
_......................_

_The current welling from this fountain's source_
_I know to be as mighty as its force,_
_Although by night. " (John of the Cross)_


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 12, 2012)

Only a Saint could articulate so well that which transcends understanding.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

Veer sp ji your inquisitive logical mind generates great questions.  It is absolutely important to be tested versus living in self ignorance.  So I thank you for your comments.  Some comments below,





Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> _Veer Ji how can one really understand more about that which is infinite_,
> 
> 
> _In my mind to try to understand one infinite creator is to understand one infinite creation around us.  At various levels of need to understand and need to know the creation around us does not pose challenges of infinity._
> ...


 Regards.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 12, 2012)

My dear brothers and sisters, 

From today's Hukamnama: 


"...*Infinite is the spiritual wisdom imparted by the Guru [...] He Himself [God] imparts understanding and awareness. O Nanak, the Lord Master is inaccessible and unfathomable; I live by His True Name..." *


- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

Brother Vouthon ji thanks for your contributions.  Much appreciated.

I thought I would add the following to clarify a bit in terms of "one Creator" and "one creation" duality.  I will do it as an analogy.

A wonderful Canadian Social Scientist, Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase,

*The medium is the message*


So if one were to consider creation and creator we can do the following equivalency/congruence,​
The Medium  *≡* _One Infinite Creation_ 
​
The Message *≡* _One Infinite Creator_ ​ 
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
*One infinite creation is one infinite creator*
* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*



So if one gets hold of this concept, then you see creator everywhere as it is imbued in various ways in all creation, all around.

Rain . Jose Feliciano (original vrs 1969 - high quality)      - YouTube


> Try replacing the word "YOU" in the lyrics with the word God/Creator see what magic happens lol japposatnamwaheguru: mundahug


Sat Sri Akal.

*PS:*  Reference to Marshal McLuhan, 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message
​


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

From Gurbanee we get a clear message that the infinite creation is perishable whereas infinite CREATOR is imperishable. So how one can consider the infinite creation as MEDIUM for imperishable CREATOR. This needs to be considered.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> From Gurbanee we get a clear message that the infinite creation is perishable whereas infinite CREATOR is imperishable. So how one can consider the infinite creation as MEDIUM for imperishable CREATOR. This needs to be considered.
> Prakash.s.Bagga


Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post.

I have not read anywhere in terms of the total destruction of all creation in SGGS.  Can you please refer to a Sabad that so describes or alludes.  I do recognize there being reference to transformational changes which will appear as destruction to the entity transformed.  Transformation being recognized as always occurring and endless in SGGS.

Regards.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

AMBARSARIA Ji,
My views are based on the following Quote from SGGS ji,
ਪਉੜੀ ॥ ਧਰਤਿ ਆਕਾਸੁ ਪਾਤਾਲੁ ਹੈ ਚੰਦੁ ਸੂਰੁ ਬਿਨਾਸੀ ॥ ਬਾਦਿਸਾਹ ਸਾਹ ਉਮਰਾਵ ਖਾਨ ਢਾਹਿ ਡੇਰੇ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਰੰਗ ਤੁੰਗ ਗਰੀਬ ਮਸਤ ਸਭੁ ਲੋਕੁ ਸਿਧਾਸੀ ॥ ਕਾਜੀ ਸੇਖ ਮਸਾਇਕਾ ਸਭੇ ਉਠਿ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਪੀਰ ਪੈਕਾਬਰ ਅਉਲੀਏ ਕੋ ਥਿਰੁ ਨ ਰਹਾਸੀ ॥ ਰੋਜਾ ਬਾਗ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਕਤੇਬ ਵਿਣੁ ਬੁਝੇ ਸਭ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਲਖ ਚਉਰਾਸੀਹ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਸਭ ਆਵੈ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਨਿਹਚਲੁ ਸਚੁ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਏਕੁ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਬੰਦਾ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ॥੧੭॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 1100}

If you have some different views It would be pleasure to look into those views.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Harry Haller (Mar 12, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post.
> 
> I have not read anywhere in terms of the total destruction of all creation in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.  Can you please refer to a Sabad that so describes or alludes.  I do recognize there being reference to transformational changes which will appear as destruction to the entity transformed.  Transformation being recognized as always occurring and endless in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
> 
> ...



that was a pretty good answer to a pretty good question wahmunda


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> AMBARSARIA Ji,
> My views are based on the following Quote from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji,
> ਪਉੜੀ ॥ ਧਰਤਿ ਆਕਾਸੁ ਪਾਤਾਲੁ ਹੈ ਚੰਦੁ ਸੂਰੁ ਬਿਨਾਸੀ ॥ ਬਾਦਿਸਾਹ ਸਾਹ ਉਮਰਾਵ ਖਾਨ ਢਾਹਿ ਡੇਰੇ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਰੰਗ ਤੁੰਗ ਗਰੀਬ ਮਸਤ ਸਭੁ ਲੋਕੁ ਸਿਧਾਸੀ ॥ ਕਾਜੀ ਸੇਖ ਮਸਾਇਕਾ ਸਭੇ ਉਠਿ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਪੀਰ ਪੈਕਾਬਰ ਅਉਲੀਏ ਕੋ ਥਿਰੁ ਨ ਰਹਾਸੀ ॥ ਰੋਜਾ ਬਾਗ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਕਤੇਬ ਵਿਣੁ ਬੁਝੇ ਸਭ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਲਖ ਚਉਰਾਸੀਹ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਸਭ ਆਵੈ ਜਾਸੀ ॥ ਨਿਹਚਲੁ ਸਚੁ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਏਕੁ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਬੰਦਾ ਅਬਿਨਾਸੀ ॥੧੭॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 1100}
> 
> ...


Veer ji that is hardly all of creation.  It is to signify the futility of worldly or universe constructs.  The destruction that you allude to actually implies "change from as you knew these".  It signifies change and not destruction of matter into nothingness.  Mortals read change as destruction to nothing, but that is not what is signified in SGGS.  Transformational change is the key concept.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 12, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post.
> 
> I have not read anywhere in terms of the total destruction of all creation in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Can you please refer to a Sabad that so describes or alludes. I do recognize there being reference to transformational changes which will appear as destruction to the entity transformed. Transformation being recognized as always occurring and endless in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
> 
> ...


 

My dear brother Ambarsaria gingerteakaur


_“Nothing of the color and the form of the creation shall remain; the entire expanse is transitory.” _

*- SriGuru Granth Sahib, p.999*


In today's Hukamnamamundahug: 


"...*The Creator Lord who created, shall also destroy. The call of death is sent out by the Lord’s Command; no one can challenge it. He Himself creates, and watches...the world is born, only to die...*


I am as yet an infant in knowledge of the Guru Granth but could one not read the above as indicating, as does current scientific theory, that the Universe will probably be destroyed in a "Big Crunch"? The currently accepted theory for the creation of the universe is the Big Bang theory which states that the universe has expanded into its current state from a primeival 'singularity event' of enormous density and temperature. 

What I find amazing is that the Granth seems to support this theory - hundreds of years before it was theorized! And the key part is that it says God did this _many _times: 


_“...In so many ways, He has unfolded Himself. *So many times, He has expanded His expansion*. Forever and ever, He is the One, the One Universal Creator...”_ 

*- Guru Granth Sahib, p.276*


This expansion idea is REALLY important given its corroboration in modern science. 


And read these two portions from the Granth: 


_"The earth, the Akaashic ethers of the sky, the nether regions of the underworld, the moon and the sun shall pass away."_ 

*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p1100*


_"Night and day, and the stars in the sky shall vanish. The sun and the moon shall vanish. The mountains, the earth, the water and the air shall pass away. Only the Word of the Holy Saint shall endure."_ 

*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p1204* 



And what does the Granth ji say will happen when this Universe ends? 


_“The entire creation came from God. As it pleases Him, He creates the expanse. As it pleases Him, He becomes the One and Only again.” _


*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib, p.294*


Jesus is recorded as having said similar things to this: 


*"...The Father's will is this: that the Universe should return to Him..."* 

_- Jesus Christ_


Perhaps though this is the transformative change you speak of ie not into nothingness but into a new form of existence etc .

However it looks to me that it might be more in line with brother Prakash's theory.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

THE message from Mr VOUTHON is highly appreciable in the sense of stating and accepting the truth from different scriptures.
Just marvelous thinking
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

Every infinite has its finite too.Therefore the infinite can be known and understood thru its finite .That is what is being told thru NAAMu in SGGS .
If RAM is for infinite then the word RAMu is finite of the infinite RAM.
If GOBIND is infinite then GOBINDu is finite for GOBIND.

The whole of infinite is represented as GuRu-GuR.The understanding of this enables us to know and understand the ONE INFINITE.

Pakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> Every infinite has its finite too.Therefore the infinite can be known and understood thru its finite .That is what is being told thru NAAMu in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji .
> If RAM is for infinite then the word RAMu is finite of the infinite RAM.
> If GOBIND is infinite then GOBINDu is finite for GOBIND.
> 
> ...


Prakash.S.Bagga ji what you don't realize is the extent of infinity.

Let us take the favorite of yours, Ram.  Infinite implies, infinite numbers of Rams.  Infinite number of Baggas, and so on.  So Ram, Bagga, Harry, etc., are just part of the infinite.  Neither can be linked directly to define the ultimate infiniteness.  The extrapolative logic of finite to bigger finite and so on fails in limit to infinity.  This destroys the concept of a specific finite having any meaning in the concept of infinite to the extent of defining the vastness of the infinite.

In the concept of Infinite, the finite the way you approach or state is meaningless.  Aunkud stuff is OK.  You are not catching the essence and vastness of expression that is SGGS.  You are minimizing it to your narrow mindset consistent with Hindu deities, Sanatanism leanings, concepts, etc.  Sorry, but only you can unshackle yourself from small to see big that is Sikhism espoused through SGGS.  Sikhism is not a hierarchy of Gods or deities no matter how it is presented or postulated in upfront or devious ways.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji what you don't realize is the extent of infinity.
> 
> Let us take the favorite of yours, Ram. Infinite implies, infinite numbers of Rams. Infinite number of Baggas, and so on. So Ram, Bagga, Harry, etc., are just part of the infinite. Neither can be linked directly to define the ultimate infiniteness. The extrapolative logic of finite to bigger finite and so on fails in limit to infinity. This destroys the concept of a specific finite having any meaning in the concept of infinite to the extent of defining the vastness of the infinite.
> 
> ...


 
I dont think you have clear concept of what actually infinite means.
Once you can get the understanding of real meaning of infinite you will automatically understand how there can be so many refered RAM .
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

Somebody has to have the last word about infinity otherwise every reason can be
met with another one and there can be no end to it.The last word is fromthe GuRu as expressed in SINGULARITY  of infinite thru a SINGULAR NAAMu as RAM NAAMu/HARi NAAMu or GUrmati RAM NAAMu.
Some feel and consider AUKAD as stuff and we have such a respect for Gurbanee words which we consider the most DIVINE and ULTIMATE.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 12, 2012)

One should always understand that all the references in SGGS are for the infinite CREATOR. 
So it is obvious that any NOUN word is not reference for ant Person Any person can be refered by SINGULAR word but any person can not be refered by PLURAL WORD.
Singular and Plural Noun word references can be only for infinite CREATOR only.

Further it should be understood that CREATOR is smallest of the smalls and greatest of the great as the whole space is filled with CREATOR only.
SINGULAR reference is for the smallest of smalls and PLURAL reference is for Greatest of the greats.
This is the real character of the concept of any infinity.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

Sorry Prakash.S.Bagga ji I diasgree on the following,





prakash.s.bagga said:


> Further it should be understood that _CREATOR is smallest of the smalls and greatest of the great_ as the whole space is filled with CREATOR only.
> _Veer ji you are confusing creation versus creator.
> 
> Creator has created the smallest of the small and greatest of the great in creation.  Creator is not physically embedded into the smallest of the small or the greatest of the great in creation._


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 12, 2012)

Vouthon ji thanks for your post.  Couple of comments if I may.





Vouthon said:


> I am as yet an infant in knowledge of the Guru Granth but could one not read the above as indicating, as does current scientific theory, that the Universe will probably be destroyed in a "Big Crunch"? The currently accepted theory for the creation of the universe is the Big Bang theory which states that the universe has expanded into its current state from a primeival 'singularity event' of enormous density and temperature.
> 
> What I find amazing is that the Granth seems to support this theory - hundreds of years before it was theorized!
> 
> ...


Regards.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 13, 2012)

If we understand NAAM from SGGS then there can be nothing misleading.
We are required to know various concepts being conveyed  in SGGS so that we are not trapped by others .
THe concept of NAAM as envisaged in SGGS is so unique which no where else can be acquired .
That is why we can say DHAN DHAN SRI GUROO GRANTH SAHIB Ji...........................

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 13, 2012)

Prakash.S.Bagga ji some comments.





prakash.s.bagga said:


> If we understand NAAM from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji then there can be nothing misleading.
> _Veer please give us your understanding of NAAM!_ _ I have little hope of an answer but got to ask anyway for the benefit of all!_
> 
> We are required to know various concepts being conveyed  in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji so that we are not trapped by others .
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 13, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji some comments.
> Sat Sri Akal.


 
Basically this all is based on grammatical considerations of Gurbanee words. I have earlier tried my best in this regard you know what is the outcome.You royrself do not accept the ri=ules of grammar as given in the script of SGGS .
Unless we come forward to understand the significance of grammatical indications it is just not possible to understand the true meanings of the messages.
You can verify yourself a fact that the Gurmukhi script is credited to 2nd GuRoo ANGAD DEV Ji. This script existed earlier also but was not so popular in usage.
Earlier language had no VOWEL SOUNDs and which had to be imagined or construed by the reader in order to decipher the writings.
Therefore there was need for a script which could faithfully reproduce the hymns of GuRu so that true meanings a messages of GuRu could not be misconstrued or misinterprated by the reader to suit his own purpose and prejudices
Thus the devicing of Gurmukhi script  proved to be essential stepin order to maintain the purity of the doctrine and exclude all possibilities of misunderstandind and misconstruction by interested persons.
Unfortunately by avoiding this important aspect of Gurbanee language and its script we are basically back to imagination misconstuction level of Gurbanee understanding.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Archived_member14 (Mar 13, 2012)

Vouthon,

You'd probably not want to hear the kind of response, but please don't mind that I give it.

Quote:
What I find amazing is that the Granth seems to support this theory - hundreds of years before it was theorized! And the key part is that it says God did this*many*times:*
“...In so many ways, He has unfolded Himself.*So many times, He has expanded His expansion. Forever and ever, He is the One, the One Universal Creator...”*<end quote>


Except for the idea that there is something which stands apart from and is responsible for such happenings, similar ideas have been expressed in Buddhist cosmology more than two thousand years ago and I believe also some other Indian texts. But is such knowledge relevant, and if so how?

A couple of weeks ago, a friend of mine who is a PhD in Science and teaches science education at a local university, commented, how amazing it is that science has come so close to what the Buddha understood and taught. He then gave the example of quantum physics and how at that level, for example the fact that what seems like solid surface was in reality mostly space, science was saying the same thing ancient Buddhist commentaries have said so long ago. I of course was not impressed and said that this is because realities are what they are at the ultimate level, that the shadows must reflect this. But working with shadows is what scientists have been and always will be doing and they will never actually make a statement about “reality”. To this my friend agreed. 

But then when I said that when Buddhist texts make the kind of statements, that they too were walking in the territory of science and not the Truth and that I found it unhelpful, this he disagreed strongly with. A week later however, when we discussed further in the presence of our teacher, he saw to some extent, the point that I was making and agreed.

During this and all other discussions there is however one thing that we both are in full agreement, namely that the shadows of reality or conventional truth, can be reminder about the nature of ultimate realities experienced from moment to moment through one of the five senses and the mind. And that it is these that form the foundation of true knowledge. Indeed it has been pointed out that the “world” in the real sense is just that one instance of experience at a time and that it has the nature of rising and disintegrating. This means that if anything is perceived as lasting over time, this must be the product of wrong understanding. 

What the above implies is that even if one had all the knowledge available in all the books ever written, but no understanding with regard to the moment to moment experiences, it is not only worthless, but in fact harmful. How? Because ignorance grows and accumulates and with this come the horde of attachment, wrong understanding, aversion and so on. In other words, not understanding reality, whatever one thinks about must be with ignorance and attachment and this is is never good. 

This is why I am not particularly impressed by the kind of comments in the Buddhist commentaries which talks about space between particles of matter and such things as birth and disintegration of world systems. If I am fascinated by the kind of knowledge, this would be due to lack of understanding and the presence of attachment and ignorance. One is the foundation for true knowledge, which usually does not appeal (to ignorance, attachment and wrong understanding), whereas this other comes with extensive conceptual knowledge (and appealing to craving), but which has nothing to do with understanding, only the illusion of knowing. 

Does all this mean that one can't work as a scientist and at the same time develop understanding about the truth? Of course one can. Understanding the limits within which science works one can use the models and postulates without being fooled by them. This is because the truth that is here and now, this remains the same for each individual regardless of the situation he is in, what interests he has and what work he does.  So I’m not saying, throw out science, only understand what it is and not be taken in by what it says.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 13, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Vouthon ji thanks for your post. Couple of comments if I may.Regards.


 

My dear brother Ambarsaria peacesignkaur

Thank you for your comments! The Bible has many scientific inaccuracies in it because its not a book of science, but one of faith, to guide us spiritually. It was revealed too people 2,000 - 3,000 years ago in a less advanced culture and society. However it contains perrenial divine truths. Much of the Bible speaks in allegories and metaphors. For example there never was a real "Adam and Eve" and the fall of man (eating of the fruit) can be understood as a metaphorical understanding of the change from a hunter gatherer society to a settled agricultural one, which transformed human existence ever more. The Church Fathers of the first three centuries AD interpreted the Bible not scientifically like modern 'bible-bashers' amidst Protestantism but allegorically. 

Origen, a third-century philosopher and theologian from Alexandria, Egypt—one of the great intellectual centers of the ancient world—provides an example of early Christian thought on creation.

Best known for _On First Principles_ and _Against Celsus_, Origen - a church father - opposed the idea that the creation story should be interpreted as a literal and historical account of how God created the world. There were other voices before Origen who advocated more symbolic interpretations of the creation story. Origen’s views were also influential for other early church thinkers who came after him.

St. Augustine of Hippo, a bishop in North Africa during the early fifth century, was another central figure of the period. Although he is widely known for _Confessions_, Augustine authored dozens of other works, several of which focus on Genesis 1–2.In _The Literal Meaning of Genesis_, Augustine argues that the first two chapters of Genesis are written to suit the understanding of the people at that time.

In order to communicate in a way that all people could understand, the creation story was told in a simpler, allegorical fashion. Augustine also believed God created the world with the capacity to develop, a view that is harmonious with biological evolution.


Pope John Paul II wrote to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences back in the 80s on the subject of cosmology and how to interpret Genesis:
_Cosmogony and cosmology have always aroused great interest among peoples and religions. The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer. The Sacred Book likewise wishes to tell men that the world was not created as the seat of the gods, as was taught by other cosmogonies and cosmologies, but was rather created for the service of man and the glory of God. Any other teaching about the origin and make-up of the universe is alien to the intentions of the Bible, which does not wish to teach how heaven was made but how one attains to [the state of] heaven_​In terms of the Granth, I agree with everything you say, and I would read it in the same manner as espoused by Blessed Pope John Paul II above. My only point was that I was deeply impressed at how the Gurus seemed to touch upon - in their own language and within the boundaries of their time and culture - truths about the nature of the universe that were later _confirmed _by science. I am well aware that Sr Guru Granth Sahib ji is not a science textbook, but a book of timeless spiritual wisdom to help us grow towards union with God and properly understand our relationship with both the divine and creation, in this day and age. 

To me this demonstrates quite clearly that divine inspiration underlies the authorship of the _Adi Granth, _its spiritual and moral wisdom that is, although the cosmological truths later confirmed by science - which I would rather class as 'cosmological' truths rather than scientific to avoid the kind of interpretations you have just outlined to me - certainly do come as a pleasant surprise and I very much appreciate the far-sightedness of the Gurus, which I can only attribute to God working through them_. _*Cosmology* is the discipline that deals with the nature of the Universe as a whole. Since the Granth does deal with the _nature _of the Universe, I should have said 'cosmological' rather than 'scientific'. 

I recognise though that it isn't the _Origin of the Species _by Darwin but a book of _*infinte*_ spiritual wisdom! (No pun intended peacesign) I was merely saying that the cosmology expounded by the Gurus in those passages is perfectly aligned with modern scientific consensus, and that this consensus seems to suggest that the rapid expansion of space by dark energy will eventually reverse in on itself, resulting in the collapse of our present universe which will then end in a 'black hole singualrity'. 

In saying this I was not suggesting that the Guru Granth be read as a science textbook. That kind of literalism is an abuse of every sacred scripture and misrepresents their true purpose. 

In terms of "theories", I also know that the Holy Granth isn't a book of theories. I was simply referring to brother Prakash's _interpretation _of the Granth in that one instance, which to my mind, actually agreed with the portions of the sacred text I had read in terms of the creation and ultimate fate of this temporal universe. 

I think that I have led you to misunderstand my meaning in this second regard because of my use of the word 'theory' rather than 'interpretation' which is what I meant, for which I apologize! 

I do not understand his views on '_Rama_' though peacesign Perhaps he could explain them to me in a clearer fashion. 

Much love to you brother, your wisdom and guidance will always find a listening and appreciative ear in me :whatzpointkudi:


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 13, 2012)

Vouthon ji thanks for your detailed post.  Some comments and thoughts to share.





Vouthon said:


> My dear brother Ambarsaria peacesignkaur
> .....
> Much of the Bible speaks in allegories and metaphors. For example there never was a real "Adam and Eve" and the fall of man (eating of the fruit) can be understood as a metaphorical understanding of the change from a hunter gatherer society to a settled agricultural one, which transformed human existence ever more. ....
> 
> ...


Vouthon ji, your posts and thoughts are very well articulated and your effort in creating and sharing shows up loud and clear.

You are always welcome too.

Regards.  mundahug


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 13, 2012)

I am sure if Mr VOUTHON comes to know about how important is the grammar of words in Gurmukhi script of SGGS ,He can become an excellent inteprater .But I think Mr VOUTHON is following english version of SGGs and we all know how correct english versions are.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## ravneet_sb (Mar 13, 2012)

Sat Sri Akaal,

The thought which forms as image and an alphabet that distinguish animals from mankind is infinite. 

All that image and word is from one and forms infinite.

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/#a 

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa 
Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 13, 2012)

A single piece of anything can be considered as infinite.Even the smallest particle of matter can be an infinite because infinite is related with the concept of being as single unit of anthing under consideration.
That is why  we can know  0/1  or 1/o  both are infinite in mathematical terms.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 13, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> A single piece of anything can be considered as infinite.Even the smallest particle of matter can be an infinite because infinite is related with the concept of being as single unit of anthing under consideration.
> _That is why  we can know  0/1 _ or 1/o  both are infinite in mathematical terms.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Prakash.S.Bagga ji this is not Math 101.  But you are making mistakes perhaps we can talk privately.  For example, 0/1 is Zero per math 101.  Rule is 0 divided by anything or multiplied by anything is 0.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 13, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> *EXAMPLE 2: *Getting in touch with one creator.
> *OBSERVATION 2: *There is often talk of contact with the creator in Sikhism believers as well as others.
> 
> It is not uncommon to hear Sikh people say,
> ...


 
Satnaam ambarsaria Ji,

This all depends on how you look at SGGS Ji. 

*One Infinate Creator God*
Many people perceive SGGS Ji as a 'This is your life book'...a set of guidlines, assistance that enables all of us Filthy Sinners to purify ourselves...pray for the grace of god, and commune with him, and experience him.

First of all before anything...everyone (including myself) needs to understand that everything all around us including us are all God...nothing exists other than God. God was 'alone' in deep meditation and created the creation to understand and experience himself. If nothing other than god exists, then the creation exists within himself...he is the creation and he is also beyond the creation. So what are we? are we not also Him? 

apae mothee oojalo aapae bhagath baseet(h) ||
You Yourself are the perfect pearl; You Yourself are the devotee and the priest.

thoo(n) aapae jal meenaa hai aapae aapae hee aap jaal ||
You Yourself are the water, You Yourself are the fish, and You Yourself are the net.

*My own addition to the above:*
*you yourself are the forum creator, you yourself are the lost/confused souls replying to the threads.  *

Just two examples out of many 

Therefore, just by helping an old lady cross the street - you are experiencing and helping god.
By feeding someone who is hungry, you are feeding and helping god.
By wiping someones tears...you are wiping gods tears.

If you 100% believe this when you do your daily seva, your Seva becomes profound and beautiful like you wouldn't imagine. you are experiencing God through every action and evry breathe you take...full stop 

*Can we Merge / Meet God?*

j*ae* ho j*aa*n*aa* *aa*kh*aa* n*aa*h*ee* kehan*aa* kathhan n j*aa**ee* ||
_Even knowing God, I cannot describe Him; He cannot be described in words. Jap 2_ 

Guru Nanak Dev Ji couldnt even describe god...we shouldnt even bother trying ourselves...
BUT Guru Nanak Dev has made many references to meeting, communing, merging, etc etc with the Lord creator. *Now personally i don't think he did this to make us all Jelous *

Make Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji your life story. thats our focus and directrion.

*Stage 1: Sinner*
apar*aa*dhh*ee* math*i*h*ee*n n*i*rag*u*n an*aa*thh n*ee*ch ||
_I am a sinner, devoid of wisdom, worthless, destitute and vile. Raag Aasaa 458_ 

*Stage 2: Seeker*
m*ae*r*ae* r*aa*m ham p*aa*p*ee* saran par*ae* har dh*uaa*r ||
_O my Lord, I am a sinner; I have come to Your Sanctuary, and fallen at Your Door, Lord._

*Stage 3: Guru Ji's Grace*
k*i*rap*aa* kar*ae* j*i*s p*aa*rabreham h*o*v*ai* s*aa*dhh*oo* sa(n)g ||
_The Supreme Lord showers His Mercy, and we find the Saadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy. Siree Raag 
71_ 

*Stage 4: Simran/Bhagti/Seva*
s*ae*v*ee* sath*i*g*u*r *aa*pan*aa* har s*i*mar*ee* dh*i*n sabh r*ai*n ||
_I serve my True Guru, and meditate on Him all day and night. Raag Maajh 136_ 

sath*i*g*u*r s*ae*v*ee* bh*aa*o kar m*ai* p*i*r dh*ae*h*u* m*i*l*aa*e ||
_I serve my True Guru with love, that He may lead me to *Union with my Husband Lord*. Siree Raag 
38_ 

*Stage 5: Union *
m*i*l*iaa* th l*aa*l g*u*p*aa*l t(h)*aa*k*u*r sakh*ee* ma(n)gal g*aa*e*iaa* ||
_I have met my Sweet Lord and Master of the Universe, and my companions sing the songs of joy. Raag Gauree 247_ 

n*i*rag*u*n m*i*l*i*ou vaj*ee* vadhh*aa**ee* ||1|| reh*aa*o ||
_I have met the Absolute Lord, and congratulations are pouring in. ||1||Pause|| Raag Aasaa 
392_ 

None of the above stages are mutually exclusive...they'll overlap each other, apart from the last stage i would imagine.

I really don't think Guru Ji has written this down to Brag to us 

None of us know what Merging/meeting/ will entail or feel like...just Like Guru Nanak Said...don;t even waste time trying to think about it...
Go find it and experience it for yourself.

In my understanding, God created Ego, Desire, Anger, etc etc in-order to create an opposite mental environment to himself, so that we can understand Love, compasion, kindness, humility *I.E HIM.*
He had to create a way for him to be able to experience himself. To give the sense of being seperate. to make many when really there is only just ONE.


*Our minds have become the slaves of the 5 thieves (ego, anger, attachment, desire, greed)...we have forgotton that we are Him.*
*When we remove the polution of the mind and regain control...we become our SOUL...the part of us inside which is also infinate *

I imagine that god willing when we hit this stage, that we will be connected to all of the universe, feel the universe and feel all of that which lies beyond...because we will have realised the beauty and magnitude of what we are a part of...will i then be able to describe that to you... I think not.

We are dismissing the whole essence of gurbani if we think we cannot acheive this...always do ardaas asking for his grace...and HE WILL GRANT IT...if it truely comes from your heart.


God bless all....


----------



## BhagatSingh (Mar 13, 2012)

Wow, this is awesome! Thanks for sharing Vouthon ji. 



Vouthon said:


> This is my all time favourite descrition of God's Unknowable Essence from St John of the Cross (1542 – 1591).
> 
> 
> *The Song of the Soul that Delights in Reaching the Supreme State of perfection, that is, the union with God, by the path of spiritual negation *
> ...


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 13, 2012)

Religion 101 states that it does not matter if you pray to a mythological entity or metaphysical one,it is the hearts intention that God checks,he never checks the postal address of prayer,post it anywhere, they all go to same P.O. box. 
He does not have time (being outside it )to check the letters grammar or translation quality and by the way he only cares for personal letters not 'mass' mail, if your not a poet that is still ok because he just weighs the love inside it.

P.O stands for Postal Overlord.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 13, 2012)

My dear brothers Ambarsaria and Prakash peacesignkaur

Peace and joy to both of you! 


It is true that I cannot read Gurbani, and so therefore my understanding of the Granth is sadly limited to English translations that often, naturally, reflect the thinking of the translator. This is why it is useful to discuss linguistic issues with others to get a broad understanding of different perspectives on a given text. 

I believe that the Gurus did not believe in the literal existence of Rama or any other of the Hindu deities. Sikhism broke away from the caste system of Hinduism, its idols, its many gods etc. 

'_Dharam_' or '_Dharma_', for example, in Sikhism retains its Sanskrit origin but takes on a very different significance and emphasis within Sikhi from dharam in Hinduism where it generally equates to the quadruple (fourfold) societal division of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras - to us, the castes. The Guru Granth uproots this whole understanding of 'dharam' and replaces it with one single universal 'dharam' for all human beings irrespective of class, race, gender or religion. I'm no scholar of Gurbani - I cannot read the language - but I do know from my reading of the Granth and commentaries on it that Guru Nanak taught one _dharam_: 

"..._eko dharam_ (*one caste*?)..." 
*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p1188*​ 
"..._be they Kshatriyas, Brahmins, Shudras or Vaishyas, the injuction is shared by people of all complexions_..." 
*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p 747*​ 
"...[_Dharam suceeds] when the whole earth becomes one colour [equal_]..." ​ 
*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p663*​ 

In the same way as Nanak used 'dharam' - a concept and word already in use within Indian philosophy - to connect to the people but gave it a new meaning, I think that the Granth makes use of an already existent belief with people of that culture, that of the names of common Hindu deities, to connect to the people as Ambarsaria says and express spiritual truths to them - without thereby granting approval or demonstrating belief in these multiple gods. 


In this respect I agree fully with Ambarsaria. Any time I have seen Rama or Krishna referred to, the Gurus have seemed to sublimate and counter the prevalent Hindu notion of these being actual immortal beings, or incarnations of God. 

The references to Hindu deities in the Guru Granth Sahib are metaphorical, not literal:

_"...Kabeer, it does make a difference, how you chant the Lord's Name, 'Raam'. This is something to consider. Everyone uses the same word for the son of Dasrath and the Wondrous Lord. Kabeer, use the word 'Raam', only to speak of the All-pervading Lord. You must make that distinction. One 'Raam' is pervading everywhere, while the other is contained only in himself..." _



*- Sri Gru Granth Sahib ji, p1374* 


I am interested to know brother Prakash, what is your thoughts in this regard? Do you as brother Ambarsaria suggest hold a differing opinion? If so, I ask simply to hear you out as well and consider. Are you a Sanatan Sikh? I know very little about anything of this sort but my understanding (and please do correct me) is that Sanatanism is an attempt to situate Sikhism within Sanatana Vedanta (Hinduism) with the Granth as a fifth Veda? We have the evidence of a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest called Fr Jerome Xavier, who was a contemporary of Guru Arjan and wrote about his execution and of Sikhi back in the early 1600s, and Sikhi is clearly not depicted as a form of Hinduism or even is Hinduism depicted as a coherent, uniform religious tradition. Sikhism, from its very origins, has been recognised as an independent world religion and is such. 


On the other hand, in terms of cosmology, I would place myself with brother Prakash in believing that the Granth does teach that this Universe is finite and will come to an end - with God _alone_ being the only Infinite. I do not see the Granth as teaching about an _infinite _Universe _in time_. It does appear to teach about an _infinite _Universe in _expanse or size_ as in: 

"..._There are planets, solar systems and galaxies._
_If one speaks of them, *there is no limit and no end*. __There are worlds upon worlds of His Creation. As He commands, so they exist_..._"_​ 
*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p8* ​ 
Now, I would dearely like a scholarly minded person to give me a straight translation of this verse from the Gurbani. One reading this could think, "Without end" _in time _*BUT *that is not what the Granth says it is speaking about infinity, limitlessness _in size, breadth or expanse. _​ 
In time, the Granth tells us - to my humble mind - that this Universe is temporal, finite and has an end just as it had a beginning in God. It will return to _Him _just as it came from/emerged from _Him_. ​ 
_"...The entire creation came from God. As it pleases Him, He creates the expanse. As it pleases Him, He becomes the One and Only again...” _​ 
*- Guru Granth Sahib, p.294*​ 
_“...Nothing of the color and the form of the creation shall remain; the entire expanse is transitory...” _​ 
*- Guru Granth Sahib, p.999*​ 

The use of the word 'transitory' is very important. God is the only _Constant. _Everything else is _ephemeral, fleeting, changeable, prone to decay, like breath, transient, bounded by time and space, existing only to die. _Indeed no scripture could have expressed this more adamantly than the Granth for it states quite clearly: 


"..._The world is born to die and is ever destroyed; one becomes eternal (only) by clinging to the Guru's Presence_..." 

*- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p448* 


It thus goes without saying that one can either trust in transitory things or trust in God, one can either follow the will of one's own fleeting, changeable desires or find satisfaction in the unchanging Will [Hukam] of God. 


And so I find myself for the moment in a kind of 'bardo realm' or 'limbo' between brothers Ambarsaria and Prakash. I appear to agree with both and disagree with both. 

I think that both of you have expressed valid, wise and excellent points. I esteem both of you. I disagree, in certain aspects, with both of you. 

I pray that all of us can reach some kind of concord and hopefully love each other despite our differences of opinion. Unity in Diversity? If we Love, then we are "All born of God and know God". That is the most important thing. 

We have a similar problem in Christianity in that people interpret the biblical text without taking regard of the context and time-period in which the Bible was revealed or posses any true knowledge of the original languages - Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. To this end they come up with all sorts of wacky views such as 'creationism' and 'predestination' and indeed a literal place called 'hell'. 

In fact 'hell' translates into English from a variety of words, one of which is 'gehenna' which in the original text referred to the Valley of Gehonnom, a dumping ground outside the city of Jerusalem which was empty of any life and where in ancient times pagans used to sacrifice people to the gods by burning them with fire. In Jesus' day it was an empty wasteland with nothing but fire and corpses in it. 

And so when Jesus is speaking about 'hell', he is not actually speaking about a place where the souls of deceased people are sent to suffer in terrible torments, but was using the metaphor of an actual earthly place known to his listeners to teach about the emptiness of our lives without God - which he said leads us to a state of mind like unto the Valley of Gehonnom, spiritual deadness, emptiness without desire for God and his Will. This becomes clear when you learn some Koine Greek and actually read the text rather than biased translations. 

As Louis Charles explains: 

"..._Hell is a myth...There is absolutely no word for Hell ever written in the original Aramaic, Greek or Hebrew languages found anywhere in the Bible. There are, however, mistranslations into the English language of different words...The sheol and hades, wrongly rendered hell, actually mean, 'common grave of mankind - the unseen where men go upon death of the physical body - the state of the dead'. Another word mistranslated as Hell is the greek word 'Gehenna' and it was well known in Jesus' day as the Valley of Hinnom (a former place of idol worship turned trash dump outside the City of Jerusalem). Gehenna is indeed a literal place but one that exists on Earth and was used by Jesus to convey a spiritual principle. If we were to visit the region of Gehenna today (which one can), we would not find a Devil or anyone suffering fiery torment. Gehenna - or hell as its wrongly translated - is thus a suffering state of mind due to incorrect thinking_..." 

Compare: the disciples ask Jesus _“When will the Kingdom of Heaven come?”_ To which Jesus replies: 


_“...It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying ‘here it is’ or ‘there it is.’ __Rather, the kingdom of *heaven is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it*...”_​ 
- Jesus Christ ​ 

And finally 

"..._Theories of a final judgement and eternal punishment in flames came from Persian religions like Zoroastrianism. This theory of a place called hell with eternal punishment and fiery torture seeped little by little from Persia into the Jewish culture and belief systems. So by the time we reach the period between the Old and New Testaments, hell had grown in popularity and closely resembles our traditional views today. Jesus would have known about these popular ideas and spoken of them because they were famaliar to the people at the time. But what did Jesus mean when he spoke about 'hell'? When Jesus spoke of hell he actually used the word 'Gehenna'. We translate it as hell in our English translations of the Bible. The word 'gehenna', used twelve times in the New Testament, comes from the Valley of 'Gehinnom'...The Valley saw much bloodshed, beginning with the Caanite worship of the gods Moloch and Baal. These gods demanded the sacrifice of children by passing them through the fire and into the hands of the gods...During times of war, soldiers piled dead bodies in the valley, where they burned...Because of all this, the people referred to Gehenna as the abyss or the accursed valley...Well before the time of Jesus, the Valley was also used as a refuse heap. The people in the surrounding areas dumped their trash in Gehenna, where it burned day and night...When Jesus spoke of gehenna his hearers would think of this valley...The passages that mention or allude to hell are in figurative language or parable form. Jesus uses parables as teaching tool to make his main points_..." 

- Sharon L Baker

Given that I am continually struggling against misinterpretations and mistranslations of my own scripture, I really sympathise. It is fascinating to me how this would appear to be a universal problem. 

Much love peacesignkaur


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 13, 2012)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Religion 101 by SP states that it does not matter if you pray to a mythological entity or metaphysical one,it is the hearts intention that God checks,he never checks the postal address of prayer,post it anywhere, they all go to same P.O. box.
> ps He does not check the letters grammar or translation quality and by the way he only cares for love letters, the rest is just junk mail ,oh and P.O stands for Postal Overlord.


 
My dear sister Scarlet peacesignkaur

That is beautiful and very true! 

God looks at the dispsition of our Will, and at the place of our Heart. He does not see as mortals see. 

I firmly believe that what is crucial is our desire for the Good (God) and our hunger for righteouesness. 

Jesus said, "Blessed are the pure *in heart* for they shall see God" and "Blessed are they who *hunger and thirst for righteouesness, *for they shall be filled". 

I think you have it in one! peacesignkaur

To this end even an atheist who, to the best of his ability, sincerely thirsts for and hungers after the good known to him through the dictates of his conscience, is on the right path.


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh (Mar 13, 2012)

In Sikhi, Truth is the Dharam!

ਬਸੰਤੁ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥ 
Basant, First Mehl:

ਦਰਸਨ ਕੀ ਪਿਆਸ ਜਿਸੁ ਨਰ ਹੋਇ ॥ 
That person, who thirsts for the Blessed Vision of the Lord's Darshan,

ਏਕਤੁ ਰਾਚੈ ਪਰਹਰਿ ਦੋਇ ॥ 
is absorbed in the One Lord, leaving duality behind.

ਦੂਰਿ ਦਰਦੁ ਮਥਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਖਾਇ ॥ 
His pains are taken away, as he churns and drinks in the Ambrosial Nectar.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਬੂਝੈ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਇ ॥੧॥ 
The Gurmukh understands, and merges in the One Lord. ||1||

ਤੇਰੇ ਦਰਸਨ ਕਉ ਕੇਤੀ ਬਿਲਲਾਇ ॥ 
So many cry out for Your Darshan, Lord.

ਵਿਰਲਾ ਕੋ ਚੀਨਸਿ ਗੁਰ ਸਬਦਿ ਮਿਲਾਇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ 
How rare are those who realize the Word of the Guru's Shabad and merge with Him. ||1||Pause||

ਬੇਦ ਵਖਾਣਿ ਕਹਹਿ ਇਕੁ ਕਹੀਐ ॥ 
The Vedas say that we should chant the Name of the One Lord.

ਓਹੁ ਬੇਅੰਤੁ ਅੰਤੁ ਕਿਨਿ ਲਹੀਐ ॥ 
He is endless; who can find His limits?

ਏਕੋ ਕਰਤਾ ਜਿਨਿ ਜਗੁ ਕੀਆ ॥ 
There is only One Creator, who created the world.

ਬਾਝੁ ਕਲਾ ਧਰਿ ਗਗਨੁ ਧਰੀਆ ॥੨॥ 
Without any pillars, He supports the earth and the sky. ||2||

ਏਕੋ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਧਿਆਨੁ ਧੁਨਿ ਬਾਣੀ ॥ 
Spiritual wisdom and meditation are contained in the melody of the Bani, the Word of the One Lord.

ਏਕੁ ਨਿਰਾਲਮੁ ਅਕਥ ਕਹਾਣੀ ॥ 
The One Lord is Untouched and Unstained; His story is unspoken.

ਏਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਸਚਾ ਨੀਸਾਣੁ ॥ 
The Shabad, the Word, is the Insignia of the One True Lord.

ਪੂਰੇ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਜਾਣੈ ਜਾਣੁ ॥੩॥ 
Through the Perfect Guru, the Knowing Lord is known. ||3||

ਏਕੋ ਧਰਮੁ ਦ੍ਰਿੜੈ ਸਚੁ ਕੋਈ ॥ 
There is only one religion of Dharma; let everyone grasp this truth.
There is only one Dharam, if someone is STEADFAST on TRUTH


ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਪੂਰਾ ਜੁਗਿ ਜੁਗਿ ਸੋਈ ॥ 
Through the Guru's Teachings, one becomes perfect, all the ages through.

ਅਨਹਦਿ ਰਾਤਾ ਏਕ ਲਿਵ ਤਾਰ ॥ 
Imbued with the Unmanifest Celestial Lord, and lovingly absorbed in the One,

ਓਹੁ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਪਾਵੈ ਅਲਖ ਅਪਾਰ ॥੪॥ 
the Gurmukh attains the invisible and infinite. ||4||


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 13, 2012)

Speaking of the Sanatan issue, should these words of Guru Arjan not settle it? 


_"...I do not keep the Hindu fast, nor the Muslim Ramadan._
_I serve Him alone who is my refuge._
_I serve the one Master, who is also Allah._
_I have broken with the Hindu and the Muslim._
_I will not worship with the Hindu, nor like the Muslim go to Mecca._
_I shall serve Him and no other._
_I will not pray to idols nor say the Muslim prayer._
_I shall put my heart at the feet of the one Supreme Being._
_For we are neither Hindus nor Muslims..." _



*- Guru Arjan* 


Sikhi is thus a completely independent world religion 0


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh (Mar 13, 2012)

When you have things to worry about like:

- Being Truthful all the time!
- Treating everything as One Creation!
- Dwelling in the infiniteness of space and time
- Being always loving and striving for perfection

How can we go spend our time doing rituals?


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 13, 2012)

> When you have things to worry about like:
> - Being Truthful all the time!
> - Treating everything as One Creation!
> - Dwelling in the infiniteness of space and time
> - Being always loving and striving for perfection


Veera If you have to worry about it then you have made it a ritual,if it comes easily then you have it because it is right.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 13, 2012)

Mr VOUTHON,
Thanks for your positive and candid views in the understanding of Gurbanee interpreatation.I may present my own views in respect of the word RAM used numerous times in Quotes of gurbanee.

1.....According to my understanding in Gurbanee the creatr has been considered as
      A SINGLE WAVE FORM.
      The CREATOR itself is a SINGLE WAVE and this CRATOR is expanded in infinite
      number of WAVES.
      Considering above fact the CREATOR has been refered as RAMu and RAM.
      The meaning of the word RAM is OMNIPRESENT.
      It is the wave and its expansion which has been refered as RAMu and RAM.
      The Single WAVE.......RAMu and 
       Expansion of SINGLE WAVE....RAM
      The above explanation is in context of CREATOR.
 2...While making reference of SON OF DASHRATH  the word used is always as RAMu
     and that too in context with other personalities like RAWAN/SITA or LUXMAN  etc.
     being mentioned in the context under consideration.
3...So it should be clear that the word RAMu or RAM as such is not the reference for person in Human Form unless otherwise  specifically  clarified in context..

The above consideration is based on the grammar of Gurbanee words in Gurmukhi script which you will not be able to see in english version as you follow that.

You may find all the NOUN words being used as SINGULAR and PLURAL to refer the CREATOR in GUrbanee.
I would request you may first confirm whether the NOUN words used  are like that or not.Having confirmed you may give me your views..

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Kanwaljit.Singh (Mar 13, 2012)

When you start, it doesn't come to you and you worry. _It comes easily _ only with time and grace!


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Mar 13, 2012)

> _It comes easily _only with time and grace!


 
Where there is grace time comes easily.


----------



## Luckysingh (Mar 13, 2012)

Infinity is beyond and without any limits.
One infinite creator is beyond time and space.

God is infinite.- We are finite, like all matter.

We can see God however we please, by seeing God in all.


----------



## gurugranthjifollower (Mar 13, 2012)

It will be a good idea to give some quotations from SGGS to elaborate your point as whatever you are saying that is according to the sikh philosophy.

I am wondering if you have definite thoughts on reincarnation according to sikh thout as explained by sggs. To me Sikhism is different from other religions so surely Guru ji will not easily go along with the popular belief of veda of the cycle of birth and death.

I look forward to hearing other peoples thoughts on this topic.

wjkk wjkf


----------



## ZaraONE (Mar 13, 2012)

I began to notice how many times the pi symbol a mathematical constant was being used in marketing which means:

*π* (sometimes written *pi*) is a mathematical constant that is the ratio of any Euclidean[1] circle's circumference to its diameter. π is approximately equal to 3.14.  The Greek letter π was first adopted for the number as an abbreviation of the Greek word for perimeter (περίμετρος), or as an abbreviation for "periphery/diameter",

I took 314 and asked Guru for an answer and as I had a "inspiration feeling" that proved right and Guru's personality showed through!

"You Yourself, O Creator, are incalculable, while the entire world is within the realm of calculation." - Ang 314

Now this happens very often in my own frame of reality/experience.  Infinity can not be measured so why bother. As for a personal "connection" with the ONE Infinite Intelligence that holds our atoms and sends constant energy to upkeep this creation and our cells, I believe "through Guru's word" we can touch it and experience it personally through intuitive guidance and inner knowing/experiences. Formless, elusive but comical all the same we are an extension of the ONE that does not take birth but needs "vessels" to experience consciousness through us and continue the Perpetual Game.


----------



## ZaraONE (Mar 13, 2012)

ZaraONE said:


> I began to notice how many times the pi symbol a mathematical constant was being used in marketing which means:
> 
> *π* (sometimes written *pi*) is a mathematical constant that is the ratio of any Euclidean[1] circle's circumference to its diameter. π is approximately equal to 3.14.  The Greek letter π was first adopted for the number as an abbreviation of the Greek word for perimeter (περίμετρος), or as an abbreviation for "periphery/diameter",
> 
> ...



Just another addition as the comical Spiritual Authority desires to "express itself" ...

Perimeter .... Peri (Spiritual Guide) meter (sweet) !!!  Gurbani is phonetics and full of riddles and fun ... simply enjoying Guru's love being showered upon all.

* Miri*

 The word miri has been derived from Persian word “miri”, which itself  comes from the Arabic “amir” which literary means commander, governor,  lord, prince, etc, and signifies temporal power, civil authority or  material control. The word miri and piri are frequently used together.  
* Piri*

 The word piri has been derived from Persian “pir” literary meaning  senior man, saint, holy man, spiritual guide, head of a religious order  and stands for spiritual authority or non-material or non-worldly power;  control over the soul of the person; pertaining to the non-material  world. The word miri and piri are frequently used together.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 13, 2012)

Zaraone ji thanks for your post.





ZaraONE said:


> Formless, elusive but comical all the same we are an extension of the ONE that _does not take birth but *needs "vessels"* to experience consciousness_ through us and continue the Perpetual Game.
> 
> _Dear sister ji are you trying to bribe the creator and be on the good side peacesign.  __Just kidding._
> _
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 14, 2012)

He is nirakar,  invisible, unfathomable, only lives in you.


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 14, 2012)

He is nirakar, invisible, unfathomble, only dwells within you..........!


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

That is why we need Sati GuRu  enabling us to see what is nirakar,invisible,
unfathomable and lives within every creation.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 14, 2012)

Yes i agree with you. Our guru is shri guru granth sahib which shows us the true path to our innrrself...........!


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

Thanks for your post.  One comment if it helps.





gurugranthjifollower said:


> I am wondering if you have definite _thoughts on reincarnation according to sikh thout as explained by Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji._ To me Sikhism is different from other religions so surely Guru ji will not easily go along with the popular belief of veda of the cycle of birth and death.
> _
> You may be interested in the following thread regarding reincarnation,
> 
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

> am personally shcoked as to how many brothers and sisters are so caught up in aspects of reincarnation! Thre is no questionthat it is spiritiually important inquiry, but in Sikhism living is far more important than any thought of beyond.




Satnaam Ambarsaria Ji,

You are correct, no one should be thinking about any 'Future' potential lives...or what will happen beyond this life. It is the here and now...to use the breathe of life given to each of us...we do not know how many breathes we have left...use them all to remember and server god.

But we should understand re-incarnation and how it affects our mental state. Our behaviours and habits from past lives remain in our subconscious, and they have an effect on the choices we make in this life if we don't learn how to remove them. this is how things we have sown in our past affect the present.

*What you sow, you shall reap.*

If we remove the filth and pollution in our minds, then only the light of god exists...and we live in the *Will Of God *and not by the will of our minds.

I am a Sinner and full of filth and this is just my current understanding. 

God bless all.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth said:


> He is nirakar,  invisible, unfathomable, _only lives in you_.


Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth ji I disagree with your statement as highlighted.  Creator creates and as a result has imprint on all.  Living inside each if used metaphorically, because such created, is acceptable.  But if one were to somehow translate into something additional and exclusive to just humans that is not in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

I believe one cannot listen to the following sabad often enough as to what Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji says about all creation off of one creator,

Awal Allah Noor - Mohinder Singh Bhalla.      - YouTube

Sat Sri Akal


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

It is important to know what is common in an ANT and an ELEPHANT.
This COMMON is the real CREATOR.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

chazSingh said:


> But we should understand _re-incarnation_ and how it affects our mental state. Our behaviours and habits from past lives remain in our subconscious, and they have an effect on the choices we make in this life if we don't learn how to remove them. this is how things we have sown in our past affect the present.
> 
> _What you sow, you shall reap._
> 
> ...


Veer Chazsingh ji let us help each other.  Reincarnation is a huge separate thread.  Please comment there.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## ZaraONE (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Zaraone ji thanks for your post.Sat Sri Akal.



The "experience" is what counts - (we say keep our mind low and wisdom exalted everyday in Ardas -wisdom flows to the mind from "somewhere" ) - things you never knew before are illuminated in a way you never imagined possible - the Guru is the Teacher and sends the information download. Where is this source of intelligence coming from?  I can only say ONE Formless "energy" a feeling/vibration and data dump within. When we surrender to the will, then things are made clear. I know nothing but listen and then take the action. Blessings.

I have sold my body and mind to the Guru, and I have given my mind and head as well - Guru Nanak

Those who have good destiny pre-ordained and inscribed on their foreheads, grasp it and keep it enshrined in the heart- Guru Amar Das

Call permanent only the One, who does not have destiny inscribed upon His Forehead - Guru Nanak

He alone is a warrior, and he alone is the chosen one, upon whose forehead good destiny is recorded. 

In the month of Jayt'h, the playful Husband Lord meets her, upon whose forehead such good destiny is recorded.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

Veer Prakash.S.Bagga ji one comment.





prakash.s.bagga said:


> It is important to know what is common in an ANT and an ELEPHANT.
> _This COMMON is the real CREATOR._
> 
> _That is actually a good point and an example.  What is common that I see is the following,
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> in Sikhism living is far more important than any thought of beyond


 

This is very true brother Ambarsaria mundahug

In Christianity one sometimes encounters ascetic-minded people who are not focused on this world but rather on an afterlife born of their own imagination. 

The Sikh emphasis on _living _is very impotant in countering this kind of extreme asceticalism. A Christian such as myself can learn much from Sikhism in this respect. For Sikhs, I have learned, there is no division between the profane and sacred. Holiness is not a state in which one tries to flee from the world and its affairs, as is often the case in certain sects of Hinduism, Gnosticism and in Buddhism where the goal is to liberate oneself from an illusionary world. In such systems of thought the material and fleshly is very much demeaned and the Universe/Creation is sometimes seen as something that restrains or imprisons the spirit and must be fled from; at its most extreme in the gnostic model creation is seen as "evil". For Sikhs creation is permeated with the presence and reality of God, who is in all things without being contained by them or limited to them, indeed he both indwells all created things and at the same time transcends them. Creation is good in Sikhism, the world is good, reality is good. This transitory, material world is part of the Infinite God and shares his attributes, partakes of them, bears His trace in all things. 

It is not tommorrow, not in some mythical, unknowable, uncertifiable afterlife or indeed in another lifetime that we experience the _Infinite One, the Beautiful, Our Glorious Beloved _but rather it is in our '_everyday' _or '_daily_' lives. 

Unlike some faiths, or should one say understanding by disciples of those faiths, Sikhism is not so much an 'Orthodoxy' (right/correct belief) as it is an '_Orthopraxy_' (right/correct action). In Sikhi an existence lived according to truth, a truthful life, is accounted as being greater even than the grasping of Truth itself: 


"...*Higher than everything is Truth but higher still is True living*..." 

_- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p62_


Sikhs thus find God and holiness in the midst of everyday life. 


The Adi Granth encapsulated the Sikh attitude to holiness for me in these words: 


"...*Spiritual liberation is attained in the midst of laughing, playing, dressing up and eating*..." 

_- Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, p 522_


Sikhism posits such a positive attitude to life and living. It reminds me of the Rabbinic teaching that the meaning of life is simply 'to _live_'. 

And it correlates much better with the actual teachings of the Lord Jesus, his Apostles, the Church Fathers, saints and teachings of the Catholic Church than any attempt to try and flee reality and demean life. 

The above quote in fact reminds me of Jesus' life. 

When describing the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, religious leaders of Judea, Jesus explained how they found fault with John the Baptist's "ascetic" life by claiming he was demon possessed and then found fault also with Jesus' life which they saw as too "worldly": 


"...For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon’; the Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!..." 

- Jesus Christ (Luke 7:33-34 NRSV)


CS Lewis, the great Anglican theologian, commented: 


"..._Our Lord Jesus pointed out the contrast between the hermit and ascetic John the Baptist, and Himself who drank wine and went to dinner parties and jostled with every kind of man_..."


Jesus was thus viewed disdainfully by the religious leaders of his day as a "vagabond" who refused to follow the laws of ritual cleanliness, and for not separating the holy from the everyday. 


"...His disciples said to him, _'When will the rest of the dead come about, and when will the new world come_?' 

He said to them, _'What you look forward to has already come, but you do not recognize it_.'..." 


*- Jesus Christ*




"...You examine the face of heaven and earth, but you have not come to know the one who is in your presence, and you do not know how to examine the present moment..." 



- *Jesus Christ *


"Hearken to the word, understand knowledge, love life, and no one will persecute you, nor will anyone oppress you, other than you yourselves...I have remembered your tears and your grief and your sorrow. They are far from us...You are the Beloved; you are those who will become a cause of life for many. Beseech the Father. Yours is life! Rejoice and be glad as children of God...This is why I say this to you, that you may know yourselves. For the Kingdom of Heaven is like an ear of grain which sprouted in a field. And when it ripened, it scattered its fruit and, in turn, filled the field with ears of grain for another year. You also: be zealous to reap for yourselves an ear of life, that you may be filled with the Kingdom!" 

_*- Jesus Christ*_


_"..._I came that they may have life, and have it to the full_..."_ 

_*- Jesus Christ*_


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> _One set of elements that all form part of "Ek Noor"_
> 
> _This Ek Noor is the material in the mixing bowl that the creator picks from, we transformed out of and will transform back into_
> _At the highest level of scientific thought, this "Ek Noor" is matter and Energy without any imprints of who and where they come from or long term memory. A human's ashes, an ant's remains, or phosphorus in the soil provide same to a plant or a tree that grows henceforth._


 
the mere definition of matter has changed since the text books we once read at school...

When they cracked open an atom, guess what they found.....nothing 
an atom is 99% empty space (they call it spave becasue they cannot detect whats in it), the remaing 1% is protons and neutron.

The positive and negative charges in all of the atoms in our bodys, and the surroundings create the feeling of solidness in wood/metal or the less dense feeling of water.

Therefore the chair i currently sit on is 99% empty space...is it really there as a solid item...or is my body computer making it feel solid so that i dont fall through it 

my belief is that that 99% is the naam, energy, universal vibration, universal consciousness that flows through all of creation...the unseen, formless, the EK from which came the ONG (sound, vibration). and the 1% is the Kaar (the skin, creation, the form of the formless, the created, the visible).

Just my theory. I don't actually know anything  all is god...the all knowing.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 14, 2012)

I think that the teachings of the biblical book of Ecclesiastes are very in tune with Sikhi values: 


"...There is nothing better for mortals than to eat and drink, and find enjoyment in their toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God; for apart from him who can eat or who can have enjoyment?... I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live; moreover, it is God's gift that all should eat and drink and take pleasure in all their toil. I said in my heart with regard to human beings that God is testing them to show that they are but animals. For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage over the animals; for all is impermanent, like breath. All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of animals goes downward to the earth? So I saw that there is nothing better than that all should enjoy their work, for that is their lot; who can bring them to see what will be after them?...As they [human beings] came from their mother's womb, so they shall go again, naked as they came...This is what I have seen to be good: it is fitting to eat and drink and find enjoyment in all the toil with which one toils under the sun the few days of the life God gives us; for this is our lot. Likewise all to whom God gives wealth and possessions and whom he enables to enjoy them, and to accept their lot and find enjoyment in their toil--this is the gift of God. For they will scarcely brood over the days of their lives, because God keeps them occupied with the joy of their hearts...Whoever is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion. The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing...Go, eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has long ago approved what you do. Let your garments always be white; do not let oil be lacking on your head. Enjoy life with the wife whom you love, all the days of your fleeting life that are given you under the sun, because that is your portion in life and in your toil at which you toil under the sun. Whatever your hand finds to do, do with your might; for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in death, to which you are going...Just as you do not know how the breath comes to the bones in the mother's womb, so you do not know the work of God, who makes everything...Rejoice, young man, while you are young, and let your heart cheer you in the days of your youth. Follow the inclination of your heart and the desire of your eyes...Banish anxiety from your mind, and put away pain from your body; for youth and the dawn of life are impermanent. Remember your creator in the days of your youth..." 

*- Book of Ecclesiastes, Holy Bible* 


Its my FAVOURITE BOOK OF THE BIBLE peacesignkaur


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

ZaraONE said:


> The "experience" is what counts - (we say keep our mind low and wisdom exalted everyday in Ardas -wisdom flows to the mind from "somewhere" ) - things you never knew before are illuminated in a way you never imagined possible - the Guru is the Teacher and sends the information download. Where is this source of intelligence coming from? I can only say ONE Formless "energy" a feeling/vibration and data dump within. When we surrender to the will, then things are made clear. I know nothing but listen and then take the action. Blessings.
> 
> I have sold my body and mind to the Guru, and I have given my mind and head as well - Guru Nanak
> 
> ...


 
Once we take time to understand our own minds...to understand how thoughts are generated, where they come from, what influences them then Gurbani takes a whole new meaning. you start to delve deeper into the mansroaver, the knowledge contained within.

start to seperate yourself from your mind, for we are not the mind..we are the soul..start analyzing the thoughts as though they are a seperate entity, laugh at the crazy thoughts, see how the mind tries to control you...eventually the mind will give up...and you'll start to hear the voice of God...the one thought which is divine and perfect..

This is my belief and what you seem to be experiencing. I get it sometimes as well, you just know that that one particular thought grabs you by the arm and just feels so right. Intuition - divine all knowing thought

On keeping with the Topic of this thread. The one creator God...the creation was created by a thought, god wanting to experience himself...maybe the Anhad shabad / naam flowing through the universe is the universal minds thought's flowing and creating the form. Gods thought 

This is just a thought that flew into my mind just now  quite interesting...and has got me thinking....


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

chazSingh said:


> the mere definition of matter has changed since the text books we once read at school...
> 
> When they cracked open an atom, guess what they found.....nothing
> an atom is 99% empty space (they call it spave becasue they cannot detect whats in it), the remaing 1% is protons and neutron.
> ...


 
My understanding is that it 100% NAAMu only. As NAAMu is perfect and complete. NAAMu is a WAVE/VIBRATION and therefore has FORM.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> My understanding is that it 100% NAAMu only. As NAAMu is perfect and complete. NAAMu is a WAVE/VIBRATION and therefore has FORM.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


_Prakash.S.Bagga ji define and clarify NAAMu as perhaps 99.99% don't think of it like you do.  For me it is developed understanding of the creator through SGGS.  What do you believe it to be?

Sat Sri Akal.
_


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> My understanding is that it 100% NAAMu only. As NAAMu is perfect and complete. NAAMu is a WAVE/VIBRATION and therefore has FORM.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


 
It most likely is all naam...for there is no space where god isnt. the 1% would be waheguru Ji / naam also.

I get really excited thinking about this all...the thirst within just wells up.
How amazing is the creation of EKONGKAAR. I just want to sit and meditate and contemplate some more..ask these sorts of questions and see what comes up in the mind from within.

What is your opinion on the anhad shabad, the vibrations from the formless being gods thoughts which generate the form.
for example...we all have invisble thoughts in our mind...no form...but when we have an angry thought...this formless vibration causes the form i.e. blood pressure to rise, heart to beat faster, face to turn red, eyes to squint...
Would this not be the method of creation for god...Universal mind, generating thoughts that create/sustain/destroy the form? Naam?

There are probable quotes depicting this in gurbani...will have a look.

 appologies for blabbing on like a fool...god bless all.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> _Prakash.S.Bagga ji define and clarify NAAMu as perhaps 99.99% don't think of it like you do. For me it is developed understanding of the creator through Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. What do you believe it to be?_
> 
> _Sat Sri Akal._


 
For me NAAMu is RAM NAAMu /HARi NAAMu or Gurmati RAM NAAMu.
I dont know how you interprate these.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> For me NAAMu is RAM NAAMu /HARi NAAMu or Gurmati RAM NAAMu.
> I dont know how you interprate these.
> 
> Prakash.s.Bagga


_Prakash.S.Bagga ji people answer questions with information and not one liners.  See posts by Vouthon ji (a much younger person), and many others.  Why they do that because they give respect and want to learn and hep.  Your Ramu__, Shamu, Prabhu one liner stuff really is pretty useless and at best a way to mis-lead like say many Nirmalas do.  Basically create confusion and destroy Sikhism.  Sorry to again come back to your antics of not being helpful but just a one liner poster.

May you one day have the courage to post your beliefs in detail and not be scared that you might find challenges.

Sat Sri Akal.
_


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> _Prakash.S.Bagga ji define and clarify NAAMu as perhaps 99.99% don't think of it like you do. For me it is developed understanding of the creator through Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. What do you believe it to be?_
> 
> _Sat Sri Akal._


 
What is the energy behind a seed germinating, and a plant forming, cell by cell, then the plant forming more seeds, that fall and then create some more...what is that driving force...the conciousness that causes this.

What is the thoughts/energy/vibration/shabad that cries out inside of a child when it is hungry telling it to cry for food, when it hasnt ever seen food or doesnt know what food is, or the concept of eating.

What is the force and thought process that stops me and you from jumping off a cliff. people say it's 'survival instict' the bodies mechanism to stay alive...so your body has consciousness deeper than your own level of consciosness

What causes the dying of cells and regenration within our bodies. 

What holds everything in the universe together.

Its all naam. Can we describe it? not really...we just know its there. 
The anhad shabad/naam/life force/universal mind which the Gurus tapped into and in this world transfered it to Gurbani.

Question is can we connect to it and soak up the knowledge that the all knowing God has? can we literally feel one with everything even when someone puts a gun to our heads? or sits us on a Hot plate or wants to pour red hot sand over our bodies.

The Guru's did it...we can do it...
thats what i believe anyway.

god bless all.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

chazSingh veer ji thanks for your input.  The issue is that a poster needs to respectfully answer questions or say they don't want to answer.  This stuff without explanations has destroyed many a threads at spn or made them jammed.  Such behavior is reality and pretty destructive.  Hence the request and pleading at times to be truthful and straight versus riddling.  Children riddle, a 60 year old man shares and does not need to hide behind riddles.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> _Prakash.S.Bagga ji people answer questions with information and not one liners. See posts by Vouthon ji (a much younger person), and many others. Why they do that because they give respect and want to learn and hep. Your Ramu__, Shamu, Prabhu one liner stuff really is pretty useless and at best a way to mis-lead like say many Nirmalas do. Basically create confusion and destroy Sikhism. Sorry to again come back to your antics of not being helpful but just a one liner poster._
> 
> _May you one day have the courage to post your beliefs in detail and not be scared that you might find challenges._
> 
> _Sat Sri Akal._


 
Unless you come out of your prejudiced views related to Gurbanee words 
it is most difficult for you to understand..
So far I find none other then your goodself to be so obsessed with Hindu Philosophy words that you remain in the dark to come to the reality of the words. Seeing any word as related to Hindu philosophy you are unable tolerate .
With such a calcitrant approach how can you expect anyone to share the views.In fact Mr VOUTHON is an example before you how to respect others views.
From Gurbanee you should know that NAAMu is refered as MATTER and is SUPREME ELEMENT. You can see even Prof Sahib Singhs interpretation as to what is NAAM.? I hope that should be more satifying you.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

chazSingh said:


> It most likely is all naam...for there is no space where god isnt. the 1% would be waheguru Ji / naam also.
> 
> I get really excited thinking about this all...the thirst within just wells up.
> How amazing is the creation of EKONGKAAR. I just want to sit and meditate and contemplate some more..ask these sorts of questions and see what comes up in the mind from within.
> ...


 
ANHAD SABAD as I understand is reference for a SOUND produced without any strike of two physical things...
You can listen to a sound similar to this when air is flowing at a speed beyond which a sound is created automatically.Pl note Sound is not FORMLESS.
So try to understand how this Sound is created.?
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 14, 2012)

Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for the post.  I will comment now that you have given your insight into NAAMu.





prakash.s.bagga said:


> In fact Mr VOUTHON is an example before you _how to respect others views_.
> _
> Prakash Singh Bagga ji respecting does not mean agreeing.  Between adults, it is not disrespect to disagree or request people to put up or shut up if they are belligerently evasive_
> 
> ...


The comments are not personal.  The comments would be the same if Ramu wrote these.  The object is to ensure that truth of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Sikhism is not destroyed through plan or ignorance or innocence.

  Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> chazSingh veer ji thanks for your input. The issue is that a poster needs to respectfully answer questions or say they don't want to answer. This stuff without explanations has destroyed many a threads at spn or made them jammed. Such behavior is reality and pretty destructive. Hence the request and pleading at times to be truthful and straight versus riddling. Children riddle, a 60 year old man shares and does not need to hide behind riddles.
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.


 
A 60 year old can see thru the words of sharing the intention behind that.
A 60 year old can not be befooled as he has reached 60 years with experience .

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for the post. I will comment now that you have given your insight into NAAMu.The comments are not personal. The comments would be the same if Ramu wrote these. The object is to ensure that truth of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Sikhism is not through plan or ignorance is not destroyed.
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.


 
I never take your comments personal.
I have already told ,  I am  supposed to write here what satisifies you? 
Probably not
If Sangat does not like my views your admin is free to delete that.I wont object. Admin is free to do that.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 14, 2012)

AMBARSARIA Ji,
In fact i wanted to avoid to answer to your personal questions in this thread.Butsince you have raised certain points which I must respond to.

1..Regdng How to respect other views
   Probably you dont know how to be respectful i can say only that.

2.NAAMu as MATTER
  You will not be able to give a single Quote from SGGS from where one can Knowtha Naam is understanding. This is your own understanding.

3...Regdng SUREME ELEMENT

    Where is the difference between CREATOR and NAAM?

4..Prof Sahib Singh s interpretation is your best choice.isnt it?

So my der brother dont try to throw your own weaknesses on others shoulders.
This is done in childhoods.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## ZaraONE (Mar 14, 2012)

Just to add to this thread of wonderful comments ... energy flows where thought is focused i.e. "There is ONE awareness among all created beings" Guru Nanak stipulates this very clearly. He also says hints and clues are shown if we pay attention. There is no 2 minds or feelings or emotions we all affect each other. I like the word "resonance" as in energy it flows everywhere. Atoms, electrons, photons, neutrons who knows what else bumping colliding all that wonderful stuff. I am not a scientist but I did start to listen to what was unfolding around me and then realized a Universal Intelligence appears to have a "characteristic" playful if we desire to see it that way like hide and seek or tag your it!

Dr Harbhajan Seth posted right after my note above... remember "all is connected on the same thread" "Everything is strung upon the ONE string of the Lord" - Guru Arjan Dev 108 ... I call this the REAL SuperString Theory if scientists want some fun or the M-Theory as 11 dimensions identified ... M is number 13 - in the words of Guru Ji thera, thera, thera (all yours, all yours, all yours) and Guru Ji is number 11.  "The riddles and hints are given, and he sees them with his eyes" - 217   Sometimes we forget that ALL languages belong to ONE and also remember when Guru Govind Singh wrote his poetry he "created new words" by fusion. There was a really good reason for this when we contemplate the deeper meaning. 

Yesterday a booked arrived I had ordered The Magical Approach Seth Speaks about the art of creative living from a non-physical being standpoint. Note the name Seth! This material was a head of its time in the 70's. A neighbour had given me one of these books a few years ago by Jane Roberts "Seth Speaks the validity of the immortal soul" and the work is now stored at Yale University in the US.  Readers can make their own assumptions but I feel I should share as the "connection" or synchronicity has clearly shown up for a reason.

The Adi Granth is an ocean of wisdom. Living life creatively is something we all should aspire to and then sharing our experience which is where we all grow. 

This video popped into my journey and I think is worth watching to get another perspective - Jill Bolte - How it feels to have a stroke by a Brain Scientist.  
How it feels to have a stroke      - YouTube

Funny thing I had a Kirtan music CD produced and the irish couple that recorded for us said she had just sang with Jill Bolte and I had Jill's video on my website. See how close these connections are? We are all flowing towards ONE reality, enjoy the journey in the present.


----------



## C Kirpal (Mar 15, 2012)

What i understand is that we can feel him. Everyone can . Close your eyes now and feel him . No need to understand as he  is un-describable but can be felt


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 15, 2012)

Ambarsaria ji,
  You have posed a very open question that should exercise a lot of minds including the ones who have already contributed. I look at things simply and will put my penny’s worth.
  I have not been through the whole of the Granth Sahib but already the differentiation of Guru and guru is confusing. Please correct me if I am wrong, our gurus talk about meeting the Guru or God or Lord – my knowledge of Granth Sahib is not sufficient to define what form of this meeting or vision is as yet. However just to learn more I join in the discussion.

  To follow your questions I will use the same order of numbering as your examples in an attempt to put my thoughts over: 



Creator      as being a specific form- Japji Sahib explains the difference between      human and God. As God is not born then all      Ram/Krishna/Buddha/Christ/Mohamed are gods or prophets as the case may be      because they were born. Granth Sahib quotes ‘darshan of Guru’ I would take      from that – we have to invent a form to satisfy ourselves unless the state      of mind to ‘see God’ is sublime feeling and peace of mind which an average      human does not experience.
Getting      in touch with One Creator – the Creator is in each and every one of us and      all things. So to get in touch with the creator is to awaken the Creator      in one. That takes a lot of ‘work’ like starting with a rough diamond the      final polished state – it needs sharp corners removed as the five thieves,      keeping the Lord in mind all the time and being thankful for His support      to take us to that state.
     3. About understanding infinite – what ever we use as an example is going to be one aspect of the Infinite. To keep it short and looking at it mathematically a 70kg person has 2.3x10^28 electrons, then there are 6 billion humans and if we use the same composition for argument sake the earth is 6^24kg, and the earth is one of the 9 planets of our sun. There are about 200 billion stars in our galaxy; there are at least 170 billion galaxies in our ever expanding universe. Need we go any further? This is just one aspect, others may be spiritual, sound, thought, and more I do not know. If electron is assumed as the smallest particle it is controlled and answers to the Lord. Human still has to find theories to explain its behaviour. One mathematical definition of infinity is ‘whole is a part of itself’. That would mean, in terms of electron example, the infinite is part of some combination of electrons! This combination may require a certain mental condition and chanting (sound) for its organisation. As we work up to more complex combinations the matter becomes more ‘visible’ but the behaviour more complex. May be this is a part of the quagmire gurus pointed out as to not ponder too much in trying to understand Infinite. [/FONT]


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 15, 2012)

C Kirpal Bhain ji thanks for your post.





C Kirpal said:


> What i understand is that we can feel him. Everyone can . _Close your eyes now and feel him__ ._ No need to understand as he  is un-describable but can be felt


_Closing eyes, thinking, touching, and all sensory stimulii are the means.  If you want it to last 24/7, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji touches on a concept called "always aware".  Seeing and experiencing all is of creator everywhere is a wonderful realization.  Whether you look at a stone, a bird, a dog. or a cat, a person, someone's writing, and so on.  All experiential, sensory and mind/heart are there at everyone's service and a gift to us from our creator.  _

I do not know if you understand Punjabi (apologies to non-Punjabi understanding) but the following is not Gurbani.  It comes from the land and language of out Guru ji's that once was, Punjabi/Punjab.

Baba Bulleh Shah,

Abida Parveen Sings Bulleh Shah      - YouTube

Another video (Hindi-Punjabi mix lyrics), fascinating rendition and focus on visualizing,

Meri Aakhon mein Yaar tu hi vasda hai - Shubha Mudgal      - YouTube

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 15, 2012)

Veer davinderdhanjal ji thanks for your post and th etime so taken to post.  I have some comments even though I don't see much that is not true wisdom in your good post.





davinderdhanjal said:


> Creator      as being a specific form- Japji Sahib explains the difference between      human and God. As God is not born then all      Ram/Krishna/Buddha/Christ/Mohamed _are gods or prophets_ as the case may be      because they were born.
> 
> 
> _I assume you mean prophets,_
> ...


Regards,

Sat Sri Akal. mundahug


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 16, 2012)

Let us folllow Siri Guru Granth Sahib truthfully and leave this all cleverness (Chaturaiee).


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 16, 2012)

Very simple. Adopt and follow the teachings of Siri Guru Granth Sahib in your daily life. One very simple example:  Be truthfull !   To yourself and to others.  Are we really truthfull?????


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 16, 2012)

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth said:


> Very simple. Adopt and follow the teachings of Siri Guru Granth Sahib in your daily life. One very simple example:  Be truthfull !   To yourself and to others.  Are we really truthfull?????


Veer ji I read some of your posts at SPN and deleted my post.  It is not worth debating/discussing when there is no effort to help but throw out one liner truisms as though "truthful" is the only word in SGGS.  In one of the other posts you suggested people to do simran and leave rest to Waheguru  (I believe).  So you see SGGS as a book of just meaningless lyrics with no effort to understand as it will come by itself by doing Simran.  You also said in another post Sikhism being one of the more Scientific religions.  Science is generally considered to be based on pursuit of understanding.  I cannot reconcile which is the truth that you imply or want others to follow or you follow.  I feel confused as your posts start to coincide with Bagga ji's posts and style.

To each their own.  I wish you well in your own ways.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 16, 2012)

....koorh raja koorh parja koorh sab sansar.........sach ta par janeyee ja hirdaye sacha hoyee!............says guru ji in asa dee war. ............


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 16, 2012)

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth said:


> ....koorh raja koorh parja koorh sab sansar.........sach ta par janeyee ja hirdaye sacha hoyee!............says guru ji in asa dee war. ............


_I have no issue with the above. That is how I try to work or think but far far from perfect.

In the practice of the above Gurbani quote who did you address the following to,

_


> _ Let us folllow Siri Guru Granth Sahib truthfully and leave this all cleverness *(Chaturaiee)*_


The tone of your line versus Gurbani is a difference of day and night.  Here you almost softly cursing an unknown with the highlighted word.  Who was this addressed to or just about everyone except self.  It just did not appear right.

Help me understand.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 16, 2012)

Hi Davinder Dhanjal,

I will try and explain the below from my own understanding and experiences.



davinderdhanjal said:


> Ambarsaria ji,
> 
> To follow your questions I will use the same order of numbering as your examples in an attempt to put my thoughts over:
> 
> ...


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 16, 2012)

Ambarsaria Ji - few points:
  The use of ‘God’ and ‘gods’ is in the sense used in Vedas and Shastras and Old Testament. Gursikhs believe in God but not in gods.
  Christianity confuses this issue by calling Jesus Christ son of God – so I add this into god category.
  Second point
_I don't believe that Guru ji and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji want us to invent a form. I realize and recognize your point about "average human" but I believe we should fight the temptation harder as the path may become._
_The comment is vague to further the cause. What is the Darshan of the formless, indescribable, indefinable, invisible, infinite? For a mountain it may be another mountain, for a tree another tree so for human we may create a form that is human. It is not clear to me yet from my understanding of Granth Sahib to date._
_Third point – Getting in touch with One Creator – one can only change oneself – not anything around. The creator as I define is narrowed to mathematical definition of infinity. If a body is made of trillions of cells or electrons etc. – it is a part of the infinite in my opinion it is a part of the Lord – may be only that which leaves the body when one dies. That is what may be called ‘part is bigger than the whole’ in mathematical terms._


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 16, 2012)

Veer ji thanks for your post.  Just one part I am not understanding of,


davinderdhanjal said:


> _..... it is a part of the infinite (1) in my opinion it is a part of the Lord – may be only that which leaves the body when one dies. That is what may be called ‘part is bigger than the whole’ in mathematical terms._ _(2)_




_I can relate to (1).  It is like part of creator's imprint in all parts of the creation.
_
_(2) I cannot see or understand unless one calls the whole a type of part.  I don't see ourselves being such a part bigger than the whole, one creator._
If you could elaborate please.

_You are knowledgeable and may have background greater than mine.  One phrase that sticks in my mind ascribed to our Guru ji's or wisdom thereof is that,  

_

_"Hinduism is blind in both eyes"_
_ Physical God_
_Multiple Gods_

_"Islam is Blind in One eye"_
_Physical God or son of God_
_But Single God
_

You don't have to but in case you know or can describe better.

Sat Sri Akal.  mundahug


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 17, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> Ambarsaria Ji - few points:
> The use of ‘God’ and ‘gods’ is in the sense used in Vedas and Shastras and Old Testament. Gursikhs believe in God but not in gods.
> Christianity confuses this issue by calling Jesus Christ son of God – so I add this into god category.
> Second point
> ...


 
Gursikh is only for his GuRu only.There is no cocept as GOD for a GuRsikh.
Gursikh lives with NAAM only.So for a Gursikh NAAM is everything.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 17, 2012)

Prakash Singh Bagga ji some comments of my understanding and thanks for your post.





prakash.s.bagga said:


> _Gursikh_ is only for his _GuRu_ only.
> 
> *Gur   (Creator)  sikh* *(Learner of)*  ====>  *Learner of the creator*
> 
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 17, 2012)

Ambarsaria Ji,
_(2) I cannot see or understand unless one calls the whole a type of part. I don't see ourselves being such a part bigger than the whole, one creator._
_Infinity is a very difficult concept to comprehend and rightly so it is attributed to the Lord God. I do not profess to know it well enough to teach others but ‘soul’ which I consider a part of a live person is not in our control and we are only when it is around. _
_If we take the body as a whole then the soul is part of it but it is ‘bigger’ than the whole as body can be mutilated and still live but soul is untouchable and overriding. _
_When the child in mother’s body it is alive (i.e. as an organ), and if you accept mother’s body and child as infinite number of electrons (or some smaller particles science may not have yet discovered), it may develop into a body and soul from these particles. _
_I think, the child has the opportunity to modify the soul by listening to the Guru’s word and following its instructions. There comes a time when person cannot look after the body or soul and it returns to the Infinite to either stay or return as per the deeds. (I have here defined two infinites one related to the body and other related to Universe)._

· _"Hinduism is blind in both eyes"_


_Physical      God_
_Multiple      Gods_
 _Hinduism believes in physical gods (although there is mention of One God as well in certain places) in fact it is understood they have 330,000,000 gods. These are in form of Rams, Krishans, Brahma etc. and then the deities that make the majority multiple gods. _
_If I may quote Bhagvad Geeta XV.15, Sri Krishna says “I am whom the four Vedas seek to know; nay, it is I who am the author of the Vedant as well as the Knower of the Vedas”. So Hindu gods are humans behaving like God._
· _"Islam is Blind in One eye"_


_Physical      God or son of God_
_But      Single God_
 _Islam believes that any religion that is established, builds on the existing. Due to its proximity it takes all the founder members of Christianity as their own also and believes that Mohamed came to improve the religion. Because of Christ, who is considered to be Son of God also by Christianity – it is a physical god as we would understand as Christ was born and not God._
_Islam, as Sikhi believes in One God._


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 17, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash Singh Bagga ji some comments of my understanding and thanks for your post.Sat Sri Akal.


 
Your comments are partially agreeable.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Randip Singh (Mar 17, 2012)

I think its a symbient relationship. The creator is us, and we are in effect the creator, but the problem is, although the creator realises all of us, not all of us realise the creator.


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 17, 2012)

Randip Singh said:


> I think its a symbient relationship. The creator is us, and we are in effect the creator, but the problem is, although the creator realises all of us, not all of us realise the creator.


 

My dear brother Randip :whatzpointkudi:

Very true and beautifully put! 


*"...*My Me is God, nor do I recognise any other Me except my God Himself...Divine light entered my heart from His love that did never fully wane, though indeed, dear, I can understand how a person’s faith can at times flicker, for what is the mind to do with something that becomes the mind’s ruin: a God that consumes us in His grace. I have seen what you want; it is there, a Beloved of infinite tenderness...He has never left you. It is just that your soul is so vast that just like the earth in its innocence, it may think, “I do not feel my lover’s warmth against my face right now.” But look, dear, is not the sun reaching down its arms and always holding a continent in its light? God cannot leave us. It is just that our soul is so vast, we do not always feel His lips upon the veil..." 


*- Saint Catherine of Genoa (1447-1510), Catholic mystic*



"...As the Godhead is nameless, and all naming is alien to Him, so also the soul is nameless; for it is here the same God...To guage the soul we must guage it with God, for the Ground of God and the Ground of the Soul are one and the same...The knower and the known are one. Simple people imagine that they should see God, as if He stood there and they here. This is not so. God and I, we are one in knowledge..." 


_*- Meister Eckhart (c. 1260 – c. 1327), Catholic Mystic & priest*_




"...In all faces, the Face of faces is veiled as a riddle. Howbeit unveiled it is not seen, until, above all faces, a man enter into a certain secret and mystic silence, where there is no knowing or concept of a face. This mist, cloud, darkness or ignorance, into which he that seeketh thy Face entereth, when he goeth beyond all knowledge and concept, is the state below which Thy Face cannot be found, except veiled; but that very darkness revealeth Thy Face to be there beyond all veils. Hence I observe how needful it is for me to enter into the darknesss and to admit the coincidence of opposites, beyond all grasp of reason, and there to seek the Truth, where Impossibility meeteth us..."

*- Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa,* *(1401 – 1464)** Catholic mystic *


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 17, 2012)

Randip Singh ji and Vouthon ji I appreciate your posts.  I have learnt some more.

Great interactions.

Sat Sri Akal.

*PS:* _Vouthon ji I relate to your citations and these are very wonderful indeed.  I wholeheartedly can relate to  Saint Catherine of Genoa and __Meister Eckhart.  I have slight questioning of Cardinal Nicolas Musa' s statement but I defer it to the other two being more of the essence.

My personal favorite past time from middle school onwards was to read "Books of Phrases and Proverbs".  Great candy for the mind.  I much like your posts where you bring out some exceptionally well written passages of conciseness and beautiful minds so creating these.

Thank you again.
_


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 17, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Randip Singh ji and Vouthon ji I appreciate your posts. I have learnt some more.
> 
> Great interactions.
> 
> ...


 

My dear brother Ambarsaria ji peacesignkaur

Thank you very much for your reply! 


I am overjoyed that you like my citations and can relate to them! 


_Anything _by Father Eckhart or Saint Catherine touches me at a deep level. 


Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa was a very deep person. He spoke about the possibility of alien life 600 years ago, proposed a heliocentric universe 200 years before Galileo and nearly became Pope (missed out by two votes I think!). 

As a result, he is often very cryptic and paradoxical. He's not the easiest thinker to get to grips with (I struggle a lot - and I'm familiar with his writings!). Hopefully I can help you, if not please do explain to me what qualms you have with him.

His whole idea is basically this: God is unknowable and incomprehensible in Essence. We cannot approach God through concepts, and we cannot expect to find the "Face" of God because God is utterly without Form. God can, however, be "seen" in every face - in every person. To see another human being, and to see yourself, is in Cusa's understanding to see God because man is made in His Image. Therefore, Cusa suggests that we must look within ourselves and in "mystic silence" go into a state of "darkness", where we realize that we can never fully "comprehend" God. We approach what Cusas called a state of "Learned Ignorance" (yes - he's utterly PARADOXICAL!). 

We arrive at the knowledge of the reality (God), and hence of unity and the infinite, only by means of a third activity of the spirit, the faculty of intellect, which is supra-rational understanding, mystical intuition. This faculty, overcoming all differences and multiplicity, presents the reality (God) as perfect unity, in which all differences are reconciled in the infinite life, the "coincidence of opposites." The principle of coincidence is for Nicholas of Cusa a new one on which logic must be based in order to arrive at the knowledge of reality.

Hence the title of Nicholas' work De Docta ignorantia, which indicates the limitation of human understanding (reason) as opposed to the knowledge of God that is free of all such limitation (supra-rational). 

It was Cusa who actually came up with the idea of God as being, the "Absolute". The word "absolute" derives from the Latin absolutum and it first occurs as a noun in the writings of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, who, in his_ De docta ignorantia _( On Learned Ignorance, 1440), used absolutum to refer to God, as the being which is not conditioned by, limited by or comparable to anything else. It was Nicholas of Cusa (often called Cusanus) who actually coined the word "Absolute" and used it in referece to the Divine. It has since become one of the most common ways to refer to God in his incomprehensibility. 

Read this extract: 


Quote:
*His central issue, as discussed in his main work, De Docta Ignorantia (On Learned Ignorance), was the problem of the knowledge of God or of the Absolute Infinite. Nicholas held that the Absolute Infinite cannot be conceived by finite thought. Hence, in theology, only negations can be assumed as true. Although positive theological statements are inevitable in order to think about God, they are inadequate. Paradoxically, one can reach the incomprehensible God only by knowing his incomprehensibility. This is the meaning of the term “learned ignorance.” In the end, both negative and positive theology must be dissolved into inexpressibility; God is ineffable beyond all affirmations and negations. More exactly, human beings cannot touch God through knowledge at all, but at the very most only by our yearning for Him.*

*Nicholas of Cusa calls infinity “absolute,” as it must be understood in a full and unrestrained sense. Hence, the sphere of an independent and self-sufficient finite cannot exist beside it, otherwise infinity itself would actually be finite and restricted. “There cannot be an opposite to the ineffable Infinite,” says Nicholas. “It is also not the whole, to whom a part could be opposed, nor can it be a part… The Infinite is above all that.” (De Visione Dei, VIII[1]) Above all opposites, the Infinite—God—is beyond all multitude as well. Thus, Nicholas calls Him the “Absolute Unity and Oneness,” which is prior to all and includes all. In this sense, he speaks of God as the “coincidence of opposites.” Everything is enveloped in God and developed in the universe. “You, O God, are the antithesis of opposites, because you are infinite; and because you are infinite, you are infinity. In infinity, the antithesis of opposites is without antithesis… Infinity does not tolerate any otherness beside itself; for, as it is infinity, nothing is external to it. The Absolute Infinite includes all and encompasses all.” (De Visione Dei, VIII)* 

I hope that helps! peacesignkaur


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 17, 2012)

Here's another passage from his writings: 


"...The absolute, Divine Mind, is all that is in everything that is... Divinity is the enfolding and unfolding of everything that is. Divintiy is in all things in such a way that all things are in divinity... There is only one mirror without flaw: the Divine, in whom what is revealed is received as it is. For this mirror is not essentially different from any existing thing. Rather in every existing thing it is that which is: it is the universal form of being...The human mind is the all of its dreams... Mind itself supposing itself to encompass, survey and comprehend all things thus concludes that it is in everything and everything is in it... whatever is found in creatures is found in the Divine...We are, as it were, a human deity. Humans are also the universe, but not absolutely since we are human. Humanity is therefore a microcosm, or in truth, a human universe. Thus humanity itself encloses both God and the universe in its human power... Humanity will find that it is not a diversity of creeds, but the very same creed which is everwhere proposed... There cannot but be one wisdom....” 

*- Cardinal Nicolas of** Cusa,* *(1401 – 1464)** Catholic mystic *


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 17, 2012)

Brother Vouthon some thoughts on my reading of Cardinal Cusa's writing.  I mean no dis-respect or any mal-intent just trying to learn with questions and discourse.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  "...In all faces, the Face of faces is veiled as a riddle. Howbeit unveiled it is not seen, until, above all faces, a man enter into a 

_certain secret and mystic silence_,  

_How could secret and mystic silence be identifiable in the first place as referenced and secondly stated or expressed!_

   where there is no knowing or concept of a face. 

_You cannot enter complete darkness or enter complete brightness.  Those are death and life for me without any ifs or butts about these.  If you enter you cannot leave or if you are outside you cannot enter._

  This mist, cloud, darkness or ignorance, into which he that seeketh thy Face entereth, when he goeth beyond all knowledge and concept, is the state below which Thy Face cannot be found, _except veiled_; 

_Here the respectful cardinal found a way to come out of the hollow and write about it.  He is trying to describe which he could not possibly if he experienced._

  but that _very darkness revealeth_ Thy Face to be there beyond all veils. 

_Very darkness to me seems just dusk or twilight described and as infinitely away from the end as when so from the beginning._

  Hence I observe how needful it is for me to enter into the _darknesss _and to admit the coincidence of opposites, beyond all grasp of reason, and _there to seek the Truth_, where Impossibility meeteth us..."

_Again in all humbleness the Cardinal is just trying to illustrate twilight and dusk and extrapolating to darkness and what it beholds!_

*- Cardinal Nicolas of Cusa,* *(1401 – 1464) Catholic mystic*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Regards.

*PS:*  Somehow this reminded me of these songs,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=gmT8AeU2xKk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8Pa9x9fZBtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=hOMd7CSt0KU


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 17, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Brother Vouthon some thoughts on my reading of Cardinal Cusa's writing. I mean no dis-respect or any mal-intent just trying to learn with questions and discourse.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> *My dear brother Ambarsaria peacesignkaur*
> ...


 

*Hope that helps! And great songs btw - never heard them before! *


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 17, 2012)

This will probably confuse and complicate the issue more lolBut here goes: 


"...You who are all in all...O Depth of riches, how incomprehensible you are! So long as I conceive a creator creating, I am still on this side of the wall. And so long as I imagine a creatable creator, I have not yet entered, but I am at the wall. But when I see you as absolute infinity to whom is suited neither the name of creating creator nor that of creatable creator, then I begin to behold you in an unveiled way. For you are not anything that can be named or conceived but are absolutely and infinitely superexalted above all such things. You are not, therefore, creator, but infinitely more than creator, although with you nothing is made or can be made. To you be the praise and the glory through all eternity...Accordingly, when I am lifted up to the highest, I see you as infinity. For this reason you cannot be approached, comprehended, named, multiplied, or seen. Whoever, therefore, approaches you must ascend above every end, every limit, and every finite thing...My God you are absolute infinity itself, which I perceive to be the infinite end, but I am unable to grasp how an end without an end is an end. You, O God, are your own end, since you are whatever you have; if you have an end, you are an end. You are, therefore, an infinite end, because you are your own end, for your end is your essence….When, therefore, I assert the existence of the infinite, I admit that darkness is light, ignorance knowledge, and the impossible necessary..." 

*- Nicholas of Cusa*


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 18, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,

            "So for a Gursikh NAAM is everything."
If that is the case please explain following in Granth Sahib.
ਗੁਰ http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.dictionary?Param=ਗੁਰਬਿਨੁ [/FONT]ਕਿਨੈ [/FONT]ਨ [/FONT]ਪਾਇਓ [/FONT]ਕੇਤੀ [/FONT]ਕਹੈ [/FONT]ਕਹਾਏ [/FONT][/FONT]॥ P420
Without the Guru, no one has obtained Him, although many may claim to have done so


The question here is NAAM but it seems more is necessary.
  Guru here does not seem to indicate God so it must be a teacher.
  Him must mean the Lord God.
  It would seem to me that NAAM is a vehicle but the guidance is still required from ‘Guru’ (I believe it should be ‘guru’ without capital G so that it is not confused with God).
  This Guru could be Guru Nanak, but from Sikhi belief we do not consider it to be valid. So who is Guru?


----------



## Luckysingh (Mar 18, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> 
> "So for a Gursikh NAAM is everything."
> If that is the case please explain following in Granth Sahib.
> ...


 
The true word of the shabad.
The Guru granth sahib ji, is in this case what I interpret as the guru.


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 18, 2012)

chazSingh Ji,
     Thanks for your comments. I think we may possibly be on the same page however my attainment may not be closer to yours. I have been through the link you posted and take note. I do not do simaran but find solace in chanting or ‘vibrating’ the name Har Har as per our gurus as and when I find it necessary. I find disturbing thoughts take over when I am getting tired and this helps.
  This does one main thing for me that it tends to limit number of things that bother me at that time and secondly I believe it acts as a breathing exercise that actually helps your body.
ਬਿਨਵੰਤਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਾਇਆ ਸਦਾ ਭਜੁ ਜਗਦੀਸਰੈ ॥੪॥੧॥੩॥
Prays Nanak, the True Guru has taught me this, to *vibrate* and meditate forever on the Lord of the Universe. ||4||1||3||


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> chazSingh Ji,
> Thanks for your comments. I think we may possibly be on the same page however my attainment may not be closer to yours. I have been through the link you posted and take note. I do not do simaran but find solace in chanting or ‘vibrating’ the name Har Har as per our gurus as and when I find it necessary. I find disturbing thoughts take over when I am getting tired and this helps.
> This does one main thing for me that it tends to limit number of things that bother me at that time and secondly I believe it acts as a breathing exercise that actually helps your body.
> ਬਿਨਵੰਤਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਸਤਿਗੁਰਿ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਾਇਆ ਸਦਾ ਭਜੁ ਜਗਦੀਸਰੈ ॥੪॥੧॥੩॥
> Prays Nanak, the True Guru has taught me this, to *vibrate* and meditate forever on the Lord of the Universe. ||4||1||3||


 
You are very very close what should be known from Gurbanee.Well apprecited views. Only rare can say and accept what you have stated.
Ypu wanted to know the meaning of "GuR".As I understand GuR is refered to GuR JoTi.
It is GuR which is SATiGuR and is giver of NAAM (HARi.HARi> what you mention .
Thanks for nice post.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

It is all "NAAM" as infinite CREATOR.
NAAM can be known from Gurbanee so is CREATOR.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 18, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> It is all "NAAM" as infinite CREATOR.
> NAAM can be known from Gurbanee so is CREATOR.
> Prakash.s.Bagga


Prakash.S.Bagga ji can you please elaborate as what you state is in in conflict with Gurbani.  Naam i smost usage is a designator but not a descriptor of the creator.   

Its usage is like when addressing a question about the creator.  "What is your Naam/Name?"  My Naam/name is *ਸਤਿ* / saṯ and so flows the understanding below,
[/quote]


> ੴ  *ਸਤਿ * *ਨਾਮੁ*  ਕਰਤਾ  ਪੁਰਖੁ  ਨਿਰਭਉ  ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ  ਅਕਾਲ  ਮੂਰਤਿ  ਅਜੂਨੀ  ਸੈਭੰ  ਗੁਰ  ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ  ॥
> 
> ੴ सति नामु करता पुरखु निरभउ निरवैरु अकाल मूरति अजूनी सैभं गुर प्रसादि ॥
> 
> ...


Prakash.S.Bagga ji their is also association of implied or otherwise with the word "Name".  Can you elaborate if you assign it any of the meanings from the following for "Name" in English as a word,



> *name  (n
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

My understanding is that the meaning of the word NAAM is not as NAME.
For NAME there is a distict word in Gurbanee and that is Naa-u.

Actually it is NAAM which is exclusive descriptive for the CREATOR. 
One should know after all why NAAM is more significant.

Is NAAM not omnipresent according to Gurbanee? If you can prove so giving any quote from Gurbanee then I may change my views and agree to what you say.

Moreover you know it very well I do not agree to the interpretation of the very first line as given  in your post.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji can you please elaborate as what you state is in in conflict with Gurbani. Naam i smost usage is a designator but not a descriptor of the creator.
> 
> Its usage is like when addressing a question about the creator. "What is your Naam/Name?" My Naam/name is *ਸਤਿ* / saṯ and so flows the understanding below,


Prakash.S.Bagga ji their is also association of implied or otherwise with the word "Name". Can you elaborate if you assign it any of the meanings from the following for "Name" in English as a word,

Sat Sri Akal.[/QUOTE]

I dont believe in abstracts .I believe in specifics.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 18, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji their is also association of implied or otherwise with the word "Name". Can you elaborate if you assign it any of the meanings from the following for "Name" in English as a word,
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.





> I dont believe in abstracts .I believe in specifics.
> 
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Prakash.S.Bagga ji Explain the specific meaning of the following as there is nothing abstract about it in the mool mantar,

 *ਸਤਿ **ਨਾਮੁ* 

*ਸਤਿ *(Eternal)
Note:  Translated as Truth by Dr. Sant Singh Khalsa ji and Bhai Manmohan Singh ji

*ਨਾਮੁ* (name, of)
ੴ (One creator)

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji Explain the specific meaning of the following as there is nothing abstract about it in the mool mantar,
> 
> *ਸਤਿ **ਨਾਮੁ*
> 
> ...


 
Therefore the the meanings given by your goodself are abstract as I understand.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 18, 2012)

Prakash.S.Bagga ji I disagree and protest as described below,





prakash.s.bagga said:


> Therefore the the meanings given by your good self are abstract as I understand.
> 
> _What is abstract about "one eternal creator"?  I suppose you want to give it a name.  Did this "one eternal creator" not exist when the word "Naam" was not in any vocabulary?__
> 
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 18, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji I disagree and protest as described below,Sat Sri Akal.


 
I am also sorry as usual.Nothing new to add.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 19, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga ji,
      Your contribution on ‘Gur’ - I did not understand your help - in any case I was trying to differentiate between ‘guru’ and ‘Guru’. Use of ‘Guru’ is limited to the Lord and ‘guru’ to the teacher of any level but born human.
              The second point in your comments about 'NAAM' is related to Indian culture/religions and how we respect pious gurus/individuals for their help to link us to the Lord. All people who have attained the highest accolade in religions (including Sikhi) have sought the help of gurus to take then over the last barrier. 
  In Sikh religion and even before guru Nanak, anyone who wants to attain sublime peace, get out of the 84 circle, and attain God, had to secure help of a guru. It is also mentioned in the Granth Sahib. This in itself is not available to all (even though it may be well known word), one has to attain a level of purity worthy of it, I note below how after a number of attempts Kabir finally resorted to spending days in the hope that his guru may ‘trip’ over him.
              Kabir, was man of God, had great difficulty finding a guru one because he was brought up in Moslem tradition and second he was seeking a Hindu guru. He eventually sought the most prominent at that time, Swami Ramanand, by lying in his path days on end. Lord intervened and one day on his way up the steps Swami Ji’s feet touched Kabir and Swami Ji touched him by the shoulder and said “auTo bytw rwm kho” 
  This (RAM) was the NAAM that Kabir needed to be liberated and as Bhai Gurdas writes “it was like philosopher’s stone touching iron to make gold”.
  Granth Sahib has a number of quotes for you to learn more but I add one from guru Arjan:
Page 46, Line 7
ਕਰਿ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਪ੍ਰਭਿ ਮੇਲਿਆ ਦੀਆ ਅਪਣਾ ਨਾਮੁ ॥
In His Mercy, God unites us with Himself, and He blesses us with the *Naam*.
There are examples of recent people who have made the grade also obtained the NAAM and pursued their missions. This NAAM is then used by the individuals to chant and live by thereon. If I understand you correctly they would possibly chant ‘NAAM’ as it is the ‘name of God’ as you understand it - which is not the case.[/FONT]


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 19, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga ji,
> Your contribution on ‘Gur’ - I did not understand your help - in any case I was trying to differentiate between ‘guru’ and ‘Guru’. Use of ‘Guru’ is limited to the Lord and ‘guru’ to the teacher of any level but born human.
> The second point in your comments about 'NAAM' is related to Indian culture/religions and how we respect pious gurus/individuals for their help to link us to the Lord. All people who have attained the highest accolade in religions (including Sikhi) have sought the help of gurus to take then over the last barrier.
> In Sikh religion and even before guru Nanak, anyone who wants to attain sublime peace, get out of the 84 circle, and attain God, had to secure help of a guru. It is also mentioned in the Granth Sahib. This in itself is not available to all (even though it may be well known word), one has to attain a level of purity worthy of it, I note below how after a number of attempts Kabir finally resorted to spending days in the hope that his guru may ‘trip’ over him.
> ...


 
Well I dont know your familiarity of Gurbanee words related to GuR.
I agree that even before NANAK dev ji people were living with the concept that GuRu was needed to attain the union with Ultimate Lord.
GuRu NanAk ji made it clear to the people who the real GuRu is.
It is not the person in Human Form that is must to attain the union with Lord. If it were so then till date we should be having GuRu in Human Form.

From Gurbanee we can learn that it is BANEE which is GuRu or Sati GuRu which is the medium for Union with the Lord.This is important to understand. This concept of BANEE as GuRu is the Unique of Sikh Philosophy.This never existed before NANAK ji.

With respect of the word RAM for KABIR  would you please take a note of the point that ultimately it is RAM NAMMu for attainment of real liberation.
GuRu NANAK and all our GuRu also talk of this RAM NAAMu in the whole of Gurbanee.
It should be surprise for you to know that RAM NAAMu of Gurbanee is not at all related to the word RAM whereas RAM NAAMu of Hindu Philosophy is definitely is refered with the word RAM.

The RAM NAAMu in Gurbanee is refered as Gurmati RAM NAAMu. So pl try to understand this aspect of Gurbanee..

I have just presented you few points for your consideration.This needs a careful interaction on the whole concept of RAM NAAMu of SGGS 

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth (Mar 19, 2012)

We have in Guru Granth  Sahib the word. Guru, which i understand as Supreme teacher, then we have the word. Akalpurakh, which is infinite invisible unfathomable  and ever present. The Akalpurakh in the form of Atma resides  in every human being. At thousands of places in GuruGranth Sahib it says search Akalpurakh in urself not anywher outside.
This is my humble interpretation.I may be totally wrong. I beg tomplease correct me
Rrspectfully
Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 19, 2012)

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth ji thanks for your post.  Some commets,


Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth said:


> We have in Guru Granth  Sahib the word. Guru, which i understand as _Supreme teacher_,
> 
> _Supreme Teacher is the essence that I also find from my limited study.  It can however be little confusing.  Say when our Guru ji (say Guru Nanak Dev ji) write about a Guru in a hymn or sabad.  Question becomes which Guru are they referring to?  It is at instances a reference to the Creator as the creator is also a Supreme Teacher among having infinite other virtues.
> 
> ...


Hope above is of some interest and of use in discourse.

Sat Sri Akal. mundahug


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 20, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,
                          I note your post. To move further I list all the related words I can find in the Granth Sahib and their meanings from one dictionary. I have not found any of the words that you have repeated in your posts – so I await your definitions of the words you feel are Gurbani words related to GuR. Words that you have already used are:
  Gur
  GuR
  GuRu
  Sati GuRu
  Ram
  Ram Naamu
  You may have another dictionary and I would be pleased if you would kindly share with us similarly.
  From my checks the words I understand from your quotes and I may have quoted are:
gu = ਸੰ. ਧਾ- ਮਲ ਤ੍ਯਾਗਣਾ.  ਬਾਣੀ ਬੋਲਨਾ. ਐਸਾ ਵਾਕ ਕਹਿਣਾ ਜਿਸ ਦੇ ਅੱਖਰ ਨਾ ਸਮਝੇ. ਝਾੜੇ ਫਿਰਨਾ। (2) ਅਸਪਸ੍ਟ ਜਾਣ। (3) ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਦੇ ਅੰਤ ਲੱਗਾ ਗੁ ਭਵਿਸ਼੍ਯਤ ਦਾ ਬੋਧ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ
ru = ਸੰ. ਰੁ. ਧਾ. ਸ਼ਬਦ ਕਰਨਾ, ਦੁੱਖ ਦੇਣਾ. ਕ੍ਰੋਧ ਕਰਨਾ, ਜਾਣਾ (ਗਮਨ ਕਰਨਾ).
rU = ਮੂੰਹ, ਚਿਹਰਾ। (2) ਕਾਰਣ. ਸਬਬ. ਹੇਤੁ। (3) ਅੱਗ ਸਾਮਣਾ। (4) ਆਸਾ. ਉੱਮੇਦ.
gur = (1) ਉਪਦੇਸ/ਸਿਖਿਆ ਦੇਣ ਵਾਲਾ, ਗਿਆਨ ਦਾਤਾ। (2) ਕਿਸੇ ਮਤ ਦਾ ਚਲਾਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਅਚਾਰੀਆ, ਕਰਤਾ। (3) ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ। (4) ਸਿਖ ਮਤ ਦੇ ਆਗੂਆਂ ਲਈ ਵਰਤਿਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ 'ਪਦ' (ਸ਼ਬਦਾਰਥ, ਨਿਰਣੈ)। (5) ਗੁਰੂ ਵਾਲਾ। (6) ਵ੍ਰਿਹਸਪਤਿ, ਦੇਵ ਗੁਰ (ਮਹਾਨਕੋਸ਼)। (7) ਅੰਤਹਕਰਣ, ਮਨ। (8) ਪ੍ਰਧਾਨ, ਵਡ (ਮਹਾਨਕੋਸ਼)। (9) ਸ੍ਰੇਸ਼ਟ
guru = (1) ਮਤ ਦਾ ਚਲਾਣ ਵਾਲਾ, ਆਚਾਰੀਆ। (2) ਉਪਦੇਸ਼ ਕਰਤਾ, ਗਿਆਨ ਦਾਤਾ, ਸਿਖਿਆ ਦਾਤਾ। (3) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ। (4) ਸਿੱਖ ਮਤ ਦੇ ਆਗੂਆਂ ਲਈ ਵਰਤਿਆ ਜਾਂਦਾ 'ਸਤਿਕਾਰ-ਪਦ' 
gurU = ਗੁਰੂ ਦਾ ਗੁਰੂ, (ਭਾਵ) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ। 

nwm = (1) ਨਾਉਂ, ਕਿਸੇ ਵਸਤੂ ਦਾ ਬੋਧ ਰਵਾਉਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਸ਼ਬਦ। (2) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਬੋਧਕ ਸ਼ਬਦ, ਪ੍ਰਭੂ, ਕਰਤਾਰ। (3) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ, ਹਰੀ ਨਾਮ।
nwmu =ਪਵਿੱਤਰ ਸ਼ਬਦ (ਸ਼ਬਦਾਰਥ) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ। (2) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ, ਹਰੀ। (3) ਨਾਂ।
nwmU = not a Gurbani word
nwim = (1) ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਨਾਮ ਦੇ, ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਨਾਮ ਦੁਆਰਾ, ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਨਾਮ ਵਿਚ, ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਨਾਮ ਦੀਆਂ। (2) ਨਾਂ/ਨਾਮ ਦੁਆਰਾ, ਨਾਂ ਨਾਲ, ਨਾਮ ਵਿਚ।
nwmI = ਸੰ. नामिन्. ਵਿ- ਨਾਮਵਾਲਾ। (2) ਪ੍ਰਸਿੱਧ. ਵਿਖ੍ਯਾਤ। (3) {ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ}. ਕਰਤਾਰ. ਵਾਹਗੁਰੂ.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 20, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> I note your post. To move further I list all the related words I can find in the Granth Sahib and their meanings from one dictionary. I have not found any of the words that you have repeated in your posts – so I await your definitions of the words you feel are Gurbani words related to GuR. Words that you have already used are:
> Gur
> GuR
> ...


 
If the meanings of the words as depicted are very true then why dont we find interpretation of gurbanee according to above in any of the Tikkas.

My understanding is that the aboce meanings do not match the Gurbanee views.The true meanings of the above words one can find from within Gurbanee itself.That should be the true meanings.

The meaning given above are construed one and without consideration of grammar of the words.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 20, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,
  Sorry to see you have not defined any of the words that you have been emphasising as ones that are pertinent to Gurbanee. 
  If these interjections are not verified it leads to corruption of documents as is the case of many ‘Sikh sakhis’ and as you mention ‘tikkas’ and various granths. 
  They are all written by people who have either researched the subject or have vested interest and may have errors.

              I agree with you that the true meaning of the above can only be found from within the Gurbanee in Granth Sahib. However as I mention there is no words that you have been quoting like ‘NAAMu’, ‘RAAMu’, GuRu etc. as I have come across – however please correct me if I am wrong. 
  I am sure that you have some background to the origins and use of these words somewhere else and I am interested to see how these pearls can enhance our understanding of Gurbanee.

“The meaning given above are construed one and without consideration of grammar of the words”.
  Please give an example so that we can be enlightened.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 20, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> Sorry to see you have not defined any of the words that you have been emphasising as ones that are pertinent to Gurbanee.
> If these interjections are not verified it leads to corruption of documents as is the case of many ‘Sikh sakhis’ and as you mention ‘tikkas’ and various granths.
> They are all written by people who have either researched the subject or have vested interest and may have errors.
> ...


 

Pl let me know you follow enlgish version of SGGS or Gurmkhi version for reading Gurbanee.On hearing from you about this I shall be able to respond you accordingly.
At least you do realise where and how the things are somewhat beyong being as true as should be.
Thanks for your response
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 21, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,
                              I use Gurmukhi versions - sometimes even they are confusing but they are closer to being correct than the English versions.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 21, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> I use Gurmukhi versions - sometimes even they are confusing but they are closer to being correct than the English versions.


 
It is nice that you read SGGS in gurmukhi which is the real script.
You can go thru the following Sabad
ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਭਾਈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਬਿਨੁ ਬੂਡਤੇ ਅਧਿਕਾਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਬਨਿਤਾ ਸੁਤ ਦੇਹ ਗ੍ਰੇਹ ਸੰਪਤਿ ਸੁਖਦਾਈ ॥ ਇਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਮੈ ਕਛੁ ਨਾਹਿ ਤੇਰੋ ਕਾਲ ਅਵਧ ਆਈ ॥੧॥ ਅਜਾਮਲ ਗਜ ਗਨਿਕਾ ਪਤਿਤ ਕਰਮ ਕੀਨੇ ॥ ਤੇਊ ਉਤਰਿ ਪਾਰਿ ਪਰੇ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਲੀਨੇ ॥੨॥ ਸੂਕਰ ਕੂਕਰ ਜੋਨਿ ਭ੍ਰਮੇ ਤਊ ਲਾਜ ਨ ਆਈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਛਾਡਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਕਾਹੇ ਬਿਖੁ ਖਾਈ ॥੩॥ ਤਜਿ ਭਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਬਿਧਿ ਨਿਖੇਧ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਲੇਹੀ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਜਨ ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੁ ਕਰਿ ਸਨੇਹੀ ॥੪॥੫॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 692

Pl see the word "RAM" in the very First line and the same word RAM in the last line which is with a matra of Aukad under its letter m.It is this word I write in english as RAMu (u is being used to indicate the matra Aukad in the word) This is ignored mostly by all.Why? No reason.
Pl give a thought how you would pronounce the word RAM in the last line of the sabad.
This is very important distiction in Gurbanee words.You can notice that nearly 70% of Gurbanee words are related to the matra of Aukad/Dulakad
for the Noun words.

I would suggest you to get familiar with some basics of Gurbanee grammar then you will have yourself more clear understanding of these words.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 21, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> It is nice that you read Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in gurmukhi which is the real script.
> You can go thru the following Sabad
> ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਰਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਿ ਭਾਈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਬਿਨੁ ਬੂਡਤੇ ਅਧਿਕਾਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ ਬਨਿਤਾ ਸੁਤ ਦੇਹ ਗ੍ਰੇਹ ਸੰਪਤਿ ਸੁਖਦਾਈ ॥ ਇਨ੍ਹ੍ਹ ਮੈ ਕਛੁ ਨਾਹਿ ਤੇਰੋ ਕਾਲ ਅਵਧ ਆਈ ॥੧॥ ਅਜਾਮਲ ਗਜ ਗਨਿਕਾ ਪਤਿਤ ਕਰਮ ਕੀਨੇ ॥ ਤੇਊ ਉਤਰਿ ਪਾਰਿ ਪਰੇ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਲੀਨੇ ॥੨॥ ਸੂਕਰ ਕੂਕਰ ਜੋਨਿ ਭ੍ਰਮੇ ਤਊ ਲਾਜ ਨ ਆਈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮ ਛਾਡਿ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਕਾਹੇ ਬਿਖੁ ਖਾਈ ॥੩॥ ਤਜਿ ਭਰਮ ਕਰਮ ਬਿਧਿ ਨਿਖੇਧ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਲੇਹੀ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ਜਨ ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੁ ਕਰਿ ਸਨੇਹੀ ॥੪॥੫॥ {ਪੰਨਾ 692
> 
> ...


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 21, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Sat Sri Akal.


 

Mr AMBARSARIA Ji ,You are highly prejudiced so I cant give any comment.
Let any body else say what you feel.You are the only one against such phonetics .Since you find yourself unable to justify and your views are the reflection of your own frustration.Nothing else.Try to learn how to face the truth which is unknown hitherto.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 21, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> Mr AMBARSARIA Ji ,You are highly prejudiced so I cant give any comment.
> Let any body else say what you feel.You are the only one against such phonetics .Since you find yourself unable to justify and your views are the reflection of your own frustration.Nothing else.Try to learn how to face the truth which is unknown hitherto.
> 
> _Brother before you destroy all that others do, say  phonetics by Dr. Thind, you have to offer an alternative.  Can you  share with sangat your complete phonetics compilation of SGGS that they  should follow based on your rules?  I know the answer is going to be  flowery NO.  _
> Prakash.s.Bagga



It is far too easy to find faults or flag errors rather than to do.  Unfortunately it foes not register in your contributions.  Look at these and see how much work outside of just repetitive lines have you put into your posts since you joined.  If you cannot see that as a honest Sikh then what can I say.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 21, 2012)

The sounds of Gurbani work alongside the deep meaning of the words 

When i've had a busy day at work, and i walk outside the office, take in a deep breath, and say Satnaam SA TA NA AA MA along my God supported breathe....the word/vibration hits me deep within.

A child who has no concept of meaning of gurbani can experience a connection with these divine sounds/vibrations which flowed from Satnaam Ji through the breath of the living guru's.

they are a manifestation of the shabad that flows from Sach Khand through the whole universe and creation. If the phonetics didnt mean anything...maybe the gurus should have saved precious time and not spell checked what they wrote... 


God bless all.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 21, 2012)

chazSingh said:


> The sounds of Gurbani work alongside the deep meaning of the words
> 
> When i've had a busy day at work, and i walk outside the office, take in a deep breath, and say Satnaam SA TA NA AA MA along my God supported breathe....the word/vibration hits me deep within.
> 
> ...


ChazSingh veer ji of course Phonetics is important to read to self quietly, loudly or to converse with others.  Phonetics is part of learning a language all the way from the Alphabet to words and so on.  It is true in all languages.  It is not rocket science that Bagga ji makes it to be.  

Dr. Thind has done exceptional service to do English Phonetics equivalents which one who can read Punjabi does not need to use.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 21, 2012)

chazSingh said:


> The sounds of Gurbani work alongside the deep meaning of the words
> 
> When i've had a busy day at work, and i walk outside the office, take in a deep breath, and say Satnaam SA TA NA AA MA along my God supported breathe....the word/vibration hits me deep within.
> 
> ...


 
The day Sikhs start consideration of phonetics  of words in interpretation of Gurbanee.The real understanding will develop near to what our GuRu ji envisagesas per Gurmati views..
But it seems we shall never allow to happen so .
Prakash.s.bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Mar 21, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> The day Sikhs _start consideration of phonetics_  of words in interpretation of Gurbanee.The real understanding will develop near to what our GuRu ji envisagesas per Gurmati views..
> But it seems we shall never allow to happen so .
> Prakash.s.bagga


Veer ji they already do and have been doing for last five plus hundred years.  I do not know which planet you live on or are coming from!  Even Sikh children do it at early age, I did too. :interestedmunda:

It seems you create mysteries out of nothing or great revelations about nothing.  You thought Dr. Thind did all phonetics without recognizing the need!  You are in a very septic self made cocoon that does not see the real world out there.

Sat Sri Aakl.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 21, 2012)

AMBARSARIA Ji,
You are unnecessarily taking a hide site of a learned person .You yourself know what is wrong with english translitration due to which you are remaining in confusion for correct and true message of Gurbanee.
How long one can hide the real truth of Gurbanee.by manipulation of the words for nothing benfit either to oneself or to the sangat as a whole.
I am not the looser or winner as person like you may think.I have been presenting my observation and shall contibnue to do so long as GuRu wants me .
I am bound by limitations of your thinking.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Archived_member15 (Mar 21, 2012)

Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth said:


> We have in Guru Granth Sahib the word. Guru, which i understand as Supreme teacher, then we have the word. *Akalpurakh, which is infinite invisible unfathomable and ever present. The Akalpurakh in the form of Atma resides in every human being. At thousands of places in GuruGranth Sahib it says search Akalpurakh in urself not anywher outside*.
> This is my humble interpretation.I may be totally wrong. I beg tomplease correct me
> Rrspectfully
> Dr. Harbhajan Singh Seth


 

cheerleader kudihug


And he is in ALL THINGS! 


"...The Spirit of the Lord has filled the Universe...The whole universe before you is like a speck that tips the scales, and like a drop of morning dew that falls on the ground. But you are merciful to all, for you can do all things, and you overlook people's sins, so that they may repent. For you love all things that exist, and detest none of the things that you have made, for you would not have made anything if you had hated it. How would anything have endured if you had not willed it? Or how would anything not called forth by you have been preserved? *You spare all things, for they are yours, O Lord, you who love the living. For your immortal spirit is in all things*...For from the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen...You, our God, are kind and true, patient, and ruling all things in mercy. For even if we sin we are yours, knowing your power...Lovers of evil [...] fail to know the one who formed them and inspired them with active souls and breathed a living spirit into them..." 


_*- The Book of Wisdom (Holy Bible)*_



"...He who lives forever is the Creator of the whole universe; the Lord alone will be proved supreme and there is no other beside him; he steers the world with the span of his hand, and all things obey his Will. To none has he given power to proclaim his works; and who can search out his mighty deeds? Who can measure his majestic power? And who can fully recount his mercies? It is not possible to diminish or increase them, nor is it possible to fathom the wonders of the Lord. When human beings have finished, they are just beginning, and when they stop, they are still perplexed. What are human beings? The number of days in their life is great if they reach one hundred years, but the death of each one is beyond the calculation of all. Like a drop of water from the sea and a grain of sand, so are a few years among the days of eternity. That is why the Lord is patient with them and pours out his mercy upon them. He sees and recognizes that their end is miserable; therefore he grants them forgiveness all the more. The compassion of human beings is for their neighbors, but the compassion of the Lord is for every living thing...When the Lord created his works from the beginning, and, in making them, determined their boundaries, he arranged his works in an eternal order, and their dominion for all generations. They neither hunger nor grow weary, and they do not abandon their tasks. They do not crowd one another, and they never disobey his word. Then the Lord looked upon the earth, and filled it with his good things. With all kinds of living beings he covered its surface, and into it they must return. The Lord created human beings out of earth, and makes them return to it again. He gave them a fixed number of days, but granted them authority over everything on the earth...I will now call to mind the works of the Lord, and will declare what I have seen. By the word of the Lord his works are made; and all his creatures do his Will. The sun looks down on everything with its light, and the work of the Lord is full of his glory. The Lord has not empowered even his holy ones to recount all his marvellous works, which the Lord the Almighty has established so that the universe may stand firm in his glory. He searches out the abyss and the human heart; he understands their innermost secrets. For the Most High knows all that may be known; he sees from of old the things that are to come. He discloses what has been and what is to be, and he reveals the traces of hidden things. No thought escapes him, and nothing is hidden from him. He has set in order the splendours of his wisdom; he is from all eternity one and the same. Nothing can be added or taken away, and he needs no one to be his counsellor. How beautiful are all his works! even to the spark and fleeting vision! The universe lives and abides forever, to meet each need each creature is preserved. All of them differ, one from another, yet none of them has he made in vain, for each in turn, as it comes is good; can one ever see enough of their splendor?...Those who go down to the sea tell part of its story, and when we hear them we are thunderstruck; In it are his creatures, stupendous, amazing, all kinds of life, and the monsters of the deep. For him each messenger succeeds, and at his bidding accomplishes his Will. We could say more but could never say enough; let the final word be: "*HE IS ALL*!..."


*- Book of Sirach (Holy Bible)*




*PS THE ABOVE QUOTED BOOKS OF WISDOM AND SIRACH ARE NOT IN PROTESTANT BIBLES BUT ONLY IN CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX ONES*



"...Through God all things came to be, not one thing had its being but through him. All that came to be had life in him and that life was the light of men, a light that shines in the dark, a light that darkness cannot overpower...For That One was the Light of Truth, who enlightens every person that comes into the world..." 


*—The Gospel of John 1.2, Bible* 






"...In him we live, and move, and have our being...We are his children..."



*—Saint Paul, Book of Acts 17.28 (Bible)* 





"...For from him, and through him and to him are all things..." 




*— Saint Paul, Book of Romans 8.36 (Bible)* 




"...There is one God who is father of all, over all, through all and within all..." 


*—Saint Paul, Book of Ephesians 4.6 (Bible)* 



"...God is love, and anyone who lives in love, lives in God, and God in him..." 


*—1 John 4.16 (Bible)*


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Mar 23, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,
                           Thank you for the example. It seems that Naamu and Raamu may have been unfortunate ‘words’ to use for discussion of Gurmukhi grammar.
              The vowels in Gurmukhi are not easy to literally interpret in Roman alphabet hence difficulty of achieving a consensus on the argument.
              You have better knowledge of the grammar than I have and it also seems that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Mahan Kosh dictionaries suffer from the same problem for example they often seems to have the same meanings in both, and Mahan Kosh tends to veer one to the modern day wording that loses the intent of Granth Sahib. I list a few examples:
icq = (1) ਮਨ, ਦਿਲ, ਅੰਤਹਕਰਣ। (2) ਚਿਤ੍ਰਕਾਰੀ (ਸ਼ਬਦਾਰਥ)
icqu = ਮਨ, ਦਿਲ
dUir = (1) ਵਿਥ/ਫਾਸਲੇ/ਦੂਰੀਤੇ। (2) ਦੂਰਕਰਨਾ, ਹਟ/ਮਿਟਜਾਣਾ (ਭਾਵ)
dUr = (1) ਵਿਥ/ਫਾਸਲੇ/ਦੂਰੀਤੇ। (2) ਦੂਰਕਰਨਾ, ਹਟ/ਮਿਟਜਾਣਾ (ਭਾਵ)
dUrI = ਵਿੱਥ, ਫਾਸਲਾ
              It is not difficult to assume that a novice (like me) would jump to the nearest word that seems to fit the inclination of the shabad. We also know that the gurus who wrote the Scriptures did not do so lightly and had a reason to use the vowels as necessary. It is also not true, as I understand it, to say that the particular vowel has been discarded now – that does not explain the intent in the Granth Sahib use.
              It now is clear to me that you have pointed out a valid lack of information in our understanding of the grammar that needs the help of people like you who have the ability to help.
              I recall a member (findingmyway, I believe) posed a question on similar lines where a shabad could be interpreted in a number of ways. I could not join in as my knowledge is nowhere near the members involved.
              It would be useful if you can point us the way to the dictionary, books or other sources that would explain the differences between the commonly mistaken words, in fact, all Gurbani words. That would educate all the people as guru Arjan Dev wanted to do.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Mar 23, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> Thank you for the example. It seems that Naamu and Raamu may have been unfortunate ‘words’ to use for discussion of Gurmukhi grammar.
> The vowels in Gurmukhi are not easy to literally interpret in Roman alphabet hence difficulty of achieving a consensus on the argument.
> You have better knowledge of the grammar than I have and it also seems that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Mahan Kosh dictionaries suffer from the same problem for example they often seems to have the same meanings in both, and Mahan Kosh tends to veer one to the modern day wording that loses the intent of Granth Sahib. I list a few examples:
> ...


 
Thank you Devender Dhanjal ji .I am pleased to note your views at least you have recognised the need of evaluating the understanding of Gurbanee as GuRu Arjan Dev ji Wishes.
You will appreciate that this thread is not related with this subject.Moreover the subject required careful deliberation too .You can share the details on this subject thru my ID mail psbagga@sms.co.in.
It would be my pleasure to do so.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Astroboy (Apr 3, 2012)

Jay Sabh Mil Ke Akhan Paye, Vedda na hovei, ghaat na jaye

There's more said than seen. Now see a glimpse of God's creation, a very tiny part of HIM.  Watch the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Zr7wNQw12l8


----------



## gurugranthjifollower (Apr 28, 2012)

to understand the gurbani words better I look at the gurbani grammer by Principal  Sahib Singh whose translation is regarded as the best so far. he does explain the difference in meaning of a  word that has just 2 muktas,i.e. mn (mind) mnu or min. They all indicate towards mind but are used as of mind, in mind oe for mind etc. For clear interpretations see gurbani grammer by sahib singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Apr 28, 2012)

gurugranthjifollower said:


> to understand the gurbani words better I look at the gurbani grammer by Principal Sahib Singh whose translation is regarded as the best so far. he does explain the difference in meaning of a word that has just 2 muktas,i.e. mn (mind) mnu or min. They all indicate towards mind but are used as of mind, in mind oe for mind etc. For clear interpretations see gurbani grammer by sahib singh


 
This is very appreciable point of consideration in interpretation of Gurbanee many of us do not give any significance to this.
Still most significant consideration should be given to the words with matra of Aukad and Dulaikad on Gurbanee words.These are most neglected matras but one can find them most useful in correct interpretation of Gurbanee.
I hope you would give your attention to the words with matra of Aukad and Dulaikad.and interprate the reference meanings accordingly.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (Apr 29, 2012)

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0cm; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]-->  Dear gurugranthjifollower,
                                  As this was not the place for sharing information on Gurbani Grammar the subject moved to http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/17943-gurbani-vichaar-5.html I found the Gurbani Viaykarn by Prof. Sahib Singh on the net. However if one googles “Gurbani Viakaran by Prof. Sahib Singh” one site is at www.scribd... (I dare not put the link here as it is unfriendly and it tends to add pop ups and needs constant cleaning of the cookies to keep the computer sane - so please be careful).
              It has a PDF copy of his book but with some critical pages missing. It has been useful to differentiate words ending with ‘w I i  u y’. These are basically related to nouns and there are 8 cases to consider. 
              As Prof. explains most of these words are derived from Sanskrit, Prakrit and other languages some of the words changed into short forms and even the endings. So along with ‘aunker  u’ a number of words changed the endings as example below:
  Page 77 explains  - (  u ijdW nwmu = nwm nUM[) On page 79 he explains the similar meanings by word endings e.g.  duDih = duD nUM, Ksmih = Ksm nUM[
  The book has a lot of background on the development of Gurmukhi from Sanskrit and Prakrit etc. to language used in Granth Sahib.
  It needs a hard copy to make best of Prof. Sahib Singh’s recorded knowledge. Hard copies seem to be difficult to get hold of as per my experience.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Apr 29, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> Dear gurugranthjifollower,
> As this was not the place for sharing information on Gurbani Grammar the subject moved to http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/17943-gurbani-vichaar-5.html I found the Gurbani Viaykarn by Prof. Sahib Singh on the net. However if one googles “Gurbani Viakaran by Prof. Sahib Singh” one site is at www.scribd... (I dare not put the link here as it is unfriendly and it tends to add pop ups and needs constant cleaning of the cookies to keep the computer sane - so please be careful).
> It has a PDF copy of his book but with some critical pages missing. It has been useful to differentiate words ending with ‘w I i u y’. These are basically related to nouns and there are 8 cases to consider.
> As Prof. explains most of these words are derived from Sanskrit, Prakrit and other languages some of the words changed into short forms and even the endings. So along with ‘aunker u’ a number of words changed the endings as example below:
> ...


 

There is another set of books as"Gurbanee da saral viyakaran Bodh" by Joginder Singh Talwara. One should also refer to these for getting more clear understanding of application of grammar in Gurbanee.

I am greatly surprised by one thing in all these books that the grammar of matras Aukad is considered but that of matra of Dulaikad is omitted without any reason.Whereas I found that the matra of Gulaikad is most important to understand along with the use of matra of Aukad.
This is just my own observation in these books.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (May 1, 2012)

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable 	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; 	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; 	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; 	mso-style-noshow:yes; 	mso-style-parent:""; 	mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; 	mso-para-margin:0cm; 	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; 	mso-pagination:widow-orphan; 	font-size:10.0pt; 	font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]-->  Dear prakash.s.bagga Ji,
                                 It is easier to understand and contribute with examples. “_matra of Dulaikad is omitted without any reason. Whereas I found that the matra of Gulaikad is most important_” I guess ‘Gulaikad’ is the same as ‘Dulaikad’ and means ‘ U’?
  If that is so only example I could find easily were:
‘gur = igAwn dwqw, guru vwlw’
‘guru = mq dw clwx vwlw’
‘gurU = guru dw gurU’
‘swD = swDU, sMq’
‘swDu = sMq jn, swDy hoey, mWx vwlw@
‘swDU = auh mnuK ijs ny Awp nMU swD ilAw hovY’
  Both are nouns but there may not be a set pattern that may be ascribed.
  You may have more pertinent words that may be worthy of attention.


----------



## Ambarsaria (May 1, 2012)

davinderdhanjal ji thanks for your post.

You may also be interested in the following thread as well,

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurbani-grammar-vyakaran/38429-gurbani-vyakaran-punjabi-grammar-3.html

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (May 2, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> Dear prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> It is easier to understand and contribute with examples. “_matra of Dulaikad is omitted without any reason. Whereas I found that the matra of Gulaikad is most important_” I guess ‘Gulaikad’ is the same as ‘Dulaikad’ and means ‘ U’?
> If that is so only example I could find easily were:
> ‘gur = igAwn dwqw, guru vwlw’
> ...


 
You can see message #23 where I have presented the classification of words according to matra of Aukad and Dulaikad as per Numbers these words represent.
Further you should also keep in mind that the Words are also classified according to GENDER as Masculine/Feminine and Neutral .

We can find use of the words in Gurbanee according to Gender as well as According to Numbers depending upon the context of application.

The application of the words is according to Genders for reference to person/persons otherwise the application is as per Numbers.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (May 2, 2012)

DAVENDERDHANJAL JI,

The message #23 is in the thread of Gurbanee grammar currenly you can visit this.
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (May 3, 2012)

davinderdhanjal said:


> Dear prakash.s.bagga Ji,
> It is easier to understand and contribute with examples. “_matra of Dulaikad is omitted without any reason. Whereas I found that the matra of Gulaikad is most important_” I guess ‘Gulaikad’ is the same as ‘Dulaikad’ and means ‘ U’?
> If that is so only example I could find easily were:
> ‘gur = igAwn dwqw, guru vwlw’
> ...


 
You are right but what do you think about the reference meanings of these three words.? Do these words convey the same reference meanings or different.?
Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## davinderdhanjal (May 3, 2012)

prakash.s.bagga Ji,
                         Please add some informative content so we can share learning. I am not sure that what I said is what you understand and vice versa. An answer with some content may be helpful.                         
I will move to the other site as per Ambarsaria Ji link to add more content.


----------

