# Sri Guru Granth Sahib: Review Of ੴ (Ik▫oaŉkār)



## Ambarsaria (Oct 13, 2011)

This is based on Professor Sahib Singh’s following work,

*sRI gurU grMQ swihb drpx
*(Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan)*

*​ Professor Sahib Singh uses his great grasp of Punjabi, Sanskrit and writing styles/constructions based on these in the composition of writings.  His inherent and deep knowledge and upfront presentation allow us to review, comment, agree or disagree but it is all in the open.

ੴ is the first composite word in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.  The phonetics of this word while quite clear has also seen variations and has lead to change of possible meaning(s) as a result.  
*
*
*Phonetics**:*
I am no Phonetics expert but I can relate to Dr. Kulbir Thind’s marvellowus contributions in this regard and accept the phonetics presented by him as follows,


> *ੴ*1, E Aqy >
> 
> *‘iek EAMkwr’*


 *Ik▫oaŉkār*


(Ref:  http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1)
This is in full alignment with Professor Sahib Singh’s description and dis-assembly of the word.



> *Note**:*  I do not like or accept from my learning the “Ik –Ongkaar”.  The sound of “g” in this is inappropriate in any possible forms from silent to full.


 Meaning of *ੴ**:*

1-ie`k[ E-EAM[ > -kwr[



> ‘E’ sMsik®q dw Sbd hY[ Amr koS Anuswr ies dy iqMn ArQ hn:-




‘E’ is a word from Sanskrit.  It has three possible meanings.




> (1) vyd Awid Drm-pusqkW dy ArMB Aqy A^Ir ivc, Ardws jW iksy piv~qr Drm-kwrj dy ArMB ivc A`Kr 'EN' piv~qr A`Kr jwx ky vriqAw jWdw hY[
> Used as *EN, *an auspicious word at the beginning or end of religious books.





> (2) iksy hukm jW pRSn Awidk dy au~qr ivc Awdr Aqy siqkwr nwl ‘jI hW’ AwKxw[ so,‘*EN*’ dw ArQ hY 'jI hW'[
> 
> A way and preamble in answering respectfully like “ji haan” (colloquially “yes respectful one”)





> (3) *EN*-bRhm[
> Brahma, a Hindu God /deity.





> iehnW ivcoN ikhVw ArQ ies Sbd dw ie`Qy ilAw jwxw hY-ies ƒ idRVH krn leI Sbd 'EN' dy pihlW '1' ilK id`qw hY[ ies dw Bwv ieh hY ik ie`Qy 'EN' dw ArQ hY 'auh hsqI jo iek hY, ijs vrgw hor koeI nhIN hY Aqy ijs ivc ieh swrw jgq smw jWdw hY['


_So which one applies!_ 

To confirm the proper application of meaning, '1' is used in Sri Guru Granth Sahib.



> qIjw ih`sw > hY, ijs dw au~cwrn hY 'kwr'[ 'kwr' sMsik®q dw iek ipCyqr hY[ Awm qOr qy ieh ipCyqr 'nWv' dy A^Ir ivc vriqAw jWdw hY[ ies dw ArQ hY 'iek-rs, ijs ivc qbdIlI nw Awvy['


 The third part (>  ) is from Sanskrit and is a syllable used at the ending of a word.  It stands for “one essence that may not change”.



> eykMkwru-eyk EAMkwr, auh iek EAM jo iek-rs hY, jo hr QW ivAwpk hY[
> so, "<>" dw au~cwrn hY " iek (eyk) EAMkwr" Aqy iesdw ArQ hY "iek Akwl purK, jo iek-rs ivAwpk hY"[


Hence,




> *<>  **stands for “One creator present as one essence everywhere”.*​


Appreciate any comments and corrections of any errors as all errors are mine to correct.


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Seeker9 (Oct 13, 2011)

That is a very detailed explanation. I will download and read more
I also have a couple of translations and would offer the following
that most of you will probably already be familiar with

===============================================================
One universal Creator God.
The name is truth.
Creative being personified. No fear. No hatred.
Image of the undying, beyond birth, self-existent.
By guru’s grace
Chant and meditate.
True in the primal beginning, true throughout the ages
True here and now. 
O Nanak, Forever true

(Dr Sant Singh Khalsa, MD)
http://www.gurbanifiles.org/translations/

================================================================
God is one. It is true. He is the Creator. He has no concern with
anything. He has no enemy. He is immortal. He does not take
birth. He came into existence on His own. He is realized by Guru’s
(divine teacher) grace reciting God’s name.

Recite

Mentioned above is true from the beginning, for
a long time. It is true now. Nanak says it will always be true. 

(Swarn Singh Bains)
http://swarnbains.tripod.com/

===================================================================

So both translations describing a few common characteristics:

- One-ness
- Beyond birth
- Self-existent
- Immortal
- This is the Truth


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 14, 2011)

Gurfatehji

As Ambersariaji has kindly provided us with 

*One creator present as one essence everywhere*

How can these two letters encapsulate sikhi. What can we learn from them? If we were to focus only on Ek Onkar for the moment, what can it teach us? 

The statement is pretty definitive, there is an energy that kickstarted the big bang, and all life that spewed forth from that bang has an element, an essence of creator. The creator is different from 'god' as we have no record of the creators word, of the creators thoughts, unlike the Old Testament. So for christians it is easier to personalise God, clearly we were never meant to personalise the Creator. 

I have never created anything in my life, if I had created a life, and I wanted the best for that life, would I nurture it personally, or give it the tools to nurture itself, again a stark difference between Christian and Sikh. Creator must seem quite a aloof Creator by comparison, no garden of eden, just sort of, here you go, theres the toolbox, get on with it. Creator does not seem to treat us like children, Creator seems to treat us as adults with free will, mind you, I have always thought the best brought up children were the ones that were never treated like children. 

If Creators essence is everywhere, and bearing in mind Sikhism and science go hand in hand, then we are talking at a molecular level, I am no scientist, so I am afraid I cannot expand this any further, but Carbon comes to mind, but then again, it does not say Creator is everywhere, it says the essence is 

wikki says
In philosophy, *essence* is the attribute or set of attributes that make an object or substance what it fundamentally is, and which it has by necessity, and without which it loses its identity.

So essence of vanilla is the smelly bit without all the bits that do not smell, so essence of Creator could possibly be described by the lines following, namely, 
to have no fear, to make no enemies, to recognise that what is now, was before, and always will be, 

but going back to the line, one Creator present as one essence everywhere............................

I have to stop here, I will think further on this at bedtime, I look forward to the interpretation of others, thanks


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 17, 2011)

I needed a few days to think this through before the next line, it has certainly made me think harder about the rest of creation, and knowing that an creator exists as one essence in everything puts a different perspective on things, 

MY wife rang me that evening to tell me that 'spot' the ferret was ill. Now I am not keen on the ferrets, I do not even know why we have them, they smell something terrible, but I had finished thinking about the above line, and I drove home to see Spot. 

Spot looked terrible, my wife was worried about the vets fees, I was worried about the vets fees, however earlier that day, the shop had done ok, we had taken enough to afford the vet without a huge problem, I picked Spot up and looked at him, I had never looked at him before, not that close, he looked bad.., I cannot do much about animals dying in India or Africa, or even children, but here in front of me was our ferret, who although was not dying, did not look great, We paid extra to get him seen to that moment, and a few hours later he was pumped full of steriods, and antibiotics for an ear infection. If creation looks you in the eye and asks for your help, how can you refuse, if you have animals, then you have to put their needs above your own, or else, do not keep animals. The trees, the ferrets, the snails, the ants, spiders, all creation, all contain essence of creator, all need to be existed with, side by side, some need to be eaten, eat them with respect and gratitude, some need to be worn, wear them with respect, and that is what Ek Onkar means to me, I could spend another year figuring it out completely, and I am sure as time goes on, my understanding will get better, thank you


----------



## Ambarsaria (Oct 17, 2011)

Harry Haller ji thanks for a wonderful post.  One thing to watch out is the mis-conception and may be I am wrong to say so, that a ditto image of the creator resides in all of us.  That is not true from my understanding.  An image that does not differentiate between you and me, a Hindu neighbor, a Muslim neighbor, a Christian neighbor, and all humans resides identically in all of us per the creator's definition of how much of what we should be capable of.  A similar image resides in various life forms specific to their needs but without favoritism within each segment.

So this kind of defeats the line about merging as we can not merge more than how we are created.  Whole ether is the creation and the creator that creates is in the total sum.  Creator never created anything apart from the creator's architectural plans.

Understand of course but don't try to merge when one doesn't even have a choice to un-merge.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 17, 2011)

Ambersariaji, 

Excuse my quick replies, I only post here when I am working, so I have to grab the chance as work and my brain allows, but I fully agree with you on the merging point, as I understand it, everything is present and ready to go, I have a pristine 1994 V8 LSE in my head, I just do not know how to drive it yet, although I am learning, maybe I should get some 'L' plates so other enlightened souls know I am learning and can make allowances for my constant bad driving the wrong way down one way streets, but one day............


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 17, 2011)

Ambersariaji, 

On your point of the ditto image, allow me to share my own thoughts regarding this, 

If we are all blessed with an essence of creator, and each of us has a singular essence, than that essence will not be the same as another, as once interpretation and experience is applied to it, it becomes personal, through life, and study of our own individual way, we become enlightened,  an elder, an Iman, a Gyani, each at the top of his/her understanding and learning, but only within that essence, what seems to be the end, is just the beginning, I do not think any religion can take you further than that, after that, with the knowledge you have, you have to find your own way further, at this point there is no sikh, no muslim, no hindu, only man and creator, look forward to your thoughts


----------



## Ishna (Oct 17, 2011)

Regarding essence within and without, there might be value in doing a SriGranth search for the English term 'with water' to read some of the shabads with ideas like:

ਕਹੁ  ਨਾਨਕ  ਹਮ  ਤੁਮ  ਗੁਰਿ  ਖੋਈ  ਹੈ  ਅੰਭੈ  ਅੰਭੁ  ਮਿਲੋਗਨੀ  ॥੪॥੩॥
कहु नानक हम तुम गुरि खोई है अम्भै अम्भु मिलोगनी ॥४॥३॥
Kaho Nānak ham ṯum gur kẖo▫ī hai ambẖai ambẖ miloganī. ||4||3||
Says Guru Nanak, the Guru has destroyed my sense of 'mine and yours'. Like water with water, I am blended with God. ||4||3||

(from here)

It's all just the swirl of water.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 17, 2011)

Ishnabhenji, 

Know what I think about that statement, if our minds are like oil and water, with one to be manmukh, and the other to be gurmukh, then Guru is washing up liquid! (which as we all know, allows oil and water to mix, or am I the only male here who is an expert on dishwashing)


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 9, 2011)

AMBARSAIA Ji,
Now I get your point,
In fact you are preconceived and have already accepted the following:
1..The numercal number one is to be refered as IK and

2...The disection of the three words is by taking Ik as separate   and the rest is added as OngKaar.

So you get the pronunciation as IK -OngKaar.

Now I have not accepted both as above.

I have understood from Gurbani that:...

1...Numerical one to be refered as EK 

2...The word EKwhen added with Ong to get EKOng and Take the Kaar as separate.

Why EK not IK...Both words are Nouns .The word IK is definitive Noun and EK as Indefinitive Noun.
Since the word Ong gramatically PLURAL(Masculine Gender)or SINGULAR(Feminine GENDER) ,So the word EK is more correct as per grammar rule rather than IK.

Since the word Ong is PLURAL it can not be convertedto SINGULAR by matra of AUKAD so the word Numerical Number One iis placed to make it SINGULAR as EKOng.

Now EKOng is single word can be refered as SABADu and this SABADu is GuRoo in Gurbani.
So adding EKONG with KAAR we get the words EKOng-Kaar when all combined it would be pronounced as EKANKAAR which is there is SGGS .It has meaning as SABADu GuRoo JOT(i).

On the contrary.we dont find any pronunciation as Ik OngKaar and also meaning that Creator is ONE.I have already shown from Gurbani that it is a SYSTEM of three  which have been refered as CREATOR.

CREATOR is ONE is not the message from Gurbani.However the SYSTEM (as creator) is ONE this is the message as IKu EKANKAAR..Ref SukhmaniASTAPADI 10

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 9, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> AMBARSAIA Ji,
> 
> 
> Now I get your point,
> In fact you are preconceived and have already accepted the following:


  Sorry Prakash.S. Bagga ji I have no pre-conceived ideas.  I started reading Prof. Sahib Singh ji’s Darpan this year.




			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> 1..The numerical number one is to be referred as IK and


 
  ੧੨੩੪੫੬੭੮੯੦
Please give me the phonetics of above in your own English  

I read these as 1 ਇੱਕ (ikk) ੧, 2 ਦੋ (dō) ੨, 3 ਤਿੰਨ (tinn) ੩, 4 ਚਾਰ (chār) ੪, 5 ਪੰਜ (pañj) ੫, 6 ਛੇ (chhē) ੬, 7 ਸੱਤ (satt) ੭, 8 ਅੱਠ (aṭṭh) ੮, 9 ਨੌਂ (nauōn) ੯,

So far me1 ਇੱਕ (ikk) ੧ is right


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> 2...The disection of the three words is by taking Ik as separate and the rest is added as OngKaar.
> 
> So you get the pronunciation as IK -OngKaar.


  See correct and complete at the top of the thread.



			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> I have understood from Gurbani that:...


  You keep quoting this line, where you think others learn from


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> 1...Numerical one to be referred as EK


 
  Sorry say again !  Where it is to be stated so it is written so.  Where it is to be called 1 ਇੱਕ (ikk) ੧,  it is also written so as well and context is so defined.


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> 2...The word EKwhen added with Ong to get EKOng and Take the Kaar as separate.


  You keep mixing up disjointed and two elements:


ਇੱਕ(ikk)੧as a number
‘E’ sMsik®q      dw Sbd hY[E-EAM[
> -kwr[
  Sorry there is no Ek!


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> Why EK not IK...Both words are Nouns .The word IK is definitive Noun and EK as Indefinitive Noun.
> Since the word Ong gramatically PLURAL(Masculine Gender)or SINGULAR(Feminine GENDER) ,So the word EK is more correct as per grammar rule rather than IK.


  So now you are saying Ek is more correct rather than saying Prof. Sahib Singh ji is wrong and Ik is wrong.
  One cannot be half pregnant!

  One also does need to pay some attention to credentials.  For example Prof. Sahib Singh ji below.



> LOVE FOR STUDY OF SANSKRIT LANGUAGE
> 
> There used to be held inter-religious debates on many issues in Pasroor. Although Sahib Singh could not follow the frequent quotations made in Sanskrit by Arya Smajist Hindus, yet he was greatly attracted to the language. He resolved that he would learn this language, and in the high school he would study Sanskrit instead of Persian Language, He had learnt Gurmukhi alphabets the very next day he received Amrit, and was regularly reciting the Gurus’ Compositions.
> He learnt the alphabets of Dev Nagri script (Hindi) in a couple of days.. At that time many friends and teachers told him, not to change the language, as the time left for the examination was very short (3 months only). Sahib Singh insisted that his language subject would be Sanskrit. He went to the Sanskrit teacher, who greatly encouraged him and promised all types of guidance. He began spending all of his time on study of Sanskrit language. In three months’ time he attained so much proficiency, which others could not attain in 3 years. In high school he always attained the first position in Sanskrit.





			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> Since the word Ong is PLURAL it can not be converted to SINGULAR by matra of AUKAD so the word Numerical Number One is placed to make it SINGULAR as EKOng.


 
_Where do you get Ong when Prof. Sahib Singh ji say it is  *“ *_*E-EAM “ .*

_You are rehashing Prof. Sahib Singh ji’s discourses!  So if the use of 1 is to simply clarify singularity/plurality of “Ong” per you why should it be phonetically sounded versus only read so._


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> Now EKOng is single word can be refered as SABADu and this SABADu is GuRoo in Gurbani.


 _Veer ji who is Guru ji’s teacher other than the one creator.  You want such to be named Guroo whereas you previously confirmed that it is GUR._


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> So adding EKONG with KAAR we get the words EKOng-Kaar when all combined it would be pronounced as EKANKAAR which is there is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji .It has meaning as SABADu GuRoo JOT(i).


 _This is wrong based on the comments above._


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> On the contrary._we dont find any pronunciation as Ik OngKaar_ and also meaning that Creator is ONE.I have already shown from Gurbani that it is a SYSTEM of three which have been referred as CREATOR.
> _First you defined the meaning as the focus and now you are starting to say Gurbani should define phonetics of Languages!  It is Gurbani (Writings of the Creator)._
> 
> CREATOR is ONE is not the message from Gurbani.


 _Sorry your logic flaws have been shown and the above is not supported as being based on flawed concepts._


			
				prakash.s.bagga said:
			
		

> However the SYSTEM (as creator) is ONE this is the message as IKu EKANKAAR..Ref SukhmaniASTAPADI 10
> Prakash.S.Bagga


_ What is this absurdity of now bringing other stuff of your own as “SYSTEM” and also calling it “creator”.  Gurbani states the one creator is indefinable and you have now defined it as a system of some sort._

_So can you define this system for us which is different than one creator? You may want to review the following sabad too,_

_Sukẖ Sāgar Har Nām Hai / ਸੁਖ ਸਾਗਰੁ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਹੈ_

  Sorry I find your argument and thesis unacceptable based on the above.

I am always open to comments and corrections.

Sat Sri Akal.
[/quote]


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 9, 2011)

AMBARSARIA ji,
The word Ong is very much there in Gurbani as



पउड़ी ॥ 

Pa▫oṛī. 

Pauree: 


ਓਅੰ ਸਾਧ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਨਮਸਕਾਰੰ ॥ 


ओअं साध सतिगुर नमसकारं ॥ 

O▫aŉ sāḏẖ saṯgur namaskāraŉ. 

ONG: I humbly bow in reverence to the One Universal Creator, to the Holy True Guru. 


The above quote is at pp250 SGGS.
It is very much clear that the word Ong is PLURAL (from the grammar of the whole line)
What should be the SINGULAR for Ong ?

I think that you are overlooking a point given by Prof Sahib Singh ji himself that EKANKAARu is also the pronunciation of the SYMBOL that is visible in SGGS. (So it is obvious that ponunciation of the SYMBOL as IK Ong Kaar is not there in SGGS)
I considered this and I find  the pronunciation EKANKAARu more in line with Gurbani.
What is wrong here?
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 9, 2011)

Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your response to one part of my post.

You keep saying the following,


> So it is obvious that _pronunciation of the SYMBOL_ as IK Ong Kaar is not there in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji


_I don't know what you are not getting from items stated many times.  Veer ji Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is Punjabi based with words from other languages.  It is not a __pronunciation guide.  One needs to understand pronunciation from the language underlying the words and Professor Sahib Singh ji has brilliantly done so including for,

_ ੴ

ੴ ਉੱਚਾਰਨ ਵੇਲੇ ਇਸ ਦੇ  ਤਿੰਨ ਹਿੱਸੇ ਕੀਤੇ ਜਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ: ੧, ਓ ਅਤੇ *> * ; ਇਸ ਦਾ ਪਾਠ ਹੈ 'ਇਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ'। ਤਿੰਨ  ਹਿੱਸੇ ਵੱਖੋ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਉੱਚਾਰਿਆਂ ਇਉਂ ਬਣਦੇ ਹਨ: ੧ = ਇੱਕ। ਓ = ਓਅੰ। *> ** = ਕਾਰ।*

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> AMBARSARIA ji,
> The word Ong is very much there in Gurbani as
> 
> SIZE=+1]पउड़ी ॥[/SIZE]
> ...



Parkash Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

Please follow the rules of the forum and post the whole Shabad and explain it in your own words so we can understand where you are coming from. Otherwise, posting one liners from this beautiful poetry becomes nothing but self fulfilling ego trip. Nothing more.And secondly, you claim is false it is not plural, but we will talk about it after you have posted the whole Shabad and explained it in your own words. You can copy and paste the translation for reference purposes.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Tejwant Singh said:


> Parkash Singh ji,
> 
> Guru Fateh.
> 
> ...


 

Here I feel the concern is more for knowing the word not for the interpretation of the whole of the SAbad.So I posted the required information only.
With regards
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Ambarsaria said:


> Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your response to one part of my post.
> 
> You keep saying the following,
> _I don't know what you are not getting from items stated many times. Veer ji Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is Punjabi based with words from other languages. It is not a __pronunciation guide. One needs to understand pronunciation from the language underlying the words and Professor Sahib Singh ji has brilliantly done so including for,_
> ...


 
AMBARSARIA Ji,
I have also taken the guidance from Prof Sahib Singh ji,
If I am given two choices like One Pronunciation is in line with SGGS and other not in line with SGGS. 
You tell me what should I accept? 
Should I ignore SGGS ?
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> If I am given two choices like One Pronunciation is in line with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and other not in line with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.


_Prakash.S.Bagga veer ji I regret that you believe somehow Prof. Sahib Singh ji's interpretation is not __in "line with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji_".  

Veer ji I personally find it not very wise to use such language.  You willy- nilly kind of align yourself on using SGGS as a support as though others are doing something else not in line with SGGS.  Your approach veer is trying to be more pious than others which is noble but in this case it has little to no basis.  You may have to unlearn a lot if you have anchored your Sikhi life around such in so hardened fashion.

Such choice is for each one of us and no one can direct anyone else.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Ambarsaria said:


> _Prakash.S.Bagga veer ji I regret that you believe somehow Prof. Sahib Singh ji's interpretation is not __in "line with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji_".
> 
> Veer ji I personally find it not very wise to use such language. You willy- nilly kind of align yourself on using Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji as a support as though others are doing something else not in line with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Your approach veer is trying to be more pious than others which is noble but in this case it has little to no basis. You may have to unlearn a lot if you have anchored your Sikhi life around such in so hardened fashion.
> 
> ...


 
AMBARSARIA Ji ,
Well I dont think there can be a Guide other than SGGS for knowing anything related to Gurbani.May be even the pronunciation of the SYMBOL itself.

Because we differ very broadly in this regard so I think it is better we drop any further sharing of views related to Pronunciation of the SYMBOL.

However we continue to share in other areas.
Many thanks for positive interaction .

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

Prakash Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

You write:



> Here I feel the concern is more for knowing the word not for the interpretation of the whole of the SAbad.So I posted the required information only.



You are wrong because the whole Pauri proves that you are incorrect with your grammar explanation concocted by you for some reason and  that is why it is important to post the whole Shabad in any form to explain what you are trying to say. I have posted the whole Pauri and also the Salok after the Pauri which has the word *ਏਕ* in it which is interpreted/pronounced as *ਇਕ*. And the number * ॥੧॥* is also pronounced as IK -* ਇਕ*.

So, in both cases you are wrong:

1. Singular but you keep on insisting as plural.

2.The pronounciation of the number * ॥੧॥* as being EK.

Both are part of your imagination. SGGS, our only Guru is our only guide, not what you think in your mind is. If I were you, I would revise my grammar thinking of Gurbani because your explanations do not make any sense and contradict Gurbani which is sad and a shame.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

ਪਉੜੀ ॥  
पउड़ी ॥  
Pa▫oṛī.  
Pauree:  
xxx

ਪਉੜੀ

ਓਅੰ ਸਾਧ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਨਮਸਕਾਰੰ ॥  
ओअं साध सतिगुर नमसकारं ॥  
O▫aŉ sāḏẖ saṯgur namaskāraŉ.  
ONG: I humbly bow in reverence to the One Universal Creator, to the Holy True Guru.  
ਓਅੰ = ਹਿੰਦੀ ਦੀ ਵਰਨਮਾਲਾ ਦਾ ਪਹਿਲਾ ਅੱਖਰ।

*ਸਾਡੀ ਉਸ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਨੂੰ ਨਮਸਕਾਰ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਗੁਰੂ-ਰੂਪ ਧਾਰਦਾ ਹੈ,*= Singular, not plural as you claimed

ਆਦਿ ਮਧਿ ਅੰਤਿ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੰ ॥  
आदि मधि अंति निरंकारं ॥  
Āḏ maḏẖ anṯ niraŉkāraŉ.  
In the beginning, in the middle, and in the end, He is the Formless Lord.  
ਆਦਿ = ਜਗਤ ਦੇ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਵਿਚ। ਮਧਿ = ਜਗਤ ਦੀ ਮੌਜੂਦਗੀ ਵਿਚ। ਅੰਤਿ = ਜਗਤ ਦੇ ਅਖ਼ੀਰ ਵਿਚ।

*ਜੋ ਜਗਤ ਦੇ ਸ਼ੁਰੂ ਵਿਚ ਭੀ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਸੀ, ਹੁਣ ਭੀ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੈ, ਜਗਤ ਦੇ ਅੰਤ ਵਿਚ ਭੀ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਰਹੇਗਾ।
*= Singular, not plural as you claimed

ਆਪਹਿ ਸੁੰਨ ਆਪਹਿ ਸੁਖ ਆਸਨ ॥  
आपहि सुंन आपहि सुख आसन ॥  
Āpėh sunn āpėh sukẖ āsan.  
He Himself is in the absolute state of primal meditation; He Himself is in the seat of peace.  
ਸੁੰਨ = ਸੁੰਞ, ਜਿਥੇ ਕੁਝ ਭੀ ਨ ਹੋਵੇ।

*(ਜਦੋਂ ਜਗਤ ਦੀ ਹਸਤੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੁੰਦੀ) ਨਿਰੀ ਇਕੱਲ-ਰੂਪ ਭੀ ਉਹ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਆਪ ਹੀ ਆਪਣੇ ਸੁਖ-ਸਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ ਟਿਕਿਆ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ,
*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਆਪਹਿ ਸੁਨਤ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਜਾਸਨ ॥  
आपहि सुनत आप ही जासन ॥  
Āpėh sunaṯ āp hī jāsan.  
He Himself listens to His Own Praises.  
ਜਾਸਨ = ਜਸ।

*ਤਦੋਂ ਆਪਣੀ ਸੋਭਾ ਸੁਣਨ ਵਾਲਾ ਭੀ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ।*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.
ਆਪਨ ਆਪੁ ਆਪਹਿ ਉਪਾਇਓ ॥  
आपन आपु आपहि उपाइओ ॥  
Āpan āp āpėh upā▫i▫o.  
He Himself created Himself.  
ਆਪੁ = ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ।

*ਆਪਣੇ ਆਪ ਨੂੰ ਦਿੱਸਦੇ ਸਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ ਲਿਆਉਣ ਵਾਲਾ ਭੀ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੈ*,= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਆਪਹਿ ਬਾਪ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਮਾਇਓ ॥  
आपहि बाप आप ही माइओ ॥  
Āpėh bāp āp hī mā▫i▫o.  
He is His Own Father, He is His Own Mother.  
ਮਾਇਓ = ਮਾਂ।

*ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਆਪਣੀ) ਮਾਂ ਹੈ, ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਆਪਣਾ) ਪਿਤਾ ਹੈ।*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਆਪਹਿ ਸੂਖਮ ਆਪਹਿ ਅਸਥੂਲਾ ॥  
आपहि सूखम आपहि असथूला ॥  
Āpėh sūkẖam āpėh asthūlā.  
He Himself is subtle and etheric; He Himself is manifest and obvious.  
ਅਸਥੂਲਾ = ਦ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਟਮਾਨ ਜਗਤ।

*ਅਣ-ਦਿੱਸਦੇ ਤੇ ਦਿੱਸਦੇ ਸਰੂਪ ਵਾਲਾ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੈ।*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਲਖੀ ਨ ਜਾਈ ਨਾਨਕ ਲੀਲਾ ॥੧॥  
लखी न जाई नानक लीला ॥१॥  
Lakẖī na jā▫ī Nānak līlā. ||1||  
O Nanak, His wondrous play cannot be understood. ||1||  
ਲੀਲ੍ਹ੍ਹਾ = ਖੇਡ ॥੧॥

*ਹੇ ਨਾਨਕ! (ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦੀ ਇਹ ਜਗ-ਰਚਨਾ ਵਾਲੀ) ਖੇਡ ਬਿਆਨ ਨਹੀਂ ਕੀਤੀ ਜਾ ਸਕਦੀ ॥੧॥*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਕਰਿ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਦੀਨ ਦਇਆਲਾ ॥  
करि किरपा प्रभ दीन दइआला ॥  
Kar kirpā parabẖ ḏīn ḏa▫i▫ālā.  
O God, Merciful to the meek, please be kind to me,  
xxx

*ਹੇ ਦੀਨਾਂ ਉਤੇ ਦਇਆ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ! ਮੇਰੇ ਉਤੇ ਮਿਹਰ ਕਰ।*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਤੇਰੇ ਸੰਤਨ ਕੀ ਮਨੁ ਹੋਇ ਰਵਾਲਾ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥  
तेरे संतन की मनु होइ रवाला ॥ रहाउ ॥  
Ŧere sanṯan kī man ho▫e ravālā. Rahā▫o.  
that my mind might become the dust of the feet of Your Saints. ||Pause||  
ਰਵਾਲਾ = ਚਰਨ-ਧੂੜ। ਰਹਾਉ = ਕੇਂਦਰੀ ਭਾਵ।

*ਮੇਰਾ ਮਨ ਤੇਰੇ ਸੰਤ ਜਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਚਰਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਧੂੜ ਬਣਿਆ ਰਹੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥*= Singular, not plural as you claimed.

ਸਲੋਕੁ ॥  
सलोकु ॥  
Salok.  
Shalok:  
xxx

ਸਲੋਕ

ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਆਕਾਰ ਆਪਿ ਨਿਰਗੁਨ ਸਰਗੁਨ ਏਕ ॥  
निरंकार आकार आपि निरगुन सरगुन एक ॥  
Nirankār ākār āp nirgun sargun ek.  
He Himself is formless, and also formed; the One Lord is without attributes, and also with attributes.  
ਆਕਾਰ = ਸਰੂਪ। ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ = ਆਕਾਰ ਤੋਂ ਬਿਨਾ। ਗੁਨ = ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸੁਭਾਵ, (ਰਜ, ਤਮ, ਸਤ੍ਵ)। ਨਿਰਗੁਨ = ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸੁਭਾਵ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਨਹੀਂ ਪਾ ਰਹੇ। ਸਰਗੁਨ = ਉਹ ਸਰੂਪ ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸੁਭਾਵ ਮੌਜੂਦ ਹਨ।

ਆਕਾਰ-ਰਹਿਤ ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਜਗਤ-) ਆਕਾਰ ਬਣਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ। ਉਹ ਆਪ ਹੀ (ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ) ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਸੁਭਾਵਾਂ ਤੋਂ ਪਰੇ ਰਹਿੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਤੇ ਜਗਤ-ਰਚਨਾ ਰਚ ਕੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਤਿੰਨ ਗੁਣਾਂ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੋ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ।

*ਏਕਹਿ ਏਕ ਬਖਾਨਨੋ ਨਾਨਕ ਏਕ ਅਨੇਕ* ॥੧॥  
एकहि एक बखाननो नानक एक अनेक ॥१॥  
Ėkėh ek bakẖānano Nānak ek anek. ||1||  
Describe the One Lord as One, and Only One; O Nanak, He is the One, and the many. ||1||  
ਏਕਹਿ = ਇਕੋ ਹੀ ॥੧॥

ਹੇ ਨਾਨਕ! ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਆਪਣੇ* ਇਕ* ਸਰੂਪ ਤੋਂ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਰੂਪ ਬਣਾ ਲੈਂਦਾ ਹੈ, (ਪਰ ਇਹ ਅਨੇਕ ਰੂਪ ਉਸ ਤੋਂ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਹਨ) ਇਹੀ ਕਿਹਾ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਉਹ ਇਕ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਆਪ ਹੈ ॥੧॥


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Tejwant Singh said:


> Prakash Singh ji,
> 
> Guru Fateh.
> 
> ...


 TEJWANT SINGH Ji,
Have I ever accepted EK as IK .How can you conclude that I agree with the interpretation of the Sabad. I feel You create your own and decide your own  .What is this style I fail to understand.
With regards 
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> TEJWANT SINGH Ji,
> Have I ever accepted EK as IK .How can you conclude that I agree with the interpretation of the Sabad. I feel You create your own and decide your own  .What is this style I fail to understand.
> With regards
> Prakash.S.Bagga



Prakash Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

First, I have no idea what you are trying to say in your post. It makes no sense to me. Secondly, little I could gather from it after reading it several times to make some sense out of it, here is my response.

Exactly my point. Your disagreeing with the interpretation makes you wrong and you are in denial to admit about your self concocted falsehood as far as your imagined in your own mind Gurbani grammar is concerned. Thanks for proving my point.

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 10, 2011)

Veer Tejwant Singh ji and Prakash.S.Bagga ji I took the opportunity in this dialog to post another sabad in Gurmat Vichhar I hope you can comment and review at your leisure.  It has reference to Onkaar as well.  

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/37723-man-har-rang-r-g-vaigo.html

Some interesting Mahan Kosh dialog on *ਓਅੰ *below*,*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*[SIZE=-1]Mahan Kosh Encyclopedia[/SIZE]* [SIZE=-0] ਸੰ. ओम्. ਇਸ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਦਾ ਮੂਲ ਅਵ (श्रव्) ਧਾਤੁ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਰਥ ਹੈ ਰਖ੍ਯਾ (ਰਕਾ)  ਕਰਨਾ, ਬਚਾਉਣਾ, ਤ੍ਰਿਪਤ ਹੋਣਾ, ਫੈਲਨਾ ਆਦਿ। 'ਓਅੰ' ਸ਼ਬਦ ਸਭ ਦੀ ਰਖ੍ਯਾ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲੇ  ਕਰਤਾਰ ਦਾ ਬੋਧਕ ਹੈ. "ਓਅੰ ਸਾਧ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਨਮਸਕਾਰੰ". (ਬਾਵਨ) "ਓਅੰ ਪ੍ਰਿਯ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ  ਚੀਤਿ". (ਸਾਰ ਮਃ ੫) ਇਸ ਦੇ ਪਰ੍*ਯਾਂਯ ਸ਼ਬਦ- "ਪ੍ਰਣਵ" ਅਤੇ "ਉਦਗੀਥ" ਭੀ ਹਨ. ਓਅੰਕਾਰ  ਸ਼ਬਦ ਦਾ ਅਰਥ ਹੈ- ਓਅੰ ਧੁਨਿ (ਓਅੰ ਦਾ ਉੱਚਾਰਣ) "ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਕਾਲ ਜਬ ਕਰਾ ਪਸਾਰਾ। ਓਅੰਕਾਰ  ਤੇ ਸ੍ਰਿਸ੍ਟਿ ਉਪਾਰਾ". (ਵਿਚਿਤ੍ਰ) ਕਈ ਥਾਈਂ "ਓਅੰਕਾਰ" ਸ਼ਬਦ ਕਰਤਾਰ ਦਾ ਬੋਧਕ ਭੀ  ਦੇਖੀਦਾ ਹੈ. "ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਏਕੋ ਰਵਿ ਰਹਿਆ". (ਕਾਨ ਮਃ ੪) "ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਅਕਾਰ ਕਰਿ ਪਵਣ ਪਾਣੀ  ਬੈਸੰਤਰ ਸਾਜੇ". (ਭਾਗੁ) ਸੰਸਕ੍ਰਿਤ ਦੇ ਵਿਦਵਾਨਾਂ ਨੇ ੳ ਅ ਮ ਤਿੰਨ ਅੱਖਰਾਂ ਨੂੰ  ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਵਿਸਨੂ ਸ਼ਿਵ ਮੰਨਕੇ ਓਅੰ ਨੂੰ ਤਿੰਨ ਦੇਵ ਰੂਪ ਕਲਪਿਆ ਹੈ, ਪਰ ਗੁਰੁਮਤ ਵਿੱਚ  ਓਅੰ ਦੇ ਮੁੱਢ ਏਕਾ ਅੰਗ ਲਿਖਕੇ ਸਿੱਧ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਕਰਤਾਰ ਇੱਕ ਹੈ. "ਏਕਾ ਏਕੰਕਾਰ ਲਿਖਿ  ਵੇਖਾਲਿਆ। ਊੜਾ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਪਾਸਿ ਬਹਾਲਿਆ". (ਭਾਗੁ)। (2) ਮੱਧ ਭਾਰਤ ਦੇ ਜਿਲੇ ਨੀਮਾੜ  ਵਿੱਚ ਨਰਮਦਾ ਨਦੀ ਦੇ ਮਾਂਧਾਤਾ ਟਾਪੂ (ਦ੍ਵੀਪ) ਵਿੱਚ ਉਸ ਨਾਉਂ ਦਾ ਇੱਕ ਵੱਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਸਿੱਧ  ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੰਦਿਰ ਹੈ, ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕ ਦੇਵ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਇਸੇ ਥਾਂ 'ਦੱਖਣੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ' ਉੱਚਾਰਣ  ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ। ¹ ੩. ਵ੍ਯ- ਹਾਂ। (4) ਸਤ੍ਯ. ਯਥਾਰਥ. ਠੀਕ. [¹ਰਾਵਲਪਿੰਡੀ ਭਾਈ ਬੂਟਾ ਸਿੰਘ  ਹਕੀਮ ਦੀ ਧਰਮਸਾਲਾ ਵਿੱਚ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਦੀ ਇੱਕ ਬਹੁਤ ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਲਿਖਤ ਦੀ  ਬੀੜ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿੱਚ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ ਰਾਗ ਦੇ ਦੱਖਣੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਤੋਂ ਇਲਾਵਾ, ਇੱਕ ਹੋਰ ੮੭ ਪਦਾਂ  (ਪੌੜੀਆਂ) ਦੀ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਬਾਣੀ ਹੈ, ਜਿਸ ਦਾ ਅਰੰਭ ਇਉਂ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ:- ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਮਃ ੧.  (ਪੰਨਾ ੧੩੧੫) ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਸਭ ਥਾਨਿ। ਤਾਤੇ ਹੋਈ ਸਗਲੀ ਖਾਨਿ। ਖਾਣਿ ਖਾਣਿ ਮਹਿ ਬਹੁ  ਬਿਸਥਾਰਾ। ਆਪੇ ਜਾਣੈ ਸਿਰਜਣਹਾਰਾ। ਸਿਰਜਨਹਾਰ ਕੇ ਕੇਤੇ ਭੇਖ। ਭੇਖ ਭੇਖ ਮਹਿ ਰਹੈ ਅਲੇਖ.  (੧) *** ਭਉ ਭਾਗਾ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਘਰਿ ਆਇਆ। ਤਬ ਇਹ ਚਰਨ ਪਖਾਲੈ ਮਾਇਆ। ਮਾਇਆਧੀਨ ਸੇਵਿਕ ਦਰਿ  ਠਾਢੀ। ਜਾਕੇ ਚਰਨਕਵਲ ਰੁਚਿ ਬਾਢੀ। ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਮਾਇ ਸਾਰਾ ਜਗ ਦੇਖੈ। ਆਪਿ ਅਲੇਖੀ ਅਉਰ ਸਭ  ਲੇਖੈ। ੮੧.] [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]
Mahan Kosh data provided by Bhai Baljinder Singh (RaraSahib Wale);  See http://www.ik13.com[/SIZE]  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Ambarsaria said:


> Veer Tejwant Singh ji and Prakash.S.Bagga ji I took the opportunity in this dialog to post another sabad in Gurmat Vichhar I hope you can comment and review at your leisure. It has reference to Onkaar as well.
> 
> http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/37723-man-har-rang-r-g-vaigo.html
> 
> ...


 
AMBARSARIA Ji,
Well ,I will not be able to share any views as I am not aware of this.
Thanks for your nice consideration.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Tejwant Singh said:


> Prakash Singh ji,
> 
> Guru Fateh.
> 
> ...


 
TEJWANT SINGH Ji,
I admit,You are really great.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

AMBARSARIA Ji,
There is a message given by Giyani Jarnail Singh Ji in the thread..Do Sikhs believe in Heaven or Hell or Not.. Post No-2.The message reads as

"Sikhs are humam....why listen to humans.?...Why not go to the Source ..THE GURU
 THE SGGS for the true and right answer." 

 This is just for your kind perusal  because you have advised me to unlearn.So I would suggest that one should learn more. I find the message just wonderful.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> This is just for your kind perusal  because you have advised me to unlearn.So I would suggest that one should learn more. I find the message just wonderful.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


_Veer Prakash Singh Bagga ji thanks.  I read almost all posts in threads I interact with.  The one you mention being one of these.

Coming back to the topic of this thread, I wonder if you paid attention to my post above or just rejected it.  Let me flag an important part of the post,

_


> [SIZE=-0]ਸੰਸਕ੍ਰਿਤ  ਦੇ ਵਿਦਵਾਨਾਂ ਨੇ *ੳ ਅ ਮ* ਤਿੰਨ ਅੱਖਰਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਵਿਸਨੂ ਸ਼ਿਵ ਮੰਨਕੇ *ਓਅੰ* ਨੂੰ  ਤਿੰਨ ਦੇਵ ਰੂਪ ਕਲਪਿਆ ਹੈ, ਪਰ ਗੁਰੁਮਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਓਅੰ ਦੇ ਮੁੱਢ ਏਕਾ ਅੰਗ ਲਿਖਕੇ ਸਿੱਧ  ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਕਰਤਾਰ ਇੱਕ ਹੈ.
> _Sanskrit scholars have taken the highlighted three letters and translated it into a system of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva (three Hindu deities believed by many Hindus to be God's incarnate) and suggested that the highlighted letters represent a three deity system, but in Gurmat (name for creator's wisdom espoused in Sikhism) having place One at the beginning have clarified that creator is but one._
> [/SIZE]


Veer ji I much sense that many have not given up on this Hindu concept internally or externally and continue to find ways to re-inject such into Sikhism.  This is a great dis-service and is rotten to the core from a Sikhism perspective.

I am not suggesting who does it and when.  I just continue to sense many so trapped in the essence of their posts.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

Prakash Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

I was wondering if you have a Nirmala back ground or something akin to it!

Please respond.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Tejwant Singh said:


> Prakash Singh ji,
> 
> Guru Fateh.
> 
> ...


 

You are the best Judge.I would love your judgement.
I consider myself as GURSIKH only. 

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

Ambarsaria ji,

Guru Fateh.



> Veer ji I much sense that many have not given up on this Hindu concept  internally or externally and continue to find ways to re-inject such  into Sikhism.  This is a great dis-service and is rotten to the core  from a Sikhism perspective.



Well said. And the saddest part is that many have the Sikhi Baana on and propagate Hindutva shamelessly.

Many are Hindus who pretend to know about Sikhi. Rajneesh Madhok, an esteemed member of this forum who for years talked gleefully about Sikhi is propagating Hindutva now in this very forum and when challenged, he is scared to respond which proves what his own religion teaches  him which is not to confront the truth.

I am still waiting for the responses on the questions asked  to him about his own posts. He shows  up here, posts something and then quietly sneaks out. 

The question arises that when one can not confront the truth then how can one live it or even pretend to?

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

TEJWANT SINGH Ji,

I feel you have great affections for NIRMALAS and Others like that.
Should I take your views like that.?
With regards

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> TEJWANT SINGH Ji,
> 
> I feel you have great affections for NIRMALAS and Others like that.
> Should I take your views like that.?
> ...



Prakash ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have affections towards all, thanks to my only Guru, SGGS. In Sikhi, one should not be afraid to ask questions nor afraid to answer them. I am sure you are aware of it as a Gursikh. I have no idea why you felt offended which is not a Sikhi trait when questioned.
Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 10, 2011)

Perhaps the most pleasurable freindships are one with great contacts,
great fights but still with great affection and love.
                                                                    A QUOTE by ELLIOT

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 10, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> Perhaps the most pleasurable freindships are one with great contacts,
> great fights but still with great affection and love.
> A QUOTE by ELLIOT
> 
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Veer ji sometimes the answer can be as simple as "YES", "NO" and "NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS".  That is how I would answer but then again I can be little less diplomatic than many mundahug.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 12, 2011)

*[SIZE=-1]Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Gurmukhi-Gurmukhi Dictionary[/SIZE]* [SIZE=-0] (1) ਭਵਿੱਖ, ਬੌਧਿਕ ਕਿਰਿਆ। (2)  ਹੈ। ਉਦਾਹਰਣ: ਕੁੰਭਾਰ ਕੇ ਘਰ ਹਾਂਡੀ ਆਛੈ ਰਾਜਾ ਕੇ  ਘਰ ਸਾਂਡੀ ਗੋ॥ {ਟੋਡੀ ਨਾਮ, ੩,  ੧:੧ (718)}। ਗਵਨੁ ਕਰੈਗੋ ਸਗਲੋ ਲੋਗਾ॥ {ਗਉ ੫, ਅਸ  ੪, ੪:੪ (237)}। [/SIZE] 


*[SIZE=-1]Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Gurmukhi-English Dictionary[/SIZE]* [SIZE=-0]* Sk. n.   The earth, the world *[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Gurmukhi-English Data provided by  Harjinder Singh Gill, Santa Monica, CA, USA.[/SIZE] 

*[SIZE=-1]Mahan Kosh Encyclopedia[/SIZE]* [SIZE=-0] ਭਵਿਸ਼੍ਯਤ (ਆਉਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਸਮੇਂ) ਦਾ ਬੋਧਕ. ਗਾ. "ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਤ ਸੁਖ ਪਾਵੈਗੋ". (ਕਾਨ ਅਃ ਮਃ  ੪)। (2)  ਹੈ. ਅਸ੍ਤਿ. "ਰਾਜਾ ਦੇ ਘਰ ਸਾਂਡੀਗੋ". (ਟੋਡੀ ਨਾਮਦੇਵ)। (3) ਸੰ. ਗਊ. ਗਾਂ।  (4)  ਕਿਰਣ. ਰਸ਼੍*ਮਿ. "ਗੋ ਮਰੀਚਿ ਕਿਰਣੱਛਟਾ". (ਸਨਾਮਾ)। (5) ਇੰਦ੍ਰਿਯ। (6) ਬਾਣੀ।  (7)  ਵੇਦ। (8) ਸਰਸ੍ਵਤੀ। (9) ਨੇਤ੍ਰ. ਦ੍ਰਿਸ੍ਟਿ। (10) ਪ੍ਰਿਥਿਵੀ। (11) ਬਿਜਲੀ।  (12)  ਦਿਸ਼ਾ. ਤਰਫ। (13) ਮਾਤਾ। (14) ਜੀਭ. ਰਸਨਾ। (15) ਘੋੜਾ। (16) ਸੂਰਜ। (17)   ਚੰਦ੍ਰਮਾ। (18) ਤੀਰ। (19) ਗਵੈਯਾ. ਗਾਇਕ। (20) ਆਕਾਸ਼। (21) ਸ੍ਵਰਗ। ੨੨ ਜਲ। ੨੩   ਵਜ੍ਰ। ੨੪ ਖਗ. ਪੰਛੀ। ੨੫ ਬਿਰਛ। ੨੬ ਫ਼ਾ. __ ਵ੍ਯ- ਯਦ੍ਯਪਿ. ਅਗਰਚਿ। ੨੭ ਵਿ- ਕਥਨ   ਕਰਤਾ. ਕਹਿਣ ਵਾਲਾ. ਐਸੀ ਦਸ਼ਾ ਵਿੱਚ ਇਸ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਯੋਗ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਦੇ ਅੰਤ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਜੈਸੇ   ਦਰੋਗ਼ਗੋ. ਬਦਗੋ। ੨੮ ਗੁਫ਼ਤਨ ਦਾ ਅਮਰ. ਤੂੰ ਕਹੁ. ਕਥਨ ਕਰ. [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

Prakash.S.Bagga[/quote]


prakash.s.bagga said:


> TEJWANT SINGh Ji,
> 
> You can see that if the word ONKAAR was to be Proper NOUN then the word wouldhave been with a Matra of AUKAD as ONKAARu.
> There is very limited use of the word ONKAAR and that too as PLURAL .
> ...


Veer Prakash.S.Bagga ji Guru Nanak Dev ji used it, Guru Amardas  ji used it, Guru Ramdas ji used it and Guru Arjan Dev ji used it.  I  understand not as much as other words but consistently for sure.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 12, 2011)

AMBARSARIA Ji,
NO Where I deny that the word ONKAAR is not ther in Gurbani.
My plea is that there are two different words one is EKANKAAR and other ONKAAR.
The reference meanings of these two words are certainly different and so far as Pronunciation of the SYMBOL is concerned the word EKANKAAR is more in line with Gurbani than Ik ONKAAR.
My stand is very clear on this point although You all may disagree due to whatever reasons that is different.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Dec 12, 2011)

harry haller said:


> Gurfatehji
> 
> As Ambersariaji has kindly provided us with
> 
> ...



It can lead us to the one who is the source. 'Ikongkar satiguri Prasad' is also a way of remembering HIM. Constant Simran is required. One may practice on 'Mool Mantra' or 'waheguru'. Let us see the intrinsic equivalence of each word of Mool Mantra instead of Beej Mantra .

Ik ong kaar = Waheguru
Satinamu=  Waheguru
Nirbhau= Waheguru
Nirvair = Waheguru
Akalmurt =Waheguru
Ajooni =Waheguru
Saibhung = Waheguru
Gur Prasad=  Obtained thru Guru blessings||1|

Aad sach = Waheguru
Jugad sach= Waheguru
Hey bhi sach = Waheguru
.... Hosi bhi Sach = Waheguru'||1|

Ultimately It is 'waheguru' ......


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 12, 2011)

Taranjeet singh said:


> It can lead us to the one who is the source. 'Ikongkar satiguri Prasad' is also a way of remembering HIM. Constant Simran is required. One may practice on 'Mool Mantra' or 'waheguru'. Let us see the intrinsic equivalence of each word of Mool Mantra instead of Beej Mantra .
> 
> Ik ong kaar = Waheguru
> Satinamu= Waheguru
> ...


 
TARANJEET SINGH Ji,
I agree to your explanation of last four lines related to SACH as WAHiGuRoo but I feel the your explanation to the forstline is not for 
WAHi GuRoo.
This is my understanding about this.You may correct me for this.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Dec 12, 2011)

prakash.s.bagga said:


> TARANJEET SINGH Ji,
> I agree to your explanation of last four lines related to SACH as WAHiGuRoo but I feel the your explanation to the forstline is not for
> WAHi GuRoo.
> This is my understanding about this.You may correct me for this.
> Prakash.S.Bagga



When ever I read your post in response to that I have posted , it automatically reminds me that there is something new to be learnt and relished; Kindly carry on Sir, that you you have to bless me with. 

[My understanding is limited to that has been shaped by Him. I have realized that It is more important now to turn to practice than to theorize lest it is too late.]


----------



## Ishna (Dec 17, 2011)

Reading a totally unrelated thread, this passage caught my eye:



> *f. Patti, Bawan-Akhri, Dukhni Onkar*.
> Patti is a long verse in which each letter of an alphabet is represented  by a stanza.... Onkar also means the beginning of an alphabet...



I have no idea if the 'Onkar' per this quote is the same word as the 'Oankar' discussed in this thread?

It would be interesting if it is, as meaning the very beginning of a stream of variety (ie. the beginning of the alphabet).  The mouth of the stream.  Which alludes to themes like Word / Shabad coming from this stream of variety (alphabet of creation).

On the other hand it might be that the transliteration into poxy old English just looks the same but the author of the original quote is referring to an altogether separate word and my imagination is getting the better of me!

Gurfatehji.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 17, 2011)

Ishna said:


> Reading a totally unrelated thread, this passage caught my eye:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ishna Bhain there is quite a variety of similar sound constructs in Sanskrit.  The symbol at the start as in below is two words.   number one and the second a word composed of parts as shown,

*ੴ* 1, E Aqy >

*‘iek EAMkwr’*  Ik▫oaŉkār   

_
_ 


> [URL="http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.dictionary?Param=%E0%A9%B4"]ੴ





> Ik▫oaŉkār
> 
> ੴ ਉੱਚਾਰਨ ਵੇਲੇ ਇਸ ਦੇ  ਤਿੰਨ ਹਿੱਸੇ ਕੀਤੇ ਜਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ: ੧, ਓ ਅਤੇ *> * ; ਇਸ ਦਾ ਪਾਠ ਹੈ 'ਇਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ'। ਤਿੰਨ  ਹਿੱਸੇ ਵੱਖੋ ਵੱਖਰੇ ਉੱਚਾਰਿਆਂ ਇਉਂ ਬਣਦੇ ਹਨ: ੧ = ਇੱਕ। ਓ = ਓਅੰ। *> ** = ਕਾਰ।*


[/URL]*

*Sat Sri Akal.*

*


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 17, 2011)

*Sorry but we need an English summary for the previous post. Otherwise we are spamming. *


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Dec 17, 2011)

Spnadmn
You need not post the reply without my permission. I_n case you intend to post the same please seek my formal and prior approval._

Ishna ji,
Your query is not related to Ik-oangKaar or Akkal Purukh. It is related to 31 Raagas that are prescribed in bani in Guru Granth sahib. It is popularly called as 'Dakhni Oankaar'. It is primarily employed with the bani of Guru Nanak dev ji [Mehl-I] .
So far as I recall the first Line of this particular bani appears on page/Ang 929 that begins with '_Oankaar Brahma Utpat._'..in Ramkali Mehl-1 Dakhni Oankar. 
Ambarsaria ji,
Hope you can also look into this.
Thanks


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 17, 2011)

Taranjeet singh said:


> Spnadmn
> .......... _In case you intend to post the same please seek my formal and prior approval._


_Taranjeet Singh ji can you explain what you mean and if it relates to others who may quote your posted material in replies._

I thought as part of sharing no one needs anyone's permission to quote and reply, etc.

Thank you.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 17, 2011)

Taranjeet singh said:


> It can lead us to the one who is the source. 'Ikongkar satiguri Prasad' is also a way of remembering HIM. Constant Simran is required. One may practice on 'Mool Mantra' or 'waheguru'. Let us see the intrinsic equivalence of each word of Mool Mantra instead of Beej Mantra .
> 
> Ik ong kaar = Waheguru
> Satinamu=  Waheguru
> ...



Taranjeet ji,

Guru Fateh.

I beg to differ with you. If all these words meant Vaheguru, then we would have 1429 pages of SGGS, our only Guru, filled with  just one word which is not the case. It is too simplistic and abstract in my opinion because SGGS is our only road map.

If I am not mistaken, at times we dwell so much in our personal devotion that we tend to ignore the  Gurmat intellect which our Gurus teach us and they also teach us how to grasp it and practice on it.

Mool Mantar for me is the Blue Print of Sikhi, the Jap its foundation and the rest of the SGGS is left for the individual's quest. By that I mean, it depends on the person what kind of mansions they want to build with their desire, thirst, perseverance,dedication and devotion.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

Ps: SPNADMIN did not mean any harm but as many do not know Gurmurkhi, there are some rules we have to follow in the forum. Sending personal messages for rules not being followed becomes impractical as the Sevadars in here have a lot in their platter to deal with.


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Dec 18, 2011)

Tejwant Singh ji,

Your comments are appreciated. Let spnadmin re-adjust this post wherever it fits in best. After all he/she is also doing sewa.

I have read your post in regard to your experience with Simran and japna etc and  you have some mind-set about this. In any case I would like to know as to which part of the post you are not comfortable with except with the points stated above. We may not converge on certain points but the divergence should also be limited after all we are all sikhs.

Before I indulge in further I would like to know:

 What are your specific views : 

1.Should sikhs stop doing simran and japna.Is it against our religion?
2. Should we only read bani and interpret it and realize by reading only? 
3. Should we always be listening to Katha Keertan and not have some private moments  with him alone; Is sikhi against this?
4. Does it really matter if we carry on as it suits us.?
5.I am neither a puritan nor cynical. But there should be some beginning somewhere at some point of time. Bani is fairly voluminous. Having understood the essence ,It is important to practice it also. What are your specific views on this?

We all have our opinions and we may differ but let us enjoy our self where we converge. 
Let me clarify with an example. With due regards to Ambarsaria ji, I am not at all in agreement the way Sukhmani sahib is being done here.To me it seems as if I am misled. I made my point twice. 

But it shall be very embarrassing for me and to Ambarsaria ji [I shall now address you as Amber, if it is O.K. and please confirm as well] as well if I try to harp on the same tune time and again. Let him do that he is doing. All I can do is to not involve myself in any argument that may be painful to both of us. In this democratic set up we have right to opinion and to express the same in a pleasant manner.
You have asked me to state as to what should we do with 1429 pages. I am too young to suggest anything. Ask this question to Guru ji sincerely from the core of your heart and all your queries would be answered. He is too kind and listens, it is my experience.

Ambarsara ji,

You are free to quote my posts for discussion purpose. I had very specifically addressed spnadmin to not to re post the post that has been deleted. We are all sikhs and the moments we are together should be enjoyed. Life is too short for arguments. Let Guru Sahib bless us all .


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 18, 2011)

Taranjeet Singh ji some comments.


			
				Taranjeet Singh said:
			
		

> Ambarsaria ji [I shall  now address you as Amber, if it is O.K. and please confirm as well] as  well if I try to harp on the same tune time and again.


_You can address me as Ambar if I can address you as Twinkle_ (_if it is O.K. and please confirm as well_)lol  peacesign.  You are very legalistic I am straight shooter at times less than astute or polite.


			
				Taranjeet Singh said:
			
		

> Ambarsara ji,
> 
> You are free to quote my posts for discussion purpose. I had very specifically addressed spnadmin to  not to re post the post that has been deleted. We are all sikhs and the  moments we are together should be enjoyed. Life is too short for  arguments. Let Guru Sahib bless us all .


Thanks and I fully agree about life too short.

I let you be the judge but I smell disagreement or holding back comments in your answer.  This is not helpful to me in my initiative with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji banis.  I don't want to be corrected on the last day, I rather clear things up and stop making mistakes as soon as possible.  Please help through private messaging if you so choose.  I know you have turned off Private Messaging receipt and you may have perfectly valid reasons.  I could use upfront comments even if painful or direct.

From your posts I  sense you are learned, respectful and co-operative.  I have no doubt you may be even more in tune with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji than me.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Dec 18, 2011)

Taranjeet Singh ji,

Guru fateh.

You write:



> I have read your post in regard to your experience with Simran and japna etc and  you have some mind-set about this. In any case I would like to know as to which part of the post you are not comfortable with except with the points stated above. We may not converge on certain points but the divergence should also be limited after all we are all sikhs.


I beg to differ with you. It is not the question of mind-set. It  is the question of what our Gurus mean when they use the words *Simran and Naam Japnah*.

For me the words mean to develop Gurmat thought process, through singing, listening, reading, studying, understanding and practicing Gurbani in our lives, so goodness can be bred within to be shared with others. Neither of them (*Simran and Naam Japnah*) mean parroting or chanting to me. Brahmins/Pundits used  to do that. They used to repeat OM again and again and they also urged their followers to do the same because they were the only one authorised to read their holy books. They had the monopoly over them.  

But thanks to Guru Nanak, he showed us how mechanical rituals are futile and useless and opened his thought process to all so everyone could enjoy the Amrit.

Ambarsaria ji has also shared some valueable information about the meanings of the above words in discussion from the Mahan kosh. I am sure  you must have read it and I happen to agree with those definitions.



> Before I indulge in further I would like to know:
> 
> What are your specific views :





> 1.Should sikhs stop doing simran and japna.Is it against our religion?


Read my answer above. You have to understand what Simran and Naam Japnah means and it is NOT parroting one or 2 words according to Sikhi.



> 2. Should we only read bani and interpret it and realize by reading only?


Read the answer above.



> 3. Should we always be listening to Katha Keertan and not have some private moments  with him alone; Is sikhi against this?japposatnamwaheguru:


Ik Ong Kaar is omnipresent, so with every breath we take, it is a private moment with The Source for me. How can Sikhi be against the omnipresence? Please explain because it is in no one's hands. I am a bit confused at your assertion.



> 4. Does it really matter if we carry on as it suits us.?


First of all I am confused by what you said. Suit what and about what? Are you talking about your feelings or are you talking about learning from 1429 pages of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, our only Guru? 

If what suits you turns out be a mechanical meaningless ritual, then you should dwell into Gurbani and find the answers for yourself about it  because that is what Guru Nanak told us not to indulge into. Only you can find your own answers with the help of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji,our  only Guru.

Please read the following described by Ambarsaria ji from Jap Pauri 21. It clearly explains what suits us is not valid. Now, if you have a different interpretation about it, please share with us so we can all learn from it.

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/jap-j...gians-japji-sahib-21st-pauree.html#post158152



> 5.I am neither a puritan nor cynical. But there should be some beginning somewhere at some point of time. Bani is fairly voluminous. Having understood the essence ,It is important to practice it also. What are your specific views on this?


Pardon my ignorance. I have  no idea what you mean by the above. Please elaborate is with the help of Gurbani.



> We all have our opinions and we may differ but let us enjoy our self where we converge.


I totally agree. That is why Sikhi is  the journey of the individual and it is important for us as individuals to find out what the words in the Gurbani mean and what message our Gurus are sending to us in order to become better beings.



> Let me clarify with an example. With due regards to Ambarsaria ji, I am not at all in agreement the way Sukhmani sahib is being done here.To me it seems as if I am misled. I made my point twice.


Well, if you see Ambarsaria's ji remarks, he always asks for the input from all, and the basic idea of this forum is to express yourself even if you disagree with someone but explain your personal views first rather than lancing questions about someone else's interpretation. 

Once again, the best way would be to give your own interpretation through which all of us can learn the same Shabad from your angle. I have always been doing the same myself on many Shabads posted by Ambarsaria ji and/or others. I will be waiting for your own interpretation of  the Shabads that have been posted by Ambarsaria ji. In this case we can all learn from all.



> But it shall be very embarrassing for me and to Ambarsaria ji [I shall now address you as Amber, if it is O.K. and please confirm as well] as well if I try to harp on the same tune time and again. Let him do that he is doing. All I can do is to not involve myself in any argument that may be painful to both of us. In this democratic set up we have right to opinion and to express the same in a pleasant manner.


Interaction is not an argument but a learning process. Offer what the message of the Shabad is to you. This is the only way we can learn from each other. This is the reason our Gurus did not put this beautiful poetry into prose to explain it to us and hand it over a platter. They left the interpretation on us and poetry's interpretation changes with time due to our own life experiences and our personal inner development that life offers us.



> You have asked me to state as to what should we do with 1429 pages. I am too young to suggest anything. Ask this question to Guru ji sincerely from the core of your heart and all your queries would be answered. He is too kind and listens, it is my experience.


Thanks for prejudging me. Your above post implies that I do not listen to Guru ji. Only you do and you are the only one who holds the "magic key".

When Guru Nanak said that each of the people can be good in their respective religions provided they do good to all humankind, it meant he did not prejudge anyone but gave the benefit of the doubt to all. This is the true Sikhi trait and the wonderful learning process that Guru Nanak and other Gurus gave us the tools to, so that we could make our inner progress towards THE ONE.

So, I will be waiting for your own interpretation about Sukhmani. Amarpal ji has also given his interpretation which you can find in this forum. More the merrier.

Do not hesitate to share what Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, our only Guru shows you. Vand kei chaknah also applies to the soul food.

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Dec 18, 2011)

Taran Tej Akash Saran Ji If you infuse Gods Name you should get lost in wonder at reading Ik ,that way you will never ever reach the next word, so there is nothing to review, except us and you .


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 18, 2011)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Taran Tej Akash Saran Ji If you infuse Gods Name you should get lost in wonder at reading Ik ,that way you will never ever reach the next word, so there is nothing to review, except us and you .



So are you saying that the 6 Gurus whose bani lives in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were either rambling on needlessly, or pulling our leg with all that excess verbiage?

:angryyoungkaur:
Folks it is time again to get on point or serious surgery is scheduled for this thread. I have been amazed, in some cases not happily amazed, at what I am reading. Thank you.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 18, 2011)

Taranjeet Singh ji comment on an item that I did not note when I first replied to your post.





			
				Taranjeet Singh said:
			
		

> Let me clarify with an example. With due regards to Ambarsaria ji, _I am  not at all in agreement the way Sukhmani sahib is being done here.To me  it seems as if I am misled__. _I made my point twice.


_Taranjeet Singh ji it bothers me that I am not understanding of what you are saying.  Please help me and explain how I may be misleading you._ _You should know I have no agenda but do have style of my own and understanding so reflecting.  If I can improve I so would._ _I do muy best to be true given the sources and my own intellect but it means nothing if the end result is as you stated.  

Please also clarify what point you made twice that I did not address and you then contested!

_Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Dec 19, 2011)

> So are you saying that the 6 Gurus whose bani lives in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were either rambling on needlessly, or pulling our leg with all that excess verbiage?


 
Spnadmin Ji 

I noticed I started getting mentally stuck in or at Ik ,as I was trying to find my Jap.It is a personal matter and I shared it just incase anyone could relate to it.Our first Guru started with Ik,from the moment he spoke Ik, he knew it could not be explained even with oceans of ink and no matter how many pages Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji contains it is still the brief introduction of Ik.For those without intuition put it this way, every Shabad starts with Ik and once you have read them all of them where does it take you, is it not back to Ik.


----------



## Harry Haller (Dec 19, 2011)

spnadmin said:


> So are you saying that the 6 Gurus whose bani lives in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were either rambling on needlessly, or pulling our leg with all that excess verbiage?
> 
> :angryyoungkaur:
> Folks it is time again to get on point or serious surgery is scheduled for this thread. I have been amazed, in some cases not happily amazed, at what I am reading. Thank you.



See what happens when your not around adminji,  I would like to say that Spji and myself have been on our best behavour japposatnamwaheguru: lol


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Dec 19, 2011)

*Ik Onkar*

_Ik Onkār_, a Sikh symbol ( ੴ)
*Ik Onkar* ( ੴ, ਇੱਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ; *Ikk Ōankār*  is a central to sikh tenets and philosophy. It is a symbol of unity of God in sikhism and is found on all religious scriptures and places like Gurudwaras.  Derived from Punjabi, Ik Onkār is the first phrase in Mool Mantra.. referring to the existence of "one constant " taken to mean "one God". It is  consequently a part of Jap Ji sahib, the Sikh morning prayer, It is a combination of two characters, the numeral, Ikk (one) and the first letter of the word Onkar (Constant taken to mean God) - which also happens to be the first letter of Gurmukhi script. 
*
In Mul Mantra*

  It was also the opening phrase of Mool Mantra, present as opening phrase in Guru Granth sahib, and the first composition Of Guru Nanak.  

*Simplified transliteration:* ikk ōnkār satināmu karatā puraku nirapǎ'u niraver akāl mūrat ajūnī sepàng gurprasād
*
* One Universal Creator, the Name is Truth, Creative Being (personified), Without fear, Without hatred, timeless Image, beyond birth and Self-existent by the Guru's Grace.
 
*Read More*…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ik_Onkar *[Note *text of this is edited to remove hyperlinks..]

Hi spnadmin /Harry ji and Dear spji ..I shall also try to be a good boy and thanks for bringing the thread on Track.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Dec 19, 2011)

Veera if I may call you that,how can we review the reviewer,our firstGuru knew what he was going to say before he spoke the first word,he did not improvise it one word at a time,so from the first if we need some intuition of where we are going with it or else we are just reading pages of a book.

Harry I never behave ,you speak for yourself lol


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 19, 2011)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Spnadmin Ji
> 
> _I noticed I started getting mentally stuck in or at Ik _,as I was trying to find my Jap.It is a personal matter and I shared it just incase anyone could relate to it.Our first Guru started with Ik,from the moment he spoke Ik, he knew it could not be explained even with oceans of ink and no matter how many pages Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji contains it is still the brief introduction of Ik.For those without intuition put it this way, every _Shabad starts with Ik and once you have read them all of them where does it take you, is it not back to Ik._









Veer sp ji can you help me I am stuck just looking at the Alphabet above specially the letter A which can mean Ik/One.  Once I read anything in English I always come back to the Alphabet, do you.  cheerleader
mundahug


----------



## Harry Haller (Dec 19, 2011)

Ambarsariaji, 

Very good point!

Spji, look at this way, and it was Ambarsariaji's post that pointed me, you are correct, the essence is indeed Ek, the rest of the SGGS teaches you how to tune into it.................


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 19, 2011)

harry haller said:


> Ambarsariaji,
> 
> Very good point!
> 
> Spji, look at this way, and it was Ambarsariaji's post that pointed me, you are correct, the essence is indeed Ek, the rest of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji teaches you how to tune into it.................


Corollary is the following,

"Say we know the Alphabet, does it imply we understand everything written using that Alphabet.  I sure would love to have so little to do having learned the Alphabet at 7 years old.  It seems rest of life is just wasted in terms of learning anything written in English  :blushh:  yellingmunda  if Alphabet was all I needed to know"

I do agree with sp ji on one point.  Namely it is impossible to say whether reading, writing is the only way to learn of the creator.  I personally would find such preposterous to dictate so!  We know how we do things and how we see results.  It is almost impossible to generalize how everyone does so!

Sharing one's understanding, limited as it may, does need some kind of communication and perhaps the easiest is talking, listening, writing, reading for ones with availability of such faculties.

mundahug


----------



## Harry Haller (Dec 19, 2011)

Spji, 

Just to add something to the cauldron, I know you are a big fan of mediation, who bother? lol


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Dec 19, 2011)

> , I know you are a big fan of mediation, who bother?


 
Veer Ji I'm a fan of it because before our Guru spoke he did samaadhi ,I don't meditate mine is a semi stupor of sorts,I try to bring on mind death actually, but I would not recommend it for all,most our each Shabad are self contained treasure,our Guru's word is not compiled in a step by step format or 101 things to do format it is in a heart format only so it could have been longer than 1429 pages or less that is the compilation of truth the size was circumstantial, what is essential is to imbibe the truth of it ,as that is the purpose of it.

Vada Veer Ji I did not really mean it like that,what I meant was I try to do full mantar but seem to stop there for some reason.It can't be like the alphabet as it is numerical lolbut anyway with such a short jap I never mess it up.


----------

