Koran, For Research Or Keeping In Home

[Pheena]

Does it surprise you that Waheguru is saying through the Guru that Ram Rahim, Puran, Koran are not to be believed in?

117681[/snapback]

Yes it does because God cannot discriminate, what reason does God have to say that He himself does not belive in Ram Rahim, Puran and Koran? I thought the Divine was beyond religion and is complete in himself?

118141[/snapback]

This is more your concept of God that has to believe that all ways towards him are acceptable rather than what the Gurus taught us. So if we follow Pheenamat rather than Gurmat then where Gurbani criticises idol worship then those verses cannot be from Waheguru?

118153[/snapback]

Veer ji slow down, How is this "my" concept of God? Is Akaal Purak beyond the lable of Religions or is he biased? Is he not Complete or Pooran in himself? Does he Discriminate? Doesn't his Grace fall upon all? My question remains, why does God need to say that? Gurbani critisize Idols for the same reason Gurbani critisizes empty rituals. I am sure you have heard the story of Dhanna Bhagat.

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

Eh...to each their own:

You could also translate "mat" in the Raam Rahim line to mean paths or philosophies (like the mat in Gurmat) so the line could mean that all the other religions profess various paths but I (Guru Sahib) do not believe in them or that all the paths all talk of different paths from each other (depending on how you percieve the line).

The crucial word in the Katha presented it the word "Bhed" in the Simrat Shaastar line. Bhed, as per the translation given here means "Secret, difference, mystery, contrast", lending credence to the view (my perspective) that Guru Sahib states The various texts state many things (things representing the meanings presented in the quotes) and I (Guru Sahib) do not recognize them.

Paath is not a cookie-cutter approach. You can do Nitnem for years and suddenly, the line you thought meant one thing could suddenly reveal a meaning totally different then before. So to each their own...

[>Bikramjit Singh<]

Does it surprise you that Waheguru is saying through the Guru that Ram Rahim, Puran, Koran are not to be believed in?

117681[/snapback]

Yes it does because God cannot discriminate, what reason does God have to say that He himself does not belive in Ram Rahim, Puran and Koran? I thought the Divine was beyond religion and is complete in himself?

118141[/snapback]

This is more your concept of God that has to believe that all ways towards him are acceptable rather than what the Gurus taught us. So if we follow Pheenamat rather than Gurmat then where Gurbani criticises idol worship then those verses cannot be from Waheguru?

118153[/snapback]

Veer ji slow down, How is this "my" concept of God? Is Akaal Purak beyond the lable of Religions or is he biased? Is he not Complete or Pooran in himself? Does he Discriminate? Doesn't his Grace fall upon all? My question remains, why does God need to say that? Gurbani critisize Idols for the same reason Gurbani critisizes empty rituals. I am sure you have heard the story of Dhanna Bhagat.

118172[/snapback]

The belief that Waheguru is beyond religions and labels can be stretched to means that Waheguru is beyond Gurbani. You may say that Gurbani does not equal Sikhi, so it could be that in your view Waheguru is beyond Sikhi. The argument then is that you need to be just spiritual and a good person and you automaticaly have Waheguru's grace. You asked whether Waheguru's grace doesn't fall in all. Neither you or I have ay idea on who grace will fall. Just as we cannot second guess where Waheguru's grace is to fall then we cannot also try and ask questions such as 'Why would Waheguru say not to believe in Ram/Rahim' Gurbani tells us that only those who are equal to Him can truely know Him.

You have approached Gurbani with preconceived notions. The main one being that Gurbani criticises empty rituals and idol worship but supports the underlying beliefs such as the belief in Ram/Rahim. Therefore when you come across a Gurbani verse which has traditionally always been understood to criticise Ram/Rahim then you feel the need to re-interpret in in order to bring it into line with your preconceived notions. The question I would ask is, Is it possible to believe in say Rahim and Koran and still not indulge in many of the things Gurbani criticises. Gurbani criticises fasting but fasting is one of five main ways that worshipppers of Rahim worship Him.

[Pheena]

The belief that Waheguru is beyond religions and labels can be stretched to means that Waheguru is beyond Gurbani.

God is beyond religion. Gurbani is the Word of the Guru and it is this Word that is our guide, the Guide itself points towards the goal, itself is not the goal. The Guru guides you towards him. The Guide (call it religion or Guru) is not the Destination, for the Destinatin is beyond both.

jy hau jwxw AwKw nwhI khxw kQnu n jweI ]

Even knowing God, I cannot describe Him; He cannot be described in words.

He is beyond words, and Gurbani consists of Words. The words themselve say he is beyond words.

You may say that Gurbani does not equal Sikhi, so it could be that in your view Waheguru is beyond Sikhi.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here, please clarify.

The argument then is that you need to be just spiritual and a good person and you automaticaly have Waheguru's grace. You asked whether Waheguru's grace doesn't fall in all. Neither you or I have ay idea on who grace will fall. Just as we cannot second guess where Waheguru's grace is to fall then we cannot also try and ask questions such as 'Why would Waheguru say not to believe in Ram/Rahim'  Gurbani tells us that only those who are equal to Him can truely know Him.

Forgive me but do you not call Akaal as 'Kirpadhaar' does he pick and choose on whom the grace should fall, if so then he must dislike and like his creations. Is this not duality? which further means he is not content or at peace and is an emotional entity.

His grace showers only on those within the gaze of His compassionate vision. On whom does this compassion descend but those who prepare themselves for it through their efforts? Understand that in everyday life the meaning of a compassionate look is quite different. Does He too show partiality? Is He kind to His own but lets the rest be? Does He select a few to shower with His grace while He leaves others to suffer? We cannot associate God with such injustices. Things would become meaningless if a sinner might receive His grace while a saint is deprived of it. There would be no sense in doing anything. No, this is not the meaning of the compassionate look. It is not that He chooses someone that suits His whim or fancy, or that He favors those who flatter and sing His praises. His grace showers on all, but there are some who have turned their pots upside down, so that they never get filled. If your pot is upright, it is bound to be filled. And don't imagine that your upright pot caused the grace to shower! Grace showers all the time.

Nanak says the filling takes place by His compassion, but some effort you have to make -- by placing your vessel in the proper position to receive.

And you will have to see that there are no cracks or holes in it, that it is not lying upside down or slanting so that the grace cannot reach the mouth of your vessel and enter it.

His grace pours on everyone incessantly. It is you who are not standing upright to receive it or in your twisting and turning, it slides off you.

There is an apparent contradiction: if you are deprived of grace you have only yourself to blame, but if you attain grace it is only because of Him. You attain through Him, lose through your own self. When following the path of surrender it is imperative to remember that if I am losing, it is I who am wrong; if I am gaining, it is entirely by His grace. This way the ego cannot be fattened, because there is no space within for it to expand -- or even to exist. He who has no ego finds that God is within him.

You have approached Gurbani with preconceived notions. The main one being that Gurbani criticises empty rituals and idol worship but supports the underlying beliefs such as the belief in Ram/Rahim. Therefore when you come across a Gurbani verse which has traditionally always been understood to criticise Ram/Rahim then you feel the need to re-interpret in in order to bring it into line with your preconceived notions. The question I would ask is, Is it possible to believe in say Rahim and Koran and still not indulge in many of the things Gurbani criticises. Gurbani criticises fasting but fasting is one of five main ways that worshipppers of Rahim worship Him.

To me these preconceived notions are a method in understanding a portion, rather a small portion of who and what god is. For example: Someone comes to you and say God is full of Hatred. You will object to that and enter the discussion with the preconeived notion that God does not hate, rather he is Compassionate, he is 'nirvair' and you will further try to explain to the other person thru the approach of Karma or learning a lesson..etc. Would u consider this preconceived notion of him being compassionate as a wrong? Did i not do the same thing, i entered into the discussion with the preconceived notion that God is not Baised and is beyond Religon. Mind you veer ji, these notions are not made up by me, instead these attributes of the divine have been spoken by many saints.

Hope to hear from you so i may learn few things. Forgive me for taking a bit long to reply. :wub:

[singh_khalsa]

guru is gurbani and is waheguru!

waheguru gur shabadh hai

[Pheena]

guru is gurbani and is waheguru!

waheguru gur shabadh hai

118987[/snapback]

So then the Word is God? meaning he consists of 4 letters and few vowels? Or is he beyond the Word and the Word points towards him.

[Khalsa_Girl_1]

I once had Koran written in Gurmukhi - I bought it for my studies.

117327[/snapback]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

just one thing AussieSikh: Gurmukhi is the scripture which was written by our 10 Guru ji's. ....im sry..i really hate it when i correct Ppl, cuz when i do i sound so aggressive. but i dont want to sound that way...i just want you to be aware of the fact that only the scriptures which were written by our 10 Guru ji's Gurmukhi.

and it is good to learn about other religions, but the one thing we have to remember is that we cant matha tek to other scriptures. (we can bow our heads in respect though)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

[Khalsa_Girl_1]

I once had Koran written in Gurmukhi - I bought it for my studies.

117327[/snapback]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

just one thing AussieSikh: Gurmukhi is the scripture which was written by our 10 Guru ji's. ....im sry..i really hate it when i correct Ppl, cuz when i do i sound so aggressive. but i dont want to sound that way...i just want you to be aware of the fact that only the scriptures which were written by our 10 Guru ji's Gurmukhi.

and it is good to learn about other religions, but the one thing we have to remember is that we cant matha tek to other scriptures. (we can bow our heads in respect though)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

[Balait_da_Sher]

Khalsa Girl, Gurmukhi isnt a Scriputre, it is a language/Script. some people use the words Gurmukhi and Punjabi interchangeably and i think AussieSikh may have done the same.

I think , He means he brought a koran which was translated into Punjabi.

[Khalsa_Girl_1]

I once had Koran written in Gurmukhi - I bought it for my studies.

117327[/snapback]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

just one thing AussieSikh: Gurmukhi is the scripture which was written by our 10 Guru ji's. ....im sry..i really hate it when i correct Ppl, cuz when i do i sound so aggressive. but i dont want to sound that way...i just want you to be aware of the fact that only the scriptures which were written by our 10 Guru ji's Gurmukhi.

and it is good to learn about other religions, but the one thing we have to remember is that we cant matha tek to other scriptures. (we can bow our heads in respect though)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

118996[/snapback]

i wasnt clear in that sry... we can only call our the scriptures whcih are written in our Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Gurmukhi. yes, we have to respect other Ppl's religious scriptures, but we shouldnt call it Gurmukhi. i know what you meant. you probably wanted to say: "I once had Koran translated in Punjabi." sry if i sounded rude...i didnt mean to be. please forgive me i offended you in any way.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.