Usage of satguru phrase and status of krishan in gurbani

[Guest Akirtghan]

^^ now i wait for a taksali to come :wub:

[Bijla Singh]

In gurbani, any amrit refers to amrit ras, naam amrit any mahapursh will tell you this. You show me an reference from gurbani- where gurbani talks about khanda da amrit/charan amrit.

Amrit has many meanings in Gurbani. It refers to milk, food etc. Amrit of Guru Sahib is Naam. Amrit that exists inside is revealed only by receiving Naam from the Guru. Every Sant Mahapurash had to take Khanday Ki Pahul before reaching any spiritual stage. If Naam is not obtained from the Guru in form of Amrit then Jot of Waheguru will not appear from within. Amrit that comes from Dasam Duar is a kalaa of Naam Amrit. I have never experienced it but this is what I have understood from Sikhi. Khanday Ki Pahul is given by Satguru hence whenever Gurbani talks about getting Amrit from Guru, it refers to Khanday Ki Pahul. Amrit that exists within is not obtained but appear because of Naam.

All bhagats were mukht before sri guru nanak dev ji, stop your tat khalsa progaganda, dont you get tired of same lies lies and lies?

You failed to answer the most important questions. I repeat them here:

ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਸਦਾ ਸਦਾ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨ ਜਾਇ ॥

So Satguru is out of the cycle of death and birth and your question of "before Guru Sahib" is mute. Satguru has always existed. Gurbani says:

ਤੂ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਆਪਿ ਆਪੇ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ॥ ਸੁਰਿ ਨਰ ਸਾਧਿਕ ਸਿਧ ਸਿਖ ਸੇਵੰਤ ਧੁਰਹ ਧੁਰੁ ॥

Bhatts are praising Guru Sahib by saying that Guru Sahib is Satguru of four yugas. This means that prior to 1469, Satguru Nanak Sahib Ji existed in the form of Nirgun Saroop and blessed bhagats with muktee. Keep in mind that there is only One Satguru in the world.

ਇਕੋ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਜਾਗਤਾ ਹੋਰੁ ਜਗੁ ਸੂਤਾ ਮੋਹਿ ਪਿਆਸਿ ॥ and

ਇਕਾ ਬਾਣੀ ਇਕੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਇਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ॥

The status of Satguru belongs to Guru Sahib only. No other human or any other being has this status. Guru Nanak Sahib appeared in this world in sargun saroop and status of Satguru was already given to him as is clear from Vaars.

I ask you to tell me who else is Satguru? What is the reference from Gurbani or Vaars? If Bhagats are praising their own human gurus in Bani then we must agree that Guru Granth Sahib includes praises of human beings which is not correct. Guru Sahib (5th Nanak) refused to add praises of Mohammad for the reason being that Gurbani will only praise Waheguru and none else. Therefore, Bhagats are either praising Waheguru or Satguru Nanak Sahib and there is no difference between them i.e. "Gur Parmeshar Eko Jaan.." and "Gur Parmeshar Poojeeye..".

Here is something more for you.

ਸਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਸਭ ਊਪਰਿ ॥ ਕਰੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਸਤਜੁਗਿ ਜਿਨਿ ਧ੍ਰੂ ਪਰਿ ॥

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਪ੍ਰਹਲਾਦ ਭਗਤ ਉਧਰੀਅੰ ॥ ਹਸੋ ਕਮਲ ਮਾਥੇ ਪਰ ਧਰੀਅੰ ॥

It is clear from the Shabad above that Guru Nanak Sahib did kirpa on Dhroo and Prehlaad and blessed them with muktee in Satyug. Hence only a Satguru that is Guru Nanak Sahib can give muktee. Humans are incapable of that. Bhagats whose bani is included in Guru Granth Sahib all became disciples of Guru Sahib. Read Bhagat Bani Ithihaas first. It is evident from their own Bani. Gurmukhi words, grammar and way of writing makes it clear that Bhagats were familiar with Gurmat and its script. Otherwise we would be seeing different style of writing and grammar in Bhagat Bani. Gurdwara Sahib in Ayodheya is the mark of event when Bhagats met Guru Sahib. This is where Bhagat Ramanand Ji said, "Satgur Mein Balhaari Tor...". You may not agree but you have no answers.

Back to the topic. Twareekh written by Bhai Chanda Singh Firozpuri, Gohaj Pothi and Das Gur Jot written by Giani Mall Singh prove that women took Amrit in 1699. Bhatt Vahis also prove that Amrit should be given to women and they must be named "Kaur". Twareekh Guru Khalsa Part 10 mentions many women who took Amrit. On page 159, there are two sakhis. On 160, there is a sakhi of Bibi Deep Kaur who was an Amritdhari. Rani Sada Kaur, mother in-law of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, was also Amritdhari. It is written in Guru Prem Padd Parkash that in 1702 Guru Sahib married Mata Sahib Devan and gave her Amrit. She became Mata Sahib Kaur. Sant Attar Singh gave Amrit to women equally. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji gave Amrit to women and rejected giving Kirpan amrit to women. Read Gurbani Paath Darshan written by him.

Do you have reference that proves that Khanday Ki Pahul must be given to men only?

[Guest Akirtghan]

namastang and bijla singh, you guys are both talking about essentially the same thing when it comes down to bhagats

[00gurpreet_singh00]

Here is tuk from gurbani:

Nau Nidh Amrit Prab Ka Naam, Dehi Meh Iska Visraam ||

Nau Nidha, riddi sidhiya da malak , amrit ras , prab ka "naam" , usda bisraam deh vich hai.

Naam amrit- prab ka naam.

Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji its not a deh roop he is jot nirankari saroop, reason i said bhagats were mukht before sri guru nanak dev ji is because these agyani thinks, bhagats had to come back to take amrit from guru sahib so that they can be "mukht". If one beleives sri guru nanak dev ji, sikh is anadi-naturally Sikhi is ever Sanatan(eternal) cannot be bound to socio-religious boundaries unlike other dharams....!

Sri Ram Chandra is a Sikh from Satyug so as Krishan so as Rishi Balmik so as Raja Janak So as Bhagat Kabir So as Bhagat Farid , Bhagat Namdev, Ravidas, Bhagat Pipa, Jain, Sadhna, Gangka Papan -------- list just goes on and on and on- infinite........!!!!!!!!!!!!

If sri guru nanak dev ji is nirgun saroopi nirankari jot and is anandi, then by same logic, ram chandar, krishan being hari avtar, all the bhagats avtars, raja janak nit avtar who also came from nirgun saroopi nirankari jot are anandi as well, you cannot claim that bhagats had to come back as singhs and take amrit so that they can be mukht. this twisted logic is only used by sharia panthis, agyani.

Sikhi is not for me or you to define, it's Guru Sahib sikhi, and seeing that guru sahib is sutantar, guru sahib can make any maryada they wish and bhagats abide by it.

[N30S1NGH]

Amrit has many meanings in Gurbani. It refers to milk, food etc. Amrit of Guru Sahib is Naam. Amrit that exists inside is revealed only by receiving Naam from the Guru. Every Sant Mahapurash had to take Khanday Ki Pahul before reaching any spiritual stage. If Naam is not obtained from the Guru in form of Amrit then Jot of Waheguru will not appear from within. Amrit that comes from Dasam Duar is a kalaa of Naam Amrit. I have never experienced it but this is what I have understood from Sikhi. Khanday Ki Pahul is given by Satguru hence whenever Gurbani talks about getting Amrit from Guru, it refers to Khanday Ki Pahul. Amrit that exists within is not obtained but appear because of Naam.

Khanda ki pahul/charan pahul/kirpan amrit is outer amrit, its physical intiation, parsad you get from khanda ki pahul is naam amrit. Which is mentioned over and over again in shabad guru sometimes in form of amrit naam , sometimes in form of gurmantar. This is been sidhant of guru maharaj. You still dodged my question, i still ask you to show me khanda ki pahul or even charan pahul outer intiation mentioned in gurbani...you wont find it because the whole essence of amrit is naam amrit...maryada is same, rehat is same, kakars are same, naam is same, amrit is same just different forms of outer amrit - khanda amrit, charan pahul, kirpan amrit all were parvan in guru ghar.

I respond to your post in detail afterwards.

[00gurpreet_singh00]

When it comes down to it, I am agyani, I got no problem admitting it, true gyan is brahmgian and I dont have it. Do you? You are basing your reasoning on what you have been told by Baba Jagjit Singh, I am basing mine on what I have learned from mahamurkhs katha and steeks. Do either of us know who is right? No. My only problem is you calling everyone that doesnt agree with you agyani or shariapanthi, Sant Gurbachan Singh states that some bhagats came back on form of panj pyarey...are you saying they were sharia panthi or agyani too? Maybe you should ask Baba Jagjit Singh if they were agyani, I know that they wouldnt say so. Would mahapurkhs debate these topics with eachother and call eachother agyani? I highly doubt it...then considering that you consider yourself a student of Baba Jagjit Singh why do you come and call everyone that doesnt agree with you agyani/shariapanthi?

[N30S1NGH]

When it comes down to it, I am agyani, I got no problem admitting it, true gyan is brahmgian and I dont have it. Do you? You are basing your reasoning on what you have been told by Baba Jagjit Singh, I am basing mine on what I have learned from mahamurkhs katha and steeks. Do either of us know who is right? No. My only problem is you calling everyone that doesnt agree with you agyani or shariapanthi, Sant Gurbachan Singh states that some bhagats came back on form of panj pyarey...are you saying they were sharia panthi or agyani too? Maybe you should ask Baba Jagjit Singh if they were agyani, I know that they wouldnt say so. Would mahapurkhs debate these topics with eachother and call eachother agyani? I highly doubt it...then considering that you consider yourself a student of Baba Jagjit Singh why do you come and call everyone that doesnt agree with you agyani/shariapanthi?

Gurpreet singh, as usual you have to tottaly missed my point and start putting words in my mouth, accusing me of what not. You total missed the part in bold when i wrote the previous - bold word was mukht, please re-read the post before getting emotional, accusing me of something which i never mentioned. I ll bold it again: READ THIS VERY CAREFULLY.

I already talked about this once again all the bhagats rachna, their feeling of oneness with akaal purkh in form of writings- quotes, poetic stanzas was already out there and used by many people before satguru maharaj came to this earth as king of kings to do udhaar of kalyugi jivs like us. That shows that, bhagats were in turiya avastha before satguru ji came.

Kabir- Jis Maran Jagat Daraie Mera Mann Anand, maran hi paie poora parmanand ||

The whole issue i m having hard to accept is not that bhagats had to come and take khanda batta da amrit as rattan singh bhangu mentioned in the puratan granth he wrote, off course anything is possible in hakum of akaal purkh, off course when this atma is re- born as jiv atma, divine law doesnt discriminate with dharms and all that but the whole issue i m having is- sharia sikhs have used that and they made it sound like as f they were not mukht atma and only purpose they came to get amrit is to get mukhti.. you know this they were already mukht as you know by their antriv anubhav in form of writings.. question- here what does these tat khalsa gain from this? they gain supermacy, they gain the claim that only way to get to sachkhand is via khanda da amrit,if its up to them they probably create big sarblohi gate in their imaginary sikhi and push that as a rule. I call this agyanta. By calling bhagats not mukht is big insult on their jevani. This slap the whole diversity in the sikhi.

I have no issue with Sant gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale beleif that some bhagats had to come and take amrit, thats not the issue, isssue here that these people used it and made it sound like they took amrit because they were not mukht. to gain supermacy that sikh dharam/khand da amrit is only way to get to sachkhand, all the great bairaag tyagi sadhus have taken gurmantar from their purangyan van guru's in haridvar following advait vedant and other mats under hinduism are just normal people, wasting their times. Then you wonder why i call them sharia panthis?.

[N30S1NGH]

In gurbani, any amrit refers to amrit ras, naam amrit any mahapursh will tell you this. You show me an reference from gurbani- where gurbani talks about khanda da amrit/charan amrit.

Amrit has many meanings in Gurbani. It refers to milk, food etc. Amrit of Guru Sahib is Naam. Amrit that exists inside is revealed only by receiving Naam from the Guru. Every Sant Mahapurash had to take Khanday Ki Pahul before reaching any spiritual stage. If Naam is not obtained from the Guru in form of Amrit then Jot of Waheguru will not appear from within. Amrit that comes from Dasam Duar is a kalaa of Naam Amrit. I have never experienced it but this is what I have understood from Sikhi. Khanday Ki Pahul is given by Satguru hence whenever Gurbani talks about getting Amrit from Guru, it refers to Khanday Ki Pahul. Amrit that exists within is not obtained but appear because of Naam.

All bhagats were mukht before sri guru nanak dev ji, stop your tat khalsa progaganda, dont you get tired of same lies lies and lies?

You failed to answer the most important questions. I repeat them here:

ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਸਦਾ ਸਦਾ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨ ਜਾਇ ॥

So Satguru is out of the cycle of death and birth and your question of "before Guru Sahib" is mute. Satguru has always existed. Gurbani says:

ਤੂ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਆਪਿ ਆਪੇ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ॥ ਸੁਰਿ ਨਰ ਸਾਧਿਕ ਸਿਧ ਸਿਖ ਸੇਵੰਤ ਧੁਰਹ ਧੁਰੁ ॥

Bhatts are praising Guru Sahib by saying that Guru Sahib is Satguru of four yugas. This means that prior to 1469, Satguru Nanak Sahib Ji existed in the form of Nirgun Saroop and blessed bhagats with muktee. Keep in mind that there is only One Satguru in the world.

ਇਕੋ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਜਾਗਤਾ ਹੋਰੁ ਜਗੁ ਸੂਤਾ ਮੋਹਿ ਪਿਆਸਿ ॥ and

ਇਕਾ ਬਾਣੀ ਇਕੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਇਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ॥

The status of Satguru belongs to Guru Sahib only. No other human or any other being has this status. Guru Nanak Sahib appeared in this world in sargun saroop and status of Satguru was already given to him as is clear from Vaars.

I ask you to tell me who else is Satguru? What is the reference from Gurbani or Vaars? If Bhagats are praising their own human gurus in Bani then we must agree that Guru Granth Sahib includes praises of human beings which is not correct. Guru Sahib (5th Nanak) refused to add praises of Mohammad for the reason being that Gurbani will only praise Waheguru and none else. Therefore, Bhagats are either praising Waheguru or Satguru Nanak Sahib and there is no difference between them i.e. "Gur Parmeshar Eko Jaan.." and "Gur Parmeshar Poojeeye..".

Here is something more for you.

ਸਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਸਭ ਊਪਰਿ ॥ ਕਰੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਸਤਜੁਗਿ ਜਿਨਿ ਧ੍ਰੂ ਪਰਿ ॥

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਪ੍ਰਹਲਾਦ ਭਗਤ ਉਧਰੀਅੰ ॥ ਹਸੋ ਕਮਲ ਮਾਥੇ ਪਰ ਧਰੀਅੰ ॥

It is clear from the Shabad above that Guru Nanak Sahib did kirpa on Dhroo and Prehlaad and blessed them with muktee in Satyug. Hence only a Satguru that is Guru Nanak Sahib can give muktee. Humans are incapable of that. Bhagats whose bani is included in Guru Granth Sahib all became disciples of Guru Sahib. Read Bhagat Bani Ithihaas first. It is evident from their own Bani. Gurmukhi words, grammar and way of writing makes it clear that Bhagats were familiar with Gurmat and its script. Otherwise we would be seeing different style of writing and grammar in Bhagat Bani. Gurdwara Sahib in Ayodheya is the mark of event when Bhagats met Guru Sahib. This is where Bhagat Ramanand Ji said, "Satgur Mein Balhaari Tor...". You may not agree but you have no answers.

Back to the topic. Twareekh written by Bhai Chanda Singh Firozpuri, Gohaj Pothi and Das Gur Jot written by Giani Mall Singh prove that women took Amrit in 1699. Bhatt Vahis also prove that Amrit should be given to women and they must be named "Kaur". Twareekh Guru Khalsa Part 10 mentions many women who took Amrit. On page 159, there are two sakhis. On 160, there is a sakhi of Bibi Deep Kaur who was an Amritdhari. Rani Sada Kaur, mother in-law of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, was also Amritdhari. It is written in Guru Prem Padd Parkash that in 1702 Guru Sahib married Mata Sahib Devan and gave her Amrit. She became Mata Sahib Kaur. Sant Attar Singh gave Amrit to women equally. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji gave Amrit to women and rejected giving Kirpan amrit to women. Read Gurbani Paath Darshan written by him.

Do you have reference that proves that Khanday Ki Pahul must be given to men only?

Bijla singh all you doing is playing with shabad gurbani words thats it, thats all you doing. If hindu bhai, comes on to this forum and uses shabad guru and say it was ram chandar ji who is nirgun nirankari jot is been there forever, its anadi and its been doing kirpa on bhagats from tibet, sikhs, hindu, christians MAT etc etc etc. you probably will call him rss. However his tactic is just as valid as your tactic, its just change of name- instead of sri guru nanak dev ji he put sri ram chandar ji. Now you may say sri ram chandar were lost in maya and go on and on about it, but the fact remains - puratan samparda's beleive- including taksal staunchly beleive - sri ram chandars were also sargun hari avtar of vahiguroo just like sri guru nanak dev ji- guru avtar and taksal along with puratan sampardas that bhagats were nit avtars just like sants/karaks. All coming from the same light. you might not have that kinda tolerance to hold that in you, but rest of the panth does.

I think there is a fine line difference between having full sharda of satguru nanak dev ji being 100% guru avtar, highest avtar of all (shared by samparda's- nirmale, taksal, nanaksar etc etc), yet reserving full respect for other guru mahatama's of other mats instead of making satguru nanak dev ji as one and only one true satguru who introduced higher reality(sachkhand) in kalyug for gursikhs only l. No one before satguru nanak dev ji managed attained/reach sachkhand-turiya avastha because no one until satguru nanak dev ji had real "gurmat naam" and sachkhand(higher reality) to merge with divine was first introduced by satguru nanak dev ji patsah.Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji opened up higher realm called sachkhand before sri guru nanak dev ji that realm was closed didnt existed but no one reached there because they were not complete.

Misinterperations of guru/satguru shabad by ignoring adyatamic interperation instead focuing more into socio-religious interperations. Adhyatamic meaning of SatGuru/Guru shared by old school samparda including taksal- Guru/Satguru means god in nirgun chaitan paratama and guru. guru also means avtars in sargun form ie- Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Sri Ram Chandar, Raja janak, bhagat kabirs etc..

What perhaps is more 'dangerous' is to view Sri Guru Nanak dev ji as independent of God, and more like a prophet bringing the 'truth' that never before existed. This contradicts those quotations given before from previous yugs, it contradicts so much of Gurmat and is clearly an attempt to turn Sikhi into a more semitic tradition with 'revelation' 'prophethood' and a historically specific 'truth'.

Likewise you would expect to find such narrations in janamsakhi literature or any of the historical narratives of the Panth. One light many forms. One truth, many forms depending on the needs of the contexts.

Defination of satguru: "Satguru from socio-religious aspect depending on different dharam, its anyone who is merged with Vahiguroo by rising above from all vices, gyan indraie, five koshas and already enlightened and has ablity to enlighten others(bring others from darkness to light).

Satguru from socio religious aspect in Sikhi is defaniately without any question- Satguru Nanak Dev Nirankar."

as for khanda da amrit sources are concern, as i said i m not here to debate this but as i said in bold that i m still discovering about this, i m doing khoj on this. I thank you for providing me the sources. I shall look into sources and do further khoj on it. However, i still beleive that there were more than one outer intiation acceptable in the panth they are just as valid because they all follow same rehat, give same gurmantar, khanda da amrit intiation recently got promoted as one and truely one intiation when tat khalsa came in.

[00gurpreet_singh00]

I didn't put any words in your mouth, what do you expect people to believe when you write "you cannot claim that bhagats had to come back as singhs and take amrit so that they can be mukht. this twisted logic is only used by sharia panthis, agyani." Maybe next time you should be clear with what you write. Even akirtghan obviously interpreted your msg the same way as me, as you can tell by the message he posted right after yours.

Last time you accused me of putting words in your mouth when I wrote that you compared guru sahib with other avtaars, I even gave you a quote of how you compared the both of them, if you don't believe me you can check the old thread.

isssue here that these people used it and made it sound like they took amrit because they were not mukht. to gain supermacy that sikh dharam/khand da amrit is only way to get to sachkhand, all the great bairaag tyagi sadhus have taken gurmantar from their purangyan van guru's in haridvar following advait vedant and other mats under hinduism are just normal people, wasting their times. Then you wonder why i call them sharia panthis?.

Please find me someone that said hindus are wasting their time...no one has said that. People say that hindus will receive the fruit of their actions but not get to sachkhand...how is this the same as wasting time? If you don't get to sachkhand in this life does that mean you wasted time? Now who is putting words in someone else's mouth...

Also, one last question. If old bhagats had to come back and take khande da amrit and before going back to sachkhand (you said you had no problem with this idea), then how can you say that khande daa amrit isn't required? The only logical conclusion that you can come to if you believe this scenario is that a 'socio-religious' ritual is required.

whatever...this topic has gone way off topic, maybe mods should split it into 2 or 3 threads.

[N30S1NGH]

I didn't put any words in your mouth, what do you expect people to believe when you write "you cannot claim that bhagats had to come back as singhs and take amrit so that they can be mukht. this twisted logic is only used by sharia panthis, agyani." Maybe next time you should be clear with what you write. Even akirtghan obviously interpreted your msg the same way as me, as you can tell by the message he posted right after yours.

isssue here that these people used it and made it sound like they took amrit because they were not mukht. to gain supermacy that sikh dharam/khand da amrit is only way to get to sachkhand, all the great bairaag tyagi sadhus have taken gurmantar from their purangyan van guru's in haridvar following advait vedant and other mats under hinduism are just normal people, wasting their times. Then you wonder why i call them sharia panthis?.

Please find me someone that said hindus are wasting their time...no one has said that. People say that hindus will receive the fruit of their actions but not get to sachkhand...how is this the same as wasting time? If you don't get to sachkhand in this life does that mean you wasted time? Now who is putting words in someone else's mouth...

Also, one last question. If old bhagats had to come back and take khande da amrit and before going back to sachkhand (you said you had no problem with this idea), then how can you say that khande daa amrit isn't required? The only logical conclusion that you can come to if you believe this scenario is that a 'socio-religious' ritual is required.

whatever...this topic has gone way off topic, maybe mods should split it into 2 or 3 threads.

i write again to clarify further : all the great bairaag tyagi sadhus have taken gurmantar from their purangyan van guru's in haridvar following advait vedant and other mats under hinduism are just * normal people, wasting their times, they will never acheive sachkhand because they didnt took khanda da amrit.

i meant common admit it, above* this is literally an beleif for every tat khalsa out there? is it not? soo much so some taksali heavily beleifs in that? which is really disappointing.

if they will not get to sachkhand, where is the turiya avastha come from? is it invented by our beloved sikhs gurus or is always been there?

Regarding your tricky question, i can reverse that question, if bhagats came back as panj pyares just to promote supermacy of khanda da amrit then, how come (gurmukhs around guru's time who have takne charan amrit ) bhai ghaniya ji, bhai nand lal along with 25 poets in Sri Guru Maharaj Darbar didnt had to re intiate into khalsa panth by khanda da amrit. Socio-religious ritual is required too, again all i m saying - amrit is required to become guru da sikh whether khanda da amrit, just naam amrit or kirpan amrit, charan pahul amrit that depends on sampardaie traditions(nirmale, udasi, sevapanthis) for example- udasi takes charan amrit, are you saying they are not sikhs, but according sant gurbachan singh ji khalsa bhindranwale they are precious ang of the panth, check out sant samaj picture on the internet, some nirmale take naam amrit straight from their vidya gurdev, some go through intiation process, are you telling me they are not sikhs, they are not following maryada?

Last time you accused me of putting words in your mouth when I wrote that you compared guru sahib with other avtaars, I even gave you a quote of how you compared the both of them, if you don't believe me you can check the old thread.

you still have dubta, you think its insult to compare sri guru nanak dev ji with krishan maharaj who is hari avtar of sargun..its same thing because they all come from the light- sargun nirgun nirankar sun samadhi aap, app kiya nanaka apai fer jaap ||.

I simply dont think its insult. go ahead call me rss.

Before i used to had that dubta myself as well until in recent discussion with sant jagjit singh harkhowale when i asked the question of this premi on sikhsangat- he asked is krishan ji in sachkhand? or karam khand? sant ji said- krishan maharaj hamesha sachkhand rehnde ne, jitha jander dharti sachkhand ban jaandi hai. I even have the recording if you think i m making it up. anyway enuf going off topics.