Guru Naanak Dev Jiz Jhorla And Stuff

[alias]

• There are nether worlds beneath nether worlds, and hundreds of thousands of heavenly worlds above.
  

• The Vedas say that you can search and search for them all, until you grow weary.
  

• The scriptures say that there are 18,000 worlds, but in reality, there is only One Universe.
  

• If you try to write an account of this, you will surely finish yourself before you finish writing it.
  

• O Nanak, call Him Great! He Himself knows Himself. ||22||
  

FYI, that translation is a bit misleading

• There are countless nether worlds beneath nether worlds, and hundreds of thousands of heavenly worlds above.
  
• People have tried searching for end in past, present and will in future at end they all gave up and will give up, vedas says the same thing -
  
• Thousands of dieties along with eighteen scriptures says there is no end, we are tired of searching because in reality, there is only One God that exist and knows.
  
• If you try to write an account of this, you will surely finish yourself before you finish writing it.
  
• O Nanak, call Him Great! He Himself knows Himself.
  

i agree.. in the japji sahib, it says "orakh orakh paal thake, vaed kehen ik vaath"

i no y u say the vedas say one thing cus it says "....vaed kehen ik vaath"

this is correct. the one thing that the vedas are saying is that there is only one naam..

the whole tuk means that 'looking for them, (whether it be the other worlds/ the pundits/ the other people), you wil tire yourself!!, the vedas say the same thing (that go after god, look for god)'

it also says in our sggs

"baed kataeb pukaaran pothia, naam bina sub kooran gali horchia"

so if the vedas are saying that without naam, everything is koor, everything is dark/black/bad/not good, then this is what guru nanak dev ji ment when they said

"....vaed kehen ik vaath"

the ik vaat is the name of the lord.

and the next,.........................................................

"sehes utaara kehen kataeba usloo ik daat"

the kataebs are saying that there are 18 sehes'z, 18 'worlds' , but in the end, there is one daat, one giver, one god.

like "tu daata dataar....."

i know they were saying about pataal and agaas and stuff, but i believe here they could have said 'gaas' or somthing along the lines of indicating that it was the worlds instead of saying the word ' daat ' which i believe means god.. as you have millions of universes..

in the second to last pauri it says "tithae lor lor aakaar" and this is the lor lor aakaar in such khand!! and is not suchkhand another universe!!

so i believe that this means god and not universe....

i just found an article and copy pasted it so it is bound to be a bit wrong!!! :D

pul khujk kima

[guptveer1469]

do u guyz know that there is a gurudwara in mecca AND medina... The place were guru nanak sahib and mardana stayed/meditated.. but due to extremist islamic views, only muslims can enter mecca and medina............ i think both gurdwaras are rotting or something

but some day i want to go there... but i dont want to convert to islam just to see 2 gurdwaras...

but historically we have many ''important'' shrines in iraq, turkey, soudi arab, etc (middle east)

[Mehtab Singh]

Please give your sources. Gurdwaras in Saudi Arabia are next to impossible, although I agree about Iraq, Iran and Turkey. The one in Iraq is verified as well, but I can't be too sure about Saudi Arabia, so it would be great if you could give sources. I have heard this same thing from many katha vachaks also, but none gave any source. The question of them rotting or having been abandoned doesn't arise, because I am not sure if one was built in the first place. But in any case, I'd like to see sources.

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Guru_Nanak_in_Mecca

[ghorandhar]

Veer jee dont worry you have not offended me. :D

I do not understand how you have reached the conclusion from gurbani that we cannot keep books for research in our homes. I have the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj jee Parkash upstairs in my home. The only thing which is kept in this room is Gutki, harmounium, tabla etc.

The books of other scriptures I keep in my own library which I have downstairs so that I can keep looking at references when im doing research. I have a 4 volume koran translation which is an interpretation word by word, I cant get that book any where and got it from Amritsar. I cant see how keeping other books in your home can be considered something a Sikh cannot do. Its correct however as you qouted from the Dasam Granth (also recited in Rehras Sahib jee, that Guru Gobind Singh jee maharaj says we should not accept them.

If you want to see where the word dhat comes from from or asloo comes from, look at the following translation:

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/0005.html

Notice how the Vedh line is totally different from how you have translated that one line, rather than the two lines together.

[alias]

Veer jee dont worry you have not offended me. :D

I do not understand how you have reached the conclusion from gurbani that we cannot keep books for research in our homes. I have the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj jee Parkash upstairs in my home. The only thing which is kept in this room is Gutki, harmounium, tabla etc.

The books of other scriptures I keep in my own library which I have downstairs so that I can keep looking at references when im doing research. I have a 4 volume koran translation which is an interpretation word by word, I cant get that book any where and got it from Amritsar. I cant see how keeping other books in your home can be considered something a Sikh cannot do. Its correct however as you qouted from the Dasam Granth (also recited in Rehras Sahib jee, that Guru Gobind Singh jee maharaj says we should not accept them.

If you want to see where the word dhat comes from from or asloo comes from, look at the following translation:

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/0005.html

Notice how the Vedh line is totally different from how you have translated that one line, rather than the two lines together.

......

ok, , books for reaserch is ok, but you have the holy koran/translation and, though it has pages (!) its not a book. it is the scripture of the muslims. hence,....its holy.

but...

i suppose that for reasearch it may be ok. (what i am about to say may sound controversial but i like it!) sikhs have no relegion, only a way of life.sikh dharam/ithaas. this i believe to be accurate. btw somone told me this randomly so i liked it..... anyway... when the sggs says "na koi hindu, ya musalmaan..." and the rehet piyaari muj ko... by dasmesh pita i think that its in support of this..

...... but in the traditional sense, keeping another relegions scripture is, in a sense 'muning' and looking into that relegion.. wont you agree with me?? like, if you keep these things and reasearch them, you are looking into another relegion and things may come up round back to you and it may be like, >>>>'y do you have, for example, the koran in your house and reacearching that... is gurbani not more than enough'...<<<< i believe this is the angle that the gurus put to us when they said for us to not mun it. if one was to reaserch the koran and say, yea this is right and this is wrong, another might say 'y not spent that time on trying to find out and figure out what our guru said.'

now, i myself know a little persian so i can read that type of inscription, (dasmeshz bani became that much eaiser to understand) but that doesent mean i will go towards or anywhere near that relegion if i have a maharaaj like sggs in my life.. so in this same sense, i am not thinkin that you are any different. i am not saying that by keeping the koran in your home, you will mun it and accept islam in your heart n stuff, but it does have an effect. just like bani has an effect on us.. this is why we say, and muslims at that fact, say all we ask you to do is read the scriptures. it does have an effect.

but fine, reacerch is reaserch, but i personally would be against keeping a koran or a translation of the koran in my home.

iv had a look at the like that you gave me, n its a website that i go on often! yey! ryt... they are talking bout the asloo ik daat, all i said in the translation i gave was 'in the end, there is the one god... and the way i look at bani is a see which words guru has used and translate (for myself) accordingly.. like, daat is associated with giving. and god is the all giver so god;giver..

the vaedh thing, it is similar to the way iv said it... but i must have not explicated it properly. it says in the like u gave me, " ik vaath, ik gal" and this is exactly what i said... this ik vaath is that of god..

and this is what i said.. "the ik vaat is the name of the lord."

so how is it totally different???? its exactly the same!!! mind you, i did bring another line from guru maharaj.. maybe you got confuzed with that...or maybe the bit where i said that people got tyrd in looking for the brahmins and those other people... it still means the same thing... i tend to think a bit too much outside the box cus i try to relate everything but the line does mean 'that looking here and there you will get tyred, vaedh say that theres the one giver/god.'

because.... in the olden tyms, people used to go looking for the brahmins in the hills n stuff. this is wasting time as in the end there is only ik daat, the one givver, god..

this is what i said and ment before...

transtating the line is easy but as you may well know, trying to find what god is reely trying to say to you(personally) is the thing...

hope my post wasnt too long for yourself to read!!!

pul chuk kima

:TH:

hum rulte firte :homer

[alias]

Veer jee dont worry you have not offended me. :D

I do not understand how you have reached the conclusion from gurbani that we cannot keep books for research in our homes. I have the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj jee Parkash upstairs in my home. The only thing which is kept in this room is Gutki, harmounium, tabla etc.

The books of other scriptures I keep in my own library which I have downstairs so that I can keep looking at references when im doing research. I have a 4 volume koran translation which is an interpretation word by word, I cant get that book any where and got it from Amritsar. I cant see how keeping other books in your home can be considered something a Sikh cannot do. Its correct however as you qouted from the Dasam Granth (also recited in Rehras Sahib jee, that Guru Gobind Singh jee maharaj says we should not accept them.

If you want to see where the word dhat comes from from or asloo comes from, look at the following translation:

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/0005.html

Notice how the Vedh line is totally different from how you have translated that one line, rather than the two lines together.

i would like to ask a question, in the koran, it does explane in detail about the embryo and egg n sprm. i havent, as of yet read gurbani extensivly to know whether it says in gurbani about this... like,.... it says about the other worlds, n stuff, does sggs say about the egg n sprm?? i know it says about the womb.. jus curious... and as you have your reasearch, id like to ask bout this.. i thought of this yesterday....

fateh ji.

[ghorandhar]

Veer jee dont worry you have not offended me. :D

I do not understand how you have reached the conclusion from gurbani that we cannot keep books for research in our homes. I have the Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj jee Parkash upstairs in my home. The only thing which is kept in this room is Gutki, harmounium, tabla etc.

The books of other scriptures I keep in my own library which I have downstairs so that I can keep looking at references when im doing research. I have a 4 volume koran translation which is an interpretation word by word, I cant get that book any where and got it from Amritsar. I cant see how keeping other books in your home can be considered something a Sikh cannot do. Its correct however as you qouted from the Dasam Granth (also recited in Rehras Sahib jee, that Guru Gobind Singh jee maharaj says we should not accept them.

If you want to see where the word dhat comes from from or asloo comes from, look at the following translation:

http://www.gurugranthdarpan.com/darpan2/0005.html

Notice how the Vedh line is totally different from how you have translated that one line, rather than the two lines together.

......

ok, , books for reaserch is ok, but you have the holy koran/translation and, though it has pages (!) its not a book. it is the scripture of the muslims. hence,....its holy.

but...

i suppose that for reasearch it may be ok. (what i am about to say may sound controversial but i like it!) sikhs have no relegion, only a way of life.sikh dharam/ithaas. this i believe to be accurate. btw somone told me this randomly so i liked it..... anyway... when the sggs says "na koi hindu, ya musalmaan..." and the rehet piyaari muj ko... by dasmesh pita i think that its in support of this..

...... but in the traditional sense, keeping another relegions scripture is, in a sense 'muning' and looking into that relegion.. wont you agree with me?? like, if you keep these things and reasearch them, you are looking into another relegion and things may come up round back to you and it may be like, >>>>'y do you have, for example, the koran in your house and reacearching that... is gurbani not more than enough'...<<<< i believe this is the angle that the gurus put to us when they said for us to not mun it. if one was to reaserch the koran and say, yea this is right and this is wrong, another might say 'y not spent that time on trying to find out and figure out what our guru said.'

now, i myself know a little persian so i can read that type of inscription, (dasmeshz bani became that much eaiser to understand) but that doesent mean i will go towards or anywhere near that relegion if i have a maharaaj like sggs in my life.. so in this same sense, i am not thinkin that you are any different. i am not saying that by keeping the koran in your home, you will mun it and accept islam in your heart n stuff, but it does have an effect. just like bani has an effect on us.. this is why we say, and muslims at that fact, say all we ask you to do is read the scriptures. it does have an effect.

but fine, reacerch is reaserch, but i personally would be against keeping a koran or a translation of the koran in my home.

iv had a look at the like that you gave me, n its a website that i go on often! yey! ryt... they are talking bout the asloo ik daat, all i said in the translation i gave was 'in the end, there is the one god... and the way i look at bani is a see which words guru has used and translate (for myself) accordingly.. like, daat is associated with giving. and god is the all giver so god;giver..

the vaedh thing, it is similar to the way iv said it... but i must have not explicated it properly. it says in the like u gave me, " ik vaath, ik gal" and this is exactly what i said... this ik vaath is that of god..

and this is what i said.. "the ik vaat is the name of the lord."

so how is it totally different???? its exactly the same!!! mind you, i did bring another line from guru maharaj.. maybe you got confuzed with that...or maybe the bit where i said that people got tyrd in looking for the brahmins and those other people... it still means the same thing... i tend to think a bit too much outside the box cus i try to relate everything but the line does mean 'that looking here and there you will get tyred, vaedh say that theres the one giver/god.'

because.... in the olden tyms, people used to go looking for the brahmins in the hills n stuff. this is wasting time as in the end there is only ik daat, the one givver, god..

this is what i said and ment before...

transtating the line is easy but as you may well know, trying to find what god is reely trying to say to you(personally) is the thing...

hope my post wasnt too long for yourself to read!!!

pul chuk kima

:TH:

hum rulte firte :homer

People like Sant Singh Maskin, giani Harinder Singh etc all studied various scriptures and maybe Im from this style of school. But instead of trying to justify it by qouting these gursikhs, it might be down to my own stupidy. Maybe if you are vulnerable you would be affected by them, but as you said (and the limited amount of Sikhi that ive understand), Sikhi is a way of life, so if you are practising Sikhi daily, you should be strong enough not to be affected. If in gurbani or the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada say so not to do so, then I put my hands up even if its research I have no right. The purpose of me reading them is because when I go to lectures and people of other faiths are also presenting their religious beliefs, sometimes questions are posed to me regarding comparisions, having a little knowledge of what other believe help me keep up with the other speakers. What amazes me when doing lectures and meeting Muslims, they have read the guru granth sahib jee, yet they have not been affected. Read Prof Sahib Singh jees translation of the line Vakhat na payioo khadia, jhi likhan likh Koran in Jap jee sahib. You will see that they have translated this line incorrectly on purpose. Once I have read what I need to because of the lecturers in involved in, I will not keep other faiths scriptures. If I have offended you in any way shape or form, I ask for muafee. I can understand why you do not keep them. My belief however is that there is no wrong or right answer on this issue.

The shabad Patala Patal from Jap jee sahib, unless ive misunderstood your translation and Prof Sahib Singhs, the concept of one god is not presented in the lines of Vedh. I always thought this shabad meant: The Vedhs have not found Akal Purakhs Aant (Because they say patala patal...), Neither have the Katibs and in the last line Guru presents the truth (Nanak Vaddha Akheea api jani ap). I always fought Vedh khain ikh vaat meant that the Vedhs have proclaimed in one zuban (ghal) that Patala patala lakh aghasa aghasa. Ive never thought that Vedh kahain ikh vaat was regarding the Lord. The Dhat is with the letter dhada and not dada, Prof Sahib Singh jee here has translated this as being creator. I posted Prof Sahib Singhs translation because I always assumed that was the correct translation. It Was interesting to see how you translated the shabad, I posed the above as a comparision. If you look at my post veer jee I was only not saying who was correct or incorrect I was only interested because it was different from what I had up to now understood.

han jee I agree, that is the hard part. But maharajs kirpa we will be Ok.

Bhai Sahib jee my knowledge of Science is limited. When doing Sehaj paath I can remember coming across some references, I will try to look for them. There is also an article on this subject which ill try to find for you, I thought I had it on my computer, but I cant find it. When ive found it ill post it for you, sorry, but my hands are up when it comes to this area.

[alias]

People like Sant Singh Maskin, giani Harinder Singh etc all studied various scriptures and maybe Im from this style of school. But instead of trying to justify it by qouting these gursikhs, it might be down to my own stupidy. Maybe if you are vulnerable you would be affected by them, but as you said (and the limited amount of Sikhi that ive understand), Sikhi is a way of life, so if you are practising Sikhi daily, you should be strong enough not to be affected. If in gurbani or the Panthic Sikh Rehit maryada say so not to do so, then I put my hands up even if its research I have no right. The purpose of me reading them is because when I go to lectures and people of other faiths are also presenting their religious beliefs, sometimes questions are posed to me regarding comparisions, having a little knowledge of what other believe help me keep up with the other speakers. What amazes me when doing lectures and meeting Muslims, they have read the guru granth sahib jee, yet they have not been affected. Read Prof Sahib Singh jees translation of the line Vakhat na payioo khadia, jhi likhan likh Koran in Jap jee sahib. You will see that they have translated this line incorrectly on purpose. Once I have read what I need to because of the lecturers in involved in, I will not keep other faiths scriptures. If I have offended you in any way shape or form, I ask for muafee. I can understand why you do not keep them. My belief however is that there is no wrong or right answer on this issue.

The shabad Patala Patal from Jap jee sahib, unless ive misunderstood your translation and Prof Sahib Singhs, the concept of one god is not presented in the lines of Vedh. I always thought this shabad meant: The Vedhs have not found Akal Purakhs Aant (Because they say patala patal...), Neither have the Katibs and in the last line Guru presents the truth (Nanak Vaddha Akheea api jani ap). I always fought Vedh khain ikh vaat meant that the Vedhs have proclaimed in one zuban (ghal) that Patala patala lakh aghasa aghasa. Ive never thought that Vedh kahain ikh vaat was regarding the Lord. The Dhat is with the letter dhada and not dada, Prof Sahib Singh jee here has translated this as being creator. I posted Prof Sahib Singhs translation because I always assumed that was the correct translation. It Was interesting to see how you translated the shabad, I posed the above as a comparision. If you look at my post veer jee I was only not saying who was correct or incorrect I was only interested because it was different from what I had up to now understood.

han jee I agree, that is the hard part. But maharajs kirpa we will be Ok.

Bhai Sahib jee my knowledge of Science is limited. When doing Sehaj paath I can remember coming across some references, I will try to look for them. There is also an article on this subject which ill try to find for you, I thought I had it on my computer, but I cant find it. When ive found it ill post it for you, sorry, but my hands are up when it comes to this area.

WAHEGURU.. i am terribally sorry if i came across in a miscontorted ay as i am come accross like that at times so my sincerest apologies.

i know that some muslims have read our guru granth sahib. a muslim friend of mine has read it. the thing is tho, as he has no alliegence to our scripture, (and ment in all due respect, they are only trying to find out how to pick apart our scriptures as they have been ordered by mohudeen in the koran to perform dwah on 'non muslims' and these muslims read our translations of sggs because of this reason..).

so all in all, as one has rehet and bani and naam and keertan and the correct means of doing their daily life, they will stay untouched by any incoming vibes.. i am not offended by the nessisary action that you have taken for your lectures and education pouporses, if it is for that and to, in effect, correct peoples misconception of gurbani, as you say it is, then i am left with no objection. education is the key and to help this, is correcting misconceptions.

id like to leave this discussion with the following tuk >>baed kataeb simarti sabh saasat, in parhiyaa mukt na hoyee<< and >>bin naavae mukat na paye<< . u do that so its k i suppose.

to my nolege, to under stand gurbani, one musst use gurbani. what i mean by this is only gurbani can explane gurbani... in 'asloo ik dhaat' yes it is dhada . however i used a different tuk to explane this.. and it was 'too data dhataar; taera dita khavana' (u know, the one we say jus before we eat) and i had said in this sense that god is the giver of dhaat. a god given boon.... here we can also say god is dhataar.. so there is only one dhaat.. god. then it says 'if u try and ryt it, in writing it you will finish yourself' this supports the previous tuk.. y? god is infinite and u cant describe him....

now the thing with the vaed say ik vaat... to myself, the understanding you have taken from that tuk is different to mine.. i have asked my grandma as i questioned myself (as we should all do all the time) and she said that the understing i have taken is ..... um... more of a true meaning! (that was hard to word!)

>>>> guru naanak paatshah is saying that pataala pataal lakh agaasa agaas.

this is basikly, there are lotsa different worlds.

ANDthen

orakh orakh bhaal thakae

this is saying, people go to here/there/ends of the earth looking for it

vaed kehen ik vaat.

now the ik vaat is meaning that the vaed say what they say with one voice.

so now, what is this it?

this it is god. to understand bani u must use the other bani that you know..

if you go to my first ever post i posted and in the second, i have said this other tuk

baed katab pukaarn pothiaa, naam bina sub koorh gale horchia

this tuk means that all the pothiaa of the vaedz kataebz and stuff are saying..... ; naam bina sub KOOR gale hochia

this second half means that everything else is koor without naam... naam is god.. so ...............................

guru naanak dev ji is saying in the japjisahib tuk, orakh........

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>we look here and there/ends of the earth and we get tired (why are we doing this when) the vaed are saying what they are saying with one voice. (?)<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

this is the thing then guru naanak go on to say......

>>>>the kataebz say there are 18(000) sehesz worlds and in the end, there is only one daat, one boon giver god. this NOW is what guru ji is saying to us..

this is the way that guru ji has put it fwd to us..

i may come across as a bit jabardast but i dont mean it in that way.. people have said i get like that when i am exlpaning somthing... so maaf karna..

[ghorandhar]

Veer jee sorry for such a late reply, ive been really busy and just sending this quickly.

The word ikh has the following letters: ihhree noo shiharee khaka noo unkar. The unkar under the khaka repersents that only the one lord is being talked about, if the unkar is not under the khaka you will not find the meaning to be Waheguru. These are just some simple pinciples of gurbani viakaran and without going into whether it is a noun or singular, all you have to do is look at the unkar and you can see that guru jee has told us that one means Waheguru, like you said we should look at gurbani, so im just showing some examples from gurbani so you can see this principle of grammar.

Sabna jee ka ikh (unkar is present and the meaning are Waheguru), data soo maih visar na jayee. Ang 2

Nanak Akhai sabh koo akhai ikh (no unkar and this is not represented as akal purakh) duu ikh (Unkar is present and translations of the word is waheguru) syana. ang 5.

Ikh comes twice in the following line which we have been discussing: Orrakh orrakh bhal takhee vidh khain ikh (no unkar and according to grammar not refering to Waheguru) vat. Shash ataran khain katiba asloo ikh (unkar is present meaning the word refers to waheguru) dhat. ang 5

Sohee kazi jin aap tajai, ikh (unkar is present therefore waheguru is the meaning) nam keea adharoo. ang 24

Ikh (unkar) is present visar doojai lubhaya. ang 111.

Look at other shabads with ikh spelt with an unkar, there are hundreds of examples.

The following are shabads where 'Ikh' does not have an unkar (like orrakh orrakh bhale takhi vedh khain ikh vaat). Therefore the meaning is not Waheguru:

Sehas syanpaa lakh hoee ta ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) na chalai nal. ang 1

Mat vich rantan javhar manik jih ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) gur kee sikh sunee. ang 2.

Gura ikh (no unkar and not refering to waheguru) deh bujai. ang 2

Once again you can look through gurbani and see how the principles of gurbani viakaran work. The word 'there' and 'their' do not mean the same because they are pronounced the same, rather we have to look at the spelling to understand the meaning. The same is for 'effect' and 'affect' or 'no' and 'know'. In gurbani we have to consult gurbani viakaran so that we can understand the difference. There are books by Prof Sahib Singh je and Joginder Singh Talwara if you want to understand viakaran.

The word Dhaat has been given the same meaning by Prof sahib Singh, Bhai Vir Singh jee (in his dictionary and panj granti satek) and Sant baba Gurbachan Singh jee Bhinderwala (Gurbani paath darshan/darpan). No one has said this means giver, at first i was intrigued by your translation, but I cant see how a dhada has become dada. If you want to see where dhaat comes from, then Bhai vir Singh jees dictionary tells you and it also shows how it can have different meanings, but none of them say data. Ang 16, 18, 25, 33, 61, 83 and 87 are all shabads in Sri Raag alone, you will not find the word Dhat meaning the giver (spelt with dada) in any of these shabads. Ive tried to look at the word dhat in other Raags aswell and no where does it mean giver.

Sorry for leading you so far of the topic.

Take care veer jee