Punjab Radio

[Guest confusingh]

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

I agree with confu singh ji.

It is all about learning, understanding and implementing teachings of Gurbani in our lives. We must read all of our Gurbani and other literature to take guidance. We have Aad Guru Darbar, Sri Dasam Guru Darbar, Sri Sarabloh Guru Darbar and Ugardanti to learn from. We must read these granths and implement their teachings. Sarabloh Guru Darbar is for Amritdhari Khalsas only though. Other than that, we have Panth Parkash, Sooraj Parkash, Mehma Parkash, Gurbilaas Paatshahi 6, Gurbilaas Paatshahi 10 and other historical granths to study from. We are ignoring our historical granths and not studying them. That is why we have so many divisions in Panth. We must read out puratan granths and gain knowledge.

www.srigranth.org

www.sridasam.org

I urge sangat to start visiting above websites and start learning aarths of Gurbani. All the nihung singhs in Budda Dal focus on reading bani and understanding aarths. Well, some have become lazy though.

Fateh!

That was not his original point. I doubt that anyone here disagrees that knowledge is a good thing. I suggest that you read the thread from the beginning and tell us whether you also agree with his beliefs on the non-existence of siddhis, that sants do not exist, that Baba Deep Singh did not fight with his head in his hand after he was decapitated (because it is impossible according to science), that Nihang aarti maryada is anti-Sikh, and that we should support a radio station that does nindiya of mahapurush and dasam bani.

K.

Kaljug Singh you my friend, I do not wish to conversate with nor do I wish to meet anybody like you in my life.

You take everything I say out of context, whether this is to annoy me, I don't know, but I assume it is because you cannot disprove me when my point is thought in context. Until you do that I do not wish to further respond to your non-contextual, incorrect and irrelevant lies, you have not backed up any of your points with quote from Gurbani and your manmat principles are useless. Good luck in your life, please try not to refer to me in future posts, I don't really want any association to one who lies and intentionally misinterprets and misguides people in order to boost their own ego, you're incorrect and everything you said to me has been proven wrong with quotes I've shown you from Bani, now gracefully please stop refering to me.

Fateh!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Fateh Budda Dal ji,

Yes completely, some people seek to take an easy route and prefer to follow any human source rather than learn Bani and implement the message within our lives, in regards to the claims made, I do not believe there is any place for ritualism or supernatural within Sikhi, Gurbani also tells us this, I have given quotes within this thread (so previous posters either dismiss Bani, or refuse to accept it) however there are several sources which tell us that Baba Deep Singh Ji was not fully decapitated, and had received a large mortal wound, which in turn meant his neck was unable to support his head, therefore with his left arm he supported his head and the right he fought the dushts, if you look back in our history it was only until artist's impressions we began to say Baba Deep Singh Ji was fully decapitated, scholarly pieces dated much further than paintings tell us this was the case as well as more recent pieces such as those by Kartar Singh. Therefore I prefer to put trust in well documented and logical sources which stay in accord to Bani, rather than simple look at a picture, see what it says, this is the truth, this isn't the role of a Sikh. Like I've said a Sikh needs to gain Gian from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj. NOR did I ever say I came to this conclusion solely because of science, again shows how a poster enjoys lieing and seems they have taken it up as a hobby.

In reference to the supernatural powers some posters have claimed they possess, I suggest they read Bani it clearly says we are not to practice these, and although I don't believe they exist, hypothetically speaking Gurbani tells us we should not look to practice, obtain or use these. So either way, if they do or don't , they don't have a place in Sikhi, however a previous poster claims he has obtained these and does practice these. Nor, should we use flames and other rituals in our shabad of Aarti, this is hindutva and there is nothing in Bani which tells us we should do this. I will later edit this post and add quotes from Guru ji which lead me to these conclusions, as previous posters have had problems reading. I also do not follow any sants, as I believe that nobody is above Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj, I never questioned whether they exist, but those who are put forward nowadays as Sants don't do anything in a selfless manner, they only do so for personal gain, this is not Sikhi.

I completely agree with you Singh, you've made some good points!

Fateh

[Kaljug Singh]

Kaljug Singh you my friend, I do not wish to conversate with nor do I wish to meet anybody like you in my life.

You take everything I say out of context, whether this is to annoy me, I don't know, but I assume it is because you cannot disprove me when my point is thought in context. Until you do that I do not wish to further respond to your non-contextual, incorrect and irrelevant lies, you have not backed up any of your points with quote from Gurbani and your manmat principles are useless. Good luck in your life, please try not to refer to me in future posts, I don't really want any association to one who lies and intentionally misinterprets and misguides people in order to boost their own ego, you're incorrect and everything you said to me has been proven wrong with quotes I've shown you from Bani, now gracefully please stop refering to me.

Well mate, if you do not want people to respond to your ideas, it's probably not a good idea to post them on a discussion forum.

As to who is lying and who is not, your posts are all here for everyone to read so they can make their own minds up.

I never questioned whether they exist, but those who are put forward nowadays as Sants don't do anything in a selfless manner, they only do so for personal gain, this is not Sikhi.

Well, it's good to know that you now agree that Sants do exist since plenty of people here have shown you the relevant shabads.

As to quoting gurbani, Singh, I could show you a line from Sri Guru Granth Sahib that says the sky is blue and you will turn around and say, well blue here actually means green, and by sky Guru ji actually meant apples, and of course "is" is "were" as the apples Guru Ji is actually talking about are Delicious Red apples that have now become ripe - and this is why oranges are forbidden in Sikhism.

Regards,

K.

[Mr. Pakora]

PUNJAB RADIO???? nigga my radio be da 93.3..

[_=singhni=_]

mr pakora? lol wot a name

dude deserves 10/10 4 dat

punjab raydeo is 4 bogeys n old fogeez

[Guest confusingh]

Kaljug Singh you my friend, I do not wish to conversate with nor do I wish to meet anybody like you in my life.

You take everything I say out of context, whether this is to annoy me, I don't know, but I assume it is because you cannot disprove me when my point is thought in context. Until you do that I do not wish to further respond to your non-contextual, incorrect and irrelevant lies, you have not backed up any of your points with quote from Gurbani and your manmat principles are useless. Good luck in your life, please try not to refer to me in future posts, I don't really want any association to one who lies and intentionally misinterprets and misguides people in order to boost their own ego, you're incorrect and everything you said to me has been proven wrong with quotes I've shown you from Bani, now gracefully please stop refering to me.

Well mate, if you do not want people to respond to your ideas, it's probably not a good idea to post them on a discussion forum.

As to who is lying and who is not, your posts are all here for everyone to read so they can make their own minds up.

I never questioned whether they exist, but those who are put forward nowadays as Sants don't do anything in a selfless manner, they only do so for personal gain, this is not Sikhi.

Well, it's good to know that you now agree that Sants do exist since plenty of people here have shown you the relevant shabads.

As to quoting gurbani, Singh, I could show you a line from Sri Guru Granth Sahib that says the sky is blue and you will turn around and say, well blue here actually means green, and by sky Guru ji actually meant apples, and of course "is" is "were" as the apples Guru Ji is actually talking about are Delicious Red apples that have now become ripe - and this is why oranges are forbidden in Sikhism.

Regards,

K.

If you think the term 'SANT' refers to humans and parchaariks of the current era, you are seriously misguided.

Sant in terms of Bani is in reference to the sanskrit word Sat. This was a verb used to describe ' good' and ' real', the root of which the term defined as a saint is different to the cognate of 'Sat', it is only because of the Bhakti influence, as well as the complex translation of sanskrit which led people to believe it is loosely translated to saint. It would be not be contextual for us to say that this is to be used as a title for mere humans from the shabads which we read, these shabads always preach equality of ALL with no exceptions, I personally believe the term 'SANT' is used in reference to Guru Sahib themselves, and when people say there is use of plural, 'SANTS' is most likely to be the sangat who are following Guru Sahib, there isn't any indication that there is to be any human form of sant, nor are we to practice a system of 'Sant' following, the term has been misinterpreted, and if one studies and goes in to depth as of the linguistics, semantics and etymology of sanskrit and Gurmukhi they'd realise how this term should be interpreted.

You ask many Jathe-Bandian, even such as AKJ their general belief is also one I agree with on this issue. The term 'good', 'true' and 'real' can only be given to a divine form, and you cannot consider humans to be divine, this is not a Sikh practice. As well as this, Bani clearly tells us we are in the cycle of reincarnation, living is false (hence attachment being denounced within Sikhi) and only death is 'real' , one who is living and can make errors, hasn't yet obtained mukti and cannot be 'true' and 'real'.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

[Matheen]

Whichever way you look at it (Viakaaran or otherwise), Bhagat Prahlad and Bhagat Kabir Ji are refeered to a 'Sant' in Gurbani.

[Kaljug Singh]

Fateh!

Are we "conversating" again? :D

If you think the term 'SANT' refers to humans and parchaariks of the current era, you are seriously misguided.

Sant in terms of Bani is in reference to the sanskrit word Sat. This was a verb used to describe ' good' and ' real', the root of which the term defined as a saint is different to the cognate of 'Sat', it is only because of the Bhakti influence, as well as the complex translation of sanskrit which led people to believe it is loosely translated to saint. It would be not be contextual for us to say that this is to be used as a title for mere humans from the shabads which we read, these shabads always preach equality of ALL with no exceptions, I personally believe the term 'SANT' is used in reference to Guru Sahib themselves, and when people say there is use of plural, 'SANTS' is most likely to be the sangat who are following Guru Sahib, there isn't any indication that there is to be any human form of sant, nor are we to practice a system of 'Sant' following, the term has been misinterpreted, and if one studies and goes in to depth as of the linguistics, semantics and etymology of sanskrit and Gurmukhi they'd realise how this term should be interpreted.

You ask many Jathe-Bandian, even such as AKJ their general belief is also one I agree with on this issue. The term 'good', 'true' and 'real' can only be given to a divine form, and you cannot consider humans to be divine, this is not a Sikh practice. As well as this, Bani clearly tells us we are in the cycle of reincarnation, living is false (hence attachment being denounced within Sikhi) and only death is 'real' , one who is living and can make errors, hasn't yet obtained mukti and cannot be 'true' and 'real'.

So now you are saying Sants don't exist again? Singh, make up your mind and let me know when you have come to a decision.

And I thought you only follow Sri Guru Granth Sahib, but now you are using the AKJ as some sort of authority? And, pray tell, what other jatha does not believe in the existence of Sants?

Does your last sentence mean that you are both a liar and a figment of my imagination?

See the references that SunSingh and other Gursikhs have given you regarding Sants and Brahmgyanis, and listen to what they are saying as they are being patient and kind and going out of their way to educate you.

Regards,

K.

[ghorandhar]

Kaljug Singh you my friend, I do not wish to conversate with nor do I wish to meet anybody like you in my life.

You take everything I say out of context, whether this is to annoy me, I don't know, but I assume it is because you cannot disprove me when my point is thought in context. Until you do that I do not wish to further respond to your non-contextual, incorrect and irrelevant lies, you have not backed up any of your points with quote from Gurbani and your manmat principles are useless. Good luck in your life, please try not to refer to me in future posts, I don't really want any association to one who lies and intentionally misinterprets and misguides people in order to boost their own ego, you're incorrect and everything you said to me has been proven wrong with quotes I've shown you from Bani, now gracefully please stop refering to me.

Well mate, if you do not want people to respond to your ideas, it's probably not a good idea to post them on a discussion forum.

As to who is lying and who is not, your posts are all here for everyone to read so they can make their own minds up.

I never questioned whether they exist, but those who are put forward nowadays as Sants don't do anything in a selfless manner, they only do so for personal gain, this is not Sikhi.

Well, it's good to know that you now agree that Sants do exist since plenty of people here have shown you the relevant shabads.

As to quoting gurbani, Singh, I could show you a line from Sri Guru Granth Sahib that says the sky is blue and you will turn around and say, well blue here actually means green, and by sky Guru ji actually meant apples, and of course "is" is "were" as the apples Guru Ji is actually talking about are Delicious Red apples that have now become ripe - and this is why oranges are forbidden in Sikhism.

Regards,

K.

If you think the term 'SANT' refers to humans and parchaariks of the current era, you are seriously misguided.

Sant in terms of Bani is in reference to the sanskrit word Sat. This was a verb used to describe ' good' and ' real', the root of which the term defined as a saint is different to the cognate of 'Sat', it is only because of the Bhakti influence, as well as the complex translation of sanskrit which led people to believe it is loosely translated to saint. It would be not be contextual for us to say that this is to be used as a title for mere humans from the shabads which we read, these shabads always preach equality of ALL with no exceptions, I personally believe the term 'SANT' is used in reference to Guru Sahib themselves, and when people say there is use of plural, 'SANTS' is most likely to be the sangat who are following Guru Sahib, there isn't any indication that there is to be any human form of sant, nor are we to practice a system of 'Sant' following, the term has been misinterpreted, and if one studies and goes in to depth as of the linguistics, semantics and etymology of sanskrit and Gurmukhi they'd realise how this term should be interpreted.

You ask many Jathe-Bandian, even such as AKJ their general belief is also one I agree with on this issue. The term 'good', 'true' and 'real' can only be given to a divine form, and you cannot consider humans to be divine, this is not a Sikh practice. As well as this, Bani clearly tells us we are in the cycle of reincarnation, living is false (hence attachment being denounced within Sikhi) and only death is 'real' , one who is living and can make errors, hasn't yet obtained mukti and cannot be 'true' and 'real'.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Veer Confusingh jee you can present as many ideas as you like however they are all maan gharat as they are without gurbani di shabad. Where you did use gurbani u took pangtia out to fit your own belief. You have not responded to the shabad in baraahmaah, why is guru jee making specific referance to meeting these sants if according to your belief there is no human form? Then you are saying that sants is referrring to the sangat who follow guru sahib jee. What you are saying makes no sense. If they are not in human form then how can they be in the sangat?

Kahit Kabir Soonhoo ri santo, sadh sangat tar jahee ga. Kabir jee is talking to sants here, so how can they not be in human form? Also you will see that Sants and Sadh Sangat are referred to by Bhagat Kabir jee as different. But you are say something else.

As for whether sant is in plural or singular, u would need to look at whether there is a unkar under the tata.

Im not sure how sant is from Sat. And if you want to look at sanskrit then Bhai Vir singh jee refers to sanskit books which refer to the word sant. look at page 95 of his Guru Granth Sahib Kosh footnote 1.

Rather than your maan gharat defintion, gurbani defines a sant and unlike your interpretation it is referrring to a person.

Jina saas giraas na visarai har nama man maant. Dhan Si Nanaka puraan sohee sant. Ang 319

All teekakar agree with the definition of sant and sants like Veer Matheen jee said. However those people who dont agree with this view on sants use Prof Sahib Singh jees teeka but why on this issue are they arguing something different?. Look at Prof Sahib singh jees translation yourself.

If you look at the words Sant (with unkar) Santoo, Sant Sadh of Bhai Vir Singh jees Kosh you will understand alot more. If you read the shabad in baraahmaah, you will realise the idea is not following a sant, but you are stuck on this one point. (chet Gobind Aradheeai, hovai anand ghana. sant jana mil payai, rasana naam bhana.)

[Guest confusingh]

Firstly, Kaljug Singh I would like to apologise if in any way I seemed aggressive or unfriendly, as I've said many times I see you an all other Sikhs who stand united under the Nishan Sahib and follow the hukam of Guru ji as my fellow brothers and sisters, I wish not argue with you but rather debate, and I hope you can take the time to just give my opinions a thought, and respectfully allow me the chance to debate, as I said I see all Sikhs as my brothers and sisters (its our rehat maryada to do so) and I do not see us as from different faiths, rather just different interpretations.

In regards to quotes and shabads; It is only with correct interpretation, if we understand the language and its context when written by Guru ji and other Bhagats, I am stating fact, it was derived from Sat. and Guru Gobind Singh Ji knew several languages so there are no doubts in anybodys mind that all words used were intentional. I recently spoke to a professor of south asian lingustics from Bristol University, this was again confirmed, just before I said this on this forum, let me be more precise, I understand the term Sant is used in plural and singular form, put this in context, in which we use the shabad 'jhooti dekhi preet jagat mein' for our Antim Sanskar, we are advised to not go towards emotional attachment as this life is not forever and is not 'real' (kaljug singh; this is meant in terms of mukti, which is the only truth, accepted generally by most Sikhs). My suggestion is to be contextual, these quotes all speak of those who ARE the definitions of Sat/ Sant... which is somebody who has obtained Mukti and has Waheguru's grace, this is not possible in human form, so it speaks of something which we cannot be so conclusive about as to say that this person should be named Sant and this one Bhai.

My point is firstly the correct interpretation of Sant, is that it is derived from Sat (the Sanskrit term) and in regards to the human form claim... Waheguru is not in human form, there are many things which are not in human form, Mukti is the meeting of Sants their wisdom is obtained through a Gursikh life, in which the return is Mukti, I believe there is Waheguru's presence amongst Sangat, and Waheguru is present in everybody, this doesn't mean there is a part of our body called Waheguru, it means it is internal is within our soul which is the tool with which we attain Mukti, do bad things, bad things will happen in a later life, do good things, good things will happen. Veer Ji there are also clear shabads which I will edit on this post once I get the time, which tell us that Waheguru is amongst and within us all, therefore it would be contradictory to say that 'Sants' obtain more of Waheguru's kirpa than anybody else, as in a Sikh's eyes Akal Purakh should not be seen as discriminatory.

Once again, I understand people have different beliefs on this issue, I however do not wish to ignore facts and context when reading Bani as this will then lead one to make a judgement which isn't in light of all information. I did not say AKJ are an authority figure for me, they are not at all, but I do agree with their view on 'Sant'.

Also, one needs to understand that das is not saying some of these people who incorrectly use the title of 'Sant' are not good people, they are some great Gursikhs and I myself say they have done some great seva for the panth, but 'Sant' shouldn't be used as a title as it is within other faiths, as this is not in keeping with the basic principles of Sikhi.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

[SunSingh]

please feel free to read the entire series of posts i have linked to above. and then refute all of that, using Gurbani, if you can.