ਵੇਦਾ ਮਹਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਉਤਮੁ

[kam1825]

Bijla Singh first of all, i think you have put accross your arguements very well.

I have read Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha's books some i like some i am cautious about. I agree we are Sikhs and not Hindus, not a Samparda of Hindus but a seperate faith altogether thus Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha wrote the book.

My personal favorite workd of Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha is the Gurchand Divakar.

I have never stated Guru Sahib studied the Vedas. They would never have needed to those who are Brahmgianis and Roop of Akaal Purkh do not need to study any scripture as their words are the scriptues. _ Sadh Ke Bachan Utam Salok

To compare modern day Sikhs to Brahmgianis or the Gurus is ludicrus, i do not even have a small amount or karmic grace to be in a conversation where we compare ourselves to them.

I agree with you that Brahmgianis and the Gurus did not study the vedas or touch them. this cannot be considered a valuable arguemaent for us not to study them. However if you read the Dasam Granth you can see that Guru Gobind Singh Ji did study the Purans (Chandi Charritar), The Srimad Bhagawat Mahapuran and Garuda Puran (Choubis Avtar), The Geeta (Gobind Geeta), The Atharvan Ved (Rudra Avtar and Gian Parbodh). Guru Hargobind Ji had the Katha of the Garuda Puran recited in katha by Pandit Nitanand. Bhai Gurdas Ji from his Vaaran shows he read the Shastars and Simratees. The Kabit Sawaiyai are based on the 9 largest Upanishads. Bhai Sobha Singh Sainapatee did a translation of the Chankaya Raajneetee at the order of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji. So if you follow what the Gurus and Sikhs you shold read all of these rahter then using the example of Sant Attar Singh Ji who again were a pooran Brahmgiani and learned all their vidiya from Nirmalas including the Sanatan granths.

If you are to follow the examples of the Guru's with regards to vidiya then Sri Guru Ram Das ji had no schooling at all but wrote loads of bani in 30 different raags. Now show me another uneduacated person that can do this. A comparison cannot be done.

Vedant is worth learnings. Look at the deep meanings of the Mool Mantar Katha by Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji. Without Vedant and the Vedas can you tell me what the terms of Viraat, Abyakrit and hirngrbh are with regards to Ik Onkar. The 6 Parmans such as Shabad and Partakh Parmaan. The reason for Too Sada Salamat Nirankar coming in the Jap Ji Sahib 4 times and the 4 Mahavakyas in the Vedas!

Vedas just help with the individuals knowledge of understanding the vast concepts of gurbani and the endless ocean of knowledge gurbani is when compared to wnything else in existance.

you say the bhagats did not study the Vedas at all but Bhagat Ramanand Ji did, Bhagat Jai Dev ji did, the Bhatts did, Bhagat Pipa Ji did and So did Bhagat Soordas. They did it for their help in understanding thats all.

I am not saying the Vedas are the be all and end all. That is Gurbani but the Vedas are your foundation.

Without the Vedas you end up wit Teekas like Joginder Singh Talwaras which are extremely basic and give you nothing antreev for a spiritual understanding.

The one main Gurbani Shabad which i cant find out the moment is by Sri Guru Amar Das Ji about a tree with two birds on it. One of the birds is sitting and watching and the other is flying and interacting with the environment. If you take this as Viakharan Arth it means nothing spiritually. If you have read the vedas and the upanishads you will find this same teaching and i mean exactly the same! In the Vedas it applies the Sakhi roop and Chadibhaas roops to the two birds to understand what is actually being said. The shabad in Gurbani is exactly the same as that from the Upanishads. Makes a person wonder is during Guru amar Das Ji's time prior to meeting Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji had studied these Sanatan Texts.

Sant Gurbahan Singh Ji's teeka of the Sri Japji Sahib, Rehiras and Kiratn Sohila is available to purchase in India. The rest of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is halfway through and should be out soon.

Bijla singh what i think you are failing to understand about my arguement is not that we have to live in line with Vedantic thoughts or live in accordance to the Vedas. However we should study the Vedas to help out with the Gurmat principles as Sant Gurbachan Singh ji did and you can hear through his katha. In comparison if you compare the teeka of professor Sahib Singh and Sant Gurbachan Singh you will see what is inferoir due to the vast amount of knowledge gained by Sant Giani Gurbachan Singh Ji through the study of other religious texts wether they be Sanatan or Simetic. Prof Sahib Singhs approach of just using Viakaran limits his understanding of knowledge. There are no uthanikas, no antreev arths, no dates or places for where the gurbani was recited no explanations for various terms such as 6 Jatees, 9 Naths, etc

If Prof Sahib Singh had studied like the old puratan Taksalis (not modern day) thay would have had a greater understanding of Gurbani as Sant Gubachan Singh Ji

[Bijla Singh]

Doing a comparison of taksal with kahn Singh nabha is reficulous even for you bilja singh, doing a comparison of even one jathedar is rediculous, try it and tell me how far you get. Making comparisons is rediculous. Change your picture bhai sahib jeo and have one of kahn singh nabha then as he has given lots to the panth.

I cannot fall at the low level of comparing two Sikhs and their avasthas. I did not do any comparison. If you are so worked up about just the thought of comparison then how tolerant will you become when one actually does do the comparison? Each Sikh contributes differently but it doesn’t mean one is better than the other. I respect Sant Jarnail Singh Ji and think he was a great Sikh leader. You need to show some respect to other Sikhs as well. I respect Bhai Kahan Singh but doesn’t mean I follow him. Taksal used to have rational reasoning for their beliefs but nowadays it is all about “Sant Ji said so”. Do you have any gauge by which you measure one’s avastha? I am interested to know. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t make them inferior. With attitude Taksalis have these days, there is no room for improvements because they are stuck with “Sant Ji had big kamayee and therefore always correct”. They forget Bani “Bhulan Andar Sab Ko”. Sant Ji like Nanksar said that there are 24000 words in Sukhmani Sahib and a person breathes 24000 times in a day which is false. Sukhmani Sahib doesn't have 24000 words and breathes vary from person to person.

To compare modern day Sikhs to Brahmgianis or the Gurus is ludicrus, i do not even have a small amount or karmic grace to be in a conversation where we compare ourselves to them.

Exactly so we shouldn’t compare anyone’s avastha with another. Avastha is different than knowledge.

I agree with you that Brahmgianis and the Gurus did not study the vedas ......Bhai Sobha Singh Sainapatee did a translation of the Chankaya Raajneetee at the order of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji

First you say Guru Sahib didn’t study the Vedas and then you say they did. I actually never said Guru Sahib didn’t study them because they did and that is why they rejected them. I only stated that I do not need to study the Vedas in order to understand Gurbani and its principles because numerous Sikh scholars did not study them. Vaars are the key to Gurbani and the best source to learn Gurmat. Bhai Gurdas Ji was a great scholar but no historical record shows that he had to study Vedas first in order to understand Gurmat. Studying for the sake of knowledge is one thing but I do not agree that they are the basics of Gurbani. Such a statement gives RSS type goons to state that Gurbani comes from Vedas.

So if you follow what the Gurus and Sikhs you shold read all of these rahter then using the example of Sant Attar Singh Ji who again were a pooran Brahmgiani and learned all their vidiya from Nirmalas including the Sanatan granths. If you are to follow the examples of the Guru's with regards to vidiya then Sri Guru Ram Das ji had no schooling at all but wrote loads of bani in 30 different raags.

Copying them and following them are two different things. Guru Sahib instructed us to keep rehat and follow Gurmat not study Vedas. One who tries to mimic Guru Sahib is a big fool. Guru Sahib had all the knowledge and he has rejected Vedas and called them false, I accept this. I do not have to waste years to reach the same conclusion. My Guru’s words are enough for me. Don’t you think?

Vedant is worth learnings. Look at the deep meanings of the Mool Mantar Katha by Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji. ......the 4 Mahavakyas in the Vedas

!

This I partially agree with. Anything that can help you understand Gurbani is good. To understand these terms and learn 4 type of darshans, 9 type of bhagtee, counting from 1 to 20 (spiritually of course), 9 nidhis, 18 sidhis etc I can use Katha Updesh Sagar, Mahan Kosh etc. and listen to katha done by Sant Ji. Again, we do not have to reinvent the wheel. Learning these terms is of no use when it comes to spirituality and salvation. It adds to your knowledge but nothing more. Gurbani has words from many different languages such as Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic, Sindhi, Marathai, Punjabi etc but doesn’t mean Gurbani is an advanced course of all these languages and one must study them before they begin to understand Gurbani. I only have to know few words of these languages which come in Gurbani. Gurbani has its roots in Akal Purakh not in Vedas. Knowledge can be obtained from other scriptures and books but to assert that Gurbani has its roots in those books is completely false.

you say the bhagats did not study the Vedas at all but Bhagat Ramanand Ji did, Bhagat Jai Dev ji did, the Bhatts did, Bhagat Pipa Ji did and So did Bhagat Soordas. They did it for their help in understanding thats all.

Any historical evidence would be fine. I can assume Bhagat Ramanand Ji probably studied them but what he practiced and followed was much different. Hence, goes to show that Vedas did not help in his spiritual jeevan.

I am not saying the Vedas are the be all and end all. That is Gurbani but the Vedas are your foundation.

Vedas are not the foundation of Gurbani. Vedas were written by man but Gurbani came from Dhur. Vedas are written in Sanskrit but Gurbani in Gurmukhi. Gurbani rejects Vedas. Some terms appearing in both doesn’t make the older the foundation. Many terms in Gurbani come from Quran so will you say Quran is foundation of Gurbani? Language and terms used in Gurbani are not the property of Vedas and Quran. They were written by men but Gurbani is revealed. If it is a foundation of Vedas then Gurbani is not eternal and inferior to Vedas which I reject strongly.

Without the Vedas you end up wit Teekas like Joginder Singh Talwaras which are extremely basic and give you nothing antreev for a spiritual understanding.

Vedas are of no spiritual value in Gurmat. Viyakaran always applies whether you do basic meanings or use context and metaphor. Read books by Bhai Randhir Singh and see it for yourself. Viyakaran prevents manmat aarths but doesn’t limit Gurbani. I can give you some meanings by Sant Ji which are far better than what other scholars have said but those meanings do not violate viyakaran. I learned them from a student of Sant Ji but many Taksalis do not know them and reject them because that’s not what they have learned from audio tapes. Higher spiritual meanings come with naam kamayee not from Vedas. If naam abhiyaas can show you Waheguru from within then what is mere knowledge? Bhai Veer Singh Ji fell sick because he became confused over which meanings to write. This wasn’t due to his knowledge of Vedas but higher spiritual jeevan.

Bijla singh what i think you are failing to understand about my arguement is not that we have to live in line with Vedantic thoughts or live in accordance to the Vedas. However we should study the Vedas to help out with the Gurmat principles as Sant Gurbachan Singh ji did and you can hear through his katha.

I understand your argument very well. I do not agree that Vedas are foundation of Gurbani because I consider it an insult whereas this is your way of superiorizing Gurbani. I would say Gurbani is the foundation of everything because it contains Naam and Naam is the root of all the existence. Foundation means without which something cannot exist and according to your argument Gurbani cannot exist without Vedas which is an insult. Vedas may help you gain some knowledge but they cannot give muktee, give naam and provide peace of mind. Gurbani does all that which makes it superior and totally independent of Vedas.

Prof Sahib Singhs approach of just using Viakaran limits his understanding of knowledge. There are no uthanikas, no antreev arths, no dates or places for where the gurbani was recited no explanations for various terms such as 6 Jatees, 9 Naths, etc

I have heard some katha by Sant Ji and also study Bhai Veer Singh Ji’s teeka. I study other sources but I do not blindly follow them. I study Gurbani objectively and if I find something wrong I try to explore it. This is not insulting those Gursikh scholars but learning from them. I highly doubt they considered their work to be 100%. We as Sikhs should make improvements and advance further. Disagreeing with them doesn’t make them inferior or question their spirituality. Prof. Sahib Singh did not go into detailing when and why the Shabad was revealed because just the basics took him 36 years and regardless viyakaran would still apply. Prof. Sahib Singh has explained what nidhis etc are. He chose to leave such details out because they do not add much to understand the underlying message of Gurbani. I have read meanings according to viyakaran that explain the context and when and where the Shabad was revealed.

My only disagreement is that Vedas are not foundation of Gurbani because many other sources, books and languages can be used to understand Gurbani but they do not make its foundation. Something that helps you understand Gurbani doesn’t become the foundation. If you want to continue I think we can limit the discussion just to this. I have no doubt about Sant Ji’s higher spiritual jeevan, knowledge and scholarship. But I also believe that everyone is bound to make mistakes and there can be and are errors in Sant Ji’s interpretation which is not insulting him. Beliefs should be defended by reasoning not by standing behind one’s spiritual jeevan. Guru Rakha

[Pheena]

ਵੇਦਾ ਮਹਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਉਤਮੁ ਸੋ ਸੁਣਹਿ ਨਾਹੀ ਫਿਰਹਿ ਜਿਉ ਬੇਤਾਲਿਆ ॥

The above pankti is usually translated as: "In the Vedas, the ultimate objective is the Naam, the Name of the Lord; but they do not hear this, and they wander around like demons."

The entire pauri is about wasting this precious life in rituals and maya. The translation does not fit in the context or with the rest of Gurbani. Wherever a person wasting his life is mentioned in Gurbani, seeking the guidance of Satguru is recommended. I have come across a better translation by Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha in Hum Hindu Nahin. According to him, the correct way to read this pankti is:

ਵੇਦਾ ਮਹਿ, ਨਾਮੁ ਉਤਮੁ ਸੋ ਸੁਣਹਿ ਨਾਹੀ, ਫਿਰਹਿ ਜਿਉ ਬੇਤਾਲਿਆ ॥

Meaning - ਨਾਮੁ ਉਤਮੁ ਸੋ ਸੁਣਹਿ ਨਾਹੀ, ਵੇਦਾ ਮਹਿ ਬੇਤਾਲਿਆ ਜਿਉ ਫਿਰਹਿ

Those who do not listen to the supreme Naam, wonder about in Vedas and

ਕਹੈ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਜਿਨ ਸਚੁ ਤਜਿਆ ਕੂੜੇ ਲਾਗੇ ਤਿਨੀ ਜਨਮੁ ਜੂਐ ਹਾਰਿਆ ॥੧੯॥

Nanak says, those who abandon the truth (Naam) and cling to falsehood lose their lives in the waste (gamble).

The entire pauri talks about people who appear "nirmal" or pure from outside but they are impure from inside because they are attached to maya, worldly pleasures and wonder about in Vedas. Next pauri talks about being pure inside.

....

.....

...

If anyone insists that Vedas have Naam then please specify which Vedas on which page talks about getting Naam. What is this Naam and how can one obtain it? What is the process? If Vedas give Naam then why aren't they consider Satguru and why were they rejected by Guru Sahib? Why didn't Guru Sahib preach the Naam of Vedas?

.....

.....

....

.

Can you tell us what is Naam and how we can identify that it does really exist in the Vedas to which you find acceptable?

[Gurmat Sangeet]

Edited - Personal attacks not allowed.

I ll post more detail response on his vikayaran arths in next couple of days. Thats it for now.

Anandmangal !

[Bijla Singh]

Namstang, this “issue” for you is viyakaran vs. samparda. Had it not been you wouldn’t be posting. Anyways, I have very well read what Prof. Sahib Singh has written. I disagree with him and agree with Bhai Randhir Singh. Prof. Sahib Singh wrote the first teeka according to viyakaran but he did not invent it. Bhai Sahib found out about viyakaran in jail and wrote a book in details. He wrote Gurmat Guaravta and many other books on how Gurmat is unique and superior. Though Prof. Sahib Singh was a great scholar he made mistakes and I have found many (don’t twist the words).

1) His teeka rejects significance of holy ishnaan at Darbar Sahib.

2) His personal beliefs were also mixed with his work. For example, he was a meat eater so not a single interpretation in his teeka goes against meat.

3) He considered five khands only spiritual stages which is wrong.

4) He assumed Sidh Goast debate took place at Batala. So his interpretation at many places is wrong. Bhai Veer Singh Ji also supports this thought but both are mistaken. Dr. Trilochan Singh has explained it very well that the debate actually took place in the mountains and proofs lie in abundance in the bani.

5) There are some errors in interpretation of Barah Maha Tukhari. I have discussed some panktis on tapoban forum. Read them yourself and see that I disagree whenever I find something wrong. There are interpretation errors at other places as well.

6) His teeka doesn’t always explain the context. For example, he sometimes rejects heavens, hell and jamdoots and other times his interpretation clearly supports it.

The point is his work is not the end of interpretation or viyakaran. His work was further taken up by other scholars. Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, Bhai Joginder Singh etc. studied Gurbani according to viyakaran. So when I read Prof. Sahib Singh’s work I keep the above points in mind and check what other scholars have written. You can reject what I write simply based on your discretion but when you reject scholar’s work you must have a rational reasoning. Your entire post attacks me and calls me all sorts of names. This doesn’t bother me but you have not proved anything. Neither does your post prove me wrong nor does it add anything to the subject. I wonder if this is what you have learned from “mahapurakhs” over the years. Your post shows intolerance, lack of intellect, attacks personally and contains insulting names yet I am the “Taliban” and “shariya follower”.

Gurmat is superior and surely “black and white” because it doesn’t give any room for “manmat options”. Gurmat is all about following the hukam. If Gurmat says, Vedas (hindu books) are false and have no Naam then it is that. Gurbani wouldn’t say anything else. Word Ved is used in different context and has multiple meanings but four books of Hindus are not given any respectable status in Gurbani. Bhagat Ji says he rejects both and doesn’t follow them. Then why is he saying not to call them false? If Vedas are not false then why didn’t he follow them? You didn’t give any example of what inconsistencies Gurbani has. Interpretation I have provided is taken directly from Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha's book not cooked up by me. You need to prove why this is wrong. I wait for your response on the Shabad and I hope next time you will be little more open minded and would discuss the Shabad rather than attacking me.

[kam1825]

Bijla Singh just a very quick thing i dont want to go off the topic too much

"4) He assumed Sidh Goast debate took place at Batala. So his interpretation at many places is wrong. Bhai Veer Singh Ji also supports this thought but both are mistaken. Dr. Trilochan Singh has explained it very well that the debate actually took place in the mountains and proofs lie in abundance in the bani."

Have you heard Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji's Uthanika to the Sidh Gosht and the Sakhi int he Gurbilas Patshshi 6 that the Katha of the Sidh Gosht was actually recited after the discussion with the sidhs!

Worth listening to!

[Jai Tegang!]

Doing a comparison of taksal with kahn Singh nabha is reficulous even for you bilja singh, doing a comparison of even one jathedar is rediculous, try it and tell me how far you get. Making comparisons is rediculous. Change your picture bhai sahib jeo and have one of kahn singh nabha then as he has given lots to the panth.

I cannot fall at the low level of comparing two Sikhs and their avasthas. I did not do any comparison. If you are so worked up about just the thought of comparison then how tolerant will you become when one actually does do the comparison? Each Sikh contributes differently but it doesn’t mean one is better than the other. I respect Sant Jarnail Singh Ji and think he was a great Sikh leader. You need to show some respect to other Sikhs as well. I respect Bhai Kahan Singh but doesn’t mean I follow him. Taksal used to have rational reasoning for their beliefs but nowadays it is all about “Sant Ji said so”. Do you have any gauge by which you measure one’s avastha? I am interested to know. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t make them inferior. With attitude Taksalis have these days, there is no room for improvements because they are stuck with “Sant Ji had big kamayee and therefore always correct”. They forget Bani “Bhulan Andar Sab Ko”. Sant Ji like Nanksar said that there are 24000 words in Sukhmani Sahib and a person breathes 24000 times in a day which is false. Sukhmani Sahib doesn't have 24000 words and breathes vary from person to person.

24000 is an estimated amount for a regular person. Ofcourse it's going to vary according to someone's daily activity.

Here's the 24000 breakdown:

In Sukhmani Sahib there are...

1) 21,624 akhars (letters)

2) 2,373 "pair vich" akhars (letters written below letters)

3) 3 "nana's" taken from three panktis where word santan is used.

Source: Sant Makhan Singh (Sato Kee Gali wale) ji's Sukhmani sahib katha. They mention this at about 7 min into the katha.

[Bijla Singh]

I will certainly listen to Sant Ji's audio as I am further studying this topic.

1) 21,624 akhars (letters)

2) 2,373 "pair vich" akhars (letters written below letters)

3) 3 "nana's" taken from three panktis where word santan is used.

There are total 24976 words in Sukhmani Sahib and I can break it down to each Astpaddi count. Counting each akhar or letter would be far more. Is there any evidence that 24000 is normal for a regular person. Just count your own breathes and see what you come up with. It won't be 24000. I think it was a tactic to get people to read Sukhmani Sahib though a good one but not the truth.

[Dason da Das]

Vaheguru Ji ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Ji ki Fateh,

After such long discussions/debates is there any conclusion.

It appears, yes, gurbani rejects lot of the 'Karam-Kands' described in the Vedas. but not sure Gurbani engages in the controversy of the existence, creation of Ved, Katebs etc

Yes, Rig Ved is Mantrs praising not only 3 'devtas' but lots of devtas.

Yes, Yajur Ved defines Yaju-mantars for sacrifices, Havans etc. Describing what to sacrfice on what occasions and what mantars to read.

Yes, Sam Ved does have raag mantars for Som-ras drinkning sessions.

Yes, Atharv Ved does describe many spells, charms, yadoo-toonas and mantar-chhantars for remedying various deceases and other problems.

No Gurbani does not advocate any of these. Gurbani does not advocate contemplating of specific parts for specific purposes at specific days, times etc.

Gurbani is not about hindu bashing, Muslim bashing. It is about Karam-kand bashing though. We should make this clear in the posts. Yes, Gurbani does use some termonolgy from the contemporary scriptures such as Veds to give examples sometimes but its the message which is of utmost importace and that applies to all individuals/groups equally not only to the group it being addressed in the Shabad;

ਸਲੋਕੁ m: ੩ ॥ ਪਰਥਾਇ ਸਾਖੀ ਮਹਾ ਪੁਰਖ ਬੋਲਦੇ ਸਾਝੀ ਸਗਲ ਜਹਾਨੈ ॥

Let us look at things objectivley:

PERIOD: Medieval (Middle Ages).

PROBLEM: Too many religious rituals, too many dos & donts for too many functions, too much classification of Varans, practices, who can do what with what scripture at what time at what occasion, some not even allowed to hear the word of God, too complicated practices for the benefit of the few (not for spiritual benefit either). Too many formalised activities related to times, days, months etc. In short, too many religious people, groups but not a lot of religious virtues and virtous living, in fact very littlle.

CONSEQUENCES: Unequality, injustice, religious strife not only amongst main religions but also within hundreds of sects within any given religion. Due to lot of practices people dissociating themselves from many other people/groups because of there too, many beliefs, practices, dresses, eating habits, i have not the time to describe all, just TOOOO...OOOOO MANY.

''BANDE DA BANDA VERY''

Did not achive any spiritual transcendency either. Actually in the name of caring for the soul, people making mince meat (oh!) of human bodies. The true saviour of humanity Baba Nanak JI described the situation as:

ਸਲੋਕੁ ਮ: ੧ ॥ ਕਲਿ ਕਾਤੀ ਰਾਜੇ ਕਾਸਾਈ ਧਰਮੁ ਪੰਖ ਕਰਿ ਉਡਰਿਆ ॥ ਕੂੜੁ ਅਮਾਵਸ ਸਚੁ ਚੰਦ੍ਰਮਾ ਦੀਸੈ ਨਾਹੀ ਕਹ ਚੜਿਆ ॥

SOLUTION: Back 2 basics, simplification of the true concept for the welfare of the whole human race and for the nurturing of the soul:

ਸਰਬ ਰੋਗ ਕਾ ਅਉਖਦੁ ਨਾਮੁ ॥

No more 'adumbars'. No more 'KURI PAAL'. Vah! Vah! Baba Nanak Ji! you gave us the true means to save the mankind from self destruction (spiritual, moral, social and political). Vah! Vah! Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji! you give us the eternal truth, guide us to live in harmony with God's entire. creation. Equality, justice for all, dignified social living, freedom of belief oh too many good things to mention.

So came the wonderful Ideology of Sikhism as a solution to all these man made problems!

CONCLUSION: period 21st century, problem worse. The hole we are digging for ourselves is now even deeper. Reason, we have introduced all the sysmptoms of the old age disease back into this pure, simple living of Sikhism. Rather than living the life of 'amrit sikhiya' of Gurbani we have managed to create our own 'Karam-kands' to get our dose of ego-boosters, so many factions even amongst Baba Ji's 'puttar-puttariyaan'. Are we really heeding:

ਅਵਲਿ ਅਲਹ ਨੂਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਕੇ ਸਭ ਬੰਦੇ ॥ ਏਕ ਨੂਰ ਤੇ ਸਭੁ ਜਗੁ ਉਪਜਿਆ ਕਉਨ ਭਲੇ ਕੋ ਮੰਦੇ ॥੧॥

All the problems of mantars, when and where, for what, how many times, ficticious count systems are in an the real counting to stop any addition to the pure Gurbani in the SGGSji may be ignored if it suits certain individuals/groups etc. One faction beating, killing other faction/s, does not seem like Baba Nanaks children behaving!!

Even the forums seem to be projecting falsifications, ego-feasting, twisting the truth as far we can to suit our ego to win the points. Was it really about this???

We need to wake up!

We need to smell the coffee!!

We need to learn and convey the eternal true immutable message 'VASTU' of the Gurbani not arguing, bickering about the 'Roop' (termonology, examples) of Gurbani which was based on the then 'Roop'.

Mary Christmas to you all (May be this will turn into food for more ego feasting! or for the more literary minds a debate 'Poh or Jeth' regarding the birth of the Christ as if really makes any difference to our daily living!) but hopefully, hopefully! for the most of you enjoy the anmol Vachan of the Saint Soldier- the Tenth Nanak:

'Hindu Turak kouoo rafzee immam safee

Manas kee jaat sabey eikey pahichanbo'

PS. may be after this post I should change my name to 'DAS TOO MUCH!'

[sikha]

In the words of our Gurus

Celibacy, self-discipline and pilgrimages were the essence of Dharma in those past ages; but in this Dark Age of Kali Yuga, the Praise of the Lord's Name is the essence of Dharma.

Each and every age has its own essence of Dharma; study the Vedas and the Puraanas, and see this as true.

"Idol worship, ritual, wearing the dhoti, and leaving the head bare are duties that were required in previous yugas(not during the present).

During the Kalyuga, the proper duty to observe is that which binds diciple to Guru. Each Yuga has its own Veda. For the Kalyuga it is the Atharva Veda. According to the Atharva Veda he who lives in the kalyuga and obeys the word of the Guru shall find rich fullfilmen, whereas he who does not obey it will sink in the ocean of existence."

-Sakhi Rehit Ki by Bhai Nand Lal

The vedas might have been the way earlier, but they are outdated now and will not bring you mukhtee.. but reading them and learning from them is good