A Correct Interpretation Of Dasam Bani

[Singhstah]

By KULBIR SINGH http://gurmatbibek.com/forum/read.php?3,4226

Veer Harinder Singh asked this Daas a question to which the response is presented below, for benefit of others.

Everything is Vaheguru himself since he is pervading in everything. About creating Naam:

ਆਪੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਆਪੁ ਸਾਜਿਓ ਆਪੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਰਚਿਓ ਨਾਉ ॥ ਦੁਯੀ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਸਾਜੀਐ ਕਰਿ ਆਸਣੁ ਡਿਠੋ ਚਾਉ ॥

1) First he established himself (not created) and then he created his Naam.

2) ਦੁਯੀ i.e. secondly he created ਕੁਦਰਤਿ which is also called Prakriti. This Prakriti is the ingredients (5 elements of this world) from which different forms were created e.g. different forms are made from clay. Clay is Prakriti and different forms are the visible universe.

As for Vaheguru having a consort, this is impossible. He has no partner and no equal. He himself is Naam-form as well because where did he create Naam from? From within himself. Nothing can be created from anywhere else because there is nothing beyond him. Everything comes from him. He has created many powers and many creations but everything was created from the Khanda or power of Naam:

ਪਉੜੀ ॥

ਖੰਡਾ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈ ਸਾਜ ਕੈ ਜਿਨ ਸਭ ਸੈਸਾਰੁ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥

ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਬਿਸਨੁ ਮਹੇਸ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਦਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਰਚਾਇ ਬਣਾਇਆ ॥

ਸਿੰਧ ਪਰਬਤ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਬਿਨੁ ਥੰਮ੍ਹਾ ਗਗਨਿ ਰਹਾਇਆ ॥

ਸਿਰਜੇ ਦਾਨੋ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਤਿਨ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਬਾਦੁ ਰਚਾਇਆ ॥

ਤੈ ਹੀ ਦੁਰਗਾ ਸਾਜਿ ਕੈ ਦੈਤਾ ਦਾ ਨਾਸੁ ਕਰਾਇਆ ॥

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਰਾਮ ਲੈ ਨਾਲ ਬਾਣਾ ਦਹਸਿਰੁ ਘਾਇਆ ॥

ਤੈਥੋਂ ਹੀ ਬਲੁ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਲੈ ਕੰਸੁ ਕੇਸੀ ਪਕੜਿ ਗਿਰਾਇਆ ॥

ਬਡੇ ਬਡੇ ਮੁਨਿ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਕਈ ਜੁਗ ਤਿਨੀ ਤਨੁ ਤਾਇਆ ॥

ਕਿਨੀ ਤੇਰਾ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ ॥ 2॥

In the above Pauri it becomes clear that Durga or Chandi or Devi is not the power or Shakti of Vaheguru. The first Pankiti clearly says that Khanda was created at first. Khanda here cannot mean Devi or Durga because Durga has been mentioned in the 5th line, later than even Vishnu, Brahma and Mahesh. Durga is just a creation of Vaheguru like other Devis, Devtas, Prophets etc.

Siri Asa kee Vaar says that he created Naam before the creation and in the above pauri of Chandi di Vaar, Guru Sahib is saying that Vaheguru first created Khanda; this proves that Naam and Khanda are one and the same thing. Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh has written that Bhagauti in "Siri Bhagauti jee Sahai" and "Pritham Bhagauti Simar kai" means not Durga Devi or Chandi Devi but it means Naam. Vichaari Durga can't become Sahai (of any help) to a Gurmukh who is a candidate of assistance from a much higher force.

Chandi, Durga or Devi has no importance in Gurmat. The whole idea of writing Krishnavtaar, Chandi di vaar and other such compositions is:

Dasam Katha Bhagaut kee Bhakhiya kari banaaye ||

Avar Baasna nahi Prabh, Dharamjudh ko chaaye ||

All these compositions are for "Dharam judh ko Chaaye" i.e. for the sake of Dharam Yudh, to instill Bir Rass in Sikhs. Nothing else. Guru Sahib's own words make it clear that the aim is Dharamjudh and not to praise these deities.

If you read the original chapter of Dasam Skand of Sirimad Bhagwat Puraan, "Judh Prabandh" in there is much smaller as compared to "Krishnavtaar". Jarasandh was the father-in-law of Kans, the Mama of Siri Krishna. He was a great warrior and the greatest wrestler of that time. Krishna killed his Mama Kans and to avenge the death of his son-in-law, Jarasandh attacked Mathura many times (17-18 times). Everytime he attacked, he was repulsed by Siri Krishna's forces but now the people of Mathura got sick of these everyday attacks and perhaps Krishna too was sick of fighting. So before the last attack, he move his kingdom to Dwarka (now in Gujrat) from Mathura.

The above battles between Jarasandh and Siri Krishna have been greatly detailed in Krishnavtaar and the reason obviously is "Dharamjudh ko Chaaye". Guru Sahib clearly writes that he has no other Baasna (reason, aim) but to instill Dharamjudh in Gursikhs. Sometimes Guru Sahib uses Durga and Mahikhasur as tools to create scenes of fierce battle and sometimes Rama and at other time Krishna. Guru Sahib is not giving any importance to these characters and nor these deities of Hindus have any importance for Sikhs. All these powers are of much lower level. Gursikhs of Siri Guru Nanak Dev jee are the worshippers of only Vaheguru and recognize no other power but Vaheguru.Vaheguru is all in all.

The level of Durga is that she brooms the ground at Gurdwara Sahibaan in order to maintain her power, as is evident from the Saakhi of Durga sweeping floor at Siri Kartarpur Sahib when Baba Lehna jee arrived there for the first time. How can such Durga or Chandi be a partner of Vaheguru and sharing power with Him?

Daas,

Kulbir Singh

[singhfauja]

Bhai Kulbir Singh has beautifully explained the real meaning of Bhagauti and Shakti. This is 100% inline with what other Panthic scholars have written on this same subject, namely in the works:

Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "ਦੇਵੀ ਪੂਜਨ ਪੜਤਾਲ"

Giani Ditt Singh's (Singh Sabha Lehar Founder) "ਦੁਰਗਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੋਧ"

Giani Manna Singh "ਦਸਮ ਗੁਰ ਗਿਰਾ ਸਰਵੇਖਣ" (published by Bhai Veer Singh Sahit Sadan)

Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha's "ਭਗੌਤੀ (ਭਗਉਤੀ)" and "ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਸਿਮਰ ਕੈ" and "ਮਹਾਕਾਲ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਅਰਾਧੀ"

Giani Harbans Singh Ji's "ਭਗਉਤੀ ਪਦ ਬਾਰੇ ਨਿਰਣਯ"

Bhai Randhir Singh Ji's "ਭਗਉਤੀ ਪਦ ਦਾ ਤੱਤ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਨਿਰਣਾ"

The above scholars ALL agreed that Bhagauti is the power (shakti) of Akal Purakh, ie: NAAM, not some eight or ten armed deity.

Despite this clarity, psuedo-Nihangs and pro-Sanatani Nirmala and Udassee minded individuals have intentionally tried to bombard Hindu symbolism and ritualism in Sikhism.

Sadly, sikhreality (Jwala Singh) have seemed to jumped on this bandwagon also.

The images posted of Hindu devi devtaas on his blog in connection to Sri Dasam Bani are sending a mixed message and adding add fuel to the fire created by the anti-Panthic elements that try to link Sri Dasam Granth to Hinduism.

First Sikhs don't worship images, and are against 'murti-puja'. Many such images were created as frescos during the time of Raja Ranjit Singh when Brahmanism has crept into many aspects of Sikhi via Nirmalas and Udasees.

These images were created by those whose were obsessed with only the qualities of Sargun and could not grasp the Nirgun power behind these scenes. They are misleading. I think it is our obligation to not promote such non-Gurmat depictions.

We don't need images to understand the message of Shabd-Guru.

When we read ਹਰਣਾਖਸੁ ਦੁਸਟੁ ਹਰਿ ਮਾਰਿਆ ਪ੍ਰਹਲਾਦੁ ਤਰਾਇਆ ॥ we don't need an image of 'NarSingh' (traditionally known as the incarnation of Vishnu) to understand this tuk.

The word ਹਰਿ is enough to illustrate the point that the evil ਹਰਣਾਖਸੁ was destroyed by the power of ਹਰਿ (Akal Purakh Himself), be it in the form of 'NarSingh.'

It is nonsense to just dismiss the above scholars and their views as "British influence." If it was not for the Singh Sabha movement, we would still have murtis of these devi devtas in Sri Darbar Sahib Harmandir Sahib and Sri Akal Takht Sahib and our local Gurdwaras along side saroops of Sri Gur Granth Sahib Ji. Without the Singh Sabha movement, instead of an Anand-Karj, Sikhs would still be circling a fire pit, while a pandit read passages from Ved.

His blog, Jwala Singh states:

The following is a passage from Khalsa Dharam Shaastar which is written by Bhai Avatar Singh Vahiria in 1914. Avatar Singh was a student of Bhai Khem Singh Ji Bedi. They were the main opposition of the British-educated version of the Singh Sabha which became the SGPC.

The Khalsa Dharam Shaastar was written ahead of time before most challenges against orthodox thought in Sikhism were started in the early 1900s. It speaks openly about orthodox traditions which are still held today by Nihang, Nirmale, Udasi, and Hazuri Sikhs.

This post links with the previous post [bhagauti Astotar Translation] because it explains the relationship between Devi/Chandi/Weapons. Avatar Singh also explains why Guru Gobind Singh Ji manifested the Devi [ref. Suraj Prakash Granth, Gurbilas Patshahi 10 etc], before he created the Khalsa. His thought does not differ with the katha in the previous post by Baba Inderjit Singh Ji.

Here is a picture of Khem Singh Bedi that Jwala Singh is referring to. Khem Singh used to sit parallel to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji on a gadee (cushion platform), it was Singh Sabha Lahore and Giani Dit Singh Ji who protested in outrage. Khem Singh wanted to treated like a Guru, in the image below there is a man doing chaur.

How can any Sikh approve of this?

Jwala Singh blog then states:

ਐਸੀ ਜਗਦੰਭਾ ਭਵਾਨੀ ਦੀ ਸੰਗ੍ਰਾਮਕ ਸ਼ਕਤੀ ਕਲਾ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਕਰਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਾਪਤ ਕੀਤੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾਨ ਦੁਵਾਰਾ ਅਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਦੇ ਵਿਚ ਸਥਾਪਨ ਕੀਤਾ ।

In this way, the ferocious battlefield power of Bhavani was manifested and used as a Kirpan when preparing Amrit.

Note: Avatar Singh is referring to when the Devi appeared before Guru Gobind Singh Ji and gave Her dagger [karad] to Guru Gobind Singh Ji for use in the Amrit Sanchaar [ref Suraj Prakash and Puratan Rehatnamas]. Giani Baba Inderjit Singh Ji also confirmed this with me.

Bhai Jwala Singh should read Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "ਦੇਵੀ ਪੂਜਨ ਪੜਤਾਲ" and Giani Ditt Singh's "ਦੁਰਗਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੋਧ", which makes it clear that NO DEVI appeared in front of Guru Gobind Singh Ji before the Baiaskhi 1699. Instead, Guru Gobind Singh Ji showed the Brahmin pandits who had been performing havan for years, praying for Durga to appear, that the Sri Sahib - Kirpan - was the real Chandi

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੇਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ ਕਰੇ ਏਕ ਤੇ ਦ੍ਵੈ ਸੁਭਟ ਹਾਥ ਸੋਹੀ ॥

and

ਨਮੋ ਤੇਗ ਤਰਵਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੱਗ ਖੰਡਾ ॥ ਮਹਾਂ ਰੁਦ੍ਰ ਰੂਪਾ ਬਿਰੂਪਾ ਪ੍ਰਚੰਡਾ ॥ (ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ)

Guru Granth Sahib Ji makes is clear that:

ਨਿਰਗੁਨੁ ਆਪਿ ਸਰਗੁਨੁ ਭੀ ਓਹੀ ॥ ਕਲਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਜਿਨਿ ਸਗਲੀ ਮੋਹੀ ॥ ਅਪਨੇ ਚਰਿਤ ਪ੍ਰਭਿ ਆਪਿ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਅਪੁਨੀ ਕੀਮਤਿ ਆਪੇ ਪਾਏ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਹੀ ਕੋਇ ॥

ਅਪਨਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਆਪਿ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖੈ ਠਾਕੁਰਿ ਰਚਨੁ ਰਚਾਇਆ ॥੧॥

Behind the scenes it is ONLY Akal Purakh and nothing else. The rest of creation is just his play. The devis, and devtaas are just part of the drama, but they not the reality.

The real DEVI, BHGAUTEE, CHANDEE is AKAL PURAKH SAHIB's SHAKTI - NAAM-Da-KHANDA.

In Sri Dasam Granth Sahib, Guru Gobind Singh Ji describes the drama (Natak) but then shows the REALITY.

The drama is there for knowledge and inspiration for dharam-yudh, in Chandi-Charriter 2, Guru Sahib states: ਸੁਨੈ ਸੂਮ ਸੋਫੀ ਲਹੈ ਜੁੱਧ ਗਾਢੈ... and in Krishanavtar, it is stated: ਦਸਮ ਕਥਾ ਭਾਗਉਤ ਕੀ ਭਾਖਾ ਕਰੀ ਬਨਾਇ॥ ਅਵਰ ਬਾਸਨਾ ਨਾਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਧਰਮ ਜੁੱਧ ਕੇ ਚਾਇ॥

Sadly, there are some factions within the Nihangs who are over zealously promoting the traditional Indian concepts of devi, bhagautee, and chandi and linking them to Sri Dasam Granth.

This is doing dis-service to those who have worked so hard to clarify these concepts according to Tat-Gurmat.

Here are some examples of such corruption:

3HO - Yogi Bhajan's group - has added a image of the Virgin Mary within the Khanda, and referr to the Khanda as "Adi Shaktee"

http://3.bp.blogspot...01C94CD1%5B1%5D

Neo-Nihangs mixing Hindu symbolism with Sikh Symbols and Gurbani (from Jwala Singh's blog site)

[GPS]

In Dasam bani chandi or devi is not a fixed meaning of Durga.So it is inappropriate to interpret chandi or Devi as Durga in Dasam Granth.Keep them separate.

Chandi is not personified in Dasam Granth.

Since dasam granth does not accept Durga fit to be venerated, it is of no use to bring this topic again and again for discussion.

Sikhism does not accord any status to any consort of akal purakah.I did not see anyone mentioning about consort of waheguru in otehr thread.if someone has said that it should be for drawing parallel between two philosophies or for simplification of the issues.

Naam and shabad are synonymous.Shabad/ naam is waheguru and waheguru is shabad/naam.

ਏਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਏਕੋ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਵਰਤੈ ਸਭ ਏਕਸੁ ਤੇ ਉਤਪਤਿ ਚਲੈ ॥

The One Shabad, the Word of the One God, is prevailing everywhere.

All the creation came from the One God

(sggs 1334).

Naam/shabad was there in the begining, is there and will be there forever.

ਰੂਪੁ ਨ ਰੇਖਿਆ ਜਾਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਤੀ ਤਉ ਅਕੁਲੀਣਿ ਰਹਤਉ ਸਬਦੁ ਸੁ ਸਾਰੁ ॥

When there was no form or shape or social class, then the Shabad, in its essence, resided in the Unmanifest Being

ang 945 SGGS ji

Shabad and naam are two sides of same coin.

[singhfauja]

GPS Ji,

There are a lot of people out there blindly following neo-Nihang propaganda that Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji was a devi upashak, as indicated on Jvala Singh's blog.

Jvala Singh stated in the thread Beautiful Old Manscript Of Dasam Granth, that all puratan Granths indicate this. I highly doubt Jvala Singh has read the works of the scholars mentioned in my previous post including Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "Devi Pujan Parrtal" in which he references Rattan Singh Bhangu, Giani Gian Singh Ji and others on this very matter.

Bhai Vir Singh Ji's states that in third edition of "Twareek Khalsa", Giani Gian Singh Ji admits that he and other writers of the past have made mistakes, and that he himself is mending his mistakes by correcting his past errors. Sikhs do not blindly follow any Gianis or historic Granths that do not pass the litmus test of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and Sri Dasam Patshah's Ji's Bani.

The only Bhagauti that appeared in front of the havan by Kesho Pandit Das was Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji's Kirpan. The Sri Sahib is the symbol of Akal Purakh Sahib Ji's Naam-Roopee-Gyan-Kharag-Khandaa. Devis and devtas have no part to play in the creation or protection of Khalsa Panth.

Neo-Nihangs are treading a dangerous line by spreading this type of propaganda. There are a few of them around in Budha Dal who hold such beliefs.

[sikhreality]

GPS Ji,

There are a lot of people out there blindly following neo-Nihang propaganda that Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji was a devi upashak, as indicated on Jvala Singh's blog.

Jvala Singh stated in the thread Beautiful Old Manscript Of Dasam Granth, that all puratan Granths indicate this. I highly doubt Jvala Singh has read the works of the scholars mentioned in my previous post including Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "Devi Pujan Parrtal" in which he references Rattan Singh Bhangu, Giani Gian Singh Ji and others on this very matter.

You have not listened to the katha posted on www.sikh-reality.blogspot.com under the Bhagauti Astotar section, yet you continue to put words in my mouth.

I have read the works of Bhai Vir Singh and Bhai Bishan Singh [Durga Prabodh] and "Babu" Teja Singh Bhasauria [bhagauti Prabodh], in fact I have all these at home. To be honest they did not convince me from away what I learnt from Baba Giani Inderjit Singh Ji and read from all old Sikh literature from 1700-1800s.

To be honest I do not think we are that far off from what we believe, please listen to the katha before we continue this discussion.

btw... Bhai Vir Singh was notorious for changing editions of Panth Prakash [Naveen and Pracheen] and Suraj Prakash to suit what he thought was Gurmat [at that time].....

[sikhreality]

Bhai Kulbir Singh has beautifully explained the real meaning of Bhagauti and Shakti. This is 100% inline with what other Panthic scholars have written on this same subject, namely in the works: Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "ਦੇਵੀ ਪੂਜਨ ਪੜਤਾਲ" Giani Ditt Singh's (Singh Sabha Lehar Founder) "ਦੁਰਗਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੋਧ"

Giani Manna Singh "ਦਸਮ ਗੁਰ ਗਿਰਾ ਸਰਵੇਖਣ" (published by Bhai Veer Singh Sahit Sadan)

Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha's "ਭਗੌਤੀ (ਭਗਉਤੀ)" and "ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਸਿਮਰ ਕੈ" and "ਮਹਾਕਾਲ ਕਾਲਿਕਾ ਅਰਾਧੀ"

Giani Harbans Singh Ji's "ਭਗਉਤੀ ਪਦ ਬਾਰੇ ਨਿਰਣਯ"

Bhai Randhir Singh Ji's "ਭਗਉਤੀ ਪਦ ਦਾ ਤੱਤ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਨਿਰਣਾ"

The above scholars ALL agreed that Bhagauti is the power (shakti) of Akal Purakh, ie: NAAM, not some eight or ten armed deity.

Despite this clarity, psuedo-Nihangs and pro-Sanatani Nirmala and Udassee minded individuals have intentionally tried to bombard Hindu symbolism and ritualism in Sikhism.

Sadly, sikhreality (Jwala Singh) have seemed to jumped on this bandwagon also.

Firstly, "I" do not say anything, I merely post real old historical documentation rather than neo-scholars.

Secondly, even in my posts, they do not disagree with the concept that Bhagauti = Shakti/Maya. If so, please show me where.

Thirdly, the above "scholars' that you mentioned have all one thing in common, they were present during the Gurdrawa Reform Movement and British Rule, and all wanted to seperate themselves and run as far away from concepts that related to Hinduism as much as possible.

The images posted of Hindu devi devtaas on his blog in connection to Sri Dasam Bani are sending a mixed message and adding add fuel to the fire created by the anti-Panthic elements that try to link Sri Dasam Granth to Hinduism.

All I posted was a photograph of an old hand written saroop of Dasam Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, I was hoping some people [which they did] would appreciate having darshan of such an absolutely beautiful Saroop. Just like my blog, I try not post my opinion about how to interpret the posting, or my personal beliefs in Sikhi.

With the blessings of Giani Baba Inderjit Singh Ji I just post translations of old Granths, be it Gurbani from Sri Sarbloh Granth or historical documentation from historical Granths. However people interpret them that is fine.

ਆਪੁ ਆਪਨੀ ਬੁਧਿ ਹੈ ਜੇਤੀ ॥ ਬਰਨਤ ਭਿੰਨ ਭਿੰਨ ਤੁਹਿ ਤੇਤੀ ॥

Each person, according to his understanding, gives Your description disparately.

ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰਯੋਪਖਯਾਨ Charitropakhyaan

I am not here to preach what I believe Sikhi is, I'm just uploading whatever I find interesting while in my personal reading time.

Jwala Singh blog then states:

Bhai Jwala Singh should read Bhai Vir Singh Ji's "ਦੇਵੀ ਪੂਜਨ ਪੜਤਾਲ" and Giani Ditt Singh's "ਦੁਰਗਾ ਪ੍ਰਬੋਧ", which makes it clear that NO DEVI appeared in front of Guru Gobind Singh Ji before the Baiaskhi 1699. Instead, Guru Gobind Singh Ji showed the Brahmin pandits who had been performing havan for years, praying for Durga to appear, that the Sri Sahib - Kirpan - was the real Chandi

ਨਮੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਬਢੇਲੀ ਸਰੋਹੀ ॥ ਕਰੇ ਏਕ ਤੇ ਦ੍ਵੈ ਸੁਭਟ ਹਾਥ ਸੋਹੀ ॥ and ਨਮੋ ਤੇਗ ਤਰਵਾਰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਖੱਗ ਖੰਡਾ ॥ ਮਹਾਂ ਰੁਦ੍ਰ ਰੂਪਾ ਬਿਰੂਪਾ ਪ੍ਰਚੰਡਾ ॥ (ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗੌਤੀ ਸਤੋਤ੍ਰ)

Guru Granth Sahib Ji makes is clear that: ਨਿਰਗੁਨੁ ਆਪਿ ਸਰਗੁਨੁ ਭੀ ਓਹੀ ॥ ਕਲਾ ਧਾਰਿ ਜਿਨਿ ਸਗਲੀ ਮੋਹੀ ॥ ਅਪਨੇ ਚਰਿਤ ਪ੍ਰਭਿ ਆਪਿ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਅਪੁਨੀ ਕੀਮਤਿ ਆਪੇ ਪਾਏ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਹੀ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਅਪਨਾ ਖੇਲੁ ਆਪਿ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖੈ ਠਾਕੁਰਿ ਰਚਨੁ ਰਚਾਇਆ ॥੧॥

You have quoted Bhagauti Astotar, please listen to Baba Ji's katha on Bhagauti Astotar on my blog, if you object to what Baba Ji says then please post and explain why.

[apnepart2]

modern saroop of devi.

http://www.apnicommunity.com/mata-ki-chowki/

[GPS]

I appreciate the restraint shown by you in your posts. But we need to keep in mind that Guru sahib has written Dasam granth.

In that he very forcefully condemns idol worship.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦੇਵ ਹੋਸੀ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਜਾਸੀ ॥

जिते देव होसी ॥ सभै अंत जासी ॥

All the gods who will come into being in future, they will all ultimately expire.

ਜਿਤੇ ਬੋਧ ਹ੍ਵੈ ਹੈਂ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤਿ ਛੈਹੈਂ ॥੭੧॥

जिते बोध ह्वै हैं ॥ सभै अंति छैहैं ॥७१॥

Alll the Buddhas, who came into being, expired ultimately.71.

ਜਿਤੇ ਦੇਵ ਰਾਯੰ ॥ ਸਭੈ ਅੰਤ ਜਾਯੰ ॥

जिते देव रायं ॥ सभै अंत जायं ॥

All the god-kings, who came into being, ultimately passed away.

Then he writes

ਪੂਜਤ ਹੈ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਕੈ ਜਿਹ ਕੇ ਪਰਸੈ ਪਰਲੋਕ ਪਰਾਹੀ ॥

पूजत है परमेसर कै जिह के परसै परलोक पराही ॥

Thou worshippest those as God, by whose touch thou shalt be driven far away from the next world.

ਪਾਪ ਕਰੋ ਪਰਮਾਰਥ ਕੈ ਜਿਹ ਪਾਪਨ ਤੇ ਅਤਿ ਪਾਪ ਲਜਾਹੀ ॥

पाप करो परमारथ कै जिह पापन ते अति पाप लजाही ॥

Thou art committing such sins in th name of parmarath (the subtle truth) that by committing them the Great sins may feel shy.

ਪਾਇ ਪਰੋ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਕੇ ਜੜ ਪਾਹਨ ਮੈਂ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਨਾਹੀ ॥੯੯॥

पाइ परो परमेसर के जड़ पाहन मैं परमेसर नाही ॥९९॥

O fool! Fall at the feet of Lord-God, the Lord is not within the stone-idols.99.

Dasam granth sahib

In view of above it is ignorance even to think that Guru sahib needed any diety to bless him before initiating khalsa.

These are all fairy tales and need to be ignored.

[.- Prabhjot Singh -.]

I have to say, please dont be so harsh on Bhai Jvala Singh Ji. Hes digging up some really old and rare stuff for all of us and we should appreciate that. Agreed that he could do without some of the images on his blog but other than than, well, i dont doubt his love for Sri Guruji even for a second. If we cant give anything back to the community, at least let us try to not hurt those who are doing seva for the panth.

Just my opinion, now dont start throwing bricks at me too..

[N30S1NGH]

It all depends on intention of an individual who is trying to illustrate shakti form of Vahiguroo. If sikh worship and or prasiing only shakti aspect of Vahiguroo via these pictures or other way and limiting all other aspects of vahiguroo and not worship nirgun form of vahiguroo via shabad without any question, he/she committing idol worshiping, should be condemned by Gurmat.

However, there is a difference between worshiping shakti form of vahiguroo and praising shakti form of Vahiguroo. I yet to see an nihang khalsa or any khalsa worshiping shakti form of vahiguroo via these pictures above, but according to gurmat sidhant, shakti form of vahiguroo whichever form it might be its praised not worshiped in sri dasam granth, there many glorifying examples already posted on the forums. I do admit i have seen nang idiots deliberately wearing t shirts of devta's like ganesh, shiva, lakshmi devi just to tick off other party. That is totally un-acceptable and cause un neccesary divide among brothers. But i am sure bhai jwala singh ji intentions not that at all, its far from it. He is merely following sri dasam granth sahib sidhant of praising shakti of vahiguroo which happen to be in many forms.

If other party whole issue is do with picture of kali devi or other devi being posted on the blog, i m sorry to say you guys have lost the plot. If pictures of various symbolism of shakti is your only issue, than instead of accusing other party of bhaut bharshti(idol worshipers), you yourself are stuck in the dandal( deep cycle) of bhaut(idol) symbolism of shakti and cannot get pass the bhaut and failed to recognize the shakti aspect of Vahiguroo.

Fine lets change pictures around, lets give an example of narsingha(driving force of vahiguroo - shakti) transcendent into this earth despite of all vars (no one destroy to me, human nor animal, nor in day nor in night), despite of all these vars given to harnakash, narsingha gave him death. Lets talk about picture of narsingha episode as its more acceptable in gurmat because direct reference in gurbani:

If dhoti, tilak wearing, multi arm narsingha picture which illustratious shakti form of vahiguroo praised or acceptable in gurmat ,why not other forms of shakti?? Is it only because other forms of shakti is shared by other religion? Well narsingha avtar is reverred an shakti form of Vahiguroo in hindu dharam too? Just because of Shakti form of Vahiguroo is appreciated/praised in other dharam does not make them automatically anti gurmat, look by rising above boundaries of dharam, religious ideologies, any Victorian abrahamic influence then you will see no specific dharam owns various form of shakti of Vahiguroo.

Fine, lets give you guys peace of mind, I am going to be blunt here, lets do a jora of kali matta change her picture a bit, put a dastar on her head, change the trishul weapon to khanda(bhaugati) instead of dead skuls mala around her head, put sarbloh mala of sarbloh weapons attached to it. Now is that symbolism of shakti good enough for you guys? or its still hindufied for you guys?

Don't accuse others of idol worshipers when your own eyes cannot see driving force behind symbolism be it (khanda, kali devi, sarbloh weapons, utensils), don't accuse others of idol worshipers when your eyes cannot get pass cham of symbols.

over and out..!