Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Gurbani teaches we are all puppets of Vaheguru and Vaheguru is the puppeteer. That he controls everyone and no one is out of his control:

kwT kI puqrI khw krY bpurI iKlwvnhwro jwnY ] kaat(h) kee putharee kehaa karai bapuree khilaavanehaaro jaanai || What can the poor wooden puppet do? The Master Puppeteer knows everything. jYsw ByKu krwvY bwjIgru Ehu qYso hI swju AwnY ]3] jaisaa bhaekh karaavai baajeegar ouhu thaiso hee saaj aanai ||3|| As the Puppeteer dresses the puppet, so is the role the puppet plays. ||3||

In Dasam Granth, Akaal Ustat, it explains that Vaheguru plays different roles in this world. Gurbani also says that Vaheguru has written the True Destiny of all from the beginning, as stated below:

gurmuiK pRgtu BieAw iqn jn kau ijn Duir msqik lyKu ilKwiedw ]15]

guramukh pragatt bhaeiaa thin jan ko jin dhhur masathak laekh likhaaeidhaa ||15||

The Lord is revealed to those humble Gurmukhs, who have such pre-ordained destiny inscribed upon their foreheads. ||15||

However, in Gurbani, the concept of change reoccurs many times in different shabads to emphasise on the power of Naam. Meaning that, Naam can change our karma, NOT THE TRUE DESTINY. Our destiny can have in it that we were meant to change our karma through Naam. Once it has been changed through Naam/through Satguru it becomes revealed -

kbIr GwxI pIVqy siqgur lIey Cfwie ] kabeer ghaanee peerrathae sathigur leeeae shhaddaae || Kabeer, I was being crushed like sesame seeds in the oil-press, but the True Guru saved me. prw pUrblI BwvnI prgtu hoeI Awie ]207] paraa poorabalee bhaavanee paragatt hoee aae ||207|| My pre-ordained primal destiny has now been revealed. ||207||

Hope that helped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So does that imply that whatever we do , the thing that is meant to happen will happen? If we are meant to be thieves or murderers or whatever ( this world has all kinds of people) , that would eventually happen and we have no control over it because the actions we would carry out would be already predetermined by our destiny? Im getting more confused :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I think that it's both free will and destiny. Our past karm determines some things like situation and circumstance like if we're born rich, poor, disabled, orphans etc (the things we have no control over) but we get to decide how we will act in these situations/circumstances. Who we will marry, the children, education, income I think is also destiny. But we can choose other actions. I heard that 65% of our life is predetermined and 35% is our choice.

So basically you land in a predetermined situation and the way you act, respond to it determines if you win or lose. Like a test, the teacher chooses the questions, you choose the answers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think you've been unable to read between the lines and grasp the subtext of the article. It's a clear attempt at pitting Sikhs against some nebulous form of Islam, by equating medieval Mughal expansionism with its various contemporary terror-related forms. British-penned propaganda or a general West vs Islam perspective, it's doing exactly what you constantly highlight on this forum about us being "recruited" by outsiders as fodder.  The playful and almost throwaway tone of the article and its vernacular is also cringeworthy. Am I suggesting we leap into bed with Islam and its adherents? No. But I don't like attempts by outsiders trying to mine our painful and blood-soaked history to manipulate us into following whatever current strand of policy they've devised against one of the existential dangers facing them. Equally, intention counts for a lot. If the guy's aim was to flatter Sikhs and shed light on a quaint and once-proud warrior race, then fair enough. But I don't take things like this on face value. There's always a purpose behind it however faint. Your cheap little attempts at psycho-analysing and shaming me into conforming to your worldview isn't working and it never will. EDIT: Having just flicked through the website from which the article originates my suspicions were correct. It's a moderately right-leaning Spectator-esque online zine.
    • No, I just think you constantly over analyse the wrong stuff. This is just some simple bod 'boosted' interpretation of Sikh history from a purely physical perspective (as opposed to spiritual). What it seems to be trying to do is amplify Sikh bravery and independence in a very simplistic manner.  It's not dissimilar to what I've heard Sikh street guys talking just prior to going out to kick off with another group.  I don't think you can read very well, compared to a lot of stuff, at least this piece somewhat underscores a perspective that doesn't co-opt Sikhs to other causes. And if a brit white guy wrote this (below), he'd be being more honest than the vast majority of the rest of his people (even though the guy is obviously ignorant of the modern nature of the Sikh army under Sikh raj with his swords against canons comment). If he was a proper brit he'd be telling us about how grateful our lot were to be subjugated and used and abused by the colonialists: The Sikhs were better fighters than the Moghuls, when the numbers and the guns were anything like equal, and by the time the Brits arrived, they’d carved out their own state in the Punjab. They fought the Brits twice, swords against cannon, and were slaughtered, then flattered, then coopted—the classic Imperial method of dealing with brave but dumb cannon fodder, as in “Our dear Highlanders,” cannon fodder in cute kilts. 
    • So why would you want to keep dragging them back here, then?
    • If it was confirmed that a British white guy wrote that piece, you'd be all over it, castigating it as establishment propaganda designed to get us to fight under the banners of ex-imperial powers for their modern colonial escapades. You're very selective with what you choose to object to: it's not the actual substance of the message that annoys you but the vessel in which the message is delivered, yes?
    • I just think it's a simplified narrative designed to inspire a bit of fearlessness in Sikhs. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.  There will always be some people who will misinterpret and maybe fly off the handle due to their own personality traits, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have such accounts.  I tend to see these things as stepping stones or entry points for people to explore the ithihaas/culture in more depth.  
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use