Shastar vidiya vs gatka

[Guest pratannanak]

there are many ways of communication and one being oral tradition, people who only want written evidence and want to khoj on this evidence then there is guru maharaj, i might be wrong but it may take a life time to understand and khoj on jap ji sahib never mind gurru granth sahib maharaj. (saying that if you have a good understanding on jap ji sahib you are in good stead of understanding maharaj)...

to give an example muay thai is a broken down version/or sport verison of muay boran, muay thai looks good and is very effective but its parent muay borna is destructive...a bit like gatka and shaster vidiya,, people listen.. a man does not represent an art... a lot of hate is towards niddar singh not his learnt art....

also people who want evidence in terms of sakhis,,, alot of guru gobond singh jis sakhis are not recorded in granths but in later "story books" so to speak..

im fairly new to this websit but one thing i have noticed is many on this site do not like to do their own research but just rely on hear say.. i also do not like to reply too much, but people come on.. open up,, this is about you and parmatma,, thats in you...parmatma is in your own body..this aint western philosophy where god is in the clouds when you die.. hazar nazar.. akaal parmatma..

[Guest]

Where would you find a shastar vidiya teacher in India?

[chatanga]

There is no written evidence, yes, but travelling all the way to Mecca and beyond it would seem logical Guru Sahib probably kept shastar as well.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji didnt keep shastar. In Sri Raag Bani, where Guru Ji tells of "Baba, hor khaana khishi khwaar..." Guru Ji tells what shastars he has, and they are not what we would class as shastars. Guru Ji also tells what is his kamarkassa, what is his barsha etc...

Go to gurmatveechar and listen to katha of these shabads. They are amazing. Dont rely on sikhito the max to give you a complete picture ofthe meaning, it only gives you a very literal meaning. listen to uthanka of the shabad, and then the katha. Sometimes i feel it is quite dangerous to listen to gurbani katha without knowing the uthanka.

Why would something as significant as Guru Nanak knowing Shastar Vidya be excluded from the Janamsakhis and the Vars of Bhai Gurdas?

The thing is, the janamsakhis do mention it but you dont know where to look for it.

read my reply to your post below.

. Guru Nanak taught Shastar Vidya to Baba Budha?

Guru Nanak Dev ji gave Baba Buddha the knowledge of 14 arts, by his Pavitar Nazar, ie just by looking at him. Just as Guru Nanak Dev Ji gave Bhai Mardana the art of Raag just by looking at him. When Bhai Mardana brought the rabab from Bhai Firanda, Guru NanakDev Ji asked him toplay, Bhai said, Guru Ji i have never played an instrument in my life, Guru Ji brought his pavitar nazar on Bhai Mardana and gave him Raag Vidiya. In the same way when Satta and Balwand insulted Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Guru Arjan gave sangat his Pavitar Nazar and blessed the sangat with Raag Vidiya. The Sikhs who had never played the rabab, jori, or saranda before, started to play them perfectly, such is the kirpa of the True Guru.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji gave Baba Buddha all 14 Vidiyas at once. It is your mistake to think that Guru Ji took a stick or sword and said "watch this pentra".

The part to read or listen to in the JananSakhis is where Baba Buddha asks Guru Nanak Dev Ji for updesh. Sant Jarnail Singh has talked about this in one of his kathas as well.

[Cisco_Singh]

there are many ways of communication and one being oral tradition, people who only want written evidence and want to khoj on this evidence then there is guru maharaj, i might be wrong but it may take a life time to understand and khoj on jap ji sahib never mind gurru granth sahib maharaj. (saying that if you have a good understanding on jap ji sahib you are in good stead of understanding maharaj)...

to give an example muay thai is a broken down version/or sport verison of muay boran, muay thai looks good and is very effective but its parent muay borna is destructive...a bit like gatka and shaster vidiya,, people listen.. a man does not represent an art... a lot of hate is towards niddar singh not his learnt art....

also people who want evidence in terms of sakhis,,, alot of guru gobond singh jis sakhis are not recorded in granths but in later "story books" so to speak..

im fairly new to this websit but one thing i have noticed is many on this site do not like to do their own research but just rely on hear say.. i also do not like to reply too much, but people come on.. open up,, this is about you and parmatma,, thats in you...parmatma is in your own body..this aint western philosophy where god is in the clouds when you die.. hazar nazar.. akaal parmatma..

Basically you have hit the nail on the head...most of the detractors on this site...infact almost all..have no background or knowledge of martial arts...hence they are not able to comprehend or constructively debate and differentiate between authentic combat art forms and exhibitionist arts.

Secondly the main issue the majority have is not with the art form itself it is with the teacher and his particular belief set.

[proactive]

Chatanga,

So Guru Nanak gave Baba Budha knowledge of Shastar Vidya by his pavittar nazar and Baba Budha then taught Guru Hargobind? Guru Hargobind is the same jyot as Guru Nanak, so why did Guru Hargobind need to be taught Shastar Vidya when as Guru he would have the knowledge already.

Is reference to pavittar nazar to both Bhai Mardana and Baba Budha contained in the Janam Sakhis?

[chatanga]

bro, The Guru illuminates the Sikh. Of course Baba Budha Ji couldnt teach the 6th Guru anything, but the Guru did the natak of learning form the Sikh.

Why did Guru Arjan Maharaj send Bibi Ganga Ji to Baba Budha to recieve the boon of a Son? Guru couldnt give this boon to Mata Ji himself? Guru Ji only did it for the wadiaee of the Sikh.

In the same way, Guru Ji was already blessed with such knowledge, and power, but did the wadiaee of his Sikh.

I have only started to read Bhai Bala's janamsakhi myself, and have read upto where Bhai Mardana receives the Rabab. This story is as i have previously posted.

[Guest]

I am reading the Dasam guru ji do chamatkar and guru gobind Singh ji was taught.Obviously he knew everything.He just needed to learn from a guru do Sikh.He knew it all but it's the Sants of god that guru ji want the charana of.He want to be taught by the truth.

Same thing with guru hargobind sahib ji.He knew everything he just wanted to learn from a true Sikh a true sant.

Writing about this just makes me cry because our guru ji's were so humble and here we are arguing like kids.

bro, The Guru illuminates the Sikh. Of course Baba Budha Ji couldnt teach the 6th Guru anything, but the Guru did the natak of learning form the Sikh.

Why did Guru Arjan Maharaj send Bibi Ganga Ji to Baba Budha to recieve the boon of a Son? Guru couldnt give this boon to Mata Ji himself? Guru Ji only did it for the wadiaee of the Sikh.

In the same way, Guru Ji was already blessed with such knowledge, and power, but did the wadiaee of his Sikh.

I have only started to read Bhai Bala's janamsakhi myself, and have read upto where Bhai Mardana receives the Rabab. This story is as i have previously posted.

I love this

[Guest]

Do the old budha dal nihang singh know puratan shastar vidiya?

[gurdssingh]

As for warfare formations, we can examine historical texts from Sikh and non Sikh sources to examine what kind of battles Sikhs fought in. In a book I read called Siques, Tigers or Thieves it talks about Sikhs used to part take in guerrilla warfare and would do something they would call "two and a half strikes) and then retreat. It was a kind of psychological warfare meant to allow small numbers fight against thousands. Martial ability, horsemanship, fearlessness and mastery of the sword and musket combined with this art of two and a half "vaars" scared the Mughal fauj to bits.

Don't confuse advertising a product called shastar vidiya with someone's personal agenda/opinion.

the person who you are referring to was heavily involved with the book you are quoting.

[Singh559]

the person who you are referring to was heavily involved with the book you are quoting.

It was by Parmjit Singh and Amandeep Madra. They are with him, but he wasn't an author.

Whatever it is, they are first person sources that are important and is of value, the authors notes are what they think and I didn't pay too much attention to them. They're mainly for someone who doesn't know about Sikh history already.

There were parts where the Mughals called Banda Singh Bahadur the "Guroo", but in reality he wasn't, so they add an author's footnote to clarify it. It's important to do so because it also sheds light on the ignorance of the Mughal bureaucracy when they refer to Sikhs as "Hindoos".

If someone produces good work, then we should say it's good work. If they produce something wrong, then in front of the sangat it should be addressed imo.

There's another book that translated and had footnotes of the translated persian sources as well that I have. I don't think I ever got a chance to complete it.