Jump to content

Is Guru Granth Sahib Your Teacher / Guide Or Is It A Diety


panthicunity
 Share

Recommended Posts

Interesting so you feel Sargun isn't avtar. So when god came before dhanna he was sargun but krishna is an avtar.

Interesting so you feel Sargun isn't avtar. So when god came before dhanna he was sargun but krishna is an avtar.

I don't believe Krishna was an avatar, I believe Krishna was a man who lived 1000s of years ago, and over time stories were created about him and exaggerated, a bit like Chinese whispers, and eventually those stories became so dramatic that he was considered a "God" or "avatar" by much of India.

My personal view is that God is not "human-like" or anthropomorphic, and if He is truly infinite then can't become avatars. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal view is that God is not "human-like" or anthropomorphic, and if He is truly infinite then can't become avatars. :)

If he is truly infinite then why are you trying to say that he can never come in human form?Thats limiting god.

My personal view is that God is not "human-like" or anthropomorphic, and if He is truly infinite then can't become avatars. :)

If he is truly infinite then why are you trying to say that he can never come in human form?Thats limiting god.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he is truly infinite then why are you trying to say that he can never come in human form?Thats limiting god.

If he is truly infinite then why are you trying to say that he can never come in human form?Thats limiting god.

Because "he" isn't really a "he" at all. My understanding is that Waheguru isn't a "person" with any emotions who chooses to do things that "please" or "displease" him, because Waheguru is beyond human feelings and limitations. Waheguru IS his own creation, so I believe he wouldn't choose to come as an avatar because he already IS everything that exists, has existed and will exist - i.e. totally immanent. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because "he" isn't really a "he" at all. My understanding is that Waheguru isn't a "person" with any emotions who chooses to do things that "please" or "displease" him, because Waheguru is beyond human feelings and limitations. Waheguru IS his own creation, so I believe he wouldn't choose to come as an avatar because he already IS everything that exists, has existed and will exist - i.e. totally immanent. :)

You first used the word "he" to describe Waheguru.

How do you know what Waheguru chooses?What if "he" said "I wana come as an avatar"for the hell of it?Remember that Waheguru can do anything "he" wants to do even if "he" wants to come as an avtar as a human.We cannot restrict Waheguru by saying that he does not have feelings etc."He" does and does not have feelings at the same time."He" is everything and nothing at the same time."He" is good and bad at the same time."He" is human and not a human at the same time.Waheguru is too complex to for us to make conclusions.If we tried our minds might explode!The only people who knew were the gurus because THEY WERE THE ONE AND ONLY WAHEGURU.They were no different.Guru gobind singh ji sache patshah even writes specifically that guru Nanak dev Ji maharaj himself was Waheguru.In the tuk there is no other interpretation saying that he was the light of god etc.It says that he was god period!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You first used the word "he" to describe Waheguru.

How do you know what Waheguru chooses?What if "he" said "I wana come as an avatar"for the hell of it?Remember that Waheguru can do anything "he" wants to do even if "he" wants to come as an avtar as a human.We cannot restrict Waheguru by saying that he does not have feelings etc."He" does and does not have feelings at the same time."He" is everything and nothing at the same time."He" is good and bad at the same time."He" is human and not a human at the same time.Waheguru is too complex to for us to make conclusions.If we tried our minds might explode!The only people who knew were the gurus because THEY WERE THE ONE AND ONLY WAHEGURU.They were no different.Guru gobind singh ji sache patshah even writes specifically that guru Nanak dev Ji maharaj himself was Waheguru.In the tuk there is no other interpretation saying that he was the light of god etc.It says that he was god period!

Yes, I used "he" because that's the common term used but as I explained Waheguru is not really a he. We seem to be going around in circles here. As I said before, it comes down to interpretation. Interpretation is when you look at something and try and understand the underlying message. My personal understanding is that the Gurus were not Avatars of God since Waheguru is Nirankaar, and his Sargun state is the entire universe (and beyond) - Ik Onkaar - one reality/universe/supreme creation, thus Waheguru is by definition infinity - Akaal Purakh. I respect that you feel differently.

WJKK, WJKF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is futility to limit akal puarakh's acts. He is capable of doing anything and everything. From time to time

he appears in his creation and gurbani gives evidence of that for example of saving of Bhagat Prahlad.

हाथि खड़गु करि धाइआ अति अहंकारि ॥
Hāth kẖaṛag kar ḏẖā▫i▫ā aṯ ahaʼnkār.
With sword in hand, and with great egotistical pride, Prahlaad's father ran up to him.
हरि तेरा कहा तुझु लए उबारि ॥
Har ṯerā kahā ṯujẖ la▫e ubār.
Where is your Lord, who will save you?
खिन महि भैआन रूपु निकसिआ थम्ह उपाड़ि ॥
Kẖin mėh bẖai▫ān rūp niksi▫ā thamĥ upāṛ.
In an instant, the Lord appeared in a dreadful form, and shattered the pillar.
हरणाखसु नखी बिदारिआ प्रहलादु लीआ उबारि ॥४॥
Harṇākẖas nakẖī biḏāri▫ā parahlāḏ lī▫ā ubār. ||4||
Harnaakhash was torn apart by His claws, and Prahlaad was saved. ||4||
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I used "he" because that's the common term used but as I explained Waheguru is not really a he. We seem to be going around in circles here. As I said before, it comes down to interpretation. Interpretation is when you look at something and try and understand the underlying message. My personal understanding is that the Gurus were not Avatars of God since Waheguru is Nirankaar, and his Sargun state is the entire universe (and beyond) - Ik Onkaar - one reality/universe/supreme creation, thus Waheguru is by definition infinity - Akaal Purakh. I respect that you feel differently.

WJKK, WJKF

Ill try finding that gurbani took about guru Nanak dev Ji being god.Tgat took only has one meaning.You cannot misinterpret that took.The meaning of that tuk is that guru Nanak dev Ji is god himself and there is no difference.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

पारब्रहमु परमेसरु अनूपु ॥

Pārbarahm parmesar anūp.

The Supreme Lord God, the Transcendent Lord, is incomparably beautiful.

सफल मूरति गुरु तिस का रूपु ॥२॥

Safal mūraṯ gur ṯis kā rūp. ||2||

The Guru is the Image of Fulfillment, the Embodiment of the Lord. ||2||

जा कै अंतरि बसै हरि नामु ॥

Jā kai anṯar basai har nām.

The Name of the Lord abides deep within him.

जो जो पेखै सु ब्रहम गिआनु ॥

Jo jo pekẖai so barahm gi▫ān.

Wherever he looks, he sees the Wisdom of God.

बीस बिसुए जा कै मनि परगासु ॥

Bīs bisu▫e jā kai man pargās.

His mind is totally enlightened and illuminated.

तिसु जन कै पारब्रहम का निवासु ॥३॥

Ŧis jan kai pārbarahm kā nivās. ||3||

Within that person, the Supreme Lord God abides. ||3||

तिसु गुर कउ सद करी नमसकार ॥

Ŧis gur ka▫o saḏ karī namaskār.

I humbly bow to that Guru forever.

तिसु गुर कउ सद जाउ बलिहार ॥

Ŧis gur ka▫o saḏ jā▫o balihār.

I am forever a sacrifice to that Guru.

सतिगुर के चरन धोइ धोइ पीवा ॥

Saṯgur ke cẖaran ḏẖo▫e ḏẖo▫e pīvā.

I wash the feet of the Guru, and drink in this water.

गुर नानक जपि जपि सद जीवा ॥४॥४३॥५६॥

Gur Nānak jap jap saḏ jīvā. ||4||43||56||

Chanting and meditating forever on Guru Nanak, I live. ||4||43||56||

Link to comment
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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use