Jump to content

Whats The Difference Between Delusion And Sharda?


alias
 Share

Recommended Posts

answer is love.. jeebz...

love creates truth out of nowhere. hence people believe that love is connecting on a more fundamental intrinsic level to the universe.

and only way to love is dristi.

so next question, how can one be sure that they are not being delusional regarding dristi?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? So are you saying if you love your Guru you are delusional?

Maaroo, First Mehla:
Some call him a ghost; some say that he is a demon.
Some call him a mere mortal; O, poor Nanak! ||1||
Crazy Nanak has gone insane, after his Lord, the King.
I know of none other than the Lord. ||1||Pause||
He alone is known to be insane, when he goes insane with the Fear of God.
He recognizes none other than the One Lord and Master. ||2||
He alone is known to be insane, if he works for the One Lord.
Recognizing the Hukam, the Command of his Lord and Master, what other cleverness is there? ||3||
He alone is known to be insane, when he falls in love with his Lord and Master.
He sees himself as bad, and all the rest of the world as good. ||4||7||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps the difference can be identified between when one harms you and the other benefits you.

You might lose everyone such as your loved ones who have past away but you got your guru to carry on. That's sharda or devotion. You might be in a stage or phase of your life when your friends drift apart maybe they have entered the ways of kaljug they do things you disagree with and you drift apart. But you still got your guru that is devotion.

If people who are nice are moving away from you and you think you still got your guru this might not be sharda or devotion. It's very likely your character has fallen, character can fall not just be actions alone but by thinking processes and they way you talk to people may have been lowered. Perhaps your actions alone have driven away people. Maybe you have taken on fundamentalist mindset present in Sikhi thinking it might benefit you but in repulse and detest people have moved away perhaps even fearing their personal safety and form of dislike for the way you speak and what you have become. That is delusion and not sharda, this form of delusion harms you. But you have to develop a good sense of also being able to live without people and with people both qualities should be present. But you got to look at what helps you as a person grow and sometimes backtracking is healthy to organic growth as a person, as a character and can help the development of a good personality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the key to understanding my question, and the answer ive given of "love", is to read the question and understand it.

im saying, where is the line with delusion and sharda? then i go on to give the distinguishing characteristic between them. and that is love. your failure to understand this, led you to believe i'm saying love is the delusion. nice gurbani shabad btw.

next, i talk about dristi. which no one mentions.

to username1, generally speaking, i believe that delusion can benefit, as well as harm you, from the perspective of the individual being deluded. killers believe delusions of grandeur and can attain it. its still a delusion. it can benifit you, as well as harm you (in various ways).

and sure, you have your guru to carry on. but this can be seen to be a delusion. (though maharaj is akaal!) so, people can be deluded and believe in god and do ritual sacrifice, drink cow pee, hold xyz in the name of god, and still, these kind of people will still believe they are doing the correct thing. however, it is a delusion. and i know plenty of nice people who move away from other people based on their own (the nice person's) personality. so your point of using a secondary means, as in, other people, to gauge whether the primary subject (the individual) is deluded or not. truth should not and does not need a crutch. so y suggest one is needed.

many a time, people have walked away from the truth when someone is calmly saying whats needed. does this mean your deluded? never can this be true. "...perhaps your actions alone have driven away people..."

so all in all, your post says to me you use a secondary crutch to support something that is basically god himself. you basically provide different means (ways) to look at the final product, but in the context of an opinion that will always be able to be refuted. sharda can never be refuted. (the persona of delusion has similar qualities which is y athiests see people of god as deluded).

so there is a clear distinction between opinion and fact. maharaj is fact and can never be refuted. so it only stands to reason, that the reasoning behind the difference between sharda and delusion be as distinct as light and dark

p.s.

dont see me as making this post of someone who is poking holes at something which cannot be poked (aka maharaj / guru). this is purely a logical debate for the mind. i hope readers see this. :)

gurfateh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

If I am humbly allowed to answer your enquiry, I would say in simple words according to Gurmat, that:

Only one without second Wahiguru Akal Purukh is "Sach" everlasting Truth, apart from that, everything is "koor" is delusion.

And the connecting link between us and Him, is "sharda" is faith, through the practical method, or jugtee of Nam Simran.

Wah wah Sachay Badshah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If I am humbly allowed to answer your enquiry, I would say in simple words according to Gurmat, that:

Only one without second Wahiguru Akal Purukh is "Sach" everlasting Truth, apart from that, everything is "koor" is delusion.

And the connecting link between us and Him, is "sharda" is faith, through the practical method, or jugtee of Nam Simran.

Wah wah Sachay Badshah.

yes, i totally agree. but who is to say that this what you have just mentioned, is not your self elusive delusion!

im coming from the POV of outsiders of our dharam (siikhi).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brother Alias,

thanks for your post. First of all, again I would like to emphasize, sikhee, is not for a particular community, it is for the whole of humanity.

Different thing is that, if one accepts or believes it, but the fact is Gurmat is for any sikh, and sikh in reality means seeker.

But seeker of what?

Of Wahiguru.

So, in that sense Gurmat is universal, there where we humans have put restrictions, rules and regulations, in the form of a fence around the teachings of our Guru Sahibans, and labeled it as religion as such, in reality, their teachings are for that soul who sincerely wants to meet and become one with Wahiguru.

Second point to be noticed when you say, if it is not your delusion?

You see, Gurmat is not created by me.

It is, the teachings of those the most perfect beings on Earth, known as Guru Sahibans, Mahapurukhs, Gurmukhs. Their teachings are a perfect science, of revealing that Divinity called Wahiguru within ourselves, through a practical method of Nam Simran.

Any wadbhagee jeeva, who dares to put that jugtee into action, will by himself realize and see that ultimate reality.

It is just a question of one´s faith, whether we take them as sach bachans and practice it, or take it as an illusory theory.

It is practice what counts in the end, not mere big words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fateh,

you have made such an amazing post. and i totally agree with it all. so i hate to play both sides here for the sake of discourse.

However. from what i read, the main points you mention, are

-guru is for the world, no restrictions

-practice the "teachings and perfect science" (so beautifully put i might add!)

-Gurmat is the way shown to us by the most perfects

-Practical aspect to try it out and realise yourself.

you say, "Different thing is that, if one accepts or believes it" and this is what i'm getting at. so still we cannot know whether its true, or, part of a self created delusion. (this is the arguments many people pose to people of faith. its true tho. if you think about it, its an exceptionally valid argument. so many people say, omg i didnt know where i was and it was like this n that and etc.. this can be created whether god is the center point of the situation, or not.

for the sake of argument, you mention seek god. how do we, or can we know that we are seeking god or if god really does exist. and its not just part of blind faith (guru tells you, you just do; aka gurmat) simple because we are told, ik oangkar, then from then onwards, its all self deluded experiences because simply we will it?. because, in that case, we can replace god with anything. and quite obviously god can never be replaced..because people say, everything starts from assumption.

regarding assumption, the hole i find in this statement is --> only things of the mind and logical things start from assumption; realisation is not assumed - but then we come back to delusion/mass delusion, hence the topical question of sharda and delusion).

so, i know im going over the same ground here again but, just for completion, guru are the most perfect human being. (obv true). but of course, it can be your view/ delusion. i know muslim people that say guru nanak dev ji used powers on the muslim guy who saw kabba at feet of guru nank dev ji. (a side topic, what are we gona say to this!) muslims use this and say, guru nanak dev ji was XYZ... a serious topic in and of itself. maybe this is worth a repost as a full topic.

to finish, i feel your ending of "choice of sharda or delusion" is fitting, but not satisfying. its the same thing i wrestled with when i started this topic. i found a way out of simply choosing sharda over taking it be be "illusory theory" as you put it.

...................

so i put to you!...,, is it not love then?. as i mentioned above in a prev post? (not going onto dristi yet).. because love is true and can be as intense as we wish it to be. so love gets us out of the dilemma of sharda or illusion.. suppose this is y guru g says jin prem kiyo. else all else we do is forsaken and self delusion. ehether that be godly experiences, naam simran everything.....

preet kare prabh paayat hai.

lastly, though this may be premature, dristi.

love is only recieved as per dristi of god.

so, although the logical debate of sharda and illusion/delusion can stop with the explanation of love, above love, guru tells us its through dristi we get love. and on this, its back sharda again. which is a good thing. its back sharda because we cant physically test (unless through naam simran) the dristi of god.

if you make it to the end of my long post, congrats! and id love to hear your thoughts and veecharaa!

dhan dhan !

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