Jump to content

Can Someone Explain This Shabad From Babur Bani, Does God Care?


TheFancyBanana
 Share

Recommended Posts

Aasaa, First Mehl:

Having attacked Khuraasaan, Baabar terrified Hindustan.

The Creator Himself does not take the blame, but has sent the Mugal as the messenger of death.

There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? ||1||

O Creator Lord, You are the Master of all.

If some powerful man strikes out against another man, then no one feels any grief in their mind. ||1||Pause||

But if a powerful tiger attacks a flock of sheep and kills them, then its master must answer for it.

This priceless country has been laid waste and defiled by dogs, and no one pays any attention to the dead.

You Yourself unite, and You Yourself separate; I gaze upon Your Glorious Greatness. ||2||

One may give himself a great name, and revel in the pleasures of the mind,

But in the Eyes of the Lord and Master, he is just a worm, for all the corn that he eats.

Only one, who dies to his ego while yet alive, obtains the blessings, O Nanak, by chanting the Lord's Name. ||3||5||39||

It says God doesn't take the blame for the deaths, yet it says the Mughal was SENT as a messenger of death. So, God is responsible because he sent the killers.

The question appears to be unanswered, it says "didn't you feel compassion?"

Then it says "God is master of all", then says if a "tiger attacks a flock of sheep, the master must answer for it", so God must answer as he is the master of all, the sheep and tigers.

Is the shabad speaking against Babbar? "just a worm, no matter how much corn you eat".

Can someone explain this, if not, send me katha on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest dasguruka

The talk is towards Babar and not God when it says "Didn't you feel compassion?" A kathavachak was doing katha on this and he said the same thing as you did. And after the katha Sant Waryam Singh told the kathavachak that Guru Nanak's first concept in Guru Granth Sahib Ji is that of Vaheguru's Hukam and not questioning what he does. I know this sounds a bit incomplete as its not coming to my memory altogether.

I was a bit thrown off too when I first read this Shabad. I don't remember what katha this was in or I would post it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The talk is towards Babar and not God when it says "Didn't you feel compassion?" A kathavachak was doing katha on this and he said the same thing as you did. And after the katha Sant Waryam Singh told the kathavachak that Guru Nanak's first concept in Guru Granth Sahib Ji is that of Vaheguru's Hukam and not questioning what he does. I know this sounds a bit incomplete as its not coming to my memory altogether.

I was a bit thrown off too when I first read this Shabad. I don't remember what katha this was in or I would post it.

"Didn't you feel compassion, Lord?"

Why would Babbur be called Lord? Guru Nanak did not bow down to worldly powers. Also, he then calls Babbur a dog.

Why would a random line to Babbur pop up as Guru Ji says "O Creator Lord", he is clearly talking to Waheguru.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I think of it is that the Guru's hukam is all encompassing. All the pain and suffering stems from the one, yet so does the much more powerful bliss, peace and liberation also comes from realizing the one. We strive to find peace and joy from our lives, but how could we appreciate the moments from which we derive such peace if we did not experience suffering and despair with which we could truly come to appreciate the great joys which stem from the guru. Would we have truly lived without knowing pain? Without pain, and without sadness, we would be laid waste to our ever growing egos, and even the most blissful and beneficial of events would seem horrible to us. In simple words, such horrible happenings provide perspective, and with that perspective, we gain a greater understanding of the world around us, and by extension, the true guru who has immersed himself within his creation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aasaa, First Mehl:

Having attacked Khuraasaan, Baabar terrified Hindustan.

The Creator Himself does not take the blame, but has sent the Mugal as the messenger of death.

There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? ||1||

O Creator Lord, You are the Master of all.

If some powerful man strikes out against another man, then no one feels any grief in their mind. ||1||Pause||

But if a powerful tiger attacks a flock of sheep and kills them, then its master must answer for it.

This priceless country has been laid waste and defiled by dogs, and no one pays any attention to the dead.

You Yourself unite, and You Yourself separate; I gaze upon Your Glorious Greatness. ||2||

One may give himself a great name, and revel in the pleasures of the mind,

But in the Eyes of the Lord and Master, he is just a worm, for all the corn that he eats.

Only one, who dies to his ego while yet alive, obtains the blessings, O Nanak, by chanting the Lord's Name. ||3||5||39||

It says God doesn't take the blame for the deaths, yet it says the Mughal was SENT as a messenger of death. So, God is responsible because he sent the killers.

The question appears to be unanswered, it says "didn't you feel compassion?"

Then it says "God is master of all", then says if a "tiger attacks a flock of sheep, the master must answer for it", so God must answer as he is the master of all, the sheep and tigers.

It was pre-ordained by God to destroy and cause death. Instead of doing it via a natural act of God such as earthquake,flood, hurricane..etc......he sent the mughal as messenger of death.

Is the shabad speaking against Babbar? "just a worm, no matter how much corn you eat".

The 'key' is usually in the rahao tuk.

which says '' If some powerful man strikes out against another man, then no one feels any grief in their mind. ||1||Pause|| ''

Looking at this, take note of the word 'POWERFUL'.... Who is really powerful ?

The mughal's ego makes him physically powerful amongst the people.

Amongst the eyes of God the mughal is just like a worm, no matter how powerful his ego may be here.

It's all God's play on how the events unfold.

We can only be powerful when we subdue and give up our Ego. If this is done, then events of dominating/death/power...etc... won't occur with our Ego-less actions !

The last line says that 'only one who dies to ego whilst alive obtains the blessings''.

These are the blessings for achievement,greatness and love, which is much more than worldly power.

Before this it also says, that God himself unites or brings closer to him the righteous good doers and God himself separates the evil and wicked.

It's ALL his play and HE does as He decides.....

The two keywords that come to me from this shabad are-

EGO and HUKAM.

In ego, you may assume you are all powerful and invincible, and in turn play as God in giving out death(which is God's role)

But it is ALL his Hukam that decides who or what becomes the cause/messenger of death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two keywords that come to me from this shabad are-

EGO and HUKAM.

In ego, you may assume you are all powerful and invincible, and in turn play as God in giving out death(which is God's role)

But it is ALL his Hukam that decides who or what becomes the cause/messenger of death.

Thank you.

But how about the "There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? ||1||" line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is why should Waheguru have compassion?Waheguru is not limited to being kind and nice but also cruel and mean.If he was only nice and compassion then who is mean and cruel.If Waheguru is all powerful then he should also be the one who is mean,cruel evil etc.

I don't think Vaheguru is mean or cruel, because They are without hate completely. The Abrahamic perception of God includes characteristics of hatred and jealousy... but the Sikh view of God I believe is all loving, all compassionate and all understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

But how about the "There was so much slaughter that the people screamed. Didn't You feel compassion, Lord? ||1||" line?

I see what you are saying !

Here is one of the shabads where you have to look at the overall message and essence, after reading a few times. And then go back to each individual line to contemplate further.

My Understanding in this case-

The direct short answer for this particular question/tuk would be the very next line-

........O Creator Lord, You are the Master of all...............

This says that You are the maker/creator of BOTH the slaughterer and the slaughtered.ie.. it is ALL part of your One creation.

so, the question would be that if they are BOTH your makings, then do you feel compassion for the slaughtered or do you feel that the slaughterer was 'powerful' ?

This answer is given further about who is Really powerful...''the One who plays in Ego or the One who kills their own ego''.

We also know,who he brings more closer to him.....- It is NOT because he feels sorry for the slaughtered, but it is more the question of who acted in the most Ego

I hope that explains and answers your question a little further !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many interpretations of Gurbani if you like. This one is Fareed Koitia teek (most referred teeka by Parcharaks )

ਖੁਰਾਸਾਨ ਕਾ ਤੋ (ਖਸਮਾਨਾ) ਪਖ ਕੀਆ ਔਰ ਹਿੰਦੁਸਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਭੈ ਦੀਆ ਭਾਵ ਇਹ ਕਿ ਮੁਗਲੋਂ ਕਾ ਪਖ ਕੀਆ ਪਠਾਨੋ ਕੋ ਭਯ ਦੀਆ ਪਰੰਤੂ ਹੇ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖ ਤੈਨੇ ਅਪਨੇ ਪਰ ਦੋਸ ਨਹੀਂ ਲਿਆ ਜਮ ਰੂਪ ਬਾਬਰ ਮੁਗਲ ਕੋ ਚਢਾਇ ਦੀਇਤਨੀ ਮਾਰ ਪੜੀ ਔਰ ਪਠਾਨ ਰੁਦਨ ਕਰਤੇ ਭਏ (ਤੈਂਕੀ) ਤੁਝਕੋ ਦਰਦ ਨ ਆਉਤਾ ਭਯਾ॥

O' Waheguru, what pain can you feel? According to me, Guru ji is not asking but telling us there is no pain he endures even being inside all of them.

Guru Gobind Singh ji says in Dasam Bani that Waheguru ji created the demons to overcome the ego of Devtey. Then he had to finish them (demons) as well with giving divine powers to the destroyers of the demons.

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

    • I am in big dilemma.  As we all know that waheguru ji everywhere. I also understand that it is important to go to gurudwara sahib as well. My question is that if i do ardaas at home or any other place other than  gurudwara sahib, will it be heard and acknowledged by guru sahib or it is always important to go to gurudwara sahib and do ardaas at gurudwara sahib for guru sahib to acknowledge it? I always do path and ardaas at home in front of harmandir sahib photo or hazur sahib photo  and then for important things i make a list and go to gurudwara sahib to do the ardaas there because i think that if i do ardaas in front of guru granth sahib then it will be more accepted by guru sahib. On the other hand i think that if i am doing ardaas in front of harmandir sahib or hazur sahib photo and redoing the same ardaas at gurudwara sahib, i feel that i am not respecting the authority of harmandir sahib or hazur sahib. Because of all this, I wait to find a quite time at gurudwara sahib when there is less or no sangat  so that I can open my list and read and do ardaas spend 10-15 minutes on average to do ardaas. If there are lot of people, i can't do ardaas due to people in the lineup and I don't want to block access to them while i am spending so much time doing ardaas. If i leave without doing ardaas then i am embarrassed, disappointed and sad and then OCD kicks in. Kindly help!    
    • Play/do gurbani, simran and keertan often, make sure you do your nitnem, use sarbloh and wear sarbloh!
    • process is to find a vichola and then the vichola talks between your family and theirs. The process should be similar to how rishta is done in India side!
    • No. If you read the histroy of Guru jis' times and even centuries later, usually marriages were done in childhood. Then when they were old enough to start their grihast jeevan partnership, the bride is brought over to her husbands's house in muklawa ceremony. 4-5 years engagement is silly. You get Anand Karaj now, and then after university she you do muklawa, that is much more in the guidelines!
    • you need to explain that even the devtay kept their kes, and is a part of the ancestors' culture, that sikhi is also preserving the kshatriya and dharmik cultures!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use