Transitioning from transliteration to reading Gurmukhi

[jkvlondon]

8 hours ago, BhForce said:

Note that the missionaries are teaching #2 (God=universe).

I.e., that there is no actual separate God. There's just the universe.

And you can call him God, god, or whatever. 

But it's all just physical matter.

There's no entity out there to listen to your Ardaas.

There's no soul, either. No aatma, no Parmatmaa. Just atoms.

So basically making sikhi by their definition animism? What a shower !

[dallysingh101]

To me one of the most important considerations from all this is that when we start trying to conceptualise our own tradition with external frameworks, perhaps we've already lost?

It's the exact same tactic used by the dawah crowd today. Draw people in under the guise of an innocuous interfaith dialogue, but you've already set the framework of the 'debate'  beforehand (which works in your own favour because you are going to push the 'so-called debate' along contrived lines).  

And we know the original impetus or antecedents for apnay doing this was being 'annexed' and colonised, and then having to go through the whole rigmarole of trying to justify our dharam to outsiders, who already had their own agenda to undermine and control (and let's not forget had centuries of experience doing this on other communities they had previously colonised and often enslaved and totally reshaped). I believe this whole process was actually another subtle attack, or subtle obfuscation aimed at control.

The conclusion seems to be that we start to subtly imbibe the values or ideas of the colonisers as a yardstick of what is good or bad, and we (whether consciously or subconsciously) start to align our inherited tradition along the the values of these external forces - it's obvious we shift things, and even though this process can be subtle (I think it is designed to be insidious)  - we can actually create a totally new thing from what existed previously - even if  external forms are retained to suggest continuity. 

That some apnay felt compelled to align our own thing with a foreign one (that has been rejected by the vast majority of the descendants of the very people who were promoting it so hard back then - the english), is explainable under these circumstances.  It does stem from a period of insecurity when apnay had been betrayed by multiple forces, external and internal (i.e. the brits and their feigned professions of friendship and loyalty with the Sikh kingdom, whilst coveting it's wealth and military resources), and those within like Lal and Tej Singh (and probably a good few others), who helped engineer what could have very easily been a complete decimation of attacking anglo forces in Panjab. 

If goray coming in and throwing around mere words like pantheism and monotheism can cause some sort of major existential crisis for Sikhs, it REALLY does show what sort of back foot engaging in such things puts one in. This Is important because it still happens today.   When you hear about people converting, it's usually just a microcosm of this process taking place. 

Thing is, those amongst us with brains and knowledge could very easily start attacking these Abrahamic faiths with similar tactics, but this just makes us the same as them. And I know from personal experience this just puts a chilli up their anus - and usually leads to conflicts because that's all people have left when their beliefs have been dismantled in this way.  

Knowing our own thing very well, on its own terms is the key to this. Relating it to the OP, learning to read Gurmukhi is a major key step in this. And today we have to be careful of the enemies within too, who'd twist this whole thing through some clannish casteist lens, or mistaken promote 'Sikhism' (as opposed to Sikhi) which is the end product of what we are talking about above) which has its own negative effect on cohesion, and is another covert obstacle designed to try and prevent us from trying to comprehend what Sikhi is and weakening us as a result. 

[Redoptics]

10 hours ago, BhForce said:

Did you make this image? It's a very good 5-second way to introduce people to Guru ji's teachings.

No I didnt just a google image

[jkvlondon]

8 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

To me one of the most important considerations from all this is that when we start trying to conceptualise our own tradition with external frameworks, perhaps we've already lost?

It's the exact same tactic used by the dawah crowd today. Draw people in under the guise of an innocuous interfaith dialogue, but you've already set the framework of the 'debate'  beforehand (which works in your own favour because you are going to push the 'so-called debate' along contrived lines).  

And we know the original impetus or antecedents for apnay doing this was being 'annexed' and colonised, and then having to go through the whole rigmarole of trying to justify our dharam to outsiders, who already had their own agenda to undermine and control (and let's not forget had centuries of experience doing this on other communities they had previously colonised and often enslaved and totally reshaped). I believe this whole process was actually another subtle attack, or subtle obfuscation aimed at control.

The conclusion seems to be that we start to subtly imbibe the values or ideas of the colonisers as a yardstick of what is good or bad, and we (whether consciously or subconsciously) start to align our inherited tradition along the the values of these external forces - it's obvious we shift things, and even though this process can be subtle (I think it is designed to be insidious)  - we can actually create a totally new thing from what existed previously - even if  external forms are retained to suggest continuity. 

That some apnay felt compelled to align our own thing with a foreign one (that has been rejected by the vast majority of the descendants of the very people who were promoting it so hard back then - the english), is explainable under these circumstances.  It does stem from a period of insecurity when apnay had been betrayed by multiple forces, external and internal (i.e. the brits and their feigned professions of friendship and loyalty with the Sikh kingdom, whilst coveting it's wealth and military resources), and those within like Lal and Tej Singh (and probably a good few others), who helped engineer what could have very easily been a complete decimation of attacking anglo forces in Panjab. 

If goray coming in and throwing around mere words like pantheism and monotheism can cause some sort of major existential crisis for Sikhs, it REALLY does show what sort of back foot engaging in such things puts one in. This Is important because it still happens today.   When you hear about people converting, it's usually just a microcosm of this process taking place. 

Thing is, those amongst us with brains and knowledge could very easily start attacking these Abrahamic faiths with similar tactics, but this just makes us the same as them. And I know from personal experience this just puts a chilli up their anus - and usually leads to conflicts because that's all people have left when their beliefs have been dismantled in this way.  

Knowing our own thing very well, on its own terms is the key to this. Relating it to the OP, learning to read Gurmukhi is a major key step in this. And today we have to be careful of the enemies within too, who'd twist this whole thing through some clannish casteist lens, or mistaken promote 'Sikhism' (as opposed to Sikhi) which is the end product of what we are talking about above) which has its own negative effect on cohesion, and is another covert obstacle designed to try and prevent us from trying to comprehend what Sikhi is and weakening us as a result. 

Panenteism is a greek concept of the universe from their philosophical musings its closest at sikhi most basic concept of Waheguru and the akaar  however sikhi's model includes all time /space dimensions and a level of subtlety that english is light years away from even capturing the most basic nuance of phrase created by lagaa maatra .

Its Ok for basic elementary gist type thing best bet is listening to good katha vichar and hitting those mahan koshs .... Any ideas if there is some sort learning book for gurbani persian out there ?

[GurjantGnostic]

@ADMIN

Vaheguru ji ga Khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh

[dallysingh101]

10 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Panenteism is a greek concept of the universe from their philosophical musings its closest at sikhi most basic concept of Waheguru and the akaar  however sikhi's model includes all time /space dimensions and a level of subtlety that english is light years away from even capturing the most basic nuance of phrase created by lagaa maatra .

Its Ok for basic elementary gist type thing best bet is listening to good katha vichar and hitting those mahan koshs ....

Oh okay, I wasn't suggesting that we should never use analogous examples from other cultures to help convey SIkhi concepts. Just that when we start to get embroiled in debates or conceptualisations from external sources, we land in trouble and inevitably introduce new things in, and actually lose things too. 

That's the nature of the game when we do this in my opinion. Language alone is embedded with lots of subtle nuances that get lost when we translate. Plus what outsiders seem to do is frame 'debates' in a way that is to their distinct advantage, and try and put the onus on us  to prove this and that (like Trumpp for example). This kind of exchange (if we can call it that) is a loaded situation. From what I've seen historically and even in contemporary times is that it is designed to put us on a back foot. It's like an intellectual trap. We need to be wary of it, because it is akin to fighting a battle on someone else's terms - which is rarely a good idea. I don't know if I've articulated this well though?

 

Quote

Any ideas if there is some sort learning book for gurbani persian out there ?

I don't know Farsi at all. My interest these days is in Brij Bhasha because I'm just encountering so much Sikh heritage in that language (from Dasam Granth to Suraj Prakash).

It might be a good idea for you to pop onto the SIkhawareness site and ask there. They have a couple of Farsi readers. They should be able to point you in the right direction. I think you can post as a guest if you need. 

[BhForce]

On 6/27/2019 at 7:55 AM, jkvlondon said:

So basically making sikhi by their definition animism? What a shower !

No. "Animism is the religious belief that objects, places and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence." - Wikipedia

Missionaries believe that there is no spiritual essence because there are no spirits.

[jkvlondon]

2 minutes ago, BhForce said:

No. "Animism is the religious belief that objects, places and creatures all possess a distinct spiritual essence." - Wikipedia

Missionaries believe that there is no spiritual essence because there are no spirits.

Descartes mechanical model ...such fools ...

[BhForce]

On 6/27/2019 at 8:14 AM, dallysingh101 said:

To me one of the most important considerations from all this is that when we start trying to conceptualise our own tradition with external frameworks, perhaps we've already lost?

Perhaps. 

On 6/27/2019 at 8:14 AM, dallysingh101 said:

And we know the original impetus or antecedents for apnay doing this was being 'annexed' and colonised, and then having to go through the whole rigmarole of trying to justify our dharam to outsiders,

Sure. Although Gurbani affirms in multiple places the concept of "Sahib mera eko ha eko hai bhai eko hai", I don't think that we need to justify fitting our religion into the box of "monotheism" created by some theology professor.

Sikhism is what Guru Sahib created it as. Attempting to fit it into some Western framework would lead to lopping off some corners to wedge it in.

On 6/27/2019 at 8:14 AM, dallysingh101 said:

If goray coming in and throwing around mere words like pantheism and monotheism can cause some sort of major existential crisis for Sikhs, it REALLY does show what sort of back foot engaging in such things puts one in.

Agreed. Some of our people would start sweating if someone were to tell them that Sikhism is not a monotheistic religion. (Whether it is or isn't is not the point. The point is that we are so wedded to pleasing the dominant forces in Western society.)

[BhForce]

On 6/27/2019 at 8:14 AM, dallysingh101 said:

Knowing our own thing very well, on its own terms is the key to this.

Well, a lot of our people don't even know that God is mixed in with the Creation. They would just as well accept the Abrahamic conception of God.

On 6/27/2019 at 8:14 AM, dallysingh101 said:

Thing is, those amongst us with brains and knowledge could very easily start attacking these Abrahamic faiths with similar tactics, but this just makes us the same as them.

Maybe. What exactly are they going to say about us that they say about each other? We don't have the record that they do. We don't have "rules for slavery" and "having to marry your rapist" as part of the Sikh Rehit Maryada.

But, secondly, it would may be better (depending on the audience) to stay on the high philosophical level (Ik Ongkar) that Sikhism is on instead of the mire of the Abrahamic foodfight.