Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Technical Terms Used In Gurbani

Recommended Posts

Thanks for writing these veechar on ghar. Veer gurmat sangeet jee or the other veer/bhen jee's who wrote this, could you please give me some referances so I can read up more on your understanding of Ghar. Ive never come across this interpretation of Ghar. Is this claimed by all bidwaans of gurmat sangeet? like Is there a consensus? All Gurmat sangeets books ive read have not made this point. If you could send me your sources, I would really appreciate it.


Give me some time to gather my sources and i will definitly get back to you.

A few more points.

Chnth or Chunt in gurbani as stated is a six lined verse. In gurmat Sangeet it is IMPERATIVE that the whole shabad is sung all in one go i.e. there is no asthaee, so for example you sing the first line as your asthaee then you sing the rest of the shabad after each line you cannot go back to the first line.

The rahao line as stated is correct, where its the central focus of the shabad and we must use it as the asthaee, because what we do nowadays is grab any line of the shabad and use it as the asthaee, when in fact what were doing is for example singing the answer before the question which makes no gramatical sence and alters the structure of gurbani.

Veer jee you didnt reply regarding the ghar interpretation. If you could that would be good, i was really interesting in learning more about the meaning you have made of Ghar.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


Firstly, let me congratulate starter of this thread who has put in a lot of effort to bring to our attention these technical terms.

I think in this day and age, it is very important that where we teach our kids Punjabi, Gatka, Sikh virtues...etc, that we also teach them Kirtan as it was originally sung, in Raags, partaals... as the Gurus did, which means understanding these terms and how Gurbani has been written - and this has been a great help.

Can I please, in all respect and fairness, add on to the following:

Quote: ''Unfortunately, Kirtan today has been commercialized to such an extent that most Raagees (Kirtan singers) are only focused and concerned with making quick money. This is commercialization and exploit of the faith. We all are to be blamed for this condition. Because, we do not perform Kirtan ourselves as envisioned by the fifth Guru, Sri Guru Arjan Dev Jee. Instead we hire the so called professionals to sing it for us. The results are in front of us.''

Veerji is right in saying that 'We all are to be blamed for this condition'.

Our knowledge of Kirtan seems to have deteriorated immensly such that if we hear Ragees singing Raags and Partaals we just dont get it and end up not getting any anand. Understanding the shabad is one thing and on top of that the Raag too? ...thats too much!

This in turn is very difficult for the Ragees as they know that if they start a Raag in a taal other than the famous Kehrwa (4 beats), 90% of the sangat leave the hall.

Over time the Ragees seem to have changed their 'style' of Kirtan to more suit the majority of Sangat. If the sangat is happy, there are chances that you can get some bheta and this would in turn help in raising your family. In any case, a Ragee has to accept what he is given after working - you dont do that in any other profession. Not all about making quick money!

Are Ragees expected not to get any money or you can give them what you want at the end? Does that raise their children, pay their school fees, other expenses?

During Guru Arjan Dev Ji's time, the Rababees were highly respected and appreciated and the Guru himself, being a great singer and having Raag knowledge/understanding second to none, was a great fan of them - highly rewarded too. Nowadays... ?

Guru Ji, in his time, unquestionably, did great things that would benefit the whole Panth. One of those was to get the whole Panth doing Kirtan. The circumstance of Rababees doing a strike (whether it was His will or coincidence) was a good opportunity to give the whole panth Kirtan Di Daat. Otherwise Kirtan would have stayed a professional and specialised thing for the Rababees.

That also helped the poor, because if you don't have any skill and you praised the Guru you will be rewarded - hence Kirtan bheta. The so called professionals you get nowadays are not professionals as they go for the bheta more than learning Kirtan the proper way.

Bhu chuk khima karni


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kewl thread and as Im starting out learning kirtan I will start at what is real and grow from that. (Im not going to bury a potato and expect a sweet mango tree to grow :) )

All the information is useful (even the incorrect) because it better shapes the current status of kirtan from some people that do kirtan in any tune they want just to sing Gurbani etc.

I want to get a dilruba and learn from that basis of Gurmat Sangeet.

ChardhiKala :D

Vaheguru :)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji didn't discriminate between satguru as their is only one same satguru for every yug.  He told us to praise, worship, meditate on the one and only satguru.  He wrote about the 24 incarnations of Vishnu and he corrected what happened actually to the 24 incarnations.  If Krishna and Vishnu were satguru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji would have said it in his writing about them.  Instead he wrote to say I don't praise them or think of them, I hold Mahakaal ( which translates into Vaheguru in this context as he is the destroyer of all) praise only in my mind.
    • people need to stop having WWA matches with rehits imo. 
    • This whole jathabandi nonsense has had a negative impact on Sikhi, and I wish we would do away with it.
    •   Jagsaw, I am very surprised that you consider the movement of Sikhs out of areas with substantial Sikh populations to be "progress". First of all, I thought you lived in Southall?  Or perhaps another part of West London?  If so, I find it odd that you consider it a positive thing not to live in areas such as the one that you yourself live in. Second of all, I think you are greatly overlooking just how much of a positive impact that living in an area with a substantial Sikh population can have when it comes to preserving our religion and culture.  It is foolish to discount the importance of children being able to grow up in a "community", with Gurdwaras and Khalsa Schools nearby, with peers who come from the same background, who practice the same things, speak the same language.  I credit the "ghettoization" of the Sikh community in the UK for preserving the Sikh religion and Punjabi culture despite several generations having elapsed.  The vast majority of Sikhs in the UK trace their roots in the UK to the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s.  Yet somehow, young Sikhs in the UK appear to be more religious and interested in Sikh issues than the Sikh youth in Canada or America.  Somehow, young Sikhs in the UK seem to have almost as much exposure to Punjabi language and culture as their American and Canadian counterparts whose families arrived from India in the 1980s and 1990s. In America, the vast majority of Sikhs live in cities and neighborhoods with effectively no Sikh presence.  That has an impact.  It leads to young Sikhs who grow up with little knowledge of, connection to, or regard for their religion and culture.  It leads to interfaith marriages that effectively wipe out Sikhi from families.  It cripples our ability to safeguard our way of life.  I very much doubt that young Sikhs in America in the year 2060, whose families arrived in the 1990s, will speak fluent Punjabi, go to the gurdwara, engage with their religion, and connect to Sikh political issues the way that a surprisingly large number of young Sikhs in the UK do today. 
    •   I think Malwa gets more credit for keeping Sikhi alive than it deserves.  Malwa is bigger than Majha and Doaba combined (in both land and population).  So the contributions its people have made to Sikhi in recent times is a bit distorted (I say "recent times", because before 1947, Majha and Malwa were comparable in terms of land and Sikh population).  Malwa is so much bigger that it dominates.   It is notable that even though Majha has a much smaller population than Malwa, the vast majority of young Sikhs who took up arms in the 1980s were from Majha. The Majha district (especially what is now Amritsar District and Tarn Taran District) have historically been the strongholds of Sikhi.  However, this region was the hardest hit during the dark times of the 1980s and 1990s, and it is perhaps the hardest hit today when it comes to the drug epidemic.  Sadly, the Sikh youth in Majha seem to have discarded their kesh, do not follow rehat, and have in many cases succumbed to drugs.