Jump to content
one love kaur

Gorakh, Brahma, Mother Parbhati........according To Guru Nanak They Are Gurus

Recommended Posts

No I'm an original poster here. The fact is that your understanding and depth of sikhism is very superficial and shallow at best. 

You have defined it by the way you see it, you should know for every negative about the dev there is a positive. You ignore the positive and concentrate on their negatives and call yourselves the all knowers.

You say there are so many meaning to a single tuk of guru grant sahib but you at every step you try and limit them and try to proclaim only yours as true. Is this not hypocritical? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like to hear explanations from other Mahapurakhs and sampradaiye and also puraatan itihasic granths. Just hearing that Bhai Randhir Singh said this and that makes it very jathebandi centric.

6 hours ago, ThunderousDominator said:

can mods please check this singh1606 guys ip address pretty sure hes been posting here before under different usernames

We should be open to discussions like this, we should not shy away from other views. The more we discuss the more we understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, singh1606 said:

My understanding and way of thinking of Sikhism is different from yours. Whether it's wrong or right it's my own understanding from my own knowledge. 

therein lies a huge problem shisha follows the guru not vice versa

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.vidhia.com/Bhai Randheer Singh Ji/Unditthi-duniya.pdf

This is Bhai Sahib Ji's words on the topic of the trinity, this is the punjabi translation too.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/276107862/Andithi-Duniya-Randhir-Singh-Punjabi

 

This is also Bhai Sahib Ji's words about how the Vedas lack Divinity too.

http://www.vidhia.com/Bhai Randheer Singh Ji/Is-bowing-to-Guru-Granth-Sahib-Ji-akin-to-idol-worship.pdf

The Punjabi translation is here too.

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/books/Punjabi_Books/Bhai_Sahib_Bhai_Randhir_Singh/Ki.Shri.Guru.Granth.Sahib.Ji.Di.Puja.But.Prasti.Hai.by.Bhai.Randhir.Singh.(GurmatVeechar.com).pdf

 

Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji on the trinity being affected with Maya.

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/01_Puratan_Katha/Sant_Gurbachan_Singh_(Bhindran_wale)/Guru_Granth_Sahib_Larivaar_Katha/Volume_05_Ang_0347-0462/042--Sant.Gurbachan.Singh.(Bhindran.wale)--Raag.Aasaa--Ang-394%2B395.mp3

 

 

6 hours ago, singh1606 said:

No I'm an original poster here. The fact is that your understanding and depth of sikhism is very superficial and shallow at best. 

 

I've posted Gurbani and words of Mahapurkhs, They're far above the trinity, far above me . Are they wrong and shallow? My depth of Gurbani comes from them. 

IN this thread alone you've made accusations on Guru Gobind Singh Ji being less of a brahmgyani than Shiva (who isn't even one in the first place), You said Gurbani isn't Yugo Yug attal. IN this thread alone you've insulted Guru Sahib more times than anyone, yet you'll level the accusation that we're shallow. By your posts you've never even touched Gurbani yet you have the audacity to call others as being superficial.

Quote

You have defined it by the way you see it, you should know for every negative about the dev there is a positive. You ignore the positive and concentrate on their negatives and call yourselves the all knowers.

The hell? lmao. So focusing on a non-biased account written by Guru Gobind Singh Ji is suddenly me calling myself all knowing? There's positives in everyone and negatives too. Why should Sikhs ignore the negatives and say they're Divine when that's a load of tosh according to Gurbani.

Quote

You say there are so many meaning to a single tuk of guru grant sahib but you at every step you try and limit them and try to proclaim only yours as true. Is this not hypocritical? 
 

I've quoted the Dasam Granth here. Bachittar Natak is history, why would it be in poetic form? Guru Sahib flat out states it in no small words.

That whole argument is ludicrous. NO one's arguing Gurbani isn't vast, but  if you're not even looking at it through a Gurmukh lense then you're basically going to draw the wrong conclusions and provide false arths. An athiest can sit and read Gurbani and say that E-On-ankar refers to Nature and not the Divine supreme. Are you going to argue that Arth is fine and God isn't real? 

You're entire pretext is based on you taking some arths and trying to spin them into Gurbani telling Sikhs something that is not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even sant bhindran wale gives proper respect to the Devas because he is well versed with who they are and their primal nature as akals first expressions as a sargun form. 

Sant jarnail Singh bhindran wale gives due respect to Vishnu by calling him Bhagwan, which means sargun form of Akal. 

Here's the recorded video if you don't believe me around at 50 seconds, if Vishnu is as useless and Maya dhari as you say he is, why did guru gobind Singh ji dedicate an entire section to 24 of his main avtars, Vishnu has had more, but these 24 are his main comings and goings in our dimension. Vishnu lives in another dimension called Vaikunth ie the heavens above us. 

Video: 

and I have also listened to Katha of baba Isher Singh Rara sahib wale and he said that once during Katha a lady asked him who were those three immaculate and bright appearing beings who came in the sangat to listen to Katha and then left? sant Ishar Singh saw them too but didn't realize anyone else did, he told her to keep quiet and not to tell anyone else, he then told her that the Tridev Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva had come to visit the sangat and partake in the vichar and vibration of the sadhu sangat. 

You should also know that Ishar as in his name sant Ishar Singh means shiva, isar is another name for shiva anyway. So even Rara sahib wale mahapurakh is named after Shiva, although you say Shiva is and always will be entangled in Maya. But he's good enough for a mahapurakh I guess. 

Nanaksar sahib wale mahapurakh after baba nand Singh was also named sant Isar Singh, which like bhole Nath, shambo, bhuteshwara, is another name for Shiva. 

Edited by singh1606

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, singh1606 said:

Even sant bhindran wale gives proper respect to the Devas because he is well versed with who they are and their primal nature as akals first expressions as a sargun form. 

Sant jarnail Singh bhindran wale gives due respect to Vishnu by calling him Bhagwan, which means sargun form of Akal. 

Here's the recorded video if you don't believe me around at 50 seconds, if Vishnu is as useless and Maya dhari as you say he is, why did guru gobind Singh ji dedicate an entire section to 24 of his main avtars, Vishnu has had more, but these 24 are his main comings and goings in our dimension. Vishnu lives in another dimension called Vaikunth ie the heavens above us. 

Video: 

and I have also listened to Katha of baba Isher Singh Rara sahib wale and he said that once during Katha a lady asked him who were those three immaculate and bright appearing beings who came in the sangat to listen to Katha and then left? sant Ishar Singh saw them too but didn't realize anyone else did, he told her to keep quiet and not to tell anyone else, he then told her that the Tridev Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva had come to visit the sangat and partake in the vichar and vibration of the sadhu sangat. 

You should also know that Ishar as in his name sant Ishar Singh means shiva, isar is another name for shiva anyway. So even Rara sahib wale mahapurakh is named after Shiva, although you say Shiva is and always will be entangled in Maya. But he's good enough for a mahapurakh I guess. 

Nanaksar sahib wale mahapurakh after baba nand Singh was also named sant Isar Singh, which like bhole Nath, shambo, bhuteshwara, is another name for Shiva. 

Are you really that desperate to have sikhs bow to Devtas. I never said Vishnu was useless, I said he was lost in Maya. Which he is. He does his duties but Gurbani has called him lost in Maya. End of story. Go and argue with Guru Sahib on that. Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji confirms this, go and call him a liar.

No Bhagwan doesn't mean Sargun form of Waheguru. What the actual hell lol. Bhagwan Vishnu was simply his title, which Sant Ji used.  Sant Ji is more than happy to call out the failings of the Trinity. He calls Shiva as being Shiv-Ji, also a mark of honorifics and a title. Yet here he openly criticises Shiva as well. 

He already calls that tongue like yours cursed who claim that Shiva is in any ways above Guru Sahib and that he even asked him for blessings. Even more he further says that Devtas like Shiva (yes that includes Vishnu) are of no importance to Sikhs and subordinate to true Gursikhs.

http://www.gurmatveechar.com/audios/Katha/01_Puratan_Katha/Sant_Jarnail_Singh_(Bhindran_wale)/Dasam_Granth_Viakhya/Sant.Jarnail.Singh--Dasam.Granth.Viakhya--Ab.Main.Apni.Katha.Bakhano.(part1).mp3

He confirms what I just said there. But you'll ignore that I bet.

 

You're actually so cursed you're claiming that Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji and Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji are liars and you're right? No Sant Isher Singh Ji wasn't named after Shiva. That's just your stupidity talking. Isher is referring to God in this context not Shiva. 

Yes they did visit Sant Ji's darbar, because they were subordinate to him. They were thirsting for the darshan of a true Mahapurkh as being in their presence is where they accumulate their powers. lol. So much for being Brahmgyanis, they need true Gursikhs to do anything. Them coming to his Darbar further proves my point at how much lower they are to Brahmgyanis who are Akaal themselves.

 

Please present Evidence from Gurbani that the Trinity aren't lost in Maya. Thank you.

 

I've presented evidence upon evidence of various Mahapurkhs all saying the Trinity are within Maya, this is once again this dude's lame way to promote some Hindu propaganda. In this entire thread he has yet to provide any reliable source and thus far all he's done is grasped for straws by saying "because a certain word was used it means Sikhs should bow to the Devtas" 

IN this thread alone he's insulted Guru Pita Guru Gobind Singh Ji and the intelligence of Various Mahapurkhs.  He considers himself infallible.

If you want to go and fall at their feet and beg them for stuff then do so. No one here will stop you. But don't drag Sikhi into it. If you have proper hardcore evidence then I'm all ears, otherwise you're grasping for straws and it couldn't be more obvious you know next to nothing about Sikhi since you're using the names of God (that were handed to the Devtas by others) to say Sikhs are followers/adherents of them. The same stale argument used by the Hindu=Sikh brigade.

 

If the words of Mahapurkhs and Scholars aren't something you can swallow and you think they're wrong then there's no hope for you. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well apparently sant ji is split 50/50 on the Devas. My hypothesis is that it is to appease the devta haters. 

Well I have sant Ishar Singh on my side, Rara sahib wale

Edited by singh1606

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, singh1606 said:

Well apparently sant ji is split 50/50 on the Devas. My hypothesis is that it is to appease the devta haters. 

No he isn't. That's just your idiocy talking, Now you're calling him a liar again saying he'll lie to appease people. Really how disgusting are you. He flat out says Vishnu proclaimed he was God and that was completely bang out of order. You're argument is based around a word, a word that's used so commonly in the world its unreal. The word is used for literally any form of honorific. You've yet to post a Katha where he says "oh yeah Vishnu is amazing and not indulging in Maya" because reality check. That's a load of tosh. 

You're free to go and pray to him, but you'll be stuck in the same Vicious cycle of life and death. 

 

Quote

Well I have sant Ishar Singh on my side, Rara sahib wale

No you don't. They serve him, they came to his Darbar because they're weak and powerless without him, because he's far above them, He is the King and they are the paupers just like all of us. He holds Gurbani at the highest, stop dragging Mahapurkhs names into things without even having any proof, your proof is they visited his Darbar, so what? So did countless other people, all of whom needed Sant Ji to help them, So thank you for further proving the point the Devta are lost in Maya. Find me where he flat out says that Vishnu should be worshipped. You wont because he never said it, He said Guru Nanak Dev Ji is Supreme. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, singh1606 said:

You should also know that Ishar as in his name sant Ishar Singh means shiva, isar is another name for shiva anyway. So even Rara sahib wale mahapurakh is named after Shiva, although you say Shiva is and always will be entangled in Maya. But he's good enough for a mahapurakh I guess. 

Nanaksar sahib wale mahapurakh after baba nand Singh was also named sant Isar Singh, which like bhole Nath, shambo, bhuteshwara, is another name for Shiva. 

Can you stop insulting Mahapurshs. No, they were not named after Shiva. They have two different meanings. Firstly you got the spellings wrong. And secondly, stop trying to make out that Nanaksar follows Hinduism. Ishar/Isher, the Sikh meaning does not refer to Shiva, but to as @Kira paji has already pointed out to you. 

Why on earth would Baba Nand Singh ji and Sant Attar Singh ji name somebody after a Hindu deity, when they themselves bowed down to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Stop your bakwas.

@jkvlondon, I think one of your children have the same/similar name, can you please shed some light on this?

 

Edited by simran345
Changed sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, simran345 said:

Can you stop insulting Mahapurshs. No, they were not named after Shiva. They have two different meanings. Firstly you got the spellings wrong. And secondly, stop trying to make out that Nanaksar follows Hinduism. Ishar/Isher, the Sikh meaning does not refer to Shiva, but to as @Kira paji has already pointed out to you. 

Why on earth would Baba Nand Singh ji and Sant Attar Singh ji name somebody after a Hindu deity, when they themselves bowed down to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Stop your bakwas.

@jkvlondon, I think one of your children have the same/similar name, can you please shed some light on this?

 

yes my daughter is Isher kaur but she is named so because she is Isher di ansh , Akal purakh's Kaur nothing more or less .

Mahakaal is that  most 'superior'  being who brings end to the creation , but that is not true of Shiva as AKal Purakh is the true Mahakaal as he can put an end to Shiva , Shivpuri, Indrapuri, Brahmlok etc all of maya etc  that is the nishaani Kaal of 'Mahakaal' that is who a sikh serves and remembers

Edited by jkvlondon
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

yes my daughter is Isher kaur but she is named so because she is Isher di ansh , Akal purakh's Kaur nothing more or less .

Mahakaal is that  most 'superior'  being who brings end to the creation , but that is not true of Shiva as AKal Purakh is the true Mahakaal as he can put an end to Shiva , Shivpuri, Indrapuri, Brahmlok etc all of maya etc  that is the nishaani Kaal of 'Mahakaal' that is who a sikh serves and remembers

Thank you penji for this insight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So a name since the sat yug, Ishar ie ishwara, which has always defined the Shiva component of Akal Purakh, for millennia it seems since older Ved were written; and now all of a sudden in just 500 years time after millennia of 3 Yugs you are going to excise the connection if Shiva to Akal Purakh and claim by yourselves that now Shiva has no connection to Akal at all and it is Akal only?? 

From an unbiased and impartial intellectual stand point that just seems wrong. Whether it is bani that is doing this or the gurus or the environment and opinion created by certain parchariks with agendas of their own, you can not take a word that has existed for millennia before has had a certain definition for that time period and then suddenly change it to suit your own needs or personal viewpoints. 

Not seeing this as a "sikh" or "Hindu" but from an impartial and complete intellectual neutrality, looking at the word Isher, or ishwar, or ishwara, in whatever form, Shiva is associated with it's definition as well as Akal Purakh. So one can deduce that Shiva and Akal are projections of each other, due to the word or shabd defining in all it's definitons both Shiva and Akal Purakh. 

So not only does a single tuk in guru granth sahib have "infinite meanings" as stated by parchariks, but even a single shabd or word. This is where the multiple meanings of single lines comes in to play. 

Moreover what you are doing by suddenly changing the exact and full meanings of words like these is intellectual dishonesty and even plaigarism. Give us the whole meaning of the word Ishar, not just your version, I personally would want to know the complete and full meaning of words I use and read so I can have it's complete version and knowledge. And I know it's personal, but especially if I were to name my own child such a name, it is only fair that I know the words full meaning and that my child also understands the full context of his or her own name. 

It's plaigarism because you are taking a word that has existed for millennia with it's various interpretations for millenia and then you take this shabd and alter it yourself excising what you like and discarding what you do not, treating it as though you were the original founder and creator of this word, when you clearly are not. 

From an unbiased and impartial intellectual standpoint, this does not make sense and is disrespectful to Gyan as well as dishonest in it's nature. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, singh1606 said:

So a name since the sat yug, Ishar ie ishwara, which has always defined the Shiva component of Akal Purakh, for millennia it seems since older Ved were written; and now all of a sudden in just 500 years time after millennia of 3 Yugs you are going to excise the connection if Shiva to Akal Purakh and claim by yourselves that now Shiva has no connection to Akal at all and it is Akal only?? 

 

And Who gave him that Name, wait for it...it was humans....after he asserted he was God. All names are traced back to God, not the other way around. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

Quote

From an unbiased and impartial intellectual stand point that just seems wrong. Whether it is bani that is doing this or the gurus or the environment and opinion created by certain parchariks with agendas of their own, you can not take a word that has existed for millennia before has had a certain definition for that time period and then suddenly change it to suit your own needs or personal viewpoints. 

No pracharik has done that, That's the Sanithya taught by Guru Gobind Singh Ji that the Taksal is teaching, that every Brahmgyani teaches. According to you all of them are wrong. What a creature you are. Are they all liars in your book? 

Quote

Not seeing this as a "sikh" or "Hindu" but from an impartial and complete intellectual neutrality, looking at the word Isher, or ishwar, or ishwara, in whatever form, Shiva is associated with it's definition as well as Akal Purakh. So one can deduce that Shiva and Akal are projections of each other, due to the word or shabd defining in all it's definitons both Shiva and Akal Purakh. 

No it's not. History is what's written by humans, not the History Guru Sahib taught. If you want to argue history then lets do so. The Vedas themselves are constantly changed, infact the ones written now are completely different from when they were first prescribed. So please find the texts that existed during Satyug because the tradition was always oral and the oldest ones are traced back to a couple of hundred years BC.

Quote

So not only does a single tuk in guru granth sahib have "infinite meanings" as stated by parchariks, but even a single shabd or word. This is where the multiple meanings of single lines comes in to play. 

Again with this stale and stupid argument. The only way it has infinite meaning is if you look at it from the glass of Gurmat. Which you cant since you've never even read Gurbani clearly. The fact that Chaupai Sahib calls people who consider Shiva as lord as being "High fools" is evidence of that. An atheist can play around with Gurbani to mean that its nothing more than metaphors for knowledge and that God isn't real. I guess they're right too.

Quote

Moreover what you are doing by suddenly changing the exact and full meanings of words like these is intellectual dishonesty and even plaigarism. Give us the whole meaning of the word Ishar, not just your version, I personally would want to know the complete and full meaning of words I use and read so I can have it's complete version and knowledge. And I know it's personal, but especially if I were to name my own child such a name, it is only fair that I know the words full meaning and that my child also understands the full context of his or her own name. 

I'm the one changing it? this is the Santhiya and arths taught by Guru Gobind Singh Ji to the taksal, these are the arths given by Brahmgyanis. None of it is my own interpretation. So are they all liars?

Quote

It's plaigarism because you are taking a word that has existed for millennia with it's various interpretations for millenia and then you take this shabd and alter it yourself excising what you like and discarding what you do not, treating it as though you were the original founder and creator of this word, when you clearly are not. 

From an unbiased and impartial intellectual standpoint, this does not make sense and is disrespectful to Gyan as well as dishonest in it's nature. 

So Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji is dishonest? So Sant Jarnail Singh JI is dishonest as well? So every Mahapurkh who stated the facts such as Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji are they all dishonest? all you've done here is show you're nothing more than a cretin who's lying through his teeth.  

The fact of the matter is your Lord Shiva is nothing more than a beggar at the Doors of the Mahapurkhs as he's lost in Maya like everyone else. Vishnu is the same and Brahma is the same. Fact. Written and penned by the 10th Master. 

I've shown you the Gurbani, I've shown you Katha by Mahapurkhs. So i'll ask you a direct question, are they all liars?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes if you change the meaning of words, you are a liar. It is misleading hence lying. No matter who does it, whether it's a brahm gyani or God Himself, karma is karma. 

Edited by singh1606

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't think bana is necessary. When I went to my amrit sanchar, I was the only person wearing a bana excluding the panj pyare, the rest wore kurta pajama. They will ask you to take off your pajama though.  
    • Why did you start drinking? You mentioned it's a recent thing having never really drunk before... So what started it off? Why do you drink? Create an account and feel free to send a personal message veer. It would help you to be open and discuss this issue in detail so we may help as best we can.
    • considering the murderer came forward and sent message through media that he killed vipin sharma because VS had arranged murder of one of his bande , his words were this has nothing to do with dharma but the murder of my man , I do not regret a thing about killing him but do not want other sikhs to be punished for what I did
    • lol yes but sometimes I can be b**tchy 
    • एक मिट्टी की मूर्तियां बनाने वाला  (कुम्हार) ईश्वर से कहता है....._     
      ⚘_"हे प्रभु तू भी एक कलाकार है और मैं भी एक कलाकार हूँ,_   
      ⚘_तूने मुझ जैसे असंख्य पुतले बनाकर इस धरती पर भेजे हैं,_
      ⚘_और मैंने तेरे असंख्य पुतले बना कर इस घरती पर बेचे हैं।_ 
      ⚘_पर ईश्वर उस समय बड़ी शर्म आती है, जब तेरे बनाये हुए पुतले आपस में लड़ते हैं_, 
      ⚘_और मेरे बनाये हुए  पुतलों के सामने लोग शीश झुकाते हैं"_..     🙏🙏
      *ध्यान से पढ़े कितना बड़ा सच है.*
×