Jump to content

What Is The Sikh View On Aarti?


Recommended Posts

Aarti written by Guru Nanak Dev Ji, Bhagat Ravidas, Bhagit Kabir, Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Nowhere do they promote the physical aarti of using a deeva.

Ootham deeara niramal baathee| thuhaee niranjan kamalaa pathee |2| Sublime is th elamp, pure is the wick. You are the immaculate and pure, O Brilliant Lord of Wealth!

thath thael naam keaa baathee deepak dhaeh oujaaraa | With the oil of knowledge about the essence of reality, the wick of the Naam, the Name of the Lord, this lamp illuminates my body.

Joth laae jagdhees jagaaeiaa boojhai boojhaneahaara |2| I have applied the Light of the Lord of the Universe, and lit this lamp. God the Knower knows.

---

All Both Bhagat Jis and Guru Sahiban jis are against the physical aarti as Guru Nanak Dev Ji made an example that the real aarti is not physically doing it but doing sewa and service to Akaal Purakh and the True Guru.

What someone on youtube claimed was the bollywood video of amitabh bachan is the right way of doing aarti and they somehow preserved a prathan tradition of the Khalsa panth...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jab Lag Khalsa Rahe Niaara || Tab Lag Tej Dheeyo Meh Saara ||

Have faith that when the Panth comes to fully recognizing and drilling this pure Mukhvaak of Kalgeedhar Guru Gobind Singh Ji they will immediately come to abide in Chardi Kala. One should contemplate over every word in this Mukhvaak, it is not so hard to understand. If the Khalsa stays distinct then Guru Kalgeedhar says 'Mai Poora Saaraa Tej Bakhshaa gaa, Devaa(n)gaa', meaning I will give the Khalsa my complete blessings (and power).

The Khalsa is a distinct nation, its birth was most distinct, the lifestyle of a Khalsa is distinct, the food and clothes the Khalsa wears is distinct and the love the Khalsa has for the almighty is most distinct.

Don't Become a Adopted Son of a Bahmin, Come Home to you real Father (Satguru Jee) & His Hukams, Pakhand was destroyed by Saache Paatshaaha.

These rituals have being put into Sikhee by Anti-Panth forces, we should awaken.

Guru Sahib jee, Mahapursh, Akaal Takht Sahib are against this practice full stop.

But most of all OUR GURU SAHIBAAN ARE AGAINST IT .

True words of guru sahib. They were true in past they are true today and they will remain true in future.

Now just put these words in reality and see what is the tej of guru sahib.

I visited sachkhand hazzor sahib the place were arti is in practice. And most of the sangat know those who dont must be amazed to hear that in whole city nanded. There is not even a single local sikh who does beadbi of kesh. It must be the only city in this world whose sikh population is 100% kesadhari.

I find it strange and very hard to digest the places were Real mareyada is being followed even the granthis are finiding it hard to keep their kids in sikh sroop. On the other hand where brhamin rituals are being followed 100% sikh kesadhari and over 80 percent amritdhari and that to without any special parchar.

Jab laag khalsa rahe neyara tab lag tej deu main sara these bachans are partkh at sach khand sri hazzor sahib the Takth following the so called "brhamins mareyada".

On the other hand in punjab i need not say whats going on and everyone is aware.

I have special respect for mareyada of akal takth sahib every one in my family follows it and I always advocate there should be 1 mareyada for the whole sikh panth. But the approach of getting this done should be sitting together and discussing thing this is what nihangs think this is what taksalis think give your sources and in the end decide on some thing. Instead of forcing and trying to prove the other person is RSS or brhamin. Such approach of calling each other brhamin will only produce friction in panth nothing more then that.

More over singh ji you said Akaal Takht Sahib are against this practice full stop. Should i post another articles from the same website which is promoting opposite views of akal takth sahib.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Singho, if wind is the fan, then why do we do Chaur Sahib di seva? Is not Chaur Sahib di seva a form of Aarti?

That is very interesting observation which i have been mentioning in any debates of arti-arta on sikhsangat in the past. From ritual perspective, chaur sahib can be deemed as hinduvad as well as its sign of royalties among rajas of hindustan.

Concept of arti-arta, phoola varkha towards maharaj it's not clear cut as people like to believe. Here is an very well written post on arti-arta performed, it touches sikh theology behind symbolism, enjoy this below, especially point 5

It's a bit long but hopefully clarifies a few things...

To my mind the evidence really weighs in favour of accepting aarti with deepa and dhoop, and instead it should be the case for those against it to state on what evidence it is to be rejected.

Taking a one particular style of interpretation based on pre-conieved assumptions of particular verses of Guru Granth Sahib alone is by itself not a way of determining what and what isn't time-honoured maryada, as I could equally justify it’s practice using the same bani (various discussions still go on to no conclusion using Guru Granth Sahib alone to define what are practical issues of maryada). Therefore we must look to other sources as well.

Some things that spring to mind on this issue,

1) Guru Granth Sahib is nowadays adorned with the maryada that we see in texts and images of how the Gurus themselves were treated (e.g. chauri sahib, gaddi, palanquin, etc). By the time of Guru Arjun Dev ji and in particular Guru Hargobind ji the Guru's darbar was functioning akin to a Maharaja's darbar as sources of both political and social decision making, coupled with spiritual influence (miripiri). Hukamnamas were issued, an army was maintained, activities of hunting with nagara occurred, in line with the activities of a traditional maharaj, etc.

It would have to be a very specific distaste based on a very specific conceptual problem with the aarti ceremony of honouring a maharaj that would cause its rejection by Guru ji (and as such would be expected to appear in texts of the time) yet allowing for open maintenance of other aspects of traditional darbar maryada. There would have to have been something particularly disliked about for it not to have been performed, and as such one would expect such a particular dislike stipulated in guidance given by early quasi-rehitnamay.

An alternative explanation for all this is to a) to interpret Guru ji's bani as rejecting any possible form of symbollic practice, therefore assume Guru ji would not perform such ceremonies along with any other form of symbolic practice c) ignore historical accounts of such practices as a perversion of tradition by brahmins/hindus d) conclude that it is to be read alone not performed.

2) Bhai Gurdas' varan aim at setting out what is expected of the Sikh in daily practice, and it is clear that aarti is to be performed separately from sohilla (in other words, the wording denotes two separate things, not one). The question that arises here is which aarti? What is interesting here is that the earliest commentary I have seen on it is Swami Anandaghun Udasi (who later was responded to by Baba Santokh Singh in Garabganjani Steek), in which the aarti he adds commentary to is much shorter and (if my memory serves me well) is only Guru Nanak Dev ji's opening bani. I presume this is the section that is being referred to by Bhai Gurdas. How and when the varying shabds were collated together in practice, I don't know. The issue here is the same as that for the dasam bani section of Rehras Sahib. There is an issue as to who the focus is of the aarti recorded at this time. Was it to be part of darbar maryada and hence accorded to the Adi Granth Sahib as it stood then? These are questions I have yet no answer for. I have seen in traditional guru-puja for the disciple to initially perform the aarti verses to the Guru, and then if appropriate for the Guru to lead the aarti of the ishtdev.

3) Lets be absolutely clear on the Hazoor Sahib maryada here. In the recent video of aarti performed by the sevadar at the takhat, he holds it still (adorned with both ghee jot and camphor jot in elaborate deepa lamps on a thal) for the first few sections of the bani and then (after ‘sankhan ki…’ possibly) proceeds to wave it in circular motions toward Guru Granth Sahib and then moves and does the same of Dasam Granth Sahib. I saw the Patna Sahib aarti ceremony this summer, and this is toward the portrait and shaster of the Guru rather than Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth Sahib. A conical aarti stand (with many deepas) on a thaal is used here and again moved in a circular motion. Having spoken with Mahant Tirath Singh he clarified that ALL sewapanthi institutions are expected to perform aarti with deepa, dhoop and shank. The recording I have of Guruwara Sis Ganj performs aarti with shank and phoolan, although no deepas.

4) As I stated earlier, the fact that all traditional orders, all traditional institutions, and traditional maryadas proceeding the Lahore Singh Sabha movement support this practice makes it a task for others to disprove its traditional role prior to the reforms. Apart from the Nirankaris I can’t think of anyone else who had rejected its practice (perhaps someone can add more). Furthermore, considering the differences between geographically diverse historical institutions and orders, it is surprising the consistency of the practice considering the diversity in other practices.

5) There is a secondary issue of the doctrinal assumptions that arise from exegesis of the meaning of the aarti bani. It is clear that nowhere does it state that aarti is not to be performed, it is instead investing the ceremony with cosmological significance. This is entirely concordant with the teachings of Sikhi, and furthermore that the practice of aarti is given a non-dualist angle in this composition. This is a common theme in Guruji's bani of pointing to the inner meaning of spiritual practices. In Japuji Sahib, Guru ji states that 'Mundaa santokh saram put jholi', pointing to the internalisation of the garments of a sadhu. The same arises within the teaching on the inner meanings of the practice of namaaz. Is Guru ji actually stating it should not be performed, or is he stating that one should invest it with deeper meaning as a means of internalising spiritual symbols? If he rejected any form of religious symbolism whatsoever, and that everything should have a purely functional purpose that would make key everyday practices in Sikhi redundant. If one accepts the 'ek jot' Guru philosophy then this thinking creates a conflict as there is no possible explanation for how symbolic practices have been instituted (and seemingly rejected) by the same jot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is very interesting observation which i have been mentioning in any debates of arti-arta on sikhsangat in the past. From ritual perspective, chaur sahib can be deemed as hinduvad as well as its sign of royalties among rajas of hindustan.

Concept of arti-arta, phoola varkha towards maharaj it's not clear cut as people like to believe. Here is an very well written post on arti-arta performed, it touches sikh theology behind symbolism, enjoy this below, especially point 5

5) There is a secondary issue of the doctrinal assumptions that arise from exegesis of the meaning of the aarti bani. It is clear that nowhere does it state that aarti is not to be performed, it is instead investing the ceremony with cosmological significance. This is entirely concordant with the teachings of Sikhi, and furthermore that the practice of aarti is given a non-dualist angle in this composition. This is a common theme in Guruji's bani of pointing to the inner meaning of spiritual practices. In Japuji Sahib, Guru ji states that 'Mundaa santokh saram put jholi', pointing to the internalisation of the garments of a sadhu. The same arises within the teaching on the inner meanings of the practice of namaaz. Is Guru ji actually stating it should not be performed, or is he stating that one should invest it with deeper meaning as a means of internalising spiritual symbols? If he rejected any form of religious symbolism whatsoever, and that everything should have a purely functional purpose that would make key everyday practices in Sikhi redundant. If one accepts the 'ek jot' Guru philosophy then this thinking creates a conflict as there is no possible explanation for how symbolic practices have been instituted (and seemingly rejected) by the same jot.

The five points bring out the reasoning behind aarti, instead of the black and white, which most people see and reject aarti with a deva. In point five i see what the guy is saying, but the namaz part is a different story and can't be brought into this discussion.

Addressed to all:

I think if we take the hindu attachment, that they practice it, away from Aarti and bring this discussion with other Sikhs. Then they would be more accepting of Aarti with a deva. Many people have a hindophobia and when they hear that hindus do it, then the natural reaction is to say it is wrong. A point that needs to be kept in mind is that Satguru Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji Maharaj is the Saroop of Sri Waheguru ji Maharaj and Sikhs to Aarti of a Saroop that is complete. When Hindus do it they are doing the Aarti of a dead stone (Maharaj words not mine). So we can't compare the two at all. Many get confused when going from the stone to Maharaj because they think the stone has Maharaj in it and is the same as Satguru. But don't grasp the next part that the stone is not the Saroop of Sri Waheguru ji Maharaj as a whole, which Satguru is. If the stone is the Saroop of Maharaj then we would have to reject the Bani of Bhagat Naamdev ji Maharaj from Satguru and reject Satguru Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji Maharaj Bani from Satguru.

Take the Aarti practice on it's own, without thinking about the Hindus do it and Satguru approves of Aarti with a deva, if the pyare for Maharaj is there. I know many will jump at me for adding the pyare part and say doesn't everything have too be done with pyare. But look at it, if a person is doing Aarti with a deva without pyare, then they are just waving the thaal around and the focus is not on the practice and it becomes a ritual for that person. Same goes for Chaur Sahib di seva Take reading Gurbani without pyare. It happens to us, but we grasp small amounts to what we did read with a little bit of concentration, so even that becomes virtuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of the nine types of Bhagti one is Acharan Bhagti where the Ist Dev is worshipped through Arti, flowers, Chaur Sahib, etc. There should be no issue about this.

The Sri Nanak Parkash states the shabad in the Kirtan Sohila by Guru Nanak Dev Ji was opposing the worship of the Devte and not of God. For this reason the statue took form and fell at the feet of sri guru nanak dev ji. The Guru and God have no different.

Avtar Na Janhi Ant, Parmeshar Parbhrahm Beant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been blessed to have done darshan at sachkand sri hazur sahib, the aarti there in the evening is different to any other I have seen, yes they do have a tray with diva/lamps etc.

We dont know that this is exactly how it was done in 10th Guru ji's time. It may have. As in Nanded there was not price on Singhs head as in Punjab. Punjab is nearer to delhi. Lahore and Delhi mughal sarkar conspired to eradicate sikhs so Gurdwareh were taken care by sikhs, like udaisis and nirmala i.e. non khlasa. As in punjab the khalsa where in the ladki jungles or in himalya foothills who knows what the custodians of the sikh faith who mixed it with other religions to make more cash did, such as adding murtis etc.

But down south in deccan this policy was not strict so in Nanded maybe the puratan rituals carried out there are the same as guru jis time.

Also the tilak ceromony on shaster is quite controversal.

I maybe totally wrong just thinking out aloud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 years later...

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