tuhintuhin

Anmol Bachans - Precious Words By Saints

141 posts in this topic

Jad banda dooje de karam parkhan lag janda tan apna karam bhul janda hai.

Ishq te akal da mel nahin. Je panj pyare akal ton kam lende pher Guru de prem vich sir na bhaint karde. Je chaar sahibzade akal ton kam lende pher neehan vich nahin si chin na

Khalsa amar kyonki Khalsa nu paida karan vala Guru amar. Naash hon vale ton paida hoeya naash hovega, par abinashi Guru ton paida hoeya khalsa vi na naas hon vala hai

Sant Harnam Singh ji Rampurkhera : -

Parmesher bhagta vich vasda hai, parmesher nu bhagta duara hi jaaneya ja sakda hai ate bhagta ne bhagti karke hi parmesher nu jaaneya hai

Adarshak aatmik jeewani paathka te apna prabhaav jaroor paundi hai, is layi kise vi mahapurkh di jeevani parhni, ona di sangat karan de brabar ho jandi hai

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kuran: - “ eh sansar har jeev de agle jeewan di kheti hai”

Akaal purkh ji di upma duneyavi shabda naal pargat nahin ho sakdi – Sant Baba Harnam Singh ji Rampurkhera

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bhai Guriqbal Singh ji Mata Kaulsarwale:

"Mann" "Indriya" (nak, kan, akhaan etc) de adheen hai, je "mann" nu "indriya (senses)" di gulami vichon kadhke "aatma" de adheen kar dita jaawe, ta dukh sukh ton pare ho janda hai kyonki "aatma" "parmatma" da ansh hai

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bhai Guriqbal Singh ji Mata Kaulsarwale:

"Mann" "Indriya" (nak, kan, akhaan etc) de adheen hai, je "mann" nu "indriya (senses)" di gulami vichon kadhke "aatma" de adheen kar dita jaawe, ta dukh sukh ton pare ho janda hai kyonki "aatma" "parmatma" da ansh hai

Could you translate that to English please ????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mind" is under the influence of or a slave to our 5 "senses/feelings" (ear / eyes / nose etc), if we surrender our "mind" to our "soul", then different attributes of "maya" won't be able to distract or affect us because our "soul" is the part of "the Supreme light / being"

Bhai Gurqibal Singh ji Mata Kaulsarwale

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Mind" is under the influence of or a slave to our 5 "senses/feelings" (ear / eyes / nose etc), if we surrender our "mind" to our "soul", then different attributes of "maya" won't be able to distract or affect us because our "soul" is the part of "the Supreme light / being"

Bhai Gurqibal Singh ji Mata Kaulsarwale

Thank you, That's nice ..

But thinking about this a little harder, I question to myself ''where does that leave mann jitey jagjeet ??''

I thought the idea is to conquer the mind and surrender our body !

But if we could surrender our mind, then we wouldn't be in duality !!

I think that Guru Nanak ji's idea was to conquer mind and maya and rise above it.

He mentions- that we still swim across the world ocean and not detach from it by assuming to get across without any contact with it .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, That's nice ..

But thinking about this a little harder, I question to myself ''where does that leave mann jitey jagjeet ??''

I thought the idea is to conquer the mind and surrender our body !

But if we could surrender our mind, then we wouldn't be in duality !!

I think that Guru Nanak ji's idea was to conquer mind and maya and rise above it.

He mentions- that we still swim across the world ocean and not detach from it by assuming to get across without any contact with it .

People who follows Gurbani will agree with you.

People who follows the bhagats who says below one needs to look into themselves what kind of sikhism they are following.

Parmesher bhagta vich vasda hai, parmesher nu bhagta duara hi jaaneya ja sakda hai ate bhagta ne bhagti karke hi parmesher nu jaaneya hai

Parmesher sab vich vasda hai te ohnu odi marzi nall guru de hukum vich reh ke jaaneya ja sakta hai.

"God is in everybody, we can realize him with his hukum following the way Guru told".

Above bold quote is mine.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

waheguru ji...a different thread has been started for discussions on bachans, so this doesn't get into debate. This link has been copied and pasted for reference.

@ Lucky singh

My thought on your opinion is that the only way for Mind to surrender is if it's won over. And it's the nature of God that only a higher level can win over a lower level. A person go to someone to learn who's on the higher level in that field. Same here, soul is higher than mind, as soul is pure, light of God and mind is based on the outer things he sees, feels, touches etc.

Body is slave to mind. Whatever mind says, body follows that. Every physical action/reaction is born as a thought first and then that thought becomes action. For example my friend asks me to go to Gurdwara, I think for a while and reply back "umm, no I wanna watch this movie, we'll go some other time"...

Now if my "mind" was under "aatma", my aatma would have asked my mind to go to Gurudwara, as aatma is the part of parmatma, and always ask the right thing.

Once soul (because soul or light inside us is the part of "supreme light") has conquered the mind, the mind will automatically rise above from "maya" , "body/senses/indriya" and "sansar" (jag jeet), as the utimate goal for every soul is to be one with the "supreme light".

The bachan is the elaboration of "man jeete jag jeet"

Edited by tuhintuhin
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

waheguru ji...a different thread has been started for discussions on bachans, so this doesn't get into debate. This link has been copied and pasted for reference.

@ Lucky singh

My thought on your opinion is that the only way for Mind to surrender is if it's won over. And it's the nature of God that only a higher level can win over a lower level. A person go to someone to learn who's on the higher level in that field. Same here, soul is higher than mind, as soul is pure, light of God and mind is based on the outer things he sees, feels, touches etc.

Body is slave to mind. Whatever mind says, body follows that. Every physical action/reaction is born as a thought first and then that thought becomes action. For example my friend asks me to go to Gurdwara, I think for a while and reply back "umm, no I wanna watch this movie, we'll go some other time"...

Now if my "mind" was under "aatma", my aatma would have asked my mind to go to Gurudwara, as aatma is the part of parmatma, and always ask the right thing.

Once soul (because soul or light inside us is the part of "supreme light") has conquered the mind, the mind will automatically rise above from "maya" , "body/senses/indriya" and "sansar" (jag jeet), as the utimate goal for every soul is to be one with the "supreme light".

The bachan is the elaboration of "man jeete jag jeet"

So your saying that 1st- Conquer and Win your mind over and then

2nd- Surrender your mind to your soul ???

I'm a little confused because I think I've nearly conquered my mind, but I don't know what to surrender ??

Should it be My head to Guruji or just my mind ??

OR do I just leave it ALL to Hukam ??

Hang on...., wouldn't it make sense to Surrender and Submit yourself to the HUKAM.

Isn't that what the Guru's did ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little confused because I think I've nearly conquered my mind, but I don't know what to surrender ??

Should it be My head to Guruji or just my mind ??

OR do I just leave it ALL to Hukam ??

waheguru ji.....could you please explain in detail what do you mean by "I" word you used?

Please do so in other thread for discussions on bachans.

Edited by tuhintuhin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bulle shah :-

"Bulleya rab da ki pauna, edhron putke edhar launa"

Rab bande de ander adrisht vasda hai, par "mann" nu "duniya" te "maya" valon torh ke rab val laun naal Rab nu pragat karke us naal mel ho sakda hai......

Edited by tuhintuhin
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manukh da moonh ik time te iko disha vich hi ho sakda hai, ik time te o do paase nahin dekh sakda, dooje pase dekhan layi usnu pehli thaan ton apnia akhhan fernia painia han.....................ise taran sarhak te ik time te iko disha val hi tureya ja sakda hai, dono val nahin, dooji disha val turan layi pehli nu shadna penda hai..................ise taran rab val chalan layi duniya ton androoni taur te moonh ferna penda hai, moh maya diya zanzeera ton upar uthke hi rab nu paya ja sakda hai..........ya ta rab val moonh hovega ya rishteya vich..........Jiwein Guru Nanak Dev ji ne grehsath jeewan te parupkaar karan di sikheya apne jeewan vichon diti hai maya ton upar utheke....

Edited by tuhintuhin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aisi te amli haan begar nashe de te kaam bhi nahin hunde

ਹਰਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਰਹਿ ਨ ਸਕਉ ਇਕ ਰਾਤੀ ॥

Har Bin Rehi N Sako Eik Raathee ||

हरि बिनु रहि न सकउ इक राती ॥

Without the Lord, I cannot live for even a second.

ਜਿਉ ਬਿਨੁ ਅਮਲੈ ਅਮਲੀ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈ ਹੈ ਤਿਉ ਹਰਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਹਮ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਤੀ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Jio Bin Amalai Amalee Mar Jaaee Hai Thio Har Bin Ham Mar Jaathee || Rehaao ||

जिउ बिनु अमलै अमली मरि जाई है तिउ हरि बिनु हम मरि जाती ॥ रहाउ ॥

Like the addict who dies without his drug, I die without the Lord. ||Pause||

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sant Harnam Singh ji Rampurkhera:-

"Aapa sware bina, naam ras maane bina te aatma de patijan ton bina, naahin lokan da koi sudhaar kita ja sakda hai ate naahin adheyaatmik khetar vich koi sewa de yog ho sakda hai"

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bhai Guriqbal Singh ji:-

"If a wife loves and respects only her husband, not any other members of the family, her husband will not be truely happy with her, in same way If a sikh loves and respects Guru sahib but bad mouth & doesn't show any humility and respect to other religions, Guru ji will not be truely happy with him"

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Just been listening to this shabad to help with some stress:  
    • Whether you’re a confident but controlling first-born or a resourceful yet restless middle child, your positioning in the family can affect everything from your choice of career to how successful your marriage is.   The order we’re born in – first, middle or youngest child – is outside our control. So it can make us uncomfortable to think that our birth order can play a significant part in our success, our personality – the direction of our life. Surely, these things are not set before we even get started? And yet, we all know a ‘typical middle child’, we recognise ‘classic only-child behaviour’. And the over-achievement of the first-born is one of the most consistent findings in child psychology. So how big a role does birth order play? I’m coming from a vulnerable, emotionally charged and pregnant perspective. I have two daughters, aged five and six, and am about to add a third baby to the mix. At the moment, Ruby, our eldest, has life sussed. She’s independent, educationally gifted and sometimes I think I could leave her in Sainsbury’s and she’d probably look after herself. Tara, her younger sister, is the one who wants the cuddles, who frets if I’m not first at the door when school finishes. The idea that she’ll soon be shoved out of her space as the baby of the family and squashed into the middle fills me with guilt. Is it downhill for her from now on? The importance of birth order was first set out by the Austrian psychologist Alfred Adler. Michael Grose, an Adlerian-trained parenting expert and author of Why First-borns Rule The World And Last-borns Want To Change It (Random House, £12.99), explains the basics. ‘We’re in a Darwinian struggle from the moment we’re born, fighting for scarce resources within a family – our parents’ time, love and affection,’ he says. Through human evolution, birth order has determined who inherits power (the first-born) and who is sent to war (the youngest as he was the ‘spare’). First born Historically, first-borns have been less likely to die in infancy, are less susceptible to disease and, as adults, are more likely to reproduce. They are their parents’ ‘blue-chip security’, whose birth is most eagerly anticipated, whose first steps, first words, first everythings are celebrated. ‘Typical first-borns are appro-val-seeking missiles,’ says Grose. ‘They’ve been showered with attention and identify strongly with power.’ First-borns are thought to be conscientious and achievement-oriented. A study of Norwegians born between 1912 and 1975 found that educational achievement was highest in first-borns and diminished the further down the birth order you got, despite little difference in IQ. The legal profession is, says Grose, filled with first-borns. World leaders are also overwhelmingly first-born children. On the negative side, first-borns are the only ones who experience having their parents all to themselves, then having to share them. For this reason, they’re thought to be anxious, emotionally intense, defensive and prone to jealous rages. These are all characteristics that fit Sarah Ruskell, 43. The eldest of three, she’s a successful academic, married with three children. As a child, she was serious, bookish and mature. ‘I had a younger sister and brother who were much naughtier on a daily basis,’ she says. ‘But if I was pushed, if they messed up my room or touched my records, I’d rage. Any threat to my power, I suppose.’ Another characteristic of first-borns, according to Frank Sulloway, author of Born to Rebel (Abacus), is caution and aversion to risk. They’re the least likely to travel or be physically daring. Again, this fits Sarah. While her middle brother took up hang-gliding and both siblings backpacked round the world, Sarah’s biggest adventure to date is a thunderstorm in France. Many theorists group only children among first-borns ­– although they never experience having to share their parents, nor the frictions, fights or fondness that comes with siblings. For this reason, they feel like outsiders, distanced from much of life. The only child is thought to be extremely mature, aloof, someone who expects a special standing. Middle child So what about the middle child? According to Darwinian theory, they lose out as they are neither the precious, able, oldest,­ nor the vulnerable youngest. Their strength is that they learn to be more flexible and sociable, to compromise and build coalitions. ‘Middle children tend to be more relaxed,’ says Grose. James, 39, is a typical case. Born between his sister and brother, he has always been easy-going, and loves to be surrounded by friends. Yet his affability comes at a price. ‘I turned my back on becoming a pro rugby player because I lacked competitive drive,’ he says. As the first-born boy, James didn’t struggle to establish his own identity as some middle-borns do, but, he says, ‘if I wanted something I definitely had to shout the loudest to make myself heard’. Gemma, 33, the middle of three sisters, found it harder to carve out her niche. ‘I lived in my older sister’s shadow, and was overlooked in favour of my younger sister,’ she says. ‘I felt left out, and overcompensated by forging friendships outside the family.’ She also became a skilled negotiator. ‘As a “middle” I was the peacemaker. I still use those skills now, and I’m good at seeing everyone’s point of view.’ Last born The youngest children are more likely to question the order of things, and develop a ‘revolutionary personality’. Many last-borns choose a completely different path to their older siblings to avoid direct competition. They are the babies of the family, and may grow up expecting others to take responsibility. ‘They’re not life’s volunteers,’ says Grose. ‘They’re more likely to put others in service.’ As the youngest of three, I can recognise myself in that. Growing up, I was the most likely to have blazing rows with my dad, I sympathised with the underdog and I’m not a volunteer. (At family get-togethers, I’m still the least helpful.) But a lonely outsider, struggling with an inferiority complex? It seems harsh to condemn anyone to this description simply on the basis of where they stand in the family. Grose admits the effects of birth order can vary according to different factors, including temperament, gender and age gap. Lucy McDonald is the third of five children, but was the first girl. ‘I’ve got a mix of middle and oldest child traits,’ she says. ‘You can have an easy-going first-born, which will ease the competition all the way down,’ says Grose. ‘If the children are the same sex, the competition is more extreme –­ two boys close together produces the most rivalry, and, generally, the closer the age gap, the more dramatic the birth-order effect. When the gap is more than five years, it’s greatly diminished.’ Grose has found birth order a useful tool when dealing with adult clients. ‘Recently, I was approached by a professional in her forties who was basically worn out,’ he says. ‘She admitted that, as a child, she was always playing catch-up with her sister, who was two years older than her. She had always tried to run as fast and be as clever, and the pattern had played out her whole life. As an adult, she was competitive in everything ­– she’d replaced her older sister with her colleagues, her boss, her friends. Despite career success, she was never happy with herself. Helping her see the problem through the context of birth order put her on the path to understanding and modifying her behaviour patterns.’ Cliff Isaacson, author of Birth Order Effect for Couples (Fair Winds, £9.99), believes birth order can even help you find a partner. ‘Two third-borns make the best couples,’ he says. ‘They relate without conflict, there’s a lot of humour and they make a protective environment for their children. Two first-borns rarely connect, there’s no compromise, it’s not a happy relationship.’ According to Isaacson, however, birth order is not a fixed state. ‘It’s a set of strategies developed in childhood to cope with your siblings (or lack of them), parents and the family situation,’ he says. ‘As you get older, you may learn other ways of interacting with your peers. The best reason for studying your birth order is to understand yourself or your children a little better – then overcome it.’ Are you a born leader? More than half the US Presidents, every US astronaut and most Nobel prize-winners have been either first born or an only child. Typical professions are law, politics, science and accountancy. First-borns: Bill and Hillary Clinton, George W Bush, Saddam Hussein, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler (actually his mother’s first surviving child), Kylie Minogue, Cherie Blair. Only children: Winston Churchill, Joseph Stalin, Franklin D Roosevelt, Jean Paul Sartre, Burt Bacharach, Frank Sinatra, Tiger Woods. Middle children: many middle children work in retail, sales, fashion, advertising or the caring professions. Stella McCartney, Michelle Pfeiffer, Jacqueline du Pré, Princess Diana, Cindy Crawford, Cate Blanchett, Emily Brontë. Last children: thought to be rebels, non-conformists, also drawn to creative professions and performing arts. Joan of Arc, Mahatma Gandhi, Charles Darwin, Leon Trotsky, Charlie Chaplin, Hugh Grant, Johnny Depp. Source - https://www.psychologies.co.uk/birth-order-effect
    • https://www.thequint.com/women/2017/03/15/sexual-harassment-at-the-time-of-sita-draupadi-mandodari-ahalya-ramayana-mahabharata
    • Yeah, but as a condition for marriage if everything else was excellent; that's an overperfection. Though he's got to be happy, instead of starting a marriage on a bad foot.
    • Massands were proven to be Anti-Gurmat, for this very reason? Only Guru Sahib can give Amrit; this is proven in Gurbani 24/7 when imperfect humans start putting their feet in water, and calling it Amrit then we have problems. Guru Sahib is allowed to give Amrit because he is God's form. Nihangs also don't believe in female Punj Pyare; the only groups that do believe in it are man-made Jathas and not Jathas made by Vaheguru; Taksali and Nihangs; (note, not all Nihangs were formed by Guru Sahib). +1, nobody should be changing the topic, but O.P. really got to stop msking threads like this; he has not even bothered to post anything in this topic he knew would lead into a fight. (I'd give him 9000 troll points for this).