Jump to content

Did the Gurus have past lives?


Singh2017
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Akalifauj said:

Passed down from who though?  That's what you have not even attempted to clarify.

Bhai Gurdas ji vaar has the following to say:

ਸੋਦਰੁ ਆਰਤੀ ਗਾਵੀਐ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਵੇਲੇ ਜਾਪੁ ਉਚਾਰਾ|| 

This tells us aarti was done by singing at the time of Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji and Sri Guru Angad Dev ji.  Had aarti been done by lighting candles, Bhai Gurdas ji would have stated this in the above vaar. 

In this vaar Bhai Gurdas ji also writes about Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji returning from his travels, giving Guruship to Sri Guru Angad Dev, Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji sons didn't obey Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji commands, and where ever Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji went the wisdom of Gurbani was spread.

What about the following:

ਰਾਤੀ ਕੀਰਤਿ ਸੋਹਿਲਾ ਕਰਿ ਆਰਤੀ ਪਰਸਾਦ ਵੰਡੰਦੇ।

This would indicate that Aarti was physically performed rather than just sang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Kira said:

soooooo back on topic. Here's Sant Bhindrawale's take on the Mata Ji's past lives.

http://kam1825.podbean.com/e/mata-sahib-kaurs-previous-life/

So my initial post about Mata Ji's past life being in Satyug as a different being from Durga is mentioned here by Sant Ji. He references the 404th Charitar in Dasam Granth, If anyone wishes to learn more I recommend you read it. 

Right, so I've listened to the Katha, read a translation of Charitr 404 (bits were missing), and a seperate analysis. Baala is the woman born of flames who, according to the katha, is Mata Sahib Kaur in Kalyug. The analysis states:

"There is another important facet to be kept in mind about Sabudh Baach - The protagonist Baala, who fought with immense courage on the advent of Satjug does not appear anywhere in this present episode for a long time. This, again, is a subtle hint that the present social order has rendered the otherwise capable woman absolutely powerless. However, she reappears in the form of Bhawani and joins Kaal Purakh again in war efforts once all the 'Turk' Demons have been destroyed."

So what @Singh123456777 said would technically be partly correct i.e Mata Sahib Kaur being Chandi/Durga/Bhavani in their past life. What happens in the rest of the charitr vis-a-vis Bhavani? What's the source of the Chandi and Dusht Daman story? Lets see if we can figure out if they are in fact connected in any way.

Also, charitr 404 takes place in Satyug so one could assume that Baala continues to take birth until Kalyug (current day), most likely as Devi until Mata Sahib Kaur (who by some is also considered to be a manifestation of Devi) - my question is this: what is the significance of being born out of fire, what does it represent, especially in regards to the way it is portrayed in the charitr? A fact which may or may not be related to this, is that Devi is often represented by a flame (sometimes in a diva believe it or not haha). Second question: I know many revere the physical manifestations of Devi to varying degrees, and many revere Mata Sahib Kaur without having any connection to Devi, but does it really matter - aren't they all forms of Shakti or the feminine aspect of Akaal Purkh?

Please forgive any mistakes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

How so?

 

Vaar 6.jpg

 

I don't know if I'm reading it wrong but to me 'aarti karke' sounds like something that was performed physically as opposed to only being sung.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrDoaba said:

 

Vaar 6.jpg

 

I don't know if I'm reading it wrong but to me 'aarti karke' sounds like something that was performed physically as opposed to only being sung.

You are making assumptions of one word ਕਰਿ. The translated punjabi you provide is adding in words.  Bhai Gurdas ji says night and the punjabi translator assumed, at bed time. Also Bhai Gurdas ji does not even use the word read.  This is being added and changing the meaning.  The word ਕੀਰਤਿ is describing ਸੋਹਿਲਾ. 

ਰਾਤੀ ਕੀਰਤਿ ਸੋਹਿਲਾ ਕਰਿ ਆਰਤੀ ਪਰਸਾਦ ਵੰਡੰਦੇ।

there is no mention of candles for aarti.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

You are making assumptions of one word ਕਰਿ. The translated punjabi you provide is adding in words.  Bhai Gurdas ji says night and the punjabi translator assumed, at bed time. Also Bhai Gurdas ji does not even use the word read.  This is being added and changing the meaning.  The word ਕੀਰਤਿ is describing ਸੋਹਿਲਾ. 

ਰਾਤੀ ਕੀਰਤਿ ਸੋਹਿਲਾ ਕਰਿ ਆਰਤੀ ਪਰਸਾਦ ਵੰਡੰਦੇ।

there is no mention of candles for aarti.

That's because it's a matter of interpretation. You're right in saying the translator has added in words but that's because he has also interpreted it as he see's fit.

As for no mention of candles, it doesn't have to be mentioned as it is implied in this case. The definition of the word ਆਰਤੀ is enough. Asking for the specific mention of divas would be like asking for the different materials that should be used to make Chaur Sahib, and in what manner one should wave the chaur.

Although English translations are often botched, I will still provide it for reference as it seems to fit:

Having recited the Sohila and made supplication at night they distribute sacred food (prasad).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

That's because it's a matter of interpretation. You're right in saying the translator has added in words but that's because he has also interpreted it as he see's fit.

when it comes to translating a person is to translate as what the original is saying and not as he see's fit. The latter is the wrong way of translating.

As for no mention of candles, it doesn't have to be mentioned as it is implied in this case. The definition of the word ਆਰਤੀ is enough

If the definition of Aarti was implied from the beginning.  When I provided the line of Bhai Gurdas ji, you should have said the candle lighting was implied and their was no need for you to go searching for a different line from Bhai Gurdas ji vaars.  Since no other word in the first line I provided would have inferred anything on the word aarti as it clearly implies for you; candle lit aarti.  If you had believed from the beginning aarti implied candle lit aarti, then you would have not questioned what ਕਰਿ means in the line you provided of Bhai Gurdas ji vaar. Let me remind you what you wrote:

I don't know if I'm reading it wrong but to me 'aarti karke' sounds like something that was performed physically as opposed to only being sung.

Asking for the specific mention of divas would be like asking for the different materials that should be used to make Chaur Sahib, and in what manner one should wave the chaur.

That's the worst comparison I have read.  Chaur sahib can't be compared to aarti as you see it, with candles.  Again you are making assumptions about the candles being part of aarti.  Gurbani directly tells us to wave the chaur sahib over Guru Sahib. One of the Gurus waved the chaur sahib over the other Guru and carried water for him.  This is specifically said in Gurbani.  Yet in Gurbani there is no mention of aarti being done with lit candles or candles at all. Hence the two cannot be compared and you can't see the difference for some reason. If aarti was clear cut, a Gurmukh would not have had to write in a book to specifically say, do not light candles and do aarti.  Bhai Gurdas ji would have been precise because he was writing about what the Gurus, Gurmukhs, and manmukh did.  It is no mystery Bhai Gurdas ji vaars provide us with how Sikh practices were done.  One example being how charan pahul was administered. Aarti is a very important Sikh practice and Bhai Gurdas ji would have not left it to ambiguous interpretations.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

when it comes to translating a person is to translate as what the original is saying and not as he see's fit. The latter is the wrong way of translating.

By this logic all translations, arths, teekas etc should just go out the window. Gurbani (including other Sikh writings) is subject to interpretation as it has many layers and so speaks to different people on different levels. Gurbani has no ant, therefore no translation etc is completely right.

20 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

If the definition of Aarti was implied from the beginning.  When I provided the line of Bhai Gurdas ji, you should have said the candle lighting was implied and their was no need for you to go searching for a different line from Bhai Gurdas ji vaars.  Since no other word in the first line I provided would have inferred anything on the word aarti as it clearly implies for you; candle lit aarti.  If you had believed from the beginning aarti implied candle lit aarti, then you would have not questioned what ਕਰਿ means in the line you provided of Bhai Gurdas ji vaar. Let me remind you what you wrote:

I was merely providing you with another line as a clearer example that aarti could well have been performed with divas. Just as you provided the former to try and definitively prove that it was not - even in that one it says that aarti was sung, it doesn't state it was strictly only sung; one could unambiguously assume that the accompanying ritual went along with it, that it need no mention, hence, me finding a different one to show that distinct possibility.

You're trying to play a game of semantics, and a poor one at that.

20 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

That's the worst comparison I have read.  Chaur sahib can't be compared to aarti as you see it, with candles.  Again you are making assumptions about the candles being part of aarti.  Gurbani directly tells us to wave the chaur sahib over Guru Sahib. One of the Gurus waved the chaur sahib over the other Guru and carried water for him.  This is specifically said in Gurbani.  Yet in Gurbani there is no mention of aarti being done with lit candles or candles at all. Hence the two cannot be compared and you can't see the difference for some reason. If aarti was clear cut, a Gurmukh would not have had to write in a book to specifically say, do not light candles and do aarti.  Bhai Gurdas ji would have been precise because he was writing about what the Gurus, Gurmukhs, and manmukh did.  It is no mystery Bhai Gurdas ji vaars provide us with how Sikh practices were done.  One example being how charan pahul was administered. Aarti is a very important Sikh practice and Bhai Gurdas ji would have not left it to ambiguous interpretations.

You're welcome to that opinion. You keep coming back to that quote stating that aarti is not to be done with divas - 1) not everybody is Taksali nor is Taksal the final authority on each and every thing in Sikhi nor does what they say apply to the whole panth 2) by saying (specifically) that a Gurmukh had to write it in a book, you are automatically implying that those who do aarti with candles are not Gurmukhs, an opinion which you have absolutely no foundation or evidence to hold. While Taksal is a respected Samparda, their members are generally biased and think only they have the correct form of Sikhi, which is what you are doing, which is flawed thinking.

First you say "if aarti was clear cut", then you proceed to say "Bhai Gurdas ji would have not left it to ambiguous interpretations" - these statements contradict eachother.

The aarti itself is not clear cut, the intention and devotion behind doing it differs amongst individuals - if one chooses to do it without divas, do it with divas, or do it with moving the divas around in a circular motion there shouldn't be a problem, none are wrong. Everybodys bhaav is not the same. In the case of divas one is honouring their Sargun Isht Dev and Spiritual & Temporal King with an ancient ceremony which, IMO and that of many others, is not considered against the teachings of Sikhi.

We're not going to come to a consensus on this so lets leave it where it is. I no longer wish to discuss it. Although, I'm glad I've been able to have this discussion with you, without any hostility as is usually the case.

Dhanvaad Jio.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/12/2017 at 12:25 AM, MrDoaba said:

Right, so I've listened to the Katha, read a translation of Charitr 404 (bits were missing), and a seperate analysis. Baala is the woman born of flames who, according to the katha, is Mata Sahib Kaur in Kalyug. The analysis states:

"There is another important facet to be kept in mind about Sabudh Baach - The protagonist Baala, who fought with immense courage on the advent of Satjug does not appear anywhere in this present episode for a long time. This, again, is a subtle hint that the present social order has rendered the otherwise capable woman absolutely powerless. However, she reappears in the form of Bhawani and joins Kaal Purakh again in war efforts once all the 'Turk' Demons have been destroyed."

So what @Singh123456777 said would technically be partly correct i.e Mata Sahib Kaur being Chandi/Durga/Bhavani in their past life. What happens in the rest of the charitr vis-a-vis Bhavani? What's the source of the Chandi and Dusht Daman story? Lets see if we can figure out if they are in fact connected in any way.

Also, charitr 404 takes place in Satyug so one could assume that Baala continues to take birth until Kalyug (current day), most likely as Devi until Mata Sahib Kaur (who by some is also considered to be a manifestation of Devi) - my question is this: what is the significance of being born out of fire, what does it represent, especially in regards to the way it is portrayed in the charitr? A fact which may or may not be related to this, is that Devi is often represented by a flame (sometimes in a diva believe it or not haha). Second question: I know many revere the physical manifestations of Devi to varying degrees, and many revere Mata Sahib Kaur without having any connection to Devi, but does it really matter - aren't they all forms of Shakti or the feminine aspect of Akaal Purkh?

Please forgive any mistakes.

 

I'll explain my interpretation in a bit paji, a bit roped up with university

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/12/2017 at 4:39 AM, MrDoaba said:

Good, I'd rather not be one than follow a document that was practically shoved down the collective Panth's throat.

So put that in your diva and light it.

VJKK VJKF,

VeerJi, forgive me if I offend you but I just wanted to know; are you a Sikh? Just wanted to know because I didn't know that there were non-Sikhs on here too. 

Vaheguru Ji.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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