Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54

Thread: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    October 2009
    Location
    Funkytown
    Age
    37
    Posts
    60
    Rep Power
    34

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Very interesting, I knew almost all of this already but within in this context it's interesting, I've never heard of this line drawing I don't think.
    Don't look for meaning there is none.

    ॐ नमः शिवाय.

  2. #32

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harjas Kaur View Post
    [...]The name Mohammed does not appear in Guru Granth Sahib. The English translation has put that there for clarification. It is not what the Gurbani says. Below is a better English translation. (You must understand that Sikhism has been tampered with over the last 100 years literally trying to place a wedge between Hindus and unite with Muslims.)

    hoe musalim dheen muhaanai maran jeevan kaa bharam chukaavai
    "Become a true Muslim by following the truth path only. Only then one can be free from the cycle of death and birth."
    That must have been a pretty bad translation I had got that quote from. Thank you for clearing this up.

  3. #33

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harjas Kaur View Post
    These answers are true. Unless you are a true Muslim, you cannot be a true Sufi. Unfortunately it is in the very definition of Islam to reject as false all other religions.
    Idries Shah, a Sufi descended from Mohammed, seemed to have completely disagreed. I do not really like that definition of 'religion' that it is sectarian: that is what should be defined as 'not religion.' Religion is mystical/esoteric and ecumenical. If it is worldly/exoteric and intolerant it is a dangerous sect--not a religion, even though many people use the word that way. Then they often also start to ignore/dislike their and other religions and react negatively to religious people because they do not like the word 'religion.'

  4. #34

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    That must have been a pretty bad translation I had got that quote from. Thank you for clearing this up.
    There is a literal war going on with Sikh translations and ideological meanings. Earliest was the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabha movement which sought to remove any association with Hinduism. That is pretty much the current mainstream Sikhi now. Needless to say the sanatan (pro-Hindu) Sikhs are actively persecuted and dera heads threatened with assassination for being a "danger" to Sikh identity and Sikh religion.

    The source of Sikh Rehat Maryada - believe it or not - is Gurbilas Patshahi 6.
    Gurbilas Patshahi 6, a book released under the SGPC seal, was banned in October 2000. What does a book ban mean for the Sikhs? My understanding is that a book ban should also apply to the reading, listening and implementing of what is written in the book. In other words, we as Sikhs should stop all practices based on a banned book. But this is not the case for Gurbilas Patshahi 6. The maryada at the Darbar Sahib is practiced based on the writings in this book.
    Why is the maryada at the Darbar Sahib based on a book which is banned by the SGPC? Some may say that this is Sikh tradition, but the question is: Is this Sikh tradition or is this biparan tradition? http://www.sikhsentinel.com/sikhsent...ongmaryada.htm
    Bipran refers to the phrase "bipran ki reet" which refers to those fake ritualistic and nonspiritual religious ideologies of Hindus. So this commentary is referring to the prevailing Tat Khalsa mentality which has condemned Hinduism and is pointing out the illogic of banning historical reference sources like Gurbilas when it is the basis for the code of the Sikhs, Reyat Maryada. This is just a small example of the erosion of Sikhi to conform to political movement rejecting Hinduism which has huge implications involving separation of affections and loyalties to the Indian state and supporting secession and militancy movements.

    The Translation of Shri Dasam Granth has had the largest uproar. For one thing an official copy was just released last year, amid fanfare of traveling exhibition and scholars from SGPC to assuage doubts and toe the party line. Now we are given a granth which contains entire sections of the Markandeya Upanishad in praise of Devi and a verse which reads (In Zafernama) that Guru Gobind Singh is the "idol breaker." Whose own father laid down his life to protect Hindus from forced conversions, now SGPC has translation that makes Guru into a form of Mughal oppression against Hindus. And in same Granth which includes praise of Devi!

    So this is the degree of translational mischief. For the 100 years of Singh Sabha reform, contention existed over Shri Dasm Granth. Scholars on both sides, pro and con are threatened with excommunication. They can't ban it because three of the panj banis an amritdhari Sikh recites daily are in it. Originally there were 32 birs. Now, there are only 3 extant with no trace of the others. No independant scholars can access whatever original versions of the Granth are left. And moreover an Udasi scholar who assisted the SGPC on translation because it's written largely in Braj Bhasha and Sanskrit, has released his own translation and it differs markedly and is of course shunned by official Sikh community as, "bipran ki reet."

    Originally Posted by Harjas Kaur
    These answers are true. Unless you are a true Muslim, you cannot be a true Sufi. Unfortunately it is in the very definition of Islam to reject as false all other religions.

    Idries Shah, a Sufi descended from Mohammed, seemed to have completely disagreed. I do not really like that definition of 'religion' that it is sectarian: that is what should be defined as 'not religion.' Religion is mystical/esoteric and ecumenical. If it is worldly/exoteric and intolerant it is a dangerous sect--not a religion, even though many people use the word that way. Then they often also start to ignore/dislike their and other religions and react negatively to religious people because they do not like the word 'religion.' ~DavidC
    If a person has higher consciousness, then he's not going to perceive impediments and separation. The question is not, "What did Indries Shah say," But what do Muslims authorities say? For one thing he was from Afghanistan. And a virtual war is going on there. No non-Muslim western Sufi is going to be accepted who is not converted to Islam. Now, if, like Paramahansa Yogananda, he came to the west and started his own group, then wonderful. BTW, descent from Mohamed is like 10-20% of the Muslim population. It has no authority. Saddam Hussein of Iraq was a descendant of Mohamed.

    We aren't talking about reading wise words and getting spiritual uplift. The conversation was in context of being considered a Sufi AND a Hindu. And this is quite independant of the many instances in which holy Sufis have been executed for apostasy by Muslim authorities simply for being Sufis. Can you imagine someone calling themselves a Christian bhakta, for example, who doesn't even believe you have to believe in Christ? Can you imagine a Hare Krishna who doesn't have to be devoted to Krishna? Sufi's are Islamic bhaktas. Muslims who already regard Sufism with suspicion or as herestical can never accept that a non-Muslim kaffir is even a Sufi.

    Now, in the 1960's a lot of spiritual movements and teachers were cropping up in the West, including Indries Shah. But that doesn't legitimate their claims. If you went to Indries Shah's Order in Afghanistan, would it even be thinkable that Western, non-Muslim disciples would be accepted as Sufis? Are any of his western disciples affiliated in any way with traditional Sufi groups? I doubt it. At best the non-Muslim Sufi movements of Indries Shah and Meher Baba are illegitimate step-children. Meaning, their non-Muslim Sufi movements are not accepted by traditional Sufis.

    Now add to that a Hindu Sufi. Is it logical? I think what was being asked was are there enough sanatan elements in Sufism for it to be considered Sanatana Dharma? And that would depend on the sect. Modernly, due to persecutions, the old open-minded Sant Mat of the Vaishnav and Sufi bhagats who influenced Sikhism has given way to a strict Islamic self-definition. I doubt you will find it alive and well in Pakistan or Afghanistan or Iran any longer. A muted version, yes. But accepting of a Hindu? Not even. Saints and holy souls don't have duality consciousness, but the rest of the world does.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    369

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
    Idries Shah, a Sufi descended from Mohammed, seemed to have completely disagreed. I do not really like that definition of 'religion' that it is sectarian: that is what should be defined as 'not religion.' Religion is mystical/esoteric and ecumenical. If it is worldly/exoteric and intolerant it is a dangerous sect--not a religion, even though many people use the word that way. Then they often also start to ignore/dislike their and other religions and react negatively to religious people because they do not like the word 'religion.'
    Namaste DavidC,

    Indeed. On surface the Mahavakya, "You are That" apparently says that there are two entitities: 'You' and 'That', but the meaning is different.

    Om Namah Shivaya
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  6. #36

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Quote Originally Posted by heartfully View Post
    Namaste! Is it possible to be both Sufi and Hindu?
    Certainly, if you have no problem with hypocracy (like most hindu's) AND you live quite a few thousand miles away from Taliban or similar true Islamic influences (preferably separated by ocean).

    Hindu's will love you for this, and in India you will get lot of respect. But India is not safe from Taliban, not for long now.
    What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    September 2009
    Posts
    623
    Rep Power
    0

    On Dharmic Religion, Sikhism and Abrahmic ideas

    Dear Harjas Kaur

    I am pleased you raised the topic because I have recently been wondering if there is any way to stop or reduce the overlap of abrahamic concepts into dharmic definitions (or if overlap is even an issue). We have picked up on a sensitive topic for some people.

    I am here to learn. With this statement in mind I must bow to your better knowledge and accept that there are no words in the SGGS which convince me that Sikhism is a variant of Islam.

    Sikhism is not Islam, I have not doubted that. If it were possible to debate this I would be limited to searches on the SGGS and internet for words i.e. nothing new. I would also like to add that I would be surprised to see blatant references in Sikhi Gurbani to the worthiness of other religions over Sikhism itself. The 10 Gurus were undoubtedly wise, to make references to the Prophet/messengers or Muslim practices would be misleading

    To make references of the teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and Islam in any depth would be similar to me going to a job interview and praising another person as the best when asked why they should hire me for the job. It makes little sense to refer to others when you know the Truth.

    Sikhism is beyond the need of any others because as you correctly say because for the Guru, He saw the truth:

    ਤੁਰੀਆ ਗੁਣੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਸਾਧ ਪਛਾਨੇ
    thureeaagun mil saadhh pashhaanae ||2||
    And then, the fourth state of bliss was revealed to me by the Holy One. ||2||

    Returning to the post, does it not strike the reader remarkable that both DavidC Ji and myself came to these thoughts without any debate, nor any long discussion, nor in my case, any extensive practice of Sikhism?

    Why do you think that happened? How can this conclusion be drawn so easily by me? Perhaps other people have made decisions based on similar assumption but this is the first time they have been questioned.

    I will try to provide some ideas in my next post, but I wished to acknowledge your posts now and sincerely hope no offence was taken from my previous hasty post.

    PS: perhaps we should consider moving this topic/posts to Sikhism HDF area?
    Last edited by Onkara; 11 November 2009 at 10:42 AM. Reason: PS

  8. #38

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    but I wished to acknowledge your posts now and sincerely hope no offence was taken from my previous hasty post.
    I'm not offended at all. It's a very important topic to discuss and explore. I enjoy this topic of conversation. Clearly it belongs just as well in Islam section as Sikhim section, perhaps more so in Islam section because it discusses encroachment of Abrahamic ideologies into Sikhi. The reason I jumped in here was to correct what I feel is a serious problem in misconstruing Sikh religion as a form of Islam. You must understand the underlying political interests which seeks to unite Sikhs with Muslims against Hindus.

    Sikhism is beyond the need of any others because as you correctly say because for the Guru, He saw the truth:
    Again, not to nitpick, but Sikhs are fighting hard to establish independence of the religion. I'm not doing that. I'm a Sanatan Sikh, and believe firmly that original Sikhism belongs to Sanatana Dharma as a sect of Hinduism. And I am prepared to prove that in any debate. The Guru saw Truth because He was a realized Master, not because "Sikhism" is superior to any other, least of all Hinduism because all of the major concepts in Guru's bani come from Hindu scriptures.

    I would be surprised to see blatant references in Sikhi Gurbani to the worthiness of other religions over Sikhism itself.
    Sikhism has nowhere established itself in any Gurbani as a separate religion except in the minds of political separatists seeking to disunite the harmony of Bharat Mata Ji. Sikhi teaching sought to confront hypocrisies of outward show of religious practices and extol authentic devotion instead. It is non-missionary so you will find Gurbani explaining that a Muslim should be a good Muslim and a Hindu should be a good Hindu, that by living up to the highest teachings in own religions people would come close to God. This is classic Sanatana Dharma. You will also find a sprinkling of Arabic and Farsi words in the Guru Granth Sahib. But you will not find Islamic teachings or beliefs.
    To make references of the teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and Islam in any depth would be similar to me going to a job interview and praising another person as the best when asked why they should hire me for the job. It makes little sense to refer to others when you know the Truth.
    Why are you writing "praise be upon him" for "Prophet?" Are you a Muslim that you praise Mohamed? There is a powerful reason the Sikh Guru's did not praise Mohamed specifically as that alone would be acknowledging him as a Prophet, and hence submitting to his religious authority as Divine.

    It was Mohamed's teaching that Muslims had supreme religion and right by God to persecute and destroy Hindu kaffirs. When you find Gurbani tuuks talking about Muslims it is in context of urging them to not harm others and to be good and sincere followers of Rachman, the God who is mercy.


    ਜੈਸੀ ਮੈ ਆਵੈ ਖਸਮ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਤੈਸੜਾ ਕਰੀ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    jaisee mai aavai khasam kee baanee thaisarraa karee giaan vae laalo ||
    As the Word of the Forgiving Lord comes to me, so do I express it, O Lalo.

    ਪਾਪ ਕੀ ਜੰਞ ਲੈ ਕਾਬਲਹੁ ਧਾਇਆ ਜੋਰੀ ਮੰਗੈ ਦਾਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    paap kee jannj lai kaabalahu dhhaaeiaa joree mangai dhaan vae laalo ||
    Bringing the marriage party of sin, Babar has invaded from Kaabul, demanding our
    land as his wedding gift, O Lalo.

    ਸਰਮੁ ਧਰਮੁ ਦੁਇ ਛਪਿ ਖਲੋਏ ਕੂੜੁ ਫਿਰੈ ਪਰਧਾਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    saram dhharam dhue shhap khaloeae koorr firai paradhhaan vae laalo ||
    Modesty and righteousness both have vanished, and falsehood struts around like
    a leader, O Lalo.

    ਕਾਜੀਆ ਬਾਮਣਾ ਕੀ ਗਲ ਥਕੀ ਅਗਦੁ ਪੜੈ ਸੈਤਾਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    kaajeeaa baamanaa kee gal thhakee agadh parrai saithaan vae laalo ||
    The Qazis and the Brahmins have lost their roles, and Satan now conducts
    the marriage rites, O Lalo.

    ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨੀਆ ਪੜਹਿ ਕਤੇਬਾ ਕਸਟ ਮਹਿ ਕਰਹਿ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    musalamaaneeaa parrehi kathaebaa kasatt mehi karehi khudhaae vae laalo
    The Muslim women read the Koran, and in their misery, they call upon God, O Lalo.

    ਜਾਤਿ ਸਨਾਤੀ ਹੋਰਿ ਹਿਦਵਾਣੀਆ ਏਹਿ ਭੀ ਲੇਖੈ ਲਾਇ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
    jaath sanaathee hor hidhavaaneeaa eaehi bhee laekhai laae vae laalo ||
    The Hindu women of high social status, and others of lowly status as well, are put
    into the same category, O Lalo.
    ~SGGS Ji ang 722


    ਸਕਤਿ ਸਨੇਹੁ ਕਰਿ ਸੁੰਨਤਿ ਕਰੀਐ ਮੈ ਨ ਬਦਉਗਾ ਭਾਈ ॥
    sakath sanaehu kar sunnath kareeai mai n badhougaa bhaaee ||
    Because of the love of woman, circumcision is done;
    I don't believe in it, O Siblings of Destiny.

    ਜਉ ਰੇ ਖੁਦਾਇ ਮੋਹਿ ਤੁਰਕੁ ਕਰੈਗਾ ਆਪਨ ਹੀ ਕਟਿ ਜਾਈ ॥੨॥
    jo rae khudhaae mohi thurak karaigaa aapan hee katt jaaee ||2||
    If God wished me to be a Muslim, it would be cut off by itself. ||2||

    ਸੁੰਨਤਿ ਕੀਏ ਤੁਰਕੁ ਜੇ ਹੋਇਗਾ ਅਉਰਤ ਕਾ ਕਿਆ ਕਰੀਐ ॥
    sunnath keeeae thurak jae hoeigaa aourath kaa kiaa kareeai ||
    If circumcision makes one a Muslim, then what about a woman?

    ਅਰਧ ਸਰੀਰੀ ਨਾਰਿ ਨ ਛੋਡੈ ਤਾ ਤੇ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਹੀ ਰਹੀਐ ॥੩॥
    aradhh sareeree naar n shhoddai thaa thae hindhoo hee reheeai ||3||
    She is the other half of a man's body, and she does not leave him,
    so he remains a Hindu. ||3||

    ਛਾਡਿ ਕਤੇਬ ਰਾਮੁ ਭਜੁ ਬਉਰੇ ਜੁਲਮ ਕਰਤ ਹੈ ਭਾਰੀ ॥
    shhaadd kathaeb raam bhaj bourae julam karath hai bhaaree ||
    Give up your holy books, and remember the Lord, you fool,
    and stop oppressing others so badly.
    ~Bhagat Kabir Ji, SGGS JI ang 477

    Last edited by Harjas Kaur; 11 November 2009 at 11:57 AM.

  9. #39

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    Returning to the post, does it not strike the reader remarkable that both DavidC Ji and myself came to these thoughts without any debate, nor any long discussion, nor in my case, any extensive practice of Sikhism?

    Why do you think that happened? How can this conclusion be drawn so easily by me? Perhaps other people have made decisions based on similar assumption but this is the first time they have been questioned.
    It comes from the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabha reform movement in Sikhism. This movement had express goal to remove Hinduism from Sikhism and began huge mischief with altering and mistranslating scriptures, banning others, illegitimizing others and making sweeping generalizations before the public. They started mass conversions of thousands of Muslims into Sikh religion. Then they removed Hindu murthis/gods from the Sikh Golden Temple and other Gurdwaras in 1906. I know how you come to the wrong conclusion, but if I say nothing you will continue to blindly believe it.

    Sweeping generalizations include that Sikhism is a synthesis of Hinduism and Islam. That Sikhism includes bhagat bani from Vaishnav Hindu saints as well as Sufi saints. And here is the mischief. Let's look at the Bhagats whose writings are in Sikh Gurbani.

    "There are 15 Bhagats who are given respect in the Guru Granth Sahib as the Bani of the Ten Sikh Gurus. They evolved a belief in one God that preceded Guru Nanak. Guru Arjan Dev selected the writings of The Great Hindu Bhaktis and Sufi saints." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat
    Sounds like a synthesis to me too. And listen to the Sikh site:

    A Bhagat is an Eastern equivalent to a Christian Saint, a Sant. The word Bhagat comes from the Sanskrit word Bhakti, which means devotion, love etc. Throughout the history of India there have been saints and thinkers who were dissatisfied with the superstitions and the religious vagaries of the Hindus. They gradually evolved a belief in one God and preceded Guru Nanak as does the dawn before sunrise. The teachings of these Bhagats are given the same prominence in the SGGS, the Sikh Holy Book as the teaching of the Ten Sikh Gurus. Guru Arjan Dev Ji selected the writings of both Hindus and Muslims with equal impartiality, according to their suitability of his purpose and religious reformation that was Sikhism. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sikh_Bhagats
    Bear with my wordiness please. There are a number of errors and false assumptions in the Tat Khalsa Sikh reformist mentality. First is that a Sanskrit Vedic word means anything like an Eastern version of a Christian saint. Second is the sweeping denunciation of Hindu religion as "superstitions" who improved spiritually by evolving into a belief in One God. And Third that Gurus gave impartial equality to bani of both Hindus and Muslims.

    In one recension of Bhai Banno's Granth, preserved at Mangat in the Gujarat district of the Punjab, there is included a hymn composed by Mira Bai, Queen of Chitaur. It is believed that Guru Arjan did not give it a place in his collection because the lady lived and died an idolater. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Sikh_Bhagats
    There is a huge controversy between the Banno bir and the Kartarpur bir as the original document on which Shri Guru Granth is based. The Kartarpur bir is the accepted legitimate original, and it is filled with deletions, white-outs, cut and pasted Guru signature, etc. Obviously there is a revisionism ongoing. Why would Guru have bani of Vaishnav sant Mirabai in one Granth but not another? Because she was an idolator?


    ਰੇ ਜਨ ਮਨੁ ਮਾਧਉ ਸਿਉ ਲਾਈਐ ॥
    rae jan man maadhho sio laaeeai ||
    O humble people, link your mind to the Lord.

    ਚਤੁਰਾਈ ਨ ਚਤੁਰਭੁਜੁ ਪਾਈਐ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
    chathuraaee n chathurabhuj paaeeai || rehaao ||
    Through cleverness, the four-armed Lord is not obtained. ||Pause||
    ~SGGS Ji ang 324



    ਸੰਖ ਚਕ੍ਰ ਗਦਾ ਹੈ ਧਾਰੀ ਮਹਾ ਸਾਰਥੀ ਸਤਸੰਗਾ ॥੧੦॥
    sankh chakr gadhaa hai dhhaaree mehaa saarathhee sathasangaa ||10||
    He carries the conch, the chakra and the war club; He is the Great Charioteer, who stays with His Saints.

    ਪੀਤ ਪੀਤੰਬਰ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਣ ਧਣੀ ॥
    peeth peethanbar thribhavan dhhanee ||
    The Lord of yellow robes, the Master of the three worlds.

    ਜਗੰਨਾਥੁ ਗੋਪਾਲੁ ਮੁਖਿ ਭਣੀ ॥
    jagannaathh gopaal mukh bhanee ||
    The Lord of the Universe, the Lord of the world; with my mouth, I chant His Name.
    ~SGGS Ji ang 1082

    What God is being described here having four arms carrying conch, chakr, war mace? Who is this four-armed god?


    It is describing the symbolic representation of Vishnu. (to be continued, sorry for wordiness)

  10. #40

    Re: Can someone be both Hindu and Sufi?

    So why would a Vaishnav sant like Mirabai be rejected for being an idolator? Or Tat Khalsas in rejecting Hinduism felt they had to reject an obviously famous Hindu saint and manipulated the scriptures to remove her. But they couldn't remove all the bani. So they made sweeping generalizations that all these words for God, Shiva, Vishnu, Krishna, Brahma, Ram, only mean the nirgun Parabrahm. Krishna doesn't really mean Krishna they say, even as the Gurbani describes him as blue skinned, playing a flute with gopis in Vrindavan. Try swallowing that one.

    So lets analyze those Sufi Muslim bhagats in Gurbani. Out of 15 bhagats, 4 are "Muslims." One is Bhagat Baini written as Beni to make it look Semitic.
    Bhagat Beni/Baini:
    Bhagat Beni makes a severe denunciation of the Hindu rituals and austerities of "Hath Yoga" so that common man learns of the real motive of true religion i.e. the remembrance of the True Lord and the cultivation of the Divine Name. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Bhagat_Beni
    This is one interpretation. Here's another:

    ਇੜਾ ਪਿੰਗੁਲਾ ਅਉਰ ਸੁਖਮਨਾ ਤੀਨਿ ਬਸਹਿ ਇਕ ਠਾਈ ॥
    eirraa pingulaa aour sukhamanaa theen basehi eik thaaee ||
    The energy channels of the Ida, Pingala and Shushmanaa: these three dwell in one place.

    ਬੇਣੀ ਸੰਗਮੁ ਤਹ ਪਿਰਾਗੁ ਮਨੁ ਮਜਨੁ ਕਰੇ ਤਿਥਾਈ ॥੧॥
    baenee sangam theh piraag man majan karae thithhaaee ||1||
    This is the true place of confluence of the three sacred rivers: this is where my mind takes its cleansing bath. ||1||

    ਸੰਤਹੁ ਤਹਾ ਨਿਰੰਜਨ ਰਾਮੁ ਹੈ ॥
    santhahu thehaa niranjan raam hai ||
    O Saints, the Immaculate Lord dwells there;
    ~Bhagat Baini, SGGS Ji ang 974


    ਉਪਜੈ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਦੁਰਮਤਿ ਛੀਜੈ ॥
    oupajai giaan dhuramath shheejai ||
    Spiritual wisdom wells up, and evil-mindedness departs;

    ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਰਸਿ ਗਗਨੰਤਰਿ ਭੀਜੈ ॥
    anmrith ras gagananthar bheejai ||
    the nucleus of the mind sky is drenched with Ambrosial Nectar.

    ਏਸੁ ਕਲਾ ਜੋ ਜਾਣੈ ਭੇਉ ॥
    eaes kalaa jo jaanai bhaeo ||
    One who knows the secret of this device,

    ਭੇਟੈ ਤਾਸੁ ਪਰਮ ਗੁਰਦੇਉ ॥੩॥
    bhaettai thaas param guradhaeo ||3||
    meets the Supreme Divine Guru. ||3||

    ਦਸਮ ਦੁਆਰਾ ਅਗਮ ਅਪਾਰਾ ਪਰਮ ਪੁਰਖ ਕੀ ਘਾਟੀ ॥
    dhasam dhuaaraa agam apaaraa param purakh kee ghaattee ||
    The Tenth Gate is the home of the inaccessible, infinite Supreme Lord.
    ~Bhagat Baini, SGGS JI ang 974


    Not to put too fine a point on it, but Bhagat Baini was 1. praising the Supreme Lord as Niranjan/immaculate Ram/Avatar Ramachandra of Avodya. This makes the "Muslim" bhagat a Vaishnav bhakta. Moreover, instead of severely denouncing yoga, he is actually preaching it. Ida, pingala and Shushmana are the main nadis the shakti rises through the chakra in Kundalini yoga system. The Tenth Gate where the practitioner meets the Supreme Divine Guru, is called sahasranama Chakra. It is located on the top of the head, where yogis and Sikhs tie their jura, top knots.


    Shaivite Sadhu and Sikh man wearing hair in top knot over the crown chakra
    The purpose of chanting the Divine name of God, which in Gurbani over 8,000 is given as Raam, is to put the beej syllables of mantra sound current which vibrates on the hairs and forms a yogic seal/mudra over the Crown chakra so the Name of God washes the thoughts, mind and heart and lifts through the chakras to unlock the tenth gate and give Samadhi.

    ਜਾਗਤੁ ਰਹੈ ਸੁ ਕਬਹੁ ਨ ਸੋਵੈ ॥
    jaagath rehai s kabahu n sovai ||
    One who remains awake, never sleeps.

    ਤੀਨਿ ਤਿਲੋਕ ਸਮਾਧਿ ਪਲੋਵੈ ॥
    theen thilok samaadhh palovai ||
    The three qualities and the three worlds vanish, in the state of Samaadhi.

    ਬੀਜ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੁ ਲੈ ਹਿਰਦੈ ਰਹੈ ॥
    beej manthra lai hiradhai rehai ||
    He takes the Beej Mantra, the Seed Mantra, and keeps it in his heart.
    ~Bhagat Baini, SGGS Ji ang 974

    Now we can clearly see the degree of mischief and mistranslation occuring to the general public by the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabha and Bhasauria anti-Hindu mentalities. They are literally inventing a new Sikhism. And this is why people have the wrong understanding. I can continue indefinitely, but suffice to say all the bhagats were Vaishnavs with exception of Baba Farid. He is the only Sufi whose bani appears in Guru granth Sahib. And even his bani says nothing about Islamic religious teachings, only praise the Divine Love of God and that disciple should be attached to his Guru, which makes it clear he too was influenced by Vaishnav bhakti sect.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •