Did Guru Gobind Singh ji seek blessings of Shivji/Parbhati?

Did Guru Gobind Singh ji seek blessings of Shivji/Parbati?

This is another hot topic on the Internet. There are two types of people who are wrong and fall under this category. First, a handful of Sikhs who don’t believe in the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji and create confusion among other Sikhs. Second, a handful of Hindus who try to tell Sikhs that they are Hindus. First, we will talk about the ‘Sikhs.’

‘Tiger Jatha UK (SinghNaad Radio)’ is one of the YouTube channels known for its so-called talks which are not more than a sacrilege of gurbani and gur-itehaas. They are following the path of their blind leaders like Kaala Afghana, Darshu, Ghagha, Jeonwala, etc. Whoever anti-panthic people are, they have a great relation with them; money is something that can blind anyone. The youngsters in Sikhi do not read much, they just listen to the talk shows or watch videos to get to know about Sikhi. That’s fine too. But they can’t differentiate between good and bad. And most importantly they don’t even listen to both the sides.

If I tell you my story, when I was in college, I came across Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji the first time. I was the person who used to think that ‘Chaupayi Sahib’ is in Guru Granth Sahib ji. You can call it my destiny or karma, I found those videos first which showed that Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji is not gurbani. A long time back, I think I was in the 7th standard, I saw an article in a newspaper talking about Charitropakhyan. I didn’t think much then because I was not such an avid reader.

So I watched and read what they had, including the books of Kaala Afghana and articles of Jeonwala and all the anti-panthic people who were shouting over the top of their voices. The first video that I watched, which said Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji’s bani is Guru Sahib’s bani, was where the Singhs were debating with Jeonwala on a TV show. I liked the way the Singhs represented the whole thing. Then I watched the videos from different seminars where professors from the universities and Singhs from the sampardas talked in length about the topic. I ordered books and read them. Then it had become clear to me who was lying.

All the youngsters in Sikhi out there, I want to tell you to read/listen to both the sides and do ardaas in front of Guru Maharaj that you have a doubt and ask to give you some guidance. Trust me, Guru Maharaj will definitely listen to you if you want to know more about Sikhi or gur-itehaas. You might find some reference in gurbani or you will meet someone who will clear your doubts. But, yes, it will be possible.

Now come to the cholli-chuk janta who are saying that the meaning of the following verse is that Guru Sahib ji is seeking blessings of Parbati/Shivji.

ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
ਦੇਹ ਸਿਵਾ ਬਰ ਮੋਹਿ ਇਹੈ ਸੁਭ ਕਰਮਨ ਤੇ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨ ਟਰੋ ॥
ਨ ਡਰੋ ਅਰਿ ਸੋ ਜਬ ਜਾਇ ਲਰੋ ਨਿਸਚੈ ਕਰ ਅਪਨੀ ਜੀਤ ਕਰੋ ॥

These anti-panthic people always come up with lame stories and logics to prove their points. While talking about ‘Mahakaal Kaala Aradhi’, we read how these people brought a story forward that how they met a man claiming Guru Sahib worshipped some deity there. Here also, they have a story to tell you. Actually, some kind of logic, which doesn’t make much sense to me. I will try to explain to you. And if you understood this logic, please comment to make me understand.

They say in Hindi, I guess this is what they said, say, you have a word Bimal (ਬਿਮਲ), it’s a masculine name – a man’s name, if you add kanna (ਾ) at the end of the word, it will become a feminine name – a woman’s name. (ਬਿਮਲਾ), name of a woman, according to them. With the same logic, they say (ਸਿਵ) is a male, Shivji; (ਸਿਵਾ) is a female, Parbati.

On another note, these people always decline the miracles in Sikhism. I read an article on an anti-panthic website of Singh Sabha Canada, a person there talked that all the miracle-stories that are there in Sikhi are wrong. The Sikh Gurus didn’t have powers, they were just common men like us. Following the same path, Dhadri said the same thing; they were common people, but they did uncommon things. Sikhs on the Internet replied to this fake preacher that how he’s wrong and his words are nothing.

You can mark my words, Khalsa ji, in the near future, these lunatics will say Guru Granth Sahib ji is just a knowledgeable book. And in the distant future, they will say there were no Sikh Gurus, like they are preaching about Bhai Baala ji (I will write an article on this soon.)

Coming back to the topic, while translating the words, they forget that one word can have different meanings. It’s like saying ‘Ram’ in gurbani, which is referred to Waheguru, is for Ramchandra ji. Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha wrote 40+ meanings of the word ‘Har.’ But for many people the meaning of Har is only Vishnu.

We will again divide the first type of people into two different parts. First, those who say meaning of Shiv is only Shivji; second, the logic that they have of kanna.

Those who read gurbani every day and listen to gur-itehaas know it very well that how the meanings of the words change according to the context of the verse. Like written above, Ram can have many meanings. It’s not only limited to Ramchandra. I remember listening to the katha that in the history, if we talk about men, there were three Rams. First one was Ramchandra, the son of Dashrath. Second, brother of Krishan ji, Bal Ram. Third one is a king named Pars Ram. Now my question to all those out there who don’t use their brains before speaking is, why you say Ram means Ramchandra but not Bal Ram or Pars Ram? Just because you believe in Ramchandra? Does it mean if there’s a person who believes in Pars Ram or Bal Ram, he will say Ram in gurbani is for them? Seriously?!

I know you will come with the following verse from gurbani to prove that Ram means Ramchandra.

ਰੋਵੈ ਰਾਮੁ ਨਿਕਾਲਾ ਭਇਆ ॥ ਸੀਤਾ ਲਖਮਣੁ ਵਿਛੁੜਿ ਗਇਆ ॥
ਰੋਵੈ ਦਹਸਿਰੁ ਲੰਕ ਗਵਾਇ ॥ ਜਿਨਿ ਸੀਤਾ ਆਦੀ ਡਉਰੂ ਵਾਇ ॥

Isn’t it what I said about the ‘context’? I think you got my point.

Same is true for the word ‘Har.’ Sometimes in gurbani, Har is used for Vishnu, if you read Krishna Avatar, and also for Waheguru. Although I don’t have a problem with the people if they say they believe Har is Vishnu or Ram is Ramchandra. But I certainly have a problem with the people who try to replace the meaning of gurbani with their interpretations.

Shiv means Shivji? : Remember we are talking about the ‘Sikhs’ who say the meaning of Shiv is Shivji in the verse. (It’ll be very easy to debunk the claims of some Hindus by writing few verses. But explaining Sikhs in detail is the main focus here.) If the ‘Sikhs’ had read gurbani, they wouldn’t have this problem.

ਆਪੇ ਸਿਵ ਵਰਤਾਈਅਨੁ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਆਪੇ ਸੀਤਲੁ ਠਾਰੁ ਗੜਾ ॥੧੩॥ – ੧੦੮੨

ਪਉੜੀ ॥ ਦੋਵੈ ਤਰਫਾ ਉਪਾਈਓਨੁ ਵਿਚਿ ਸਕਤਿ ਸਿਵ ਵਾਸਾ ॥ – ੧੦੯੦

ਸਿਵ ਅਗੈ ਸਕਤੀ ਹਾਰਿਆ ਏਵੈ ਹਰਿ ਭਾਈਆ ॥ ਇਕਿ ਵਿਚਹੁ ਹੀ ਤੁਧੁ ਰਖਿਆ ਜੋ ਸਤਸੰਗਿ ਮਿਲਾਈਆ ॥ – ੧੦੯੬

ਭੈਰਉ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥ ਦਸ ਮਿਰਗੀ ਸਹਜੇ ਬੰਧਿਆਨੀ ॥ ਪਾਂਚ ਮਿਰਗ ਬੇਧੇ ਸਿਵ ਕੀ ਬਾਨੀ ॥੧॥ – ੧੧੩੬

ਸਕਤਿ ਗਈ ਭ੍ਰਮੁ ਕਟਿਆ ਸਿਵ ਜੋਤਿ ਜਗਾਇਆ ॥ – ੧੨੩੯

There’re so many other verses that can be written here, but the point will be the same i.e. the meaning of Shiv is different than what the people are talking about, especially about the verses in discussion. Although many Hindus believe that Shiv means Shivji and the sold-out ‘Sikhs’ have adopted the same meaning to please their masters, because they are the ones who are filling their pockets with money.

So, no, the meaning of Shiv is not limited to Shivji. If we want to have the meaning of Shiv as Shivji then the above-mentioned verses will have a totally different meaning and that will not be according to gurbani. What I am trying to say here is that like Ram, Shiv is also used for Waheguru, not only for Shivji.

Logic of kanna (w): I have never come across this absurd logic of changing the word from masculine to feminine by adding one laga-matra. I don’t know why people don’t laugh at them who give this logic. This can be dismantled by giving only two examples from gurbani. And both are quoted by many scholars to prove how these fake scholars are wrong.

ਸਭੈ ਘਟ ਰਾਮੁ ਬੋਲੈ ਰਾਮਾ ਬੋਲੈ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਬਿਨਾ ਕੋ ਬੋਲੈ ਰੇ ॥੧॥ – ੯੮੮

Let’s have the same logic here to translate the above verse.

‘Everywhere Ram is present; everywhere Sita is present.’ Why Sita? Because, remember, Shiv means Shivji – a male; Shiva means Parbati – a female? Same here: Ram means Ram Chandar ji – a male; Rama (see the kanaa (ਾ)) means Sita – a female. In the next line it’s written only Ram is there. Then why mentioned Sita in the first verse? Simple. Because we translated it wrongly. Same is true for those who put kanna (ਾ) and try to change the meaning. Will they accept the above translation if we go by the logic of kanna (ਾ)?

ਮਿਲੁ ਮੇਰੇ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਮਾ ਜੀਉ ਤੁਧੁ ਬਿਨੁ ਖਰੀ ਨਿਮਾਣੀ ॥ – ੨੪੪

Pritam is a word for male (according to these people), then Pritama will be a feminine word, no? Means Waheguru has a wife too? Strange.

If you have a good laugh, put these questions to the brainless people who change the meaning to have their own conclusions.

If what they are telling is not true, what is then?

Coming to that point, Shiva is not for Shivji or Parbati in the aforementioned verses. Shiva is Akaal Shakti, which doesn’t have any form like Waheguru and there is no difference between Waheguru and His Shakti. Many of the so-called Internet-historians try to say that Akaal Shakti is a goddess and Guru Gobind Singh ji worshipped her. They didn’t say it’s Parbati but some other form of a female. We have already talked about it here. You can check the link.

Now, we might have this problem that ‘you know, I never heard of this Akaal Shakti thing in gurbani.’ I was one of those guys actually who would say this and the reason behind that was that I hadn’t read gurbani. There are many times it’s written but we don’t even read Japji Sahib, reading the whole gurbani is difficult for us. So following are the verses where you can see the mentioning of Akaal Shakti.

ਨਹ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤੀ ਜਲੁ ਨਹੀ ਪਵਨਾ ਤਹ ਅਕਾਰੁ ਨਹੀ ਮੇਦਨੀ ॥ -੮੮੩

ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤਿ ਆਪਿ ਉਪਾਇ ਕੈ ਕਰਤਾ ਆਪੇ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਵਰਤਾਏ ॥ – ੯੨੦

ਚਾਰਿ ਪਦਾਰਥ ਲੈ ਜਗਿ ਜਨਮਿਆ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤੀ ਘਰਿ ਵਾਸੁ ਧਰੇ ॥ -੧੦੧੩

ਵਾਜੈ ਪਉਣੁ ਤੈ ਆਪਿ ਵਜਾਏ ॥ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤੀ ਦੇਹੀ ਮਹਿ ਪਾਏ ॥ਗੁਰਪਰਸਾਦੀ – ੧੦੫੬

ਜਹ ਦੇਖਾ ਤਹ ਰਵਿ ਰਹੇ ਸਿਵ ਸਕਤੀ ਕਾ ਮੇਲੁ ॥ – ੨੧

Shiv Shakti can be referred to Akaal Shakti; Rajo Gun, Tamo Gun, Sato Gun; Maaya; etc., depending on the verse. In other words, when Guru Sahib ji is talking about Shiva in Chandi Charitar, Guru Sahib ji is talking about Akaal Shakti, not Parbati or Shivji. I have written the following verses so many times in the blog and you might have read it several times too.

ਮਹਾਦੇਵ ਅਰੁ ਕਬਿਲਾਸ ॥ ਦੁਰਗਾ ਕੋਟਿ ਜਾ ਕੈ ਮਰਦਨੁ ਕਰੈ ॥
ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਕੋਟਿ ਬੇਦ ਉਚਰੈ ॥੧॥ - ਅੰਗ ੧੧੬੨

There are millions of Shivji and Durga/Parbati, if you say, just say it for the sake of argument, that Guru Sahib ji worshipped some goddess Parbati, then which one? According to gurbani there are millions of them out there!

Stop spreading lies among Sikhs.

Now come to those handful of Hindus who don’t know nothing of Sikhi but talk as if they’ve read the whole gurbani and gur-itehaas. There are not many lines but few that are enough for them to understand that Shivji, Ramchandra ji, Krishan ji are not gods in Sikhism but the servants of Waheguru. If they want to revere them as gods, their choice.

ਮੈ ਨ ਗਨੇਸਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਥਮ ਮਨਾਊਂ ॥
ਕਿਸਨ ਬਿਸਨ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨਹਿ ਧਿਆਊਂ ॥

ਪਾਂਇ ਗਹੇ ਜਬ ਤੇ ਤੁਮਰੇ ਤਬ ਤੇ ਕੋਊ ਆਂਖ ਤਰੇ ਨਹੀ ਆਨ੍ਯੋ ॥
ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਅਨੇਕ ਕਹੈਂ ਮਤ ਏਕ ਨ ਮਾਨ੍ਯੋ ॥
ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬੇਦ ਸਭੈ ਬਹੁ ਭੇਦ ਕਹੈਂ ਹਮ ਏਕ ਨ ਜਾਨ੍ਯੋ ॥
ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਸਿਪਾਨ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਤੁਮਰੀ ਕਰਿ ਮੈ ਨ ਕਹ੍ਯੋ ਸਭ ਤੋਹਿ ਬਖਾਨ੍ਯੋ ॥੧॥

Following are the points worth mentioning after this discussion.

     1.      Guru Gobind Singh ji never worshipped any deity.

     2.      There are so many flaws in the logic that people talk about to prove Shiva means Parbati or Shivji.

     3.      In his writing, Guru Gobind Singh ji clearly mentioned what these deities are in front of Waheguru.

     4.      Shiv has more meanings than just Shivji.

     5.      Internet is not a good place if you want to know about history.

We made two videos on this topic also and that can be found here:

Part I

Part II