Replying to Baljit Singh ji
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh
Baljit Singh ji, I’ve been waiting for this part to reply to you about the questions that you raised. First of all, when I first read your article, it happened to me, no offence, that you are a non-Sikh. And the reason behind that was obvious. Your writing explains everything that I needed to know. I still do not know who you are. But my first assumption was that.
The video that I made was, was to the reply to what Bhai Gurpreet Singh (Rinku Vir Ji Bombay Wale) was saying in one of the videos. It’s the first time when I heard his name. So I just opened the video out of curiosity, and when he started explaining the meaning, I stopped there, because I couldn’t just listen to what he’s saying (and there might be many people too who listen/read to what I say/write and stop in the middle because it’s not according to what they believe, which is fine. We are just human beings, it’s a habit of ours not to agree with many people.)
Let me tell you this thing that I will write it according to a sequence, not how our conversation happened. To those who are reading this and are not reading from the first part, just want to tell that Baljit Singh ji writes at exposingvadakayil blog to talk about Ajit Vadakayil, a man with little brain, and exposes him and gives his view about the articles that Vadakayil has written. A person on our YouTube channel posted the link of Baljit Singh’s blog and I went there to check and found some things that I was not comfortable with, this is from where our conversation started. You can go check his post.
Coming back to you, Baljit Singh ji, why I asked you about Gurpreet Singh ji was because I’ve heard this before and I thought that it might be the person that you might be following. I was not sure then. That’s the only reason to make sure I know what I am going to get by having a talk with you. I do not know about you, but I’ve been listening to different people since 2004, so know a little bit from where what type of information can come.
Few days back, I heard Thakur Singh (Namdhari) doing the same translation of the shabad that is in consideration. So yesterday I thought that Gurpreet Singh might be a Namdhari too (because of the style of his dastaar, I know it’s silly but I thought this.) That led me to believe that you are a Namdhari too. But it’s just a guess. And I do not believe in that guess because you do not believe in the bani of Dasam Guru Granth Sahib, but Namdharis do. Even if you are neither a non-Sikh nor Namdhari, I am fine because it’s your choice of believing/following someone/something.
Before I go too far, I want to have your attention at one of your posts where you wrote ‘Sikhsandsikhi did not respond to my message, but conveniently hid the messages so that only I can see it and no one else can see it. Only reason a person hides something is because he does not want anyone to see.’ Firstly, I laughed at that that how someone could think like it. I had five reasons to laugh.
1. I was not hiding your comments at all (they are still there, will come to that.)
2. Secondly, I was giving the link of your post in my post. So hiding would never have worked because you copied and pasted your last comment.
3. Thirdly, I was talking to you in the comment section of your blog, but you, I think, went too far (and you can think the same about me too, if you want to) and accused me of being a communist. 😐 So I left the conversation.
4. Fourthly, I already told you in the comment section that the comment section of blog gives only around 4k characters and it gets very hard for me to write everything in few words. This series from the beginning of the first part has 14870 words and 65295 characters. See how hard it gets to have everything in few words.
5. And the last is, I was the one who came on your blog; and I am running both blog and YouTube channel, how could I have run away from the conversation!?
Let’s talk about the ‘hiding thing’ that you mentioned because it’s outrageous.
I couldn’t understand why you were not able to see the comment, because I was sure I didn’t block you just because you have a different opinion than I. But, yes, I blocked a person because he’s just spreading venom by saying Sikhs killed Hindus and other person was saying Hindus killed Sikhs. I do not want to have those types of conversations on my blog or YouTube. In a way, if you want to convey your message, it’s fine, but it should be in a limit.
I checked the Settings if you were somehow got blocked or not. There was only one name and it’s not you. Then I directly went to the video. Bingo!
You can get the comment section by New or Top. I think you might have noticed this thing. Let me paste some screenshots for you.
You can see there is no comment and still it’s showing ‘1 Comment.’ I think you got confused by this. Now let me show you how you can see your comment.
You need to click on SORT By and then ‘Newest first’, you will be able to see your comment. I think by default it’s on Top comments, perhaps (and your comment is not Top level 😉, just kidding.)
In this post, I am going to give the bani of Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji so that people will know why anti-panthic people are disregarding this (do not know if you come in anti-panthic group or not, so this might not be for you, but I will describe some people for your convenience.) It will expose them badly because the praises (sarcasm) of the deities in Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji were so good that all those, who are getting ecstasy by reading the words like Ram, Murari, Moham, and many more, in Guru Granth Sahib ji, will be shamed because it’ll show their real face to the people.
Maaya. A word which I’ve been using in my posts and comments and you said you didn’t get this point. This is how it’s.
Waheguru is one of the names of God. Its meaning and origin I will talk about after this because you misinterpreted it in many comments. He created Maaya (which is also known as Akaal Shakti, Kudrat (not the one that Dhadriawala is preaching)). There are three articles on this blog for that, you can check it out. Through that Akaal Shakti, Waheguru created the whole world. First Akaal Shakti created three guns and from them came three main deities, and then the whole creation happened. I would be glad if you listen to the katha of the 30th pauri of Jap Ji Sahib by Giani Thakur Singh ji. There are two kathas for that. First one was in so much detail, listen to that. You can get it here.
ਏਕਾ ਮਾਈ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਵਿਆਈ ਤਿਨਿ ਚੇਲੇ ਪਰਵਾਣੁ ॥
ਇਕੁ ਸੰਸਾਰੀ ਇਕੁ ਭੰਡਾਰੀ ਇਕੁ ਲਾਏ ਦੀ ਬਾਣੁ ॥
ਜਿਵ ਤਿਸੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਤਿਵੈ ਚਲਾਵੈ ਜਿਵ ਹੋਵੈ ਫੁਰਮਾਣੁ ॥
ਓਹੁ ਵੇਖੈ ਓਨਾ ਨਦਰਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਬਹੁਤਾ ਏਹੁ ਵਿਡਾਣੁ ॥
ਆਦੇਸੁ ਤਿਸੈ ਆਦੇਸੁ ॥
ਆਦਿ ਅਨੀਲੁ ਅਨਾਦਿ ਅਨਾਹਤਿ ਜੁਗੁ ਜੁਗੁ ਏਕੋ ਵੇਸੁ ॥੩੦॥
From Maaya, the deities came from. The question is, if they are created by Maaya and have influence of Maaya, how could you say that they are the avatars of Waheguru? You mentioned yourself that ‘even though his Avatars are within the rules of Maya.’ If you want to say that Ram Chandra and Krishan were the avatars of Vishnu, it will make so much sense. But the other way around will not. And in which verses it’s said that the deities are avatars of Waheguru? It’s definitely written that the jot of Waheguru is in them too, but they are not above Maaya or equal to Waheguru. How you got to such a conclusion? If you are going to talk about the shabad that you mentioned in the post on your blog, we’ve discussed that thoroughly and I do not know if you are reading them or not. I am posting all the questions here for you, maybe you can answer them correctly.
1. If Vishnu is under Maaya, how could he be Liberator?
2. If Vishnu is under Maaya, how could he be called Madhav?
3. If Vishnu is under time, how could he be called Abhinasi?
4. If there are multiple Vishnus in the world, how he happened to be called omnipresent?
5. Which incarnation of Vishnu has thousands of eyes?
6. Which incarnation of Vishnu has multiple forms?
7. If Vishnu is under Maaya, how could he be called Niranjan?
8. If Vishnu is under time, how could he be called Achut?
9. If the jot of Waheguru in Vishnu be taken away, can he perform any actions?
10. If Vishnu is same as Waheguru, then why is he under Maaya?
11. If there is no difference between Vishnu and Waheguru, then why Vishnu is under time?
12. Is Vishnu unborn?
13. Is Vishnu self-existed?
14. Under whose command Vishnu took the incarnations?
15. Who is in all the world – omnipresent?
16. Whose place will not be perished at last?
17. Who is formless?
18. Who is Parkash Saroop?
19. Who is undeceivable?
20. Who’s uncountable limbs?
21. Who is Shudh Saroop?
22. Does Vishnu destroy the world at last?
23. Is Vishnu timeless; if yes, why is he under Maaya?
24. Will Vishnu perish one day?
25. How Krishna is gopi?
26. Why Shesh Naag will sing the names of Vishnu if he’s not present everywhere?
27. If Vishnu is under Maaya, why someone will ask him to help him swim the river of Maaya?
28. If everything seeable is perishable, how could the deities survive?
29. If all the names given are the names of Vishnu, how is he All-knower, Lord of Senses, Reason of this World, Imperishable, Formless, Timeless, Hatredless, Protector of World, jot saroop, Omnipresent, Lord of Maaya, Without any Weakness, Giver, Beyond Birth, Self-existed, Without the influence of Maaya, Creator, Destroyer, Undeceivable, especially when he’s under Maaya?
30. Why would Guru Sahib ask for Vishnu to make (us) meet saints when Vishnu himself is perishable?
31. If Vishnu is perishable, how could he be doing everything by himself?
I remember listening to Osho once (not a fan, BTW), he said a thing and it really got me. It seems true in your case. You commented on the video ‘I challenge you to do even 1/10th of what Krishna Ji has done since you have the same JOT within you too.’ Are you believing in Krishan just because he’s powers? If that’s the case then Prophet Mohammad cut moon into two, you can follow him, no? Or there were Sidhs with powers at the time of Guru Nanak Dev ji and they might be present now too, why don’t you follow them? Even Shivji has powers, why are you stuck at Krishna? Brahma is creating the whole world, why not him? And there are 330 million of them, why not them? And most importantly, if the powers of Vishnu are gone or whatever the miracles that Krishna performed never happened, will you still follow him?
Now come to the part of jot. Yes, I’ve the same jot as of what Vishnu or Shivji has but my stage of meditation is not that high that I could be compared to them. And those all are worshipping Waheguru. I remember in the katha, it’s said that Shivji mediates on Waheguru for 60,000+ years in one go. I can’t do that. They are deities because of the grace of Waheguru, because of the praises of Waheguru that they do. The whole world is doing it in ways which can’t be described.
ਸਿਮਰੈ ਧਰਤੀ ਅਰੁ ਆਕਾਸਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਚੰਦ ਸੂਰਜ ਗੁਣਤਾਸਾ ॥
ਪਉਣ ਪਾਣੀ ਬੈਸੰਤਰ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਸਿਮਰੈ ਸਗਲ ਉਪਾਰਜਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਖੰਡ ਦੀਪ ਸਭਿ ਲੋਆ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਪਾਤਾਲ ਪੁਰੀਆ ਸਚੁ ਸੋਆ ॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਖਾਣੀ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਬਾਣੀ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਸਗਲੇ ਹਰਿ ਜਨਾ ॥੨॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੇ ਬਿਸਨ ਮਹੇਸਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਕੋੜਿ ਤੇਤੀਸਾ ॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਜਖੵਿ ਦੈਤ ਸਭਿ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਅਗਨਤੁ ਨ ਜਾਈ ਜਸੁ ਗਨਾ ॥੩॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਪਸੁ ਪੰਖੀ ਸਭਿ ਭੂਤਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਬਨ ਪਰਬਤ ਅਉਧੂਤਾ ॥
ਲਤਾ ਬਲੀ ਸਾਖ ਸਭ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਰਵਿ ਰਹਿਆ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਸਭ ਮਨਾ ॥੪॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਥੂਲ ਸੂਖਮ ਸਭਿ ਜੰਤਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਸਿਧ ਸਾਧਿਕ ਹਰਿ ਮੰਤਾ ॥
ਗੁਪਤ ਪ੍ਰਗਟ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਮੇਰੇ ਸਗਲ ਭਵਨ ਕਾ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਧਨਾ ॥੫॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਨਰ ਨਾਰੀ ਆਸਰਮਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਜਾਤਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਭਿ ਵਰਨਾ ॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਗੁਣੀ ਚਤੁਰ ਸਭਿ ਬੇਤੇ ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਰੈਣੀ ਅਰੁ ਦਿਨਾ ॥੬॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਘੜੀ ਮੂਰਤ ਪਲ ਨਿਮਖਾ ॥ ਸਿਮਰੈ ਕਾਲੁ ਅਕਾਲੁ ਸੁਚਿ ਸੋਚਾ ॥
ਸਿਮਰਹਿ ਸਉਣ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਸੰਜੋਗਾ ਅਲਖੁ ਨ ਲਖੀਐ ਇਕੁ ਖਿਨਾ ॥੭॥
ਕਰਨ ਕਰਾਵਨਹਾਰ ਸੁਆਮੀ ॥ ਸਗਲ ਘਟਾ ਕੇ ਅੰਤਰਜਾਮੀ ॥
ਕਰਿ ਕਿਰਪਾ ਜਿਸੁ ਭਗਤੀ ਲਾਵਹੁ ਜਨਮੁ ਪਦਾਰਥੁ ਸੋ ਜਿਨਾ ॥੮॥
How could I be as strong as they are? This is their bhagti that gave them the highest posts and their deeds sometimes punished them too. Like we all know the story of Indra and Ahalya, and how Indra was sent out of heavens. Such a mighty deity, and he’s out!? Why is that? Guru Sahib mentions that too.
ਅਭਮਾਨੁ ਉਤਾਰਨ ਦੇਵਤਿਆ ਮਹਿਖਾਸੁਰ ਸੁੰਡ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
ਜੀਤ ਲਏ ਤਿਨ ਦੇਵਤੇ ਤਿਹ ਲੋਕੀ ਰਾਜੁ ਕਮਾਇਆ ॥
Haume is the biggest disease in the world. And the deities have that too.
You are talking about the jot of Waheguru in me and asking me to do what Krishan did. If Waheguru wants, He can make someone do this:
ਕੀੜਾ ਥਾਪਿ ਦੇਇ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹੀ ਲਸਕਰ ਕਰੇ ਸੁਆਹ ॥
It is all under His command. Even you can perform the miracles if Waheguru wishes. And in Krishna Avtar, Guru Gobind Singh ji created a character named Kharag Singh. He fought with Krishan and his armies. Kharag Singh killed everyone who came in his way and others left the battlefield.
There were bodies and limbs on the ground, blood everywhere. When Krishan saw his armies getting vanquished, he left the battlefield. There’s no one who could have killed Kharag Singh. Later he realized that he shouldn’t have left the battlefield. So he went again in there with another army and asked Kharag Singh to pick his weapons because he’s going to kill him soon. Kharag Singh replied, go away and live your life. You do not even have a moustache on your face, staying here would definitely give you death. You know very well if you stay here, you will not live; it’s better if you go away.
ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
ਖੜਗ ਸਿੰਘ ਕੋ ਹਰਿ ਕਹਯੋ ਅਬ ਤੂੰ ਖੜਗ ਸੰਭਾਰ ॥
ਜਾਮ ਦਿਵਸ ਕੇ ਰਹਤ ਹੀ ਡਾਰੋ ਤੋਹ ਸੰਘਾਰ ॥੧੪੪੪॥
ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
ਕੋਪ ਕੈ ਬੈਨ ਕਹੈ ਖੜਗੇਸ ਕੋ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਹਰਿ ਜੂ ਧਨ ਬਾਨਨ ਲੈਕੈ ॥
ਚਾਮ ਕੇ ਦਾਮ ਚਲਾਇ ਲਏ ਤਮਹੂ ਰਨ ਮੈ ਮਨ ਕੋ ਨਿਰਭੈ ਕੈ ॥
ਮਤਿ ਕਰੀ ਗਰਬੈ ਤਬ ਲਉ ਜਗ ਲਉ ਮ੍ਰਿਗਰਾਜ ਗਹਿਓ ਨ ਰਿਸੈ ਕੈ ॥
ਕਾਹੇ ਕਉ ਪ੍ਰਾਨਨ ਸੋ ਧਨ ਖੋਵਤ ਜਾਹੁ ਭਲੇ ਹਥਿਯਾਰਨ ਦੈ ਕੈ ॥੧੪੪੫॥
ਯੋਂ ਸੁਨ ਕੈ ਹਰਿ ਕੀ ਬਤੀਆ ਤਬਹੀ ਨ੍ਰਿਪ ਉੱਤਰ ਦੇਤ ਭਯੋ ਹੈ ॥
ਕਾਹੇ ਕਉ ਸੋਰ ਕਰੈ ਰਨ ਮੈ ਬਨ ਮੈ ਜਨੁ ਕਾਹੂ ਨੇ ਲੂਟ ਲਯੋ ਹੈ ॥
ਬੋਲਤ ਹੋ ਹਠਿ ਕੇ ਸਠਿ ਜਿਉ ਹਮ ਤੇ ਕਈ ਬਾਰਨ ਭਾਜ ਗਯੋ ਹੈ ॥
ਨਾਮ ਪਰਯੋ ਬ੍ਰਿਜਰਾਜ ਬ੍ਰਿਥਾ ਬਿਨ ਲਾਜ ਸਮਾਜ ਮੈ ਆਜੁ ਖਯੋ ਹੈ ॥੧੪੪੬॥
Their battle started and Kharag Singh filled Krishan’s body with arrows.
ਜਿਉ ਘਨ ਬੂੰਦਨ ਤਿਉ ਸਰ ਸਿਉ ਕਮਲਾਪਤਿ ਕੋ ਤਨ ਤਾਲ ਭਰਯੋ ਹੈ ॥੧੪੫੩॥
With his power, Krishan called the armies from the heavens. Indra came with his army. Kharag Singh killed them and Indra and others left the battlefield. Then Krishan called Varun devta, Kharag Singh killed his army too and soon he also left because it’s not possible to win a battle against Kharag Singh. Baljit Singh ji, this’s the character that Guru Gobind Singh ji is creating for the Khalsa, who will not be afraid of anyone even when it comes to fighting a deity. And you are calling them (Khalsa) merely an army, nothing more. Will come to that too because this post is going to be very big.
Then demons came, Kharag Singh killed them too.
Later, Krishna called Shivji with his sons and armies. All were worried what could be there that Vishnu couldn’t handle and he needed help. When they all came in the battleground, Kharag Singh asked them to fight with all the power that they have, he will kill them all.
ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
ਰੇ ਸਿਵ ਆਜ ਅਯੋਧਨ ਮੈ ਲਰਿ ਲੈ ਹਮ ਸੋ ਕਰ ਲੈ ਬਲ ਜੇਤੋ ॥
ਐ ਰੇ ਗਨੇਸ ਲਰੈ ਹਮਰੇ ਸੰਗ ਹੈ ਤੁਮਰੇ ਤਨ ਮੈ ਬਲੁ ਏਤੋ ॥
Shivji replied him too that you would be killed now. Kharag Singh said when your army started shouting and running, you will run away too.
ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
ਕਿਉ ਸਿਵ ਮਾਨ ਕਰੈ ਇਤਨੋ ਭਜਿ ਹੈ ਤਬਹੀ ਜਬ ਮਾਰ ਮਚੈਗੀ ॥
ਏਕ ਹੀ ਬਾਨ ਲਗੈ ਕਪ ਜਿਉ ਸਿਗਰੀ ਤੁਮਰੀ ਅਬ ਸੈਨ ਨਚੈਗੀ ॥
Kharag Singh killed all the people and the mighty deities left the battleground. All of them. Later, Kharag Singh pulled Krishan from his hair like Krishan did to Kans, and was ready to kill him but then he stopped. He told Krishan that you are a great warrior, if I kill you there will not be any great warrior left.
ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
ਚਿੰਤ ਕਰੀ ਚਿਤ ਮੈ ਤਿਹ ਭੂਪਤ ਜੋ ਇਹ ਕਉ ਅਬ ਹਉ ਬਧ ਕੈਹਉ ॥
ਸੈਨ ਸਭੈ ਭਜ ਹੈ ਜਬਹੀ ਤਬ ਕਾ ਸੰਗ ਜਾਇਕੈ ਜੁੱਧੁ ਮਚੈ ਹਉ ॥
ਹਉ ਕਿਹ ਪੈ ਕਰਿਹੋ ਬਹੁ ਘਾਇਨ ਕਾ ਕੇ ਹਉ ਘਾਇ ਸਨੰਮੁਖ ਖੈਹਉ ॥
ਛਾਡ ਦਯੋ ਕਹਿਓ ਜਾਹੁ ਚਲੇ ਹਰਿ ਤੋ ਸਮ ਸੂਰ ਕਹੂ ਨਹੀ ਪੈਹਉ ॥੧੫੩੩॥
There is a great battle and many more things too after this, but I just want to convey to you that this is the mindset of Khalsa that Guru Gobind Singh ji wanted to create. That’s the main reason behind the writing of these great stories so that Khalsa can have warrior spirit all the time. And this is also the main reason behind the disregard of this bani by anti-panthic people because they just want the Sikhs to have rosaries in their hands but not the weapons. Those who are claiming that it’s written by some brahmin/pandit, which pandit/brahmin could have written that Krishna is lying on the battleground like a lost warrior? Which brahmin/pandit could have written that Indra, Shivji, Krishan, etc., ran away from the battlefield?
So, Khalsa ji, this bani is written by none other than Guru Gobind Singh ji. Read bani yourself, don’t follow the anti-panthic people who are just telling you not to read.
And Baljit Singh ji, you mentioned that Guru Gobind Singh ji’s bani is not written by him because some ‘scholars’ say it too. That is not the reason, bhaji. The real reason is the verses in there which are not letting your worship Krishna. Scholars are just an excuse so that you can use the shabads of Guru Granth Sahib ji and tell which deity is worshipped where.
Just say for the sake of the argument that the ‘scholars’ which are saying that this’s not the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji, if they started saying that it’s, will you believe that? Or will have another reason to say why it’s not? You will need so much of time and learning if you really want to know about Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji, not just the ‘scholars say’ thing.
There is one main scholar which is used by many anti-panthic people and his name is Dr. Ratan Singh Jaggi. I do not know if you know him or not. He did his PhD on this and wrote the thesis that this’s not gurbani. Later he wrote another thesis that it’s the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Which one you believe? And those who are beating their chests that Ratan Singh Jaggi wrote this or that do not tell us common Sikhs that Ratan Singh has never been outspoken this as anti-panthic people do. He just wrote his thesis and later agreed that this is bani.
The other puppet that you can think of might be Dilgeer Singh. It’s after he got the influence of Kaala Afghana (also writing about him here) and started getting money from agencies when he flipped the switch of opinion. Earlier he was such a great scholar and has many books on his name. But money blinds people.
And Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji’s bani is the one which will shatter all the beliefs of those, including you, who say that gurbani talks about the incarnations of deities (especially the names) and they are worshipped without knowing the meanings of the words. Here, you will get the direct message.
ਕਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਸੇ ਕੀਟ ਕੋਟੈ ਉਪਾਏ ॥ ਉਸਾਰੇ ਗੜੇ ਫੇਰਿ ਮੇਟੇ ਬਨਾਏ ॥
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॥
This is the core thing of Sikhi, which anti-panthic people are not using for their mean meanings. But they will never be successful in that. Do the propaganda as you wish, but you are still there where you were in the 90s.
Baljit Singh ji, you used the name of Giani Sant Singh Maskeen ji too. I think you might have intentionally used his name because he’s among those who believed in the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji, including Charitropakhyan. And he’s in the group too which asked Jathedar Jogindar Singh Vedanti to see that the notes are written where necessary in Gurbilas Patshahi Chevi.
If people want to say Giani Sant Singh Maskeen had some Brahmanical influence, they are wrong. Even now many people use the examples of many kings in the past in the katha, that doesn’t make them followers of the Smritis/Vedas. Giani Kartar Singh ji Khalsa Bhindrawale gave an example of Prophet Mohammed too once, does it make him a follower of Islam? No. Then he said a very beautiful thing that I shared many times: when you want to have milk, you do not care about the religion of the caretaker of buffaloes. Same way when something is there to learn, you can learn from anyone. Even I read the books of other religions. Recently I started reading Quran. It’s okay to read any books of other religions. But it’s NOT OKAY to change the meanings of gurbani.
Now let’s talk about Baljit Singh Delhi. He’s the person who’s also changing the meanings of gurbani. You said that you didn’t see any intentional lie in his video. Did you listen him say that you should meditate on the name of Waheguru to have liberation? No. It’s the main thing in Sikhi and he didn’t talk about it, just talked about the casteism and superstition. I said the same in the video that he said few things correctly but he didn’t talk about naam simran.
And this is how the meanings are changed. Don’t tell the correct meanings and people will start believing that the meanings told to them are correct. Same is true for those who are just having the English translation of Guru Granth Sahib ji and doing just copy and paste.
This is not only limited to Baljit Singh Delhi; Inderjit Singh Ghagga, Ranjit Singh Dhadriyawala, Darshan Singh, Kaala Afghana, Sarabjit Singh Dhunda, Panthpreet Singh, Gurcharan Singh Jeonwala, Dilgeer Singh, Jagtar Singh Jachak, and many more people are there who are just destroying Sikhi by using their little brains. I do not know how many of the names you know, but you can check their videos on YouTube and decide. And guess what, none of them will agree with you that the shabad that you are using is talking about Krishna. 😊
Now comes the part of me giving you a verse that you are saying that I am saying the deities are just the kings. First of all, this is not me but gurbani. Secondly, it doesn’t mean that they didn’t have powers. Guru Amardas ji says the same that there were kings in different yugs and they were called avatars by people. Even they have not known Him completely. Then how could you say they were the avatars of Waheguru?
ਜੁਗਹ ਜੁਗਹ ਕੇ ਰਾਜੇ ਕੀਏ ਗਾਵਹਿ ਕਰਿ ਅਵਤਾਰੀ ॥
ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਅੰਤੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ ਤਾ ਕਾ ਕਿਆ ਕਰਿ ਆਖਿ ਵੀਚਾਰੀ ॥੭॥
Vaar of Bhai Gurdas ji says the same.
ਓਅੰਕਾਰ ਆਕਾਰ ਕਰ ਏਕ ਕਵਾਉ ਪਸਾਉ ਪਸਾਰਾ॥
ਪੰਚ ਤੱਤ ਪਰਵਾਨ ਕਰ ਘਟ ਘਟ ਅੰਦਰ ਤ੍ਰਿਭਵਨ ਸਾਰਾ॥
ਕਾਦਰ ਕਿਨੇ ਨ ਲਖਿਆ ਕੁਦਰਤ ਸਾਜ ਕੀਆ ਅਵਤਾਰਾ॥
ਇਕਦੂੰ ਕੁਦਰਤ ਲੱਖ ਕਰ ਲੱਖ ਬਿਅੰਤ ਅਸੰਖ ਅਪਾਰਾ॥
ਰੋਮ ਰੋਮ ਵਿਚ ਰਖਿਓਨ ਕਰ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ ਕਰੋੜ ਸ਼ੁਮਾਰਾ॥
ਇਕਸ ਇਕਸ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ ਵਿਚ ਦਸ ਦਸ ਕਰ ਔਤਾਰ ਉਤਾਰਾ॥
ਕੇਤੇ ਬੇਦ ਬਿਆਸ ਕਰ ਕਈ ਕਤੇਬ ਮਹੰਮਦ ਯਾਰਾ॥
ਕੁਦਰਤ ਇਕ ਏਤਾ ਪਾਸਾਰਾ ॥੪॥
So, bhaji, here it’s not about you or me, but gurbani. I am saying it again that I am not against the deities and those who worship them. They can do as they wish, but nobody should bring Sikhi into something that it shuns badly. So please I urge you that you can follow Krishna and sing his praises. But please don’t use gurbani to prove your point.
ਇਨ ਮਹਿ ਸ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਸੁ ਦਸ ਅਵਤਾਰਾ ॥
ਜਿਨ ਮਹਿ ਰਮਿਯਾ ਰਾਮ ਹਮਾਰਾ ॥
ਅਨਤ ਚਤੁਰ ਦਸ ਗਨ ਅਵਤਾਰੂ ॥
ਕਹੋ ਜੁ ਤਿਨ ਤਿਨ ਕੀਏ ਅਖਾਰੂ ॥੪॥
ਜੋ ਚਉਬੀਸ ਅਵਤਾਰ ਕਹਾਏ ॥
ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਤੁਮ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਨਕ ਨ ਪਾਏ ॥
ਸਭ ਹੀ ਜਗ ਭਰਮੇ ਭਵਰਾਯੰ ॥
ਤਾ ਤੇ ਨਾਮੁ ਬਿਅੰਤ ਕਹਾਯੰ ॥੭॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਸੇ ਕੀਟ ਕੋਟੈ ਬਨਾਏ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਰਾਮ ਸੇ ਮੇਟਿ ਡਾਰੇ ਉਪਾਏ ॥
ਮਹਾਂਦੀਨ ਕੇਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਿਥੀ ਮਾਂਝ ਹੂਏ ॥
ਸਮੈ ਆਪਨੀ ਆਪਨੀ ਅੰਤਿ ਮੂਏ ॥੨੭॥
It doesn’t mean that we humans should say that Krishan or Ram or Prophet Mohammad were nothing, no. Guru Sahib is saying in contrast to Waheguru. There’s no deity which can be compared to Him. So, bhaji, you are saying Vishnu and Shivji are avatars of Waheguru, but gurbani doesn’t say it. I will come to the vaar of Bhai Gurdas ji too that you have been using and you posted the same on Quora too.
Also, I couldn’t understand why you are saying there’re only 5 avatars and then saying that Guru Gobind Singh ji mentioned 24 avatars. There are so many things that I didn’t get at all. Now let me give you the names of the 10 avatars that I said. Macchh, Kacchh, Varah, Narsingh, Vaman, Parshuram, Ramchandra, Krishan, Bhudd, Kalki. These are the 10 avatars which are mentioned in gurbani and Bhai Gurdas ji’s vaar. Actually, there are 24 avatars, but 10 are main avatars, you can say.
Next is your claim of Guru Nanak Dev ji an avatar of Vishnu. 😐
Firstly, it was so hard for me to understand how you could have come to such a conclusion which has no base in gurbani. Then I saw your post talking about adishakti.org. I remember talking about them in a series where I explained that their claim that Guru Gobind Singh ji worshipped some deity is wrong because their knowledge of the Gurmukhi language is not correct otherwise they would not have made a big blunder while trying to translate the bani of Dasam Guru Granth Sahib ji. If you want, you can check it out.
Secondly, Guru Gobind Singh ji wrote Chobis Avtar, you yourself mentioned it in your post (and on the other side, you do not believe in the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Strange.) There Guru Gobind Singh ji didn’t mention that Guru Nanak Dev ji was an incarnation of Vishnu. How you got to know? Or which part of gurbani says it?
Thirdly, we have the vaar of Bhai Gurdas ji.
ਸਤਿਜੁਗ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਵਾਸਦੇਵ ਵਾਵਾ ਵਿਸ਼ਨਾ ਨਾਮ ਜਪਾਵੈ॥
ਦੁਆਪਰ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਹਰੀਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨ ਹਾਹਾ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮ ਧਿਆਵੈ॥
ਤ੍ਰੇਤੇ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਰਾਮ ਜੀ ਰਾਰਾ ਰਾਮ ਜਪੇ ਸੁਖ ਪਾਵੈ॥
ਕਲਿਜੁਗ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਗਗਾ ਗੋਵਿੰਦ ਨਾਮ ਜਪਾਵੈ॥
ਚਾਰੇ ਜਾਗੇ ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗੀ ਪੰਚਾਇਣ ਵਿਚ ਜਾਇ ਸਮਾਵੈ॥
ਚਾਰੋਂ ਅਛਰ ਇਕ ਕਰ ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂ ਜਪ ਮੰਤ੍ਰ ਜਪਾਵੈ॥
ਜਹਾਂ ਤੇ ਉਪਜਿਆ ਫਿਰ ਤਹਾਂ ਸਮਾਵੈ ॥੪੯॥੧॥
Let me say it again about this vaar, I will write it in a more elaborated way in future. Here, let’s just do it in few words.
There are four different names of Waheguru here: Vasdev, Har, Ram, Gobind. These names are not to tell that they were the avatars of Vishnu. I asked this question and will ask again, who was the avatar of Vasdev and Gobind? If you are going to translate that Vishnu’s avatar was Guru Nanak Dev ji, then why Gobind word is mentioned? And most importantly, Guru Nanak Dev ji didn’t give Gobind word to Sikhs, I mean the gurmantar was Waheguru, not Gobind. You yourself mentioned the following shabad (that’s a different thing that you mistranslated it.)
ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਬਿਨੁ ਨਹੀ ਕੋਈ ॥
That shabad is of Bhagat Namdev ji, who was born before Guru Nanak Dev ji, that means the word was already there. Then how come Guru Nanak Dev ji started giving Gobind name? The name which was not there should be given will make more sense, like Waheguru word, which was not there. Why Gobind naam japave is written then?
And if we read gurbani, we will see that Vasdev is not for Vishnu but Waheguru.
ਵਾਸੁਦੇਵ ਸਰਬਤ੍ਰ ਮੈ ਊਨ ਨ ਕਤਹੂ ਠਾਇ ॥
ਅੰਤਰਿ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਸੰਗਿ ਹੈ ਨਾਨਕ ਕਾਇ ਦੁਰਾਇ ॥੧॥
ਵਾਸੁਦੇਵ ਜਲ ਥਲ ਮਹਿ ਰਵਿਆ ॥
ਵਵੈ ਵਾਸੁਦੇਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਵੇਖਣ ਕਉ ਜਿਨਿ ਵੇਸੁ ਕੀਆ ॥
ਵੇਖੈ ਚਾਖੈ ਸਭੁ ਕਿਛੁ ਜਾਣੈ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਰਵਿ ਰਹਿਆ ॥੩੨॥
ਵਵੈ ਵਾਰੀ ਆਈਆ ਮੂੜੇ ਵਾਸੁਦੇਉ ਤੁਧੁ ਵੀਸਰਿਆ ॥
ਏਹ ਵੇਲਾ ਨ ਲਹਸਹਿ ਮੂੜੇ ਫਿਰਿ ਤੂੰ ਜਮ ਕੈ ਵਸਿ ਪਇਆ ॥੧੨॥
Vasdev is Waheguru who is omnipresent.
These are the names of Waheguru that people were meditating on in different yugs. Guru Nanak Dev ji took all the names and made one name Waheguru.
I never said that people who were doing the rituals in the earlier Ages were wrong. But in this Age of Darkness, there’s only name of Waheguru. Gurbani says it with a clear meaning.
ਚਹੁ ਜੁਗਾ ਕਾ ਹੁਣਿ ਨਿਬੇੜਾ ਨਰ ਮਨੁਖਾ ਨੋ ਏਕੁ ਨਿਧਾਨਾ ॥
ਜਤੁ ਸੰਜਮ ਤੀਰਥ ਓਨਾ ਜੁਗਾ ਕਾ ਧਰਮੁ ਹੈ ਕਲਿ ਮਹਿ ਕੀਰਤਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮਾ ॥੨॥
ਜੁਗਿ ਜੁਗਿ ਆਪੋ ਆਪਣਾ ਧਰਮੁ ਹੈ ਸੋਧਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਬੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨਾ ॥
ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਜਿਨੀ ਧਿਆਇਆ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਜਗਿ ਤੇ ਪੂਰੇ ਪਰਵਾਨਾ ॥੩॥
On the other hand, Guru Sahib says that people went astray and the avatars started calling themselves Waheguru.
ਤੇ ਹਮ ਤਮਕਿ ਤਨਕ ਮੋ ਖਾਪੇ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਕੀ ਠਉਰ ਦੇਵਤਾ ਥਾਪੇ ॥
ਤੇ ਭੀ ਬਲ ਪੂਜਾ ਉਰਝਾਏ ॥ ਆਪਨ ਹੀ ਪ੍ਰਮੇਸਰ ਕਹਾਏ ॥੭॥
ਮਹਾਦੇਵ ਅਚੁੱਤ ਕਹਵਾਯੋ ॥ ਬਿਸਨ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਕੋ ਠਹਿਰਾਯੋ ॥
ਬ੍ਰਹਮਾ ਆਪ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਬਖਾਨਾ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੋ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਨ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਜਾਨਾ ॥੮॥
ਤਬ ਸਾਖੀ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਅਸਟ ਬਨਾਏ ॥ ਸਾਖ ਨਮਿਤ ਦੇਬੇ ਠਹਿਰਾਏ ॥
ਤੇ ਕਹੈ ਕਰੋ ਹਮਾਰੀ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ ਹਮ ਬਿਨ ਅਵਰ ਨ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਦੂਜਾ ॥੯॥
ਪਰਮ ਤੱਤ ਕੋ ਜਿਨ ਨ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਕਰਿ ਈਸਰ ਤਿਨ ਕਹੁ ਮਾਨਾ ॥
ਕੇਤੇ ਸੂਰ ਚੰਦ ਕਹੁ ਮਾਨੈ ॥ ਅਗਨ ਹੋਤ੍ਰ ਕਈ ਪਵਨ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਨੈ ॥੧੦॥
ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਪਾਹਨ ਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥ ਨੑਾਤਿ ਕਿਤੇ ਜਲ ਕਰਤ ਬਿਧਾਨਾ ॥
ਕੇਤਕ ਕਰਮ ਕਰਤ ਡਰਪਾਨਾ ॥ ਧਰਮਰਾਜ ਕੋ ਧਰਮ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥੧੧॥
ਜੇ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਸਾਖ ਨਮਿਤ ਠਹਰਾਏ ॥ ਤੇ ਹਿਆਂ ਆਇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਕਹਵਾਏ ॥
ਤਾ ਕੀ ਬਾਤ ਬਿਸਰ ਜਾਤੀ ਭੀ ॥ ਅਪਨੀ ਅਪਨੀ ਪਰਤ ਸੋਭ ਭੀ ॥੧੨॥
ਜਬ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੋ ਨ ਤਿਨੈ ਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥ ਤਬ ਹਰਿ ਇਨ ਮਨੁਛਨ ਠਹਿਰਾਨਾ ॥
ਤੇ ਭੀ ਬਸਿ ਮਮਤਾ ਹੁਇ ਗਏ ॥ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਪਾਹਨ ਠਹਿਰਏ ॥੧੩॥
ਤਬ ਹਰਿ ਸਿੱਧ ਸਾਧ ਠਹਿਰਾਏ ॥ਤਿਨ ਭੀ ਪਰਮ ਪੁਰਖ ਨਹੀ ਪਾਏ ॥
ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਹੋਤ ਭਯੋ ਜਗਿ ਸਿਆਨਾ ॥ ਤਿਨ ਤਿਨ ਅਪਨੋ ਪੰਥੁ ਚਲਾਨਾ ॥੧੪॥
ਪਰਮ ਪੁਰਖ ਕਿਨਹੂੰ ਨਹ ਪਾਯੋ ॥ ਬੈਰ ਬਾਦ ਅਹੰਕਾਰ ਬਢਾਯੋ ॥
ਪੇਡ ਪਾਤ ਆਪਨ ਤੇ ਜਲੈ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੈ ਪੰਥ ਨ ਕੋਊ ਚਲੈ ॥੧੫॥
All this was to reply to the claims of Guru Nanak Dev ji to be an incarnation of Vishnu, and Vishnu is avatar of Waheguru. Let me have it in the following points in short.
1. Vishnu is no avatar of Waheguru, but he’s jot of Waheguru.
2. Guru Nanak Dev ji is no avatar of Vishnu but Waheguru.
3. There’s no worshipping of any deities in Sikhism.
4. Deities are nothing more than insects in front of Waheguru.
Next and important part is the religion. You ignored that Guru Sahib started a new religion/panth. You also said ‘Religions are curse of Kali Purush, Kalyug. It is a chain of slavery put around us to divide us and make us hate each other.’ Maybe it’s the definition of religion that you have and it’s not the same what I have, that might be the reason I am not agreeing here. I have given my view of what religion is on Quora. I will just copy and paste here.
Religions are the ways to experience God. As these days, people are not liking the word ‘Religion’, so they have started saying that it’s ‘a way of life.’ Actually, if we think it thoroughly, we will see that all the religions are ways of lives according to the rules of the religions. Wherever there are rules, there will be ways of living your life, because the rules are defining how to live life. It’s not only limited to religions but the countries too where we have the constitutions to tell what things to do and what not to, otherwise they will throw us in jail. So, let’s just leave the argument that religions are bad or they didn’t exist at all because it will be wrong; whenever people start following the rules to talk to God or achieve Oneness, they are already in a religion (if the word ‘Religion’ disgusts you, you can change the word, but the reality will be the same: religions have been there for a long time.)
Since the starting of human race (you can believe in Adam and Eve, or evolution, no problem, my point is since humans/apes start understanding the surrounding), they have been trying to understand the creation in a way which was giving them some inspects of the creator. When they didn’t have answers to the questions, they tried to attach this to God (these days, many people are saying that they were wrong and all, let’s skip that part.) So in this or that way, God always plays the role in the lives of humans; they understand God in different ways and start worshipping Him in ways which they understand or are familiar/easy.
Religions are not to divide or to spread hate. Religions are ways to experience Waheguru. You also mentioned ‘According to Hindu belief’, when you mentioned it you yourself said it to be a group (a religion, I will prefer, but you can have any name here.) Even gurbani talks it that there are different groups/religions in the world. I’ve given the verses earlier. Let’s have more here.
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਅੰਨੑਾ ਤੁਰਕੂ ਕਾਣਾ ॥ ਦੁਹਾਂ ਤੇ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਸਿਆਣਾ ॥
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥
ਤੁਰਕ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੁਕਨਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਸਮਾਹਿ ॥ ਲੋਕ ਮੁਹਾਵਹਿ ਚਾੜੀ ਖਾਹਿ॥
ਚਉਕਾ ਦੇ ਕੈ ਸੁਚਾ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਐਸਾ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਵੇਖਹੁ ਕੋਇ ॥
ਏਥੈ ਜਾਣੈ ਸੁ ਜਾਇ ਸਿਞਾਣੈ ॥ ਹੋਰੁ ਫਕੜੁ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੈ ॥
ਸਭਨਾ ਕਾ ਦਰਿ ਲੇਖਾ ਹੋਇ ॥ ਕਰਣੀ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਤਰੈ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਕਾ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਏਕ ॥ ਕਹ ਕਰੈ ਮੁਲਾਂ ਕਹ ਕਰੈ ਸੇਖ ॥੩॥
ਜੋਗੀ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਗੋਰਖੁ ਕਰੈ ॥ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਰਾਮ ਨਾਮੁ ਉਚਰੈ ॥
ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਕਾ ਏਕੁ ਖੁਦਾਇ ॥ ਕਬੀਰ ਕਾ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਰਹਿਆ ਸਮਾਇ ॥੪॥੩॥੧੧॥
ਕਾਜੀ ਮੁਲਾਂ ਬਿਨਤੀ ਫੁਰਮਾਇ ॥ ਬਖਸੀ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੈ ਤੇਰੀ ਗਾਇ ॥੨੨॥
ਤੁਰਕ ਤਰੀਕਤਿ ਜਾਨੀਐ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਬੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨ ॥
ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨਾ ਸਿਫਤਿ ਸਰੀਅਤਿ ਪੜਿ ਪੜਿ ਕਰਹਿ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥
ਬੰਦੇ ਸੇ ਜਿ ਪਵਹਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਬੰਦੀ ਵੇਖਣ ਕਉ ਦੀਦਾਰੁ ॥
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਸਾਲਾਹੀ ਸਾਲਾਹਨਿ ਦਰਸਨਿ ਰੂਪਿ ਅਪਾਰੁ ॥
ਤੀਰਥਿ ਨਾਵਹਿ ਅਰਚਾ ਪੂਜਾ ਅਗਰ ਵਾਸੁ ਬਹਕਾਰੁ ॥
ਕਹਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਗੁਨ ਗਾਵਉ ॥ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਦੋਊ ਸਮਝਾਵਉ ॥੪॥੪॥੧੩॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਹਿੰਦੂਆ ਗਾਇਤ੍ਰੀ ਕੋ ਗੁਪਤ ਜਪਿਓ ਕਹੂੰ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਤੁਰਕਾ ਪੁਕਾਰੇ ਬਾਂਗ ਦੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
All these verses I gave just to say that religions have been there in the world before the British came in India. What about the following shabad of Guru Arjan Dev ji?
ਭੈਰਉ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
ਵਰਤ ਨ ਰਹਉ ਨ ਮਹ ਰਮਦਾਨਾ ॥ ਤਿਸੁ ਸੇਵੀ ਜੋ ਰਖੈ ਨਿਦਾਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਏਕੁ ਗੁਸਾਈ ਅਲਹੁ ਮੇਰਾ ॥ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਦੁਹਾਂ ਨੇਬੇਰਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ ਏਕੋ ਸੇਵੀ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਦੂਜਾ ॥੨॥
ਪੂਜਾ ਕਰਉ ਨ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਗੁਜਾਰਉ ॥ ਏਕ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਲੇ ਰਿਦੈ ਨਮਸਕਾਰਉ ॥੩॥
ਨਾ ਹਮ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਨ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ॥ਅਲਹ ਰਾਮ ਕੇ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਰਾਨ ॥੪॥
ਕਹੁ ਕਬੀਰ ਇਹੁ ਕੀਆ ਵਖਾਨਾ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਪੀਰ ਮਿਲਿ ਖੁਦਿ ਖਸਮੁ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥੫॥੩॥
Just to prove your point, you gave two sakhis. First one is related to Guru Nanak Dev ji and second one to Guru Teg Bahadur ji. And you interpreted both wrongly just to change your opinion into a fact. I will write both of them here so that people would know how the bend is created to prove something.
ਮਾਰਿਆ ਸਿੱਕਾ ਜਗਤ ਵਿਚ ਨਾਨਕ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਪੰਥ ਚਲਾਯਾ॥
ਚੌਪਈ ॥
ਤਿਨ ਇਹ ਕਲ ਮੋ ਧਰਮੁ ਚਲਾਯੋ ॥ ਸਭ ਸਾਧਨ ਕੋ ਰਾਹੁ ਬਤਾਯੋ ॥
ਜੋ ਤਾਂ ਕੇ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਮਹਿ ਆਏ ॥ ਤੇ ਕਬਹੂੰ ਨਹੀ ਪਾਪ ਸੰਤਾਏ ॥
Guru Nanak Dev ji went to Kurukshetra during a festival to give the message of Sikhi. There were so many pandits available to do the rituals. This is one of the stories that many people sometimes use to say that Guru Nanak Dev ji went to Hindu holy places, so he followed all what the Hindus believe in. NO. To deliver a message, Guru Sahib went to all the four directions. Not only to Hindu places but Muslim’s too. Guru Nanak Dev ji is Jagat Guru, who came on this earth to spread the message of Waheguru. Those who say there’s no Sikhi at all, then there wouldn’t have been any reason of going to different places to talk to the people, Guru Sahib would have followed the same, but this is not the case. And idiots like Ajit Vadakayil wrote that the British injected poison in the Vedas, so before that there would have been clean Vedas, right? Then why Guru Sahib wrote gurbani if there’s already Vedas available? If there’s no difference between Sikhi and Hinduism, why didn’t Guru Sahib accept the Vedas and Smritis? I am not delivering the message that they are bad, no. All the religious books can be read, but Sikhs only believe in gurbani.
There in Kurukshetra, Guru Sahib wanted to talk to pandits who gathered there. Guru Sahib gave messages to people according to his ways. A queen came to Guru Nanak Dev ji and put a dead deer in front of him and asked him to give her son something (some power) so that he could go and win the battles again, as they’d been sent out by the enemies. Guru Sahib asked them to clean the deer and start cooking it. Many Sikhs who eat non-veg, they bring this sakhi of Guru Nanak Dev ji to prove their point that it’s allowed in Sikhi. Just this thing of Guru Nanak Dev ji, they will not talk about the complete sakhi and the updesh of Guru Sahib, and nowhere in this sakhi Guru Sahib said to eat non-veg. People are really weird.
When pandits saw the smoke in the air, they started gritting their teeth that there’s solar eclipse and Guru Nanak Dev ji is cooking. They all went to him.
They asked Guru Nanak Dev ji why he’s cooking. Guru Sahib said I was hungry so I started cooking. A pandit said that he saw that it’s meat that he’s cooking here. That angered the pandits and they got ready to hit Guru Sahib. Guru Sahib said politely if you want to hit me, hit me; if you want to talk, then let’s talk. Many people then gathered around Guru Nanak Dev ji. This’s the main motive of Guru Nanak Dev ji to gather the people so that Guru Sahib could give wisdom to them.
Then there came Naanu Pandit also whose name was Nanak Chand among other pandits. He’d read that there would be an avatar of Waheguru who would come in Kalyug, so he started calling himself that. Guru Nanak Dev ji talked with the pandits and when they were losing the debate, they pushed Naanu Pandit in front of Guru Nanak Dev ji. Even he couldn’t answer everything and later they all said that we agree with you whatever you are saying but you shouldn’t have cooked meat today. Guru Sahib said that there’s no meat but kheer. When they checked, it’s kheer which was there. Then Naanu also said that he would not be calling himself Nanak Chand but Naanu.
This is the story of Guru Nanak Dev ji. Even, bhaji, if the link that you gave in the post we consider, it’s mentioned there ‘The Guru of the prophets, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiv ji is God almighty himself. This very Creator will manifest itself as a human, in the form of one whose name will be NANAK.’ So Guru Sahib was avatar of Waheguru, not Vishnu. And even if there’s mentioned that he’s a Vishnu avatar in the Vedas, then the gurbani doesn’t believe that. It’s as simple as that. All the religious books around the world are only good for Sikhs if they are according to gurbani, if it’s something against gurbani, Sikhs do not believe in that.
ਨਾਨਕਿ ਰਾਜੁ ਚਲਾਇਆ ਸਚੁ ਕੋਟੁ ਸਤਾਣੀ ਨੀਵ ਦੈ ॥
Now let’s have the story from the life of Guru Teg Bahadur ji. Before we go in detail, let’s first understand that there’re many stories written down, and some of them are not according to gurmat. So for Sikhs, the first source of truth will always be gurbani, if there’s something which is against gurbani, we do not believe it to be the sakhi of the Sikh Gurus.
When Guru Teg Bahadur ji went to Delhi, he was locked up in a room with other people. It’s said that there’re very bad souls there, so the Mughals chose that place for that specific reason. A pret came to Guru Teg Bahadur ji and told his story that how he happened to fall in that jooni. With Guru’s blessings, he got liberated from that. In the morning, when the Qazis and others opened the door, they were shocked to see them alive. Later Aurangzeb came to meet Guru Sahib.
He had a long discussion with Guru Sahib and told him that Hindus believe in you, they call you their guru, you know as well that in Guru Nanak’s House, there is no devotion to the deities and the stones, it’s better if you ask these people to convert. I am ready to give them any money, honour, women and anything that they need in this world. It’s written that if you convert a kafir into Islam, you go to Heavens. If you ask them to convert to Islam and you do the same, I will be under your command. You will be having miri of this country and I will have piri.
Guru Sahib said forcefully changing the religion is wrong. You shouldn’t do it. And I will not change my religion just to have pleasant days in future.
They had a long discussion and then Guru Sahib asked for the chillies and told that you want to have one religion from two, but there will be three religions.
I do not know, bhaji, if you have read a book named Hum Hindu Nahi by Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha or not. If you have, a few things might have got cleared. Sikhs were not many in numbers that’s the reason Guru Sahib said that; the other reason was Guru Sahib was talking about Khalsa Panth. If you read Bhai Gurdas Ji’s vaar, you will see Christian (esaai) name coming in there. And people believe that Christianity was there in India before the Sikh Gurus.
ਕਿਤੜੇ ਸੁੰਨੀ ਆਖੀਅਨ ਕਿਤੜੇ ਈਸਾਈ ਮੂਸਾਈ॥
ਕੇਤੜੀਆਂ ਹੀ ਰਾਵਜ਼ੀ ਕਿਤੜੇ ਮੁਲਹਦ ਗਣਤ ਨ ਆਈ॥
ਲੱਖ ਫਿਰੰਗੀ ਇਰਮਨੀ ਰੂਮੀ ਜੰਗੀ ਦੁਸ਼ਮਨ ਦਾਈ॥
ਕਿਤੜੇ ਸਯਦ ਆਖੀਅਨ ਕਿਤੜੇ ਤੁਰਕਮਾਨ ਦੁਨਿਆਈ॥
ਕਿਤੜੇ ਮੁਗਲ ਪਠਾਨ ਹਨ ਹਬਸ਼ੀ ਤੇ ਕਿਲਮਾਗ ਅਵਾਈ॥
ਕੇਤੜਿਆਂ ਈਮਾਨ ਵਿਚ ਕਿਤੜੇ ਬੇਈਮਾਨ ਬਲਾਈ॥
ਨੇਕੀ ਬਦੀ ਨ ਲੁਕੇ ਲੁਕਾਈ ॥੧੬॥
ਬਹੁ ਸੁੰਨੀ ਸ਼ੀਅ ਰਾਫਜ਼ੀ ਮਜ਼ਹਬ ਮਨਿ ਭਾਣੇ॥
ਮੁਲਹਿਦ ਹੋਇ ਮੁਨਾਫ਼ਕਾ ਸਭ ਭਰਮਿ ਭੁਲਾਣੇ॥
ਈਸਾਈ ਮੂਸਾਈਆਂ ਹਉਮੈ ਹੈਰਾਣੇ॥
Christians were also available then, then why Guru Sahib said there’re only two religions? What answer will be there? Not only that you said there’s no Buddhism before British. Then why Jap Ji Sahib talks about Budh? Is it because Buddhism was Hinduism, later British changed it? And the people just agreed that they have a new religion without changing the values of the religion? Just like that?
ਆਖਹਿ ਕੇਤੇ ਕੀਤੇ ਬੁਧ ॥
ਕੇਤੇ ਸਿਧ ਬੁਧ ਨਾਥ ਕੇਤੇ ਕੇਤੇ ਦੇਵੀ ਵੇਸ ॥
So, bhaji, benti aa k kuch v bematlab diya galla nahi kehnia chahidia, jo sara sar jhooth hove te jinda koi muh ya matha na hove.
On the one hand you are saying there’s no Sikhism, and on the second Khalsa was just an army, then why Guru Sahib said to have tisra panth? What does it mean? Either this’s not the sakhi of Guru Sahib or Guru Sahib lied? Which one you want to believe? Or is it the interpretation that is wrong?
Also, I wrote about the Singh Sabha Movement, and you somehow said that the British wouldn’t have let the people do it or something, which is hard to digest. If we go with the same logic, then how will you explain the battles of Guru Hargobind Sahib ji and Guru Gobind Singh ji? If the Mughals were ruling the place, how could there be any struggle to go against them? What about Baba Banda Singh Bahadur? What about the Battle of Chamkaur, Battle of Anandpur, Battle of Sirhind, Battle of Smana, and countless battles that Singhs fought against tyranny? Were the rulers trying to destroy everything by themselves? And what about Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev, and many other revolutionists who fought against the British? Did they also do nothing, it’s all the British?
Actually, this’s how the great history of a religion is destroyed by using the baseless arguments, and guess what, the logical fallacy of your argument is conspicuous.
And what is this ‘Let's say if Guru Nanak Dev Ji started a new religion where One is worshipped and not other, then he could have easily told everyone to become Muslims since they worship the Absolute God.’? I think that’s the dumbest argument that I ever heard in my life. At least was not expecting from a person who is writing stuff to expose Vadakayil. To make people see through Vadakayil’s deceit, if you are using that type of arguments, that’s very laughable. And if you read gurbani you will get that answer too.
ਸੁੰਨਤਿ ਕੀਏ ਤੁਰਕੁ ਜੇ ਹੋਇਗਾ ਅਉਰਤ ਕਾ ਕਿਆ ਕਰੀਐ ॥
ਅਰਧ ਸਰੀਰੀ ਨਾਰਿ ਨ ਛੋਡੈ ਤਾ ਤੇ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਹੀ ਰਹੀਐ ॥੩॥
ਬੁਤ ਪੂਜਿ ਪੂਜਿ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੂਏ ਤੁਰਕ ਮੂਏ ਸਿਰੁ ਨਾਈ ॥
ਓਇ ਲੇ ਜਾਰੇ ਓਇ ਲੇ ਗਾਡੇ ਤੇਰੀ ਗਤਿ ਦੁਹੂ ਨ ਪਾਈ ॥੧॥
ਕਾਹੂ ਲਖਿਓ ਹਰਿ ਅਵਾਚੀ ਦਿਸਾ ਮਹਿ ਕਾਹੂ ਪਛਾਹ ਕੋ ਸੀਸ ਨਿਵਾਇਓ ॥
ਕੋਊ ਬੁਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਤ ਹੈ ਪਸੁ ਕੋਊ ਮ੍ਰਿਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਨ ਧਾਇਓ ॥
ਕੂਰ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਉਰਝਿਓ ਸਭ ਹੀ ਜਗ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਵਾਨ ਕੋ ਭੇਦੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਓ ॥੧੦॥੩੦॥
ਕਹਤ ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਗੁਨ ਗਾਵਉ ॥ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਦੋਊ ਸਮਝਾਵਉ ॥੪॥੪॥੧੩॥
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਅੰਨੑਾ ਤੁਰਕੂ ਕਾਣਾ ॥ ਦੁਹਾਂ ਤੇ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਸਿਆਣਾ ॥
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥ ਨਾਮੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਜਹ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਨ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥੪॥੩॥੭॥
ਵਰਤ ਨ ਰਹਉ ਨ ਮਹ ਰਮਦਾਨਾ ॥ ਤਿਸੁ ਸੇਵੀ ਜੋ ਰਖੈ ਨਿਦਾਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਏਕੁ ਗੁਸਾਈ ਅਲਹੁ ਮੇਰਾ ॥ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਦੁਹਾਂ ਨੇਬੇਰਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ ਏਕੋ ਸੇਵੀ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਦੂਜਾ ॥੨॥
ਪੂਜਾ ਕਰਉ ਨ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਗੁਜਾਰਉ ॥ ਏਕ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਲੇ ਰਿਦੈ ਨਮਸਕਾਰਉ ॥੩॥
ਨਾ ਹਮ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਨ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ॥ਅਲਹ ਰਾਮ ਕੇ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਰਾਨ ॥੪॥
ਕਹੁ ਕਬੀਰ ਇਹੁ ਕੀਆ ਵਖਾਨਾ ॥ ਗੁਰ ਪੀਰ ਮਿਲਿ ਖੁਦਿ ਖਸਮੁ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥੫॥੩॥
ਜਾਗਤ ਹੋਤਿ ਜਮੈ ਨਿਸਬਾਸੁਰ
ਏਕ ਬਿਨਾ ਮਨ ਨੈਕ ਨ ਆਨੈ ॥
ਪੂਰਨ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਪ੍ਰਤੀਤ ਸਜੈ
ਬ੍ਰਤ ਗੋਰ ਮੜ੍ਹੀ ਮਟ ਭੂਲ ਨ ਮਾਨੈ ॥
ਤੀਰਥ ਦਾਨ ਦਯਾ ਤਪੋ ਸੰਜਮ
ਏਕ ਬਿਨਾ ਨਹਿ ਏਕ ਪਛਾਨੈ ॥
ਪੂਰਨ ਜੋਤਿ ਜਗੈ ਘਟ ਮੈ
ਤਬ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਤਾਂਹਿੰ ਨਖਾਲਸ ਜਾਨੈ ॥੧॥
There’re some things in each religion that’s not what Guru Sahib wanted to preach, that’s why Guru Sahib started a new religion.
You also wrote that if jot of Waheguru is present in everyone, why not worship them? Again, read gurbani and you will get the answer.
ਕਤਹੂੰ ਸੁਚੇਤ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਚੇਤਨਾ ਕੋ ਚਾਰ ਕੀਓ ਕਤਹੂੰ ਅਚਿੰਤ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਸੋਵਤ ਅਚੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਤਹੂੰ ਭਿਖਾਰੀ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਮਾਂਗਤ ਫਿਰਤ ਭੀਖ ਕਹੂੰ ਮਹਾ ਦਾਨ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਮਾਂਗਿਓ ਧਨ ਦੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਮਹਾਂ ਰਾਜਨ ਕੋ ਦੀਜਤ ਅਨੰਤ ਦਾਨ ਕਹੂੰ ਮਹਾਂ ਰਾਜਨ ਤੇ ਛੀਨ ਛਿਤ ਲੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਬੇਦ ਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤਾ ਸਿਉ ਬਿਪਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤ੍ਰਿਗੁਨ ਅਤੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਸੁਰਗੁਨ ਸਮੇਤ ਹੋ ॥੧॥੧੧॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਜੱਛ ਗੰਧ੍ਰਬ ਉਰਗ ਕਹੂੰ ਬਿਦਿਆਧਰ ਕਹੂੰ ਭਏ ਕਿੰਨਰ ਪਿਸਾਚ ਕਹੂੰ ਪ੍ਰੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਹਿੰਦੂਆ ਗਾਇਤ੍ਰੀ ਕੋ ਗੁਪਤ ਜਪਿਓ ਕਹੂੰ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਤੁਰਕਾ ਪੁਕਾਰੇ ਬਾਂਗ ਦੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਕੋਕ ਕਾਬ ਹੁਇਕੈ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੜਤ ਮਤ ਕਤਹੂੰ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਕੋ ਨਿਦਾਨ ਜਾਨ ਲੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਬੇਦ ਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤਾ ਸਿਉ ਬਿਪਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤ੍ਰਿਗੁਨ ਅਤੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਸੁਰਗੁਨ ਸਮੇਤ ਹੋ ॥੨॥੧੨॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਦੇਵਤਾਨ ਕੇ ਦਿਵਾਨ ਮੈ ਬਿਰਾਜਮਾਨ ਕਹੂੰ ਦਾਨਵਾਨ ਕੋ ਗੁਮਾਨ ਮਤ ਦੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਰਾਜਾ ਕੋ ਮਿਲਤ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਪਦਵੀ ਸੀ ਕਹੂੰ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਪਦਵੀ ਛਿਪਾਇ ਛੀਨ ਲੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਤਹੂੰ ਬਿਚਾਰ ਅਬਿਚਾਰ ਕੋ ਬਿਚਾਰਤ ਹੋ ਕਹੂੰ ਨਿਜ ਨਾਰ ਪਰ ਨਾਰ ਕੇ ਨਿਕੇਤ ਹੋ ॥
ਕਹੂੰ ਬੇਦ ਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤਾ ਸਿਉ ਬਿਪਰੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਤ੍ਰਿਗੁਨ ਅਤੀਤ ਕਹੂੰ ਸਰਗੁਨ ਸਮੇਤ ਹੋ ॥੩॥੧੩॥
ਨਮੋ ਗੀਤ ਗੀਤੇ ਨਮੋ ਤਾਨ ਤਾਨੇ ॥੪੭॥
ਨਮੋ ਨਿਰਤ ਨਿਰਤੇ ਨਮੋ ਨਾਦ ਨਾਦੇ ॥
ਨਮੋ ਪਾਨ ਪਾਨੇ ਨਮੋ ਬਾਦ ਬਾਦੇ ॥੪੮॥
ਜੋਗੀ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਜੋਗੀਆ ॥ ਤੂੰ ਭੋਗੀ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਭੋਗੀਆ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਬਿਨੁ ਦੂਜਾ ਨਾਹੀ ਕੋਇ ॥ ਸਰਬ ਨਿਰੰਤਰਿ ਏਕੋ ਸੋਇ ॥
Guru Sahib is saying that wherever I see, I see only Waheguru. If you read Jaap Sahib, you will know more. And read Akaal Ustat and Bachitar Natak too. Read the whole bani actually. 😊
This post is getting bigger, so I will stop in few paragraphs because I’ve made the point that I wanted to make. Let me just talk a little about the Khalsa Panth, who you called just an army. Let’s go through the history.
ਸੁਨਿ ਕਰਿ ਗੁਰੁ ਫੁਰਮਾਵਨਿ ਕੀਆ ।
ਭਯੋ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਜਗ ਮਹਿ ਤੀਆ ।
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕ ਦੁਹਿਨ ਤੇ ਨ੍ਯਾਰੋ ।
ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਅਕਾਲ ਕੇ ਦਾਸ ਬਿਚਾਰੋ ॥੪੪॥
ਪੁਨ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕਨ ਤੇ ਨ੍ਯਾਰਾ ।
ਰਚੋਂ ਪੰਥ ਯਹਿ ਬਲੀ ਅਪਾਰਾ ।
ਖਾਲਸਾ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਤੇ ਨਿਆਰਾ ਰਹੇ ।
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਤੁਰਕਨ ਤੇ ਹੈ ਨ੍ਯਾਰਾ ।
ਫਿਰਕਾ ਇਨਕਾ ਅਪਰ ਅਪਾਰਾ ।
ਬ੍ਯਾਹ ਨਕਾਹ ਨ ਏਹ ਕਰੈਂ ਹੈਂ ।
ਭੁਗਤ ਅਨੰਦ ‘ਆਨੰਦੁ’ ਪੜੈ ਹੈਂ ।
ਸਿੰਘ ਸਿੰਘਣੀ ਜੋ ਮਰ ਜੈਹੈਂ ।
ਬਾਂਟਤ ਹਲੁਵਾ ਤੁਰਤ ਬਨੈ ਹੈਂ ।
ਕਿਰਿਆ ਕਰਮ ਕਰਾਵਤ ਨਾਹੀਂ ।
ਹੱਡੀ ਪਾਂਯ ਨ ਗੰਗਾ ਮਾਹੀ ।
ਕਰਤ ਦਸਹਿਰਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਪੜ੍ਹਾਵਤ
ਕੰਠੀ ਜੰਞੂ ਤਿਲਕ ਨ ਧਰਹੈਂ ।
ਬੁੱਤ ਪਰਸਤੀ ਕਦੇ ਨ ਕਰਹੈਂ ।
ਏਕ ਰੱਬ ਕੀ ਕਰਤ ਬੰਦਗੀ ।
ਰਖਤ ਨ ਔਰਨ ਕੀ ਮੁਛੰਦਗੀ ।
ਵੇਦ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕਤੇਬ ਕੁਰਾਨ ।
ਪੜ੍ਹਤ ਸੁਨਤ ਨਹਿ ਮਾਨਤ ਕਾਨ ।
ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜੋ ਕਥੀ ਕਲਾਮ ।
ਤਾਂ ਪਰ ਰਖਤ ਇਨਾਮ ਤਮਾਮ । …
ਤੱਤ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਗੁਰੁ ਕਾ ਜਾਹਰ ।
ਕਹਿਤ ਚੁਰਾਸੀ ਤੇ ਹੈ ਬਾਹਰ ।
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਅੰਨ੍ਹੇ ਤੁਰਕੂ ਕਾਣੇ ।
ਸਿੰਘ ਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਸਭ ਤਂੋ ਸ੍ਯਾਣੇ ।
ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ਹਿੰਦੁਨ ਤੈ ਨ੍ਯਾਰੀ ।
ਰੀਤ ਇਨ੍ਹੋਂ ਮੇਂ ਹੈ ਭਲਿ ਸਾਰੀ ।
Many times, people like Ajit Vadakayil uses the argument that there’s no Sikhism before 1699. That is not the case. It’s already there. Guru Sahib created Khalsa Panth, not Sikhism. Khalsa Panth is the extension of Sikhism where the rules are final.
If we read Bhagat Ratnavli by Bhai Mani Singh ji Shaheed, we see the following sakhi in there.
Sikhs came to Guru Sahib and told him that in Kashmir pandits are not letting them read gurbani, they say that you (people who came there) have left everything which’s according to Vedas. Vedas are the Dev Bani, on the other side others are not.
There’s a long parsang that you can read in the book. My point of having it here was that it’s not that everyone was Hindu until Guru Gobind Singh ji like dilettante preaches. Sikhism was already there.
And you got me wrong, bhaji. I read your appeal too and I was thinking that it’s for me. The articles I’ve written and the videos that I’ve made, they do not exhibit hate for some deities. I never said hateful words in videos, neither did I write them on blog. But if you find somewhere, will definitely think about it. My motive was not to hurt people’s sentiments but to tell what’s happening, how people are mistranslating gurbani and giving their own conclusions. Yes, you are among those people.
At last you can call me misguided, misleading person, communist (BTW, you should know that communist do not believe in God), or anything, but the truth will be the same i.e. Sikhism was there, there is no worshipping of any deities in Sikhi. If you want to follow them, it’s fine. Your life, your choice. But do not include the verses of gurbani to prove your point.
Oh, I almost forgot one thing that you mentioned.
ਧਨਿ ਧੰਨਿ ਓ ਰਾਮ ਬੇਨੁ ਬਾਜੈ ॥ ਮਧੁਰ ਮਧੁਰ ਧੁਨਿ ਅਨਹਤ ਗਾਜੈ ॥੧॥
Don’t you think that flute that you are referring to was in the hand of Krishan and Ram Chandra has a bow? Then why Ram is playing the flute? Shouldn’t it be opposite? Or the translation that we are having is wrong? Think about it!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please note there are couple of articles on different topics on this blog. There are very good chances that what you're going to bring in the comment section has already been discussed. And your comment will not be published if it has the same arguments/thoughts.
Kindly read this page for more information: https://sikhsandsikhi.blogspot.com/p/read-me.html
Or read the footer of any article: 'A request to the readers!'