Ugardanti is one of the major points raised by Puneet Sahani when it comes to mistranslation and misquoting the verses to prove his agenda. We have covered the existence of 5K before the SGPC, and the so-called devi worshipped by the tenth Guru in our latest video. But I learned the Ugardanti’s misquoted verses later, so here we are to clear some unnecessary doubts raised by the speaker. Those who’re new should read the Clichéd Argument 40 about the same.
The last time we used the Ugardanti to show the distinct identity of Sikhs. Now it’s for a different reason. Puneet Sahani said the Guru worshipped the devi and Ugardanti is in that regard. His other major points for other discussions were of calling the Sikhs Hindus and mistranslating the verses to show the worshipping of the Hindu deities in the Gurbani. Ugardanti disregards all these notions.
Guru Gobind Singh ji praised only the One in his bani. Many anti-Panthic elements claim that the reason behind the writing of Chandi Charitar and Chandi di Vaar was the veneration of Durga – Shivji’s wife. But they cleverly ignore Vishnu’s, Brahma’s, and Shivji’s incarnations written by him. If the writing of the battles of Durga makes him the follower of hers, why doesn’t the Chobees Avatar turn him into a follower of Vaishnavism?
The truth is the purpose of writing these avatars was to instil a warlike spirit in the Sikhs, not to worship them. Guru Gobind Singh ji and the historical scriptures point in the same direction.
Shaheed Bilas, written in early 19th century says:
ਸ਼੍ਰੀ ਮੁਖ ਤੋਂ ਕਲਗੀਧਰ ਆਪੈ । ਬੀਰ ਰੱਸ ਕੀ ਕਥਾ ਅਲਾਪੈ ।
ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਮੱਧ ਹੈ ਜਾਨੋ । ਖੜਗ ਸਿੰਘ ਕਾ ਯੁੱਧ ਪਛਾਨੋ ।
ਜਿਸ ਤੇ ਸੁਨਤ ਕਾਇਰਤਾ ਭਾਗੈ । ਧਰਮ ਜੁੱਧ ਮਹਿ ਹੋਇ ਅਨੁਰਾਗੈ ।[1]
In Guru Gobind Singh ji’s writing, we have the following verses:
ਚੰਡ
ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ
ਕਵਿੱਤਨ ਮੈ
ਬਰਨਿਓ ਸਭਹੀ ਰਸ
ਰੁਦ੍ਰ ਮਈ ਹੈ
।।
ਏਕ ਤੇ ਏਕ ਰਸਾਲ
ਭਇਓ ਨਖ ਤੇ ਸਿਖ
ਲਉ ਉਪਮਾ ਸੁ ਨਈ
ਹੈ ।।[2]…
ਦਸਮ ਕਥਾ ਭਾਗੌਤ ਕੀ ਭਾਖਾ ਕਰੀ ਬਨਾਇ ।।
ਅਵਰ ਬਾਸਨਾ ਨਾਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਧਰਮ ਜੁੱਧ ਕੇ ਚਾਇ ।।[3]
Like in the banis of Chandi Charitar, Chobees Avatar, Shastar Naam Mala, and Charitro Pakhyan, the Guru writes about the formless jot of Waheguru and calls it Bhagauti, similarly Guru Sahib writes in Ugardanti that he’s talking about the jot of Waheguru. This formless jot of Waheguru is described by him in second and third chhand of Ugardanti in the form of the avatars of Vishnu and the queens of those times. This formless jot is omnipresent. Everybody has it. But because of the feminine nature of the words – including ‘devi’ – it has been wrongly and mischievously translated into Durga or merely a devi. The Singh Sabha Members and the translators of the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji gave enough references to prove otherwise. The linguistics of the bani or the words used by the Guru are enough to prove he’s talking about none other than the One, because where the references are misunderstood as a devi are cleared by none other than the Guru by using the muscular names for this devi, so that the readers don’t have any doubts about it.
But this has been overlooked by those who’re trying to prove the bani of Guru Gobind Singh ji as the praises of a devi. These people aren’t using Gurmat to look at Gurbani but their own prejudices and beliefs to understand it. Because of the mix of the philosophies in the Hindu fold, some of its followers have started suggesting that Guru Granth Sahib has the influence of Vaishnavism, and Dasam Granth Sahib has Shaktism/Shaivism. The principle of the one-jot of Waheguru among all the Sikh Gurus is rejected by them with these thoughts. Max Muller was so right when he said[4]:
Plato is strange, till we know him; Berkely is mystic, till for a time we have identified ourselves with him. So it is with these ancient sages, who have become the founders of great religions of antiquity. They can never be judged from without, they must be judged from within. We need not become Brahmans or Buddhists or Taosze altogether, but we must for a time, if we wish to understand, and still more, if we are bold enough to undertake to translate their doctrines. Whoever shrinks from that effort, will see hardly anything in these sacred books or their translations but matter to wonder at or to laugh at; possibly something to make him thankful that he is not as other men.
Without leaving the prejudices behind, one will never truly understand Gurbani. So, if a non-Sikh wants to know about Sikhi or Gurbani, he must leave behind his religion and its philosophy, otherwise he will misjudge the preaching of the Sikh Gurus.
Anyways, in Ugardanti, the jot is mentioned several times. This jot of Waheguru is said to be in everyone. The Guru left no stone unturned by writing the words like Akaal, Har, and other names of the One. It is not possible that the Guru worshipped a devi in Ugardanti and then asked to chant the name of Akaal. If it were a devi, the Guru would have asked the Sikhs to chant her name, not One’s. Below are a few of the verses that show the formless nature of Waheguru in Ugardanti.
ਨਮੋ ਜੋਤਿ ਜ੍ਵਾਲਾ ਤੁਮੈ ਬੇਦ ਗਾਵੈ ।। …
ਤੁਹੀ ਸਭ ਘਟਨ ਮੋ ਨਿਰਾਲਮ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸੀ ।। …
ਤੁਹੀ ਕਾਲ ਅਕਾਲ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਛਾਜੈ ।। …
ਜਪਉ ਜਾਪ ਏਕੈ ਹਰੇ ਹਰਿ ਅਕਾਲੰ ।। …
ਅਟਲ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਕਾ ਨਾਮ ਲੀਜੈ ।। ...
ਤੁਹੀ ਏਕ ਅਕਾਲ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਜਪਾਯੰ ।। ...
ਫ਼ਤਹਿ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੀ ਜਗਤਿ ਸਿਉਂ ਬੁਲਾਊਂ ।।
ਸਭਨ ਕਉ ਸ਼ਬਦ ਵਾਹਿ ਵਾਹਿ ਦ੍ਰਿੜਾਊਂ ।। ...
It doesn’t stop here. The whole bani of the tenth Sikh Guru has this. Then why is the jot of Waheguru turned into a woman or a devi?
Since the beginning of the founding of the Sikh religion, we find the debates between the Gurmatt of the Sikh Gurus and Hindu philosophies. They have two ways to distort Sikhi. One, to mistranslate the verses to manipulate the Sikh Thought; two, to verbally abuse the Sikhs. And both of these ways are adopted by some people. They speak ill of the Singh Sabha Members and call the Sikhs with different names. One of the names that they’ve given Sikhs is MacSikhs, meaning Sikhs following what Macauliffe wrote in his books. This theory that Macauliffe inspired the people like Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha and Bhai Vir Singh has been disseminated for years now. But the truth is Macauliffe was the person who asked Maharaja Hira Singh of Nabha to ask Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha to teach him Guru’s philosophy.[5] It is clear from Macauliffe’s book too where he acknowledged the help of Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, Diwan Lila Ram, Bhai Shankar Dayal, Bhai Hazara Singh, Bhai Sardul Singh, Bhai Ditt Singh, and Bhai Bhagwan Singh.[6]
People like Puneet mustn’t have even read half of the first book of Macauliffe, let alone his complete work. This thing reminds me of the Singhs who said while having a debate with Jeonwala that people like him started speaking after getting the highlighted verses from the top (their masters), without any thorough analysis. In the case of Puneet, I am sure he did that because after reading the above-mentioned verses (and many more) he would never have called devi-worshipping in Ugardanti.
Next question is: is it definitely a devi, if not, how come the jot of Waheguru has been started getting worshipped as a devi/female/woman? Baba Teja Singh ji Nihang Singh writes[7]:
I urge the great scholars to look at it that if the Guru made a mistake by praising the devi, then only Parbati or Durga helped the devtas to win this battle against the daints, her companion Kali she revealed from her forehead. Then while praising, why the Guru wrote names of many devtas and devis in this? If one says it’s (devi’s-praises headline) written, then can’t the Aad Shakti be called devi? If we say Dev to Akaal Purakh, why can’t we call His power as Devi? Is the duty of killing the demons is with Parbati? Or her source power Aad Shakti? If not, why Aad Shakti’s name is there everywhere, or without it which power is there? Who’s the source of Jog Juala? From where Parbati took the power? What’s the need to name Ambka and Jambka devis (in the praises)? It’s clear that I do namaskar to that devi who’s the jot form in Ambka and Jambka. Who doesn’t have a body, who’s the king of kings? Is the Guru calling jagat janni to Durga, or the King who’s protecting all the religions is Durga or Aad Shakti? Dear readers, read it carefully. The writers who have read the Devi Puranas know that the feminine names of Aad Shakti are linked to Durga and Parbati.
The bold letters in the above paragraph are ours.
Baba Teja Singh ji might be referring to the power being said as a female in the Devi Puranas like Durga Saptashati, which is an extract/part of the Markande Purana. The making of the devi in Markande Purana should be looked at, it may sound different than what Puneet Sahani and such are suggesting.
When the devtas were exiled by the daints, the former went to Vishnu and Shivji. They heard their pain. With that, a power came out of the mouths of Vishnu, Brahma, and Shivji. Not only this but Indra’s and other deities’ mouths released that power which turned into a female/devi. The power that came out of the mouth of Shivji made the face of the devi, Vishnu’s power made arms, Moon’s made the breasts, Indra’s power made the middle part of the body, Varun’s power made thighs, Brahma’s power created feet, Sun’s power made fingers, Kuber’s made nose[8] … there is more than what I can describe. But this devi, who fought with Sumbh, Nisumbh, and other daints, was created with the tej/power of the devtas.
The weapons were given to the devi by the deities. Shivji gave a trashool, Vishnu gave a chakra, Varun a sankh, Vayu gave two quivers, Indra a bell, Kaal a sword, Yama a dhand, etc.[9]
The Sikhs don’t have any dispute with the names. If the formless jot is called Durga or Kali or anything, Sikhs are OK with that. Names are not what causes the problem. The depiction of the names is what creates the dispute. The Sikh Gurus used different names for the One in their Gurbani, like Waheguru, Ram, Allah, Khuda, Har, Nirankar, Gopal, etc. The problem is when one person from another religion starts transforming his religious thoughts into names and associate them with the names of the One in Gurbani. If that mistranslation or the association of the names to deities is avoided by them, there is no enmity between the Sikhs and any other faith on philosophy.
[1] ਸ਼ਹੀਦ ਬਿਲਾਸ, ਕਵੀ ਸੇਵਾ ਸਿੰਘ, ਸੰਪਾਦਿਤ ਗਰਜਾ ਸਿੰਘ ਗਿਆਨੀ, ਪੇਜ 59, 2007
[2] ਚੰਡੀ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਉਕਤਿ ਬਿਲਾਸ, 99
[3] ਚੌਬੀਸ ਅਉਤਾਰ, ਕ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾ ਅਵਤਾਰ, 570
[4] The Sacred Books of the East, Edited by F. Max Muller, Vol 1, xxxvii, 1879
[5] Mahan Kosh
[6] The Sikh Religion, Max Arthur Macauliffe, Vol 1, 1909, xxix-xxx
[7] ਦਸਮ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਸ਼੍ਰੋਮਣੀ ਸਟੀਕ, ਗਿਆਨੀ ਈਸ਼ਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਰਾਮਗੜੀਆ ਰੋਪੜ, Footnote, 230
[8] Markande Purana, 82nd Chapter, verses 1-15
[9] Markande Purana, 82nd Chapter, verses 19-30
