First off, this is an English translation. The doctor quoted at the bottom may have been the person translating and we do no know how accurate the translation may be when the original is not provided. Im take the ideas express in the English translation and proved a point of view learned through Gurbani.
Poster Harsharan, is claiming this sakhi was specifically made for Bhai Navala and Nihala as the teachings in the sakhi apply th e two individuals only. If such is the case, then there was no need to write down the sakhi for rest of the world to read or even present it on this forum. Reading it would have no benefits for anyone else because it was meant for these two mentioned individuals only, according to poster harsharan. Reading the sakhi we get the info of how these two individuals went to find out how to attain liberation. So why did Guru Sahib provide an answer, according to the sakhi, for 4 different dovotees? The answer should have been individualized as Satguru is all knowing and knows the path these two will be treading on. The question was personal and according to poster harsharan thought, it should have been a direct response, but it wasn't. Instead Satguru gives 4 different ways, according to the sakhi to reach Akal Purakh. I strongly believe these 4 different types of devotees is meant for everyone to learn from and not two individuals who asked for the answer. Also there is not only 4 different devotees. For these 4 different types forget about how Bhagat Danna Jatt ji was liberated. Poster Harsharan want to claim Bhagat ji was a devotee with a high avastha. I don't disagree Bhagat ji was a devotee with a high avastha, but Harsharan is missing the point. Before Bhagat ji met Akal Purakh, he did not have a high avastha. Instead his state was low because he was fooled by a Brahmin to believe a rock was THEE Supreme Being. Also, Bhagat ji sat for days waiting for a rock to eat, which would allow Bhagat ji to eat afterwards. A devotee with a high avastha would have recognized a rock is not the Supreme Being and followed the instructions to Jaap Naam like Bhagat Naam Dev ji.
DMnY syivAw bwl buiD ]
dhha(n)nai saeviaa baal budhh ||
Dhanna served the Lord, with the innocence of a child.
iqRlocn gur imil BeI isiD ]
thrilochan gur mil bhee sidhh ||
Meeting with the Guru, Trilochan attained the perfection of the Siddhas.
byxI kau guir kIE pRgwsu ]
baenee ko gur keeou pragaas ||
The Guru blessed Baynee with His Divine Illumination.
ry mn qU BI hoih dwsu ]5]
rae man thoo bhee hohi dhaas ||5||
O my mind, you too must be the Lord's slave. ||5|| ang 1192
Poster harsharan wants to say may be Bhagat ji served the saints. If Bhagat ji did, there was no need for Bhagat ji to go to the Brahmin to get instructions on how and what to worship as the Supreme Being. Secondly, Bhagat ji would have been instructed by the saints to not worship a rock or multiple rocks as the Supreme Being or at all. Bhagat Naam Dev ji in Gurbani makes it clear, worshipping a stone is not worshipping Akal Purakh
Poster harsharan wants to say may be Bhagat ji served the saints. If Bhagat ji did, there was no need for Bhagat ji to go to the Brahmin to get instructions on how and what to worship as the Supreme Being. Secondly, Bhagat ji would have been instructed by the saints to not worship a rock or multiple rocks as the Supreme Being or at all. Bhagat Naam Dev ji in Gurbani makes it clear, worshipping a stone is not worshipping Akal Purakh.
eykY pwQr kIjY Bwau ]
eaekai paathhar keejai bhaao ||
One stone is lovingly decorated,
dUjY pwQr DrIAY pwau ]
dhoojai paathhar dhhareeai paao ||
while another stone is walked upon.
jy Ehu dyau q Ehu BI dyvw ]
jae ouhu dhaeo th ouhu bhee dhaevaa ||
If one is a god, then the other must also be a god.
kih nwmdyau hm hir kI syvw ]4]1]
kehi naamadhaeo ham har kee saevaa ||4||1||
Says Naam Dayv, I serve the Lord. ||4||1|| ang 525
I simply said Bhagat ji does not fit here because he was not suffering from a physical diseas or fear of the enemies. This was pretty obvious, this will sound repetitive, though it's necessary, Bhagat ji does not fit here because Gurbani says Bhagat ji met Akal Purakh because of his child-like innocence. Yet harsharan goes off somewhere else, but says, Bhagat ji had no pettiness, Hence he does not fit in this type of devotee type.
Previously, poster harsharan has been shown from Gurbani, Satguru has defined who is a Sikh and you don't have this authority to define who is a Sikh in Sikhi. But poster harsharan wants to stick to his definition. Which is alright because he is entitled to his opinion, but his definition is wrong according to Gurbani. Gurbani defines Sikh by saying a person who follows the teaching of Gurbani, while accepting no one else as the true Guru is a Sikh. Even SGPC Rehat Maryada does not accept poster harsharan definition of a Sikh. Neither does any other Rehat Maryada of any Puratan Jatha of the Khalsa Panth. Our beloved Bhagat ji before he came to be known as a Bhagat of Satguru, accepted a lost Brahmin as hi Guru and a rock as his Supreme Being. The Brahmin was Bhagat ji's Guru because he accepted what the Brahmin said as the full truth regarding Akal Purakh being a rock. So bhagat ji was not a Sikh for similar reasons Bhai Lehna Ji was no a Sikh for worshipping a goddess.
Previously, poster harsharan has been shown from Gurbani, Satguru has defined who is a Sikh and you don't have this authority to define who is a Sikh in Sikhi. But poster harsharan wants to stick to his definition. Which is alright because he is entitled to his opinion, but his definition is wrong according to Gurbani. Gurbani defines Sikh by saying a person who follows the teaching of Gurbani, while accepting no one else as the true Guru is a Sikh. Even SGPC Rehat Maryada does not accept poster harsharan definition of a Sikh. Neither does any other Rehat Maryada of any Puratan Jatha of the Khalsa Panth. Our beloved Bhagat ji before he came to be known as a Bhagat of Satguru, accepted a lost Brahmin as hi Guru and a rock as his Supreme Being. The Brahmin was Bhagat ji's Guru because he accepted what the Brahmin said as the full truth regarding Akal Purakh being a rock. So bhagat ji was not a Sikh for similar reasons Bhai Lehna Ji was no a Sikh for worshipping a goddess.
The original text quoted above says, the devotees who KNOW the truth. This would mean Bhagat ji knew Vaheguru was everywhere and in every being, yet he went to a Brahmin for advice on how to worship Vaheguru and fell for the Brahmins trick!!! Knowing the truth means, being aware of the teaching; don't worship stones as thee Supreme Being. Poster harsharan says Bhagat ji had devotion. The big question here is, in what did he have devotion? Surely was not Akal Purakh. If Bhagat ji did have devotion toward Akal Purakh, according to poster harsharan Gurbani is wrong for saying Bhagat ji met Akal Purakh through child-like innocence. Bhagat ji devotion was for a rock and faith in a Brahmin who tricked him. Last time I checked, Gurbani says a big fat no to devoting oneself to a rock as Akal Purakh.
Problem arises when poster harsharan wants to take this sakhi as the complete truth and not analyze it. People with blind faith in sakhis have lost the plot. The writer may have not got the whole lesson or the sakhi could have been passed down through word of mouth like majority of the Sikh sakhis and it was altered or parts were forgotten about over time by mistake. The sakhi does present some teachings but not the complete teaching of Gurbani. For anyone to get angry over someone else pointing out obvious mistakes is foolish and arrogant. Only Gurbani is the full truth and provides the full truth about Akal Purakh.
↧