sikhi for dummies

32.) Debunking claims of Dayanand Saraswati.

Founder of Arya Samaj, Swami Dayanand Saraswati in his book Satyarth Prakash in chapter 11 has criticised Saints and Gurus. He spoke against a highly revered saint Like Bhagat Kabir because like Sikhi, Kabir was against the hypocrisy of hindus and muslims. Looking at Dayand's limited knowledge about Sikhi, Bhagat Kabir was right about hindu texts not being enough for one's salvation. I can't speak for what Kabirpanthis do. Regarding Gurus, here is what swami said, i have also added my replies: 1.) The aim of Nanak was no doubt good but he did not possess any learning and was merely acquainted with the dialect of the (Punjabi) villagers among whom he was born. He was quite ignorant of the Vedas and the Shastras and of Sanskrit, otherwise why should he have written Nirbhau instead of Nirbhaya. ans. Language & Pronounciation change over time, its common sense. Guru Nanak also used a different word 'Nirbhe' on Page 597 of SGGS. 2.) Another proof of his ignorance of the Sanskrit language is his composition called Sanskrit hymns (Satotras). He wanted to show that he had some pretentions to the knowledge of Sanskrit. But how could one know Sanskrit without learning it. Is is possible that he might have passed for a Sanskrit scholar before those ignorant villagers who had never heard a man speak Sanskrit. He could never have done unless he was anxious to gain public applause, fame and glory. He must have sought after fame or he would have preached in the language he know and told the people that he had not read Sanskrit. ans. Guru Nanak was well educated in sanskrit, all Gurus were because in the name of education back then, Hindu texts were standard. He was beyond human need of fame & glory. The sanskrit hymns swami is talking about is not pure sanskrit but mix of pali, sanskrit and prakrit, they are called Salok Sahaskriti. In question first, Swami said Guru was ignorant about sanskrit and have written Nirbahu instead Nirbhaya, however, in sahahskriti hymns, Guru Arjan has also used word Nirbhaya (Page 1357 - salok 37). I am quoting Guru Arjan because some writings of his are quoted by Swami below. He never read Sahaskriti hymns in the first place. 3.)Since he was a little vain, he may possibly have even resorted to some sort of make-believe to gain reputation and acquire fame, hence it is that in his book called the Grantha the Vedas have been praised as well as censured, because had he not done so, some one might have asked him the meaning of the Vedic Mantra and as he would not have been able to explain it he would have been lowered in the estimation of the people. Anticipating this difficulty, he from the first denounced the Vedas here and there but occasionally also spoke well of the Vedas because had he not done so the people would have called him a Nastika, i.e., and atheist or a reviler of the Vedas. For instance, it is recorded in the Grantha, 'Even Brahma who constantly read the Vedas died. All the four Vedas are mere fiction. The Vedas can never realize the greatness of a Sadhu.' SUKHMANI, 7: 8. 'Nanak says that a man versed in Divine knowledge is himself God.' SUKHMANI 8:6. If the scholars of the Vedas like Brahma are dead, have not Nanak, etc., also shared the same fate. Did they consider themselves immortal? The Vedas are a mine of all kinds of knowledge. Whatever a man, who calls the Vedas mere fiction, says, is a mere fabrication. If the word Sadhus is another name for idiots, how can they ever understand the greatness of the Vedas? Had Nanak held up the Vedas alone as the supreme authority, he would not have succeeded in founding his sect, nor would he have been recognized a Guru (Master). As he was quite ignorant of Sanskrit, he would not have been able to teach others and thereby make them his disciples. ans. First of all, half of his first reference is wrong. It does not exist in that text. As i have said in many queries, Guru Granth Sahib agrees on some themes with vedas such as Formless Brahman but also disagree on plenty not because of saving face but due to difference in opinion like Havans, Animal sacrifice, Worshipping deities etc., Guru was not afraid to be called Nastik because we don't follow vedas in the first place. There is a difference between Nastik and Nirishwarvaad. Brahma is a Deva, many like him have come and gone. Those who dies in shabad gets mukti. Death of physcial body is not a big deal. Vedas are standard for you, not for us. They can't know the limits of the Saints like Kabir who was united with God. A saint of God is representation/ God himself, does not mean we worship Sargun form. Swami believed in mukti being temporary so there is no point in arguing about philosophies with someone like him. 4.) It is true though that in Nanak's time the Punjab was altogether destitute of Sanskrit learning and was groaning under the tyranny of the Mohammedans. He did save some persons from embracing Mohammedanism. Nanak in his lifetime had not had many followers, nor did his sect flourish much. But it is a habit with the ignorant that they make a saint of their Guru after his death, then invest him with a halo (of glory) and believe him to be an incarnation of God. ans. Guru Nanak also saved us from egotistical people like a certain someone. 5.) Nanak was neither a rich man, nor was he one of the aristocracy and yet his followers have written in Nanak Chandrodaya and Janamsakhi that he was a great saint who possessed miraculous powers, met Brahman and other (sages of yore), had long talks with them, all paid him homage on the occasions of his marriage when he went to marry his bride, he had a long procession of horses, carriages and elephants ornamented with silver, gold, pearls and diamonds. All this is recorded in the above-mentioned books. Now what are these but yarns spun by his followers. It is his followers who are to blame for this and not Nanak. ans. I agree there are many false stories but Guru Nank belonged to a reputable family, had a business and was a farmer. He was well settled. 6.)After his death, the sect of Udasees originated with his son, while that of Nirmalas with Ram Das, etc. Many a successor to the throne of Nanak have incorporated his writings in the Grantha. The tenth Guru of the Sikhs was Guru Gobind. Since his time no addition has been made to it, but, instead, all the smaller books that were extant then were collected together and bound in one volume (and the name of Granth was given to it). The successors of Nanak wrote various treatises: some of them invented fictitious stories like those of the Puranas and, acting on the precept 'The man versed in Divine knowledge is himself God,' arrogated to themselves Divine privileges. Their followers renounced the practice of good works and Divine contemplation and, instead, paid their Gurus the homage due to God. Thus has been done a great mischief. It would have been very good had these men kept on worshipping God in the way pointed out by Nanak. Now, the Udasees claim to be superior to all others, while the Nirmala make the same claim for themselves. The Akalees and Suthreshahees hold that they are above all. ans. Nirmalas originated after 10th Guru not 4th and their origin is controversial. The 'fictitious stories' are written by people who want to assimilate Sikhs within Hinduism. A sikh's good work and divine contemplation is not affected in any way, people who are uneducated about Sikhi thinks sikhi of Guru Nanak and later Gurus is different. Sects exist everywhere, Gurus never forced their children to follow anything, thus sects were formed but Guru chose Khalsa as their only way. 7.) Gobind Singh was indeed a very brave man among the followers of Nanak. The Mohammedans had oppressed his people very much. He was anxious to revenge himself on them, but he had neither the men nor the necessary material for the purpose whilst the Mohammedans were at the zenith of their power. He, therefore, resorted to a strategem. He gave it out that the goddess had given him a sword and a blessing saying: 'Go forth and fight against the Mohammedans. You shall win.' He gained many supporters from amongst the people. he (appointed) five kakars, i.e., five articles all beginning with the letter K as the signs of his faith just like five makers of he Vama Margis - and five Sanskars of the Chakrankits. The five Kkars of Sikhs were of great use in fighting. ans. Gurus were beyond these human emotions like revenge. They accepted God's will and never worshipped any goddess. You can read other queries for detail, these are all false stories to assimilate us within hinduism. Sikh concept of 5 is different from hindu concept of 5, we are based on 5 good values, 5 bad values, 5 beloved ones, 5 banis in nitnem, etc. 8.) Gobind Singh, through his wisdom, started the practice of wearing these five articles. They were very useful for the time in which he lived, but they are of no use at the present time. (It is strange -that) those things which were required to be used because of there being of great service in fighting (with the enemy) have now come to be regarded as part and parcel of the religions of the Sikhs. It is true that they do not practice idolatry but they worship the Grantha even more than idols. Now is not this idolatry? To bow down before an material object or worship it is idolatry. They ply their trade just like all other idolators and make a good living by it. Just as the idolator priests show their idols (in the temples) to the visitors and receive (gifts offered by them to idols). Likewise do the followers of Nanak worship the Grantha and teach others to do the same and receive what is offered to it. The followers of the Grantha do not show the same amount of respect to the Vedas as do the Puranics. Of course it can be urged in their defense, that these people had neither even read the Vedas, nor heard them being read, they could not, therefore, be blamed for showing scanty respect to them. If they were to read the Vedas or hear them being read, those among them, who are free from prejudice and bigotry, would not doubt embrace the Vedic religion. It is greatly to the credit of these people that they have done away with various troublesome and useless restrictions in the matter of eating and drinking, it will be a very good thing indeed if the would also free themselves from sensualism, vanity and false pride and advance the cause of the Vedic religion. ans. 5ks are always useful. Dayanand himself was following millenias old vedic dharm but does not want others to follow their younger one. According to Hinduism, to worship an idol you have to do the Pran Pratishtha first, we don't have any such concept in the first place. Unlike idols, Granth actually imparts knowledge however bowing to SGGS is not idoltary, we are not worshipping our Granth, we only worship Vaheguru which we can do anywhere. Bowing is literally how you pay respect in India.Seems like swami was not only uneducated about Sikh Gurus, their history and values but seems like Indian culture itself. Also their are corrupt people everywhere but most money donated to Gurdwaras is in good hands. Gurus and many sikh scholars were educated not only in vedas but six hindu philosophies and other religious books thats why we follow different path. 10th Guru ordered us to read them but have faith in Vaheguru and SGGS only. And no we dont need your Vedic religion. Swami was either ignorant or dishonest. He never actually read Guru Granth Sahib. He is the prime example of someone Gurbani mentions again and again- Ang-56 ਕੇਤੇ ਪੰਡਿਤ ਜੋਤਕੀ ਬੇਦਾ ਕਰਹਿ ਬੀਚਾਰੁ ॥ There are so many Pandits and astrologers who ponder over the Vedas. ਵਾਦਿ ਵਿਰੋਧਿ ਸਲਾਹਣੇ ਵਾਦੇ ਆਵਣੁ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ They glorify their disputes and arguments, and in these controversies they continue coming and going. ਬਿਨੁ ਗੁਰ ਕਰਮ ਨ ਛੁਟਸੀ ਕਹਿ ਸੁਣਿ ਆਖਿ ਵਖਾਣੁ ॥੭॥ Without the Guru, they are not released from their karma, although they speak and listen and preach and explain. ||7||