Shivpreet Singh

Sant Singh Maskeen ji always talks about Puranas as "Mithihaas" which is the opposite of "Itihaas" ... something that was made up compared to something that truly happened. I wanted to find out if it was just him saying this and whether this is commonly used by Vedic philosophers. According to the shastraas it seems "Mith" is different from the english mythology. I found this interesting essay on "Mithya" ... which delves into this word into more depth. Shankara's kArikA defines Mythia in the following way:

saprayojanataA teShAM svapne vipratipadyate |
tasmAdAdyantavattvena mithyaiva khalu te smRRitAH ||

The utility (of the objects seen in the waking state) is contradicted by the dream state. (Objects) have to be regarded as mithyA since they have a beginning and an end.

So the search goes on ...

Here is the article:

https://www.advaita-vision.org/origin-and-meaning-of-the-word-mithya/

Seekers often ask questions about the meaning of the word mithyA. It is, after all, one of the most important concepts in Advaita. Someone has just asked about the usage of the word itself: Did Shankara use it? Does it occur in the Upanishads? I had to do a bit of research on this one and thought others might be interested in what I discovered.

The dictionary definition of the word gives: 1) contrarily, incorrectly, wrongly, improperly; 2) falsely, deceitfully, untruly; 3) not in reality, only apparently; 4) to no purpose, fruitlessly, in vain. According to John Grimes, it derives from the verb-root mith, meaning ‘to dispute angrily, altercate’.

It seems that it only occurs in one Upanishad – the muktikopaniShad. This is the Upanishad which tells you which Upanishads you need to study in order to obtain mokSha or mukti. It says that you can, in theory, get away with studying only one – the Mandukya, with its bare 12 sutras. If this alone does not enlighten you, then you need to study the 10 major Upanishads (Isha, Kena, Katha, Prashna, Mundaka, Mandukya, Taittiriya, Aitareya, Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka). If you still haven’t got it, there are a further 22 making up the main ones. Failing that, you are doomed to have to study the 108 commonly recognized ones. (After that, you start again!)

Obviously, the muktika itself has to be a relatively recent Upanishad since it is able to name these 108. (The muktika awards itself 108th position.) It seems certain that it was written after Gaudapada’s kArikA-s on the Mandukya Upanishad. (The best guess seems to be that it was written prior to 1656CE.) If this is the case, then it also seems probable that the reason this Upanishad mentions the word mithyA is because Gaudapada himself uses it.

It occurs in kArikA-s 2.7 and 4.32. Since these verses are identical, the word is effectively only used in one place prior to Shankara. The kArikA reads:

saprayojanataA teShAM svapne vipratipadyate |

tasmAdAdyantavattvena mithyaiva khalu te smRRitAH ||

The utility (of the objects seen in the waking state) is contradicted by the dream state. (Objects) have to be regarded as mithyA since they have a beginning and an end.

In the section where this occurs, Gaudapada is refuting the various suggestions about what makes an object ‘real’. One of these is that, if an object has utility, then it must be real. Thus, for example, I see a glass of water on the table; I pick it up and drink it and my thirst is quenched. Therefore that glass of water must have been real. But the glass of water seen in a dream quenches the thirst of the dreamer. On waking, however, it is realized not to have been real. In fact, the waking glass of water is totally useless to the dreamer. Accordingly, utility cannot be a relevant factor in determining what is real. (Otherwise, we would have to conclude that reality was relative.) What we have to say is that the dream world is useful to the dreamer and the waking world to the waker. Both worlds are ‘relatively real’ but neither is absolutely real. Hence there is the need for a new word to describe them – mithyA.

A good metaphor for this is ‘fatherhood’. If X is the father of Y who in turn is the father of Z, then we can say that the ‘fatherhood’ of Y is real from the standpoint of Z but not from the standpoint of X. It is a relative term only and has no absolute reality.

Objects are not real because they can be sublated (in the way that the rope-snake can be realized to be a rope). Chairs can be realized to be only wood; waves to be water; water to be H2O etc. But they are not unreal because we can perceive them; they have utility and so on.

(As an aside, the word is also used in the Bhagavad Gita 18.59 but here it is used in the sense of ‘vain, untrue, hopeless’: “Your resolve will be in vain”. This is the fourth of the definitions given above.)

The Muktika quote is from 2.14:

janmAntashatAbhyastA mithyA sa.nsAravAsanA |

sA chirAbhyAsayogena vinA na kshIyate kvachit ||

Krishna Warrier translates this: “The false impression of worldly life is got in a hundred lives and cannot be destroyed without long practice.”

Certainly the concept, if not the word, occurs in the Vedas (Upanishads). The tadananyatvAdhikaraNam topic (Brahmasutras chapter 2.1.14-20 or 15-21 depending upon which version you have) is all about this. ‘The world (effect) is non-different from Brahman (the cause)’ etc. The idea is that ‘everything’ which might be considered to be a modification of this cause is mithyA and therefore does not exist separate from Brahman. Shankara quotes Br. U. 4.5.6 and 2.4.6 and Ch. U. 6.1.1 as examples where this is taught. The latter is the famous vAchArambhaNa section which I have written about elsewhere, the idea that we effectively bring something into existence by giving it a name.

I think that basically, it is a word hit upon later by commentators as a good word for the idea conveyed by Shankara et all when talking about the nature of the universe. There are five definitions encountered in Advaita. The best book I have come across for discussing these is ‘The Fundamentals of Advaita’ by K. Narain, Indological Research Centre, 2003; ISBN 81-88260-00-2 (but beware – although it is called ‘fundamental’, it is actually quite difficult reading!).

The first definition equates mithyA with anirvachanIya – indefinable or inexplicable. Narain spells it out as “that which is not the substratum of either being or non-being”. This is often encountered as sad-asad-vilakShaNa, other than real or non-real. If analyzed, it is found that this could mean several things. What is meant by Advaitins is that a mithyA object has two properties: ‘the absolute negation of being’ and ‘the absolute negation of non-being’. Other philosophies regard this as contradictory! The advaita siddhi by madhusUdana discusses all the intricacies of logic here and refutes the objectors. But, if Narain is ‘difficult’, the advaita siddhi is incomprehensible!

The second definition uses the concept of ‘counterpositive’ (pratiyogin) and many people (including myself) have great difficulty getting their heads around it! It is discussed in detail in Madhavananda’s vedAnta paribhAshA, probably the most difficult text on Advaita (epistemology) that I have ever encountered. Acharya Sadananda wrote an extensive commentary on the first part of this work for the Advaitin group and I edited this extensively for the site (the ‘Knowledge’ series, parts 1 and 2, with around 70 separate essays). There is an interpolated essay on the concept of ‘counterpositive’ by S. N. Sastri at http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/knowledge/counterpositive.htm. There, he gives an example which comes closest for me to explaining the meaning:

If one makes a statement such as: “There is no pot on this floor” or “A pot does not exist on this floor”, the pot is the counter-positive of its own non-existence and the floor is the substratum. A person sees a rope and thinks it is a snake. Afterwards he finds out that it is only a rope. Then he says, “There never was a snake here”. Another way of saying this is, “There is absolute non-existence of a snake here”. In this sentence the snake, whose non-existence is stated, is the counter-positive. The rope in front is the substratum. So we can say that the snake is the counter- positive of its own absolute non-existence in the rope which was the substratum on which it was seen, i.e. which was supposed to be its substratum. The expression “non-existence that abides in the substratum” means only “the non-existence in the substratum”. Thus what the sentence quoted above means is: That which appeared to exist at a particular place, but was found later to be non-existent there is mithyA. The snake appeared to exist where the rope was, but later on it was found that it did not exist. So the snake is mithyA.

So the second definition, utilizing this concept is: (mithyAtva is) the counter-positive of absolute negation with reference to the substratum in which it is cognized. As Narain puts it, which is just about understandable, “when Advaitins affirm that a jar is ‘unreal’ (i.e. mithyA) they mean: ‘it is capable of being absolutely denied (with reference to past, present and future) in regard to the point of space and time in relation to which it is cognized’, like ‘silver’ in ‘conchshell’ (or nacre).” Again, there is lots of to and fro argumentation in respect of this definition if you have the intellect able to tackle it!

The third definition was given by Citsukha, an Advaitin who lived around the 13th century CE. He suggested the (much simpler!) one that mithyAtva is that which possesses the specific character that it is sublated by knowledge. The obvious example would be the snake that we see in the dark which, when light (knowledge) is brought to the subject, is realized to be a rope. If it had been real, then knowledge could only reinforce the belief. Only those things that are mistakenly perceived can be altered as a result of knowledge. But misperceived snakes etc cannot be regarded as totally unreal either, since they have their effects on our metabolism. So, being neither real nor unreal, we use the word mithyA.

It was noted above that other philosophies, such as dvaitins, argue against all of these definitions. As an aside, an interesting one relating to this definition is as follows. As it stands, the idea is that it is knowledge that, in a moment of realization, reveals an object previously thought to be real as false. One of the key Dvaitins (Vyasatirtha) asked whether a jar that has been destroyed by a stick in the past is false. Here, the jar is ‘terminated’ by the stick and not by knowledge! Therefore, the jar must have been real before its destruction! This resulted in further arguments and refining of definitions – but I am not going to attempt to go into this here. (It involves more ‘counterpositives’.)

The fourth definition is again from Citsukha and is a slight modification of the second. mithyAtva is the character of being the counterpositive of absolute negation located in its own substratum. The example that is used a cloth, consisting of woven threads. The cloth only exists in conjunction with the threads – it is never seen anywhere else. And we cannot attribute separate reality to it where it is seen either, since we know it is only an arrangement of the threads. So we say that it is the counterpositive of absolute negation located in the threads, and we say that the cloth is mithyA.

The final definition is that mithyAtva is something distinct and different from ‘real’. This proved to be a bit too indefinite and the advaita siddhi amplifies this to explain that the word ‘real’ means “established by pramANa, unrelated to any of the defects that have their final causality in avidyA and uncontradicted at all times (past, present and future)”.

Nowadays, the word mithyA is very commonly used. We use it to describe everything in ‘creation’. The world appears to be real but, when Self-ignorance is removed, we realize that it is the substratum – brahman – that is the only reality. Thus the world (which we still see, and which is therefore not unreal) is known not to be real. Accordingly, we require the word mithyA to talk about it. It is not a synonym for vyavahAra. Everything in vyavahAra is mithyA, but dreams are mithyA too and they are prAtibhAsika.

The standard text for all of this is the Advaita-Siddhi itself and, strictly for the most intrepid souls, this is available in the Indian Philosophical Classics series: advaita-siddhiH, madhusUdana sarasvatI, translated and explained by Karuna Bhattacharya, Motilal Banarsidass, 1992. ISBN 84-85636-00-1. The five definitions of falsity and an additional chapter on the ‘Justification of Falsity in General’ occupy some 200+ pages. There is also the original text, together with four commentaries edited by Pt. N. S. Ananta Krishna Sastri, Parimal Publications, 2005. ISBN 81-7110-010-4. This has 904 pages plus a supplementary section! Oh yes, it is also in Sanskrit…

Vismaad in Asa Ki Vaar

I was listening to Maskeen ji's katha on Vismaad and thought I would write my thoughts on it. Vismaad, a word derived from the Punjabi language, embodies the concept of wonder and astonishment that transcends mere intellectual comprehension. It is a state of being that goes beyond the limitations of ego and encompasses a deep appreciation for the mysteries of life. While individuals such as children, poets, and saints often possess this capacity for vismaad, many others are consumed by ego, depriving themselves of the beauty and awe that can be found in the world around them.

Guru Nanak says:

Vismaad naad vismaad ved. Vismaad je-a vismaad bhed.
Vismaad roop vismaad rang. Vismaad nagnae phireh jant.
Vismaad pa-un vismaad paanee. Vismaad agneekhaydeh vidaanee.
Vismaad dhartee vismaad khaanee. Vismaad saad lageh paraanee.
Vismaad sanjog vismaad vijog. Vismaad bhukh vismaad bhog.
Vismaad sifat vismaad saalaah. Vismaad ujharh vismaad raah.
Vismaad nayrhai vismaad door(h). Vismaad daykhai haajraa hajoor.
Vaiykh vidaan rahi-aa vismaad. Nanak bujhan pooraibhaag. ||1||
(SGGS, Pg. No. 463)

Paraphrasing Guru Nanak's Vismaad Pauri:

I am filled with wonder as I observe the wind blowing in one place and water flowing in another. The mesmerizing dances of fire never fail to astonish me. It is truly remarkable how the Earth sustains the myriad creatures through various means of birth, be it from an egg, a womb, the earth itself, or even through perspiration. The enjoyment of your abundant blessings by mortals is a spectacle that fills me with awe.

The experience of people coming together or being separated is nothing short of astonishing. Oh God, it is difficult to comprehend that while some suffer from acute hunger, others are surrounded by abundance and indulgence. Somewhere, the Creator is being praised and glorified. It is wondrous to witness the divergent paths taken by individuals, some straying away from the divine commands while others walk along the well-laid paths. The play of this wondrous existence is simply astounding.

It is incredible how some claim that You are very near, while others believe You to be far away, and yet some perceive Your presence right beside them, permeating every corner of existence. Witnessing these marvels, I am left wonderstruck. Oh Nanak, those who comprehend the astonishing wonders you manifest are blessed with perfect destiny.

Vismaad in Children, Poets, and Saints:

Children, with their innocent and untainted perspectives, possess an innate sense of wonder. They marvel at the simplest things like butterflies, the sun, snow, flowers, and the moon. To them, the world is filled with endless mysteries waiting to be explored, and their vismaad allows them to revel in these wonders without the constraints of ego.

Similarly, poets are blessed with the gift of vismaad. Through their poetic expressions, they capture the ineffable essence of life and evoke emotions that transcend ordinary understanding. Poets possess a heightened sense of observation and tap into the deeper dimensions of existence, allowing them to perceive and convey the beauty and wonder that often eludes others.

Saints, particularly those who have attained spiritual enlightenment, embody the highest form of vismaad. They possess a profound connection with their souls and possess the ability to perceive the divine within all things. Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, emphasized the significance of vismaad when he proclaimed, "Vekh vidaan rehaa vismaad" - witnessing your wonders, I am in wonder. This ability to experience vismaad is considered a rare blessing bestowed upon individuals through good fortune.

The Pitfall of Ego:

Ego, the antithesis of vismaad, acts as a hindrance to the experience of wonder. When one becomes consumed by the ego, they adopt a sense of omniscience, falsely believing that they possess complete knowledge. This inflated sense of understanding eliminates the mystery and curiosity that accompanies vismaad. Scientists, who often approach the world with a purely analytical mindset, may lack vismaad as they seek to unravel the mechanisms and intricacies of the natural world, focusing solely on objective knowledge rather than embracing the wonder it holds.

Vismaad in Everyday Life:

Namdev, a revered saint and poet from India, professed that vismaad can be found in every aspect of existence. He emphasized that everything in creation resonates with wisdom, even the smallest leaf or a droplet in the vast ocean. The sheer diversity and uniqueness of every living being, whether animal or plant, evoke a sense of wonder. Each organism, down to the minutest detail, exhibits distinct characteristics, captivating those with vismaad.

Moreover, vismaad extends beyond living beings to encompass the vast array of shapes and colors in the world. The intricacy and diversity found in nature's creations evoke awe and fascination. Even a single fish can exhibit a multitude of vibrant hues, each contributing to its individuality. Saints, with their heightened perception, may even find divinity in seemingly ordinary objects, recognizing the presence of God in an eggplant, for instance, while others remain oblivious to such revelations due to their lack of vismaad.

Fostering Vismaad

Vismaad, the state of wonder that surpasses intellectual understanding, holds immense value in our lives. It allows us to transcend the limitations of ego, opening our minds to the mysteries and beauty of the world. Children, poets, and saints serve as exemplars of vismaad, demonstrating how embracing wonder can lead to a deeper connection with ourselves and the world around us. By fostering vismaad, we can unlock the hidden wisdom and appreciate the awe-inspiring diversity that permeates every aspect of existence.

My notes from Maskeen ji's katha:

Asa DI vaar #5

Wonder is beyond intellect.

When ego comes in, wonder goes away. There is no mystery if you know everything. If you understand that what we know is incomplete we are capable of vismaad. For that reason kids, poets and saints all have vismaad. Most other people have ego and don’t have vismaad.

A kid loves butterflies. Sun. Snow. Flowers. Moon. Mystery abounds. Vismaad.

Poets also have this vismaad.

Saints also have the highest vismaad. They can see through their soul. Vekh vidaan rehaa vismaad says nanak. Nanak bujhe pure bhaag - only with good fortune does anyone get this.

The normal person in his ego says I know clouds. I know earth. I know the sun. The scientist doesn’t have vismaad.

Guru Nanak says I’m in wonder because of all this things

He starts with sound vismaad naad

Clouds. Wind. Birds. Music. These make the saint wonder. But not for the layman. But do you really hear do you really listen namdev says sabhai ghat Raam bole.

He says I’m in wonder because of knowledge. There is wisdom in everything even the leaf has wisdom even a droplet in the ocean has an ocean of wealth.

Then I am wonder because of all the living beings on earth. No animal is like any other animal. Even every leaf of the same tree is different. I am in wonder because of all the differences.

Vismad roop ... rang

So many shapes and so many colors. Every organism is different. Even one fish may have so many different colors.

A saint might fall in love with an eggplant because he sees God in it. But the layman might see an eggplant even if you showed him God. He wouldn’t recognize.

Vismaad naange phire

I am surprised that animals are naked and they are not embarrassed.

Vismaad pavan paani Agni ...

I’m in vismaad looking at pavan. You give me life and refresh me. You give me warmth. You quench my thirst. You fill me with wonder.

Daava agan, badva agan,

(Work in progress. Please visit later to see final translation)

Translation of Sant Singh Maskeen Ji's lecture on Guru Gobind Singh's couplet:
"Anek hai Phir Ek hai"

You are many, still you are one

Dear respected community, greetings! I am going to start discussion of the words of the Guru with my modest discussion of a chhand of Guru Gobind singh:

Amaan hai, Nidhaan hai

Anek hai Phir Ek hai

By "Nidhaan" Guru Ji implies "treasure of Virues". You are the treasure of the virtue of energy. You are the treasure of beauty. But at the same time you are "Amaan". You don't have any pride. You don't have the pride of being powerful. You don't have any ego of being beautiful. You don't have pride of having any of your multifarious virtues.

The writers of the Upanishads have considered three virtues of the universal entity: Satyam, Shivam, Sundaram. That God is Satya or true. That God is Shivam or enlightened (?). And that God is Sundaram, or extremely beautiful.

Vedic rishis have described this universal entity as "Sad-Chit-Anand". True. Enlightened. And beautiful.

The universal entity has been described by Guru Nanak as "sat suhaan sadaa man chao". Or "You are true. You are beautiful. You bring pleasure to the heart." There is joy within you. There is hope and optimism within you. You are blossoming and you are glowing with youthful vigor and freshness.

That treasure of strength, the treasure of beauty, the treasure of joys ... Of this Guru Gobind Singh that the universal entity has no pride.

And the next thing, "Anek hai Phir Ek hai". In other words despite being one, you are many and despite being many, you are one. This sounds like a riddle. If something is one, how can it be many. And if something is many, how can it be one?

Being many, you are one. Being one you are many. The first word in the Guru Granth Sahib is "one" or "ik". The first word from Guru Nanak after high enlightenment was "one". That was the first brahm naad from Guru Nanak.

What is the shape of this one? How does this one look? What is the character of this one? What is the ability of this one? The whole Guru Granth Sahib is the exposition of this "one".

And do you know what is the decision of the words of the Guru?

Ek vastu boojhai ta hovai paak

Bin boojhai tu sadaa napaak

If you understand the "one" you, if you assimilate yourself with the one, you become pure. If you don't understand you remain always impure. You are filled with dirt.

6:00

The Guru doesn't think there can be purity without the understanding of one. There is no one who is pure without one. Without connecting with the one.

Even if there is a big philanthropist, if he doesn't understand one, if he is not connected to one, not only is he impure, there is impurity in his philanthropy too. There will be the bad smell of ego in his gifts.

If someone is doing a big service, but he/she does not understand "one", this service will give birth to ahankaar, or ego, not Nirankaar or God.

If someone is meditating, if he is going to the Gurdwara without fail, and is trying to do service in many ways, but if he doesn't understand one, nor is connected to the one, then from all these religious acts, only "ego" is going to be visible not Nirankaar or God.

And every act which depicts ego, every act that is done as a show off, is not pure. That is dirty. And the one who is dirty, his service is also dirty. His philanthropy is also dirty. Believe me. His sitting in the Gurdwara is also dirty. Until he is not himself pure, none of his acts are pure.

Then the question arises, how can one become pure? And Gurbani says:

Ek vastu boojhai ta hovai paak

Bin boojhai tu sadaa napaak

If you understand the "one" you, if you assimilate yourself with the one, if you know one, then you are pure. If you don't understand you remain always impure.

Let me repeat. The first letter of the Guru Granth Sahib is one. And Guru Gobind Singh says:

Amaan hai, Nidhaan hai

Anek hai Phir Ek hai

You are many, yet one. You are one, yet many.

Pay attention here. This seems like a riddle. How can you be one and many at the same time. As a matter of fact, at the level of the sansaar or world, he is many. At the level of himself Nirankaar, he is one. At the level of aakar or shapes, he is many while at the level of niraakaar, or shapeless, he is one. At the level of sargun, or qualities, he is many while at the level or nirgun or quality-less he is one.

Guru Granth Sahib says, "Eh bani birlo vichaarsi je Ko Gurmukh hovai".

The one who read, sing, or listen to the guru's words are many. But the ones who truly contemplate are rare.

When we say a person has changed what do we mean? Have his hands changed? Feet? Face? No. Nothing in the body has changed. What has changed are his thoughts. His thinking has changed. When thoughts change, the whole world changes. With changing thoughts, a person's character changes. When the mind changes, everything changes.

When the minds of many people change, we say that the "yug" or age has changed. The change of ages has to do with the changes of minds. If one person's mind changes, his whole world changes. His character changes, the melody of his life changes. Thinking is everything.

On this planet there is one race that bows down to thoughts. And that is the Sikh race. Guru Granth Sahib is the center of thoughts and Sikhs bow down to the center of thoughts. For that reason, a Sikh should never be without good thoughts. Sikhs aught not to be unwise because wisdom is their Guru.

Gyan Guru Aatam Updeson

Naam vibhoot lagaon

If wisdom is the Guru how can a Sikh not be wise? How can a Sikh who bows down to supreme wisdom, not attain wisdom. If there is bowing down but there is no wisdom, the bowing down is hypocritical. And it is true, that there is a lot of hypocrisy in those who bow down these days. Guru Nanak says:

What is the point of bowing if you don't understand, if you don't comprehend, if you don't have faith, if you don't have any trust. What is the point of bowing down your head if the heart is impure.

It is possible that in your charity there is hypocrisy. It is possible that there is no meaning to your bowing down.

As a matter of fact, without changing your thinking, you cannot change the melody of your life.

What is the biggest gift that you can give to your Guru? Is it money, food, clothes, gold and silver? Not really. When an innocent child starts learning how to write, then he starts with exercises. Money, food, clothes etc are like that. They are exercises. They are useful to get a disciple to the point that he offers his thoughts as the gift to his Guru, to the point that he offers his mind to the Guru. What is the mind but an idol of one's thoughts. Only if one could learn how to give this gift.

And when that happens, the Guru gives the disciple his own mind. Our thoughts have lobh or greed. The Gurus thoughts have santokh or acceptance. Our thoughts have Kaam or lust. The Guru's thoughts have Raam. Our thoughts have ahankaar or ego. The Guru's thoughts have Nirankaar. Our thoughts have krodh or anger. The Guru's thoughts have daya or compassion. Our thoughts have moh or attachment. The Guru's thoughts have Prem or love.

Only if you offer your anger, will you get compassion. Only if you offer your Kaam, will you get Raam. Only if you offer your ahankaar will you obtain Nirankaar. Only if you offer your moh, will you get prem.

What does it mean by giving your mind to the Guru? Giving your mind implies giving your thoughts to the Guru.

And what do humans generally have in their thoughts?

The definition of the body is simple. The body is made in four layers. Bone, muscle, connective tissue (minj) and skin. That's it. Bhagat Kabir says:

Are you proud of these bones? Are you proud of your muscles? Are you proud of the connective tissue, or your skin? Is that it? Think about it. The pride of the body is the pride of the skin. Just like we wear different colored clothes, God has not given the same color skin to anyone. Everyone has a different color.

Karmi Avai kapda nadri mokh duaar

It is our karma that gets us this body, this skin. But everyone has been given a different color. Some are white, black, brown, golden. This is Gods choice.

Anik rang tere narayana

Yours are many colors

So many colors! And because all the colors have come from Narayan, every color has Narayan.

Rang Sabe Narayane

What is body? Body is bones, muscle connective tissue and skin. And then what is mind? Mind is also a collection of four elements: vichaar, Sochni, chhitvani, and aham. They say "Man budh chit aham". The writers of scriptures also call it chatushta-anteh-karan or the four inside doers.

Humans have many thoughts. When a choice among thoughts is made, "man" becomes "budh". When we are remembering someone, "man" becomes "chit". And "aham" separates thoughts about ourselves from thoughts about others. Aham is related to questions lik, is that me thinking? Or is that me remembering. So the mind comprises of these four: man budh chit aham.

What is a change in the mind? A change of your mind is a change of your thoughts, discernment, remembrance, and ego.

What do you mean by a change in ego. How can an ego change. Well, there is something called a "Nirmal" ego ... Or the soft ego. Initially humans have pride of their bodies, their wealth, their youth, their family, their caste, their ancestors ... But when ego changes, he has pride of God, no one else.

Oh god. Oh true one. You are my pride. You are my energy. All other pride is unclean. Guru Tegh Bahadur says

The bhagats are not necessarily without pride or nimaane. They have a lot of pride. They are proud of God. Guru Arjan Dev says:

Oh God. I don't want to live without pride (nimaana). I don't want to live without power (Nitaana). It's natural that someone without any power is left without any pride. The one that is without any power is actually dead ... A walking and talking dead body. A community without any power is without any pride. Without power a country is also without any pride. There is no place in this world for the one without power. Weaklings have no place in this world. If there is no kind of power ... No Power of wealth, no power of youth, no power of family, no power of caste, then what kind of power can one have? One can have the power of God.

Oh god, you are my power. So you are my pride!

The pride of God is pure. All other pride is impure.

When thoughts undergo a change ... What is there in a human's thoughts? We say that changing of your thoughts change the world. By changing your thinking you can change your life. By changing what you remember you can change everything. Then the question arises what is really in this thinking? What is in these thoughts?

Indian philosophers have concluded that within human thinking are the five thieves: kaam, krodh, lobh, moh and ahankaar. Study your own thinking. What are you thinking. Read your thoughts, what is there? Analyze your remembrance; what is there?

Guru Nanak says, You can read such great books, but you can't read your mind?

You can read deep treatises, big books, but you can't read what is written on your forehead. What is happening in your mind. What is happening in your head. Read!

And the one who can read his own mind, that is a 'sadhak'. And the one who can change his own mind is a 'sadhu'. The one that is in 'Sadhna'. Guru Arjan Dev goes even beyond this and says (it's actually Kabir who says this):

The wise sages like Sanak and Narad also didn't realize the mind within the body. They couldn't understand the depth of the mind. They were duped by the mind.

Bhai Gurdas writes about Brahma:

Brahma is the one who originated the four vedas. His intellect is unmatchable. But he is attracted by his own daughter Sarawati. Like Brahma, Vishnu, Shiv, Indra and Narad were similarly incapable of winning their minds.

Winning your own mind is no child's play. People say purify your mind before going to the Gurdwara. They are absolutely incorrect. One should never say that. What should be said is, "go to the Gurdwara so your mind is purified." How is it possible to purify your mind before going to the Gurdwara.

Ones who don't understand the mind they say, "calm your mind to do 'path'". But they are wrong. How can the mind be calmed without paath. They don't understand the mind. They should instead say, "Do your paath so your mind is calmed."

It is not someone else that dupes you. It is your mind. The mind duped Indra. Indra committed a folly that normal humans commit. He could not control his urges and has a relationship with Gautam Rishi's wife Ahilya. Guru Granth Sahib puts this history in front of us (it's actually Bhai Gurdas):

What is there in the thoughts of humans? In our thoughts there is 'Kaam' or desire. We have lobh or greed. We have ahankaar or ego. I did not include krodh and moh. (Anger and attachment) Do you know why?

Religious philosophers say that three -- Kaam, lobh and ahankaar -- have their own origin. Krodh or anger and moh or attachment are just shadows of the other three. Attachment is the shadow of desire, greed and ego. Similarly krodh or anger is the shadow of desire, greed and ego.

With what our greed is satisfied, we get attached to it. With what our greed is not satisfied, we are angry towards it.

With what our desire is satisfied, we get attached. And when our desire is not satisfied we are angry.

Whoever stokes our ego, we get attached to and whoever hurts our ego we get angry with.

In that way anger and attachment are shadows of greed, desire and ego.

There are some that say themselves, "if we are not there, how will there be any service." "If we are not there, the school will close." My one answer is, try to die and everything will continue happening.

keti gayi vekh vaaje vajaye

vahi ek raisi jo saacha khudaye

See ... So many have gone

after playing their instruments

The only one who remains

Is the true lord

Tomorrow you may ask if the sun will rise if I am not there. How will the rivers flow if I do not guide. If I am not there how will the wind blow. But who can tell you that everything will continue even if you are not there. It's just your ego. Ego is useless. Worthless. Everything will happen even if you are not there.

The one who stokes your ego, you tend to like. You get attached to that one. And the one who stops, we are angry at. The one who fulfills greed we are attached to. The one who betrays your greed we are angry with.

Think about this. The one who fulfills your desire that one looks beautiful; we get attached to them. The one who stops desire, is subject to our anger. For that reason, religious philosopher say that attachment and anger don't have their own independent origin. They are shadows.

Listening

Let me say this. We have to look inside. We have to understand our mind. Without looking inside, nothing will be gained. And you can look inside only by listening. Listening is what is hard. It is very hard. Very very hard.

There are mosques, temples and gurdwaras. The form of prayers are slightly different, but the objective, the end result is the same.

Our Hindu brothers go to the temple so they can see the idol of a Devta. Darshan or vision is the way of the Hindu. Whatever will be in front of the eyes, the eyes shall see. The whole meditation is based on vision or darshan. If you see the idol in a temple, and come out and see the idol in everything -- that is the objective of the meditation.

Our Muslim brothers and sisters go to the Masjid. They read the "Namaz." Devotion rests upon reading. Reading the Quran is the most important. You need more concentration to read, than you need to see.

Sikhs go to the gurdwara to hear the shabad of the guru. Listening of the word of the guru is most important. Their whole devotion rests upon listening. You need more concentration to listen than you need to read.

Don't be in the false impression, that all of us who are sitting here are listening. Among all the hundreds may be 2 or 4 are listening. Everyone is listening to their own thoughts. Everyone is listening to their own remembrances. If someone listens, then:

Nanak Bhagtan Sadaa Vigaas
Suniye Dookh Paap Ka Naas

By listening evil is vanquished. By listening our sorrows are destroyed. By listening, Guru's thoughts will enter us. Guru's thoughts will drive ego out of us. That will drive out sorrows. Listening is hard.

Only that person can listen who is concentrating his whole mind. The mind is going hither and thither all the time. If you are seeing here and there, and being distracted by every sight and noise, it is clear that your thoughts are also lost.

Haven't you seen someone saying something loud, and the listener says, "Can you please repeat it, I didn't hear what you were saying?" Well why didn't you hear? When the speaker was saying it so loud, why didn't you hear? It is clear that the thoughts were somewhere else. Without the concentration of thought it is hard to listen.

And without listening, it is hard to get Guru's word inside you. And without Guru's word going inside you, it is impossible to eject all the sorrows. Sorrows will come out only when the Guru's word will enter.

Nanak Bhagtan Sadaa Vigaas
Suniye Dookh Paap Ka Naas

It is only after listening with complete concentration that peace can be found. Listening can make you pure. Listening is like going on 68 pilgrimates:

Suniye athsath ka isnaan

Food enters the body through the mouth. When food is digested it becomes part of the body, it becomes energy, it becomes medicine for the body. The Guru's word enters the body through the ears and becomes eternal peace, ultimate energy, angelic virtue, and the power of the soul. But the word has to enter the ears. And it will only enter when someone listens. And only that person will listen who is concentrated on listening.

Who listens? People get very excited and do akhand paaths of the Guru Granth Sahib at home. But in the room in which the akhand paath is going on, they forget entering the room, lest they have to listen. Who listens? It is hard.

A person can listen to his son, to his friend, to his wife, husband etc ... but listening to the Guru is tough. It is very tough. Why? Because Guru's words are not set to the rhythm of our thinking. We think about kaam, Guru thinks about raam. We think about krodh. Guru thinks about dayaa. We think of nirankaar. Guru thinks of nirankaar. The rhythm does not match!

If the harmonium goes in one direction and the tabla goes in a wholly different direction, will that create beautiful music? No! The rhythm does not match. Guru's thinking and our thinking has a huge gap. They say, when there is harmony between instruments, that's when it appears beautiful. Otherwise it does not appear beautiful.

Sometimes, listening to kirtan, if it is appearing beautiful, there must be harmony. Only a few find kirtan to be beautiful. People are mostly lost in voices, melodies and rhythms, or useless stories. Stories that don't even have relevance with either history or truth. I have seen the nadir of listening. How will they listen to the Guru?

Eh Bani Birloh Bichaarsi

How will they meditate upon the Guru? The story of truth. Not depthless tirades. If a story does not align with the Guru Granth Sahib's thinking, how can it be true?

One from many, many from one

Anyways, let me continue. Guru Granth's thinking has nirankaar, the virtues of the most benevolent. They enter the body only through listening. Shabad enters the body and becomes samadhi. It becomes angelic virtues. And the understanding of the ultimate reality will dawn upon the mind. Which ultimate reality? The one about which Guru Gobind Singh says:

Anek Hain Phir Ek Hain
The one that is one, and at the same time, the one that is many.

How can this be. Its a riddle. How can he be one and many at the same time? He has a body and he is without a body at the same time. He is Sargun and nirgun -- with virtues and without virtues at the same time.

Nirgun aap sargun bhi ohee
kalaadhar jin sagli mohee

In the robe of sargun he is many. In the robe of nirgun he is one. He is one from many and many from one.

Sometime notice in the world -- everything is many. There is nothing that is one. You can bring oneness from the outside. But nature does not have oneness. So many of you are sitting here, everyone is different.

Mere Karte ik khen upaaya
Koye na kis jaisa upaayaa

There is no one like the other. Lakhs of humans are being born into this world everyday. They come with a new bodies, new voices, new walks, and amazingly new fingerprints. All of you have different fingerprints. Everyone has a different thumbprint. One thumb is not identical to any other thumb. There are currently 5 billion people on the earth. They all have different fingerprints. The one's that have gone in the past had different finger prints. The one's that are yet to come will have different finger prints. Different bodies, voices, walks, color ... there is no one like the other.

Leave apart humans. There is no mountain like another mountain. There is no river like another river. There is no one tree like another tree. Forget trees. There is no leaf like another leaf. Even when you see leaves from the same tree. There is no flower like another flower. If a tree has a thousand fruits, they are still all different. Don't have the misconception that there will be two fruits which are exactly alike -- in color, shape, body, weight, smell, taste. There is undersandable difference.

Whether we understand the difference is a wholly different issue. There is a difference nevertheless. God does not make one like another. God does not repeat. There is no repetition from God. He doesn't repeat anything. The day that God starts making something exactly the same, they you can assume that God has died. That is not possible.

There is no sun like another sun. There is no moon like another moon. And there is not one sun, there are millions of sun. Guru Arjan Dev has said:

Kai Kot Sassiyar Soor Nikhatra

There are many crores of Suns. And today science has agreement on this. There are 50 billion stars in the universe. (Now it is said there are over 100 billion stars just in the milky way galaxy - which means all humans could have have their own 10 stars, and there would still be more stars in just our own galaxy).

Everything has an age

Just like we have an age, suns have an age. Some suns are in their childhood, some are in their youth, some are old, and some are nearing their death. Guru Arjan Dev ji says,

Ghatant deepan, ghatant roopan
Ghatant rav sas nikhatra gaganan

The sun is decreasing, and one day it will end. The moon is diminishing and one day it will expire. The earth is diminishing and one day it will die. Humans are diminishing and one day they will die.
Everything increases, then decreases, then expires. These three rules work on everything. They apply on sun, moon and the stars too. And science opines that our sun has passed its youth and is getting old now. Every second the sun loses 40 lakh tonnes of mass.

Ghatant deepan, ghatant roopan
Ghatant rav sas nikhatra gaganan

They are all decreasing. One day they will all die. "Mahapralay" is the name of this magnificent death. The death of one universe. We are living under an aging sun. Even though its age might be millions or billions of years, there is an age. Everything increases, decreases and finishes.

There is no one sun like another sun. There is no moon like another moon. There is no human like another. Or a tree! There is no river like another river. God does not repeat.

When God starts repeating, that is the end of everything.

Sahib mera neet navaa

sadaa sadaa daataar

He is always new. Whatever comes from him is new. Lets not go into a tangent here, but millions of children are being born in the world. They all have a new body, new mind, new voice, new thinking, new eyes and features, new fingerprints. Every child is different.

The game of difference

Mere Kartay ik Khen rachaya

Koe na tis hi jeha upaaya

Everything is different. But in all this manyness there is a oneness.

Amaan hain Nidhaan hain

Anek hain phir Ek hain

You are one in many and many in one. Why has God done this? Guru Gobind Singh answers this in the following way:

Ek moorat anek darsan keen roop anek

khel khel akhel khelan ant ko phir ek

Manyness is a play of God. It is a drama. It is a game.

Only two really know how to play a game: kids or God.

Vismaad in Asa Ki Vaar

Paraphrasing Guru Nanak's Vismaad Pauri:

Vismaad in Children, Poets, and Saints:

The Pitfall of Ego:

Vismaad in Everyday Life:

Fostering Vismaad

My notes from Maskeen ji's katha:

SHIVPREET SINGH

Related Posts

Popular - 30 days

Blog Archive

Message

Twitter