Did Nanak name any scripture as "Granth"

[paarsurrey]

Did Nanak name any scripture as "Granth", please?

I understand from what I have read so far from Granth* that Nanak did not name any scripture as "Granth" in a clear, unequivocal, unambiguous and straightforward manner, in Granth .
If yes, please quote Nanak's words from Granth?
Right, please?
Thread open to everybody of religion or no-religion, please.

Regards

___________
*I am at page 1031 of 1430 of Granth .

 

[shunyadragon]

Did Nanak name any scripture as "Granth", please?

I understand from what I have read so far from Granth* that Nanak did not name any scripture as "Granth" in a clear, unequivocal, unambiguous and straightforward manner, in Granth .
If yes, please quote Nanak's words from Granth?
Right, please?
Thread open to everybody of religion or no-religion, please.

Regards

___________
*I am at page 1031 of 1430 of Granth .

I am unfamiliar with the Granth. Please clarify. Are you referring to the founder of Sikhism and the writings.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Granth in Indian languages means a book. The Sikh book, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, was compiled during the time of the fifth Sikh guru, Sri Guru Arjan Dev ji in 1604. It contained hymns by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji and other gurus, 13 Hindu and 2 Muslim saints. The later gurus also added their hymns. The 10th Guru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji did not appoint any successor to himself and asked the Sikhs to follow what was there in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Just as the other religions have their sacred books, the Sikhs also have one. I do not understand why Paarsurrey has started this thread and what he wants to say. If he wants to study Guru Nanak's hymns, then he can find a nice English translation here: http://www.khalsadarbar.com/PDFs/SriGuruGranthSahibJiDarpanEnglish.pdf

 

[paarsurrey]

I am unfamiliar with the Granth. Please clarify. Are you referring to the founder of Sikhism and the writings.

Nanak did no claim, I understand, to be founder of any religion in Granth- the Sikhism scripture which has Nanak's words in it as they claim.
Does one want to be familiar with Granth which is in Punjabi language?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Granth in Indian languages means a book. The Sikh book, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, was compiled during the time of the fifth Sikh guru, Sri Guru Arjan Dev ji in 1604. It contained hymns by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji and other gurus, 13 Hindu and 2 Muslim saints. The later gurus also added their hymns. The 10th Guru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji did not appoint any successor to himself and asked the Sikhs to follow what was there in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Just as the other religions have their sacred books, the Sikhs also have one. I do not understand why Paarsurrey has started this thread and what he wants to say. If he wants to study Guru Nanak's hymns, then he can find a nice English translation here: http://www.khalsadarbar.com/PDFs/SriGuruGranthSahibJiDarpanEnglish.pdf

I am already reading from Nanak's words in Granth translated by Singh Sahib Sant Singh Khalsa, MD.
I am at Page 1031 of 1430 of Granth, reading only Nanak's words from it. I understand from what I have read so far, that neither Nanak himself claim to be a guru nor he foretold in his own words in Granth of any successors of him who would be gurus. Nanak did not authorize them in a clear, unequivocal, unambiguous and straightforward manner, to compile or write in his name any scripture on his behalf using his name Nanak in their verses. Right, please?
If yes, then please quote from Nanak's words from Granth, please.
Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Granth in Indian languages means a book. The Sikh book, Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, was compiled during the time of the fifth Sikh guru, Sri Guru Arjan Dev ji in 1604. It contained hymns by Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji and other gurus, 13 Hindu and 2 Muslim saints. The later gurus also added their hymns. The 10th Guru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji did not appoint any successor to himself and asked the Sikhs to follow what was there in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Just as the other religions have their sacred books, the Sikhs also have one. I do not understand why Paarsurrey has started this thread and what he wants to say. If he wants to study Guru Nanak's hymns, then he can find a nice English translation here: http://www.khalsadarbar.com/PDFs/SriGuruGranthSahibJiDarpanEnglish.pdf

I have checked from Nanak's words in the above translation. I understand that Nanak did not claim to have written any "Book" or any "Granth", please.
If yes, then please quote from Nanak's words in the Granth, please.
Right, please?

Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

I understand from what I have read so far, that neither Nanak himself claim to be a guru nor he foretold in his own words in Granth of any successors of him who would be gurus. Nanak did not authorize them in a clear, unequivocal, unambiguous and straightforward manner, to compile or write in his name any scripture on his behalf using his name Nanak in their verses. Right, please?

As I have already mentioned somewhere, claiming to be something is considered very egoistic in Hinduism. Hindu saints never do that. In Nanak's time and later also, Sikhism was but a part of Hinduism, a sect. Panth - way, Mata - opinion. Even now, for millions of Hindus, Punjabis and Sindhis, Guru Nanak is the only Guru. The five features that are considered necessary for Sikhs today were adopted in the time of the 10th Guru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji. Yeah, Guru Nanak chose Bhai Lehna to lead the Sikh congregation after him. He was named Guru Angad (the steadfast one). Sure, Guru Nanak did not know that his group will blossom as Sikhs or that his hymns will become a sacred book for Sikhs. That is OK. So, what is your problem? Unfortunately, I have not been able to understand that.

We do not have prophets / sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis sent by a God or Allah on a mission. Nanak's God (which he mentioned as Ek Onkar) was very different from the Abrahamic concept of God or Allah. Nanak was a monist. Do not compare Sikhism or any Indian religion to Abrahamic religion. The confusion that you are facing is because of that.

 

[danieldemol]

So, what is your problem? Unfortunately, I have not been able to understand that.

It would be difficult to say without @paarsurrey spelling it out, however dare I speculate that what he is alluding to is the Ahmadiyya belief that Nanak was nothing more than a Sufi Muslim, a view which they attempt to prove by referring to the writings on one of Nanak’s coats.

Having said that, I have heard a rumour that the coat in question was the gift of a Sufi Muslim to Nanak, and thus the handwriting on it was not Nanak’s.

If the rumour is true then the Ahmadiyya claim is a flimsy one.

Besides it raises the questions;
1. If Nanak did not give a set of teachings why did he appoint a successor
2. If Nanak was a Muslim why did he choose a non-Muslim successor.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nanak sure gave teaching. That is what attracted people to him. That is what his hymns are (like Hindus have Sanskrit verses of wisdom). He had a group of followers. So he chose the best of his pupils and not his sons to lead the congregation. Of course, his elder son formed his own group and that goes on with the name of 'Udaseen Akhara'. Udaseen means 'uninterested'. That is taken as a part of Hinduism.
Nanak, Kabir cannot be contained in the bounds of religion. They were for all. Nanak, sure was born in a Hindu family. Kabir is supposed to have been an orphan raised by a Muslim weaver family. They are important even without any religion. The fourth Guru, Guru Ram Das declared that he was neither a Hindu nor a Muslim. Bahais are no different from Ahmadiyyas, that is why you ask for religion.
We have a saying in Hindi:
"Jati na poochho sadhu ki, poochh lijiye gyan;
mole karo talwar ka, padi rehan do myan"
(Don't ask a renunciate about his caste, check his knowledge;
negotiate cost of the sword, don't get fixated on the scabbard).

 

[paarsurrey]

Nanak sure gave teaching. That is what attracted people to him. That is what his hymns are (like Hindus have Sanskrit verses of wisdom). He had a group of followers. So he chose the best of his pupils and not his sons to lead the congregation. Of course, his elder son formed his own group and that goes on with the name of 'Udaseen Akhara'. Udaseen means 'uninterested'. That is taken as a part of Hinduism.
Nanak, Kabir cannot be contained in the bounds of religion. They were for all. Nanak, sure was born in a Hindu family. Kabir is supposed to have been an orphan raised by a Muslim weaver family. They are important even without any religion. The fourth Guru, Guru Ram Das declared that he was neither a Hindu nor a Muslim. Bahais are no different from Ahmadiyyas, that is why you ask for religion.
We have a saying in India, "Jati na poochho sadhu ki, poochh lijiye gyan" (Don't ask a renunciate about his caste, check his knowledge).

"So he chose the best of his pupils and not his sons to lead the congregation."

This is no mentioned by Nanak in his own words in Granth. Right, please?
If yes, then please quote from Nabak from Granth. Right, please?
Anybody, please

Regards

 

[danieldemol]

Bahais are no different from Ahmadiyyas, that is why you ask for religion.

1. I’m not a Baha’i
2. I did not ask for religion

 

[danieldemol]

@paarsurrey Why does everything Nanak ever said or did have to be contained in Granth?

And is it not hypocritical to act as though if it is not in Granth, Nanak never said it, all the while insisting he was a Muslim, which to my knowledge he also never said in Granth?

 

[paarsurrey]

@paarsurrey Why does everything Nanak ever said or did have to be contained in Granth?

And is it not hypocritical to act as though if it is not in Granth, Nanak never said it, all the while insisting he was a Muslim, which to my knowledge he also never said in Granth?

Does one want to say that Sikhism has got nothing to do with Nanak, please?
or
Sikhism was not founded by Nanak, please?
Right, please?

Regards

 

[danieldemol]

Does one want to say that Sikhism has got nothing to do with Nanak, please?
or
Sikhism was not founded by Nanak, please?
Right, please?

Regards

No right please?

 

[Aupmanyav]

We have a saying in Hindi (the full saying):
"Jati na poochho sadhu ki, poochh lijiye gyan;
mole karo talwar ka, padi rehan do myan"
(Don't ask a renunciate about his caste, check his knowledge;
negotiate the cost of sword, don't get fixated on the scabbard).

* Negotiate for what is important and not for what is not.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This is no mentioned by Nanak in his own words in Granth. Right, please?

Choosing a person is not a hymn (that is why it is not in the book), it is a historical fact. Guru Angad led the Sikh congregation from 1539 to 1552. He chose Guru Amar Das instead of his son to lead the congregation after he passing. Yeah, I know, Ahmadiyyas have a dynastic succession - father to son. So, what is your problem?

 

[Aupmanyav]

1. I’m not a Baha’i
2. I did not ask for religion

Yeah, I understand that, but sometimes make a mistake. Kindly excuse me.

 

[Aupmanyav]

@paarsurrey Why does everything Nanak ever said or did have to be contained in Granth?
And is it not hypocritical to act as though if it is not in Granth, Nanak never said it, all the while insisting he was a Muslim, which to my knowledge he also never said in Granth?

Guru Nanak did not even know that his hymns will turn into a scripture.

 

[paarsurrey]

As I have already mentioned somewhere, claiming to be something is considered very egoistic in Hinduism. Hindu saints never do that. In Nanak's time and later also, Sikhism was but a part of Hinduism, a sect. Panth - way, Mata - opinion. Even now, for millions of Hindus, Punjabis and Sindhis, Guru Nanak is the only Guru. The five features that are considered necessary for Sikhs today were adopted in the time of the 10th Guru, Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji. Yeah, Guru Nanak chose Bhai Lehna to lead the Sikh congregation after him. He was named Guru Angad (the steadfast one). Sure, Guru Nanak did not know that his group will blossom as Sikhs or that his hymns will become a sacred book for Sikhs. That is OK. So, what is your problem? Unfortunately, I have not been able to understand that.

We do not have prophets / sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis sent by a God or Allah on a mission. Nanak's God (which he mentioned as Ek Onkar) was very different from the Abrahamic concept of God or Allah. Nanak was a monist. Do not compare Sikhism or any Indian religion to Abrahamic religion. The confusion that you are facing is because of that.

"Sure, Guru Nanak did not know that his group will blossom as Sikhs or that his hymns will become a sacred book for Sikhs. That is OK."

So, as I understand, one confirms my point that the present Sikhism has no roots and foundation in the hymns of Nanak in Granth. Right, please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It would be difficult to say without @paarsurrey spelling it out, however dare I speculate that what he is alluding to is the Ahmadiyya belief that Nanak was nothing more than a Sufi Muslim, a view which they attempt to prove by referring to the writings on one of Nanak’s coats.

Having said that, I have heard a rumour that the coat in question was the gift of a Sufi Muslim to Nanak, and thus the handwriting on it was not Nanak’s.

If the rumour is true then the Ahmadiyya claim is a flimsy one.

Besides it raises the questions;
1. If Nanak did not give a set of teachings why did he appoint a successor
2. If Nanak was a Muslim why did he choose a non-Muslim successor.

"Besides it raises the questions;
1. If Nanak did not give a set of teachings why did he appoint a successor
2. If Nanak was a Muslim why did he choose a non-Muslim successor.
"

There is nothing in the hymns of Nanak as given in Granth:

1. that Nanak was founding any new religion
2. or that Nanak needed any religious successor-ship after him
3. Nanak did not choose anybody as his religious successor.

Angad , I understand,self-appointed himself as "guru", he was not chosen by Nanak as "guru" after him, there is nothing in the hymns of Nanak as given in Granth that he was chosen by Nanak.
If yes, then please quote from Nanak. Right, please?
Anybody, please

Regards