On Ang 264 there is a panktee in Sukhmani Sahib - "laakh karoree ba(n)dhh n parai ||" Could someone explain it in clear terms according to viyakaran. I have read darpan and it is not clear to me as I don't see the connection between this and the next panktee. Perhaps someone could explain it better. Why can it not be "bandhan"? Which grammar rule is violated?

Bijla Singh jeeo,

The pankiti in question is as follows:

ਲਾਖ ਕਰੋਰੀ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਰੈ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਕਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਤ ਨਿਸਤਰੈ ॥

Through having Lakhs and Crores (of money), bandh (stopage) to trishna or hunger for more, does not occur. In other words by having more money, one just keeps wanting more and this hunger does not get satiated. On the other hand by japping Naam, one swims across this ocean.

Problems in doing the pad chhed as ਬੰਧੁਨ ਪਰੈ are as follows:

1) ਬੰਧੁਨ in Gurbani never occurs in the meanings of bandhan i.e. bonds. The aunkad is never under dhadha but should be under nanna in case of singular noun and without aunkad if it is plural.

2) The verb ਪਰੈ with dulaava in the end is for singular and not for plural noun. This word would have ended with sihaari on haaha if it had been for plural word bandhan.

Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh has written about this as follows:

ਅਨਿਕ ਪਾਠੀ ਇਸ ਦੁਪੰਗਤੀ ਵਾਲੇ ਵਾਕ ਦੀ ਪਹਿਲੀ ਪੰਗਤੀ ਵਿਚ ਆਏ ‘ਬੰਧੁ ਨ’ ਨਿਖੜਵੇਂ ਪਾਠ ਨੂੰ ਅਰਥਾਤ ‘ਬੰਧੁ’ ਤੇ ‘ਨ’ ਨੂੰ ਇਕਠਾ ‘ਬੰਧੁਨ’ ਕਰਕੇ ਉਠਾਉਂਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਕਈਆਂ ਗੁਟਕਿਆਂ ਵਿਚ ਭੀ ‘ਬੰਧੁਨ’ ਹੀ ਛਪਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ ਪਰ ‘ਬੰਧੁ’ ਪਦ ਦੇ ਧੱਦੇ ਨੂੰ ਜੋ ਔਂਕੜ ਹੈ ਇਹ ਸਾਫ ਨੰਨੇ ਨੂੰ ‘ਬੰਧੁ’ਨਾਲੋਂ ਨਿਖੇੜਦਾ ਹੈ। ਇਹ ਇਕੰਠਾ ਪਾਠ ਉਠਾਉਣ ਵਾਲੇ ‘ਬੰਧੁਨ’ ਪਦ ਨੂੰ ਬਹੁ ਬਚਨੀ ਨਾਂਵ ਸਮਝਦੇ ਹਨ ਅਤੇ ਅਰਥ ਕਰਦੇ ਹਨ ਕਿ ਲਖਾਂ ਕ੍ਰੋੜਾਂ ਦੰਮਾਂ ਦੀ ਖੱਟੀ ਵਾਲਿਆਂ ਧਨੀਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਬੰਨਣ ਪੈ ਜਾਂਦੇ ਹਨ। ‘ਪਰੈ’ ਜੋ ਕਿਰਿਆ ਵਾਚਕ ਪਦ ਹੈ ਸੋ ਇਕ ਬਚਨ ਵਰਤਮਾਨ ਕਾਲ ਹੈ। ਜੇ ਬਹੁ ਬਚਨ ਵਰਤਮਾਨ ਕਾਲ ਵਾਲਾ ਇਹ ਪਦ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਤਾਂ ‘ਪਰੈ’ ਦੇ ਥਾਉਂ ‘ਪਰਹਿ’ ਯਾ ‘ਪਰੇ’ ਇਕ ਲਾਮ ਵਾਲਾ ਪਦ ਆਉਂਦਾ। ਤਾਂਤੇ ‘ਪਰੈ’ ਇਕ ਬਚਨ ਕਿਰਿਆ ਇਕ ਬਚਨਕ ਕਰਮ (ਮਫਊਲ) ‘ਬੰਧੁ’ ਦੀ ਹੀ ਸੂਚਕ ਹੈ। ਧੱਦੇ ਨੂੰ ਔਂਕੜ ਵਾਲਾ ‘ਬੰਧੁ’ ਪਦ ਬੰਨ੍ਹ ਦਾ ਅਰਥ ਰਖਦਾ ਹੈ। ਸਾਰੀ ਦੁਤੁਕੀ ਦਾ ਸਪਸ਼ਟ ਭਾਵ ਅਰਥ ਬਣਦਾ ਹੈ-

ਲਖਾਂ ਕਰੋੜਾਂ ਦੀ ਮਾਇਕ ਖੱਟੀ ਨਾਲ ਤ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾ ਨੂੰ ਬੰਨ੍ਹ ਨਹੀਂ ਪੈਂਦਾ, ਸਗੋਂ ਤ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾ ਹੋਰ ਵਧਦੀ ਜਾਂਦੀ ਹੈ। ਕਰੋੜਾਂ ਧਨਵਾਨ ਭੀ ਤ੍ਰਿਸ਼ਨਾਲੂ ਹੀ ਹਨ। ਉਹਨਾਂ ਦਾ ਨਿਸਤਾਰਾ ਕਿਥੇ? ਨਿਸਤਾਰਾ ਤਾਂ ਨਾਮ ਜਪਣ ਕਰ ਕੇ ਹੀ ਨਾਮ ਅਭਿਆਸੀਆਂ ਨਾਮ ਜਪਨਾਸੀਆਂ (ਨਾਮ ਜਪਣ ਵਾਲਿਆਂ) ਦਾ ਹੀ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ। ਤਾਂ ਤੇ ਸਹੀ ਪਾਠ ‘ਬੰਧੁ ਨ’ ਵਾਲਾ ਨਿਖੜਵਾਂ ਪਾਠ ਹੀ ਹੈ। ਔਂਕੜ ਦੀ ਲਗ ਨੇ ਸਾਫ ਫੈਸਲਾ ਕਰ ਦਿਤਾ। ਇਸ ਦੁਤੁਕੀ ਦੇ ਭਾਵ ਦੀ ਪਰੋੜ੍ਹਤਾ ਅਗਲੌ ਦੁਪੰਗਤੀ ਭਲੀ ਪਰਕਾਰ ਕਰਦੀ ਹੈ। ਯਥਾ-

ਅਨਿਕ ਮਾਇਆ ਰੰਗ ਤਿਖ ਨ ਬੁਝਾਵੈ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਤ ਆਘਾਵੈ॥ (264)

Baani is agam agaadh bodh. May Guru Sahib pardon our mistakes while doing Gurbani vichaar.

Kulbir Singh



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/17/2008 06:38PM by admin.

I couldn't read Bhai Sahib's text. Maybe you could post it in unicode. I understand the viyakaran now. I keep reading the meanings over and over but I do not see how the two lines fit together. Transition from one panktee to the other doesn't make sense to me because granted that more money will not satisfy the person but how is that related to getting muktee? If the meanings of last panktee had been like "By japping naam, hunger goes away and one gets satisfied" it would make more sense. Or "Lakh and Cror cannot buy one muktee, only naam can". I will try to have another go at it after some time when my mind is free. Thanks for explaining.

In katha of Sukhmani Sahib , Giani Thakur Singh ji touched the same exact issue.
He said that Sant Harnam Singh ji Rampur Khede wale , asked Guru Arjan Dev ji if He had written Bandhan or Bandh Na , Guru ji said that he has written Bandhan Pare but if sikhs recite bandh na then that is also fine.

Makes sense now. I was able to read Bhai Sahib's text. Do you have a reference "toronto_86"?

Giani Thakur Singh seems to have many such anecdotes. Some of them are humorous, and some ridiculous.

This one in particular makes no sense. Why would Guru Sahib state it is OK to ready both ways ? Does that mean we can padched Gurbani according to our OWN budhi ?

niranjan singh ,

Guru Ji emphasized that He has written Bandhan , so sikhs should recite Bandhan which makes sense according to the next pankti.
Lakhs of boundings are cut by reciting the Naam of God.

but if sikhs due to ignorance recite it bandh na , then they are not going to be penalised for it. Thats what Sant Harnam Singh ji meant.

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh

Khalsa jio,

ਲਾਖ ਕਰੋਰੀ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਰੈ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਕਾ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਤ ਨਿਸਤਰੈ ॥

ਬੰਧੁ ਨ is 100% right padd ched. Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh's explanation is also correct. But as some ਕਥੋਗੜ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਜੀ created doubt here so let's decipher his doubt by going back to Jagat jot GURU SAHIB ji. The following tuks which have similar essence as those tuks of sri Sukhmani Sahib are:

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਮੁਕਤੋ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਾਇ ॥
ਸਬਦੁ ਬੀਚਾਰਿ ਛੁਟੈ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਇ ॥੨॥ (ਗਉੜੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੧ ॥) Panna 152

Now if ਬੰਧੁ ਨ is read together ਬੰਧੁਨ then meaning would be completely contradicting or against to ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਮੁਕਤੋ but Gurbani never contradicts itself from Ik Oankaar to Nanak Naam Milay Ta(n) Jiva(n) then why would it contradict just within a same tuk?. So this tuk also clarifies ਲਾਖ ਕਰੋਰੀ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਰੈ.

Guru Mehar Karay

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh

Khalsaspirit,

the tuk you posted had nothing to do with this discussion. No one has ever said bandh and na can't be separate; obviously they can. Please don't try boosting you point of view with erroneous premises.

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh

gsingh jio,

"No one has ever said bandh and na can't be separate; obviously they can"

Good. Atleast you acknowleged the correct paath is ਬੰਧੁ ਨ not ਬੰਧੁਨ. But gsingh jio as ਕਥੋਗੜ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਜੀ said it can be ਬੰਧੁਨ too so we went to Guru Sahib to ask about this then Guru Sahib gave us those two tuks ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਮੁਕਤੋ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਾਇ ॥ ਸਬਦੁ ਬੀਚਾਰਿ ਛੁਟੈ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਇ ॥੨॥ and Guru Sahib said as in these tuks ਬੰਧੁ ਨ is correct path similarly the correct paath is ਲਾਖ ਕਰੋਰੀ ਬੰਧੁ ਨ ਪਰੈ ॥ then we asked Guru Sahib jee how you written those words? then Guru Sahib said they had not written ਬੰਧੁਨ nor ਬੰਧੁ ਨ what they have written is ਲਾਖਕਰੋਰੀਬੰਧੁਨਪਰੈ ॥ and ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿਮੁਕਤੋਬੰਧੁਨਪਾਇ ॥ in continues words. So, we accepted the Guru Sahib's hukam and posted here. Now if some one thinks those are not revelent then it's some one's own mat what we can do?

Guru Mehar Karay

Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2008 01:36PM by admin.

No, I did not acknowledge anything, nor have I said what I believe to be the correct paath. Nor do I honestly believe my opinion on such matters to be valuable in comparision to the other, much more learned Singhs on the forum. My only point was that your means of dicussion reminds me of the last time I saw two bibian arguing with eachother...once they ran out of meaningful, thoughtful things to say, they try using sianipaa(n) and clever tricks to try to show themselves as the victor. If Sikhs can't discuss bani over the internet without resorting to name calling and clever tricks, it just goes to show the state of so-called Gursikhs.

challo, maharaj kirpa karan.