TO ARMS

Why Good Men Must Fight

The Art Of Denial:

Why does evil afflict good men? This is a critical question that has dumbfounded humans since the dawn of reason. If one does good then why does evil severely impact them? Why does evil even target them initially? The religious world has produced some ludicrously fascinating explanations.

(a) An omnipotent, omnipresent God has endowed man with freewill ergo man’s evil. But, contradictorily, this omnipotent and omnipresent God has furnished man with the capacity for evil but evil (somehow) is punishment for man’s sins.

(b) Evil is God’s instrument for man’s moral perfection. But God’s clock seems turned off as evil may never be punished. Sanataanism outmanoeuvres this by arguing for a cyclical existence with sweet platitudes of justice in some next life but with no furnishable rationale.

(c) Evil is a part of divine rationale and God works in mysterious ways. What more can we say?

The religious hypothesis (unproven=hypothesis) is highly convoluted given that it is presupposed God is all-powerful and good and God’s presence negates evil ergo the above arguments. But despite their onerous claims, blind faith and religion incite more questions with their theories than they answer. The art of denial while honed to an artform by the faithful remains just that, simple denial.

Theodicy:

Judaism’s inability to reconcile the existence of good and evil catalysed in the inception of theodicy or the justification of God. You read that right, the dying vestiges of the Hellenistic-Roman world rejuvenated themselves enough to compel Jewish intellectuals to furnish a new field of study, the vindication of Yahweh. It proved counterproductive, however, as theodicy’s arguments reawakened the long-buried elucidations of Socrates and Epicurus regarding the co-existence of morality and immorality. With Judaism failing, Christianity took up the mantle of vindication. Unable to defend their faith, Christian sophists resorted to the tale of Job.

A Good Fool:

Job’s existence is moot. His joyless tale underscores man’s role as a pawn among two opposing forces. God is the embodiment of good but there is a rival force that epitomises evil, Satan. The Jewish backlash was swift with many Judaic intellectuals arguing against the existence of Job and questioning the credibility of his tale considering that not only does God seemingly allow the proliferation of evil but is also its central source.

In the tale, Job is a prosperous farmer with ten children who resides in Ur. God brings him to Satan’s attention goading the alleged prince of evil that Job would never forfeit his faith. Satan takes the bait striking down Job’s children as a result, depleting his prosperity, and finally mutilating him physically. A broken Job sits atop garbage mounds picking at his puss-filled sores and crying for God who finally speaks with him revealing that he baited Satan into torturing him.

Symbolising man’s role as a pawn (whether willing or unwilling) Job worships God. The original condition being Satan could not kill Job, the prince of evil departs and God restores Job’s fortunes. Intriguingly enough, the original ten children are not resurrected indicating that ressurection had not yet entered Judaic considerations when the tale was written.

The tale of the good fool Job proved (and still proves) troublesome for its upholders. An omnipotent, omnipresent God who is supposedly free of evil provokes evil into afflicting Job. Naturally the aforementioned argument (b) was brought to the fore with any doubters burnt at the stake. The likes of Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Irenaeus of Lyon, and John Chrysostom tied themselves into knots explaining the supposed morality of God over testing (read torturing) Job.

The Impracticality Of Arguments:

The biblical revelation undeniable, Irenaeus contended that the tale of Job underscored God’s morality as evil sanctifies man and brings him closer to God disallowing God to be blamed for evil. Let us rephrase, pain strengthens our bodies and mind and we should thank our tormentors disallowing them from being punished for their inhumanity. Would this work in real life? Outside consensual sadomasochism, no.

Chrysostom swung in to defend Irenaeus allegorising God as a physician contending that God was only healing one of evil through evil and if a physician remained a physician even if a patient died then so should God and his morality. He failed to allegorize a physician creating disease akin to God creating evil and then arguing that he was only strengthening the immune system and let dead patients be bygones.

Had they lived into the 21st century, Irenaeus would have altered tact considering that his vindication of his deity was nothing new while Chrysostom would have worked day and night to decolonise the medical system to veil the loopholes in his defense. The impracticality of blind faith arguments are evident from both their words. Man is a pawn with some modicum of freewill but God encourages evil to sanctify mankind while emphasizing its eradication. Mysterious ways indeed.

Diogenes The Second:

Hearkening back to the last sunset of the once mighty Greeks, one is reminded of a particular principle conceived of by Diogenes the second. The fracturing of Macedonia post-Alexander allowed Rome to strangle Greek military might until it levied a heavy fine on Athens. As a last-ditch effort, Athens dispatched its philosophers to argue its case in the Roman senate. Accompanying the embassy was the Stoic radical Diogenes the second.

Captivating the senate, Diogenes not only succeeded in liberating Athens from the fine but converted many eminent Romans to the Stoic cause by rooting his teachings in their schools. Of particular note is his foremost principle: an argument, a belief, a philosophy, a rationale should not appeal to any otherworldly authority but remain firmly entrenched in reality as people desire real-life practicality for real-life struggles. All else is temporary.

When applying this principle to the modern religious world it is observable that besides unbroken ground (post-death etc) rationale triumphs over religion considering that modern global interconnectedness exposes the loopholes of blind faith. Imagine the looks on the faces of Job’s champions considering that for every one narrative of a prayer fulfilled they would boldly relate, their audience would hold up examples of thousands more unfulfilled on their devices.

Are religions that denounce the human intellect and rationale truly practical? Do they provide pragmatic solutions for life’s daily struggles or do they provide an illusion of a second life, post-death, to invoke temporary solace and a false hope? Does theodicy and the like truly facilitate us with the means of confronting evil? Do they allow us to effectively curtail man’s ignorance from whence this evil arises or conveniently distract us with laughable tales?

The Ancients:

Epicurus, Plato, Socrates, and thousands more grappled with the complexity of divinity allowing good and evil. Among the aforementioned arguments, argument a proved troublesome for believers considering God furnished evil and utilizes it as a tool but contradictorily argues for its effacement. Do those who commit evil become divine agents of retribution and are free from the consequences? Who decides? Where does practicality fit into this?

Argument b proved equally contradictory as it made good the source of the bad intertwining the two and negating the victory of one over the other. This was further convoluted by theodicy. On the subcontinent, Sanataanism arising from the Vedas imposed the view that life was cyclical and justice if absent in this life would be available on the next. However, would the agent of this justice be free from the fruits of their action in the next considering the world was false?

The ancient philosophers argued for an alternative view arguing that one not concern themselves with musing over the existence or non-existence of the Gods. If they existed, their heavenly nature barred them from comprehending the daily struggles of man. If they were non-existent, man’s daily struggles continued unabated. Rather, man was to focus on harmonising his innate nature with reality to leave an influential legacy behind him when he entered the abyss.

One sees this with Panaetius (c.185 BC-c.109 BC), the Roman savant. Identifying four elements constituting a man:

1.) The universal duties of all mankind,

2.) The duties specific for our daimon or personal being,

3.) The duties assigned by birth and heritage,

4.) The duties arising from our actions,

he argued for synchronising them with ethicality and reality recognising that no two situations may be similar for one individual and that negating ethicality for reality or vice versa would compel evil. Establishing the Scipionic Circle as a covert reformatory body, Panaetius infiltrated his thoughts among Rome’s highest echelons lending flesh to his vision. In his eyes, evil was as natural as good given man’s capability for both and the wise man was a combative Pankratist.

The Arena Of Life:

The combative arts have often drawn parallels with human life considering the effort put into both to better oneself and better the outcomes of one’s actions. It takes a special breed of the mentally strong to enter the arena and battle for dominance in the ring against complete strangers who may be their next brothers-in-arms. The Guru Granth incorporates Punjab’s now long-lost famed tradition of combative grappling when referring to the battles of life:

ਹਉ ਗੋਸਾਈ ਦਾ ਪਹਿਲਵਾਨੜਾ ॥ ਮੈ ਗੁਰ ਮਿਲਿ ਉਚ ਦੁਮਾਲੜਾ ॥ ਸਭ ਹੋਈ ਛਿੰਝ ਇਕਠੀਆ ਦਯੁ ਬੈਠਾ ਵੇਖੈ ਆਪਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੧੭॥ ਵਾਤ ਵਜਨਿ ਟੰਮਕ ਭੇਰੀਆ ॥ ਮਲ ਲਥੇ ਲੈਦੇ ਫੇਰੀਆ ॥ ਨਿਹਤੇ ਪੰਜਿ ਜੁਆਨ ਮੈ ਗੁਰ ਥਾਪੀ ਦਿਤੀ ਕੰਡਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੧੮॥ ਸਭ ਇਕਠੇ ਹੋਇ ਆਇਆ ॥ ਘਰਿ ਜਾਸਨਿ ਵਾਟ ਵਟਾਇਆ ॥ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਲਾਹਾ ਲੈ ਗਏ ਮਨਮੁਖ ਚਲੇ ਮੂਲੁ ਗਵਾਇ ਜੀਉ ॥੧੯॥ ਤੂੰ ਵਰਨਾ ਚਿਹਨਾ ਬਾਹਰਾ ॥ ਹਰਿ ਦਿਸਹਿ ਹਾਜਰੁ ਜਾਹਰਾ ॥ ਸੁਣਿ ਸੁਣਿ ਤੁਝੈ ਧਿਆਇਦੇ ਤੇਰੇ ਭਗਤ ਰਤੇ ਗੁਣਤਾਸੁ ਜੀਉ ॥੨੦॥ ਮੈ ਜੁਗਿ ਜੁਗਿ ਦਯੈ ਸੇਵੜੀ ॥ ਗੁਰਿ ਕਟੀ ਮਿਹਡੀ ਜੇਵੜੀ ॥ ਹਉ ਬਾਹੁੜਿ ਛਿੰਝ ਨ ਨਚਊ ਨਾਨਕ ਅਉਸਰੁ ਲਧਾ ਭਾਲਿ ਜੀਉ ॥੨੧॥੨॥੨੯॥

“I am my Maker’s wrestler. My Guru (the truth) has tied a dumalla (war turban) upon my head as a sign of honor. The spectators have congregated in the wrestling pit to witness my spectacles as well as my Maker. The bells chime; the drums roar and the trumpets blare aloud. The wrestlers assemble and encircle me. The Guru pats me on my back and I enter the fray. I render my five challengers obsolete and throw them to the ground. Spectators and wrestlers alike have gathered in the arena but now take different routes out. The Gurmukhs win their bets and the Manmukhs lose…”

-Guru Granth, 74.

The five vices in question are hubris, lust, resentment, obsession, and fear that disbalance man’s innate nature and capability for rendering good making him a beast:

ਨਰੂ ਮਰੈ ਨਰੁ ਕਾਮਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ॥ ਪਸੂ ਮਰੈ ਦਸ ਕਾਜ ਸਵਾਰੈ ॥੧॥

ਅਪਨੇ ਕਰਮ ਕੀ ਗਤਿ ਮੈ ਕਿਆ ਜਾਨਉ ॥ ਮੈ ਕਿਆ ਜਾਨਉ ਬਾਬਾ ਰੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

ਹਾਡ ਜਲੇ ਜੈਸੇ ਲਕਰੀ ਕਾ ਤੂਲਾ ॥ ਕੇਸ ਜਲੇ ਜੈਸੇ ਘਾਸ ਕਾ ਪੂਲਾ ॥੨॥

ਕਹੁ ਕਬੀਰ ਤਬ ਹੀ ਨਰੁ ਜਾਗੈ ॥ ਜਮ ਕਾ ਡੰਡੁ ਮੂੰਡ ਮਹਿ ਲਾਗੈ ॥੩॥੨॥

“What do I know of my acts? What do I learn from their consequences? When the human within (conscience) dies then an individual becomes obsolete. However, if the animal within (individuation) dies then the individual is useful for ten purposes and more. In the end, all our bones will perish like logs in flame. Our hairs will wither away like hay in wind. Kabir askes the reader, will you only awaken then when death knocks at your door?”

-Guru Granth, 870.

Panaetius similarly referenced the combative grappling of his day, the savage Pankration that was eventually banned by Christian fundamentalists. The art had commenced in Greece and been introduced to Punjab during the Alexandrian invasions. It had survived well into Rome albeit with heavy regulation censoring its more underhanded tactics. Panaetius often utilised it as an example for life. To paraphrase Aulus Gellius,

“Panaetius often advised that good men who aid others and themselves must see to their security for their nature opens them to loss of life or limb at the hands of detractors. One must always be alert and ready in both body and mind to defend themselves just like the pancratist atheletes. Just as the pancratists transform their body into a fortress, so should the wise man. Just as the pancratists are always prepared to ward off blows, roll with blows, tolerate blows, and deal their own teeth-shattering blows so must the wise man…the wise man must be prepared in both body and mind to ward off the attempts of the wicked least he be caught unawares by a sudden onslaught.”

-Aulus Gellius, On Panaetius.

One can detect an undercurrent of sagacious advise in the words of both the Guru Granth and Panaetius. Evil exists and will target its detractors. Contrary to relying on the deus ex machina of divine intervention, one must see to their own security to do good for evildoers: nullifying them for the greater benefit of one’s own mission and vision.

Sikhi:

The problem of evil for the Gurus did not arise from the Creator having a de-facto partner like Satan. Man was born with the capability of choice between the preordained parameters of reality netting the fruits of both moral and immoral actions. The Creator had fashioned him as an extension of himself with some limitations to awaken his capacity for enlightenment and tap into his infinite potential. So from where did evil arise?

The Creator fashioned man as an equal stakeholder in contributing to Creation. The capability for both good and necessary cruelty for the greater good was installed within him. The Creator reserved the right to know the outcomes of all courses of action man would select but left the decision-making to man himself ordaining he reaped what he sowed.

ਆਪੇ ਬੀਜਿ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਖਾਹੁ ॥

“What you sow, so will you reap.”

-Guru Granth, 4.

Overstepping the barriers of necessity in ignorance, man has brought into being the most vile of evils but simultaneously only man can liberate himself from evil by traversing the path of virtue intended for him by his Maker. The responsibility denied by theodicy and the like, while contradictorily blaming man for the first transgression, is more conspicuous in Sikhi. Liberty from both vice and tyranny are responsibilities entrusted to the Maker’s most magnificent Creation: Man.

If man is his own worst tyrant but also his own greatest liberator than how to make him realise his potential? The Guru Granth espouses,

ਆਸਾ ਭਰਮ ਬਿਕਾਰ ਮੋਹ ਇਨ ਮਹਿ ਲੋਭਾਨਾ ॥

ਝੂਠੁ ਸਮਗ੍ਰੀ ਮਨਿ ਵਸੀ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਨ ਜਾਨਾ ॥੨॥

“Placing his hope in delusions, the mortal is mired in temptations. False necessities permeate his mind and he recognises not his Maker.”

-Guru Granth, 815.

How does one recognise the Maker?

ਹਰਿ ਸੰਗਿ ਸਹਾਈ ਮਹਾ ਮੀਤੁ ਤਿਸ ਸਿਉ ਤੇਰਾ ਭੇਦੁ ॥

ਬੀਧਾ ਪੰਚ ਬਟਵਾਰਈ ਉਪਜਿਓ ਮਹਾ ਖੇਦੁ ॥੩॥

“Your Maker pervades everywhere and is your best companion but you ignore this fact. You invite the five depravities and then are tormented as a result.”

-Ibid.

The Gurus disagree with the Stoics on the issue of divine existence reinforcing faith in a supreme Creator but one who wishes to observe man’s success in life achieved by his own hands. This necessitates an empirical, fact-based belief rather than faith in the entirely abstract.

ਆਪੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਆਪੁ ਸਾਜਿਓ ਆਪੀਨ੍ਹ੍ਹੈ ਰਚਿਓ ਨਾਉ ॥

ਦੁਯੀ ਕੁਦਰਤਿ ਸਾਜੀਐ ਕਰਿ ਆਸਣੁ ਡਿਠੋ ਚਾਉ ॥

“Having decided upon your own intent you installed your own divine wisdom. Secondly you established this Creation and with joy reside within it.”

-Guru Granth, 463.

The path to overcoming evil is by restraining the base human mind and restraining the five vices by transforming them into five virtues. This is easier said than done but Sikh history bears witness to its possibility. However once achieved, this state invites its own fair share of evil from those who cannot tolerate the flame of perfectness among them. It then becomes imperative for the perfect-minded to resort to force to liquidate evil.

ਕਥਾ ਪੁਰਾਤਨ ਇਉ ਸੁਣੀ ਭਗਤਨ ਕੀ ਬਾਨੀ ॥

ਸਗਲ ਦੁਸਟ ਖੰਡ ਖੰਡ ਕੀਏ ਜਨ ਲੀਏ ਮਾਨੀ ॥੩॥

“I have heard the same ancient discourse from all the teachings of the (divine) adherents. All foes have been shredded to bits for which your followers are honored.”

-Guru Granth, 815.

To borrow Panaetius’s term, in Sikhi the wise man is a warrior annihilating the foe that impedes the flow of Creation by imposing illusory perspectives on the world. This formed the core of the sixth Guru’s address to the Sikhs upon being officiated as the sixth heir to Guru Nanak when he called his people to arms pledging retribution upon the Islamic-Sanataan combine. When man violates his intellect in the pursuit of evil, it is obligatory on his fellows to correct him.

Good Men Do Not Fight For Others:

The older generation of Sikhs known colloquially as Boomers attempt to embed western liberal secularism within the Sikh dynamic by claiming Sikhs are dutybound to fight and die for everyone. The irony here is that after the 1984 Sikh genocide, Hindus were excluded from everyone and currently any youth questioning their imbecility is treated similarly. The Gurus never enjoined Sikhs to fight for others emphasizing all victims war for their own liberty.

There is a keen misinterpretation of the tenth Guru’s political injunctions to argue Sikhs compulsively defend the meek and the poor. The caveat conveniently omitted is that in their own state the Sikhs defend the meek and the poor contributing to the upkeep of the Khalsa’s political model. Not otherwise as liberty is the responsibility of each and every human individual and by not warring for their own freedom, the enslaved violate divine precepts.

Good men do not fight for others. They inspire them to fight for themselves. Guru Hargobind’s injunctions to the Punjabi peasantry was to arm itself. When the low castes approached Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur begging for an entourage of Sikhs to protect them, the Guru detained them in his dungeons. He then forced all of them to live the barracks-lifestyle of his Khalsa warriors breaking them both in body and spirit causing them to allege he was a tyrant.

What seemed tyranny to the low castes was deemed as a harshly fair treatment by onlookers. The Guru commanded them to shut their mouths and heed his words. His Khalsa went without any financial recompense. It warred day and night to realise its political model. It was comprised of high castes, low castes, the rich, the poor, all united by Guru Nanak’s continuing war against religiopolitical tyranny. What right did the low castes have to expect it to sacrifice itself for them?

Good men do not die for others but influence them to die for their own liberty. Good men, wise men, sagacious men-they well know that their vision is correct and none other can be allowed to dilute it. If they fight for others, they demand total submission to themselves. Otherwise, they leave the enslaved to remain slaves. Liberty is a responsibility and what right do we have of others to die for us if we are not prepared to die for our own selves?

To Arms:

The clarion call of Guru Nanak to forego blind faith and discard the base religions reverberated throughout Punjab when Banda Singh armed the peasants to fight their own wars. Upon entering modern-day Haryana he liberated villagers from predatory bandits. The villagers profusely thanked him expecting him to permanently defend them. Banda had them beaten and then armed. The cowards ran off, the valorous remained behind to die for their freedom.

Evil exists, but the Sikh is expected to confront it head-on whenever it attacks him. Whether psychologically or physically, the Gurus expect their Sikhs to gain the upper-hand. Evil emanates from man’s abuse of his own intellectual privileges. The consequences are to be delivered by other men. This is a perennial responsibility. What one sows one reaps and divine retribution is delivered through the hands of man on man.

The Guru Granth draws certain parallels between the mythological deity Ram Chandra and Ram in the etymological sense defining the all-pervasive Maker underscoring that Man is to emulate the virtues of his Maker and not deities conceived of by imperfect minds.

ਰਾਮੁ ਝੁਰੈ ਦਲ ਮੇਲਵੈ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਬਲੁ ਅਧਿਕਾਰ ॥

ਬੰਤਰ ਕੀ ਸੈਨਾ ਸੇਵੀਐ ਮਨਿ ਤਨਿ ਜੁਝੁ ਅਪਾਰੁ ॥

ਸੀਤਾ ਲੈ ਗਇਆ ਦਹਸਿਰੋ ਲਛਮਣੁ ਮੂਓ ਸਰਾਪਿ ॥

ਨਾਨਕ ਕਰਤਾ ਕਰਣਹਾਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਵੇਖੈ ਥਾਪਿ ਉਥਾਪਿ ॥੨੫॥

ਮਨ ਮਹਿ ਝੂਰੈ ਰਾਮਚੰਦੁ ਸੀਤਾ ਲਛਮਣ ਜੋਗੁ ॥

ਹਣਵੰਤਰੁ ਆਰਾਧਿਆ ਆਇਆ ਕਰਿ ਸੰਜੋਗੁ ॥

ਭੂਲਾ ਦੈਤੁ ਨ ਸਮਝਈ ਤਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੀਏ ਕਾਮ ॥

ਨਾਨਕ ਵੇਪਰਵਾਹੁ ਸੋ ਕਿਰਤੁ ਨ ਮਿਟਈ ਰਾਮ ॥੨੬॥

“Profusely aggrieved, Ram (Chandra) prepares his army for war internally strengthening his resolve. The army of apes serves him, preparing both mentally and physically for conflict. His wife Sita has been abducted by the ten-headed fiend while his brother Lakshman is cursed to die. Nanak, the true Creator meanwhile creates and creates creating and destroying as he sees fit. Within his mind, Ram Chandra is apprehensive worrying about what is transpiring with Sita and Lakshman. He remembers Hanuman who comes running to meet him. The foolish devil (Ram Chandra) fails to realise how his Maker works. Nanak is not anxious for what his Ram does his Ram never effaces.”

-Guru Granth, 1412.

The deities of ages past warred out of anxiety. The wise men of ages past have warred for the realisation and defense of their vision never expressing any anxiety knowing that after them others will take on the mantle. They have planned accordingly having expected death as a natural outcome of their decisions.

ਸਤਿ ਬਚਨ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਕਹੈ ਪਰਗਟ ਸਭ ਮਾਹਿ ॥

ਪ੍ਰਭ ਕੇ ਸੇਵਕ ਸਰਣਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਤਿਨ ਕਉ ਭਉ ਨਾਹਿ ॥੪॥੨੬॥੫੬॥

“Nanak speaks the truth, these words are obvious to all. The Maker’s servants tread on their Maker’s path and all fear has fled from within them.”

-Guru Granth, 815.

The World:

Summarily, the call to arms for wise men reverberates throughout this world. The interplay of good and bad, the vagaries of Gods and mortals, and the fate of perfection cannot be possible without this world. This world is a blessed abode of righteousness where man finds himself and then his purpose in life. Without this world, man would have no value.

ਧਨਿ ਧੰਨਿ ਓ ਰਾਮ ਬੇਨੁ ਬਾਜੈ ॥

ਮਧੁਰ ਮਧੁਰ ਧੁਨਿ ਅਨਹਤ ਗਾਜੈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

ਧਨਿ ਧਨਿ ਮੇਘਾ ਰੋਮਾਵਲੀ ॥

ਧਨਿ ਧਨਿ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਓਢੈ ਕਾਂਬਲੀ ॥੧॥

ਧਨਿ ਧਨਿ ਤੂ ਮਾਤਾ ਦੇਵਕੀ ॥

ਜਿਹ ਗ੍ਰਿਹ ਰਮਈਆ ਕਵਲਾਪਤੀ ॥੨॥

ਧਨਿ ਧਨਿ ਬਨ ਖੰਡ ਬਿੰਦ੍ਰਾਬਨਾ ॥

ਜਹ ਖੇਲੈ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਨਾਰਾਇਨਾ ॥੩॥

ਬੇਨੁ ਬਜਾਵੈ ਗੋਧਨੁ ਚਰੈ ॥

ਨਾਮੇ ਕਾ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਆਨਦ ਕਰੈ ॥੪॥੧॥

“Blessedly auspicious is the flute played by the all-pervasive Creator. Delightfully it penetrates the mind and uninterruptedly resonates within ( ensuring continued enlightenment). Blessed is the sheep and its wool; blessed is the woolen blanket that Krishna adorns; blessed are you Mother Devki in whose abode the husband of Laxmi took birth. Blessed is the realm of Brindaban where Krishna plays his own flute and grazes cattle. Namdev’s Master observes all this and sustains his bliss.”

-Guru Granth, 988.

Wise men are enlightened men and enlightened men know that the world is primarily divine. The world is not rendered divine by the entry or exit of one deity or another; one mortal or another. Rather, those who come into the world are rendered divine by the opportunities it provides. Had it not been for the world, neither would the demi-god Krishna have been worshipped nor his mother honored. As the Guru Granth inquires,

ਏ ਸਰੀਰਾ ਮੇਰਿਆ ਇਸੁ ਜਗ ਮਹਿ ਆਇ ਕੈ ਕਿਆ ਤੁਧੁ ਕਰਮ ਕਮਾਇਆ ॥

ਕਿ ਕਰਮ ਕਮਾਇਆ ਤੁਧੁ ਸਰੀਰਾ ਜਾ ਤੂ ਜਗ ਮਹਿ ਆਇਆ ॥

“My mortal frame, what exploits have you performed since being born among the masses? What exploits have you performed mortal frame since you have arrived among the masses?”

-Guru Granth, Anand.

What wise acts have we performed? And are we ready to defend them against the evil nature of those who would abuse their own divine intellect?