Surdas Biography – Surdas Poems
Surdas Biography
Surdas was a great devotee of Lord Krishna and one of the prominent figures in the Bhakti movement in India from the 14th to the 17th century. He lived in the 16th century and was blind. Surdas was not only a poet but also a singer like Tyagaraja. Most of his lyrics had been written praising Lord Krishna. His works contain two literary dialects Braj Bhasa, one in Hindi and the other being Awadhi.
He followed Hinduism as well as Sikhism. He influenced the Bhakti movement, and the hymns are also mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib, the holy book of Sikhs. His father’s name was Ramdas Sargwat, and his works were written as ‘Sun Sagar, Sun Saravali, and Sahitya Lahari. The literary works of Surdas show and explains the intense bondage between Lord Krishna and his devotees.
Surdas Early Life
At an early age, he was interested in visiting Vallabha Acharya to listen to his teachings on life and various issues. Gradually, he was influenced by Vallabha Acharya and started writing Hymns on Lord Krishna. Since his childhood, he has been blind. However, as a keen observer of voice and memory, I quickly wrote poetry and sang it with a sweet voice.
According to historians, Surdas was born in 1478 AD or 1483 AD and died in 1561 AD or 1584 AD. According to Vallabhite’s story, Surdas was blind during his childhood, so his low-income family neglected and forced him to leave the house to live by begging. At that time, he lived on the banks of the Yamuna river. In the meantime, he learned about Vallabh Acharya and became his disciple. Since then, his life has moulded him as a great poet and devotee of Lord Krishna.
Surdas Poems
He composed the tremendous literary work ‘Sursagar’. In that book, he described Lord Sri Krishna and Radha as lovers and explained Lord Krishna’s grace with Gopis. In Sursagar, Surdas focuses on the childhood activities of Lord Krishna and his naughty plays with His friends and Gopis. Sur also composed the Sur paravail and Sahityalahari. These two poetic works wrote approximately one lakh verses. Due to the obscurity of the times, many verses had been lost. He narrated the Holi festival with rich literary work. The poems described Lord Krishna as a great player and life’s philosophy through broking the pot.
In his rhyme,s we can listen to the epic story incidents from Ramayana and Mahabharat. With his poems, he beautifully described all incarnations of Lord Vishnu. Significantly, every devotee can impact when reading Sant Surda’s poems on Dhruva and Prahlada Hindu legendaries.
Curious comment, ‘He followed Hinduism and Sikhism’? Surdas was a Hindu as were all the Sikhs. His Sampradaya was the Vallabhacharya Sampradaya. The Sikh sampradaya can be termed the ‘Nanak’ Sampradaya. Yes we can state that the Sikhs belong to the Vaishnav bhakti tradition and the teachings of their gurus included Advaita. We know that Vallabhacharya was an Advaitin.
Advaita was formalised by Adi Shankara. This makes Sikhism as one branch of Hinduism.
For the above statement to be accurate, we need to know which Sikh Guru had Surdas met, where? And when was he accepted into the Sikh fold?
Todays neo-MacSikhs are vigorously and violently adamant that the Krishna, Govinda, Gopala, son of Devaki, holder of Govardhana mentioned in the Adi Granth is totally different to The Krishna of the Hindus. Fine, so in that case, how would that make Surdas, a person who spent all his life singing hymns of devotion a Sikh? According to Neo-MacSikhs [the Hindu] Nirakaar, Nirgun is the only truth and god has no form. Surdas’s poetry overflows with description of thye form of Krishna and his relationships with Yashoda, Nanda, Balarama, Radha, the Gopas and Gopis.
Sikhism as an independent religion totally separate from Hinduism that you allude to, recognises non of this. The Sikhs who do accept Krishna however, never see themselves as different from Hindus.
So there is a definite unthought out flaw in the logic used.
As a person with a Sikh background myself, I’d want to say that statements like that are mischievous, irresponsible and ignorant at best.
The best way that it can be put to keep NeoMacsikhs contented is to state that his work is respected by both Hindus and Sikhs.
If pictures of Jesus are found in Hindu homes, that does not mean to say that Jesus was both a Jew and a Hindu.
I do not know Aranjay? He did not mention it!
What was the contribution of him in the bhakti movement?