If Christianity Can Be Proven Wrong, Then What Makes Sikhism So Right?

[Original]

Good morning Everyone,

Dear Truthsikher

You write, "if Christianity can be proven wrong, then what makes Sikhism so right?"

Allow me to share with you the following: religious experience rises above such intellectual parameters [right n wrong] and since they both [Christianity n Sikhism] fall within the ambit of "religion", they cannot be intellectually analysed. Religion is a system of belief based on the "faith" of the individual. You either believe or you don't, full stop. Arguments will forever remain inconclusive because objective testing cannot be had. Experience alone, will confirm the validity of the holy scriptures and that experience has to be your own. Moreover, Sikhism is a religion that was "revealed" and not found through the hard-graft of the mind, nor the empirical observation of the sciences. The ultimate truth [metaphysical, Nanak's satnam] that we all seek doesn't come about through rational thinking and argument but through revelation, intuition and mystical experience. You've obviously yet to experience that "eternal truth" [God]. Have faith for it is that faith, which constitutes belief and it is belief that manifests into "revelations" where the individual experiences metaphysical excursions.

Christianity has many flaws, and yet it's one of the oldest and first religions.

..incorrect ! Oldest religions are still practiced by certain tribes in Africa [stand corrected].

So then what makes Sikhism so right and real.

Nanak the founder of Sikhism, questioned "what is real" and concluded that "alone" God is real and that conscious experience constitutes reality. He departed from the hard-headed realists who believed tables, chairs, plants, animals, universe, etc are the only objects representing reality. He went on to affirm that conscious experience [living in the moment, meeting God] is primary and called it, ultimate reality. From this perspective [Sikhism] the external reality [tables n chairs] that appears to constitute the ambient environment of this experience is to be understood as a reflection of the ultimate reality, a construct that is abstracted from conscious sense-data, meaning, God. In other words, matter is but part of God and God an experience.

Am I to believe "God" talked to the white man 1000s of years ago, sent his son only to take him back, and then waited 1000s of years later to speak to 10 gurus in a span of 100 years, in which they perform miracles of their own, and then never to be heard from anyone again.

..you are to believe that these individuals experienced something that we call "irrational" and that their experiences are tabled in these so called scriptures. Those who go on to believe in the writings of these scriptures "actually" experience the same and hence the reason they endorse the scriptures to be authentic and real. This then forms the basis of their belief.

Since the 10th guru, no one legitammly has claiimed to spoken to God. And in today's time if one says they saw him or spoke to him, we' d call them crazy.

Sikhs speak to God everyday - their prayers, recitations, remembrance is actually a medium of communicating with God.

To me Sikhism is just another man made up religion.

That will be your prerogative !

Nice to have you interacting with practicing Sikhs.

You are judging Sikhi from the crooked prism of misleading Vedic or Abrahamic interpretations.

..back it up with evidence and try telling the believers of the faiths in question ! Its never a Sikh thing to call "theological" concepts as misleading. It goes to show how much of the Sikh you are "not" and yet, self-appoint yourself to be the advocate ? Don't knock other belief systems on the one hand and then on the other, go on to promote inter-faith education at SPN.

This very forum, which has its roots firmly rooted in Punjab,

...yeah, it sure has, just the SIKH bit. The philosophy network is foreign and pretty much youth-centric. Hardly any of the think-tank at SPN is from Punjab, or Punjabi literate. How its rooted in Punjab beats me ?

We firmly denounce all such fairly tales and anything which is inconsistent to common sense.

..since when did common sense come into Sikhism ? You need to brush up bro - sending out mixed messages here ! Read up on "manmukh" [common sense] and "gurmukh" [gur sense]. It is Guru's mat [wisdom] that underpins Sikhism and not your Jo Blogg Man mat [common sense] - get it right shall we !

The entire creation is Sikh, meaning, students. Those that follow Guru's way of life are called Gursikhs and those that follow their own mental constructs or contemporary belief n value are called Manmukhs. The difference is in belief and not knowledge. The "believers" of Guru Nanak Mat and His successors, including Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are called Sikhs. The rest, respectively, as beautiful human beings part of the whole Ekonkar {God].

Many thanks - enjoy Sunday

 

[Kully]

Hardly any of the think-tank at SPN is from Punjab, or Punjabi literate.

That is scary.

 

[Harry Haller]

That is scary.

why? what is so special about input from the Punjab? Does it have a monopoly on the truth? if anything Punjab taints Sikhism with its own brand of misogyny, racism, caste prejudice, Babas and Sants in BMW's with red lights, superstitions and a strong belief in Sakhis, most of which are incorrect. No, what is scary is that while the rest of the world questions and grows, Punjab is still routed in the Sikhism of years ago, which I guess suits some people, maybe those that would seek to control, those that seek to write definitively as if they know the game and everyone else is a {censored},

5" Car Warning Red Flashing Strobe Beacon Emergency Lights 12V For Car Pickup | eBay

i think they are on special if anyone who is scared is interested.

 

[Kully]

why? what is so special about input from the Punjab?

Nothing wrong with not being from Punjab, but the "Punjabi literate" is the one that is of concern.

The standard of Punjabi language spoken and written word understood.

Does it have a monopoly on the truth?

No, it just has a stronger connection to understanding Gurmat. Case in point. On this forum, we had a respected admin and another poster, both non-Punjabi speakers/readers/writers. To their dismay, they read a text in english and then got the wrong idea about it. Yet they made their views on the text seem like they had understood it, in it's entirety. Yet after there was some linguistic effort made into looking at the same text, we saw an entirely different scenario being presented. Now both member and admin can understand it more accurately.

 

[Harry Haller]

Nothing wrong with not being from Punjab, but the "Punjabi literate" is the one that is of concern.

The standard of Punjabi language spoken and written word understood.

now that would be utter rubbish my friend, for if that were the case, then Punjab would stand up as the very pinnacle of understanding, instead it is fact the pinnace of Babas, Sants and superstition. The problem that I see is the culture of parent worship, now, I love my mum and dad hugely, I also matha tek my parents, although not daily, but they remain the most important people in my life, however, there seems to be an attitude that whatever they taught us, whatever we learned from their knees, is sacrosanct, and must never be questioned, so any growth in learning is quite limited, whereas I question, I doubt, I bring in litmus tests, what your camp bring to the table is simply faith, and this faith is so precious to you, that it rises above logic, common sense and more importantly consistency.

No, it just has a stronger connection to understanding Gurmat. Case in point. On this forum, we had a respected admin and another poster, both non-Punjabi speakers/readers/writers. To their dismay, they read a text in english and then got the wrong idea about it. Yet they made their views on the text seem like they had understood it, in it's entirety. Yet after there was some linguistic effort made into looking at the same text, we saw an entirely different scenario being presented. Now both member and admin can understand it more accurately.

can you put a link to the thread so that I can fully understand your argument?

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Exactly we are never actually separate because there is only ONE in existence. Akal Purakh exists as both ONE and ALL at the same time.

The problem is unlike the drop of water separated from the ocean, we have been in the ocean all along... we just forgot we were here.

Heaven and Hell are metaphors because in truth, ALL is illusion except ONEness. There is only ONE actor playing ALL the parts of ALL beings... Ang 736. But the costumes (us) are being played by the same ONE. How can a costume experience heaven or hell? And the conscious awareness behind the costumes, is Akal Purakh. How can ONE Creator existing as formless experience heaven or hell?

Within the ‘play’ or dream or illusion, sure we can create artificial hells for ourself. Like financial ruin, etc. Or artificial heavens like surrounding ourselves with money or influential people etc. But when the actor finishes the play and all the costumes are removed we all will collectively wake up and realize we were all the same ONE.

There is no ‘soul’ except for Waheguru. The bodies are false. Who does that leave to experience heaven or hell?

I'm not confused. Thats just a convenient answer for you, as it avoids answering the statement.



Call it a foresight if it helps you. It is still a prophecy. Look up the meaning of prophecy as you seemed confused by it.




You claim to know what it isn't, but can't/don't say what it is?




Who said anything about it being a physical body? Read the remainder of the sentence and you will see what body it refers to.




Let's see some shabads that show heaven and hell as metaphors only.

This hell and incarnation seems very real:

ਗਉੜੀ ਗੁਆਰੇਰੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
Gauree Gwaarayree, Fifth Mehla:
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਹਰਖ ਸੋਗ ਬਿਸਥਾਰ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਖ਼ੁਸ਼ੀ ਗ਼ਮੀ ਦਾ ਖਿਲਾਰਾ ਹੈ,
It torments us with the expression of pleasure and pain.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਸੁਰਗ ਨਰਕ ਅਵਤਾਰ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਜੀਵ ਨਰਕਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਪੈਂਦੇ ਹਨ, ਕਿਤੇ ਸੁਰਗਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਪਹੁੰਚਦੇ ਹਨ,
It torments us through incarnations in heaven and hell.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਧਨ ਨਿਰਧਨ ਪੇਖਿ ਸੋਭਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਧਨ ਵਾਲੇ ਹਨ, ਕਿਤੇ ਕੰਗਾਲ ਹਨ, ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਆਪਣੀ ਸੋਭਾ ਹੁੰਦੀ ਵੇਖ ਕੇ (ਖ਼ੁਸ਼ ਹਨ)—ਇਹਨਾਂ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਤਰੀਕਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਮਾਇਆ ਜੀਵਾਂ ਉਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਪਾ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ।
It is seen to afflict the rich, the poor and the glorious.
ਮੂਲੁ ਬਿਆਧੀ ਬਿਆਪਸਿ ਲੋਭਾ ॥੧॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਸਾਰੇ ਰੋਗਾਂ ਦਾ ਮੂਲ ਲੋਭ ਬਣ ਕੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਆਪਣਾ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਪਾ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ।੧।
The source of this illness which torments us is greed. ||1||
ਮਾਇਆ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਬਹੁ ਪਰਕਾਰੀ ॥
ਹੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ! (ਤੇਰੀ ਰਚੀ) ਮਾਇਆ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਤਰੀਕਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ (ਜੀਵਾਂ ਉਤੇ) ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਪਾਈ ਰੱਖਦੀ ਹੈ (ਤੇ ਆਤਮਕ ਮੌਤੇ ਜੀਵਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਮਾਰ ਦੇਂਦੀ ਹੈ),
Maya torments us in so many ways.
ਸੰਤ ਜੀਵਹਿ ਪ੍ਰਭ ਓਟ ਤੁਮਾਰੀ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਤੇਰੇ ਸੰਤ ਤੇਰੇ ਆਸਰੇ ਆਤਮਕ ਜੀਵਨ ਮਾਣਦੇ ਹਨ ।੧।ਰਹਾਉ।
But the Saints live under Your Protection, God. ||1||Pause||
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਅਹੰਬੁਧਿ ਕਾ ਮਾਤਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ‘ਹਉ ਹਉ, ਮੈਂ ਮੈਂ’ ਦੀ ਅਕਲ ਵਿਚ ਮਸਤ ਹੈ,
It torments us through intoxication with intellectual pride.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਪੁਤ੍ਰ ਕਲਤ੍ਰ ਸੰਗਿ ਰਾਤਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਪੁੱਤਰ ਇਸਤ੍ਰੀ ਦੇ ਮੋਹ ਵਿਚ ਰੱਤਾ ਪਿਆ ਹੈ,
It torments us through the love of children and spouse.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਹਸਤਿ ਘੋੜੇ ਅਰੁ ਬਸਤਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਹਾਥੀ ਘੋੜਿਆਂ (ਸੁੰਦਰ) ਕੱਪੜਿਆਂ (ਦੀ ਲਗਨ ਹੈ),
It torments us through elephants, horses and beautiful clothes.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਰੂਪ ਜੋਬਨ ਮਦ ਮਸਤਾ ॥੨॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਰੂਪ ਤੇ ਜਵਾਨੀ ਦੇ ਨਸ਼ੇ ਵਿਚ ਮਸਤ ਹੈ—ਇਹਨਾਂ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਤਰੀਕਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਮਾਇਆ ਆਪਣਾ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਪਾ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ।੨।
It torments us through the intoxication of wine and the beauty of youth. ||2||
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਭੂਮਿ ਰੰਕ ਅਰੁ ਰੰਗਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਭੁਇਂ ਦੀ ਮਾਲਕੀ ਹੈ, ਕਿਤੇ ਕੰਗਾਲ ਹਨ, ਕਿਤੇ ਅਮੀਰ ਹਨ,
It torments landlords, paupers and lovers of pleasure.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਗੀਤ ਨਾਦ ਸੁਣਿ ਸੰਗਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਮੰਡਲੀਆਂ ਵਿਚ ਗੀਤ ਨਾਦ ਸੁਣ ਕੇ (ਖ਼ੁਸ਼ ਹੋ ਰਹੇ ਹਨ),
It torments us through the sweet sounds of music and parties.
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਸੇਜ ਮਹਲ ਸੀਗਾਰ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ (ਸੋਹਣੀ) ਸੇਜ, ਹਾਰ-ਸਿੰਗਾਰ ਤੇ ਮਹਲ-ਮਾੜੀਆਂ (ਦੀ ਲਾਲਸਾ ਹੈ), ਇਹਨਾਂ ਅਨੇਕਾਂ ਤਰੀਕਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਮਾਇਆ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਪਾ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ।
It torments us through beautiful beds, palaces and decorations.
ਪੰਚ ਦੂਤ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਅੰਧਿਆਰ ॥੩॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਮੋਹ ਦੇ ਹਨੇਰੇ ਵਿਚ ਕਾਮਾਦਿਕ ਪੰਜੇ ਦੂਤ ਬਣ ਕੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਪਾ ਰਹੀ ।੩।
It torments us through the darkness of the five evil passions. ||3||
ਬਿਆਪਤ ਕਰਮ ਕਰੈ ਹਉ ਫਾਸਾ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਹਉਮੈ ਵਿਚ ਫਸਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ (ਆਪਣੇ ਵਲੋਂ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ) ਕੰਮ ਕਰ ਰਿਹਾ ਹੈ,
It torments those who act, entangled in ego.
ਬਿਆਪਤਿ ਗਿਰਸਤ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਉਦਾਸਾ ॥
ਕੋਈ ਗ੍ਰਿਹਸਤ ਵਿਚ ਪ੍ਰਵਿਰਤ ਹੈ, ਕੋਈ ਉਦਾਸੀ ਰੂਪ ਵਿਚ ਹੈ,
It torments us through household affairs, and it torments us in renunciation.
ਆਚਾਰ ਬਿਉਹਾਰ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਇਹ ਜਾਤਿ ॥
ਕਿਤੇ ਕੋਈ ਧਾਰਮਿਕ ਰਸਮਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਪ੍ਰਵਿਰਤ ਹੈ, ਕੋਈ (ਉੱਚੀ) ਜਾਤਿ ਦੇ ਮਾਣ ਵਿਚ ਹੈ
It torments us through character, lifestyle and social status.
ਸਭ ਕਿਛੁ ਬਿਆਪਤ ਬਿਨੁ ਹਰਿ ਰੰਗ ਰਾਤ ॥੪॥
ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਵਿਚ ਮਗਨ ਹੋਣ ਤੋਂ ਵਾਂਜੇ ਰਹਿ ਕੇ ਇਹ ਸਭ ਕੁਝ ਮਾਇਆ ਦਾ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਵ ਹੀ ਹੈ ।੪।
It torments us through everything, except for those who are imbued with the Love of the Lord. ||4||
ਸੰਤਨ ਕੇ ਬੰਧਨ ਕਾਟੇ ਹਰਿ ਰਾਇ ॥
ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਸੰਤ ਜਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਬੰਧਨ ਕੱਟ ਦੇਂਦਾ ਹੈ ।
The Sovereign Lord King has cut away the bonds of His Saints.
ਤਾ ਕਉ ਕਹਾ ਬਿਆਪੈ ਮਾਇ ॥
ਉਹਨਾਂ ਉਤੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਆਪਣਾ ਜ਼ੋਰ ਨਹੀਂ ਪਾ ਸਕਦੀ ।
How can Maya torment them?
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਧੂਰਿ ਸੰਤ ਪਾਈ ॥ ਤਾ ਕੈ ਨਿਕਟਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਮਾਈ ॥੫॥੧੯॥੮੮॥
ਹੇ ਨਾਨਕ ! ਆਖ—ਜਿਸ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਨੇ ਸੰਤ ਜਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਚਰਨਾਂ ਦੀ ਧੂੜ ਪ੍ਰਾਪਤ ਕਰ ਲਈ ਹੈ, ਮਾਇਆ ਉਸ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਦੇ ਨੇੜੇ ਨਹੀਂ ਢੁੱਕ ਸਕਦੀ ।੪।੧੯।੮੮।
Says Nanak, Maya does not draw near those who have obtained the dust of the feet of the Saints. ||5||19||88||



But we are never separate from Sri Kaal Purkh.



ਪਵੜੀ ॥
Pauree:
ਬਦਫੈਲੀ ਗੈਬਾਨਾ ਖਸਮੁ ਨ ਜਾਣਈ ॥
(ਜੋ ਮਨੁੱਖ) ਲੁਕ ਕੇ ਪਾਪ ਕਮਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਮਾਲਕ ਨੂੰ (ਹਰ ਥਾਂ ਹਾਜ਼ਰ ਨਾਜ਼ਰ) ਨਹੀਂ ਸਮਝਦਾ,
The foolish demon, who does evil deeds, does not know his Lord and Master.
ਸੋ ਕਹੀਐ ਦੇਵਾਨਾ ਆਪੁ ਨ ਪਛਾਣਈ ॥
ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਪਾਗਲ ਕਹਿਣਾ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ, ਉਹ ਆਪਣੇ ਅਸਲੇ ਨੂੰ ਪਛਾਣਦਾ ਨਹੀਂ ।
Call him a mad-man, if he does not understand himself.
ਕਲਹਿ ਬੁਰੀ ਸੰਸਾਰਿ ਵਾਦੇ ਖਪੀਐ ॥
ਜਗਤ ਵਿਚ (ਵਿਕਾਰਾਂ ਦੀ) ਬਿਖਾਂਧ (ਐਸੀ) ਚੰਦਰੀ ਹੈ (ਵਿਕਾਰਾਂ ਵਿਚ ਪਿਆ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਵਿਕਾਰਾਂ ਦੇ) ਝੰਬੇਲੇ ਵਿਚ ਹੀ ਖਪਦਾ ਰਹਿੰਦਾ ਹੈ
The strife of this world is evil; these struggles are consuming it.
ਵਿਣੁ ਨਾਵੈ ਵੇਕਾਰਿ ਭਰਮੇ ਪਚੀਐ ॥
ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ ਛੱਡ ਕੇ ਮੰਦ ਕਰਮ ਤੇ ਭਟਕਣਾ ਵਿਚ ਖ਼ੁਆਰ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ ।
Without the Lord's Name, life is worthless. Through doubt, the people are being destroyed.
ਰਾਹ ਦੋਵੈ ਇਕੁ ਜਾਣੈ ਸੋਈ ਸਿਝਸੀ ॥
(ਮਨੁੱਖਾ ਜੀਵਨ ਦੇ) ਦੋ ਰਸਤੇ ਹਨ (ਮਾਇਆ ਤੇ ਨਾਮ), ਇਸ (ਜੀਵਨ ਵਿਚ) ਉਹੀ ਕਾਮਯਾਬ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ ਜੋ (ਦੋਹਾਂ ਰਸਤਿਆਂ ਵਿਚੋਂ) ਇਕ ਪਰਮਾਤਮਾ ਨੂੰੂ ਚੇਤੇ ਰੱਖਦਾ ਹੈ,
One who recognizes that all spiritual paths lead to the One shall be emancipated.
ਕੁਫਰ ਗੋਅ ਕੁਫਰਾਣੈ ਪਇਆ ਦਝਸੀ ॥
(ਨਹੀਂ ਤਾਂ) ਝੂਠ ਵਿਚ ਗ਼ਲਤਾਨ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੀ ਸੜਦਾ ਹੈ ।
One who speaks lies shall fall into hell and burn.
ਸਭ ਦੁਨੀਆ ਸੁਬਹਾਨੁ ਸਚਿ ਸਮਾਈਐ ॥
ਜੋ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਸਦਾ ਕਾਇਮ ਰਹਿਣ ਵਾਲੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਵਿਚ ਜੁੜਿਆ ਹੋਇਆ ਹੈ, ਉਸ ਲਈ ਸਾਰਾ ਜਗਤ ਸੋਹਣਾ ਹੈ,
In all the world, the most blessed and sanctified are those who remain absorbed in Truth.
ਸਿਝੈ ਦਰਿ ਦੀਵਾਨਿ ਆਪੁ ਗਵਾਈਐ ॥੯॥
ਉਹ ਖ਼ੁਦੀ ਮਿਟਾ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੇ ਦਰ ਤੇ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਦੀ ਦਰਗਾਹ ਵਿਚ ਸੁਰਖ਼ਰੂ ਹੁੰਦਾ ਹੈ ।੯।
One who eliminates selfishness and conceit is redeemed in the Court of the Lord. ||9||

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Read between the lines... hell is being separated (or rather THINKING we are separated) from Waheguru.

Read the line above the one you highlighted. It speaks about THIS opportunity. If we do not use his opportunity to find our true identity and divine light within ourselves then we will experience torment of not knowing Akal Purakh. Not knowing Akal Purakh for a Gurmukh is worse than any worst description one can come up with for torment so the descriptions just drive that home. Remember we are trying to understand concepts beyond the physical, using physical metaphors. We obviously can’t describe nonphysical concepts without doing this.

It’s like saying... if you don’t use this chance to meet God while in this life, you feel such (inner) torment that it will be like a thousand hot pokers being stuck in your side etc. I am obviously not saying you will have hot pokers stuck in your side...

Agreed. Look at the highlighted text and ask why Guru Sahib would give such vivid descriptions if none were true?

ਸਲੋਕ ਮਃ ੪ ॥
Shalok, Fourth Mehla:
ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਵਿਚਿ ਵਡੀ ਵਡਿਆਈ ਜੋ ਅਨਦਿਨੁ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥
ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਵਿਚ ਇਹ ਭਾਰਾ ਗੁਣ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਉਹ ਹਰ ਰੋਜ਼ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ-ਨਾਮ ਦਾ ਸਿਮਰਨ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ
Great is the greatness within the True Guru, who meditates night and day on the Name of the Lord, Har, Har.
ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਰਮਤ ਸੁਚ ਸੰਜਮੁ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੇ ਹੀ ਤ੍ਰਿਪਤਾਵੈ ॥
ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਸੱੁਚ ਤੇ ਸੰਜਮ ਹਰਿ-ਨਾਮ ਦਾ ਜਾਪ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਉਹ ਹਰਿ-ਨਾਮ ਵਿਚ ਹੀ ਤ੍ਰਿਪਤ ਰਹਿੰਦਾ ਹ
The repetition of the Name of the Lord, Har, Har, is his purity and self-restraint; with the Name of the Lord, He is satisfied.
ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਤਾਣੁ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਦੀਬਾਣੁ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੋ ਰਖ ਕਰਾਵੈ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਦਾ ਨਾਮ ਹੀ ਆਸਰਾ ਤੇ ਨਾਮ ਹੀ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਲਈ ਰੱਖਿਆ ਕਰਨ ਵਾਲਾ ਹੈ
The Lord's Name is His power, and the Lord's Name is His Royal Court; the Lord's Name protects Him.
ਜੋ ਚਿਤੁ ਲਾਇ ਪੂਜੇ ਗੁਰ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਸੋ ਮਨ ਇਛੇ ਫਲ ਪਾਵੈ ॥
ਜੋ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਇਸ ਗੁਰ-ਮੂਰਤੀ ਦਾ ਪੂਜਨ ਚਿੱਤ ਲਾ ਕੇ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ (ਭਾਵ, ਜੋ ਜੀਵ ਗਹੁ ਨਾਲ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਉਪਰ-ਲਿਖੇ ਗੁਣਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਧਾਰਨ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ) ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਉਹੀ ਫਲ ਮਿਲ ਜਾਂਦਾ ਹੈ ਜਿਸ ਦੀ ਮਨ ਵਿਚ ਇੱਛਾ ਕਰੇ ।
One who centers his consciousness and worships the Guru, obtains the fruits of his mind's desires.
ਜੋ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਰੇ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਪੂਰੇ ਕੀ ਤਿਸੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਮਾਰ ਦਿਵਾਵੈ ॥
ਜੋ ਮਨੁੱਖ ਪੂਰੇ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਦੀ ਨਿੰਦਾ ਕਰਦਾ ਹੈ, ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ
Only earlier you were saying that hell is being separate from Sri Sarab Kaal.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

now that would be utter rubbish my friend, for if that were the case, then Punjab would stand up as the very pinnacle of understanding, instead it is fact the pinnace of Babas, Sants and superstition. The problem that I see is the culture of parent worship, now, I love my mum and dad hugely, I also matha tek my parents, although not daily, but they remain the most important people in my life, however, there seems to be an attitude that whatever they taught us, whatever we learned from their knees, is sacrosanct, and must never be questioned, so any growth in learning is quite limited, whereas I question, I doubt, I bring in litmus tests, what your camp bring to the table is simply faith, and this faith is so precious to you, that it rises above logic, common sense and more importantly consistency.



can you put a link to the thread so that I can fully understand your argument?

He is speaking about Dasam Granth and myself I assume and no by no means did his arguments and his own ‘interpretations’ of the whole chapter in question, changed my mind about how much it degraded women. He thinks somehow his theories successfully explained away all the degrading comments in that text towards women. He’s wrong. He didn’t sway me one iota. He may have convinced himself only.

 

[Harry Haller]

He is speaking about Dasam Granth and myself I assume and no by no means did his arguments and his own ‘interpretations’ of the whole chapter in question, changed my mind about how much it degraded women. He thinks somehow his theories successfully explained away all the degrading comments in that text towards women. He’s wrong. He didn’t sway me one iota. He may have convinced himself only.

no, I don't think he is talking about you, on the occasion in question whoever he is talking about accepted they were at fault and admitted they were wrong, which is why I have asked for the link, I know your views on the topic, I do not think you would have accepted any other interpretation than the one you are comfortable with, so who is it?

 

[sukhsingh]

No miracles? The Gurus performed many actions that were miraculous. These miracles were not for their own gains but to remind Man of his reason for this birth.

Please provide examples of miracles?

 

[Inderjeet Kaur]

Please provide examples of miracles?

Please define what you mean by "miracle." The definition I use is"A miracle is a temporary suspension of natural law by or through a supernatural being."

This definition has gotten me into trouble. When my dear friend had a baby and called it a it miracle, she got very angry when I tried to explain to her that a baby, while wondrous, is the operation of natural law, not its suspension and therefore not a miracle. It took me a moment to realize that we were using two different definitions.

Without knowing how you define the word, it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion.

 

[sukhsingh]

Please define what you mean by "miracle." The definition I use is"A miracle is a temporary suspension of natural law by or through a supernatural being."

This definition has gotten me into trouble. When my dear friend had a baby and called it a it miracle, she got very angry when I tried to explain to her that a baby, while wondrous, is the operation of natural law, not its suspension and therefore not a miracle. It took me a moment to realize that we were using two different definitions.

Without knowing how you define the word, it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion.

OK cool let's go with the definition you reference .

So using that definition does anyone have any evidence of them performing miracles?

 

[Truthsikher31]

good post...
very interesting...and to be honest....many many sikhs would go along with this notion...just another man made religion...nothing to it....
and so, most people will just live their lives...but hope they do enough good to get a place in some kind of heaven just in case their really is a God...lol

So what does one find when they open the SGGS Ji? seriously...when i first opened it and read it (aged 24)...i was gobsmacked...
what i read was so intriguing, and what i loved was that....if i really want to see if it was True...i could...by following it's methods...whilst alive, in this life...not after death

So, at least you can prove to yourself...if it's nonsense...or if it's real...that's the beauty of it...

and yes...if you do get your own proof that it's for real...everyone...even other Sikhs will call you crazy...they will say you're smoking Drugs, taking the spiritual Bong, floating to cloud 9 etc etc...

but you know what...you'll have your proof, and what you say could inspire someone else...even if it's only one other person...you may find there are others that have had similar experiences...as i did...

or it could be bullsh*t ... but at least you'll know...and you made the effort to be a spiritual scientist and sit the experiment..

chazSingh,

Thanks for the reply. My approach to this post was to question beyond Sikhi, and when I say beyond I dont mean spiritually. Beyond as in what came before. Because most major events in history were inspired by or affected by events that came before. So when I started questioning Sikhi, why do we follow 5ks, how did it come about, how were Guru's chosen, even what did Gurus do on a daily basis. See like when people think of Jesus, they know baby Jesus and adult Jesus, but the bible and their history skip or never talk much about his journey or what he did or what events happen during that gap. So we to also have a Sikh history. It talks about the wars/battles, the miracles, the teachings, etc. So the Gurus unlike "Jesus" (who's like this God like being), the Gurus were just human. So they must have lives with their families. So I started wondering about their lives, and where it all started. What inspired Guru Nanak to take that step. But the world did not start with Sikhi or Guru Nanak. There is world history before that. And so if you start to going backwards in history, like what events were occurring prior to Sikhism, and things before those events. You can almost find the origins of "religion". Christianity and Islam, are few of the oldest religions. Some here comment that there were tribes in Africa that still exist today, or Hindus or Taoism came before Christians, fair enough I wont argue the validity of that. But Tribal worshipers, how much credit are you really going to give them. Their beliefs and thoughts were in a time of uncertainty. Really a Sun god, or Hinduism - multiple gods. Gods with multi arms, or elephants, or multi heads. Gimme a break. Hinduism would require a separate post. But still they all came before Sikhism. Sorry might have gone off topic from your reply

But for me, I would call myself a practicing Sikh. I have not taken Amrit, so don't practice all the 5ks, so guess according to some rules, can't be considered a Khalsa Sikh. But anyways, I've kept my Kesh my whole life. Didn't think much of it, just its my religion, we do it because we're born into a Sikh family and part of the Sikh community, so must follow what they say. Never questioning why, but whats fascinating, now that I'm older, have two kids of my own, I start to question all these thoughts. First choice was my parents, and do be honest they did not have much answers, and I feel like much of their generation never thought to question Sikism, hell you all know most women in our parents and grandparents times didnt have any equality. Can you imagine a woman raising half the questions on this Website to their parents. So my parents say I need to speak to a Bhai saab. I feel like majority won't have answers, they'll prolly say "It's God's will". I could be wrong, but lets face it, most Bhai Saabs are in it for non-spiritual reasons. Hell some sell CDs. I guess I'm on my own journey right now, and with what limited sources I have, I've turned to WWW. It's at least helped me to learn lil bit of Sikh history. And I'm trying to view things from a realistic, logical point of view. Not spiritual. And I might not ever be done with my search, but one question was the validity of religion(s). If Christians today can question and have valid proof that their religion isnt all that true - or not realistic, then that really questions the existence of God. Because even though religion is man made, they claim that it is the word of God that they do what they do. So if religions start with God, but God doesn't exist, then what does it say about the Gurus who created Sikhism.

I know I might be picking on Christianity a lot, but I question the validity of other religions (Islam, Hinduism, etc.) just the same. They all have hard to believe explanations.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Actually Mithraism and Zoroastrianism came before Abrahamic religion... and don’t forget ancient Egypt. Wait there seems to be something intriguing going on....

 

[Harry Haller]

Really a Sun god, or Hinduism - multiple gods. Gods with multi arms, or elephants, or multi heads. Gimme a break. Hinduism would require a separate post.

Ultimately Hindus believe in one god, the facets of which are not unlike the God as described in Sikhism, in my opinion.

Brahman is the name of the God, Hindus are though, it seems, allowed to worship this God in any form they wish, which explains the plethora of Gods.

There are different sects that focus on different Gods, but ultimately its all Brahman.

here is one of many links on the subject

God in Hinduism - Wikipedia

 

[namritanevaeh]

I have news for you provided you know anything about the religions.
Sikhi is not a religion. It has no god as seen in other religions. Sikhi has no mechanical rituals, no hell, no heaven, no judgement day, no reincarnation, no miracles, no prophets hence no prophecies........

I find people start off by saying Sikhi is a way of life. And then the rules start.

You must keep your hair.
You must not have sex outside of marriage.
You must bow down before ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ.
You must not drink.

And it goes on and on with one "sikh" dissing another for what they do that falls outside what sikhi "prescribes".

There are 52 hukkams. How is that not a list of rules?

 

[Harry Haller]

I am pretty sure you don't actually have to do anything, it is society and traditions that dictate the do's and don'ts, I do not consider myself a Sikh as I have no belief in theology, I accept a higher power exists, but my own belief is that is is absolutely non interventionist, and when your dead, your dead, however, if did believe in the theology, I absolutely would consider myself a Sikh despite not doing any of the above, I have no problem bowing, I bow to my parents after an absence, I have no problem bowing before the SGGS, but if I did not, it would not negate me from being a Sikh, the rules are man made, at the end of the day, you make your own peace with yourself and your creator in your own way.

That is not to say the above rules do not have a point, I feel the hair is a vanity thing, if everyone looks the same, vanity as a concept is negated, sex outside marriage, again, makes sense, you don't end up at the STD clinic and be on first names with the nurses, the bowing, I guess that is a mixture of the traditional way of showing respect in India, and showing humility, and the drink and the drugs, I lost a lot of time to both, a lot of time, managed to get through in one piece, but I know many that did not make it,

At the end of the day its a personal choice, the advice is there, but it remains a personal thing, funnily enough, now I am approaching 50, I keep whatever hair appears on my head, now that there is very little there, I have a disdain for casual sex, the urges fade with time, but I am glad I got into treble figures, although looking back, each one left their own baggage with me, as a young man, I was proud and egoistical, now I laugh at it all, I don't go out of my way to be humble, but humility does not scare me, and I hardly drink, rarely, and even then, maybe a glass of wine.

Funny how it all comes back round again

 

[Tejwant Singh]

I find people start off by saying Sikhi is a way of life. And then the rules start.

I call it Lifestyle but it is definitely not a religion as religion is defined and also as compared to other religions.

You must keep your hair

Well, not really. I personally find it uncomfortable when non-Sikhs are told to keep hair and take khandei de pahul in order to embrace Sikhi. This is not the message of the SGGS, our only Guru, but the total ignorance laced with imposition by the honchos of Sikhi. This is sheer segregation in my view.

In my personal opinion, keeping kesh was a defiance as was wearing turbans or riding horses, because the latter two were forbidden for the commoner by the Hindu upper class and also by the Mughal emperors.

As far as keeping unshorn hair is concerned, Hindus used to shave heads of their children of both sexes at a very young age as a ritual called mundan which our Gurus may have thought to be futile, hence keeping one's kesh became the defiance to the ritual. However, there are many Sikhs who do not keep unshorn hair and are called sehajdhari Sikhs, sehaj meaning slow paced in this sense. Not all who considered themselves Sikhs during the day of Vaisakhi in 1699 took khandei de pahul either and many had unshorn hair then. The majority still do not take khandei de pahul but they call themselves Sikhs either with kesh and turban or without.

There are many sehajdhari Sikhs in Sikhi. One of the well-known ones is a Sikh scholar, Dr Harbans Lal who was the first sehajdhari Sikh to become the head of a Sikh Association of some sort. You can google him if you wish to and he is also on FB. He is married to a German and lives in Texas and a well known Sikh scholar.

In the past, most of the Hindu Punjabi families had their first child, sadly a boy, to be a Sikh with kesh etc. etc. Hence one will find many Hindu families having Sikhs in their families because of this.

You must not have sex outside of marriage.

Well, that is a moral code that the societies want to abide by to have a long married life together.
Would you let yourself or your spouse have sex outside your marriage provided that was your case?
If you meant sex before marriage, in other words, remain a virgin, then it is a different thing and is sadly favourable to the male gender than to the female one which is unfair.
This is worth mentioning again as it was said before in another thread that virginity lies between one's two ears, not between one's two legs. Masturbation and wet dreams in both sexes prove that whether one is a virgin or not.

You must bow down before ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ.

What do you understand by 'bow down before ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ'?
Once you expand on what you mean by the above, then only I will be able to respond.

You must not drink.

I suppose you mean drinking alcohol if I am not mistaken. We all know its mals. We see AA all around the world. DUI is a crime. Many kill and get killed while driving drunk daily. So, I have no idea what you are trying to convey. Would you please expand on it?

And it goes on and on with one "sikh" dissing another for what they do that falls outside what sikhi "prescribes".
There are 52 hukkams. How is that not a list of rules?

Would you be kind enough to expand on the above as well, please? Thanks.

 

[sukhsingh]

Moreover, Sikhism is a religion that was "revealed" and not found through the hard-graft of the mind, nor the empirical observation of the sciences. The ultimate truth [metaphysical, Nanak's satnam] that we all seek doesn't come about through rational thinking and argument but through revelation, intuition and mystical experience. You've obviously yet to experience that "eternal truth" [God]. Have faith for it is that faith, which constitutes belief and it is belief that manifests into "revelations" where the individual experiences metaphysical excursions.

That's quite a statement to make please elaborate and qualify your opinion.. I don't necessarily disagree with it but it suggests that the pursuit of truth and the application of critical thinking is not required..but rather blind faith..
Can you please provide examples of revelation..?

Sikhs speak to God everyday - their prayers, recitations, remembrance is actually a medium of communicating with God.

Sikhs speak to God..? Hhhhmmm curious.. Recitations are a medium of communicating with God..? Which mantra should we be reciting ?

For me
Naam japo.. Recite naam , sat naam =truth is the name..
Always speak truth?

 

[namritanevaeh]

sex outside marriage, again, makes sense, you don't end up at the STD clinic and be on first names with the nurses, [...] I have a disdain for casual sex, the urges fade with time, but I am glad I got into treble figures, although looking back, each one left their own baggage with me, as a young man, I was proud and egoistical, now I laugh at it all, I don't go out of my way to be humble, but humility does not scare me, and I hardly drink, rarely, and even then, maybe a glass of wine.

Funny how it all comes back round again

True.

Some of what you say is totally true, but it's entirely possible to have sex, casual sex, and avoid being high risk for STD's. Similarly, being married does NOT guarantee no STD's, as that is partly based on the faithfulness of your PARTNER, and im sûre we mostly know a lot of people just aren't.

I have to say though, as I age, I view STD's very differently than i did as a teen. I think partly it was that as i ended my teen years, HIV was a very.big.deal. and it was considered a definite death. Now, I view it totally differently. Science has made such huge advances, that neither HIV nor Hepatitis B are "guaranteed death within 10 years". Yeah you may ultimately die from complications related to HIV if you are unlucky and get it BUT, with modern médecines people are literally living 40-50+ years, decently long lives, WITH HIV. And there are no other STD's currently that are not really cureable, the way they were terrible centuries ago. There are treatments for gonnorhea or syphillis. Etc.

So as I see it, you can eat a bag of improperly washed salad from the store which is recalled for E. coli contamination, and die from that bug...but we don't say salad is unhealthy for us.

Sex in general, is good for us. It helps prevent certain things (prostate cancer in men for example), and is good for our mental health.

So Yeah. There's a small risk from sex...EVEN if you're being super careful. Broken condom. Unfaithful partner when you think you're being monogamous.

But overall I feel the benefits outweigh the risks, when we can die from things like salad too. and salad is healthy for us. We can die crossing the street after looking both ways...but it's good to go out and take a walk, nobody says otherwise.