Christianity Losing My Religion: Why I'm Raising My Child To Believe In Science, Not God

[seeker3k]

Arshdeep88 ji

SSA

Thanks for your view on Bhi gurdas. If he said Nirakar took birth as Nanak out of love. For you it is good thing that some one glorify Nanak.In same way when Christian says that Jesus is son of god then why we get upset on that?

Bhi Gurdad was leaned person he read Nanak and other guru’s bani. How can he say that is not in Sikhi. Nanak made it clear that HE do not take birth and never die.

Resp[ect for Guru is good but saying some that Nanak him self made it clear is not right in my and many others thinking.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

WHY would anyone DISREGARD what NANAK WROTE about NIRANKAAR and beleive some one else ?? This someone else could be ADULTERATED as Bhai Gurdass Jis works CERTAINLY ARE.

But we must not forget that GURU NANAK ji also says something else about the NIRANKAAR....READ the SOHILA SHABADS to find out. Nirankaar has NO EYES...and YET He has billions of EYES...He has NO FEET...yet He has Billions of FEET...and WE can certainly SEE all thsoe eyes, the feet etc....

IF YOU cant SEE GOD in ALL..you cannot see Him..dont blame others.

 

[seeker3k]

WHY would anyone DISREGARD what NANAK WROTE about NIRANKAAR and beleive some one else ?? This someone else could be ADULTERATED as Bhai Gurdass Jis works CERTAINLY ARE.

But we must not forget that GURU NANAK ji also says something else about the NIRANKAAR....READ the SOHILA SHABADS to find out. Nirankaar has NO EYES...and YET He has billions of EYES...He has NO FEET...yet He has Billions of FEET...and WE can certainly SEE all thsoe eyes, the feet etc....

IF YOU cant SEE GOD in ALL..you cannot see Him..dont blame others.

SSA Gyani gi,

That’s why I say it is poetry not strait writing there can be many translations of it. Whose translation one should accept? Every gyani claim to know his is best translation.
As far as I know Nanak said in mool manter God do not take birth not if or but.

How hard is to understand the one word? HE DOSE NOT TAKE BIRTH.

 

[arshdeep88]

Me ,You, We All are imperfect seeker ji.

Bhai Gurdass Ji is well respected person in the history of the sikhism no doubt about it
but certainly he is not the GURU that is why his works are not in the GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI.

Gurus told us to follow Guru Granth Sahib not Bhai Gurdass Ji Works.
So i dont think bhai gurudass ji works should be opened up and compared with the works of Guru Granth Sahib.

and last we all are imperfect ,what others do ,say is not much of a concern in sikhi i guess.
more stress is laid upon oneself and if someone has to be judged it has to be oneself.

 

[seeker3k]

Me ,You, We All are imperfect seeker ji.

Bhai Gurdass Ji is well respected person in the history of the sikhism no doubt about it
but certainly he is not the GURU that is why his works are not in the GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI.

Gurus told us to follow Guru Granth Sahib not Bhai Gurdass Ji Works.
So i dont think bhai gurudass ji works should be opened up and compared with the works of Guru Granth Sahib.

and last we all are imperfect ,what others do ,say is not much of a concern in sikhi i guess.
more stress is laid upon oneself and if someone has to be judged it has to be oneself.

Arshdep ji

SSA

I am glad that you recognize that WE are not perfect. I had the different feeling.
Here every one judge one another.

Thanks for Kabir’s salok

Bura Jo Dekhan Main Chala, Bura Naa Milya Koye
Jo Munn Khoja Apnaa, To Mujhse Bura Naa Koye

 

[spnadmin]

SSA Gyani gi,

That’s why I say it is poetry not strait writing there can be many translations of it. Whose translation one should accept? Every gyani claim to know his is best translation.
As far as I know Nanak said in mool manter God do not take birth not if or but.
veto
How hard is to understand the one word? HE DOSE NOT TAKE BIRTH.

seekr3k ji

It is true: He does not take birth. That does not veto other points made in SGGS and individual translations can only go so far. These different translations cannot turn things on their head.

He is nirgun, he has no visible form.
He is nirankar, he is the all pervading one.

Because he is nirgun and nirankar, he has no eyes and he has 1000 eyes. Because he is nirgun and nirankar, he has no feet and he has 1000 feet.

That is to make the point that the formless Lord nonetheless can be found in every particle of the Universe.

 

[Luckysingh]

Me ,You, We All are imperfect seeker ji.

Bhai Gurdass Ji is well respected person in the history of the sikhism no doubt about it
but certainly he is not the GURU that is why his works are not in the GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI.

Gurus told us to follow Guru Granth Sahib not Bhai Gurdass Ji Works.
So i dont think bhai gurudass ji works should be opened up and compared with the works of Guru Granth Sahib.

and last we all are imperfect ,what others do ,say is not much of a concern in sikhi i guess.
more stress is laid upon oneself and if someone has to be judged it has to be oneself.

Bhai gurdas ji has no work in the Guru Granth sahib ji, but I wouldn't go as far as rejecting his vaars because they were not gurmat enough.
Remember that Guru Arjun dev ji when compiling the Adi granth included the works from the first 4 Nanaks of which he deemed as passing the test of gurmat. Many works collected by Guru Nanak ji from his travels were not included.
What is important to me is that as Bhai Gurdas ji was scribing the Adi Granth, he was also absorbing and studying the works in depth and not just parrot writing or copying !
I also believe that Guru Arjun Dev ji himself called the Vaaran as the ''Key'' to the Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Therefore, My conclusion gives very high regards for his Vaaran much more than say many of Kabirji's rejected dohras that were not included by Guru ji.
To compare his vaaran to the rejected works seems like an insult for me personally.

 

[arshdeep88]

Lucky Singh Ji
Respected brother my post was addressed to seeker ji ,who compared the works of Guru Nanak dev ji and Bhai Gurdass Ji on the issue of GOD.Obviously out of the two Guru Nanak works and writings are more authentic and are advised to be followed to all other sikhs.

Personally i too have really very high regard for not only Bhai Gurdass ji ,who had written a lot about the history of the sikhism and as you mentioned is a key to understanding guru granth sahib g, but all the sikhs who had been associated with gurus in one way or the other.

My post was not in any way directed at insulting Bhai Gurdass Ji.I too like you feel that his work shouldn't be go on the verge of rejecting but should be more understood.My understanding was that calling Guru Nanak god by bhai gurdass ji was either out of love of highest order for Guru Ji or out of the reason that the creator's light dwells in all and so all are part of the creator and are no different to HIM.

coming to the topic
do science believes in CREATOR?
and how it addresses the laws of the universe?

BIG Bang theory states that there was one big explosion before the universe started to expand and till now it is in the state of expanding only,so it means all the matter was UNIFIED and TOGETHER only.

I read about newton ,he is in fact the greatest scientist we have ever had. Wikepedia mentions that from childhood he was very much into bible and newton in his few books too addresses about Creator GOD.It has been mentioned that he was very much devoted to his christian faith.So its not impossible that science and religion cant go hand in hand.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Lucky Singh Ji..whats your source on.."Lots of what GURU NANAK JI "COLLECTED" was NOT ACCEPTED by GURU ARJUN JI ???

GURU NANAK JI is the FOUNTAINHEAD...every single DROP of Gurmatt FLOWS FROM GURU NANAK..hence even the Name NANAK used by all the others. IN FACT the entire SGGS is an exposition of what GURU NANAK ji has written...NONE of the compositions veer even a MM from the Straight line set by GURU NANAK JI.

This is the FIRST I am hearing of Guru Arjun ji REJECTING what GURU NANAK Ji collected !!!

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

SSA Gyani gi,

That’s why I say it is poetry not strait writing there can be many translations of it. Whose translation one should accept? Every gyani claim to know his is best translation.
As far as I know Nanak said in mool manter God do not take birth not if or but.

How hard is to understand the one word? HE DOSE NOT TAKE BIRTH.

Veera..the thing is not about "BIRTH/DEATH...He is AJJONNE..not born or dies..BUT He is everywhere..he is the DOG that I "killed" this morning while speeding in the dark unlit road...and I am so sad...He is..YOU..He is ME..He is everything..

 

[seeker3k]

Lucky Singh Ji
Respected brother my post was addressed to seeker ji ,who compared the works of Guru Nanak dev ji and Bhai Gurdass Ji on the issue of GOD.Obviously out of the two Guru Nanak works and writings are more authentic and are advised to be followed to all other sikhs.

Personally i too have really very high regard for not only Bhai Gurdass ji ,who had written a lot about the history of the sikhism and as you mentioned is a key to understanding guru granth sahib g, but all the sikhs who had been associated with gurus in one way or the other.

My post was not in any way directed at insulting Bhai Gurdass Ji.I too like you feel that his work shouldn't be go on the verge of rejecting but should be more understood.My understanding was that calling Guru Nanak god by bhai gurdass ji was either out of love of highest order for Guru Ji or out of the reason that the creator's light dwells in all and so all are part of the creator and are no different to HIM.

coming to the topic
do science believes in CREATOR?
and how it addresses the laws of the universe?

BIG Bang theory states that there was one big explosion before the universe started to expand and till now it is in the state of expanding only,so it means all the matter was UNIFIED and TOGETHER only.

I read about newton ,he is in fact the greatest scientist we have ever had. Wikepedia mentions that from childhood he was very much into bible and newton in his few books too addresses about Creator GOD.It has been mentioned that he was very much devoted to his christian faith.So its not impossible that science and religion cant go hand in hand.

SSA

I was not compared the works of Guru Nanak dev ji All I was saying that the most respected writer did not understand what Nanak said. I do not reject all of Bhai Gurdas's vaars. All I am asking do we believe what he said that God himselfd took birth as Nanak? Or God live in shachkand? Yet this group do not believe in heaven or hell?

I asked before about therd Guru's Anad sahib one sloke in that does no not sit well with me. He says when he accepted guru that point "angles" came to sing songs. Is it possible that there are angles? If they are then where do they live, what is their work? This is not that I am rejecting the SGGS.

I personally do not believe in big bang. It is just a concept. As for Newton reading Bible. He was born in Christianity sure he have to read that book. Same as Einstein reading Tora and he also read Gita. Just by reading it do not make any one a believer. I have read Gita,Bible,Kuran Granth even heer is s ritual book and many other religious books. I do not believe in God as most people believe. Most call me kafar. Learning science is best for kids in my view. Religion and science is same if one read it with open mind. The problem is in both they reject each other with out knowing. Look at this internet it is from science we can chat live with out leaving our home. It can be miracle too. What I do narrow the gap between both. How science can fit in religion.
Doctor can change one's heart. That was unheard of before 45 years.
Religion is needed to start the child with knowledge but it was not meant to worship or sing praises songs thinking it will please God. That can never happen. If we combine both science life will be much better

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

Is it possible that there are angles? If they are then where do they live,

Yes it is possible ,where they live is in corners.

 

[Luckysingh]

Lucky Singh Ji..whats your source on.."Lots of what GURU NANAK JI "COLLECTED" was NOT ACCEPTED by GURU ARJUN JI ???

GURU NANAK JI is the FOUNTAINHEAD...every single DROP of Gurmatt FLOWS FROM GURU NANAK..hence even the Name NANAK used by all the others. IN FACT the entire Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is an exposition of what GURU NANAK ji has written...NONE of the compositions veer even a MM from the Straight line set by GURU NANAK JI.

This is the FIRST I am hearing of Guru Arjun ji REJECTING what GURU NANAK Ji collected !!!

I'm sorry, my mention was that 'not all the works collected by Guru Nanak ji on is travels were included'.
My source---Well, I know that Guruji visited the villages and places of the Bhagats and collected their writings, and say for example Bhagat Jaidev ji who has just 2 shabads in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, -Then I personally don't assume that is all he collected in the same way that Kabirji's works are found in other scriptures that were not include in Adi Granth.
Please don't misinterpret this statement in the sense that Guru Arjan Dev ji rejected Guru Nanakji's works, that is NOT what I am thinking or saying.
What Guru Nanak ji collected and what he included in his personal pothis is what Guru Arjan Dev ji continued.
In simple words my understanding is that I don't think Guru Nanakji went to Bhagat Jaidev's village and said ''I will have that, oh that's good.... but I don't want that or that...'' I reckon he collected all that may have been given to him and then later organized his pothis.

Is my thinking and assumption irrational and extreme...I honestly don't know, I'm just using a little logic and painting pictures in my head that help make more sense!!

 

[Luckysingh]

When it comes to Newton, I think there was much more to him than we actually know.
I firmly believe that he was an enlightened soul.
If you think about the 'apple' the fruit of knowledge, forbidden fruit or the fruit of the maya world. Then the reason for it's falling, alike to the moon's gravitational attraction to the earth, then you may realize that he was a lot deeper than just the science aspects.
The real duality that we live in and the maya world was created when the apple was eaten. The events of adam and eve are quite metaphoric and tell us about the maya world illusion !!!

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

I'm sorry, my mention was that 'not all the works collected by Guru Nanak ji on is travels were included'.
My source---Well, I know that Guruji visited the villages and places of the Bhagats and collected their writings, and say for example Bhagat Jaidev ji who has just 2 shabads in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, -Then I personally don't assume that is all he collected in the same way that Kabirji's works are found in other scriptures that were not include in Adi Granth.
Please don't misinterpret this statement in the sense that Guru Arjan Dev ji rejected Guru Nanakji's works, that is NOT what I am thinking or saying.
What Guru Nanak ji collected and what he included in his personal pothis is what Guru Arjan Dev ji continued.
In simple words my understanding is that I don't think Guru Nanakji went to Bhagat Jaidev's village and said ''I will have that, oh that's good.... but I don't want that or that...'' I reckon he collected all that may have been given to him and then later organized his pothis.

Is my thinking and assumption irrational and extreme...I honestly don't know, I'm just using a little logic and painting pictures in my head that help make more sense!!

Lucky ji.

Well..its quite OK i guess.

My thinking is Guru Nanak ji DID SELECT ONLY those writings that "Fit" His Jigsaw Puzzle...in one instance there is only a SINGLE LINE by Bhagat SURDAS Ji !! in SGGS !! This SELECTION process was put in place by Guru nanak ji himself..and THE "POTHI" WAS PASSED DOWN to the succeeding GURU on Gurgadee.- Guur Angad sahib - Guru Amardass sahib - to Guru ramdass sahib - Guru Arjun ji Sahib - and so on Until Guru Gobind Singh ji recompiled the SGGS at DAMDAMA SAHIB (Dasvaan patshah ka Granth) and passed Gurgadee to this Granth in 1708..

As I see it..IF Guru nanak ji " is assumed to CANNOT say to Bhagat jaidev..I DONT wnat this..I WANT that etc....can we assume that Guru Angad sahib also then " I DONT WANT this shabad..I want ??" while looking thru the POTHI passed on to HIM by GURU NANAK Ji ?? that is a ridiculous idea in my eyes. What GURU Nanak ji wrote down..was passed intact..with the succeeding GURU ADDING His own compositions...as time passed...we have the case of GURU ANGAD SAHIB...not a SINGLE SLOK exists as written by BHAI LEHNNA JI....the one who wrote the Masterpiece ANAND SAHIB is Mahlla 3...and yet not a single line exists penned by BHAI AMARDASS JI....Did Amardass ji SUDDENLY turn into such a fantastic POET at AGE 70+++ when a normal person goes SENILE ?? The REASON is that the "ANAND SAHIB" came to GURU AMARDASS JI as DHUR KI BANI...the Bhai Amardass who lived for 70YEARS before that instant was NOT A POET/writer of ANYTHING.

DHUR KI BANI...BANI GURU...GURU HAI BANI...Vich bani AMRIT SAREH are What we have to ACCEPT UNCONDITIONALLY..no "logic" allowed or necessary. Bhai Amardass Ji was NOT "GURU"..hence not writing a SINGLE WORD....but the instant He transformed into GURU..the BANI began to FLOW..and we all know that the ANAND SAHIB as a POETRY is equal to JAPJI or SUKHMANI...ONLY a GURU can pen Bani...and ONLY a GURU can "SELECT" Bani. Each line in SGGS is GURU,,,GURBANI...DHUR KI BANI. What is left OUTSIDE..is NOT. The GURU decided what is what.

Regards

Jarnail Singh

 

[seeker3k]

SSA

The word "bani" means is what person speak. There is no magical thing about bani.
Kabir also sayd bani mithi bol jo kesi da mann na dukhe.

If any one want big thing about it so be it I am not going or demand it to change it.

It is like what I asked about angles. No one want to reply to it.

Whan Nanak passed away there was arguments between Bhi Lehna and Nanak's sons. I dont think all was passed to Lehana. But Bhi Lehan left that place and set it up in Khandoor.
Even At the time of amardas Nanak son went there and kicked him that he is sitting on his father's seat.
This is not in SGGS so one can take it any way one wants to.

Here people take Christianity apart but no one can dare talk about what had happened that time. Even Christian taking Christian apart to get the truth. Only us we dont want to know the truth.

 

[aristotle]

Kabir also sayd bani mithi bol jo kesi da mann na
dukhe.

Please provide the Shabad or atleast the exact tuk when you ascribe a statement to someone.

Here people take Christianity apart but no one can dare
talk about what had happened that time. Even
Christian taking Christian apart to get the truth. Only us
we dont want to know the truth.

Perhaps you like to generalise a lot. From what you have said here it appears Sikhs don't want to or are incapable to find out the theological truth, though nothing could be more wrong than that. Take care before pointing fingers unnecessarily.

 

[aristotle]

Whan Nanak passed away there was arguments
between Bhi Lehna and Nanak's sons. I dont think all
was passed to Lehana. But Bhi Lehan left that place
and set it up in Khandoor.
Even At the time of amardas Nanak son went there and
kicked him that he is sitting on his father's seat.

Seeker Ji,
What is this 'all' you are claiming to have not been passed on to Guru Angad Sahib in totality?
If it is the Bani of Guru Nanak Sahib and the Bhagat Bani he had collected, it is a long proven fact that the whole collection was passed on to the Second Guru by Guru Nanak Sahib himself. Also, it is out of pure common sense that Guru Nanak Sahib could not have been so callous to have appointed a successor and not entrust him with the Bani.

By the Sakhi you have quoted, I fail to see the point. Wherever this Sakhi(given we accept this Sakhi at the face value) appears it always illustrates the humble nature of Guru Sahib and not any question of successorship, please specify what you want to say.

 

[Inderjeet Kaur]

SSA



Whan Nanak passed away there was arguments between Bhi Lehna and Nanak's sons. I dont think all was passed to Lehana. But Bhi Lehan left that place and set it up in Khandoor.
Even At the time of amardas Nanak son went there and kicked him that he is sitting on his father's seat.
This is not in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji so one can take it any way one wants to.

3k ji, you can hold any opinions you like and I shan't be too hard on you, but I do humbly request that you refer to our Gurus Sahiban with a bit of respect, at least in writing. He was Guru Amardas or Guru Amar Das ji, not "amardas." I am very serious; I rarely request anything humbly.

 

[Brother Onam]

Harry Haller is a curious guy to me. Let me start by saying you sound like a likable and intelligent guy. But I'm mystified by your understanding of Sikhism.
You're always quick to say most turban-wearing 'Sikhs' are not indeed Sikhs, presumably because they are close-minded, greedy, selfish, ignorant or whatnot. But you state you are a Sikh, right after admitting you are a womanizer, drunk, meat-eating atheist, etc...
I can't help thinking you were born into Sikh culture and have spent your life trying to reconcile Sikh identity with beliefs and lifestyle that fly in the face of Sikh doctrine. Wouldn't it be easier to renounce Sikhi and go forth as a worldly and thoughtful atheist, rather than spending so much energy trying to explain away, re-word, re-interpret and re-read the literally thousands of descriptions in the Guru of the many aspects and qualities of God? Just wondering.
By the way, I'm not in disagreement with you that the vast majority of us go through life with the outside appearance of devotion, while in our hearts we are absorbed in low and mundane pursuits.
Waheguru Waheguru Waheguru