Sikhi After Life

[Ishna]

I think I agree with most of what you're saying Akasha ji, but I'm not sure where why the atheist stuff keeps coming up?

Atheism
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

But we're talking about the afterlife. I still maintain that WE don't go on to an afterlife. We cease to exist. Our carbon is reabsorbed into the world and our energy disperses into the ether. The Creator continues on regardless, for eternity.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

I think I agree with most of what you're saying Akasha ji, but I'm not sure where why the atheist stuff keeps coming up?

Atheism
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

But we're talking about the afterlife. I still maintain that WE don't go on to an afterlife. We cease to exist. Our carbon is reabsorbed into the world and our energy disperses into the ether. The Creator continues on regardless, for eternity.

Yup I agree with you 100% us as individuals cease to exist... but that part inside that makes us able to 'think' and reason and question 'why are we here' that part - the consciousness is what does not cease to exist. The same as the dream analogy I used. While you are your dream character at night, you know of no other existence except as that character. But when you wake in the morning, you are still you... you didn't 'die' you just woke up and remembered. You... the thinking feeling part of you will not cease to exist. Your body? yup... for sure. The physical aspects of 'feelings' caused by chemicals in the brain... yup those will be gone too... but underneath all of that... you contain the divine light. We all do.

Another analogy... take a curtain and cut 5 holes, and put your fingers through... each one appears to operate independantly... take away the curtain and you realize that all 5 were really just ONE. Those 5 didn't 'die' or cease to exist... They continue on as part of the ONE because in reality they always were part of that ONE.

Athiest comes into it because they don't believe in a conscious creator... aka Waheguru Ji. They believe in Waheguru Ji as just a word or concept used to describe the workings of nature. It goes hand in hand with the with the idea of life after life... because Athiests believe in only the physical world they can touch and see and taste and smell and hear.

 

[Ishna]

I get your analogies but something still isn't sitting right but I can't put my, erm, finger on it. Have discussed as far as I can with my puny mind at this late hour.

 

[harmanpreet singh]

harry ji ,Ishna ji i wanna ask do you believe in Soul (aatma )? means do we have a soul ?

 

[harmanpreet singh]

I am actually surprised Harry Ji, that you would actually put not one but 4 laughing smileys at someone else's beliefs just because they don't agree with yours...
.

ya ,hw such non sincere stuff of ridiculing once s belief is being allowed , i feel moderator should take notice .

 

[Harry Haller]

I am actually surprised Harry Ji, that you would actually put not one but 4 laughing smileys at someone else's beliefs just because they don't agree with yours...

Hmm thats not strictly true now is it, is it my view that we should not as Sikhs

1. celebrate the full moon
2. light candles
3. pray to pictures of the Gurus who have made it quite clear that no visual representation should ever be made or worshiped.
4. engage in pointless rituals.
5. ask Creator for anything.

or is it at the very foundations of Sikhism?

Now, if certain people, and lets face it. a lot of Gurdwaras celebrate the moon, wish to go down the above path, then it is no surprise that they would also embrace another good old Vedic philosophy, reincarnation.

Do I laugh at such people? yes, in fact I have increased my smileys! I laugh at them because although reincarnation is subject to personal choice, the above numbered points are not, there can be no argument about them, so embracing the above and attempting to shoehorn them all into Sikhism is , in my view, quite hilarious, why not just embrace Hinduism instead?

I would not laugh at a monkey, and I would not laugh at a bear , but I probably would laugh at a bear dressed as a monkey.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

I would not laugh at a monkey, and I would not laugh at a bear , but I probably would laugh at a bear dressed as a monkey.

Hmmm or how about an Athiest dressed as a Sikh??

Fact remains there are FAR more Sikhs who ARE spiritual than there are who are Athiest. Should they all start sending you laughing smileys??

You assumed that because these people in my Sangat believe in a spiritual existence and view Gurbani in that light, that they are wrong and somehoware Hindu wannabes... when they are not. What if it's you that is wrong in the Athiestic interpretation of Gurbani??

 

[spnadmin]

There are things worse than the use of smileys during serious discussion of beliefs.

The label "atheist' is thrown about recklessly on many internet forums, including Sikh forums. And the same goes for this thread.

There is a real danger in that. The primary danger is that it substitutes name-calling for rational debate. Name-calling labels a person or an idea as if the name and the truth are one and the same. Name-calling absolves the name-caller from taking responsibility for looking further into the truth.


3 scenarios

Atma Kaur does not agree with 3 different Sikhs. Atma ji ponders:

Puneet Kaur does not believe in reincarnation. Atheists do not believe in reincarnation. Therefore Puneet Kaur must be an atheist.

Atma''s conclusion is neither logical nor factual. Of the entire universe of those who do not believe in reincarnation, some are atheists and some may believe in a deity. Christians and Muslims renounce reincarnation; they believe in a deity.

Satnam Kaur does not believe in reincarnation. Therefore she must not believe that a soul continues after death. She sounds like an atheist.

Atma's conclusion is not logical because something important is missing. Atma never bothered to check whether Satham believes there is a soul that persists after death. Satnam may have a different idea about the life of the soul, if she in fact believes in a soul.

Harjas Kaur does not accept the idea of coming and going through 84 lakh joon. Therefore she must not believe in reincarnation. Could she be an atheist?

How does Atma know that Harjas does not accept a view of reincarnation that is different from Atma's. There are several.

More important. Is belief in a soul or in life after death a necessary condition for one to believe in God? Does belief in God require belief in a soul? Does belief in a soul require belief in life after death in any form?

The problem? Atma Kaur's conclusions may or may not be based in truth, and they are not logical.

There is, from the perspective of simple logic, no difference between calling out "atheist" and calling out "heretic" "slanderer" or "communist" because someone else's world-view or a religious point differs from one's own. Majority agreement does not make something more logical or true.

 

[harmanpreet singh]

Hmm thats not strictly true now is it, is it my view that we should not as Sikhs

1. celebrate the full moon
2. light candles
3. pray to pictures of the Gurus who have made it quite clear that no visual representation should ever be made or worshiped.
4. engage in pointless rituals.
5. ask Creator for anything.

or is it at the very foundations of Sikhism?

harry ji ,no one here supports above mentioned things , so to me it seems an attempt to divert discussion .

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Akasha ji,

Guru Fateh.

Sikhi is a learning process where disagreements happen all the times. This is the reason we are called Sikhs, and as Sikhs, we learn, unlearn and relearn all the times. I am sure it has happened in your life as in mine and in many others’ who call themselves Sikhs. We, including yourself will keep on having disagreements and you may even have some disagreements with the people in your own Gurdwara Sangat as you grow spiritually in your Sikhi journey which is natural and rather a must.

I know I have repeated the same many a times before but this is part of my Nitnem of awareness so I do not become a mere parrot but a pragmatic person with Gurmat.

Guru Gobind Singh who bestowed Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji to us as our last Guru could have given us the interpretation on a platter but the fact is that he did not. If he had, then we would not be having this discussion today.

In my opinion and I may be wrong, the reason he did not do that is for us to discover Gurbani by ourselves with time. As Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a living Guru, its beauty is that its meaning changes with time. It has happened to me several times, hence I often use the word learning, unlearning and relearning.

You write:

There are far more Sikhs who DO believe in spirituality than that don't... and it has been brought to my attention that this site is managed by a good number from the 'Sikh Missionary' which are all Athiest... so that explains a lot. I didn't know about the mass exodus in 2009-2010 of the devout. I thought this was a Sikh site... not an Athiest site... which means not ridiculing each other's interpretations. I always out in my posts that these are MY beliefs..

Akasha ji,

I am a bit confused and appalled at the same time as you have claimed/accused many of the members of this family of which you are part of as Atheists because there is a disagreement amongst us which as mentioned before is part of the Sikhi journey.

What made you come to the decision about who believes in spiritualty and who does not? Neither yourself, myself nor any other will be ever able to find that out because only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone each of us is at. So, this is a false premise on your part.

You say:

... and it has been brought to my attention that this site is managed by a good number from the 'Sikh Missionary' which are all Athiest... so that explains a lot. I didn't know about the mass exodus in 2009-2010 of the devout. I thought this was a Sikh site... not an Athiest site...

Now, let’s move back a bit and check the facts out.

1. No one here has ever accused you of not being a Sikh.

2. You have accused many Sikhs of being Atheists.

3. The members on this site have always been encouraging to your taking the Sikhi path and always made you feel member of this one global family.

4. Any time you had questions about Sikhi, they were responded to in the best possible manner with the knowledge the members have.

5. When you decided to take Khandei de Pahul, I was the first one to ask you to think about it but as I came to know that you had already made up your mind, I and many others admired your determination and encouraged you to do so.

6. We are all excited about you for taking this “plunge”.

7. We even felt very happy when you put your Keski on and shared some tips with you.

1. Which Atheist site as you accused SPN of would do that?

2. How did you come to the conclusion that this site is managed by the ‘Sikh Missionary’, your words?

3. What made you claim that they (we in your implication) are Atheists?

Lastly, SPN is a Sikh site and the fastest growing one in this cyber world. If SPN were an Atheist site, then it would not happen in this manner. This is the only site that allows open dialogues, non-moderation of the posts before they are posted unlike other Sikh Sites.

This is the only site that gives the freedom of speech to all. SPN is the least moderated Sikh site in the cyber world , the way it should be because Sikhi encourages the freedom of expression how opposite/bizarre they may be to some.

You are the proof of that. We will be all here for you as part of one family in all aspects of life. This is the way this site has been built up, as one large global family and like in all families, disagreements are inevitable. And in this special family they are rather welcome so a dialogue, a conversation can take place rather than food fights.

I want to wish you all the best in your Sikhi journey and please be prepared for more disagreements in our understanding of Gurbani because that is the way it is.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[harmanpreet singh]

More important. Is belief in a soul or in life after death a necessary condition for one to believe in God? Does belief in God require belief in a soul? Does belief in a soul require believe in life after death in any form?
.

ya this point need discussion ,

is belief in Soul (aatma ) ,required in Sikhi ? and What Guru Granth Sahib says about it .

 

[spnadmin]

ya this point need discussion ,

is belief in Soul (aatma ) ,required in Sikhi ? and What Guru Granth Sahib says about it .

There is a recent thread on that point

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/41154-soul-in-sikhi.html

 

[spnadmin]

Tejwant ji

One needs only to check threads on other forums, and then multiply that by the private messages sent back and forth on any or all forums regarding the exodus of the devout and the spiritual corruption of SPN.

This is a natural phenomenon on the Internet, and it is the downside of the idea of a "global village," because of the village mentality. All goes to illustrate my earlier point about name calling.

Here are some names individual SPN members have been called. I will edit and add to the list as more come to mind: Heretic, guru nidak, slanderer, follower of Kala Afgana, Darshan Singh groupie,, atheist, Lal, anti-panthic, enemy of the quom, ..... I am leaving space to add here

Thanks for reminding me that the Sikh Missionary (I am not sure which College) is also on the list.

Truly droll however was the one accusation that not only are we anti-panthic guru nindaks, but we are so polite about it.

All this insider knowledge about what is panthic and what other people really believe rivals the searcher of hearts himself.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

I was actually informed by someone who left in 2010... about the Sikh Missionary movement... I wasn't even a member then, nor have I read any posts on other forums...

As for the disagreements... I am all for agreeing to disagree... it's when people equate those of us who are spiritual in our interpretation and say that we are trying to be 'Hindu' (essentially saying that the Sikhs who are spiritual are also the same ones who would participate in Hindu rituals) and adding laughing smileys that hurts me.

Just as you are very sincere in your panthic view and interpretation, I am just as sincere in my spiritual view and interpretation. I was the one who initially said that whatever side of that coin you sit on, will depend on how you interpret Gurbani. I never name called... the term 'Athiest' is not meant as derogatory but just as a descriptor of someone who does not believe in life after this life, soul, creator... I always add to my posts that my views are MY views... I never mock someone else's beliefs (like Harry did) by suggesting that the people in my Sangat here are participating in all kinds of Hindu rituals simply because they believe that there is more to the Universe than the physical... and then even replied a second time insinuating that to believe in the spiriutal aspects of Sikhi is really the same as 'dressing as a Hindu' and adding that he would add even more laughing smileys... and having an Admin 'like' that comment - that is why I got upset....

Essentially he was insinuating that his interpretation was correct, we're wrong, and those of us who oppose it are not real Sikhs... we're just wannabe Hindus.... I am sure that the Amritdhari members of my Sangat (some very devout older Auntys etc) would feel very hurt by his comments...

 

[Harry Haller]

Hmmm or how about an Athiest dressed as a Sikh??

I would not know, I am not an Atheist, I believe in Akal Purakh, the unseen, unborn and undead, named the truth, as stated in Mool Mantra.

Fact remains there are FAR more Sikhs who ARE spiritual than there are who are Athiest. Should they all start sending you laughing smileys??

I laugh a lot, at a lot of things, somethings I find quite funny, in any situation, I find making people laugh helps, be it a man with his hands round my throat, or sitting in the back of a police car in cuffs, its how I get through life, having said that, the first time I laughed when my wife was angry, she gave me a look that suggested it did not go down well, she thought I was laughing at her, I guess maybe you thought I was laughing at you, if so, I apologise.

You assumed that because these people in my Sangat believe in a spiritual existence and view Gurbani in that light, that they are wrong and somehoware Hindu wannabes... when they are not. What if it's you that is wrong in the Athiestic interpretation of Gurbani??

Not quite, the point I am making is that Vedic philsophy has penetrated Sikhism to the absolute core, at the highest level. I have no problem with reincarnation being a Sikh philosophy, I have no problem with Sikh spiritualism, my writings to you have always been , I feel, quite friendly, humerous, supportive, even apologetic, yet by return, I sense some sort of issue with me or my lifestyle,

Your description of this website, which I find to be a lone voice of reason in a world full of 'just do your path and have faith in Guruji, and everything will be fine, your all desires will be fulfilled', I find quite bemusing, we are all guests here in someone elses house,

Also, which mass exodus are you referring to?

 

[spnadmin]

Akasha ji

What are you saying?

There are far more Sikhs who DO believe in spirituality than that don't... and it has been brought to my attention that this site is managed by a good number from the 'Sikh Missionary' which are all Athiest... so that explains a lot. I didn't know about the mass exodus in 2009-2010 of the devout. I thought this was a Sikh site... not an Athiest site... which means not ridiculing each other's interpretations. I always out in my posts that these are MY beliefs.

• "I always out in my posts that these are MY beliefs." If you don't believe all the rest of the quote, why did you say it as if it is true?
• What do you mean by Spirituality? "There are far more Sikhs who DO believe in spirituality" How many are on either side of the spirituaiity divide?
• Who are these people? "This site is managed by a good number from the Sikh Missionary"
• What does this mean? "A good number from the Sikh Missionary (sic: College?) which are all ATHEIST. What makes Sikh Missionary ATHEIST."
• What does this mean? "I thought this site was a Sikh site, not an ATHEIST site.

Yes these are YOUR opinions. Why are you surprised by negative feedback when any member here happens to be on the other side of the spirituality divide as you define spirituality?

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

My post was in response to Harry's... where he basically called my Sangat Hindu wannabes for believing in more than just the physical.

That was supposed to be 'put' not 'out' typo... I was referring to the fact that even though I always put that those are my beliefs and that we will be on opposite sides of the coin, others are replying in an attacking way by typing as if they are absolute correct. Neither side can prove to the other.... If you dont believe in nonphysical reality or aspect to creation, you will interpret Gurbani one way... it doesn't mean that your way is THE way. Where I always state that fact, others seem to instead attack and make their way seem as THE way.

Anyway I don't want to argue on this anymore... I believe we exist beyond death... period. I believe we are spiritual in nature, not just physical....period. SOme of you believe the opposite that's fine... but my beliefs don't make me a Hindu, and it doesn't mean I do Hindu rituals.... and my beliefs still fall completely in line with gurbani because as Tejwant Ji said... it's open to interpretation.

btw Athiest is not a derogatory word... and Harry Ji you called yourself Athiest on numerous previous posts! Athiest simply means someone who does not believe in the nonphysical... or God. i.e. the idea of a soul, or life after life, or a persona creator... they believe simply in science with no intelligent design. (lets pls not pick apart the meaning of intelligent again...)

As a side note I have no idea who the Sikh missionary are... I was told they are spreading the 'athiestic sikh' theory while condemning the spiritual... that's all I know.

 

[Harry Haller]

Akashaji

allow me to respond to you by posting something devoid of humour, sarcasm, smiley faces, in fact, allow me to be serious for just a moment.

ahem, ok, here goes,

uhm,

err

uhmm ok I apologise, again, if I offended you, and for laughing at you, and for the record, I believe it is you that is the true Sikh and me that is the heretic, I would not have it any other way, that my way is the right way fills me with horror,I am a comedian, not an expert on Sikhism, I thought that was clear! I am just a guy that does not want anything from anyone, even Creator, I have said this before, and I will say it again, we are both in this for different reasons, so it is not strange that we have different outlooks.

BTW my wife thinks you look magnificent in your photographs, and I promise not to mock spiritualism in my writings to you.

Can we let it go now, we are both Sikhs after all,

 

[Luckysingh]

Tejwant ji mentioned the below in a post

In my opinion and I may be wrong, the reason he did not do that is for us to discover Gurbani by ourselves with time. As Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a living Guru, its beauty is that its meaning changes with time. It has happened to me several times, hence I often use the word learning, unlearning and relearning.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/41257-sikhi-after-life-6.html

I totally agree and personally, I like to call the above as different stages of spiritual development.
I find that some gurbani may be telling me one thing at one time or stage and then something much different at a later stage.
I think of it as my progress on the different levels of spirituality where I develop and acquire higher levels.

In the same way, I agree that my spirituality or spirit is the God creator/invincible part of me and not my ego.
I certainly don't believe that when death comes, the lights go out or the plug is pulled and that's it- complete darkness.. void.... nothing !

I am more than certain that the true me, the conscious/atma/soul or whatever you want to call it continues to live on just like the God that never dies.
I agree with Akashaji when she mentions it being like a dream and then waking up or realizing what you really were and are.
The problem is that our Ego makes us think that we ARE the body we are in, we shall die and then it shall ALL be over.
This is the Ego that tells us that when God plugs the plug, that's it- The END!

I will try and explain using the terms 'timeless' and 'time bound'-
When we Die, then the Ego that is also ATTACHED to this 'time bound' body also dies.
Therefore, the Timeless God jyot within or atma/soul/conscuosness/spirit..continues to live on since it is 'timeless' unlike the 'time bound' body.

It's like the timeless part of us gets awakened and then we know exactly what and who we are. This timeless part within doesn't surface or overpower our mind because of the strong duality created with the time bound Ego.
I feel that Gurbani is telling me at this personal stage to try and awaken the 'timeless' entity within me, since that is the True Me. When this is awakened, then I will realize that the True me is also you and everyone else and HIM !


Anyway, since it has recently been revealed to Adminji that I secretly belong to the Church of Elvis, then of course I have to believe in some form of afterlife- Because the King continues to live... the show must go on....rock and roll will never die!.....

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Luckysingh Ji, you summed up exactly my beliefs! I could not have said it better... though I did try earlier.