Atheism Sikhism And Atheism: A Philosophical Discourse

Astroboy · Jul 14, 2009

YouTube - I've Converted To EVERY Religion (Just In Case)

ਮੰਨੈ ਮਗੁ ਨ ਚਲੈ ਪੰਥੁ ॥
मंनै मगु न चलै पंथु ॥
Source:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=21014 (God's Identity)
Mannai mag na cẖalai panth.
The faithful do not follow empty religious rituals.
Guru Nanak Dev - [SIZE=-1]view Shabad/Paurhi/Salok[/SIZE]

ਅਧਿਆਤਮ ਕਰਮ ਜੇ ਕਰੇ ਨਾਮੁ ਨ ਕਬ ਹੀ ਪਾਇ ॥
अधिआतम करम जे करे नामु न कब ही पाइ ॥
Source:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=21014 (God's Identity)
Aḏẖi*āṯam karam jė karė nām na kab hī pā*ė.
You may perform religious rituals, and still never obtain the Naam, the Name of the Lord.
Guru Amar Das - [SIZE=-1]view Shabad/Paurhi/Salok[/SIZE]

ਬਿਨੁ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਨ ਲਭਈ ਲਖ ਕੋਟੀ ਕਰਮ ਕਮਾਉ ॥੨॥
बिनु सतिगुर हरि नामु न लभई लख कोटी करम कमाउ ॥२॥
Bin saṯgur har nām na labẖ*ī lakẖ kotī karam kamā*o. ||2||
Without the True Guru, the Name of the Lord is not found, even though people may perform hundreds of thousands, even millions of rituals. ||2||
Guru Ram Das - [SIZE=-1]view Shabad/Paurhi/Salok[/SIZE]

jasbirkaleka · Jul 14, 2009

Sat Sri Akal. One does not necessarily have to believe in the existence of God to learn and gain from the teachings of our Sikh Gurus.There is more emphsis on being a better human-being,who can contribute to the society and the world around him then the importance of belief in God.

spnadmin · Jul 14, 2009

NamJap ji

OH YES! We must always remember THE JUST IN CASE Theory! :welcome:It is very popular and there are many adherents round the globe. :yes:

Astroboy · Jul 14, 2009

jasbirkaleka said:
Sat Sri Akal. One does not necessarily have to believe in the existence of God to learn and gain from the teachings of our Sikh Gurus.There is more emphsis on being a better human-being,who can contribute to the society and the world around him then the importance of belief in God.

Excellent

....to learn and gain from the teachings of our Sikh Gurus.

Jasbirkaleka Ji,

Kindly expand on your claims by quoting simple examples. :happy:

Astroboy · Jul 14, 2009

Even an Atheist believes (which means Atheists have a belief system) the scientific fact,
"Every action has an equal and opposite reaction".
But I am wondering if this applies (as in Atheism) to physical laws only.

It's just that the religions rephrase it as "As you sow so shall you reap."
Each thought, each word and each deed has to be accounted and compensated for in nature. Nature spares no man.
ਜੇਹਾ ਬੀਜੈ ਸੋ ਲੁਣੈ ਕਰਮਾ ਸੰਦੜਾ ਖੇਤੁ ॥
जेहा बीजै सो लुणै करमा संदड़ा खेतु ॥
Jehā bījai so luṇai karmā sanḏ▫ṛā kẖeṯ.
As she has planted, so does she harvest; such is the field of karma. (Ang 134)

Comments are :welcome:

BhagatSingh · Jul 14, 2009

Namjap ji, you should check out videos of Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins on youtube. they are awesome.

Astroboy · Jul 14, 2009

BhagatSingh said:
Namjap ji, you should check out videos of Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins on youtube. they are awesome.

Bhagat Singh Ji,

Please send the links of the videos through. Thanks.

BhagatSingh · Jul 14, 2009

There are sooo many!!!

Astroboy · Jul 17, 2009

Atheism is to Christianity, as Sikhism is to Hinduism and Islam? - Yahoo! Answers

BhagatSingh · Oct 3, 2009

Namjap ji

Sikhism when compared to Hinduism and Islam does sound very atheistic but is it really atheism? Perhaps, we ought to analyze the nature of the Sikh God, and then compare it to the Atheist beliefs. The mool mantar is good start but is that all we need to know about the Sikh God?

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

How does this relate to Karma??

jasbirkaleka · Oct 4, 2009

Sat Sri Akal,

I believe that deep down, Baba Nanak was more of an atheist then as a believer in a Christian or an Islamic God.

BhagatSingh · Oct 7, 2009

Well, all religions are atheistic with respect to each other. But is Atheism only comparable to Sikhism with respect to Hinduism and Islam or is there something else?

spnadmin · Oct 7, 2009

BhagatSingh said:
Well, all religions are atheistic with respect to each other. But is Atheism only comparable to Sikhism with respect to Hinduism and Islam or is there something else?

Bhagat Singh ji

I find your above comment intellectually irresponsible :down: given the amount of knowledge that you have of religions in general. Let's see again what your definition of "atheism" is -- your working definition, and not one that you apply to one religion or another. It could be that the hidden assumptions you are making are incorrect and hidden even from yourself.

Another problem is using common terms in idiosyncratic ways: e.g., the nirgun/sargun aspect of the Creator do not equal "Sikhs are athesists." Yet you have tried to argue that in other threads.

In order to have a discussion in which more than "one" person takes part the meanings of words have to be agreed or shared. Otherwise there is a "foolish wrangle" over issues that have not even put on the table.

BhagatSingh · Oct 7, 2009

Narayanjot Kaur said:
Bhagat Singh ji

I find your above comment intellectually irresponsible :down: given the amount of knowledge that you have of religions in general. Let's see again what your definition of "atheism" is -- your working definition, and not one that you apply to one religion or another. It could be that the hidden assumptions you are making are incorrect and hidden even from yourself.

Another problem is using common terms in idiosyncratic ways: e.g., the nirgun/sargun aspect of the Creator do not equal "Sikhs are athesists." Yet you have tried to argue that in other threads.

In order to have a discussion in which more than "one" person takes part the meanings of words have to be agreed or shared. Otherwise there is a "foolish wrangle" over issues that have not even put on the table.

I am actually confused over why you thought my comment was "intellectually irresponsible". (I not sure exactly what that phrase means to be honest) Let me clarify myself anyhow.
When I argue in favour of something, that does not necessarily mean I adhere to that viewpoint. (Usually my views change quite a bit so its meaninngless for me to say "I believe...", it's often "At the moment, I believe..." ...nowadays I won't even say "I believe")

I have never argued that "Sikh are atheists". That's simply a misunderstanding. It was always that you don't have to be a theist to be a Sikh. So you can be a Sikh and not believe in God. My argument went something like this.... that God is everything and nothing. Everything for the theist and nothing for the atheist... technically he's both but it brings theists and atheists together...bringing people together is one thing Sikhism teaches,etc ... I am sure you are familiar with that.

Anyways, it is probably idosyncratic like you said but I can't say anything to that because I have either forgotten why or never realized it or maybe it's simply not... But sargun-nirgun was where "it" all started. I came up with my argument because of it but that wasn't the only reason.
Later what supported this hypothesis was that in Sikhism, serving God is fact is done through serving humanity... which is essentially humanism (a form of atheism) in disguise. The fact that humans are above all creatures adds to the humanism thing. Then some stuff that I interpreted to be pantheistic appeard... where God is the universe (Sargun?). Pantheisism is what this guy (famous guy) calls "Sexed up atheism"... the mystified mysteries of the universe in Sikhism correspond to Einsteinian religion and have nothing to do with theism. And several other things that I cannot recall also led me to make that previously mentioned argument.

Now I am not making that argument here. In fact, I want to see what kind of arguments others present. I have presented one I have previously endorsed, above. Rebut it if you wish. Like I said I have either forgotten or never reliazed any rebuttals of it, if any.

So back to your first point
Atheism: a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods
Obviously there are different levels to it depending on what you mean by God. When Einstein used the word God, he would not be considered a theist or a believer because he used it in a metaphoric way.
Also, a Sikh will be an atheist to the judeochristian God simply because he doesn't believe in such a God as per his doctrine. A Muslim doesn't believe tha Jesus was God so he is an atheist relative to the Christian. My comment was referring to this as you know and it followed Namjap ji's comment:

Atheism is to Christianity, as Sikhism is to Hinduism and Islam? - Yahoo! Answers

Atheism is also rejection of theism. Theism in the broad sense is of course is belief is God or Gods but more specifically:" theism refers to a particular doctrine concerning the nature of God and his relationship to the universe"
Guru Nanak was obviously in disagreement with the theistic positions of his time.

At the same time I also agree with Richard Dawkins's definition of atheism because he says (because of certain arguments he puts forth...) that there is probably No God. notice the word probably, it has a more agnostic feel to it and that's because a scientist such as himself cannot be certain but can say its highly unlikely that God exists.
He puts himself at 6.9 from a scale of 1 to 7 with 1 being absolutely sure that there is a God and 7 being absolutely sure that there isn't a God.

spnadmin · Oct 7, 2009

Well there are lots of things I had on my mind to say Bhagat ji -- and maybe I will say them later. But for now -- why are you guided by Dawkins instead of Sri Guru Granth Sahib?

jasbirkaleka · Oct 8, 2009

Sat Sri Akal. I believe that being an atheist does not stop one from following the teachings of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.I fail to understand why Narayanjot Kaur is so afraid of reading God Disillusion by Richard Dawkins. How can we outright reject something without reading it,or are we too scared that it might shake our belief in what we have been taught to be the ultimate truth.

Tejwant Singh · Oct 8, 2009

jasbirkaleka said:
Sat Sri Akal. I believe that being an atheist does not stop one from following the teachings of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.I fail to understand why Narayanjot Kaur is so afraid of reading God Disillusion by Richard Dawkins. How can we outright reject something without reading it,or are we too scared that it might shake our belief in what we have been taught to be the ultimate truth.

Jasbir ji,

Guru Fateh.

I tend to agree with you. One should read books written by all atheists, Hawkings, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens and any other that I might have missed. Knowledge is our best friend. I enjoyed all their books.

The problem is not Atheism but our perception as Sikhs about it. These Atheists are against and rightfully so towards all personified deities which encompass most of the religions except the Sikhi way of life. They are against the dogmas created by the few so that the followers could adhere to them with fear otherwise they will be punished. They are against the subjective truths like Hell and Heaven but not against the objective reality on which Sikhi is based.

Ik Ong Kaar is NOT a deity but Creative Energy which is in organic and in inorganic hence we call this Creative Energy omnipresent.

I have many atheist friends who enjoy Gurbani because they have been introduced to it. I participate a lot in Christian forums and regularly quote Gurbani and many atheists who are there to bash Christianity get curious and ask me the origin of the quotes. This is one of the ways I have met many of them.

One of my best friends is an athiest who came to my wedding in Los Angeles from London and he wanted to wear a turban,which he did and he said he would only bow to SGGS but to no other Scripture because according to him, it is the universal teachings that SGGS contains gives him that urge to read and understand Gurbani.

He is an avid student of Gurbani now.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

spnadmin · Oct 8, 2009

Tejwant Singh said:
Jasbir ji,

Guru Fateh.

I tend to agree with you. One should read books written by all atheists, Hawkings, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens and any other that I might have missed. Knowledge is our best friend. I enjoyed all their books.

The problem is not Atheism but our perception as Sikhs about it. These Atheists are against and rightfully so towards all personified deities which encompass most of the religions except the Sikhi way of life. They are against the dogmas created by the few so that the followers could adhere to them with fear otherwise they will be punished. They are against the subjective truths like Hell and Heaven but not against the objective reality on which Sikhi is based.

Ik Ong Kaar is NOT a deity but Creative Energy which is in organic and in inorganic hence we call this Creative Energy omnipresent.

I have many atheist friends who enjoy Gurbani because they have been introduced to it. I participate a lot in Christian forums and regularly quote Gurbani and many atheists who are there to bash Christianity get curious and ask me the origin of the quotes. This is one of the ways I have met many of them.

One of my best friends is an athiest who came to my wedding in Los Angeles from London and he wanted to wear a turban,which he did and he said he would only bow to SGGS but to no other Scripture because according to him, it is the universal teachings that SGGS contains gives him that urge to read and understand Gurbani.

He is an avid student of Gurbani now.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

jasbirkaleka said:
Sat Sri Akal. I believe that being an atheist does not stop one from following the teachings of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.I fail to understand why Narayanjot Kaur is so afraid of reading God Disillusion by Richard Dawkins. How can we outright reject something without reading it,or are we too scared that it might shake our belief in what we have been taught to be the ultimate truth.

Have we not made a few unwarranted assumptions above? Best I not take a defensive posture. Instead I go to Dr. Dawkins.

1. He introduces his fair share of irony and contradiction. Did you notice that he opens Clip 1 by being thankful for being given "this splendid opoprtunity" of life. Opportunity given by Whom? by What? If he is an atheist then why thank anyone.? He happened! According to the laws of nature! No need to say "Thank you."

2. He puts forward in succession a number of untenable analogies: e.g., Darwin's theory of natural selection is to Intelligent Design as atheisim is to belief in deities; or, atheism is to lower life forms like George Bush as scientists are to religionists.

No, the only thing I am afraid of is death by quippiness.

So let me ask this. What do these tuks below mean? There are many similar tuks in Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj ji.

from Ang 383
kahu naanak sabh thaeree vaddiaaee koee naao n jaanai maeraa

From Ang 392
kahu naanak thaerai kurabaan

For those not reading Punjabi, clues are available. You can figure it out.

CLUES
"kahu" means "says;"

"naanka" means "Nanak;"

and "thaeree/thaerai" mean "you" in two different grammatical forms: "thaeree vaddiaaee" (Your greatness) and "thaerai" (to You)

Who is Guru Nanak talking to? or referring to? Who is "You?" "You" is actually there in each tuk. The problem of word-by-word translation doesn't really apply here because the word "you" is unmistakable. The translator is not adding or being imaginative. Who is Guru Nanak talking to? He cannot be talking to himself. Or is he?

Tejwant Singh · Oct 8, 2009

Narayanjot Kaur said:
Have we not made a few unwarranted assumptions above? Best I not take a defensive posture. Instead I go to Dr. Dawkins.

1. He introduces his fair share of irony and contradiction. Did you notice that he opens Clip 1 by being thankful for being given "this splendid opoprtunity" of life. Opportunity given by Whom? by What? If he is an atheist then why thank anyone.? He happened! According to the laws of nature! No need to say "Thank you."

2. He puts forward in succession a number of untenable analogies: e.g., Darwin's theory of natural selection is to Intelligent Design as atheisim is to belief in deities; or, atheism is to lower life forms like George Bush as scientists are to religionists.

No, the only thing I am afraid of is death by quippiness.

So let me ask this. What do these tuks below mean? There are many similar tuks in Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj ji.

from Ang 383
kahu naanak sabh thaeree vaddiaaee koee naao n jaanai maeraa

From Ang 392
kahu naanak thaerai kurabaan

For those not reading Punjabi, clues are available. You can figure it out.

CLUES
"kahu" means "says;"

"naanka" means "Nanak;"

and "thaeree/thaerai" mean "you" in two different grammatical forms: "thaeree vaddiaaee" (Your greatness) and "thaerai" (to You)

Who is Guru Nanak talking to? or referring to? Who is "You?" "You" is actually there in each tuk. The problem of word-by-word translation doesn't really apply here because the word "you" is unmistakable. The translator is not adding or being imaginative. Who is Guru Nanak talking to? He cannot be talking to himself. Or is he?

Narayanjot ji,

Guru Fateh.

I agree with you.

We are all making assumptions here.As mentioned in my post, all these Atheists talk about the personified deity not about the Creative Energy that Ik Ong Kaar is in Sikhi way of life.

How do you know Dawkins is not thanking the Creative Energy- Ik Ong Kaar, quite unknowingly?

Regarding the Gurbani Tuks, are you trying to imply that Guru Nanak is talking to some Being as Ik Ong Kaar?

Guru Nanak himself said many a times that our language is too poor to describe the awe, the wow factors and the vastness of The Source.

Guru Arjan Dev ji says:
Of all religions,This is the best:Not one of rituals,Not one of words,But the Path of Deeds -Serving the truly pious. GGS, M5, 1182:14

Do you mean the Atheists are not able to adhere to the principles mentioned about by our 5th Guru?

It is hard to meet the Creator of the Universe and beyond, our Divine Master. Ik Ong Kaar's form is immeasurable, inaccessible and unfathomable. Ik Ong Kaar is all-pervading everywhere.

Ik Ong Kaar is above all formless and indescribable, so sublime as to be totally beyond human powers of recognition, description, or conception.

Hence IT is called AJUNI- SEHBHUNG- THE CREATIVE ENERGY.

I am just talking about the Atheists I know in my life and they all have been introduced to Gurbani and enjoy it.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

BhagatSingh · Oct 8, 2009

Narayanjot Kaur ji

Well there are lots of things I had on my mind to say Bhagat ji -- and maybe I will say them later. But for now -- why are you guided by Dawkins instead of Sri Guru Granth Sahib?

Haha of course! Can't wait to hear them

I dont know why you are asking me such a question. Where did I imply that...????

1. He introduces his fair share of irony and contradiction. Did you notice that he opens Clip 1 by being thankful for being given "this splendid opoprtunity" of life. Opportunity given by Whom? by What? If he is an atheist then why thank anyone.? He happened! According to the laws of nature! No need to say "Thank you."

He doesn't say "Thank you" because that would imply he is thanking someone. He is simply feeling thankful as per this definition:
Definitions of thankful on the Web:
grateful: feeling or showing gratitude; "a grateful heart"; "grateful for the tree's shade"; "a thankful smile"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Similary using the definition of oppurtuniy...
Definitions of opportunity on the Web:
a possibility due to a favorable combination of circumstances; "the holiday gave us the opportunity to visit Washington"; "now is your chance"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Darwin's theory of natural selection is to Intelligent Design as atheisim is to belief in deities

Makes sense... what's so untenable?
The latter analogy of George Bush was humour so...

------------------------------------------------------------------
Tejwant Singh ji
Creative energy, it seems to be the basis of your argument yet you have spent no time in actually explaining what it means.
You have simply stated

Ik Ong Kaar is above all formless and indescribable, so sublime as to be totally beyond human powers of recognition, description, or conception.

Hence IT is called AJUNI- SEHBHUNG- THE CREATIVE ENERGY.

To the first bit, if Ik Ong Kaar is beyond everything, then what's purpose does he serve? How can you know anything about him or even know if he exists? Why would you then still formulate a sort of description of him?

Now the next bit:
"Ajuni Sehbung = creative energy" I finally figured out why you are calling it energy because Ajuni is translated to beyond birth, and sehbung is self-existent... as energy is neither created nor destroyed but is energy self-existent... will have to look into that. But anyhow, this is idiosyncratic (if I may repeat Narayanjot Kaur ji's term). Read the whole mool mantar .. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying, Beyond Birth, Self-Existent.
We are talking about "people qualities" so ajuni means he is not born of a woman. You cannot start personifying something and then start listing qualities of energy which is clearly non-matter... non person. Also, "no fear and no hatred" are meaningless when talking about energy... but not when talking about a person.

Atheism Sikhism And Atheism: A Philosophical Discourse

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)

jasbirkaleka

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)

BhagatSingh

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)

BhagatSingh

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)

BhagatSingh

jasbirkaleka

BhagatSingh

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

BhagatSingh

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

jasbirkaleka

Tejwant Singh

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)

Tejwant Singh

BhagatSingh

Latest Activity