• Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

The God Element

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,219
Shanger ji

Obviously your either did not read or chose to ignore my warning above, and decided to continue to bicker on this point.

In addition, do not take me to task on this thread. That will only hasten your departure.

There will be no more chances. If I find one more example of this anywhere on any thread, you are out of here permanently.
 

Shanger

SPNer
Oct 28, 2010
105
43
Any time I counter your points you delete my posts to make it look like i was flaming or something.

If you had any honour you'd reply to my posts, keeping them there, and let the readers make their own minds up.

Banned and forum leaders will decide whether to make it permanent.
 

findingmyway

Writer
SPNer
Aug 17, 2010
1,665
3,778
World citizen!
Shanger,
Freedom of speech comes with a responsibility not to be offensive for the sake of it.

It is not our job to educate you. You must do that for yourself. The Guru's were human beings but they were better humans that you or I will ever be. This is revealed through their teachings which empowered people away from the slavery of the time (slavery in terms of enforced belief systems as well as physical rule). People who are not Sikhs and have studied SGGS cannot find fault with it and agree it is a wonderful trove of wisdom. The Guru's lives also showed how amazing they were as they made many sacrifices and constantly stood up for others in a very selfless way.

The only way to remove ignorance is to research. School teaches us the skills to be able to do this. If you are really interested in Sikhi then you will spend time studying SGGS. If not, your posts become mischievous. We have many members from other faiths and belief systems. This is respected and welcomed. All we ask in return is mutual respect. Undermining SGGS on unfounded grounds is a slap in every Sikh's face.

You talk about honour. So show us your honour. Increase your understanding by being constructive not critical at every turn.
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,387
5,690
spnadmin ji this was developing into a very thought provoking thread with good participation. It appears this person just cannot tolerate good dialog. By the way dialog was not about everyone agreeing but sharing.

Is it possible to delete the posts from this person to maintain discourse without distraction?

Thank you and it will be much appreciated.

Sat Sri Akal.
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Kjsinghhyd ji,


Quoting me: What I gather from your own statements is that it doesn’t matter if one believes in God or not

Kj: For Budhhists it doesn't matter if they believe in God or not. They do believe in Nirvana and ending cycle of Life and Death.

C: Are you suggesting that in the end it does not matter what one believes in as long as one follows the suggestions of any particular religion? What the Truth is does not matter? I wonder how anyone can hold onto such a position and still be motivated enough to move in the one direction until the goal is reached?
Kj: We call this stage free from cycle as being that of merging with Waheguru. Buddhists on the other hand, don't mention God literally. And if you try and do research, they reject Creator of Universe as a deity or person.

C: So you are saying that one system of beliefs explicitly encourages a belief in God and another does not, yet both are moving towards the same goal and both would in the end come to realize directly, the reality of God? Anyway, I suspect that your source with regard to Buddhism comes from some Mahayana tradition, one which I happen to reject completely.


Kj: They reject the idea of trying to describe how the Universe was created. We reject it too. It is something which cannot be explained.

C: There is the simile of a man being shot by an arrow. Someone comes forward to help him, but this man refuses help until he finds out who shot the arrow, what his clan is and so on. When the answers are given, he insists on knowing which wood was used, which kind of bow etc., and then it is too late and he dies. This simile is used to show the danger of philosophical speculation and the importance of having enough understanding to condition a sense of urgency, one which leads to taking into consideration only what is “now”.

It is not so much a matter of ‘how’ it was created, but more of ‘when’ it all started. After all, how it is and maintained is explained by the concept of the five ‘cosmic orders’ and these are:

1. Caloric order.
2. Germinal order.
3. Moral order.
4. Psychical order.
5. Natural phenomena sequence.

Without getting into the details, I’d just point out that this explains the arising, maintenance and falling away of all conditioned existence. And with the development of understanding, one comes to be more and more convinced that this is true and was so in the past and will be in the future. The only way that this kind of understanding is ever developed, is by the study of the present moment. Everything else is speculation and some of the questions asked are symptomatic of madness even.


Kj: For us, God is the Universe, God is the Truth. And such impersonal definition of God finds acceptance with Buddhists too. They reject god born on the 7th sky and creating Adam and Eve in 6 days concept.

C: I hope that you can now see why yours must be a wrong representation of the Buddha’s teachings? Both physical and mental phenomena rise and fall away in an instant by complex set of conditions. Nothing ever remains for even one millisecond to affect other objects, let alone be the basis for the kind of belief which suggests ‘unity’ of some kind.
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Ambarsaria ji,

There is good reason why we should avoid a discussion on this topic. It would have been better had Msbaath ji made it clear from the beginning that the Buddha was not included in his or her mention of ‘enlightened’ people. But since you have asked, I think I should give a response, but would suggest that we leave it here and not go any further after this.

====
Ambarsaria:
I want to pose the following,

If two people have enlightenment and they are asked to express it, would they express it the same way and agree about the sameness of such enlightenment?

C: Only one enlightened person will understand what another enlightened person has experienced. In terms of what otherwise is the object of experience, that of enlightenment will be expressed in terms of negating all those other experiences.

====
Ambarsaria:
Supposition:
If Gautam Buddha was asked to describe his enlightenment without using the word God?
If Guru Nanak was asked to describe his enlightenment without referring to God?
Question: Would Gautam Buddha and Guru Nanak be close or far from each other?

C: Sorry I do not agree with this line of enquiry, since the fact is that the Buddha did not believe in God and Guru Nanak did so. Enlightenment is supposed to reveal the “Truth” and this is then taught to others. And it is this Truth expressed which is what attracts the followers and maintains their confidence. Had it been that it does not really matter what the conclusion arrived at is, such confidence could not be aroused.

====
Ambarsaria:
Without having the benefit of their physical presence amidst us, I humbly submit that they will be closer rather than further to their realization. For me "great minds think alike but not 100% similar".

C: Right is right, wrong is wrong and the Truth is the truth. So yes, great minds think alike. The question here however is this, did the Buddha and Guru Nanak both arrive at the same truth? We do not need them to be here in order to determine this, since it is evident in what each of them taught.

====
Ambarsaria:
I am not psychic but based on my participation on these boards and dialogs (specifically with Confused ji and many other very great contributors, I humbly submit that my observations have some iota of merit.

C: I surely would like to hear what the basis for this is. But it is perhaps better that I not insist on it.

====
Ambarsaria:
I also submit that, no two people in the world would have exact same experience of enlightenment, or express and experience enlightenment the same way.

C: There is really no need to think in terms of the quality of the ‘experience’ itself. But one thing that caught my attention in Msbaath ji’s original message was the idea that “all enlightened people would come to the same conclusion”. This is because a similar idea is expressed in Buddhism as well, namely that all enlightened people of the past and future would arrive at the same Truth and end up teaching the same thing.

====
Ambarsaria:
I also submit that search for 100% enlightenment is impossible as 100% will vary from person to person and it won't be identical.

C: No two moments are ever the same, including what goes on within the individual. But in terms of what “kind” of mental and physical phenomena there are, the experience of “seeing” for example, is the same for a fish, an insect or a man. Being that seeing has a particular characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause which are not the same as in the case of say, hearing or thinking. So sure, wisdom understands that no two moments are ever the same; however it must also have arrived at the conclusion that the elements are what they are and what conditions them. This latter is what all those who “know” will also agree upon.

====
Ambarsaria:
Hence comparing enlightenment is also fruitless.

C: And the question is, can two persons both enlightened, come to a different conclusion about the Truth?

====
Ambarsaria:
One could compare results of one's enlightenment in terms of our responses to various matters and perhaps concurrences and differentiations.

C: Yes, it would manifest in the actions performed. However, this is not really how we determine if someone is enlightened or not. Obviously, the person judging would himself have to have a good degree of understanding, but I’d suggest that this person will not be looking so much at the results, but rather the “causes”. And one sure way for this to happen, is to be involved in a discussion with the individuals concerned.

====
Ambarsaria:
Not to prove just to learn, enjoy and share respectfully.

C: I appreciate the initiative.

Regards.
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Msbaath ji,


Had you made this clear in that first post, this discussion needn’t have taken place. Perhaps, I should not have poked my nose into the matter anyway regardless of the perception. But since we have come so far and this being one of the things I had in mind and wanted to address, I’d like to response to the following part of your message:

Msbaath:
ok ur talking about buddhism
buddhism is a great religion
but i dont know much about it
because what buddha says(or what we assume he said) doesnt appeal to me( im sorry if someone is hurt)


C: At one time in my life I would probably have made a similar comment. My stating that ‘Buddhism is a great religion’ or that the ‘Buddha was enlightened’ would have been more or less a product of hearsay, rather than any attempt to study the teachings.

The Buddha at one point, in response to someone who was attracted to his outward appearance and demeanor and following him everywhere, said that “only if you understood my teachings would you really ‘see’ me”.

The implication of this is that we should first develop some understanding of what he taught before we can make any statement about the value of his teachings. And in the process we’d come to understand better the qualities of the Buddha and only then can we say that he was in fact enlightened.

And for this reason I would have preferred that you did not include the Buddha in your reference to ‘enlightened people of the past’.
Msbaath;
im not sure if i helped u in any way

C: Yes you have. ;-)
 

Kanwaljit.Singh

Writer
SPNer
Jan 29, 2011
1,502
2,173
Vancouver, Canada
Kj: For Budhhists it doesn't matter if they believe in God or not. They do believe in Nirvana and ending cycle of Life and Death.

C: Are you suggesting that in the end it does not matter what one believes in as long as one follows the suggestions of any particular religion? What the Truth is does not matter? I wonder how anyone can hold onto such a position and still be motivated enough to move in the one direction until the goal is reached?

Nirvana is like Realization, finding your Purpose. There are so many ways to define it yet it cannot be defined. There have been great Masters in every religion, as long as you are following one Master Truly, you will find Light and Truth in your life. It doesn't matter if you do Kung Fu, Karate or Tae Kwan Do. But the purpose is be able to defend. Similarly purpose of Spirituality is to Awaken and Merge your Soul with One Soul. Buddhists might call it Soul of Knowledge or something, we call the One Soul Waheguru.

Kj: We call this stage free from cycle as being that of merging with Waheguru. Buddhists on the other hand, don't mention God literally. And if you try and do research, they reject Creator of Universe as a deity or person.

C: So you are saying that one system of beliefs explicitly encourages a belief in God and another does not, yet both are moving towards the same goal and both would in the end come to realize directly, the reality of God? Anyway, I suspect that your source with regard to Buddhism comes from some Mahayana tradition, one which I happen to reject completely.

Well Sikhism doesn't consider Waheguru as a deity or person either. The systems are not different, but are perceived to be different. We think of our Souls as drops of water trying to be back in Universal Sea of Waheguru. You think your Souls at a plane, with good actions they rise up on the plane and the highest plane is of Buddha! See I am not a Buddhist, I am trying to be Sikh. I don't know fully about Buddhist traditions.

It is not so much a matter of ‘how’ it was created, but more of ‘when’ it all started. After all, how it is and maintained is explained by the concept of the five ‘cosmic orders’ and these are:

1. Caloric order.
2. Germinal order.
3. Moral order.
4. Psychical order.
5. Natural phenomena sequence.

Without getting into the details, I’d just point out that this explains the arising, maintenance and falling away of all conditioned existence. And with the development of understanding, one comes to be more and more convinced that this is true and was so in the past and will be in the future. The only way that this kind of understanding is ever developed, is by the study of the present moment. Everything else is speculation and some of the questions asked are symptomatic of madness even.

I can't talk much about these 5 Orders as I haven't read or researched about them. But there is an important question. What is Morality? How do we define something as Moral and Immoral? What is guiding us in this Judgement?

Kj: For us, God is the Universe, God is the Truth. And such impersonal definition of God finds acceptance with Buddhists too. They reject god born on the 7th sky and creating Adam and Eve in 6 days concept.

C: I hope that you can now see why yours must be a wrong representation of the Buddha’s teachings? Both physical and mental phenomena rise and fall away in an instant by complex set of conditions. Nothing ever remains for even one millisecond to affect other objects, let alone be the basis for the kind of belief which suggests ‘unity’ of some kind.

My friend, if there is anything which binds all the people, countries, planets, galaxies and universes, multiverses, it is Truth. Truth has no date of birth, Truth will never die. Truth has prevailed all creation and destruction. Truth makes people happy when they speak the Truth, Truth makes them doubt their actions when they go against it. If a Buddhist believes in Truth then how is a Buddhist different from a Sikh? Truth is the common goal in all human religions.

Truth is a natural phenomenon. If a meteor strikes Earth, then the crater stays there. As a mark of Truth, that yes a meteor did strike at that place. If some planet gets destroyed, then there are asteriods sprewn over in space. Another mark of Truth. A son has DNA of both Father and Mother, that is his mark of Truth for being a loving son.
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,387
5,690
kjsinghhyd and confused ji thanks for your comments and inputs. I have the following two comments in terms of one for Confused ji and the other for kjsinghhyd,

Confused ji states:
The Buddha at one point, in response to someone who was attracted to his outward appearance and demeanor and following him everywhere, said that “only if you understood my teachings would you really ‘see’ me”.

The implication of this is that we should first develop some understanding of what he taught before we can make any statement about the value of his teachings. And in the process we’d come to understand better the qualities of the Buddha and only then can we say that he was in fact enlightened.

Answer Ambarsaria: Confused ji I do not expect you to study Sikhism in as much detail as I will never be able to understand to your level either. One part of sentence highlighted above in your comment is verbatim used in Sikhism teachings,
"Bani Guru, Guru hai Bani, wich Bani ..... "
Translate: If you understand the writings (Gurbani or writings in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji), you will understand me or the writers.
So there is congruence of approach by the masters I recognize there may be differences in teachings.


kjsinghhyd writes:

Well Sikhism doesn't consider Waheguru as a deity or person either. The systems are not different, but are perceived to be different. We think of our Souls as drops of water trying to be back in Universal Sea of Waheguru. You think your Souls at a plane, with good actions they rise up on the plane and the highest plane is of Buddha! See I am not a Buddhist, I am trying to be Sikh. I don't know fully about Buddhist traditions.


Ambarsaria comment:

I do not believe that the following is my understanding of Sikhism and teachings thereof,

"We think of our Souls as drops of water trying to be back in Universal Sea of Waheguru."
I believe Sikhism teaches us that we need to understand the truth. We are always part of the truth but it is the understanding that is missing. So just as Confused ji believes in "the truth" per Buddhism, the same truth applies from his perspective whether one understands or not.

So Sikhism teaches that we live in the universe with an "undeniable supreme truth", what you call merging is simply the recognition of what that "truth is" which Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji guides Sikhs through. You are always living it, submerged in it before birth, during life and after death.

There is no special merging or submerging needed unless you want to classify "understanding the truth" as "submerging in the truth" where as I will call it being at peace with the truth through understanding.
Sat Sri Akal.
[/FONT]
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,387
5,690
Yup my line was metaphoircal for submerging in truth only.
kjsinghhyd ji that is great.

You are a very wise Sikh. Try to help others and share your understanding (if you are already not doing it, that is!) with your friends, family and strangers, as your understanding is very good.

Thank you.

Sat Sri Akal.:afriends2:mundahug
 

CuriousCour

SPNer
Mar 5, 2011
10
5
CuriousCour ji
there is evidence of god everywhere, all this clever creation cant be a spontaeous accident
and you say we cant be sure if gurus are speaking the truth
i agree with you we need to be skeptical
but the proof that gurus are a trustworthty source is very evident
two of our gurus have sacrificed their life for their beleif and philosophy
that means they were very sure of what they were saying
had they said something thats not true that would have implied that they are dishonest. and i dont believe a dishonest person can sacrifice his life for something
besides what gurus say is confirmed by enlightened persons of all ages and places
i dont know about you but all my skepticism has died its own death
we have examples of people who die and kill in expectation of a heaven and hooris but they are fools(fools rush where angels fear to tread)

msbaath ji,

Firstpoint: No ones saying its a spontaneous accident.Because you can't find an explantion it doesn't mean it is gods doing.Isaac Newton (who some regard as the greatest genius ever lived) attributed the workings of the solar system to god.Why? Because at the limits of his knowledge he couldn't work it out himself.Yet hundreds years later another mathematician solves the problem without referencing to god because he figured it out.Second point: Nothing is clever about this creation.In the universe planets have unstable orbits,theres radiation, extreme temperatures, you can get sucked into a black hole,thousands of meteorites are hurled against planets.On earth theres floods, earthquakes,tsunamis, volcanoes, we can't live on 2/3rds of the earth's surface. What about humans? Our teeth fall out with age, we go blind/deaf, we don't have two seperate airways so can easily choke, were warm blooded so we have to constantly eat, we can't detect magnetic fields, we can't smell lethal gases.Do you see what im getting at?
Being very sure and knowing the truth are two different things.I could be very sure in knowing that i can jump off the grand canyon and hover to safety.Doesn't mean its the truth.
 

CuriousCour

SPNer
Mar 5, 2011
10
5
First of all, it is nice you see the valuable principles Guru has given us. So anything else Guru has given us is valuable too. Including the concept of God. And now when he has given us concept of God, you have to forget any other God concept anyone else has given you. You have to unlearn about God to the point that God exists. Guru says God exists. And now you have to get into the ocean of pearls of Guru Granth Sahib. And find out about God. For this definition and understanding of God will be totally different from what you have heard so far.

kjsinghhyd ji,

Not necessarily.I could give you valuable advice on how to write a book does that then mean my advice on how to build a house is valuable?(even though i have no knowledge whatsoever of how to build a house).Thats the thing.I have never had the god concept implanted in my head so ive always investigated myself.It sounds like your saying guru said,so now you have to almost persuade yourself until you believe.
 

Kanwaljit.Singh

Writer
SPNer
Jan 29, 2011
1,502
2,173
Vancouver, Canada
If I am a doctor you will take my medical advice but not my financial advice. But Guru is wise in all spheres, for Guru Himself is the Wisdom imparted in all spheres of life. The kind of Wisdom Guru gives can be used Universally anywhere.
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Kjsinghhyd ji,


Quote:Kj: For Budhhists it doesn't matter if they believe in God or not. They do believe in Nirvana and ending cycle of Life and Death.

Old C: Are you suggesting that in the end it does not matter what one believes in as long as one follows the suggestions of any particular religion? What the Truth is does not matter? I wonder how anyone can hold onto such a position and still be motivated enough to move in the one direction until the goal is reached?

KjS: Nirvana is like Realization, finding your Purpose. There are so many ways to define it yet it cannot be defined.

Cf: Yes Nirvana can’t be defined for the simple reason that it is the “unconditioned reality’ and all we ever experience and come from are the “conditioned realities”. But allow me to use the Pali word now instead of the Sanskrit, since I want to avoid any Mahayana misconceptions.

The experience of Nibbana is not akin to ‘finding the purpose’. It is the unconditioned reality which becomes the object of enlightenment, when the perception of the unconditioned helps to see through the nature of conditioned phenomena and eradicates particular unwholesome tendencies depending on the stage of enlightenment. This can only ever happen with the development of wisdom when conditioned realities are insighted and understood over a long period of time, such that in the end one is ready to experience the unconditioned.

The experience itself is very momentary and one goes on living one’s life as usual, only without particular unwholesome experiences beginning with wrong view, doubt and tendency to rite and ritual ever arising again. At this stage it becomes impossible to break the five precepts, namely, killing, stealing, lying etc. Later at higher levels of enlightenment are eradicated, sensual desire and aversion. Finally at the last stage, attachment to being, ignorance and conceit are no more.

=======
KjS: There have been great Masters in every religion, as long as you are following one Master Truly, you will find Light and Truth in your life. It doesn't matter if you do Kung Fu, Karate or Tae Kwan Do. But the purpose is be able to defend.

Cf: With Truth as the aim, my question is whether the ‘cause’ professed matches this. But of course, it’s just an idea each person projects a personal meaning into.

=======
KjS: Similarly purpose of Spirituality is to Awaken and Merge your Soul with One Soul. Buddhists might call it Soul of Knowledge or something, we call the One Soul Waheguru.

Cf: I take it that what you mean by ‘merge’ is in fact a reference to ‘Awakening’.

The Truth to be understood (gradually) according to Buddhism, are all that goes on from moment to moment through the five senses and the mind. In any one of these momentary experiences, there is no self or soul, but only mental and physical elements conditioning each other, rising and falling away together instantly. Therefore if one starts off with the perception of a self or soul and aim at what one thinks to be the Truth, this is an instance of a ‘cause’ not being in line with the result aimed at. But of course, it will lead somewhere which will then be mistaken for Truth, and I call this ‘illusion of result’. The fact is that ‘self-view’ or ‘wrong view’ stands in direct opposition to right view, which the development of wisdom is all about.

=======
<snip>
KjS: Well Sikhism doesn't consider Waheguru as a deity or person either.


Cf: I know this.

=======
KjS: The systems are not different, but are perceived to be different. We think of our Souls as drops of water trying to be back in Universal Sea of Waheguru. You think your Souls at a plane, with good actions they rise up on the plane and the highest plane is of Buddha! See I am not a Buddhist, I am trying to be Sikh. I don't know fully about Buddhist traditions.

Cf: Yes, you don’t know where I am coming from. It is not the Buddhism that has so far been your source of information.

There is of course no self or soul to rise from one plane to the next. One must also distinguish plane of existence from plane of consciousness, and realize that all this is in fact all about the development of wisdom, such that no matter which plane of existence one finds oneself in, when the conditions are appropriate, this wisdom can arise.

Unless one has reached at least the first stage of enlightenment, there is no guarantee that rebirth in a good plane will happen. Being reborn in higher realms is the result of good deeds, and this can happen without having to follow the Buddha’s teachings. The Buddha’s teachings are however aimed at the development of right understanding and not to being reborn in ever higher planes.

In other words, yes, good deeds lead to good results (rebirth being one), however this would still be the stuff of continued existence in the cycle of birth and death. The development of wisdom on the other hand, is the one cause which can lead to going out of this cycle.

======
<snip>
KjS: I can't talk much about these 5 Orders as I haven't read or researched about them. But there is an important question. What is Morality? How do we define something as Moral and Immoral? What is guiding us in this Judgement?

Cf: The only thing that can ever guide us is the understanding of the difference between good states and evil states. Greed, aversion, ignorance and all those realities which depend on these such as conceit, wrong view, jealousy, doubt, shamelessness and so on are the evil states. On the other side, the good states include non-greed, non-hatred, wisdom and all the realities in dependence, such as generosity, kindness, faith, compassion and morality. All these states rise and fall away by conditions and it is imperative that we know them by their characteristics, as and when they appear.

This is the only real basis for morality. In short, good is good because it is, and bad is bad because it is. In the absence of such understanding, we usually end up relying on reference points that are arbitrary. This can only lead to doubt and much mischief in the long run. The truth is that there is never any justification to have aversion, to kill, to steal to lie, to be jealous, to miserliness and so on, yet we often find ourselves wondering whether we should act this way or that way in certain situations. On the other hand, there is never a moment where kindness is not called for, but not really knowing what this is; we sometimes feel justified for being angry or else go on to express attachment, mistaking it for kindness.

But then there is so much more accumulations for ignorance and other evil that it should be expected that only rarely can we act morally. This is why according to the Buddha’s teachings the five moral precepts are said to be “training rules” rather than commandments. Since in the end, we are meant to “understand” them and not just follow.

=======
Quote:Kj: For us, God is the Universe, God is the Truth. And such impersonal definition of God finds acceptance with Buddhists too. They reject god born on the 7th sky and creating Adam and Eve in 6 days concept.

Old C: I hope that you can now see why yours must be a wrong representation of the Buddha’s teachings? Both physical and mental phenomena rise and fall away in an instant by complex set of conditions. Nothing ever remains for even one millisecond to affect other objects, let alone be the basis for the kind of belief which suggests ‘unity’ of some kind.

KjS: My friend, if there is anything which binds all the people, countries, planets, galaxies and universes, multiverses, it is Truth.

Cf: You mean as in Gaddhafi to his people or the Al Queda to the U.S. government? ;-)

=========
KjS: Truth has no date of birth, Truth will never die. Truth has prevailed all creation and destruction. Truth makes people happy when they speak the Truth, Truth makes them doubt their actions when they go against it. If a Buddhist believes in Truth then how is a Buddhist different from a Sikh? Truth is the common goal in all human religions.

Cf: At one time I thought that it was good that some people set out on the “quest for truth”. However now I am not impressed by the idea anymore. Now I consider only understanding itself, no matter what level, to be aimed at the Truth. In other words, only if one has had an inkling of what the Truth is, can one make any correct statement with regard to it. All other instances of referring to the concept must in fact be rooted in ignorance and craving, and this can never lead to the good.

Shame and fear of evil is what keeps the human world from becoming like animals. Morality exists because to be human is to have some capacity to judge right from wrong. But only wisdom can recognize wisdom, and only this can understand the Truth.

=========
KjS: Truth is a natural phenomenon. If a meteor strikes Earth, then the crater stays there. As a mark of Truth, that yes a meteor did strike at that place. If some planet gets destroyed, then there are asteriods sprewn over in space. Another mark of Truth. A son has DNA of both Father and Mother, that is his mark of Truth for being a loving son.

Cf: While observing a meteor, there are the experience through the five senses and the mind, without which the idea of ‘meteor’ wouldn’t even be conceived of. In the absence of any understanding about these, one is left to work only with shadows / concepts. If craving arises and one is not aware of this, all perceptions and subsequent proliferations follow the dictates of ignorance and this same craving. If the knowledge derived from such ignorance is mistaken for Truth, this is a case of being deluded.

When matter contacts another matter, this is in accordance with the ‘caloric order’ and is a Truth. But do we know this? Do we not instead conceive of the ideas, meteor, earth and the activity of striking, and build a story around this all the while driven by ignorance and attachment ? Would the qualifying as Truth such a case not then be meaningless?
 

Kanwaljit.Singh

Writer
SPNer
Jan 29, 2011
1,502
2,173
Vancouver, Canada
Quote:Kj: For Budhhists it doesn't matter if they believe in God or not. They do believe in Nirvana and ending cycle of Life and Death.
Old C: Are you suggesting that in the end it does not matter what one believes in as long as one follows the suggestions of any particular religion? What the Truth is does not matter? I wonder how anyone can hold onto such a position and still be motivated enough to move in the one direction until the goal is reached?

KjS: Nirvana is like Realization, finding your Purpose. There are so many ways to define it yet it cannot be defined.

Cf: Yes Nirvana can’t be defined for the simple reason that it is the “unconditioned reality’ and all we ever experience and come from are the “conditioned realities”. But allow me to use the Pali word now instead of the Sanskrit, since I want to avoid any Mahayana misconceptions.

The experience of Nibbana is not akin to ‘finding the purpose’. It is the unconditioned reality which becomes the object of enlightenment, when the perception of the unconditioned helps to see through the nature of conditioned phenomena and eradicates particular unwholesome tendencies depending on the stage of enlightenment. This can only ever happen with the development of wisdom when conditioned realities are insighted and understood over a long period of time, such that in the end one is ready to experience the unconditioned.

The experience itself is very momentary and one goes on living one’s life as usual, only without particular unwholesome experiences beginning with wrong view, doubt and tendency to rite and ritual ever arising again. At this stage it becomes impossible to break the five precepts, namely, killing, stealing, lying etc. Later at higher levels of enlightenment are eradicated, sensual desire and aversion. Finally at the last stage, attachment to being, ignorance and conceit are no more.

Well said. The experience is momentary but the lesson learnt lasts till the end of life.


=======
KjS: There have been great Masters in every religion, as long as you are following one Master Truly, you will find Light and Truth in your life. It doesn't matter if you do Kung Fu, Karate or Tae Kwan Do. But the purpose is be able to defend.

Cf: With Truth as the aim, my question is whether the ‘cause’ professed matches this. But of course, it’s just an idea each person projects a personal meaning into.

=======
KjS: Similarly purpose of Spirituality is to Awaken and Merge your Soul with One Soul. Buddhists might call it Soul of Knowledge or something, we call the One Soul Waheguru.
Cf: I take it that what you mean by ‘merge’ is in fact a reference to ‘Awakening’.

The Truth to be understood (gradually) according to Buddhism, are all that goes on from moment to moment through the five senses and the mind. In any one of these momentary experiences, there is no self or soul, but only mental and physical elements conditioning each other, rising and falling away together instantly. Therefore if one starts off with the perception of a self or soul and aim at what one thinks to be the Truth, this is an instance of a ‘cause’ not being in line with the result aimed at. But of course, it will lead somewhere which will then be mistaken for Truth, and I call this ‘illusion of result’. The fact is that ‘self-view’ or ‘wrong view’ stands in direct opposition to right view, which the development of wisdom is all about.

=======

KjS: Well Sikhism doesn't consider Waheguru as a deity or person either.


Cf: I know this.
=======
KjS: The systems are not different, but are perceived to be different. We think of our Souls as drops of water trying to be back in Universal Sea of Waheguru. You think your Souls at a plane, with good actions they rise up on the plane and the highest plane is of Buddha! See I am not a Buddhist, I am trying to be Sikh. I don't know fully about Buddhist traditions.

Cf: Yes, you don’t know where I am coming from. It is not the Buddhism that has so far been your source of information.

There is of course no self or soul to rise from one plane to the next. One must also distinguish plane of existence from plane of consciousness, and realize that all this is in fact all about the development of wisdom, such that no matter which plane of existence one finds oneself in, when the conditions are appropriate, this wisdom can arise.

Unless one has reached at least the first stage of enlightenment, there is no guarantee that rebirth in a good plane will happen. Being reborn in higher realms is the result of good deeds, and this can happen without having to follow the Buddha’s teachings. The Buddha’s teachings are however aimed at the development of right understanding and not to being reborn in ever higher planes.

In other words, yes, good deeds lead to good results (rebirth being one), however this would still be the stuff of continued existence in the cycle of birth and death. The development of wisdom on the other hand, is the one cause which can lead to going out of this cycle.

I am not aware of a separate plane of conscience from the plane of existence. Maybe I understand the concept, but can't put it in words. And wisdom leads to good deeds. An unwise person will not have many good deeds.

======
<snip>
KjS: I can't talk much about these 5 Orders as I haven't read or researched about them. But there is an important question. What is Morality? How do we define something as Moral and Immoral? What is guiding us in this Judgement?


Cf: The only thing that can ever guide us is the understanding of the difference between good states and evil states. Greed, aversion, ignorance and all those realities which depend on these such as conceit, wrong view, jealousy, doubt, shamelessness and so on are the evil states. On the other side, the good states include non-greed, non-hatred, wisdom and all the realities in dependence, such as generosity, kindness, faith, compassion and morality. All these states rise and fall away by conditions and it is imperative that we know them by their characteristics, as and when they appear.

This is the only real basis for morality. In short, good is good because it is, and bad is bad because it is. In the absence of such understanding, we usually end up relying on reference points that are arbitrary. This can only lead to doubt and much mischief in the long run. The truth is that there is never any justification to have aversion, to kill, to steal to lie, to be jealous, to miserliness and so on, yet we often find ourselves wondering whether we should act this way or that way in certain situations. On the other hand, there is never a moment where kindness is not called for, but not really knowing what this is; we sometimes feel justified for being angry or else go on to express attachment, mistaking it for kindness.


But then there is so much more accumulations for ignorance and other evil that it should be expected that only rarely can we act morally. This is why according to the Buddha’s teachings the five moral precepts are said to be “training rules” rather than commandments. Since in the end, we are meant to “understand” them and not just follow.

See there is this common understanding of difference between good and bad states. It is common to all. It is like some inexplainable phenomenon which exists in the world. You can say good is good because it is. But it's hard to explain this to others. This understanding is what we call that God has come to abide in your heart, rule your heart or be active in your heart/mind. All we pray is for God or Understanding to be active and guide us down the good path.

=======
Quote:Kj: For us, God is the Universe, God is the Truth. And such impersonal definition of God finds acceptance with Buddhists too. They reject god born on the 7th sky and creating Adam and Eve in 6 days concept.

Old C: I hope that you can now see why yours must be a wrong representation of the Buddha’s teachings? Both physical and mental phenomena rise and fall away in an instant by complex set of conditions. Nothing ever remains for even one millisecond to affect other objects, let alone be the basis for the kind of belief which suggests ‘unity’ of some kind.

KjS: My friend, if there is anything which binds all the people, countries, planets, galaxies and universes, multiverses, it is Truth.

Cf: You mean as in Gaddhafi to his people or the Al Queda to the U.S. government? ;-)

Yes, the Truth binding the Libyans is that they have been quiet for so long, and so they seek democracy by shouting. And the Truth is that CIA trained Al Qaeda to route the Russians out.
=========
KjS: Truth has no date of birth, Truth will never die. Truth has prevailed all creation and destruction. Truth makes people happy when they speak the Truth, Truth makes them doubt their actions when they go against it. If a Buddhist believes in Truth then how is a Buddhist different from a Sikh? Truth is the common goal in all human religions.

Cf: At one time I thought that it was good that some people set out on the “quest for truth”. However now I am not impressed by the idea anymore. Now I consider only understanding itself, no matter what level, to be aimed at the Truth. In other words, only if one has had an inkling of what the Truth is, can one make any correct statement with regard to it. All other instances of referring to the concept must in fact be rooted in ignorance and craving, and this can never lead to the good.

Shame and fear of evil is what keeps the human world from becoming like animals. Morality exists because to be human is to have some capacity to judge right from wrong. But only wisdom can recognize wisdom, and only this can understand the Truth.
Don't mind my use of words. But it is common saying that wisdom which is not practiced doesn't become knowledge. If you understand Truth but don't practice it in life fully (where quest for Truth is Metaphor) then you will lose your wisdom of Truth (it will fade away). In Sikhism it is said, Truth is High, Higher still is Truthful Living. Our Guru says a person who lives in Truth, is a True Divine being.

=========
KjS: Truth is a natural phenomenon. If a meteor strikes Earth, then the crater stays there. As a mark of Truth, that yes a meteor did strike at that place. If some planet gets destroyed, then there are asteriods sprewn over in space. Another mark of Truth. A son has DNA of both Father and Mother, that is his mark of Truth for being a loving son.

Cf: While observing a meteor, there are the experience through the five senses and the mind, without which the idea of ‘meteor’ wouldn’t even be conceived of. In the absence of any understanding about these, one is left to work only with shadows / concepts. If craving arises and one is not aware of this, all perceptions and subsequent proliferations follow the dictates of ignorance and this same craving. If the knowledge derived from such ignorance is mistaken for Truth, this is a case of being deluded.

When matter contacts another matter, this is in accordance with the ‘caloric order’ and is a Truth. But do we know this? Do we not instead conceive of the ideas, meteor, earth and the activity of striking, and build a story around this all the while driven by ignorance and attachment ? Would the qualifying as Truth such a case not then be meaningless?

There are 2 things here. One is that things observed by the 5 senses and the mind are not True but ignorance. It may be, but until the Truth is fully revealed/understood by me, I cannot call the former ignorance. It is like till you don't get one thing in hand, you don't let go of other. In any case, attachment of any sort is not good. Secondly I was just giving an example of when matter contacts matter and it leads to changes in both of them.
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Ambarsaria ji,


Cf: Not being difficult or arguing just for the sake of arguing.

We know that Sikh teachings emphasize ‘understanding’ just as Buddhist teachings do. It is not unreasonable then that the kind of conclusion will be arrived at through simple reasoning. The question should be, what is the understanding that is being encouraged in either case. And this you know is different.

On a couple of occasions in the past, I pointed out to my Buddhist friends some ideas from Sikhism that is similar to that of Buddhism, such as the rejection of rites and ritual and the idea that if one associates with fools, it is akin to handling coal. At the time I entertained the thought that this was the result of Guru Nanak’s extensive study of other religions and therefore he must have been influenced to some extent by Buddhism as well. Although I do not insist on this idea anymore and believe that it is possible that he arrived at what he did independently, it is very clear to me, that the ‘understanding’ pointed at is very different indeed.

Similarly there are ideas expressed in Taoism and Sufism that I know are similar to that of Buddhism, but let me take one idea, a quote I once liked very much, as example to illustrate why I think the underlying understanding is so different.

There is a Sufi saying that goes something like this:

“You can’t ride a camel which hasn’t arrived and you can’t ride one which is already gone.”

This is a statement encouraging of taking the present moment as reference point and as basis for knowledge. People who follow Buddhism are attracted by this same idea. But just as most Buddhists get it wrong due to their lack of understanding of the difference between reality and concept, everyone else who has not made this distinction, would have a different understanding about this.

*The present moment is defined by the reality which presents itself.* And the understanding would be that it has already fallen away. This attending to the present reality can’t happen simply by deciding to do so, since this would be equivalent to an attempt to ride the camel which has either just gone or one which hasn’t arrived yet. The thinking which thinks to note, would be the reality of the present moment and is not known, but instead the object of this thinking which must necessarily be a concept, is taken for real and proliferated upon.

In other words, what most people understand as being present, are such things as “when sitting, one knows that one is sitting” or “when washing the dishes, one is aware of washing the dishes”. But these are concepts, of self, activity and situation, while the realities of thinking, seeing, touching, visible object, feeling, memory, attachment, ignorance etc. rise and fall away unknown.

One kind of object is the basis for the development of wisdom and insight, the other kind is basically no different from that which has given rise to all the theories and philosophies about self and the world that we see lined up on shelves in any library. And is why I can’t expect to learn anything worthwhile from any of these books. Indeed such perceptions is what leads to identification as ‘me’, ‘mine’ and ‘I’ which in turn are cause for much evil and also one’s own suffering. Of the three, self-view (or wrong view), attachment, and conceit, the first is said to be the most dangerous, and is very hard to see.

Attachment and conceit are often perceived in fact, through the lens of self-view and this creates an illusion of ‘knowing’, and so one ends up thinking that one is on the right track when in reality it is not. It is like one has had a glimpse of the wrongness of the other two unwholesome realities, but quickly fall prey to the third one. But this is to be expected since self-view or wrong-view is hidden and can only ever be revealed and taught by a Buddha. This is why he is sometimes referred to as ‘Anatta-vadin’ or the ‘teacher of non-self’.

Ambarsaria ji, the above is meant to illustrate how different the Buddha’s teaching is from all other religions and philosophies. I am quite sure that you will never accept it and make it part of how you perceive things. But I do hope that you will pause to consider, the next time that you are inclined to see similarities between Buddhism and Sikhism, whether or not it can be misleading.
 
Aug 28, 2010
1,514
1,116
73
OUR GURUS HAVE NOT GIVEN THE CONCEPT OF GOD ANYWHERE.

GURU IS GIVING THE CONCEPT OF GURU-GUR WHICH SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD AS GURU JOTi that is A WAVE OF THE WORD GURU which is INFINITE WITH NO START-MID OR END.In SHORT GURU GUR IS ALSO REFFERED AS GUR ONLY.

WHAT I FIND IS THAT THE WORD GOD IS OUR OWN INTRODUCTION FOR GUR.

BY VERTUE OF THE WORD GUR WE REFER BANI AS GURBANI.

SO WE SHOULD ANALYSE HOW CORRECT IS THE USE OF WORD GOD IN GURBANI.?

PRAKASH.S.BAGGA
 
Nov 14, 2004
408
388
63
Thailand
Kanwaljit ji,


==
<snip>
Kj:
Well said. The experience is momentary but the lesson learnt lasts till the end of life.


Con: Thanks. But I wonder if you took into account the part about the need for development of wisdom over a long period of time? ;-)

=======

<snip>

Kj:
I am not aware of a separate plane of conscience from the plane of existence. Maybe I understand the concept, but can't put it in words. And wisdom leads to good deeds. An unwise person will not have many good deeds.


Con: Yes, wisdom leads to good deeds. An unwise person may have accumulated the tendency to good deeds such that it can arise often. However, without wisdom, this tendency will not get any stronger but in fact diminish.

======
<snip>
Kj:
See there is this common understanding of difference between good and bad states. It is common to all.


Con: I once suggested that people who are attracted to religion do so initially, because of the teachings about the value of morality, kindness, compassion, giving, honesty and other kinds of good. Indeed one of my intentions was to encourage people here to consider more about this aspect of their religion while I try to overlook the other ideas that I do not agree with. This was fine in theory, but now I realize that it is not so in practice.

Some of the reasons for this include the fact that this was an undertaking for which I’m not equipped enough. The idea to address this particular aspect while keeping separate certain core ideas is not practical, although had I known that the Sikh understanding about Karma is what I now see, I’d probably not even have tried. But allow me to highlight one particular difference in understanding.

The idea of encouraging good and discouraging evil, in the case of certain other religions, is based on the understanding about the nature and value of good states and harm in bad ones, beginning with attachment to sense objects. While Buddhism does encourage all kinds of good, its aim however is to understand all states, be it good, bad or indeterminate, and also all matter, as impermanent, insubstantial and non-self. In other words, while other religions “understand the value” of say, morality, Buddhism “sees it for what it is”.

And this understanding would include seeing them as elements, as aggregates, as base, as cause (karma), resultants or functional, as wholesome, unwholesome or indeterminate and more. One also comes to know besides the characteristics and manifestation of each reality, their functions and proximate cause. However from the very beginning, understanding the difference between concept and reality is necessary if further development is to happen.

So while other religions, despite seeing the value of good and harm of evil, end up ‘identifying’ with their experiences as me, mine and I, Buddhism does not see any ‘self’ or ‘soul‘ anywhere, but only impersonal elements.

I hope that you now see the difference Kj?

=====
Kj:
It is like some inexplainable phenomenon which exists in the world. You can say good is good because it is. But it's hard to explain this to others.


Con: Not at all. I say this because we can directly know it. You are unnecessarily making it into something mysterious.

The fact is that you and I make reference to moral states all day and this is because they are very much real. Kindness is a state of mind, ill-will is a state of mind, and similarly moral restraint is a state of mind. Each of these has particular characteristic, function and cause. They can be referred to and communicated to others precisely because everyone experiences them, except that there is no understanding involved. And this is why we need to at least learn about them from those who do understand. And why failing this we end up with our own misleading theories.

========
<snip>
KjS: My friend, if there is anything which binds all the people, countries, planets, galaxies and universes, multiverses, it is Truth.

Quote:Cf: You mean as in Gaddhafi to his people or the Al Queda to the U.S. government? ;-)


Kj:
Yes, the Truth binding the Libyans is that they have been quiet for so long, and so they seek democracy by shouting. And the Truth is that CIA trained Al Qaeda to route the Russians out.


Con: You mean anything that we can think of about a situation can be referred to as reflecting some underlying truth?

======
Quote:KjS: Truth has no date of birth, Truth will never die. Truth has prevailed all creation and destruction. Truth makes people happy when they speak the Truth, Truth makes them doubt their actions when they go against it. If a Buddhist believes in Truth then how is a Buddhist different from a Sikh? Truth is the common goal in all human religions.

Quote:Cf: At one time I thought that it was good that some people set out on the “quest for truth”. However now I am not impressed by the idea anymore. Now I consider only understanding itself, no matter what level, to be aimed at the Truth. In other words, only if one has had an inkling of what the Truth is, can one make any correct statement with regard to it. All other instances of referring to the concept must in fact be rooted in ignorance and craving, and this can never lead to the good.


Kj:
Don't mind my use of words. But it is common saying that wisdom which is not practiced doesn't become knowledge. If you understand Truth but don't practice it in life fully (where quest for Truth is Metaphor) then you will lose your wisdom of Truth (it will fade away).


Con: One starts off ignorant about the Truth and then one hears about it. Most people do not even appreciate it but for those who do; it starts with intellectual understanding and reflective acceptance. This *is* a level of understanding and must accumulate before it can become ‘practice’. If one thinks to practice when the understanding at the intellectual level is absent or weak, one can be sure that the driving force must be ignorance and craving.

What do you mean by practice Kj?

=====
Kj:

In Sikhism it is said, Truth is High, Higher still is Truthful Living. Our Guru says a person who lives in Truth, is a True Divine being.

Con: I would say, just develop understanding and allow it to lead the way. Be wary of any ambition with regard to practice and results, because this would surely take you in the wrong direction.

=========
Quote:KjS: Truth is a natural phenomenon. If a meteor strikes Earth, then the crater stays there. As a mark of Truth, that yes a meteor did strike at that place. If some planet gets destroyed, then there are asteriods sprewn over in space. Another mark of Truth. A son has DNA of both Father and Mother, that is his mark of Truth for being a loving son.

Quote:Cf: While observing a meteor, there are the experience through the five senses and the mind, without which the idea of ‘meteor’ wouldn’t even be conceived of. In the absence of any understanding about these, one is left to work only with shadows / concepts. If craving arises and one is not aware of this, all perceptions and subsequent proliferations follow the dictates of ignorance and this same craving. If the knowledge derived from such ignorance is mistaken for Truth, this is a case of being deluded.

When matter contacts another matter, this is in accordance with the ‘caloric order’ and is a Truth. But do we know this? Do we not instead conceive of the ideas, meteor, earth and the activity of striking, and build a story around this all the while driven by ignorance and attachment ? Would the qualifying as Truth such a case not then be meaningless?


Kj:
There are 2 things here. One is that things observed by the 5 senses and the mind are not True but ignorance. It may be, but until the Truth is fully revealed/understood by me, I cannot call the former ignorance. It is like till you don't get one thing in hand, you don't let go of other.


Con: Like I said above, one hears about the Truth, accepts it and proceeds from there. And as explained, the Truth according to Buddhism is just these experiences through the five senses and the mind and their objects (excepting concepts / ideas) when known for what they are. After having made the reality vs. concept distinction, we can be sure that if we do not have any awareness of say, visible object and only the perception of people and things, that there must indeed be ignorance there. Or, since we accept that each reality must have a characteristic, if we find ourselves thinking for example, that objects and situations perceived are real, then not only is there ignorance, but wrong understanding as well.

This is intellectual understanding, and is how it must be for every beginner. There is much to be developed (over lifetimes) at this level itself before little by little, ‘practice’ arises and develops. So you don’t actually need to have great wisdom before you can let go, indeed there must be an element of detachment from the very beginning of development, including at the level of intellectual understanding. Only this happens with understanding and is not something we can decide to ‘do’ or make happen.

=======
Kj:
In any case, attachment of any sort is not good. Secondly I was just giving an example of when matter contacts matter and it leads to changes in both of them.


Con: Please give me an example of matter. I am quite sure our understanding of what this is, is quite different.

Thanks for engaging me in this discussion.
 
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:

Latest Activity

Top