The Gurus Were Not "chosen"

[BhagatSingh]

My title for the post is that they weren't chosen. "Chosen" being not chosen by God. But yet me make out everything that the Guru's did was because of God's will. You're saying whats the big deal, if they did take it upon themselves? The gurus weren't just teachers, or priest-like. They were leaders, military leaders. People followed them, listened to them, gave their lives to the gurus. If you take out God and religion from this, then what do you have - a Monarchy. But then everyone is going to claim, so what if it was "monarchistic". They guru's were virtuous , they taught the truth, all was goody-goody. So lets take today's current world. Are any of you okay with the concept of a Monarch gov't. You mean to tell me, in the times of the Gurus there were no other true-righteous persons who could have taken the "throne".

Guru Hargobind by passes his own son (Guru Tegh Bahadur) and choose his grandson Guru Har Rai. Guru Har Rai was 14 when he took over, and Guru Teg Bahadur during that year was 23 years old. And reason why Guru Tegh Bahadur was not 'chosen" because he wasn't ready to lead men, probably lead for battle. Yet a 14 yr old is ready, quite interesting. Then at the age of 31 Guru Har Rai declares his youngest son (Guru Harkrishan) to be the next guru at the age of 5. FIVE!!! Amazing. A five a year old was chosen. Tell me was that God's will or a desperate father's choice to keep it within the family, because his older son (13 yrs of age) was excommunicated from Sikhi.

If you believe a monarch system is wrong, then the Guru's were wrong to.

Gurgaddi within the family
Bibi Bhani ji did immense seva for Guru Amar Das ji and she requested that the Gurgaddi remain within the family. He granted her that, and so did the later Gurus.

There are both pros and cons to this approach and to the merit-based approach of the previous gurus.

So it is true that Guru Hari Gobind ji, Guru Hari Rai ji, Guru Hari Krishan ji and Guru Gobind SIngh ji were all very young when they obtained Gurugaddi.

They got mentoring from the elders who were attached to the Guru's families. E.g. Guru Gobind Singh ji learned from Pandit Kripa Ram ji. His family was very attached to the Gurus from a long time, and so he mentored Guru sahib throughout his life.

About Monarchy
Even heaven is a monarchy, with the Father and King, Akal Purakh sahib at the top.

I don't believe monarchy is inherently wrong, just like I don't believe democracy is inherently right.

These are different systems of governance that each have their pros and cons.

Chosen by God

Kavi Kalya ji ki bani from Guru Granth Sahib -

ਸਤਜੁਗਿ ਤੈ ਮਾਣਿਓ ਛਲਿਓ ਬਲਿ ਬਾਵਨ ਭਾਇਓ ॥
In Satyug, You enjoyed deceiving and liberating King Bali in the Vaman avtar.

ਤ੍ਰੇਤੈ ਤੈ ਮਾਣਿਓ ਰਾਮੁ ਰਘੁਵੰਸੁ ਕਹਾਇਓ ॥
In Treta, You loved being called King Ram, of the Raghu Dynasty.

ਦੁਆਪੁਰਿ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਮੁਰਾਰਿ ਕੰਸੁ ਕਿਰਤਾਰਥੁ ਕੀਓ ॥
In Dwapar, You, Krishan Murari, killed Kans and saved everyone.

ਉਗ੍ਰਸੈਣ ਕਉ ਰਾਜੁ ਅਭੈ ਭਗਤਹ ਜਨ ਦੀਓ ॥
You granted Kingship to Ugrasain and elevated your devotees.

ਕਲਿਜੁਗਿ ਪ੍ਰਮਾਣੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰੁ ਅੰਗਦੁ ਅਮਰੁ ਕਹਾਇਓ ॥
In Kaliyug, You came as Guru Nanak Dev, Guru Angad Dev and Guru Amar Das.

ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਰਾਜੁ ਅਬਿਚਲੁ ਅਟਲੁ ਆਦਿ ਪੁਰਖਿ ਫੁਰਮਾਇਓ ॥੭॥
The rule of Guru Sahibs is unchanging, unmovable, by the very command of the Primal Being.

 

[Sikhilove]

OP- You don't understand the concept of Karma.

And you dont respect Gods will.

Why put a donkey on a throne when you can crown a King. Blood doesn't matter, Nanaks family proved that from the beginning.

 

[Truthsikher31]

OP- You don't understand the concept of Karma.

And you dont respect Gods will.

Why put a donkey on a throne when you can crown a King. Blood doesn't matter, Nanaks family proved that from the beginning.

There's so many conflicts with your response, not sure where to begin.
Let's see I don't respect "God's" will and I don't get the concept of karma. Sounds more like a threat from God
Karma - what goes around comes around. And according to you since I'm being disrespectful to Gods choices, something bad is going to happen to me? But isn't God all good? So if he is true and I'm just an idiot rambling on, then he's going to punish me? Interesting. Is he gonna take me away from me or my kids away from me, or something worse? That would be a {censored} move on his end, no? Or maybe you can help me understand.

Why put a donkey on the throne when you can put a king. Very interesting. So who decided who was the donkey and who was king. And very interesting you used the word "king". Kinda helps me prove my point about being a monarchy. Back to the donkey part. We're the gurus families and bloodlines pure and the rest of the people were jackasses? Guess so, since they must be fools. But wait doesn't sikhi preach all are equal, including women? So then how is a family of gurus more worthy? The women that wed into the families must be pure to then, since they give birth to these gurus. And what about those womens parents? Meaning the gurus in-laws were they all Sikhs? Were they worthy?
Help me to understand who the donkeys and kings were.
Blood doesn't matter, well according to history it did. If it didn't matter, why were some gurus kids when they were chosen. Why not some more qualified adult who wasn't family.
Nanaks family proves blood doesn't matter? That's a poor example to use since he started sikhi. But after the third guru, is where choosing the gurus system gets flawed .

My point is God didn't personally choose these gurus. Nor did God communicate to each guru which to choose next. These were man made choices , just like how all religions are man made up.
I find it ironic that when given the name Singh, and being called Lions, that most people become like sheeps the moment something not so nice is questioned about sikhi.
Let's say for a second o agree with you that there is a God. And as Sikhs we dont cut our hair because God gave us that hair. And we perfect and beautiful in his image and creation. So is the brain, the mind. It's a beautiful gift we posses. So then why do you disrespect that gift, by giving up so lazily.
Oh a natural disaster just occured, killing thousands and damaging unimaginable. Why did that happen, oh its Gods plan.
Thousands of children die at or before birth, was that Gods plan? Was that his will? Ya none of us can prove the (Whys), but then is God still all good?
You talk about Karma, is that Gods game? Love me endlessly or be punished?

Someone else posted even if the Gurus selection was like a monarchy, what's the big deal? Everything was "all good". So that makes it okay? But who decides what they did, what they taught was "right". Other religions at the time didn't agree with them, not all. Ans yet, most Sikhs will still say the Guru's were right and good, because its their pride talking. Chances are when your born in to a religion, you'll think your religion is the best and can't do no wrong.

Before you start to get all defensive, and try to scare with empty threats, think about what you just said.

 

[Ishna]

There's so many conflicts with your response, not sure where to begin.
Let's see I don't respect "God's" will and I don't get the concept of karma. Sounds more like a threat from God
Karma - what goes around comes around. And according to you since I'm being disrespectful to Gods choices, something bad is going to happen to me? But isn't God all good? So if he is true and I'm just an idiot rambling on, then he's going to punish me? Interesting. Is he gonna take me away from me or my kids away from me, or something worse? That would be a {censored} move on his end, no? Or maybe you can help me understand.

Why put a donkey on the throne when you can put a king. Very interesting. So who decided who was the donkey and who was king. And very interesting you used the word "king". Kinda helps me prove my point about being a monarchy. Back to the donkey part. We're the gurus families and bloodlines pure and the rest of the people were jackasses? Guess so, since they must be fools. But wait doesn't sikhi preach all are equal, including women? So then how is a family of gurus more worthy? The women that wed into the families must be pure to then, since they give birth to these gurus. And what about those womens parents? Meaning the gurus in-laws were they all Sikhs? Were they worthy?
Help me to understand who the donkeys and kings were.
Blood doesn't matter, well according to history it did. If it didn't matter, why were some gurus kids when they were chosen. Why not some more qualified adult who wasn't family.
Nanaks family proves blood doesn't matter? That's a poor example to use since he started sikhi. But after the third guru, is where choosing the gurus system gets flawed .

My point is God didn't personally choose these gurus. Nor did God communicate to each guru which to choose next. These were man made choices , just like how all religions are man made up.
I find it ironic that when given the name Singh, and being called Lions, that most people become like sheeps the moment something not so nice is questioned about sikhi.
Let's say for a second o agree with you that there is a God. And as Sikhs we dont cut our hair because God gave us that hair. And we perfect and beautiful in his image and creation. So is the brain, the mind. It's a beautiful gift we posses. So then why do you disrespect that gift, by giving up so lazily.
Oh a natural disaster just occured, killing thousands and damaging unimaginable. Why did that happen, oh its Gods plan.
Thousands of children die at or before birth, was that Gods plan? Was that his will? Ya none of us can prove the (Whys), but then is God still all good?
You talk about Karma, is that Gods game? Love me endlessly or be punished?

Someone else posted even if the Gurus selection was like a monarchy, what's the big deal? Everything was "all good". So that makes it okay? But who decides what they did, what they taught was "right". Other religions at the time didn't agree with them, not all. Ans yet, most Sikhs will still say the Guru's were right and good, because its their pride talking. Chances are when your born in to a religion, you'll think your religion is the best and can't do no wrong.

Before you start to get all defensive, and try to scare with empty threats, think about what you just said.

Erm.. actually, @Sikhilove has made an astute observation. "What goes around, comes around" is really nothing like any of the definitions of karma I've ever seen in the Sikh framework. It's a common Western oversimplification of a complex idea or (because I'm feeling charitable tonight) cosmic mechanism governing rebirth.

I have no idea where you're getting the idea of threats from and this idea of god punishing you - it seems like you may want to check your own defensiveness and what you're reading in to other's words.

You said "My point is God didn't personally choose these gurus." I'm sorry but you can't know that. Period.

The rest of your post is off-topic and betrays your complete lack of basic understanding about Sikhi. Before we can go any further, if you'd like to have some reasonable discussion about the points you're questioning, it might benefit you to do some study. I suggest having a read of Gurbani itself at www.srigranth.org and there are some articles here including introductions Sikh Missionary Society(U.K.) - Online Publications Library ( Sikhism eBooks ) and even www.sikhiwiki.org (with a pinch of salt) can start you on a path to better understanding if you so choose.

I invite others to please share their favourite intro websites, too, please.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

OP- You don't understand the concept of Karma.

What is Karma as per Sikhi?
What is Karma as per Hinduism and Buddhism?
How is it understood in Sikhi?
Is it different than what Karma is in Hinduism and Buddhism?
I know everyone nowadays, especially in the west, parrot the word Karma many a time a day without understanding what it entails.

And you dont respect Gods will.

Although I admire your passionate arrogance, how do you know about the OP's behaviour, "you dont respect Gods will?"
Are you pretending to play god now because only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone each of us is at? Neither you, I nor anyone else can find that out.
What does "God's Will" even mean in Sikhi?
"God's Will" is a term used by the religions who believe their god is a personified deity, hence it is "His Will."
Sikhi rejects this notion of God.
Would you be kind enough to quote the full Shabads with your own understanding of "God's Will" from the SGGS, our only Guru?

Why put a donkey on a throne when you can crown a King. Blood doesn't matter, Nanaks family proved that from the beginning.

Wow!
Who is a donkey in your post?

 

[Sikhilove]

There's so many conflicts with your response, not sure where to begin.
Let's see I don't respect "God's" will and I don't get the concept of karma. Sounds more like a threat from God
Karma - what goes around comes around. And according to you since I'm being disrespectful to Gods choices, something bad is going to happen to me? But isn't God all good? So if he is true and I'm just an idiot rambling on, then he's going to punish me? Interesting. Is he gonna take me away from me or my kids away from me, or something worse? That would be a {censored} move on his end, no? Or maybe you can help me understand.

Why put a donkey on the throne when you can put a king. Very interesting. So who decided who was the donkey and who was king. And very interesting you used the word "king". Kinda helps me prove my point about being a monarchy. Back to the donkey part. We're the gurus families and bloodlines pure and the rest of the people were jackasses? Guess so, since they must be fools. But wait doesn't sikhi preach all are equal, including women? So then how is a family of gurus more worthy? The women that wed into the families must be pure to then, since they give birth to these gurus. And what about those womens parents? Meaning the gurus in-laws were they all Sikhs? Were they worthy?
Help me to understand who the donkeys and kings were.
Blood doesn't matter, well according to history it did. If it didn't matter, why were some gurus kids when they were chosen. Why not some more qualified adult who wasn't family.
Nanaks family proves blood doesn't matter? That's a poor example to use since he started sikhi. But after the third guru, is where choosing the gurus system gets flawed .

My point is God didn't personally choose these gurus. Nor did God communicate to each guru which to choose next. These were man made choices , just like how all religions are man made up.
I find it ironic that when given the name Singh, and being called Lions, that most people become like sheeps the moment something not so nice is questioned about sikhi.
Let's say for a second o agree with you that there is a God. And as Sikhs we dont cut our hair because God gave us that hair. And we perfect and beautiful in his image and creation. So is the brain, the mind. It's a beautiful gift we posses. So then why do you disrespect that gift, by giving up so lazily.
Oh a natural disaster just occured, killing thousands and damaging unimaginable. Why did that happen, oh its Gods plan.
Thousands of children die at or before birth, was that Gods plan? Was that his will? Ya none of us can prove the (Whys), but then is God still all good?
You talk about Karma, is that Gods game? Love me endlessly or be punished?

Someone else posted even if the Gurus selection was like a monarchy, what's the big deal? Everything was "all good". So that makes it okay? But who decides what they did, what they taught was "right". Other religions at the time didn't agree with them, not all. Ans yet, most Sikhs will still say the Guru's were right and good, because its their pride talking. Chances are when your born in to a religion, you'll think your religion is the best and can't do no wrong.

Before you start to get all defensive, and try to scare with empty threats, think about what you just said.

It's not a threat, it's the Truth, but you have a lack of understanding. The remedy= Learn.

My use of the word King pertained to a King in a spiritual sense. One who has put his head on the ground as lowest of the low in this world, and so is deemed as highest of the high in Truth.

If you know a King who publicly deems himself to be lowest of the low and a lowly worm, let me know. What makes a Real King, a Sache Patshah, is Humility. Mankinds definitition of a King is twisted.

If the Gurus didn't practice Truth and Humility to the levels that they did, they wouldn't have been crowned Spiritual Kings.

The Jyot passed between each one of them, a concept you fail to consider. This wasn't a mortal kingship, it was and still is immortal, it's beyond what your eyes can see.

 

[Sikhilove]

What is Karma as per Sikhi?
What is Karma as per Hinduism and Buddhism?
How is it understood in Sikhi?
Is it different than what Karma is in Hinduism and Buddhism?
I know everyone nowadays, especially in the west, parrot the word Karma many a time a day without understanding what it entails.



Although I admire your passionate arrogance, how do you know about the OP's behaviour, "you dont respect Gods will?"
Are you pretending to play god now because only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone each of us is at? Neither you, I nor anyone else can find that out.
What does "God's Will" even mean in Sikhi?
"God's Will" is a term used by the religions who believe their god is a personified deity, hence it is "His Will."
Sikhi rejects this notion of God.
Would you be kind enough to quote the full Shabads with your own understanding of "God's Will" from the SGGS, our only Guru?



Wow!
Who is a donkey in your post?

It's not arrogance, I just spoke the truth. It's a pill many find difficult to swallow. I used to be the same.

Read Gurbani and you'll get the answers to the questions you asked.

How better to learn that to learn on your own, with Gods Grace.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

It's not arrogance, I just spoke the truth. It's a pill many find difficult to swallow. I used to be the same.

Read Gurbani and you'll get the answers to the questions you asked.

How better to learn that to learn on your own, with Gods Grace.

Please firstly, answer the questions asked.

I want to learn from you. Please give me the page number of the SGGS you want me to study. so we can interact with it and hence all of us can learn.
Thanks

 

[Truthsikher31]

It's not a threat, it's the Truth, but you have a lack of understanding. The remedy= Learn.

My use of the word King pertained to a King in a spiritual sense. One who has put his head on the ground as lowest of the low in this world, and so is deemed as highest of the high in Truth.

So that's how you're correcting yourself, you were referring Kings and Donkeys in a "spiritual" sense. Why is it so hard to talk in a literal sense. Regardless, you refer to the Gurus as King-like, worthy of the crown. But you say that now, because it's been done. They are part of history, been selected and did their deeds. So now, after you've learned who the Gurus were, what they did, how they suffered, and so forth, you just accept that each were worthy. But just for a second put yourself back in the 1500s. Say you were a loyal servant to the Sikhi faith. You served not just the Guru but the people with out any ego. And say some thought you were worthy of next in line, but you werent of blood. And so, you get overlooked and a 5 yr old is chosen to be next in line. Do you think that is right.

In today's time, would you let a 5 yrs or teen, lead the Sikh people. Oh but wait, it was different back then. That was a more spiritual time. The 1500s were time before people actually had common sense, before most could think for themselves. It was a "special time" right. Humans been around for so long prior to 1500, yet it was only during that period, God intervened with a small family in India, and told them how to be Gurus, how to lead people. Whats so different about now vs 500 yrs ago. Was magic and spiritual powers a real thing. But got lost when the Guru's left this world? Or were people just naive and believed what they couldnt understand.

Who is worthy to be King-like and not, could you decide that. According to yourself and others like you, you'll argue that the Guru's were worthy enough to select their successor. But thats all good now because its been done. But who says they were right, you? Others who share your feelings? Why? Why do you believe they were right. Because you were born into a Sikh family? Some convert to Sikhism, so why do they believe the Gurus. What was wrong about the religion they were born into. Do they believe the Gurus because their teachings comfortably fit in, with what they believe in.

Let me ask this, and its not just for you. Guru Hargobind, does not choose his own son (Guru Tegh Bahadur age 23 at the time) but instead chooses his grandson (Guru Har Rai age 14). Because he felt Tegh Bahadur wasnt ready to lead. Then Har Rai chooses his 5 yr old son, and before he passes away, chooses Tegh Bahadur. Was Guru Tegh Bahadur really ready or was it that there were no other living male blood relatives still alive? Guru Har Krishan's grandfather Baba Gurditta passed away before his birth, as did his other Great-uncles Baba Atal and Baba Ani Rai.

Atal dies at the age of 9 (obviously no kids)
Baba Ani - could not find much info
Guru Harkrishan's brother - was disowned by their father
Guru Tegh Bahadur only had one child, but was born after Harkrishan passed away.

So being that at the age of 8, with only 1 living male family member, was the decision for Guru Tegh Bahadur because "God" chose him, or that Harkrishan saw Tegh Bahadur "worthy"? His own father didnt think Tegh Bahadur could lead. Why now. Or was it just simply they needed to keep the Guruship within the Bloodline no matter what.

Even with facts like this, you're argument might still be "so what". Gurus were good, they taught nice things, all's good. Here's my issue. I don't think they were special. Each one had their own legacy, with each being remembered for something they did or introduced. But why didnt each's predecessor come up with the same thoughts/concepts. For example, Guru Gobind comes up with the Khalsa, the 5ks. Why didnt any of the previous 9 Gurus think of it? They are God-send after all. They're very spiritual, worthy, and all knowing. My point is, I believe anyone could have done similar to what they accomplished and never know might have done it better. But we'll never know that because the people weren't viewed as equals, not deemed worthy right? They were considered "donkeys". Your words not mine.

And if you look closer to the dates (the births and deaths), you might see what I've been trying to point out. That the bloodline seemed more important than actually choosing a proper "chosen one"

 

[Tejwant Singh]

So that's how you're correcting yourself, you were referring Kings and Donkeys in a "spiritual" sense. Why is it so hard to talk in a literal sense. Regardless, you refer to the Gurus as King-like, worthy of the crown. But you say that now, because it's been done. They are part of history, been selected and did their deeds. So now, after you've learned who the Gurus were, what they did, how they suffered, and so forth, you just accept that each were worthy. But just for a second put yourself back in the 1500s. Say you were a loyal servant to the Sikhi faith. You served not just the Guru but the people with out any ego. And say some thought you were worthy of next in line, but you werent of blood. And so, you get overlooked and a 5 yr old is chosen to be next in line. Do you think that is right.

In today's time, would you let a 5 yrs or teen, lead the Sikh people. Oh but wait, it was different back then. That was a more spiritual time. The 1500s were time before people actually had common sense, before most could think for themselves. It was a "special time" right. Humans been around for so long prior to 1500, yet it was only during that period, God intervened with a small family in India, and told them how to be Gurus, how to lead people. Whats so different about now vs 500 yrs ago. Was magic and spiritual powers a real thing. But got lost when the Guru's left this world? Or were people just naive and believed what they couldnt understand.

Who is worthy to be King-like and not, could you decide that. According to yourself and others like you, you'll argue that the Guru's were worthy enough to select their successor. But thats all good now because its been done. But who says they were right, you? Others who share your feelings? Why? Why do you believe they were right. Because you were born into a Sikh family? Some convert to Sikhism, so why do they believe the Gurus. What was wrong about the religion they were born into. Do they believe the Gurus because their teachings comfortably fit in, with what they believe in.

Let me ask this, and its not just for you. Guru Hargobind, does not choose his own son (Guru Tegh Bahadur age 23 at the time) but instead chooses his grandson (Guru Har Rai age 14). Because he felt Tegh Bahadur wasnt ready to lead. Then Har Rai chooses his 5 yr old son, and before he passes away, chooses Tegh Bahadur. Was Guru Tegh Bahadur really ready or was it that there were no other living male blood relatives still alive? Guru Har Krishan's grandfather Baba Gurditta passed away before his birth, as did his other Great-uncles Baba Atal and Baba Ani Rai.

Atal dies at the age of 9 (obviously no kids)
Baba Ani - could not find much info
Guru Harkrishan's brother - was disowned by their father
Guru Tegh Bahadur only had one child, but was born after Harkrishan passed away.

So being that at the age of 8, with only 1 living male family member, was the decision for Guru Tegh Bahadur because "God" chose him, or that Harkrishan saw Tegh Bahadur "worthy"? His own father didnt think Tegh Bahadur could lead. Why now. Or was it just simply they needed to keep the Guruship within the Bloodline no matter what.

Even with facts like this, you're argument might still be "so what". Gurus were good, they taught nice things, all's good. Here's my issue. I don't think they were special. Each one had their own legacy, with each being remembered for something they did or introduced. But why didnt each's predecessor come up with the same thoughts/concepts. For example, Guru Gobind comes up with the Khalsa, the 5ks. Why didnt any of the previous 9 Gurus think of it? They are God-send after all. They're very spiritual, worthy, and all knowing. My point is, I believe anyone could have done similar to what they accomplished and never know might have done it better. But we'll never know that because the people weren't viewed as equals, not deemed worthy right? They were considered "donkeys". Your words not mine.

And if you look closer to the dates (the births and deaths), you might see what I've been trying to point out. That the bloodline seemed more important than actually choosing a proper "chosen one"

I will not dissect your post this time because I did not get any response for my previous post from another thread which is fine with me but it seems a bit weird when you write and question in your long posts, and when challenged you get mum for the reasons only known to you. I will give you the general thought about what you have been talking about, which is, in reality, meaningless whining, to put it mildly.

You seem to be more concerned about the Sikh history that our visionary Gurus decided not to write by choice although they had all the means to do so. The reason for this purposeful omission along with the absence of their self-portraits in my view is because they were all about One-ism rather than Me-ism.

You seem to claim better thought process than our Gurus'. Thanks for showing your humility.

It does not bother me a bit if you keep on questioning and second-guessing our Gurus. What saddens me a bit is that you are not even curious about the message of our Gurus for equality and justice which brings self-betterment.

Why don't we discuss the message through which all of us can become better?
Would you care to try that or would you keep on putting walls around your own thought process so nothing valuable can penetrate itself in your psyche?

 

[Truthsikher31]

I will not dissect your post this time because I did not get any response for my previous post from another thread which is fine with me but it seems a bit weird when you write and question in your long posts, and when challenged you get mum for the reasons only known to you. I will give you the general thought about what you have been talking about, which is, in reality, meaningless whining, to put it mildly.

You seem to be more concerned about the Sikh history that our visionary Gurus decided not to write by choice although they had all means to do so. The reason for this purposeful omission along with the absence of their self-portraits in my view is because they were all about One-ism rather than Me-ism.

You seem to claim better thought process than our Gurus. Thanks for showing your humility.

It does not bother me a bit if you keep on questioning and second-guessing our Gurus. What saddens me a bit is that you are not even curious about the message of our Gurus for equality and justice which brings self-betterment.

Why don't we discuss the message through which all of us can become better?
Would you care to try that or would you keep on putting walls around your own thought process so nothing valuable can penetrate itself in your psyche?

But you have to start with History. If for example you major in Religion in school, you would learn about other Religion's history, how they started, what influenced them, what are they about, etc. So as Sikh boy, and probably like most Sikh youths, you're born into a Sikh family, go to Gurdwara, taught to bow before Guru Granth Sahib, langar/seva. You might attend a little Punjabi sunday school where you learn punajbi language, and stories about the Guru's and other iconic figures in the religion. But we're never taught the true history (I'm not saying I've mastered it, I'm still looking for sources). I didn't know til recently how all the Gurus were tied together. And I have a strong feeling that most Sikh youths don't either. Why am I focusing on this, I believe it gets overlooked. I don't consider Sikhism to be any more special and supreme over the next religion. I think all religions are equally false.

You said lets discuss the message that the Gurus gave, sure that's fine. But let me ask you this. What make Sikhism that much more different than the other major religions. And I'm not referring to the Idols, or the Jesus', or Gurus. The scriptures in Guru Granth Sahib, Bible, Qur'an. What's the end message. You can live your life as Sikh and practice its rules, or follow the rules of the Qur'an, or Bible, but in the end isn't it all the same?

 

[Ishna]

I think all religions are equally false.

Does that mean you've discarded Sikhi in its entirety, and you're mission is not to reveal to everyone just how 'false' it it? Did you set this thread up as a straw man to demonstrate your point?

The last part of your post probably deserves its own thread. Would you like to make one? I think it would be fun to discuss!

 

[Tejwant Singh]

But you have to start with History. If for example you major in Religion in school, you would learn about other Religion's history, how they started, what influenced them, what are they about, etc. So as Sikh boy, and probably like most Sikh youths, you're born into a Sikh family, go to Gurdwara, taught to bow before Guru Granth Sahib, langar/seva. You might attend a little Punjabi sunday school where you learn punajbi language, and stories about the Guru's and other iconic figures in the religion. But we're never taught the true history (I'm not saying I've mastered it, I'm still looking for sources). I didn't know til recently how all the Gurus were tied together. And I have a strong feeling that most Sikh youths don't either. Why am I focusing on this, I believe it gets overlooked. I don't consider Sikhism to be any more special and supreme over the next religion. I think all religions are equally false.

You said lets discuss the message that the Gurus gave, sure that's fine. But let me ask you this. What make Sikhism that much more different than the other major religions. And I'm not referring to the Idols, or the Jesus', or Gurus. The scriptures in Guru Granth Sahib, Bible, Qur'an. What's the end message. You can live your life as Sikh and practice its rules, or follow the rules of the Qur'an, or Bible, but in the end isn't it all the same?

All your questions have been answered by many members of this forum but sadly you keep on asking them again and again.
It is about time you stopped being argumentative.
If you have anything to add, please be our guest here. But mind you, adding is not by questioning repeatedly what has been answered already.
If you do not change your stance to learning, we will be compelled to take your TOS violations seriously.

 

[Truthsikher31]

All your questions have been answered by many members of this forum but sadly you keep on asking them again and again.
It is about time you stopped being argumentative.
If you have anything to add, please be our guest here. But mind you, adding is not by questioning repeatedly what has been answered already.
If you do not change your stance to learning, we will be compelled to take your TOS violations seriously.

Why are you so threatened? You said lets discuss the messages Sikhi delivers, and I replied with a question which you still failed to answer, with no answer at all. Just because I have different opinions, I'm being argumentative. Well ya, what else are these forums for. You talk about Learning? How does anyone learn without questioning. So what I'm supposed to become a sheep because you've been a member on this site for 10+ years, and what you call learning is change my stance, and just agree with you?

If you want to block me that is your choice, but seems like you're the one who's failing to discuss.

1. Stop arguing?
2. Change my stance?
3. Threaten with violations?

I could say the same to you - why don't you change you stance and just agree with me. But then nothing is learned or truly experienced. But because you're in a senior position on this website, you feel you have power to block anyone who doesn't agree with you. If that's how you run this site, I guess I don't have much control over that

But, please explain me what was wrong with my last reply. You asked why I focus on history, I explained why. You said lets discuss the "messages", and I asked you a question about it. Yet you didn't answer. You claim others have answered my questions. What's the answer, forget everything I posted, sit down and read gurbani, and all my questions will be answered? Is that it? Thats like when people ask why did such n such natural disaster kill so many, or why did family member have to die. Oh its God's will or its his plan. So answer to all is - it's God Will, any questions you have, you'll find answers in Guru Granth Sahib, and going forward we can shut our brains down, because we no longer need to think.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Why are you so threatened?

I have no reason to be threatened. Your repeated questioning of the same thing is just tiresome.

You said lets discuss the messages Sikhi delivers, and I replied with a question which you still failed to answer, with no answer at all.

I am sorry if I missed your question. Please ask again.

Just because I have different opinions, I'm being argumentative.

Your different opinions are respected as everyone else's is. Disagreements are part and parcel of the learning process in Sikhi.

Well ya, what else are these forums for. You talk about Learning? How does anyone learn without questioning

You are not questioning. You have been making an attempt to impose your view rather than respecting the others' views. Everyone has an opinion. Despite your opinion been answered, you keep on repeating the same again and again. Please give others a fair chance too.

So what I'm supposed to become a sheep because you've been a member on this site for 10+ years, and what you call learning is change my stance, and just agree with you?

That would be your own decision.

If you want to block me that is your choice, but seems like you're the one who's failing to discuss.

Let's try to be honest here. No one threatened to block you. I just warned you for the TOS violation.

1. Stop arguing?
2. Change my stance?
3. Threaten with violations?

Yes!

I could say the same to you - why don't you change you stance and just agree with me.

Oh, so is that your objective here that everyone must agree with you?

But then nothing is learned or truly experienced. But because you're in a senior position on this website, you feel you have power to block anyone who doesn't agree with you. If that's how you run this site, I guess I don't have much control over that.

LOL. You love making things up now. Your mind is playing games with you. I have the same position as yours here in the forum. This is the way SPN functions.

But, please explain me what was wrong with my last reply. You asked why I focus on history, I explained why. You said lets discuss the "messages", and I asked you a question about it. Yet you didn't answer.

You are repeating the same thing again and again.

You claim others have answered my questions. What's the answer, forget everything I posted, sit down and read gurbani, and all my questions will be answered? Is that it? Thats like when people ask why did such n such natural disaster kill so many, or why did family member have to die. Oh its God's will or its his plan. So answer to all is - it's God Will, any questions you have, you'll find answers in Guru Granth Sahib, and going forward we can shut our brains down, because we no longer need to think.

Same repetitions. Time to move on to another subject.

 

[Sikhilove]

So that's how you're correcting yourself, you were referring Kings and Donkeys in a "spiritual" sense. Why is it so hard to talk in a literal sense. Regardless, you refer to the Gurus as King-like, worthy of the crown. But you say that now, because it's been done. They are part of history, been selected and did their deeds. So now, after you've learned who the Gurus were, what they did, how they suffered, and so forth, you just accept that each were worthy. But just for a second put yourself back in the 1500s. Say you were a loyal servant to the Sikhi faith. You served not just the Guru but the people with out any ego. And say some thought you were worthy of next in line, but you werent of blood. And so, you get overlooked and a 5 yr old is chosen to be next in line. Do you think that is right.

In today's time, would you let a 5 yrs or teen, lead the Sikh people. Oh but wait, it was different back then. That was a more spiritual time. The 1500s were time before people actually had common sense, before most could think for themselves. It was a "special time" right. Humans been around for so long prior to 1500, yet it was only during that period, God intervened with a small family in India, and told them how to be Gurus, how to lead people. Whats so different about now vs 500 yrs ago. Was magic and spiritual powers a real thing. But got lost when the Guru's left this world? Or were people just naive and believed what they couldnt understand.

Who is worthy to be King-like and not, could you decide that. According to yourself and others like you, you'll argue that the Guru's were worthy enough to select their successor. But thats all good now because its been done. But who says they were right, you? Others who share your feelings? Why? Why do you believe they were right. Because you were born into a Sikh family? Some convert to Sikhism, so why do they believe the Gurus. What was wrong about the religion they were born into. Do they believe the Gurus because their teachings comfortably fit in, with what they believe in.

Let me ask this, and its not just for you. Guru Hargobind, does not choose his own son (Guru Tegh Bahadur age 23 at the time) but instead chooses his grandson (Guru Har Rai age 14). Because he felt Tegh Bahadur wasnt ready to lead. Then Har Rai chooses his 5 yr old son, and before he passes away, chooses Tegh Bahadur. Was Guru Tegh Bahadur really ready or was it that there were no other living male blood relatives still alive? Guru Har Krishan's grandfather Baba Gurditta passed away before his birth, as did his other Great-uncles Baba Atal and Baba Ani Rai.

Atal dies at the age of 9 (obviously no kids)
Baba Ani - could not find much info
Guru Harkrishan's brother - was disowned by their father
Guru Tegh Bahadur only had one child, but was born after Harkrishan passed away.

So being that at the age of 8, with only 1 living male family member, was the decision for Guru Tegh Bahadur because "God" chose him, or that Harkrishan saw Tegh Bahadur "worthy"? His own father didnt think Tegh Bahadur could lead. Why now. Or was it just simply they needed to keep the Guruship within the Bloodline no matter what.

Even with facts like this, you're argument might still be "so what". Gurus were good, they taught nice things, all's good. Here's my issue. I don't think they were special. Each one had their own legacy, with each being remembered for something they did or introduced. But why didnt each's predecessor come up with the same thoughts/concepts. For example, Guru Gobind comes up with the Khalsa, the 5ks. Why didnt any of the previous 9 Gurus think of it? They are God-send after all. They're very spiritual, worthy, and all knowing. My point is, I believe anyone could have done similar to what they accomplished and never know might have done it better. But we'll never know that because the people weren't viewed as equals, not deemed worthy right? They were considered "donkeys". Your words not mine.

And if you look closer to the dates (the births and deaths), you might see what I've been trying to point out. That the bloodline seemed more important than actually choosing a proper "chosen one"

Lol I cannot reason with you so I wont even try.

You still don't understand Gods Will and karam.... read up on it then we can talk.

Be open to learning and to other possibilities. None of us are perfect or have all of the answers.

 

[Jasdeep118]

Truth, if you are that conflicted, why don't you become an atheist? I a mean I ain't part of this arguement, but if have issues with Sikhism than you can leave it. Heck, I am what of an Agnostic Theist but I am a devout, practicing, Sikh of sorts, I am just saying.

 

[Truthsikher31]

Truth, if you are that conflicted, why don't you become an atheist? I a mean I ain't part of this arguement, but if have issues with Sikhism than you can leave it. Heck, I am what of an Agnostic Theist but I am a devout, practicing, Sikh of sorts, I am just saying.

Hi Jasdeep
Its funny, "become an atheist". How does that really happen, I mean there isn't a clear initiation or a some sort of atheist baptism ceremony. Not that I know of. I even find it funny when atheists congratulate each other when declaring they've converted. Ya I get it my comments make me more anti, but where else could I turn to. I was born into a sikh family and been living mostly a blind sikh my entire life. I don't know the rituals or or full teachings of other religions, only what I've been brought up with. So I could only turn to a Sikh site. this site caught my eye because they had Hard topics and active responses. But it seems some feel threatened with different POVs, or feel they have the answers but are never clear with what they say (always a different meaning), or just want you to change your belief or where your stance is and just agree with them. So if I am considered an atheist, can I not be part of this sites discussions? Because if I can't then I don't want to waste others time.

 

[Jasdeep118]

Hi Jasdeep
Its funny, "become an atheist". How does that really happen, I mean there isn't a clear initiation or a some sort of atheist baptism ceremony. Not that I know of. I even find it funny when atheists congratulate each other when declaring they've converted. Ya I get it my comments make me more anti, but where else could I turn to. I was born into a sikh family and been living mostly a blind sikh my entire life. I don't know the rituals or or full teachings of other religions, only what I've been brought up with. So I could only turn to a Sikh site. this site caught my eye because they had Hard topics and active responses. But it seems some feel threatened with different POVs, or feel they have the answers but are never clear with what they say (always a different meaning), or just want you to change your belief or where your stance is and just agree with them. So if I am considered an atheist, can I not be part of this sites discussions? Because if I can't then I don't want to waste others time.

I wasn't even criticising you friend. I even said I am an Agnostic Theist myself, I was in the same boat as you 3 years ago when I was into that doubting god phase, I mean I had hard time believe in god, but for some reason I just believe that there is a higher being out there and whenever I pray to that higher power a lot of good things happened to me, but it could be a giant coincidence. I still have my doubts here and there which is why I now consider myself an Agnostic Theist or something like that. I mean I don't know why I called you an Atheist, I mean you never said your standpoint on God, but I think you said you had your doubts. I also understand trying to learn Sikhi. I am just saying, just look deeper into Sikhism and find some sort of meaning. Sorry if I was a {censored} to you friend, I don't know why I called you an Atheist, I understand your hard questions, heck I said the same shit a couple of years ago, regarding caste and such.

 

[Jasdeep118]

Also, everyone has their own point of views, I mean regarding the Guru business, they are humans, they are flawed.

Hi Jasdeep
Its funny, "become an atheist". How does that really happen, I mean there isn't a clear initiation or a some sort of atheist baptism ceremony. Not that I know of. I even find it funny when atheists congratulate each other when declaring they've converted. Ya I get it my comments make me more anti, but where else could I turn to. I was born into a sikh family and been living mostly a blind sikh my entire life. I don't know the rituals or or full teachings of other religions, only what I've been brought up with. So I could only turn to a Sikh site. this site caught my eye because they had Hard topics and active responses. But it seems some feel threatened with different POVs, or feel they have the answers but are never clear with what they say (always a different meaning), or just want you to change your belief or where your stance is and just agree with them. So if I am considered an atheist, can I not be part of this sites discussions? Because if I can't then I don't want to waste others time.

Also, don't allow anyone's point of view change your's. We all have our unique perspectives and such, don't let anyone bully you too Truthsikher31.