The Gurus Were Not "chosen"

[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.

One last thing, for the Guru's not chosen fiasco. For me I just think that Guru Nanak wanted different people to be selected, but maybe some of the Guru's chose one of their bloodlines and it trickled down from here, but if Guru Nanak's intentions was to have someone else to be initiated? For all of these questions, they are healthy TruthSikher31, they help you give wisdom and they help you understand Sikhism more and more.

 

[Truthsikher31]

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.

Lol I guess there's lil miscommunication on both sides (the beauty of online discussions). I'm not mad or accusing you of calling me an Atheist. I wasn't offended by it, it was the phrase "become an Atheist". Like some might say to be a true sikh, you must take Amrit. And for Amrit there is a ritual of baptism. So, I just thought it funny, when someone becomes or declares themselves an Atheist, is there a like a proper method or something. You're good, no apologies needed.

 

[Truthsikher31]

One last thing, for the Guru's not chosen fiasco. For me I just think that Guru Nanak wanted different people to be selected, but maybe some of the Guru's chose one of their bloodlines and it trickled down from here, but if Guru Nanak's intentions was to have someone else to be initiated? For all of these questions, they are healthy TruthSikher31, they help you give wisdom and they help you understand Sikhism more and more.

What I don't understand, is why others don't find questions like this or when it comes to the credibility of Sikhi important. They're end answer is always the same. Didn't matter how the Guru's came to be, etc. Just that Guru Granth Sahib is all that matters, read it, learn from it, and all else doesn't matter. But the Guru Granth Sahib is a collection of all the Guru's teachings, as well as inputs from other individuals. But still the creation of Guru Granth Sahib, the credit goes to the Gurus. So I wanted to focus on the history of Sikhi. I even tried reading the reign of Sikhism after the death of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Like what came after and how it kinda led to where we are now. Not sure if I asked this already, but to those reading this discussion, do you believe in the Christianity (Jesus), Islam (Mohammed), Hinduism (All their gods). Do you think they are right and real? This is important, because if we don't believe in these "elder" religions, then what credit do they have and those religions who follow after. And I feel because Sikhism is very young, we are lucky in that we can confirm the existence of the Guru's, their history, and the event that occurred during those times. All the Hindu gods (seems like the Indian version of Greek Mythology). Where's the proof those beings existed. Christians believe so hard that Jesus exists and will return. I find that to be bogus. So if those religions aren't as credible, than what gives Sikhism credit. It seems it becomes very touchy to others when questioning the existence of Sikhi or anything that regards the Gurus.

Thanks for the reply Jasdeep118

 

[Tejwant Singh]

I feel compelled to jump in here because of all the deliberate distortions

Truthsikher31, when you came to SPN you put the following question about the same thing in almost all the threads you started.
Here it all began-https://www.sikhphilosophy.net/threads/if-christianity-can-be-proven-wrong-then-what-makes-sikhism-so-right.50590/
I did respond to you in post#2 -
"I have news for you provided you know anything about the religions.
Sikhi is not a religion. It has no god as seen in other religions. Sikhi has no mechanical rituals, no hell, no heaven, no judgement day, no reincarnation, no miracles, no prophets hence no prophecies........"
Now check your response to my post. Rather than asking questions why I thought in this way, a part of your response was-

"Wow, you must have already achieved enlightenment, since you know all about religions."

And this has happened constantly in all the threads you started and when responded, not to your fancy, you get upset for the reasons only known to you.

To be honest, I have no idea what your end goal is.

 

[Truthsikher31]

I feel compelled to jump in here because of all the deliberate distortions

Truthsikher31, when you came to SPN you put the following question about the same thing in almost all the threads you started.
Here it all began-https://www.sikhphilosophy.net/threads/if-christianity-can-be-proven-wrong-then-what-makes-sikhism-so-right.50590/
I did respond to you in post#2 and check your response to my post. Rather than asking questions why I thought in this way, your response was,


And this has happened constantly in all the threads you started and when responded, not to your fancy, you get upset for the reasons only known to you.

To be honest, I have no idea what your end goal is.

Your response was:

I have news for you provided you know anything about the religions.
Sikhi is not a religion. It has no god as seen in other religions. Sikhi has no mechanical rituals, no hell, no heaven, no judgement day, no reincarnation, no miracles, no prophets hence no prophecies........

Ya you came off sounding like you knew everything already. Sikhi not being a religion is your opinion. Its not a fact.

What's my end game, I dont know if I can answer that fully right now. But I guess as I'm become more self-aware, and before I devote the rest half of my life to a creator/being - whether it be a bearded man in the sky or some cosmic entity, I want to know if all of this is truly valid. Or was the concept of religion, God, etc. just a form of control designed by clever men to gain power over simple minded people.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Your response was:


Ya you came off sounding like you knew everything already. Sikhi not being a religion is your opinion. Its not a fact.

What's my end game, I dont know if I can answer that fully right now. But I guess as I'm become more self-aware, and before I devote the rest half of my life to a creator/being - whether it be a bearded man in the sky or some cosmic entity, I want to know if all of this is truly valid. Or was the concept of religion, God, etc. just a form of control designed by clever men to gain power over simple minded people.

Oh, the problem of you getting offended for nothing was,

"Ya you came off sounding like you knew everything already."

This is a false presumption on your part. If you read my post again, you would notice that.
In case, if you understood the way you said you did, it was based on your questions. You talked about all the religions you knew in a generic way and lumped them all together which is a false assumption when compared to Sikhi. So, shall I repeat the same about yourself?

Ya you came off sounding like you knew everything already.

Sikhi not being a religion is your opinion.

Wrong again. The reasons for not Sikhi being a religion are also given in my post. Please re-read it.

Its not a fact.

What is not a fact?

 

[Truthsikher31]

Oh, the problem of you getting offended for nothing was, This is a false presumption on your part. If you read my post again, you would notice that.



Wrong again. The reasons for not Sikhi being a religion are also given in my post. Please re-read it.

What is not a fact?

It's not a fact that Sikhi is not a religion. To me that's your opinion. If i'm getting this correct, your claim is, since Sikhi's view or concept of God is different, and because it doesn't believe in rituals and beliefs as others so its not a religion. But by definition this is what religion means. "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods." Doesn't Sikhi say God has no shape or form? So because it doesn't agree with what a God is with the other major religions, then Sikhi is not defined as a religion? Sikhi has a place of worship, a belief in God, scriptures, shabads, Gurus/Priests. It's organized, and respected by other religions if it wasn't then it would be just another cult.

This is what another member (Kully) posted in the same Post discussion:
Me: My question was, if you didnt understand, is that Sikhism was created by Guru Nanak.

Kully: No Sir, Gurmat was revealed by Guru Nanak but created on Wahegurus order. Guru Sahibans say time and time that they act on the instructions of Sri Kaal Purkh only.

Seems clear to me they got the word from God. Seems like some kind of form communicating with the Gurus.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

It's not a fact that Sikhi is not a religion. To me that's your opinion.

Please give reasons why you claim it is my opinion when the reason of what a religion is explained quite nitidly?

If i'm getting this correct, your claim is, since Sikhi's view or concept of God is different, and because it doesn't believe in rituals and beliefs as others so its not a religion.

Are we talking about god or religion because they are not one and the same?

But by definition this is what religion means. "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

OK. But Sikhi does not, "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods."

Doesn't Sikhi say God has no shape or form?

Yes, it does.

So because it doesn't agree with what a God is with the other major religions, then Sikhi is not defined as a religion?

You seem confused again. All religions believe their God is the only one because of their concocted principles for the entity. So, the question is not about agreement, there is no other God for other religions except their own.

Sikhi has a place of worship,

Not really. Sikhi has a place of self-reflection. There is no worshipping in Sikhi because worshipping requires mechanical blind rituals that Sikhi has none.

a belief in God,

Sikhi is not a belief system but a pragmatic look at life.

scriptures,

Not really. I call it a toolbox where tools come from all different people of various religions, castes and classes but with only One idea of Oneness.

shabads,

Yes, the Gurbani is all musical.

Gurus

Not really. Our Gurus never called themselves Gurus. They rather gave themselves numbers. I am sure you are aware of that.

Priests.

Nope. As Sikhi has no clergy system which makes other religions Religions, there are no priests in Sikhi. There are custodians and caretakers of the Gurdwaras though.

It's organized,

Yes, but it depends on what you mean by that. Sikh Gurdwaras are built by the local sangats in their respective towns independently unlike the Churches, the Mosques etc. There is no central organisation as in the others

and respected by other religions if it wasn't then it would be just another cult.

I am sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about. You are all over the place again. If you read all of my posts, you will find the answer to this one too. Where did cult come from?
As I said, you are all over.

This is what another member (Kully) posted in the same Post discussion:
Me: My question was, if you didnt understand, is that Sikhism was created by Guru Nanak.

Kully: No Sir, Gurmat was revealed by Guru Nanak but created on Wahegurus order. Guru Sahibans say time and time that they act on the instructions of Sri Kaal Purkh only.
Seems clear to me they got the word from God. Seems like some kind of form communicating with the Gurus.

OK. For further clarifications please check this thread ਧੁਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਆਈ ॥ Dhurr Kee Banee Aayee ॥ Sggs Page 628

 

[Jasdeep118]

What I don't understand, is why others don't find questions like this or when it comes to the credibility of Sikhi important. They're end answer is always the same. Didn't matter how the Guru's came to be, etc. Just that Guru Granth Sahib is all that matters, read it, learn from it, and all else doesn't matter. But the Guru Granth Sahib is a collection of all the Guru's teachings, as well as inputs from other individuals. But still the creation of Guru Granth Sahib, the credit goes to the Gurus. So I wanted to focus on the history of Sikhi. I even tried reading the reign of Sikhism after the death of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Like what came after and how it kinda led to where we are now. Not sure if I asked this already, but to those reading this discussion, do you believe in the Christianity (Jesus), Islam (Mohammed), Hinduism (All their gods). Do you think they are right and real? This is important, because if we don't believe in these "elder" religions, then what credit do they have and those religions who follow after. And I feel because Sikhism is very young, we are lucky in that we can confirm the existence of the Guru's, their history, and the event that occurred during those times. All the Hindu gods (seems like the Indian version of Greek Mythology). Where's the proof those beings existed. Christians believe so hard that Jesus exists and will return. I find that to be bogus. So if those religions aren't as credible, than what gives Sikhism credit. It seems it becomes very touchy to others when questioning the existence of Sikhi or anything that regards the Gurus.

Thanks for the reply Jasdeep118

Well, I think there was a quote in the Guru Granth, but I am not sure. I mean every religion has their own ways of meeting through god, some meditate, some go to church, some fast, some whip themselves, some get high to meet god. For Hinduism, they believe in a greater creator called Brahman I think and that all of these gods all come from Brahman, its pretty much Henotheism. They believe in one god, but there are sub god's you know, I mean every religion gets it right. That there are ways of meeting God, but every religion has their own techniques. Another thing that religion has in common is that they always preach the same thing. Be a good citizen, be honest, be kind and respectful for others. I mean all of these prophets and gods I think they are just messengers of God in someway if you get what I am saying. For Jesus and Mohammed there is historical records of them existing, while for the Hindu Gods, there is a lot of wacky theories. I heard is that they are actually Aliens sent by God or are actual Aliens that were helping humanity and we thought of them as Gods. Or another thing was that these Hindu Gods existed during a period but it was destroyed during some big war. I mean one point that Atheists get's right that for Monotheist's that they believe that the Greek Gods, and the other polytheistic gods are myth's, but what about their god? I have the same bias too, when I think about Abrahamic religion, I think its a bit crazy to have an actual heaven and hell and control people, I just think that reincarnation seems better, since it gives everyone another chance, but it is a bias since I was raised in a Dharmic faith (Sikhi), if I was a Christain, Jew, or Muslim I would think that the Dharmic religions are batshit crazy, but at the end I think all religions have something in common which is to appreciate nature and meet god through different ways.

 

[Jasdeep118]

What I don't understand, is why others don't find questions like this or when it comes to the credibility of Sikhi important. They're end answer is always the same. Didn't matter how the Guru's came to be, etc. Just that Guru Granth Sahib is all that matters, read it, learn from it, and all else doesn't matter. But the Guru Granth Sahib is a collection of all the Guru's teachings, as well as inputs from other individuals. But still the creation of Guru Granth Sahib, the credit goes to the Gurus. So I wanted to focus on the history of Sikhi. I even tried reading the reign of Sikhism after the death of Guru Gobind Singh ji. Like what came after and how it kinda led to where we are now. Not sure if I asked this already, but to those reading this discussion, do you believe in the Christianity (Jesus), Islam (Mohammed), Hinduism (All their gods). Do you think they are right and real? This is important, because if we don't believe in these "elder" religions, then what credit do they have and those religions who follow after. And I feel because Sikhism is very young, we are lucky in that we can confirm the existence of the Guru's, their history, and the event that occurred during those times. All the Hindu gods (seems like the Indian version of Greek Mythology). Where's the proof those beings existed. Christians believe so hard that Jesus exists and will return. I find that to be bogus. So if those religions aren't as credible, than what gives Sikhism credit. It seems it becomes very touchy to others when questioning the existence of Sikhi or anything that regards the Gurus.

Thanks for the reply Jasdeep118

ਸ੍ਵੈਯਾ ॥
Swaiya

ਪਾਂਇ ਗਹੇ ਜਬ ਤੇ ਤੁਮਰੇ ਤਬ ਤੇ ਕੋਊ ਆਂਖ ਤਰੇ ਨਹੀ ਆਨਯੋ ॥ ਰਾਮ ਰਹੀਮ ਪੁਰਾਨ ਕੁਰਾਨ ਅਨੇਕ ਕਹੈਂ ਮਤ ਏਕ ਨ ਮਾਨਯੋ ॥
Since the day I caught hold of your feet, I have not looked elsewhere; Ram, Rahim, Puranas, Quran many recite but even one does not understand.


ਸਿੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਬੇਦ ਸਭੈ ਬਹੁ ਭੇਦ ਕਹੈ ਹਮ ਏਕ ਨ ਜਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਸਿਪਾਨ ਕ੍ਰਿਪਾ ਤੁਮਰੀ ਕਰਿ ਮੈ ਨ ਕਹਯੋ ਸਭ ਤੋਹਿ ਬਖਾਨਯੋ ॥੮੬੩॥
The Simritis, Shastras and Vedas all describe many mysteries, but I do not know any of them. O sword-wielder God! All here has been described by your Grace; what can I say, it is as you have ordained (863)


ਦੋਹਰਾ ॥
Dohra

ਸਗਲ ਦੁਆਰ ਕਉ ਛਾਡਿ ਕੈ ਗਹਯੋ ਤੁਹਾਰੋ ਦੁਆਰ ॥ ਬਾਂਹਿ ਗਹੇ ਕੀ ਲਾਜ ਅਸਿ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਦਾਸ ਤੁਹਾਰ ॥੮੬੪॥
O Lord ! I have abandoned all other venues and have taken your path only. With the Lord's arm sheltering me, this is, Gobind, Your slave. (864)

Here is the last hymns from Chapuai Sahib

 

[Seeker9]

We mostly hear and talk about Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind, and I was curious about the other 8, like how they were chosen, what happened during their reign, etc. And I was quite shocked to learn that after the 3rd or 4th Guru, all of them were related by blood. For example sons, or uncles, or son in-laws, etc. To me that seems a bit Monarchist. Now I know they all went through their own "trials" because some had brothers who were not chosen - "because of their practice of miracles" and other sins. But still the search for the next Guru was never that far to look for - all in the family. I really find it hard to believe, that no other person (yes even female) outside the Guru's bloodline, was ever qualified to be the next Guru - to pass the torch if you will. To continue the teachings of their predecessors.

History is pretty clear that religious history (Sikh, Hindus, Muslim, Jewish, Christians) was male dominated. But then again, most of history was.

My timings might be off but when Guru Gobind declared that there shall be no other physical Guru, and that what was in the SGGS was final, was that after or before he lost his sons. The reason I ask this is because, was his decision to end the line of Gurus because the didn't have anyone he "trusted" that was blood related to pass the "torch" to? Or did he for-see something else.

I have only read the first couple of pages on my way to work and thought I would post this quick reply

My question is why does it matter?Does it change what the Gurus achieved? What is the outcome that ia sought here that will benefit the Sikh community?

Do we accept it takes a unique individual to do everything the Gurus did? If we accept what they did was remarkable and life changing and no ordinary person could have done this, why is the selection process important at all?

Why does it matter to what we have today I. E SGGS Ji? Can anyone please explain the significance to me as I have obviously missed it

 

[sukhsingh]

did what they did, how can anyone answer this? How can I say, yeah sure he saw something else, and this is what it was, I don't know, no one knows, however questioning the judgement of a Sikh Guru, is probably not going to win you any fans, they were perfect, so we have to assume they had their reasons, any debate that ends with the conclusion that an action of a Guru was wrong throws the whole foundations of Sikhism open

I think throw it open..
It's a tough space to explore but let's go there..
Firstly I think it's important to remember that before Guru Gobind singh ji passed gurgaddi on to SGGSJ he had already established the primacy of the panth.. Before his children were martyred
Guru Nanak Dev Ji passed on gurgaddi during his lifetime as did Guru Angad dev.. Primacy of the Adi Granth was established and held above all else long before Guru Gobind singh ji articulated Guru Maneyo Granth.. It's a narrow reading in my opinion of seeing it in successionist terms