D&amp;D Religion&#x27;s &quot;Ask About Sikhism&quot; Thread

Original post by AkaJetson

He's just asking questions.

theres a way of asking a question

Reply 722

Original post by nju

Sorry but I do not understand why sikhs are pro Khalistan because every time I hear about (like in Gurdwara) people are just promoting it and I have never know why

sorry if the answer is something really obvious

I think that the minority of pro-khalistan people are literallly pro in the sense that they actually want a singular sikh homeland. But a lot of khalistanis want change, big change but remain in India somehow. Im one of those. We want change to such an extent that we finally do get some independance. I think Khalistan could only really work by ruling all of India, which the Great Singhs once did.

Please tell me whats wrong with my logic

6,000,000 jews killed by Hitler = Only fair Israel Exist
250,000-1,000,000 Sikhs killed, whom since their inception, rightly or wrongly are as patriotic as anyway a subjected to Hitlerequse rule and torture = No right to there own country.

Is the above logic which has turned me from pro-indian to very anti. Dont get me wrong, i love Panjab, but India as country, no thanks

If the Indian government could do a few things to calm Khalistan talk, it would be this:

Pay the biggest amount of rupees, find the best investigators in the world, find out the culprits of the crimes against humanity commited between 1978-2011 and HANG THEM, regardless of who they are (Need a lot of rope)

Have a look at the Anandpur Sahib resolution again without idiotic rose-tinted glasses

Get Badal, his party, and BJP in Panjab high court on corruption charges

Setout a massive program of legislation to address the wrongs commtied against Sikhs and to actually write the word 'sikh' into Indian constitution

Same kind of compensation paid to each and every family effected by cruel but also disgusting methods of congress party, Panjab police

If Indians put their partriotism (not a bad thing) to one side, they'll find that wrongs commited against Sikhs are a level with Taliban

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 723

nju

4

Original post by okapobcfc08

I think that the minority of pro-khalistan people are literallly pro in the sense that they actually want a singular sikh homeland. But a lot of khalistanis want change, big change but remain in India somehow. Im one of those. We want change to such an extent that we finally do get some independance. I think Khalistan could only really work by ruling all of India, which the Great Singhs once did.

Please tell me whats wrong with my logic

6,000,000 jews killed by Hitler = Only fair Israel Exist
250,000-1,000,000 Sikhs killed, whom since their inception, rightly or wrongly are as patriotic as anyway a subjected to Hitlerequse rule and torture = No right to there own country.

Is the above logic which has turned me from pro-indian to very anti. Dont get me wrong, i love Panjab, but India as country, no thanks

If the Indian government could do a few things to calm Khalistan talk, it would be this:

Pay the biggest amount of rupees, find the best investigators in the world, find out the culprits of the crimes against humanity commited between 1978-2011 and HANG THEM, regardless of who they are (Need a lot of rope)

Have a look at the Anandpur Sahib resolution again without idiotic rose-tinted glasses

Get Badal, his party, and BJP in Panjab high court on corruption charges

Setout a massive program of legislation to address the wrongs commtied against Sikhs and to actually write the word 'sikh' into Indian constitution

Same kind of compensation paid to each and every family effected by cruel but also disgusting methods of congress party, Panjab police

If Indians put their partriotism (not a bad thing) to one side, they'll find that wrongs commited against Sikhs are a level with Taliban

I can understand where you are coming from but the truth is India has too much corruption in it's politics for any of the stuff you mentioned to happen, especially your points about the justice for sikhs who have suffered and taking Badal and BJP to court. All the points that you have said are correct and I agree with them, all I am trying to say that it is very unlikely to happen.

Reply 724

Original post by nosaer

If you believe God gave you the whole truth in Sikhism, you're either selfish to keep it to yourself, or you obviously don't have much faith in it that you feel the need to spread the truth. If there are different paths to God, and each has its merits enough that you feel you don't need to preach to them, then one wonders why Guru Nanak even started Sikhism.

Guru Nanak is the most widely travelled prophet in history. This is a fact. He made five Udasis (journeys) guring his lifetime. No other religion's founder travelled anywhere near the distances that he travelled. Jesus, Muhammad, the Buddha etc. don't even come close.

This map shows the areas, where we have undeniable evidence, universally accepted by historians worldwide, that Guru Nanak travelled to.

The above pictures show the Gurdwara built in Baghdad in honour of Guru Nanak. The Arabic inscription proves that Guru Nanak went there. Even today there are several disciples of Guru Nanak in Iraq. These people live on the banks of the Tigris river, particularly in the cities of Al Kut and Baghdad. They are called Sobi and generally they are gold-smiths by occupation. They are experts in their trade. They keep long hair, do not cut their beards, brush their teeth with a dantan (like a miswak, but from a nim tree) and remember the Guru by name of Baba Nanak.

Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that Guru Nanak travelled even further than what is shown on the map. For example, the Mul mantra (opening verse of Guru Granth Sahib) is inscribed in the wall of a Zoroastrian temple in Azerbaijan

There are many people in Uzbekistan who are followers of a "Wali Hind" (protector from India). They state that his name is Nanak and that he was accompanied by a companion playing a stringed instrument (this was Mardana). Many other Arab countries, such as Syria, have followers of a "Wali Hind" came to teach them three things - Remembrance of one God; Hard, honest work; and the importance of sharing one's earnings. These are the three pillars of Sikhism, therefore it was Guru Nanak who taught them these things.

This monument is in Istanbul, Turkey. The writing shows us that Guru Nanak came there to reform the people.

A new discovery now suggests that Guru Nanak may have travelled as far as East Africa. A small settlement, a hundred miles from Kampala, Uganda, is named ‘Bamu Nanika’ (Bamu may be a short form of Baba Mungu – Mungu means God in Swahili) which the locals there revere for it’s spiritual powers. They say that a holy man, not one of their own, sat on a certain spot there and meditated. The spot is covered in a bark-like material and not shown to anyone. Prayers are done in their traditional way. It is also said that all of Uganda’s Kabakas (traditional kings) visited the ‘shrine’ to receive blessings upon their advent of rule. The area is arid with no fresh water for miles. But only a few hundred meters away is a small spring of fresh water which the locals do not allow anyone to drink or wash hands with. The water is somehow used like ‘giving amrit’ to devotees who are all Africans. When asked about who they revere the place for, the locals say that, ‘He is not one of ours but there is some great spiritual power here’.

Obviously I cannot go through all of the places that Guru Nanak visited, but this is a short introduction into an ocean of history. It's very interesting if you look into it.

Guru Amar Das continued the expansion of Sikh Institutions. He trained a band of 146 masands (52 of whom were were women) and sent them to various parts of the country. He also set up 22 dioceses called manjis across the country. He gave people education, both in spiritual and worldly matters, through this.

Guru Arjan also sent masands to areas such as Afghanistan, as well as preaching himself.

Guru Gobind Singh said, "When I became a Spiritual Sovereign, I spread Religion to the best of my ability."

So when did it stop? Why are Sikhs so hesitant to do parchaar (preaching) nowadays?

After Guru Arjan's martyrdom, it became increasingly difficult to preach. It was illegal to be a Sikh, hence any form of preaching would be dangerous. Also, people could be questioned, tortured, and put to death, for associated with the Sikhs. Therefore, preaching was only around in Sikhism for ~100 years. This compared with, for example, Islam's preaching years is quite a short period of time. Also, people are attracted to power. Nobody listened to the Christians until they had statehood and money. The same can be said for Muhammad, who only had a maximum of 150 followers pre-Hijra.

During the Misl period, the Sikhs were living in th jungles because they had been driven out of the towns and cities due to persecution. Therefore preaching could not take place at this stage.

Preaching was officially stopped during the reign of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, because he was worried about offending the Muslims who were now being ruled by the Sikhs, after the collapse of the Mughal Empire.

The British were already in India by the time of Guru Tegh Bahadur. The British further discouraged the practise, because they did not want Sikhism to branch out into other races. This is because they didn't want the Sikhs to get to large in numbers, and they wanted to dismantle the Sikh faith to prevent any uprising or rebellion. They also believed Sikhs to be a "martial race," and hence thought Sikhs of other races would interfere with this. They wanted to use Sikhs for their own gain.

You could argue anybody can perform good deeds, so why do you need religion at all?

You need to believe in one God, but it does not matter what name you call it by (eg. God, Allah, Yahweh, Waheguru etc.) They are all the same thing.

Modern day Sikhs are still used to not talking about their religion, and we've lost our incentive to preach. They are scared of Sikhism turning into what Islam has become (ie Zakir Naik etc). Quote me if you want me to clarify that point.

Didn't answer the question but whatever.

It did.

What I said, was its incorrect to say alcohol is bad period. We now know it to have some beneficial properties, and both islamic and hindu scriptures acknowledge this fact. They don't say 'alcohol is bad, avoid it', they say alcohol has both good and bad properties and in Islam at least, goes on to say that the bad outweigh the good, thus it is prohibited.

Read what I posted again, and you'll see what I mean.

Sikhs are more against the state of being drunk, rather than health issues.

Sound familiar - you don't need to preach that to me....

I'm not.

Islam's already said this.

Good for you :smile:

(I'm not being sarcastic)

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 725

http://www.searchsikhism.com/khalistan.html

Previous post got too long....

To me, it seems like a religion meant for the people around its founder, not humanity.

[INDENT]“There is only one true Faith. The Guru's Way is complete and perfect through the ages.”
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 1188)[/INDENT]

Some quotes from Western theologans, historians, and philosophers:

"His (Guru Nanak's) teachings are of universal application and his message of love, service and sacrifices will continue to inspire coming generations." - Lord Mountbatten (Excerpt from speech in London on Guru Nanak’s Quincentenary)

“Although the future of religion is bleak but yet one hope is there in the form of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji which teaches us all God’s message of love and gives direction to life." - Arnold Toynbee

"Mankind’s religious future may be obscure; yet one thing can be foreseen. The living higher religions are going to influence each other more than ever before, in the days of increasing communications between all parts of the world and branches of human race. In this coming religious debate, the Sikh religion and its scriptures, the Guru Granth, will have something special of value to say to the rest of the world." - Arnold Toynbee (Forward to the Sacred Writings of the Sikhs by UNESCO)

"If some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, then the Sikh religion will be the only means of guiding them." - Bertrand Russel

"Baba Nanak was a prophet of universal love, a lighthouse for the whole of humanity, a redeemer of all mankind. Indeed, there is nothing parochial (exclusive), sectarian or communal about his message. The task of emancipating human beings from the yoke of oppression, injustice, superstition and falsehood was entrusted to Guru Nanak" - Professor Abdul Majid Khan (Guru Nanak, A Homage)

"This religion is in proximity with science, that is why this religion will be the last resort for the future generation." - H. L. Bradshaw

"Sikhism is a universal world faith, a message for all men. This is amply demonstrated in the writings of the Gurus. Sikhs must cease to think of their faith as "just another good religion" and must begin to think in terms of Sikhism as being the religion for this new age. The religion preached by Guru Nanak is the faith of New Age. It completely supplants and fulfils all the former dispensations of older religions. Books must be written proving this. The other religions also contain the truth, but Sikhism contains the fullness of truth." - H. L. Bradshaw

"The Sikh religion is truly the answer to the problems of modern man." - H. L. Bradshaw

"Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is a spiritual guide for me and I strongly feel that whatever is good for me, is also beneficial for my brothers all over the world. Guru Granth Sahib represents a casteless society. A society where there is no racial discrimination or difference of opinions." - Doctor B. R. Ambedkar

"....Perhaps this sense of unity is the source of power I find in these volumes (the Guru Granth Sahib). They speak to a person of any religion or of none. They speak for the human heart and the searching mind." - Pearl S. Buck

“Sri Guru Granth Sahib is the common religious book of all. Sikhs have been unsuccessful in making the world know about their religious book. Today, humanity is in dire need of Guru Granth Sahib’s peaceful and loving message.” - Archer

"Sikhism is the only religion which welcomes each and every one to its langar without any discrimination of caste, creed, color, or sex.” - Doctor W. O. Cole

“(The) Sikh religion is a religion and path which is related to the whole world, not a repudiator of it.” - Edward Bittencourt

"...it would be difficult to point to a religion of greater originality or a more comprehensive ethical system." - Max Arthur Macauliffe (The Sikh Religion)

"...in this religion all people without any discrimination of caste, colour, creed or sex can sit together and worship God." - P. M. Violum (An Introduction to Sikh Belief)

From these quotes, I think it is obvious that our religion is applicable to all peoples at all times.

Original post by okapobcfc08

Whats your problem mate? Why do keep barking about why Sikhism is so special and keep comparing it to Islam. That in itself is the best part of Sikhism. We dont look for trouble of no-one. Sikhism's speciality is it's lack of arrogant beliefs, lack of boasting by it's prophets, acceptance of every human being regardless of who they are. I would like to ask you a question. Why do certain minority within Islam always look to claim Sikhism as theyre own or ridicule it in some way?

Don't criticise him for asking questions. It's better he comes here and asks questions, rather than spread lies and misconceptions to the masses who have little or no idea of what Sikhism teaches and what our principles are.

I do understand your feeling though. On the internet at least, it seems to be Muslims who are the unanimous critics of Sikhism.

No idea why that is, but anywho....

Original post by okapobcfc08

please look up farmers suicide rates in Panjab over last half decade, you tell me they want more of the current same?

That problem has many strands.

National Crime Records Bureau says over 200,00 farmers in Punjab have committed suicide since 1997 due to the fact that they are heavily in debt and unable to repay their lenders.

Punjabi farmers are also going through a water crisis in which the Indian government has restricted water rights for irrigation, making it extremely inefficient and expensive for farmers to maintain their crops and land.
The Government has also allowed for the usage of unregulated pesticides and fertilizers to counterbalance the low productivity resulting in major health problems in the people of Punjab.

However, there has also been bad weather in Punjab oer the past decade due to global warming, which has limited the growth of crops. Khalistan would do nothing to solve this.

Also, this problem is happening all over India, not just in Punjab.

Khalistan is not a "perfect" country. They could just as easily make the same mistakes the Indian governmnet has made. Khalistan would need a huge amount of money to be created, which would increase the tax burden on farmers, and hence reduce their profits. This defeats the point of Khalistan.

Khalistan could not happen now. Punjab is in too much of a mess. There is now point just making a country and calling it "Land of the Pure." The people have to be pure too. Right now, Punjab has the highest rates of drug and alcohol abuse, despite being one of the smaller states of India. Do you really think these people are pure? Do you really think they can form the foundations of a country?

Don't get me wrong, I think Khalistan should happen. It's just that Punjab isn't ready for it just yet.

Original post by nju

Sorry but I do not understand why sikhs are pro Khalistan because every time I hear about (like in Gurdwara) people are just promoting it and I have never know why

Original post by nosaer

I'm sorry, I thought this was the Ask About Sikhism thread. If you don't like it, leave.

I'm glad that you're asking questions, but some users may be annoyed by your pro-Islam slant. Just so you know....

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 726

Original post by SaintSoldier

[INDENT]“There is only one true Faith. The Guru's Way is complete and perfect through the ages.”
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 1188)[/INDENT]

Thanks for your replies, but you haven't answered any of my questions. Copying and pasting quotes from people about Sikhism is a pointless exercise as you could find an equal and great number saying the same thing about any religion, so I'm going to ignore it. I will look at the above quote. All the prophets said that, what makes Guru Nanak special?

As for your previous post, Im not sure why you point out that Guru Nanak was the most widely travelled 'prophet' as a point of note. He may very well have travelled to neighbouring regions, but what do we have to show for it now? Not much. Was his travels for the purpose of his own enlightenment or to spread his message, because if its the latter, he didn't do a very good job of it considering Sikhism is pretty much confined to the Punjab of India (ignoring the dispora). Its all well and good saying Guru Nanak travelled to such and such a place (although some of your 'evidence' is desperate at best), but while he was extensively travelled, his message clearly was not.

Original post by SaintSoldier

Modern day Sikhs are still used to not talking about their religion, and we've lost our incentive to preach. They are scared of Sikhism turning into what Islam has become (ie Zakir Naik etc). Quote me if you want me to clarify that point.

Quoted.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 727

Original post by SaintSoldier

That problem has many strands.

National Crime Records Bureau says over 200,00 farmers in Punjab have committed suicide since 1997 due to the fact that they are heavily in debt and unable to repay their lenders.

Punjabi farmers are also going through a water crisis in which the Indian government has restricted water rights for irrigation, making it extremely inefficient and expensive for farmers to maintain their crops and land.
The Government has also allowed for the usage of unregulated pesticides and fertilizers to counterbalance the low productivity resulting in major health problems in the people of Punjab.

However, there has also been bad weather in Punjab oer the past decade due to global warming, which has limited the growth of crops. Khalistan would do nothing to solve this.

Also, this problem is happening all over India, not just in Punjab.

Khalistan is not a "perfect" country. They could just as easily make the same mistakes the Indian governmnet has made. Khalistan would need a huge amount of money to be created, which would increase the tax burden on farmers, and hence reduce their profits. This defeats the point of Khalistan.

Khalistan could not happen now. Punjab is in too much of a mess. There is now point just making a country and calling it "Land of the Pure." The people have to be pure too. Right now, Punjab has the highest rates of drug and alcohol abuse, despite being one of the smaller states of India. Do you really think these people are pure? Do you really think they can form the foundations of a country?

Don't get me wrong, I think Khalistan should happen. It's just that Punjab isn't ready for it just yet.

you make a lot of sense Singh and I dont disagree with anything you have said. I agree that Khalistan can only work if all of India is Khalistan (which is never going to happen without the emergence of the world breaking warrior generation of 1600's to 1800's. The reason I support, like many, support idea of Khalistan is I want change, I dont want more of the same. People just s*** it when they hear the word Khalistan, which they shouldnt. All i'm saying is, yes, stay within idea, but get someone like Akali Dal Mann into power, give someone a f****** chance instead of anti-sikh BJP, blood of sikhs Congress or disgraceful to sikhs Akali Dal. Enough is enough stuff indian government and manmohan singh

Reply 728

Original post by nosaer

Thanks for your replies, but you haven't answered any of my questions. Copying and pasting quotes from people about Sikhism is a pointless exercise as you could find an equal and great number saying the same thing about any religion, so I'm going to ignore it. I will look at the above quote. All the prophets said that, what makes Guru Nanak special?

As for your previous post, Im not sure why you point out that Guru Nanak was the most widely travelled 'prophet' as a point of note. He may very well have travelled to neighbouring regions, but what do we have to show for it now? Not much. Was his travels for the purpose of his own enlightenment or to spread his message, because if its the latter, he didn't do a very good job of it considering Sikhism is pretty much confined to the Punjab of India (ignoring the dispora). Its all well and good saying Guru Nanak travelled to such and such a place (although some of your 'evidence' is desperate at best), but while he was extensively travelled, his message clearly was not.

This is where the problems begin. Listen, I as a Sikh, have been taught to never question another religions prophets ever. I don’t. In a nutshell, that is one of the great things about Sikhism. Also, you seem to, in every post somehow think you can question the credibility of the greatest philosopher in the world history, the leader of Sikhism, the wisest of them all, Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Sahib Ji.

How many years has Christianity been around, and how many followers has it got today?

How many years has Islam been around, how many followers has it got today.

Sikhism is barely 700 years old? On a proportionate basis it is hardly doing badly at all. We don’t actively pine for converts. The crucial message of Sikhism is hukam. You follow the order of the Waheguru Sahib Ji. If God wants you to be Sikh, you will be. If God wants you to be Muslim, you will be Muslim, you don’t challenge it. That sentences about “Sikhism is pretty much confined to the Punjab of India” is irrelevant.

The reason why Sikhism is special: it is the only religion which has a living prophet, which was, TRUE AT THE TIME OF THE GURU SAHIBANS, IS TRUE NOW, AND WILL BE TRUE IN 1,0000000000,00000000000000000000000000000000^infinity years time.

Reply 729

Original post by okapobcfc08

This is where the problems begin. Listen, I as a Sikh, have been taught to never question another religions prophets ever. I don’t. In a nutshell, that is one of the great things about Sikhism. Also, you seem to, in every post somehow think you can question the credibility of the greatest philosopher in the world history, the leader of Sikhism, the wisest of them all, Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Sahib Ji.

How many years has Christianity been around, and how many followers has it got today?

How many years has Islam been around, how many followers has it got today.

Sikhism is barely 700 years old? On a proportionate basis it is hardly doing badly at all. We don’t actively pine for converts. The crucial message of Sikhism is hukam. You follow the order of the Waheguru Sahib Ji. If God wants you to be Sikh, you will be. If God wants you to be Muslim, you will be Muslim, you don’t challenge it. That sentences about “Sikhism is pretty much confined to the Punjab of India” is irrelevant.

The reason why Sikhism is special: it is the only religion which has a living prophet, which was, TRUE AT THE TIME OF THE GURU SAHIBANS, IS TRUE NOW, AND WILL BE TRUE IN 1,0000000000,00000000000000000000000000000000^infinity years time.

You've replied with your heart not your head. That's great, but not what I'm looking for, so leave it to the other poster. In fact, I don't even care all that much tbh, so if it grates on you so much, I'll leave you to it. Enjoy.

Reply 730

antho91

Just do not understand where Sikhism derive their doctrine from. Could you provide any good website, so that I could look into it? Thanks..

Reply 731

Original post by nosaer

Copying and pasting quotes from people about Sikhism is a pointless exercise as you could find an equal and great number saying the same thing about any religion, so I'm going to ignore it. I will look at the above quote. All the prophets said that, what makes Guru Nanak special?

Well I think the words of a reputed scholar or historian carry more weight than my own.

That's like me asking you "What makes Muhammad so special?"

There are literally millions of things I could say about the Gurus which would leave anyone, irrespective of their religion, in awe. Sikhism and Sikh history is truly magnificant, if you only look into it:

[INDENT]"Within the mind are gems, jewels and rubies, if you listen to the Guru's Teachings, even once."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 2)[/INDENT]

As for your previous post, Im not sure why you point out that Guru Nanak was the most widely travelled 'prophet' as a point of note.

It shows that he actually believed in what he was talking about.

He may very well have travelled to neighbouring regions, but what do we have to show for it now? Not much. Was his travels for the purpose of his own enlightenment or to spread his message, because if its the latter, he didn't do a very good job of it considering Sikhism is pretty much confined to the Punjab of India (ignoring the dispora).

He wasn't trying to convert people. He was trying to get them to be better practitioners of their own religion. Vaheguru (God) looks kindly on discipline, and all religions offer that. In fact, there is a Saakhi (account, like Hadiths basically) which answers your question:

"....Rukan Din asked Guru Nanak to open and search in his scripture whether Hindu is greater or the Muslim. Guru replied that without good deeds both will have to weep and wail. Only by being a Hindu or a Muslim one cannot get accepted in the kingdom of God. As the colour of safflower is impermanent and is washed away in water, likewise the colours of religiosity are also temporary"
(The Vaars by Bhai Gurdas, 1)

Its all well and good saying Guru Nanak travelled to such and such a place (although some of your 'evidence' is desperate at best),

I don't see how a stone memorial with Guru Nanak's name engraved into it for centuries is "desparate."

Quoted

Zakir Naik is essentially humiliating himself. He is practically begging people to come to Islam, and lies through his teeth on literally every lecture. He does not come across as a respectful man. He lies and misinforms people. This is not the way to spread your religion.

Original post by antho91

Just do not understand where Sikhism derive their doctrine from. Could you provide any good website, so that I could look into it? Thanks..

What do you mean by this?

Do you mean where the Guru Granth Sahib came from? Who wrote it? The Guru Granth Sahib's authenticity?

I'll hopefully answer your question wih these quotes:

[INDENT]“Vaheguru gave me His Order to sing His Praises day and night. Vaheguru, my Lord and Master summoned me, His minstrel, to the True Mansion of His Presence. (Vaheguru,) the Image of True Praise and Glory, gave me the Siropaao, robe of honour. The spiritual-life giving Name, Amrit Naam, the True Name, which gives eternal spiritual life, has become my sustenance.”
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 150)

"O Lalo! As the Lord’s word comes to me so I deliver it."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 722)

"I myself know not what to say; all I speak is what the Lord commands."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 763) [/INDENT]

Thus, the Guru Granth Sahib is derived from God.

With regards to the authenticity of the Guru Granth Sahib, Macauliffe, an eminent historian, puts it very well:

"The Sikh religion differs as regards the authenticity of its dogmas from most other great theological systems. Many of the great teachers the world has known, have not left a line of their own composition, and we only know what they taught through tradition or second-hand information. If Pythagoras wrote any of tenets, his writings have not descended to us. We know the teachings of Socrates only through the writings of Plato and Xenophon. Buddha has left no written memorials of his teaching. Kungfu-tze, known to Europeans as Confucious, left no documents in which he detailed the principles of his moral and social systems. The Founder of Christianity did not reduce his doctrines to writing, and for them we are obliged to trust to the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark. Luke, and John. The Arabian Prophet did not himself reduce to writing the chapters of the Quran. They were written or compiled by his adherents and followers. But the compositions of the Sikh Gurus are preserved and we know first hand what they taught. They employed the vehicle of verse, which is generally unalterable by copyist, and we even become in time familiar with their different styles. No spurious compositions or extraneous dogmas, can therefore be represented as theirs."
(An excerpt from "The Sikh Religion," by Max Arthur Maxauliffe)

The Guru Granth Sahib was written by the Gurus themselves, thus our scripture has been preserved. We are unique in this respect.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 732

Original post by okapobcfc08

The reason why Sikhism is special: it is the only religion which has a living prophet, which was, TRUE AT THE TIME OF THE GURU SAHIBANS, IS TRUE NOW, AND WILL BE TRUE IN 1,0000000000,00000000000000000000000000000000^infinity years time.

Just thought I'd back this point up with evidence.

These were Guru Gobind Singh's last words:

"Under the orders of God the Panth (community) was created,
All Sikhs are ordained to accept the Granth as their Guru.
Accept the Guru Granth Sahib as the body of a present Guru for all ages to come.
Whosoever is desirous of seeking communication with God,
Let him search through the hymns of the Guru Granth Sahib.
The Khalsa shall rule, and there will be no one to resist them.
Those who are separated will be united, and all the devotees shall be saved.
Sat Nam, Waheguru"

Reply 733

Original post by SaintSoldier

Well I think the words of a reputed scholar or historian carry more weight than my own.

Yes, but each side can and will find quotes by historians that favour their own agenda. Hence why I am ignoring them all here.

That's like me asking you "What makes Muhammad so special?"

There are literally millions of things I could say about the Gurus which would leave anyone, irrespective of their religion, in awe. Sikhism and Sikh history is truly magnificant, if you only look into it:

[INDENT]"Within the mind are gems, jewels and rubies, if you listen to the Guru's Teachings, even once."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 2)[/INDENT]

You misunderstood my point. Im sure Guru Nanak was a lovely person, but there have been many lovely people before him. As a founder of a new religion, what makes Guru Nanak so special? As far as I can tell, he did not come with a message that was particularly revolutionary, nor one that we haven't heard before.

It shows that he actually believed in what he was talking about.

I don't see how the two are linked in any way whatsoever, and quite odd that you should even offer such a reason. Why do you think this?

He wasn't trying to convert people. He was trying to get them to be better practitioners of their own religion. Vaheguru (God) looks kindly on discipline, and all religions offer that. In fact, there is a Saakhi (account, like Hadiths basically) which answers your question:

"....Rukan Din asked Guru Nanak to open and search in his scripture whether Hindu is greater or the Muslim. Guru replied that without good deeds both will have to weep and wail. Only by being a Hindu or a Muslim one cannot get accepted in the kingdom of God. As the colour of safflower is impermanent and is washed away in water, likewise the colours of religiosity are also temporary"
(The Vaars by Bhai Gurdas, 1)

If he felt his way of life was the best, you would surely expect him to preach it to others no?

You're making it quite unclear as to what Gura Nanak's purpose was on Earth? Did he come to spread Sikhism?

I don't see how a stone memorial with Guru Nanak's name engraved into it for centuries is "desparate."

I was referring to your story about the village in Africa. Anyway, when you say

"This monument is in Istanbul, Turkey. The writing shows us that Guru Nanak came there to reform the people."

How do you know this?

Zakir Naik is essentially humiliating himself. He is practically begging people to come to Islam, and lies through his teeth on literally every lecture. He does not come across as a respectful man. He lies and misinforms people. This is not the way to spread your religion.

I find it pretty cheap that you should to resort to personal attacks that are unwarranted, so I won't entertain you there. However, this is a really poor argument from you. Sikhs don't want to preach for fear of becoming like Zakir Naik?! For this to be a valid reason we would have to assume Naik's way of preaching is the only way, and has been the only way of doing it. What you are essentially saying is that Sikhs are afraid of preaching for fear of becoming lying, cheating, shameless crooks in the eyes of others. Not much confidence in your co-religionists there is there?

This therefore still leaves the question, why don't Sikhs preach?

What do you mean by this?

Do you mean where the Guru Granth Sahib came from? Who wrote it? The Guru Granth Sahib's authenticity?

I'll hopefully answer your question wih these quotes:

[INDENT]“Vaheguru gave me His Order to sing His Praises day and night. Vaheguru, my Lord and Master summoned me, His minstrel, to the True Mansion of His Presence. (Vaheguru,) the Image of True Praise and Glory, gave me the Siropaao, robe of honour. The spiritual-life giving Name, Amrit Naam, the True Name, which gives eternal spiritual life, has become my sustenance.”
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 150)

"O Lalo! As the Lord’s word comes to me so I deliver it."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 722)

"I myself know not what to say; all I speak is what the Lord commands."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 763) [/INDENT]

Thus, we believe that the Gurus had revelations from God, therefore the Guru Granth Sahib is derived from God.

With regards to the authenticity of the Guru Granth Sahib, Macauliffe, an eminent historian, puts it very well:

"The Sikh religion differs as regards the authenticity of its dogmas from most other great theological systems. Many of the great teachers the world has known, have not left a line of their own composition, and we only know what they taught through tradition or second-hand information. If Pythagoras wrote any of tenets, his writings have not descended to us. We know the teachings of Socrates only through the writings of Plato and Xenophon. Buddha has left no written memorials of his teaching. Kungfu-tze, known to Europeans as Confucious, left no documents in which he detailed the principles of his moral and social systems. The Founder of Christianity did not reduce his doctrines to writing, and for them we are obliged to trust to the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark. Luke, and John. The Arabian Prophet did not himself reduce to writing the chapters of the Quran. They were written or compiled by his adherents and followers. But the compositions of the Sikh Gurus are preserved and we know first hand what they taught. They employed the vehicle of verse, which is generally unalterable by copyist, and we even become in time familiar with their different styles. No spurious compositions or extraneous dogmas, can therefore be represented as theirs."
(An excerpt from "The Sikh Religion," by Max Arthur Maxauliffe)

The Guru Granth Sahib was written by the Gurus themselves, thus our scripture has been preserved. We are unique in this respect.

I don't think you are at all unique. Increasingly we see similarities between Sikhism and those that came before it. For example, your story of the revelations to Guru Nanak are just a copy of what's come before: God speaks to his messenger, messenger conveys the message of God to the people, includes a book in their too. You've even got the same verse that both Islam and Christianity contain in their relevant books too:

"I myself know not what to say; all I speak is what the Lord commands."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 763)

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak."
(Bible, John 12:49)

He does not speak out of his own desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed.
(The Holy Quran 53:4-5)

Your holy book, is it the the unadulterated word of God?

Reply 734

Original post by SaintSoldier

Just thought I'd back this point up with evidence.

These were Guru Gobind Singh's last words:

"Under the orders of God the Panth (community) was created,
All Sikhs are ordained to accept the Granth as their Guru.
Accept the Guru Granth Sahib as the body of a present Guru for all ages to come.
Whosoever is desirous of seeking communication with God,
Let him search through the hymns of the Guru Granth Sahib.
The Khalsa shall rule, and there will be no one to resist them.
Those who are separated will be united, and all the devotees shall be saved.
Sat Nam, Waheguru"

You believe you have a present day living prophet? (Why do you use the term prophet?) Who is he?

Reply 735

antho91

Original post by nosaer

Yes, but each side can and will find quotes by historians that favour their own agenda. Hence why I am ignoring them all here.

There are literally millions of things I could say about the Gurus which would leave anyone, irrespective of their religion, in awe. Sikhism and Sikh history is truly magnificant, if you only look into it:

[INDENT]"Within the mind are gems, jewels and rubies, if you listen to the Guru's Teachings, even once."
(Guru Granth Sahib, Ang 2)[/INDENT]

You misunderstood my point. Im sure Guru Nanak was a lovely person, but there have been many lovely people before him. As a founder of a new religion, what makes Guru Nanak so special? As far as I can tell, he did not come with a message that was particularly revolutionary, nor one that we haven't heard before.

I don't see how the two are linked in any way whatsoever, and quite odd that you should even offer such a reason. Why do you think this?

If he felt his way of life was the best, you would surely expect him to preach it to others no?

You're making it quite unclear as to what Gura Nanak's purpose was on Earth? Did he come to spread Sikhism?

I was referring to your story about the village in Africa. Anyway, when you say

How do you know this?

I find it pretty cheap that you should to resort to personal attacks that are unwarranted, so I won't entertain you there. However, this is a really poor argument from you. Sikhs don't want to preach for fear of becoming like Zakir Naik?! For this to be a valid reason we would have to assume Naik's way of preaching is the only way, and has been the only way of doing it. What you are essentially saying is that Sikhs are afraid of preaching for fear of becoming lying, cheating, shameless crooks in the eyes of others. Not much confidence in your co-religionists there is there?

This therefore still leaves the question, why don't Sikhs preach?

I don't think you are at all unique. Increasingly we see similarities between Sikhism and those that came before it. For example, your story of the revelations to Guru Nanak are just a copy of what's come before: God speaks to his messenger, messenger conveys the message of God to the people, includes a book in their too. You've even got the same verse that both Islam and Christianity contain in their relevant books too:

Your holy book, is it the the unadulterated word of God?

With all due respect, are you actually against the Sikhism? It seems that all your points are to refute this religion per se.

Reply 736

SMEGGGY

21

Original post by nosaer

You believe you have a present day living prophet? (Why do you use the term prophet?) Who is he?

No. where is this indicated in his post?

Reply 737

SMEGGGY

21

Original post by antho91

Just do not understand where Sikhism derive their doctrine from. Could you provide any good website, so that I could look into it? Thanks..

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Main_Page

I'm sure you can google and you'll see millions of links. :smile:

Reply 738

SMEGGGY

21

Original post by nosaer

Your holy book, is it the the unadulterated word of God?

Yes, unlike the Bible and Quran it was written by the Prophets themselves as instructed by Allah. No versions were compiled and later altered as the Quran was by the Caliphs.

Reply 739