Curioussingh

Ur post is full of incorrect facts first even during Guru Nanak times notable muslims such as Rai Bular

,Mardana, Dluat khan became sikhs . Guru Arjun dev ji times many muslims strated becoming sikhs, during Guru Hargobind shiab times for the 1st time in1634 mughal forces forces severe defeat it was first defeat of any muslim empire from inside the empire. Besides sduring 10th master times some prominent muslims like Pir buddhu shah were devotees of gurus ansd guru resolve to remain under the will of god makes them much superior than any prophets of not only other religions but other reformers

My post is not full of incorrect facts just one and I admitted my error. Besides the conversion of some muslims to sikhism doesn't constitute a victory against the Mughals who had tens of millions of muslims backing them during that time period. Winning a battle in 1634 does not mean winning a war.

Stupid thread if the person posting is a Sikh he would know the message was universal by the Sikh Gurus. Muhammad preached nothing new but Arab culture, Arabic mixed with ideas borrowed from Christians and Jews. Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji was not executed by the Mughals.

Was the beheading of 900 Jews in Medina also a miracle for Muslims?

Muhammad died in 632 A.D. He died as a result of being poisoned following his attack upon and conquest of the Jewish settlement of Khaibar. About 2 month before his attack on Khaibar Muhammad failed in an attempt to go to Mecca. This failure resulted in the Treaty of Hudaybiyya with the Meccans. He returned humiliated in the eyes of the Meccans and in the minds of his people. To lift their defeated spirit, Muhammad told his followers that the events at Hudaybiyya were really a victory. In fact, another convenient "revelation" was given to Muhammad as proof that it really was a victory (Sura 48:1). However, Allah was not able to deliver the Meccan's goods as booty, so Muhammad told his followers that they were going to attack and plunder the weaker Jewish settlement of Khaibar.

About 6 weeks later Muhammad led his army and attacked the Jews while they were on their way to work on their date palms. Khaibar was a settlement defended by a number of forts spread apart from each other. One by one Muhammad's army took the forts. Finally, the last few surrendered to him. Muhammad had several of the leaders of the Jewish settlement beheaded, one leader (Kinana) was tortured to reveal where buried treasure was hidden. Then when Kinana was near death, Muhammad commanded that he be beheaded. Many of the women and children were enslaved. Muhammad even took the most beautiful woman for himself and married her (Safiyah).

Some of Khaibar's residents made a deal with Muhammad. Instead of enslaving them, which would leave the rich orchards of Khaibar to go untended and unproductive, the Jews would give Muhammad and the Muslims 1/2 of all of what they produced. Muhammad accepted the deal, with the stipulation that they could be expelled at his slightest whim. Years later, Umar expelled the last remaining Jews from Khaibar.

Immediately following the conquest of Khaibar, a Jewish woman prepared a dinner for Muhammad and some of his men. Unknown to the Muslims was that she had put a poison into the lamb (some say goat) that was served at dinner. Muhammad ate some of the poisoned lamb and died as a result three years later.

It seems like you are just using my question as an excuse to vomit anti-muslim sentiment. Insulting someone who asks a question by saying "stupid thread" shows something about your ability to argue anything about religion. Please refrain from answering any question I post.

death is not loss

succumbing to fear is loss

one could say that y did muhammad(pbuh im not saying this is true) die?

is that deafeat too

Gurus could have converted

they could have avoided pain

but that shows weakness

they took hukam as sweet and showed the world that death is nothing to the soul who is bowed at Gods feet

I want to thank everyone for their responses. I like TejiKaur's explanation the best. Thank you TejiKaur.

From what I know, after the battle of Kartarpur, Guru HarGobind Sahib Ji moved to Kiratpur where again he was attacked. However he succeded to cross the Sutlej river and make it to Kiratpur where he spent 10 years of his life and acceded to Sachkhand in 1644. So then how was Guru Ji executed by Mughals?

Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji gave his head for humanity. Hence the name Hind Di Chadar. He willingly went to the Mughal leaders, he knew what atrocities him and Bhai Sati Das, Bhai Mati Das, and Bhai Dayal Das were to face. Guru Ji set another example for Sikhs to not back away and willingly give Shaheedi which was followed by Sikhs as Bhai Taru Singh and Banda Singh Bahadur.

By the way, Jesus also died a violent death being crucified and still Christians believe that he was sent by God. So then why didn't God save him?

You are right I was wrong about Guru Hargobind. However, I still consider having Guru Tegh Bahadur give his head a loss. After all, the only winners from this were the Muslim rulers because they got rid of someone they considered a nuisance. It didn't put a dent in muslim tyranny at the time, and it didn't do a single thing to stop muslim tyranny in later years. A real victory would have been the end of mughal rule (similar to how muhammad ended pagan rule in saudi arabia).

The assassination of Guru Gobind was not addressed.

I'm not an expert on Christianity, but according to Christians, Jesus had to die violently in order to pay for the sins of humanity. Thus, it is only because of Jesus that salvation can be obtained (according to them) because he paid for man's original sin. Also, they feel Jesus came back to life 3 days after he died on the crucifix.

The gurus were not messengers of god. There is no difference between the gurus (unlimited kala) and waheguru. Hence you can therefore say they were basically waheguru. Read mool mantar it describes the gurus. I can even go a step further and say there is no difference between waheguru, the gurus and pooran brahm gianis. The answer to all your questions depends on understanding and obeying akal purakhs hukum.

Also there is no point comparing the prophets/avatars of other religions as to see any distination or have any partiality is work of agyani pursh(ignorant ones) not aim or work of gyanvan bhramgyanis.

So your question ji is flawed to begin with.

If you are saying the Gurus were basically waheguru, then how is that not saying they were God incarnate? How is that different from the Christian belief that God is Jesus (who took human form)?

Why is there no point in comparing the prophets/avatars of other religions?

I know my questions may annoy some people, but I ask in order to get answers to better understand the religion.

When did the Guru's lose? And when did God not help them? We won all battles. When were we being killed by Moghul forces? And moreover, Guru Gobind Singh Ji's Zafarnama changed Aurangzeb. Muhammad died didn't he? Not all things are permanent on earth.

Gurus lost when:

Guru Har Gobind was executed by Mughals

Guru Tegh Bahadur was executed by Mughals

Guru Gobind Singh was stabbed by a muslim assassin which eventually led to his death

I consider these losses not victories in the battle against muslim tyranny. Yes, nothing is permanent but the manner in which people die also matters. My question is if God favored them then why did they die such violent deaths?Why did they suffer so much when men like muhammad didn't?

Why is the Punjab government not doing anything about it? Another question would be why isn't the Sikh governing body doing anything about it? And finally, why aren't the truly devout in Punjab opposing it? I think getting the answers to these questions may give a better idea of the scope of the problem and how to solve it

If the Sikh Gurus were messengers of God, then why were they always being killed by Moghul forces? Shouldn't God have protected his messengers? I ask because I heard some muslims talking about how muhammad (sp?) was a victorious figure who overcame the odds to win in battle and religion. When I looked up one battle it seems as though muhammad did find himself getting a lot of "breaks" such as an enemy general secretly converting to islam and causing an overwhelming force of muhammad's enemies to flee when muhammad's defeat (and death) seemed certain. These breaks could easily be interpreted as divine intervention by muslims. When the Gurus needed God most God did not intervene. So why did the Sikh Gurus get killed off but Muhammad survived/thrived? If God was really on their side then wouldn't God have intervened like God did for muhammad? This is larger than the question of why bad things happen to good people (which this question could be interpreted as asking), since the Sikh Gurus were not just ordinary people. They were supposed to be carrying God's message.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, and I believe I understand what you are saying.

Does anyone know of any quotes from Sikh scripture that support the view to cherish your family/friends?

I have a question about one of the many things I don't seem to understand about Sikhi. I understand that focusing your mind on God is the primary goal. There are some points that emphasize that you should remain detached from your family and friends because when you die they won't come with you. I can understand how doing that can actually make you a better family member since you see God in all and are not overly emotional about the things around you, but I have a feeling that most people don't reach that point of spiritual enlightenment in their lifetime. So wouldn't that detachment just turn them into terrible parents/spouses/friends? They try hard to be emotionally detached from them, but they aren't spiritually developed enough to see God in all. Wouldn't that be a terrible combination to have?

Wow, I had no idea they had it that bad. The situation you described is not only illegal but also highly immoral, and I think it is human exploitation. The gurdwaras have so much money, so where is it all going if the gianis aren't being paid properly?

"As a side point the whole teaching of Guru Granth Sahib, should be done in english and then once the sangat start to understanding, slowly learning Gurbani. I am pretty sure that the Guru Granth Sahib have different langauges within it, and Guru Nanak devi ji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji spoke different langauges to convey the teaching of God.

What is the point in sitting in the Gurudwara if one does not understand, other than hearing and experiencing Gods blessing, but we need to understand them as well and practice them ."

I think you hit on a major point here. Most of the punjabi sikhs I know can't understand a word of what is being said in a gurudwara, so how can anyone expect them to follow the religion? I can barely understand anything being said and have to rely on online english translations.

Hi,

I don't know enough to post tuka from gurbani, but there is something called Antabuse that you can get from your doctor. It is used to treat chronic alcoholism, and it essentially causes the person to throw up the alcohol if they drink due to a disulfiram reaction. It can also cause flushing, headache, nausea, weakness, and blurred vision even when small amounts of alcohol are consumed. This will help to link negative reactions with alcohol after drinking it rather than the positive "feel good" reaction that people get after drinking. Getting him into a structured treatment program will also be of great benefit.

There is also something called Orthomolecular Medicine. Since vitamins and minerals are involved in just about every reaction in the body, they feel adjusting the levels of them can have dramatic effects on the body. Current medical science opposes it because they say it doesn't work, but two time nobel prize winning scientist Linus Pauling believed in it. People who support it say that the physicians in the studies weren't using high enough doses of the vitamins (they megadose certain vitamins in orthomolecular medicine), and that the RDA set the daily intake level for vitamins to be too low. (Side note: do not take too much Vitamin A,K,D,or E because they can get stored in bodyfat and cause toxicity. Most other vitamins are simply urinated out if too much is taken in.)

Here is a link: http://www.orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v01n06.shtml

If you decide to take any vitamin always look up the side effect profile so you know what to expect if you are taking to much. Not to scare you, but I always believe better safe than sorry. I look up side effects before I take any medication or vitamin/mineral.

Hope things work out,

Curious Singh

PS His brain most likely physically changed due to alcohol abuse to the point where he craves it and his body needs it. It will also light up with activity when he sees places where he used to drink a lot or sees alcohol, so there will be craving on those occassions. It will take a long time for his brain to physically change back to normal, so make sure he is getting social support (Especially if he fails and needs to try again). I can't emphasize enough the importance of positive support even when he fails because most people who try to recover from alcoholism fail a number of times, so he will need encouragement to try and keep up his struggle against it. It will most likely be the biggest struggle of his life.

http://en.wikipedia....lip_Singh_Saund

He was a member of the House of Representatives and managed to get elected in a time that was far more racist than now. People are making a big deal about Nikki Haley, but I think he is more impressive.

Hi, I have been learning about Sikh history and how so many Sikhs had given their lives to protect the weak and end the suffering of the oppressed. I was wondering why Sikhs are supposed to stand up for "good" in the first place. Since everything is God's will, then isn't "evil" God's will too? If it is God's will shouldn't we accept it? To clarify, isn't it God's will that the suffering occur? It is a Sikh's duty to oppose evil, but I don't see how that doesn't contradict the Sikh idea that everything that comes from God is good (even what our limited understanding views as evil) and that we should graciously accept God's will. Even if evil is caused by the ego of others then isn't that God's will too? Shouldn't we accept evil and not oppose it?

Well, if Sikhs are truly worried about Muslim influx into Canada, then you are right in saying that lobbying should be done. Since Sikhs are a minority, they should follow the path of Jews who have managed to obtain tremendous amounts of political power in the countries in which they reside. This means setting up Sikh lobbying organizations that are very well funded by the community to endorse Sikh aims. It also means donating so much money to campaigns through various organizations or individuals to influence the decision making policies of politicians. Essentially, make it so a politician fears he won't get elected without your money I think there will be prosperous Sikhs in Canada who would be willing to donate to such a cause.

I want to thank the both of you for your answers! Thanks for taking the time to help me out

Okay, so this is my first post, and I will admit that I am still learning about the religion (despite being born into it). Keeping that in mind, I ask that you forgive any misunderstandings that I may have. I have two questions that have been on my mind and I'm not really sure of the answers.

1) I am not sure about the idea of an impersonal and personal God in Sikhism. Is God in Sikhism personal or impersonal? I ask because if God is impersonal and does not directly interfere with human affairs then what is the point of praying in the first place?

2) I know that heaven for a Sikh is to merge with God, but does this mean everything I am essentially ceases to be. If I am merged into God then wouldn't I lose my personality and who I am as a whole? How could I possibly retain who I am if I was merged into a being as great as God? It is the idea of people being a drop of water and God being an ocean. Everything that made that drop of water distinct is now gone as it blends in with trillions of other drops that make up the ocean. In Christian and Muslim heavens you retain your personality and are able to be with family and friends who have passed, but it seems like in Sikhism family and friends would have their personalities cease to exist as they merge into the ocean that is God (otherwise they are reincarnated). As a result, it's like those you cared for no longer exist.

I know these may seem like silly questions to some, but I ask that only people with serious answers respond.