username1

Does anyone know what the smallest chapter (shabad/tuk) would be from gurbani perhaps guru granth sahib?

It's possible the word might be derived from sabbath the sunday (which again is the 7th day of the week so related to 7) of no work which kept under judaism and some more traditional christians perhaps more common in muhammads time. It's likely it was a pre-cursor to islam as it plagiarized also from gnostic christian sources which the vatican wiped out, hence the lack of history makes it difficult to put together a strong argument for providing evidence of the korans plagiarism. Regardless when reading the content of the koran plagiarism is evident from events such as the crossing of elephants which is impossible in the geographical location muhammad was located and elephants didn't exist in his part of the world. Some mentions of local landscapes do indicate the events of some of the chapters and verses seem to be taking place perhaps in syria instead of saudi arabia (there is a very big time period gap before Christianity was wiped out by the sword from syria and islam had a foothole in syria). There is the additional falsehood muslims spread that arabic is the oldest language on the word which goes against every academic linguistics findings which allows you to trace perhaps the origins of pre-muhammden arabia- rather than the idea that the arabs were savages, it's likely they became savages after brainwashing. It's very likely muhammad directly plagiarized the work of poets or used poets and then thrusted his sword, weapons with a touch of mafia/gang violence threatening families not to expose him fully although people had their suspicions throughout the haddith tradition and muhammad dealt with it by spilling blood so the outcome on any whistle blower was sealed. Islamic sources also do mention Zoroastrians as maagis which is where the word magic is dervied from also known as fire worshipers from iran it's likely their rich tradition was plagiarized into islamic sources some writers which talk about possible sources of the bible mention Zoroastrianism as one of it's sources so it's likely it came through directly or indirectly or both. It's really sad people have publish books which make strong counter arguments on other religion and many muslim writers have written tons of books slandering sikhi, the gurus etc. only to later make themselves out to be the most tolerant people in the world. The saddest part is people can't speak the truth about islams entire fabrication, in the past people believed islam was devil oriented due to how much it attacked other religions, turned people crazy and how muhammad had a strong period of time where he suffered from devil possesion when in fact we realise he was mentally unstable from the symptoms he suffered from such as ringing noises in his ears, his body freezing, epileptic seizures, seeing things like demons, angels - jins (mythological invisible creatures that modern day intelligent people have to believe in with islam).

Another thing to add someone gave this link on youtube which contains the counting of the koranic scriptures use of rhetorical devices http://labs.globalquran.com/widgets/literarydevices.html

Under the dawah man youtube page he additionally posted this video- I really liked this comment I want to share here: Sunny Bond 17 hours ago Muslim Guy:Come as calm and compassionate person Sikh Guy: Come as calm and compassionate person Muslim Guy: Facial expression showing ignorance what's being said in converation and instead focus on next devile move to put down other religion Sikh Guy: Facial expression showing love misunderstanding of opponent in recognizing different colors/cultures God put on this earth. Muslim Guy: Jumping like a monkey during debate Sikh Guy: Composed, Calm, Objective and Compassionate about Sikhism Muslim Guy: quran is ONLY word of God because it has 10 rhetorical device per word Sikh Guy:Will you trash quran and start following something you come across that has 11 rhetorical device per word Impatient and defeated Muslim Guy:.You will burn in hell if you are not muslim Calm and Compassionate Sikh Guy: We don't believe in such a nuisance Muslim Guy:Leave as confused and stressed person Sikh Guy: Leave as calm and compassionate person Ironically in the way Hamza has constructed his 8 point arguments he has equally wrote something which is being passed off to many people as if it is koranic scripture so he himself has answered his own question in his question. There is also this youtube comment Wang Bin 1 day ago There's no way of objectively counting 'rhetorical features', literary analysis isn't maths. For example, you could say that every syllable in a sentence is onomatopoeic (eg imitative of the sound of thunder, or whatever) and immediately get two dozen items on your 'rhetorical features' tally. Do you have a reference for the '10 words' and a breakdown of the '40 rhetorical features'? As there are lots of different ways of breaking down the literary techniques used in a phrase, it'd be interesting to see the way that was used to arrive your total. Wang Bin 1 day ago Also, you talk as if 'rhetorical techniques per word' were a commonly accepted standard of literary quality. But the number of metaphors in a sentence tells you nothing about the quality of the work or the divinity of the author. It just tells you that he/she would be good at designing riddles and crossword puzzles. I don't know about Arabic, but in English and Chinese the best poets use both complexity and pure clarity, and shift skilfully between the two. See, eg. the shift to simplicity in the last line of this from Shakespeare: "Will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood/ Clean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather/ The multitudinous seas incarnadine,/ Making the green one red." I fully believe that the Koran is beautiful and poetic, but I think you'd communicate that better if you were less competitive. The muslim himself destroys imran's comments

I think since that guys faith solely rests on rhetorical devises we should eliminate his argument. It's actually a brand new argument that's been created. The original verse of muhammad was a tricky one because answering it was blasphemy: Koran Verse 2:23 "And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides God, if your (doubts) are true." If you read the above there is nothing about using arabic of other languages or even rhetorical devices, this challenge has already been defeated by many people such as Rumi with his masnavi or the following ( a bunch of arab actually constructed using arabic a piece of literature similar to the koran shortly what followed was death threats and when it does come up in debates, a few good debators question the grammar of the arabic used since the koran is the basis of arabic and people like Hamza Tzoris the greek convert had the come up with the 40 to 10 rhetoric device argument. The argument is a new literature challenge rather than a miraculous claim. Answers to "Sura like it" Challenge Answers to "Sura like it" - challenge (Challenge in the Qur'an, 2:23, to produce something of equal quality as the Qur'an, "And if you are in doubt as to which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a sura (chapter) like it") http://www.islam-exposed.org/ http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Miracle/ http://www.suralikeit.com/ http://members.aol.com/suralikeit/ http://www.geocities.com/freethoughtmecca/suralikeit.htm A verse written by christians (there is a video on youtube where this was recited and a muslim believed it was a piece of the koran- click on the first thread on that link the view the surah like it) " Surat Al-Muslimoon (1) Alef Lam Sad Meem (2) Kul ya ayoohal muslimoona innakom lafee dalalen ba'eed. (3) Innal latheena kafaroo bil'lahee wa maseehihee lahom fil akhiratee naroo jahannama wa athabon shadeed. .... Translation of the Meaning of Al-Muslimoon: (1) Alef Lam Saad Meem (2) Say: O Muslims, You are far astray. (3) Those who disbelieved in God and his Christ shall have in the lifeafter the fire of hell and a severe torture. " https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.religion.islam/hfLZ4afB3jQ Hamza's website illustrates the argument abit more clearly, this student of Hamza wasn't able to articulate the argument clearly enough for it to make sense. http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/exploring-the-quran/three-lines-the-changed-the-world-the-inimitability-of-the-shortest-chapter-in-the-qur’an/ Inna aAtayna kal kawthar Fasalli li rabbika wanhar Inna shani-aka huwal abtar Verily We have given to you the abundance So pray to your Lord and sacrifice Indeed your enemy is the one who is cut off The above is the verse in question, I question the content of it from which you determine those without abundance (wealth) are god's enemy hence allah of the koran hates poor people and since alot of muslims live in abject poverty and in 3rd worlds their own god hates them, at one point of muhammad the prophets life he was in poverty so his own allah hated him. Notice the repetition of "Inna" (indeed, frequently used through the koran to establish it's themw and tone of absolute certainty) and the end of line ended with har, har and then tar which rhymes with har. kawthar means a river in heaven hence referring to riches. Hamza says about the verse above: "This chapter has less than 15 words yet briefly analysing this chapter more than 15 rhetorical devices and related features have been found. These features are not just mediocre attempts to please and persuade, rather they are sublime features that if removed or altered will distort the impact and communicative effect of the text." So where did the number 40 come from if it's just 15? Al-taquia? Another part of the argument of producing verse like it, is the idea of the verses own uniqueness even a terrible piece of literature such as written by a child will not have a likeness upon it since it is unique. So one method of defeating the argument to begin with is to ask for examples from their own measuring stick of what they feel from external sources if of likeness to another? Do they feel mozart's music is in likeness to beethovens? Or are the uniqueness of the 2 separate entities enough to call them two separate genres even though traditionally they are classified under the same. This whole business of rhetorical devices needs a few us to dive deeper into here are some sources of what they are, how they are constructed and the rules towards them (which all sound like sales men trying to pitch a horrible product) : http://www.englishbiz.co.uk/extras/rhetoricalexamples.htm http://www.virtualsalt.com/rhetoric.htm http://www.dailywritingtips.com/50-rhetorical-devices-for-rational-writing/ Hamza's website says the following (which all sounds subjective and ignores how the koran speaks in the 3rd person as opposed to god's word in the first person): Example 2: Grammatical Shift (iltifaat) Professor Abdel Haleem in his article ‘Grammatical Shift for Rhetorical Purposes: Iltifaat and related features in the Qur’an[33], highlighted another inimitable feature of the Qur’an, the extensive use of grammatical shifts. This feature is an effective rhetorical device that enhances the texts literary expression and achieves the communicative goal;[34] it is an accepted, well researched part of Arabic rhetoric. One can find references in the books of balagha (Arabic Rhetoric) by al-Athir, Suyuti and Zarkashi.[35] These grammatical shifts include changes in person, change in number, change in addressee, change in tense, change in case marker, using a noun in place of a pronoun and many other changes.[36] An example of this complex rhetorical feature is exhibited in the following verse. It changes to talking about Allah, in the third person, to Allah Himself speaking in the first person plural of majesty: ... hese shifts contribute to the dynamic style of the Qur’an and are obvious stylistic features and accepted rhetorical practice. The Qur’an uses this feature in such a way that conforms to the theme of the text (semantically driven) while enhancing the impact of the message it conveys. It is not surprising that Neal Robinson in his book ‘Discovering the Qur’an: A Contemporary Approach to a Veiled Text’ concludes that the grammatical shifts used in the Qur’an, “…are a very effective rhetorical device.”[37] The Qur’an is the only form of Arabic prose to have used this rhetorical device in an extensive and complex manner. Professor Abdel Haleem states, “…it employs this feature far more extensively and in more variations than does Arabic poetry. It is, therefore, natural to find…no one seems to quote references in prose other than from the Qur’an.”[38] ... [Neal Robinson's book : http://www.youquran.com/DISCOVERING-QURAN-Robinson.PDF ] ] Hamza earlier on sets his own conditions for breaking the koranic code which is (sounds abit like pakistani cricket match fixing set conditions which are impossible to meet even for another piece of literature which defeats the koran being superior since it is unique as is every other piece of text- I wonder if Hamza can do this for any other man-made text as he calls it such as a legal document or a piece of poetry like bulleh shah's works): Without going into an extensive analysis of why Muslim and non-Muslim scholars have agreed that those who have attempted to challenge the Qur’an have failed, the following summary should suffice. Even though the challengers have had the same set of ‘tools’, which are the twenty eight Arabic letters, finite grammatical rules and the blue print of the challenge – which is the Qur’an itself; they have failed to: 1. Replicate the Qur’an’s literary form 2. Match the unique linguistic nature of the Qur’an 3. Select and arrange words like that of the Qur’an 4. Select and arrange similar grammatical particles 5. Match the Qur’an’s superior eloquence and sound 6. Equal the frequency of rhetorical devices 7. Match the level of content and informativeness 8. Equal the Qur’an’s conciseness and flexibility

I'm abit confused about his fast how is he exactly fasting? Because if a human goes without water for 3 days they will die (this is without any other source such as food or soft drinks). Now if he is drinking water then he should start experiencing alot of spasms, confusion, aces and other symptoms but within 3-5 weeks so roughly a month a person should be dead.

You do realize in the adam and eve story they both just have 2 sons, kane and able. Who do get violent with one another however besides the point how can have all of mankind just come from 2 brothers? Did they then have children with their mother? Did their mother have more undocumented children who then as siblings had children with their brother? Doesn't this go against biblical teachings of that close of an incest or was it okay in that covenant? Didn't they get thrown out of the garden of eden to suffer because of a talking snake and a tricky god? Gurbani mentions adam and eve in kabir ji bani but it seems very metaphorical when bhagat kabir talks about the sufi islamic concept of adam being a great prophet or spiritual seeker who reached greatness and fell the islamic sufi reason is god needed to send adam downwards so that he could uplift others. But Kabir ji is talking about his or the reader or listeners spiritual state compared to the greats which doesn't exactly tell us an Adam did exist since you can use fictional stories and metaphors to make a point. There are interprations of evolution drawn upon in GS Sidhu's works or books written in english where he quotes passages of gurbani which he feels proves evolution existed in gurbani. The only problem is why did the British come up with theory before sikhs? Why do sikhs easily dismiss it? The theory did exist in it's early days from the ancient greek philosophers, why didn't sikhs adopt that early on? Evolutionist theory do however propose that all of mankind from traces of DNA did have a single maternal point of ancestry so an evolved Eve did exist but no Adam. Evolution seems to be far to factual to discount. As does the big bang but the point of the big bang is where they question mark lies something doesn't just come out of nothing hence a causation is required. Richard Dawkins does make excellent arguments to dismiss common misconceptions of evolution that the british education system didn't entirely eliminate in it's education system and the American education system that refuses to teach even though america is one of the leading nations in science- people have to learn it in university I guess over there. BTW under kabbalah jewish mysticism which seems very eastern and similar to our own philosophy the serpent or magical talking snake represent ego/maya- the dollar symbol for money is derived from an ancient symbol of twin snakes. The apple has always represented knowledge hence why people say ignorance is bliss- but in the common christian narrative it was the knowledge of evil which corrupted adam and eve through that apple, which doesn't explain why does a loving god set up knowingly his children to be damned for all eternity especially when he controls them only for jesus - you got to remember these stories come from various jewish writers it's likely this came from a more economically depressed time since it's the earliest story of genesis when the jews were a desert tribe, a minority grouping of people and as with other tribal groups had their stories. I guess in sikhi the snake and apple might be both maya (materialism) and haumai (self-destructive ego)

To add onto earlier the internet is sure used as a religious tool for publishing the bible or even the use of sikh sangat. There was the return of a national Zoroastrian holiday and I think Sikhs should celebrate anything but Eid or any other islamic holiday. check this site out aswell on Sikhs being called pagans it's not by muslims not sure who created it http://www.angelfire.com/ab/email/sikh.html Long ago, in the 16th century, Guru Nanak wanted to find a way to get the Hindus and Muslims in India to get along. So he invented a religion which was a synthesis of these two pre-existing religions, incorporating elements of both. Guru Nanak hoped to cause these two antagonistic religious groups to find common ground so that there would be peace between the two. Nanak's intentions were noble, to be sure, but there are problems with his approach. First of all, these two religions are mutually incompatible. Islam is a MONOtheistic religion while Hinduism is a POLYtheistic religion. In other words, Islam believes in one god, while Hinduism believes in many gods and goddesses. Another problem with Nanak's work is this: Both these belief systems, Islam and Hinduism, are FALSE religions, invented by Satan! Combining two false religions will get you what? — ANOTHER false religion!

How about the logic- The internet was made by Christians, it's manmat to use computers

I think it might be linked with the Khands described at the end of Japji Sahib. 1. Dharam Khand: the realm of righteous action (pauri 35),2. Gian Khand: the realm of knowledge (pauri 36),3. Saram Khand: the realm of spiritual endeavour (pauri 36),4. Karam Khand: the realm of grace, (pauri 37) and5. Sach Khand: the realm of Truth (pauri 37).http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Five_Khands This is before sehaj and jog happen to give mukhti when total unity occurs of soul atma and super soul par-atma

Are you talking about Holla Mohalla? Holla Mohalla is on the nanaksahi calendar as a gurpurbh approved by the sgpc. The parading of orange a colour prohibited in islam? Doesn't sound bad. As long as it ain't eid I don't mind the holiday.

It's likely pigs have human traits due to the period of time they have been domesticated for farming purposes and how eloquent of a dish pork is in comparison to other animals. If you compare pigs kept in the east they have adapted to have different traits. Besides that hybrid animals can't reproduce such as mules there are alot of complications in that and even if his theory is correct it doesn't take the much effort just to observe in a lab dish when both species are mixed to see the outcome. It would be interesting if it's possible to reproduce animals which are closer to use and easier to study upon without protesters interfering as much, the research could help produce a cure for every known illness if for example stem cell research was conducted more openly. The lack of hair in humans is already theorized to do with humans which may have lived in watery conditions helping them move about in water more easily.

Think of the christmas tree like wearing boars tusks if you will. There are several things which have entered contemporary culture which were a part of religions and using them aren't necessarily flirting or attempting to convert to them such as the use of stress beads doesn't mean you are using a mala/rosary directly.

Sikhs are pagans in accordance to some muslims some like to call us book worshipers.

The Christmas holiday is actually a pagan festival incorporated into Christianity my guess is it was engreza di lohri (winter solstice). Jesus was born in the spring times which would be more near vaisakh. Muslims hate christmas and feel it's unislamic and in the spirit of antagonizing the antagonists it should give you even more reason to keep a Christmas tree. The true spirit of christmas is giving, which can be done in the forms of daan, sewa, charity, philanthropy aswell as looking into goodwill for other human beings.

It sounds like from the original poster seems to be interacting heavily with those brainwashed with a singular mindset especially one which seeks to use familiar, endearing terms for the purpose of trying to convert you. If you try do the opposite they don't easily take it onwards, I think it's best to ignore them and focus on yourself, your future and your life.