MisterrSingh

By that logic Gurbachana is in Sach Khand.

Who's Gurbhachana?

It's a pale shadow of what it use to be AND should be, but it's Akal Takhat Sahib, y'know? It has such huge historical and religious significance I can't bring myself to cast it aside like yesterday's newspaper. They've put Sikhs in a quandary, and that's a situation that should never have arised.

Balkaar,

Not everyone are strong enough who can digust vulgur name calling against guru sahibs bani and our panthic traditions. People like kala afghana publicily saying that amrit cant even revive a small rat far away doing anything else.

He said that?!

Sometimes you have to wonder what such people are doing concerning themselves with religious issues. Everyone's entitled an opinion, of course, but with some people you get the impression they want to pry people away from the path, and they actually revel in such mischief. Strange times.

Sikhi is actually not Dharmic because we believe in something greater than our deeds known as Gur Prassad: which isn't an Indian concept in the slightest.

Could you expand on the above, bro? It's piqued my interest. PM if you like so as not to clutter the thread. Thanks.

With love, of course..

Definitely.

Equally, a situation such as the one the OP is referring to shouldn't be entered without a lot of soul searching.

Be prepared to hear, "You can't tell me what to do, you ain't my dad!!"

All jokes aside, it takes a special type of man to raise - or even cordially live with - another man's offspring in a family unit. It takes patience, wisdom, understanding, amongst other things of that nature.

It begs the question - and I apologise if this sounds harsh - but is it really necessary? Whoever is involved, whether it's the OP or someone else, what's the motivation of the mother in this? Equally, what is the man hoping to get out of this situation? "Love" is not an answer, hehe. Situations such as these require the head to take control and as little of the heart to dictate matters as possible. Either way these are questions only the person involved can answer. Good luck.

I don't accept his idea of Jesus Christ being like Santa Claus either, but I wouldn't say, he wants to attack those who don't follow his beliefs. He clearly didn't say it and you were attributing it to him. I saw it to be unfair and spoke up. I don't even know what you are talking about, the tongue lashing and don't care; secular quasi-religious fanatics are nobodies.

Calling others dim isn't nice either. Where it is warranted I make such comments to wake the person up from having a blondie moment. And I don't know how you took the mother reference to be directed at you. I don't have a problem with anything other than ego.

I use to think you were a decent guy, but the "mother" comment crossed the line. You can backtrack all you like, but you knew what you meant. I won't repeat myself, but think on. It's best if you don't reply to me again, because you've exhausted any goodwill I had for you in one fell swoop.

*****

As for Jagsaw, his entire raison d'etre is one of arrogance and sneery condescension. He was trying to be clever and I called him out on his nonsense and now he can't rest until he's had the last word.

Grow up missedsingh. If you think you 'owned' someone because you corrected an 'o' for an 'a', despite showing yourself up in a 'debate' you have a lot of growing up to do.

I mean could be really horrible and edit my post correcting the 'o' and 'a' but I won't be that cruel to you. You've suffered enough.

You're a very small man. They call it the Napoleon Complex

No where does he imply or directly say to stop anyone from following their foolish beliefs in a certain way. This is your weak attempt to through propaganda at his post. You act all high and moral, but actually are no better than anyone who uses deceiving methods.

I respect you because you know more about Sikh scriptures than I do, but his whole post was an attempt to distort, misrepresent, and seize on half truths in order to win the argument. He's an incredibly devious man, and just because he gave your adversary, Neo, a tongue-lashing a while ago, that doesn't make him a bastion of Sikhi.

Also, a warning: keep my mother out of any discussion. I know you have a problem with keeping to your limits at times, but two can play that game if you don't control your tongue. Is that clear, Singh Ji?

religious experience perhaps can be a branch off of spiritual experience IMO

I wonder if someone who has doubts about the existence of God, or a good old non-theist has ever had a spiritual experience that can't be explained away as the mind playing tricks or things of that nature? Or do only those who "believe" have such experiences? In that case do we "will" such experiences into existence? Or is there a deeper, karmic-based reason that you're more likely to such have experiences if you're open to that frequency of thought?

Well thats me tought a lesson then. :surrender:

You're clearly the winner of the debate with that insightful post.

*taught

Well seeing as I live in England and here in England the question 'how'd you like them apples' implies nothing more than the fact that someone may have given to me as a gift some rather lovely apples as a sign of friendship and is now politely asking if I found them to be as sweet and juicy as expected I would have to answer that sadly your said gift of lovely apples has failed to arrive.

Oh I read what you said, my friend but all posts, when contrasted with yours, seem 'smart' in comparison.

Do you like Huey Lewis and The News? Their early work was a little too new wave for my tastes, but when Sports came out in '83, I think they really came into their own, commercially and artistically. The whole album has a clear, crisp sound, and a new sheen of consummate professionalism that really gives the songs a big boost. He's been compared to Elvis Costello, but I think Huey has a far more bitter, cynical sense of humour.

In '87, Huey released Fore, their most accomplished album. I think their undisputed masterpiece is "Hip to be Square", a song so catchy, most people probably don't listen to the lyrics. But they should, because it's not just about the pleasures of conformity, and the importance of trends, it's also a personal statement about the band itself.

Why are you complaining? Willfully ignoring and misrepresenting another person's points are what you're a world class expert at. If YOU'D read what I'd written originally you wouldn't had have to make your original "smart" post.

How'd you like them apples?

So by your logic we must NEVER say anything negative about the hundred thousand new babas and guru deras in Punjab because it means so so much in spirituality to the people who follow them ? :nono:

But just before you said that it was 'facts' that I gave you. Or are you saying that it was just an amazing coincidence that Jesus had the exact same birth, life and death of the most popular diety of the day ? :nono:

That, my friend, is childish naivity at its worst. There are belief systems out there that have human sacrifice as part of their rituals. There are some that have drugs as a central point of reference. There are some that have peadophile activities central to it. Others bow down to stones and rocks. Others to photographs. Some to rats. Others have sex orgies as their central spirituality core.

Respect them all do you ? :nono:

Your heart is in the right place my friend, but you lack common sense.

So when you sit down to break bread with the followers of that religion that is particularly close to your heart, do you pull them up on the fact that they actively preach that our Guru Sahibs are liars and frauds; a teaching that is absolutely fundamental to their faith? Do you smack the taste of their mouth when they retreat to their place of worship and are repeatedly told by their spiritual leaders that anyone after Mohammed who purported to be God's messenger is actually nothing of the sort? Something tells me your bravado and your smart mouth (or in this case, dextrous fingers) cease functioning when you step away from this forum.

Back to your first response: if you're unable to tell the difference between Gurmeet Ram Rahim (and his ilk) and somebody like Jesus or another spiritual being who actually did some good on this earth, then you're clearly not as smart as you think are. In your eagerness to score points you've revealed yourself to be quite simple-minded and devoid of even a drop of spirituality. Thankfully, I grew out of this phase you're currently mired in when I became a Gursikh at the age of 14. So, lower your books on the crane and Alexander the Great, and instead pick up a Gutka or a Pothi on the odd occasion; you'd be surprised at what it'll do for your soul.

Also, Guru Gobind Singh Ji stated that the likes of Jesus succumbed to ego and didn't discourage those who began to worship him instead of instructing the people that their salvation lies with Akal Purakh; where exactly did Guru Gobind Singh Ji say Jesus was a fictional creation based on a pagan myth, and therefore didn't exist as you're alluding to? Surely to end all belief in Christianity would it not have been better for Guru Sahib to tell us that, without a second's hesitation, Christ was a fictitious creation? Unless you think you know more than Dasme Paatshah?

And what of being comfortable in one's own Sikhi that others are happily afforded the courtesy to believe whatever they wish to (aside from the ludicrous examples you gave which are hardly worth mentioning, because doing so would fall into the trap you think you've cleverly laid, hehe)? I never said I respect those beliefs; that's you attributing words to me that I've not spoken or even thought. I said I acknowledge the fact that people believe in things that are sacred to them --- that doesn't make those beliefs sacred to me. Again, you're clutching at straws to score points, but you're just revealing yourself to be a bit dim. If someone wants to worship a log, go right ahead. If someone wants to bow down to a rosebush, that's their prerogative. Consequently, what can you do to stop others believing things or worshipping things, etc., that you find unsavoury? Round them up and behead them? Flog them, stone them? What CAN you do? Nothing. You can't do a thing, can you? Apart from flaunt your painfully apparent haughty condescension and mistaken sense of superiority on forums like these.

We can attempt to converse with them and show them how, according to our beliefs, they are hugely mistaken and indulging in useless ritual. Aside from that, what do you suggest?

So, unless you're going to give up your comfortable Western lifestyle and arrest the middle-age spread that's spreading from your mid-riff to your brain cells, I assume you'll be taking up arms and hunting and executing every stone-worshipping, child-abusing, orgy-partaking deviant in the world, because such deluded blasphemy is clearly keeping you awake at nights.

You're having a laugh "my friend" and not a very amusing one at that. :nono:

Yeah. I always find it strange when people take anything to do with christianity serious. For me, it is and always will be first class comedy material.

I mean lets just sum it up succintly: A really nice, good and proud Jew called Issa really did live about 2000 years ago. He was a good Jew and never made any separate religion. He was a good man and his followers became known as the Nazarene sect of Judaism. Then, many many years after his death when Jews were being expelled from Jeruselum

The Nazarene tried to save their own skins and not get expelled from their homes by turning around and saying heyplease let us stay.were Nazarenes.were different from Jews.please let us stay. Thus was born this brand new religion. And now that a new religion was born they needed some stories. They didnt have to look too far for some. At that time, and even during Jesuss time, the most popular god of the age was Mithras. Mithrass story was that he was born in a stable and when he born a light shone in the sky and kings came bearing gifts. Many other things happened to Mithras during his lifetime. Youd recognise them all. Mithrass story ends with him being crucified and mysteriously coming back alive exactly 3 days later.

Sound familiar ? Yes, thats because what the Nazarenes did was to take the story behind the most popular god of the day and attribute it to their man instead

Like I said, any thread about anything even vaguely Christian is first class comedy material. There are bare jokes to be made man. Bare jokes.

Still, it's sacred to somebody whether we believe in it or not. Some people struggle to separate the man from what came later. Anyone with an iota of spirituality would never entertain knocking one of God's messengers of whichever race or background.

Guru Gobind Singh Ji presented the facts about these prophets; he never mocked them or was hostile towards them in the way some of us are.

I'm all for holding to account religious hypocricy and distortions, but some of the stuff I hear is a terrible reflection on us as Sikhs.

I've more to say but I can't type worth a darn on touchscreen, so when I get to my computer I'll contribute to this particular topic.

Which posts ?

There's one huge rant on the previous page that was quite unsavoury.

Reading some of the posts on this thread has made my I.Q. drop a few points... and it wasn't that high to be begin with, lol!

As Ron Burgundy once said, "Take it easy. Why don't you sit this one out, stop talking for a while."

Is there a difference between a religious experience and a spiritual experience? Serious question.

@singhcity - It's a decent book. But you're right, the scope of his work in this area is quite narrow. A bit frustrating but unsurprising.

There's a book called The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James which might be of help. It's quite old and the frames of reference are mostly from the Abrahamic perspective, but the overall theories and opinions he ventures are quite sound IMO.

Hi,

Thanks for the answers.

To give an example:

- you want someone to act a certain way, or dress a certain way or merry a certain person because is your belief or your traditions or religion says is the right thing to do.

But that person isn't a bad person ( respects others, doesn't breake the law ) but doesn't agree with you because religion or tradions aren't a big part in there life and they want to make their own decisions regarding there own life.

Is it ok to accept that persons decision irelevant of my/our families religion, traditions, or beliefs

Thanks

What's the alternative? Force them? With threats of violence or what? If they refuse to understand your perspective through verbal communication and reasoning there's not much else you can do aside from get a bit heavy handed and turn the situation ugly, which I wouldn't recommend. Yes, it's sad and infuriating at times to see a loved one enter a situation that isnt ideal, but best to let them make their mistakes. Easier said than done, especially for an outsider such as myself, but feasibly it's the only option available to you.

If I'm being completely and utterly frank, if you're determined that your perspective is the right one, then you can lay down an ultimatum or two to "encourage" the other party to tow the line. But that takes some manoeuvring and isn't for the feint of heart. It depends what you're willing to do and how bad the potential situation is for the person you're concerned about.

I've long suspected if any of our misguided lot had the kind of power to topple regimes or the backing of an organisation who'd provide weapons and things of that sort, we'd see the darkness that resides in every man come to the fore in the name of Sikhi. But the vast majority of our people are too obsessed with wealth accumulation and social climbing to get their hands dirty in such ways. Plus, I doubt the modern breed of Sikh has the intelligence to balance his martial heritage (which is central to who we are) with the more cerebral aspects of our religion that require a patient hand and a loving heart. Like I said in another thread, it's all or nothing when it comes to us.

Does anyone here like the music of Phil Collins? Or Huey Lewis and The News?

Seems like the scenario Alan Moore devised in V for Vendetta might not be too wide of the mark in coming years, in the UK at least. "England Prevails."

sort of like the fellas flexing at Darbar Sahib for a quick click? Or the bollywood stars and how their fans from the sangat leave the darbar to see them instead? Or the VIP treatment given to well "vips"?

Really? Our lot do that at Darbar Sahib? Stupid fools. Disgusting, lowly behaviour. I had no idea.