Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'muhammad'.
Found 4 results
Out of interest was Muhammad a good logician? He established his own criterion (apparently from Allah) via which he commanded Muslims to recognize his so called divinity and integrity, but where is the subjectivity in that? What non-Islamic principles can prove his authenticity? Put simply, other then Muhammad's word what else is there to say Islam truly is the veracious path to God? Isn't it a defeatist mentality when da'wah givers penultimately proclaim that for not accepting Islam you will burn in hell?
The story says that the angel Jibril (Gabriel) dictated the Quran to Muhammad from the mouth of Allah. What is the Sikh perspective of this? Is the Quran written by Allah (Waheguru), Jibril, or Muhammad?
Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh, A lot of modern Sikhs are very quick to extol their opinions that Sikhism equates all the major religions of the world to rivers flowing into a single ocean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universalism#Sikhism In other words all religions, when properly followed, can lead one to God. Aside from this metaphor being nauseating for its sentimentality, the idea that two faiths with completely different and usually contradictory precepts can both yield the same spiritual pay dirt strikes me as being utterly fanciful. It also betrays an ignorance of the religions with which Sikhi is being equated. Take Muhammad, as an instance of a prophet from another religion. Some members of our Panth consider that both the Prophet of Islam and our own Gurus were all sent by the same God in order to enlighten the masses, that both these parties are composed of the messengers of God. However it is made explicitly clear in the Quran, which was supposedly revealed to Muhammad by Allah himself, that he would be the very last prophet in history to the exclusion of all others that came after him. This includes our own Guru Sahibaan: "Muhammad is... the Apostle of God, and the Seal of the Prophets (The Quran, Surah 33:40). As a "seal" closes a letter, so does Muhammad close the line of prophethood. Therefore if we accept Muhammad as a prophet we must by definition accept his revelation (all of which came directly from Allah through the supposed intercession of the Angel Gabriel), and in lending any credence to the idea that he is the last messenger of God, we are in effect denouncing our own Guru Sahibaan as pretenders. We cannot possibly believe in both the Gurus and Muhammad. Either Muhammad was right and our Gurus were liars, or our Gurus are right and Muhammad was a liar. I very much doubt that any of us inclines towards the former. Secondly, how can it be argued that both Islam and Sikhi both lead to salvation when the two of them advocate completely different and antithetical ways of attaining it? In Sikhism, as the members of the Sangat here will well know, one is instructed that rituals such as fasting, pilgrimages, circumcisions are wholly unimportant and of no consequence. One who wishes to attain Mukhta is counselled to avoid these things. But in Islam, fasts, pilgrimages and rituals are of the utmost importance, and are actually said to be necessary if one wishes to go to heaven (two of the so called five pillars of the faith being predicated on ritual). To summarise, is it possible for Muhammad to have been sent by the very same God who sent our own Guru Sahibaan, when the first party's message excludes and contradicts that of the latter?