Are Sikhs Hindus? (I nice reply)

[Guest Akaal108]

Hindu Dharam has loads of bhagats who did upasana of nirankar(one and only one) via Guru-Shish Relationship.

1. Siri Ram Chandar Maharaj. (Poran Avtar equilavent to Guru Avtar)

2. Rishi Balmik

3. Vaishit Ji( Guru of Siri Ram Chandar Maharaj) [(Poran Avtar equilavent to Guru Avtar)]

4. Siri Krishan Maharaj (Poran Avtar equilavent to Guru Avtar)

5. Raja Janak (Poran Avtar equilavent to Guru Avtar)

and thousands of hindu bhagats are orginal representation of Hindu Dharam.

By the way Guru word itself..orgin came from sanskrit...spiritually speaking there were Guru's before Guru Nanak Dev in yugs.

Guru-Shish realtionship exists in sikhi as well (all our guru's had it before giving gurship to siri guroo granth).

Our Guru's lineage are linked with luv and kush ...read bachitar natak.

Sant gyani 108 baba gurbachan Singh Ji Bhindranvaley lists some small facts about the 10 Guru Sahibs on pages 13 to 23 of his book ‘Gurbani Paath Darshan’.

Baba Ji states that the “Bedi” family of Guru Nanak Maharaaj can be linked back to a Kush the son of Siri Raam Chandra. And because a descendant of Kush studied the Vedas at Kanshee the family was called the “Bedi” family.

Guru Angad Maharaaj Ji’s “Tehan” lineage is said to go back to to the son of Siri Lashman Ji whose name was Takh and hence his lineage was known as the ‘Tehan’ family.

Guru Amardass Ji’s “Bhalla” lineage can be linked to the brother of Siri Raam Chandra whose name was Bharath, his son Bhallan is said to have given his name to the “Bhalla” family.

Guru Raamdass Ji’s “Sodhi” lineage can be linked back to Luv the son of Siri Raam Chandra. The descendants of Luv won over the kingdom of “Snoaudh” and from there the “Sodhi” family descends.

In this way Baba Ji has linked all of the Gurus back to the family of Siri Raam Chandra Ji. We cannot deny these links as they are agreed upon not only by Panth-Rattan Baba Gurbachan Singh ‘Khalsa’ but also many other Nirmala, Udasi and Sevapanthi Gurmukh Pyare, Sadhu Sants. This is also confirmed by the writings of Dashmesh Pitta Guru Gobind Singh in ‘Bachittar-Natak’.

Can we really say that the entire of the 10 Gurus lineage linking back to Siri Raam Chandra is a coincidence? Or should we just ignore this true fact just in case we are scared of being classed as ‘Hindus’?

“We have just enough religion to hate one another, but not enough Dharma to love one another.”

[Bijla Singh]

Siri Ram Chandar Maharaj. (Poran Avtar equilavent to Guru Avtar)

I don't know about your "avtar" theories but Guru Ji is not avtar because:

Aink qpisAw kry AhMkwr ]

nrk surg iPir iPir Avqwr ]

here read some more.

iqRhu gux mih vrqY sMswrw ]

nrk surg iPir iPir Aauqwrw ]3]

This proves that avtar means anyone who is in the cycle of death and birth. Now, IF Guru Ji is avtar and raam chand is equivalent then look what Gurbani says about raam chand

rwmu gieE rwvnu gieE jw kau bhu prvwru ]

Guru Ji on the other hand never passed away.

rovY rwmu inkwlw BieAw ]

Guru Gobind Singh Ji left Anandpur Sahib, thousands of gursikhs became shaheed, His four sons and mother became shaheed, everything was gone but even then Guru Ji stayed in chardee kala. raam chand cried bunch of times showing he was nothing more than a mere human being. what kind of an <banned word filter activated> leaves his wife out in the jungle while she is pregnant.

2. now we come to Rishi Balmik who was prviously a thief. lot of bhagtee and wrote ramayan some 10,000 years (i think) before it happened. Guru Ji rejects going to jungles to do bhagtee. Sikhs are supposed to live in this world among society. he left the society. not a gurmat way. and the story of him making kush is really a big joke.

3. Raam chand met Bhagat Vashist during his exile. but when he was a kid his dad dasrath sent raam chand to brahmins to live in a jungle to get an religious education so technically vashist wasn't his first guru. didn't vashist bring river ganga from akaash which was flowing out of shiva's joora? amazing. again, Guru Nanak Dev Ji went to siddhas to teach them not to outcaste the society. vashist did no different than siddhas.

4. I have provided some quotes from Guru Gobind Singh Ji's bani regarding krishna. Guru Ji called him an <banned word filter activated>. his whole family got drunk and killed each other. and the way he humiliated women is just another story. he married some 16108 women and radha was not one of them.

5. Raja Janak, heard lot of good stuff about him but what's with asking brahmins for good mahoorat and stuff? he asked all brahmins and scholars for good mahoorat to marry his daughter but it is a known fact that she spent all her life in misery. with so much bhagtee he had to go back to brahmins?

and thousands of hindu bhagats are orginal representation of Hindu Dharam.

given no status in Sikhi. those who came from hindu background rejected hinduism openly. Gurbani is the proof.

By the way Guru word itself..orgin came from sanskrit...spiritually speaking there were Guru's before Guru Nanak Dev in yugs.

Guru in hinduism is not the same in Sikhi. Guru in hinduism is a human being, in western countries it is a master of yoga or some shrink but in Sikhi Shabad is the Guru. meanings are totally different which changes the concept.

Our Guru's lineage are linked with luv and kush ...read bachitar natak.

read above. Gurbani is pretty clear about raam chand. but even then what does linage have to do with Sikhi? Guru Nanak Dev Ji was born in a hindu family but does not make him a hindu. Guru Gobind Singh Ji rejected hinduism more than other Gurus. I respect Sant Ji but disagree with him and with the theory of Panj Pyare being some hindu avtars in previous births.

Sikhi is not a reformed movement. Sikhi is distinct, a "Teesar Majhab", religion of Khalsa. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

First and foremost, Hinduism is not a religion. Hinduism is a title given by the invaders to the residents of the Indian subcontinent upon conquest. "Hinduism" is actually a bunch of tribal religions bonded together by 1) the invader label and 2) by the Brahmin that sits atop every tribal religion. Thus, stating that Sikhism has somehow reformed the Hindu religion is an odd concept. Is Hinduism anything cohesive? One village pays homage to Ganesh, one to Krishna and another to Shiva, each with different ceremonies and rituals. There are multiple granths of the "Hindus", many of which are contradictory to the other. Bhai Gurdas Sahib even dictates that the followers of all these different granths used to do nothing but fight with each other over the superiority of their granth.

Another important factor to remember when discussing this "Hinduism" is that the history according to Gurbani is divided into 4 ages, each with its own religion. Lord Raam's religion fit the Treta and Lord Krishna's fit Duapar. But there were separate faiths meant for those ages. Similarly, Sikhism is the religion of the Kal Yuga. True, the objective (which has since been lost in the former three age religions) was to worship the Almighty, but they were separate paths. Yes, Sanskrit was used in the olden Granths...so what. Gurbani also includes words from the Middle East...shall we suddenly believe that Sikhism is Islam as well, a religion that it also shares core beliefs with (not to mention Christianity, Judaism, Bah'aism, Taosim, Buddhism, Zorostranism, Confucianism, and all the other world religions).

Indians seem themselves to be in some delusion that there exists one entity called Hinduism. In reality, Hinduism was initiated by the invaders to categorize a people and sustained by the Brahmins who sit in delhi darbar for their own benefits. In all seriousness, can a Gujrati pujari of Krishna even attend the mandir of a Marathi Ganesh pujari and get the same teachings or the same sermon? Though the teachings may share similarities, the focus of the entire service would be to entirely different entities.

The primal factor in the actual topic started "Are Sikhs Hindus?" is first to provide one universally accepted definition of Hinduism. Well, there is none, despite the vague "Hinduism is so vast that it encompasses everything". There exists a definition of Sikhism that is indeed universal, bound by a code of conduct and is agreed upon by the majority of the Panth. How can which itself does not know its definition claim dominion over that which is sharply defined? It cannot... therefore, the entire statement that "Sikhs are Hindus" is self-defeating right at the beginning.

To twist the words of the Matrix "There is no Hinduism".

The Guru-Shish principle is not something so earth-shattering from India. It exists in animals too. Take any animal child learning from its parent...is this not a Guru-Shish principle? Yes, the content is worls apart, but the concept is not something so insanely Indian. If there is a skill that you acquire from another, that is a Guru-Shish relationship, whether it be the profound message of the Almighty or the masterful wielding of a sword.

The commentary of Guru Sahiban's lineage. Yes, the lineage existed. So what? Guru Gobind Singh Sahib cut all ties with his genetic family for their being heretics and making themselves to be Gurus. Rather, he appointed the Guru Granth and the Guru Panth the Guru. He did not recite the words "In He Ki Kirpa Saje Hum Hai" to Krishna or Raam, but to the Khalsa. What does this demonstrate? Guru Sahib did not strike any verses in supreme praises to Lord Raam or Lord Khrisna (quite the opposite, he stated that he did not believe in them) but rather to the Almighty and to his Sikhs. Hey, Ksyhtrias were the genetic warriors of India...why did Guru Sahib not just reform them, but rather reformed those who were considered less than dirt? If lineage was that important, then Guru Sahib would have paid the supreme respects to the Brahmins, whose forefathers (despite the sins of their progeny) were actually imbued with the thoughts of the Almighty all day and the Kshytria, who used to be the defenders of Dharma (but since had commenced trading their own daughters and the Indian population to harems for their own safety).

[Guest Akaal108]

Bijla Singh,

straight up- your posts are full of insecurities... when you can't prove otherwise you bring down avtars send by Vahiguroo themselves..!

If Sikh existed only after Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji .. what do you call previous incarnation of Siri Guru Gobind Singh Ji- Dusat Daman...surely sikhi didn't existed before siri guru nanak dev ji then according to modern sikhs.???????????????

Sikhi is eternal that's why bhagat kabir bani's, baba farid ji bani, bhagat namdev bani's , bhagat ravidasa bani are included in Sikh Dharam.

This proves anyone who is upasak of Nirankar (one and only one) through their practises regardless of their faith is a sikh !!!!!!!!!!!!

Let me tell you something-

Avtarhood has very little to do with dharma in general. They come here to spread name of Vahiguroo and see tamasha in hakum of Vahiguroo.

I choose not to accept that out of all yugs there is only one Guru Avtar who is Guru baba nanak dev ji... this defeats the purpose of (ikongkar) and brings duality(dvait) to people's mind.

Remember from Nirgun(sun) you can get many rays(Sargun) but rays(Sargun) cannot be Nirgun(Sun)[or source] to produce it's own rays.

As Guru Gobind Singh Ji said:

""Meh hoo param purakh ko dasa, dekhan aeyaa jagat tamasha'"

In my views, all the religion prophets are linked together because in that state...wordly religious labels are gone...nobody is muslim , nobody is hindu, nobody is sikh, nobody is christian...those labels are way gone before.

so my intention in my above post on luv and kush is not sikhi is hinduism but how avtars are linked together. Sant baba gurbachan singh ji didn't had any hard time accepting the possiblity because he was at bhramgyan stage...he had no insecurity to accept it but we are on other hand...when something like this comes ...either we ignore it or debate it by putting down other avtars (take gurbani out of context, yet we ignore same prophets being praised).

I am up for all sikh as distinctive dharam but eternally all the avtars of these dharams are linked with each other..somehow.

source: http://srec.gurmat.info/srecarticles/srida...idynasties.html

[Guest A Singh.]

5. Raja Janak, heard lot of good stuff about him but what's with asking brahmins for good mahoorat and stuff? he asked all brahmins and scholars for good mahoorat to marry his daughter but it is a known fact that she spent all her life in misery. with so much bhagtee he had to go back to brahmins?

Bhai Gurdas // 10

Bgq vfw rwjw jnk hY gurmuK mwXw ivc audwsI]

King Janak was a great saint who amidst maya remained indifferent to it.

dyv lok noN cilAw gx gMDrb sBw suKvwsI]

Along with gans and gandharvs (calestial musicians) he went to the abode of the gods.

jmpur gieAw pukwr sux ivllwvn jI nrk invwsI]

From there, he, hearing the cries of inhabitants of hell, went to them.

Drmrwie no AwiKEnu sBnw dI kr bMd KlwsI]

He asked the god of death, Dharamrai, to relieve all their suffering.

kry bynqI Drmrwie hau syvk Twkur AibnwsI]

Hearing this, the god of death told him he was a mere servant of the eternal Lord (and without His orders he could not liberate them).

gihxy DirAnu iek nwauN pwpW nwl krY inrjwsI]

Janak offered a part of his devotion and remembrance of the name of the Lord.

pwsMg pwp n pujnI gurmuK nwauN Aqul n qulwsI]

All the sins of hell were found not equal even to the counterweight of balance.

nrkhuM Cuty jIAw jMq ktI glhu islk jmPwsI]

In fact no balance can weigh the fruits of recitation and remembrance of the Lords name by the gurmukh.

mukiq jugiq nwvYN kI dwsI ]õ]

All the creatures got liberated from hell and the noose of death was cut. Liberation and the technique of attaining it are the servants of the name of the Lord.

[Guest Akaal108]

Bijla Singh you should be shamed of slandering raja janak in such a way. He was highly praised by Bhai Gurdas Ji...just because some of the stuff he did doesn't make sense to you..you make mockery of him.

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

Akaal108 Ji, recent science calculated that the humans of the world population, despite its 6 billion plus size, are all cousins 52 times removed.

So you, me and Bilja Singh is all related to these Mahapurakhs too, as well as Aurangzeb, Babur, and Hitler (one big happy/dysfunctional/insane/saintly family). But you don't see anyone printing t-shirts about that do you? :e: Given the population of the world at the times of the Gurus, the cousin relationship would have been even closer. Even today who knows, maybe me, you Bilja Singh or anyone else are of the bloodline of Krishna...does that really make a difference?

So lineages...big whoop. There were many Paapis (aka. Prithi Chand) that came out of the lineage too. Guru Sahib addressed the people in the Guru Granth Sahib to recognize the Almighty in all, not pay attention to lineages. YES, lineages exist...but it is the character that counts much more.

[Guest Akaal108]

Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself mentions these family lineages in the Bachittar Natak....if they were in-signifcant then guru's shouldn't have felt the need to discuss about them.

[Pheena]

when you compare one religion against another, you are bouund to find faults and things which contradict your refrence religion. Obviously from the beginning people are pro Sikhi and will never accept anything which will belittle your sikhi and place Hinduism in a position where your beliefs are compromised.

In the efforts to differentiate between Hinduism and Sikhism we have begun to slander the Religion simply because we don't see their methods of attaining God as the right way. It is natural for one to defend their religion, but it isn't natural for one to defend one religion on the cost of disecting the faith of another with the intent of destroying it when you yourself are not Hindu. You are an Observer, not a Practitioner.

[Bijla Singh]

If Sikh existed only after Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji .. what do you call previous incarnation of Siri Guru Gobind Singh Ji- Dusat Daman...surely sikhi didn't existed before siri guru nanak dev ji then according to modern sikhs.???????????????

Sikhi was started by Guru Nanak Dev Ji. go ask any sant of yours. Guru Gobind Singh Ji says he did bhagtee at hemkunt sahib but Guru Ji doesn't say he was in human form. in fact, he did bhagtee for four yugs and then Akal Purakh called Guru Ji and ordered him to come to this world. This proves two things. One, Guru Ji was not in any human form before coming to this world as Gobind Rai simply because no human being can live to see four yugs. Second, he became our Guru when Jot Nanak entered his body. The story of his previous birth holds no significance in Sikhi way of life. if it does then prove it.

This proves anyone who is upasak of Nirankar (one and only one) through their practises regardless of their faith is a sikh

This is wrong. Sikhi is internal and external. you praise too much all the sants but tell me if they were amritdharis or not? why did they have to take amrit? Upasna is taught by Guru Ji. One MUST follow the path of Guru Ji to do bhagtee. follower of true Guru is a Sikh which means he has to take amrit, keep rehat and ONLY believe in Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

I choose not to accept that out of all yugs there is only one Guru Avtar who is Guru baba nanak dev ji... this defeats the purpose of (ikongkar) and brings duality(dvait) to people's mind.

Guru Ji is NOT an avtar. avtar is someone who is in cycle of death and birth. I have given you quotes from Gurbani. I did not use it out of context.

Regarding Bhai Gurdas Ji's vaars. Bhai Sahib Ji narrated the story but the main point is in the last lines.

In fact no balance can weigh the fruits of recitation and remembrance of the Lords name by the gurmukh.

You have no answers to my points. Did janak not ask brahmins for mahoorats to marry his daughter? All Bhagats in Guru Granth Sahib spoke against brahmins openly but this janak king with so much bhagtee kept going back to brahmins. did he not get hankaar on his way to heaven?

just because some of the stuff he did doesn't make sense to you..you make mockery of him.

then why don't you prove your points and remove my doubts? I don't know how you look at sants but they are my elder brothers not Gurus.

Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself mentions these family lineages in the Bachittar Natak....if they were in-signifcant then guru's shouldn't have felt the need to discuss about them.

What does this have to do with Sikhi? what significance does it hold? bani is Bachittar Natak so obviously Guru Ji has to talk about his family background. what else do you expect?

You are an Observer, not a Practitioner.

A person does not have to practice hinduism to know about it. a person must speak against the wrong things. mannu simartis talk about how severly sudras should be punished but why should one respect it? a wrong thing is wrong no matter where it is written and who wrote it. only good things are accepted and respected. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh