Can Sikhism Offer Salvation?

[Rajs]

Hi,

History:

It is quite evident from Sikh scriptures, Punjabi culture, customs and traditions that Sikhism is an offshoot of Hinduism with some Islamic theology adaptations, such as the concept of one God and rejection of idol worship. Historically, the ten gurus never ever disassociated themselves from Hinduism but remain within the parameter of Hinduism. What they did do was to speak out against certain practices of Hinduism exploited by the Brahmins. In particular, the caste system and status of women in the society.

It was the British, who according to their policy “to divide and rule,” went about planting the seed of distinction between Sikhs and Hindus. In fact, for over hundred years, while most of the Sikhs were serving the British army, it was the Hindus, who never considered Sikh gurus as non-Hindus, looked after the Gurdwaras. Later, Singh Sabha, in early 20th century began to take control over the Gurdwaras and started to secede from Hindu religion for political reasons.

Gurus:

Perceived founder of Sikhism, Guru Nanak’s act of rejecting “Janeau” ceremony is always pointed out as an ironclad fact that, Nanak rejected Hinduism. However, what is often overlooked are the facts that Nanak never ever started a new religion; he was born to Hindu parents, married a Hindu and according to Hindu customs. All the gurus were Hindus; one has to just follow the names of all gurus, their wives, and their children to see the names were derived from Hindu gods and goddess, and as a religion, Sikhism, has no foundation whatsoever. Guru Gobind Singh did start the Khalsa Panth, however, if you are to take Gobind singh’s baptism initiation as a beginning for Sikh religion then you will have to disqualify the previous nine gurus as Sikh Gurus because none of them were baptized. You will also have to accept Gobind Singh’s baptism initiation as a failure because the number of Sikhs baptised at any given time in history and at present is pitifully low.

The Guru Granth is touted, as the ultimate living Guru for the Sikhs. However, the fact is that Guru Arjun wrote the “Adi Granth“ in 1604 but it wasn’t until another 104 years before it became “Guru Granth”! What, may I ask, was the status of Guru Granth between 1604 and 1708? Were Guru Arjun and the rest of the Gurus running a parallel Guruship along the Guru Granth or, for over hundred year period it was just an ordinary book?

Among Sikhs, it is believed that when Nanak died, his body turned into flowers, which were distributed among his Hindu and Muslim followers for last rites according to their customs! Why, I mean, where were the Sikhs to take care of his remains or flowers? What about the bodies of later nine gurus? Since they were attributed with same jyote (guru’s spirit) then how come their bodies did not turn into flowers or whatever?

Teaching:

Nanak was greatly influenced by the Bhakti movement, and various Sufis and Sants. The journeys he undertook were mainly to learn from others, rather than, to dispense his own brand of religion, i.e., Sikhism. In India, he mainly taught against Brahminism and their self-serving practises, but did not, at any stage reject Hinduism. Incorporating teachings of Farid, Ravidas, Surdas, Kabir, Ramanand, etc. in the Granth is a clear indication of lack of original substance on part of the Gurus. Sikhism has pretty much kept Hinduism’s idea of birth-death-cycles to achieve Mukti, i.e, so called soul uniting with God, as a final stage for humans.

To understand Sikhism, one must see that, it is a branch of Hinduism, cut from the main tree and planted on its own, which eventually generated roots and became a separate tree. However, even as a separate tree, it still contains the same characteristics as the original tree from which it was taken. Trees of same species may look different in their outlook, i.e., physical form but they are not different in their inherent nature. The Singh Sabha movement, which took over Nirankari and Namdhari movements of 19th century, began “creating” a unique Sikh identity to be identified with Sikhism, separate from Hinduism and, to that effect, new customs and rites were formed, for e.g., a new marriage ceremony for Sikhs – Anand Karaj in early 1900. Change of Hindu names; Hari Mandir (Golden Temple) became Darbar Sahib. Names of gurus, too, began to change – Arjun became Arjan; Hari Govind became Har Gobind, Govind Rai became Gobind Singh, Hari Krishan became Harkrishan. For the past 100 years, Sikh establishment has been “creating” history and concocting stories, in order to separate themselves from the Hindus, a trend originally set by the British to divide-and-rule India.

Finally, on a personal level, as a Sikh, I found that Sikhism has no answer for the ultimate barrier between God and man. In my search for the truth about God, I discovered that what actually separates us from God is sin. God is HOLY and we are sinners. There is nothing we can do to reach the level of holiness God requires to be without sin, so God provided the source of our salvation, Jesus Christ, and ONLY through him, we may receive the forgiveness of sins, which leads to salvation.

Regards

Rajs

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

one question, who is the founder of hinduism?

this has been posted so many times, do a search buddy. From your post it is 100% clear you have no clue about sikhi.

mMdw iksY n AwKIAY piV AKru eyho buJIAY ] (473-13, Awsw, mÚ 1)

mandaa kisai na aakhee-ai parh akhar ayho bujhee-ai.

Do not call anyone bad; read these words, and understand.

mUrKY nwil n luJIAY ]19] (473-13, Awsw, mÚ 1)

moorkhai naal na lujhee-ai. ||19||

Don't argue with fools. ||19||

[ParwinderSingh]

im not as knowlegable as most sikhs so i wont answer everything and iv gota revise for my exam tomorow so i dont hav time lol.........but i do know that our first guru , Guru Nanak Dev Ji distinguished himself from hindus and muslims. he was neither. there are flaws in both of those religions.

secondly the Guru Granth Sahib was the guru after Guru Gobind Singh Ji, it had all the teachings of each Guru. Guru Arjan Dev Ji started compiling it and it was completed by Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Gobind Rai became Gobind Singh after he was initiated into the Khalsa Panth by the panj piayria. thats why singh is used. anyone who takes amrit takes the name singh.

also Guru Nanak Dev Ji was spreading the word fdirectly from Akal Purak, and was not influenced by any sufi saints . instead the sufis were influenced and drawn towards guru nanak dev ji.

i do not agree with your article, i think u may not hav read gurbani or understood it, as most questions can be answered by reading it . i am even doubting the fact your a sikh becos uv wrote nonsense ...........however bhul chuk di kima

Fateh!

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

Here we go...

"It is quite evident from Sikh scriptures, Punjabi culture, customs and traditions that Sikhism is an offshoot of Hinduism with some Islamic theology adaptations,"

First, define Hinduism...there is no cohesive definition. Some say it is monotheistic, whereas there is an India Supreme Court decision what states it is polytheistic. Some proclaim the Vedas as supreme and others the Shastras. Truth be told, "Hinduism" is a bunch of various philosophies and paths cobbled together by one commonality: Thr Brahmin and the Manu Simrities. Through the assignment of castes, the Brahmins have forced often contradictory philosophies together for their personal benefit.

Now, as per your point...Sikhism has many concepts in common with all world religions because they all share certain universal concepts. However, it is ludicrous to assume that Sikhism and Hinduism share common roots when the primary concept of the religion is vastly different. The "Hindus" (aka. Vedic followers) mostly agree upon the trinity known as OM, which designates Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Sikhism goes to Ik Ongkaar, which denotes the Primal Power that created the trinity. It is to that One Almighty that the Sikhs worship. Vastly different from Hinduism, in which each village and town has a local diety that they worship.

"Historically, the ten gurus never ever disassociated themselves from Hinduism but remain within the parameter of Hinduism."

For that the Gurus speak these words:

I observe neither fasting (like a Hindu).

nor the month of austerity (like a Muslim).

For I serve God alone.

Who saves all at the last.

Gosain of the Hindus and Allah of the Muslims are one to me.

I have broken free from Hindus as from Muslims.

Neither I go to Mccca to perform Hajj (like Muslims),

nor I perform worship at pilgrim places of Hindus.

I serve only the sole Lord (i.e., God) and no other.

I neither perform the Hindu worship.

nor say the Muslim prayer.

I bow to the One Formless Lord in my heart.

We are neither Hindus nor Musalmans,

Our body and soul belong to the One Supreme Being,

Who alone is both Ram and Allah for us.[53]

Guru, Guru Granth Sahib, Rag Bhairo, Guru Arjun Sahib, 1136

As per your Gurus are Hindus and never started another religion. If the Gurus never started another religion, then what Hindu diety did they worship? What was the need for another Granth Sahib when 100's of Hindu Granths existed? Rather, the reason for establishing a new religion is read by Sikhs every day in the Tav Parsad Sawiyae, where Guru Gobind Singh Ji writes that he wandered everywhere and saw nobody as a devotee of the Almighty. These wanderings are none other that that of Guru Nanak Sahib that the tenth embodiment of Guru Nanak Sahib in the body and name of Guru Gobind Singh Ji is writing. The verse from the Guru Granth Sahib Ji stands testament to the separation from Hinduism and Islam.

"however, if you are to take Gobind singh's baptism initiation as a beginning for Sikh religion then you will have to disqualify the previous nine gurus as Sikh Gurus because none of them were baptized."

Wrong:

He washed His feet, eulogised God and got his Disciples drink the ambrosia of his feet.

charan dhhoe rehiraas kar charanaamrith skhiaan peelaayaa||

Vaaran Bhai Gurdas Sahib, Vaar 1, Pauri 23

Every succeeding Guru was a disciple of the previous Guru and chosen because of their selfless dedication to the Sikh path. Guru Nanak was given the Amrit of Naam directly by the Almighty:

ho dtaadtee vaekaar kaarai laaeiaa ||

I was a minstrel, out of work, when the Lord took me into His service.

raath dhihai kai vaar dhhurahu furamaaeiaa ||

To sing His Praises day and night, He gave me His Order, right from the start.

dtaadtee sachai mehal khasam bulaaeiaa ||

My Lord and Master has summoned me, His minstrel, to the True Mansion of His Presence.

sachee sifath saalaah kaparraa paaeiaa ||

He has dressed me in the robes of His True Praise and Glory.

sachaa a(n)mrith naam bhojan aaeiaa ||

The Ambrosial Nectar of the True Name was brought forth.

(Guru Granth Sahib, Guru Nanak Sahib, 150).

"You will also have to accept Gobind Singh's baptism initiation as a failure because the number of Sikhs baptised at any given time in history and at present is pitifully low. "

Pitifully low? It was enough to save Hinduism from extinction. Sikhism never values quantity but quality. There were 80,000 people gathered at the Bisakhi in 1699 and only 5 got up to become Sikhs. Guru Gobind Singh himself stated that he would make 1 Sikh fight 250,000, and he fulfilled that promise at Chamkaur Sahib. Nadir Shah was absolutely flabbergasted that small contingents of Sikhs (less than a hundred) would daringly attack his army and take back the women and property he had looted to be returned to India and pined that they would one day rule India. On the reverse end, there were millions of Hindus in India and yet they could not stop the Mughals from trampling the populace. The Brahmins and Kshytrias sold out their own people to the Mughals. Tell me, what good were numbers then? Failure? Hardly...Sikhism has become a global religion and a community that holds plenty of power in countries like Canada, U.K. and U.S. You have yet to realize the full potential of Sikhs.

"The Guru Granth is touted, as the ultimate living Guru for the Sikhs. However, the fact is that Guru Arjun wrote the "Adi Granth" in 1604 but it wasn't until another 104 years before it became "Guru Granth"! What, may I ask, was the status of Guru Granth between 1604 and 1708? Were Guru Arjun and the rest of the Gurus running a parallel Guruship along the Guru Granth or, for over hundred year period it was just an ordinary book? "

Your comments show your complete ignorance of Sikh history as well as the training of the human mind. The object was to teach humanity how to live like humans again and that took 10 Gurus, not just to save Hindus from the Mughals as you are assuming. It it wold require 10 Gurus to restore honor and religion to those who had been trampled upon by every invading force for thousands of years. The Adi Granth Sahib was indeed written in the time of the 5th Guru and upon its assuming its throne in the Harimandir Sahib, no Guru ever sat at the same level as Gurbani but always lower. It took 6 Gurus to completely ingrain the concept of Gurbani, NOT the Guru body being the Guru. The idea was to firmly teach the Sikhs the firm concepts of Sikhism and make Sikhs. Had they not done so, Sikhism would be idol worshippers like your ilk, praying blindly to pictures and idols of Gurus instead of paying heed to the teachings. The Adi Granth Sahib was never treated as an ordinary book, but rather given a high regard by the Gurus themselves. That is why the Gurus wrote "Bani Guru, Guru Hai Bani".

"Why, I mean, where were the Sikhs to take care of his remains or flowers? What about the bodies of later nine gurus? Since they were attributed with same jyote (guru's spirit) then how come their bodies did not turn into flowers or whatever?"

Because the Sikhs do not have any attachment to the physical remain. If a Sikh body after death was creamted, buried, tossed into a river, it matters not. If the Muslims and Hindus were arguing over such a matter, the Guru would have wanted to resolve the situation amicably. Your version of history states that the Hindus and Muslims took the flowers and performed rights on them. Other versions of history state that Guru Sahib's body simply turned into flowers, thus avioding the problem of burial or cremation altogether, because there was no longer a body to cremate.

"Nanak was greatly influenced by the Bhakti movement, and various Sufis and Sants. The journeys he undertook were mainly to learn from others, rather than, to dispense his own brand of religion, i.e., Sikhism. In India, he mainly taught against Brahminism and their self-serving practises, but did not, at any stage reject Hinduism. Incorporating teachings of Farid, Ravidas, Surdas, Kabir, Ramanand, etc. in the Granth is a clear indication of lack of original substance on part of the Gurus. Sikhism has pretty much kept Hinduism's idea of birth-death-cycles to achieve Mukti, i.e, so called soul uniting with God, as a final stage for humans. "

Read Vaaran Bhai Gurdas Sahib, but since you remain ignorant of the rest of Sikh history, how can I expect you to do that. So I will summarize. Guru Nanak Sahib NEVER went to learn anything from anyone. Even in school, he was the one who taught the teacher what the real purpose of the letter he was teaching to the class were and in a few days, the teacher remarked that he had tried to teach Guru Nanak Sahib everything he knew, but there was nothing left. On his trips to various religious places, he confronted and challenged every group directly and defeated them, showing them that their practices were meaningless. He defeated the Vedics, the Muslims, the Yogis and anyone who claimed to be the superior intellect of the age.

" Incorporating teachings of Farid, Ravidas, Surdas, Kabir, Ramanand, etc. in the Granth is a clear indication of lack of original substance on part of the Gurus. Sikhism has pretty much kept Hinduism's idea of birth-death-cycles to achieve Mukti, i.e, so called soul uniting with God, as a final stage for humans. "

Why don't you go read some Hindu scriptures. The Vedas are nothing more than instruction manuals to the Brahmins on how to perform rituals for their clients to get them what they want. The Upanishads, one of the few truly enlightening Granths, calls the Vedas inferior knowledge. The Manu Simrities have women kissing their husband's feet and worshipping them like Gods while being treated worse than the untouchables. You have Brahmins pouring lead into any "lower caste" who hears the Vedas and poking their eyes out for reading the Vedas. Compare this to the equality preaching, anti-ritual, anti-caste teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib and you have the spheres to state that the Guru Granth Sahib is unorigional? The Bhagats you are mentioning were all mostly low-caste that Hinduism would never have accepted the teachings of as Divine. What talk is there of Mukhti in Hinduism? Which diety do I have to bribe to get that? There are even Yogic practices that can force the soul to leave the body...and then what? You wander the earth like a ghost? The concept of the One Almighty is all but lost in Hindusim, replaced by ritualism and idolatory. Heck, you have people worshipping Krishna Avatar when his teaching tell Arjuna to worship the One Almighty as he explains that he as been ever present in the world through various incarnations.

"Finally, on a personal level, as a Sikh, I found that Sikhism has no answer for the ultimate barrier between God and man. In my search for the truth about God, I discovered that what actually separates us from God is sin. God is HOLY and we are sinners. There is nothing we can do to reach the level of holiness God requires to be without sin, so God provided the source of our salvation, Jesus Christ, and ONLY through him, we may receive the forgiveness of sins, which leads to salvation."

And it comes out...you are a Jehova's Witness, probably a convert from Hinduism or Sikhism without any knowledge of the two, trying to do his best on a Sikh forum. I feel for you buddy...so much pressure. You got peers that are telling you to spread the word of Christ and you got all this new energy. First resolve this problem for me: the origional sin. If my ancestor Adam committed a sin, why am I born with it? Consequently, if my ancestor's sins can cumulate in such a fashion, then all the sins of my forefathers and mothers would also add up into my body. So all those sins are mine, right? What type of God allows this? Why the heck do I have to pay for sins that some old dude hundreds of years ago committed? Next, if you think Sikhism and Hinduism are the same then you have to know that Christianity is the same thing as Judaism with a few little changes right? Shoot, you guys come from the same country, you read the same scriptures (the Old Testament is a Jewish and a Christian text), you have the same commandments. Tell me, what makes your faith so distinct? On top of that, your savior had long uncut hair and a turban, as was the custom of those who resided in Nazereth and the Judaic lands. Yet, I don't see none of your missionary friends wearing a turban or keeping long hair? Whatsa matter, afraid of looking like your cousin religion, the Muslims?

Rather than going on forums trying to preach half-researched bull, how about you read up on the Bible and try to follow it instead of having the preachers intrepret it for you. You will find in those words much more tolerant than the typical "Jesus or eternal damnation" propaganda spread by a low of people. If you have any questions on the Bible, ask. I'll be more than happy to teach your religion to you.

P.S. Jesus never said that ONLY through him can salvation be reached. That was written by the disciple John as his opinion in the ever-famous 3:16 but is NOT a directly attributable quote to Jesus. Basically, he wrote his opinion and the Christians take it as fact. His name isn't even Jesus Christ, but Jesus of Nazereth. Christ was added on later as it is a Greek variant of Christos, which means of the Lord.

[Mehtab Singh]

I am going to paste my response which I gave you on sikhawareness forum. Looks like you need to read it once more, so here goes.

from http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...8205&highlight=

It is quite evident from Sikh scriptures, Punjabi culture, customs and traditions that Sikhism is an offshoot of Hinduism with some Islamic theology adaptations, such as the concept of one God and rejection of idol worship.

Guru Nanak Dev Jee's words : na ko Hindu, na ko Musalmaan.

Historically, the ten gurus never ever disassociated themselves from Hinduism but remain within the parameter of Hinduism.

Gurujee has time & again emphasized in Gurbani that they are neither Hindu nor Muslim.

It was the British, who according to their policy “to divide and rule,” went about severing the umbilical chord and planting the seed of distinction between Sikhs and Hindus. In fact, for over hundred years, while most of the Sikhs were serving the British army, it was the Hindus, who never considered Sikh gurus as non-Hindus, looked after the Gurdwaras. Later, Singh Sabha, in early 20th century began to take control over the Gurdwaras and started to secede from Hindu religion for political reasons.

Same old rotten stuff!

however, if you are to take Gobind Singh’s baptism initiation as the beginning for Sikh religion then you will have to disqualify the previous nine gurus as Sikh Gurus because none of them were baptized.

Until the 9th Guru it was called Charan Pahul, and from Guru Gobind Singh Jee onwards it was Khande baate da Amrit. So all the Gurus WERE baptized.

You will also have to accept Gobind Singh’s baptism initiation as a failure because the number of Sikhs baptised at any given time in history and at present is pitifully low.

Because it takes one to be more than a mere human to go ahead and offer oneself at Gurujee's feet.

Were Guru Arjun and the rest of the Gurus running a parallel Guruship along the Guru Granth or, for over hundred year period it was just an ordinary book?

Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee became the eternal Guru of the Sikhs in 1708 when Guru Gobind Singh Jee left His physical body. It was Him who passed on Gurgaddi to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee. Before that, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee (then called Adi Granth) was the main scripture of the Sikhs, but Guruship passed on only after Guru Gobind Singh Jee.

where were the Sikhs to take care of his remains or flowers?

Followers of Guru Nanak Dev Jee were both of Hindu and Muslim backgrounds, and each wanted to do the last rites as per their customs.

What about the bodies of later nine gurus? Since they were attributed with same jyote (guru’s spirit) then how come their bodies did not turn into flowers or whatever?

The lesson that was meant to be taught was that people should not hate each other based on religious differences. Each of the 10 Gurus came with an exclusive message, and so its absurd to ask "how come their bodies did not turn into flowers" like Guru Nanak Dev Jee's did. Next you will ask "why didn't the Gurus after Guru Arjan Dev Jee not have to sit on a hot plate?", or "why wasn't any other Guru besides Guru Tegh Bahadur Jee beheaded?"

Incorporating teachings of Farid, Ravidas, Surdas, Kabir, Ramanand, and many others, in the Granth is a clear indication of lack of original substance on part of the Gurus.

Perhaps you have a problem with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee being the only scripture in the world which sees no barriers to religion. You will never hear Allah in a Hindu mandir, and you will never hear Ram in a Muslim mosque. But in the house of Guru Nanak where all are loved equally, you will hear both "Sabhey ghatt Ram boley" and "Awwal Allah Noor upaya".

Does it mean Sikhs have no problem in walking into a Mosque, a Church, a Mandir, etc. and worshipping along with the people present there. After all, the same God is there as in the Gurdwara? Would Sikhs be willing to praise the name of Allah, meditate on Buddha, and sing Vishnu’s praise?

Sikhs respect other faiths and firmly believe that others should have freedom to worship according to their own religion, which is why Guru Tegh Bahadur Jee stood up for Hindus even at the cost of His life (something you probably didn't know of). Just because we respect other faiths doesn't mean we start following them. Its like one guy respecting his friend's dad starts calling the man as his own dad!! Ridiculous.

To understand Sikhism, one must see that it is a branch of Hinduism that was cut from the main tree and planted on its own which eventually generated roots and became a separate tree.

Try as hard as you may, but thats never gonna happen sweety. You may try to fool a few naive Sikhs with this ideology, but then again thats because they are naive.

However, even as a separate tree, it still contains the same characteristics as the original tree from which it was taken.

So? There are loads of similarities in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, does that mean they are 1 religion? Try reasoning with a Muslim that he is a Jew or a Christian.

After the British, Singh Sabha movement, which took over Nirankari and Namdhari movements of 19th century, began “creating” a unique Sikh identity to be identified with Sikhism, separate from Hinduism.

The separate identity was created by Dasmesh Pita Sahib Guru Gobind Singh Jee.

To that effect, new customs and rites were formed, for e.g., a new marriage ceremony for Sikhs – Anand Karaj in early 1900. Change of Hindu names; Hari Mandir (Golden Temple) became Darbar Sahib. Names of gurus, too, began to change – Arjun became Arjan; Hari Govind became Har Gobind, Govind Rai became Gobind Singh, Hari Krishan became Harkrishan. For the past 100 years, Sikh establishment has been “creating” history and concocting stories, in order to separate themselves from the Hindus, a trend originally set by the British to divide-and-rule India.

Another piece of propaganda.

Finally, on a personal level, I found that Sikhism has no answer for the ultimate barrier between God and mankind.

Since you believe that there is a barrier, and since you believe it is ultimate, you have already closed your eyes to the truth that Gurbani teaches, which is why you can't see it. Gurbani says that God is closer to us even more than our own limbs, yet you see this ultimate barrier and blame Gurbani for not teaching the truth? Do you have a problem?

In my search for the truth about God, I discovered that what actually separates us from God is sin.

Thats the duality thats stuck up in your head. You think that we are separate from God whereas actually its the relation between a drop and the ocean and can't be separated. Its maya/mammon that causes the duality.

Sikhism can never lead you to a path to God because it doesn't have one.

Maybe you can't see the path because its the shortest possible way to get to God. Happens dude! When one is blinded to a point that you close your eyes inspite of being blind, you tend not to see stuff thats obvious, so its not your fault.

All the Gurus died, and to think that there souls "merged" with God and the same can haapen to you is a fallacy.

The truth never dies. There have been loads of those who called themselves kings and masters, but where are they today? These kings and masters were all fake and temporary. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was our True King (Sachey Patshah) centuries ago, and will remain the same till eternity. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee was our True Guru (SatGuru) centuries ago, and will remain the same till eternity. False are others who came and died, but this Guru Jot, this Shabad Guru is eternal.

Gurus, in their lifespan, never did wash anybody's sins and neither can it be done today by reciting the Gurbani - just like going to Mecca or, washing in Ganges does nothing for your sins. Only by accepting Jesus Christ as Saviour, our sins may be forgiven, and salvation attained.

Jesus said "No one comes to the Father but through me". With all due respect to Jesus (something you don't have for our Gurus), let me point out that he in a way compelled people to follow him if they wanted to go to heaven, or else they were doomed. It seems as though he wanted them to become his followers in return/exchange for his sacrifice.

But look at the greatness of Dhann Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Jee, who sacrificed His life for another faith (Hinduism...yup it was another faith because Gurujee wasn't Hindu) and never asked for anything in return. No thanks, no acknowledgement, and didn't ask even a single Hindu to become a Sikh since He was sacrificing His life for their freedom of religion. Beat that!

I am really sorry to say this, but your knowledge on Sikhism is totally hopeless. I feel for you bro!

Before making your next post, make sure you read this :

This should wake you up - Sikhism - By Janet Lant : http://www.searchsikhism.com/si3.html

Other stories to give you a rude shock : http://www.searchsikhism.com/stories.html

Another response

Guru Nanak's statement "Na Koi Hindu, Na Koi Mussalman" neither made him a Sikh nor laid down foundation of a new religion.

It made it clear, as you yourself stated, that in God's eyes we are all one.

The statement actually belongs to Kabir

And whats your source?

Furthermore, if Nanak rejected identifying mankind through religion and caste, and preached the universal brotherhood of men, then why would he began a new religion?

Bhai Gurdas Jee clearly says in his vaaraan "Nanak nirmal Panth chalaya", and yet those totally uninformed about Sikhism continue to weep and wail that Guru Nanak Dev Jee didn't start a new faith.

Seriously tell me something. Do we listen to you guys who have no idea what you gys on about, or do we listen to Gurujee's words which are stated clearly? Don't you guys have anything better to do? You know you should spend more time trying to be better Christians or which ever respected faith you belong to, rather than trying to screw other people's brains with your theories. Not to attack your ego, but the only few "Sikhs" who fall for your words are those who are as uneducated about Sikhism as you yourself are. So just because you "conquered" the non-existent brains of a few doesn't mean everyone else will buy all that you have to sell.

The reason we don't go around preaching Sikhism to brainwash people is because we believe in freedom of religion, something our Gurus gave their lives for. Plus a diamond loses its charm if you sell it cheaply, which is why we don't sell doctrines like "Come my way or be destined to hell for eternity".

So once again, if you are here to discuss about Sikhism and learn something, you are more than most welcome. Don't worry we won't get anywhere close to converting you, and infact we too look forward to understanding Christianity better so that we can respect other faiths more than we already do. But if you are here only to diss our faith and our Gurus, and that too without knowing anything substantial about Sikhism, then I am afraid we shall always be at war.

Good luck and God bless!

Be it sikhsangat or sikhawareness, you will never be successful in confusing Sikhs Mr/Miss Rajs

ms514 veerjee's response is as usual the best once again :T: :TH:

[Khalsa4ever]

Waheguroo jee ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo jee kee Fateh!

Mehtab singh and ms514

Waheguroo jee ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo jee kee Fateh!

[ms514]

Sat Sri Akal:

Bhai Mehtab Singh Deh Jawaab Dah Koi Jawaab Nahee

Kithaa Kattar Akhree Vaar, Likhya Keyboard Deh Raahee

Haraayaa Koor Parchaar Noo Jiwe Mirg Nu Maarya Baagh

Kutthia Rajs Nu Jiveh Pendoo Bibian Kuthdiaan Sarson Dah Saag

Rehgayaa ms514 Guru Di Kirpa To La Jawaab

Dhan Guru Sahiban Jine Mittee Nu Baniya Nawaab

[ISDhillon]

Rajs has been infecting the sikh philosophy website also I think this is the best article for you to learn about sikhism it even allows you to understand why christianity is incompatible with sikh thought when claiming the divinity of christ happy reading

The Sikh Doctrine

The Sikhism

The Vision of Sikhism for a New Civilization

Metaphysical Pillars

Sikhism on the Eve of 21st Century

The Sikh Doctrine

Political Pluralism

Sikhism as a Renaissance Movement

The World Historical Mission of Sikhism

Contributor:

Dr. Jasbir Singh Ahluwalia

Vice-Chancellor

Punjabi University, Patiala(INDIA)

The Sikhism

Over 500 years ago in sub-continental India arose Sikhism - one of the five major world religions - as a unique renaissance and resurgence of the human spirit. The spirit of man, realizing afresh its kinship, its integral bond, with the Spirit Divine, liberated itself out of the obsolescent, dogma-encrusted existence and came into its own, efflorescently, as a dynamic force, a creative impulse. The elan vital of Sikhism had great potential for ushering in a new civilization qualitatively different from the earlier Indic and Hindu civilizations. Thereby raising humanity to a new level of cultural and civilizational progress. In its universal dimension Sikhism introduced a new concept of man, of society and state and in its historical dimension, this religion awakened medieval Indian society out of its collective amnesia, its inertia, and shook it out of its bondage to the dead past.

The Vision of Sikhism for a New Civilization

But the vision of Sikhism for a new civilization, for a new post-feudal, trans-capitalist, socio - politico - economic dispensation could not be realized owing to the feudalization of the Sikh movement soon after the Banda Bahadur period, with the correlative processes of the Brahminization of Sikh society & Vedanticization of the Sikh doctrine. The futuristic vision of Sikhism has become all the more relevant and significant for humanity in the 21st century and the third millennium. Sikh religion with its holistic world view can and should play a leading role in evolving the ideology of the global civilization and in shaping its institutional super-structure with the Khalsa as the embodiment of the Spirit-in-history - a concept introduced by Sikh philosophy for the first time in the world's speculative and sociological thought, as we shall see later.Modern Western civilization which, in a sense, gave rise to a particular kind of 'modern' world view and vision, was based on certain fundamentals that made it different from medieval and ancient civilizations on the one hand and would, hopeably, distinguish it from the post-modernist 21st century and the third millennium global civilization on the other hand. The ideational postulates of modern Western civilization, evolved in different ways, involved the dichotomy and dialectic of the noumenal and the phenomenal; of the spiritual and the terrestrial; of mind and matter; of soul and body; of value and fact; and of subject and object.

The sociological correlates of this world-view, humanism, secularism, unitarian polity, cultural hegemony and homogenization etc., refer back to the same dichotomy and dualism. Empiricism asserted that the sensory, phenomenal world was the only (knowable) reality. Humanism (distinguishable from the post-modernist kind) made man the measure of all things, without any reference to any transcendental reality or principle. History asserted that values were of a relative nature. Existentialism postulated the priority of individual existence over essence, over transcendental ideals and ideas. Secularism which in the form of so-called secular nationalism became the ideology of modern nation-state, was again based on the separating division of the secular and the religious domain. This kind of secularism, or secular nationalism, conceded no conceptual room to religious minorities, religious identities and religious institutions.

Metaphysical Pillars

The dualism under reference was based on the following metaphysical pillars : Metaphysically, it was held that reality is of material nature, with a rational structure, having an atomistic composition; independently existing (material) objects and phenomena could be known, independently of the subject through reason with its analytic-reductionist methodology.The all-powerful, mighty reason reigned supreme in nature, history and society during the past few centuries of the modern era, uptill the first half of the 20th century when it faced an impasse which, in a sense, was the impasse of modern Western civilization and its dichotomous world-view and dualistic ideational postulates.

The necessitated a paradigm shift, a new way of thinking, a post-modernist vision. This does not mean going back from reason but going beyond reason to the realm of spirit. This means a shift from the old concept of reality in the sense of static being to the new concept of reality in the sense of dynamic becoming. The new concept, termed "post-modernist view", discards static categories of dualism -- both ontological and epistemological; for the new vision reality is of the nature of an organism involving integral bonds, linkages, inter-connections from the terrestrial to the transcendental.

Reality is not an assortment of unrelated objects or coincidentally related phenomena; it is, rather, a web of relations, a network of systems nesting in systems of wholes-within-wholes. Reality is, thus, knowable through "systems thinking" replacing the analytic-reductionist methodology of reason. On ontological level, the new conception envisions reality as Spirit which instantiates itself in organismic relationships between (the earlier categories of) the noumenal and the phenomenal; between the individual and society, and between man's religious and secular life -- all seen as interwoven into distinct configurations, all interlocked in wholes-within-wholes in a network wherein the identity of each component is recognised, while being a part of the whole.

This is not merely an abstract metaphysical concept but a holistic viewpoint that has revolutionary implications on social, political, economic, religious and cultural levels. This constitutes the ideational founding of a new global civilization of the future which would be based on the notion of spirit in the same way that modern Western civilization was built up on the concept of reason.

Sikhism on the Eve of 21st Century

On the eve of 21st century and the third millennium, mankind is turning to religion in a new way, as the Spirit has manifested itself from time to time in religious revelations. In this context, Sikhism, with its futuristic vision, can play a leading role in evolving the ideology of the coming global civilization. Sikhism is distinct among world religions in that its basic category is spirit and not being; its vision is holistic and not dualistic. For the Sikh religion, God is the creative Spirit (Karta Purakh) distinguishable from, say, the Vedantic and Vedanta-based religions for which Brahman is Sat (Being), Chit (Consciousness) and Anand (Bliss), but not Creator. Before Nanakian speculative throught, whenever the notion of Spirit appeared, it was seen as manifesting and revealing itself in space (nature), in the Word and in the human soul. With Sikh thought comes, for the first time in the history of speculative thought of the world, the concept of the Spirit descending, through the Guru-medium, in (historical)time, in history. The spiritual aspect of the Spirit (spiritual sovereignty)becomes immanent in the Word (Guru Granth) and the temporal aspect (temporal sovereignty) becomes determinate in the societal category known in Sikh parlance as the Khalsa Panth, Guru Panth.

The Khalsa is my determinate form

I am immanent in the Khalsa

-Guru Gobind Singh

The Khalsa is, verily, the Spirit-in-history created by the Divine Will in order to usher in a new dispensation on earth : religious, social cultural, economic and political.

This, verily, is the phenomenal form

of the time-transcendent Spirit manifest in

the corporate being of the Khalsa

-Prahilad Rai

This new dispensation which can provide a blueprint for the emerging global civilization is characterised by liberalism, (new) humanism, universalism and pluralism (religious, cultural and political) - these being the four pillars of the edifice of Sikhism in its institutional form.

Liberalism means liberation from dogmatised belief, and from rites and rituals, from static, never-changing code of conduct:

The fetters around the feet are sundered

The Guru has emancipated me.

-Guru Arjan Dev

The Sikh Doctrine

It is significant to note that in the Sikh doctrine, there is no institution, comparable to the Roman Catholic Church, with an inherent right to interpretation of the Bani; prescription of code of conduct and excommunication from the community of faith-followers. There is no clergy, no theocrat in the Sikh religion. A Sikh has a direct, unbreakable, integral linkage and communion with his Guru and God (Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa). He has the inherent right to seek for himself the enlightenment from the Guru Shabda and mould his life accordingly. He is a free, sovereign spirit, as he partakes of the Divine sovereignty. This is the meaning of the archetypal self-surrender of the first five Sikhs at the creation of the Khalsa.

From here also flows the second postulate of Sikhism : humanism (radically different from the old conception). The first Prophetic message of Guru Nanak was:

"No Hindu, No Muslim "

Here, the first Prophet of Sikhism was stressing the primacy of the human spirit, being the primary identity, that partakes of the essence of the Divine Spirit. The secondary identity (or identities) depending on the variables of time and space are significant, as the primary essence becomes determinate in and through a network of secondary identities - religious, ethnic, cultural, regional, etc. For the same reason, these secondary identities should not be homogenised into a single all-embracing identity.

The new humanistic approach of Sikhism, stressing the primary human identity of man, provides a new basis for the equality of men and women and of communities whether in majority or minority. Guru Gobind Singh expresses the essential humanism of the Sikh religion in its sociological form in these words :

Recognise all humanity as one in spirit.

Universalism is another cardinal value in Sikhism. Sikhism is a universal religion in two senses of the expression. First, it is not bracketed with a particular ethnicity (Punjabiat), or a particular region (the Punjab). The whole earth having been revered as "mother earth" by Guru Nanak in his Japji, there is no particularised promised or holy land. The different ethnicities of the first five Sikhs (Panj Pyare), baptised by Guru Gobind Singh while creating the Order of the Khalsa, imply that Sikhism is not an ethnicity-specific, region-specific religion. Guru Gobind Singh says that God cannot be bound to a particular creed, place or era (Jaap Sahib), nor can He be bracketed with any particular ethnicity ( Akal Ustat ). He is the Lord of all the peoples of the world. This makes Sikhism a truly universal religion, unicentral on religious level, while being pluricentral on cultural, ethnic and social levels.

Sikhism is "universal" in another sense also. Its primary essential concerns -- social, political, cultural economic -- are of a universal nature, embracing humanity as a whole. Unfortunately, during the last hundred years or so, the universal concerns of Sikhism have become subordinate to and eclipsed by the existential concerns of the Sikhs in Punjab. The time has come to demarcate the two sets of concerns so that the universal concerns of Sikhism - such as human rights; eco-system; depletion of natural resources; effects of value-neutral technology; sustainable models of growth and development; equitable distribution of wealth; terrorism, particularly state-sponsord terrorism, etc. could come to the centrestage.

Pluralism - both political and religious - is another characteristic of the Sikh vision of social reality. Monolithic, unitarian polity cannot ensure co-equal participation and partnership of different layers of hierarchised societies and of the minorities in particular. Political pluralism alone can realise participation and partnership of all sections of society on an equal footing in a truly representative dispensation as envisioned by Guru Arjan, the fifth Prophet of Sikhism.

All are co -equal partners in The commonwealth

Political Pluralism

Political pluralism is correlative to religious pluralism, which simply does not mean the co-existence of different faiths and various religious communities, or even equal respect for all religions. What is more important is the conceptual basis of religious pluralism. Here again, the distinctiveness of Sikhism - which should not be interpreted as it superiority in theomachy-needs to be highlighted. Sikhism does not claim to be the full and final revelation of God, the full and final determination of the Spirit, the full and final revelation of all that is known and knowable; such absolutist, exclusivist claims lead to religious fundamentalism and intolerance. The infinity of the Divine attributes and aspects, the relativity of different revelations and the limitations of human cognition- as stressed by Guru Nanak in his Japji-leave no room for the concept of " full and final relvelation." Hence the co-validity of all revelations in their respective contexts, and of different paths to God, as proclaimed by Guru Gobind Singh .

Same are the temple and the mosque

And same are the forms of worship.

Sikhism as a Renaissance Movement

Sikhism, which once arose as a mighty renaissance movement, a revolutionary force, a dynamic praxis, for paving the path of self-sublimating, self-realizing salvation of the soul in the world hereafter, as well as a new dispensation on earth (halemi raj in the language of the fifth Prophet of Sikhism, Guru Arjun), is today in need of an internal reformation and renaissance. The first Sikh reformation arose in the last quarter of the 19th century in the context of a deep crisis after the loss of political power in the year 1849 coupled with the correlative processes of feudalization of the Sikh movement, Brahminization of the Sikh society & the Vedanticization of the Sikh doctrine.

At that time the very physical survival of the Sikhs was overshadowed by a question mark. No wonder, then, that the existential concerns of the Sikhs -- social, cultural economic, political -- took precedence over the universal concerns of Sikhism. This lopsidedness that has continued for over 100 years has to be rectified so that the universal concerns of Sikhism, referred to earlier, come back to the centrestage. The first Sikh reformation also led to a symbiotic relationship between religion and politics, between the religious and political institutions, resulting in exploitation of the one by the other and vice versa, depending upon the exigencies of the given situation. This symbiotic relationship, forged on a mistaken, distorted concept of miri - piri unity, needs to be immediately brought to an end, so that the religious and the political praxis operate, autonomously, in their respective domains.

The concept of miri - piri unity in essence means that Sikhism embraces the other-worldly spiritual concerns of the soul as much as the this-worldly temporal concerns of man, society and state, but without coalescence of the religious and the political power, authority and institutions. The miri - piri unity does not mean a monistic unity but a differentiated unity. The trend towards emergence of clergy in contemporary Sikhism, including the Takht clergy - appropriating unto itself authority, power and jurisdiction which do not doctrinally and historically vest in it - needs to be forcefully countered. The clergy( There being no anointed clergy in Sikh religion, there is no Church-like authority or institution with inherent right to interpret the Scripture, to excommunicate a Sikh from the community and to prescribe a code of conduct for a Sikh who is directly responsible for his deeds to his Guru and God. There is no theocrat, no clerico-cracy. The Akal Takht jathedar is not a theocrat or a vice-deity presiding over the temporal affairs of this sacred institution of Sikhism; he is a sewadar, or at best of spokesman of the voice and will of the community articulated through intra-community deliberations in different forums, particularly the democratically elected Sikh institutions.) as a mediatory class or institution is not envisaged in Sikhism, there being a direct relationship between a Sikh and his Guru and God (Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa ).

The growing role of the clergy, particularly of the Takht clergy, is leading not only to ritualization of contemporary Sikh society but also to suppressing and repressing the essential liberalism of Sikhism. Sikhism blended a spiritual vision of life with the spirit of enquiry and a liberated state of mind. This catholicity of outlook -- an essential element of Sikh liberalism - is threatened by the growing clout of the clergy which, as a class, breeds on self-appropriated authoritarianism with inherent tendency towards intolerance, sectarianism and dogmatism. Recognition of and respect for difference; acceptance of the Other; co-validity of multiple viewpoints - these are essential aspects of the Sikh value pattern.

Another aspect of the internal Sikh reformation and renaissance relates to the evolutionary relationship between the universal and the historical dimension. A living religion, particularly of institutional type, has to, synergically, develop in both universal and historical dimension. Without the universal dimension developing simultaneously, an institutional religion dries up as a sect; and without the historical dimension it ends up (at best) as an abstrtact thought-system. In the case of Sikhism, after the Guru-period, the synergical, evolutionary unity of the universal and the historical dimension broke down. This break-down leads to an agonizing question : Has the universal in Sikhism exhausted itself in one particular historical determination - ethnicized Sikhism in its contemporary Punjabi form ? Or whether in future, t here would evolve many more historical determinations of the universal in Sikhism ? This question relates to the historical variables of region and ethnicity. As stressed earlier, Sikhism, essentially, is neither a region - specific nor an ethnicity - specific religion. The Punjab is the natural habitat of the Sikh community but not in the sense of the ' promised land ' or (exclusively) the holy land. De-regionalization of contemporary Sikhism is an essential aspect of the second (internal) Sikh renaissance.

The World Historical Mission of Sikhism

Sikhism is also not an ethnicity - specific religion. De-ethnicization of contemporary Sikhism is also essential for the second Sikh reformation, if this religion is to really become a universal religion. The mere presence of the Punjabi/Indian Sikhs in different countries - the Sikh diaspora - does not mean that it has already become a universal religion. De-ethnicization of contemporary Sikhism is also necessary for it to become a universal religion. Christianity arose within the Jewish milieu, Jewish tradition, Jewish ethnicity. But St. Paul took Christianity beyond its original Jewish milieu, tradition and ethnicity. A similar development is required for Sikhism. In this context, the historical role of Siri Singh Sahib Bhai Sahib Harbhajan Singh Khalsa Yogiji in implanting Sikhism in American milieu and ethnicity is, in a sense, comparable to that of St. Paul. The American Singhs -- the American followers of Yogiji - constitute a historical experiment towards universalization of Sikhism, in contemporary context. The Punjabi/Indian Sikhs in North America also, transcending their nostalgia about the Punjabi Sikh identity, should culturally contribute towards the making of the American Sikh identity. Religiously unifocal, but culturally multifocal : that is how contemporary Sikhism would have to evolve to realize its World historical mission.

In realizing the World historical mission of Sikhism the present state of Sikh studies would also have to be kept in view. Over the past few decades Sikh studies abroad by Western scholars have been done from the Christian perspective which has also conditioned the approach and methodology of the Indian Sikh scholars overawed by the

Western scholars. In fact, the intellectual agenda of the meta-narrative of Sikhism has been set by the Western scholars with the indigenous Sikh scholars remaining bogged down in reacting to the Sikh discourse of the Western scholars. The Sikh scholars would have to go beyond their present reactive role to a really pro-active role in setting the ideational agenda of discourse about Sikhism. This is essential for two main reasons. The Christian and the Sikh perspective constitute, epistemologically, two different frames of reference, the categories of which are not symmetrical (For instance, the Sikh conception of the Word is qualitatively different from the Christian view. In Sikh thought, the Spirit, besides becoming immanent in the societal category Khalsa, also, becomes determinate in the Word (bani) which, as such, is elevated and revered as the eternal 'living' Guru in the form of Sri Guru Granth. Christian thought holds that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. " The Word became 'flesh', that is, incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ who, as such, is the focal point of the faith and worship and not the Bible, the Scripture. That is why the Western studies of the Sikh Scripture are so off the tangent, for the concept of the Divine spirit becoming determinate in the Word (bani) is incomprehensible in the Christian perspective in which the process is reversed : The Word becoming embodied in the person of Jesus Christ.). Secondly, a religious tradition needs to be approached in terms of its own self-definition, in terms of its self-defined identity. This, epistemologically, requires an unmediated experiential insight-through socio-religious osmosis - which is not possible in the case of the ' outsiders ', whatever be their cerebral brilliance or methodological novelties.

There are some of the urgent issues that contemporary Sikhism would have to address, before it re-starts on the path of realizing its World historical mission. It is imperative for the Sikh renaissance today to re-discover its essential values, to re-focus its vision, to update its praxis. This is how Sikhism would be able to impart its futuristic vision to the ideology of the new World civilization in the offing. This is how it would be in a position to play its role in the evolution of the institutional web of the 21st century society and the third millennium civilization. This is how the Khalsa once again would become the motor force of history : the Spirit-in-history.

[Jai Tegang!]

Looks like Rajs (aka the copy/paste-christian) strikes again.

The twerp is a product of a Christian mission setup in UK to specifically target Sikhism.

[buddasingh]

Rajs

Wouldn't you agree with me that salvation could also be acheived through the parotid glands?