Jump to content

why sikhism isn't for me....yet?


curioustoknow
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guru is God

in the eastern religions(excepting Gurmat, which looks as the Shabad Guru rather than human Guru) all the Gurus or teachers/guides were treated on a par with God, that isnt to say that they WERE God, but as they were the guide to deliverance, they were treated as if they were actually God. This is common throughout Eastern philosophies. Gurmat broke the mould.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets identify the "Guru" first, is it the body of Guru Nanak Dev Ji? No, it is the Shabad, the Word of Sri Akal, so firstly, the Word was never seperate from Sri Akal, so the question of the "Guru" connecting with Sri Akal is nonsensical.

But can I ask is it not in Islam, that one cannot be submissive/obedient to Allah, unless he recognises that Mohamed is the Messenger of Allah and the seal of the Prophets?

Dont confuse the human bodies of the Gurus with God. The human body was or is not God, it was the eternal WORD, the Shabad which is worthy of worship, not the actual human body. By that reasoning someone could say the Sikhs havent had a Guru since 1708, after 10th Guru.

Yes, it is, but Muhammed PBUH was not considered God

I understand and agree with what you say about the Word being God...but at the same time, didn't Guru Nanaak used to wash his feet and let people drink the water to bestow blessings on them?

Wouldn't that be considered a physical embodiment, not just a spiritual?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you believe Hazrat Muhammad traveled to heaven and returned in the time it takes to blink an eye? Do you believe Jesus brought the dead back to life? Do you believe Moses walked on the path the sea cleared up for him? Then howcome you don't believe that Guru Sahib was God Himself? Gurbani says there is no difference between God and Guru. In fact I am not comfortable using the word "God" as it is so Semitic. In fact, several Hindus and Muslims as well who met the Guru Sahibaan did confess that "Thour art Allah Himself". See the problem is you are trying to analyze apples using the information you have about oranges. You are trying to understand Sikhi from an Islamic point of view. You need to shed away all preconceived notions you have and set your mind independent before you start studying Sikhi. You will entirely miss the context of things if you hold onto any specific mindset. In Islam Allah isn't believed to be omnipresent, in Sikhi, Vaaheguroo jee is. Once again, read up the lives of the Guru Sahibaan. You'll realize that there is no difference between the sun, the sun rays, and sunlight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it is, but Muhammed PBUH was not considered God

I understand and agree with what you say about the Word being God...but at the same time, didn't Guru Nanaak used to wash his feet and let people drink the water to bestow blessings on them?

Wouldn't that be considered a physical embodiment, not just a spiritual?

Muhammed PBUH was not considered God, but the connection of him with God is essential for a Muslim. You cant be a Muslim unless you recognise Muhammed, so the connection between God and Muhammed is there.

Charan Pahul was the form of physical connection with the Word, not a spiritual connection. Guru Nanak Dev Ji was not connecting these people with himself physically by giving them amrit.

I can see where this debate is heading, it is heading towards the Sargun/Nirgun God. Sargun/Nirgun God is unfathomable to Abrahamic faiths, and I personally are still learning about this. There are other people on this forum who are able to explain God better than me.

You are trying to understand Sikhi from an Islamic point of view.

this is natural, as you have been following this beleif system for years, but try to think outside of the "box" as we say in UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really not debating anything I'm not trying to bring Islam into this, but because I have said I am a Muslim this continually gets Brought up I'm trying to understand if the Gurus were considered the physical embodiment of God Or not...some say yes some say no this seems to be too important of an issue to just let go...do sikhs worship the gurus as physical God or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really not debating anything I'm not trying to bring Islam into this, but because I have said I am a Muslim this continually gets Brought up I'm trying to understand if the Gurus were considered the physical embodiment of God Or not...some say yes some say no this seems to be too important of an issue to just let go...do sikhs worship the gurus as physical God or not?

What is physical about God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do sikhs worship the gurus as physical God or not?

No, we dont, Waheguru's permanent state is one of Nirgun, one without physical attributes, His Sargun, physical dimension is only temporary.

This is kinda hard to explain, but what is Waheguru in Sikhi? This is the answer you are looking for. Then you will find the answer to the question you have asked above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very informative, thank you...and for the prophets who brought miracles, they only were able to perform the miracles because God allowed them to, not because they were God. There is even a story in the Torah where Misses PBUH took credit for one of the miracles and was severely punished for it...so the humans were not the embodiment of God himself but were given a small amount of Gods power to use in accordance with Gods will.

Question for the person who said Guru Nanaak wasn't born, I am not so sure I follow, he had a mother a father, and a sister, or are you referencing to when he came up out of the river enlightened? Or how about just explain to me what you mean please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Part of the problem is the hostilities between India and Pakistan. If the border were open, Amritsar would easily become a huge trading city. Secondly, the National Highways Authority of India is constructing a new 6-lane expressway from Kashmir, through Amritsar/Jalandhar/Ludhiana to Dehli which will be part of the Ludhiana-Delhi-Kolkatta Industrial Corridor.  Maps of the New Silk Road show Kolkata as a key part of the "road". The Punjab to Kolkata expressway and rail connections will fulfill the ability to hook up to the New Silk Road.  In addition, while crossing to Pakistan via AH1 (Asian Highway 1) is difficult, India does connect to AH1 on the other side, towards the East. Finally, Punjab can trade with the world via Mundra port in Gujurat. Rail to Mundra, then sea onwards. Dubai is very close with a free port. If you send products to Iran, there are ground links onward to Europe.
    • Yeah, that's one possibility. Another I initially thought is that it's a Muslim trying to gather info. But then, you might ask, how does he know about Sikh textual sources. Well, you'd be surprised at their resourcefulness. A final possibility is he's a weak Sikh who was asked a question by a non-Sikh and now he's suddenly feverishly wondering where it's "written" that you can't marry a young child. To the latter, I would say, you're looking in the wrong spot. Gurbani isn't a 1428 page rulebook, like Leviticus or the Vedas: ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਪੁੰਨ ਪਾਪ ਬੀਚਾਰਦੇ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ The Simritis and Shastras discriminate between charity and sin, but know not the essence of the Real Thing. Without the Guru, they know not the essence of the Reality, know not the essence of the Reality. Anand Sahib.
    • You're confusing two different things: One is merely adding starch to a turban to get a certain feel to the fabric. The other is tying your turban once and taking it off like a hat. It is this that people have a problem with. What's wrong with it is that Rehit says to tie your turban afresh every time. If you ask, "Where is that written?", it's written in Bhai Nand Lal ji's Rehitnama. @ipledgeblue didn't just make it up. Umm, no, bro. We're not evangelical Christians like President George W Bush of the US claiming to "talk to God" who told him to invade Iraq. "Speaking to him directly" basically ends up being doing whatever you feel like with the excuse that Guru ji told you to do it. If you still want to take your turban off like a hat, feel free to do so, but don't claim that it's Rehit.
    • You don't need to wear either a pag or dumalla in the gym. You can simply wear a meter or 1.5m small turban (gol pagg or round turban). It doesn't come off.
    • The reason you don't see anything wrong with it is because like a fish in water, you grew up in Western culture and imbibed it fully. It's very difficult to for parents to inculcate traditional culture while in the West. The reason there is a problem is because a kiss between a man and wife is a sexual act (I didn't say it's coitus, but it's still sexual.) By contrast a kiss between a mother and a child, for example, is not sexual. And in our culture, sexual acts are not allowed in public. Goras do allow it. And that's also the reason they have gay pride parades now with people walking around naked with children in attendance and so forth.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use