Jump to content

Questions About Sikhi (From A Non-Sikh)


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Guest Anonymous

The SGGS is our Guru, it is the thing we turn to for guidance and help. It is the Guru who will help us find Waheguru. Reading bani is very important because it is like having a conversation with your Guru. Everyday he reminds you of what you should be doing, everyday he instructs you. Read bani, understand it and implement it into your life. Singing is very important. Just sing your soul out, call for your beloved. The Gurus gave their message in song. The SGGS is written in raag, musical notes. There are no chapters, instead the SGGS is divided by raag. Kirtan is very important in Sikhi. Self reflection is also important, look within yourself. Sikhi is all about improving yourself. The treasure is within you, so self reflection is important. However, the Guru is the one who shows you how to achieve this treasure.

So all of them are equally important?

The SGGS says nothing about homosexuals or anything. The SGGS is not a rule book. There is no dogma in the SGGS. You'll find the yearings of those who walked the path of the saints who wished to find Waheguru. The SGGS doesn't say anything about marriage or homosexuals. Every human contains the light of Waheguru, everyone is equal. Punjabi culture is very homophobic, not Sikhi. The decision to not allow homosexuals to marry has not been made by Sikhi. The panth (Sikhs themselves) decided this in 1920 when they released the current form of the rehat maryada or code of conduct. This code of conduct is a living document and Sikhs have the power to change it as a collective. Perhaps, in the future the panth will decide to allow homosexuals to marry.

So you reject the Rehat Maryada then? What of those who say that true Sikhs, the Amritdhari, must follow the Rehat Maryada? So it is not unquestionable, but rather changeable as values change?

Again Punjabi culture means most people have arranged marriages. Sikhi doesn't care how you get married. Some people get love marriages, other people get arranged marriages. Interfaith marriages are not allowed by Anand Karaj because you are promising to live according to the Gurus teachings. If it is an interfaith marriage, you clearly aren't going to live according to Sikh teachings and follow the Guru. Whats the point of getting an Anand Karaj and promising the Guru you will follow him if you aren't going to? You are free to date whoever you want, but only Sikhs can have an Anand Karaj.

Why does getting an interfaith marriage mean you are not going to live according to Sikh teachings? At one point you are speaking against the Rehat Maryada and here you are speaking for it.

This poster always has the need to disregard the core values of Sikhi and delude certain aspects of Sikhi for his own beliefs. Best to ignore this secular quasi-religious fanatic advice.

Why do you feel this way? What aspects is he deluding? His post offers a different viewpoint and adds to the discussion. If you think I should ignore him, I would like to hear why you think so.

"3. So if the goal is to get rid of desires and ego and such, would a monastic life not be more effective at doing so?

4. That makes sense. As a westerner it is hard for me to accept arranged marriages, since love is so ingrained in my cultural values and is very important to me. Love marriages are acceptable then, but not encouraged? What about a marriage in which there is more mature love and the couple grows together spiritually? Is this easier to achieve in a love marriage or an arranged marriage? I don't think I could live in a loveless marriage, but perhaps I am misunderstanding arranged marriages. Pardon me, it is simply something I've never considered before."

Yes of course a monastic life is more effective and easier for getting rid of desires than living in a desire filled world and then tryingbto get rid of desires.But then society is depleted of good, spititual people as they all leave to become yogis, sidhas, monks. In fact that was the condition of society when Guru Nanak Dev Ji came. Society was being led by corrupt leaders the brahmins n pundits n kings. And yet nobody was saving people from the Mughal invaders n raiders who were enslaving n killin ppl. So guru Ji decided to create warrior saints. Yes their job was harder to be saints while living in the world and serving people as defenders. So in a Gurudwara one was able to get food for the soul,food for the body,and protection. That is why Gurbani is so important. It is the thing that allows one to live in the world and be a renunciate as well. Its good that u reading japji sahib but it can be a bit too complex n philosophical. I recommend reading Sukhmani Sahib after ur finished with jap Ji sahib. The man in blue ( he is a dutch convert into Sikhi, u shud read his blog) says sukhmani sahib is easier to translate so easier to grasp. Also check out Yuttadhama Bhikhu on youtube , he is a Canadian Buddhist monk, I like his way of meditating. Other forum/blogs u shud check out is gurmatbibek.com n manvirsingh.blogspot and gupt wannabe naam abhiyaasi blog.

4. The thing about arranged marriage is to find a person who is compatible with ur views, lifestyle etc by using ppl who know u to find someone that matches. But if u can find that in a love marriage good but the thing is not to care about outer looks which can be hard. So if u can find mature love and grow in spiritality, great.

I hadn't thought about that. I'll take a look at those, thank you.

Japji sahib is not a bani to be read in night it should be recited only before the sun set and after midnight (i.e 12:30 a.m approx).

You cannot reach satisfaction from our points,facts and stories.Hard work is necessary and by hard work i mean faith,patience,compassion and dicipline.

There is a theory that there are 5 main realms (khand) which a human being goes through.Every obtained khand remain with him as he continues the joury.

Apologies that I didn't do it properly. I am going to university right now and nighttime is the best time I have available to read Bani. Why is there a rule on when it can be read? Are there any other rules I should be aware of while I read?

I'm not expecting to achieve enlightenment from your responses. I'm just trying to understand my own path and exploring a religion I find fascinating :)

Interesting point about the khands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

https://m.youtube.com/user/basicsofsikhi Exploring this page will help you

There are similarities between Buddhism and Sikhi. Waheguru is everywhere, every part of creation is Waheguru. Within you is Waheguru. Our goal is to realise Waheguru, to understand ourselves. Ego sep

. You came to right place regarding your concerns following human master. -Sikhi is one unique dharma where it challenges one particular point of view or mindset of mandatory needed of human mas

1. Guru Sahib has seen God Himself with His very own eyes. He also provided us with the path to have the same vision. It follows logically that you trust the one who knows for sure over the one who is not sure. Sikhi is a monotheistic faith whereas Buddhism is atheistic. Gurmat condemns asceticism but Buddhism encourages it. Nirvana is the result of self-effort but Gurmat salvation is the result of grace of God. Both faiths are poles apart.

2. Gurbani is divine and its source is God Himself. Gurbani is Satguru. Hence, reading Bani means talking to Satguru and receiving guidance. Naam Simran must be done according to the way Gurbani teaches because Gurbani (Guru) is where a devotee would receive Naam from. I fail to see how you can engage in Naam Simran without obtaining it from Satguru. Leaving the Bani means leaving the path of Simran. Gurbani is like a doctor and Naam is like a medicine. There is no such thing as over the counter Naam.

3. Let me be very clear. Philosophically speaking, there is no such thing as Western religion or Western values because pretty much everything comes from the East. The so-called Western ideas are stemming from American society and its understanding of the world-view. These ideas are neither divine nor always ethically grounded. Gurmat strictly prohibits homosexuality. I could write a long article on this subject (maybe I will some day when Guru Sahib wills) but the gist of it is this: Anand Karaj is a physical cum spiritual union between a man and a woman. It is to be emulated after the relationship between a Husband Lord and the Soul bride. Marriage completes a family unit. While it serves as a mean to have local sangat, it is also a way created by God for procreation. Procreation happens because of heterosexual relationship. Without it humanity will cease to exist. The philosophy of Gurmat is that it only accepts principles that can be universally applicable to all and can benefit the entire humanity. For procreation, heterosexuality can be universally applied to all males and females whereas homosexuality terribly fails to deliver the same results. Just as wandering ascetics who claim to be on the right path go begging to householders for food and clothes, homosexuals claim to be the same and want to have the same rights yet entirely depend on heterosexuals for children. So where is the equality? Lets put any homosexual couple on an uninhabited planet and see if humanity survives. This is why homosexuals are not allowed to have Anand Karaj because they are not qualified. They faill to meet the Anand Karaj teachings and ideals. In order to meet the spiritual criteria, one needs not to have any homosexual relationship at all. This entire relationship is based on physical attraction and nothing more. Gurbani, Vaars etc. all speak to heterosexual marriage very explicitly. Just because homosexuals are humans and have equal human rights doesnt mean they are Sikhs as well. Gurbani covers the topics that affect a person on the spiritual path i.e. topics that benefit him/her as well as the one that can harm his/her. If someone is completely off the path of Gurmat and while engaging in anti-Gurmat acts wishes to obtain Gurbani teachings concerning his deeds, he wont find anything. For example, if one wants to know what to do if he is cheating on his spouse, beating her, going through a divorce or a drug addict. The Gurmat message would be to stop all of this because anyone who commits such acts is not a Sikh. Homosexuality is in the same basket which is incompatible with the path of Gurmat, hence, it is not mentioned in Gurbani. The remedy is to stop it and submit to the path enunciated by Satguru. Ill end this here.

4. Do you even know what love is? Compare the divorce rate between love marriages versus arranged marriages and find out yourself. Why are so many marriages failing in the West? Arranged marriages are not devoid of love. In fact, such marriages tend to do better and last longer compared to their counterpart love marriages. I wont speak to their differences but inter-faith marriage creates problems if both are deeply religious. All faiths are different so it is pertinent to have the same faith in order to have peace, unanimity and love in the household. A Sikh is to marry a Sikh. If a Sikh wants to marry a non-Sikh, he is not a Sikh at all. In such a case, why bother to have Anand Karaj? I am of the opinion that only Amritdharis should be allowed to have Anand Karaj because it is a SIKH ceremony.

5. Sikh is not a label. It is a way of life. A Hindu/Muslim can claim to be a religious person yet not follow it at all. A Muslim would go to heaven regardless of how bad he is. Guru Sahib condemned external symbolism as an end in itself. A Sikh cannot have external appearance alone. All the external symbols, kakkars etc. have connection to internal way of life. Sikh code of conduct is not mechanical acts but Islamic and Hindu conducts are.

6. Guru Granth Sahib is the eternal Guru. It is beyond death, birth and time. As long as God exists, Gurbani will exist.

The best way to learn about Gurmat is by keeping in the company of practicing Sikhs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

I'm sorry to say this but if this is the "true" Sikh perspective, I think I have lost my interest (though not my respect) in following this religion.

1. Guru Sahib has seen God Himself with His very own eyes. He also provided us with the path to have the same vision. It follows logically that you trust the one who knows for sure over the one who is not sure. Sikhi is a monotheistic faith whereas Buddhism is atheistic. Gurmat condemns asceticism but Buddhism encourages it. Nirvana is the result of self-effort but Gurmat salvation is the result of grace of God. Both faiths are poles apart.

Here I have to ask you how much you have studied Buddhism. Yes, Buddhism is essentially atheistic, though some Mahayana schools do have some deities. Buddhism also condemns asceticism, and quite strongly. Gautama tried asceticism himself, and said very clearly that it is as useless as hedonism. What Buddhism does advocate is monasticism, which is a very different thing entirely. I would say that Buddhism and Sikhism are much more similar to each other than Sikhism is to Abrahamic religions.

2. Gurbani is divine and its source is God Himself. Gurbani is Satguru. Hence, reading Bani means talking to Satguru and receiving guidance. Naam Simran must be done according to the way Gurbani teaches because Gurbani (Guru) is where a devotee would receive Naam from. I fail to see how you can engage in Naam Simran without obtaining it from Satguru. Leaving the Bani means leaving the path of Simran. Gurbani is like a doctor and Naam is like a medicine. There is no such thing as over the counter Naam.

How do you know it is directly from God? Many religions claim that their religion is the "only way", or the "best way". What makes Sikhi any different? Especially when claims like these are made, it makes Sikhi seem like just another self-aggrandizing religion. I'm looking for truth, not dogma.

3. Let me be very clear. Philosophically speaking, there is no such thing as Western religion or Western values because pretty much everything comes from the East. The so-called Western ideas are stemming from American society and its understanding of the world-view. These ideas are neither divine nor always ethically grounded. Gurmat strictly prohibits homosexuality. I could write a long article on this subject (maybe I will some day when Guru Sahib wills) but the gist of it is this: Anand Karaj is a physical cum spiritual union between a man and a woman. It is to be emulated after the relationship between a Husband Lord and the Soul bride. Marriage completes a family unit. While it serves as a mean to have local sangat, it is also a way created by God for procreation. Procreation happens because of heterosexual relationship. Without it humanity will cease to exist. The philosophy of Gurmat is that it only accepts principles that can be universally applicable to all and can benefit the entire humanity. For procreation, heterosexuality can be universally applied to all males and females whereas homosexuality terribly fails to deliver the same results. Just as wandering ascetics who claim to be on the right path go begging to householders for food and clothes, homosexuals claim to be the same and want to have the same rights yet entirely depend on heterosexuals for children. So where is the equality? Lets put any homosexual couple on an uninhabited planet and see if humanity survives. This is why homosexuals are not allowed to have Anand Karaj because they are not qualified. They faill to meet the Anand Karaj teachings and ideals. In order to meet the spiritual criteria, one needs not to have any homosexual relationship at all. This entire relationship is based on physical attraction and nothing more. Gurbani, Vaars etc. all speak to heterosexual marriage very explicitly. Just because homosexuals are humans and have equal human rights doesnt mean they are Sikhs as well. Gurbani covers the topics that affect a person on the spiritual path i.e. topics that benefit him/her as well as the one that can harm his/her. If someone is completely off the path of Gurmat and while engaging in anti-Gurmat acts wishes to obtain Gurbani teachings concerning his deeds, he wont find anything. For example, if one wants to know what to do if he is cheating on his spouse, beating her, going through a divorce or a drug addict. The Gurmat message would be to stop all of this because anyone who commits such acts is not a Sikh. Homosexuality is in the same basket which is incompatible with the path of Gurmat, hence, it is not mentioned in Gurbani. The remedy is to stop it and submit to the path enunciated by Satguru. Ill end this here.

Alright, fair enough. There is no such thing as "Western" values. Call it "liberal" values then. Whatever label you want to use, they are my values. I don't see how "pretty much everything" comes from the East, and I think that is grossly unfair to the independent development that we have had here in the West. Now you can claim they are coming from the American world view, but where does that come from? Largely from Europe, especially the UK and Western Europe. I am American, so, no conflict there. To say that these values are neither divine nor ethically grounded is extremely narrow-minded on your part, and reinforces that you see your way as the only right way. Also to say that because homosexuals cannot have children, they are useless shows your bias. Homosexuals can not only have surrogate children, they can also adopt, which is also very useful to society as there are many orphaned and abused children in need of homes. This would also be true of anyone who is infertile, or simply chooses not to marry. Is it against Gurmat to be infertile? They can't procreate either. Your comparison of homosexuals to ascetics is also equally unfair. Homosexuals do NOT go begging, they are perfectly capable of living their own independent *householder* lives, and do not need society to support them any more than you do. Do they depend on heterosexuals for children? Yes they do, but what does it matter? They are not the majority, they never will be, and we're not exactly at risk for running out of children either. If you look at evolutionary psychology, homosexuality serves an evolutionary advantage by furthering genetic relatedness indirectly by PARTICIPATING IN THE COMMUNITY and HELPING TO TAKE CARE OF OTHERS CHILDREN. Homosexuals are an asset to society, not a hindrance.

My understanding, though I am willing to be corrected, is that the SGGSJ does not speak about homosexuality at all. The only document which does is the Rehat Maryada, which states that marriage is between a man and a woman. Though one could argue, if the soul is genderless (STATED IN THE SGGSJ), just like God, then why is there such an arbitrary constraint on marriage? And this is not my argument, this is an argument that SIKHS have made. Are you also stating that homosexuals cannot be Sikhs? What about the path of the Satguru being available to all humans? And now you are comparing homosexuality to wife-beating, domestic abuse, cheating, and drug abuse. I too will end this here because I am afraid if I continue I will not be able to contain myself.

4. Do you even know what love is? Compare the divorce rate between love marriages versus arranged marriages and find out yourself. Why are so many marriages failing in the West? Arranged marriages are not devoid of love. In fact, such marriages tend to do better and last longer compared to their counterpart love marriages. I wont speak to their differences but inter-faith marriage creates problems if both are deeply religious. All faiths are different so it is pertinent to have the same faith in order to have peace, unanimity and love in the household. A Sikh is to marry a Sikh. If a Sikh wants to marry a non-Sikh, he is not a Sikh at all. In such a case, why bother to have Anand Karaj? I am of the opinion that only Amritdharis should be allowed to have Anand Karaj because it is a SIKH ceremony.

I do. I have experienced it. Have you? Are divorce rates higher in the West? Yes, they are, I won't deny that. Why is that the case? That's a very complicated question, and it does not have as simple of an answer as arranged is better. Remember, correlation is not causation. If you are going to ask a sociological question like that, you need to approach it from a scientific perspective.

5. Sikh is not a label. It is a way of life. A Hindu/Muslim can claim to be a religious person yet not follow it at all. A Muslim would go to heaven regardless of how bad he is. Guru Sahib condemned external symbolism as an end in itself. A Sikh cannot have external appearance alone. All the external symbols, kakkars etc. have connection to internal way of life. Sikh code of conduct is not mechanical acts but Islamic and Hindu conducts are.

A Sikh can also claim to be a Sikh and not follow it at all. This is true for any religion. Are you saying that Muslim and Hindu conducts are completely meaningless? I would advise you to remember that Guru Nanak Ji himself had a Muslim companion, and verses composed by Kabir, a SUFI MUSLIM, are present in the SGGSJ. A Muslim will not go to heaven regardless of how bad he is, as there are sins within their own code of conduct that are unforgivable or require repentance before death. ISIS members are most certainly not going to any kind of heaven, and any Muslim will tell you that, even though they claim to be Muslim. An example of an unforgivable sin is shirk, to associate partners with Allah or worship any god other than Allah. The Qu'ran states that even a prophet who commits shirk will be abandoned by Allah, and will be forsaken by Him. I would suggest you do your research before you make such bold claims on other religions.

Apologies if I have caused any offense. These are very important issues to me, and I, just like Sikhs are called to do, will defend people who have been attacked by your post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You asked questions and many provided answers. If you are thinking of having an argument or a debate then you will have to find someone else for it.

Having some similarities does not mean anything. What sets Gurmat apart from Buddhism is the fact (and a very important one) is that the former believes in One Supreme Being whereas the latter does not. Hence, all other concepts concerning way of life and salvation would be vastly different. Similarities can be found in all religions. This does not prove anything.

How do I know? Because my Satguru told me and He is not a liar. He received the revelation and penned it down Himself. He preached and practiced the same message. Countless Sikhs have experienced the Divine from this message. The true message can only preach what is according to the very nature of God i.e. without hate, fear, equality, peace etc. What proof do you have that Gurbani is not revealed? If you are looking for truth then why not compare the original Gurbani message to other holy books and see for yourself. Truth is not sought by asking questions on forums and picking an argument. Truth is obtained by following Satguru and having an inner connection with Vaheguru which is wholly absent in Buddhism.

It seems to me you do not understand logic. If you want to treat homosexuality topic as something personal then it leaves no room for any objective discussion. I never said homosexuals are useless. I only stated they cannot procreate which is part of Anand Karaj lifestyle. Hence, within Gurmat they have no place. Surely they can adopt but I have already refuted such a useless point. They depend on heterosexuals for it. Assume there are no children left in the world for adoption, what then? On what basis do homosexuals justify having a family unit? On what basis is this marriage justified? You failed to address my point: Lets put any homosexual couple on an uninhabited planet and see if humanity survives. Gurmat is universal and all of its principles are universally applicable. If homosexuality was universally applied, humanity will cease to exist. Infertility is a medical disability. Are all homosexuals medically disabled? You are the one doing apples to oranges comparison not me. You are the one comparing healthy homos to infertile. Procreation is not the only criterion but is definitely one of the criteria. First criterion for Anand Karaj is to have a man and a woman. Many Gurbani verses explicitly state this. Vaars also state the same fact in no ambiguous terms. I never said homosexuals are beggars but are like ascetics who depend on heterosexuals. I dont think you understand how examples work. Homosexuals are NOT householders as defined in Gurbani (I highly doubt you know what householder means within the scope of Gurmat). Their entire relationship is predicated upon physical attraction towards the same sex be it for companionship, intimacy or lust. Living the ideal Gurmat lifestyle is never on their mind. Mind you, we are not discussing pros and cons of homosexuality but whether it is accepted in Sikhi or not. The topic is not homosexuality in general but very specific as to Gurmat injunctions in regards to it.

I have already stated why Gurbani does not mention it explicitly. Again, it is incompatible with Gurmat i.e. it is opposite to Sikh way of life. You argue in vain that soul is genderless. So what? Is homosexual relationship soul based? No. It is same sex based. It is physical based. Hence, your argument is invalid. I can argue that since soul has no gender why cant all homosexuals marry the opposite sex and form heterosexual family units? Why do they feel attracted to the same gender which is purely physical? A Sikh and homosexual are contradictory. It is analogous to saying criminal and cop are one and the same or a saint and a sinner are the same. Not to say that homosexuals are criminals or sinners. Absolutely not. The point being that two are contradictory in nature. A Gursikh who is God oriented person can never be homosexual. This is how Gurbani defines it. Divorce, abuse, wife-beating etc. are topics which are not mentioned in Gurbani so should we assume Gurbani endorses such practices? Absolutely not. These topics are not covered because they are incompatible with true way of life. If someone was to ask what Gurbani says concerning a Sikh getting a divorce or beating his wife, the answer would be that the person is not a Sikh. Homosexuality is in the same boat. A Sikh is heterosexual by definition. His life centers around being a heterosexual person. His marriage is not founded upon physical attraction but rather is grounded in having a household sangat and procreation. God created us in balance. For man He created woman and vice versa. Why should we go against such a natural design and resort to animalistic behavior in which physical traits is the only basis for a relationship? Homosexuals are not Sikhs. Period. The path is open to them but they must follow it wholeheartedly. It is not my way but Gurus way. Guru advocated heterosexuality. This is what he preached, practiced and emulated for us.

I think you need to calm down. If love marriage is better then why does it fail more than an arranged marriage? Shouldnt love be stronger? Clearly, what most Westerners call love is nothing more than physical attraction from which they seek worldly pleasures. They dont understand what it takes to make a marriage successful. Many marriages fall apart because they dont experience the same love or the feelings are not there anymore or one of them starts to cheat. If one truly loves another person, their relationship should go stronger and stronger every day. Love is not something that fades or weakens over time.

A person can claim to be a Sikh and not follow it. Correct. But this is not the point I made. My point is that one who doesnt follow Sikhi is not a Sikh doesnt matter how religious he presents himself to be. He is called a hypocrite in Gurbani. This is not the case in many other religions especially Hinduism and Islam. A Hindu can believe in God or not but remains a Hindu. A Muslim must observe prayers but there are many exceptions. In Islam, the most sinful Muslim in the world would go to heaven (after he is cleansed in hell) but the most saintly non-Muslim would go to hell. Prophets are exempt from mistakes and sins so no punishments for them. Read the Maariful Quran commentary yourself. Hence, it comes down to labels for them. I have studied these religions from their own books written by their eminent scholars.

This is in contrast to Gurmat. Guru Sahibs companion Mardana became a Sikh during the odysseys. Bhagat Kabir Ji rejects Islam in his own compositions. I am not here to argue with you or offend anyone. I respect all humans but those who dont follow Sikhi are not Sikhs. It doesnt mean they are inferior or unequal. Gurmat is the path of submission to God. Dont expect it to be like Hinduism which accommodates any manmat thinking. Very easy to say you seek truth but it I shard to accept it and follow it. It is up to you to make a choice. If you choose Gurmat then follow it nearly and dearly by giving up your own way of thinking including seeing homosexuality the same as heterosexuality. Otherwise you will have to find another religion that accommodates your belief system which in my opinion is contrary to the very nature of seeking a religion. Just dont become a Sikh and start to push your own thinking over Gurmat. We already have enough of those doing internal damage. Again, I am least interested in having arguments. I only presented my answers. I am not here to convince you but simply provide the information. You can reject all of it and look the other way which would be contrary to the claim of seeking truth. Good luck on your search. Guru Rakha

Link to post
Share on other sites
As the title of the thread suggests, I am currently exploring Sikhi as well as other religious beliefs (including Buddhism and Radha Soami, though I have issues with following a human master). I come from a Christian background, but I would not describe my beliefs as being particularly Christian, as I believe in an all-pervading God who is impersonal, and I believe in systems such as reincarnation and karma. So, I have many questions about Sikhi as I am on my search, and I was hoping that you all might be able to answer some questions for me. None of these questions are meant to challenge your beliefs at all, but merely to express my own doubts and challenges that I face in my search
.
You came to right place regarding your concerns following human master.
-Sikhi is one unique dharma where it challenges one particular point of view or mindset of mandatory needed of human master. It does not totally reject the concept being in society of teachers to learn as it talks about benefits sant parsad, sadh sangat- soceity of saints- masters all to encourage one go to introvert as overall ultimately-Satguru is within all of us- it challenges conventional prevalent view based on dogmatic cultural/conceptual notions that one must need physical human master.
What sikhi provides is beyond human master which is direct link with God/ Satguru (nirgun roop) which is in shabad form within/inner shabad gyan- satguru (true consciousness) within in all of us via manifested form of Satguru guidance ( Sargun roop-Visible form of God-Sri guru granth sahib ji)-
It's direct link between seeker and within seeker pure God's divine alive functioning light-knowledge-Satguru- inner guiding force.
In order to access or abide within within all of us that pure God's divine alive functioning light-knowledge- Satguru (nirgun roop) inner bani-naam- inner guiding force...sikhs read manifested form satguru- sri guru granth sahib (visible Sargun roop of Guru) to break one's egoic conditioning- go introvert and explore divine within, and with Gurparsad (grace of true guru manifested/unmanifested within) merges in absolute truth.
1. Buddhism and Sikhism I think are largely similar, but they have a major difference that I find hard to reconcile. Buddhism (at least Theravadan and Zen) teaches that the existence of God can't be answered for sure, and the same can be said for the soul. Instead the Buddha says that we should forget such questions, and instead focus on achieving Nirvana, as these questions impede our spiritual growth. Sikhi (as far as I am aware) states that our ultimate purpose is to merge with God, and reach Sach Khand. The problem is, I can see and understand the reasoning behind both of these positions, and I have a really hard time figuring out what to believe on this issue. How can I resolve this conflict?
There is secret indication what buddha is saying, its statement to avoid people making mountains of conceptual philosophies/ideas about truth which impedes one own spirituality as opposed to living the truth and experience it for yourself as this is sad reality of humanity.
Most people reside in comfort of conceptual ideas about the truth-egoistic mind conditioning as false sense of security instead of taking truth inside and let the truth does its work.
There are similarities- absolute truth, grace always happening we need to study more deeper to get list of similarities- If you want to learn about nirvana read buddhist heart sutra which tries to explain ultimate non dual reality/realization,- Gate, Gate, Paragate, Para Sam gate Bodhi svaha. It talks about absolute reality- emptiness is form, form is emptiness always being always becoming can be experienced by buddha nature (pure awareness enlightened being).
However since there are many interpretations of it via many school of thoughts, its not very clear as one can easily confuse or caught up empty awakeness/pure awareness as void-half transcendental awakening etc etc.
Absolute reality/truth is defined in Sikh Mool mantra(Root Mantra) is very clear and pristine:
Ik Oankar - One universal Eternal Absolute unchanged Awareness Being-Light-Knowledge- God- all in one, one in all- embodiment of stillness awareness, expressing itself in its movement - creating, preserving and changing creation spontaneously effortlessly.
Which is
Satnam- Eternal Truth Pure Existence
Kartapurkh- Creative consciousness
Nirbhauo- No fear- fearless as there is only one in all, all in one- fear from what? There is NO other. Ikoankar is all, all is ikoankar
Nirvair- No enemy of anyone- since its only one in all, all in one, there is no enemy.
Akaal Moorat- Timeless Being which is one being in all, all in one- One-JOT-Light-pure knowledge form.
Ajooni- Unborn non dual pure awareness being all in one, one in all.
Gurparsad- Pure consciousness/awareness bliss is realized by grace of true Guru-Satguru-sargun-manifested Guru in form of sri guru granth sahib/ invisible alive SatGuru within all- bestowed grace.
2. Scriptures are obviously very important to Sikhs, as the SGGSJ forms the foundation for Sikhi. My question regarding this is, why is reading the Bani repeatedly so important? Is kirtan more beneficial than to practice simran and meditation on the atman inside? I can understand reading it for understanding, and of course reading scriptures at different times in our lives, we will receive different lessons. But is inward meditation not more valuable, provided it is done with a proper spiritual understanding?
For every sikh, reading gurbani, contemplating on it, practising is quite important because gurbani breaks sikh-seeker egoistic conditioning, pre conceived notions/ideology/mindset if seeker allows- ALIVE GURBANI (ALIVE DIVINE BEING KNOWLEDGE) to take center stage of being let truth gurbani do its work, most of times its egoic conditioning pretends they are reading gurbani (ocean of bliss) however they are anyalizing ocean of gurbani from off shore rather being in it.
For example there is a famous story in our history where gurbani is used as medicine as analogy to show dogmatic notion for patient- where one groups of sikhs are shown doing gargles of medicine instead of taking it all in and other group is shown taking it all in one having full affect of gurbani.
In Sikh dharma, reading-Contemplation, kirtan, meditation are not in clash courses with each other they all can be incorporated whatever one is drawn too. They all can provided great divine insight, naam awakening inside as naam which is integral focus in sikh dharma where interpretation of naam can be grasped at many different levels depending on the spiritual maturity of the aspirant.
5. Again as far as I understand, Guru Nanak Ji shunned religious labels. He stated "There is no Hindu, there is no Muslim." So therefore, why have his teachings started a religion? This is something I haven't been able to find much discussion about, and I am quite curious about it. Has Sikhism fallen prey to the same dogmatism that he taught against?
Not Sikhism but on many levels more than handful areas of sikh community definitely has fallen prey because of Victorian abhramic notions.

6. The SGGSJ was named as the last Guru for the Sikhs. Does this mean there will never be another Guru? What about when we move out of Kal Yug and into the next age, will there be another succession of Gurus?
Guru and Waheguru are same. There is only Guru/God. There won't be any other. Ultimate Guru is inner One God/ Guru within all of us as all pervading God, thats what Sri guru granth sahib ji is manifested personal Guru visible form is referring to (Sargun personal manifested guru is referring to its impersonal nirgun form). There is no duality as such- SGGS is personified manifested Guru form of non manifested non confined non dual Shabad Guru/Satguru-true consciousness/awareness within all of us which is alive never born and dies-Vaho Vaho Bani Nirankar Hai ||. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Last night I read the Japji Sahib and tonight I will read more.

Don't just read it conceptually, but contemplate deeply on it, ask questions while reading how does it relate to my experience- lots of questions and answers already in japji sahib. Satguru talks to everyone all the time, its just we are busy with our conditioned mind-metal noise, be quiet and listen(sunaie)-

ਸੁਣਿਐ ਲਾਗੈ ਸਹਜਿ ਧਿਆਨੁ ॥

Suṇi▫ai lāgai sahj ḏẖi▫ān.
By Listening-intuitively one spontaneously starts to meditate/contemplate deeply.

For example-

kiv sachi-aaraa ho-ee-ai kiv koorhai tutai paal How then can one be purified? How can one throw away the falsehood? hukam rajaa-ee chalnaa naanak likhi-aa naal Says Nanak, By Abiding by the Command of God, which is written along with everyone!

Here Satguru nanak dev ji is saying hakum rajaie chalna nanak likiya naal. According to my understanding, answer which is given here is -One has to look beyond conditioned mind and get attuned with their inner intuition within/intuitively listen with one consciousness/intellect (surat) -Hakum-divine will of God/absolute reality which is always unfolding-always happening right at this moment. So on a person level, whats hakum always unfolding for you or how does this relate to you in your experience? You have to listen with your unconditioned consciousness-surti for guidance directly from inner Guru-Satguru within. It essentially our intrinsic deepest spiritual impulse getting drawn to God-absolute truth or aspects of it as part of spiritual development, all contributing in our going back to our source.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Poster Bijla Singh has answered all your questions. If anonymous is an honest seeker, he would contemplate on what Bijla Singh has said. Instead of rushing to argue. Even in my post you skip over important information provided and ask a question on what has already been answered.

How do I know Gurbani is God? Because I have faith and contentment in Gurbani. I have no issue answering this question. Yet, you have faith in Buddha and Buddhism and you cannot be 100% sure it is actually Buddhism because Buddha didn't write anything down. Over the centuries many things change and concepts are lost. Sikh Gurus wrote ALL of God's teaching down on how to reach God and this makes Sikhi authentic and real and unchanging. You are blindly following 'Buddha teachings without any clue if today's Buddhism is what Buddha taught. Also lastly and not least Buddha was ONLY a seeker. The Gurus are God himself. Any honest person looking for answers would deeply consider this thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bijla Singh's response has been very fair and considered. It may not immediately be digestible from certain perspectives, but I think it is best to approach questions such as these with humility and an "I know nothing yet I'm ready to learn" attitude. Most of it is down to faith too. What is religion but a leap of faith? BTW, I love certain aspects of Western culture, I really do, but it is not the be all and end all of modern existence. Don't be strong-armed into thinking that, "West = great and sophisticated" whilst, "East = irrelevant and archaic." Draw from both, but derive confidence and faith from Sikhi, because it really is a beautifully serene way to live one's life. Just don't get sidetracked or lured into blind alleys by Man. A Sikh wishes to merge with the Creator; the hard work has to be done by us. Nobody can put in a good word for us and slip us through to the other side, thankfully. Thoughts and deeds, cause and effect. Simple as that. The final four lines of Japji Sahib sum it up perfectly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Let me get to this one first, and then I will respond to the others.

You asked questions and many provided answers. If you are thinking of having an argument or a debate then you will have to find someone else for it.

I thought to have a peaceful discussion, and others provided that. You are the only one who started directly accusing other religions (namely Islam and Hinduism) as having meaningless morals.

Having some similarities does not mean anything. What sets Gurmat apart from Buddhism is the fact (and a very important one) is that the former believes in One Supreme Being whereas the latter does not. Hence, all other concepts concerning way of life and salvation would be vastly different. Similarities can be found in all religions. This does not prove anything.

Alright, we can agree to disagree on this.

How do I know? Because my Satguru told me and He is not a liar. He received the revelation and penned it down Himself. He preached and practiced the same message. Countless Sikhs have experienced the Divine from this message. The true message can only preach what is according to the very nature of God i.e. without hate, fear, equality, peace etc. What proof do you have that Gurbani is not revealed? If you are looking for truth then why not compare the original Gurbani message to other holy books and see for yourself. Truth is not sought by asking questions on forums and picking an argument. Truth is obtained by following Satguru and having an inner connection with Vaheguru which is wholly absent in Buddhism.

I have compared, I am comparing now, and the thing is, Sikhi doesn't look like it's any different. Yes, it does teach very high morals which I absolutely respect, but it seems like its followers are just as divided and into blind-faith as any other religion. Do I expect to get truth here? No, that would be completely unreasonable. But it can help me to totally rule out paths which aren't going to work for me.

It seems to me you do not understand logic. If you want to treat homosexuality topic as something personal then it leaves no room for any objective discussion. I never said homosexuals are useless. I only stated they cannot procreate which is part of Anand Karaj lifestyle. Hence, within Gurmat they have no place. Surely they can adopt but I have already refuted such a useless point. They depend on heterosexuals for it. Assume there are no children left in the world for adoption, what then? On what basis do homosexuals justify having a family unit? On what basis is this marriage justified? You failed to address my point: Lets put any homosexual couple on an uninhabited planet and see if humanity survives. Gurmat is universal and all of its principles are universally applicable. If homosexuality was universally applied, humanity will cease to exist. Infertility is a medical disability. Are all homosexuals medically disabled? You are the one doing apples to oranges comparison not me. You are the one comparing healthy homos to infertile. Procreation is not the only criterion but is definitely one of the criteria. First criterion for Anand Karaj is to have a man and a woman. Many Gurbani verses explicitly state this. Vaars also state the same fact in no ambiguous terms. I never said homosexuals are beggars but are like ascetics who depend on heterosexuals. I dont think you understand how examples work. Homosexuals are NOT householders as defined in Gurbani (I highly doubt you know what householder means within the scope of Gurmat). Their entire relationship is predicated upon physical attraction towards the same sex be it for companionship, intimacy or lust. Living the ideal Gurmat lifestyle is never on their mind. Mind you, we are not discussing pros and cons of homosexuality but whether it is accepted in Sikhi or not. The topic is not homosexuality in general but very specific as to Gurmat injunctions in regards to it.

You too are treating it as something personal, don't pretend that you're not. Within Gurmat they have no place, fine, that is basically the same as being useless (within Gurmat). Do you ever really see a time when there are no children left in the world for adoption? Do you ever really think that would happen? If it does, then we can solve that issue when we get there, because it does NOT matter now. Many indigenous cultures have survived with culturally sanctioned homosexuality, and it has actually benefited them (Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Turkey, many Native American tribes). On what basis? LOVE MY MAN. Love is as good of a reason as any. Many homosexual couples choose not to adopt or otherwise have children, but they are married because they want to be together, and they want to have a partner. Who are you to deny that of them? We're not putting homosexuals on an uninhabited planet, and to draw such comparisons is irresponsible. If you look at something that is contextually dependent, and then take it out of its context, then of course it will seem ridiculous and implausible. Infertility is a medical disability, that's true, but homosexuality is also biological and genetic. Are they really any different? How can you say that one biological thing is fine, but another biological thing is not? If you are going to state that Anand Karaj is a marriage with procreation as its prime intent, then you must apply that principle universally and say that people who are sterile cannot have an Anand Karaj, heterosexual or otherwise. If you're going to have such strong principles, stick to them in all cases.

As for universally applied, no one ever said we were universally applying homosexuality. You got that idea, not me. The question is, how is SIKHI universally applicable? And if homosexuals are not able to practice Sikhi because of a BIOLOGICALLY, GENETICALLY determined sexuality, then Sikhi is not universally applicable. It is applicable to everyone who is not homosexual. To be universally applicable, it has to be practicable in full by anyone. If I don't know what householder means, then let's define it. I don't see this argument going anywhere because you say one thing is true and then another thing is true. Give me a definition and stick to it. To say that love and companionship are based solely on physical attraction is grossly misunderstanding the point of a relationship, and it seems as juvenile as high schoolers in their two-week relationships. You say we are talking solely about Gurmat, but again and again you make broad sweeping statements about homosexuality as a whole. Which one is it?

I have already stated why Gurbani does not mention it explicitly. Again, it is incompatible with Gurmat i.e. it is opposite to Sikh way of life. You argue in vain that soul is genderless. So what? Is homosexual relationship soul based? No. It is same sex based. It is physical based. Hence, your argument is invalid. I can argue that since soul has no gender why cant all homosexuals marry the opposite sex and form heterosexual family units? Why do they feel attracted to the same gender which is purely physical? A Sikh and homosexual are contradictory. It is analogous to saying criminal and cop are one and the same or a saint and a sinner are the same. Not to say that homosexuals are criminals or sinners. Absolutely not. The point being that two are contradictory in nature. A Gursikh who is God oriented person can never be homosexual. This is how Gurbani defines it. Divorce, abuse, wife-beating etc. are topics which are not mentioned in Gurbani so should we assume Gurbani endorses such practices? Absolutely not. These topics are not covered because they are incompatible with true way of life. If someone was to ask what Gurbani says concerning a Sikh getting a divorce or beating his wife, the answer would be that the person is not a Sikh. Homosexuality is in the same boat. A Sikh is heterosexual by definition. His life centers around being a heterosexual person. His marriage is not founded upon physical attraction but rather is grounded in having a household sangat and procreation. God created us in balance. For man He created woman and vice versa. Why should we go against such a natural design and resort to animalistic behavior in which physical traits is the only basis for a relationship? Homosexuals are not Sikhs. Period. The path is open to them but they must follow it wholeheartedly. It is not my way but Gurus way. Guru advocated heterosexuality. This is what he preached, practiced and emulated for us.

If this is the case then Anand Karaj is not soul-based, it is physical based. You can't have it both ways. If you stick to one, I will respect it, but you are switching your position over and over to further your own agenda. You can also argue that the Gurus left certain matters up to our own interpretation and moral standards (in order TO be universally applicable, perhaps?). We have cultural differences, and a universal religion cannot squash any culture that is different. Why do they feel attracted to the same gender? Why do you feel attracted to the opposite? It's the same question. Gurbani does not say that person is no longer a Sikh, because Gurbani does not talk about these topics. It is left to the Sikh community and each individual's moral standards to determine. There is far too much inconsistency in your argument.

I think you need to calm down. If love marriage is better then why does it fail more than an arranged marriage? Shouldnt love be stronger? Clearly, what most Westerners call love is nothing more than physical attraction from which they seek worldly pleasures. They dont understand what it takes to make a marriage successful. Many marriages fall apart because they dont experience the same love or the feelings are not there anymore or one of them starts to cheat. If one truly loves another person, their relationship should go stronger and stronger every day. Love is not something that fades or weakens over time.

I think I am calm. I think I am simply defending people, as you Sikhs are also called to do. What happened to tolerance of all humanity? I never said love marriage is better. It is simply my culture, I never stated it as being superior to yours. You are the one who said that my culture is wrong. What you said about love is true, and I absolutely agree, however that is an issue in ALL cultures, not just the West.

A person can claim to be a Sikh and not follow it. Correct. But this is not the point I made. My point is that one who doesnt follow Sikhi is not a Sikh doesnt matter how religious he presents himself to be. He is called a hypocrite in Gurbani. This is not the case in many other religions especially Hinduism and Islam. A Hindu can believe in God or not but remains a Hindu. A Muslim must observe prayers but there are many exceptions. In Islam, the most sinful Muslim in the world would go to heaven (after he is cleansed in hell) but the most saintly non-Muslim would go to hell. Prophets are exempt from mistakes and sins so no punishments for them. Read the Maariful Quran commentary yourself. Hence, it comes down to labels for them. I have studied these religions from their own books written by their eminent scholars.

That is also not true, at least in Islam. I don't know enough about Hinduism to be able to speak on its behalf.

وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَهُمْ تُعْجِبُكَ أَجْسَامُهُمْ وَإِن يَقُولُوا تَسْمَعْ لِقَوْلِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ خُشُبٌ مُّسَنَّدَةٌ يَحْسَبُونَ كُلَّ صَيْحَةٍ عَلَيْهِمْ

هُمُ الْعَدُوُّ فَاحْذَرْهُمْ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ

When you look at them, their exteriors please you. When they speak, you listen to their words. They are as (worthless as hollow) pieces of timber propped up, (unable to stand on their own). They think that every cry is against them. They are the enemies; so beware of them. The curse of Allah be on them! How deluded they are (from the truth)!

This is talking about munafiqs, hypocrites, ones who call themselves Muslim but do not act as Muslims.

The hypocrites who are in two minds between belief and unbelief sometimes pretend to remember Allah. However, they try to deceive Allah and show off. When they stand up to prayer, they stand without earnestness (an-Nisa,4/142-3). They swear to falsehood knowingly in order to obstruct men from the Path of Allah (al-Mujadila, 58/14; al-Munafiqun, 63/2).

They do not accept the true words; all of them will be together with unbelievers in the hereafter (an-Nisa, 4/140), It is equal to munafiqs whether you pray for their forgiveness or not; Allah will not forgive those transgressors. (al-Munafiqun, 63/6). (emphasis mine)

"One Day will the hypocrites men and women― say to the Believers: "Wait for us! Let us borrow (a light) from your Light!" It will be said: "Turn back to your rear! Then seek a light where you can"; they will see that there is a wall between them and the believers. (Those without) will call out "were we not with you?" They will reply "True! But you led yourselves into temptation."(al-Hadid 57/13-15). Thus, munafiqs and unbelievers will come together in Hell (an-Nisa, 4/140).

God forgives not that aught should be with Him associated; less than that He forgives to whomsoever He will. Whoso associates with God anything, has indeed forged a mighty sin. S. 4:48

And this was Our argument which we gave to Ibrahim against his people; We exalt in dignity whom We please; surely your Lord is Wise, Knowing. And We gave to him Ishaq and Yaqoob; each did We guide, and Nuh did We guide before, and of his descendants, Dawood and Sulaiman and Ayub and Yusuf and Haroun; and thus do We reward those who do good (to others). And Zakariya and Yahya and Isa and Ilyas; every one was of the good; And Ismail and Al-Yasha and Yunus and Lut; and every one We made to excel (in) the worlds: And from among their fathers and their descendants and their brethren, and We chose them and guided them into the right way. This is Allah's guidance, He guides thereby whom He pleases of His servants; and if they had set up others (with Him), certainly what they did would have become ineffectual for them. These are they to whom We gave the book and the wisdom and the prophecy; therefore if these disbelieve in it We have already entrusted with it a people who are not disbelievers in it. These are they whom Allah guided, therefore follow their guidance. Say: I do not ask you for any reward for it; it is nothing but a reminder to the nations. S. 6:83-90 Shakir

Read the Qu'ran my brother, before you speak so ill about it.

This is in contrast to Gurmat. Guru Sahibs companion Mardana became a Sikh during the odysseys. Bhagat Kabir Ji rejects Islam in his own compositions. I am not here to argue with you or offend anyone. I respect all humans but those who dont follow Sikhi are not Sikhs. It doesnt mean they are inferior or unequal. Gurmat is the path of submission to God. Dont expect it to be like Hinduism which accommodates any manmat thinking. Very easy to say you seek truth but it I shard to accept it and follow it. It is up to you to make a choice. If you choose Gurmat then follow it nearly and dearly by giving up your own way of thinking including seeing homosexuality the same as heterosexuality. Otherwise you will have to find another religion that accommodates your belief system which in my opinion is contrary to the very nature of seeking a religion. Just dont become a Sikh and start to push your own thinking over Gurmat. We already have enough of those doing internal damage. Again, I am least interested in having arguments. I only presented my answers. I am not here to convince you but simply provide the information. You can reject all of it and look the other way which would be contrary to the claim of seeking truth. Good luck on your search. Guru Rakha

Fair enough. Just do not push your values on me either, as it gets you nowhere. You attacked both Muslims and Hindus by calling them inferior in your post, as well as attacking the status of homosexuals, and I will defend them to the best of my ability.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Poster Bijla Singh has answered all your questions. If anonymous is an honest seeker, he would contemplate on what Bijla Singh has said. Instead of rushing to argue. Even in my post you skip over important information provided and ask a question on what has already been answered.

How do I know Gurbani is God? Because I have faith and contentment in Gurbani. I have no issue answering this question. Yet, you have faith in Buddha and Buddhism and you cannot be 100% sure it is actually Buddhism because Buddha didn't write anything down. Over the centuries many things change and concepts are lost. Sikh Gurus wrote ALL of God's teaching down on how to reach God and this makes Sikhi authentic and real and unchanging. You are blindly following 'Buddha teachings without any clue if today's Buddhism is what Buddha taught. Also lastly and not least Buddha was ONLY a seeker. The Gurus are God himself. Any honest person looking for answers would deeply consider this thought.

If I skipped over any information you provided, it means either I agree or I have nothing more to ask on the topic. It doesn't mean I was not listening. I asked questions multiple times to different people because they have different opinions and I want to hear the different perspectives within Sikhi.

I think Bijla Singh's response has been very fair and considered. It may not immediately be digestible from certain perspectives, but I think it is best to approach questions such as these with humility and an "I know nothing yet I'm ready to learn" attitude. Most of it is down to faith too. What is religion but a leap of faith? BTW, I love certain aspects of Western culture, I really do, but it is not the be all and end all of modern existence. Don't be strong-armed into thinking that, "West = great and sophisticated" whilst, "East = irrelevant and archaic." Draw from both, but derive confidence and faith from Sikhi, because it really is a beautifully serene way to live one's life. Just don't get sidetracked or lured into blind alleys by Man. A Sikh wishes to merge with the Creator; the hard work has to be done by us. Nobody can put in a good word for us and slip us through to the other side, thankfully. Thoughts and deeds, cause and effect. Simple as that. The final four lines of Japji Sahib sum it up perfectly.

Previous to his response, I was willing to do so and was humble as many of you are much more educated than me on these topics. I never said that West is great, but Bijla Singh made a statement that "everything has come from the East" which is simply not true, and is just as derogatory of a statement.

I will get to the other posts when I have time. As of right now I have too much to work on. But I did want to respond to this.

= Not so brother, Bhai Mardana Ji were the first Sikh in history (though yes they were an apostate from Islam).

= In Islamic theology it would be hard to argue that Islamic State fighters will not be greeted by 72 light skinned virgins in Heaven as they are merely doing that which the Prophet Muhammad himself did in terms of enslavement of women and minors for financial gain and beheadings of innocents and opponents alike to incite terror and invoke fear of Islam's Empire.

Alright, my misunderstanding on that one.

I would like to address this about ISIS. I would suggest you take a look at this. It is a letter written by over 130, mostly conservative, Sunni Muslim scholars on the crimes that ISIS has committed. http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/10/is-the-muslim-scholars-open-letter-to-isis-really-enough It includes an English translation of the letter as well. Here are some examples from it.

6 - It is forbidden in Islam to kill an innocent

7 - It is forbidden in Islam to kill emissaries, ambassadors, and diplomats. Hence, it is forbidden to kill journalists and aid workers.

8 - Jihad in Islam is a defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose, and without the right rules of conduct.

9 - It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless they openly declare disbelief.

12 - It is forbidden in Islam to re-introduce slavery. It was abolished by universal consensus.

13 - It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert

14 - It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights

17 - It is forbidden in Islam to torture people

22 - It is forbidden in Islam to declare a caliphate without consensus from all Muslims

And so on.

{And those who do not invoke with Allaah another deity or kill the soul which Allaah has forbidden [to be killed], except by right, and do not commit unlawful sexual intercourse. And whoever should do that will meet a penalty. Multiplied for him is the punishment on the Day of Resurrection, and he will abide therein humiliated.} [Quran 25:68-69]

{But whoever deliberately slays another believer, his requital shall be Hell, therein to abide; and God will condemn him, and will reject him, and will prepare for him awesome suffering.} (An-Nisaa' 4:93)

ISIS is most certainly NOT Muslim, they do not abide by the laws of Islam, they are despicable, and they are most certainly NOT going to be rewarded in Heaven for their deeds, at least under Islamic law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, you have a habit of putting your own words in others mouths and then accusing them which is nothing short of deceit and a lie. I never said Islam and Hinduism have "meaningless morals". Show me a single line that states this.

You are looking for a path that works for you. Hence, you want something that fits your viewpoint, thinking and opinions. This is absolutely the wrong way of finding the truth. In Sikhi, one has to submit, hence, mould their thinking and behavior according to Sikh ideals. You want your choice to be moulded to your thinking which cannot happen in Gurmat.

According to the rules of logic, your arguments are invalid and incoherent. Just because someone is not accepted in Sikhi doesnt mean they are entirely useless. According to Gurmat, they are on the wrong path. Period. One cannot be a Muslim, Hindu, Jew etc. and still be a Sikh at the same time. One cannot be a homo and a Sikh at the same time. No one can pick and choose. Now, it Is not impossible that there will not be orphans left for adoption. Certainly, the possibility is there and it goes to show that homosexuality doesn't work all the time. Hence, your argument for defending homosexuality on the basis of adoption doesn't work which is why you avoided it by stating "it does NOT matter now". So do you mean homosexuality should be allowed as long as there are children left to be adopted?

If homosexuals want a partner due to physical love towards another human then it is not according to the basis of Anand Karaj. I have already explained what Sikh marriage is all about. Pure physical attraction and the need or desire to have a partner does not justify having an Anand Karaj. I don't deny them marriage or any rights as long as they remain outside of Sikhi. Sikhi is a specific way of life. All the Gurus preached and practiced heterosexuality NOT because of their sexual orientation but because of its truth and validation by God. Gurus were beyond physical attractions, lust or the need to have a partner. They demonstrated the true lifestyle for Sikhs to emulate. This historical evidence is sufficient and strong enough to repudiate homosexuality. Besides, all verses in Gurbani and Vaars speak to heterosexual marriage. This is my challenge to you and anyone else who advocates homosexuality to show me a single verse from either Gurbani or Vaars that makes homosexuality acceptable.

Why can't we put homos on a uninhabited planet? Because you know humanity will cease to exist. Do the same to any heterosexual couple and do the comparison. If you still cant see the difference then you are blinded by your own ignorance. It goes to show how homosexuality harms the survival of humanity. If God approved such a lifestyle then he wouldve given men to bear children the same way as women in a natural way. Do you really think infertility is the same as homosexuality? Being biological does not prove the sameness. Inferiles are physically incapable of reproducing but homos are not. One is healthy the other is disabled. Hence, there is no comparison. Again, you fail to understand logic and rationality. The point being that homos cannot procreate. Therefore, they fail to meet one of the Sikh marriage criteria. Besides, we are not discussing validity of homosexuality from biological standpoint but from Sikhi standpoint. So stay focused on the topic. Also, I never said procreation is the primary or the only intent of Anand Karaj. You failed to read properly.

Sikhi is universally applicable which means its path is open to all and no one is disbarred from it. In other words, its message is not restricted to any human. However, every human that wishes to become a Sikh must submit to the path set forth by Satguru. Just as a Muslim, Hindu, alcoholic, drug addict, rapist etc. must renounce their way of life and adopt Gurmat in totality, homosexuals must give up their mental orientation towards the same gender in order to become Sikhs. Sexual orientation must be changed and conquered. Any sexual orientation or need to have sex stems from lust which can be conquered and mind can be subdued. Habits can be changed. This is the position of Gurbani. Therefore, Sikhi does not accept those who refuse to follow it. The path is open but only those who follow it are accepted as Sikhs.

When did I ever state that Anand Karaj is entirely soul based? It is certainly a union of two souls but the physical aspect or criteria is still there i.e. it is a union of two souls which are housed in a man and a woman. Union between two men and/or two women is not allowed. I again challenge you to show me a single verse that states otherwise. When it comes to moral and ethics based lifestyle, the Gurus did not leave anything out. Since Anand Karaj is clearly defined and has been demonstrated by the Gurus over the period of 240 years it leaves no doubt about rejection of homosexuality. You need to provide evidence from Gurbani that personal moral standards are allowed within Gurmat. This is nothing but manmat. Since a Gursikh submits to Satguru, he gives himself up physically and mentally and wholeheartedly serves Satguru. While Gurbani talks about a Sikh being a heterosexual, not a single verse speaks of a Sikh being a homosexual. The message is crystal clear. No choice, no individual opinion or standard.

I will leave Islam out as it is beyond the scope of this discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that Bijla Singh is trying to convey is that a person cannot be a "true" sikh if he is under the unnecessary attachments of maya.By getting baptised a homosexual totally contradicts the point of getting baptised.

There are many relationships in Sikh history of 2 persons of same gender,that is of Guru and sikh.The relationship is not physically based but pure love based like of a son and father.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that Bijla Singh is trying to convey is that a person cannot be a "true" sikh if he is under the unnecessary attachments of maya.By getting baptised a homosexual totally contradicts the point of getting baptised.

There are many relationships in Sikh history of 2 persons of same gender,that is of Guru and sikh.The relationship is not physically based but pure love based like of a son and father.

This post sounds confusing. We, Sikhs, do know that homosexuality is a biological condition. However as long as a person does not lead a homosexual lifestyle, that person can be Sikh. So in this post it seems like a homosexual person should not get baptized, when in fact it means, people living a homosexual lifestyle should not get baptized. So nothing against the person or their inclinations just against the lifestyle...
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Alright. My questions have been answered. I will no longer respond to this thread, as I do not wish to continue the argument. It will not get any of us any further in our spiritual progression. Thank you for the answers, everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest a dumb guy

Alright. My questions have been answered. I will no longer respond to this thread, as I do not wish to continue the argument. It will not get any of us any further in our spiritual progression. Thank you for the answers, everyone.

*People attempted to answer.

The best way is to read gurbani and study the gurus yourself. I know you already dropped Sikhi, but it should be something to remember for the next religion you try out, if you do try another one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Paedophile doctor, 28, who groomed '13-year-old girl' on Kik using the username 'olderc**k' walks free from court after his lawyer blamed his actions on working long hours during the pandemic James Peter Farthing, 28, spoke to the 'teenager' on messaging service Kik He asked to see pictures of her and sent the account a picture of his <banned word filter activated> But the NHS doctor was actually speaking to an undercover police officer He admitted attempting to groom a child and was given a suspended sentence  A doctor who attempted to groom a '13-year-old girl' online has been spared prison after his lawyers blamed his actions on working long hours during the Covid pandemic. James Peter Farthing, 28, spoke to the 'teenager' on messaging service Kik - under the username 'olderc**k' - as well as on Snapchat. The junior doctor, who worked for the NHS in Stockport, asked to see photographs of her body and shared an image of <banned word filter activated>. The account was actually being run by an undercover police officer and Farthing was later arrested for attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. However, today he walked free from Minshull Street Crown Court after being handed a suspended sentence. Lawyers mitigating for Farthing, said he had been juggling working long hours during the pandemic, his wife's health condition and his training.  They said he had 'emotional struggles', had been watching pornography and smoking cannabis at the time - but that he was working to address his issues. Her Honour Judge Tina Landale sentenced him to six months in prison, suspended for two years, after he admitted attempting to engage in sexual communication with a child. He was handed concurrent sentences for attempting to involve a child aged 13 or over in non-penetrative sexual activity; and attempting to engage with a child aged 13 to 15 to watch and look at images of a sexual nature. The court heard Farthing spoke to the 'girl' on Kik - under the username 'olderc**k', Fiona Clancy, prosecuting said. He also spoke to her on Snapchat, in March. He said he was 23 and from Leeds. The 'girl' was called 'Beth' and was said to have been from Liverpool. The cop used a picture of kittens to portray how young she was, Ms Clancy said. Farthing asked 'Beth' if she was into 'older guys' and if she would send him a picture. 'Beth' told him: 'I'm 13, by the way.' Farthing replied: 'Cool. Are you down for role play or sex?' He asked to see her body and offered to show her his <banned word filter activated>. The 'girl' said she was worried about sending a photograph. Farthing reassured her that if she didn't include her face, it 'should be fine'. 'The fact that the undercover officer was 13 was reiterated, but the sexual conversations continued,' Ms Clancy said, as the conversations moved to Snapchat. Farthing told 'Beth': 'I have spoken to a few girls that like older men.' The officer then sent a picture of a young, clothed girl.  Farthing sent a photograph of his <banned word filter activated>. 'I really want to touch your body and see what you look like naked,' he said. He then sent another picture of his <banned word filter activated>. Ms Clancy said that when officers arrested Farthing, he said he was 'ashamed' and 'tried to stop', but 'gave in to sexual pleasure', the court heard. Simon Gurney, defending, said Farthing, who has no previous convictions, was 'deeply ashamed and remorseful for his behaviour'.   His supervisor - a consultant - and training programme director provided statements to the court. Staff and patients 'all expressed shock' after Farthing was arrested, the court heard, as people thought he had a good 'moral compass'.  Mr Gurney said they 'stand by him' because they acknowledge his remorse. The lawyer said it was the first time in Farthing's career that he didn't enjoy his work - and that his family was in debt as a result of the pandemic.  Mr Gurney said Farthing 'only has himself to blame for jeopardising' his career.  Judge Landale said the 'girl' made it 'clear that she didn't want to talk about sex'.  Farthing was ordered to take part in the Horizon project; to complete 20 rehabilitation activity requirement days; and to undertake 200 hours of unpaid work. He was also made the subject of a sexual harm prevention order - to last a decade.   https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9995087/NHS-junior-doctor-28-groomed-13-year-old-girl-Kik-spared-prison.html  
    • Plus who said I was some 'admitted expert' about the dumbing down? There's no two ways about it, everything is dumbed down for pendus. Who can't see that? The only people who can't see it, are the dumb themselves. 
    • Who do you think is the dog's bollocks then? Go on, give us a laugh.  To be honest, they are pretty much all insufferable to me, that's why I prefer reading. This guy just smashed it with his santhiya readings, I can't count how many other people have also learnt to read Gurbani from his recitals. That's got to be acknowledged. I did see him a few times at Goodmayes Gurdwara and he was better than most I've ever heard (which ain't many). I mean I stayed till the end for the first time. lol Moms used to watch Maskeen a lot, but as a young energetic person, I always found his style a bit boring and couldn't engage. Plus you know all these guys like to add their things in. And you should know by now, given the opportunity, I prefer trying to decipher the original puratan texts when I'm able to.  It's like shastarsingh said on another thread, You can pick up important information within two minutes in a book that you have to listen to two hours katha for....  Katha not my thing, so I'm no expert about it. But seeing as it's mainly done for rurals, I don't have high expectations anyway. At least they aren't bhangra paa-ing like fudhoos I guess? Not until later in the evening anyway.  PS - I think maybe because he is of a considerable girth, his vocal delivery is clear. Some others I have heard sound like they are mumbling somewhat which is off putting.  
    • You've got to be joking me, bro. This Singh is a top kathavachak for you? You, the admitted expert about the gradual dumbing down of Sikhi to appeal to the lowest common denominator, defending this religious gentleman? I hope you're trolling me.
    • Plz listen at 9:00 sec Some people using kisan andolan to fool nri Sikhs.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use