Do Sikhs have blind faith?

[harsharan000]

5 hours ago, mahandulai said:

check the mahandulai is a troll thread, all pointed out.

I have checked but can not see, can´t you provide it, as  it  is you who has supposedly written it, or is that also asking you too much?

[harsharan000]

10 hours ago, mahandulai said:

no shame here,

I'm not saying don't have faith,

I'm saying don't have the faith for the wrong reason - which in this case, for many seems to be, is relying on stories from so long ago.

It is but just normal, that there where is no shame, it is called shameless

You definetely have no shame in lying, no shame in trolling, no shame in inflating self ego by proclaiming self importance... 

is there anything left for which you have not behaved shamelessly. I doubt there is any.

You say you are not proving things wrong, but just questioning...what rubbish is that?  

of course you are questioning to prove it wrong, otherwise you would have agreed and supported..

You are a lost case..... on one hand you say SGGS is true, then on the other hand you say  :  all your belief is from some story, hundreds of years ago.

So mainly but indirectly  you are saying SGGS is story of some hundred years ago ......on which people  base their belief.

Is not that the job a devlish minded beast, to call Gurbani stories of some hundred years?

Keep on denying your trolling and lies, but the facts of your lies and nonsense are present in each one of your evil posts .

you are not worthy of  staying even one minute more , on such a beautiful, peaceful  and nice website as Sikhsangat. 

you are full of yourself, so you need no learning, but neither do we need any of your utter rubbish,  so get lost !!!

[mahandulai]

20 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

 

That line, will differ from Sikh to Sikh. Some will believe all sakhis relating to the Gurus, and some will believe very few. What determines this line, is what your perception of the "Guru" is.

My friend who has a year ago become a Sikh (from another religion) always says "The Gurus were perfect and capable of anything!" And he really believes it. So if he were to hear the sakhi of Bhai Lehna being told to eat a dead body, on the orders of Guru Nanak he has no trouble in believing it.

Other people may not feel the same about the Gurus, and say that Guru Nanak would never have made such a demand. They feel that there would be no logic/understanding in Guru Nanak Dev Ji asking this of Bhai Lehna.

The line, is wherever you yourself are my friend. Nowhere else.

 

 

"let's say" and "imagine" ?

Why ask questions based on hypothetical belief?

For me, there is no "let's say" and "imagine."

 

The questions you pose are answered by the actual structure of SGGS. The Gurus employed a numbering system so that there cannot be any alterations. The oldest saroops that exist can prove this. If you go onto Sikh Digital Library you will see saroops from the Guru's own times.

 

If you are talking about historical anecdotes then most likely the teller will add his own embellishments in order to keep the story and it's audience connected. There is some filler, not a lot mind you, in certain sakhis ie of Bhai Maha Singh and the Chali Mukte.

 

 

Of course we don't know fully. We don't know because we weren't there to witness it and record it.

But there is a difference between rejecting what others saw/felt/experienced/heard just because of our own personal foibles.

 

 

"all" of your belief?

No Sikh places his total belief on stories. Sikhs places their beliefs primarily on Gurbani and then sakhis.

 

 

Of course it is a fact that SOME stories can't be accounted for. But Gurmat has also been passed down by oral tradition for quite a few decades.

Now you say that "SGGS is true and everything" but the first solid evidence we have of this is from Gurbilas patshahi 10 which was written some 4 decades after.

How can you make your about SGGS unless you actually have some faith that it actually happened although its a little hard to prove?

 

 

 

No you most likely can't. But none of the older Sikh texts have gone through such a change that I know of. Which text (where the sakhis are based on) do you feel have?

 

Well in that case do you really need to wear that turban and keep your kes? We don't REALLY know what happened on Vaisaikhi of 1699 do we. Its not written in SGGS. So let's forget all about the event. It most likely has changed all the time and the original event must have got lost in the ages....?

And let's focus on today where very few Sikhs actually want to keep kes and wear turbans. Let's make it easy for them by teling them Vaisakhi was something else, and they can see their nearest barbers when ever they want.

 

very touching post,

not going to say anything, because it hit home, for me.

[mahandulai]

15 hours ago, harsharan000 said:

It is but just normal, that there where is no shame, it is called shameless

You definetely have no shame in lying, no shame in trolling, no shame in inflating self ego by proclaiming self importance... 

is there anything left for which you have not behaved shamelessly. I doubt there is any.

You say you are not proving things wrong, but just questioning...what rubbish is that?  

of course you are questioning to prove it wrong, otherwise you would have agreed and supported..

You are a lost case..... on one hand you say SGGS is true, then on the other hand you say  :  all your belief is from some story, hundreds of years ago.

So mainly but indirectly  you are saying SGGS is story of some hundred years ago ......on which people  base their belief.

Is not that the job a devlish minded beast, to call Gurbani stories of some hundred years?

Keep on denying your trolling and lies, but the facts of your lies and nonsense are present in each one of your evil posts .

you are not worthy of  staying even one minute more , on such a beautiful, peaceful  and nice website as Sikhsangat. 

you are full of yourself, so you need no learning, but neither do we need any of your utter rubbish,  so get lost !!!

ok ok ok

my final bout with you is this:

texts from the past are more provable, and sggs, seems very reliable as to be written by guru, markings etc,

other things like sakhis, about heroes, and all these people who lived for 300 years, and had half lion bodies, errrr MAYBE not, maybe.

Finally my last point, sggs is poetry, and literal translations should not be used. Also, for every point in the sggs saying, 'everyone is unique' there will be another line saying 'everyone is the same', that is why we should think about our quotings more.

END.