Jump to content
Guest Bhujang

Why are we not Hindus?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Guest guest said:

i don't need advice on how to 'debate' .  i was contributing to a discussion, not engaging in a debate.  debates are for "chalak" (sly) people who have preset ideological motives and are only interested in being publicly seen as winning arguments, hence resort to such petty tactics as 'ad hominem'  attacks etc.  this seems your interest, not mine.  the intention you had in asking me about babri masjid was clear.  your lame 'attack' failed.  maybe you should learn to engage in straight forward discussions and concentrate on the points on hand. 

Though not in habit of chain-type replying but you are not making any sense. You use the method of deflection and since you are not even registered as a member and maybe you are posting with various different ids to post your ideology (fearing that you may not have enough support). For that reason, i feel it will be my waste of time debating/discussing with you my dear brother. Have a great life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/29/2018 at 4:50 AM, BhForce said:

Yeah, it's just some random fellow named "Nanak" that said we're neither Hindus or Muslims, that Hindus are blind, and that they are wrong from the start.

Thank God that "Guru Guest Bhujang ji" came along to set us straight.

Dhanvaad.

 

ਨਾ ਹਮ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਨ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ॥

Naa Ham Hindhoo N Musalamaan ||

I am not a Hindu, nor am I a Muslim.

ਭੈਰਉ (ਮਃ ੫) (੩) ੪:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੧੩੬ ਪੰ. ੧੧ 
Raag Bhaira-o Guru Arjan Dev

https://www.searchgurbani.com/guru-granth-sahib/shabad/4205/line/10

 

ਹਿੰਦੂ ਅੰਨ੍ਹਾ ਤੁਰਕੂ ਕਾਣਾ ॥

Hindhoo Annhaa Thurakoo Kaanaa ||

The Hindu is sightless; the Muslim has only one eye.

ਗੋਂਡ (ਭ. ਨਾਮਦੇਵ) (੭) ੪:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੮੭੫ ਪੰ. ੨ 
Raag Bilaaval Gond Bhagat Namdev

https://www.searchgurbani.com/guru-granth-sahib/ang/875

 

ਹਿੰਦੂ ਮੂਲੇ ਭੂਲੇ ਅਖੁਟੀ ਜਾਂਹੀ ॥

Hindhoo Moolae Bhoolae Akhuttee Jaanhee ||

The Hindus have erred from the start; they are going the wrong way.

ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ ਵਾਰ (ਮਃ ੪) (੨੦) ਸ. (੧) ੨:੧ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੫੫੬ ਪੰ. ੯ 
Raag Bihaagrhaa Guru Nanak Dev

 

 

 

Why did you miss out this? 

 

ਅਲਹ ਰਾਮ ਕੇ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਰਾਨ ॥੪॥

 

Aleh Raam Kae Pindd Paraan ||4||

 

My body and breath of life belong to Allah - to Raam - the God of both. ||4||

 

ਭੈਰਉ (ਮਃ ੫) (੩) ੪:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੧੩੬ ਪੰ. ੧੨ 

Raag Bhaira-o Guru Arjan Dev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2018 at 5:16 AM, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

OHH ! that evil 'Sikhism' vs the pious good'ol 'Sikhi' debate again. Changing names doesn't change anything man.

Agreed Singh Sabha and the passages of time have def changed sikhi , and we truly today are following a flavor of Sikhism perhaps quite different from 200 yrs ago. For one , raag vidya is NON EXISTENT ! I am surprised no one is speaking about that in this debate. Something so important that the entire SGGS is divided into passaged based on Raags and we have not an iota of what it is and how its to be sung ! As the classic joke among sikh circles goes, Harmonium is not old enough .So first step in reviving ancient gurmat sangeet. For that we might need help of non-sikh sources who actually know what Dhanasri is , What sorath is , What Ramkalee is and how they sing it and then try to transpose that music pattern onto gurbani . If it fits well on the shabads, you know you got it right ! 

Secondly , As many hindus themselves have said "Gurbani is an approximation of hindu vedantic thought" and to an extent they're correct.

Now if you go by this viewpoint , you will have to justify why you need a separate identity , since you're following the same tenets of Karma, Dharma, Rebirth , Three gunas (sato , rajo , tamo) and the 5-element body and the other nuances of Indic thought . So why don't we put you as a "sect" of Sanatan Dharam . You have any reply on that ?!!

There must be certain nuances of Sikhi matt and vedantic matt, ELSE I don't see a point as to why Sikhism exists as a separate religion. Now what those nuances are , you can ONLY tell after going through BOTH vedantic (10 mukhya upanishads) and gurbani (SGGS) thought process and compare their differences. 

EDIT ---

There are four mahavaaks from each of the 4 vedas that is the "juice" of the learning from that particular veda or the Upanishad actually linked to that veda .

RigVed : "Prajnanam Brahm" (Intellect is Brahm)

YajurVed : "Aham Brahmasmi" (I am Brahm)

SamVed : "Tat tvam asi" (you are that) (same stuff as "mann tu jot saroop hai")

AtharvaVed : "Ayam Atma Brahm" (the atma is brahm)

So apparently this is juice of all vedic thoughts churned over 3000 yr period ! 

One ashtapadi of Sukhmani sahib  has more gyaan than this ! 

Raag vidya and gurbani sangeet traditions are being promoted look into the work of bhai baldeep singh ji and the Anad foundation 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2018 at 3:54 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Why did you miss out this? 

 

ਅਲਹ ਰਾਮ ਕੇ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਰਾਨ ॥੪॥

 

Aleh Raam Kae Pindd Paraan ||4||

 

My body and breath of life belong to Allah - to Raam - the God of both. ||4||

 

ਭੈਰਉ (ਮਃ ੫) (੩) ੪:੨ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੧੩੬ ਪੰ. ੧੨ 

Raag Bhaira-o Guru Arjan Dev

What point are  you trying to make? 

Do you think that Gurbani contradicts itself?

On the one hand it says that we are not Hindus (or Muslims).

Given the fact that that line says "my body and breath belong to Allah and Raam", do you think that that means that, here, Allah and Ram are two distinct gods, and they hold a 50-50 percent stake in your body and breath?

All that the line means is that Guru ji is saying that there's only one God, call him Allah or Ram, whatever. And he owns my body and breath.

In no sense does the line negate the earlier line that we are neither Muslims or Hindus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ranveer

Hinduism is the only ancient civilization still in existence till this day..dharma regardless of Hindu,Buddhist or sikh is growing,the west have adopted the methods & teachings of eating healthy and doing daily yoga. At the end of the day whatever anyone says it's about self experience and if that works for the betterment of that individual than who I'm I to say its wrong, Vedas (Upanishads) has done so much great in the world and the knowledge is superior that it's having a strong effect on people even now..schools are teaching children Sanskrit which is crucial coz most translation in English were corrupted by the west people like max muller..If anyone's ancestors were from sindh than you're a Hindu by geography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2018 at 7:57 AM, BhForce said:

What point are  you trying to make? 

Do you think that Gurbani contradicts itself?

On the one hand it says that we are not Hindus (or Muslims).

Given the fact that that line says "my body and breath belong to Allah and Raam", do you think that that means that, here, Allah and Ram are two distinct gods, and they hold a 50-50 percent stake in your body and breath?

All that the line means is that Guru ji is saying that there's only one God, call him Allah or Ram, whatever. And he owns my body and breath.

In no sense does the line negate the earlier line that we are neither Muslims or Hindus.

I don't think gurbani contradicts itself at all.. I think you contradicted yourself and was selective in your choice of quotes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was having a think about the relationship between  Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism Buddhism the other day and I think there is nothing wrong if someone of Hindu faith considers themselves Dhamic and not be labelled as Hindu as Hinduism is an open book faith. there is no set worship, rule book, it is only the RSS that has come up with all this bullcrap which has somewhat turned Hinduism into a conventional religion when its clearly not.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2018 at 6:40 PM, Guest Ranveer said:

Hinduism is the only ancient civilization still in existence till this day..dharma regardless of Hindu,Buddhist or sikh is growing,the west have adopted the methods & teachings of eating healthy and doing daily yoga. At the end of the day whatever anyone says it's about self experience and if that works for the betterment of that individual than who I'm I to say its wrong, Vedas (Upanishads) has done so much great in the world and the knowledge is superior that it's having a strong effect on people even now..schools are teaching children Sanskrit which is crucial coz most translation in English were corrupted by the west people like max muller..If anyone's ancestors were from sindh than you're a Hindu by geography.

not true aboriginal dharam still exists and is followed to this day much older than vedas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2018 at 7:55 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I don't think gurbani contradicts itself at all.. I think you contradicted yourself and was selective in your choice of quotes 

Again, you fail to post what you think the line means.

Do you seriously agree with the translation posted? That's meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2018 at 8:57 AM, BhForce said:

What point are  you trying to make? 

Do you think that Gurbani contradicts itself?

On the one hand it says that we are not Hindus (or Muslims).

Given the fact that that line says "my body and breath belong to Allah and Raam", do you think that that means that, here, Allah and Ram are two distinct gods, and they hold a 50-50 percent stake in your body and breath?

All that the line means is that Guru ji is saying that there's only one God, call him Allah or Ram, whatever. And he owns my body and breath.

In no sense does the line negate the earlier line that we are neither Muslims or Hindus.

Allah is literal 'the most high/exalted  ' and Ram is not Ram Chander son of king Dasarath but Rameiya 'the One who is initmately intermingled/connected to the Creation' so superficial reading of Gurbani is not going to cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guru Nanak created Sikh in order to establish a unique religion. Do Hindus do Langar? Maybe some but with limitations. Guru Ji's Langar? All Gurudwaras for everyone no matter caste, creed n religion.

Do Hindus cover heads? Does the scriptures encourage "Believe in one God?" Or "Believe in me, for I am Krishna?" Does it recommend Deswand or seva of Brahmins n Pundits??

Think about it this way, Ram Ji opens up Costa coffee and establishes rules. Guru Nanak Ji approaches Ram Ji and says "I'd like to open a Franchise of Costa..." Then a customer approaches Guru Nanak's Costa, "Americano, please".    . "Sorry. Ram Ji's Costa don't do Americano so I don't neither..."

If you want newer things u must establish your own identity. Rules, regulations n services will be different. Saying Sikhs are under Hindu's wing is like walking into Costa n asking for Starbuck Special coffee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jkvlondon said:
On 11/15/2018 at 11:57 PM, BhForce said:

What point are  you trying to make? 

Do you think that Gurbani contradicts itself?

On the one hand it says that we are not Hindus (or Muslims).

Given the fact that that line says "my body and breath belong to Allah and Raam", do you think that that means that, here, Allah and Ram are two distinct gods, and they hold a 50-50 percent stake in your body and breath?

All that the line means is that Guru ji is saying that there's only one God, call him Allah or Ram, whatever. And he owns my body and breath.

In no sense does the line negate the earlier line that we are neither Muslims or Hindus.

Allah is literal 'the most high/exalted  ' and Ram is not Ram Chander son of king Dasarath but Rameiya 'the One who is initmately intermingled/connected to the Creation' so superficial reading of Gurbani is not going to cut it

Sure, I'd be willing to accept what you said as a meaningful interpretation of the line.

The problem is the literal translation quoted by @Sukhvirk1976 , which seems to imply that the writer of the Shabad is beholden to two different entities, Allah and Ram (as normally defined). And, secondly, that that somehow negates what I quoted about "Na hum Hindu na Musalman". As if we're supposed to believe in both Allah and Ram (traditionally defined) and therefore we are both Hindu and Muslim. Nutty.

I asked Sukhvirk to give his own interpretation, but he has failed to reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anaah Kaanah
53 minutes ago, BhForce said:

I asked Sukhvirk to give his own interpretation, but he has failed to reply.

Those that are Islamophiles can hardly be expected to admit such truths.

It's bizarre why so many act as apologists for the perpetrators of Genocide.

The British Genocide of Sikhs is hardly ever mentioned by most Sikhs nowadays.

The Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs is hardly mentioned by Sikhs either despite 20% of the Sikh population being killed there.

Obviously the minority that is historically aware does recognise the Vada Ghallughara in which Muslims killed 90% of Sikhs.

However, after 1977 (a mere 30years after 1947) to all intents and purposes the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs was forgotten.

Similarly, a great many people forgot the devastation and almost 100year Genocide inflicted by the East India Company and British Empire upon Sikhs and subsequently enlisted with them for purely financial gain similar to nominal Sikhs enlisting with Punjab Police between 1985-1995. Obviously greater numbers of Muslim Punjabi's and Hindu's generally fought for the British (with Sikhs only being a small minority of their forces) but that there are thousands of pounds wasted by UK Sikhs on statues (that ought to have been 100% funded by the Government) whilst Sikh children in Punjab go hungry, go uneducated and die for lack of health treatment is an utter disgrace. Even the original Nihangs of Akali Phula Singh Ji's time were neutered by the British after 1849 into a degenerate bunch of drug takers that fought on behalf of the Hindu Mahants during the Gurdwara Reform Movement, for the 1897 Sodhak Committee and working against the Panth on behalf of Indira Gandhi in 1984. 

The number of Sikhs killed in the British Genocide of Sikhs actually exceeds anything Congress and Indira Gandhi inflicted.

As for 1984 it's crystal clear that the majority do not remember it today. If the British Genocide of Sikhs and the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs which inflicted far far worse casualties (particularly as a higher percentage of the smaller Sikh population back in those times) were so easily and quickly forgotten then it's hardly any surprise. But that Panj Piare in every pind along with their allies are not launching a dharam yudh against female infanticide, the drugs menace, illiteracy, poverty, cancer, environmental disaster, matrimonial apartheid and failing to unite every pind under a single united Gurdwara is the worst aspect of 1984 being forgotten about.

Meaningless slogans year after year in the Diaspora which achieve nothing and take our eyes off the mainly self-inflicted silent Genocide that we are a party to are becoming part of the problem. The Pakistani's have received tens of billions of development aid from the British Government since 1984.

Yet Sikhs in the UK have not made any concrete efforts to demand that an equal number of billions be invested by the UK into helping poor Sikhs in Punjab and across India as part of a long awaited yet to be received apology for the UK Government's collusion with Indira Gandhi and Congress in the 1980's with Sikh taxpayers money.

 

White people who are not racist are not our enemy. We need to enlist more and more of them like GurjantGnostic as allies.

Similarly ordinary Hindu's who can be tomorrow's sehajdhari and potential Amritdhari Sikhs are not part of the problem.

We need to incorporate these so-called falsely classified Hindu's (defined as so by RSS) as new members of the Sikh Panth.

But before that, if we can't get our own house in order ourselves (ie one Gurdwara per pind only for starters) then continued Sikh apathy towards the Congress Genocide of Sikhs, the Pakistani Genocide of Sikhs and the British Genocide of Sikhs as well as earlier (and far more devastating in percentage terms) Holocausts inflicted upon the Sikh Qaum by Muslims are par for the course.

Seriously what kind of "Sikh" enjoys holidays to Pakistan or Arabia (and flies on Muslim airlines) given what they think of Sikhs!?

What kind of community tolerates female infanticide and matrimonial apartheid given what happened to our Qaum in 1984!?

The answer is a community that is heading towards minority status in east Punjab in a few years unless we start to do something about it very fast by welcoming as much new blood into Sikh Panth as possible regardless of whether that new blood is Hindu Punjabi, Bihari, Tamil, white, black or even from the same background as Guru ka Sikh Bhai Mardana Ji's parents.

We must grow the numbers of the Sikh Panth and educate our younger generations or else (perish)!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BhForce said:

Sure, I'd be willing to accept what you said as a meaningful interpretation of the line.

The problem is the literal translation quoted by @Sukhvirk1976 , which seems to imply that the writer of the Shabad is beholden to two different entities, Allah and Ram (as normally defined). And, secondly, that that somehow negates what I quoted about "Na hum Hindu na Musalman". As if we're supposed to believe in both Allah and Ram (traditionally defined) and therefore we are both Hindu and Muslim. Nutty.

I asked Sukhvirk to give his own interpretation, but he has failed to reply.

Hi there.. Firstly my original response to you was really quite specific.. By raising the question about your omission of the very next line of the shabd I was highlighting how problematic your assertion is. You decontextualised the shabd it would be very easy for someone who doesn't know the complexity and sophistication of gurbani to see your views as dogmatic..

Note the structure of the bani, and the use of identity labels used in the first verse but transcendental terms used in the second.. I am neither Hindu nor Muslim.. 

And then as a counterpoint uses terms from each traditions cosmology Allah raam my body and soul. The very core of nondualism. That if you obsess over one approach over another you end up missing the point. Both philosophical traditions have merit but because identity politics and blind following, it is a critique of blind following.. 

Interestingly your next quote actually reaffirms that.. Hindu is blind, turkoo (or Muslim) has one eye the core of nondualism. That all and one are what makes the whole.. The 'Hindu' is blind because he is blinded by the scope of avatars and thinks them to be gods rather than metaphorical expression of characteristics of akaal. The Muslim has one eye because he doesn't recognise the pluralistic nature of akaal.. Is dogmatic, places importance in a simplistic understanding where he sees avatars as polytheism.. Both are wedded to identity rather than actually understanding.. That like body and soul (duality which are symbiotic) make up the whole which is advaita.. 

I categorically reject that the shabd suggests it is beholden to two entities.. I believe it is both revelatory and a warning to us about not getting bogged down in identity politics.. Otherwise we will become blind or myopic 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
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...



×

Important Information

Terms of Use