Why are we not Hindus?

[harsharan000]

On 10/27/2018 at 4:43 PM, Guest Bhujang said:

It's clear that Sikhi is very different from Islam. However, same cannot be argued for Hinduism. Sikhi shares a lot with it; reincarnation, concept of Guru-student, mukti etc. Given that Hinduism encompasses various differing traditions, Sikhi can be accepted as a tradition within the wider Hindu dharma. It technically is and has been, until the British-funded Singh Sabha

Guest Bhujang,

the basis of any true dharam is basically same  all have a common ground to an extent , but, it is the ignorant blind people who distort the teachings to the level of the highest peak of their stupidity, thus they want  segregation and want to convert others to their so called religion and  in name of that  distorted religion, they start provoking, quarreling, and killing, including terrorism on others.

This is more like worshipping the devil himself, for making out beasts of human beings. Just sickening

Any faith, any dharam, any religion, if honest, its outcome has natural virtues, such as compassion,  tolerance, forgiveness, benevolance for all humanity irrespectively of race, creed, color or nationality.

While it may seem to some, hinduism is similar to sikhee, or sikhee a part of wider hinduism.... That s technically wrong.

As said before, we may share common ground in terms of goodness to an extent, for that is the base of any faith, otherwise it is  Kal/Shaitan worship.

The difference mainly between them is that, while one places its  worship and faith in multiplicty/ variety, and  its goal is very much and at most within the realms of Maya,  and though some of our sikh brothers and sisters have partly belief in these deities as forms of Wahiguru.

I will not blame them, as that is what is in their present consciouss level.

On the other hand, in sikhee, our devotion and love is only for  IKO,  Paarbraham Wahiguru Akal Purukh, the only changeless and permanent reality since Aad Jugad.

Since the very begining when there was nothing, He Akal Purukh was  absorbed in Him, in His Shabad form.

Later on, when creation took place, and with the aid of Maya, all these varities of deities, gods, trinities,devtays, etc appeared, which were created to keep running the creation, for whatever reason it maybe , and so people started taking them as ultimate reality impressed by their fantastic forms and powers.

While on the other hand, Wahiguru Akal Purukh came at our human level, as normal humble human beings, without any such impressing bodies or powers, and the best thing is, they were Akal Purukh Himself, yet unlike the avatars of gods, they never allowed any worship of themselves as ultimate Truth, but they told us to only give our love and devotion, to the real Truth of Satnam.

That is why in the Bani it says: Ik Oankar Satnam , Satgur parsad jap.  Which means, there is only one Lord God, Satnam/Wahiguru Akal Purukh, who is realized by His grace, when we do the jaap of His Nam.

Other main distinction is, while their devotion is outward directed there where is Maya, Guru Jee directs our love, and devotion, there where He is, means within ourselves, there where He is permanently, and in due time reach His abode of Sach Khand, beyond all paraphernalia creation of dizziling  Maya, with its variety and multiplicity.

So as per the title of this thread, why are we not hindus?

The answer is: why should we be?

Is not sikhee the most truest to the ultimate reality?

Then why take less, if we can have the best?

Sikhee iif followed faithfully,is simple and best, for it is a direct highway, to the only realty and Truth: Wahiguru Akal Purukh.

Stay blessed.

Sat Sree Akal.

[GuestKaur2]

On 10/27/2018 at 4:43 PM, Guest Bhujang said:

It's clear that Sikhi is very different from Islam. However, same cannot be argued for Hinduism. Sikhi shares a lot with it; reincarnation, concept of Guru-student, mukti etc. Given that Hinduism encompasses various differing traditions, Sikhi can be accepted as a tradition within the wider Hindu dharma. It technically is and has been, until the British-funded Singh Sabha

The truth does not have to be subjected to one religion. Hinduism does have some truth in it which is what is mentioned in Sikhi eg: reincarnation, mukhti etc. However,  Sikhi is the full truth. Sikhi is about faith, not just worshipping idols. Sikhi starts from within like a seed and the more bhagti and seva we do, the more it blossoms and grows till the fragrance of Sikhi and pyaar is spread within our heart. Sikhi teaches us about righteousness and love and the equality of humanity, whereas Hindu's have been separated by caste. In Sikhi we see no difference between a king and a beggar, a white person and a black person, or a child and an adult. We are all equal and loved by Guru Ji the same.

[Guest guest]

On 10/31/2018 at 3:18 PM, S1ngh said:

You make no sense. Let's talk about Babri Masjid, shall we? What are your opinions on that case?

I'm Sikh not Hindu.  So your rebuttal is what makes no sense.

Babri Masjid isnt even an appropriate analogy.  The claim is that a masjid was built by Aurangzeb etc over a Ram mandir.  How is that the same thing?  In my opinion, since original Hindu dharma believes in ahimsa, they should have just left it as God's will and made a new mandir in the nearest suitable place.  And they should have peacefully come to some agreement with the muslims there, maybe funded a masjid somewhere else for them.  

But like I said I'm not Hindu, so it's not my concern.

[Guest guest]

9 hours ago, BhForce said:

1. Why don't you try refuting anything I said? You have no answer, that's why.

2. "OK to grab these places by force?" 

Are you kidding me? Did the mahants have a title deed in their name written by Guru Raam Daas ji, who bought the area of Amritsar by paying landowners of 3 surrounding villages?

3. If someone came and started living in your house, do you think it would be horrible for you to come back?

4. I notice that you conveniently dropped the ridiculous claim that the Singh Sabha was created by the British. By asking your question, you have implicitly accepted that the Singh Sahba was not pro-British and vice versa.

5. "Guru Gobind Singh never allowed sikhs to grab Harimandir Sahib or the Adi Granth by force."

What are you even talking about? First of all, if you were a Sikh, you'd say "ji", not just "Guru Gobind Singh".

Secondly, do you even know that Guru Gobind Singh ji sent Bhai Mani Singh ji to take possession of the Harimander Sahib?

6. "Stealing someones property by force is theft and a sin."

Good that you admit that. So, tell us, how did the Mahants come into possession of the Gurdwaras? Like you say, stealing property is a sin.

The fact is that Gurdwaras are the property of the Guru. The personal property of the Gurus was passed on to their descendants. The money that the Sangat provided for Guru's works was separate, and was passed on to the next Guru, not to the Guru's sons. After Guru Gobind Singh ji, the Guruship is with Guru Granth Sahib and the Khalsa Panth.

So now do you understand why the Panth is entitled to its Gurdwaras?

 

Why don't you go back to RSS headquarters and tell them that they didn't prepare you enough.

Does SGGS add 'ji' everytime it refers to a Guru's name?  This is English, not Hindi (you're following Hindi ettiquette yet you call me RSS?).  50 years ago everyone was supposed to say 'Shri' before and 'Dev' after each Guru's name.  Now the tendency is to add the epithet 'Sahib'. Why don't you add those epithets if you a such a 'real' sikh?

It you who are not answering my points.  Bhai Mani Singh was a scholar not an army general.  Guru Gobind Singh did not want these things taken by force.  Didn't he demand the Adi Granth be given back after it was taken by force?

If you what to talk about Khalsa panth maybe you should go study the basics of 'dharma' (right and wrong /morality) that they are meant to adhere to.  Sikhism is spiritual and not concerned with 'land disputes'.  Are you interested in God or paise?

To use your analogy-  if it was my land I would use peaceful means to get it back.  I would not send a mob to exhort it back with intimidation.  However if it was land from 500 years ago back where a Guru/Saint lived, what claim could I have to it?

 

[scali]

Thousands of Sikhs killed in 84 riots by Hindu mobs after Indra death.

No one killed after Rajiv Gandhi killed by Hindus

It’s quiet clear. Yet trolls still being this up.

 

[Punjabiwolves]

On 10/28/2018 at 9:00 PM, puzzled said:

Lingayats want to break away from Hinduism and be recognized as a separate religion, but don't think the government is letting them.   

I have not heard of them before. There are also Hindu's that worship Shiva only and then you have the Hara Khrisna movement which is different from other Hindu's. its hard to define Hinduism 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

On 10/27/2018 at 9:13 PM, Guest Bhujang said:

Sikhi can be accepted as a tradition within the wider Hindu dharma.

I smell a RSS troll who is trying to drive a wedge between hindu-sikh relationship .

Well the simple answer to your question is : "Because Sikhism emphasizes on Parbrahm solely whereas other hindu traditions don't! " 

In hinduism , parbrahm is like the background entirely missed by worship of lesser gods : brahma, vishnu, shiva, ganesha , devi mata, etc etc etc WHEREAS in Sikhism Parbrahm is the only adorable centre-of-attention deity . This fact would have been easily known to you if you read even one baani like Sukhmani sahib . And greatness of sikh gurus would have been obvious to you , but since you're a RSS undercover whose aim to destroy Sikhism , its no surprise you don't know or pretend to know above stated facts ! 

Quote

It technically is and has been, until the British-funded Singh Sabha

You just confirmed you're a RSS brahmin agent ! Ofcourse Singh Sabha movement is an evil in your eyes BECAUSE IT WAS THIS MOVEMENT led by sikh intellectuals that saved Sikhism from dissolving into the Hinduism . We Sikhs owe our existence today to Singh Sabha , so no wonder you RSS and your ilks hate Singh Sabha movement so much .

 

What a shame, you're trying to drive a wedge between hindus and sikhs ! 

Thank god for the abrahamics in india. They're a buffer and a distraction for you . 

 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

Dharmic brotherhood is mostly a farce ! 

They say Abrahamics fight amongst each other despite having common  descendence from Abraham via his 2 sons : isaac [jews/chrisians] and ishmael [muslims] 

Well if dharmic brotherhood was real , why were the buddhist  monks butchered 1500 yrs ago by brahmin state rulers of Shunga dynasty and Gupta dynasty . and their monasteries destroyed. Why Buddhism is next to no presence in india while in neighboring countries its flourishing and majority. 

Why jain temples in south were ransacked and converted to hindu temples. Theres evidence of this happening . 

If they couldn't show brotherly , we're-from-the-same-roots love to jainis and buddhis , then why trust them to shower that love on us ??!!!

And no surprise they even claim "Harmandir sahib" as "Vishnu temple" now . 

Honestly I can't trust ! 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

On 10/29/2018 at 10:20 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

 

 

 

Please don't quote such gurbaani which most don't have the intellect or audacity to digest ! 

Quoting this does more harm than good ! To understand baani like these one needs a certain level of maturity 

[Guest guest]

On 10/31/2018 at 3:18 PM, S1ngh said:

You make no sense. Let's talk about Babri Masjid, shall we? What are your opinions on that case?

i'm not a hindu, but even Babri Masjid is not the same thing.

the claim of Babri Masjid is that another religion built its worship place over a Hindu temple.  thats not the same thing as we are discussing.