Answering a muslim

[Big_Tera]

So a muslim made a response to the 13 reasons for sikhism by jaswinder singh from sikhs.com

The main point the muslim makes is that in Sikhism we claim  not look down at non sikhs or see them as inferior(non believers) We also say that all faiths lead to God. But How can this be when we look at things pratically. For instance. Sikhs believe in the concept of rebirth. Muslim believe in heaven and hell. 

What will apply to the muslim heaven and hell or rebirth? there can only be one truth. For instance the muslim will essentially be punished with rebirth by waheguru and not the muslim god allah. there is only one God. So in all muslims will essentially be governed by waheguru and not allah. so waheguru sees non sikhs as inferior in a way. if we believe all religions lead to god then that must mean there are 6 or 7 Gods. 

https://www.sikhs.org/art4.htm = 13 reasons for sikhism.

below is responce from a muslim against these 13 reasons. 

 

"1. There is black; there is white - there is truth; there is falsehood (the absence of truth). People get judged according to the truth by Waheguru, so though what you say sounds nice to hear, in practicality people who disbelieve in Waheguru and act on falsehood will be punished with rebirth. Therefore they are inferior in the eyes of God even if you feel the word inferior sounds too harsh.

The fact that Sikhs do not try to spread the message of Sikhi in any meaningful way (beyond sporadic interfaith dialogue meetics or small groups like Basics of Sikhi) is an argument against Sikhi rather than for it. Sikhi is allegedly meant to be the complete truth from God, and the truth is meant to benefit people; rather the religion is largely ethnocentrically limited to the Punjabi diaspora, so the truth remains locked away amongst a community which is slowly losing its religiosity (like the rest of the world religious communities), but it is not replenishing its numbers with any significant number of new converts. The religion won't die out any time in the next 100 years, but liberal secularism will render the majority of the population outside of India into hollow believers with no real grounding in belief, instead simply being heritage.


2. Though Sikhi espouses equality, there are some things I would comment on this.
(A) Men and women have spiritual equality in other religions too. In terms of wordly rights, it is impractical to have *absolute* equality between men and women as men and women are biologically different and generally speaking have different natural inclinations e.g. men are typicallyfirmer and more rational (that is not to say women are irrational), and women are typically more creative and softer. Subsequently, more men are in the army (as it should be), for example, as they are physically more capable. Even if these exceptions are few, they are exceptions nonetheless, demonstrating that absolute equality is impractical if not impossible.
(B) In Sikh history, polygamy has been allowed (even during the Guru's time), and though there is a difference of opinion between Sikh historians, there is credible evidence suggesting that a couple of the Gurus had more than one wife. Admittedly this has never been a widespread practice in the Sikh community in general, though Jagraj from Basics of Sikhi said that it was practiced during times of war, but nonetheless I have not encountered anyone suggesting it is okay for women to marry multiple husbands.


3. It may have been the case early on in the path of Guru Nanak, but after successive Gurus and reaching a peak with Guru Gobind Singh, Sikhi evolved from a spiritual path into an organised religion and subsequently developed loads of rituals - air dusting of the Granth, keeping Kesh, dipping a Kirpan in the Prashad, taking shoes off, doing the rounds during Anand Karaj, bowing to the Granth, wearing a Kara, wearing special Kacheh, taking Amrit etc. You may say all of these have practical benefits, but that would be special pleading - the rest of us could explain the spiritual and practical significances of our rituals e.g. the direction of prayer and slaughtering in the name of God (which many Sikhs do not seem to understand properly) just as you would, yet you call them valueless.

4. This point is partially covered by my previous points, so please refer to them. 
If God is not the head of a single religion, and Sikhs do not spread the 'complete truth' that Sikhi is branded as, there is no need for Sikhi - Muslims just need to continue being Muslims sincerely, Jews being Jews sincerely, etc, then we will all meet God with clean hearts. The religion is therefore invalidated and Sikhs are absolved of any duty to encourage righteousness.

5. The concept of reincarnation is problematic for Sikhi. The Granth is meant to be the perfected book of God but it contains antithetical concepts such as Hell (in the Saloks of Farid) - and Farid believed in Hell literally as a Muslim. Even though as a Sikh you can interpret Hell metaphorically in order to reconcile it with reincarnation, this only dodges the fact that Farid's intention was for it to be meant literally, therefore the Granth contains things that it does not even teach i.e. a literal Hell with fire and damnation. It is like planting a poisenous tree in your orchard and plucking and selling its poisenous fruit because it looks nice rather than because it is inherently beneficial to one's wellbeing."

[MisterrSingh]

Ask the religious heavyweights on the forum. They're lions when interacting with other Sikhs but strangely lose their voice when it comes to taking on the likes of Muslims. 

[RajKaregaKhalsa1]

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

We also say that all faiths lead to God

All faiths can lead to God. Maharaaj says that naam will take you to Waheguru ji's lotus feet. The Christians have hallowed be thy name, the Muslims have the 99 names of Allah but all have forgotten the teaching on Naam.

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

So in all muslims will essentially be governed by waheguru and not allah. so waheguru sees non sikhs as inferior in a way. if we believe all religions lead to god then that must mean there are 6 or 7 Gods. 

If we all say that God is the uncreated creator there can only be one. Allah is just another name for Waheguru ji.

 

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

Therefore they are inferior in the eyes of God even if you feel the word inferior sounds too harsh.

 

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

There is black; there is white - there is truth; there is falsehood (the absence of truth). People get judged according to the truth by Waheguru, so though what you say sounds nice to hear, in practicality people who disbelieve in Waheguru and act on falsehood will be punished with rebirth. Therefore they are inferior in the eyes of God even if you feel the word inferior sounds too harsh

What point is the guy trying to make. Do we give less langar to someone just because their atheist? Obviously we know that they are lost and need to be shown the way. The only reason people are atheist nowadays, even though there is so much extraordinary evidence for Waheguru ji, is because they want to act in there sinful ways. So if they are being ignorant and acting in ego obviously Waheguru will favour that less so we need to help them. And by the way God will still love anyone although he favours the Bhagats because they have listened to him.

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

The fact that Sikhs do not try to spread the message of Sikhi in any meaningful way (beyond sporadic interfaith dialogue meetics or small groups like Basics of Sikhi) is an argument against Sikhi rather than for it. Sikhi is allegedly meant to be the complete truth from God, and the truth is meant to benefit people; rather the religion is largely ethnocentrically limited to the Punjabi diaspora, so the truth remains locked away amongst a community which is slowly losing its religiosity (like the rest of the world religious communities), but it is not replenishing its numbers with any significant number of new converts. The religion won't die out any time in the next 100 years, but liberal secularism will render the majority of the population outside of India into hollow believers with no real grounding in belief, instead simply being heritage.

If we have been persecuted, gone through our own holocausts when we were down to no man, how is that our fault? Obviously now we should be trying to preach and whatever you said about liberal secularist taking over is wrong. Maharaj says Raj Karega Khalsa. Over the world not just Punjab, Sikhi is growing day by day.

1 hour ago, Big_Tera said:

3. It may have been the case early on in the path of Guru Nanak, but after successive Gurus and reaching a peak with Guru Gobind Singh, Sikhi evolved from a spiritual path into an organised religion and subsequently developed loads of rituals - air dusting of the Granth, keeping Kesh, dipping a Kirpan in the Prashad, taking shoes off, doing the rounds during Anand Karaj, bowing to the Granth, wearing a Kara, wearing special Kacheh, taking Amrit etc. You may say all of these have practical benefits, but that would be special pleading - the rest of us could explain the spiritual and practical significances of our rituals e.g. the direction of prayer and slaughtering in the name of God (which many Sikhs do not seem to understand properly) just as you would, yet you call them valueless.

Okay first of all, Guru Nanak Dev ji worships the one God and says Shabad is Guru. So making sure our Guru is clean by doing Chaur Sahib is doing the utmost respect to our Guru so the Saroop doesn't get dirty. Keeping Kesh is not a ritual, it is to have a spiritual benefit (all Guru Sahib's kept their hair), and even Muhammed kept his hair. Even Jesus kept his hair. This is not a ritual, Kesh is a gift

There is no point of making this post even longer, it is clear by now that this Muslim hasn't done his homework!

[dallysingh101]

1 hour ago, MisterrSingh said:

Ask the religious heavyweights on the forum. They're lions when interacting with other Sikhs but strangely lose their voice when it comes to taking on the likes of Muslims. 

We've got religious heavyweights on the forum? 

[MisterrSingh]

29 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

We've got religious heavyweights on the forum? 

Self-styled.

[GuestKaur2]

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

For instance. Sikhs believe in the concept of rebirth. Muslim believe in heaven and hell. 

Well there are realms of heavens and hells, not just one. Sikhi believes in eternal life with Vaheguru - is this not heaven? Muslims believe in a different type of heaven, one where people can enjoy themselves and do whatever they want as a result of praying 5 times a day etc. So no religion is wrong in the sense that it does teach people to worship God, whether that be Vaheguru or Allah. They are both the same. 

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

Therefore they are inferior in the eyes of God even if you feel the word inferior sounds too harsh.

Inferior is the wrong word to use. How can a parent find one of His childen inferior to the other? Vaheguru is benevolent and gives an equal opportunity to everyone to merge with Him. Whether you are a Sikh or a Muslim, we are all dear to Vaheguru.

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

Sikhi is allegedly meant to be the complete truth from God, and the truth is meant to benefit people; rather the religion is largely ethnocentrically limited to the Punjabi diaspora, so the truth remains locked away amongst a community which is slowly losing its religiosity (like the rest of the world religious communities), but it is not replenishing its numbers with any significant number of new converts.

Sikhi is the complete truth from Vaheguru. I don't agree with the fact that Sikhi is limited to Punjabi diaspora because there are lots of people converting to Sikhi from all types of backgrounds. So this statement is not true. Yes the number of people converting to Sikhi is low (at the moment) but considering we are one of the youngest religions but the 5th largest in the world, we are not doing bad at all. The number of Sikhs WILL increase - even though it is happening slowly at the moment.

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

2. Though Sikhi espouses equality, there are some things I would comment on this.
(A) Men and women have spiritual equality in other religions too. In terms of wordly rights, it is impractical to have *absolute* equality between men and women as men and women are biologically different and generally speaking have different natural inclinations e.g. men are typicallyfirmer and more rational (that is not to say women are irrational), and women are typically more creative and softer. Subsequently, more men are in the army (as it should be), for example, as they are physically more capable. Even if these exceptions are few, they are exceptions nonetheless, demonstrating that absolute equality is impractical if not impossible.
(B) In Sikh history, polygamy has been allowed (even during the Guru's time), and though there is a difference of opinion between Sikh historians, there is credible evidence suggesting that a couple of the Gurus had more than one wife. Admittedly this has never been a widespread practice in the Sikh community in general, though Jagraj from Basics of Sikhi said that it was practiced during times of war, but nonetheless I have not encountered anyone suggesting it is okay for women to marry multiple husbands.

The truth is that, men and women will not have full equality because some people refuse to change their mindset on this. But Sikhi promotes the equality of men and women so this is proving that Guru Ji saw men and women as equal. This can be proven by Guru Ji stopping the practise of Sati. However yes, Guru Ji did respect the roles of men and women in life - Men went to war and women stayed at home to take care of family. However, when Mai Bhago went to the battlefield Guru Ji didn't stop her yet lovingly tied a dastar to her head and allowed her to fight.

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

3. It may have been the case early on in the path of Guru Nanak, but after successive Gurus and reaching a peak with Guru Gobind Singh, Sikhi evolved from a spiritual path into an organised religion and subsequently developed loads of rituals - air dusting of the Granth, keeping Kesh, dipping a Kirpan in the Prashad, taking shoes off, doing the rounds during Anand Karaj, bowing to the Granth, wearing a Kara, wearing special Kacheh, taking Amrit etc. You may say all of these have practical benefits, but that would be special pleading - the rest of us could explain the spiritual and practical significances of our rituals e.g. the direction of prayer and slaughtering in the name of God (which many Sikhs do not seem to understand properly) just as you would, yet you call them valueless.

None of these are rituals, these are another type of devotion, prayer and expressing our love for Vaheguru. This was done in Guru Ji's time so why wouldn't we do it? All of this is for respect and also for practical reasons. Just as you see the value of direction of prayer and slaughtering in the name of God we see the value of this which you would not understand the value of.

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

4. This point is partially covered by my previous points, so please refer to them. 
If God is not the head of a single religion, and Sikhs do not spread the 'complete truth' that Sikhi is branded as, there is no need for Sikhi - Muslims just need to continue being Muslims sincerely, Jews being Jews sincerely, etc, then we will all meet God with clean hearts. The religion is therefore invalidated and Sikhs are absolved of any duty to encourage righteousness.

When Sikhi was first founded - both Hindu's and Muslims were forgetting the essence of true religion so there was a need for Sikhi to be made. Sikhi promotes the belief in religion (whatever religion you are) as long as you cherish it in your heart and follow it lovingly.

10 hours ago, Big_Tera said:

5. The concept of reincarnation is problematic for Sikhi. The Granth is meant to be the perfected book of God but it contains antithetical concepts such as Hell (in the Saloks of Farid) - and Farid believed in Hell literally as a Muslim. Even though as a Sikh you can interpret Hell metaphorically in order to reconcile it with reincarnation, this only dodges the fact that Farid's intention was for it to be meant literally, therefore the Granth contains things that it does not even teach i.e. a literal Hell with fire and damnation. It is like planting a poisenous tree in your orchard and plucking and selling its poisenous fruit because it looks nice rather than because it is inherently beneficial to one's wellbeing."

Sikhi believes in realms of heaven of hell (as previously mentioned) so such places do exist and we may be put in such places for a short amount of time (if an individual has been really bad ie. murderers etc) before being put back into the 8.4 million life cycle. Sikhi believes that God is benevolent so how can a benevolent God let His child suffer in such a hell for the rest of eternity? Sikhi does make sense and everything is practical in Sikhi. Once we dedicate our life to Vaheguru religion does not matter. The main purpose is to ensure every human is enlightened and to bring lost individuals back onto the Path of God - whatever the religion may be, it doesn't matter. This is what Sikhi teaches us, to be a good person. And I am proud that I have such a great Guru who is incomparable to anyone else. I have immense love for Vaheguru and Guru Ji, I would be lost without Him.