Jump to content

Gurmat vs Evolution


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

Before the science fanatics start beating their drum. Too late already started. This tuck is from Gurbani 

ਲਖ ਚਉਰਾਸੀਹ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਘਟੈ ਨ ਵਧੈ ਉਤਾਹਿ ॥ ang 936

This line is saying 8.4 million joonis doesn't decrease or increase. 

Be careful here your PhD and science studies doesn't match up to Gurbani.   Don't turn into baba Ram Rai.  

kulbir Singh is not saying it is fixed.  This is Gurbani saying it is fixed. 

 

Doesn't matter because the gurbani tuk is about JOONS and the cycle.   The same cycle that you will have to go through unless you get naam pargat inside you.   It means that whether you tried to get naam and hear shabad, and failed miserably or whether you never attempted at all;  the chaurasi lak cycle is still the SAME.  The person that tried and failed isn't going to get less joons in his/her cycle.     That person's trying and failing is accounted for in his lekha and karams which he will carry with him throughout these same joons.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Honestly Kulbir Singh is half-read on evolution , or worse, has not even read it.

Secondly , lets come to spiritual point of view. 

Gurbani refers to the concept of Shiva-Shakti repeatedly . Shiva is consciousness (our mann) , Shakti is the matter/energy . Consciousness (mann) and matter (physical body) evolved together side by side all these billions of years. 

Thats why you see progressive levels of consciousness from plant level to humans . 

Quote

ਲਖ ਚਉਰਾਸੀਹ ਮੇਦਨੀ ਘਟੈ ਨ ਵਧੈ ਉਤਾਹਿ ॥

Entire group of species die , and new evolve to fill their niche. Dinosaurs are dead, no ??

Quote

Gurmat does not promote the idea that humans have evolved from Baandars (monkeys). Jo kichh paaiya so ika Vaar.

Thats a very gross interpretation of Gurbaani. It means infact the raw ingredients for an entire sequence of events to happen were put at once , then their was just play and interaction between elements and we see baani is true. The collective sum of elements on earth is same, its just chemical reactions between molecules that led to life and formation of cells. But that same elements are present. 

 

Those are some very good points. MAYA and creation, including us humans, are all about 5 tats(5 elements) It's explained in detail throughout gurbani.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RajKaregaKhalsa1 said:

 He is one of the people at Gurmat Bibek, you know the ones that make YouTube videos.

I respect them so much. Its sad they hold such unscientific opinions. It makes me loose faith in sikhs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

did you even read my response properly.

I said species die and are formed gradually. And as per current science estimates , there're around 8.7 million species which is close to 8.4 million joons. 

What was your reason for quoting the Gurbani tuk and then writing this

"Entire group of species die , and new evolve to fill their niche. Dinosaurs are dead, no ??"

In this post now you have equated the word species to joons. So according to Gurbani does the word joons mean species or did your over zealous science reading get the best of you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Wicked Warrior said:

Kulbir Singh states there’s 8.4m species and that this is fixed. He states there can be no new forms of life.

Kulbir says:

"8.4 million life forms (life forms or Joonis are not same as species) and this has been the truth from the beginning."

clearly he does not define joons or life forms as species. Yet you misunderstood him anyway.  Time to start smelling some coffee beans to wake up that mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Akalifauj said:

Kulbir says:

"8.4 million life forms (life forms or Joonis are not same as species) and this has been the truth from the beginning."

clearly he does not define joons or life forms as species. Yet you misunderstood him anyway.  Time to start smelling some coffee beans to wake up that mind.

It starts off as 8.4m life forms and then talks about how they can’t change from one life form to another. 

He cannot refer to the number of individual “life forms” given that there are 7.7 billion human life forms alone. 

So what else is he referring to? What counts in this 8.4m “life forms”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wicked Warrior said:

It starts off as 8.4m life forms and then talks about how they can’t change from one life form to another. 

He cannot refer to the number of individual “life forms” given that there are 7.7 billion human life forms alone. 

So what else is he referring to? What counts in this 8.4m “life forms”?

He is talking about 8.4 million life forms.  Not individual life forms.  Again you have not understood it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I was searching igurbani.com which gives correct pronunciation of Gurbani. I can’t remember all of it at once. I guess it relies on more practice, like more Sehaj Paths. The meaning becomes clearer. I have noticed slight variants in it. This could be because it’s written in old Punjabi.  
    • Veer Manpreet Singh, a lay preacher, claims that -Sikhs aren't supposed to worship Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We are only supposed to worship God as is written in Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We only "revere" Guru Granth Sahib ji.     He says a lot of other things in this video, some are good refutations of Hindu superstitions, but the reformers often go too far. Anyways, what he is saying about not worshipping Guru Granth Sahib ji is totally wrong. The reason is Guru Granth Sahib ji is Guru. Guru is Satguru. Satguru is God. We worship God. Therefore, we also worship Satguru (Guru Granth Sahib ji).   There are innumerable verses in Gurbani equating God and Guru. ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ The Guru is the Supreme Lord and the Transcendent Master. The Guru floats (saves) the drowning one. p49   ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ Know the Guru and God as One. p864   ਗੁਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਲਿ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਖੋਜਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡੁ ॥ There is no one at par with the Guru. I have searched and seen the whole universe. p49 (If the Guru is the greatest in the whole universe, shouldn't we worship the Guru?)   I'd like to ask Manpreet Singh what is worship? Any reasonable definition would include obeisance, remembrance, and praise. Those are exactly the same things Gurbani says to do regarding Guru! Remembrance and obeisance: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਸਦ ਸਦਾ ਸਮ੍ਹਾਰੇ ॥ Ever, ever, I think of the True Guru, ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਕੇਸ ਸੰਗਿ ਝਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ and the Guru's feet I brush with my head's hair. p387   Praise: ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਆਪਿ ॥ The Guru himself is the transcendent Lord and the supreme master. ਆਠ ਪਹਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਜਾਪਿ ॥੪॥੧੬॥੬੭॥ Throughout the eight watches of the day, O Nanak meditate thou on the Guru. p387   In fact, Gurbani says the way to find God is to worship (puja) of Guru: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਧੋਇ ਧੋਇ ਪੂਜਹੁ ਇਨ ਬਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਲਹੁ ਰੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Washing and bathing the True Guru's feet, worship thou them. In this way thou shall obtain my Lord Master. Pause. p1118   Could it be any clearer that we are to worship Guru ji?
    • Bro, reciting a shorter Chaupai Sahib is hardly "anti-Dasam". It's fine to argue that the longer Chaupai is more traditional, but the short one isn't anti-Dasam. That's like claiming shorter Rehras is anti-Guru Granth Sahib ji just because there are fewer selections from Guru Granth Sahib. It might not be traditional, but it's not anti-Guru Granth Sahib. I prefer the longer versions, but let's not exaggerate. Every tradition has a slightly different Rehras version. Nanaksar vs Taksal vs Nihangs and so on. The basic template for Rehras is at the beginning of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Later, Chaupai Sahib was added and Anand Sahib always follows as the end of a process. Then some sangats added more saloks to start Rehras and others were added at the end. Some additional selections from Dasam Bani were also added, but it wasn't the same ones for every sangat. The important thing is to not hate on each other for these variations.
    • Umm, so you're upset that this jatha did Chaupai the same way it's being done at Harimandar Sahib for 100 years? Shouldn't you be upset at the manager of Darbar Sahib? I'm not saying that Sikhs who are aware of certain issues shouldn't do the longer Chaupai, but there are only so many battles you can fight. Instead of calling some jatha traitors because they're doing the (for better or worse) "standard" Chauapai published by the SGPC, it would be better to change things from the central point. You can't fault the average Sikh for picking up the average Gutka and doing paath.
    • It's the same here in Toronto. Alot of the gudwaras here are political orientated and get tons of funding from the government-probably want them stay hush hush with all the BS that has been happening with India.  These guys are skewing gurbani. A complaint was sent to a ragi singh a couple of days ago in regards to a hukamnama. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use