horses are extremely spiritual animals

[kuldipk123]

14 hours ago, Sat1 said:

Lol. They are beings with a soul too. Animals can also sense the Truth presence as we can. 

If that’s the case, then do you believe that pigs also have souls and can reincarnate as humans? Do you also believe that humans can reincarnate as animals based on their actions?  Clarify your statement above, as there is little or no point making empty or hollow statements like above. Ambiguity leads nowhere but confusion! Educate.

[kuldipk123]

1 hour ago, Singh375 said:

But you, me and others already wasted time. Imagine collectively how many hours we’ve put into engaging with him. 

Meanwhile the very genuine people on here we ignore them. The young Singh, 16 learning to tie dumalla, isn’t he more worthy of our time? The char sahibzade sacrificed their life to keep Sikhi alive. Maybe we could sacrifice our time spent giving this Muslim a well deserved slap for encouraging the next generation of Sikhi. 

That’s only one example, what about the person who’s cousin is considering cutting kesh? They are also more important than this Muslim donkey, right?

I totally  agree with you. Our first responsibility is towards looking after each other as Sikhs. We should be more than willing to help genuine Sikhs with any problems they may face or are facing. There is no doubt about it and the youngster having difficulties with tying a dumalla or keeping his rehat  should be our number one priority as Sikhs!  The reason I am engaging with the Muslim is purely due to his attitude towards our faith and what we believe in. I would like to see some evidence as to his belief in 72 virgins, paradise after death (jannat) and so on. Can he prove his faith in all these concepts in a scientific laboratory? No, he can’t. So why mock or make fun of our belief in the law of reincarnation? Why ask for evidence?  It makes me sick to see guru ke Sikhs doing kesh katal. When you try to teach them why they shouldn’t do it, they will soon find something to say to justify their reasons!

[Tamansingh123]

14 minutes ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

So the cow is more respected than other animals in Sikhi then, interesting. Another example of Hindu influence creeping in to Sikhi from Nanak's Hindu followers perhaps...

Cow gives us milk. If the mother dies, the baby is fed either cow or buffalo milk. Its really nutritious. if u wat beef, it produces the most amount of toxic gases in the air. Plus u can get more nutrition from almost every meat than beef. Btw u prophet ordered some tribe members to drink camel urine. Im sure u know about it.

[shastarSingh]

in nihang dals, it is said that 1 year of ghorian de seva is equivalent of 12 years of any other seva of Guru Ghar.

[Koi]

4 hours ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

So the cow is more respected than other animals in Sikhi then, interesting. Another example of Hindu influence creeping in to Sikhi from Nanak's Hindu followers perhaps...

Well, let's put it this way. In every religion certain animals are given a higher or lower status depending on the traditions. For example, within Islam, a pig is considered unclean. Now, this is also prevalent within Judaism. However, we wouldn't say that Islam copied the belief, or that it crept in, would we? Progressive revelation. Also, dogs are also considered unclean in Islam. However, in other cultures (eg western) dogs are considered loyal, man's best friend etc. The traditions of one culture do not necessarily dictate that same authority in another.

And yes, in Nihang traditions, a cow is not eaten, even though they fully practice the traditions of jhatka and tilak. As such, not eating beef is not the same as considering a cow sacred. And it certainly doesn't mean that it is "copied" from elsewhere. Just because something is the same, doesn't mean it's been plagiarised. 

[Koi]

8 hours ago, kuldipk123 said:

Wrong again. Stop playing the coward and answer his question directly. Stop pandering!!  Ask questions if you can’t answer directly without digressing and trying to please him and make him  happy!  

If you can’t answer it admit it that you don’t have enough learning so you are unable to answer, but you will do some research and ask from those that are more learned than you!
 

What “instances” are you referring to? Direct answer would be that it  is everything to do with brahmgiyaan awastha and nothing to do with “instances” at all!  Are you even a Amrittary Sikh?
 

Humility is the way to go about it! 

So, your issue with my answer is in the semantics? That's fine, but how does that equate to pandering?

And what does me being Amritdhari or not have to do with my ability to answer a question? Are you suggesting that only Amritdhari Sikhs should be allowed to answer here? What about all the non-Amritdharis on this forum (who you clearly look down upon)?

When I mentioned saints, what did you think I was referring to? If an individual who may not have in depth knowledge asks a question, does it befit to go in to too much detail to thus confuse them? Not saying that a detailed answer is unwarranted, but a basic answer can suffice just as well.

At the end of the day, this is very much a public forum. And, much like the real world, there are going to be a variety of people asking a myriad of questions, some of which you're not going to like. And in those instances, you're going to need a much thicker skin than you are displaying here. And if you cannot tolerate this, maybe a public forum is not the best place for you...

[Singh375]

.

[Singh375]

.

[jkvlondon]

32 minutes ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

You'd have a point if Sikhi originated in say Australia and there was zero evidence of interaction between Nanak, the other 9 Gurus and the religion and culture of Hinduism what so ever. But unfortunately for you all 10 of your Gurus were Indian and some born in to Hindu house holds and the religion you claim that Nanak founded just so happens to be heavily influenced by Hinduism and Hindu culture so far as to believing in devte, devtis and all this avtaar stuff.

Off topic question: Was Guru Nanak, Waheguru on Earth? I've asked this to other Sikhs who have blatantly refused to answer after saying things which lead to him being God on Earth.

wrong only four were born in hindu households , three became sikhs because they were either adopted by or devoted themselves to their predecessor Guru rest were born to Sikh households only. None were Indian because India was only in exsistence after angrez took over , they were born into a number of different kingdoms .

IT is too hard for Abrahamic faith to grasp sikhi's viewpoint you are convinced the Creator is a male entity, remote and not within the creation Whereas dharmic  faiths see The Creator as both seperate and within the creation , within every heart.
Sikhi goes further it says those who achieve oneness with the Creator is no longer different from  the Creator since you have to reach that level to have knowledge of The Creator . So Yes Guru Nanak Dev ji is App  Parmeshwar and if other sikhs are scared to spell it out for you there are many many Gurbani quotes which are written by the different Guru Sahiban and saints also which state the same .

 

[Koi]

59 minutes ago, MuslimNeighbour said:

You'd have a point if Sikhi originated in say Australia and there was zero evidence of interaction between Nanak, the other 9 Gurus and the religion and culture of Hinduism what so ever. But unfortunately for you all 10 of your Gurus were Indian and some born in to Hindu house holds and the religion you claim that Nanak founded just so happens to be heavily influenced by Hinduism and Hindu culture so far as to believing in devte, devtis and all this avtaar stuff.

Off topic question: Was Guru Nanak, Waheguru on Earth? I've asked this to other Sikhs who have blatantly refused to answer after saying things which lead to him being God on Earth.

Again, similarities does not mean plagiarism, regardless of progressive revelation. 

And for your off topic question, yes, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji is Waheguru.