Discussion/Questions on Sikhism

[جوري]

I find this highly offensive!!! :raging: :raging: :raging: :raging: :raging:

.....

My humble apologies Avar-Allah noor... But I wanted to show that offending with inflammatory posts isn't the best way to an honest debate! I hope you can understand this isn't directed at you....
peace!

 

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

Controlling vices covers everything. You should be paying attention my friends...
No my definition of morality is defined by five vices...

Let me guess, those 'five vices' are defined by who? Its surely not in your book since a book about God cannot be about 'vices'.

Yes Sikhi principles are so superior than an ordinary person can't follow them...

:rollseyes

Once someone follow law of Sikhi, s/he will automatically not be breaking any laws unless they are immoral as per Sikhi...

Ofcourse not, that is so convenient. The law of the land is my law, therefore, if the most immoral thing is norm, then its also norm for me. If I mess up, Ill just come back in my next life and try harder. How convenient. Kinda defeats the purpose dont you think?

So now you go by the "social norms". Would age of the person be a factor in determining suitability?

And you accuse us of 'twisting things around' when you are not capable of holding yourself in a factual discussion?

Let me show you what was said. You said:

So can you answer if you wouldn't feel at all if someone older than you came to you and proposed to your daughter?
​

I said:

Yes, if the person was suitable.
​

I meant, yes, I would marry off my daugher if the proposer was suitable. Then you take it that 'suitable' is reffering to society norms. No, unlike you, we have guidance from the final Messenger of God, Muhammad about every matter.

“A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman; (otherwise) you will be a loser.” (Al-Bukhari)
​

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women. So before you ignore Fi's post again, do try and read it this time.
http://www.islamicboard.com/683004-post534.html

As for age, anytime after puberty is fine. You do know that this arguement of yours undermines nothing of Islam? I suggest you leave it before you end up looking like a fool, and I say this with all due respect. If discussion on this thread has truly deteriorated to this level, it isn't even worth responding to.

 

[cali dude]

Let me guess, those 'five vices' are defined by who? Its surely not in your book since a book about God cannot be about 'vices'.

Sure they are defined in Guru Granth Sahib. It's about controlling vices. In order to be at the spiritual level, one has to have control over vices.

:rollseyes
Ofcourse not, that is so convenient. The law of the land is my law, therefore, if the most immoral thing is norm, then its also norm for me. If I mess up, Ill just come back in my next life and try harder. How convenient. Kinda defeats the purpose dont you think?

Well this has nothing to do what I said. Let me try explaining. Sikhi principles are based upon having all vices (lust, anger, greed, worldly attachments, and ego) in control. Someone who has controlled these vices could never commit any immoral act. Do you understand so far and do you agree? So even if all laws in the world are based upon morality, having control over vices, a Sikh could never go wrong or commit anything unlawful. It doesn't mean that we follow immoral laws of the world.

And you accuse us of 'twisting things around' when you are not capable of holding yourself in a factual discussion?

Let me show you what was said. You said:

So can you answer if you wouldn't feel at all if someone older than you came to you and proposed to your daughter?
​

I said:

Yes, if the person was suitable.
​

I meant, yes, I would marry my daugher if the proposer was suitable. Then you take it that 'suitable' is reffering to society norms. No, unlike you, we have guidance from the final Messenger of God, Muhammad about every matter.

“A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman; (otherwise) you will be a loser.” (Al-Bukhari)
​

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women. So before you ignore Fi's post again, do try and read it this time.
http://www.islamicboard.com/683004-post534.html

As for age, anytime after puberty is fine. You do know that this arguement of yours undermines nothing of Islam? I suggest you leave it before you end up looking like a fool, and I say this with all due respect. If discussion on this thread has truly deteriorated to this level, it isn't even worth responding to.

What you just explained was suitability of woman. But since I asked if you wouldn't have any problem letting your daughter marry someone older than you, I am asking what quality you would be looking in the man who wants to marry your daughter. Would age be a factor at all? I am not asking what quality the man should be looking in your daughter.

 

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

Well this has nothing to do what I said. Let me try explaining. Sikhi principles are based upon having all vices (lust, anger, greed, worldly attachments, and ego) in control. Someone who has controlled these vices could never commit any immoral act. Do you understand so far and do you agree? So even if all laws in the world are based upon morality, having control over vices, a Sikh could never go wrong or commit anything unlawful. It doesn't mean that we follow immoral laws of the world.

Are we really going to go through this again? This was already responded to before by Br. Fi_sabillilah:

5 vices isn't sufficient to distinguish between wrong and right for every act that occurs in the world today. There too wide, like the example of stealing for the sake of living. Islamically that's permissible, whereas in sikhism that isn't.

Which implies that your religion depends more on man made laws rather than it's on laws.
​

http://www.islamicboard.com/682310-post523.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/688295-post625.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/687219-post616.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/681635-post500.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/673732-post311.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/671320-post299.html

What you just explained was suitability of woman. But since I asked if you wouldn't have any problem letting your daughter marry someone older than you, I am asking what quality you would be looking in the man who wants to marry your daughter. Would age be a factor at all? I am not asking what quality the man should be looking in your daughter.

I said the narration applies to both men and women.

Therefore, 'suitable' refers to his religion and that is the first thing that I would look for, and 'religion' is a comrehensive term that includes under its umbrella many things. After religion, his character, then he should be able to provide for her, etc etc. I explained this in my previous post:

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, and then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women.
​

As Aamirsaab said before this is a teaching whose following is optional. If I wish, I will marry off my daughter, and if I wish I will not. The fact is that it is permissible in Islam because there is nothing wrong with it.

Thus, this arguement of yours undermines nothing of Islam. It is simply your opinion, which has no weight in a factual discussion

 

[cali dude]

Are we really going to go through this again? This was already responded to before by Br. Fi_sabillilah:

5 vices isn't sufficient to distinguish between wrong and right for every act that occurs in the world today. There too wide, like the example of stealing for the sake of living. Islamically that's permissible, whereas in sikhism that isn't.

Which implies that your religion depends more on man made laws rather than it's on laws.
​

When you say it isn't allowed in Sikhi, I hope you mean that a Sikh would never steal even if he is dying. But it does not mean that a Sikh would punish such person.

So just because we don't apply our rules onto others, it does not mean we don't follow them.

You can give an example of an act and I am confident we can find out whether or not it's right based upon five vices.

I said the narration applies to both men and women.

Therefore, 'suitable' refers to his religion and that is the first thing that I would look for, and 'religion' is a comrehensive term that includes under its umbrella many things. After religion, his character, then he should be able to provide for her, etc etc. I explained this in my previous post:

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, and then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women.
​

As Aamirsaab said before this is a teaching whose following is optional. If I wish, I will marry off my daughter, and if I wish I will not. The fact is that it is permissible in Islam because there is nothing wrong with it.

Thus, this arguement of yours undermines nothing of Islam. It is simply your opinion, which has no weight in a factual discussion

See this is a good lesson to non-Muslims who are thinking about maybe even converting. Nobody today wants someone older than him/her proposing to his/her daughter. It could happen to anyone, i.e. some pervert older than you might come to your door proposing to your daughter. As a non-Muslim, you can probably take a legal action but if you do become Muslim, you can't because he allowed...

Have a good day ​

 

[Woodrow]

See this is a good lesson to non-Muslims who are thinking about maybe even converting. Nobody today wants someone older than him/her proposing to his/her daughter. It could happen to anyone, i.e. some pervert older than you might come to your door proposing to your daughter. As a non-Muslim, you can probably take a legal action but if you do become Muslim, you can't because he allowed...

Have a good day

It don't quite work that way. A Muslim Father loves his daughter just as much as any non-Muslim father and you can be certain that in a good Muslim home a person with perverted intentions about a daughter is not going to be a welcome guest.

 

[Ibn Abi Ahmed]

When you say it isn't allowed in Sikhi, I hope you mean that a Sikh would never steal even if he is dying. But it does not mean that a Sikh would punish such person.

So just because we don't apply our rules onto others, it does not mean we don't follow them.

You can give an example of an act and I am confident we can find out whether or not it's right based upon five vices.

Someone who has controlled these vices could never commit any immoral act.
​

Stealing is immoral, therefore a Sikh cannot steal even if he is about to die. Why don't you go and read Fi's posts again since you are clearly going to start the same discussion again?

See this is a good lesson to non-Muslims who are thinking about maybe even converting. Nobody today wants someone older than him/her proposing to his/her daughter.

And yet Islam is the fastest growing religion. Come on, your opinion-based arguement is detriorating as you post.

It could happen to anyone, i.e. some pervert older than you might come to your door proposing to your daughter. As a non-Muslim, you can probably take a legal action but if you do become Muslim, you can't because he allowed...
Have a good day

This is an example of a logical fallacy that is called petitio principii, or circular reasoning. You project your presupposed interpretation of my words and then cite it as evidence for that very same interpretation! You have assumed what you have yet to prove.

This is the last time I will spell this out for you because you are only wasting my time, and everyone else's time as well, by repeating your absurd opinions which lack any basis.

“A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman; (otherwise) you will be a loser.” (Al-Bukhari)

And the narration applies to both men and women.

Therefore, 'suitable' refers to his religion and that is the first thing that I would look for, and 'religion' is a comrehensive term that includes under its umbrella many things. After religion, his character, then he should be able to provide for her, etc etc. I explained this in my previous post:

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, and then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women.
​

As Aamirsaab said before this is a teaching whose following is optional. If I wish, I will marry off my daughter, and if I wish I will not. The fact is that it is permissible in Islam because there is nothing wrong with it.
​

Cali dude has repeatedly on this thread made claims and has failed to provide evidence for them and his posts in the past 40 pages are a witness to this. When his opinions and misconceptions were corrected based upon evidences from our sources he decides to ignore them and goes on repeating his own opinion. Then he proceeds to use our words which are clear in explaining to him his mistakes, and he twists them to fit his own desires and presupposed distorted views and he has fallen into circular reasoning where he is blinded by his own opinions and he fails to see beyond that. Thus, there is no reason to even respond to him further because he has successfully proven that he cannot hold himself in a factual debate.

 

[snakelegs]

well that's why Sikhi is the greatest


i guess it really depends. if religion is easy to be followed, many people can. for example, if you were to follow Rajneesh's path, it would be easy. of course it wouldn't get anyone anywhere. but if it's the purest religion, then of course it isn't easy...

i didn't know that sikhs had this superiority thing! does it view all other religions as false?
if that is so, why do they include the writings of people from other religions in the SGGS? (something which makes them unique).

 

[NoName55]

Noname55,

Which article are you talking about?

............

All I can suggest is that you ask the editor
Ma'aslama

 

[cali dude]

i didn't know that sikhs had this superiority thing! does it view all other religions as false?
if that is so, why do they include the writings of people from other religions in the SGGS? (something which makes them unique).

Sorry you missed the point. No Sikhi doesn't have superiority complex and that's why Sikhi is the greatest.

 

[cali dude]

Someone who has controlled these vices could never commit any immoral act.
​

Stealing is immoral, therefore a Sikh cannot steal even if he is about to die.

That's correct, for a "True Sikh" stealing is always immoral...

Why don't you go and read Fi's posts again since you are clearly going to start the same discussion again?

There is no discussion. This is simple fact...

And yet Islam is the fastest growing religion.

I can't say for sure that this is a fact. But if it's, then there are many reasons behind it. You constantly target young impressionable people. You have a lot more kids than anybody else. It's like Bin Laden's family. Doesn't his father have like 50 kids or something? If you are going to have 5 wives, obviously you are going to have 20-30 kids. Plus people go for something easy to follow. Easy doesn't mean it's right.

I have also seen that corruption level is going up in the world? Does this mean that corruption is any good? Also, how about the gang recruiting going up? Does it mean gangs are good? So my point here is that something growing fast doesn't mean much...

This is an example of a logical fallacy that is called petitio principii, or circular reasoning. You project your presupposed interpretation of my words and then cite it as evidence for that very same interpretation! You have assumed what you have yet to prove.

This is the last time I will spell this out for you because you are only wasting my time, and everyone else's time as well, by repeating your absurd opinions which lack any basis.

“A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman; (otherwise) you will be a loser.” (Al-Bukhari)

And the narration applies to both men and women.

Therefore, 'suitable' refers to his religion and that is the first thing that I would look for, and 'religion' is a comrehensive term that includes under its umbrella many things. After religion, his character, then he should be able to provide for her, etc etc. I explained this in my previous post:

And that is what is meant by suitable, their religion has to be firm, and then the other three factors. And the narration applies to both men and women.
​

As Aamirsaab said before this is a teaching whose following is optional. If I wish, I will marry off my daughter, and if I wish I will not. The fact is that it is permissible in Islam because there is nothing wrong with it.
​

Cali dude has repeatedly on this thread made claims and has failed to provide evidence for them and his posts in the past 40 pages are a witness to this. When his opinions and misconceptions were corrected based upon evidences from our sources he decides to ignore them and goes on repeating his own opinion. Then he proceeds to use our words which are clear in explaining to him his mistakes, and he twists them to fit his own desires and presupposed distorted views and he has fallen into circular reasoning where he is blinded by his own opinions and he fails to see beyond that. Thus, there is no reason to even respond to him further because he has successfully proven that he cannot hold himself in a factual debate.

I think I have made my point. If you don't get it you don't it. There is nothing I can do about it. By the way, I didn't start this topic here. Some of the posts from other topic were moved here. Remember this was a result of Ojadd Jatt starting something under different topic?