To my none-muslim friends peace and blessing be upon you
In the name of ALLAH most gracious, most merciful
Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
And there is none like unto Him.
(Iklas 112)
Hello ISDhillion! How you doin? I have read your discussion with brother Qurban, I’ll have to say it is very interesting the way you have explained Sikhism. Thank you for trying to explain what your religion is about. However I have some things to say about this matter I hope you don’t mind?
To proceed, you said (IsDillion)
The basic category of the the bible is hope that you live in the hope that what is written is true and you will have salvation. The basic category of the Koran is morality that those who will live a moral life will go to paradise,
Your wrong my friend- you may be a scholar in Sikhism, but with all due respect your knowledge in Islam leaves much to be desired- I would have to say your reaching fantastic conclusion. Firstly you don’t even know Foss-ha the Quranic language; hence you’re in no position to interpret the Quran. So I think you should leave this to us Muslims, don’t you think? Since we know how to read the language; a language which is known to be the best literature on the face of this earth.
You said
In sri guru granth sahib ji the seeker has a direct link with god when we read the verses the same is not true for any other scripture on earth why? – because it is the only word of god on earth.
Not very convincing……….I could say the same about the Holy Quran. Provide proof my friend, provide clear evidence.
You said:
I need to know Islamic doctrine and I have as yet not come across one Islamic scholar who can relay Islamic doctrine without using the Koran, doctrine comes from learning history with respect to your faith it is not inferred by interpreting verses in the Koran cos we can all do that.
Are you being serious! I can’t believe what I am reading-
This matter of religion is so important, and you’re saying that you’d rather follow Doctrine from a man, rather than Gods revelation?
And yes it is true we always use the Quran, because it’s the word of God, and God doesn’t make mistakes, but it appears to me that you’d rather rely on doctrines produced by humans who are prone to errors. So when it comes to making a decision such as choosing the right path, I think we all would agree to use the direct source i.e. from God.
And if we followed your logic (i.e. following the doctrines) we will be following a man made religion, or to be more précise, human opinions and views regarding the scripture.
It sounds like the source of the knowledge you have in your religion today is not from God but rather from history i.e. mankind. I think I can see the difference between our religions- only one follows the will of God.
You said
no the path of naam was practised by all saints through out the ages naam is the unstruck melody which pervades the universe it has always existed its just Sikhism made naam marg the purpose of life,
there have been plenty before who were also attuned to the naam but the guru made this path easy that’s why you do not have to be a sikh but make no mistake without naam you will be reborn. There is no such thing as sin so therefore rebirth is not a punishment just part and parcel of gods creation.-
Firstly, does the God you believe in want us to follow the path of naam
Yes –or-No?
If it’s yes-
Then if you don’t follow the path of naam, then you are going against the will of God- and as a consequence you will be re-born!
According to what you have said, in Sikhism, acting against the will of God in is not classified as a sin, hence since there is no sin then there is no such thing as punishment rather a part and parcel of life!
If there are no sin, and no punishment for going against the will of god then what’s the incentive following the will of God-?
According to your statement, in Sikhism, criminal acts such as robbery, rape and Murder cannot classified as sin, since sin does not exist- hence their will be no punishment rather a rebirth which is part and parcel of life- in what way is this concept beneficial to mankind here on earth? What has the God in Sikhism done to address such issues-
So far after reading most of your explanation about your religion it has caused more harm then good, all you have done is just create contradictions in your dialogue exchange with brother Qurban. The brother asked you initially is it a punishment or reward for not following naam marg, which is according to you the will of God- and after deciphering your response, you’re saying “there is no such thing as sin hence there is no punishment its just a part and parcel of life”. With all due respect this shows me the guidance that has been revealed by your God is not complete, as it doesn’t address an important concept of promoting peace on earth-there is no law in order. We can do what ever we like in this world, then be reborn with no punishment. And keep doing so, until one day we decide, I am bored of this world hence lets follow naam, and the loop is over. So in one way or another we all will end up in heaven eventually, depending on how much time we waste to find naam. And what about the concept of justice, who provides true justice? What happens when a murderer is not punished in this life, where is the justice for the victim? the victims family?
Don’t really think this is very convincing that this idea is from God.
This is what I make of this whole concept of naam so far from the information you have supplied in this forum, which to say the least is very confusing-
A- Supposedly God wants us to follow the path of naam marg, if you don’t follow it you will be re-born. From this its quite clear that reborn is a consequence of going against god’s will!
B- Naam Marg has always existed- “naam is the unstruck melody which pervades the universe it has always existed “
C- Naam Marg (Gods will) was not a purpose before the advent of Sikhism “Sikhism made naam marg the purpose of life”,
D- Guru came and made this path easy- so before Guru the path was hard?
Questions
1- If naam Marg was not the purpose for mankind before the advent of Sikhism, why then punish them with re-birth? And what was their purpose in life? Its Not there fault God hid away from them such an important thing such as naam.
2- if naam marg was not the purpose before the advent of Sikhism, why did those saints attuned to it, how did they know about this concept,
3- How comes they did not teach it other people- a bit selfish don’t you think, I mean if they new that without following this path they will be reborn, why not preach it to others-
4- Are their any historical facts supporting the existence of naam marg, and these saints who followed it, before the advent of Sikhism, or are you just making things as you go along.
5- in what point of time in history did this Guru come and made this path easy?
6- what was his name?
7- If God is fair, and he wants us to follow the path of naam, and it is his will, why make the concept so hard to follow, that it required some one else to arrive and make it easy?
Off course this whole concept of following naam will be classified as man made nonsense designed to misguide mankind into eternal damnation. Unless you have proof to back it up.
You said
no it doesn’t at all, divine essence In Sikhism is not a wobbly blob or an old man with a beard who looks like santa, in Sikhism god is a substance with properties: oneness, creative, self-existent, unborn, formless, truth, no fear, no hatred. Divine essence doesn not follow the laws of science you cannot know the nature of your lord through the mind if you could then Sikhism would not have revealed the way of naam.
The smokescreen you have just created to avoid the question by Qurban was futile- you were asked
“This causes problems- anything that was created did not existed prior to his creation, is your scripture saying God never existed at some point?”
Then you replied saying
”no because the creation is a reflection of god and god exists within the whole of creation”-
“divine essence In Sikhism is not a wobbly blob or an old man with a beard who looks like santa, in Sikhism god is a substance with properties: oneness, creative, self-existent, unborn, formless, truth, no fear, no hatred”
Firstly, your saying that when their was nothing created by God, God didn’t exist. Because you’re saying: the creation was a reflection of god, so if the creation was not there then there is nothing to reflect? Hence no God
Now to address the 2nd point you raised, in what way does this solve the problems brother Qurban raised?
You said “God is a substance with properties-“
The properties are – Oneness- how can that be when he created himself?- if he created another version of himself- that makes it two gods- if its not and he is still one, then he must of not existed prior to his creation- i.e. 0.
If he created himself, he must of not existed prior to his creation, but that in it self causes logical flaws, as if he was not their, then he ceased to exists hence how can he create himself- if he existed and is self existence then why the need to create himself. This makes no sense what’s so ever, I thought you where a scholar?
You said
DON’T PUT A SPIN ON THESE AYATS, they say the message came from the angel jibreel even though the word is not written this is accepted by all muslims even you:
the sentence to note here is:
“even though the word is not written”
If the word is not written, then where are you getting your ideas from? Like I said before, you don’t even understand the Quranic language, then what are you doing trying to explain to us what the Ayat means, and whether we should or shouldn’t put a spin to these Ayats, just because you said it means this and we should believe it? Have you forgotten you’re a scholar in Sikhism not Islam.
Anyways just to explain what this Ayat means.
Verily this is the word of a most honourable Messenger, Endued with Power, with rank before the Lord of the Throne, With authority there, (and) faithful to his trust.
The Holy Qur'an, Surah 81, Ayat 19-21.
Meaning, indeed this Qur'an is being conveyed by a noble messenger,
where does it say that Quran is the word of a most honourable messenger. And the key word in this passage is
messenger, which I’ve realised you have trouble understanding.
The second verse you've quoted to defend your arguement, that the Quran is the word of angel Gabrielle is:
Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims.
The Holy Qur'an, Sura 16, Ayat 102.
Yes!...
From thy lord in truth, once again you have defeated yourself in this argument.
Goodness me! Did you even read this passage before posting it, “
the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth” – which in plane English means angel Gabrielle brought this revelation FROM ALLAH. So what does that make the angel, the source of the message or a messenger? Even a 10 year old kid would easily answer it saying he is just a messenger. And you claim to be a scholar? Are you sure you’re a scholar? I am sure a scholar knows the meaning of the word “messenger”
Brother Qurban has provided many analogies, of what it requires being a messenger and you still can’t quite grasp the concept of a messenger can you? Or may be your just being ignorant.
I mean if we all started acting ignorant like you, then I have to say everything you put forward from your scripture are just your words- not gods. Since you believe, when the angel Gabrielle passed the message from God to the prophet (pbuh) it’s was the angel’s word, then I could say the scripture your quoting from your holy book, are not Gods word rather it is yours, even when your just passing this message to me. Therefore if we stick to our ignorant idea and refuse to understand what a messenger is then no one will get anywhere.
You said
”I do not care for the opinions of angels as they lick the dust of my gurus feet”
That’s just a matter of opinion and frankly I don’t think any one cares less about yours- And there is so need to get all childish, come on you’re a scholar, I thought you would have passed that phase by now.
Brother Quraban said:
Is the Adi Granth your holy scripture (aka sri Guru Granth Sahbb)?
And you said
no sri guru granth sahib ji is our guru as it was given a formal investiture by sri guru gobind singh ji, adi granth was a compilation of all direct revelations the gurus understood to be imbued with naam and they are the toughstone of guruship therefore knew what could and couldn’t be classed as kachee (unripe) and pakki (ripe) bani, guru gobind singh rewrote the whole of guru granth sahib ji from memory because the original was stolen by thieves who wanted the knowledge for themselves and the guru therefore made changes to the original by incorporating his fathers (9th guru) compositons.
Why where there changes made to the original - wasn’t the original good enough? I mean if Gobind singh rewrote the whole of guru granth sahib ji message from memory, why didn’t he just rewrite the entire message, why did he make changes. So from what you just said, the original scripture doesn’t exist, because you said the original was by guru granth sahib ji which was stolen. And you also said “the guru therefore made changes to the original”, and when changes are made to the original, it is not in its original text anymore.
brother Qurban said
Is it the word of God?
You said
no it is not the word of god, the word is god
Are you saying the word is God? Is that something you’re saying, or is it said in the scripture? Because if it has, then I have to say that a thief has stolen God.
Because you said
“original was stolen by thieves who wanted the knowledge for themselves”So if the word is God and the scripture (which contains the word (i.e. God)) was stolen, then was God stolen by a thief?
Qurban saidis
“Asa Di Var Pauri 1, Page 463 in Sri Guru Granth Sahib a divine revelation from God
You said
it definitely is please provide evidence to the contrary.
Well from my understand, after reading your explainiation of this passage it says:
“In Asa Di Var, Pauri 1, page 463 of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji states: "He, the Lord, of Himself, created Himself,”
"Kita pasao eko kavao" Guru Nanak in JAP JI (Pauri 13)
Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji teaches - "In the beginning God was all alone and there was no one beside Him
As the borther Qurban said “this causes problems- anything that was created did not existed prior to his creation, is your scripture saying God never existed at some point?
This contradicts with “"In the beginning God was all alone and there was no one beside Him””.
And you still haven’t replied to this illogical statement.
If God existed then why was there the need to create him self?-
Unless he created another version of himself, which contradicts the concept of one God.
Please forgive me if I have come off rude, that was not my intention. Have a nice day ISDhillon.
May Allah guide you
Say: If the sea were ink for the words of my Lord, the sea would surely be consumed before the words of my Lord are exhausted, though We were to bring the like of that (sea) to add (Al-Kahf, Chapter #18, Verse #109)
ffended: