Sikhism

[AvarAllahNoor]

Yes it does. I don't see the relevance. This is different to Sikhism which you admitted to earlier God only sent 10 gurus and nothing to the mankind before it

And certainly I've sent messengers before you: there are some of them that i have mentioned to you and there are others whom i have not mentioned to you..." [40:78]

Does the Ahadeeth not mention many more in number? More than 25 in the Kuran!''

So this quote only refers to whom God sent before Islam?

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Yet you have questioned on many occasions on why we do Hajj, why we pray to the ka'bah, why we allow polygamy, why we apparently oppress the women by not giving them equal status. This is clearly saying islam is wrong

Only questioned so we can get an insight into your practices!

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Interesting i did not know this. Islam only contains the word of God, not by any man. Especially in this case of men who are of other religions associating lies with god

These men were inspired by God just as Mohammed was! So how dare you say that it is full of lies??!!

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Now the problem here is Guru Nanek was sent according to you as islam and Hinduism had gone astray. Now, Hindus themselves admit their scriptures is no longer the same as it was, but no muslim has ever said the same about the Qur'an. The message was still there, it was just people were no longer following it. So in such an instance there was no need to send a new law/rules/religion/messenger/guru as the religion (Islam) God had sent previously was still intact, and God had said in the Qur'an it is the last and final message


Please clarify what you mean. Do you or do you not believe the Qur'an is the word of God. please no ambiguity. Do you believe Muhammed PBUH is a messenger or not? Do you believe the Qur'an is 100% the word of God or not?

For the muslims yes, but not for us!

 

[snakelegs]

SSA,
did sikhs invent the concept of langar or were muslims already doing that?
for others: (correct me if i'm wrong) - there were kitchens at the gurdwaras where all castes sat together and ate. in order to see the guru, you first had to eat.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

snakeleg

am not aware if it was being done earlier..

but a universal langar..open to people of all religion, caste and creed was started in Punjab by Gurus.

am not aware of other regions.

also i donot think that there was any binding that to meet guru the disciples HAD to eat there...

True!

Once the emperor Akbar came to see Guru Sahib and he had to eat the coarse rice in the Langar before he could see Guru Ji. That was to show equality amongst all people. And Akbar did eat langar!

 

[Hijrah]

Wasn't Sikhism just a mixture of Islam and Hinduism used to unite India

 

[jss]

Wasn't Sikhism just a mixture of Islam and Hinduism used to unite India

Read the threads on Sikhi



Moss,
Whats with the narrow minded comments.
No Sikh of the Guru can accept the quran as the 100% word of God because some of it is inconsistant with Gurmat and no, not believed as 100% word of God. Same with Islam, that is why many bhagats even before the Guru's times spoke against empty religious rituals and practices within Islam and Hinduism that do not lead to God.
So why contemplate the quran or the puraanas?
Again it comes back to the context in which you look at things, which you yourself said earlier in relation to the word 'kaffir'- either in hatred and in contempt or just in reference to a non-Muslim.

Furthermore you can have a Muslim who lives life by doing good deeds, respecting others etc
Or you can have a Muslim who blows himself up killing innocents.
Depends on how ppl study the quran and how they perceive and implement its teachings.

The quran has teachings (correct me if I'm wrong) on doing good deeds and charity which is consistent with Gurmat. Therefore how can we dismiss the quran or the bible or the vedas as totally false- if our faith emphasised that then we would be contradicting ourselves-cus we would also be condemning part of our teachings which advocate truthful living and also practicing good deeds.
So how I see it, it is not entirely false or 100% word of God but I do respect it and your religion.

Rehit maryada also directs us to avoid being missionaries and slandering others religion because it just leads to ego i.e my religion is better than yours, im follow the truth-all else are false etc etc....
And ego hinders spiritual progress.

As for Guru and prophet, they are not on the same levels.
Only through the Guru can salvation be obtained from the cycle of life and death, this no prophet, diety can do.
So to settle any debate- simply put that your religion is beautiful to you and mine is too me.
As for answers- why not reading all comments and researching Sikhi (first hand) for yourself rather than trying to look for flaws and contradictions.

Contemplate that.:thankyou:

bhul chuk maaf

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Wasn't Sikhism just a mixture of Islam and Hinduism used to unite India

Read the posts provided, i'm not going to repeat myself over and over!!

 

[max314]

I'm sorry, but the application of the word "manmat" and the word "käfir" is effectively the same, but applied to two different disciplines.

Both are considered to be "non-believers" pertaining to their respective ideologies, both saying that "if you don't believe in message X, you are - in one way or another - wrong and punishable in some way".

Personally, I think that both are total bollocks. There is no logical argument to be had here.

The Muslims make the very well-constructed observation that "we have the right message".

In return, the Sikkhs make a similarly ingenious counter-argument that states "no, we have the right message".

[content removed]

Old wars become new wars, old names replaced by new ones, old weapons replaced by new weapons...

...but humans remain the same.

[content removed]

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

I'm sorry, but the application of the word "manmat" and the word "käfir" is effectively the same, but applied to two different disciplines.

.

Actually Manmat (way of the mind) is not the same as Kafir (Non-Believer) and it does not mean the same regardless, of how it's applied!!

 

[max314]

Actually Manmat (way of the mind) is not the same as Kafir (Non-Believer) and it does not mean the same regardless, of how it's applied!!

The opposite to "manmat" is "gur-mat".

"Gur-mat" is the label given (apparently) to one who follows the Guru's Will (Guru, of course, referring - as many Sikkhs would have you believe - to the Ten Masters and the Granth, symbolised by following the Khalsa brotherhood). Hence, wearing bana, reading bani and following the Khalsa code is considered to be the gur-mat way of life whereby (again, apparently) no questions are asked and the crowd is followed with a herd mentality ("sangat").

Those who do not adhere to the 'Way Of The Guru' are obviously those who do not believe in the Guru, and hence are considered to be 'inferior'...even though we like to say that "everyone is equal" and are seen as being a 'lesser' entity in the eyes of God (great bit of communal hypocrisy, ain't it? ;D ).

Those non-believers are classed as "man-mukhs" (the opposite to a gur-mukh.

----

The irony here, of course, is that both terms have been grossly misinterpreted by Sikkhs, who have in turn passed those misinterpretations down through the generations. Whilst I can't speak for Islam and the käfir mentality, I have a gut instinct that a similar thing has happened over time with their philosophy as well.

I will explain the true meaning of gur-mat versus man-mukh.

But only if the members here are willing to listen. Else, I will not waste my energy.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

The opposite to "manmat" is "gur-mat".

"Gur-mat" is the label given (apparently) to one who follows the Guru's Will (Guru, of course, referring - as many Sikkhs would have you believe - to the Ten Masters and the Granth, symbolised by following the Khalsa brotherhood). Hence, wearing bana, reading bani and following the Khalsa code is considered to be the gur-mat way of life whereby (again, apparently) no questions are asked and the crowd is followed with a herd mentality ("sangat").

Those who do not adhere to the 'Way Of The Guru' are obviously those who do not believe in the Guru, and hence are considered to be 'inferior'...even though we like to say that "everyone is equal" and are seen as being a 'lesser' entity in the eyes of God (great bit of communal hypocrisy, ain't it? ;D ).

Those non-believers are classed as "man-mukhs" (the opposite to a gur-mukh.

----

The irony here, of course, is that both terms have been grossly misinterpreted by Sikkhs, who have in turn passed those misinterpretations down through the generations. Whilst I can't speak for Islam and the käfir mentality, I have a gut instinct that a similar thing has happened over time with their philosophy as well.

I will explain the true meaning of gur-mat versus man-mukh.

But only if the members here are willing to listen. Else, I will not waste my energy.

'inferior'?? Don't be so pathetic, where on earth did you get that interpretation from? I've no idea what kind fo sangat you affiliate with, but i can assure you, nobody of Sikh faith that i know of think of anyone who is not following gurmat is inferior - Not saying that there arn't people who do though!

 

[jss]

The opposite to "manmat" is "gur-mat".

"Gur-mat" is the label given (apparently) to one who follows the Guru's Will (Guru, of course, referring - as many Sikkhs would have you believe - to the Ten Masters and the Granth, symbolised by following the Khalsa brotherhood). Hence, wearing bana, reading bani and following the Khalsa code is considered to be the gur-mat way of life whereby (again, apparently) no questions are asked and the crowd is followed with a herd mentality ("sangat").

Those who do not adhere to the 'Way Of The Guru' are obviously those who do not believe in the Guru, and hence are considered to be 'inferior'...even though we like to say that "everyone is equal" and are seen as being a 'lesser' entity in the eyes of God (great bit of communal hypocrisy, ain't it? ;D ).

Those non-believers are classed as "man-mukhs" (the opposite to a gur-mukh.

----

The irony here, of course, is that both terms have been grossly misinterpreted by Sikkhs, who have in turn passed those misinterpretations down through the generations. Whilst I can't speak for Islam and the käfir mentality, I have a gut instinct that a similar thing has happened over time with their philosophy as well.

I will explain the true meaning of gur-mat versus man-mukh.

But only if the members here are willing to listen. Else, I will not waste my energy.

Someone who wears bana and looks 'chardi kalla' could also be following manmat (way of the mind). Manmat and Gurmat is adapted from rehit maryada and Gurbani so where is the 'misinterpretation.'

Herd mentality? Where did you get that from? How is following gurmat a herd mentality? Who is making the misinterpretations?

Looking at someone in an inferior way or labelling whether it be 'kafir', 'manmukh' or as you put it 'manmat' is down to haumai which is dependant on the own individual. Gurbani tells us, which you probably already know, how to control these vices and live a gurmat orientated way of life.

bhul chuk maaf

 

[bandoo]

I heard a story about when Sikhs people first came to saudi arabia, the people there thougt that they were muslims aswell.. because they also grow beards. So they strated to help them in getting them in the good places for work.. but later on they started to think because they never saw those men comming to the mosques on Juma
so from then they knew they werent muslim.....

pretty weird huh

What is weird about it? Like us the Sikhs also can grow beard, why should not they?

Bandoo

 

[bandoo]

and about the black stone, this stone is from Jannah! (paradise) who wouldn't want to touch something from jannah, or kiss something from heaven. we don't worship the stone, it is just something that allah gave to us as a gift, and he allowed us to touch it or kiss it.

Dear Zohair,

Your statement that the Black Stone is from paradise does not make sense, simply because paradise is yet to be created by the Allah. He is going to create it on the Day of Quayamat along with the Hell. Hence the stone could not have come from there. Also, the falling of stone from the skies is a routine phenomenon. Such large sized stones can be found at many places in the world e.g. Colarodo in USA, Lonar in India and also in Siberia.

What I want to say is we should go by facts as well as logic.

Bandoo

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings,

Your statement that the Black Stone is from paradise does not make sense, simply because paradise is yet to be created by the Allah. He is going to create it on the Day of Quayamat along with the Hell. Hence the stone could not have come from there.

Is not paradise already created, along with Hell, since we know that Adam (as) lived in Paradise before he came to earth? And there are also hadeeth mentioning the creation of Paradise and Hell, such as the following (which has been shortened to include the key things):

Muslim, Abu Dawud and Imaam Ahmad report from Abu Hurayrah (ra) that the Messenger (saw) said, "When Allaah (swt) created Paradise and Hell, He sent Jibreel to Paradise, saying "Go and look at it and at what I have prepared therein for its inhabitants". So he went and looked at it and at what Allaah had prepared therein for its inhabitants.... then He sent him to Hellfire saying, "Go and look at it and what I have prepared therein for its inhabitants" So he looked at it and saw that it was in layers, one above the other...."

And there are other hadeeth and verses from the Qur'aan that also indicate this.

Peace.

 

[max314]

Yes but then Why had the same God sent down religions previously to the other messengers



There are many errors with your above statement. Firstly it also says in The Qur'an the only way we differ in front of God is by piety, not by what Sex we are, what race we come from, our lineage, age wealth, but our piety alone.

49:13 O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you with Allah is the most pious. Verily, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware.​

Now we attain piety by following the rules and commands of God. Now all the rituals Guru nanek mentions above are what God (my God, your God, and the God that send Prophet Muhammed PBUH whom you believe in) has instruct3d us to do. is that clear, so these aren't useless rituals that are of little merit. I don't understand why would Guru nanek speak against what God had ordained for previous Prophets

You're assuming that God created these religions. You're just accepting that on faith. Faith. There's nothing wrong with it, but when it creates this much antagonism between human beings, there is everything wrong with it.

Believe me, many Sikkhs say exactly the same thing you are, but applying the 'divinity' to Sikkhism instead. You say that you're right. They say that they're right. In the end, none of it is provable. You just have to decide that - as a human being with body, mind and spirit - how you're going to use them.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Anymore for anymore? :giggling:

I'm bored give me a question people!

 

[Mohsin]

Lol. Could you clarify for me please the followjg, since all the posts from before have totally confused me about Sikhism. I tried to stay away from the topic seeing if it would be clearer looking at it in a weeks time but that hasn't happened.

Do you believe Muhammed was a prophet? Sorry if you feel i am repeating myself, or you will be repeating yourself, can you please just answer though, and i will ask my next question. I feel asking one question at a time would be easier as otherwise confusion will be caused